19198	----	Anthracite Regions._ Warne: The Slav Invasion, IV, VII. IV. _Factors in Slavic History and Conditions Favoring and Hindering the Access of the Gospel._ McLanahan: Our People of Foreign Speech, 34-58. Charities and Commons, issues 1905-06. V. _Conditions Among Russian Jews._ Statements of Jewish authors as to conditions among Russian Jews in their native lands and in America. Bernheimer: The Russian Jew in the United States, I (B), IV (A), VI (A). _The city is the nerve center of our civilization. It is also the storm center. The city has a peculiar attraction for the immigrant. Here is heaped the social dynamite; here the dangerous elements are multiplied and concentered._--Josiah Strong. VI THE FOREIGN PERIL OF THE CITY The city is the most difficult and perplexing problem of modern times.--_Francis Lieber._ We must save the city if we would save the nation. Municipal government and city evangelization together constitute the distinctive problem of the city, for this generation at least.--_Josiah Strong._ Talk of Dante's Hell, and all the horrors and cruelties of the torture chamber of the lost! The man who walks with open eyes and bleeding heart through the shambles of our civilization needs no such fantastic images of the poet to teach him horror.--_General Booth._ With the influx of a large foreign population into the great cities, there have come also foreign customs and institutions, laxity and license--those phases of evil which are the most insidious foes of the purity and strength of a people. The slums of our large cities are but the stagnant pools of illiteracy, vice, pauperism, and crime, annually fed by this floodtide of immigration.--_R. M. Atchison._ You can kill a man with a tenement as easily as with an ax.--_Jacob Riis._ Our foreign colonies are to a large extent in the cities of our own country. To live in one of these foreign communities is actually to live on foreign soil. The thoughts, feelings, and traditions which belong to the mental life of the colony are often entirely alien to an American.--_Robert Hunter._ The vastness of the problem of the city slum, and the impossibility, even with unlimited resources of men and money, of permanently raising the standards of living of many of our immigrants as long as they are crowded together, and as long as the stream of newer immigrants pours into these same slums, has naturally forced itself upon the minds of thinking persons.--_Robert D. Ward._ VI THE FOREIGN PERIL OF THE CITY _I. The Evils of Environment_ [Sidenote: Tendency Toward the Cities] As is the city, so will the nation be. The tendencies all seem to be toward steady concentration in great centers. The evils of congestion do not deter the thronging multitudes. The attractions of the city are irresistible, even to those who exist in the most wretched conditions. The tenement districts baffle description, yet nothing is more difficult than to get their miserable occupants to leave their fetid and squalid surroundings for the country. To the immigrants the city is a magnet. Here they find colonies of their own people, and prize companionship more than comfort. "Folks is more company than stumps," said an old woman in the slums to Dr. Schauffler. In the great cities the immigrants are massed, and this constitutes a most perplexing problem. If tens of thousands of foreigners could somehow be gotten out of New York, Boston, Chicago, and other cities, and be distributed where they are needed and could find work and homes, immigration would cause far less anxiety. But when the immigrant prefers New York or Chicago, what authority shall remove him to Louisiana or Oklahoma? [Sidenote: Perils Due to Environment] The foreigner is in the city; he will chiefly stay there; and the question is what can be done to improve his city environment; for the perils to which we refer are primarily due not to the foreigner himself but to the evil and vice-breeding conditions in which he has to exist. These imperil him and make him a peril in turn. The overcrowded tenements and slums, the infection of long-entrenched corruption, the absence of light, fresh air, and playgrounds for the children, the unsanitary conditions and exorbitant rents, the political heelers teaching civic corruption, the saloons with their attendant temptations to vice and crime, the fraudulent naturalization--these work together upon the immigrant, for his undoing and thus to the detriment of the nation. When we permit such an environment to exist, and practically force the immigrant into it because we do not want him for a next-door neighbor, we can hardly condemn him for forming foreign colonies which maintain foreign customs and are impervious to American influences. It has too long been the common practice to lay everything to the foreigner. Would it not be fairer and more Christian to distribute the blame, and assume that part of it which belongs to us. In the study of the facts contained in this chapter, put yourself persistently in the place of the immigrant, suddenly introduced into the conditions here pictured, and ask yourself what you would probably be and become in like circumstances. [Sidenote: A Call for Reform] How the other half lives is not the only mystery. How little the so-called upper-ten know how the lower-ninety live. And how little you and I, who are fortunate to count ourselves in the next upper-twenty, perhaps, know how the under-seventy exist and think and do. If only the more fortunate thirty per cent. knew of the exact conditions under which a large proportion of men, women, and children carry on the pitiful struggle for mere existence, there would be an irresistible demand for betterment. Every Christian ought to know the wrongs of our civilization, in order that he may help to right them. This glimpse beneath the surface of the city should stir us out of comfortable complacency and give birth in us to the impulse that leads to settlement and city mission work, and to civic reform movements. The young men and women of America must create a public sentiment that will demolish the slums, and erect in their places model tenements; that will tear down the rookeries, root out the saloons and dens of vice, and provide the children with playgrounds and breathing space. And this work will be directly in the line of Americanizing and evangelizing the immigrants, for they are chiefly the occupants and victims of the tenements and the slums. [Sidenote: Vanishing Americanism] New York is a city in America but is hardly an American city. Nor is any other of our great cities, except perhaps Philadelphia. Boston is an Irish city, Chicago is a German-Scandinavian-Polish city, Saint Louis is a German city, and New York is a Hebrew-German-Irish-Italian-Bohemian-Hungarian city--a cosmopolitan race conglomeration. Eighteen languages are spoken in a single block. In Public School No. 29 no less than twenty-six nationalities are represented. This indicates the complicated problem. [Sidenote: A Jewish City] New York is the chief Jewish capital. Of the 760,000 Jews on Manhattan, about 450,000 are Russian, and they overcrowd the East Side ghetto. In that quarter the signs are in Hebrew, the streets are markets, the shops are European, the men, women, and children speak in Yiddish, and all faces bear the foreign and Hebrew mark plainly upon them. [Sidenote: An Italian City] Go on a little further and you find that you are in Little Italy, quite distinct from Jewry, but not less foreign. Here the names on the signs are Italian, and the atmosphere is redolent with the fumes of Italy. The hurdy-gurdy vies with the push-cart, the streets are full of children and women, and you are as a stranger in a strange land. You would not be in a more distinctively Italian section if you were by magic transplanted to Naples or Genoa. [Sidenote: A Foreign City] [Sidenote: Other Foreign Cities] Nor is it simply the East Side in lower New York that is so manifestly foreign. Go where you will on Manhattan Island and you will see few names on business signs that do not betray their foreign derivation. Two out of every three persons you meet will be foreign. You will see the Italian gangs cleaning the streets, the Irish will control the motor of your trolley-car and collect your fares, the policeman will be Irish or German, the waiters where you dine will be French or German, Italian or English, the clerks in the vast majority of the shopping places will be foreign, the people you meet will constantly remind you of the rarity of the native American stock. You are ready to believe the statement that there are in New York more persons of German descent than of native descent, and more Germans than in any city of Germany except Berlin. Here are nearly twice as many Irish as in Dublin, about as many Jews as in Warsaw, and more Italians than in Naples or Venice. In government, in sentiment, in practice, as in population (thirty-seven per cent. foreign-born and eighty per cent. of foreign birth or parentage), the metropolis is predominantly foreign, and in elections the foreign vote, shrewdly manipulated for the most part, controls. Nor is this true of New York alone. In thirty-three of our largest cities the foreign population is larger than the native; in Milwaukee and Fall River the foreign percentage rises as high as eighty-five per cent. In all these cities the foreign colonies are as distinct and practically as isolated socially as though they were in Russia or Poland, Italy or Hungary. Foreign in language, customs, habits, and institutions, these colonies are separated from each other, as well as from the American population, by race, customs, and religion. [Sidenote: Failure in City Government] To believe that this makes no particular difference so far as the development of our national life is concerned is to shut one's eyes to obvious facts. As such an impartial and intelligent student of our institutions as Mr. James Bryce has pointed out, the conspicuous failure of democracy in America thus far is seen in the bad government of our great cities. And it is in these centers that the mass of the immigrants learn their first and often last lessons of American life. [Sidenote: Where the Newcomers First Go] The strong tendency of immigrants is to settle in or near the ports of entry. Where in the great cities do these newcomers find a dwelling place? What will their first lessons in American life be? If we deal largely with New York, it is simply because here are the typical conditions and here the larger proportion of arrivals. Once admitted at Ellis Island, the alien is free to go where he will; or rather, where he can, for his place of residence is restricted, after all. If he is an Italian, he will naturally and almost of necessity go to one of the Little Italies; if a Jew, to the ghetto of the East Side; if a Bohemian, to Little Bohemia; and so on. In other words, he will go, naturally and almost inevitably, to the colonies which tend to perpetuate race customs and prejudices, and to prevent assimilation. Worse yet, these colonies are in the tenement and slum districts, the last environment of all conceivable in which this raw material of American citizenship should be placed. _II. Tenement-House Life_ [Sidenote: Vice-Breeding Conditions] To those who have not made personal investigation, the present conditions, in spite of laws and efforts to ameliorate the worst evils, are well nigh unbelievable. The cellar population, the blind alley population, the swarming masses in buildings that are little better than rat-traps, the herding of whole families in single rooms, in which the miserable beings sleep, eat, cook, and make clothing for contractors, or cigars that would never go into men's mouths if the men saw where they were made--these things seem almost impossible in a civilized and Christian land. It is horrible to be obliged to think of the human misery and hopelessness and grind to which hundreds of thousands are subjected in the city of New York day in and out, without rest or change. It is no wonder that criminals and degenerates come from these districts; it is a marvel, rather, that so few result, and that so much of human kindness and goodness exists in spite of crushing conditions. There is a bright as well as dark side even to the most disgraceful districts; but there is no denying that the dark vastly predominates, and that the struggle for righteousness is too hard for the average human being. Nearly everything is against the peasant immigrant thrust into the throng which has no welcome for him, no decent room, and yet from which he has little chance to get away. He is commonly cleaner morally when he lands than after six months of the life here. Why should he not be? What has American Christianity done to safeguard or help him? [Sidenote: Immigrants Not Responsible] The existence of the tenement-house evils, it must be borne in mind, is chargeable primarily to the owner and landlord, not to the foreign occupant. The landlords are especially to blame for the ill consequences. The immigrant cannot dictate terms or conditions. He has to go where he can. The prices charged for rent are exorbitant, and should secure decency and healthful quarters. No property is so remunerative. This rent money is literally blood money in thousands of instances, and yet every effort to improve things is bitterly fought. Why should not socialism and anarchism grow in such environment? Of course many of the immigrants are familiar with poor surroundings and do not apparently object to dirt and crowding. But that does not make these conditions less perilous to American life. Self-respect has a hard struggle for survival in these sections, and if the immigrant does not possess or loses that, he is of the undesirable class. Mr. Robert Hunter makes the statement that no other city in the world has so many dark and windowless rooms, or so many persons crowded on the acre, or so many families deprived of light and air as New York. He says there are 360,000 dark rooms in Greater New York. And these are almost entirely occupied by the foreigners. But unsanitary conditions prevail also in all the cities, large and small, and especially in the mine and mill and factory towns, wherever large masses of the poorest workers live. [Sidenote: Legal Remedies Possible] Concerning possible legislation to correct these city evils of environment, Mr. Sargent says: "So far as the overcrowding in city tenements is concerned, municipal ordinances in our large cities prescribing the amount of space which rapacious landlords should, under penalties sufficiently heavy to enforce obedience, be required to give each tenant, would go far toward attaining the object in view. Whether such a plan could be brought into existence through the efforts of our general government, or whether the Congress could itself legislate directly, upon sanitary and moral grounds, against the notorious practice of housing aliens with less regard for health and comfort than is shown in placing brute animals in pens, the Bureau is unprepared to say. [Sidenote: Demands Immediate Remedy] It is, however, convinced that no feature of the immigration question so insistently demands public attention and effective action. The evil to be removed is one that is steadily and rapidly on the increase, and its removal will strike at the root of fraudulent elections, poverty, disease, and crime in our large cities, and on the other hand largely supply that increasing demand for labor to develop the natural resources of our country."[71] [Sidenote: Little Italy] Not to draw the picture all in the darker shades, let us look at the best type of Italian tenement life. We are not left to guesswork in the matter. Settlement workers and students of social questions are actually living in the tenement and slum sections, so as to know by experience and not hearsay. One of these investigators, Mrs. Lillian W. Betts, author of two enlightening books,[72] has lived for a year in one of the most crowded tenements in one of the most densely populated sections of the Italian quarter. We condense some of her statements, which reveal the foreign life of to-day in New York's Little Italy, with its 400,000 souls. [Sidenote: Immigrant Isolation] "A year's residence in an Italian tenement taught me first of all the isolation of a foreign quarter; how completely cut off one may be from everything that makes New York New York. The necessities of life can be bought without leaving the square that is your home. After a little it occasioned no surprise to meet grandparents whose own children were born in New York, who had never crossed to the east side of the Bowery, never seen Broadway, nor ever been south of Houston Street. There was no reason why they should go. Every interest in their life centered within four blocks. I went with a neighbor to Saint Vincent's Hospital, where her husband had been taken. I had to hold her hand in the cars, she was so terrified. She had lived sixteen years in this ward and never been on a street-car before. Of a family of five sons and two daughters, besides the parents, in this country fifteen years, none spoke English but the youngest, born here, and she indifferently. Little Italy was all of America they knew, and of curiosity they had none. [Sidenote: Children American in Spirit] "The house in which we lived was built for twenty-eight families and occupied by fifty-six. One man who had been in the country twenty-eight years could not speak or understand a word of English. Nothing but compulsion made his children use Italian, and the result was pathetic. The eldest child was an enthusiastic American, and the two civilizations were always at war. This boy knew more of American history, its heroes and poetry, than anyone of his age I ever met. This boy had never been five blocks from the house in which we lived. He removed his hat and shoes when he went to bed in winter; in summer he took off his coat. A brother and two sisters shared the folding bed with him. His father hired the three rooms and sublet to a man with a wife and three children. The women quarreled all the time, but worked in the same room, finishing trousers and earning about forty-five cents a day each. [Sidenote: Evils of Overcrowding] "How do they live? One widow, with three in her own family, took nine men boarders in her three rooms. A nephew and his wife also kept house there, the rent being $18 a month. Another neighbor, whose family consisted of four adults and two children, had seven lodgers or boarders at one time. These men owned mattresses, rolled up by day, spread on the floor at night. One of them had a bride coming from Italy. Two men with their mattresses were ejected and space made for the ornate brass and green bedstead. The wedding was the occasion of great rejoicing. Next day the bride was put to work sewing 'pants.' At the end of a month I found she had not left those rooms from the moment she entered them, and that she worked, Sundays included, fourteen hours a day. She was a mere child, at that. The Italian woman is not a good housekeeper, but she is a homemaker; she does not fret; dirt, disorder, noise, company, never disturb her. She must share everything with those about her. She cooks one meal a day and that at night. Pot or pan may be placed in the middle of the table and each may help himself from it, but the food is what her husband wants. [Sidenote: Family Coöperation] "Together they will wash the dishes or he will take the baby out. The mother, who has sewed all day, will wash till midnight, while the husband sits dozing, smoking, talking. But he hangs out the clothes. They work together, these Italian husbands and wives. Their wants are the barren necessaries of life; shelter, food, clothing to cover nakedness. The children's clothes are washed when they go to bed. Life is reduced to its lowest terms. They can move as silently as do the Arabs and do so in the night watches. But they are rarely penniless; they have a little fund always in the bank. They put their young children in institutions from weaning-time until they are old enough to work, then bring them home to swell the family income. Recently a father, whose children had thus been cared for by the state, bought a three-story tenement. This is typical thrift. There was never a day when all the children of school age were in school. School was a prison house to most of them. There was not room for them, even if they wanted to go. [Sidenote: City Neglect] "The streets in which the Italians live are the most neglected. It is claimed that cleanliness is impossible where the Italian lives. The truth is that preparation for cleanliness in our foreign colonies is wholly inadequate. The police despise the Italian except for his voting power. He feels the contempt, but with the wisdom of his race he keeps his crimes foreign, and defies this department more successfully than the public generally knows. He is a peaceable citizen in spite of the peculiar race crimes which startle the public. The criminals are as one to a thousand of these people. On Sundays watch these colonies. The streets are literally packed with crowds from house line to house line, as far as the eye can see, but not a policeman in sight, nor occasion for one. Laughter, song, discussion, exchange of epithet, but no disturbance. They mind their own business as no other nation, and carry it to the point of crime when they protect the criminal."[73] [Sidenote: Possibilities of Uplifting] This is testimony directly from life and has especial value. It reveals the difficulties, and at the same time the possibilities, of reaching and Americanizing these immigrants, who are better than their surroundings, and promising if properly cared for. [Sidenote: Sources of Degradation] The impression that steadily deepens with observation and study is that of the evil and degrading surroundings. Not only are there the evil moral influences of overcrowding, but also the contact with elements of population already deteriorated by a generation of tenement house life. The fresh arrivals are thrown into contact with the corrupt remnants of Irish immigration which now make up the beggars, drunkards, thugs, and thieves of those quarters. The results can easily be predicted. The Italian laboring population is temperate when it comes to this country; but under the evil conditions and influences of the tenement district disorderly resorts have been opened, and drinking and other vices are spreading. The Hebrews show tendencies to vices from which formerly they were free. The law does not protect these immigrants, and it is charged that the city permits every kind of inducement for the extension of immorality, drunkenness, and crime. Thus the immigrant is likely to deteriorate and degenerate in the process of Americanization, instead of becoming better in this new world. He has indeed little chance. If he does not become a pauper or criminal or drunkard, it will be because he is superior to his environment. _III. The Sweat-shop Peril_ [Sidenote: An Awful Peril] An immigrant peril is the sweat-shop labor which this class performs. "Sweating" is the system of sub-contract wherein the work is let out to contractors to be done in small shops or at home. According to the Illinois Bureau of Labor Statistics, "in practice sweating consists of the farming out by competing manufacturers to competing contractors of the material for garments, which in turn is distributed among competing men and women to be made up." This system is opposed to the factory system, where the manufacturer employs his own workmen, sees the goods made, and knows the conditions. The sweating system is one of the iniquities of commercial greed, and the helpless foreigner of certain classes is its victim. The contractor or sweater in our cities is an organizer and employer of immigrants. His success depends upon getting the cheapest help, and life is of no account to him, nor apparently to the man above him. The clothing may be made in foul and damp and consumption or fever-infested cellars and tenement-styes, by men, women and children sick or uncleanly, but the only care of the sweater is that it be made cheaply and thus his returns be secured. It is a standing reproach to our Christian civilization that the sweating system and the slums are still existing sores in American centers of population. So far the law has been unable to control or check greed, and the plague spots grow worse. Here is a typical case, taken from the report of the Industrial Commission: [Sidenote: A Striking Example] "A Polish Jew in Chicago, at a time when very few of the Poles were tailors, opened a shop in a Polish neighborhood. He lost money during the time he was teaching the people the trade, but finally was a gainer. Before he opened the shop he studied the neighborhood; he found the very poorest quarters where most of the immigrant Poles lived. He took no one to work except the newly arrived Polish women and girls. The more helpless and dependent they were, the more sure of getting work from him. In speaking about his plans he said: 'It will take these girls years to learn English and to learn how to go about and find work. In that way I will be able to get their labor very cheap.' His theory turned out to be practical. He has since built several tenement-houses." [Sidenote: A Foreign Importation] The cheap tailor business is divided among the Italians, Russians, Poles, and Swedes, Germans and Bohemians. The women and children are made to work, and hours are not carefully counted. Long work, poor food, poor light, foul air, bad sanitation--all make this kind of life far worse than any life which the immigrants knew in Europe. Better physical starvation there than the mental and spiritual blight of these modern conditions here. That so much of hopeful humanity is found in these unwholesome and congested wards proves the quality worth saving and elevating. [Sidenote: Story of a Sweat-shop Girl] Here is an illustration of the resolute spirit which conditions cannot crush. A young Polish girl was brought by her widowed mother to America, in hope of bettering their condition. The mother died soon afterward, leaving the orphan dependent. Then came the disappointments, one after another, and finally, the almost inevitable result in such cases, the fall into the slums and the sweat-shops. By hard work six days in the week, fourteen or more hours a day, this girl of tender age could make $4 a week! She had to get up at half past five every morning and make herself a cup of coffee, which with a bit of bread and sometimes fruit made her breakfast. Listen to her story: [Sidenote: Her Own Story] "The machines go like mad all day, because the faster you work the more money you get. Sometimes in my haste the finger gets caught and the needle goes right through it. We all have accidents like that. Sometimes a finger has to come off.... For the last two winters I have been going to night school. I have learned reading, writing, and arithmetic. I can read quite well in English now, and I look at the newspapers every day. I am going back to night school again this winter. Some of the women in my class are more than forty years of age. Like me, they did not have a chance to learn anything in the old country. It is good to have an education; it makes you feel higher. Ignorant people are all low. People say now that I am clever and fine in conversation. There is a little expense for charity, too. If any worker is injured or sick we all give money to help."[74] [Sidenote: Possibilities] Surely this is good material. A changed and Christian environment would make shining lights out of these poor immigrants, who are kept in the subways of American life, instead of being given a fair chance out in the open air and sunlight of decently paid service. [Sidenote: A Foreign System] Practically all of the work in tenements is carried on by foreign-born men and women, and more than that, by the latest arrivals and the lowest conditioned of the foreign-born. Tenement-house legislation has been practically forced upon New York, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania, whose ports of entry receive the first impact of immigration, by two of the races that have been crowding into the cities--the Italian and Hebrew. The Italian woman, working in her close tenement, has by her cheap labor almost driven out all other nationalities from that class of work still done in the home, the hand sewing on coats and trousers. Of the 20,000 licenses granted by the New York factory inspector for "home finishing" in New York City, ninety-five per cent. are held by Italians. This work has to be done because the husband is not making enough to support the family. These men work mostly as street laborers, hucksters, and peddlers. To make both ends meet not only the wife but children have to work. [Sidenote: A Typical Case] Here is a typical case of this class of worker and the earnings, from an inspector's note-book: "Antonia Scarafino, 235 Mulberry Street; finisher; gets five cents per pair pants, bastes bottoms, puts linings on; one hour to make; two years at this business; four in this country; married, with baby; sister works with her; can both together make $4 per week; husband peddles fish and makes only $1 to $2 a week; got married here; two rooms, $8.50 rent; kitchen 10 x 12; bedroom 8 x 10; gets all the work she wants. No sunlight falls into her squalid rooms, and there is no stopping, from early morning till late at night." _IV. Three Constant Perils_ [Sidenote: The Naturalization Evil] Illegal and fraudulent naturalization is another evil to which the foreigner in the city becomes a party, although the blame belongs chiefly to the ward politicians who make him a _particeps criminis_. The recognized managers of the foreign vote of various nationalities--almost always saloonkeepers--hold citizenship cheap, perjury undiscovered as good as truth, and every vote a clear gain for the party and themselves. So the naturalization mills are kept running night and day preceding a national or municipal election. Describing this process, ex-United States Senator Chandler says that in New York during a single month just before election about seven thousand naturalization papers were issued, nearly all by one judge, who examined each applicant and witnesses to his satisfaction, and signed his orders at the rate of two per minute, and as many as 618 in one day. Many classes of frauds were committed. Witnesses were professional perjurers, each swearing in hundreds of cases, testifying to a five years' residence when they had first met the applicants only a few hours before. During the past year some of these professional perjurers and political manipulators were tried and sent to the penitentiary; but the frauds will go on. Here is an illustration: [Sidenote: Making Citizens] "Patrick Hefferman, of a given street in New York, was twenty-one years old September 2, 1891, and came to this country August 1, 1888. He was naturalized October 20, 1891. On that day he was introduced by Thomas Keeler to a stranger, who went with him to court and signed a paper; they both went before the judge, who asked the stranger something. Hefferman signed nothing, said nothing, but kissed a book and came out a citizen, having taken no oath except that of renunciation and allegiance." [Sidenote: Fraud Abundant] Thus are the sacred rights of citizenship obtained by thousands upon thousands, not in New York alone, but in all our cities. More than that, fraudulent use is freely made of naturalization papers. The Italian immigrant, for example, finds his vote is wanted, and obtains a false paper. He returns to Italy to spend his earnings, and there is offered a sum of money for the use of his papers. These are given to an emigrant who probably could not pass the examination at Ellis Island, but who as a naturalized citizen, if he is not detected in the fraud, cannot be shut out. Then he sends the papers back to Italy. It is admitted that there is a regular traffic in naturalization papers. In every way the alien is put on the wrong track, and his American experiences are such as would naturally make him lawless and criminal rather than a good citizen. He needs nothing more than protection against corrupting and venal agencies, which find their origin in politics and the saloon. [Sidenote: The Saloon and the Immigrant] The foreign element furnishes the saloons with victims. In his graphic book describing tenement life in New York Mr. Riis shows the rapid multiplication of the saloons in the slums where the foreigners are crowded into tenements, nine per cent. more densely packed than the most densely populated districts of London. In the chapter, "The Reign of Rum,"[75] he says: [Sidenote: Testimony of Riis] "'Where God builds a church the devil builds next door a saloon' is an old saying that has lost its point in New York. Either the devil was on the ground first, or he has been doing a good deal more in the way of building. I tried once to find out how the account stood, and counted to 111 Protestant churches, chapels, and places of worship of every kind below Fourteenth Street, 4,065 saloons. The worst half of the tenement population lives down there, and it has to this day the worst half of the saloons. Up town the account stands a little better, but there are easily ten saloons to every church to-day. [Sidenote: Hunting for an American] "As to the motley character of the tenement population, when I asked the agent of a notorious Fourth Ward alley how many people might be living in it, I was told: One hundred and forty families--one hundred Irish, thirty-eight Italian, and two that spoke the German tongue. Barring the agent herself, there was not a native-born individual in the court. The answer was characteristic of the cosmopolitan character of lower New York, very nearly so of the whole of it, wherever it runs to alleys and courts. One may find for the asking an Italian, German, French, African, Spanish, Bohemian, Russian, Scandinavian, Jewish, and Chinese colony. The one thing you shall ask for in vain in the chief city of America is a distinctively American community." [Sidenote: The Peril of Poverty] The immigrant is nearly always poor, and is thrust into the poverty of the city. We must distinguish between pauperism and poverty. As Mr. Hunter points out, in his stirring chapter on this subject,[76] "pauperism is dependence without shame, poverty is to live miserable we know not why, to have the dread of hunger, to work sore and yet gain nothing." Fear of pauperism, of the necessity of accepting charity, drives the self-respecting poor insane and to suicide. It is to be said that the majority of the immigrants are not paupers, but self-respecting poor. Moreover, the new immigration is not nearly so ready to accept pauperism as are the Irish, who make up the largest percentage of this class, as already shown. But the poor immigrants are compelled, by circumstances, to come in contact with, if not to dwell directly among this pauper element, lost to sense of degradation. The paupers make up the slums. And because the rents are cheaper in the miserable old rookeries that still defy public decency, the Italians especially crowd into these pestilential quarters, which are the hotbeds of disease, physical and moral filth, drunkenness, and crime. Thus pauperism and poverty dwell too closely together. [Sidenote: Some Causes of Poverty] Upon the unskilled masses the weight of want is constantly pressing. Unemployment, sickness, the least stoppage of the scant income, means distress. It is estimated that in our country not less than 4,000,000 persons are dependents or paupers, and not less than 10,000,000 are in poverty. This means that they cannot earn enough regularly to maintain the standard of life that means the highest efficiency, and that at some time they are liable to need aid. Mr. Riis has shown that about one third of the people of New York City were dependent upon charity at some time during the eight years previous to 1890. The report of the United Hebrew Charities for 1901 shows similar conditions existing among the Jewish population of New York. Pauperism is a peril, and poverty is a source of apathy and despair. The unskilled immigrant tends to increase the poverty by creating a surplus of cheap labor, and also falls under the blight of the evil he increases. [Sidenote: Pauperism and Immigration] Treating of this subject, the Charities Association of Boston reports that it is hopeless to attempt to relieve pauperism so long as its ranks are increased by the great hosts coming into the country, with only a few dollars to depend upon, and no certain work. The statistics of the public almshouses show that the proportion of foreign-born is greatly in excess of the native-born. The pathetic feature of this condition is that what is wanted is not charity but employment at living wages. Greatly is it to the credit of the immigrants from southeastern Europe that they are eager for work and reluctant to accept charity. The danger is that, if allowed to come and then left without opportunity to work, they will of necessity fall into the careless, shiftless, vicious class, already so large and dangerous. [Sidenote: Peril of the "Great White Plague"] The immigrants in the city tenements are especially exposed to consumption, that "Great White Plague" which yearly kills its tens of thousands. In New York City alone ten thousand die annually of tuberculosis; and this is the result largely of tenement conditions. Statisticians estimate that the annual money loss in the United States from tuberculosis, counting the cost of nursing, food, medicines, and attendance, as well as the loss of productive labor, is $330,000,000. Mr. Hunter instances a case where an entire family was wiped out by this disease within two years and a half. In spite of his efforts to get the father, who was the first one infected with the disease, to go to a hospital, he refused, saying that as he had to die, he was going to die with his family. The Health Board said it had no authority forcibly to compel the man to go to a hospital; and the result was that the whole family died with him. This plague "is the result of our weakness, our ignorance, our selfishness, and our vices; there is no need of its existence, and it is the duty of the state to stamp it out." That is Mr. Hunter's conclusion, with which we heartily agree. _V. The Cry of the Children_ [Sidenote: Peril of Child Neglect] Another peril of the city, and of the entire country as well, that comes through the foreigners is child neglect and labor; which means illiteracy, stunted body and mind, and often wreckage of life. Every foreign neighborhood is full of children, and sad enough is the average child of poverty. What makes the tenement district of the great city so terrible to you as you go into it is the sight of the throngs of children, who know little of home as you know it, have irregular and scanty meals, and surroundings of intemperance, dirt, foul atmosphere and speech, disease and vice. No wonder the police in these districts say that their worst trouble arises from the boys and the gangs of young "toughs." There is every reason for this unwholesome product. Mr. Hunter says there are not less than half a million children in Greater New York whose only playground is the street. Result, the street gang; and this gang is the really vital influence in the life of most boys in the large cities. It is this life, which develops, as Mr. Riis says, "dislike of regular work, physical incapability of sustained effort, gambling propensities, absence of energy, and carelessness of the happiness of others." The great homeless, yardless tenement, where the children of the immigrants are condemned to live, is the nursery of sickness and crime. The child is left for good influence to the school, the settlement, or the mission. For the enormous amount of juvenile crime in the city, which it requires a special court to deal with, the conditions are more responsible than the children, or even than the parents, who are unable to maintain home life, and who, through the pinch of poverty or the impulse of avarice, give over the education of the children to school or street. Here is a picture of the life on its darker side: [Sidenote: Street Life of Children] "Crowded in the tenements where the bedrooms are small and often dark, where the living room is also a kitchen, a laundry, and often a garment-making shop, are the growing children whose bodies cry out for exercise and play. They are often an irritant to the busy mother, and likely as not the object of her carping and scolding. The teeming tenements open their doors, and out into the dark passageways and courts, through foul alleys and over broken sidewalks, flow ever renewed streams of playing children. Under the feet of passing horses, under the wheels of passing street-cars, jostled about by the pedestrian, driven on by the policeman, they annoy everyone. They crowd about the music or drunken brawls in the saloons, they play hide-and-seek about the garbage boxes, they shoot 'craps' in the alleys, they seek always and everywhere activity, movement, life."[77] [Sidenote: Imprisoned Childhood] But worse than this picture is that of childhood in the sweat-shop, the factory, the mine, and other places of employment. Mr. Hunter has written a chapter on "The Child"[78] that should be studied by every lover of humanity. Its facts ring out a clarion call for reform. This touches our subject most closely because, as he says, "These evils of child life are doubly dangerous and serious because the mass of people in poverty in our cities are immigrants. The children of immigrants are a remarkable race of little ones." [Sidenote: Happy Childhood] Indeed they are, and they give you the bright side of the picture, in spite of all the evil conditions in which they live. The present writer stood recently opposite the entrance to a public school in the congested East Side, where not one of all the thousand or more of scholars was of native stock. As the crowds of little girls poured out at noontime their faces made a fascinating study. The conspicuous thing about them was the smile and fun and brightness. The dress was of every description, and one of the merriest-faced of all had on one shoe and one rubber in place of the second shoe; but from the faces you would never suspect into what kind of places these children were about to go for all they know of home. The hope lies in the children, and the schools are their great blessing and outlet, even if as Mrs. Betts says, many of them of certain classes do not think so. Mr. Hunter says: [Sidenote: What Kind of Americans?] "They are to become Americans, and through them, more than through any other agency, their own parents are being led into a knowledge of American ways and customs. All the statistics available prove that vice and crime are far more common among the children of immigrants than among the children of native parentage, and this is due no less to the yardless tenement and street playground than to widespread poverty. In a mass of cases the father and mother both work in that feverish, restless way of the new arrival, ambitious to get ahead. To overcome poverty they must neglect their children. Turned out of the small tenement into the street, the child learns the street. Nothing escapes his sharp eyes, and almost in the briefest conceivable time, he is an American ready to make his way by every known means, good and bad. To the child everything American is good and right. There comes a time when the parents cannot guide him or instruct him; he knows more than they; he looks upon their advice as of no value. If ever there was a self-made man, that man is the son of the immigrant. But the street and the street gang have a great responsibility; they are making the children of a hundred various languages from every part of the world into American citizens." [Sidenote: A Plain Duty] How long will American Christianity allow this process of degeneracy to go on, before realizing the peril of it, and providing the counteracting agencies of good? That is the question the young people ought to consider and help answer. [Sidenote: Child Labor] But far worse than all else, "the nation is engaged in a traffic for the labor of children." In this country over 1,700,000 children under fifteen are compelled to work in the factories, mines, workshops, and fields. These figures may mean little, for as Margaret McMillan has said, "You cannot put tired eyes, pallid cheeks, and languid little limbs into statistics." But we believe that if our Christian people could be brought for one moment to realize what the inhumanity of this child labor is, there would be such an avalanche of public opinion as would put a stop to it. This evil is a new one in America, begotten of greed for money. This greed is shared jointly by the capitalist employer and the parents, but the greater responsibility rests upon the former, who creates the possibility and fosters the evil. [Sidenote: Alien Victims] The immigrants furnish the parents willing to sell their children into child slavery in the factory, or the worse mill or mine--prisons all, and for the innocent. Into these prisons gather "tens of thousands of children, strong and happy, or weak, underfed, and miserable. Stop their play once for all, and put them out to labor for so many cents a day or night, and pace them with a tireless, lifeless piece of mechanism, for ten or twelve hours at a stretch, and you will have a present-day picture of child labor." But there is yet one thing which must be added to the picture. Give the child-slave worker a tenement for a home in the filthy streets of an ordinary factory city, with open spaces covered with tin cans, bottles, old shoes, garbage, and other waste, the gutters running sewers, and the air foul with odors and black with factory smoke, and the picture is fairly complete. It is a dark picture, but hardly so dark as the reality, and if one were to describe "back of the yards" in Chicago, or certain mill towns or mining districts, the picture would be even darker than the one given. [Sidenote: The Shame of the Century] Think of it, young people of Christian America! In the twentieth century, in the country we like to think the most enlightened in the world, after all our boasted advancements in civilization, child slavery--more pitiful in some respects than African slavery ever was--has its grip on the nation's childhood. [Sidenote: An Appalling Record] The record is amazing to one who has never thought about this subject. Easily a hundred thousand children at work in New York, in all sorts of employments unsuitable and injurious. Try to realize these totals, taken from Mr. Hunter, of children under fifteen, compelled to work in employments generally recognized as injurious: Over 7,000 in this country in laundries; nearly 2,000 in bakeshops; 367 in saloons as bartenders and other ways; over 138,000 at work as waiters and servants in hotels and restaurants, with long hours and conditions morally bad; 42,000 employed as messengers, with work hours often unlimited and temptations leading to immorality and vice; 20,000 in stores; 2,500 on the railroads; over 24,000 in mines and quarries; over 5,000 in glass factories; about 10,000 in sawmills and the wood-working industries; over 7,500 in iron and steel mills; over 11,000 in cigar and tobacco factories; and over 80,000 in the silk and cotton and other textile mills. [Sidenote: Soul Murder for Money] Now, all of these industries are physically injurious to childhood. But more than this, schooling has been made impossible, and immorality, disease, and death reap a rich harvest from this seed-sowing. And why are these helpless children thus engaged and enslaved, stunted, crippled, and corrupted, deprived of education and a fair chance in life? Simply because their labor is cheap. Mr. Hunter speaks none too strongly when he calls this "murder, cannibalism, destruction of soul and body." And it is the children of the immigrants who are thus sacrificed to Mammon, the pitiless god of greed. Shall our Christian young people have no voice in righting this wrong? Within a generation they can put an end to it, if they will. Here is home missionary work at hand, calling for highest endeavors. QUESTIONS FOR CHAPTER VI AIM: TO SEE CLEARLY THE DANGERS ARISING FROM CONGESTION OF FOREIGNERS IN OUR CITIES, AND THE BEST WAYS OF GUARDING AGAINST THEM I. _Foreigners in Cities._ 1. What are the chief causes of the following: (1) the rapid growth of great cities; (2) the existence of slums; (3) the settling of immigrants in colonies? 2. Is your knowledge of the lives of the poor sufficient to move you to work for their redemption? Are any of those persons, about whom we have studied, your neighbors? 3. Is the prevailing tone of New York and other cities American or Foreign? Give illustrations. 4. What is the prevailing tone in city government? Is there any connection between the answers of these last two questions? II. _Tenement-House Evils._ 5. Where do most of the foreigners settle first in the United States? Of what races is the mass chiefly composed? 6. Describe the conditions under which they live. Do they find them so or make them so? 7. What remedies can be applied to tenement-house conditions? What do the workers among them think of the needs and prospects? 8. What can be done toward improvement by the family? the school? the city government? III. _Prevalent Abuses._ 9. Do the slum conditions tend to contaminate new arrivals? Do they actually deteriorate? 10. What is the worst industrial feature of the tenement-house districts? Describe its workings. Tell of some typical sweat-shop workers. 11. What political evils flourish in the congested districts? 12. What moral and social evils flourish in the congested districts? IV. _Effects upon the Poor and the Children._ 13. What relation does immigration hold to pauperism and poverty? To conditions of health? 14. Name some of the principal authorities for the preceding answers? How would you answer those who disputed their statements? 15. Can you give any facts as to child labor? What do you think of the policy of employing children? 16. * Does this chapter convince you that Christians have a duty in these matters, and if so, what is it? REFERENCES FOR ADVANCED STUDY.--CHAPTER VI I. _New York Slums and Foreign Quarters._ Study especially the Ghetto, Little Italy, Little Hungary, et al. and find out whether similar conditions exist in cities of your section. For New York, consult University Settlement Studies, Vol. I, Nos. 3 and 4. Riis: How the Other Half Lives, X, XII. For Chicago, consult Hull House Papers. For Boston, consult Wood: Americans in Process, III, IV. II. _Measures for Relief of Slum Population._ Riis: The Battle With the Slum, V-XV. Riis: How the Other Half Lives, VI, VII, XXIV. III. _Connection between a Dense Foreign Population and Corruption in Politics._ Wood: Americans in Process, VI. IV. _Checks Put upon Industrial Oppression and Poverty._ Riis: The Peril and the Preservation of the Home. V. _Problems of Poverty and Childhood as Affected by Immigration._ Hunter: Poverty, I, V, VI. Riis: How the Other Half Lives, XV, XVII, XXI. _"To make us love our country, our country ought to be lovely," said Burke. If there is to be patriotism, it must be a matter of pride to say, "Americanus sum"--I am an American._--Professor Mayo-Smith. VII IMMIGRATION AND THE NATIONAL CHARACTER If that man who careth not for his own household is worse than an infidel, the nation which permits its institutions to be endangered by any cause that can fairly be removed, is guilty, not less in Christian than in natural law. Charity begins at home; and while the people of the United States have gladly offered an asylum to millions upon millions of the distressed and unfortunate of other lands and climes, they have no right to carry their hospitality one step beyond the line where American institutions, the American rate of wages, the American standard of living are brought into serious peril. _Our highest duty to charity and to humanity is to make this great experiment here, of free laws and educated labor, the most triumphant success that can possibly be attained._ In this way we shall do far more for Europe than by allowing its slums and its vast stagnant reservoirs of degraded peasantry to be drained off upon our soil.--_General Francis A. Walker._ If the hope which this country holds out to the human race of permanent and stable government is to be impaired by the enormous and unregulated inroad of poverty and ignorance, which changed conditions of transportation have brought upon us, then for the sake of Europe, as well as for the sake of America, the coming of these people should be checked and regulated until we can handle the problems that are already facing us.--_Phillips Brooks._ There are certain fundamentals in every system, to destroy which destroys the system itself. Our institutions have grown up with us and are adapted to our national character and needs. To change them at the demand of agitators knowing nothing of that character and those needs would be absurd and destructive.--_Professor Mayo-Smith._ VII IMMIGRATION AND THE NATIONAL CHARACTER _I. Two Points of View_ [Sidenote: The Larger Race Problem] Immigration is a radically different problem from that of slavery, but not less vital to the Republic. It is a marvelous opportunity for a Christian nation, awake; but an unarmed invasion signifying destruction to the ideals and institutions of a free and nominally Christian nation, asleep. "The wise man's eyes are in his head," says Solomon, "but the fool walketh in darkness." In other words, the difference between the wise and otherwise is one of sight. While Americans are walking in the darkness of indifferentism and of an optimism born not of faith but ignorance, immigration is steadily changing the character of our civilization. We are face to face with the larger race problem--that of assimilating sixty nationalities and races. The problem will never be solved by minimizing or deriding or misunderstanding it. [Sidenote: The Two Sides] All through this study we have sought to remember that there are two sides to every question, and two to every phase of this great immigration question. Especially is this true when we come to estimating effects upon character, for here we are in the domain of inference and of reasoning from necessarily limited knowledge. Here, too, temperament and bias play their part. One person learns that of every five persons you meet in New York four are of foreign birth or parentage, notes the change in personality, customs, and manners, and wonders how long our free institutions can stand this test of unrestricted immigration. Another answers that the foreigners are not so bad as they are often painted, and that the immorality in the most foreign parts of New York is less than in other parts. [Sidenote: Different Opinions] A third says it is not fair to count the children of foreign-born parents as foreign; that they are in fact much stronger Americans in general than the native children of native parentage; and instances the flag-drills in the schools, in which the foreign children take the keenest delight, as they do in the study of American history. But a fourth says, with Professor Boyesen, that it takes generations of intelligent, self-restrained, and self-respecting persons to make a man fit to govern himself, and that if the ordinary tests of intelligence and morality amount to anything, it certainly would take three or four generations to educate these newcomers up to the level of American citizenship. [Sidenote: Conflicting Views] One observer of present conditions says there is a lowered moral and political tone by reason of immigration; and another agrees with a leader in settlement work who recently said to the writer that he sees no reason to restrict immigration, that wages will take care of themselves and the foreigner steadily improve, and that there is in the younger foreign element a needed dynamic, a consciousness of Americanism, an interest in everything American in refreshing contrast to the _laissez-faire_ type of native young person now so common. His conclusion, from contact with both types, is that the intenseness and enthusiasm of the foreign element will make the native element bestir itself or go under. [Sidenote: Mean between Extremes] So opinions run, pro and con. There must be a mean between the two extremes--the one, that God is in a peculiar sense responsible for the future of the United States, and cannot afford to let our experiment of self-government fail, however foolish and reckless the people may be; and the other, that unless Congress speedily passes restrictive laws the destiny of our country will be imperiled beyond remedy. We find such a mean in that Americanization which includes evangelization as an essential part of the assimilating process. [Sidenote: Foreigners Everywhere] As to the ubiquity of the foreigner all will agree. "Any foreigners in your neighborhood?" asked the writer of a friend in a remote country hamlet. "O, yes," was the reply, "we have a colony of Italians." Of all such questions asked during months past not one has been answered in the negative. Go where you will, from Atlantic to Pacific Coast, the immigrant is there. In nineteen of the northern states of our Republic the number of the foreign-born and their immediate descendants exceeds the number of the native-born. In the largest cities the number is two thirds, and even three quarters. There are more Cohens than Smiths in the New York directory. Two thirds of the laborers in our factories are foreign-born or of foreign parentage. New England is no longer Puritan but foreign. So is it in the Middle and the Central West, and not only in city and town but hamlet and valley. The farms sanctified by many a Puritan prayer are occupied to-day by French-Canadian and Italian aliens. Foreigners are running our factories, working our mines, building our railways, boring our tunnels, doing the hard manual labor in all the great constructive enterprises of the nation. They are also entering all the avenues of trade, and few other than foreign names can be seen on the business signs in our cities large or small. [Sidenote: Foreignism Preserved] Not only do you find the foreigner, of one race or another, everywhere, but wherever you find him in any numbers you note that the most distinctive feature is the foreignism. The immigrant readily catches the spirit of independence and makes the most of liberty. He is insistent upon his rights, but not always so careful about the rights of others. He is imitative, and absorbs the spirit of selfishness as quickly as do the native-born. He is often unkempt, uncultured, dirty, and disagreeable. He is also impressionable and changeable, responsive to kindness as he is resentful of contempt. He follows his own customs both on Sundays and week days. He knows as little about American ideas as Americans know about him. He is commonly apt to learn, and very much depends upon the kind of teaching he falls under. Much of it, unfortunately, has not been of the kind to make the American ideas and ways seem preferable to his own. Made to feel like an alien, he is likely to remain at heart an alien; whereas the very safety and welfare and Christian civilization of our country depend in no small degree upon transforming him into a true American. For upon this change hangs the answer to the question, which influence is to be strongest--ours upon the foreigner or the foreigner's upon us. _II. American Ideals_ [Sidenote: A Question for Patriots] Surely this is a question to engage the attention of Christian patriots--the influence of this vast mass of undigested if not indigestible immigration upon the national character and life. A most scholarly and valuable treatment of this subject is found in the discriminating work by Professor Mayo-Smith, one of the very best books written on the subject. The figures are out of date, but the principles so clearly enunciated are permanent, and the conclusions sane and sound. This is the way he opens up the subject we are now considering: [Sidenote: The Marks of a High Civilization] "The whole life of a nation is not covered by its politics and its economics. Civilization does not consist merely of free political institutions and material prosperity. The morality of a community, its observance of law and order, its freedom from vice, its intelligence, its rate of mortality and morbidity, its thrift, cleanliness, and freedom from a degrading pauperism, its observance of family ties and obligations, its humanitarian disposition and charity, and finally its social ideals and habits are just as much indices of its civilization as the trial by jury or a high rate of wages. These things are, in fact, the flower and fruit of civilization--in them consists the successful 'pursuit of happiness' which our ancestors coupled with life and liberty as the inalienable rights of a man worthy of the name. "In order that we may take a pride in our nationality and be willing to make sacrifices for our country, it is necessary that it should satisfy in some measure our ideal of what a nation ought to be. What now are the characteristics of American state and social life which we desire to see preserved? Among the most obvious are the following: [Sidenote: American Ideals] "(1) The free political constitution and the ability to govern ourselves in the ordinary affairs of life, which we have inherited from England and so surprisingly developed in our own history; "(2) The social morality of the Puritan settlers of New England, which the spirit of equality and the absence of privileged classes have enabled us to maintain; "(3) The economic well-being of the mass of the community, which affords our working classes a degree of comfort distinguishing them sharply from the artisans and peasants of Europe; "(4) Certain social habits which are distinctively American or are, at least, present in greater degree among our people than elsewhere in the world. Such are love of law and order, ready acquiescence in the will of the majority, a generally humane spirit, displaying itself in respect for women and care for children and helpless persons, a willingness to help others, a sense of humor, a good nature and a kindly manner, a national patriotism, and confidence in the future of the country. "All these are desirable traits; and as we look forward to the future of our commonwealth we should wish to see them preserved, and should deprecate influences tending to destroy the conditions under which they exist. Any such phenomenon as immigration, exerting wide and lasting influence, should be examined with great care to see what its effect on these things will be."[79] [Sidenote: Protestant Religion Vital] We should add to this thoughtful statement a clause concerning religion. A vital thing to be maintained and extended is the Protestant faith which formed the basis of our colonial and national life. No part of the subject should receive more careful scrutiny than the effect of immigration upon Protestant America. Whatever would make this country less distinctively Protestant in religion tends to destroy all the other social and civil characteristics which, it is well said, we wish to preserve. [Sidenote: American Life Changing] When immigration began in the early years of the nineteenth century, the American people possessed a distinctive life and character of their own, differing in many respects from that of any other people. The easy amalgamation of the races that formed the colonial stock--English, Huguenot, Scotch, Dutch--had produced an American stock distinct from any in the Old World. The nation was practically homogeneous, and its social, religious, and political ideals and aims were distinct. That great changes have taken place in the past century no one will deny. The material expansion and development have not been more marked than the changes social and religious. [Sidenote: Influence of Immigration] Just what part immigration has played in producing these changes it is of course difficult to say with exactness, but unquestionably the part has been very great. The twenty-three millions of aliens admitted into the United States since 1820 brought their habits and customs and standards of living with them; brought also their religion or want of it; and it would be absurd to imagine that all of these millions had been Americanized, or, in other words, had given up their old ways for our ways of thinking and living. On the contrary, they have transported all sorts of political notions from monarchial countries to our soil. "The continental ideas of the Sabbath, the nihilist's ideas of government, the communist's ideas of property, the pagan's ideas of religion--all these mingle in our air with the ideas that shaped the men at Plymouth Rock and Valley Forge," that adorned hill, dale and prairie with Christian church and Christian school, and made possible the building of free America. [Sidenote: The Grade of the Aliens] As we have seen, the immigrants have mostly represented the peasant or lower classes of the countries whence they came. This is noted, not in the way of prejudice, but because it is always true that mortality is greater, and crime, illiteracy, and pauperism are more prevalent among the lower classes. Of course it is also true that if the higher classes had come from foreign lands they would have made an addition to the social life quite different from that which did come. The average character of the immigration, however favorable, required raising in order to meet the American level. In the new environment it was to be expected that large numbers of individuals among the immigrants would rise to prominence and influence, and this has been the case. The country owes large debt to the immigrants of earlier days. Their children and descendants are loyal Americans. It is true, on the other hand, that many have come from unfortunate conditions in the Old World only to fall into quite as unfortunate ones in the New; and they and their descendants have swollen the pauper and criminal class. The statistics prove that a large proportion of our criminals and convicts are of foreign birth. It is still more significant to note that, in the opinion of expert observers, the first generation of foreign-born parentage, in the cities at least, make a worse record than the migrating parents. [Sidenote: Bad Effects of New Environments] If this be so, the new environment is producing deterioration and degeneracy instead of improvement. An Italian of education, working among his people, told the writer that the Italian boys and girls born here, or coming at a very early age, were much more lawless and disorderly and difficult to deal with than their fathers and mothers. They had imbibed all the worst features of our life, its independence, its defiance of parental authority, its selfishness, rudeness, and vices, while they lacked the reverence, courtesy, and spirit of obedience native to the Italian-born. This is substantiated by many witnesses who have labored among the foreign element. The Americanization these children are getting is largely of the worst type--the type that we should like to see emigrate to European countries. And it is confined to no one race, but common to all. Professor Boyesen, for instance, a Norwegian-American, who blamed the ideas gained in the public schools for some of the results seen in the young hoodlums and roughs of foreign parentage, said that worthy German and Scandinavian fathers complained bitterly that they could not govern their children in this country. Their sons took to the streets, and if disciplined left home entirely; and they attributed this to the spirit of irresponsible independence in the air. This is perhaps one of the inevitable penalties of individual liberty. _III. Various Effects of Immigration_ [Sidenote: Making Life too Cheap] The introduction through immigration of a lower standard of living has been shown in preceding chapters. The point to be appreciated is that in this matter we are not dealing with the immigration of individual paupers and cheap workingmen, but with the influx of whole classes that threaten to degrade our material civilization. There are in America entire communities which live on a different plane, and form colonies as foreign to American ideas and life as anything in Europe can show. They have organized their own social life and fixed their own standards, instead of rising to ours. The results are plain all over the country. Immigration has cheapened more than wages in certain lines, it has cheapened life, until the coal barons could say, "It is cheaper to store men than coal." But men may be too cheap. [Sidenote: Good Qualities Bad if Abused] Some of the best qualities in the immigrants are liable to abuse. Thrift, for instance, is commendable, but not when it is exercised at the expense of decent living. Economy is an admirable trait, but not when practiced at the expense of manhood and decent conditions. A distinct deterioration of the masses displaced by the cheaper labor has marked the advent of the new immigration. While some of the workingmen thrown out of employment by immigration rise with the increase in the number of superior positions, the great mass are obliged to accept the lower standard or are forced out of the industry into misery, pauperism, and crime. The greater tendency of immigrants, by reason of their poverty, to permit or encourage the employment of their wives or children, still further increases the intensity of the competition for employment. In view of all the facts, a recent writer argues that the limitation or restriction which would reduce the volume and improve the economic quality of immigration would greatly improve labor conditions in this country. [Sidenote: Deterioration a Result of too Large Immigration] Under the present free inflow, says this writer, "the condition of the great mass of the working classes of this country is being permanently depressed, and the difference between the industrial condition of the unskilled workers in our country and of other countries is being steadily lessened to our permanent and great detriment."[80] [Sidenote: False Reasoning] As to the economic effects of unrestricted immigration, the stock argument that it costs a foreign country a thousand dollars to raise a man, and that, therefore, every immigrant is that much clear money gain to this country, simply begs the question of the usefulness of the immigrant and the country's need of him. Many immigrants are not worth what it cost to raise them, to their native land or any other; and at any rate, a man is only of value where he can fit into the community life and do something it needs to have done. Another naïve claim is that every mouth that comes into the country brings with it two hands, the assumption being that there is necessarily work for the two hands. If not, then there is an extra mouth to be fed at somebody else's expense. The real question is one of demand and quality. [Sidenote: Effects upon Education] What effect has immigration had, and what is it likely to have, upon our national educational policy? The parochial school is opposed to the public school; the parochial school is Roman, the public school American. The parochial schools could not secure scholars but for immigration. The Roman Catholic Church is persistently trying to get appropriations of public money for parochial schools, although well aware that this is directly contrary to the fundamental American principle of absolute separation of Church and State; and is relying upon the foreign vote to accomplish this un-American purpose. Here is an illustration of the conditions made possible through unchecked immigration and the wielding of this immigration by priestly influence: [Sidenote: Baneful Results in Illinois] In Illinois the foreign element outnumbers the native in voting power. In consequence compulsory education in the public schools of that state was voted down by a legislature pledged to obey the dictum of the foreign element. Where the priests wield the foreign element in favor of the parochial schools, it is not possible to pass a bill for compulsory education in the English language. [Sidenote: Parochial Schools in Pennsylvania] The striking fact is given by Dr. Warne[81] that in parochial schools for the Slav children in Pennsylvania, English is not taught, and the children are growing up as thoroughly foreign and under priestly control as though they were in Bohemia or Galicia. [Sidenote: A Real Menace to the Republic] A student of this subject[82] says that all the facts indicate that the time will come when, if compulsory education in English is not maintained by the states, this important matter will have to be made one of national legislation. "The supine bowing of the native element in our political parties to this foreign, domineering, un-American and denationalizing opposition to the state control of the education of the child for citizenship is in itself a menace. When we hear of public schools in America taught in German and Polish, instead of the language of Emerson and Longfellow, Lincoln and Grant, one feels like taking, not Diogenes' lantern, but an Edison searchlight, and going about our streets to see if there be in all our cities a patriot." More evil in results than this, and most insidious of all the attempts of the Roman Catholic hierarchy to undermine American principles, is the system of so-called compromise by which some of the public schools are taught by nuns, sisters, and priests, who wear their Church garb, and use the school buildings during certain hours for sectarian instruction. The mere statement of the facts ought to be sufficient to bring about drastic remedies, but the easy-going Protestants apparently do not realize what is being done. [Sidenote: Schools the Sure Way to Americanism] American patriotism must steadily and resolutely resist every Roman Catholic attack, open or covert, upon our public schools, every attempt to divert public moneys to sectarian purposes. This is vital to the preservation of our civil and religious liberty. For the immigrant children the public schools are the sluiceways into Americanism. When the stream of alien childhood flows through them, it will issue into the reservoirs of national life with the Old World taints filtered out, and the qualities retained that make for loyalty and good citizenship. We shall have to look to our school boards, elevate them above party politics and the reach of graft, and elect upon them men and women instinct with the spirit of true Americanism, or see this mightiest agency of modern civilization diverted from its high mission to produce for the Republic an enlightened and noble manhood and womanhood. [Sidenote: Effects upon Political Conditions] What is the effect of the addition of so many thousands of men of voting age upon our political conditions? Undoubtedly demoralizing and dangerous. Professor Mayo-Smith says: "We are thus conferring the privilege of citizenship, including the right to vote, without any test of the man's fitness for it. The German vote in many localities controls the action of political leaders on the liquor question, oftentimes in opposition to the sentiment of the native community. The bad influence of a purely ignorant vote is seen in the degradation of our municipal administrations in America."[83] The foreign-born congregate in the large cities, especially the mass of unskilled laborers. There they easily come under control of leaders of their own race, who use them to further selfish ends. Fraudulent naturalization is another evil result. There is no more dangerous element in the Republic than a foreign vote, wielded by unscrupulous partisans and grafters. The immigrant is not so much to blame as are those who corrupt him, but if he were not here they would have no opportunity. In order to wield a bludgeon a bully must have the bludgeon. [Sidenote: A Voter Should be Able to Read his Ballot] There is an unquestioned and increasing evil and peril in a German vote, an Irish vote, a Scandinavian vote, an Italian vote, and a Hebrew vote. Out in South Dakota a Russian vote also has to be reckoned with, and in New England a French-Canadian vote. All this is undemocratic and unwholesome in the highest degree. Our government is based upon the intelligent and responsible use of the ballot. How can such use be possible in the case of the naturalized alien who cannot read or write our language or any other? No one can declare it unreasonable that a reading test as a qualification for voting should be required of all. On the brighter side of the political phase, it is asserted that it was the foreign element of the East Side in New York that made possible the election of a reform candidate in a recent election, and that this element can be relied upon for reform and independent voting quite as much as the American society element, which is frequently too indifferent to vote at all. There is too much truth in this. At the same time, one who is familiar with the discussions at the People's Forum in Cooper Institute, New York, or similar meeting places of the foreign element in other large cities, knows how essentially un-American are the point of view and the theories most advocated. _IV. The Religious Problem_ [Sidenote: Effects upon Religious Conditions] What is the effect of immigration upon the religious life of the country? This is an exceedingly difficult matter upon which to generalize. There is no doubt that great changes have taken place in the religious views and practices of the people, but how far these can be attributed to foreign influence is something upon which agreement will be rare and judgment difficult. It will be instructive, first of all, to study this table, which gives the results of questions asked the immigrants in 1900 concerning their religious connections. This was the last inquiry of the kind officially made, and will indicate what religious elements in immigration must be taken into consideration: RELIGIOUS STATISTICS OF THE IMMIGRATION FOR 1900 ------------------------------------------------------- |Total | | Protestants Countries | | | Roman Catholics | | | |Greek Catholics ------------------------------------------------------- Austria-Hungary|64,835 | 5,009 | 39,694| 7,699 Belgium | 1,728 | 94 | 967| 2 Denmark | 3,253 | 2,629 | 44| -- France | 4,902 | 165 | 1,736| 3 German Empire |25,904 |10,258 | 6,758| 18 Greece | 2,450 | 14 | 14| 2,350 Italy |79,664 | 50 | 78,306| 26 Netherlands | 1,994 | 839 | 190| -- Norway | 7,113 | 6,674 | 2| -- Portugal | 2,269 | 2 | 2,056| -- Roumania | 1,655 | 160 | 60| 31 Russian Empire | | | | and Finland |62,537 |13,295 | 22,462| 1,470 Servia, | | | | Bulgaria | 59 | -- | 4| 47 Spain | 1,428 | 15 | 704| -- Sweden |13,541 |12,708 | 9| -- Switzerland | 2,294 | 710 | 608| 7 Turkey in | | | | Europe | 137 | 5 | 5| 33 United Kingdom |65,390 | 12,611| 31,216| 4 Not specified | 8 | --| -- | 5 Total Europe |341,161| 65,238|184,835|11,695 Total Asia | 9,726| 452| 1,390| 2,833 Africa | 109| 13| 9| -- All other | | | | countries | 10,440| 1,274| 2,178| 11 --------------------------------- Grand Total[84] |361,436| 66,977|188,412|14,539 --------------------------------- Percentage in | | | | each religion| 100| 18.54| 52.14| 4.03 ------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------- |Israelites | | Brahmans Countries | | | Mohammedans | | | |Miscellaneous -------------------------------------------------------- Austria-Hungary |11,082 | -- | -- | 1,351 Belgium | 4 | -- | -- | 661 Denmark | 2 | -- | -- | 578 France | 12 | -- | 2 | 2,984 German Empire | 401 | -- | -- | 8,469 Greece | -- | -- | -- | 72 Italy | 1 | -- | -- | 1,281 Netherlands | 8 | -- | -- | 957 Norway | -- | -- | -- | 437 Portugal | -- | -- | -- | 211 Roumania | 1,350 | -- | -- | 54 Russian Empire | | | | and Finland |24,351 | -- | 1 | 958 Servia, | | | | Bulgaria | 1 | -- | -- | 7 Spain | -- | -- | -- | 709 Sweden | -- | -- | -- | 824 Switzerland | 6 | -- | -- | 963 Turkey in | | | | Europe | 27 | -- | 13 | 54 United Kingdom | 197 | -- | 1 | 21,361 Not specified | -- | -- | -- | 3 Total Europe | 37,442| -- | 17 | 41,934 Total Asia | 48| 3,373| 77 | 1,553 Africa | 5| -- | 16 | 66 All other | | | | countries | 28| 228| -- | 6,721 --------------------------------- Grand Total[84] | 37,523| 3,601| 110| 50,274 --------------------------------- Percentage in | | | | each religion | 10.39| .99| -- | 13.91 ------------------------------------------------------- [Sidenote: Eighty Per Cent. Non-Protestant] In analyzing these figures, it will be noted that the Roman Catholics had fifty-two per cent. in a year when the total immigration of 361,436 (not much over one third that of the present time) was about the same in the proportion of aliens from southeastern Europe as now. The Jews would make a larger showing at present, as the immigrants from Russia are almost wholly Jews. The Protestant strength certainly would not be any greater proportionately. The large number put down as miscellaneous is significant. What a task is laid upon American Protestantism--nothing less than the evangelization of nearly eighty-two per cent. of the vast immigration. It is easy to say that the fifty-two per cent. is nominally Christian, but in fact that nominal Christianity is in many respects as much out of sympathy with American religious ideals, with democracy and the pure gospel, as is heathenism; and it is in many cases as difficult to reach, and as great an obstacle to the assimilation of the aliens. [Sidenote: Sunday Observance] Looking at various results of this incoming host, in regard to reverence for Sunday and observance of it, it is fair to assume that the millions of Germans, with their continental Sunday, were leaders in breaking in upon our Sunday customs. While they have as a people observed the laws--although seeking to have the laws changed so as to permit here the home customs of open concert halls and beer gardens on Sunday afternoon and evening--their influence has been strongly felt in favor of loose Sunday observance, and this has been sufficient to stimulate the natural tendency of the American element to make the day one of amusement and recreation, regardless of laws. The result is that now we have a lawless American Sunday quite different from and more objectionable than the continental Sunday. [Sidenote: Disregard of Law] In the larger cities throughout the country the encroachments of the money-makers have been steady. Performances of all kinds are permitted, theaters run either openly or with thinly veiled programs, saloons are open to those who know where the proper entrances are, and many forms of business and labor are carried on seven days in the week. The Jews claimed that it was a hardship to have to close on Sunday, when their religious observances came on Saturday, with result that a good many manage to keep shops and factories open all the year around. Pleas of necessity have been put forward where contractors desired to push jobs and profits. Sunday excursions are universal, and in order to gain their Sunday pleasure-outings several millions of people of all races keep several other millions hard at work on the day of rest. All places are crowded on Sunday except the churches. Go among the foreign elements in the city and you would never know it was Sunday. Holiday has supplanted holy-day. Observe the trolley-cars or subway or elevated trains on Sunday and you will see nine foreigners out of every ten persons. Go into the suburbs and you will find springing up in out-of-the-way places, where land can be secured cheap, little recreation parks, with games and dancing platforms; and here there will be throngs of Italians and other foreigners all day. [Sidenote: Loss of the American Sunday] Let us be just in this matter. The loss of the American Sunday is undoubtedly due in great measure to immigration; due in part to the weakness and dereliction of American professing Christians who have surrendered to the foreign elements and fallen in with their ideas instead of maintaining public worship and insisting upon respect for law at least. Let the blame fall where it belongs, and let the Church members recreant to duty take their share. When the sea threatened Holland her resolute people built the dykes and maintained them; American Christians have failed to stop the leaks in the church dykes, and we have had a Sunday submergence in consequence. The effect of it upon our national development is already evident and is most disastrous to our highest interests. Sabbath-breaking and progress-making never go together. Sunday work and pleasure combined form the peril alike of the American workingman and of Christian civilization. [Sidenote: General Deterioration] Along with this inflow of alien ideas in religion goes a lowered morality and a lower tone generally. Not that the sins of those in high places are to be charged upon the poor immigrant, for he rarely if ever belongs to that class. The statement may be true that the great rascals are of native stock. But that only increases the peril. The masses that come to us from southern Europe certainly will not raise the moral or commercial, any more than they will the political or intellectual, level. If we do not raise them they will tend to lower us; and much of what they see and hear can have nothing less than a demoralizing effect. [Sidenote: The Only Safeguard of Liberty] Where shall we find the zealous and consistent Christians who by sympathetic contact will represent the true spirit of Christianity, and make the elevation of the aliens possible? The supreme truth to be realized is that nothing but Christianity, as incarnated in American Protestantism, can preserve America's free institutions. [Sidenote: Spread of Socialism] Ex-President Seelye, of Amherst, said that socialism is the question of the time, and this is more apparent with every passing year. Socialism has its source in the foreign element. It is not native to America. Its swelling hosts are composed almost entirely of immigrants of recent coming. It is found not only in the great cities but is spreading through the farming sections. Now, there is a truth in socialism that must be intelligently dealt with; and there is a Christian socialism that should become dominant. And this is the only force that can check and counteract the foreign socialism that would sweep away foundations instead of ameliorating conditions and remedying evils. [Sidenote: Migration a Severe Test] In the same way, Protestant Christianity is the only agency that can save us from the moral degeneracy involved in migration, even if the immigrants were of our moral grade before coming. As Dr. Strong says, the very act of migration is demoralizing. All the strength that comes from associations, surroundings, relations, the emigrant leaves behind him, and becomes isolated in a strange land. Is it strange, then, that those who come from other lands, whose old associations are all broken and whose reputations are left behind, should sink to a lower moral level? Across the sea they suffered restraints which are here removed. Better wages afford larger means of self-indulgence; often the back is not strong enough to bear prosperity, and liberty too often lapses into license.[85] [Sidenote: Why Foreign Colonies are Perpetuated] This result of migration is at once an evil and an opportunity. Breaking away from the old associations leaves room and necessity for new ones. Upon the character of these the future of the immigrant will largely depend. Here is the Christian opportunity. See to it that the new associations make for righteousness and patriotism. If the immigrant is evangelized, assimilation is easy and sure. It is recognition of this fact that leads the Roman Catholic Church to keep foreign colonies in America as isolated and permanent as possible. The ecclesiastics realize that children must be held in the parochial schools, so as to avoid the Americanization that comes through the public schools, with the probable loss of loyalty to the Church. The parents equally must be kept away from the influences that would broaden and enlighten them. Dr. Strong tells of large colonies in the West, settled by foreigners of one nationality and religion; "thus building up states within a state, having different languages, different antecedents, different religions, different ideas and habits, preparing mutual jealousies, and perpetuating race antipathies. In New England conventions are held to which only French-Canadian Roman Catholics are admitted. At such a convention in Nashua, New Hampshire, attended by eighty priests, the following mottoes were displayed: 'Our tongue, our nationality, our religion,' 'Before everything else, let us remain French!'" And it is well said: "If our noble domain were tenfold larger than it is, it would still be too small to embrace with safety to our national future, little Germanies here, little Scandinavias there, and little Irelands yonder." To-day there are also little Italies and little Hungaries, and a long list of other races. _V. The Hopeful Side_ [Sidenote: A Brighter Picture] Turning to the pleasanter and brighter side of this great question, we give the encouraging view of one who has spent years among the immigrant population, studying their environment, conditions, and character, with view to improving their chances. She says: "The writer will risk just one generalization which, it is hoped, the ultimate facts will bear out, that in the case of the new immigration we shall see a repetition of the story of the old immigrant we are so familiar with. First comes the ignorant and poor but industrious peasant, the young man, alone, without wife or family. For a few years he works and saves, living according to a 'standard of life' which shocks his older established neighbors, and we may guess would often shock his people at home. At first he makes plans for going back, sends his savings home, and perhaps goes back himself. But he usually returns to this country, with a wife. America has now become his home, savings are invested here, land is bought, and a little house built. The growing children are educated in American schools, learn American ways, and forcibly elevate the 'standard of life' of the family. The second generation, in the fervor of its enthusiasm for change and progress becomes turbulent, unruly, and is despaired of. [Sidenote: The Open Door] "But out of the chaos emerges a third generation, of creditable character, from whom much may be expected. Our Austrian, Hungarian, and Russian newcomers are still in the first and second stages, and there seems no good reason why they should not pull through successfully to the third. But in that endeavor we can either help or materially hinder them, according to our treatment of them, as employees, as producers, as fellow citizens. America, for her own sake, owes to the immigrant not only the opportunities for 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness' that she promises to every man, but a sympathetic appreciation of his humanity, and an intelligent assistance in developing it."[86] [Sidenote: How the Children Lead] This is a picture of progress in assimilation to be remembered, and the conclusion is admirably expressed. Assimilation is made easy when the wheels of contact are oiled by kindness and sympathy. The children lead the way to Americanization. Mr. Brandenburg gives this report of a conversation overheard in an Italian tenement in New York, the parties being a mother, father, and the oldest of three daughters: "Said the mother in very forcible Tuscan: 'You shall speak Italian and nothing else, if I must kill you; for what will your grandmother say when you go back to the old country, if you talk this pig's English?' 'Aw, g'wan! Youse tink I'm goin' to talk dago 'n' be called a guinea! Not on your life. I'm 'n American, I am, 'n you go 'way back an' sit down,' The mother evidently understood the reply well enough, for she poured forth a torrent of Italian, and then the father ended matters by saying in mixed Italian and English: 'Shut up, both of you. I wish I spoke English like the children do,' Many parents have learned good English in order to escape being laughed at or despised by their children."[87] [Sidenote: The Young American] The language is not classic, but it is that of real life such as these children have to endure. The rapidity with which foreigners become Americanized is illustrated, said Dr. Charles B. Spahr, by the experience of a gentleman in Boston. In his philanthropic work he had gotten quite a hold on the Italian population. A small boy once asked him: "Are you a Protestant?" He said "Yes," and the boy seemed disappointed. But presently he brightened up and said, "You are an American, aren't you?" "Yes." "So am I!" with satisfaction. Children become American to the extent that they do not like to have it known that they have foreign parents. One little girl of German parentage said of her teacher: "She's a lady--she can't speak German at all." Where assimilation is slow, it is quite as likely to be the fault of the natives as of the immigrants, much more likely, indeed. How can he learn American ways who is carefully and rudely excluded from them? We build a Chinese wall of exclusiveness around ourselves, our churches, and communities, and then blame the foreigner for not forcing his way within. In a thoughtful treatment of this whole subject, Mr. Sidney Sampson says:[88] [Sidenote: The Real Question] "It has become a pressing and anxious question whether American institutions, with all their flexibility and their facility of application to new social conditions, will continue to endure the strain put upon them by the rapid and ceaseless introduction of foreign elements, unused, and wholly unused in great measure, to a system of government radically differing from that under which they have been educated. Can these diverse elements be brought to work in harmony with the American Idea? The centuries of subjection to absolutism, or even despotism, to which the ancestors of many of the immigrant classes have been accustomed, has formed a type of political character which cannot, except after long training, be brought into an understanding of, and sympathy with, republican principles. This is by far the most important aspect of the question, much more so than questions of industrial competition." If the republic will not ultimately endure harm, he believes industrial questions will slowly but surely right themselves; if otherwise, none even of the wisest can foresee the result. We give his conclusion: [Sidenote: Optimism the True View] "What is to be the outcome of this movement of the nations upon American political and industrial life is a question which confronts us with a problem never before presented in the world's history. Upon a review of the entire situation I think we may be optimists. Notwithstanding all unfavorable features, there are antagonizing elements constantly at work, not the less potent because they work silently. We may attach undue importance to statistics merely. [Sidenote: Assimilating Agencies] "Students of the immigration problem do not sufficiently observe the influences--in fact, the immigrant may not himself be conscious of them--which year after year tend to adjust his habits of thought and his political views and actions to his new environment. Freedom of suffrage, educational advantages, improved industrial conditions, the dignity of citizenship, equal laws, protection of property--all these nourish in him an increasing respect for the American system; and we have reason to believe that, under proper legislation, the combined influence of all these will in the long run fully neutralize the distinctly unfavorable results of future immigration." [Sidenote: Solution by Combined Forces] With this we are in accord, provided the Christian people of America can be brought to see and do their whole duty by the aliens. The solution of the problem demands the combined forces of our educational, social, political, and evangelical life. In that solution is involved the destiny of ultimate America. QUESTIONS FOR CHAPTER VII AIM: TO REALIZE THE EFFECT OF IMMIGRATION UPON THE NATIONAL CHARACTER AND OUR INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR IMPROVING CONDITIONS I. _Reasons for Concern._ I. * Do you think that immigration makes a very serious problem for the United States? Why? Mention others who think differently. Why do you not agree with them? 2. * Are there any foreigners in your neighborhood? What are they and what can you do for them? 3. Do these immigrants long retain their foreign aspect and ways? In what respects do they change most quickly? 4. What does Professor Mayo-Smith say about keeping American ideals intact? Must Protestant Christianity be guarded? II. _Threatening Changes._ 5. In what respects has immigration since 1820 introduced un-American standards? 6. * Have the average character and the plane of living of the immigrants been raised or lowered by their coming here? Same as to wages? As to intelligence? 7. * How are our public schools affected? Is there any menace to our school system? Can we provide compulsory education for all the children? III. _Other Effects._ 8. Do these new Americans learn to use the ballot rightly? Can they learn? 9. Does their coming make genuine Christianity more or less prominent in the national life? What effect does it have on Sunday observance? Does it lessen or increase lawbreaking? IV. _National Bulwarks._ 10. What are the safeguards pointed out by Professor Boyesen? By ex-President Seelye? 11. How can Socialism be met? 12. * Will anything but Christianity effectively guard our institutions? 13. How far will material improvements help to uplift and assimilate the newcomers? 14. Do the children learn patriotism from their new country? Do they keep it when grown up? 15. * Is there good reason for being optimistic? Upon what condition may we be hopeful? REFERENCES FOR ADVANCED STUDY.--CHAPTER VII I. Study further some of the specific effects of the immigrants' presence. Warne: The Slav Invasion, V, VI. Wood: Americans in Process, VII, VIII. Riis: How the Other Half Lives, XVIII, XXI. II. What can you learn about the present status of the parochial school movement, especially in your own vicinity? Refer to local periodicals and daily papers. III. Is assimilation of foreigners taking place everywhere, or only in certain places? McLanahan: Our People of Foreign Speech, I. Hall: Immigration, 172, 182. Wood: Americans in Process, XII. Strong: The Twentieth Century City, IV. IV. Are our school facilities, actual or prospective, likely to prove sufficient for the demands made upon them? Riis: How the Other Half Lives, XV, XVI. Wood: Americans in Process, X. Hunter: Poverty, V. _The Christian Churches in America stand face to face with a tremendous task. It is a challenge to their faith, their devotion, their zeal. The accomplishment of it will mean not only the ascendancy of Christianity in the homeland, but also the gaining of a position of vantage for world-wide evangelization._--E. E. Chivers, D.D. VIII THE HOME MISSION OPPORTUNITY The question of supreme interest to us is the religious question. What share shall the Church have in making Christian Americans of these immigrants? How may Church and State work together for the solution of the problem, on the solution of which very largely the future prosperity of the State and the Church depends.--_Charles L. Thompson, D.D._ The future success of missions will be largely affected by the success of the Church in dealing with problems that lie at her very door. The connection between home and foreign missionary work is living. The conversion of the world is bound up with the national character of professedly Christian lands. --_Rev. Herbert Anderson, English Missionary in India._ "The blood of the people! changeless tide through century, creed, and race, Still one, as the sweet salt sea is one, though tempered by sun and place, The same in ocean currents and the same in sheltered seas: Forever the fountain of common hopes and kindly sympathies. Indian and Negro, Saxon and Celt, Teuton and Latin and Gaul, Mere surface shadow and sunshine, while the sounding unifies all! One love, one hope, one duty theirs! no matter the time or kin, There never was a separate heart-beat in all the races of men." VIII THE HOME MISSION OPPORTUNITY _I. Alien Accessibility_ [Sidenote: A Unique Mission Field] "Save America and you save the world." Through immigration the United States is in a unique sense the most foreign country and the greatest mission field on the globe. "All peoples that on earth do dwell" have here their representatives, gathered by a divine ordering within easy reach of the gospel. Through them the world may be reached in turn. Every foreigner converted in America becomes directly or indirectly a missionary agent abroad, spreading knowledge of the truth among his kindred and tribe.[89] The greatness of the opportunity is the measure of obligation. God's message to this nation has been thus interpreted: "Here are all these people; I have taken them from the overcrowded countries where they were living and sent them to you, that you may mass your forces and lend a hand to save them." No such opportunity ever came to a nation before. The Christian church must seize it or sink into deserved decadence and decay. Only a missionary church can save the world or justify its own existence. The manner in which American Christianity deals with the religious problems of immigration will decide what part America is to play in the evangelization of the nations abroad. [Sidenote: The Gospel the Chief Factor] We have now reached the vital part of our subject. We have learned to discriminate between peoples and find the good in all of them. We have seen that assimilation is essential to national soundness and strength. But we have yet to realize that the most potential factor in assimilation is not legislation or education but evangelization. There is no power like the gospel to destroy race antipathies, break down the bars of prejudice, and draw all peoples into unity, brotherhood, and liberty--that spiritual freedom wherewith Christ makes free. When American Protestantism sees in immigration a divine mission none will discover in it thenceforth a human menace. [Sidenote: Shall America be kept Christian] Marvelous mission, involving the destiny of free America. A writer asks, "Will New England be kept Christian?" and answers, "That depends. Population is greatly changing. Immigrants from all parts of the world are here. They will continue to come. Unless they are molded according to the principles of our religion, they will greatly increase the irreligious elements of New England, already too large. There is a religious basis in those who come, but it will require an application of religious agencies to make them truly Christian citizens."[90] Put America in place of New England, and the question and answer will be as pertinent. Shall America be kept Christian? That depends. It depends upon what American Christians do. [Sidenote: Immigrants not Evangelical] Few of the immigrants are evangelical in religion. They know nothing of our gospel, and little or nothing of the Bible. The religious principles they have been taught are totally opposed to the spirit of our free institutions of religion. They know priestly sovereignty but not soul liberty. They are the creatures of a system, and the system is thoroughly un-American and inimical to freedom of conscience and worship. But thousands and tens of thousands of them are out of sorts with the system and are ready for something better.[91] They have lost faith in their Church and will lose it in religion unless we teach them the gospel. To accomplish this result two persons must be changed--the immigrant and the American. Alien assimilation depends largely upon American attitude. [Sidenote: Two Timely Questions] Two questions confront us squarely as we approach this subject. First, the common one, What do we think of the immigrant? And second, the less common but not less important one, What does the immigrant think of us? It will do us good, as Americans and as Christians, to consider both of these frankly. Honestly, what is your attitude toward the ordinary immigrant? Do you want him and his family, if he has one, in your church? Do you not prefer to have him in a mission by himself? Would you not rather work for him by proxy than with him in person? Do you not pull away from him as far as possible if he takes a seat next to you in the car? Actual contact is apt to mean contamination, germs, physical ills. He is ignorant and uncultured. You desire his conversion--in the mission. You wish him well--at a convenient distance. You would much more quickly help send a missionary to the Chinese in China than be a missionary to a Chinaman in America, would you not? Think it over, Christian, and determine your personal relation to the immigrant. Is he a brother man, or a necessary evil? Will you establish a friendly relation with him, or hold aloof from him? Does your attitude need to be changed? [Sidenote: The Alien Point of View] What, now, do you suppose this "undesirable" immigrant thinks of America and Protestant Christianity? What has he reason to think, in the light of his previous dreams and present realizations? What does Protestant Christianity do for him from the time he reaches America? What will he learn of our free institutions--in the tenement slums or labor camps or from the "bosses" who treat him as cattle--that will teach him to prize American citizenship, desire religious liberty, or lead a sober, respectable life? If we are in earnest about the evangelization of the immigrant we must put ourselves in his place occasionally and get his point of view. When we think fairly and rightly of the immigrant, and treat him in real Christian wise, he will soon come to think of us that our religion is real, and this will be a long step toward the change we desire him to undergo. We shall never accomplish anything until we realize that the coming of these alien millions is not accidental but providential. _II. Missionary Beginnings_ [Sidenote: Alien Accessibility is Home Mission Possibility] The first human touch put upon the immigrant in the new environment is vastly important in its effects. He is easily approachable, if rightly approached. Alien accessibility makes home mission possibility. The approach may not at first be on the distinctively religious side, but there is a way of access on some side. A living gospel incarnated in a living, loving man or woman is the "open sesame" to confidence first and conversion afterward. Make the foreigner feel that you are interested in him as a man, and the door is open beyond the power of priestcraft to shut it. The priest may for a time keep the Catholic immigrant away from the Protestant church but not from the Protestant cordiality and sympathy; and if these be shown it will not be long before the immigrant, learning rapidly to think for himself, will settle the church-going according to his own notion. A kind word has more attractive power than a cathedral. You will never win an Italian as long as you call him or think of him as "dago," nor a Jew while you nickname him "sheeny." The immigrant wants neither charity nor contempt, but a man's recognition and rights, and when American Christians give him these he will believe in their Christianity and be apt to accept it for himself. [Sidenote: The First Touch] Home mission work of a distinctive character should and does begin at the point of landing in the New World. At Ellis Island, for example, there are now some thirty missionaries, representing the leading Christian denominations. This gives proof of the partial awakening of the Churches to the importance of this work. It is only of late years that any special attention has been paid to the welfare of the incomers, either by State or Church. Now both are seeking to throw safeguards around the immigrants and secure them a fair start. A large room is set apart for the missionaries in the receiving building at Ellis Island, and they perform a service of great good both to the aliens and the country. First impressions count tremendously, and happy is it for the immigrant who gets this initial impression from contact with a Christian missionary instead of a street sharper. Once put the touch of human kindness upon the immigrant and he is not likely to forget it. The hour of homesickness, of strangeness in a strange land, of perplexity and trouble, is the hour of hours when sympathy and help come most gratefully. The missionaries are on hand at this critical juncture. Thousands of immigrants are saved from falling into bad hands and evil associations through their zealous efforts. Thousands are supplied with copies of the Testament, the sick and sorrowful are comforted, the rejected are tenderly ministered to in their distress, and the gospel is preached in the practical way that makes it a living remembrance. This is one way in which a true and enduring assimilation is begun. [Sidenote: The Fruit of Kindness] Here is a single illustration of the unexpected results of this first Christian touch in the new world. One of the women missionaries was very kind to a Bohemian family, helping the father find his destination and get settled. At parting, the missionary gave him a Testament and asked him to read it when in trouble. He thanked her for all her kindness to him and his family, and said he would keep the book for her sake. He put it away and forgot all about it. One day his little girl got the book and tore a leaf out. When he learned what she had done he was very angry, and punished her for tearing the book, saying that the kind lady at Ellis Island had given it to him, and he had promised to keep it. He threatened the child with severe punishment if she touched it again. "What is the book, papa?" she asked. He said he did not know what it was, but the lady gave it to him, and that was enough. [Sidenote: The Gospel's Power] The little girl kept asking about it until at length his curiosity was aroused, and he took the Testament to find out for himself. As he began to read the story of Jesus he became interested, and presently had his wife reading it also. Such wonderful things he had never heard of before, and he thought he would tell the priest about it, for if the priest knew about it he would surely tell the people. The priest forbade him to look into the book again, saying that it was a bad book and would cost him his soul if he read it. This only ended the influence of the priest, for the immigrant said such a good person as Jesus could not do anybody any harm, he was sure of that. He decided to go back to Ellis Island and ask the kind lady about it. The light came, and he and his family are earnest members of a Christian church, showing their gratitude by trying with true missionary spirit to bring others of their race to the Master.[92] [Sidenote: Immigrant Headquarters] This missionary work, coming at the critical time, needs to be extended and dignified. It should be so enlarged that it would be possible to reach in some way the great mass of the newcomers, where now it touches comparatively few. There should be a great interdenominational headquarters building, thoroughly equipped for every kind of helpful service. A large force of trained workers of different nationalities should be employed, so that all kinds of needs might be met. It is entirely possible to establish a center that would powerfully impress the immigrants with the worth and importance of the Christian religion. But no small affair will do. Our great denominations have the money in plenty, and certainly have the talent to organize such a work as the world has never yet seen. And what a chance for personal service such an institution would afford. This would be a living object lesson of Christianity helping the world, that might fitly stand beside the statue of "Liberty enlightening the world." _III. Protestantism and the Alien_ [Sidenote: Present Work for the Foreigners] How are the evangelical denominations meeting their imperative obligation to evangelize the multitudes brought to their very doors? When the immigrant has passed through the gates, what attention is paid to him? Take it in the centers of population, where the mass of the immigrants go, and the showing is not very imposing as yet. [Sidenote: Abandoned Fields] The truth is that as the foreigners have moved into down-town New York the old-time Protestant churches have moved out, in great measure abandoning the field, on the assumption that there was no constituency to maintain an American church. It did not seem to dawn upon the rich churches which moved up town that the new population needed evangelization and could be evangelized. The result is that the immigrant accustomed to imposing churches and splendid architecture and impressive ritual, sees little to impress him with the existence of Protestant Christianity. Go through that teeming East Side in New York, and here and there you will find a mission supported in desultory fashion by some church or city mission society or mission board, and in quarters conducive to anything but worship or respect. There is nothing to make the new arrival feel the presence and power of the religious faith that created this free Republic and still predominates in its best life. So it is wherever you go. The home mission work is in its beginnings, and these are manifestly feeble and inadequate. [Sidenote: An Example] The Roman Catholics teach us some practical lessons. They build large and impressive churches for the immigrants. They abandon no fields, and immediately occupy those left by Protestants. They expend money where it will go furthest. The Protestants of New York should have been far-sighted enough to plant strong evangelistic and philanthropic institutions in the fields from which they withdrew their churches. Valuable ground has been lost for want of this missionary insight and impulse. [Sidenote: Need of an Awakening] The conditions in New York are symptomatic of those obtaining generally, in country as well as city. The Protestant churches, not recognizing the supreme home mission opportunity to Christianize the immigrants, have in many cases become weak where a zealous evangelism would have kept them strong. Too many of the American Churches have been satisfied with their own prosperity and unmindful of the growing need of the gospel all around them. As a missionary worker says:[93] "There are plenty of Christians who believe that the gospel is the power of God unto salvation in a vague and general way; but there are not enough people who clearly believe that the gospel is the power of God unto salvation to the Italian working on the railroad, or the Hungarian in the shops, or the German on the farm. Too many of us have no faith at all in foreign missions at home." [Sidenote: Reasons for Present Conditions] It is impossible to enter into details of what has been undertaken by the different evangelical denominations. Reference to the tables furnished by various Home Mission Boards[94] will indicate, as far as bald figures can do so, the extent of the work among the various peoples. The statistics show that in the country, especially in the West, missions among the earlier type of immigrants--the German and Scandinavian--have long been maintained with success. There are hundreds of strong and prosperous churches among these peoples. For the later immigrants less has been done, although the need is far greater. Some of the reasons for the small proportions of this work are manifest. In order to reach the Slavs and Italians there must be native missionaries, and these cannot be found offhand. After converts are made, those who are fitted to preach and teach must be trained, and schools must be provided for the training.[95] The difficulties of language must first be overcome. The process requires time and patience and large resources. Missions cannot be imposed upon these foreign peoples from without. Force cannot be used. Access must be found, and the gospel seed be sown as opportunity occurs. There must be a natural development in a work like this, which deals with individuals, and that by persuasion. The present work must not be judged too harshly, therefore, as reflecting upon the churches. Only of late has the need been recognized by the leaders in Christian effort. Dr. Thompson puts the situation in true light, when he says: [Sidenote: The Point for a New Departure] "It goes without saying that the church has not so far taken its full share of the responsibility. She has not realized the gravity of the situation. Indeed, only in late years has it emerged in its full significance. Consequently the work of the various Christian bodies has been sporadic, rather than systematic and persistent. There has been no serious endeavor to deal with it as a problem and to try to compass it. All the Churches have worked among the foreigners, but it has been determined by local conditions and needs which have appealed to Christian people here and there; that, however, is very different from an intelligent view of the whole situation and a campaign intended and adapted to solve the whole problem. We have reached a point in the immigration problem where it must be solved broadly, philosophically, and by the combination of all forces--civic, social, moral, and religious--to bring about the healthy assimilation of all foreign elements into the life of the body politic."[96] [Sidenote: Success of Earnest Effort] We have said the foreigner is accessible. How true this is, when earnest and genuine effort is made, is shown by the tent work in many cities. Take it among the Italians in New York, for example. A tent worker tells the results:[97] "New York City within a year will hold a half million Italians. What is the Church of America to do with them? Will they listen to the gospel? Who has tried to reach them? [Sidenote: Tent Work Results in a Church] "During the past summer a company of earnest workers for God and man tested the problem of saving men to save New York. They started an open-air and tent campaign. They proceeded on the simple hypothesis that 'Nothing will elevate the man, no matter how good he is morally, except the gospel of Jesus Christ, for it alone is the power of God to change the whole man and save him eternally.' They drove their tent-stakes into the ground in an Italian quarter and began to preach and to sing the gospel of grace triumphant into the ears and hearts of Roman Catholic Italians. Except when the weather was exceptionally bad, from five to six hundred persons were there nightly. They were met just as the foreign missionary would meet them. Not one among them, perhaps, Christian from a purely evangelistic standpoint, and yet, what was the result? In less than one year they expect to have a permanent church building to cost $60,000; something like two hundred are ready to enter and form a Protestant church." [Sidenote: An Ingenious Italian Expedient] Is this a hopeful work, this effort to evangelize the foreigners? Let the following unique instance give its answer, and illustrate also the intertwinings of the home and foreign work. In a quarry at Monson, Massachusetts, where over three hundred Italians are employed, there was among the number a man who had been converted in Italy, through the faithful efforts of an American missionary. When this convert reached the Massachusetts quarry, his heart burned within him as he realized the spiritual condition of his countrymen, who were living without any religious services. He labored so effectively for their salvation that in a few months seventeen of the workmen were converted, and they held regular meetings for prayer and study of the Bible. At length they sent a message, signed by every convert, to a state missionary society: "In God's name, send us a missionary." A missionary was sent to organize them into a church. They had no meeting-place, and in this emergency one of the converts proposed that a room be built on the roof of his cottage. This was done by the little band, and there they worshiped until the place was too small. Then the first story was extended in the rear, giving space for a comfortable chapel, and the family occupied the second story or roof-room. This indicates the ingenuity as well as the generous and self-sacrificing spirit of these Italian Christians, who maintain a regular pastor and full services. How many of our American churches, with much larger resources, could show a better record? What American Christian would have thought of building a meeting-house on his home roof, or would have been willing to do it if he had thought of it? In devotion and liberality the converted aliens often set noble examples for American Christians.[98] _IV. The Call to Great Things_ [Sidenote: How to Save Our American Churches] [Sidenote: Missionary Effort the Solution] Missionaries have been surprised at the eagerness with which they were received by the Italians, Bohemians, Poles, Slovaks, and Lithuanians, and others commonly regarded as most hopeless. The Bohemians have a large number of freethinkers--over 300 societies of them--who have sought to draw their people away from Christianity or any form of religion; but they also have a large number of earnest and devoted Christian converts, who know the power of the gospel to save, and are preaching and teaching it. In Pennsylvania, among the Slav peoples, simple-hearted native workers who have found the way of life are making that way known to others, and local churches in many places are becoming revived through their active work for these foreigners. Many churches now extinct would be alive if they had seen their opportunity. If those churches that have lost most of their old-time membership could be filled with missionary zeal, and be sustained as evangelistic centers, the church life of the mining regions would become a different thing once more. The only way to save these American churches is for them to save the immigrants. The same thing is true in all country sections where the foreigners have become numerous. The need everywhere is for money to plant and equip thoroughly, and maintain efficiently, these evangelizing churches in every community. These institutions must be more than meeting-houses, open a few times a week. [Sidenote: A Great Mission Enterprise] The institutional church always open, with something to meet every legitimate need of old and young, so that the evangelical center shall be the center of community life, can alone meet the requirement. A great force of workers must be raised up, and this means training schools. No more important educational work can be done in our country in the present emergency. These schools might be interdenominational, with special classes where required for the specific denominational training, and thus a united Protestantism could be rallied to their support, and make them of size sufficient to impress all with the real consequence of the work. [Sidenote: Church Federation for Service] In this work the interdenominational comity and coöperation represented in the federation of evangelical churches would secure the best covering of the whole field, in the true fraternal and Christian spirit. What all desire supremely is the salvation of the immigrants. And only a united Protestantism can present such a massive front as to impress the world. This work must be large enough to be self-respecting. At present it is extremely doubtful if there is enough of it to make individual members of the churches feel its worth and importance. There should be a mighty advance movement, calling for millions of money and thousands of missionaries, and reaching into a multitude of places now destitute of gospel influences. Then the alien in America would realize the American spirit and purpose and interest in him, and the birth of a new citizenship would begin. [Sidenote: Planning Large Things] This is the day of large enterprises. The home mission movement for the evangelization of the foreign peoples in America ought to be in the forefront of the great enterprises. The real hope of America lies in the success of this work. The best brain of the Christian laity should be engaged in this business. [Sidenote: A Million a Year in New York] In New York City alone the Christian denominations ought to raise and expend at least a million dollars a year for the next ten years for city foreign evangelization, and this would be only a start in a work bound to extend indefinitely. The demand is imperative. The fields are ripe for harvest. We have seen that the old religious ties are not only weakened by the Atlantic voyage, but often broken altogether. In some nationalities this tie is strong, in most of them not very binding. The great bulk of the new immigration is Roman or Greek Catholic. Thousands of these nominal church members drift into open infidelity or schools of atheism, or else into nothingism. Their former Church does not keep them, and Protestantism does not get them. It is a question whether their new condition is better or worse, religiously, than it was in the old country. We should remove that question by surrounding them with such Christian influences and institutions as will make it impossible for them to escape the Americanizing and evangelizing environment. Why should not Christian philanthropy, for instance, build a block of model tenement-houses in the Italian district, and give the income from rentals as a permanent endowment for Italian mission work? This would be a double blessing. [Sidenote: How to Use Wealth for Country] There is a magnificent opportunity, an opportunity to fire the heart of the men who have means to carry out whatever they devise. The evangelical denominations should establish in the heart of the East Side, where are gathered a dozen little nationalities, not simply one great establishment of distinctively religious and educational character, but a number of such institutional churches, costing anywhere from a million to a million and a half each, and sustained in a thoroughly business-like way. Christianity should permeate the entire work. We ought to be working for to-day and for the future. The Home Mission Boards in coöperation should be asked to lead forward in this, the greatest task of the twentieth century. There is nothing sentimental or impracticable about these suggestions. [Sidenote: A Work for United Protestantism] Here is a work that demands the moral strength of Protestant union. Let us seek to make the foreigners Christian, give them the Bible, and set them an example of the brotherhood of believers. Then the immigrants will become believers and join the brotherhood. [Sidenote: What the Local Church Can Do] In addition to this organized work done through the missionary bodies, there is a large work for local churches to do. In some denominations, which report little organized effort, there is much mission work done by local parishes. And in all denominations there are many churches that study their community and apply themselves to its needs. The Chinese Sunday-school work has been chiefly done by the local churches, and therefore it is not easy to learn the extent of the work, since reports are not made to central boards. This form of service is especially desirable when it draws the members of the churches to any extent into personal contact with the foreign element, and it should be fostered. _V. The Individual Duty_ [Sidenote: What You Can Do] This brings us to the heart of the whole matter--the personal equation. The trouble is that the alien and the American do not know each other. Aversion on the one side is met by suspicion on the other. Shut away from intercourse, the alien becomes more alienated, and the American more opinionated, with results that may easily breed trouble. The antidote for prejudice is knowledge. Immigration has made it possible--and in this case possibility is duty--for the consecrated Christian, in this day and land of marvelous opportunity, to be a missionary--not by proxy but in person. [Sidenote: Be a Home Missionary] Here is the foreigner in every community. You meet him in a hundred places where the personal contact is possible. Did it ever occur to you that you could do something directly for the evangelization of the Greek or Italian fruit vender or bootblack or laborer? Have you ever felt any responsibility for the salvation of these commonly despised foreigners? Have you laughed at them, or shown your contempt and dislike for them as they have crowded the public places? The evangelization of the foreigners in America must be effected by the direct missionary effort of the masses of American Christians. That is the foundation truth. The work cannot be delegated to Home Mission Boards or any other agencies, no matter how good and strong in their place. [Sidenote: A Personal Service] Hence, let all emphasis be put here upon personal responsibility and opportunity. Be a missionary yourself. Reach and teach some one of these newcomers, and you will do your part. Do not begin with talking about religion. Make the chance to get acquainted; then after you have shown genuine human interest, and won confidence, the way will be open for the gospel that has already been felt in human helpfulness. As a result of this study, which has taught you to discriminate and to be charitable to all peoples, the new attitude and sympathy will enable you to approach those who have been brought within your sphere of influence. There is a field of magnificent breadth open to our young people. Once engaged in this personal service, and aware of its blessed effects, there will be no lack of a missionary zeal that will embrace the world-wide kingdom. [Sidenote: A Shining Example of Personal Effort] At a conference in New York, in the Home Mission study class a young colored man from the West Indies gave a practical illustration of individual missionary effort of the kind that would evangelize the foreigners, if it were generally practiced. He said that every Thursday, when the steamer from the West Indies arrives, he arranges his work so as to be at the wharf, ready to welcome immigrants, especially young people, and to advise them, if they are strangers without settled destination. He was led to do this by his own experience. For three years after he came to New York, he went from church to church without ever receiving a word of welcome or invitation to come again. Finally he found a church home; but the homesickness and loneliness of those years made him feel that so far as he could help it, no one else from the West Indies should have a similar experience. So he made himself free to speak to the young men, and always invited them to church. He had been the means of aiding many to establish themselves, and had saved many immigrants from being lured away into evil. He said the place to get the heart of the foreigner was when he first landed. It was a simple story, told without any false modesty. Plainly his heart was in the work. He was a home missionary, doing a definite service of importance, and setting an example that inspired that company. They could not help the round of applause that followed his statement. It was spontaneous. This is the personal touch that must be put in some way upon the stranger that is within our gates. If the alien can be brought under this gracious Christian influence, the chances are many that he will soon cease to be alien and become Christian. Blessed is he who makes any soul welcome to country and church. [Sidenote: A Call for Sacrifice] A call to home mission service is thus presented by Dr. Goodchild, who would carry religion more fully into the settlement idea: "We need for the solution of this problem that young men and women who go to the great cities from the strong churches of the smaller towns and villages should identify themselves with mission churches rather than to seek ease and honor in wealthy churches where unused talent is already congested. [Sidenote: The Living Example] "We need young men and young women to go down among these people and live Christian lives in the midst of them. I do not believe that any one should take his children there to rear them. But young men in groups, or young women in groups, or young couples without children, who are able to earn their own living could contribute greatly to the solution of these problems if they would live among these foreigners and help in the process of digestion and assimilation. And there is nothing that can do that work so quickly and effectually as for Christian men and women to dwell among these people, as Christ once left his home on high to dwell among the sinful ones of earth. And if there are young men and young women who are willing to give themselves wholly to work for these people, and will live among them, and seek by the power of divine grace to lift them up, it surely is very little for you and me to sustain them while they toil." [Sidenote: How the Work Grows] Wherever earnest effort has been put forth, the progress of the work has been most encouraging. As an illustration of this, when Dr. H. A. Schauffler some twenty years ago began his pioneer missionary work among the 25,000 Bohemians of Cleveland, he could not learn of any fellow-laborers in the Slavic field except a Bohemian theological student in New York, a Bohemian Reformed Church pastor in Iowa, and another in Texas. But in 1905 there met in Chicago an Interdenominational Conference of Slavic missionaries and pastors, and that gathering comprised no less than 103 Slavic workers, of whom sixty-four were pastors and preachers, fourteen women missionaries, and twenty-five missionary students; while the conference represented forty-nine churches in thirteen states, and five evangelical denominations. Mr. Ives says truly: "It has been forever established that foreigners are as convertible as our own people, that in many instances their faith is more pure and evangelical than the American type, that their lives are transformed by its power to an extent that sometimes puts the American Christian to shame, that their children are easily gathered into Sunday-schools, their young people into Endeavor Societies, and their men and women into prayer-meetings, where in many different tongues they yet speak and pray in the language of Canaan. The immigration problem is not the same menace that it was. A mighty solvent has been found." [Sidenote: Inspiring Difficulties] There is no escaping the fact that a prodigious amount of difficult lifting must be done in order to elevate the aliens to the American social and religious level. But the very vastness of the home mission task is inspiring rather than discouraging to heroic souls. As someone says, "The American loves a tough job." Difficulties will not hinder him a moment when once he is moved with the divine impulse, sees the thing to be done, and sets himself with God's help to do it. Present conditions call to mind that passage in "Alice in Wonderland," where by the seashore The walrus and the carpenter were walking hand in hand, And wept like anything to see such quantities of sand. "If seven maids with seven mops, swept it for half a year, Do you suppose," the walrus said, "that they could get it clear?" "I doubt it," said the carpenter, and shed a bitter tear. [Sidenote: A Hopeful, not Hopeless Task] It must be confessed that what has been done, in comparison with what has to be done, would not be unfairly represented by the seven maids, and that some people think the conversion of the foreigner as hopeless as the carpenter did the sand-sweeping job. But seven mops are better than none, and the pessimists are few. Souls are different material to work upon from sand. By and by the Christian denominations will stop sweeping around the edges of this great missionary enterprise, and take hold of it with full force. This will come to pass when the real conditions and needs and perils are widely known; and in making them known the young people have their opportunity to render signal service to foreigner, country, Church, and Christ. _VI. Basal Grounds for Optimism_ [Sidenote: The Outlook] Now that we have completed our study of immigration, necessarily limited by time and space, we are in position to draw some conclusions with regard to the outlook. Our study shows that there is plenty in the character and extent of present day immigration to make the Christian and patriot thoughtful, prayerful, and purposeful. On the surface there is enough that is appalling and threatening to excuse if not justify the use of the word "peril." The writer confesses that when he lived, years ago, in western Pennsylvania, and came close to the inferior grades of immigrants, and witnessed the changes wrought by the displacement of the earlier day mining class, he bordered for a time on the pessimistic plane. Nor was his condition much improved during residence in New England, where the changing of the old order and the passing of the Puritan are of vast significance to our country. But closer study of the broad subject has led to a positively optimistic view concerning immigration, and some of the grounds of this optimism may properly close this chapter and volume. [Sidenote: Two Great Factors--Democracy and Religion] The basal ground is the universal tendency toward democracy and the universal necessity for religion. These are sufficiently axiomatic. The appeal to the history of the nineteenth century is sufficient to establish the first, and the appeal to the heart of humanity will establish the second. Democracy is the dominant spirit in the world's life to-day. It is the vital air of America. Whatever is in its nature inimical to democracy cannot permanently endure on this continent, and certainly cannot control, whether it be in the sphere of ecclesiasticism or commercialism. This, then, is the sure ground for optimism. Religion is a necessity in a nation. What shall the type of religion be in America? The answer is clear, for Protestantism is democratic, while Romanism is autocratic. [Sidenote: Influence of the New Environment] The hope of America's evangelization is increased by the fact that the pure religion of Jesus Christ is so essentially democratic in its fundamental teachings of the brotherhood of man, of spiritual liberty and unity. The immigrant comes into a new environment, created alike by civil and religious liberty, and cannot escape its influence. Political liberty teaches the meaning of soul liberty, and leads the way slowly but surely to it. A man cannot come into rights of one kind without awakening to rights of every kind; and once awakened, soon he insists upon having them all for himself. Freedom is infectious and contagious, and the disease is speedily caught by the old-world arrival, who breathes in its germs almost before the ship-motion wears off. The peril of this is that to him the main idea of liberty is license. The true meaning of the word he must be taught by the Christian missionary, for certainly he will not learn it from the Church to which he commonly belongs. Here, then, is the opportunity for the pure gospel and for the Christian missionary. [Sidenote: The Testing "If"] Adding the natural appeal of the gospel in its simplicity to this favoring democratic environment, there is every reason for optimism concerning immigration, if only American Protestantism prove true to its opportunity and duty. "Ah, but that is a tremendous IF," said a widely known Christian worker to whom this statement was made. "I agree with you as to the favoring conditions, and my only doubt is whether our Christian Churches can be brought to see their duty and do it. So far there are only signs of promise. Our home mission societies are doubtless doing all they can with the slender means furnished by the contributing churches, but they are only playing at the evangelization of these inpouring millions." What could be said in reply? One could not deny present apathy on the part of Protestants at large, whether the cause be ignorance or indifference or want of missionary spirit. One could but declare faith in the prevailing power of Protestantism when the crisis comes. We believe the day is not distant when American Protestantism will present a united front and press forward irresistibly. For the hastening of this day let us pray and work. [Sidenote: The Task of the Ages] Thus the problem always resolves itself to this at last: God has set for American Protestant Christianity the gigantic task of the ages--the home-foreign-mission task--nothing less than the assimilation of all these foreign peoples who find a home on this continent into a common Americanism so that they shall form a composite American nation--Christian, united, free, and great. What could be more glorious than to have part in the solution of this problem? To this supreme service, young men and women of America, you are called of God. What say you: shall it be Alien or American? QUESTIONS FOR CHAPTER VIII AIM: TO MAKE HOPEFUL BEGINNINGS A STRONG INCENTIVE TO GREAT EXPANSION OF CHRISTIAN WORK FOR FOREIGNERS I. _Faults on Both Sides._ 1. What issues hang upon our work for the incoming foreigners? 2. * What barriers must be broken down in order to approach them successfully? 3. What do these immigrants (speaking of them in general terms) possess, and what do they lack, spiritually? 4. Is there a lack in our own personal attitude and feelings toward them? What is it? 5. * If you had come as an average immigrant, what would you be likely to think of "America" and the "Americans"? II. _Missionary Beginnings._ 6. When and where is it most easy to approach the foreigner? What will a "lurking prejudice" do? 7. What Christian workers are there at the ports of entry? Give instances of the results of their labors. 8. Can we possibly rest content with what is now being done on these lines? Why not? 9. * Should all denominations unite in an effort to meet the situation? Will you strive for it? 10. What has been the history of evangelical churches down town in New York City? What centers of Christian work may be found there? What form would a more adequate provision be likely to take? 11. Among what classes of immigrants has the most successful Christian work been done? 12. Among what classes has it been thus far sporadic and experimental? Give instances of successful work for Italians. III. _Expansion Needed and Possible._ 13. * Are those who are ordinarily neglected responsive to the right sort of effort? How may there be sent forth "more laborers into the harvest"? 14. When and how may the scattered forces be joined for more effective work? 15. * Shall we "dare to brave the perils of an unprecedented advance"?[99] Have we such faith that God will move his people to furnish the funds? IV. _Local and Individual Efforts._ 16. Are there many Sunday-schools for Chinese in local churches? Why not as many for other needy races? 17. * How can every Christian be a Home Missionary? Describe some example. Compare our Lord's parable of the leaven. 18. Will the "day of small things" lead to greater? On what conditions? Give instances. 19. * Is the task great enough to challenge our Christian faith, courage, and perseverance? V. _A Hopeful Outlook for the Christian._ 20. Is there any reason for inactivity and despair? Why not? 21. Will Christian democracy help to solve the problem? 22. Where lies the element of uncertainty and how can it be removed? 23. * Will you deliberately give yourself to be used of God in helping to remove it? "Immigration Means Obligation." REFERENCES FOR ADVANCED STUDY.--CHAPTER VIII I. Study the various forms of work undertaken for foreigners by denominational Home Mission Boards. Tables and statements in the appendixes of this book. Missionary periodicals. Reports and papers of different Societies. II. Investigate and report upon efforts made in your own locality. III. Frame an argument, or plea, for the great enlargement of all Christian activities on behalf of foreigners. McLanahan: Our People of Foreign Speech, X, XI. APPENDIXES APPENDIX A TABLE I NUMBER OF IMMIGRANTS ARRIVED IN THE UNITED STATES EACH YEAR FROM 1820 TO 1905, BOTH INCLUSIVE[100] ----------------------------------------- Period |Number | ------------------------------|---------| Year ending September 30-- | | 1820 | 8,385| 1821 | 9,127| 1822 | 6,911| 1823 | 6,354| 1824 | 7,912| 1825 | 10,199| 1826 | 10,837| 1827 | 18,875| 1828 | 27,382| 1829 | 22,520| 1830 | 23,322| 1831 | 22,633| Oct. 1, 1831, to Dec. 31, 1832| 60,482| Year ending December 31-- | | 1833 | 58,640| 1834 | 65,365| 1835 | 45,374| 1836 | 76,242| 1837 | 79,340| 1838 | 38,914| 1839 | 68,069| 1840 | 84,066| 1841 | 80,289| 1842 | 104,565| Jan. 1 to Sept. 30, 1843 | 52,496| Year ending September 30-- | | 1844 | 78,615| 1845 | 114,371| 1846 | 154,416| 1847 | 234,968| 1848 | 226,527| 1849 | 297,024| 1850 | 310,004| Oct. 1 to Dec. 31, 1850 | 59,976| Year ending December 31-- | | 1851 | 379,466| 1852 | 371,603| 1853 | 368,645| 1854 | 427,833| 1855 | 200,877| 1856 | 195,857| Jan. 1 to June 30, 1857 | 112,123| Year ending June 30-- | | 1858 | 191,942| 1859 | 129,571| 1860 | 133,143| Year ending June 30-- | | 1861 | 142,877| 1862 | 72,183| 1863 | 132,925| 1864 | 191,114| 1865 | 180,339| 1866 | 332,577| 1867 | 303,104| 1868 | 282,189| 1869 | 352,768| 1870 | 387,203| 1871 | 321,350| 1872 | 404,806| 1873 | 459,803| 1874 | 313,339| 1875 | 227,498| 1876 | 169,986| 1877 | 141,857| 1878 | 138,469| 1879 | 177,826| 1880 | 457,257| 1881 | 669,431| 1882 | 788,992| 1883 | 603,322| 1884 | 518,592| 1885 | 395,346| 1886 | 334,203| 1887 | 490,109| 1888 | 546,889| 1889 | 444,427| 1890 | 455,302| 1891 | 560,319| 1892 | 579,663| 1893 | 439,730| 1894 | 285,631| 1895 | 258,536| 1896 | 343,267| 1897 | 230,832| 1898 | 229,299| 1899 | 311,715| 1900 | 448,572| 1901 | 487,918| 1902 | 648,743| 1903 | 857,046| 1904 | 812,870| 1905 |1,026,499| 1906[101] |1,100,735| ----------------------------------------- TABLE II RACE, SEX, AND AGE OF IMMIGRANTS ADMITTED IN 1905 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- | | | | Under | 14 to |45 yrs. Race or people | Male | Female| Total | 14 | 44 | and | | | | years | years | over --------------------|-------|-------|---------|-------|-------|------- African (black) | 2,325| 1,273| 3,598| 433| 2,974| 191 Armenian | 1,339| 539| 1,878| 246| 1,529| 103 Bohemian and | | | | | | Moravian | 6,662| 5,095| 11,757| 2,620| 8,442| 695 Bulgarian, Servian, | | | | | | and Montenegrin | 5,562| 261| 5,823| 97| 5,529| 197 Chinese | 1,883| 88| 1,971| 28| 1,666| 277 Croatian and | | | | | | Slovenian | 30,253| 4,851| 35,104| 1,383| 32,470| 1,251 Cuban | 4,925| 2,334| 7,259| 1,346| 5,225| 688 Dalmatian, Bosnian, | | | | | | and Herzegovinian | 2,489| 150| 2,639| 62| 2,450| 127 Dutch and Flemish | 5,693| 2,805| 8,498| 1,699| 6,085| 714 East Indian | 137| 8| 145| 3| 122| 20 English | 31,965| 18,900| 50,865| 6,956| 36,726| 7,183 Filipino | 4| 1| 5| | 4| 1 Finnish | 11,907| 5,105| 17,012| 1,483| 15,047| 482 French | 6,705| 4,642| 11,347| 1,121| 8,825| 1,401 German | 49,647| 32,713| 82,360| 11,469| 64,441| 6,450 Greek | 11,586| 558| 12,144| 446| 11,523| 175 Hebrew | 82,076| 47,834| 129,910| 28,553| 95,964| 5,393 Irish | 24,640| 29,626| 54,266| 2,580| 48,562| 3,124 Italian (north) | 31,695| 8,235| 39,930| 3,569| 34,561| 1,800 Italian (south) |155,007| 31,383| 186,390| 16,915|159,024| 10,451 Japanese | 9,810| 1,211| 11,021| 124| 10,588| 309 Korean | 4,506| 423| 4,929| 325| 4,557| 47 Lithuanian | 13,842| 4,762| 18,604| 1,474| 16,875| 255 Magyar | 34,242| 11,788| 46,030| 3,864| 39,926| 2,240 Mexican | 152| 75| 227| 29| 169| 29 Pacific Islander | 13| 4| 17| 1| 15| 1 Polish | 72,452| 29,985| 102,437| 9,867| 89,914| 2,656 Portuguese | 2,992| 1,863| 4,855| 1,035| 3,381| 439 Roumanian | 7,244| 574| 7,818| 153| 7,293| 372 Russian | 2,700| 1,046| 3,746| 591| 2,988| 167 Ruthenian (Russniak)| 10,820| 3,653| 14,473| 661| 13,321| 491 Scandinavian | | | | | | (Norwegians, | | | | | | Danes, and Swedes)| 37,202| 25,082| 62,284| 6,597| 52,226| 3,461 Scotch | 10,472| 5,672| 16,144| 2,270| 12,109| 1,765 Slovak | 38,038| 14,330| 52,368| 4,582| 45,882| 1,904 Spanish | 4,724| 866| 5,590| 403| 4,612| 575 Spanish-American | 1,146| 512| 1,658| 223| 1,232| 203 Syrian | 3,248| 1,574| 4,822| 742| 3,843| 237 Turkish | 2,082| 63| 2,145| 45| 2,073| 27 Welsh | 1,549| 982| 2,531| 464| 1,726| 341 West Indian (except | | | | | | Cuban) | 892| 656| 1,548| 187| 1,209| 152 All other peoples | 288| 63| 351| 22| 311| 18 | | | | | | Total |724,914|301,585|1,026,499|114,668|855,419| 56,412 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Here we have forty-four races or nationalities differentiated. Surely this is a medley of peoples to be harmonized. Note the vast proportion of working age. TABLE III DEBARRED IN 1905, FOR REASONS GIVEN ---------------------+------+------+----------+----------+--------+--------+ Race or People |Idiots|Insane|Paupers or|Loathsome |Contract|Relieved| | | |likely to |or |laborers|in | | | |be public |contagious| |hospital| | | |charges |diseases | | | ---------------------+------+------+----------+----------+--------+--------+ African (black) | .. | .. | 107 | .. | 13 | 3 | Armenian | .. | .. | 25 | 50 | 5 | 78 | Bohemian and | | | | | | | Moravian | .. | 1 | 38 | 8 | 5 | 104 | Bulgarian, Servian, | | | | | | | and Montenegrin | .. | .. | 314 | 19 | 62 | 37 | Chinese | .. | 1 | 9 | 74 | 3 | 2 | Croatian and | | | | | | | Slovenian | .. | .. | 263 | 88 | 32 | 128 | Cuban | .. | 1 | 22 | 4 | 11 | .. | Dalmatian, Bosnian, | | | | | | | and Herzegovinian | .. | .. | 41 | 3 | 13 | 18 | Dutch and Flemish | 2 | 1 | 51 | 7 | 5 | 41 | East Indian | .. | .. | 12 | .. | 1 | 3 | English | 4 | 9 | 328 | 28 | 58 | 144 | Finnish | 2 | 1 | 33 | 46 | 4 | 89 | French | .. | 2 | 94 | 9 | 23 | 48 | German | 5 | 8 | 420 | 100 | 60 | 747 | Greek | .. | .. | 193 | 22 | 60 | 70 | Hebrew | 10 | 10 | 1,208 | 353 | 33 | 1,534 | Irish | 4 | 13 | 175 | 28 | 15 | 243 | Italian (north) | .. | 2 | 169 | 41 | 42 | 158 | Italian (south) | 6 | 19 | 1,578 | 247 | 205 | 1,290 | Japanese | .. | 1 | 238 | 285 | 13 | 2 | Korean | .. | .. | 4 | 18 | .. | 1 | Lithuanian | 2 | 1 | 48 | 92 | 8 | 269 | Magyar | .. | .. | 427 | 103 | 18 | 363 | Mexican | .. | .. | 7 | 8 | .. | 2 | Polish | .. | 4 | 444 | 204 | 125 | 991 | Portuguese | .. | .. | 50 | 7 | 1 | 26 | Roumanian | .. | .. | 388 | 14 | 111 | 47 | Russian | .. | 3 | 66 | 27 | 1 | 59 | Ruthenian (Russniak) | 1 | 1 | 186 | 14 | 13 | 115 | Scandinavian | | | | | | | (Norwegians, Danes,| | | | | | | and Swedes) | 2 | 9 | 152 | 43 | 14 | 253 | Scotch | .. | 2 | 77 | 10 | 21 | 75 | Slovak | .. | .. | 275 | 66 | 47 | 491 | Spanish | .. | 1 | 66 | 6 | 63 | 23 | Spanish American | .. | .. | 13 | 4 | 1 | 6 | Syrian | .. | .. | 124 | 155 | 59 | 200 | Turkish | .. | .. | 46 | 9 | 5 | 17 | Welsh | .. | 1 | 12 | 1 | 13 | 8 | West Indian | | | | | | | (except Cuban) | .. | 1 | 20 | .. | .. | 17 | All other peoples | .. | .. | 195 | 5 | .. | 74 | ---------------------+------+------+----------+----------+--------+--------+ Grand total | 38 | 92 | 7,898 | 2,198 | 1,164 | 7,776 | ---------------------+------+------+----------+----------+--------+--------+ [Illustration: WAVE OF IMMIGRATION into the United States FROM ALL COUNTRIES during 87 Years. ESTIMATED ARRIVALS 1776 TO 1820 250,000 ARRIVALS 1820 TO 1906 24,032,718] APPENDIX B TABLE OF ACTS OF CONGRESS CONCERNING IMMIGRATION 1862. Act of February 19, prohibiting building, equipping, loading, or preparing any vessel licensed, enrolled or registered in the United States for procuring coolies from any Oriental country to be held for service or labor. 1875. Act of March 3, providing that any person contracting or attempting to contract to supply coolie labor to another be guilty of felony. Excluding convicts, and women imported for immoral purposes, making this traffic felony. 1882. General Immigration Act of August 3; enlarging excluded list and establishing head tax. 1885. Contract Labor Act of February 26, to prevent importation of labor under the padrone or other similar system. 1891. Act of March 3, which codified and strengthened the previous statutes. Excluded classes increased; encouraging of contract labor to emigrate by advertisements forbidden; scope of Immigration Bureau enlarged by establishing office of Superintendent of Immigration (now Commissioner-General), providing for return of debarred aliens, and making decision of immigration officers as to landing or debarment final. 1893. Act of March 3; requiring manifests and their verification; providing boards of special inquiry; and compelling steamship companies to post in the offices of their agents copies of the United States immigration laws, and to call the attention of purchasers of tickets to them. 1894. Act of August 18; making the decision of the appropriate immigration officials final as to admission of aliens, unless reversed by the Secretary of the Treasury on appeal. 1903. Immigration Restriction Act of March 3. (For its main provisions see p. 70 of this book, footnote 23.) THE PRINCIPAL EXCLUDED CLASSES (1) Idiots; (2) insane persons; (3) epileptics; (4) prostitutes; (5) paupers; (6) persons likely to become public charge; (7) professional beggars; (8) persons afflicted with a loathsome or contagious disease; (9) persons who have been convicted of a felony or other crime or misdemeanor involving moral turpitude, not including those convicted of purely political offences; (10) polygamists; (11) anarchists (or persons who believe in or advocate the overthrow by force or violence of the government of the United States or of all government or forms of laws, or the assassination of public officials); (12) those deported within a year from date of application for admission as being under offers, solicitation, promises or agreements to perform labor or service of some kind therein; (13) any person whose ticket or passage is paid for with the money of another, or who is assisted by others to come, unless it is shown that such person does not belong to one of the excluded classes; but any person in the United States may send for a relative or friend without thereby putting the burden of this proof upon the immigrant. CRIMES UNDER THE ACT OF 1903 In order to enforce these provisions twelve violations were made crimes, with penalties of both fine and imprisonment: (1) Importing any person for immoral purposes; (2) prepaying the transportation or encouraging the migration of aliens under any offer, solicitation, promise or agreement, parol or special, expressed or implied, made previous to the importation of aliens, to perform labor in the United States; (3) encouraging the migration of aliens by promise of employment through advertisements in foreign countries; (4) encouraging immigration on the part of owners of vessels and transportation companies by any means other than communications giving the sailing of vessels and terms of transportation; (5) bringing in or attempting to bring in any alien not duly admitted by an immigrant inspector or not lawfully entitled to enter the United States; (6) bringing in by any person other than railway lines of any person afflicted with a loathsome or dangerous contagious disease; (7) allowing an alien to land from a vessel at any other time and place than that designated by the immigration officer; (8) refusing or neglecting to return rejected aliens to the port from which they came or to pay their maintenance while on land; (9) refusing or neglecting to return aliens arrested within three years after entry as being unlawfully in the United States; (10) knowingly or willfully giving false testimony or swearing to any false statement affecting the right of an alien to land is made perjury; (11) assisting any anarchist to enter the United States, or conspiring to allow, procure or permit any such person to enter; (12) failing to deliver manifests. LAWS TO PROTECT THE IMMIGRANT Act of 1819, providing that a vessel should not carry more than two passengers for every five tons, and that a specified quantity of certain provisions should be carried for every passenger; requiring the master to deliver sworn manifests showing age, sex, occupation, nativity, and destination of passengers. Act of 1855, limited number to one for every two tons, and provided that each passenger on main and poop decks should have sixteen feet of floor space, and on lower decks eighteen feet. Act of 1882, providing that in a steamship the unobstructed spaces shall be sufficient to allow one hundred cubic feet per passenger on main and next deck, and 120 on second deck below main deck, and forbidding carrying of passengers on any other decks, or in any space having vertical height less than six feet; other provisions regulate the occupancy of berths, light and air, ventilation, toilet rooms, food, and hospital facilities. Explosives and other dangerous articles are not to be carried, nor animals with or below passengers. Lists of passengers are to be delivered to the boarding officer of customs. Act of 1884, provision that no keeper of a sailors' boarding house or hotel, and no runner or person interested in one, could board an incoming vessel until after it reached its dock. This to protect aliens from imposition and knavery. LEGISLATION RECOMMENDED IN 1905 BY THE COMMISSIONER-GENERAL OF IMMIGRATION 1. In regard to diseased aliens: that competent medical officers be located at the principal ports of embarkation; that all aliens seeking passage secure as a prerequisite from such officer a certificate of good health, mental and physical; and that the bringing of any alien unprovided with such certificate shall subject the vessel by which he is brought to summary fine. 2. That the penalty of $100 now prescribed for carrying diseased persons be increased to $500, as a means of making the transportation lines more careful. 3. Such further legislation as will enable the government to punish those who induce aliens to come to this country under promise or assurance of employment. Less exacting rules of evidence and a summary mode of trial are needed to make the law effective. 4. That Congress provide means for distributing arriving aliens who now congregate in the large cities. 5. That as a means of those incapable of self-support through age or feebleness; those who have not brought sufficient money to maintain them for a reasonable time in event of sickness or lack of employment. 6. That adequate means be adopted, enforced by sufficient penalties, to compel steamship companies to observe in good faith the law which forbids them to encourage or solicit immigration. If other means fail, a limitation apportioning the number of passengers in direct ratio to tonnage is suggested. 7. That masters of vessels be required to furnish manifests of outgoing aliens, similar to those of arriving aliens, so that the net annual increase of alien population may be ascertained. In addition two special recommendations are made, with view to control immigration and lessen the hardships of the debarred: (1) To enlighten aliens as to the provisions of our laws, so that they may not in ignorance sever their home ties and sacrifice their small possessions in an ineffectual attempt to enter the United States. To this end the laws and regulations should be translated into the various tongues and distributed widely. This might not prevail as against the influence and promises of transportation agents, but it would relieve this country of responsibility for needless distress and suffering. (2) An international conference of immigration experts. APPENDIX C WORK OF LEADING DENOMINATIONS FOR THE FOREIGN POPULATION The following facts and figures, received from the leading Home Mission Boards, give some idea of the work which is now being done for the evangelization of the foreign peoples in the United States. We should be glad if the reports were more complete. They do not represent all of the work that is being done, because a considerable part of this work is carried on by the local churches in all of the denominations, and this work is seldom reported and does not enter into the statistics of the Home Mission Boards. It is hoped that each Board will provide a supplementary chapter, setting forth in detail its work among the foreign population--a work abounding in incident and hopefulness. There is no more encouraging home mission work, and wherever earnest effort has been made, the response has been most gratifying. Write to your Home Mission Board for full information. Where a special chapter is not furnished for a supplemental study, the Boards will send the information and literature that will enable the leader of the study class to show what is being done, with a detail impossible in the general treatment of the subject. It is significant, in this connection, that all the Boards are calling especial attention to the needs of this work among the foreign peoples and urging large advance in plans for evangelization. MISSION WORK OF THE METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH IN 1906 AMONG THE FOREIGN POPULATION ----------------------+-----------------------+-------------------------- | No. of charges | Members and probationers | receiving | in charge receiving Nationality | missionary aid | missionary aid ----------------------+-----------------------+-------------------------- Welsh 4 185 Swedish 135 12,076 Norwegian and Danish 85 4,236 German 265 19,184 French 8 350 Chinese 11 298 Japanese 30 1,666 Bohemian and Hungarian 11 1,666 Italian 18 1,014 Portuguese 3 86 Finnish 9 93 Foreign Populations 3 .... --- ------ 582 39,557 Including the charges not now receiving missionary aid, the total number of missions, or charges, among the foreign peoples was 971, not including Spanish work, and the total membership, including probationers, was 92,082 in 1906. The work is extended all over the country. The Woman's Home Missionary Society supports Immigrant Homes in New York City, and in Boston, Mass., in which immigrants may find protection and counsel as well as a safe lodging. In Philadelphia, Pa., work is also done for incoming strangers, and lodgings provided in case of need. Missionaries are stationed at each of these points. Much work is done for foreigners by this Society through its three large city missions, and its numerous Deaconess Homes. MISSION WORK OF THE PRESBYTERIAN HOME MISSION BOARD IN 1906 AMONG THE FOREIGN POPULATION Nationality No. of Churches and Stations Membership Armenian 3 183 Bohemian 30 1,529 Chinese 10 438 Danes and Norwegians 1 101 Dutch 12 1,365 French 9 508 German 156 13,446 Hungarian (Magyar) 15 1,035 --- ------ Total 236 18,605 Italian 32 955 Japanese 3 50 Korean 1 40 Russian 1 .... Slavic 8 337 Syrian 2 15 Welsh 7 414 --- ------ Total 290 20,415 The Annual Report for 1906 says: In addition to the above it is doubtless true that there are many churches, and even individuals, carrying on religious work among foreigners which has not been reported to the Board. Two facts warrant special attention. One is that the proper carrying on of the work of giving the gospel to these foreign-speaking peoples necessarily includes and is closely allied with other needs--such as schools; literature in their own tongue, including tracts, papers, and the Bible; colporteur visitation; Bible reading, and so forth. It is not sufficient simply to open a church or hall where a meeting can be held and expect the people to come. A great deal of preparatory work must be done. MISSION WORK OF THE AMERICAN BAPTIST HOME MISSION SOCIETY IN 1906, AMONG THE FOREIGN POPULATION Nationality No. of Field Members of Mission Fields Bohemians 6 196 Chinese 12 209 Danes 20 484 Finns 13 175 French Canadian 29 650 Germans 148 5,196 Hungarians 3 42 Italians 25 391 Japanese 2 68 Jews 2 .... --- ------ 260 7,411 Lettish 2 31 Mexicans in U. S 18 113 Norwegians 50 1,095 Poles 6 82 Portuguese 2 42 Russians 2 71 Slavs 5 77 Swedes 205 7,623 Syrians 1 .... --- ------ 551 16,545 FOREIGN PEOPLES IN BAPTIST CHURCHES, THE RESULTS OF HOME MISSION WORK Churches Memb'ship Germans, 1906 266 26,274 Dane-Norwegian, 1903 90 5,530 Swedes, 1903 331 22,625 The number of missionaries among the foreign populations was 312. The Women's Societies maintained a number of workers, including the efficient missionaries at Ellis Island. The Home Mission Society is supporting Italian missionaries in twenty cities. Aside from organized effort, Chinese Sunday-schools are conducted by many local churches, which do not report to any central organization. There is a considerable work done also by the city mission societies, which work independently in part. In some places, local churches also maintain missions among the Italians, Hungarians, and Slavs. MISSION WORK OF THE CONGREGATIONAL HOME MISSIONARY SOCIETY IN 1906 Total number of Missionaries 215 German Missions 73 Scandinavian Missions 89 Bohemian " 20 Polish " 5 French " 7 Spanish Missions 10 Finnish " 6 Danish " 2 Armenian " 6 Greek " 1 Chinese and Japanese 22 STATEMENTS SHOWING NUMBER OF CONGREGATIONAL CHURCHES FOR FOREIGN SPEAKING PEOPLES, WITH THEIR TOTAL MEMBERSHIP Churches Members Average to a Church Germans 170 8,000 47 Scandinavians 95 7,495 79 Slavs 12 636 58 All other Nationalities, (including Italians, French, Greek, Armenian, Chinese, Welsh, etc) 102 8,222 78 --- ------ --- 379 24,353 262 WORK OF THE PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH AMONG THE FOREIGN POPULATION The Domestic Section of the Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States carries on work to a limited extent among the Swedes. There is a general missionary in the East, who has charge of this work in the three dioceses of Rhode Island, New York, and Massachusetts, and one in the northwest. In the eastern dioceses named there were in 1906 fifteen Swedish missions and parishes, with 1,897 communicants, ministered to by five clergymen. The western general missionary visited Sweden during the past year for the purpose of finding suitable university students for the ministry in this country. There are missions in Duluth and at other points. The Annual Report says: "Of all the work under the care of the general missionary, none is more important than the mission to Scandinavian immigrants arriving at Ellis Island, New York, for it acts as a special feeder to the church. The Scandinavian immigrants outnumber those from any other Protestant country." What further work is done for the foreign peoples is carried on by the local parishes, such as Grace Church, Trinity, Saint George's, and Saint Bartholomew's in New York, which work among the Italians and other nationalities, and equip their missions in a manner worthy of imitation. LUTHERAN WORK IN THE UNITED STATES Large numbers of the immigrants are Lutherans. The resources of the Lutheran church in America to care for her people are thus stated by the Rev. J. N. Lenker, D.D., in the _Lutheran World_, the church organ: For the Germans, 5,000 pastors, 8,000 churches, and 1,200,000 communicant members. For the Scandinavians, 1,800 pastors, 14,300 churches, and 500,000 communicant members. For the Finns, three synods, 58 pastors, 187 churches, and 22,149 communicant members. For the Slovaks, about 200 organizations with a growing number of pastors and a very loyal constituency. For the Letts and Esthonians, 21 organized congregations and preaching stations, divided into the eastern and western districts. For the Icelanders, one synod, 10 pastors, 37 organized congregations, 3,785 communicant members. For the Poles, Bohemians, and Magyars, work is done by the various German synods, the late statistics of which are not at hand. Besides congregations in these languages, many understand German and are served by German pastors. The whole Lutheran Church of America, including the Swedish Mission Friends with 33,000 members and the German Evangelical Synod with 222,000 members, the constituents of which are nearly all Lutherans, making in all 8,956 pastors, 15,135 churches, and 2,123,639 communicant members are the results of immigrant mission work or mission work in foreign languages or languages other than English. ANALYSIS OF THE IMMIGRATION FOR 1905, WITH REGARD TO RELIGIOUS AFFILIATIONS AND EASE OF ASSIMILATION[102] First class and the easiest to assimilate are English 50,865 Reformed Scotch 16,144 Reformed Germans 82,360 Luth. and Cath. Scandinavians 62,284 Lutheran Irish 54,266 Catholic. Finns 17,012 Lutheran Letts, et al. 18,604 Lutheran Slovaks 52,368 Lutheran ------- Total 353,903 Second class and the second easiest to assimilate: Magyars 46,030 Ref. and Cath. Bohemians, etc 11,757 Ref. and Cath. French 11,021 Ref. and Cath. Ruthenians 14,473 Catholic ------ Total 83,281 Third class and the most difficult to evangelize and Americanize and the class that makes the new problem difficult: Poles 102,137 Catholic Italians 226,320 Catholic Hebrews 129,910 Israelites ------- Total 458,367 APPENDIX D BIBLIOGRAPHY Bernheimer, Charles S., Editor. The Russian Jew in the United States. B. F. Buck & Co., New York $1.50. Written mostly by Jews; replete with facts gathered in the various centers--New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, Boston. Should be read by those who would understand this remarkable people. Brandenburg, Broughton. Imported Americans. F. A. Stokes, New York. $1.60. Description of experiences while making personal investigations in New York, Italy, and the steerage, of immigration problems. Crowell, Katherine R. Coming Americans. Willett Press, New York. Paper, 25 cents; Cloth, 35 cents. A book for Juniors, putting in attractive form for children and teachers of children the leading features of immigration. Gordon, W. Evans. The Alien Immigrant. Charles Scribner's Sons, New York. $1.50. Describes the Hebrews in European countries, with chapter on situation in the United States. Hall, Prescott F. Immigration. Henry Holt & Co., New York. $1.50. The latest volume of comprehensive character, taking the restrictive position. The author is secretary of the Immigration Restriction League. Holt, Hamilton. Undistinguished Americans. James Pott & Co., New York. $1.50. Biographical and readable. Lord, Eliot, et al. The Italian in America. B. F. Buck & Co., New York. $1.50. Makes an exceedingly favorable showing for the Italians; somewhat one-sided but valuable. Mayo-Smith, Richmond. Emigration and Immigration. Charles Scribner's Sons, New York. $1.50. An exceedingly valuable and scholarly work. McLanahan, Samuel. Our People of Foreign Speech. Fleming H. Revell Company, New York. 50 cents, net. A handbook containing many valuable facts in compact form. Riis, Jacob. How the Other Half Lives. Charles Scribner's Sons, New York. $1.25, net. Descriptive of the conditions in which the foreign population struggles for existence. Roberts, Peter. Anthracite Coal Communities. The Macmillan Company, New York. $3.50. A study of the anthracite regions and the Slavs, similar in character to Dr. Warne's book. Sinclair, Upton. The Jungle. Doubleday, Page & Co., New York. $1.50. A work based on personal investigation and living among the Slavs who labor in the stockyards in Chicago; vivid narrative. This book discloses the treatment of the alien that makes him a menace to America. Strong, Josiah. Our Country. Baker & Taylor Company, New York. 60 cents. The points made in the chapter on Immigration are as pertinent now as when the book was issued in 1881. Strong, Josiah. The Twentieth Century City. Baker & Taylor Company, New York. Paper, 25 cents; Cloth, 50 cents. Has the breadth of view and effectiveness which belong to the author. Warne, F. Julian. The Slav Invasion. J. B. Lippincott Co., Philadelphia, Pa. $1.00, net. Study at first hand of conditions in Pennsylvania mining regions and the Slav population. Whelpley, J. D. The Problem of the Immigrant. Charles Scribner's Sons, New York. $4.20. Dealing with the emigration and immigration laws of all nations. Wood, Robert A. Americans in Process. Charles Scribner's Sons, New York. $1.50. A series of papers by Robert A. Wood, and other workers in the South End House in Boston, Mass. INDEX Abuses, of immigration privileges and laws, 42, 43, 63-69, 78-84, 92, 93 Adams, Representative, of Pennsylvania, 74, 97 Admission, see _Immigrants_ Africans, 124 Alabama, 113 Albany, New York, 22 Aldrich, Thomas Bailey, 3 Alien, admission, 53-64; advance in numbers and distribution, 15-50, 102-117; characterized, 236, 237, 258; ideas imported, 241; loss of religious faith, 271; opinion of America, 272; protection, 65-68; restriction, 68-84 Aliens, classes excluded, 77, 78; total since American Revolution, 28 America, duty to guard its own genius, 232; mission, 10, 269; must be kept Christian, 271; unique mission field, 269 American, Christians, duty of, 10, 11, 44-47; fair play, 73; ideals to be preserved, 11, 46, 47, 91, 238, 239, 262; institutions, 232, 261; liberty, 117; Protestantism, 16, 47, 254, 255, 288; teacher in Syria, 39; Tract Society, 50; type of nationality, 11, 45, 46, 92, 238, 240 Americanization of immigrants, 10, 14, 46, 113, 126, 176, 242; children promoting, 205, 223, 259, 260 Anderson, Herbert, 268 Antwerp, 99 Appeal, right of, by excluded, 77, 78 Ardan, Ivan, 181, 182 Armenians, 124 Asia, immigrants from, 20, 21, 113 Assimilation of foreign peoples, 270, 271; aid to, 293 Assisted immigration, 43, 77, 93, 101 Associated Charities of Boston, 96 Atchison, Rena M., 194, 247 Attila, 27 Australians, as immigrants, 22 Austria, 81, 82 Austria-Hungary, 92, 165; immigrants from, 21, 25, 72 Baldwin, Mrs. S. L., 72, 73 Baltimore, 53 Barrows, Dr. S. J., 142 Battery, the, 54, 62, 108 Belgians, as immigrants, 21 Belgium, 29 Berlin, 199 Betts, Mrs. Lillian W., 151, 152, 204 Bible, 34, 167, 174, 283, 288 "Birds of passage," 71, 135 Blackwell's Island, 139 Board of Special Inquiry, 62 Bohemians, as immigrants, 21, 165-170; city centers, 166; freethinking tendencies, 168, 169; Protestant in spirit, 165-168; religious work among, 285 Booth, General William, 194 Bosnians, 183 Boston, 24, 53, 83, 198; Italian Society, 111 Boyesen, Professor, 28, 89, 90, 234 Brandenburg, Broughton, 41, 65-68, 82, 97, 98, 101 Bremen, 82, 99 Brooklyn, 148 Brooks, Phillips, 232 Bryce, James, 200 Buffalo, 172 Bulgarians, as immigrants, 21, 183 Bureau of Information, 110 Burlington, Iowa, 20 Calvin, 172 Cambridge, Massachusetts, 24 Canada, 27; ingress from, 53, 77, 92 Canadians, as immigrants, 21 Carr, Mr. 138 Carroll, Dr. H. K., 174 Castle Garden, 28 Celtic peoples, 123 Chandler, ex-Senator, 214 Chattanooga, Immigration Bureau in, 113 Chicago, 36, 166-172, 176, 187, 198 Childhood, the blighting of, 225, 226 Children, condition of, in great cities, 221, 222; number of, at work, 224, 226 Chinese, as immigrants, 21, 40, 72, 73; converts, 73, 89, 269; exclusion act, 70, 73; Sunday-schools for, 289 Chivers, Dr. E. E., 267 Chopin, 172 Christ, 44, 277 Christian attitude toward immigrants, 44-47, 270; coöperation and federation, 286; optimism, 8, 117, 262 Christianity, converts to, 73; its first impression for newcomers, 277, 278 Churches, duty and opportunity of, 270, 282, 286; abandoning lower New York, 278; must be missionary, 270; saving themselves through saving immigrants, 285; work for foreigners, 289 Cincinnati, 23 Citizenship, how degraded, 214 City, the, bad government of, 200; conditions of tenement-house life in, 201, 210; demoralizing influences, 209, 214; environment offered immigrants, 196, 201-206; foreignization of, 198, 199, 217; isolation of foreigners in, 205; nerve and storm center, 193; overcrowding, 203, 206; political evils, 214 City College, many Jewish pupils in, 189 Civil War, effect on immigration, 26, 31 Claghorn, Kate H., 97, 259 Cleveland, Ohio, 24, 166, 169, 172 Cleveland, President, 96 Colonies, foreign, in America, 196, 198, 200, 217 Colonists distinguished from immigrants, 45, 46 Columbia University, 13 Columbus, Christopher, 188 Commissioner-General of Immigration, 25, 76-78, 83, 92, 93; of the Port, 77 Coney Island, 150 Congestion of foreign elements in cities, 195 Congress, acts of, 70 Connecticut, 173, 174, 180 Consumption, statistics of, 220; foreign element largely its victims, 220 Contract labor exclusion, 77, 82, 92; violation, 82, 83 Convicts, excluded, 77 Cook, Joseph, 52 Coolies, Chinese, excluded, 70 Coöperation, interdenominational, 286; of Home Mission Boards, 288 Copernicus, 172 Crime, conditions favorable to increase of, 209, 224; foreigners led into by environment and example, 209 Croatians, 124, 183 Czechs, see _Bohemians_ Dalmatians, as immigrants, 183 Danes, as immigrants, 21 Debarred, see _Excluded_ Democracy, influence of upon aliens, 296, 298 Denmark, immigrants from, 23 Detroit, 21, 172 Discrimination needed as to immigrants, 127 Diseases guarded against, 57, 59, 60, 74, 77, 78, 93 Distribution of immigrants, 102-117; New York state, 105, 107; New Zealand methods, 116; North Atlantic section, 105; Ohio, 107; Pennsylvania, 105, 107; railroads assisting, 116; societies aiding, 107-113; South Central states, 105; West Virginia, 107; Western section, 105 Dublin, 199 Dutch, as immigrants, 21 Eastern invasion, the, 157-192 Edison, Thomas A., 247 Educational policy affected by immigration, 246 Ellis Island, 18, 19, 35, 37, 54, 55, 59-62, 74, 83, 99, 100, 108; missionary workers at, 274; results of personal efforts at, 275 Emerson, Ralph W., 247 English, as immigrants, 19, 21, 126; language, influence of, 259, 260 Environment, evil effects of upon children, 243 Europe, American ideas working in, 33, 34; immigrants from, 20, 23, 98, 123-192 Evangelization of immigrants, 10, 16, 46, 47; accessibility, 294; illustration of, 283; most potent factor in Americanizing, 270; need for extension of, 277; personal responsibility for, 290; sporadic, not systematic, 281 Evasion of immigration laws, 78-83 Excluded classes, 74-78, 100, 101 Federation of Jewish Charities, 102 Financial panics, effect on immigration, 26, 31 Finns, as immigrants, 21 Fiume, 82, 99 Forbes, James, 139 Foreign-born, distribution of, 107 Four State Immigration League, 113 France, 34 Franklin, Benjamin, 69 Freethinkers, their societies among immigrants, 168, 169, 180, 285 French-American College, the, 280 French, as immigrants, 21 French-Canadians, Roman Catholic convention of, 257 Fung Yuet Mow, 269 Gardner, Representative, of Massachusetts, 95 Genoa, 99, 132 Germans, as immigrants, 19, 21, 35, 126 Germany, immigrants from, 25, 33, 81 Goodchild, Rev. F. M., 33, 292 Grant, Ulysses S., 247 Great Britain, immigrants from, 25, 43, 128 Greece, 92 Greek Catholic Church, 182, 184; Orthodox or Russian State Church, 182 Greeks, as immigrants, 21, 37, 41 Hall, Prescott F., 45, 70, 129 Hamburg, 82, 99 Havre, 99 Hebrew, see _Jewish_, _Jews_ Herzegovinians, as immigrants, 183 Hewes, F. W., 107 Home Missions, at Ellis Island, 274; demand for extension of in New York, 287; opportunities of, for local churches, 279; personal work, 274, 290, 291; results of abroad, 269; settlement influences by residence, 292, 293 Honolulu, 53 Huguenot colonial stock, 240 Hungarians, as immigrants, 33, 128, 177-179; cafés, as social centers, 178, 179; fair degree of education, 177; open to mission work, 178 Hungary, 19, 128 Huns, 27, 165 Hunter, Robert, 194, 200 Huss, John, 166, 170 Iberic peoples, 123 Idiots, excluded, 77, 78 Illiteracy, amount of among immigrants, 22, 24, 125; test proposed, 95, 96 Immigrants, admission, 53-64; "assisted," 43, 93; approachable, 273, 282; attracted to the city, 195; debarred, 70, 71, 77, 78; diseased, 57, 60, 74, 77, 78, 93, 94; illiteracy among, 22, 23, see also _Illiteracy_; "manifest," 55, 56, 61; nationality, 21, 22; "natural," 31-42; ports and routes of entry, 53, 77; "solicited," 42, 43, 80-82, 93; smuggling of, 81, 92; religious census and conditions, 251, 271; value of first impression upon, 273; views of America, 272; women among, 18, 61, 76 Immigration, annual volume, 17-22; Bureau of, 76, 77, 92, 104; causes of, 29-31; Christian view of, 8; classes, 31-43; Conference of 1905, 90, 91; divine mission in, 270; economic fallacies of, 245; effect upon educational policy, 246; inspectors and officers, 59-61, 76, 77; laws, see _Laws, immigration_; new development of, 121-155; numbers since 1820, 25-27; process by the steerage and Ellis Island described, 55-62; Restrictive League, 96; "runner," 80-82; steamship and railroad arrangements, 55, 57, 62 Indianapolis, 22 Indians, North American, 45 Industrial Commission, 31 Insane, excluded, 77, 78 Insanity, low proportion among Italians and Jews, 140 Institutional church, need of, 286, 288 Ireland, 27, 43, immigrants from, 25, 31, 72, 128; potato famine, 25 Irish, as immigrants, 19, 21, 38, 39, 89, 126; compared with the Italians, 136, 137 Italian, Benevolent Institute, 147; Chamber of Commerce, 145; Hospital, 147; Immigration Department, 138; Savings Bank, 147 Italians, as immigrants, 19, 34, 36, 37, 110, 130; distribution, 135, 136; family coöperation, 207; generally peaceable character, 141, 142, 208; illiteracy, 22, 134; in New York, 139, 145, 206; number entering, 19, 134, 135; parallel drawn with Irish, 136, 137; societies for mutual aid, 50, 110, 145, 147; spirit of converts, 284; thrift, 139-147, 207; women homemakers, 206; Italy, 92, 131-133; government action and aid, 79, 111; immigrants from, 25, 31, 72, 79, 107; Royal Department of Emigration, 111; sections compared, 131-134 Ives, Mr., 294 Japanese, as immigrants, 40; Robinson Crusoe, 40 Jefferson, President, 68 Jerome of Prague, 166 Jersey City, 22 Jewish children as pupils, 189 Jews, as immigrants, 21, 95, 96, 113, 128, 185-190; Austria-Hungarian, 21, 186; German, 185; good qualities, 190; number of in New York, 186, 198; Roumanian, 186; Russian, 11, 12, 21, 185-190 _John G. Carlisle_, ferryboat, 53 Joseph II, Emperor, of Austria, 167 Juvenile Court, Jewish children in, 190 Kansas City, 22 Kosciusko, 172 Kossuth, a Slovak, 175 Labor, immigration of skilled and unskilled, 23, 24 Latin races, as immigrants, 113, 131 Lawrence, Kansas, 20 Laws, immigration, 58, 64; Bill of 1906, 95; problems, 87-119; protective, 65-68; restrictive, 68-84; summaries and recommendations, 309-313 Lee, Dr. S. H., 136, 152 Legislation, see _Laws, immigration_ Letts, the, as immigrants, 179, 180 Liberty, American, as a working leaven, 33, 34; statue of, 57, 278 Lieber, Francis, 194 Lincoln, Abraham, 247 Lithuanians, as immigrants, 23, 36, 179, 180; illiteracy, 23 Liverpool, 99 Lodge, Senator, 96 London, 99 Long Island, as a field for Italians, 149 Longfellow, 247 Louisiana, 113 Louisville, 23 Luther, 172 Lynn, Massachusetts, 24 Machinery, effect on immigration, 43 Madison, President, 68 Mafia, the, 130, 141 Magna Charta, 34 Magyars, as immigrants, 21, 177-179; illiteracy, 23; see also _Hungarians_ "Manifest" for immigrant, 55, 56, 61 Marine Hospital Service, 59 Marseilles, 99 Mashek, Nan, 166 Massachusetts, 142, 173 Mayo-Smith, Richmond, 52, 231, 238, 248 McLanahan, Samuel, 121 McMillan, Margaret, 225 Mexicans, as immigrants, 21 Mexico, ingress through, 92, 93 Michigan, 172 Milwaukee, 170, 172 Minneapolis, 21 Mission workers for immigrants, 274 Mississippi, 113, 183 Mitchell, Max, 102 Mongolic peoples, 124 Montenegrins, as immigrants, 21, 183 Moravians, as immigrants, 164 Music, love of by Bohemians, 169; by Italians, 144 Naples, 99, 199 National Civic Federation, 90; Slavonic Society, 176 Naturalization, illegal methods, 93, 196, 214-215; reading test desirable, 249 New Amsterdam, 45 New England, 45, 148, 173, 179; how it can remain Christian, 270, 271 New Haven, 23 New Jersey, 148, 173, 178 New Orleans, 183 New York, Bible Society, 50; State, 69, 70, 105, 107, 178, 213 New York City, 30-39, 53, 54, 62, 63, 110, 112, 139, 145, 165, 166, 169, 172, 176-189, 198, 200, 220; chief port of entry for immigrants, 53; child life and labor in, 220, 221; consumption in, 220; cosmopolitan character, 198, 199; foreign peoples in, 139, 145, 150, 166, 172, 178, 179, 186-189, 195-226 Norway, 27; immigrants from, 23, 25, 126 Occupations, of various races, 23, 24 Odessa, 99 Ogg, Frederick A., 92, 93, 99, 100 Ohio, 172 Optimism, 8, 29, 262 Ottawa, Illinois, 20 Padrones, 82, 92, 111 Parochial schools among aliens, 246, 256 Pauperism in the United States, 218; contrasted with poverty, 217; foreign percentage of, 219; increased by immigration, 219 Pennsylvania, 160-163, 172, 175, 177, 179, 181, 183, 213 People's Forum in Cooper Institute, 250 Persecution, affecting immigration, 29, 30, 91 Philadelphia, 38, 53, 172, 176, 179, 187 Pittsburg, 82, 172, 174, 176 Poles, as immigrants, 22, 35, 75, 76, 170-174; clannish, 173; illiteracy, 22, 173; independence, 173 Polish, Catholics, 174; girl, story of, 212; Jew, "sweater," 210; National Alliance, 170 Ports, for examination abroad, 98, 99; of entry, 53 Portsmouth, New Hampshire, 20 Poughkeepsie, New York, 20 Poverty in the United States, 218; defined, 217 Presbyterian Slavistic Union, 176 Protestantism, as related to immigrants, 9, 39, 47, 202, 166-174, 177-188, 216, 224, 251; could change conditions as to child labor, 225, 226; ought to save immigrants from moral degeneracy, 255; vast opportunity to evangelize and Americanize, 267-299 Providence, Rhode Island, 21 Public Schools, attacks upon to be resisted, 248; duty to elevate, 248; foreign children in, 198, 223, 248; power to Americanize, 234, 248, 256 Publicity, value of, 83, 90 Quarantine, 56, 62 Railroads and immigrants, 62, 63 Reich, Emil, 131 Religious census of immigrants in 1900, 251 Removal Bureau, for directing Jewish emigrants, 111 Reports, Commissioner-General, 25, 143 Riis, Jacob, 194, 216 Roman Catholic Church, as related to immigrants, 133, 151, 152, 167, 168, 172-174, 177-184, 247, 248, 251, 256, 257, 271, 297; efforts to get public money for parochial schools, 246; some lessons to be learned from, 279 Roosevelt, President, 51, 73, 88, 92, 96, 179 Rossi, Adolpho, 138, 147 Rotterdam, 99 Roumanians, as immigrants, 19, 21; see also _Jews_ Rovinanek, Mr., 174, 175 Russia, 34, 128; immigrants from, 25, 81, 217 Russian empire, 19; Jews, 11, 19, 112; persecution, 29, 30 Saint Louis, 145, 198 Saint Nazaire, 99 Saloon, evil effects of, 216, 217 Sampson, Sidney, 260 San Francisco, 41, 53, 73, 148 Saratoga Springs, New York, 20 Sargent, Commissioner-General, 28, 103, 158, 203 Scandinavians, 27; agricultural tendency, 127; useful immigrants, 19, 21, 126, 217; small illiteracy, 23 Schauffler, Dr. A. F, 30, 195 Schauffler, Dr. H. A., 293 Scotch, as immigrants, 21, 126; small illiteracy, 23 Scotland, 27 Secretary of Commerce and Labor, 77, 78 Seelye, ex-President of Amherst, 255 Servian immigrants, 21 Settlement service by religion and residence, 292, 293 Sioux Falls, Iowa, 20 Slavic home missionaries, 293, 294; peoples, 124 Slavs, as immigrants, 21, 79, 107, 113, 127, 128, 157-192; defined, 159, 160; displacing other peoples, 160, 162; illiteracy, 23, 164; largely unskilled, 164; migration of recent date, 160; mostly mine and factory workers, 164; native workers among, 285 Slovaks, as immigrants, 174-176; from agricultural class, 175; organizations among, 176; tinware workers, 176 Slovenians, as immigrants, 183 Slums, peril of the children in, 220-224; poverty and pauperism of, 217-219 Socialism, bred in the slums, 202 Societies in aid of immigrants by races, 110-112 Society for Italian immigrants, 50, 110, 111 Solicitation, as affecting immigration, 42, 43, 80-82, 93 South American immigrants, 21 South Carolina, 113 South, the New, as a field for immigrants, 113 Southampton, 99 Spahr, Dr. Charles B., 260 Spanish immigrants, 21, 217 Special Inquiry Board, 77 Speranza, Gino C., 88, 145 "Stairs of Separation," 62, 63 Standards of living, lowered through immigration, 244 States and countries as a scale of immigration, 24, 25, 27, 28 Statistics of immigration, aliens since Revolution, 28; arrivals by years from 1820 to 1905, 305; child labor in New York City, and in United States, 226, 227; countries by totals, 127-129; debarred during fourteen years, and by race or people, 77, 303; distribution by states, 105-107; entries at ports and through Canada, 53; estimated immigration for 1905-6, 20; illiteracy, 21-23, 134, 164; increase of immigrants for 1905, 25; inflow since 1820, 25-27; insanity, 140; Italians, by years, locality, and occupation, 134, 135, 143; Jews, chiefly Russian, 185, 186, 198; labor skilled and unskilled, 23, 24, 134, 164; mendicancy, 140; money sent from United States to aid immigrants, 31; present annual race totals illustrated, 20-23; race, sex, and age of immigrants for 1905, 306; religious divisions for 1900, 251; savings and investments of Italians, 145, 146; Slavs for 1905, 159, see also, for distribution and occupation, 165-183; tendency among Italians to forsake Roman Catholic Church, 271 Steamships for immigrants, 55, 57; overcrowding, 65; rate cutting, 79; steerage abuses and reforms, 65-68; unkind treatment, 57, 58, 67; unsanitary arrangements, 65-67; violation of laws, 78-84 Stettin, 99 Strong, Dr. Josiah, 9-16, 193, 194, 256, 257 Sunday laws and observance, as affected by immigration, 72, 237, 241, 252-254; Sunday-schools, among immigrants, 284, 294 Sweat-shop, description of system, 209, 210; reproach to Christian civilization, 210; victims of, 210-213 Sweden, 27; immigrants from, 23, 25, 33, 37, 38, 126 Swiss, as immigrants, 21, 28 Switzerland, 27, 43 Syrian immigrants, 23, 39 Tariff, effect on immigration, 44 Temperance, large measure of, among Chinese, Italians, and Jews, 73, 141, 190 Tenement-houses, description of life in, 204-208; evils of, 201; exorbitant rents, 202; model block of suggested, 288; responsibility of landlords, 202; unsanitary conditions of, 211 Tent campaign, winning Italians, 282 Teutonic peoples, 123 Texas, 113 Thompson, Dr. Charles L., 117, 268 Training schools, needed in work among aliens, 286 Trieste, 99 Tuoti, Mr. G., 145 Turks, as immigrants, 21; illiteracy, 23 Tymkevich, Paul, 158 United Hebrew Charities, 111, 219, 277 United Kingdom, see _Great Britain_ United States, agencies of helpful to immigrants, 50, 54, 57-63, 111, 274; "assisted" immigration to, 43, 93; attraction of, 29-42; Immigration Investigating Commission, 112, 113; Industrial Commission on Immigration, 141; legislation as to immigrants, see _Laws, immigration_; money from relatives in, to aid immigrants, 31; national songs, 34; Post-office, an immigration agency, 33; see also _Commissioner-General of Immigration, Ports of entry_ Venice, 199 Vincennes, Indiana, 20 Virginia, 45, 175 Vote, foreign, peril of, 249 Walker, General Francis A., 232 Ward, Robert D., 194 Warne, F. J., 157, 158, 162, 246 Warsaw, 199 Washington, city of, 24; President, 68 Watchorn, Commissioner Robert, 30, 82 Welsh, as immigrants, 21, 126 Whelpley, J. D., 16, 70, 79, 94, 101 Wisconsin, 167 Women immigrants, 18, 35, 38, 39, 57, 61, 67, 75, 76, 304; special inspection for, 61, 76 Work of leading denominations for foreign population, 314-320 Yiddish language, 198 Young people, as creators of public sentiment, 197; opportunity of for Christian service, 10 Ziska, General, 166 * * * * * ~The Forward Mission Study Courses~ * * * * * "Anywhere, _provided it be_ FORWARD."--_David Livingstone_ * * * * * _Prepared under the auspices of the YOUNG PEOPLE'S MISSIONARY MOVEMENT_ EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE:--Harry Wade Hicks, S. Earl Taylor, John W. Wood, F. P. Haggard, T. H. P. Sailer. * * * * * The Forward Mission Study Courses are an outgrowth of a conference of leaders in Young People's Mission Work, held in New York City, December, 1901. To meet the need that was manifested at that conference for Mission Study Text-books suitable for young people, two of the delegates, Professor Amos R. Wells, of the United Society of Christian Endeavor, and Mr. S. Earl Taylor, Chairman of the General Missionary Committee of the Epworth League, projected the Forward Mission Study Courses. These courses have been officially adopted by the Young People's Missionary Movement, and are now under the immediate direction of the Executive Committee of the Movement, which consists of the young people's secretaries, or other official representatives of twelve of the leading missionary boards of the United States and Canada. The aim is to publish a series of text-books covering the various home and foreign mission fields, and written by leading authorities with special reference to the needs of young people. The entire series when completed will comprise perhaps as many as twenty text-books. A general account will be given of some of the smaller countries, such as Japan, Korea, and Turkey; but, for the larger fields, as China, Africa, and India, the general account will be supplemented by a series of biographies of the principal missionaries connected with the country. The various home mission fields will also be treated both biographically and historically. The following text-books have been published:-- ~1. The Price of Africa.~ (Biographical.) By S. Earl Taylor. ~2. Into All the World.~ A General Survey of Missions. By Amos R. Wells. ~3. Princely Men in the Heavenly Kingdom.~ (Biographical.) By Harlan P. Beach, M.A., F.R.G.S. ~4. Child Life in Mission Lands.~ A Course of Study for Junior Societies. By Ralph E. Diffendorfer. ~5. Sunrise in the Sunrise Kingdom.~ A Study of Japan. By the Rev. John H. De Forest, D.D. ~6. Heroes of the Cross in America.~ Home Missions. (Biographical.) By Don O. Shelton. ~7. Daybreak in the Dark Continent.~ A Study of Africa. By Wilson S. Naylor. ~8. The Christian Conquest of India.~ A Study of India. By Bishop James M. Thoburn. ~9. Aliens or Americans?~ A Study of Immigration. By Rev. Howard B. Grose, Ph.D. These books are published by mutual arrangement among the denominational publishing houses, to whom all orders should be addressed. They are bound uniformly, and are sold for 50 cents, in cloth, and 35 cents, in paper, postage extra. * * * * * Study classes desiring more advanced text-books are referred to the admirable series published by the Interdenominational Committee of the Woman's Boards. The volumes already published are:-- ~Via Christi.~ A Study of Missions before Carey. By Louise Manning Hodgkins. ~Lux Christi.~ A Study of Missions in India. By Caroline Atwater Mason. ~Rex Christus.~ A Study of Missions in China. By Rev. Arthur H. Smith, D.D. ~Dux Christus.~ A Study of Missions in Japan. By Rev. W. E. Griffis, D.D. ~Christus Liberator.~ A Study of Missions in Africa. By Ellen C. Parsons. ~Christus Redemptor.~ A Study of the Island World. By Helen Barrett Montgomery. * * * * * [Illustration: AN ITALIAN SUNDAY SCHOOL IN NEW ENGLAND] [Illustration: PORTUGUESE AND SPANISH CHILDREN Portuguese Boy and Girl Spanish Boys] [Illustration: FOUR NATIONALITIES Jewish Girl Polack Girl Italian Boy Spanish Boy ] [Illustration: AN ITALIAN FAMILY CROWDED IN A NEW YORK TENEMENT] [Illustration: A GROUP OF IMMIGRANTS JUST ARRIVED AT ELLIS ISLAND] [Illustration: THREE TYPES OF IMMIGRANTS Alsace-Lorraine Girl Ruthenian Woman Holland Dame ] [Illustration: A GROUP OF TWELVE DIFFERENT NATIONALITIES Taken on the Roof Garden at Ellis Island] [Illustration: AN APPEAL FROM THE SPECIAL INQUIRY BOARD TO COMMISSIONER WATCHORN] [Illustration: ITALIAN AND SWISS GIRLS Italian Girl Swiss Girl ] [Illustration: ELLIS ISLAND IMMIGRANT STATION The Chief Port of Entry in New York Harbor] [Illustration: DETAINED FOR SPECIAL EXAMINATION] [Illustration: A GERMAN FAMILY "Seven soldiers lost to the Kaiser." (German Consul's remark on seeing this picture)] [Illustration: RECEIVING ROOM AT ELLIS ISLAND (A) Entrance stairs; (B) Examination of health ticket; (C) Surgeon's examination; (D) Second surgeon's examination; (E) Group compartments; (F) Waiting for inspection; (G) Passage to the stairway; (H) Detention room; (I) The Inspectors' desks; (K) Outward passage to barge, ferry, or detention room.] [Illustration: THE LANDING AT THE BATTERY IN NEW YORK] [Illustration: _From copyright stereograph, 1907, by Underwood & Underwood, New York_ THE INFLOWING TIDE] [Illustration: RACES OF IMMIGRANTS FISCAL YEAR 1905 FIGURES ON THE MAP REPRESENT THE NUMBER OF IMMIGRANTS OF THE RACES NAMED COMING FROM EACH COUNTRY INDICATED, WHILE THE FIGURES ON THE BARS REPRESENT THE TOTAL NUMBER OF IMMIGRANTS OF THE RACES NAMED COMING FROM ALL COUNTRIES. THE COLOR ON MAP INDICATES APPROXIMATELY REGIONS OF THE RACIAL GRAND DIVISIONS WHERE THE TERMS "BOHEMIAN," "BULGARIAN," "CROATIAN," AND "DALMATIAN" ARE USED, THEY REFER TO "BOHEMIAN AND MORAVIAN," "BULGARIAN, SERVIAN, AND MONTENEGRIN," "CROATIAN AND SLOVENIAN," AND "DALMATIAN, BOSNIAN, AND HERZEGOVINIAN."] * * * * * FOOTNOTES: [1] J. D. Whelpley, _The Problem of the Immigrant_, 2. [2] Entrance Port for Immigrants at New York. [3] The total immigration into the United States for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1906, was 1,100,735. [4] For table showing immigration for each year from 1820 to 1905, see Appendix A. [5] Now known as the Battery. See footnote 1, p. 54. [6] _City Mission Monthly_, April, 1902. [7] Those who are interested in this feature can trace--by examining the table in the Appendix which gives the immigration by years since 1820--the relation between prosperity and immigration. The effect of the panics of 1837, 1843, 1873, 1893, and the depression caused by the Civil War, will be seen clearly in the immigration totals. This subject is treated in _Immigration_, 17 ff. [8] Published in _Baptist Home Mission Monthly_ for July, 1906. [9] Hamilton Holt, _Undistinguished Americans._ [10] The Swedish _krone_ (kro-ne) has a value of about 27 cents. [11] Broughton Brandenburg, _Imported Americans_, 37. [12] Prescott F. Hall, _Immigration_, 3, 4. [13] The park and piers at the southern end of New York City, formerly known as Castle Garden. [14] Samuel E. Moffett, _Review of Reviews_, July, 1903. [15] It is good to know that the reception conditions, so far as the Government is concerned, have been made as favorable as present accommodations will allow, and enlargement is already projected. Since the Federal Government finally took charge of immigration in 1882, great improvement has been made in method and administration. The inspection is humane, prompt, and on the whole kindly, although entrance examinations are as much dreaded by the average immigrant as by the average student. Commissioner Watchorn, an admirable man for his place, insists upon kindness, and want of it in an employee is cause for dismissal. Ellis Island affords an excellent example of carefully adjusted details and thorough system, whereby with least possible friction thousands of aliens are examined in a day, and pronounced fit or unfit to enter the country. The process is too rapid, however, to give each case the attention which the best interests of the country demand. [16] Under the Act of 1903, this manifest has to state: The full name, age and sex; whether married or single; the calling or occupation; whether able to read or write; the nationality; the race; the last residence; the seaport landing in the United States; the final destination, if any, beyond the port of landing; whether having a ticket through to such final destination; whether the alien has paid his own passage or whether it has been paid by any other person or by any corporation, society, municipality, or government, and if so, by whom; whether in possession of thirty dollars, and if less, how much; whether going to join a relative or friend and if so, what relative or friend, and his name and complete address; whether ever before in the United States, and if so, when and where; whether ever in prison or almshouse or an institution or hospital for the care and treatment of the insane or supported by charity; whether a polygamist; whether an anarchist; whether coming by reason of any offer, solicitation, promise, or agreement, expressed or implied, to perform labor in the United States, and what is the alien's condition of health, mental and physical, and whether deformed or crippled, and if so, for how long and from what cause. [17] Broughton Brandenburg, _Imported Americans_, 208. [18] This imaginary sketch adheres in every detail to the facts. The medical examiners and inspectors become exceedingly expert in detecting disease, disability, or deception. If an overcoat is carried over the shoulder, they look for a false or stiff arm. The gait and general appearance indicate health or want of it to them, and all who do not appear normal are turned aside for further examination, which is thorough. The women have a special inspection by the matrons, who have to be both expert and alert to detect and reject the unworthy. The chief difficulty lies in too small a force to handle such large numbers, which have reached as high as 45,000 in five days. [19] The present regulations were passed in 1882, and if lived up to, as by trustworthy testimony they are not, would prevent serious overcrowding, although the conditions as to air, sanitation, and morals would still be most unsatisfactory. For protective laws, see Appendix B. [20] Broughton Brandenburg, _Imported Americans_, chap. XIV. [21] This Act of 1824 required of vessel-masters a report giving name, birthplace, age, and occupation of each immigrant, and a bond to secure the city against public charges. [22] _Immigration_, chap. X. [23] The main provisions are: 1. Head tax of $2. 2. Excluded classes numbering 17. 3. Criminal offenses against the Immigration Acts, enumerating 12 crimes. 4. Rejection of the diseased aliens. 5. Manifest, required of vessel-masters, with answers to 19 questions. 6. Examination of immigrants. 7. Detention and return of aliens. 8. Bonds and guaranties. The law may be found in full in the Appendix to _Immigration_, and in _The Problem of the Immigrant_, chap. VI., where the rules and regulations for its enforcement are also given. A list of the excluded classes and criminal offenses will be found in Appendix B of this volume. [24] Joseph H. Adams, in _Home Missionary_, for April, 1905. [25] The Immigration Bureau has 1,214 inspectors and special agents. The Commissioner-General says of them: They are spread throughout the country from Maine to southern California. They are [26] thoroughly organized under competent chiefs, many of them working regardless of hours, whether breaking the seals of freight cars on the southern border to prevent the smuggling of Chinese, or watching the countless routes of ingress from Canada, ever alert and willing, equally efficient in detecting the inadmissible alien and the pretended citizen. The Bureau asserts with confidence that, excepting a very few, the government of this country has no more able and faithful servants in its employ, either civil or military, than the immigration officers. [27] Commissioner-General's Report for 1905, p. 41. [28] _Immigration Report_ for 1905, p.56. [29] Broughton Brandenburg, _Imported Americans_, 33. [30] _Immigration Report_ for 1905, p. 48. [31] Prof. H. H. Boyesen. [32] Frederick Austin Ogg, in _Outlook_ for May 5, 1906. [33] A synopsis of these recommendations will be found in Appendix B. [34] Sec. 38. That no alien immigrant over sixteen years of age physically capable of reading shall be admitted to the United States until he has proved to the satisfaction of the proper inspection officers that he can read English or some other tongue ... provided that an admissible alien over sixteen, or a person now or hereafter in the United States of like age, may bring in or send for his wife, mother, affianced wife, or father over fifty-five, if they are otherwise admissible, whether able to read or write or not. [35] Sec. 39. That every male alien immigrant over sixteen shall be deemed likely to become a public charge unless he shows to the proper immigration officials that he has in his possession at the time of inspection money to the equivalent of $25, or that the head of his family entering with him so holds that amount to his account. Every female alien must have $15. [36] The Bill, as amended, left the head tax at $2, and the reading test was omitted. Great opposition to the Bill came from the foreign element, especially the Jews. [37] Dr. Goodchild. [38] Broughton Brandenburg, _Imported Americans_, 302. [39] _Outlook_ for May 5, 1906. [40] J. D. Whelpley, _The Problem of the Immigrant_, 13. [41] _Annual Report for_ 1903, p. 60. [42] _Annual Report for_ 1905, p. 58. [43] Idem, opposite p. 34. [44] This bureau shall collect and furnish to all incoming aliens, data as to the resources, products, and manufactures of each state, territory and district of the United States; the prices of land and character of soils; routes of travel and fares; opportunities of employment in the skilled and unskilled occupations, rates of wages, cost of living, and all other information that in the judgment of the Commissioner-General might tend to enlighten the aliens as to the inducements to settlement in the various sections. [45] Bernheimer, _The Russian Jew in the United States_, 370. [46] Prescott F. Hall, _Immigration_, 303. [47] Eliot Lord, in _The Italian in America_, 177 ff. [48] "The Problem of Immigration," Presbyterian Board of Publication. [49] For a condensed characterization of the north of Europe immigrants read the chapter on Racial Conditions in _Immigration_ (chap. III.) The leading traits of the various immigrant peoples are set forth with fairness and discrimination, although probably none of those described would see themselves exactly as Mr. Hall sees them. [50] _The Italian in America._ [51] John Foster Carr in _Outlook_. [52] See page 146. [53] Dr. S. H. Lee in _Baptist Home Mission Monthly_, for May, 1905. [54] Location of various public institutions of New York City. [55] Industrial Commission Report to Congress, Dec. 5, 1901. [56] _The Italian in America_, 215, 216. [57] G. Tuoti, in _The Italian in America_, 78. [58] A remarkable showing of what the Italians have accomplished through these farming colonies in various parts of the country is given in the chapter "On Farm and Plantation", in _The Italian in America_. [59] Rev. E. P. Farnham, D.D., in New York _Examiner_, June 22, 1906. [60] _University Settlement Studies_, December, 1905. [61] While the Magyars (or Hungarians) are not Slavs, they have lived in close contact with them, and for convenience may be classed in the Slavic division; and the same thing is true of the Roumanian and Russian Jews. All these peoples come from Russia, Austria-Hungary, or the Balkan States, and represent similar customs and ideas, although they differ materially in character, as we shall see. [62] Samuel McLanahan, _Our People of Foreign Speech_, 34 ff. [63] F. J. Warne, _The Slav Invasion_, chap. VI. [64] Miss Kate H. Claghorn, in _Charities_, for December, 1904. [65] _Charities_, for December, 1904. [66] Samuel McLanahan, _Our People of Foreign Speech_, 45. [67] Louis H. Pick, in _Charities_, for December, 1904. [68] Miss Emily Balch, "The Slavs at Home," in _Charities and Commons_. [69] Lee Frankel, in _The Russian Jew in the United States_, 63. [70] Julius H. Greenstone, in _The Russian Jew in the United States_, 158. [71] Commissioner-General's Report for 1905, p. 58. [72] _The Leaven of a Great City_, and _The Story of an East Side Family_. [73] _University Settlement Studies_, January, 1906. [74] Hamilton Holt, _Undistinguished Americans_, 43 ff. [75] Jacob Riis, _How the Other Half Lives_, chap. XVIII. [76] Robert Hunter, _Poverty_, chap. I. This is a book that every American should read. The author is indebted to it for much of the material in this chapter. [77] Robert Hunter, _Poverty_, 196. [78] Idem, chap. V. [79] Richmond Mayo-Smith, _Emigration and Immigration_, 5 ff. [80] Walter E. Heyl, in _University Settlement Studies_. [81] F. J. Warne, _The Slav Invasion_, 103. [82] Rena M. Atchison, _Un-American Immigration_, 82. [83] Richmond Mayo-Smith, _Emigration and Immigration_, 84 ff. [84] Represents the recapitulation of totals of Europe, Asia, Africa and all other countries. [85] Josiah Strong, _Our Country_, 56. [86] Kate H. Claghorn, in _Charities_ for December, 1904. [87] Broughton Brandenburg, _Imported Americans_, 19. [88] Sidney Sampson, pamphlet, "The Immigration Problem." [89] Fung Yuet Mow, Chinese missionary in New York, says that at a missionary Conference which he attended in Canton there were fifty missionaries present, native Chinese, and half of them were converted in our missions in America, and returned home to seek the conversion of their people. Everywhere he met the influence of Chinese who found Christ in this country. [90] Henry H. Hamilton in the _Home Missionary_. [91] In one city in Massachusetts, where there are 1,700 Italians only fifty or sixty attend the Roman Catholic Church; and in another, of 6,000 Italians, only about 300 go to that church. They declare that they are tired of the Romish Church and have lost faith in its priests. Similar reports come from all parts of the country. [92] There are numerous instances equally remarkable. Many young people express their desire to lead true lives and the missionaries often learn how well the resolutions made at Ellis Island have been kept. One missionary says: "I meet one here and another there, who tell me that I met them first three or four years ago, when they first reached this country, strangers to Christ as well as to me; but now they say, 'We love to tell the story of Jesus and his love.' Some of the denominations have houses fitted up for the temporary entertainment of immigrants who need a safe place while waiting to hear from friends or secure employment. This missionary work admirably supplements the excellent service rendered by the protective organizations, of which the United Hebrews Charities is perhaps the most influential, dispensing funds amounting to $270,000 a year, including the Baron Hirsch fund. There is also an Immigrant Girls' Home which saves many from temptation while they are seeking employment, and helps them secure places in Christian families." [93] Rev. Joel S. Ives, pamphlet, "The Foreigner in New England." [94] Appendix C. [95] Some denominations already have theological training departments for foreign people. The French-American College at Springfield, Massachusetts, is the first distinctive training school for foreigners. [96] "The Foreign Problem." Published by the Presbyterian Board of Home Missions. [97] Rev. F. H. Allen, in _Home Missionary_ for January, 1906. [98] Rev. C. W. Shelton reports typical cases, that could be duplicated by every secretary of a Home Missionary Society and every missionary. In one mission church a young Swede girl gave $25 a month, out of her earnings as cook, toward the pastor's support. In a Finnish church, another young woman pledged $30 a month out a salary of $50. A Chinese mission in California supports three native workers in China. A Slav Mission Sunday-school in Braddock, Pennsylvania, with thirty members, gave out of its poverty, as one year's record, $6 for home missions, $1.25 for windows in a new Bohemian church, $1 for missionary schools, $6.35 for maps, and $6 for a foreign missionary ship. Nearly fifty cents a member these Slavs gave; and that amount per member from all Christian Churches and Sunday-schools would make the missionary treasuries much fuller than at present. [99] Words used by Dr. A. L. Phillips, of Richmond, Va., at the Asheville Conference, July, 1906. [100] From Annual Report of Commissioner-General of Immigration for 1905. [101] Statement from Commissioner-General F. P. Sargent. [102] From the Lutheran World. 
39230	----	[Illustration: (Argentine Coat of Arms)] ARGENTINE REPUBLIC MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE Immigration Department The Immigration Offices and Statistics from 1857 to 1903 INFORMATION for the Universal Exhibition of St. Louis (U. S. A.) The Head Offices are situated in Alsina Street No. 624 Buenos Aires, where information can be obtained either verbally or by correspondence in different languages by those who wish to establish themselves in the Argentine Republic. BUENOS AIRES Printing Establishment of the Argentine Weather Bureau 1904 * * * * * Duties of the Immigration Department subject to which immigrants can avail themselves of the benefits of the Immigration Law The Immigration Department under the control of the Ministry of Agriculture, has the direction of all relating thereto in the Argentine Republic, and is organized to correspond to the special services related to it, which are ruled by the organic Law of 16th. October 1876. Managing Staff in Buenos Aires The managing staff is composed of a Chief and a head clerk, and further more the Secretary's Department, Archives, Accountants Department, Treasury, Statistics, Interpreters office for verbal information and foreign correspondence, Disembarking office, Labour and Forwarding office, Immigration Hotel, Hospital and Medical service, and Post and Telegraph office, all of which are established in Buenos Aires. Auxiliary Commissions in all the Argentine Territory To attend the requirements of the service in the Interior, there are 42 Auxiliary Commissions established in the principal cities and towns of importance. (Articles 6, 7 and 8, Chapter III of the Law.) Archives In the Archives of the Department, a careful Register is kept of all administrative papers, studies, observations and documents of ships transporting immigrants, and a list of all those entered since the year 1857. Accountant's and Treasury Departments The Accountant's Department and the Treasury have under their charge the financial part of the administration and keep account of all amounts spent in lodging and transport of immigrants and their baggage, payment of wages to employés and other expenses. (Article 3 paragraph 13.) Statistics The Statistical Office keeps minute statistics of the immigrants arriving in the country, classifying annually and monthly the arrivals and departures of steamers, stating date, flag, number of passengers and immigrants with a summary of the immigration movement; steamers inspected, ports of procedure, classification of immigrants according to nationality, profession, sexe, age; monthly, annually and quinquennially; sexagenarians entered; births and deaths on board, immigrants entered at the Hotel and settling of immigrants in the interior. Interpreters Office In the Interpreters office there are employés who speak several languages: verbal information is given to all immigrants who ask for it. It provides information regarding lands offered for sale and has charge of the foreign correspondence. Labour and Forwarding Office The Labour and Forwarding Office receives inquiries for workmen from all parts of the country, and, according to such inquiries, undertakes the placing of the immigrants who come to the Hotel, asking for lodging and employment. This office provides the immigrants with the information they solicit about the different districts of the country, means of communication, wages etc. It undertakes the forwarding of the immigrants and their distribution in the regions to which they desire to be sent, and all other work connected with these services. (Articles 9, 10 and 11 and 48 to 54 of the Law.) [Illustration: Immigrants Hotel in Buenos Aires View taken from the River] Landing Superintendents The Disembarking Office consists of Inspectors who go on board the vessels to receive and classify the immigrants, and see if the ships have complied with the conditions of the Law regarding vessels carrying immigrants, and also to impede the entry of those which said Law prohibits (Chapter VI, Articles 18 to 37 and the Regulation agreed upon of 4th. March 1880.) Immigrants Hotel or Home Those who avail themselves of the benefits of the Law, are lodged in the Immigrants Hotel whilst work is procured for them, which is done immediately. The Hotel is provided with the accommodation and service necessary to meet this requirement. It has separate dormitories for each sex, ample dining rooms, lavatories, and a police service to contribute in maintaining order and also a corps of firemen to prevent conflagrations. (Chapter VIII of the Law, Articles 42 to 47.) Hotel Interpreters The Hotel is provided with interpreters of all languages, to mediate between the immigrants, and the Hotel employés and the Labour and Forwarding Office. Medical Assistance Sick immigrants and members of their families are attended at all hours by the Medical staff of the Hotel, which is further more provided with an Infirmary supplied with all the most necessary medicaments. [Illustration: Immigrants Hotel in Buenos Aires View taken from the City] Customs Service To facilitate the despatch of immigrants baggage, the Custom House has an office in the Hotel which carrys out all the corresponding operations. * * * * * By means of this organization, which meets all the exigencies of the immigration in the Argentine Republic, the immigrants are given all the advantages accorded by the Immigration Law hereunder transcribed. ARTICLES OF THE IMMIGRATION LAW IMPORTANT FOR IMMIGRANTS TO KNOW CONCERNING THE LABOUR OFFICES Art. 9.--The Immigration-Office in Buenos Aires and the Commissions at their various head quarters shall, whenever it may be necessary, have placed under their direct control a Labour and Employment-Office to be served by such a number of clerks as may be fixed in the Budget. Art. 10.--These Offices are bound and empowered: 1. To attend to such applications of teachers, artisans, journeymen or workmen as may be sent in to them. 2. To secure advantageous terms for the employment of immigrants, and to see that such employment be given by people of good repute. 3. To intervene at the request of the immigrants in such agreements as to work as said immigrants may make, and to see to their strict observance on the part of masters. 4. To write down in a special register the number of the procured employments, mentioning the date, the sort of work, the conditions of the contract, and the names of the persons that may have intervened in it. Art. 11.--At such places where there are no Employment-Offices, the duties incumbent on these shall be carried out by the Commissions of Immigration. [Illustration: Immigrants Hotel in Buenos Aires Interior of a yard] CHAPTER V. CONCERNING IMMIGRANTS Art. 12.--By the effects of this Law, every foreigner under sixty years of age, whether he be a journeyman, artisan, labourer, tradesman or teacher, who proves his morality and capacities, shall be considered an immigrant, on arriving in the Republic, to establish himself in it, either in a steamer or sailing vessel, paying his own 2nd. or 3rd. class passage, or having it paid by the State, the Provinces, or by private societies protecting immigration and colonisation. Art. 13.--Those persons to whom these conditions apply and who do not desire to profit by the advantages offered to the immigrants, shall let it be known to the captain of the ship at the moment of their embarking, when he will note it in the ship's register, or communicate it to the maritime authorities of the landing port: in this case, those persons shall be considered as simple travellers. This disposition is not meant for those immigrants who may come engaged in this capacity for the colonies or other places in the Republic. Art. 14.--Every immigrant on giving sufficient proof of his good conduct and fitness for any occupation, art or usefull trade, will be entitled, on his arrival to the following special privileges: 1. To be boarded and lodged at the expense of the Nation during the time fixed by articles 45, 46 and 47. 2. To have employment given him in such calling or trade as there may be in the country, and which he may prefer. 3. To be transported at the expense of the Nation to such locality in the Republic as he may select for his residence. 4. To import free of duty articles for personal use, clothing, furniture for domestic purposes, agricultural implements, tools, utensils, instruments of such arts and trades as they may exercise, and one fowling piece to each adult immigrant, of such value as may be fixed by the Executive. Art. 15.--The dispositions of the preceding article shall be extended as far as they can be applied, to the wives and to the children of the immigrants, if grown up, provided they can give proof of their morality and industrious aptitudes. Art. 16.--The good conduct and industrious capacities of the immigrants can be proved by certificates given by the Consuls or Immigration Agents of the Republic abroad, or by a certificate from the authorities of the immigrant's residence, legalized by the said Consuls or Immigration Agents of the Republic. [Illustration: Immigrants Hotel in Buenos Aires Interior of the yard of the dormitories] CHAPTER VIII. CONCERNING THE LODGING AND BOARDING OF THE IMMIGRANTS Art. 42.--In the cities of Buenos Aires, Rosario, and at all such others where, owing to the number of immigrants, it may be necessary, there shall be a house for their temporary lodgment. Art. 44.--At such places where there should not be any houses for the accommodation of immigrants, the respective Commissions shall proceed to board and lodge the same in public hotels or in other suitable ways. Art. 45.--Immigrants shall be entitled to suitable board and lodging, at the expense of the Nation, for five days after landing. Art. 46.--In case of serious illness which should render it impossible for them to remove to another habitation, at the expiration of the said five days, the expense of the succeeding board and lodging shall continue to be met by the State, as long as the said illness continues. Except in such cases, the continuance of immigrants at the Establishment for more than five days shall be at their own expense, at the rate of half a national gold dollar a day for every person more than 8 years old, and 25 cents for every child under that age. Art. 47.--The regulations contained in the preceding articles do not include immigrants having contracts with the Government in connection with the Colonies. All such will be entitled to board and lodging free of charge until transported to their destination. [Illustration: Immigrants Hotel in Buenos Aires Office for admittance and passports] CHAPTER IX. CONCERNING THE TRANSPORT TO THE PROVINCES AND THE EMPLOYMENT OF THE IMMIGRANTS Art. 48.--The Employment-Offices or the Immigration-Commissions in their stead, shall use their best endeavours to provide immigrants with employment in such art, trade or calling as they may prefer. Art. 49.--Such employment shall be procured if possible within five days after the immigrant's arrival, and on as favourable terms as possible. Art. 50.--The Employment-Offices or the Immigration-Commissions in their stead shall, at the request of the interested parties, intervene in such contracts for employment as they may make, with a view to securing their fulfillment for the immigrant. Art. 51.--Any immigrant who should prefer to fix his residence in any of the interior Provinces of the Republic, or at any of its Colonies, will be at once transported with his family and luggage to such place, as he may select, free of all charge. Art. 52.--In case of an immigrant going to the Provinces, he will be entitled on arrival at his destination, to be lodged and boarded for ten days by the Immigration-Commission. At the expiration of this time, he shall pay half a national gold dollar a day for every person over 8 years old, and 25 cents for every child under that age, except in case of illness, when he would continue to be maintained at the expense of the Government as long as the said illness lasts. Art. 54.--The immigrants can on no pretence whatever, profit by the privileges granted by the preceding articles, to pass through the territory of the Republic to a foreign country, under penalty of repaying all the expenses that have been occasioned for their passage, landing, board, lodging and transport. [Illustration: Immigrants Hotel in Buenos Aires Office for employment and free transport of the immigrants to the provinces] Reception of immigrants in the Argentine Republic. THE IMMIGRANT INSPECTION AND ITS REASON Each ship that arrives in the country bringing immigrants, 2nd. and 3rd. class passengers, according to Law, is visited and inspected by a Commission comprising the Immigration Inspector, Board of Health doctor and Coast Guard officer, who examine the hygiene and healthiness of the ship, accommodation, provisioning during the voyage, supply of medicines, and as to whether a doctor or chemist is carried; if or no a greater number of passengers were carried than the accommodation allows; if the measurements of the deck, sparedeck and of the berths are in accordance with the Law; if there is sufficient ventilation, supply of firehose and cooking utensils, life belts and life boats; if there are passengers with contagious diseases; if passengers have been embarqued at ports where there is an epidemic; if any part of the cargo is inflamable or unhealthy, and, finally, receive any protest of the passengers of bad treatment and obtain from the Captain the documents he should deliver, showing cognoscence of the Immigration Law, and any incidents that have happened on the voyage. This is done in the interest of the immigrants. RECEIVING THE IMMIGRANTS The immigrants are carefully questioned and classified to find out their trades and means, note being taken of those who do not wish to come under the Immigration Law, their passports then being stamped «passenger only», as also are stamped «former resident» the passports of those who come under that heading. Once the passports revised by the officials, those immigrants admited under the Law, are handed over to the receiving officials of the Immigrants Hotel who attend to them, placing them in trams, which take them to the Hotel. The baggage is taken on trucks to the same place by the Hotel porters. [Illustration: Immigrants Hotel in Buenos Aires Group of immigrants] FREE LODGING Arriving at the Hotel, the names of the immigrants are entered in the Hotel register and they are given a lodging ticket valid for five days, which can be prolonged in case of sickness. The immigrants are comfortably lodged, the women and children in separate rooms to the men. The baggage is taken by the Hotel porters to a deposit where it is revised by the Custom House Officers, specially. FREE BOARD The rations given to the immigrants are of the best, and in the following proportions per day, per adult: meat 600 grams, bread 500 grams, potatoes, carrots or cabbage (alternately) 150; rice, maccaroni, or beans (alternately) 100; sugar 25 and coffee 10 grams; milk is given to the children. The food is cooked by steam and is served by the Hotel attendants in a large dining room. MEDICAL ATTENDANCE There is an Infirmary in the Hotel where patients are carefully attended; children as well as adults can be vaccinated. There is a staff of doctors, students, sicknurses, and a chemist's fully equiped with medicines and disinfectants. GOVERNMENT EMPLOYMENT OFFICE On arrival, the immigrants are questioned as to what part of the country they wish to go, and are offered work by the Employment Office, in accordance with the inquiries for workmen received, full information of which, of wages paid and other conditions are carefully entered up in books kept for that purpose. If there are no enquiries for workmen in the particular trade of an immigrant looking for employment, this Office undertakes to find him work by either directing him to Works and Factories or by telegraphing enquiries to the Interior. Immigrants are warned, should they wish to go to any part of the country where there is no opening for one in their trade. No persuasion is used to induce immigrants to go to any particular part of the country, it is left to them to decide. [Illustration: Immigrants Hotel in Buenos Aires Group of immigrants] FORWARDING AND RECEIVING FREE The immigrants placed up country or who wish to join their relations, are taken care of by forwarding Agents who remit their luggage properly labeled, note down the immigrants so forwarded, provide them with tickets and see them on to the train or river steamers. ARRIVING AT THE PROVINCES AND POINTS OF DESTINATION The immigrants who go to the Provinces or National Territories to be settled, are met on arrival of the train by the Secretary of the Branch Office, boarded and lodged for ten days until they are settled or leave for some fixed destination. If they should have to change trains, they are looked after by this Official in the same way as in the Federal Capital, from the arrival of one train until the departure of the one in which they continue their journey. POST AND TELEGRAPH OFFICE For the better handing of the immigrants correspondence and in order that the Head Office and National Employment Office can transmit without delay, orders and instructions all over the Republic, there is a Post and Telegraph Office in the Immigration Hotel. STATISTICAL RETURNS The four following returns, summarize the Argentine Immigration movement from 1857 to 1903. In those relating to the entry and nationality of immigrants, the information corresponding to the years running from 1857 to 1903 is given, and in those which refer to their trades and forwarding to the interior, the information has been taken corresponding to the last decade, this lapse of time being sufficiently demonstrative. [Illustration: Immigrants Hotel in Buenos Aires Part of the dining-hall] IMMIGRANTS PLACED AND FORWARDED TO THE INTERIOR OF THE COUNTRY BY THE NATIONAL LABOUR OFFICE DURING THE LAST DECADE FROM 1894 TO 1903. --------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+------- Provinces and | 1894 | 1895 | 1896 | 1897 | 1898 | 1899 Territories | | | | | | --------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+------- Federal Capital | 545 | 683 | 1.209 | 589 | 876 | 1.736 Buenos Aires | 3.071 | 4.212 | 12.028 | 8.471 | 7.503 | 9.991 Entre Rios | 2.345 | 2.129 | 814 | 1.190 | 1.184 | 1.575 Corrientes | 101 | 115 | 114 | 455 | 293 | 194 Santa Fé | 11.801 | 10.143 | 13.077 | 6.273 | 6.577 | 9.647 Córdoba | 2.413 | 2.198 | 2.995 | 1.958 | 2.659 | 3.951 Tucumán | 802 | 387 | 898 | 1.173 | 456 | 514 Santiago del Estero | 76 | 51 | 291 | 149 | 165 | 141 Salta | 19 | 36 | 47 | 237 | 345 | 224 JuJuy | 18 | 10 | 104 | 38 | 17 | 69 Catamarca | 11 | 29 | 19 | 16 | 8 | 14 La Rioja | -- | 25 | 12 | 20 | 14 | 43 San Luis | 46 | 91 | 183 | 207 | 95 | 129 Mendoza | 566 | 665 | 1.973 | 2.569 | 1.365 | 1.695 San Juan | 137 | 155 | 270 | 390 | 252 | 269 Chaco | 34 | 6 | 20 | 105 | 112 | 21 Misiones | 30 | 13 | 7 | 72 | 254 | 509 Tierra del Fuego | -- | 16 | 54 | 41 | 19 | 8 Chubut | 11 | 25 | 10 | 84 | 22 | 13 Santa Cruz | 11 | 1 | 40 | 44 | 18 | 24 Formosa | 47 | 5 | 13 | 116 | 50 | 16 Pampa Central | 7 | 17 | 63 | 160 | 93 | 117 Río Negro | 1 | -- | 55 | 293 | 69 | 34 Neuquen | -- | -- | 27 | 13 | -- | 16 --------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+------- | 22.092 | 21.012 | 34.323 | 24.663 | 22.446 | 30.950 --------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------- Provinces and | 1900 | 1901 | 1902 | 1903 | Total Territories | | | | | --------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------- | | | | | Federal Capital | 3.077 | 2.739 | 635 | 449 | 12.538 Buenos Aires | 10.213 | 12.982 | 9.828 | 13.447 | 91.746 Entre Rios | 1.456 | 1.151 | 677 | 317 | 12.838 Corrientes | 117 | 225 | 118 | 46 | 1.778 Santa Fé | 9.336 | 12.628 | 7.440 | 10.115 | 97.037 Córdoba | 3.581 | 4.002 | 1.768 | 2.973 | 28.498 Tucumán | 590 | 1.576 | 366 | 366 | 7.128 Santiago del Estero | 99 | 132 | 82 | 73 | 1.259 Salta | 94 | 76 | 31 | 61 | 1.170 JuJuy | 41 | 273 | 72 | 216 | 858 Catamarca | 14 | 35 | 10 | 5 | 161 La Rioja | 22 | 20 | 28 | 25 | 209 San Luis | 129 | 159 | 124 | 76 | 1.239 Mendoza | 2.183 | 4.160 | 1.521 | 757 | 17.454 San Juan | 354 | 190 | 155 | 82 | 2.254 Chaco | 24 | 41 | 27 | 12 | 402 Misiones | 1.136 | 1.738 | 1.083 | 81 | 4.923 Tierra del Fuego | 9 | 17 | 7 | 17 | 188 Chubut | 56 | 75 | 153 | 239 | 688 Santa Cruz | 54 | 85 | 59 | 54 | 390 Formosa | 20 | 35 | 25 | 1 | 328 Pampa Central | 145 | 181 | 173 | 349 | 1.305 Río Negro | 42 | 198 | 73 | 63 | 828 Neuquen | 17 | 29 | 39 | 11 | 152 --------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------- | 32.809 | 42.747 | 24.494 | 29.835 | 285.371 [Illustration: Immigrants Hotel in Buenos Aires Part of the kitchen] IMMIGRATION FROM COUNTRIES BEYOND THE SEA AND MONTEVIDEO 1857 to 1903. ---------+----------------+--------------+-------------- | Countries | | Years | beyond | Montevideo | Total | the sea | | ---------+----------------+--------------+-------------- 1857 | 4.951 | | 4.951 1858 | 4.658 | | 4.658 1859 | 4.735 | | 4.735 1860 | 5.656 | | 5.656 1861 | 6.301 | | 6.301 1862 | 6.716 | | 6.716 1863 | 10.408 | | 10.408 1864 | 11.682 | | 11.682 1865 | 11.767 | | 11.767 1866 | 13.696 | | 13.696 1867 | 13.225 | 3.821 | 17.046 1868 | 25.919 | 3.315 | 29.234 1869 | 28.958 | 8.976 | 37.934 1870 | 30.898 | 9.069 | 39.967 1871 | 14.626 | 6.307 | 20.933 1872 | 26.208 | 10.829 | 37.037 1873 | 48.382 | 27.950 | 76.332 1874 | 40.674 | 27.603 | 68.277 1875 | 18.532 | 23.534 | 42.066 1876 | 14.532 | 16.433 | 30.965 1877 | 14.675 | 21.650 | 36.325 1878 | 23.624 | 19.334 | 42.958 1879 | 32.717 | 22.438 | 55.155 1880 | 26.643 | 15.008 | 41.651 1881 | 31.431 | 16.053 | 47.484 1882 | 41.041 | 10.462 | 51.503 1883 | 52.472 | 10.771 | 63.243 1884 | 49.623 | 28.182 | 77.805 1885 | 80.618 | 28.104 | 108.722 1886 | 65.655 | 27.461 | 93.116 1887 | 98.898 | 21.944 | 120.842 1888 | (a) 130.271 | 25.361 | 155.632 1889 | (a) 218.744 | 42.165 | 260.909 1890 | (a) 77.815 | 32.779 | 110.594 1891 | 28.266 | 23.831 | 52.097 1892 | 39.973 | 33.321 | 73.294 1893 | 52.067 | 32.353 | 84.420 1894 | 54.720 | 25.951 | 80.671 1895 | 61.226 | 19.762 | 80.988 1896 | 102.673 | 32.532 | 135.205 1897 | 72.978 | 32.165 | 105.143 1898 | 67.130 | 28.060 | 95.190 1899 | 84.442 | 26.641 | 111.083 1900 | 84.851 | 21.051 | 105.902 1901 | 90.127 | 35.824 | 125.951 1902 | 57.992 | 38.088 | 96.080 1903 | 75.227 | 37.444 | 112.671 ---------+----------------+--------------+-------------- | 2.158.423 | 846.572 | 3.004.995 (a)--With assisted passages. =General Total (including first class passengers) 3.685.430.= TRADES OF FOREIGN IMMIGRANTS, IN THE LAST TEN YEARS, FROM 1894 TO 1903. Agriculturers 312.723 Masons 8.500 Upper cutters 898 Surveyors 16 Architects 12 Fitters 81 Sawers 127 Barbers 1.332 Coal-men 99 Butchers 725 Carpenters 7.142 Coppersmiths 439 Cooks (male, female) 9.265 Confectioners 500 Merchants 30.996 Dressmakers 28.194 Tanners 691 Coachmen 149 Calkers 54 Quarry-men 255 Clerks 10.755 Gilders 99 Draftsmen 41 Joiners 604 Electricians 711 Bookbinders 77 Sculptors 43 Firemen 793 Apothecaries 352 Photographers 65 Cattle breeders 690 Engravers 113 Glovers 76 Smiths 3.546 Tinsmiths 548 Printers 38 Engineers 17 Workmen 118.223 Gardeners 923 Brickmakers 262 Lithographers 37 Marble-cutters 59 Sailors 7.739 Engine drivers 445 Mechanics 2.113 Milliners 6.051 Millers 605 Musicians 796 Miners 1.272 Physicians 41 Furniture makers 92 Bakers 2.382 Stone cutters 1.208 Painters 926 Laundresses 8.749 Fishermen 112 Teachers 12 Watchmakers 372 Tailors 4.985 Without trade (children) 113.433 Without trade (women) 8.111 Servants (male, female) 28.450 Hatters 501 Weavers (male, female) 6.546 Typographers 481 Coopers 316 Turners 103 Dyers 62 Harness makers 133 Viner, winemakers 403 Veterinaries 33 Plasterers 100 Shoemakers 6.094 Other trades 8.430 -------- 751.366 ======== +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Transcriber's Note: To make the following table easier to read on | | the screen it has been transposed to show Years as column headings | | and Nationalities as row headings. | +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ NATIONALITY OF IMMIGRANTS FROM COUNTRIES BEYOND THE SEA, EXCLUSIVELY, from 1857 to 1903. Years | 1857-59| 1860-69 | 1870-79 | 1880-89 | 1890-99 ----------------+--------+---------+---------+---------+-------- Italians | 9.006 | 93.802 | 156.746 | 475.179 | 411.674 Spaniards | 2.440 | 20.169 | 44.802 | 148.394 | 124.891 French | 720 | 6.360 | 32.938 | 78.914 | 40.544 Austrians | 226 | 819 | 3.469 | 16.479 | 8.681 English | 359 | 3.603 | 9.265 | 15.692 | 4.691 Germans | 178 | 1.212 | 3.522 | 12.958 | 9.204 Russians | | | | 3.837 | 15.665 Swiss | 219 | 1.562 | 6.203 | 11.659 | 4.875 Belgians | 68 | 519 | 628 | 15.096 | 2.654 Dutch | | | | 4.303 | 675 Portuguese | | | | 1.751 | 1.612 Danes | | | | 1.097 | 1.230 North Americans | | | | 1.094 | 794 Swedes | | | | 613 | 441 Others | 1.128 | 6.282 | 7.295 | 8.330 | 13.659 ----------------+--------+---------+---------+---------+-------- Total | 14.344 | 134.328 | 264.868 | 795.396 | 641.290 Years | 1900 | 1901 | 1902 | 1903 | Totals ----------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+----------- Italians | 52.143 | 58.314 | 32.314 | 42.358 | 1.331.536 Spaniards | 20.383 | 18.066 | 13.911 | 21.917 | 414.973 French | 3.160 | 2.788 | 2.378 | 2.491 | 170.293 Austrians | 2.024 | 2.742 | 2.135 | 1.378 | 37.953 English | 421 | 439 | 405 | 560 | 35.435 Germans | 760 | 836 | 1.029 | 1.000 | 30.699 Russians | 2.119 | 2.086 | 1.753 | 1.429 | 26.889 Swiss | 355 | 363 | 267 | 272 | 25.775 Belgians | 117 | 117 | 148 | 174 | 19.521 Dutch | 43 | 35 | 37 | 72 | 5.165 Portuguese | 205 | 156 | 141 | 202 | 4.067 Danes | 121 | 175 | 187 | 139 | 2.949 North Americans | 89 | 151 | 132 | 93 | 2.353 Swedes | 10 | 18 | 21 | 24 | 1.127 Others | 2.901 | 3.841 | 3.134 | 3.118 | 49.688 ----------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+----------- Total | 84.851 | 90.127 | 57.992 | 75.227 | 2.158.423 
40535	----	[ Transcriber's Notes: Every effort has been made to replicate this text as faithfully as possible, including inconsistencies in spelling and hyphenation. Some corrections of spelling and punctuation have been made. They are listed at the end of the text. Italic text has been marked with _underscores_. ] By Mary Antin THEY WHO KNOCK AT OUR GATES. Illustrated. THE PROMISED LAND. Illustrated. HOUGHTON MIFFLIN COMPANY Boston and New York THEY WHO KNOCK AT OUR GATES [Illustration: THE SINEW AND BONE OF ALL THE NATIONS] THEY WHO KNOCK AT OUR GATES A COMPLETE GOSPEL OF IMMIGRATION BY MARY ANTIN WITH ILLUSTRATIONS BY JOSEPH STELLA BOSTON AND NEW YORK HOUGHTON MIFFLIN COMPANY The Riverside Press Cambridge 1914 COPYRIGHT, 1914, BY THE PHILLIPS PUBLISHING COMPANY COPYRIGHT, 1914, BY HOUGHTON MIFFLIN COMPANY ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Published May 1914 CONTENTS Introduction ix I. The Law of the Fathers 1 II. Judges in the Gate 31 III. The Fiery Furnace 99 ILLUSTRATIONS The sinew and bone of all the nations (page 63) Frontispiece Rough work and low wages for the immigrant 64 The ungroomed mother of the East Side 72 A fresh infusion of pioneer blood 108 INTRODUCTION Three main questions may be asked with reference to immigration-- _First:_ A question of principle: Have we any right to regulate immigration? _Second:_ A question of fact: What is the nature of our present immigration? _Third:_ A question of interpretation: Is immigration good for us? The difficulty with the first question is to get its existence recognized. In a matter that has such obvious material aspects as the immigration problem the abstract principles involved are likely to be overlooked. But as there can be no sound conclusions without a foundation in underlying principles, this discussion must begin by seeking an answer to the ethical question involved. The second question is not easy to answer for the reason that men are always poor judges of their contemporaries, especially of those whose interests appear to clash with their own. We suffer here, too, from a bewildering multiplicity of testimony. Every sort of expert whose specialty in any way touches the immigrant has diagnosed the subject according to the formulæ of his own special science--and our doctors disagree! One is forced to give up the luxury of a second-hand opinion on this subject, and to attempt a little investigation of one's own, checking off the dicta of the specialists as well as an amateur may. The third question, while not wholly separable from the second, is nevertheless an inquiry of another sort. Whether immigration is good for us depends partly on the intrinsic nature of the immigrant and partly on our reactions to his presence. The effects of immigration, produced by the immigrant in partnership with ourselves, some men will approve and some deplore, according to their notions of good and bad. That thing is good for me which leads to my ultimate happiness; and we do not all delight in the same things. The third question, therefore, more than either of the others, each man has to answer for himself. THEY WHO KNOCK AT OUR GATES I THE LAW OF THE FATHERS And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: and thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children. . . . And thou shalt write them upon the posts of thy house, and on thy gates. Deut. vi, 6, 7, 9. If I ask an American what is the fundamental American law, and he does not answer me promptly, "That which is contained in the Declaration of Independence," I put him down for a poor citizen. He who is ignorant of the law is likely to disobey it. And there cannot be two minds about the position of the Declaration among our documents of state. What the Mosaic Law is to the Jews, the Declaration is to the American people. It affords us a starting-point in history and defines our mission among the nations. Without it, we should not differ greatly from other nations who have achieved a constitutional form of government and various democratic institutions. What marks us out from other advanced nations is the origin of our liberties in one supreme act of political innovation, prompted by a conscious sense of the dignity of manhood. In other countries advances have been made by favor of hereditary rulers and aristocratic parliaments, each successive reform being grudgingly handed down to the people from above. Not so in America. At one bold stroke we shattered the monarchical tradition, and installed the people in the seats of government, substituting the gospel of the sovereignty of the masses for the superstition of the divine right of kings. And even more notable than the boldness of the act was the dignity with which it was entered upon. In terms befitting a philosophical discourse, we gave notice to the world that what we were about to do, we would do in the name of humanity, in the conviction that as justice is the end of government so should manhood be its source. It is this insistence on the philosophic sanction of our revolt that gives the sublime touch to our political performance. Up to the moment of our declaration of independence, our struggle with our English rulers did not differ from other popular struggles against despotic governments. Again and again we respectfully petitioned for redress of specific grievances, as the governed, from time immemorial, have petitioned their governors. But one day we abandoned our suit for petty damages, and instituted a suit for the recovery of our entire human heritage of freedom; and by basing our claim on the fundamental principles of the brotherhood of man and the sovereignty of the masses, we assumed the championship of the oppressed against their oppressors, wherever found. It was thus, by sinking our particular quarrel with George of England in the universal quarrel of humanity with injustice, that we emerged a distinct nation, with a unique mission in the world. And we revealed ourselves to the world in the Declaration of Independence, even as the Israelites revealed themselves in the Law of Moses. From the Declaration flows our race consciousness, our sense of what is and what is not American. Our laws, our policies, the successive steps of our progress--all must conform to the spirit of the Declaration of Independence, the source of our national being. The American confession of faith, therefore, is a recital of the doctrines of liberty and equality. A faithful American is one who understands these doctrines and applies them in his life. It should be easy to pick out the true Americans--the spiritual heirs of the founders of our Republic--by this simple test of loyalty to the principles of the Declaration. To such a test we are put, both as a nation and as individuals, every time we are asked to define our attitude on immigration. Having set up a government on a declaration of the rights of man, it should be our first business to reaffirm that declaration every time we meet a case involving human rights. Now every immigrant who emerges from the steerage presents such a case. For the alien, whatever ethnic or geographic label he carries, in a primary classification of the creatures of the earth, falls in the human family. The fundamental fact of his humanity established, we need only rehearse the articles of our political faith to know what to do with the immigrant. It is written in our basic law that he is entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. There is nothing left for us to do but to open wide our gates and set him on his way to happiness. That is what we did for a while, when our simple law was fresh in our minds, and the habit of applying it instinctive. Then there arose a fashion of spelling immigration with a capital initial, which so confused the national eye that we began to see a PROBLEM where formerly we had seen a familiar phenomenon of American life; and as a problem requires skillful handling, we called an army of experts in consultation, and the din of their elaborate discussions has filled our ears ever since. The effect on the nation has been disastrous. In a matter involving our faith as Americans, we have ceased to consult our fundamental law, and have suffered ourselves to be guided by the conflicting reports of commissions and committees, anthropologists, economists, and statisticians, policy-mongers, calamity-howlers, and self-announced prophets. Matters irrelevant to the interests of liberty have taken the first place in the discussion; lobbyists, not patriots, have had the last word. Our American sensibility has become dulled, so that sometimes the cries of the oppressed have not reached our ears unless carried by formal deputations. In a department of government which brings us into daily touch with the nations of the world, we have failed to live up to our national gospel and have not been aware of our backsliding. What have the experts and statisticians done so to pervert our minds? They have filled volumes with facts and figures, comparing the immigrants of to-day with the immigrants of other days, classifying them as to race, nationality, and culture, tabulating their occupations, analyzing their savings, probing their motives, prophesying their ultimate destiny. But what is there in all this that bears on the right of free men to choose their place of residence? Granted that Sicilians are not Scotchmen, how does that affect the right of a Sicilian to travel in pursuit of happiness? Strip the alien down to his anatomy, you still find a _man_, a creature made in the image of God; and concerning such a one we have definite instructions from the founders of the Republic. And what purpose was served by the bloody tide of the Civil War if it did not wash away the last lingering doubts as to the brotherhood of men of different races? There is no impropriety in gathering together a mass of scientific and sociological data concerning the newcomers, as long as we understand that the knowledge so gained is merely the technical answer to a number of technical questions. Where we have gone wrong is in applying the testimony of our experts to the moral side of the question. By all means register the cephalic index of the alien,--the anthropologist will make something of it at his leisure,--but do not let it determine his right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I do not ask that we remove all restrictions and let the flood of immigration sweep in unchecked. I do ask that such restrictions as we impose shall accord with the loftiest interpretation of our duty as Americans. Now our first duty is to live up to the gospel of liberty, through the political practices devised by our forefathers and modified by their successors, as democratic ideas developed. But political practices require a territory wherein to operate--democracy must have standing-room--so it becomes our next duty to guard our frontiers. For that purpose we maintain two forms of defense: the barbaric devices of army and navy, to ward off hostile mass invasions; and the humane devices of the immigration service, to regulate the influx of peaceable individuals. We have plenty of examples to copy in our military defenses, but when it comes to the civil branch of our national guard, we dare not borrow foreign models. What our neighbors are doing in the matter of regulating immigration may or may not be right for us. Other nations may be guided chiefly by economic considerations, while we are under spiritual bonds to give first consideration to the moral principles involved. For this, our peculiar American problem, we must seek a characteristically American solution. What terms of entry may we impose on the immigrant without infringing on his inalienable rights, as defined in our national charter? Just such as we would impose on our own citizens if they proposed to move about the country in companies numbering thousands, with their families and portable belongings. And what would these conditions be? They would be such as are required by public safety, public health, public order. Whatever limits to our personal liberty we are ourselves willing to endure for the sake of the public welfare, we have a right to impose on the stranger from abroad; these, and no others. Has, then, the newest arrival the same rights as the established citizen? According to the Declaration, yes; the same right to live, to move, to try his luck. More than this he does not claim at the gate of entrance; with less than this we are not authorized to put him off. We do not question the right of an individual foreigner to enter our country on any peaceable errand; why, then, question the rights of a shipload of foreigners? Lumping a thousand men together under the title of immigrants does not deprive them of their humanity and the rights inherent in humanity; or can it be demonstrated that the sum of the rights of a million men is less than the rights of one individual? The Declaration of Independence, like the Ten Commandments, must be taken literally and applied universally. What would have been the civilizing power of the Mosaic Code if the Children of Israel had repudiated it after a few generations? As little virtue is there in the Declaration of Independence if we limit its operation to any geographical sphere or historical period or material situation. How do we belittle the works of our Fathers when we talk as though they wrought for their contemporaries only! It was no great matter to shake off the rule of an absent tyrant, if that is all that the War of the Revolution did. So much had been done many times over, long before the first tree fell under the axe of a New England settler. Emmaus was fought before Yorktown, and Thermopylæ before Emmaus. It is only as we dwell on the words of Jefferson and Franklin that the deeds of Washington shine out among the deeds of heroes. In the chronicles of the Jews, Moses has a far higher place than the Maccabæan brothers. And notice that Moses owes his immortality to the unbroken succession of generations who were willing to rule their lives by the Law that fell from his lips. The glory of the Jews is not that they received the Law, but that they kept the Law. The glory of the American people must be that the vision vouchsafed to their fathers they in their turn hold up undimmed to the eyes of successive generations. To maintain our own independence is only to hug that vision to our own bosoms. If we sincerely believe in the elevating power of liberty, we should hasten to extend the reign of liberty over all mankind. The disciples of Jesus did not sit down in Jerusalem and congratulate each other on having found the Saviour. They scattered over the world to spread the tidings far and wide. We Americans, disciples of the goddess Liberty, are saved the trouble of carrying our gospel to the nations, because the nations come to us. Right royally have we welcomed them, and lavishly entertained them at the feast of freedom, whenever our genuine national impulses have shaped our immigration policy. But from time to time the national impulse has been clogged by selfish fears and foolish alarms parading under the guise of civic prudence. Ignoring entirely the _rights_ of the case, the immigration debate has raged about questions of expediency, as if convenience and not justice were our first concern. At times the debate has been led by men on whom the responsibilities of American citizenship sat lightly, who treated immigration as a question of the division of spoils. A little attention to the principles involved would have convinced us long ago that an American citizen who preaches wholesale restriction of immigration is guilty of political heresy. The Declaration of Independence accords to _all_ men an equal share in the inherent rights of humanity. When we go contrary to that principle, we are not acting as Americans; for, by definition, an American is one who lives by the principles of the Declaration. And we surely violate the Declaration when we attempt to exclude aliens on account of race, nationality, or economic status. "All men" means yellow men as well as white men, men from the South of Europe as well as men from the North of Europe, men who hold kingdoms in pawn, and men who owe for their dinner. We shall have to recall officially the Declaration of Independence before we can lawfully limit the application of its principles to this or that group of men. Americans of refined civic conscience have always accepted our national gospel in its literal sense. "What becomes of the rights of the excluded?" demanded the younger Garrison, in a noble scolding administered to the restrictionists in 1896. If a nation has a right to keep out aliens, tell us how many people constitute a nation, and what geographical area they have a right to claim. In the United States, where a thousand millions can live in peace and plenty under just conditions, who gives to seventy millions the right to monopolize the territory? How few can justly own the earth, and deprive those who are landless of the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? And what becomes of the rights of the excluded? If we took our mission seriously,--as seriously, say, as the Jews take theirs,--we should live with a copy of our law at our side, and oblige every man who opened his mouth to teach us, to square his doctrine with the gospel of liberty; and him should we follow to the end who spoke to us in the name of our duties, rather than in the name of our privileges. The sins we have been guilty of in our conduct of the immigration debate have had their roots in a misconception of our own position in the land. We have argued the matter as though we owned the land, and were, therefore, at liberty to receive or reject the unbidden guests who came to us by thousands. Let any man who lays claim to any portion of the territory of the United States produce his title deed. Are not most of us squatters here, and squatters of recent date at that? The rights of a squatter are limited to the plot he actually occupies and cultivates. The portion of the United States territory that is covered by squatters' claims is only a fraction, albeit a respectable fraction, of the land we govern. In the name of what moral law do we wield a watchman's club over the vast regions that are still waiting to be staked out? The number of American citizens who can boast of ancestral acres is not sufficient to swing a presidential election. For that matter, those whose claims are founded on ancestral tenure should be the very ones to dread an examination of titles. For it would be shown that these few got their lands by stepping into dead men's shoes, while the majority wrenched their estates from the wilderness by the labor of their own hands. In the face of the sturdy American preference for an aristocracy of brain and brawn, the wisest thing the man with a pedigree can do is to scrape the lichens off his family tree. Think of having it shown that he owes the ancestral farmhouse to the deathbed favoritism of some grouchy uncle! Or, worse still, think of tracing the family title to some canny deal with a band of unsophisticated Indians! No, it will not do to lay claim to the land on the ground of priority of occupation, as long as there is a red man left on the Indian reservations. If it comes to calling names, usurper is an uglier name than alien. And a squatter is a tenant who doesn't pay any rent, while an immigrant who occupies a tenement in the slums pays his rent regularly or gets out. We may soothe our pride with the reflection that our title to the land does not depend on the moral validity of individual claims, but on the collective right of the nation to control the land we govern. We came into our land as other nations came into theirs: we took it as a prize of war. Until humanity has devised a less brutal method of political acquisition, we must pass our national claim as entirely sound. We own the land because we were strong enough to take it from England. But the moment we hark back to the War of the Revolution, our sense of possession is profoundly modified. We did not quarrel with the English about the possession of the colonies, but about their treatment of the colonists. It was not a land-grab that was plotted in Independence Hall in 1776, but a pattern of human freedom. We entered upon the war in pursuit of ideals, not in pursuit of homesteads. We had to take the homesteads, too, because, as we have already noted, a political ideal has to have territory wherein to operate. But we must never forget that the shining prize of that war was an immaterial thing,--the triumph of an idea. Not the Treaty of Paris, but the Declaration of Independence, converted the thirteen colonies into a nation. Having taken half a continent in the name of humanity, shall we hold it in the name of a few millions? Not as jealous lords of a rich domain, but as priests of a noble cult shall we best acquit ourselves of the task our Fathers set us. And it is the duty of a priest to minister to as many souls as he can reach. The most revered of our living teachers has passed this word:-- It is the mission of the United States to spread freedom throughout the world by teaching as many men and women as possible in freedom's largest home how to use freedom rightly through practice in liberty under law. And our ardor shall not be dampened by the reflection that perhaps the Fathers builded better than they knew. "Do you really think they looked so far ahead?" it is often asked. "Did the founders of the Republic foresee the time when foreign hordes would alight on our shores, demanding a share in this goodly land that was ransomed with the blood of heroes?" Fearful questions, these, to make us pause in the work of redeeming mankind! If our Fathers did not foresee the whole future, shall we therefore be blind to the light of our own day? If they had left us a mere sketch of their idea, could we do less than fill in the outlines? Since they left us not a sketch, but a finished model, the least we can do is to go on copying it on an ever larger scale. Neither shall we falter because the execution of the enlarged copy entails much labor on us and on our children. When Moses told the Egyptian exiles that they should have no god but the One God, he may not have guessed that their children would be brought to the stake for refusing other gods; and yet nineteen centuries of Jewish martyrdom go to show that the followers of Moses did not make his lack of foresight an excuse for abandoning his Law. Let the children be brought up to know that we are a people with a mission, and that mission, in the words of Dr. Eliot, to teach the uses of freedom to as many men as possible "in freedom's largest home." Let it be taught in the public schools that the most precious piece of real estate in the whole United States is that which supports the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty; that we need not greatly care how the three million square miles remaining is divided among the people of the earth, as long as we retain that little island. Let it further be repeated in the schools that the Liberty at our gates is the handiwork of a Frenchman; that the mountain-weight of copper in her sides and the granite mass beneath her feet were bought with the pennies of the poor; that the verses graven on a tablet within the base are the inspiration of a poetess descended from Portuguese Jews; and all these things shall be interpreted to mean that the love of liberty unites all races and all classes of men into one close brotherhood, and that we Americans, therefore, who have the utmost of liberty that has yet been attained, owe the alien a brother's share. * * * * * To this position we are brought by a construction of the Declaration of Independence which makes of it the law of the land, binding on American citizens individually and collectively, and in all circumstances whatever. Out of this position there is one avenue of escape, and only one. We may refuse to read in the Declaration a sincere expression of the faith of 1776, and construe it instead as a bombastic political manifesto, advanced by the leaders of the rebellion as an excuse for a gigantic land-grab. Let the descendants of the Puritans take their choice of these two interpretations. For my part, I have chosen. I have chosen to read the story of '76 as a chapter in sacred history; to set Thomas Jefferson in a class with Moses, and Washington with Joshua; to regard the American nation as the custodian of a sacred trust, and American citizenship as a holy order, with laws and duties derived from the Declaration. For very pride in my country I must choose thus, for the alternate view takes the meaning out of American history, reduces the War of Independence to a war of plunder, and the Colonial heroes to a band of pious hypocrites. What, indeed, shall we teach our children to be proud of if we reject the higher interpretation of the deeds of the Fathers? The American Revolution as a campaign of conquest is not unique in history; on the contrary, it has been more than once surpassed, both in respect to the prowess of the conquerors and to the magnificence of the prize. Outside the physical realm, where our inventions and discoveries and the material development of a continent belong, this country has contributed nothing of moment to the world's progress, unless it is that political adaptation of the Golden Rule which is indicated in the Declaration and elaborated in the Constitution. In the arts and sciences we sit, for the most part, at the feet of foreign masters; in jurisprudence we have borrowed from the Romans, and the elements of liberal government we have from our next of kin, the English. The notion of the dignity of man, which is the foundation of the gospel of democracy, is derived from Hebrew sources, as the Psalm-singing founders of New England would be the first to acknowledge. It was not entirely due to accident nor to the exigencies of pioneer life that the meeting-house and the town hall were one in the New England settlements. The influence of the Bible is plainly stamped on the works of the Puritans. What, then, shall we claim as the great American achievement, our peculiar treasure in the midst of so much borrowed glory? A magnificent espousal of humanity--that or nothing can we call our own. Seeing that they brought nothing into the world that was all their own, our glorious dead are not glorious unless we make them so, by imputing to them the noblest motives that their case will permit, and rating their works at not less than face value. Pride demands it, and, fortunately for our country's honor, justice supports the claims of pride. Neither the cynics nor the enthusiasts shall have the last word in the matter. In the writings of their contemporaries, in the casual sayings of their intimates, in the critical comments of those who came next after them, we find convincing evidence that in the minds of the leaders of '76 the most advanced political thought of the age crystallized into a mighty conviction--the conviction of the inherent nobility of humankind, which makes it treason for any man to enslave his neighbor. That is the thought that was sent out into the world on July 4, 1776, and because that thought has shaped our history, we call it the basic law of our land, and the Declaration of Independence our final authority. If under that authority the immigrant appears to have rights in our land parallel to our own rights, we shall not lightly deny his claims, lest we forfeit our only title to national glory. II JUDGES IN THE GATE Judges and officers shalt thou make thee in all thy gates . . . and they shall judge the people with just judgment. Deut. xvi, 18. There is nothing so potent in a public debate as the picturesque catchwords in which leaders of thought sum up their convictions. Logic makes fewer converts in a year than a taking phrase makes in a week. For catchwords are the popular substitute for logic, and the man in the street is reduced to silence by a good round phrase of the kind that sticks. Two classes of citizens are especially prone to fall under the tyranny of phrases: those whose horizon, through no fault of their own, is limited by the rim of an empty dinner-pail; and those whose view of the universe is obstructed by the kitchen-middens of too many dinners. There is no clear thinking on an empty stomach, and equally muddled are the thoughts of the over-full. When I hear of a public measure that is largely supported by these two classes of citizens, I know at once that the measure appeals to human prejudices rather than to divine reason. Thus I became suspicious of the restrictionist movement when I realized that it was in greatest favor among the thoughtless poor and the thoughtless rich. I am well aware that the high-priests of the cult include some of the most conscientious thinkers that ever helped to make history, and their earnestness is attested by a considerable body of doctrine, in support of which they quote statistics and special studies and scientific investigations. But I notice that the rank and file of restrictionists do not know as much as the titles of these documents. They have not followed the argument at all; they have only caught the catchwords of restrictionism. And these catchwords are the sort that appeal to the mean spots in human nature,--the distrust of the stranger, the jealousy of possession, the cowardice of the stomach. Nothing else is expressed by such phrases as "the scum of Europe," "the exploitation of America's wealth," or "taking the bread from the mouth of the American workingman." Even the least venomous formula of restrictionism, "immigration isn't what it used to be," raises such a familiar echo of foolish human nature that I am bound to challenge its veracity. Does not every generation cry that the weather isn't what it used to be, children are not what they used to be, society is not what it used to be? "The good old times" and "the old immigration" may be twin illusions of limited human vision. If it is true that immigration is not what it used to be, the fact will appear from a detailed comparison of the "old" and the "new" immigration. But which of the immigrant stocks of the good old times shall be taken as a standard? Woman's wisdom urges me to go right back to the original pattern, just as I would do if I went to the shops to match samples. And the original pattern was brought to this country in the year 1620. Surely comparison with the Mayflower stock is the most searching test of the quality of our immigration that any one could propose. The predominant virtue of the Pilgrims was idealism. The things of the spirit were more to them than the things of the flesh. May we say the like of our present immigrants? Of very many of them, yes; a thousand times yes. Of the 8,213,000 foreigners landed between the years 1899 and 1909, 990,000 were of that race which for nineteen centuries has sacrificed its flesh in the service of the spirit. It takes a hundred times as much steadfastness and endurance for a Russian Jew of to-day to remain a Jew as it took for an English Protestant in the seventeenth century to defy the established Church. Those who think that with the Spanish Inquisition Jewish martyrdom came to an end are asked to remember that the Kishinieff affair is only eight years behind us, and that Bielostock has been heard from since Kishinieff, and Mohileff since Bielostock. And more terrible than the recurrent _pogrom_, which hacks and burns and tortures a few hundreds now and then, is the continuous bloodless martyrdom of the six million Jews in Russia through the operation of the anti-Semitic laws of that country. Thirty minutes spent in looking over a summary of these laws recently compiled by an English historian(1) will convince any reader with a spark of imagination that every Russian Jewish immigrant to-day is a fugitive from religious persecution, even as were the English immigrants of 1620. (1) Lucien Wolf, _Legal Sufferings of the Jews in Russia_. But while nobody questions the idealism of the Jew in religion, the world has been very slow to credit him with any degree of civic devotion. The world did not stop to think that a man has to have a country before he can prove himself a good citizen. But happily in recent times he has been put to the test of civic opportunity, notably in America; with the result that he was found to possess a fair share of the civic virtues, from the generosity displayed in the town meeting, when citizens vote away their substance to support a public cause, to the brute heroism of the battle-field, where mangled flesh gives proof of valiant spirit.(2) And what the Jews of West European stock proved in the American wars for freedom the Jews of Eastern Europe have proved more recently, by their forwardness in the Russian revolution of 1905. (2) See _The Jews in America_, by Rev. Madison C. Peters. No group of people of all the heterogeneous mass that constitutes the Russian nation were half so prominent as the Jews in that abortive attempt at freedom. Witness the police records of the revolutionary period, which show that sixty-five out of every hundred political offenders were Jews, in districts where the population was fifteen parts Jewish and eighty-five parts Gentile. When I visited my native town in the Pale, several years after the revolution, it was hard to find, among the young men and women I talked with, one in a dozen who had not shared in the dangers of 1905. If we really want to know how heartily the Jews played their part in the revolution, we need only ask the Russian Government why the anti-Semitic laws have been so vengefully enforced since a certain crimson year within the present decade. And the whole significance of these things, in the present study, lies in the fact that precisely that spirit which prompts to rebellion in despotic Russia rallies in free America to the support of existing institutions. If it was a merit in 1620 to flee from religious persecution, and in 1776 to fight against political oppression, then many of the Russian refugees of to-day are a little ahead of the Mayflower troop, because they have in their own lifetime sustained the double ordeal of fight and flight, with all their attendant risks and shocks. To obtain a nice balance between the relative merits of these two groups of rebels, we remind ourselves that, for sheer adventurousness, migration to America to-day is not to be mentioned on the same page with the magnificent exploit of 1620, and we reflect that the moral glory of the revolution of 1776 is infinitely greater than that of any subsequent revolt; because that, too, was a path-finding adventure, with no compass but faith, no chart but philosophical invention. On the other hand, it is plain that the Russian revolutionists moved against greater odds than the American colonists had to face. The Russians had to plot in secret, assemble in the dark, and strike with bare fists; all this under the very nose of the Czar, with the benighted condition of the Russian masses hanging like a cloud over their enterprise. The colonists were able to lay the train of revolution in the most public manner, they had the local government in their hands, a considerable militia obedient to their own captains, and the advantage of distance from the enemy's resources, with a populace advanced in civic experience promising support to the leaders. And what a test of heroism was that which the harsh nature of the Russian Government afforded! The American rebels risked their charters and their property; for some of them dungeons waited, and for the leaders dangled a rope, no doubt. But confiscation is not so bitter as Siberian exile, and a halter is less painful than the barbed whip of the Cossacks. The Minutemen at Concord Bridge defied a bully; the rioters in St. Petersburg challenged a tiger. And first of all to be thrust into the cage would be the rebels of Jewish faith, and nobody knew that better than the Jews themselves. The superior zeal and high degree of self-sacrifice displayed by the Jewish revolutionists would naturally be explained by the fact that, of all the peoples held in chains by the Russian Government, the Jews are the ones who have suffered the cruelest oppression. But there is proof, proof that will go down with the stream of history, that the Jewish participants in the Russian revolution of 1905 were actuated by the highest patriotism, their peculiar grievances being forgotten in the grievances of the nation as a whole. The sinking of the Jewish question in the national question was an important article of the revolutionary propaganda among the Jews; so much so, that when a prominent Jewish leader attempted to demonstrate, on philosophical grounds, that that was a false position to take, he was hotly repudiated, although up to that time he had stood high in the councils of the leaders.(3) (3) See Article by Achad Ha'am, _American Hebrew_, June 21, 1907. If we find such a high degree of civic responsiveness in what we have been trained to think the most unlikely quarter, shall we not look hopefully in other corners of our world of immigrants? If the Jewish spirit of freedom leaps from the grave of Barkochla to the hovels of the Russian ghetto, half across the world and half across the civilized era, shall we not look for similar prodigies from the more recent graves of Kosciuszko and Garibaldi? If the hook-nosed tailor can turn hero on occasion, why not the grinning organ-grinder, and the surly miner, and the husky lumber-jack? We experienced a shock of surprise, a little while ago, when troops of our Greek immigrants deserted the bootblacking parlors and fruit-stands and tumbled aboard anything that happened to sail for the Mediterranean, in their eagerness--it's hard to bring it out, in connection with a "Dago" bootblack!--in their eagerness to strike a blow for their country in her need. But that's the worst of calling names: it deceives those who do so. The little bootblacks would not have fooled us as they did if we had not recklessly summed up the Greek character in a contemptuous epithet. It is quite proper for street urchins to invent nicknames for everybody--that is what street urchins are for; but let us not hand down the judgment of the gutter where the judgment of the senate is called for. Between Leonidas at the pass and little Metro under the saloon window, fawning for our nickels, is indeed a dismal gap; and yet Metro, when occasion demanded, reached out his grimy hand and touched the tunic of the Spartan hero. From these unexpected exploits of the craven Jew and the degenerate Greek, it would seem as if the different elements of the despised "new" immigration only await a spectacular opportunity to prove themselves equal to the "old" in civic valor. But if contemporary history fails to provide a war or revolution for each of our foreign nationalities, we are still not without the means of gauging the idealistic capacity of the aliens. Next after liberty, the Puritans loved education; and to-day, if you examine the registers of the schools and colleges they founded, you will find the names of recent immigrants thickly sprinkled from A to Z, and topping the honor ranks nine times out of ten. All readers of newspapers know the bare facts,--each commencement season, the prize-winners are announced in a string of unpronounceable foreign names; and every school-teacher in the immigrant section of the larger cities has a collection of picturesque anecdotes to contribute: of heroic sacrifices for the sake of a little reading and writing; of young girls stitching away their youth to keep a brother in college; of whole families cheerfully starving together to save one gifted child from the factory. Go from the public school to the public library, from the library to the social settlement, and you will carry away the same story in a hundred different forms. The good people behind the desks in these public places are fond of repeating that they can hardly keep up with the intellectual demands of their immigrant neighbors. In the experience of the librarians it is the veriest commonplace that the classics have the greatest circulation in the immigrant quarters of the city; and the most touching proof of reverence for learning often comes from the illiterate among the aliens. On the East Side of New York, "Teacher" is a being adored. Said a bedraggled Jewish mother to her little boy who had affronted his teacher, "Don't you know that teachers is holy?" Perhaps these are the things the teachers have in mind when they speak with a tremor of the immense reward of work in the public schools. That way of speaking is the fashion among workers of all sorts in the educational institutions where foreigners attend in numbers. Get a group of settlement people swapping anecdotes about their immigrant neighbors, and there is apt to develop an epidemic of moist eyes. Out of the fullness of their knowledge these social missionaries pay the tribute of respect and affection to the strangers among whom they toil. For they know them as we know our brothers and sisters, from living and working and rejoicing and sorrowing together. The testimony of everyday experience is borne out by the sudden revelations of catastrophic circumstances, as reported by a librarian from Dayton, Ohio. In Dayton they had branch libraries located in different parts of the city, not in separate library buildings, but in convenient shops or dwelling-houses, where they were left in the care of some responsible person in the neighborhood. After the recent flood,(4) when the panic was over and the people began to dig for their belongings underneath the accumulated slime and wreckage, the librarian tried to collect at the central library whatever was recovered of the scattered collection. Crumpled, mutilated, slimy with the filth of the disemboweled city, the books came back--all but one collection, which had been housed in the midst of the Hungarian quarter. These came back neatly packed, scraped clean of mud, their leaves smoothed, dried,--as presentable as loving care could make them. (4) March, 1913. If that was not a manifestation of pure idealism, then is human conduct void of symbolism, and our public squares are cumbered in vain with monuments erected in commemoration of human deeds. But we read men's souls in their actions, and we know that they who flock to the schools are the spiritual kindred of those who founded them; they who cherish a book are passing along the torch kindled by him who wrote it. They pay the highest tribute to an inventor who show the most eagerness to adopt his invention. The great New England invention of compulsory education is more eagerly appropriated by the majority of our immigrants than by native Americans of the corresponding level. That is what the school-teachers say, and I suppose they know. They also say,--they and all public educators in chorus,--that while one foreign nationality excels in the love of letters, another excels in the love of music, and a third in the love of science; and all of them together constitute an army whose feet keep time with the noble rhythms of culture. Let a New Yorker on Friday night watch the crowd pushing out of a concert hall after one of Ysaye's recitals, and on Saturday afternoon let him take the subway uptown, and get out where the crowd gets out, and buy a ticket for the baseball game. If he can keep cool enough for a little study, let him compare the distorted faces in the bleachers with the shining faces of the crowd of the night before; and let him say which crowd responded to the nobler inspiration, and then let him declare in which group the foreigners outnumbered the Americans. The American devotion to sport is no reproach to the descendants of the Puritans, since it can be demonstrated from various angles that the baseball diamond may supplement the schoolroom and the pulpit in the training of American citizens. Indeed, it is not difficult to accept that interpretation of the national sport which reduces a good game of baseball to an epitome of all that is best in the lives of the best Americans. At the same time we need to remember that the love of art is more generally accepted as a mark of grace than the love of sport. Thus, when we speak of the glory of old Athens we have in mind not the Olympian games, noble as they were, but the poets and sculptors and philosophers who uttered her thoughts. The original of the Discobolus must have been a winner,--I can imagine Athenian mothers lifting up their beautiful bare babies to see the hero over the heads of the throng,--but who can tell me his name to-day? Meanwhile the name of Myron has been guarded as a talisman of civilization. We shall not look in the sporting columns, then, for the names of contemporary Americans who are likely to secure us a place of honor on the scrolls of history. We look under the current book reviews, in theatre programmes, in the announcements of art galleries. As a by-product of such a search we announce the discovery that the prizefighters seem to be near cousins of certain Americans of turbulent notoriety in politics, themselves derived from one of the approved immigrant stocks of the "old" dispensation; while the singer and painter and writer folk very often hail from those parts of Europe at present labeled "undesirable" as a source of immigration. Nay, is it not a good joke on the restrictionists that an American singer who aspires to be a prima donna must trick herself out with a name borrowed from the steerage lists of recent arrivals at Ellis Island? If it is the scum of Europe that we are getting in our present immigration, it seems to be a scum rich in pearls. Pearl-fishing, of course, is accompanied by labor and danger and expense, but it is reckoned a paying industry, or practical men would not invest their capital in it. The brunt of the business falls on the divers, however. Have we divers willing to go down into our human sea and risk an encounter with sharks and grope in the ooze at the bottom? We have our school teachers and librarians and social missionaries, whose zest for their work should shame us out of counting the cost of our human fishery. As to the accumulations of empty shells, we are told that in the pearl fisheries of South America about one oyster in a thousand yields a pearl; and yet the industry goes on. The lesson of the oyster bank goes further still. We know that the nine hundred and ninety-nine empty shells have a lining, at least, of mother-of-pearl. We are thus encouraged to look for the generic opalescence of humanity in the undistinguished mass of our immigrants. What do the aliens show of the specific traits of manhood that go to the making of good citizens? Immersed in the tide of American life, do their spiritual secretions give off that fine lustre of manhood that distinguished the noble Pilgrims of the first immigration? The genius of the few is obvious; the group virtue of the mass on exalted occasions, such as popular uprisings, has been sufficiently demonstrated. What we want to know now is whether the ordinary immigrant under ordinary circumstances comes anywhere near the type we have taken as a model. There can be no effective comparison between the makers of history of a most romantic epoch and the venders of bananas on our own thrice-commonplace streets. But the Pilgrims were not always engaged in signing momentous compacts or in effecting a historic landing. In a secondary capacity they were immigrants--strangers come to establish themselves in a strange land--and as such they may profitably be used as a model by which to measure other immigrants. The historic merit of their enterprise aside, the virtue of the Pilgrim Fathers was that they came not to despoil, but to build; that they resolutely turned their backs on conditions of life that galled them, and set out to make their own conditions in a strange and untried world, at great hazard to life and limb and fortune; that they asked no favors of God, but paid in advance for His miracles, by hewing and digging and ploughing and fighting against odds; that they respected humankind, believed in themselves, and pushed the business of the moment as if the universe hung on the result. The average immigrant of to-day, like the immigrant of 1620, comes to build--to build a civilized home under a civilized government, which diminishes the amount of barbarity in the world. He, too, like that earlier newcomer, has rebelled against the conditions of his life, and adventured halfway across the world in search of more acceptable conditions, facing exile and uncertainty and the terrors of the untried. He also pays as he goes along, and in very much the same coin as did the Pilgrims; awaiting God's miracle of human happiness in the grisly darkness of the mine, in the fierce glare of the prairie ranch, in the shrivelling heat of coke-ovens, beside roaring cotton-gins, beside blinding silk-looms, in stifling tailor-shops, in nerve-racking engine-rooms,--in all those places where the assurance and pride of the State come to rest upon the courage and patience of the individual citizen. There is enough of peril left in the adventure of emigration to mark him who undertakes it as a man of some daring and resource. Has civilization smoothed the sea, or have not steamships been known to founder as well as sailing vessels? Does not the modern immigrant also venture among strangers, who know not his ways nor speak his tongue nor worship his God? If his landing is not threatened by savages in ambush, he has to run the gauntlet of exacting laws that serve not his immediate interests. The early New England farmer used to carry his rifle with him in the fields, to be ready for prowling Indians, and the gutter-merchant of New York to-day is obliged to carry about the whole armory of his wits, to avert the tomahawk of competition. No less cruel than Indian chiefs to their white captives is the greedy industrial boss to the laborers whom poverty puts at his mercy; and how could you better match the wolves and foxes that prowled about the forest clearings of our ancestors than by the pack of sharpers and misinformers who infest the immigrant quarters of our cities? Measured by the exertions necessary to overcome them, the difficulties that beset the modern immigrant are no less formidable than those which the Pilgrims had to face. There has never been a time when it was more difficult to get something for nothing than it is to-day, but the unromantic setting of modern enterprises leads us to underestimate the moral qualities that make success possible to-day. Undoubtedly the pioneer with an axe over his shoulder is a more picturesque figure than the clerk with a pencil behind his ear, but we who have stood up against the shocks of modern life should know better than to confuse the picturesque with the heroic. Do we not know that it takes a _man_ to beat circumstances, to-day as in the days of the pioneers? And manliness is always the same mixture of courage, self-reliance, perseverance, and faith. Inventions have multiplied since the days of the Pilgrims, but which of our mechanical devices takes the place of the old-fashioned quality of determination where obstacles are to be overcome? The New England wilderness retreated not before the axe, but before the diligence of the men who wielded the axe; and diligence it is which to-day transmutes the city's refuse into a loaf for the ragpicker's children. Resourcefulness--the ability to adjust the means to the end--enters equally in the subtle enterprises of the business man and in the hardy exploits of the settler; and it takes as much patience to wait for returns on a petty investment of capital as it does to watch the sprouting of an acre of corn. Hardiness and muscle and physical courage were the seventeenth-century manifestations of the same moral qualities which to-day are expressed as intensity and nerve and commercial daring. Our country being in part cultivated, in part savage, we need citizens with the endowment of the twentieth century, and citizens with the pioneer endowment. The "new" immigration, however interpreted, consists in the main of these two types. Whether we get these elements in the proportion best suited to our needs is another question, to be answered in its place. At this point it is only necessary to admit that the immigrant possesses an abundance of the homely virtues of the useful citizen in times of peace. We arrived at this conclusion by a theoretical analysis of the qualities that carry a man through life to-day; and that was fair reasoning, since the great majority of aliens are known to make good, if not in the first generation, then in the second or the third. Any sociologist, any settlement worker, any census clerk will tell you that the history of the average immigrant family of the "new" period is represented by an ascending curve. The descending curves are furnished by degenerate families of what was once prime American stock. I want no better proof of these facts than I find in the respective vocabularies of the missionary in the slums of New York and the missionary in the New England hills. At the settlement on Eldridge Street they talk about hastening the process of Americanization of the immigrant; the country minister in the Berkshires talks about the rehabilitation of the Yankee farmer. That is, the one assists at an upward process, the other seeks to reverse a downward process. Right here, in these opposite tendencies of the poor of the foreign quarters and the poor of the Yankee fastnesses, I read the most convincing proof that what we get in the steerage is not the refuse, but the sinew and bone of all the nations. If rural New England to-day shows signs of degeneracy, it is because much of her sinew and bone departed from her long ago. Some of the best blood of New England answered to the call of "Westward ho!" when the empty lands beyond the Alleghanies gaped for population, while on the spent farms of the Puritan settlements too many sons awaited the division of the father's property. Of those who were left behind, many, of course, were detained by habit and sentiment, love of the old home being stronger in them than the lure of adventure. Of the aristocracy of New England that portion stayed at home which was fortified by wealth, and so did not feel the economic pressure of increased population; of the proletariat remained, on the whole, the less robust, the less venturesome, the men and women of conservative imagination. It was bound to be so, because, wherever the population is set in motion by internal pressure, the emigrant train is composed of the stoutest, the most resourceful of those who are not held back by the roots of wealth or sentiment. Voluntary emigration always calls for the highest combination of the physical and moral virtues. The law of analogy, therefore, might suffice to teach us that with every shipload of immigrants we get a fresh infusion of pioneer blood. But theory is a tight-rope on which every monkey of a logician can balance himself. We practical Americans of the twentieth century like to feel the broad platform of tested facts beneath our feet. [Illustration: ROUGH WORK AND LOW WAGES FOR THE IMMIGRANT] The fact about the modern immigrant is that he is everywhere continuing the work begun by our pioneer ancestors. So much we may learn from a bare recital of the occupations of aliens. They supply most of the animal strength and primitive patience that are at the bottom of our civilization. In California they gather the harvest, in Arizona they dig irrigation ditches, in Oregon they fell forests, in West Virginia they tunnel coal, in Massachusetts they plant the tedious crops suitable to an exhausted soil. In the cities they build subways and skyscrapers and railroad terminals that are the wonder of the world. Wherever rough work and low wages go together, we have a job for the immigrant. The prouder we grow, the more we lean on the immigrant. The Wall Street magnate would be about as effective as a puppet were it not for the army of foreigners who execute his schemes. The magic of stocks and bonds lies in railroad ties and in quarried stone and in axle grease applied at the right time. A Harriman might sit till doomsday gibbering at the telephone and the stock exchange would take no notice of him if a band of nameless "Dagos" a thousand miles away failed to repair a telegraph pole. New York City is building an aqueduct that will surpass the works of the Romans, and the average New Yorker will know nothing about it until he reads in the newspapers the mayor's speech at the inauguration of the new water supply. Our brains, our wealth, our ambitions flow in channels dug by the hands of immigrants. Alien hands erect our offices, rivet our bridges, and pile up the proud masonry of our monuments. Ignoring in this connection the fact that the engineer as well as the laborer is often of alien race, we owe to mere muscle a measure of recognition proportionate to our need of muscle in our boasted material progress. An imaginative schoolboy left to himself must presently catch the resemblance between the pick-and-shovel men toiling at our aqueducts and the heroes of the axe and rifle extolled in his textbooks as the "sturdy pioneers." Considered without prejudice, the chief difference between these two types is the difference between jean overalls and fringed buckskins. Contemporaneousness takes the romance out of everything; otherwise we might be rubbing elbows with heroes. Whatever merit there was in hewing and digging and hauling in the days of the first settlers still inheres in the same operations to-day. Yes, and a little extra; for a stick of dynamite is more dangerous to handle than a crowbar, and the steam engine makes more widows in a year than ever the Indian did with bloody tomahawk and stealthy arrow. There is no contention here that every fellow who successfully passes the entrance ordeals at Ellis Island is necessarily a hero. That there are weaklings in the train of the sturdy throng of foreigners nobody knows better than I. I have witnessed the pitiful struggles of the unfit, and have seen the failures drop all around me. But no bold army ever marched to the field of action without a fringe of camp-followers on its flanks. The moral vortex created by the enterprises of the resolute sucks in a certain number of the weak-hearted; and this is especially true in mass movements, where the enthusiasm of the crowd ekes out the courage of the individual. If it is not too impious to suggest it, may there not have been among the passengers of the Mayflower two or three or half a dozen who came over because their cousins did, not because they had any zest for the adventure? When we remember that the Pilgrim Fathers came with their families, we may be very sure that that was the case, because the different members of a family are seldom of the same moral fibre. No doubt the austere ambitions of the voyagers of the Mayflower made them stern recruiting masters, but our knowledge of men in the mass forbids the assumption that they were all heroes of the first rank who stepped ashore on Plymouth Rock. I have little sympathy with declaimers about the Pilgrim Fathers, who look upon them all as men of grand conceptions and superhuman foresight. An entire ship's company of Columbuses is what the world never saw. It takes a wizard critic like Lowell to chip away the crust of historic sentiment and show us our forefathers in the flesh. Lowell would agree with me that the Pilgrims were a picked troop in the sense that there was an immense preponderance of virtue among them. And that is exactly what we must say of our modern immigrants, if we judge them by the sum total of their effect on our country. Not a little of the glory of the Pilgrim Fathers rests on their own testimony. Our opinion of them is greatly enhanced by the expression we find, in the public and private documents they have left us, of their ideals, their aims, their expectations in the New World. Let us judge our immigrants also out of their own mouths, as future generations will be sure to judge them. And in seeking this testimony let us remember that humanity in general does not produce one oracle in a decade. Very few men know their own hearts, or can give an account of the impulses that drive them in a particular direction. We put our ears to the lips of the eloquent when we want to know what the world is thinking. And what do we get when we sift down the sayings of the spokesmen among the foreign folk? An anthem in praise of American ideals, a passionate glorification of the principles of democracy. Let it be understood that the men and women of exceptional intellect, who have surveyed the situation from philosophical heights, are not trumpeting forth their own high dreams alone. If they have won the ear of the American nation and shamed the indifferent and silenced the cynical, it is because they voiced the feeling of the inarticulate mob that welters in the foreign quarters of our cities. I am never so clear as to the basis of my faith in America as when I have been talking with the ungroomed mothers of the East Side. A widow down on Division Street was complaining bitterly of the hardships of her lot, alone in an alien world with four children to bring up. In the midst of her complaints the children came in from school. "Well," said the hard-pressed widow, "bread isn't easy to get in America, but the children can go to school, and that's more than bread. Rich man, poor man, it's all the same: the children can go to school." The poor widow had never heard of a document called the Declaration of Independence, but evidently she had discovered in American practice something corresponding to one of the great American principles,--the principle of equality of opportunity,--and she valued it more than the necessaries of animal life. Even so was it valued by the Fathers of the Republic, when they deliberately incurred the dangers of a war with mighty England in defense of that and similar principles. [Illustration: THE UNGROOMED MOTHER OF THE EAST SIDE] The widow's sentiment was finely echoed by another Russian immigrant, a man who drives an ice-wagon for a living. His case is the more impressive from the fact that he left a position of comparative opulence in the old country, under the protection of a wealthy uncle who employed him as steward of his estates. He had had servants to wait on him and money enough to buy some of the privileges of citizenship which the Russian Government doles out to the favored few. "But what good was it to me?" he asked. "My property was not my own if the police wanted to take it away. I could spend thousands to push my boy through the Gymnasium, and he might get a little education as a favor, and still nothing out of it, if he isn't allowed to be anything. Here I work like a slave, and my wife she works like a slave, too,--in the old country she had servants in the house,--but what do I care, as long as I know what I earn I got it for my own? I got to furnish my house one chair at a time, in America, but nobody can take it away from me, the little that I got. And it costs me nothing to educate my family. Maybe they can, maybe they can't go to college, but all can go through grammar school, and high school, too, the smart ones. And all go together! Rich and poor, all are equal, and I don't get it as a favor." Better a hard bed in the shelter of justice than a stuffed couch under the black canopy of despotism. Better a crust of the bread of the intellect freely given him as his right than the whole loaf grudgingly handed him as a favor. What nobler insistence on the rights of manhood do we find in the writings of the Puritans? Volumes might be filled with the broken sayings of the humblest among the immigrants which, translated into the sounding terms of the universal, would give us the precious documents of American history over again. Never was the bread of freedom more keenly relished than it is to-day, by the very people of whom it is said that they covet only the golden platter on which it is served up. We may not say that immigration to our country has ceased to be a quest of the ideal as long as the immigrants lay so much stress on the spiritual accompaniment of economic elevation in America. Nobly built upon the dreams of the Fathers, the house of our Republic is nobly tenanted by those who cherish similar dreams. But dreams cannot be brought before a court of inquiry. A diligent immigration commission with an appropriation to spend has little time to listen to Joseph. A digest of its report is expected to yield statistics rather than rhapsodies. The taxpayers want their money's worth of hard facts. But when the facts are raked together and boiled down to a summary that the business man may scan on his way to the office, behold! we are no wiser than before. For a host of interpreters jump into the seats vacated by the extinct commission and harangue us in learned terms on the merits and demerits of the immigrant, _as they conceive them_, after studying the voluminous report. That is, the question is still what it was before: a matter of personal opinion! The man with the vote realizes that _he_ has to make up _his_ mind what instructions to send to his representative in Congress on the subject of immigration. And where shall he, a plain, practical man, unaccustomed to interpret dreams or analyze statistics, find an index of the alien's worth that he can read through the spectacles of common sense? There is a phrase in the American vocabulary of approval that sums up our national ideal of manhood. That phrase is "a self-made man." To such we pay the tribute of our highest admiration, justly regarding our self-made men as the noblest product of our democratic institutions. Now let any one compile a biographical dictionary of our self-made men, from the romantic age of our history down to the prosaic year 1914, and see how the smell of the steerage pervades the volume! _There_ is a sign that the practical man finds it easy to interpret. Like fruits grow from like seeds. Those who can produce under American conditions the indigenous type of manhood must be working with the same elements as the native American who starts out a yokel and ends up a senator. Focused under the microscope of theoretical analysis, or viewed through the spectacles of common sense, the average immigrant of to-day still shows the markings of virtue that have distinguished the best Americans from the time of the landing at Plymouth to the opening of the Panama Canal. But popular judgment is seldom based on a study of the norm, especially in this age of the newspaper. The newspaper is devoted to the portrayal of the abnormal--the shining example and the horrible example; and most men think they have done justice when they have balanced the one against the other, leaving out of account entirely the great mass that lies between the two extremes. And even of the two extremes, it is the horrible example that is more frequently brought to the attention of the public. Half a dozen Italians draw knives in a brawl on a given evening, and the morning newspapers are full of the story. On the same evening hundreds of Italians were studying civics in the night schools, inquiring for classics at the public library, rehearsing for a historical pageant at the settlement--and not a word about them in the newspapers. One Jewish gangster makes more "copy" than a hundred Jewish boys and girls who win honors in college. So also it is the business of the police to record the fact that a Greek was arrested for peddling without a license, while it is nobody's business to report that a dozen other Greeks chipped in their spare change to pay his fine. The reader of newspapers is convinced that the foreigners as a whole are a violent, vicious, lawless crowd, and the fewer we have of them the better. Could the annual reports of libraries and settlements be circulated as widely as the newspapers, the American public would not be guilty of such errors of judgment. But who reads annual reports? The very name of them is forbidding! It becomes necessary, therefore, to explain the newspaper types that jump to the fore in every discussion of the immigrant. First of all we must get a good grip on our sense of proportion. To speak of the immigrants as undesirable because a few of them throw bombs or live by gambling is about as fair as it would be for the world to call us Americans a nation of dissolute millionaires and industrial pirates because a Harry Thaw drank himself into an insane asylum and a Rockefeller swept a host of competitors to ruin. But the bomb-thrower and the gambler are extremely undesirable. Look at the Black Hand outrages, look at the Rosenthal case! Aye, I have looked, and I see plainly that these horrible examples are due to the same causes as any shining example that could be named. Each is the product of the qualities the immigrant brought with him and the opportunities he found here to exercise them. The law-abiding, ambitious immigrant who came here a beggar and worked himself into the ranks of the princes found his opportunity in our laws and customs, which enable the common man to make the most of himself. The blackmailer's opportunity was provided by the operation of corrupt politics, which removes police commissioners and impeaches governors for trying to enforce the law. The Rosenthal case brought forth Lieutenant Becker, and an investigation of the spread of the Black Hand terror discovers political bosses behind the scenes.(5) We have laws providing for the deportation of alien criminals. Why are they not always enforced? When we have found the broom that will sweep the political vermin from our legislatures, we shan't need to look around for a shovel to keep back the scum of Europe. The two will go together. (5) See _The Outlook_, August 16, 1913; article by Frank Marshall White. In the whole catalogue of sins with which the modern immigrant is charged, it is not easy to find one in which we Americans are not partners,--we who can make and unmake our world by means of the ballot. The immigrant is blamed for the unsanitary conditions of the slums, when sanitary experts cry shame on our methods of municipal house-cleaning. You might dump the whole of the East Side into the German capital and there would be no slums there, because the municipal authorities of Berlin know how to enforce building regulations, how to plant trees, and how to clean the streets. The very existence of the slum is laid at the door of the immigrant, but the truth is that the slums were here before the immigrants. Most of the foreigners hate the slums, and all but the few who have no backbone get out of them as fast as they rise in the economic scale. To "move uptown" is the dearest ambition of the average immigrant family. If the slums were due to the influx of foreigners, why should London have slums, and more hideous slums than New York? No, the slum is not a by-product of the steerage. It is a sore on the social body in many civilized countries, due to internal disorders of the economic system. A generous dose of social reformation would do more to effect a cure than repeated doses of restriction of immigration. A whole group of phenomena due to social and economic causes have been falsely traced, in this country, to the quantity and quality of immigration. Among these are the labor troubles, such as non-employment, strikes, riots, etc. England has no such immigration as the United States, and yet Englishmen suffer from non-employment, from riots and bitter strikes. Whom does the English workingman blame for his misery? Let the American workingman quarrel with the same enemy. If wage-cutting is a sin more justly laid at the door of the immigrant, a minimum wage law might put a stop to that. The immigrant undoubtedly contributes to the congestion of population in the cities, but not as a chief cause. Congestion is characteristic of city life the world over, and the remedy will be found in improved conditions of country life. Moreover, the immigrant has shown himself responsive to direction away from the city when a systematic attempt is made to help him find his place in the country. There is the experience of the Industrial Removal Office of the Baron de Hirsch Foundation as a hint of what the Government might accomplish if it took a hand in the intelligent distribution of immigration. The records of this organization, dealing with a group of immigrants supposed to be especially addicted to city life, kill two immigrant myths at one stroke. They prove that it is possible to direct the stream of immigration in desired channels and that the Jew is not altogether averse to contact with the soil; both facts contrary to popular notions. A good deal of anti-immigration feeling has been based on the vile conditions observed in labor camps, by another turn of that logic which puts the blame on the victims. A labor camp at its worst is not an argument against immigration, but an indictment of the brutality of the contractor who cares only to force a maximum of work out of the workmen, and cares nothing for their lives; an indictment also of the Government that allows such shameful exploitation of the laborers to go on. That a labor camp does not have to be a plague spot has been gloriously demonstrated by Goethals at Panama. What Goethals did was to emphasize the _man_ in workingman, with the result that Panama during the vast operations of digging the Canal was a healthier, happier, more inspiring place to live in than many of our proudest cities; the workmen came away from the job better men and better citizens; and the work was better done and with more dispatch and at less expense than any such work was ever done by the old-fashioned method, where the workers are treated not as men but as tools. There may not be another Goethals in the country, but what a great man devises little men may copy. The labor camp must never again be mentioned as a reproach to the immigrant who suffers degradation in it, or the world will think that we do not know the meaning of the medals which we ourselves have hung on Goethals's breast. Immigrants are accused of civic indifference if they do not become naturalized, but when we look into the conditions affecting naturalization we wonder at the numbers who do become citizens. Facilities for civic education of the adult are very scant, and dependent mostly on the fluctuating enthusiasm of private philanthropies. The administration of the naturalization laws differs from State to State and is accompanied by serious material hindrances; while the community is so indifferent to the civic progress of its alien members that it is possible for a foreigner to live in this country for _sixteen years_, coming in contact with all classes of Americans, without getting the bare information that he may become a citizen of the United States if he wants to. Such a case, as reported by a charity worker of New Britain, Connecticut, makes a sensitive American choke with mortification. If we were ourselves as patriotic as we expect the immigrant to be, we would employ Salvation Army methods to draw the foreigner into the civic fold. Instead of that, we leave his citizenship to chance--or to the most corrupt political agencies. I would rather not review the blackest of all charges against the immigrant, that he has a baleful effect on municipal politics: I am so ashamed of the implications. But sensible citizens will talk and talk about the immigrant selling his vote, and not know whom they are accusing. Votes cannot be sold unless there is a market for them. Who creates the market for votes? The ward politician, behind whom stands the party boss, alert, and powerful; and behind him--the indifferent electorate who allow him to flourish. Among immigrants of the "new" order, the wholesale prostitution of the ballot is confined to those groups which are largely subjected to the industrial slavery of mining and manufacturing communities and construction camps. These helpless creatures, in their very act of sinning, bear twofold witness against us who accuse them. The foreman who disposes of their solid vote acquires his power under an economic system which delivers them up, body and soul, to the man who pays them wages, and turns it to account under a political system which makes the legislature subservient to the stock exchange. But let it be definitely noted that to admit that groups of immigrants under economic control fall an easy prey to political corruptionists is very far from proving any inherent viciousness in the immigrants themselves. Neither does the immigrant's civic reputation depend entirely on negative evidence. New York City has the largest foreign population in the United States, and precisely in that city the politicians have learned that they cannot count on the foreign vote, because it is not for sale. A student of New York politics speaks of the "uncontrollable and unapproachable vote of the Ghetto." Repeated analyses of the election returns of the Eighth District, which has the largest foreign population of all, show that "politically it is one of the most uncertain sections" in the city. Many generations of campaign managers have discovered to their sorrow that the usual party blandishments are wasted on the East Side masses. Hester Street follows leaders and causes rather than party emblems. Nowhere is the art of splitting a ticket better understood. The only time you can predict the East Side vote is when there is a sharp alignment of the better citizens against the boss-ridden. Then you will find the naturalized citizens in the same camp with men like Jacob Riis and women like Lillian Wald. And the experience of New York is duplicated in Chicago and in Philadelphia and in every center of immigration. Ask the reformers. How often we demand more civic virtue of the stranger than we ourselves possess! A little more time spent in weeding our own garden will relieve us of the necessity of counting the tin cans in the immigrant's back yard. As to tin cans, the immigrants are not the only ones who scatter them broadcast. How can we talk about the foreigners defacing public property, when our own bill-boards disfigure every open space that God tries to make beautiful for us? It is true that the East Side crowds litter the parks with papers and fruit-skins and peanut shells, but they would not be able to do so if the park regulations were persistently enforced. And in the mean time the East Side children, in their pageants and dance festivals, make the most beautiful use of the parks that a poet could desire. There exists a society in the United States the object of which is to protect the natural beauties and historical landmarks of our country. Who are the marauders who have called such a society into being? Who is it that threatens to demolish the Palisades and drain off Niagara? Who are the vulgar folk who scrawl their initials on trees and monuments, who chip off bits from historic tombstones, who profane the holy echoes of the mountains by calling foolish phrases through a megaphone? The officers of the Scenic and Historic Preservation Society are not watching Ellis Island. On the contrary, it was the son of an immigrant whose expert testimony, given before a legislative committee at Albany, helped the Society to save the Falls of the Genesee from devastation by a power company. This same immigrant's son, on another occasion, spent two mortal hours tearing off visiting-cards from a poet's grave--cards bearing the names of American vacationists. Some of the things we say against the immigrants sound very strange from American lips. We speak of the corruption of our children's manners through contact with immigrant children in the public schools, when all the world is scolding us for our children's rude deportment. Finer manners are grown on a tiny farm in Italy than in the roaring subways of New York; and contrast our lunch-counter manners with the table-manners of the Polish ghetto, where bread must not be touched with unwashed hands, where a pause for prayer begins and ends each meal, and on festival occasions parents and children join in folk-songs between courses! If there is a corruption of manners, it may be that it works in the opposite direction from what we suppose. At any rate, we ourselves admit that the children of foreigners, before they are Americanized, have a greater respect than our children for the Fifth Commandment. We say that immigrants nowadays come only to exploit our country, because some of them go back after a few years, taking their savings with them. The real exploiters of our country's wealth are not the foreign laborers, but the capitalists who pay them wages. The laborer who returns home with his savings leaves us an equivalent in the products of labor; a day's service rendered for every day's wages. The capitalists take away our forests and water-courses and mineral treasures and give us watered stock in return. Of the class of aliens who do not come to make their homes here, but only to earn a few hundred dollars to invest in a farm or a cottage in their native village, a greater number than we imagine are brought over by industrial agents in violation of the contract labor law. Put an end to the stimulation of immigration, and we shall see very few of the class who do not come to stay. And even as it is, not all of those who return to Europe do so in order to spend their American fortune. Some go back to recover from ruin encountered at the hands of American land swindlers. Some go back to be buried beside their fathers, having lost their health in unsanitary American factories. And some are helped aboard on crutches, having lost a limb in a mine explosion that could have been prevented. When we watch the procession of cripples hobbling back to their native villages, it looks more as if America is exploiting Europe. O that the American people would learn where their enemies lurk! Not the immigrant is ruining our country, but the venal politicians who try to make the immigrant the scapegoat for all the sins of untrammeled capitalism--these and their masters. Find me the agent who obstructs the movement for the abolition of child labor, and I will show you who it is that condemns able-bodied men to eat their hearts out in idleness; who brutalizes our mothers and tortures tender babies; who fills the morgues with the emaciated bodies of young girls, and the infirmaries with little white cots; who fastens the shame of illiteracy on our enlightened land, and causes American boys to grow up too ignorant to mark a ballot; who sucks the blood of the nation, fattens on its brains, and throws its heart to the wolves of the money market. The stench of the slums is nothing to the stench of the child-labor iniquity. If the foreigners are taking the bread out of the mouth of the American workingman, it is by the maimed fingers of their fainting little ones. And if we want to know whether the immigrant parents are the promoters or the victims of the child labor system, we turn to the cotton mills, where forty thousand native American children between seven and sixteen years of age toil between ten and twelve hours a day, while the fathers rot in the degradation of idleness. From all this does it follow that we should let down the bars and dispense with the guard at Ellis Island? Only in so far as the policy of restriction is based on the theory that the present immigration is derived from the scum of humanity. But the immigrants may be desirable and immigration undesirable. We sometimes have to deny ourselves to the most congenial friends who knock at our door. At this point, however, we are not trying to answer the question whether immigration is good for us. We are concerned only with the reputation of the immigrant--and incidentally with the reputation of those who have sought to degrade him in our eyes. If statecraft bids us lock the gate, and our national code of ethics ratifies the order, lock it we must, but we need not call names through the keyhole. Mount guard in the name of the Republic if the health of the Republic requires it, but let no such order be issued until her statesmen and philosophers and patriots have consulted together. Above all, let the voice of prejudice be stilled, let not self-interest chew the cud of envy in full sight of the nation, and let no syllable of willful defamation mar the oracles of state. For those who are excluded when our bars are down are exiles from Egypt, whose feet stumble in the desert of political and social slavery, whose hearts hunger for the bread of freedom. The ghost of the Mayflower pilots every immigrant ship, and Ellis Island is another name for Plymouth Rock. III THE FIERY FURNACE Nebuchadnezzar spake and said unto them, . . . Now if ye be ready that at what time ye hear the sound of the cornet . . . ye fall down and worship the image that I have made; well: but if ye worship not, ye shall be cast the same hour into the midst of a burning fiery furnace; and who is that God that shall deliver you out of my hands? Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, answered and said to the king, O, Nebuchadnezzar, we are not careful to answer thee in this matter. If it be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of thine hand, O king. But if not, be it known unto thee, O king, that we will not serve thy gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up. Dan. iii, 14-18. In the discussion of the third question,--whether immigration is good for us,--more honest Americans have gone astray than in the other two divisions. Let it be said at the outset that those who have erred have been about equally distributed between the ayes and the nays. For the answer to this question is neither aye nor nay, but something that cannot be put into a single syllable. If we steer our way cautiously between the opposing ranks, the light of the true answer will presently shine on us. The arguments they severally advance in defense of their respective positions reveal an appalling number of citizens on each side of the house who have entirely disregarded the principles involved. Those who, like the labor-union lobbyists, point to the empty dinner-pails of American workingmen as a reason for keeping out foreign labor, are no more at fault than the lobbyists of the opposite side, who offer in support of the open-door policy statistics showing the need of rough laborers in various branches of our current material development. All of them are wrong in that they would treat our foreign brothers as pawns on the chessboard of our selfish needs. Show me a million American workingmen out of work, and I fail to see a justification for the exclusion of a million men from other lands who are also looking for a job. Does the mother of an impoverished family strangle half her brood in order that the other half may have enough to eat? No; she divides the last crust equally among her starvelings, and the laws of nature do the rest. This analogy, of course, is a vessel without a bottom unless the gospel of the brotherhood of man is accepted as a premise of our debate. The only logic it will hold is the logic of a practical incarnation of the theories we loudly applaud on occasions of patriotic excitement. That ought to be acceptable both to the poor men who like to parade the streets with the Stars and Stripes at the head of the column and the _Marseillaise_ on their lips, and to the rich men who subscribe generously to soldiers' and sailors' monument funds, and who ransack ancient chronicles to establish their connection with the heroes of the Revolution. Let the paraders and the ancestor-worshipers unite in a practical recognition of the rights of their belated brothers who are seeking to enter the kingdom of liberty and justice, and they will have given a living shape to the sentiment they symbolically honor, each in his own way. I am not content if the labor leaders retire from the lobby when all the mills are running full time and shop foremen are scouring the streets for "hands." It is no proof of our sincerity that we are indifferent in times of plenty as to who it is that picks up the crumbs after we have fed. They only are true Americans who, remembering that this country was wrested from the English in the name of the common rights of humanity, resist the temptation to insure their own soup-kettles by patrolling the national pastures and granaries against the hungry from other lands. Share and share alike is the motto of brotherhood. But who will venture to preach such devotion to principle to the starved and naked and oppressed? Why, I, even I, who refuse to believe that the American workingman is past answering the call of a difficult ideal, no matter what privations are gnawing at his vitals. I have read in the history books that when Lincoln issued his call for volunteers, they came from mills and factories and little shops as promptly as from counting-rooms and college halls. Fathers of large families that looked to him for bread kissed their babies and marched off to the war, taking an elder son or two with them. Were they all aristocrats whose names are preserved on four thousand gravestones at Gettysburg? And who were they who went barefoot in the snow and starved with Washington in Valley Forge? The common people, most of them, the toilers for daily bread, they who give all when they give aught, because they have not enough to divide. They only mark themselves as calumniators of the poor who protest that times and men have changed since Washington's and Lincoln's day; who think that the breed of heroes died out with the passing of the Yankee farmer and the provincial townsman of the earlier periods. Shall not the testimony of a daughter of the slums be heard when the poor are being judged? I was reared in a tenement district of a New England metropolis, where the poor of many nations contended with each other for a scant living; and the only reason I am no longer of the slums is because a hundred heroes and heroines among my neighbors fought for my release. Not only the members of my family, but mere acquaintances put their little all at my disposal. Merely that a dreamer among them might come to the fulfillment of her dream, they fed and sheltered and nursed me and cheered me on, again and again facing the wolves of want for my sake, giving me the whole cloak if the half did not suffice to save the spark of life in my puny body. If my knowledge of the slums counts for anything, it counts for a positive assurance that the personal devotion which is daily manifested in the life of the tenements in repeated acts of self-denial, from the sharing of a delicacy with a sick neighbor to the education of a gifted child by the year-long sacrifices of the entire family, is a spark from the smouldering embers of idealism that lie buried in the ashes of sordid existence, and await but the fanning of a great purpose to leap up into a flame of abstract devotion. Times have changed, indeed, since the days of Washington. His was a time of beginnings, ours is a time ripe for accomplishment. And yet the seed the Fathers sowed we shall not reap, unless we consecrate ourselves to our purpose as they did,--all of us, the whole people, no man presuming to insult his neighbor by exempting him on account of apparent weakness. The common people in Washington's time, and again in Lincoln's time, stood up like men, because they were called as men, not as weaklings who must be coddled and spared the shock of robust moral enterprise. Not a full belly but a brimming soul made heroes out of ploughboys in '76. The common man of to-day is capable of a like transformation if pricked with the electric needle of a lofty appeal. Those who are teaching the American workingman to demand the protection of his job against legitimate alien competition are trampling out the embers of popular idealism, instead of fanning it into a blaze that should transfigure the life of the nation. [Illustration: A FRESH INFUSION OF PIONEER BLOOD] Idealism of the finest, heroism unsurpassed, are frequently displayed in the familiar episodes of the class war that is going on before our eyes, under unionistic leadership. But it is a narrowing of the vision that makes a great mass of the people adopt as the unit of human salvation the class instead of the nation. The struggle which has for its object the putting of the rapacious rich in their place does not constitute a full programme of national progress. If labor leaders think they are leading in a holy war, they should be the last to encourage disrespect of the principles of righteousness for which they are fighting. It is inconsistent, to put it mildly, to lead a demonstration against entrenched capital on one day, and the next day to head a delegation in Congress in favor of entrenched labor. Is there anything brotherly about a monopolization of the labor market? Substituting the selfishness of the poor for the selfishness of the rich will bring us no nearer the day of universal justice. Though I should not hesitate to insist on a generous attitude toward the foreigner even if it imposed on our own people all the hardships which are alleged to be the result of immigration, I do not disdain to point out the fact that, when all is said and done, there is enough of America to go around for many a year to come. It is hard to know whether to take the restrictionists seriously when they tell us that the country is becoming overcrowded. The population of the United States is less than three times that of England, and England is only a dot on our map. In Texas alone there is room for the population of the whole world, with a homestead of half an acre for every family of five, and a patch the size of Maryland left over for a public park. A schoolboy's geography will supply the figures for this pretty sum. The over-supply of labor is another myth of the restrictionist imagination that vanishes at one glance around the country, which shows us crops spoiling for want of harvesters, and women running to the legislature for permission to extend their legal working-day in the fields; such is the scarcity of men. Said ex-Secretary Nagel, commenting upon the immigration bill which was so strenuously pushed by the restrictionists in the Sixty-third Congress, only to be vetoed by President Taft:-- In my judgment no sufficiently earnest and intelligent effort has been made to bring our wants and our supply together, and so far the same forces that give the chief support to this provision of the new bill [a literacy test, intended to check the influx of cheap labor] have stubbornly resisted any effort looking to an intelligent distribution of new immigration to meet the needs of our vast country. [And] no such drastic measure [as the literacy test] should be adopted until we have at least exhausted the possibilities of a rational distribution of these new forces. Distribution--geographical, seasonal, occupational; that should be our next watch-word, if we are bent on applying our vast resources to our needs. It cannot be too often pointed out that a nation of our political confession is bound to try every other possible solution of her problems before resorting to a measure that encroaches on the rights of humanity. And so far are we from exhausting the possibilities of internal reform that even the most obvious economic errors have not been corrected. It is not good sense nor good morals to keep men at work twelve and thirteen hours a day, seven days in the week, as they do, for example, in the paper-mills. It is bad policy to use women in the mills; it is heinous to use the children. Every one of those over-long jobs should be cut in two; the women should be sent back to the nursery, and the children put to school, and able-bodied men set in their places. If such a programme, consistently carried out throughout the country, still left considerable numbers unemployed, there is one more remedy we might apply. We might chain to the benches in the city parks, where involuntary idlers now pass the day, all the agents and runners who move around Europe at the expense of steamship companies, labor contractors, and mill-owners. We must _stop_ the importation of labor, not talk about stopping it. To refrain from soliciting immigration is a very different thing from imposing an arbitrary check on voluntary immigration, and gives very different results. The class of men who are lured across the ocean by the golden promises of labor agents are not of the same moral order as those who are spurred to the great adventure by a desire to share in our American civilization. When we restrain the runners, we rid ourselves automatically of the least desirable element of immigration,--the hordes of irresponsible job-hunters without family who do not ask to be steered into the current of American life, and whose mission here is accomplished when they have saved up a petty fortune with which to dazzle the eyes of peasant sweethearts at home. It is this class that contributes, through its ignorance and aloofness, the bulk of the deplorable phenomena which are quoted by restrictionists as arguments against immigration in general. But we must go after them by the direct method, applying the force of the law to the agents who rout them out of their native villages. When we attempt to weed out this one element by indirect methods, such as the oft-proposed literacy test, we are guilty of the folly of discharging a cannon into the midst of the sheepfold with the object of killing the wolf. If through such a measure as the literacy test the desired results could be insured, we should still be loath to adopt it until every other possible method had been tried. To hit at labor competition through a pretended fear of illiteracy is a tricky policy, and trickery is incompatible with the moral dignity of the American nation. Are we bankrupt in statesmanship that we must pawn the jewel of national righteousness? It required no small amount of ingenuity to find a connection between the immigrant's ability to earn a wage and his inability to read. If the resourceful gentlemen who invented the literacy test would concentrate their talents on the problem of stopping the stimulation of immigration, we should soon hear the last of the over-supply of cheap labor. Where there's a will there's a way, in statecraft as in other things. It is not enough for the integrity of our principles to scrutinize the ethical nature of proposed legislation. It must be understood in general that whoever asks for restrictive measures as a means of improving American labor conditions must prove beyond a doubt, first, that the evils complained of are not the result of our own sins, and next, that the foreign laborer on coming to America has not exchanged worse conditions for better. The gospel of brotherhood will not let us define our own good in terms of indifference to the good of others. Preaching selfishness in the name of the American workingman is an insidious way of shutting him out from participation in the national mission. If it is good for the nation to live up to its highest traditions, it cannot be bad for any part of the nation to contribute its share toward the furtherance of the common ideal. For we are not a nation of high and low, where the aristocracy acts and the populace applauds. If America is going to do anything in the world, every man and woman among us will have a share in it. Objection to the influx of foreign labor is sometimes based on a theory the very opposite of the scarcity of work. Some say that there is altogether too much work being done in this country--that we are developing our natural resources and multiplying industries at a rate too rapid for wholesome growth; and to check this feverish activity it is proposed to cut off the supply of labor which makes it possible. I doubt, in the first place, if it is reasonable to expect a young nation with half a continent to explore to restrain its activity, as long as there are herculean tasks in sight, any more than we would expect a boy to walk off the diamond in the middle of the game. Or if it is thought best to slacken the speed of material progress, the brakes should be applied at Wall Street, not at Ellis Island. The foreign laborer is merely the tool in the hands of the promoter, indispensable to, but not responsible for, his activities. The workmen come in _after_ the promoter has launched his scheme. At least, I have never heard of a development company or industrial corporation organized for the purpose of providing jobs for a shipload of immigrants. That species of philanthropy our benevolent millionaires have not hit on as yet. It is because the brutal method is the easiest that we are advised to confiscate the tools of industry in order to check the rate of material development. The more dignified way would be to restrain the captains of industry, by asserting our authority over our own citizens in matters affecting the welfare of the nation. An up-to-date mother, desiring that her little boy should not play with the scissors, would be ashamed to put them on a high shelf: she would train the boy not to touch them though they lay within his reach. Why should the assemblage of mothers and fathers who constitute the nation show less pride about their methods than a lone woman in the nursery? * * * * * Outside the economic field, fear of the immigrant is perhaps oftenest expressed in the sociological anxiety concerning assimilation. The question is raised whether so many different races, products of a great variety of physical and moral environments, can possibly fuse into a harmonious nation, obedient to one law, devoted to one flag. Some people see no indication of the future in the fact that race-blending has been going on here from the beginning of our history, because the elements we now get are said to differ from us more radically than the elements we assimilated in the past. To allay our anxiety on this point, we have only to remind ourselves that none of the great nations of Europe that present such a homogeneous front to-day arose from a single stock; and the differences between peoples in the times of the political beginnings of Europe were vastly greater than the differences between East and West, North and South, to-day. Moreover, the European nations were assorted at the point of the sword, while in America the nations are coming together of their own free will; and who can doubt that the spiritual forces of common education, common interests and associations are more effective welding agents than brute force? Doubts as to the assimilative qualities of current immigration do not exist in the minds of the workers in settlements, libraries, and schools. These people have a faith in the future of the strangers that is based on long and intimate experience with foreigners from many lands. When they are dealing with the normal product of immigration, the people who come here following some dim star of higher destiny for their children, the social missionaries are jubilantly sure of the result; and face to face with the less promising material of the labor camps, where thousands are brought together by the lure of the dollar and are kept together by the devices of economic exploitation, the missionaries are still undaunted. They have discovered that sanitation is a remedy for the filth of the camp; that a spelling-book will make inroads on the ignorance of the mob; that a lecture hall will diminish the business of the saloon and the brothel; that substituting neighborly kindness for brutal neglect will fan to a glow the divine spark in the coarsest natures. And then there is the Goethals way of managing a labor camp. The remedy for the moral indigestion which unchecked immigration is said to induce is in enlarging the organs of digestion. More evening classes, more civic centers, more missionaries in the field, and above all more neighborly interest on the part of the whole people. If immigration were a green apple that we might take or leave, we might choose between letting the apple alone or eating it and following it up with a dose of our favorite household remedy. But immigration consists of masses of our fellow men moving upon our country in pursuit of their share of human happiness. Where human rights are involved, we have no choice. We have to eat this green apple,--the Law of the Fathers enjoins it on us,--but we have only ourselves to blame if we suffer from colic afterwards, knowing the sure remedy. There is no lack of resources, material or spiritual, for carrying out our half of the assimilation programme. We have money enough, brains enough, inspiration enough. The only reason the mill is grinding so slowly is that the miller is overworked and the hopper is choked. We are letting a few do the work we should all be helping in. At the settlements, devoted young men and women are struggling with classes that are too large, or turning away scores of eager children, and their fathers and mothers, too, because there are not enough helpers; and between classes they spend their energies in running down subscribers, getting up exhibitions to entice the rich men of the community to come and have a look at their mission and drop something in the plate. But why should there be a shortage of helpers at the settlement? Have not the rich men sons and daughters, as well as check-books? What are those young people doing, dancing the nights away in ballrooms and roof-gardens, season after season, year after year? They should be down on their knees washing the feet of the pilgrims to the shrine of liberty, binding up the wounds of the victims of European despotism, teaching their little foreign brothers and sisters the first steps of civilized life. Is it preposterous to ask that those who have leisure and wealth should give of these stores when they are needed in the chief enterprise of the nation? In what does patriotism consist if not in helping our country succeed in her particular mission? Our mission--the elevation of humanity--is one in which every citizen should have a share, or he is not an American citizen in the spiritual sense. The poor must give of their little--the workingman must not seek to monopolize the labor market; and the rich must give of their plenty--their time, their culture, their wealth. Certain texts in the restrictionist teachings are as insulting to our well-to-do citizens as is the labor-monopoly preachment to the classes who struggle for a living. The one assumes that the American workingman puts his family before his country; the other--the cry that we cannot assimilate so many strangers--implies that the country's reservoirs of wealth and learning and unspent energy are monopolized by the well-to-do for their own selfish uses. We know what schools and lectures and neighborhood activities can do to promote assimilation. We cannot fail if we multiply these agencies as fast as the social workers call for them. The means for such extension of service are in the hands of the rich. Whoever doubts our ability to assimilate immigration doubts the devotion of our favored classes to the country's cause. Upon the rich and the poor alike rests the burden of the fulfillment of the dream of the Fathers, and they are poor patriots who seek to lift that burden from our shoulders instead of teaching us how to bear it nobly. Fresh from the press, there lies on my table, as I write, a review of an important work on immigration, in which the reviewer refers to the "sincere idealists who still cling to the superstition that it is opposition to some predestined divine purpose to suggest the rejection of the 'poor and oppressed.'" It is just such teaching as that, which discards as so much sentimental junk the ideas that made our great men great, that is pushing us inch by inch into the quagmire of materialism. If it is true that our rich care for nothing but their ease, and our poor have no thought beyond their daily needs, it is due to the fact that the canker of selfishness is gnawing at the heart of the nation. The love of self, absorption in the immediate moment, are vices of the flesh which fastened on us during the centuries of our agonized struggle for brute survival. The remedy that God appointed for these evils, the vision of our insignificant selves as a part of a great whole, whose lifetime is commensurate with eternity, the materialists would shatter and throw on the dump of human illusions. Who talks of superstition in a world built on superstition? Civilization is the triumph of one superstition after another. At the very foundation of our world is the huge superstition of the Fatherhood of God. In a time when the peoples of the earth bowed down to gods of stone, gods of wood, gods of brass and of gold, what more incomprehensible superstition could have been invented than that of an invisible, omnipresent Creator who made and ruled and disciplined the entire universe? One nation ventured to adopt this superstition, and that nation is regarded as the liberator of humanity from the slavery of bestial ignorance. Out of that initial superstition followed, in logical sequence, the superstition of the Brotherhood of Man, spread abroad by a son of the venturesome race; succeeded by a refinement of the same notion, the idea that the Father has no favorite children, but allots to each an equal portion of the goods of His house. That is democracy, the latest superstition of them all, the cornerstone of our Republic, and the model after which all the nations are striving to pattern themselves. * * * * * Side by side in our public schools sit the children of many races, ours and others. Week by week, month by month, year by year, the teachers pick out the brightest pupils and fasten the medals of honor on their breasts; and a startling discovery brings a cry to their lips: the children of the foreigners outclass our own! They who begin handicapped, and labor against obstacles, leave our own children far behind on the road to scholarly achievement. In the business world the same strange phenomenon is observed: conditions of life and work that would prostrate our own boys and girls, these others use as a block from which to vault to the back of prancing Fortune. In private enterprises or public, in practical or visionary movements, these outsiders exhibit an intensity of purpose, a passion of devotion that do not mark the normal progress of our own well-cared-for children. What is the galvanizing force that impels these stranger children to overmaster circumstances and bestride the top of the world? Is there a special virtue in their blood that enables them to sweep over our country and take what they want? It is a special virtue, yes: the virtue of great purpose. The fathers and mothers of these children have not weaned them from the habit of contemplating a Vision. They teach them that, in pursuit of the Vision, bleeding feet do not count. They tell them that many morrows will roll out of the lap of to-day, and they must prepare themselves for a long and arduous march. That is the reading of the riddle, and if we do not want to be shamed by the newcomers in our midst, we must silence those sophisticated teachers of the people who ridicule or pass over with a smile the idea that we, as a nation, are in pursuit of a Vision, and that those things are good for us which further our quest, and the rest--even to bleeding feet--do not count with us. It is the obliteration of the Vision that causes the emptiness in the lives of our children which they are driven to fill up with tinsel pleasures and meaningless activities of all sorts. The best blood in the world is in their veins,--the blood of heroes and martyrs, of dreamers and doers,--filtered through less than half a dozen generations. If they do not arise and do great deeds all around us, it is because their noble blood is clogged in their veins through the infiltrations of materialism in the teachings of the day. For such an inconsequential whim as that men should be free to pray in any way they choose, the Pilgrim Fathers betook themselves to a wilderness peopled with savages, preferring to die by the tomahawk rather than submit to clerical authority. The free admission of immigrants is not half so rash an adventure, and the thing to be gained by it is a more obvious good than that of freedom of worship. Even a child can understand that it is better for human beings, be they Russians or Italians or Greeks, to get into a country where there is enough to eat and enough to wear, where nobody is permitted to abuse anybody else, and where story-books are given away, than it is to live in countries where starvation and cruel treatment is the lot of multitudes. No man worthy of the name will deny that moral paralysis is a worse evil than congestion of the labor market, and moral paralysis creeps on us whenever we throw down the burden of duty to recline in the lap of comfort. We shall see no prodigies in the ranks of our children as long as we are ruled by the calculating commercial spirit which takes nothing on faith, which spurns as impracticable whatever is not easily negotiable, and repudiates our debt to the past as something too fantastic for serious consideration. Before the present era of prosperity set in, a scoffer who would brand as superstition the ideas for which our forefathers died would not have spoken with the expectation of being applauded, as he does to-day. Worldly things, like comfort, position, security, and what is called success, have absorbed our attention to such a degree that some of us have forgotten that there is any good save the good of the flesh. Possessions have crowded out aspirations, the applause of the world has become more necessary than the inner satisfactions, and the whole horizon of life is filled with the glaring bulk of an overwhelming prosperity. No wonder a prophet like Edward Everett Hale was moved to pray before his assembled congregation, "Deliver us, O Lord! from our terrible prosperity." He saw what the worship of fleshly good did to our children: how it stripped from them the wings of higher ambition, and shackled their feet, that should be marching on to the conquest of spiritual worlds, with the weight of false successes. "Deliver us, O Lord! from our terrible prosperity," that our children may have burdens to lift, that they may learn to clutch at things afar, and their sight grow strong with gazing after visions. "Deliver us, O Lord! from our terrible prosperity," that simplicity of life may strip from us all sophistication, till we learn to honor the dreamers in our midst, and our prophets have a place in the councils of the nation. * * * * * Not the good of the flesh, but that of the spirit is the good we seek. If it is good for the soul of this nation that we should walk in the difficult path our Fathers trod, harkening only to the inner voice, never pausing to hear the counsels of cold prudence, then assuredly it is good for us to lift up the burdens of welcoming and caring for our brothers from other lands, thus putting into fuller use the instrument of democracy the Fathers invented,--our Republic, founded to promote liberty and justice among men. Or if we despise the omens, refuse to take up the difficult task where our predecessors left off, what awaits us? If we persist in pampering ourselves as favorite children, and bedeck ourselves with prosperity's coat of many colors, how long will it be before the less favored brethren, covetous of our superabundance, will strip us and sell us into the bondage of decadence? Immigration on a large scale into every country as thinly populated as ours must go on, will go on, as long as there are other countries with denser populations and scantier resources for sustaining them. Right through history, the needy peoples have gone in and taken possession of the fat lands of their neighbors. Formerly these invasions were effected by force; nowadays they are largely effected by treaties, laws, international understandings. But always the tide flows from the lands of want to the lands of plenty. Nature is behind this movement; man has no power to check it permanently. We in America may, if we choose, shut ourselves up in the midst of our plenty and gorge till we are suffocated, but that will only postpone the day of a fair division of our country's riches. We shall grow inert from fullness, drunk with the wine of prosperity, and presently some culminating folly, such as every degenerate nation sooner or later commits, will leave us at the mercy of the first comers, and our spoils will be divided among the watchers outside our gates. These things will not happen in a day, nor in a generation, nor in a century, but have we no care for the days that will follow ours? When we talk about providing for to-morrow, let us, in the name of all the wisdom that science has so laboriously amassed, think of that distant to-morrow when the things we now do will have passed into history, to stand for the children of that time either as a glorious example or a fearful warning. If we settle the immigration question selfishly, we shall surely pay the penalty for selfishness. And the rod will smite not our own shoulders, but the shoulders of countless innocents of our begetting. The law that the hungry shall feed where there is plenty is not the only one which we defy when we turn away the strangers now at our gates. A narrow immigration policy is in opposition also to a primary law of evolution, the law of continuous development along a given line until a climax is reached. Now the evolution of society has been from small isolated groups to larger intermingling ones. In the beginning of political history, every city was a world unto itself, and labored at its own salvation behind fortified walls that shut out the rest of the world. Presently cities were merged into states, states united into confederacies, confederacies into empires. Peoples at first unknown to each other even by name came to pass in and out of each other's territories, merging their interests, their cultures, their bloods. This process of the removal of barriers, begun through conquests, commerce, and travels, is approaching completion in our own era, through the influences of science and invention. "The world is my country" is a word in many a mouth to-day. East and West hold hands; North and South salute each other. There remain a few ancient prejudices to overcome, a few stumps of ignorance to uproot, before all the nations of the earth shall forget their boundaries, and move about the surface of the earth as congenial guests at a public feast. This, indeed, will be the proof of the ancient saying, "He hath made of one blood all nations of men, for to dwell on all the face of the earth." It is coming, inevitably it is coming. We in America are in a position to hasten the climax of the drama of unification. If, instead of hastening it, we seek to delay it, we step aside from the path of the world's progress. America is not God's last stand. That which is to be is conditioned by what has been. Sometime, somewhere, the Plan that the centuries have brooded over will come perfect out of the shell of Time. I am not afraid that humanity will stop short of its inevitable climax, but I am so jealous for the glory of my country that I long to have America retain the leadership which she has held so nobly for a while. I desire that the mantle of the New England prophets should rest on the shoulders of our own children. Of the many convincing arguments that have been advanced in support of the proposition that immigration is good for us, I shall quote only one, in the words of Grace Abbott, of Chicago, when she sums up a study of eleven immigrant nationalities from southern and eastern Europe. "It was the faith in America and not the occasional criticism that touched me most," she writes, referring to the sayings of the foreigners. "I felt then, as I have felt many times when I have met some newcomer who has expected a literal fulfillment of our democratic ideals, that fortunately for America we had great numbers who were coming to remind us of the 'promise of American life,' and insisting that it should not be forgotten." All the rest of the arguments--utilitarian, humanitarian, and scientific--I willingly omit. For I do not want the immigrant to be admitted because he can help us dig ditches and build cities and fight our battles in general. I beg that we make this a question of principle first, and of utility afterwards. Whether immigration is good for us or not, I am very certain that the decadence of idealism is bad for us, and that is what I fear more than the restrictionist fears the immigrant. It should strengthen us in our resolution to abide by the Law of the Fathers--the law of each for all, and all for each--if we find that the movement of democracy to which they imparted such a powerful impulse appears to be in the direct path of social evolution. But even if such omens were lacking I should still pray for strength to cling to the ideal which is defined in the opening words of the Declaration of Independence. For I perceive that here, in the trial at Ellis Island, we are put to the test of the fiery furnace. It was easy to preach democracy when the privileges we claimed for ourselves no alien hordes sought to divide with us. But to-day, when humanity asks us to render up again that which we took from the English in the name of humanity, do we dare to stand by our confession of faith? Those who honor the golden images of self-interest and materialism threaten us with fearful penalties in case we persist in our championship of universal brotherhood. They are binding our hands and feet with the bonds of selfish human fears. The fiery glow of the furnace is on our faces--and the world holds its breath. * * * * * Once the thunders of God were heard on Mount Sinai, and a certain people heard, and the blackness of idolatry was lifted from the world. Again the voice of God, the Father, shook the air above Bunker Hill, and the grip of despotism was loosened from the throat of panting humanity. Let the children of the later saviors of the world be as faithful as the children of the earlier saviors, and perhaps God will speak again in times to come. THE END The Riverside Press CAMBRIDGE . MASSACHUSETTS U . S . A [ Transcriber's Note: The following is a list of corrections made to the original. The first line is the original line, the second the corrected one. Introduction vii Introduction ix III. The Fiery Furnace 101 III. The Fiery Furnace 99 (6) See Article by Achad Ha'am, _American Hebrew_, June, 21, 1907. (7) See Article by Achad Ha'am, _American Hebrew_, June 21, 1907. flesh which fastened on us during the centuries of our agonzied struggle flesh which fastened on us during the centuries of our agonized struggle ] 
36822	----	produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive.) Japan and The California Problem By T. Iyenaga, Ph.D. Professorial Lecturer in the Department of Political Science, University of Chicago and Kenoske Sato, M.A. Formerly Fellow in the University of Chicago G. P. Putnam's Sons New York and London The Knickerbocker Press 1921 Copyright, 1921 by G. P. Putnam's Sons _Printed in the United States of America_ CONTENTS PAGE CHAPTER I INTRODUCTORY 3 CHAPTER II JAPANESE TRAITS AND PHILOSOPHY OF LIFE 9 Emotional Nature--Æsthetic Temperament--Group Consciousness-- Adaptable Disposition--Spirit of Proletarian Chivalry-- Philosophy of Life--New Turn in Thought. CHAPTER III JAPAN'S ASIATIC POLICY 33 Korean Situation--Policy of Self-Preservation--Shantung Settlement--Coöperation with China--Understanding with America--Japan's Proper Sphere of Activity. CHAPTER IV BACKGROUND OF JAPANESE EMIGRATION 50 Causes of Emigration and Immigration--Japan's Land Area-- Agriculture--Population--Industry--Social Factors. CHAPTER V ATTEMPTS AT EMIGRATION: RESULTS 64 Australia--Canada--South America--The United States--Results. CHAPTER VI CAUSES OF ANTI-JAPANESE AGITATION 75 Modern Civilization--Various Attitudes Towards Japanese-- Psychological Nature of the Cause--Chinese Agitation Inherited--Local Polities--"Yellow Peril"--Propaganda-- Racial Difference--Japanese Nationality--Modern Nationalism-- Congestion in California--Fear and Envy Incited by Japanese Progress--Summary. CHAPTER VII FACTS ABOUT THE JAPANESE IN CALIFORNIA--POPULATION AND BIRTH RATE 90 Number of Japanese in California--Immigration--"Gentlemen's Agreement"--Smuggling--Birth Rate--What we May Expect in the Future. CHAPTER VIII FACTS ABOUT THE JAPANESE IN CALIFORNIA--FARMERS AND ALIEN LAND LAWS 120 History of Japanese Agriculture in California--Causes of Progress--Japanese Farm Labor--Japanese Farmers--Anti-Alien Land Laws--Land Laws of Japan--Effect of the Initiative Bill. CHAPTER IX ASSIMILATION 148 Nationalism and Assimilation--Meaning of "Assimilation"-- Biological Assimilation--Is Assimilation without Intermarriage Possible?--Cultural Assimilation--Assimilability of Japanese Immigrants--Native-Born Japanese. CHAPTER X GENERAL CONCLUSION 178 APPENDIXES APPENDIX A 198 Charts on Comparative Height and Weight of American, Japanese-American, and Japanese Children. APPENDIX B 201 Extracts from the Treaty of Commerce and Navigation and Protocol between Japan and the United States of America, of February 21, 1911. APPENDIX C 204 California's Alien Land Law, Approved May 19, 1913. APPENDIX D 207 Alien Land Law, Adopted November 2, 1920. APPENDIX E 216 Crops Raised by Japanese and their Acreage. APPENDIX F 217 Japanese Immigration to the United States. APPENDIX G 218 Japanese Admitted into Continental United States; Arrivals and Departures. APPENDIX H 218 Immigrants and Non-Immigrants. APPENDIX I 219 Distribution of Japanese and Chinese Population in the United States. APPENDIX J 220 Distribution of Japanese in the United States, According to the Consular Division, as Reported by Foreign Department, Japan. APPENDIX K 221 An Abstract of Expatriation Law of Japan. APPENDIX L 223 A Minute of Hearing at Seattle, Washington, before the House Sub-Committee on Immigration and Naturalization. APPENDIX M 230 Comparative Standing of Intelligence and Behavior of American-born Japanese Children and American Children Discussed by Several Principals of Elementary Schools of Los Angeles, California. LITERATURE ON THE SUBJECT 238 INDEX 247 Japan and the California Problem Japan and The California Problem CHAPTER I INTRODUCTORY When, during the middle years of the last century, thousands of stalwart pioneers moved westward to California in quest of gold, they had no idea whatsoever of the part of destiny they were playing. When, synchronously with that movement, Commodore Perry crossed the Pacific and forced open the doors of Japan with the prime object of securing safe anchorage, water, and provisions for the daring American schooners then busily engaged in trade with China, he never dreamed of the tremendous result which he was thereby bringing about. What those men were doing unconsciously was nothing short of preparing the way for contact and ultimate harmonious progress of two great branches of mankind and civilization which originally sprang from a common root, but which in the course of thousands of years of independent development have come to possess strikingly different characteristics. Culture is aggressive and masculine; it craves conquest and vaunts victory. Once let loose in the open field of the Pacific, the East and West are now involved in a mighty tournament, the outcome of which is yet beyond mortal imagination. The most we can hope for is the speedy realization of Kipling's vision: But there is neither East nor West, Border, nor Breed, nor Birth, When two strong men stand face to face, Though they come from the ends of the earth. The Oriental problems in California, originating as they did in the conflict of local, economic, and political interests, have in recent years come to assume more and more the character of cultural and racial questions. The forms and motives of the movement for the exclusion of the Orientals are vastly diverse, often counteracting and contradictory, but deep in the bottom of the whirl there lies the fundamental question of race and civilization. To say the least, the present unrest in California with reference to the Japanese problem is the intensified, miniature form of the general struggle in which East and West are now being involved. Says Governor Stephens of California in his letter to Secretary of State Colby: California stands as an outpost on the western edge of Occidental civilization. Her people are the sons or the followers of the Argonauts who wended their way westward ... and here, without themselves recognizing it at the time, they took the farthest westward step that the white men can take. From our shores roll the waters of the Pacific. From our coast the mind's eye takes its gaze and sees on the other shores of that great ocean the teeming millions of the Orient, with its institutions running their roots into the most venerable antiquity, its own inherited philosophy and standards of life, its own peculiar races and colors. This being the case, the magnitude of the Japanese problem in California can hardly be exaggerated. Enveloped in a state under the guise of local conflict, the problem is, nevertheless, a gigantic one, involving vital questions of world destiny. Shall the races of Asia and Europe, brought together by the progress of science, be once more strictly separated? Cannot different races, while remaining biologically distinct, form together the strong factors of a unified nation? Should white races organize in defense of themselves against "the rising tide of color" and invoke race war of an unprecedented scale and consequence? Is it not possible to arrive at some principle by which the contact of white and yellow races may be rendered a source of human happiness instead of being a cause for all the evil consequences imaginable? These are some of the questions which are contained in the Asiatic problem in California. Already a considerable quantity of literature has appeared which sounds an extremely pessimistic forecast of the future of Eurasiatic relationship. Some writers erroneously divide mankind into so many races by the color of the skin, as if each were a pure, homogeneous race, and they indulge in the risky speculation of "inevitable" race war between the white race, which hitherto held supremacy, and the yellow race, which is now attaining a position of serious rivalry. Others urge the imperative need of organizing the white nations into a supernational state in order to enable them to weather the threatened attacks from the yellow races. All these arguments are based on the presumption that the Asiatic races wherever they go--in Australia, Canada, or America--create conflict with the Aryan race. The fallacy of such arguments lies in envisaging the large problem of East and West from its partial expression. The anti-Asiatic movement in the new world is certainly a significant problem, but it is only an incidental and local phenomenon of the great process under way of cultural unification. That the California problem is not all that is involved in the relationship of Asia and America can readily be seen by the incessant increase, in spite of it, of close coöperation between them. In science, in art, in religion, in ideals, in industry, and commerce, and, last but not least, in sentiment, the peoples of these continents find themselves ever more closely bound together, learning to appreciate the inestimable value thereby created, and fast widening the scope of their group consciousness so as to embrace all mankind, thus concretely vindicating the futility of the idle speculation of race war based on the mere difference of skin pigmentation. If the error of race-war theory arises from absorption in parts, overlooking their relations with the whole--from magnifying out of proportion the local racial conflict to the extent of eclipsing the value and significance of vastly more important relations--it behooves us to avoid such grievous mistakes and to view the situation in a broader perspective. Indeed, the key to the understanding and the solution of the difficulty of the Pacific Coast is in viewing it in the light of friendship and coöperation between America and Japan. Then, and only then, does it become clear how important it is to approach the problem with prudence and foresight, and to endeavor to solve it in a spirit of fairness and justice. It then becomes plain, in the face of the vastly important tasks involved in wisely conducting the relationship of Orient and Occident, how foolish and cowardly it is to assume a negative attitude of fear and withdrawal from the natural circumstance which time has brought about. Whether one likes it or not, the world is already made one, and any human attempt to divide it into air-tight compartments is hopeless. We are bound to have yet closer contacts among all races and nations. The way to a satisfactory solution of the California problem clearly lies in a closer and more intimate association--in a word, better mutual understanding between Orientals and Occidentals. Let us then honestly seek to comprehend the heart of the difficulty and frankly discuss the question, untrammeled by any bias, prepossessions, or fear; with eyes steadily fixed on the larger aspects of the problem; eager to arrive at some constructive principles of solution satisfactory to all concerned. CHAPTER II JAPANESE TRAITS AND PHILOSOPHY OF LIFE The national traits of different peoples are, like our faces, similar in rough outline but infinitely different in the finer details. The people of Japan are in the larger characteristics not different from any other people; they are part of the aggregate of human beings and they possess all the instincts and desires which are common to humanity. But, as distinguished from other peoples, they display certain individual characteristics which are the product of a unique environment and history. Emotional Nature. Perhaps the most prominent characteristic of the Japanese is their excitable, emotional nature, which among the ignorant is often expressed in turbulent and irascible action, and which among the refined takes the form of a fine sentimentality and temperamental delicacy. This is rather the direct opposite of the American disposition, which is stable, blunt and big, hearty and generous. Such difference is greatly responsible for mutual misunderstandings, such as the Japanese charge that the American is discourteous and inconsiderate, and the American impression that the Japanese is dissimulating, not to say tricky. The emotional temper of the Japanese has played a large rôle in their history and constitutes a conspicuous factor in their national life. If the history of the Anglo-Saxons is primarily a story of competition and struggle for the control of power and the pursuit of material interests, that of the Japanese is a drama of sentimental entanglement largely removed from material issues. Without due regard to the rôle played by emotion, the history of the Japanese people is wholly incomprehensible. What, for instance, incited Hideyoshi to invade Korea in 1592? What made the Japanese accept so readily the teachings of the Jesuit Fathers during the latter half of the sixteenth century? What more recently induced Japan to insist at the Paris Conference on recognition of racial equality by the League of Nations? If the emotionalism of the race has been deeply influential in the historic drama, it has been no less persuasive in the political and social life of the present-day Japan. Compare the Constitutions of America and Japan. If the outstanding features of the American Constitution are the safeguarding of the interests and rights of the individual, the states, and the nation, those of the Japanese Constitution are the expressions of the people's anxiety to recognize and perpetuate their beloved head, the Emperor, as the great, the divine ruler of their ideals. Although the onslaught of materialism has wrought some changes in recent years, there yet remains the ineradicable proof of Japanese emotionalism in the realm of marriage and love, where all earthly considerations are forgotten, if not tabooed, and in the realms of family and of society, where the relations between parents and children, and between friends and neighbors, are conducted with an assured sense of devotion, love, and good will. The same tendency is to be recognized in almost all Japanese institutions, educational, military, and political, while it is particularly true in the realm of æsthetics, including, art, literature, and music--a realm that is ruled by sentiment. In the common daily life of the Japanese their emotionalism expresses itself in almost infinitely diverse ways. Their peculiarly strong sense of pride and dignity, individual, family, and national, a sense for which the Japanese will make any sacrifice, comes from their highly-strung nervous system. Their keen sense of pride gives rise to another marked Japanese peculiarity--an excessive susceptibility to the opinions and feelings of their fellow men. Social ostracism to the Japanese is a punishment which is often more unbearable than the death penalty. The peculiarly high rate of suicides in Japan is explained by statisticians as being largely due to some mistake or sin for which the offender would rather die than be chastised by society. The cold-blooded _hara kiri_ was an institution by which the Samurai could sustain his honor or save his face when involved in disgrace. High-spirited temper, suppressed by ethical teachings, social conventions, and rigorous discipline, results in a singular contrast between external physical expressions and internal feelings. The placid faces, reserved manners, and reticence are but masks of the intense, burning spirit, whose spontaneous expression has been inhibited by centuries of stoic training. It is most unfortunate that this virtue in the Oriental sense has frequently been a cause of misunderstanding, making the Japanese appear dissimulating, and, therefore, untrustworthy. But at heart the Japanese are neither as inscrutable or deceitful as some believe, nor are they as intriguing or profound as these terms would imply. They are kind and sympathetic, easily moved by the attitude of others, quite simple-minded and honest, lacking tenacity, audacity, iron will, or cold deliberation. In these respects, as in many others, the Japanese possess some of the weaker traits of the South European peoples. They have proved heretofore not a great people, but a little people "who are great in little things and little in great things." The simple explanation of Japanese sentimentalism may be found in one of the original race stocks which migrated from southern islands of tropical climate, where emotion rather than will guides the conduct of the people. The topographical and climatic conditions of Japan have also had their influence, and these, with the numerous volcanic eruptions, frequent earthquakes, and recurrent typhoons, have given the people the disposition of restlessness and excitement. Perhaps also the social system of the Middle Ages, which was unduly autocratic and despotic, irritated the lower classes, driving them to turbulent and "peppery" conduct. Æsthetic Temperament. The next characteristic of the Islander is one which is closely related to the preceding trait. It is artistic temperament. Some scholars of archæology attempted to trace this characteristic to the original settlers of the empire, but the resultant opinions are so diverse as to deny scientific validity. Some of them maintain that the Ainu, the earliest known settlers in Japan, a now dwindling race living in the northern island called Hokkaido, were originally a very artistic people, contributing much to the æsthetic temperament of the Japanese. There are other scholars who insist that the Yamato race, and not the Ainu, was the most artistic, while there are still others who uphold the view that it was the vast horde of migrators coming from Korea, Tartary, and China who brought with them the love of beauty. But these are speculations of prehistorical conditions which are largely hidden from us by the veil of mythology. What we can be sure of is that the influence on the people of the exceptionally beautiful natural surroundings reflected itself in their artistic genius. Encouragement of art and literature and of artistic productions generally through the patronage of aristocrats, who enjoyed from the earlier ages leisure and wealth, has also had much to do in making the Japanese artistic. What influence has this æsthetic temperament exerted on the life of the Japanese? In the first place, it has rendered Japanese civilization markedly feminine. This is shown by the fact that the creative efforts of the people were mainly directed to personal and home decoration and to literary and artistic pursuits, instead of to masculine efforts to fight and conquer the forces of nature, from which alone the sciences are born. Particularly noticeable was the almost total absence of science in Japan, in striking contrast to the remarkable wealth of art at the time, some half a century ago, when the country began a critical introspection of itself in comparison with other nations. In the second place, it had the effect of making the people inclined to underestimate the value of material things and to exaggerate the glory of the spiritual aspects of life. This is most clearly seen in the teachings of Bushido,[1] which laid strong emphasis on the baseness of the conduct that has for its motive pecuniary or material interests, and which taught the subordination of the body to the soul as the most essential virtue of the Samurai. The traditional custom of sacrificing the material side of a question for the satisfaction and upholding of the emotional side still survives in present Japan, and constitutes one of the marked characteristics of the Japanese. His strong inclination towards imagination, meditation, and religious belief is too well known a fact to require more than a mention here. It seems true that people gifted æsthetically are more apt to turn hedonistic. While it remains doubtful whether the Japanese are more immoral than other peoples, as is so frequently charged, it is quite true that they take more delight in a leisurely comfort of living, going to picnics, attending theaters, calling upon friends, and holding various ceremonies and feasts. Generally speaking, although not given to excesses, they show no puritanic disposition about drink and are lavish spenders for luxuries. In the tea houses and other places of social amusement they spend money often beyond the reasonable proportion of their income. They are not a thrifty people. Group Consciousness. Next to the artistic disposition must be mentioned their strong group consciousness. It is true that all people have a certain degree of group consciousness which emerges out of the facts of common biological and cultural heritage and experience. But in the case of the Japanese this group spirit is markedly strong, expressing itself in loyalty and patriotism. Most strangely, the spirit of _Yamato_, or the Japanese group spirit, has had its source more than anywhere else in primitive myths. Two ancient books of mythology, _Kojiki_ and _Nihongi_, record the story of the Japanese ancestors who were originally born of the gods of heaven and earth, and who settled in Japan and established there through their brave deeds the majesty of the Empire of Nippon. From these ancestors sprang the people of Japan. This myth is faithfully believed by the Japanese, and the people worship at the shrines where the spirits of their heroic ancestors are supposed still to reside and guard the country. So strong is this belief in myth even to-day that, in spite of the anthropological discovery that the original settlers of the island were of diverse races and possessed no advanced culture, the people still cling to the idea that the Japanese are a pure and glorious race, having sprung from one line of ancestors which was divine and which is now represented by its direct descendant, the Emperor. In addition to mythology, what bound the Japanese so close together was the natural environment and the lack of cosmopolitan associations. Marooned as they were on little islands, the mutual association and intermarriage of people took place freely, and in the course of time established a substantially complete homogeneity of the population. The internal unity was further strengthened by the policy of national seclusion, which gave the common people the idea that Japan was the only universe and that the Japanese were the only people on earth. In modern times, the group spirit or patriotism has been skillfully encouraged and enkindled by utilizing the national experience of the wars with China and Russia, and by a system of education which aimed to impress on the minds of children the glory of their people and history, the absolute duty of being loyal to the Emperor, and the hostile tendency of foreign countries toward their own. What the people gain by narrow patriotism in the maintenance of national integrity they lose in their failure to take a broad view of things. This stubbornly obstructs the Japanese in their efforts to view their country in its proper relation to other countries; it hinders them from being "Romans when in Rome"; it makes the idea of following the example of England, the policy of loose national expansion, wholly unthinkable--Japanese colonies must be exclusively Japanese. The chief cause of the failure of Japanese colonization and emigration must be attributed to the strong consciousness of the Yamato Minzoku (Yamato race). This has made the Japanese noticeably narrow-minded, quite awkward in their relations with different peoples, and more or less given to race prejudice. The reputation of the Japanese as poor mixers is well known. Their strong race prejudice has been exemplified by their attitude toward the Chinese, Koreans, and the outcast class of their fellow countrymen, called _Eta_, which has been nothing short of prejudicial discrimination. In spite of the desperate efforts of the militarists and bureaucrats to conserve narrow patriotism and racial pride, it has been found increasingly difficult to do so, since the facts and thoughts of the West became accessible to the people. When the marvelous scientific achievements of the Occidental peoples, their advanced political and social systems, their profound philosophies of life and of the universe, together with their superior physique and formidable armament, were appreciated, it became all too apparent, even to the most conceited mind, that the culture and racial stock, in which the Japanese had taken so much pride, were sadly inferior, and that years of hard toil would be necessary before they could be the equals of the Occidentals. The pathetic cry of Japan for recognition of racial equality by the League of Nations is a reluctant admission of this fact. The outcome of this disillusionment has been the appearance of three currents of thought with reference to the national policy. One is the ultra Occidentalism which sees nothing good in their own country and people, and hence is extremely merciless and outspoken in denunciation of things Japanese, but which admires even to the point of worship almost everything that is European and American. To this school belong many younger radicals who are more or less socialistically inclined and who would like to see Japan converted into a republic or a Bolshevik communism. Categorically opposed to this thought is another school, which its adherents call "Japanism." This school sees nothing new or worth while in things Occidental, and advocates, after the reasoning of Rousseau, a return to natural Japan. Between these two extremes stand the majority of sane intellectuals, who clearly perceive both the limitations and the strength of Japan, and endeavor to benefit through learning and assimilating the valuable experience of advanced nations. Adaptable Disposition. Another notable feature of the Japanese is their meager endowment of originality and, conversely, their marked aptitude for adaptability. A glance at the outline of Japanese history shows how much the Japanese borrowed from other peoples in almost all phases of civilization and how little they themselves have created. Indeed, there is hardly anything which belongs to Japan that cannot be traced originally to the earnest creative effort of other peoples. The same may be said of modern peoples, who, with the exception of scientific inventions, have mainly derived their culture from the Greeks and Romans. Whatever difference the future may witness, the Japanese thus far have been borrowers and receivers of other races' accomplishments. Perhaps this is the cause of the rapid development of the Japanese, who have succeeded in imitating and assimilating the strong points of nations in succession from the lower to the top of the hierarchy--from Korea, China, India, to Europe. When the process reaches the top of the ladder, let us hope that Nippon will start for the first time real creative work. Spirit of Proletarian Chivalry. The discussion of Japanese traits would be very incomplete if we omitted one outstanding idiosyncrasy that has not yet been mentioned. So peculiar is this trait to the Japanese that there is no adequate word to designate it in other languages. The Japanese express it by such words as _kikotsu_, _otokodate_, and _gikyoshin_. The nearest English equivalents for these terms would be heroism and chivalry. It is a mixed sentiment of rebellion against bully power, sympathy for the helpless, and willingness to sacrifice self for the sake of those who have done kind acts. This admirable sentiment must be strictly distinguished from the spirit of Bushido, because it has arisen among the plebeians in place of Bushido, which was the way of the Samurai or aristocrats, although it may have been, as some scholars claim, the source of inspiration for the growth of proletarian chivalry. Bushido has found an able propounder in Dr. Nitobé. Under the Tokugawa régime the Samurai was the flower and the rest were nothing. The Samurai often abused their privilege and oppressed the common people not a little, disregarding their rights and personality. Then a class of plebeians appeared who called themselves "men of men," and who made it their profession to defy the bullying Samurai and to defend the oppressed people. It was the virtue of this class always to help the weak and crush the strong, and to be ready to lay down their lives at any moment. The story of Sakura Sogoro, who fell a martyr to the cause of oppressed peasants, has become a classic. Thus originating in defiance of despotism, the spirit of proletarian chivalry permeated among the lower classes of people, and to this day it forms the bulwark of the rights and freedom of the common people. Refined and enriched by the embodiment in it of enlightened knowledge and ideals, the sentiment came to be on one side a keen appreciation of kindness and sympathy, and on the other a strong hatred of oppression and injustice. The present proletarian movement in Japan, a movement which is destined presently to become a mighty social force, owes its source and guidance to "the ways of the common people." If Dr. Nitobé is right in predicting that Bushido, "the way of the Samurai," will eventually enjoy the glory of "blessing mankind with the perfume with which it will enrich life," we may reasonably hope that proletarian chivalry will succeed in bringing about general freedom and democracy in Nippon, in defiance of military and imperialistic domination. The understanding of this trait of the common people of Japan goes far to explain what has puzzled those Americans who wonder why the Japanese immigrants in this country are so unsubmissive and rebellious. In his letter to the Legislature of Nevada, the late Senator Newlands stated: "The presence of the Chinese, who are patient and submissive, would not create as many complications as the presence of Japanese, whose strong and virile qualities would constitute additional factors of difficulty." Governor Stephens of California, too, observes in his letter to the Secretary of State: "The Japanese, be it said to their credit, are not a servile or docile stock." Acquired by centuries of opposition to arbitrary power, the trait has become almost instinctive, and expresses itself even under democracy whenever they think they are unjustly treated. In discussing the features of Japanese character thus far, we have taken care to state the known causes which gave rise to each trait. This has been done with a view to preparing ourselves to answer the question; To what extent are these characteristics of the Japanese inherent in the race and to what extent acquired? The answer which the foregoing discussion suggests is that they are both inherent and acquired, biological and social. While racial stock is responsible to an extent, other factors, such as natural environment and social conditions, have helped to develop the characteristics of the Japanese. Perhaps the best criterion by which we can determine the relative strength of heredity and environment in this case is to observe how and in what respects the Japanese, born and reared in other countries, undergo transformation in their mentality and characteristics. We shall touch on this point again later when we discuss the characteristics of the American-born Japanese children. Philosophy of Life. It is but natural that the philosophy of a nation developed from the life and experience of people should be deeply colored by their temperament. After having discussed the essential features of the Japanese disposition, it may be easy to anticipate the character of philosophy which rests on it. We shall now consider the outstanding features of Japanese thought, with a view to interpreting and evaluating the spiritual side of Japan's civilization. True to the characteristics of the Japanese, who lack initiative, the thought of the people also manifests a marked absence of originality. Until, in the early part of the sixth century, Buddhism and Confucianism came into the country, the Japanese seem to have had no system of religion or philosophy save fetichism and mythology. The advent of new doctrines of ethics and religion caused a rapid transformation of the life and ideas of the people, elevating them by one stroke from barbarian obscurity to civilized enlightenment. From this time on a childish admiration of mythological characters and stories began to be superseded by an earnest effort for the perfection of the individual character and the realization of social ideals; and crude superstitions were gradually replaced by the profound teachings of Gautama. Out of the religious zeal were developed admirable art and literature, and from the moral effort were born elaborate ethical codes, social order, and social etiquette. Thus, with raw materials imported, the Japanese worked diligently and carefully to turn out finished products well adapted to their tastes and needs. If the Japanese were people endowed with great originality, they would surely have given evidence of it during nearly three hundred years of national seclusion (1570-1868), when almost all conditions requisite for a creative impulse were present, including peace, prosperity, need, and encouragement. In fact, however, the people were interested and absorbed in stamping out the feeble hold of Christian influence, in assimilating the teachings of Wang Yang Ming, and in recasting the doctrines of Confucius and Buddha. When the flood gates of Japan were thrown open and the tides of Occidental learning swept in, the Japanese were almost overwhelmed, and found themselves too busy in coping with them to think of the original contribution. Lack of ability to start new things is generally compensated by the capacity to borrow new things. In the point of borrowing new ideas and then working these to suit their own tastes, the Japanese are probably second to no nation on earth. Japan first borrowed Confucianism and Buddhism, and within a short time remodeled them in ways peculiar to her, rendering their identity with the original almost unrecognizable. Thus the stoic, pessimistic character of Buddhism was greatly modified, becoming more or less epicurean and optimistic in the hands of the Japanese. The casuistic, practical, individualistic ethics of Confucius were radically changed to general principles of ideal conduct, with the addition of æsthetic elements, and a strong emphasis laid on group loyalty rather than on filial piety. It is to this ability of the Japanese to assimilate new thought and new belief that the unexpected success of early Catholic propaganda was chiefly due. To this capacity of assimilation is also due the origin of Bushido, which is essentially an eclectic of Confucian, Taoist, and Buddhist doctrines. The later-day Shintoism, the so-called cult of ancestor worship, is also a product of the skillful combination of native mythology, Taoism, and Confucianism, with an infusion of certain of the Buddhist doctrines. That the present Japanese civilization is largely a product of assimilation by native genius of American, French, German, and English ideas and institutions is an established fact. It may be that therein lies the hope, as many Japanese thinkers cherish, of making Japan a modern Alexandria, where centuries of human achievements in Asia and Europe may be harmoniously woven together for the realization of a more perfect fabric of civilization. In literature it is asserted that the creative period is uncritical and the critical period is barren. It seems that the critical tendency is the antithesis of creative effort. This applies to the Japanese, who do not create but who are keenly critical. Instinctively bent on absorbing new ideas, they immediately react to any new schools of thought--turning from Eucken to Bergson, again to Russell, now to Einstein--but they soon begin to analyze their doctrines and to find fault and fallacy here and there, and, finally, are ready to depreciate them wholesale. In so doing, of course, they assimilate some of the good points involved in various systems. The chief obstacle which Christianity, as interpreted by healthy-minded missionaries, encounters in Nippon is the sceptical temper of the Japanese intellectuals. A strong appeal to emotionalism and to the sense of beauty rather than to cold reason and unpleasant realities is another common characteristic of Japanese philosophy. The Japanese have always taken pride in expressing great truths in a short verse form called _Uta_, with choice words and exquisite phrases. Until the advent of European learning, poetry and philosophy were never clearly distinguished in Japan. Love of emotionalism naturally leads Japanese thought to humanism rather than to metaphysical speculation. From this it may be thought that English positivism would find great vogue in Japan. In fact, the influence of Adam Smith, Bentham, Mill, Malthus, and others was a considerable factor in shaping modern Japanese thought. But at bottom the Japanese are not utilitarians. They are by temper idealists. The magical power by which German idealism as propounded by Kant, Hegel, and Fichte, and more recently by Lotze and Eucken, controls the Japanese mind is astounding. Nearly all the prominent philosophers of the Meiji era may be classed under some branch of German idealism. The fact that of American thinkers Emerson is more widely read than any other, and that Royce is more popular than James, is no accident. If pragmatism appeals to the Japanese mind, it is not in the logical form of Professor Dewey but rather in the æsthetic presentation of Santayana. New Turn in Thought. Recently, however, or more particularly since the war, the trend of Japanese thought has began to follow a somewhat different path. Industrial revolution, which has been rapidly advancing during the past twenty years, reached its culmination during the war, when various forces accidently combined in bringing about universal recognition of the need for radical social reorganization. Capitalism, which had in the course of time grown to be a gigantic power, proved unable to adapt itself to the changing conditions of the day, and it thus obstructed the onward march of liberalism and democracy. Labor, however, shook off the dust of long humiliation, and began with united front to demand recognition of its rights and of humanity. The struggle naturally forced the attention of the people to the actual condition of society, where the poor majority are sadly left in destitution, where sins and crime are sapping the very vitality of the people, where the rich are abusing their fortunes for deplorable ends. Then came the European downfall of autocracy and the triumph (at least for a short time) of democracy. Liberty, equality, and fraternity became once more the slogan of the time. All these forces united and started a reform movement, upsetting to a certain degree the age-long social system of Nippon. The three years of confusion did a lasting good. The German systems of government, diplomacy, education, military affairs, and philosophy, to which the Japanese had hitherto adhered too blindly, were, one after another, filtrated and purified, thereby removing much of the scum that was in them. It is, of course, impossible for hardened militarists and bureaucrats to get rid of the beliefs in which they were born and brought up and which have become endeared; but the old generations are gradually dying off, carrying with them to the grave the skeleton of systems which are now dead. In open rebellion against these falling autocrats there arose a great number of brilliant young people, bred and trained in the new school of liberty and democracy, with courage and foresight to complete the second Restoration--that of the rights of humanity belonging to the common masses. Already the status of the working classes is greatly improved through a persistent, costly struggle against the misused power of capital; wages have been increased, hours shortened, and, in the near future, we may expect the triumph of industrial democracy, a triumph which will secure for labor the deserved right of industrial copartnership. Already the status of the women has been greatly improved by their emancipation from the traditional and social bondage under which they suffered so long. Political rights have been greatly enlarged, and universal manhood suffrage is now within view. The educational system, too, has just been revised, rendering its spirit a great deal more liberal than ever before. In this way, though the road is yet long and uncertain, true liberalism in Nippon at last stands firmly on its ground, ready to march towards its ordained goal. Such a great social innovation is but a concrete expression of changes that are taking place in the underlying currents of thought. It indicates the breaking up of classic systems of moral and political philosophy, which by dint of age-long prestige had never ceased to exercise a strong influence upon the minds of the people. It discloses the bankruptcy of that German idealism which so precisely fitted in with the _à priori_, passive, spiritual temper of the people but which proved hopeless in the face of vital problems of life and society. It means the exposure of the inadequacy of English utilitarianism, with its over-emphasis on individualism, to help the people effectually to solve many difficulties of society. The changes now taking place in Japanese thought imply the failure of those philosophies which belittle the value of the material, slight the position of mankind in the universe and fail to satisfy man's inherent craving for ceaseless progress. The new direction of Japanese thought is decidedly towards pragmatic humanism at its best, with due emphasis on the importance of the practical and social phases of life, enriched with the spirit of a sentimental delicacy and an æsthetic proclivity singularly characteristic of the people. CHAPTER III JAPAN'S ASIATIC POLICY Colonel Theodore Roosevelt once remarked to one of the authors of this book, with his accustomed emphasis and gesture: "The United States' proper sphere is in this hemisphere; Japan's proper sphere is in Asia." With this text the great statesman was propounding an idea of deep political significance. What is suggested by the text is, of course, not that either of the two nations should resume its traditional policy of isolation or confine its activities within the specified zones, but rather it is to the effect that each should know its bounds and play the part which destiny and geography have assigned to it. In further elucidating the same idea, in his book entitled _Fear God and Take Your Own Part_, Roosevelt says: Japan's whole sea front, and her entire home maritime interest, bear on the Pacific; and of the other great nations of the earth the United States has the greatest proportion of her sea front on, and the greatest proportion of her interest in, the Pacific. But there is not the slightest real or necessary conflict of interests between Japan and the United States in the Pacific. When compared with each other, the interest of Japan is overwhelmingly Asiatic, that of the United States overwhelmingly American. Relatively to each other, one is dominant in Asia, the other in North America. Neither has any desire, nor any excuse for desiring, to acquire territory on the other's continent. President Roosevelt had a unique opportunity of making himself thoroughly conversant with the situation in the Far East without even setting foot on the soil. The Portsmouth Treaty of 1905, the "Gentlemen's Agreement" of 1907, the Root-Takahira Agreement of 1908, negotiated on behalf of America by the able Secretary of State, Elihu Root, and the American recognition of the amalgamation of Korea into the Japanese Empire in 1910, are the outstanding acts of the Roosevelt administration wherein the foregoing idea has been translated into deeds. These acts have proceeded from a thorough appreciation of the history and development of modern Japan. Nor did Colonel Roosevelt cease on his return to private life to follow closely the march of events in Asia. He wrote many articles on Far Eastern affairs which showed his remarkable grasp of the situation. No wonder, then, that the Japanese people reciprocate this generous appreciation by paying the highest respect to, and entertaining a genuine admiration for, the late American statesman. Korean Situation. Recently Japan has been made the target of attack from many quarters with reference to her Asiatic policy. The Shantung settlement, the Korean administration, and Japan's activities in East Siberia have been severely assailed by her critics. Patriotism imposes upon a citizen no obligation to condone any mistakes and wrongs which his country has committed. We deplore the gross diplomatic blunder which Japan made in 1915 in her dealings with China, which, although perfectly justifiable in the main proposals presented,[2] had the appearance of browbeating her to submission by brandishing the sword. We deplore the atrocities perpetrated in the attempt to crush the Korean uprisings. Whatever may have been the advisability of adopting drastic measures to nip the Korean revolt in the bud, a revolt which, if leniently dealt with, might have resulted in far greater sufferings of the people, it can never be proffered as a plea for the committing of inhuman deeds. Fortunately, a change of heart has come to the Mikado's Government, which, by uprooting the militaristic régime, is now resolutely introducing liberal measures and reforms in Korea. The most significant of the measures is the system of local self-government which has just been inaugurated. It creates in the provinces, municipalities, and villages of Chosen (Korea) consultative or advisory Councils whose functions are to deliberate on the finances and other matters of public importance to the respective local bodies. The members are partly elective and partly appointive. Besides these deliberative Councils, there will be established in each municipality, county, and island a School Council to discuss matters relating to education. This is the sure road to complete self-government in Chosen. The same process of evolution, which brought local autonomy and a constitutional régime to Japan proper, which took thirty years to perfect, is now being applied to the newly joined integral part of the Mikado's Empire. The step may be slow, but the goal is sure. Korea's union with Japan was consummated after the bitter experience of two sanguinary wars and the mature deliberation of the best minds of the two peoples. Its revocation is out of the question, unless it is demanded in the future for most cogent reasons. The privilege of taking a hand in the government of the empire, however, should be extended as speedily as possible to its subjects in the peninsula. Policy of Self-Preservation. Many as are the pitfalls into which Japan has fallen in pursuance of her Asiatic policy, it may confidently be asserted that the road she has trodden has, on the whole, been straight. She can face with a clean conscience the verdict of history. When Far Eastern history, from the China-Japan War to the conclusion of the Versailles Treaty, is carefully examined and rightly understood, it will be conceded that the course which Japan has adopted, so far as its general principles are concerned, is the one which any nation of self-respect and right motive would pursue. Fundamentally Japan's Asiatic policy is the policy of self-preservation, the policy of defense, and never of aggression. The Anglo-Japanese Alliance, which was and still remains the cornerstone of Japan's Asiatic policy, was formed for purely defensive purposes, in order to maintain peace in Asia and safeguard mutual interests vested therein of the two Powers. Only the "inexorable march of events" has brought Japan into Korea, Manchuria, and East Siberia. None of the statesmen who took part in the Meiji Restoration could ever have dreamed that their country would in the course of time be driven through sheer force of circumstances to plant its flag on the Asiatic mainland. It was solely in self-defense that Japan took up arms against China and Russia. Once enmeshed in continental politics, however, it became imperative for her to take such measures as would ensure and consolidate the position and gains that were won through enormous sacrifice of blood and treasure. Herein, in short, is the genesis of Japan's present status in Korea and Manchuria. Even at the present time, the heavy arming of Japan is a case of necessity, so long as the Far East remains in such an unstable condition as exists there to-day, and is not free from the menace of the Bolsheviki, who, professing pacifism, are not slow to emulate the military machine of Imperial Russia. Nothing could be more welcome to the Japanese people than to see the curtailment of their naval and military equipments, for the maintenance of which they have to bear the burden of crushing taxes, and to behold the day when they can, without fear of interference by force of arms, win their spurs in the Far East by engaging in the peaceful enterprises of farming, trade, and industry. Precisely as the position of Japan on the Asiatic mainland was the result of arbitrament by the sword, drawn in response to a challenge made by others, and is now upheld by the prestige of arms, her Asiatic policy, although conceived in self-defense, came to assume in the eyes of the outside world a semblance of military aggrandizement. As a consequence, Japan is looked upon as a militaristic nation, bent upon conquest. Suspicion and fear are thereby engendered. This is, to say the least, extremely unfortunate. No stone should be left unturned to smooth the sharp edges cut by this historical retrospect and to obliterate the unpleasant memories of the past. No effort would be too great for Japan to convince the world of her genuine faith that her future lies "not in territorial and military conquest, but on the water in the carrying trade and on land in her commercial and industrial expansion abroad." Her erstwhile failure to dispel the suspicion of the world about her intentions and to take it into her confidence is the root of many ills with which she has been afflicted for the past few years. Shantung Settlement. The storm of criticism we have witnessed in America about the Shantung settlement is a good illustration. Whatever part party politics in the United States may have played in raising the furor, had Japan secured the complete confidence of the American people, all the eloquence expended for the denunciation of the Shantung clause in the Versailles Treaty would surely have fallen on deaf ears. That our judgment is not wrong is sustained by the fact that the Portsmouth Treaty evoked not a word of protest in America. We need not remind our readers that the Treaty concluded through the good offices of President Roosevelt and the settlement made at Versailles are not only based upon the same principles but are exactly identical in many respects, with this most important exception--namely, that the former Treaty transferred to Japan the lease of the Kwantung territory, and she still holds it, while in the latter case she pledges herself to relinquish the leasehold of Kiaochow, thereby restoring the complete sovereignty of China over Shantung, which had been infringed upon by Germany. The Shantung settlement is, consequently, of a far greater advantage to China. What Japan secures in that province is only the same economic rights and privileges which are enjoyed by other Powers in other parts of China. There is, therefore, no justifiable ground for singling out Japan for attack with regard to the international arrangement now in vogue in China. Were the complete reconstruction of China, the re-writing of her history, to be attempted, international justice would demand that the parties interested should all share equal responsibilities and sacrifices. Discrimination against Japan alone is unjust, unfair. The would-be builders of the new heaven and the new earth can ill afford to lay the cornerstone of their edifice on such an unsafe and unlevel ground. Manifestly, the dawn of the millennium is still far away. We have to make the best of the world as it is. To ignore this fact is to make the confusion in the world worse confounded. As a result of this misapprehension of history, the Shantung question still remains in abeyance, because of China's refusal to enter into negotiations with Japan for the restoration of Kiaochow, thus delaying perfect accord between the two Oriental neighbors whom destiny has called to be on the best of terms. The foregoing interpretation of the Shantung question could not in ordinary circumstances have failed to convince the practical American people of the appropriateness of the Versailles settlement, were they not tempted to indulge suspicions of Japan and, hence, ready to be easily misled by false stories, misrepresentations, and slanders concocted by her enemies. Rather unfortunate, one is sometimes tempted to think, has been the heading of the clause in the Versailles Treaty, that has readjusted the German-China Treaty of 1898 and its sequel, and disposed of the rights and privileges Germany had secured thereby in the province of Shantung. Like "the three R's" and other catchwords that have in American history often proved so powerful in misleading the people, so this curt phrase "Shantung clause," which was seized on and skillfully utilized by Japan's critics, has been a cause of mountains of misunderstanding that have crept into the heads of the American people, who, as a rule, take neither time nor pains to examine the subject carefully and thoroughly. As a result, they imagine that the whole province of Shantung was ceded to Japan by the Peace Treaty. Great, indeed, as is this mistake, it would be extremely difficult to correct it, as the mischief has already been done, except by the actual restoration of Kiaochow. Japan cannot, of course, be held responsible for the misinterpretations of other people, but at the same time it would be well for her to spare no effort to convince China of the wisdom of entering into negotiations for the recovery of the leased territory, and, consequently, of her complete sovereignty over the province of Shantung. Until this pledge is redeemed, Japan's credit will suffer, and all her pronouncements on justice and humanity fall flat on the ears of the world. Coöperation with China. While Japan's Asiatic policy was, of course, primarily formulated to further her own interests, it has also been inspired with the laudable ambition of rendering a good record of stewardship over the people who have come within the orbit of its influence. No one who knows the work undertaken in Korea and South Manchuria will grudge a word of praise for the record. It has bestowed untold benefits on the inhabitants. Theodore Roosevelt, in reviewing the enterprise of Japan in Korea, grew enthusiastic over it. The same story is repeated in South Manchuria, where the South Manchurian Railroad Company, acting as a civilizing agent, has wrought marvels. We should like to dwell here with patriotic pride on these reforms and undertakings in some detail, were they not out of place in this book. Commendable as are these civilizing measures adopted by Japan, the fact remains that she has signally failed in one great essential, namely, in winning the good will and friendship of her neighbors. This is the weakest spot in the armor of her Asiatic policy. She is thereby jeopardizing her future. The sentiment of good will is as much a fact, though imponderable, as any other fact, and is a force of immense consequence. How vital this moral asset is to Japan can easily be gauged when we consider that in her neighboring lands are found the indispensable materials for her industrial expansion and the best market for her commerce. Japanese leaders are thoroughly aware of the importance of this moral asset, and have done all that they could to secure it. The failure to win it is partly due to the pettiness of Japanese officialdom, so bitterly complained of by Lafcadio Hearn with his fine poetical irony--the pettiness which tries to bring everything within its prescribed order and does not allow free play to the idiosyncrasies and peculiar characteristics of other peoples. No less responsible are the shortsightedness of Japanese nationals, their too great eagerness to accomplish things within a short time, their haughtiness and overbearing manners, which are decidedly offensive to their neighbors. The fault, however, is not Japan's alone. There are tremendous difficulties which confront her in the way of winning the friendship of her neighbors. The first to reckon with are their weak and unstable qualities, which have so sadly but too clearly been shown by their incapacity to organize a strong nation or to put their house in order. To deal with these neighbors is no easy task. It requires the highest statesmanship. The task is made difficult a hundredfold by the counteracting influences exerted on Japan's neighbors, as they are in the vortex of international rivalry. And not all foreigners are the friends of Japan. There is a considerable number of those who entertain, for one reason or another, a dislike of the Island Empire, and ceaselessly labor to defeat its purpose. They paint, either wittingly or unwittingly, every act of Japan so maliciously that it instills fear and hatred of her among her neighbors. Undiscriminating and unfair attacks of Japan's critics play into the hands of the jingoistic elements in the countries concerned and make the task of the liberals extremely difficult. Whatever the obstacles, however, they must be surmounted, for the future road to tread is clear. Japan's salvation, together with that of her neighbors, lies in their genuine friendship and coöperation. Understanding with America. A brief review of Japan's Asiatic policy was deemed advisable in connection with the discussion of the Japanese-California problem in order to see how Japan proposes to solve the question of human congestion at home and to meet her other urgent needs. The succeeding chapters will show what an unparalleled predicament Japan is facing. Circumscribed within a narrowly limited area, only 16 per cent. of which is fit for cultivation, and crowded with two thirds as many people as the entire population of the United States, with an annual increase at the rate of seven hundred thousand, Japan must perforce find a way whereby her people may live contentedly and develop robustly. Emigration and industrial expansion are manifestly the exits from the dilemma of slow strangulation. Emigration, however, is found a difficult exit, for the Japanese find themselves barred from the most favorably placed lands of the earth. Australia, Canada, and the United States, with their vast lands yet sparsely peopled, and their immense resources left unexploited, while welcoming every race and creed of Europe, shut their doors against the Japanese. Japan has acquiesced without much ado in the restrictive immigration measures adopted by America and by British colonies from the higher consideration of international comity. She saw that there lies at the bottom of these measures the delicate question of race difference, which requires a long period for its proper adjustment. To ignore this fact and force the race issue, however just in principle, would be to court disaster. It might result in the loss of friendship of her best associates in international affairs and of the vital interests involved in that friendship. At the same time, the "Gentlemen's Agreement" which Japan has entered into is evidence of her sincere solicitude to avoid embarrassment of her friends by the influx of an alien race. It is then but just that they reciprocate the courtesy by a sympathetic understanding of Japan's difficulties. Barred in the east and south, it is natural for Japan to strive to find room and employment for the surplus of her population in her neighboring lands--the sparsely peopled Manchuria, Mongolia, and East Siberia. Climate, cheap and efficient native labor, and the unfavorable economic conditions, however, preclude the immigration in large numbers of Japanese laborers into these regions. Only by building up large plants and inaugurating big agricultural enterprises, in coöperation with the natives, could Japan hope to transplant in these lands some portion of her skilled laborers and traders. During the stay of a decade and a half in South Manchuria, limited as it was until the conclusion of the China-Japan Treaties of 1915 to the Kwantung territory and the railway zones, Japan can count therein as colonists only a little over 150,000 of her sons and daughters.[3] The only alternative which remains and which is the most feasible proposition to absorb the energies of her crowded population is found in her commercial and industrial expansion. Here again, however, she is terribly handicapped, as we shall see in the next chapter, by the conspicuous absence and scarcity of raw materials indispensable for industrial development. Fortunately, in the territories of her neighbors--China and East Siberia--there are vast stores of these materials untouched and unused, the unfolding of which will not only meet her wants, but will equally benefit her neighbors. The supreme importance of winning their good will thereby becomes accentuated a thousandfold, for without their willing coöperation nothing can be accomplished. In the participation of the benefits accruing from the development of her neighbors' natural resources Japan need not ask for special privileges. The faithful and effective execution of the "open door" policy is all she requires. Here she stands on common ground with Occidental Powers. She entertains no fear of the outcome of the "open door" policy, for she is in a position to secure every advantage accruing from its operation. Japan's Proper Sphere of Activity. As Colonel Roosevelt pointed out, "Japan's proper sphere is in Asia," and it is but proper that her activities therein develop in intensity and vigor. She is entitled to use every peaceful and legitimate means that is open to her for the extension of her influence in the Far East, for it is there that she can assure herself of her right to live. America and Great Britain, while reserving to themselves the right of opening or closing their own doors to the Japanese, will not be playing a fair and even game if they grudge to recognize this fact. In the strict adherence on the part of Japan to the spirit which gave birth to the "Gentlemen's Agreement," and in the just appreciation on the part of America of Japan's difficulties at home and abroad, lies one of the fundamentals of an equitable solution of the Japanese-California problem. CHAPTER IV BACKGROUND OF JAPANESE EMIGRATION Causes of Emigration and Immigration. Diverse as are the causes that induce emigration and invite immigration, the most fundamental of all, with the exception of a few extraordinary cases, such as that of the Pilgrim Fathers, is economic pressure. There is a close relationship--a mutual give and take--between the immigrants and those who receive them. Generally speaking, human activities have their main-spring in man's desire to improve his conditions of living. The motive which induces the people of one country to go out and settle in another country is the same as the motive which induces another people to invite immigrants from other countries. True, in the former case, the direct reason for the move is generally the overcrowding and poor natural environment at home. In the latter case, it is the lack of man-power and the presence of great unexploited natural resources. But in both cases the real motive is the pursuit of interest, which may be reciprocally promoted by the transaction. It is well to keep this point clearly in mind at the outset, because much of the confusion in discussing the Japanese problem in California arises from forgetting the real cause which brought Japanese immigrants to America and which induced America to invite them. During the early colonial period the American colonies invited refugees from political and religious oppression to come and settle in the new world of freedom and democracy. The remnant of this early spirit still remains embodied in the present immigration laws of the United States. Nevertheless, it is almost a dead letter, with great historic interest but with no practical significance. The real motive for welcoming immigrants has been the acquisition of man-power for the exploitation of vast natural resources and for the development of industry. This is a fact which may be observed in almost all "new worlds," including the South American republics, Canada, and Australia, where the dearth of human energy is the capital reason of slow economic development. With settlers, however, the economic motive is not the only one, though it is predominant. Here the motives are diverse and complicated. With the Japanese there are particular causes which have been driving them to seek opportunities in new worlds. Japan's Land Area. The first and foremost cause is Japan's limited and unresourceful land. The land area of Japan Proper is 147,655 square miles, which is about 8,000 square miles less than that of California. The terrain of Japan is mountainous and volcanic, being traversed by two chains of mountains. One runs down from Saghalien towards the center of Honshu and the other from China via Formosa headed towards the north, both meeting at the middle of Honshu, thereby producing rugged upheavals popularly known as "the Japanese Alps." Being thus rocky and mountainous, the area contains a very small portion of plain land. Hokkaido, the extreme northern island, has seven plains. Honshu, the main island, has between the mountains five small plains, and Kyushu, the large southern island, has one. The total area of plains forms about one fourth of the entire area of Japan. The consequence of this geological formation is that about 16 per cent. of the total area is fit for cultivation, while over 70 per cent. of it is made up of mountains and forests. Agriculture. The Japanese having always been primarily farmers, agriculture still remains the principal occupation of the people. More than half the population is earning a livelihood wholly or partially by agricultural pursuits. The large number of farmers and the small amount of agricultural land allotted to them has given rise to the most intensive cultivation, which probably has no parallel in the world. Nearly five and a half million families, or thirty million people, cultivate fifteen million acres, which means less than three acres per family, and half an acre per individual farmer. It is little wonder that the law of diminishing return has long been operating, rendering the agricultural pursuit less and less remunerative, driving farm hands to industry and other work. The average daily wage of the farm laborer was 56 sen in 1917, while that of the industrial laborer was 1 yen.[4] In recent years the Government undertook a thorough examination of the tillable land in the country and reported as a result that there is yet a possibility of reclaiming about five million acres. By way of experiment, the Government began, with the approval of the 41st Session of the Diet (1918-19), to undertake the work of partial reclamation of seven hundred thousand acres on a nine-year program, with an outlay of some four million yen. It is yet uncertain how the enterprise will turn out; but it is fairly doubtful, in view of the fact that already the land is utilized almost to the limit of cultivation, including narrow back yards and rugged hillsides, as well as sandy beach, whether the program can materially increase the present amount of farm acreage. Parallel with the effort to extend the tillable land, everything has been done to increase the productivity of the soil under cultivation. Thanks to the application of scientific methods in agriculture and the use of fertilizer, the average yield of all crops per acre has increased since 1894 by about 35 per cent. But experts assert that owing to the excessive employment of land the soil now indicates signs of exhaustion, and that accordingly any further increase of productivity cannot be hoped for. On the contrary, the tendency will be toward a gradual decrease of productivity in the future. This is a grave forecast for Japan, and makes that country dependent more and more upon the food supply from abroad. The average yield of staple crops in Japan during the past few years comprises: barley, nine million koku (a koku is approximately five bushels); rye, seven million koku; wheat, five million koku; millet, four million koku, and rice, the most important crop, fifty-two million koku. The crops are far from being sufficient to feed a population of fifty-five millions, and Japan buys annually millions of koku of staple food from abroad. Taking rice, for instance, the average annual consumption is fifty-eight million koku, which exceeds by six million koku the average annual yield of Japan, so that the deficiency is made up by imports from Korea, China, and India. Naturally, the Japanese, being very good farmers and fond of agriculture, and yet having so small a prospect of success at home, look with eager eyes for an opportunity to cultivate land abroad. In the north there are the vast plains of Manchuria; towards the south the fertile soil of Australia; in the east, California and Hawaii appear to offer golden opportunities for industrious farmers. Manchuria, however, turned out to be too cold, and competition there with cheap Chinese labor proved unprofitable. Australia, from the beginning, never welcomed the yellow races. Only Hawaii and California seemed in all respects satisfactory for Japanese emigration. Hence, large numbers of Japanese farmers migrated to these places during the years between 1891 and 1907. Population. Another big factor of Japanese emigration is the overcrowded status of the home population. Strangely, during the three centuries of national isolation, Japan's population remained fairly static, varying only slightly around twenty-six millions. A reasonable explanation of this peculiar phenomenon may be found in the rigid social structure of feudalism, which allowed no swelling of population beyond a certain number. Malthusian factors, such as pestilence and famine, as well as artificial means of control, operated in effectively thwarting the increasing forces of population. When, however, feudalism was at last destroyed and in its place were established new forms of political and social systems which were much more liberal and advanced, the population suddenly began to swell at a tremendous rate. The advent of Occidental enlightenment which went far to improve the economic conditions of the country, and hence the conditions of living among the people, greatly encouraged the rapid multiplication of the number of people. Within the last fifty years the population of Japan has nearly doubled, increasing from thirty millions to fifty-five millions. At the present time the population is increasing at the rate of 650,000 to 700,000 per annum within Japan proper alone. The census taken on October 1, 1920, shows the total population of the Mikado's Empire as totalling 77,005,510, of which that of Japan proper is 55,961,140. The significance of Japan's population cannot be appreciated unless it is considered in connection with her land. The total area of Japan proper we have seen to be 147,655 square miles and the population close to 56,000,000. That is to say, the number of inhabitants per square mile is 380. This is rather a high figure when compared with that of other countries. Germany with her dense population counted, in 1915, 319 per square mile; France had 191, America 31 (1910), India and China, famous for density, had populations enumerated respectively at 158 and 100. Great Britain has rather a dense population (370 per square mile), but she has vast colonies, the population of which is extremely thin. This comparison of the number of people per square mile does not tell the true story until the quality and resources of each square mile are also compared. It has already been made clear that only 16 per cent., or fifteen million acres, of the land of Japan proper is tillable. This gives only one quarter of an acre of agricultural land per capita of population. In Great Britain agricultural land occupies 77 per cent. of the total area; in Italy, 76 per cent.; in France, 70 per cent. and in Germany 65 per cent. Industry. Handicapped as she is in agriculture, and holding on the other hand a vast and ever-increasing population, the best, in fact the only, policy for Japan to follow has been to utilize her vast man-power for the development of industry. Firmly convinced that the future of Japan depends solely on her ability to stand in the world as an industrial nation, the far-sighted statesmen of Japan long ago formulated plans for a steady industrial expansion. These plans were furthered by Government subsidy and have been faithfully carried out step by step by the authorities. The creation of a vast merchant marine; the building of railroads throughout the country, closely knitting all parts of the empire together; the enactment of a carefully drafted protective tariff; the national and municipal monopolization of public utilities and important industries; the establishment of a stable financial system with facilities for financing healthy enterprises; the establishment of technical schools throughout the empire for the training of experts and skilled workmen, and thousands of other remarkable undertakings were accomplished within a very short time by the direct and indirect efforts of the State. The people, too, were not behind in their devotion to the cause of making Japan an industrial power. They toiled most willingly under all kinds of disadvantages and hardships; they shouldered extortionate taxes with smiling faces; they worked in unison, disregarding for the time being petty private interests; they calmly and bravely met all privations and adversities. There is little wonder indeed that Japan established herself within only a few decades as an industrial nation of the first rank. In order to get a general idea of Japan's industrial strides, a few figures will perhaps suffice. Take, for instance, the number of factories. There was not one factory, properly so-called, in the country at the time of the Restoration in 1868; as late as 1885 there were but 496 industrial companies, joint stock or partnership, with a total capital of seven million yen. In the year 1900, however, there were 7000 typically modern factories, and this number rapidly multiplied, subsequently reaching over 25,000, with billions of paid-up capital. The number of factory operatives, too, correspondingly multiplied during that period. Less than 500,000 twenty years ago, they now total 1,500,000. The increase in the output of production and multiplication of various kinds of industries has been particularly phenomenal. In the textile industry the production has increased more than 300 per cent. during the past twenty years, cotton yarn having increased from 30,000,000 kan (one kan is approximately equal to 8.27 pounds avoirdupois) in 1900 to 100,000,000 kan; and in the silk textiles from 2,500,000 kan to 7,500,000 kan. In cloth fabrics, similarly the value turned out in silk weaving increased from $42,000,000 to $100,000,000; in cotton weaving from $30,000,000 to $200,000,000 between the years mentioned. The corresponding increase of output has been realized in almost all established industries, and the same ratio obtains in the many new industries which have sprung up in recent years. Generally speaking, the industry of Japan, which was established on a firm footing by the year 1900, has trebled during the last twenty years. The World War, too, by absorbing for military purposes all the energies of the belligerent Powers in Europe and America, was greatly instrumental in stimulating the industrial growth of Japan, who, after accomplishing her allotted task at the initial stage of the great conflict, was thereafter called upon by her Allies to do her utmost in supplying their urgent needs in ships and industrial products. The development of industry naturally accompanies a similar expansion in commerce. The total amount of foreign trade, which started with the meager sum of $13,000,000 in 1868, jumped to about $250,000,000 in 1900, and in 1920 reached $2,124,000,000. That is, within the past twenty years only, Japan's foreign trade increased roughly ten times, and during the past fifty years 163 times. Yet, with all this remarkable development, the future of Japanese manufactures does not allow unqualified optimism. In several important respects the foundation of Japan's industrialism is seriously hampered. In the first place, the supply of raw material is pitifully meager. With the exception of silk, Japan has in store hardly any raw material worthy of mention. She produces no wool or cotton and has only a limited store of iron. With the exception of coal, in which alone she is fairly independent--at least for the present--Japan depends for these indispensable factors of modern industry mostly on foreign supply. Scarcity of iron, in particular, is a notable weakness of Japan as an industrial nation. The many mistakes Japan made in her labor policy, which were the inevitable outcome of the extreme difficulty she confronted in adjusting the sudden transition from the Feudal régime to the modern industrial stage, must also be counted as a cause in retarding the progress of her industry. Due to exceedingly low wages, long working hours, and lack of adequate protection of labor from exploitation, the man-power of Japan has been greatly lavished and wasted. The paternal social systems inherited from the feudal days long refused to allow the voice of the working classes to be heard and to give them freedom to improve their status. Strikes and labor unions, whatever their motive and character, have always been frowned upon in Japan. It is by no means too much to say that the present development of Japan's industry has been achieved largely by the costly sacrifice of health and the rights of millions of laboring men and women. Considering how costly was the present achievement of industry, there remains some doubt as to how far Japan can carry on its progress in the future. It may seem that the development of industry must have brought a marked improvement in the standard of living of the masses. Such, however, is not the case. It has indeed immensely swelled the pockets of plutocrats, but has not much benefited the rank and file. While the income of the lower classes has not increased to any large extent, the cost of living has gone up by leaps and bounds, aggravating the severity of their struggle. When both farming and manufacturing failed successfully to cope with the ever-increasing population, the only alternative for the Japanese was emigration. Among the students, the talk of another alternative, namely birth-control, is becoming a fad. Social Factors. Besides the economic reasons so far discussed there are social reasons which induce Japanese youths to go abroad. Socially an old country like Japan contains a vast accumulated crust of custom and tradition which refuses to adapt itself to the changing conditions and ideals of the age, and which, therefore, is objectionable to the younger generation who know something of the value of freedom and democracy. Again, the national conscription for military service is becoming increasingly distasteful to the youths of individualistic inclination. It is but natural, in the face of such powerful and numerous fetters which obstruct the free development of lives and personalities, that the young people of Nippon should seek opportunities abroad. All these factors above described would not have constituted the effective motive forces for Japanese emigration had it not been for the assumed external advantages. Attractive narratives in which some of the new countries, more especially America, were represented as places where economic opportunities are really boundless and where an ideal state of freedom and democracy prevails, took an exaggerated form in the imagination. The glaring contrast which the visualized America presents with the actual Japan stimulates the desire of young men to turn to America and try their fortunes. CHAPTER V ATTEMPTS AT EMIGRATION: RESULTS The history of Japanese emigration began only a few decades ago. Immediately after the conclusion of treaties with the Western Powers many Japanese youths were sent abroad to acquire advanced Occidental knowledge. A number of adventurous persons and travelers also knocked at the doors of western countries, but they were not immigrants. Real immigration movement did not start until the facts of other countries became more or less known; until the colossal task of economic and social "revolutions" was well started; until the influence of European imperialism began to take root in the empire. Then came a brief period of "emigration fever" towards the end of the eighties, lasting some twenty years. What follows is a brief history of the various attempts made by Japanese to emigrate into different countries, and the results of the experiment. Australia. Because of the geographical proximity and alluring temptations that the vast uncultivated lands and rich natural resources presented, Australia was the place which early attracted the Japanese. A few hundreds of them began to migrate to several colonies, chiefly to Queensland, New South Wales, and Victoria. But they soon found the conditions exceedingly uncomfortable, owing to the hostile feeling already prevalent there against the Asiatics. The Australian fear of an influx of Asiatic races was early aroused by Chinese immigrants, who, as early as 1848, attained a sufficient number to cause agitation and race riots in several colonies. These colonies subsequently enacted rigorous anti-Asiatic immigration laws restricting the number of immigrants admitted per annum to a few hundred. Since then, filled with the fear, real or imaginary, of a menace of Asiatic inundation from across the equator, where one-half of the planet's population live congested on one-tenth of the total area of the earth, the great task of Australia during the last sixty years has been to keep the country clear of Asiatics. The immigration policy of the Commonwealth of Australia presents perhaps the most clear-cut and radical example of racial discrimination. While, on the one side, she spares neither effort nor money to attract and welcome white settlers, on the other side she leaves no stone unturned to exclude all Asiatic immigrants. With an immensely large area--about 50,000 square miles more extensive than that of the United States--yet almost untouched, and a population less than that of the City of New York, Australia really needs farmers, artisans, and all other classes of people. It is the function of the Commonwealth Department of Home and Territories to advertise in Europe, through lectures, films, exhibitions, and posters, for the purpose of inviting laborers and settlers to Australia. Each State of the Commonwealth has extended assistance in money and privilege to hundreds of thousands of European immigrants. The cause for lamentation by the government is that with all this effort and sacrifice she has not been successful in getting any considerable number of people as settlers. Unsuccessful in attracting white settlers, she has been most successful in repelling the yellow race. She has an immigration law which requires immigrants to pass a dictation test--a test in writing of not less than fifty words of a European language--which is dictated to them by an officer. Examination in a European language for the Asiatics! And what is more, the Europeans are exempt from it. The law provides, furthermore, that Asiatic immigrants may be required to pass a test at any time within two years after they have entered the Commonwealth. Even for the reception of those Asiatics who have been lawfully admitted, some of the States, New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, and Tasmania in particular, do not allow them the right of owning or leasing land, under the pretext that they are not eligible to citizenship. The Commonwealth of Australia does not extend the right of naturalization to Asiatics. No wonder, then, that there is only a handful of Orientals in that vast country--35,000 Chinese and some 5000 Japanese. Canada. Until recent years, no record was kept of the number of Japanese immigrants arriving in Canada and consequently the development of the movement cannot be accurately traced. The Canadian census of 1901 shows that 4674 persons born in Japan were in the Dominion at that time; 4415 were in the Province of British Columbia, the rest being scattered in the Provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta. After that year the number of Japanese immigrants coming to Canada gradually increased, and when the United States placed restrictions on the influx of Japanese from Hawaii, and the latter began to seek entrance into Canada, the number grew considerably and soon caused serious concern to the people of Western Canada. It was estimated that in 1907 the Japanese domiciled in Canada had reached eight thousand. Determined opposition soon arose among the western provinces, and protests were sent by the Canadian Government to Hawaii and Tokyo requesting them to control the sudden immigration tide. An agreement was reached in 1908 between Japan and Canada by which the number of passports to be granted in any one year to Japanese emigrating to Canada was limited to four hundred. In this way the question was satisfactorily settled. Canada's treatment of the Asiatic races lawfully admitted has been marked by leniency. She has extended to the Orientals the privilege of naturalization and of securing homesteads. Even in British Columbia, the center of anti-Oriental agitation, the Japanese and Chinese are permitted to conduct business and cultivate land on an equal basis with British subjects in Canada. They may own land, both urban and rural, and in provinces other than British Columbia they are entitled to voting privileges when naturalized; only in that province the Orientals are not allowed to cast ballots, though free to become citizens. It is reported that there are 13,823 Japanese residing in Canada to-day, engaged in fishing and logging and sawmill industries, as well as in agriculture. South America. For some years past a number (about six thousand) of Japanese immigrants has been sent every year to Brazil in compliance with the request of the Republic. They have been mostly engaged on coffee plantations in Sao Paulo. The colonization is still in an experimental stage, and it is a little premature to forecast its future at this time. Altogether about twenty thousand Japanese immigrants have gone to the South American Republic. The United States. Perhaps attracted by the wonderful stories of the discovery of gold in the Sacramento Valley, or possibly cast ashore in boats on the Pacific Coast of America, there seem to have lived in the early sixties in California about a hundred Japanese. Early California papers record the story of quaint-looking Japanese settlers, who were received with great favor. Although accurate records are lacking, it would seem that the number of Japanese did not begin to increase until the late eighties, when a few hundred began to come in every year. The census of 1890 reported the number of Japanese residents as 2039. From that time on the number of immigrants steadily increased, reaching the highest mark in 1907, when about ten thousand of them entered continental America in one year.[5] The direct incentive for Japanese emigration was furnished by a few large emigration companies,[6] which were formed with a view to supplying contract labor to Hawaii and America, where the demand for labor was insatiable. In the former case, the rapid growth of the sugar plantations demanded a large supply of cheap labor. In the latter case, the need for cheap labor was urgent, due to the enactment of the Chinese Exclusion Law in 1882, which soon began to effect a decrease in the number of Chinese laborers, resulting in a dearth of labor on the farms and in railroad work. It was in response to the urgent demand of capitalists and landowners in Hawaii and America for Japanese labor that the emigration companies sprang into existence with the object of facilitating the complex process of immigration. The Japanese coolies so brought in were welcomed and prosperous--at least for a while. Their industry and frugality won them the confidence of their employers. In agriculture, in railroad-building, in mining and fishing, they proved useful hands. They saved money and remitted to their native country a considerable portion of it. Some of them returned home with a fortune and a degree of refinement which a superior environment could bestow upon a laborer. These incidents stimulated the desire of ambitious Japanese to leave for and work in California and Hawaii, and the number of applicants for emigration greatly multiplied. In the meantime, between 1895 and 1900, changes had taken place in the attitude of the people of California toward the Japanese. For various reasons the friendly feeling of the Californians was gradually replaced by a more or less hostile sentiment. It so happened that just about this time California was the stage for a struggle between organized labor and capital. It was with a great deal of effort and sacrifice that the organized labor of California succeeded in excluding the Chinese coolies. But their hard-won victory was shattered to pieces by the advent of Japanese laborers, whom capital, taking advantage of their ignorance of American customs and language, wisely utilized as a powerful weapon to defeat the unions. To the union men it made no difference whether the strike-breakers were Chinese or Japanese; whether strike-breaking was voluntarily or unwittingly performed; they were enemies just the same. The cry for exclusion was a natural consequence. Then there also seems to be some truth in the report[7] made in 1908 by W. L. Mackenzie King, the Deputy Minister of the Government of Canada, which states that it is suspected that much of the anti-Japanese agitation in California was deliberately fermented by the interests of the Planters' Association of Honolulu, who, alarmed by the tendency of Japanese laborers engaged on the sugar plantations to seek work on the Pacific Coast of America, where wages were much better, started a campaign to check the exodus by causing ill feeling toward the Japanese along the Pacific Coast. The report states in part: It is believed ... that the members of the Asiatic Exclusion League in San Francisco were not without contributions from the Association's incidental expense fund, to assist them in an agitation which by excluding Japanese from the mainland would confine that class of labor to the islands, to the greater economic advantage of the members of the Association.[8] For these two chief reasons, and perhaps for many other minor ones, there arose the persistent social movement for Japanese exclusion in California, which first took definite shape in 1900, when a mass-meeting held at San Francisco for the express purpose of more rigidly excluding the Chinese, adopted a resolution urging Congress to take measures for the total exclusion of Japanese other than members of the Diplomatic Staff. Following this came the first of the anti-Japanese messages delivered by the Governor of California, and of the resolutions voted on by the State Legislature calling upon Congress to extend the Chinese Exclusion Law to other Asiatics. The climax of the movement was reached when, immediately after the earthquake, the Board of Education of San Francisco passed the "separate school order," and Japan protested. A series of diplomatic negotiations followed, which finally resulted in the repeal of the school discriminatory order and the conclusion of the "Gentlemen's Agreement," whereby Japan pledged herself to restrict the number of immigrants to the United States. Leaving to a later chapter the detailed discussion of the result which the "Gentlemen's Agreement" has brought about in the status of Japanese immigration, it will suffice to mention here that the agreement has faithfully and loyally been carried out by Japan, and that since then the Japanese problem has in fact ceased to be an immigration issue. Results. Twenty years of emigration attempts, chief of which we reviewed in this chapter, have resulted in failure in every case, and Japan's effort to plant her race in other lands has proved futile. There are many causes for this failure, for which Japan is partially, but not wholly, responsible. But this is a matter which we shall more fully discuss in the next chapter. Excluded and maltreated wherever they went, the Japanese returned home with shattered hopes and wounded feelings, and the mooted question of population once more confronted them with intensified severity. Giving up as entirely hopeless the attempt at settling in places where the white races held supremacy, they now appear to have made up their minds to migrate towards the north, where climatic and economic disadvantages, together with political revolution in Eastern Europe, have freed the land temporarily from the strong white grip, offering the line of least resistance for Japanese. CHAPTER VI CAUSES OF ANTI-JAPANESE AGITATION Modern Civilization. The major cause of the agitation against Japanese in California must be attributed to modern civilization, which, with scientific devices, has conquered time and space and thereby destroyed the high walls of international boundaries. Indeed, had it not been for the steamboat, railroad, telegraph, and other civilized instruments, which bind the nations of the world into a composite whole, and modern industrialism, which civilization brought about and which in turn assisted in unifying the world, Japan for one would have remained a peaceful hermit nation, undisliked or unsuspected by any other. She, of course, has no reason to regret the adoption of European culture, which brought her untold values and happiness; but the fact remains that the present anti-Japanese agitation in California, as well as elsewhere in the world, would never have occurred had she not followed the lead of Occidental nations. Clearly, such a conflict is one of the by-products of the complex international relations brought about by modern science, which, simply because of the lack of experience and regulation due to their short history, remain deplorably defective. This suggests the point already brought out in our introduction, that the principle of the solution of the California problem lies not in an attempt at separating Japan and the United States, which time and destiny brought together, but in a yet closer, more regulated relationship, and in the promotion of a better mutual understanding. Various Attitudes Towards Japanese. With reference to the attitude toward the Japanese, it is possible to discern four classes of critics in California. There are the veteran exclusionists, whose only hope in this world seems to be the realization of the slogan, "All Japs must go!" There is the majority of people which is too preoccupied with its own affairs to investigate the facts and is ready to accept anything said or asserted by the exclusionists. Then there are those, intellectually more critical, who hold independent opinions as to why the Japanese must be excluded. There are also others who stoutly oppose, rationally or irrationally, any attempt at excluding the Japanese. The reasons offered for justifying the exclusion of the Japanese widely vary according to the class of people, and they are often mutually contradictory and conflicting. To those agitators whose motive is purely self-interest, agitation is a profession, and hence it transcends the consideration of justice or international courtesy. They have no scruples about lying or resorting to any means which they think would serve their purpose. The masses, generally speaking, accept what is given to them by the agitators, unthinkingly echo their voices, and so play directly into their hands. Only fair, rational exclusionists study the facts of the case, consider the significance involved therein, and present arguments supporting their conviction. It is in this class of people, and not in professional agitators or whimsical populace, or irrational friends of the Japanese, that the hope of the solution of the problem may be found. From the fact that so much agitation is going on in California, some may think--especially those in Japan--that all Californians are unkind or hostile to the Japanese. This, however, is far from being the case. It is precisely in California that the most earnest, devoted friends of the island people are found--found in great numbers.[9] These sympathizers are wholly unable to share the opinions of the exclusionists, and are simply at a loss to comprehend the reason why so much fuss should be made because of a handful of Japanese who compare favorably with European immigrants. Psychological Nature of the Cause. The fact that right in the midst of the hotbed of the Japanese exclusion movement there are goodly numbers of unqualified friends of the Japanese suggests that the motives of exclusion as well as inclusion are primarily personal; that is, psychological. We are all human and are prone to pass judgment from personal incidents or experience. A single disagreeable experience with a Japanese may drive a level-headed politician to a frenzy of Japanese exclusion, just as the memory of one Japanese friend may make another individual a consistent advocate of a friendly attitude toward all Japanese. Inevitably limited in the scope of experience, we can only generalize from a few particulars. This is why there are such contradictory attitudes to be found among Californians toward the same problem. In generalizing from particular experience we are more apt to arrive at a conclusion which suits our desires and emotions. We reach our conclusions in ways which we think promote our interests and please our feeling. Gain or loss, like or dislike, are two pivots determining our judgment. Those who think they gain from the presence of Japanese and those who like the Japanese, from whatever reason, naturally tend to welcome them; those who feel the contrary, incline to advocate their exclusion. At bottom, therefore, the effort of discrimination arises from a direct or indirect personal experience with Japanese which resulted in some sort of an unfavorable impression. Chinese Agitation Inherited. With this preliminary we shall see what are the more obvious factors which give rise to anti-Japanese sentiment on the Pacific Coast. It is perhaps beyond doubt, as most authorities insist, that the Japanese inherited the ill-feeling that early prevailed against the Chinese, and this for no other reason than that the Japanese are similar to the Chinese in many respects and were placed under the same conditions which caused hostility to the Chinese. We have already discussed how the Japanese coolies were used by capital as weapons to pit against the ascendency of organized labor. Under the general term "Asiatics" the Japanese shared at first, and later inherited, the painful experience of the Chinese. Local Politics. That the Japanese issue was frequently made the football of minor political games in California is an undeniable truth. Wholly apart from the consideration of right and wrong, we cite a case of political activity which illustrates such a situation. Writing in the January (1921) issue of the _North American Review_, Mr. R. W. Ryder observes: All during the late war--while the Japanese fleet was protecting our commerce and other interests by patrolling the Pacific--the most cordial relationship existed between the two peoples. But the Armistice had hardly been signed before agitation against the Japanese again manifested itself; however, not until it had been resuscitated and energized by one of California's United States Senators who was soon to be a candidate for reëlection. This Senator, Mr. Phelan, appeared in California early in 1919, and at once made a visit to the Immigration Station at San Francisco and Los Angeles; whereupon he issued a statement characterizing the Japanese situation as a menace. Next, he addressed the State Legislature on the Japanese question. Prior to his address, although the Legislature had been in session for almost two months, it had done nothing regarding the Japanese. But a few days afterward several anti-Japanese measures were introduced.... The particular susceptibility of the Japanese issue to political agitation in California may be attributed to the safety and advantage with which it may be manipulated. The Japanese in California having practically no vote are safe toys for play. The possibility of magnifying the "menace" of the Asiatic "influx" is immensely tempting in this case, rendering it a most effective smoke screen for the tactics of private interests. The San Francisco _Chronicle_ stated, in its editorial on October 22, 1920, under the heading, "It Would Probably Have Been Settled without Trouble but for Politicians," as follows: Had no attempt been made to drag California's Japanese question into politics we would probably have settled the question satisfactorily and with no fuss.... We think it probable that if the question had not been appropriated by politicians seeking to make capital for themselves it would have been possible to have obtained the coöperation, at least the acquiescence, of the intellectual Japanese leaders in the State, in measures designed to prevent the presence of their countrymen from being or becoming an economic menace to California.... That the question has been brought into politics, where it was not an issue and could not be, that it has been made a cause of irritation between Japan and the United States, and has given Japan a lever to use against us in all matters affecting the Orient, is due to the senior Senator from California, who sought to use the problem to advance his own personal interests. "Yellow Peril." The imaginary fear of an Asiatic influx, cleverly fermented by agitators, is certainly a strong cause of Japanophobia. Somehow we have a historical fear of foreign invasion. This fear is inculcated and whetted among the Californians by a hideous picture of a Japanese Empire, that, like medieval Mongolia, would send a storming army of invasion. One might gather from the reports of the Hearst papers in California that the Pacific Coast of North America was invaded by a Japanese army on an average of once a month. Whether misled by jingo journalism or aroused by the exaggeration of agitators--whatever the cause--it is simply amazing how large a portion of the California people honestly fear the utterly impossible eventuality of a Japanese invasion. Quite recently another form of menace was suggested, which, because of its more plausible nature, has been widely circulated. It is the fear based upon conjecture that the Japanese will soon control the entire agricultural industry of California and that they will ere long overwhelm the white population in that State. This apprehension was by far the most effective force in deciding in the affirmative the initiative bill voted on by the California electorate on November 2, 1920. Propaganda. Propaganda is autocratic power in a democratic state; it is a subtle attempt at controlling social sentiment by influencing the people's mind through its unconscious entrance. Freud teaches us that each of us is in a sense a complex of boundless wishes. We wish vastly more than our environment offers us; hence, most of our wishes have to be suppressed, thwarted. Now, propaganda appeals to this weakest part of man; it promises us an opportunity to satisfy our arrested wishes. "You are badly off, my friends," a propagandist would say to honest laborers, "because the Japs are here to bid your wages down. We are trying to get rid of them for you, and for this we want your help." A similar appeal can be made with immediate good results to almost all classes of people who have some unsatisfied wish--and all men do have such wishes. Racial Difference. It is clearly untenable, however, to argue that the Japanese agitation in California is wholly due to imaginary fear and aversion created in the minds of people by politicians and propagandists. The Japanese themselves are responsible for conditions which often justify some of the accusations, and which prompt exaggeration and misrepresentation. In the first place, the Japanese are a wholly different race, with different customs, manners, sentiment, language, traditions, and--not of least importance--of different physical appearance. Were these differences merely in kind, they would not be very repugnant, but when such differences involve qualitative difference they are particularly repulsive. It is, of course, impossible to pass judgment upon the relative superiority in all respects of things Occidental and Oriental; but western civilization naturally seems incomparably superior to American eyes. Mere difference of race alone gives no unpleasant feeling. When it is also a difference of quality, at least in appearance--and in this all must agree--it arouses our æsthetic repulsion. Even if a man be of different race and as ugly as a Veddah from Ceylon, if he remains a solitary example, or one of a very limited number of his kind, he would not only not arouse our antipathy but would even stimulate our curiosity, and many of us would spend money to see his quaint customs and manners. But when his followers increase in number and establish themselves in our midst, and carry on the struggle for existence until they are in the way of fairly matching ourselves, we begin to be alarmed and unconsciously learn to hate them. This is an exaggerated illustration, but it is precisely the process which has been taking place in California relative to the Japanese. The fact that the Japanese are looked upon rather favorably in the East is because there they are comparatively few in number and are not competitors of the Americans in the struggle for existence. Japanese Nationality. To a certain extent, the anti-Japanese sentiment in California as well as elsewhere is accentuated by the national principles of the Japanese Empire. It has a system of government which for various good reasons is unique. It embraces many points that are considered, from the standpoint of the Anglo-Saxon, undemocratic. The smooth operation of democracy has been hindered by some inherent defect in the national system, by lack of experience in representative government, and by the influence exerted through an unconstitutional power represented by the elder statesmen. To make the situation worse, by means of unscrupulous journalism, the American mind is duly impressed with the assumed bellicose and Prussian character of the Japanese Empire, the hatred of which becomes anti-Japanese sentiment in general. The Japanese Government, again, adheres to a policy of extreme paternalism with regard to her colonists abroad. It seems true that in case of an aggressive and military government it is from necessity the devotee of a pure race and a solidified population, as Mr. Walter Lippman stated.[10] At any rate, Japan does not wish her subjects to be naturalized nor does she encourage them to lose their racial or national consciousness. This is clearly seen in her policy of dual nationality (which we shall have occasion to discuss later), which aims to retain the descendants of the Japanese who are born in America, and hence are citizens thereof, as subjects also of the Mikado. It is likewise observable in the spirit of Japanese education, which is fundamentally nationalistic, as it was referred to in the second chapter. Such a policy of nationalism inevitably incites the suspicion of countries to which Japanese immigrants go, and discourages the people from making an attempt at assimilating the Japanese. This, together with their nationalistic training and education, renders the assimilation of the Japanese exceedingly difficult. Modern Nationalism. What accentuates the difficulty in the situation is that the countries which receive such Japanese immigrants also uphold a policy of nationalism, which runs full tilt against the "influx" of immigrants who do not readily become amalgamated or assimilated. The inflow of such a population, they claim, threatens and endangers the unity of the nation, and therefore it must be stopped or resisted. This is the capital reason which is being ascribed for the discriminatory effort against the Japanese in California by the leaders of the movement. Congestion in California. The Japanese, moreover, manifest a strong tendency to congregate in a locality where they realize a social condition which is a poor hybrid of Japanese and American ways. The tendency to group together is not a phenomenon peculiar to Japanese immigrants alone. Such a tendency is manifested by almost all immigrants in America in different degrees. In the case of the Japanese, however, several additional factors operate to necessitate their huddling together--they are ethnologically different; English is an entirely different language from theirs; their customs are wholly different from those of Americans; their segregation offers advantages and facilities to some Americans who deal with them. The external hostile pressure naturally compresses them into small groups. Whatever the cause, it is true that this habit of collective living among themselves retards the process of assimilation, and, moreover, makes the Japanese problem loom large in the eyes of the white population living in adjoining places. Fear and Envy Incited by Japanese Progress. In addition to this, a point to be noted is the increase in number of Japanese and their rapid economic development within the State of California. The question of immigration becomes inextricably mixed up in the minds of the populace with the problem of the treatment of those who are already admitted. They act and react as causes and effects of the agitation. The apprehension of a Japanese "influx" expresses itself in a hostile attitude toward the Japanese already domiciled there. Conversely, the conflict arising from the presence of Japanese in California naturally prompts opposition against Japanese immigration. Now, it so happened that recently, and especially since the war, the number of Japanese coming to the United States through the California port has decidedly increased. This is due to the increased arrival of travelers, business men, officials, and students, as a consequence of the closer relationship between America and Japan, as we shall see in the next chapter. Nevertheless, it incites the fear of the Californians and induces them to adopt more stringent measures against the Japanese living in that State. On the other hand, the economic status of the Japanese in California has been steadily developing. They are entering in some directions into serious competition with the white race. Thus, in agriculture, their steady expansion through industry and thrift has caused alarm among small white farmers. Added to this is the high birth rate among the Japanese, which, because of their racial and cultural distinction, forms a problem touching the fundamental questions of the American commonwealth. Summary. By the foregoing analysis of the situation, we see that although the problem of the Japanese in California has been made the subject of political and private exploitation, and thereby rendered unnecessarily complicated and acute, it is, nevertheless, a grave problem which contains germs that are bound to develop many evils unless it is properly solved. In the following chapters we shall study the status of the Japanese in California in respect to population and birth rate, their agricultural condition, their living and culture, and their economic attainments, with a view to elucidating just wherein lie the precise causes of the difficulties. CHAPTER VII FACTS ABOUT THE JAPANESE IN CALIFORNIA--POPULATION AND BIRTH RATE A knowledge of the facts regarding the Japanese population in California is important, because it has been a point of sharp dispute between those who insist on exclusion and those who oppose it, the former arguing that the Japanese are increasing at an amazing rate through immigration, smuggling, and birth, threatening to overwhelm the white population in the State, the latter contending that they are not multiplying in a way menacing to the State of California. The fact that such a dispute prevails in the matter of the number of Japanese suggests that it is, at least, one of the crucial points on which the whole problem rests. This is true in the sense that, if the Japanese in California were decreasing in number as the American Indians are, it would be totally useless to waste energy in an attempt to quicken the final extinction. If, on the other hand, they were to multiply in a progressively higher rate so as to overwhelm the white population, it would certainly be serious both for California and for the United States. Number of Japanese in California. This being the case, it is but natural that the enemies of the Japanese should exaggerate the number of Japanese living in California. The leaders of the movement for excluding Japanese estimate their number as no less than one hundred thousand. The report of the State Board of Control of California, prepared for the specific purpose of emphasizing the gravity of the Japanese problem in California, enumerated the population of Japanese in that State at the end of December, 1919, as 87,279. This number turned out to be 13,355 higher than the number reported by the Foreign Office of Japan,[11] which was based on the Consular registrations (including American-born offspring of the Japanese) and the count made by the Japanese Association of America. Most fortunately, the preliminary publication of a part of the United States Census for 1920 removed the uncertainty arising from the discrepancy by stating the exact number of the Japanese in California to be 70,196. The possible cause of the over-estimation by the Board of Control is to be found in its method of computation. Instead of counting the actual number of residents, it simply added the number of net gain from immigration and the excess in birth over death statistics to the returns of the census of 1910, overlooking the fact that in the meantime a great number of Japanese were leaving California for Japan as well as other States of the Union. The present number of Japanese is a minor matter compared with its dynamic tendency. The rate of increase of the Japanese population in California in the past may be easily obtained by comparing the returns of the United States Census. The following table indicates the number and rate of decennial increase: NUMBER OF JAPANESE IN CALIFORNIA ACCORDING TO THE UNITED STATES CENSUS. =========================================== Year.|Number.|Decennial| Percentage of | |Increase.|Decennial Increase. -----|-------|---------|------------------- 1880 | 86| ..... | ....... 1890 | 1,147| 1,061 | 1,234 % 1900 | 10,151| 9,004 | 785 % 1910 | 41,356| 31,205 | 307.3% 1920 | 70,196| 28,840 | 69.7% =========================================== We see from the above table that after half a century of Japanese immigration to the United States, California's net gain amounts to a little over 70,000, the number having increased at an average rate of 14,025 per decade, or 1603 per annum. We also observe that the percentage of decennial increase gradually decreased from 1234 per cent. to 69.7 per cent. It is useful to compare this development of the Japanese population with that of California in general, because it gives an idea of the relative importance of the Japanese increase. This is shown in the following table, in which the decennial rates of increase between them are compared: COMPARISON OF POPULATION INCREASE OF CALIFORNIA AND OF JAPANESE IN CALIFORNIA. ================================================================== Year.| Number. | Decennial | Rate of | Rate of | Percentage of | | Increase. |Decennial|Japanese | Japanese to the | | |Increase.|Decennial|Total Population | | | |Increase.| of California. -----|-----------|-----------|---------|---------|---------------- 1880 | 864,694 | ......... | .... | .... | .0099% 1890 | 1,213,398 | 348,704 | 40.3% | 1234 % | .095 % 1900 | 1,485,053 | 271,655 | 22.3% | 785 % | .68 % 1910 | 2,377,549 | 892,496 | 60.0% | 307.3% | 1.73 % 1920 | 3,426,861 | 1,049,312 | 44.1% | 69.7% | 2.04 % ================================================================== Thus we see that while the percentage of decennial increase of Japanese has been fast decreasing since the census of 1890, descending from 1234 per cent. to 785 per cent. in the next census, and to 307.3 per cent. in 1910, and 69.7 per cent. in 1920, that of California is headed, on the whole, towards an increase. We also notice that the percentage of the Japanese population to the total population of California also shows a tendency to slow growth, increasing only three tenths of one per cent. during the last decade. As a general conclusion, therefore, we may say that the rate of increase of Japanese in California is slowly declining while that of the total population of California is steadily increasing. In the next place, how does the status of the Japanese population in California compare with that in the continental United States? In the following table, we compare the rate of increase in California and the United States, and enumerate the percentage of the number of Japanese in California to the total number of Japanese in the United States: JAPANESE POPULATION IN THE UNITED STATES AND CALIFORNIA. ===================================================================== Census.|Japanese in| Decennial | Rate of | Rate of | Percentage of |Continental|Increase of|Decennial| Decennial | Japanese in |United |Japanese in|Increase.|Increase of| California to |States. |Continental| |Japanese in|entire Japanese | | United | |California.| population of | | States. | | |United States. -------------------|-----------|---------|-----------|--------------- 1880 | 148 | ...... | ....... | ...... | 58.1% 1890 | 2,039 | 1,891 | 1,277.7%| 1234.0% | 56.2% 1900 | 24,326 | 22,287 | 1,093.0%| 785.0% | 41.7% 1910 | 72,157 | 47,831 | 196.6%| 307.3% | 57.3% 1920 | 119,207 | 47,050 | 65.2%| 69.7% | 58.8% ===================================================================== The table indicates that the percentage of Japanese in California to the total number of Japanese in the United States is rather high, justifying the complaint of the Governor of California that during ten years, between 1910 and 1920, "the Japanese population in California _increased_ 25,592, but in all of the other States of the United States it _decreased_ 10,873. Perhaps, in this last-named fact may be found the reason that makes Oriental immigration a live subject of continued consideration in California."[12] The truth of this statement, which in other words means that the cause of anti-Japanese agitation in California is due to congestion in that one State, becomes almost indisputable. It is doubly apparent when we consider the reason why the Chinese no longer constitute the objects of exclusion in California while the Japanese do. The Chinese have shown, ever since the launching of the agitation against them in the early '80's, a wise tendency to disperse into other States, thus avoiding conflict with the Californians. The Japanese, on the other hand, appear to cling tenaciously to California, and the more they are maltreated and slandered the more steadfastly they remain in that State. This is apparently due largely to the recognition of the desirability of California, even with its handicaps, over other States, but it is also due to their helplessness to extricate themselves from the situation in fear of a great financial loss involved in the change. The Report of the State Board of Control of California uses the fact of the decreasing number of Chinese and the increasing number of Japanese in California as evidence of the success of the Chinese Exclusion Act in accomplishing its purpose, and of the failure of the "Gentlemen's Agreement" in restricting Japanese immigration.[13] But, in so doing, it fails to take into consideration the very fact which it points out elsewhere, which we have just quoted; namely, that the number of Japanese has decreased in all of the other States combined while it has increased in California. It also fails to take into account the fact that the number of Chinese, contrary to the Japanese tendency, has shown a marked tendency to grow in eastern and middle western States and to decrease in California. Thus, for example, the number of Chinese in New England, the Middle Atlantic, and Eastern and North Central States increased from 401, 1227, and 390 respectively in 1880 to 3499, 8189, and 3415, respectively, in 1910, while it decreased in the Pacific division from 87,828 to 46,320 in the corresponding period.[14] The foregoing examination establishes the fact that much of the anti-Japanese agitation in California is due to the congestion of Japanese in that one State, as pointed out by the authorities of California, and as confirmed by the extinction of anti-Chinese sentiment in California, consequent upon the exodus of large numbers of Chinese from that State. We have seen that the Japanese population in California increased from 86 in 1880 to 70,196 in 1920 at the annual rate of 1403. We shall now see how each of the three factors--lawful entrance of Japanese into the United States, smuggling, and birth--has contributed to this increase. Immigration. Without question, the coming of the Japanese who are legally permitted to enter the United States has been the largest factor contributing to their increase in California. Of the total Japanese entering the continental United States since its beginning up to the end of 1920, estimated at 180,000,[15] California claims to have received about two thirds,[16] or approximately 125,000. Since California's present Japanese population is 70,196, of which about 25,000[17] are American-born children, it means that out of the total number of Japanese immigrants (125,000) who entered California, only 45,196 survive now in that State, the rest having either migrated to other States, or died out, or returned home. One reason why the Japanese immigration is viewed with so much apprehension is because the facts of the situation are not rightly understood. The number of Japanese coming to the United States has decidedly increased in recent years, especially since the war, the annual number reaching the ten thousand mark. This would certainly be alarming were it not for the correspondingly large number of Japanese who returned every year. The following table shows the percentage of those who returned out of the total arrivals: ======================================= Year.|Arrivals.|Returned.| Percentage | | | of Returned | | |Against Total | | | Arrivals. -----|---------|---------|------------- 1916 | 9,100 | 6,922 | 76% 1917 | 9,159 | 6,581 | 72% 1918 | 11,143 | 7,696 | 69% 1919 | 11,404 | 8,328 | 73% 1920 | 12,868 | 11,662 | 90% ======================================= The growing number of Japanese coming into America and the increasing high rate of their return, as shown in the above table, clearly indicate the fact that the character of the Japanese now entering the United States has decidedly changed. The explanation of the high rate of Japanese entrance is to be sought in the growing business, diplomatic, intellectual, and other relations between America and Japan which the recent war brought about. In the field of business, the number of branch offices of Japanese firms employing Japanese clerks and managers rapidly increased in the large cities of the United States. Students who formerly went to Europe for study now flock to America and enter the large universities of this country. Many of the newly rich whom the unique opportunity of the World War has created, have taken it into their heads to see the post-war changes in America and Europe. But these Japanese visitors are not immigrants; they are not coolies; they do not come to America to work and settle. They will give America no trouble, for they stay in this country only a brief period of time. They are America's guests, as it were, and they should not be treated as immigrants. The rough handling of these visitors, as sometimes happens in the Western States, gives them a bad impression of the American people at large. That most of the Japanese now coming to this country are temporary visitors is shown by the following table which distinguishes non-laborers from laborers: =================================================== Year.| Total.|Laborers.|Non-Laborers.|Percentage of | | | |Non-Laborers | | | |Against All. -----|-------|---------|-------------|------------- 1916 | 9,100| 2,956 | 6,144 | 67.5% 1917 | 9,159| 2,838 | 6,321 | 69 % 1918 | 11,143| 2,604 | 8,539 | 77 % =================================================== "Gentlemen's Agreement." It is useful to remember the above fact when discussing the workings of the so-called "Gentlemen's Agreement." It is often alleged that Japan has not been observing the agreement in good faith. Thus Governor Stephens states: There can be no doubt that it was the intent of our Government by this agreement (the "Gentlemen's Agreement") to prevent the further immigration of Japanese laborers. Unfortunately, however, the hoped-for results have not been attained. Without imputing to the Japanese Government any direct knowledge on the subject, the statistics clearly show a decided increase in Japanese population since the execution of the so-called "Gentlemen's Agreement." Skillful evasions have been resorted to in various manners. Such an accusation appears plausible when it is examined solely in the light of the high number of annual Japanese arrivals. The accusation, however, falls to the ground when we consider two other facts already pointed out; namely, the correspondingly high and ascending rate of departures, and the increasingly high percentage of non-immigrants against immigrants. It is provided in the "Gentlemen's Agreement" that "the Japanese Government shall issue passports to the continental United States only to such of its subjects as are non-laborers, or are laborers who in coming to the continent seek to resume a formerly-acquired domicile, to join a parent, wife, or children residing here, or to assume active control of an already possessed interest in a farming enterprise in this country." Accordingly, the classes of laborers entitled to receive passports have come to be designated "former residents," "parents, wives, or children of residents," and "settled agriculturists." Of these, the last item, the "settled agriculturists," has practically no significance, because under that class only four entered America since the conclusion of the agreement. According to the agreement, then, only two classes of immigrants, former residents and the families of residents, are admitted. This agreement leaves the question of the admittance of non-laborers entirely untouched, permitting the Japanese Government to decide as to who may be classed laborers and who non-laborers. The lack of concrete understanding between Japan and the United States in this respect is a grave defect in the agreement. True, the executive orders issued in connection with the "Gentlemen's Agreement" provide a definition of term "laborer," and state: For practical administrative purposes, the term "laborer, skilled and unskilled," within the meaning of the executive order of February 24, 1913, shall be taken to refer primarily to persons whose work is essentially physical, or, at least, manual, as farm laborers, street laborers, factory hands, contractors' men, stablemen, freight handlers, stevedores, miners, and the like, and to persons whose work is less physical, but still manual, and who may be highly skilled as carpenters, stone masons, tile setters, painters, blacksmiths, mechanics, tailors, printers, and the like; but shall not be taken to refer to persons whose work is neither distinctively manual nor mechanical but rather professional, artistic, mercantile, or clerical--as pharmacists, draftsmen, photographers, designers, salesmen, bookkeepers, stenographers, copyists, and the like.[19] The weakness of the provision, however, is in the difficulty it gives rise to in practical application and in the liability of wrong construction to be placed by the American public in the administration of the "Gentlemen's Agreement." The difficulty lies not at all in the lack of mutual understanding between the American and the Japanese Governments in respect to this question. The _modus operandi_ arrived at between these two Governments has worked satisfactorily. But because of the lack of a specified definition of "non-immigrants" and "immigrants," the distinction to be made between them, and, consequently, the granting of passports, as already stated, is left in a large measure to the discretion of the authorities of the Foreign Office of the Japanese Government. The foregoing defect and the confusion on the part of the American people suggest that the adoption of a specific definition of "immigrants" and "non-immigrants"--in other words, laborers and non-laborers--on the basis of whether a person is coming to America for work and settlement or for a temporary visit, seems quite essential. The Japanese method of distinguishing non-immigrants from immigrants, however, has not been altogether irrational or arbitrary. The established custom is that the Government issues two kinds of passports, one with a lavender color design on the front page with the word "non-immigrant" stamped on it, and the other with a green color design with the word "immigrant" printed on the front page. The former is given to those who desire to go to America for business, educational, or traveling purposes, expecting to return home after a brief stay, and who have strong financial assurance. The latter passports, namely, the immigrant's, are given to those who are entitled to enter America, according to the already specified provisions of the "Gentlemen's Agreement," viz. "former residents," "parents, wives, or children of residents," and "settled agriculturists." The passports, however, are not granted even to these classes unless they file a petition to the Government with a certificate from a Japanese Consulate in America certifying the breadwinner in America to be an honest man, with a clean record, who is capable of comfortably supporting a family. In this way, although without a definite standard of regulation, the Japanese Government faithfully adheres to the provisions of the agreement, even to the point of being charged with an extreme rigidity. The following table given in the Report of the Commissioner-General of Immigration shows in detail how the agreement has been operating: JAPANESE LABORERS ADMITTED TO CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES 1910 TO 1919. _According to Annual Report of Commissioner-General of Immigration._ ========================================================================= | In possession of proper passports. | Fiscal| Entitled to passports under | Year | "Gentlemen's Agreement." | Ending|------------------------------------------------------------------ June. | Former | Parents, | Settled | Not | Without |Total. |Residents.| Wives, |Agriculturists.| Entitled | Proper | | | and | | to |Passports.| | | Children | |Passports.| | | | of | | | | | |Residents.| | | | ------|----------|----------|---------------|----------|----------|------ 1910 | 245 | 373 | 1 | 47 | 39 | 705 1911 | 351 | 268 | .. | 88 | 25 | 732 1912 | 602 | 224 | .. | 60 | 27 | 913 1913 | 1,175 | 178 | .. | 41 | 13 | 1,407 1914 | 1,514 | 119 | .. | 84 | 51 | 1,768 1915 | 1,545 | 585 | 1 | 54 | 29 | 2,214 1916 | 1,695 | 1,199 | 2 | 39 | 78 | 3,013 1917 | 1,647 | 1,115 | .. | 36 | 87 | 2,885 1918 | 1,774 | 507 | .. | 88 | 235 | 2,604 1919 | 1,265 | 422 | .. | 48 | 241 | 1,976 |----------|----------|---------------|----------|----------|------ Total | 11,813 | 4,990 | 4 | 585 | 825 |18,217 ========================================================================= The table indicates that out of the total immigration of 18,217 from 1909 to 1920, 11,813 of this number were people who temporarily visited Japan; 4990 belonged to the families of residents; 4 were "settled agriculturists," and 585 were persons not entitled, for reasons unexplained, to passports. It also shows that 825 were persons without proper passports. The latter category included immigrants bound for Canada, Mexico, and South America who were sidetracked on the way, those who lost their passports, as well as deserting seamen and smugglers. For these cases of illicit endeavors to enter America, the Japanese Government can hardly be held responsible. It would be absurd to put forth the negligible number of 585 cases, that are recorded during the period of ten years as persons who are not entitled to passports, as an evasion of the "Gentlemen's Agreement" on the part of the Tokyo Government. It is one thing to point out the defects of the agreement, but it is an entirely different matter to charge bad faith in its execution. By way of summary, then, it may be stated that ever since the "Gentlemen's Agreement" was put into effect in 1907, the number of immigrants has gradually decreased, those admitted having been mostly former residents, although the total number of Japanese coming to the United States has increased, due to the growing number of tourists and business men. The agreement, as far as its execution is concerned, has been carried out with the utmost scruple, but it is defective in that it does not clearly distinguish immigrants from non-immigrants, and this leads to confounding visitors with immigrants, and hence to the unfounded claim that it is being ignored, evaded. Judging from the sentiment prevailing in California, and in other Western States, against the Japanese, it is desirable that the agreement be so amended as to forbid the advent of all Japanese, except well-defined non-immigrants and former residents temporarily visiting Japan. This will prevent the further increase through immigration of Japanese settlers in California or elsewhere in the United States. This step is deemed advisable, not that a handful of immigrants as such is serious, but that the main question at issue--the treatment of Japanese already in America--becomes thereby liberated from further complication. It will go far to reduce the fear of Californians, and thereby alleviate the difficulty of the main issue. Smuggling. There is no room for doubt that smuggling is responsible for a part of the Japanese population in California. From the nature of the case, it is, however, impossible to estimate the number of Japanese who have entered the United States through this illegal method. During the visit to California last summer, of the House sub-Committee on Immigration and Naturalization for the investigation of Japanese conditions, a rumor was circulated and published in the principal papers of the country to the effect that the Committee had discovered amazing facts as to the systematic smuggling of Japanese into this country through Guaymas. Later, it was made clear that the rumor owed its source to the machinations of certain anti-Japanese agitators who willfully concocted the canard. While it is possible that from the Mexican and Canadian borders a few scores of Japanese may be smuggled in every year, it is absurd to imagine that any wholesale smuggling is being practiced through the connivance of Japanese officials and under the noses of competent officers who patrol the borders and coasts. It may also be remembered that Japan and Canada have an agreement restricting the number of Japanese entering Canada. This renders the northern borders of the United States comparatively free from the danger of smuggling. Except through desertion of seamen, which numbered 315 cases during the past ten years, it is almost impossible to enter secretly by way of the Pacific Coast. The only danger zone is the Mexican border. But here again there are good reasons for believing that smuggling from Mexico cannot be practiced on a large scale. In the first place, the number of Japanese in Mexico amounts only to 1169,[20] and no passports have been granted by the Japanese Government since 1908 to laborers who wish to go to Mexico.[21] In the second place, the American Government would take care to see that its border-patrol is efficient enough to arrest smugglers. The Mikado's Government, too, has been sincere in cooperating with the American authorities to prevent the evasion of the law. Birth Rate. The cardinal question relating to the Japanese population in California is the question of birth rate. Immigration can be restricted, smuggling may be completely prevented, but the fact of the high birth rate is something which cannot be very easily combated without infringing upon traditionally sacred principles and personal freedom. It is quite true that the high birth rate among the Japanese in California would not have been a serious matter if the nationalism of America were as broad as that of Ancient Rome, or if the Japanese were a race which will readily and speedily lose its identity in the great American melting pot. But the fact remains that the United States of America is not merely a mixture of different races and colors; she is a solid, unified, composite country, although she draws race material from all over the world. Nor are the Japanese a race likely to amalgamate completely with Americans in a few generations. Thus the question of Japanese birth rate in America becomes a vital matter, touching the fundamental questions of national and racial unity in the United States. With the importance of the question clearly kept in mind, we shall see what are the facts as to births among the Japanese in California. The following table, prepared from the reports of the California State Board of Health, Bureau of Vital Statistics, shows the number of annual births of Japanese from 1906 to 1919, and its percentage of the total number of births in California: NUMBER OF BIRTHS. ======================================================== Year. |Total Births |Japanese Births| Japanese |in California.|in California. |Births--Percentage | | | of Total. ------|--------------|---------------|------------------ 1906 | ...... | 134 | .... 1907 | ...... | 221 | .... 1908 | ...... | 455 | .... 1909 | ...... | 682 | .... 1910 | 32,138 | 719 | 2.24% 1911 | 34,828 | 995 | 2.86% 1912 | 39,330 | 1,407 | 3.73% 1913 | 43,852 | 2,215 | 5.05% 1914 | 46,012 | 2,874 | 6.25% 1915 | 48,075 | 3,342 | 6.95% 1916 | 50,638 | 3,721 | 7.35% 1917 | 52,230 | 4,108 | 7.87% 1918 | 55,922 | 4,218 | 7.54% 1919 | 56,527 | 4,378 | 7.75% |--------------|---------------| Totals| 459,552 | 29,469 | ======================================================== The table indicates in the first place that the birth rate of California as a whole is steadily growing, and in the second place that the birth rate of the Japanese was very low until 1906 or 1907, but since then it has been rapidly growing. The relative percentage of Japanese births in the total births of California, however, indicates the tendency to diminish, having reached the highest mark in 1917, when it was 7.87 per cent., but decreasing slightly in the last few years. The exceedingly high birth rate of the Japanese in California becomes clearer when considered in terms of the rate of birth per thousand of population. In the year 1919, the number of births in California was 1.79 per thousand population. In Japan, where the birth rate is high, it was 2.53 during the past decade. The birth rate of Japanese in California is more than three times as high as that for the total of California, and more than double that in Japan. There are several reasons for this abnormally high birth rate among the Japanese in California. In the first place, a large portion of these Japanese are in the prime of life, and moreover they are selected groups of vigorous and healthy individuals. Commenting on the age distribution of Japanese in this country, the report of the Bureau of Census states[22]: The most noteworthy fact about the age distribution of the Japanese is their remarkable concentration on the age groups 25 to 44, nearly two-thirds of the Japanese being in this period of life. Only 4.5 per cent. of the Japanese are over 45 years of age, as compared with 44.7 per cent. of the Chinese. The explanation is, doubtless, to be found in the fact that the Japanese represent more recent immigration than the Chinese. The truth of this statement was borne out by the recent investigation conducted by the Japanese Association of San Francisco, which obtained the following result in thirty-six northern counties of California: AGE DISTRIBUTION OF JAPANESE IN MIDDLE AND NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, 1920. ========================================== Age. |Male. |Female.|Total. |Percentage | | | | of Age | | | | Group. --------|------|-------|-------|---------- Under 7 | 4,078| 3,786| 7,864| 18.% 8 to 16| 2,035| 1,663| 3,698| 8.% 17 to 40|17,037| 8,535| 25,572| 59.% Above 40| 5,683| 805| 6,488| 15.% --------|------|-------|-------|---------- Total |28,833| 14,789| 43,622| 100. ========================================== Thus, out of the total number of 43,622 investigated, 25,572 or nearly 59 per cent. are between the ages of seventeen to forty, only 5 per cent. of females being those who passed the age of fertility. Another reason for the high birth rate of the Japanese in California is the high percentage of married people. The rate of married people among the Japanese in California suddenly rose since some ten years ago when a great number (between 400 and 900 per annum) of wives began to come in under the popular name, _picture brides_. The ratio maintained between male and female among the Japanese in California was one to six ten years ago, but at present, it is one to two.[23] Since it is estimated that there are 16,195 Japanese wives in California,[24] it is obvious that there are double that number, or 32,390 married Japanese, in California, which means that 46 per cent. of the total population are married. This is apparently a high rate, since it is 17 per cent. in Japan, 36 per cent. in Great Britain, 37 per cent. in Italy. Although exact data is lacking, judging from the fact that only less than a half of California's white population are of ages above twenty-one,[25] it may not be too far-fetched to estimate the percentage of married people at 25 per cent. of the total population. From the foregoing considerations we can deduce this, that the Japanese are mostly at the prime of life, and that the percentage of married people is exceedingly high. Now, in comparing the birth rates of two groups such as those of the Japanese and of the Californians in general, a mere comparison of rates without taking into consideration the difference in age distribution and marital conditions is not only useless, but it is absolutely misleading. California has only 20 per cent. of people between the ages of eighteen to forty-four,[26] while the Japanese group has 59 per cent.; California has about 25 per cent. or less of married population, including those who have passed the fertile period; while the Japanese community has 46 per cent. of married population, all of whom are in the zenith of productivity. No wonder, then, that the Japanese in California have three times as high a birth rate as that of California as a whole. There is another factor which accounts for the high birth rate of the Japanese. It is the sudden rise of the standard of living. It is an established principle of immigration that when immigrants settle in a new country and attain a much higher standard of living than they were accustomed to at home they tend to multiply very rapidly through high birth rate. Among the European immigrants in this country, a birth rate of fifty per thousand is not rare.[27] In the careful researches made in Rhode Island concerning the fertility of the immigrant population,[28] it was found that their birth rate was invariably high, 72 per cent. of the married women each having upwards of three children, with an average of 4.5 children for each one of them. This fact holds equally good for the Japanese immigrants, most of whom came from the poor quarters of the agricultural communities, where not only economic handicaps but customs and social fetters operate to check their multiplication. When, therefore, they come to California, where food is abundant, work easy, climate salubrious, and personal freedom is incomparably greater, they naturally tend to multiply. What we May Expect in the Future. We have seen, then, that the high birth rate among the Japanese settlers in California is due primarily to the facts that the largest portion of them are in the prime of life; that the percentage of married people is remarkably high, the larger part of them, especially the women, being at the zenith of productivity, and that their standard of living suddenly improves when they settle in California. The question naturally arises as to what will be the future development of Japanese nativity. Remembering that a prediction, however scientific, cannot at best be more than a possibility, we shall venture to forecast the future of the Japanese birth rate in California. In doing so, the proper way would be to examine any possible future change in the causes which constitute the present high birth rate. How, then, about the age distribution of the Japanese? It has been shown that 59 per cent. of them are between the ages of seventeen and forty, and that 15 per cent. of them are above forty. In other words, 74 per cent. of the Japanese are mature, while only 26 per cent. are minors. Now, we are all mortals, and grow old as time passes; even the Japanese do not have magical power to retain perennial juvenility, as some agitators seem to think. They grow old, the Japanese in California, as years come and go, passing gradually into the age when childbearing is no longer possible. Therefore, if fresh immigration is checked, which we have already indicated is desirable, it is manifest that a large portion of the present Japanese in California will die out without being reinforced by youths save those who are born in America, and hence are citizens thereof. That this tendency has already set in may be seen from the increase of the death rate among the Japanese in California, as the following table indicates: DEATH RATE OF JAPANESE IN CALIFORNIA. ======================== Year.|Number.|Percentage | | of Death | | per 1000. -----|-------|---------- 1910 | 440 | 10.64% 1911 | 472 | ..... 1912 | 524 | ..... 1913 | 613 | ..... 1914 | 628 | ..... 1915 | 663 | ..... 1916 | 739 | ..... 1917 | 910 | ..... 1918 | 1150 | ..... 1919 | 1360 | 20.00% ======================== The rate of death per one thousand population increased twice during the past ten years. When the age distribution becomes normal by the passing away of the middle-aged group which constitutes the majority at present, rendering the population evenly distributed among the children, middle-aged, and the old, the present high percentage of married people also will disappear, descending to the normal rate ruling in the ordinary communities, which is but half as high as that now prevailing among the Japanese living in California. When the number of young people relatively lessens, and that of married people also decreases, what other result can we expect but the marked fall in numbers born? Improved standards of living as a cause of the high birth rate will also cease to operate as new immigrants will no longer enter; and the American-born generations will gradually take their parents' place. The younger generations of Japanese are as a rule higher in culture and ideals than their parents. Accordingly, it is unthinkable, other things being equal, that they should go on multiplying themselves as their parents did. It is an established principle proved conclusively by the thoroughgoing Congressional researches in Rhode Island,[29] that the birth rate among foreign-born immigrants is exceedingly high, and that it steadily decreases in successive generations, reaching the normal American rate within a few generations. We are, then, on a safe ground in inferring that a similar tendency will also manifest itself among the Japanese in the United States. Our discussions concerning future birth rate then, seem to point decidedly to the conclusion that since the present high percentage of the middle-age group and the married group is bound to diminish as time passes, and since the fertility of the future generations is not likely to be as high as that of their parents, it will decrease markedly by the time the present generation passes away. It is, therefore, only a question of time. The present is a transitional period, a turning-point, in the history of the Japanese in America. It is surely unwise, then, to become unduly excited over the passing phenomenon, and thereby defeat the working of a natural process which promises to bring about a satisfactory solution in the not distant future. CHAPTER VIII FACTS ABOUT THE JAPANESE IN CALIFORNIA--FARMERS AND ALIEN LAND LAWS Agriculture is by far the most important occupation of the Japanese in California. Out of the total Japanese population of 70,196 in California, 38,000 belong to the farming classes including those who are sustained by breadwinners. Besides, there are thousands of laborers who seek farm work during the summer. Perhaps owing to the facts that most of the Japanese immigrants are drawn from the agricultural communities in Japan, that the climate and soil of California are especially suited to the kinds of farming in which the Japanese are skilled--such as garden-trucking and berry-farming--the Japanese in California have been markedly successful in agricultural pursuits. History of Japanese Agriculture in California. The history of Japanese farming in California dates back to the time when the Chinese Exclusion Law was enacted in 1882. A number of Japanese laborers were employed in the Vaca Valley and another group in the vineyards of Fresno as early as 1887-1888. Since that time the number of Japanese farm laborers has steadily increased. They have distributed themselves widely in the lower Sacramento, San Joaquin River, Marysville, and Suisun districts. Later many Japanese settled in Southern California. During that early period the Japanese farm laborers were warmly welcomed by the California farmers because of the dearth of farm hands and because of their skill and industry in farming. But the Japanese were not satisfied at remaining mere farm hands. They saved their wages and attempted to start independent farming. In many cases independent farming was not as profitable as wage labor, since the former involved risk and responsibility. Yet because of the incalculable pleasure which independence brings, because of the ease with which leases could be obtained, and because of the social prestige attached to the "independent farmers," the Japanese developed a distinct tendency to lease or buy land and to take up farming by themselves rather than be employed as wage earners. This tendency, however, did not manifest itself distinctly until some time later, when they had saved sufficient sums of money to launch such undertakings. Thus the census of 1900 records only 29 farms, covering 4698 acres, which were operated by Japanese. The number steadily increased during the following ten years. According to the census of 1910 they operated 1816 farms, covering 99,254 acres of land. At present it is reported that they own some 600 farms covering 74,769 acres and operate some 6000 farms embracing 383,287 acres under lease or crop contract, bringing the total farm acreage under Japanese control to 458,056 acres. The brilliant success of the Japanese farmers in California may be better appreciated when the amount and value of the crops turned out by them every year are considered. Governor Stephens, in his letter to Secretary of State Colby, quotes in part the report prepared by the State Board of Control, and states: ... At the present time, between 80 and 90 per cent. of most of our vegetable and berry products are those of the Japanese farms. Approximately, 80 per cent. of the tomato crop of the State is produced by Japanese; from 80 to 100 per cent. of the spinach crop; a greater part of our potato and asparagus crops, and so on. In another part of the letter he remarks: ... In productive values--that is to say, in the market value of crops produced by them--our figures show that as against $6,235,856 worth of produce marketed in 1909, the increase has been to $67,145,730, approximately ten-fold. Causes of Progress. There are many causes for this rapid development. In the first place, the Japanese as a rule are ambitious. They do not rest satisfied, like the Chinese and the Mexicans, with being employed as farm laborers. They save money or form partnerships with well-to-do friends, and start independent farms. This is made easy by a form of tenancy which prevails in California. That is, the landowner advances the required sum of money to a tenant, offers him tools and shelter, and in return receives rent from the sale of the crops. This is a modified form of crop contract, but it is decidedly more secure for the owner, because he assumes less risk. It is more profitable to the tenant because he gets a due reward for his effort. On account of the ease with which this kind of lease is obtained, ambitious Japanese farm laborers soon become tenants, and when successful--and usually they are--they buy a piece of land with the intention of making a permanent settlement. That Japanese farmers are usually favorably regarded by landowners is an important factor in their success. Although there have been cases in which the Japanese provoked the hatred of landowners by not observing promises or failing to carry out contracts, on the whole, the Japanese are preferred to other races, because they are more peaceful, take better care of the land, and pay higher rent.[30] The reason why Japanese take better care of the land and can pay higher rent than ordinary farmers may be found in their previous agricultural training in Japan. There the farming is conducted on the basis of intensive cultivation. Moreover, in order to prevent exhaustion of land the farmers are accustomed to taking minute care that the soil's fertility be retained. This habit of intensive cultivation and the minute care of the soil, which are really inseparable, are maintained by the Japanese farmers when they undertake agriculture in California. Furthermore, it so happens that the climate and soil of California are especially suited for intensive cultivation. Such products as vegetables and berries, which grow so abundantly in California, are precisely the kinds of crops which demand careful and intensive cultivation. The notable success of Japanese farmers in this form of production, therefore, is not an accident. By the introduction of methods of intensive cultivation they have been able to take good care of the land and to pay high rent to the landowners. That the Japanese are good farmers is attested by the fact that they actually produce more per acre than the other farmers. The Japanese-American Year Book of 1918 has the following comment to make regarding the efficiency of Japanese farmers in California: In the year 1917 there were 12,000,000 acres of irrigated farm lands in California. From this, California produced crops valued at $500,000,000; that is to say, the value of the product turned out per acre was about $42. Japanese cultivated 390,000 acres and produced $55,000,000 worth of farm products, or $141 per acre. The value of the Japanese farms turned out per acre was, therefore, three and a half times as much as that obtained by California farms in general. Perhaps the patience and industry with which the Japanese have developed some of the "raw" land of California into productive farm land accounts for their prosperity in such localities as Florin, New Castle, the Sacramento district, and the Imperial Valley. Japanese Farm Labor. We may now inquire to what extent the Japanese farmers constitute a menace to the California farmers and to the State of California. In considering this question, it is useful to distinguish between the Japanese farm laborers and the regular farmers. There are in California at present about fifteen thousand Japanese who are employed in various kinds of agriculture. The number varies according to season. In the summer months it increases considerably, while in the winter it greatly decreases. When the seasonal work is over in a locality, the men seek other jobs in other localities. There is work for them throughout the year, since the climatic conditions of California are such that some crop is raised in some part of the State in almost all months. The agency which adjusts the demand and supply of farm labor is known as a "Japanese Employment Office." There are over three hundred, at least, of such agencies facilitating the supply of labor. The chief advantage which the employment of Japanese farm laborers offers to employers is, in the first place, their highly transitory character. Most of the Japanese laborers, being men of middle age with no settled homes, go to any place where wages are high. The convenience which the farmers receive from this rapid supply of necessary labor is immense, since the crops handled by the Japanese are perishables demanding immediate harvesting. The transitory facility of Japanese labor is one thing which California farmers cannot easily dispense with and is a thing which the white laborers with families cannot very well substitute. Another convenience derived from the employment of Japanese farm labor is the "boss system." It is a form of contract labor in which a farmer employs workers on his farm as a united body through its representative or boss. This frees the farmer from the care of overseeing the work, of arranging the wages with the workers, and of taking other troubles. Although this system has given rise to many regrettable complications through the occasional failure of the Japanese to observe their contracts, which leads to the general belief that the Japanese are unreliable and dishonest; nevertheless, this "boss system" remains as the one distinct feature of Japanese farm labor which is welcomed by the California farmers. There is one more characteristic of the Japanese farm laborers which is unique and extremely important. They are by habit and constitution adapted to the garden farming which prevails in California. Fruit and berry picking, trimming and hoeing, transplanting and nursery work, which require manual dexterity, quick action, and stooping over or squatting, are singularly suited to the Japanese. No other race, save possibly the Chinese, can compete with the Japanese in this sort of field labor. With their training in intensive cultivation, with physical adaptation to the important agricultural industries of California, and with the rapid transitory capacity and advantageous system of contract labor, the Japanese farm laborers constitute an important asset to the agriculture of California. There are, however, serious charges made against this class of Japanese. Perhaps the most pertinent criticism of them is that they do not observe contracts or promises. This question was very ably discussed by Professor Millis in his valuable book, _The Japanese Problem in the United States_, as follows: Much has been heard to the effect that the Japanese are not honest in contractual relations.... So far as it relates to the business relations of the farmers, there has been not a little complaint. Much of it, however, appears to have been due to their inability to understand all the details of a contract they could not read. In recent years more care has been taken to understand all of the conditions of the contract entered into, and the charges of breach of contract have become much fewer. Another source of misunderstanding has been that some of the Japanese, who think more in personal terms and less in terms of contract than the Americans, have sought to secure a change in their leases when they proved to be bad bargains, and have occasionally left their holdings in order to avoid loss. A third fact is that formerly some undesirable Japanese secured leases. These, however, have gradually fallen out of the class of tenants, so that most of those who remain are efficient and desirable farmers.[31] Another charge is that they work for lower wages than the white laborers. This may have been true several years ago, but at present it is claimed that the exact reverse is the case. The answers received by the State Board of Control of California to questionnaires sent out by it (one of which was, "Give wage comparisons, with notes on living conditions,") to the County Horticultural Commissioners and County Farm Advisers in the State, agree on one essential; namely, that Japanese farm hands are receiving wages equal to or higher than those paid the white workers.[32] Mr. Chiba, the managing director of the Japanese Agricultural Association of California, gives the following figures as to wages of Japanese and white farm laborers[33]: _During Harvest._ _After Harvest._ Japanese common laborers, $4 per day with $3.50 per day meals. with meals. White common laborers, $3.50 per day $3 per day with with meals. meals. White teamsters, $4 per day with $3.50 per day meals. with meals. The charge that the living conditions of Japanese are lower is a thing which cannot be determined by off-hand judgment. Reliable statistics are lacking in this line. In fact, the standard, by which we may safely pronounce our judgment on the question, is not easy to establish scientifically. Food, dress, and dwelling may, on the whole, be taken as the criteria for comparison. The food, however, when it happens to be different in kind between two groups of people, unless the prices are compared, cannot be taken as a sure measure for estimating the higher or lower standard of living. The diet of the Japanese farmer is different in kind from that of the American; but it will be rash to conclude that the Japanese standard of living is thereby lower than that of the American. As a rule, the Japanese feed and dress well. There is perhaps no more liberal spender than a Japanese youth. His weakness lies rather in taking too much delight in making display than in taking to heart the qualities of a miser. In dwellings the Japanese have nothing to compare with the comfortable and durable homes of the Americans. The reason for this deficiency is that the Japanese have no assurance for the future; hence they have no incentive to build permanent homes. At any rate, as long as the Japanese are getting higher wages than the white laborers, and are not underbidding the latter, frugal living and money-saving are wholly a matter of individual freedom, which should not give cause for criticism. That there are still other shortcomings in Japanese farm laborers must be conceded. They are irascible, unstable, complaining, unsubmissive. These are inborn tendencies of the Japanese, and it is not easy to correct them in a short time. Concerning the question as to what extent the Orientals displace white labor, the replies given by the County Horticultural Commissioners and the County Farm Advisers of California disclose this interesting fact; namely, that in most counties where Japanese are engaged in farm work they are not displacing white labor, and only in a few counties where fruits are the chief products do they appear to displace white labor to any extent.[34] The truth is that the supply of Japanese farm labor has been diminishing noticeably since the virtual stopping of immigration, while the demand has been on the increase. In 1910, it was reported that 30,000 Japanese were engaged in farm labor in California[35]; in 1918, there were only 15,794 employed.[36] Professor Millis observed The number of Japanese available for employment by white farmers has diminished, and in certain communities to a marked degree. The total number of such laborers has decreased with restriction on immigration, and the increase in number of Japanese farmers.[37] Japanese Farmers. While Japanese farm labor has been diminishing, the responsible farmers have been increasing. As already stated, in 1909 the Japanese controlled 1816 farms, covering 99,254 acres; but in 1919 they cultivated 6000 farms, embracing 458,056 acres. The value of the annual farm products also jumped from $6,235,856 to $67,145,230 during the ten-year period. Thus the increase of cultivation area has been approximately four-fold and that of the crop value ten-fold. For three outstanding reasons the rapid progress of Japanese farmers is envisaged with serious apprehension. The first reason is found in the words of the Governor of California: These Japanese, by very reason of their use of economic standards impossible to our white ideals--that is to say, the employment of their wives and their very children in the arduous toil of the soil--are proving crushing competitors to our white rural populations. This statement, that the Japanese are crushing competitors of California farmers, is in a measure true, but it greatly exaggerates the situation. In California, large farms still predominate, and the average size of a farm is about two hundred acres. The size of the Japanese farm is usually small, the average being about fifty-seven acres. The contrast is due to the difference both in the method of cultivation and in the crops raised by white and Japanese farmers. The crops cultivated exclusively by white farmers are such as corn, fruit, nuts, hay, and grain, which require extensive farming and the employment of machines and elaborate instruments. The Japanese, being accustomed to intensive cultivation, almost monopolize the state production of berries, celery, asparagus, etc., which require much stooping, squatting, and painstaking manual work. Thus there is a clear line of demarkation between white and Japanese farmers based on the difference of training and physical constitution.[38] It must also be remembered that the crops which are exclusively raised by white farmers are those which constitute the more important products of the State, a greater acreage of land being devoted to each of them. Most of the products which are monopolized by the Japanese are newly introduced kinds, total crop values of which are small, a very limited amount of acreage being used for their cultivation. This being the case, it is clearly misleading to represent the Japanese farmers as "crushing competitors" of all other agriculturists in California. Some of those who follow the Japanese methods of intensive cultivation perhaps find themselves injured by the more efficient and successful Japanese farmers, but the number of such farmers is very small. That the Japanese work longer hours than the white farmers is true. That they occasionally work on Sundays is also true. The explanation for this is that, being discouraged from taking part in the communal life and activities, they naturally tend to spend more time in work and to seek recreation in work itself. On many of the Japanese farms it is frequently the custom to have a day off during the week instead of on Sunday for the purpose of going to town to shop or to go visiting. It is true that the women and children are often found working in the fields with the men, but this is due to the fact that in intensive cultivation there is much trivial work which children and women can undertake without undue physical exertion. The children are usually allowed to play in the fields around their parents while the parents work, and this is often represented as compelling children of tender age to engage in "arduous toil." We cannot, of course, ascertain how far the Japanese farmers will in the future push and drive the white farmers out if they are given a free hand; but it is certain that at the present time the sharp competition has not yet commenced on account of the clear division of labor established between the Japanese and white farmers. That the unparalleled success of Japanese farmers should give rise to jealousy and hatred among intolerant American farmers is an inevitable tendency. The second reason given for apprehension is that the Japanese might soon control the entire agricultural land of California unless preventive measures are promptly adopted. This particular fear was by far the most powerful factor in ushering in and passing the land laws prohibiting either lease or ownership of agricultural land by an Oriental. The groundless nature of the premonition becomes apparent when a few figures are introduced. California has 27,931,444 acres of farm land, of which about half has been improved. The Japanese at the end of 1920 owned 74,769 acres and leased 383,287 acres.[39] It may be true that the lands under Japanese control are usually good lands, but they were not so invariably at the time of purchase. As a matter of fact, most of the lands which Japanese have secured were at first either untillable or of the poorest quality, and only by dint of patient toil have they been converted into productive soil. Many thrilling stories are told of the hardship and perseverance of Japanese farmers, who have after failure on failure succeeded in their enterprise. They have indeed reclaimed swamps and rehabilitated many neglected orchards and ranches. Whatever may be the nature of the land owned by Japanese, however, its amount is truly insignificant. It forms only 0.27 per cent. of the agricultural lands of California, or one acre for every 374 acres; while the amount leased is 1.40 per cent. or one acre for every 72.8 acres. This is saying that the Japanese in California, who constitute 2 per cent. of the native population, cultivate under freehold and leasehold 1.67 per cent. of the farm lands of California. When we recollect that more than half of California's agricultural land--16,000,000 acres--is still left uncultivated, it seems almost preposterous that so much vociferation should be raised because of the very limited amount of acreage held by the Japanese. The weightiest reason offered for the necessity of checking Japanese agricultural progress is the one which almost all leaders of the anti-Japanese movement have emphasized; namely, that the Japanese are unassimilable. If they were an assimilable race, and in the course of a few generations were to blend their racial identity with the American blood, California would have no reason to oppose their progress in agriculture. But they are a distinct people who amalgamate with difficulty, if at all. Were they allowed unhindered development in agriculture, in which their success has been most marked, in the opinion of the exclusionists, they would multiply tremendously in number and correspondingly increase in power to the extent of not only overwhelming the white population of California but also of endangering the harmony and unity of American nationality. This is precisely the line of argument which the Governor of California advanced in his letter to Secretary of State Colby. In its conclusion he states: I trust that I have clearly presented the California point of view, and that in any correspondence or negotiations with Japan which may ensue as the result of the accompanying report, or any action which the people of the State of California may take thereon, you will understand that it is based entirely on the principle of race self-preservation and the ethnological impossibility of successfully assimilating this constantly increasing flow of Oriental blood. Accordingly, the question whether or not California is justified in prohibiting the Japanese from the pursuit of agriculture is not to be determined by a consideration of the amount of land they cultivate or the comparative wages they receive, but by the consideration of their assimilability. We shall discuss this pertinent question in the next chapter. Anti-Alien Land Laws. The significance of the land issue in itself being slight, as shown by the foregoing study, a casual discussion will suffice on the issue of the anti-alien land laws. The land law of 1913, which was enacted in spite of strong opposition among certain groups of the people of California and on the part of the Federal Government, provided, in summary: (1) An alien not eligible to citizenship cannot acquire, possess, or transfer real property, unless such is prescribed by the existing treaty between the United States and the country of which he is a subject. This provision takes advantage of the fact that in the Treaty of Commerce and Navigation concluded in 1911 between America and Japan, no specific mention is made concerning the ownership of farm land. The Treaty provides: Article I. The subjects or citizens of each of the high contracting parties shall receive, in the territories of the other, the most constant protection and security for their persons and property, and shall enjoy in this respect the same rights and privileges as are or may be granted to native subjects or citizens, on their submitting themselves to the conditions imposed upon the native subjects and citizens.[40] (2) An alien not eligible to citizenship cannot lease land for agricultural purposes for a term exceeding three years. (3) Any company or corporation of which a majority of the members are aliens who are ineligible to citizenship, or of which a majority of the issued capital stock is owned by such aliens, shall not own agricultural lands or lease for more than three years. (4) Any real property acquired in fee in violation of the provisions of this act shall escheat to, and become the property of, the State of California.[41] This ingenious law was rendered ineffective because the Japanese kept on buying and leasing land in the names of those of their children who are citizens of this country. Moreover, they resorted to the formation of corporations in which a majority of the stock was owned by American citizens. The outcome of the situation was the adoption in November of last year of a new land law more carefully framed. The new law naturally aims to correct the defects which led to the evasion of the former law. It is in substance as follows: (1) All aliens not eligible to citizenship and whose home government has no treaty with the United States providing such right cannot own or lease land; (2) All such aliens cannot become members or acquire shares of stock in any company, association, or corporation owning agricultural land; (3) These aliens cannot become guardians of that portion of the estate of a minor which consists of property which they are inhibited by this law from possession or transfer; (4) Any real property hereafter acquired in fee in violation of the provisions of this act by aliens shall escheat to and become the property of the State of California. The difference between the old and the new laws is that in the new law evasion is made entirely impossible by prohibiting the Japanese from buying or selling land in the names of their children or through the medium of corporations. A novel feature of the new law is that it forbids the three-year lease which was allowed by the old law. The opponents of the newly enacted law claim that it is unwise because, if it proves effective, it will have driven a large number of capable and industrious farmers out of agriculture, thereby causing no little inconvenience to the people in getting an abundant supply of table delicacies. Even the report of the State Board of Control admits that "the annual output of agricultural products of Japanese consists of food products practically indispensable to the State's daily supply," and adds that their sudden removal is not wise.[42] If, on the other hand, the law fails--and that there is abundant possibility of it the sponsors of the law themselves admit--critics insist that it will result in no gain, but "it merely persecutes the aliens against whom it is directed, and sows the seed of distrust in their minds," and further it will occasion an unnecessary ill-feeling between America and Japan. Presenting the reasons for opposing the new land measure, the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce stated: The clause denying the right to lease agricultural lands is ineffective in operation. It may prove irritating to the Japanese people, but it will not prevent them from occupying lands for agricultural purposes under cropping contracts for personal services, which cannot be legally prohibited to any class of aliens. This is what Governor Stephens referred to when he confessed that the law can be evaded by legal subterfuge, which it is not possible for the State to counteract. And California has no lack of lawyers, who are resourceful and ready enough to teach the Japanese the technical way of evading the law. The advocates of the new law, on the other hand, argued that anything is better than nothing to show their disapproval of Japanese domination in agriculture, and pointed to the Japanese law regarding foreign land ownership as an example of foreigners not being allowed to own land. If Japan does not permit the ownership of land by Americans, they argue, by what right do the Japanese demand the privilege in America? This apparently does not hit the point since in case of Japan the prohibition of land-ownership is not discrimination against any single nation or people, whereas the case of California is. We may, however, cursorily touch here upon the status of foreign land ownership in Japan. Land Laws of Japan. Under present regulations there are three ways in which foreigners may hold land in Japan, viz.: (1) By ordinary lease running for any convenient term and renewable at the will of the lessee. The rent of such leased property is liable to a review by the courts, after a certain number of years, on the application of either party; (2) A so-called superficies title may be secured in all parts of Japan, save what is called the colonial areas, running for any number of years. Many such titles now current run for 999 years. These titles give as complete control over the surface of the land as a fee-simple title would do. (3) Foreigners may form joint stock companies and hold land for the purposes indicated by their charters. They are juridical persons, formed under the commercial code of Japan, and are regarded just as truly Japanese legal persons as though composed solely of Japanese. It will thus be seen that in practice foreigners can take possession of land in Japan about as effectually as in fee simple. On April 13, 1910, the Japanese Diet passed a land law which embodied, among others, the following provisions: Article I. Foreigners domiciled or resident in Japan and foreign juridical persons registered therein shall enjoy the right of ownership in land, provided always that in the countries to which they belong such right is extended to Japanese subjects, and Japanese juridical persons.... Article II. Foreigners and foreign juridical persons shall not be capable of enjoying the right of ownership in land in the following districts: First, Hokkaido; second, Formosa; third, Karafuto; fourth, districts necessary for national defense. Article III. In case a foreigner or a foreign juridical person owning land ceases to be capable of enjoying the right of ownership in land, the ownership of such land shall accrue to the fiscus [the Imperial Treasury], unless he disposes of it within a period of one year. Article IV. The date for putting the present law into force shall be determined by Imperial ordinance. This law was severely criticized by both liberals and foreigners on account of its too conservative provisions, and as a consequence it was not promulgated by the Emperor for the time being. In the legislative session of 1919, the Government introduced to the Diet a revised bill embodying more liberal principles and omitting all features in the law of 1910 considered objectionable by foreigners. Unfortunately the Lower House was suddenly dissolved by the deadlock encountered on the issue of universal suffrage before the proposed law was voted on. The Japanese Government, it is reported, has drafted a new law with the intention of introducing it to the session of the Diet now sitting (January, 1921), the notable feature of which is the inclusion of Korea and other territories among the available lands for ownership by foreigners. Effect of the Initiative Bill. Already there are indications that the action of California has had its effect on the neighboring States. Similar legislation is mooted in Texas, Washington, Oregon, and Nebraska. When we consider that in those States the number of Japanese is very small and the amount of land-holding is simply negligible, the only explanation for the proposal is the influence of California, which has been deliberately strengthened by the direct appeal of Governor Stephens to other States for coöperation. In this way California is rather making the local situation worse, for by limiting the scope of discriminatory activity within her doors, she might have found a remedy for relieving the tension found therein through the dispersal of Japanese into other States. It is not the purpose of this book to enter into a detailed examination of the legal aspects and technicalities of the new land law voted on by the California electorate. It may be found in contravention to the American Constitution by depriving certain residents legally admitted into this country of the "equal protection of the law" as guaranteed by that instrument. The Japanese Government may lay before the Federal Government a formal protest against the land law on the theory that it infringes on the Japanese-American Treaty of 1911, by running counter to the spirit of fairness pervading the document in withholding from Japanese aliens the rights and privileges enjoyed by aliens of other nationalities. Or it may be the intention of the Washington and Tokyo Governments to reach a mutual agreement by concluding a new treaty which will specifically state the rights to be conferred upon each other's subjects, so that subterfuge will no longer be possible, and, on the other hand, will completely prevent the entrance of Japanese immigrants. We are not in a position to gauge the intent and nature of the proposed treaty, which is understood to be under way between the Japanese Embassy and the State Department, while it is in the stage of negotiation or discussion. Whatever may be the nature of the _pourparler_, it must be based on the conviction that neither legal contention nor diplomatic dispute will ever settle the vexed question. America is the country of the people, and the Government is powerless unless it is supported by the people. The key to the solution, accordingly, must be found in the attitude of the people and not exclusively in legal or diplomatic arrangements. We are of the opinion, therefore, that the surest way of removing the difficulty is to study the causes that constitute the present California unrest and endeavor to eliminate them so far as it is within our power to do so. Only by regaining the genuine friendship of the people of California in this way can the Japanese in that State expect to free themselves from the unfortunate unfriendly pressure. CHAPTER IX ASSIMILATION Nationalism and Assimilation. In the question of assimilation we find the heart of the Japanese problem in California. The reader will probably recall that, in discussing California's effort to counteract the progress of the Japanese in agriculture, we stated that there would be no ground for justification of the recent rigorous measure except on the assumption that the Japanese are unassimilable, and that they should not, therefore, be allowed to flourish in that State. He will also remember that we stated, in discussing the Japanese population in California, that, were it not for the apprehension of the probable impossibility of assimilating the Japanese, their increase in number either in California or in the United States was not an occasion for anxiety. These arguments implied our belief that the entire problem of the Japanese-California situation would finally resolve itself to one crucial point; namely, the question of assimilation. It is our profound conviction that if it be established that the Japanese are unassimilable, then decisive steps--much more decisive than any so far adopted--should be taken by both America and Japan in order to forestall a possible tragedy in the future. We hold this view because the present state of world affairs allows us to entertain no other opinion. As long as our world order is such that its constituent units are highly organized, composite nations with independent rights and marked individualities, it is only natural that each nation should demand that foreigners entering for the purpose of permanent settlement conform in a large measure to the social order and ideals of the country. In case this is deemed impossible, the nation opposes any large influx of foreign races because of the necessity of maintaining its national unity and harmony. Naturally, this tendency of conserving strict national integrity is strongest among the oldest and most highly organized States, and weakest among the new and loosely integrated countries. Countries like Japan and England, which have long, proud histories and traditions, and which are highly organized, are more strict about the way they take foreigners into their households. On the other hand, new countries like Australia and the South American republics, which have short histories and few traditions, are more or less liberal in admitting foreigners. This truth has been exemplified by the history of the United States. She has shown a marked laxity in this regard during the colonial and growing periods; but as soon as she achieved a more perfect national unity and consciousness, she began to manifest a strong tendency toward integration, exerting her energy on the one hand upon consolidation of her population and on the other upon excluding "squatters" who would not readily assimilate. Whether or not such a nationalistic policy may be considered just, and whatever change the future may witness in this regard, the fact remains that not a single nation in the world at present discards or rejects the policy in practice. In the face of such a situation the only alternative for the Japanese in the United States, when they obstinately cling to their own ways of living and thinking, would be to go elsewhere. This conviction of ours should not be confused with the hasty, groundless conjecture that the Japanese are a race utterly impossible of assimilation to American ways by nature and constitution. Most of the careless agitators who put forth statements to this effect start from the wrong end in their reasoning. They assume what ought to be proven, and forthwith proceed to formulate a policy on this assumption. They assume that the Japanese are unassimilable and conclude that, therefore, they should not be given an opportunity to progress. This is analogous to saying that because a child is ignorant he should not be sent to school, forgetting that the very ignorance of the child is due to the fact that he has been denied an education. They fail to see that their conclusion is the very cause of their premises. What we maintain is that when the Japanese shall have proved unassimilable, _after all means for their assimilation have been exhausted_, they should then be persuaded to give up the idea of establishing themselves in America. Meaning of "Assimilation." A great deal of confusion arises from the ambiguity of the term "assimilation." Its interpretations vary from the idea of a most superficial imitation of dress and manners to that of an uncontrollable process of biological resemblance or identity. Those using the term in the former sense, in face of the fact that the Japanese in their midst dress, talk, and live like Americans, consider it indisputable that they are assimilable. Those who use the word in a narrow sense of ethnological similarity, on the contrary, insist with equal conviction that the assimilation of the Japanese is absolutely impossible. Neither is wrong in reasoning, for assimilation, according to the accepted diction, means the process of bringing to a resemblance, conformity or identity--it is a relative term. Hence, in order to determine whether it is possible for the Japanese to become Americanized, it is necessary to find a standard by which the process can safely be gauged. Without this it is wholly absurd to say either that they are or are not assimilable. If the standard be fixed at physical identity with Americans, the Americanization of the Japanese is hopeless--at least for a few generations; but if it be fixed at conformity with American customs and social order, the Japanese have to a certain degree already been assimilated. How is the criterion to be determined? Perhaps it may be found, like the standard of our morality, in practical usage; that is, in the accepted usages and customs of the United States. Here we can do no better than point out the traditional spirit of cosmopolitanism, or firm adherence to the policy of racial non-discrimination, which was sustained even at the costliest of sacrifices and which is inscribed in the immortal fourteenth amendment of the Constitution, which states that "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." If the supreme law as well as the traditions and customs of the land do not deny, on account of color or race, any person born in America the right of citizenship, it is apparently un-American to make racial similarity or conformity the standard of assimilability. A nation, however, cannot maintain its own rights and honor among the family of nations without upholding its individuality. But America's individuality does not consist in ethnological unity alone. It consists more in cultural and spiritual solidarity. America upholds her dignity and national rights with the strength of that patriotism of her people which is born of their active sharing in her culture and ideals, as well as of their common experiences of American life. Clearly, then, one criterion of Americanization is unmixed devotion and allegiance to the cause and welfare of the United States--devotion and allegiance not blindly compelled by force of imposition, but born of voluntary and unrestricted participation in American culture and ideals, religion, and industry; in short, in the entire American life. More concisely expressed, the required standard of assimilation in America is an active share in American life as a whole to such an extent that unmixed love and the will to devote self to the United States are no longer resistible. The essence of Americanization was elucidated in simple and beautiful words by President Wilson in his memorable speech delivered at Philadelphia in 1915 before an audience of naturalized citizens of that city. He said in part: ... This is the only country in the world which experiences this constant and repeated rebirth. Other countries depend upon the multiplication of their own native people. This country is constantly drinking strength out of new sources by the voluntary association with it of great bodies of strong men and forward-looking women out of other lands. And so by the gift of the free will of independent people it is being constantly renewed from generation to generation by the same process by which it was originally created. You have just taken an oath of allegiance to the United States. Of allegiance to whom?... to a great ideal, to a great body of principles, to a great hope of the human race.... You cannot dedicate yourself to America unless you become in every respect and with every purpose of your will thorough Americans. You cannot become Americans if you think of yourselves in groups. America does not consist of groups. A man who thinks of himself as belonging to a particular national group in America has not yet become an American.... My urgent advice to you would be, not only always to think first of America, but always, also, to think first of humanity. You do not love humanity if you seek to divide humanity into jealous camps. Humanity can be welded together only by love, by sympathy, by justice, not by jealousy and hatred. Biological Assimilation. With this clarified meaning of assimilation or Americanization, let us examine the assimilability of the Japanese. First of all, we shall take up the matter of racial amalgamation. Immediately the questions arise, "Is it possible to amalgamate the Japanese? Is it desirable to do so? Is it necessary to do so?" To the first question, paradoxical as it may seem, careful observations compel us to reply that it is, and that it is not, possible to amalgamate the Japanese blood with the American. Just as there is no national boundary in science, so there is no human barrier in marriage. Truth and love appear to transcend all natural and artificial obstacles. That love defies racial difference has been amply proven in the United States, where all races are in the process of being fused together. It has no less conclusively been proven by the number of happy marriages that have taken place between Americans and Japanese in this country and in Japan. On the other hand, it is unthinkable that the Japanese should begin wholesale intermarriages with Americans in the near future, to the extent of losing their racial distinction. This is unthinkable because of the social stigma--and Americans as well as Japanese are extremely sensitive on the question of social environment--and the legal and economic handicaps which cause thoughtful persons of both nationalities, who take into consideration the welfare of themselves as well as of their descendants, to refrain from indulging in uncustomary marriages. It is more likely, therefore, that while here and there sporadic cases of intermarriage will continue to take place, and that such cases will gradually increase as the Japanese raise the degree of Americanization, it is wholly out of the question that under the present conditions of social, economic, and political encumbrances, the practice will prevail to any large extent. This being the case, our second query--"Is intermarriage desirable?"--appears superfluous. Indeed, had it not been for the dangerous dogmatism inculcated by some willful propagandists that the result of intermarriage between Americans and Japanese is "the germ of the mightiest problem that ever faced this State; a problem that will make the black problem in the South look white,"[43] the subject would be purely an academic one. To allow this sort of baseless assertion to go unchallenged is extremely dangerous, because it exaggerates an unimportant point to misrepresent maliciously the whole question of the Japanese in the United States. The conclusions of able observers, such as Dr. Gulick and Professor Millis, invariably confirm the fact that, as far as the ordinary means of observation go, the offspring of a Japanese and American couple is in no respect inferior to those of either American or Japanese unmixed descent. Professor Millis states: So far as experience shows, there is nothing inherently bad in race mixture, if it takes place under normal conditions, and neither race is generally regarded as inferior and the offspring therefore given inferior rank, as in the case of the negro.[44] From his extensive association with Japanese, Dr. Gulick has been able to make some valuable observations on this topic. He states in his important book, _The American Japanese Problem_: The offspring of mixed marriages are oftentimes practically indistinguishable from Caucasians. The color distinction is the first to break down. The Japanese hair and eye exert a stronger influence. So far as the observation of the writer goes, there is a tendency to striking beauty in Americo-Japanese. The mental ability, also, of the offspring of Japanese and white marriages is not inferior to that of children of either race.[45] These observations are valuable in refuting the kind of vile allegations we have quoted. But because of the limited number of cases observed, and the necessarily unscientific character of the observation, the utilization of these studies must be confined to pointing out the absurdity of the opposite extreme dogmatism and not extended to the constructive argument. Even less reliable are the opinions of speculative biologists who by the use of analogy--that is, by examples of hybridization of plants and animals--try to throw light on the subject of racial intermarriage. In general, the assertions of these biologists agree that the intermixture of races too far apart is undesirable because it results in a breakdown of the inherent characteristics of each, but that the combination of races slightly different is more desirable than intra-racial marriage because it tends to invigorate the stock. To this extent, opinions concur; but as to the question what races may be considered similar and what races different they begin to disagree. Most of them divide the human races by the color of the skin, and state that the case of the black and white races is that of extreme intermixture, and cite that between two white races as a desirable one. When they are pressed to pass a verdict on the result of mixture between the yellow and white races, most of them give only vacillating replies, as in the following extracts: Yellow-white amalgamation may not be fraught with the evil consequences in the wake of the yellow-black and the white-black crosses. At the same time, it should be pointed out that the Caucasians and the Mongolians are far apart in descent, and that the advantages to be gained by either in this breaking up of superior hereditary complexes developed during an extended past are not clear.[46] Professor Castle is more precise in his assertion. He says: Mankind consists of a single species; at least no races exist so distinct that when they are crossed sterile progeny are produced. Offspring produced by crossing such races do not lack in vigor, size, or reproductive capacity.... Racial crosses, if so conducted as not to interfere with social inheritance, may be expected to produce on the whole intermediates as regards physical and psychic characters.[47] Here, Professor Castle touches on the important question involved; namely, social inheritance. Indeed, human civilization is not all that is contained in germplasm. Mankind developed and accumulated an elaborate system of living conditions which operate independently of biological processes. However wonderful a brain a child has, he will have to remain a savage if he is born in a savage tribe of Africa or in a place where the level of culture is extremely low. In discussing the possible effect of intermarriage upon progeny, therefore, the cultural level of parents and their environment must first of all be taken into consideration. It is here that we find ground for opposition to intermarriage between Japanese and Americans at present. With some marked exceptions, the cultural standard attained by the mixed couples has on the whole been not of a very high order. This is inevitable when we consider that intermarriage between Japanese and Americans has not yet received full social sanction, thus obstructing free play to the process of natural selection. Aside from the purely biological consideration, this want of social approval of intermarriage, with its concomitant, an unenviable social position of the parents, results in an undesirable environment for the offspring. The welfare of their progeny is not the only determining point of intermarriage. Is it, then, sufficiently happy for the couple? Our observations lead us to answer in the negative. To be sure, there are cases of fortunate marriages in which it seems impossible for the couple to be happier. But, on the whole, the husband and the wife often find it difficult to harmonize their sentiments and ideals on account of different antecedents. The inharmony seems to grow as the couple advance in age, rendering their lives miserable. The greatest stumbling block, however, seems to be economic. The Japanese in the United States who are engaged in the ordinary walks of life are offered very little opportunities save in farming on a small scale and in petty businesses. Regardless of their ambition or ability, the Japanese cannot get what are considered in America good positions. Hence, neither their positions nor incomes improve very rapidly--perhaps no advance is made. Most American women are not satisfied to follow a blind alley. They turn back and get a divorce. Exceptional cases, of course, are found in the American-Japanese couples, whose husbands have won distinction and wealth by extraordinary personal ability or by scientific or literary attainments, or by representing great firms of Japan. Our discussion of intermarriage seems to suggest that it is not likely to occur, for some time at least, in large numbers; that as far as hereditary effect on progeny is concerned, it is wholly premature to pass any judgment at present because of our limited knowledge; but that the social as well as the economic position of the contemporary Japanese in America does not seem conducive to the happiness of either the children of such unions or their parents. Is Assimilation without Intermarriage Possible? Let us now consider the third question:--"Is intermarriage necessary for the assimilation of the Japanese?" The people, who argue that the Japanese should be discriminated against because they are biologically unamalgable, thereby commit themselves to maintaining that intermarriage is the only way by which Japanese may become true Americans. Governor Stephens states that California's effort at Japanese exclusion is "based entirely on the principle of race self-preservation and the ethnological impossibility of successfully assimilating this constantly increasing flow of Oriental blood."[48] Without questioning whence he derived the authority for the assertion that the Japanese are ethnologically impossible of assimilation, we wish to refute the contention that the Japanese are unassimilable because they are racially impossible of amalgamation. We believe that racial amalgamation is not a prerequisite of assimilation. We have already shown that the customs and traditions, as well as the supreme law of the United States, do not demand that all Americans be of one and the same race. This fact alone is sufficient condemnation of those baseless utterances which seek an excuse for failure and negligence in successfully fulfilling the duty of Americanizing aliens by the camouflage of race difference. But there are other powerful reasons to support our view that race intermixture is not the only way to Americanize the Japanese. And this we find in the strong influence of environment on the physical and mental make-up of man. Perhaps the most significant anthropological contribution of recent times is the establishment of the truth that race is not a fixed thing, but that it is a changeable thing; changeable according to the conditions of environment. Professor Boas, a recognized authority on anthropology, found, in a strictly scientific investigation concerning the changes in bodily form of immigrants and their descents in America, that aliens change considerably in physical form after they come to America. His conclusions are: The investigation has shown much more than was anticipated, and the results, so far as worked out, may be summarized as follows: The head form, which has always been considered as one of the most stable and permanent characteristics of human races, undergoes far-reaching changes due to the transfer of races of Europe to American soil. The influence of American environment upon the descendants of immigrants increases with the time that the immigrants have lived in this country before the birth of their children. The differences in type between the American-born descendant of the immigrant and the European-born immigrant develop in early childhood and persist throughout life. Among the East European Hebrews the American environment, even in the congested parts of the city, has brought about a general more favorable development of the race, which is expressed in the increased height of body (stature) and the weight of the children. There are not only decided changes in the rate of development of immigrants, but there is also a far-reaching change in the type--a change which cannot be ascribed to selection or mixture, but which can only be explained as due directly to the influence of environment. We are, therefore, compelled to draw the conclusion that if these traits change under the influence of environment, presumably _none of the characteristics of the human types that come to America remain stable_.[49] A very similar result has been reached by Dr. Fishberg in his study[50] of the Jews in America, in which he found that the physical features of the Jews in the United States are changing considerably as the result of change in social elements. Because of lack of scientifically established data pertaining to the physical change of Japanese descendants in America, we forbear from making any bold assertion on that topic. Yet, even to the casual observer, it seems almost undeniable that American-born Japanese children are fast departing from the type which their parents represent, thus corroborating the truth discovered by scientists. The Japanese Educational Association of San Francisco once conducted an extensive physical examination of Japanese children in twenty different grammar schools in California, and found (1) that they are generally superior in physical development to children of corresponding ages in Japan; (2) that in height they are from one to two inches taller than children in Nippon; (3) that in weight they are from three to seven pounds heavier; (4) that they have fairer skin when compared with that of their parents born in Japan; (5) that their hair is dark brown and not jet black, as is that of their parents; and (6) that their general posture is much better than that commonly seen among the children of Japan.[51] These purely bodily changes of American-born descents may be attributed to the difference in diet, in mode of living, in climate, and in the mysterious power of the social _milieu_, of whose influence upon the physiology of man we are yet uninformed. It is well to remember that America is a wonderful melting pot which does not depend, in its functions, solely upon the biological process of cross-breeding, but also in a good measure upon the social and natural process of automatic conformity to type. Cultural Assimilation. The real criteria of Americanization being, as we have seen, a genuine patriotism and cultural refinement, it is in the light of these two points, more than in any other regard, that the question of Japanese assimilability must be examined. Patriotism is a peculiar emotion manifesting itself in love of one's own country, in willingness to devote one's self for the maintenance of national honor and welfare. It arises in us from our association, since early childhood, with things that surround us. We love things that we are used to; we cherish the mountains, rivers, and trees among which we were brought up; we hold dear the friends and people with whom we associated in our early childhood, and as we grow mature, we take pride in finding ourselves members not only of local communities and societies of various sorts but also of the family of a great nation whose ideals and history we inherit. These and numerous other things become a part of our life for which we do not hesitate to fight, and if necessary to lay down our lives. This suggests that two things are necessary for the genesis of patriotism--native birth and a free sharing in the goods of life. While no generalization can be made off-hand, introspection reveals that, when we migrate to another country after we have grown up, it seems well-nigh impossible to find ourselves emotionally attached as closely to the adopted country as to the country of our birth. To _be born_ in a country is the strongest factor in one's patriotism. The Constitution of the United States in claiming all persons born in America as its citizens is clearly a product of master minds. Nativity alone, however, is not often sufficient to enkindle the fire of patriotism in our hearts. In the slave, to whom most of the goods of life were denied, to whom no active share in communal life was allowed, who was treated not as a member of the nation but as a tool, could mere nativity arouse strong love for his country? Only when the child is brought up in an environment of friendly spirit, encouragement, and sympathy does he learn to identify himself with the country. How do we find the patriotism of the Japanese in America? Are they patriotic in relation to the United States? For all those Japanese who came to America as immigrants of mature age with the prime object of making money, the answer must be made in the negative. Born and reared in the beautiful country of Nippon among a most hospitable people, their love of Japan is surely stronger than their love of America. Trained and educated in the customs and traditions of Japan, imbued with the belief, ideas, and ideals that are peculiar to Japan, they would not know even how to avail themselves of the opportunity, supposing they were granted the rights and the freedom to share in the now forbidden privileges. To complete the inhibition, there are all sorts of handicaps placed on them, making it unthinkable that they should love this country. They cannot vote, they cannot get public positions, and now they can neither own nor lease the land in California. No; the Japanese immigrants in America do not love America more than they love Japan. Assimilability of Japanese Immigrants. How, then, about their cultural conditions? It is impossible here to compare the culture of the Japanese _en masse_ with that of other people. We can take only a few specific points and see how they stand. Of course, in the absence of accurate data our conclusions are necessarily unscientific. It is often alleged that the Japanese in the United States have a different standard of morality from that of the Americans, and as evidence of this allegation the attitude of Japanese men towards women is pointed out. Japanese men are really "bossy" in their attitude toward women, but that is the outcome of custom and should not be charged against their morals. They are often accused of being tricky, untrustworthy. We have already seen that there have been cases that justify such accusations, but that the cause was mostly due to their ignorance of legal processes and obligations, in which they sadly lack training. On the whole, the Japanese in America are law-abiding; they very rarely become public charges, and are peaceful and industrious. These facts even the most uncompromising Japanese exclusionist, Mr. J. M. Inman, admits as true, and states further that they are "sober, industrious, peaceful, and law-abiding, and contain within their population neither anarchists, bomb-throwers, Reds, nor I. W. W.'s."[52] That the Japanese in America have been able to make rapid progress in the Christian religion has been due to the generous aid and wise direction of the American churches. Within less than thirty years Christianity has become deeply rooted among the Japanese communities, exerting the most wholesome and powerful influence in uplifting their living conditions. In 1911, the _Den Do Dan_, or Japanese Inter-Denominational Mission Board, was organized with a view to carrying on a systematic campaign for evangelistic as well as community service. The Mission Board has been successful in propagating Christianity among the Japanese. This is clearly shown by the fact that at the present time there are sixty-one Protestant churches on the Pacific Coast, besides fifty-seven Sunday schools. The greatest success of the Board, however, has been attained in the field of practical social service, where the organization of young people's Christian associations, the campaign against gambling and other vices, relief work among the needy, and the promotion of Americanization, have been successfully carried out.[53] Judging from the small percentage of illiteracy and the complete system of Japanese compulsory education, the Japanese in America do not seem to be much behind the corresponding elements in the American population in average intelligence. Only in English are they markedly weak. The importance of a knowledge of the language in assimilation can hardly be exaggerated. It is the gate through which the alien can arrive at an understanding of American institutions and culture. The weakness of the Japanese in English is chiefly due to the radical difference of the language from their own. Statistics indicate, however, a decided increase in the number of those who can command English. The census of 1900 showed that less than 40 per cent. of the Japanese in America could speak English, but in the census of 1910 the rate increased to 61 per cent.[54] The rate for foreign-born whites in 1910 was 77 per cent. The economic status of the Japanese appears to be about the same as that of European immigrants. This is indisputable from the sheer fact that the earnings of both are about the same. The only difference is that the Japanese show a tendency to mediocrity of earning power without becoming either paupers or millionaires. This is due to the fact that while there is an abundance of work offered to Japanese which enables them to earn a comfortable living, all avenues for a greater economic success are closed to them. No sooner do the Japanese show signs of some small success in agriculture than the privilege to till the soil is denied them. A similar restraint is now being attempted on the Japanese progress in fishing in California. In a sense, economic welfare is the foundation of cultural and spiritual progress, and to be denied the opportunity to make progress in this field is a heavy disadvantage. The gravest defect of the Japanese is their lack of training in democratic institutions. Having been given little opportunity to share in public or political activities in Japan, their understanding and training in civic duties is notoriously weak. Obviously this must hinder the process of Americanization to a great extent. To counteract this weakness the dissemination among them of a knowledge of American civics is necessary. It may be most effectively done by allowing them to share in a measure the American communal activities. But this is a privilege denied them. The foregoing discussion of the cultural conditions of the Japanese in America is important, not in determining whether or not the Japanese immigrants are qualified to become American citizens--for this is out of the question at present, since the right of naturalization is not granted to them--but to show what is the character of the influence which is exerted upon the native-born Japanese, Americans by birth, by their parents. The core of the Japanese problem in America is, in our opinion, whether or not American citizens of Japanese descent can become worthy Americans. Those immigrants who came from Japan will die out in the course of time, and further immigration can be stopped. In this way it is possible to curtail to a minimum the number of alien Japanese in the United States. But the American-born Japanese are American citizens and they are here to stay. Whether these young Americans will become a strong and successful element of the American people or whether they will degenerate to a kind of parasite and become America's "thorns in the flesh" is really a question of cardinal importance. But this depends much on the freedom and opportunity which are extended to their parents in this country. Thus the treatment of the Japanese in California or elsewhere in the United States assumes an aspect of vital significance to the nation. It is not a question of the abstract principles of justice or equality alone, but one of concrete and vital interest to America's own welfare. It is in this connection that all sorts of pressure and oppression--economic, political, social, and spiritual--exerted on the Japanese population, become most objectionable and harmful. These discriminatory efforts against the Japanese obstruct the Americanization of native-born Japanese in two ways. They prevent the parents from becoming well-to-do and refined people, and from getting permanent occupation and homes, all of which are essential if parents are to bring up their sons and daughters to a respectable standard. They also unconsciously imprint on the tender minds of children the idea that their fathers and mothers were not treated kindly in America, whose loyal citizens they are destined to become. What do those exclusionists really mean, when they insist that the Japanese should be given no opportunity to progress either in agriculture or industry because they are unassimilable people? Do they mean thereby to check Japanese immigration? They surely cannot mean this, for there are other and more friendly ways of achieving their object, since Japan has more than once expressed her willingness to coöperate with America in this respect. What else can they mean but that they want to hinder the American citizens of Japanese descent from becoming worthy Americans by ostracizing and persecuting their parents? Native-Born Japanese. Fortunately, in spite of all unfavorable influence and environment created for them, the native-born Japanese show very hopeful signs of realizing perfect Americanization. Here again we do not wish to dogmatize, in apparent lack of scientific data, and assert that we need feel no apprehension. Yet the few data gathered on the subject from observation strongly point to the hopeful conclusion that as greater numbers of them approach mature age they are gradually becoming Americans by the accepted standard. They proved their patriotism to America during the great war by enlisting in the American army and navy. In their manner, address, and temperament these boys and girls are American, with an unconcealed air of American mannerism. In their fluent and natural English, in their frankness and bold recklessness, in their dislike of little and irksome tasks and love of big and adventurous undertakings, in their chivalry and gallantry, in their tall and well-built stature, these young people are wholly American, no longer recognizable as Japanese except in their physical features. Indeed, it is the common testimony of the Japanese visiting America that the Japanese children born and reared here differ so distinctly from children in Japan that in their manners, spirit, and even in the play of expression on their faces, they appear characteristically American. We cannot help being surprised by the completeness with which the so-called racial traits of the Japanese are swept away in the first generation of Japanese born in America. The explanation for such a remarkable fact must be sought in the strong influence of social, national, and spiritual environment. We have seen how even the most stable elements of man's physiological constitution may change in a new environment. This being the case, it may not be entirely surprising that less stable elements, such as temperament and expression, should change more rapidly and completely in a new social _milieu_. This fact is a deathblow to the theorists who uphold the _à priori_ view of race, that it is a fixed, pure, unchangeable reality. It attests the truth of Mr. John Oakesmith's thesis in which he so ably establishes that "the objective influence of race in the evolution of nationality is fiction," and that the sole foundation and unifying force of nationality is the "organic continuity of common interest."[55] In the cross-examination of native-born Japanese children by the Congressional Sub-Committee on Immigration and Naturalization conducted on the Pacific Coast last spring, it was found that in almost all cases the children expressed the feeling that they like the United States better than Japan because they are more familiar and closely associated with things and people in America. This is doubtless an honest confession of their sentiment. They generally do not read or write Japanese because it is wholly different from English and so difficult. They learn from their parents that the life is hard and competition is keen in Japan. They know America is a great country, a land of liberty and opportunity. Naturally their interest in Japan is very slight, and they think they are Americans, and they are proud of it.[56] These are the hopeful signs which offer us reason for being optimistic. We cannot, nevertheless, be blind to the fact that there are many obstacles which if left unchecked will tend to defeat our hopes. These obstacles we find, first, in the congested condition of the Japanese on the Pacific Coast. For convenience and benefit the Japanese have been living more or less in groups, speaking their own language to a large extent, and retaining many of the Japanese customs and manners. This tendency has been a great obstacle in the assimilation of the Japanese. Their dispersal in many other States of the Union is one of the first requirements of Americanization, and consequently of an equitable solution of the Japanese-California problem. We shall touch upon this subject in the concluding chapter. CHAPTER X GENERAL CONCLUSION In dealing with the Japanese problem in California, we started with a general account of Japanese traits and ideas. We did so because we believed that a knowledge of the Japanese disposition is essential to a comprehensive understanding of the problem. No attempt was made to determine whether the traits of the Japanese--their emotional nature, their well-developed æsthetic temperament and strong group consciousness, and the unique feature of chivalry and virility prevailing among the lower classes--are inherent in the race or acquired; but we concluded that the question may best be answered by observing those of Japanese descent born and reared in different countries. Later, when we examined the characteristics of the American-born Japanese and discovered that they appear to have lost most of the Japanese traits, and, in turn, have acquired mental attitudes that are peculiar to the American, it was suggested that none of the racial characteristics is necessarily fixed, and that, similarly, the Japanese traits must have been largely acquired through peculiar natural surroundings and social systems. Next we reviewed in a brief way Japan's Asiatic policy in order to envisage the international situation in which she finds herself and to see how she proposes to meet her difficulties at home and abroad. We commented on the manifest shortcomings of that policy. In view of the fact that Japan's industry--her only hope in the future--has to depend largely on the supply of raw material from her Asiatic neighbors, the assurance of good-will and friendly coöperation with them is essential for her welfare. It is in the failure to obtain this assurance that the defect of Japan's past Asiatic policy becomes apparent. We expressed our conviction that under the circumstances the best that Japan can do is to so reconstruct the principle of the policy as to convince her neighbors of her genuine sincerity. In the chapter on the background of Japanese emigration, an attempt has been made to discover its causes. The principal causes found are the small amount of land, the dense population, and the limited prospect of industrial development due to the scarcity of raw material. Moreover, the peculiar social and political conditions in Japan are such as to obstruct, by numerous fetters and restraints, the free development of ambitious youths. The exaggerated stories of great opportunities in the new worlds kindle the desire of the young people to go abroad. Tentative attempts were made some thirty years ago in emigration to Australia, Canada, and the United States. Nearly a quarter of a century's effort at emigration into the new worlds, with the exception of partial success in Brazil, had proved a complete failure, and thus attempts at migration towards the North came into vogue. In our discussion of the causes of anti-Japanese agitation in California, it was made clear that the explanation of much of the trouble lies in the conditions of the Japanese themselves, such as congestion in particular localities and different manners and customs. The nationalistic policy of Japan was also pointed out as a factor making for resentment. What renders the situation unnecessarily complicated, leading to a general misunderstanding, is the employment of the issue in local politics--exploitation of the subject for private ends by agitators and propagandists. Then our study entered the heart of the California problem, the fact of the existing Japanese population. It was discovered that the rate of increase of Japanese population in California has been rapid, but that it shows a tendency to slow down, while the rate of increase of the entire population of the State shows a tendency to steady increase. We found that in comparison with the total number of Japanese in the United States the percentage of Japanese in California is remarkably high, nearly 60 per cent. of them being domiciled in that one State. Then we examined the factors--immigration, smuggling, and births--which contributed to the increase of the Japanese population in California. Under the subject of immigration it was made clear that the net gain from immigration has become small since the restrictive agreement was concluded, but that the number of those entering the country increased because the number of those who are passing through or temporarily visiting America has increased. We expressed our opinion that in order to quiet the excitement of the people of the Pacific Coast it is entirely desirable to stop sending Japanese immigrants to America. We have somewhat fully treated the subject of birth because it is a vital part of the question. It was discovered in the discussion that the birth rate of the Japanese in California is exceptionally high, due to the fact that a high percentage of the immigrants are in the prime of life and that the percentage of married people is remarkably high. In forecasting the future of the birth rate we stated that if immigration is stopped the present generation will in time pass out without being re-enforced, leaving behind American-born children, who, with higher culture and more even distribution with regard to age and marriage, will not multiply at nearly so high a rate as their parents. We concluded, therefore, that the present is a transitional period and that apprehension over the high birth rate is entirely unwarranted. The chapter on Japanese agriculture in California gives report of a degree of progress that has been remarkable. As to the causes of this progress the peculiar adaptation of the Japanese farmers to the agricultural conditions of California was presented as the principal one. Then we considered separately the Japanese farm labor and the farmers. What we found in treating the subject of Japanese farm laborers was that they are indispensable to California's agriculture, inasmuch as they have several important peculiarities which are useful. Their ability to farm and their aptitude for bodily and manual dexterity, as well as their highly transitory character under the system of contract labor, are useful assets to the farmers of California. Under the topic of the Japanese farmer, we examined the reasons given for the discrimination against Japanese in agricultural pursuits. The first reason--that they are "crushing competitors of California farmers"--was criticized on the ground that there is not much competition between white and Japanese farmers, since there is a pretty clear line of demarkation between them, the former being engaged in farming on a large scale and the latter engaged in small intensive agriculture. The second apprehension--that the Japanese farmer, if left unchecked, will soon control the greater part of California agriculture--was characterized as an entirely exaggerated fear, since the portion of land which the Japanese till is quite negligible and there are vast tracts of land yet uncultivated. The third objection--which finds reason for opposition in the unassimilability of the Japanese--we held as the weightiest count, and withheld criticism until we had fully treated the subject of assimilation in the succeeding chapter. What we insisted on was that it is unwise to maltreat the Japanese on the surmise that they are unassimilable. Whether they are assimilable or not--and this is not the question, for they are not allowed to become American citizens--their children, who are Americans by virtue of birth, will suffer much from a hostile policy towards their parents. The anti-alien land laws were considered briefly, and the views of their critics were introduced. As an effective measure to cope with the legislation, we suggested that neither legal nor diplomatic disputes will bring about a satisfactory result, but that only through obtaining the good-will and friendship of the people of California can there be a true solution. The topic of assimilation discussed in the preceding chapter needs no recapitulation. The foregoing study, which we have undertaken from the outset with an open mind and fair attitude, has, it is to be hoped, disclosed that the underlying cause of the entire difficulty is a conflict or maladjustment of interest. There are four parties whose peculiar interests and rights are seriously involved in the situation. First and foremost, we have to consider the rights and interests of California. Then we have the United States, which is no less directly concerned with the problem. For the Japanese living in California, the issue is a matter of life and death; their entire interests and welfare are at stake. Japan also is as much concerned with the fate of her subjects in America as the United States would be with the welfare of her people living abroad--say in Mexico. The Japanese problem in California is the concrete expression of the maladjustment of the interests and rights of these four parties concerned. Various measures, wise and unwise, have been proposed for the solution of the problem, but none of them has so far been put into effect, since each has failed to adjust the interests and rights of all parties concerned in an harmonious way, and hence has met with violent protest at the outset. Take, for instance, the proposal that the Japanese should be granted the right of naturalization. The promoters of the project insist that the denial to the Japanese of the right to become citizens of the United States is the cause of the anti-Japanese exclusion movement, and, accordingly, that the granting of the privilege will annul all discriminatory efforts. Undoubtedly the proposal was well meant, but it has perhaps done more harm than good. In the first place, it confuses the cause and method of discrimination against the Japanese. The Japanese ineligibility to citizenship has certainly been seized on as a weapon for discrimination, but it is by no means the cause. The cause is elsewhere. In the second place, the advocates of the proposal argue that, if adopted, it will defeat the entire discriminatory efforts of the Californians. It is, however, decidedly unwise to attempt to defeat the effort without removing the cause of the difficulty. No wonder the proposal has provoked the wild criticism of California leaders. The granting of citizenship to refined and Americanized Japanese is in itself a proper and desirable step, but to use it as a weapon to defeat the exclusion movement is clearly unwise. The solution of the Japanese problem in California, if it be equitable at all and satisfactory to the four parties involved, must rest on the following basic principles: _1. That it should be in consonance with justice and international courtesy; it must redress Japan's grievances and meet America's wishes._ _2. That it should be fair to Californians; that is to say, operate to allay the fear they entertain of the alarming increase of Japanese in numbers and economic importance._ _3. That it should be fair to the Japanese residents, both aliens and American-born, so that they may enjoy in peace, without molestation or persecution, the blessings of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," and participate, as all American-born are entitled and in duty bound to do, in the promotion of the State's well-being._ The new treaty, which is reported to have been laid for final decision before the Washington and Tokyo Governments by the two negotiators, Ambassador Morris and Ambassador Shidehara, has not been made public at this writing. We have, therefore, no means of knowing the contents or nature of its provisions. It may, however, be presumed that it will go a long way toward redressing Japan's grievances and meeting America's wishes. The latter will probably be met by Japan's adoption of drastic measures to check completely the influx of her immigrants. Knowing that Japan has always been sincere and ready to yield to the wishes of the United States, we hold it only just that she be saved the embarrassment arising from discrimination against her subjects in America. Proud and sensitive, Japan takes to heart the abuses or indignities which she deems seriously detrimental to her national honor. The conclusion of the Treaty and its ratification by the Senate, however, may not prove the panacea for all evils, for governmental action is naturally circumscribed in its sphere. To solve the perplexing question once for all, the Treaty must be supplemented by the patriotic efforts of public-spirited citizens of both countries to heal and adjust the irritated parts in the scheme of American-Japanese relations which are beyond the reach of governmental action. Viscount Shibusawa and some of his compatriots have, during the last year, held many conferences with some prominent Americans--those representing the Chamber of Commerce of San Francisco and the party headed by Mr. Frank Vanderlip. A better understanding of the situation must have resulted as a consequence of the conferences. The earnestness of the Viscount and his friends to do what they could for the good of both countries is beyond praise. But we fear they have been measuring America by Japan's standard and trying to cure the trouble without remedying the cause. In Japan the counsel of a few influential men often proves effective even in local affairs, but in America, where local autonomy is strongly entrenched, a man, however prominent a figure he may have cut in national affairs, will think twice before he pronounces judgment on matters of local concern, lest it be construed as an intrusion, and thus defeat the good intention. The California question can only be settled by or in coöperation with the Californians, and right on the spot, not elsewhere. We believe that the time has come, therefore, when those public-spirited citizens of both countries should replace academic discussion by action. As a means of alleviating the situation we venture to offer the following modest suggestion: 1. That a Committee of a dozen or so members, consisting of public-spirited men of broad vision of both countries, and particularly of California, be formed with the object of formulating and putting into effect the project of relieving the congestion of Japanese in California. Such a Committee would doubtless be able to secure the hearty coöperation of The Japan Society of New York and other cities, as well as of the Japanese Association of America and similar organizations, all of which exist with a view to promoting friendly relations between America and Japan. 2. That the said Committee appoint an administrator of proved executive ability and a staff for the prosecution of the project. 3. That to finance the project an initial fund of half a million dollars be raised by contribution from the 120,000 Japanese living in this country. The Japanese domiciled in this country have the keenest interest in the subject; they are directly or indirectly affected by the anti-Japanese agitation in California; they would not grudge a contribution of a small sum for the purpose of uprooting the cause of that annoyance. The Japanese in California who have interests at stake would surely be more than willing to contribute their quota to the fund. The native Californians, too, we strongly feel, in their calm and considerate mood, would obey the dictates of wisdom to adopt a more liberal and logical method of relieving the local tension than to resort, as at present, to measures of repression and persecution. We are of the opinion that there would be a fair demand in other States of the Union for such skilled farm hands as we have found in the Japanese in California if the facts were well advertised. If proper precaution be taken so as to avoid the repetition of the same story of congestion as that in California, the plan of dispersal above outlined might prove a boon to all concerned. If the initial stage of the plan be earnestly carried out before the eyes of the Californians, a totally different atmosphere might be created among them so as to win their good will and enlist their coöperation. When such a happy outcome is obtained, a solution of the Japanese-California problem is assured. There is certainly a great deal which the Japanese in California can and must do. In the first place, they must thoroughly grasp the psychology of the Californians. They must indicate, if they are to remain in this country, their willingness to become Americans regardless of barriers or opposition. They must show this willingness not only in intention but also in practice. They must improve their command of English, alter many of their customs and manners. They must endeavor to elevate their standard of living and culture. They must give up beliefs and ideals which are Japanese and which run counter to the American. It would be well for them to refrain from building in California Shinto shrines and Buddhist temples and from maintaining language schools. They must above all learn to take an interest in the national life of the United States. There is also much that the Japanese Government can do. Its policy of paternalism, extending too much care to Japanese domiciled abroad, and even to Japanese born abroad, must, in our opinion, be altered. The claim of allegiance to the home country by the children born in another country, whatever may be their status in the land of birth, is an international practice still adhered to by most European nations--France, Italy, Germany, Switzerland, Greece. From this results what is called a "dual nationality" of a subject. In a country like the United States, where its Constitution endows children born therein with citizenship, the so-called "dual nationality" gives rise to an awkward situation in case its mother country adopts the military conscription system. To avoid this awkward situation, Japan enacted in the year 1916 a law which provides that a Japanese boy who has acquired a foreign nationality by reason of his birth in a foreign country may divest himself of Japanese nationality if his father, or other parental authority, takes the necessary steps to that end before he is fifteen years of age, or, if he has attained the age of fifteen, he may himself take the same steps, with the consent of his father or guardian, before he reaches the age of seventeen.[57] This law is objectionable because it fixes the age limit of expatriation at seventeen, when the subject is yet a minor and is not competent to exercise his own choice. Fixing the age limit at seventeen is a provision in consonance with the Japanese military law, which imposes on all male Japanese subjects above that age the duty of military service. Consequently, all American-born Japanese males who have failed to expatriate before they have reached the age of seventeen are claimed as Japanese subjects and are subject to conscription, while at the same time they are American citizens. The existence of such a discordance in the laws and Constitution of the two countries has the possibility of giving rise to a serious international complication, and it seems advisable that some sort of settlement be made on this point between the American and Japanese Governments. The difficulty could, of course, be overcome if the Japanese parents who are determined to stay permanently in this country would take the necessary steps to expatriate their children as soon as they are born, or at the proper time. The hesitation they have heretofore manifested was greatly due to the uncertainty in which their future and that of their children was shrouded. We cannot omit to emphasize in this connection the part which America can and has to perform. Of the numerous things America can do with profit we believe the task of Americanizing the Japanese to be the foremost. We wish to make it clear that, whether Japanese aliens are worthy or not, their children born in America are in any case Americans, and it is America's duty to make them worthy members of the nation. They are not foreigners or aliens, and, accordingly, it is clearly wrong, as well as unwise, to deal with them as if they were. Upon what we can do to guide the rising generation depends the future of the Japanese problem in America. This in turn must depend upon how America treats their parents. Disappearing gradually as they are, they are bequeathing their impressions and accomplishments to their children. Any generosity and kindness extended to them are acts not so much of altruism as of vital interest in the welfare of America herself, for they are the guardians of the Republic's sons and daughters of Japanese blood. It is certainly not fair to slander and maltreat those people, who were originally brought in to fill the need of man-power and who have contributed much towards making the Pacific Coast what it is to-day. To prevent the influx of Japanese immigrants, to avoid the possible future development of difficult problems with Japan, there certainly ought to be some better means than gradually strangling the innocent people who individually are in no way to be blamed for the present strained relations on the Pacific Coast. All these considerations lead us to a belief that the time is now ripe for the American people, and especially for the people of California, to reconstruct their attitude and policy towards the Japanese domiciled in this country. Every indication seems to suggest that if, in place of the discriminatory policy so far resorted to with no better effect than general irritation, a new policy be initiated, a policy of constructive Americanization based upon generosity, sympathy, and understanding, the result will surely be far-reaching. It is a common fact of human experience that one's attitude is directly responded to by other people with whom we deal. It was Thackeray, we believe, who said that "the world is like a looking-glass; if we smile, others also smile." What cannot be achieved by a hostile policy is often easily and satisfactorily accomplished by sympathetic attitude and friendly dealing. Give the Japanese the opportunity and see what good use they will make of it. We hardly need to reiterate that the Japanese-California question--the main theme of this book--is only a part of the vast problem which confronts America and Japan. The present world tendency is to bind increasingly all parts of the world into one. The process of civilization, like a revolving body, exerts centrifugal and centripetal force and gradually unifies all civilizations into a cohesive system. At present there are two centers of such forces, one in the East and another in the West, each trying to influence the other. By virtue of being the youngest and the most vigorous representatives of the two spheres, Japan and America, respectively, are naturally destined to shoulder together the great task of harmonizing and unifying these two great currents of human achievement. The task involves, from its gigantic nature, a great many difficulties and risks of which the present California issue is certainly one. All these difficulties must be squarely met and surmounted with courage and wisdom, since to shrink from the job is to commit the future relationship of the East and West to the cruel law of natural selection. It is, however, generally true that the perfect understanding of the common aim settles the incidental difficulties arising in the process. This is particularly true in the case of the California-Japanese question, which is a partial issue of the great undertaking between America and Japan. The core of the California problem, our study has shown, is the question of assimilability of the Japanese. But what is the assimilation but the approach to the common standard of culture and ideals? The approach to the common standard of culture and ideals between the peoples of Asia and Europe and America is precisely the task in which Japan and the United States are engaged in unison. Herein is the explanation of our earlier assertion that the California problem is a miniature form of the problem of the East and West. Herein also is the support of our contention that to accelerate the coöperative effort of America and Japan for mutual understanding is the only and the best method of bringing about the solution of the Japanese problem in California or elsewhere in the United States. We wish, therefore, to emphasize once more that the wisest policy to follow in the future for America and Japan is not foolishly to sharpen the edge of swords for imaginary race wars, which are absurd, but to devote themselves wisely to learning and appreciating each other's accomplishments and greatness, from which alone true friendship can arise. APPENDIX A [Illustration: _COMPARATIVE HEIGHT OF AMERICAN, JAPANESE-AMERICAN & JAPANESE CHILDREN_] [Illustration: _COMPARATIVE WEIGHT OF AMERICAN, JAPANESE-AMERICAN & JAPANESE CHILDREN_] APPENDIX B EXTRACTS FROM THE TREATY OF COMMERCE AND NAVIGATION AND PROTOCOL BETWEEN JAPAN AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, OF FEBRUARY 21, 1911. His Majesty, the Emperor of Japan, and the President of the United States of America, being desirous to strengthen the relations of amity and good understanding which happily exist between the two nations, and believing that the fixation in a manner clear and positive of the rules which are hereafter to govern the commercial intercourse between their respective countries will contribute to this most desirable result, have resolved to conclude a treaty of commerce and navigation. =Article I.=--The subjects or citizens of each of the high contracting parties shall have liberty to enter, travel, and reside in the territories of the other, to carry on trade, wholesale and retail, to own or lease and occupy houses, manufactories, warehouses, and shops, to employ agents of their choice, to lease land for residential and commercial purposes, and generally to do anything incident to or necessary for trade, upon the same terms as native subjects or citizens, submitting themselves to the laws and regulations there established. They shall not be compelled, under any pretext whatever, to pay any charges or taxes other or higher than those that are or may be paid by native subjects or citizens. The subjects or citizens of each of the high contracting parties shall receive, in the territories of the other, the most constant protection and security for their persons and property and shall enjoy in this respect the same rights and privileges as are or may be granted to native subjects or citizens, on their submitting themselves to the conditions imposed upon the native subjects and citizens. =Article IV.=--There shall be between the territories of the two high contracting parties reciprocal freedom of commerce and navigation. The subjects or citizens of each of the contracting parties, equally with the subjects or citizens of the most favored nation shall have liberty freely to come with their ships and cargoes to all places, ports, and rivers in the territories of the other which are or may be opened to foreign commerce, subject always to the laws of the country to which they thus come. =Article V.=--Neither contracting party shall impose any other or higher duties or charges on the exportation of any article to the territories of the other than are or may be payable on the exportation of the like article to any other foreign country. Nor shall any prohibition be imposed by either country on the importation or exportation of any article from or to the territories of the other which shall not equally extend to the like article imported from or exported to any other country. =Article XIV.=--Except as otherwise expressly provided in this treaty, the high contracting parties agree that in all that concerns commerce and navigation, any privilege, favor, or immunity which either contracting party has actually granted or may hereafter grant, to the subjects or citizens of any other State shall be extended to the subjects or citizens of the other contracting party ... on the same or equivalent conditions.... Declaration In proceeding this day to the signature of the treaty of commerce and navigation ... the undersigned has the honor to declare that the Imperial Japanese Government are fully prepared to maintain with equal effectiveness the limitation and control which they have for the past three years exercised in regulation of the immigration of laborers to the United States. (Signed) Y. UCHIDA. February 21, 1911. APPENDIX C CALIFORNIA'S ALIEN LAND LAW (Approved May 19, 1913) _The people of the State of California do enact as follows_: =Section 1.=--All aliens eligible to citizenship under the laws of the United States may acquire, possess, enjoy, transmit, and inherit real property, or any interest therein, in this State, in the same manner and to the same extent as citizens of the United States, except as otherwise provided by the laws of this State. =Section 2.=--All aliens other than those mentioned in section one of this act may acquire, possess, enjoy, and transfer real property, or any interest therein, in this State, in the manner and to the extent and for the purposes prescribed by any treaty now existing between the Government of the United States and the nation or country of which such alien is a citizen or subject and not otherwise, and may in addition thereto lease lands in this State for agricultural purposes for a term not exceeding three years. =Section 3.=--Any company, association, or corporation organized under the laws of this or any other State or nation, of which a majority of the members are aliens other than those specified in section one of this act, or in which a majority of the issued capital stock is owned by such aliens, may acquire, possess, enjoy, and convey real property, or any interest therein in this State, in the manner and to the extent and for the purposes prescribed by any treaty now existing between the Government of the United States and the nation or country of which such members or stockholders are citizens or subjects, and not otherwise, and may in addition thereto lease lands in this State for agricultural purposes for a term not exceeding three years. =Section 4.=--Whenever it appears to the court in any probate proceeding that by reason of the provisions of this act any heir or devisee cannot take real property in this State which, but for said provisions, said heir or devisee would take as such, the court, instead of ordering a distribution of such real property to such heir or devisee, shall order a sale of said real property to be made in the manner provided by law for probate sales of real property, and the proceeds of such sale shall be distributed to such heirs or devisee in lieu of such real property. =Section 5.=--Any real property hereafter acquired in fee in violation of the provisions of this act by any alien mentioned in section two of this act, or by any company, association or corporation mentioned in section three of this act, shall escheat to, and become and remain the property of the State of California. The attorney general shall institute proceedings to have the escheat of such real property adjudged and enforced in the manner provided by section 474 of the Political Code and title eight, part three of the Code of Civil Procedure. Upon the entry of final judgment in such proceedings, the title to such real property shall pass to the State of California. The provisions of this section and of sections two and three of this act shall not apply to any real property hereafter acquired in the enforcement or in satisfaction of any lien now existing upon, or interest in such property, so long as such real property so acquired shall remain the property of the alien, company, association or corporation acquiring the same in such manner. =Section 6.=--Any leasehold or other interest in real property less than the fee, hereafter acquired in violation of the provisions of this act by any alien mentioned in section two of this act, or by any company, association or corporation mentioned in section three of this act, shall escheat to the State of California. The attorney general shall institute proceedings to have such escheat adjudged and enforced as provided in section five of this act. In such proceedings the court shall determine and adjudge the value of such leasehold, or other interest in such real property, and enter judgment for the State for the amount thereof together with costs. Thereupon the court shall order a sale of the real property covered by such leasehold, or other interest, in the manner provided by section 1271 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Out of the proceeds arising from such sale, the amount of the judgment rendered for the State shall be paid into the State Treasury and the balance shall be deposited with and distributed by the court in accordance with the interest of the parties therein. =Section 7.=--Nothing in this act shall be construed as a limitation upon the power of the State to enact laws with respect to the acquisition, holding or disposal by aliens of real property in this State. =Section 8.=--All acts and parts of acts inconsistent or in conflict with the provisions of this act, are hereby repealed. APPENDIX D ALIEN LAND LAW (Adopted November 2, 1920) PROPERTY RIGHTS AND DISABILITIES OF ALIENS IN CALIFORNIA =Alien Land Law.= Initiative Act. Permits Acquisition and Transfer of Real Property by Aliens Eligible to Citizenship, to Same Extent as Citizens Except as Otherwise Provided by Law; Permits Other Aliens, and Companies, Associations, and Corporations in Which they Hold Majority Interest, to Acquire and Transfer Real Property Only as Prescribed by Treaty, but Prohibiting Appointment Thereof as Guardians of Estates of Minors Consisting Wholly or Partially of Real Property or Shares in Such Corporations; Provides for Escheats in Certain Cases; Requires Reports of Property Holdings to Facilitate Enforcement of Act; Prescribes Penalties and Repeals Conflicting Acts. _An act relating to the rights, powers, and disabilities of aliens and of certain companies, associations, and corporations with respect to property in this State, providing for escheats in certain cases, prescribing the procedure therein, requiring reports of certain property holdings to facilitate the enforcement of this act, prescribing penalties for violation of the provisions hereof, and repealing all acts or parts of acts inconsistent or in conflict herewith._ _The people of the State of California do enact as follows_: =Section 1.=--All aliens eligible to citizenship under the laws of the United States may acquire, possess, enjoy, transmit, and inherit real property, or any interest therein, in this State, in the same manner and to the same extent as citizens of the United States, except as otherwise provided by the laws of this State. =Section 2.=--All aliens other than those mentioned in section one of this act may acquire, possess, enjoy, and transfer real property, or any interest therein, in this State, in the manner and to the extent and for the purpose prescribed by any treaty now existing between the Government of the United States and the nation or country of which such alien is a citizen or subject, and not otherwise. =Section 3.=--Any company, association or corporation organized under the laws of this or any other State or nation, of which a majority of the members are aliens other than those specified in section one of this act, or in which a majority of the issued capital stock is owned by such aliens, may acquire, possess, enjoy, and convey real property, or any interest therein, in this State, in the manner and to the extent and for the purposes prescribed by any treaty now existing between the Government of the United States and the nation or country of which such members or stockholders are citizens or subjects, and not otherwise. Hereafter all aliens other than those specified in section one hereof may become members of or acquire shares of stock in any company, association or corporation that is or may be authorized to acquire, possess, enjoy or convey agricultural land, in the manner and to the extent and for the purposes prescribed by any treaty now existing between the Government of the United States and the nation or country of which such alien is a citizen or subject, and not otherwise. =Section 4.=--Hereafter no alien mentioned in section two hereof and no company, association or corporation mentioned in section three hereof, may be appointed guardian of that portion of the estate of a minor which consists of property which such alien or such company, association or corporation is inhibited from acquiring, possessing, enjoying or transferring by reason of the provisions of this act. The public administrator of the proper county, or any other competent person or corporation, may be appointed guardian of the estate of a minor citizen whose parents are ineligible to appointment under the provisions of this section. On such notice to the guardian as the court may require, the superior court may remove the guardian of such an estate whenever it appears to the satisfaction of the court: (_a_) That the guardian has failed to file the report required by the provisions of section five hereof; or (_b_) That the property of the ward has not been or is not being administered with due regard to the primary interest of the ward; or (_c_) That facts exist which would make the guardian ineligible to appointment in the first instance; or (_d_) That facts establishing any other legal ground for removal exist. =Section 5.=--(_a_) The term "trustee" as used in this section means any person, company, association or corporation that as guardian, trustee, attorney-in-fact or agent, or in any other capacity has the title, custody or control of property, or some interest therein, belonging to an alien mentioned in section two hereof, or to the minor child of such an alien, if the property is of such a character that such alien is inhibited from acquiring, possessing, enjoying or transferring it. (_b_) Annually on or before the thirty-first day of January every such trustee must file in the office of the Secretary of State of California and in the office of the county clerk of each county in which any of the property is situated, a verified written report showing: (1) The property, real or personal, held by him for or on behalf of such an alien or minor; (2) A statement showing the date when each item of such property came into his possession or control; (3) An itemized account of all expenditures, investments, rents, issues, and profits in respect to the administration and control of such property with particular reference to holdings of corporate stock and leases, cropping contracts, and other agreements in respect to land and the handling or sale of products thereof. (_c_) Any person, company, association or corporation that violates any provision of this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year, or by both such fine and imprisonment. (_d_) The provisions of this section are cumulative and are not intended to change the jurisdiction or the rules of practice of courts of justice. =Section 6.=--Whenever it appears to the court in any probate proceeding that by reason of the provisions of this act any heir or devisee cannot take real property in this State or membership or shares of stock in a company, association or corporation which, but for said provisions, said heir or devisee would take as such, the court, instead of ordering a distribution of such property to such heir or devisee, shall order a sale of said property to be made in the manner provided by law for probate sales of property and the proceeds of such sale shall be distributed to such heir or devisee in lieu of such property. =Section 7.=--Any real property hereafter acquired in fee in violation of the provisions of this act by any alien mentioned in section two of this act, or by any company, association or corporation mentioned in section three of this act, shall escheat to, and become and remain the property of the State of California. The attorney general or district attorney of the proper county shall institute proceedings to have the escheat of such real property adjudged and enforced in the manner provided by section four hundred seventy-four of the Political Code and title eight, part three of the Code of Civil Procedure. Upon the entry of final judgment in such proceedings, the title to such real property shall pass to the State of California. The provisions of this section and of sections two and three of this act shall not apply to any real property hereafter acquired in the enforcement or in satisfaction of any lien now existing upon, or interest in such property, so long as such real property so acquired shall remain the property of the alien, company, association or corporation acquiring the same in such manner. No alien, company, association or corporation mentioned in section two or section three hereof shall hold for a longer period than two years the possession of any agricultural land acquired in the enforcement of or in satisfaction of a mortgage or other lien hereafter made or acquired in good faith to secure a debt. =Section 8.=--Any leasehold or other interest in real property less than the fee, hereafter acquired in violation of the provisions of this act by any alien mentioned in section two of this act, or by any company, association or corporation mentioned in section three of this act, shall escheat to the State of California. The attorney general or district attorney of the proper county shall institute proceedings to have such escheat adjudged and enforced as provided in section seven of this act. In such proceedings the court shall determine and adjudge the value of such leasehold or other interest in such real property, and enter judgment for the State for the amount thereof together with costs. Thereupon the court shall order a sale of the real property covered by such leasehold, or other interest, in the manner provided by section twelve hundred seventy-one of the Code of Civil Procedure. Out of the proceeds arising from such sale, the amount of the judgment rendered for the State shall be paid into the state treasury and the balance shall be deposited with and distributed by the court in accordance with the interest of the parties therein. Any share of stock or the interest of any member in a company, association or corporation hereafter acquired in violation of the provisions of section three of this act shall escheat to the State of California. Such escheat shall be adjudged and enforced in the same manner as provided in this section for the escheat of a leasehold or other interest in real property less than the fee. =Section 9.=--Every transfer of real property, or of an interest therein, though colorable in form, shall be void as to the state and the interest thereby conveyed or sought to be conveyed shall escheat to the State if the property interest involved is of such a character that an alien mentioned in section two hereof is inhibited from acquiring, possessing, enjoying or transferring it, and if the conveyance is made with intent to prevent, evade or avoid escheat as provided for herein. A _prima facie_ presumption that the conveyance is made with such intent shall arise upon proof of any of the following groups of facts: (_a_) The taking of the property in the name of a person other than the persons mentioned in section two hereof if the consideration is paid or agreed or understood to be paid by an alien mentioned in section two hereof; (_b_) The taking of the property in the name of a company, association or corporation, if the membership or shares of stock therein held by aliens mentioned in section two hereof, together with the memberships or shares of stock held by others but paid for or agreed or understood to be paid for by such aliens, would amount to a majority of the membership or the issued capital stock of such company, association or corporation; (_c_) The execution of a mortgage in favor of an alien mentioned in section two hereof if said mortgagee is given possession, control or management of the property. The enumeration in this section of certain presumptions shall not be so construed as to preclude other presumptions or inferences that reasonably may be made as to the existence of intent to prevent, evade or avoid escheat as provided for herein. =Section 10.=--If two or more persons conspire to effect a transfer of real property, or of an interest therein, in violation of the provisions hereof, they are punishable by imprisonment in the county jail or State penitentiary not exceeding two years, or by a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars, or both. =Section 11.=--Nothing in this act shall be construed as a limitation upon the power of the State to enact laws with respect to the acquisition, holding or disposal by aliens of real property in this State. =Section 12.=--All acts and parts of acts inconsistent or in conflict with the provisions hereof are hereby repealed; _provided_, that-- (_a_) This act shall not affect pending actions or proceedings, but the same may be prosecuted and defended with the same effect as if this act had not been adopted; (_b_) No cause of action arising under any law of this State shall be affected by reason of the adoption of this act whether an action or proceeding has been instituted thereon at the time of the taking effect of this act or not and actions may be brought upon such causes in the same manner, under the same terms and conditions, and with the same effect as if this act had not been adopted. (_c_) This act in so far as it does not add to, take from or alter an existing law, shall be construed as a continuation thereof. =Section 13.=--The legislature may amend this act in furtherance of its purpose and to facilitate its operation. =Section 14.=--If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this act is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this act. The people hereby declare that they would have passed this act, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause and phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional. APPENDIX E CROPS RAISED BY JAPANESE AND THEIR ACREAGE. =============================================================== | Total |Acreage by|Percentage of Japanese Product. | Acreage of | Japanese.| Cultivation Against |Cultivation.| | Total Cultivation. ----------------|------------|----------|---------------------- Berries | 6,500 | 5,968 | 91.8 Celery | 4,000 | 3,568 | 89.2 Asparagus | 12,000 | 9,927 | 82.7 Seeds | 20,000 | 15,847 | 79.2 Onions | 12,112 | 9,251 | 76.3 Tomatoes | 16,000 | 10,616 | 66.3 Cantaloupes | 15,000 | 9,581 | 63.8 Sugar Beets | 102,949 | 51,604 | 50.1 Green Vegetables| 75,000 | 17,852 | 23.8 Potatoes | 90,175 | 18,830 | 20.8 Hops | 8,000 | 1,260 | 15.7 Grapes | 360,000 | 47,439 | 13.1 Beans | 592,000 | 77,107 | 13.0 Rice | 106,220 | 16,640 | 10.0 Cotton | 179,860 | 18,000 | 10.0 Corn | 85,000 | 7,845 | 9.2 Fruits, Nuts | 715,000 | 29,210 | 4.0 Hay, Grain | 2,200,000 | 15,753 | 0.0 =============================================================== Reported by the Japanese Agricultural Association of California, 1919. APPENDIX F JAPANESE IMMIGRATION TO THE UNITED STATES. ===================== Year.|No. of Japanese | Immigrants. -----|--------------- 1869 | 63 1870 | 48 1871 | 78 1872 | 17 1873 | 9 1874 | 21 1875 | 3 1876 | 4 1877 | 7 1878 | 2 1879 | 4 1880 | 4 1881 | 11 1882 | 5 1883 | 27 1884 | 20 1885 | 49 1886 | 194 1887 | 229 1888 | 404 1889 | 640 1890 | 691 1891 | 1,136 1892 | 1,498 1893 | 1,648 1894 | 1,739 1895 | 480 1896 | 1,110 1897 | 1,526 1898 | 2,230 1899 | 2,844 1900 | 6,618 1901 | 4,908 1902 | 5,325 1903 | 6,990 1904 | 7,771 1905 | 4,319 1906 | 5,178 1907 | 9,948 1908 | 7,250 ---------------------- ----------------------------------- Year.| Admitted.|Departed.|Balance. -----|----------|---------|-------- 1909 | 1,593 | 5,004 | -3,411 1910 | 1,552 | 5,024 | -3,472 1911 | 4,282 | 5,869 | -1,587 1912 | 5,358 | 5,437 | - 79 1913 | 6,771 | 5,647 | +1,124 1914 | 8,462 | 6,300 | +2,162 1915 | 9,029 | 5,967 | +3,062 1916 | 9,100 | 6,922 | +2,178 1917 | 9,159 | 6,581 | +2,578 1918 | 11,143 | 7,691 | +3,452 1919 | 11,404 | 8,328 | +3,076 1920 | 12,868 | 11,662 | +1,206 ----------------------------------- The above is taken from the Annual Report of the Commissioner General of Immigration. APPENDIX G JAPANESE ADMITTED INTO CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES: ARRIVALS AND DEPARTURES. =============================================== | Number of | |Total Gains Year. | Arrivals. | Departed. |Up to Date. -----------|-----------|-----------|----------- 1861-1870 | 218 } | | 1871-1880 | 149 } | | 1881-1890 | 2,270 } | 25,000 | 1891-1900 | 20,829 } |(estimated)| 1901-1910 | 54,838 } | | 1911-1920 | 87,576 | 70,404 | -----------|-----------| | Total | 165,880 | | | | | No. of | | | transient | | | immigrants | | | from Hawaii| 15,000 | | |(estimated)| | |-----------|-----------|----------- Total | 180,880 | 95,404 | 87,476 =============================================== APPENDIX H IMMIGRANTS AND NON-IMMIGRANTS. ======================================================== | Total | | | Percentage of | Number | | Non- | Non-Immigrants Year.|Admitted.|Immigrants.|Immigrants.| Against Total | | | |Number Admitted. -----|---------|-----------|-----------|---------------- 1909 | 1,593 | 255 | 1,338 | 84.0 1910 | 1,552 | 116 | 1,436 | 92.5 1911 | 4,282 | 736 | 3,546 | 83.0 1912 | 5,358 | 894 | 4,464 | 83.3 1913 | 6,771 | 1,371 | 5,400 | 79.7 1914 | 8,462 | 1,762 | 6,700 | 79.1 1915 | 9,029 | 2,214 | 6,815 | 75.5 1916 | 9,100 | 2,958 | 6,142 | 67.5 1917 | 9,159 | 2,838 | 6,321 | 69.0 1918 | 11,143 | 2,604 | 8,539 | 76.6 ======================================================== Taken from Kawakami, _Japan Review_, vol. iv., p. 76. APPENDIX I DISTRIBUTION OF JAPANESE AND CHINESE POPULATION IN THE UNITED STATES. DISTRIBUTION OF JAPANESE POPULATION. ====================================================== Census. | 1880 | 1890 | 1900 | 1910 -------------------|--------|--------|--------|------- Total United States| 148 | 2039 | 24,326 | 72,157 -------------------|--------|--------|--------|------- New England | 14 | 45 | 89 | 272 Middle Atlantic | 27 | 202 | 446 | 1,643 East North Central | 7 | 101 | 126 | 482 West North Central | 1 | 16 | 223 | 1,000 South Atlantic | 5 | 55 | 29 | 156 East South Central | ... | 19 | 7 | 26 West South Central | ... | 42 | 30 | 428 Mountain | 5 | 27 | 5,107 | 10,447 Pacific | 89 | 1,532 | 18,296 | 57,703 ====================================================== DISTRIBUTION OF CHINESE POPULATION. ======================================================== Census. | 1880 | 1890 | 1900 | 1910 -------------------|---------|---------|--------|------- United States | 105,465 | 107,488 | 89,863 | 71,531 -------------------|---------|---------|--------|------- New England | 401 | 1,488 | 4,203 | 3,499 Middle Atlantic | 1,277 | 4,689 | 10,490 | 8,189 East North Central | 390 | 1,254 | 2,533 | 3,451 West North Central | 423 | 1,097 | 1,135 | 1,195 South Atlantic | 74 | 669 | 1,791 | 1,582 East South Central | 90 | 274 | 427 | 414 West South Central | 758 | 1,173 | 1,555 | 1,303 Mountain | 14,274 | 11,572 | 7,950 | 5,614 Pacific | 87,828 | 85,272 | 59,779 | 46,320 ======================================================== Taken from Gulick, _American Democracy and Asiatic Citizenship_, pp. 152, 177. APPENDIX J DISTRIBUTION OF JAPANESE IN UNITED STATES. (_According to Consular Division as Reported by Foreign Department, Japan._) ================================================== Districts. | Male. | Female. | Total for 1919. --------------|--------|---------|---------------- Seattle | 14,568 | 4,397 | 18,965 Portland | 5,829 | 1,637 | 7,466 San Francisco | 37,375 | 16,578 | 53,953 Los Angeles | 22,644 | 9,861 | 32,505 Chicago | 2,336 | 378 | 2,714 New York | 3,320 | 284 | 3,604 |--------|---------|---------------- | 86,072 | 33,135 | 119,207 ================================================== APPENDIX K AN ABSTRACT OF EXPATRIATION LAW OF JAPAN =Article XVIII.=--When a Japanese, by becoming the wife of a foreigner, has acquired the husband's nationality, then such Japanese loses her Japanese nationality. =Article XX.=--A person who voluntarily acquires a foreign nationality loses Japanese nationality. In case a Japanese subject, who has acquired foreign nationality by reason of his or her birth in a foreign country has domiciled in that country, he or she may be expatriated with the permission of the Minister of State for Home Affairs. The application for the permission referred to in the preceding paragraph shall be made by the legal representative in case the person to be expatriated is younger than fifteen years of age. If the person in question is a minor above fifteen years of age, or a person adjudged incompetent, the application can be made with the consent of his or her legal representative or guardian. A stepfather, a stepmother, a legal mother, or a guardian may not make the application or give the consent prescribed in the preceding paragraph without the consent of the family council. A person who has been expatriated loses Japanese nationality. =Article XXIV.=--Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding six articles a male of full seventeen years or upwards does not lose Japanese nationality, unless he has completed active service in the army or navy, or he is under no obligation to enter into it. A person who actually occupies an official post--civil or military--does not lose Japanese nationality notwithstanding the provisions of the foregoing seven articles. =Article XXVI.=--A person who has lost Japanese nationality in accordance with Article XX may recover Japanese nationality provided that he or she possesses a domicile in Japan, but this does not apply when the person mentioned in Article XVI has lost Japanese nationality. In case the person who has lost Japanese nationality in accordance with the provision of Article XX is younger than fifteen years of age, the application for the permission prescribed in the preceding paragraph shall be made by the father who is the member of the family to which such person belonged at the time of his expatriation; should the father be unable to do so, the application shall be made by the mother; if the mother is unable to do so, by the grandfather; and if the grandfather is unable to do so, then by the grandmother. APPENDIX L A MINUTE OF HEARING AT SEATTLE, WASHINGTON, BEFORE THE HOUSE SUB-COMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION DIRECT EXAMINATION July 27, 1920. Evening Session SEATTLE JAMES SAKAMOTO, produced as a witness, having been first duly sworn, testified as follows: QUESTIONS BY MR. BOX: _Q._ What is your name? _A._ James Sakamoto. _Q._ Where do you live? _A._ 1609 Yesler Way. _Q._ You were born in the United States? _A._ Yes, sir. _Q._ Where were you born? _A._ In Seattle, Washington. _Q._ Right here? _A._ Yes. _Q._ Are you full of Seattle spirits? _A._ You bet. _Q._ You only refer to one kind. How old are you? _A._ Seventeen. I was born in 1903; March 22d. _Q._ You go to school here? _A._ Oh, yes. _Q._ In the high school? _A._ The Franklin High. _Q._ About how many boys are there here in and about Seattle that were born here, along about your age, from three or four years younger to two or three years older? _A._ Well, I only know of the fellows that I associate with. I can't tell you the fellows that I don't know about. _Q._ Do you know a number? _A._ I don't know many of them. _Q._ A half a dozen? _Q._ How many in your high school are Japanese boys? _A._ I think I am the only one. _Q._ Are there many young ladies? Do you know this young lady that just testified? _A._ Yes, sir. _Q._ Are there many such nice looking girls as she is in Seattle? _A._ You better ask them. _Q._ You get along all right in school? _A._ Oh, yes, sir. _Q._ You don't have any trouble with your classes, and boys? _A._ I have lots of fun. _Q._ You have a good time? _A._ Yes, sir. _Q._ Did you attend the Japanese Language School? _A._ Yes, sir; eight years. _Q._ What did they teach you there? _A._ Taught me Japanese. _Q._ The Japanese language? _A._ Yes, sir. _Q._ Did they teach you Japanese history? _A._ I wasn't able to learn very quick. _Q._ You were not very quick to learn, but they did that, teach the history of Japan? _A._ They tried to. _Q._ Didn't they succeed with a boy as bright as you are, going to high school? _A._ They were successful, but I did not succeed. See? _Q._ You read the Japanese language now? _A._ I can't read it; it is too hard. _Q._ You really can't read any? _A._ There are three different kinds of words and letters. I can read the easiest. _Q._ In other words, you have adopted the road of least resistance with the Japanese language? _A._ Sure. _Q._ You talk Japanese with your parents? _A._ In a simple, broken language. _Q._ Do they talk English? _A._ They can't talk English. They have been here quite long, but they have never had a chance to talk English. _Q._ Let me ask you this; do you get along very well with them? _A._ In my home? _Q._ Yes. _A._ Sure. They are my father and mother. _Q._ (Mr. Siegel.) And you say that you don't understand the Japanese language sufficiently well to carry on a conversation with them? _A._ I understand them, but that is about all. _Q._ How do they arrange to get along with you, if you can't speak the language orally? _A._ They just about guess what I am trying to tell them. _Q._ In other words, you are always asking for money. Is that the principal idea? _A._ May be, not any more, but I used to. _Q._ When they talk to you, you understand them all right? _A._ Oh, yes; I understand them. _Q._ (Mr. Raker.) Would you tell us why, you haven't, or didn't, and haven't given more attention and worked harder to become familiar with the Japanese language and history? _A._ That is a hard question to ask me just now. _Q._ I know it is, but I think you know, my boy; tell us in your own language, in your own way? _A._ Well, suppose we go to school five hours a day, the American school. We attend Japanese school for two hours; that is overwork two hours, you see, and we don't get paid for over time. _Q._ I guess you are about pretty near right, didn't I? You are the kind of a fellow that is going to be thinking a little about money as you grow up, and you are going to make it in Seattle. _A._ I haven't got a business. _Q._ (Mr. Raker.) What I was asking that question for, I am going to put it direct. I want you to give me your good frank answer, which I know you will. Is it your determination when you get a little older, and begin to think over the situation, that you want to become familiar with the English language and understand the American ways rather than to devote your time to Japanese ways and language? _A._ Well, I want to be an American more than a Japanese. I was born here. _Q._ That is one of the reasons you haven't devoted your time to the Japanese language. How old were you when you started? _A._ I started the same year when I went to Grammar School. _Q._ That was when? _A._ Five years old. Five years old I started to kindergarten, and at six I started to Grammar School. _Q._ So when you started to kindergarten did you start in the Japanese School? _A._ No, when I was six. _Q._ And you did that from the time you were six until you were fourteen? _A._ I think that is right, fourteen. _Q._ How old are you now? _A._ Seventeen. _Q._ You have to renounce the Japanese Emperor before you are seventeen? _A._ I don't know a thing about it. _Q._ You know, don't you, that you are claimed as a citizen by Japan, and also by the United States. _A._ I don't care. I was born here. _Q._ Is it your intention to remain an American citizen or be a Japanese citizen? _A._ Why shouldn't I remain an American? I was born here. Why should I go back there? This is my home here. _Q._ You intend to remain an American citizen? _A._ Nobody is going to stop me. _Q._ That's what I want to get at. Do you remember when you were first told that you were a native-born American citizen; do you remember when that was first told you? _A._ I don't know. _Q._ How long have you felt the pride that you are a young American citizen? How long have you held that feeling of pride? _A._ Since I went to Grammar School. _Q._ Has every young Japanese boy here expressed that feeling as you do to us; have you heard them talk about it? _A._ They don't talk about it much. It is mostly their home training. My father and mother don't care whether I am an American. They would rather have me an American. _Q._ And they have encouraged you to be an American? _A._ Sure. _Q._ And your teachers have? _A._ Oh, yes, naturally. _Q._ And you like the idea? _A._ Sure. _Q._ Your father and mother intend to remain here all their lives, do they, as far as you know? _A._ Well, I would like to have them go back and see their home once again, but that is about all. I don't know what I can do. _Q._ (Mr. Vaile.) As far as you know, their own intention is to live here, except for a visit home, perhaps, the rest of their lives? _A._ Yes, sir. _Q._ Suppose you visit Japan. You know, don't you, that the Japanese Emperor still claims you as his subject? Suppose you are required to render military service to Japan, what would be your position on that subject? _A._ It would be a pretty difficult one, but I will get out of it. _Q._ Following that, suppose you were required to render military service to the United States, what will be your position? _A._ I will get in. _Q._ Exactly. We are glad to meet you. Good luck to you. (_Witness Excused._) APPENDIX M COMPARATIVE STANDING OF INTELLIGENCE AND BEHAVIOR OF AMERICAN-BORN JAPANESE CHILDREN AND AMERICAN CHILDREN DISCUSSED BY SEVERAL PRINCIPALS OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS OF LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA. _Request Sent to the Board of Education of Los Angeles, California._ December 24, 1920. President of the Board of Education, Los Angeles, California. MY DEAR SIR: I am collecting data on the intellectual and moral status of American-born Japanese children. Among the data the most important, I need hardly say, are their school records. I shall highly appreciate your courtesy if you will be pleased to provide me with the valuable information you have at your command bearing on the subject. What I am particularly interested in is the average record of American-born Japanese children and its comparison with the record of American children. Yours very respectfully, (Signed) T. IYENAGA. _Method of Gathering Material_ December 31, 1920. DEAR MR. SHAFER: May I trouble you to select two of your schools in which you have the largest Japanese attendance and secure for me at your earliest possible convenience data as to the number of Japanese children in those schools and the points about them that are touched upon in the accompanying letter? My thought is this--that if we secure records from two or three schools where we have the largest Japanese attendance, this will suffice as a basis for decision as to the other such schools. MRS. DORSEY. January 7, 1921. Mrs. Adda Wilson Hunter, _Principal_, Moneta School, Miss Mary A. Colestock, _Principal_, Hewitt St. School, Miss Mary A. Henderson, _Principal_, Amelia St. School, Miss Lizzie A. McKenzie, _Principal_, Hobart Blvd. School. A communication has been received from Dr. T. Iyenaga stating that he is collecting data on the intellectual and moral status of American-born Japanese children. He is anxious to know the average record of American-born Japanese children in the schools and how it compares with the record of American children. Will you kindly send me statement concerning the results in your schools? Very truly yours, _Assistant Superintendent_. _Replies_ (1) _Office of the Principal of Hewitt St. School, District No. 151_ Report of American-born Japanese Children. January 17, 1921. MY DEAR MR. SHAFER: The American-born Japanese children, who are enrolled in this school, compare most favorably with the American children both intellectually and morally. They are like all groups of children. We find some very bright children and some very dull ones. As a whole, they are more persevering and more dependable than the class of white children found in this school. Miss Oliver, who has been working with the Japanese for the past four years, said, "When with them I feel that I am in the company of well-bred Americans." Truly yours, MARY A. COLESTOCK, _Prin._ (2) _Amelia St. School, City_ January 19, 1921. MR. HARRY M. SHAFER, _Assistant Superintendent_, Los Angeles City Public Schools, Los Angeles, California. DEAR MR. SHAFER: My general observation has been that given anything of an equal chance, children are children, human nature is human nature, and brains are brains--whatever the mother tongue may be. Compared with our other foreign children, or with other children born in America of foreign parentage not Japanese, keeping in mind the differences in social position that exist in all classes, whatever the nationality may be, I cannot see much difference along any line between our Japanese children and our Mexicans, our French and our Italians; nor do I think any of them differ radically from what we are apt to term "American" children. Few families are many generations away from some foreign ancestors.... Our Japanese children are called brighter and more studious, sometimes, than the others. I think this is due to the fact that they have, in many cases, ambitious, educated parents who follow school work up very closely in the home. Where home restrictions are lifted, such conditions do not always prevail, any more than in cases of other neglected children. _They must_ be studious. Discipline of American-born Japanese children is not so close in the home as it seems to be with children born in Japan and reared along Japanese lines, yet such children show much more initiative in all of their work at school. They catch the American spirit. As summary, I would say that physically, mentally, morally, given the same chance, there does not seem to me to be a great difference among children of the different nationalities, but this difference is most readily noticed. The other nationalities do assimilate quickly, and lose, to a great extent, their parents' national traits in short time; but it is exceedingly hard to get the same results with our Japanese children. They cling to one another, to their own ways, and to their own language, even after many years of work in public schools, where most social barriers are broken down. My personal feeling in the matter is that this condition is the result of lack of American education in the Japanese homes and lack of American touch with the Japanese mothers. Our Home teachers are doing much to help along this line, but it is slow work, and work that takes much time, and requires great tact on part of the workers. Most important to me is the work our public schools are doing with the Japanese girls, the mothers of tomorrow. Yours respectfully, MARY A. HENDERSON. (3) _Report of Intellectual and Moral Status of American-born Japanese Children_ MONETA SCHOOL, LOS ANGELES SCHOOL DIST. As a rule American-born Japanese children know no English when entering school. Their progress at first, therefore, is more slow than that of English speaking children. Japanese children require one year to complete one half year's work through the first, second, and third grades. After the third grade they complete the work in the time assigned. They are especially good in handwork. Their chief difficulty is with English. In application they rank high. As to their moral status they are neither better nor worse than other children. MRS. ADDA WILSON HUNTER, _Principal Moneta School_. January 14, 1921. _Report of Intellectual and Moral Status of American-Born Japanese Children_ ========================================================================= Grade| Amer.- |Time to |Standard|Average | Rank |Appli- |1. In What Do | Born |Complete| Age of | Age of | in |cation.| They Excel? |Japanese |Work of | Grade. |Am.-Born|Class.| |2. What is |Enrolled.| 1/2 | |Jap'se. | | | Greatest | | Year. | | | | | Drawback? -----|---------|--------|--------|--------|------|-------|--------------- | | | | | | | Kgn. | 13 | 1 yr. |4-1/2-6 | 5 | | Good |1. Handwork. | | | | | | |2. Do not speak | | | | | | | English. | | | | | | | B-1 | 21 | 1 yr. | 6-7 | | | Good |1. Drawing, | | | | | | | writing, | | | | | | | handwork. | | | | | | |2. Do not speak | | | | | | | English. | | | | | | | A-1 | 4 | 1 yr. | 6-7 | 9 | | Good |1. Handwork. | | | | | | |2. Do not speak | | | | | | | English. | | | | | | | B-2 | 2 | 1 yr. | 7-8 | 9 | | Good |1. Handwork. | | | | | | |2. Do not speak | | | | | | | English. | | | | | | | A-2 | 3 | 1 yr. | 7-8 | 10 | | Good |1. Handwork. | | | | | | |2. Do not speak | | | | | | | English. | | | | | | | B-3 | 2 | 5 mos. | 8-9 | 10 |Excel.| Poor |1. Spelling, | | | | | | | arithmetic. | | | | | | |2. English. | | | | | | | A-3 | 3 | 1 yr. | 8-9 | 10 | Fair | Good |1. Spelling, | | | | | | | arithmetic. | | | | | | |2. English. | | | | | | | B-4 | 1 | 5 mos. | 9-10 | 9 |Excel.| Excel.|1. Arithmetic. | | | | | | |2. English. | | | | | | | A-4 | 1 | 5 mos. | 9-10 | 11 |Excel.| Excel.|1. Arithmetic, | | | | | | | spelling. | | | | | | |2. English. | | | | | | | B-5 | 2 | 5 mos. | 10-11 | 11 |Excel.| Excel.|1. Arithmetic, | | | | | | | spelling. | | | | | | |2. English. | | | | | | | B-6 | 2 | 5 mos. | 11-12 | 10 | Good | Excel.|1. History, | | | | | | | geography. | | | | | | |2. Arithmetic. | | | | | | | A-6 | 1 | 5 mos. | 11-12 | 12-1/2 |Excel.| Excel.|1. Arithmetic, | | | | | | | history. | | | | | | |2. Geography. | | | | | | | ========================================================================= (4) HOBART BLVD. SCHOOL, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA, January 13, 1921. MR. HARRY M. SHAFER, _Assistant Supt. City Schools_. MY DEAR MR. SHAFER: In reply to your inquiry relative to the American-born Japanese pupils of our school, I enclose statement as to results noted in the various classes. Trusting that this may serve the purpose desired, and appreciating your very kindly interest, Sincerely, LIZZIE A. MCKENZIE, _Principal_. Hobart Blvd. School. January 13, 1921. _Report on Japanese Pupils_ (American-born) Many of the Japanese fail in First Grade on account of inability to understand the English language. In succeeding grades, progress is satisfactory as shown by the following tabulation of current date: ==================== | To Be Enrolled.|Promoted. ---------|---------- B-1 16 | 10 A-1 7 | 6 B-2 5 | 5 A-2 4 | 4 B-3 1 | 1 A-3 1 | 1 B-4 2 | 2 A-4 0 | B-5 2 | 1 A-5 1 | 1 B-6 1 | 1 A-6 0 | Total enrolled, 40. Total promoted, 32. ==================== We find these children as a rule clever in use of pen and crayon, possessing light touch, having correct ideas of form, and excellent taste in selection of color. As pupils they follow direction well, and are usually free from faults of rudeness or improper language. Of the forty above Kindergarten, three are troublesome and are persistent cases. In general, it may be said that these children as a class compare favorably with others in matters of progress and of conduct as well. LIZZIE A. MCKENZIE, _Principal_. LITERATURE ON THE SUBJECT BOOKS ANNALS OF AMERICAN ACADEMY OF POLITICAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE, January, 1921. _Present Day Immigration with Special Reference to the Japanese._ ANNALS OF AMERICAN ACADEMY OF POLITICAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE, September, 1909. _Chinese and Japanese in America._ GULICK, SYDNEY L. _American Democracy and Asiatic Citizenship._ Scribners, New York, 1918. _The American-Japanese Problem._ Scribners, New York, 1914. ICHIHASHI, Y. _Japanese Immigration._ Marshall Press, San Francisco, 1915. KAWAKAMI, K. K. _American-Japanese Relations._ Revell, New York, 1912. _Asia at the Door._ Revell, New York, 1914. _Japan in the World Politics._ Revell, New York, 1917. MASAOKA, N. (Editor). _Japan to America._ G. P. Putnam's Sons, New York, 1915. MILLIS, H. A. _The Japanese Problem in the United States._ McMillan, New York, 1915. PITKIN, WALTER B. _Must We Fight Japan?_ The Century Co., New York, 1921. RUSSELL, LINDSAY (Editor). _America to Japan._ G. P. Putnam's Sons, New York, 1915. SCHERER, J. A. A. _The Japanese Crisis._ Stokes, 1915. THE JAPANESE-AMERICAN NEWS. _The Japanese-American Year Book_, 1910 and 1918. San Francisco. OFFICIAL PUBLICATIONS Annual Reports of the United States Commissioner-General of Immigration. Bureau of Labor (California). Biennial Reports, and especially, "Report on the Japanese in California." California and the Oriental. Report of California State Board of Control, with Governor Wm. D. Stephens's letter addressed to Secretary of State Bainbridge Colby. California State Printing Office, Sacramento, 1920. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census. Chinese and Japanese in the United States, 1910. Bulletin 127, Washington Printing Office, 1914. Immigration Commission. Changes in Bodily Form of Descendants of Immigrant. Senate Document, No. 208, 61st Congress, 2nd Session. Washington Government Printing Office, 1910. Immigration Laws of the United States. (Revised Federal Statutes). KAHN, CONGRESSMAN. Japanese-California Problem. Congressional Record, 60, 4: 78-82, December 9, 1920. METCALF, SECRETARY. Report on the Japanese School Question. Naturalization Laws of the United States. (Revised Federal Statutes.) Reports of the Immigration Commission. Immigrants in the Industries, Vols. 23, 24, 25, Senate Document, No. 633, 61st Congress. ROOSEVELT, THEODORE. Presidential Message to Congress, 1907. House of Representatives; Message of the President of the United States, and Accompanying Documents. Part I; pp. 492-846. Ex. Doc. No. 1. PAMPHLETS CALIFORNIA FARMERS' CO-OPERATIVE ASSOCIATION. _Japanese Immigration and the Japanese in California_, 1919. CLEMENT, E. W. _Expatriation of Japanese Abroad._ Japanese Association of America, San Francisco, 1916. ELIOT, CHAS. W. _Friendship between the United States and Japan._ Japanese Merchants' Association, Portland, Oregon. GADSBY, JOHN. _Foreign Land-Ownership and Leasing in Japan_, 1920. Japanese Association of America, San Francisco, 1914. GULICK, SYDNEY L. _How Shall Immigration be Regulated?_ 1920. _Japan and the Gentlemen's Agreement._ 1920. _The New Anti-Japanese Agitation._ 1920. ICHIHASHI, Y. _Japanese Immigration, Its Status in California._ 1913. IRISH, JOHN P. _Campaign of Lies, Stolen Letters of Senator Phelan._ 1920. _Shall Japanese-Americans in Idaho be Treated with Fairness and Justice or Not?_ 1921. KAWAKAMI, K. K. _Senator Phelan, Dr. Gulick and I._ Bureau of Literary Service, San Francisco, 1920. LAMONT, THOMAS, AND OTHERS. _Japan._ 1920. PEOPLE'S LEAGUE OF JUSTICE. _Petition by People's League of Justice_, Los Angeles, California, 1920. REA, GEORGE BRONSON. _Japan's Right to Exist._ _Far Eastern Review_, Shanghai, China, 1920. ROOSEVELT, T. _America and Japan._ Reprint from the New York _Times_. SHIMA, GEORGE. _An Appeal To Justice._ 1920. TAFT, HENRY W. _Our Relations with Japan._ Japan Society, New York, 1920. THE AMERICAN COMMITTEE OF JUSTICE. _California and the Japanese._ Oakland, California, December, 1920. TYNDALL, PHILIP. _Proposed Initiative Measure to be Presented to the Legislature of 1921_, Seattle, Washington. VANDERLIP, FRANK. _Mr. Vanderlip's Message._ WALLACE, J. B. _Waving the Yellow Flag in California._ Reprinted from the Dearborn Independent. WILLIAMS, B. H. _The Case against the Japanese._ 1920. ARTICLES IN PERIODICALS "America and the Japanese Relations." WAINWRIGHT, S. H. _Outlook_, 124: 392, March, 1920. "America's Responsibility on the Pacific." GREENBIE, S. _North American Review_, 212: 71-79, July, 1920. "Another Japanese Problem." MCLEOD, H. _New Republic_, 24: 184-6, October 20, 1920. "Anti-Japanese Agitation." _Business Chronicle_, 9, 18: 137-49, September, 1920. "Asia's American Problem." ROBINSON, GEROID. _Pacific Review_, 367-388, December, 1920. "California and the Japanese." KAWAKAMI, K. K. _Nation_, 112: 173-174, February 2, 1921. "California and the Oriental." The Letter of WM. D. STEPHENS to the Secretary of State Colby. _The Pacific Review_, 349-361, December, 1920. "California-Japanese Problem." _The Pacific Voice_, 5, 10: 4-10. "California-Japanese Question." WOOLSEY, THEODORE S. _The American Journal of International Laws_, Oxford Press, 15, 1: 24-26, January, 1921. "Co-operation between Japan and America." KANEKO, K. _Japan Review_, 24-26, December, 1920. "Discrimination against the Japanese." _New Republic_, 24: 135-6. "Future of Japanese-American Relations." SHIDEHARA, K. _Japan Review_, 170-171, April, 1920. "Hegemony of the Pacific." _Living Age_, 316: 638-40. "Japan, a Great Economic Power." LONGFORD, J. H. _Nineteenth Century_, 523: 526-39, September, 1920. "Japan and America." _Far Eastern Review_, 16: 335-36. "Japan and the United States, a Suggestion." OTTO, M. C. _Japan Review_, 334-336, October, 1920. "Japan and the Japanese-California Problem." IYENAGA, T. _Current History_, 13, 1: 1-7, October, 1920. "Japan as Colonizer." _Stead's Review_, 53, 7: 358-9. "Japan Challenges Us to Control California." STODDARD, L. _World's Work_, 40: 48-85. "Japan Our New Customer." STARRETT, W. A. _Scribner's_, 66: 517-18. "Japan's Diplomacy of Necessity." _Living Age_, 316: 638-640. "Japan's New Difficulties with China." _The New York Times Current History_, 457-458, December, 1920. "Japan's Use of Her Hegemony." FERGUSON, J. C. _North American Review_, 210: 456-459. "Japan's Aggression." INMAN, J. M. _Forum_, 65, 1: 1-9, January, 1921. "Japanese-American Relations." SHIDEHARA, K. _Outlook_, 125: 317-18, June 16, 1920. "Japanese-American Relations." YOSHINO, SAKUZO. _Pacific Review_, 418-421, December, 1920. "Japanese and the Pacific Coast." RYDER, R. W. _North American Review_, 213, 1: 1-15, January, 1921. "Japanese Farmers' Contribution to California." CHIBA, TOYOJI. _Japan Review_, 212-13, May, 1920. "Japanese Imperialism in Siberia." CHAMBERLAIN, W. H. _Nation_, 110: 798-9. "Japanese in America." TRENT, P. J. _Review of Reviews_, 61: 76-8, June, 1920. "Japanese in California." BRIGGS, A. H.; JOHNSON, H. B.; LOOFBOUROW, I. J. _Japan Review_, 166-170, April, 1920. "Japanese in California." IRISH, JOHN P. _Japan Review_, 7-72, January, 1920. "Japanese in California." JORDAN, D. S. _The Pacific Review_, 316-65, December, 1920. "Japanese Issue in California." STODDARD, L. _World's Work_, 40, 5: 585-600, September, 1920. "Japanese Language Schools." KAWAKAMI, K. K. _Japan Review_, 14-15, January, 1921. "Japanese Problem in California." LOCAN, C. A. _Current History_, 13: 7-11, October, 1920. "Japanese Pupils and American Schools." FULTON, C. W. _North American Review_, December, 1906. "Japanese Question." _Kawakami, K. K._ _Pacific Review_, 365-78, December, 1920. "Japanese Views of California." _Literary Digest_, 67, 1: 20-1. "Japanthropy." WOOLSTON, H. D. _Pacific Review,_ 289-96, December, 1920. "Legal Aspects of the Japanese Question." MCMURRAY, ORRIN K. _Pacific Review_, 396-403, December, 1920. "Liberalism in Japan." DEWEY, JOHN. _Dial_, 63: 283-5; 335-7; 369-71. "Light on the Japanese Question." KINNEY, H. W. _Atlantic Monthly_, 126: 832-42, December, 1920. "Moral Factors in Japanese Policy." BLAND, J. O. P. _Asia_, 211-217, March, 1920. "Oriental Immigration from the Canadian Standpoint." BAGGS, THEODORE H. _Pacific Review,_ 408-418, December, 1920. "Oriental in California." IRISH, JOHN P. _Overland_, 75: 332-3, April, 1920. "Oriental Problem, as the Coast See It." HART, J. A. _World's Work_, March, 1906. "Oriental Question and Popular Diplomacy." PRUETT, ROBERT L. _Japan Review_, 291-92, August, 1920. "Possum and the Dinosaur." MASON, G. _Outlook_, 125: 319-20, June 16, 1920. "Race Prejudice: Psychological Analysis." SATO, K. _Japan Review_, 237-238, June, 1920. "Shall East and West Never Meet?" SATO, K. _Japan Review_, 336-37, October, 1920. "Some Aspects of the So-called Japanese Problem." VANDERLIP, F. A. _Outlook_, 125: 380-4. "What are the Japanese Doing towards Americanization?" SASAMORI, JUNZO. _Japan Review_, 22-24, December, 1920. "What Japan Wants." ADACHI, K. _Nation_, 181-82, February 2, 1921. "When East is West," GULICK, SYDNEY L. _Outlook_, 102: 12-14, April 3, 1920. INDEX Adaptability, Japanese disposition of, 20 Æsthetic temperament of Japanese, 13 Age distribution of Japanese in California, 112 Agreement, Root-Takahira, 34 Agriculture, Japanese, in California, 120-147; causes of Japanese progress in, 123-126 Ainu, 14 American-born Japanese, 174-177 American disposition, 9 Americanization, criterion of, 151-154 Ancestors, Japanese, 16 Anti-Alien Land Laws, 138-142; effect of, 145; Appendixes C, D Anti-Japanese Agitation, causes of, 75-89 Asiatic policy, Japan's, 33-45 Assimilation, 137; 148-177; and nationalism, 148-159; meaning of, 151-154; biological, 155-162; of Japanese immigrants, 168-174 Australia, Japanese emigration to, 64-67 Birth-rate of Japanese in California, 109-119 Boas, Professor, quoted, 163 Bolsheviki, 38 Buddhism, 25 Bushido, 15, 21 California, causes of Anti-Japanese agitation in, 75; causes of Japanese influx to, 50-63; Christianity among Japanese in, 169-170; competition in, 133-135; congestion of Japanese in, 87-89; cultural assimilation of Japanese in, 166-168; genesis of hostility towards Japanese in, 71; population of, 93; problem, 7 Canada, Japanese emigration to, 67-69 Capitalism, 29 Castle, Professor, quoted, 159 Chiba, T., quoted, 129 China, Japan's coöperation with, 42-45 Chinese, 23, 95 Chivalry, proletarian, 21 Christianity, 28 Colonization, Japanese policy of, 18 Confucianism, 25, 27 Congressional sub-Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, 176 Constitution, Japanese, 11 Democracy, industrial, 31 Democratic institutions, Japanese training in, 172 Den Do Dan, 169-170 Despotism, Japanese, 22 Dewey, Professor John, 29 Dispersal of Japanese in California, 189 Disposition, Japanese, 20 Dual nationality, 191 East and West, 4, 195-196 Economic status of Japanese in California, 171 Education, system of, 31 Emotional nature, of Japanese, 9 English, Japanese ability to command, 170 Eta, 18 Eurasiatic relationship, 6 Expatriation Law of Japan, Appendix K Farmers, Japanese, in California, 132-138 Fishberg, Dr., quoted, 164 "Gentlemen's Agreement," 100-106 German, influence on Japan, 30; idealism, 32 _Gikyoshin_, 21 Group consciousness of Japanese, 16 Gulick, Dr. Sydney L., quoted, 157 _Hara kiri_, 12 Hearn, Lafcadio, 44 Hedonism, Japanese, 15 Hideyoshi, 10 History of Japanese, 10, 20 Humanism, 32 Immigration to Australia, 64-67 Canada, 67-69 South America, 69 United States, 69-75 Industrial democracy, 31 Intelligence of Japanese in California, 170 Intermarriage, 155-162 Japan, topographical conditions of, 13; Nature of, 14 Japan's, Asiatic Policy, 33; land area, 52; agriculture, 52-55; industry, 57-62; population, 55-57; social conditions, 62-63 Japanese, ability to speak English, 170; age distribution of, in California, 112; agriculture in California, 120-147; ancestors, 16; assimilability of, 148-177; birth rate in California, 109-119; civilization of, 14; Constitution, 11; death rate of, in California, 117; descendants in California, 164-166, 174-177; economic status of, in California, 171; farm labor, 126-131; farmers in California, 132-138; immigration to America, 97-107; Land Laws, 142-145; morality of, in California, 168-169; nationality, 85-86; number of, in California, 91; philosophy, 24; sex distribution of, in California, 112; social system, 30; susceptibility of, 12; training in civics, 172 Jesuit Fathers, 10 Jones and East, quoted, 159 _Kikotsu_, 21 Kipling, quoted, 4 Kojiki, 16 Korea, amalgamation of, 34; local self-government in, 36; situation in, 35-37 Koreans, 18 Kusama, Shiko, note, 170 Labor, 30 Land, amount held by Japanese in California, 135-137 Land Laws, Anti-Alien, 138-142; Appendixes C and D League of Nations, 19 Lippman, Walter, note, 86 Manchuria, 37 Mankind, 6 Marriage, Japanese, 11 Millis, Professor H. A., quoted, 157 Morality of Japanese in California, 168-169 Morris, Roland, 186 Myth, 17 Nationalism, 148 Native-born Japanese, 174 Nevada, 23 Newlands, U. S. Senator, 23 Nihongi, 16 Nitobé, Dr., 22 Number of Japanese in California, 91 Oakesmith, John, quoted, 176 Occidental learning, 26 Occidentalism, ultra, 19 _Otokodate_, 21 Pacific Coast, 193-194 Passports, 103 Patriotism of Japanese, 17 Perry, Commodore, 3 Philosophy, Japanese, 24 Picture brides, 113 Political rights of Japanese, 31 Politics as a cause of agitation, 80-82 Population of Japanese in California, 90-97 Positivism, English, 28 Pragmatism, 29, 32 Pride of Japanese, 11, 19 Propaganda, 83 Race war, 7 Racial difference, 83-85 Radicals, Japanese, 20 Relationship, American Japanese, 7 Roosevelt, Theodore, 33 Root-Takahira Agreement, 34 Russo-Japanese war, 18 Sakura, Sogoro, 22 Samurai, 12, 15 San Francisco Chamber of Commerce, 187 Santayana, 29 Science, lack of, in Japan, 15 Sex distribution of Japanese in California, 113 Shantung, 39 Shibusawa, Viscount, 186 Smuggling of Japanese to United States, 107-109 Social, force, 23; _milieu_ as affecting man, 165; reorganization, 29 South America, Japanese emigration to, 69 State Board of Control of California, 96 Stephens, Governor, quoted, 5, 23, 122 Suicide in Japan, 12 Thought, Japanese, 29 Tokugawa régime, 22 Traits, Japanese, 9 Treaty, American-Japanese, 187, Appendix B United States, the, Japanese immigration to, 69-74 Unity, national, 17 Utilitarians, 29 Vanderlip, Frank, 187 Wang Yang Ming, 26 White and yellow races, 5 Wilson, Woodrow, quoted, 154 Women, status of Japanese, 31 Yamato race, 14 "Yellow peril," 82 Young Japan, 14 FOOTNOTES: [1] _The System of Samurai Ethics and Obligations of Honor._ [2] See "The New Chino-Japanese Treaties and Their Import," by T. Iyenaga, in _The American Review of Reviews_, September, 1915. [3] According to the result of the census taken on October 1, 1920, the Japanese population of South Manchuria stands at 154,998 souls. Of this total, those living at Dairen number 63,745; Fushun, 12,659; Mukden, 12,268; Port Arthur, 9379; Antung, 7057, and Anshan, 6678, while those resident in the jurisdiction of Kwantung Province number 74,893. [4] One dollar U. S. currency is approximately two yen. [5] For a complete tabulation of Japanese immigration see appendix F. [6] Tokyo Emigration Co., Toyo Emigration Co., were the most conspicuous. [7] Report of the Royal Commission appointed to inquire into the methods by which Oriental laborers were induced to come to Canada in 1909. [8] Report as cited, p. 54. [9] Those who voted in the negative for the initiative bill were 222,086 against 668,483 in the affirmative. [10] _Stakes of Diplomacy_, by Walter Lippman, p. 40. [11] Report published on October 5, 1920, by the Bureau of Commercial Affairs, Foreign Office, Tokyo, Japan. [12] _California and the Oriental, State Board of Control of California, 1920_, p. 30. [13] _California and the Oriental_, p. 27. [14] For detailed comparison of geographical distribution of Chinese and Japanese see Appendix I. [15] See Appendix G. [16] _California and the Oriental_, p. 31. [17] Total number of Japanese born in California so far is approximately 30,000, of which about 5000 have either died or live in Japan. [18] Annual Report of Commissioner-General of Immigration. [19] _Immigration Laws--Rules of November 15, 1911_, published by U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Immigration, March 10, 1913. [20] _Japan Year Book_, 1920, p. 34. [21] _Pacific Review_, vol. i., No. 3, p. 363; "The Japanese in California," by David S. Jordan. [22] Bulletin 127, 1914, p. 8. [23] The following data are reported by the Bureau of Census, Washington, in preliminary publication of 1920 census: The Japanese population by sex in 1920 is male 44,364, female 25,832; for 1910, male 35,116, female 6,240; and for 1900, male 9,598, female 553. The per cent. distribution by sex of the Japanese in 1920 is male 63.2 per cent., female 36.8 per cent.; for 1910 male 84.9 per cent., female 15.1 per cent.; and for 1900, male 94.6 per cent., female 5.4 per cent. [24] Gulick, S. L., _Japan and the Gentlemen's Agreement_, 1920, p. 7. [25] _World Almanac 1921_, p. 476-9. [26] _World Almanac 1920_, p. 487. [27] The birth rate of immigration population in Massachusetts was 49.1 in 1910. [28] _Senate Document_, vol. lxv., 61st Congress. [29] _Senate Document_, vol. lxv., 61st Congress. [30] Of the forty-one answers to the questionnaires sent to the County Farm Commissioners in California by the Board of Control asking them to give pertinent facts concerning the methods used by these races (Orientals) in securing land leases, twenty-five stated: "The Japanese pay more rent in cash or shares"; ten said: "Japanese pay ordinary rent" or "use ordinary means in obtaining lease." _California and the Oriental_, pp. 56-61. [31] _The Japanese Problem in the United States_, pp. 148-49. [32] _California and the Oriental_, pp. 56-61. [33] _Ibid._, p. 221. [34] _California and the Oriental_, p. 58. [35] _Immigration Commission Reports_, vol. xxiii., chap. iv. [36] _Japanese-American Year Book_, 1918, p. 10. [37] _The Japanese Problem in the United States_, p. 123. [38] For detailed comparison of crops raised by white and Japanese farmers see Appendix E. [39] Figures taken from _California and the Oriental_, p. 47. [40] See Appendix B. [41] For full texts of land laws 1913 and 1920 see Appendixes C and D. [42] _California and the Oriental_, p. 104. [43] Mr. Newman in the hearings held at Sacramento, California, in 1913. [44] Millis' _The Japanese Problem in the United States_, p. 275. [45] Gulick, S. L., _The American Japanese Problem_, p. 153. [46] Jones and East, _Inbreeding and Outbreeding--Their Genetic and Sociological Significance_, p. 255. [47] W. E. Castle, _Genetics and Eugenics_, pp. 233-38. [48] _California and the Oriental_, p. 15. [49] "Changes in Bodily Form of Descendants of Immigrants." _Senate Document No. 208_, pp. 7-54. [50] _The Jews: A Study of Race and Environment._ [51] See Appendix A. [52] _The Forum_, January, 1921, p. 3. [53] For this as well as other information the authors are indebted to Mr. S. Kusama, who furnished us with the materials which were carefully prepared by him from first-hand research in California. [54] _Bureau of Census Bulletin 127_, p. 12. [55] _Race and Nationality_, Frederick A. Stokes Co., New York, 1919. [56] See example of testimony in Appendix L. See also Appendix M in which the subject of comparative standing of intelligence and behaviour of native-born Japanese children and American children is discussed by several principals of elementary schools in Southern California. [57] For text of this law see Appendix K. Transcriber's Notes: Passages in italics are indicated by _italics_. Passages in bold are indicated by =bold=. Foonote 18 appears on page 104 of the text, but there is no corresponding marker on the page. 
26064	----	PROBLEMS OF EXPANSION AS CONSIDERED IN PAPERS AND ADDRESSES BY WHITELAW REID NEW YORK THE CENTURY CO. 1900 Copyright, 1898, 1900, by THE CENTURY CO. THE DEVINNE PRESS. PREFATORY NOTE So general have been the expressions as to the value of these scattered papers and addresses that I have thought it a useful service to gather them together from the authorized publications at the time, or, in some cases, from newspaper reports, and (with the consent of the Century Co. and of Mr. John Lane for the copyrighted articles) to embody them consecutively, in the order of their several dates, in this volume. The article entitled "The Territory with which We are Threatened" was prepared before the appointment of its author as a member of the Commission to negotiate terms of peace with Spain, and published only a few days afterward. This circumstance attracted unusual attention to its views about retaining the territory the country had taken. As to the attitude of every one else connected officially with the determination of that question there has been, naturally, more or less diplomatic reserve; but the position of Mr. Reid before he was appointed was thus clearly revealed. When the storm of opposition was apparently reaching its height, in June, 1899, he took occasion to avow explicitly the course it was obvious he must have recommended. In his address at the Seventy-fifth Anniversary of Miami University, referring to some apparently authorized despatches on the subject from Washington, he said: "I readily take the time which hostile critics consider unfavorable, for accepting my own share of responsibility, and for avowing for myself that I declared my belief in the duty and policy of holding the whole Philippine Archipelago in the very first conference of the Commissioners in the President's room at the White House, in advance of any instructions of any sort. If vindication for it be needed, I confidently await the future." This measure of responsibility for the expansion policy upon which the country is launched has necessarily given special interest to Mr. Reid's subsequent discussions of the various problems it has raised. They have been called for on important occasions both abroad and in all parts of our own country. They have covered many phases of the subject, but have preserved a singular uniformity of purpose and consistency of ideas throughout. They appeared at times when public men often seemed to be groping in the dark on an unknown road, but it is now evident that the road which has been taken is substantially the road they marked out. As a foreign critic said in comment on one of the addresses: "The author is one man who knows what he thinks about the new policy required by the new situation in which his country is placed, and has the courage and candor to say it." It has seemed desirable with each paper and address to prefix a brief record of the circumstances under which it was made. A few memoranda which Mr. Reid had prepared to elucidate the text are added, in foot-notes and in the Appendices which include the Resolutions of Congress as to Cuba, the Protocol of Washington, and the text of the Peace of Paris. C. C. BUEL. NEW ROCHELLE, NEW YORK, May 25, 1900. CONTENTS Page I. THE TERRITORY WITH WHICH WE ARE THREATENED 1 In "The Century," September, 1898. II. WAS IT TOO GOOD A TREATY? 25 At the Lotos Club, New York, February 11, 1899. III. PURPORT OF THE TREATY 35 At the Marquette Club, Chicago, February 13, 1899. IV. THE DUTIES OF PEACE 53 At the Ohio Society dinner, New York, February 25, 1899. V. THE OPEN DOOR 65 At the dinner of the American-Asiatic Association, New York, February 23, 1899. VI. SOME CONSEQUENCES OF THE TREATY OF PARIS 71 From "The Anglo-Saxon Review," June, 1899. VII. OUR NEW DUTIES 109 Address at the Seventy-fifth Anniversary of Miami University, June 15, 1899. VIII. LATER ASPECTS OF OUR NEW DUTIES 161 At Princeton University, on Commemoration Day, October 21, 1899. IX. A CONTINENTAL UNION 199 At the Massachusetts Club, Boston, March 3, 1900. X. OUR NEW INTERESTS 221 At the University of California, on Charter Day, March 23, 1900. XI. "UNOFFICIAL INSTRUCTIONS" 259 At the Farewell Banquet to the Philippine Commission, San Francisco, April 12, 1900. APPENDICES 1. POWER TO ACQUIRE AND GOVERN TERRITORY 271 2. THE TARIFF IN UNITED STATES TERRITORY 277 3. THE RESOLUTIONS OF CONGRESS AS TO CUBA 280 4. THE PROTOCOL OF WASHINGTON 282 5. THE PEACE OF PARIS 285 I THE TERRITORY WITH WHICH WE ARE THREATENED This paper first appeared in "The Century Magazine" for September, 1898, for which it was written some time before the author's appointment as a member of the Paris Commission to negotiate the terms of peace with Spain, and, in fact, before hostilities had been suspended or the peace protocol agreed upon in Washington. THE TERRITORY WITH WHICH WE ARE THREATENED Men are everywhere asking what should be our course about the territory conquered in this war. Some inquire merely if it is good policy for the United States to abandon its continental limitations, and extend its rule over semi-tropical countries with mixed populations. Others ask if it would not be the wisest policy to give them away after conquering them, or abandon them. They say it would be ruinous to admit them as States to equal rights with ourselves, and contrary to the Constitution to hold them permanently as Territories. It would be bad policy, they argue, to lower the standard of our population by taking in hordes of West Indians and Asiatics; bad policy to run any chance of allowing these people to become some day joint arbiters with ourselves of the national destinies; bad policy to abandon the principles of Washington's Farewell Address, to which we have adhered for a century, and involve ourselves in the Eastern question, or in the entanglements of European politics. The men who raise these questions are sincere and patriotic. They are now all loyally supporting the Government in the prosecution of the war which some of them were active in bringing on, and others to the last deprecated and resisted. Their doubts and difficulties deserve the fairest consideration, and are of pressing importance. [Sidenote: Duty First, not Policy.] But is there not another question, more important, which first demands consideration? Have we the right to decide whether we shall hold or abandon the conquered territory, solely, or even mainly as a matter of national policy? Are we not bound by our own acts, and by the responsibility we have voluntarily assumed before Spain, before Europe, and before the civilized world, to consider it first in the light of national duty? For that consideration it is not needful now to raise the question whether we were in every particular justifiable for our share in the transactions leading to the war. However men's opinions on that point may differ, the Nation is now at war for a good cause, and has in a vigorous prosecution of it the loyal and zealous support of all good citizens. The President intervened, with our Army and Navy, under the direct command of Congress, to put down Spanish rule in Cuba, on the distinct ground that it was a rule too bad to be longer endured. Are we not, then, bound in honor and morals to see to it that the government which replaces Spanish rule is better? Are we not morally culpable and disgraced before the civilized world if we leave it as bad or worse? Can any consideration of mere policy, of our own interests, or our own ease and comfort, free us from that solemn responsibility which we have voluntarily assumed, and for which we have lavishly spilled American and Spanish blood? Most people now realize from what a mistake Congress was kept by the firm attitude of the President in opposing a recognition of the so-called Cuban Republic of Cubitas. It is now generally understood that virtually there was no Cuban Republic, or any Cuban government save that of wandering bands of guerrilla insurgents, probably less numerous and influential than had been represented. There seems reason to believe that however bad Spanish government may have been, the rule of these people, where they had the power, was as bad; and still greater reason to apprehend that if they had full power, their sense of past wrongs and their unrestrained tropical thirst for vengeance might lead to something worse. Is it for that pitiful result that a civilized and Christian people is giving up its sons and pouring out blood and treasure in Cuba? In commanding the war, Congress pledged us to continue our action until the pacification of the island should be secured. When that happy time has arrived, if it shall then be found that the Cuban insurgents and their late enemies are able to unite in maintaining a settled and peaceable government in Cuba, distinctly free from the faults which now lead the United States to destroy the old one, we shall have discharged our responsibility, and will be at liberty to end our interference. But if not, the responsibility of the United States continues. It is morally bound to secure to Cuba such a government, even if forced by circumstances to furnish it itself. [Sidenote: The Pledge of Congress.] At this point, however, we are checked by a reminder of the further action of Congress, "asserting its determination, when the pacification of Cuba has been accomplished, to leave the government and control of the island to its people." Now, the secondary provisions of any great measure must be construed in the light of its main purpose; and where they conflict, we are led to presume that they would not have been adopted but for ignorance of the actual conditions. Is it not evident that such was the case here? We now know how far Congress was misled as to the organization and power of the alleged Cuban government, the strength of the revolt, and the character of the war the insurgents were waging. We have seen how little dependence could be placed upon the lavish promises of support from great armies of insurgents in the war we have undertaken; and we are beginning to realize the difference between our idea of a humane and civilized "pacification" and that apparently entertained up to this time by the insurgents. It is certainly true that when the war began neither Congress nor the people of the United States cherished an intention to hold Cuba permanently, or had any further thought than to pacify it and turn it over to its own people. But they must pacify it before they turn it over; and, from present indications, to do that thoroughly may be the work of years. Even then they are still responsible to the world for the establishment of a better government than the one they destroy. If the last state of that island should be worse than the first, the fault and the crime must be solely that of the United States. We were not actually forced to involve ourselves; we might have passed by on the other side. When, instead, we insisted on interfering, we made ourselves responsible for improving the situation; and, no matter what Congress "disclaimed," or what intention it "asserted," we cannot leave Cuba till that is done without national dishonor and blood-guiltiness. [Sidenote: Egypt and Cuba.] The situation is curiously like that of England in Egypt. She intervened too, under far less provocation, it must be admitted, and for a cause rather more commercial than humanitarian. But when some thought that her work was ended and that it was time for her to go, Lord Granville, on behalf of Mr. Gladstone's government, addressed the other great European Powers in a note on the outcome of which Congress might have reflected with profit before framing its resolutions. "Although for the present," he said, "a British force remains in Egypt for the preservation of public tranquillity, Her Majesty's government are desirous of withdrawing it as soon as the state of the country and the organization of proper means for the maintenance of the Khedive's authority will admit of it. In the meantime the position in which Her Majesty's government are placed towards His Highness imposes upon them the duty of giving advice, with the object of securing that the order of things to be established shall be of a satisfactory character and possess the elements of stability and progress." As time went on this declaration did not seem quite explicit enough; and accordingly, just a year later, Lord Granville instructed the present Lord Cromer, then Sir Evelyn Baring, that it should be made clear to the Egyptian ministers and governors of provinces that "the responsibility which for the time rests on England obliges Her Majesty's government to insist on the adoption of the policy which they recommend, and that it will be necessary that those ministers and governors who do not follow this course should cease to hold their offices." That was in 1884--a year after the defeat of Arabi, and the "pacification." It is now fourteen years later. The English are still there, and the Egyptian ministers and governors now understand quite well that they must cease to hold their offices if they do not adopt the policy recommended by the British diplomatic agent. If it should be found that we cannot with honor and self-respect begin to abandon our self-imposed task of Cuban "pacification" with any greater speed, the impetuous congressmen, as they read over their own inconsiderate resolutions fourteen years hence, can hide their blushes behind a copy of Lord Granville's letter. They may explain, if they like, with the classical excuse of Benedick, "When I said I would die a bachelor, I did not think I should live till I were married." Or if this seems too frivolous for their serious plight, let them recall the position of Mr. Jefferson, who originally declared that the purchase of foreign territory would make waste paper of the Constitution, and subsequently appealed to Congress for the money to pay for his purchase of Louisiana. When he held such an acquisition unconstitutional, he had not thought he would live to want Louisiana. As to Cuba, it may be fairly concluded that only these points are actually clear: (1) We had made ourselves in a sense responsible for Spain's rule in that island by our consistent declaration, through three quarters of a century, that no other European nation should replace her--Daniel Webster, as Secretary of State, even seeking to guard her hold as against Great Britain. (2) We are now at war because we say Spanish rule is intolerable; and we cannot withdraw our hand till it is replaced by a rule for which we are willing to be responsible. (3) We are also pledged to remain till the pacification is complete. [Sidenote: The Conquered Territories.] In the other territories in question the conditions are different. We are not taking possession of them, as we are of Cuba, with the avowed purpose of giving them a better government. We are conquering them because we are at war with Spain, which has been holding and governing them very much as she has Cuba; and we must strike Spain wherever and as hard as we can. But it must at once be recognized that as to Porto Rico at least, to hold it would be the natural course and what all the world would expect. Both Cuba and Porto Rico, like Hawaii, are within the acknowledged sphere of our influence, and ours must necessarily be the first voice in deciding their destiny. Our national position with regard to them is historic. It has been officially declared and known to every civilized nation for three quarters of a century. To abandon it now, that we may refuse greatness through a sudden craven fear of being great, would be so astonishing a reversal of a policy steadfastly maintained by the whole line of our responsible statesmen since 1823 as to be grotesque. John Quincy Adams, writing in April of that year, as Secretary of State, to our Minister to Spain, pointed out that the dominion of Spain upon the American continents, North and South, was irrevocably gone, but warned him that Cuba and Porto Rico still remained nominally dependent upon her, and that she might attempt to transfer them. That could not be permitted, as they were "natural appendages to the North American continent." Subsequent statements turned more upon what Mr. Adams called "the transcendent importance of Cuba to the United States"; but from that day to this I do not recall a line in our state papers to show that the claim of the United States to control the future of Porto Rico as well as of Cuba was ever waived. As to Cuba, Mr. Adams predicted that within half a century its annexation would be indispensable. "There are laws of political as well as of physical gravitation," he said; and "Cuba, forcibly disjoined from its own unnatural connection with Spain, and incapable of self-support, can gravitate only towards the North American Union, which, by the same law of nature, cannot cast her off from its bosom." If Cuba is incapable of self-support, and could not therefore be left, in the cheerful language of Congress, to her own people, how much less could little Porto Rico stand alone? There remains the alternative of giving Porto Rico back to Spain at the end of the war. But if we are warranted now in making war because the character of Spanish rule in Cuba was intolerable, how could we justify ourselves in handing back Porto Rico to the same rule, after having once emancipated her from it? The subject need not be pursued. To return Porto Rico to Spain, after she is once in our possession, is as much beyond the power of the President and of Congress as it was to preserve the peace with Spain after the destruction of the _Maine_ in the harbor of Havana. From that moment the American people resolved that the flag under which this calamity was possible should disappear forever from the Western hemisphere, and they will sanction no peace that permits it to remain. The question of the Philippines is different and more difficult. They are not within what the diplomatists of the world would recognize as the legitimate sphere of American influence. Our relation to them is purely the accident of recent war. We are not in honor bound to hold them, if we can honorably dispose of them. But we know that their grievances differ only in kind, not in degree, from those of Cuba; and having once freed them from the Spanish yoke, we cannot honorably require them to go back under it again. That would be to put us in an attitude of nauseating national hypocrisy; to give the lie to all our professions of humanity in our interference in Cuba, if not also to prove that our real motive was conquest. What humanity forbade us to tolerate in the West Indies, it would not justify us in reëstablishing in the Philippines. What, then, can we do with them? Shall we trade them for something nearer home? Doubtless that would be permissible, if we were sure of thus securing them a better government than that of Spain, and if it could be done without precipitating fresh international difficulties. But we cannot give them to our friend and their neighbor Japan without instantly provoking the hostility of Russia, which recently interfered to prevent a far smaller Japanese aggrandizement. We cannot give them to Russia without a greater injustice to Japan; or to Germany or to France or to England without raising far more trouble than we allay. England would like us to keep them; the Continental nations would like that better than any other control excepting Spain's or their own; and the Philippines would prefer it to anything save the absolute independence which they are incapable of maintaining. Having been led into their possession by the course of a war undertaken for the sake of humanity, shall we draw a geographical limit to our humanity, and say we cannot continue to be governed by it in Asiatic waters because it is too much trouble and is too disagreeable--and, besides, there may be no profit in it? Both war and diplomacy have many surprises; and it is quite possible that some way out of our embarrassing possession may yet be found. The fact is clear that many of our people do not much want it; but if a way of relinquishing it is proposed, the one thing we are bound to insist on is that it shall be consistent with our attitude in the war, and with our honorable obligations to the islands we have conquered and to civilization. [Sidenote: Fear of them as States.] The chief aversion to the vast accessions of territory with which we are threatened springs from the fear that ultimately they must be admitted into the Union as States. No public duty is more urgent at this moment than to resist from the very outset the concession of such a possibility. In no circumstances likely to exist within a century should they be admitted as States of the Union. The loose, disunited, and unrelated federation of independent States to which this would inevitably lead, stretching from the Indian Archipelago to the Caribbean Sea, embracing all climes, all religions, all races,--black, yellow, white, and their mixtures,--all conditions, from pagan ignorance and the verge of cannibalism to the best product of centuries of civilization, education, and self-government, all with equal rights in our Senate and representation according to population in our House, with an equal voice in shaping our national destinies--that would, at least in this stage of the world, be humanitarianism run mad, a degeneration and degradation of the homogeneous, continental Republic of our pride too preposterous for the contemplation of serious and intelligent men. Quite as well might Great Britain now invite the swarming millions of India to send rajas and members of the lower House, in proportion to population, to swamp the Lords and Commons and rule the English people. If it had been supposed that even Hawaii, with its overwhelming preponderance of Kanakas and Asiatics, would become a State, she could not have been annexed. If the territories we are conquering must become States, we might better renounce them at once and place them under the protectorate of some humane and friendly European Power with less nonsense in its blood. This is not to deny them the freest and most liberal institutions they are capable of sustaining. The people of Sitka and the Aleutian Islands enjoy the blessings of ordered liberty and free institutions, but nobody dreams of admitting them to Statehood. New Mexico has belonged to us for half a century, not only without oppression, but with all the local self-government for which she was prepared; yet, though an integral part of our continent, surrounded by States, and with an adequate population, she is still not admitted to Statehood. Why should not the people on the island of Porto Rico, or even of Cuba, prosper and be happy for the next century under a rule similar in the main to that under which their kinsmen of New Mexico have prospered for the last half-century? With some necessary modifications, the territorial form of government which we have tried so successfully from the beginning of the Union is well adapted to the best of such communities. It secures local self-government, equality before the law, upright courts, ample power for order and defense, and such control by Congress as gives security against the mistakes or excesses of people new to the exercise of these rights. [Sidenote: Will the Constitution Permit Withholding Statehood?] But such a system, we are told, is contrary to our Constitution and to the spirit of our institutions. Why? We have had just that system ever since the Constitution was framed. It is true that a large part of the territory thus governed has now been admitted into the Union in the form of new States. But it is not true that this was recognized at the beginning as a right, or even generally contemplated as a probability; nor is it true that it has been the purpose or expectation of those who annexed foreign territory to the United States, like the Louisiana or the Gadsden Purchase, that it would all be carved into States. That feature of the marvelous development of the continent has come as a surprise to this generation and the last, and would have been absolutely incredible to the men of Thomas Jefferson's time. Obviously, then, it could not have been the purpose for which, before that date, our territorial system was devised. It is not clear that the founders of the Government expected even all the territory we possessed at the outset to be made into States. Much of it was supposed to be worthless and uninhabitable. But it is certain that they planned for outside accessions. Even in the Articles of Confederation they provided for the admission of Canada and of British colonies which included Jamaica as well as Nova Scotia. Madison, in referring to this, construes it as meaning that they contemplated only the admission of these colonies as colonies, not the eventual establishment of new States ("Federalist," No. 43). About the same time Hamilton was dwelling on the alarms of those who thought the country already too large, and arguing that great size was a safeguard against ambitious rulers. Nevertheless, the objectors still argue, the Constitution gives no positive warrant for a permanent territorial policy. But it does! Ordinarily it may be assumed that what the framers of the Constitution immediately proceeded to do under it was intended by them to be warranted by it; and we have seen that they immediately devised and maintained a territorial system for the government of territory which they had no expectation of ever converting into States. The case, however, is even plainer than that. The sole reference in the Constitution to the territories of the United States is in Article IV, Section 3: "The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States." Jefferson revised his first views far enough to find warrant for acquiring territory; but here is explicit, unmistakable authority conferred for dealing with it, and with other "property," precisely as Congress chooses. The territory was not a present or prospective party in interest in the Union created under this organic act. It was "property," to be disposed of or ruled and regulated as Congress might determine. The inhabitants of the territory were not consulted; there was no provision that they should even be guaranteed a republican form of government like the States; they were secured no right of representation and given no vote. So, too, when it came to acquiring new territory, there was no thought of consulting the inhabitants. Mr. Jefferson did not ask the citizens of Louisiana to consent to their annexation, nor did Mr. Monroe submit such a question to the Spaniards of Florida, nor Mr. Polk to the Mexicans of California, nor Mr. Pierce to the New Mexicans, nor Mr. Johnson to the Russians and Aleuts of Alaska. The power of the Government to deal with territory, foreign or domestic, precisely as it chooses was understood from the beginning to be absolute; and at no stage in our whole history have we hesitated to exercise it. The question of permanently holding the Philippines or any other conquered territory as territory is not, and cannot be made, one of constitutional right; it is one solely of national duty and of national policy. [Sidenote: Does the Monroe Doctrine Interfere?] As a last resort, it is maintained that even if the Constitution does not forbid, the Monroe Doctrine does. But the famous declaration of Mr. Monroe on which reliance is placed does not warrant this conclusion. After holding that "the American continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintained, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European Power," Mr. Monroe continued: "We should consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any part of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety. With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European Power we have not interfered, and shall not interfere." The context makes it clear that this assurance applies solely to the existing colonies and dependencies they still had in this hemisphere; and that even this was qualified by the previous warning that while we took no part "in the wars of European Powers, in matters relating to themselves," we resented injuries and defended our rights. It will thus be seen that Mr. Monroe gave no pledge that we would never interfere with any dependency or colony of European Powers anywhere. He simply declared our general policy not to interfere with existing colonies still remaining to them on our coast, so long as they left the countries alone which had already gained their independence, and so long as they did not injure us or invade our rights. And even this statement of the scope of Mr. Monroe's declaration must be construed in the light of the fact that the same Administration which promulgated the Monroe Doctrine had already issued from the State Department Mr. Adams's prediction, above referred to, that "the annexation of Cuba will yet be found indispensable." Perhaps Mr. Monroe's language might have been properly understood as a general assurance that we would not meddle in Europe so long as they gave us no further trouble in America; but certainly it did not also abandon to their exclusive jurisdiction Asia and Africa and the islands of the sea. [Sidenote: The Necessary Outcome.] The candid conclusions seem inevitable that, not as a matter of policy, but as a necessity of the position in which we find ourselves and as a matter of national duty, we must hold Cuba, at least for a time and till a permanent government is well established for which we can afford to be responsible; we must hold Porto Rico; and we may have to hold the Philippines. The war is a great sorrow, and to many these results of it will seem still more mournful. They cannot be contemplated with unmixed confidence by any; and to all who think, they must be a source of some grave apprehensions. Plainly, this unwelcome war is leading us by ways we have not trod to an end we cannot surely forecast. On the other hand, there are some good things coming from it that we can already see. It will make an end forever of Spain in this hemisphere. It will certainly secure to Cuba and Porto Rico better government. It will furnish an enormous outlet for the energy of our citizens, and give another example of the rapid development to which our system leads. It has already brought North and South together as nothing could but a foreign war in which both offered their blood for the cause of their reunited country--a result of incalculable advantage both at home and abroad. It has brought England and the United States together--another result of momentous importance in the progress of civilization and Christianity. Europe will know us better henceforth; even Spain will know us better; and this knowledge should tend powerfully hereafter to keep the peace of the world. The war should abate the swaggering, swash-buckler tendency of many of our public men, since it has shown our incredible unreadiness at the outset for meeting even a third-rate Power; and it must secure us henceforth an army and navy less ridiculously inadequate to our exposure. It insures us a mercantile marine. It insures the Nicaragua Canal, a Pacific cable, great development on our Pacific coast, and the mercantile control of the Pacific Ocean. It imposes new and very serious business on our public men, which ought to dignify and elevate the public service. Finally, it has shown such splendid courage and skill in the Army and Navy, such sympathy at home for our men at the front, and such devoted eagerness, especially among women, to alleviate suffering and humanize the struggle, as to thrill every patriotic heart and make us all prouder than ever of our country and its matchless people. II WAS IT TOO GOOD A TREATY? This speech was made at a dinner given in New York by the Lotos Club in honor of Mr. Reid, who had been its president for fourteen years prior to his first diplomatic service abroad in 1889. It was the first public utterance by any one of the Peace Commissioners after the ratification of the Treaty of Paris. Among the many letters of regret at the dinner, the following, from the Secretary of State and from his predecessor, were given to the public: WASHINGTON, D.C., February 9, 1899. _To John Elderkin, Lotos Club, New York:_ I received your note in due time, and had hoped until now to be able to come and join you in doing honor to my life-long friend, the Hon. Whitelaw Reid; but the pressure of official engagements here has made it impossible for me to do so. I shall be with you in spirit, and shall applaud to the best that can be said in praise of one who, in a life of remarkable variety of achievement, has honored every position he has held. Faithfully yours, JOHN HAY. CANTON, OHIO, February 8, 1899. _To Chester S. Lord, Lotos Club, New York:_ I beg to acknowledge the receipt of your invitation to attend the dinner to be given to the Hon. Whitelaw Reid on the evening of the 11th inst. Nothing would afford me more pleasure than to join the members of the Lotos Club in doing honor to Mr. Reid. It is a source of much regret that circumstances compel me to forego the privilege. His high character and worth, leadership in the best journalism of the day, eminent services, and wide experience long since gave him an honorable place among his contemporaries. The Commission to negotiate the treaty concluded at Paris on December 10 had no more valued member. His fellow-Commissioners were fortunate in being able to avail themselves of Mr. Reid's wide acquaintance with the leading statesmen and diplomats residing in Paris. His presence as a member of the Commission rendered unnecessary any further introduction to those who had known him as our Minister to France. He gave to the work of the Commission in unstinted measure the benefit of his wisdom in council, judgment, and skill in the preparation and presentation of the American case at Paris. Permit me to join you in congratulations and best wishes to Mr. Reid, and to express the hope that there are in store for him many more years of usefulness and honor. Very truly yours, WILLIAM R. DAY. WAS IT TOO GOOD A TREATY? Obviously the present occasion has no narrow or merely personal meaning. It comes to me only because I had the good fortune, through the friendly partiality of the President of the United States, to be associated with a great work in which you took a patriotic interest, and over the ratification of which you use this means of expressing your satisfaction. It was a happy thing for us to be able to bring back peace to our own land, and happier still to find that our treaty is accepted by the Senate and the people as one that guards the honor and protects the interests of the country. Only so should a nation like ours make peace at all. Come, Peace, not like a mourner bowed For honor lost and dear ones wasted, But proud, to meet a people proud, With eyes that tell of triumph tasted. I shall make no apology--now that the Senate has unsealed our lips--for speaking briefly of this work just happily completed. The only complaint one hears about it is that we did our duty too well--that, in fact, we made peace on terms too favorable to our own country. In all the pending discussion there seems to be no other fault found. On no other point is the treaty said by any one to be seriously defective. It loyally carried out the attitude of Congress as to Cuba. It enforced the renunciation of Spanish sovereignty there, but, in spite of the most earnest Spanish efforts, it refused to accept American sovereignty. It loaded neither ourselves nor the Cubans with the so-called Cuban debts, incurred by Spain in the efforts to subdue them. It involved us in no complications, either in the West Indies or in the East, as to contracts or claims or religious establishments. It dealt liberally with a fallen foe--giving him a generous lump sum that more than covered any legitimate debts or expenditures for pacific improvements; assuming the burden of just claims against him by our own people; carrying back the armies surrendered on the other side of the world at our own cost; returning their arms; even restoring them their artillery, including heavy ordnance in field fortifications, munitions of war, and the very cattle that dragged their caissons. It secured alike for Cubans and Filipinos the release of political prisoners. It scrupulously reserved for Congress the power of determining the political status of the inhabitants of our new possessions. It declared on behalf of the most Protectionist country in the world for the policy of the Open Door within its Asiatic sphere of influence. With all this the Senate and the country seemed content. But the treaty refused to return to Spanish rule one foot of territory over which that rule had been broken by the triumphs of our arms. Were we to be reproached for that? Should the Senate have told us: "You overdid this business; you looked after the interests of your own country too thoroughly. You ought to have abandoned the great archipelago which the fortunes of war had placed at your country's disposal. You are not exactly unfaithful servants; you are too blindly, unswervingly faithful. You haven't seized an opportunity to run away from some distant results of the war into which Congress plunged the country before dreaming how far it might spread. You haven't dodged for us the responsibilities we incurred." That is true. When Admiral Dewey sank the Spanish fleet, and General Merritt captured the Spanish army that alone maintained the Spanish hold on the Philippines, the Spanish power there was gone; and the civilization and the common sense and the Christianity of the world looked to the power that succeeded it to accept its responsibilities. So we took the Philippines. How could men representing this country, jealous of its honor, or with an adequate comprehension either of its duty or its rights, do otherwise? A nation at war over a disputed boundary or some other material interest might properly stop when that interest was secured, and give back to the enemy all else that had been taken from him. But this was not a war for any material interest. It was a war to put down a rule over an alien people, which we declared so barbarous that we could no longer tolerate it. How could we consent to secure peace, after we had broken down this barbarous rule in two archipelagos, by agreeing that one of them should be forced back under it? There was certainly another alternative. After destroying the only organized government in the archipelago, the only security for life and property, native and foreign, in great commercial centers like Manila, Iloilo, and Cebu, against hordes of uncivilized pagans and Mohammedan Malays, should we then scuttle out and leave them to their fate? A band of old-time Norse pirates, used to swooping down on a capital, capturing its rulers, seizing its treasure, burning the town, abandoning the people to domestic disorder and foreign spoliation, and promptly sailing off for another piratical foray--such a band of pirates might, no doubt, have left Manila to be sacked by the insurgents, while it fled from the Philippines. We did not think a self-respecting, civilized, responsible Christian Power could. [Sidenote: Indemnity.] There was another side to it. In a conflict to which fifty years of steadily increasing provocation had driven us we had lost 266 sailors on the _Maine_; had lost at Santiago and elsewhere uncounted victims of Spanish guns and tropical climates; and had spent in this war over $240,000,000, without counting the pensions that must still accrue under laws existing when it began. Where was the indemnity that, under such circumstances, it is the duty of the victorious nation to exact, not only in its own interest, but in the interest of a Christian civilization and the tendencies of modern International Law, which require that a nation provoking unjust war shall smart for it, not merely while it lasts, but by paying the cost when it is ended? Spain had no money even to pay her own soldiers. No indemnity was possible, save in territory. Well, we once wanted to buy Cuba, before it had been desolated by twelve years of war and decimated by Weyler; yet our uttermost offer for it, our highest valuation even then, was $125,000,000--less than half the cost of our war. But now we were precluded from taking Cuba. Porto Rico, immeasurably less important to us, and eight hundred miles farther away from our coast, is only one twelfth the size of Cuba. Were the representatives of the United States, charged with the duty of protecting not only its honor, but its interests, in arranging terms of peace, to content themselves with little Porto Rico, away off a third of the way to Spain, plus the petty reef of Guam, in the middle of the Pacific, as indemnity for an unprovoked war that had cost and was to cost their country $300,000,000? [Sidenote: The Trouble they Give--are they Worth it?] But, some one exclaims, the Philippines are already giving us more trouble than they are worth! It is natural to say so just now, and it is partly true. What they are worth and likely to be worth to this country in the race for commercial supremacy on the Pacific--that is to say, for supremacy in the great development of trade in the Twentieth Century--is a question too large to be so summarily decided, or to be entered on at the close of a dinner, and under the irritation of a Malay half-breed's folly. But nobody ever doubted that they would give us trouble. That is the price nations must pay for going to war, even in a just cause. I was not one of those who were eager to begin this war with Spain; but I protest against any attempt to evade our just responsibility in the position in which it has left us. We shall have trouble in the Philippines. So we shall have trouble in Cuba and in Porto Rico. If we dawdle, and hesitate, and lead them to think we fear them and fear trouble, our trouble will be great. If, on the other hand, we grasp this nettle danger, if we act promptly, with inexorable vigor and with justice, it may be slight. At any rate, the more serious the crisis the plainer our path. God give us the courage to purify our politics and strengthen our Government to meet these new and grave duties! III PURPORT OF THE TREATY This speech was made, two days after the preceding one, on the invitation of the Marquette Club of Chicago, at the dinner of six hundred which it gave in the Auditorium Hotel, February 13, 1899, in honor of Lincoln's birthday. PURPORT OF THE TREATY Beyond the Alleghanies the American voice rings clear and true. It does not sound, here in Chicago, as if you favored the pursuit of partizan aims in great questions of foreign policy, or division among our own people in the face of insurgent guns turned upon our soldiers on the distant fields to which we sent them. We are all here, it would seem, to stand by the peace that has been secured, even if we have to fight for it. Neither has any reproach come from Chicago to the Peace Commissioners because, when intrusted with your interests in a great negotiation in a foreign capital, they made a settlement on terms too favorable to their own country--because in bringing home peace with honor they also brought home more property than some of our people wanted! When that reproach has been urged elsewhere, it has recalled the familiar defense against a similar complaint in an old political contest. There might, it was said, be some serious disadvantages about a surplus in the national Treasury; but, at any rate, it was easier to deal with a surplus than with a deficit! If we have brought back too much, that is only a question for Congress and our voters. If we had brought back too little, it might have been again a question for the Army and the Navy. No one of you has ever been heard to find fault with an agent because in making a difficult settlement he got all you wanted, and a free option on something further that everybody else wanted! Do you know of any other civilized nation of the first or even of the second class that wouldn't jump at that option on the Philippines? Ask Russia. Ask Germany. Ask Japan. Ask England or France. Ask little Belgium![1] And yet, what one of them, unless it be Japan, has any conceivable interest in the Philippines to be compared with that of the mighty Republic which now commands the one side of the Pacific, and, unless this American generation is blinder to opportunity than any of its predecessors, will soon command the other? [1] At this time it was still a secret that among the many intrigues afoot during the negotiations at Paris was one for the transfer of the Philippines to Belgium. But for the perfectly correct attitude of King Leopold, it might have had a chance to succeed, or at least to make trouble. Put yourselves for a moment in our place on the Quai d'Orsay. Would you really have had your representatives in Paris, the guardians of your honor in negotiating peace with your enemy, declare that while Spanish rule in the West Indies was so barbarous that it was our duty to destroy it, we were now so eager for peace that for its sake we were willing in the East to reëstablish that same barbarous rule? Or would you have had your agents in Paris, the guardians also of your material interests, throw away all chance for indemnity for a war that began with the loss of 266 American sailors on the _Maine_, and had cost your Treasury during the year over $240,000,000? Would you have had them throw away a magnificent foothold for the trade of the farther East, which the fortune of war had placed in your hand, throw away a whole archipelago of boundless possibilities, economic and strategic, throw away the opportunity of centuries for your country? Would you have had them, on their own responsibility, then and there decide this question for all time, and absolutely refuse to reserve it for the decision of Congress and of the American people, to whom that decision belongs, and who have the right to an opportunity first for its deliberate consideration? [Sidenote: Some Features in the Treaty.] Your toast is to the "Achievements of American Diplomacy." Not such were its achievements under your earlier statesmen; not such has been its work under the instructions of your State Department, from John Quincy Adams on down the honored line; and not such the work your representatives brought back to you from Paris. They were dealing with a nation with whom it has never been easy to make peace, even when war was no longer possible; but they secured a peace treaty without a word that compromises the honor or endangers the interests of the country. They scrupulously reserved for your own decision, through your Congress or at the polls, the question of political status and civil rights for the inhabitants of your new possessions. They resisted adroit Spanish efforts for special privileges and guaranties for their established church, and pledged the United States to absolute freedom in the exercise of their religion for all these recent Spanish subjects--pagan, Mohammedan, Confucian, or Christian. They maintained, in the face of the most vehement opposition, not merely of Spain, but of well-nigh all Europe, a principle vital to oppressed people struggling for freedom--a principle without which our own freedom could not have been established, and without which any successful revolt against any unjust rule could be made practically impossible. That principle is that, contrary to the prevailing rule and practice in large transfers of sovereignty, debts do not necessarily follow the territory if incurred by the mother country distinctly in efforts to enslave it. Where so incurred, your representatives persistently and successfully maintained that no attempt by the mother country to mortgage to bondholders the revenues of custom-houses or in any way to pledge the future income of the territory could be recognized as a valid or binding security--that the moment the hand of the oppressor relaxed its grasp, his claim on the future revenues of the oppressed territory was gone. It is a doctrine that raised an outcry in every Continental bourse, and struck terror to every gambling European investor in national loans, floated at usurious profits, to raise funds for unjust wars. But it is right, and one may be proud that the United States stood like a rock, barring any road to peace which led to loading either on the liberated territory or on the people that had freed it the debts incurred in the wars against it. If this is not International Law now, it will be; and the United States will have made it. But your representatives in Paris placed your country in no tricky attitude of endeavoring either to evade or repudiate just obligations. They recognized the duty of reimbursement for debts legitimately incurred for pacific improvements or otherwise, for the real benefit of the transferred territory. Not till it began to appear that, of the Philippine debt of forty millions Mexican, or a little under twenty millions of our money, a fourth had been transferred direct to aid the war in Cuba, and the rest had probably been spent mainly in the war in Luzon, did your representatives hesitate at its payment; and even then they decided to give a lump sum equal to it, which could serve as a recognition of whatever debts Spain might have incurred in the past for expenditures in that archipelago for the benefit of the people. They protected what was gained in the war from adroit efforts to put it all at risk again, through an untimely appeal to the noble principle of Arbitration. They held--and I am sure the best friends of the principle will thank them for holding--that an honest resort to Arbitration must come before war, to avert its horrors, not after war, to escape its consequences. They were enabled to pledge the most Protectionist country in the world to the liberal and wise policy of the Open Door in the East. And finally they secured that diplomatic novelty, a treaty in which the acutest senatorial critics have not found a peg on which inadmissible claims against the country may be hung. [Sidenote: The Material Side of the Business.] At the same time they neither neglected nor feared the duty of caring for the material interests of their own country;--the duty of grasping the enormous possibilities upon which we had stumbled, for sharing in the awakening and development of the farther East. That way lies now the best hope of American commerce. There you may command a natural rather than an artificial trade--a trade which pushes itself instead of needing to be pushed; a trade with people who can send you things you want and cannot produce, and take from you in return things they want and cannot produce; in other words, a trade largely between different zones, and largely with less advanced peoples, comprising nearly one fourth the population of the globe, whose wants promise to be speedily and enormously developed. The Atlantic Ocean carries mainly a different trade, with people as advanced as ourselves, who could produce or procure elsewhere much of what they buy from us, while we could produce, if driven to it, most of what we need to buy from them. It is more or less, therefore, an artificial trade, as well as a trade in which we have lost the first place and will find it difficult to regain. The ocean carriage for the Atlantic is in the hands of our rivals. The Pacific Ocean, on the contrary, is in our hands now. Practically we own more than half the coast on this side, dominate the rest, and have midway stations in the Sandwich and Aleutian Islands. To extend now the authority of the United States over the great Philippine Archipelago is to fence in the China Sea and secure an almost equally commanding position on the other side of the Pacific--doubling our control of it and of the fabulous trade the Twentieth Century will see it bear. Rightly used, it enables the United States to convert the Pacific Ocean almost into an American lake. Are we to lose all this through a mushy sentimentality, characteristic neither of practical nor of responsible people--alike un-American and un-Christian, since it would humiliate us by showing lack of nerve to hold what we are entitled to, and incriminate us by entailing endless bloodshed and anarchy on a people whom we have already stripped of the only government they have known for three hundred years, and whom we should thus abandon to civil war and foreign spoliation? [Sidenote: Bugbears.] Let us free our minds of some bugbears. One of them is this notion that with the retention of the Philippines our manufacturers will be crushed by the products of cheap Eastern labor. But it does not abolish our custom-houses, and we can still enforce whatever protection we desire. Another is that our American workmen will be swamped under the immigration of cheap Eastern labor. But tropical laborers rarely emigrate to colder climates. Few have ever come. If we need a law to keep them out, we can make it. It is a bugbear that the Filipinos would be citizens of the United States, and would therefore have the same rights of free travel and free entry of their own manufactures with other citizens. The treaty did not make them citizens of the United States at all; and they never will be, unless you neglect your Congress. It is a bugbear that anybody living on territory or other property belonging to the United States must be a citizen. The Constitution says that "persons born or naturalized in the United States are citizens of the United States"; while it adds in the same sentence, "and of the State wherein they reside," showing plainly that the provision was not then meant to include territories. It is equally a bugbear that the tariff must necessarily be the same over any of the territory or other property of the United States as it is in the Nation itself. The Constitution requires that "all duties, imposts, and excises shall be the same throughout the United States," and while there was an incidental expression from the Supreme Bench in 1820 to the effect that the name United States as here used should include the District of Columbia and other territory, it was no part even then of the decision actually rendered, and it would be absurd to stretch this mere dictum of three quarters of a century ago, relating then, at any rate, to this continent alone, to carry the Dingley tariff now across to the antipodes. [Sidenote: Duties of the Hour.] Brushing aside, then, these bugbears, gentlemen, what are the obvious duties of the hour? First, hold what you are entitled to. If you are ever to part with it, wait at least till you have examined it and found out that you have no use for it. Before yielding to temporary difficulties at the outset, take time to be quite sure you are ready now to abandon your chance for a commanding position in the trade of China, in the commercial control of the Pacific Ocean, and in the richest commercial development of the approaching century. Next, resist admission of any of our new possessions as States, or their organization on a plan designed to prepare them for admission. Stand firm for the present American Union of sister States, undiluted by anybody's archipelagos. Make this fight easiest by making it at the beginning. Resist the first insidious effort to change the character of this Union by leaving the continent. The danger commences with the first extra-continental State. We want no Porto Ricans or Cubans to be sending Senators and Representatives to Washington to help govern the American Continent, any more than we want Kanakas or Tagals or Visayans or Mohammedan Malays. We will do them good and not harm, if we may, all the days of our life; but, please God, we will not divide this Republic, the heritage of our fathers, among them. Resist the crazy extension of the doctrine that government derives its just powers from the consent of the governed to an extreme never imagined by the men who framed it, and never for one moment acted upon in their own practice. Why should we force Jefferson's language to a meaning Jefferson himself never gave it in dealing with the people of Louisiana, or Andrew Jackson in dealing with those of South Carolina, or Abraham Lincoln with the seceding States, or any responsible statesman of the country at any period in its history in dealing with Indians or New Mexicans or Californians or Russians? What have the Tagals done for us that we should treat them better and put them on a plane higher than any of these? And next, resist alike either schemes for purely military governments, or schemes for territorial civil governments, with offices to be filled up, according to the old custom, by "carpet-baggers" from the United States, on an allotment of increased patronage, fairly divided among the "bosses" of the different States. Egypt under Lord Cromer is an object-lesson of what may be done in a more excellent way by men of our race in dealing with such a problem. Better still, and right under our eyes, is the successful solution of the identical problem that confronts us, in the English organization and administration of the federated Malay States on the Malacca Peninsula. [Sidenote: The Opposition as Old as Webster.] I wish to speak with respect of the sincere and conscientious opposition to all these conclusions, manifest chiefly in the East and in the Senate; and with especial respect of the eminent statesman who has headed that opposition. No man will question his ability, his moral elevation, or the courage with which he follows his intellectual and moral convictions. But I may be permitted to remind you that the noble State he worthily represents is not now counted for the first time against the interest and the development of the country. In February, 1848, Daniel Webster, speaking for the same great State and in the same high forum, conjured up precisely the same visions of the destruction of the Constitution, and proclaimed the same hostility to new territory. Pardon me while I read you half a dozen sentences, and note how curiously they sound like an echo--or a prophecy--of what we have lately been hearing from the Senate: Will you take peace without territory and preserve the integrity of the Constitution of the country?... I think I see a course adopted which is likely to turn the Constitution of this land into a deformed monster--into a curse rather than a blessing.... There would not be two hundred families of persons who would emigrate from the United States to New Mexico for agricultural purposes in fifty years.... I have never heard of anything, and I cannot conceive of anything, more absurd and more affrontive of all sober judgment than the cry that we are getting indemnity by the acquisition of New Mexico and California. I hold that they are not worth a dollar! It was merely that splendid empire in itself, stretching from Los Angeles and San Francisco eastward to Denver, that was thus despised and rejected of Massachusetts. And it was only fifty years ago! With all due respect, a great spokesman of Massachusetts is as liable to mistake in this generation as in the last. [Sidenote: Lack of Faith in the People.] It is fair, I think, to say that this whole hesitation over the treaty of peace is absolutely due to lack of faith in our own people, distrust of the methods of administration they may employ in the government of distant possessions, and distrust of their ability to resist the schemes of demagogues for promoting the ultimate admission of Kanaka and Malay and half-breed commonwealths to help govern the continental Republic of our pride, this homogeneous American Union of sovereign States. If there is real reason to fear that the American people cannot restrain themselves from throwing open the doors of their Senate and House of Representatives to such sister States as Luzon, or the Visayas, or the Sandwich Islands, or Porto Rico, or even Cuba, then the sooner we beg some civilized nation, with more common sense and less sentimentality and gush, to take them off our hands the better. If we are unequal to a manly and intelligent discharge of the responsibilities the war has entailed, then let us confess our unworthiness, and beg Japan to assume the duties of a civilized Christian state toward the Philippines, while England can extend the same relief to us in Cuba and Porto Rico. But having thus ignominiously shirked the position demanded by our belligerency and our success, let us never again presume to take a place among the self-respecting and responsible nations of the earth that can ever lay us liable to another such task. If called to it, let us at the outset admit our unfitness, withdraw within our own borders, and leave these larger duties of the world to less incapable races or less craven rulers. Far other and brighter are the hopes I have ventured to cherish concerning the course of the American people in this emergency. I have thought there was encouragement for nations as well as for individuals in remembering the sobering and steadying influence of great responsibilities suddenly devolved. When Prince Hal comes to the crown he is apt to abjure Falstaff. When we come to the critical and dangerous work of controlling turbulent semi-tropical dependencies, the agents we choose cannot be the ward heelers of the local bosses. Now, if ever, is the time to rally the brain and conscience of the American people to a real elevation and purification of their Civil Service, to the most exalted standards of public duty, to the most strenuous and united effort of all men of good will to make our Government worthy of the new and great responsibilities which the Providence of God rather than any purpose of man has imposed upon it. IV THE DUTIES OF PEACE A speech made at the dinner given by the Ohio Society in honor of the Peace Commissioners, in the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel, New York, February 25, 1899. THE DUTIES OF PEACE You call and I obey. Any call from Ohio, wherever it finds me, is at once a distinction and a duty. But it would be easier to-night and more natural for me to remain silent. I am one of yourselves, the givers of the feast, and the occasion belongs peculiarly to my colleagues on the Peace Commission. I regret that more of them are not here to tell you in person how profoundly we all appreciate the compliment you pay us. Judge Day, after an experience and strain the like of which few Americans of this generation have so suddenly and so successfully met, is seeking to regain his strength at the South; Senator Frye, at the close of an anxious session, finds his responsible duties in Washington too exacting to permit even a day's absence; and Senator Davis, who could not leave the care of the treaty to visit his State even when his own reëlection was pending, has at last snatched the first moment of relief since he was sent to Paris last summer, to go out to St. Paul and meet the constituents who have in his absence renewed to him the crown of a good and faithful servant. It is all the more fortunate, therefore, that you are honored by the presence of the patriotic member of the opposition who formed the regulator and balance-wheel of the Commission. When Senator Gray objected, we all reëxamined the processes of our reasoning. When he assented, we knew at once we must be on solid ground and went ahead. It was an expected gratification to have with you also the accomplished secretary and counsel to the Commission, a man as modest and unobtrusive as its president, and, like him, equal to any summons. In his regretted absence, we rejoice to find here the most distinguished military aid ordered to report to the Commission, and the most important witness before it--the Conqueror of Manila. So much you will permit me to say in my capacity as one of the hosts, rather than as a member of the body to which you pay this gracious compliment. It is not for me to speak of another figure necessarily missing to-night, though often with you heretofore at these meetings--the member of the Ohio Society who sent us to Paris! A great and shining record already speaks for him. He will be known in our history as the President who freed America from the last trace of Spanish blight; who realized the aspiration of our earlier statesmen, cherished by the leaders of either party through three quarters of a century, for planting the flag both on Cuba and on the Sandwich Islands; more than this, as the President who has carried that flag half-way round the world and opened the road for the trade of the Nation to follow it. All this came from simply doing his duty from day to day, as that duty was forced upon him. No other man in the United States held back from war as he did, risking loss of popularity, risking the hostility of Congress, risking the harsh judgment of friends in agonizing for peace. It was no doubt in the spirit of the Prince of Peace, but it was also with the wisdom of Polonius: "Beware of entrance to a quarrel; but, being in, bear it, that the opposer may beware of thee!" Never again will any nation imagine that it can trespass indefinitely against the United States with impunity. Never again will an American war-ship run greater risks in a peaceful harbor than in battle. The world will never again be in doubt whether, when driven to war, we will end it in a gush of sentimentality or a shiver of unmanly apprehension over untried responsibilities, by fleeing from our plain duty, and hastening to give up what we are entitled to, before we have even taken an opportunity to look at it. [Sidenote: Does Peace Pacify?] But it must be confessed that "looking at it" during the past week has not been an altogether cheerful occupation. While the aspect of some of these new possessions remains so frowning there are faint hearts ready enough to say that the Peace Commission is in no position to be receiving compliments. Does protection protect? is an old question that used to be thrown in our faces--though I believe even the questioners finally made up their minds that it did. Does peace pacify? is the question of the hour. Well, as to our original antagonist, historic, courageous Spain, there seems ground to hope and believe and be glad that it does--not merely toward us, but within her own borders. When she jettisoned cargo that had already shifted ruinously, there is reason to think that she averted disaster and saved the ship. Then, as to Porto Rico there is no doubt of peace; and as to Cuba very little--although it would be too much to hope that her twelve years of civil war could be followed by an absolute calm, without disorders. As to other possessions in the farther East, we may as well recognize at once that we are dealing now with the same sort of clever barbarians as in the earlier days of the Republic, when, on another ocean not then less distant, we were compelled to encounter the Algerine pirates. But there is this difference. Then we merely chastised the Algerines into letting us and our commerce alone. The permanent policing of that coast of the Mediterranean was not imposed upon us by surrounding circumstances, or by any act of ours; it belonged to nearer nations. Now a war we made has broken down the only authority that existed to protect the commerce of the world in one of its greatest Eastern thoroughfares, and to preserve the lives and property of people of all nations resorting to those marts. We broke it down, and we cannot, dare not, display the cowardice and selfishness of failing to replace it. However men may differ as to our future policy in those regions, there can be no difference as to our present duty. It is as plain as that of putting down a riot in Chicago or New York--all the plainer because, until recently, we have ourselves been taking the very course and doing the very things to encourage the rioters. [Sidenote: Why Take Sovereignty?] A distinguished and patriotic citizen said to me the other day, in a Western city: "You might have avoided this trouble in the Senate by refusing title in the Philippines exactly as in Cuba, and simply enforcing renunciation of Spanish sovereignty. Why didn't you do it?" The question is important, and the reason ought to be understood. But at the outset it should be clearly realized that the circumstances which made it possible to take that course as to Cuba were altogether exceptional. For three quarters of a century we had asserted a special interest and right of interference there as against any other nation. The island is directly on our coast, and no one doubted that at least as much order as in the past would be preserved there, even if we had to do it ourselves. There was also the positive action of Congress, which, on the one hand, gave us excuse for refusing a sovereignty our highest legislative authority had disclaimed, and, on the other, formally cast the shield of our responsibility over Cuba when left without a government or a sovereignty. Besides, there was a people there, advanced enough, sufficiently compact and homogeneous in religion, race, and language, sufficiently used already to the methods of government, to warrant our republican claim that the sovereignty was not being left in the air--that it was only left where, in the last analysis, in a civilized community, it must always reside, in the people themselves. And yet, under all these conditions, the most difficult task your Peace Commissioners had at Paris was to maintain and defend the demand for a renunciation of sovereignty without anybody's acceptance of the sovereignty thus renounced. International Law has not been so understood abroad; and it may be frankly confessed that the Spanish arguments were learned, acute, sustained by the general judgment of Europe, and not easy to refute. A similar demand concerning the Philippines neither could nor ought to have been acquiesced in by the civilized world. Here were ten millions of people on a great highway of commerce, of numerous different races, different languages, different religions, some semi-civilized, some barbarous, others mere pagan savages, but without a majority or even a respectable minority of them accustomed to self-government or believed to be capable of it. Sovereignty over such a conglomeration and in such a place could not be left in the air. The civilized world would not recognize its transfer, unless transferred to somebody. Renunciation under such circumstances would have been equivalent in International Law to abandonment, and that would have been equivalent to anarchy and a race for seizure among the nations that could get there quickest. We could, of course, have refused to accept the obligations of a civilized, responsible nation. After breaking down government in those commercial centers, we could have refused to set up anything in its stead, and simply washed our hands of the whole business; but to do that would have been to show ourselves more insensible to moral obligations than if we had restored them outright to Spain. [Sidenote: How to Deal with the Philippines.] Well, if the elephant must be on our hands, what are we going to do with it? I venture to answer that first we must put down the riot. The lives and property of German and British merchants must be at least as safe in Manila as they were under Spanish rule before we are ready for any other step whatever. Next, ought we not to try to diagnose our case before we turn every quack doctor among us loose on it--understand what the problem is before beginning heated partizan discussions as to the easiest way of solving it? And next, shall we not probably fare best in the end if we try to profit somewhat by the experience others have had in like cases? The widest experience has been had by the great nation whose people and institutions are nearest like our own. Illustrations of her successful methods may be found in Egypt and in many British dependencies, but, for our purposes, probably best of all either on the Malay Peninsula or on the north coast of Borneo, where she has had the happiest results in dealing with intractable types of the worst of these same races. Some rules drawn from this experience might be distasteful to people who look upon new possessions as merely so much more government patronage, and quite repugnant to the noble army of office-seekers; but they surely mark the path of safety. The first is to meddle at the outset as little as possible with every native custom and institution and even prejudice; the next is to use every existing native agency you can; and the next to employ in the government service just as few Americans as you can, and only of the best. Convince the natives of your irresistible power and your inexorable purpose, then of your desire to be absolutely just, and after that--not before--be as kind as you can. At the outset you will doubtless find your best agents among the trained officers of the Navy and the Army, particularly the former. On the retired list of both, but again particularly of the Navy, ought to be found just the experience in contact with foreign races, the moderation, wide views, justice, rigid method, and inflexible integrity, you need. Later on should come a real civil service, with such pure and efficient administration abroad as might help us ultimately to conclude that we ourselves deserve as well as the heathen, and induce us to set up similar standards for our own service at home. Meantime, if we have taught the heathen largely to govern themselves without being a hindrance and menace to the civilization and the commerce of the world, so much the better. Heaven speed the day! If not, we must even continue to be responsible for them ourselves--a duty we did not seek, but should be ashamed to shirk. V THE OPEN DOOR A speech made at the dinner given by the American-Asiatic Association in honor of Rear-Admiral Lord Charles Beresford, at Delmonico's, New York, February 23, 1899. THE OPEN DOOR The hour is late, you have already enjoyed your intellectual feast, you have heard the man you came to hear, and I shall detain you for but a moment. The guest whom we are all here to honor and applaud is returning from a journey designed to promote the safety and extension of his country's trade in the Chinese Orient. He has probably been accustomed to think of us as the most extreme Protectionist nation in the world; and he may have heard at first of our recent acquisition on the China Sea with some apprehension on that very account. [Sidenote: United States a Free-Trade Country.] Now, there are two facts that might be somewhat suggestive to any who take that view. One is that, though we may be "enraged Protectionists," as our French friends occasionally call us, we have rarely sought to extend the protective system where we had nothing and could develop nothing to protect. The other is that we are also the greatest free-trade country in the world. Nowhere else on the globe does absolute free trade prevail over so wide, rich, and continuous an expanse of territory, with such variety and volume of production and manufacture; and nowhere have its beneficent results been more conspicuous. From the Golden Gate your guest has crossed a continent teeming with population and manufactures without encountering a custom-house. If he had come back from China the other way, from Suez to London, he would have passed a dozen! When your Peace Commissioners were brought face to face with the retention of the Philippines, they were at liberty to consider the question it raised for immediate action in the light of both sides of the national practice. Here was an archipelago practically without manufactures to protect, or need for protection to develop manufactures; and here were swarming populations with whom trade was sure to increase and ramify, in proportion to its freedom from obstructions. Thus it came about that your Commissioners were led to a view which to many has seemed a new departure, and were finally enabled to preface an offer to Spain with the remark that it was the policy of the United States to maintain in the Philippines an open door to the world's commerce. Great Protectionist leader as the President is and long has been, he sanctioned the declaration; and Protectionist as is the Senate, it ratified the pledge. [Sidenote: The Open Door.] Under treaty guaranty Spain is now entitled to the Open Door in the Philippines for ten years. Under the most favored nation clause, what is thus secured to Spain would not be easily refused, even if any one desired it, to any other nation; and the door that stands open there for the next ten years will by that time have such a rising tide of trade pouring through it from the awakening East that no man thenceforward can ever close it. There are two ways of dealing with the trade of a distant dependency. You may give such advantage to your own people as practically to exclude everybody else. That was the Spanish way. That is the French way. Neither nation has grown rich of late on its colonial extensions. Again, you may impose such import or export duties as will raise the revenue needed for the government of the territory, to be paid by all comers at its ports on a basis of absolute equality. In some places that is the British way. Henceforth, in the Philippines, that is the United States way. The Dingley tariff is not to be transferred to the antipodes. Protectionists or Free-traders, I believe we may all rejoice in this as best for the Philippines and best for ourselves. I venture to think that we may rejoice over it, too, with your distinguished guest. It enables Great Britain and the United States to preserve a common interest and present a common front in the enormous commercial development in the East that must attend the awakening of the Chinese Colossus; and whenever and wherever Great Britain and the United States stand together, the peace and the civilization of the world will be the better for it. VI SOME CONSEQUENCES OF THE TREATY OF PARIS This discussion of the advances in International Law and changes in national policy traceable to the negotiations that ended in the Peace of Paris, was written in March, for the first number of "The Anglo-Saxon Review" (then announced for May), which appeared in June, 1899. SOME CONSEQUENCES OF THE TREATY OF PARIS In 1823 Thomas Jefferson, writing from the retirement of Monticello to James Monroe, then President of the United States, said: Great Britain is the nation which can do us the most harm of any one on all the earth, and with her on our side we need not fear the world. With her, then, we should most sedulously cherish a cordial friendship, and nothing would tend more to knit our affections than to be fighting once more, side by side, in the same cause. As these lines are written,[2] the thing which Jefferson looked forward to has, in a small way, come to pass. For the first time under government orders since British regulars and the militia of the American colonies fought Indians on Lake Champlain and the French in Canada, the Briton and the American have been fighting side by side, and again against savages. In a larger sense, too, they are at last embarked side by side in the Eastern duty, devolved on each, of "bearing the white man's burden." It seems natural, now, to count on such a friendly British interest in present American problems as may make welcome a brief statement of some things that were settled by the late Peace of Paris, and some that were unsettled. [2] The request of the editor for the preparation of this article was received just after the British and American forces had their conflict with the natives in Samoa. Whether treaties really settle International Law is itself an unsettled point. English and American writers incline to give them less weight in that regard than is the habit of the great Continental authorities. But it is reasonable to think that some of the points insisted upon by the United States in the Treaty of Paris will be precedents as weighty, henceforth, in international policy as they are now novel to international practice. If not International Law yet, they probably will be; and it is confidently assumed that they will command the concurrence of the British government and people, as well as of the most intelligent and dispassionate judgment on the Continent. [Sidenote: When Arbitration is Inadmissible.] The distinct and prompt refusal by the American Commissioners to submit questions at issue between them and their Spanish colleagues to arbitration marks a limit to the application of that principle in international controversy which even its friends will be apt hereafter to welcome. No civilized nation is more thoroughly committed to the policy of international arbitration than the United States. The Spanish Commissioners were able to reinforce their appeal for it by striking citations from the American record: the declaration of the Senate of Massachusetts, as early as 1835, in favor of an international court for the peaceful settlement of all disputes between nations; the action of the Senate of the United States in 1853, favoring a clause in all future treaties with foreign countries whereby difficulties that could not be settled by diplomacy should be referred to arbitrators; the concurrence of the two Houses, twenty years later, in reaffirming this principle; and at last their joint resolution, in 1888, requesting the President to secure agreements to that end with all nations with whom he maintained diplomatic intercourse. But the American Commissioners at once made it clear that the rational place for arbitration is as a substitute for war, not as a second remedy, to which the contestant may still have a right to resort after having exhausted the first. In the absence of the desired obligation to arbitrate, the dissatisfied nation, according to the American theory, may have, after diplomacy has completely failed, a choice of remedies, but not a double remedy. It may choose arbitration, or it may choose war; but the American Commissioners flatly refused to let it choose war, and then, after defeat, claim still the right to call in arbitrators and put again at risk before them the verdict of war. Arbitration comes before war, they insisted, to avert its horrors; not after war, to afford the defeated party a chance yet to escape its consequences. The principle thus stated is thought self-evidently sound and just. Americans were surprised to find how completely it was overlooked in the contemporaneous European discussion--how general was the sympathy with the Spanish request for arbitration, and how naïf the apparently genuine surprise at the instant and unqualified refusal to consider it. Even English voices joined in the chorus of encouraging approval that, from every quarter in Europe, greeted the formal Spanish appeal for an opportunity to try over in another forum the questions they had already submitted to the arbitrament of arms. The more clearly the American view is now recognized and accepted, the greater must be the tendency in the future to seek arbitration at the outset. To refuse arbitration when only sought at the end of war, and as a means of escaping its consequences, is certainly to stimulate efforts for averting war at the beginning of difficulties by means of arbitration. The refusal prevents such degradation of a noble reform to an ignoble end as would make arbitration the refuge, not of those who wish to avoid war, but only of those who have preferred war and been beaten at it. The American precedent should thus become a powerful influence for promoting the cause of genuine international arbitration, and so for the preservation of peace between nations. [Sidenote: Does Debt Follow Sovereignty?] Equally unexpected and important to the development of ordered liberty and good government in the world was the American refusal to accept any responsibility, for themselves or for the Cubans, on account of the so-called Cuban debt. The principle asserted from the outset by the American Commissioners, and finally maintained, in negotiating the Peace of Paris, was that a national debt incurred in efforts to subdue a colony, even if called a colonial debt, or secured by a pledge of colonial revenues, cannot be attached in the nature of a mortgage to the territory of that colony, so that when the colony gains its independence it may still be held for the cost of the unsuccessful efforts to keep it in subjection. The first intimations that no part of the so-called Cuban debt would either be assumed by the United States or transferred with the territory to the Cubans, were met with an outcry from every bourse in Europe. Bankers, investors, and the financial world in general had taken it for granted that bonds which had been regularly issued by the Power exercising sovereignty over the territory, and which specifically pledged the revenues of custom-houses in that territory for the payment of the interest and ultimately of the principal, must be recognized. Not to do it, they said, would be bald, unblushing repudiation--a thing least to be looked for or tolerated in a nation of spotless credit and great wealth, which in past times of trial had made many sacrifices to preserve its financial honor untarnished. It must be admitted that modern precedents were not altogether in favor of the American position. Treaties ceding territory not infrequently provide for the assumption by the new sovereign of a proportional part of the general obligations of the ceding state. This is usually true when the territory ceded is so considerable as to form an important portion of the dismembered country. Even "the great conqueror of this century," as the Spanish Commissioners exclaimed in one of their arguments, "never dared to violate this rule of eternal justice in any of the treaties he concluded with those sovereigns whose territories he appropriated, in whole or in part, as a reward for his victories." They cited his first treaty of August 24, 1801, with Bavaria providing that the debts of the duchy of Deux-Ponts, and of that part of the Palatinate acquired by France, should follow the countries, and challenged the production of any treaty of Napoleon's or of any modern treaty where the principle of such transfer was violated. They were able to base a stronger claim on the precedents of the New World. They were, indeed, betrayed into some curious errors. One was that the thirteen original States, at the close of the Revolutionary War, paid over to Great Britain fifteen million pounds as their share of the public debt. Another was that the payment of the Texas debt by the United States must be a precedent now for its payment of the Cuban debt--whereas the Texas debt was incurred by the Texas insurgents in their successful war for independence, while the Cuban debt was incurred by the mother country in her unsuccessful effort to put down the Cuban insurgents. But as to the Spanish-American republics, they were more nearly on solid ground. It was true, and was more to the point than most of their other citations, that every one of these Spanish-American republics assumed its debt, that most of them did it before their independence was recognized, and that they gave these debts contracted by Spain the preference over later debts contracted by themselves. The language in the treaty with Bolivia was particularly sweeping. It assumed as its own these debts of every kind whatsoever, "including all incurred for pensions, salaries, supplies, advances, transportation, forced loans, deposits, contracts, and any other debts incurred during war-times or prior thereto, chargeable to said treasuries; provided they were contracted by direct orders of the Spanish government or its constituted authorities in said territories." The Argentine Republic and Uruguay, in negotiating their treaties, expressed the same idea more tersely: "Just as it acquires the rights and privileges belonging to the crown of Spain, so it also assumes all the duties and obligations of the crown." The argument was certainly obvious, and at first sight seemed fair, that what every other revolted American colony of Spain had done, on gaining its independence, the last of the long line should also do. But an examination shows that in no case were the circumstances such as to make it a fair precedent for Cuba. In the other colonies the debts were largely due to their own people. To a considerable extent they had been incurred for the prosecution of improvements of a pacific character, generally for the public good and often at the public desire. Another part had been spent in the legitimate work of preserving public order and extending the advantages of government over wild regions and native tribes.[3] The rich, compact, populous island of Cuba had called for no such loans up to the time when Spain had already lost all of her American colonies on the continent, and had consequently no other dependency on which to fasten her exacting governor-generals and hosts of other official leeches. There was no Cuban debt. Any honest administration had ample revenues for all legitimate expenses, and a surplus; and this surplus seems not to have been used for the benefit of the island, but sent home. Between 1856 and 1861 over $20,000,000 of Cuban surplus were thus remitted to Madrid. Next began a plan for using Cuban credit as a means of raising money to re-conquer the lost dominions; and so "Cuban bonds" (with the guaranty of the Spanish nation) were issued, first for the effort to regain Santo Domingo, and then for the expedition to Mexico. By 1864 $3,000,000 had been so issued; by 1868 $18,000,000--not at the request or with the consent of the Cubans, and not for their benefit. Then commenced the Cuban insurrection; and from that time on, all Spain could wring from Cuba or borrow in European markets on the pledge of Cuban revenues and her own guaranty went in the effort to subdue a colony in revolt against her injustice and bad government. The lenders knew the facts and took the risk. Two years after this first insurrection was temporarily put down, these so-called Cuban debts had amounted to over $170,000,000. They were subsequently consolidated into other and later issues; but whatever change of form or date they underwent, they continued to represent practically just three things: the effort to conquer Santo Domingo, the expedition to Mexico, and the efforts to subdue Cuba. A movement to refund at a lower rate of interest was begun in 1890, and for this purpose an issue of $175,000,000 of Spanish bonds was authorized, to be paid out of the revenues of Cuba, but with the guaranty of the Spanish nation. Before many had been placed the insurrection had again broken out. Thenceforward they were used not to refund old bonds, but to raise money for the prosecution of the new war. Before its close this indebtedness had been swollen to over double the figure named above, and a part of the money must have been used directly in the war against the United States. [3] One of the author's colleagues at Paris, the Hon. Cushman K. Davis, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee of the United States Senate, and among the most scholarly students of International Law now in American public life, says in a private letter: "I was at first very much struck by the unanimity of action by the South American republics in the assumption of debts created by Spain. But some reflection upon the subject has caused that action to lose, to me, much of its apparent relevancy. There was in none of those cases any funded debt, in the sense of bond obligations, held in the markets of the world. There were two parties in the various Spanish provinces of North and South America, one of which supported Spanish ascendancy, and the other of which was revolutionary. The debts created by the exactions of Spain and of the revolutionary party alike were, mainly if not entirely, obligations due to the people of the colonies themselves. As to the continuance of pensions, endowments, etc., it must be remembered that these were Catholic countries, and that these obligations ran to a state church, which continued to be a state church after the colonies had achieved their independence. As to the Napoleonic treaties cited by the Spanish Commissioners, they were mere matters of covenant in a special case, and were not, in my judgment, the result of any anterior national obligation." In the negotiations Spain took high moral ground with reference to these debts. She utterly denied any right to inquire how the proceeds had been expended. She did not insist for her own benefit on their recognition and transfer with the territory. She was concerned, not for herself, but for international morality and for the innocent holders. Some, no doubt, were Spanish citizens, but many others were French, or Austrian, or of other foreign nationalities. The bonds were freely dealt in on the Continental bourses. A failure to provide for them would be a public scandal throughout civilization; it would cause a wide-spread and profound shock to the sense of security in national obligations the world over, besides incalculable injustice and individual distress. But the fact was that these were the bonds of the Spanish nation, issued by the Spanish nation for its own purposes, guaranteed in terms "by the faith of the Spanish nation," and with another guaranty pledging Spanish sovereignty and control over certain colonial revenues. Spain failed to maintain her title to the security she had pledged, but the lenders knew the instability of that security when they risked their money on it. All the later lenders and many of the early ones knew, also, that it was pledged for money to continue Spain's efforts to subdue a people struggling to free themselves from Spanish rule. They may have said the morality or justice of the use made of the money was no concern of theirs. They may have thought the security doubtful, and still relied on the broad guaranty of the Spanish nation. At any rate, caveat emptor! The one thing they ought not to have relied upon was that the island they were furnishing money to subdue, if it gained its freedom, would turn around and insist on reimbursing them! The Spanish contention that it was in their power, as absolute sovereign of the struggling island, to fasten ineradicably upon it, for their own hostile purposes, unlimited claims to its future revenues, would lead to extraordinary results. Under that doctrine, any hard-pushed oppressor would have a certain means of subduing the most righteous revolt and condemning a colony to perpetual subjugation. He would only have to load it with bonds, issued for his own purposes, beyond any possible capacity it could ever have for payment. Under that load it could neither sustain itself independently, even if successful in war, nor persuade any other Power to accept responsibility for and control over it. It would be rendered impotent either for freedom or for any change of sovereignty. To ask the Nation sprung from the successful revolt of the thirteen colonies to acknowledge and act on an immoral doctrine like that, was, indeed, ingenuous--or audacious. The American Commissioners pronounced it alike repugnant to common sense and menacing to liberty and civilization. The Spanish Commissioners resented the characterization, but it is believed that the considerate judgment of the world will yet approve it. International practice will certainly hesitate hereafter, in transfers of sovereignty over territory after its successful revolt, at any recognition of loans negotiated by the ceding Power in its unsuccessful effort to subdue the revolt--no matter what pledges it had assumed to give about the future territorial revenues. Loans for the prosecution of unjust wars will be more sharply scrutinized in the money markets of the world, and will find less ready takers, however extravagant the rates. It may even happen that oppressing nations, in the increasing difficulty of floating such loans, will find it easier to relax the rigors of their rule and promote the orderly development of more liberal institutions among their subjects. Far from being an encouragement, therefore, to repudiation, the American rejection of the so-called Cuban debt was a distinct contribution to international morality, and will probably furnish an important addition to International Law. [Sidenote: Ready to Pay Legitimate Colonial Debts.] At the same time the American Commissioners made clear in another case their sense of the duty to recognize any debt legitimately attaching to ceded territory. There was not the remotest thought of buying the Philippines, when a money payment was proposed, in that branch of the negotiations. When the Spanish fleet was sunk and the Spanish army captured at Manila, Spanish control over the Philippines was gone, and the Power that had destroyed it was compelled to assume its responsibilities to the civilized world at that commercial center and on that oceanic highway.[4] If that was not enough reason for the retention of the Philippines, then, at any rate, the right of the United States to them as indemnity for the war could not be contested by the generation which had witnessed the exaction of Alsace and Lorraine plus $1,000,000,000 indemnity for the Franco-Prussian War. The war with Spain had already cost the United States far above $300,000,000. When trying to buy Cuba from Spain, in the days of that island's greatest prosperity, the highest valuation the United States was ever willing to attach to it was $125,000,000. As an original proposition, nobody dreams that the American people would have consented to buy the remote Philippines at that figure or at the half of it. Who could think the Government exacting if it accepted them in lieu of a cash indemnity (which Spain was wholly incapable of paying) for a great deal more than double the value it had put upon Cuba, at its very doors? [4] It might, of course, have run away and left them to disorder. That is what a pirate could have done, and would have compelled the intervention of European governments for the protection of their own citizens. Or it might have restored them to Spain. Besides the desertion of natives whose aid against Manila had been encouraged, that would have been to say that while the United States went to war because the injustice and barbarity of Spanish rule in the West Indies were such that they could no longer be tolerated, it was now so eager to quit and get peace that it was willing to reëstablish that same rule in the East Indies! It was certain, then, that the Philippines would be retained, unless the President and his Commissioners so construed their duty to protect their country's interests as to throw away, in advance of popular instruction, all possible chance of indemnity for the war. But there was an issue of Spanish bonds, called a Philippine loan, amounting to forty million dollars Mexican, or say a little less than twenty millions of American money. Warned by the results of inquiry as to the origin of the Cuban debt, the American Commissioners avoided undertaking to assume this en bloc. But in their first statement of the claim for cession of sovereignty in the Philippines, while intimating their belief in their absolute right to enforce the demand on the single ground of indemnity, they were careful to say that they were ready to stipulate "for the assumption of any existing indebtedness of Spain incurred for public works and improvements of a pacific character in the Philippines." When they learned that this entire "Philippine debt" had only been issued in 1897, that apparently a fourth had been transferred to Cuba to carry on the war against the Cuban insurgents, and finally against the United States, and that much of what was left of the remainder, after satisfying the demands of officials for "costs of negotiation," must have gone to the support of the government while engaged in prosecuting the war against the natives in Luzon, the American Commissioners abandoned the idea of assuming it. But even then they resolved, in the final transfer, to fix an amount at least equal to the face value of that debt, which could be given to Spain. She could use it to pay the Philippine bonds if she chose. Nothing further was said to Spain about the Philippine debt, and no specific reason for the payment was given in the ultimatum. The Commissioners merely observed that they "now present a new proposition, embodying the concessions which, for the sake of immediate peace, their Government is, under the circumstances, willing to tender." What had gone before showed plainly enough the American view as to the sanctity of public debt legitimately incurred in behalf of ceded territory, and explained the money payment in the case of the Philippines, as well as the precise amount at which it was finally fixed. [Sidenote: Privateering.] Neither the Peace of Paris nor the conflict which it closed can be said to have quite settled the status of private war at sea. "Privateering is and remains abolished," not in International Law, but merely between the Powers that signed that clause in the Declaration of Paris in 1856. But the greatest commercial nation, as well as the most powerful, that withheld its signature was the United States. Obviously its adhesion to the principle would bring more weight to the general acceptance among civilized nations, which is the essential for admission in International Law, than that of all the other dissenting nations. Under these circumstances, the United States took the occasion of an outbreak of war between itself and another of the dissenting nations to announce that, for its part, it did not intend, under any circumstances, to resort to privateering. The other gave no such assurance, and was, in fact, expected (in accordance with frequent semi-official outgivings from Madrid) to commission privateers at an early day; but the disasters to its navy and the collapse of its finances left it without a safe opportunity. The moral effect of this volunteer action of the United States, with no offset of any active dissent by its opponent, becomes almost equivalent to completing that custom and assent of the civilized world which create International Law. Practically all governments may henceforth regard privateering as under international ban, and no one of the states yet refraining from assent--Spain, Mexico, Venezuela, or China--is likely to defy the ban. The announcement of the United States can probably be accepted as marking the end of private war at sea, and a genuine advance in the world's civilization. [Sidenote: Exempt all Private Property.] The refusal of the United States, in 1856, to join in the clause of the Declaration of Paris abolishing privateering was avowedly based upon the ground that it did not go far enough. The American claim was that not only private seizure of enemy's goods at sea should be prohibited, but that all private property of the enemy at sea should be entitled to the same protection as on land--prizes and prize courts being thus almost abolished, and no private property of the enemy anywhere being liable to confiscation, unless contraband of war. It was frankly stated at the time that without this addition the abolition of privateering was not in the interest of Powers like the United States, with a small navy, but a large and active merchant fleet. This peculiar adaptability of privateering at that time to the situation of the United States might have warranted the suspicion that its professions of a desire to make the Declaration of Paris broader than the other nations wished only masked a desire to have things remain as they were. But the subsequent action of its Government in time of profound peace compelled a worthier view of its attitude. A treaty with Italy, negotiated by George P. Marsh, and ratified by the United States in 1871, embodied the very extension of the Declaration of Paris for which the United States contended. This treaty provides that "in the event of a war between them (Italy and the United States) the private property of their respective citizens and subjects, with the exception of contraband of war, shall be exempt from capture or seizure, on the high seas or elsewhere, by the armed vessels or by the military forces of either party." Is it too much to hope that this early committal of the United States with Italy, and its subsequent action in the war with Spain, may at last bring the world to the advanced ground it recommended for the Declaration of Paris, and throw the safeguards of civilization henceforth around all private property in time of war, whether on land or sea? [Sidenote: The Monroe Doctrine Stands.] Here, then, are three great principles, important to the advancement of civilization, which, if not established in International Law by the Peace of Paris and the war it closed, have at least been so powerfuly reinforced that no nation is likely hereafter lightly or safely to violate them. But it has often been asked, and sometimes by eminent English writers, whether the Americans have not, at the same time, fatally unsettled the Monroe Doctrine, which never, indeed, had the sanction of International Law, but to which they were known to attach the greatest importance. A large and influential body of American opinion at first insisted that the acquisition of the West Indian, Philippine, and Sandwich Islands constituted an utter abandonment of that Doctrine; and apparently most European publicists have accepted this view. Only slight inquiry is needed to show that the facts give it little support. The Monroe Doctrine sprang from the union of certain absolute monarchs (not claiming to rule by the will of the people, but by "divine right") in a "Holy Alliance" against that dangerous spread of democratic ideas which, starting in the revolt of the American colonies, had kindled the French Revolution and more or less unsettled government in Europe. It was believed that these monarchs meant not only to repress republican tendencies in Europe, but to assist Spain in reducing again to subjection American republics which had been established in former Spanish colonies, and had been recognized as independent by the United States. Under these circumstances, James Monroe, then President, in his Annual Message in 1823, formally announced the famous "Doctrine" in these words: The occasion has been deemed proper for asserting as a principle in which the rights and interests of the United States are involved, that the American continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintained, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European Powers.... Our policy in regard to Europe ... is not to interfere in the internal concerns of any of its Powers. That is the whole substance of it. There was no pledge of abstention throughout the future and under all circumstances from the internal concerns of European Powers--only a statement of present practice. Far less was there a pledge, as seems to have been widely supposed, that if the Holy Alliance would only refrain from aiding Spain to force back the Mexican and South American republics into Spanish colonies, the United States would refrain from extending its institutions or its control over any region in Asia or Africa or the islands of the sea. Less yet was there any such talk as has been sometimes quoted, about keeping Europe out of the Western hemisphere and ourselves staying out of the Eastern hemisphere. What Mr. Monroe really said, in essence, was this: "The late Spanish colonies are now American republics, which we have recognized. They shall not be reduced to colonies again; and the two American continents have thus attained such an independent condition that they are no longer fields for European colonization." That fact remains. It does not seem probable that anybody will try or wish to change it. Furthermore, the United States has not interfered in the internal concerns of any European Powers. But it is under no direct pledge for the future to that effect; and as to Asia, Africa, and the islands of the sea, it is and always has been as free as anybody else. It encouraged and protected a colony on the west coast of Africa. It acquired the Aleutian Islands, largely in the Asiatic system. It long maintained a species of protectorate over the Sandwich Islands. It acquired an interest in Samoa and joined there in a protectorate. It has now taken the Sandwich Islands and the Philippines. Meanwhile the Monroe Doctrine remains just where it always was. Nothing has been done in contravention of it, and it stands as firmly as ever, though with the tragic end of the Franco-Austrian experiment in Mexico, and now with the final disappearance from the Western world of the unfortunate Power whose colonial experiences led to its original promulgation, the circumstances have so changed that nobody is very likely to have either interest or wish to interfere with it. [Sidenote: Leaving the Continent.] What has really been unsettled, if anything, by the Peace of Paris and the preceding war, has been the current American idea as to the sphere of national activities, and the power under the Constitution for their extension. It is perfectly true that the people did not wish for more territory, and never dreamed of distant colonies. There had always been a party that first opposed and then belittled the acquisition of Alaska. There was no considerable popular support since the Civil War for filibustering expeditions of the old sort against Cuba. There was genuine reluctance to take the steps which recent circumstances and the national committals for half a century made almost unavoidable in the Sandwich Islands. Now suddenly the United States found itself in possession of Cuba, Porto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines. The first impression was one of great popular perplexity. What was to be done with them? Must they be developed through the territorial stage into independent States in the Union? or, if not, how govern or get rid of them? What place was there in the American system for territories that were never to be States, for colonies, or for the rule of distant subject races? Up to this time, from the outbreak of the war, the Administration had found the American people united in its support as they had hardly been united for a century. The South vied with the North, the West forgot the growing jealousy of the East, the poor the new antagonism to the rich, and the wildest cow-boys from Arizona and New Mexico marched fraternally beside scions of the oldest and richest families from New York, under the orders of a great Secessionist cavalry general. But now two parties presently arose. One held that there was no creditable escape from the consequences of the war; that the Government, having broken down the existing authority in the capital of the Philippines, and practically throughout the archipelago, could neither set up that authority again nor shirk the duty of replacing it; that it was as easy and as constitutional to apply some modification of the existing territorial system to the Philippines as it had been to Alaska and the Aleutians; and that, while the task was no doubt disagreeable, difficult, and dangerous, it could not be avoided with honor, and would ultimately be attended with great profit. On the other hand, some prominent members of the Administration party led off in protests against the retention of the Philippines on constitutional, humanitarian, and economic grounds, pronouncing it a policy absolutely antagonistic to the principles of the Republic and the precursor of its downfall. In proportion as the Administration itself inclined to the former view, the opposition leaders fell away from the support they had given during the war, and began to align themselves with those members of the Administration party who had opposed the ratification of the treaty. They were reinforced by a considerable body of educated and conservative public opinion, chiefly at the East, and by a number of trades-union and labor leaders, who had been brought to believe that the new policy meant cheap labor and cheap manufactures in competition with their own, together with a large standing army, to which they have manifested great repugnance ever since the Chicago riots. [Sidenote: Anti-Administration View of the Constitution.] In the universal ferment of opinion and discussion that ensued, the opponents of what is assumed to be the Administration policy on the new possessions have seemed to rely chiefly on two provisions in the Constitution of the United States and a phrase in the Declaration of Independence. The constitutional provisions are: The Congress shall have power to levy and collect taxes ... and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; _but all duties, imposts, and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States_.--Art. I, Sec. 8. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.--Art. XIV, Sec. 1. To serve the purpose for which these clauses of the Constitution are invoked, it is necessary to hold that any territory to which the United States has a title is an integral part of the United States; and perhaps the greatest name in the history of American constitutional interpretation, that of Mr. Chief Justice Marshall of the Supreme Court of the United States, is cited in favor of that contention. If accepted, it follows that when the treaty ceding Spanish sovereignty in the Philippines was ratified, that archipelago became an integral part of the United States. Then, under the first clause above cited, the Dingley tariff must be immediately extended over the Philippines (as well as Porto Rico, the Sandwich Islands, and Guam) precisely as over New York; and, under the second clause, every native of the Philippines and the other new possessions is a citizen of the United States, with all the rights and privileges thereby accruing. The first result would be the disorganization of the present American revenue system by the free admission into all American ports of sugar and other tropical products from the greatest sources of supply, and the consequent loss of nearly sixty millions of annual revenue. Another would be the destruction of the existing cane- and beet-sugar industries in the United States. Another, apprehended by the laboring classes, who are already suspicious from their experience with the Chinese, would be an enormous influx, either of cheap labor or of its products, to beat down their wages. Next, it is argued, there is no place in the theory or practice of the American Government for territories except for development into Statehood; and, consequently, the required population being already present, new States must be created out of Luzon, Mindanao, the Visayas, Porto Rico, and the Sandwich Islands. The right to hold them permanently in the territorial form, or even under a protectorate, is indignantly denied as conflicting with Mr. Jefferson's phrase in the Declaration of Independence, to the effect that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. Some great names can certainly be marshaled in support of such views--Chancellor Kent, Mr. John C. Calhoun, Mr. Chief Justice Taney, and others. Denial of this duty to admit the new possessions as States is denounced as a violation by the Republic of the very law of its being, and its transformation into an empire; as a revival of slavery in another form, both because of government without representation, and because of the belief that no tropical colony can be successful without contract labor; as a consequent and inevitable degradation of American character; as a defiance of the warnings in Washington's Farewell Address against foreign entanglements; as a repudiation of the congressional declaration at the outbreak of the war, that it was not waged for territorial aggrandizement; and finally as placing Aguinaldo in the position of fighting for freedom, independence, and the principles of the fathers of the Republic, while the Republic itself is in the position of fighting to control and govern him and his people in spite of their will. On the other hand, the supporters of the treaty and of the policy of the Administration, so far as it has been disclosed, begin their argument with another provision of the Constitution, the second part of Section 3 in Article IV: The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States. They claim that, under this, Congress has absolute power to do what it will with the Philippines, as with any other territory or other property which the United States may acquire. It is admitted that Congress is, of course, under an implied obligation to exercise this power in the general spirit of the Constitution which creates it, and of the Government of which it is a part. But it is denied that Congress is under any obligation to confer a republican form of government upon a territory whose inhabitants are unfit for it, or to adopt any form of government devised with reference to preparing it for ultimate admission to the Union as a State. It is further denied that Congress is under any obligation, arising either from the Constitution itself or from the precedents of the Nation's action under it, to ask the consent of the inhabitants in acquired territory to the form of government which may be given them. And still further, it is not only denied that Congress is under any obligations to prepare these territories for Statehood or admit them to it, but it is pointed out that, at least as to the Philippines, that body is prevented from doing so by the very terms, of the preamble to the Constitution itself--concluding with the words, "do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States _of America_." There is no place here for States of Asia. [Sidenote: Replies to Constitutional Objections.] In dealing with the arguments against retention of the Philippines, based on the sections previously quoted from Articles I and XIV of the Constitution, the friends of the policy say that the apparent conflict in these articles with the wide grant of powers over territory to Congress which they find in Article IV arises wholly from a failure to recognize the different senses in which the term "the United States" is used. As the name of the Nation it is often employed to include all territory over which United States sovereignty extends, whether originally the property of the individual States and ceded to the United States, or whether acquired in treaties by the Nation itself. But such a meaning is clearly inconsistent with its use in certain clauses of the Constitution in question. Thus Article XIII says: "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude ... shall exist within the United States _or any place subject to their jurisdiction_." The latter clause was obviously the constitutional way of conveying the idea about the Territories which the opponents of the Philippine policy are now trying to read into the name "United States." The constitutional provision previously cited about citizenship illustrates the same point. It says "all persons born," etc., "are citizens of the United States _and of the State wherein they reside_." There is no possibility left here that Territories are to be held as an integral part of the United States, in the sense in which the Constitution, in this clause, uses the name. If they had been, the clause would have read, "and of the State _or Territory_ in which they reside." For these opinions high authorities are also cited, including debates in the Senate, acts of Congress, the constant practice of the Executive, and most of the judicial rulings of the last half-century that seem to bear upon the present situation. [Sidenote: The Outcome not Doubtful.] It has been thought best, in an explanation to readers in another country of the perplexity arising in the American mind, in a sudden emergency, from these disputed points in constitutional powers, to set forth with impartial fairness and some precision the views on either side. It is essential to a fair judgment as to the apparent hesitation since this problem began to develop, that the real basis for the conflicting opinions should be understood, and that full justice should be done to the earnest repugnance with which many conscientious citizens draw back from sending American youth to distant tropical regions to enforce with an armed hand the submission of an unwilling people to the absolute rule of the Republic. It should be realized, too, how far the new departure does unsettle the practice and policy of a century. The old view that each new Territory is merely another outlet for surplus population, soon to be taken in as another State in the Union, must be abandoned. The old assumption that all inhabitants of territory belonging to the United States are to be regarded as citizens is gone. The idea that government anywhere must derive its just powers only from the consent of the governed is unsettled, and thus, to some, the very foundations of the Republic seem to be shaken. Three generations, trained in Washington's warnings against foreign entanglements, find it difficult all at once to realize that advice adapted to a people of three millions, scattered along the border of a continent, may need some modifications when applied to a people of seventy-five millions, occupying the continent, and reaching out for the commerce of both the oceans that wash its shores. But whatever may be thought of the weight of the argument, either as to constitutional power or as to policy, there is little doubt as to the result. The people who found authority in their fundamental law for treating paper currency as a legal tender in time of war, in spite of the constitutional requirement that no State should "make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts," will find there also all the power they need for dealing with the difficult problem that now confronts them. And when the constitutional objections are surmounted, those as to policy are not likely to lead the American people to recall their soldiers from the fields on which the Filipinos attacked them, or abandon the sovereignty which Spain ceded. The American Government has the new territories, and will hold and govern them. A republic like the United States has not been well adapted hitherto to that sort of work. Congress is apt to be slow, if not also changeable, and under the Constitution the method of government for territories must be prescribed by Congress. It has not yet found time to deal with the Sandwich Islands. Its harsher critics declare it has never yet found time to deal fairly with Alaska. No doubt, Executive action in advance of Congress might be satisfactory; but a President is apt to wait for Congress unless driven by irresistible necessities. He can only take the initiative through some form of military government. For this the War Department is not yet well organized. Possibly the easiest solution for the moment would be in the organization of another department for war and government beyond the seas, or the development of a measurably independent bureau for such work in the present department. Whatever is done, it would be unreasonable to expect unbroken success or exemption from a learner's mistakes and discouragements. But whoever supposes that these will result either in the abandonment of the task or in a final failure with it does not know the American people. VII OUR NEW DUTIES This commencement address was delivered on the campus at Miami University, Oxford, Ohio, at the celebration of its seventy-fifth anniversary, June 15, 1899. OUR NEW DUTIES Sons and Friends of Miami: I join you in saluting this venerable mother at a notable waymark in her great life. One hundred and seven years ago the Congress voted, and George Washington approved, a foundation for this University. Seventy-five years ago it opened its doors. Now, si monumentum quæris, circumspice. There is the catalogue. There are the long lists of men who so served the State or the Church that their lives are your glory, their names your inspiration.[5] There are the longer lists of others to whom kinder fortune did not set duties in the eye of the world; but Miami made of them citizens who leavened the lump of that growing West which was then a sprawling, irregular line of pioneer settlements, and is now an empire. Search through it, above and below the Ohio, and beyond the Mississippi. So often, where there are centers of good work or right thinking and right living--so often and so widely spread will you find traces of Miami, left by her own sons or coming from those secondary sources which sprang from her example and influence, that you are led in grateful surprise to exclaim: "If this be the work of a little college, God bless and prolong the little college! If, half starved and generally neglected, she has thus nourished good learning and its proper result in good lives through the three quarters of a century ended to-day, may the days of her years be as the sands of the sea; may the Twentieth Century only introduce the glorious prime of a career of which the Nineteenth saw but modest beginnings, and may good old Miami still flourish in sæcula sæculorum!" [5] Much attention had been attracted, as the date for this celebration approached, to the numerous sons of this small college who had in one way or another become prominent; and the newspapers printed long lists of them. Among the names thus singled out in the press were Benjamin Harrison, of the class of 1852, President of the United States, 1889-93; William Dennison, class of 1835, Governor of Ohio, 1859-63, and Postmaster-General under Abraham Lincoln; Caleb B. Smith, 1826, Secretary of the Interior in the same Administration; General Robert C. Schenck, 1827, Chairman Ways and Means Committee in House of Representatives, Major-General in the Civil War, and United States Minister to Brazil and to Great Britain; William S. Groesbeck, 1834, Congressman, counsel for Andrew Johnson in the impeachment proceedings, and United States delegate to the International Monetary Congress, 1878; Samuel Shellabarger, 1841, Congressman, member of the Crédit Mobilier Investigation, and of the United States Civil Service Commission; Oliver P. Morton, 1845, War Governor of Indiana, and United States Senator; Charles Anderson, 1833, Governor of Ohio; James Birney, 1836, Governor of Michigan; Richard Yates, 1830, War Governor of Illinois, and United States Senator; Milton Sayler, 1852, Speaker House of Representatives; John S. Williams, 1838, the "Cerro Gordo Williams" of the Mexican War, United States Senator from Kentucky; George E. Pugh, 1840, United States Senator from Ohio; James W. McDill, 1853, United States Senator from Iowa; General Samuel F. Carey, 1835, Congressman from Ohio, and temperance orator; Albert S. Berry, 1856, Congressman from Kentucky; Dr. John S. Billings, U.S.A., 1857, head of New York Library; David Swing, 1852, the Chicago clergyman; General A. C. McClurg, 1853, the Chicago publisher; Henry M. MacCracken, 1857, Chancellor of New York University; William M. Thomson, 1828, author of "The Land and the Book"; Calvin S. Brice, 1863, railway-builder, and United States Senator; etc. But the celebration of her past and the aspirations for her future belong to worthier sons--here among these gentlemen of the Board who have cared for her in her need. I make them my profound acknowledgments for the honor they have done me in assigning me a share in the work of this day of days, and shall best deserve their trust by going with absolute candor straight to my theme. [Sidenote: New Duties; a New World.] I shall speak of the new duties that are upon us and the new world that is opening to us with the new century--of the spirit in which we should advance and the results we have the right to ask. I shall speak of public matters which it is the duty of educated men to consider; and of matters which may hereafter divide parties, but on which we must refuse now to recognize party distinctions. Partizanship stops at the guard-line. "In the face of an enemy we are all Frenchmen," said an eloquent Imperialist once in my hearing, in rallying his followers to support a foreign measure of the French Republic. At this moment our soldiers are facing a barbarous or semi-civilized foe, who treacherously attacked them in a distant land, where our flag had been sent, in friendship with them, for the defense of our own shores. Was it creditable or seemly that it was lately left to a Bonaparte on our own soil to teach some American leaders that, at such a time, patriotic men at home do not discourage those soldiers or weaken the Government that directs them?[6] [6] "MY DEAR SIR: I have received your letter of the 23d inst., notifying me of my election as a vice-president of the Anti-Imperialist League. I recognize the compliment implied in this election, and appreciate it the more by reason of my respect for the gentlemen identified with the league, but I do not think I can appropriately or consistently accept the position, especially since I learn through the press that the league adopted at its recent meeting certain resolutions to which I cannot assent.... I may add that, while I fully recognize the injustice and even absurdity of those charges of 'disloyalty' which have been of late freely made against some members of the league, and also that many honorable and patriotic men do not feel as I do on this subject, I am personally unwilling to take part in an agitation which may have some tendency to cause a public enemy to persist in armed resistance, or may be, at least, plausibly represented as having this tendency. There can be no doubt that, as a matter of fact, the country is at war with Aguinaldo and his followers. I profoundly regret this fact;... but it is a fact, nevertheless, and, as such, must weigh in determining my conduct as a citizen.... "CHARLES JEROME BONAPARTE. "BALTIMORE, "May 25, 1899." Neither shall I discuss, here and now, the wisdom of all the steps that have led to the present situation. For good or ill, the war was fought. Its results are upon us. With the ratification of the Peace of Paris, our Continental Republic has stretched its wings over the West Indies and the East. It is a fact and not a theory that confronts us. We are actually and now responsible, not merely to the inhabitants and to our own people, but, in International Law, to the commerce, the travel, the civilization of the world, for the preservation of order and the protection of life and property in Cuba, in Porto Rico, in Guam, and in the Philippine Archipelago, including that recent haunt of piracy, the Sulus. Shall we quit ourselves like men in the discharge of this immediate duty; or shall we fall to quarreling with each other like boys as to whether such a duty is a good or a bad thing for the country, and as to who got it fastened upon us? There may have been a time for disputes about the wisdom of resisting the stamp tax, but it was not just after Bunker Hill. There may have been a time for hot debate about some mistakes in the antislavery agitation, but not just after Sumter and Bull Run. Furthermore, it is as well to remember that you can never grind with the water that has passed the mill. Nothing in human power can ever restore the United States to the position it occupied the day before Congress plunged us into the war with Spain, or enable us to escape what that war entailed. No matter what we wish, the old continental isolation is gone forever. Whithersoever we turn now, we must do it with the burden of our late acts to carry, the responsibility of our new position to assume. When the sovereignty which Spain had exercised with the assent of all nations over vast and distant regions for three hundred years was solemnly transferred under the eye of the civilized world to the United States, our first responsibility became the restoration of order. Till that is secured, any hindrance to the effort is bad citizenship--as bad as resistance to the police; as much worse, in fact, as its consequences may be more bloody and disastrous. "You have a wolf by the ears," said an accomplished ex-Minister of the United States to a departing Peace Commissioner last autumn. "You cannot let go of him with either dignity or safety, and he will not be easy to tame." [Sidenote: Policy for the New Possessions.] But when the task is accomplished,--when the Stars and Stripes at last bring the order and peaceful security they typify, instead of wanton disorder, with all the concomitants of savage warfare over which they now wave,--we shall then be confronted with the necessity of a policy for the future of these distant regions. It is a problem that calls for our soberest, most dispassionate, and most patriotic thought. The colleges, and the educated classes generally, should make it a matter of conscience--painstakingly considered on all its sides, with reference to International Law, the burdens of sovereignty, the rights and the interests of native tribes, and the legitimate demands of civilization--to find first our national duty and then our national interest, which it is also a duty for our statesmen to protect. On such a subject we have a right to look to our colleges for the help they should be so well equipped to give. From these still regions of cloistered thought may well come the white light of pure reason, not the wild, whirling words of the special pleader or of the partizan, giving loose rein to his hasty first impressions. It would be an ill day for some colleges if crude and hot-tempered incursions into current public affairs, like a few unhappily witnessed of late, should lead even their friends to fear lest they have been so long accustomed to dogmatize to boys that they have lost the faculty of reasoning with men. When the first duty is done, when order is restored in those commercial centers and on that commercial highway, somebody must then be responsible for maintaining it--either ourselves or some Power whom we persuade to take them off our hands. Does anybody doubt what the American people in their present temper would say to the latter alternative?--the same people who, a fortnight ago, were ready to break off their Joint Commission with Great Britain and take the chances, rather than give up a few square miles of worthless land and a harbor of which a year ago they scarcely knew the name, on the remote coast of Alaska. Plainly it is idle now, in a government so purely dependent on the popular will, to scheme or hope for giving the Philippine task over to other hands as soon as order is restored. We must, then, be prepared with a policy for maintaining it ourselves. Of late years men have unthinkingly assumed that new territory is, in the very nature of our Government, merely and necessarily the raw material for future States in the Union. Colonies and dependencies, it is now said, are essentially inconsistent with our system. But if any ever entertained the wild dream that the instrument whose preamble says it is ordained for the United States of _America_ could be stretched to the China Sea, the first Tagal guns fired at friendly soldiers of the Union, and the first mutilation of American dead that ensued, ended the nightmare of States from Asia admitted to the American Union. For that relief, at least, we must thank the uprising of the Tagals. It was a Continental Union of independent sovereign States our fathers planned. Whoever proposes to debase it with admixtures of States made up from the islands of the sea, in any archipelago, East or West, is a bad friend to the Republic. We may guide, protect, elevate them, and even teach them some day to stand alone; but if we ever invite them into our Senate and House, to help to rule us, we are the most imbecile of all the offspring of time. [Sidenote: The Constitutional Objection.] Yet we must face the fact that able and conscientious men believe the United States has no constitutional power to hold territory that is not to be erected into States in the Union, or to govern people that are not to be made citizens. They are able to cite great names in support of their contention; and it would be an ill omen for the freest and most successful constitutional government in the world if a constitutional objection thus fortified should be carelessly considered or hastily overridden. This objection rests mainly on the assumption that the name "United States," as used in the Constitution, necessarily includes all territory the Nation owns, and on the historic fact that large parts of this territory, on acquiring sufficient population, have already been admitted as States, and have generally considered such admission to be a right. Now, Mr. Chief Justice Marshall--than whom no constitutional authority carries greater weight--certainly did declare that the question what was designated by the term "United States" in the clause of the Constitution giving power to levy duties on imposts "admitted of but one answer." It "designated the whole of the American empire, composed of States and Territories." If that be accepted as final, then the tariff must be applied in Manila precisely as in New York, and goods from Manila must enter the New York custom-house as freely as goods from New Orleans. Sixty millions would disappear instantly and annually from the Treasury, and our revenue system would be revolutionized by the free admission of sugar and other tropical products from the United States of Asia and the Caribbean Sea; while, on the other hand, the Philippines themselves would be fatally handicapped by a tariff wholly unnatural to their locality and circumstances. More. If that be final, the term "United States" should have the same comprehensive meaning in the clause as to citizenship. Then Aguinaldo is to-day a citizen of the United States, and may yet run for the Presidency. Still more. The Asiatics south of the China Sea are given that free admission to the country which we so strenuously deny to Asiatics from the north side of the same sea. Their goods, produced on wages of a few cents a day, come into free competition in all our home markets with the products of American labor, and the cheap laborers themselves are free to follow if ever our higher wages attract them. More yet. If that be final, the Tagals and other tribes of Luzon, the Visayans of Negros and Cebu, and the Mohammedan Malays of Mindanao and the Sulus, having each far more than the requisite population, may demand admission next winter into the Union as free and independent States, with representatives in Senate and House, and may plausibly claim that they can show a better title to admission than Nevada ever did, or Utah or Idaho. Nor does the great name of Marshall stand alone in support of such conclusions. The converse theory that these territories are not necessarily included in the constitutional term "the United States" makes them our subject dependencies, and at once the figure of Jefferson himself is evoked, with all the signers of the immortal Declaration grouped about him, renewing the old war-cry that government derives its just powers from the consent of the governed. At different periods in our history eminent statesmen have made protests on grounds of that sort. Even the first bill for Mr. Jefferson's own purchase of Louisiana was denounced by Mr. Macon as "establishing a species of government unknown to the United States"; by Mr. Lucas as "establishing elementary principles never previously introduced in the government of any Territory of the United States"; and by Mr. Campbell as "really establishing a complete despotism." In 1823 Chancellor Kent said, with reference to Columbia River settlements, that "a government by Congress as absolute sovereign, over colonies, absolute dependents, was not congenial to the free and independent spirit of American institutions." In 1848 John C. Calhoun declared that "the conquest and retention of Mexico as a province would be a departure from the settled policy of the Government, in conflict with its character and genius, and in the end subversive of our free institutions." In 1857 Mr. Chief Justice Taney said that "a power to rule territory without restriction as a colony or dependent province would be inconsistent with the nature of our Government." And now, following warily in this line, the eminent and trusted advocate of similar opinions to-day, Mr. Senator Hoar of Massachusetts, says: "The making of new States and providing national defense are constitutional ends, so that we may acquire and hold territory for those purposes. The governing of subject peoples is not a constitutional end, and there is therefore no constitutional warrant for acquiring and holding territory for that purpose." [Sidenote: An Alleged Constitutional Inability.] We have now, as is believed, presented with entire fairness a summary of the more important aspects in which the constitutional objections mentioned have been urged. I would not underrate by a hair's breadth the authority of these great names, the weight of these continuous reassertions of principle, the sanction even of the precedent and general practice through a century. And yet I venture to think that no candid and competent man can thoroughly investigate the subject, in the light of the actual provisions of the Constitution, the avowed purpose of its framers, their own practice and the practice of their successors, without being absolutely convinced that this whole fabric of opposition on constitutional grounds is as flimsy as a cobweb. This country of our love and pride is no malformed, congenital cripple of a nation, incapable of undertaking duties that have been found within the powers of every other nation that ever existed since governments among civilized men began. Neither by chains forged in the Constitution nor by chains of precedent, neither by the dead hand we all revere, that of the Father of his Country, nor under the most authoritative exponents of our organic act and of our history, are we so bound that we cannot undertake any duty that devolves or exercise any power which the emergency demands. Our Constitution has entrapped us in no impasse, where retreat is disgrace and advance is impossible. The duty which the hand of Providence, rather than any purpose of man, has laid upon us, is within our constitutional powers. Let me invoke your patience for a rather minute and perhaps wearisome detail of the proof. The notion that the United States is an inferior sort of nation, constitutionally without power for such public duties as other nations habitually assume, may perhaps be dismissed with a single citation from the Supreme Court. Said Mr. Justice Bradley, in the Legal Tender Cases: "As a government it [the United States] was invested with all the attributes of sovereignty.... It seems to be a self-evident proposition that it is invested with all those inherent and implied powers which, at the time of adopting the Constitution, were generally considered to belong to every government as such, and as being essential to the exercise of its functions" (12 Wall. 554). Every one recalls this constitutional provision: "The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property of the United States." That grant is absolute, and the only qualification is the one to be drawn from the general spirit of the Government the Constitution was framed to organize. Is it consistent with that spirit to hold territory permanently, or for long periods of time, without admitting it to the Union? Let the man who wrote the very clause in question answer. That man was Gouverneur Morris of New York, and you will find his answer on page 192 of the third volume of his writings, given only fifteen years after, in reply to a direct question as to the exact meaning of the clause: "I always thought, when we should acquire Canada and Louisiana, it would be proper to govern them as provinces, and allow them no voice in our councils. In wording the third section of the fourth article, I went as far as circumstances would permit to establish the exclusion." This framer of the Constitution desired then, and intended definitely and permanently, to keep _Louisiana_ out! And yet there are men who tell us the provision he drew would not even permit us to keep the Philippines out! To be more papist than the Pope will cease to be a thing exciting wonder if every day modern men, in the consideration of practical and pressing problems, are to be more narrowly constitutional than the men that wrote the Constitution! Is it said that, at any rate, our practice under this clause of the Constitution has been against the view of the man that wrote it, and in favor of that quoted from Mr. Chief Justice Marshall? Does anybody seriously think, then, that though we have held New Mexico, Arizona, and Oklahoma as territory organized or unorganized, part of it nearly a century and all of it half a century, our representatives believed all the while they had no constitutional right to do so? Who imagines that when the third of a century during which we have already held Alaska is rounded out to a full century, that unorganized Territory will even then have any greater prospect than at present of admission as a State? or who believes our grandchildren will be violating the Constitution in keeping it out? Who imagines that under the Constitution ordained on this continent specifically "for the United States of _America_," we will ever permit the Kanakas, Chinese, and Japanese, who make up a majority of the population in the Sandwich Islands, to set up a government of their own and claim admission as an independent and sovereign State of our American Union? Finally, let me add that conclusive proof relating not only to practice under the Constitution, but to the precise construction of the constitutional language as to the Territories by the highest authority, in the light of long previous practice, is to be found in another part of the instrument itself, deliberately added three quarters of a century later. Article XIII provides that "neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall exist within the United States, _or any place subject to their jurisdiction_." If the term "the United States," as used in the Constitution, really includes the Territories as an integral part, as Mr. Chief Justice Marshall said, what, then, does the Constitution mean by the additional words, "or any place subject to their jurisdiction"? Is it not too plain for argument that the Constitution here refers to territory not a part of the United States, but subject to its jurisdiction--territory, for example, like the Sandwich Islands or the Philippines? What, then, shall we say to the opinion of the great Chief Justice?--for, after all, his is not a name to be dealt with lightly. Well, first, it was a dictum, not a decision of the court. Next, in another and later case, before the same eminent jurist, came a constitutional expounder as eminent and as generally accepted,--none other than Daniel Webster,--who took precisely the opposite view. He was discussing the condition of certain territory on this continent which we had recently acquired. Said Mr. Webster: "What is Florida? It is no part of the United States. How can it be? Florida is to be governed by Congress as it thinks proper. Congress might have done anything--might have refused a trial by jury, and refused a legislature." After this flat contradiction of the court's former dictum, what happened? Mr. Webster won his case, and the Chief Justice made not the slightest reference to his own previous and directly conflicting opinion! Need we give it more attention now than Marshall did then? Mr. Webster maintained the same position long afterward, in the Senate of the United States, in opposition to Mr. John C. Calhoun, and his view has been continuously sustained since by the courts and by congressional action. In the debate with Mr. Calhoun in February, 1849, Mr. Webster said: "What is the Constitution of the United States? Is not its very first principle that all within its influence and comprehension shall be represented in the Legislature which it establishes, with not only a right of debate and a right to vote in both houses of Congress, but a right to partake in the choice of President and Vice-President?... The President of the United States shall govern this territory as he sees fit till Congress makes further provision.... We have never had a territory governed as the United States is governed.... I do not say that while we sit here to make laws for these territories, we are not bound by every one of those great principles which are intended as general securities for public liberty. But they do not exist in territories till introduced by the authority of Congress.... Our history is uniform in its course. It began with the acquisition of Louisiana. It went on after Florida became a part of the Union. In all cases, under all circumstances, by every proceeding of Congress on the subject and by all judicature on the subject, it has been held that territories belonging to the United States were to be governed by a constitution of their own,... and in approving that constitution the legislation of Congress was not necessarily confined to those principles that bind it when it is exercised in passing laws for the United States itself." Mr. Calhoun, in the course of this debate, asked Mr. Webster for judicial opinion sustaining these views, and Mr. Webster said that "the same thing has been decided by the United States courts over and over again for the last thirty years." I may add that it has been so held over and over again during the subsequent fifty. Mr. Chief Justice Waite, giving the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States (in National Bank _v._ County of Yankton, 101 U.S. 129-132), said: "It is certainly now too late to doubt the power of Congress to govern the Territories. Congress is supreme, and, for all the purposes of this department, has all the powers of the people of the United States, except such as have been expressly or by implication reserved in the prohibitions of the Constitution." Mr. Justice Stanley Matthews of the United States Supreme Court stated the same view with even greater clearness in one of the Utah polygamy cases (Murphy _v._ Ramsey, 114 U.S. 44, 45): "It rests with Congress to say whether in a given case any of the people resident in the Territory shall participate in the election of its officers or the making of its laws. It may take from them any right of suffrage it may previously have conferred, or at any time modify or abridge it, as it may deem expedient.... Their political rights are franchises which they hold as privileges, in the legislative discretion of the United States." The very latest judicial utterance on the subject is in harmony with all the rest. Mr. Justice Morrow of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in February, 1898, held (57 U.S. Appeals 6): "The now well-established doctrine [is] that the Territories of the United States are entirely subject to the legislative authority of Congress. They are not organized under the Constitution nor subject to its complex distribution of the powers of government. The United States, having rightfully acquired the Territories, and being the only Government which can impose laws upon them, has the entire dominion and sovereignty, national and municipal, Federal and State." [Sidenote: More Recent Constitutional Objections.] In the light of such expositions of our constitutional power and our uniform national practice, it is difficult to deal patiently with the remaining objections to the acquisition of territory, purporting to be based on constitutional grounds. One is that to govern the Philippines without their consent or against the opposition of Aguinaldo is to violate the principle--only formulated, to be sure, in the Declaration of Independence, but, as they say, underlying the whole Constitution--that government derives its just powers from the consent of the governed. In the Sulu group piracy prevailed for centuries. How could a government that put it down rest on the consent of Sulu? Would it be without just powers because the pirates did not vote in its favor? In other parts of the archipelago what has been stigmatized as a species of slavery prevails. Would a government that stopped that be without just powers till the slaveholders had conferred them at a popular election? In another part head-hunting is, at certain seasons of the year, a recognized tribal custom. Would a government that interfered with that practice be open to denunciation as an usurpation, without just powers, and flagrantly violating the Constitution of the United States, unless it waited at the polls for the consent of the head-hunters? The truth is, all intelligent men know--and few even in America, except obvious demagogues, hesitate to admit--that there are cases where a good government does not and ought not to rest on the consent of the governed. If men will not govern themselves with respect for civilization and its agencies, then when they get in the way they must be governed--always have been, whenever the world was not retrograding, and always will be. The notion that such government is a revival of slavery, and that the United States by doing its share of such work in behalf of civilization would therefore become infamous, though put forward with apparent gravity in some eminently respectable quarters, is too fantastic for serious consideration. Mr. Jefferson may be supposed to have known the meaning of the words he wrote. Instead of vindicating a righteous rebellion in the Declaration, he was called, after a time, to exercise a righteous government under the Constitution. Did he himself, then, carry his own words to such extremes as these professed disciples now demand? Was he guilty of subverting the principles of the Government in buying some hundreds of thousands of Spaniards, Frenchmen, Creoles, and Indians, "like sheep in the shambles," as the critics untruthfully say we did in the Philippines? We bought nobody there. We held the Philippines first by the same right by which we held our own original thirteen States,--the oldest and firmest of all rights, the right by which nearly every great nation holds the bulk of its territory,--the right of conquest. We held them again as a rightful indemnity, and a low one, for a war in which the vanquished could give no other. We bought nothing; and the twenty millions that accompanied the transfer just balanced the Philippine debt. But Jefferson did, if you choose to accept the hypercritical interpretation of these latter-day Jeffersonians--Jefferson did buy the Louisianians, even "like sheep in the shambles," if you care so to describe it; and did proceed to govern them without the consent of the governed. Monroe bought the Floridians without their consent. Polk conquered the Californians, and Pierce bought the New Mexicans. Seward bought the Russians and Alaskans, and we have governed them ever since, without their consent. Is it easy, in the face of such facts, to preserve your respect for an objection so obviously captious as that based on the phrase from the Declaration of Independence? Nor is the turn Senator Hoar gives the constitutional objection much more weighty. He wishes to take account of motives, and pry into the purpose of those concerned in any acquisition of territory, before the tribunals can decide whether it is constitutional or not. If acquired either for the national defense or to be made a State, the act is constitutional; otherwise not. If, then, Jefferson intended to make a State out of Idaho, his act in acquiring that part of the Louisiana Purchase was all right. Otherwise he violated the Constitution he had helped to make and sworn to uphold. And yet, poor man, he hardly knew of the existence of that part of the territory, and certainly never dreamed that it would ever become a State, any more than Daniel Webster dreamed, to quote his own language in the Senate, that "California would ever be worth a dollar." Is Gouverneur Morris to be arraigned as false to the Constitution he helped to frame because he wanted to acquire Louisiana and Canada, and keep them both out of the Union? Did Mr. Seward betray the Constitution and violate his oath in buying Alaska without the purpose of making it a State? It seems--let it be said with all respect--that we have reached the reductio ad absurdum, and that the constitutional argument in any of its phases need not be further pursued. [Sidenote: The Little Americans.] If I have wearied you with these detailed proofs of a doctrine which Mr. Justice Morrow rightly says is now well established, and these replies to its assailants, the apology must be found in the persistence with which the utter lack of constitutional power to deal with our new possessions has been vociferously urged from the outset by the large class of our people whom I venture to designate as the Little Americans, using that term not in the least in disparagement, but solely as distinctive and convenient. From the beginning of the century, at every epoch in our history we have had these Little Americans. They opposed Jefferson as to getting Louisiana. They opposed Monroe as to Florida. They were vehement against Texas, against California, against organizing Oregon and Washington, against the Gadsden Purchase, against Alaska, and against the Sandwich Islands. At nearly every stage in that long story of expansion the Little Americans have either denied the constitutional authority to acquire and govern, or denounced the acquisitions as worthless and dangerous. At one stage, indeed, they went further. When State after State was passing ordinances of secession, they raised the cry,--erroneously attributed to my distinguished predecessor and friend, Horace Greeley, but really uttered by Winfield Scott,--"Wayward Sisters, depart in peace!" Happily, this form, too, of Little Americanism failed. We are all glad now,--my distinguished classmate here,[7] who wore the gray and invaded Ohio with Morgan, as glad as myself,--we all rejoice that these doctrines were then opposed and overborne. It was seen then, and I venture to think it may be seen now, that it is a fundamental principle with the American people, and a duty imposed upon all who represent them, to maintain the Continental Union of American Independent States in all the purity of the fathers' conception; to hold what belongs to it, and get what it is entitled to; and, finally, that wherever its flag has been rightfully advanced, there it is to be kept. If that be Imperialism, make the most of it! [7] The Hon. Albert S. Berry, M.C., from the Covington, Kentucky, District. [Sidenote: The Plain Path of Duty.] It was no vulgar lust of power that inspired the statesmen and soldiers of the Republic when they resisted the halting counsel of the Little Americans in the past. Nor is it now. Far other is the spirit we invoke: Stern daughter of the Voice of God, O Duty! If that name thou love-- in that name we beg for a study of what the new situation that is upon us, the new world opening around us, now demand at our hands. The people of the United States will not refuse an appeal in that name. They never have. They had been so occupied, since the Civil War, first in repairing its ravages, and then in occupying and possessing their own continent, they had been so little accustomed, in this generation or the last, to even the thought of foreign war, that one readily understands why at the outset they hardly realized how absolute is the duty of an honorable conqueror to accept and discharge the responsibilities of his conquest. But this is no longer a child-nation, irresponsible in its nonage and incapable of comprehending or assuming the responsibilities of its acts. A child that breaks a pane of glass or sets fire to a house may indeed escape. Are we to plead the baby act, and claim that we can flounce around the world, breaking international china and burning property, and yet repudiate the bill because we have not come of age? Who dare say that a self-respecting Power could have sailed away from Manila and repudiated the responsibilities of its victorious belligerency? After going into a war for humanity, were we so craven that we should seek freedom from further trouble at the expense of civilization? If we did not want those responsibilities we ought not to have gone to war, and I, for one, would have been content. But having chosen to go to war, and having been speedily and overwhelmingly successful, we should be ashamed even to think of running away from what inexorably followed. Mark what the successive steps were, and how link by link the chain that binds us now was forged. The moment war was foreseen the fleet we usually have in Chinese waters became indispensable, not merely, as before, to protect our trade and our missionaries in China, but to checkmate the Spanish fleet, which otherwise held San Francisco and the whole Pacific coast at its mercy. When war was declared our fleet was necessarily ordered out of neutral ports. Then it had to go to Manila or go home. If it went home, it left the whole Pacific coast unguarded, save at the particular point it touched, and we should have been at once in a fever of apprehension, chartering hastily another fleet of the fastest ocean-going steamers we could find in the world, to patrol the Pacific from San Diego to Sitka, as we did have to patrol the Atlantic from Key West to Bar Harbor. Palpably this was to go the longest way around to do a task that had to be done in any event, as well as to demoralize our forces at the opening of the war with a manoeuver in which our Navy has never been expert--that of avoiding a contest and sailing away from the enemy! The alternative was properly taken. Dewey went to Manila and sank the Spanish fleet. We thus broke down Spanish means for controlling the Philippines, and were left with the Spanish responsibility for maintaining order there--responsibility to all the world, German, English, Japanese, Russian, and the rest--in one of the great centers and highways of the world's commerce. But why not turn over that commercial center and the island on which it is situated to the Tagals? To be sure! Under three hundred years of Spanish rule barbarism on Luzon had so far disappeared that this commercial metropolis, as large as San Francisco or Cincinnati, had sprung up and come to be thronged by traders and travelers of all nations. Now it is calmly suggested that we might have turned it over to one semi-civilized tribe, absolutely without experience in governing even itself, much less a great community of foreigners, probably in a minority on the island, and at war with its other inhabitants--a tribe which has given the measure of its fitness for being charged with the rights of foreigners and the care of a commercial metropolis by the violation of flags of truce, treachery to the living, and mutilation of the dead which have marked its recent wanton rising against the Power that was trying to help it! If running away from troublesome responsibility and duty is our rôle, why did we not long ago take the opportunity, in our early feebleness, to turn over Tallahassee and St. Augustine to the Seminoles, instead of sending Andrew Jackson to protect the settlements and subdue the savages? Why, at the first Apache outbreak after the Gadsden Purchase, did we not hasten to turn over New Mexico and Arizona to _their_ inhabitants? Or why, in years within the memory of most of you, when the Sioux and Chippewas rose on our Northwestern frontier, did we not invite them to retain possession of St. Cloud, and even come down, if they liked, to St. Paul and Minneapolis? Unless I am mistaken in regarding all these suggestions as too unworthy to be entertained by self-respecting citizens of a powerful and self-respecting nation, we have now reached two conclusions that ought to clear the air and simplify the problem that remains: First, we have ample constitutional power to acquire and govern new territory absolutely at will, according to our sense of right and duty, whether as dependencies, as colonies, or as a protectorate. Secondly, as the legitimate and necessary consequence of our own previous acts, it has become our national and international duty to do it. [Sidenote: The Policy for our Dependencies] How shall we set about it? What shall be the policy with which, when order has been inexorably restored, we begin our dealings with the new wards of the Nation? Certainly we must mark our disapproval of the treachery and barbarities of the present contest. As certainly the oppression of other tribes by the Tagals must be ended, or the oppression of any tribe by any other within the sphere of our active control. Wars between the tribes must be discouraged and prevented. We must seek to suppress crimes of violence and private vengeance, secure individual liberty, protect individual property, and promote the study of the arts of peace. Above all, we must give and enforce justice; and for the rest, as far as possible, leave them alone. By all means let us avoid a fussy meddling with their customs, manners, prejudices, and beliefs. Give them order and justice, and trust to these to win them in other regards to our ways. All this points directly to utilizing existing agencies as much as possible, developing native initiative and control in local matters as fast and as far as we can, and ultimately giving them the greatest degree of self-government for which they prove themselves fitted. Under any conditions that exist now, or have existed for three hundred years, a homogeneous native government over the whole archipelago is obviously impossible. Its relations to the outside world must necessarily be assumed by us. We must preserve order in Philippine waters, regulate the harbors, fix and collect the duties, apportion the revenue, and supervise the expenditure. We must enforce sanitary measures. We must retain such a control of the superior courts as shall make justice certainly attainable, and such control of the police as shall insure its enforcement. But in all this, after the absolute authority has been established, the further the natives can themselves be used to carry out the details, the better. Such a system might not be unwise even for a colony to which we had reason to expect a considerable emigration of our own people. If experience of a kindred nation in dealing with similar problems counts for anything, it is certainly wise for a distant dependency, always to be populated mainly, save in the great cities, by native races, and little likely ever to be quite able to stand alone, while, nevertheless, we wish to help it just as much as possible to that end. [Sidenote: The Duty of Public Servants.] Certainly this is no bed of flowery ease in the dreamy Orient to which we are led. No doubt these first glimpses of the task that lies before us, as well as the warfare with distant tribes into which we have been unexpectedly plunged, will provoke for the time a certain discontent with our new possessions. But on a far-reaching question of national policy the wise public man is not so greatly disturbed by what people say in momentary discouragement under the first temporary check. That which really concerns him is what people at a later day, or even in a later generation, might say of men trusted with great duties for their country, who proved unequal to their opportunities, and through some short-sighted timidity of the moment lost the chance of centuries. It is quite true, as was recently reported in what seemed an authoritative way from Washington, that the Peace Commissioners were not entirely of one mind at the outset, and equally true that the final conclusion at Washington was apparently reached on the Commission's recommendation from Paris. As the cold fit, in the language of one of our censors, has followed the hot fit in the popular temper, I readily take the time which hostile critics consider unfavorable, for accepting my own share of responsibility, and for avowing for myself that I declared my belief in the duty and policy of holding the whole Philippine Archipelago in the very first conference of the Commissioners in the President's room at the White House, in advance of any instructions of any sort. If vindication for it be needed, I confidently await the future. What _is_ the duty of a public servant as to profiting by opportunities to secure for his country what all the rest of the world considers material advantages? Even if he could persuade himself that rejecting them is morally and internationally admissible, is he at liberty to commit his country irrevocably to their rejection, because they do not wholly please his individual fancy? At a former negotiation of our own in Paris, the great desire of the United States representative, as well as of his Government, had been mainly to secure the settled or partly settled country adjoining us on the south, stretching from the Floridas to the city of New Orleans. The possession of the vast unsettled and unknown Louisiana Territory, west of the Mississippi, was neither sought nor thought of. Suddenly, on an eventful morning in April, 1803, Talleyrand astonished Livingston by offering, on behalf of Napoleon, to sell to the United States, not the Floridas at all, but merely Louisiana, "a raw little semi-tropical frontier town and an unexplored wilderness." Suppose Livingston had rejected the offer? Or suppose Gadsden had not exceeded his instructions in Mexico and boldly grasped the opportunity that offered to rectify and make secure our Southwestern frontier? Would this generation judge that they had been equal to their opportunities or their duties? The difficulties which at present discourage us are largely of our own creation. It is not for any of us to think of attempting to apportion the blame. The only thing we are sure of is that it was for no lack of authority that we hesitated and drifted till the Tagals were convinced we were afraid of them, and could be driven out before reinforcements arrived. That was the very thing our officers had warned us against,--the least sign of hesitation or uncertainty,--the very danger every European with knowledge of the situation had dinned in our ears. Everybody declared that difficulties were sure to grow on our hands in geometrical proportion to our delays; and it was perfectly known to the respective branches of our Government primarily concerned that while the delay went on it was in neglect of a duty we had voluntarily assumed. For the American Commissioners, with due authority, distinctly offered to assume responsibility, pending the ratification of the treaty, for the protection of life and property and the preservation of order throughout the whole archipelago. The Spanish Commissioners, after consultation with their Government, refused this, but agreed that each Power should be charged, pending the ratification, with the maintenance of order in the places where it was established. The American assent to that left absolutely no question as to the diminished but still grave responsibility thus devolved.[8] That responsibility was avoided from the hour the treaty was signed till the hour when the Tagal chieftain, at the head of an army he had been deliberately gathering and organizing, took things in his own hand and made the attack he had so long threatened. Disorder, forced loans, impressment, confiscation, seizure of waterworks, contemptuous violations of our guard-lines, and even the practical siege of the city of Manila, had meantime been going on within gunshot of troops held there inactive by the Nation which had volunteered responsibility for order throughout the archipelago, and had been distinctly left with responsibility for order in the island on which it was established. If the bitterest enemy of the United States had sought to bring upon it in that quarter the greatest trouble in the shortest time, he could have devised for that end no policy more successful than the one we actually pursued. There may have been controlling reasons for it. An opposite course might perhaps have cost more elsewhere than it saved in Luzon. On that point the public cannot now form even an opinion. But as to the effect in Luzon there is no doubt; and because of it we have the right to ask a delay in judgment about results there until the present evil can be undone. [8] Protocol No. 19 of the Paris Commission, Conference of December 5, 1898: "The President of the Spanish Commission having agreed, at the last session, to consult his Government regarding the proposal of the American Commissioners that the United States should maintain public order over the whole Philippine Archipelago pending the exchange of ratifications of the treaty of peace, stated that the answer of his Government was that the authorities of each of the two nations shall be charged with the maintenance of order in the places where they may be established, those authorities agreeing among themselves to this end whenever they may deem it necessary." [Sidenote: The Carnival of Captious Objection.] Meantime, in accordance with a well-known and probably unchangeable law of human nature, this is the carnival and very heyday of the objectors. The air is filled with their discouragement. Some exclaim that Americans are incapable of colonizing or of managing colonies; that there is something in our national character or institutions that wholly disqualifies us for the work. Yet the most successful colonies in the whole world were the thirteen original colonies on our Atlantic coast; and the most successful colonists were our own grandfathers! Have the grandsons so degenerated that they are incapable of colonizing at all, or of managing colonies? Who says so? Is it any one with the glorious history of this continental colonization bred in his bone and leaping in his blood? Or is it some refugee from a foreign country he was discontented with, who now finds pleasure in disparaging the capacity of the new country he came to, while he has neither caught its spirit nor grasped the meaning of its history? Some bewail the alleged fact that, at any rate, our system has little adaptability to the control of colonies or dependencies. Has our system been found weaker, then, than other forms of government, less adaptable to emergencies, and with people less fit to cope with them? Is the difficulty inherent, or is it possible that the emergency may show, as emergencies have shown before, that whatever task intelligence, energy, and courage can surmount the American people and their Government can rise to? It is said the conditions in our new possessions are wholly different from any we have previously encountered. This is true; and there is little doubt the new circumstances will bring great modifications in methods. That is an excellent reason, among others, for some doubt at the outset as to whether we know all about it, but not for despairing of our capacity to learn. It might be remembered that we have encountered some varieties of conditions already. The work in Florida was different from that at Plymouth Rock; Louisiana and Texas showed again new sets of conditions; California others; Puget Sound and Alaska still others; and we did not always have unbroken success and plain sailing from the outset in any of them. It is said we cannot colonize the tropics, because our people cannot labor there. Perhaps not, especially if they refuse to obey the prudent precautions which centuries of experience have enjoined upon others. But what, then, are we going to do with Porto Rico? How soon are our people going to flee from Arizona? And why is life impossible to Americans in Manila and Cebu and Iloilo, but attractive to the throngs of Europeans who have built up those cities? Can we mine all over the world, from South Africa to the Klondike, but not in Palawan? Can we grow tobacco in Cuba, but not in Cebu; or rice in Louisiana, but not in Luzon? An alarm is raised that our laboring classes are endangered by competition with cheap tropical labor or its products. How? The interpretation of the Constitution which would permit that is the interpretation which has been repudiated in an unbroken line of decisions for over half a century. Only one possibility of danger to American labor exists in our new possessions--the lunacy, or worse, of the dreamers who want to prepare for the admission of some of them as States in the American Union. Till then we can make any law we like to prevent the immigration of their laborers, and any tariff we like to regulate the admission of their products. It is said we are pursuing a fine method for restoring order, by prolonging the war we began for humanity in order to force liberty and justice on an unwilling people at the point of the bayonet. The sneer is cheap. How else have these blessings been generally diffused? How often in the history of the world has barbarism been replaced by civilization without bloodshed? How were our own liberty and justice established and diffused on this continent? Would the process have been less bloody if a part of our own people had noisily taken the side of the English, the Mexican, or the savage, and protested against "extreme measures"? Some say a war to extend freedom in Cuba or elsewhere is right, and therefore a duty; but the war in the Philippines now is purely selfish, and therefore a crime. The premise is inaccurate; it is a war we are in duty bound to wage at any rate till order is restored--but let that pass. Suppose it to be merely a war in defense of our own just rights and interests. Since when did such a war become wrong? Is our national motto to be, "Quixotic on the one hand, Chinese on the other"? How much better it would have been, say others, to mind our own business! No doubt; but if we were to begin crying over spilt milk in that way, the place to begin was where the milk was spilled--in the Congress that resolved upon war with Spain. Since that congressional action we have been minding what it made our own business quite diligently, and an essential part of our business now is the responsibility for our own past acts, whether in Havana or Manila. Some say that since we began the war for humanity, we are disgraced by coming out of it with increased territory. Then a penalty must always be imposed upon a victorious nation for presuming to do a good act. The only nation to be exempt from such a penalty upon success is to be the nation that was in the wrong! It is to have a premium, whether successful or not; for it is thus relieved, even in defeat, from the penalty which modern practice in the interest of civilization requires--the payment of an indemnity for the cost of an unjust war. Furthermore, the representatives of the nation that does a good act are thus bound to reject any opportunity for lightening the national load it entails. They must leave the full burden upon their country, to be dealt with in due time by the individual taxpayer! Again, we have superfine discussions of what the United States "stands for." It does not stand, we are told, for foreign conquest, or for colonies or dependencies, or other extensions of its power and influence. It stands solely for the development of the individual man. There is a germ of a great truth in this, but the development of the truth is lost sight of. Individual initiative is a good thing, and our institutions do develop it--and its consequences! There is a species of individualism, too, about a bulldog. When he takes hold he holds on. It may as well be noticed by the objectors that that is a characteristic much appreciated by American people. They, too, hold on. They remember, besides, a pregnant phrase of their fathers, who "ordained this Constitution," among other things, "to promote the general welfare." That is a thing for which "this Government stands" also; and woe to the public servant who rejects brilliant opportunities to promote it--on the Pacific Ocean no less than the Atlantic, by commerce no less than by agriculture or manufactures. It is said the Philippines are worthless--have, in fact, already cost us more than the value of their entire trade for many years to come. So much the more, then, are we bound to do our duty by them. But we have also heard in turn, and from the same quarters, that every one of our previous acquisitions was worthless. Again, it is said our continent is more than enough for all our needs, and our extensions should stop at the Pacific. What is this but proposing such a policy of self-sufficient isolation as we are accustomed to reprobate in China--planning now to develop only on the soil on which we stand, and expecting the rest of the world to protect our trade if we have any? Can a nation with safety set such limits to its development? When a tree stops growing, our foresters tell us, it is ripe for the ax. When a man stops in his physical and intellectual growth he begins to decay. When a business stops growing it is in danger of decline. When a nation stops growing it has passed the meridian of its course, and its shadows fall eastward. Is China to be our model, or Great Britain? Or, better still, are we to follow the instincts of our own people? The policy of isolating ourselves is a policy for the refusal of both duties and opportunities--duties to foreign nations and to civilization, which cannot be respectably evaded; opportunities for the development of our power on the Pacific in the Twentieth Century, which it would be craven to abandon. There has been a curious "about face," an absolute reversal of attitude toward England, on the part of our Little Americans, especially at the East and among the more educated classes. But yesterday nearly all of them were pointing to England as a model. There young men of education and position felt it a duty to go into politics. There they had built up a model civil service. There their cities were better governed, their streets cleaner, their mails more promptly delivered. There the responsibilities of their colonial system had enforced the purification of domestic politics, the relentless punishment of corrupt practices, and the abolition of bribery in elections, either by money or by office. There they had foreign trade, and a commercial marine, and a trained and efficient foreign service, and to be an English citizen was to have a safeguard the whole world round. Our young men were commended to their example; our legislators were exhorted to study their practice and its results. Suddenly these same teachers turn around. They warn us against the infection of England's example. They tell us her colonial system is a failure; that she would be stronger without her colonies than with them; that she is eaten up with "militarism"; that to keep Cuba or the Philippines is what a selfish, conquering, land-grabbing, aristocratic government like England would do, and that her policy and methods are utterly incompatible with our institutions. When a court thus reverses itself without obvious reason (except a temporary partizan purpose), our people are apt to put their trust in other tribunals. [Sidenote: The Future.] "I had thought," said Wendell Phillips, in his noted apology for standing for the first time in his antislavery life under the flag of his country, and welcoming the tread of Massachusetts men marshaled for war--"I had thought Massachusetts wholly choked with cotton-dust and cankered with gold." If Little Americans have thought so of their country in these stirring days, and have fancied that initial reverses would induce it to abandon its duty, its rights, and its great permanent interests, they will live to see their mistake. They will find it giving a deaf ear to these unworthy complaints of temporary trouble or present loss, and turning gladly from all this incoherent and resultless clamor to the new world opening around us. Already it draws us out of ourselves. The provincial isolation is gone; and provincial habits of thought will go. There is a larger interest in what other lands have to show and teach; a larger confidence in our own; a higher resolve that it shall do its whole duty to mankind, moral as well as material, international as well as national, in such fashion as becomes time's latest offspring and its greatest. We are grown more nearly citizens of the world. This new knowledge, these new duties and interests, must have two effects--they must extend our power, influence, and trade, and they must elevate the public service. Every returning soldier or traveler tells the same story--that the very name "American" has taken a new significance throughout the Orient. The shrewd Oriental no longer regards us as a second- or third-class Power. He has just seen the only signs he recognizes of a nation that knows its rights and dare maintain them--a nation that has come to stay, with an empire of its own in the China Sea, and a Navy which, from what he has seen, he believes will be able to defend it against the world. He straightway concludes, after the Oriental fashion, that it is a nation whose citizens must henceforth be secure in all their rights, whose missionaries must be endured with patience and even protected, and whose friendship must be sedulously cultivated. The national prestige is enormously increased, and trade follows prestige--especially in the farther East. Not within a century, not during our whole history, has such a field opened for our reaping. Planted directly in front of the Chinese colossus, on a great territory of our own, we have the first and best chance to profit by his awakening. Commanding both sides of the Pacific, and the available coal-supplies on each, we command the ocean that, according to the old prediction, is to bear the bulk of the world's commerce in the Twentieth Century. Our remote but glorious land between the Sierras and the sea may then become as busy a hive as New England itself, and the whole continent must take fresh life from the generous blood of this natural and necessary commerce between people of different climates and zones. But these developments of power and trade are the least of the advantages we may hopefully expect. The faults in American character and life which the Little Americans tell us prove the people unfit for these duties are the very faults that will be cured by them. The recklessness and heedless self-sufficiency of youth must disappear. Great responsibilities, suddenly devolved, must sober and elevate now, as they have always done in natures not originally bad, throughout the whole history of the world. The new interests abroad must compel an improved foreign service. It has heretofore been worse than we ever knew, and also better. On great occasions and in great fields our diplomatic record ranks with the best in the world. No nation stands higher in those new contributions to International Law which form the high-water mark of civilization from one generation to another. At the same time, in fields less under the public eye, our foreign service has been haphazard at the best, and often bad beyond belief--ludicrous and humiliating. The harm thus wrought to our national good name and the positive injury to our trade have been more than we realized. We cannot escape realizing them now, and when the American people wake up to a wrong they are apt to right it. More important still should be the improvement in the general public service at home and in our new possessions. New duties must bring new methods. Ward politics were banished from India and Egypt as the price of successful administration, and they must be excluded from Porto Rico and Luzon. The practical common sense of the American people will soon see that any other course is disastrous. Gigantic business interests must come to reinforce the theorists in favor of a reform that shall really elevate and purify the Civil Service. Hand in hand with these benefits to ourselves, which it is the duty of public servants to secure, go benefits to our new wards and benefits to mankind. There, then, is what the United States is to "stand for" in all the resplendent future: the rights and interests of its own Government; the general welfare of its own people; the extension of ordered liberty in the dark places of the earth; the spread of civilization and religion, and a consequent increase in the sum of human happiness in the world. VIII LATER ASPECTS OF OUR NEW DUTIES This address was delivered on the invitation of the Board of Trustees, at Princeton University, in Alexander Hall, on October 21, 1899. LATER ASPECTS OF OUR NEW DUTIES The invitation for to-day with which Princeton honored me was accompanied with the hint that a discussion of some phase of current public affairs would not be unwelcome. That phase which has for the past year or two most absorbed public attention is now more absorbing than ever. Elsewhere I have already spoken upon it, more, perhaps, than enough. But I cannot better obey the summons of this honored and historic University, or better deserve the attention of this company of scholars, gentlemen, and patriots, than by saying with absolute candor what its present aspects prompt. [Sidenote: Questions that have been Disposed of.] And first, the chaos of opinion into which the country was thrown by the outbreak of the Spanish-American War ceases to be wholly without form and void. The discussions of a year have clarified ideas; and on some points we may consider that the American people have substantially reached definite conclusions. There is no need, therefore, to debate laboriously before you whether Dewey was right in going to Manila. Everybody now realizes that, once war was begun, absolutely the most efficient means of making it speedily and overwhelmingly victorious, as well as of defending the most exposed half of our own coast, was to go to Manila. "Find the Spanish fleet and destroy it" was as wise an order as the President ever issued, and he was equally wise in choosing the man to carry it out. So, also, there is no need to debate whether Dewey was right in staying there. From that come his most enduring laurels. The American people admire him for the battle which sank the Spanish navy; but they trust and love him for the months of trial and triumph that followed. The Administration that should have ordered him to abandon the Eastern foothold he had conquered for his country--to sail away like a sated pirate from the port where his victory broke down all civilized authority but our own, and his presence alone prevented domestic anarchy and foreign spoliation--would have deserved to be hooted out of the capital. So, again, there is no need to debate whether the Peace Commissioners should have thrown away in Paris what Dewey had won in Manila. The public servant who, without instructions, should in a gush of irresponsible sentimentality abandon great possessions to which his country is justly entitled, whether by conquest or as indemnity for unjust war, would be not only an unprofitable but a faithless servant. It was their obvious duty to hold what Dewey had won, at least till the American people had time to consider and decide otherwise. Is there any need to debate whether the American people will abandon it now? Those who have a fancy for that species of dialectics may weigh the chances, and evolve from circumstances of their own imagination, and canons of national and international obligation of their own manufacture, conclusions to their own liking. I need not consume much of your time in that unprofitable pursuit. We may as well, here and now, keep our feet on solid ground, and deal with facts as they are. The American people are in lawful possession of the Philippines, with the assent of all Christendom, with a title as indisputable as the title to California; and, though the debate will linger for a while, and perhaps drift unhappily into partizan contention, the generation is yet unborn that will see them abandoned to the possession of any other Power. The Nation that scatters principalities as a prodigal does his inheritance is too sentimental and moon-shiny for the Nineteenth Century or the Twentieth, and too unpractical for Americans of any period. It may flourish in Arcadia or Altruria, but it does not among the sons of the Pilgrims, or on the continent they subdued by stern struggle to the uses of civilization. Nevertheless, our people did stop to consider very carefully their constitutional powers. I believe we have reached a point also where the result of that consideration may be safely assumed. The constitutional arguments have been fully presented and the expositions and decisions marshaled. It is enough now to say that the preponderance of constitutional authorities, with Gouverneur Morris, Daniel Webster, and Thomas H. Benton at their head, and the unbroken tendency of decisions by the courts of the United States for at least the last fifty years, from Mr. Chief Justice Waite and Mr. Justice Miller and Mr. Justice Stanley Matthews, of the Supreme Court, down to the very latest utterance on the subject, that of Mr. Justice Morrow of the Circuit Court of Appeals, sustain the power to acquire "territory or other property" anywhere, and govern it as we please.[9] Inhabitants of such territory (not obviously incapable) are secure in the civil rights guaranteed by the Constitution; but they have no political rights under it, save as Congress confers them. The evidence in support of this view has been fully set forth, examined, and weighed, and, unless I greatly mistake, a popular decision on the subject has been reached. The constitutional power is no longer seriously disputed, and even those who raised the doubt do not seem now to rely upon it. [9] Some of these authorities have already been briefly presented in the address at Miami University, pp. 107-158. It may be desirable to consult a few additional ones, covering the main points that have been disputed. They are grouped for convenience in the Appendix. [Sidenote: Contributions to International Law and Morality.] In thus summarizing what has been already settled or disposed of in our dealings with the questions of the war, I may be permitted to pause for a moment on the American contributions it brought about to international morality and law. On the day on which the American Peace Commissioners to Paris sailed for home after the ceremonial courtesy with which their labors were concluded, the most authoritative journal in the world published an interview with the eminent President of the corresponding Spanish Commission, then and for some time afterward President also of the Spanish Senate, in which he was reported as saying: "We knew in advance that we should have to deal with an implacable conqueror, who would in no way concern himself with any pre-existing International Law, but whose sole object was to reap from victory the largest possible advantage. This conception of International Law is absolutely new; it is no longer a case of might against right, but of might without right.... The Americans have acted as vainqueurs parvenus."[10] [10] London "Times," December 17, 1898. Much may be pardoned to the anguish of an old and trusted public servant over the misfortunes of his native land. We may even, in our sympathy, endeavor to forget what country it was that proposed to defy the agreements of the Conference of Paris and the general judgment of nations by resorting to privateering, or what country it was that preferred to risk becoming an asylum for the criminals of a continent rather than revive, even temporarily, that basic and elementary implement of modern international justice, an extradition treaty, which had been in force with acceptable results for over twenty years. But when Americans are stigmatized as "vainqueurs parvenus," who by virtue of mere strength violate International Law against a prostrate foe, and when one of the ablest of their American critics encourages the Spanish contention by talking of our "bulldog diplomacy at Paris," it gives us occasion to challenge the approval of the world--as the facts amply warrant--for the scrupulous conformity to existing International Law, and the important contributions to its beneficent advancement that have distinguished the action of the United States throughout these whole transactions. Having already set these forth in some detail before a foreign audience,[11] I must not now do more than offer the briefest summary. [11] See (pp. 70-105) article from "The Anglo-Saxon Review." The United States ended the toleration of Privateering. It was perfectly free to commission privateers on the day war was declared. Spain was equally free, and it was proclaimed from Madrid that the Atlantic would soon swarm with them, sweeping American commerce from the ocean. Under these circumstances one of the very first and noblest acts of the President was to announce that the United States would not avail itself of the right to send out privateers, reserved under the Declaration of Paris. The fast-thickening disasters of Spain prevented her from doing it, and thus substantially completed the practice or acquiescence of the civilized world, essential to the acceptance of a principle in International Law. It is safe to assume that Christendom will henceforth treat Privateering as under international ban. The United States promoted the cause of genuine International Arbitration by promptly and emphatically rejecting an insidious proposal for a spurious one. It taught those who deliberately prefer War to Arbitration, and, when beaten at it, seek then to get the benefit of a second remedy, that honest Arbitration must come before War, to avert its horrors, not after War, to evade its penalties. The United States promoted peace among nations, and so served humanity, by sternly enforcing the rule that they who bring on an unjust war must pay for it. For years the overwhelming tendency of its people had been against any territorial aggrandizement, even a peaceful one; but it unflinchingly exacted the easiest, if not the only, payment Spain could make for a war that cost us, at the lowest, from four to five hundred million dollars, by taking Porto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines. It requires some courage to describe this as either a violation of International Law, or a display of unprecedented severity by an implacable conqueror, in the very city and before the very generation that saw the Franco-Prussian War concluded, not merely by a partition of territory, but also by a cash payment of a thousand millions indemnity. The United States promoted the peaceful liberalizing of oppressive rule over all subject peoples by making it more difficult to negotiate loans in the markets of the world to subdue their outbreaks. For it firmly rejected in the Cuban adjustments the immoral doctrine that an ill-treated and revolting colony, after gaining its freedom, must still submit to the extortion from it of the cost of the parent country's unsuccessful efforts to subdue it. We therefore left the so-called Cuban bonds on the hands of the Power that issued them, or of the reckless lenders who advanced the money. At the same time the United States strained a point elsewhere in the direction of protecting any legitimate debt, and of dealing generously with a fallen foe, by a payment which the most carping critic will some day be ashamed to describe as "buying the inhabitants of the Philippines at two dollars a head."[12] [12] There has been so much misconception and misrepresentation about this payment of twenty millions that the following exact summary of the facts may be convenient. When Spain sued for peace in the summer of 1898, she had lost control of the Philippines, and any means for regaining control. Her fleet was sunk; her army was cooped up in the capital, under the guns of the American fleet, and its capture or surrender had only been delayed till the arrival of reinforcements for the American Army, because of the fears expressed by foreigners and the principal residents of Manila that the city might be looted by natives unless American land forces were at hand in strength ample to control them. The Spanish army did so surrender, in fact, shortly after the arrival of these reinforcements, before the news of the armistice could reach them. In the protocol granting an armistice, the United States exacted at once the cession of Porto Rico and an island in the Ladrones, but reserved the decision as to the control, disposition, and government of the Philippines for the treaty of peace, apparently with a view to the possibility of accepting them as further indemnity for the war. When the treaty came to be negotiated, the United States required the cession of the Philippines. Its Peace Commissioners stated that their Government "felt amply supported in its right to demand this cession, with or without concessions," added that "this demand might be limited to the single ground of indemnity," and pointed out that it was "not now putting forward any claim for _pecuniary_ indemnity, to cover the enormous cost of the war." It accompanied this demand for a transfer of sovereignty with a stipulation for assuming any existing indebtedness of Spain incurred for public works and improvements of a pacific character in the Philippines. The United States thus asserted its right to the archipelago for indemnity, and at the same time committed itself to the principle of payment on account of the Philippine debt. When it became necessary to put the Philippine case into an ultimatum, the Peace Commissioners did not further refer to the debt or give any specific reason either for a cession or for a payment. They simply said they now presented "a new proposition, embodying the concessions which, for the sake of immediate peace, their Government is, under the circumstances, willing to tender." But it was really the old proposition (with the "Open Door" and "Mutual Relinquishment of Claims" clauses added), with the mention for the first time of a specific sum for the payment, and without any question of "pacific improvements." That sum just balanced the Philippine debt--40,000,000 Mexican, or, say, 20,000,000 American dollars. All these are acts distinctly in accord with International Law so far as it exists and applies, and distinctly tending to promote its humane and Christian extension. Let me add, in a word, that the peace negotiations in no way compromised or affected the Monroe Doctrine, which stands as firm as ever, though much less important with the disappearance of any probable opposition to it; and that the prestige they brought smoothed the way for the one hopeful result of the Czar's Conference at The Hague, a response to the American proposal for a permanent International Court of Arbitration. A trifling but characteristic inaccuracy concerning the Peace Commission may as well be corrected before the subject is left. This is the statement, apparently originating from Malay sources, but promptly indorsed in this country by unfriendly critics, to the effect that the representative of Aguinaldo was uncivilly refused a hearing in Paris. It was repeated, inadvertently, no doubt, with many other curious distortions of historic facts, only the other day, by a distinguished statesman in Chicago.[13] As he put it, the doors were slammed in their faces in Washington as well as in Paris. Now, whatever might have happened, the door was certainly never slammed in their faces in Paris, for they never came to it. On the contrary, every time Mr. Agoncillo approached any member of the Commission on the subject, he was courteously invited to send the Commissioners a written request for a hearing, which would, at any rate, receive immediate consideration. No such request ever came, and any Filipino who wrote for a hearing in Paris was heard. [13] General Carl Schurz, at the Chicago Anti-Expansion Convention, October, 1899. [Sidenote: The Present Duty.] Meanwhile we are now in the midst of hostilities with a part of the native population, originating in an unprovoked attack upon our troops in the city they had wrested from the Spaniards, before final action on the treaty. It is easy to say that we ought not to have got into this conflict, and to that I might agree. "I tell you, they can't put you in jail on that charge," said the learned and disputatious counsel to the client who had appealed from his cell for help. "But I _am_ in," was the sufficient answer. The question just then was not what might have been done, but what can be done. I wish to urge that we can only end this conflict by manfully fighting through it. The talk one hears that the present situation calls for "diplomacy" seems to be mistimed. That species of diplomacy which consists in the tact of prompt action in the right line at the right time might, quite possibly, have prevented the present hostilities. Any diplomacy now would seem to our Tagal antagonists the raising of the white flag--the final proof that the American people do not sustain their Army in the face of unprovoked attack. Every witness who came before the American Peace Commission in Paris, or sent it a written statement, English, German, Belgian, Malay, or American, said the same thing. Absolutely the one essential for dealing with the Filipinos was to convince them at the very outset that what you began you stood to; that you did not begin without consideration of right and duty, or quail then before opposition; that your purpose was inexorable and your power irresistible, while submission to it would always insure justice. On the contrary, once let them suspect that protests would dissuade and turbulence deter you, and all the Oriental instinct for delay and bargaining for better terms is aroused, along with the special Malay genius for intrigue and double-dealing, their profound belief that every man has his price, and their childish ignorance as to the extent to which stump speeches here against any Administration can cause American armies beyond the seas to retreat. No; the toast which Henry Clay once gave in honor of an early naval hero fits the present situation like a glove. He proposed "the policy which looks to peace as the end of war, and war as the means of peace." In that light I maintain that the conflict we are prosecuting is in the line of national necessity and duty; that we cannot turn back; that the truest humanity condemns needless delay or half-hearted action, and demands overwhelming forces and irresistible onset. [Sidenote: Eliminate Temporary Discouragements.] But in considering this duty, just as in estimating the Treaty of Paris, we have the right to eliminate all account of the trifling success, so far, in the Philippines, or of the great trouble and cost. What it was right to do there, and what we are bound to do now, must not be obscured by faults of hesitation or insufficient preparation, for which neither the Peace Commissioners nor the people are responsible. I had occasion to say before a college audience last June what I now repeat with the additional emphasis subsequent events have warranted--that the difficulties which at present discourage us are largely of our own making; and I repeat that it is still not for us, here and now, to apportion the blame. We have not the knowledge to say just who, or whether any man or body, is wholly at fault. What we do know is that the course of hesitation and inaction which the Nation pursued in face of an openly maturing attack was precisely the policy sure to give us the greatest trouble, and that we are now paying the penalty. If the opposite course had been taken at the outset--unless all the testimony from foreign observers and from our own officers is at fault--there would have been either no outbreak at all, or only one easily controlled and settled to the general satisfaction of most of the civilized and semi-civilized inhabitants of the island. On the personal and partizan disputes already lamentably begun, as to senatorial responsibility, congressional responsibility, or the responsibility of this or that executive officer, we have no occasion here to enter. What we have a right to insist on is that our general policy in the Philippines shall not be shaped now merely by the just discontent with the bad start. The reports of continual victories, that roll back on us every week, like the stone of Sisyphus, and need to be won over again next week, the mistakes of a censorship that was absolutely right as a military measure, but may have been unintelligently, not to say childishly, conducted--all these are beside the real question. They must not obscure the duty of restoring order in the regions where our troops have been assailed, or prejudice our subsequent course. I venture to say of that course that neither our duty nor our interest will permit us to stop short of a pacification which can only end in the establishment of such local self-government as the people are found capable of conducting, and its extension just as far and as fast as the people prove fit for it. [Sidenote: Pacification and Natural Course of Organization.] The natural development thus to be expected would probably proceed safely, along the lines of least resistance, about in this order: First, and till entirely clear that it is no longer needed, Military Government. Next, the rule of either Military or Civil Governors (for a considerable time probably the former), relying gradually more and more on native agencies. Thirdly, the development of Dependencies, with an American Civil Governor, with their foreign relations and their highest courts controlled by us, and their financial system largely managed by members of a rigidly organized and jealously protected American Civil Service, but in most other respects steadily becoming more self-governing. And, finally, autonomous governments, looking to us for little save control of their foreign relations, profiting by the stability and order the backing of a powerful nation guarantees, cultivating more and more intimate trade and personal relations with that nation, and coming to feel themselves participants of its fortunes and renown. Such a course Congress, after full investigation and deliberation, might perhaps wisely formulate. Such a course, with slight modifications to meet existing limitations as to his powers, has already been entered upon by the President, and can doubtless be carried on indefinitely by him until Congress acts. This action should certainly not be precipitate. The system demands most careful study, not only in the light of what the English and Dutch, the most successful holders of tropical countries, have done, but also in the light of the peculiar and varied circumstances that confront us on these different and distant islands, and among these widely differing races--circumstances to which no previous experience exactly applies, and for which no uniform system could be applicable. If Congress should take as long a time before action to study the problem as it has taken in the Sandwich Islands, or even in Alaska, the President's power would still be equal to the emergency, and the policy, while flexible, could still be made as continuous, coherent, and practical as his best information and ability would permit. [Sidenote: Evasions of Duty.] Against such a conscientious and painstaking course in dealing with the grave responsibilities that are upon us in the East, two lines of evasion are sure to threaten. The one is the policy of the upright but short-sighted and strictly continental patriot--the same which an illustrious statesman of another country followed in the Sudan: "Scuttle as quick as you can." The other is the policy of the exuberant patriot who believes in the universal adaptability and immediate extension of American institutions. He thinks all men everywhere as fit to vote as himself, and wants them for partners. He is eager to have them prepare at once, in our new possessions, first in the West Indies, then in the East, to send Senators and Representatives to Congress, and his policy is: "Make Territories of them now, and States in the American Union as soon as possible." I wish to speak with the utmost respect of the sincere advocates of both theories, but must say that the one seems to me to fall short of a proper regard for either our duty or our interest, and the other to be national suicide. Gentlemen in whose ability and patriotism we all have confidence have lately put the first of these policies for evading our duty in the form of a protest "against the expansion and establishment of the dominion of the United States, by conquest or otherwise, over unwilling peoples in any part of the globe." Of this it may be said, first, that any application of it to the Philippines probably assumes a factional and temporary outbreak to represent a settled unwillingness. New Orleans was as "unwilling," when Mr. Jefferson annexed it, as Aguinaldo has made Manila; and Aaron Burr came near making the whole Louisiana Territory far worse. Mr. Lincoln, you remember, always believed the people of North Carolina not unwilling to remain in the Union, yet we know what they did. But next, this protest contemplates evading the present responsibility by a reversal of our settled policy any way. Mr. Lincoln probably never doubted the unwillingness of South Carolina to remain in the Union, but that did not change his course. Mr. Seward never inquired whether the Alaskans were unwilling or not. The historic position of the United States, from the day when Jefferson braved the envenomed anti-expansion sentiment of his time and bought the territory west of the Mississippi, on down, has been to consider, not the willingness or unwillingness of any inhabitants, whether aboriginal or colonists, but solely our national opportunity, our own duty, and our own interests. Is it said that this is Imperialism? That implies usurpation of power, and there is absolutely no ground for such a charge against this Administration at any one stage in these whole transactions. If any complaint here is to lie, it must relate to the critical period when we were accepting responsibility for order at Manila, and must be for the exercise of too little power, not too much. It is not Imperialism to take up honestly the responsibility for order we incurred before the world, and continue under it, even if that should lead us to extend the civil rights of the American Constitution over new regions and strange peoples. It is not Imperialism when duty keeps us among these chaotic, warring, distracted tribes, civilized, semi-civilized, and barbarous, to help them, as far as their several capacities will permit, toward self-government, on the basis of those civil rights. A terser and more taking statement of opposition has been recently attributed to a gentleman highly honored by this University and by his townsmen here. I gladly seize this opportunity, as a consistent opponent during his whole political life, to add that his words carry great weight throughout the country by reason of the unquestioned ability, courage, and patriotic devotion he has brought to the public service. He is reported as protesting simply against "the use of power in the extension of American institutions." But does not this, if applied to the present situation, seem also to miss an important distinction? What planted us in the Philippines was the use of our power in the most efficient naval and military defense then available for our own institutions where they already exist, against the attack of Spain. If the responsibility entailed by the result of these acts in our own defense does involve some extension of our institutions, shall we therefore run away from it? If a guaranty to chaotic tribes of the civil rights secured by the American Constitution does prove to be an incident springing from the discharge of the duty that has rested upon us from the moment we drove Spain out, is that a result so objectionable as to warrant us in abandoning our duty? There is, it is true, one other alternative--the one which Aguinaldo himself is said to have suggested, and which has certainly been put forth in his behalf with the utmost simplicity and sincerity by a conspicuous statesman at Chicago. We might at once solicit peace from Aguinaldo. We might then encourage him to extend his rule over the whole country,--Catholic, pagan, and Mohammedan, willing and unwilling alike,--and promise him whatever aid might be necessary for that task. Meantime, we should undertake to protect him against outside interference from any European or Asiatic nation whose interests on that oceanic highway and in those commercial capitals might be imperiled![14] I do not desire to discuss that proposition. And I submit to candid men that there are just those three courses, and no more, now open to us--to run away, to protect Aguinaldo, or to back up our own army and firmly hold on! [14] The exact proposition made by General Carl Schurz in addressing the Chicago Anti-Expansion Convention, October 17, 1899. [Sidenote: Objections to Duty.] If this fact be clearly perceived, if the choice between these three courses be once recognized as the only choice the present situation permits, our minds will be less disturbed by the confused cries of perplexity and discontent that still fill the air. Thus men often say, "If you believe in liberty for yourself, why refuse it to the Tagals?" That is right; they should have, in the degree of their capacity, the only kind of liberty worth having in the world, the only kind that is not a curse to its possessors and to all in contact with them--ordered liberty, under law, for which the wisdom of man has not yet found a better safeguard than the guaranties of civil rights in the Constitution of the United States. Who supposes that to be the liberty for which Aguinaldo is fighting? What his people want, and what the statesman at Chicago wishes us to use the Army and Navy of the United States to help him get, is the liberty to rule others--the liberty first to turn our own troops out of the city and harbor we had in our own self-defense captured from their enemies; the liberty next to rule that great commercial city, and the tribes of the interior, instead of leaving us to exercise the rule over them that events have forced upon us, till it is fairly shown that they can rule themselves. Again it is said, "You are depriving them of freedom." But they never had freedom, and could not have it now. Even if they could subdue the other tribes in Luzon, they could not establish such order on the other islands and in the waters of the archipelago as to deprive foreign Powers of an immediate excuse for interference. What we are doing is in the double line of preventing otherwise inevitable foreign seizure and putting a stop to domestic war. "But you cannot fit people for freedom. They must fit themselves, just as we must do our own crawling and stumbling in order to learn to walk." The illustration is unfortunate. Must the crawling baby, then, be abandoned by its natural or accidental guardian, and left to itself to grow strong by struggling, or to perish, as may happen? Must we turn the Tagals loose on the foreigners in Manila, and on their enemies in the other tribes, that by following their instincts they may fit themselves for freedom? Again, "It will injure us to exert power over an unwilling people, just as slavery injured the slaveholders themselves." Then a community is injured by maintaining a police. Then a court is injured by rendering a just decree, and an officer by executing it. Then it is a greater injury, for instance, to stop piracy than to suffer from it. Then the manly exercise of a just responsibility enfeebles instead of developing and strengthening a nation. "Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed." "No man is good enough to govern another against his will." Great truths, from men whose greatness and moral elevation the world admires. But there is a higher authority than Jefferson or Lincoln, Who said: "If a man smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." Yet he who acted literally on even that divine injunction toward the Malays that attacked our Army in Manila would be a congenital idiot to begin with, and his corpse, while it lasted, would remain an object-lesson of how not to deal with the present stage of Malay civilization and Christianity. Why mourn over our present course as a departure from the policy of the fathers? For a hundred years the uniform policy which they began and their sons continued has been acquisition, expansion, annexation, reaching out to remote wildernesses far more distant and inaccessible then than the Philippines are now--to disconnected regions like Alaska, to island regions like Midway, the Guano Islands, the Aleutians, the Sandwich Islands, and even to quasi-protectorates like Liberia and Samoa. Why mourn because of the precedent we are establishing? The precedent was established before we were born. Why distress ourselves with the thought that this is only the beginning, that it opens the door to unlimited expansion? The door is wide open now, and has been ever since Livingston in Paris jumped at Talleyrand's offer to sell him the wilderness west of the Mississippi instead of the settlements eastward to Florida, which we had been trying to get; and Jefferson eagerly sustained him. For the rest, the task that is laid upon us now is not proving so easy as to warrant this fear that we shall soon be seeking unlimited repetitions of it. [Sidenote: Evasion by Embrace.] That danger, in fact, can come only if we shirk our present duty by the second of the two alternative methods of evasion I have mentioned--the one favored by the exuberant patriot who wants to clasp Cuban, Kanaka, and Tagal alike to his bosom as equal partners with ourselves in our inheritance from the fathers, and take them all into the Union as States. We will be wise to open our eyes at once to the gravity and the insidious character of this danger--the very worst that could threaten the American Union. Once begun, the rivalry of parties and the fears of politicians would insure its continuance. With Idaho and Wyoming admitted, they did not dare prolong the exclusion even of Utah, and so we have the shame of seeing an avowed polygamist with a prima facie right to sit in our Congress as a legislator not merely for Utah, but for the whole Union. At this moment scarcely a politician dares frankly avow unalterable opposition to the admission of Cuba, if she should seek it. Yet, bad as that would be, it would necessarily lead to worse. Others in the West Indies might not linger long behind. In any event, with Cuba a State, Porto Rico could not be kept a Territory. No more could the Sandwich Islands. And then, looming direct in our path, like a volcano rising out of the mist on the affrighted vision of mariners tempest-tossed in tropic seas, is the specter of such States as Luzon and the Visayas and Haiti. They would have precedents, too, to quote, and dangerous ones. When we bought Louisiana we stipulated in the treaty that "the inhabitants of the ceded territory shall be incorporated in the Union of the United States and admitted as soon as possible, according to the principles of the Federal Constitution, to the enjoyment of all the rights, advantages, and immunities of citizens of the United States." We made almost identically the same stipulation when we bought Florida. When one of the most respected in the long line of our able Secretaries of State, Mr. William L. Marcy, negotiated a treaty in 1854 for the annexation of the Sandwich Islands, he provided that they should be incorporated as a State, with the same degree of sovereignty as other States, and on perfect equality with them. The schemes prior to 1861 for the purchase or annexation of Cuba practically all looked to the same result. Not till the annexation of San Domingo was proposed did this feature disappear from our treaties. It is only candid to add that the habit of regarding this as the necessary destiny of any United States Territory as soon as it has sufficient population has been universal. It is no modern vagary, but the practice, if not the theory, of our whole national life, that would open the doors of our Senate and House, and give a share in the Government to these wild-eyed newcomers from the islands of the sea. The calamity of admitting them cannot be overrated. Even in the case of the best of these islands, it would demoralize and degrade the national suffrage almost incalculably below the point already reached. To the Senate, unwieldy now, and greatly changed in character from the body contemplated by the Constitution, it would be disastrous. For the present States of the Union it would be an act of folly like that of a business firm which blindly steered for bankruptcy by freely admitting to full partnership new members, strangers, and non-residents, not only otherwise ill qualified, but with absolutely conflicting interests. And it would be a distinct violation of the clause in the preamble that "we, the people,... do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of _America_." There is the only safe ground--on the letter and the spirit of the Constitution. It contemplated a Continental Union of sovereign States. It limited that Union to the American Continent. The man that takes it farther sounds its death-knell. [Sidenote: The General Welfare.] I have designedly left to the last any estimate of the material interests we serve by holding on in our present course. Whatever these may be, they are only a subordinate consideration. We are in the Philippines, as we are in the West Indies, because duty sent us; and we shall remain because we have no right to run away from our duty, even if it does involve far more trouble than we foresaw when we plunged into the war that entailed it. The call to duty, when once plainly understood, is a call Americans never fail to answer, while to calls of interest they have often shown themselves incredulous or contemptuous. But the Constitution we revere was also ordained "to promote the general welfare," and he is untrue to its purpose who squanders opportunities. Never before have they been showered upon us in such bewildering profusion. Are the American people to rise to the occasion? Are they to be as great as their country? Or shall the historian record that at this unexampled crisis they were controlled by timid ideas and short-sighted views, and so proved unequal to the duty and the opportunity which unforeseen circumstances brought to their doors? The two richest archipelagos in the world are practically at our disposal. The greatest ocean on the globe has been put in our hands, the ocean that is to bear the commerce of the Twentieth Century. In the face of this prospect, shall we prefer, with the teeming population that century is to bring us, to remain a "hibernating nation, living off its own fat--a hermit nation," as Mr. Senator Davis has asked? For our first Assistant Secretary of State, Mr. Hill, was right when he said that not to enter the Open Door in Asia means the perpetual isolation of this continent. [Sidenote: Have they any Value?] Are we to be discouraged by the cry that the new possessions are worthless? Not while we remember how often and under what circumstances we have heard that cry before. Half the public men of the period denounced Louisiana as worthless. Eminent statesmen made merry in Congress over the idea that Oregon or Washington could be of any use. Daniel Webster, in the most solemn and authoritative tones Massachusetts has ever employed, assured his fellow-Senators that, in his judgment, California was not worth a dollar. Is it said that the commercial opportunities in the Orient, or at least in the Philippines, are overrated? So it used to be said of the Sandwich Islands. But what does our experience show? Before their annexation even, but after we had taken this little archipelago under our protection and into our commercial system, our ocean tonnage in that trade became nearly double as heavy as with Great Britain. Why? Because, while we have lost the trade of the Atlantic, superior advantages make the Pacific ours. Is it said that elsewhere on the Pacific we can do as well without a controlling political influence as with it? Look again! Mexico buys our products at the rate of $1.95 for each inhabitant; South America at the rate of 90 cents; Great Britain at the rate of $13.42; Canada at the rate of $14; and the Hawaiian Islands at the rate of $53.35 for each inhabitant. Look at the trade of the chief city on the Pacific coast. All Mexico and Central America, all the western parts of South America and of Canada, are as near to it as is Honolulu; and comparison of the little Sandwich Islands in population with any of them would be ridiculous. Yet none of them bought as much salmon in San Francisco as Hawaii, and no countries bought more save England and Australia. No countries bought as much barley, excepting Central America; and even in the staff of life, the California flour, which all the world buys, only five countries outranked Hawaii in purchases in San Francisco. No doubt a part of this result is due to the nearness of Hawaii to our markets, and her distance from any others capable of competing with us, and another part to a favorable system of reciprocity. Nevertheless, nobody doubts the advantage our dealers have derived in the promotion of trade from controlling political relations and frequent intercourse. There are those who deny that "trade follows the flag," but even they admit that it leaves if the flag does. And, independent of these advantages, and reckoning by mere distance, we still have the better of any European rivals in the Philippines. Now, assume that the Filipino would have far fewer wants than the Kanaka or his coolie laborer, and would do far less work for the means to gratify them. Admit, too, that, with the Open Door, our political relations and frequent intercourse could have barely a fifth or a sixth of the effect there they have had in the Sandwich Islands. Roughly cast up even that result, and say whether it is a value which the United States should throw away as not worth considering! And the greatest remains behind. For the trade in the Philippines will be but a drop in the bucket compared to that of China, for which they give us an unapproachable foothold. But let it never be forgotten that the confidence of Orientals goes only to those whom they recognize as strong enough and determined enough always to hold their own and protect their rights! The worst possible introduction for the Asiatic trade would be an irresolute abandonment of our foothold because it was too much trouble to keep, or because some Malay and half-breed insurgents said they wanted us away. [Sidenote: The Future.] Have you considered for whom we hold these advantages in trust? They belong not merely to the seventy-five millions now within our borders, but to all who are to extend the fortunes and preserve the virtues of the Republic in the coming century. Their numbers cannot increase in the startling ratio this century has shown. If they did the population of the United States a hundred years hence would be over twelve hundred millions. That ratio is impossible, but nobody gives reasons why we should not increase half as fast. Suppose we do actually increase only one fourth as fast in the Twentieth Century as in the Nineteenth. To what height would not the three hundred millions of Americans whom even that ratio foretells bear up the seething industrial activities of the continent! To what corner of the world would they not need to carry their commerce? What demands on tropical productions would they not make? What outlets for their adventurous youth would they not require? With such a prospect before us, who thinks that we should shrink from an enlargement of our national sphere because of the limitations that bound, or the dangers that threatened, before railroads, before ocean steamers, before telegraphs and ocean cables, before the enormous development of our manufactures, and the training of executive and organizing faculties in our people on a constantly increasing scale for generations? Does the prospect alarm? Is it said that our Nation is already too great, that all its magnificent growth only adds to the conflicting interests that must eventually tear it asunder? What cement, then, like that of a great common interest beyond our borders, that touches not merely the conscience but the pocket and the pride of all alike, and marshals us in the face of the world, standing for our own? What, then, is the conclusion of the whole matter? Hold fast! Stand firm in the place where Providence has put you, and do the duty a just responsibility for your own past acts imposes. Support the army you sent there. Stop wasting valuable strength by showing how things might be different if something different had been done a year and a half ago. Use the educated thought of the country for shaping best its course now, instead of chiefly finding fault with its history. Bring the best hope of the future, the colleges and the generation they are training, to exert the greatest influence and accomplish the most good by working intelligently in line with the patriotic aspirations and the inevitable tendencies of the American people, rather than against them. Unite the efforts of all men of good will to make the appointment of any person to these new and strange duties beyond seas impossible save for proved fitness, and his removal impossible save for cause. Rally the colleges and the churches, and all they influence, the brain and the conscience of the country, in a combined and irresistible demand for a genuine, trained, and pure Civil Service in our new possessions, that shall put to shame our detractors, and show to the world the Americans of this generation, equal still to the work of civilization and colonization, and leading the development of the coming century as bravely as their fathers led it in the last. IX A CONTINENTAL UNION This speech was delivered on the invitation of the Massachusetts Club, at their regular dinner in Boston, March 3, 1900. A CONTINENTAL UNION A third of a century ago I had the honor to be a guest at this club, which met then, as now, in Young's Hotel. It has ever since been a pleasure to recall the men of Boston who gathered about the board, interested, as now, in the affairs of the Republic to which they were at once ornament and defense. Frank Bird sat at the head. Near him was Henry Wilson. John M. Forbes was here, and John A. Andrew, and George S. Boutwell, and George L. Stearns, and many another, eager in those times of trial to seek and know the best thing to be done to serve this country of our pride and love. They were practical business men, true Yankees in the best sense; and they spent no time then in quarreling over how we got into our trouble. Their one concern was how to get out to the greatest advantage of the country. Honored now by another opportunity to meet with the club, I can do no better than profit by this example of your earlier days. You have asked me to speak on some phase of the Philippine question. I would like to concentrate your attention upon the present and practical phase, and to withdraw it for the time from things that are past and cannot be changed. [Sidenote: Things that Cannot be Undone.] Stare decisis. There are some things settled. Have we not a better and more urgent use for our time now than in showing why some of us would have liked them settled differently? In my State there is a dictum by an eminent judge of the Court of Appeals, so familiar now as to be a commonplace, to the effect that when that court has rendered its decision, there are only two things left to the disappointed advocate. One is to accept the result attained, and go to work on it as best he can; the other, to go down to the tavern and "cuss" the court. I want to suggest to those who dislike the past of the Philippine question that there is more important work pressing upon you at this moment than to cuss the court. You cannot change the past, but you may prevent some threatened sequences which even in your eyes would be far greater calamities. There is no use bewailing the war with Spain. Nothing can undo it, and its results are upon us. There is no use arguing that Dewey should have abandoned his conquest. He didn't. There is no use regretting the Peace of Paris. For good or for ill, it is a part of the supreme law of the land. There is no use begrudging the twenty millions. They are paid. There is no use depreciating the islands, East or West. They are the property of the United States by an immutable title which, whatever some of our own people say, the whole civilized world recognizes and respects. There is no use talking about getting rid of them--giving them back to Spain, or turning them over to Aguinaldo, or simply running away from them. Whoever thinks that any one of these things could be done, or is still open to profitable debate, takes his observations--will you pardon me the liberty of saying it?--takes his observations too closely within the horizon of Boston Bay to know the American people. They have not been persuaded and they cannot be persuaded that this is an inferior Government, incapable of any duty Providence (through the acts of a wicked Administration, if you choose) may send its way--duties which other nations could discharge, but we cannot. They do not and will not believe that it was any such maimed, imperfect, misshapen cripple from birth for which our forefathers made a place in the family of nations. Nor are they misled by the cry that, in a populous region, thronged by the ships and traders of all countries, where their own prosecution of a just war broke down whatever guaranties for order had previously existed, they are violating the natural rights of man by enforcing order. Just as little are they misled by the other cry that they are violating the right of self-government, and the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution of the United States by preparing for the distracted, warring tribes of that region such local government as they may be found capable of conducting, in their various stages of development from pure barbarism toward civilization. The American people know they are thus proceeding to do just what Jefferson did in the vast region he bought from France--without the consent, by the way, either of its sovereign or its inhabitants. They know they are following in the exact path of all the constructive statesmen of the Republic, from the days of the man who wrote the Declaration, and of those who made the Constitution, down to the days of the men who conquered California, bought Alaska, and denied the right of self-government to Jefferson Davis. They simply do not believe that a new light has been given to Mr. Bryan, or to the better men who are aiding him, greater and purer than was given to Washington, or to Jefferson, or to Lincoln. And so I venture to repeat, without qualification or reserve, that what is past cannot be changed. Candid and dispassionate minds, knowing the American people of all political shades and in all sections of the country, can see no possibility that any party in power, whether the present one or its opponent, would or could, now or soon, if ever, abandon or give back one foot of the territory gained in the late war, and ours now by the supreme law of the land and with the assent of the civilized world. As well may you look to see California, which your own Daniel Webster, quite in a certain modern Massachusetts style, once declared in the Senate to be not worth a dollar, now abandoned to Mexico. [Sidenote: No Abstractions or Apologies or Attacks.] It seems to me, then, idle to thresh over old straw when the grain is not only winnowed, but gone to the mill. And so I am not here to discuss abstract questions: as, for example, whether in the year 1898 the United States was wise in going to war with Spain, though on that I might not greatly disagree with the malcontents; or as to the wisdom of expansion; or as to the possibility of a republic's maintaining its authority over a people without their consent. Nor am I here to apologize for my part in making the nation that was in the wrong and beaten in the late war pay for it in territory. I have never thought of denying or evading my own full share of responsibility in that matter. Conscious of a duty done, I am happily independent enough to be measurably indifferent as to a mere present and temporary effect. Whatever the verdict of the men of Massachusetts to-day, I contentedly await the verdict of their sons. But, on the other hand, I am not here either to launch charges of treason against any opponent of these policies, who nevertheless loves the institutions founded on these shores by your ancestors, and wishes to perpetuate what they created. Least of all would it occur to me to utter a word in disparagement of your senior Senator, of whom it may be said with respectful and almost affectionate regard that he bears a warrant as authentic as that of the most distinguished of his predecessors to speak for the conscience and the culture of Massachusetts. Nor shall any reproach be uttered by me against another eminent son of the commonwealth and servant of the Republic, who was expected, as one of the officers of your club told me, to make this occasion distinguished by his presence. He has been represented as resenting the unchangeable past so sternly that he now hopes to aid in defeating the party he has helped to lead through former trials to present glory. If so, and if from the young and unremembering reproach should come, be it ours, silent and walking backward, merely to cast over him the mantle of his own honored service. [Sidenote: Common Duty and a Common Danger.] No, no! Let us have a truce to profitless disputes about what cannot be reversed. Censure us if you must. Even strike at your old associates and your own party if you will and when you can, without harming causes you hold dear. But for the duty of this hour, consider if there is not a common meeting-ground and instant necessity for union in a rational effort to avert present perils. This, then, is my appeal. Disagree as we may about the past, let us to-day at least see straight--see things as they are. Let us suspend disputes about what is done and cannot be undone, long enough to rally all the forces of good will, all the undoubted courage and zeal and patriotism that are now at odds, in a devoted effort to meet the greater dangers that are upon us. For the enemy is at the gates. More than that, there is some reason to fear that, through dissensions from within, he may gain the citadel. In their eagerness to embarrass the advocates of what has been done, and with the vain hope of in some way undoing it, and so lifting this Nation of seventy-five millions bodily backward two years on its path, there are many who are still putting forth all their energies in straining our Constitution and defying our history, to show that we have no possessions whose people are not entitled to citizenship and ultimately to Statehood. Grant that, and instead of reversing engines safely in mid-career, as they vainly hope, they must simply plunge us over the precipice. The movement began in the demand that our Dingley tariff--as a matter of right, not of policy, for most of these people denounce the tariff itself as barbarous--that our Dingley tariff should of necessity be extended over Porto Rico as an integral part of the United States. Following an assent to this must have come inevitably all the other rights and privileges belonging to citizenship, and then no power could prevent the admission of the State of Porto Rico. Some may think that in itself would be no great thing, though it is for you to say how Massachusetts would relish having this mixed population, a little more than half colonial Spanish, the rest negro and half-breed, illiterate, alien in language, alien in ideas of right, interests, and government, send in from the mid-Atlantic, nearly a third of the way over to Africa, two Senators to balance the votes of Mr. Hoar and Mr. Lodge; for you to say how Massachusetts would regard the spectacle of her senatorial vote nullified, and one third of her representation in the House offset on questions, for instance, of sectional and purely Northern interest, in the government of this continent, and in the administration of this precious heritage of our fathers. Or, suppose Massachusetts to be so little Yankee (in the best sense still) that she could bear all this without murmur or objection--is it to be imagined that she can lift other States in this generation to her altruistic level? How would Kansas, for example, enjoy being balanced in the Senate, and nearly balanced in the House, on questions relating to the irrigation of her arid plains, or the protection of her beet-root industry, or on any others affecting the great central regions of this continent, by these voices from the watery waste of the ocean? Or how would West Virginia or Oregon or Connecticut, or half a dozen others of similar population, regard it to be actually outvoted in their own home, on their own continent, by this Spanish and negro waif from the mid-Atlantic? All this, in itself, may seem to some unimportant, negligible, even trivial. At any rate, it would be inevitable; since no one is wild enough to believe that Porto Rico can be turned back to Spain, or bartered away, or abandoned by the generation that took it. But make its people citizens now, and you have already made it, potentially, a State. Then behind Porto Rico stands Cuba, and behind Cuba, in time, stand the whole of the West Indies, on whom that law of political gravitation which John Quincy Adams described will be perpetually acting with redoubled force. And behind them--no, far ahead of them, abreast of Porto Rico itself--stand the Philippines! The Constitution which our fathers reverently ordained for the United States of _America_ is thus tortured by its professed friends into a crazy-quilt, under whose dirty folds must huddle the United States of America, of the West Indies, of the East Indies, and of Polynesia; and Pandemonium is upon us. [Sidenote: The Degradation of the Republic.] I implore you, as thinking men, pause long enough to realize the degradation of the Republic thus calmly contemplated by those who proclaim this to be our constitutional duty toward our possessions. The republican institutions I have been trained to believe in were institutions founded, like those of New England, on the Church and the school-house. They constitute a system only likely to endure among a people of high virtue and high intelligence. The republican government built up on this continent, while the most successful in the history of the world, is also the most complicated, the most expensive, and often the slowest. Such are its complications and checks and balances and interdependencies, which tax the intelligence, the patience, and the virtue of the highest Caucasian development, that it is a system absolutely unworkable by a group of Oriental and tropical races, more or less hostile to each other, whose highest type is a Chinese and Malay half-breed, and among whom millions, a majority possibly, are far below the level of the pure Malay. What holds a nation together, unless it be community of interests, character, and language, and contiguous territory? What would more thoroughly insure its speedily flying to pieces than the lack of every one of these requisites? Over and over, the clearest-eyed students of history have predicted our own downfall even as a continental republic, in spite of our measurable enjoyment of all of them. How near we all believed we came to it once or twice! How manifestly, under the incongruous hodge-podge of additions to the Union thus proposed, we should be organizing with Satanic skill the exact conditions which have invariably led to such downfalls elsewhere! Before the advent of the United States, the history of the world's efforts at republicanism was a monotonous record of failure. Your very school-boys are taught the reason. It was because the average of intelligence and morality was too low; because they lacked the self-restrained, self-governing quality developed in the Anglo-Saxon bone and fiber through all the centuries since Runnymede; because they grew unwieldy and lost cohesion by reason of unrelated territory, alien races and languages, and inevitable territorial and climatic conflicts of interest. On questions vitally affecting the welfare of this continent it is inconceivable, unthinkable, that even altruistic Massachusetts should tolerate having her two Senators and thirteen Representatives neutralized by as many from Mindanao. Yet Mindanao has a greater population than Massachusetts, and its Mohammedan Malays are as keen for the conduct of public affairs, can talk as much, and look as shrewdly for the profit of it. There are cheerful, happy-go-lucky public men who assure us that the national digestion has been proved equal to anything. Has it? Are we content, for example, with the way we have dealt with the negro problem in the Southern States? Do we think the suffrage question there is now on a permanent basis which either we or our Southern friends can be proud of, while we lack the courage either honestly to enforce the rule of the majority, or honestly to sanction a limitation of suffrage within lines of intelligence and thrift? How well would our famous national digestion probably advance if we filled up our Senate with twelve or fourteen more Senators, representing conditions incomparably worse? Is it said this danger is imaginary? At this moment some of the purest and most patriotic men in Massachusetts, along with a great many of the very worst in the whole country, are vehemently declaring that our new possessions are already a part of the United States; that in spite of the treaty which reserved the question of citizenship and political status for Congress, their people are already citizens of the United States; and that no part of the United States can be arbitrarily and permanently excluded from Statehood. The immediate contention, to be sure, is only about Porto Rico, and it is only a very little island. But who believes he can stop the avalanche? What wise man, at least, will take the risk of starting it? Who imagines that we can take in Porto Rico and keep out nearer islands when they come? Powerful elements are already pushing Cuba. Practically everybody recognizes now that we must retain control of Cuba's foreign relations. But beyond that, the same influences that came so near hurrying us into a recognition of the Cuban Republic and the Cuban debt are now sure that Cuba will very shortly be so "Americanized" (that is, overrun with American speculators) that it cannot be denied admission--that, in fact, it will be as American as Florida! And, after Cuba, the deluge! Who fancies that we could then keep San Domingo and Haiti out, or any West India island that applied, or our friends the Kanakas? Or who fancies that after the baser sort have once tasted blood, in the form of such rotten-borough States, and have learned to form their larger combinations with them, we shall still be able to admit as a matter of right a part of the territory exacted from Spain, and yet deny admission as a matter of right to the rest? The Nation has lately been renewing its affectionate memories of a man who died in his effort to hold on, with or without their consent, to the States we already have on this continent, but who never dreamed of casting a drag-net over the world's archipelagos for more. Do we remember his birthday and forget his words? "This Government"--meaning that under the Constitution ordained for the United States of _America_--"this Government cannot permanently endure, half slave, half free." Who disputes it now? Well, then, can it endure half civilized and enlightened, half barbarous and pagan; half white, half black, brown, yellow, and mixed; half Northern and Western, half tropical and Oriental; one half a homogeneous continent, the rest in myriads of islands scattered half-way around the globe, but all eager to participate in ruling this continent which our fathers with fire and sword redeemed from barbarism and subdued to the uses of the highest civilization? [Sidenote: Clamor that Need not Disturb.] I will not insult your intelligence or your patriotism by imagining it possible that in view of such considerations you could consent to the madman's policy of taking these islands we control into full partnership with the States of this Union. Nor need you be much disturbed by the interested outcries as to the injustice you do by refusing to admit them. When it is said you are denying the natural rights Mr. Jefferson proclaimed, you can answer that you are giving these people, in their distant islands, the identical form of government Mr. Jefferson himself gave to the territories on this continent which he bought. When it is said you are denying our own cardinal doctrine of self-government, you can point to the arrangements for establishing every particle of self-government with which these widely different tribes can be safely trusted, consistently with your responsibility for the preservation of order and the protection of life and property in that archipelago, and the pledge of more the moment they are found capable of it. When you are asked, as a leading champion[15] asked the other night at Philadelphia, "Does your liberation of one people give you the right to subjugate another?" you can answer him, "No; nor to allow and aid Aguinaldo to subjugate them, either, as you proposed." When the idle quibble that after Dewey's victory Spain had no sovereignty to cede is repeated, it may be asked, "Why acknowledge, then, that she did cede it in Porto Rico and relinquish it in Cuba, yet deny that she could cede it in the Philippines?" Finally, when they tell you in mock heroics, appropriated from the great days of the anti-slavery struggle for the cause now of a pinchbeck Washington, that no results of the irrevocable past two years are settled, that not even the title to our new possessions is settled, and never will be until it is settled according to their notions, you can answer that then the title to Massachusetts is not settled, nor the title to a square mile of land in most of the States from ocean to ocean. Over practically none of it did we assume sovereignty by the consent of the inhabitants. [15] General Carl Schurz, at the Philadelphia Anti-Imperialist Convention, February 22, 1900. [Sidenote: Where is your Real Interest?] Quite possibly these controversies may embarrass the Government and threaten the security of the party in power. New and perplexing responsibilities often do that. But is it to the interest of the sincere and patriotic among the discontented to produce either result? The one thing sure is that no party in power in this country will dare abandon these new possessions. That being so, do those of you who regret it prefer to lose all influence over the outcome? While you are repining over what is beyond recall, events are moving on. If you do not help shape them, others, without your high principle and purity of motive, may. Can you wonder if, while you are harassing the Administration with impracticable demands for an abandonment of territory which the American people will not let go, less unselfish influences are busy presenting candidates for all the offices in its organization? If the friends of a proper civil service persist in chasing the ignis fatuus of persuading Americans to throw away territory, while the politicians are busy crowding their favorites into the territorial offices, who will feel free from self-reproach at the results? Grant that the situation is bad. Can there be a doubt of the duty to make the best of it? Do you ask how? By being an active patriot, not a passive one. By exerting, and exerting now when it is needed, every form of influence, personal, social, political, moral,--the influence of the clubs, the Chambers of Commerce, the manufactories, the colleges, and the churches,--in favor of the purest, the ablest, the most scientific, the most disinterested--in a word, the best possible civil service for the new possessions that the conscience and the capacity of America can produce, with the most liberal use of all the material available from native sources. I have done. I have no wish to argue, to defend, or to attack. I have sought only to point out what I conceive to be the present danger and the present duty. It is not to be doubted that all such considerations will summon you to the high resolve that you will neither shame the Republic by shirking the task its own victory entails, nor despoil the Republic by abandoning its rightful possessions, nor degrade the Republic by admissions of unfit elements to its Union; but that you will honor it, enrich it, ennoble it, by doing your utmost to make the administration of these possessions worthy of the Nation that Washington founded and Lincoln preserved. My last word is an appeal to stand firm and stand all together for the Continental Union and for a pure civil service for the Islands. X OUR NEW INTERESTS This address was delivered on Charter Day at the University of California, on March 23, 1900. OUR NEW INTERESTS My subject has been variously stated in your different newspapers as "Current National Questions," or "The Present National Question," or "General Expositions; Not on Anything in Particular." When your President honored me with his invitation to a duty so high and so sudden that it might almost be dignified by the name of a draft, he gave me nearly equal license. I was to speak "on anything growing out of the late war with Spain." How that war resembles the grippe! You remember the medical definition by an authority no less high than our present distinguished Secretary of State. "The grippe," said Colonel Hay, "is that disease in which, after you have been cured, you get steadily worse every day of your convalescence"! There are people of so little faith as to say that this exactly describes the late war with Spain. If one is to speak at all of its present aspects, on this high-day of your University year, he should do so only as a patriot, not as a partizan. But he cannot avoid treading on ground where the ashes are yet warm, and discussing questions which, in spite of the present intermingling of party lines and confusion of party ideas, will presently be found the very battle-ground of campaign oratory and hostile hosts. You will credit me, I hope, with sufficient respect for the proprieties of this platform to avoid partizan arguments, under the warrant of your distinguished President to discuss national questions from any point of view that a patriot can take. It is profoundly to be regretted that on these questions, which pure patriotism alone should weigh and decide, mere partizanship is already grasping the scales. One thing at least I may venture to promise before this audience of scholars and gentlemen on this Charter Day of your great University: I shall ask the Democrat of the present day to agree with me no farther than Thomas Jefferson went, and the Republican of the day no farther than Abraham Lincoln went. To adapt from a kindred situation a phrase by the greatest popular orator of my native State, and, I still like to think, one of the greatest of the country in this century,--a phrase applied by him to the compromise measures of 1848, but equally fitting to-day,--"If we are forced to part company with some here whom it has been our pleasure and pride to follow in the past, let us console ourselves by the reflection that we are following in the footsteps of the fathers and saviors of the Republic, their garments dyed with the blood of the Red Sea, through which they led us out of the land of bondage, their locks still moist with the mists of the Jordan, across which they brought us to this land of liberty."[16] [16] Thomas Corwin of Ohio, in United States Senate, 1848. [Sidenote: To be Taken for Granted now.] Yet, even with those from whom we must thus part company there are elemental truths of the situation on which we must still agree. Some things reasonable men may take for granted--some that surely have been settled in the conflict of arms, of diplomacy, and of debate since the spring of 1898. Regret them if you choose, but do not, like children, seek to make them as though they were not, by shutting your eyes to them. The new territories in the West Indies and the East are ours, to have and to hold, by the supreme law of the land, and by a title which the whole civilized world recognizes and respects. We shall not speedily get rid of them--whoever may desire it. The American people are in no mood to give them back to Spain, or to sell them, or to abandon them. We have all the power we need to acquire and to govern them. Whatever theories men may quote from Mr. Calhoun or from Mr. Chief Justice Taney, the uniform conduct of the National Administration throughout a century, under whatever party, justifies the triumphant declaration of Daniel Webster to Mr. Calhoun, over half a century ago, and the consenting opinions of the courts for a long term since, down to the very latest in the line, by your own Judge Morrow, to the effect, in a word, that this Government, like every other one in the world, has power to acquire "territory and other property" anywhere, and govern it as it pleases.[17] [17] Over a month after the above was delivered came the first recent judicial expression of a contrary view. It was by Judge William Lochren of the United States Circuit Court at St. Paul, in the case of habeas corpus proceedings against Reeve, warden of the Minnesota State Prison at Stillwater, for the release of a Porto Rican named Ortiz. He was held for the murder of a private soldier of the United States, sentenced to death by a Military Commission at San Juan, and, on commutation of the sentence by the President of the United States, sent to this State Prison for life. Judge Lochren denied the writ on the ground that the conviction took place before the Treaty of Paris, by which Spain ceded sovereignty in Porto Rico to the United States, had been ratified by the Senate. The Judge went on, however, to argue that Ortiz could not have been lawfully tried before the Military Commission after the ratification of the treaty, because the island of Porto Rico thereby became an integral part of the United States, subject to the Constitution and privileged and bound by its provisions. As this point was not involved in the case he was deciding, this is, of course, merely a dictum--the expression of opinion on an outside matter by a Democratic judge who was recently transferred by Mr. Cleveland from a Washington bureau to the bench. It clearly shows, however, what would be his decision whenever the case might come before him. His argument followed closely the lines taken by Mr. Calhoun in the Senate and Mr. Chief Justice Taney in the Dred Scott decision. On these points I make bold to repeat what I felt warranted in saying a fortnight ago within sight of Bunker Hill--that there is every evidence that the American people have distinctly and definitely made up their minds. They have not been persuaded and they cannot be persuaded that this is an inferior government, incapable of any duty Providence may send its way--duties which other nations could discharge, but we cannot. So I venture to affirm the impossibility that any party in power, whether the present one or its opponent, could soon, if ever, abandon one foot of the territory gained in the late war. We are gathered on another old Spanish territory taken by our country in war. It shows what Americans do with such acquisitions. Before you expect to see Porto Rico given back to Spain or the Philippines abandoned to Aguinaldo, wait till we are ready to declare, as Daniel Webster did in the Senate, that this California of your pride and glory is "not worth a dollar," and throw back the worthless thing on the hands of unoffending Mexico. Till then, let us as practical and sensible men recognize that what is past is settled. [Sidenote: Duty First; but then Interest also.] Thus far have we come in these strange courses and to these unexpected and unwelcome tasks by following, at each succeeding emergency, the path of clear, absolute, and unavoidable duty. The only point in the whole national line of conduct, from the spring of 1898 on to this March morning of 1900, at which our Government could have stopped with honor, was at the outset. I, for one, would gladly have stopped there. How was it then with some at the West who are discontented now? Shake not your gory locks at me or at my fellow-citizens in the East. You cannot say we did it. In 1898, just as a few years earlier in the debate about Venezuela, the loudest calls for a belligerent policy came not from the East, "the cowardly, commercial East," as we were sometimes described, but from the patriotic and warlike West. The farther West you came, the louder the cry for war, till it reached its very climax on what we used to call the frontier, and was sent thundering Eastward upon the National Capital in rolling reverberations from the Sierras and the Rockies which few public men cared to defy. At that moment, perhaps, if this popular and congressional demand had not pushed us forward, we might have stopped with honor--certainly not later. From the day war was flagrant down to this hour there has been no forward step which a peremptory national or international obligation did not require. To the mandate alone of Duty, stern daughter of the voice of God, the American people have bowed, as, let us hope, they always will. It is not true that, in the final decision as to any one step in the great movement hitherto, our interests have been first or chiefly considered. But in all these constitutional discussions to which we have referred, one clause in the Constitution has been curiously thrust aside. The framers placed it on the very forefront of the edifice they were rearing, and there declared for our instruction and guidance that "the people do ordain and establish this Constitution ... to promote the general welfare." By what right do statesmen now venture to think that they can leave our national interests out of the account? Who and where is the sentimentalist who arraigns us for descending to too sordid a level when we recognize our interest to hold what the discharge of duty has placed in our hand? Since when has it been statesmanship to shut our eyes to the interests of our own country, and patriotism to consider only the interests or the wishes of others? For my own part, I confess to a belief in standing up first for my own, and find it difficult to cherish much respect for the man who won't: first for my own family rather than some other man's; first for my own city and State rather than for somebody else's; first for my own country--first, please God! for the United States of America. And so, having in the past, too fully, perhaps, and more than once, considered the question of our new possessions in the light of our duty, I propose now to look at them further, and unblushingly, in the light of our interests. [Sidenote: The Old Faith of Californians.] Which way do your interests lie? Which way do the interests of California and the city of San Francisco lie? Three or four days ago, when your President honored me with the summons I am now obeying, there came back to me a vague memory of the visions cherished by the men you rate the highest in California, your "Pioneers" and "Forty-Niners," as to the future of the empire they were founding on this coast. There lingered in my mind the flavor at least of an old response by a California public man to the compliment a "tenderfoot" New-Yorker, in the innocence of his heart, had intended to pay, when he said that with this splendid State, this glorious harbor, and the Pacific Ocean, you have all the elements to build up here the New York of the West. The substance of the Californian's reply was that, through mere lack of knowledge of the country to which he belonged, the well-meaning New-Yorker had greatly underrated the future that awaited San Francisco--that long before Macaulay's New-Zealander had transferred himself from the broken arches of London Bridge to those of Brooklyn, it would be the pride and boast of the denizens of those parts that New York had held its own so finely as still to be fairly called the San Francisco of the East! While the human memory is the most tenacious and nearest immortal of all things known to us, it is also at times the most elusive. Even with the suggestions of Mr. Hittell and the friendly files of the Mechanics' Library, I did not succeed in finding that splendid example of San Francisco faith which my memory had treasured. Yet I found some things not very unlike it to show what manner of men they were that laid the foundations of this commonwealth on the Pacific, what high hopes sustained them, and what radiant future they confidently anticipated. Here, for example, was Mr. William A. Howard, whom I found declaring, not quite a third of a century ago, that San Francisco would yet be the largest American city on the largest ocean in the world. At least, so he is reported in "The Bulletin" and "The Call," though "The Alta" puts it with an "if," its report reading: "If the development of commerce require that the largest ocean shall have the largest city, then it would follow that as the Atlantic is smaller than the Pacific, so in the course of years New York will be smaller than San Francisco." And here, again, was Mr. Delos Lake, maintaining that the "United States is now on a level with the most favored nations; that its geographical position, its line of palatial steamers established on the Pacific Ocean by American enterprise, and soon to be followed by ocean telegraphs, must before long render this continent the proper avenue of commerce between Europe and Asia, and raise this metropolis of the Pacific to the loftiest height of monetary power." There was a reason, too, widely held by the great men of the day, whose names have passed into history, for some such faith. Thus an old Californian of high and happy fame, Major-General Henry W. Halleck, speaking of San Francisco, said: "Standing here on the extreme Western verge of the Republic, overlooking the coast of Asia and occupying the future center of trade and commerce of the two worlds,... if that civilization which so long has moved westward with the Star of Empire is now, purified by the principles of true Christianity, to go on around the world until it reaches the place of its origin and makes the Orient blossom again with its benign influences, San Francisco must be made the abutment, and International Law the bridge, by which it will cross the Pacific Ocean. The enterprise of the merchants of California has already laid the foundation of the abutments; diplomacy and steam and telegraph companies are rapidly accumulating material for the construction of the bridge." Thus far Halleck. But have the Californians of this generation abandoned the bridge? Are we to believe those men of to-day who tell us it is not worth crossing? Here, again, was Eugene Casserly, speaking of right for the California Democracy of that date. Writing with deliberation more than a quarter of a century ago, he said: "We expect to stand on equal grounds with the most favored of nations. We ask no more in the contest for that Eastern trade which has always heretofore been thought to carry with it the commercial supremacy of the globe. America asks only a fair field, even as against her oldest and most formidable rivals. Nature, and our position as the nearest neighbors to eastern Asia, separated from her only by the great highways of the ocean, have placed in our hands all the advantages that we need.... Favored by vicinity, by soil and climate on our own territory, with a people inferior to none in enterprise and vigor, without any serious rivals anywhere, all this Pacific coast is ours or is our tributary.... We hold as ours the great ocean that so lately rolled in solitary grandeur from the equator to the pole. In the changes certain to be effected in the currents of finance, of exchange, and of trade, by the telegraph and the railroads, bringing the financial centers of Europe and of the United States by way of San Francisco within a few weeks of the ports of China and of the East, San Francisco must become at no distant day the banker, the factor, and the carrier of the trade of eastern Asia and the Pacific, to an extent to which it is difficult to assign limits." Are the people now lacking in the enterprise and vigor which Mr. Casserly claimed for them? Have the limits he scorned been since assigned, and do the Californians of to-day assent to the restriction? Take yet another name, treasured, I know, on the roll of California's most worthy servants, another Democrat. Governor Haight, only a third of a century ago, said: "I see in the near future a vast commerce springing up between the Chinese Empire and the nations of the West; an interchange of products and manufactures mutually beneficial; the watchword of progress and the precepts of a pure religion uttered to the ears of a third of the human race." And addressing some representatives of that vast region, he added, with a burst of fine confidence in the supremacy of San Francisco's position: "As Chief Magistrate of this Western State of the Nation, I welcome you to the territory of the Republic,... in no selfish or narrow spirit, either of personal advantage or seeking exclusive privileges for our own over the other nations; and so, in the name of commerce, of civilization, of progress, of humanity, and of religion, on behalf not merely of California or America, but of Europe and of mankind, I bid you and your associates welcome and God-speed." Perhaps this may be thought merely an exuberant hospitality. Let me quote, then, from the same man, speaking again as the Governor of the State, at the Capitol of the State, in the most careful oration of his life: "What shall be said of the future of California? Lift your eyes and expand your conceptions to take in the magnitude of her destiny. An empire in area, presenting advantages and attractions to the people of the Eastern States and Europe far beyond those presented by any other State or Territory--who shall set limits to her progress, or paint in fitting colors the splendor of her future?... Mismanagement may at times retard her progress, but if the people of California are true to themselves, this State is destined to a high position, not only among her sister States, but among the commonwealths of the world,... when her ships visit every shore, and her merchant princes control the commerce of the great ocean and the populous countries upon its borders." Was Governor Haight alone, or was he in advance of his time? Go yet farther back, to the day when Judge Nathaniel Bennett was assigned by the people of San Francisco to the task of delivering the oration when they celebrated the admission of California into the Union, on October 29, 1850: "Judging from the past, what have we not a right to expect in the future? The world has never witnessed anything equal or similar to our career hitherto.... Our State is a marvel to ourselves, and a miracle to the rest of the world. Nor is the influence of California confined within her own borders.... The islands nestled in the embrace of the Pacific have felt the quickening breath of her enterprise.... She has caused the hum of busy life to be heard in the wilderness where rolls the Oregon, and where until recently was heard no sound save his own dashings. Even the wall of Chinese exclusiveness has been broken down, and the children of the Sun have come forth to view the splendors of her achievements.... It is all but a foretaste of the future.... The world's trade is destined soon to be changed.... The commerce of Asia and the islands of the Pacific, instead of pursuing the ocean track by the way of Cape Horn or the Cape of Good Hope, or even taking the shorter route of the Isthmus of Darien or the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, will enter the Golden Gate of California and deposit its riches in the lap of our city.... New York will then become what London now is--the great central point of exchange, the heart of trade, the force of whose contraction and expansion will be felt throughout every artery of the commercial world; and San Francisco will then stand the second city of America.... The responsibility rests upon us whether this first American State of the Pacific shall in youth and ripe manhood realize the promise of infancy. We may cramp her energies and distort her form, or we may make her a rival even of the Empire State of the Atlantic. The best wishes of Americans are with us. They expect that the Herculean youth will grow to a Titan in his manhood." Nor was even Judge Bennett the pioneer of such ideas. Long before he spoke, or before the Stars and Stripes had been raised over Yerbabuena, as far back as in 1835, the English people and the British Government had been advised by Alexander Forbes that "The situation of California for intercourse with other countries and its capacity for commerce--should it ever be possessed by a numerous and industrious population--are most favorable. The port of San Francisco for size and safety is hardly surpassed by any in the world; it is so situated as to be made the center of the commercial relations which may take place between Asia and the western coast of America.... The vessels of the Spanish Philippines Company on their passage from Manila to San Blas and Acapulco generally called at Monterey for refreshments and orders.... Thus it appears as if California was designed by nature to be the medium of connecting commercially Asia with America, and as the depot of the trade between these two vast continents, which possess the elements of unbounded commercial interchange; the one overflowing with all the rich and luxurious commodities always characteristic of the East, the other possessing a superabundance of the precious metals and other valuable products to give in exchange.... If ever a route across the Isthmus shall be opened, California will then be one of the most interesting commercial situations in the world; it would in that case be the rendezvous for all vessels engaged in the trade between Europe and Asia by that route. It is nearly mid-voyage between these two countries, and would furnish provisions and all naval supplies in the most ample abundance, and most probably would become a mart for the interchange of the commodities of the three continents." [Sidenote: Has the State Lost Heart and Shriveled?] Let no man fancy that these sometimes exuberant expressions of a noble and far-seeing faith by your own predecessors and by a prescient foreigner have been revived in derision or even in doubt. Those were the days when, if some were for a party, at any rate all were for the State. These were great men, far-seeing, courageous, patriotic, the men of Forty-nine, who in such lofty spirit and with such high hope laid the foundation of this empire on the Pacific. Distance did not disturb them, nor difficulties discourage. There sits on your platform to-day a man who started from New York to California by what he thought the quickest route in December, 1848; went south from the Isthmus as the only means of catching a ship for the north, and finally entered this harbor, by the way of Chile, in June, 1849. He could go now to Manila thrice over and back in less time. And yet there are Californians of this day who profess to shrink in alarm from the remoteness and inaccessibility of our new possessions! Has the race shriveled under these summer skies? Has it grown old before its time; is its natural strength abated? Are the old energy and the old courage gone? Has the soul of this people shrunk within them? Or is it only that there are strident voices from California, sounding across the Sierras and the Rockies, that misrepresent and shame a State whose sons are not unworthy of their fathers? The arm of the Californian has not been shortened, that he cannot reach out. The salt has not left him, that he cannot occupy and possess the great ocean that the Lord has given him. Nor has he forgotten the lesson taught by the history of his own race (and of the greatest nations of the world), that oceans no longer separate--they unite. There are no protracted and painful struggles to build a Pacific railroad for your next great step. The right of way is assured, the grading is done, the rails are laid. You have but to buy your rolling-stock at the Union Iron Works, draw up your time-table, and begin business. Or do you think it better that your Pacific railroad should end in the air? Is a six-thousand-mile extension to a through line worthless? Can your Scott shipyards only turn out men-of-war? Can your Senator Perkins only run ships that creep along the coast? Is the broad ocean too deep for him or too wide? [Sidenote: New Fields and the Need for them.] Contiguous land gives a nation cohesion; but it is the water that brings other nations near. The continent divides you from customers beyond the mountains; but the ocean unites you with the whole boundless, mysterious Orient. There you find a population of over six hundred millions of souls, between one fourth and one third of the inhabitants of the globe. You are not at a disadvantage in trading with them because they have the start of you in manufactures or skill or capital, as you would be in the countries to which the Atlantic leads. They offer you the best of all commerce--that with people less advanced, exchanging the products of different zones, a people awakening to the complex wants of a civilization that is just stirring them to a new life. Have you considered what urgent need there will be for those new fields? It is no paltry question of an outlet for the surplus products of a mere nation of seventy-five millions that confronts you. Your mathematical professors will tell you that, at the ratio of increase established in this Nation by the census returns for the century just closing, its population would amount during the next century to the bewildering and incomprehensible figure of twelve hundred millions. The ratio, of course, will not be maintained, since the exceptional circumstances that caused it cannot continue. But no one gives reasons why it should not be half as great. Suppose it to turn out only one fourth as great. Is it the part of statesmanship--is it even the part of every-day, matter-of-fact common sense--to reject or despise these Oriental openings for the products of this people of three hundred million souls the Twentieth Century would need to nourish within our borders? Our total annual trade with China now--with this customer whom the friendly ocean is ready to bring to your very doors--is barely twenty millions. That would be a commerce of the gross amount of six and two third cents for each inhabitant of our country in the next century, with that whole vast region adjoining you, wherein dwell one fourth of the human race! Even the Spanish trade with the Philippines was thirty millions. They are merely our stepping-stone. But would a wise man kick the stepping-stone away? [Sidenote: The New Blood Felt.] San Francisco is exceptionally prosperous now. So is the State of California. Why? Partly, no doubt, because you are sharing the prosperity which blesses the whole country. But is that all? What is this increase in the shipping at your wharves? What was the meaning of those crowded columns of business statistics your newspapers proudly printed last New Year's?--what the significance of the increase in exports and imports, far beyond mere army requirements? Why is every room taken in your big buildings? What has crowded your docks, filled your streets, quickened your markets, rented your stores and dwellings, sent all this new blood pulsing through your veins--made you like the worn Richelieu when, in that moment, there entered his spent veins the might of France? Was it the rage you have witnessed among some of your own leaders against everything that has been done during the past two years--the warning against everything that is about to be done? Was it the proof of our unworthiness and misdeeds, to which we all penitentially listened, as so eloquently set forth from the high places of light and leading--the long lamentation over how on almost every field we had shown our incapacity; how unfit we were to govern cities, unfit to govern territories, unfit to govern Indians, unfit to govern ourselves--how, in good old theological phrase, we were from head to foot a mass of national wounds and bruises and putrefying sores, and there was no health in us? Was it the demonstration that what we needed was to sit under the live-oaks and "develop the individual man," nor dare to look beyond? Was it the forgetfulness that muscles grow strong only with exercise; that it is the duties of manhood that take the acrid humors out of a youth's blood; that it is great responsibility, manfully met, not cowardly evaded, that sobers and steadies and ennobles? Some one has lately been quoting Lincoln's phrase, "We cannot escape history." It is a noble and inspiring thought. Most of us dare not look for a separate appearance at that greatest of human bars--may hope only to be reckoned in bulk with the multitude. But even so, however it may be with others on this coast, I, for one, want to be counted with those who had faith in my countrymen; who did not think them incapable of tasks which duty imposed and to which other nations had been equal; who did not disparage their powers or distrust their honest intentions or urge them to refuse their opportunities; to be counted with those who at least had open eyes when they stood in the Golden Gate! [Sidenote: Wards or Full Partners.] I do not doubt--you do not doubt--they are the majority. They will prevail. What Duty requires us to take, an enlightened regard for our own interests will require us to hold. The islands will not be thrown away. The American people have made up their minds on that point, if on nothing else. Well, then, how shall the islands be treated? Are they to be our wards, objects of our duty and our care; or are they to be our full partners? We may as well look that question straight in the face. There is no way around it, or over or under or out of it; and no way of aimlessly and helplessly shuffling it off on the future, for it presses in the legislation of Congress to-day. Wards, flung on our hands by the shipwreck of Spain, helpless, needy, to be cared for and brought up and taught to stand alone as far as they can; or full partners with us in the government and administration of the priceless heritage of our fathers, the peerless Republic of the world and of all the centuries--that is the question! Men often say--I have even heard it within a week on this coast--that all this is purely imaginary; that nobody favors their admission as States. Let us see. An ounce of fact in a matter of such moment is worth tons of random denial. Within the month a distinguished and experienced United States Senator from the North has announced that he sees no reason why Porto Rico should not be a State. Within the same period one of the leading religious journals of the continent has declared that it would be a selfish and brutal tyranny that would exclude Porto Rico from Statehood. Only a few weeks earlier one of our ablest generals, now commanding a department in one of our dependencies, a laureled hero of two wars, has officially reported to the Government in favor of steps for the admission of Cuba as a State. On every hand rise cries that in any event they cannot and must not be dependencies. Some of these are apparently for mere partizan effect, but others are the obvious promptings of a sincere and high-minded, however mistaken, conviction. I shall venture, then, to consider it as a real and not an abstract question,--"academic," I think it is the fad of these later days to say,--and I propose again (and again unblushingly) to consider it from what has been called a low and sordid point of view--so low, in fact, so unworthy the respect of latter-day altruistic philosophers, that it merely concerns the interests of our country! For I take it that if there is one subject on which this Union has a right to consult its own interests and inclinations, it is on the question of admitting new States, or of putting territory in a position where it can ever claim or expect admission; just as the one subject on which nobody disputes the right of a mercantile firm to follow its own inclinations is on that of taking in some unfortunate business man as a partner; or the right of an individual to follow his own inclinations about marrying some needy spinster he may have felt it a duty to befriend. Because they are helpless and needy and on our hands, must we take them into partnership? Because we are going to help them, are we bound to marry them? [Sidenote: The Porto Rican Question.] Partly through mere inadvertence, but partly also through crafty design, the wave of generous sympathy for the suffering little island of Porto Rico which has been sweeping over the country has come very near being perverted into the means of turning awry the policy and permanent course of a great Nation. To relieve the temporary distress by recognizing the Porto Ricans as citizens, and by an extension of the Dingley tariff to Porto Rico as a matter of constitutional right, foreclosed the whole question. I know it is said, plausibly enough, in some quarters, that Congress cannot foreclose the question,--has nothing to do with it, in fact,--but that it is a matter to be settled only by the Supreme Law of the land, of which Congress is merely the servant. The point need not be disputed. But it is an unquestioned part of the Supreme Law of the land, as authoritative within its sphere and as binding as any clause in the Constitution itself, which declares, in the duly ratified Treaty of Paris, that the whole question of the civil rights and political status of the inhabitants in this newly acquired property of ours shall be reserved for the decision of Congress! Let those who invoke the Supreme Law of the land learn and bow to it. As to the mere duty of prompt and ample relief for the distress in Porto Rico, there is happily not a shade of difference of opinion among the seventy-five millions of our inhabitants. Nor was the free-trade remedy, so vehemently recommended, important enough in itself to provoke serious objection or delay. Cynical observers might find, indeed, a gentle amusement in noting how in the name of humanity the blessings of free trade were invoked by means of the demand for an immediate application of the highest protective tariff known to the history of economics! The very men who denounce this tariff as a Chinese wall are the men who demand its application. They say, "Give Porto Rico free trade," but what their proposal means is, "Deprive Porto Rico of free trade, and put her within the barbarous Chinese wall." Their words sound like offering her the liberty of trade with all the world, but mean forbidding her to trade with anybody except the United States. [Sidenote: Importance of the Question.] The importance of the question from an economic point of view has been ludicrously exaggerated on both sides. The original proposal would have in itself done far less harm than its opponents imagined and far less good than its supporters hoped. Yet to the extent of its influence it would have been a step backward. It would have been the rejection of the modern and scientific colonial method, and the adoption instead of the method which has resulted in the most backward, the least productive, and the least prosperous colonies in the world--the method, in a word, of Spain herself. For the Spanish tariff, in fact, made with some little reference to colonial interests, we should merely have substituted our own tariff, made with sole reference to our own interests. A more distinct piece of blacksmith work in economic legislation for a helpless, lonely little island in the mid-Atlantic could not well be imagined. What had poor Porto Rico done, that she should be fenced in from all the Old World by an elaborate and highly complicated system of duties upon imports, calculated to protect the myriad varying manufactures and maintain the high wages of this vast new continent, and as little adapted to Porto Rico's simple needs as is a Jorgensen repeater for the uses of a kitchen clock? Why at the same stroke must she be crushed, as she would have been if the Constitution were extended to her, by a system of internal taxation, which we ourselves prefer to regard as highly exceptional, on tobacco, on tobacco-dealers, on bank-checks, on telegraph and telephone messages, on bills of lading, bills of exchange, leases, mortgages, life-insurance, passenger tickets, medicines, legacies, inheritances, mixed flour, and so on and so on, ad infinitum, ad nauseam? Did she deserve so badly of us that, even in a hurry, we should do this thing to her in the name of humanity? All the English-speaking world, outside some members of the United States Congress perhaps, long since found a more excellent way. It is simplicity itself. It legislates for a community like Porto Rico with reference to the situation and wants of that community--not with reference to somebody else. It applies to Porto Rico a system devised for Porto Rico--not one devised for a distant and vastly larger country, with totally different situation and wants. It makes no effort to exploit Porto Rico for the benefit of another country. It does make a studied and scientific effort from the Porto Rico point of view (not from that of temporary Spanish holders of the present stocks of Porto Rican products) to see what system will impose the lightest burdens and bring the greatest benefits on Porto Rico herself. The result of that conscientious inquiry may be the discovery that the very best thing to provide for the wants and promote the prosperity of that little community out in the Atlantic Ocean is to bestow upon them the unmixed boon of the high protective Dingley tariff devised for the United States of America. If so, give them the Dingley tariff, and give it straight. If, on the other hand, it should be found that a lower and simpler revenue system, better adapted to a community which has practically no manufactures to protect, with freedom to trade on equal terms with all the world, would impose upon them lighter burdens and bring them greater benefits, then give them that. If it should be further found that, following this, such a system of reciprocal rebates as both Cuba and the United States thought mutually advantageous in the late years of Spanish rule, would be useful to Porto Rico, then give them that. But, in any case, the starting-point should be the needs of Porto Rico herself, intelligently studied and conscientiously met--not the blacksmith's offhand attempt to fit on her head, like a rusty iron pot, an old system made for other needs, other industries, a distant land, and another people. And beyond and above all, give her the best system for her situation and wants, whether it be our Dingley tariff or some other, because it is the best for her and is therefore our duty--not because it is ours, and therefore, under the Constitution of the United States, her right and her fate. The admission of that ill-omened and unfounded claim would be, at the bar of politics, a colossal blunder; at the bar of patriotism, a colossal crime. [Sidenote: Political Aspect of the Constitutional Claim.] The politics of it need not greatly concern this audience or long detain you. But the facts are interesting. If Porto Rico, instead of belonging to us, is a part of us, so are the Philippines. Our title to each is exactly the same. So are Guam and the Sandwich Islands, if not also Samoa; and so will be Cuba if she comes, or any other West India Island. First, then, you are proposing to open the ports of the United States directly to the tropical products of the two greatest archipelagos of the world, and indirectly, through the Open Door we have pledged in the Philippines, to all the products of all the world! You guarantee directly to the cheap labor of these tropical regions, and indirectly, but none the less bindingly, to the cheap labor of the world, free admission of their products to this continent, in unrestricted competition with our own higher-paid labor. And as your whole tariff system is thus plucked up by the roots, you must resort to direct taxation for the expenses of the General Government. Secondly, as if this were not enough, you have made these tropical laborers citizens,--Chinese, half-breeds, pagans, and all,--and have given them the unquestionable and inalienable right to follow their products across the ocean if they like, flood our labor market, and compete in person on our own soil with our own workmen. Is that the feast to be set before the laboring men of this country? Is that the real inwardness of the Trojan horse pushed forward against our tariff wall, in the name of humanity, to suffering Porto Rico? What a programme for the wise humanitarians who have been bewitching the world with noble statesmanship at Washington to propose laying before the organized labor of this country as their chosen platform for the approaching Presidential campaign! They need have no fear the intelligent workingmen of America will fail to appreciate the sweet boon they offer. [Sidenote: The Patriotic Aspect of it.] But if the question thus raised at the bar of politics may seem to some only food for laughter, that at the bar of patriotism is matter for tears. If the islanders are already citizens, then they are entitled to the future of citizens. If the territory is already an integral part of the United States, then by all our practice and traditions it has the right to admission in States of suitable size and population. Is it said we could keep them out as we have kept out sparsely settled New Mexico? How long do you expect to keep New Mexico out, or Oklahoma, or Arizona? What luck did you have in keeping out others--even Utah, with its bar sinister of the twin relic of barbarism? How long would it take your politicians of the baser sort to combine for the admission of the islands whose electoral votes they had reason to think they could control? But it is said that Porto Rico deserves admission anyway, because we are bound by the volunteered assurance of General Miles that they should have the rights of American citizens. Perhaps; though there is no evidence that he meant more, or that they thought he meant more, than such rights as American citizens everywhere enjoy, even in the District of Columbia--equal laws, security of life and property, freedom from arbitrary arrests, local self-government, in a word, the civil rights which the genius of our Government secures to all under our control who are capable of exercising them. If he did mean more, or if they thought he meant more, did that entitle him to anticipate his chief and override in casual military proclamation the Supreme Law of the land whose commission he bore? Or did it entitle them to suppose that he could? But Porto Rico received the irresistible army of General Miles so handsomely, and is so unfortunate and so little! Reasons all for consideration, certainly, for care, for generosity--but not for starting the avalanche, on the theory that after it has got under only a little headway we can still stop it if we want to. Who thinks he can lay his hand on the rugged edge of the Muir Glacier and compel it to advance no farther? Who believes that we can admit this little island from the mid-Atlantic, a third of the way over to Africa, and then reject nearer and more valuable islands when they come? The famous law of political gravitation which John Quincy Adams prophetically announced three quarters of a century ago will then be acting with ever-increasing force. And, at any rate, beside Porto Rico, and with the same title, stand the Philippines! Regard, I beg of you, in the calm white light that befits these cloistered retreats of sober thought, the degradation of the Republic thus coolly anticipated by the men that assure us we have no possessions whose people are not entitled under our Constitution to citizenship and ultimately to Statehood! Surely to an audience of scholars and patriots like this not one word need be added. Emboldened by the approval you have so generously expressed, I venture to close by assuming without hesitation that you will not dishonor your Government by evading its duty, nor betray it by forcing unfit partners upon it, nor rob it by blind and perverse neglect of its interests. May I not go further, and vouch for you, as Californians, that the faith of the fathers has not forsaken the sons--that you still believe in the possibilities of the good land the Lord has given you, and mean to work them out; that you know what hour the national clock has struck, and are not mistaking this for the Eighteenth Century; that you will bid the men who have made that mistake, the men of little faith, the shirkers, the doubters, the carpers, the grumblers, begone, like Diogenes, to their tubs--aye, better his instruction and require these his followers to get out of your light? For, lo! yet another century is upon you, before which even the marvels of the Nineteenth are to grow pale. As of old, light breaks from the east, but now also, for you, from the farther East. It circles the world in both directions, like the flag it is newly gilding now with its tropic beams. The dawn of the Twentieth Century bursts upon you without needing to cross the Sierras, and bathes at once in its golden splendors, with simultaneous effulgence, the Narrows of Sandy Hook and the peerless portals of the Golden Gate. XI "UNOFFICIAL INSTRUCTIONS" This speech was delivered at the Farewell Banquet given by over four hundred citizens of San Francisco to the second Philippine Commission, on the eve of their sailing for Manila, at the Palace Hotel, April 12, 1900. The title is adopted from the phrase used by the President of the Commission in his response; to which a leading journal of the Pacific coast, "The Seattle Post-Intelligencer," promptly added that the address "spoke for the whole people of the United States," and was "the concrete expression of a desire that animates nine tenths of all our citizens." Judge Taft frankly stated his concurrence in the views expressed (though he held some legal doubts as to whether the Constitution of the United States did not extend, ex proprio vigore, to the new possessions), and he pledged the Commission against the influence of political considerations. "UNOFFICIAL INSTRUCTIONS" The kindness of your call shall not be misinterpreted or taken advantage of. Quite enough of my voice has been heard in the land, and that very recently, as some of you can testify to your cost. There are others here with far greater claims upon your attention, and I promise to be as brief as heretofore I have been prolix. The occasion is understood to be primarily one of congratulation and personal good will. It is evident that San Francisco thinks well of the Pacific coast member of this Commission, and none the worse because he seems to have been chosen for the post merely on account of his being peculiarly fit for it. The city gladly takes the rest of you on faith, believing that the same rule of selection must have been applied in the cases with which it has not the happiness to be quite so familiar. But it is an occasion, I am authoritatively assured, of no political significance whatever. It embraces in its comprehensive impulse of greeting and good wishes Republicans and Democrats and Dewey men; men who hold the offices, men who want the offices, and men who say, "A plague on both your houses!"--men who indorse the course of the Administration, and men who believe the acquisition of the Philippines a mistake. I shall not attempt to disguise from you the fact that this last is not an opinion that I individually hold. Still, I can respect the convictions of those who do. But evidently we can have no concurrence to-night on our extra-continental policy, since the differences are so wide on vital points. Yet the organizers of this testimonial made no mistake. There is a common ground for our meeting. We are all citizens of the Republic, grateful for our high privilege and solicitous that the Republic shall take no harm--all Americans, proud of the name and eager that it shall never be stained by base or unworthy acts. There is no one here, of whatever political faith or lack of faith, who is not a patriot, anxious for our country on these new and untried paths it must walk--most desirous that all its ways may prove ways of pleasantness and all its paths lead to honorable peace. Well, then, gentlemen, what is it that a company thus divided in opinion, and united only in patriotic aspirations, can agree in looking to this Commission for? What do the American people in general, and without distinction of party, look to them for? Did I hear a public opponent but personal friend over there murmur as his reply, "Not much of anything"? Alas! we may as well recognize that there are political augurs who are ready to give just that as their horoscope, and even point to their useful predecessor, the last Commission, for presumptive proof! In fact, there are occasional grumblers who would look for more from them if they were fewer. These skeptical critics recognize that sometimes in a multitude of counselors there may be safety, but also recall the maxim that councils of war never fight. If the truth must be whispered in the ear of the Commissioners, there are here and there very sincere, capable people who are growing a bit weary of a multiplicity of commissions. They say--so cynical are they--that, in all ages and countries, the easiest method of evading or postponing a difficult problem has been to appoint a commission on it and thus prolong the circumlocution. For a first thing, then, on which we are all united, we look hopefully to our guests to redeem the character of this mode of government by commission. For we assume that they are sent out to the archipelago to govern; and just at present we don't know of any part of the country's possessions that seems more in need of government. We all unite in regarding them as setting sail, not only charged with the national interests, but dignified and ennobled by a guardianship of the national honor. Thus we are trying to put ourselves in Emerson's state of mind about a certain notable young poet, and unite in hoping that, to use his well-known phrase, we greet them at the beginning of a great career. We certainly unite in earnestly wishing that they may make the best of a situation which none of us wholly like, and many dislike with all their hearts: the best of it for the country which, by good management or bad, rightfully or wrongfully, is at any rate clearly and in the eyes of the whole world now responsible for the outcome; and the best of it, no less, for the distracted people thrown upon our hands. We cannot well help uniting in the further hope that their first success will be the re-establishment of order throughout regions lately filled with violence and bloodshed; and that they can then bring about a system of just and swift punishment for future crimes of disorder, since all experience in those regions and among those people shows that the neglect to enforce such punishment is itself the gravest and cruelest of crimes. Nor can any one here help uniting in the hope that their next and crowning success will some way be attained in the preservation and extension of those great civil rights whose growth is the distinction, the world over, of Anglo-Saxon civilization; whose consummate flower and fruitage are the glory of our own Government. I am even bold enough to believe that, however it might have been twelve months ago, or but six months ago, there is no one here to-night, recognizing the changed circumstances now, who would think they could best secure those rights to all the people by calling back the leader who is in hiding, and his forces, which are scattered and disorganized, and by now abandoning to such revengeful rule the great majority of the islanders who have remained peaceful and orderly during our occupation. For the present, at least, we unite in recognizing that they are forced to retain that care themselves; forced to act in the common interest of all the people there, not in the sole interest of a warring faction in a single tribe--in the interest of all the islands for which we have accepted responsibility, not simply of the one, or of a part of the population on the one, that has made the most trouble. There can be little disagreement in this company on the further proposition that, in like manner, they must act in the interest of all the people here. In the interest of the islanders, they will soon seek to raise the needed revenue in the way least burdensome and most beneficial to the islands; but in the interest of their country, we cannot expect them to begin by assuming that the only way to help the islanders is to throw products of tropic cheap labor into unrestricted competition with similar products of our highly paid labor. In the interest of the islanders, they will secure and guarantee the civil rights which belong to the very genius of American institutions; but in the interest of their country, they will not make haste to extend the privilege of American citizenship, and so, on the one hand, enable those peoples of the China Sea, Chinese or half-breed or what not, to flood our labor market in advance of any readiness at home to change our present laws of exclusion, while, on the other hand, opening the door to them as States in the Union to take part in the government of this continent. If, in the Providence of God, and in contempt of past judicial rulings, the Supreme Court should finally command it, this Commission, like every other branch of the Government, will obey. Till then we may be sure it will not, in sheer eagerness and joyfulness of heart, anticipate, or, as Wall Street speculators say, "discount," such a decree for national degradation. But in their own land, and, as far as may be, in accordance with their old customs and laws, the Commission will secure to them, if it is to win the success we all wish it, first every civil right we enjoy, and next the fullest measure of political rights and local self-government they are found capable of sustaining, with ordered liberty for all the people. There, then, is the doom we have reason to expect this Commission to inflict on these temporarily turbulent wards of the Nation! First order; then justice; then American civil rights, not for a class, or a tribe, or a race, but for all the people; then local self-government. But if your guests begin this task with the notion that they are the first officials of a free people ever given such work, and must therefore, American fashion, discover from the foundation for themselves,--if they fancy nobody ever dealt with semi-civilized Orientals till we stumbled on them in the Philippines,--they will waste precious time in costly experiments, if not fail outright. It isn't worth while thus to invent over again everything down to the very alphabet of work among such people. We can afford to abate the self-sufficiency of the almighty Yankee Nation enough to profit a little by the lessons other people have learned in going over the road before us. From such lessons they will be sure to gather at once that if they now show a trace of timidity or hesitation in their firm and just course, because somebody has said something in Washington or on the stump, or because there is an election coming on, they will fail. In fact, if they do not know now, as well as they know what soil they still stand on and what countrymen are about them, and if they do not act as if they knew, that, no matter what the politicians or the platforms say, and no matter what party comes into power, the American people have at present no notion of throwing these islands away, or abandoning them, or neglecting the care of them, they have not mastered the plainest part of their problem, and must fail. Above all, if there is a trace of politics in their work, or of seeking for political effect at home, they will fail, and deserve to fail. In this most delicate and difficult task before them there is no salvation but in the scrupulous choice of the very best fitted agency available, in each particular case, for the particular work in hand. If they appoint one man, or encourage or silently submit to the appointment of one man, to responsible place in their service among these islanders, merely because he has been useful in politics at home, they will be organizing failure and discredit in advance. But they will do no such things. Not so has this body of men been selected. Not such is the high appreciation of the opportunity offered that has led you, Mr. President of the Commission, to abandon your well-earned and distinguished place at home to begin a new career at the antipodes. Yet more--I, at least, can certify to this company that not such is the sense of public duty you inherited from your honored father, and have consistently illustrated throughout your own career. You will not fail, because you know the peril and the prize. You will not fail, because you have civilization and law and ordered freedom, the honor of your land and the happiness of a new one, in your care--because you know that, for uncounted peoples, the hopes of future years hang breathless on your fate. And so, gentlemen of the Commission, good-by, and God-speed! In spite of rock and tempest's roar, In spite of false lights on the shore, Sail on, nor fear to breast the sea! APPENDICES 1. POWER TO ACQUIRE AND GOVERN TERRITORY. 2. THE TARIFF IN UNITED STATES TERRITORY. 3. THE RESOLUTIONS OF CONGRESS AS TO CUBA. 4. THE PROTOCOL OF WASHINGTON. 5. THE PEACE OF PARIS. 1 POWER TO ACQUIRE AND GOVERN TERRITORY _The United States has as much power as any other Government._ "The Constitution of the United States established a Government, and not a league, compact, or partnership.... As a Government it was invested with all the attributes of sovereignty.... It is not only a Government, but it is a National Government, and the only Government in this country that has the character of nationality.... Such being the character of the General Government, it seems to be a self-evident proposition that it is invested with all those inherent and implied powers which, at the time of adopting the Constitution, were generally considered to belong to every Government as such, and as being essential to the exercise of its functions." (Mr. Justice Bradley, United States Supreme Court, Legal Tender Cases, 12 Wall. 554.) _The United States can acquire territory by conquest or by treaty, as a condition of peace or as indemnity._ "The United States ... may extend its boundaries by conquest or treaty, and may demand the cession of territory as the condition of peace, in order to indemnify its citizens for the injuries they have suffered, or to reimburse the Government for the expenses of the war. But this can only be done by the treaty-making power or the legislative authority." (United States Supreme Court, Fleming _et al. v._ Page, 9 How. 614.) _The United States can have a valid title by conquest to territory not a part of the Union._ "By the laws and usages of nations, conquest is a valid title.... As regarded by all other nations it [Tampico] was a part of the United States, and belonged to them as exclusively as a Territory included in our established boundaries, but yet it was not a part of the Union." (United States Supreme Court, Fleming _et al. v._ Page, 9 How. 603-615.) _A title so acquired by the United States cannot be questioned in its courts._ "If those departments which are intrusted with the foreign intercourse of the Nation ... have unequivocally asserted its rights of dominion over a country of which it is in possession and which it claims under a treaty, if the legislature has acted on the construction thus asserted, it is not in its own courts that this construction is to be denied. A question like this, respecting the boundaries of a nation, is ... more a political than a legal question, and in its discussion the courts of every country must respect the pronounced will of the legislature." (Mr. Chief Justice Marshall, Foster _et al. v._ Neilson, 2 Peters 253, 309.) _Yet such territory may be still outside the United States_ (meaning thereby the American Union organized by the Constitution--the Nation), _and cannot get in without action by the political authorities_. "The boundaries of the United States, as they existed when war was declared against Mexico, were not extended by the conquest.... They remained unchanged. And every place which was out of the limits of the United States, as previously established by the political authorities of the Government, was still foreign." (Fleming _et al. v._ Page, 9 How. 616.) _The United States can govern such territory as it pleases. Thus it can withhold any power of local legislation._ "Possessing the power to erect a Territorial government for Alaska, they could confer upon it such powers, judicial and executive, as they deemed most suitable to the necessities of the inhabitants. It was unquestionably within the constitutional power of Congress to withhold from the inhabitants of Alaska the power to legislate and make laws. In the absence, then, of any law-making power in the Territory, to what source must the people look for the laws by which they are to be governed? This question can admit of but one answer. Congress is the only law-making power for Alaska." (United States _v._ Nelson, 29 Fed. Rep. 202, 205, 206.) _Mr. Jefferson even held that the United States could sell territory, hold it as a colony, or regulate its commerce as it pleased._ "The Territory [Louisiana] was purchased by the United States in their confederate capacity, and may be disposed of by them at their pleasure. It is in the nature of a colony whose commerce may be regulated without any reference to the Constitution." (And Louisiana was so governed for years after the purchase, with different tariff requirements from those of the United States, and without trial by jury in civil cases.) _Again, the United States may even_ (as in the case of Consular Courts) _withhold the right of trial by jury_. "By the Constitution a government is ordained and established 'for the United States of America,' and not for countries outside of their limits. The guaranties it affords against accusation of capital or infamous crimes, except by indictment or presentment by a grand jury, and for an impartial trial by a jury when thus accused, apply only to citizens and others within the United States, or who are brought there for trial for alleged offenses committed elsewhere, and not to residents or temporary sojourners abroad. The Constitution can have no operation in another country." (_In re_ Ross, 140 U.S. 463, 465.) (In this case the prisoner insisted that the refusal to allow him a trial by jury was a fatal defect in the jurisdiction exercised by the court, and rendered its judgment absolutely void.) _The United States can govern such territory through Congress._ "At the time the Constitution was formed the limits of the territory over which it was to operate were generally defined and recognized. These States, this territory, and future States to be admitted into the Union, are _the sole objects of the Constitution_. There is no express provision whatever made in the Constitution for the acquisition or government of territories beyond those limits. The right, therefore, of acquiring territory is altogether incidental to the treaty-making power, and perhaps to the power of admitting new States into the Union; and the government of such acquisitions is, of course, left to the legislative power of the Union, as far as that power is controlled by treaty." (Mr. Justice Johnson of the Supreme Court, sitting in the Circuit, in Am. Ins. Co. _v._ Canter, 1 Pet. 517.) Mr. Chief Justice Marshall, affirming the above decision, says: "Perhaps the power of governing a Territory belonging to the United States which has not, by becoming a State, acquired the means of self-government, may result necessarily from the facts that it is not within the jurisdiction of any particular State, and is within the power and jurisdiction of the United States. The right to govern may be the inevitable consequence of the right to acquire territory. Whichever may be the source whence the power is derived, the possession of it is unquestioned." (1 Pet. 541, 542.) _The General Government exercises a sovereignty independent of the Constitution._ "Their people [in organized Territories] do not constitute a sovereign power. All political authority exercised therein is derived [not from the Constitution, but] from the General Government." (Snow _v._ United States, 18 Wall. 317, 320.) _The General Government is expected, however, to be controlled as to personal and civil rights by the general principles of the Constitution._ "The personal and civil rights of the inhabitants of the Territories are secured to them, as to other citizens, by the principles of constitutional liberty which restrain all the agencies of government." (Murphy _v._ Ramsay, 114 U.S. 15, 44, 45.) "Doubtless Congress, in legislating for the Territories, would be subject to those fundamental limitations in favor of personal rights which are formulated in the Constitution and its amendments; but these limitations would exist rather by inference and the general spirit of the Constitution, from which Congress derives all its powers, than by any express and direct application of its provisions." (Mormon Church _v._ United States, 136 U.S. 1, 44; Thompson _v._ Utah, 170 U.S. 343, 349.) 2 THE TARIFF IN UNITED STATES TERRITORY The one point at which the opponents of the doctrine that Congress can govern the Territories as it pleases are able to make a prima facie case by quoting a decision of the Supreme Court, is as to the application of the United States tariff to the Territories. When California was acquired, but before Congress had acted or a Collection District had been established, the Supreme Court sustained the demand for duties under the United States tariff on goods landed at California ports (Cross _v._ Harrison, 16 How. 164). Mr. Justice Wayne said: "By the ratifications of the treaty California became a part of the United States. And as there is nothing differently stipulated in the treaty with respect to commerce, it became instantly bound and privileged by the laws which Congress had passed to raise a revenue from duties on imports and tonnage.... The right claimed to land foreign goods within the United States at any place out of a Collection District, if allowed, would be a violation of that provision in the Constitution which enjoins that all duties, imposts, and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States." The court here bases its reasoning distinctly on the treaty by which California was acquired. But that treaty gave the pledge that California (an adjacent Territory) should be incorporated into the American Union. The Treaty of Paris gave no such pledge as to the Philippines (not adjacent territory, but nine thousand miles away), could not in the nature of the case have given such a pledge, and did provide, instead, that the whole question of the civil rights and political status of the native inhabitants should be determined by the Congress. Recalling Mr. Justice Story's remark that in a Constitution "there ought to be a capacity to provide for future contingencies as they may happen, and as these are ... illimitable in their nature, so it is impossible safely to limit that capacity," it would seem that there would certainly be elasticity enough in the Constitution, or common sense enough in its interpretation, to permit the Supreme Court to perceive some difference between a requirement of uniform tariff on this continent over a territory specifically acquired in order to be made a State, and such a requirement on the other side of the globe over territory not so acquired. The case becomes stronger when the treaty (also constitutionally a part of the Supreme Law of the land) turns over the political status of the latter territory entirely to Congress. The Constitution makes the same or similar requirements of uniformity throughout the United States as to the tariff, internal taxes, courts, and the right of trial by jury. But in every case the early practice did not construe this to include the Territories. _As to uniformity in tariff._ It was not enforced rigidly in Louisiana for years. So little, in fact, was it then held that Louisiana, as soon as acquired, became an integral part of the United States (notwithstanding the treaty provision that in time it should), that though the directors of the United States Bank were empowered to establish offices of discount and deposit "wheresoever they shall think fit _within the United States_," they did not consider this a warrant for establishing one in New Orleans, and actually secured from the Congress for that purpose a bill, signed by Thomas Jefferson on March 23, 1804, extending their authority, under the terms of their original charter, to "any part of the Territories or dependencies of the United States." _As to uniformity in internal taxes._ The very first levied in the United States, that of March 3, 1791, omitted the Territories altogether, dividing the United States into fourteen Collection Districts, "each consisting of one State." It is not until 1798 that any trace can be found of a collection of internal revenue in the territory northwest of the Ohio. _As to the courts._ The Constitution requires that the judicial officers of the United States shall hold office during good behavior. For a century the judicial officers of Territories have been restricted to fixed terms of office. _As to trial by jury._ The Constitution gives the right to it to every criminal case in the United States, and to every civil case involving over twenty dollars. Under Mr. Jefferson's government of Louisiana, trial by jury was limited to capital cases in criminal prosecutions. It has likewise been denied in Consular Courts. 3 THE RESOLUTIONS OF CONGRESS AS TO CUBA Adopted by Congress, April 19, 1898: by the Senate at 1:38 A.M., 42 to 35; by the House at 2:40 A.M., 311 to 6. WHEREAS, The abhorrent conditions which have existed for more than three years in the island of Cuba, so near our own borders, have shocked the moral sense of the people of the United States, have been a disgrace to Christian civilization,--culminating, as they have, in the destruction of a United States battle-ship, with two hundred and sixty of its officers and crew, while on a friendly visit in the harbor of Havana,--and cannot longer be endured, as has been set forth by the President of the United States in his message to Congress of April 11, 1898, upon which the action of Congress was invited; therefore be it resolved, _First_, That the people of the island of Cuba are, and of right ought to be, free and independent. _Second_, That it is the duty of the United States to demand, and the Government of the United States does hereby demand, that the Government of Spain at once relinquish its authority and government in the island of Cuba and withdraw its land and naval forces from Cuba and Cuban waters. _Third_, That the President of the United States be, and he hereby is, directed and empowered to use the entire land and naval forces of the United States, and to call into the actual service of the United States the militia of the several States to such an extent as may be necessary to carry these resolutions into effect. _Fourth_, That the United States hereby disclaims any disposition or intention to exercise sovereignty, jurisdiction, or control over said island, except for the pacification thereof, and asserts its determination when that is accomplished to leave the government and control of the island to its people. 4 THE PROTOCOL OF WASHINGTON William R. Day, Secretary of State of the United States, and His Excellency Jules Cambon, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Republic of France at Washington, respectively possessing for this purpose full authority from the Government of the United States and the Government of Spain, have concluded and signed the following articles, embodying the terms on which the two Governments have agreed in respect to the matters hereinafter set forth, having in view the establishment of peace between the two countries, that is to say: ARTICLE I Spain will relinquish all claim of sovereignty over and title to Cuba. ARTICLE II Spain will cede to the United States the island of Porto Rico and other islands now under Spanish sovereignty in the West Indies, and also an island in the Ladrones to be selected by the United States. ARTICLE III The United States will occupy and hold the city, bay, and harbor of Manila, pending the conclusion of a treaty of peace which shall determine the control, disposition, and government of the Philippines. ARTICLE IV Spain will immediately evacuate Cuba, Porto Rico, and other islands now under Spanish sovereignty in the West Indies; and to this end each Government will, within ten days after the signing of this protocol, appoint Commissioners, and the Commissioners so appointed shall, within thirty days after the signing of this protocol, meet at Havana for the purpose of arranging and carrying out the details of the aforesaid evacuation of Cuba and the adjacent Spanish islands; and each Government will, within ten days after the signing of this protocol, also appoint other Commissioners, who shall, within thirty days after the signing of this protocol, meet at San Juan, in Porto Rico, for the purpose of arranging and carrying out the details of the aforesaid evacuation of Porto Rico and other islands now under Spanish sovereignty in the West Indies. ARTICLE V The United States and Spain will each appoint not more than five Commissioners to treat of peace, and the Commissioners so appointed shall meet at Paris not later than October 1, 1898, and proceed to the negotiation and conclusion of a treaty of peace, which treaty shall be subject to ratification according to the respective constitutional forms of the two countries. ARTICLE VI Upon the conclusion and signing of this protocol, hostilities between the two countries shall be suspended, and notice to that effect shall be given as soon as possible by each Government to the commanders of its military and naval forces. Done at Washington in duplicate, in English and in French, by the undersigned, who have hereunto set their hands and seals the twelfth day of August, 1898. (Seal) WILLIAM R. DAY. (Seal) JULES CAMBON. 5 THE PEACE OF PARIS Negotiations begun in Paris, October 1, 1898. Treaty signed in Paris, 8:45 P.M., December 10. Delivered by United States Commissioners to the President, December 24; transmitted to the Senate with the official report of the negotiations, January 4, 1899; ratified by Senate in executive session, February 6, by a vote of 57 against 27. Formal exchange of ratifications at Washington, April 11. Twenty millions paid through Jules Cambon, May 1. Treaty ratified by Spanish Senate, July 3, 1899. The United States of America and Her Majesty the Queen Regent of Spain, in the name of her august son, Don Alfonso XIII, desiring to end the state of war now existing between the two countries, have for that purpose appointed as plenipotentiaries: _The President of the United States,_ William R. Day, Cushman K. Davis, William P. Frye, George Gray, and Whitelaw Reid, citizens of the United States; _And Her Majesty the Queen Regent of Spain,_ Don Eugenio Montero Rios, President of the Senate; Don Buenaventura de Abarzuza, Senator of the Kingdom and ex-Minister of the Crown; Don Jose de Garnica, Deputy to the Cortes and Associate Justice of the Supreme Court; Don Wenceslao Ramirez de Villa Urrutia, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary at Brussels; and Don Rafael Cerero, General of Division; * * * * * Who, having assembled in Paris and having exchanged their full powers, which were found to be in due and proper form, have, after discussion of the matters before them, agreed upon the following articles: * * * * * Article I. Spain relinquishes all claim of sovereignty over and title to Cuba. And as the island is, upon its evacuation by Spain, to be occupied by the United States, the United States will, so long as such occupation shall last, assume and discharge the obligations that may under international law result from the fact of its occupation for the protection of life and property. Article II. Spain cedes to the United States the island of Porto Rico and other islands now under Spanish sovereignty in the West Indies, and the island of Guam, in the Marianas or Ladrones. Article III. Spain cedes to the United States the archipelago known as the Philippine Islands, and comprehending the islands lying within the following lines: A line running from west to east along or near the twentieth parallel of north latitude, and through the middle of the navigable channel of Bachti, from the one hundred and eighteenth (118th) to the one hundred and twenty-seventh (127th) degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich, thence along the one hundred and twenty-seventh (127th) degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich to the parallel of four degrees and forty-five minutes (4° 45') north latitude, thence along the parallel of four degrees and forty-five minutes (4° 45') north latitude to its intersection with the meridian of longitude one hundred and nineteen degrees and thirty-five minutes (119° 35') east of Greenwich, thence along the meridian of longitude one hundred and nineteen degrees and thirty-five minutes (119° 35') east of Greenwich to the parallel of latitude seven degrees and forty minutes (7° 40') north, thence along the parallel of latitude seven degrees and forty minutes (7° 40') north to its intersection with the one hundred and sixteenth (116th) degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich, thence by a direct line to the intersection of the tenth (10th) degree parallel of north latitude with the one hundred and eighteenth (118th) degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich, and thence along the one hundred and eighteenth (118th) degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich to the point of beginning. The United States will pay to Spain the sum of twenty million dollars ($20,000,000) within three months after the exchange of the ratifications of the present treaty. Article IV. The United States will for ten years from the date of exchange of ratifications of the present treaty admit Spanish ships and merchandise to the ports of the Philippine Islands on the same terms as ships and merchandise of the United States. Article V. The United States will, upon the signature of the present treaty, send back to Spain, at its own cost, the Spanish soldiers taken as prisoners of war on the capture of Manila by the American forces. The arms of the soldiers in question shall be restored to them. Spain will, upon the exchange of the ratifications of the present treaty, proceed to evacuate the Philippines, as well as the island of Guam, on terms similar to those agreed upon by the Commissioners appointed to arrange for the evacuation of Porto Rico and other islands in the West Indies under the protocol of August 12, 1898, which is to continue in force till its provisions are completely executed. The time within which the evacuation of the Philippine Islands and Guam shall be completed shall be fixed by the two Governments. Stands of colors, uncaptured war-vessels, small arms, guns of all calibers, with their carriages and accessories, powder, ammunition, live stock, and materials and supplies of all kinds belonging to the land and naval forces of Spain in the Philippines and Guam remain the property of Spain. Pieces of heavy ordnance, exclusive of field artillery, in the fortifications and coast defenses, shall remain in their emplacements for the term of six months, to be reckoned from the exchange of ratifications of the treaty; and the United States may in the meantime purchase such material from Spain, if a satisfactory agreement between the two Governments on the subject shall be reached. Article VI. Spain will, upon the signature of the present treaty, release all prisoners of war and all persons detained or imprisoned for political offenses in connection with the insurrections in Cuba and the Philippines and the war with the United States. Reciprocally the United States will release all persons made prisoners of war by the American forces, and will undertake to obtain the release of all Spanish prisoners in the hands of the insurgents in Cuba and the Philippines. The Government of the United States will at its own cost return to Spain, and the Government of Spain will at its own cost return to the United States, Cuba, Porto Rico, and the Philippines, according to the situation of their respective homes, prisoners released or caused to be released by them, respectively, under this article. Article VII. The United States and Spain mutually relinquish all claims for indemnity, national and individual, of every kind, of either Government, or of its citizens or subjects, against the other Government, which may have arisen since the beginning of the late insurrection in Cuba, and prior to the exchange of ratifications of the present treaty, including all claims for indemnity for the cost of the war. The United States will adjudicate and settle the claims of its citizens against Spain relinquished in this article. Article VIII. In conformity with the provisions of Articles I, II, and III of this treaty, Spain relinquishes in Cuba and cedes in Porto Rico and other islands in the West Indies, in the island of Guam, and in the Philippine Archipelago all the buildings, wharves, barracks, forts, structures, public highways, and other immovable property which in conformity with law belong to the public domain and as such belong to the Crown of Spain. And it is hereby declared that the relinquishment or cession, as the case may be, to which the preceding paragraph refers, cannot in any respect impair the property or rights which by law belong to the peaceful possession of property of all kinds of provinces, municipalities, public or private establishments, ecclesiastical or civic bodies or any other associations having legal capacity to acquire and possess property in the aforesaid territories renounced or ceded, or of private individuals, of whatsoever nationality such individuals may be. The aforesaid relinquishment or cession, as the case may be, includes all documents exclusively referring to the sovereignty relinquished or ceded that may exist in the archives of the Peninsula. Where any document in such archives only in part relates to said sovereignty a copy of such part will be furnished whenever it shall be requested. Like rules shall be reciprocally observed in favor of Spain in respect of documents in the archives of the islands above referred to. In the aforesaid relinquishment or cession, as the case may be, are also included such rights as the Crown of Spain and its authorities possess in respect of the official archives and records, executive as well as judicial, in the islands above referred to, which relate to said islands or the rights and property of their inhabitants. Such archives and records shall be carefully preserved, and private persons shall, without distinction, have the right to require, in accordance with the law, authenticated copies of the contracts, wills, and other instruments forming pact of notarial protocols or files, or which may be contained in the executive or judicial archives, be the latter in Spain or in the islands aforesaid. Article IX. Spanish subjects, natives of the Peninsula, residing in the territory over which Spain by the present treaty relinquishes or cedes her sovereignty, may remain in such territory or may remove therefrom, retaining in either event all their rights of property, including the right to sell or dispose of such property or of its proceeds; and they shall also have the right to carry on their industry, commerce, and professions, being subject in respect thereof to such laws as are applicable to other foreigners. In case they remain in the territory they may preserve their allegiance to the Crown of Spain by making, before a court of record, within a year from the date of the exchange of ratifications of this treaty, a declaration of their decision to preserve such allegiance; in default of which declaration they shall be held to have renounced it and to have adopted the nationality of the territory in which they may reside. The civil rights and political status of the native inhabitants of the territories hereby ceded to the United States shall be determined by the Congress. Article X. The inhabitants of the territories over which Spain relinquishes or cedes her sovereignty shall be secured in the free exercise of their religion. Article XI. The Spaniards residing in the territories over which Spain by this treaty cedes or relinquishes her sovereignty shall be subject in matters civil as well as criminal to the jurisdiction of the courts of the country wherein they reside, pursuant to the ordinary laws governing the same; and they shall have the right to appear before such courts and to pursue the same course as citizens of the country to which the courts belong. Article XII. Judicial proceedings pending at the time of the exchange of ratifications of this treaty in the territories over which Spain relinquishes or cedes her sovereignty shall be determined according to the following rules: First. Judgments rendered either in civil suits between private individuals or in criminal matters, before the date mentioned, and with respect to which there is no recourse or right of review under the Spanish law, shall be deemed to be final, and shall be executed in due form by competent authority in the territory within which such judgments should be carried out. Second. Civil suits between private individuals which may on the date mentioned be undetermined shall be prosecuted to judgment before the court in which they may then be pending, or in the court that may be substituted therefor. Third. Criminal actions pending on the date mentioned before the Supreme Court of Spain against citizens of the territory which by this treaty ceases to be Spanish shall continue under its jurisdiction until final judgment; but, such judgment having been rendered, the execution thereof shall be committed to the competent authority of the place in which the case arose. Article XIII. The rights of property secured by copyrights and patents acquired by Spaniards in the island of Cuba, and in Porto Rico, the Philippines, and other ceded territories, at the time of the exchange of the ratifications of this treaty, shall continue to be respected. Spanish scientific, literary, and artistic works not subversive of public order in the territories in question shall continue to be admitted free of duty into such territories for the period of ten years, to be reckoned from the date of the exchange of the ratifications of this treaty. Article XIV. Spain shall have the power to establish consular officers in the ports and places of the territories the sovereignty over which has either been relinquished or ceded by the present treaty. Article XV. The Government of each country will, for the term of ten years, accord to the merchant-vessels of the other country the same treatment in respect to all port charges, including entrance and clearance dues, light dues and tonnage duties, as it accords to its own merchant-vessels not engaged in the coastwise trade. This article may at any time be terminated on six months' notice given by either Government to the other. Article XVI. It is understood that any obligations assumed in this treaty by the United States with respect to Cuba are limited to the time of its occupancy thereof; but it will, upon the termination of such occupancy, advise any Government established in the island to assume the same obligations. Article XVII. The present treaty shall be ratified by the President of the United States, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate thereof, and by Her Majesty the Queen Regent of Spain; and the ratifications shall be exchanged at Washington within six months from the date hereof, or earlier if possible. In faith whereof we, the respective plenipotentiaries, have signed this treaty and have hereunto affixed our seals. Done in duplicate at Paris, the tenth day of December, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and ninety-eight. (Seal) WILLIAM R. DAY. (Seal) CUSHMAN K. DAVIS. (Seal) WILLIAM P. FRYE. (Seal) GEORGE GRAY. (Seal) WHITELAW REID. (Seal) EUGENIO MONTERO RIOS. (Seal) B. DE ABARZUZA. (Seal) J. DE GARNICA. (Seal) W. R. DE VILLA URRUTIA. (Seal) RAFAEL CERERO. 
34028	----	RACES AND IMMIGRANTS IN AMERICA [Illustration: ELLIS ISLAND, IMMIGRATION STATION] RACES AND IMMIGRANTS IN AMERICA BY JOHN R. COMMONS PROFESSOR OF POLITICAL ECONOMY, UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN New York THE MACMILLAN COMPANY LONDON: MACMILLAN & CO., LTD. 1907 _All rights reserved_ COPYRIGHT, 1907, BY THE MACMILLAN COMPANY. Set up and electrotyped. Published May, 1907. Norwood Press J. S. Cushing & Co.--Berwick & Smith Co. Norwood, Mass., U.S.A. CONTENTS PAGE REFERENCES vii CHAPTER I. RACE AND DEMOCRACY 1 II. COLONIAL RACE ELEMENTS 22 III. THE NEGRO 39 IV. NINETEENTH CENTURY ADDITIONS 63 V. INDUSTRY 107 VI. LABOR 135 VII. CITY LIFE, CRIME, AND POVERTY 160 VIII. POLITICS 179 IX. AMALGAMATION AND ASSIMILATION 198 INDEX 239 ILLUSTRATIONS ELLIS ISLAND, IMMIGRANT STATION _Frontispiece_ PAGE "RETURN OF THE MAYFLOWER." Painting By Boughton, 1834 _opposite_ 24 ANGLO-SAXON MOUNTAINEERS, BEREA COLLEGE, KENTUCKY _opposite_ 36 COUNTIES HAVING A LARGER PROPORTION OF NEGROES IN 1900 THAN IN 1880 _opposite_ 50 MOVEMENT OF IMMIGRANTS, IMPORTS OF MERCHANDISE PER CAPITA AND IMMIGRANTS PER 10,000 POPULATION _between_ 63-64 ALIENS AWAITING ADMISSION AT ELLIS ISLAND _opposite_ 78 NORWEGIAN, ITALIAN, AND ARABIC TYPES " 90 SLAV, JEWISH, POLACK, AND LITHUANIAN TYPES " 96 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS OF IMMIGRANTS--1906 _between_ 108-109 AMERICAN SCHOOL BOYS _opposite_ 122 FILIPINO GOVERNORS " 142 GOVERNOR JOHNSON OF MINNESOTA.--SWEDE " 154 DR. ORONHYATEKHA, MOHAWK INDIAN. LATE CHIEF OF ORDER OF FORESTERS " 168 CHINESE STUDENTS, HONOLULU " 186 FACULTY OF TUSKEGEE INSTITUTE " 202 SLAVIC HOME MISSIONARIES " 216 ALIENS AWAITING ADMISSION AT ELLIS ISLAND " 230 REFERENCES CITED IN FOOTNOTES "AMERICA'S RACE PROBLEMS." A series of discussions on indigenous race elements and the negro. _American Academy of Political and Social Science_, Vol. XVIII, No. 1 (1901). ATLANTA UNIVERSITY PUBLICATIONS:-- No. 1. "Mortality among Negroes in Cities" (1896). No. 2. "Social and Physical Condition of Negroes in Cities" (1897). No. 3. "Some Efforts of Negroes for Social Betterment" (1898). No. 6. "The Negro Common School" (1901). No. 7. "The Negro Artisan" (1902). No. 8. "The Negro Church" (1903). No. 9. "Notes on Negro Crime" (1904). No. 10. "A Select Bibliography of the Negro American" (1905). BALCH, EMILY GREENE, "Slav Emigration at its Source," _Charities_, 1906. "Introductory," Jan. 6; "Bohemians," Feb. 3; "Slovaks," March 3, April 7; "Galicia, Austrian Poles, Ruthenians," May 5. BLUNTSCHLI, J. K., _The Theory of the State_. New York, 1885. BRANDENBURG, BROUGHTON, _Imported Americans_ (1904). Description of trip by author and wife through southern Italy and Sicily and return by steerage with immigrants. BRINTON, DANIEL G., _Religions of Primitive Peoples_. New York, 1897. BUREAU OF LABOR, Seventh Special Report, _The Slums of Baltimore, Chicago, New York, and Philadelphia_ (1894). Ninth Special Report, _The Italians in Chicago_ (1897). BURGESS, JOHN W., _Reconstruction and the Constitution_, 1866-1876. New York, 1903. BUSHEE, FREDERICK A., "Ethnic Factors in the Population of Boston," _American Economic Association_, 3d Series, Vol. IV, pp. 305-470 (1903). CASSON, HERBERT N., _Munsey's Magazine_, "The Jews in America," 34:381; "The Sons of Old Scotland in America," 34:599; "The Germans in America," 34:694; "The Scandinavians in America," 35:613; "The Welsh in America," 35:749; "The Italians in America," 35:122; "The Dutch in America," 35:238; "The Spanish in America," 35:294. COMAN, KATHERINE, "The History of Contract Labor in the Hawaiian Islands," _American Economic Association_, 3d Series, Vol. IV, No. 3 (1903). "The Negro as Peasant Farmer," _American Statistical Association_, June, 1904, pp. 39-54. COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION, _Annual Reports_, Washington. COMMISSIONER-GENERAL OF IMMIGRATION, _Annual Reports_, Washington. COMMONS, J. R., _Proportional Representation_. New York, 1907. CUTLER, JAMES E., _Lynch Law. An Investigation into the History of Lynching in the United States_. New York, 1905. DE FOREST AND VEILLIER, _The Tenement House Problem_, 2 vols. New York, 1903. DU BOIS, W. E. B., _The Philadelphia Negro_. Philadelphia, 1899; _The Soul of Black Folk._ New York, 1903; "Negroes," Twelfth Census, _Supplementary Analysis_, pp. 185-275; "The Negro Farmer," pp. 511-579. EATON, DORMAN B., _The Civil Service in Great Britain_. New York, 1880. EMIGRATION TO THE UNITED STATES, Special Consular Reports, Vol. XXX. Department of Commerce and Labor, 1904. _Facts about Immigration._ Reports of Conferences of the Immigration Department of the National Civic Federation, Sept. 14 and Dec. 12, 1906. New York, 1907. _Federation._ Quarterly Journal of Federation of Churches and Christian Organizations, New York. Especially June, July, December, 1902, March, June, October, 1903. Also annual reports and sociological canvasses of the Federation. FISKE, JOHN, _Old Virginia and her Neighbors_, 2 vols. New York, 1897. FLEMING, WALTER L., _Civil War and Reconstruction in Alabama_. New York, 1897. FRANKLIN, F. J., _The Legislative History of Naturalization in the United States_. Chicago, 1906. GROSE, HOWARD B., _Aliens or Americans?_ Forward Mission Study Courses. New York, 1906. HALL, PRESCOTT F., _Immigration and its Effect upon the United States_. New York, 1906. HAMPTON NEGRO CONFERENCE, Annual, 1897-1901. HANNA, CHARLES A., _The Scotch-Irish_, 2 vols. New York, 1902. HAWAII, REPORTS ON, United States Bureau of Labor, 1st Report, Sen. Doc. 169, 57th Congress, 1st Sess., 13:4231; 2d Report, _Bulletin_ No. 47 (1903); 3d Report, _Bulletin_ No. 66 (1906). HOFFMAN, FREDERICK L., "Race Traits and Tendencies of the American Negro," _Publications of the American Economic Association_, Vol. XI, Nos. 1, 2, 3 (1896). HUEBNER, GROVER G., "The Americanization of the Immigrant," _American Academy of Political and Social Science_, May, 1906, p. 191. _Hull House Maps and Papers, A Presentation of Nationalities and Wages in a Congested District of Chicago_, by residents of Hull House. New York, 1895. HUNTER, ROBERT, _Poverty_. New York, 1904. Chapter VI, "The Immigrant." _Immigration Laws and Regulations and Chinese Exclusion Laws_, Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization, Washington. IMMIGRATION RESTRICTION LEAGUE, Prescott F. Hall, Secretary, Boston, Mass. Leaflets. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION, Vol. XV, _Immigration and Education_; Vol. XIX, _Miscellaneous_ (1901). JACKSON, HELEN HUNT, _A Century of Dishonor_. New York, 1881. JAPANESE AND KOREAN EXCLUSION LEAGUE, San Francisco. Leaflets. JENKS, J. W., _Certain Economic Questions in the English and Dutch Colonies in the Orient_. War Department, Bureau of Insular Affairs, 1902, Doc. No. 168. JEWISH AGRICULTURAL AND INDUSTRIAL AID SOCIETY, _Annual Reports_. New York. KELLOR, FRANCES A., _Out of Work_. New York, 1904. KELSEY, CARL, _The Negro Farmer_. Chicago, 1903. Also _Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science_, January, 1903. KING AND OKEY, _Italy To-day_. London, 1901. KUCZYNSKI, R., "The Fecundity of the Native and Foreign Born Population in Massachusetts," _Quarterly Journal of Economics_, November, 1901, February, 1902. "Die Einwanderungspolitik und die Bevölkerungsfrage der Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika," _Volkswirthschaftliche Zeitfragen_. Berlin, 1903. LAZARE, BERNARD, _Antisemitism, Its History and Causes_. New York, 1903. LIBRARY OF CONGRESS, _Select List of References on the Negro Question (1903). List of Works relating to the Germans in the United States (1904). Select List of References on Chinese Immigration (1904). Fourteenth Amendment_. List of Discussions of Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments with Special Reference to Negro Suffrage (1906). _List of References on Naturalization (1907)._ LODGE, HENRY CABOT, _Historical and Political Essays_. Boston, 1892. LORD, TRENOR, AND BARROWS, _The Italian in America_. New York, 1905. Especially Italians in American agriculture. MALLOCK, W. H., _Aristocracy and Evolution_. New York, 1898. MARSHALL, ALFRED, _Principles of Economics_. New York, 1891. MERRIAM, G. S., _The Negro and the Nation_. New York, 1906. MUIRHEAD, JAMES F., _The Land of Contrasts_. London and New York, 1900. MÜNSTERBERG, HUGO, _American Traits_. New York, 1902. NATURALIZATION, REPORT TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE COMMISSION ON. Submitted Nov. 8, 1905, 59th Cong., 1st Sess., H. R. Doc. 46. NEGRO. Series of Articles on the Reconstruction Period, _Atlantic Monthly_. "The Reconstruction of the Southern States," Woodrow Wilson, 87:1; "The Conditions of the Reconstruction Problem," Hilary A. Herbert, 87:145; "The Freedman's Bureau," W. E. B. Du Bois, 87:354; "Reconstruction in South Carolina," Daniel H. Chamberlain, 87:473; "The Ku-Klux Movement," William G. Brown, 87:634; "Washington during Reconstruction," S. W. McCall, 87:817; "Reconstruction and Disfranchisement," Editors, 88:31; "New Orleans and Reconstruction," Albert Phelps, 88:121; "The Southern People during Reconstruction," Thomas Nelson Page, 88:289; "The Undoing of Reconstruction," William A. Dunning, 88:437. United States Bureau of Labor, _Bulletin_ No. 22, "The Negro in the Black Belt"; No. 32, "The Negroes of Sandy Spring, Maryland"; No. 35, "The Negro Landholder of Georgia"; No. 37, "The Negroes of Litwalton, Virginia"; No. 38, "Negroes of Cinclare Central Factory and Calumet Plantation, Louisiana"; No. 48, "The Negroes of Xenia, Ohio." "NEGROES, SOCIAL INTERESTS OF, IN NORTHERN CITIES." _Charities_, special number, Oct. 7, 1905. RIPLEY, W. Z., _The Races of Europe_. New York, 1899. ROOSEVELT, THEODORE, _The Winning of the West_, 4 vols. New York, 1889-1894. ROSENBERG, EDWARD, "Chinese Workers in China," "Filipinos as Workmen," "Labor Conditions in Hawaii," _American Federationist_, August, October, December, 1905. ROSS, EDWARD A., "The Causes of Race Superiority," _Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science_, July, 1901, pp. 67-89. The notable address in which the term "race suicide" was coined. ROWE, LEO S., _The United States and Porto Rico_. New York, 1904. SEMPLE, ELLEN CHURCHILL, _American History and its Geographic Conditions_. New York, 1903. "The Anglo-Saxons of the Kentucky Mountains: A Study in Anthropogeography," _Geographical Journal_, 17:588 (1901). SLAV IN AMERICA, THE, _Charities_, December, 1904. Descriptive articles by representatives of the several Slav nationalities. SMITH, R. M., _Emigration and Immigration_. New York, 1890. "Assimilation of Nationalities in the United States," _Political Science Quarterly_, Vol. IX, pp. 426-444, 650-670 (1894). STEWART, ETHELBERT, "Influence of Trade Unions on Immigrants," Bureau of Labor, _Bulletin_ No. 56. STONE, A. H., "The Negro in the Yazoo-Mississippi Delta," _American Economic Association_, 3d Series, Vol. III, pp. 235-278 (1901). "The Mulatto Factor in the Race Problem," _Atlantic Monthly_, May, 1903. "A Plantation Experiment," _Quarterly Journal Economics_, 19:270 (1905). "The Italian Cotton Grower: The Negro's Problem," _South Atlantic Quarterly_, 4:45 (1905). SUFFRAGE, SUPPRESSION OF THE. Report of the Committee on Political Reform of the Union League Club. New York, 1903. THOMAS, W. H., _The American Negro_, 1901. TILLINGHAST, JOSEPH A., "The Negro in Africa and America," _American Economic Association_, 3d Series, Vol. III, No. 2 (1902). VAN VORST, MRS. JOHN AND MARIE, _The Woman who Toils_. New York, 1903. Contains introduction by President Roosevelt. WALKER, FRANCIS A., _Discussions in Economics and Statistics_, 2 vols., 1897. WARD, ROBERT DE C., "Sane Methods of Regulating Immigration," _Review of Reviews_, March, 1906. WARNE, FRANK JULIAN, _The Slav Invasion and the Mine Workers_, 1904. WASHINGTON, BOOKER T., _The Future of the American Negro_, 1900. _Up from Slavery_, 1901. WATSON, ELKANAH, _Men and Times of the Revolution_. Edited by his son, Winslow C. Watson, 2d edition. New York, 1861. WELFARE WORK, CONFERENCE ON, National Civic Federation. New York, 1904. WHELPLEY, JAMES D., _The Problem of the Immigrant_, 1905. Emigration laws of European countries and immigration laws of British Colonies and the United States. WOODS, R. A., _The City Wilderness_, 1898. _Americans in Process_, 1902. RACES AND IMMIGRANTS IN AMERICA CHAPTER I RACE AND DEMOCRACY "All men are created equal." So wrote Thomas Jefferson, and so agreed with him the delegates from the American colonies. But we must not press them too closely nor insist on the literal interpretation of their words. They were not publishing a scientific treatise on human nature nor describing the physical, intellectual, and moral qualities of different races and different individuals, but they were bent upon a practical object in politics. They desired to sustain before the world the cause of independence by such appeals as they thought would have effect; and certainly the appeal to the sense of equal rights before God and the law is the most powerful that can be addressed to the masses of any people. This is the very essence of American democracy, that one man should have just as large opportunity as any other to make the most of himself, to come forward and achieve high standing in any calling to which he is inclined. To do this the bars of privilege have one by one been thrown down, the suffrage has been extended to every man, and public office has been opened to any one who can persuade his fellow-voters or their representatives to select him. But there is another side to the successful operations of democracy. It is not enough that equal opportunity to participate in making and enforcing the laws should be vouchsafed to all--it is equally important that all should be capable of such participation. The individuals, or the classes, or the races, who through any mental or moral defect are unable to assert themselves beside other individuals, classes, or races, and to enforce their right to an equal voice in determining the laws and conditions which govern all, are just as much deprived of the privilege as though they were excluded by the constitution. In the case of individuals, when they sink below the level of joint participation, we recognize them as belonging to a defective or criminal or pauper class, and we provide for them, not on the basis of their rights, but on the basis of charity or punishment. Such classes are exceptions in point of numbers, and we do not feel that their non-participation is a flaw in the operations of democratic government. But when a social class or an entire race is unable to command that share in conducting government to which the laws entitle it, we recognize at once that democracy as a practical institution has in so far broken down, and that, under the forms of democracy, there has developed a class oligarchy or a race oligarchy. Two things, therefore, are necessary for a democratic government such as that which the American people have set before themselves: equal opportunities before the law, and equal ability of classes and races to use those opportunities. If the first is lacking, we have legal oligarchy; if the second is lacking, we have actual oligarchy disguised as democracy. Now it must be observed that, compared with the first two centuries of our nation's history, the present generation is somewhat shifting its ground regarding democracy. While it can never rightly be charged that our fathers overlooked the inequalities of races and individuals, yet more than the present generation did they regard with hopefulness the educational value of democracy. "True enough," they said, "the black man is not equal to the white man, but once free him from his legal bonds, open up the schools, the professions, the businesses, and the offices to those of his number who are most aspiring, and you will find that, as a race, he will advance favorably in comparison with his white fellow-citizens." It is now nearly forty years since these opportunities and educational advantages were given to the negro, not only on equal terms, but actually on terms of preference over the whites, and the fearful collapse of the experiment is recognized even by its partisans as something that was inevitable in the nature of the race at that stage of its development. We shall have reason in the following pages to enter more fully into this discussion, because the race question in America has found its most intense expression in the relations between the white and the negro races, and has there shown itself to be the most fundamental of all American social and political problems. For it was this race question that precipitated the Civil War, with the ominous problems that have followed upon that catastrophe; and it is this same race problem that now diverts attention from the treatment of those pressing economic problems of taxation, corporations, trusts, and labor organizations which themselves originated in the Civil War. The race problem in the South is only one extreme of the same problem in the great cities of the North, where popular government, as our forefathers conceived it, has been displaced by one-man power, and where a profound distrust of democracy is taking hold upon the educated and property-holding classes who fashion public opinion. This changing attitude toward the educational value of self-government has induced a more serious study of the nature of democratic institutions and of the classes and races which are called upon to share in them. As a people whose earlier hopes have been shocked by the hard blows of experience, we are beginning to pause and take invoice of the heterogeneous stocks of humanity that we have admitted to the management of our great political enterprise. We are trying to look beneath the surface and to inquire whether there are not factors of heredity and race more fundamental than those of education and environment. We find that our democratic theories and forms of government were fashioned by but one of the many races and peoples which have come within their practical operation, and that that race, the so-called Anglo-Saxon, developed them out of its own insular experience unhampered by inroads of alien stock. When once thus established in England and further developed in America we find that other races and peoples, accustomed to despotism and even savagery, and wholly unused to self-government, have been thrust into the delicate fabric. Like a practical people as we pride ourselves, we have begun actually to despotize our institutions in order to control these dissident elements, though still optimistically holding that we retain the original democracy. The earlier problem was mainly a political one--how to unite into one self-governing nation a scattered population with the wide diversity of natural resources, climates, and interests that mark a country soon to stretch from ocean to ocean and from the arctics to the subtropics. The problem now is a social one,--how to unite into one people a congeries of races even more diverse than the resources and climates from which they draw their subsistence. That motto, "_E pluribus unum_," which in the past has guided those who through constitutional debate and civil war worked out our form of government, must now again be the motto of those who would work out the more fundamental problem of divergent races. Here is something deeper than the form of government--it is the essence of government--for it is that union of the hearts and lives and abilities of the people which makes government what it really is. The conditions necessary for democratic government are not merely the constitutions and laws which guarantee equality, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, for these after all are but paper documents. They are not merely freedom from foreign power, for the Australian colonies enjoy the most democratic of all governments, largely because they are owned by another country which has protected them from foreign and civil wars. Neither are wealth and prosperity necessary for democracy, for these may tend to luxury, inequality, and envy. World power, however glorious and enticing, is not helpful to democracy, for it inclines to militarism and centralization, as did Rome in the hands of an emperor, or Venice in the hands of an oligarchy. The true foundations of democracy are in the character of the people themselves, that is, of the individuals who constitute the democracy. These are: first, intelligence--the power to weigh evidence and draw sound conclusions, based on adequate information; second, manliness, that which the Romans called virility, and which at bottom is dignified self-respect, self-control, and that self-assertion and jealousy of encroachment which marks those who, knowing their rights, dare maintain them; third, and equally important, the capacity for coöperation, that willingness and ability to organize, to trust their leaders, to work together for a common interest and toward a common destiny, a capacity which we variously designate as patriotism, public spirit, or self-government. These are the basic qualities which underlie democracy,--intelligence, manliness, coöperation. If they are lacking, democracy is futile. Here is the problem of races, the fundamental division of mankind. Race differences are established in the very blood and physical constitution. They are most difficult to eradicate, and they yield only to the slow processes of the centuries. Races may change their religions, their forms of government, their modes of industry, and their languages, but underneath all these changes they may continue the physical, mental, and moral capacities and incapacities which determine the real character of their religion, government, industry, and literature. Race and heredity furnish the raw material, education and environment furnish the tools, with which and by which social institutions are fashioned; and in a democracy race and heredity are the more decisive, because the very education and environment which fashion the oncoming generations are themselves controlled through universal suffrage by the races whom it is hoped to educate and elevate. =Social Classes.=--Closely connected with race division in its effect upon democracy are the divisions between social classes. In America we are wont to congratulate ourselves on the absence of classes with their accompanying hatred and envy. Whether we shall continue thus to commend ourselves depends partly on what we mean by social classes. If we compare our situation with an extreme case, that of India,[1] where social classes have been hardened into rigid castes, we can see the connection between races and classes. For it is generally held that the castes of India originated in the conquests by an Aryan race of an indigenous dark or colored race. And while the clear-cut race distinctions have been blended through many centuries of amalgamation, yet it is most apparent that a gradation in the color of the skin follows the gradation in social position, from the light-colored, high-caste Brahman to the dark-colored, low-caste Sudra, or outcast pariah. Race divisions have been forgotten, but in their place religion has sanctified a division even more rigid than that of race, for it is sacrilege and defiance of the gods when a man of low caste ventures into the occupation and calling of the high caste. India's condition now is what might be conceived for our Southern states a thousand years from now, when the black man who had not advanced to the lighter shades of mulatto should be excluded from all professions and skilled trades and from all public offices, and should be restricted to the coarsest kind of service as a day laborer or as a field hand on the agricultural plantations. Confined to this limited occupation, with no incentive to economize because of no prospect to rise above his station, and with his numbers increasing, competition would reduce his wages to the lowest limit consistent with the continuance of his kind. Such a development is plainly going on at the present day, and we may feel reasonably certain that we can see in our own South the very historical steps by which in the forgotten centuries India proceeded to her rigid system of castes. There is lacking but one essential to the Indian system; namely, a religion which ascribes to God himself the inequalities contrived by man. For the Indian derives the sacred Brahman from the mouth of God, to be His spokesman on earth, while the poor Sudra comes from the feet of God, to be forever the servant of all the castes above him. But the Christian religion has set forth a different theory, which ascribes to God entire impartiality toward races and individuals. He has "made of one blood all nations." It is out of this doctrine that the so-called "self-evident" assertion in the Declaration of Independence originated, and it is this doctrine which throughout the history of European civilization has contributed to smoothen out the harsh lines of caste into the less definite lines of social classes. For it must be remembered that Europe, like India, is built upon conquest, and the earlier populations were reduced to the condition of slaves and serfs to the conquering races. True, there was not the extreme opposition of white and colored races which distinguished the conquests of India, and this is also one of the reasons why slavery and serfdom gradually gave way and races coalesced. Nevertheless, the peasantry of Europe to-day is in large part the product of serfdom and of that race-subjection which produced serfdom. Herein we may find the source of that arrogance on the one hand and subserviency on the other, which so closely relate class divisions to race divisions. The European peasant, says Professor Shaler,[2] "knows himself to be by birthright a member of an inferior class, from which there is practically no chance of escaping.... It is characteristic of peasants that they have accepted this inferior lot. For generations they have regarded themselves as separated from their fellow-citizens of higher estate. They have no large sense of citizenly motives; they feel no sense of responsibility for any part of the public life save that which lies within their own narrow round of action." How different from the qualities of the typical American citizen whose forefathers have erected our edifice of representative democracy! It was not the peasant class of Europe that sought these shores in order to found a free government. It was the middle class, the merchants and yeomen, those who in religion and politics were literally "protestants," and who possessed the intelligence, manliness, and public spirit which urged them to assert for themselves those inalienable rights which the church or the state of their time had arrogated to itself. With such a social class democracy is the only acceptable form of government. They demand and secure equal opportunities because they are able to rise to those opportunities. By their own inherent nature they look forward to and aspire to the highest positions. But the peasants of Europe, especially of Southern and Eastern Europe, have been reduced to the qualities similar to those of an inferior race that favor despotism and oligarchy rather than democracy. Their only avenues of escape from their subordinate positions have been through the army and the church, and these two institutions have drawn from the peasants their ablest and brightest intellects into a life which deprived them of offspring. "Among the prosperous folk there have been ever many classes of occupations tempting the abler youths, while among the laborers the church has afforded the easiest way to rise, and that which is most tempting to the intelligent. The result has been, that while the priesthood and monastic orders have systematically debilitated all the populations of Catholic Europe, their influence has been most efficient in destroying talent in the peasant class."[3] Thus it is that the peasants of Catholic Europe, who constitute the bulk of our immigration of the past thirty years, have become almost a distinct race, drained of those superior qualities which are the foundation of democratic institutions. If in America our boasted freedom from the evils of social classes fails to be vindicated in the future, the reasons will be found in the immigration of races and classes incompetent to share in our democratic opportunities. Already in the case of the negro this division has hardened and seems destined to become more rigid. Therein we must admit at least one exception to our claim of immunity from social classes. Whether with our public schools, our stirring politics, our ubiquitous newspapers, our common language, and our network of transportation, the children of the European immigrant shall be able to rise to the opportunities unreached by his parents is the largest and deepest problem now pressing upon us. It behooves us as a people to enter into the practical study of this problem, for upon its outcome depends the fate of government of the people, for the people, and by the people. =Races in the United States.=--We use the term "race" in a rather loose and elastic sense; and indeed we are not culpable in so doing, for the ethnographers are not agreed upon it. Races have been classified on the basis of color, on the basis of language, on the basis of supposed origin, and in these latter days on the basis of the shape of the skull. For our purpose we need consider only those large and apparent divisions which have a direct bearing on the problem of assimilation, referring those who seek the more subtle problems to other books.[4] Mankind in general has been divided into three and again into five great racial stocks, and one of these stocks, the Aryan or Indo-Germanic, is represented among us by ten or more subdivisions which we also term races. It need not cause confusion if we use the term "race" not only to designate these grand divisions which are so far removed by nature one from another as to render successful amalgamation an open question, but also to designate those peoples or nationalities which we recognize as distinct yet related within one of the large divisions. Within the area controlled by the United States are now to be found representatives of each of the grand divisions, or primary racial groups, and it would be a fascinating study to turn from the more practical topics before us and follow the races of man in their dispersion over the globe and their final gathering together again under the republic of America. First is the Aryan, or Indo-Germanic race, which, wherever it originated, sent its Sanskrit conquerors to the South to plant themselves upon a black race related to the Africans and the Australians. Its Western branch, many thousand miles away, made the conquest and settlement of Europe. Here it sent out many smaller branches, among them the Greeks and Latins, whose situation on the Mediterranean helped in great measure to develop brilliant and conquering civilizations, and who, after twenty centuries of decay and subjection, have within the past twenty years begun again their westward movement, this time to North and South America. North of Greece the Aryans became the manifold Slavs, that most prolific of races. One branch of the Slavs has spread the power of Russia east and west, and is now crushing the alien Hebrew, Finn, Lithuanian, and German, and even its fellow-Slav, the Pole, who, to escape their oppressors, are moving to America. The Russian himself, with his vast expanse of fertile prairie and steppe, does not migrate across the water, but drives away those whom he can not or will not assimilate. From Austria-Hungary, with its medley of races, come other branches of the Slavs, the Bohemians, Moravians, Slovaks, Slovenians, Croatians, Roumanians, Poles, and Ruthenians, some of them mistakenly called Huns, but really oppressed by the true Hun, the Magyar, and by the German. To the west of the Slavs we find the Teutonic branches of the Aryans, the Germans, the Scandinavians, and, above all, the English and Scotch-Irish with their descent from the Angles, Saxons, and Franks, who have given to America our largest accessions in numbers, besides our language, our institutions, and forms of government. Then other branches of the Aryans known as Celtic, including the Irish, Scotch, and Welsh, formerly driven into the hills and islands by the Teutons, have in these latter days vied with the English and Germans in adding to our population. The French, a mixture of Teuton and Celt, a nationality noted above all others for its stationary population and dislike of migration, are nevertheless contributing to our numbers by the circuitous route of Canada, and are sending to us a class of people more different from the present-day Frenchman in his native home than the Italian or Portuguese is different from the Frenchman. In the fertile valleys of Mesopotamia and the Tigris the Semitic race had separated from its cousins, the Aryans, and one remarkable branch of this race, the Hebrews, settling on a diminutive tract of land on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean and finally driven forth as wanderers to live upon their wits, exploited by and exploiting in turn every race of Europe, have ultimately been driven forth to America by the thousands from Russia and Austria where nearly one-half of their present number is found. Another race, the Mongolian, multiplying on the plains of Asia, sent a conquering branch to the west, scattering the Slavs and Teutons and making for itself a permanent wedge in the middle of Europe, whence, under the name of Magyar, the true Hungarian, the Mongolians come to America. Going in another direction from this Asiatic home the Mongolian race has made the circuit of the globe, and the Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans meet in America their unrecognized cousins of many thousand years ago. Last of the immigrants to be mentioned, but among the earliest in point of time, is the black race from the slave coast of Africa. This was not a free and voluntary migration of a people seeking new fields to escape oppression, but a forced migration designed to relieve the white race of toil. All of the other races mentioned, the Aryan, the Semitic, the Mongolian, had in early times met one another and even perhaps had sprung from the same stock, so that when in America they come together there is presumably a renewal of former ties. But as far back as we can trace the history of races in the records of archæology or philology, we find no traces of affiliation with the black race. The separation by continents, by climate, by color, and by institutions is the most diametrical that mankind exhibits anywhere. It is even greater than that between the Aryan and the native American, improperly called the Indian, whose presence on the soil which we have seized from him has furnished us with a peculiar variation in our multiform race problem. For the Indian tribes, although within our acquired territory, have been treated as foreign nations, and their reservations have been saved to them under the forms of treaties. Only recently has there sprung up a policy of admitting them to citizenship, and therefore the Indian, superior in some respects to the negro, has not interfered with our experiment in democracy. Last in point of time we have taken into our fold the Malay race, with some seven million representatives in the Hawaiian and Philippine Islands. Like the Indian and the negro, this race never in historic times prior to the discovery of the new world came into close contact with the white races. With its addition we have completed the round of all the grand divisions of the human family, and have brought together for a common experiment in self-government the white, yellow, black, red, and brown races of the earth. =Amalgamation and Assimilation.=--Scarcely another nation in ancient or modern history can show within compact borders so varied an aggregation. It is frequently maintained that a nation composed of a mixed stock is superior in mind and body to one of single and homogeneous stock. But it must be remembered that amalgamation requires centuries. The English race is probably as good an example of a mixed race as can be found in modern history, yet this race, though a mixture of the closely related primitive Celt, the conquering Teuton, and the Latinized Scandinavian, did not reach a common language and homogeneity until three hundred years after the last admixture. We know from modern researches that all of the races of Europe are mixed in their origin, but we also know that so much of that mixture as resulted in amalgamation occurred at a time so remote that it has been ascribed to the Stone Age.[5] The later inroads have either been but temporary and have left but slight impression, or they have resulted in a division of territory. Thus the conquest of Britain by the Teutons and the Normans has not produced amalgamation so much as it has caused a segregation of the Celts in Scotland, Wales, and Ireland, and of the Teutons, with their later but slight infusion of Normans, in England. On the continent of Europe this segregation has been even more strongly marked. The present stratification of races and nationalities has followed the upheavals and inroads of a thousand years introduced by the decline and fall of the Roman Empire. Two developments have taken place. A conquering race has reduced a native population in part to subjection and has imposed upon the natives its laws, customs, and language. In course of time the subject race becomes a lower social class and slowly assimilates with the upper classes, producing a homogeneous nationality with a new evolution of laws, customs, and language. This is the history of four great nations of Europe,--the French, the German, the English, the Italian. The other development has been the segregation of a portion of the conquered race, who having fled their conquerors avoid actual subjection by escaping to the mountains and islands. Here they preserve their original purity of stock and language. This is the history of Austria-Hungary, whose earlier population of Slavs has been scattered right and left by German and Hun and who now constitute separate branches and dialects of the unassimilated races. That Austria-Hungary with its dozen languages should be able to hold together as a "dual empire" for many years is one of the marvels of history, and is frequently ascribed to that which is the essence of autocracy, the personal hold of the emperor. The little bundle of republics known as Switzerland is a federation of French, Germans, and Italians, who retain their languages and have developed what out of such a conflict of races has elsewhere never been developed, a high grade of democratic government. Here in historic times there has been no amalgamation of races or assimilation of languages, but there has been the distinct advantage of a secluded freedom from surrounding feudal lords, which naturally led to a loose federation of independent cantons. It is Switzerland's mountains and not her mixed races that have promoted her democracy. At the other end of the world the highest development of democracy is in the colonies of Australasia, where a homogeneous race, protected from foreign foes, and prohibiting the immigration of alien races and inferior classes, has worked out self-government in politics and industry. In the Roman Empire we see the opposite extreme. At first a limited republic, the extension of conquests, and the incorporation of alien races led to that centralization of power in the hands of one man which transformed the republic into the empire. The British Empire, which to-day covers all races of the earth, is growingly democratic as regards Englishmen, but despotic as regards subject races. Taking the empire as a whole, neither amalgamation nor self-government is within the possibilities of its constitutional growth. In America, on the other hand, we have attempted to unite all races in one commonwealth and one elective government. We have, indeed, a most notable advantage compared with other countries where race divisions have undermined democracy. A single language became dominant from the time of the earliest permanent settlement, and all subsequent races and languages must adopt the established medium. This is essential, for it is not physical amalgamation that unites mankind; it is mental community. To be great a nation need not be of one blood, it must be of one mind. Racial inequality and inferiority are fundamental only to the extent that they prevent mental and moral assimilation. If we think together, we can act together, and the organ of common thought and action is common language. Through the prism of this noble instrument of the human mind all other instruments focus their powers of assimilation upon the new generations as they come forth from the disunited immigrants. The public schools, the newspapers, the books, the political parties, the trade unions, the religious propagandists with their manifold agencies of universal education, the railroads with their inducements to our unparalleled mobility of population, are all dependent upon our common language for their high efficiency. Herein are we fortunate in our plans for the Americanization of all races within our borders. We are not content to let the fate of our institutions wait upon the slow and doubtful processes of blood amalgamation, but are eager to direct our energies toward the more rapid movements of mental assimilation. Race and heredity may be beyond our organized control; but the instrument of a common language is at hand for conscious improvement through education and social environment. CHAPTER II COLONIAL RACE ELEMENTS Doubtless the most fascinating topic in the study of races is that of the great men whom each race has produced. The personal interest surrounding those who have gained eminence carries us back over each step of their careers to their childhood, their parents, and their ancestry.[6] Pride of race adds its zest, and each race has its eulogists who claim every great man whose family tree reveals even a single ancestor, male or female, near or remote, of the eulogized race. Here is a "conflict of jurisdiction," and the student who is without race prejudice begins to look for causes other than race origin to which should be ascribed the emergence of greatness. Mr. Henry Cabot Lodge[7] attempted, some years ago, to assign to the different races in America the 14,243 men eminent enough to find a place in "Appleton's Encyclopedia of American Biography." He prepared a statistical summary as follows:-- EMINENT AMERICANS English 10,376 Scotch-Irish 1,439 German 659 Huguenot 589 Scotch 436 Dutch 336 Welsh 159 Irish 109 French 85 Scandinavian 31 Spanish 7 Italian 7 Swiss 5 Greek 3 Russian 1 Polish 1 ------ Total 14,243 When we inquire into the methods necessarily adopted in preparing a statistical table of this kind we discover serious limitations. Mr. Lodge was confined to the paternal line alone, but if, as some biologists assert, the female is the conservative element which holds to the type, and the male is the variable element which departs from the type, then the specific contribution of the race factor would be found in the maternal line. However, let this dubious point pass. We find that in American life two hundred years of intermingling has in many if not in most cases of greatness broken into the continuity of race. True, the New England and Virginia stock has remained during most of this time of purely English origin, but the very fact that in Mr. Lodge's tables Massachusetts has produced 2686 notables, while Virginia, of the same blood, has produced only 1038, must lead to the suspicion that factors other than race extraction are the mainspring of greatness. It must be remembered that ability is not identical with eminence. Ability is the product of ancestry and training. Eminence is an accident of social conditions. The English race was the main contributor to population during the seventeenth century, and English conquest determined the form of government, the language, and the opportunities for individual advancement. During the succeeding century the Scotch-Irish and the Germans migrated in nearly equal numbers, and their combined migration was perhaps as great as that of the English in the seventeenth century. But they were compelled to move to the interior, to become frontiersmen, to earn their living directly from the soil, and to leave to their English-sprung predecessors the more prominent occupations of politics, literature, law, commerce, and the army. The Germans, who, according to Lodge, "produced fewer men of ability than any other race in the United States," were further handicapped by their language and isolation, which continue to this day in the counties of Pennsylvania where they originally settled. On the other hand, the Huguenots and the Dutch came in the first century of colonization. They rapidly merged with the English, lost their language, and hence contributed their full share of eminence. Finally, the Irish, Scandinavian and other races, inconspicuous in the galaxy of notables, did not migrate in numbers until the middle of the nineteenth century, and, in addition to the restraints of language and poverty, they found the roads to prominence preoccupied. [Illustration: "RETURN OF THE MAYFLOWER" Painting by Boughton, 1834] Besides the accident of precedence in time, a second factor distinct from race itself has contributed to the eminence of one race over another. The Huguenots and the French, according to Lodge's statistics, show a percentage of ability in proportion to their total immigration much higher than that of any other race. But the Huguenots were a select class of people, manufacturers and merchants, perhaps the most intelligent and enterprising of Frenchmen in the seventeenth century. Furthermore the direct migration from France to this country has never included many peasants and wage-earners, but has been limited to the adventurous and educated. Had the French-Canadians who represent the peasantry of France been included in these comparisons, the proportion of French eminence would have been materially reduced. The same is true of the English. Although sprung from one race, those who came to America represented at least two grades of society as widely apart as two races. The Pilgrims and Puritans of New England were the yeomen, the merchants, the manufacturers, skilled in industry, often independent in resources, and well trained in the intellectual controversies of religion and politics. The Southern planters also sprang from a class of similar standing, though not so strongly addicted to intellectual pursuits. Beneath both these classes were the indentured servants, a few of whom were men of ability forced to pay their passage by service. But the majority of them were brought to this country through the advertisements of shipowners and landholders or even forcibly captured on the streets of cities or transported for crimes and pauperism. Though all of these classes were of the same race, they were about as widely divergent as races themselves in point of native ability and preparatory training. The third and most important cause of eminence, apart from ancestry, is the industrial and legal environment. An agricultural community produces very few eminent men compared with the number produced where manufactures and commerce vie with agriculture to attract the youth. A state of widely diversified industrial interests is likely to create widely diversified intellectual and moral interests. Complicated problems of industry and politics stimulate the mind and reflect their influence in literature, art, education, science, and the learned professions. Most of all, equal opportunity for all classes and large prizes for the ambitious and industrious serve to stimulate individuals of native ability to their highest endeavor. It was the deadening effects of slavery, creating inequalities among the whites themselves, that smothered the genius of the Southerner whether Englishman, Huguenot, or Scotch-Irish, and it was the free institutions of the North that invited their genius to unfold and blossom. These considerations lead us to look with distrust on the claims of those who find in race ancestry or in race intermixture the reasons for such eminence as Americans have attained. While the race factor is decisive when it marks off inferior and primitive races, yet, in considering those Europeans races which have joined in our civilization, the important questions are: From what social classes is immigration drawn? and, Do our social institutions offer free opportunity and high incentive to the youth of ability? In so far as we get a choice selection of immigrants, and in so far as we afford them free scope for their native gifts, so far do they render to our country the services of genius, talent, and industry. =Incentives to Immigration.=--It is the distinctive fact regarding colonial migration that it was Teutonic in blood and Protestant in religion. The English, Dutch, Swedes, Germans, and even the Scotch-Irish, who constituted practically the entire migration, were less than two thousand years ago one Germanic race in the forests surrounding the North Sea. The Protestant Reformation, sixteen centuries later, began among those peoples and found in them its sturdiest supporters. The doctrines of the Reformation, adapted as they were to the strong individualism of the Germanic races, prepared the hearts of men for the doctrines of political liberty and constitutional government of the succeeding century. The Reformation banished the idea that men must seek salvation through the intercession of priests and popes, who, however sacred, are only fellow-men, and set up the idea that each soul has direct access to God. With the Bible as a guide and his own conscience as a judge, each man was accountable only to one divine sovereign. From the standpoint of the age this doctrine was too radical. It tended to break up existing society into sects and factions, and to precipitate those civil and religious wars which ended in a Catholic or aristocratic reaction. When this reaction came, the numerous Protestant sects of the extremer types found themselves the objects of persecution, and nothing remained but to seek a new land where the heavy hand of repression could not reach them. Thus America became the home of numberless religious sects and denominations of these several races. From England came Congregationalists (the "Pilgrims"), Puritans, Quakers, Baptists; from Scotland and Ireland came Presbyterians; from Germany came Quakers, Dunkards, Pietists, Ridge Hermits, Salzburgers, and Moravians. It is not to be inferred that religious persecution alone in the early colonial period caused emigration. In point of numbers commercial enterprise was probably equally influential. In Holland all religious sects were welcomed with a liberality far in advance of any other nation, and at the same time the Dutch people were the most advanced in the modern pursuits of trade and commerce. The Dutch settlement of New Amsterdam was therefore a business enterprise, and neither before nor after the conquest by the British was there any religious obstacle to the reception of other races and religions. In this respect New York differed widely from New England, where religious exclusiveness preserved the English race as a peculiar people until the middle of the nineteenth century. So diverse were the races in New York, and so liberal were the opportunities open to all, that Governor Horatio Seymour was able to say that nine men prominent in its early history represented the same number of nationalities. Schuyler was of Dutch descent, Herkimer of German, Jay of French, Livingston of Scotch, Clinton of Irish, Morris of Welsh, Hoffman of Swedish, while Hamilton was a West India Englishman and Baron Steuben a Prussian.[8] Another colony to which all races and religions were welcomed was Pennsylvania. William Penn established this colony both as a refuge for the persecuted Quakers of England and as a real estate venture. He was the first American to advertise his dominions widely throughout Europe, offering to sell one hundred acres of land at two English pounds and a low rental. His advertisements combined humanity and business, for they called attention to popular government and universal suffrage; equal rights to all regardless of race or religious belief; trial by jury; murder and treason the only capital crimes, and reformation, not retaliation, the object of punishment for other offences. Thus Pennsylvania, although settled a half century later than the Southern and Northern colonies, soon exceeded them in population. Penn sent his agents to Germany and persuaded large numbers of German Quakers and Pietists to cast their lot in his plantation, so that in twenty years the Germans numbered nearly one-half the population. Again, in the beginning of the eighteenth century, when Louis XIV overran the Palatinate and thousands of Germans fled to England, the English government encouraged their migration to America. In one year four thousand of them, the largest single emigration of the colonial period, embarked for New York, but their treatment was so illiberal that they moved to Pennsylvania, and thenceforth the German migration sought the latter colony. These people settled at Germantown, near Philadelphia, and occupied the counties of Bucks and Montgomery, where they continue to this day with their peculiar language, the "Pennsylvania Dutch." Not only William Penn himself, but other landowners in Pennsylvania and also the shipowners advertised the country in Germany, and thousands of the poorer sort of Germans were induced to indenture themselves to the settlers to whom they were auctioned off by the ship captains in payment for transportation. Probably one-half of all the immigrants of the colonial period came under this system of postpaid transportation, just as at the present time nearly two-thirds come on prepaid tickets. It was in Pennsylvania that the largest portion of the Scotch-Irish settled, and before the time of the Revolution that colony had become the most populous and most diversified of all the colonies. It was the only colony, except Maryland, that tolerated Roman Catholics, and with all phases of the Christian religion and all branches of the Teutonic and Celtic races, Pennsylvania set the original type to which all of America has conformed, that of race intermixture on the basis of religious and political equality. =The Scotch-Irish.=--It has long been recognized that among the most virile and aggressive people who came to America in colonial times, and who have contributed a peculiar share to the American character, are the Scotch-Irish. Their descendants boast of their ancestry and cite long lists of notables as their coderivatives. Yet until recent years it has been the misfortune of the Scotch-Irish to have escaped historical investigation; for American history has been written chiefly in New England, whose colonial Puritans forbade them in their midst. In fact, from the earliest settlement, the Scotch-Irish have been pioneers and men of action. They have contributed to America few writers and artists, but many generals, politicians, and captains of industry. In literature they claim two eminent names, Irving and Poe; but in the army, navy, politics, and business they claim John Paul Jones, Perry, Andrew Jackson, Winfield Scott, Zachary Taylor, Ulysses S. Grant, Stonewall Jackson, George B. McClellan, Alexander Hamilton, John C. Calhoun, James G. Blaine, Jefferson Davis, Thomas Benton, Hendricks, John G. Carlisle, Mark Hanna, William McKinley, Matthew S. Quay, Andrew Carnegie, John D. Rockefeller, Horace Greeley, Henry Watterson, and hundreds alike famous in the more strenuous movements of American life. A paradoxical fact regarding the Scotch-Irish is that they are very little Scotch and much less Irish. That is to say, they do not belong mainly to the so-called Celtic race, but they are the most composite of all the people of the British Isles. They are called Scots because they lived in Scotia, and they are called Irish because they moved to Ireland. Geography and not ethnology has given them their name. They are a mixed race through whose veins run the Celtic blood of the primitive Scot and Pict, the primitive Briton, the primitive Irish, but with a larger admixture of the later Norwegian, Dane, Saxon, and Angle. How this amalgamation came about we may learn from the geography of Scotland. The Highlands of Scotland begin at the Grampian Hills and the Lowlands extend south from this line to the British border, and include the cities of Glasgow and Edinburgh. The Scotch-Irish came from that southwestern part of the Lowlands which bulges out toward Ireland north of the Solway Firth. Over these Lowland counties, bounded by water and hills on three sides, successive waves of conquest and migration followed. First the primitive Caledonian or Pict was driven to the Highlands, which to this day is the Celtic portion of Scotland. The Briton from the south, pressed on by Roman and then by Teuton, occupied the country. Then Irish tribes crossed over and gained a permanent hold. Then the Norwegian sailors came around from the north, and to this day there are pure Scandinavian types on the adjacent islands. Then the Saxons and Angles, driven by the Danes and Normans, gained a foothold from the east, and lastly the Danes themselves added their contingent. Here in this Lowland pocket of territory, no larger than a good-sized American county, was compounded for five hundred years this remarkable amalgam of races. A thousand years later, after they had become a united people and had shown their metal in the trying times of the Reformation, they furnished the emigrants who displaced the Irish in the north of Ireland. James I, whom Scotland gave to England, determined to transform Catholic Ireland into Protestant England, and thereupon confiscated the lands of the native chiefs in Ulster and bestowed them upon Scottish and English lords on condition that they settle the territory with tenants from Scotland and England. This was the "great settlement" of 1610, and from that time to the present Ulster has been the Protestant stronghold of Ireland. In 1901 the population of Ulster was 44 per cent Catholic, 23 per cent Episcopalian, and 27 per cent Presbyterian, an ecclesiastical division corresponding almost exactly to the racial division of Irish, English, and Scotch. During the whole of the seventeenth century--the first century of this occupation--the Catholics and Episcopalians were in a much smaller proportion than these figures show for the present time, and the relative increase in Irish and Episcopalians during the eighteenth century was closely connected with the migration of the Scotch to America. For one hundred years the Scotch multiplied in Ulster and had no dealings with the remnants of the Irish, whom they crowded into the barren hills and whom they treated like savages. They retained their purity of race, and although when they came to America they called themselves Irish and were known as Irish wherever they settled, yet they had no Irish blood except that which entered into their composition through the Irish migration to Scotia fifteen hundred years before. Yet, though they despised the Irish, they could not escape the unhappy fate of Ireland. The first blow came in 1698, nearly one hundred years after their settlement. English manufacturers complained of Irish competition, and the Irish Parliament, a tool of the British crown, passed an act totally forbidding the exportation of Irish woollens, and another act forbidding the exportation of Irish wool to any country save England. Their slowly growing linen industry was likewise discriminated against in later years. Presbyterian Ulster had been the industrial centre of Ireland, and these acts nearly destroyed her industry. Next Queen Anne's Parliament adopted penal laws directed against Roman Catholics and Presbyterians, and the Test Act, which compelled public officials to take the communion of the Established Church, deprived the entire Scotch population of self-government. Nevertheless they were compelled to pay tithes to support the Established Church to which they were opposed. Lastly, the hundred-year leases of the tenants began to run out, and the landlords offered renewals to the highest bidders on short leases. Here the poverty-stricken Irish gained an unhappy revenge on the Scotch who had displaced them of their ancestral lands, for their low standard of living enabled them to offer rack-rents far above what the Scotch could afford. No longer did religion, race pride, or gratitude have a part in holding Ulster to Protestant supremacy. The greed of absentee landlords began to have full sway, and in the resulting struggle for livelihood, hopeless poverty was fitter to survive than ambitious thrift. The Scotch tenants, their hearts bitter against England and aristocracy, now sought a country where they might have free land and self-government. In 1718 it is stated that 4200 of them left for America. After the famine of 1740 there were 12,000 who left annually. Altogether, in the half century just preceding the American Revolution, 200,000[9] persons, or one-third of the Protestant population of Ulster, are said to have emigrated, and the majority came to America. This was by far the largest contribution of any race to the population of America during the eighteenth century, and the injustice they suffered at the hands of England made them among the most determined and effective recruits to the armies that won our independence. Before the Scotch-Irish moved to America the Atlantic coast line had been well occupied. Consequently, in order to obtain land for themselves, they were forced to go to the interior and to become frontiersmen. They found in Massachusetts a state church to which they must conform in order to be admitted to citizenship. But what they had left Ireland to escape they would not consent in a new country to do. The Puritans were willing that they should occupy the frontier as a buffer against the Indians, and so they took up lands in New Hampshire, Vermont, Western Massachusetts, and Maine. Only a few congregations, however, settled in New England--the bulk of the immigrants entered by way of Philadelphia and Baltimore and went to the interior of Pennsylvania surrounding and south of Harrisburg. They spread through the Shenandoah valley and in the foothill regions of Virginia and North and South Carolina. Gradually, they pushed farther west, across the mountains into Western Pennsylvania about Pittsburg, and into Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee. In all of these regions they fought the Indians, protected the older inhabitants from inroads, and developed those pioneer qualities which for one hundred years have characterized the "winning of the West." [Illustration: ANGLO-SAXON MOUNTAINEERS, BEREA COLLEGE, KENTUCKY] The Scotch-Irish occupied a peculiar place in the new world. More than any other race they served as the amalgam to produce, out of divergent races, a new race, the American. The Puritans of New England, the Quakers of Pennsylvania, the Cavaliers of Virginia, were as radically different as peoples of different races, and they were separated from each other in their own exclusive communities. The Germans were localized in Pennsylvania and Maryland, the Dutch in New York, but the Scotch-Irish "alone of the various races in America were present in sufficient numbers in all of the colonies to make their influence count; and they alone of all the races had one uniform religion; had experienced together the persecutions by state and church which had deprived them at home of their civil and religious liberties; and were the common heirs to those principles of freedom and democracy which had been developed in Scotland as nowhere else. At the time of the American Revolution there were ... in all above five hundred settlements scattered over practically all the American colonies."[10] Trained as they were in the representative democracy of the Scottish kirk, thrown on their own resources in the wilderness, mingling with the pioneers of many other races, they took the lead in developing that Western type which in politics and industry became ultimately the American type; yet they retained their original character, and the American to-day is more at home in Glasgow than in London. CHAPTER III THE NEGRO Although the negro races of Africa extend across the continent and from the Sudan to Cape Colony, yet the races which yielded the largest supply of slaves for America were confined to a narrow stretch of the Atlantic coast near the equator. For nearly two thousand miles from Cape Verde the coast of Africa runs southeast and easterly, and then for another thousand miles it runs to the south, forming the Gulf of Guinea, and from a belt of land along this coast practically all the negro immigrants to America have come. Here several large rivers, the Senegal, the Gambia, the Niger, and the Congo--furnished harbors for slave ships and routes for slave traders from the interior. Two circumstances, the climate and the luxuriant vegetation, render this region hostile to continuous exertion. The torrid heat and the excessive humidity weaken the will and exterminate those who are too strenuous; but this same heat and humidity, with the fertile soil, produce unparalleled crops of bananas, yams, and grains. Thus nature conspires to produce a race indolent, improvident, and contented. Seventy-five per cent of the deaths are said to be executions for supposed witchcraft, which has killed more men and women than the slave trade. Formerly cannibalism prevailed, but it has now been largely stamped out by European governments. The native governments are tribal, and the chiefs sustain themselves by their physical prowess and the help of priests and medicine men. Property is mainly in women and slaves, and inheritance is through the female, except among the nobility of Dahomey, where primogeniture rules. Written laws and records are unknown. The people are unstable, indifferent to suffering, and "easily aroused to ferocity by the sight of blood or under great fear." They exhibit aversion to silence and solitude, love of rhythm, excitability, and lack of reserve. All travellers speak of their impulsiveness, strong sexual passion, and lack of will power.[11] Such, in brief, were the land and the people that furnished one-sixth of our total population and two-fifths of our Southern population. In shifting such a people from the torrid climate of equatorial Africa to the temperate regions of America, and from an environment of savagery to one of civilization, changes more momentous than those of any other migration have occurred. First, it was only the strongest physical specimens who survived the horrible tests of the slave catcher and the slave ship. Slavery, too, as a system, could use to best advantage those who were docile and hardy, and not those who were independent and feeble. Just as in the many thousand years of man's domestication of animals, the breechy cow and the balky horse have been almost eliminated by artificial selection, so slavery tended to transform the savage by eliminating those who were self-willed, ambitious, and possessed of individual initiative. Other races of immigrants, by contact with our institutions, have been civilized--the negro has been only domesticated. Democratic civilization offers an outlet for those who are morally and intellectually vigorous enough to break away from the stolid mass of their fellows; domestication dreads and suppresses them as dangerous rebels. The very qualities of intelligence and manliness which are essential for citizenship in a democracy were systematically expunged from the negro race through two hundred years of slavery. And then, by the cataclysm of a war in which it took no part, this race, after many thousand years of savagery and two centuries of slavery, was suddenly let loose into the liberty of citizenship and the electoral suffrage. The world never before had seen such a triumph of dogmatism and partizanship. It was dogmatism, because a theory of abstract equality and inalienable rights of man took the place of education and the slow evolution of moral character. It was partisanship, because a political party, taking advantage of its triumph in civil war, sought to perpetuate itself through the votes of its helpless beneficiaries. No wonder that this fateful alliance of doctrinaires and partizans brought fateful results, and that, after a generation of anarchy and race hatred, the more fundamental task of education has only just begun. True, there was a secondary object in view in granting the freedmen suffrage. The thirteenth amendment, adopted in 1865, legalized and extended the proclamation of emancipation, which had been a war measure. But this was followed by servile and penal laws in all the Southern states that looked like peonage in place of slavery.[12] Congress then submitted the fourteenth amendment, which was adopted in 1867, creating a new grade of citizenship--citizenship of the nation--and prohibiting any state from depriving "any person of life, liberty, or property without the due process of law" and from denying to any person "the equal protection of the laws." But this was not enough. The next step was the fifteenth amendment adopted in 1869, prohibiting any state from denying the suffrage to citizens of the United States "on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude." Thus equality before the law was to be protected by equality in making the law. This object was a worthy one, and it added the appearance of logical necessity to the theories of doctrinaires and the schemes of partisans. But it failed because based on a wrong theory of the ballot. Suffrage means self-government. Self-government means intelligence, self-control, and capacity for coöperation. If these are lacking, the ballot only makes way for the "boss," the corruptionist, or the oligarchy. The suffrage must be earned, not merely conferred, if it is to be an instrument of self-protection. But it is the peculiar fate of race problems that they carry contestants to bitter extremes and afford no field for constructive compromise. Could the nation have adopted Lincoln's project of a hundred years, or even thirty years, of gradual emancipation, it might have avoided both the evils of war and the fallacies of self-government. But the spirit of race aggrandisement that precipitated the one rendered the other inevitable. With the negro suddenly made free by conquest, each fatal step in reconstruction was forced by the one that preceded. The North, the South, and the negro were placed in an impossible situation, and a nation which dreaded negro suffrage in 1868[13] adopted it in 1869. For eight years the government of the Southern states was in the hands of the negroes. The result of turning the states over to ignorant and untried voters was an enormous increase of debt without corresponding public improvements or public enterprises. Even the negro governments themselves began to repudiate these debts and they were almost wholly repudiated by the whites after returning to power. It is not necessary to dwell upon the methods by which the white voters regained and kept control of the states. Admittedly it was through intimidation, murder, ballot-box "stuffing," and false counting. The negro vote has almost disappeared, and in more recent years that which was accomplished through violence is perpetuated through law. Mississippi, Louisiana, South Carolina, North Carolina, Alabama, and Virginia have adopted so-called "educational" tests with such adroit exceptions that white illiterates may vote, but negroes, whether literate or illiterate, may be excluded from voting. As stated by a prominent white Virginian, "the negro can vote if he has $300, or if he is a veteran of the Federal or Confederate armies, or if he is a profound constitutional lawyer." The fifteenth amendment, by decisions of the United States Supreme Court, has been rendered inoperative, and the fourteenth amendment, without helping the negro, for whom it was designed,[14] has raised up government by private corporations which never had been thought of as needing an amendment. With these decisions it may be taken for granted that the negro will not again in the near future enjoy the privilege of a free ballot. This is a situation in which the North is as deeply interested as the South. The South, during the period of slavery, through the privilege of counting three-fifths of the slaves, enjoyed a predominance in Congress and in presidential elections beyond its proportion of white voters. The South now enjoys a greater privilege because it counts all the negroes. The fourteenth amendment expressly provides for a situation like this. It says:-- "When the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for president and vice-president of the United States, representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion or other crime, the basis of representation shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state." Whether it will be possible under our form of government to carry out this provision of the fourteenth amendment may be doubted, but that it is fast becoming a question of live interest is certain. The educational test is a rational test, but it is rational only when the state makes an honest and diligent effort to equip every man to pass the test. The former slave states spend $2.21 per child for educating the negroes, and $4.92 per child for educating the whites.[15] The great lesson already learned is that we must "begin over again" the preparation of the negro for citizenship. This time the work will begin at the bottom by educating the negro for the ballot, instead of beginning at the top by giving him the ballot before he knows what it should do for him. What shall be the nature of this education? =Education and Self-help.=--We have argued that democracy must be based upon intelligence, manliness, and coöperation. How can these qualities be produced in a race just emerged from slavery? Intelligence is more than books and letters--it is knowledge of the forces of nature and ingenuity enough to use them for human service. The negro is generally acknowledged to be lacking in "the mechanical idea." In Africa he hardly knows the simplest mechanical principles. In America the brightest of the negroes were trained during slavery by their masters in the handicrafts, such as carpentry, shoemaking, spinning, weaving, blacksmithing, tailoring, and so on. A plantation became a self-supporting unit under the oversight and discipline of the whites. But the work of the negro artisans was careless and inefficient. The negro blacksmith fastened shoes to the plantation mule, but the horses were taken to the white blacksmith in town. Since emancipation the young generation has not learned the mechanical trades to the same extent as the slave generations. Moreover, as machinery supplants tools and factories supplant handicrafts, the negro is left still farther behind. "White men," says a negro speaker,[16] "are bringing science and art into menial occupations and lifting them beyond our reach. In my boyhood the walls and ceilings were whitewashed each spring by colored men; now this is done by a white man managing a steam carpet-cleaning works. Then the laundry work was done by negroes; now they are with difficulty able to manage the new labor-saving machinery." Even in the non-mechanical occupations the negro is losing where he once had a monopoly. In Chicago "there is now scarcely a negro barber in the business district. Nearly all the janitor work in the large buildings has been taken away from them by the Swedes. White men and women as waiters have supplanted colored men in nearly all the first-class hotels and restaurants. Practically all of the shoe polishing is now done by Greeks."[17] Individual negroes have made great progress, but what we need to know is whether the masses of the negroes have advanced. The investigators of Atlanta University, in summarizing the reports of three hundred and forty-four employers of negroes, conclude: "There are a large number of negro mechanics all over the land, but especially in the South. Some of these are progressive, efficient workmen. More are careless, slovenly, and ill-trained. There are signs of lethargy among these artisans, and work is slipping from them in some places; in others they are awakening and seizing the opportunities of the new industrial South."[18] The prejudice of white workmen has undoubtedly played a part in excluding the negro from mechanical trades, but the testimony of large employers, who have no race prejudice where profits can be made, also shows that low-priced negro labor often costs more than high-priced white labor. The iron and steel mills of Alabama have no advantage in labor cost over mills of Pennsylvania and Ohio. The foundation of intelligence for the modern workingman is his understanding of mechanics. Not until he learns through manual and technical training to handle the forces of nature can the workingman rise to positions of responsibility and independence. This is as important in agricultural labor, to which the negro is largely restricted, as in manufactures. Intelligence in mechanics leads to intelligence in economics and politics, and the higher wages of mechanical intelligence furnish the resources by which the workman can demand and secure his political and economic rights. The second requisite of democracy is independence and manliness. These are moral qualities based on will power and steadfastness in pursuit of a worthy object. But these qualities are not produced merely by exhortation and religious revivals. They have a more prosaic and secular foundation. History shows that no class or nation has risen to independence without first accumulating property. However much we disparage the qualities of greed and selfishness which the rush for wealth has made obnoxious, we must acknowledge that the solid basis of the virtues is thrift. The improvidence of the negro is notorious. His neglect of his horse, his mule, his machinery, his eagerness to spend his earnings on finery, his reckless purchase of watermelons, chickens, and garden stuff, when he might easily grow them on his own patch of ground,--these and many other incidents of improvidence explain the constant dependence of the negro upon his employer and his creditor. There are, of course, notable exceptions where negroes have accumulated property through diligent attention and careful oversight.[19] These are all the more notable when it is remembered that the education of the negro has directed his energies to the honors of the learned professions rather than to the commonplace virtues of ownership, and that one great practical experiment in thrift--the Freedman's Bank--went down through dishonesty and incapacity. With the more recent development of the remarkable institutions of Hampton and Tuskegee and their emphasis on manual training and property accumulation, it is to be expected that these basic qualities of intelligence and independence will receive practical and direct encouragement. Coöperation is the third and capital equipment for attaining the rights of citizenship. There are two forms of coöperation--a lower and a higher. The lower is that of the chief or the boss who marshals his ignorant followers through fear or spoils. The higher is that of self-government where those who join together do so through their own intelligence and mutual confidence. In the lower form there are personal jealousies and factional contests which prevent united action under elected leaders. Negro bosses and foremen are more despotic than white bosses. The Colored Farmers' Alliance depended upon a white man for leadership. The white "carpet-baggers" organized the negro vote in the reconstruction period. The negro was in this low stage of coöperation because he was jealous or distrustful of his fellow-negro and could rally together only under the banner of a leader whom he could not depose. With the growth of intelligence and moral character there comes a deepening sense of the need of organization as well as leaders of their own race whom they can trust. The most hopeful indication of progress for the negroes is the large number of voluntary religious, beneficial, and insurance societies whose membership is limited to those of their own color.[20] Liberty has always come through organization. The free cities of Europe were simply the guilds of peasants and merchants who organized to protect themselves against the feudal lords and bishops. Latterly they gained a voice in parliaments as the "third estate" and established our modern representative democracy. The modern trade unions have become a power far in excess of their numbers through the capacity of the workman to organize. With the modest beginnings of self-organization among negroes the way is opening for their more effective participation in the higher opportunities of our civilization. [Illustration: COUNTIES HAVING A LARGER PROPORTION OF NEGROES IN 1900 THAN IN 1880] The negro trade unionist has not as yet shown the organizing capacity of other races. Only among the mine workers, the longshoremen, and bricklayers are they to be found in considerable numbers, although the carpenters have negro organizers. But in most of these cases the negro is being organized by the white man not so much for his own protection as for the protection of the white workman. If the negro is brought to the position of refusing to work for lower wages than the white man he has taken the most difficult step in organization; for the labor union requires, more than any other economic or business association in modern life, reliance upon the steadfastness of one's fellows. Unfortunately, when the negro demands the same wages as white men, his industrial inferiority leads the employer to take white men in his place, and here again we see how fundamental is manual and technical intelligence as a basis for other progress.[21] It must not be inferred because we have emphasized these qualities of intelligence--manliness and coöperation as preparatory to political rights--that the negro race should be deprived of the suffrage until such time as its members acquire these qualities. Many individuals have already acquired them. To exclude such individuals from the suffrage is to shut the door of hope to all. An honest educational test honestly enforced on both whites and blacks is the simplest rough-and-ready method for measuring the progress of individuals in these qualities of citizenship. There is no problem before the American people more vital to democratic institutions than that of keeping the suffrage open to the negro and at the same time preparing the negro to profit by the suffrage. Neither should the negro be excluded from the higher education. Leadership is just as necessary in a democracy as in a tribe. Self-government is not suppression of leaders but coöperation with them. The true leader is one who knows his followers because he has suffered with them, but who can point the way out and inspire them with confidence. He feels what they feel, but can state what they cannot express. He is their spokesman, defender, and organizer. Not a social class nor a struggling race can reach equality with other classes and races until its leaders can meet theirs on equal terms. It cannot depend on others, but must raise up leaders from its own ranks. This is the problem of higher education--not that scholastic education that ends in itself, but that broad education that equips for higher usefulness. If those individuals who are competent to become lawyers, physicians, teachers, preachers, organizers, guides, innovators, experimenters, are prevented from getting the right education, then there is little hope for progress among the race as a whole, in the intelligence, manliness, and coöperation needed for self-government. =Growth of Negro Population.=--After the census of 1880 it was confidently asserted that the negro population was increasing more rapidly than the white population. But these assertions, since the census of 1890, have disappeared. It then became apparent that the supposed increase from 1870 to 1880 was based on a defective count in 1870, the first census after emancipation. In reality the negro element, including mulattoes, during the one hundred and ten years of census taking, has steadily declined in proportion to the white element. Although negroes in absolute numbers have increased from 757,000 in 1790 to 4,442,000 in 1860, and 8,834,000 in 1900, yet in 1790 they were one-fifth of the total population; in 1860 they were one-seventh and in 1900 only one-ninth. It is naturally suggested that this relative decrease in negro population has been owing to the large immigration of whites, but the inference is unwarranted. In the Southern states the foreign element has increased less rapidly than the native white element, yet it is in the Southern states that the negro is most clearly falling behind. In the twenty years from 1880 to 1900 the whites in eighteen Southern states without the aid of foreign immigration increased 57 per cent and the negroes only 33 per cent.[22] In only six Southern states, West Virginia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Arkansas, have the negroes, during the past ten years, increased more rapidly than the whites, and in only three of these states, Alabama, Mississippi, and Arkansas, was the relative increase significant. In but two states, South Carolina and Mississippi, does the negro element predominate, and in another state, Louisiana, a majority were negroes in 1890, but a majority were whites in 1900. "At the beginning of the nineteenth century the Southern negroes were increasing much faster than the Southern whites. At the end of it they were increasing only about three-fifths as fast."[23] This redistribution of negroes is an interesting and significant fact regarding the race and has a bearing on its future. Two movements are taking place, first to the fertile bottom lands of the Southern states, second to the cities, both North and South. Mr. Carl Kelsey has shown this movement to the lowlands in an interesting way.[24] He has prepared a geological map of Alabama, which with Mississippi has received the largest accession of negroes, and has shown the density of negro population according to the character of the soil. In this map it appears that the prairie and valley regions contain a proportion of 50 per cent to 90 per cent negroes, while the sand hill and pine levels contain only 10 per cent to 50 per cent, and the piedmont or foothill region less than 10 per cent. A similar segregation is found in other Southern states, especially the alluvial districts of Mississippi and Arkansas. In these fertile sections toward which the negroes gravitate, the crops are enormous, and Mr. Kelsey points out a curious misconception in the census summary, wherein the inference is drawn that negroes are better farmers than whites because they raise larger crops. "No wonder the negroes' crops are larger," when the whites farm the hill country and the negroes till the delta, which "will raise twice as much cotton per acre as the hills." Furthermore the negro, whether tenant or owner, is under the close supervision of a white landlord or creditor, who in self-protection keeps control of him, whereas the white farmer is left to succeed or fail without expert guidance. The migration of negroes to the cities is extremely significant. In ten Southern states the proportion of the colored population was almost exactly the same in 1890 as it had been in 1860,--namely, 36 per cent,--yet in sixteen cities of those states, as shown by Mr. Hoffman,[25] the colored proportion increased from 19 per cent in 1860 to 29 per cent in 1890. This relative increase, however, did not continue after 1890, for, according to the census of 1900, the proportion of negroes in those cities was still 29 per cent. During the past decade the negroes have increased relatively faster in Northern cities. The white population of Chicago increased threefold from 1880 to 1900, and the colored population fivefold. The white population of Philadelphia during the same period increased 50 per cent and the colored population 100 per cent. In the thirty-eight largest cities of the country the negro population in ten years increased 38 per cent and the white population, including foreign immigration, increased 33 per cent. In thirty Northern and border cities during the past census decade the negroes gained 167,000, and in twenty Southern cities they gained 80,000.[26] The Southern whites also are moving from the South, and in larger proportions than the negroes, though the movement of both is small. In 1900, 7 per cent of the whites of Southern birth lived in the North and West and only 4.3 per cent of the negroes of Southern birth. But the negroes who go North go to the cities, and the whites to the country. Three-fifths (58 per cent) of these northbound negroes moved to the larger cities and only one-fourth (26 per cent) of the northbound whites.[27] The accompanying map, derived from the census of 1900,[28] shows clearly both of these movements of negro population. The shaded areas indicate the counties where negroes formed a larger proportion of the population in 1900 than they did twenty years earlier, in 1880. Here can be seen the movement to the low and fertile lands of the South and the cities of the North and South. There are but two areas in California and Colorado, not included on the map, where the population of negroes has increased, and one of these contains the city of Los Angeles. Were the negroes in the cities to scatter through all the sections, the predominating numbers of the white element might have an elevating influence, but, instead, the negroes congregate in the poorer wards, where both poverty and vice prevail. Hoffman has shown that two-thirds of the negroes in Chicago live in three wards, which contain all the houses of ill-fame in that part of the city. The same is true of Philadelphia, Boston, and Cincinnati.[29] In these sections negro prostitution has become an established institution, catering to the Italian and other lower grades of immigrants, and supporting in idleness many negro men as solicitors. We have seen that the negro population has not kept pace with the native white population. The reason is found in the smaller excess of births over deaths. Statistics of births are almost entirely lacking in the United States. Statistics of deaths are complete for only portions of Northern states and a few Southern cities, containing, in 1900, in all, 27,500,000 whites and 1,180,000 negroes. Of this number, 20,500,000 whites and 1,100,000 negroes lived in cities, so that the showing which the census is able to give is mainly for cities North and South and for rural sections only in the North.[30] It appears that for every 1000 colored persons living in these cities the deaths in 1900 were 31.1, while for every 1000 white persons the deaths were only 17.9. That is to say, the colored death-rate was 73 per cent greater than the white death-rate. In the rural districts there was much less difference. The colored death-rate was 19.1 and the white death-rate 15.3, a colored excess of 25 per cent. =Morals and Environment.=--In explaining the excessive colored mortality there are two classes of opinions. One explains it by social conditions, the other by race traits. The one points to environment, the other to moral character. The one is socialistic, the other individualistic. These different views exist among colored people themselves, and one of the encouraging signs is the scientific and candid interest in the subject taken by them under the leadership of Atlanta University. A colored physician who takes the first view states his case forcibly:[31]-- "Is it any wonder that we die faster than our white brother when he gets the first and best attention, while we are neglected on all sides? They have the best wards and treatment at the hospital, while we must take it second hand or not at all; they have all the homes for the poor and friendless, we have none; they have a home for fallen women, we have none; they have the public libraries where they can get and read books on hygiene and other subjects pertaining to health, we have no such privileges; they have the gymnasiums where they can go and develop themselves physically, we have not; they have all the parks where they and their children can go in the hot summer days and breathe the pure, cool air, but for fear we might catch a breath of that air and live, they put up large signs, which read thus, 'For white people only'; they live in the best homes, while we live in humble ones; they live in the cleanest and healthiest parts of the city, while we live in the sickliest and filthiest parts of the city; the streets on which they live are cleaned once and twice a day, the streets on which we live are not cleaned once a month, and some not at all; besides, they have plenty of money with which they can get any physician they wish, any medicine they need, and travel for their health when necessary; all of these blessings we are deprived of. Now, my friends, in the face of all these disadvantages, do you not think we are doing well to stay here as long as we do?" Another colored writer, less eloquent, but not less accurate, in summarizing the statistics collected under the guidance of Atlanta University concludes:[32]-- "Overcrowding in tenements and houses occupied by colored people does not exist to any great extent, and is less than was supposed. "In comparison with white women, an excess of colored women support their families, or contribute to the family support, by occupation which takes them much of their time from home, to the neglect of their children. "Environment and the sanitary condition of houses are not chiefly responsible for the excessive mortality among colored people. "Ignorance and disregard of the laws of health are responsible for a large proportion of this excessive mortality." It is pointed out by these colored students and by many others that the excessive mortality of colored people is owing to pulmonary consumption, scrofula, and syphilis, all of which are constitutional; and to infant mortality due also to constitutional and congenital disease. The census of 1900 reports for a portion of the Northern states that for every 1000 white children under five years of age there were 49.7 deaths in one year, and for every 1000 colored children under five years there were 118.5 deaths, an excess of negro infant mortality of 137 per cent.[33] The census also reports that negro deaths in cities owing to consumption are proportionately 2.8 times as many as white deaths,[34] deaths owing to pneumonia are 89 per cent greater,[35] while deaths owing to contagious causes, such as measles, scarlet fever, diphtheria,[36] are but slightly greater or actually less than the white deaths in proportion to population. In the city of Charleston, where mortality statistics of negroes were compiled before the war, it has been shown that from 1822 to 1848 the colored death-rate from consumption was a trifle less than the white, but since 1865 the white mortality from that cause has decreased 38 per cent, while the negro mortality has increased 70 per cent.[37] The death-rates from consumption in Charleston in 1900 were 189.8 for 100,000 whites and 647.7 for 100,000 negroes, an excess of 241 per cent. The lowest negro death-rate reported from consumption in cities is 378.5 for Memphis, but in that city the white death-rate from the same cause is 169.9, a negro excess of 123 per cent.[38] At a conference held at Atlanta University, Professor Harris, of Fisk University, concluded:[39]-- "I have now covered the ground to which our excessive death-rate is mainly due; namely, pulmonary diseases, especially consumption and pneumonia, scrofula, venereal diseases, and infant mortality. If we eliminate these diseases, our excessive death-rate will be a thing of the past.... While I do not depreciate sanitary regulations and a knowledge of hygienic laws, I am convinced that a _sine qua non_ of a change for the better in the negro's physical condition is a higher social morality.... From the health reports of all our large Southern cities we learn that a considerable amount of our infant mortality is due to inanition, infantile debility, and infantile marasmus. Now what is the case in regard to these diseases? The fact is that they are not diseases at all, but merely the names of symptoms due to enfeebled constitutions and congenital diseases, inherited from parents suffering from the effects of sexual immorality and debauchery.... It is true that much of the moral laxity which exists among us to-day arose out of slavery.... But to explain it is not to excuse it. It is no longer our misfortune as it was before the war; it is our sin, the wages of which is our excessive number of deaths.... The presence of tubercular and scrofulous diseases, consumption, syphilis, and leprosy, has caused the weaker nations of the earth to succumb before the rising tide of Christian civilization.... The history of nations teaches us that neither war, nor famine, nor pestilence, exterminates them so completely as do sexual vices." CHAPTER IV NINETEENTH CENTURY ADDITIONS It is only since the year 1820 that the government of the United States has kept a record of alien passengers arriving in this country. For several years following 1820 the immigration was so slight as to be almost negligible. It was not until 1820 that there were more than 20,000 arrivals. So accustomed have we become to large figures of immigration that nothing less than 100,000 seems worth noting, and this figure was not reached until 1842. Since then there have been only four years of less than 100,000, and two of these were years of the Civil War. A striking fact which first attracts the attention of one who examines the statistics since 1840 is the close sympathy between immigration and the industrial prosperity and depression of this country. Indeed, so close is the connection that many who comment on the matter have held that immigration during the past century has been strictly an industrial or economic phenomenon, depending on the opportunities in this country, and that the religious and political causes which stimulated earlier immigration no longer hold good. A curved line on the accompanying chart has been drawn so as to show the relative numbers of immigrants since 1800, and another line shows the movement of imports of merchandise per capita of the population. The latter, except for tariff changes, is a fair index of the cycles of prosperity and depression. By following these two lines on the chart we notice the coincidence is close, except for a few years prior to the Civil War. Both movements reached high points in 1873, and fell to very low points in 1879; then rose in 1882 and fell in 1885; then reached another high point in 1892 and a low point in 1897; and finally, the present period of prosperity and heavy imports brings the largest immigration in the history of the country. In following the history of immigration by races we shall see to what extent the alleged coincidence between prosperity and immigration may be counted as a social law. Probably in the middle of the century it was not so much the opportunities for employment in this country as it was conditions in Europe that drove people to our shores. When we come to inquire as to the nationalities which constituted immigration at that period, we shall find what these causes were. In 1846 occurred the unparalleled potato rot in Ireland, when the year's crop of what had become the sole food staple of the peasantry of that island was entirely lost. The peasants had been reduced to subsistence on the cheapest of all staples through the operations of a system of landlordism scarcely ever paralleled on a large scale as a means of exploiting tenants. It was found that land used for potatoes would support three times the number of people as the same land sown to wheat, and the small tenants or the cotter peasants paid the landlord a higher rent than could be obtained from larger cultivators. Reduced to a diet of potatoes by an economic system imposed by an alien race, the Irish people are one of the many examples which we find throughout our studies of a subject people driven to emigration by the economic injustices of a dominant race. We shall find the same at a later time in Austria-Hungary, whence the conquered Slav peoples are fleeing from the discrimination and impositions of the ruling Magyar. We shall find it in Russia, whence the Jew, the Finn, and the German are escaping from the oppression of the Slav; and we shall find it in Turkey, whence the Armenian and the Syrian flee from the exactions of the Turk. Just so was it in Ireland in the latter half of the decade, 1840 to 1850, and the contention of the apologist for England that the famine which drove the Irish across the seas was an act of God, is but a weak effort to charge to a higher power the sufferings of a heartless system devised to convert the utmost life and energy of a subject race into gold for their exploiters. Much more nearly true of the part played by the Divine hand in this catastrophe is the report of the Society of Friends in Ireland, saying that the mysterious dispensation with which their country had been visited was "a means permitted by an All-wise Providence to exhibit more strikingly the unsound state of its social condition." [Illustration: MOVEMENT OF IMMIGRANTS, IMPORTS OF MERCHANDISE PER CAPITA, AND IMMIGRANTS PER 10,000 POPULATION--1800 TO 1906.] Thus we have an explanation of the incentives under which, even in a period of industrial depression in this country, the unfortunate Irish flocked hither. It is true that the population of Ireland had increased during the century preceding the famine at a rate more rapid than that of any other country of Europe. It was 3,000,000 in 1790, and over 8,000,000 in the year of the famine. At the present time it is only 5,000,000. The potato, above all other crops, enables the cultivator to live from hand to mouth, and coupled with a landlord system which takes away all above mere subsistence, this "de-moralizing esculent" aided the apparent overpopulation. Certainly the dependence of an entire people on a single crop was a most precarious condition. During the five years, 1846 to 1850, more than a million and a quarter of Irish emigrants left the ports of the United Kingdom, and during the ten years, 1845 to 1855, more than a million and a quarter came to the United States. So great a number could not have found means of transportation had it not been for the enormous contributions of government and private societies for assistance. Here began that exportation of paupers on a large scale against which our country has protested and finally legislated. Even this enormous migration was not greatly in excess of the number that actually perished from starvation or from the diseases incident thereto. The Irish migration since that time has never reached so high a point, although it made a second great advance in 1882, succeeding another famine, and it has now fallen far below that of eastern races of Europe. Altogether the total Irish immigration of over four million since 1821 places that race second of the contributors to our foreign-born population, and, compared with its own numbers, it leads the world, for in sixty years it has sent to us half as many people as it contained at the time of its greatest population. Scarcely another country has sent more than one-fifth. Looking over a period of nearly three centuries, it is probably true that the Germans have crossed the ocean in larger numbers than any other race. We have already noted the large migration during the eighteenth century, and the official records show that since 1820 there have entered our ports more than 5,200,000 Germans, while Ireland was sending 4,000,000 and Great Britain 3,300,000. The German migration of the nineteenth century was quite distinct in character from that of the preceding century. The colonial migration was largely induced on religious grounds, but that of the past century was political and economic, with at first a notable prominence of materialism respecting religion. From the time of the Napoleonic wars to the revolution of 1848, the governments of Germany were despotic in character, supporting an established church, while at the same time the marvellous growth of the universities produced a class of educated liberals. In the revolution of 1848 these took a leading part, and although constitutional governments were then established, yet those who had been prominent in the popular uprisings found their position intolerable under the reactionary governments that followed. The political exiles sought America, bringing their liberalism in politics and religion, and forming with their descendants in American cities an intellectual aristocracy. They sprang from the middle classes of Germany, and latterly, when the wars with Austria and France had provoked the spirit of militarism, thousands of peasants looked to emigration for escape from military service. The severe industrial depression of 1873-79 added a powerful contributing cause. Thus there were two periods when German migration culminated; first in 1854, on political grounds, second in 1882, on military and economic grounds. Since the latter date a significant decline has ensued, and the present migration of 32,000 from Germany is mainly the remnants of families seeking here their relatives. A larger number of German immigrants, 55,000, comes from Austria-Hungary and Russia, those from the latter country being driven from the Baltic provinces and the Volga settlements by the "Russianizing" policy of the Slav. =The Changing Character of European Immigration.=--Besides the Germans and the Irish, the races which contributed the largest numbers of immigrants during the middle years of the nineteenth century were the English and Scandinavian. After the decline during the depression of 1879 there was an increase of all those races in 1882, a year when nearly 800,000 immigrants arrived. At about that time began a remarkable change in the character of immigration destined to produce profound consequences. This change was the rapid shifting of the sources of immigration from Western to Eastern and Southern Europe. A line drawn across the continent of Europe from northeast to southwest, separating the Scandinavian Peninsula, the British Isles, Germany, and France from Russia, Austria-Hungary, Italy, and Turkey, separates countries not only of distinct races but also of distinct civilizations. It separates Protestant Europe from Catholic Europe; it separates countries of representative institutions and popular government from absolute monarchies; it separates lands where education is universal from lands where illiteracy predominates; it separates manufacturing countries, progressive agriculture, and skilled labor from primitive hand industries, backward agriculture, and unskilled labor; it separates an educated, thrifty peasantry from a peasantry scarcely a single generation removed from serfdom; it separates Teutonic races from Latin, Slav, Semitic, and Mongolian races. When the sources of American immigration are shifted from the Western countries so nearly allied to our own, to Eastern countries so remote in the main attributes of Western civilization, the change is one that should challenge the attention of every citizen. Such a change has occurred, and it needs only a comparison of the statistics of immigration for the year 1882 with those of 1902 and 1906 to see its extent. While the total number of immigrants from Europe and Asiatic Turkey was approximately equal in 1882 and 1902, as shown in the accompanying table, yet in 1882 Western Europe furnished 87 per cent of the immigrants and in 1902 only 22 per cent, while the share of Southeastern Europe and Asiatic Turkey increased from 13 per cent in 1882 to 78 per cent in 1902. During twenty years the immigration of the Western races most nearly related to those which have fashioned American institutions declined more than 75 per cent, while the immigrants of Eastern and Southern races, untrained in self-government, increased nearly sixfold. For the year 1906 the proportions remain the same, although in the four years the total immigration had increased two-thirds. IMMIGRATION FROM EUROPE AND ASIATIC TURKEY BY COUNTRIES, 1882, 1902, 1906 1882 1902 1905 ------------- ------------- ------------- NUMBER PER NUMBER PER NUMBER PER CENT CENT CENT Total Europe and Asiatic Turkey 647,082 100 622,987 100 1,024,719 100 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Great Britain and Ireland 179,423 27.7 46,036 7.4 102,241 10.0 Belgium 1,431 .2 2,577 .4 5,099 .5 Denmark 11,618 1.8 5,660 .9 7,741 .8 France 6,003 .9 5,117 .8 9,386 .9 Germany 250,630 38.7 26,304 4.2 37,564 3.7 Netherlands 9,517 1.1 2,284 .4 4,946 .5 Norway 29,101 4.5 17,404 2.8 21,730 2.1 Sweden 64,607 10.0 30,894 5.0 23,310 2.3 Switzerland 10,884 1.7 2,344 .4 3,846 .4 Total Western Europe 563,174 87.0 136,620 22.0 215,863 21.7 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Italy 32,159 5.0 178,375 28.6 273,120 26.7 Portugal 42 [41] 5,307 .9 8,517 .8 Spain 378 [41] 975 .1 1,921 .1 Austria-Hungary 29,150 4.5 171,989 27.6 265,138 25.9 Russia 21,590 3.3 107,347 17.2 215,665 21.0 Greece [40]73 [41] 8,104 1.3 19,489 1.9 Roumania [40]77 [41] 7,196 1.2 4,476 .5 Servia, Bulgaria, and Montenegro [41] 851 [41] 4,666 .5 Turkey in Europe [40]86 [41] 187 [41] 9,510 .9 Turkey in Asia 82 [41] 6,223 1.0 6,354 .6 Total Southern and Eastern Europe and Asiatic Turkey 83,637 13.0 486,367 78.0 808,856 78.9 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- =Italians.=--It was at this period that Italian immigration first became noticeable. Prior to 1880 this stream had been but the merest trickle, which now has become the greatest of all the foreign tributaries to our population. In 1873 the Italians for the first time reached 8000 in number, but they fell to 3000 in 1876 and so continued in moderate proportions, but suddenly in 1880 jumped to 12,000, and in 1882 to 32,000. Falling off again with the industrial depression to 13,000 in 1885, they reached 76,000 in 1891, and then with another depression to 35,000 in 1895 they have now gone forward by leaps to the high mark of 287,000.[42] The Italians seem destined to rival the Germans and Irish as the leading contributors to our social amalgam. Of course only a small part are as yet women and children, but this is because the immigration is in its early and pioneer stages. The women and children follow rapidly when the men have saved enough money to send for them. One-fourth of the emigration is on tickets and money furnished by friends and relatives in the United States.[43] The immigrants from Italy differ from those from Austria, Russia, Hungary, and Ireland, in that they are not driven forth by the oppressions of a dominant race, but as a result of the economic and political conditions of a united people. This does not indeed exclude oppression as a cause of expatriation, but it transfers the oppression from that of one race to that of one class upon another. By far the larger portion of Italian immigration comes from the southern provinces and from Sicily, where the power of the landlords is greatest. In these provinces of large estates held by the nobility, the rents have been forced to the highest notch, an orange garden paying as high as $160 per year per acre, and the leases are short, so that the tenant has little to encourage improvement.[44] In many cases the land is rented by large capitalist farmers, who raise therefrom cattle, wheat, and olives, and are prosperous men. But their prosperity is extracted from the miserable wages of their laborers. The agricultural laborer gets from 8 cents to 32 cents a day through the year and 10 cents to 38 cents through the summer. Unskilled laborers get 25 cents to 50 cents a day, and such skilled trades as masons and carpenters get only 27 cents to $1.40 a day. This wide range of wages corresponds generally with the South and North, the lowest rates being in the South and the highest toward the North. In France and England wages are two and one-half times higher than in Italy, while in Germany they are about 30 per cent to 50 per cent higher. Nor must it be supposed that the cost of living is low to correspond with the low wages. This is largely owing to the exaggerated system of indirect taxes. Although wheat is a staple crop, yet the peasants eat corn in preference, because, for a given expenditure, it gives a stronger sense of repletion. Of wheat and corn meal together the Italian peasant eats in a year only three-fourths as much as the inmate of an English poorhouse. Of meat the peasant in Apulia gets no more than ten pounds a year, while the English workhouse pauper gets fifty-seven pounds. The local taxes on flour, bread, and macaroni are as high as 10 or 15 per cent of the value, and the state tax on imported wheat is nearly 50 per cent of its value. The consumption of sugar has decreased one-fourth since heavy duties were imposed to protect native beet sugar, and it averages barely over five pounds per head. The consumption in the United States is sixty-five pounds per head. The iniquitous salt tax raises the price of salt from eleven pounds for two cents to one pound for two cents, and the peasants sometimes cook their corn meal in sea water, although this is smuggling. What the peasants lack in grain and meat they strive to supply by vegetables, and the proportion of vegetables, peas, and beans consumed is greater than that for any other country of Europe. The peasants drink no beer, spirits, tea, nor coffee, but the average annual consumption of wine is twenty gallons a head. Food alone costs the peasants 85 per cent of their wages, whereas it costs the German peasant 62 per cent and the American workman 41 per cent. The poor and working classes pay over one-half the taxes, amounting, even without wine, to 10 or 20 per cent of their wages. There are in the south and Sardinia some 13,000 sales of land a year on distress for non-payment of taxes, and the expropriated owners become tenants. Several villages in Southern Italy have been almost wholly abandoned and one village has recently announced its intention of removing itself entire to one of the South American republics.[45] The rich escape taxation, which is laid largely on consumption. Besides the state tax on imports, each city and town has its _octroi_, or import tax, on everything brought into the city. These "protective duties rob the poor to fill the pockets of the rich landlord and manufacturer." Since 1870 wealth has increased 17 per cent and taxes 30 per cent. Taxes are nearly one-fifth of the nation's income, against one-twelfth in Germany, one-sixteenth in England, and one-fifteenth in the United States. Wages rose from 1860 to 1885, but since 1890 they have fallen. The army and navy are the greatest drain on the resources of the people. They cost one-fourth more of the national income than do the armies and navies of France and Germany. Eighty million dollars a year for military expenditures in Italy is over 5 per cent of the income of the people, whereas $194,000,000 for the same purpose in the United States is less than 2 per cent of our incomes. In the Triple Alliance of Germany, Austria, and Italy, the latter country crushes its peasants in order to make a showing by the side of its wealthier partners. The army takes every able-bodied peasant from industry into barracks and drills for two years of his best vigor. But the long line of exposed coast and the general military situation in Europe make it unlikely that Italy for many years can shake off this incubus. In addition to all these economic and political causes of pressure, there is another cause of a more profound nature, the rapid growth of population. Strange as it may seem, the very poverty of Italy increases the tendency to a high birth-rate, and the rate is highest in the very districts where illiteracy and poverty are greatest. Only the great number of deaths produced by poverty and lack of sanitation prevents the increase of population from exceeding that of the more rapidly growing countries of Germany, Great Britain, and Scandinavia. It is not among those classes and nations, like the middle classes and the thrifty people of France, that the largest number of children are born, but it is among those ignorant and low-standard peoples to whom the future offers no better prospect for their children than for themselves. Early marriages and large families are both a result and a cause of poverty. Parts of Lombardy and Venetia have a thicker population than any other European country except Belgium, which is really not a country, but a manufacturing centre of Europe. The density of population in Italy is in excess of that of Germany, France, India, and even China. It is exceeded only by the islands of Great Britain and Japan, and the states of Rhode Island and Massachusetts.[46] Emigration is the only immediate relief from this congestion. All other remedies which operate through raising the intelligence and the standards of living require years for appreciable results, but meanwhile the persistent birth-rate crowds new competitors into the new openings and multiplies the need of economic and political reforms before they can be put into effect. Emigration is a relief ready at hand, but it is not a lessening of population. For many years to come Italy will furnish a surplus population to overflow to America.[47] Emigration is also a means of revenue for the mother country. For it is estimated that the peasants in foreign countries send back to their families and relatives $30,000,000 to $80,000,000 each year, and many of them return with what to them is a fortune, and with new ideas of industry and progress, to purchase and improve a farm and cottage for their declining years. It is said that already there are several small country towns in Southern Italy which have risen from squalor to something of prosperity through the money and influence of those who have come home. This temporary emigration is probably over 150,000 each year going abroad or to adjoining countries expecting to return. Besides this temporary emigration there is an equally large permanent emigration. This is of two kinds, almost as entirely distinct from each other as the emigration from two separate nations. The North Italian is an educated, skilled artisan, coming from a manufacturing section and largely from the cities. He is Teutonic in blood and appearance. The South Italian is an illiterate peasant from the great landed estates, with wages less than one-third his northern compatriot. He descends with less mixture from the ancient inhabitants of Italy. Unhappily for us, the North Italians do not come to the United States in considerable numbers, but they betake themselves to Argentina, Uruguay, and Brazil in about the same numbers as the South Italians come to us. It is estimated that in those three countries there are 3,000,000 Italians in a total population of 23,000,000, and they are mainly derived from the north of Italy. Surrounded by the unenterprising Spanish and Portuguese, they have shown themselves to be the industrial leaders of the country. Some of the chief buildings, banks, flour mills, textile mills, and a majority of the wheat farms of Argentina belong to Italians. They are one-third of the population of Buenos Ayres and own one-half of the commercial capital of that city. They become lawyers, engineers, members of parliament, and an Italian by descent has been president of the Republic of Argentina, while other Italians have been ministers of war and education.[48] While these North Italians, with their enterprise, intelligence, and varied capacities, go to South America, we receive the South Italians, who are nearly the most illiterate of all immigrants at the present time, the most subservient to superiors, the lowest in their standards of living, and at the same time the most industrious and thrifty of all common laborers. [Illustration: ALIENS AWAITING ADMISSION AT ELLIS ISLAND] =Austria-Hungary.=--Next to that from Italy the immigration from the Austro-Hungarian Empire in recent decades has reached the largest dimensions. While Italy sent 273,000 people in 1906, Austria-Hungary sent 265,000 in that year and 276,000 the year before. Like the immigration from Italy, this increase has occurred since 1880. Prior to that date the largest number reported from Austria-Hungary was 9000 in 1874. While these figures compare with those of the Italians, yet, unlike the Italians, they refer to a congeries of races and languages distinct one from another. The significance of Austro-Hungarian immigration is revealed only when we analyze it by races. The race map of this empire shows at once the most complicated social mosaic of all modern nations. Here we see, not that mixture of races and assimilation of language which in our own country has evolved a vigorous, united people, but a juxtaposition of hostile races and a fixity of language held together only by the outside pressure of Russia, Germany, Italy, and Turkey. This conflict of races has made the politics of the empire nearly incomprehensible to foreigners, and has aggravated the economic inequalities which drive the unprivileged masses to emigrate. Not only are there in Austria-Hungary five grand divisions of the human family,--the German, the Slav, the Magyar, the Latin, and the Jew,--but these are again subdivided. In the northern mountainous and hilly sections are 13,000,000 Slavic peoples, the Czechs, or Bohemians, with their closely related Moravians, and the Slavic Slovaks, Poles, and Ruthenians (known also as Russniaks); while in the southern hills and along the Adriatic are another 4,000,000 Slavs, the Croatians, Servians, Dalmatians, and Slovenians. Between these divisions on the fertile plains 8,000,000 Magyars and 10,000,000 Germans have thrust themselves as the dominant races. To the southwest are nearly a million Italians, and in the east 2,500,000 Latinized Slavs, the Roumanians. The Slavs are in general the conquered peoples, with a German and Magyar nobility owning their land, making their laws, and managing their administration. The northern Slavs are subject to Austria and Hungary, and the Ruthenians suffer a double subjection, for they were the serfs of their fellow-Slavs, the Poles, whom they continue to hate, and in whose longings for a reunited Poland they do not participate. The southern Slavs and Roumanians are subject to Hungary. The Roumanians are a widespread and disrupted nationality of Slavs, conquered by the Romans, from whom they imperfectly took their language, but now distributed partly in independent kingdoms and partly under the dominion of the Magyars. The Croatians from the southwest mountains are among the finest specimens of physical manhood coming to our shores. They are a vigorous people, hating Hungary which owns them and calling themselves "Austrians" to ward off the name "Hun," by which Americans mistakenly designate them. The Magyars are the Asiactic conquerors who overran Europe ten centuries ago, and being repulsed by the Teutons to the west established themselves on the Slavs in the valley and plains of the Danube. Boasting a republican constitution a thousand years old they have not until the past year been compelled to share it with the people whom they subdued. Astute politicians and dashing military leaders, they are as careless in business as the Slavs, and the supremacy which they maintained in politics has slipped into the hands of the Jews in economics. In no other modern country has the Jew been so liberally treated, and in no other country have public and private finance come more completely under his control. Profiting by the Magyars' suppression of the Slavs, the Jew has monopolized the business opportunities denied to the Slovak and the Croatian, and with this leverage has quietly elbowed out the Magyar himself. No longer is the Magyar the dominant race, and in the past year he has contributed to America more immigrants than any branch of his conquered Slavs. In the Austrian dominions of former Poland the Jew likewise has become the financier, and both the Ruthenian and the Pole, unable to rise under their burden of debt, contribute their more enterprising peasants to America. By a perverse system of representative government, based on representation of classes both in Austria and in Hungary, the great landowners and wealthy merchants have heretofore elected three-fourths of the parliaments, but recently in both countries the emperor has granted universal manhood suffrage. The peasant Slavs will henceforth be on equal footing with the German, the Magyar, and the Jew, and whether out of the belated equality of races there will come equality of economic opportunity remains to be seen. For the past few years the emigration from the unfortunate dual empire has amazingly increased. With all of this confusing medley of races, with this diversity of Greek and Roman Catholicism and Judaism, with this history of race oppression and hatred, it is not surprising that the immigrants should break out into factions and feuds wherever thrown together among us. It is the task of America to lift them to a patriotism which hitherto in their native land they could not know. The earliest migration from Austria-Hungary was that of the Bohemians, the most highly educated and ardently patriotic of the Slavic people. After the revolution of 1848, when the Germans suppressed their patriotic uprising, students, professional men, and well-to-do peasants came to America and settled in New York, St. Louis, Milwaukee, Chicago, and in the rural districts of Texas, Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, and California. Again, after the Austro-Prussian War of 1866, skilled laborers were added to the stream, and they captured a large part of the cigar-making industry of New York and the clothing trade of Chicago. Latterly recruits from the peasants and unskilled laborers sought the sections where the pioneers had located, learned the same trades, or joined the armies of common labor. In Chicago the Bohemian section is almost a self-governing city, with its own language, industries, schools, churches, and newspapers. After a slight decline there is again an increasing flow of immigrants, the number in 1906 being 13,000. Those who come bring their families, and few return. In these earlier days the Polish and Hungarian Jews also began their migration, following the steps of their German precursors. In the decade of the eighties the increase of immigration from Austria-Hungary was first that of the Poles, now numbering 44,000, then the Magyars, now 43,000, then the Slovaks, now 37,000. In the latter part of the nineties the Southern Slavs--Croatians and Slovenians--suddenly took up their burden, and 43,000 of them came in 1906. Following them came the Ruthenians from the North, numbering 16,000 in 1906. Last of all, the Latinized Slavs, the Roumanians, began their flight from the Magyar, to the number of less than 400 in the year 1900, but swelling to 11,000 in 1906. Only 300 additional came from their own proper kingdom--Roumania. During all this period there has been also a considerable migration of Germans, reaching 35,000 in 1906. In the face of this swollen migration the Hungarian government has at last taken alarm. They see even their own people, the Magyars, escaping. Recently the government has attempted to restrict the unrest by prohibiting advertisements or public speeches advocating emigration, by prohibiting the sale of tickets or solicitation by any one not holding a government license for the purpose, by contracting with a steamship line from their own Adriatic part of Fiume in order to reduce migration across the German and Italian frontiers. This may account for the decline of ten thousand immigrants from Austria-Hungary in 1906. Practically the entire migration of the Slavic elements at the present time is that of peasants. In Croatia the forests have been depleted, and thousands of immigrant wood-choppers have sought the forests of our South and the railway construction of the West. The natural resources of Croatia are by no means inadequate, but the discriminating taxes and railway freight rates imposed by Hungary have prevented the development of these resources. The needed railways are not obtainable for the development of the mines and minerals of Croatia, and the peasants, unable to find employment at home, are allured by the advertisements of American steamships and the agents of American contractors. So it is with the Slovak peasants and mine workers of the northern mountains and foothills. With agricultural wages only eighteen cents a day, they find employment in the American mines, rolling-mills, stock-yards, and railroad construction at $1.50 a day. In addition to race discrimination, the blight of Austria-Hungary is landlordism. Considerable reforms, indeed, have been made in certain sections. The free alienation of landed property was adopted in the Austrian dominions in 1869, and in the following twelve years 42,000 new holdings were carved out of the existing peasant proprietorships in Bohemia. Similar transfers have occurred elsewhere, but even where this peasant ownership has gained, the enormous prices are an obstacle to economic independence. They compel the land-owning peasant to content himself with five to twelve acres, the size of four-fifths of the farms in Galicia. His eagerness to own land is his dread of the mere wage-earner's lot, which he no longer dreads when he lands in America. "The fear of falling from the social position of a peasant to that, immeasurably inferior, of a day laborer, is the great spur which drives over the seas alike the Slovak, the Pole, and the Ruthenian."[49] These high rentals and fabulous values can exist only where wages and standards of living are at the bare subsistence level, leaving a heavy surplus for capitalization. They also exist as a result of most economical and minute cultivation, so that, with this training, the Bohemian or Polish farmer who takes up land in America soon becomes a well-to-do citizen. Taxation, too, is unequal. For many years the government suffered deficits, the military expenses increased, and worst of all, the nobility were exempt from taxation. The latter injustice, however, was remedied by the revolution of 1848, and yet at the present time the great landowners pay much less than their proportionate share of the land-tax, to say nothing of the heavy taxes on consumption and industry. As in other countries of low standards, the number of births is large in proportion to the inhabitants. For every one thousand persons in Hungary, there are forty-three births each year,[50] a number exceeded by but one great country of Europe, Russia. Yet, with this large number of births, because the economic conditions are so onerous and the consequent deaths so frequent, the net increase is less than that of any other country except France. In Austria the births and deaths are less and the net increase greater, and they run close to those of prolific Italy. In each of these countries the figures for births and deaths stand near those of the negroes in America, and like the negroes, two-fifths of the mortality is that of children under five years of age, whereas with other more favored countries and races this proportion is only one-fifth or one-fourth. It is not so much the overpopulation of Austria-Hungary that incites emigration as it is the poverty, ignorance, inequality, and helplessness that produce a seeming overpopulation. While these conditions continue, emigration will continue to increase, and the efforts of the Hungarian government to reduce it will not succeed. =Russia.=--The Russian Empire is at the present time the third in the rank of contributors to American immigration. Russian immigration, like that of Italy and Austria-Hungary, is practically limited to the past two decades. In 1881 it first reached 10,000. In 1893 it was 42,000, and in 1906, 216,000. The significant fact of this immigration is that it is only 2 per cent Russian and 98 per cent non-Russian. The Russian peasant is probably the most oppressed of the peasants of Europe, and though his recent uprising has aroused his intellect and disabused the former opinion of his stupidity, yet he has been so tied to the soil by his system of communism, his burden of taxes and debt and his subjection to landlords, that he is as yet immune to the fever of migration. In so far as he has moved from his native soil he has done so through the efforts of a despotic government to Russianize Siberia and the newly conquered regions of his own vast domain. On the other hand, the races which have abandoned the Russian Empire have been driven forth because they refused to submit to the policy which would by force assimilate them to the language or religion of the dominant race. Even the promises of the aristocracy under the fright of recent revolution have not mitigated the persecutions, and the number taking refuge in flight has doubled in four years. Foremost are the Jews, 125,000 in 1906, an increase from 37,000 four years ago; next the Poles, 46,000 in 1906; next 14,000 Lithuanians, 13,000 Finns, and 10,000 Germans. The Poles and Lithuanians are Slavic peoples long since conquered and annexed by the Russians. The Finns are a Teutonic people with a Mongol language; the Germans are an isolated branch of that race settled far to the east on the Volga River by invitation of the Czar more than one hundred years ago, or on the Baltic provinces adjoining Germany; while the Jews are the unhappy descendants of a race whom the Russians found in territory conquered during the past two centuries. =The Jews.=--Russia, at present, sends us five-sixths of the Jewish immigration, but the other one-sixth comes from adjoining territory in Austria-Hungary and Roumania. About six thousand temporarily sojourn in England, and the Whitechapel district of East London is a reduced picture of the East Side, New York. During American history Jews have come hither from all countries of Europe. The first recorded immigration was that of Dutch Jews, driven from Brazil by the Portuguese and received by the Dutch government of New Amsterdam. The descendants of these earliest immigrants continue at the present time in their own peculiar congregation in lower New York City. Quite a large number of Portuguese and Spanish Jews, expelled from those countries in the time of Columbus, have contributed their descendants to America by way of Holland. The German Jews began their migration in small numbers during colonial times, but their greatest influx followed the Napoleonic wars and reached its height at the middle of the century. Prior to the last two decades so predominant were the German Jews that, to the ordinary American, all Jews were Germans. Strangely enough, the so-called Russian Jew is also a German, and in Russia among the masses of people the words "German" and "Jew" also mean the same thing. Hereby hangs a tale of interest in the history of this persecuted race. Jews are known to have settled at the site of the present city of Frankfort in Southern Germany as early as the third century, when that town was a trading post on the Roman frontier. At the present time the region about Frankfort, extending south through Alsace, contains the major part of the German and French Jews. To this centre they flocked during the Middle Ages, and their toleration in this region throws an interesting light on the reasons for their persecution in other countries. Under the Catholic polity following the crusades the Jew had no rights, and he could therefore gain protection only through the personal favor of emperor, king, or feudal lord. This protection was arbitrary and capricious, but it was always based on a pecuniary consideration. Unwittingly the Catholic Church, by its prohibition of usury to all believers, had thrown the business of money lending into the hands of the Jews, and since the Jew was neither inclined toward agriculture nor permitted to follow that vocation, his only sources of livelihood were trade and usury. The sovereigns of Europe who protected the Jews did so in view of the large sums which they could exact from their profits as usurers and traders. They utilized the Jews like sponges to draw from their subjects illicit taxes. When, therefore, the people gained power over their sovereigns, and the spirit of nationality arose, the Jew, without his former protector, was the object of persecution. England was the first country where this spirit of nationality emerged and the first to expel the Jews (1290); France followed a century later (1395); and Spain and Portugal two centuries later (1492 and 1495). But in Germany and other parts of the Holy Roman Empire political confusion and anarchy prevailed, and the emperor and petty sovereigns were able to continue their protection of the Jews. [Illustration: NORWEGIAN ITALIAN ARABIC (From _The Home Missionary_)] The Russian people, at that time, were confined to the interior surrounding Moscow, but even before the crusades they had expelled the Jews. As rapidly as they conquered territory to the south from Turkey, or to the west from Poland, they carried forward the same hostility. There was only one country, Poland, in the centre of Europe, where the kings, desiring to build up their cities, invited the Jews, and hither the persecuted race fled from the East before the Russians, and latterly from the West, driven out by the Germans. When finally, a hundred years ago, the remnant of the Polish Empire was divided between Russia, Prussia, and Austria, the Jewish population in this favored area had become the largest aggregation of that people since the destruction of Jerusalem. To-day in certain of these provinces belonging to Russia the Jews number as high as one-sixth of the entire population, and more than half of that of several cities. Fifteen provinces taken from Poland and Turkey, extending 1500 miles along the border of Germany and Austria-Hungary and 240 miles in width, constitute to-day the "Pale of Settlement," the region where Jews are permitted to live. Here are found one-third of the world's 11,000,000 Jews.[51] Here they formerly engaged in all lines of industry, including agriculture. Now we come to the last great national uprising, like that which began in England six hundred years ago. The Russian serfs had been freed in 1861. But they were left without land or capital and were burdened by high rents and enormous taxes. The Jews became their merchants, middlemen, and usurers. Suddenly, in 1881, the peasants, oppressed and neglected by landlord and government, turned in their helplessness upon the intermediate cause of their misery, the Jew. The anti-Semitic riots of that year have perhaps never been exceeded in ferocity and indiscriminate destruction. Then began the migration to America. The next year the Russian government took up the persecution, and the notorious "May Orders" of 1882 were promulgated. These, at the instigation of the Greek Church, have been followed by orders more stringent, so that to-day, unless relieved by the terrorized promises of the Czar, the Jew is not permitted to foreclose a mortgage or to lease or purchase land; he cannot do business on Sundays or Christian holidays; he cannot hold office; he cannot worship or assemble without police permit; he must serve in the army, but cannot become an officer; he is excluded from schools and universities; he is fined for conducting manufactures and commerce; he is almost prohibited from the learned professions. While all other social questions are excluded from discussion, the anti-Semitic press is given free play, and the popular hatred of the Jew is stirred to frenzy by "yellow" journals. Only when this hatred breaks out in widespread riots does the news reach America, but the persecution is constant and relentless. The government and the army join with the peasants, for, true to the character of this versatile race, the Jews are leaders of the revolutionary and socialistic patriots who seek to overthrow the government and restore the land to the people. Nor is this uprising confined to Russia. Galician Jews in the Austrian possessions of former Poland, where the Slavs bitterly complain of them as saloon-keepers and money-lenders,[52] have suffered the persecutions of their race, and in the last ten years Roumania, a country of peasants adjoining Hungary and Russia, has adopted laws and regulations even more oppressive than those of her neighbor. Thus it is that this marvellous and paradoxical race, the parent of philosophers, artists, reformers, martyrs, and also of the shrewdest exploiters of the poor and ignorant, has, in two decades, come to America in far greater numbers than in the two centuries preceding. It should not be inferred that the Jews are a race of pure descent. Coming as they do from all sections and nations of Europe, they are truly cosmopolitan, and have taken on the language, customs, and modes of thought of the people among whom they live. More than this, in the course of centuries, their physical characteristics have departed from those of their Semitic cousins in the East, and they have become assimilated in blood with their European neighbors. In Russia, especially in the early centuries, native tribes were converted to Judaism and mingled with their proselyters. That which makes the Jew a peculiar people is not altogether the purity of his blood, but persecution, devotion to his religion, and careful training of his children. Among the Jews from Eastern Europe there are marked intellectual and moral differences. The Hungarian Jew, who emigrated earliest, is adventurous and speculative: the Southern Russian keeps few of the religious observances, is the most intellectual and socialistic, and most inclined to the life of a wage-earner; the Western Russian is orthodox and emotional, saves money, becomes a contractor and retail merchant; the Galician Jew is the poorest, whose conditions at home were the harshest, and he begins American life as a pedler. That which unites them all as a single people is their religious training and common language. The Hebrew language is read and written by all the men and half of the women, but is not spoken except by a few especially orthodox Jews on Saturday. Hebrew is the language of business and correspondence, Yiddish the language of conversation, just as Latin in the Middle Ages was the official and international language, while the various peoples spoke each its own vernacular. The Yiddish spoken by the Russian Jews in America is scarcely a language--it is a jargon without syntax, conjugation, or declension. Its basis is sixty per cent German of the sixteenth century, showing the main origin of the people, and forty per cent the language of the countries whence they come. That which most of all has made the Jew a cause of alarm to the peasants of Eastern Europe is the highest mark of his virtue, namely, his rapid increase in numbers. A high birth-rate, a low death-rate, a long life, place the Jew as far above the average as the negro is below the average. These two races are the two extremes of American race vitality. Says Ripley:[53]-- "Suppose two groups of one hundred infants each, one Jewish, one of average American parentage (Massachusetts), to be born on the same day. In spite of the disparity of social conditions in favor of the latter, the chances, determined by statistical means, are that one-half of the Americans will die within forty-seven years; while the first half of the Jews will not succumb to disease or accident before the expiration of seventy-one years. The death-rate is really but little over half that of the average American population." While the negro exceeds all races in the constitutional diseases of consumption and pneumonia, the Jew excels all in immunity from these diseases. His vitality is ascribed to his sanitary meat inspection, his sobriety, temperance, and self-control. Of the Jew it might be said more truly than of any other European people that the growth of population has led to overcrowding and has induced emigration. Yet of no people is this less true, for, were it not for the discrimination and persecution directed against them, the Jews would be the most prosperous and least overcrowded of the races of Europe. =The Finns.=--Until the year 1901 Finland was the freest and best governed part of the Russian Empire. Wrested from Sweden in 1809, it became a grand duchy of the Czar, guaranteed self-government, and confirmed by coronation oath of each successor. It was the only section of the Russian Empire with a constitutional government in which the laws, taxes, and army were controlled by a legislature representing the people. Here alone in all his empire was the Czar compelled to ask the consent of parliament in order to enact laws. But these free institutions within the past seven years were by his decree abrogated. The Czar claimed the right to put into force such laws as he chose without discussion or acceptance by the Finnish diet. The Russian language took the place of Swedish and Finnish as the official medium, a severe censorship of the press was introduced, the Lutheran religion, devoutly adhered to, was subordinated to the "orthodox," the independent Finnish army was abolished and Finns were distributed throughout the armies of the empire, and a Russian governor with absolute powers was placed over all. Thus have 2,000,000 of the sturdiest specimens of humanity been suddenly reduced to the level of Asiatic despotism. They had managed by industry and thrift to extort a livelihood from a sterile soil, and had developed a school system with universal education, culminating in one of the noblest universities of Europe. Their peasants are healthy, intelligent, honest, and sober. In one year, 1900, their emigration increased from 6000 to 12,000, and it continues at 14,000, notwithstanding the repentance of the Czar and his restoration of their stolen rights. Compared with the population of the country, the present immigration from Finland is proportionately greater than that of any race except the Jews; and famine, adding its horrors to the loss of their liberties, has served to augment the army of exiles. [Illustration: SLAV JEWISH POLACK LITHUANIAN (From _The Home Missionary_)] Much dispute has arisen respecting the racial relations of the Finns. Their language is like that of the Magyars, an agglutinative tongue with tendencies towards inflections, but their physical structure allies them more nearly to the Teutons. Their Lutheran religion also separates them from other peoples of the Russian Empire. Their sober industriousness and high intelligence give them a place above that of their intolerant conquerors; and the futile attempts of the Slav to "Russify" them drove to America many of our most desirable immigrants. =The French Canadians.=--When Canada was conquered by England in 1759, it contained a French population of 65,000. Without further immigration the number had increased in 1901 to 2,400,000, including 1,600,000 in Canada and 800,000 emigrants and their children in the United States. Scarcely another race has multiplied as rapidly, doubling every twenty-five years. The contrast with the same race in France, where population is actually declining, is most suggestive. French Canada is, as it were, a bit of mediæval France, picked out and preserved for the curious student of social evolution. No French revolution broke down its old institutions, and the English conquest changed little else than the oath of allegiance. Language, customs, laws, and property rights remained intact. The only state church in North America is the Roman Catholic Church of Quebec, with its great wealth, its control of education, and its right to levy tithes and other church dues. With a standard of living lower than that of the Irish or Italians, and a population increasing even more rapidly, the French from Canada for a time seemed destined to displace other races in the textile mills of New England. Yet they came only as sojourners, intending by the work of every member of the family to save enough money to return to Canada, purchase a farm, and live in relative affluence. Their migration began at the close of the Civil War, and during periods of prosperity they swarmed to the mill towns, while in periods of depression they returned to their Northern homes. Gradually an increasing proportion remained in "the States," and the number in 1900 was 395,000 born in Canada, and 436,000 children born on this side of the line. =The Portuguese.=--A diminutive but interesting migration of recent years is that of the Portuguese, who come, not from Portugal, but from the Cape Verde and Azores Islands, near equatorial Africa. These islands are remarkably overpopulated, and the emigration, nearly 9000 souls in 1906, is a very large proportion of the total number of inhabitants. By two methods did they find their way to America. One was almost accidental, for it was the wreck of a Portuguese vessel on the New England coast that first directed their attention to that section. They have settled mainly at New Bedford, Massachusetts, where they follow the fisheries in the summer and enter the mills in the winter. The other method was solicitation, which took several thousand of them to Hawaii as contract laborers on the sugar plantations. Unlike the Oriental importations to these islands the Portuguese insisted that their families be imported, and then as soon as their contracts expired they left the planters to become small farmers, and are now the backbone of the coffee industry. They and their children are nearly half of the "Caucasian" element of 30,000. In Massachusetts they are of two distinct types, the whites from the Azores and the blacks from the Cape Verde Islands, the latter plainly a blend of Portuguese and Africans. Their standards of living are similar to those of the Italians, though they are distinguished by their cleanliness and the neatness of their homes. =Syrians and Armenians.=--That the recruiting area of American immigration is extending eastward is no more clearly evident than in the recent migration of Syrians and Armenians. These peoples belong to the Christian races of Asiatic Turkey, whence they are escaping the oppressions of a government which deserves the name of organized robbery rather than government. Within the past thirty years many thousand Syrians of Mount Lebanon have emigrated to Egypt and other Mediterranean countries, to the dependencies of Great Britain and South America. Six thousand of them came to the United States in 1906. They belong mainly to the Greek Church or the Maronite branch of the Roman Catholic Church, and it is mainly American missionary effort that has diverted them to the United States. Unlike other immigrants, they come principally from the towns, and are traders and pedlers. Broadly speaking, says an agent of the Charity Organization Society of New York, "the well-intentioned efforts of the missionaries have been abused by their protégés.... It is these alleged proselytes who have contributed largely to bring into relief the intrinsically servile character of the Syrian, his ingratitude and mendacity, his prostitution of all ideals to the huckster level.... As a rule they affiliate themselves with some Protestant church or mission, abandoning such connections when no longer deemed necessary or profitable."[54] The Armenian migration began with the monstrous Kurdish atrocities of recent years, instigated and supported by the Turkish government. Armenians are a primitive branch of the Christian religion, and at an early date became separated from both the Greek and Roman churches. They are among the shrewdest of merchants, traders, and money-lenders of the Orient, and, like the Jews, are hated by the peasantry and persecuted by the government. Like the Jews also, religious persecution has united them to the number of five million in a racial type of remarkable purity and distinctness from the surrounding races. =Asiatic Immigration.=--Utterly distinct from all other immigrants in the nineteenth century are the Chinese. Coming from a civilization already ancient when Europe was barbarian, the Chinaman complacently refuses to assimilate with Americans, and the latter reciprocate by denying him the right of citizenship. His residence is temporary, he comes without his family, and he accumulates what to him is a fortune for his declining years in China. The gold discoveries of California first attracted him, and the largest migration was 40,000 in 1882, the year when Congress prohibited further incoming. In 1906, 3015 Chinamen tried to get in, and 2732 were admitted, mainly as United States citizens, returning merchants and returning laborers. One-half of the 1448 admitted as "exempt" were believed by the immigration officials to have been coolies in disguise.[55] Within the past ten years the Japanese have taken his place, and 14,000 of his Mongolian cousins arrived in 1906. The immigration of the Japanese has taken a peculiar turn owing to the annexation of Hawaii. While these islands were yet a kingdom in 1868 this immigration began, and in 1886 a treaty was concluded with Japan for the immigration of Japanese contract laborers for the benefit of the sugar planters. Many thousand were imported under this arrangement, and "the fear that the islands would be annexed to Japan was one of the prime factors in the demand for annexation to the United States."[56] With annexation in 1900 contract labor was abolished, and the Japanese, freed from servitude, indulged in "an epidemic of strikes." The Japanese government retained paternal oversight of its laborers migrating to foreign lands, which is done through some thirty-four emigrant companies chartered by the government. Since opening up Korea for settlement Japan has granted but a limited number of passports to its citizens destined for the mainland of America, so that almost the entire immigration comes first to Honolulu through arrangements made between the emigrant companies and the planters. But the planters are not able to keep them on the island on account of the higher wages on the Pacific coast. Since the alien contract-labor law does not apply to immigrants from Hawaii, a _padroni_ system has sprung up for importing Japanese from that island. As a result, the arrivals at Honolulu are equalled by the departures to the mainland, and Hawaii becomes the American side entrance for the Japanese.[57] This evasion has been stopped by the law of February 20, 1906. Hawaii also is showing another Asiatic race the opening to America. The growing independence of the Japanese led the planters to seek Koreans, since the Chinese exclusion law came into force with annexation. In this effort to break down Japanese solidarity some eight thousand Koreans have been mixed with them during the past five years, and these also have begun the transit to California. Although the Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans are the familiar examples often cited of low standards of living, yet their wages in their native countries are higher than those of the South Italians and equal to those of the Slavs. They earn $4 or $5 a month and spend $2 or $3 for living. In Hawaii they get $18 to $20 a month, and on the Pacific coast $35 to $50. In the past two or three years a tiny dripping of immigration has found its way from another vast empire of Asiatic population--India. Some two hundred are admitted each year. The populations of that land are growing discontented as they see Indians returned from Natal, where they earned $20 to $35 a month, while at home they get only $3 to $7 under a penal contract system. The American consul at Calcutta reports ten sturdy Punjab Mohammedans inquiring the way to America and telling of their friends at work on American dairy farms. In his judgment they are stronger and more intelligent than the Chinese coolies and are preferable for work on the Panama Canal. The self-governing British colonies have educational restrictions designed to prevent Asiatic immigration, whether of British subjects or aliens;[58] other colonies have contract labor. The unrest of India therefore turns the native eyes towards America. While America has been welcoming the eastward and backward races she has begun to lose her colonial stock and her Americanized Teutonic stock. These pioneer elements have kept in front of the westward movement, and now that the American frontier is gone they seek a new frontier in Canada. The Canadian government for several years has sought to fill its vast Western plains with Teutonic races and to discourage others. It has expended many thousand dollars for advertising and soliciting in the British Isles, and has maintained twenty to thirty immigration agents in our Western states. The opportunities of British Columbia are now well known, and the American farmers, with agricultural land rising enormously in value, sell out to the newcomer or the acclimated immigrant and betake themselves to double or treble the area for cultivation under the flag of England. They push onward by rail and by wagon, and the ingress of millions of immigrants is reflected in the egress of thousands of Americans.[59] =Indigenous Races.=--It is not enough that we have opened our gates to the millions of divergent races in Europe, Asia, and Africa; we have in these latter days admitted to our fold new types by another process--annexation. The Hawaiians are the latest of these oversea races to be brought under our flag, although in the course of eighty years they have been brought under our people. Nowhere else in the world has been seen such finished effect on an aboriginal race of the paradoxes of Western civilization--Christianity, private property, and sexual disease. With a population of some 300,000 at the time of discovery they had dwindled by domestic wars and imported disease to 140,000 when the missionaries came in 1820, then to 70,000 in 1850 when private property began its hunt for cheap labor, and now they number but 30,000. A disease eliminating the unfit of a race protected by monogamy decimates this primitive people on a lower stage of morals. Missionaries from the most intellectual type of American Protestantism converted the diminishing nation to Christianity in fifty years. A soil and climate the most favorable in the world for sugar-cane inspired American planters and sons of missionaries to displace the unsteady Hawaiians with industrious coolies, and finally to overthrow the government they had undermined and then annex it to America. Although acquiring American citizenship and sharing equally the suffrage with Caucasians, the decreasing influence of the Hawaiians is further diminished by the territorial form of government. The Spanish War added islands on opposite sides of the globe, with races resulting from diametrically opposite effects of three centuries of Spanish rule. From Porto Rico the aboriginal Carib had long disappeared under the slavery of his conquerors, and his place had been filled by the negro slave in sugar cultivation and by the Spaniard and other Europeans in coffee cultivation. To-day the negro and mulatto are two-fifths of the million population and the whites three-fifths.[60] In the Philippine Islands the native races have survived under a theocratic protectorate and even their tribal and racial subdivisions have been preserved. Two-fifths of their population of 7,600,000 belong to the leading tribe, the Visayans, and one-fifth to another, the Tagalogs. Six other tribes complete the list of "civilized" or Christianized peoples, while 10 per cent remain pagan in the mountains and forests. Four-fifths of the population are illiterate, a proportion the same as in Porto Rico, compared with less than half of the negroes and only one-sixteenth of the whites in the United States.[61] CHAPTER V INDUSTRY In preceding chapters we have seen the conditions in their foreign homes which spurred the emigrants to seek America. We have seen religious persecution, race oppression, political revolution, militarism, taxation, famine, and poverty conspiring to press upon the unprivileged masses and to drive the more adventurous across the water. But it would be a mistake should we stop at that point and look upon the migration of these dissatisfied elements as only a voluntary movement to better their condition. In fact, had it been left to the initiative of the emigrants the flow of immigration to America could scarcely ever have reached one-half its actual dimensions. While various motives and inducements have always worked together, and it would be rash to assert dogmatically the relative weight of each, yet to one who has carefully noted all the circumstances it is scarcely an exaggeration to say that even more important than the initiative of immigrants have been the efforts of Americans and ship-owners to bring and attract them. Throughout our history these efforts have been inspired by one grand, effective motive,--that of making a profit upon the immigrants. The desire to get cheap labor, to take in passenger fares, and to sell land have probably brought more immigrants than the hard conditions of Europe, Asia, and Africa have sent. Induced immigration has been as potent as voluntary immigration. And it is to this mercenary motive that we owe our manifold variety of races, and especially our influx of backward races. One entire race, the negro, came solely for the profit of ship-owners and landowners. Working people of the colonial period were hoodwinked and kidnapped by shippers and speculators who reimbursed themselves by indenturing them to planters and farmers. The beginners of other races have come through similar but less coercive inducements, initiated, however, by the demand of those who held American property for speculation or investment. William Penn and his lessees, John Law, the Dutch East India Company, and many of the grantees of lands in the colonies, sent their agents through Western Europe and the British Isles with glowing advertisements, advanced transportation, and contracts for indentured service by way of reimbursement. In the nineteenth century new forms of induced migration appeared. Victims of the Irish famine were assisted to emigrate by local and general governments and by philanthropic societies, and both the Irish and the Germans, whose migration began towards the middle of the century, were, in a measure, exceptions to the general rule of induced immigration for profit. Several Western states created immigration bureaus which advertised their own advantages for intending immigrants, and Wisconsin, especially, in this way settled her lands with a wide variety of races. After the Civil War, induced migration entered upon a vigorous revival. The system of indenturing had long since disappeared, because legislatures and courts declined to recognize and enforce contracts for service. Consequently a new form of importation appeared under the direction of middlemen of the same nativity as that of the immigrant. Chinese coolies came under contract with the Six Companies, who advanced their expenses and looked to their own secret agents and tribunals to enforce repayment with profit.[62] Japanese coolies, much later, came under contract with immigration companies chartered by the Japanese government.[63] Italians were recruited by the _padroni_, and the bulk of the new Slav immigration from Southeastern Europe is in charge of their own countrymen acting as drummers and middlemen. INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS OF IMMIGRANTS--1906[64] ===============+========+=========+==================+========================== | | SEXES | AGES | OCCUPATIONS[65] | +----+----+-----+-----+-----+-------+----+----+----+---- | TOTAL, | | | | | | TOTAL,|Professional RACE OR PEOPLE | 100 | | |Under|14-45|Over | 100 | |Commercial |PER CENT| M | F | 14 |years| 45 | PER | | |Skilled | | | |years| |years| CENT | | | |Unskilled ---------------+--------+----+----+-----+-----+-----+-------+----+----+----+---- African (black)| 3,786|62.2|37.8| 9.1| 86.8| 4.1| 2,921| 3.0| 2.6|45.6|48.8 Armenian | 1,895|75.1|24.9| 11.8| 84.3| 3.9| 1,390| 3.4| 5.1|38.5|53.0 Bohemian and | | | | | | | | | | | Moravian | 12,958|57.3|42.8| 20.7| 73.9| 5.4| 7,985| 1.3| 1.2|43.6|53.9 Bulgarian, | | | | | | | | | | | Servian, and | | | | | | | | | | | Montenegrin | 11,548|96.2| 3.8| 1.9| 96.2| 1.9| 11,025| 0.1| 0.3| 3.7|95.9 Chinese | 1,485|94.1| 5.9| 4.5| 81.5| 14.0| 1,261| 6.9|66.0| 1.5|25.6 Croatian and | | | | | | | | | | | Slovenian | 44,272|86.5|13.5| 3.8| 94.1| 2.1| 40,125| 0.1| 0.1| 3.7|96.1 Cuban | 5,591|67.4|32.6| 17.2| 73.2| 9.6| 2,842|10.3|19.1|55.9|14.7 Dalmatian, | | | | | | | | | | | Bosnian, and | | | | | | | | | | | Herzegovinian| 4,568|95.1| 4.9| 1.7| 96.3| 2.0| 4,373| 0.1| 0.3| 7.7|91.9 Dutch and | | | | | | | | | | | Flemish | 9,735|67.0|33.0| 17.6| 76.4| 6.0| 5,849| 5.2| 7.9|30.1|56.8 East Indian | 271|93.0| 7.0| 5.5| 90.5| 4.0| 222| 9.9|52.7| 5.4|32.0 English | 45,079|62.1|37.9| 13.5| 75.3| 11.2| 28,249|10.8|13.5|51.3|24.4 Finnish | 14,136|67.4|32.6| 7.1| 90.8| 2.1| 11,959| 0.4| 0.3| 7.2|92.1 French | 10,379|57.1|42.9| 8.6| 81.7| 9.7| 6,823|16.5|12.9|31.3|39.3 German | 86,813|59.2|40.8| 15.1| 78.6| 6.3| 55,095| 4.3| 6.7|29.7|59.3 Greek | 23,127|96.3| 3.7| 3.1| 95.9| 1.0| 21,615| 0.5| 2.6| 9.4|87.5 Hebrew | 153,748|52.1|47.9| 28.3| 66.3| 5.4| 76,605| 1.4| 5.6|66.7|26.3 Irish | 40,959|50.9|49.1| 4.6| 90.9| 4.5| 35,387| 1.7| 2.9|15.1|80.3 Italian (North)| 46,286|78.9|21.1| 8.6| 87.9| 3.5| 36,980| 1.4| 2.3|19.4|76.9 Italian (South)| 240,528|79.4|20.6| 11.1| 84.3| 4.6|190,105| 0.4| 1.3|16.0|82.3 Japanese | 14,243|89.6|10.4| 1.0| 97.1| 1.9| 11,797| 2.2|10.3| 2.8|84.7 Korean | 127|81.1|18.9| 16.5| 81.1| 2.4| 80| 6.3|15.0| 2.5|76.2 Lithuanian | 14,257|66.1|33.9| 8.9| 89.5| 1.6| 11,568| 0.2| 0.2| 9.2|90.4 Magyar | 44,261|71.8|28.2| 9.0| 87.5| 3.5| 34,559| 0.6| 0.5| 9.3|89.6 Mexican | 141|66.0|34.0| 14.9| 74.5| 10.6| 65|23.1|35.4|24.6|16.9 Pacific | | | | | | | | | | | Islander | 13|76.9|23.1| 7.7| 76.9| 15.4| 9|33.3| 0.0|66.7| 0.0 Polish | 95,835|69.3|30.7| 9.3| 88.5| 2.2| 77,437| 0.2| 0.2| 7.7|91.9 Portuguese | 8,729|58.4|41.6| 20.9| 70.7| 8.4| 5,815| 0.5| 1.1| 4.8|93.6 Roumanian | 11,425|92.5| 7.5| 2.0| 94.0| 4.0| 10,759| 0.2| 0.2| 2.5|97.1 Russian | 5,814|81.7|18.3| 10.0| 86.8| 3.2| 4,591| 3.2| 2.4|10.8|83.6 Ruthenian | 16,257|75.7|24.3| 3.6| 93.9| 2.5| 14,899| 0.1|[66]| 2.7|97.2 Scandinavian | 58,141|62.1|37.9| 9.1| 86.4| 4.5| 47,352| 1.8| 1.6|23.5|73.1 Scotch | 16,463|66.1|33.9| 12.9| 78.8| 8.3| 11,207| 5.7| 9.9|62.8|21.6 Slovak | 38,221|69.6|30.4| 8.9| 88.4| 2.7| 29,817|[66]| 0.1| 4.9|95.0 Spanish | 5,332|83.6|16.4| 7.1| 84.6| 8.3| 4,211| 5.7|19.2|44.4|30.7 Spanish | | | | | | | | | | | American | 1,585|69.7|30.3| 17.0| 74.4| 8.6| 790|23.7|37.1|21.1|18.1 Syrian | 5,824|70.4|29.6| 15.2| 80.9| 3.9| 4,023| 1.1|11.1|19.9|67.9 Turkish | 2,033|95.7| 4.3| 1.9| 96.0| 2.1| 1,914| 1.5| 4.4| 8.3|85.8 Welsh | 2,367| 7.1|29.9| 12.5| 78.2| 9.3| 1,639| 4.9| 6.7|62.4|26.0 West Indian | | | | | | | | | | | (except | | | | | | | | | | | Cuban) | 1,476|58.9|41.1| 14.8| 76.1| 9.1| 900| 7.6|15.0|49.4|28.0 Other Peoples | 1,027|94.5| 5.5| 2.6| 96.0| 1.4| 932| 1.2| 4.1|18.0|76.7 ---------+----+----+-----+-----+-----+-------+----+----+----+---- Total 1,100,735|69.5|30.5| 12.4| 83.0| 4.6|815,275| 1.8| 3.1|21.7|73.4 ===============+========+====+====+=====+=====+=====+=======+====+====+====+==== These labor speculators have perfected a system of inducements and through billing as effective as that by which horse and cattle buyers in Kentucky or Iowa collect and forward their living freight to the markets of Europe. A Croatian of the earlier immigration, for example, sets up a saloon in South Chicago and becomes an employment bureau for his "greener" countrymen, and also ticket agent on commission for the steamship companies. His confederates are stationed along the entire route at connecting points, from the villages of Croatia to the saloon in Chicago. In Croatia they go among the laborers and picture to them the high wages and abundant work in America. They induce them to sell their little belongings and they furnish them with through tickets. They collect them in companies, give them a countersign, and send them on to their fellow-agent at Fiume, thence to Genoa or other port whence the American steerage vessel sails. In New York they are met by other confederates, whom they identify by their countersign, and again they are safely transferred and shipped to their destination. Here they are met by their enterprising countryman, lodged and fed, and within a day or two handed over to the foreman in a great steel plant, or to the "boss" of a construction gang on a railway, or to a contractor on a large public improvement. After they have earned and saved a little money they send for their friends, to whom the "boss" has promised jobs. Again their lodging-house countryman sells them the steamship ticket and arranges for the safe delivery of those for whom they have sent. In this way immigration is stimulated, and new races are induced to begin their American colonization. Eventually the pioneers send for their families, and it is estimated that nearly two-thirds of the immigrants in recent years have come on prepaid tickets or on money sent to them from America.[67] The significance of this new and highly perfected form of inducement will appear when we look back for a moment upon the legislation governing immigration. =Immigration Legislation.=--At the close of the Civil War, with a vast territory newly opened to the West by the railroads, Congress enacted a law throwing wide open our doors to the immigrants of all lands. It gave new guaranties for the protection of naturalized citizens in renouncing allegiance to their native countries, declaring that "expatriation is a natural and inherent right of all people, indispensable to the enjoyment of the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."[68] In the same year, 1868, the famous Burlingame treaty was negotiated with China, by which Americans in China and Chinese in America should enjoy all the privileges, immunities, and exemptions enjoyed by citizens of the most favored nation. These steps favorable to immigration were in line with the long-continued policy of the country from the earliest colonial times. But a new force had come into American politics--the wage-earner. From this time forth the old policies were violently challenged. High wages were to be pitted against high profits. The cheap labor which was eagerly sought by the corporations and large property owners was just as eagerly fought by the unpropertied wage-earners. Of course neither party conceded that it was selfishly seeking its own interest. Those who expected profits contended that cheap foreign labor was necessary for the development of the country; that American natural resources were unbounded, but American workmen could not be found for the rough work needed to turn these resources into wealth; that America should be in the future, as it had been in the past, a haven for the oppressed of all lands; and that in no better way could the principles of American democracy be spread to all peoples of the earth than by welcoming them and teaching them in our midst. The wage-earners have not been so fortunate in their protestations of disinterestedness. They were compelled to admit that though they themselves had been immigrants or the children of immigrants, they were now denying to others what had been a blessing to them. Yet they were able to set forward one supreme argument which our race problems are every day more and more showing to be sound. The future of American democracy is the future of the American wage-earner. To have an enlightened and patriotic citizenship we must protect the wages and standard of living of those who constitute the bulk of the citizens. This argument had been offered by employers themselves when they were seeking a protective tariff against the importation of "pauper-made" goods. What wonder that the wage-earner should use the same argument to keep out the pauper himself, and especially that he should begin by applying the argument to those races which showed themselves unable rapidly to assimilate, and thereby make a stand for high wages and high standards of living. Certain it is that had the white wage-earners possessed the suffrage and political influence during colonial times, the negro would not have been admitted in large numbers, and we should have been spared that race problem which of all is the largest and most nearly insoluble. For it must be observed in general that race antagonism occurs on the same competitive level. What appear often to be religious, political, and social animosities are economic at bottom, and the substance of the economic struggle is the advantage which third parties get when competitors hold each other down. The Southern planter was not hostile to the negro slave--he was his friend and protector. His nurse was the negro "mammy," his playmates were her children, and the mulatto throws light on his views of equality. It was the poor white who hated the negro and fled from his presence to the hills and the frontier, or sank below his level, despised by white and black. In times of freedom and reconstruction it is not the great landowner or employer that leads in the exhibition of race hostility, but the small farmer or wage-earner.[69] The one derives a profit from the presence of the negro--the other loses his job or his farm. With the progress of white democracy in place of the old aristocracy, as seen in South Carolina, hostility to the negro may be expected to increase. With the elimination of the white laborer, as seen in the black counties, the relations of negro and planter are harmonious.[70] So it is in the North. The negro or immigrant strike breaker is befriended by the employer, but hated by the employee. The Chinaman or Japanese in Hawaii or California is praised and sought after by the employer and householder, but dreaded by the wage-earner and domestic. Investors and landowners see their properties rise in value by the competition of races, but the competitors see their wages and jobs diminish. The increase of wealth intensifies the difference and raises up professional classes to the standpoint of the capitalists. With both of them the privilege of leisure depends on the presence of servants, but the wage-earners do their own work. As the immigrant rises in the scale, the small farmer, contractor, or merchant feels his competition and begins to join in measures of race protection. This hostility is not primarily racial in character. It is the competitive struggle for standards of living. It appears to be racial because for the most part races have different standards. But where different races agree on their standards the racial struggle ceases, and the negro, Italian, Slav, and American join together in the class struggle of a trade-union. On the other hand, if the same race has different standards, the economic struggle breaks down even the strongest affinities of race. The Russian Jew in the sweat-shop turns against the immigrant Jew, fleeing from the very persecution that he himself has escaped, and taking his place in the employment of the capitalist German Jew.[71] It is an easy and patriotic matter for the lawyer, minister, professor, employer, or investor, placed above the arena of competition, to proclaim the equal right of all races to American opportunities; to avow his own willingness to give way should even a better Chinaman, Hindu, or Turk come in to take his place; and to rebuke the racial hatred of those who resist this displacement. His patriotism and world-wide brotherhood cost him and his family nothing, and indeed they add to his profits and leisure. Could he realize his industrial position, and picture in imagination that of his fellow-citizens, their attitude would not appear less disinterested than his own. The immigrant comes as a wage-earner, and the American wage-earner bears the initial cost of his Americanization. Before he acquired the suffrage his protest was unheard--after he gained political power he began to protect himself. The first outbreak of the new-found strength of the American wage-earner was directed against a race superior even to the negro immigrants in industry, frugality, intelligence, and civilization--the Chinese. And this outbreak was so powerful that, in spite of all appeals to the traditions and liberties of America, the national government felt driven to repudiate the treaty so recently signed with the highest manifestations of faith, good-will, and international comity. Very early in the settlement of California the Chinaman had encountered hostile legislation. The state election had been carried by the Knownothings as early as 1854. Discriminating taxes, ordinances, and laws were adopted, and even immigration was regulated by the state legislature. But the state and federal courts declared such legislation invalid as violating treaties or interfering with international relations. Then the wage-earning element of California joined as one man in demanding action by the federal government, and eventually, by the treaty of 1880 and the law of 1888, Chinese laborers were excluded.[72] Thus did the Caucasian wage-earner score his first and signal victory in reversing what his opponents proclaimed were "principles coeval with the foundation of our government." The next step was the Alien Contract Labor law of 1885 and 1888, placed on the statute books through the efforts of the Knights of Labor and the trades-unions. As early as 1875 Congress had prohibited the immigration of paupers, criminal, and immoral persons, but the law of 1885 went to the other extreme and was designed to exclude industrial classes. The law is directed against prepayment of transportation, assistance, or encouragement of foreigners to immigrate _under contract_ to perform labor in the United States, and provides for the prosecution of the importer and deportation of the contract immigrant. This law has been enforced against skilled labor, which comes mainly from northwestern Europe, but, owing to the new system of _padroni_ and middlemen above described, it cannot be enforced against the unskilled laborers of Southern and Eastern Europe, since it cannot be shown that they have come under contract to perform labor. By the amendment and revised law adopted in 1903, after considerable discussion, and an effort on the part of the labor unions to strengthen the law, it was extended so as to exclude not only those coming under contract but also those coming under _offers_ and _promises_ of employment.[73] From what precedes we see that there are two exactly opposite points of view from which the subject of immigration is approached. One is the production of wealth; the other is the distribution of wealth. He who takes the standpoint of production sees the enormous undeveloped resources of this country--the mines to be exploited, railroads and highways to be built and rebuilt, farms to be opened up or to be more intensively cultivated, manufactures to be multiplied, and the markets of the world to be conquered by our exports, while there are not enough workmen, or not enough willing to do the hard and disagreeable work at the bottom. He who takes the standpoint of distribution sees the huge fortunes, the low wages, the small share of the product going to labor, the sweat-shop, the slums, all on account of the excessive competition of wage-earner against wage-earner. Consider first the bearing of immigration on the production of wealth. [Illustration: AGE GROUPS, FOREIGN AND NATIVE-BORN] =Immigration and Wealth Production.=--Over four-fifths of the immigrants are in the prime of life--the ages between fourteen and forty-five. In the year 1906 only 12 out of every 100 were under fourteen years of age, and only 4.5 out of every 100 over forty-five years of age. The census of 1900 offers some interesting comparisons between the native-born and the foreign-born in this matter of age distribution. It shows quite plainly that a large proportion of the native-born population is below the age of industrial production, fully 39 per cent, or two-fifths, being under fifteen years of age, while only 5 per cent of the foreign-born are of corresponding ages. On the other hand, the ages fifteen to forty-four include 46 per cent of the native and 58 per cent of the foreign-born. This is shown in the diagram based on five-year age periods. The native born are seen to group themselves in a symmetrical pyramid, with the children under five as the wide foundation, gradually tapering to the ages of eighty and eighty-four, but for the foreign-born they show a double pyramid, tapering in both directions from the ages of thirty-five to thirty-nine, which include the largest five-year group. Thus, immigration brings to us a population of working ages unhampered by unproductive mouths to be fed, and, if we consider alone that which produces the wealth of this country and not that which consumes it, the immigrants add more to the country than does the same number of native of equal ability. Their home countries have borne the expense of rearing them up to the industrial period of their lives, and then America, without that heavy expense, reaps whatever profits there are on the investment. [Illustration: PROPORTION OF SEXES. NATIVE AND FOREIGN-BORN WHITES, 1900, AND IMMIGRANTS 1906] In another respect does immigration add to our industrial population more than would be done by an equal increase in native population, namely, by the large excess of men over women. In 1906, over two-thirds of the immigrants were males and less than one-third were females. This is shown on the accompanying diagram, as well as the fact based on the census statistics that among the foreign-born the men predominate over the women in the ratio of 540 to 460, while among the native-born population the sexes are about equal, being in the proportion of 507 males to 493 females. This small proportion of women and children shows, of course, that it is the workers, not the families, who seek America. Yet the proportions widely vary for different nationalities. Among the Jews 48 per cent are females and 28 per cent children. This persecuted race moves in a body, expecting to make America its home. At the other extreme the Greeks send only 4 per cent females and 3 per cent children, the Croatians 13 per cent females and 4 per cent children, the South Italians 21 per cent females and 11 per cent children. These are races whose immigration has only recently begun, and naturally enough the women and children, except in the case of the Jews, do not accompany the workmen. A race of longer migration, like the Germans, has 41 per cent females and 15 per cent children. The Irish have a peculiar position. Alone of all the races do the women equal the men, but only 5 per cent are children. Irish girls seeking domestic service explain this preponderance of women. Significant and interesting facts regarding other races may be seen by studying the table entitled "Industrial Relations of Immigrants." [Illustration: SWEDEN GREECE GERMANY RUSSIA CHINA SCOTLAND AUSTRIA AUSTRALIA CANADA ENGLAND ITALY ROUMANIA AMERICAN SCHOOL BOYS (From _World's Work_)] Such being the proportions of industrial energy furnished by immigration, what is the quality? Much the larger proportion of immigrants are classed as unskilled, including laborers and servants. Omitting those who have "no occupation," including mainly women and children, who are 30.5 per cent of the total, only 21.7 per cent of the remainder who are working immigrants are skilled, and 73.4 per cent are unskilled. The proportions vary greatly among the different races. The largest element of skilled labor is among the Jews, a city people, two-thirds of whom are skilled workmen. Nearly the same proportion of the Scotch and Welsh and over one-half of the English and Bohemians are skilled mechanics. Nearly one-third of the Germans and Dutch are skilled, and one-fourth of the Scandinavians. At the other extreme, only 3 to 5 per cent of the Ruthenians, Croatians, Roumanians, and Slovaks are skilled, and 8 to 10 per cent of the Magyars, Lithuanians, and Poles. One-fifth of the North Italians and one-sixth of the South Italians are skilled. These and other proportions are shown in the statistical table. The skilled labor which comes to America, especially from Northern and Western Europe, occupies a peculiar position in our industries. In the first place, the most capable workmen have permanent places at home, and it is, in general, only those who cannot command situations who seek their fortunes abroad. The exceptions to this rule are in the beginnings of an industry like that of tin plate, when a large proportion of the industry moved bodily to America, and the highly skilled tin workers of Wales brought a kind of industrial ability that had not hitherto existed in this country. As for the bulk of skilled immigrants, they do not represent the highest skill of the countries whence they come. On the other hand, the European skilled workman is usually better trained than the American, and in many branches of industry, especially machinery and ship-building, the English and Scotch immigrants command those superior positions where an all-round training is required. This peculiar situation is caused by the highly specialized character of American industry. In no country has division of labor and machinery been carried as far as here. By division of labor the skilled trades have been split up into simple operations, each of which in itself requires little or no skill, and the boy who starts in as a beginner is kept at one operation so that he does not learn a trade. The old-time journeyman tailor was a skilled mechanic who measured his customer, cut the cloth and trimmings, basted, sewed, and pressed the suit. Now we have factories which make only coats, others which make only vests, others trousers, and there are children's knee-pants factories and even ladies' tailor establishments where the former seamstress sees her precious skill dissipated among a score of unskilled workers. Thus the journeyman tailor is displaced by the factory, where the coat passes through the hands of thirty to fifty different men and women, each of whom can learn his peculiar operation in a month or two. The same is true in greater or less degree in all industries. Even in the building trades in the larger cities there are as many kinds of bricklayers as there are kinds of walls to be built, and as many kinds of carpenters as there are varieties of woodwork. So it is with machinery. The American employer does not advertise for a "machinist"--he wants a "lathe hand" or a "drill-press hand," and the majority of his "hands" are perhaps only automatic machine tenders. The employer cannot afford to transfer these hands from one job to another to enable them to "learn the trade." He must keep them at one operation, for it is not so much skill that he wants as cheap labor and speed. Consequently, American industry is not producing all-round mechanics, and the employers look to Europe for their skilled artisans. In England the trade-unions have made it their special business to see that every apprentice learns every part of his trade, and they have prevented employers from splitting up the trades and specializing machinery and thereby transforming the mechanic into the "hand." Were it not for immigration, American industries would ere now have been compelled to give more attention to apprenticeship and the training of competent mechanics. The need of apprenticeship and trade schools is being more seriously felt every year, for, notwithstanding the progress of division of labor and machinery, the all-round mechanic continues to play an important part in the shop and factory. American trade-unions are gaining strength, and one of their most insistent demands is the protection of apprenticeship. The bricklayers' and carpenters' unions of Chicago even secure from their employers instruction for apprentices in school. Not much headway in this line, however, has yet been made, and American industry has become abnormal, we might almost say suicidal, or at any rate, non-self-supporting. By extreme division of labor and marvellous application of machinery it makes possible the wholesale employment in factories of the farm laborers of Europe and their children, and then depends on Europe for the better-trained types of the skilled mechanic, who, on account of the farm laborer, have not been able to learn their trade in America. Not only does immigration bring to America the strongest, healthiest, and most energetic and adventurous of the work-people of Europe and Asia, but those who come work much harder than they did at home. Migration tears a man away from the traditions, the routine, the social props on which he has learned to rely, and throws him among strangers upon his own resources. He must swim or drown. At the same time he earns higher wages and eats more nourishing food than he had ever thought within reach of one in his station. His ambition is fired, he is stirred by the new tonic of feeling himself actually rising in the world. He pictures to himself a home of his own, he economizes and saves money to send to his friends and family, or to return to his beloved land a person of importance. Watch a gang of Italians shovelling dirt under an Irish boss, or a sweat-shop of Jewish tailors under a small contractor, and you shall see such feverish production of wealth as an American-born citizen would scarcely endure. Partly fear, partly hope, make the fresh immigrant the hardest, if not the most intelligent, worker in our industries. =Industrial Capacities of Different Races.=--But, however hard one may work, he can only exercise the gifts with which nature has endowed him. Whether these gifts are contributed by race or by civilization, we shall inquire when we come to the problems of amalgamation and assimilation. At present we are concerned with the varying industrial gifts and capacities of the various races as they actually exist at the time when immigration, annexation, or conquest takes place. The mental and moral qualities suited to make productive workers depend upon the character of the industry. It is not conceivable that the immigrants of the present day from Southern Europe and from Asia could have succeeded as frontiersmen and pioneers in the settlement of the country. In all Europe, Asia, and Africa there was but one race in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries that had the preliminary training necessary to plunge into the wilderness, and in the face of the Indian to establish homes and agriculture. This was the English and the Scotch-Irish. The Spaniards and the French were pioneers and adventurers, but they established only trading stations. Accustomed to a paternal government they had not, as a people, the self-reliance and capacity for sustained exertion required to push forward as individuals, and to cut themselves off from the support of a government across the ocean. They shrank from the herculean task of clearing the forests, planting crops among the stumps, and living miles away from their neighbors. True, the pioneers had among their number several of German, French, and Dutch descent, but these belonged to the second and third generations descended from the immigrants and thrown from the time of childhood among their English-Scotch neighbors. The French trappers and explorers are famous, and have left their names on our map. But it was the English race that established itself in America, not because it was first to come, not because of its armies and navies, but because of its agriculture. Every farm newly carved out of the wilderness became a permanent foothold, and soon again sent out a continuous colony of sons and daughters to occupy the fertile land. Based on this self-reliant, democratic, industrial conquest of the new world the military conquest naturally, inevitably followed. But at the present day the character of industry has entirely changed. The last quarter of the nineteenth century saw the vacant lands finally occupied and the tribe of frontiersmen coming to an end. Population now began to recoil upon the East and the cities. This afforded to manufactures and to the mining industries the surplus labor-market so necessary for the continuance of large establishments which to-day need thousands of workmen and to-morrow hundreds. Moreover, among the American-born workmen, as well as the English and Scotch, are not found that docility, obedience to orders, and patient toil which employers desire where hundreds and thousands are brought like an army under the direction of foremen, superintendents, and managers. Employers now turn for their labor supply to those eastern and southern sections of Europe which have not hitherto contributed to immigration. The first to draw upon these sources in large numbers were the anthracite coal operators of Pennsylvania. In these fields the English, Scotch, Welsh, and Irish miners, during and following the period of the Civil War, had effected an organization for the control of wages, and the outrages of a secret society known as the Molly Maguires gave occasion for the importation of new races unaccustomed to unionism, and incapable, on account of language, of coöperation with English-speaking miners. Once introduced in the mining industry, these races rapidly found their way into the unskilled parts of manufactures, into the service of railroads and large contractors. On the construction of the Erie Canal in 1898, of 16,000 workmen, 15,000 were unnaturalized Italians.[74] The census of 1900 showed that while the foreign-born males were one-fourteenth of the laborers in agriculture, they were three-fourths of the tailors, more than one-half of the cabinet makers, nearly one-half of the miners and quarrymen, tannery workers, marble and stonecutters, more than two-fifths of the boot and shoe-makers and textile workers, one-third of the coopers, iron and steel workers, wood-workers and miscellaneous laborers, one-fourth of the carpenters, painters, and plasterers, and one-fifth of the sawmill workers.[75] The foreign-born females numbered nearly two-fifths of the female cotton-mill operatives and tailors, one-third of the woollen-mill operatives, one-fourth of the tobacco and silk-mill operatives. On the Pacific slope the Chinese and Japanese immigrants have filled the place occupied by the southeast European in the East and the negro in the South. They were the workmen who built the Pacific railroads, and without them it is said that these railroads could not have been constructed until several years after their actual completion. The immigration of the Chinese reached its highest figures prior to the exclusion laws of 1882, and since that time has been but an insignificant contribution. In their place have come the Japanese, a race whose native land, in proportion to its cultivable area, is more densely populated than any other country in the world. The Chinese and Japanese are perhaps the most industrious of all races, while the Chinese are the most docile. The Japanese excel in imitativeness, but are not as reliable as the Chinese. Neither race, so far as their immigrant representatives are concerned, possesses the originality and ingenuity which characterize the competent American and British mechanic. In the Hawaiian Islands, where they have enjoyed greater opportunities than elsewhere, they are found to be capable workmen of the skilled trades, provided they are under the direction of white mechanics.[76] But their largest field of work in Hawaii is in the unskilled cultivation of the great sugar plantations. Here they have been likened to "a sort of agricultural automaton," and it becomes possible to place them in large numbers under skilled direction, and thus to secure the best results from their docility and industry. In the United States itself the plantation form of agriculture, as distinguished from the domestic form, has always been based on a supply of labor from backward or un-Americanized races. This fact has a bearing on the alleged tendency of agriculture toward large farms. Ten years ago it seemed that the great "bonanza" farms were destined to displace the small farms, just as the trust displaces the small manufacturer. But it is now recognized that the reverse movement is in progress, and that the small farmer can compete successfully with the great farmer. It has not, however, been pointed out that the question is not merely an economic one and that it depends upon the industrial character of the races engaged in agriculture. The thrifty, hard-working and intelligent American or Teutonic farmer is able to economize and purchase his own small farm and compete successfully with the large undertaking. He is even beginning to do this in Hawaii since the compulsory labor of his large competitors was abolished.[77] But the backward, thriftless, and unintelligent races succeed best when employed in gangs on large estates. The cotton and sugar fields of the South with their negro workers have their counterpart in the plantations of Hawaii with their Chinese and Japanese, and in the newly developed sugar-beet fields of Nebraska, Colorado, and California, with their Russians, Bohemians, Japanese, and Mexicans. In the domestic or small form of agriculture the bulk of immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe are not greatly desired as wage-earners, and they do not succeed as proprietors and tenants because they lack oversight and business ability. Where they are located in colonies under favorable auspices the Italians have achieved notable success, and in the course of Americanization they will doubtless rival older nationalities. But in the immigrant stage they are helpless, and it is the immigrants from Northwestern Europe, the Germans and Scandinavians, whose thrift, self-reliance, and intensive agriculture have made them from the start the model farmers of America. The Jewish immigrant, particularly, is unfitted for the life of a pioneer. Remarkably individualistic in character, his field of enterprise is society, and not the land. Of the thirty thousand families sent out from New York by industrial and agricultural removal societies, nine-tenths are located in industry and trade, and the bulk of the remainder, who are placed on farms, succeed by keeping summer boarders. Depending on boarders, they neglect agriculture and buy their food-stuff. Their largest colony of hoped-for agriculturists, Woodbine, New Jersey, has become a clothing factory.[78] Yet the factory system, with its discipline and regular hours, is distasteful to the Jew's individualism. He prefers the sweat-shop, with its going and coming. If possible, he rises through peddling and merchandising. These are a few of the many illustrative facts which might be set forth to show that the changing character of immigration is made possible by the changing character of industry; and that races wholly incompetent as pioneers and independent proprietors are able to find a place when once manufactures, mines, and railroads have sprung into being, with their captains of industry to guide and supervise their semi-intelligent work. CHAPTER VI LABOR We have seen that the character of the immigrants for whom a place can be found depends upon the character of the industry. It also depends upon the laws governing property in labor. Here the industrial problem widens out into the social problem. There are four variations in the treatment of labor as property in the United States, each of which has had its peculiar effect on the character of immigration, or has grown out of the relations between races. They are slavery, peonage, contract labor, and free labor. Under slavery the laborer and his children are compelled by law throughout their lifetime to work for an owner on terms dictated and enforced by him. Under peonage the laborer is compelled by law to pay off a debt by means of his labor, and under contract labor he is compelled by law to carry out a contract to work. To enforce peonage and contract labor the offence of "running away" is made punishable by imprisonment at forced labor, or by extension of the period of service. Under freedom the law refuses to enforce a contract to work, making this an exception to the sacredness of contracts, and refuses to enforce the payment of a debt by specific service. This leaves to the contractor or creditor the usually empty relief of suing for damages. The significance of these varying degrees of servile, semi-servile, and free labor will be seen in the following discussion of the social relations of the superior and inferior races. In the entire circuit of the globe those races which have developed under a tropical sun are found to be indolent and fickle. From the standpoint of survival of the fittest, such vices are virtues, for severe and continuous exertion under tropical conditions bring prostration and predisposition to disease. Therefore, if such races are to adopt that industrious life which is a second nature to races of the temperate zones, it is only through some form of compulsion. The negro could not possibly have found a place in American industry had he come as a free man, and at the present time contract labor and peonage with the crime of "running away" are recognized in varying degrees by the laws of Southern states. These statutes have been held unconstitutional by the Supreme Court,[79] under an act of Congress passed in 1867, but the condition of peonage which they contemplate is considered by many planters as essential to the continuance of the cotton industry. One of them, in southwestern Georgia, a graduate of Columbia College, with five years of business training in the Northern states, is quoted in an interview as follows:[80]-- "We have two ways of handling our plantations. We rent small sections of forty acres each, and with these go a plough and the mule. In addition, I have about 450 hands who work on wages. These men are paid nine dollars a month, in addition to a fixed rate of food, which amounts to four pounds of meat a week, a certain percentage of vegetables, tobacco, sugar, flour, and some other commodities. "These negroes live on the plantation, are given a roof over their heads, have garden patches, and several other more or less valuable privileges. They invariably come to me for small advances of money. "These advances of money and rations and clothing, although there is not much of the latter, are frequently sufficient to put the negro in debt to us. The minute he finds he is in debt he naturally conceives it to be easier to go to work somewhere else and begin all over again, instead of paying his debts. "Now, when a negro runs away and violates his contract, leaving us in the lurch, not only short of his labor, but short of the advances we have made to him in money and goods, what would happen if we depended simply and solely on our right to sue? In the first place, with 450 hands we would have 450 suits before the season is out, and if we won them all we would not be able to collect forty-five cents. "The result is, that in Georgia and Alabama, and I believe in other states, the law recognizes the right of the planter to reclaim the laborer who has left in violation of his contract, whether he be actually in debt or not. "Whether Judge Jones has declared this law constitutional or not, the planters in the black belt will have to maintain their right to claim their contract labor, or else they will have to go out of the business. Under any other system you would find it impossible to get in your cotton, because the negroes at the critical time would simply sit down and refuse to work. When they are well, we compel laborers to go to the field by force. This is the truth, and there is no use lying about it." This reasoning is entirely logical from the business standpoint. If production of wealth is the standard, contracts must be fulfilled and debts must be paid. Otherwise capital will not embark in business. But the reasoning does not stop with the negro. Once established, the practice spreads to other races. Instances are cited of white men held in peonage, negroes holding other negroes, and Italians forced to work in a phosphate mine.[81] It is an easy matter to get working men in debt. Many thousand rural justices keeping no records of convictions, hundreds of constables with fees depending on convictions, scores of petty crimes with penalties not usually enforced, contractors and planters eager for labor at the convict's rating of 35 cents a day--neither the negro nor the poor white is safe. Immigrants avoid a country with such a record. Not only the dread of forced labor for themselves but the dread of competition with the low wages that the forced labor of others implies, keep the immigrants away from the South. The fame of peonage is spread among them before they leave their native land. The business that rests on coerced labor damages the whole community for its own temporary gain. The right to quit work is as sacred for the workman as the right to enforce contracts for the capitalist. It is just as necessary to get energetic labor as it is to get abundant capital to embark in business. By recognizing the right of workmen to violate contracts, the employer learns to content himself with contracts that will not hurt when violated. He learns to appeal to the workman's motive to industry by methods that are not coercive. Admitting that the bulk of what is said about the negro's fickleness is true, he nevertheless is indiscriminately maligned. The thousands that are unreliable furnish a cloak for suppressing the hundreds that are industrious. I have made comparisons of the pay-rolls of two gas works in Southern cities--the one employing negro stokers at 11 cents an hour, the other whites at 22 cents an hour, and both working 12 hours a day seven days a week. The negroes put in as many hours between pay-days as did the whites, and if they "laid off" after pay-day it is no more than any class of white workmen would do after two weeks of such exhausting work. The negro in Southern cities can scarcely hope to rise above 12 cents an hour, and white mechanics have a way of working with negro helpers at 10 cents an hour in order to lift their own wages to 20 cents an hour. White wage-earners and white employers in the South speak of the negroes' efforts to get higher wages in the same words and tones as employers in the North speak of white wage-earners who have organized unions and demanded more pay. A foreman condemned his "niggers" for instability when they were leaving him at 10 cents an hour for a railroad job at 12-1/2 cents an hour. Praising the Italians in comparison with the negro, he could not think of paying 17-1/2 cents an hour for pick-and-shovel work, which Italians were said to be getting in another section of the state. The right to quit work is the right to get higher wages. If the higher wages are paid and proper treatment accorded, a process of natural selection ensues. The industrious and steady workmen of all races retain the jobs. The gas company referred to above, by a system of graded pay advancing with years of service, had sorted out a more steady and reliable force of negroes than they could have secured of whites at the rate of wages paid. The test is indeed a severe one where a race has always been looked upon as servile. With high wages regarded as "white man's wages," the process of individual selection does not work out, and the dominant race excuses its resort to whipping, beating, and peonage on the ground of the laziness which its methods of remuneration have not learned to counterbalance. Even the industrious Italians treated in this way would not be industrious--they would leave for other states. The Malay races, to which the Filipinos belong, are, like the negroes, careless, thriftless, and disinclined to continuous exertion. In order to induce the Javanese to work, the Dutch government of Java sets aside a certain tract of government land for coffee planting, and compels each head of a household to set out and keep in order a certain number of coffee trees. On private estates in Java and in other Malay and Indian colonies, such as Burma, Ceylon, British India, where the government does not compel the native to take a contract to work, it nevertheless enforces contracts voluntarily made. In certain provinces of the Philippines "the tenants are usually in debt, and the old law which permits the creditor to imprison the debtor for non-payment of debt is still in force.... Landowners of a district frequently come together shortly before the crops are sold and agree among themselves how much interest to charge the tenants on their debts. This is for the purpose of charging the highest possible rate and at the same time retain tenants, who then could not leave, finding the same conditions prevailing throughout the district."[82] In densely populated countries like Java and Southern India, where the native cannot set up for himself, he has no alternative except to work under these contracts, and this is also true in the more thickly populated districts of the Philippine Islands. But the case is different in sparsely settled countries like Burma, East Sumatra, and the greater part of the Philippines, where wages are so high that natives are not compelled by necessity to work continuously. "Speaking generally," says Professor Jenks, "the unskilled Filipino laborer, while intelligent enough, is careless and thriftless. He in most cases wishes to take two or three days a week, on the average, to celebrate as feast days. In individual cases, where his wages have been increased, he has been known to lessen correspondingly the number of days per month which he would work. His income being sufficient to satisfy his modest needs, he could see no reason why he should toil longer than was necessary to earn his income."[83] Hence in these sparsely settled countries the Dutch and English governments have adopted, and Professor Jenks, in his report to the War Department, has recommended a limited use of the system of contract labor, not, however, for the native, but for imported Chinese. This system has existed in another of our newly acquired possessions, Hawaii, since 1852, where it applied to Chinese, Japanese, Portuguese, and German immigrants, and whence it was abolished by the act of annexation in 1898.[84] [Illustration: FILIPINO GOVERNORS (From Census of the Philippine Islands)] Contract labor of this kind is quite different from the peonage and contract labor of the non-industrial races. It is similar to the indentured service of colonial times, in that the term of each contract is limited to a few years, and the contract is made by way of compensation for advanced expenses of immigration. The object is not, as in the case of slavery and peonage, to compel a shiftless race to work, but it is to develop the country by the introduction of an industrious race. The Chinese, after the expiration of their contracts, often become skilled laborers and merchants, and in the latter position their frugality and wiliness make them dangerous neighbors for the native Malay and Filipino races.[85] For this reason Professor Jenks recommends that employers be placed under bonds to return each contract Chinese coolie to China at the expiration of the period of contract, not to exceed three years, unless the government gives special permission for renewal of the contract. Governor Taft, in his report for the year 1902, while advocating a limited employment of Chinese contract coolies, said, "the truth is that, from a political standpoint, the unlimited introduction of the Chinese into these islands would be a great mistake. I believe the objection on the part of the Filipinos to such a course to be entirely logical and justified. The development of the islands by Chinamen would be at the expense of the Filipino people, and they may very well resent such a suggestion."[86] Governor Taft's opinion is strongly supported by the special commissioner of the American Federation of Labor, who, after inquiries in the district surrounding Manila, reports as follows:-- "Their reluctance to work, continually harped upon by many employers, is simply the natural reluctance of a progressive people to work for low wages under bad treatment. When wages rise above the level of the barest and poorest necessaries of life, and where treatment is fair, there Filipinos are at work in any numbers required."[87] The situation here is similar to that of the negroes. In order to get two hundred steady workers at high wages it is necessary to try out a thousand or more. But the reports of the Philippine Commission show that with the process of selection which their engineers can pursue by means of the high wages on government work the results are satisfactory.[88] "Of course," continues Mr. Rosenberg in his report, "the Filipino worker cannot successfully compete--cheap as he can live--with the Chinese standard of living, hence the unceasing vilification of the Filipino workers by those employers and their following, who, seeing near by the unlimited supply of cheap Chinese labor, wish these islands to be thrown open to such labor, not only for the purpose of reducing the small wages of the Filipinos, but also to reduce that of the Chinese laborers now here. As one employer stated to me, 'We want more Chinese, to keep them here for one or two years, then ship them back and get another lot, for the Chinese I have here now are becoming too independent and want more pay.'" =Free Labor.=--The free laborer is not compelled by law to work. Then why should he work? Why does he work? The answer is found within himself. He wants something that he cannot get without working. Though this may seem a trifling question and a self-evident answer, the question and answer are the foundation of all questions of free institutions. For the non-working races and classes or the spasmodic and unreliable workers are the savages, paupers, criminals, idiots, lunatics, drunkards, and the great tribe of exploiters, "grafters," despots, and "leisure classes," who live on the work of others. Nearly every question of social pathology may be resolved to this, Why does he not work? And nearly every social ill would be cured if the non-workers could be brought voluntarily to work. There are just two grand motives which induce the freeman to work--necessity and ambition. Necessity is the desire for quantity, quality, and variety of things to be used. The term is elastic. It is psychological, not material. It includes, of course, the wants of mere animal existence--food, clothing, shelter. But this is a small part. The cost of the mere quantity needed to support life is less than the added cost needed to secure the quality and variety that satisfy the taste and habits. A pig enjoys raw corn, but a man requires corn cake at five times the cost. Tastes and habits depend on one's childhood, one's training, one's associations, and kind of work. The necessities of a Chinese coolie, Italian immigrant, or negro plantation hand are less, and cost less, than those of a skilled mechanic or a college graduate, because his associations have been different, and his present work is different. But necessity goes farther. It includes the wants of the family considered as a unit, and not merely the wants of the single man or woman, else the race would not continue to increase. Furthermore, social obligations impose added necessity. Compulsory education of children compels parents to support their children instead of living on their wages. Laws regulating sanitation and tenements compel the tenant to pay more rent. The necessities of a farm-hand on the estates of Italy are less than those of the same hand in the cities of America. Ambition is the desire for an improved position for one's self and family--for better quality and greater variety of material things. It demands a style of clothing and living suitable to the improved position aspired to. It demands an education for one's children superior to the minimum set by compulsory schooling. It demands thrift and economy for the sake of independence or the ability to hold on until one's demands are conceded. Ambition looks to the future--necessity is based on the past. The negro or the Malay works three days and loafs three because three days' wages procure his necessities. The Chinaman, or Italian, or Jewish immigrant works six days and saves the wages of three because the future is vivid to his imagination. With similar necessities one is ambitious, the other is content. The scope and possibility of evoking ambition depend upon the institution of private property. Property in human beings suppresses it, unless occasionally a slave is permitted to purchase his freedom. The wage system evokes ambition if the way is open for promotion or for escape by becoming an owner. Tenancy is on a still higher level, but most of all, for the masses of men, the ownership of his own small property is the keenest spur to ambition, for it rewards the worker with all of his product. This motive is the surest test of an individual's or a race's future. Compare the negro and the Italian cotton grower as tenants in the new vocation opening up to the latter. "It is always difficult," says the observant planter, Mr. Stone,[89] "to get a negro to plant and properly cultivate the outer edges of his field--the extreme ends of his rows, his ditch banks, etc. The Italian is so jealous of the use of every foot for which he pays rent that he will cultivate with a hoe places too small to be worked with a plough, and derive a revenue from spots to which a negro would not give a moment's thought. I have seen them cultivate right down to the water's edge the banks of bayous that had never been touched by the plough. I have seen them walk through their fields and search out every skipped place in every row and carefully put in seed to secure a perfect stand. I have seen them make more cotton per acre than the negro on the adjoining cut, gather it from two to four weeks earlier, and then put in the extra time earning money by picking in the negro's field." But ambition has its penalty. It is equivalent to an increase in the supply of labor. As an ambitious proprietor the increase goes into his permanent property, but the ambitious wage-earner accepts a lower rate of pay. His fellows see the reduction and go still lower. The see-saw continues until wages reach the level of necessities, and there is nothing left for ambition. The Jewish sweat-shop is the tragic penalty paid by that ambitious race. In the Illinois coal mines the wages were reduced one-third during twelve years of Italian and Slav immigration. The ambitious races are the industrial races. But their ambition and their industry bring the momentous problem of destructive competition. It might seem that this evil would correct itself--that an increase in the products of one industry would be offset by an increase in other industries; that therefore the increased supply in one would not be forced upon the market at lower prices, but would be exchanged on the same terms as before for the increased supply in others. This is indeed the case in prosperous times. All industries advance together, and the increasing supply of one is merely an increasing demand for others. But for some reason, industries do not always harmoniously advance together. And when the disproportion appears, the workers who are blindly but ambitiously pushing ahead endeavor to overcome, by increasing the quantity of output, what they lose by reducing the price. There is but one immediate and practical remedy--the organization of labor to regulate competition. The method of organization is to do in concert through self-sacrifice what the non-industrial races do individually for self-indulgence; namely, refuse to work. Where the one loafs the other strikes. While the necessities of the workers set the minimum below which wages cannot fall, and their physical endurance sets the maximum hours beyond which they cannot work, the labor-union, by means of the strike or the threat to strike, sets a higher minimum of wages and a lower maximum of hours, which leaves room for ambition. Eventually the higher wage and the shorter hours become habitual and become a higher level of necessities. Gifted individuals may, indeed, rise above the wage-earning class by their own efforts, but labor organization alone can raise the class as a whole. The organization of workmen in labor unions has been more difficult in this than in other free countries, owing to the competition of races. Heretofore it has been the easiest possible matter for a manager, apprehensive of agitators in forming a union, to introduce a new race and a new language into his works. Indeed, almost the only device and symptom of originality displayed by American employers in disciplining their labor force has been that of playing one race against another. They have, as a rule, been weak in methods of conciliation and feelings of consideration for their employees, as well as in the means of safeguarding life and health, but they have been strong with the weapon "divide and conquer." The number of races they have drawn upon is often amazing. The anthracite mine workers comprise nineteen languages and dialects. The employees of the Colorado Fuel and Iron Company belong to thirty-two nationalities and speak twenty-seven languages. Such a medley of races offers indeed a disheartening prospect to the union organizer. And therefore when these races finally organize, the change in their moral character must be looked upon as the most significant of the social and industrial revolutions of our time. The United Mine Workers of America, with 300,000 members, is very largely composed of recent immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe. So with the Longshoremen, the United Garment Workers, and the Butcher Workmen. These are or have been among the strongest and best disciplined of American labor-unions. The newest races of the past twenty years have been coming long enough to have members who speak the English language and act as interpreters and leaders, and this is essential where the speeches at a union meeting must be translated often into four or five languages before the subject can be voted upon. Furthermore, the recruiting area for new races has been nearly exhausted, and the races now coming find their fellow-countrymen already in the unions. In the anthracite coal field I saw a dozen Slovaks just arrived from Hungary, but persuaded by their unionized precursors not to take the places of strikers. In New York a shipload of Italians in time of strike has been taken directly into the union. Such a sight would have been unlikely a dozen years ago. The competition of races is the competition of standards of living. The reason the Chinaman or the Italian can save three days' wages is because wages have been previously fixed by the greater necessities of more advanced races. But competition has no respect for superior races. The race with lowest necessities displaces others. The cotton textile industry of New England was originally operated by the educated sons and daughters of American stock. The Irish displaced many of them, then the French Canadians completed the displacement; then, when the children of the French had begun to acquire a higher standard, contingents of Portuguese, Greeks, Syrians, Poles, and Italians entered to prevent a rise, and latterly the Scotch-Irish from the Appalachian Mountains came down to the valleys of the South, and with their low wages, long hours, and child labor, set another brake on the standard of living. Lastly, Italians are beginning to be imported to supplement the "poor whites." Branches of the clothing industry in New York began with English and Scotch tailors, were then captured by Irish and Germans, then by Russian Jews, and lastly by Italians, while in Boston the Portuguese took a share, and in Chicago the Poles, Bohemians, and Scandinavians. Almost every great manufacturing and mining industry has experienced a similar substitution of races. As rapidly as a race rises in the scale of living, and through organization begins to demand higher wages and resist the pressure of long hours and overexertion, the employers substitute another race and the process is repeated. Each race comes from a country lower in the scale than that of the preceding, until finally the ends of the earth have been ransacked in the search for low standards of living combined with patient industriousness. Europe has been exhausted, Asia has been drawn upon, and there remain but three regions of the temperate zones from which a still lower standard can be expected. These are China, Japan, and India. The Chinese have been excluded by law, the Japanese and Koreans are coming in increasing numbers, and the Indian coolies remain to be experimented upon. That employers will make strenuous efforts to bring in these last remaining races in the progressive decline of standards, to repeal the Chinese prohibitive laws and to prevent additions to these laws, naturally follows from the progress toward higher standards and labor organization already made by the Italian and the Slav. The trade-union is often represented as an imported and un-American institution. It is true that in some unions the main strength is in the English workmen. But the majority of unionists are immigrants and children of immigrants from countries that know little of unionism. Ireland and Italy have nothing to compare with the trade-union movement of England, but the Irish are the most effective organizers of the American unions, and the Italians are becoming the most ardent unionists. Most remarkable of all, the individualistic Jew from Russia, contrary to his race instinct, is joining the unions. The American unions, in fact, grow out of American conditions, and are an American product. Although wages are two or three times as high as in his European home, the immigrant is driven by competition and the pressure of employers into a physical exertion which compels him to raise his standard of living in order to have strength to keep at work. He finds also that the law forbids his children to work, and compels him to send them to school to maintain a higher standard and to support his children he must earn more wages. This he can do in no other way than by organizing a union. The movement is of course aided by English-speaking outsiders or "agitators," especially by the Irish, but it finds a prompt response in the necessities of the recruits. Labor organization is essentially the outcome of American freedom, both as a corrective to the evils of free competition and as an exercise of the privilege of free association. When once moved by the spirit of unionism, the immigrants from low-standard countries are the most dangerous and determined of unionists. They have no obligations, little property, and but meagre necessities that compel them to yield. The bituminous coal miners were on strike four months in 1897 and the anthracite mine workers five months in 1902. Unionism comes to them as a discovery and a revelation. Suddenly to find that men of other races whom they have hated are really brothers, and that their enmity has been encouraged for the profit of a common oppressor, is the most profound awakening of which they are capable. Their resentment toward employers who have kept them apart, their devotion to their new-found brothers, are terrible and pathetic. With their emotional temperament, unionism becomes not merely a fight for wages but a religious crusade. It is in the nature of retribution that, after bringing to this country all the industrial races of Europe and Asia in the effort to break down labor organizations, these races should so soon have wiped out race antagonism and, joining together in the most powerful of labor-unions, have wrenched from their employers the greatest advances in wages. There is but one thing that stands in the way of complete unionization in many of the industries; namely, a flood of immigration too great for assimilation. With nearly a million immigrants a year the pressure upon unions seems almost resistless. A few of the unions which control the trade, like the mine workers and longshoremen, with high initiation fees and severe terms of admission, are able to protect themselves by virtue of strength already gained. But in the coast states and on miscellaneous labor this strategic advantage does not exist, and the standards are set by the newest immigrants. [Illustration: GOVERNOR JOHNSON OF MINNESOTA.--SWEDE (From _The World To-Day_)] =Profits and Wages.=--We have now stated at some length in this and the preceding chapter the two standpoints from which the immigration of industrial races is viewed. One standpoint is that of the production of wealth, the other the distribution of wealth. One is the development of our natural resources, the other is the elevation of our working population. If we inquire somewhat more critically and take into account all of the circumstances, we shall find that the motives animating this difference of policy are not really the above distinction between production and distribution, but the distinction between two opposing interests in distribution; namely, profits and wages. Unfortunately it is too readily assumed that whatever increases profits does so by increasing production. As a matter of fact it is only secondarily the production of wealth and development of resources that is sought by one of the interests concerned--it is primarily increase of profits at the expense of wages. Cheap labor, it is asserted, is needed to develop the less productive resources of the country--what the economists call the margin of production. It is needed to develop the less productive industries, like sugar beet, and the less productive branches of other industries, like the construction of railways in undeveloped regions or the reconstruction of railways in older regions, or the extension of a coal mine into the narrow veins, and so on. Without cheap labor these marginal resources, it is asserted, could not profitably be exploited, and would therefore not be developed. This argument, within limits, is undoubtedly true, but it overlooks the part played by machinery and inventions where wages are high. The cigar-making machine cannot extensively be introduced on the Pacific coast because Chinese cheap labor makes the same cigars at less cost than the machines. High wages stimulate the invention and use of machinery and scientific processes, and it is machinery and science, more than mere hand labor, on which reliance must be placed to develop the natural resources of a country. But machinery and science cannot be as quickly introduced as cheap immigrant labor. Machinery requires accumulation of capital in advance of production, but labor requires only the payment of daily wages in the course of production. Consequently in the haste to get profits the immigrant is more desired than machinery. But excessive profits secured in this way bring reaction and a period of business depression which check the production of wealth even more than the period of prosperity has stimulated production. Consider the extreme vacillations of prosperity and depression which characterize American industry. In a period of prosperity the prices of commodities rise rapidly, but the wages of labor, especially unorganized labor, follow slowly, and do not rise proportionately as high as prices. This means an enormous increase in profits and production of commodities. But commodities are produced to be sold, and if the market falls off, then production comes to a standstill with what is known as "overproduction." Now, wage-earners are the mass of consumers. If their wages do not rise in proportion to prices and profits, they cannot purchase as large a proportion of the country's products as they did before the period of prosperity began. "Overproduction" is mainly the "underconsumption" of wage-earners. Immigration intensifies this fatal cycle of "booms" and "depressions." A natural increase in population by excess of births over deaths, continues at practically the same rate year after year, in good times and bad times, but an artificial increase through immigration falls off in hard times and becomes excessive in good times. Thus, in 1879, at the lowest point of depression, the number of immigrants was 177,826, but three years later, in the "boom" culminating in 1882, it rose to 788,992. In nine years following the depression of 1897 the number increased from 230,000 to 1,100,000. Even this does not tell the story complete, for the effects of free immigration are intensified by the opposite policy of a protective tariff on imports. While labor is admitted practically free, the products of labor are taxed to prevent free ingress. The following table shows the extreme points in the rise and fall of immigration and imports:-- CULMINATING POINTS OF IMMIGRATION AND IMPORTS OF MERCHANDISE =================+=========================+======================= | IMMIGRATION | IMPORTS YEAR ENDING +----------+----------+--------------+------------ JUNE 30 |Prosperity|Depression| Prosperity | Depression -----------------+----------+----------+--------------+------------ 1873 | 459,803 | | $642,000,000| 1879 and 1878[90]| | 177,826 | |$437,000,000 1882 | 788,992 | | 725,000,000| 1886 and 1885[90]| | 334,203 | | 578,000,000 1893 | 439,307 | | 866,000,000| 1897 and 1898[90]| | 230,832 | | 616,000,000 1906 |1,100,735 | | 1,226,000,000| -----------------+----------+----------+--------------+------------ By comparing the two sets of columns it will be seen that, owing to the protective tariff, the imports of merchandise vary but slightly in periods of prosperity and depression compared with the variation in number of immigrants. Thus in the recent period of prosperity, the imports increased twofold above the lowest point of the preceding depression, while the number of immigrants increased nearly fivefold. The swell of immigration in the above-mentioned periods of prosperity increases the supply of labor, but the protective tariff prevents a similar increase in the supply of products. Thus immigration and the tariff together prevent wages from rising with the rise in prices of commodities and cost of living. This permits profits to increase more than wages, to be followed by overproduction and stoppage of business. Furthermore, when once the flow of immigrants is stimulated it continues for some time after the pinnacle of prosperity has been reached. In 1903 the boom met a check at the beginning of the year, but the number of immigrants continued to increase during the summer and fall at the rate of 20,000 per month in excess of the number during the high period of prosperity in 1902. This makes it possible for great corporations to continue their investments by means of cheap labor beyond the probable demands of the country, with the result of overproduction, loss of profits, inability to pay fixed charges, and consequent panics. Thus it is that immigration, instead of increasing the production of wealth by a steady, healthful growth, joins with other causes to stimulate the feverish overproduction, with its inevitable collapse, that has characterized the industry of America more than that of any other country. It helps to create fortunes during a period of speculation, and intensifies the reaction during a period of stagnation. CHAPTER VII CITY LIFE, CRIME, AND POVERTY Statistics are considered by many people as dry and uninteresting, and the fact that a book is statistical is a warning that it should not be read, or that the statistical paragraphs should be passed over for the narrative and historical parts. This is a dilettante and lazy attitude to take, and especially so in the study of social subjects, for in these subjects it is only statistics that tell us the true proportions and relative importance of our facts. The study of statistics leads us to a study of social causes and forces, and when we see that in the year 1790 three per cent of our population lived in cities, and in the year 1900 thirty-three per cent lived in cities of 8000 population and over, we are aroused to the importance of making a serious inquiry into the reasons for this growth of cities and the effects of city life on the future of democracy and the welfare of the nation. More impressive to the student of race problems becomes the inquiry when we realize that while one-fifth of our entire population lives in the thirty-eight cities of over 100,000 population, two-fifths of our foreign-born population, one-third of our native offspring of foreign parents, and only one-tenth of our people of native parentage live in such cities. That is to say, the proportion of the foreign-born in great cities is four times as great, and the proportion of the children of foreign parents is three and one-third times as great as that of the colonial and older native stock. These proportions appear in the accompanying table and the upper diagram on page 162. POPULATION IN THE UNITED STATES AND LARGE CITIES: 1900 =======================+===================+=========================== | | IN 38 CITIES OF 100,000 | IN UNITED STATES | POPULATION AND OVER +-----------+-------+------------+-------------- TOTAL FOR UNITED STATES| | | | Per cent of | | Per | | total of | Number | cent | Number | corresponding | | | | class -----------------------+-----------+-------+------------+-------------- Population |75,994,575 | 100.0 | 14,208,347 | 18.7 Native white, native | | | | parents |40,958,216 | 53.9 | 4,245,817 | 10.3 Native white, foreign | | | | parents |15,637,063 | 20.6 | 5,280,186 | 33.2 Foreign white |10,213,817 | 13.4 | 3,972,324 | 39.7 Negroes | 8,833,994 | 11.6 | 668,324 | 7.6 Indian and Mongolians | 351,385 | .5 | 32,696 | 9.3 -----------------------+-----------+-------+------------+-------------- If we present the matter in another form in order to show the full extent of foreign influence in our great cities, we have another diagram, which shows that 59 per cent of the population outside, and only 30 per cent of the population within these cities is of native parentage, while 27 per cent of the population outside, and 65 per cent of the population within these cities is of foreign parentage. The census enumeration carries us back only to the parents, but if we had knowledge of the grandparents we should probably find that the immigrant element of the nineteenth century contributed a goodly portion of those set down as of native parentage. [Illustration: DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION: 1900] [Illustration: PERCENTAGE OF POPULATION IN CITIES: 1900] [Illustration: CONSTITUENTS OF THE POPULATION OF CITIES OF MORE THAN 100,000 INHABITANTS: 1900] Still more significant becomes the comparison when we take each of these cities separately, as is done in the chart reproduced on page 163 from the Statistical Atlas of the Twelfth Census. Here it appears that the extreme is reached in the textile manufacturing city of Fall River, where but 14 per cent of the population is of native extraction, while in the two greatest cities, New York and Chicago, the proportion is 21 per cent, and the only large cities with a predominance of the native element are St. Joseph, Columbus, Indianapolis, and Kansas City, with Denver equally divided. As already stated, grandparents would still further diminish the proportion of native element. If we carry our comparison down to the 160 cities of 25,000 population, we shall find that in such cities is one-half of the foreign-born population,[91] and we shall also see marked differences among the races. At one extreme, three-fourths of those born in Russia, mainly Jews, live in these principal cities, and at the other extreme, one-fifth of the Norwegians. The other Scandinavian countries and the Welsh and Swiss have about one-third, while the English and Scotch are two-fifths, Germany, Austria, Bohemia, and Poland, one-half to three-fifths, Ireland and Italy nearly two-thirds. Individual cities suggest striking comparisons. In New York, computations based on the census show 785,035 persons of German descent, a number nearly equal to the population of Hamburg, and larger than the native element in New York (737,477). New York has twice as many Irish (710,510) as Dublin, two and one-half times as many Jews as Warsaw, half as many Italians as Naples, and 50,000 to 150,000 first and second generations from Scotland, Hungary, Poland, Austria, and England.[92] Chicago has nearly as many Germans as Dresden, one-third as many Bohemians as Prague, one-half as many Irish as Belfast, one-half as many Scandinavians as Stockholm.[93] The variety of races, too, is astonishing. New York excels Babel. A newspaper writer finds in that city sixty-six languages spoken, forty-nine newspapers published in foreign languages, and one school at Mulberry Bend with children of twenty-nine nationalities. Several of the smaller groups live in colonies, like the Syrians, Greeks, and Chinese. But the colonies of the larger groups are reservoirs perpetually filling and flowing.[94] The influx of population to our cities, the most characteristic and significant movement of the present generation, has additional significance when we classify it according to the motives of those who seek the cities, whether industrial or parasitic. The transformation from agriculture to manufactures and transportation has designated city occupations as the opportunities for quick and speculative accumulation of wealth, and in the cities the energetic, ambitious, and educated classes congregate. From the farms of the American stock the sons leave a humdrum existence for the uncertain but magnificent rewards of industrialism. These become the business men, the heads of great enterprises, and the millionaires whose example hypnotizes the imagination of the farm lads throughout the land. Many of them find their level in clerical and professional occupations, but they escape the manual toil which to them is the token of subordination. These manual portions are the peculiar province of the foreign immigrant, and foreign immigration is mainly a movement from the farms of Europe to the cities of America. The high wages of the industries and occupations which radiate from American cities are to them the magnet which fortune-seeking is to the American-born. The cities, too, furnish that choice of employers and that easy reliance on charitable and friendly assistance which is so necessary to the indigent laborer looking for work. Thus it is that those races of immigrants the least self-reliant or forehanded, like the Irish and the Italians, seek the cities in greater proportions than those sturdy races like the Scandinavians, English, Scotch, and Germans. The Jew, also, coming from the cities of Europe, seeks American cities by the very reason of his racial distaste for agriculture, and he finds there in his coreligionists the necessary assistance for a beginning in American livelihood. At this point we gradually pass over from the industrial motives of city influx to the parasitic motives. The United Hebrew Charities of New York have asserted that one-fourth of the Jews of that city are applicants for charity, and the other charitable societies make similar estimates for the population at large. These estimates must certainly be exaggerated, and a careful analysis of their methods of keeping statistics will surely moderate such startling statements, but we must accept them as the judgment of those who have the best means of knowing the conditions of poverty and pauperism in the metropolis. However exaggerated, they indicate an alarming extent of abject penury brought on by immigration, for it is mainly the immigrant and the children of the immigrant who swell the ranks of this indigent element in our great cities. Those who are poverty-stricken are not necessarily parasitic, but they occupy that intermediate stage between the industrial and the parasitic classes from which either of these classes may be recruited. If through continued poverty they become truly parasitic, then they pass over to the ranks of the criminal, the pauper, the vicious, the indolent, and the vagrant, who, like the industrial class, seek the cities. The dangerous effects of city life on immigrants and the children of immigrants cannot be too strongly emphasized. This country can absorb millions of all races from Europe and can raise them and their descendants to relatively high standards of American citizenship in so far as it can find places for them on the farms. "The land has been our great solvent."[95] But the cities of this country not only do not raise the immigrants to the same degree of independence, but are themselves dragged down by the parasitic and dependent conditions which they foster among the immigrant element. [Illustration: DR. ORONHYATEKHA MOHAWK INDIAN, LATE CHIEF OF ORDER OF FORESTERS] =Crime.=--This fact is substantiated by a study of criminal and pauper statistics. Great caution is needed in this line of inquiry, especially since the eleventh census in 1890 promulgated most erroneous inferences from the statistics compiled under its direction. It was contended by the census authorities that for each million of the foreign-born population there were 1768 prisoners, while for each million of the native-born there were only 898 prisoners, thus showing a tendency to criminality of the foreign-born twice as great as that of the white native-born. This inference was possible through oversight of the important fact that prisoners are recruited mainly from adults, and that the proportion of foreign-born adults to the foreign-born population is much greater than that of the native-born adults to the native population. If comparison be made of the number of male prisoners with the number of males of voting age, the proportions are materially different and more accurate, as follows:-- NUMBER OF MALE PRISONERS PER MILLION OF VOTING POPULATION, 1890 (OMITTING "UNKNOWN")[96] Native white, native parents 3,395 Native white, foreign parents 5,886 Native white, total 3,482[97] Foreign white 3,270 Negro 13,219 Here the foreign-born show actually a lower rate of criminality (3270) than the total native-born (3482). This inference harmonizes with our general observations of the immigrants, namely, that they belong to the industrial classes, and that our immigration laws are designed to exclude criminals. But this analysis brings out a fact far more significant than any yet adverted to; namely, that the native-born children of immigrants show a proportion of criminality (5886 per million) much greater than that of the foreign-born themselves (3270 per million), and 70 per cent greater than that of the children of native parents. This significant fact is further brought out, and with it the obverse of the census mistake above referred to, when we examine the census inferences respecting juvenile criminals. The census calculations show that there are 250 juvenile offenders for every million of the native-born population, and only 159 such offenders for every million of the foreign-born population; but if we remember that the proportion of foreign-born children is small, and then proceed to compare the number of boys who are offenders with the number of boys 10 to 19 years of age rather than with the number of persons of all ages, we shall have the following results, confining our attention to the North Atlantic states, where juvenile reformatories are more liberally provided than in other sections:-- MALE JUVENILE OFFENDERS PER MILLION OF MALE POPULATION TEN TO NINETEEN YEARS OF AGE, NORTH ATLANTIC STATES, 1890 (OMITTING "UNKNOWN")[98] Native white, native parents 1,744 Native white, foreign parents 3,923 Foreign white 3,316 Colored 17,915 This table throws a different light on the situation, for it shows that the tendency towards crime among juveniles, instead of being less for the foreign-born than for the native-born, is nearly twice as great as that of the children of American parentage, and that the tendency among native children of foreign parentage (3923 per million) is more than twice as great as that among children of American parents (1744 per million). This amazing criminality of the children of immigrants is almost wholly a product of city life, and it follows directly upon the incapacity of immigrant parents to control their children under city conditions. The boys, especially, at an early age lose respect for their parents, who cannot talk the language of the community, and who are ignorant and helpless in the whirl of the struggle for existence, and are shut up during the daytime in shops and factories. On the streets and alleys, in their gangs and in the schools, the children evade parental discipline, and for them the home is practically non-existent. Says a well-informed student of race problems in New York,[99] "Example after example might be given of tenement-house families in which the parents--industrious peasant laborers--have found themselves disgraced by idle and vicious grown sons and daughters. Cases taken from the records of charitable societies almost at random show these facts again and again." Even the Russian Jew, more devoted and self-sacrificing in the training of his children than any other race of immigrants, sees them soon earning more money than their parents and breaking away from the discipline of centuries. Far different is it with those foreigners who settle in country districts where their children are under their constant oversight, and while the youngsters are learning the ways of America they are also held by their parents to industrious habits. Children of such immigrants become substantial citizens, while children of the same race brought up in the cities become a recruiting constituency for hoodlums, vagabonds, and criminals. The reader must have observed in the preceding statistical estimates the startling preëminence of the negro in the ranks of criminals. His proportion of prisoners for adult males (13,219 per million) seems to be four times as great as that of the native stock, and more than twice as great as that of foreign parentage, while for boys his portion in the North Atlantic states (17,915 per million) is ten times as great as that of the corresponding native stock, and four times as great as that of foreign parentage. The negro perhaps suffers by way of discrimination in the number of arrests and convictions compared with the whites, yet it is significant that in proportion to total numbers the negro prisoners in the Northern states are nearly twice as many as in the Southern states. Here, again, city life works its degenerating effects, for the Northern negroes are congregated mainly in towns and cities, while the Southern negroes remain in the country. Did space permit, it would prove an interesting quest to follow the several races through the various classes of crime, noticing the relative seriousness of their offences, and paying attention to the female offenders. Only one class of offences can here be noted in detail; namely, that of public intoxication. Although classed as a crime, this offence borders on pauperism and the mental diseases, and its extreme prevalence indicates that the race in question is not overcoming the degenerating effects of competition and city life. Statistics from Massachusetts seem to show that drunkenness prevails to the greatest extent in the order of preëminence among the Irish, Welsh, English, and Scotch, and least among the Portuguese, Italians, Germans, Poles, and Jews. The Italians owe their prominence in the lists of prisoners to their crimes of violence, and very slightly to intoxication, though the latter is increasing among them. In the Southern states the ravages of drink among the negroes have been so severe and accompanied with such outbreaks of violence that the policy of prohibition of the liquor traffic has been carried farther than in any other section of the country. Probably three-fourths of the Southern negroes live in prohibition counties, and were it not for the paternal restrictions imposed by such laws, the downward course of the negro race would doubtless have outrun considerably the speed it has actually attained. Besides the crimes which spring from racial tendencies, there is a peculiar class of crimes springing largely from race prejudice and hatred. These are lynchings and mob violence. The United States presents the paradox of a nation where respect for law and constitutional forms has won most signal triumphs, yet where concerted violations of law have been most widespread. By a queer inversion of thought, a crime committed jointly by many is not a crime, but a vindication of justice, just as a crime committed by authority of a nation is not a crime, but a virtue. Such crimes have not been continuous, but have arisen at times out of acute racial antagonisms. The Knownothing agitation of 1850 to 1855, which prevailed among religious and patriotic Americans, was directed against the newly arrived flood of immigrants from Europe and Asia, and was marked by a state of lawlessness and mob rule such as had never before existed, especially in the cities of Boston, New York, Pittsburg, Cincinnati, Louisville, and Baltimore.[100] These subsided or changed their object under the oncoming slavery crisis, and the Civil War itself was a grand resort to violence by the South on a question of race domination. Beginning again with the Kuklux and White-cap uprisings in the seventies, mob rule drove the negroes back to a condition of subordination, but the lawless spirit then engendered has continued to show itself in the annual lynching of fifty to one hundred and fifty negroes suspected or convicted of the more heinous crimes.[101] Nor has this crime of the mob been restricted to the South, but it has spread to the North, and has become almost the accepted code of procedure throughout the land wherever negroes are heinously accused. In the Northern instances this vengeance of the mob is sometimes wreaked on the entire race, for in the North the negro is more assertive, and defends his accused brother. But in the South the mob usually, though not always, stops with vengeance on the individual guilty, or supposedly guilty, since the race in general is already cowed. Other races suffer at the hands of mobs, such as the Chinese in Wyoming and California at the hands of American mine workers, Italians in Louisiana and California at the hands of citizens and laborers, Slovaks and Poles in Latimer, Pennsylvania, at the hands of a mob militia. With the rise of organized labor these race riots and militia shootings increased in number, often growing out of the efforts of older races of workmen to drive newer and backward races from their jobs, or the efforts of employers to destroy newly formed unions of these immigrant races. Many strikes are accompanied by an incipient race war where employers are endeavoring to make substitution, one race for another, of Irish, Germans, native whites, Italians, negroes, Poles, and so on. Even the long series of crimes against the Indians, to which the term "A Century of Dishonor" seems to have attached itself without protest, must be looked upon as the mob spirit of a superior race bent on despoiling a despised and inferior race. That the frenzied spirit of the mob, whether in strikes, panicky militia, Indian slaughter, or civil war, should so often have blackened the face of a nation sincerely dedicated to law and order is one of the penalties paid for experimenting on a problem of political and economic equality with material marked by extreme racial inequality. =Poverty and Pauperism.=--Prior to year 1875 the laws of the United States imposed no prohibition upon the immigration of paupers from foreign countries, and not until the federal government took from the states the administration of the law in 1891 did the prohibitions of the existing law become reasonably effective. Since that year there have been annually debarred, as likely to become public charges, 431 to 7898 arrivals, the latter number being debarred in the year 1905. In addition to those debarred at landing, there have been annually returned within one to three years after landing, 177 to 845 immigrants, many of whom had meantime become public charges. From these statements it will be seen that, prior to 1891, it was possible and quite probable that many thousand paupers and prospective paupers were admitted by the immigration authorities, and consequently the proportion of paupers among the foreign-born should appear larger than it would in later years. In the earlier years systematic arrangements were in force in foreign countries, especially Great Britain, to assist in the deportation of paupers to the United States, and therefore it is not surprising that, apart from race characteristics, there should have come to this country larger numbers of Irish paupers than those from any other nationality. Since these exportations have been stopped, it is not so much the actual pauper as the prospective pauper who gets admission. 96 per cent of the paupers in almshouses have been in this country ten years or more, showing that the exclusion laws are still defective, in that large numbers of poor physique are admitted. Taking the census reports for 1904, and confining our attention to the North Atlantic states, where children are generally provided for in separate establishments, we are able to compute the following as the relative extent of pauperism among males:-- MALE PAUPERS IN ALMSHOUSES PER MILLION VOTING POPULATION, NORTH ATLANTIC STATES, 1904. Native white, native parents 2,360 Native white, foreign parents 2,252 Foreign white 5,119 Colored 4,056 Here we see the counterpart of the estimates on crime, for the natives of foreign parentage show a smaller proportion of paupers than the natives of native parentage, while the foreign-born themselves show more than double the relative amount of pauperism of the native element, and the colored paupers are nearly twice the native stock. The census bureau also furnishes computations showing the contributions of the different races and nationalities to the insane asylums and benevolent institutions.[102] In general it appears that the foreign-born and the negroes exceed the native classes in their burden on the public. A report of the Department of Labor of great value and significance, incidentally bearing on this subject, shows for the Italians in Chicago their industrial and social conditions. According to this report the average earnings of Italians in that city in 1896 while at work were $6.41 per week for men and $2.11 per week for women, and the average time unemployed by the wage-earning element was over seven months. In another report of the Department of Labor it appears that the slum population of the cities of Baltimore, Chicago, New York, and Philadelphia in 1893 was unemployed three months each year. With wages one dollar a day, and employment only five months during the year, it is marvellous that the Italians of Chicago, during the late period of depression, were not thrown in great numbers upon public relief. Yet, with the strict administration of the exclusion laws leading to the deportation of over 2000 Italians a year as liable to become public charges, it is likely that the immigrants of that race, although low in physique, poverty, and standards of living, are fairly well screened of actual paupers. CHAPTER VIII POLITICS American democracy was ushered in on a theory of equality. And no word has been more strangely used and abused. There is the monarchical idea of equality, and Mr. Mallock begs the question when he gives the title "Aristocracy and Evolution" to a book on the necessary part played by great men. Doubtless, in Greek, aristocracy means "government by the best," but in history it means government by the privilege of birth and landed property. Democracy may be in philology "government by the mob," but in politics and industry it has been opportunity for great men without blood or property. Mr. Münsterberg, too, sees the breakdown of American democracy and the reaction towards aristocracy in the prominence of civil-service reform, the preëminence conceded to business ability, the deference to wealth, and the conquest of the Philippines.[103] But civil-service reform is only a device for opening the door to merit that has been shut by privilege. In England it was the means by which the mercantile classes broke into the offices preëmpted by the younger sons of aristocracy.[104] In America it is an awkward means of admitting ability wherever found to positions seized upon by political usurpers. It appealed to the American democracy only when its advocates learned to call it, not "civil-service reform," but "the merit system." As for the astonishing power of mere wealth in American affairs the testimony of another English observer is based on wider observation when he says, "Even the tyranny of trusts is not to be compared with the tyranny of landlordism; for the one is felt to be merely an unhappy and (it is hoped) temporary aberration of well-meant social machinery, while the other seems bred in the very bone of the national existence."[105] A feeling of disappointment holds true of the conquest and treatment of the Philippines. That a war waged out of sympathy for an oppressed island nearby should have shaken down an unnoticed archipelago across the ocean was taken in childlike glee as the unexpected reward of virtue. But serious thinking has followed on seeing that these islands have added another race problem to the many that have thwarted democracy. Only a plutocracy sprung from race divisions at home could profit by race-subjection abroad, and the only alternative to race-subjection is equal representation in Congress. But to admit another race to partnership without the hope of assimilation is to reject experience. Independence or cession to Japan is the self-preservation of American democracy. Another idea of equality is the socialist idea. Infatuated by an "economic interpretation of history," they overlook the racial interpretation. Permitting and encouraging plutocracy, they hope to see the dispossessed masses take possession when conditions become intolerable. But the "masses" would not be equal to the task. Privileged wealth knows too well how to buy up or promote their leaders, how to weaken them by internal dissensions, how to set race against race. Most of all, the inexperienced despotism of the masses is worse than the smooth despotism of wealth. The government of the South by the negro, the government of San Francisco by "labor," fell into the hands of the "carpet-bagger" and the "boss." Once in power, internal strife and jealousy, struggle for office, or racial antagonism disrupt the rulers, and a reaction throws them back more helpless than before. Men are not equal, neither are races or classes equal. True equality comes through equal opportunity. If individuals go forward, their race or class is elevated. They become spokesmen, defenders, examples. No race or class can rise without its own leaders. If they get admitted on equal terms with other leaders, whether it be in the councils of the church, the law-making bodies of the city, state, and nation, or the wage conferences of employers, they then can command the hearing which their abilities justify. They secure for their followers the equal opportunity to which they are entitled. This is exactly the political problem that grows out of the presence of races and immigrants. With these admitted to the suffrage on the basis of mere manhood inspired by a generosity unknown to the people of any other land, the machinery of representative government inherited from England does not, for some reason, permit the free choice of leaders. The difficulties may be seen in cities where the system first broke down. A variety of races and nationalities living in the same ward are asked to elect aldermen and other officers by majority vote. No one nationality has a majority, but each sets up its list of candidates. The nationality with a mere plurality elects all of its candidates, and the other nationalities--a majority of the voters--are unrepresented. This is an extreme case, and has not often been allowed to happen. But the only means of preventing it is the "ward boss." The boss emerges from the situation as inevitably as the survival of the fittest. And the fittest is the Irishman. The Irishman has above all races the mixture of ingenuity, firmness, human sympathy, comradeship, and daring that makes him the amalgamator of races. He conciliates them all by nominating a ticket on which the offices are shrewdly distributed; and out of the Babel his "slate" gets the majority. The boss's problem is not an easy one. His ward may contain business men on the hill and negroes along the canal. To nominate a business man would lose the negro vote--to nominate a negro would lose the business vote. He selects a nondescript somewhere between, and discards him for another at the next election. The representative becomes a tool in the hands of the boss. The boss sells his power to corporations, franchise speculators, and law-evaders. Representative democracy becomes bossocracy in the service of plutocracy. The ward system worked well when the suffrage was limited. Then the business men elected their business man unimpeded. But a system devised for restricted suffrage breaks down under universal suffrage. Could the ward lines be abolished, could the business men come together regardless of residence and elect their choice without the need of a majority vote, could the negroes and other races and classes do the same, then each would be truly represented by their natural leaders. So it is, not only in cities, but in county, state, and nation. Universal suffrage, clannish races, social classes, diversified interests, seem to explain and justify the presence of the party "machine" and its boss. Otherwise races, classes, and interests are in helpless conflict and anarchy. But the true explanation is an obsolete ward and district system of plurality representation adopted when but one race, class, or interest had the suffrage. Forms of government are the essence of government, notwithstanding the poet. An aristocratic form with a democratic suffrage is a plutocratic government. Belgium and Switzerland have shown that a democratic form is possible and practicable. Proportional representation instead of district representation is the corollary of universal suffrage which those countries have worked out as a model for others.[106] The model is peculiarly adapted to a country of manifold nationalities, interests, and classes. Races and immigrants in America have not disproved democracy--they have proved the need of more democracy. This is seen also in the distinction between men and measures. It often has been noted that in American elections the voters are more interested in voting for candidates than they are in voting on issues. The candidate arouses a personal and concrete interest--the issue is abstract and complicated. The candidate calls out a full vote--the issue is decided by a partial vote. This difference is partly the result of organization. The candidate has a political party, campaign funds, and personal workers to bring out the vote. The issue has only its merits and demerits. Equally important under American conditions is the race or nationality of the candidate. This feature is often concealed by the ingenuity of political managers in nominating a ticket on which the several nationalities are "recognized." But with the recent progress of the movement to abolish party conventions and to nominate candidates directly at the primaries the racial prejudices of the voters show themselves. The nationalities line up for their own nationality, and the political and economic issues are thrown in the background. It is different when they vote on the issues directly. The vital questions of politics, industry, corporations, and monopoly which menace the country, unless rightly answered, cut across the lines of nationality. The German farmer, manufacturer, wage-earner, merchant, capitalist, and monopolist may all unite to elect a popular German to office, but they do not unite to give a corporation a monopoly. The same is true of other nationalities. Wherever the referendum has been fairly tested, in Chicago, Detroit, Oregon, and elsewhere, the sound judgment of all races has prevailed over bias, prejudice, or racial jealousy. There none can claim preëminence, for all have shown their share of patriotism, intelligence, and regard for equal rights. By an automatic self-disfranchisement the ignorant, the corrupt, and the indifferent of all races eliminate themselves by failing to vote. Instead of being dismissed on the ground that voters care mainly for men and less for measures, the referendum should be adopted on the ground that it permits those interested in measures to decide the question. Those who are not interested enough to vote do thereby proclaim that they are satisfied whichever side wins. The initiative and referendum are, above all other forms of government, the specific remedy for the ills of universal suffrage and conflicting nationalities. Race antagonism springs from personalities, race coalescence from community of interest. A vote for candidates intensifies antagonism--a vote on measures promotes community. There are, indeed, some kinds of measures which stir up race antagonism. But the keenest of these have happily been eliminated. More intense than any other source of discord is religious belief. Religious differences in America are not so much theological as racial in character. The Judaism of the Jew, the Protestantism of the British and colonial American, the Lutheranism of the German, the Roman Catholicism of the Irish, Italian, and Slav, the Greek Catholicism of other Slavs, all testify to the history and psychology of races. Far-sighted indeed were our fathers who separated Church and State. Were the people taxed to support religion, every election would be a contest of races. All other questions would be subordinate, and democracy impossible. But with religion relegated to private judgment, each race is free to cultivate at will that one of its own peculiarities most fanatically adhered to, but most repellent to other races, while uniting with the others on what is most essential to democracy. Religious freedom is more than a private right--it is an American necessity. [Illustration: CHINESE STUDENTS, HONOLULU (From _The Independent_)] Another class of measures running partly along race lines are sumptuary laws, especially those regulating saloons and Sunday observance. In the Southern states saloon prohibition is largely a race discrimination and a race protection. In the North it often is American puritanism of the country against European liberalism of the cities. Here the referendum shows itself as the conciliator of nationalities. Upon no other issue has the popular vote been so generally resorted to. This issue comes close to the habits and passions of the masses. It takes precedence of all others except religion, but cannot be evaded like religion. If legislative bodies and executive officials decide the question, then the German or the Irishman adds to his zeal for the election of a conationalist his thirst for the election of a candidate with habits like his own. But when left to a popular vote, the saloon question is separated from the choice of candidates, and other issues come forward. A majority vote, too, pacifies the minority of all races, where the act of a legislative body leaves the suspicion of unfair advantage taken by unrepresentative politicians. By the exigencies of the situation the referendum has been invoked to take both the saloon problem and its share of the race problem "out of politics." The lesson is applicable wherever race or nationality conflicts with democracy. With questions of religious belief eliminated by the constitution, and questions of personal habits eliminated by the referendum, other questions of race antagonism will be eliminated by the initiative and the referendum.[107] =Suffrage.=--The climax of liberality in donating the suffrage to all races and conditions was reached with the fifteenth amendment in 1869. At that time not only had the negro been enfranchised; but nearly a score of Western and Southern states and territories had enfranchised the alien. So liberal were these states in welcoming the immigrant that they allowed him to vote as soon as he declared his intention to take out naturalization papers. This declaration, under the federal law, is made at least two years before the papers are granted, and it may be made as soon as the immigrant has landed. Thus in some of those states he could vote as soon as he acquired a legal residence, that is, four or four and one-half years before he acquired citizenship. Several of these states have recently changed these laws, but there remain nine that continue to accept the alien as a voter. In the Eastern states such generosity was not granted by law but was practised by fraud. Naturalization papers are issued by federal courts and by state courts of record. The law gives the judge much discretion, for he is required to refuse the certificate if he is not satisfied that the alien is of good moral character, attached to the Constitution, and well disposed. But so careless or crowded are the judges that seldom have they examined the applicants. Indeed the political managers have had the option of judges and could take their immigrants to the court that would shut its eyes. Many thousands of fraudulent papers have been secured in this way, beginning at the very time when the naturalization law was enacted in 1802, but increasing enormously during the past forty years.[108] Finally, in 1906, Congress enacted a law giving to the Bureau of Immigration control over naturalization. The object is to bring all of the courts under a uniform practice, to provide complete records and means of identification, to establish publicity, to enable the government to appear in court and resist fraudulent naturalization, and to impose severe penalties.[109] The law also adds something to the qualifications required of the alien. He must not be an anarchist or a polygamist, nor a believer of such doctrines; he must be able to speak the English language, and must intend to reside permanently in the United States.[110] The language restriction affects but few, since in 1900 only 3.3 per cent of the naturalized foreign-born males of voting age could not speak English.[111] The intention of permanent residence, as well as the entire measure, is designed to remove the abuse of foreigners' acquiring citizenship in order to return to their native land and defy their rightful government. On the administrative side this law is of great significance. It marks a serious beginning on the part of the federal government of protecting the citizenship that a generation before it had so liberally bestowed. There are certain races which by law are prohibited from naturalization. For nearly seventy years the law on the subject enacted in 1802 admitted to citizenship only free white persons. This was amended in 1870 to admit "aliens of African nationality and persons of African descent." But other colored races were not admitted, so that the Chinese, Japanese, or Malay immigrant has never been eligible to citizenship. His children, however, born in this country are citizens, and cannot be excluded from voting on account of race or color. Indians living in tribes are foreigners, but if they recognize allegiance by paying taxes or dividing up their land in severalty they are citizens and voters. Of the immigrant races eligible to citizenship their importance as possible voters is greater than their importance in the population. This is because men and boys come in greater numbers than women and children. Ten million foreign-born population furnishes 5,000,000 males of voting age, but 66,000,000 native population furnishes only 16,000,000 males of voting age. In other words, one-half of the foreign-born, and only one-fourth of the native-born, are potential voters. But not all of the potential voters are actual voters. With a grand total in the year 1900 of 21,000,000 of the proper sex and age, only 15,000,000 went to the polls. The ratio is five out of seven. Two million negroes were excluded, and 1,400,000 foreign-born had not yet naturalized. This leaves 2,600,000 natives and foreign-born who might have voted but did not. The foreigner who takes out his citizenship papers does it mainly to vote. Two-thirds of them had done so or declared their intention in 1900.[112] Probably the proportion of native whites who did not vote was 15 per cent of their total number, and the proportion of foreign-born who did not, or could not, was over 40 per cent. But this proportion differs greatly among the several races. It is not so much a difference in willingness as a difference in opportunity. Five years are required for naturalization, and while 40 per cent of those who have been here six to nine years have not declared their intention nor taken out their papers, only 7 per cent of those who have been here twenty years retain their allegiance to foreign governments.[113] This increases relatively the political weight of the Teutonic and Celtic races which are oldest in point of immigration, and reduces relatively the weight of the Italian, Slav, and Jewish races. The figures below make this quite plain. The table shows the proportion of foreign-born who remain aliens, in the sense that they have neither taken out citizenship papers nor declared their intention of doing so. Only 7 to 13 per cent of the foreigners from Northwestern Europe are aliens, compared with 35 to 60 per cent of those from Eastern and Southern Europe. In course of time these differences will diminish, and the Italian and Slav will approach the Irishman and German in their share of American suffrage:-- PER CENT OF ALIENS AMONG FOREIGN-BORN MALES OF VOTING AGE[114] Wales 7.1 Germany 8.3 Norway 9.7 Ireland 10.1 Denmark 10.3 Holland 11.6 Sweden 11.9 Scotland 12.5 Bohemia 12.6 England 12.9 Canada, English 21.1 Russia (mainly Jews) 35.2 Canada, French 38.5 Finland 38.6 Austria (largely Slavs) 44.6 Portugal 51.6 Italy 53.0 Hungary (mainly Slavs) 53.1 Greece 57.8 Austria, Poland 61.6 The right to vote is not "inalienable," neither is the right to life or liberty. Governments give them, refuse them, and take them away. In America this means the state governments. The federal government only declares that the states must follow the "due process of law," and not discriminate on account of race, religion, or servitude. In allowing the right to vote they may and do discriminate on other grounds, such as morals, illiteracy, intelligence, property, and sex. This may result in race or immigrant discrimination, and does so in the case of illiteracy and intelligence. After the Irish immigration of the forties, Connecticut in 1855 and Massachusetts in 1857 refused thenceforth to enfranchise those who could not read the Constitution. Since 1889 six other Northern and Western states--Wyoming, Maine, California, Washington, Delaware, and New Hampshire, in the order named--have erected barriers against those who cannot read or write the English language or the Constitution.[115] Six Southern states have done the same, but one of them, Mississippi, has added another permanent barrier,--intelligence. This is supposed to be measured by ability to "understand" the Constitution as read by a white man. Southern states have also added vagrancy, poll tax, and property clauses even more exclusive than reading and writing.[116] The federal courts have refused to interfere because these restrictions in their legal form bear alike on white and black. If in practice they bear unequally, that is a matter for the state courts.[117] To take away the suffrage from many of those who enjoy it is peacefully impossible under our system. But voters who hold fast to the privilege for themselves may be induced to deny it to the next generation. It was in this way usually that the foregoing restrictions were introduced. Massachusetts set the example by retaining all who could vote when the test was adopted, and making the exclusion apply only to those who came after. The Southern states did the same by "grandfather" and "understanding" clauses. By either method, in course of time, the favored voters disappear by death or removal, and the restrictions apply in full to the succeeding generation.[118] The effect of the educational test on the suffrage of the foreign-born is not as great as might be supposed. Naturalization itself is almost an educational test. Only 6.3 per cent of the naturalized foreigners are illiterate, but 28 per cent of those who remain aliens are unable to read. In Boston only 2 per cent are excluded from voting through inability to read English, although the corresponding aliens are 22 per cent. Probably the educational qualification in Massachusetts affects these proportions by lessening the inducement to naturalize, but in Chicago and New York, where that qualification is not required, scarcely more than 5 per cent of those who get naturalized would be unable to vote under such a law, compared with less than 1 per cent of the native voters.[119] In the country at large the disproportion is not so great. Five and eight-tenths per cent of the sons of native parents would be excluded by an educational test against 6.3 per cent of the naturalized foreigners, and only 2 per cent of the native sons of foreigners. In the several Southern states the test, if equally applied, will exclude 6 to 20 per cent of the white voters and 35 to 60 per cent of the colored voters.[120] In a Southern city like Memphis it would exclude 1 per cent of the white and 38 per cent of the colored. Tested by the standards of democracy, the ability to read and write the English language is a proper qualification. It is perhaps the maximum that can be required, for to test the ability to understand what is read and written is to open the door to partisanship and race discrimination. Yet it is intelligence that makes the suffrage an instrument of protection, and it is not a denial of rights to refuse such an instrument to one who injures himself with it. The literacy qualification is one that can be acquired by effort. Other tests, especially the property qualification, are an assertion of inequality. Yet it is not strange that with the corrupt and inefficient governments that have accompanied universal suffrage there should have occurred a reaction. This has not always expressed itself in the policy of restricting the suffrage, for that can with difficulty be accomplished. It has shown itself rather in withdrawing government as far as possible from the control of the voters. The so-called "business theory" which has so generally been applied to the reform of city governments has converted the city as far as possible to the model of a private corporation, with its general manager, the mayor. The city has been denied its proper functions, and these have been turned over to private parties. But this reaction seems to have reached its limit. It is now understood to have been simply the legal recognition of an incipient plutocracy establishing itself under the forms of democracy. The return movement has begun, and the rescue of democracy is sought, as stated above, in forms and functions of government still more democratic. The way plutocracy looks when it has passed the incipient stage may be seen in Hawaii.[121] It is as though we had annexed those islands in order to watch in our own back yard the fruit of excessive immigration. A population of 154,000 furnishes 65,000 Hawaiians, Portuguese, and other Caucasians. The Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans have 87,000 population and no votes. The American contingent is some 17,000 souls and 3000 votes. The latter represent four classes or interests: the capitalist planters owning two-thirds of the property; superintendents, engineers, and foremen managing the plantation labor; skilled mechanics; small employers, merchants, and farmers. In order to get plantation labor and to keep the supply too large and diversified for concerted wage demands the planters imported contract Chinese in place of Hawaiians, then Japanese, then Koreans. As each race rises in standards and independence it leaves the plantations to enter trades, manufactures, and merchandising. It drives out the wage-earners from the less skilled occupations, then from the more skilled, then the small manufacturers, contractors, and merchants. The American middle classes disappear, partly by emigration to California, partly by abandoning business and relying on the values of real estate which rise through the competition of low standards of wages and profits, and partly by attaching themselves to the best-paid positions offered by the planters. In proportion as they move up in the scale through the entrance of immigrants in the lower positions, they transfer their allegiance from democracy to plutocracy. The planters themselves are caught in a circle. The rising values of their land absorb the high tariff on sugar and prevent rising wages if the values are to be kept up. The Japanese, with contract labor abolished, have shown a disposition to strike for higher wages. This has led to advances at the expense of profits, and the resulting "scarcity of labor" compels the planters again to ask for contract Chinese coolies. Immigration is thus only a makeshift remedy for the exactions of unions and the undevelopment of resources. More immigration requires perpetually more and still more, till the resulting plutocracy seeks to save itself by servile labor. A moderate amount of immigrant labor, assimilated and absorbed into the body politic, stimulates industry and progress, but an excessive and indigestible amount leads to the search for coercive remedies and ends in the stagnation of industry. The protective tariff was supposed to build up free American labor, but in Hawaii, with unrestricted immigration, it has handed us American plutocracy. CHAPTER IX AMALGAMATION AND ASSIMILATION A German statistician,[122] after studying population statistics of the United States and observing the "race suicide" of the native American stock, concludes: "The question of restriction on immigration is not a matter of higher or lower wages, nor a matter of more or less criminals and idiots, but the exclusion of a large part of the immigrants might cost the United States their place among the world powers." Exactly the opposite opinion was expressed in 1891 by Francis A. Walker,[123] the leading American statistician of his time, and superintendent of the censuses of 1870 and 1880. He said: "Foreign immigration into this country has, from the time it first assumed large proportions, amounted not to a reinforcement of our population, but a replacement of native by foreign stock.... The American shrank from the industrial competition thus thrust upon him. He was unwilling himself to engage in the lowest kind of day labor with these new elements of population; he was even more unwilling to bring sons and daughters into the world to enter into that competition.... The more rapidly foreigners came into the United States, the smaller was the rate of increase, not merely among the native population separately, but throughout the population of the country as a whole," including the descendants of the earlier foreign immigrants. Walker's statements of fact, whatever we may say of his explanations, are easily substantiated. From earliest colonial times until the census of 1840 the people of the United States multiplied more rapidly than the people of any other modern nation, not excepting the prolific French Canadians. The first six censuses, beginning in 1790, show that, without appreciable immigration, the population doubled every twenty years, and had this rate of increase continued until the present time, the descendants of the colonial white and negro stock in the year 1900 would have numbered 100,000,000 instead of the combined colonial, immigrant, and negro total of 76,000,000. Indeed, if we take the total immigration from 1820 to 1900, exceeding 19,000,000 people, and apply a slightly higher than the average rate of increase from births, we shall find that in the year 1900 one-half of the white population is derived from immigrant stock, leaving the other half, or but 33,000,000 whites, derived from the colonial stock.[124] This is scarcely more than one-third of the number that should have been expected had the colonial element continued to multiply from 1840 to 1900 as it had multiplied from 1790 to 1840. An interesting corroboration of these speculations is the prediction made in the year 1815, thirty years before the great migration of the nineteenth century, by the mathematician and publicist, Elkanah Watson.[125] On the basis of the increase shown in the first three censuses he made computations of the probable population for each census year to 1900, and I have drawn up the following table, showing the actual population compared with his estimates. Superintendent Walker, in the essay above quoted, uses Watson's figures, and points out the remarkable fact that those predictions were within less than one per cent of the actual population until the year 1860, although, meanwhile, there had come nearly 5,000,000 immigrants whom Watson could not have foreseen. Thus the population of 1860, notwithstanding access of the millions of immigrants, was only 310,000, or one per cent less than Watson had predicted. And the falling off since 1860 has been even greater, for, notwithstanding the immigration of 20,000,000 persons since 1820, the population in 1900 was 75,000,000, or 25 per cent less than Watson's computations. POPULATION AND IMMIGRATION ------+------------+---------------+-------------+----------- | POPULATION | WATSON'S | WATSON'S | FOREIGN | (CENSUS) | ESTIMATE | ERROR |IMMIGRATION | | | |FOR DECADE ------+------------+---------------+-------------+----------- 1790 | 3,929,214 | | | 1800 | 5,308,483 | | | 50,000 1810 | 7,239,881 | | | 70,000 1820 | 9,633,822 | 9,625,734 | -8,088 | 114,000 1830 | 12,866,020 | 12,833,645 | -32,375 | 143,439 1840 | 17,069,453 | 17,116,526 | +47,073 | 599,125 1850 | 23,191,876 | 23,185,368 | -6,508 | 1,713,251 1860 | 31,443,321 | 31,753,825 | +310,503 | 2,598,214 1870 | 38,558,371 | 42,328,432 | +3,770,061 | 2,314,824 1880 | 50,155,783 | 56,450,241 | +6,294,458 | 2,812,191 1890 | 62,622,250 | 77,266,989 | +14,644,739 | 5,246,613 1900 | 75,559,258 | 100,235,985 | +24,676,727 | 3,687,564 ------+------------+---------------+-------------+----------- Total immigration 1820-1900 19,229,224 ------------------------------------------------------------- This question of the "race suicide" of the American or colonial stock should be regarded as the most fundamental of our social problems, or rather as the most fundamental consequence of our social and industrial institutions. It may be met by exhortation, as when President Roosevelt says, "If the men of the nation are not anxious to work in many different ways, with all their might and strength, and ready and able to fight at need, and anxious to be fathers of families, and if the women do not recognize that the greatest thing for any woman is to be a good wife and mother, why that nation has cause to be alarmed about its future."[126] The anxiety of President Roosevelt is well grounded; but if race suicide is not in itself an original cause, but is the result of other causes, then exhortation will accomplish but little, while the removal or amelioration of the other causes will of itself correct the resulting evil. Where, then, shall we look for the causes of race suicide, or, more accurately speaking, for the reduced proportion of children brought into the world? The immediate circumstances consist in postponing the age of marriage, in limiting the number of births after marriage, and in an increase in the proportion of unmarried people. The reasons are almost solely moral and not physical. Those who are ambitious and studious, who strive to reach a better position in the world for themselves and their children, and who have not inherited wealth, will generally postpone marriage until they have educated themselves, or accumulated property, or secured a permanent position. They will then not bring into the world a larger number of children than they can provide for on the basis of the standing which they themselves have attained; for observation shows that those who marry early have large families, and are generally kept on a lower station in life. The real problem, therefore, with this class of people, is the opportunities for earning a living. In the earlier days, when the young couple could take up vacant land, and farming was the goal of all, a large family and the coöperation of wife and children were a help rather than a hindrance. To-day the couple, unless the husband has a superior position, must go together to the factory or mill, and the children are a burden until they reach the wage-earning age. Furthermore, wage-earning is uncertain, factories shut down, and the man with a large family is thrown upon his friends or charity. To admonish people living under these conditions to go forth and multiply is to advise the cure of race suicide by race deterioration. [Illustration: FACULTY OF TUSKEGEE INSTITUTE (From _World's Work_)] Curiously enough, these observations apply with even greater force to the second generation of immigrants than to the native stock, for among the daughters of the foreign-born only 19 per cent of those aged 15 to 24 years are married, while among daughters of native parents 30 per cent are married; and for the men of 20 to 29 only 26.8 per cent of the native sons of foreigners are married and 38.5 per cent of the sons of natives.[127] These figures sustain what can be observed in many large cities, that the races of immigrants who came to this country twenty-five or more years ago are shrinking from competition with the new races from Southern Europe. Boston, for example, with its large Irish immigration beginning two generations ago, shows a similar disproportion. Of the American daughters of foreign parents 15 to 24 years of age, only 12 per cent are married, but of the daughters of native parents 17 per cent are married; of the sons of foreign parents 20 to 29 years of age, only 20 per cent are married, but of the sons of native parents 26 per cent are married. The contrast with the immigrants themselves is striking. In Boston, 24 per cent of the foreign-born women aged 15 to 24 are married, and 35 per cent of the foreign-born men aged 20 to 29.[128] In other words, the early marriages of immigrant men and women are nearly twice as many as those of the American-born sons and daughters of immigrants, and only one-third more than those of the sons and daughters of native stock. With such a showing as this it would seem that our "place among the world powers" depends indeed on immigration, for the immigrants' children are more constrained to race suicide than the older American stock.[129] The competition is not so severe in country districts where the native stock prevails; but in the cities and industrial centres the skilled and ambitious workman and workwoman discover that in order to keep themselves above the low standards of the immigrants they must postpone marriage. The effect is noticeable and disastrous in the case of the Irish-Americans. Displaced by Italians and Slavs, many of the young men have fallen into the hoodlum and criminal element. Here moral causes produce physical causes of race destruction, for the vicious elements of the population disappear through the diseases bequeathed to their progeny, and are recruited only from the classes forced down from above. On the other hand, many more Irish have risen to positions of foremanship, or have lived on their wits in politics, or have entered the priesthood. The Irish-American girls, showing independence and ambition, have refused to marry until they could be assured of a husband of steady habits, and they have entered clerical positions, factories, and mills. Thus this versatile race, with distinct native ability, is meeting in our cities the same displacement and is resorting to the same race suicide which itself inflicted a generation or two earlier on the native colonial stock. But the effect is more severe, for the native stock was able to leave the scenes of competition, to go West and take up farms or build cities, but the Irish-American has less opportunity to make such an escape. Great numbers of Irishmen, together with others of English, Scotch, German, and American descent, remaining in these industrial centres, have sought to protect themselves and maintain high standards through labor-unions and the so-called "closed shop," by limiting the number of apprentices, excluding immigrants, and giving their sons a preference of admission. But even with the unions they find it necessary also to limit the size of their families, and I am convinced from personal observation, that, were the statistics on this point compiled from the unions of skilled workmen, there would be found even stronger evidences of race suicide than among other classes in the nation. To the well-to-do classes freedom from the care of children is not a necessity, but an opportunity for luxury and indulgence. These include the very wealthy, whose round of social functions would be interrupted by home obligations. To them, of course, immigration brings no need of prudence--it rather helps to bring the enormous fortunes which distract their attention from the home. But their numbers are insignificant compared with the millions who determine the fate of the nation. More significant are the well-to-do farmers and their wives who have inherited the soil redeemed by their fathers, and whose desire to be free for enjoying the fruits of civilization lead them to the position so strongly condemned by President Roosevelt. This class of farmers, as shown in the census map of the size of private families,[130] may be traced across the Eastern and Northern states, running through New England, rural New York, Northern Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan, parts of Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, and Iowa. In the rich counties of southern Michigan, settled and occupied mainly by native stock from New York, the average size of families is less than four persons, as it is in a large area of Central New York, whereas for the country at large it is 4.7, and for counties in the mining sections of Michigan occupied by immigrants it rises as high as 5.8 persons. The census figures showing the size of families do not, however, reveal the number of children born to a family, since they show only those living together and not those who have moved away or died. This especially affects the large-sized families, and does not reveal, for example, a fact shown by Kuczynski from the state census of Massachusetts that the average number of children of the foreign-born women in that state is 4.5, while for native women it is only 2.7.[131] This also affects the showing for a state like West Virginia, composed almost entirely of native Americans of colonial stock, with only 2 per cent foreign-born and 5 per cent colored, where the average size of families is 5.1 persons, the highest in the United States, but where in the Blue Ridge Mountains I have come upon two couples of native white Americans who claimed respectively eighteen and twenty-two children. Throughout the South the reduction in size of families and the postponement of marriage have not occurred to any great extent either among the white or colored races, and these are states to which immigration has contributed less than 3 per cent of their population. Yet, if Superintendent Walker's view is sound in all respects, the Southern whites should shrink from competition with the negro in the same way that the Northern white shrinks from competition with the immigrant. He does not do so, and the reasons are probably found in the fact that the South has been remote from the struggle of modern competition, and that ignorance and proud contentment fail to spur the masses to that ambitious striving which rises by means of what Malthus called the prudential restraints on population. It is quite probable that in the South, with the spread of the factory system and universal education, the growth in numbers through excess of births over deaths will be retarded. On the whole it seems that immigration and the competition of inferior races tends to dry up the older and superior races wherever the latter have learned to aspire to an improved standard of living, and that among well-to-do classes not competing with immigrants, but made wealthier by their low wages, a similar effect is caused by the desire for luxury and easy living.[132] =Americanization.=--A line on the chart opposite page 63 shows the proportions between the number of immigrants and the existing population. From this it appears that the enormous immigration of 1906 is relatively not as large as the smaller immigration of the years 1849 to 1854, or the year 1882. Three hundred thousand immigrants in 1850 was as large an addition to a population of 23,000,000 as 1,000,000 in 1906 to a population of 85,000,000. Judged by mere numbers, the present immigration is not greater than that witnessed by two former periods. Judged by saturation it may be greater, for the former immigrants were absorbed by colonial Americans, but the present immigrants enter a solution half colonial and half immigrant. The problem of Americanization increases more than the number to be Americanized. What is the nature of this problem, and what are the forces available for its solution? The term amalgamation may be used for that mixture of blood which unites races in a common stock, while assimilation is that union of their minds and wills which enables them to think and act together. Amalgamation is a process of centuries, but assimilation is a process of individual training. Amalgamation is a blending of races, assimilation a blending of civilizations. Amalgamation is beyond the organized efforts of government, but assimilation can be promoted by social institutions and laws. Amalgamation therefore cannot attract our practical interest, except as its presence or absence sets limits to our efforts toward assimilation. Our principal interest in amalgamation is its effect on the negro race. The census statisticians discontinued after 1890 the inquiry into the number of mulattoes, but the census of 1890 showed that mulattoes were 15 per cent of the total negro population. This was a slightly larger proportion than that of preceding years. The mulatto element of the negro race is almost a race of itself. Its members on the average differ but little if at all from those of the white race in their capacity for advancement, and it is the tragedy of race antagonism that they with their longings should suffer the fate of the more contented and thoughtless blacks.[133] In their veins runs the blood of white aristocracy, and it is a curious psychology of the Anglo-Saxon that assigns to the inferior race those equally entitled to a place among the superior. But sociology offers compensation for the injustice to physiology. The mulatto is the natural leader, instructor, and spokesman of the black. Prevented from withdrawing himself above the fortunes of his fellows, he devotes himself to their elevation. This fact becomes clear in proportion as the need of practical education becomes clear. The effective work of the whites through missionary schools and colleges has not been the elevation of the black, but the elevation of mulattoes to teach the blacks. A new era for the blacks is beginning when the mulatto sees his own future in theirs. Apart from the negro we have very little knowledge of the amalgamation of races in America. We only know that for the most part they have blended into a united people with harmonious ideals, and the English, the German, the Scotch-Irish, the Dutch, and the Huguenot have become the American. We speak of superior and inferior races, and this is well enough, but care should be taken to distinguish between inferiority and backwardness--between that superiority which is the original endowment of race and that which results from the education and training which we call civilization. While there are superior and inferior races, there are primitive, mediæval, and modern civilizations, and there are certain mental qualities required for and produced by these different grades of civilization. A superior race may have a primitive or mediæval civilization, and therefore its individuals may never have exhibited the superior mental qualities with which they are actually endowed, and which a modern civilization would have called into action. The adults coming from such a civilization seem to be inferior in their mental qualities, but their children, placed in the new environments of the advanced civilization, exhibit at once the qualities of the latter. The Chinaman comes from a mediæval civilization--he shows little of those qualities which are the product of Western civilization, and with his imitativeness, routine, and traditions, he has earned the reputation of being entirely non-assimilable. But the children of Chinamen, born and reared in this country, entirely disprove this charge, for they are as apt in absorbing the spirit and method of American institutions as any Caucasian.[134] The race is superior but backward. The Teutonic races until five hundred years after Christ were primitive in their civilization, yet they had the mental capacities which made them, like Arminius, able to comprehend and absorb the highest Roman civilization. They passed through the mediæval period and then came out into the modern period of advanced civilization, yet during these two thousand years their mental capacities, the original endowment of race, have scarcely improved. It is civilization, not race evolution, that has transformed the primitive warrior into the philosopher, scientist, artisan, and business man. Could their babies have been taken from the woods two thousand years ago and transported to the homes and schools of modern America, they could have covered in one generation the progress of twenty centuries. Other races, like the Scotch and the Irish, made the transition from primitive institutions to modern industrial habits within a single century, and Professor Brinton, our most profound student of the American Indian, has said,[135] "I have been in close relations to several full-blood American Indians who had been removed from an aboriginal environment and instructed in this manner [in American schools and communities], and I could not perceive that they were either in intellect or sympathies inferior to the usual type of the American gentleman. One of them notably had a refined sense of humor as well as uncommon acuteness of observation." The line between superior and inferior, as distinguished from advanced and backward, races appears to be the line between the temperate and tropical zones. The two belts of earth between the tropics of Capricorn and Cancer and the arctic and antarctic circles have been the areas where man in his struggle for existence developed the qualities of mind and will--the ingenuity, self-reliance, self-control, strenuous exertion, and will power--which befit the modern industrial civilization. But in the tropics these qualities are less essential, for where nature lavishes food, and winks at the neglect of clothing and shelter, there ignorance, superstition, physical prowess, and sexual passion have an equal chance with intelligence, foresight, thrift, and self-control. The children of all the races of the temperate zones are eligible to the highest American civilization, and it only needs that they be "caught" young enough. There is perhaps no class of people more backward than the 3,000,000 poor whites of the Appalachian Mountains, but there is no class whose children are better equipped by heredity to attain distinction in any field of American endeavor. This much cannot be said for the children of the tropical zones. Amalgamation is their door to assimilation. Before we can intelligently inquire into the agencies of Americanization we must first agree on what we mean by the term. I can think of no comprehensive and concise description equal to that of Abraham Lincoln: "Government of the people, by the people, for the people." This description should be applied not only to the state but to other institutions. In the home it means equality of husband and wife; in the church it means the voice of the laity; in industry the participation of the workmen. Unhappily it cannot be said that Lincoln's description has ever been attained. It is the goal which he and others whom we recognize as true Americans have pointed out. Greater than any other obstacle in the road toward that goal have been our race divisions. Government for the people depends on government by the people, and this is difficult where the people cannot think and act together. Such is the problem of Americanization. In the earlier days the most powerful agency of assimilation was frontier life. The pioneers "were left almost entirely to their own resources in this great struggle. They developed a spirit of self-reliance, a capacity for self-government, which are the most prominent characteristics of the American people."[136] Frontier life includes pioneer mining camps as well as pioneer farming. Next to the frontier the farms of America are the richest field of assimilation. Here the process is sometimes thought to be slower than it is in the cities, but any one who has seen it under both conditions cannot doubt that if it is slower it is more real. In the cities the children are more regularly brought under the influence of the public schools, but more profound and lasting than the education of the schools is the education of the street and the community. The work of the schools in a great city like New York cannot be too highly praised, and without such work the future of the immigrant's child would be dark. In fact the children of the immigrant are better provided with school facilities than the children of the Americans. Less than 1 per cent of their children 10 to 14 years of age are illiterate, but the proportion of illiterates among children of native parents is over 4 per cent. This is not because the foreigner is more eager to educate his child than is the native, but because nearly three-fourths of the foreigners' children and only one-sixth of the natives' children live in the larger cities, where schools and compulsory attendance prevail. Were it not for compulsory education, the child of the peasant immigrant would be, like the child of the Slav in the anthracite coal fields, "the helpless victim of the ignorance, frugality, and industrial instincts of his parents."[137] As it is, they drop out of the schools at the earliest age allowed by law, and the hostility of foreigners to factory legislation and its corollary compulsory school legislation is more difficult to overcome than the hostility of American employers, both of whom might profit by the work of their children. The thoroughness with which the great cities of the North enforce the requirements of primary education leaves but little distinction between the children of natives and the children of foreigners, but what difference remains is to the advantage of the natives. In Boston in 1900 only 5 children of native parents were illiterate, and 22 native children of foreign parents, a ratio of one-twentieth of 1 per cent for the natives and one-tenth of 1 per cent for the foreigners. In New York 68 of the 83,000 children of native parents were illiterate, and 311 of the 166,000 native children of foreign parents, a ratio insignificant in both cases, but more than twice as great for the foreigners as for the natives.[138] Taking all of the cities of at least 50,000 population, more than one-fourth of the foreign-born children 10 to 15 years of age are bread-winners, and only one-tenth of the children of native parents. The influence of residence in America is shown by the fact that of the children of foreigners born in this country the proportion of bread-winners is reduced to one-seventh.[139] But it is the community more than the school that gives the child his actual working ideals and his habits and methods of life. And in a great city, with its separation of classes, this community is the slums, with its mingling of all races and the worst of the Americans. He sees and knows surprisingly little of the America that his school-books describe. The American churches, his American employers, are in other parts of the city, and his Americanization is left to the school-teacher, the policeman, and the politician, who generally are but one generation before him from Europe. But on the farm he sees and knows all classes, the best and the worst, and even where his parents strive to isolate their community and to preserve the language and the methods of the old country, only a generation or two are required for the surrounding Americanism to permeate. Meanwhile healthful work, steady, industrious, and thrifty habits, have made him capable of rising to the best that his surroundings exemplify. [Illustration: SLAVIC HOME MISSIONARIES (From _The Home Missionary_)] Since the year 1900 the Immigration Bureau has not inquired as to the religious faith of the immigrants. In that year, when the number admitted was 361,000, one-fifth were Protestants, mainly from Great Britain, the Scandinavian countries, Germany, and Finland. One-tenth were Jews, 4 per cent were Greek Catholics, and 52 per cent were Roman Catholics. With the shifting of the sources toward the east and south of Europe the proportion of Catholic and Jewish faith has increased. During this transition the Protestant churches of America have begun to awaken to a serious problem confronting them. The three New England states which have given their religion and political character to Northern and Western states are themselves now predominantly Catholic. In all of the Northern manufacturing and industrial states and in their great cities the marvellous organization and discipline of the Roman Catholic Church has carefully provided every precinct, ward, or district with chapels, cathedrals, and priests even in advance of the inflow of population, while the scattered forces of Protestantism overlap in some places and overlook other places. Two consequences have followed. The Protestant churches in much the larger part of their activities have drawn themselves apart in an intellectual and social round of polite entertainment for the families of the mercantile, clerical, professional, and employing classes, while the Catholic churches minister to the laboring and wage-earning classes. In a minor and relatively insignificant part of their activities the Protestant churches have supported missionaries, colporters, and chapels among the immigrants, the wage-earners, and their children. Their home missionary societies, which in the earlier days followed up their own believers on the frontier and enabled them to establish churches in their new homes, have in the past decade or two become foreign missionary societies working at home. Nothing is more significant or important in the history of American Protestantism than the zeal and patriotism with which a few missionaries in this unaccustomed field have begun to lead the way. By means of addresses, periodicals, books, study classes, they are gradually awakening the churches to the needs of the foreigner at home.[140] Among certain nationalities, especially the Italians and Slavs, they find an open field, for thousands of those nationalities, though nominally Catholic, are indifferent to the church that they associate with oppression at home. Among these nationalities already several converts have become missionaries in turn to their own people, and with the barrier of language and suspicion thus bridged over, the influence of the Protestant religion is increasing. Perhaps more than anything else is needed a federation of the Protestant denominations similar to that recently arranged in Porto Rico. That island has been laid out in districts through mutual agreement of the home missionary societies, and each district is assigned exclusively to a single denomination. While the Protestant churches have been withdrawing from the districts invaded by the foreigners, the field has been entered by the "social settlement." This remarkable movement, eliminating religious propaganda, is essentially religious in its zeal for social betterment. Its principal service has been to raise up Americans who know and understand the life and needs of the immigrants and can interpret them to others. In the "institutional church" is also to be found a similar adaptation of the more strictly religious organization to the social and educational needs of the immigrants and their children. More than any other class in the community, it is the employers who determine the progress of the foreigner and his children towards Americanization. They control his waking hours, his conditions of living, and his chances of advancement. In recent years a few employers have begun to realize their responsibilities, and a great corporation like the Colorado Fuel and Iron Company establishes its "sociological" department with its schools, kindergartens, hospitals, recreation centres, and model housing, on an equal footing with its engineering and sales departments. Other employers are interesting themselves in various degrees and ways in "welfare work," or "industrial betterment," and those who profit most by this awakening interest are the foreign-born and their families. This interest has not yet shown itself in a willingness to shorten the hours of labor, and this phase of welfare work must probably be brought about by other agencies. The influence of schools, churches, settlements, and farming communities applies more to the children of immigrants than their parents. The immigrants themselves are too old for Americanization, especially when they speak a non-English language. To them the labor-union is at present the strongest Americanizing force. The effort of organized labor to organize the unskilled and the immigrant is the largest and most significant fact of the labor movement. Apart from the labor question itself, it means the enlistment of a powerful self-interest in the Americanization of the foreign-born. For it is not too much to say that the only effective Americanizing force for the Southeastern European is the labor-union. The church to which he gives allegiance is the Roman Catholic, and, however much the Catholic Church may do for the ignorant peasant in his European home, such instruction as the priest gives is likely to tend toward an acceptance of their subservient position on the part of the workingmen. It is a frequently observed fact that when immigrants join a labor-union they almost insolently warn the priest to keep his advice to himself. Universal suffrage admits the immigrant to American politics within one to five years after landing. But the suffrage is not looked upon to-day as the sufficient Americanizing force that a preceding generation imagined. The suffrage appeals very differently to the immigrant voter and to the voter who has come up through the American schools and American life. The American has learned not only that this is a free government, but that its freedom is based on constitutional principles of an abstract nature. Freedom of the press, trial by jury, separation of powers, independence of the judiciary, equality of opportunity, and several other governmental and legal principles have percolated through his subconscious self, and when he contemplates public questions these abstract principles have more or less influence as a guide to his ballot. But the immigrant has none of these. He comes here solely to earn a better living. The suffrage is nothing to him but a means of livelihood. Not that he readily sells his vote for money--rather does he simply "vote for his job." He votes as instructed by his employer or his political "boss," because it will help his employer's business or because his boss will get him a job, or will, in some way, favor him and others of his nationality. There is a noticeable difference between the immigrant and the children of the immigrant in this regard. The young men, when they begin to vote, can be appealed to on the ground of public spirit; their fathers can be reached only on the ground of private interest. Now it cannot be expected that the labor-union or any other influence will greatly change the immigrant in this respect. But the union does this much: it requires every member to be a citizen, or to have declared his intention of taking out naturalization papers. The reasons for doing this are not political; they are sentimental and patriotic. The union usually takes pride in showing that its members are Americans, and have foregone allegiance to other countries. In a union like the musicians' the reasons for requiring citizenship are also protective, since they serve to exclude transient musical immigrants from American audiences. Again, the union frees its members from the dictation of employers, bosses, and priests. Politicians, of course, strive to control the vote of organized labor, but so disappointing has been the experience of the unions that they have quite generally come to distrust the leader who combines labor and politics. The immigrant who votes as a unionist has taken the first step, in casting his ballot, towards considering the interests of others, and this is also the first step towards giving public spirit and abstract principles a place alongside private interest and his own job. But there is another way, even more impressive, in which the union asserts the preëminence of principles over immediate self-interest. When the foreigner from Southern Europe is inducted into the union, then for the first time does he get the idea that his job belongs to him by virtue of a right to work, and not as the personal favor or whim of a boss. These people are utterly obsequious before their foremen or bosses, and it is notorious that nearly always they pay for the privilege of getting and keeping a job. This bribery of bosses, as well as the padrone system, proceed from the deep-seated conviction that despotism is the natural social relation, and that therefore they must make terms with the influential superior who is so fortunate as to have favor with the powers that be. The anthracite coal operators represented such men, prior to joining the union, as disciplined and docile workmen, but in doing so they disregarded the fact that outside the field where they were obsequious they were most violent, treacherous, and factional. Before the organization of the union in the coal fields these foreigners were given over to the most bitter and often murderous feuds among the ten or fifteen nationalities and the two or three factions within each nationality. The Polish worshippers of a given saint would organize a night attack on the Polish worshippers of another saint; the Italians from one province would have a knife for the Italians of another province, and so on. When the union was organized the antagonisms of race, religion, and faction were eliminated. The immigrants came down to an economic basis and turned their forces against their bosses. "We fellows killed this country," said a Polish striker to Father Curran, "and now we are going to make it." The sense of a common cause, and, more than all else, the sense of individual rights as men, have come to these people through the organization of their labor unions, and it could come in no other way, for the union appeals to their necessities, while other forces appeal to their prejudices. They are even yet far from ideal Americans, but those who have hitherto imported them and profited by their immigration should be the last to cry out against the chief influence that has started them on the way to true Americanism.[141] =Agricultural Distribution of Immigrants.=--The congestion and colonizing of immigrants in the cities and their consequent poverty and the deterioration of the second generation have brought forth various proposals for inducing them to settle upon the farms. The commissioners of immigration[142] at various times have advocated an industrial museum at Ellis Island, wherein the resources and opportunities of the several states could be displayed before the eyes of the incoming thousands. They and others have gone further and advocated the creation of a bureau of immigrant distribution to help the immigrants out of the crowded cities into the country districts. Still others have urged the establishment of steamship lines to Southern ports and the Gulf of Mexico, so that immigrants may be carried directly to the regions that "need them." Very little can be expected from projects of this kind,[143] for the present contingent of immigrants from Southeastern Europe is too poor in worldly goods and too ignorant of American business to warrant an experiment in the isolation and self-dependence of farming. The farmers of the South and West welcome the settler who has means of purchase, but they distrust the newly arrived immigrant. Scandinavians and Germans in large numbers find their way to their countrymen on the farms, but the newer nationalities would require the fostering care of government or of wealthy private societies. The Jews have, indeed, taken up the matter, and the Jewish Agricultural and Industrial Aid Society of New York, by means of subventions from the Baron de Hirsch fund, has distributed many families throughout the country, partly in agriculture, but more generally in trade. The Society for the Protection of Italian Immigrants is doing similar work. Great railway systems and land companies in the South and West have their agricultural and industrial agents on the lookout for eligible settlers. All of the Southern states have established bureaus of immigration, and they are advertising the North and Europe for desirable immigrants. But these agencies seek mainly those immigrants who have resided in the country for a time, and have learned the language and American practices, and, in the case of the railroad and land companies, those who have accumulated some property. The immigration bureaus of the Southern states and railways, the most urgent applicants at the present time for immigrants, are strongly opposed to the plan of federal distribution. They want farmers who will do their own work. From the standpoint of the immigrant himself this position is correct. To find a place as an agriculturist he must find a place as a farmer and not a harvest hand.[144] Speaking for the Southern bureaus, Professor Fleming says,[145] "The South decidedly objects to being made the government dumping-ground for undesirable immigrants. It does not want the lower class foreigners who have swarmed into the Northern cities. It wants the same sort of people who settled so much of the West." The state board of South Carolina officially invites immigration of "white citizens of the United States, citizens of Ireland, Scotland, Switzerland, and France, and all other foreigners of Saxon origin." As for those without money who must depend on their daily labor for wages, they must go where employment is most regular and the best wages are paid. This is not on the farms, with a few months' work in summer and no homes in winter. It is unmistakably in the great cities and industrial centres. The commissioner of immigration at Ellis Island, speaking of the cordon established by his bureau along the Canadian frontier from Halifax to Winnipeg in order to catch those who tried to escape inspection at New York, said, "All those immigrants who had New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, Cleveland, or Cincinnati in mind as a destination when they left Europe and came to Quebec, went all the way around that wall to its western end at Winnipeg, and then took trains and came back to the very places they had in mind when they left Europe; and if you were to land all the ships that now come to New York at Galveston, New Orleans, or Charleston, every one of the immigrants would come to the place he had in mind when he decided to emigrate."[146] Professor Wilcox contends that the immigrants already distribute themselves according to their economic advantage as completely as do the natives. They seem to congest in the cities because the cities are necessarily their places of first arrival. "Our foreign-born arrive, in at least nine-tenths of the cases, at some city. Our native citizens arrive by birth, in at least three-fourths of the cases, in the country. The foreign-born arrive mainly at seaport cities, and disperse gradually from those cities to and through other interior cities, ultimately reaching in many cases the small towns or open country. It is in no sense surprising, or an evidence of imperfect distribution, that the foreign-born should be massed in the cities when nine-tenths of them arrive there, and the native population massed in the country districts when three-fourths of them arrive there."[147] Artificial distribution would not relieve the pressure as long as the character and amount of immigration continue--it can only be relieved by creating greater economic inducements in the country. Natives and foreigners both crowd to the cities because wages and profits are higher than they are in the country. Even supposing the congestion in the cities could be relieved by making the inducements in the country greater, the relief could not continue, for it would only invite more immigration. Emigration has not relieved the pressure of population in Europe. In no period of their history, with the exception of Ireland, have the populations of Europe increased at a greater rate than during the last half century of migration to America. It is not emigration but improved standards of living that lessens the pressure of numbers, and France with the widest diffusion of property has little emigration and no increase in population. With the redundant millions of Europe, increasing thousands would migrate if they got word from their friends that the American government is finding jobs for them. Just as we have already seen that the tide of immigration rises with a period of prosperity in America, so would it rise with agricultural distribution of immigrants. Both are simply more openings for employment, and the knowledge of such opportunities is promptly carried to the waiting multitudes abroad. Consider also the political jeopardy of an administration at Washington conducting a bureau for the distribution of immigrants. If it refused to direct immigrants to one section of the country because it found that the wages were low, it would arouse the hostility of employers. If it directed them to another section, where the wages offered were high because the employers were preparing for a lockout, or the unions were on strike, it would lose the votes of workingmen. The administration would soon learn that safely to conduct such a bureau it must not conduct it at all. Far better is it that the federal government should leave the distribution of immigrants to private employment agencies. It might then license all such agencies that conduct an interstate business. With the power to take away the license on proof of fraud and misrepresentation, and with the prosecution of agencies and employers that deceive and enslave the immigrant, the government would accomplish all that it could directly do for better distribution. Unquestionably the employment agencies, with their _padroni_, their bankers, and their false promises, are the source of miserable abuse to thousands of immigrants.[148] They require interstate as well as state regulation. By weeding out the dishonest agencies the field would be occupied by the honest ones, and the immigrant could trust himself to their assistance. But such regulation would not be merely for the sake of the immigrant. It would, as it should, aid the American as well. This suggests to us the true nature of the problem of city congestion and the nature of its solution. It is not to be found in special efforts on behalf of the immigrant, but in efforts to better the condition of both Americans and immigrants. The congestion of cities is owing to discriminations in favor of cities. If the government gives aid to agriculture as it does to manufactures, if it provides better communication, equalizes taxes, reduces freight rates to the level enjoyed by cities, then agriculture and the small towns will be more attractive. Americans will not crowd to the cities, and the more provident of the immigrants will find their way to the country. The proposition of federal distribution of immigrants is merely a clever illusion kept up to lead Congress astray from the restriction of immigration. =Higher Standards of Immigration.=--As for the inferior, defective, and undesirable classes of immigrants, there is no protection except stringent selection. The Commissioner of Immigration at New York estimates that 200,000 of the million immigrants in 1903 were an injury instead of a benefit to the industries of the country,[149] and he advocates a physical examination and the exclusion of those who fall below a certain physical standard. During the past ten years the educational, or rather, illiteracy test, has come to the front, and the advantages of this test are its simplicity and its specific application to those races whose standards are lowest. [Illustration: ALIENS AWAITING ADMISSION AT ELLIS ISLAND] Much discussion has been carried on respecting this test, and there has been considerable misunderstanding and misrepresentation as to its probable effects. The principal mistake has been the assumption that it is designed to take the place of other tests of admission, and that therefore it would permit, for example, the most dangerous criminals--those who are intelligent--to enter this country. If we examine existing laws, and seek to understand the real nature of immigration restriction, we can see the character of this mistake. All of our legislation governing immigration should be described as _improvement_ of immigration rather than _restriction_ of immigration. The object has always been to raise the average character of those admitted by excluding those who fall below certain standards. And higher standards have been added from time to time as rapidly as the lawmakers perceived the need of bettering the quality of our future citizenship. Although in 1862 Congress had enacted a law prohibiting the shipment of Chinese coolies in American vessels,[150] it was not until 1875 that the lawmakers first awoke to the evil of unrestricted immigration. In that year a law was enacted to exclude convicts and prostitutes. This law made an exception in favor of those who had been convicted of political offences. Next, in 1882, Congress added lunatics, idiots, paupers, and Chinese. In 1885 laborers under contract were for the first time to be excluded, but an exception was made in order to admit actors, artists, lecturers, singers, domestics, and skilled workmen for new industries. In 1891 the list of ineligibles was again extended so as to shut out not only convicts but persons convicted of crime, also "assisted" immigrants, polygamists, and persons with loathsome or dangerous contagious diseases. In 1903 the law added epileptics, persons who have had two or more attacks of insanity, professional beggars, and anarchists. Notwithstanding these successive additions of excluded classes, the number of immigrants has continually increased until it is greater to-day than in any preceding period, and while the standards have been raised in one direction, the average quality has been lowered in other directions. The educational and physical tests, while not needed for the races from Northwestern Europe, are now advocated as additions to the existing tests on account of the flood of races from Southeastern Europe. The question of "poor physique" has come seriously to the front in recent reports of immigration officials. The decline in the average of physical make-up to which they call attention accompanies the increase in numbers of Southern and Eastern Europeans. While the commissioner at Ellis Island estimates that 200,000 immigrants are below the physical standards that should be required to entitle them to admission, the number certified by the surgeons is much less than this. Yet nine-tenths of even that smaller number are admitted, since the law excludes them only if other grounds of exclusion appear. That the physical test is practicable is shown by the following description of the qualities taken into account by the medical examiners at the immigrant stations; qualities which would be made even more definite if they were authorized to be acted upon:[151]-- "A certificate of this nature implies that the alien concerned is afflicted with a body not only but illy adapted to the work necessary to earn his bread, but also but poorly able to withstand the onslaught of disease. It means that he is undersized, poorly developed, with feeble heart action, arteries below the standard size; that he is physically degenerate, and as such not only unlikely to become a desirable citizen, but also very likely to transmit his undesirable qualities to his offspring should he, unfortunately for the country in which he is domiciled, have any. "Of all causes for rejection, outside of those for dangerous, contagious, or loathsome diseases, or for mental disease, that of 'poor physique' should receive the most weight, for in admitting such aliens not only do we increase the number of public charges by their inability to gain their bread through their physical inaptitude and their low resistance to disease, but we admit likewise progenitors to this country whose offspring will reproduce, often in an exaggerated degree, the physical degeneracy of their parents." The history of the illiteracy test in Congress is a curious comment on lobbying. First introduced in 1895, it passed the House by a vote of 195 to 26, and the Senate in another form by a vote of 52 to 10. Referred to a conference committee, an identical bill again passed both Houses by reduced majorities. But irrelevant amendments had been tacked on and the President vetoed it. The House passed it over his veto by 193 to 37, but it was too late in the session to reach a vote in the Senate. Introduced again in 1898, it passed the Senate by 45 to 28, but pressure of the Spanish War prevented a vote in the House. The bill came up in subsequent Congresses but did not reach a vote.[152] The lobby is directed by the steamship companies, supported by railway companies, the Hawaiian Sugar Planters' Association, and other great employers of labor. By misrepresentation, these interested agencies have been able at times to arouse the fears of the older races of immigrants not affected by the measure. Their fears were groundless, for the illiteracy test is not a test of the English language, but a test of any language, and it applies only to those who are 15 years of age and over, but does not apply to wife, children, parents, or grandparents of those who are admitted. With these reasonable limitations it would exclude only 1 in 200 of the Scandinavians, 1 in 100 of the English, Scotch, and Finns, 2 or 3 in 100 of the Germans, Irish, Welsh, and French; but it would exclude one-half of the South Italians, one-seventh of the North Italians, one-third to two-fifths of the several Slav races, one-seventh of the Russian Jews, altogether one-fifth or one-fourth of the total immigration.[153] But these proportions would not long continue. Elementary education is making progress in Eastern and Southern Europe, and a test of this kind would stimulate it still more among the peasants. Restrictive at first, it is only selective; it would not permanently reduce the number of immigrants, but would raise their level of intelligence and their ability to take care of themselves. The foregoing principles do not apply to Chinese immigration. There the law is strictly one of exclusion and not selection. This distinction is often overlooked in the discussion of the subject. Respecting European, Japanese, and Korean immigration, the law _admits_ all except certain classes definitely described, such as paupers, criminals, and so on. Respecting Chinese immigration the law _excludes_ all except certain classes described, such as teachers, merchants, travellers, and students. In the case of European immigration the burden of proof is upon the immigration authorities to show that the immigrant should be excluded. In the case of the Chinese, the burden of proof is on the immigrant to show that he should be admitted. In the administration of the law the difference is fundamental. If the Chinese law is liberalized so as to admit doctors, lawyers, and other professional classes, against whom there is no objection, it can be done in one of two ways. It can name and specify the additional classes to be admitted. To this there is little objection, for it retains the existing spirit of the law. Or it can be reversed, and can admit all classes of Chinese except coolies, laborers, and the classes now excluded by other laws. If this were done, the enforcement of the law would break down, for the burden of proof would be lifted from the immigrant and placed on the examining board. The law is with great difficulty enforced as it is, but the evasions bear no comparison in number with those practised under the other law. European immigration is encouraged, provided it passes a minimum standard. Chinese immigration is prohibited unless it exceeds a maximum standard. One is selection, the other is exclusion. One should be amended by describing new classes _not_ to be admitted, the other by describing classes which _may_ be admitted. This difference between the two laws may be seen in the effects of the restrictions which have from time to time been added to the immigration laws. Each additional ground of restriction or selection has not decreased the total amount of immigration, nor has it increased the proportion of those debarred from admission. In 1898, 3200 aliens were sent back, and this was 1.4 per cent of those who arrived. In 1901, 3900 were sent back, but this was only three-fourths of 1 per cent of those arriving. In 1906, 13,000 sent back were 1.2 per cent of the arrivals. Intending immigrants as well as steamship companies learn the standards of exclusion and the methods of evasion, so that the proportion who take their chances and fail in the attempt is very small. Nevertheless, this deportation of immigrants, though averaging less than 1 per cent, is a hardship that should be avoided. It has often been proposed that this should be done through examination abroad by American consuls or by agents of the Immigration Bureau. Attractive and humane as this proposal appears, the foreign examination could not be made final. It would remove the examiners from effective control, and would require a large additional force as well as the existing establishment to deport those who might evade the foreign inspection. It does not strike at the root of the evil, which is the business energy of the steamship companies in soliciting immigration, and their business caution in requiring doubtful immigrants to give bonds in advance to cover the cost of carrying them back.[154] It is not the exclusion law that causes hardship, but the steamship companies that connive at evasions of the law. The law of 1903 for the first time adopted the correct principle to meet this evasion, but with a limited application. Since 1898, the Bureau had debarred increasing numbers on account of loathsome and contagious diseases. But these had already done the injury which their deportation was designed to prevent. In the crowded steerage the entire shipload was exposed to this contagion. Congress then enacted the law of 1903, not only requiring the steamship companies to carry them back, as before, but requiring the companies to pay a fine of $100 for every alien debarred on that account. In 1906, the companies paid fines of $24,300 on 243 such deportations. The principle should be extended to all classes excluded by law, and the fine should be raised to $500. Then every agent of the steamship companies in the remotest hamlets of Europe would be an immigration inspector. Their surgeons and officials already know the law and its standards of administration as thoroughly as the immigration officials. It only needs an adequate motive to make them cooperators with the Bureau instead of evaders of the law. Already the law of 1903 has partly had that effect. One steamship company has arranged with the Bureau to locate medical officers at its foreign ports of embarkation. However, the penalty is not yet heavy enough, and the Commissioner-General recommends its increase to $500. By extending the law to all grounds of deportation in addition to contagious diseases, the true source of hardship to debarred aliens will be dried up.[155] INDEX A Advertising, 26, 29, 84, 85, 104, 108, 109. Age Composition of Immigrants, 119. Agriculture, 130, 131, 132, 133. Alien Contract Labor Law, 118. American Federation of Labor, 144. Americanization, 208. Armenians, 65, 99. Asiatic Immigration, 101-104. Assimilation, 17-21, 113, 198. Atlanta University, 58, 59, 61. Australia, 6, 19. Austria-Hungary, 18, 65, 79-87. B Births, 57, 86, 94. Bohemians, 80, 82, 132. Boston, 203, 215. Brinton, Daniel G., 212. Burlingame Treaty, 111. Butcher Workmen, 150. C California, 101, 103, 117. Canada, 104. (See "French Canadians.") Carib, 106. Castes, 8. Charity, 108. Charity Organization Society of New York, 100. Chicago, 47, 110, 165, 178. Child Labor, 152. Chinese, 101, 109, 111, 114, 117, 130, 131, 132, 143, 144, 146, 156, 231. (See "Coolies.") Chinese Exclusion, 117, 152, 235. Cities, 54, 55, 164, 165, 166, 215. Civil War, 3, 63, 64, 98, 111, 129, 175. Classes in America, 8, 12. Closed Shop, 205. Colorado Fuel and Iron Company, 150, 219. Colored Farmers' Alliance, 50. Competition, Race, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 148, 149, 151, 204, 208. Contract Labor, 99, 102, 104, 108, 109, 110, 118, 135, 138, 141, 142, 143, 231. (See "Coolies," "Peonage.") Coolies, 109, 152. (See "Chinese," "Japanese.") Coöperation, 49, 50. Cost of Living, 73. (See also "Standard of Living.") Crime, 26, 168-175. Croatians, 80, 81, 83, 84, 109, 122, 123. Curran, Father, 223. D Death-rate, 58, 60, 61, 86, 95. (See "Infant Mortality.") Distribution of Immigrants, 130, 224-230. Drunkenness, 172. Dutch, 24, 88, 89, 123. Dutch East India Company, 108. E Education, 45, 46, 52, 146, 214. (See "Illiteracy.") Educational Tests, 44, 45, 52, 194, 231, 232, 234. (See "Negro.") Eminence of Races in America, 23-27, 31, 32. Employment Agencies, 229. English Race, 17, 23, 25, 128. Erie Canal, 130. F Fifteenth Amendment to the Constitution, 42, 44, 188. Filipinos, 140, 142, 143, 144. Finns, 95-97. Fleming, Professor W. L., 226. Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, 42, 44, 45. French, 25, 128. French Canadians, 25, 97, 151, 199. G Galicia, 93. (See also "Austria-Hungary.") Germans, 24, 30, 65, 67-68, 84, 122, 132, 152. Greeks, 47, 122. H Hampton Institute, 49. Hawaii, 99, 101, 102, 103, 105, 131, 132, 142, 196. Hawaiian Sugar Planters' Association, 234. Heredity, 5. Hoffman, Fred L., 55, 57. Huguenots, 24-25. I Illiteracy, 76, 79, 194. Immigration, 22-38, 63-106. Immigration Bureaus, 225, 237. Incentives to Immigration, 27-31, 63-68, 72, 76, 77, 80, 84-87, 88, 95, 96, 99, 100, 101, 107, 108. India, 9, 10, 103, 141, 142. Indigenous Races, 104. Industrial Capacity of Races, 127-134. Industrial Education, 46, 47, 48. (See "Negro.") Industrial Prosperity and Depression, 63, 68, 72, 157. Infant Mortality, 60, 62, 87. (See "Death-rate.") Initiative and Referendum, 185-187. Irish, 24, 34, 65, 66, 67, 122, 151, 153, 204, 205. Italians, 70-79, 109, 122, 123, 127, 130, 132, 140, 141, 147, 151, 153. J Japanese, 101, 102, 109, 114, 130, 131, 132. Jefferson, Thomas, 1. Jenks, J. W., 142. Jews, 65, 81, 83, 87-95, 115, 122, 123, 127, 132, 133, 152, 153, 164. K Kelsey, Carl, 54, 55. Knights of Labor, 118. Knownothings, 117, 173. Koreans, 103. Kuczynski, R. R., 198, 207. L Labor, 124, 125, 126, 131, 134-159. (See "Wage Earners," "Trade Unions.") Labor, Department of, 177, 178. Landlordism, 64, 66, 72, 85, 87, 180. Languages, 20, 94, 97. Law, John, 108. Leadership, 52. Legislation, 111, 117, 118, 136, 231, 234, 236. Lincoln, Abraham, 43, 213. Lodge, Henry Cabot, 22-25. Longshoremen, 150. M Machinery, 125, 156. Magyars, 81, 82, 83, 84, 123. Malay Races, 140, 142. Mallock, W. H., 179. Marriage, 203. Mexicans, 132. Military Duties, 75. Miners, 129, 130, 150, 154. Mob Violence, 173, 174, 175. Molly Maguires, 129. Morality, 61, 62, 204. (See "Prostitution.") Münsterberg, Hugo, 179. N Naturalization, 111, 188, 189, 190, 194. Negro, 3, 12, 16, 39-62, 106, 108, 112, 113, 114, 136, 137, 139, 140, 147, 172, 209. New York, 164, 214, 215. Norwegians, 164. (See "Scandinavians.") P Padroni, 102, 103, 109, 118, 229. "Pale of Settlement," 91. Penn, William, 29, 108. Pennsylvania, 29, 30, 31. Peonage, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 141. Philippine Commission, 144. Philippine Islands, 106, 141, 179, 180. Poles, 83, 123, 152. Political Boss, The, 182. Political Exiles, 68. Population, 53-58, 76, 157, 160. (See "Births" and "Death-rates.") Porto Rico, 106, 218. Portuguese, 98, 152. Poverty and Pauperism, 26, 66, 76, 167, 175-178. Primaries, Direct, 185. Profits, 108, 155. Prohibition, 173. Proportional Representation, 184. Prostitution, 57. Protective Tariff, 158. Q Quakers, 28, 29. R Race Problem, 4, 8, 40, 42, 43, 44, 113. (See "Negro.") Races, 3, 5, 7, 8, 12-17, 87, 88, 104-106, 108, 211. (See individual name of race.) Race Suicide, 198, 200. Railroads, 130, 156, 225. Reconstruction, 43, 50. Religion, 28, 186, 217-219. (See "Incentives to Immigration.") Restriction of Immigration, 116 n., 117, 118, 175, 230, 231. Ripley, W. Z., 95. Roosevelt, Theodore, 201, 206. Rosenberg, Edward, 144. Roumanians, 83, 84, 123. Russia, 87, 92, 93, 132. Ruthenians, 80, 83, 123. S Scandinavians, 24, 132, 152. (See "Norwegians.") Scotch Irish, 23-24, 31-38, 128, 151. (See "Irish.") Self-government, 2-4, 42, 43, 49, 53. Seymour, Governor Horatio, 29. Shaler, Professor N. S., 10. Slavs, 14, 65, 80, 82, 83, 152. Slovaks, 81, 83, 151. Social Settlements, 219. Socialism, 181. Spaniards, 128. Standard of Living, 112, 115, 151, 153, 208. Statistics, 119, 130, 158, 160-178, 198. (See "Population," "Births," "Death-rate.") Steamship Lines, 84, 85, 107, 110, 237, 238. Stone, A. H., 147. Strikes, 102, 149. Suffrage, 2, 42, 43, 44, 51, 52, 117, 182, 183, 188, 220. (See also "Educational Tests.") Sweatshops, 115, 133, 148. Swedes, 47. Syrians, 99, 151. T Taft, Governor, 143. Taxation, 74, 75, 84, 86. Temporary Immigration, 77, 98, 101. Test Act, 35. Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution, 42. Trade Unions, 50, 51, 115, 129, 149, 150, 152, 154, 205, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224. (See "Labor" and "Wage Earners.") Triple Alliance, 75. Tuskegee Institute, 49. U United Garment Workers of America, 115 n., 150. United Hebrew Charities of New York, 167. United Mine Workers of America, 150. W Wage Earners, 111-118, 157.(See "Labor.") Wages, 112, 113, 129, 140, 148, 152, 153, 155, 157, 159. (See "Labor.") Wage System, The, 147. Walker, Francis A., 198, 200, 207. Watson, Elkanah, 200. Wealth Production and Immigration, 119, 159. Welfare Work, 219. Wilcox, Professor, 227. Footnotes: [1] Bluntschli, "Theory of the State," pp. 108-181. [2] _Atlantic Monthly_, May, 1903, p. 649. [3] Shaler, p. 651. [4] Ripley, "The Races of Europe." [5] Ripley, Chs. XVII and XVIII. [6] See the interesting series of articles by H. N. Casson, _Munsey's_, 1906. [7] Lodge, p. 138. [8] "History and Topography of New York," Address at Cornell University, June 30, 1870. [9] These figures are probably exaggerated, but authorities agree upon the magnitude of the migration. Fiske, "Old Virginia," Vol. II, p. 594. [10] Hanna, "The Scotch-Irish," Vol. II, p. 2. [11] Tillinghast, "The Negro in Africa and America." [12] Burgess, pp. 45, 225; Fleming, pp. 380, 433. [13] Burgess, p. 207. [14] See Ch. VIII, "Politics." [15] Commission of Education _Report_, 1900-1901, Vol. I, p. ci. [16] Hugh M. Browne, A.M.E., _Zion Church Quarterly_, April, 1894, quoted by Tillinghast, p. 186. [17] Fannie B. Williams, _Charities_, October 7, 1905, p. 43. [18] _Atlanta University Publications_, No. 7, p. 188. [19] Bureau of Labor, _Bulletin_, No. 35. [20] _Atlanta University Publications_, Nos. 3 and 8. [21] _Atlanta University Publications_, No. 3, pp. 153-178. [22] Twelfth Census, _Supplementary Analysis_, p. 203. [23] Willcox, "Census Statistics of the Negro," _Yale Review_, 13:279 (1904). [24] "The Negro Farmer," p. 90. [25] Pp. 9, 10. [26] Dabney, Commissioner of Education, _Report_, 1902, Vol. I, p. 797. [27] Twelfth Census, _Supplementary Analysis_, pp. 305, 307. [28] _Supplementary Analysis_, p. 204. [29] Pp. 16, 17; Wood, "American in Process," p. 218. [30] Twelfth Census, Vol. III, p. lxix. [31] _Atlanta University Publications_, No. 1, p. 24. [32] _Atlanta University Publications_, No. 2, p. 9. [33] Twelfth Census, Vol. III, p. lxxxii. [34] P. clxxvi. [35] P. ccxviii. [36] Pp. cxix, cxxiii, cxxvii. [37] Hoffman, p. 70. [38] Twelfth Census, _Supplementary Analysis_, pp. 496, 497. [39] _Atlanta University Publications_, No. 1, p. 26. [40] Figures for 1883. [41] Less than one-tenth of one per cent. [42] This is the number according to race; the table gives the number according to last place of residence. [43] _Review of Reviews_, 33:491 (1906). [44] Statistics mainly from King and Okey, "Italy To-day." [45] _Review of Reviews_, 33:491 (1906). [46] Twelfth Census, _Supplementary Analysis_, p. 27. [47] _Review of Reviews_, 33:491 (1906). [48] King and Okey, pp. 316-318. [49] Balch, _Charities_, May, 1906, p. 179. [50] Marshall, "Principles of Economics," p. 248. [51] "Jewish Encyclopedia," 2:532. [52] Balch, _Charities_, May, 1906, p. 180. [53] P. 380. [54] "Industrial Commission," 15:442. [55] Commissioner-General, 1906, p. 85. [56] Coman, "History of Contract Labor," etc., p. 47. [57] Reports on Hawaii; Commissioner-General of Immigration. See Index. [58] Report of the Royal Commission on Alien Immigration, 1903. Cd. 1741. [59] Semple, "American History," etc., p. 332. [60] Rowe, Chapter V. [61] Census of the Philippine Islands. [62] Lalor's "Cyclopedia of Political Economy, Political Science, and United States History," article on "Chinese Immigration." [63] Industrial Commission, 19:679. [64] Computed from Table VIII, p. 28 _et seq._, Report of Commissioner-General of Immigration, 1906. "Commercial" includes agents, bankers, hotel-keepers, manufacturers, merchants, and dealers, and other miscellaneous. "Unskilled" includes draymen, hackmen, and teamsters, farm laborers, farmers, fishermen, laborers, and servants. [65] Two hundred and eighty-five thousand four hundred and sixty immigrants set down as "no occupation," including mainly women and children, are omitted from this computation. [66] Less than one-tenth of one per cent. [67] Industrial Commission, Vol. XV, see index, "Prepaid Tickets," p. 818. [68] United States Revised Statutes, 1901, Section 1999, Act of July 28, 1868. [69] Fleming, pp. 692, 693. [70] "If I were asked what one factor makes most for the amicable relations between the races in the Delta, I should say, without hesitation, the absence of a white laboring class, particularly of field laborers."--Stone, "The Negro in the Yazoo-Mississippi Delta," p. 241. "There is comparatively little crime in the Black Belt and in the White Belt. It is in the counties where the races meet on something like numerical equality and in economic competition that the maximum of crime is charged against negroes."--_Atlanta University Publications_, No. 9, p. 48. [71] In 1905, after losing a strike in New York, the General Executive Board of the United Garment Workers of America, consisting with one exception of Russian Jews, adopted the following resolutions:-- Resolved, That the unprecedented movement of the very poor in America from Europe in the last three years has resulted in wholly changing the previous social, political, and economic aspects of the immigration question. The enormous accessions to the ranks of our competing wage-workers, being to a great extent unemployed, or only partly employed at uncertain wages, are lowering the standard of living among the masses of the working people of this country, without giving promise to uplift the great body of immigrants themselves. The overstocking of the labor market has become a menace to many trade-unions, especially those of the lesser skilled workers. Little or no benefit can possibly accrue to an increasing proportion of the great numbers yet coming; they are unfitted to battle intelligently for their rights in this republic, to whose present burdens they but add others still greater. The fate of the majority of the foreign wage-workers now here has served to demonstrate on the largest possible scale that immigration is no solution of the world-wide problem of poverty. Resolved, That we call on American trade unionists to oppose emphatically the proposed scheme of government distribution of immigrants, since it would be an obvious means of directly and cheaply furnishing strike breakers to the combined capitalists now seeking destruction of the trade-unions. Resolved, That we condemn all forms of assisted immigration, through charitable agencies or otherwise. Resolved, That we warn the poor of the earth against coming to America with false hopes; it is our duty to inform them that the economic situation in this country is changing with the same rapidity as the methods of industry and commerce. Resolved, That with respect to immigration we call on the government of the United States for a righteous relief of the wage-workers now in America. We desire that Congress should either (1) suspend immigration totally for a term of years; or (2) put into force such an illiteracy test as will exclude the ignorant, and also impose such a head tax as will compel immigrants to pay their full footing here and be sufficient to send back all those who within a stated period should become public dependants. [72] Smith, "Emigration and Immigration," pp. 238-263. [73] Act of March 3, 1903, Sec. 2. [74] New York Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1898, p. 1155. [75] Twelfth Census, "Occupations," p. clxxxvii. [76] Report on Hawaii, _Bulletin_ No. 47, pp. 780-783. [77] Report on Hawaii, _Bulletin_ No. 66, pp. 441-447. [78] Jewish Agricultural and Industrial Aid Society, _Annual Reports_. [79] Clyatt _v._ U.S., 97 U.S., 207 (1903); Peonage Cases, 123 Fed. 671. [80] New York _Herald_, June 24, 1903. [81] _The Nation_, 83:379 (1906); Durand, Herbert, "Peonage in America," _Cosmopolitan_, 39:423 (1905). [82] Rosenberg, _American Federationist_, October, 1903, p. 1026. [83] Jenks, "Certain Economic Questions," etc., p. 157. [84] Coman, and "Reports on Hawaii." [85] Jenks, pp. 47, 54, 55, 158. [86] United States Philippine Commission, 1902, Part I, p. 22. [87] Rosenberg, p. 1021. [88] Philippine Commission, 1902, index, "The Labor Situation." [89] "The Italian Cotton Grower," p. 45. [90] Where two years are given, the first is for Immigration and the second for Imports. [91] Twelfth Census, Vol. I, p. clxxvi. [92] See _Federation_, June 1902, p. 40. [93] Twelfth Census, Vol. I, pp. 878-881. [94] New York _Sun_, Nov. 29, 1903. [95] Semple, 312. [96] Prisoners having one parent foreign are apportioned in the ratio of native and foreign parentage. [97] Includes native-born, parentage unknown. [98] Offenders having one parent foreign are apportioned in the ratio of native and foreign parentage. [99] Kate Holladay Claghorn, "The Tenement House Problem," Vol. II, p. 79. [100] John B. McMaster, "The Riotous Career of the Knownothings," _Forum_, July, 1894, p. 524. [101] Cutler, "Lynch Law"; Bishop, "Lynching," _International Quarterly_, September, 1903. [102] Bureau of the Census, Special Reports, "Paupers in Almshouses, 1904," "Benevolent Institutions, 1904," "Insane and Feeble-minded in Hospitals and Institutions, 1904." [103] Münsterberg, "American Traits," p. 225 ff. [104] Eaton, "The Civil Service in Great Britain," p. 160 ff. [105] Muirhead, "The Land of Contrasts," p. 274. [106] See description of the Belgium system by the author, _Review of Reviews_, May, 1900; also, "Representation of Interests," _Independent_, June, 1900; "Proportional Representation." [107] Commons, "Proportional Representation," Appendix. Publications of the Federation for Majority Rule, Washington, D.C. [108] Hunt, Gaillard, "Federal Control of Naturalization," _World's Work_, 11:7095 (1906). [109] "Report to the President on Naturalization." [110] "Naturalization Laws and Regulations of October, 1906," published by the Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization. [111] Twelfth Census, Vol. I, p. 929. [112] Twelfth Census, "Abstract," p. 18. [113] Twelfth Census, "Abstract," p. 19. [114] Twelfth Census, Vol. I, p. ccxvii. [115] Phillips, J. B., "Educational Qualifications of Voters," _University of Colorado Studies_, Vol. III, No. 2 (1906). [116] Caffey, Francis G., "Suffrage Limitations at the South," _Political Science Quarterly_, 20:53 (1905). Report on Political Reform, Union League Club, New York, 1903. [117] Williams _v._ Mississippi, 170 U.S., 213; Giles _v._ Harris, 189 U.S., 475; Giles _v._ Teasley, 193 U.S., 146. [118] This does not apply to the "understanding" clause in Mississippi, which is permanent. [119] Twelfth Census, Vol. I, pp. ccxiii, ccxv. [120] Twelfth Census, Vol. I, pp. cciv, ccv. [121] See "Reports on Hawaii." [122] Kuczynski, "Einwanderungspolitik," p. 35. [123] _Forum_, 11:634-743 (1891). Reprinted in "Discussions," etc., pp. 417-426. [124] Professor Smith, for the year 1888, estimated the colonial element at 29,000,000 and the immigrant element at 26,000,000, applying to the immigrants the average rate of increase from births. "Emigration and Immigration," pp. 60-61. [125] Watson, p. 522. [126] Van Vorst, "The Woman Who Toils," p. viii. [127] Computed from the Twelfth Census, Vol. II, p. lxxxvii, ff. [128] Computed from the Twelfth Census, Vol. II, p. 312. [129] Kuczynski concludes from his study of Massachusetts statistics that "the native population cannot hold its own. It seems to be dying out." Could he have separated the two elements of the native population, he would have found that the immigrant element is dying out faster than the older native element. "The Fecundity of the Native and Foreign Born Population in Massachusetts," p. 186. [130] Twelfth Census, "Statistical Atlas," plate 98. [131] "Fecundity," etc., p. 157. [132] Ross, "Causes of Race Superiority." [133] See Du Bois, "The Souls of Black Folk." [134] Report on Hawaii, _Bulletin_ No. 47, p. 715. [135] "Religions of Primitive People," p. 15. [136] Smith, "Assimilation of Nationalities," p. 440. [137] Lovejoy, "The Slav Child," _Charities_, July, 1905, p. 884. [138] Twelfth Census, _Supplementary Analysis_, p. 374. [139] "Child Labor in the United States," p. 15, Bureau of the Census. [140] Grose, "Aliens or Americans?" [141] See also Stewart and Huebner. [142] Report, 1903, p. 60; 1904, p. 44; 1905, p. 58; 1906, p. 64. [143] Industrial Commission, 15:492-646; 19:971-977. [144] Tosti, Gustavo, "The Agricultural Possibilities of Italian Immigration," _Charities_, May 5, 1904, p. 472. [145] "Immigration to the Southern States," _Political Science Quarterly_, 20:276 (1905). [146] "Facts about Immigration," p. 11. [147] _Ibid._, p. 119. [148] Kellor, "Out of Work," pp. 17, 50-53, 70; _Charities_, Feb. 6, 1904, p. 151. [149] Commissioner-General, 1903, p. 70. [150] Chapter 27, Laws of 1862. [151] Commissioner-General, 1906, p. 62. [152] For details of the several measures, see Hall, "Immigration." [153] "Industrial Commission," 19:1001-1003. Hall, "Immigration." [154] Commissioner-General, 1904, p. 41. [155] The National Immigration Conference, December 8, 1905, adopted the following resolution: "That the penalty of $100, now imposed on the steamship companies for bringing diseased persons to the United States, be also imposed for bringing in any person excluded by law." _National Civic Federation Review_, January, 1906, p. 19. POVERTY By ROBERT HUNTER Paper 12mo 25 cents net Cloth 12mo $1.50 net "A book that should be read by every one who has the promotion of social betterment at heart."--_Milwaukee Sentinel._ "A most interesting, a most startling, and a most instructive book."--_Los Angeles Times._ "His book is largely a result of personal experience, and the aid of such works as his observation has led him to believe are approximately accurate and worthy of credence. 'Poverty' seeks to define its subject estimate its extent, describe some of its effects, and point out the necessary remedial action, as seen by a settlement worker. The result is a collection of data of considerable value."--_New York Daily People._ "This is in many ways a noteworthy book. The author has long lived face to face with the almost incredible conditions which he here portrays. He has extended his work and observations from the crowded tenement districts of the great cities to the smaller industrial towns, and what he finds reveals conditions in this country--even in times of industrial prosperity--very similar to those found in England by Booth and other investigators; namely, that a percentage of poverty exists in the smaller industrial centres not far below that of the great industrial places, and that this percentage is extraordinarily high."--_Springfield Republican._ "The book is written with earnestness, but without exaggeration. Every one familiar with the facts knows that conditions are even more cruel and brutal than as here described. And yet, no one of the great industrial nations is so backward as our own in devising and employing the legislative and other necessary remedies. Mr. Hunter's presentation of the situation is of the greatest value, and deserves the widest consideration."--_The Congregationalist._ THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 64-66 Fifth Avenue, New York Transcriber's Notes: Passages in italics are indicated by _italics_. Passages in bold are indicated by =bold=. The following misprints have been corrected: "conquerers" corrected to "conquerors" (page 97) "Amercianized" corrected to "Americanized" (page 104) "anequal" corrected to "an equal" (page 121) "780 783" corrected to "780-783" (footnote 76) "Soul" corrected to "Souls" (footnote 133) 
35415	----	+-----------------------------------------------------------+ | Transcriber's Note: | | | | This document was produced from an AMS Press reprint. | | All modern material has been removed. The original, | | printed in 1914, is an article in a journal, with it's | | own page numbering (as well as the journal page numbering,| | which has been removed from this transcription). | | | | Inconsistent hyphenation in the original document has | | been preserved. | | | | Obvious typographical errors have been corrected. For | | a complete list, please see the end of this document. | | | +-----------------------------------------------------------+ 4 JEWISH IMMIGRATION TO THE UNITED STATES Studies in History, Economics and Public Law Edited by the Faculty of Political Science of Columbia University Volume LIX] [Number 4 Whole Number 145 JEWISH IMMIGRATION TO THE UNITED STATES FROM 1881 TO 1910 by SAMUEL JOSEPH 1914 To MY FATHER AND MY MOTHER PREFACE In this survey of Jewish immigration to the United States for the past thirty years, my purpose has been to present the main features of a movement of population that is one of the most striking of modern times. The causes of Jewish emigration from Eastern Europe, the course of Jewish immigration to the United States and the most important social qualities of the Jewish immigrants are studied, for the light they throw upon the character of this movement. The method employed in this investigation has been largely statistical and comparative, a fact which is partly due to the kind of material that was available and partly to the point of view that has been taken. Certain economic and social factors, having a close bearing upon the past and present situation of the Jews in Eastern Europe and frequently neglected in the discussion of the various phases of this movement, have been emphasized in the examination into the causes of the emigration of the Jews from Eastern Europe and have been found vital in determining the specific character of the Jewish immigration to this country. I desire gratefully to acknowledge my deep indebtedness to Mr. A.S. Freidus, head of the Jewish department of the New York Public Library, for his ever-ready assistance in the preparation of this work. Thanks are due as well to Dr. C.C. Williamson, head of the Economics department of the library, and to his able and courteous staff; to Professor Robert E. Chaddock for his many valuable suggestions and aid in the making of the statistical tables and in the reading of the proof; and to Professor Edwin R.A. Seligman for his painstaking reading of the manuscript. SAMUEL JOSEPH. TABLE OF CONTENTS. PART I.--THE CAUSES OF JEWISH EMIGRATION. PAGE CHAPTER I _Introduction._ 1. Character of Jewish immigration 21 2. Eastern Europe 22 3. Distribution of Jews in Eastern Europe 22 4. Uniform character of East-European Jews 22 CHAPTER II EASTERN EUROPE: ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND POLITICAL CONDITIONS. I. _Russia._ 1. Medieval past 27 2. Agricultural character 28 3. Emancipation of serfs 29 4. Reminiscences of serfdom 29 5. Changes since the emancipation 30 6. Epoch of transition 31 7. Social orders: classes, the church 31 8. Political order: autocracy, bureaucracy 32 9. Political struggle: Russian liberalism 32 10. Reaction since Alexander III 33 II. _Roumania._ 1. Social-economic classes 34 2. Emancipation of the serfs: results 35 3. Development of industry and commerce 36 4. Growth of a middle class 36 III. _Austria-Hungary._ 1. Reminiscences of medieval economy 37 2. Transitional nature of economic life 37 3. Organization of industry and commerce 37 4. Politico-economic struggles 38 5. Galicia: economic and social conditions 39 IV. _Summary._ CHAPTER III THE JEWS IN EASTERN EUROPE: ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL POSITION I. _Russia._ 1. Economic characteristics 42 a. Occupational distribution of the Jews 42 b. Comparison with the non-Jews 42 c. Participation of the Jews in principal occupational groups 43 d. Comparison of occupational distribution of Jews and non-Jews in the Pale 43 e. Economic activities of the Jews 44 2. Social characteristics 46 a. Urban distribution of the Jews 46 b. Comparison with the non-Jews 46 c. Literacy: comparison with the non-Jews 47 d. Liberal professions: comparison with the non-Jews 48 II. _Roumania._ 1. Economic characteristics 48 a. The Jews as merchants and entrepreneurs 48 b. The Jewish artisans 49 c. Participation of the Jews in industry and commerce 49 2. Social characteristics 49 a. Urban distribution of the Jews 49 b. Comparison with the non-Jews 49 c. Literacy: comparison with the non-Jews 50 III. _Austria-Hungary._ 1. Economic characteristics 50 a. Occupational distribution of the Jews 50 b. Comparison with the non-Jews 51 c. Participation of the Jews in principal occupational groups 51 Galicia 51 a. Occupational distribution of the Jews 51 b. Comparison with the non-Jews 51 c. Participation of the Jews in principal occupational groups 51 d. Industrial and commercial position of the Jews in East and West Galicia 52 2. Social characteristics 52 a. Urban distribution of the Jews 52 b. Comparison with the non-Jews 52 c. Liberal professions: comparison with the non-Jews 52 IV. _Summary._ CHAPTER IV THIRTY YEARS OF JEWISH HISTORY I. _Russia._ 1. Treatment of the Jews after the partitions of Poland 56 2. Pale of Jewish Settlement: special Jewish laws 57 3. Attitude of Russian government toward the Jews 57 4. Alexander II and liberalism 58 5. Reaction: antagonism to the Jews 59 6. Economic attack: the May Laws 60 7. Effect of the May Laws 61 8. Educational restrictions: the "percentage rule" 62 9. _Pogroms: pogroms of 1881-2_ 63 10. Expulsions from Moscow 64 11. Nicholas II: anti-Jewish agitation: Kishineff 64 12. War and revolution: effect upon the Jews 65 13. _Pogroms_ as counter-revolution 66 14. Results: economic and social pressure 67 15. Jewish policy of reactionary régime 68 II. _Roumania._ 1. Early legal status of the Jews 69 2. Convention of Paris 69 3. Anti-Jewish activities of the government: Article VII 70 4. Berlin Congress 70 5. Article 44 of the Berlin Treaty 71 6. The revised Article VII 71 7. Legal status of the Jews fixed 72 8. Campaign of discrimination 73 9. Exclusion of Jews from economic activities 73 10. Educational restrictions: restrictions to professional service 74 11. Political basis of anti-Jewish policy 75 12. Results: economic and social pressure 76 13. Jewish policy of Roumanian government: Hay's circular note 76 III. _Austria-Hungary._ 1. Early legal status of the Jews: emancipation 77 2. Jews attacked as liberals and capitalists 78 3. Rise of political antisemitism: its triumph: the clericals 78 Galicia 78 1. Rise of a Polish middle class: displacement of Jews in industry and commerce 79 2. Economic boycott of Jewish artisans and traders 79 3. Anti-Jewish activity of local authorities 79 4. Over-competition and surplus of Jews in industry and commerce 80 5. Historical rôle of the Jews: antagonism of peasantry and clergy 80 CHAPTER V CONCLUSION PART II.--JEWISH IMMIGRATION TO THE UNITED STATES A. ITS MOVEMENT CHAPTER I DETERMINATION OF NUMBER OF JEWISH IMMIGRANTS 1. Construction of table: difficulties 87 2. Sources utilized: reports of Jewish societies 87 3. Rearrangement of numbers from 1886 to 1898 88 4. Determination of numbers by country of nativity: methods used 88 5. Determination of numbers from 1881 to 1885: methods used 90 6. Tendency to magnify numbers of Jewish immigrants 91 7. Results 92 CHAPTER II IMMIGRATION OF JEWS FROM EASTERN EUROPE 1. Jewish immigration East-European 95 2. Summary by decades of Jewish immigration from Russia, Roumania and Austria-Hungary 95 3. Annual contributions of Jewish immigration from Russia, Roumania and Austria-Hungary 96 CHAPTER III IMMIGRATION OF JEWS FROM RUSSIA 1. Russian Jewish immigration a movement of steady growth 98 a. Summary by decades 98 b. Annual variations: effect of the Moscow expulsions 98 2. Participation of Jews in the immigration from Russia 101 a. Annual variations 101 b. Summary by decades 102 c. Relative predominance of Jewish in total 102 3. Intensity of Jewish immigration from Russia 103 a. Rate of immigration 103 b. Fluctuations of rate 104 CHAPTER IV IMMIGRATION OF JEWS FROM ROUMANIA 1. Roumanian Jewish immigration a rising movement 105 a. Summary by decades 105 b. Annual variations 105 2. Participation of Jews in the immigration from Roumania 107 a. Jewish and total synonymous 107 b. Annual variations 107 3. Intensity of Jewish immigration from Roumania 108 a. Rate of immigration 108 b. Fluctuations of rate 108 CHAPTER V IMMIGRATION OF JEWS FROM AUSTRIA-HUNGARY 1. Jewish immigration from Austria-Hungary a rising movement 109 a. Summary by decades 109 b. Annual variations 109 c. Comparison of Jewish with total 2. Participation of Jews in the immigration from Austria-Hungary 110 a. Summary by decades 110 b. Annual variations 111 3. Comparison of immigration of Jews from Austria and Hungary 111 a. Numbers 111 b. Participation in total 111 4. Immigration of Jews and other peoples from Austria-Hungary 112 5. Rate of Jewish immigration from Austria-Hungary 112 CHAPTER VI JEWISH IMMIGRATION 1. Total movement one of geometrical progression 113 a. Summary by decades 113 b. Summary by six-year periods 113 c. Annual variations 114 CHAPTER VII PARTICIPATION OF JEWS IN TOTAL IMMIGRATION 1. Rise in proportion of Jewish to total 117 2. Summary by decades 117 3. Annual variations 117 4. Comparison of annual variations of Jewish and total immigration 118 5. Rank of Jewish in total immigration 119 6. Rate of immigration 120 CHAPTER VIII SUMMARY B. ITS CHARACTERISTICS CHAPTER I FAMILY MOVEMENT 1. Importance of sex and age distribution 127 2. Proportion of females in Jewish immigration 127 a. Tendency towards increase 127 3. Proportion of children in Jewish immigration 128 4. Proportion of sexes in total and Jewish immigration 129 5. Proportion of children in total and Jewish immigration 129 6. Comparison of composition by sex of Jews and other immigrant peoples 130 7. Comparison of composition by age of Jews and other immigrant peoples 130 8. Comparison of composition by sex and age of Jews and the Slavic races 131 9. Comparison of composition by sex and age of Jews from Roumania and Roumanians 131 10. Comparison of composition by sex and age of Jewish and "old" and "new" immigration 132 11. Conclusion 132 CHAPTER II. PERMANENT SETTLEMENT 1. Emigration of Jews compared with immigration of Jews 133 2. Comparison of return movement of total and Jewish immigration 134 3. Comparison of return movement of Jews and other immigrant peoples 134 4. Emigration tendency of Jews from Russia, Roumania and Austria-Hungary 135 5. Comparison of return movement of Jews and Poles from Russia and Austria-Hungary 136 6. Comparison of return movement of Jewish and "old" and "new" immigration 137 7. Comparison of return movement of Jews and other immigrant peoples, 1908 137 8. Response of Jewish immigration to economic conditions in the United States 138 9. Comparison of Jews and other immigrant peoples who have been previously in the United States 138 10. Conclusion 139 CHAPTER III OCCUPATIONS 1. Occupational distribution of Jewish immigrants 140 2. Jewish immigrants reporting occupations 141 a. Number and percentage of occupational groups 141 3. Skilled laborers 141 a. Garment workers 141 b. Other important groups 142 4. Participation of Jews in occupational distribution of total immigration 142 5. Comparison of occupational distribution of Jews and other immigrant peoples 143 6. Comparison of occupational distribution of Jews and Slavic peoples 144 7. Comparison of occupational distribution of Jewish and "old" and "new" immigration 144 8. Conclusion 145 CHAPTER IV ILLITERACY 1. Illiteracy of Jewish immigrants 146 2. Influence of sex upon illiteracy of Jewish immigrants 146 3. Illiteracy of Jewish male and female immigrants 147 4. Comparison of rate of illiteracy of Jews and other immigrant peoples 147 5. Comparison of rate of illiteracy of Jewish and "old" and "new" immigration 147 6. Comparison of rate of illiteracy of Jews and East-European peoples 148 7. Comparison of rate of illiteracy of each sex among Jews and East-European peoples 148 8. Conclusion 148 CHAPTER V DESTINATION 1. Factors influencing destination 149 2. Proportion of Jewish immigrants destined for divisions 149 3. Proportion of Jewish immigrants destined for principal states 149 4. Comparison of destination of Jews and other immigrant peoples 150 5. Participation of Jews in the immigration destined for divisions 150 6. Final disposition of Jewish immigrants 151 CHAPTER VI SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS STATISTICAL TABLES PAGE IA. Participation of Jews in occupations in the Russian Empire, 1897 158 IB. Participation of Jews in occupations in the Pale of Jewish Settlement, 1897 159 II. Jewish immigration at the ports of New York, Philadelphia and Baltimore, July to June, 1886 to 1898 159 III. Jewish immigration at the port of New York, July, 1885 to June, 1886, by month and country of nativity 159 IVA. Jewish immigration at the port of Philadelphia, 1886 to 1898, by country of nativity 160 IVB. Jewish immigration at the port of Baltimore, 1891 to 1898, by country of nativity 160 V. Jewish immigration at the ports of New York, Philadelphia and Baltimore, 1886 to 1898, by country of nativity 161 VI. Jewish immigration to the United States, 1881 to 1910 93 VII. Percentage of annual Jewish immigration to the United States, contributed by each country of nativity, 1881 to 1910 94 VIII. Jewish immigration to the United States, 1881 to 1910, absolute numbers and percentages, by decade and country of nativity 162 IX. Jewish immigration from Russia, 1881 to 1910, and percentage of total arriving each year 162 X. Jewish immigration from Russia, 1881 to 1910, by decade and percentage of total arriving each decade 163 XI. Jewish immigration from Russia at the port of New York, January 1, 1891 to December 31, 1891, and January 1, 1892 to December 31, 1892, by month 163 XII. Total immigration from Russia and Jewish immigration from Russia, 1881 to 1910, and percentage Jewish of total 164 XIII. Total immigration from Russia and Jewish immigration from Russia, 1881 to 1910, by decade and percentage Jewish of total 164 XIV. Immigration to the United States from the Russian Empire, 1899 to 1910, by annual percentage of contribution of principal peoples 165 XV. Rate of immigration of peoples predominant in the immigration from Russia, 1899 to 1910 165 XVI. Rate of Jewish immigration from Russia per 10,000 of Jewish population, 1899 to 1910 166 XVII. Jewish immigration from Roumania, 1881 to 1910, by decade and percentage of total arriving each decade 166 XVIII. Jewish immigration from Roumania, 1881 to 1910, and percentage of total arriving each year 167 XIX. Total immigration from Roumania and Jewish immigration from Roumania, 1899 to 1910, and percentage Jewish of total 168 XX. Rate of Jewish immigration from Roumania per 10,000 of Jewish population, 1899 to 1910 168 XXI. Jewish immigration from Austria Hungary, 1881 to 1910, by decade and percentage of total arriving each decade 169 XXII. Jewish immigration from Austria-Hungary, 1881 to 1910, and percentage of total arriving each year 169 XXIII. Total and Jewish immigration from Austria-Hungary, 1881 to 1910, by decade and percentage Jewish of total 170 XXIV. Total and Jewish immigration from Austria-Hungary, 1881 to 1910, and percentage Jewish of total 170 XXV. Percentage of annual immigration from Austria-Hungary contributed by principal peoples, 1899 to 1910 171 XXVI. Rate of Jewish immigration from Austria-Hungary per 10,000 of Jewish population, 1899 to 1910 171 XXVII. Jewish immigration, 1881 to 1910, by decade 172 XXVIII. Jewish immigration, 1881 to 1910, by six-year period 172 XXIX. Jewish immigration to the United States, 1881 to 1910 173 XXX. Total immigration and Jewish immigration, 1881 to 1910, by decade and percentage Jewish of total 174 XXXI. Total immigration and Jewish immigration, 1881 to 1910, by year and percentage Jewish of total 174 XXXII. Total and Jewish immigration, 1881 to 1910, by number and percentage of increase or decrease 175 XXXIII. Sex of Jewish immigrants, 1899 to 1910 176 XXXIV. Sex of Jewish immigrant adults at the port of New York, 1886 to 1898 176 XXXV. Age of Jewish immigrants, 1809 to 1910 177 XXXVI. Age of Jewish immigrants at the port of New York, 1886 to 1898 177 XXXVII. Sex of total and Jewish immigrants, 1899 to 1910 178 XXXVIII. Sex of European immigrants, 1899 to 1910 179 XXXIX. Age of European immigrants, 1899 to 1909 180 XL. Sex, 1899 to 1910, and age, 1899 to 1909, of Slavic immigrants 181 XLIA. Sex of Roumanian immigrants, 1899 to 1910, and of immigrants from Roumania. 1900 to 1910 181 XLIB. Age of Jewish and Roumanian immigrants, 1899 to 1909 181 XLII. Sex and age of "old" and "new" immigration (Jewish excepted) and of Jewish immigration, 1899 to 1909 182 XLIII. Jewish immigration and emigration, 1908 to 1912 182 XLIV. Total and Jewish emigrant aliens and percentage Jewish immigrant aliens of total immigrant aliens, 1908 to 1912 183 XLV. European immigrant aliens admitted, and European emigrant aliens departed, 1908, 1909 and 1910 183 XLVI. Jewish immigration and emigration, Russia, Austria-Hungary and Roumania, 1908 to 1912 184 XLVII. Polish immigration and emigration, Russia and Austria-Hungary, 1908 to 1912 184 XLVIII. "Old" and "new" (Jewish excepted) and Jewish immigration and emigration, 1908 to 1910 185 XLIX. European immigrant aliens, 1907, and European emigrant aliens, 1908 185 L. Total European immigrants admitted and total of those admitted during this period in the United States previously, 1899 to 1910 186 LI. Occupational distribution of Jewish immigrants, 1899 to 1910 186 LII. Jewish immigrants reporting occupations, 1899 to 1910 187 LIII. Jewish immigrants engaged in professional occupations, 1899 to 1910 187 LIV. Jewish immigrants reporting skilled occupations, 1899 to 1910 188 LV. Occupations of total European and Jewish immigrants, 1899 to 1909, and percentage Jewish of total 189 LVI. Total European immigrants and immigrants without occupation, 1899 to 1910 189 LVII. Occupations of European immigrants reporting employment, 1899 to 1910 190 LVIII. Occupations of Slavic and Jewish immigrants reporting employment, 1890 to 1910 191 LIX. Occupations of "old" and "new" immigration (Jewish excepted) and of Jewish immigration, 1899 to 1909 191 LX. Illiteracy of Jewish immigrants, 1899 to 1910 192 LXI. Sex of Jewish immigrant illiterates, 1908 to 1912 192 LXII. Illiteracy of European immigrants, 1899 to 1910 193 LXIII. Illiteracy of "old" and "new" immigration (Jewish excepted) and of Jewish immigration, 1899 to 1909 194 LXIV. Illiteracy of peoples from Eastern Europe, 1899 to 1910 194 LXV. Sex of illiterates of peoples from Eastern Europe, 1908 194 LXVI. Destination of Jewish immigrants, 1899 to 1910, by principal divisions 195 LXVII. Destination of Jewish immigrants, 1899 to 1910, by principal states 195 LXVIII. Percentage of Jewish and total immigrants destined for each division, 1899 to 1910 196 LXIX. Participation of Jewish immigrants in destination of total immigrants, 1899 to 1910, by principal divisions 196 APPENDICES A. President Harrison's Message, 1891 199 B. Article VII of the Constitution of Roumania 200 C. Secretary Hay's Note 201 BIBLIOGRAPHY 207 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Thirty years have elapsed since the Jews began to enter the United States in numbers sufficiently large to make their immigration conspicuous in the general movement to this country. A study of Jewish immigration, in itself and in relation to the general movement, reveals an interesting phase of this historic and many-sided social phenomenon and throws light upon a number of important problems incident to it. Especially does it become clear that the Jewish immigration, although in part the result of the same forces as have affected the general immigration and the separate groups composing it, differs, nevertheless, in certain marked respects, from the typical immigration. Some of these differences indeed are fundamental and far-reaching in their effects and practically stamp the Jewish immigration as a movement _sui generis_. Generally speaking, in the forces which are behind the emigration of the Jews from the countries of the Old World, in the character of their immigration--its movement and its distinguishing qualities--the Jewish immigration strikes a distinctly individual note. Three European countries--Russia, Austria-Hungary and Roumania--furnish the vast majority of the Jewish immigrants to the United States.[1] It is to these countries, therefore, that we must turn for light upon the causes of this movement. Geographically, these countries are closely connected; they form practically the whole of the division of Eastern Europe. Here the Slavonic races so largely predominate that the term Slavonic Europe has been applied to this section of Europe. Eastern or Slavonic Europe is a social as well as a geographical fact. In racial stratification, economic and social institutions, cultural position and, in part, religious traditions as well, these countries present strong similarities to one another and equally strong differences in most of these respects from the countries of Western Europe. It is here that the Jews are found concentrated in the greatest numbers. Nearly seven and a half-million Jews--more than half of the Jews of the world--live in these countries. Of this number more than five millions are in Russia, more than two millions in Austria-Hungary, and a quarter of a million in Roumania. The great majority of these are massed on the contiguous borders, in a zone which embraces Poland, and Western Russia, Galicia, and Moldavia. This is the emigration zone. The relative density of the Jews is greatest in these parts. Every seventh man in Poland, every ninth man in Western Russia and in Galicia, and every tenth man in Moldavia, is a Jew. Thus the center of gravity of the Jewish populations is still the former kingdom of Poland, as it was constituted before the partitions at the end of the eighteenth century. United originally in Poland, the Jews of Eastern Europe still retain the same general characteristics, in spite of the changes that have been brought about by a century of rule under different governments. Speaking a common language, Yiddish, and possessing common religious traditions, as well as similar social and psychological traits, the East-European Jews present on the whole a striking uniformity of character. Through the centuries they have become deeply rooted in the East-European soil, their economic and social life intimately connected with the economic and social conditions of these countries and their history deeply influenced by the transformations that have been taking place in them for half a century. As these conditions and transformations furnish the foundation of Jewish life in Eastern Europe, and contain the explanation of the situation that has been largely responsible for the recent Jewish emigration to Western Europe and the United States, a rapid review of the economic, social and political conditions of Russia, Roumania and Austria-Hungary will be made. FOOTNOTES: [1] _Cf. infra_, p. 95. PART I THE CAUSES OF JEWISH EMIGRATION CHAPTER II EASTERN EUROPE: ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND POLITICAL CONDITIONS I. RUSSIA The difficulty of the average American to understand the character of Russian life, some traits of which have been so vividly brought home to him in recent years, may be attributed to a general idea that a country rubbing elbows as it were with Western civilization for several centuries must perforce itself possess the characteristics of modern civilization. A closer survey of the economic, social and political conditions prevailing in Russia to-day, however, reveals many points of difference from those of the countries of Western Europe, and presents a remarkable contrast with those prevailing in the United States. Russia and the United States, indeed, stand, in Leroy-Beaulieu's phrase, at the two poles of modern civilization. So far apart are they in the character of their economic, social and political structures, in the degree in which they utilize the forms and institutions of modern life, and, in the difference in the mental make-up of their peoples, that there exist few, if any, points of real contact. Up to the middle of the 19th century, Russia was, in nearly all respects, a medieval state. She was a society, which, in the words of Kovalevsky, "preserved still of feudalism, not its political spirit but its economic structure, serfdom, monopoly and the privileges of the nobility, its immunities in the matter of taxes, its exclusive right to landed property, and its seignorial rights."[2] Her modern era dates from the emancipation of the serfs in 1861, when she became, at least in form, a European state. But, though the Russia of our day has witnessed great transformations in the direction of modernization, she still retains many of the conditions and much of the spirit of her medieval past. A rapid review of the economic, social and political conditions of Russia will serve to make clearer this situation, which has an important bearing upon the exceptional position, legal, economic, social, of the Jews in the Empire, and upon the fateful events of their history for a third of a century. The most striking fact in the economic life of present-day Russia is that it is overwhelmingly agricultural. More than three-fourths of her population are engaged in some form of agricultural labor. The vast majority are peasants living in villages. Towns are relatively few and sparsely populated. Agricultural products constitute 85 per cent of the annual exports. What a contrast does this agricultural state, this "peasant empire", present to the industrially and commercially developed countries of Western Europe and the United States! The Russian peasant still practices a primitive system of agriculture. His method of extensive cultivation, the three-field system in vogue, his primitive implements, his domestic economy of half a century ago, with its home production for home consumption, which is still maintained in many parts of Russia to this day--all these present conditions not far removed from those of the middle ages of Western Europe.[3] The existence to our day of this almost primitive economy finds its explanation in the fact that serfdom existed in Russia, in all its unmitigated cruelty, until comparatively recent times. Its abolition through the Emancipation Act of Alexander II--antedating our own Emancipation Proclamation by a few years--struck off the chains that bound twenty millions of peasants to the soil. The emancipation, however, was not complete. The land the peasants received was insufficient for their needs. Other conditions co-operated in the course of time with this primary one, to create a situation of chronic starvation for the great mass of the Russian peasants. Forced by the government to pay heavy taxes, in addition to redemption dues for the land, which they paid until recently, and receiving little help from either government or the nobility for the improvement of their position, they are virtually exploited almost as completely as before the emancipation. Thus, though freed in person, the peasants are to a great extent bound by economic ties to their former masters, the nobles. These two social-economic classes maintain towards each other practically the same relative position held by them before the emancipation. The manor still controls the hut. The former servile relations have persisted psychologically as well. The Russian peasant is still largely a serf in his mentality, in his feeling of dependence, in his inertia and lack of individual enterprise, and, above all, in the smallness of his demands upon life.[4] This fact permeates, as it serves to explain, many aspects of contemporary Russian life. The industrial and commercial stage of Russian economy began with the emancipation, which set free a great supply of labor. The changes that have taken place have nevertheless not obliterated many of the landmarks of the feudal, pre-reformation period. The economic activities of the last half-century present a curious juxtaposition of old and new, medieval and modern. Cottage and village industries but little removed from the natural economy of the earlier period exist by the side of great factories and industrial establishments employing thousands of workmen. Fairs and markets still play a large part in supplying the needs of the peasants, rapidly as they are being supplanted by the commercial activities of the towns. The industrial laborers, recruited mainly from the country, retain largely their peasant interests, relations and characteristics. The payment of wages in kind, which is still in vogue in many parts, and the right of inflicting corporal punishment retained by the employers, give evidence of the strong impress of the servile conditions of the past. Vast changes have nevertheless taken place since the emancipation. Capitalism has made rapid, if uneven, progress. Under the fostering care of the government, industry and commerce have made immense strides. The factory system has taken firm root and has been developing a specialized class of industrial laborers. Great industrial centers have sprung up; towns have grown rapidly. The middle class, hitherto insignificant, has increased in number, wealth and influence. Among the peasants as well, freedom has given birth to the spirit of individualism. The differentiation of the peasantry into wealthier peasants and landless agricultural laborers, the great mass of the peasantry occupying the middle ground, and the gradual dissolution of the two great forces of Russian agricultural life--the patriarchal family and the village community--have been the most important results. Russia is clearly in a state of transition from the agricultural or medieval to the industrial and commercial or modern economic life. This transformation of the economic structure is being effected under great difficulties and the strong opposition of the ruling classes, whose privileges are threatened by the new order of things. The Russian social and political order reflects the medieval background which formed the setting for her entrance upon the modern stage. The class distinctions, naturally obtaining, are hardened into rigidity by the law, which divides Russian society into a hierarchy of five classes or orders--the nobles, the clergy, the merchants, the townsmen and the peasants--each with separate legal status, rights and obligations. The individual is thus not an independent unit, as in the legal codes of Western Europe or the United States. Accompanying the legal stratification there is an exceedingly strong, almost caste-like, sense of difference between the members of the different groups. This emphasis on the person is characteristic of the medieval social order. In Russia it finds additional expression in the control of individual movement by means of the passport, without which document a Russian may be said to have no legal existence. Even more striking is the position of the Russian Church, as well as the religio-national conception which dominates the Russian mind and according to which orthodoxy and nationality are regarded as one. The Russian Orthodox is the only true Russian; all others are foreigners. In the alliance of church and state--which in Russia reaches a degree of strength not attained in any other European state--in the complete control exercised by the Church over the lives of the faithful and the clergy, in secular as in religious matters, in its intolerant attitude towards other creeds and its unceasing attempts to suppress them--it presents characteristics strongly reminiscent of the position of the medieval church in Western Europe. The one great political fact of Russia has been the autocracy. The degree of control which the autocratic Czars exercised unopposed over their subjects marks an important difference between the political development of Russia and that of the countries of Western Europe. At an early period the Czars had transformed the nobility into a body of state officials, thus at a blow depriving them of any real powers, apart from the will of the Crown, and making them serve the interests of the state. In this way the nobles, or the landed aristocracy, became the main source from which the members of the bureaucracy were recruited. The lack of a middle class of any real size and influence, which could play a part in the demand for political rights, explains in a measure the strength of the autocratic powers.[5] The autocracy in turn has been largely dependent upon its servant, the bureaucracy. To such an extent has the Russian government been the expression of the will and interests of this all-powerful body as to justify Leroy-Beaulieu's designation of Russia as the "Bureaucratic State". Thus the autocracy, the nobility-bureaucracy and the church have been the dominating forces in the economic, social and political life of Russia. In the light of this analysis, the political struggles that have been so conspicuous a feature of Russian life during the last half of the 19th century become an accompaniment as well as an expression of the progressive development of Russia towards modern economic, social and political institutions. Russian liberalism,--largely revolutionary because of the denial of even elementary rights, such as the freedom of person, of speech, of the press and of meeting,--rights which were secured to Englishmen through the Magna Charta--has had the serious task not only of securing these rights but at the same time of creating in Russia the conditions of modern civilization. For the twenty years in which its spirit ruled, during the reign of Alexander II, the reforms begun under its influence amounted to a veritable revolution. The economic, social, political and juridical reforms of this epoch generated new forces and began the modernization of Russia. These reforms encountered the formidable opposition of the nobility and the church and finally of the autocracy, when the latter felt that its position was gradually being undermined, especially by the demand for a constitution. With the assassination of Alexander II, the liberal era was brought to a close, and a reaction was ushered in which has lasted to our day. The classes that came into power with Alexander III and Pobedonostseff were, from their economic interests, social outlook and political ideals, essentially medieval and may properly be termed the feudal party. Guided by its economic interests--which had been seriously threatened by the emancipation--and swayed by the Slavophilistic philosophy,[6] this party sought to nullify as far as possible the reforms of the epoch of emancipation and to carry through a many-sided program for putting the order of things backward to the medieval, pre-reform days. Autocracy, Greek Orthodoxy and Russian Nationalism--the famous Slavophilistic trinity--were glorified, the first two as peculiarly national institutions, the policy of russification and the repression of non-orthodox faiths by force were proclaimed as vital to the social health of Russia, the blind ignorance and illiteracy of the peasants were extolled as a virtue and the control over them by the nobility was strengthened in many ways. Freedom of every form was condemned as an aping of the "rotten" civilization of the West with its decaying institutions, and as false to the true Russian national, historical development. During this period of reaction, however, the liberal movement was kept alive, largely as revolutionary propaganda. The earlier movement had been directed by the educated classes, the "_Intelligenzia_" of Russia. Lately, with the growth of the middle class and a population of industrial workers in the towns and the factories, and a wealthier class of peasants, the cry for reform has become more insistent, and only recently partly successful in results. Summarizing his impressions of Russian life and institutions obtained while serving as Ambassador to Russia, Andrew D. White remarked: "During two centuries Russia has been coming slowly out of the middle ages--indeed, out of perhaps the most cruel phases of medieval life."[7] One of the phases of this process has been the bitter struggle between the feudal and the modern forces that has occupied Russia for the last third of a century. II. ROUMANIA In Roumania,[8] in spite of a liberal constitution modeled upon the Belgian, granting all rights enjoyed by citizens of a free state, the underlying economic, social and, in a measure, political conditions point to a state of things little removed from the medieval forms of life. The main social-economic classes are the large landed proprietors, composed chiefly of the old nobility or boyars, and the peasants, who were formerly serfs. In the hands of the former are concentrated the greater part of the land. Five thousand large landed proprietors together owned nearly half of the cultivable land. Nearly a million of peasants, on the other hand, comprising with their dependents a great majority of the population, together owned a little over two-fifths of the cultivable land.[9] This situation is an inheritance from the servile system which existed in Roumania until 1864, when it was legally abolished. The freedom granted to the peasants was, however, more formal than real. The land given them being insufficient for their needs, and pasture land especially having been denied them, they were as a rule compelled to lease land or pasture right from their former masters at ruinous rates, often paying by labor on their former masters' estates. Thus the essential feudal services were in the main continued, especially as the lease and labor contracts, generally drawn up in the interests of the landed proprietor, were often usurious and extremely oppressive.[10] In twenty years there was little change from the previous condition of serfdom, so that a law was necessary, in 1882, to permit the peasants to work at least two days during the week on their own land. Since this period there has been practically little change in this essentially feudal relation of the peasantry to the landed proprietors. As the owners of the great estates are a ruling power in the political life of the country, the greater part of peasants being disqualified from voting through property and educational requirements, the former have been enabled to keep the peasantry in this condition of semi-servitude. The result is a state of ignorance, misery and degradation on the part of the peasantry that is difficult to parallel in another European country. That the peasants are not entirely passive under their wrongs is shown in the repeated uprisings against their masters and in the two great social revolutions of 1888 and 1907, both of which were put down by military force. Roumania's advent into industry and commerce may be dated from the eighties of the last century, and was initiated by the industrial law of 1887, which sought to create a national industry by means of subsidies, land grants and other favors to undertakers of large industrial enterprises. Since then the growth has been sufficiently rapid to place Roumania as the industrial and commercial leader of the Balkan States. Relatively, however, it is still very backward. Only 14 per cent of the population is urban. The industrial laborers are estimated at no more than 40,000. There are only a few cities. Only the largest--Bucarest--has above 100,000 inhabitants, three other cities have between fifty and seventy-five thousand inhabitants. The chief industrial establishments, such as saw mills, flour mills and distilleries, are concerned mainly in the working up of the raw materials produced in the country. Nevertheless, industrial progress has made for the growth of a small but influential middle class, which divides the control of affairs with the large landed proprietors. Its influence can be traced in the electoral law, which gives the urban classes, constituting the backbone of the liberal party, a majority in the Chamber of Deputies. III. AUSTRIA-HUNGARY Though relatively far advanced along the road of modern civilization, Austria-Hungary, through its prevailing mode of economic and social life, and through its large Slavic populations, belongs rather to Eastern than to Western Europe. Historically, it began its modern career about the same time as Russia, when it abolished, in 1867, the feudal services and dues, survivals of the previous servile institutions. Nevertheless, in its large agricultural population, in the primitive system of cultivation generally in vogue, in the scattered character of the peasant holdings, in the strong contrast between the great landed estates or _Latifundia_, held chiefly by the nobility, and the small, even minute, estates of the majority of the peasant proprietors, and in the natural economy prevailing in many parts of the Dual Monarchy and constituting the main foundation upon which the life of the peasants rests--in all these characteristics, is reflected the almost medieval economy which existed in the empire before 1848 and which is not yet entirely outgrown. Industrially and commercially, Austria, far more than Hungary, has indeed made really remarkable progress. Yet in this respect the greatest contrast exists between the various Austrian provinces. Certain of these--Galicia and Bukowina, for instance--are not only the most backward in these pursuits, but their agricultural population is even relatively increasing. Even in the industrially advanced provinces, such as Lower Austria and Bohemia, the transitional nature of the industrial life is evident in the unspecialized character of a larger portion of the town laborers, many of whom are peasants temporarily employed in factories and mines. The Austrian organization of industry and commerce is a modernized version of the guilds and crafts of medieval Western Europe. How these medieval economic forms with their underlying psychologic forces still live and dominate Austria, especially its Slavic nationalities, is shown by the revival in 1859 of the Austrian guilds, the direct descendants of the medieval _Innungen_. These were, in 1883, developed in the form of _Zwangsgenossenschaften_ or compulsory trade-guilds, which, in their regulations concerning the _Befähigungsnachweis_ or certificate of capacity, the three orders of master, journeyman and apprentice, the principle of compulsory entrance into the local guild, the workman's passport or _Arbeitsbuch_, unite the methods of regulating and restricting industry and trade characteristic of the Middle Ages, with modern methods of combination, arbitration, and assistance of members. By the side of these compulsory guilds are to be found the _Gewerkschaften_, or the modern voluntary trade-unions. The transition to modern economic and social conditions is, nevertheless, well advanced. This is seen in a decrease of the agricultural classes and an increase of the industrial and commercial classes in the thirty years from 1869 to 1900. Another sign is the fairly strong differentiation of the economic-social classes, in both the agricultural and the industrial groups, which has advanced quite rapidly. The middle class, while neither as large nor as influential as in the countries of Western Europe, has played an important rôle towards hastening this transition. Politically, the Dual Monarchy occupies a middle ground between absolutist Russia and constitutional England. The court, the nobility and the Roman Church with its strong aristocratic leanings, represent the dominant power in Austria. The economic and social changes of the transitional period have been accompanied by politico-economic struggles which have played a vital part and have cut through and across the racial, national and religious conflicts of this much-distracted conglomeration of peoples. Amid the confusion of parties, with their complexity of programs, may be distinguished the German-Austrian liberals, representatives of the middle class or industrialists, whose historic mission was to create a modern state in Austria, and who carried out, in large measure, their program of constitutionalism, economic freedom and the secular state. Against them were arrayed the powerful forces of the agrarian party or the landed aristocracy--the upholders of the feudal economic-social order of privilege and class distinction, the clericals--the upholders of the idea of the Christian State--and the representatives of the lower middle class, composed chiefly of petty artisans and traders, whose ideal was the medieval industrial organization, largely co-operative and regulated, as opposed to the individualistic and competitive system of the modern era, with its great concentration of wealth, capital and power in the hands of the middle class. That the present structure of Austria is so much of a compromise and crosspatch between modern and medieval economic, social and political forms, and contains so much that is essentially incongruous, is due largely to the successful struggle which the chief parties of the medieval order--the feudal-clericals--the party of the upper classes, and the Christian Socialists--the party of the lower classes--have waged against the growing constitutionalization, industrialization and secularization of Austria--in short, against the transformation of Austria into a modern state. It is in Galicia that the conditions obtaining in Russia are largely duplicated. Geographically, racially and socially, Galicia is a part of Russia. Galicia is a preponderatingly agricultural land and possesses the densest agricultural population in Europe. Modern industry is relatively little developed, its place being held to a great extent by the domestic system of industry. The contrast between the large and small estates is sharper here than perhaps in any other section of Europe. The Polish nobility, in whose hands the large estates are mostly found, are the ruling social and political, as well as economic, power in Galicia. The autonomous Galician _Diet_ is practically the instrument of their interests. A middle class has been gradually rising and contesting their supremacy. The peasantry is one of the most illiterate, degraded, and oppressed in all Europe. IV. SUMMARY This brief review of the economic and social conditions in Russia, Roumania and Austria-Hungary has shown that, broadly speaking, these countries present points of similarity in their situation and their recent movement. In all of these countries, economic and social conditions closely resembling those that obtained in the countries of Western Europe several centuries ago were found until comparatively recent times. The abolition of serfdom in Russia and in Roumania, and of feudal dues in Austria-Hungary, paved the way for the entrance of these states into modern European civilization. The succeeding period has been marked by a rapid transition from the old domestic economy to a modern exchange economy, through the growth of industry and commerce. The medieval conditions of the earlier period have nevertheless not been entirely obliterated. They exist, in Russia, in the privileges and powers of the nobility, in the inferior status and oppressed condition of the peasantry, in the strong class distinctions, in the restraints upon economic activity and upon movement. Though in smaller measure, the same conditions are found in Austria-Hungary, especially in Galicia. In Roumania, so far as the peasantry is concerned, the pre-emancipation conditions remain practically, if not legally, in force. Owing to the increase of population, the minute subdivision of the estates of the peasants, the backwardness of their agricultural methods, and their over-taxation, the position of the peasants has been rendered precarious. Revolutionary uprisings directed chiefly against the landed proprietors have been a recurring expression of their discontent. An important consequence has been the rapid evolution of the industrial and commercial, or the middle class. The growth of the middle class has been accompanied by a struggle in each of these countries between the privileged classes of the feudal state and the middle class, including in the latter the educated classes and the industrial workers of the towns. It is in this middle class that the Jews are chiefly to be found. Owing to this fact, as well as through the action of historical conditions, the Jews occupy an exceptional position in the economic activities and the social life of each of the countries of Eastern Europe. A survey of their economic and social position in each country will serve to clarify the last thirty years of their history in Eastern Europe and to give some of the causes underlying their vast movement from these countries to Western Europe and particularly to the United States. FOOTNOTES: [2] Kovalevsky, _La crise russe_ (Paris, 1906), p. 111. [3] _Cf._ Witte, _Vorlesungen über Volks- und Staatswirtschaft_ (Stuttgart and Berlin, 1913), p. 40. Milyoukov, _Russia and its Crisis_ (University of Chicago Press, 1905), p. 439. [4] _Cf._ Witte, _op. cit._, p. 52. [5] _Cf._ Milyoukov, _op. cit._, p. 246 _et seq._ [6] An interesting statement of the principles of the Slavophiles may be obtained from Simkhovitch (_International Quarterly_, Oct., 1904). [7] White, _Autobiography_ (New York, 1905), vol. ii, p. 35. [8] Owing to the similarity of conditions in Russia and Roumania, particularly as regards the Jews, Roumania has been considered, practically throughout, immediately after Russia. [9] Kogalniceancu, "Die Agrarfrage in Rumänien" _Archiv für Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik_, vol. xxxii, p. 804. [10] _Ibid._, p. 184. Jorga, _Geschichte des Rumänischen Volkes_ (Gotha, 1905), vol. ii, p. 374. CHAPTER III THE JEWS IN EASTERN EUROPE: ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL POSITION The economic and social life of the Jews in Eastern Europe has moved along the familiar channels of commerce, industry and urban life characteristic of the Jews in all countries during the middle ages. An examination of the economic position and function and the principal social characteristics of the Jews reveals the fact that they play an important part in each of these countries. This we shall see by tracing their principal economic activities and some significant phases of their social life. I. RUSSIA A review of the occupations of the Jews in the Russian Empire shows that those engaged in the manufacturing and mechanical pursuits constituted 39 per cent of the total Jewish population gainfully employed. This was the largest occupational group. Commerce engaged 32 per cent. Together the industrial and commercial classes comprised seven-tenths of all Jews engaged in gainful occupations. On the other hand, only 3 per cent were employed in agricultural pursuits. It is in comparison with the occupations of the non-Jewish population in Russia that the significance of this distribution becomes evident. Of the non-Jews in Russia, agricultural pursuits engaged 61 per cent, manufacturing and mechanical pursuits 15 per cent, and commerce only 3 per cent. The non-Jews engaged in industry and commerce thus constituted somewhat less than one-fifth of the total non-Jewish population gainfully employed. More than twice as many Jews, relatively, as non-Jews were engaged in industrial pursuits and practically twelve times as many Jews as non-Jews in commercial pursuits.[11] This difference of occupational grouping makes itself felt in the participation of the Jews in the principal occupational groups. Of the total Russian population gainfully employed, the Jews were 5 per cent. They constituted, however, 11 per cent of all engaged in industry, and 36 per cent of all engaged in commerce.[12] Thus, in the Russian Empire the Jews formed a considerable proportion of the commercial classes and a large proportion of those engaged in industrial pursuits. Properly to gauge the economic function of the Jews in Russia, comparison should be made not with the population of the Russian Empire but rather with that of the Pale of Settlement, where nearly 95 per cent of the Jews live. There the contrast was even stronger. Of the Jews, 70 per cent were employed in industry and commerce as compared with 13 per cent on the part of the non-Jews. Though the Jews are only 12 per cent of the total working population of the Pale, they formed 32 per cent of all engaged in industry and 77 per cent of all engaged in commerce.[13] This clearly shows that the Jews constituted the commercial classes and a significant part of the industrial classes of the Pale. In other words, what is true of the place of the Jews in the occupational distribution of all Russia is still more true of the Pale. The Jews are preponderatingly industrial and commercial, in striking contrast to the rest of the population, which is preponderatingly agricultural. What is the nature of their activities and their function in the industrial and commercial life of Russia? The great majority of Jews engaged in manufacturing and mechanical pursuits are artisans. In the present relatively backward stage of Russian industrial development these are chiefly handicraftsmen, who mainly supply the needs of local consumers. These artisans, who number more than half a million,[14] support nearly one-third of the Jewish population. The most important industry is the manufacture of clothing and wearing apparel, which employed more than one-third of the Jewish working population and supported more than one-seventh of the total Jewish population. It is in effect a Jewish industry: practically all the tailors and shoemakers in the Pale are Jews. They predominate as well in the preparation of food products, in the building trades, in the metal, wood and tobacco industries.[15] Hampered by legal restrictions, lack of technical education, and lack of capital, they nevertheless have become an essential part of the economic life of the Pale, supplying the needs for industrial products not only of the Jews but of the entire Pale, and, especially of the peasants. In the development of large-scale industry, the Jews have taken a smaller part than the Germans or foreigners, owing to the conditions above referred to. Yet, in 1898, in the fifteen provinces of the Pale, more than one-third of the factories were in Jewish hands.[16] Jewish factory workers were estimated at one-fifth of all the factory workers in the Pale.[17] Trade and commerce engage Jews chiefly, supporting nearly two-thirds of the total Jewish population.[18] As Russia is essentially an agricultural country, trade in agricultural products, such as grain, cattle, furs and hides, _etc._, is of prime importance. Nearly half of the Jewish merchants in the Pale were dealers in these products. Of the dealers in the principal grain products, Jews formed an overwhelming majority. Relatively twenty-six times as many Jews as Russians, in the Pale, were grain dealers.[19] Four-fifths of all the dealers in furs and hides, three-fourths of all the dealers in cattle were Jews.[20] The Jewish traders are agents in the movement of the crops, in the various stages from the direct purchase of the grain from the peasant to its export for the world markets. In view of the lack of development in Russia of modern methods for marketing the agricultural produce, and in view of the fact that the Russian peasant is ignorant of the most elementary principles of trade, the Jewish merchants, with their knowledge of the market and their skillful use of credit, play a vital part in the organization of the Russian grain trade, and control this trade in the Pale and on the Black Sea. In other branches of commerce, the Jews are almost as strongly represented. As sellers to the village and city populations, they carry on the largest part of the retail trade of the Pale. The great majority of the merchants, however, are petty traders or store-keepers. The wholesale merchants enrolled in the guilds, on the other hand, constitute a large proportion of all the guild merchants. Thus, through their activity as petty artisans, traders and merchants, the Jews preponderate in the industrial and commercial life of the Pale. As manufacturers and wholesale merchants they play a less important but nevertheless significant part in all Russia. In general the Jewish merchants are quite strongly distinguished from the Russian merchants in their employment of the competitive principles and methods common to the commercial operations of Western Europe and the United States. Their principle of a quick turnover with a small profit, and their use of credit, are not in vogue among the Russian merchants who operate on the basis of customary prices and long credits. In their social characteristics as well, the Jews are strongly set off from the rest of the population. The Jews are essentially urban, the non-Jews are overwhelmingly rural. In all Russia, 51 per cent of the Jews lived in incorporated towns, as against only 12 per cent of the non-Jews. Though the Jews constituted 4 per cent of the total population, they constituted 16 per cent of the town population.[21] In the Pale, where they constituted 12 per cent of the total population, they comprised 38 per cent of the urban population.[22] Their concentration in the cities of the Pale is striking. In nine out of the fifteen provinces of the Pale, they constituted a majority of the urban population. In twenty-four towns, they were from two-fifths to seven-tenths of the population. In the important cities of Warsaw and Odessa they were one-third of the population.[23] The urban and occupational distribution of the Jews places them higher than the great majority of the non-Jews among the social classes into which the Russian people are legally divided. Townsmen are of a higher rank than peasants. Nearly 95 per cent of the Jews belong to this category and only 7 per cent of the Russians. The vast majority of the Russians--86 per cent--are peasants. Only 4 per cent of the Jews are of this class. Again, 2 per cent of the Jews are merchants, as against only .2 per cent of the Russians. Thus in these two classes of townsmen and merchants there were twelve times as many Jews, relatively, as Russians.[24] The higher cultural standing of the Jews may be partly measured by the relative literacy of the Jews and of the total population. According to the census of 1897, in the Jewish population ten years of age or over there were relatively one and a half times as many literates as in the total population of the corresponding group. In each of the age-groups there were relatively more literates among the Jews than among the total population. In the highest age-group, that of sixty years of age and over, the Jews had relatively more literates than any of the age-groups of the total population, indicating that the educational standing of the Jews half a century ago was higher than that of the Russian population of to-day.[25] The fact that the Jews dwell chiefly in towns has considerably to do with their higher educational standing. If the statistics of relative literacy of the Jewish and the non-Jewish population in the towns were obtainable, the chances are strong that they would not show a much higher rate of literacy on the part of the Jews. At the same time the difficulties that are put in the way of Jewish attendance in the elementary schools must be regarded as a considerable factor in explaining this possibility.[26] The participation of the Jews in the liberal professions, which implies the possession of a higher education, is also very large, even with the great obstacles that have been placed in the way of the entrance of the Jews into the universities, into the liberal professions and the state service. Relatively seven times as many Jews as Russians are found in the liberal professions.[27] II. ROUMANIA The economic activities of the Jews in Roumanian industry and commerce closely resemble those of their Russian brethren.[28] The large part taken by the Jews in Roumanian commerce may be gathered from the fact that, in 1904, one-fifth of those who paid the merchant-license tax were Jews. Equally great is their participation in large-scale industry, where, as an inquiry in 1901-2 shows, nearly one-fifth of the large industries were conducted by Jewish entrepreneurs. In some of the most important ones--the glass industry, the clothing industry, the wood and furniture industry and the textile industry--from one-fourth to one-half of the total number of entrepreneurs were Jews. As in the case of Russia, it is in _Klein-industrie_ or handicraft, which is more nearly characteristic of the present form of Roumanian industrial economy, that the Jews are mostly concentrated and where they participate so largely as to constitute "the backbone of the young Roumanian industry". The latest inquiry--that of 1908--shows that the Jews were one-fifth of all inscribed in the corporations as artisans. They formed more than one-fourth of the master-workmen and nearly one-sixth of the laborers. In the five principal industries Jewish master-workmen formed from nearly one-tenth to nearly one-half. In the following trades Jews formed between one-fourth and nearly two-thirds of the entire workers: watchmakers, tinners, modistes, tailors, glazers, housepainters, coopers and bookbinders. In all the garment industries nearly one-third of the workers were Jews. The principal trades of the Jews, in which two-thirds of the Jewish industrial workers were found, were, in order: tailors, shoemakers, tinners, joiners and planers, and bakers.[29] The Jews in Roumania were thus more strongly concentrated in industry and less in commerce than their Russian brethren. As masters and workmen they play a part in Roumanian large-scale and small-scale industry nearly four and a half times as large as their proportion in the total population. Their participation in commerce is equally large. The Jews in Roumania present the same social characteristics, relatively to the surrounding population, as the Jews in Russia. The Jews were overwhelmingly concentrated in the towns. 80 per cent of the Jews dwelt in the towns; 84 per cent of the non-Jews dwelt in the villages. Of the population in the department-capitals the Jews constituted one-fifth. Of the population of the other towns they constituted more than one-tenth. In some of the department-capitals, notably Jassi, the Jews were a majority of the total population. In six other department-capitals they constituted from one-fourth to one-half of the population. That the Jews are of a higher educational standing than the Roumanians is seen in the fact that they possessed a higher rate of literacy, having relatively twice as many literates among the males and nearly twice as many among the females. Confining this comparison to the cities, however, we find that the Jews had a higher literacy only in the age-groups above fifteen. The Roumanian urban population between the ages of seven and fifteen showed a higher literacy than the corresponding group among the Jews, indicating the influence of the special restrictions on Jewish education which will later be discussed. While the higher literacy of the Jews in Russia and Roumania is due partly to residence in towns, the restrictions on the Jewish participation in the educational facilities afforded by the Russian and Roumanian governments have been so great as to make the higher educational standing of the Jews practically a product of their own efforts. III. AUSTRIA-HUNGARY The economic position of the Jews in Austria-Hungary presents a close parallel to that in Russia. The largest proportion of the Jews--44 per cent--were engaged in commerce and in trade, and 29 per cent were engaged in industry.[30] A significantly large proportion were engaged in public service and in the liberal professions. A surprisingly large proportion--11 per cent--were engaged in agriculture and allied occupations. Thus, a little over seven-tenths of the Jews were concentrated in commerce and trade, and industry. The contrast between the Jewish and the non-Jewish population is most striking in the relative proportions of those engaged in agriculture, and commerce and trade. 54 per cent of the non-Jews were engaged in agriculture, or five times as many, relatively, as Jews. On the other hand, only 8 per cent were engaged in commerce and trade, or relatively one-fifth as many as Jews. Of the total population engaged in commerce and trade the Jews constituted 21 per cent. They constituted, on the other hand, 5 per cent of all engaged in industry. Thus, the Jews in Austria-Hungary were concentrated in commerce and trade to a much larger extent than in all other occupations, constituting an important part of all engaged in this branch. It is in Galicia, however, where conditions in general most resemble those in Russia, that the Jews are seen to occupy relatively the same position as their brethren in Russia. In Galicia, 29 per cent of the Jews were engaged in commerce and trade, and 26 per cent in industry. Together the Jews engaged in these two branches constituted more than half of the total Jewish working population. By far the largest part of the non-Jewish population--86 per cent--were engaged in agriculture. In industry only 4 per cent of the non-Jews were engaged and in commerce only 1 per cent. Thus the Jews were largely concentrated in commerce and industry, the non-Jews preponderatingly concentrated in agriculture. As compared with the Jews in Russia and Roumania the Galician Jews engaged in agriculture show a surprising proportion--18 per cent being so engaged--a larger proportion than in any other country. The Jews in East Galicia were 13 per cent of the total population.[31] Of all the "independents" engaged in commerce in East Galicia 92 per cent were Jews; of all the "independents" engaged in industry 48 per cent were Jews. The Jews in West Galicia were 8 per cent of the total population. Of all "independents" engaged in commerce they constituted 82 per cent; of all "independents" engaged in industry they constituted 33 per cent. This gives the crux of the economic position of the Jews in Galicia. They play an overwhelming part in its commercial life, practically monopolizing it. In industry their participation is very significant. Socially the Jews in Austria-Hungary and especially in Galicia, present characteristics similar to those in Russia and Roumania. In the forty cities in Galicia with a population above five thousand there dwelt 34 per cent of the total Jewish population. Only 7 per cent of the non-Jewish population lived in these cities. Thus, relatively five times as many Jews as non-Jews were urban. Though the Jews in Galicia were 11 per cent of the total population, they constituted 37 per cent of the population in these cities, thus being represented in the cities by more than three times their proportion in the total population. In nine of these towns they formed a majority of the population. They were more than one-third in twelve, and more than one-fourth in eleven other towns. In the two chief cities in Galicia--Lemberg and Cracow--they constituted a third of the total population. The figures regarding literacy are not available for Austria-Hungary or Galicia, but there is every reason to believe that essentially the same situation exists as in Russia and Roumania. In the liberal professions in Austria-Hungary there were 16 per cent of the Jews so engaged as compared with 11 per cent of the non-Jews. In Galicia the contrast is much sharper. Relatively ten times as many Jews as non-Jews were represented in the liberal professions.[32] IV. SUMMARY A review of the occupations, economic function and social characteristics of the Jews in the countries of Eastern Europe reveals them in an important and essentially similar rôle in each country. Pursuing mainly industrial and commercial occupations, the Jews constitute by far the largest part of the middle classes of each country. The historical position which they held in the ancient kingdom of Poland as the middle class has been practically maintained to this day. By virtue of their occupations, the Jews are possessed of liquid wealth to a greater extent than the nobility or the peasantry, and in the lack of proper credit facilities still serve as bankers and money-lenders. The Jews have also been conspicuous in Eastern Europe as stewards or administrators of the estates of the nobility, who are, as a rule, absentee landlords, distinguished as a class by their serious lack of interest or ability in the management of their estates. The Jewish _Hofjuden_, as they were known, were particularly useful in the utilization of the products of the soil, through distilleries, mills, trade with agricultural products and exploitation of the forests.[33] In this way, however, Jews often acted as intermediaries in the oppression of the peasantry by the nobles. They were often keepers or lessees of the taverns, the ownership of which was formerly vested in the nobles as one of their feudal privileges. It is, however, as artisans, industrial laborers and merchants, retail and wholesale, that Jews chiefly obtain their living. Their monopoly of industry and commerce has given them an influence far above their numerical proportions. In each of these countries, again, the Jews are essentially town dwellers in the midst of preponderatingly rural populations. That the degree of the contrast is due to the artificial workings of restrictive laws is unquestioned. The chief reason for this, however, is occupational. The Jews as an industrial and commercial people constitute one of the main elements out of which the town populations are recruited. Towns are ordinarily the foci of all the cultural forces and the movement and enterprise of a country. In Eastern Europe, where the number of towns is so few, this is much more the case than in Western Europe. The fact that the Jews are so largely concentrated in these comparatively few towns serves to give them a cultural position and influence far out of proportion to their numbers. Their economic activities and their relatively large participation in the liberal professions strengthens this position considerably. Amidst populations preponderatingly devoted to agricultural occupations and dwelling in villages, the Jews represent an industrial and commercial people, strongly concentrated in towns. This economic and social position of the Jews is of the greatest significance, especially in the present period of transition in these countries. Possessed of the characteristics of a modern people in their economic and social life and in their mentality, they present a sharp contrast with the peoples among whom they dwell and whose economic and social life are only now taking on modern forms. It is this that makes the Jews personify in a large degree the forces of economic enterprise and of social progress in these countries. On the other hand, the exceptional economic and social position held by the Jews among the East-European peoples has made them peculiarly susceptible to the changes that have been taking place, as their inferior legal status and sharp differentiation from the mass of the people have made them favorable objects of attack in the politico-economic struggles that have largely accompanied the transition. A consideration of the legal status of the Jews in each of the countries of Eastern Europe and of the chief forces that have ruled their history for more than a third of a century will enable us to see some of the dynamic aspects of the recent history of the East-European Jews and the underlying causes of their recent emigration. FOOTNOTES: [11] Rubinow, _Economic Condition of the Jews in Russia_ (Washington, 1907), p. 500. [12] _Cf._ table IA, p. 158. [13] _Cf._ table IB, p. 158. Rubinow, _op. cit._, p. 501. [14] Margolin puts the number at 600,000. [15] Ruppin, _Die Sozialen Verhältnisse der Juden in Russland_ (Berlin, 1906), p. 59. [16] Rubinow, _op. cit._, p. 537. [17] Rubinow, _op. cit._, p. 542. [18] _Ibid._, p. 553. [19] Ruppin, _op. cit._, p. 62. [20] Rubinow, _op. cit._, p. 556. [21] Ruppin, _op. cit._, p. 100. [22] Rubinow, _op. cit._, p. 493. [23] Ruppin, _op. cit._, p. 19. [24] Ruppin, _op. cit._, p. 65. [25] Rubinow, _op. cit._, pp. 577-578. [26] In a personal communication to the writer, Dr. Rubinow gives it as his opinion that the Jews as a group consisting primarily of artisans and merchants will show a very much higher rate of literacy than a group of factory employes, and, we may add, of unskilled laborers, to which groups the majority of the non-Jews in the towns belong. [27] Ruppin, _op. cit._, p. 62. [28] On the economic activities and social characteristics of the Jews in Roumania, _cf._ Ruppin, _Die Juden in Rumänien_, p. 27 _et seq._ [29] _Enquête sur les artisans_ (Bucarest, 1909), p. 157 _et seq._ [30] Thon, _Die Juden in Oesterreich_ (Berlin, 1908), p. 112. [31] Thon, _op. cit._, p. 124. [32] Thon, _op. cit._, p. 127. [33] _Grenzboten: Galizische Wirtschaft_, vol. lxii, p. 402. CHAPTER IV THIRTY YEARS OF JEWISH HISTORY IN EASTERN EUROPE I. RUSSIA Religious intolerance had been the prime motive of Russia's policy of completely excluding the Jews from her borders. Through the partitions of Poland from 1772 to 1795, she became the unwilling ruler over the destinies of millions of Jews living in Lithuania, Western and Southwestern Russia and Poland proper. The historic medieval principle by which the Jews were regarded as an alien and heretic race living among the Christian peoples--a principle that had, with the growth of modern ideas, been rapidly losing its hold upon the West-European nations--expressed Russia's attitude towards the Jews and conformed to her strongly medieval outlook and organization of this period. Thus, at the time when the emancipation of the Jews had begun to be in Western Europe a concomitant of social progress, Russia set to work to recreate almost typically medieval conditions for a vaster Jewish population than had ever before been assembled in any European country. The Jews were placed in the position practically of aliens, whose activities were regulated by special laws. The first and the most far-reaching of these laws limited their right of residence to those provinces in which they lived at the time of the Polish partitions. In this way originated that reproduction on a vast scale of the medieval Ghetto--the Pale of Jewish Settlement. The elementary right of free movement and choice of residence, which was denied to the Jews, has remained the principal restriction to which they are subjected. The Pale of Jewish Settlement, continued with but few changes to our day, includes the fifteen provinces of Western and Southwestern Russia--Vilna, Kovno, Grodno, Minsk, Vitebsk, Mohileff, Volhynia, Podolia, Kiev (except the city of Kiev), Chernigov, Poltava, Bessarabia, Kherson, Jekaterinoslav, Taurida (except the city of Yalta), and the ten provinces into which Poland is divided--Warsaw, Kalisz, Kielce, Lomza, Lublin, Petrikow, Plock, Radom, Suvalk and Siedlec. From the rest of the eighty-nine provinces and territories--constituting nearly 95 per cent of the total territory of the Russian Empire--the Jews were excluded. In the course of a century the special laws relating to the Jews have multiplied greatly until they now consist of more than a thousand articles, regulating their religious and communal life, economic activities and occupations, military service, property rights, education, _etc._, and imposing special taxes over and above those borne by all other Russian subjects. The direct consequence of these laws was to mark the status of the Jews as the lowest in the Empire, placing them in the position of aliens as to rights and citizens as to obligations.[34] The policy of the Russian government throughout the 19th century has been full of contrasts and contradictions. Attempts at forcible russification and assimilation, which with Nicholas I practically spelled conversion, have alternated with methods of repression which sought to prevent closer contact between the Jewish and the native populations. It was the liberal epoch of Alexander II that gave the first real promise of emancipation to Russian Jewry. The great reforms of this era benefited the Jews along with the other subjects of the Empire. With the influence of the liberals over the government there came a new attitude regarding the Jews and their value as economic and cultural forces. Partly to relieve the intense competition in the Pale, harmful both to the Christian and the Jewish populations, but chiefly to give the provinces of interior Russia the benefit of the superior industrial and commercial, and professional abilities of the Jews, laws were enacted allowing certain classes of Jews to live outside of the Pale. These were, chiefly, master-artisans, merchants of the first guild, students and graduates of universities and higher educational institutions, and members of the liberal professions. With these laws and with the opening of the high schools and universities to the Jews, the movement for Russianization received a mighty impetus. Though these reforms, hedged about and limited by onerous conditions, affected comparatively few and hardly touched the life of the Jewish masses in a radical way, nevertheless, the impulse which even these relatively slight reforms gave to the current of Jewish life in Russia was far out of proportion to the relief they afforded. Jewish hopes for a final emancipation soared high: it seemed as if the walls of the Pale needed but little more to be broken down. The reaction that followed the assassination of Alexander II fell upon the Jews as a national calamity. To the feudal party which now came into control, the Jews seemed the very embodiment of the forces in the Empire whose progress they were seeking to stem. No other nationality in the Russian Empire concentrated in itself so many characteristics and tendencies opposed to the ideals and interests of the Russian ruling classes. To the Church, dominated by a religio-national point of view, they were the very opposite of her ideal type of Russian orthodox, their very existence in Russia being regarded as an anomaly and as an actual and possible influence in disintegrating the religious faith of the orthodox peasants. To the nationalists they were an alien people racially and religiously, whose assimilation with the Russian people was neither possible nor desirable. To the autocracy and the bureaucracy there was the added fear from their intellectual superiority and their zeal for education of their playing a powerful part among the liberal forces seeking political freedom. Indeed, the Jews, whose economic and cultural activities and interests bound them closely to Western Europe and were in themselves modernizing and liberalizing influences, growing all the stronger through the greater freedom offered them during the liberal epoch, excited the deep repugnance of the feudal forces now directing the destinies of the state. To them the Jews spelled anathema. Separated from the great masses of the Russian people by race, nationality, religion, occupations and other social and psychological characteristics, they offered an unusually favorable object of attack. It soon became clear that the new régime had determined upon making the Jews a central feature in their policy of reaction. At once a many-sided campaign against the Jews was begun. A powerful machinery of persecution was at hand in the existing Jewish laws. All that was necessary was to revive them, to interpret them rigorously, to tighten the legislative screws which had become loosened during the preceding liberal régime. This, however, seemed insufficient. It was determined that a powerful and definitive blow must be struck at the roots of their very existence in Russia. The main attack was economic. The industrial and commercial activities of the Jews, especially in the Pale, make them, as we have seen, among the chief industrial producers for the peasants, as well as the chief buyers of their agricultural produce. This contact between the Jews and the peasants was a vital need in the economic life of both. The familiar charge that the Jews were exploiters of the peasantry was revived. Behind this charge lay the medieval economic prejudice, which attributes no really useful rôle to the merchant or trader.[35] In a custom-ridden economic order, the competitive methods of the Jewish traders smacked of commercial deceit. Principally, however, this charge served for a convenient explanation of the change of policy towards the Jews. In this wise were introduced the "Temporary Regulations" of May, 1882, or the May Laws, the main clauses of which are the following: 1. As a temporary measure and until a general revision is made of the legal status of the Jews, they are forbidden to settle anew outside of towns and townlets (boroughs), an exception being made only in the case of existing Jewish agricultural colonies. 2. Until further orders, the execution of deeds of sale and mortgage in the names of Jews is forbidden, as well as the registration of Jews as lessees of real estate situated outside of towns and townlets, and also the issuing to Jews of powers of stewardship or attorney to manage and dispose of such real property. The May Laws may be regarded as an extension of the general principle underlying the creation of the Pale. Through the first clause they were now to be forbidden free movement even within the Pale. As far as possible, their contact with the peasantry was to be cut off. The second clause aimed to put an end to the ownership by Jews of land in rural districts and the employment of Jews as stewards or managers of estates. A further construction of this clause forbade Jews to be connected with any business directly or indirectly depending upon the purchase of landed property outside of the towns of the Pale, thus debarring them from the utilization of land for industrial and commercial, as well as for agricultural purposes. In the actual execution of these laws, and in the legal interpretations given them by the highest courts, the effect was far greater. A series of wholesale expulsions from the villages into the towns of the Pale began, on the ground of illegal residence. This was increased by the device, which became normal, of renaming towns as villages--easily possible in Russia where towns are frequently only administrative units--the resident Jews then being expelled as illegal settlers. Again, movement within the villages even on the part of Jews who had the right to live in villages was prohibited. A further effect of this change in policy was upon the position of the Jews outside of the Pale, who enjoyed the right of residence in the interior of Russia, through the laws of the preceding régime. A stricter interpretation of these laws, added to a change in the administrative policy, had the effect not only of stopping the comparatively slight current of Jewish artisans into the interior of Russia, but also of starting a never-ending series of expulsions from the interior to the Pale. These expulsions have since continued, with individuals, families and whole groups, until they have become a constant phenomenon of Jewish life in Russia and a familiar item of world news. While the May Laws thus touched to the quick the economic life of the Russian Jews, another series of laws sought to break down their cultural life by barring them from the higher educational and professional institutions. The contrast with the policy of the preceding régime was here as complete as possible. The principle of liberal assimilation with regard to the Jews had dictated the policy of opening wide to them the doors of the secondary schools and universities, and the liberal professions. The new régime, however, not only opposed education generally, and higher education particularly, as the means by which the reform and westernization of Russia was being accomplished, but it regarded the russification of the Jews as a special evil. Culturally as well, the Jews were to be separated from the Russian people. Hence the introduction of the "percentage rule" in 1886 and 1887, restricting the proportion of Jewish students admitted to the secondary and high schools, and universities, within the Pale, to 10 per cent of the total number of students admitted. Outside of the Pale, the proportion was 5 per cent, except in St. Petersburg and Moscow, where it was placed at 3 per cent. In addition, the Jews were completely barred from a number of these institutions. As the Jews constituted so large a part of the populations in the towns of the Pale and had distinguished themselves in Russia as elsewhere by the eagerness with which they grasped the educational and professional opportunities offered them, the introduction of the "percentage rule" meant that the vast majority of the Jewish youth were to be deprived of the normal chances for education. Thus the "percentage rule", which was extended to institutions founded by the Jews themselves, was almost as great a blow as the May Laws. It threatened the cultural ruin of Russian Jewry. Bound up as the admission to these schools was with the liberal professions and with the opportunity of escaping from the limits of the Pale, it meant that one of the main highways to freedom in Russia had been closed to the Jews. The most striking method of repression introduced by the new régime and its feudal supporters was that combination of murder, outrage and pillage--the _pogrom_. The revival of this characteristic expression of the antisemitism of the middle ages was not the result of spontaneous outbreaks of fury on the part of the Russian masses, but a deliberate and calculated awakening of latent racial and religious prejudices, evoked as powerful aids to inflame against the Jews the Russian masses, who are, religiously speaking, a tolerant people and whose relations to the Jews had been marked, on the whole, with friendliness. The first _pogroms_ began a month after the accession of Alexander III to the throne, and extended in the course of a year to 160 places in Southern Russia. Though the connivance of the local authorities was clearly established, the originators of the _pogroms_ were never found.[36] However, moral support was lent by the government in the promulgation of the May Laws which closely followed. The doctrine that the misery of the peasants was due to their exploitation by the Jews, and that the _pogroms_ were the instinctive expression of the fury of the peasants, was officially sanctioned. The _pogroms_ of 1881-2 served as notice to all Russia and particularly to Russian Jewry, that the old order had given place to the new. Apart from the loss of life and damage to property they left the Russian Jews in a state of stupefaction and horror, with the sense of living on the brink of a precipice. The first decade of Alexander III's reign had opened with these _pogroms_. The second decade opened with the wholesale expulsions from Moscow. Within six months, more than ten thousand Jews were expelled from the city on the ground of illegal residence. So vast a number of Jewish families was affected and so summary was the manner of executing the decree of expulsion, that several governments, among them our own, protested to the Russian government. President Harrison, discussing this protest in his message to Congress, frankly stated that the banishment, whether by direct decree or by not less certain indirect methods, of so large a number of men and women is not a local question. A decree to leave one country is in the nature of things an order to enter another--some other. This consideration, as well as the suggestion of humanity, furnishes ample ground for the remonstrances which we have presented to Russia.[37] The expulsions were preceded by a year of ominous rumors of a program of new restrictions beside which the May Laws would pale into insignificance. An offer of ten million dollars for the cause of Jewish education made by Baron de Hirsch to the Russian government was refused. His scheme, however, for the organization of a mass-emigration of Jews to Argentine was sanctioned. All these facts lent strength to the feeling of the Jews that they had nothing to hope for under the existing régime. Thus closed the reign of Alexander III and a memorable chapter in Russian Jewish history. The early years of Nicholas II were marked by a relaxation in the strict administration and interpretation of the existing restrictive laws. Hopes for the amelioration of the Jewish situation began to be entertained. These hopes were destined shortly to be shattered. The first decade of the twentieth century opened with threatening unrest. Economic depression began and was accompanied by revolutionary attacks. For the Jews, the most alarming symptom was the rise and uninterrupted progress of a group of antisemitic agitators and Russian loyalists, who sought to counteract the revolutionary movement by denouncing the Jews as the leaders of the revolution and the enemies of the autocracy and the Orthodox religion. Thus was sown the seed of the Kishineff massacre of April, 1903, which lasted three days. Before the echoes of Kishineff had died away, the massacre at Gomel followed. But Kishineff proved to be merely a bloody prelude. The air was surcharged with explosives. The outbreak of the Russo-Japanese war and of the first organized revolution created a dangerous combination of events for the Jews. To the discontent of the peasants, forced to go to the front in a war for which they had no enthusiasm, and sore with the reverses of the Russian army, was added the increased activity of the agitators who declared that the war with Japan had been forced upon Russia by the Jews, eager to profit through its ruin, and who called upon their followers and the peasants through propaganda and proclamations to revenge themselves upon the Jews. The government at bay, on the verge of breakdown under the revolutionary attacks, and anxious to excuse its incompetency and failure in the conduct of the war, sought a means of diverting the peasants from the uprisings against the landed proprietors spreading over the land, and, above all, of stifling the revolution, which had met with such opportune and unlooked-for success among all classes. This was a situation alive with danger for the Jews, whose proletarians in the cities had taken an active part in the revolution. The organization of Jewish massacres by responsible agents of the government became the central feature of its program of counter-revolution.[38] A veritable holocaust ensued in nearly every province of the Empire for two years, only the climaxes of which became known to the world in Zhitomir, Odessa, Bialystok, and Siedlec. The rôle of the bureaucracy in the creation of the _pogroms_, especially in 1906, in which year there took place hundreds of _pogroms_, was made abundantly clear by the Russian press, by Prince Urussov's disclosures in the Duma, and by the report of the Duma Commission appointed to investigate the causes of the Bialystok _pogrom_ of 1906. As announced in their official report, an investigation had shown that the relations between the Jews and the Christians of Bialystok previous to the bloodshed had been amicable, and that preparations for a _pogrom_ had been deliberately and carefully made by agents of the bureaucracy and carried out with the aid of the local authorities. Both periods of _pogroms_ in these thirty years were periods of revolution. In both the government had felt the ground shaking under its feet from terroristic attacks and from peasant uprisings. In the first period Jews had taken only slight part. In the late revolution, however, the participation of the Jews of the Pale, through the Jewish labor organization, the _Bund_, was quite strong. The earlier _pogroms_ gave a hint as to the policy of the new régime. The later ones occurred at the end of years of repression and persecution, and were a culminating point in the fury of the reactionary forces at their failure to stem the tide of liberalism in the struggle for parliamentary institutions and for the rights of citizens in a modern state. The results of these thirty years of reaction remain to be considered. Though the effects of the _pogroms_ upon the Russian Jews can hardly be overestimated, the less evident, because less spectacular, methods of restrictive law and administrative action have in the long run left a far more enduring impress. The introduction of the May Laws at the very beginning of the eighties awakened the Jews to the realization that their future in Russia was threatened. The May Laws and the laws that were developed from them, the obstacles that were placed in the way of Jewish education and, in general, the administrative difficulties that were created, have affected every movement of their life. Freedom of movement of the individual is the very essence of the life of modern states and the basis of their economic, social and political institutions. The lack of this freedom, especially to the extent created by the May Laws, bars the Jews from the possibilities of normal economic growth and progress. The Jewish manufacturers and capitalists are prevented from participating in the industrial and commercial development of Russia, which is so rapidly proceeding and to which, owing to their economic position and capacities, they could powerfully contribute. Legal interference with economic activities, so frequently the rule in Russia, is emphasized in the case of the Jews. A far more serious situation confronts the great mass of the Jewish artisans, petty merchants and factory workers, to which the vast majority of the Jews belong. Largely prevented access to their natural customers, the peasants, by the prohibition of rural residence, and confined to the relatively few towns of the Pale, where over-crowding and over-competition are the necessary and unavoidable results, the Jewish artisans and petty merchants have a bitter struggle to maintain a position of economic independence. Added to this, there is the social pressure to which the Jews have been subjected. Not until this period has the century-long position of the Jews as the "pariahs of the Empire" been so sharply emphasized. Enmeshed in a net of special laws and regulations, at the mercy of ministerial decree, secret circular, arbitrary administrative act, law has lost all meaning for the Jews. In this atmosphere they exist mainly through bribery, at once their bane and their salvation. The unusual economic and social pressure exerted by the reactionary régime upon its Jewish subjects, through the new restrictive laws that were put into operation during the last thirty years, the administrative harrying that became the order of the day and the introduction of the hitherto unused method of physical repression, the _pogrom_, becomes clear in the light of its policy. Beginning as a movement to suppress the Jews in their economic and cultural activities, and to separate them as far as possible from their Russian neighbors, the anti-Jewish program became in its final form the expulsion and extermination of the Jews from Russia. The historic sentence of Count Ignatiev, author of the May Laws, at the very beginning of this period, "the Western borders are open to you Jews", strikes the keynote of this policy. And, in fact, for practically the first time in its history, the Russian government relaxed in 1892 its rigorous rules forbidding emigration, and gave its sanction to Baron de Hirsch's plan of organizing a vast emigration of Jews from Russia, which its author hoped would, at the end of a quarter of a century, result in the complete transplantation of the Jews from Russia. The famous principle of the Russian government, "once a Russian always a Russian", was for once put aside in favor of the Jews. They were given one right not enjoyed by other Russians, that of leaving Russia under the obligation of abandoning Russian citizenship forever.[39] II. ROUMANIA Up to very recent years, the history of the Jews in Roumania centers about those resident in Moldavia. Its proximity to ancient Poland and close association with Bessarabia, naturally made for a back-and-forth movement of the Polish and Russian Jews, whose settlement was invited by the boyars or landed nobility because of resulting industrial and commercial advantages. The position of the Jews in Moldavia up to the middle of the nineteenth century did not differ to any extent from that of their brethren in Russia. Moldavia, as a Christian state, denied civil and political rights to all non-Christians. The Jews in Moldavia were regarded as aliens, whose activities were subject to special regulation. The beginning of the last century witnessed the first special Jewish laws. The Jews were forbidden to buy the products of the soil, to acquire real property; non-resident Jews were debarred unless they could prove an occupation and show the possession of property. Definite restrictions as to occupation, residence in the villages, the ownership, in villages, of houses, land, vineyards, _etc._, existed. As vagabonds they could be expelled from the country by administrative decree. Thus was their legal status fixed. The emancipation of Jews was first demanded by the liberal party during the revolutionary days of 1848. But no practical change resulted until the Convention of Paris in 1856, which, in granting autonomy to the two provinces, guaranteed civil rights to all Moldavians, regardless of creed. Though political rights were granted only to Christian Moldo-Wallachians, the provision was made that, by legislative arrangements, the enjoyment of political rights could be extended to other creeds. Thus was established the possibility of a gradual emancipation of the Jews, foreshadowed in the communal law of 1864, which granted the right of naturalization to certain classes of native Roumanian Jews. Those who had passed through college or had a recognized foreign degree, or who had founded a factory in the land employing at least fifty workmen were among the favored classes. Shortly afterwards, this section was abrogated, and, with the abdication of the liberal Couza and the accession of Charles Hohenzollern, the present king, to the throne, the situation changed. Article VII of the constitution of the newly-created kingdom read that foreigners not of the Christian faith could not be naturalized. As within the term foreigner the great mass of the Jews residing in the land was included, this was a denial of the conditions laid down in the Treaty of Paris. At the same time, old laws against the Jews which had fallen into abeyance were revived, expulsions of the Jews from the villages into the towns began to take place with great frequency, laws requiring all sellers of liquor in rural communes to be naturalized Roumanians deprived many Jewish families of a livelihood--in short, the usual symptoms of anti-Jewish activity became the order of the day. It was at the famous Berlin Congress, convened to decide questions created by the Russo-Turkish war of 1877, that the subject of the Jewish disabilities in Roumania was brought up, in connection with the demand of Roumania for recognition as an independent state. The chief objection made especially by the representatives of three of the European powers--France, England and Germany--was Roumania's treatment of the Jews. It was finally decided by the Congress to recognize her independence on the condition that she grant civil and political equality to all her citizens without distinction of race or creed. This was expressed in Article 44 of the historic Berlin Treaty, which read as follows: Article 44. In Roumania, difference in religious beliefs and confessions shall not be brought against anyone as a ground for exclusion or unfitness as regards the enjoyment of civil and political rights, admission to public offices, functions, and honors, or the exercise of various professions and industries in any place whatever. Freedom in outward observance of all creeds will be assured to all subjects of the Roumanian state, as well as to strangers, and no obstacle will be raised either to the ecclesiastical organization of different bodies, or to their intercourse with their spiritual heads. The citizens of all states, whether merchants or others, shall be dealt with, in Roumania, without distinction of religion, on the basis of perfect equality. In the _constituante_ which was convoked soon after to discuss the question of giving the Jews equal political rights, an interesting picture is obtained of the sentiment of the upper and middle classes of Roumania.[40] An overwhelming majority was opposed to the granting of political rights to the Jews on the ground that Roumania was a Christian-Latin State, or on the purely nationalistic ground that the Jews were an alien and utterly unassimilable element of the population. To meet the demands of the Powers the principle of individual naturalization was adopted, by which an alien could be granted naturalization individually and only by a special vote of the Chamber of Deputies. Other onerous conditions, such as the requirement of a ten years' residence in the country for citizenship, and the prohibition of the purchase by aliens of rural estates, showed conclusively that Roumania was prepared to give only formal assent to the demand of the Powers.[41] After a year of negotiations, the three Powers agreed to the recognition of her independence, expressing the hope that the Roumanian government would recognize the inadequacy of the revised article and especially of the principle of individual naturalization as meeting the conditions of the Berlin Treaty, and would aim towards a complete emancipation of all her subjects.[42] The situation at the beginning of the eighties presented but little hope of improvement in the political condition of the Jews. Eight hundred and eighty-three Jews who had fought in the war for independence had been naturalized _en masse_. With the exception of this small number, the Jews were legally classed as foreigners.[43] Shortly after, owing to the fact that Austria-Hungary had withdrawn its protection from several thousands of its Jewish citizens resident in Roumania, the entire body of Jews received a new legal status, that of "foreigners not subject to any foreign Power". In other words, they were stateless, though subject to all the obligations of Roumanian citizens, including military service and the payment of taxes. This legal status of the Jews has received the attention of the world and marks a condition of things which according to Bluntschli is "a denial of the entire development of European states".[44] Freed from the control of the Powers, Roumania now entered on a new campaign of discrimination against the Jews. The first decade of the eighties saw this begun in a series of laws which for completeness finds no parallel even in Russia. At the very beginning, a law giving the police the right of domiciliary visitation and of expelling under the vagabond law anyone in the rural districts, was employed against the Jews, resulting in their frequent expulsions into the towns. The enforcement of the law against rural residence was so strict as to create practically the same situation as exists in the Russian Pale. The law of 1883, prohibiting lotteries, and in the following year the law prohibiting hawking or any form of sale from house to house or on the streets deprived several thousands of Jewish families of their livelihood. It was in 1886 and 1887, however, when the laws which were to create a national industry and commerce were introduced, that a serious step was taken to exclude the Jews from economic activity. On the assumption that occupations were a civil right to which aliens could or could not be admitted, the Jews were systematically deprived even of the civil rights which had been theirs, to a great extent, before the Berlin Congress sought to make them politically free. As foreigners, the Jews were prohibited the right of choosing electors for the newly-created Chambers of Commerce and Trade, or of becoming members of these chambers although they formed a large majority of the merchants and manufacturers represented in these important bodies. A still more serious provision was that which decreed that five years after the foundation of a factory two-thirds of the workingmen employed therein must be Roumanians. Jews were also partly excluded from the administrative positions in joint-stock companies. They were completely excluded from employment in the financial institutions of the state, from the state railway service, and, by a provision that two-thirds of the employes on private railways must be Roumanians, were practically excluded from these as well. The sharpest blow, however, was struck in 1902, when a new law for the organization of trades, popularly known as the Artisans' Bill, was passed. In this law there is to be seen a revival of the guild organizations of the Middle Ages. To pursue his occupation every artisan was required to obtain a certificate from a guild. Jewish master artisans and workmen were hit by the requirement that aliens in order to have the right of working in accordance with this law must prove that in their own country reciprocal rights existed for Roumanians, or obtain an authorization from a Chamber of Commerce or Industry. Whatever value this requirement may have had for the protection of Roumanian workmen in foreign countries, its chief effect was to place in a position of economic helplessness the majority of the Jewish workmen as "aliens not subject to any foreign Power", and largely unable to secure authorization from such chambers controlled by competitors. Other clauses, requiring that all workingmen belong to a guild, and that fifty workmen possessing civil and political rights are empowered to form a guild, put the control of trades into the hands of non-Jews, although the majority of the artisans in many of the trades were Jews. A similar policy was pursued with reference to the cultural activities of the Jews. A circular of the minister of public instruction, issued in 1887, ordered that preference should be given to Roumanian children, in cases where there was not enough room in the elementary schools for all. This began the gradual exclusion of Jewish children from the Roumanian elementary schools. The formal treatment of the Jews as aliens in the educational system was introduced in 1893, when all aliens were required to pay fees for entrance into the public schools, and were admitted only in case there was enough room for them. The effect of these laws was seen in the diminished proportion of Jewish children in the elementary schools. Similar provisions for the secondary and high schools and universities largely closed the doors of these institutions to the Jews. From schools of agriculture and forestry, and of commerce they were completely excluded. To the educational restrictions were added restrictions to professional service. As aliens, they were forbidden to be employed in the public sanitary service and health department as physicians, pharmacists, _etc._, from owning as well as working in private pharmacies, and from entering other professional fields. The almost complete agreement of the two principal parties--liberal and conservative--explains the thoroughness and uninterrupted progress of this process of piling up disability upon disability. The explanation is partly to be found in the constitution of Roumania, the electoral law of which places the political powers in the hands of two classes--the landed aristocracy and the urban, or middle class. The vast majority of the peasants are excluded by educational and property qualifications, obtaining only indirect representation. Had the Jews been granted political rights, they would have shared political power with the other two classes. It is through the second electoral college, of both the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies, that the middle class is represented politically. As manufacturers and merchants, as urban dwellers, as members of the liberal professions and as graduates of the elementary schools, the Jews would have become the most important part of this electoral college. Again, the creation of an industry and commerce along national lines was largely a course of action in the interests of this middle class of Roumanian merchants, artisans and laborers. It was in favor of this class that the laws were passed debarring Jews from various occupations and seeking essentially to wrest the industrial and commercial monopoly from their hands. In this course of action, powerful aid was extended by the bureaucracy, recruited mainly from the lower nobility and the middle classes. Depending for their support upon the urbans, and seeking to prevent the entrance of Jews into state service, which would have resulted from the granting of political rights to the Jews, the bureaucracy have acted in harmony with the middle classes in the attempt to make the Jews politically, economically, and culturally powerless. Thus the situation that the Jews in Roumania have been facing for thirty years is abnormal, from every standpoint. At no time within thirty years has there been any serious question of giving to the Jews the political rights, the granting of which had been made the condition of the recognition of Roumania's independence by the Powers. The history of the succeeding thirty years has been one of gradual, steady and systematic deprivation of one civil right after another. To the prohibition of freedom of movement has been added that of work; one occupation after another has been prohibited to Jews under the mask of foreigners. From all the branches of state service Jews have been almost completely debarred. Participation in important private and public enterprises has similarly been limited. The schools have been largely closed to them. The effect has been partly registered in a rate of illiteracy higher in the cities among the Jewish children between seven and fifteen than among the non-Jewish children of the same age. Thus the conscious policy of Roumania has been that of oppression, political, economic and social, with the deliberate aim of making it impossible for the Jews to live in Roumania. This method of indirect expulsion is the essence of her policy of thirty years. As such it was recognized and openly stated in the only formal protest against her manner of fulfilling the conditions of the Berlin Treaty, made by the United States, through its Secretary of State, John Hay, whose circular to the Powers signatory to the Treaty demanded that Roumania be called to account for her treatment of the Jews, and her dishonesty in violating the pledges given by her to the Powers.[45] III. AUSTRIA-HUNGARY Until the middle of the nineteenth century, the legal position of the Jews in Austria-Hungary differed from that of their brethren in Russia and Roumania only in degree. Prohibited the free exercise of their religion, the right to hold real property, and to enter certain occupations, and burdened by special Jewish taxes, the Jews remained a class apart and governed in all their activities by special laws. Their legal emancipation, begun in 1848, was definitely established by the promulgation in each division of the Empire of the Fundamental Law of 1867, declaring that religion should not be a ground for discrimination in civil and political rights. The civil and political equality of the Jews was a cardinal principle of the creed of German-Austrian liberalism and one of a number of its victories embodied in the Constitution of 1867. Austrian economic and social life at this period was, however, too saturated with medievalism to allow for a complete revolution in the attitude toward the Jews. On the other hand, the influential part played by the Jews in the liberal movement and the fact that a group of wealthy Jews were powerful factors in the _haute finance_ and in the commercial life of the country were made the basis of an attack by the feudal-clericals upon the Jews. The great financial crash of 1873, in which several Jewish financial houses were concerned, was the starting-point of political antisemitism in Austria. The Jews were denounced as the representatives of the capitalist order of society, with its overwhelming concentration of wealth and its exploitation of the industrial and the agricultural proletariat. The Christian-Socialist movement began with antisemitism as the corner-stone of its economic and social doctrines. Its opposition to the Jews and to capitalism was largely due to medieval prejudices in favor of the Christian-feudal state and the medieval industrial organization. In the early eighties it began to triumph when the "small man" or petty industrialist received political power through an extension of the suffrage. It reached its height in the nineties, when, under the combined influence of feudal-clerical nobles, the clergy and the lower middle class, a period of reaction set in. In Vienna, in 1895, the antisemite Lueger was elected mayor. Powerless though they were to change the legal status of the Jews, the antisemites succeeded in creating in both upper and lower circles of Austrian society an atmosphere of antagonism to the Jews which has prevented the complete fulfillment of the principle of equality as set forth in the constitution. The clericals have fanned the flames of religious hatred especially among the peasantry by ritual-murder accusations, which have been rife and have played a large part in strengthening the sentiment of hostility toward the Jews. In Galicia, the position of the Jews became unsettled, owing to a variety of causes.[46] Although one of the least advanced among the Austrian crown lands, Galicia has experienced within the last half-century an industrial and commercial development along with the rest of the Empire. This resulted in the growth of a middle class particularly among the Poles, which began to compete for supremacy with the Jews. The improvements in transportation and communication, the organization of agricultural syndicates, for the purpose of directly purchasing and selling the produce of the peasants, and the creation of rural credit societies, helped considerably to displace the Jewish middlemen and traders as well as the Jewish money-lenders, who dealt largely with the peasantry. The movement to develop Galicia industrially was fostered on national lines by these Polish organizations, which carried on an extensive propaganda and systematically organized economic boycotts against the Jews. "Do not buy of Jews", "Do not patronize Jewish artisans", became familiar cries in Galicia as in other parts of Austria. The process of wrestling the monopoly of industry, trade and commerce from the Jews in favor of the Polish petty merchants and artisans was considerably accelerated by the official bodies, the autonomous Galician _Diet_ and the municipal boards, controlled chiefly by the Polish-Catholic nobility, who saw in the national-industry movement a means of capturing the votes of the middle class and of thus retaining their position as leaders of the Polish people. Communal funds were used to establish Poles in business. Attempts were made to take away from the Jews the small-salt and tobacco trades. The taxes on the taverns were increased. In the public financial institutions organized for various purposes Jews were not given representation. In nearly all the activities designed to promote the interest of the urban population and the peasantry, the Jews were systematically excluded by the local authorities. Added to this, the increasing distress of the Galician peasants has reacted strongly upon the Jews, who depend so largely upon their buying power. The poverty of the peasantry, the competition for the control of the rural market created by public and private agencies, added to the increasing competition in the towns from other sections of the population, have all co-operated to create a great surplus, in proportion to the population, of petty merchants and artisans among the Jews. This had its effect in an over-competition from the side of the Jews themselves. The Jews have suffered as well from their historical rôle of intermediaries between a most avaricious nobility and a bitterly exploited peasantry. Acting as stewards and as tavern keepers for the Polish nobles, who are mainly absentee landlords, and who, until very recently, enjoyed the right of keeping taverns as one of their feudal privileges, the Jews have become the buffers of the deep-seated antagonism between the two chief classes of Galicia. Agrarian uprisings have been frequent of late, particularly after the failure of the crops, which here as in Russia and Roumania spells a crisis. These, chiefly directed against the nobles, have frequently been diverted toward the Jews, to whom the peasants are largely indebted, and in whom they see the visible instruments of the oppression of their lords. Economic antagonism has been intensified by the religious hatred which has been fostered by the Polish clergy and which has been the basis of numerous ritual-murder charges. FOOTNOTES: [34] Leroy-Beaulieu, _The Empire of the Tsars_ (New York, 1894), vol. iii, p. 558. [35] For an example of typically medieval economic notions regarding trade and commerce prevalent among the feudal classes of Eastern Europe, _cf._ Carmen Sylva's criticism on the economic activities of the Jews in Roumania in _Century_, March, 1906. [36] The part played by the authorities in these _pogroms_ is discussed by A. Linden in _Die Judenpogromen_, vol. i, pp. 12-96. [37] President Harrison's Message is given in Appendix A, page 199. [38] Séménoff, _The Russian Government and the Jewish Massacres_ (London, 1907), pp. 147-167. [39] Immigration Commission: _Emigration Conditions in Europe_, pp. 261-262. [40] The discussions are presented in _La question juive_. [41] Article VII is given in Appendix B, p. 200. [42] _Cf. English Parliamentary Papers_, 1880, vol. lxxix, Correspondence relative to the recognition of Roumania. [43] In the following twenty years only 85 Jews were granted citizenship. [44] Bluntschli's pamphlet is a valuable statement of the situation. For title _cf._ Bibliography. [45] The Hay note is given in Appendix C, pp. 201-206. [46] _Jüdische Statistik_, p. 208 et seq. CHAPTER V CONCLUSION An intimate connection has thus been established between the present state of economic and social transition through which the countries of Eastern Europe are passing and the situation which has confronted the Jews in each of these countries and has profoundly influenced their position and their history for the last third of a century. What the forces are behind the emigration of the Jews from these countries to Western Europe and the United States during this period now become clear. The industrial and commercial development of the recent decades brought about changes in themselves unfavorable to the economic activities of the Jews. The improvements in communication and transportation through the extension of railroads, the building of roads, and the creation of credit facilities especially for the peasantry served partly to displace the Jews, whose economic position had been largely based upon the services they rendered in a relatively backward industrial and commercial civilization. The rise of a middle class among the Christian populations, chiefly engaged in industry, added an element of competition not before present. Not the least important in its effects was the increasing poverty of the peasantry, which seriously affected the Jews, as the principal buyers of their produce and sellers of finished products. Agricultural crises, so frequent in recent years in Eastern Europe, have often involved the Jews in financial ruin.[47] These purely economic factors served to weaken the position of the Jews and to cause an over-concentration in trade and industry, to their detriment. The gradual readjustment that would have followed naturally was, however, prevented by the existence of other forces, in the action of which we find the key to the situation faced by the Jews and the impelling forces of Jewish emigration. One of these was the economic antisemitism that rose partly from the competition of the middle classes of both populations. This competitive jealousy awakened racial and religious prejudices and found particularly in Galicia an active expression in the organization of economic boycotts, and in the co-operative agencies that were created to foster the growth of the Christian artisans and merchants. The sufferings of the agricultural population, again, were charged to the Jews, with whom the peasants were in close business relations and to whom they were deeply indebted. Preached from platform, press and pulpit, the doctrine of Jewish exploitation of the peasantry found a ready acceptance among all classes. Economic and social hostility was furthered by the feudal ruling classes whose antagonism to the Jews was deep-seated and many-sided. As these formed the ruling economic, social and political power in Eastern Europe, they were the chief instrument in creating a situation that was full of danger for the Jews. In the politico-economic struggles between these privileged classes and the liberal middle classes that accompanied the transition, the Jews were found, consciously or unconsciously, on the side of the liberals, who sought to introduce the economic, social and political conditions of modern civilization. Thus they served as a convenient object of attack. In Russia, where, since the reaction, the control of the feudal classes over the government was complete, the new laws restricting residence, movement, occupations and economic activity in general, checked the economic growth of the Jews and put them at a great disadvantage in the struggle for existence. This situation was created to an even greater degree in Roumania, where the economic interests of the Roumanian middle class were furthered at the expense of the Jews. Economic helplessness was essentially the condition created for the Jews, so narrow was the margin left for the exercise of their powers. The social pressure that was added, through laws limiting the entrance of Jews to the educational institutions and the liberal professions, seeking to limit their cultural influence, was part and parcel of the same policy. In the case of Russia, repression reached the form of massacres of Jews, when these were found politically useful. Governmental oppression was thus the chief force in unsettling the economic and social position of the Jews. Throughout the course of thirty years the leading motive of the Russian and Roumanian governments was the reduction, through every possible means, of the number of their Jewish populations. This governmental pressure which began to be applied at the beginning of the eighties became equivalent in the course of time to an expulsive force. The only outlet to the intolerable conditions that had been created by the forces of governmental repression and oppression was emigration. This was sensed by the Jews at the very beginning of the period. How eagerly it has been seized upon the following pages will show. It is enough for the moment to point out that the vast and steadily increasing stream of Russian Jewish immigrants to the United States alone, has risen to such proportions that its average for the past decade has approached the estimated annual increase of the Jews in Russia. In other words, emigration has begun to mean the decline, not only relatively, but even absolutely, of the Jewish population in Russia. The fact that the persecution of the Jews in the case of Russia and Roumania amounts to a force of rejection has been widely recognized during the course of the emigration of the Jews from Eastern Europe. In England, where the number of Jewish immigrants increased rapidly, it found expression in the official reports, and in the United States, it became a subject of direct diplomatic correspondence in the formal protest to Russia in 1891 by President Harrison, and in 1902 in the circular note to the Powers by Secretary Hay, regarding Roumania's treatment of the Jews. A still more significant recognition of the exceptional forces behind the Jewish immigration was given by the Jews of Western Europe and the United States, living in a state of freedom, security and comparative wealth, to whom the oncoming of thousands of Jewish refugees at all the critical periods, and the steady stream of Jewish immigrants at other times has meant a taking-up of onerous burdens and a sharing of the hardships of the situation thus suddenly thrust upon them. The attempt to organize and regulate Jewish emigration from Eastern Europe was a task early undertaken by the _Alliance Israélite Universelle_. The Jewish Colonization Association was expressly founded by Baron de Hirsch to open up, in various countries, new paths for the Jewish emigrants. At all periods of exceptional emigration, national and international committees met to consider the problems of the immigrants thrown upon their responsibility. The vast majority of the emigrants made the United States their goal. In their movement and their economic and social characteristics we shall find a striking reflection of the impelling forces of their emigration. FOOTNOTES: [47] _Cf. Hersch_, chap. v. He gives to this factor far more importance than it deserves. For criticism of his method, _cf._ p. 92, note I. PART II JEWISH IMMIGRATION TO THE UNITED STATES A. ITS MOVEMENT CHAPTER I DETERMINATION OF NUMBER OF JEWISH IMMIGRANTS In a study of Jewish immigration to the United States the first problem is to determine the number of Jews who entered this country during the thirty years from 1881 to 1910, and their nationality, or their countries of nativity. The determination of these figures meets with the difficulty that prior to 1899, immigrants were classified in the official statistics by country of nativity or residence, and not by race or nationality. Thus the figures regarding Jewish immigration are obtainable from official sources only from 1899. Those relating to previous years have to be sought for elsewhere. The main sources that have been used to obtain the figures before 1899 are the reports of three Jewish societies which were concerned with the care of the Jewish immigrants arriving at the principal ports of New York, Philadelphia, and Baltimore. These were the United Hebrew Charities, of New York; the Association for the Protection of Jewish Immigrants, of Philadelphia; and the Hebrew Benevolent Society, of Baltimore. Each of these maintained an agent who, besides his other duties, collected statistical information concerning the sex, age, country of nativity, occupation, destination, etc., of the Jewish immigrants, partly from the ships' manifests and partly through personal inquiry. The statistical information thus obtained was regularly included in the annual reports of these societies. These records were begun by the New York and Philadelphia societies, in 1884, and by the Baltimore society, in 1891. As the yearly statistical tables of these reports were made to correspond with the annual meeting of these societies,[48] it was found advisable to rearrange them from July to June, in order to have them correspond with the fiscal year, and thus allow for a proper comparison with the official data furnished by the immigration authorities. As rearranged, the tables presented the number of Jewish immigrants entering the ports of New York and Philadelphia from July 1, 1886, to June 30, 1898, and the number of Jewish immigrants entering the port of Baltimore from July 1, 1891, to June 30, 1898.[49] As these three ports were, up to recent years, the places of entry of all but a very small number of Jewish immigrants, the figures thus obtained represent practically the total Jewish immigration to the United States from 1886 to 1898. To ascertain the nationality or country of nativity of the Jewish immigrants from 1886 to 1898, it was necessary to redistribute in accordance with the fiscal year the monthly arrivals found in the tables of the United Hebrew Charities, which contain the figures for each nationality.[50] As the reports of the Philadelphia society gave only the totals of arrivals of each nationality for each year but not distributed by months, the following method was employed. The percentage the immigration of each nativity constituted of the total immigration from November to October (the society's year) was used as the basis for calculating the annual immigration of each nativity from July to June.[51] There being no essential difference between Baltimore and Philadelphia, so far as Jewish immigrants of each nationality are concerned, the same percentages were used as for Philadelphia.[52] The discrepancy between the official figures of the total immigration from Roumania from 1886 to 1898 and those of the Jewish societies for the Jewish immigrants from Roumania for the same period is worthy of note. In each of four years the number of Jewish immigrants from Roumania as reported by the Jewish societies exceeded the total immigration from Roumania as reported in the official statistics. For two years, 1892 and 1893, the official statistics do not report any immigrants from Roumania, whereas the Jewish societies report,[53] respectively, 740 and 555 Jewish immigrants from Roumania, which represented a normal number from this country, as the other years indicate.[54] The total number of immigrants of each nationality arriving from July 1, 1886, to June 30, 1898, was thus obtained. The total number of Jewish immigrants arriving from Russia, Austria-Hungary and Roumania, at each of the principal ports, for each year from 1886 to 1898, are summarized in table V.[55] The figures of Jewish immigration before 1886 were not obtainable either from the official or the Jewish sources, there being only an estimate of the number of the Jewish immigrants from 1881 to 1884 in the _American Jewish Year Book_ of 1899-1900 (as 74,310), and in the _Jewish Encyclopedia_ (as 62,022), without any indications as to how these were obtained. To secure a fairly accurate statement, the proportion the Russian Jewish immigration from 1886 to 1898 bore to the total Russian immigration was used as the basis for calculating the total number of Russian Jewish immigrants from 1881 to 1885.[56] This was distributed yearly according to the proportion of each year's contribution to the five years' total. By a similar calculation the number of Jewish immigrants from Austria-Hungary was obtained.[57] For Roumania, the proportion of Jews being more than ninety per cent, and at this period practically the entire Roumanian immigration being Jewish, the figures were taken _in toto_. The results for each year added together constituted the total Jewish immigration for the year. The general tendency among writers on the subject of Jewish immigration has been to exaggerate the magnitude of this movement. In a discussion in the _Jewish Encyclopedia_ regarding the dimensions of the Jewish immigration before 1899, exact figures were given that are on their face erroneous.[58] The inaccuracy of these figures is explained by the fact that the writer committed a gross error in making his table. The total Russian immigration to the United States from 1880 to 1898 was designated as the Jewish immigration from Russia, though it should have been evident that the number of other peoples coming from Russia and included in these figures must have been very large. Another column gave as Jewish immigrants coming from countries other than Russia, the totals of the Jewish immigrants entering the United States from 1885 to 1898, as reported in the _American Jewish Year Book_ of 1899 (the latter figures of which included Russian Jews as well as those of other nativities), thereby doubling the number of Russian Jewish immigrants for this period. The result has been to more than triple the numbers of the Jewish immigrants. These figures have been widely used and quoted, and have generally created the impression of a Jewish immigration larger by several hundred thousands than is really the case.[59] The results of the foregoing are summarized in Table VI, which gives the number of Jewish immigrants arriving in each of the thirty years from 1881 to 1910, and the principal countries of nativity of these immigrants. We are thus in a position closely to study the movement of Jewish immigration for practically the entire period since it became a significant part of the recent immigration to the United States, and thereby to throw light upon the character of this movement, in itself and as a part of the general immigration. TABLE VI JEWISH IMMIGRATION TO THE UNITED STATES, 1881 TO 1910 Year Austria- United Russia Hungary Roumania Kingdom Germany 1881 3125 2537 30 -- -- 1882 10489 2648 65 -- -- 1883 6144 2510 77 -- -- 1884 7867 3340 238 -- -- 1885 10648 3938 803 -- 1473 1886 14092 5326 518 -- 983 1887 23103 6898 2063 -- 780 1888 20216 5985 1653 -- 727 1889 18338 4998 1058 -- 758 1890 20981 6439 462 -- 633 1891 43457 5890 854 -- 636 1892 64253 8643 740 -- 1787 1893 25161 6363 555 -- 1814 1894 20747 5916 616 -- 1109 1895 16727 6047 518 -- 1028 1896 20168 9831 744 -- 829 1897 13063 5672 516 -- 586 1898 14949 7367 720 -- 296 1899 24275 11071 1343 174 405 1900 37011 16920 6183 133 337 1901 37660 13006 6827 110 272 1902 37846 12848 6589 55 182 1903 47689 18759 8562 420 477 1904 77544 20211 6446 817 669 1905 92388 17352 3854 14299 734 1906 125234 14884 3872 6113 979 1907 114937 18885 3605 7032 734 1908 71978 15293 4455 6260 869 1909 39150 8431 1390 3385 652 1910 59824 13142 1701 4098 705 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Total 1119059 281150 67057 42896 20454 Year Brit. All N.A. Turkey France Others Total 1881 -- -- -- -- 5692 1882 -- -- -- -- 13202 1883 -- -- -- -- 8731 1884 -- -- -- -- 11445 1885 -- -- -- -- 16862 1886 -- -- -- 254 21173 1887 -- -- -- 200 33044 1888 -- -- -- 300 28881 1889 -- -- -- 200 25352 1890 -- -- -- 124 28639 1891 -- -- -- 561 51398 1892 -- -- -- 950 76373 1893 -- -- -- 429 35322 1894 -- -- -- 791 29179 1895 -- -- -- 871 26191 1896 -- -- -- 276 32848 1897 -- -- -- 535 20372 1898 -- -- -- 322 23654 1899 5 81 9 52 37415 1900 -- 114 17 49 60764 1901 -- 154 20 49 58098 1902 -- 138 9 21 57688 1903 -- 211 11 74 76203 1904 8 313 32 196 106236 1905 11 173 327 772 129910 1906 429 461 479 1297 153748 1907 1818 918 306 952 149182 1908 2393 635 425 1079 103387* 1909 2780 690 325 748 57551* 1910 2262 1388 339 801 84260* ----------------------------------------------------------- Total 9706 5276 2299 14903 1562800 * From 1908 immigrants were classified in the reports of the Commissioner-General of Immigration as "immigrant aliens," those intending to reside permanently in the United States and "non-immigrant aliens," those making a temporary trip to the United States. In the figures of 1908, 1909 and 1910, only the "immigrant aliens" are considered. TABLE VII PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL JEWISH IMMIGRATION TO THE UNITED STATES CONTRIBUTED BY EACH COUNTRY OF NATIVITY, 1881 TO 1910 Austria- United Year Russia Hungary Roumania Kingdom Germany 1881 54.8 44.7 0.5 -- -- 1882 79.5 20.1 0.4 -- -- 1883 70.4 28.7 0.9 -- -- 1884 68.7 29.2 2.1 -- -- 1885 63.1 23.4 4.8 -- 8.7 1886 66.6 25.2 2.4 -- 4.6 1887 69.9 20.8 6.3 -- 2.4 1888 70.0 20.7 5.7 -- 2.5 1889 72.3 19.7 4.2 -- 3.0 1890 73.3 22.5 1.6 -- 2.2 1891 84.6 11.5 1.6 -- 1.2 1892 84.1 11.3 1.1 -- 2.2 1893 71.2 18.0 1.6 -- 5.1 1894 71.1 20.3 2.1 -- 3.8 1895 63.9 23.1 2.0 -- 3.9 1896 61.4 29.9 2.3 -- 2.5 1897 64.1 27.9 2.5 -- 2.9 1898 63.2 31.1 3.0 -- 1.3 1899 64.9 29.5 3.6 .5 1.1 1900 60.9 27.8 10.2 .2 .6 1901 64.8 22.4 11.8 .2 .5 1902 65.6 22.3 11.4 .1 .3 1903 62.6 24.6 11.2 .6 .6 1904 73.0 19.0 6.1 .8 .6 1905 71.1 13.4 3.0 11.0 .6 1906 81.5 9.7 2.5 4.0 .6 1907 77.1 12.7 2.4 4.7 .5 1908 69.6 14.8 4.3 6.1 .8 1909 68.0 14.7 2.4 5.9 1.2 1910 71.1 15.6 2.0 4.9 .8 -------------------------------------------------------- Total 71.6 17.9 4.3 2.8 1.3 Year Brit. All N.A. Turkey France Others Total 1881 -- -- -- -- 100.0 1882 -- -- -- -- 100.0 1883 -- -- -- -- 100.0 1884 -- -- -- -- 100.0 1885 -- -- -- -- 100.0 1886 -- -- -- 1.2 100.0 1887 -- -- -- .6 100.0 1888 -- -- -- 1.1 100.0 1889 -- -- -- .8 100.0 1890 -- -- -- .4 100.0 1891 -- -- -- 1.1 100.0 1892 -- -- -- 1.3 100.0 1893 -- -- -- 4.1 100.0 1894 -- -- -- 2.7 100.0 1895 -- -- -- 7.1 100.0 1896 -- -- -- 3.9 100.0 1897 -- -- -- 2.6 100.0 1898 -- -- -- 1.4 100.0 1899 -- -- -- .4 100.0 1900 -- -- -- .3 100.0 1901 -- .2 -- .1 100.0 1902 -- .2 -- .1 100.0 1903 -- .3 -- .1 100.0 1904 -- .3 -- .2 100.0 1905 -- .1 .2 .6 100.0 1906 .3 .3 .3 .8 100.0 1907 1.2 .6 .2 .6 100.0 1908 2.3 .6 .4 1.1 100.0 1909 4.7 1.2 .6 1.3 100.0 1910 2.7 1.6 .4 .9 100.0 ------------------------------------------------------ Total 0.6 0.3 0.2 1.0 100.0 FOOTNOTES: [48] The year of the United Hebrew Charities is from October to September, that of the Philadelphia society is from November to October, that of the Baltimore society is from July to June. [49] _Cf._ table II, p. 159. The figures for Baltimore were furnished by the Baron de Hirsch Fund. [50] For an example of this distribution _cf._ table III, p. 159. [51] _Cf._ table IVA, p. 160. Thus, from November 1885 to October 1886 there entered the port of Philadelphia 2165 Jews, of whom 1624 or 75 per cent were from Russia, 260 or 12 per cent were from Austria-Hungary, 43 or 2 per cent were from Roumania, and 238 or 11 per cent were from all other countries. From July 1, 1885 to June 30, 1886, there entered the port of Philadelphia 1625 Jews. To ascertain the numbers of each nationality for this fiscal year, we may use the percentages given above for each nationality. Calculating these, we find that in the fiscal year 1886 of the 1625 Jews entering the port of Philadelphia, 1218 were from Russia, 196 were from Austria-Hungary, 33 were from Roumania, and 178 were from all other countries. In like manner, the numbers of each nationality for the other years were obtained. [52] _Cf._ table IVB, p. 160. [53] As corrected by the methods described. [54] For the four years mentioned, the figures are as follows, those reported by the Jewish societies preceding those from official sources: in 1886, 518, 494; in 1887, 2063, 2045; in 1888, 1653, 1188; in 1889, 1058, 893. For the official figures _cf._ Immigration Commission: _Statistical Review of Immigration_, pp. 40-44. [55] _Cf._ table V, p. 161. [56] Out of a total of 505,078 Russian immigrants from 1886 to 1898, the Russian Jewish immigrants constituted 315,355, or 62 per cent. [57] In calculating the number of Jewish immigrants from Austria-Hungary the percentage the Jewish immigration was of the total immigration from Austria-Hungary from 1886 to 1910 and not, as in the case with the Jewish immigration from Russia, from 1886 to 1898, was used through an oversight as the basis for calculation. As the immigration of Jews from Austria-Hungary for 1885 at the port of New York alone constituted 14 per cent of the total immigration from Austria-Hungary, this figure was put down _in toto_, being a higher number than the one obtained by calculation. As the Jewish immigration from 1886 to 1910 constituted 9 per cent of the total immigration from Austria-Hungary and the immigration from 1886 to 1898 constituted 14 per cent of the total immigration, the difference is not large. Following is the table indicating the difference for each year from 1881 to 1884. Year. Total Jewish immigration. Difference. immigration. at 14 at 9 per cent per cent 1881 27935 3882 2537 1345 1882 29150 4051 2648 1403 1883 27625 3840 2510 1330 1884 36571 5083 3340 1743 The increased numbers from the higher percentage involve no change in the relative position of Jewish immigration from the three principal countries of emigration, except in 1881, when the Jewish immigration from Austria-Hungary would have exceeded that from Russia. [58] _Jewish Encyclopedia_: "Migration," vol. viii, p. 584. _Ibid._, "Russia"--Emigration, vol. x, p. 547. [59] Ruppin uses these figures in _Die Sozialen Verhältnisse der Juden in Russland_, p. 11. Hersch, (_Le juif errant d'aujourd'hui_), subjects the figures given in the _Jewish Encyclopedia_ to a thorough analysis and shows their absurdity. Unaware, however, of the nature of the error committed by the writer and of the existence of authoritative sources for the figures of Jewish immigration, he drew the conclusion that it is impossible to obtain any really accurate figures of Jewish immigration before 1899. This leads him into serious errors owing to the fact that he discusses the movement of Jewish immigration from the basis of the twelve years from 1899 to 1910, representing the height of the movement, instead of for the entire period of thirty years. This vitiates his principal conclusions regarding the character of the Jewish movement to this country. Particularly noticeable is his neglect of the phenomena presented by the Russian and Roumanian movements and his elevation of the movement from Austria-Hungary as the type of Jewish immigration to this country. CHAPTER II IMMIGRATION OF JEWS FROM EASTERN EUROPE In the thirty years between 1881 and 1910, 1,562,800 Jews entered the United States. An examination of Tables VI and VII reveals the fact that the great majority of the immigrants came from Russia, Austria-Hungary and Roumania. Of the total number, Russia contributed 1,119,059 immigrants, or 71.6 percent; Austria-Hungary 281,150 immigrants, or 17.9 per cent, and Roumania 67,057 immigrants, or 4.3 per cent. Together these three countries contributed 93.8 per cent of the total for the thirty years. The great majority of the Jewish immigrants from the United Kingdom and British North America are not English or Canadian Jews but transmigrants or transient East-European Jews, to whom England and Canada were a halfway house from the countries of Eastern Europe to the United States.[60] If we included these immigrants, the Jewish immigration from these three countries of Eastern Europe would be considerably above 95 per cent. The Jewish immigration of the last third of a century is thus practically wholly from Eastern Europe. Summarizing the results for the three decades,[61] we find that the Jewish immigrants from Russia maintained a fairly constant proportion to the total Jewish immigration, contributing 135,003, in the decade between 1881 and 1890 or 69.9 per cent of the total for the decade, 279,811 or 71.1 per cent in the decade between 1891 and 1900, and 704,245, or 72.1 per cent, in the decade between 1901 and 1910. Roumanian Jewish immigration was relatively smaller in the earlier decades, numbering 6,967 in the first, 12,789 in the second decade, comprising 3.2 per cent and 3.6 per cent, respectively, of the total, and in the last decade, numbering 47,301 and constituting 4.8 per cent of the total immigration of the decade. The Jewish immigration from Austria-Hungary bore a proportion to the total higher in the first two decades, contributing 44,619 immigrants in the first decade and 83,720 immigrants in the second decade, or 23.1 per cent and 21.3 per cent, respectively, of the total, and 152,810 immigrants, or 15.7 per cent, in the last decade. The Jewish immigrants from the United Kingdom and British North America, which, in the first two decades constituting less than one per cent of the total of each decade, were included in the rubric "all others", rose in the last decade to 42,589, constituting 4.4 per cent, and to 9,701, constituting one per cent, of the total of this decade. An examination of the yearly contributions made by the Jews of the principal countries[62] shows that the immigrants from Russia formed the majority of the immigrants for each year of the entire period, and as a rule, did not deviate far from the general proportion established for the thirty years. The greatest increases occurred during the years of maximum Jewish immigration, in 1882, 1891, 1892 and 1906, when the Russian Jewish immigrants constituted four-fifths or more of the total for the year. The immigrants from Roumania showed higher percentages than their average in 1887 and in 1888, and a remarkable increase of their contribution from 1900 to 1903, in which years they constituted more than a tenth of the total number of immigrants. The immigrants from Austria-Hungary formed, on the average, less than one-fifth of the total, but varied considerably in their proportions. In general, they maintained a rate higher than their average during the earlier years of their movement. In the later years they showed a relative decline, especially during the last decade, owing to the greater relative increase of the Jewish immigration from Russia and Roumania, though their absolute numbers increased greatly during this period. Their highest ratios of contribution were made from 1883 to 1886 and from 1896 to 1900, the latter period marking their maximum relative contributions. The influence of the Russian Jewish immigration is thus paramount. It dominates and controls the entire movement, owing to its great preponderance of numbers. To a closer consideration of its movement we shall now turn. FOOTNOTES: [60] Landa, _The Alien Problem and its Remedy_, pp. 54-57. [61] _Cf._ table VIII, p. 162. [62] _Cf._ tables VI and VII, pp. 93-94. CHAPTER III IMMIGRATION OF JEWS FROM RUSSIA The mass-movement of the Russian Jews to the United States began in the first year of Alexander III's reign. Though in this year the number of Russian Jews entering this country amounted to a little over three thousand, the immigration grew so rapidly and in such proportions that at the end of thirty years, more than a million Russian Jews had been admitted to the United States. An examination of the figures of the Russian Jewish immigration for the thirty years[63] reveals that it is a movement of steady growth. The Russian Jewish immigration falls practically into two periods; the first culminating in 1892, the second culminating in 1906. Considering it by decades,[64] we find that the movement is one of geometrical progression. In the first decade, from 1881 to 1890, 135,003 Russian Jews entered the country, 12.1 per cent of the total Russian Jewish immigrants. Between 1891 and 1900, 279,811 Russian Jews entered, constituting 25.0 per cent of the total. In the last decade, from 1901 to 1910, there entered 704,245 Russian Jews, or 62.9 per cent of the total. The annual variations are, nevertheless, considerable and largely explainable by the special conditions in Russia that have influenced the lives of the Jews throughout this period. At the beginning of this period, in 1881, the immigration of Russian Jews was small. The _pogroms_ of 1881-2 were reflected in the sudden rise in 1882 to 10,489 immigrants, more than three times the number of the preceding year. The immigration of this year was rather a flight than a normal movement. The great majority of the immigrants were refugees, fleeing from massacre and pillage.[65] In this year Russian Jewish immigration began its upward course. Another high point was reached in 1887 with 23,103 immigrants, when the educational restrictions and the expulsions that followed a strict application of the May Laws indicated a renewal of the policy of the Russian government. The rumors of new restrictions that marked the beginning of the nineties, and the opening of the second decade of Alexander III's reign, were followed by the wholesale expulsions from Moscow. The immigration in 1891 of 43,457 and in 1892 of 64,253 Russian Jews--the latter the highest number reached in two decades--reflects this situation. Nearly a tenth of the total immigration entered in these two years. The direct effect of the administrative activity of this year and especially of the Moscow expulsions upon the Russian Jewish immigration is seen in the number of Russian Jews who entered New York during the months closely following these expulsions.[66] For the first five months of 1891, the immigration averaged approximately 2,300, evidently a normal figure for this decade. It reached its lowest in May, when 1,225 Jews entered the country. In June, two months after the order of expulsion, the number of immigrants jumped to 8,667--a six-fold increase--which up to this year was the largest number of Russian Jews entering this country in one month. This figure was surpassed in the immigration of August and September. Out of a total of 60,261 Russian Jews who entered in 1891, 11,449 came the first five months from January to May, and 40,706, or more than three times the previous immigration, came the next five months from June to October. The following five months there came only 16,832, less than half the number of immigrants of the months of June to October. And, finally, taking the year as a whole, there came over 60,261 Russian Jews in 1891, the year of the Moscow expulsions, as compared with the 28,834 Russian Jews who entered in 1892, when no exceptional circumstances occurred to affect their immigration tendency. The six years from 1893 to 1898 were relatively mild years for the Russian Jews. The change of rulers in Russia and the comparatively lenient attitude shown by Nicholas II toward the Jews in the beginning of his reign resulted in a less stringent administration of the special Jewish laws. The financial depression in the United States which began in 1893 and embraced this period, was an additional influence in diminishing the flow of Russian Jewish immigrants. The fall, however, was not as large as the existence of unfavorable economic conditions in this country might lead one to expect. For in spite of it, Russian Jewish immigration resumed the rate it maintained in the years before 1891. From 1893 to 1898 there entered this country 110,815 Russian Jews as against the 107,378 Russian Jews who entered in the six years from 1885 to 1890. Another rise began in 1899. Economic depression, revolutionary terrorism and anti-Jewish propaganda paved the way for a great inpouring of Russian Jews to the United States. The Kishineff massacre of 1903 sent thousands of Jews in veritable flight to the United States, a fact which is reflected in an immigration of 77,544 Russian Jews in 1904, the greatest number up to this year. With the beginning of the Russo-Japanese war, the outbreak of the revolution and, above all, of the Jewish massacres the immigration rose in 1905 to 92,388. In 1906, a year of _pogroms_, it reached the number of 125,234, the highest in the entire period--and in 1907, 114,932, the second largest immigration. The diminution in the numbers in 1908 reflects largely the relative change for the better that took place in the situation in Russia, with the beginning of parliamentary government, as well as the panic conditions in the United States of the preceding year. How great still was the impulse to leave is shown by the fact that in spite of the panic of 1907, the number of immigrants for 1908 was 71,978. The great rise of the immigration from the United Kingdom during these years was also due to the number of Russian Jews that came to the United States by way of England. In all, during these five years which form an epoch in contemporary Russian Jewish history, there streamed into the United States half a million Russian Jews, constituting more than two-fifths of the total immigration for the entire thirty years. Of special significance is the part the Jewish immigrants play in the total Russian immigration to the United States.[67] By far the largest group of immigrants coming from Russia are Jews. For the entire thirty years they constituted 48.3 per cent of the total Russian immigration. As a general rule, the proportion of the Jewish in the total Russian immigration rises during the critical periods of these thirty years. Thus in 1891, the year of the Moscow expulsions, the Jewish immigrants constituted 91.6 per cent of the total immigration from Russia, and in the following year, under the same influences, 78.8 per cent. The years 1886 and 1887 are also signalized by the great proportion of the Jewish immigrants, who formed 79.2 per cent and 75.1 per cent, respectively, of the total Russian immigration for these years. In the last decade, when the Jewish participation in the total immigration had become relatively lessened, the three years which represented the climax of the movement, 1904, 1905 and 1906, show a higher relative proportion, 53.4 per cent, 50 per cent and 58.1 per cent, respectively, than the average for the decade or for the entire period. Considering the proportions by decades,[68] we find that of the total of 213,282 Russian immigrants entering in the decade from 1881 to 1890, the Jewish immigrants contributed 135,003, or 63.3 per cent. Of a total of 505,280 Russian immigrants in the decade from 1891 to 1900, the Jewish immigrants numbered 279,811, or 55.4 per cent. In the last decade, from 1901 to 1910, of a total of 1,597,306 Russian immigrants, the Jewish immigrants were 704,245, or 44.1 per cent. The diminishing importance of the Jewish in the total Russian immigration, in spite of the fact that the former shows so great an increase, is due to the rapid growth of the immigration tendency among the other races in Russia, especially in the last decade. Nevertheless, a closer examination of the relative participation by the various peoples of Russia in the immigration from that country from 1899 to 1910[69] shows that the Jews maintain their position of predominance, contributing a larger proportion to the total Russian immigration than any other people throughout this period, except in 1910, when the Poles contributed a slightly higher proportion to the immigration of that year. The Polish contribution is next to that of the Jews, attaining its maximum at a point where the Jewish immigration is at its lowest, relatively, in the twelve years. The preceding sufficiently indicates the abnormal extent of the Russian Jewish immigration but its intensity may be judged further from the fact that though the Jews in Russia were less than one-twentieth of the total Russian population, they formed nearly half of the Russian immigrants to the United States. In other words, they were represented in the Russian immigration by more than eleven times their proportion in the Russian population. As, however, the emigration movement of the Russians proper is directed chiefly to Siberia, we may limit the comparison to the Pale, where the Jews are overwhelmingly concentrated, and where they constitute more than a tenth of the total population. Even with this limitation they were represented in the immigration to the United States by more than four times their proportion of the population. Another method of judging the degree of intensity of the Russian Jewish movement is to compare the proportion the number of Jewish immigrants for a period bears to the total Jewish population in Russia--their rate of immigration--with that of the other Russian peoples represented in the immigration to the United States. The rate of immigration of the Jews is by far the highest among the peoples of Russia. From 1899 to 1910 the Jewish immigrants to the United States constituted on the average one out of every 79 of the Jewish population in Russia.[70] The Finnish immigrants constituted one out of every 191 Finns, the Polish immigrants one out of every 200 Poles, and the Russian immigrants proper one out of every 11,552 of the Russian population. The relative position of the Jews is thus strikingly indicated. The rate of immigration truly becomes an index of the economic and social pressure to which the Jews have been subjected for a third of a century. This rate of immigration for the Jews, moreover, shows large fluctuations in the twelve years from 1899 to 1910.[71] Of every 10,000 Jews in Russia there came to this country on the average for the twelve years from 1899 to 1910, 125 Jews. From 1899 to 1903 the annual rate of immigration was much lower than the average. In 1904, with the beginning of the critical years, the annual rate rose to 152, and in 1905, to 181. It reached its climax in 1906, with 246, almost twice as large as the average for the entire period. It fell slightly below this in 1907 with 226. In 1908, there was a great fall to 141, though the rate was still above the average for the period. The movement of the Russian Jews to this country in the last thirty years is seen to be steadily rising and to reach enormous dimensions in the last decade. The Jews are more largely represented in the movement from Russia than any other people, and predominate practically for the entire thirty years. The rate of immigration is abnormally high, as compared with that of any other of the immigrant races from Russia. For the most part the Russian Jewish immigration reflects the unusual situation confronting the Jews in Russia. FOOTNOTES: [63] _Cf._ table IX, p. 162. [64] _Cf._ table X, p. 163. [65] Sulzberger, _The Beginnings of Russo-Jewish Immigration to Philadelphia_ (Philadelphia, 1910), pp. 125-150. [66] _Cf._ table XI, p. 163. [67] _Cf._ table XII, p. 164. [68] _Cf._ table XIII, p. 164. [69] _Cf._ table XIV, p. 165. [70] _Cf._ table XV, p. 165. [71] _Cf._ table XVI, p. 166. CHAPTER IV IMMIGRATION OF JEWS FROM ROUMANIA The immigration of Roumanian Jews to the United States began as a small stream at the end of the sixties, and assumed significant dimensions in the eighties. Two important periods of rising immigration are clearly distinguishable. The first period attains its maximum between 1885 and 1889. The second attains its maximum and that of the entire movement between 1900 and 1904. In the thirty years between 1881 and 1910, 67,057 immigrants entered the United States.[72] In the first decade, 6,967 immigrants, or 10.4 per cent of the total, arrived. In the second decade, 12,789 immigrants arrived, or 19.1 per cent of the total. The great majority, 47,301 immigrants, or 70.5 per cent of the total, arrived in the last decade, more than twice as many as had arrived in the two preceding decades. The Roumanian Jews thus began to take a significant part in the Jewish movement only within the last decade. The annual variations are closely connected with the conditions in Roumania which have been previously discussed.[73] The rise in 1885 to 803 immigrants, the first number of any consequence, reflects the measures taken in Roumania to restrict the economic activity of the Jews, chiefly through the hawkers' law of 1884. The continuation of the administrative activities against the Jews, the expulsion of many from the villages, and particularly the beginning in earnest of the attempt to drive them from industry and commerce, by the law of 1887, are responsible for the wholesale exodus in that and the following two years. In these three years more than 7 per cent of the total Roumanian Jewish immigration entered the country. After 1889 and for nearly a decade the immigration of Jews from Roumania subsided, resuming the proportions established before 1887. Another rise began in 1899. In 1900, the Roumanian Jewish immigration reached the relatively great number of 6,183, around which point it stood for the next two years. In 1903, it reached its maximum with an immigration of 8,562 Jews, one-eighth of the entire Roumanian Jewish immigration for the thirty years. In the following year the immigration still held to the high numbers reached before 1903. The years following 1904 show a fall to less than 4,000, which was interrupted in 1908, when the immigration rose to 4,455. In 1909, a sharp fall ensued to 1,390, and in 1910 to 1,701. The great rise from 1900 to 1904, during which period there came more than half of the total number of Jewish immigrants from Roumania, was largely due to the resumption of the government program against the Jews. The chief form of restriction was the passing of the Artisans' Law in 1902, preceded by some years of agitation and administrative activity directed against the Jews, which aimed to make it impossible for the Jewish artisans to secure work. The feeling that the Jews had nothing to hope from the government, as much as the actual distress occasioned, was largely responsible for the unprecedented immigration.[74] The Jewish forms so large a part of the Roumanian immigration as to be practically synonymous with it. As we have before noted, the figures obtained from the Jewish sources indicate a larger immigration from 1886 to 1898 on the part of the Jews alone than the official figures give for the entire immigration from Roumania for this period. Confining our attention to the figures of immigration from 1899 to 1910,[75] we find that, from 1899 to 1910, of the 61,073 immigrants from Roumania who entered the United States, 54,827, or 89.8 per cent, were Jews. Thus practically nine-tenths of the immigrants from Roumania are Jews. In the five years in which the Jewish movement was at its height, the Jews constituted from 91 per cent to 95.7 per cent of the Roumanian immigration. The immigration of other peoples from Roumania is insignificant. The highest number entering in any of the twelve years amounted to less than 800. Still more significant is the intensity of immigration of the Roumanian Jews, especially in view of the negligible number of immigrants from Roumania other than Jews. The rate of immigration of the Roumanian Jews is far higher than that even of their Russian brethren.[76] The average annual immigration of Roumanian Jews, for the twelve years, from 1899 to 1910, amounted to 4,569, which represented an average rate of immigration for the Roumanian Jews of 175 per 10,000 of the Jewish population in Roumania. In the five years of maximum immigration, from 1900 to 1904, the rate was considerably higher, reaching in 1903 the enormous proportion of 329 immigrants to every 10,000 Jews in Roumania. The lowest rate during this period, that of 1900, was only slightly smaller than the maximum rate approached by the Jewish immigrants from Russia. However, in the three years which represented the highest point of the rate of immigration of the Jews from Russia, from 1905 to 1907, the rate of immigration for the corresponding years in Roumania was considerably smaller. The Jewish immigration from Roumania is thus a product chiefly of the last decade. The rise in the first decade and the relatively tremendous rise in the last decade are a result largely of the activities of the Roumanian government. The vast majority of the immigrants from Roumania are Jews, whose rate of immigration is unprecedented. FOOTNOTES: [72] _Cf._ table XVII, p. 166. [73] _Cf._ table XVIII, p. 167. [74] In the _Century_ of Nov., 1913, Professor Ross, writing on "The Old World in the New," remarks (p. 28) that "the emigration of 50,000 Roumanian Jews between January and August, 1900, was brought about by steamship agents who created great excitement in Roumania by distributing glowing circulars about America." It is remarkable that with so large an emigration of Roumanian Jews during these eight months, ostensibly directed to America, only 6183 Roumanian Jews were recorded as arriving in the United States in 1900, and only 6,827 in 1901. In the twelve years from 1899 to 1910, Professor Ross's figure is approached; for the entire period 54,827 Roumanian Jews are officially recorded as entering the United States. Even of the relatively large immigration of Jews from Roumania in 1900, the cause clearly was not the activity of steamship agents. Compare the report of the president of the United Hebrew Charities, keenly alive to the problems presented to the American Jews by the Jewish immigration: "The last few months have been noteworthy in the history of the Jewish race for an outbreak of Anti-Semitism in a far-away country, the far-reaching effects of which have been keenly felt in this city. I refer of course, to the persecutions of the Jews in Roumania. A small group of Jewish philanthropists of this city (under the direction of the IOOB) has taken up the task of providing for the newcomers." Such a response is not usually given to immigrants lured to this country by promises of gain. _United Hebrew Charities of New York City_, Oct., 1900, p. 19. [75] _Cf._ table XIX, p. 168. [76] _Cf._ table XX, p. 168. CHAPTER V IMMIGRATION OF JEWS FROM AUSTRIA-HUNGARY The immigration of Jews from Austria-Hungary began before the eighties of the last century, becoming at the beginning of the nineties a relatively strong and steady current. Until recently, this immigration was almost exclusively from Galicia.[77] Summarizing the movement by decades,[78] we find that 44,619 Jews, or 15.9 per cent of the total, came during the decade from 1881 to 1890; 83,720 immigrants, or 29.8 per cent of the total, came during the decade from 1891 to 1900. In the last decade, from 1901 to 1910, there entered 152,811 immigrants, or 54.3 per cent of the total. Thus there is a nearly steady rise of the movement, though it is not as great as that found in the Jewish immigration from Russia. The annual variations are also not as large as are found in the Russian Jewish movement.[79] The greatest number that came in any year in the first decade was in 1887, when 6,898 immigrants arrived, contributing 2.4 per cent of the total for the year. The highest number that came in the second decade was in 1899, when 11,071 immigrants arrived, contributing 3.9 per cent of the total. From this year there began a great rise which reached its maximum in 1904 with an immigration of 20,211 Jews, constituting 7.2 per cent of the total--the highest point attained in the entire movement. A comparison of the fluctuations of the Jewish with those of the total Austro-Hungarian immigration shows that the former follows the general movement quite closely, though there are minor differences and the maximum periods of both movements do not coincide.[80] An examination of the part the Jewish played in the general immigration from Austria-Hungary shows that during the entire period of thirty years there entered into the United States from Austria-Hungary 3,091,692 immigrants, to which the Jews contributed 281,150 immigrants, or 9.1 per cent.[81] That the Jewish movement was relatively stronger in the earlier period than the general movement from Austria-Hungary is indicated by the fact that the Jews participate to a much larger extent in the movement of the first decades than in that of the last. In the first decade, from 1881 to 1890, of the 353,719 immigrants from Austria-Hungary, the Jews were 44,619, or 12.6 per cent of the total for the decade. In the decade from 1891 to 1900, of the 592,707 immigrants they were 83,720, or 14.1 per cent of the total. In the last decade, of 2,145,266 immigrants, they were 158,811, or 7.4 per cent of the entire movement. The Jewish movement is thus seen to be relatively the strongest in the second decade. Its fall in the last decade to almost half the proportion of the preceding decade was due to the tremendous growth in the immigration of the other races from Austria-Hungary. Whereas the general movement nearly quadrupled its numbers in the last decade, the Jewish movement did not quite double its numbers. The largest part in the movement from Austria-Hungary was taken by the Jews during the earlier years.[82] The highest point was reached in 1886, when the Jews constituted 18.6 per cent of the total movement. In the following year the Jewish immigrants constituted 17.1 per cent. Other years in which the Jews participated strongly were 1895, and from 1897 to 1899. In 1898 the second highest point was reached, the Jews constituting 18.5 per cent of the movement. From 1904 a great fall ensued. The lowest point was reached in 1909, when the Jews constituted only 5 per cent of the total movement. A clearer idea of the situation would be obtained if the figures for the years and decades could be ascertained for Austria and Hungary separately, as the Jews in each of the divisions of the Dual Monarchy differ considerably in their immigration tendency. Austria and Hungary are distinguished in the immigration statistics only since 1910. Nevertheless, the three years from 1910 to 1912 serve to show that the Jews from Austria immigrate to the United States in much larger numbers than their brethren in Hungary. From 1910 to 1912, out of a total of 36,684 Jewish immigrants from Austria-Hungary, 29,340, or fully four-fifths, came from Austria. The participation of the Austrian Jews in the general movement is also correspondingly larger. From 1910 to 1912, the Jewish immigrants from Austria numbered 29,340 out of a total of 303,776, constituting 9.7 per cent of the total Austrian immigration. For the same period the Jewish immigrants from Hungary numbered only 7,344 out of a total of 292,900, constituting 2.5 per cent of the total. Thus the Jews participate in the movement from Austria practically four times as much as in the movement from Hungary. The relative position of the Jews among the peoples immigrating from Austria is of interest in this connection. The peoples with which comparison must be maintained are those concentrated in Galicia, the chief source of the Jewish, Polish and Ruthenian immigration.[83] For the seven years between 1899 and 1905, the Jewish immigrants constituted the second largest group. From 1906, they fell into the third position (excepting in 1908), owing to the rapid increase of immigration among the Ruthenians. The average rate of immigration of the Jews of Austria-Hungary for the twelve-year period from 1899 to 1910, is 74 for every 10,000 Jews in the Empire.[84] The maximum rate was 97, which was reached in the immigration of 1904. In comparison with the Russian and Roumanian Jewish immigrants, those from Austria-Hungary have a far lower rate of immigration. This is true for the average as well as for the single years. However, in the first two years, 1899 and 1900, the rate of immigration was higher among the Jewish immigrants from Austria-Hungary. In comparison with the rate of immigration of the Poles and the Ruthenians, the Jews occupy an intermediate position, having a lower rate than the Poles and a higher rate than the Ruthenians.[85] The Jewish movement from Austria-Hungary thus shows a fairly steady rise, but neither in its yearly variations nor its rate of immigration does it give evidence of any exceptional characteristics. FOOTNOTES: [77] Buzek, "Das Auswanderungsproblem in Oesterreich," _Zeitschrift für Volkswirtschaft, Sozialpolitik und Verwaltung_, p. 458. [78] _Cf._ table XXI, p. 169. [79] _Cf._ table XXII, p. 169. [80] _Cf._ table XXIII, p. 170. [81] _Cf._ table XXIV, p. 170. [82] _Cf._ table XXIV, p. 170. [83] _Cf._ table XXV, p. 171. [84] _Cf._ table XXVI, p. 171. [85] _Cf._ Hersch, _op. cit._, p. 43. This comparison gives a lower rate of immigration to the Jews than they really possess, owing to the fact that it is based upon the total Jewish population of Austria-Hungary, and not upon that of Galicia, from which province the great majority of the Jewish immigrants come. CHAPTER VI TOTAL JEWISH IMMIGRATION The movement of the total Jewish immigration for the thirty years becomes clear in the light of the preceding pages. It is a rising movement, divided into two parts, the first culminating in 1892 and the second culminating in 1906. Like the Russian Jewish immigration which underlies it, the movement is one of geometrical progression.[86] From 1881 to 1890, 193,021 Jewish immigrants entered this country, 12.3 per cent of the total Jewish immigration. From 1891 to 1900, 393,516 Jewish immigrants, or 25.2 per cent entered. In the last decade there entered the enormous number of 976,263 Jewish immigrants, representing 62.5 per cent of the total Jewish immigration for the thirty years. This was more than twice as many as had entered the preceding decade, and more than five times the number of those who had entered the first decade. The Jewish immigration is in its largest part a product of the last decade. The rise has not, however, been uniformly steady, as a division of the entire period into five six-year periods shows.[87] In the period from 1893 to 1898, there was a fall in the Jewish immigration. This period coincides with the years of depression in the United States following the panic of 1893. The fall was chiefly due to that in the Russian Jewish immigration. The Jewish immigration from Austria-Hungary on the contrary showed a relative rise. For this period, as well as for a few years before, the Roumanian Jewish immigration contributed smaller numbers than in the previous decade. As in the case of the Russian Jewish movement, if we compare the immigration of the six-year period from 1885 to 1890, with that from 1893 to 1898, omitting the years 1891 and 1892 which are influenced in their great rise by the exceptional circumstances occurring within these two years, we find that the Jewish immigration was higher during the latter period of depression in the United States than during the earlier period, the total number of immigrants being 167,567 for the latter period, and 153,951 for the former. In the period from 1899 to 1904 there was a great rise. A quarter of the entire immigration came in this period. The largest number of immigrants--more than two-fifths of the total of thirty years--came in the period from 1905 to 1910. If we included the immigration of 1904, which properly belongs to the later movement, we find that half of the entire Jewish immigration came within the seven years from 1904 to 1910. The yearly variations of the total Jewish immigration correspond closely in the main to those of the Russian Jewish movement.[88] The influence of the other movements is, however, felt, at times quite strongly. Before 1885 the total Jewish immigration was quite small; less than 10,000 (except in 1882) or less than 1 per cent of the total, arrived each year. The rise of the immigration in 1882 to 13,202 was wholly due to the increase in the number of Russian Jewish immigrants. The second half of this decade was marked by a rising tide in the Jewish immigration from all the countries of Eastern Europe, which reached a height in 1887, with an immigration of 33,044, constituting more than 2 per cent of the total number. This was but a prelude to the great rise at the opening of the second decade which in 1892 reached the number of 76,373 Jewish immigrants, the highest number attained in the first two decades. The immigration for this year alone constituted nearly one-twentieth of the total Jewish immigration. The increase of these years is due solely to the increase in the Russian Jewish immigration. From this point a fall ensued, which lasted until 1899. The fall was strongest in the Russian and the Roumanian movements. The absolute numbers and the relative proportions in the Jewish movement from Austria-Hungary increased. The tremendous rise of the last decade began in 1899. In 1900 the number of Jewish arrivals rose to 60,764. This increase was general, though it reached unusual proportions in the immigration from Roumania. The fall in the next two years was due to a decrease in the number of immigrants from Austria-Hungary. That from Russia remained the same as in 1900, and the Roumanian Jewish immigration maintained the high level established in that year. The immigration of 1903 surpassed the great numbers attained in 1892. The rise of nearly 20,000 of this year was general, though relatively greatest in the Jewish immigrants from Austria-Hungary. The next three years marks the heights of the movement. In 1904, the 30,000 immigrants which represented the increase from the preceding year were Russian Jews. This is equally true of the large increase of 1905. In this year a fall took place both in the Austrian and Roumanian Jewish immigration. The Jewish immigration from the United Kingdom rose tremendously from 817 of the preceding year to 14,299,[89] an increase which reflects the influences of the Russian Jewish movement for this year, and indicates that this movement from the United Kingdom must be considered as largely Russian Jewish. The year 1906 marked the high-water mark of Jewish immigration for thirty years. 153,748 immigrants, practically one-tenth of the total movement, came in this year. As in the preceding year, the increase in the immigration from Russia (including the numbers from the United Kingdom) was the basis of the increase in the total. From this point on we have a decline. The decline in 1907 to 149,182 immigrants reflected the decline in the numbers of the Russian Jewish immigrants, those from Austria-Hungary increasing. In this year the number of immigrants from British North America became conspicuous. In 1908 the immigration fell to 103,387, reflecting almost wholly the fall in the numbers of the Russian Jewish immigrants. The year 1909 marked a tremendous decline of the Jewish immigration to 57,551 immigrants. This decline was general, though relatively the greatest in the Austro-Hungarian and the Roumanian immigration. A speedy recovery in numbers was shown in 1910 when the immigration rose to 84,260, recurring to the numbers at the beginning of the recent great rise, and higher than the immigration of any year before 1904. The rise was felt equally in the Russian and Austro-Hungarian immigration, relatively little in the Roumanian. Thus by far the chief influence in the movement of the Jewish immigration for these thirty years has been the Russian Jewish immigration. In its growth of numbers, and in its rise and fall, the total Jewish immigration of the last thirty years is a reflection of the movement of the Russian Jews to this country. FOOTNOTES: [86] _Cf._ table XXVII, p. 172. [87] _Cf._ table XXVIII, p. 172. [88] _Cf._ table XXIX, p. 173. [89] _Cf._ table VI, p. 93. CHAPTER VII PARTICIPATION OF JEWS IN TOTAL IMMIGRATION We turn now to a consideration of the part played by the Jewish immigration in the total immigration to this country for these thirty years.[90] A general rise is revealed in the proportions the Jewish bore to the total immigration. In the decade between 1881 and 1890, of the 5,246,613 immigrants, the Jewish immigrants were 193,021, or 3.7 per cent of the total. In the decade between 1891 and 1900, of the 3,687,564 immigrants, the Jewish immigrants numbered 393,516. The Jewish proportion of the total rose to 10.7 per cent. This really tremendous rise was due to the fact that while the total number of immigrants fell off one-third in this decade, the Jewish immigrants doubled their numbers. It is from this decade that the Jewish immigrants become conspicuous in the immigration to the United States. In the decade between 1901 and 1910, of the 8,795,386 immigrants, the Jewish immigrants numbered 976,263. The proportion of the Jewish immigrants to the total rose to 11.1 per cent. Even in this decade of tremendous increase in the general immigration, the Jewish immigration rose at a still greater rate. For the entire period the Jewish immigration was 8.8 per cent of the total immigration.[91] This proportion was not reached before 1891. The maximum in the first decade was in 1887, when the Jewish immigration constituted 6.7 per cent of the total for the year. In 1891, this proportion rose to 9.2 per cent. It reached its highest point during nineteen years, in 1892, when the Jewish immigrants constituted 13.2 per cent of the total for the year. Throughout the period of depression, from 1893 to 1898, the contribution of the Jewish to the total immigration was, with two exceptions, above its average for the thirty years. In 1893, when the number of Jewish immigrants fell to half of that of the preceding year, its contribution to the total was 8 per cent. In 1897, a year of lowest Jewish as well as general immigration, its proportion was the same as the average. In the following years the contribution of the Jewish immigration rose proportionately, and in 1900 it reached the maximum for thirty years, constituting 13.5 per cent of the total for the year. The next highest proportion was reached in the year of maximum Jewish immigration, 1906, when the Jewish immigrants represented 13.4 per cent of the total for the year. Throughout the years from 1904 to 1908, the Jewish immigrants contributed above their average for the period. In 1908, when the numbers both of the Jewish and the total immigration had been greatly reduced, the Jewish immigrants contributed 13.2 per cent of the total, one of the highest proportions in the entire period, a fact which indicates that the Jewish immigrant tide recedes more slowly than that of the total immigration. In 1909, the year in which the effect of the panic of 1907 was registered in the Jewish immigration, the proportion of the Jewish immigrants to the total fell to 7.7 per cent. A slight relative rise took place in 1910 to 8.1 per cent. A comparison of the annual fluctuations of the Jewish and the total immigration enables us to distinguish some points of difference.[92] Though, on the whole, the Jewish corresponds with the total immigration in its rise and fall, there are significant differences. Thus, 1882 represents a year of high immigration in each, but the rise is in the case of the total immigration one of 17.9 per cent over that of the preceding year, but in the case of the Jewish, it represents a rise of 131.9 per cent over that of the preceding year, proportionately more than seven times as great. Another period of rising movement is in 1891 and 1892. Where, however, in 1891 the total immigration rose 20.9 per cent, the Jewish rose 79.5 per cent. In 1892, the total rose 3.4 per cent, the Jewish rose 48.6 per cent. In all these cases the difference is so great as to indicate the working of special influences in the Jewish movement. The existence of these special influences is again evident in the last decade. In 1904, the total immigration fell off 5.2 per cent, but the Jewish immigration rose 39.4 per cent. In 1906, in spite of the great total immigration of that year, and its increase of 7.2 per cent over the preceding year, the increase of the Jewish was 18.2 per cent--more than double that of the total. Again, the maximum periods of the two movements do not coincide. The total immigration reached its highest point for the thirty years in 1907. The maximum of the Jewish movement was in 1906. The panic of 1907 also appears to have influenced the Jewish immigration more slowly than the total. The greatest fall in the latter took place in 1908, immediately after the panic. The greatest fall of the Jewish immigration took place in 1909. This is another indication of the slowness of the response of the Jewish immigration to business conditions in this country, as compared with the rapid response of the general body of immigrants. As the racial classification was introduced only in 1899, it is impossible to determine for the entire thirty years the exact place the Jews occupy in the movement of peoples from the Old World to the New. During the twelve years from 1899 to 1910, there entered the United States a total of 1,074,442 Jewish immigrants, an annual average of nearly ninety thousand. This was the second largest body of immigrants, constituting more than a tenth of the total immigration for this period. In this regard the Jews were surpassed only by the South Italians.[93] This is an immense volume of immigration, both relatively and absolutely, and indicates to what an extent the immigration tendency has seized the Jews. In this tendency, however, the Jews from the different countries of Europe differ very strongly. As practically only three countries of Eastern Europe--Russia, Roumania and Austria-Hungary--are represented in the recent Jewish immigration, a rate of immigration established for the Jews should be based upon the population of these countries rather than upon the total Jewish population in Europe. Thus established, the Jews have the highest rate of immigration of any immigrant peoples. In 1906, during the maximum period of Jewish immigration, the rate of immigration of the East-European Jews was twenty out of every thousand. In 1907, the rate of the Jewish immigration was nineteen out of every thousand. The Jews are approached in this respect only by the Slovaks, who, in 1907, had a rate of immigration of eighteen per thousand. In this respect, the Jewish immigration is seen to occupy an exceptional position in the recent movement of peoples from Europe to this country. FOOTNOTES: [90] _Cf._ table XXX, p. 174. [91] _Cf._ table XXXI, p. 174. [92] _Cf._ table XXXII, p. 175. [93] This average and the same relative position is maintained if we take the fifteen years from 1899 to 1913, in which period there entered 1,347,590 Jewish immigrants. CHAPTER VIII SUMMARY The preceding analysis of the movement of the Jewish immigration to the United States and that of its Russian, Roumanian and Austro-Hungarian tributaries, from 1881 to 1910, has revealed certain facts of importance. The progressive nature of the Jewish movement has been disclosed. The greatest numbers have come within the last decade. This is particularly true of the movement from Roumania, and to a less extent of the movement from Russia. On the other hand, a larger relative proportion of the Jews from Austria-Hungary came during the first two decades. Throughout, the Jews from Russia have predominated in the total movement, governing its course for practically the entire period. In the total movement from the three countries of Eastern Europe, the Jews have participated most strongly in the Roumanian immigration, constituting nine-tenths of this immigration. The Jews are nearly a half of the immigrants from Russia. Their participation in the immigration from Austria-Hungary is relatively much smaller, being less than a tenth of the total immigration. In the immigration of the two latter countries, the Jews show a lessening participation, due to the great growth of the immigration of the other peoples. In the movements from Russia and Roumania, the participation of the Jewish immigrants rises greatly in all periods significant in the situation of the Jews in these countries. The influence of the unusual conditions facing the Jews in Russia and Roumania and of the principal events in their history for these thirty years is reflected in the annual fluctuations of the Jewish immigration of each of these countries to the United States. The economic and social pressure exerted upon the Jews in Russia and Roumania is reflected in the degree emigration is utilized by them. The Jews from Russia have a much higher rate of immigration than any other people immigrating from Russia. The rate of immigration of the Jews from Roumania is the highest among the Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe. In both annual fluctuations and rate of immigration the movement of the Jews from Austria-Hungary does not indicate the existence of special influences. The participation of the Jews in the total immigration to the United States is large and increasing in importance. For the last fifteen years they formed the second largest body of immigrants. Their fate of immigration is also higher than that of any other immigrant people. Of note, too, is the slow response of their immigration to unfavorable economic conditions in this country. When these facts are joined to those which have shown the striking relative participation of the Jews in the movements from Russia and Roumania, and the existence of special causes operating in these countries and indicating their influence in the yearly variations and in an extraordinary rate of immigration, it becomes clear that for the largest part of this period of thirty years Jewish immigration is controlled mainly by the conditions and events affecting the fate of the Jews in the countries of Eastern Europe. That the conditions in the United States exercise an influence, favorable or unfavorable, upon the immigration of Jews is undoubted. The influences, however, exerted by the conditions abroad are far stronger and steadier, and, on the whole, override the latter. The conclusion previously reached that the Jewish immigration is for the largest part the result of the expulsive and rejective forces of governmental persecution is thus strengthened by this examination into the situation as presented by the figures of the Jewish immigration to the United States. With it as a guiding principle, some of the main characteristics peculiar to the Jewish immigration are explained. To these we now turn. PART II JEWISH IMMIGRATION TO THE UNITED STATES B. ITS CHARACTERISTICS CHAPTER I FAMILY MOVEMENT Vital aspects of an immigrant people are revealed in its sex and age distribution. Generally speaking, whether an immigration is composed of individuals or of families is shown in the relative proportion of males and females, and of adults and children, of which it is composed. That the Jewish movement is essentially a family movement is shown by the great proportion of females and children found in it.[94] From 1899 to 1910, out of a total immigration of 1,074,442 Jews, 607,822, or 56.6 per cent were males, and 466,620, or 43.4 per cent, were females. These proportions have varied but slightly throughout the period. The greatest departures were in the years 1904 and 1905. The increase of the immigration of males in these years is explained by the unusual conditions existing in Russia at this time--economic unrest, revolution--which had the effect of sending over the men as an _avantgarde_ to prepare the way for their families. Young men fleeing to escape conscription also swelled the numbers. In 1906, however, the number of males decreased by 2,000, but that of females increased by more than 25,000. In this tremendous increase of females is registered the effect of the _pogroms_ of 1905-6, in which years the movement became a veritable flight. The general tendency has been towards an increase in the proportion of females. For the thirteen years preceding, from 1886 to 1898,[95] out of a total immigration at the port of New York of 251,623 Jewish adults, 147,053, or 58.4 per cent, were males, and 104,570, or 41.6 per cent, were females. The proportion of males is here somewhat higher than that for the period from 1899 to 1910. The difference is, however, relatively small. The tendency, previously noted, towards the increase in the proportion of females is found here. The greater relative diminution of the males in the later years--in 1894 reaching the point where there were more females--is even striking. Turning to a consideration of the ages of the Jewish immigrants, we learn that, between 1899 and 1910, 267,656, or practically one-fourth of all the Jewish immigrants, were children under fourteen years.[96] The large part that is taken in the Jewish immigration by the children is apparent. Here, again, 1904 and 1905 represent periods of great increase in the immigration of those between fourteen and forty-four years. As was the case with the females, the proportion of children in the immigration is at its greatest in the year 1906, by far the largest part of the increase for this year being children, thus giving a significant indication of the extent and literalness of the flight from Russia in this year of _pogroms_.[97] In the thirteen years preceding, from 1886 to 1898, of the 380,278 Jewish immigrants that entered the port of New York for this period, 128,655, or 33.8 per cent, were children under sixteen years of age.[98] A steady increase in the latter years is noted in the proportion of children, which harmonizes with a similar tendency noted of the females for the same period. That these facts reveal a family movement of considerable size, there is no question. They become truly significant when comparison is made with the proportions of the females and the children in the general immigration and with those of the peoples of which it is composed. A comparison of the proportion of males and females in the total and the Jewish immigration from 1899 to 1910 shows that for the entire period the percentage of females in the Jewish was much higher than in the total immigration, 43.4 per cent of the Jewish immigration being females as compared with 30.5 per cent of the total.[99] The percentage of females in the Jewish immigration was higher for every year from 1899 to 1910. While the percentage of males in the total immigration was above 70 per cent in five years, the percentage of males in the Jewish immigration was less than 60 per cent in all but two years, 1904 and 1905, when it rose to 61.2 per cent and 63.2 per cent. The latter, which represents the highest point in the percentage of males in the Jewish immigration, was smaller than the percentage of males in the total immigration for every year but 1899. In other words the maximum percentage of males in the Jewish and the minimum percentage in the total immigration practically coincide. In the period between 1899 and 1909 the proportion of children under fourteen years of age in the Jewish immigration was 24.8 per cent, while that in the total immigration was only 12.3 per cent.[100] The Jewish thus had proportionately twice as many children as the total immigration. The exceptional position of the Jews in regard to their family movement is most strikingly shown when the composition of the Jewish immigration by sex and age is compared with that of the other immigrant peoples.[101] In a comparison with immigrant races which contributed more than 100,000 to the total immigration from 1899 to 1910, the Jews are seen to have a higher proportion of females than any other people except the Irish. The Irish present in this regard an anomaly, in that they have more females than males in their immigration. That it is not in the main a family movement is shown by reference to the proportion of children under fourteen in the Irish immigration, which is only 5 per cent, one of the lowest in the entire series. The anomaly is easily explained by the well-known fact that their females for the most part are single, who come to the United States to work as servants.[102] Only one other people, the Bohemian and Moravian, approached the Jewish in its high proportion of females. On the other hand, the one people with a larger immigration than the Jewish, the South Italian, presents a striking contrast to the Jewish immigration, in that its proportion of females was about half that of the Jews. Although its immigrants numbered twice as many as the Jewish, the females in the Italian movement were only 408,965, as compared with 466,620 females in the Jewish immigration. A comparison of the immigrant peoples with reference to their composition by age shows that the Jewish movement contains without any exception the largest proportion of children.[103] Out of a total of 990,182 Jewish immigrants from 1899 to 1909, 245,787, or 24.8 per cent, were children under fourteen. In this regard, again, the Bohemian and Moravian approach the Jewish, though not as closely as in the proportion of females. The contrast with the South Italians obtains here as well. As the Jewish immigration, during the twelve years from 1899 to 1910, was the second highest in numbers, contributing more than a million to the total, the number of females and children found in its movement was higher than that of any other immigrant race, not only relatively but absolutely as well. Most striking, indeed, is the contrast in these respects between the Jewish immigrants and the other races coming from the countries of Eastern Europe, particularly the Slavic immigrant races with whom the Jews have been associated in the official statistics.[104] An examination of the proportion of females in the immigration of the eight races composing the Slavic group, shows that, with the exception of the Bohemians and Moravians (whose movement presents strong similarities to that of the Jews), the percentage of females was less than a third of the total immigration of each race, the highest being that of the Poles, which was 30.5 per cent. The contrast is even more striking in respect to children under fourteen. Here, again, excluding the Bohemians and Moravians, the highest percentage in the group was that of the Poles, 9.5 per cent. In this respect, therefore, the association of the Jewish immigrants with the other immigrants from Eastern Europe, under the rubric "Slavic races", is seen to be untenable. Strongest of all is the contrast between the Jewish immigration and that of the Roumanian people.[105] The Roumanian movement is seen to be composed practically wholly of individuals, only 9 per cent being females, while that of the people from Roumania (nine-tenths of whom are Jews[106]) is seen to have a proportion of females higher even than that in the total Jewish immigration. Even greater is the contrast with respect to age, only 2.2 per cent of the Roumanians being children under fourteen. The division of the peoples represented in the immigration to the United States into "old" and "new", the former consisting of the peoples from Northern and Western Europe, the latter of the peoples from Southern and Eastern Europe, is a convenient classification essentially of two periods of immigration coinciding largely with changes in the economic conditions in the United States. A comparison of the proportion of females and children in the "old" and the "new" immigration with that in the Jewish shows that the Jewish immigration has proportionately almost twice as many females as the "new" immigration (Jews excepted), and surpasses even the "old" immigration in this regard.[107] Of children under fourteen the Jewish movement has proportionately more than two and one-half times as many as the "new" immigration (Jews excepted), and nearly twice as many as the "old" immigration. This analysis shows conclusively that the Jewish immigration is essentially a family movement; that it is approached by no other immigrant people in this regard; that it not only cannot be classed with the "new" immigration, but shows a tendency towards family movement far stronger than that of the peoples composing the "old" immigration. The significance of this characteristic of the Jewish immigration is obvious. Their unequaled family movement gives one of the clearest indications that the Jewish immigrants are essentially composed of permanent settlers. FOOTNOTES: [94] _Cf._ table XXXIII, p. 176. [95] _Cf._ table XXXIV, p. 176. [96] _Cf._ table XXXV, p. 177. [97] _Cf._ Hersch, _op. cit._, p. 76. [98] _Cf._ table XXXVI, p. 177. [99] _Cf._ table XXXVII, p. 178. [100] _Cf. Abstract of Emigration Conditions in Europe_, p. 14. See Bibliography. [101] _Cf._ table XXXVIII, p. 179. [102] _Cf. Abstract of Emigration Conditions in Europe_, p. 15, for the high proportion of servants among the Irish immigrants. [103] _Cf._ table XXXIX, p. 180. [104] _Cf._ table XL, p. 181. [105] _Cf._ table XLI, p. 181. The Roumanian immigrants come principally from Austria-Hungary, and only slightly from Roumania. [106] _Cf. supra_, p. 131, note 2. [107] _Cf._ table XLII, p. 182. CHAPTER II PERMANENT SETTLEMENT Our studies of the sex and age distribution of the Jewish immigrants have shown a family movement unsurpassed in degree. This in itself is sufficient indication that the Jews are essentially permanent settlers in this country and not transients, "who have no intention of permanently changing their residence and whose only purpose in coming to America is temporarily to take advantage of greater wages paid for industrial labor in this country."[108] Equally convincing evidence is afforded by a survey of the facts regarding the outward movement of Jews from this country.[109] The figures of Jewish immigration are obtainable only from 1908, the law of 1907 having required all steamship companies to furnish information regarding their emigrant passengers. The relative stability of an immigration may be determined by contrasting the departure of the aliens composing the immigration with the arriving immigrants of this group for the same period. From 1908 to 1912, 33,315 Jews left the United States--an average annual emigration of 6,660 Jews. This is a strikingly low number, especially when compared with the large Jewish immigration for the same period, which numbered 417,016, and averaged annually 83,400 Jewish immigrants. Thus, for every hundred Jews admitted, only eight Jews left the country. This average proportion was largely exceeded only in 1909, not, however, because of any great increase in the absolute numbers of the Jewish emigrants, but because of the great fall in the number of Jewish immigrants of this year. The part that is taken by the Jewish emigrants in the total emigration is insignificant and is in striking contrast with the great part taken by the Jewish immigrants in the total immigration.[110] From 1908 to 1912, the Jewish immigrants constituted 9.7 per cent of the total immigrants. In the same period, the Jewish emigrants constituted only 2.3 per cent of the total emigrants. Moreover, while the proportion that the Jewish immigrants constituted of the total immigrants exhibited a considerable and significant variation, fluctuating from 7.7 per cent to 13.2 per cent, the proportion the Jewish emigrants constituted of the total emigrants remained around 2 per cent and showed practically no variation. Relatively both to the number of Jewish immigrants and of total emigrants, therefore, the number of the Jewish emigrants is exceedingly small and practically negligible. How great the relative stability of the Jewish immigration is may be seen when its return movement is compared with that of the total immigration and of other peoples conspicuous in the immigration to the United States.[111] Whereas, from 1908 to 1910, for every hundred admitted in the total immigration, thirty-two departed--the outward movement thus approximating one-third of the inward--in the case of the Jewish immigration, only eight departed, an outward movement only one-quarter as large, relatively, as the total. This was the smallest outward movement, relatively to the inward, of any immigrant people, except the Irish, whose outward movement was 6 per cent of the inward. Relatively to the inward movement, the Jews had an outward movement one-seventh as large as the South Italians, almost one-fourth as large as the Poles, and less than one-half as large as the Germans. In the total immigration for these years, the Jews were the third largest group with 236,100 immigrants, which constituted 10.2 per cent of the total immigration. To the outward movement for this period, however, they contributed 18,543 Jews, which constituted only 2.5 per cent of the total number of emigrants, one of the smallest contributions. The Poles, who constituted 11.7 per cent of the immigration for the three years, contributed practically the same proportion, 11.4 per cent, to the outward movement. Even more striking is the contrast with the Italian movement. The Italians contributed 19.8 per cent of the inward movement for the period and 35.7 per cent of the outward movement for the three years. Though their immigration for these three years was only twice as large as that of the Jews, their emigration was more than fourteen times that of the Jews. In other words, no people combined in an equal degree as the Jews so small a number of emigrants with so large a number of immigrants. It is interesting to determine what is the emigration tendency of the Jews coming from Russia, Roumania and Austria-Hungary. This may be gathered from the number of emigrants returned for each of these countries, from 1908 to 1912, as compared with the number admitted.[112] From 1908 to 1912, 294,813 Jews from Russia entered the United States and 20,546 Jews departed for Russia; 11,246 Jews from Roumania entered the United States and 546 Jews departed for Roumania; 60,408 Jews from Austria-Hungary entered the United States, and 8,513 Jews departed for Austria-Hungary. In other words, for every hundred Jews entering from Russia seven departed, for every hundred Jews entering from Roumania five Jews departed, for every hundred Jews entering from Austria-Hungary fourteen departed for their respective countries. The emigration tendency was thus smaller with the Roumanian and the Russian Jews than with the Austro-Hungarian Jews. This held true for each of the five years. Relatively twice as many Jews from Austria-Hungary as from Russia returned. The Roumanian Jews showed the smallest tendency to return. Of importance is the question of the relative stability of the Jewish movement from Russia and Austria-Hungary and that of their close neighbors in these countries, the Poles, who contributed almost as large a current of immigrants to the United States as the Jews, and who, since they constitute the most important Slavic group, may be taken as the type of the Slavic movement to this country. From 1908 to 1912, 265,964 Polish immigrants from Russia were admitted to the United States and 60,290 Poles departed for Russia, this constituting an average emigration of twenty-two per hundred admitted.[113] As, for every hundred Russian Jews admitted in this period, only seven departed, this constituted a relative emigration one-third as large as that of the Poles. For the same period, 214,931 Poles were admitted from Austria-Hungary and 88,994 Poles left for that country, which constituted an average emigration of forty-one per hundred admitted. The average emigration of the Jews from Austria-Hungary was fourteen per hundred admitted or practically one-third as large as that of the Poles. Thus, the Jewish immigrants from Russia and Austria-Hungary present relatively three times as stable a movement as the Polish immigrants from these countries. The fact that the Jewish emigration from Galicia was a movement of families and was essentially a movement of permanent settlement in their new home was noted by Buzek as characteristic of this emigration even in the early eighties, and as strongly contrasted with the emigration of the Poles from Galicia.[114] A comparison of the return movement of the "old" and the "new" immigration with that of the Jewish immigration gives similar results.[115] For every hundred admitted, there were, in the "new" immigration, forty-two emigrants, relatively more than five times as many as among the Jews. Even in the "old" immigration, which is largely accepted as the type of permanent immigration, for every hundred admitted, there were thirteen emigrants, about one and a half times as many relatively as among the Jews. The Jewish immigration must thus be accorded the place of distinction in American immigration for permanence of settlement. An unusual test of this conclusion was afforded by the remarkable emigration following the crisis of 1907.[116] The general opinion that "the causes which retard emigration from abroad also accelerate the exodus from the United States", was considerably strengthened by the great exodus of 1908. To this rule the Jewish immigration forms, again, a most striking exception. Although its number in 1907--149,182 immigrants--was only slightly below its maximum for thirty years, and constituted the second highest immigration for the year, only 7,702 Jews left the country in 1908. This constituted only two per cent of the total emigration for that year. Relatively to the number admitted the Jewish emigration was, without exception, the lowest, being only five departed for every hundred admitted. The remarkable disparity in this regard with the Poles and the Italian was again shown here. For every hundred Poles entering in 1907, thirty-three emigrated in 1908. For every hundred South Italians entering in 1907, sixty emigrated in 1908. That the business conditions of this country affect Jewish immigration is unquestioned, but the difference in the degree and the manner of the response puts it in a class apart. A comparison of the total gain in population in 1908 and 1909 in the immigration of Italians and Jews shows that whereas in the Italian inward and outward movement in 1908 there was a net loss to this country of 79,966, but in 1909 a net gain of 94,806, in the Jewish inward and outward movement in 1908 there was a net gain of 95,685, and in 1909 a net gain of 50,705.[117] The Jewish immigration responds in its inward movement much more slowly and less completely to the pressure of unfavorable conditions in this country. In its outward movement it shows practically no response. The conclusion that the Jewish immigrants constitute to an unusual degree a body of permanent settlers is strengthened by an examination of the figures concerning immigrants who have been in the United States previously.[118] Of the total from 1899 to 1910 of 9,220,066 immigrants, 1,108,948, or 12 per cent, had been here before. Of the 1,074,442 Jews who entered the country during this period, only 22,914, or 2.1 per cent, had been previously in the United States. The proportion of Jews who have been in this country before is by far the lowest of any immigrant peoples. As the total Jewish exodus is insignificant as compared both with the total emigration and the proportion of the Jewish immigration in the total inward movement; as the Jewish outward movement shows practically no response to unfavorable economic conditions in this country, and as the Jewish inward movement presents the phenomenon of a practically new body of immigrants, we are led to conclude that the Jewish immigration exhibits a quality of permanence and stability to so great a degree as to render this fact one of its distinguishing characteristics. FOOTNOTES: [108] Immigration Commission: _Conclusions and Recommendations_, p. 16. [109] _Cf._ table XLIII, p. 182. [110] _Cf._ table XLIV, p. 183. [111] _Cf._ table XLV, p. 183. [112] _Cf._ table XLVI, p. 134. [113] _Cf._ table XLVII, p. 184. [114] Buzek, _op. cit._, p. 467. [115] _Cf._ table XLVIII, p. 185. [116] _Cf._ table XLIX, p. 185. [117] The number of Jewish emigrant aliens in 1908 was deducted from the number of Jewish immigrant aliens: the combined number of Jewish emigrant and non-emigrant aliens in 1909 was deducted from the combined number of Jewish immigrant and non-immigrant aliens. _Cf._ Fairchild, _Immigration_, 1913, p. 361. [118] _Cf._ table L, p. 186. CHAPTER III OCCUPATIONS The occupations of an immigrant people throw light upon their industrial equipment and their probable future occupations in this country. A study of the occupational distribution of the Jewish immigrants from 1899 to 1910 will serve to illuminate some of the characteristics of their movement.[119] The largest group is that classed as having "no occupation". This group comprises 484,175 immigrants, and is 45.1 per cent of the total. In the fact that it holds so large a place in the occupational distribution, there is reflected the great number of women and children among the Jewish immigrants. The rise in the proportion of the "no occupation" group in the second half of the twelve years follows a similar rise in the proportion of women and children in the Jewish movement, which has been previously noted.[120] These are, in the main, economically dependent, a fact which is of the highest importance with reference to the character of this immigration, as well as in its influence upon the economic and social problems facing the immigrant Jews in their new home. Skilled laborers were the second largest group, numbering 395,823 immigrants and comprising 36.8 per cent of the total. Next in order was the group classed as "miscellaneous", with 186,989 immigrants, representing 17.4 per cent of the total. This group included common and farm laborers, servants, merchants and dealers, _etc._ In professional occupations there were 7,455 immigrants, comprising 7 per cent of the total. Omitting the "no occupation" group, and considering the 590,267 Jewish immigrants reporting occupations, we find that of these the great majority--67.1 per cent--were skilled laborers.[121] Laborers numbered 69,444 and comprised 11.8 per cent. Next in order of numbers were servants, 65,532, who comprised 11.1 per cent. A much smaller group was that composed of merchants and dealers (chiefly petty merchants, hucksters, and peddlers), who numbered 31,491 and were 5.3 per cent of the total. Of farm laborers there were 11,460, comprising 1.9 per cent. The entire professional class comprised 1.3 per cent of the total. There were 1,000 farmers, who comprised .2 per cent. In the professional classes the teachers were the largest group, represented by 2,192, and comprising 29.4 per cent.[122] The next class were the musicians, who numbered 1,624, comprising 21.8 per cent of the total. Together these two groups were more than half of the total. Thus, by far the most important occupational group was that of the skilled laborers.[123] An examination of the distribution of this group shows that they were represented in thirty-five trades. By far the largest group of the skilled laborers were the tailors, numbering 145,272, and comprising 36.6 per cent. The dressmakers and seamstresses numbered 39,482, and comprised one-tenth of the total. Including the closely allied trades such as hat and cap makers, milliners, _etc._, the garment workers composed practically one-half of the entire body of skilled laborers. Second in rank were the carpenters and joiners, who, together with the cabinet makers and woodworkers (not specified) numbered 40,901, and comprised more than one-tenth of the total. The fourth highest group were the shoemakers, with 23,519, or 5.9 per cent of the total. Clerks and accountants, and painters and glaziers contributed an almost equal number--the former 17,066, the latter 16,387--representing 4.3 per cent and 4.1 per cent respectively of the total. Of butchers there were 11,413, or 2.9 per cent, and of bakers 10,925, or 2.8 per cent. There were also 9,385 locksmiths, or 2.4 per cent, and 8,517 blacksmiths, or 2.2 per cent. Together, these ten groups comprised 318,104, or 80.4 per cent of the Jews in skilled occupations. Another skilled occupation represented by more than 5,000 was tinners. Trade groups of more than 3,000 were watch and clock makers, tobacco workers, hat and cap makers, barbers and hairdressers, weavers and spinners, tanners and curriers, furriers and fur workers, and bookbinders. More than a thousand skilled laborers were found in the following trades: photographers and upholsterers, mechanics (not specified), masons, printers, saddlers and harness makers, milliners, metal workers (other than iron, steel and tin), machinists, jewelers and millers. Less than a thousand laborers were found in two groups: iron and steel workers, and textile workers (not specified). The Jewish immigrants were therefore concentrated in the two groups of "no occupation" and "skilled laborers", to which belonged more than four-fifths of the total number. In the part taken by the Jewish immigrants in the occupational distribution of the total immigrants from 1899 to 1909, these two groups are prominent.[124] To the 1,247,674 skilled laborers, the Jewish immigrants contributed 362,936, or 29.1 per cent. This was more than twice the proportion of the Jewish immigrants in the total number of immigrants. They were also represented in the "no occupation" group by more than one and one-half times their proportion of the total immigration, contributing to a total of 2,165,287 immigrants, 445,728, or 20.6 per cent. In striking contrast with the great contribution to these two classes is their insignificant contributions to the groups of common laborers and farmers, and farm laborers, to which they contributed respectively 2.9 per cent, 1.1 per cent, and 0.1 per cent. It is, however, in comparison with the occupational grouping of the other races that the peculiarities of the distribution of the Jewish immigrants are most clearly seen.[125] An examination of the number of those classed as having "no occupation" of each European immigrant people and the percentage this group comprised of the total immigration of each people, shows that the Jews have the highest proportion, 45.1 per cent, of all immigrants belonging to this group. The Bohemians and Moravians are next in order, with 39.5 per cent. The absolute numbers of the Jews belonging to this group are also higher than those of any other people. The Italians have only 440,274 immigrants in the "no occupation" group, as compared with the 484,175 Jewish immigrants in this group. Even more striking is the contrast with the Poles, who have only 200,634 immigrants belonging to this group. This corresponds closely with similar facts as to the relative proportions of females and children found in the Jewish immigration and among the other immigrant races. An even greater contrast exists in the proportions of skilled laborers between the Jewish and the other immigrant peoples.[126] Of those reporting occupations the Jews have, by far, the highest proportion of those in skilled occupations. The nearest approach to their proportion of skilled laborers is found among the Scotch, with 57.9 per cent. The next in order are the English, with 48.7 per cent. A much smaller proportion is found among the Bohemians and Moravians and the Germans. All these races contribute not only much smaller proportions than the Jews, but very much smaller absolute numbers to the total body of skilled laborers. Of laborers (including farm laborers), the Jews, on the other hand, have a smaller proportion, 13.7 per cent, than any people, except the Scotch (who resemble the Jews most strongly in their high proportion of skilled laborers and their low proportion of common laborers). The most striking contrast, in occupational distribution, however, is presented with the Slavic peoples.[127] Of those reporting occupations, the Slavic peoples, with the exception of the Bohemians and Moravians, are seen to be overwhelmingly concentrated in the two related groups of common and farm laborers, whereas the Jews are mostly to be found in the group of skilled laborers. Relatively ten times as many Jews as Poles, for instance, are in the skilled occupations. That the Jews form a striking exception in their occupational grouping is evident. A comparison of the occupational distribution of the "old" and the "new" immigrants with that of the Jewish immigrants, from 1899 to 1909, leads to the same conclusion.[128] The Jewish immigrants have twice as many in the "no occupation" group as the "new" immigrants, and a much higher percentage than the "old" immigrants. They have relatively four times as many skilled laborers as the "new" immigrants, and more than one and one-half times as many as the "old" immigrants. Most remarkable is the fact that in spite of the relatively great proportion of women among the Jewish immigrants, they have a smaller proportion of servants than the "new" immigrants and one-third as large a proportion as the "old" immigrants. This indicates that the Jewish women are, as a rule, not servants, but either do not engage in work, or, if they do, are employed in skilled occupations. The latter group is, however, relatively inconspicuous. In professional occupations the Jews occupy an intermediate position between the "old" and the "new" immigrants. In common and farm laborers, the Jews have an exceedingly low proportion as compared with the "old" and a strikingly low proportion as compared with the "new" immigrants. Some distinctive traits in the occupational grouping of the Jewish immigrants have become evident. They are apart from all the other immigrant peoples in the great number of those having "no occupation". In other words, the Jewish immigrants are burdened with a far greater number of dependents than any other immigrant people, standing apart in this respect from the peoples of the "old" immigration and to a far greater extent from the peoples of the "new" immigration. Secondly, the Jewish immigrants are distinguished by a far greater proportion of skilled laborers. In this respect again they exceed even the peoples of the "old" immigration. The fact that the skilled laborers are more largely represented among the Jewish immigrants than they are in the occupations of the Jews in the countries of Eastern Europe is significant as showing an unusual pressure upon these classes abroad. FOOTNOTES: [119] _Cf._ table LI, p. 186. [120] _Cf. supra_, pp. 127-128. [121] _Cf._ table LII, p. 187. [122] _Cf._ table LIII, p. 187. [123] _Cf._ table LIV, p. 188. [124] _Cf._ table LV, p. 189. [125] _Cf._ table LVI, p. 189. [126] _Cf._ table LVII, p. 190. [127] _Cf._ table LVIII, p. 191. [128] _Cf._ table LIX, p. 191. CHAPTER IV ILLITERACY The rate of illiteracy has been generally used as a rough standard for estimating the mental equipment of the immigrants. A consideration of the rate of illiteracy among the Jewish immigrants dispels the popular impression that practically every Jew is able to read and write.[129] Out of a total of 806,786 Jews fourteen years of age and over who entered this country from 1899 to 1910, 209,507 or 26 per cent, were unable to read and write. As the average rate of illiteracy among all the immigrants, from 1899 to 1910, was 26.7 per cent, the rate of Jewish illiteracy is seen to be only slightly below the average. A number of considerations enter. One of these is the influence of sex. It is generally recognized that, as a rule, females are more usually unlettered than males. This difference of illiteracy between the sexes is also more pronounced in countries where popular education is less widely spread than in those where it is the rule. Such is the case with the countries of Eastern Europe, which are the source of the recent Jewish immigration. The contrast between male and female illiteracy is strongest among the East-European Jews, who neglect the education of their daughters as much as they strive to educate their sons. This is reflected in the relative illiteracy of males and females among the Jewish immigrants.[130] Of the 172,718 Jewish males fourteen years of age and over entering this country from 1908 to 1912, 33,970, or 19.7 per cent, were illiterates. Of the 139,283 females fourteen years of age and over, 51,303, or 36.8 per cent, were illiterates. The illiteracy of Jewish females is thus almost twice as high as that of Jewish males. As the proportion of females in the Jewish immigration is so large, the influence of the sex factor in increasing the rate of illiteracy among the Jewish immigrants is considerable. A tendency from a lower to a higher rate of illiteracy is discernible. The average rate for the first six years was 23.8 per cent, that for the last six years was 27.2 per cent. This corresponds with the increase in the latter years in the proportion of females in the Jewish immigration, which has been previously noted. A comparison of the rate of illiteracy of the Jewish immigrants with that of the other immigrant peoples shows that the Jews occupy an intermediate position.[131] They have a relatively high rate of illiteracy, as compared with the peoples from Northern and Western Europe. In comparison with the Slavs, their rate of illiteracy is also much higher than that of the Bohemians and Moravians, and, higher also, though to a far less degree, than that of the Slovaks. The relative position of the Jews is clearly shown in a comparison of their rate of illiteracy from 1899 to 1910 with that for the same period of the "old" and the "new" immigration (from the latter of which the Jews are excepted.)[132] The rate of illiteracy of the "old" immigration is 2.5 per cent, that of the "new" immigration (Jews excepted) is 37.2 per cent, that of the Jews is 25.7 per cent. The Jews occupy a middle ground, yet near enough to the "new" immigration to be classed with it in this respect. The conclusion reached in the first part that the educational standing of the Jews is higher than that of the peoples in Eastern Europe among whom they live is reflected in the greater relative literacy of their immigrants.[133] The rate of illiteracy of the Jewish immigrants is lower than that of the peoples among whom the Jews are found. In the case of the Lithuanians and the Ruthenians the difference is considerable. This is seen to hold true for each sex.[134] The illiterates among the Jewish males constituted 21.9 per cent of the total number of Jewish males. The illiterates among the Jewish females constituted 40.0 per cent of the total number of Jewish females. In both sexes, the proportion of illiterates was lower than that prevailing among the other immigrant peoples. Here, again, the fact is noticeable of a wider difference in the case of the Jews between the illiteracy of their males and females than exists among any of the other peoples. Owing to the fact that the Jews have in their immigration a notably higher proportion of females than any of these peoples, the difference between their rate of illiteracy and that of these peoples is lessened to some extent. That the illiteracy of the Jews is due chiefly to their exceptional status in Russia and Roumania, our review of the conditions affecting Jewish education in those countries has shown. No more striking illustration exists of the fact that the literacy of the Jews is conditioned by their freedom than the degree in which they are taking advantage of the educational opportunities offered in this country, remarkable testimony to which is presented in the reports of the recent Immigration Commission. FOOTNOTES: [129] _Cf._ table LX, p. 192. [130] _Cf._ table LXI, p. 192. [131] _Cf._ table LXII, p. 193. [132] _Cf._ table LXIII, p. 194. [133] _Cf._ table LXIV, p. 194. [134] _Cf._ table LXV, p. 194. CHAPTER V DESTINATION The destination, or intended future residence, of immigrants is influenced by certain considerations, such as the place of residence of friends or relatives, the port arrived at, and the funds at the disposal of the immigrants. The most important influence is that exercised by the occupations of the immigrants. The preponderance of the industrially skilled and commercial groups among the Jewish immigrants makes for residence in the industrial and commercial centers. The great majority of the Jewish immigrants arriving from 1899 to 1910 were destined for the eastern states.[135] Of the total number of Jewish immigrants from 1889 to 1910, 923,549 immigrants, or 86 per cent, gave the North Atlantic States as their destination and 110,998 immigrants, or 10.3 per cent, the North Central States. Less than one-twentieth gave all the other divisions as their destination. A great proportion of the Jewish immigrants, numbering 690,296, or 64.2 per cent of the total, gave New York as their destination.[136] Pennsylvania was the destination of the next largest number of immigrants, 108,534, constituting 10.1 per cent of the total. For Massachusetts there were destined 66,023 immigrants, or 6.1 per cent of the total. Four-fifths of the total number of immigrants were destined for these three states. Other eastern states receiving a large number of immigrants were New Jersey, for which 34,279 were destined, and Connecticut, for which 16,254 immigrants were destined. Of the North Central States, Illinois was the destination of the largest number, 50,931 immigrants, constituting 4.7 per cent of the total. Ohio was the destination of the next largest number, 20,531 immigrants, or 1.9 per cent of the total. One state in the South Central division, Maryland, was given as the destination of 18,700 immigrants, constituting 1.7 per cent of the total, and the largest number of those destined for this division. The tendency of the Jewish immigrants towards industrial and commercial centers is here reflected. The destination of the Jewish immigrants to the eastern states agrees with that of the total immigration for the same period.[137] A larger proportion of the Jewish immigrants than of the total immigrants was destined for the North Atlantic States, which contain the commercial and manufacturing centers. Less than one-half as many Jewish immigrants as total immigrants were destined for the North Central States. About an equal proportion of each was destined for the South Atlantic States. A much smaller proportion of the Jewish than of the total was destined for the Western States. In view of the industrial equipment of the Jewish immigrants discussed previously, this tendency is explained. The Jewish immigrants destined for the eastern states play a correspondingly large part among the total number destined for these states.[138] The Jewish immigrants destined for the North Atlantic States were 14.5 per cent of all the immigrants destined for this division. Their next highest proportion was of those destined for the South Central States, of which they constituted 9.9 per cent. They constituted an almost equal proportion of the immigrants destined for the North Central and the South Central States, 5.2 per cent, and 5.0 per cent, respectively. Of the immigrants destined for the Western States they constituted only 1.2 per cent. The final destination of the immigrants very frequently is different from the destination stated at the time of landing. An examination of the disposition of Jewish immigrants landing at the port of New York from 1886 to 1906 showed that a large part of the immigrants left within a very short time for other parts.[139] Of the 918,388 immigrants that landed at the port of New York, from 1886 to 1906, 669,453, or 72.9 per cent, remained in New York, and 248,935, or 27.1 per cent, left for other points. FOOTNOTES: [135] _Cf._ table LXVI, p. 195. [136] _Cf._ table LXVII, p. 195. [137] _Cf._ table LXVIII, p. 196. [138] _Cf._ table LXIX, p. 196. [139] _Cf._ reports of the United Hebrew Charities of New York City, 1886 to 1906. CHAPTER VI SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Some of the principal characteristics of the Jewish immigration to the United States have been presented in the preceding pages. The Jewish immigration has been shown to consist essentially of permanent settlers. Its family movement is incomparable in degree, and contains a larger relative proportion as well as absolute number of women and children, than any other immigrant people. This in turn is reflected in the greater relative proportion as well as absolute number of those classified as having "no occupation". The element of dependency thus predicated is another indication of the family composition of the Jewish immigration. Its return movement is the smallest of any, as compared both with its large immigration and the number of total emigrants. The Jewish immigrants are distinguished as well by a larger relative proportion and absolute number of skilled laborers, than any other immigrant people. In these four primary characteristics the Jewish immigrants stand apart from all the others. It is with the neighboring Slavic races emigrating from the countries of Eastern Europe and with whom the Jewish immigrants are closely associated that the contrasts, in all these respects, are strongest. The Slavic immigrants are chiefly male adults. Their movement is largely composed of transients, as evidenced by a relatively large outward movement and emphasized by the fact that the vast majority of them are unskilled laborers. An exception, in large measure, must be made of the Bohemian and Moravian immigrants who present characteristics strongly similar to those of the Jewish immigrants. The division into "old" and "new" immigration brings out even more clearly the exceptional position of the Jews in regard to these characteristics. Although the Jewish immigration has been contemporaneous with the "new" immigration from Eastern and Southeastern Europe, and is furthermore essentially East-European in origin, its characteristics place it altogether with the "old" immigration.[140] Most striking, however is the fact that in all of these respects--family composition, and small return movement (both indicating permanent settlement) and in the proportion of skilled laborers--the Jewish immigration stands apart even from the "old" immigration. Further confirmation may be obtained, in the study of the characteristics of the Jewish immigration, of the principle established in the preceding sections that the rejective forces of governmental oppression are responsible for the largest part of this immigration. The large family movement of the Jewish immigration is a symptom of abnormal conditions and amounts almost to a reversal of the normal immigration, in which single or married men without families predominate. Even the family movement of the "old" immigrants may largely be attributed to the longer residence of their peoples in the United States as well as to their greater familiarity with the conditions and customs of the United States. That so large a part of the Jewish immigrants is composed of dependent females and children creates a situation of economic disadvantage for the Jewish immigrants, all the stronger because of their relative unfamiliarity with the language or the conditions facing them in this country. Again, the Jews respond slowly and incompletely to the pressure of unfavorable economic conditions in this country. This was emphasized by the almost complete lack of response to the panic of 1907, as well as expressed in the small, practically unchanging return movement of the Jews to their European homes. The pressure upon the Jewish artisans, or skilled laborers, in Eastern Europe is reflected in the predominance of this class among the Jewish immigrants to this country. That so useful an element in Eastern Europe with its still relatively backward industrial development--a fact that was given express recognition by the permission accorded the Jewish artisans in Alexander II's time to live in the interior of Russia--should have been compelled to emigrate indicates that the voyage across the Atlantic was easier for them than the trip into the interior of Russia, access to which is still legally accorded to them. That the oppressive conditions created particularly in Russia and Roumania and operating as a pressure equivalent to an expulsive force does not explain the entire Jewish immigration to this country is evident from the preceding pages. In a great measure, the immigration of Jews from Austria-Hungary is an economic movement. The existence, however, of a certain degree of pressure created by economic and political antisemitism has however been recognized. The Jewish movement from Austria-Hungary shares largely with the movement from Russia and Roumania the social and economic characteristics of the Jewish immigration which we have described. A strong family movement and a relative permanence of settlement, especially as compared with the Poles, and a movement of skilled laborers must be predicated of the Jewish immigrants from Austria-Hungary, though undoubtedly not to the same degree as in the case of the Jewish movements from Russia and Roumania. It is also clear that the forces of economic attraction in the United States do not play an altogether passive part in the Jewish immigration. The very fact of an immigrant-nucleus formed in this country and serving as a center of attraction to relatives and friends abroad--a force which increases in direct and multiple proportion to the growth of immigration--is an active and positive force in strengthening the immigration current. This was early understood by the _Alliance Israélite Universelle_ which had acted upon this principle in the seventies and had prophetically sought to direct a healthy movement of Jewish immigrants to this country in the hope of thereby laying a foundation for future Jewish immigration to this country. This current, however, once started and growing only by the force of its increasing attraction, would reflect in its movement almost wholly the economic conditions in this country. That so large a part of the Jewish immigration, and so many of the phenomena peculiar to it, find their explanation, for the largest part of the thirty years, in the situation and the course of events in the countries of Eastern Europe leads to the inevitable conclusion that the key to the Jewish immigration is to be found not in the force of economic attraction exercised in the United States but rather in the exceptional economic, social and legal conditions in Eastern Europe which have been created as a result of governmental persecution. Reviewing the various phases of the history of Jewish immigration for these thirty years, we are enabled to see more closely its nature. The study of the immigration, its movement and its social and economic characteristics, in comparison with those of other immigrant peoples, has revealed in it a number of distinguishing traits. In the causes of the emigration of the Jews, in the pressure exerted upon their movement as reflected in their rate of immigration, in their family movement, in the permanence of their settlement, and in their occupational distribution have been found characteristics which mark them off from the rest of the immigrant peoples. The number of these characteristics and the degree in which they are found in the Jewish immigration, put it in a class by itself. The facts of governmental pressure amounting to an expulsive force, and reflected in an extraordinary rate of immigration, in a movement of families unsurpassed in the American immigration, the largest part economically dependent, in an occupational grouping of skilled artisans, able to earn their livelihood under normal conditions, and in a permanence of settlement in this country incomparable in degree and indicating that practically all who come stay--all these facts lead irresistibly to the conclusion that in the Jewish movement we are dealing, not with an immigration, but with a migration. What we are witnessing to-day and for these thirty years, is a Jewish migration of a kind and degree almost without a parallel in the history of the Jewish people. When speaking of the beginnings of Russian Jewish immigration to Philadelphia, David Sulzberger said: "In thirty years the movement of Jews from Russia to the United States has almost reached the dignity of the migration of a people," he used no literary phrase. In view of the facts that have developed, this statement is true without any qualification. This migration-process explains the remarkable growth of the Jewish population in the United States, within a relatively short period of time. In this transplantation, the spirit of social solidarity and communal responsibility prevalent among the Jews has played a vital part. The family rather than the individual thus becomes the unit for the social life of the Jewish immigrant population in the United States. In this respect the latter approaches more nearly the native American population than does the foreign white or immigrant population. One of the greatest evils incident to and characteristic of the general immigration to this country is thereby minimized. Again, the concentration of the Jewish immigrants in certain trades explains in great measure the peculiarities of the occupational and the urban distribution of the Jews in the United States. The development of the garment trades through Jewish agencies is largely explained by the recruiting of the material for this development through these laborers. These primary characteristics of the Jewish immigration of the last thirty years will serve to explain some of the most important phases of the economic and social life of the Jews in the United States, three-fourths of whom are immigrants of this period. Of all the features of this historic movement of the Jews from Eastern Europe to the United States, not the least interesting is their passing from civilizations whose bonds with their medieval past are still strong to a civilization which began its course unhampered by tradition and unyoked to the forms and institutions of the past. The contrast between the broad freedom of this democracy and the intolerable despotism from whose yoke most of them fled, has given them a sense of appreciation of American political and social institutions that is felt in every movement of their mental life. FOOTNOTES: [140] So strongly was this the case that the Immigration Commission in discussing these characteristics was compelled to separate the Jewish from the "new" immigration, in order to bring out the essential differences of the latter from the "old" immigration. STATISTICAL TABLES TABLE IA PARTICIPATION OF JEWS IN OCCUPATIONS IN THE RUSSIAN EMPIRE, 1897[1] ------------------------+----------+----------+------------------- Group of occupation | Total | Jews | Per cent of total ------------------------+----------+----------+------------------- Agricultural pursuits | 18245287 | 40611 | .2 Professional service | 988813 | 71950 | 7.5 Personal service[2] | 5150012 | 277466 | 5.4 Manufacturing and | | | mechanical pursuits | 5169919 | 542563 | 10.5 Transportation | 714745 | 45944 | 6.4 Commerce[2] | 1256330 | 452193 | 36.0 ------------------------+----------+----------+------------------- Total | 31525106 | 1430727 | 4.5 ------------------------+----------+----------+------------------- [1] Compiled from Rubinow, p. 500. [2] _Cf._ Rubinow, note, p. 500. TABLE IB PARTICIPATION OF JEWS IN OCCUPATIONS IN THE PALE OF JEWISH SETTLEMENT, 1897[1] -----------------------+----------+----------+------------------ Group of occupation | Total | Jews |Per cent of total -----------------------+----------+----------+------------------ Agricultural pursuits | 6071413 | 38538 | .6 Professional service | 317710 | 67238 | 21.1 Personal service[2] | 2139981 | 250078 | 11.6 Manufacturing and | | | mechanical pursuits | 1573519 | 504844 | 32.1 Transportation | 211983 | 44177 | 20.8 Commerce[2] | 556086 | 426628 | 76.7 -----------------------+----------+----------+------------------ Total | 10870692 | 1331503 | 12.2 -----------------------+----------+----------+------------------ [1] Compiled from Rubinow, p. 501. [2] _Cf._ Rubinow, note, p. 500. TABLE II JEWISH IMMIGRATION AT THE PORTS OF NEW YORK, PHILADELPHIA AND BALTIMORE, JULY TO JUNE, 1886 to 1898[1] -------+----------+--------------+-----------+-------- Year | New York | Philadelphia | Baltimore | Total -------+----------+--------------+-----------+-------- 1886 | 19548 | 1625 | -- | 21173 1887 | 30866 | 2178 | -- | 33044 1888 | 26946 | 1935 | -- | 28881 1889 | 23958 | 1394 | -- | 25352 1890 | 26963 | 1676 | -- | 28639 1891 | 47098 | 2719 | 1581[2]| 51398 1892 | 66544 | 4677 | 5152 | 76373 1893 | 29059 | 4322[3] | 1941 | 35322 1894 | 23444 | 3833 | 1902 | 29179 1895 | 21422 | 3672 | 1097 | 26191 1896 | 27846 | 3016 | 1986 | 32848 1897 | 17362 | 1613 | 1397 | 20372 1898 | 19222 | 2121 | 2311 | 23654 -------+----------+--------------+-----------+-------- Total | 380278 | 34781 | 17367 | 432426 -------+----------+--------------+-----------+-------- [1] Table II and all succeeding tables are arranged from July 1st to June 30th, the fiscal year. [2] Baltimore statistics begin October. [3] Philadelphia figures for August missing. TABLE III JEWISH IMMIGRATION AT THE PORT OF NEW YORK, JULY, 1885, TO JUNE, 1886, BY MONTH AND COUNTRY OF NATIVITY[1] -----------+--------+-----------------+----------+--------+------- Month | Russia | Austria-Hungary | Roumania | Others | Total -----------+--------+-----------------+----------+--------+------- July | 1130 | 354 | 58 | 107 | 1649 August | 1512 | 448 | 33 | 121 | 2114 September | 945 | 185 | 20 | 119 | 1269 October | 785 | 236 | 12 | 216 | 1249 November | 1347 | 589 | 21 | 80 | 2037 December | 574 | 249 | 17 | 62 | 902 January | 565 | 202 | 4 | 26 | 797 February | 492 | 228 | 16 | 44 | 780 March | 1077 | 444 | 35 | 66 | 1622 April | 639 | 309 | 28 | 55 | 1031 May | 791 | 521 | 31 | 70 | 1413 June | 3017 | 1365 | 210 | 93 | 4685 -----------+--------+-----------------+----------+--------+------- Total | 12874 | 5130 | 485 | 1059 | 19548 -----------+--------+-----------------+----------+--------+------- [1] Compiled from reports of the United Hebrew Charities of New York. TABLE IVA JEWISH IMMIGRATION AT THE PORT OF PHILADELPHIA, 1886 TO 1898, BY COUNTRY OF NATIVITY -------+------+-----+--------+-----+--------+-----+------+-----+------ | | Per |Austria-| Per | | Per | | Per | Year |Russia| cent|Hungary | cent|Roumania| cent|Others| cent|Total -------+------+-----+--------+-----+--------+-----+------+-----+------ 1886 | 1218 | 75 | 196 | 12 | 33 | 2 | 178 | 11 | 1625 1887 | 1699 | 78 | 262 | 12 | 86 | 4 | 131 | 6 | 2178 1888 | 1432 | 74 | 232 | 12 | 97 | 5 | 174 | 9 | 1935 1889 | 1129 | 81 | 125 | 9 | 42 | 3 | 98 | 7 | 1394 1890 | 1424 | 85 | 184 | 11 | 34 | 2 | 34 | 2 | 1676 1891 | 2447 | 90 | [1] | -- | [1] | -- | 272 | 10 | 2719 1892 | 3929 | 84 | 561 | 12 | 47 | 1 | 140 | 3 | 4677 1893 | 3025 | 70 | 519 | 12 | 43 | 1 | 735 | 17 | 4322 1894 | 2951 | 77 | 422 | 11 | 77 | 2 | 383 | 10 | 3833 1895 | 1983 | 54 | 624 | 17 | 73 | 2 | 992 | 27 | 3672 1896 | 1538 | 51 | 875 | 29 | 60 | 2 | 543 | 18 | 3016 1897 | 1049 | 65 | 355 | 22 | 32 | 2 | 177 | 11 | 1613 1898 | 1611 | 76 | 382 | 18 | 64 | 3 | 64 | 3 | 2121 -------+------+-----+--------+-----+--------+-----+------+-----+------ Total |25435 | 73 | 4737 | 14 | 688 | 2 | 3921 | 11 |34781 -------+------+-----+--------+-----+--------+-----+------+-----+------ [1] Immigrants from Austria-Hungary and Roumania were this year grouped under "all others" in the original tables. TABLE IVB JEWISH IMMIGRATION AT THE PORT OF BALTIMORE, 1891 TO 1898, BY COUNTRY OF NATIVITY -------+------+-----+--------+-----+--------+-----+------+-----+------ | | Per |Austria-| Per | | Per | | Per | Year |Russia| cent|Hungary | cent|Roumania| cent|Others| cent| Total -------+------+-----+--------+-----+--------+-----+------+-----+------ 1891 | 1423 | 90 | [1] | -- | [1] | -- | 158 | 10 | 1581 1892 | 4328 | 84 | 618 | 12 | 52 | 1 | 154 | 3 | 5152 1893 | 1388 | 70 | 232 | 12 | 19 | 1 | 302 | 17 | 1941 1894 | 1465 | 77 | 209 | 11 | 38 | 2 | 190 | 10 | 1902 1895 | 592 | 54 | 187 | 17 | 22 | 2 | 296 | 27 | 1097 1896 | 1013 | 51 | 576 | 29 | 40 | 2 | 357 | 18 | 1986 1897 | 908 | 65 | 307 | 22 | 28 | 2 | 154 | 11 | 1397 1898 | 1757 | 76 | 416 | 18 | 69 | 3 | 69 | 3 | 2311 -------+------+-----+--------+-----+--------+-----+------+-----+------ Total |12874 | 74 | 2545 | 15 | 268 | 2 | 1680 | 9 |17367 -------+------+-----+--------+-----+--------+-----+------+-----+------ [1] Immigrants from Austria-Hungary and Roumania were this year grouped under "all others" in the original tables. TABLE V[1] JEWISH IMMIGRATION AT THE PORTS OF NEW YORK, PHILADELPHIA AND BALTIMORE, 1886 TO 1898, BY COUNTRY OF NATIVITY -------+-----------------+-----------------------------------+-------- | | Ports | Year | Country of |----------+------------+-----------| Total | nativity | New York |Philadelphia| Baltimore | -------+-----------------+----------+------------+-----------+-------- 1886 | Russia | 12874 | 1218 | -- | 14092 | Austria-Hungary | 5130 | 196 | -- | 5326 | Roumania | 485 | 33 | -- | 518 1887 | Russia | 21404 | 1699 | -- | 23103 | Austria-Hungary | 6636 | 262 | -- | 6898 | Roumania | 1977 | 86 | -- | 2063 1888 | Russia | 18784 | 1432 | -- | 20216 | Austria-Hungary | 5753 | 232 | -- | 5985 | Roumania | 1556 | 97 | -- | 1653 1889 | Russia | 17209 | 1129 | -- | 18338 | Austria-Hungary | 4873 | 125 | -- | 4998 | Roumania | 1016 | 42 | -- | 1058 1890 | Russia | 19557 | 1424 | -- | 20981 | Austria-Hungary | 6255 | 184 | -- | 6439 | Roumania | 428 | 34 | -- | 462 1891 | Russia | 39587 | 2447 | 1423 | 43457 | Austria-Hungary | 5890 | [1] | [1] | 5890 | Roumania | 854 | [1] | [1] | 854 1892 | Russia | 55996 | 3929 | 4328 | 64253 | Austria-Hungary | 7464 | 561 | 618 | 8643 | Roumania | 641 | 47 | 52 | 740 1893 | Russia | 20748 | 3025 | 1388 | 25161 | Austria-Hungary | 5612 | 519 | 232 | 6363 | Roumania | 493 | 43 | 19 | 555 1894 | Russia | 16331 | 2951 | 1465 | 20747 | Austria-Hungary | 5285 | 422 | 209 | 5916 | Roumania | 501 | 77 | 38 | 616 1895 | Russia | 14152 | 1983 | 592 | 16727 | Austria-Hungary | 5236 | 624 | 187 | 6047 | Roumania | 423 | 73 | 22 | 518 1896 | Russia | 17617 | 1538 | 1013 | 20168 | Austria-Hungary | 8380 | 875 | 576 | 9831 | Roumania | 644 | 60 | 40 | 744 1897 | Russia | 11106 | 1049 | 908 | 13063 | Austria-Hungary | 5010 | 355 | 307 | 5672 | Roumania | 456 | 32 | 28 | 516 1898 | Russia | 11581 | 1611 | 1757 | 14949 | Austria-Hungary | 6569 | 382 | 416 | 7367 | Roumania | 587 | 64 | 69 | 720 -------+-----------------+----------+------------+-----------+-------- Total | ------ | 380278 | 34781 | 17367 | 432426 -------+-----------------+----------+------------+-----------+-------- [1] See note to Tables IVa and IVb. For Tables VI and VII, see pp. 93 and 94. TABLE VIII JEWISH IMMIGRATION TO THE UNITED STATES, 1881 TO 1910, ABSOLUTE NUMBERS AND PERCENTAGES, BY DECADE AND COUNTRY OF NATIVITY -------------------+-----------------------+-------------------------- | Absolute numbers | Percentages Country of +-------+---------------+-------+-----+-----+------ nativity | | 1881- | 1891- | 1901- |1881-|1891-|1901- | Total | 1890 | 1900 | 1910 |1890 |1900 |1910 -------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----+-----+------ Russia |1119059| 135003| 279811| 704245| 69.9| 71.1| 72.1 Austria-Hungary | 281150| 44619| 83720| 152811| 23.1| 21.3| 15.7 Roumania | 67057| 6967| 12789| 47301| 3.6| 3.2| 4.8 United Kingdom | 42589| -- | -- | 42589| --| --| 4.4 Germany | 20454| 5354| 8827| 6273| 2.8| 2.3| .7 British North | | | | | | | America | 9701| -- | -- | 9701| --| --| 1.0 Turkey | 5081| -- | -- | 5081| --| --| .5 France | 2273| -- | -- | 2273| --| --| .2 All others | 15436| 1078| 8369| 5989| .6| 2.1| .6 -------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----+------------ Total |1562800| 193021| 393516| 976263|100.0|100.0|100.0 -------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----+------------ TABLE IX JEWISH IMMIGRATION FROM RUSSIA, 1881 TO 1910, BY YEAR AND PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL ARRIVING EACH YEAR -------+-------------------+------------------- Year | Jewish immigrants | Per cent of total -------+-------------------+------------------- 1881 | 3125 | 0.3 1882 | 10489 | 0.9 1883 | 6144 | 0.5 1884 | 7867 | 0.7 1885 | 10648 | 1.0 1886 | 14092 | 1.3 1887 | 23103 | 2.1 1888 | 20216 | 1.8 1889 | 18338 | 1.6 1890 | 20981 | 1.9 1891 | 43457 | 3.9 1892 | 64253 | 5.7 1893 | 25161 | 2.2 1894 | 20747 | 1.9 1895 | 16727 | 1.5 1896 | 20168 | 1.8 1897 | 13063 | 1.2 1898 | 14949 | 1.3 1899 | 24275 | 2.2 1900 | 37011 | 3.3 1901 | 37660 | 3.4 1902 | 37846 | 3.4 1903 | 47689 | 4.3 1904 | 77544 | 6.9 1905 | 92388 | 8.2 1906 | 125234 | 11.2 1907 | 114932 | 10.3 1908 | 71978 | 6.4 1909 | 39150 | 3.5 1910 | 59824 | 5.3 -------+-------------------+------------------- Total | 1119059 | 100.0 -------+-------------------+------------------- TABLE X JEWISH IMMIGRATION FROM RUSSIA, 1887 to 1910, BY DECADE AND PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL ARRIVING EACH DECADE -----------+-------------------+------------------- Decade | Jewish immigrants | Per cent of total -----------+-------------------+------------------- 1881-1890 | 135003 | 12.1 1891-1900 | 279811 | 25.0 1901-1910 | 704245 | 62.9 -----------+-------------------+------------------- Total | 1119059 | 100.0 -----------+-------------------+------------------- TABLE XI JEWISH IMMIGRATION FROM RUSSIA AT THE PORT OF NEW YORK, JANUARY 1, 1891 TO DECEMBER 31, 1891, AND JANUARY 1, 1892 TO DECEMBER 31, 1892, BY MONTH (From reports of United Hebrew Charities of New York City, 1891 and 1892) ---------------+----------------------- | Jewish immigrants +----------+------------ Month | 1891 | 1892 ---------------+----------+------------ January | 2179 | 3276 February | 2185 | 3057 March | 3150 | 2397 April | 2714 | 1468 May | 1225 | 1620 June | 8667 | 4028 July | 8253 | 5673 August | 9109 | 4842 September | 9422 | 1729 October | 5255 | 416 November | 3792 | 121 December | 4310 | 198 ---------------+----------+------------ Total | 60261 | 28834 ---------------+----------+------------ TABLE XII TOTAL IMMIGRATION FROM RUSSIA AND JEWISH IMMIGRATION FROM RUSSIA, 1881 TO 1910, AND PERCENTAGE JEWISH OF TOTAL --------+------------+------------+------------- | Total | Jewish | Per cent of | immigrants | immigrants | total --------+------------+------------+------------- 1881 | 5041 | 3125 | Est. 1882 | 16918 | 10489 | 1883 | 9909 | 6144 | at 1884 | 12689 | 7867 | 1885 | 17158 | 10648 | 62.0 1886 | 17800 | 14092 | 79.2 1887 | 30766 | 23103 | 75.1 1888 | 33487 | 20316 | 60.4 1889 | 33916 | 18338 | 54.1 1890 | 35598 | 20981 | 58.9 | | | 1891 | 47426 | 43457 | 91.6 1892 | 81511 | 64253 | 78.8 1893 | 42310 | 25161 | 59.5 1894 | 39278 | 20747 | 52.8 1895 | 35907 | 16727 | 43.2 1896 | 51435 | 20168 | 39.2 1897 | 25816 | 13063 | 50.6 1898 | 29828 | 14949 | 50.1 1899 | 60982 | 24275 | 39.8 1900 | 90787 | 37011 | 40.8 | | | 1901 | 85257 | 37660 | 44.2 1902 | 107347 | 37846 | 35.3 1903 | 136093 | 47689 | 35.0 1904 | 145141 | 77544 | 53.4 1905 | 184897 | 92388 | 50.0 1906 | 215665 | 125234 | 58.1 1907 | 258943 | 114932 | 44.4 1908 | 156711 | 71978 | 45.9 1909 | 120460 | 39150 | 32.5 1910 | 186792 | 59824 | 32.1 --------+------------+------------+------------- Total | 2315868 | 1119059 | 48.3 --------+------------+------------+------------- TABLE XIII TOTAL IMMIGRATION FROM RUSSIA AND JEWISH IMMIGRATION FROM RUSSIA, 1881 TO 1910, BY DECADE, AND PERCENTAGE JEWISH OF TOTAL ------------+------------+------------+------------- Decade | Total | Jewish | Per cent of | immigrants | immigrants | total ------------+------------+------------+------------- 1881-1890 | 213282 | 135003 | 63.3 1891-1900 | 505280 | 279811 | 55.4 1901-1910 | 1597306 | 704245 | 44.1 ------------+------------+------------+------------- Total | 2315868 | 1119059 | 48.3 ------------+------------+------------+------------- TABLE XIV IMMIGRATION TO THE UNITED STATES FROM THE RUSSIAN EMPIRE, 1899 TO 1910, BY ANNUAL PERCENTAGE OF CONTRIBUTION OF PRINCIPAL PEOPLES[1] -------+---------+--------+--------+------------+--------+--------- | Finnish | German | Jewish | Lithuanian | Polish | Russian -------+---------+--------+--------+------------+--------+--------- 1899 | 9.9 | 8.8 | 39.8 | 11.2 | 25.4 | 2.7 1900 | 13.8 | 5.9 | 40.8 | 11.3 | 24.8 | 1.3 1901 | 11.7 | 6.6 | 44.2 | 10.0 | 25.2 | .8 1902 | 12.9 | 8.0 | 35.3 | 9.3 | 31.5 | 1.4 1903 | 13.8 | 7.7 | 35.0 | 10.6 | 29.1 | 2.6 1904 | 6.9 | 4.9 | 53.4 | 8.8 | 22.4 | 2.7 1905 | 9.0 | 3.6 | 50.0 | 9.5 | 25.5 | 1.8 1906 | 6.2 | 4.8 | 58.1 | 6.4 | 21.4 | 2.4 1907 | 5.5 | 5.2 | 44.4 | 9.6 | 28.2 | 6.2 1908 | 4.0 | 6.4 | 45.9 | 8.5 | 24.2 | 10.4 1909 | 9.3 | 6.5 | 32.5 | 12.1 | 31.4 | 7.6 1910 | 8.0 | 5.4 | 32.1 | 11.6 | 34.1 | 7.9 -------+---------+--------+--------+------------+--------+--------- Total | 8.5 | 5.8 | 43.8 | 9.6 | 27.0 | 4.4 -------+---------+--------+--------+------------+--------+--------- [1] From Immigration Commission: _Emigration Conditions in Europe_, p. 338. TABLE XV RATE OF IMMIGRATION OF PEOPLES PREDOMINANT IN THE IMMIGRATION FROM RUSSIA, 1899 TO 1910[1] ------------+--------------------+-------------------+---------------- | |Average annual | |Population in Russia|immigration to U.S.| Ratio of People |1897 and in Finland |from Russia and | immigration | 1900 combined |Finland 1899-1910 | to population ------------+--------------------+-------------------+---------------- Jewish | 5082343[2] | 63794 | 1 to 79 Finnish | 2352990 | 12348 | 1 to 191 Polish | 7865437 | 39282 | 1 to 200 German | 1721387 | 8401 | 1 to 205 Lithuanian | 3077436 | 14062 | 1 to 212 Swedish | 349733 | 1135 | 1 to 308 Russian | 75434753 | 6530 | 1 to 11552 ------------+--------------------+-------------------+---------------- [1] Ibid., p. 339. [2] The figure for the Jewish population in Russia as given in _Emigration Conditions in Europe_, p. 339, is incorrect. See Goldberg, _Jüdische Statistik_, pages 266 and 270. TABLE XVI RATE OF JEWISH IMMIGRATION FROM RUSSIA, PER 10000 OF JEWISH POPULATION, 1899 TO 1910 ------+---------------------- Year | Ratio of immigration ------+---------------------- 1899 | 47 1900 | 72 1901 | 74 1902 | 74 1903 | 93 1904 | 152 1905 | 181 1906 | 246 1907 | 226 1908 | 141 1909 | 77 1910 | 117 ------+---------------------- Total | 125 ------+---------------------- TABLE XVII JEWISH IMMIGRATION FROM ROUMANIA, 1881 TO 1910, BY DECADE AND PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL ARRIVING EACH DECADE -----------+-------------------+------------------- Decade | Jewish immigrants | Per cent of total -----------+-------------------+------------------- 1881-1890 | 6067 | 10.4 1891-1900 | 12789 | 19.1 1901-1910 | 47301 | 70.5 -----------+-------------------+------------------- Total | 67057 | 100.0 -----------+-------------------+------------------- TABLE XVIII JEWISH IMMIGRATION FROM ROUMANIA, 1881 TO 1910, BY YEAR AND PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL ARRIVING EACH YEAR --------+-------------------+------------------- Year | Jewish immigrants | Per cent of total --------+-------------------+------------------- 1881 | 30 | [1] 1882 | 65 | .1 1883 | 77 | .1 1884 | 238 | .3 1885 | 803 | 1.2 1886 | 518 | .8 1887 | 2063 | 3.1 1888 | 1653 | 2.5 1889 | 1058 | 1.6 1890 | 462 | .7 | | 1891 | 854 | 1.3 1892 | 740 | 1.1 1893 | 555 | .8 1894 | 616 | .9 1895 | 518 | .8 1896 | 744 | 1.1 1897 | 516 | .8 1898 | 720 | 1.1 1899 | 1343 | 2.0 1900 | 6183 | 9.2 | | 1901 | 6827 | 10.2 1902 | 6589 | 9.8 1903 | 8562 | 12.8 1904 | 6446 | 9.6 1905 | 3854 | 5.7 1906 | 3872 | 5.8 1907 | 3605 | 5.4 1908 | 4455 | 6.6 1909 | 1390 | 2.1 1910 | 1701 | 2.5 --------+-------------------+------------------- Total | 67057 | 100.0 --------+-------------------+------------------- [1] Below one-tenth per cent. TABLE XIX TOTAL IMMIGRATION FROM ROUMANIA AND JEWISH IMMIGRATION FROM ROUMANIA, 1899 TO 1910, AND PERCENTAGE JEWISH OF TOTAL --------+----------------+-----------------+------------------- Year |Total immigrants|Jewish immigrants|Per cent of total --------+----------------+-----------------+------------------- 1899 | 1606 | 1343 | 83.6 1900 | 6459 | 6183 | 95.7 1901 | 7155 | 6827 | 95.4 1902 | 7196 | 6589 | 91.6 1903 | 9310 | 8562 | 91.9 1904 | 7087 | 6446 | 91.0 1905 | 4437 | 3854 | 86.8 1906 | 4476 | 3872 | 86.5 1907 | 4384 | 3605 | 82.2 1908 | 5228 | 4455 | 85.2 1909 | 1590 | 1390 | 87.4 1910 | 2145 | 1701 | 79.3 --------+----------------+-----------------+------------------- Total | 61073 | 54827 | 89.8 --------+----------------+-----------------+------------------- TABLE XX RATE OF JEWISH IMMIGRATION FROM ROUMANIA, PER 10000 OF JEWISH POPULATION, 1899 TO 1910[1] --------+----------------------- Year | Ratio of immigration --------+----------------------- 1899 | 51 1900 | 238 1901 | 262 1902 | 253 1903 | 329 1904 | 246 1905 | 148 1906 | 149 1907 | 138 1908 | 171 1909 | 53 1910 | 65 --------+----------------------- Total | 175 --------+----------------------- [1] For Jewish population in Roumania _cf._ Ruppin, _The Jews of To-Day_, p. 39. TABLE XXI JEWISH IMMIGRATION FROM AUSTRIA-HUNGARY, 1881 TO 1910, BY DECADE AND PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL ARRIVING EACH DECADE -----------+-------------------+------------------- Decade | Jewish immigrants | Per cent of total -----------+-------------------+------------------- 1881-1890 | 44619 | 15.9 1891-1900 | 83720 | 29.8 1901-1910 | 152811 | 54.3 -----------+-------------------+------------------- Total | 281150 | 100.0 -----------+-------------------+------------------- TABLE XXII JEWISH IMMIGRATION FROM AUSTRIA-HUNGARY, 1881 TO 1910, BY YEAR, AND PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL ARRIVING EACH YEAR ----------+-------------------+------------------- Year | Jewish immigrants | Per cent of total ----------+-------------------+------------------- 1881 | 2537 | .9 1882 | 2648 | .9 1883 | 2510 | .9 1884 | 3340 | 1.2 1885 | 3938 | 1.4 1886 | 5326 | 1.9 1887 | 6898 | 2.4 1888 | 5985 | 2.1 1889 | 4998 | 1.8 1890 | 6439 | 2.3 | | 1891 | 5890 | 2.1 1892 | 8643 | 3.1 1893 | 6363 | 2.3 1894 | 5916 | 2.1 1895 | 6047 | 2.2 1896 | 9831 | 3.5 1897 | 5672 | 2.0 1898 | 7367 | 2.6 1899 | 11071 | 3.9 1900 | 16920 | 6.0 | | 1901 | 13006 | 4.6 1902 | 12848 | 4.6 1903 | 18759 | 6.7 1904 | 20211 | 7.2 1905 | 17352 | 6.2 1906 | 14884 | 5.3 1907 | 18885 | 6.7 1908 | 15293 | 5.4 1909 | 8431 | 3.0 1910 | 13142 | 4.7 ----------+-------------------+------------------- Total | 281150 | 100.0 ----------+-------------------+------------------- TABLE XXIII TOTAL AND JEWISH IMMIGRATION FROM AUSTRIA-HUNGARY, 1881 TO 1910, BY DECADE AND PERCENTAGE JEWISH OF TOTAL -----------+----------------+-----------------+------------------ Decade |Total immigrants|Jewish immigrants|Per cent of total -----------+----------------+-----------------+------------------ 1881-1890 | 353719 | 44619 | 12.6 1891-1900 | 592707 | 83720 | 14.1 1901-1910 | 2145266 | 158811 | 7.4 -----------+----------------+-----------------+------------------ Total | 3091692 | 281150 | 9.1 -----------+----------------+-----------------+------------------ TABLE XXIV TOTAL AND JEWISH IMMIGRATION FROM AUSTRIA-HUNGARY, 1881 TO 1910, AND PERCENTAGE JEWISH OF TOTAL -------------------------------------------------------------------- Year | Total immigrants | Jewish immigrants | Per cent of total ----------+------------------+-------------------+------------------ 1881 | 27935 | 2537 | Est. 1882 | 29150 | 2648 | at 1883 | 27625 | 2510 | 1884 | 36571 | 3340 | 9.0 1885 | 27309 | 3938 | 14.4 1886 | 28680 | 5326 | 18.6 1887 | 40265 | 6898 | 17.1 1888 | 45811 | 5985 | 13.1 1889 | 34174 | 4998 | 14.6 1890 | 56199 | 6439 | 11.5 | | | 1891 | 71042 | 5890 | 8.3 1892 | 76937 | 8643 | 11.2 1893 | 57420 | 6363 | 11.1 1894 | 38638 | 5916 | 15.3 1895 | 33401 | 6047 | 18.1 1896 | 65103 | 9831 | 15.1 1897 | 33031 | 5672 | 17.2 1898 | 39797 | 7367 | 18.5 1899 | 62401 | 11071 | 17.7 1900 | 114847 | 16920 | 14.7 | | | 1901 | 113390 | 13006 | 11.5 1902 | 171989 | 12848 | 7.5 1903 | 206011 | 18759 | 9.1 1904 | 177156 | 20211 | 11.4 1905 | 275693 | 17352 | 6.3 1906 | 265138 | 14884 | 5.6 1907 | 338452 | 18885 | 5.6 1908 | 168509 | 15293 | 9.1 1909 | 170191 | 8431 | 5.0 1910 | 258737 | 13142 | 5.1 ----------+------------------+-------------------+------------------ Total | 3091692 | 281150 | 9.1 -------------------------------------------------------------------- TABLE XXV PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL IMMIGRATION FROM AUSTRIA-HUNGARY CONTRIBUTED BY PRINCIPAL PEOPLES, 1899 TO 1910[1] --------+--------+--------+----------- Year | Polish | Jewish | Ruthenian --------+--------+--------+----------- 1899 | 18.7 | 17.7 | 2.2 1900 | 19.9 | 14.7 | 2.5 1901 | 17.9 | 11.5 | 4.7 1902 | 18.9 | 7.5 | 4.4 1903 | 18.2 | 9.1 | 4.8 1904 | 17.1 | 11.4 | 5.3 1905 | 18.4 | 6.3 | 5.2 1906 | 16.5 | 5.6 | 5.9 1907 | 17.6 | 5.6 | 7.0 1908 | 15.7 | 9.1 | 7.2 1909 | 21.4 | 5.0 | 9.0 1910 | 22.6 | 4.9 | 10.2 --------+--------+--------+----------- Total | 18.6 | 7.8 | 6.2 --------+--------+--------+----------- [1] From _Emigration Conditions in Europe_, p. 373. TABLE XXVI RATE OF JEWISH IMMIGRATION FROM AUSTRIA-HUNGARY, PER 10000 OF JEWISH POPULATION, 1899 TO 1910[1] --------+---------------------- | Ratio of immigration --------+---------------------- 1899 | 53 1900 | 83 1901 | 63 1902 | 62 1903 | 90 1904 | 97 1905 | 84 1906 | 72 1907 | 91 1908 | 74 1909 | 41 1910 | 63 --------+---------------------- Total | 74 --------+---------------------- [1] For Jewish population in Austria-Hungary _cf._ Ruppin, _The Jews of To-Day_, pp. 38-39. TABLE XXVII JEWISH IMMIGRATION, 1881 TO 1910, BY DECADE -----------+-------------------+------------------- Decade | Jewish immigrants | Per cent of total -----------+-------------------+------------------- 1881-1890 | 193021 | 12.3 1891-1900 | 393516 | 25.2 1900-1910 | 976263 | 62.5 -----------+-------------------+------------------- Total | 1562800 | 100.0 -----------+-------------------+------------------- TABLE XXVIII JEWISH IMMIGRATION, 1881 TO 1910, BY SIX-YEAR PERIOD -----------+-------------------+------------------- Period | Jewish immigrants | Per cent of total -----------+-------------------+------------------- 1881-1886 | 77105 | 4.9 1887-1892 | 243687 | 15.6 1893-1898 | 167566 | 10.7 1899-1904 | 396404 | 25.4 1905-1910 | 678038 | 43.4 -----------+-------------------+------------------- Total | 1562800 | 100.0 -----------+-------------------+------------------- TABLE XXIX JEWISH IMMIGRATION TO THE UNITED STATES, 1881 TO 1910 -------+-------------------+-------------------- Year | Jewish immigrants | Per cent of total -------+-------------------+-------------------- 1881 | 5692 | .4 1882 | 13202 | .8 1883 | 8731 | .5 1884 | 11445 | .7 1885 | 16862 | 1.1 1886 | 21173 | 1.3 1887 | 33044 | 2.1 1888 | 28881 | 1.8 1889 | 25352 | 1.6 1890 | 28639 | 1.8 | | 1891 | 51398 | 3.3 1892 | 76373 | 4.9 1893 | 35322 | 2.3 1894 | 29179 | 1.9 1895 | 26191 | 1.7 1896 | 32848 | 2.1 1897 | 20372 | 1.3 1898 | 23654 | 1.5 1899 | 37415 | 2.4 1900 | 60764 | 3.9 | | 1901 | 58008 | 3.7 1902 | 57688 | 3.7 1903 | 76203 | 4.9 1904 | 106236 | 6.8 1905 | 129910 | 8.3 1906 | 153748 | 9.9 1907 | 149182 | 9.6 1908 | 103387 | 6.6 1909 | 57551 | 3.7 1910 | 84260 | 5.4 -------+-------------------+-------------------- Total | 1562800 | 100.0 -------+-------------------+-------------------- TABLE XXX TOTAL IMMIGRATION AND JEWISH IMMIGRATION, 1881 TO 1910, BY DECADE AND PERCENTAGE JEWISH OF TOTAL -----------+------------+------------+---------- Decade | Total | Jewish | Per cent | immigrants | immigrants | of total -----------+------------+------------+---------- 1881-1890 | 5246613 | 193021 | 3.7 1891-1900 | 3687564 | 393516 | 10.7 1901-1910 | 8795386 | 976263 | 11.1 -----------+------------+------------+---------- Total | 17729563 | 1562800 | 8.8 -----------+------------+------------+---------- TABLE XXXI TOTAL IMMIGRATION AND JEWISH IMMIGRATION, 1881 TO 1910, BY YEAR AND PERCENTAGE JEWISH OF TOTAL -----------+------------+------------+----------- Year | Total | Jewish | Per cent | immigrants | immigrants | of total -----------+------------+------------+----------- 1881 | 669431 | 5692 | .9 1882 | 788992 | 13202 | 1.7 1883 | 603322 | 8731 | 1.4 1884 | 518592 | 11445 | 2.2 1885 | 395346 | 16862 | 4.3 1886 | 334203 | 21173 | 6.3 1887 | 490109 | 33044 | 6.7 1888 | 546889 | 28881 | 5.3 1889 | 444427 | 25352 | 5.7 1890 | 455302 | 28639 | 6.3 | | | 1891 | 560319 | 51398 | 9.2 1892 | 579663 | 76373 | 13.2 1893 | 439730 | 35322 | 8.0 1894 | 285631 | 29179 | 10.2 1895 | 258536 | 26191 | 10.1 1896 | 343267 | 32848 | 9.6 1897 | 230832 | 20372 | 8.8 1898 | 229229 | 23654 | 10.7 1899 | 311715 | 37415 | 12.0 1900 | 448572 | 60764 | 13.5 | | | 1901 | 487918 | 58098 | 12.1 1902 | 648743 | 57688 | 8.9 1903 | 857046 | 76203 | 8.9 1904 | 812870 | 106236 | 11.8 1905 | 1026499 | 129910 | 12.6 1906 | 1100735 | 153748 | 13.4 1907 | 1285349 | 149182 | 11.6 1908[1] | 782870 | 103387 | 13.2 1909[1] | 751786 | 57551 | 7.7 1910[1] | 1041570 | 84260 | 8.1 -----------+------------+------------+----------- Total | 17729563 | 1562800 | 8.8 -----------+------------+------------+----------- [1] Only immigrant aliens taken these years. TABLE XXXII TOTAL AND JEWISH IMMIGRATION, 1881 TO 1910, BY NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF INCREASE OR DECREASE --------+-------------------+------------------- | Total immigrants | Jewish immigrants +-------------------+------------------- Year | Increase (+) | Increase (+) | or decrease (-) | or decrease (-) +----------+--------+---------+--------- | Number | Per | Number | Per | | cent | | cent --------+----------+--------+---------+--------- 1881 | -- | -- | -- | -- 1882 | +119561 | +17.9 | + 7509 | +131.9 1883 | -185670 | -23.5 | - 4471 | - 33.9 1884 | - 84730 | -14.0 | + 2714 | + 31.1 1885 | -123246 | -23.8 | + 5417 | + 47.3 1886 | - 61143 | -15.5 | + 4491 | + 26.7 1887 | +155906 | +46.7 | +11871 | + 56.1 1888 | + 56780 | +11.6 | + 4163 | + 12.6 1889 | -102462 | -18.7 | - 3529 | - 12.2 1890 | + 10875 | + 2.4 | + 3287 | + 13.0 | | | | 1891 | +105017 | +20.9 | +22759 | + 79.5 1892 | + 19344 | + 3.4 | +24975 | + 48.6 1893 | -139933 | -24.1 | -39051 | - 51.1 1894 | -154099 | -35.0 | - 6143 | - 17.4 1895 | - 27095 | - 9.5 | - 2988 | - 10.2 1896 | + 84731 | +32.8 | + 6657 | + 25.4 1897 | -112435 | -32.8 | -12476 | - 38.0 1898 | - 1533 | - .7 | + 3282 | + 16.1 1899 | + 82416 | +36.0 | +13761 | + 58.2 1900 | +136857 | +43.9 | +23349 | + 62.4 | | | | 1901 | + 39346 | + 8.8 | - 2666 | - 4.4 1902 | +160825 | +33.0 | - 410 | - .7 1903 | +208303 | +32.1 | +18515 | + 32.1 1904 | - 44176 | - 5.2 | +30033 | + 39.4 1905 | +213629 | +26.3 | +23674 | + 22.1 1906 | + 74236 | + 7.2 | +23838 | + 18.2 1907 | +184614 | +16.8 | - 4566 | - 3.0 1908 | -502479 | -39.1 | -45795 | - 30.7 1909 | - 31084 | - 4.0 | -45836 | - 44.3 1910 | +289784 | +38.5 | +26709 | + 46.4 --------+----------+--------+---------+--------- TABLE XXXIII SEX OF JEWISH IMMIGRANTS, 1899 TO 1910[1] -------+---------+-----------------+--------------- | | Number | Per cent Year | Total +--------+--------+------+-------- | | Male | Female | Male | Female -------+---------+--------+--------+------+-------- 1899 | 37415 | 21153 | 16262 | 56.5 | 43.5 1900 | 60764 | 36330 | 24434 | 59.8 | 40.2 1901 | 58098 | 32345 | 25753 | 55.7 | 44.3 1902 | 57688 | 32737 | 24951 | 56.7 | 44.3 1903 | 76203 | 43985 | 32218 | 57.7 | 42.3 1904 | 106236 | 65040 | 41196 | 61.2 | 38.8 1905 | 129910 | 82076 | 47834 | 63.2 | 36.8 1906 | 153748 | 80086 | 73662 | 52.1 | 47.9 1907 | 149182 | 80530 | 68652 | 54.0 | 46.0 1908 | 103387 | 56277 | 47110 | 54.4 | 45.6 1909 | 57551 | 31057 | 26494 | 54.0 | 46.0 1910 | 84260 | 46206 | 38054 | 54.8 | 45.2 -------+---------+--------+--------+------+-------- Total | 1074442 | 607822 | 466620 | 56.6 | 43.4 -------+---------+--------+--------+------+-------- [1] From _Reports of Commissioner-General of Immigration_. TABLE XXXIV SEX OF JEWISH IMMIGRANT ADULTS[1] AT THE PORT OF NEW YORK, 1886 TO 1898[2] -------+---------+-----------------+--------------- | | Number | Per cent Year | Total +--------+--------+------+-------- | | Male | Female | Male | Female -------+---------+--------+--------+------+-------- 1886 | 14212 | 9598 | 4614 | 67.5 | 32.5 1887 | 22223 | 13872 | 8351 | 62.4 | 37.6 1888 | 19456 | 11691 | 7765 | 60.1 | 39.9 1889 | 17155 | 9946 | 7209 | 58.0 | 42.0 1890 | 19449 | 11524 | 7925 | 59.3 | 40.7 1891 | 33343 | 20980 | 12363 | 62.9 | 37.1 1892 | 43155 | 25338 | 17817 | 58.7 | 41.3 1893 | 18314 | 9715 | 8599 | 53.0 | 47.0 1894 | 13142 | 6404 | 6738 | 48.7 | 51.3 1895 | 12366 | 6275 | 6091 | 50.7 | 49.3 1896 | 17052 | 9703 | 7349 | 56.9 | 43.1 1897 | 10226 | 5447 | 4779 | 53.3 | 46.7 1898 | 11530 | 6560 | 4970 | 56.9 | 43.1 -------+---------+--------+--------+------+-------- Total | 251623 | 147053 | 104570 | 58.4 | 41.6 -------+---------+--------+--------+------+-------- [1] Sixteen years of age and over. [2] From _Reports of United Hebrew Charities of N.Y. City_. TABLE XXXV AGE OF JEWISH IMMIGRANTS, 1899 TO 1910[1] ------+---------+--------------------------+------------------------ | | Number | Percentage Year| Total +--------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------- | | Under | 14 to | 45 and | Under | 14 to | 45 and | | 14 | 44 | over | 14 | 44 | over ------+---------+--------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------- 1899 | 37415 | 8987 | 26019 | 2409 | 24.0 | 69.5 | 6.5 1900 | 60764 | 13092 | 44239 | 3433 | 21.6 | 72.8 | 5.6 1901 | 58098 | 14731 | 39830 | 3537 | 25.4 | 68.6 | 6.0 1902 | 57688 | 15312 | 38937 | 3439 | 26.5 | 67.5 | 6.0 1903 | 76203 | 19044 | 53074 | 4085 | 25.0 | 69.6 | 5.4 1904 | 106236 | 23529 | 77224 | 5483 | 22.1 | 72.7 | 5.2 1905 | 129910 | 28553 | 95964 | 5393 | 22.0 | 73.9 | 4.1 1906 | 153748 | 43620 | 101875 | 8253 | 28.4 | 66.2 | 5.4 1907 | 149182 | 37696 | 103779 | 7707 | 25.3 | 69.5 | 5.2 1908 | 103387 | 26013 | 71388 | 5986 | 25.1 | 69.1 | 5.8 1909 | 57551 | 15210 | 38465 | 3876 | 26.5 | 66.7 | 6.8 1910 | 84260 | 21869 | 57191 | 5200 | 26.0 | 67.9 | 6.1 ------+---------+--------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------- Total| 1074442 | 267656 | 747985 | 58801 | 24.9 | 69.6 | 5.5 ------+---------+--------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------- [1] From _Reports of Commissioner-General of Immigration_. TABLE XXXVI AGE OF JEWISH IMMIGRANTS AT THE PORT OF NEW YORK, 1886 TO 1898[1] -------+--------+--------------------+--------------------- | | Number | Percentage Year | Total +--------+-----------+--------+------------ | | Adults |Children[2]| Adults |Children[2] -------+--------+--------+-----------+--------+------------ 1886 | 19548 | 14212 | 5336 | 72.7 | 27.3 1887 | 30866 | 22223 | 8643 | 72.0 | 28.0 1888 | 26946 | 19456 | 7490 | 72.2 | 27.8 1889 | 23958 | 17155 | 6803 | 71.6 | 28.4 1890 | 26963 | 19449 | 7514 | 72.1 | 27.9 1891 | 47098 | 33343 | 13755 | 70.8 | 29.2 1892 | 66544 | 43155 | 23389 | 64.8 | 35.2 1893 | 29059 | 18314 | 10745 | 63.0 | 37.0 1894 | 23444 | 13142 | 10302 | 56.1 | 43.9 1895 | 21422 | 12366 | 9056 | 57.7 | 42.3 1896 | 27846 | 17052 | 10794 | 61.2 | 38.8 1897 | 17362 | 10226 | 7136 | 58.9 | 41.1 1898 | 19222 | 11530 | 7692 | 60.0 | 40.0 -------+--------+--------+-----------+--------+------------ Total | 380278 | 251623 | 128655 | 66.2 | 33.8 -------+--------+--------+-----------+--------+------------ [1] From _Reports of United Hebrew Charities of N.Y. City_. [2] Children under sixteen. TABLE XXXVII SEX OF TOTAL AND JEWISH IMMIGRANTS, 1899 TO 1910[1] -------+-------------------+------------------ | Total immigrants |Jewish immigrants +-------------------+------------------ Year | Per cent | Per cent +--------+----------+--------+--------- | Male | Female | Male | Female -------+--------+----------+--------+--------- 1899 | 62.6 | 37.4 | 56.5 | 43.5 1900 | 67.8 | 32.2 | 59.8 | 40.2 1901 | 67.9 | 32.1 | 55.7 | 44.3 1902 | 71.9 | 28.1 | 56.7 | 43.3 1903 | 71.5 | 28.5 | 57.7 | 42.3 1904 | 67.6 | 32.4 | 61.2 | 38.8 1905 | 70.6 | 29.4 | 63.2 | 36.8 1906 | 69.5 | 30.5 | 52.1 | 47.9 1907 | 72.4 | 27.6 | 54.0 | 46.0 1908 | 64.8 | 35.2 | 54.4 | 45.6 1909 | 69.2 | 30.8 | 54.0 | 46.0 1910 | 70.7 | 29.3 | 54.8 | 45.2 -------+--------+----------+--------+--------- Total | 69.5 | 30.5 | 56.6 | 43.4 -------+--------+----------+--------+--------- [1] From _Reports of Commissioner-General of Immigration_. TABLE XXXVIII SEX[1] OF EUROPEAN IMMIGRANTS,[2] 1899 TO 1910[3] ------------------------+---------+-------------------+--------------- | | Number | Per cent People | Total |---------+---------+------+-------- | | Male | Female | Male | Female ------------------------+---------+---------+---------+------+-------- Irish | 439724 | 210686 | 229038 | 47.9 | 52.1 Jewish | 1074442 | 607822 | 466620 | 56.6 | 43.4 Bohemian and Moravian | 100189 | 57111 | 43078 | 57.0 | 43.0 French | 115783 | 67217 | 48566 | 58.1 | 41.9 German | 754375 | 448054 | 306321 | 59.4 | 40.6 English | 408614 | 251421 | 157193 | 61.5 | 38.5 Scandinavian | 586306 | 362467 | 223839 | 61.8 | 38.2 Scotch | 136842 | 86938 | 49904 | 63.5 | 36.5 Finnish | 151774 | 100289 | 51485 | 66.1 | 33.9 Polish | 949064 | 659267 | 289797 | 69.5 | 30.5 Slovak | 377527 | 266262 | 111265 | 70.5 | 29.5 Lithuanian | 175258 | 123777 | 51481 | 70.6 | 29.4 Magyar | 338151 | 244221 | 93930 | 72.2 | 27.8 Ruthenian | 147375 | 109614 | 37761 | 74.4 | 25.6 Italian North | 372668 | 291877 | 80791 | 78.3 | 21.7 Italian South | 1911933 | 1502968 | 408965 | 78.6 | 21.4 Croatian and Slovenian | 355543 | 284866 | 50677 | 84.9 | 15.1 Greek | 216962 | 206306 | 10656 | 95.1 | 4.9 ------------------------+---------+---------+---------+------+-------- Total[4] | 9555673 | 6641367 | 2914306 | 69.5 | 30.5 ------------------------+---------+---------+---------+------+-------- [1] Arranged in order of percentage of females. [2] Excluding all races with an immigration below 100,000. [3] From _Statistical Review of Immigration_, p. 49. [4] Total includes all races. TABLE XXXIX AGE[1] OF EUROPEAN IMMIGRANTS,[2] 1899 TO 1909. ----------------+----------------------------------+--------------------- | Number | Per cent People +--------+--------+--------+-------+------+------+------- | Total | Under | 14 to | 45 and| Under| 14 to|45 and | | 14 | 44 | over | 14 | 44 | over ----------------+--------+--------+--------+-------+------+------+------- Jewish | 990182| 245787 | 690794 | 53601 | 24.8 | 69.8 | 5.4 Bohemian and | | | | | | | Moravian | 91727| 18965 | 67487 | 5275 | 20.7 | 73.6 | 5.8 German | 682995| 116416 | 520437 | 46142 | 17.0 | 76.2 | 6.8 Scotch | 112230| 17157 | 85123 | 9950 | 15.3 | 75.8 | 8.9 English | 355116| 52459 | 262334 | 40323 | 14.8 | 73.9 | 11.4 Italian, South | 1719260| 201492 |1416075 |101693 | 11.7 | 82.4 | 5.9 Scandinavian | 534269| 51220 | 457306 | 25743 | 9.6 | 85.6 | 4.8 Polish | 820716| 77963 | 723226 | 19527 | 9.5 | 88.1 | 2.4 Slovak | 345111| 32157 | 302399 | 10555 | 9.3 | 87.6 | 3.1 Finnish | 136038| 12623 | 119771 | 3644 | 9.3 | 88.0 | 2.7 Italian, North | 341888| 30645 | 297442 | 13801 | 9.0 | 87.0 | 4.0 Magyar | 310049| 27312 | 270376 | 12361 | 8.8 | 87.2 | 4.0 Lithuanian | 152544| 12004 | 137880 | 2660 | 7.9 | 90.4 | 1.7 Irish | 401342| 20247 | 363797 | 17298 | 5.0 | 90.6 | 4.3 Ruthenian | 119468| 5537 | 110705 | 3226 | 4.6 | 92.7 | 2.7 Croatian and | | | | | | | Slovenian | 295981| 12711 | 273685 | 9585 | 4.3 | 92.5 | 3.2 Greek | 177827| 7314 | 168250 | 2263 | 4.1 | 94.6 | 1.3 ----------------+--------+--------+--------+-------+------+------+------- Total[3] | 8213034|1013974 |6786506 |412554 | 12.3 | 82.6 | 5.0 ----------------+--------+--------+--------+-------+------+------+------- [1] Arranged in order of highest percentage of children. [2] Excluding all races with an immigration below 100,000, except the Bohemian and Moravian. [3] Total includes all European races. TABLE XL SEX,[1] 1899 TO 1910, AND AGE,[2] 1899 TO 1909, OF SLAVIC AND JEWISH IMMIGRANTS ------------------------+-------------+------------------------------ |Sex--per cent| Age--per cent Group +------+------+--------+--------+------------ | Male |Female|Under 14|14 to 44|45 and over ------------------------+------+------+--------+--------+------------ Polish | 69.5 | 30.5 | 9.5 | 88.1 | 2.4 Ruthenian | 74.4 | 25.6 | 4.6 | 92.7 | 2.7 Russian | 85.0 | 15.0 | 7.5 | 90.0 | 2.5 Slovak | 70.5 | 29.5 | 9.3 | 87.6 | 3.1 Croatian and Slovenian | 84.9 | 15.1 | 4.3 | 92.5 | 3.2 Bohemian and | | | | | Moravian | 57.0 | 43.0 | 20.7 | 73.6 | 5.8 Jewish | 56.6 | 43.4 | 24.8 | 69.8 | 5.4 ------------------------+------+------+--------+--------+------------ [1] From _Statistical Review of Immigration_, p. 49. [2] From _Emigration Conditions in Europe_, p. 25. TABLE XLI A. SEX OF ROUMANIAN IMMIGRANTS,[1] 1899 TO 1910, AND OF IMMIGRANTS FROM ROUMANIA,[2] 1900 TO 1910 ----------------+------------------------------------------------ | | Number | Per cent Group | Total +---------+----------+--------+-------- | | Male | Female | Male | Female ----------------+---------+---------+----------+--------+-------- From Roumania | 59467 | 31968 | 27499 | 53.8 | 46.2 Roumanian | 82704 | 75238 | 7466 | 91.0 | 9.0 ----------------+---------+---------+----------+--------+-------- B. AGE OF JEWISH AND ROUMANIAN IMMIGRANTS[3] 1899 TO 1909 -----------+--------+--------------------+------------------------ | | Number | Per cent Race | Total +------+------+------+-------+-------+-------- | Number | Under| 14 to|45 and| Under | 14 to | 45 and | | 14 | 44 | over | 14 | 44 | over -----------+--------+------+------+------+-------+-------+-------- Jewish | 990182 |245787|690794| 53601| 24.8 | 69.8 | 5.4 Roumanian | 68505 | 1476| 63997| 3032| 2.2 | 93.4 | 4.4 -----------+--------+------+------+------+-------+-------+-------- [1] From _Statistical Review of Emigration_, pp. 44-48. [2] From _Emigration Conditions in Europe_, p. 23. [3] _Ibid._, p. 25. TABLE XLII SEX AND AGE OF "OLD" AND "NEW" IMMIGRATION (JEWISH EXCEPTED), AND OF JEWISH IMMIGRATION, 1899 TO 1909[1] ---------------------+-------+---------------+------------------------ | | Sex--per cent | Age--per cent Group | +------+--------+-------+-------+-------- | Total | | | Under | 14 to | 45 and | | Male | Female | 14 | 44 | over ---------------------+-------+------+--------+-------+-------+-------- Old immigration |2273782| 58.5 | 41.5 | 12.8 | 80.4 | 6.8 New immigration | | | | | | (Jewish excepted) |4949070| 76.3 | 23.7 | 9.7 | 86.2 | 4.1 Jewish immigration | 990182| 56.7 | 43.3 | 24.8 | 69.8 | 5.4 ---------------------+-------+------+--------+-------+-------+-------- [1] From _Emigration Conditions in Europe_, pp. 23-26. TABLE XLIII JEWISH IMMIGRATION AND EMIGRATION, 1908 TO 1912[1] --------+-----------+-----------+--------------- | Jewish | Jewish | Number Year | immigrant | emigrant | departed per | aliens[2] | aliens[3] | 100 admitted --------+-----------+-----------+--------------- 1908 | 103387 | 7702 | 7 1909 | 57551 | 6105 | 10 1910 | 84260 | 5689 | 6 1911 | 91223 | 6401 | 7 1912 | 80595 | 7418 | 9 --------+-----------+-----------+--------------- Total | 417016 | 33315 | 8 --------+-----------+-----------+--------------- [1] From _Reports of Commissioner-General of Immigration_. [2] See note, page 93. [3] Emigrant aliens are aliens whose permanent residence has been in the United States and who intend to reside permanently abroad. TABLE XLIV TOTAL AND JEWISH EMIGRANT ALIENS AND PERCENTAGE JEWISH IMMIGRANT ALIENS OF TOTAL IMMIGRANT ALIENS, 1908 TO 1912[1] -------+---------------------------+------------------------------ | Emigrant aliens | Immigrant aliens +--------+--------+---------+---------+---------+---------- Year | Total | Jewish |Per cent.| Total | Jewish |Per cent. |emigrant|emigrant|Jewish of|immigrant|immigrant|Jewish of | aliens | aliens | total | aliens | aliens | total -------+--------+--------+---------+---------+---------+---------- 1908 | 381044 | 7702 | 2.0 | 782870 | 103387 | 13.2 1909 | 225802 | 6105 | 2.7 | 751876 | 57551 | 7.7 1910 | 202436 | 5689 | 2.8 | 1041570 | 84260 | 8.1 1911 | 295666 | 6401 | 2.1 | 878587 | 91223 | 10.4 1912 | 333262 | 7418 | 2.2 | 838172 | 80595 | 9.5 -------+--------+--------+---------+---------+---------+---------- Total | 1438210| 33315 | 2.3 | 4293075 | 417016 | 9.7 -------+--------+--------+---------+---------+---------+---------- [1] From _Reports of Commissioner-General of Immigration_. TABLE XLV EUROPEAN IMMIGRANT ALIENS ADMITTED[1] AND EUROPEAN EMIGRANT ALIENS DEPARTED, 1908, 1909 AND 1910[2] -----------------+-----------------+------------------------------- |Immigrant aliens | Emigrant aliens departed | admitted | +--------+--------+--------+--------+------------- People | |Per cent| |Per cent| Number | Number |of total| Number |of total| departed | |admitted| |departed| for every | | | | |100 admitted -----------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+------------- Jewish | 236100 | 10.2 | 18543 | 2.5 | 8 Croatian and | | | | | Slovenian | 78658 | 3.4 | 44316 | 5.2 | 56 English | 101611 | 4.4 | 11152 | 1.5 | 11 German | 192644 | 8.3 | 35823 | 5.0 | 19 Greek | 86257 | 3.7 | 21196 | 2.9 | 25 Irish | 93090 | 4.0 | 5728 | .8 | 6 Italian, North | 77661 | 3.3 | 47870 | 6.7 | 62 Italian, South | 457414 | 19.8 | 255188 | 35.7 | 56 Lithuanian | 51129 | 2.2 | 7185 | 1.0 | 14 Magyar | 78910 | 3.4 | 50597 | 7.1 | 64 Polish | 269646 | 11.7 | 82080 | 11.4 | 30 Ruthenian | 55106 | 2.3 | 6681 | .9 | 12 Scandinavian | 113786 | 4.8 | 11193 | 1.5 | 10 Slovak | 70717 | 3.0 | 41383 | 5.8 | 59 -----------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+------------- Total[3] |2297338 | | 713356 | | 32 -----------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+------------- [1] All peoples with an inward movement of less than 50,000 excluded. [2] From _Emigration Conditions in Europe_, p. 41. [3] Total for all races, including Syrians. TABLE XLVI JEWISH IMMIGRATION AND EMIGRATION, RUSSIA, AUSTRIA-HUNGARY AND ROUMANIA, 1908 TO 1912[1] ---------+--------------------------------------------+ | Russia | +-------------+------------+-----------------+ | Immigrant | Emigrant | Number departed | Year | aliens | aliens | per 100 admitted| ---------+-------------+------------+-----------------+ 1908 | 71978 | 5439 | 7 | 1909 | 39150 | 3989 | 10 | 1910 | 59824 | 3295 | 5 | 1911 | 65472 | 3375 | 5 | 1912 | 58389 | 4448 | 7 | ---------+-------------+------------+-----------------+ Total | 294813 | 20546 | 7 | ---------+-------------+------------+-----------------+ ---------+--------------------------------------------+ | Austria-Hungary | +-------------+------------+-----------------+ | Immigrant | Emigrant | Number departed | Year | aliens | aliens | per 100 admitted| ---------+-------------+------------+-----------------+ 1908 | 15293 | 1758 | 11 | 1909 | 8431 | 1398 | 16 | 1910 | 13142 | 1409 | 10 | 1911 | 12785 | 1827 | 14 | 1912 | 10757 | 2121 | 19 | ---------+-------------+------------+-----------------+ Total | 60408 | 8513 | 14 | ---------+-------------+------------+-----------------+ ---------+--------------------------------------------- | Roumania +-------------+------------+-----------------+ | Immigrant | Emigrant | Number departed | Year | aliens | aliens | per 100 admitted| ---------+-------------+------------+-----------------+ 1908 | 4455 | 158 | 3 1909 | 1390 | 87 | 6 1910 | 1701 | 101 | 6 1911 | 2188 | 78 | 3 1912 | 1512 | 122 | 8 ---------+-------------+------------+------------------ Total | 11246 | 546 | 5 ---------+-------------+------------+------------------ [1] From _Reports of Commissioner-General of Immigration_. TABLE XLVII POLISH IMMIGRATION AND EMIGRATION, RUSSIA AND AUSTRIA-HUNGARY, 1908 TO 1912[1] ---------+--------------------------------------------+ | Russian Poles | +-------------+------------+-----------------+ | Immigrant | Emigrant | Number departed | Year | aliens | aliens | per 100 admitted| ---------+-------------+------------+-----------------+ 1908 | 73122 | 18187 | 25 | 1909 | 37770 | 8421 | 22 | 1910 | 63635 | 6705 | 10 | 1911 | 40193 | 12276 | 30 | 1912 | 51244 | 14701 | 28 | ---------+-------------+------------+-----------------+ Total | 265964 | 60290 | 22 | ---------+-------------+------------+-----------------+ ---------+--------------------------------------------+ | Austro-Hungarian Poles +-------------+------------+------------------ | Immigrant | Emigrant | Number departed Year | aliens | aliens | per 100 admitted ---------+-------------+------------+------------------ 1908 | 59719 | 28048 | 47 1909 | 336483 | 10292 | 28 1910 | 60565 | 9609 | 15 1911 | 27515 | 18499 | 67 1912 | 30649 | 22546 | 73 ---------+-------------+------------+------------------ Total | 214931 | 88994 | 41 ---------+-------------+------------+------------------ [1] From _Reports of Commissioner-General of Immigration_. TABLE XLVIII "OLD" AND "NEW" (JEWISH EXCEPTED) AND JEWISH IMMIGRATION AND EMIGRATION, 1908 TO 1910[1] ---------------------------+-----------+----------+-------------- | Immigrant | Emigrant | Number Class | aliens | aliens | departed per | | | 100 admitted ---------------------------+-----------+----------+-------------- Old Immigration | 599732 | 79664 | 13 New immigration (Jewish | | | excepted) | 1461506 | 615549 | 42 Jewish immigration | 236100 | 18543 | 8 ---------------------------+-----------+----------+-------------- Total | 2297338 | 713356 | 32 ---------------------------+-----------+----------+-------------- [1] From _Emigration Conditions in Europe_, p. 42. TABLE XLIX EUROPEAN IMMIGRANT ALIENS,[1] 1907, AND EUROPEAN EMIGRANT ALIENS, 1908[2] -----------------+---------------------+---------------------------- | Immigrant aliens | Emigrant aliens, 1908 | 1907 | +-----------+---------+--------+---------+-------- People | | | | | Number | Number |Per cent.| Number |Per cent.|departed | | of total| | of total| per 100 | | | | |admitted -----------------+-----------+---------+--------+---------+--------- Jewish | 149182 | 12.1 | 7702 | 2.0 | 5 Bulgarian, | 27174 | 2.2 | 5965 | 1.6 | 22 Servian and | | | | | Montenegrin | | | | | Croatian and | | | | | Slovenian | 47826 | 3.9 | 28584 | 7.5 | 60 English | 51126 | 4.1 | 5320 | 1.4 | 10 German | 92936 | 7.5 | 14418 | 3.8 | 15 Greek | 46283 | 3.7 | 6763 | 1.8 | 14 Irish | 38706 | 3.1 | 2441 | .6 | 6 Italian, North | 1564 | 4.2 | 19507 | 5.1 | 37 Italian, South | 242497 | 19.6 | 147828 | 38.8 | 60 Lithuanian | 25884 | 2.1 | 3388 | .9 | 13 Magyar | 60071 | 4.9 | 29276 | 7.7 | 48 Polish | 138033 | 11.2 | 46727 | 12.3 | 33 Scandinavian | 53425 | 4.3 | 5801 | 1.5 | 11 Slovak | 42041 | 3.4 | 23573 | 6.2 | 56 -----------------+-----------+---------+--------+---------+--------- Total | 1237341[3]| | 381044 | | 32 -----------------+-----------+---------+--------+---------+--------- [1] All peoples with an inward movement of less than 25,000 omitted. [2] From _Emigration Conditions in Europe_, pp. 39-40. [3] All European immigrants, including Syrians. TABLE L TOTAL EUROPEAN IMMIGRANTS ADMITTED[1] AND TOTAL OF THOSE ADMITTED DURING THIS PERIOD IN THE UNITED STATES PREVIOUSLY, 1899 TO 1910[2] --------------------------+----------+----------------------- | | In United States | | previously People | Number |---------+------------- | admitted | | Per cent of | | Number | admitted --------------------------+----------+---------+------------- Jewish | 1074442 | 22914 | 2.1 Bohemian and Moravian | 100189 | 4066 | 4.1 Croatian and Slovenian | 355542 | 43037 | 12.8 English | 408614 | 103828 | 25.4 Finnish | 151774 | 17189 | 11.3 French | 115783 | 33859 | 29.2 German | 754375 | 86458 | 11.5 Greek | 216962 | 12283 | 5.7 Irish | 439742 | 80636 | 18.3 Italian, North | 372668 | 56738 | 15.2 Italian, South | 1911933 | 262508 | 13.7 Lithuanian | 175258 | 6186 | 3.5 Magyar | 337351 | 39785 | 11.8 Polish | 949064 | 65155 | 6.9 Ruthenian | 147375 | 18492 | 12.5 Scandinavian | 586306 | 86700 | 14.8 Scotch | 136842 | 27684 | 20.2 Slovak | 377527 | 71889 | 19.0 --------------------------+----------+---------+------------- Total[3] | 9220066 | 1108948 | 12.0 --------------------------+----------+---------+------------- [1] All peoples with an immigration below 100,000 omitted. [2] From _Emigration Conditions in Europe_, p. 51. [3] Includes all European peoples entered and Syrians. TABLE LI OCCUPATIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF JEWISH IMMIGRANTS, 1899 TO 1910[1] -------------------+-----------+------------ Group | Number | Per cent -------------------+-----------+------------ No occupation | 484175 | 45.1 Skilled laborers | 395823 | 36.8 Professional | 7455 | .7 Miscellaneous | 186989 | 17.4 -------------------+-----------+------------ Total | 1074442 | 100.0 -------------------+-----------+------------ [1] From _Reports of Commissioner-General of Immigration_. TABLE LII JEWISH IMMIGRANTS REPORTING OCCUPATIONS, 1899 TO 1910[1] -------------------------+----------+------------ Group | Number | Per cent -------------------------+----------+------------ Professional | 7455 | 1.3 Skilled laborers | 395823 | 67.1 Laborers | 69444 | 11.8 Merchants and dealers | 31491 | 5.3 Farm laborers | 11460 | 1.9 Farmers | 1008 | .2 Miscellaneous | 8051 | 1.3 -------------------------+----------+------------ Total | 590267 | 100.0 -------------------------+----------+------------ [1] From _Reports of Commissioner-General of Immigration_. TABLE LIII JEWISH IMMIGRANTS ENGAGED IN PROFESSIONAL OCCUPATIONS[1] -------------------------------------+--------- Occupation | Number -------------------------------------+--------- Actors | 232 Architects | 108 Clergymen | 350 Editors | 84 Electricians | 359 Engineers | 484 Lawyers | 34 Literary and scientific persons | 385 Musicians | 1624 Officials (gov.) | 18 Physicians | 290 Sculptors and artists | 357 Teachers | 2192 Others | 938 -------------------------------------+--------- Total | 7455 -------------------------------------+--------- [1] From _Reports of Commissioner-General of Immigration_. TABLE LIV JEWISH IMMIGRANTS REPORTING SKILLED OCCUPATIONS, 1899 TO 1910[1] A. _Principal skilled occupations_ -----------------------------------+----------+------------ | | Per cent Occupation | Number | of total | | skilled -----------------------------------+----------+------------ Tailors | 145272 | 36.6 Carpenters, joiners, etc.[2] | 40901 | 10.3 Dressmakers and seamstresses[2] | 39482 | 10.0 Shoemakers | 23519 | 5.9 Clerks and accountants | 17066 | 4.3 Painters and glaziers | 16387 | 4.1 Butchers | 11413 | 2.9 Bakers | 10925 | 2.8 Locksmiths | 9385 | 2.4 Blacksmiths | 8517 | 2.2 -----------------------------------+----------+------------ Total | 322867 | 81.5 -----------------------------------+----------+------------ B. _Other skilled occupations_ --------------------------------------------------+-----------+-------- Occupation | Number | --------------------------------------------------+-----------+-------- Tinners | 6967 | Watch and clockmakers | 4444 | Tobacco workers | 4350 | Hat and capmakers | 4070 | Barbers and hairdressers | 4054 | Weavers and spinners | 3971 | Tanners and curriers | 3715 | Furriers and fur workers | 3144 | Bookbinders | 3009 | Masons | 2507 | Plumbers | 2455 | Saddlers and harness makers | 2311 | Milliners | 2291 | Metal workers (other than iron, steel and tin) | 2231 | Machinists | 1907 | Jewelers | 1837 | Millers | 1390 | Mechanics (not specified) | 1203 | Upholsterers | 1109 | Photographers | 1013 | Iron and steel workers | 604 | Textile workers (not specified) | 436 | Others | 13938 | --------------------------------------------------+-----------+-------- Total | 72956 | +-----------+ Grand total | 395823 | --------------------------------------------------+-----------+-------- [1] From _Reports of Commissioner-General of Immigration_. [2] Seamstresses are included with dressmakers; cabinetmakers and woodworkers (not specified) with carpenters and joiners. TABLE LV OCCUPATIONS OF TOTAL EUROPEAN AND JEWISH IMMIGRANTS, 1899 TO 1909, AND PERCENTAGE JEWISH OF TOTAL[1] --------------------+------------+------------+---------- Group | Total | Jewish |Per cent | immigrants | immigrants |of total --------------------+------------+------------+---------- Professional | 803222 | 6836 | 8.5 Skilled laborers | 1247674 | 362936 | 29.1 Farm laborers | 1290295 | 9633 | 0.1 Farmers | 841466 | 908 | 1.1 Common laborers | 2282565 | 66311 | 2.9 Servants | 890093 | 61611 | 6.9 No occupation | 2165287 | 445728 | 20.6 Miscellaneous | 172652 | 36219 | 21.0 --------------------+------------+------------+---------- Total | 8213034 | 990182 | 12.1 --------------------+------------+------------+---------- [1] From _Emigration Conditions in Europe_, p. 27. TABLE LVI TOTAL EUROPEAN IMMIGRANTS[1] AND IMMIGRANTS WITHOUT OCCUPATION, 1899 TO 1910[2] --------------------------+-----------+------------------+--------- | Total |Without occupation|Per cent People |Immigrants | (including women | of | | and children) | total --------------------------+-----------+------------------+--------- Jewish | 1074442 | 484175 | 45.1 Bohemian and Moravian | 100189 | 39700 | 39.5 Croatian and Slovenian | 355542 | 37219 | 11.1 English | 408614 | 158616 | 38.8 Finnish | 151774 | 28766 | 18.9 French | 115783 | 45745 | 39.5 German | 745375 | 296082 | 39.7 Greek | 216962 | 19244 | 8.9 Irish | 439724 | 63456 | 14.4 Italian, North | 372668 | 76046 | 20.4 Italian, South | 1911933 | 440274 | 23.0 Lithuanian | 175258 | 33718 | 19.2 Magyar | 338151 | 78875 | 23.3 Polish | 949064 | 200634 | 21.1 Ruthenian | 147375 | 18915 | 12.9 Scandinavian | 586306 | 111212 | 18.9 Scotch | 136842 | 47634 | 34.9 Slovak | 377527 | 87280 | 23.1 --------------------------+-----------+------------------+--------- Total | 9555673[3]| 2506713 | 26.2 --------------------------+-----------+------------------+--------- [1] All races with an immigration below 100,000 omitted. [2] From _Statistical Review of Immigration_, p. 52. [3] Total includes all races. TABLE LVII OCCUPATIONS OF EUROPEAN IMMIGRANTS[1] REPORTING EMPLOYMENT, 1899 TO 1910[2] ----------------+----------+-------------------------------------------- | | Per cent | +------------+-----------+---------+--------- | | | |Laborers,| | Number |In | |including| | reporting|professional|In skilled |farm |Miscell- People |employment|occupations |occupations|laborers |aneous ----------------+----------+------------+-----------+---------+--------- Jewish | 590267 | 1.3 | 67.1 | 13.7 | 18.0 Bohemian and | | | | | Moravia | 60489 | 1.3 | 40.8 | 28.5 | 29.4 Bulgarian, | | | | | Servian and | | | | | Montenegrin | 90991 | .1 | 3.3 | 92.0 | 4.6 Croatian and | | | | | Slovenian | 298324 | .1 | 5.0 | 86.4 | 8.5 English | 249908 | 9.0 | 48.7 | 14.1 | 28.1 Finnish | 123008 | .3 | 6.0 | 67.2 | 26.5 French | 70038 | 9.3 | 34.5 | 26.0 | 30.2 German | 458293 | 3.5 | 30.0 | 37.7 | 28.8 Greek | 197718 | .3 | 7.7 | 86.2 | 5.8 Irish | 376268 | 1.3 | 12.6 | 35.2 | 50.9 Italian, North | 296622 | 1.1 | 20.4 | 66.5 | 12.0 Italian, South |1471659 | .4 | 14.6 | 77.0 | 7.9 Lithuanian | 141540 | .1 | 6.7 | 76.1 | 17.2 Magyar | 259276 | .5 | 8.6 | 77.5 | 13.4 Polish | 748430 | .2 | 6.3 | 75.3 | 18.1 Roumanian | 75531 | .2 | 2.7 | 93.8 | 3.3 Russian | 69986 | 1.4 | 9.1 | 82.7 | 6.8 Ruthenian | 128460 | .1 | 2.0 | 80.6 | 17.4 Scandinavian | 475094 | 1.2 | 20.5 | 43.8 | 34.5 Scotch | 89208 | 5.7 | 57.9 | 12.1 | 24.3 Slovak | 290247 | .1 | 4.4 | 80.0 | 15.5 ----------------+----------+------------+-----------+---------+--------- Total |7048953[3]| 1.4 | 20.2 | 79.3 | 19.1 ----------------+----------+------------+-----------+---------+--------- [1] All races with an immigration below 50,000 omitted. [2] From _Statistical Review of Immigration_, p. 53. [3] Total includes all races. TABLE LVIII OCCUPATIONS OF SLAVIC AND JEWISH IMMIGRANTS REPORTING EMPLOYMENT, 1899 TO 1910[1] ---------------+-----------+-------------------------------------------- | | Per cent | +------------+-----------+----------+-------- | | | | Common | People | | | | laborers |Miscel- | No. |In |In |(including|laneous | reporting |professional|skilled | farm | |occupations|occupations |occupations| laborers)| ---------------+-----------+------------+-----------+----------+-------- Jewish | 590267 | 1.3 | 67.1 | 13.7 | 18.0 Bohemian and | | | | | Moravian | 60489 | 1.3 | 40.8 | 28.5 | 29.4 Bulgarian, | | | | | Servian and | | | | | Montenegrin | 90991 | .1 | 3.3 | 92.0 | 4.6 Croatian and | | | | | Slovenian | 298324 | .1 | 5.0 | 86.4 | 8.5 Polish | 748430 | .2 | 6.3 | 75.3 | 18.1 Russian | 69986 | 1.4 | 9.1 | 82.7 | 6.8 Ruthenian | 128460 | .1 | 2.0 | 80.6 | 17.4 Slovak | 290247 | .1 | 4.4 | 80.0 | 15.5 ---------------+-----------+------------+-----------+----------+-------- [1] From _Statistical Review of Immigration_, p. 53. TABLE LIX OCCUPATIONS OF "OLD" AND "NEW" IMMIGRATION (JEWISH EXCEPTED) AND OF JEWISH IMMIGRATION, 1899 TO 1909[1] ------------------+-----------------+-----------------+----------------- | |"New" immigration| Jewish |"Old" immigration|(Jewish excepted)| immigration Occupations +-------+---------+-------+---------+-------+--------- | Number| Per cent| Number| Per cent| Number| Per cent ------------------+-------+---------+-------+---------+-------+--------- Professional | 56406| 2.5 | 17080| .3 | 6836| .7 Skilled laborers | 442754| 19.5 | 441984| 8.9 | 362936| 36.7 Farm laborers | 138598| 6.1 |1142064| 23.1 | 9633| 1.0 Farmers | 40633| 1.8 | 42605| .9 | 908| .1 Common laborers | 402074| 17.7 |1814180| 36.7 | 66311| 6.7 Servants | 424698| 18.7 | 403784| 8.2 | 61611| 6.2 No occupation | 678510| 29.8 |1041049| 21.0 | 445728| 45.0 Miscellaneous | 90109| 4.0 | 46324| .9 | 36219| 3.7 ------------------+-------+---------+-------+---------+-------+--------- Total |2273782| 100.0 |4949070| 100.0 | 990182| 100.0 ------------------+-------+---------+-------+---------+-------+--------- [1] From _Emigration Conditions in Europe_, p. 29. TABLE LX ILLITERACY OF JEWISH IMMIGRANTS, 1899 TO 1910[1] ---------+-----------------+-----------------------+----------- |Jewish immigrants| Jewish immigrant | Per cent Year | 14 years of age |illiterates[2] 14 years|illiterate | and over | of age and over | ---------+-----------------+-----------------------+----------- 1899 | 28428 | 5637 | 19.5 1900 | 47672 | 10607 | 22.2 1901 | 43367 | 10119 | 23.3 1902 | 42376 | 11921 | 28.1 1903 | 57159 | 14980 | 26.2 1904 | 82707 | 18763 | 22.6 1905 | 101357 | 22770 | 22.4 1906 | 110128 | 29444 | 26.7 1907 | 111486 | 31885 | 28.6 1908 | 77374 | 23217 | 30.3 1909 | 42341 | 12201 | 28.8 1910 | 62391 | 17963 | 28.8 ---------+-----------------+-----------------------+----------- Total | 806786 | 209507 | 26.0 ---------+-----------------+-----------------------+----------- [1] From _Reports of Commissioner-General of Immigration_. [2] Those who could neither read nor write. TABLE LXI SEX OF JEWISH IMMIGRANT ILLITERATES, 1908 TO 1912[1] ---------+---------------------+----------------------------------- | | Jewish immigrant illiterates | Jewish immigrants | 14 years of age and over | 14 years of age |-----------------+----------------- Year | and over | Number | Per cent |----------+----------+--------+--------+--------+-------- | Male | Female | Male | Female | Male | Female ---------+----------+----------+--------+--------+--------+-------- 1908 | 43270 | 34104 | 9455 | 13762 | 21.9 | 40.4 1909 | 23452 | 18889 | 4832 | 7369 | 20.6 | 39.0 1910 | 35272 | 27120 | 7593 | 10370 | 21.5 | 38.2 1911 | 38018 | 31370 | 6453 | 10304 | 16.9 | 32.8 1912 | 32706 | 27799 | 5637 | 9498 | 17.2 | 34.2 ---------+----------+----------+--------+--------+--------+-------- Total | 172718 | 139282 | 33970 | 51303 | 19.7 | 36.8 ---------+----------+----------+--------+--------+--------+-------- [1] In order to ascertain the number of males and females, 14 years of age and over, the number of Jewish immigrants under 14 years of age were distributed equally between the sexes. Subtracting these respectively from the number of males and females, we obtain the above totals. Cf. _Report of New York State Commission on Immigration_, 1908, p. 171. TABLE LXII ILLITERACY OF EUROPEAN IMMIGRANTS,[1] 1899 to 1910[2] ------------------------+---------------+--------------------------- | | Immigrant illiterates 14 | Immigrants 14 | years of age and over People | years of age +-------------+------------- | and over | Number | Per cent ------------------------+---------------+-------------+------------- Jewish | 806786 | 209507 | 26.0 Bohemian and Moravian | 79721 | 1322 | 1.7 Croatian and Slovenian | 320977 | 115785 | 36.1 English | 347458 | 3647 | 1.0 Finnish | 137916 | 1745 | 1.3 German | 625793 | 32236 | 5.2 Greek | 208608 | 55089 | 26.4 Irish | 416640 | 10721 | 2.6 Italian, North | 339301 | 38897 | 11.5 Italian, South | 1690376 | 911566 | 53.9 Lithuanian | 161441 | 79001 | 48.9 Magyar | 307082 | 35004 | 11.4 Polish | 861303 | 304675 | 35.4 Ruthenian | 140775 | 75165 | 53.4 Scandinavian | 530634 | 2221 | .4 Scotch | 115788 | 767 | .7 Slovak | 342583 | 82216 | 24.0 ------------------------+---------------+-------------+------------- Total[3] | 8398624 | 2238801 | 26.7 ------------------------+---------------+-------------+------------- [1] All peoples with an immigration below 100,000 excluded, except the Bohemian and Moravian. [2] From _Statistical Review of Immigration_, p. 51. [3] Total for all races. TABLE LXIII ILLITERACY OF "OLD" AND "NEW" IMMIGRATION (JEWISH EXCEPTED) AND OF JEWISH IMMIGRATION, 1899 TO 1909[1] ---------------------+-----------------+--------------------------- | | Immigrant illiterates 14 | Immigrants 14 | years of age and over Classed | years of age +------------+-------------- | and over | Number | Per cent ---------------------+-----------------+------------+-------------- Old immigration | 1983618 | 52833 | 2.7 New immigration | | | (Jewish excepted) | 4471047 | 1667754 | 37.3 Jewish immigration | 744395 | 191544 | 25.7 ---------------------+-----------------+------------+-------------- Total | 7199060 | 1912131 | 26.6 ---------------------+-----------------+------------+-------------- [1] From _Emigration Conditions in Europe_, p. 30. TABLE LXIV ILLITERACY OF PEOPLES FROM EASTERN EUROPE, 1899 TO 1910[1] ---------------------+-----------------+------------------------- | Immigrants 14 | Illiterates People | years of age +------------+------------ | and over | Number | Per cent. ---------------------+-----------------+------------+------------ Jewish | 806786 | 209507 | 26.0 Lithuanian | 161441 | 79001 | 48.9 Polish | 861303 | 304675 | 35.4 Russian | 77479 | 29777 | 38.4 Ruthenian | 140775 | 75165 | 63.4 ---------------------+-----------------+------------+------------ [1] From _Statistical Review of Immigration_, p. 51. TABLE LXV SEX OF ILLITERATES OF PEOPLES FROM EASTERN EUROPE, 1908[1] ---------------+-----------------------+--------------------- | Number illiterates 14 | Per cent. | years and over | Race +-----------+-----------+----------+---------- | Male | Female | Male | Female ---------------+-----------+-----------+----------+---------- Jewish | 9455 | 13762 | 21.9 | 40.4 Lithuanian | 4215 | 2897 | 53.4 | 63.4 Polish | 14573 | 8813 | 36.7 | 42.9 Russian | 5820 | 828 | 40.1 | 50.8 Ruthenian | 4203 | 1836 | 49.6 | 57.4 ---------------+-----------+-----------+----------+---------- [1] From _Report of New York State Commission on Immigration_, 1908, p. 171. TABLE LXVI DESTINATION OF JEWISH IMMIGRANTS, 1899 TO 1910, BY DIVISION[1] --------------------------+-------------------+---------- Division | Jewish immigrants | Per cent --------------------------+-------------------+---------- North Atlantic States | 923549 | 86.0 North Central States | 110998 | 10.3 South Atlantic States | 25149 | 2.3 South Central States | 8324 | .8 Western States | 6384 | .6 --------------------------+-------------------+---------- Total | 1074404[2] | 100.0 --------------------------+-------------------+---------- [1] From _Reports of Commissioner-General of Immigration_. [2] 27 were destined for Alaska, Hawaii, and Porto Rico, and 11 were tourists. TABLE LXVII DESTINATION OF JEWISH IMMIGRANTS, 1899 to 1910, BY PRINCIPAL STATES ----------------+-------------------+------------------- State | Jewish immigrants | Per cent of total ----------------+-------------------+------------------- New York | 690296 | 64.2 Pennsylvania | 108534 | 10.1 Massachusetts | 66023 | 6.1 Illinois | 59931 | 4.7 New Jersey | 31279 | 3.2 Ohio | 20531 | 1.9 Maryland | 18700 | 1.7 Connecticut | 16254 | 1.5 Missouri | 12476 | 1.2 Minnesota | 7029 | .7 Wisconsin | 6369 | .6 Michigan | 5970 | .6 Rhode Island | 5023 | .5 All others | 31989 | 3.0 ----------------+-------------------+------------------- Total | 1074404[1] | 100.0 ----------------+-------------------+------------------- [1] _Cf._ note 2 of table LXVI. TABLE LXVIII PERCENTAGE OF JEWISH AND TOTAL IMMIGRANTS DESTINED FOR EACH DIVISION, 1899 TO 1910[1] -----------------------+------------------+------------------- Division | Per cent of | Per cent of | total immigrants | Jewish immigrants -----------------------+------------------+------------------- South Atlantic States | 67.5 | 86.0 North Central States | 22.4 | 10.3 South Atlantic States | 2.7 | 2.3 South Central States | 1.8 | .8 Western | 5.6 | .6 -----------------------+------------------+------------------- Total | 100.0 | 100.0 -----------------------+------------------+------------------- [1] From _Reports of Commissioner-General of Immigration_. TABLE LXIX PARTICIPATION OF JEWISH IMMIGRANTS IN DESTINATION OF TOTAL IMMIGRANTS, 1899 TO 1910, BY DIVISION -----------------+--------------+-------------+----------------- Division | Total | Jewish | Per cent | immigrants | immigrants | Jewish of total -----------------+--------------+-------------+----------------- North Atlantic | 6368243 | 923549 | 14.5 North Central | 2116327 | 110998 | 5.2 South Atlantic | 254936 | 25149 | 9.9 South Central | 167437 | 8324 | 5.0 Western | 532824 | 6384 | 1.2 -----------------+--------------+-------------+----------------- Total | 9439757 | 1074404[2] | 11.4 -----------------+--------------+-------------+----------------- [1] From _Reports of Commissioner-General of Immigration_. [2] _Cf._ note 2 of table LXVI. APPENDICES APPENDIX A. PRESIDENT HARRISON'S MESSAGE TO CONGRESS, DECEMBER 9, 1891.[141] This Government has found occasion to express in a friendly spirit, but with much earnestness, to the Government of the Czar its concern because of the harsh measures now being enforced against the Hebrews in Russia. By the revival of antisemitic laws, long in abeyance, great numbers of those unfortunate people have been constrained to abandon their homes and leave the Empire by reason of the impossibility of finding subsistence within the pale to which it is sought to confine them. The immigration of these people to the United States--many other countries being closed to them--is largely increasing and is likely to assume proportions which may make it difficult to find homes and employment for them here and to seriously affect the labor market. It is estimated that over 1,000,000 will be forced from Russia in a few years. The Hebrew is never a beggar; he has always kept the law--life by toil--often under severe and oppressive civil restrictions. It is also true that no race, set or class has more fully cared for its own than the Hebrew race. But the sudden transfer of such a multitude under conditions that tend to strip them of their small accumulations and to depress their energies and courage is neither good for them nor for us. The banishment, whether by direct decree or by not less certain indirect methods, of so large a number of men and women is not a local question. A decree to leave one country is in the nature of things an order to enter another--some other. This consideration, as well as the suggestion of humanity, furnishes ample ground for the remonstrances which we have presented to Russia, while our historic friendship for that government can not fail to give assurance that our representations are those of a sincere wellwisher. FOOTNOTES: [141] (_Messages and Papers of the Presidents_, 1789-1897, vol. ix, 1889-97, p. 188. Washington, 1898). APPENDIX B. ARTICLE VII OF THE CONSTITUTION OF ROUMANIA. Difference in religious beliefs and confessions does not constitute in Roumania an obstacle to the obtainment of civil and political rights, nor to the exercise of these rights. (1) A foreigner without distinction of religion, and whether a subject or not of a foreign government, can become naturalized under the following conditions: (a) He shall address to the government an application for naturalization, in which he shall indicate the capital he possesses, the profession or craft which he follows, and his abode in Roumania. (b) He shall reside, after this application, ten years in the country, and prove, by action, that he is of service to it. (2) The following may be exempted from the intermediary stages: (a) Those who have brought into the country industries, useful inventions, or talent, or who have founded large establishments of commerce or industry. (b) Those who, born and bred in Roumania, of parents established in the country, have never been subjected, either themselves or their parents, to any protection by a foreign power. (c) Those who have served under the colors during the war of independence; these may be naturalized collectively by government decree, by a single resolution, and without any further formality. (3) Naturalization can not be given except by law, and individually. (4) A special law shall determine the manner in which foreigners may establish their home on Roumanian territory. (5) Only Roumanians, and those who have been naturalized Roumanians, can buy rural estates in Roumania. APPENDIX C. SECRETARY HAY'S NOTE. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, } WASHINGTON, _August 11, 1902_. } "Excellency:--In the course of an instruction recently sent to the Minister accredited to the Government of Roumania in regard to the bases of negotiation begun with that government looking to a convention of naturalization between the United States and Roumania, certain considerations were set forth for the Minister's guidance concerning the character of the emigration from that country, the causes which constrain it, and the consequences so far as they adversely affect the United States. "It has seemed to the President appropriate that these considerations, relating as they do to the obligations entered into by the signatories of the Treaty of Berlin, of July 13, 1878, should be brought to the attention of the Governments concerned, and commended to their consideration in the hope that, if they are so fortunate as to meet the approval of the several Powers, such measures as to them may seem wise may be taken to persuade the Government of Roumania to reconsider the subject of the grievances in question. "The United States welcomes now, as it has welcomed from the foundation of its Government, the voluntary immigration of all aliens coming hither under conditions fitting them to become merged in the body politic of this land. Our laws provide the means for them to become incorporated indistinguishably in the mass of citizens, and prescribe their absolute equality with the native born, guaranteeing to them equal civil rights at home and equal protection abroad. The conditions are few, looking to their coming as free agents, so circumstanced physically and morally as to supply the healthful and intelligent material of free citizenhood. The pauper, the criminal, the contagiously or incurably diseased are excluded from the benefits of immigration only when they are likely to become a source of danger or a burden upon the community. The voluntary character of their coming is essential; hence we shut out all immigration assisted or constrained by foreign agencies. The purpose of our generous treatment of the alien immigrant is to benefit us and him alike--not to afford to another state a field upon which to cast its own objectionable elements. The alien, coming hither voluntarily and prepared to take upon himself the preparatory and in due course the definitive obligations of citizenship, retains thereafter, in domestic and international relations, the initial character of free agency, in the full enjoyment of which it is incumbent upon his adoptive State to protect him. "The foregoing considerations, whilst pertinent to the examination of the purpose and scope of a naturalization treaty, have a larger aim. It behooves the State to scrutinize most jealously the character of the immigration from a foreign land, and, if it be obnoxious to objection, to examine the causes which render it so. Should those causes originate in the act of another sovereign State, to the detriment of its neighbors, it is the prerogative of an injured State, to point out the evil and to make remonstrance: for with nations, as with individuals the social law holds good, that the right of each is bounded by the right of the neighbor. "The condition of a large class of the inhabitants of Roumania has for many years been a source of grave concern to the United States. I refer to the Roumanian Jews, numbering some 400,000. Long ago, while the Danubian principalities labored under oppressive conditions, which only war and a general action of European powers sufficed to end, the persecution of the indigenous Jews under Turkish rule called forth in 1872 the strong remonstrance of the United States. The Treaty of Berlin was hailed as a cure for the wrong, in view of the express provisions of its forty-fourth article, prescribing that "in Roumania, the difference of religious creeds and confessions shall not be alleged against any person as ground for exclusion or incapacity in matters relating to the enjoyment of civil and political rights, admission to public employments, functions, and honors, or the exercise of the various professions and industries in any locality whatsoever," and stipulating freedom in the exercise of all forms of worship to Roumanian dependents and foreigners alike, as well as guaranteeing that all foreigners in Roumania shall be treated, without distinction of creed, on a footing of perfect equality. "With the lapse of time these just prescriptions have been rendered nugatory in great part, as regards the native Jews, by the legislation and municipal regulations of Roumania. Starting from the arbitrary and controvertible premise that the native Jews of Roumania domiciled there for centuries are "aliens not subject to foreign protection," the ability of the Jew to earn even the scanty means of existence that suffice for a frugal race has been constricted by degrees, until nearly every opportunity to win a livelihood is denied; and until the helpless poverty of the Jew has constrained an exodus of such proportions as to cause general concern. "The political disabilities of the Jews in Roumania, their exclusion from the public service and the learned professions, the limitations of their civil rights and the imposition upon them of exceptional taxes, involving as they do wrongs repugnant to the moral sense of liberal modern peoples, are not so directly in point for my present purpose as the public acts which attack the inherent right of man as a breadwinner in the ways of agriculture and trade. The Jews are prohibited from owning land, or even from cultivating it as common laborers. They are debarred from residing in the rural districts. Many branches of petty trade and manual production are closed to them in the overcrowded cities where they are forced to dwell and engage, against fearful odds, in the desperate struggle for existence. Even as ordinary artisans or hired laborers they may only find employment in proportion of one "unprotected alien" to two "Roumanians" under any one employer. In short, by the cumulative effect of successive restrictions, the Jews of Roumania have become reduced to a state of wretched misery. Shut out from nearly every avenue of self-support which is open to the poor of other lands, and ground down by poverty as the natural result of their discriminatory treatment, they are rendered incapable of lifting themselves from the enforced degradation they endure. Even were the fields of education, of civil employment and of commerce open to them as to "Roumanian citizens," their penury would prevent their rising by individual effort. Human beings so circumstanced have virtually no alternatives but submissive suffering or flight to some land less unfavorable to them. Removal under such conditions is not and cannot be the healthy, intelligent emigration of a free and self-reliant being. It must be, in most cases, the mere transplantation of an artificially produced diseased growth to a new place. "Granting that, in better and more healthful surroundings, the morbid conditions will eventually change for good, such emigration is necessarily for a time a burden to the community upon which the fugitives may be cast. Self-reliance and the knowledge and ability that evolve the power of self-support must be developed, and, at the same time, avenues of employment must be opened in quarters where competition is already keen and opportunities scarce. The teachings of history and the experience of our own nation show that the Jews possess in a high degree the mental and moral qualifications of conscientious citizenhood. No class of immigrants is more welcome to our shores, when coming equipped in mind and body for entrance upon the struggle for bread, and inspired with the high purpose to give the best service of heart and brain to the land they adopt of their own free will. But when they come as outcasts, made doubly paupers by physical and moral oppression in their native land, and thrown upon the long-suffering generosity of a more favored community, their migration lacks the essential conditions which make alien immigration either acceptable or beneficial. So well is this appreciated on the Continent that, even in the countries where anti-Semitism has no foothold, it is difficult for these fleeing Jews to obtain any lodgment. America is their only goal. "The United States offers asylum to the oppressed of all lands. But its sympathy with them in no wise impairs its just liberty and right to weigh the acts of the oppressor in the light of their effects upon this country and to judge accordingly. "Putting together the facts now plainly brought home to this Government during the past few years, that many of the inhabitants of Roumania are being forced, by artificially adverse discriminations, to quit their native country; that the hospitable asylum offered by this country is almost the only refuge left to them; that they come hither unfitted, by the conditions of their exile, to take part in the new life of this land under circumstances either profitable to themselves or beneficial to the community; and that they are objects of charity from the outset and for a long time--the right of remonstrance against the acts of the Roumanian Government is clearly established in favor of this Government. Whether consciously and of purpose or not, these helpless people, burdened and spurned by their native land, are forced by the sovereign power of Roumania upon the charity of the United States. This Government cannot be a tacit party to such an international wrong. It is constrained to protest against the treatment to which the Jews of Roumania are subjected, not alone because it has unimpeachable ground to remonstrate against the resultant injury to itself, but in the name of humanity. The United States may not authoritatively appeal to the stipulations of the Treaty of Berlin to which it was not and cannot become a signatory, but it does earnestly appeal to the principles consigned therein because they are the principles of international law and eternal justice, advocating the broad toleration which that solemn compact enjoins and standing ready to lend its moral support to the fulfilment thereof by its co-signatories, for the act of Roumania itself has effectively joined the United States to them as an interested party in this regard. "You will take an early occasion to read this instruction to the Minister for Foreign Affairs and, should he request it, leave with him a copy. "I have the honor to be, "Your obedient servant, "JOHN HAY". BIBLIOGRAPHY (All works referred to in the text are given below. A number of other works that have been found useful are also included.) Alexinsky, Gregor. _Modern Russia._ New York, Charles Scribner's Sons, 1913. _Alliance Israélite Universelle_, 1870 to 1900. _The American Jewish Year Book._ Philadelphia, Jewish Publication Society of America, 1900-1913. ---- 1913. Jewish Immigration to the United States, pp. 283-4. Association for the Protection of Jewish Immigrants of Philadelphia. _Annual Reports_, 1885 to 1910. Balch, Emily Greene. _Our Slavic Fellow-Citizens._ New York Charities Publication Committee, 1910. Bluntschli. Dr. _Roumania and the Legal Status of the Jews in Roumania._ London, Anglo-Jewish Association, 1879. Buzek, Dr. Joseph. "Das Auswanderungsproblem in Oesterreich," _Zeitschrift für Volkswirtschaft, Sozialpolitik und Verwaltung_, vol. 10, 1901. Carmen Sylva. "Roumania and the Foreigners," _Century_, March, 1906. Charmatz, Richard. _Deutsch-Oesterreichische Politik._ Leipzig, Duncker und Humblot, 1907. Demidoff San Donato, Prince. _The Jewish Question in Russia._ London, Darling & Son, 1884. _Die Judenpogromen in Russland._ 2 vols. Köln, Jüdischer Verlag, 1910. English Royal Commission on Alien Immigration, 1904. _Enquête sur les Artisans--première partie_, Ministère de l'Industrie et du Commerce, Royaume de Roumanie, Bucarest 1909. Fairchild. _Immigration._ New York, Macmillan Co., 1913. Frederic, Harold. _The New Exodus._ New York, G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1892. Goldberg. "Die Juden unter der städtischer Bevölkerung Russlands." _Zeitschrift für Demographie und Statistik der Juden._ Bureau für Statistik der Juden, Berlin. _Grenzboten_, vol. 62, 1903. (1) "Galizische Wirtschaft." (2) "Galizien." Hersch, L. _Le Juif errant d'aujourd'hui._ Paris, M. Giard et E. Brière, 1913. Hillman, Anselm. _Jüdisches Genossenschaftswesen in Russland_, Bureau für Statistik der Juden, Berlin, 1911. Immigration Commission. _Emigration Conditions in Europe._ Report to 61st Congress, 2nd Session, Senate Document No. 748, Washington, 1911. ---- _Conclusions and Recommendations._ ---- _Abstract of Emigration Conditions in Europe._ ---- _Abstract of Statistical Review of Immigration to the United States, 1820-1910._ Washington, 1911. _Jewish Chronicle_, 1875-1910. _Jewish Encyclopedia._ 1. "Antisemitism." 2. "Austria." 3. "Migration." 4. "Roumania." 5. "Russia." Jorga, N. _Geschichte des Rumänischen Volkes._ 2 vols. Gotha, Fredrich Andreas Perthes, 1905. Jüdische Statistik, Berlin, Jüdischer Verlag, 1903. ---- _Enquête über die Lage der jüdischen Bevölkerung Galiziens_, von Dr. S. Fleischer. ---- _Zur Bewegung der jüdischen Bevölkerung in Galizien_, von Dr. A. Korkis. Kogalniceanu, Vasile M. "Die Agrarfrage in Rumänien." _Archiv für Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik_, vol. 32, 1911. Kovalevsky, Maxim. _La crise russe._ V. Giard et E. Brière, Paris, 1906. ---- _Russian Political Institutions._ University of Chicago Press, 1902. Landa, M.J. _The Alien Problem and its Remedy._ London, P.S. King & Son, 1911. _La question juive dans les Chambres roumaines._ Seconde édition. Paris, Ch. Maréchal, 1879. Lazare, Bernard. _Die Juden in Rumänien._ H.S. Hermann, Berlin, 1902. Leroy-Beaulieu, Anatole. _The Empire of the Tsars._ 3 vols. New York, G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1894. Loeb, Isidore. _La Situation des Israélites en Turquie, en Serbie et en Roumanie._ Paris, Joseph Baer et Cie, 1877. Margolin, Salomon. "Die wirtschaftliche Lage der jüdischen arbeitenden Klassen in Russland." _Archiv für Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik._ Band 26, Heft I. Milyoukov, Paul. _Russia and its Crisis._ University of Chicago Press, 1905. Palmer, Francis H.E. _Austro-Hungarian Life in Town and Country._ New York, G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1903. ---- _Russian Life in Town and Country._ New York, G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1903. _Persecution of the Jews in Russia_ (issued by the Russo-Jewish committee of London). Philadelphia, Jewish Publication Society of America, 1891. _Reports of the Commissioner-General of Immigration_, 1881 to 1912. _Report on the Causes inciting Immigration to the United States_, 1892. Rubinow, I.M. _Economic Condition of the Jews in Russia._ Bulletin of the Bureau of Labor, Department of Commerce and Labor, Washington, 1907. Ruppin, Dr. A. _Die Sozialen Verhältnisse der Juden in Russland._ Berlin, Jüdischer Verlag, 1906. ---- _Die Juden in Rumänien._ Bureau für Statistik der Juden. Heft 5. Louis Lamm, Berlin, 1908. ---- _The Jews of To-Day._ New York, Henry Holt & Co., 1913. Schulze-Gävernitz, Dr. G. von. _Volkswirtschaftliche Studien aus Russland._ Leipzig, 1899. Séménoff, E. _The Russian Government and the Jewish Massacres._ London, John Murray, 1907. Simkhovitch, Valdimir G. "An Interpretation of Russian Autocracy." _The International Quarterly_, Oct., 1904. Sincerus, Edmond. _Les Juifs en Roumanie._ New York, Macmillan & Co., 1901. Sturdza, A.A.C. _La Terre et la Race roumaines._ Paris, Lucien Lavens, 1904. Sulzberger, David. _The Beginnings of Russo-Jewish Immigration to Philadelphia._ Publications of the American Jewish Historical Society, No. 19, 1910. Thon, Dr. Jacob. _Die Juden in Oesterreich._ Bureau für Statistik der Juden. Heft 4. Louis Lamm, Berlin, 1908. United Hebrew Charities of New York, _Annual Reports_, 1884 to 1910. Urussov, Prince Serge. _Memoirs of a Russian Governor._ New York, Harper Bros., 1908. Wallace, Sir Donald Mackenzie. _Russia._ 2nd edition. New York, Henry Holt & Co., 1905. White, Andrew D. _Autobiography._ 2 vols. New York, Century Co., 1905. Witte, S.J. _Vorlesungen über Volks und Staatswirtschaft._ Stuttgart and Berlin, 1913. Wolf, Lucien. _The Legal Sufferings of the Jews in Russia._ London, T. Fisher Unwin, 1912. * * * * * +-------------------------------------------------------------+ | Typographical errors corrected in text: | | | | Page 74: acordance replaced with accordance | | Page 75: elementay replaced with elementary | | Page 103: Jewism replaced with Jewish | | Page 183: Croation replaced with Croatian | | Page 185: Croation replaced with Croatian | | Page 187: Commissiomer replaced with Commissioner | | Page 196: Table LXIX (2nd) North Central replaced with | | South Central | | | | On page 146 the typesetter misplaced four lines of text: | | "Out of a total | | this country from 1899 to 1910, 209,507 or 26 per | | of 806,786 Jews fourteen years of age and over who entered | | cent, were unable to read and write." | | This has been changed to read: | | "Out of a total | | of 806,786 Jews fourteen years of age and over who entered | | this country from 1899 to 1910, 209,507 or 26 per | | cent, were unable to read and write." | | | +-------------------------------------------------------------+ 
46103	----	GERMANY'S VANISHING COLONIES Germany's Vanishing Colonies BY GORDON LE SUEUR AUTHOR OF "CECIL RHODES," ETC. NEW YORK McBRIDE, NAST & COMPANY 1915 "ICHABOD" "Who sows the Wind will reap the Tempest." PREFACE By Lieut.-Col. A. ST. H. GIBBONS, F.R.G.S., F.R.C.I., 23rd (Service) Batt. Roy. Fusiliers (1st Sportsman's) In giving his readers a very concise and reliable description of "Germany's Vanishing Colonies," the author performs a useful public service. To the travelled man who may have seen something of these Colonies the work carries conviction; for others it has a useful educative value. Knowledge is essential to sound judgment, and although--thanks to the policy of the late Paul Kruger!--a growing interest in our great Empire has permeated all classes in recent years, anything like a comprehensive knowledge of the local conditions and interests of our 12,000,000 miles of Empire is not to be expected until our schools and universities have added to their curriculum systematic instruction in Imperial history and geography. This book provides important and interesting data on which, at the close of the war, that policy which will determine the status and ownership of Germany's overseas possessions can be built. To some it may appear that the title of the book implies the dividing of the skin before the lion is killed. Be that as it may; to those who have never felt misgivings as to the ultimate result of this life-and-death struggle for Empire, the speculative element is overshadowed by the supreme importance of inspiring the public mind with an accurate and intelligible grasp of the situation. At times consciously, at others unconsciously, democratic Governments reflect the mind of the community. In due course, our statesmen, working in concert with the Dominion Governments, will be called upon to decide, in the name of the Empire, how far it is politic, either for strategic or economic purposes, to annex all or part of such German oversea possessions as the Allies in council shall decide to be within the British sphere of influence. Let the people in private and public discussion, and through the medium of the Press, come to something like an unanimous decision (and this volume should help them to do so), and so strengthen the hands of the Government when the crucial hour arrives. No doubt every aspect will be taken into consideration. It will be noted that from the moment Germany decided to establish a colonial Empire her envious hatred of Great Britain took root. She realised that at the British Empire's expense alone could she fully develop her ideal. This feeling has grown and intensified until, in recent years, she had barely cloaked her ambitious design to replace us as a world Power. When the final word is spoken, and compensation for loss in life and treasure is forced on us by her unscrupulous action is discussed, it will, I think, be ruled that we are more than justified in absorbing, as part payment, those possessions which she had designed to expand at the expense of ours. Again, British and French Foreign Office dispatches, at the outbreak of war and subsequently, go to show that German diplomacy has been deeply tinged with covetousness and that special kind of hatred born of envy; that she has brushed aside all honourable and humanitarian considerations, and ignored that international code to which she herself had set her seal in favour of a ruthless and unscrupulous application of the principle of brute force. Nor in this case can she offer the "first offenders'" plea. Before the Bar of History she is confronted by Mary Therese and Francis Joseph of Austria, by the quondam Kingdom of Poland, by Denmark and France. Each and all give evidence of forced war as a step towards Prussian expansion. Can a nation so deeply impregnated with such principles since its cradle days so far reform its political methods as to give reasonable assurance that in thirty or forty years hence she will not reintroduce into the life of nations that spirit and practice of mediaeval barbarism (now better known as "_kultur_") which at present racks the civilised world? We may leave it to the Ethiopian and the leopard may reply. Popular opinion at present seems to indicate an almost unanimous opinion that the roar of the last cannon will ring down the curtain on the German Empire of to-day. That Prussia's Polish province and Alsace-Lorraine will cease to be German may be assumed. Should Denmark recover Schleswig-Holstein, should Hanover regain her independence, and Bavaria repudiate Prussia's uncongenial overlordship it would--in the event of a non-annexation policy being adopted--be difficult to decide to whom the present German Colonies belong--this, of course, irrespective of conquests which have been or may be effected in the meantime, and which, in accordance with the German theory that "might is right," will, _ipso facto_, have been transferred to the Allies with a "clean title." History serves to show that to annex territory carrying a considerable homogeneous and hostile population is seldom a success, but since the German Colonies are so sparsely settled--partly because her bureaucratic methods discourage immigration, and partly because she has no difficulty in absorbing her surplus population at home--this argument does not apply here. Closely linked with this is the native question. Personal observation, supported by first-hand information, serves to show that German treatment of indigenous populations is just what might be expected. To the Englishman, discipline implies leadership--to the German, the mere forcing of will, without consideration for their feelings or personal interests, on subordinates. It serves to crush out individuality and self-respect. It is the discipline of "push." Those who have travelled in Germany will have noticed how this spirit permeates all ranks and classes. That its application becomes more intense in dealing with inferior races, where the restraints of civilisation do not exist, will surprise no one. In the Pacific Islands, as in their African Colonies, the same tale is told. Their native population would rejoice to exchange German for British rule. If, then, we are to save the next generation from a second great European upheaval, and if we desire to emancipate those native races at present under German control from a system of harsh and selfish exploitation, Germany in Europe must, by the elimination of provinces detached from neighbouring states by previous wars of aggression, be deprived of the power she has so notoriously abused, and if we are to do our obvious duty by the native races, her Colonies must pass to other hands. A. ST. H. GIBBONS. _25th December, 1914._ _Acknowledgments are due to_ "The Partition of Africa." J. SCOTT KELTIE. "Modern Germany." J. ELLIS BARKER. "Stanford's Compendium of Geography." A. H. KEANE. "British and German East Africa." H. BRODE. "A Footnote to History." R. L. STEVENSON. "In Near New Guinea." HENRY NEWTON. "China." E. H. PARKER. "Encyclopaedia Brittanica." "The Journal of the African Society." "United Empire"--the Journal of the Royal Colonial Institute. "Haydn's Dictionary of Dates." "Samoan Consular Reports." "Blue Books on Affairs of Samoa." The "Daily Telegraph." "Germany and the Next War." General VON BERNHARDI. CONTENTS CHAPTER I GERMANY AND HER COLONIAL EXPANSION 17 CHAPTER II SOUTH WEST AFRICA 36 CHAPTER III EAST AFRICA 84 CHAPTER IV TOGOLAND AND KAMERUN 109 CHAPTER V THE PACIFIC ISLANDS 124 CHAPTER VI KIAU-CHAU 172 GERMANY'S VANISHING COLONIES CHAPTER I GERMANY AND HER COLONIAL EXPANSION The German Empire of to-day may best be described as an enlarged and aggrandised Prussia; its people imbued with Prussian ideals and drawing their aspirations from the fountain of Prussia. In the Confederation of the German States as constituted in 1814, Prussia, under the Hohenzollern Dynasty, was always the turbulent and disturbing element, by methods peculiarly Prussian, working towards a unity of the German states--a comity of nations welded into one under the hegemony of Prussia. It was not long before Prussian domination became irksome, and her provocative and arrogant attitude created a war with Denmark in 1864 and with Austria in 1866--the latter, a struggle between Hohenzollern and Hapsburg, culminating in the complete discomfiture of Austria. The war with Denmark gave Germany the harbour of Kiel, together with the million inhabitants of Schleswig-Holstein, and Prussia emerged from the struggle with Austria the leading Power in the new North German Confederation. Since then the salt of Prussian militarism has been ploughed into the fertile German fields which produced some of the master-minds in the worlds of Thought, Philosophy and Literature. In accord with true Prussian methods France was forced into a declaration of war in 1870, with the result that the German octopus settled its tentacles upon the provinces of Alsace and Lorraine, an area of 5,605 square miles, with 1,500,000 inhabitants. A new phase of Empire was then created, and the Germany of to-day was constituted as practically a new nation under the rule of William of Hohenzollern, who was elected the "Deutscher Kaiser," or German Emperor, at Versailles on 18th January, 1871. Prince Otto von Bismarck became the first Chancellor of the new German Empire, and in his hands the fortunes of the House of Hohenzollern prospered, as he set himself to his fixed and single-minded purpose--that was, to elevate Prussia to the foremost place amongst the continental Powers. Bismarck's policy was directed towards extension, but it was extension of Prussia (or Germany) in Europe and the consolidation of the portions added to the German Empire. In 1871 he declared "Germany does not want Colonies." He refused to embark upon dazzling adventures in which the risk stirred the imagination, and when an agitation arose in favour of making Germany a sea Power, he confronted it with the words of Frederick the Great: "All far-off acquisitions are a burden to the State." This view he held until the last decade of his career. Bismarck looked forward, however, to the germanisation of the Low Countries, the absorption of which Cecil Rhodes declared to the German Emperor he believed to be the destiny of Germany. The spirit of Prussia was even instilled into Austria, and Prussian example was emulated by the House of Hapsburg. As Prussia set herself to the repression of Danish nationality in Schleswig-Holstein and of French in Alsace-Lorraine, so Austria adopted a policy of eradicating national traits in Hungary. The national unity aimed at by Bismarck having been established, Germany continued to thrive and grow during the peaceful years following 1871; and the development of the trade of this infant amongst nations is a world's phenomenon. Yet as with Prussia in the past, so with the greater Germany of to-day, history is a tale of one persistent struggle for possessions. As is natural during times of peace, the population of Germany increased at an enormous rate, growing from 35,500,000 in 1850 to 66,000,000 in 1912--an average of about 615,000 per annum--while the present increase is roughly 900,000 per annum. Between the years 1881 and 1890 German emigration amounted to 130,000 annually; but it was only 18,500 in 1913, and this was more than counterbalanced by immigration from Austria, Russia, and Italy. Over-population soon became a pressing question, and the obvious remedy was expansion of frontiers or new territories for the accommodation of the surplus. German policy in a very few years became directed towards extension of territories, for it was apparent that emigration to foreign countries and dependencies only strengthened other nations. An outlet for the surplus population was required; but in view of the need for men to feed the military machine which had founded the German Empire and upon which its strength depended, it was clear that emigration to foreign countries and dependencies was an inexpedient measure of relief, as it would be applied at the expense of the mother country. In the year 1882 the German Colonisation Society was started, with the object of acquiring Colonies oversea and the establishment of a navy and mercantile marine to form the link binding the isolated territories to the motherland. The society was formed by merchants and traders with the end in view of extending trade; but to the militarist section the idea of Imperial expansion presented itself, and to that party the Colonies appealed rather from a strategical than a commercial standpoint. The society received enthusiastic support, and, indeed, all Germany began to look to Colonies which were to be purely German; and with this enlarged horizon, policy settled down to the acquisition of oversea territory, the ambition being naturally accompanied by an aspiration towards a powerful navy, necessary, ostensibly, to keep communications open. The German Emperor held very determined ideas on the subject of expansion, but the Chancellor, Bismarck, altered his views only so far as to approve of the founding of Trade Colonies under Imperial Protection. Bismarck was loth to weaken his military machine by the emigration of men; and the German ideal of colonisation was not, therefore, a policy of settlement but one of commercial exploitation; inasmuch as Germany's aim was to develop home industries in order to keep in employment at home the men who formed the material of her armour. Germans were required to remain Germans; and this object it was hoped to attain by settlements in German Colonies, where compact centres of German _kultur_ could be established to teach the art of order to the remaining peopled kingdoms. The German view being that the British oversea Empire was acquired "by treachery, violence and fomenting strife," one cannot imagine, especially with her Prussian traditions, a violent disturbance of the "good German conscience" in contemplating means of attaining an object. In the first Prussian Parliament Bismarck thundered out "Let all questions to the King's Ministers be answered by a roll of drums," and, in sneering at the ballot as "a mere dice-box," he declared: "It is not by speechifying and majorities that the great questions of the day will have to be decided, but by _blood and iron_." Prussia had fought for and won her predominance; her greatness was acquired by the sword; and the Bismarck cult has prevailed in that no other means of expansion and nationalisation than by conquest presents itself to the German mind. All negotiations with foreign nations, therefore, have been conducted to the accompaniment of the rattle of the sword in the scabbard. Speaking of Colonies in his recent bombastic book, General von Bernhardi said: "The great Elector laid the foundation of Prussia's power by successful and deliberately planned wars"; and in justifying the right to make war he says: "It may be that a growing people cannot win Colonies from uncivilised races, and yet the State wishes to retain the surplus population which the mother country can no longer feed. Then the only course left is to acquire the necessary territory by war." Germany now proposed to tread the same path as England, but she had arrived late in the day and the methods whereby she purposed making up for lost time were not the methods whereby England had established herself. Behind German colonisation lies no record of great accomplishments inspired by lofty ideals and high aspirations, carried into effect by noble self-sacrifice on the part of her sons; the history conjures up no pageant of romantic emprise nor vista of perilous undertakings in unexplored parts of the globe by the spirits of daring and adventure; it holds no pulse-stirring stories of the blazing of new trails; and scattered over its pages we do not find imprints of the steps of pioneers of true civilisation, nor are its leaves earmarked with splendid memories. Where England gave of the best of her manhood to establish in daughter states in the four quarters of the globe her ideals of freedom, justice, and fair commerce--that manhood whose inspiration and incentive was their country's honour, but whose guerdon was in many a case a lonely grave or a more imposing monument in the "sun-washed spaces"--the ambassadors of German _kultur_ followed upon a beaten track to seize at the opportune moment the material benefit of the crop where the others had ploughed with the expenditure of their physical energy, sown with the seeds of their intellect, and fertilised with their blood. Casting about between 1882 and 1884 for territory over which to hoist her flag, Germany found that nearly the whole of the world was occupied; and direct action of conquest not being expedient, Germans were busy seeking to accomplish their aims by secret methods of intrigue, always accompanied by deprecation of the infringement of the vested rights of others. Active steps for the acquisition of territory began to be taken in 1884. Under pretext of being interested in the suppression of the slave trade, Germany concerned herself in the affairs of Zanzibar, long subject to the influence of the Portuguese and British; but Germany later abandoned her ambitions in the island on the cession of Heligoland. Africa was the one continent which had not been partitioned, and Germany's quest of territory brought about the "scramble for Africa." Germany had annexed portions of the west coast (Togoland and Kamerun), and the vacillating policy of the British Government during 1882-1883 enabled the Germans to annex an enormous tract of territory north of the Orange River, which became known as German South West Africa. Altogether the German Colonies in Africa acquired in 1884 amounted to over 1,000,000 square miles. By what is known as the "Caprivi Treaty" of the 1st July, 1890, Great Britain and Germany agreed as to their respective "spheres of influence" in Africa. Great Britain assumed protection over the Island of Zanzibar, and ceded to Germany in exchange the Island of Heligoland. This exchange was regarded in Germany generally as a most disadvantageous one; but the possession of Heligoland as a fortress was of inestimable value to Germany--making possible the Borkum-Wilhelmshaven-Heligoland-Brunsbüttel naval position, and the German militarist section craved it in order to forestall France. The territory of the Sultan of Zanzibar on the mainland of Africa was ceded to Germany, with the harbour of Dar-es-Salaam; and the boundaries were so delimited as to include in German East Africa the mountain of Kilima 'Njaro, the German Emperor being supposed to have expressed a wish to possess the highest mountain in Africa as a mere matter of sentiment. The Caprivi Treaty also defined the boundaries of South West Africa. In 1884 Germany had also busied herself in the Pacific, and had hoisted her flag on several islands as well as in North New Guinea, where the Australasian Colonies had established settlements and vainly urged annexation on the British Government. In 1885 the sum of 180,000 marks was voted by the Reichstag "for the protection" of these new German Colonies. The opening of 1891 saw Germany with ample territory oversea to accommodate surplus population; while we, secure in our own strength, with amused tolerance, allowed her to climb to "her place in the sun." It was not the intention of Germany, however, to use the Colonies as dumping grounds, nor to encourage a policy of emigration--but rather to exploit them as supports for home industry. Many German industries depend upon foreign countries for the import of a continual supply of raw material which cannot be produced in Germany; while part of their necessaries are even obtained from abroad. They also depend to a considerable extent upon foreign countries for the sale of manufactures. Their prosperity depends upon import and export trade; for while the home industries provide work for masses of the population, all the products cannot be consumed at home and markets have to be found elsewhere if employment is to continue. It can never be said to be an economic interest to encourage the establishment of industries in Colonies--at least not manufactories of articles made at home. The establishment of such may be of interest to provide work for those who emigrate; but from the point of view of countries like Germany, whose existence depends on keeping their men at home, it is far preferable to develop every possible industry at home, and retain the Colonies only as markets and producers of raw material. This Germany proceeded to do. Developing Colonial trade, she extended her home industries. During eight years her Colonial trade rose from scarcely £5,000,000 to £12,000,000, and the effect of the acquisition of Colonies upon her home industries is marked in the fact that she employed in those industries 11,300,000 men in 1907 as against 6,400,000 in 1882. Germany, moreover, protects even her agriculture against the competition of her own Colonies--shutting out their meat and their grain. Germany's conception of the idea of Colonies, therefore, was to build up overseas a new Germany composed of daughter states, which would remain essentially German and be the means of keeping her men at home in remunerative employment by providing raw material for the development of her industries. A continental nation, surrounded by powerful neighbours, it seemed in her case a suicidal policy to scatter her population abroad; and therefore she exploited her Colonies in such a way as to help her to concentrate her people at home, where she required men in time of peace for economic development and in time of war for defence--and offence. As a natural sequence to the responsibility of oversea dominions, it becomes a question of life and death to keep open the oversea commerce protected by a powerful navy; and this point was strongly urged by the National Party which, advocating colonisation, arose in Germany in 1892. But with the growth of Germany's oversea trade and her navy, a new and splendid vista unfolded itself--no less than Germany, from her place in the sun, mistress of the world. To quote von Bernhardi: "The German nation, from the standpoint of its importance to civilisation, is fully entitled not only to demand a place in the sun, but to aspire to an adequate share in the sovereignty of the world far beyond the limits of its present sphere of influence." Von Treitschke, the neurotic German historian and poet, again "incessantly points his nation towards the war with England, to the destruction of England's supremacy at sea as the means by which Germany is to burst into that path of glory and of world dominion."[A] "Treitschke dreamed of a greater Germany to come into being after England had been crushed on the sea."[B] To obtain their object no other means presented itself than the Prussian militarist method. Bismarck's object--the goal towards which he strove, to so amply secure the position in Europe that it could never be questioned--seemed to have been attained by the machine of militarism, the huge army created and kept in being by national self-sacrifice. So to obtain what was now aimed at, the instrument was to be an invincible fleet which would in defiance of everyone keep sea communications open. As early as 1896 the "world Power" idea had evolved, and at the celebration in that year of the twenty-fifth anniversary of the foundation of the German Empire, the Emperor termed it a "world Empire." On the question of the rights of others the German Emperor was at all events satisfied, for he announced to the German Socialists: "We Hohenzollerns take our crown from God alone, and to God alone we are responsible," which leaves nothing more to be said on that point. To German minds the domination of the world was a very real ambition and quite in accord with the best Prussian traditions. In 1905 the German Emperor visited Tangier to impress upon a cynical brother Emperor the right to a place in Moroccan affairs; while in 1911 German diplomacy asserted that Germany was anxious to preserve the independence and integrity of Morocco because of her important interests in the country. As a matter of fact, German trade had steadily lost ground in Morocco and "in 1909 was exactly equal to 1/1500th or one-fifteenth part of one single per cent of her whole foreign trade."[C] Anent the Agadir crisis in 1911, Von Bernhardi naively admits that it was "only the fear of the intervention of England that deterred us from claiming a sphere of interests of our own in Morocco." The "sphere of interests" in Morocco consisted in coveting Agadir, the best harbour on the Atlantic coast of Morocco, which would have been of enormous importance to Germany and her Colonies because ordinarily the German fleet would be tied to the North Sea for want of coaling stations. During Great Britain's time of stress with the South African Republics, in the same way Baron Marshall von Bieberstein declared officially that "the continued independence of the Boer Republics was a German interest." The interest of Germany, apart from the undoubted hope of making the Republics German Colonies, it might simply be remarked, was that Germany had in contemplation the construction of a railway line from Pretoria to Santa Lucia Bay on the east coast, 800 miles nearer Europe than the port of Cape Town. German history holds no record of the integrity or independence of her neighbours being either of German interest or concern, and her attitude is in accord with her principle of concealing her real intention by adopting a spirit of deprecation. This is amply exemplified in the German Emperor's letter to Lord Tweedmouth of 14th February, 1908, stigmatising as "nonsensical and untrue" the idea that the German fleet was being built for any other purpose "than her needs in relation with her rapidly growing trade." The real obstacle to realisation of the great German dream was British naval supremacy; and all German thought and energy was devoted to the construction of a navy strong enough to challenge that supremacy. When she could do that it was within the bounds of possibility that Germany would indeed be _the_ world Power. Roughly, the German Colonial Empire is five times as big as Germany, with a population of about 14,000,000 natives; and the question of German Colonial policy is a question of native policy. It is in Germany's interest that the natives should be as numerous as possible, for it is their labour, intelligence, and industry that makes the Colonial Empire useful and necessary to Germany. Individual settlers are not encouraged to emigrate, but the plantations, ranches, etc., whence Germany drew her supplies of raw material such as cotton, rubber, wool, etc., are developed by chartered companies and trading firms, and the so-called settlers are the managers of these. Independent German farmers in her Colonies are few and far between, and the settlements which were to be centres of German _kultur_ have not eventuated. A new Germany has not been created oversea. There was, moreover, no room in German Colonial expansion for individualism, which has proved such a strength to England but was suppressed in Germany. The individual German is not given scope but subordinated to a system. The truth seems to be that Germany had not got the class of men she required for her scheme of Colonial development--or exploitation seems the better word. Germany's requirements were lands for growing raw material by native labour, and markets from which she could not be excluded--and she thought she had found them in her Colonies. The Colonies cried out for European enterprise and European capital, but they did not want individual settlers. Under British rule the German has proved a most desirable Colonist, but he has never thriven under his own Colonial administration. He is by nature extremely assimilative, and in our Colonies he prospers, not only competing with but outstripping the British trader owing to the employment of undercutting methods which do not so readily occur to the British mind, hampered as it usually is by a sense of fair play. In the eastern province of the Colony of the Cape of Good Hope, the members of the German Legion who settled after disbandment about King William's Town, Hanover, Stutterheim, etc., have developed into prosperous farmers and merchants. A sandy waste in the neighbourhood of Cape Town, once thought to be worthless, was subdivided and taken up almost entirely by Germans, and they have turned the land into one of the most productive portions of the Cape Peninsula. In America the German immigrants have readily assimilated, though in Brazil they have formed separate centres. In the German Colonies a set-back to development has been the fact that they have never realised the importance of respecting local manners and customs, but the home machinery has been applied in every particular to conditions wholly dissimilar and unsuitable. In South West Africa, for instance, Dr Bönn of Munich says they "solved the native problem by smashing tribal life." Being trained and accustomed to obey, moreover, the German cannot act without orders, and lacks initiative and therefore administrative ability. Compulsory military service has been instituted, and the German Colonial administration is cordially detested except where perhaps it favours ill-treatment and oppression of natives. Where the British have evolved a system of government which is a comity of commonwealths within a monarchy, and hold their dependencies by the sense of honour and appreciation, to which the attitude of South Africa bears splendid witness, the German's grip was by the claws of militarism and terrorism. Under the circumstances it is perhaps not surprising that the Germans should fall into the error that the British dependencies would embrace an opportunity of "throwing off the British yoke"; and the assumed disloyalty of British Colonies, with the further assumption, widely distributed, that various peoples under the British flag were capable of being tampered with easily, may well have been one of the most cogent theories leading the German Emperor and his advisers to their fateful decision. With the extraordinary aptitude of the Germans for intrigue, perhaps the war Lords were not altogether foolish in their conclusions. There was a chance of seduction, especially with native races in Africa, but it was a very small chance, and, like many another well-laid scheme, this one failed because its authors did not understand the material which was to be used to work it. It failed in Africa because the African is more than the beast of burden the German Colonists schooled and deluded themselves into thinking. They did not understand the native; and, in a word, the native hates the German, especially the officials. Their methods of colonisation have good points in matter of detail, routine work, etc.; but if colonisation be regarded as something more than the exploitation of a subject race and the passive holding of its territory, they must be written down a failure, for the extraordinary efficiency of the administrative machinery falls far short of compensating for the rottenness of the policy behind it. A nation in whom a much-vaunted _kultur_ has produced an ideal of national life whose highest expression is the atmosphere of a penal settlement, is foredoomed to failure as a coloniser. CHAPTER II SOUTH WEST AFRICA Ever since her acquisition of the Colony of the Cape of Good Hope, vitally important to her in view of her interests in the East, Great Britain had been unquestionably the supreme Power in the south of the African Continent. With the passing of the Dutch East India Company, Holland had ceased to be a South African Power; while the Portuguese had lost their status. The latter in reality only held an area along the coast of her possessions, a great proportion of the interior, which undoubtedly had once been beneficially occupied by Portuguese, having reverted to savagedom. The southern point of Portuguese South East Africa extended to and included Delagoa Bay and Lourenço Marquez, while the southern boundary of their western Colony was about the 22° S. From the days of its earliest history the Cape Colony was subject to attacks by natives, and the constant raids by hordes of Kafirs caused the Colony to extend its borders and absorb and settle the Hinterland. [Illustration: THE GERMAN COLONIES IN AFRICA, 1914. (Reproduced by permission of _The Times_.)] Up to 1883 the natural course of beneficial occupation and development had been towards the east and north-east borders, over the more fertile and naturally resourceful portions of the country, rather than west and north-west, where a comparatively arid zone intervened. Towards the Orange and Vaal Rivers the hardiest race of pioneers the world has ever seen, the "Voor-trekking" Boers, pressed onwards to escape from subjection to any form of government excepting their own patriarchal control. Their story hardly comes within the scope of this modest work; but it is indissolubly connected with the making of South Africa, and a brief sketch of their history may be permissible. The exodus of the Boers, who were composed of farmers of not only Dutch but French and English origin, commenced with the Great Trek of 1836, and they spread out ever seeking freedom from restraint. They came into collision with the Zulus under Dingaan, by whom a number of them were treacherously massacred, but whom they finally severely defeated and Dingaan fled. Dissensions arose amongst the Boers shortly after, and a number trekked on and established a separate settlement, with Potchefstroom as capital. Those who remained occupied Natal and established a Republic. Here, however, they did not find peace, for Sir George Napier, in command of the British forces at the Cape, dispatched a contingent to drive them out. This contingent the Boers nearly annihilated. A settler, Dick King, then made his memorable ride from Durban to Grahamstown, covering the distance of 375 miles in nine days, and reinforcements were sent up. Natal was, in 1843, declared to be a British Colony, with the result that a fresh exodus of Boers occurred across the Drakensberg Mountains into Griqualand. For forty years the Boers wandered, but wherever they tried to settle they were pressed on--being continually told that they could not shake off their allegiance, although no step was taken to reclaim them or the country they won. So far from receiving protection from the Cape Government, the latter even armed the Griquas against the Boers, and sent a military force to the assistance of the natives. And so they were harried until they were allowed to establish their Republics of the Transvaal and Free State, until overtaken by the destiny which Providence had marked out for them. In 1881 an attempt was made by Great Britain to annex the Transvaal, but after General Colley's defeat and death at Majuba the independence of the Transvaal was acknowledged under British suzerainty. The western border of the Transvaal Republic marched on Bechuanaland and the Kalahari Desert, and in 1882 the Transvaal completed a convention with the Portuguese Government under which the former was granted a concession to build a railway from the capital, Pretoria, to Delagoa Bay on the east coast. The delimited boundary of the Cape Colony was the Orange River, but as early as 1793 a Dutch expedition from the Cape took possession of Walfisch Bay, Angra Pequena, as well as Possession, Ichaboe, and other islands on the south-west coast in the name of the Dutch East India Company, while Namaqualand and Damaraland had been traversed from end to end by British and Dutch traders and explorers. British statesmen, however, neglected the south-west, though the islands were annexed at different times between 1861 and 1867, and Walfisch Bay in 1878. In 1874 the islands were incorporated in the Cape Colony. The mainland on the south-west, however, remained an open field as far as actual occupation went, in spite of its being tacitly acknowledged a British "sphere of influence." Until the "scramble for Africa" no one would have regarded with anything but ridicule the idea that an enormous tract of country, comprising Great Namaqualand and Damaraland, would have been lost to Great Britain; yet British statesmen at home, feeling secure in the country's position, refused to encourage anything but a policy of gradual absorption. In 1867 the Home Government was strongly urged by the Government of the Cape to annex Great Namaqualand and Damaraland, but declined to undertake the responsibility. In the following year the residents of the territory, including numerous German missionaries, urged that the country might be declared British and be subject to British administration; but the proposal was met with disfavour. In the year 1877 that great-minded Imperialist, Sir Bartle Frere, then Governor of the Cape of Good Hope, advised by the Executive Council at the Cape, made a strong recommendation that as a first step an Order in Council should be passed, empowering the Cape Parliament to legislate for the purpose of annexing the coast up to the Portuguese boundary; and that in the meanwhile no time should be lost in hoisting the British flag at Walfisch Bay. This latter step was assented to, and it was shortly afterwards carried into effect; but Sir Bartle Frere's larger proposals were negatived. Sir Bartle Frere subsequently renewed his representations on the subject, but the Imperial Government continued of opinion that no action should be taken.[D] The British Imperial Government was satisfied that there could be no possible danger in delay, and were disturbed at the unsettled state of the native territories of the Cape Colony and the recurrence of native disturbances which have been a prevailing element in the existence of the Colony. The Imperial Government finally decided that it was unnecessary to extend their possessions beyond the then boundaries, that the Orange River should be maintained as the north-western boundary of the Cape Colony, and that the Government would give no encouragement to schemes for the extension of British jurisdiction over Great Namaqualand and Damaraland. Up to 1883 the only assent to petitions from the Cape Government, from residents in Great Namaqualand and Damaraland, and from the natives of those territories, was for the annexation of the islands off the coast, and of Walfisch Bay and a very small portion of the country immediately surrounding it. The danger of Germany stepping in was never disturbing to the minds of the British statesmen, and they were merely concerned with weighing the advantages of embracing the occasion. German diplomacy had, however, been at work in its insidious way; and although active operations under Bismarck's policy of forming "Trade Colonies" were not undertaken by the German Government until well into 1884, the promoters and originators of the German Colonisation Society had been busy ever since the first conception of the Colonial idea in Germany. During the years preceding 1884, indeed, representatives of the Bremen and Hamburg merchants had made many not unsuccessful efforts to worm themselves into the trading centres in Southern Africa. Ambassadors of German commerce set out as pioneers of the new movement, and as early as August, 1883, the _Standard_ newspaper published a communication from its special correspondent in Berlin--headed "The First German Colony"--reporting that a Bremen firm had "acquired" the Bay of Angra Pequena (Luderitzbucht) on the south-west coast of Africa. The article proceeds that "the German Press, which was disappointed by the Reichstag last year (_re_ the Samoa Bill), expresses great satisfaction at the consent of the German Government to protect the infant Colony and to allow the German flag to be hoisted over it. The semi-official _Post_ declares that this is the most practicable kind of colonisation, because it avoids international difficulties. In spite of the statement ... that the German Government avoids giving any encouragement to immigration, the _Post_ is convinced that if Germans will promote the increase of German manufacturing industry by founding commercial Colonies, they will not lack the powerful protection of the Imperial Government." There the whole of Bismarck's ex-territorial policy lies in a nutshell: the continued expansion of Germany from within by means of trade with purely German dominions. Beyond this the German Government expressed no intention of actually annexing territory, though it was a straw which showed very clearly the direction in which the wind set. It was an inexpedient policy for the Government to proceed to declaring Protectorates over areas not in actual occupation by other Powers yet coming within their "spheres of influence," and the subterfuge resorted to was the establishment of trade centres by merchants who would claim the protection of the German flag; albeit it could not be seriously argued that the mere foundation of a trading station could constitute territorial acquisition in any part of the world where Germany as a Power had not the least claim. For many years there had in Germany been advocates of colonisation schemes with a considerably wider horizon, who had formulated ideas of expansion and pressed their views upon the German Government and public. Foremost amongst these was Herr Ernst von Weber, and the enunciation of his higher ambitions for his country, in a remarkable article published in 1879, not only attracted considerable attention in South Africa but induced Sir Bartle Frere again to draw the attention of the Home Government to the avouched plan for a German Colony in South Africa. Herr von Weber in his article pointed to the attractive prospect and noble ambition by which Englishmen might be inspired to found a new Empire in the African continent, "possibly more valuable and more brilliant than even the Indian Empire." Von Weber argued that it was the duty of Germany to protest against steps taken by England to realise this ambition; urging in support that Germans had a peculiar interest in the "Boer" territories--"for here dwell a splendid race of people nearly allied to us (Germans)." After going into the history of the Boers, the writer of the article states quite seriously that the Transvaal Boers had "the most earnest longing that the German Empire, _which they properly regard as their parent and mother country_, should take them under its protection." As a matter of fact, except in Government circles in the coterie of continental intriguers who surrounded and misled Paul Kruger, the German is barely tolerated by the Boers, and _vervluchste Deutscher_ (cursed German) is as common a descriptive as _verdomde Rooinek_ (damned Englishman).[E] In the first place, to the Boers every German is a Jew--a gentleman, in his mind, associated with a watch with defective parts or a "last year's ready reckoner." Next, the Boer, while proud of his ancestry, strongly disclaims any loyalty to a European Power; and although a Dutch dialect is in almost universal use, he would indignantly repudiate a suggestion that he is bound by any ties to Holland, even after he has been fully persuaded of the actual existence of that country. The Boer trekkers, besides those of Dutch origin, included the descendants of many noble French families, and their numbers were supplemented by English immigrants who were sent out to the eastern province of the Cape Colony in 1820. Many of these trekked with the Boers owing to dissatisfaction at being denied political and civil rights; and of the original 3053 immigrants who landed in 1820, only 438 remained a few years later, on their original grants in the Cape Colony. While the Boers protested and fought against annexation by great Britain, it was merely because of repugnance to restraint and certainly not out of any love for Germany. After expatiating on the richness of the mineral resources of the Transvaal, von Weber points to the possibilities of the country if Delagoa Bay were acquired. In spite of claiming the Boers as kindred, however, he shows the cloven hoof by stating that "a constant mass immigration of Germans would gradually bring about a decided numerical preponderance of Germans over the Dutch population, and of itself would by degrees effect the germanisation of the country in a peaceful manner." He goes on to recommend that Germany ought "at any price," in order to forestall England, to get possession of points on both the west and east coasts of Africa, where factories could be established, branches of which, properly fortified, could be gradually pushed farther and farther inland and so by degrees form a wide network of German settlements. That these views were not held by Herr von Weber alone in Germany must have been apparent to our Foreign and Colonial Offices, but the only steps taken were to ask the British ambassador in Berlin for a report; and this, when received, assured the Government that the plan had no prospect of success, because the German Government felt more the want of soldiers than of Colonies, and consequently discouraged emigration--while the German Government's disinclination to acquire distant dependencies had been marked in the rejection of the Samoa Bill. The possibility of a reversal of feeling did not occur to anyone apparently, and the British Government was therefore quite satisfied that "the plan had no prospect of success"; and having intimated the same to Sir Bartle Frere, abandoned interest in the matter. To the Prussian militarist section in Germany Ernst von Weber's exhortation irresistibly appealed. A glance at the map of South Africa will show how feasible it was for Germany not only to curtail the expansion of British territory from the south, but to secure the dominion of the greater part of the continent for Germany. It was a great ideal and came near to consummation by insidious working of German Government agents, bountifully assisted in their object by the vacillation and indifference of the British Colonial and Foreign Offices. In the south-west was a huge area of which no actual annexation had been proclaimed, yet to the mind of our statesmen amply secured by being understood to be within the "sphere of British influence." Between it and the Transvaal Republic lay another unprotected area stretching across the Kalahari so-called "desert" and including Bechuanaland, the happy hunting-ground of missionaries and Matabele raiders. South-east of the Transvaal, stretching to the coast, was another unoccupied region comprising Tongaland and part of Zululand, with an excellent harbour on the east coast at St Lucia Bay. Give any Power Great Namaqualand and Damaraland on the west coast, add Bechuanaland in the interior and a working agreement with the Transvaal Republic with access to the east coast at St Lucia Bay, then the Cape Colony was shut in by very circumscribed borders for ever from her Hinterland; while a dream of "Africa all Red" was smothered in its genesis, and its record filed away for future reference in the archives of the might have been. But a belt across the southern portion of the continent did not comprise the sum-total of the Prussian ambition. There was an enormous and fabulously rich extent of country stretching up to and beyond the Zambezi, occupied only by marauding savages under the rule of Lo Bengula, King of the Amandebele--and now known as Rhodesia. With a distinct vision of the prize offering, the German set out with the mailed fist wrapped in cotton wool to stalk his prey delicately. In 1883 while German traders were busy establishing a footing in Great Namaqualand and Damaraland, diplomacy and intrigue had been at work in the Transvaal. The Boer Government had concluded an agreement with the Portuguese whereby they obtained an outlet to the east coast by a railway to Delagoa Bay, and the Boers had begun to occupy portions of Bechuanaland, separating the Transvaal and Namaqualand. Boer Republics were proclaimed over the territories of several Bechuana chiefs, and overtures were made by German emissaries from the Transvaal to Lo Bengula for a concession over the territory under his sway. [Illustration: SOUTH AFRICA IN 1883. Showing the Transcontinental belt with which Germany hoped to shut in Cape Colony and prevent northern expansion.] Tongaland and a portion of the Zululand coast, including St Lucia Bay, was under the subjection of Dinizulu, who had succeeded Cetywayo as King of Zululand, and with him negotiations were entered into, the ultimate end of which was to be the cession to Germany (or the Transvaal) of a portion of the sea-board. The British Government can hardly really be blamed for not pursuing in 1883 a vigorous policy of annexation in Southern Africa, for in 1879 there had been general native disturbances--including a costly war with the Zulus, with its memorable disaster to the British arms at Isandhlwana and the deplorable death of Prince Victor Napoleon. In 1881 we were defeated by the Boers at Laings Nek and Majuba, the little war ending with a retirement quite the reverse of graceful; in 1882 Egypt was in a foment, and although Sir Garnet Wolseley destroyed Ahmed Arabi at Tel-el-Kebir, the Sudan was still overrun by frenzied fanatics. The dilatoriness of the Imperial Government, however, is inexcusable in view of the importance of the issue at stake, which was the overthrow of British supremacy in South Africa in favour of Germany. Fortunately for us, there were at the Cape imperially minded statesmen who were fully alive to the danger threatening Great Britain: Sir Bartle Frere, Cecil Rhodes, Sir Thomas Upington, and John X. Merriman; and these continually pressed their views upon the Home Government, while Rhodes, who had formulated his own ideas as to the destiny of the sub-continent, set himself to employ his bounteous talents of mental and physical energy to the due accomplishment of a purpose which he made his life's aim. Fortunately he had at his private command the financial resources indispensable to the consummation of his ideals; for if he had had to rely upon the Home Government for that support, his ambition stood little hope of realisation. The German hope of obtaining sway over Bechuanaland through the Boers was frustrated by vigorous action on the part of the Cape statesmen. Their protests, and especially the individual efforts of Rhodes, stirred the Home Government into saving for the Empire the territory which the freebooters from the Transvaal had seized upon in the name of their Republic. Rhodes personally, on behalf of the Cape Government, conducted negotiations with the Boers, but it was not until 1885 that a successful issue was arrived at after a show of force by the Home Government in the expedition of Sir Charles Warren. The danger of the Cape Colony being cut off from the north through Bechuanaland was obviated, but a large field for German enterprise still lay open. Their attempts to acquire a footing in Matabeleland were frustrated, and the delegates who set out from the Transvaal in search of a concession from Lo Bengula were unsuccessful in their mission to secure for Germany sway over the countries that now comprise Rhodesia. For decades British private enterprise had been busy on the coast of Great Namaqualand and Damaraland; in fact in 1863 a British firm (De Pass, Spence & Co.) had purchased from the native chiefs a large tract round about Angra Pequena, and worked the huge deposits of guano on the Ichaboe group of islands, some of which are less than a mile off the mainland. Disputes were constant up to 1884 between British and German traders; continuous appeals were made for British annexation of the territory from the Orange River to the Portuguese border, but the Government could not be induced to do anything more towards acceding to Sir Bartle Frere's urgent representations than to declare Walfisch Bay, with some fifteen miles around it, to be British territory. In 1882 a German, Herr Luderitz, the representative in South Africa of the Hamburg and Bremen merchants who pulled the strings of the Government through the German Colonisation Society, established a trading station at Angra Pequena and commenced, in accordance with the preconceived plan of "conquest," to extend the operations of his business inland by founding trade stations at suitable centres. The British traders soon began to make representations to the Cape Government owing to Luderitz exercising rights of proprietorship over a large portion of territory which he claimed to own by purchase, and to his levying import duty charges upon goods landed by other traders. Another cause of complaint was that Luderitz was importing large quantities of arms and ammunition and supplying them to the natives by way of barter. The German wedge having been insidiously inserted into South West Africa, the propitious moment seemed to have arrived in 1884 for Germany to acquire territorial possession of South West Africa. Representations were accordingly made by the German to the British Government, pointing out that German subjects had substantial interests in and about Angra Pequena in need of protection, and inquiring whether the British were prepared to extend protection to the German industries and subjects north of the Orange River, which British statesmen seemed to have stubbornly determined should remain the boundary of the Cape Colony. The Governor of the Cape had, indeed, been clearly and distinctly given to understand that, except as regards Walfisch Bay, the Home Government would lend no encouragement to the establishment of British jurisdiction in Great Namaqualand and Damaraland north of the Orange River. Bismarck's application to Lord Granville, therefore, placed the latter in an awkward predicament, inasmuch as he intimated that if Great Britain were not agreeable to providing protection for the lives and properties of German subjects, the German Government would do its best to extend to it the same measure of protection which they gave to their subjects in other remote places. Bismarck took care, however, to impress upon the British Foreign Office that in any action the German Government might take there was no underlying design to establish a territorial footing in South Africa. He disclaimed any intention other than to obtain protection for the property of German subjects; and this assurance was complacently accepted as a complete reply to the representations of the Cape statesmen. The Home Government seem, at the same time, to have understood at the beginning of 1884 that the choice lay before them of formally annexing South West Africa from the Orange River north to the Portuguese border, or acquiescing in a German annexation. With almost criminal procrastination, however, they deferred replying to the German inquiry, deeming it necessary to communicate with the Government of the Cape Colony and invite that Government, in the event of South West Africa being declared to be under British jurisdiction, to undertake the responsibility and cost of the administration of the territory. Lord Granville, moreover, temporised by informing Bismarck that the Cape Colonial Government had certain establishments along the south-western coasts, and that he would obtain a report from the Cape, as it was not possible without more precise information to form any opinion as to whether the British authorities would have it in their power to give the protection asked for in case of need. This answer Bismarck probably expected and welcomed, as it left him free to proceed with his own arrangements, while the British Foreign Office pigeonholed the subject until the matter might be reopened. In the beginning of 1883, owing to representations from British firms interested in South West Africa as to German activity in that part, the British Foreign Office obtained a report from their Chargé d'Affaires in Berlin, and were again lulled into complaisant inactivity by being assured that the amount of "protection" intended to be afforded by the German Government to Luderitz's "commercial Colony" was precisely what would be granted to any other subject of the Empire who had settled abroad and acquired property. It would be a mistake, the Foreign Office was notified, to suppose that the German Government had any intention of establishing crown Colonies or of assuming a Protectorate over a territory acquired by a traveller or explorer. In September the German inquiries of the Foreign Office assumed a more pertinent nature, and to the uncultured mind would carry an alarming significance. The British Foreign Office was asked "quite unofficially" and for the private information of the German Government, whether Great Britain claimed suzerainty rights over Angra Pequena and the adjacent territory; and if so, to explain upon what grounds the claim was based. This necessitated another reference to the Cape of Good Hope; but in the meantime a party of English traders, disgusted at the delay at home in annexing the south-west coast, resolved to take action on their own account, and set off for Angra Pequena with the fixed determination--of which they gave the Government due notice--of expelling the Germans. Instructions were immediately sent out for a gunboat to proceed to the spot to prevent a collision between the British and Germans, as the whole question of jurisdiction was still the "subject of inquiry." H.M.S. _Boadicea_ proceeded on instructions to Angra Pequena, and her Commander was able to report, on her return to Simon's Bay on the Cape station, that no collision had taken place. In November, 1883, the British Foreign Office intimated to the German Government that a report on South West Africa was in course of preparation, but that while British sovereignty had not been proclaimed excepting over Walfisch Bay and the islands, the Government considered that any claim to sovereignty or jurisdiction by a foreign Power between the Portuguese border and the frontier of the Cape Colony (the Orange River) would infringe Great Britain's legitimate rights. Early in 1884 the German Government, in a dispatch to the British Foreign Office, pointed out that the fact that British sovereignty had not been proclaimed over South West Africa permitted of doubt as to the legal claim of the British Government, as well as to the practical application of the same; the German Government having clearly in mind the avowal of a fixed intention on the part of the British Government not to extend jurisdiction over the coast territory excepting in so far as Walfisch Bay and the islands were concerned. The dispatch argued that events had shown that the British Government did not claim sovereignty in the territory, but as a matter of fact the Government had emphatically declined to assume that responsibility. The German dispatch concluded by asking our Government for a statement of the title upon which any claim for sovereignty over the territory was based, and what provision existed for securing legal protection for German subjects in their commercial enterprises and property, in order that the German Government might be relieved of the duty of providing direct protection for its subjects in that territory. Here, again, was a deprecation on the part of Germany of any other ambition than to secure protection for life and property of German subjects. Lord Derby, Secretary of State for the Colonies, was aware of the possibility of Germany assuming jurisdiction over Angra Pequena in the absence of an assurance that the British Government was prepared to undertake the protection of German subjects; but the British Government shrank from the idea of annexing the territory, and endeavoured to saddle the Cape Government with the responsibility of giving the undertaking asked for by Germany. The Cape Government was in no position to assume such a responsibility, though they did not hesitate to offer to do so as soon as a cabinet meeting could be called to decide on the matter--but when it was too late. On the 30th January, 1884, the Cape Government, in a minute signed by John X. Merriman, recommended the annexation to the British Empire of the whole of Great Namaqualand and Damaraland from the Orange River to the Portuguese border, the interests of the Cape Colony being chiefly in the arming of natives by gun-running through the port at Angra Pequena. Official and private notifications were sent to the British Foreign Offices of the intention of Germany to take over the suzerainty of South West Africa in defiance of Great Britain's claims; but our Government, fondly embracing the idea that Germany had no intention of acquiring the territory but was only solicitous for legal protection of private property, still declined to act until the Cape Government expressed their readiness to accept the responsibility and cost. On the 24th April, 1884, the day which has recently been described in German publications as "the Birthday of the German Colonial Empire," Bismarck telegraphed to the German Consul at Cape Town as follows: "According to statements of Mr Luderitz, Colonial authorities doubt as to his acquisitions north of Orange River being entitled to German protection. You will declare officially that he and his establishments are under protection of the Empire." This meant the annexation to Germany of the whole territory; but communications continued between the Home and the Cape Colonial Governments. In the Reichstag on the 23rd June, 1884, Bismarck showed his hand for the first time; and on the point of infringement of Great Britain's "legitimate rights," stated that no such infringement could be pleaded inasmuch as in English official documents the Orange River had repeatedly been declared to be the north-western border of the Cape Colony. Bismarck further announced that it was the intention of the Government to afford the Empire's protection to any "settlements" similar to that of Luderitz which might be established by Germans. He added in his address to the Reichstag that "if the question were asked what means the Empire had to afford effective protection to German enterprises in distant parts, the first consideration would be the influence of the Empire and the wish and interests of other Powers to remain in friendly relations with it." There was nothing left but for our Government to bow at the triumph of superior diplomacy, and the position was accepted with a good grace--Lord Granville declaring that in view of the definitions which had been publicly given by the British Government of the limits of Cape Colony, the claim of the German Government could not be contested, and that the British Government was therefore prepared to recognise the rights of the Germans. There were some very violent expressions of opinion on the part of Britishers who had vested interests in this, the first of Germany's Colonies, for there were many private rights concerned, and it was decided that an Anglo-German Commission should be appointed to inquire into and settle all conflicting claims; but it is not of record that, excepting in regard to the islands, the decisions of the Commission were in favour of the British traders who had for many years been established along the coast of South West Africa. The result of Luderitz's enterprise, supported by Prussian diplomacy, was, therefore, that the German flag waved over the whole extent of South West Africa from the Orange River to the border of Portuguese Angola, and Angra Pequena assumed the responsibility of the name "Luderitzbucht." In the meantime Herr Luderitz had established his trading stations at St Lucia Bay on the coast of Zululand, and proceeded to repeat the stratagem he had followed in Angra Pequena by founding trade stations at points inland while he opened negotiations with Dinizulu. The annexation of South West Africa had, however, caused the British Government to throw off some of their lethargy, and a British warship was dispatched to St Lucia Bay, over which, by virtue of a treaty made with the Zulu King Panda some forty years previously, the British flag was hoisted on the 18th December, 1884. Danger of the Cape being cut off from the north was, however, still extant in Bechuanaland, where the Boers had annexed the territories known as Stellaland, Goshen, and Rooigrond; but this was eventually saved to Great Britain by vigorous individual action on the part of Cecil Rhodes, who had himself appointed a Commissioner to visit Bechuanaland, where he strenuously opposed the claims of the Transvaal Republic. These claims were, however, only withdrawn in the following year after an expedition under Sir Charles Warren had proceeded to the disputed areas and persuaded the Boers that Great Britain was this time in real and eager earnest. Bechuanaland became a British "Protectorate," and the well-laid scheme for a German transcontinental Empire was frustrated. The boundaries of the territory brought under German sway in South West Africa were defined by what is known as the Caprivi Treaty of the 1st July, 1890, between Germany and Great Britain, and by an agreement between Germany and Portugal. Under the terms of the latter the northern boundary of German South West Africa, between that Colony and Portuguese Angola, was fixed at the Cunene River; while under the Caprivi Treaty the boundary between the Cape Colony and German South West Africa was declared to be the Orange River. Great Britain retained Walfisch Bay, which became a "district" of the Cape Colony and was placed under the Colonial administration in 1884, and also kept the territory round Lake 'Ngami in northern Bechuanaland. The lake district was neglected, however, until Cecil Rhodes, fearing the loss of more territory unless it was beneficially occupied, sent, at his own expense, an expedition of Boer trekkers to settle on the land. Article III of the Caprivi Treaty was an important one, for thereunder it was provided that Germany should "have free access from her Protectorate (South West Africa) to the Zambezi River by a strip which shall at no point be less than twenty English miles in width." The acquisition by Germany of South West Africa was of great strategical importance, enabling them to establish in time a system of communication by wireless telegraphy which covered the whole continent. In Togoland on the west coast the most powerful wireless apparatus in the world was installed, and this was in touch both by wireless and cable with Berlin. The Togoland station was also in touch with the wireless installation at Windhoek, the capital of German South West Africa, and with Dar-es-Salaam, the German port on the east coast opposite Zanzibar. It is a matter for congratulation, but not on the statesmanship displayed by British ministers, that the fruit of the German essay at the establishment of a "new Empire" in Southern Africa was no more than the annexation of South West Africa, for it is by no means unthinkable that there was a possibility that in addition to the south-west the Germans might have drawn a wide belt right across the continent from west to east, taking in Bechuanaland, the Transvaal, Tongaland, and that portion of Zululand giving the Transvaal an outlet to the east coast at St Lucia Bay. [Illustration: ILLUSTRATING GERMANY'S WIRELESS SYSTEM EMBRACING AFRICA.] The territory hitherto known as German South West Africa covers an area of nearly 323,000 square miles, and has a coastline of 930 miles from the mouth of the Orange River, which separates it from the Cape Colony in the south, to the mouth of the Cunene River, which divides the territory from Portuguese Angola in the north. The southern boundary runs along the Orange River into the interior for some 300 miles. The German population is stated to be about 15,000, and the natives are estimated at 200,000; but this latter is probably a high calculation, in view of the number who have fled into Bechuanaland and Cape Colony to escape from German tyranny. One of the first acts of the German Government after their annexation of Damaraland and Great Namaqualand was to declare the claims of British concessionaires invalid. The "rights" of Herr Luderitz were taken over by a chartered company, incorporated by the Government, which set itself to investigate the resources of the country. The islands off the coast remained British, and there the huge deposits of guano have been worked for years. A form of military government was established, who proceeded to impress the natives with the might of Germany; but the Hereros who occupied Damaraland never acknowledged even a German suzerainty, and in 1904 a "rebellion" broke out. Utterly unaccustomed as they were to warfare of the description they were now called upon to undertake, the Germans found great difficulty in dealing with the "Hottentots," as the natives were termed; and the German effort to destroy the whole tribe involved the employment of 9,000 regular troops and an expenditure of £ 20,000,000. The Herero War was carried on for nearly three years, and in 1907 was brought to an end by Major Elliott of the Cape Police; for the principal Herero chiefs crossed the borders of the Cape Colony, where they were routed by Major Elliott's force of police and their leaders captured. They were detained for a time by the Cape Government, and finally handed over to the German authorities, by whom they were executed. Major Elliott was thanked and duly decorated by the Kaiser. The Germans did not find tribes of natives on whose industry they could batten, and the inhabitants of Great Namaqualand and Damaraland were really unpromising material for such a purpose, not being pure-bred distinctive tribes, but bastard races with a strong admixture of half-castes. For decades the territory had been the refuge of criminals and cattle thieves, who had fled from the Cape Colony, after raiding the Bechuana cattle kraals. A great deal of the coast and part of the southern portion of the Colony is little else than an arid, waterless waste; in fact the rainfall in parts has been known to be half an inch in two years. Even at Walfisch Bay there is no fresh water to speak of, and for years water for all purposes was brought up the coast by steamers. It is a condition prevailing all along the coast, for even at Port Nolloth in Lesser Namaqualand, south of the Orange River, the inhabitants depend upon water condensed by the sea fogs and dripped from the roofs into tanks, which are by the way kept locked to prevent theft of the precious liquid. Powerful condensers have, however, for some time been used at various points on the coast to provide fresh water, and this is retailed at a high price. The Kalahari Desert stretches over the border of the Cape Colony and into Bechuanaland, and contains no surface water; although good results have been obtained by drilling to comparatively shallow depths, and the sandy soil proved highly productive on irrigation. The desert itself was occupied by nomad bushmen armed with bows and arrows poisoned by being laid in putrid human flesh, and who kept secret the places where they obtained water. Many of these are pools hidden beneath the earth's surface and from which the water can only be drawn up through a narrow channel by suction through a bamboo reed. A good substitute for water is found in the wild melons which grow in patches in the driest parts of the Kalahari, and on these police patrols in Bechuanaland have often to rely for water for themselves and animals. The arid zone is limited, however, and towards the north-east the land gradually rises to an elevated tableland, possessing a dry and one of the most perfect climates in the world. Approaching Angola again farther north the country becomes almost tropical. The majority of the veld is of the karoo type, covered with the remarkable karoo bush on the leafless twigs of which sheep thrive and fatten. The salt bush, similar to that valued in Australia for sheep, is found in abundance, but towards the north and coming under the influence of a rainfall the land, while there is no marked geological difference, produces grass instead of the salt bush, and there are belts of rich grass country as fine as any to be found in Southern Africa. Damaraland is in reality one of the finest cattle countries in Africa, while nearly the whole country is suitable for sheep and goats. With energetic development there is a big future for it as a producer of hides, wool, and mohair. Horses do well in many parts of South West Africa; in fact in Namaqualand, along the Orange River, a breed of hardy ponies exists in a semi-wild state. In the drier parts camels are extensively used both by British and German patrols. The most waterless area near the coast produces a shrub known by the Boers as _melk bosch_ (milk-bush), which carries a plentiful supply of a milky sap which has been manufactured into a fair quality of rubber; but the difficulty of its collection militates against the prospects of its development into a prosperous industry. The number of head of cattle, the property of the natives but transferred to the Germans by conquest, was, in 1913, estimated at 240,000, wool-bearing sheep 660,000, and other sheep, including Persians, at over 500,000. There were approximately the same number of goats, 20,000 horses, and 3000 ostriches. In the northerly portion, suitable for agriculture, this was carried on by natives; but their land was confiscated by the Germans, and, as Dr Bönn stated in a reading upon the Colony, "the framework of society is European; very little land is in the hands of natives." The land was parcelled out into farms and allocated to companies and Boer settlers, the average size of a farm being about 28,000 acres. Ostriches are found in many parts in a wild state, and a great number have been domesticated; but the German traders preferred as a rule to rely for their supply of feathers upon the plumes of wild birds killed by the bushmen of the Kalahari. Of other industries mention might be made of the collection, besides guano, of penguin eggs and seal skins on the islands off the coast, while a few degrees north whalers, operating from Port Alexander, last year accounted for some 3000 whales. As at the Cape of Good Hope, the whales met with are of the less valuable "hump-backed" variety, but an occasional "right" or sperm whale is captured. Of ordinary trade there was practically none, as the natives had little or nothing to give in exchange for imported goods; and as for the Boer settler, beyond a little coffee and sugar, he has learned to rely only upon the resources of his farm for his requirement. The natives' only asset of value to the German, his labour, he was not disposed to trade in. Investigation has revealed the existence of mountains of marble, varied in colour and of a quality equal to Carara; while enormous deposits of gypsum exist. The whole country is highly mineralised. Silver first attracted the attention of prospectors but has never been found in payable quantities, although large veins of galena have been traced. The development of the mineral resources is almost entirely British, and Johannesburg financiers have opened up copper and gold mines. Enormous deposits of haematite iron and asbestos are known to exist, but so far have not been worked. Copper, gold, silver, tin, and lead have been worked profitably; but the principal mining industry is diamond washing, and this is mainly in Government hands. No mine or pipe has been discovered, but the diamonds are found in the loose sand on the foreshore under conditions similar to those prevailing at Diamantina in Brazil. The diamonds are "dolleyed," and picked out by natives under supervision; but there are a few individual diggers upon whose net production the Government levied a tax. The output of diamonds in 1913 was valued at £3,000,000, the stones being disposed of under State agency, who occupy the same relative position to the industry as the De Beers Diamond Buying Syndicate to the Kimberley mines. Diamonds and their concomitants such as olivine, rubies, garnets, etc., have also been discovered on the islands, and in 1906 the discovery of a true pipe was reported on Plum Pudding Island. A syndicate was formed in England, and an expedition, fitted out with great secrecy, was sent out in the S.S. _Xema_; but on arriving at Plum Pudding Island they not only discovered that a tug, dispatched by a Cape Town firm, had visited the island and claimed discoverers' rights, but that by order of the Cape Government no landing was permitted for fear of disturbing the sea-birds, on whom the guano industry depended. The capital of South West Africa was established at Windhoek, 235 miles inland, and here a large five-tower wireless station was built, which could under the most favourable conditions communicate direct with Berlin, but was otherwise in touch via Togoland. Windhoek is connected by a railway line with the coast at Swakopmund at the mouth of the Swakop River close to Walfisch Bay, and 1318 miles of railways have been built. The Administration has laid down a network of roads and telephones, which presents a contrast to some of our Colonies where the means of communication are extremely difficult, but points at the same time to expensive administration. Signposts are placed everywhere in the country, indicating the direction of water or villages. While Luderitzbucht is a fine harbour, the lack of fresh water made the Germans select Swakopmund as the principal point on the coast, although it possesses an open roadstead and a heavy sandy bar. From Swakopmund the principal railway through Windhoek links up with the line from Luderitzbucht at Keetmanshoop, and the lines, as in other German Colonies, strike significantly towards British borders. The Caprivi strip, running into northern Rhodesia, and presented to Germany under the agreement of 1890--which the newspaper _South Africa_ termed "a most iniquitous one"--was of great importance to Germany's aspirations in the interior, inasmuch as Germany aimed at the construction of a German line over German territory to connect with the Rhodesian Trans-African line near the Zambezi. The strip indeed abuts for about 100 miles on the Zambezi. No effort has been made to develop it, and under a heavy penalty no one was allowed to enter the strip. A line such as that under contemplation by the Germans is, however, now in course of construction from Lobito Bay (Benguella) in Portuguese territory. The only real settlers in South West Africa are Boers who trekked from the Transvaal and Cape Colony. It has been said that where you find Boers you may be sure to find the pick of the farming land, and the Boer farms are widely scattered over Damaraland. The German system, however, was not likely to appeal to such spirits of independence as the Boers, especially when the Germans meted out to those Boers whom they employed as transport-riders during the Herero campaign, the same treatment as to the natives, and in some cases had Boers tied up to wagon wheels and flogged for minor offences. Taken in all, the Colony is one the development of which has been carried on on strategical rather than commercial lines; but it is a territory of vast possibilities as a pastoral land, and as there is at present all over the world a shortage of meat, likely to intensify, the holder of a vast extent of country suitable for raising cattle possesses a most valuable asset. There cannot be the least doubt that in common with the rest of Germany, South West Africa had for some time been preparing for the anticipated inevitable war with Great Britain, and a much larger number of German troops were held in the Colony than any fear of a possible native disturbance warranted. The German forces were estimated at no less than 15,000, with at least 30 batteries of guns. A plan had, as events have subsequently revealed, been laid for the invasion of the South African Union, which was to be overrun with the assistance of the Boers--on whose co-operation the Germans were fatuous enough to imagine they could count. Holding their own Colonies by terrorism, they held an utterly false conception of the relation of our Colonies to the mother country. The Germans in South West Africa, at the outbreak of the war, had succeeded in bribing and corrupting an ex-Boer General, Maritz, and issued a circular to the Boer farmers on the border, calling upon them "to free themselves from English dominion so long and unwillingly borne," and to exchange the British "yoke" for the German shackles. They forgot that the weight of the "yoke" was never felt. On the declaration of war, a section of the Boers preached neutrality on the part of the Union, but the Boer leaders themselves denounced this doctrine as craven and pitiful. While "a systematic German propaganda deliberately attempted to poison the integrity of a section of the people," to quote Mr John X. Merriman, the Germans found in the Union Premier, General Louis Botha, that, to the German mind, incomprehensible being, a man imbued with the sense of the very highest integrity and honour, in whose nature it was impossible to contemplate a breach of faith or to regard a treaty bearing his signature as a "scrap of paper." The Germans found to their intense surprise Briton and Boer united, while the Union was swept by a wave of intense patriotism, revealed in the promise and offer of loyal support to General Botha by every section of the varied comities. From natives, Cape "Boys," and Malays alike came assurances of their intense loyalty, with offers of help; while the native contributions in cattle swelled the relief funds. Prior to the knowledge of Maritz's defection, General Botha had only mobilised a few thousand men for defence purposes; but on his assurance that the Union was able to undertake its own defence, the Imperial Government was enabled to remove the garrisons of regulars for service on the continent. This was possibly regarded by the Germans as a ruse on General Botha's part to get rid of the British garrisons; and a few days after when a state of war existed between Great Britain and Germany, the Germans on the Orange River assumed the offensive. At Nakob a garrison of five South African Mounted Rifles was attacked by 250 Germans with three maxims, but nevertheless gave a good account of themselves. The traitor Maritz held an important command under the Union on the Orange River, and on 1st October, doubtless through his treachery, two squadrons of the South African Mounted Rifles and a section of the Transvaal Horse Artillery were led into a trap at Sandfontein, where they were attacked by 2000 Germans with ten guns--and overwhelmed. The place was a veritable death-trap, being one of the waterholes surrounded by kopjes; and the Germans adopted the method employed against themselves by the Hereros, who waited until their enemies had encamped at a waterhole and then attacked from the kopjes. On the 13th October Maritz threw off his mask and broke into open rebellion. He was, however, easily dealt with by his late comrades, and fled across the border. Operations in this theatre are of course extremely difficult, owing to the lack of water and the impossibility of moving large bodies of men across waterless tracks in order to attack an enemy who is ensconced about the only available source of water. The principal advance, therefore, against the Germans in South West Africa was by way of Luderitzbucht and Swakopmund. The rebellion of Maritz was followed later by the defection of two distinguished ex-Boer Generals: Beyers in the Transvaal and de Wet in the Orange Free State. But they seem to have been actuated in prostituting their otherwise unsullied careers by jealousy and petty spite against General Botha personally, and not animated by any anxiety to come under German dominion--though de Wet's principal grievance against the British Government appeared to be that an English magistrate had fined him five shillings for assaulting a native, and that instead of admonishing the native the magistrate had "looked at him as if he wanted to kiss him." Upon the outbreak of ex-Generals de Wet and Beyers, supported by the rag-tag and bobtail of the more ignorant Boers, General Botha ordered a further mobilisation in the Union, and decided to take the field in person, being the first Premier of a British dominion to do so at the head of his own troops. He immediately proceeded against Beyers, and the latter was defeated and fled, subsequently meeting his death by drowning in the Vaal River. General Botha then turned his attention to de Wet, who with a partially armed force had commenced blowing up railway lines and destroying bridges, and after a prolonged chase de Wet was captured and the pitiful rebellion ended. The Union troops, under the command of Colonel Beves, arrived off Luderitzbucht on 19th September, and were landed by tugs without opposition. A party of the South African Railway Engineers took charge of the electric power station, telephone and condensing plant. The town was searched for arms, and a large quantity unearthed; but there was not the slightest injury to any person or property. A special party was landed under a flag of truce to demand the surrender of the town; and having returned with the principal German officials as hostages, the official entry was made by Colonel Beves, and the Union Jack was hoisted over the town hall. The Germans had retired to the capital at Windhoek, where they were said to have three years' provisions and stores, and had removed from Luderitzbucht all railway rolling stock, but had damaged no property. Colonel Beves issued a proclamation formally annexing the town, and providing for the security of life and property. Prisoners of war and non-combatants were sent off to Cape Town. The latter included a number of Cape "Boys" who had been paid their wages in German _goodfors_; and these expressed their delight at the British occupation. The _goodfors_ were cashed by Cape Town merchants for the "Boys," and were passed on in payment of amounts claimed from them by German subjects. The occupation was conducted in the most orderly manner, and the late German residents of Luderitzbucht were loud in their expressions of appreciation of the consideration with which they were treated. The Caprivi strip was entered by a force of police from Rhodesia, and within a few days Schuckmannsburg, near the Zambezi River, surrendered to them--and so a very unsightly intrusion into Rhodesian territory was wiped off the map. CHAPTER III EAST AFRICA In the early days of modern African history, when Portugal was at her zenith and her richly laden galleons were plying between the Cape of Good Hope, Goa, and Calicut, practically the whole of the trade of the east coast of Africa north of the Zambezi River was in the hands of Arab-descended "Sultans" and Portugal--who had extensive "settlements" along the coast. A trade with India, which in the past has been the _raison d'être_ of more strife and bitterness than any subject--excepting religious intolerance, for which nations have contended--had been established for centuries, and the glamour of the East pervaded the whole atmosphere of social and commercial relations. When the European nations started competing for supremacy in the east coast trade, which had always been a valuable one, the Arabs made the Island of Zanzibar the centre of their activities. The island was only chosen as the headquarters of the supreme Sultan of the east coast and his palace built there at a comparatively late date, when the Powers had already begun to bring under their direct administration lands to whose native rulers they had hitherto only extended a "protection," a benefit which had not been sought with any spontaneity. The selection of Zanzibar as the Sultan's headquarters was due to the fact that it afforded a much-needed secure place of retreat; but a trade between Zanzibar, India, and the African mainland was built up that rivalled that of the British East India Company. The trading expeditions of the Arabs, moreover, took the form of devastating raids, and their territory on the coast was but precariously held. The importance of Zanzibar grew apace, and more and more of the adjoining coast, sixteen miles distant, came under the sway of the Sultans, whose caravans pushed farther and farther into the interior, returning laden with ivory and accompanied by gangs of slaves, for which Zanzibar became the market of the world. The slave trade indeed assumed enormous proportions, was almost entirely in Arab hands, and although an international movement for the suppression of the iniquitous traffic had been on foot from the beginning of the nineteenth century, the British Government alone took active measures in East Africa to apply their humanitarian principles of freedom. With the wane of Portugal's power the influence of Great Britain in Zanzibar and its dependencies, the chief centres of which were the Island and Bay of Pemba and Witu, grew and intensified until Great Britain became, as was meet on account of her possession of India, supreme in the Zanzibari regions--a British Consul at Zanzibar being appointed as early as 1841. Up to 1884, although there had been no definite annexation of territory, British influence was extending in every direction, as British explorers ventured farther and farther into the interior--adventurous spirits stirred by the reports of the Arabs of the great lakes existing in what was then unknown Africa. Central Africa remained a no-man's-land, inhabited only by aborigines, and under no control whatsoever excepting that exercised by the Arab leaders of marauding and slave-trading expeditions, whose principal commercial object was ivory--white and black. To mention but a few names, Burton, Speke, Grant, Baker, all added to the world's knowledge of the Dark Continent, and mapped out the region about Lakes Tanganyika and Victoria and Albert Nyanza; Burton, indeed, penetrated far enough west to plant a British flag upon the majestic mountains of the Kamerun, above the Gulf of Guinea. Their wanderings were inspired by the spirit of adventure innate in the British, and undertaken with no sordid motive; while the results of their labours became the property of the civilised world. In the course of their explorations the wanderers unfolded the mystery of the source of the Nile in Lake Victoria Nyanza, which had been the subject of conjecture for centuries. Of explorers other than British, was the German Van der Decken, who had extensively explored the interior round about Kilima 'Njaro, and who had undoubtedly before him the attractive idea of a new German Empire, embracing a large portion of Central Africa; and who urged upon his countrymen the desirability of acquiring part, if not the whole of what was practically no-man's-land, from the east coast opposite the Island of Zanzibar to the mouth of the Congo in the west. H. M. Stanley had explored Uganda, his report on which caused that country to become infested with missionaries whose subsequent squabbles about forms and dogmas gave rise to more serious disturbances amongst the Mazai and Waganda than the slave trade. Stanley had also crossed the continent, and in the employ of Leopold, King of the Belgians, made that far-seeing monarch's private venture an enormously successful enterprise--embracing a huge area, taking in from the western shore of Lake Tanganyika (which it covered) the whole country across the continent to the mouth of the Congo. The Congo Free State was born of King Leopold's venture, and remained his private concern until his death, when by his will he bequeathed the territory, over 800,000 square miles in extent, to Belgium. It might be mentioned that the Belgian Congo shut off along Lake Tanganyika British Central Africa (Nyasaland) from British East Africa (Uganda). A Frenchman, M. Labaudy, in 1904 endeavoured to emulate King Leopold, and proclaimed himself Emperor of the Sahara; but his resources not being quite in proportion to his ambitions, the Sahara was not brought under his august rule. While stamping out the slave trade, Great Britain was, in 1884, bringing under her sway the tribes on the east coast; and this was being accomplished without much difficulty, accompanied, as her dealings with natives were, by justice, which more than any virtue appeals to the native mind. From the north Great Britain had advanced along the Nile, and to all intents and purposes taken under protection the Nile country up to Lake Albert Nyanza. Round about Kilima 'Njaro Mr (now Sir) H. H. Johnston had obtained concessions of territory; but the necessity of actually and formally annexing was not apparent to the Government, who preferred to rely upon a process of gradual absorption. As early as 1874 German traders were establishing themselves in Zanzibar and the territories of the Sultan on the mainland, and "making a bid for a fair share of the trade"; while Germany, which had really only existed since 1871, made the affairs of the Sultan of Zanzibar her business, "because of Germany's interest in suppressing slavery," which, however, the Germans did not hesitate to practise extensively themselves as soon as they had territorially established themselves. There was never a more disinterested act than the freedom of these human machines on the part of Great Britain; for while she was insisting upon the release of thousands and thousands of slaves, to whose "masters" she paid large sums as compensation, many industries in her Colonies were not only hampered but closed down altogether on account of the impossibility of procuring the native labour necessary for their continuance. The idea of Colonies forming a new German Empire in Africa, which obsessed the minds of a few individuals and later on appealed to the cupidity of the German merchants, could not obtain the all-powerful Bismarck's support until their proved value as commercial propositions should justify him in extending to them the Imperial protection. At the opportune moment, however, he struck and struck hard with his weapons of blood and iron. Unending warnings were conveyed to our Government as to the result of inaction in proclaiming sovereignty over their "spheres of influence" on the east coast, and in 1880 Sir Bartle Frere made strong representations to the Government as to Germany's growing influence; but the Government remained incredulous of German designs. The events of 1884, however, proved prognostications to be correct, and the "scramble for Africa" entailed a division of the territories of the Zanzibari Sultan. While Herr Luderitz was busy establishing trade stations at Angra Pequena and St Lucia Bay, and pushing inland to girdle Africa with a German belt, other and less open methods were employed on the east coast. Dr Carl Peters was President of the new-formed German Colonisation Society which was at the back of the initiatory steps for acquiring oversea territory; and he, with two friends, set out for Zanzibar as a base of operations, being justifiably doubtful of Luderitz's success in operating from St Lucia Bay. All Dr Peters's proceedings were enveloped in great secrecy. In workmen's garb the three made their way across France and travelled as steerage passengers to Zanzibar, and thence, towards the end of 1884, proceeded up country and obtained, under the pretext of "autograph collecting," the signatures of Arab and native chiefs to treaties, with which they hurried back to Berlin early in 1885 and founded a company to exploit their "concessions"--the company being known as the German East Africa Society. The territories covered by these concessions had, through the British Consul, been offered by the Sultan of Zanzibar to Great Britain, who, however, declined to assume the protection until a real necessity arose. The necessity had now arisen, but Peters and his friends were guarded by treaties bearing the signatures of natives potentates, which according to the ethics of German _kultur_ were worthy of respect. In 1885 the Sultan of Zanzibar was acquainted by the British Consul of the annexation by Germany of a large portion of his territory on the mainland which had been proclaimed by Bismarck, and instead of supporting the Sultan in his righteous protest our statesmen, having been forestalled, determined to give Germany all assistance to establish herself as a neighbour; and the British Representative received instructions "to co-operate immediately with the German Consul-General in forwarding German interests." Lord Granville, however, reproached Bismarck with not disclosing his real designs, which must have caused that statesman many a sleepless night. On his part Lord Granville went out of his way to inform Bismarck, in 1885, that British capitalists intended to build a railway from the east coast (the Nairobi Railway) to the Nile lakes, and that "the project would only receive the support of the Brittanic Government if the latter were assured that it would in no way interfere with German designs." This to Bismarck might very easily have appeared to be veiled sarcasm had he been dealing with a man of his own kidney. A demonstration of force on the part of Germany was necessary to induce the Sultan of Zanzibar to adopt the same humble attitude as the British Government; and a formidable German squadron appeared before the Sultan's palace on the 7th August, 1885, and presented an ultimatum, on which the Sultan bowed to the inevitable and stoically watched himself depleted of his possessions on the mainland, though he retained a considerable portion of the coastline. Zanzibar Island, indeed, itself fell under a German form of suzerainty from this date until 1890, when Germany resigned all claims over the island to Great Britain, in exchange for the cession of Heligoland. The slopes of Kilima 'Njaro were the scene of the busiest activities of German agents prior to the appointment of a Commission for the delimitation of the respective British and German boundaries. Although the concessions granted to Mr H. H. Johnston in this desirable region were considerably earlier than any German grants, our Government agreed to allow all claims to remain in abeyance pending the deliberations and decision of the joint Boundary Commission. Under the agreement come to by Great Britain and Germany as the result of the report of the Commission (1886), a strip of coastline 600 miles in length was left to the Sultan of Zanzibar in addition to his islands, while he gave up all claims to Kilima 'Njaro. Under the agreement practically the whole of the magnificent Kilima 'Njaro region, with its fertile slopes and foothills, was, through an uncalled-for fit of generosity on the part of Great Britain, made over to Germany--a concession which was made, it was said, to humour a sentimental wish expressed by the Kaiser to possess the highest mountain in Africa. The effect of this concession was, however, to place severe restrictions upon the development of British East Africa, and threatened to confine British enterprise to exceedingly narrow limits. Meanwhile Portugal could not look on with equanimity at the partitioning out by Great Britain and the upstart Power, Germany, of territory the history of which was permeated by her traditions, and protested against being excluded from the deliberations of the Powers. In view of the fact, however, that Portugal's claims were based upon ancient rights held only by hazy recollection, and that she had never exercised effective jurisdiction over the territory she claimed, she was treated with scant consideration by Great Britain, and no courtesy at all by Germany, who, however, emphatically demonstrated the hopelessness of the position by warning Portugal that any action on her part displeasing to Germany might result in the loss to her of any and all territory she then held in Africa. Portugal could but raise a loud lament and stamp in impotent rage; but when, after the agreement of 1886, the Sultan of Zanzibar made coarse references to the status of Portugal, the latter found her limit of endurance, and developing a fit of naughty petulance, proceeded to bombard for three days several unprotected native villages on the Bay of Tungi, on the main coastline belonging to the Sultan, thereby by no means impressing the world with an appreciation of Portugal's might. The Germans after the agreement of 1886 proceeded with energy and determination not only to test the resources of their new "Colony," but to extend their territorial sphere in every direction--a proceeding which evoked a British protest and necessitated a fresh delimitation of boundaries in 1890. This was effected by the Caprivi Treaty of 1st July, 1890, under which Germany received ridiculously favourable consideration in every demand. In 1888 the whole of the remaining territory of the Sultan of Zanzibar on the mainland was placed under the administration of Germany by virtue of a lease from the Sultan. The new area included the magnificent harbour of Dar-es-Salaam, which became the principal port on that portion of the east coast. Five days after taking possession of the newly leased territory, the Germans managed to organise an "insurrection" amongst the natives; and the assistance of the Imperial (German) Government was invoked by the German East Africa Society to repress the "rebellion" which they had deliberately incited. Captain Hermann von Wissmann was at the beginning of 1889 accordingly sent out with full instructions to deal with the native revolt, and having enlisted a thousand or more ex-British _askaris_ (native soldiers) and Zulus, he proceeded to slay, burn, and destroy. A huge area was devastated and the "rebellion" was quelled, while the natives were thoroughly terrorised. The principal sufferers, however, were British Indians, owners of plantations and trading stations, and these fled for protection to British territory or crossed to Zanzibar. The German East Africa Company was severely censured in various quarters in connection with the "insurrection," but pleaded that it was a movement organised by the Arabs through jealousy at the success of German trading stations. This was credulously accepted by Great Britain, who went to the length, when her co-operation was sought by Germany in her need, of dispatching a fleet which united with the German ships in establishing a blockade all along the coast in Zanzibari waters. The Reichstag voted the sum of two million marks "for the suppression of the slave trade and the protection of German interests in East Africa," and this sum was used to meet the expenses of the "campaign." So far from expending millions of marks on the cause of humanity, the Germans, on their own admission, were largely employing slave labour on their tobacco plantations. The natives were not finally terrorised into submission until late into the year 1890; and the Germans, being firmly established, made their position unquestionably secure by purchasing from the Sultan, in the name of the German East Africa Society, the whole of his territory on the mainland for the sum of four million marks--only a part of which was, however, ever paid. The fact that the whole venture had passed into the hands of the German Government was only manifested by the fact that the Reichstag voted ten and a half million marks partly for the purpose of paying the Sultan of Zanzibar and partly for use in the improvement and development of Germany's new "Colony." The territory under the sway of Germany on the east coast of Africa was the largest of Germany's Colonies, comprising an area double the size of Germany itself, 387,000 square miles. On the north the Colony is bounded by British East Africa and on the south by the Portuguese Colony of Mozambique. Situated between the 2° and 10° S. the climate is tropical, and in parts on the coast there are dense mangrove swamps, with the usual luxuriant tropical vegetation. The country rises rapidly, however, towards the interior where the Tanganyika plateau forms a high and healthy tableland over 3,500 feet high. Range after range of mountains and foothills divide the coast from the majestic peak of Kilima 'Njaro on the borders of British East Africa, and whose slopes offer splendid conditions for European settlement. The white population numbers roughly 5,500, mainly German officials, traders, soldiers, and managers of plantations; for, as in the other German Colonies, there are no settlers in the true sense, although Professor Bönn has said that there are "even some close settlements reproducing German village life." The civil population indeed is composed chiefly of Britishers or Greeks, while there are, as elsewhere along the coast, a great many Banyans or Indian traders, who are British subjects, nearly every German being a soldier or an official. The native population numbers 9,000,000--the two principal tribes being the Urundi with 1,500,000 and the Ruandi with 2,000,000 respectively. From the German point of view this was an ideal "Colony," for there were abundant natural resources and a dense native population whose industry might assure prosperity for their German masters. In acquiring East Africa the Germans had made a bid for the dominant interest in Central Africa and had by no means lost hope of absorbing the Congo Free State, which by international agreement was open to Free Trade. They went so far indeed as to offer to take the Congo Free State under "protection" when the atrocities of the Congo rubber-collecting trade were the subject of European concern. The aim and end of such a "protection" may easily be surmised. Having settled down to the exploitation of the territory Germany, with her trade methods, began to oust the once all-dominant trade of Zanzibar. The latter depended on her trade with India and the mainland, and the Germans instituted a direct service of luxuriously appointed steamers to stop goods from going to Zanzibar and being handled twice. In the way German traders are able to cut prices, it is probable that the saving of one handling of the goods constituted the profit on them. A direct Indian service was also inaugurated which further cut into Zanzibar trade; while a line of steamers started to circumnavigate Africa, going down the west coast to Cape Town and returning up the east coast leisurely through the Suez Canal back to Hamburg. It was not long before the Germans had practically the whole of the east coast trade in her hands, and the German description of Dar-es-Salaam as the metropolis of the whole of the East African coast began to have some foundation in fact. After quelling the "insurrection" in 1889, Major von Wissmann set the corps he had formed to the building of Government offices and residences, and the imposing edifices round about the lagoon at Dar-es-Salaam are tribute to their skill. A strong force of police was enrolled and consisted of 260 Europeans and 2,750 men, who, uniformed in khaki, were armed with the most modern guns and rifles. They constituted a formidable fighting force of sixteen companies, each of which had several machine guns. The natives are in the main mild-mannered; and as long association with the Arabs made a condition of slavery quite a natural existence, they were readily terrorised, and the Germans found ideal ground for cultivation. Energetically the administration set to work to open up the country by establishing centres of trade; the country was intersected in every direction by paths six feet wide for _machela_[F] travelling, and the natives were compelled to make these paths free of charge and maintain them in good order. The administration, German like, was all by rule of thumb, and even the prices of food were everywhere fixed by tariff. German home methods were applied everywhere with a mixture, as in Zanzibar itself, of a shoddy imitation of Indian life. The Port of Dar-es-Salaam (the "Haven of Peace") was made the capital, and from here the principal railway runs into the interior. From the coast the town is hardly visible, the quiet lagoon on which it is built being so shut in by bluffs; while the entrance is between coral reefs, the passage through which is in some places not much over fifty yards. The harbour is small but is perfectly sheltered, and with its fringe of palms makes a striking picture. The town is laid out on luxurious lines with wide well-paved streets, an extensive botanical garden, electric light, and a powerful wireless installation. The neighbouring native town is a striking contrast, being squalid in the extreme. The railway system extends for nearly 1,000 miles, and a line from Dar-es-Salaam to Lake Tanganyika was being pushed on energetically. The territory is eminently suited for the cultivation of tropical agricultural products, and the export of these amounts to roughly £1,800,000 per annum--about equally divided between European and native. The Germans have done no development themselves for the production of raw material, but the European plantations are huge farms in the lower-lying country; and though on the slopes of Kilima 'Njaro there are small holders, these are in the main Englishmen, Greeks, or British Indians. The Germans did not grant a full title to land, and intending planters had to buy their land from natives and run the risk that their titles might not be recognised, as the natives' claim to land had not yet been adjudicated--which means, of course, that, as elsewhere, the land had been "confiscated"; though it did not suit German policy immediately to take it out of the hands of the natives. The products grown on the European plantations by what has passed from actual to semi-slave labour, are principally coffee, rubber, cotton, and sisal hemp. The European products were heavily subsidised. The natives contribute from the natural resources of the country grain, medicinal herbs, copal, beeswax, hides, wild coffee, wild rubber, palm-oil, copra, and dairy products. They have been encouraged in every way to increase their production of raw materials by brutality and terrorism, which almost depopulated the Ruanda country, and by instruction in the methods of growing and collecting. A translation in the journal of the African Society quotes Hans Zache in "Dressig jahre Deutsch-Ost-Africa" (Thirty years of German East Africa): "It is a falsely reasoned and falsely proved humanitarianism which seeks to take no cognisance of the education of the native _for manual work_. Work is provided by the European planters so that the Colony may benefit by increased production, and not least also is it provided for the blessing of the negro." The blessing is not altogether so apparent to the negro, regarded in conjunction with the fruit of his labour--usually dishonourable stripes. The European plantations are in the hands of 758 planters, and cover an area of about 250,000 acres--of which 80,000 were planted with rubber, 50,000 with sisal, and 35,000 with cotton; while 1,000,000 cocoa-nut trees were also put in. Ivory, which for years was the chief article of export, has given place to sisal; and in 1913 the value of sisal hemp exported approached £500,000, rubber taking second place with £325,000. Sisal culture in East Africa is of recent origin, and was started in German East Africa with a few plants imported from Central America. The cultivation is difficult and the treatment of the leaves equally so, but millions of plants now exist in both German and British East Africa. The exportation of sisal plants was prohibited by the German Government. While sisal takes about seven years to mature in the West Indies, it takes only three in East Africa. In contrast to the tropical Colonies on the west coast, the cotton-growing is chiefly in the hands of the whites--not solely in the natives. In 1912 it formed the principal crop, with an output of 1,882 tons. The "slump" in rubber proved a set-back in the economic development of the Colony. A report of the Consul at Dar-es-Salaam states the number of rubber trees planted and ready for tapping were 19,000,000. The report proceeds: "Owing to the low prices, all the plantations have limited the number of hands employed, and two of the largest suspended tapping entirely. The planters are heavily handicapped by having to pay the costs of recruiting labour in the interior and its transport down to the plantation. The costs often amount to about £2, 10s. per head before work is begun, and the rate of wages is high--about 16s. 6d. per month for a Wanyamwezi tapper. Owing to a slight rise in the price of rubber, tapping has been resumed by some of the planters, and there is a more hopeful feeling. The small planter has probably a better chance than the large company; his working expenses are less, he can often obtain local labour cheaply or get time-expired hands without paying recruiting fees; and, in addition, he can keep his men under more personal control. "The outlook for the larger estates is far from reassuring, and it is said that some of them have already begun to cut down the rubber trees to make room for other crops. The Colonial Economic Committee is taking steps to introduce a standard quality of East African rubber, the absence of which is another difficulty which has hampered the planters. "There is only one large washing and curing factory in the Colony, at Muhesa, though there are several smaller ones in Usambara. Most of the planters wash the rubber themselves, with the result that it has often to be done again in Europe." The natives collect rubber from the wild forest vines, but rubber balls sent in by Europeans and natives alike are cut through the middle to detect the presence of a core of leaves or other foreign substance. Cotton and coffee are articles also jointly produced by planters and natives. As elsewhere in tropical Africa, cotton grew wild and is now extensively cultivated--the value exported in 1912 being £105,000. The coffee produced by the natives is either collected from the trees which grow wild or by cultivating the indigenous plants. The wild coffee has a small misshapen bean, but is excellently flavoured, the quality of the bean improving with each year of keeping. The value of coffee exported amounts to about £100,000 per annum. On the highlands oats, barley, and wheat are grown successfully; and other articles of export are hides and skins, coming chiefly from the district round Lake Victoria and from the provinces of Ruanda and Urundi, which abound with millions of head of cattle and other live stock. The slopes of the highlands are covered with short sweet grass, and are well watered with perennial streams, which might easily be diverted into channels to irrigate the land below. Though sheep do well in parts, the grass in the main grows too coarse for any small stock, and requires feeding down. The cattle are still nearly all in the hands of the natives, but the Germans turned the hides to profit, £200,000 worth having been exported in 1912. The exportation of cattle is prohibited, but traders from Rhodesia have made their way up into German East Africa, where they traded cattle from the natives at prices averaging about 40s., and managed to return with large herds of the quaint "hump-backed" beasts, known as "Madagascar cattle," to southern Rhodesia, where they found a ready market at an average price of about £7, 10s. Horses do fairly well in parts of the country only, but a small variety of extremely hardy and strong donkey is plentiful; and these are most useful for transport work, being able it seems to live on the memory of a pannikin of maize, and capable of being packed with any weight. The cultivation of chillies and pea-nuts is exclusively a native industry, and the export of pea-nuts in 1912 amounted to £62,500. The collection of palm-oil and copra, too, is in native hands, the nuts being collected from the wild palms which grow in their thousands on the coast belts. The European planters in recent years commenced cocoa-nut palm cultivation, but the million trees planted have not yet come to maturity. Gum-copal, the resin of an indigenous tree, used for varnishing, and the wax of wild bees is also collected by the natives in the forests, and the export of beeswax in recent years has averaged about £50,000. This system of collection by natives means the reduction of economic resources, as in collecting wild rubber the vines are destroyed and so are the swarms of bees in the search for wax. There are other trees capable of commercial exploitation, such as the baobab (cream of tartar tree), cazou, the nuts of which are largely exported from Jamaica, and wattle, the bark of which produces tannin. The timber possibilities are great, as large forests of cedar exist and a certain amount has been exported. The geological formation is similar to British East Africa; and although prospecting for minerals is not encouraged, gold in payable quantities has been discovered and worked, and gold to the value of about £30,000 has been exported annually for some years. Mica of good quality is found in the Uluguru Mountains on the Tanganyika railway about 124 miles from Dar-es-Salaam, and about 100 tons are exported annually. A promising proposition exists at Magadi in a large lake of carbonate of soda, which a British company has endeavoured to secure. In time this should prove one of the principal industries, as the deposit appears to be unlimited. The inter-native trade does not amount to much, as in this direction the Indian can compete with and outreach even the German. As a "commercial" Colony for the production of raw materials, the Germans looked upon their East African territory as the jewel of their possessions. It was intended to give in August, 1914, a demonstration of the economic life of the Colony, and to hold at Dar-es-Salaam an exhibition for the whole country, to be connected with the opening of the working of the whole length of the Tanganyika railway. The exhibition was to have been held under the patronage and graced by the presence of the German Crown Prince, and festivities extending over a fortnight were arranged for. German firms were to have sent a large number of exhibits, and numbers of visitors from Europe were expected. Visitors have certainly since arrived, but not in the guise it was anticipated. On 8th August, 1914, H.M.S. _Pegasus_ and _Astraea_ appeared before Dar-es-Salaam and proceeded to destroy the powerful wireless station, and in a few hours the town and several liners in the harbour surrendered. The _Pegasus_ was subsequently attacked by the _Königsberg_ while the former was at anchor, and being outranged was destroyed. The _Königsberg_ did not, however, have a long spell of liberty, for she was shortly afterwards discovered by H.M.S. _Chatham_ hiding in shoal water, sheltered from view by dense palms, about six miles up the Rufigi River Opposite Mafia Island, and put out of action. Meanwhile British forces composed of Sikhs, other Indian troops, and King's African Rifles, whose headquarters are Zanzibar, proceeded from British Central and British East Africa to occupy the German territory. CHAPTER IV TOGOLAND AND KAMERUN When the Germans entered the field of Colonial enterprise in 1884, the European Powers chiefly concerned in Africa were Great Britain, France, and Portugal--the latter's connection with the Dark Continent, indeed, dating from the earliest days of its modern history. Portuguese power had, however, been for some time in process of decay, and her influence was on the wane. The interests of France were centred in the north and north-west of the continent, while Great Britain was supreme in the south. The adventure of Leopold, King of the Belgians, on the Congo was still a private venture in the hands of H. M. Stanley, and had not yet borne fruit in the shape of the Congo Free State. British and French had been actively engaged in operations for the suppression of the slave trade, but the energies of the two countries were at this time being devoted rather to the development of the trading stations established on the Gold and Slave Coasts on the Gulf of Guinea. "Spheres of influence" were being leisurely demarcated by France and Great Britain--the latter feeling so secure in her position that she hardly treated seriously, in fact scouted, the notion of being rivalled in her supremacy. For some considerable time Germany had been making an effort to secure a portion of the trade of the west coast, overcoming the difficulty of introducing her cheap and inferior goods by giving them English and French trademarks, quite in keeping with the best principles of German trade. Trading stations on the Gulf of Guinea were established by Germans, who immediately, employing the obsequiousness which has enabled the German to tread many an unaccustomed path, began to approach native chiefs for concessions. Nearly the whole territory, known respectively as the Grain Coast, Gold Coast, Ivory Coast, and Slave Coast, was beneficially occupied by the French and British; but parts had not been formally annexed between the British Colony of the Gold Coast and French Dahomey. The French really had a prior claim, but the natives were continually petitioning the British Government to take them under their protection. In French Dahomey itself Germans had established many trading stations, and began to pay particular attention to a strip of the Slave Coast between Lome Bay and Popo, including Porto Seguro. Great Britain had not yet awakened to Germany's real intentions, and all her policy was accompanied by procrastination and dilatoriness. The repeated petitions of the natives for British protection were ignored or put aside "for inquiry and consideration," pending which the natives received no reply to their applications. The lesson taught at Angra Pequena, where the whole of the south-west coast from the Orange River to Portuguese Angola was lost to Great Britain in spite of the strenuous efforts of the Colonial statesmen, was ignored; though it must be conceded that there was an influential section in England strongly opposed to further increasing Great Britain's responsibilities oversea and thus hampering the Colonial and Foreign Offices. In the month of June, 1884, an emissary of the German Government, Dr Nachtigal, was dispatched to the west coast of Africa, ostensibly as a Trade Commissioner, to inquire into and report upon the progress of German commerce. Bismarck having decided on his policy of "Trade Colonies" under Imperial protection, pursued it vigorously and with his usual diplomacy. He immediately acquainted the British Foreign Office with the fact of the mission, but took the opportunity of hoodwinking Lord Granville as to its object--if he did not actually disclaim any intention of territorial acquisition. Dr Nachtigal proceeded to the French settlements on the Ivory Coast, and interviewed the German traders there in preparation for his _coup_; thence he made for the thirty-two mile strip south of Lome, now known as Togoland, and on the 5th July the German flag was hoisted and the territory declared annexed by Germany. The natives accepted the position quietly, having been impressed with the greatness of Germany by plentiful gifts of firearms and spirits. While the coastline of Togoland is only 32 miles in length, the area which the Germans claimed as their "sphere of influence" widens to three or four times that width in the interior. In accordance with the amazing German native policy, the next step to annexation was terrorism--the mailed fist under the glove of peaceful trade, and the natives were "taught a sharp lesson." Germany's action in declaring a Protectorate over Togoland met with protests from the British and French Governments, and protracted negotiations ensued and continued for some considerable time; in fact it was not until 1897 that the boundary line between Togoland and French Dahomey was settled by a Franco-German agreement. The western boundary was defined by the Anglo-German agreements of 1890 and 1899. On the south of the Gulf of Guinea, stretching from Old Calabar to the French Congo, lies Kamerun (known also as the Cameroons) off which is the Spanish Island of Fernando Po. In 1842 the French occupied the Gaboon and gradually brought under subjection the country between the coast and the Congo; while a British mission was established at Victoria in Kamerun in 1858. The country had for many years been explored and opened up by British explorers and traders, and the British flag had, in fact, been hoisted. The territory had, however, never been formally taken possession of, although the Dualla native kings had for years petitioned the British Government to be taken under their protection. At the end of 1883 our Foreign Office decided to accede to the natives' request, and to establish a Protectorate over Kamerun. Going about the business, however, in the usual dilatory fashion, it was some six months before instructions were issued to Mr Hewett, British Consul, to proceed to Kamerun and declare the territory annexed, subject to the willingness of the Dualla kings to make concessions. German traders had strongly established themselves in the territory and had won over a considerable number of the natives by the usual means of bribery and unlimited gin. Mr Hewett proceeded to Kamerun to find that Dr Nachtigal had forestalled him. Immediately after having hoisted the German flag over Togoland, Dr Nachtigal at Kamerun commenced negotiations with the Duallas; and when the British Representative arrived the German flag had been floating for several days over the mainland opposite Fernando Po. Germany's intentions were only now regarded as serious in England, and by Mr Hewett, who immediately left Kamerun and proceeded to make treaties along the coast, thereby being instrumental in securing the delta of the Niger, or that, too, might have been lost to England. The acquisition of Togoland and Kamerun by Germany was looked on as a triumph of diplomacy for Bismarck, who was reproached, it seems unreasonably and peevishly, by Lord Granville for not having disclosed the real object for which Dr Nachtigal had been sent out. It is remarkable, however, that in view of Germany's action in South West Africa, which was even then the subject of correspondence, the true purpose of the mission was not divined. TOGOLAND Togoland enjoys the distinction of being the smallest and at the same time the most prosperous of the German Colonies. The Colony is 33,700 square miles in extent, with a coastline of only thirty-two miles, reaching from Lome, on the border of the British Colony of the Gold Coast, to Grand Popo on the boundary of French Dahomey. The French Colonies of Upper Senegal and Niger are the northern boundary; while it is bounded on the east by French Dahomey and by the British Gold Coast on the west. The climate is tropical, and like the rest of the Guinea coast the coast-belt is hot, humid and malaria-stricken, such as is generally met with in low-lying forest country or on the coast at sea-level anywhere in the Tropics. Lying behind the coast-belt are stretches of dense forest containing palms, rubber vines, and considerable quantities of timber of good quality. Arising farther inland are high and extensive plateaux, many of the elevated parts being free from malaria and capable of yielding quantities of natural products. The richness of its natural resources indeed made Togoland almost immediately after annexation financially independent. There is a German population in Togoland of 1,537, nearly all of whom are officials and soldiers; and of the 131 so-called settlers, the majority are plantation managers and overseers. The native population amounts to 3,500,000, and they are divided into numerous tribes, embracing many degrees of _kultur_ from raw cannibals to comparatively civilised states. The administration is in the hands of an Imperial Governor, surrounded by a swarm of officials and a local council of unofficial members, who are, as a rule, the representatives of merchant houses. Immediately on acquiring Togoland, the Germans commenced sending trading expeditions into the interior, and extending their "sphere of influence" inland. A central trading station (Bismarcksburg) was established, and a trade centre was created for each tribe. Two hundred and twenty miles of railway have been built in three lines, all starting from Lome--one 80 miles in length to Palime and another 120 miles to Atakpanie. Lack of proper transport facilities has retarded the development of the Colony, as owing to the lack of transport animals nearly the whole of the carrying of produce is done by natives. The prosperity of the Colony is entirely due to the exploitation of the natives; in fact the economic life of the country depends upon the natives' industry. Nearly the whole of the agriculture is in the hands of natives, some of whom have plantations of their own. Only 250,000 acres are in the hands of Europeans, and less than a quarter of these are cultivated. The hardships inflicted on the native, however, are forgotten by the German trader in his excessive eagerness to get as much as he can out of him; and this has resulted in some rubber-collecting districts in depopulation and a consequent falling off in the production. The principal exports of Togoland are india-rubber, palm-oil and kernels, cotton and cocoa. Tobacco is also being tried with favourable results. Rubber forms nearly one-half of the total exports, and is nearly all wild rubber collected by natives from the forest vines--an expensive form of production, as the vines are destroyed in the process. Palm-oil and palm kernels (largely used in the manufacture of nut butter or margarine) forms another important item. The nuts are collected mainly from the palms originally introduced by the Portuguese and now found in forests for many miles from the coast. In 1911 the export of palm kernels amounted to 13,000 tons, but fell to 7,000 tons in 1913 owing to a scarcity of native labour. The natives of Togoland are said to have cultivated cotton in almost every part of the country from time immemorial, and an average of about 500 tons is exported annually. The Germans, realising the importance of this article, did all they could to extend the cultivation of cotton. The cultivation is entirely in the hands of natives, but an agricultural school was started for them by the Government to train them in better methods of growing cotton, and they were supplied with ploughs and other agricultural implements as well as seed, free of cost. A certain amount of cocoa is grown on native plantations, 335 tons being shipped during 1913. The natives have also taken kindly to a new crop in the shape of maize, the export of which rose from 103 tons in 1911 to 2,500 in 1913. Although the conformation of the country is very similar to British Nigeria and other parts of the coasts where gold, tin, and other minerals have been discovered and worked, the Germans have not embarked upon the enterprise of having the country prospected for minerals--a probable cause being that prospecting entails expenditure of money, and to the German this is the negative purpose of a Trade Colony! Besides being a source of wealth in trade, Togoland was in reality of great strategical value, being connected by cable with Germany and with Dualla in the Kamerun; while Kamina was connected by a powerful wireless installation with Dar-es-Salaam in German East Africa and with Windhoek, the capital of German South West Africa. On 26th August, 1914, Togoland was occupied by the Gold Coast Regiment of the West African Frontier Force, assisted by a French force from Dahomey. The Germans destroyed the wireless station at Kamina and asked for terms, but eventually surrendered unconditionally. KAMERUN Kamerun, on the Gulf of Guinea, south of Togoland, and bounded on the north by British Nigeria and on the south by the French Gaboon (Rio Campo), comprises 291,000 square miles, including 100,000 square miles ceded to Germany out of French Equatorial Africa as the price of the Moroccan Settlement, under the Franco-German agreement of 1911. The physical features are very similar to Togoland, but much of the interior is mountainous--the foothills and fertile slopes being covered with dense vegetation. There is the usual German population of officials and merchants--1,871 in number; and a native population of 2,500,000. While not so prosperous as Togoland, Kamerun has nevertheless been developed on the usual German plan of officialism; but the natives have not proved so tractable. It is possible that the Dualla tribes still feel the disappointment at having their petitions for protection by Great Britain ignored; one German writer, indeed, speaks of the Dualla natives as a hindrance to progress. Kamerun was administered by an Imperial Governor, a Chancellor and two secretaries, with a local council of three merchants. Professor Bönn pointed out that there are ample signs of the growing strength of the administration, and gives as an instance that there is a yearly increase in the number of native criminals brought to justice. The ever-increasing returns of the hut tax, too, which in the Kamerun has nearly doubled in the last four years, is pointed to as proof of increased administrative efficiency. Kamerun stretches into the interior to Lake Tchad, in the direction of which a railway has been built for 400 miles. The trade of the Colony in 1912 amounted to £1,629,895 imports and £1,102,803 exports, the latter being the usual tropical products. Cotton is known to have been grown and cultivated round about Lake Tchad for centuries, and agricultural experimental stations have been established in the lake districts. As in Togoland, the agriculture is all in native hands. Kamerun has been held back by transport difficulties which it was hoped to overcome by building railways, and railway projects were propagated energetically which it was hoped to carry into effect shortly. The usual means of transport, as in other parts of the coast, is by native carrier; and the villages are therefore grouped within a reasonable distance of the main trade routes, paths which the chiefs and people are responsible for keeping in order. Palm-oil and copra are, as in the other West African Colonies, the chief articles of export; and palm kernels are daily coming more and more into use in Europe as a substitute for butter, and for the manufacture of cattle-food, etc. Two-thirds of the copra exported from Kamerun, amounting to £300,000 worth in 1912, went to Germany and one-third to England. In the Colony itself five oil works have been established, but owing to lack of transport it is calculated that three-fourths of the yield of the oil palm trees is left to rot on the ground unused. The forests of Kamerun hold an immense quantity of trees bearing timber of excellent quality, and this to the value of £35,000 was exported in 1912. Round the Kamerun mountains exist large tracts under cultivation of cocoa, of which 4,550 tons, valued at £212,500, were exported in 1912. The natives have been urged to extend this industry, and travelling instructors were appointed by the Government to train them in the best methods of cultivation. More and more fresh as well as dried bananas, too, have been exported from Kamerun, and this trade offers a promising field of enterprise. Ten per cent of the exports of the Colony go to England, while nearly 15 per cent of the imports are of British origin. The native policy is in the Kamerun worse, if possible, than in Togoland, and the natives have been systematically sweated. While the revenue is principally obtained from customs dues and a general _ad valorem_ duty on imported goods (with preference in favour of Germany of course), a poll tax is levied upon natives, together with a toll upon those using Government roads. There is every reason to believe that the Dualla natives will hail with delight deliverance from the German yoke. The British West African Frontier Force on 25th August, 1914, crossed the Anglo-German frontier from Nigeria, and after considerable opposition and suffering appreciable losses, advanced on Dualla. H.M.S. _Cumberland_ and _Dwarf_ had, while these events were taking place on land, reconnoitred the mouth of the Kamerun River and the approaches to Dualla, at the same time capturing a number of German merchant liners. On 24th September French troops from Libreville attacked Ukoko in Corisco Bay, attended by the French warship _Surprise_. The French and British forces combined on 27th September in an attack on the towns of Dualla and Bonaberi, following upon a bombardment by the British ships; and the towns surrendered unconditionally to the allied force, after destroying the wireless station. Although some 1,500 prisoners were taken, a large portion of the garrisons, some 2,000 (whites) in number, managed to escape to concentrate in the interior. Of the prisoners 500 were handed over to the French and the remainder, owing to the difficulty of feeding them, sent to England. CHAPTER V THE PACIFIC ISLANDS Of the islands in the southern seas where the Indian and Pacific Oceans meet, and amongst which Australia forms a fifth continent, some are mere vaults in which repose the relics of ill-advised and vainly attempted ventures, whilst others are fruitful gardens wherein flourish the trees whose sturdy growth testifies to the good seed from which they sprang and the skill of the gardeners who planted them. The Archipelagos lying south of the China Seas were first explored from the west by the Portuguese and Dutch in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, but the steel glove upon which the mailed fist seems afterwards to have been modelled failed to retain a hold upon the territory which it grasped. The Portuguese, indeed, abandoned their enterprises in the southern seas in favour of developing their trade between Goa and the east coast of Africa. They excelled as navigators and explorers, but the whole of their history shows that they have never formed any conception of the principles of administration. [Illustration: GERMAN COLONIES IN THE PACIFIC, 1914. (Reproduced by permission of _The Times_.)] The Dutch concentrated on Java, Sumatra and Borneo, and ever since have waged war with the natives. It seems strange that both these nations should have decentralised Colonial interests away from their home countries, in striking contrast to our own country which has pursued a policy binding her oversea dominions closer and closer to the motherland--a policy which has eventuated in the formation of a comity of nations firmly united by the bonds of sentimental tradition and common commercial interest. The Portuguese made Goa the centre of their East African and Eastern enterprises,[G] and the Dutch placed the Cape of Good Hope (while it was in their possession) under the administration of Batavia in the Island of Java. The spice trade attracted adventurers of all the pioneering nations. Spain made extensive voyages of discovery and plunder in the South Seas, and their galleons for many years provided the excitement of the chase as well as profit in "double pieces of eight" for British sea rovers; but the Spanish acquired but a tentative hold upon territory, and this was finally released by the Spanish-American War of 1901. The legacy of Spain to the South Seas was the romantic occupation of searching for wrecks bearing cargoes of doubloons and the abandoned booty of pirates, which they seem to have collected for the specific purpose of burying in brass-clamped chests on uninhabited islands for the benefit of the adventurous spirit who might in future years display sufficient enterprise and determination to find his way through the maze which surrounded the prizes. The latter part of the seventeenth century saw one of the greatest periods of British activities in venturing trade abroad, albeit it often-times took the form of preying upon the rich cargoes collected by the Dutch, Spanish, and Portuguese marauders. This, however, was then the most approved and recognised form of commerce. Direct trade in Borneo and Sumatra by the British was commenced in about 1685, and "factories" were established to develop the spice trade which was then the richest of the East, a cargo of pepper-corns being regarded as one of the most valuable that could avoid a meddlesome buccaneer and be safely brought to port. The voyages of Captain Cook, whose name ranks high amongst the pioneers of our Empire, and who discovered and named many of the island groups as well as the east coast of Australia, where he hoisted the British flag, really firmly established British interests in the South Seas, after strenuous struggles with the Dutch who regarded the area as most particularly their "sphere of influence." Through the last decades of the eighteenth century British influence and prestige grew, and the apathy of the statesmen at home was not allowed by their sons on the spot to interfere with energetic development and settlement which proceeded apace. Coming rather late in the day, France was, through private British enterprise, forestalled in her principal designs which were centred on New Zealand, and her "protection" was only extended to some small island groups such as New Caledonia, lying between Australia and Fiji, and for which she found use as penal establishments. The big prizes of the Pacific--Australia, Tasmania, and New Zealand--had fallen to the heritage of Great Britain, and development rather concentrated on these magnificent offshoots of British oak. There were other important groups of islands, however, which, although locally regarded as natural adjuncts of the Australian Settlements, were not definitely taken possession of. The most important of these were New Guinea and the Samoan group. New Guinea is divided from the Queensland province of Australia by the shoal-dotted Torres Straits, about 90 miles wide; while the Samoan Islands lie east of Fiji. The Portuguese Magellan was the first discoverer in the sixteenth century of New Guinea (also known as Papua), while the new name appears to have been given to the island by Ortiz de Retez, who laid down certain points. During the centuries succeeding, New Guinea received frequent visitors representing European nations, amongst them Captain Cook and Tasman, whose name is perpetuated in Tasmania though the island for many years bore the name of his lieutenant, Van Diemen, and was known as "Van Diemen's Land." New Guinea was also frequently visited by Chinese fishing junks in search of bêche-de-mer, or trepang. The Dutch from their adjacent settlements in Java and Borneo were supreme in the north of New Guinea without exercising any effective jurisdiction, and relied upon the difficult navigation of New Guinea waters for a continuance of their exclusiveness. Towards the end of the eighteenth century they (the Dutch) had practically a monopoly of the spice trade, and were extremely jealous of any other nations obtaining a footing in spice islands, where their monopoly might be jeopardised. They obstinately refused all access to New Guinea; but the Dutch barrier was broken down by emissaries of the British East India Company in search of spice islands, and in 1793 New Guinea was annexed by two commanders in the service of the company, and the territory was thereafter regarded as an adjunct of Queensland, although no steps were taken for an administrative occupation. In 1828 the Dutch erected a fortress to protect the rights they claimed in New Guinea, but this they abandoned in 1835. While Samoa and numerous other groups of islands were not incorporated in the dominions of the countries whose explorers "discovered" them, and their savage inhabitants were allowed to continue their own administration, a brisk British trade sprang up between Australasia and the islanders. The necessity for bringing either New Guinea or the Samoan group under direct rule was not an expediency that presented itself as an urgent one to either the Imperial British or Australian Governments as long as fair trading conditions prevailed on harmonious lines and the lives and private property of British traders were safeguarded, until in about 1880 the tips of the tentacles of the German octopus delicately spread out to seek the spots whereon to plant the suckers of trading stations, behind them the unlidded eyes of Imperial Protection watching to gauge the value of the prize and the parrot-beaked maw ready to grasp for the satisfaction of Prussian greed. A flourishing inter-coastal and island trade had long been established by the United States of America, but until 1898, when they annexed Hawaii and occupied Samoa, the United States adhered to their doctrine of not attempting territorial acquisition outside their own continental borders. By 1883 the Germans had firmly established themselves commercially, and their influence began to be most markedly denoted in disaffection amongst the natives and in inter-tribal wars--notably in Samoa. In this year the British New Guinea Colonising Society proposed an expedition to Lord Carnarvon, who was then Colonial Secretary, but the minister declined to lend his support to an enterprise which he considered entailed too much risk. The enterprise was imagined in collaboration with supporters of Imperial extension in Australasia, and, acting on their own initiative, the Government of Queensland, with the approval of the whole of Australia, annexed a portion of New Guinea to her dominions; but this act was disavowed by the British Government and declared to be "null in point of law and not to be admitted in point of policy." Queensland most determinedly represented to the Government of Australia and our Imperial minister the danger to her commerce if New Guinea were to fall into the hands of a foreign Power by annexation. The prospect did not appear alarming to the home statesmen, nor did further annexation of the South Sea Islands enter into their scheme of practical politics; and, therefore, when the proclamation of a Protectorate over the whole of New Guinea and the adjacent islands (including the New Britain Archipelago, the Solomon, Caroline, Palau, Marshall, and Ladrone Islands) under a High Commissioner was determined on at a conference held by the Australian Colonies at Sydney in 1883 and recommended to the Imperial Government, our Colonial Office met the proposal with discouragement. In November, 1884, however, the Home Government was persuaded to proclaim in New Guinea a Protectorate over the region lying "between the 141st meridian eastward as far as East Cape, with the adjacent islands as far as Kosman Island." This brought under the British flag the southern portion of New Guinea, known as Papua, only; but in other parts of the islands there were British settlements originating in Australia which were left under no effective jurisdiction. In December, 1884, the Germans, having firmly established themselves commercially in the Samoan Islands, began to definitely and formally annex territory; the German flag was hoisted in the northern part of New Guinea and on several of the adjacent islands, and the German "Colony" received the unpromising name of "Kaiser Wilhelm's Land." The Australian Colonies immediately lodged an indignant protest; but arrogance, overglossed with suavity, carried the day, and a friendly agreement in regard to New Guinea was made between Great Britain and Germany in 1885, whereby the latter assumed administration over the northern portion of the island, to subjection of the jurisdiction of which were later added the Caroline, Palau and Marianne Islands. "New Britain" undertook the responsibility of the name "Bismarck Archipelago"; and the principal island of the group was renamed New-Pommern, with its capital at Herbertshöhe. In 1888 British New Guinea was constituted a separate Colony, but the administration was, in 1902, placed in the hands of the Commonwealth of Australia. Up to 1884 affairs in the islands comprising the kingdom of Samoa had proceeded along the lines of progress, and the three nations chiefly concerned in the Samoan trade (Great Britain, Germany, and the United States of America) were conducting commerce without friction until the Germans felt strong enough to assume an aggressive attitude, not only towards their trade rivals but also the native Samoans whose property they coveted. The German influence began to be most markedly denoted in disaffection amongst the natives and in inter-tribal wars. It was in 1884, indeed, that the German pretensions to a say in the administrative control of Samoa began to be recognised by Great Britain and the United States as the German faculty for instigating disputes amongst the islanders made desirable the institution of some European control over the native administration. The affairs of State in Samoa were conducted under the rule of native kings (two) and chiefs, but constant feuds and bickerings disturbed the tranquillity of the islands. It was really German influence that was the disturbing element, for inter-tribal strife was fomented in order that "repressive measures for the establishment of law and order" on the part of the Imperial Government might elevate German prestige. Apia, the chief town on the principal island of the Samoan group, Upolu, became the centre of trade of the eastern South Sea Islands, though its chief importance to the outside world exists in its incentive to a distinguished memory. Agreements were made by the Samoan kings at various dates with Great Britain, the United States and Germany. Each of the treaty agreements contained a "most-favoured-nation" clause, and empowered the foreign state to form naval stations and coaling depots at various parts of the island group. In April, 1885, it was deemed advisable by the British Government to appoint a Commissioner to confer with a nominee of the German Government upon the subject of British and German interests respectively in such parts of the Western Pacific Ocean as might be placed by either Government under its special protection, with a view to recommending the adoption by both Governments of such principles as, in the opinion of the Commissioners, might be applied to better regulate and protect the interests of their respective subjects, each within the other's region of jurisdiction. The movement was inaugurated by the German Government and was the old game successfully played by Luderitz in South West Africa of applying to the Imperial German Government for its "powerful protection" as soon as commercial interests were well established. The British Commissioner was Mr Thurston, who seems to have throughout been altogether dominated by the German nominee and to have cheerfully acquiesced in and recommended to our Government the adoption of every suggestion put forward by the German Representative. The Commission, which dealt exclusively with the position of the three treaty nations in Samoa, submitted that the existing unsettled state of affairs in Samoa under the native kings and chiefs was incompatible with the maintenance of peace and order and destructive of the best interests both of the Samoans themselves and of the foreign residents in the islands, and did not see any hope of improvement owing to the long-standing feuds and divisions of the natives. They recommended, therefore, that a real and immediate improvement in the social and economical conditions of Samoa would be best secured if the administration of the native Government was assumed by _one_ of the treaty Powers; the sovereignty of the King of Samoa and the independence of the islands continuing to be recognised, and due care being taken by pre-arrangement to secure all rights justly acquired. As an alternative, another scheme was submitted for reconstructing the native Government upon the general lines of a Crown Colony Government. It was agreed that the sovereignty of Samoa was to be permanently confirmed upon King Malietoa and his heirs, and that a Council of Chiefs (called the King's Council) should be created to advise and assist the King in the administration of government. Here the German Commissioner showed the cloven hoof by suggesting that the Council should consist of eight members: four native Samoans and four Europeans, of which latter two were to be nominated by Germany, one by Great Britain, and one by America. By virtue of their treaty the Germans set up a sort of Germano-Samoan Council for the special control of the two principal harbours, Apia and Saluafata; but the establishment of similar Anglo-Samoan and Americo-Samoan Councils was hardly an expedient measure if friction were to be avoided. The principal object of the Commission was, so far as Great Britain was concerned, the suppression of inter-tribal feuds and warfare, to maintain which the Samoans were bartering away their land and all other possessions in order to obtain rifles and ammunition. Dr Krauel, the German Commissioner, in making the recommendation that the administration of the native government should be assumed by one of the treaty Powers, suavely proposed that "having regard to the great preponderance of German commercial interests in Samoa, the task of forming a better administration should be entrusted, in the first instance, to the German Government." On the alternative proposal, Dr Krauel thought that this commercial preponderance of Germany should meet recognition by the nomination of two German representatives as against one each of the other treaty Powers on the proposed King's Council. Mr Thurston, the British Commissioner, was sufficiently impressed with the representations of his German colleague to suggest to his Government the adoption of the suggestions, which meant German control over the whole administration. Before any action was taken upon the recommendations of the Commission, the Germans took matters into their own hands; and on 31st December, 1885, King Malietoa was driven by a German force from his seat of Government, and the Samoan flag hauled down by German forces from a man-o'-war. Inquiries elicited the fact that "the object of the German Representative was not to abolish the Samoan Government by force, but only to take reprisals against King Malietoa." The foundation for the first act of direct aggression on the part of the Germans seems to have arisen in the sale of a portion of Apia to an American, who transferred the deeds to a German--the purchase price being only five hundred dollars. The land was looked on by the Samoans as the centre of the seat of their Government; and very rightly, too, as it covered the whole harbour of Apia. The King, Malietoa, offered five thousand dollars to the German holder to rescind the sale, but was met with a curt refusal of his offer; following upon which a German proclamation was immediately issued, drawing attention to alleged grievances of Germany, _more especially in respect of the violations of treaty agreements_, and declaring the intention of the German Government to take, in reparation, "possession of the lands of the village and district of Apia, in which is included Malinuu (the seat of Government) and the harbour of Apia, to hold possession under the supreme control that was under the Government of Malietoa, for the Government of Germany." The Samoans were informed in the proclamation that it was only the "municipality" that was being taken possession of, and the document concludes with a characteristic Hohenzollern touch: "I beseech you to be at peace and to have confidence in the Government of Germany and myself. Then will Samoa indeed be happy!" An impartial inquiry into the arbitrary action of the Germans was suggested, but the German Imperial Government temporised the while a movement was set on foot by Germans in Samoa to upset the rule of Malietoa and replace him by one of their own creatures who had been plentifully bribed with the two things dearest to the native--spirits and firearms. King Malietoa was informed by the British Consul that an inquiry was to be held, and that his kingship could not be jeopardised, the three Powers, Great Britain, Germany, and America, having jointly agreed to recognise and maintain his authority. To subdue the ardour of the more impetuous amongst his people, Malietoa issued the following proclamation to the Chiefs of Samoa: "CHIEFS,--I call upon you to keep quiet, and not to entertain foolish fears, for the English Consul, W. Powell, has assured me that in a short time Samoa will be once more united under the Government of Malietoa, for England does not undertake anything which she does not carry through; and all that England undertakes she does carry through. What Germany does, on the other hand, is merely commenced, and is not concluded. Let us place confidence in these words, which will be fulfilled." The German Ambassador in London, in discussing the Samoan question with our own Foreign Minister, the Earl of Iddlesleigh, referred rather bitterly to King Malietoa's proclamation, and Lord Iddlesleigh readily agreed that it was very offensive. A further joint Commission was held on the affairs of Samoa late in the year 1886, in the early months of which Malietoa had offered to place Samoa under the protection of the United States--which offer was accepted by the American Consul, but his action immediately repudiated by his Government. No workable form of administration could, however, be agreed upon by the three Powers--the reason being that the Germans were determined to pursue their fixed aim of acquiring the absolute control of Samoa. The rule of Malietoa, who had been recognised in authority by treaty agreements, was irksome to them; and towards the end of 1887 they demanded satisfaction from Malietoa for alleged robbery and insults to German subjects, whom they declared had been attacked when returning from celebrating the birthday of the German Emperor. The required redress not being forthcoming, Malietoa was declared deposed by the Germans, and one Tamasese was set up in his place. The English and American Consuls did not participate in the recognition of Tamasese. A state of anarchy now prevailed for a time; and inter-tribal combats took place all over the islands, centring about Apia. An insurrection was engineered by the Germans which was headed by Matiafa, who was attacked by Malietoa; and the opportunity having, as the Germans considered, arrived for the action of the mailed fist, Germany declared war on Malietoa. In March, 1889, relations between the three Powers became extremely strained in regard to Samoa, and warships of all the nations concerned appeared off Apia. The story of the hurricane that swept the harbour on the 16th March, in the teeth of which the British _Calliope_ alone pounded her way out to sea and safety to the ringing cheers of the American sailors, is stirringly told in Robert Louis Stevenson's "A Footnote to History." The _Calliope_, fighting the tempest and making less than a knot an hour, upheld the traditions of British seamanship; while the ribs of the German flagship _Adler_ serve the purpose of providing a mournful monument to the death of German ambitions in Samoa. Until Samoan administrative affairs were finally settled, her history consists of no more than a record of squabbles and intrigues. Every fresh effort only demonstrated more clearly the futility of control by the three Powers, one of which was fixed in her determination to be supreme. A convention was, indeed, signed at Berlin in 1889 under which the Samoan Islands were declared to be independent neutral territory, Great Britain, Germany, and the United States to have equal rights, and the King Malietoa, who was a strong opponent of German claims, was again recognised as King. Matiafa, who had been stirred into insurrection for their own purposes by the Germans, now supported Malietoa, who received a vociferous welcome from the Samoans on his return to Apia in his regal capacity. Shortly after his reinstatement, however, Malietoa wearied of his office and resigned his throne, which was no sinecure, in favour of his friend Matiafa. The latter's election by the people was necessary; but having duly gone through the formula, he assumed the sceptre with Malietoa as "vice-King." The subordinate position, however, was unsatisfactory to Malietoa, and by concert of the Powers he was reinstated in his former position--a proceeding which Matiafa strongly disapproved of, and he attacked Malietoa with a strong force. The Powers again intervened conjointly, and Matiafa was subdued and deported. A further rebellion against Malietoa's rule was suppressed, and the affairs of Samoa began to present some appearance of law and order when Mr Henry Ide, an American, was appointed Chief Justice--a position of great responsibility. He seems, however, to have been over-strenuous in his dispensation of justice, for in less than a year his repressive measures created a state of Civil War. In November, 1894, the unsatisfactory condition of affairs induced the Government of New Zealand to come forward with a proposal to establish a Protectorate over Samoa, and an expressed desire to undertake the administration of the islands. The proposal was not entertained by our Home Government; and while it is probable that such an arrangement would have met with the approval of the United States, it is certain that Germany would have strenuously objected. Further insurrections in 1894 brought about joint intervention by Great Britain and Germany, and the bombardment by ships of the two countries; while the death of Malietoa in 1898 necessitated another naval demonstration. A serious dispute, which might have had far reaching consequences but for the tact displayed by our Consular Service, arose over the election of a king to succeed Malietoa. The claimants to the throne were Tanu, son of Malietoa, and Matiafa. In January, 1899, Chief Justice Chambers, an American, in whose hands the final decision lay, decided in favour of Tanu in accordance with the international agreement whereby the throne was secured to Malietoa and his heirs. The decision, however, met with the strong disapproval of the Germans, who instigated Matiafa to rebel; and a serious outbreak occurred, in the course of which the greater part of Apia was burned. A force of British marines was landed from H.M.S. _Porpoise_, on which Mr Chambers and other Europeans took refuge. A provisional Government was now formed by Dr Raffel, a German, and President of the Municipal Court of Apia; and he proclaimed himself Chief Justice in spite of the protests of the British and American Consuls. The Consuls appealed to Captain Sturdee of the _Porpoise_ to assist in the reinstatement of Mr Chambers, and he sent ashore a threat to bombard the town if any resistance were offered to Mr Chambers in resuming his seat as Chief Justice. Mr Chambers was opposed by the German faction, but Dr Raffel's action did not meet with the approval of the Government at Berlin, and he was recalled in February, 1899. In the meantime, Admiral Kantz of the American navy arrived on the United States cruiser, _Philadelphia_, and a proclamation was issued under which Matiafa's Government was declared to be illegal under the terms of the Berlin Treaty. A counter-proclamation was immediately issued by the German Consul, Herr Rose, the immediate result of which was that Apia was surrounded by a strong force of rebels, and riots occurred--in the course of which R. L. Stevenson's house was looted. The British and American warships opened fire and landed forces of bluejackets, who, after some severe fighting and losses, repulsed the rebels. On the 23rd March, 1899, Tanu was crowned King of the Samoan Islands in the presence of the Foreign Consuls, with the exception of the Representative of the German Government. Matiafa, with German moral support, continued in rebellion, and several Anglo-American parties of bluejackets and marines were ambuscaded, though the chief rebels' posts were captured. A state of anarchy now prevailed, and another international Commission was appointed in May, 1899, Mr Bartlett Tripp (President) representing the United States, Mr Eliot Great Britain, and Baron Sternburg Germany. Mr Chambers' decision was confirmed by the Commission, but Tanu had wearied of his kingship and voluntarily abdicated. Further fighting now occurred, but an agreement was signed in August, 1899, by the three Powers, under which the kingship was abolished and the Government of Samoa placed in the hands of an Administrator with a Council of the Consuls of Great Britain, Germany, and the United States, assisted by a native assembly and a High Court of Justice. The German, Dr Solf, Municipal President, was nominated as Administrator, and Mr Osborne, the United States Consul, was appointed to act as Chief Justice in the place of Mr Chambers who had resigned. Samoa remained under this triple administration until the 1st March, 1900, when by the Anglo-German Convention, embodied in the Samoa Treaty, the principal Samoan Islands were annexed by Germany, the Tonga, Savage, and Solomon Islands came under the rule of Great Britain, while Tutuila and the adjacent islands became the property of the United States. On the 1st March, 1900, the German flag was hoisted over Apia. Claims for compensation were presented for the destruction of property during the Matiafa rebellion; and these, having been submitted to the arbitration of the King of Sweden, were, in 1902, adjudged to be payable by Great Britain and the United States of America! The surrender of Samoa to Germany was a bitter pill to New Zealand, and the Imperialist Premier, the late "Dick" Seddon, expressed himself forcibly on the subject. In reply to the letter from the Imperial Colonial Secretary announcing British withdrawal from Samoa, Seddon, who had looked to the realisation of the dream of a federation of the Pacific Islands under the hegemony of New Zealand, wrote: "This surrender of Samoa will in future be a source of anxiety and entail expense on Great Britain and the Colonies in preparing for and providing against eventualities. However, now that it has been done, it is necessary that immediately opportune steps should be taken to put the islands admitted to be British on a satisfactory footing. Some definite action of a forward character is required in the Pacific at the earliest opportune moment, for the surrender of Samoa has disheartened the natives in the islands, disappointed the people of Australasia, and lowered the prestige of Great Britain in this part of the world." SAMOA The thought of South Sea Islands conjures up pictures of treasure-trove and pearls, of joy-rides on turtle back, of dusky beauties with scarlet hybiscus blooms in their hair, and of fat, naked brown babies rolling on the sun-kissed sands. Readers of Robert Louis Stevenson will know Samoa and the Samoans as he knew them, and will picture the life on the islands he loved--gentle and entrancing--and breathe the soft atmosphere undisturbed save by the gurgle of rivulets flinging spray, on which small rainbows dance, over lichen-covered boulders flanked by feathery tree ferns. Samoa, Upolu, Fanuatapu--the very sound of the names has in it the cadence of the murmur of the surf over coral reefs and silver sands, or the whisper of perfume-laden breezes in tall palms fringing blue lagoons. That is the more aesthetic conception; but there is a sordid view open to the imagination in blood-spattered, headless corpses, victims of tribal fights, or "the white men on the beach," in turn victims of unbridled passions and "square-face" gin. The beachcombers of the South Seas have enriched the slang of our language with the expression "on the beach," or "on the pebbly," to denote a hopeless financial condition; but as a class these pyjama-clad, unlaced-booted gentry represent the limit of degradation--the bottom of the depths. To natives all white men are chiefs, but "surely these are not great chiefs?" asked one of the Samoan islanders, indicating the whites who dream the idle hours away on the sandy beach of Samoa. Papua, or New Guinea, again, is in the mind immediately associated with fearsome weapons of warfare made of carved wood, with collections of smoke-dried human heads with fantastically tattooed faces, and horrid feasts at which the _pièce de résistance_ was sirloin of "methody" missionary. The Samoan Islands are perfect in their beauty, and all the conditions, including the ease with which the bare necessaries of life were produced from natural resources, conduced to a _dolce far niente_ sort of existence amongst the natives, by which the whites also became infected. The Samoan group, which forms the entrepôt of all the islands round where trade is carried on, consists of fourteen islands, of which eight, Savaii, Manono, Apolima, Upolu, Fanuatapu, Manua, Nu'utele, and Nu'ulua, were German--the remainder being British and American. Savaii is roughly 50 miles long by 10 miles wide, comprising some 650 square miles; while Upolu, 22 miles east of Savaii, comprises about 340 square miles. All the islands are of volcanic origin, and rise to rugged elevations; while they are surrounded by coral reefs intersected by passages through which the navigation is difficult and dangerous. Savaii, rising to 5,400 feet, possesses an active volcano; Upolu reaches an elevation of 3,200 feet; while Tutuila, separated from Upolu by a channel 36 miles in width, is 2,300 feet at its highest point. On all the islands there is a certain scarcity of fresh water inland, but it is plentiful on the lower slopes and above high-water mark on the seashore. While the climate is moist, it is never excessively hot; and the fertility of the soil is such that it is almost a drawback, for the extreme productiveness of the soil obviates the necessity for strenuous labour on the part of anyone who occupies a patch of ground whereon to grow cocoa-nuts, yams, etc. On the Island Upolu, R. L. Stevenson's home, is Apia, the port and centre of Samoan trade. At Apia Stevenson died on the 5th December, 1894. He was much loved by the Samoans, and was by them buried on the top of Vasa Mountain, 1,300 feet above the sea. Saluafata is the next harbour of importance; but both Apia and Saluafata are open harbours, and during the months of January, February, and March are particularly insecure, owing to the hurricanes which prevail. The Samoan Islands contain less than 600 white inhabitants, and the native population is a little over 40,000. The natives residing on Upolu amount to 18,000, and on Savaii 13,000; while imported labourers total about 1,500. The origin of the natives is obscure, but ethnological students have declared them to be closely allied to the Maoris of New Zealand, and to have their origin in China; and there seems to be no reason to doubt their judgment. While cannibalism was prevalent throughout the islands of the South Seas, its practice has always been denied by the Samoans. By nature the Samoan natives are indolent, and would look upon any uncalled-for exertion as a midsummer madness; while, to the Samoan mind, the idea of growing food such as cocoa-nuts, etc., for the purpose of sending it away and selling it, held about it something barbaric, unhandsome, and absurd. There is for him no conceivable object in growing anything more than is necessary to provide daily food, and consequently he would have no share nor parcel in such a practice. The question of labour, therefore, has always been a pressing one on the plantations; and to provide this Chinese have been imported under indentures, and by Chinese labour all the work is carried on. From the time of their first gaining a footing in Samoa, the Germans began to oust the natives from the land; and as the Samoans could not be got to work, plantations were established under German managers who proceeded to extract from it, by means of the cheapest foreign labour procurable, as much as it would yield. At Apia, which Stevenson describes as the seat of the political sickness of Samoa, a controlling German firm was established who gradually obtained possession of the most fertile lands, but their titles were at times of the flimsiest. The same writer describes how a visitor would observe, near an ancient Samoan village which he had been informed was the proper residence of the Samoan kings, a notice-board set up indicating that the historic village was the property of the German firm. These boards, he adds, which were among the commonest features of the landscape, might be rather taken to imply that the claim had been disputed. If the "sales" of land from the natives to the German firm were questionable, the Samoans beheld in the firm only the occupier of _their_ land, and consequently regarded the constant raiding of the German plantations and the stealthy gathering of the cocoa-nuts merely in the light of a very trifling peccadillo, and certainly not as theft. Such land as the firm was unable to find labour to work was "mortgaged" to natives, who were compelled, under a penalty of imprisonment, to sell their copra to no one except to the mortgagee. The firm, which Stevenson describes as "the true centre of trouble, the head of the boil," of which Samoa languished thus gradually, got into its own hands the practical monopoly of trade. The trade of the islands of the South Pacific was, as previously stated, always regarded in Europe as a most valuable one; and when in 1711 a monopoly of trade with South America and the Pacific Islands was granted to the South Sea Company in England, its riches were popularly looked upon as illimitable and the shares of the South Sea Company stood at one time at a premium of 900 per cent. The bursting of the "South Sea Bubble," however, was the end of monopolies until the era of the German firm, whose agents gained a preponderance even in Fiji. The principal article of Samoan trade is copra, and the value of land is assessed according to its growth of cocoa-nuts. The trade was eminently suited for Germans, as the natives readily bartered for cheap and flashy goods "made in Germany." In the vicinity of Apia uncultivated land is worth from £15 to £25 an acre, and cultivated land planted with cocoa-nuts from £20 to £40; while "bush" land faced a value ranging from 8s. to £2. In addition to palm-oil and copra, Samoa yields the usual tropical products of cocoa, coffee, tobacco and rubber, as well as vegetable ivory. From Samoa the export of copra in 1912 amounted to £200,000, and owing to the increased utility found for copra and its steady rise in price during recent years, further planting has energetically proceeded, though somewhat interfered with by the appearance of the rhinoceros beetle. The pest seems to have been introduced in baskets of earth in which rubber stumps were packed, and soon obtained a firm hold upon the plantations, though the Samoan Government has made strenuous efforts to extirpate it. "The larvae usually proceeding from eggs deposited in decayed cocoa-nut stumps are found in large quantities six to twelve inches beneath the soil, in masses of rubbish, where they gradually transform themselves into beetles. On coming to the surface they fly from tree to tree and feed on the leaves, especially on the centre leaf of the cocoa-nut palm--the heart of the tree--which, being eaten up, the tree dies. The eggs, it is said, are always deposited by the beetles above the ground, and turn into caterpillars, which, boring their way through loose soil and rubbish, then become larvae."[H] Rubber is of comparatively recent introduction into Samoan production, and only amounted to £646 in 1911. Tapping really only commenced in that year; and though later figures are not available all reports as regards the quality of Samoan rubber are reassuring, and the prospects of the industry are regarded as excellent. Cocoa, however, has been grown for many years, and in 1911 was exported to the value of £38,508, despite the ravages of the "cacao canker," which attacks the older trees, the young ones under eight or nine years old being seldom if ever affected. Amongst other industries is the collection of phosphates, the value of which, exported from the Pacific Islands in 1912, amounted to £250,000. The following official report was made last year on the phosphate industry in the islands of Nauru and Angaur: "The Pacific Phosphate Company in 1912 shipped from the islands 138,000 tons (as against 90,000 tons in the previous year). The Company suffered from a gradually growing lack of labourers, which was in the end overcome by the importation of coolies. At the end of 1912, 59 Europeans, 90 Chinese, and 576 natives of the Protectorate were employed in the phosphate mines on the Island of Nauru. The works were improved and extended in many directions. The Deutsche Suedsee Phosphat Aktiengesellschaft exported from Angaur 54,000 tons of phosphate, as against 45,000 tons in the previous year. The total annual production has consequently increased by 57,000 tons. While on Nauru Island labour was scarce, on Angaur several plants had to be finished before work could proceed to the full extent. Labour conditions were here satisfactory." The imports to Samoa are principally cheap "trade goods," and include large quantities of calico, petticoats of which are worn by both men and women. The latter purchase white dress-stuff and have them printed by native dyers with a dye known as tapa. The value of imports in 1911 totalled £203,312. Galvanised iron has grown more and more in demand, the wild sugar-cane disease having nearly destroyed the manufacture of the picturesque native thatch. New Zealand and Australia have a regularly connecting line of steamers, and in 1913 a better connection was provided for the whole South Sea District (by the Germans of course) by a steamship line from Singapore which touched New Guinea as well as Samoa. The South Seas have for many decades been the field of fruitful labour of missionaries, and as a result of their work in their native schools every Samoan can read and write his own language. The Government had a school for white and half-caste children at Upolu in which they were taught English. After annexing Samoa the Germans established a Government, taking the form of a Government Council, consisting, besides the members who occupied official positions, of eight persons selected by the Governor, and who were chosen from the leading merchants and planters. The votes of the general public as regards the election of these were presented to the Governor for his information, but he was not compelled to act in accordance with them--the votes merely indicating the popular wish in the matter. Up to 1912 two councillors, who received no salary, were Englishmen but subsequently all were German. The Germans took steps to get rid of "the white men on the beach," and the class of white who dreamed the hours away there were discouraged by a deposit of £25, or a guarantee for that amount, being required to be placed in the hands of the collector of customs before strangers from foreign countries could land, unless they intended leaving again by the next or following steamer. Up to December, 1912, pleading by foreigners in the Imperial Court in Apia was allowed in the English language by persons who could not speak German, but this was then stopped and all Court proceedings were held in the German language, or, where those concerned could not speak German, by means of an interpreter. Interpreters were provided by the Court for witnesses, but not for parties to suits nor for anyone appearing for them. In the custom-house and post office, however, English was still permitted. The Government was extremely anxious to increase the use of the German language in Samoa, but as regarded trade and commerce the proximity of Australia, New Zealand and Fiji caused the knowledge of English to be of far more importance to the residents, whatever their nationality. NEW GUINEA The New Guinea (formerly known as Papua) group of islands comprise Melanesia, the Samoan being included in Polynesia. In New Guinea the British territory was in 1914 approximately 87,786 square miles, while the German possessions in the north of the principal island, and including the Bismarck Archipelago, amounted to roughly 180,000 square miles. German New Guinea was, upon the hoisting of the German flag, renamed Kaiser Wilhelm's Land, New Britain became Neu Pommern, and New Ireland took the name of Neu Mecklenburg. Neu Pommern and Neu Mecklenburg are the principal islands of the Bismarck Archipelago, the area of which is estimated at 48,000 square miles. Lying in the equatorial region, the climate of New Guinea and the Bismarck Archipelago is hot and humid, and the seasons may be roughly divided into the comparatively dry period of the southeast monsoon from about May to November, and the rainy west or north-west monsoon. The annual rainfall is heavy, being some 150 inches on the sea-board, and far more on the highlands which intercept the moisture-laden clouds. Like the majority of the islands of the South Seas, New Guinea coastal districts are infested with mosquitoes, and malarial fever, which affects Europeans as well as natives, is prevalent. It occurs in more or less severe forms, and occasionally terminates fatally. The eradication of the mosquito pest by petroleum spraying, which has proved such a marked success in the Panama regions, is now being attempted in all malarial-stricken countries, and will, when accomplished, no doubt bring immunity from malaria to New Guinea. The coastline on the mainland of New Guinea is fringed by coral reefs and a line of large and small islands, and is indented by fine bays; but to reach them the navigation is extremely difficult. In the narrow passages between the islands and between the reefs the current is so strong and runs so continuously for days at a time that a sailing boat can do nothing but lie at anchor waiting for a turn in the tide, and some have had to wait for a fortnight before they could get through. The chief danger to navigation is the number of coral reefs that are scattered about the coast, very few of them charted. Sometimes there is enough water to make it safe to pass over them, and then the coral presents a beautiful sight--snow-white with long branches, or bright-red: then the sudden drop into deep, dark nothingness, at the edge of the reef that rises sheer from bottomless depths. The islands are volcanic and the Kaiser Wilhelm territory in particular is very mountainous, the most prominent feature of its configuration, especially on the east coast, being the magnificent mountain ranges which in places rise steeply from the narrow fringe of the low coastal lands. Snow-capped mountains and volcanoes, rising to a height of 15,000 feet or more, are reported to have been seen in the interior, which is still considerably unexplored. There are a large number of mountain streams on all the large islands, but so far no navigable river has been found in the Archipelago. An abundant rainfall, together with a high and equable temperature, has produced a vegetation of exceptional luxuriance and great variety. While in places extensive areas of grass plains are found, the hillsides and lowlands are, for the greater part, covered with almost impenetrable forest, containing timber trees of considerable size and utilitarian value. Manioc (wild arrowroot), yams, bananas, and other tropical fruit such as paw-paws are cultivated by the natives, while sago forms a staple food of the inhabitants. Sago palms grow wild in the bush, and prior to treatment sago is, like tapioca, in its crude state poisonous; but the Papuans have devised the means of carefully preparing the pith of the palm, and by washing, straining, and drying rendered it fit for food. Until the end of the flowering period, the hollow interior of the sago palm, somewhat similar to bamboo, is filled with a starchy mass from which the growing fruit draws its nourishment. The tree is felled by the Papuans and the pulp scraped and washed, during which process the sago is separated and sinks to the bottom. Cocoa-nuts also form an important food factor, and groves are found everywhere; while copra and palm-oil are the principal articles of trade. Papuan birds are noted, and amongst the numerous species of bird life the bird of paradise is particularly notable for richness of plumage; and the skins of bright-plumaged birds have been in the past extensively exported. New Guinea holds less than 500 white inhabitants, the majority being, of course, German officials and planters; while the natives living in all the islands are estimated at 500,000. Papua suffered for years from the presence of the undesirable "white men on the beach," and wild and weird tales are told of early days of white men with nothing to do, sitting or lying about in native houses. The Rev. Henry Newton, one of the pioneers of later civilisation in British New Guinea, gives the following description of a phase of New Guinea life: "The storekeeper would go to bed and leave a supply of liquor handy for his clients to dispose of as seemed best to them. "They would spend the night drinking and gambling, the empty bottles thrown over the veranda would form a fine heap on the ground, and sometimes one or two humans would follow the bottles as the result of a heated but disconnected argument, and decide to remain there till the morning. The storekeeper and publican would count up the number of 'dead-heads' in the morning, and divide the total cost amongst those whom he had left to enjoy themselves overnight. "A gaol was built for the accommodation of native prisoners; not that this meant there was no need of a place of detention for members of the white race. Occasionally a white man had to be accommodated. "One man, an Irishman, who had been indulging not wisely but too well and had decided on open-air treatment, was lying asleep in the street, and it was necessary to remove him. A detachment of native police was told off to carry the member of the ruling race to the gaol. "When they had hoisted him on their shoulders and were marching off, the unhappy man waked up for a moment, and, not quite understanding the situation, said 'Hullo, boys, what have I done? Why, am I a hero?'"[I] The native Papuans are not regarded as suitable for work in the Western sense of the word, and the German efforts to exploit the natives have not produced very successful economic results, and the import of Chinese coolies had to be relied on. This resulted, in the Pacific Islands generally, in a traffic in labour which roused R. L. Stevenson's ire. The native inhabitants consist in New Guinea of a number of races, differing totally from each other in appearance, customs, and language. The various tribes have little in common with each other, and inter-tribal wars and feuds have been continuous, in the course of which the custom of "head-hunting" became a popular pastime. Although the Samoans strenuously repudiate the suggestion that they or their ancestors were ever addicted to cannibalism, the Papuans freely admit the prevalence of the custom; and although they now profess to have discontinued cannibalism, the older men will talk confidentially about the doings in "the old days," and will sigh for the times that have been. The natives have unbounded belief in the powers of sorcerers and in witchcraft, and are more easily held in control by superstition than by any appeal to any sense. The hard work--domestic and agricultural--is done by the women, as amongst most native races; it being beneath a man's dignity to be engaged in any other labour than that connected with warfare, sport, or the provision of creature comforts. The Government of New Guinea was vested in a Governor whose seat was at Herbertshöhe, picturesquely situated on the shores of Neu Pommern. The town was the most important commercial centre of the Colony, several of the principal trading and planting firms making it their headquarters. Round about it are situated some of the best cocoa-nut plantations in the islands. The official language was, of course, German, but English was also spoken or at least understood by all European residents in the islands. In the intercourse with the natives the weird form of speech known as pidgin-English is in universal use throughout the South Seas. It is framed on the same principles as their own languages, and every white man who cannot speak native seems to fall naturally into the use of it. So universal is its use that in German New Guinea the Government officials, to the offence of their _kultured_ minds, had to use it if they wanted the natives to understand them. In their anxiety to spread the use of German, this must have been particularly distasteful to the officials, especially when an Englishman who did not understand German found a medium in pidgin-English. Some compensation, however, is found by a German writer who says that "_although_ it is deplorable that, while the easily learned Malay language might be introduced with advantage, this unlovely dog-English should still be encouraged, the quaint expressions promptly invited by the natives for anything new to them, amply demonstrate their ready wit and furnish a constant source of amusement." But if "pidgin" is a barbarous perversion of English, on the other hand pidgin-German is a horror hardly conceivable. Of all the island groups in the Pacific Ocean, perhaps none offers conditions equally favourable for agricultural pursuits than does the north coast of New Guinea and the Archipelago. Lying outside the cyclonic belt, those devastating storms which are largely responsible for the failure of crops in Polynesia, as well as in some of the groups north of the line, need not be reckoned with, and a greater fertility of the soil further helps to make this part of the Pacific well fitted for tropical cultivation. Cocoa-nut growing especially proves most profitable, but cotton, rubber, cocoa, coffee, and tobacco are also grown, besides spices and fruits. The export of copra, which in 1912 amounted to £300,000, has steadily increased as more and more land was brought under cultivation. Other articles of export include phosphates, pearl and tortoiseshell, trepang, sandal-wood, and vegetable ivory. The exportation of phosphates in 1912 amounted to about £250,000, and with copra made up 90 per cent of the exports. Skins of birds of paradise were exported from Kaiser Wilhelm's Land in 1912 to the value of £25,000, but an agitation on hand against the destruction of wild birds for the sake of their plumage will no doubt put an end to this traffic. Trepang or bêche-de-mer, otherwise known as sea cucumbers and sea slugs, are an important food luxury amongst the Chinese and other Eastern people. They are used in the gelatinous soups which form an important article of food in China. They are prepared for export by being lightly boiled, then sun-dried, and finally smoked over a fire. A small English company is engaged in the industry of trepang fishing. While timber of great variety and excellent quality exists in inexhaustible quantities, and although there are small saw-mills in Kaiser Wilhelm's Land, only small quantities of timber for cabinet purposes have been exported. Traces of valuable minerals have been discovered. In 1890 gold was located by prospectors from Queensland, but the gold veins discovered have not proved as valuable as had been hoped. Oil has also been prospected in New Guinea, but its exploitation was reserved by the German Government. The analysis showed a high percentage of heavy oil. The imports, amounting in 1912 to £750,000, consist chiefly of food-stuffs, liquid and tinned, machinery and iron ware, building materials, clothing, leathern goods, and sundries. The wants of the natives are few, however, and little trade is done with them in textiles, the clothing of men and women alike being usually composed of strips of cloth with plaited grass girdles and a profusion of shell ornaments. On 15th August, 1914, the advanced detachment of the New Zealand Expeditionary Force, which was ordered to seize Samoa, left Wellington at dawn and was met at sea by three of His Britannic Majesty's cruisers in New Zealand waters--the _Psyche_, the _Pyramus_, and the _Philomel_. As it was known that the German armoured cruisers _Scharnhorst_ and _Gneisenau_ were at large in the Pacific, it was decided not to go direct to Samoa, but to shape a course for New Caledonia (French). Cruising off New Caledonia the British ships were joined by the French cruiser _Montcalm_ and by the Australian cruisers _Australia_ and _Melbourne_. The contingent received a wonderfully enthusiastic reception from the French in New Caledonia, and under the command of Admiral Sir G. E. Patey the allied fleet steamed for Samoa. In the early dawn of 30th August the first glimpse was obtained of Upolu--the scene of wars and rebellions and international schemings, and the scene also of that devastating hurricane which wrecked six ships of war and ten other vessels and sent 142 officers and men of the German and American navies to their last sleep. The rusting ribs and plates of the _Adler_, the German flagship, pitched high inside the reef, stared at them as a reminder of that memorable event. The _Psyche_ went on ahead, and after the harbour had been swept for mines, she steamed in under a flag of truce and delivered a message from Rear-Admiral Sir George Patey demanding surrender. The Germans, who had been expecting their own fleet in, were surprised at the suddenness with which an overwhelming force had descended upon them, and decided to offer no resistance to a landing. In a remarkably brief space of time the covering party was on shore, and shortly afterwards Apia was swarming with British bluejackets and troops. Guards were placed all about the Government buildings and a staff installed in the Government offices. The custom-house was seized and an armed party was dispatched along a bush road to seize the wireless station, the tall, latticed iron mast of which could be seen rising above the trees some three or four miles inland on the lower slopes of the hills. Meantime the German flag that had flown over the island for fourteen years was hauled down, the Germans present doffing their hats and standing bareheaded and silent on the veranda of the Supreme Court as they watched the soldier in khaki from New Zealand unceremoniously pulling it down, detaching it from the rope, and carrying it inside the building. Next morning the British flag was hoisted with all due ceremony. The troops were drawn up in three sides of a square facing the court-house--the seat of the new Government. Inside the square and facing the flagstaff were Colonel Logan and staff in their rough khaki uniforms, with them the naval Commanders. On the left the high Samoan Chiefs, Tanu-Malietoa and Tamasese--who had been specially invited to attend the ceremony--with other Chiefs made a picturesque group. Fifteen years ago some of those present had seen the young Chief Tanu placed on the throne of Malietoa, with the representatives of the allied fleets of Great Britain and America and the civil authorities of these natives in attendance, and the Germans conspicuous only by their absence. A few minutes before 8 o'clock all was ready. The commands to the troops had ceased and an intense silence had prevailed. Two bluejackets and a naval lieutenant stood, with the flag, awaiting the signal. Presently the first gun of the Royal salute from the _Psyche_ boomed out across the bay. Then slowly, very slowly, inch by inch, to the booming of twenty-one guns the flag was hoisted, the officers with drawn swords silently watching it go up. With the sound of the last gun the flag reached the top of the flagstaff and fluttered out in the southeast trade wind above the tall palms of Upolu. The troops came to the Royal salute as the band played the National Anthem. The reading of a proclamation by Colonel Logan terminated the brief but finely impressive ceremonial. The German Governor, Dr Schutz, was sent to Fiji and subsequently to New Zealand. With similar ceremonies Herbertshöhe in Neu Pommern was occupied by an Australian force. * * * * * On the 14th September the German cruisers _Scharnhorst_ and _Gneisenau_ made their appearance at Apia, but on the New Zealanders manning the guns the ships left for the open Pacific. A German merchant ship was at the time at Pango-Pango in the American island of Tutuila, and ten members of the crew deserted and rowed the seventy miles to Apia, where they hoped to find the _Scharnhorst_ and _Gneisenau_. They were, however, arrested by the British authorities. A British administration was set up. The German officials in the old administration resigned their appointments, but the natives decided to continue under British rule. CHAPTER VI KIAU-CHAU In their various "voyages of discovery" and enterprises to extend their trading operations, it was inevitable that the European nations should endeavour to find an opening into China. From being a dreaded volcano whence streams of lava in the shape of devastating hordes constantly overflowed to upset the ideas of culture as conceived by the nations who radiated the principles of "civilisation" in succession to the fallen Empires of Greece and Rome, China had retired into a seclusion, only to be disturbed when "Progress" knocked at her doors. She shut herself in and literally walled her borders, not so much to keep out invasion but to retain for herself and her people her stoical civilisation and the secrets in the arts and crafts of which she was the sole possessor; for Chinese internal affairs concerned no one but herself and her people, and her peculiar industries were conducted and perpetuated on an apprentice system--father to son handing down by word of mouth the methods of success in the various arts. As European nations rose and fell--as the grandeur that was Spain succeeded the glittering adventures of Portuguese navigators, as the Dutch, French, and British struggled for mastery on the outer seas, and while Europe resounded with the stern music of the tramp of Napoleon's legions, China, with her centuries of arrested civilisation, maintained an inscrutable attitude, and, slumbering in brooding silence, preserved her aloofness from any interest without her borders. The wave of European trade-expansion surged high upon her barrier of inclusiveness before she awoke to what was to her a new era--the age in which man might demand for man equable treatment in the way of trade, upon a basis in the constitution of which China had no experience and no say. Hitherto China's conception of outer trade was merely the collection of tribute, and her first association with trade with the "foreign devils" from the outer world was quite in conformity with that idea, for her piratical junks set out and joyously exacted toll indiscriminately. But this was hardly the legitimate form intended by the merchants of the West, and compensation for the misconceived acts of her subjects being demanded, China was invited to subscribe to treaties which might open her doors to the introduction of more cultured methods of barter. Unreluctantly, however, as China assented to the development of trade by foreign nations in her seas and along her coasts, for many years the severest possible restrictions were placed upon Chinese leaving their country for the purpose of trade. "Treaties" were concluded with the Western nations for the sake of peace, but by the Chinese in general these treaties were regarded as mere subterfuges whereby to disarm the vigilance of the prey. Treaties for the furtherance of trade were entered into with the Western nations in turn from the end of the seventeenth century onwards, but none of these entailed any territorial concessions nor threatened "the integrity of China." The thin end of the German wedge seems to have been inserted into Chinese affairs by the conclusion of a secret treaty in 1880 between Germany and China, whereby the latter, who was ready to grant or promise any manner of concession in return for being left alone, gave Germany trading privileges, which she had already granted to other nations. But Germany's influence in China was nil until after the Chino-Japanese War of 1894. Russia, owing to her geographical position and to the intercourse of her subjects with the Chinese, was chiefly interested in China, and the Taiping Rebellion of 1850 firmly established France and Great Britain in the exclusive Empire. In 1894 war broke out between China and Japan, which resulted in a complete and decisive victory for the latter. Peace was signed by Li Hung Chang on behalf of China at Shimonoseki on the 17th April, 1895, and the European nations realised at its conclusion that in Japan a new Power had arisen in the Far East, and that the beginning of a new epoch had begun. The Peace Treaty entered into between Japan and China in 1895 provided, for the absolute independence of Korea which had been a vassal of China since 1882, the cession to Japan of the Island of Formosa and the Liao-tung Peninsula at the foot of which lies Port Arthur (which was then occupied by the Japanese), and the payment of an indemnity of £30,000,000, pending the handing over of which Japan was to occupy the Port of Wei-hai-wei on the Shantung Peninsula. A further condition of the treaty was the opening of certain places to foreign enterprise and commerce. The conclusion of this treaty brought the European Powers on the scene. For some time Russia had been intent upon the problem of securing an ice-clear port on the Pacific Ocean as an outlet to her Siberian possessions--an ambition which was considered by British statesmen as not unreasonable--and therefore the occupation by Japan of all the coastline of Korea by no means suited Russia. She, therefore, invited the intervention of the Powers, and the invitation was accepted by France and Germany, but declined by Great Britain. A joint note was then presented to the Tokio Government by Russia, France and Germany, under which Japan was recommended not to occupy any of the Chinese mainland permanently. The Japanese, finding this force arrayed against them, stated that they "yielded to the dictates of magnanimity, and accepted the advice of the three Powers." Japan gave up the whole of her continental acquisitions under the war, and retained only Formosa; so the "integrity of China" seemed to be preserved for the time. The Japanese people were shocked at this incident. The attitude of Russia and France they could understand, but Germany, who had been worming her way into Japan's good graces by professions of friendship and who was wholly uninterested in the ownership of Manchuria, seemed to have joined in robbing Japan of the fruits of her victorious war merely to establish a title to Russia's goodwill, and to renew the good relations with Russia which had been broken by the Franco-Russian _entente_ of the years 1891-1895. In pursuit of her aim of an outlet to Siberia, Russia assisted China in the payment of the Japanese war indemnity, and obtained the right to carry the Siberian railway to Vladivostock, this giving her a grasp on Northern Manchuria. By a secret arrangement with Germany, Russia subsequently obtained a "lease" of the Liao-tung Peninsula, giving the assurance that Port Arthur would be an "open port" for the trade of all nations; but as it transpired that Port Arthur was unsuited to mercantile trade, it became solely a naval base and the "open port" was established at Dalny. On the 20th June, 1895, France entered into a convention with China under which she obtained certain railway and mining rights in Kiang-si and Yun-nan, and the signing of this convention brought China into conflict with Great Britain. Great Britain could hardly regard with equanimity the growth of Russian influence in the north; she therefore demanded and obtained a lease of Wei-hai-wei on the Shantung Peninsula, occupied Wei-hai-wei immediately upon its evacuation by the Japanese, and threw the port open to outside trade. In the meantime Germany considered that she had received no reward for her share in supporting France and Russia in compelling the retrocession of Liao-tung; in fact China could not be brought to see that Germany's place in "world politics" entitled her to annex any portion of the Chinese Empire. On 1st November, 1897, however, two Roman Catholic missionaries, who were German subjects, were most conveniently murdered near Kiau-Chau, and, ostensibly to get compensation for this outrage on German _kultur_, Germany proceeded to seize Kiau-Chau. This port was claimed by Russia, but on the face of it the synchronical cession of Port Arthur to Russia points to the two countries having come to an arrangement mutually satisfactory under the secret agreement concluded by them, while Russian action respecting Port Arthur and German action in regard to Kiau-Chau tallied at every point. The proceedings in regard to Kiau-Chau were Hohenzollern to the last degree--arrogant and theatrical. Three German warships were dispatched to China and they landed marines at Kiau-Chau while preparations for sending out reinforcements were hurried on in Germany. The squadron was placed under the command of the German Emperor's brother, Prince Henry of Prussia, whom the Kaiser designated, in a farewell speech at Kiel, as the "mailed fist" of Germany. The German Emperor thus furnished a pleasing fancy for humoristic journalists and caricaturists, for the comic side prevailed and the mission rocked the world in the gentle throes of laughter rather than stirred it with the tremulous quaking of dread. On arriving at Kiau-Chau with his squadron, Prince Henry wrapped the mailed fist in a parchment covering, demanding the "lease" of the town and the neighbouring district to Germany for a period of ninety-nine years; and, divining that Germany could rely on the support of Russia, the Court of Pekin had no option but to bow to the inevitable, and the lease of the territory demanded was signed on the 6th March, 1898. The Shantung Peninsula, a maritime province of China on the Yellow Sea, is the most densely inhabited part of China, and is celebrated as the native province of Confucius and therefore sacred to both Chinese and Japanese followers of the dictate of the sage's analects. The peninsula is a mass of mountain ranges which rise to a height of 5,000 feet. The ranges are intersected by fertile valleys which provide sustenance at a minimum expenditure of toil. Kiau-Chau is a splendid harbour and, in regard to Pekin, of great strategical importance. The German occupation of the harbour and as much of the surrounding territory as they could bring under their influence was, they declared, only to provide a gateway to China and an open door for German trade. The trade did not, however, progress under German administration of the territory. There were no means of transport, and until railways could be constructed the port could only supply and draw from its immediate neighbourhood. Only Germans frequented Kiau-Chau and trade decreased, as the natives cordially disliked the inquisitorial ways of the official system. The chief value of Shantung is in its mineral deposits--principally coal, and coal easily takes the first place amongst articles of export. Iron ore, gold, galena (lead and silver), and copper are found in considerable quantities. The principal agricultural products are wheat, millet, Indian corn, pulse, arrowroot, castor-oil, vegetables, and fruit. Wax is a considerable article of trade, while seri-culture (silk) forms an important industry. Silkworms are fed on mulberry, oak, lettuce, or vine leaves; and the nature and quality of the silk depends upon the character of the food. The worms fed on mulberry and lettuce leaves produce the lighter forms of silk, those on vine leaves a silk of a deeper yellow colour verging on red, while the oak-leaf-fed worms produce the well-known pongee, chifu or Shantung silks. This latter is not as fine as the mulberry or lettuce silk but is of more practical use and of better wear. The soya bean, cultivated so extensively and profitably in Japan, the oil cake made therefrom, and cotton are also produced by the Chinese in the Shantung province. The exports from Kiau-Chau, according to Chinese statistics, amounted in 1912 to about £1,250,000; while the exports reached £1,750,000. Germany brought under her sway in the Shantung Peninsula an area of about 120 square miles. The German population in Kiau-Chau, exclusive of troops, was only about 2,100 in 1913, but the peninsula was strongly garrisoned. The Chinese population centred about Tsingtau and amounted to nearly 54,000. Immediately after their occupation of the Shantung province the Germans entered into negotiations (which were probably conducted in the usual Prussian way) with the Chinese authorities, and a concession was granted for the continuation of the Shantung railway to a junction with the great cross-country railway Pekin-Hankau, the German object being of course to establish a direct Kiau-Chau-Pekin trade. In 1914 a new service of steamships via the Suez Canal from Hamburg to the American Pacific coast was inaugurated, and the liners calling at Tsingtau, in order to carry goods to the United States and Canada without reshipment, provided a fortnightly service for Tsingtau. A German writer says: "The mountainous neighbourhood of Tsingtau is, thanks to German afforestation, beginning to get a different character. Where formerly only rough open country was to be seen, timber and orchards are filling the slopes. The Chinese _work voluntarily_ for the Government, and receive payment in seeds, shrubs, and trees for their own property." The Germans made every effort for the germanisation of Shantung, and schools were established where science and technical science were taught; and the students, according to the same writer, "first learned German and in this way became messengers of German civilisation all over China," for which blessing China has not, seemingly, exhibited any marked degree of gratitude. Kiau-Chau and Tsingtau were fortified and made as impregnable fortresses as modern science could construct, and all German proceedings indicated that any "ultimate retrocession to China" of the province was extremely problematical. The outbreak of the war of 1914 gave Japan an opportunity of paying off to Germany both the capital and accumulated interest of the score she had held to Germany's debit ever since the latter's unwarrantable intrusion into her sphere. The capital consisted of an announcement in the early stages of the war of Japan's intention to take action to protect the general interests in the Far East, "keeping especially in view the independence and integrity of China," and in the delivery on the 15th August of an ultimatum to Germany. The interest was provided by the ultimatum being couched in almost identical terms with Germany's ultimatum to Japan sixteen years previously. The following is the text of the ultimatum: "We consider it highly important and necessary in the present situation to take measures to remove the causes of all disturbance of peace in the Far East, and to safeguard general interests as contemplated in the agreement between Japan and Great Britain. "In order to secure firm and enduring peace in Eastern Asia, the establishment of which is the aim of the said agreement, the Imperial Japanese Government sincerely believes it to be its duty to give advice to the Imperial German Government to carry out the following two propositions:-- "(1) Withdraw immediately from Japanese and Chinese waters the German men-of-war and armed vessels of all kinds, and to disarm at once all those which cannot be withdrawn. "(2) To deliver, on a date not later than 15th September, to the Imperial Japanese authorities without condition or compensation the entire leased territory of Kiau-Chau with a view to the eventual restoration of the same to China. "The Imperial Japanese Government announces at the same time that in the event of its not receiving by noon on 23rd August an answer from the Imperial German Government signifying unconditional acceptance of the above advice offered by the Imperial Japanese Government, Japan will be compelled to take such action as it may deem necessary to meet the situation." The ultimatum caused a sensation in China, as it was stated that China was fully of the intention "eventually" to regain possession of Kiau-Chau by her own resources. The Chinese Government in perturbation expressed the opinion that the only course for Germany was to cancel the lease of Kiau-Chau and hand the territory back to China. The United States of America intimated, as an expression of their view, that the United States would have been better pleased if the word "eventually" in the ultimatum had been better defined. On the 23rd August Japan declared war upon Germany, and immediately proceeded, with the assistance of British warships and men, to blockade the harbour of Kiau-Chau and invest Tsingtau, which was the key to the situation. The German cruiser _Emden_ was at Tsingtau on the outbreak of war and got to sea before the blockade. The _Emden_ had a short but by no means inglorious career. Under her resourceful, gallant and courteous Commander, Von Müller, she cruised the Bay of Bengal and destroyed British shipping to the value of over £1,000,000; she bombarded Madras, causing appreciable damage, and her final exploit of note was to steam boldly into the British port of Penang, disguised by rigging up a dummy extra funnel and flying the Japanese flag, where she sank a Russian cruiser and a French torpedo-boat destroyer. On 10th November, however, she arrived off Cocos Islands, and while a landing party was busy destroying the wireless and cable apparatus there she was discovered by the Australian cruiser H.M.A.S. _Sydney_, by whom she was engaged, driven ashore and burnt. The Shantung German possession made a strenuous resistance, but after two months' investment by land and blockade by sea, surrendered to the joint British and Japanese force, and the dream of a German Empire in the Far East was dissipated. The fall of Tsingtau and Kiau-Chau was a rending blow to German prestige in the East, and its severity excited bitter comments on this extinguishment of what was in German papers described as "a shining testimony to German culture." Poor old _kultur_! It has of late had many a heavy burden to bear and is now entrusted with the final destruction of Japan, for according to a leading German paper: "The Japanese have assisted England in destroying the most brilliant work of German colonisation (save the mark!). England will reap the harvest sown by her short-sighted Government in a time not so far distant. "Germany has lost Kiau-Chau, but not for ever; and when eventually the time of reckoning arrives then as unanimously as what is now a cry of pain will a great shout of rejoicing ring through Germany--'Woe to Nippon.'" So both England and Japan had better look out. INDEX A Africa, East, 84 ----, area and features, 97 ----, British explorers, 86 ----, German exploitation, 98 ----, Germans engineer rebellion, 95 ----, Germany annexes, 91 ----, Germany obtains Kilima 'Njaro, 93 ----, history, 84 ----, jewel of German possessions, 107 ----, Portuguese status, 93 ----, products, 101 ----, railways, 101 ----, terrorism of natives, 96 Africa, German wireless, 66 Africa, South West, 36 ----, area, 69 ----, boundaries, 65 ----, British operations, 82 ----, Herero rebellion, 70 ----, physical features, 73 ----, products, 74 ----, railways, 76 Africa, West, 109 ----, Germany annexes Togoland, 112 ----, Germany's entry into, 110 ----, history, 109 Agadir crisis, 30 Angra Pequena, British subjects' position, 55 ----, H.M.S. _Boadicea_ at, 59 ----, possession of, 41 Arrowroot, 180 Asbestos, 75 Australia in the Pacific, 129 Australian Colonies, conference on the Pacific Islands, 133 Austria, emulation of Prussia, 19 B Bananas, 121, 161 Bêche-de-mer, 166 Bechuanaland, Boer action, 64 ----, Rhodes's steps, 65 Belgian Congo, 87 Bernhardi, General von, on Germany's "place in the sun," 28 ----, views on Colonies, 32 Beyers, General, defeat and death, 82 ----, rebels, 81 Birds, 162 Bismarck, Otto von, 18, 19, 21, 22, 29, 45, 57, 91, 111 Boers, the, as pioneers, 39 ----, in South West Africa, 77 ----, Republics in Bechuanaland, 64 ----, view of Germans, 47 Bönn, Dr, on native policy, 33 Botha, General Louis, 79 ----, takes field, 82 British policy in Africa, 41 ---- sea supremacy, 28 ---- vacillation, 24, 53 C Cape Colony, danger of being shut in, 50 Caprivi Treaty, 25, 66, 77, 83, 94 Carbonate of soda, 107 Carnarvon, Lord, refuses to annex New Guinea, 132 Castor-oil, 180 Cazou, 106 Chillies, 106 China and trade treaties, 174 ---- and the Western nations, 172 ----, German wedge inserted into, 174 ----, the "mailed fist," 179 ----, war with Japan, 175 Coal, 180 Cocoa, 117, 121, 154, 166 Coffee, 101, 102, 154, 166 Congo Free State, 88 Cook, Captain, 128 Copper, 75, 180 Copra, 102, 120, 154, 162, 166 Cotton, 101, 117, 120, 166 D Damaraland, 41 Dar-es-Salaam, 95 ---- bombarded, 108 De Wet, General, defeat and capture, 82 ----, rebels, 81 Diamonds, 75 Dutch in Pacific, 127, 130 E Elliott, Major, stops rebellion in South West Africa, 70 _Emden_, the, 184, 185 F France in the East, 176, 177 ---- in West Africa, 109 Frere, Sir Bartle, 42, 46, 53, 90 G Galena, 75, 180 German Colonial Empire limits, 31 ---- Colonial trade, 27 ---- Colonisation Society, 20 ---- Confederation of 1814, 17 ---- East African Society, 91 ---- Emperor, 18 ---- Emperor, letter to Lord Tweedmouth, 31 ---- industries, 26 ---- native policy, 31 ---- naval aspirations, 31 Germans and natives, 34 ---- as colonisers, 32 ---- in America, 33 ---- in Brazil, 33 ---- in Cape Colony, 33 German South West Africa, 24 Germany and native treaties, 91 ---- annexes South West Africa, 62 ----, aspirations in Rhodesia, 55 ----, aspirations in South Africa, 53 ---- at Angra Pequena, 56 ---- "a world Power," 28 ----, deprecatory spirit, 31, 61 ----, emigration, 21 ---- enters colonisation field, 23 ----, false conception of Boer character, 79 ----, first German Colony, 44 ----, ideas of expansion, 26 ---- in the Pacific, 25, 124 ---- in West Africa, 110 Germany in Zanzibar, 24, 89 ----, native policy, 70 ----, naval demonstration at Zanzibar, 92 ----, place in Moroccan affairs, 29 ----, population, 20 ----, secret treaty with Russia _qua_ China, 178 ----, threat to Japan, 176, 185 ----, ultimatum to Japan, 176 ----, wireless system in Africa, 66 Gold, 75, 107, 167, 180 Grain, 101 Granville, Lord, and Bismarck, 57, 111 Great Britain in Africa, 36 Great Namaqualand and Cape Colony, 61 Guano, 74 Gum-copal, 101 H Heligoland, exchange for Zanzibar, 25, 92 Hides, 73, 102 I Iron, 75, 180 Ivory, 102, 154, 166 J Japan, German ultimatum, 176 ----, her claims in China, 175 ----, ultimatum to Germany, 183 K Kalahari Desert, 41 Kamerun, 24, 109, 113, 119, 120, 122 Kiau-Chau, 172, 178, 179, 180 ----, fall of, 185 ----, Japan's ultimatum to Germany, 183 Kiel, 18 Kilima 'Njaro, 25, 88, 93 L Lead, 75 Lebaudy, M., 88 Leopold, King of the Belgians, 87 Luderitz, Herr, at Angra Pequena, 55 ----, at Santa Lucia, 64 Luderitzbucht, 64, 82 M Magellan, 130 "Mailed fist," the, 178 Maize, 118 Marble, 74 Maritz, General, 79 Merriman, John X., 54 Mica, 107 Mohair, 73 Morocco, 29 N Nachtigal, Dr, 111 Namaqualand, Great, 41 Natives, German exploitation of, 116 New Guinea, 25, 130, 166 ---- and Queensland, 132 New Zealand offers to protect Samoa, 144 O Oil, 167 P Pacific Islands, 124, 129, 131, 133 Palm kernels, 117 Palm-oil, 102, 117, 120, 154, 162 Pea-nuts, 106 Penguin eggs, 74 Peters, Dr Carl, 90 Phosphates, 156, 166 Portugal, 36, 93, 109, 124, 126 Prussian militarism, 17 Pulse, 180 Q Queensland and New Guinea, 132 R Rhodes, Cecil, 19, 54 Rhodesia, German efforts, 55 Rubber, 73, 101, 102, 117, 154, 166 Russia in China, 174 S Sago, 161 Samoa, 131, 133, 136, 144, 150, 154 ----, _Calliope_ and hurricane, 142 ----, German annexation, 147 ----, the British occupy, 168 Sandal-wood, 166 Schleswig-Holstein, 18 "Scramble for Africa," 24 Seal skins, 74 Seddon, Hon. R., 148 Silk, 180 Silver, 74 Sisal hemp, 101 South Africa, 34, 53 Stanley, H. M., 87 Stevenson. R. L., 149 St Lucia Bay, 30 Swakopmund, 82 T Tangier, German Emperor's visit to, 29 Tannin, 107 Tasmania, 24 Timber, 107, 115, 121, 167 Tin, 75 Tobacco, 154, 166 Togoland, 66, 109, 112, 114, 117 Tortoise-shell, 166 Transvaal, German aspirations, 30 Treaty, Anglo-German, 94 Treitschke, von, and "Greater Germany," 28 Trepang, 166 U Upington, Sir Thomas, 54 V Van Diemen, 130 Von der Decken, 87 Von Weber, Ernst, 45 Von Wissmann, Captain H., 95 W Walfisch Bay, 41 Warren, Sir Charles, 54 Warren expedition, 54 Wax, 180 ----, bees', 101 Wei-hai-wei, Great Britain's lease, 177 Whales, 74 Wheat, 180 Wireless, Togoland, 118 Wool, 73 "World Power," 29 Z Zanzibar, 85, 90, 94, 96 * * * * * PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN BY THE NORTHUMBERLAND PRESS, THORNTON STREET, NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE FOOTNOTES: [A] "Modern Germany," by J. Ellis Barker. [B] _Ibid._ [C] "Modern Germany," by J. Ellis Barker. [D] Government Paper C--4265, 1884. [E] _Rooi-Nek_, Red Neck, served to describe Englishmen owing to their exposed necks burning brick-red under South African suns. [F] _Machela._--Hammock slung on a bamboo which is carried on the shoulders of six or eight boys, according to the weight of the traveller; a form of travelling universal in Central and Eastern Africa. [G] Even to-day the business of the Portuguese Colonies on the East Coast of Africa is carried on with Lisbon via Goa. [H] From H. B. M.'s Consular Report, 1910. [I] "In Far New Guinea," by Henry Newton. Seeley Service & Co. Price, 16s. Transcriber's notes: - Different spelling of 'resistance' and 'résistance' results from different usage and languages. - Ligatures '[ae]' converted - as used/possible in Latin texts - to 'ae'. 
46294	----	THE IMMIGRANT TIDE ITS EBB AND FLOW EDWARD A. STEINER'S Studies of Immigration _The Broken Wall_ Stories of the Mingling Folk. Illustrated net $1.00 "A big heart and a sense of humor go a long way toward making a good book. Dr. Edward A. Steiner has both these qualifications and a knowledge of immigrant's traits and character."--_Outlook._ _Against the Current_ Simple Chapters from a Complex Life. 12mo, cloth, net $1.25 "As frank a bit of autobiography as has been published for many a year. The author has for a long time made a close study of the problems of immigration, and makes a strong appeal to the reader."--_The Living Age._ _The Immigrant Tide--Its Ebb and Flow_ Illustrated, 8vo, cloth, net $1.50 "May justly be called an epic of present day immigration, and is a revelation that should set our country thinking."--_Los Angeles Times._ _On the Trail of the Immigrant_ 7th Edition. Illustrated, 12mo, cloth, net $1.50 "Deals with the character, temperaments, racial traits, aspirations and capabilities of the immigrant himself. Cannot fail to afford excellent material for the use of students of immigrant problems."--_Outlook._ _The Mediator_ A Tale of the Old World and the New. Illustrated, 12mo, cloth, net $1.25 "A graphic story, splendidly told."--ROBERT WATCHORN, _Former Commissioner of Immigration_. _Tolstoy, the Man and His Message_ A Biographical Interpretation _Revised and enlarged._ Illustrated, 12mo, cloth, net $1.50 [Illustration: A CZAR IN EMBRYO Southern Slavic chief, who exchanged his symbols of authority for pick and shovel at "Guinea Hill."] THE IMMIGRANT TIDE ITS EBB AND FLOW EDWARD A. STEINER _Professor in Grinnell College, Iowa_ _Author of "On the Trail of the Immigrant," etc._ _ILLUSTRATED_ [Illustration: colophon] NEW YORK CHICAGO TORONTO Fleming H. Revell Company LONDON AND EDINBURGH Copyright, 1909, by FLEMING H. REVELL COMPANY New York: 158 Fifth Avenue Chicago: 125 No. Wabash Ave. Toronto: 25 Richmond Street, W. London: 21 Paternoster Square Edinburgh: 100 Princes Street _To Mr. and Mrs. Bayard Henry, Americans: In whom blend all the nobler strains which made the past illustrious, and who are awake to the peril and the opportunities of the hour, This book is cordially inscribed_ PREFACE "Put your hand on this cable," the captain said; and a dozen hands grasped it before it sank back into the sea. Our fingers felt no thrill or shock, for we had touched only the incasing insulation. Then the captain told its length, stretching along the ocean's depths, its weight and cost; but the figures falling upon our ears roused no emotions; for they gave no idea of the cable's value to society. On shore we were taken into a dark chamber and there saw flashes of light, which lived but a moment; yet each spark was a letter, holding some hidden meaning, revealing some vital truth. Here the imagination was stirred and the mighty significance of the cable comprehended. There are two ways in which to reveal the import of those vital connections between the continents, as established by the immigration of European peoples to America. One way is to record its volume, measure its fluctuations, classify the different groups and statistically determine the value of this movement to them; to trace the effect upon its sources and its significance to the country which receives them. The state of New York and the government of the United States, through their Immigrant Commissions, have attempted to do this from the statistical standpoint with material gathered by observers, more or less skilled. The difficulties involved in this method are very great, especially if the result is to furnish a test of the desirability of one race or nationality over another, or determine its value to our civilization. A race may be homogeneous in its historical or racial consciousness, but heterogeneous in its cultural development. This is true of the Slavs, the Latins and the Semitic peoples who make up the bulk of our immigrant population. Not only is there a number of well defined racial groups, but each group needs to be sub-divided, and those subdivisions in turn have many divisions; for every mountainside has its own traditions and each valley holds different ideals. For instance: I know of one Slav village in Hungary in which illegitimacy is unknown; yet within two or three miles there is a village in which it is the rule rather than the exception. I know some villages in the Carpathians, so remote from civilization that the inhabitants have not yet learned how to make bread with yeast, and I know other villages in the same locality in which are culinary artists who make a cake having national fame. A man may be a Polish peasant and be a semi-barbarian or he may be on the same cultural level as the German "bauer" at his best. The statistical method is of value; but it must be exceedingly painstaking, and even then I doubt that it can serve in all cases the purpose for which it is intended. I have therefore chosen the second, the interpretative method. It sees the sparks in the dark room, it interprets the flying flame and feels the influences on both sides of the sea. It crosses and recrosses the ocean with these human cables which bind together the continents; it listens to their stories and records them, hesitatingly draws conclusions and undogmatically tries to teach some lessons. In the first part of my book I have tried to show the influences of the returned immigrant upon his peasant home and his social and national life. In the second part I interpret the relation of various races to our institutions, their attitude towards them and their influence upon them. In all I have told, I have aspired to be an interpreter and not an enumerator; a mediator and not a critic; I have desired to create contacts and not divisions; to disarm prejudice and not give it new weapons. In this book, as in all the others I have written, I am indebted to my wife; not only for doing all the tedious tasks such work involves, but also for inspiration and the creation of an atmosphere in which I could write in superlative terms of American ideals. I wish to acknowledge the courtesy of the editors of the _Outlook_ and the _Review of Reviews_ in permitting me to reprint portions of this book. I heartily thank the Y. M. C. A. of Pennsylvania and Mr. E. B. Buckalew, its efficient State Secretary, for the opportunity to gather material in that state and in Europe; the young men who made up the Pennsylvania Expedition for the Study of Immigration, who were helpful, joyous comrades, and the trustees of Grinnell College, Iowa, for a generous leave of absence. E. A. S. _Grinnell, Iowa, August, 1909._ CONTENTS PART I WITH THE OUTGOING TIDE I. "THEY THAT GO OUT IN SHIPS" 15 II. THE PRICE THEY PAY 34 III. A MURDERER, MARY AND AN HONORARY DEGREE 46 IV. REFLEX INFLUENCES 62 V. OUR CRITICS 77 VI. THE DOCTOR OF THE KOPANICZE 93 VII. "MOSCHELE AMERIKANSKY" 102 VIII. "NOCH IST POLEN NICHT VERLOREN" 112 IX. THE DISCIPLES IN THE CARPATHIANS 124 X. THE GUSLAR OF RAGUSA 138 XI. WHERE THE ANGEL DROPPED THE STONES 152 XII. "THE HOLE FROM WHICH YE WERE DIGGED" 165 PART II WITH THE INCOMING TIDE XIII. PROBLEMS OF THE TIDE 185 XIV. THE SLAV IN THE IMMIGRANT PROBLEM 203 XV. THE SLAV IN HISTORIC CHRISTIANITY 215 XVI. FROM EPHRATA TO WHISKEY HILL 227 XVII. FROM THE LOVCZIN TO GUINEA HILL 242 XVIII. THE JEW AND THE CHRISTIAN 259 XIX. THE JEW IN THE IMMIGRANT PROBLEM 276 XX. FROM FIFTH AVENUE TO THE GHETTO 290 XXI. FROM LAKE SKUTARI TO LAKE CHAUTAUQUA 300 XXII. THE PROTESTANT CHURCH AND THE IMMIGRANT 311 XXIII. TWENTY-FIVE YEARS WITH THE NEW IMMIGRANT 329 XXIV. FROM CHAOS TO COSMOS 348 APPENDIX I (Classification of the New Immigrant Groups) 359 APPENDIX II (Net Immigration to the United States 1899-1908) 362 APPENDIX III (Industrial Depression and Immigration) 364 APPENDIX IV (Suggested Changes in Immigration Laws) 366 INDEX 368 ILLUSTRATIONS _Facing page_ A CZAR IN EMBRYO _Title_ DIRTY MARY DURING THE PERIOD OF TRANSITION 50 TRIEST 62 A CONTRAST IN HOMES 71 THE MARKET SQUARE IN CRACOW 112 AT THE FOOT OF THE TATRA MOUNTAINS 135 COAST OF DALMATIA 138 WHERE THE ANGEL DROPPED THE STONES AND NOW DROPS DOLLARS 158 TWO TYPES OF POLES 207 RUTHENIANS 224 THE SLAVIC HOME IN HUNGARY 236 THE SLAVIC HOME ON WHISKEY HILL 236 A JEW OF THE POORER TYPE 276 A JEW OF THE FINER TYPE 276 ALBANIANS 300 FACULTY AND AMERICAN STUDENTS AT MISSIONS-HAUS, KATTOWITZ 318 SLAVIC WOMEN 352 GENERAL AND MRS. RICIOTTO GARIBALDI AT THE FOOT OF HIS FATHER'S MONUMENT IN ROME 356 PART I With the Outgoing Tide I "THEY THAT GO OUT IN SHIPS" "Do really nice ladies smoke cigarettes, papa?" my young daughter asked of me perplexedly, awaiting an answer. "No, I don't _think_ they do," I replied hesitatingly, the passing of severe judgments not being much to my liking. "Do really nice ladies drink whiskey?" the young interrogator continued. This time I answered with more assurance. "No. Really nice ladies do _not_ drink whiskey." "But, papa dear, so many ladies in our cabin either drink or smoke, and I think they are very nice." My little woman is perhaps a better judge of human nature than her Puritanized papa; for going into the smoking-room of the Italian steamer on which we had embarked, I saw, indeed, a number of women smoking and drinking and pretending to enjoy both, with that pharisaic air of abandon which convinced me that they were "really nice" ladies. They were "sailing away for a year and a day," and were celebrating their liberation from the conventionalities of their environment by "being quite European," as one of them expressed it. Ladies who smoke cigarettes and drink cocktails in the smoking-room of an ocean steamer cannot expect that the gentlemen, whose domain they have invaded, will wait for an introduction before beginning a conversation, and soon I was deep in the discussion of the aforesaid cigarettes and cocktails, as pertaining to ladies who are "really nice." One of these ladies was from "ye ancient and godly town" of Hartford, Conn., and her revered ancestors sleep in the Center Church cemetery, all unconscious of the fact that "The better set, to which I belong," quoting the descendant of the revered ancestors, "smokes and drinks and breaks the Sabbath." "And swears?" I asked. "No; but we do say: Dum it," she replied, inhaling the smoke as if she were a veteran, but betraying her novitiate by the severe attack of coughing which followed. "Well, I am not up to it, quite," she remarked. "You see I didn't begin till my senior year in college, and gave it up during the earlier years of my married life." Then I, a college professor, who has lived these many deluded years in the belief that not even his senior boys smoked, except perhaps when no one was looking--gasped and became speechless. Seeing me so easily shocked, she tried to shock me more by telling tales of social depravity, of divorces, remarriages and more divorces, of which she had one; until my speechlessness nearly ended in vocal paralysis. I did not find my voice again until a gentleman from Boston who "never drank in Boston," but who, it seemed, departed from that custom to an alarming degree on shipboard, helped me to recover my lost organ, by launching forth into a tirade against the immigrant, that ready scapegoat for all our national sins. Upon the immigrant the Boston man laid the blame for the degeneration of America and the Americans. "What can you expect of our country with this scum of the earth coming in by the million? Black Hands, Socialists, and Anarchists? What can you expect? "The Sabbath is broken down by them as if it had never been a day of rest. They drink like fish, they live on nothing----" and he went on with his contradictory statements until the well-known end, in which he saw our country ruined, our flag in the dust, liberty dethroned and the Constitution of the United States trampled under the feet of these infuriated Black Hands, Socialists and Anarchists. Through the open door from the steerage below came the murmur of voices from a thousand or more passengers, crowded in their narrow space, too narrow for even scant comforts; yet in the murmur were long, cheerful notes. A mixture of sounds it was. Weird snatches of songs from the Greeks, the mandatory call of the Italian lotto players who seem never to tire of their half innocent gambling, and the deep, guttural notes of various Slavic groups, telling the story of the hard fight for money in the strange country. Above these sounds came the wailing notes of a lonely violin, played by an Hungarian gypsy, who was artist, vagabond, business man, beggar and thief. His playing was intended to lure pennies out of the pockets of the poor; failing in that, he meant to help himself. It would not have been the steerage if the voices of children had not been heard in all their crescendos and diminuendos; nor, indeed, would it have been the steerage if bitter cries had not come from those who could not restrain their grief, although long ago they had ceased to be children. This ship carried not a few such, who had left our land beaten by many stripes; poor and sick and ready to die. A Boston man who has once broken through his icy crust, especially if that crust be melted by hot drink, can speak long and unctuously, and my wrath had time to gather, and grow thick as a cloud around my brain. Even before he had quite finished speaking, I blurted out in very unacademic language: "I'll bet you five dollars, that among the thousand steerage passengers on this ship, you will not find one woman who smokes cigarettes, drinks cocktails, has had a divorce or contemplates having one." It was a reckless challenge to make, but my wrath was kindled. Confusion was added to my anger, however, when the man from Boston said, with a reproachful glance: "I am no sport and I don't bet. I am a church-member." Then he called for another cocktail, and I sought the lower deck, over which hung the afterglow of a sunset, rare on the Northern Atlantic, even in June. The noises on the steerage deck had almost ceased. Most of the children were in their bunks, the lotto players found the light too dim to read the numbers on their cards, the gypsy fiddler continued to wail out lamentations on his instrument; while the Greeks squatted unpicturesquely on the very edge of the forecastle, watching the waves. No doubt the gentle, bluish green held some distant promise of the glory of their Mediterranean. As I descended the steps I looked into a sea of faces, friendly faces, all. To my "Buon Giorno," there was a chorus of "How do you do?" from Slavs, Latins and Greeks alike, and in but a few moments there was a rather vital relation established between the man from the cabin and the men in the steerage. That is to me a perpetual wonder; this opening of their lives to the inquisitive eyes of the stranger. Why should they so readily disclose to me all their inmost thoughts, tell me of what they left behind, what they carry home and what awaits them? There is no magic in this, even as there is no effort. All I am sure of is that I want to know--not for the mere knowing, but because somehow the disclosure of a life is to me something so sacred, as if knowing men, I learned to know more of God. Of all the pleasures of that journey; those starry, never-to-be-forgotten nights, the phosphorescent path across the sea; the moonlit way from the deeps to the eternal heights, the first dim outlines of the mighty coasts of Portugal and Spain; Capri and Sorrento in the setting of the Bay of Naples--above them all, is the glory of the first opening of strange, human hearts to me, when "How do you do," from that gentle chorus of voices answered my "Buon Giorno." "What's your name?" I turned to a friendly Calabrian whose countrymen had encircled me and one after another we had shaken hands. "My name Tony." "Have you been a long time in America?" "Three year," he answered in fairly good English, while a friendly smile covered his face. "Where have you been?" "Tshicago, Kansas, Eeleenoy, Oheeo." In pretty nearly every place where rails had to be strung in that vast, encircling necklace of steel; where powder blasts opened the hidden fissures of the rocks; wherever his sinuous arm could exchange its patient stroke for American dollars. "Do you like America?" "Yes!" came a chorus of voices. "Yes!" And the faces beamed. "Why are you going back?" And I looked into the face of a man whom no one would have taken for an Italian, but who, too, was from Calabria. "Mia padre and madre is in Calabria. They are old. I am going home to work in the field." "How long have you been in America?" "Twelve years." That accounts for the changed look. "Where do you live?" "In Connecticut. Among the Yankees." "Do you like the Yankees?" "Yes," and his smile grew broader. "Yes, good men; but they drink too much whiskey--make head go round like wheel. Then Yankee get crazy and swear." And he shook his head, this critic of ours, who evidently did not believe that "really nice" ladies or even "really nice" gentlemen should drink whiskey, overmuch. "Why do you go back?" And this time it was a diminutive Neapolitan whom I addressed. His face wore a beatific smile. "Him sweetheart in Neapoli." Some one ventured the information, and confusedly he acknowledged his guilt, while everybody laughed. He was going home to marry Pepitta and when times grew better they would come back to Pittsburg. "Don't you get homesick for Neapoli in Pittsburg?" "Nop," he replied. "Me citizen, American citizen," he repeated with proud emphasis. "What is your name?" I asked as I shook hands with my fellow citizen who had foresworn his allegiance to the King of Italy and plighted it to Uncle Sam. Proudly he pulled out his papers. I looked at them and they almost dropped from my fingers; for they were made out to "John Sullivan." When he saw my astonishment he said: "I change name. Want to be an American. My name used to be Giovanni Salvini." At the edge of the ever-increasing circle I saw my friends, the Slavs, and I reached out my hand to them. It was grasped a dozen times or more, by Poles, Slovenes and "Griners," as they are called, because they come from the Austrian province of Krain. They were less cheerful than the Italians. They were returning home because of the hard times, many of them with empty pockets, some of them with modest savings. There were Croatians, a few Dalmatians and many Bulgarians and Serbs, who for some reason are the least successful among our Slavic toilers. They were all in rags, looked pinched and half starved and told their hard luck story with many embellishments. A great many stalwart young fellows were going back to join the army; for the emperor had declared amnesty to all who had left their country before serving their term in arms. One could well afford to be patriotic when the king forgave and when times were hard in America. Some of the Southern Slavs had marched up in the scale of social life; had become machinists, petty foremen and taskmasters over their own kinsmen. They knew English fairly well and seemed to have acquired some better things than mere bank accounts. An old gentleman from Lorain, Ohio, was going home to die, and to die in poverty, because the hard times struck at the roots of his business and he was too old to labour in the mills. Another went back to claim a fortune, and asked me for the loan of a dollar, which he would be sure to send back as soon as his fingers touched the waiting wealth. The circle received constant additions, for our laughter and banter reached down to the dreary bunks, and many of their occupants came up to listen. Women brought their half-asleep children and I drew on my stock of sweets. Even the more reticent women talked to "the man," and told him things glad and sad. A Polish woman was the spokesman of her group. "We are going back to the Stary Kray (the Old Country). America ne dobre" (not good). "Why is it not good?" "The air ne dobre, the food ne dobre, the houses ne dobre." Nothing was good. "We came to America with red cheeks, like the cheeks of summer apples, and now look at us. We are going back looking like cucumbers in the autumn." Yes, their cheeks were pale and pinched and their skin wrinkled. How could it be otherwise? They had lived for years by the coke ovens of Pennsylvania, breathing sulphur with every breath; their eyes had rarely seen the full daylight and their cheeks had not often felt the warm sunlight. America "ne dobre." And yet something must have seemed good to them; for they wore American clothes. Long, trailing skirts, shirt-waists with abbreviated sleeves and belts with showy buckles. All of them had children, many children of varying sizes, and among the children not one said: "America ne dobre." The boys had penetrated into the mysteries of baseball vernacular, and one of them was the short-stop on his team. When I inquired of him just what a short-stop is, he looked at me pityingly and said: "Say, are you a greenhorn?" I am sure if I had told him that I was a college professor, he would have asked for my credentials. Some of the girls, besides having gone to our public schools, belonged to clubs, wore pins and buttons and chewed gum most viciously. All were loath to go to the "Stary Kray." I surely was in my element, the human element; with babies to cuddle, to guess their ages and their weight; to watch the boisterous, half Americanized, mysterious youth and to ask questions and answer them among these strong, friendly men. There was one woman who neither smiled at me nor answered my greeting; who held her half-clothed, puny baby close to her breast, giving him his evening meal. Other little ones, seemingly all of one age, huddled close to the mother, who looked like a great, frightened bird hovering over her young. "Her man been killed in the mine," the women said, and I found no more questions to ask her. I could only sympathize with her in her grief; for I knew it. I knew it because I had seen her or her kind, by the hundreds at a time, prone on the ground beside the yawning pit, claiming some unrecognizable form as that of husband or son; often of husband and son. I have heard the bitter wails and lamentations of a whole hillside. Out of each hut they came, the heart-broken cries of the living over the dead; and in that grief, the Slovak, the Polish or the Italian women were just like the American woman, who more silently, perhaps, grieved over her husband, the foreman of the mine. In the radiant morning he walked away from her and home; into the mine, his tomb. The poor Slav woman had paid the price for her American hopes and had a right to say: "America ne dobre"; but she did not say it. "Lift my boy!" a rather muscular, good-looking man said, in the English of New York's East Side. He seemed a little jealous of the attention I had paid to these strange children. "He's the real stuff," he continued. "A genuine Yankee boy. Born on the East Side." "My! But he's heavy!" "You bet he is!" the proud father exclaimed, after my only half successful effort to lift the youngster. "He's going to be a prize-fighter, like his daddy;" and before I realized it I was initiated into the technicalities of the prize-ring. My new friend proved to be an aspirant for strange honours, especially strange when sought by a Jew. His ambition was to be a champion. "I was the foist one," he said, "to start the fighting business among the Jews. There's lots of 'em now." Why was he going over? His wife, a native of Hungary, had grown homesick for the Magyarland. She was dying of that most dreadful of all diseases, consumption; so her Ike and little Joe were going with her to Budapest. "Say," Ike confided, "I don't know what that Old Country is like; but I'll be hiking back to the good old Bowery in six weeks unless I'm mighty much mistaken." Little Joe, with all his weight, had nestled in my arms and grown quite affectionate. When we parted, he called me "Uncle," and I was properly proud of being the uncle of a future champion prize-fighter of the world. By the time the first bugle sounded for dinner I had tasted enough of the joys of this new fellowship; so I said good-night in four languages. Up to the deck and to my cabin door, I could hear little Joe calling after me in a voice like that of a lusty young rooster, "Good-night, uncle!" Dinner in the first cabin was fashionably quiet; for it was our first evening meal together, and we were measuring and scanning one another after the manner of fashionable folk, trying to decide with whom it was safe to speak. We reached the point of discussing the dinner and the merits of Italian cooking; we spoke of the weather and hoped it would remain so calm and beautiful all the way. Some of us even went so far as to ask our neighbour if this was the first trip over, which is a rather silly question to ask nowadays when every one has crossed the ocean a dozen times, except a few very extraordinary people. After dinner, as we lounged on deck, a lady, whose face I could not see, sat down beside me and said: "You don't approve ladies' smoking, do you?" With that, she drew from her silver case a cigarette, and put it to her lips. "I don't myself," she continued; "but I smoke because my whole nature is reacting against the Connecticut Puritanism in which I have been steeped. I don't enjoy smoking, at least my nerves don't; but my whole self takes pleasure in it because I have been told over and over again that I mustn't; so now I do. "I do everything, even drink cocktails, as you have seen. I do love to shock people." I told her that I had grown accustomed to shocks, that I had seen something of the world, was fairly well acquainted with the weakness of the flesh and the power of the devil; but that I really thought it strange that an American woman and a mother should smoke and drink. Her daughter, a girl of about sixteen, properly gowned and coldly indifferent, watched her mother and listened to our conversation until her maid came and bore her away, after she had bade her mother an unaffectionate good-night. I suppose it was the cigarettes that made my neighbour communicative, perhaps it was simply because she wanted to talk, that she told me her story--a story more lamentable than I have ever heard in the steerage. She was graduated from a college which prides itself more than most colleges, on being an intellectual centre. Immediately after entering society she married a man of her own set, wealthy, cultured and a university graduate. Now, after seventeen years of married life, she had obtained a divorce, because, as she said, they had "had enough of each other." He had already married, and she was going to Europe to find a husband, a man with braid and gilt buttons; preferably some one connected with an embassy. Several of her friends, she said, had married into that class and were "perfectly happy." "Foreigners are so polite," she said. "Americans, especially American husbands, are boors. Think of nothing but business, know nothing of music or art, and are absorbed in football, the Board of Trade and fast horses." I knew that this woman was not a typical American woman, nor typical of a large class; but she was interesting as a type of many of her class who have grown weary of Democracy and the attendant Puritanisms of America, have crossed the seas and recrossed them, have gambled at Monte Carlo and flirted at Budapest and Vienna, have seen the shady side of Paris by early morning light and have become alienated from the best there is in America. This particular woman had broken up her home, had left a fourteen-year-old son with his grandparents, and was about to throw herself away on pretty nearly anything that presented itself, if it sported brass buttons and trimmings, and had at least a Von to its name. She belongs to a species which I have often seen in the American quarters of European cities; but one so frank as she, I had never met. I thought I had known something of American homes and American husbands; but evidently I have lived in the social backwoods, for what she told me was indeed a revelation. In the course of the conversation we were joined by other husbandless women who were to live abroad, although not divorced nor yet seeking gold braid and brass buttons; by the gentleman from Boston who had confessed to being a church-member, and by a merchant from the West who was eager to make up a pool on the ship's run,--and before we knew it, we were back to my proposition about the steerage. It was the merchant from the West who said that he noticed how much American clothing these immigrants carried back. That the men had celluloid collars, watches and brass-bound trunks. It was the man from Boston who said that they carried themselves so differently from those who came over, and it was he who began to calculate how much money they carried back, impoverishing our country and enriching theirs. "One thing," I ventured in reply, "you have not counted and cannot count. How much of that which is better than money they are carrying back. Ideals filtered into their minds, new aspirations dominating their lives, and all found in the humblest places in America. "The steerage, as I have said before, and now say again with still more emphasis, carries into Europe more saving ideas than the cabin. What we bring we have borrowed from Europe and bring back in exaggerated forms. Neither Paris nor Berlin, nor Vienna nor Monte Carlo is being blessed by our coming or cares for us at all, but only for our dollars." No one contradicted me and I do not think I shall be contradicted. "Neither Europe nor America is the better for our coming or our going," I continued. "And you," turning to the man from Boston, "you who say that the immigrants are to blame for our social and religious deterioration, ask yourself what you and your class bring back to America after a season spent on the frayed edges of the so-called social life of Europe, with which the average American comes in contact. As for the money the immigrants carry back, they have earned every cent of it, and I have no doubt that we in the cabin carry more money over to Europe than they do, and we will spend it there; and I am not so sure that we have earned it. "Moreover," waving aside the man from Boston who was about to interrupt me, but I was wound up and could not run down, "they have paid a terrible price for the money they carry home. Shall I tell you what that price is?" And I told the story of the Slavic widow and her orphaned brood. Then my good neighbour, the Puritan rebel, who had heartlessly talked of her deserted home, stretched out her hand and touching mine said: "Please don't tell us any more. You have already made me think, and I don't want to." Then came four bells from the bridge, and the lonely sailor watching from the crow's nest called out: "All's well on board!" With a sigh my Puritan rebel rose, murmuring what I alone heard: "Sailor, that isn't so!" Then she said: "Good-night." After that there were more cigarettes and cocktails in the smoking-room; but one woman wasn't there. II THE PRICE THEY PAY The ship's doctor was very much like other men of his profession who choose to be knocked about from port to port, dealing out pills and powder, when pills and powders seem of so little consequence. He was young, inexperienced and had not yet learned half the secret of his calling; namely, to keep his mouth shut at the proper time. At breakfast he told us that he had eight cases of consumption in the steerage, and that three men were about the worst he had ever seen. He told this with the cool air of the medical man who delights in "cases" as such. Then he told us about one of them, a Greek, who was at the point of death, but all the time kept calling for cheese. "Don't you give him cheese, all the cheese he wants?" cried one of the young ladies across the table. "No," replied the doctor; "what's the use?" Then I looked at the young lady and she looked at me; I whispered something to my steward, and she gave an order; and we both had cheese--real Greek cheese for breakfast. In the morning the steerage looks its best. The deck has been scrubbed and so have some of the passengers. If the day promises to be fair, the travellers unconsciously draw upon the coming joy in large draughts. When I went down that day, I was no more among strangers. Tony greeted me with an unusually broad smile, John Sullivan shook hands with me so vigorously that I thought he must be the veritable John L. and the children gathered round me, confidently awaiting their sweets. This was truly inspiring; but it became touching when the Slavic widow said to her brood: "The Krist-kindel comes." In the depths of the steerage they had heard that a man from the cabin had come down and been good to them; that he had petted the children, luring them with sweets. And the steerage gave up its treasure of little ones, seemingly endless in number; so that the stock of good things had to be replenished many a time before each child had its fair and equal share. Truly it is "More blessed to give than to receive," yet the blessing brings its burdens, in the disclosure of real or pretended suffering; and the immigrants are no exception to the rule. I know now as I have never known before, the price they pay for the dollars so safely tucked away, which are their wealth, their power and, I trust, their happiness. Here is a beggarly-looking group of Bulgarians. They left their home in the richest district of that new Balkan czardom about a year ago. I know their village, set in the midst of acres of roses, of poppies and of maize. Like their forefathers they lived there contentedly until restlessness, like a disease, crept upon them. Coming from the plains in the West, it spread its contagion over the Alps, the Carpathians and the Macedonian hills. The men mortgaged their homes, left their wives and children to gather the roses, the poppies and the maize, and took passage at Triest to gather dollars in America. On landing, they were shipped West and farther West. They travelled by polluted rivers, and over mountains stripped of their verdure and robbed of the wealth of their veins. They saw the refuse of the mines left like broken trappings of war on the battle-field. They saw the glare of a thousand flaming ovens where coal was being baked into coke, and in their shadows they saw besmirched and bedraggled towns, now clustering, now trailing along, now losing themselves in the darkness, and now glowing again in the lurid light of giant flames pouring from huge furnaces. They saw day turned into night by smoke, and night turned into day by unquenched fires, and they knew not whether it was day or night, or heaven or hell to which they had come. At the end of the journey they were led into a deep ravine through which an inky river struggled, and over which hung a cloud as immovable as if the released elements were forming again into solids. Twelve men were counted by some one who led them, or drove them, or pushed them into a hut which had once been painted some dingy colour, but now was part of the gloom around it. Other twelve men were made to enter another hut, and so on, until all were disposed of. By signs they were given to understand that this was home; so they spread out their woolen coats and went to sleep. When morning came, after a breakfast of cheap whiskey and poor bread, they were marched into the mill of a certain corporation. It would do no good to mention the name of this corporation, and it would do no harm. No one would be offended; for there is no one to offend. I have very dear friends who own stock in that company, but they just draw dividends--they do not control the mill. The man and the men who run it produce the dividends; they do not own the stock, certainly not all of it. I cannot single out that corporation; it is not the only sinner nor the chief one, and that would be its only consolation, were it looking for anything so unpractical. My Bulgarians saw boiling pots of metal and red-hot ingots of metal and men of metal, who shouted at them in an unknown tongue, and the louder they shouted the less the men understood. Little by little, however, they grew accustomed to the tumult, and learned to walk skillfully on the inch plank which alone separated them from death and destruction. They found consolation in the bulging envelope full of money which came to them at the end of the week; for it was much money, exchanged into their currency, more money than three months' labour brought them among the roses, the poppies and the maize. Two-thirds of it they sent home, and lived on the other third, eating coarse meat and bread, and indulging in strong drink. Month after month they toiled in the mill, and lived in the same ravine, with the thundering, spewing, belching monsters. They lost the freshness of skin and the elasticity of movement characteristic of their race; but were happy in the fat, bulging envelope at the end of the week. Of the city, with its churches and its beautiful homes they had seen nothing; for the mill ran day and night, and night and day, and Sabbath days and Sabbath nights as well. They cared not for cities or churches or even for fine houses, so long as they got the envelopes. One morning, however, they came to the mill and it was silent within, as it was silent without, and the door was closed. One week and another they waited; but there was no envelope with money. Their own small change was gone and they were starving. Then came the same man who had driven them twelve by twelve into the huts, and twelve by twelve he drove them out; for they had no money with which to pay the rent, and men with hearts of metal cannot feel what it means to be driven out of a hut, even such a wretched hut, and be in the roofless street. Half-starved, the men left their miserable shelter and marched into the main street, past the stores and the churches; and then they saw that the city had homes and that not all the men had hearts of metal. Bread came in abundance, and soup and meat. Fine women were proud to serve them, and the basement of the church became their lodging place. On Sunday they heard above them the voices of little children, and then deep organ tones and a man's voice speaking loud enough for them to hear, although they could not understand. Then came a great volume of song, and if the congregation sang: "The Church's one foundation is Jesus Christ, her Lord," poetry never was more true to fact; for the church seemed buttressed upon these Slavic brothers of Jesus, in whom, as in all the needy, He incarnates Himself. By slow stages the men found their way back to the sea, and through the charity of their own more fortunate countrymen, they were now homeward bound. A more forlorn looking set of men I have never seen; emaciated, ragged, unclean and discouraged. They had paid the price. A man groped his way towards me, his face disfigured and his eyelids closed forever. He had money, nearly a thousand dollars, he told me. "But what would I not give for only one eye?" he said pathetically. He paid the price when a powder blast blotted daylight out forever. A rather forward Jewish girl snatched from my hands goodies intended for the children, and at a glance I knew the price she had paid, if she carried any dollars across the sea. She belonged to an ever-increasing number of Jewish women, who have forsaken the path of virtue or have been pushed from it, who knows into how deep a hell? A man came to me, the mere shadow of a man and asked for some soothing sweet for his cough. He was a Montenegrin and had been a stalwart soldier in the army of his prince, in whose domain the white plague is practically unknown. He, too, carried money home; more money than any man in his village in the Black Mountains had ever possessed. It was earned in the iron works of an Ohio town, in a pit so full of flying metal, ground from rough surfaces, that every breath carried destruction to his lungs. The sight of this man recalled the conversation at the breakfast table, and I looked for the hospital. Two stories below the steerage deck I found the contagious ward, and upon iron cots lay the three dying men, mere shadows of men except the eyes. They were still the eyes of flesh, grown larger seemingly, through suffering, which was all too real. Nearest the door, and nearest death apparently, was the Greek. He looked almost happy; for he had cheese, the cheese of Greece, which my opposite neighbour at table was feeding him bit by bit. He ate and ate, and called for more. Poor fellow! His soul had already forgotten the glory of Athens; but his craving stomach had a long memory; it remembered the cheese of Greece. Stolidly looking at the iron ceiling from which hung the huge sweat drops of the labouring ship, lay a dying Slav. The racial marks of his face were almost obliterated, and one could with difficulty recognize the Slav, except by his silence in suffering. My hands touched his; and although they were mere skin and bone, the marks of heavy labour were still upon them. His memory had not quite faded; for between panting breaths he told me of the village in Hungary from which he had gone, a lusty youth; of the old Matka he had left behind, of the sea voyage and then of his work in the mines. It was "Prach, prach" (dust, dust), he said. He was sure that when the air of the Tatra mountains filled his lungs again, he would get well. Did he want anything? "Yes, palenka." His native white, biting drink. Oh, if he just had palenka! "Wouldn't whiskey do as well?" "Yes, anything that gives strength; but palenka would be the best." There was a third man, an Italian of the Calabrian group to which Tony and John Sullivan belonged. There was, or there had been, a third man; for even as we turned towards him, a rattle in his hollow chest gave sign that he had crossed to another harbour than that for which he had embarked. We would have lingered; but death brought the nurse and the doctor, with much muttering and many complaints against us, and threats of quarantine. After all, it was good to reach the noisy deck, even the deck of the steerage--and life. "Tombola! Tombola!" the Calabrian peasants shouted, shaking a pasteboard box of dice. "Tre, sette, dieci,--terno!" the lucky winner screamed, gathering up the greasy soldi piled on the greasy deck. In another corner the dealer was shaking a wicker basket full of the lucky and unlucky numbers, drawing them forth one by one and calling them out to the winners and the losers. All over the deck there were such groups of noisy Italians, ignorant of the death of a comrade who had drawn the unlucky number--or the lucky one; who can tell? Unconscious of the fact that death had come in the wake of the ship and overtaken us, all went merrily on--and no one in cabin or steerage must be told; for the dark angel is nowhere so unwelcome as upon the uncertain deep, where there are never more than a few planks of wood or girders of steel between time and eternity. No one thought of death that morning. Who could think of it with the sky so blue and the sea so calm? Even nature seemed oblivious of the fact that one of her children had paid the price. Nor was the man from Boston, nor many men in Boston, with all their inherited sensitiveness of conscience, nor the men in Pennsylvania where conscience is blackened by coal, and hardened by steel--none of these men, I say, was conscious or is conscious how great is the price these European peasants pay for the dollars they carry home. In all the industrial states, there are hundreds and thousands of graves, marked by humble wooden crosses, beneath which sleep just such toilers, snatched from life by "The broken wheel, the loosened cord." They have paid the price, the greatest price, giving their lives for the dollars, the hoarding of which we begrudged them. No less than 10,000 of these despised aliens laid down their lives in one year, digging coal, making steel, blasting stone and doing the numberless dangerous drudgeries of our industrial life. All that the Boston man saw was the money, the good clothes, the celluloid collars of the men, and the gaudy shams that decked the women. _I_ could see the mouths of half a dozen mines, out of which were dragged in one year the mangled, powder-burnt, asphyxiated bodies of a thousand once-breathing souls. I heard the cries and groans of hundreds of women and thousands of children; for I have seen mothers embrace bodiless limbs and limbless bodies, fragments of the sons they had borne, and although 30,000,000 dollars and more were carried home by the living, they too had paid a price beyond the hard labour they did. In the suffering they endured in damp mines, by the hot metal blasts, in cold ditches and in dark and dangerous tunnels, they paid the price, indeed. I wish that the man from Boston and all the men with small vision had been on the deck of that Italian steamer, when three times during her long voyage the engines stopped their breathing, just before sunrise. In the steerage and in the cabin alike, men and women were asleep. The captain, the doctor and a few of us, who knew and dared, were the only ones astir. From the depths of the ship the sailors carried the sail-cloth sheathed bundles and held them over the waters. Then sharp and clear the captain called: "Let go!" The engines breathed again, the mighty screws churned the quiet sea to foam and the surging waves enfolded the bodies of the men who had paid the price. III A MURDERER, MARY AND AN HONORARY DEGREE Once a day the steerage was roused from its monotony. Men, women and children, a thousand of them, pushed and crowded (good-naturedly, of course) in the attempt to get a glimpse of a fellow passenger. There was nothing which distinguished him from the rest of the immigrants except that he had taken human life, and was being carried back to pay the penalty of his crime. The hour which he daily spent on deck was an hour of singular triumph. Almost reverently the crowd stared at him, as if he had just dropped from heaven or risen from his grave. I am sure that no one felt any ill will towards him, and even the sailor who, revolver in hand, stood guard over him, shared the distinction which the steerage felt in having a murderer there. The fact is, he did not look like a murderer or even like the typical bad man; neither did he seem smitten by remorse, nor did he exhibit any kind of bravado which might have aroused resentment. Graciously he accepted the cigar which some one gave him, and as graciously permitted me to light it for him (his hands were in irons) while with remarkable frankness he told me his history and the story of his crime. Of course he was an Italian, born in a southern town in which some 20,000 people had accepted poverty as their inheritance, and made little or no struggle against it. They had also accepted the burden of taxation and exploitation by government officials; although here and there some one with the gleam of freedom in his breast felt the grievousness of it, and secretly or openly protested. Patriot brigands enough there were, and the stories of their exploits fired the imagination of a number of boys, of whom Luigi (the murderer) was one. On Sunday evenings under a clump of cedars these boys gathered, until in imitation of their elders they organized a society, whose patriotic purposes involved nothing less than the overthrow of monarchy, and wiping Church, priests and Pope from the face of the earth. A rather ambitious program for minors; but they had imbibed the "Zeit-geist" in an exaggerated form, had begun to feel the great social wrongs of the times, and like most youths, admired the heroic. Luigi told me frankly that he committed thefts first from the till of his father, a shopkeeper, who, upon the discovery of his son's pilfering, beat him half to death and drove him out of the house. After that the boy stole from any one and any place; because the "Society for the Liberation of the People of Italy" needed money, first, last and all the time, to carry on its ambitious schemes. Ultimately he was caught and sentenced to three years' imprisonment. I know something of the horrors of Southern Italian prisons, and I could well believe that three such years would ripen rebellious thoughts into desperate ones. Luigi left the prison with vengeance in his heart, slew the judge who had sentenced him, and fled to America. I have purposely robbed his story of all its patriotic and picturesque elements, for I do not wish to glorify Luigi. He is just a type, perhaps not a very fair type, of many of his countrymen whose coming to America disturbs us and whose leaving it causes no regrets. Luigi's further history was interesting to me because he knew some things about America which I did not know. He had lived a number of years in the state of New Jersey, which seems to be a sort of haven of refuge for Trusts and Anarchists. During those years he had been in intimate relation with our courts, jails, prisons and police. He had plotted for them, with them and against them, and now was being sent back in irons because (he said) his remaining in the United States would embarrass certain officials. Luigi saw no great difference between prisons here and in Italy; between jailers there and jailers here; between judges on this side the water and on the other side. The only difference that Luigi _did_ see was that over here they are much smarter than in Italy. There was but one good thing which Luigi experienced in America. They had been good to his "kid." Over and over again he told me that, and over and over again he blessed the good women of a certain New Jersey town for being good to his "kid." Often as he cursed the police (police, state and nation are one in the mind of Luigi and his kind) so often did he bless two women at the edge of that New Jersey town, who had truly revealed the heart of a nation, whose conscience had been falsely revealed to him by the police and the petty courts. Looking over the railing, the cabin passengers watched the murderer as eagerly as those in the steerage, and when I returned after my interview with him, every one clamoured for a report of the conversation. Many of the men sneered at my suggestion that the murderer might be a victim of circumstances. "He ought to be shot!" was the brief but conclusive argument of several. "We're not strict enough with them," said the man from Boston; and added the information that shooting is too good for these Black Hands and Anarchists. He called me an "unpractical sentimentalist." The man from the West, however, took my part. "You may call the professor a sentimentalist, but I guess he may be right after all. We've got a sentimentalist as they called him, in Denver. He took it into his head that you can bust kids of their meanness by being good to them instead of clapping them into jail, and he has done it. We called him a dangerous sentimentalist; but the kids of Denver call him their friend, and he has done more for them than all the sheriffs and judges and jailers put together." While the man from the West was speaking, "Dirty Mary," as we called her, looked wistfully up at me and reminded me that it was candy time in the steerage. Mary was positively the most hopeless little creature my eyes have ever seen. She was about eleven years of age, and could swear as picturesquely in English as if she were a Bowery tough; while from her stockingless feet up to her head, which looked as if it never had been guilty of contact with a hair-brush, she was a mass of unpicturesque dirt. Mary had come from Naples to Mulberry Street, and never had a chance to be homesick, for she never had a home. Her father was in prison and her mother had all she could do to take care of the numerous little ones, who, at the [Illustration: DIRTY MARY DURING THE PERIOD OF TRANSITION] earliest moment, like the fledglings in a nest, were pushed out to shift for themselves. Mary had slept beneath docks, in ash cans and dark alleys, and although still a child, there was nothing left for her to learn concerning the evils of this world. As I was sharing my sweets with her, the Boston man called down from his safe vantage ground: "Try your love-making on Mary!" "What's that bloke talkin' about?" she asked, noisily chewing her candy. "He has challenged me," I answered. "Say," she said, looking at the generous proportions of the Boston man and then at me, "he's got a cinch, ain't he?" Nevertheless, I accepted the challenge. "Mary," I began, in my gentlest and most persuasive tones, "Mary, I want you to wash yourself." "Ain't got no soap," was the reply. "Will you wash yourself if I furnish the soap?" "Nop"--very decidedly--"no soap in mine." The preliminary skirmish was over, and I had lost; but I was not discouraged. Probably the attack had been wrong. I left Mary, and going to the barber's shop, I bought the most strongly scented soap he had. Armed with this weapon I returned to the steerage, and renewed the attack. "Mary," I said, holding the soap close to her nose, "this will make you smell sweet all over, if you use water with it." Mary sniffed the musk-laden air, and the primitive spirit in her, lured by the odour, conquered her will. She took the cake of soap and it disappeared in the pocket of her greasy skirt. Triumphantly I went to the upper deck and reported progress. After a remarkably short time Mary reappeared and smilingly looked at me from below. She had used the soap, all of it, I think; for it was liberally plastered over her face, her hands and even her limbs. Indeed dirt and soap were pretty equally distributed over her body. I had never known that Mary was shy; but when she heard the laughter of the passengers, she disappeared as quickly as a frightened deer, leaving a strong smell of musk behind her. "What was you all laughing about?" she demanded, when, after a long search, I found her tucked in among the blankets of the shelf which was her bed. Then I explained to her the uses of soap, and by the aid of a pocket mirror showed her its effect when used with the proper proportion of water. Mary was an apt pupil, and then and there washed herself for the first time in many days and weeks. "Mary, will you wear stockings if I bring them to you?" Emphatically and briefly Mary answered: "Sure." "And shoe-strings in your shoes?" I was growing bold; but "According to your faith----" The next day Mary appeared, washed clean and wearing stockings which my own little woman had provided. After that the shoes were laced, and before we reached Naples a hair-brush had invaded the wilderness which crowned her head. A bright ribbon bow was the bribe which accomplished that miracle. Her teeth even became acquainted with a tooth-brush, although I had to use chewing-gum as an inducement to open her tightly closed lips. Outwardly, at least, Mary became a changed creature. I cannot tell much about what went on in her little soul; but I trust she felt something of that love, which, even in the imperfect way in which it was manifested to her, had some power. The love I have for the people in the steerage has begotten love in them, and I have brothers and sisters innumerable; while countless children call me "Uncle." I am quite sure that if these strangers are to be blended into our common life, the one great power which must be used will be this something, which practical people call sentimentalism; but which after all, at its best, is a really practical thing, and accomplishes what rigid law, whether good or bad, cannot accomplish. I have seen this force at work, healing, reclaiming, redeeming; and my faith in it is unbounded, although the practical man may ridicule it and the scientific man may scoff at it. My faith in love as a factor, the greatest factor in our social life, is based first of all upon my belief in our common kinship. I recognize no barriers of race, class or religion between myself and any other human being that needs me. I happen to know something about human beings; I know intimately many races and more nationalities, and I have discovered that when one breaks through the strange speech, which so often separates; when one closes one's eyes to what climate has burned upon a man's skin, or what social or economic conditions have formed or deformed--one will find in every human being a kinsman. Those of us who know certain races most intimately have come to the conclusion that what at first we regarded as essential differences, are largely upon the surface; and that when we have penetrated the unusual, we quickly reach the essentially alike. The most interesting books and the most acceptable lectures about strange peoples often come from those who know their subjects least. They were not long enough among them to discover the likeness--that which is so commonplace that one cannot write books about it or deliver sensational lectures regarding it. If emigration to America has done nothing else, it has proved that but few race characteristics, if any, are fixed. Should some sceptic wish to be convinced on this point, let him visit such towns as South Bend, Indiana; Scranton, Pa., or Youngstown, Ohio, and look at a group of Slavs or Italians who came here twenty years ago. Let him go among those who have had the full advantage of our environment, of our standard of living, of education and of an enlightening religion. He will find what we call race characteristics almost obliterated, from the faces of even the first generation. The sluggish Pole has become vivacious; while the fiery Italian has had his blood cooled to a temperature approved by even the most fastidious of those who believe that fervour and enthusiasm are not signs of good breeding. My own anthropological acumen has sometimes played me sore tricks, especially in the following case: I was the guest of a Woman's Club, in the Middle West, to speak on the theme of Immigration. At the close of the session, refreshments were served. The mistress of the house--and be it known that her ancestors came to this country when there was neither steerage nor cabin--told me that she had an Hungarian maid whom she wished me to see. I looked about the room and saw two young women serving the guests. One was a typical American girl, with almost a Gibson face; the daughter of the house, I decided. The face of the other showed some Slavic characteristics, and mentally I placed her birthplace in the Carpathian Mountains. I was congratulating myself on my good judgment, when the young ladies came to serve me; then I discovered that the one with Slavic features was the daughter of the house, while the "Gibson girl" had been born by the river March, in Hungary. One of the most wonderful sights from the sociological standpoint is the main street of Scranton, Pa., and the neighbouring Court-house Square. Scranton has a weekly corso. A vast stream of young people passes up and down the street on Saturday afternoon, to see and to be seen; to court and to be courted. I have watched that stream for hours, and although fully eighty per cent. of those young people are of foreign birth or children of the foreign born, I could only faintly trace racial differences. Almost invariably, too, the racial marks have been most effectually blotted out from the faces of those who have had the best advantages; that is, the same advantages which we have had. It is noticeable that children of the Southern Italians grow larger than their parents, and would grow better than they, if in the changed environment love would supply what chance or fate has denied them. I believe in love as a factor in social redemption, not only because I believe that we are essentially alike, but because I believe that most human beings respond to it more or less quickly. We know that children do, and that we ourselves rarely outgrow the response to love. I recall once travelling westward on an immigrant train. To begin with, the car was very much crowded, and after it became part of a slow local train, it was invaded by native Americans, who fretted much and justly, at having to travel in an unventilated, ill-smelling car. At one station a mother came in, with a child about five years of age. The little one was crying bitterly, because it had the toothache. Two other children caught the infection and lifted up their voices, loud enough and long enough to set every passenger on edge. The mother of the five year old tried to comfort her by telling her that soon they would be at the dentist's, and he would pull the naughty tooth. That remark failed to produce the desired effect, for the little girl fairly screamed and the two babies joined in the chorus. Then the mother, growing angry, cried: "Jenny, if you don't keep still, I'll break your neck!" At which Jenny, not unnaturally, ran from her. I stretched out my arms, and catching her held the struggling form for a minute, then lifted her gently to my knee. "Tell me, Jenny," I said, "where does the tooth hurt?" She pointed to her swollen cheek, and I said: "Now, dear, I'll take that toothache away," and I lightly stroked the sore cheek. Here let me say that I am neither a Christian Scientist nor a Faith Healer, and that when I have a toothache, I go straightway to the dentist. I stroked Jenny's swollen cheek for a time and then asked: "Does it still hurt, dearie?" and Jenny answered: "Not now. Do it some more." And I did. "One, two, three!" I said at last. "I'll put your toothache into my pocket." And lo! and behold! the toothache was gone. Relieved of pain, the child soon fell asleep in my arms, and I carried her back to her mother. The other children were still crying--challenging my faith in love as a soothing syrup; and I accepted the challenge. One baby belonged to a Lithuanian woman who was going to join her husband in the coal fields of Illinois. It required more than love to touch that baby; it needed a good digestion as well; for the child was so dirty that it seemed perilous to take it, from whatever point I approached. Finally, I landed it safe. Its skin was hot and dry; evidently it had a fever, and I knew that it would appreciate water without and within. I applied it liberally, and before long I could really love the child; for when the dirt was removed, it was fair to look upon. When its cries ceased, as they did soon after I gave it a cool drink, I laid it on a seat far from its mother, and it went to sleep. All this time the third baby continued its lamentations; they were the cries of a very young baby, and went to my heart. I asked its Italian mother to let me take it, and she, having witnessed the miracles I wrought, had faith in me and gave me her child. As soon as it felt the strange, muscular arm, however, it howled with renewed vigour; but I held bravely to it, and walked up and down the car, and down and up, and up and down again. I had to; for whenever I attempted to sit down, the baby shrieked the louder, and as I was being eagerly watched by all the passengers, my reputation was at stake. At last I recalled a little Italian lullaby, one my Dalmatian nurse used to sing to me; I hummed it as I continued my weary march, until the child's cries changed to a low crooning. Then I sat down and number three fell asleep. Triumphantly I carried it to its mother, and took my seat, much the worse for wear and perspiring at every pore. In a short time a benevolent looking lady wearing eye-glasses came to me and said: "I beg your pardon, sir, but are you an M. D.?" "No, madam," I replied, "I am an L. L. B." "What is that?" she inquired. "Lover of Little Babies," I answered. I told this story to my fellow passengers in the cabin; not only because I am proud of my honorary degree, but to prove my belief in the fact that most human beings respond to love, and also that it is a specific for many ills. My theory may be unscientific and impractical; but my fellow voyagers saw it successfully carried out in the steerage of that steamer. Shall I ever forget the landing of the ship at Naples? Tony and John Sullivan and Pietro and Guisseppi, resplendent in their American clothes,--eager to land; yet not forgetting to shake my hand as they bade me a smiling good-bye. I doubt that there was one of those hundreds of men whose life's history I did not know, whose hopes for the future I did not share and in whom my love had not awakened some kindly feeling. I knew the women and the children; I was expected to kiss the babies--and I did--and the children all said good-bye to their "Uncle." After all, I may not have done them any good, but I know that they enriched my life. Proudly I looked at Mary, no longer "Dirty Mary," and her clean face made me happy; while her smile was worth much more than gold. I had new brothers and sisters, nephews, nieces and children. My orthodox friend from Boston stood beside me when they landed. "This is like heaven," he said as he looked around. The matchless bay, with its blue water, glittered in the light of the sun, which made a pavement of gold fit for angels and spirits to walk upon. It was like heaven to me also; not because I thought of golden pavements or harps or halos, or any of the glories which the imagination might picture to itself. To me it seemed like heaven because "The redeemed walk there," those whom America is lifting from the steerage into the many cabins of the Lord. IV REFLEX INFLUENCES The ports of Naples, Triest and Fiume felt the full tide of returning immigration, and although it came sweeping in with unprecedented force, it was not regarded as a calamity. For hours at each port, noisy venders of fruit, and "runners" for modest lodging places hung about the ship, and every passenger who disembarked was an asset, not only to the port in which he waited for the train or boat which would carry him to his native place, but to the whole economic life of his nation. There was something almost grotesquely grandiose in the air with which each immigrant viewed the shores of his native land, and an unconscious exaggeration of our American ways in his walk and talk, and the prodigality with which he handled small change. The street venders and purveyors of small pleasures recognized this, and appealed to his newly awakened generosity by charging him twice as much for everything as they charged when he was outward bound. The customs officers had a sharpened vision [Illustration: TRIEST Austria's commercial harbor; prosperous, whether the immigrant tide ebbs or flows.] and did not treat his baggage with the usual disrespect. The brass-bound trunks contained phonographs to disturb the age-long silence of some mountain village, samples of American whiskey, "the kind that burns all the way down," and therefore characteristic of our temper. There were cigars, manufactured by the American Tobacco Trust, and safely concealed; for the Austrian and Italian governments have been wise enough to create a monopoly of their own on tobacco. Gold trinkets, too, there were, for some Dulcinea in the Apennines or the Carpathians--trinkets brought as tokens of faithfulness, which is often as spurious as the metal; and ah, yes! there is something else which they bring and no customs boundary can keep it out. It is hidden away in the innermost being and will come to light some day, although now the wanderer himself may be unconscious of it. The returned immigrants scatter into thousands of villages, rousing them from their commonplaceness by stories of adventure, boasts of mighty deeds of valor and praise or criticism of our strange customs. Sitting in the inn of a little Alpine village, I once overheard one of these immigrants comparing the slow ways of the natives with our swifter pace. "In America the trains go so fast that they can't stop to take on passengers; they just have hooks with which they are caught as the train flies past. "They have reaping machines," this candidate for the "Ananias Club" continued, "to which a dozen horses are hitched, and the grain is cut, threshed, ground to flour and baked, in a few minutes. All you have to do is to touch a button and you can get bread or cake as you choose." All this his auditors believed; but when he told them that we build houses forty stories high, their credulity was strained to the breaking point; although he swore by the memory of his departed mother that it was so, and that he had seen it with his own eyes. One reason that the returned immigrant is so quickly recognized is, that he purposely emphasizes the difference between himself and those who have remained at home. He does everything and wears everything which will make him like an American, even if over here he had scarcely moved out of his group or come in touch with our civilization. With pride the men wear our clothing, including stiff collars and ties, and when one is in doubt as to a man's relation to our life, a glance at his feet is sufficient; "for by their"--shoes--"ye shall know them." While one may deplore the loss of the picturesque in European peasant life, there is an ethical significance in the immigrant's American garments which is of rather vital importance. The Polish peasant in his native environment is one of the laziest among European labourers. Wrapped in his sheepskin coat, summer and winter, walking barefoot the greater part of the year, and in winter putting his feet into clumsy, heavy boots which impeded his progress, these garments fitted his temper. They were heavy, inexpensive, never changing, and rarely needed renewal. The American clothes he wears are a symbol of his altered character. They mean a new standard of living even as they mean a new standard of effort. In America the Polish labourer loses his native laziness. The journey in itself has shaken him out of his lethargy; the high gearing of our industrial wheels, the pressure brought to bear upon him by the American foreman, the general atmosphere of our life charged by an invigorating ozone, and the absence of a leisure class, at least from the industrial community, have, in a few years, changed what many observers regarded as a fixed characteristic. The whole Slavic race is inclined to lead an easy life, and immigration is destined to have a permanent effect upon it; for the returned immigrant acts contagiously upon his community. Unbiased landowners and manufacturers have told me that we have trained their workmen in industry, that we have quickened their wits and that while wages have risen nearly 60% in almost all departments of labour, the efficiency of the labourers has been correspondingly increased, most noticeably where the largest number of returned immigrants has entered the home field. The Slavic peasants both in Hungary and Poland were gradually losing their allotted land, and were socially and physically deteriorating, prior to the movement to America. Indolence coupled with intemperance drove them into the hands of usurers, and they dropped into the landless class, thus becoming dependent upon casual labour. The returned immigrant began to buy land which the large landowners were often forced to sell, because wages had risen abnormally and labourers were often not to be had at any price. In the four years between 1899 and 1903, land owned by peasants increased in some districts to 418%, and taking the immigrant districts in Austro-Hungary and Russian-Poland together, the increase in four years reaches the incredible figure of 173%. In three districts of Russian-Poland the peasants bought in those four years 14,694 acres of farmland. This of course means not only that money was brought back from America, but that the peasant at home has become more industrious, if not always more temperate and frugal. The little village of Kochanovce in the district of Trenczin in Hungary, out of which but few had emigrated to America, and to which not many families had returned, has, under this new economic impulse, bought the land on which the villagers' forefathers were serfs and on which they had worked during the harvest for about twenty cents a day. The peasants bought the whole baronial estate, including the castle, giving a mortgage for the largest part of the purchase sum; but they are now the owners of one of the finest estates in Hungary, and the mortgage drives them to work as they have never worked before. This same impulse has struck the district of Nyitra in which the land had almost gone out of the peasants' hands, lost by the same causes, intemperance and indolence. In the last five years the change has been so great as to seem marvellous. Usurers have been driven out of business and the peasant's house has ceased to be a mud hut with a straw-thatched roof. In fact, that type of building has been condemned by law, at the initiative of returned immigrants. The shopkeepers throughout the whole immigrant territory rejoice. Their stock is increased by many varieties of goods; for the peasant now wants the best there is in the market, often useless luxuries, to be sure; but while he may spend his money "for that which is not meat," he wants to spend, and that means effort, than which the Slavs as a race need nothing more for their social and political salvation. Their advance is strikingly illustrated by the following examples. The B. Brothers of Vienna are manufacturers of neckties. On a recent visit to their establishment I met some buyers from Hungary, one of whom, when the salesman showed him the class of goods which he had been in the habit of buying, highly coloured, stiff bows of cheap cotton, said: "We have no use for such stuff. This is the tie we want," and he pulled out an American tie of rather fine quality and the latest pattern. I had to promise the head of the firm of B. Brothers to put him in touch with an American haberdasher's journal, so that he may keep himself informed as to our styles. Partly to test the influence of immigration in the remotest region of Hungary and partly to satisfy my craving for a certain kind of candy, I visited a little village hidden away in the Carpathians, where neither steam nor electricity has yet obtruded itself. There in a certain store, I bought my very first sweets, and although I have since tasted the delicacies of many civilizations, the lingering flavour of that first candy still seems the most delicious, and its taste has never left my palate. It was hard, highly coloured and usually exposed to flies and dust; but it was my first love, and my first pennies were sacrificed to it; so I was eager to revel in its delights again. I went to that village in the spirit of one who goes on a pilgrimage, and as one seeks one's favourite shrine so did I seek that little store. My palate's memory led me to the very door; but in front of it, forcing itself upon my candy-hungry gaze, was a penny in the slot machine, out of which, in response to two Hungarian Filers, came dropping a stick of genuine American chewing-gum. It is needless to say that my primitive, highly-coloured candy was no more. In its place were caramels and buttercups very much like those I had left behind me in the United States. Now I do not mean to imply that chewing-gum and caramels have any social or ethical bearing upon my subject; but they do prove that the old order changes and that the new has been brought in by the immigrant. Still within the sphere of the economic, yet having large ethical value, is the fact that the returned immigrant brings gold, not only in his pocket but in his teeth. I certainly never realized the far-reaching social and ethical value of the dentist until I saw the contrast between the returned immigrant, especially the contrast between his wife and daughter and the women who had remained at home. If it ever was true that coarse fare makes strong teeth, it certainly has not been true during the period of my observations among the peasant people of Europe. Where I know the bread to be coarsest and the fare simplest, as for instance in impoverished Montenegro, there the old, toothless hags are most numerous, and even the mouths of the young are disfigured by decaying teeth. This is especially true of the Alpine and Carpathian regions, out of which many of the Slavic immigrants come; there, a woman of forty is usually an old woman because she has no teeth. She is ugly in consequence, and therefore neglected by her husband. The immigrant woman has discovered that gold in the teeth renews one's youth, that it preserves one's charms and is apt to keep lovers and husbands more loyal. Mistresses in America know how readily these foreign servants sacrifice their wages upon the dentist's altar. Not only does dentistry keep the women young and their lovers faithful, it keeps the men in good health, adds to their self-respect, and into regions hitherto untouched by their beneficent influence, it has introduced tooth-brushes and dentifrice. If the returned immigrant can be easily recognized [Illustration: Before he emigrated When the Immigrant comes home. A CONTRAST IN HOMES] by his shoes and by gold in his teeth, his residence can be quickly detected from the fact that day and night his isba is blessed by fresh air; and perhaps more significant to the world's well-being than the American economic doctrine of the "Open Door," is its physiological doctrine of the open window. Pastor Holubek, of Bosacz in Hungary, when I asked him what effect the returned immigrant had upon his parish, said: "A good effect. The returned immigrant is a new man. He carries himself differently, he commands the respect of his fellows, he treats his wife better and he keeps the windows of his isba open." The last two facts are exceedingly important, and my observations bear out his testimony. Wherever I saw an open window in the evening, I could with perfect assurance open the door and say: "How do you do?" and I was certain to be greeted by a still more emphatic and cordial, "How do you do?" For some inexplicable reason, Europeans of all classes are averse to air in sleeping rooms, especially at night. Night air is supposed to hold all sorts of evils, and even the medical profession, progressive as it is, has not yet freed itself from this terrible superstition. Frequently I have discovered in the returned immigrant a quickening of the moral sense, especially among the men who had come in contact with the better class of American mechanics; and the discovery was as welcome as unexpected. I saw this emphasized during my trip last year. It was on a Sunday's journey among the villages of the valley of the Waag. Picturesque groups were moving along the highway to and from the church and into the village and out of it. The appearance of my companions and myself always created a great sensation and never a greater one than on Sunday when the peasants were at leisure. They took it as a special privilege to see "genuine Americans," and those who had been over here were quickly on the scene to air their English and to show their familiarity with our kind. It was a reciprocal pleasure; for it seemed like a breath from home to hear men talk intelligently of Hazleton, Pittsburg, Scranton and Wilkes-Barre; moreover it gave us a splendid opportunity to test the effect of our civilization upon them. In one village a husband with his wife and two children came out of their isba, and we could easily imagine ourselves at home; for the whole family looked as if it had just come from a grand bargain sale at one of our department stores. What seemed most delightful to us was the way in which the man spoke of his wife, and no American husband could have been more careful of her than was he; all this in striking contrast to the peasants to whom the woman is still an inferior being. In conversation with them, I took the returned immigrant as my subject and told them something of our own social order as shown in the relation of husband and wife in America; upon which one of the peasants told a very ugly and realistic story to illustrate what he thought of women. Then it was that the unexpected happened. My immigrant friend blushed--yes, blushed--just as I should expect any well-bred man to blush under similar circumstances, and said to me: "Don't mind him. He has a dirty mouth. He may after all have a clean heart." The man who blushed had been five years in--Pittsburg! The change brought about through immigration, even in a youth of the better class, whose character had been spoiled by his early training, was shown in a young Magyar in Budapest. That city has the unenviable reputation of being one of the most immoral cities in Europe. The immorality of the great cities is everywhere very much alike in certain respects; still it seems to me that a city is more or less immoral, not according to the size of its tenderloin district, but in how far immorality has been accepted as the norm of life. In that respect Budapest is considerably in the lead; for its youth is nourished in an atmosphere of indolence, false pride and various phases of social impurity. The family to which this particular young man belonged boasted three sons of whom he is the oldest. He went the road which leads to destruction, and he went with the full knowledge of his parents, for both were going their own gait in the same direction. Finally he was forced to run away because he had transgressed the law. He landed in New York penniless and fortunately without friends. He learned all the lessons which homesickness, hunger and cold could teach him, and as there was no other way to escape them than by labour, this youth, who never had worked, began driving a milk wagon and ultimately graduated into a clerkship. When I saw him among his own people in Budapest where he was visiting, he was so changed in his physique that not even his closest friends recognized him. Although the law had been appeased and by the death of his father he had the opportunity to conduct the business bequeathed him, his awakened conscience rebelled against the conditions around him and he was eager to return to America. It was interesting to note that his friends found him unbearable, declaring him no longer a gentleman because he worked with his hands and was not ashamed of it; while the young ladies decided that he had been spoiled by his sojourn in America because he was not eternally kissing their hands and had forgotten how to make pretty and meaningless compliments. Of course one does not always receive favourable replies to one's questions as to the effect of the returned immigrant upon his community. Manufacturers who exploited his labour, large landowners to whom he was no more than a serf, and priests, uneasy about the effect of the contagion, are usually very critical; but these unfavourable replies are only a proof that the leaven is at work. I put the question to some guests at a confirmation feast. The priest told me that the immigrants become Atheists and Salvationists. In his mind there was not much difference between them. The judge told me that they become immoral; which meant that they do not pay him sufficient revenue. The host, a wealthy landowner, said that they become Socialists and Anarchists; which meant that they demand higher wages and better treatment. All agreed that emigration has been of large economic value. So far as my observation goes, I feel certain that emigration has been of inestimable economic and ethical value to the three great monarchies chiefly concerned, namely: Italy, Austro-Hungary and Russia. It has withdrawn inefficient labour and has returned some of it capable of more and better work; it has lifted the status of the peasantry to a degree which could not have been achieved even by a revolution; it has educated the neglected masses, lifted them to a higher standard of living and has implanted new and vital ideals. That there are attendant evils, no one will question. There is much more discontent than there ever has been, more haste and less leisure; there is less respect for authority and for established institutions; certain social evils have been accentuated; the newly acquired wealth has proved disastrous to some, and family ties have been strained by the absence of the heads of many households. Nevertheless, an Hungarian statesman, who had risen from the ranks, said to me: "America has been a blessing to us. Had Columbus not discovered it, all Europe would still be in servitude, and had it not been rediscovered by our peasants, they would not have had much chance to get their necks from under the yoke. "America is our leaven and will yet be our salvation." I have watched the leaven at work, and in the succeeding chapters I have recorded some concrete instances, which clearly show that "A little leaven, leaveneth the whole lump." V OUR CRITICS The third-class waiting-room in the Oderberg station, on the Northern Railroad of Austria, is splendid vantage ground from which to watch the racial and national conglomerate that forms the insecure structure called the Austro-Hungarian monarchy. Here from her East and West, her North and South, one meets those great social currents which stream from the mountains to the plains and from the villages to the cities. Here, also, the tides of immigration come in and go out, and by their volume one can judge the prosperity of the United States, or at least the condition of our labour markets. Here the "spick and span" German, from across the border, meets his less vigorous and more "gemuethlich" cousin, the Austrian. Here the Moravian and the Czech touch elbows and glory in their Slavic speech--the age-long battle for the supremacy of their language being one of the few points which they have won in this contentious monarchy. This is also the meeting place of Southern and Western Slavs, and here the fierce looking Bosnians carry, in their erstwhile weapon belts, pins, pipes, jack-knives and razors, which they sell to their Slavic brothers of the West; they even deign to speak in broken German to the hated "Schwabs," when driving their bargains. Glancing around the crowded waiting-room, one sees Ruthenians and Wallachians, in picturesque garb, travelling from their impoverished mountain homes to the upper Danubian plain. They are harvesters, and their backs are bent under the weight of crude cooking utensils and primitive harvest implements. Close to this group are fiercely moustachioed Magyars, in their semi-Oriental, loose, white linen trousers and heavy sheepskin coats. They are going to take charge of the flocks of sheep on some lordly estates; they know the ways of all four-footed animals, and are considered faithful shepherds. In one corner stand smoothly shaven, coarse featured Slovaks, in clothing, home-made, from their felt boots to their felt hats; primitive folk they are, seeking labour in the industrial cities along this busy highway. Of course, there are Jews from the East and the West; as far removed from each other in culture and beliefs as those two points of the compass, yet all swayed by the same mysterious force which at its best turns their vision towards Jehovah, and at its worst towards Mammon. They all are divided more or less by speech, blood and faith and are united, only by the poverty which compels them to travel third-class on the government's railways, whose low-zone tariff encourages the migrations of its people; thus easily relieving economic distress in some regions and providing labour where it is needed. When the train comes, the conductor sorts this mixture of humanity according to his prejudices or the seeming ability of the travellers to reward him for rescuing them from this malodorous conglomerate, by providing a less crowded compartment. As a rule, I am willing to be thus rescued, but not this time; for there is one element in evidence which makes the well-known mass of people more interesting than usual; namely, the returning immigrant. "Where thou goest, I will go," even if it was into the thick of bag and baggage carried on the backs of men and women, through the narrow door, into an already over-crowded compartment where windows were hermetically sealed and where the air was not only stiflingly hot but full of mysterious odours, much unlike those of "Araby the blest." There seemed no limit to the capacity of the car or to the patience of the passengers who were being pushed about like cattle; until the conductor attempted to thrust in a woman of unusual size, who evidently was acquainted with our ways and certain words of our language. She let loose upon the official the vials of her wrath, her realistic Slavic becoming fairly lurid, reënforced as it was by English words, which, when used in America, make even printers gasp, when they must be printed. Were it not that such words can be indicated only by dashes, it would prove interesting to record them here, to show what changes they undergo upon the lips of our apt pupils. Puffing and panting, this colossal woman forced her way through the crowded car, looking for a seat. I gave her my place, and as she accepted it, she asked laconically, "'Merican man?" When I nodded assent, the point of contact was made, we shook hands and said: "How do you do?" Like an electric current the greeting communicated itself from bench to bench. A woman across the aisle caught the force of it and waved her hand over the heads of the crowd as she cried: "How do you do?" She held up a fretful boy of five, who raised his voice in lamentation; while she said: "Behave yourself, kid; there's an American boss on the car." But the boy, thoroughly American, would not be frightened by threats of boss, police, or any other bugaboo. He pulled at her skirt, clutched her expansive hat, nearly tearing it from its insecure moorings, then rolled the window shade up and down, suddenly letting it go with a spring--after which, all in one breath, he peremptorily demanded candy, water, bananas, and that his mother make the reluctant "choo-choo cars" go at once. This woman's husband is a merchant in Wilmerding, Pa., and she, after many years in America, was going home to visit her people, bringing this hopeful youngster with her to disturb the "peace of Jerusalem." "If he were my boy," growled the unfortunate man who sat on the same bench with him, "I'd throw him out the window;" and the woman apologetically said: "He is an American boy, and they are all like this. You can't tame them. Whipping does no good." "Well," the man muttered, under his fierce moustachio, "I am glad I am not living in America." A young Moravian woman, who, in America, had exchanged her peasant garb and ruggedness for our more expensive dress and gentler ways, corroborated the mother's statement. She had worked in American homes and testified: "Children in America are all terrible. Nothing is sacred to them; neither the kitchen nor the church. It's because they have so few children; they spoil them." "Yes," agreed a young Hungarian Jew; "in America, they have the one child system, and many women do not have even one child. They are so sterile. You should see how thin and flat-chested they are." Then, in his realistic way, he described the physique of our women. He was a great talker, that young Jew. Having been unsuccessful in New York, he was returning home a cynic and a severe critic. "Hm!" he continued; "the women of America are the boss. Just think of it; you can't get a woman to black your boots. That is the reason so many men get a divorce." He knew all about the American woman's luxuries, and talked loudly and long of silken petticoats, lace waists, and other sartorial mysteries; for he had worked in a tailor's shop and was acquainted with all woman's "doings." "The American men are to blame!" exclaimed a man who was crowded close to me. He had returned from America some time before, and was travelling up and down the country, buying butter and eggs. He had caught a vision of the American man and his business methods in Chicago, where he had worked in a large packing-house, and in a modest way, he was applying his knowledge. "They work like niggers," he continued, "and let their women remain in idleness, sitting all day long in rocking-chairs, rocking, rocking"--and he imitated the motion--"and eating candy. Just think of it! They buy candy by the pound!" Evidently he was not imitating the example of American men in the treatment of his wife who was with him, sharing the hardships of the journeys from village to village. While he was speaking, she drew their luncheon from her ample pockets: hard rye bread and Salami, a sausage as hard as the bread. "No, indeed!" He had not taken her to America. "That's where they spoil the women." His aspiration was to ultimately control the butter and egg business in his region, and future historians may record his name as a "Captain of Industry," with those of Armour and Swift. He knew a little of every language spoken in the dual monarchy, and that, together with the fact that he spoke some English, made him a most interesting travelling companion. The greater part of the time he preached to the peasants the gospel of business. "You poor rascals," he said; "you work in the fields from sunrise to sunset, eat bread-soup, and not much else, three times a day, and carry loads heavy enough to break your backs; while the Jews, who do the business, live in fine houses, eat the best spring geese, which you raise for them, and send their children to college. You ought to go to America and see business. Even the little boys of rich people sell newspapers and lemonade in front of their fathers' palaces. Go into business and the Jews will have to go back to Jerusalem where they came from." The peasants all nodded their heads and said: "Tak ye, tak ye," it is so, it is so; but one could see in their placid, half-stupid faces, that if they ever have the spirit which ventures, they must first go to America. The corpulent woman who had accepted my seat knew something about the lot of her kind in America, and, having by this time recovered her breath, she very emphatically gave the butter and egg man her views on the subject. "You say that women don't work in America, and that they are spoiled? I just come from there; I have been there fourteen years, in McKeesport, Pa. I have kept boarders ever since I went there, and I haven't had time to sit in a rocking-chair, and my husband never bought me any candy. It's true, you can't beat us women there as you can over here. Soon after we went there, my husband beat me when he was drunk. I took it as patiently as I did here, and he beat me again and I didn't say anything; although I carried a black eye for a week. Then the young woman who takes the money at the grocery store asked me how I hurt myself. I said I didn't hurt myself, my husband did it. Then that young girl, as thin as a rail and as meek-looking as a swallow, said: 'You tell me the next time he hits you.' "It wasn't long before he beat me again, and I told her and the police came and took him by the neck and put him in the lock-up, and it cost me twenty-five dollars to get him out. I earned that money myself and it was no punishment to him. I told the young woman about it, and she said: 'The next time he hits you, you hit back.' I said: 'Is it allowed?' She laughed, and said: 'If he hits you first and you kill him, nothing will happen to you.' It wasn't long until he came home drunk and beat me again and I gave him one with the rolling-pin and he fell, and as he was lying there I got so angry I gave him another and another, and after that he knew better than to beat me." This Slavic Deborah told her story graphically and dramatically, and, undoubtedly, her husband was not the first immigrant to learn that marriage on the European plan is one thing, and on the American plan, quite another matter. "Yes," said the young Moravian woman. "When I get married, I'll get an American husband. They don't expect a dowry, and they don't make you work like a slave." "In a year he'll get divorced," the young Hungarian Jew broke in. "They do that quickly." "And what of it?" she retorted. "I'll be still better off. He'll have to pay me." I do not know exactly at what point of the conversation I began to sing the praises of the American man; his loyalty and his sense of justice--if there is one thing that I enjoy more than singing the praise of the American woman it is lauding the American man. Hardly had I begun to speak, when a young Roumanian, whom I had not previously noticed, commenced to rail at me, telling me in a mixture of three languages to keep my mouth shut; for he knew better. From the time he landed in New York until he left the country, he had not met a man who did not take advantage of him or ill-treat him. In Chicago, he was lured from the Union Station to a saloon on Canal Street, and, when he came to himself, he was lying in an alley, penniless. He found his way to Montana, where he herded sheep. There he tasted something of loneliness and homesickness, seeing nothing for weeks but red hills and blue sky--not a living thing except his sheep, or wolves to drive away. Then one day came American men on ponies and killed every one of his sheep, hundreds and hundreds of them, knocked him down and threatened to riddle him with bullets if he did not turn his face towards the East and march on without looking back. Days and days he walked, and because his face was of a darker hue than others, and his clothes looked strange, "No man gave unto him." He then worked in the mines of Colorado. "The men there," he said, "shoot, drink, and gamble, and have about as much regard for human life as for the life of sheep, and as soon as I had money enough I made ready to go home." No more America for him, and no praise for its men. "That's not so, Brother," came a voice from the farther end of the car, and I turned to see this valiant champion of ours. Had I been asked to give the place of his nativity, I should have put it in that Middle West of ours, which takes from her children all surplus flesh and puts in its place bone and sinew. His complexion was sallow, and the general expression of his face betokened sensitiveness, bordering on the abnormal. "I have been in America twenty years, and those years in Chicago, and I have met many good men. The good men don't shoot and drink and gamble." It seemed strange language to my travelling companions; but to me it sounded familiar. After the Chicago man had delivered his exordium, I had no difficulty in getting his story from him, and then I knew "whence this man had this doctrine." Emigrating in his young manhood to Chicago, he had come in touch with Methodist missionaries, who befriended him and saved him from a life of intemperance and infidelity. Unfortunately, his awakened, religion-hungry soul became confused by the shibboleths of contending sects; he travelled and travailed all the way, from striving after a "Second Blessing," to "Soul Sleepers," "Seventh Day Adventists," and Dowie's religious movement, which at times looked like Opera Bouffe, but which ended in a great tragedy. I did not discover what form of faith was now holding the allegiance of his spirit; but as he told me that it was neither a church nor a sect, I surmised that he belonged to some church or sect whose chief doctrine is that it is neither. Evidently the Spirit was upon him, some spirit at least; for he told me that he had been sent to Hungary to convert his brethren. Knowing how much the region from which he came needed some moral and religious quickening, I timidly offered him my hand and my good wishes; but he declined both. He "must not lean on the arm of flesh; so the Bible says." The odour of tobacco offended his sensitive nostrils, and, turning to the butter and egg man, who was the chief offender, he pointed to his pipe, saying: "Throw that devilish thing away!" But a Slav and his pipe are not so soon parted, and the butter and egg man held firmly to his; although he smiled, not wishing to offend this prophet in Israel. Then the luckless man pulled his whiskey bottle out of his pocket and offered it to the ex-Dowieite, who took it, lifted it high in air, and made an eloquent temperance address, after which he threw the bottle out the window. If, as a drowning man, he had refused a life-preserver, or had thrown diamonds into the sea, his Slavic brothers would not have thought him more reckless or insane. Palenka, as they call it, gives strength. Black bread and palenka have kept the hard-working Slav alive, have given him courage and cheer, and this crazy man had thrown the precious stuff away! Yet he was so righteously indignant, so wrought up over his heroic task, that the peasants who had risen to remonstrate with him or to attack him, sank back into their seats; while over them all came a solemn silence, broken only by the grinding and jolting of the flat car-wheels. This was the psychological moment for the prophet to declare his mission and preach to us all, and he did. It was a fervent message; one in which much truth and falsehood mingled, and if Dowie's spirit hovered near, his satisfaction at hearing one of his disciples speak of the things for which he fought and on which he throve, would have been marred only by the fact that, for once at least, "Elijah the Second" was outdone. All the Dowie vernacular, translated into the realistic Slavic, was let loose by this apostle. Now it was the voice of some Old Testament prophet which spoke; and again it was as if a John pleaded for love's sake. Then came a jumble of words and bitter invective, which, by comparison, caused the imprecatory Psalms to seem like the thirteenth chapter of First Corinthians. No sooner had the preacher resumed his seat than the spell he had woven about his auditors was broken. The butter and egg man rose and demanded to be reimbursed for his wasted palenka, concluding his remarks by asserting that in America good people do drink whiskey, that everybody drinks, and that "they make you drink whether you want to or not." "Tak ye," so it is, said a young man, who, as far as his clothing was concerned, might have just stepped out of an American Jockey Club. His voice was guttural and every sentence was punctuated by oaths. "My father keeps a saloon in Hazleton, and the policemen and aldermen come there and drink, and at election time the burgess comes and 'sets 'em up' for everybody." While he spoke, he jingled the money in his pockets and kept his audience much interested by telling about his betting on horse-races, the intricacies of the game of poker, how much money his father made on liquor and what a high and mighty position was that of a saloon-keeper in Hazleton. He was going to Galicia to visit his grandparents, and he meant to show the slow town of Przemysl what it means to have a "hot time." At Hodonin, in Moravia, I had to leave the train; so I bade good-bye to the interesting company. The woman from McKeesport said, as we shook hands, "America all right, and you bet I'm going back just as soon as I have seen to my property." With a contemptuous glance at the young Jew, the Moravian girl said: "Right she is! There's nothing the matter with America, and when I go back, I bet you I'll get an American husband!" "Oh, yes! Of course. They are lying on the shelf waiting for you!" sneered the object of her contempt. The sport tried to be kind in his good-bye words; but he used so many oaths that he became repulsive. When I remonstrated, he said: "In America, everybody swear--no make trouble to say: good-morning your--Highness. See a man--slap him on shoulder and say: Hello--John--you--how dy? So long, then, you--old man, good-bye." The butter and egg man gripped my hand mightily, and as a parting word gave me this injunction. "Don't let your old woman boss you;" then, glancing at our prophet, he added: "He little not all right." The Roumanian shepherd looked out the window and made no effort to take my proffered hand. His sallow face was drawn by pain, caused by something I dimly divined. We were at the station, a station famous for a certain kind of sausage, whose odorous steam soon filled our nostrils. Taking several portions from the tray which a waiter held towards me, I gave them to the Roumanian peasant. Like a wild beast he fell upon the food, while into his pain-drawn face came a ray of human joy. The prophet had difficulty in making up his mind about me. Reluctantly he stretched out his hand as I was leaving the car. When I grasped it, he querulously asked: "Have you received the Blessing?" and with great assurance I answered: "You bet." VI THE DOCTOR OF THE KOPANICZE The last people to feel the sweep of the tide which carried them to the United States and back again were the mountain folk in Eastern Europe. The Slav is naturally a plainsman, and even in the lowlands, where he could not very well escape the force of world currents, he resisted them as long as possible, content to follow his plough for a meagre wage. When at last the lure of the gold grew too strong for him to withstand its seductive beckoning, he went first from the great highways along the main branches of railroads, and from villages on the shores of rivers; until the ever-rising tide, with all its volume and all its good or ill, reached the mountains. Where in straggling villages in the Carpathians the little mud-huts are detached, and scattered on top of the foothills in the midst of their stony fields, these form a Kopanicze; the individual hut is called a Kopanicza, and the inhabitants are called Kopaniczari. They are the poor mountain folk, isolated from church and school, far from the highways of travel, and are among the most backward, most primitive, and most neglected of the Slovak people. Their isolation has often bred not only ignorance but sometimes lawlessness, and, even now, he who has no pressing business there, avoids these settlements. Meeting a Kopaniczar on a lonely highway gives one a queer, creepy sensation. He is a raw-boned, clumsy creature, his body wrapped in a sheepskin coat, his head covered by a broad, felt hat, soaked in grease, his feet encased in woolen boots; all his garments of the most primitive home manufacture. He looks more ferocious than he is; for unless heavily under the influence of alcohol, which does not easily affect him, he is a good-natured human being. His superstition and his ignorance, however, coupled with his intemperance, make him often dangerous, as is seen by the following incident which took place last year. A great many fires of incendiary origin occurred in one of the settlements, and as no satisfactory clue to the perpetrator was found, they were supposed to be the work of evil spirits. Fire in one of these settlements is especially disastrous; for as the huts are built of exceedingly inflammable material, everything is consumed. Such a house usually includes in its primitive possessions a horse or a cow, and when these are destroyed, it spells utter ruin. One day a tourist came into this Kopanicze, the first of his kind who had ever ventured into that isolated region. Being a tourist, he naturally carried a camera, and as he levelled it upon the buildings, the peasants, conceiving the insane idea that he was marking their huts for destruction, ran out and beat him to death. A boyhood friend of mine was appointed district physician in the upper Trenczin district, the most poverty stricken in Hungary, largely populated by these Kopaniczari. He was a Jew without powerful protection, and one way of getting rid of surplus Jewish physicians was to put them in charge of one of these regions, in which they were sure to be out of the way of some Gentile aspirant for a large and lucrative medical practice. My friend had travelled the usual long and thorny road which a poor boy has to travel in striving after a university education. His parents, who were poor, laboured and begged and borrowed; while he tutored and borrowed and begged; yet he found himself still within two years of a diploma when his parents died. Then he did the not uncommon thing; consulted a marriage broker, who found a marriageable maiden with a dowry, and parents willing to advance a portion of it; so that the young man could finish his education before he led the daughter to the altar. In Hungary, a doctor's diploma is a splendid asset in the marriage business, and had my friend been able to wait until he really had his, he could have commanded twice as much dowry and a handsomer maiden. Being poor, he shared the lot of all those unfortunates who have to make purchases on the instalment plan, be they plush albums, life insurance, or wives. In spite of the materialistic way in which my doctor went about getting a bride, he was an idealist; and, consequently, doomed to have a hard time in this exceedingly practical world. When after his marriage he was sent to the Trenczin district, he found that the Kopanicze had as much use for a doctor as it had for a professor of psychology. Not that the people were never ill; on the contrary, infants born in the wretched huts, unless remarkably well prepared for the stifling air they had to breathe, for the hard rye bread soaked in alcohol, which often they had to eat, and for the poppy seed concoction which they were given to keep them quiet while their mothers were working in the fields--such infants, and there were many--went back into the unknown soon after they came out of it. If they lingered, if any one lingered, before death overtook him, the witch was the first aid brought into requisition. To cure infantile convulsions, she would lay the baby on the threshold and cause a female dog to jump over it three times. A specific against typhoid fever was a vile compound made of the heart of a black cat, juniper berries, and alcohol; while if a child had eaten poisoned mushrooms, it was hit over the head until it either died or recovered. Strange to say, and yet not strange, a fair proportion of robust infants, as well as hardened adults, survived such treatment, and even to this day there is a witch not far from the city of Vag Ujhely, who has some degree of national fame for her healing art. If the witch failed to cure, the priest was sent for and the proper saints invoked for the healing. If the priest's prayers failed to help--"What's the use of sending for the doctor?" The undertaker was notified, and the grave-digger did the rest. Unselfishly my friend tried to save these people. He preached the gospel of fresh air, and in passing through one of the settlements with him, some five years ago, I saw him break window after window (they were not made to open) that fresh air might at least once enter the wretched living-rooms. The result was a riot, and that night all his windows were broken; so that for once he had more air than he desired. There was consumption in one settlement, and he provided sanitary cuspidors, proscribed by law; but he saw them used for culinary purposes instead! Vainly, he lifted his voice against the use of alcohol; he had the innkeepers and the State against him. The State prefers to see its people rot from poison rather than lose its revenue. In spite of all he did, he was regarded as the enemy of the community and not its friend; so having meddled much in business which was not his, he could not expect a promotion, and none came. Five years ago he had accepted poverty, neglect, and the enmity of his neighbours as his lot in life. He had sunk into such a hopeless attitude that neither in dress nor in habits of living could one easily distinguish him from his ignorant neighbours. His wife was more disappointed than he was. Had she bestowed upon him such a dowry to live in the Kopanicze? She had expected to be the "Highborn Mrs. Dr. M----" and taste something of the forbidden fruits of Gentile society. Ordinarily, the physician breaks through the cast of race and faith; but here she was, despised even by the Kopaniczari, the lowliest of the lowly. I left the doctor after that last visit, vowing never to see him again; for it was an uncomfortable experience, if not a painful one. My studies last year carried me into this very region. Since I had left it, hundreds of men and women had gone to America and a large number had returned home. Here, indeed, was the proper field for observation, and the man to help me most, was my boyhood's friend. With difficulty I found his home; for it was new, the doctor's wife was resplendent in fine clothing, and the doctor's office, once full of dust and cobwebs, contained new cases with new surgical instruments, and, wonder of wonders! a dentist's machine. I had to wait for the return of the doctor, who was visiting a patient, and had time to catch my breath; for having come a great distance by wheel and then finding such a surprise, proved quite overwhelming. "What has happened here?" I asked him when he returned. "One thing at a time," he replied. "First let's have some refreshments;" and as we drank the delicious raspberry soda which he prepared, he said: "If I wished to tell you in one word what has happened, I could do it by saying: Emigration. "It seemed almost a miracle to see the first people leaving the Kopanicze; for neither they nor their ancestors had moved away since the great persecution in the sixteenth century brought them here from Bohemia. "The letters they wrote, and which I had to read to their neighbours, contained such glowing accounts of America that others went, until nobody was left but the women, the children, the aged, the witch, and ourselves. We were at the point of starvation when the first money came from America, and with it nearly every husband, who sent it, wrote: 'If there is anything the matter with the children, send for the doctor.' "My first case was a scarlet fever patient. The child recovered; but the contagion had spread. The mother whose child I had saved told everybody that the witch with her machinations made no impression upon the fever; while the medicine helped. I was called to other cases. In most homes I am sure that after I left the witch was called also; but I did not care so long as the children were given my medicine. "Soon I was called to other villages, and as the money kept coming from America, and the peasants gained confidence in me, my services were greatly in demand. "Our old house, which nearly caved in over our heads, was replaced by this one. I still owe money on it, but I am sure I can pay the rest in a year." "What use do you make of this?" I asked, pointing to the well-known object found in every dentist's office in America. "Since the men have come back," he replied, "filled teeth have become as fashionable as red waistcoats used to be, and I have had to learn dentistry. And there is more money in filling teeth," he added with a shrewd smile, "than in giving pills. "What do I think of the effect of emigration on the Kopanicze? It has driven out the witch, it has awakened a community which had slept for many centuries, it has done for these people in the twentieth century what the Reformation did in the sixteenth. And as for us, it has saved us from starvation." As I was about to go, I heard a peasant girl in the hall say: "I kiss your hand, Most Highborn Mrs. Dr. M----. Is the Most Mighty and Honourable Mr. Dr. M---- at home?" And the "Most Highborn Mrs. Dr. M----" answered triumphantly, that the Most Mighty and Honourable Mr. Dr. M---- was at home, but busy. A gentleman from America had come to consult him about his health; and I am sure that at that moment the "Most Highborn Mrs. Dr. M----" felt that her dowry had been well invested and that it was coming back with interest, through emigration to America. VII "MOSCHELE AMERIKANSKY" The Hungarian town inhabited by Magyars, does not materially differ from the villages in which so many varieties and subjects of other races live. Such a town is merely a larger village, and, instead of one broad street flanked by straw thatched huts, there are at least four streets which terminate on the "square," around which the dignitaries have built their more pretentious dwellings. Here also are the stores, usually kept by Jews, who are not indifferent to the economic movements of the people whose purveyors they are. Twenty years ago, before emigration from the district of Nyitra had begun, the principal town in that district boasted but half a dozen stores so called, the largest and best of which could be discovered only by its tiny show-window, where, crowded in dire confusion, were a few articles of general merchandise. During all the years of my comings and goings I could never see any change in the articles displayed, nor even by a wild flight of imagination see any indication that a duster had lost its way among them. It is not, however, of this store that I wish to tell, in spite of the fact that it now has a double show-window, and contains, among many other new things, a genuine American cash register. The "Amerikansky Schtore" was once the meanest and smallest among all the stores of that village. No front door led into it, no show-window betrayed its existence, and certainly no sign-board gave a hint of what could be purchased within. It was then owned by "Uncle Isaac," as every one called him. He made a living out of the store; but his life came out of the Talmud, and of course both were scanty. Uncle Isaac's father, Reb Ephraim, studied the Talmud, and his sainted grandfather, Reb Isaac, after whom he was named, left such a holy savour behind him that to this day his name is reverently uttered in prayer, as one who is surely near to God and can intercede for the children of this generation who study less Talmud and do more business. Uncle Isaac's forefathers, "God knows how far back," kept this same store in the same way; for like the ring in Lessing's fable it was to be left to the son who knew most about the Talmud, and, as a consequence, least about the business. The Talmud had to be studied, the store ran itself. Not that there was anything automatic about it in those days; but Uncle Isaac, true to the traditions of his forefathers, sold only those things which his forefathers had sold before him, namely; red earthen pots and big green bowls which he bought from the same family in the same town where the same peasant potteries flourished, from which his forefathers had bought their supplies of these same red pots and green bowls. If a customer came to the store while the children were little and his wife was busy caring for them (for Uncle Isaac was blessed according to the promise made to Abraham) he had to wait until Uncle Isaac disentangled himself from the mazes of the Talmud. Then almost reluctantly he sold the pot or bowl, scarcely ever exchanging a word with his customer, who was usually a peasant, and of course a Gentile whose presence disturbed the pious atmosphere into which Uncle Isaac had wrapped himself. If any of the townspeople came, he was more friendly; he had to be, and as was often the case in later days if they asked why he didn't sell cups and saucers and wash-bowls, he would invariably shrug his shoulders as his blessed forefathers had shrugged their shoulders before him. This shrug was eloquent, and meant many things; but, above all, it meant: "Have I not bother enough to remember what Rasche's (a celebrated Jewish commentator) comment upon Rambam's (the abbreviation of another commentator's name) comment was? How can you expect me to give my time to such things as buying and selling wash-bowls and cups and saucers?" His children, three boys and three girls, were nurtured in this atmosphere. The sons began studying the Talmud when they were five years of age, and the daughters were initiated into the mysteries of the Kosher household before that age. As the children grew, Uncle Isaac withdrew almost entirely from business and gave himself more and more to the study of the holy books. The oldest son, named after the sainted grandfather, went to Pressburg to study for the Rabbinate, living from the charity of the faithful, by whom the support of a pious youth is considered a great privilege. The next son married into a rich but not pious family to whom his sacred learning was a very welcome asset. This left the business, such as it was, upon the shoulders of the youngest son, Moschele. Moschele inherited less of his pious forefathers' piety and much more of some remote ancestor's business talents, and one day he came home from a distant market bringing with him a dozen cups and saucers and a wash-bowl and pitcher. Had he brought home idols made of clay he could not have hurt his father more, and the whole town soon knew that Moschele--young Moschele whose eyes had already rested lovingly upon the blushing faces of young maidens--had received a beating from his father, who, in his fury, had broken the cups and saucers, throwing the fragments at the poor, defenseless head of the culprit. Uncle Isaac's temper was equalled only by his piety, and the old man was beside himself. Moschele was in the same mood, and decided to leave his old father with his red pots and green bowls and dry Talmud. I visited Uncle Isaac's store many a time after this event. It was less a store than ever. The house itself was sinking into the surrounding mire, the thatched roof was falling in on one side and sliding off on the other. "Where is Moschele?" I asked him on one of these visits. He lifted his weary head from the Talmud, and extricated from a pile of ancient manuscripts an envelope printed all over with English letters, which announced the business of Jake Greenbaum who kept the "finest General Department Store on Avenue B." in New York. The letter in the envelope told of Moschele's employment in the great city, and of his life there. "Moschele, my Moschele, is in America!" And the tears began to gather in the old man's eyes as he spoke. "Who knows whether he eats Kosher, and whether he wears the sacred fringes upon his breast? How I wish I could see him before I go hence!" I promised to visit Moschele upon my return to America, and the old man's face beamed. "Would you mind finding out whether he eats Kosher, and whether he wears the sacred fringes?" I promised even that; but I did not find Moschele on Avenue B. He was up town, on the West Side, in one of the larger department stores, where he had entire charge of the crockery department. When I told him that I had seen his father, he plied me with questions. I told him the condition of affairs and urged him to return home to save his parents from utter poverty. He promised to go if his father would attend to the Talmud and let him attend to the business. I did not ask him if he wore the fringes and ate Kosher, I did not need to; for we lunched together and ham sandwich was the "pièce de résistance." Some eight years later, my journey took me once more through Uncle Isaac's town. The rapid changes taking place in America seemed as nothing compared with those which I saw in this little spot in the Carpathians. There was actually a sidewalk, a cement sidewalk, the cement furnished by Moschele. The old wooden pump upon which generations had expended their surplus strength and patience to coax up the water, had given place to an air pressure pump, sold to the town by Moschele. In the old days, three coal-oil lamps furnished light for the miry street (when there was no moon), and now the town had an artificial gas plant, placed there and partly owned by Moschele. Even as in Florence, this or that or the other is by Michael Angelo; so in this far-away town, generations to come will remember that Moschele ushered in a new era, if not of art, at least of civilization. It was well worth a trip across the ocean to have looked upon Moschele and Moschele's store. First of all was the sign in big letters, "Amerikansky Schtore"; then the outer wall of a new building, covered by huge illustrations of the various things sold therein--a method of advertising made necessary because many of the peasants cannot read. The store itself was full of all sorts of crockery and tin and graniteware, such as had never been seen there before. And oh! the wonder of it! Moschele had already sold one bath-tub, and carried four patterns in stock. "I have not seen such faith, no not in Israel." He also sold building materials, and the yard was full of everything which could not be crowded into the store. That which especially marked the business as American, was the fact that one price was charged to all. Uncle Isaac had withdrawn from the world and mourned the departure of the good old days. I found him sitting in a well-lighted, well-furnished room, clothed in finest broadcloth; for it was the Sabbath. Everything around him was new except the Talmud. Was he happy? No, indeed! "Where can a thing like this lead? Only to destruction! "Who ever heard of such a thing as this before? Moschele rests neither by day nor by night; he prints bills and scatters them as if money were paper; he sleeps with an open window even in the winter, as if he wanted to heat all outdoors, and he has even travelled on the Sabbath!" Then the old man broke down, hid his face in the Talmud, and wept. I think I comforted him; at least I tried to, and as I left him he breathed a prayer for his venturesome son who had deserted the Talmud, and the red pots and green bowls; who certainly was no longer in peril of poverty, but in peril of his soul. One more year passed and in visiting this town, I immediately turned my steps towards the "Amerikansky Schtore." I found its doors closed, and from within came sounds of bitter wailing and lamentation. I did not need to be told that the death angel had made his sorrow-bringing visitation, and my heart grew tender as I thought of the dear old man who would no more bend over the Talmud and mourn the departure of the good old times. A Jewish house of mourning is sadder than can be described. Its atmosphere chills one to the bone, such an air of resigned hopelessness pervades everything. All is sackcloth and ashes; no sign of hope is visible and but little of it lies in the hearts of the mourners. Entering the room, where the family sat upon the ground lamenting its dead, how great was my amazement to find that Uncle Isaac, instead of being the one mourned for, was the centre of the group of mourners; while the one missing was Moschele, the pillar of the household, the founder of the "Amerikansky Schtore." The old man stretched out both hands to me in mute welcome, and when I sat down beside him he told me the sad story which I shall try to give in his own words. "Moschele is dead! What a blow! What a blow! I expected something terrible! I knew this couldn't go on! He grew bolder and bolder, and richer and richer. Have you seen the new store? In all Hungary there is nothing like it. He was a genius; even his enemies admit that." Then the old man fell into silence. "But tell me how he died." "He went out from among us in the morning as strong and straight as an oak, and he was brought home felled to the ground as if struck by lightning. God's ways are mysterious; but oh, my son, my strong, noble son! If only he had not departed from the ways of his fathers I might still have him. "He went to the railroad; they had switched his car of goods where he could not get it--he was buying goods by the carload; nothing like this has ever been heard of before--and he wanted his car; so he helped the men to move it. Moschele wasn't afraid of anything. The men pushed and Moschele fell over a switch and the car went over him." Here a paroxysm of grief silenced the old man and he swayed to and fro, weeping piteously. * * * * * And again I passed through the town, and this time I went to the God's acre with Uncle Isaac, to visit the grave of his son. In weird confusion lay the gray and moss-grown stones. No care is bestowed upon the graves or upon the memorials of the departed; for the body is nothing, the spirit is everything and that is with God. In the centre of the cemetery is a knoll, and upon its crest is a monument such as cannot be found anywhere in Hungary. It is in the shape of a sarcophagus, is hewn out of Vermont granite and is so heavy that it cost over 500 kronen to bring it from the station and put it in place. How much the stone cost no one knows except Uncle Isaac, who erected it for his son Moschele, who wanted everything he had to come from America--even his tombstone. VIII "NOCH IST POLEN NICHT VERLOREN" It has always seemed to me wise to carry letters of introduction, especially when travelling to the East of Europe; often, too, I have found it still wiser to forget that I had them, for a letter of introduction sometimes blocks avenues of investigation, particularly when the problem in question involves the privileged or official classes. This time in following the immigrant tide, I carried one letter which I was eager to deliver; it was given me by a personal friend in America and was to be presented to his mother-in-law in Poland. Not that I was overanxious to meet his mother-in-law, but because Polish women of the upper class are, as a rule, so superior to the men, so ready to talk and talk so well, that I promised myself a rather fruitful call. I did not meet the mother-in-law yet I was not disappointed. Cracow looks dingy even to one who, like myself, is able to illuminate its sombre present in the light of its important if not glorious past. Coming, as I had come, by way of industrial German-Poland, with its glistening newness, from the [Illustration: THE MARKET SQUARE IN CRACOW Here Poland mourns her glorious past, and the returned immigrant assures her of a glorious future.] policemen's helmets to the weather-vane of the new Rathhaus; out of its tense atmosphere of whirring wheels within wheels; out of its geometrically correct parks and new and ever growing building additions, Cracow looked to me as if it had fallen off this revolving planet and settled itself "Where the wicked cease from troubling, and the weary are at rest"--wherever that may be. The only thing that had grown since last I saw the city was its hatred of the Germans. On the doors of many stores on the Rinok were large placards, which, literally translated, read: "The gentlemen travellers from Germany, who wish to come in here to do business with us, are politely requested to stay out." Everything else looked the same, only more dingy; even the Austrian officers who loaf around Havelik's restaurant seemed to have lost something of their newness; for braid and buttons, two of the component elements out of which Austrian officers are made, were tarnished and worn. The Jews' quarter seemed more hopeless and wretched than ever. On the Kazimir were the same haggling crowds in the same small stores, and the same shambling Jews in black, greasy cloaks. In front of the Jesuit church stood the same twelve apostles, and I regret to say that they were just as shabby-looking as their unbaptized brethren. Cracow, the freest portion of divided Poland, is certainly as wretched looking as Warsaw, where liberty dare not lift her head, and it cannot compare with any of the cities of German-Poland where the Prussian gendarme is trying, at the point of the bayonet, to cram German speech down the unwilling throats of Polish children. Why, I asked myself, should this shabbiness, this negligence, this "run-down-at-the-heel" appearance prevail in all the Slavic cities from Belgrade to St. Petersburg, and from Cracow to Irkutsk? Why should this be so of every place, except where the German has stepped in with his iron heel or where the Magyar or the Jew is trying to make of the Slav what he is not and does not care to be? I was tempted to take the first train out of Cracow, so painful to me was this condition of affairs; for I admire the Slavs, although I think I know their weaknesses. But the first train did not go until midnight, and I had nearly eight long hours on my hands. Then I remembered my letter of introduction. I found it with my passport and letter of credit, and looked at it again, to assure myself that it was right. Yes, it was addressed to the Countess So & So, and all the way to the house, I pictured to myself my friend's mother-in-law. She would be rather rotund, for Slavic women incline that way, especially during the full moon of life. She would have gray hair, dark complexion, and a rather pronounced down on the upper lip. That seems to be the tendency of the Polish woman as she grows older; perhaps because of her great vitality. Beneath the portal of a so-called palace, which was pervaded by an incredibly strong smell of whitewash, I presented my card to the porter, who looked somewhat contemptuously at the German name it bore. After long waiting I was guided to the very top story of the house, through clouds of falling mortar and showers of broken brick. The building seemed to be in the possession of masons and plasterers, and the noise they were making was as confusing as the dirt and dust their destructive hands were creating. Two surprises awaited me. The first was, that in spite of the fact that the roof was partly torn off, and confusion reigned supreme, that top story contained some of the most lavishly appointed apartments I have ever seen. Pictures, statuary, and bric-à-brac, created by Polish genius, costly vases, rare flowers, exquisite rugs and furniture; and everything in perfect taste. If Cracow without seemed dingy and dead, here it was brilliant and alive. Thus had I pictured my Slav at his best--imaginative, creative, revelling in the beautiful, lavish of colour, yet creating harmonies. Everything around me seemed to breathe out life, and here I could understand the "Noch ist Polen nicht Verloren," although in the street I had been ready to sing a requiem for the nation. A hundred questions passed through my brain; questions which I would ask the mother-in-law when she appeared. Then came my second surprise. As I sat there thrilled by contending emotions, the curtain opposite me was thrown back gracefully and quickly, not at all as if a short, stout mother-in-law were behind it--and my eyes fell upon one of the most beautiful young women I have ever seen. This again was Poland at her best, if not Poland typified. Her eyes were burningly eloquent, yet showed a hidden pathos; her features looked as if chiselled by a master's hand, yet, in the background, the crude touch was faintly visible. The welcome accorded me was genuinely cordial, yet tinged by the proper reserve. "How is it," I asked, after some conversation, "that you don't look like a mother-in-law, and that you speak English as if you came from Boston?" "Because," she said, with the sweetest smile, "I am as yet only a sister-in-law, and I do come from Boston. That is, I lived there for years after my parents were exiled from Poland. I came back here after my marriage." This, then, was my chance to ask all manner of questions about the Slavs in general and the Poles in particular, and have them answered in the light of a rather unique experience. "Why is Cracow a dead city?" This was certainly a perfectly familiar American question, and I received a characteristic answer. "It is dead because it is 'crying over spilt milk.' Nobody is regarded as a patriot unless he talks about our past glory and blames some one in general and the Germans in particular, for the loss of that glory. We might do great things if we would just do them. We have the vision and the talent; but we wear ourselves out, saying what a great people we are and how superior to all other human beings; yet we accomplish nothing. Look at this house of ours, and you see Poland in miniature. I don't know just how old it is, my husband can tell you; but when it was built, the work was poorly done, and every year it has to be repaired from the bottom up. In America, it would have been torn down years ago, and a new house built, to suit the needs of the times. Instead of that, my husband is spending a fortune trying to make it a fit place to live in, and he never succeeds. "Yet that is the thing he enjoys. He can scold the workmen half the year for dragging their task along, and the other half year he scolds them for having done their work so poorly. "You Americans enjoy being comfortable, we Poles enjoy being miserable. If the Polish men had half the energy of the American men, we would indeed be a great people, and Cracow would be a city worthy of our pride in it." I am not sure that I am recording the Countess' exact words, for to see her talk was such an æsthetic pleasure, that I must have forgotten much of what she said; but I give the substance of her words. "See what America is doing for our peasants!" she continued. "They go there lazy and shiftless, they come back thrifty and industrious, and are rapidly taking the places of our decayed nobility. When they come back, they have what we Slavs have always lacked--initiative. I wish we could export to you all our stock of Counts." I suggested that she might try it as a business venture; for they would bring a good price in our matrimonial market. "Oh, no!" she replied. "We would want them back. They have talent and devotion; they need only to learn to work, and America is the world's great boss." At this point in the conversation the Count entered the room. The Countess had told me that her home was the type of Poland; she had not told me what I soon discovered, that her husband was the typical Pole, both physically and mentally. He was a small man with unmistakable Polish features, which looked well worn; for being a Polish nobleman, he had travelled through life swiftly and indulgently. After scarcely five minutes' conversation, he began talking about the sufferings of the Poles, and what they would do if it were not for those wicked Germans. Then followed what was as nearly a family jar as I care to witness. My hostess opened wide her beautiful eyes, and, in most forceful Polish, gave her liege lord a piece of her mind. "I am tired of your tirades against the Germans. I don't admire their methodical ways, myself; but they are doing things. "Go out of Cracow to the border and look across, and you will see order on that side and disorder on this. Step into a German train; it is clean and efficiently managed, while our cars, from the first-class to the third, are dirty and ill-lighted and the trains go by fits and starts. "Go to the German towns, and you will find business flourishing; while ours stagnates. They don't neglect art, either. Their music may be slower than ours, but it is art; their paintings may not be as brilliant as ours, but they are as artistic. Go to work! Do something worth while! Build from the foundations! Develop some backbone, some character, do better than the Germans, and then you may call them names!" The sensitive nostrils of the husband grew wider and contracted again. He was furiously angry; but facing him was his Americanized wife, and he knew that "Discretion was the better part of valour"; so he permitted his anger to cool while he nervously bit the ends of his moustache. "Yes," he said, ignoring the Countess' outburst; "there is a great future for us Slavs when we all get together. We were in Prague this summer, at the Slavic Congress, and everything between us was so harmonious that I have great hopes of a Slav Confederation. Then we will crush our German oppressors. What do you think of it?" I analyzed the situation thus: "As yet, the Slavs lack racial consciousness. Each group, no matter how small, thinks itself different from the other, and often superior to it. Not only are they divided by small historic dissimilarities, but religious differences have obscured racial unity to such a degree that I have but little hope that their racial consciousness will soon ripen into tangible results. "In the great game of politics, the Slav has given his soul as a pawn, with which popes and patriarchs have gambled. Poland's national life has been lost, not so much by corruption from within, as because the Pole was used as a tool by the Roman Curia in the game of world politics she was playing, and playing unscrupulously." Ah! It was good to see the Countess' dark eyes dancing from pleasure, while I thus analyzed the situation. I continued: "The Slav either lacks sane pride in his race, or he has an overbearing conceit; he is either easily crushed, or he crushes, ruthlessly. Look at this daily paper. In Dalmatia, the Serbs break the windows of the Italians, and tramp madly through the streets proclaiming their superiority over the Latins. In Laibach, the Slovene does the same thing to the Germans. Tears down German business signs, shoots, and is shot in turn. In Prague, the Czechs are constantly bombarding the houses of the Germans, until martial law has to be declared. All this, to the detriment of the development of a rational, racial pride. "And these same boisterous, roistering Slavs, to-morrow will cringe before their Magyar and German masters. "Another thing is in the way," I hastened to add; for I saw that my host was eager to talk: "The Slavs lack collective wisdom. Where there are three thinking Slavs, there are always three quarrels. People who wish to rule must learn to act wisely together; yet in the history of the Slavs this collective wisdom, this inability of one group to acknowledge the equality of the other, has been their greatest lack. "The Russian revolution failed, even as the Polish revolution failed, and as the Czechs' will fail, because they lack collective wisdom. It will take at least a hundred years," I concluded prophetically, "before you Slavs will confederate." My host laughed nervously. "You are a false prophet. It will come in a decade. We will flow together like small rivers into a great stream. We Poles, of course, being the most cultured, the most civilized, and the best prepared to play the leading rôle, will be the stream into which all these lesser rivers will flow. In the great overture of Slavic union, the Pole will play the leading part." To reason with such a man was futile; so I drank my tea and looked at the beautiful lady opposite me, in whom the practical American and the idealistic Pole were so harmoniously blended. Perhaps in her person she was a prophecy of the great day to come. The Count talked incessantly about Poland, its past, its powers, its enemies; but I was not listening. From my silence he thought he had convinced me, and as I rose to go, he asked: "Have you not changed your mind about its taking a hundred years to federate the Slavs?" "Yes," I replied, "I have changed my mind. It will take two hundred years; unless"--and I looked at my fair hostess--"you bring back many more such Polish women from America." IX THE DISCIPLES IN THE CARPATHIANS The river Waag has a broad and beautiful valley in which to indulge its vagabond habits. Now it seeks a channel close to the Carpathian hills on one side, and again rushes far away towards the mountain wall, close to the Austrian border. The Romans appropriately named the river "Waag," the vagabond river, and it lives up to its reputation at all times of the year. One can scarcely find fault with its wandering propensities, for both shore lines are imposing and wildly beautiful; many of the little towns are castle-crowned, while each town and each castle has its myth and story, rivalling those of the Rhine in fantastic invention and equalling them in historic interest. The river Waag, however, is not in Germany, where everything is prohibited, regulated, and subdued, even the turbulent rivers. This is Hungary, the ill-mated spouse in that Austro-Hungarian alliance, in which quarrels are continual, and divorce, with alimony or without it, is threatened every day. Here rivers and races foam and rage; floods of hate beat against historic walls and there are no smooth channels for politics, education, or religion. Struggle there is everywhere. Those who are too weak to fight, resist, and none, however small or unimportant, is ready to surrender. Among those people with strength enough to resist, but not enough to fight, are the Slovaks, who live in wretched villages on both sides of the river. The villages grow more wretched as they climb away from the richer valley to the scant clearings in the mountains, where poverty, ignorance, superstition, and intemperance are the four walls which hem them in from the throbbing life of the century and shut them out from it. No one climbs the almost impassable highways except the Magyar gendarmes, who are the minions of the master race which has subdued the Roumanians, Ruthenians, and Germans within its borders, and is now hard at work to blot out the Slovaks, the feeble remnant of a once powerful people. These gendarmes are but stupid tools in the hands of a stupid government. They erase the Slavic names of villages and paint over them Magyar names, not even remotely related to the original; they prohibit the Slovak language in the higher schools, fall savagely upon assemblies of innocent folk and disperse them by force of arms, annoy unsuspicious travellers and arrest nationalistic agitators and severely punish them. Then they believe that they have changed sluggish Slovak blood into the fiery Magyar fluid, obliterated age-long, historic memories, created in a day a new patriotism, blotted out a vernacular spoken in related languages and dialects by 100,000,000 of people and substituted for it one spoken by a warlike people, numbering not more than 8,000,000, and slowly emerging from Asiatic barbarism. This they believe; but the fact is that no people were ever assimilated by force. Force begets resistance, and the most stupid Slovak, shut in by the four walls of his wretched isba, if he knows nothing else, knows that the Magyar is his enemy, and that the Magyar speech must not lodge in his memory and displace his mother tongue. Although he may have no knowledge of his historic past and no idea of the significance of the Slavic race of which he is a member, he _does_ know that he must resist the Magyars, and resist, only where he cannot fight. Two forces are at work which will soon turn this resistance into fighting. One of them is the unbearable and unreasonable methods used by the Hungarian government, and the other is that giant in the growing, the returned immigrant. The Slovak immigrant comes back less rugged but more agile; for he has passed through trials by fire and by flood; he goes back less docile, for he has had no masters except those that directed his daily task; his mind is awakened, for he has read the uncensored news from the Fatherland; news coloured more or less by the not always scrupulous agitator; added to all this, the Slovak immigrant goes back conscious of his racial inheritance, for he was one of a great Slavic brotherhood, organized on this side the sea, carrying on, unhampered, its agitations against the historic Magyar foe. Above all, he goes back with a bank account, and money is power in business and politics alike. Hat in hand, the Slovak used to wait patiently at the ticket window until the Magyar station agent deigned to notice him and sell him his third-class ticket; then, as if he were an ox being loaded for the stockyards at Budapest, the Magyar conductor would push him into a car crowded by his kind. I have repeatedly seen Slovak men and women miss the only train that could take them to the market town or from it, because the proud Magyar official paid no attention to their repeated request for a ticket. Day after day I have witnessed the incivilities and even cruelties they had to suffer on the trains; but when the Slovak comes back, he knows that the railroad official is only a servant, his servant, and he treats him like one; he demands attention. Woe unto the bribe-taking conductor--and there are no others on the Hungarian railways--who pushes him into a car crowded to suffocation, while more than half the cars of the same class are almost empty, with only here and there a passenger, who is politely treated because he is a Magyar or because he has pressed into the conductor's responsive hand the usual bribe. The Slovak immigrant returns home somewhat of a rebel. The Hungarian government knows this, and were it not for the fact that he brings back money, and spends it freely, his emigration to America would be forbidden. Recently a special police force has been created to watch every outgoing and incoming train, and every third-class passenger who has baggage enough to mark him as an emigrant is detained, rigidly examined, and if permitted to go to America at all, is sent _via_ the Hungarian port of Fiume. On the way he is duly inoculated by the fact that he is an Hungarian subject and that as such he must return. The stupidity and the illiberal spirit of the Hungarian government are nowhere more clearly manifested than in its relation to the religious movements which are American in their origin and which have been transplanted from the Alleghanies to the Carpathians. In the hands of a truly liberal government this new force might become a constructive and saving one to multitudes of people; instead, it is alienated, put on the defensive and limited in its usefulness. When the Y. M. C. A. expedition, of which I was the leader, reached the valley of the Waag, to study the Slovak language and people, serious difficulties to the carrying out of our plans presented themselves. The towns have all become Magyarized by the gendarmes and a multitude of officials. To speak the Slovak language marks one an inferior and renders one an object of suspicion. The village inns are merely dram-shops, kept and generally ill-kept by Jews, who are under the influence of the Magyars, and consequently look down upon the Slovaks. Even had it been possible for us to lodge in one of these inns, our friendly attitude towards the Slovaks would have forbidden it. The gendarmes were alert and agitated from the moment we entered the valley, and when they learned the nature of our errand they were incredulous. "Who ever heard of anybody's having a disinterested concern for the Slovaks? How could they believe that Americans, cold, materialistic Americans, would equip an expedition to study the needs of this downtrodden race, that it might be lifted up? Of course, we were nationalistic agitators sent out by the Slovanic Society of America, to arouse the half-awake Slovak into revolution." That which confirmed them in this suspicion was the fact that the only place where it was posible for us to lodge was the home of Jan Chorvat, Apostle of the Christian faith in the Carpathians, and suspected of being a revolutionary, because he preached to his countrymen in their native tongue; preached to them a Gospel broad enough to embrace all races and nationalities, strong enough to wean them from drink and free enough to loose them from the bonds of superstition and ecclesiastical tyranny. The simple and perfect hospitality which Jan Chorvat and his wife offered us was the product of that faith. Without hesitation they moved into the basement and gave the upper rooms to their guests. The first night of our sojourn with them, our hearts were cheered, and we felt as if we were at home when we overheard their evening devotions. The words of an English hymn, "My Faith Looks up to Thee," came in subdued tones through the thick walls of the room below. Then Jan Chorvat prayed, as only those can pray who walk consciously with God. The sentences which I could translate from the strange tongue knitted us into an unbroken friendship. "I thank Thee, God, that Thou hast put it into the hearts of the American people to send these dear brothers across the sea, that they might learn to speak the tongue of my people so that they may serve them in the far-away land and inspire them to become sober and chaste; good citizens, good husbands, and good brothers. "May these young brothers learn, above all, to love my people with the passion of Jesus, so that they will be able to lead them to the source of all redemptive power--Jesus Christ." Jan Chorvat and his wife, in their outlook upon life, in the strength of their convictions, in their passion for righteousness, would have fitted easily into the church of the Puritans anywhere on this side the sea, where Puritanism is still at its best. In his asceticism Jan Chorvat reminded us of John the Baptist, in the sweetness of his temper of the Beloved Disciple, and, in his zeal and passion for Christ, of the Apostle to the Gentiles. Here was a Slovak who spoke English almost perfectly, who wrote his native language classically, who clung to a noble faith passionately; yet that which bound us to him closely and I must regretfully admit, most closely, was the fact that Jan Chorvat was what he was, because of certain religious influences emanating from America. These influences and ideals, which are slowly growing stronger, are being augmented and reënforced by returning immigrants who come home with a passion for their kinsmen, eager to redeem them from their individual and national sins. The centre of this religious movement is in O Tura, one of those mountain villages isolated, but brought into the world's current by mighty ideals; fit birthplace of a new hope. Here a Protestant pastor ministered in the more or less stereotyped forms of the established faith, and, when he died, left three daughters, the "Roy Sisters," to carry on his work for the people he loved. Hampered by a strict orthodoxy and a suspicious government, they hungered with their people and for them, unconscious of a larger faith and a better way; until so commonplace a thing as a religious newspaper, published by the missionaries of the American Board at Prague, found its way to them. Our credulity has been so severely tested by the narratives of missionaries who hinged mighty consequences upon trivial causes, that here too one is assailed by doubt; until one reads Christina Roy's little story: "How I came to the Light." In simple yet graphic language, she tells of her life in the parsonage, her father's struggle against adverse conditions, her own budding ideals, and finally the important moment when for the first time she came in touch with the vital truths of Christianity as presented in the little Bohemian newspaper, _Bethania_. Upon so slender a thread travelled this mighty current which gave direction to her own life, which has enabled her to enlarge the vision of an oppressed peasantry, and which is now encouraging her and the noble group of men and women around her to attempt the almost hopeless struggle against intemperance. Whether one agrees with the type of theology which these people preach or not, one can but feel that they are in touch with real spiritual forces, and that, by the test of character and of work accomplished, we who travel faster in the paths of what we call progress, are compelled to halt and admire. The students who were the members of my expedition were nearly all recent college graduates and had left their schools with much of their traditional faith unsettled. Any doubts they may have had regarding the doctrine of the Incarnation, as it is commonly interpreted, were lost, when they saw the spirit of Jesus dominating the lives of simple peasants whose dull faces have become radiant, whose animal appetites have been controlled, and whose homes have become the abodes of peace and happiness. To look into the faces of the "Roy Sisters," of Jan Chorvat and his wife, and of hundreds of peasants who come to hear the Gospel preached in true simplicity, was a better definition of the doctrine of the Incarnation than any professor of theology can give. The Atonement, as defined by our orthodox churches and which is such a stumbling-block to the rationalistic mind, lost all its mystery in watching another member of this group, John Rohac[ve]k, at work among the gypsies; loving those whom no one loves, living with them in huts by the wayside and trying with a divine passion to lift them out of age-long Paganism into a wholesome relation to the doctrine: "Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin." Although John Rohac[ve]k believes with all his simple soul that "Jesus paid it all," he is willing and eager to shed his blood for God's despised children, those most neglected of all, the gypsies. For them he has suffered persecution, imprisonment, hunger and thirst, in the true apostolic spirit; and although those American students may never be able to explain to themselves the meaning of the Atonement, they certainly will never be able to say that they have not seen the Atonement "at work." Here among the Slovaks, the seed sown by the American missionary at home and abroad has brought forth more vital fruit, perhaps, than on the home soil. Although these Slovak disciples have gone out to save only this one or that one, they are helping to save a nation and are lifting a race out of degeneration. Nominally, Jan Chorvat was a teacher in the Slovak language to our expedition; and to learn the more effectually, my students often went with him on his tours from village to village. As they walked, he explained to them the grammar [Illustration: AT THE FOOT OF THE TATRA MOUNTAINS] and enriched their vocabulary. How much of the difficult Slovak language they will remember when they come to their task in Pennsylvania, I do not know; but they can never forget the lessons he taught them by his singleness of purpose, his devotion to his people, and his fearless approach to those who he thought needed his admonition. Those students will surely remember that "Though they speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not love, it profiteth nothing." The last day of our stay in Hungary brought us early to a village at the foot of the Tatra mountains, the village of Czorba. Leaving our uncomfortable third-class carriage in which we had spent the night, we were quickly revived by the ozone-laden mountain air, and by the marvellous sight which greeted our eyes. Here were the giant mountains of Hungary which she has proudly pictured highest on her escutcheon. That which most quickened us, however, as a group of strangers, was the greeting extended to us by three men waiting in the early dawn. They had come many miles on foot to meet us, and carried huge loaves of rye bread and bottles of milk for our refreshment. They were to guide us to the top of the mountain. The three men belonged to three antagonistic races of Hungary, and we were Americans, a conglomerate of races; Teutonic, Semitic, and Celtic. Together we broke bread, prayed, sang, and exchanged thoughts about the vital things of life. The man who appeared to be the leader of the group, the brightest and happiest of the three, the one with the largest outlook on life, was a Slovak who had found his vision and his happiness in America. He worked in a blacksmith's shop in Torrington, Conn. Here some one with a passion for common men ministered to him and led him from drunkenness to sobriety, and from his coarse animal existence into fellowship with the divine. He returned home and is daily at his task of shoeing horses and mending broken ploughshares; but he never forgets that what carried him back among his people was his awakened passion for them. At the forge, he preaches the gospel of sobriety, of industry, and of peace; and, as he welds broken iron, so he is trying to weld into union the three alien races that battle round the foot of the Tatra. The task is difficult, and it will be slow. The stupid and materialistic Hungarian government is trying to accomplish this task by throwing people into prison, because they love their mother tongue, or do not lightly regard their historic inheritance. The Slovak Christian will certainly accomplish more than the gendarmes for the unification of these alien peoples in Hungary; for the Gospel is more powerful than guns and bayonets. As we parted from our new friends that last day, we sang: "Blest be the Tie that Binds." The gendarmes, who were watching us, thought we were singing some revolutionary "Marseillaise," and in that they were not mistaken; for there is nothing more revolutionary than the force which "Binds our hearts in Christian Love." X THE GUSLAR OF RAGUSA It is a long time since I first saw Dalmatia, on the eastern shore of the Adriatic. Her hills were denuded of verdure, monotonously barren and ashen gray, with a bit of Paradise here and there along the edge of the sea. In silence, her ancient cities mourned a turbulent past of which they were reminded by walls and palaces which the Romans built, as only the Romans knew how to build. Although these walls have felt the force of Venetian battering-rams, of French, Turkish, and Austrian cannon-balls, they still stand, silent witnesses of a civilization which carried culture in the path of its conquest, and brought a certain kind of liberty to its captives. The Venetians took away these liberties, and, in exchange, gave the Dalmatians churches, whose graceful campaniles tower over the gray and solid Roman walls. The French came and went; but, far as the eye can see, left nothing behind them. Austria brought soldiers who are still there; nesting in the forts, commanding the mule-paths [Illustration: COAST OF DALMATIA From here, come virile children, of the stony soil, to mine our coal and dig our trenches.] and seaways and hated by the native population, which is Slavic with a sprinkling of Italian, both races being antagonistic to the ruling power. That Dalmatia has been badly governed, no one denies. It has been purposely kept out of touch with the mainland, the old motherland behind it, Croatia. Only by the sea had it access to other peoples, to whom it rarely went and who seldom came to it. Of all Dalmatian cities, Ragusa is the proudest, even as it is the poorest. Once the seat of a virile republic, she sent out armadas for conquest, watched from her sea-girt walls the struggles between Venice and the Ottomans, and, by force of arms, helped to decide the destinies of nations. Ragusa's glory was short, but memory is long; although her harbour is choked and useless, her sea-wall in ruins, and her pavements grass-grown; still under marble porticoes half-sunk into the ground, sit the grandees of the city, smoking the Turkish _czibuk_ and musing over those golden days when Ragusa called herself the "Queen of the Adria," and fought with Venice for its supremacy. On the corner of the Stradona and the Piazza, there stood all day long an old minstrel, who strummed monotonous strains on the _gusla_, while he sang the epics inspired by centuries of conflict. As he sang, the grandees smoked and mused; while the lesser folk cobbled _opankee_, embroidered garments after Oriental fashion, and wove tiny strands of silver into crude filigree. The old _guslar_ was minstrel, poet, and historian. It was he who told me marvellous stories of the time when in each of those palaces on the Stradone there lived a statesman-soldier, at war politically with one half his world and in social rivalry with the other half. The city's gentlefolk were divided into the _Salamanchesi_ and the _Sorbonnesi_; those who sent their sons to the University of Salamanca and those who sent them to the Sorbonne. These divergent cultural currents kept the nobility apart and gave ample cause for petty quarrels; many a Ragusan Romeo's love for his Juliet has furnished material for a romance and for a beautiful funeral. Against these old walls and old traditions the immigrant tide has been beating for the last ten years, carrying away the grandee's sons, numbers of whom are now digging coal in Pennsylvania, or waiting on table in some cheap restaurant in New York. Yet, whether he lives in a wretched boarding-house in a Pittsburg "Patch," or accepts the modest tip his patrons give him, the son of a Ragusan grandee never forgets his nobility. These immigrants, too, have gone home again, and make their presence felt, economically and socially. They have repaired the old palaces and brought money into circulation; but the old _guslar_, who stood on the corner of the Stradona and the Piazza, and whom I sought out after these ten years, had his story to tell. "Yes, Signor, many have gone to America and have come back, and will go again; but, Signor, that must be a bad country, a wild country. They come home and walk carelessly up and down the Stradona, the finest street in the world, every house a palace--and they talk of it with disrespect! "Why, Signor, they say that in America there are finer streets than this, and bigger houses, and they laugh at the _Dogana_, Signor--at the _Dogana_, where our _Principes_ and our _Consiglios_ made treaties with the great powers, where we received the ambassadors of the Sultan and of the Doges of Venice! "Signor, they walk up and down the street with their heavy-soled shoes, talking loudly, and making such a noise that the grandees cannot take their siestas undisturbed. "Yes, Signor, there are some of them here now. They came back a fortnight ago, a man and his two daughters. A good-for-nothing he is, Signor. Think of it! Ah, listen!" He paused abruptly. I listened. The sweet, harmonious quiet was rudely broken; the air, full of the fragrance of oleander blossoms, seemed suddenly vitiated; the Monte Sergio and the swaying palms beneath it, which made so marvellous a picture, seemed to drop with a crash out of their frame of sky and sea. "Signor, listen!" And the old _guslar_ trembled from anger and pain. It was the grinding of a phonograph which struck our ears. "Listen, Signor! That they bring out of America! Out of your barbaric country!" True enough; they were the painfully familiar notes of "canned ragtime" at its worst. "Signor, that man has come back with his two daughters. They can't speak a word of their mother tongue; and oh, Signor! they walk up and down the Stradona without a duenna, they look boldly at the men, and they keep their jaws moving constantly, even when they do not speak. "The father drinks, he drinks maraschino by the bottleful and he defiles the pavements of our ancient streets by his polluted spittle. You want to go to see him?" The _guslar_ looked deeply hurt. He feared that the phonograph had lured me from him. "No, I shan't go until you play and sing for me." He took his _gusla_ and moved his bow gently over its single string, while he sang of "Mustapha who came riding on a dapple gray stallion, with thirty Pashas as his escort. He struck a glass of wine from the hand of a Servian hero, who vowed that he would shed the black blood of the Turk," which, after many monotonous verses, he did. "Signor, I can't sing very well--ah, there it is again!" While he had been singing about Mustapha, who died so many years ago, the phonograph bawled lustily about "Tammany, Tammany," which, unfortunately, is very much alive. I made my peace with the _guslar_ by putting into his hand a liberal fee; then I followed the sound of the phonograph which had been switched from "Tammany" to the song of "A nice young man, that lives in Kalamazoo." On the lower floor of a house in one of the small streets which divide the Stradona, I discovered the phonograph and its owner, a man neither of the nobility nor noble. His knowledge of America extended as far as Brooklyn and the Austro-Italian docks, near which he had established a boarding-house. Of course, he had come home rich, and only for a visit. "Who could live in Ragusa after Brooklyn?" He told me that he made a great deal of money selling liquor, and acknowledged that he sold it without a license. Besides that, the sailors brought over various articles for which he found a ready market. His case would not be worth recording were it not for the fact that he may be looked upon as a man who has been spoiled by his sojourn with us. I doubt, though, that there was anything to spoil; evidently, he was a man of poor breeding and low moral standards. In America, he had found an outlet for his evil tendencies, and a bad business which offered opportunities for lawlessness. His daughters were more interesting than he; for they came back perfect strangers, into the environment which they had left as children. They had quite forgotten Italian and spoke Serbo-Slavic very poorly; while their English was typical. "Golly! But Ragusa is a bum town!" The Adriatic shore could not be compared with the sea they knew, bordered as it was by Coney Island. "No, sir-ree! Give me Coney Island, and you can have this two for a cent, Gravoosa." And I suppose, the peninsula of Lapad also, circled by palms and olives and set in a sea of turquoise blue. When I mentioned the _guslar_, one of the girls said that he "might make a hit at Coney Island as a side-show." "Were there many Dalmatians in America?" I asked the father. "You bet! They have gone from along the whole ---- coast, and there is one ---- little town near Lucin Piccolo where there is not an able-bodied man left. They'll all come over when they get the ---- money. The more come the better for me." His place was the centre to which they came and from which they radiated. "What do they do in America?" I asked. "Oh! any old thing. It all depends. There is one back here now." "He's a regular big head," interrupted one of the girls; "thinks he's the whole cheese. He's a newspaper man. I suppose he'll be on the Stradona to-night." Every evening after sunset, all Ragusa wakens out of its day-dreams and is on parade in the Stradona. Demure maidens come out from behind latticed windows, reflecting in their garments the sombre hues borrowed from Venice, and a riot of Oriental colours. They are dark-eyed creatures, these maidens, and their faces, as well as their garb, show the mixture of Latin and Slav; for this is the battling-ground of the two races, the persistent Slav being in the ascendency. The youths followed at a distance; for propriety is one of the assets of Ragusan society. Noiselessly they walked up and down over the grass-grown pavement, and, when one heard the heavy-soled shoe striking it, one recognized the stranger; and by that sign I knew the Ragusan-American newspaper man. A graceful, swarthy young fellow he was, upon whose face his new environment had already written its story. His eyes had lost their melancholy look, for he had escaped the thraldom of the past and seemed like a man fully awake to the present. When we met, he looked at my shoes, I looked at his, and the contact was made. Interesting, indeed, his story was, beginning with his running away from home, one of those ancient palaces on the Stradona. His assets were: money enough to take him to Triest, third-class, a large stock of inherited pride, and nothing else. At that time there was no passenger service from Triest, but there were freight steamers and a chance to serve as steward to the officer's mess. Three weeks of life on the sea and then New York. There he served his apprenticeship in the art of "getting along" by walking up and down Broadway, hungry and cold, sleeping in "Sailor's Boarding Houses," and finally in the police station. At last came a turn in his fortunes, through getting work as a strawberry-picker in New Jersey, then working in a restaurant in Pennsylvania as waiter and cook. After much chance and change, he had become the owner of an Italian newspaper, whose chief object was to chronicle the happenings in the Fatherland, for the edification of his countrymen. It had been a rough road, but it was worth the struggle; for it led to usefulness and into life. He thought that his countrymen always experienced unusual difficulties in America. "The masses of them are illiterate to an alarming degree; bound by traditions, tribal in their social outlook, and serve as so much carrion for those birds of prey, the steamship companies' agents, the _padrone_, the boarding-house keeper, the saloon, and the venal justice of the peace." Our national moral character he interpreted in the light or the experiences of his countrymen, and his judgment was not a flattering one. Yet he admitted that America is a blessing to Dalmatia. It has relieved bitter poverty, mentally awakened the people, and has broken down worthless traditions. In Dalmatia, as elsewhere, the returned immigrant has sharpened the hunger for political liberties, and has intensified the struggle between the oppressed and the oppressor. Wherever the government was aided by the reactionary church, the people left the church. This is especially true of the northern towns of the peninsula, between Zara and Triest. "Yes, indeed! The returned immigrant causes much trouble, and I am no exception. I wound my parents by my democratic ways, and I have forgotten many of the niceties of their social life. "Yes, it was I who hurt the _guslar's_ feelings by telling him that there are streets in New York finer than the _Stradona_, and houses bigger than the _Dogana_. Ah, yes; the returned immigrant causes both sorrow and annoyance. Just watch that man and his two daughters." There they were; the man from Brooklyn, garishly attired. His daughters walked proudly beside him, heedless of the fact that over those pavements generations of Ragusa's great men had walked to victory or to death. The Brooklyn man seemed quite oblivious of the fact that these people whom he passed so carelessly were the sons and daughters of nobles and heroes. He did not lift his hat to them or step aside to let them pass; his daughters occupied more than their share of space, with their gorgeous and exaggerated hats, and smiled encouragingly on the young men whom they met, although strangers to them. Later, there was much discussion of these "Americans," among those who spend the evening at the "Café Arciduca Federigo"; smoking, singing, sipping _granite_, and talking about the good old days, those quiet, dreamy days which they had spent on this matchless spot, watching the sea as it encircled with its phosphorescent splendour the Island of Lacroma, or when, beaten by the Bora, it lashed itself into fury against the ancient walls. The young newspaper man told me much about the pride and poverty of his countrymen, of their love for this fair spot, of their moral standards, and their unbroken word. The _guslar_, standing in front of the café, began tuning his Jeremaic instrument, looking wistfully, as he did so, at the stranger who had given him so liberal a fee. He needed but slight encouragement to begin his plaintive recitative. A few lines clung to my memory; for they fitted so well into my conversation with the young Ragusan: "Go out and sing of right and truth, Of valour and of manly strife; Better far, thy tongue grow mute Than that thou sing of baser life For common gain." In the middle of a verse, he dropped his instrument hopelessly. "Oh, Signor! These terrible Americans! Listen!" The quiet of that matchless night was being assailed by the awful refrain of: "There'll be a hot time in the old town to-night." "Ah, me, Signor! This will be my ruin! All the young men are at that man's house drinking like beasts; they no more care for me, or for the heroic songs of their ancestors, and while they used to give me _kreutzer_, they now give me _heller_, if they give me anything." The old minstrel sighed profoundly and disappeared into the darkness, his _gusla_ under his arm; while from the tin horn poured a medley of songs, the climax of which was: "A nice young man that lives in Kalamazoo." The sorrowful old man and his grief made me feel guilty, as if I were responsible for that terrible, torturing, unmusical outburst which disturbed the peace of the wonderful night. After the _guslar_ had left us, the newspaper man rowed me in his father's _barquetta_ across the shallow harbour, as far as the shadow cast by the gigantic palm trees on the shore. Every time his oars dipped into the water they brought to the surface a flame of fire; yet amid all the splendour of that night, I could think of nothing but the sad old musician. Many months passed and I had quite forgotten the _guslar_ of Ragusa. Again I was at the seashore; but it was the turbulent Atlantic--not the sunny Adriatic; Coney Island--not Lacroma. Many confusing strains of music were in deadly conflict with one another; myriads of glowing lights encircled grotesque buildings of all descriptions; through streets given over to pleasure, crowded in one day nearly as many people as there are inhabitants in all Dalmatia. I certainly did not think of Dalmatia, until I stood before an "Oriental Palace of Pleasure," in front of which I saw the man from Brooklyn, resplendent in a gorgeous Oriental costume, "barking" to the multitude the sensuous pleasures which could be enjoyed within "for the small sum of one dime, only ten cents." When he paused for breath, I heard peculiar, strange, and yet familiar music. Following the sounds, I found on a balcony, in a blaze of electric lights, the _guslar_ of Ragusa. When he finished playing, he too cried: "Tenee cenee, onlee tenee cenee! C-o-m-e een! Only tenee cenee!" XI WHERE THE ANGEL DROPPED THE STONES Prince Nicolas of Montenegro does not remember me, and why should he? It was many years ago, and I was one of 20,000 guests who suddenly descended upon his little capital of 5,000 inhabitants, during its national festivities in honour of the Prince of Bulgaria. Cetinje's two modest hostelries, in which under normal conditions twenty strangers might have found crude comforts, were packed from cellar to garret with the entourage of the royal guest. The rest of us, mostly natives and a few strangers, roving about the odd corners of Europe, were sheltered in private homes, hospitably thrown open by Cetinje's citizens, who still believe in hospitality as a virtue, which they practice on all occasions. I did not know until the morning after my arrival that my host was the Minister to the Exterior. The Interior, being so small, needed no minister, I suppose. His house, a rude stone structure, was only a degree better than that of the peasant; the bed was softer than his, for it was not the stone floor. The food was practically the same; a monotonous diet of maize bread and mutton, the staple food of rich and poor alike, except that the peasant eats only the bread and sells the mutton. To find that my boots were blacked by a relative of the Minister to the Exterior, and that by virtue of being his guest I was also to be a guest at the banquet given by Prince Nicolas in honour of his princely visitor, produced in me no little feverish excitement; revealing the fact that I was a mere mortal, and as much pleased by my aristocratic surroundings and the prospect of royal favour, as if I were not a student of social phenomena with a strong bias towards democracy. It is of no consequence to chronicle these facts here, except that they led to a passing acquaintance with the Prince and his family. His youngest son was then a growing youth of exceedingly lovable character. At that time the Queen of Italy was a visitor in her father's simple home. The Prince is a writer of some ability, and I was glad to be able to tell him that I was familiar with his contributions to Serbic literature. The royal favour accorded me stood me in good stead; for not only could I watch the pageant and other festivities from a splendid vantage ground, but it proved very helpful in my journey through the principality, which I traversed from Nyegusi to Lake Skutari, and from the Albanian Alps to the Herzegovina. The country seemed like a huge eagle's nest, perched amid inhospitable mountains. Here all men were warriors, from the time they were weaned from their mother's breast, until they sank into their rock-hewn graves. The women reared the young, tilled the bit of precious soil found among a waste of boulders, and carried mutton carcases to the market at Podgoricza or Cattaro, the largest trading town in Dalmatia. On the return home, they brought coffee and spring water, the two luxuries of those arid mountain heights. These poor homes, although rarely better than stables, sheltered people full of heroism, hospitality, and primitive social virtues; as well as a passionate hatred for the "Schwab," their Austrian neighbour, and the Turk, their ancient foe. The men lived in anticipation of war, not much caring whom they fought; for peace meant a stagnant poverty, while war held glory and pillage. It was the day of the farewell festivities for the Bulgarian Prince, that the peasant subjects of Prince Nicolas passed in review before their patriarch, who was the supreme judge and arbiter of their fate. The menials kissed the hem of his coat, while the heads of different tribes kissed his cheek. Each man in passing before his lord told his troubles openly, and waited for the word of cheer or of judgment. With little variation they all told of utter poverty--the kind of poverty which meant that from the month of August until the next autumn, there would be no bread; for the crops had failed. There was no prospect of relief, the Prince himself being poor and in debt; and the country had no resources. I proposed emigration as a remedy, and rather impatiently the Prince dismissed the suggestion, saying that every warrior was of value in this mountain fastness; soldiers were its one asset, and they might at any moment be needed by their godmother, Russia, if not by himself. Soldiers we did not need, I told him; the war with Spain was over, and even during its progress, we had soldiers to spare; but if his men would learn to "turn their spears into" crowbars, and "their swords into" shovels (taking liberties with a prophetic utterance) they would find opportunity for work, if not for valour; for a good wage, but not for pillage. I knew they would come and they did. An apostolic band of twelve men first; seventy and more, following; three hundred on the next steamer, after which a temporary check. The three hundred, having violated the contract labour law, were sent home. Then, like a flood, too long held back, came thousands, scattering through the Alleghanies and the Middle Western plain, as far as the Missouri River, and into California, where a colony of many hundreds at Los Angeles is in Paradise; although first they went through many a purgatory. Ten years, and ten times ten years, which in Montenegro's past were more or less glorious, had left the country practically unchanged; except as the present ruler had tried to root out some of its latent barbarisms. Here Slavic traditions at their best were immovably intrenched, and here were the bulwarks against the best and the worst in our civilization. Neither steam nor electricity, those destroyers of archaic simplicity, had yet entered the country, nor had our vulgarities of French dress and morals driven out the simple virtues or the picturesque national garb, worn by the Prince and by the peasant. On all sides, Montenegro's neighbours, the Albanians, Bosnians, Herzegovinians, and even her brother, Servia, in the lowlands of the old cradle home--had all yielded, in a greater or lesser degree, to Mohammedan influences. Montenegro alone remained an unsealed fortress, in which the crescent never supplanted the cross; nor did the horse's tail wave from its flag-staff, on which once and forever had been unfurled the victorious colours--red, black, and white. The dawn of the twentieth century found the principality still Homeric and patriarchal, but the brief years since its opening have been significant ones. During those years her sons for the first time left "their crags and unsealed passes" to go out upon so base an errand as seeking work across the Atlantic, later to return with the booty of a bloodless conquest. About ten years after my last visit to Montenegro, I was again journeying towards it upon that serpentine road from whose every winding the truly matchless bay can be seen, receding with every turn, hemmed in more and more by the chalk cliffs which look like petrified clouds. Almost barren of verdure they are, but full of an awful majesty; until they blend with the bay, when one can see beyond them the blue Adriatic. The ships upon her bosom are moved by a gentle _sirocco_, while the islands on the Dalmatian coast, hidden in the shining green of the olive and the yellower tints of fig leaves, make patches of colour which seem to be floating away in the mist rising at noontime from the sea. Suddenly one turns northward and faces gray stones, walls of stone, fields of stone--nothing but stone--and that is Montenegro. My peasant driver told me that when God made the earth, He saw that He had made it good, with the exception of the stones, of which there were too many. He called His angel Gabriel and told him to take a bag as large as the ends of the four winds and go down to earth, pick up the surplus stones and cast them into the sea. The devil, who delighted in the stones and the trouble they would give humanity, flew after the busy angel. When Gabriel had picked up all the superfluous stones on earth, and was about to drop them into the Adriatic, his Satanic Majesty took his pocket knife, cut a hole in the angel's bag, and all the stones dropped on to that part of the earth where Montenegro is situated. The peasant's story accounts for the topsy-turvy position of the stones; now piled high as mountains, then solid walls of stone, and, again, huge boulders scattered about, with plenty of smaller ones between. There are some fertile spots, especially the famous _Brda_, where flocks find pasture; and there is an occasional field large enough for a horse to turn with its plough. Most of the country, however, is barren, and it is from this bleakest mountain region that the exodus to America has taken place. At Nyegusi, as usual, there was an hour's wait, and a chance to refresh the inner man with cheese and coffee. In this primitive hostelry one noticed the first evidences of the changes wrought. Nyegusi, the birthplace of the Prince, under the shadow of the historic Lovczin, has been more drained of its men in these times of peace than ever it was in time of war. [Illustration: WHERE THE ANGEL DROPPED THE STONES AND NOW DROPS DOLLARS A typical landscape in a district of Montenegro, from which immigration has set in.] When last I passed through it, there stood before every one of the wretched stone huts a giant-like figure, attired in his native costume, which, according to Montenegrin standards, was worth a fortune, and did indeed represent its wearer's wealth. Ancient and costly weapons protruded from his belt, generously wound around his portly body. Thus armed, he paraded up and down the rocky streets of Nyegusi, or lounged in the village inn, smoking cigarettes and drinking his _raki_, if he had the wherewithal. At the time of which I write, the streets were deserted, save for the women, who bent beneath their heavy burdens of wood which they bring down from the ravines in the Lovczin mountain. Old men sat wearily on the stone walls which surrounded their small fields, and every one told of a son who had gone "to Amerikee." One toothless woman could tell her age only approximately, by the number of sons she had borne; and there were eighteen. Ten of them were in America; the others had been killed in border warfare. In this same town I met a mother of twenty-two sons, twenty of whom had lost their lives in battle. The two survivors were the innkeepers of Nyegusi. The inn itself was the same as when first I saw it, with its beaten earth floor, and walls bare, except for the _icon_, a splendid bit of Byzantine workmanship; but since I drank the excellent coffee there, ten years ago, more than 5,000 braves have been under its roof, bound for my own country or returning from it. Now the room is full of them, all homeward bound, spending money far too freely in drinking and gambling; two vices which, although taken with them from their mountains, they bring back in exaggerated form. I must confess to a sense of disappointment when I saw them beside the Montenegrin who had remained at home. The sombre dress of our civilization was a poor exchange for the brilliant, native costume. The hard labour the men performed in America had robbed them of their erect and elastic forms, and they looked like the menials of their brothers who had been keeping watch against the "Schwab," in the shadow of the Lovczin. The change was not unlike that which has taken place in the American Indian who left the war-path to repair the steel path of the railroad. The men in the inn, nearly thirty of them, belonged to all parts of the little realm, from Niksic in the North and Grahova on the Herzegovinian border, to Cetinje and Podgoricza, its centre. They had gone out in neighbourhood groups, members of one tribe; but, returning, had become badly mixed. Some in the original group had failed, while others had succeeded; some decided to remain in America, others were glad to come home. Most of those in the inn had been West, and knew only the rigorous side of our industrial life, and to no European people could the experience have been so trying; while none could have adjusted itself less easily to it. The complaints as registered in Cetinje were many, and on the whole justified. They may be classified as follows: Cheated by Employment Agencies 80% Cheated by Austrian boarding-house keepers 60% Money lost by giving bribes to Irish-American bosses who promised jobs which were never given 36% Rough treatment by bosses 72% Robbed by railroad crews in Montana 80% "Shanghaied"--made drunk and railroaded from St. Louis to Southern Kansas 15% Robbed of money and tickets before departure for home 40% This represented the dark side of the experience of the Montenegrin immigrant. The brighter side cannot so easily be classified. As with other groups, so with those; America meant an enlargement of their horizon. Most of them had earned money and meant to buy land; some of them had an eye to the undeveloped mineral wealth of their country, and two carried home enriched lives through having attended an evening school, where they had learned to read and write some English. All were still loyal sons of their mountain home, and only three of the thirty in the inn meant to try their luck again. The innkeeper thought emigration a great boon, and it was, to him; for the emigrants all passed through Nyegusi whether they came or went, and that meant revenue. Externally, Cetinje, the capital, is still the same; although there the greatest change has taken place since my last visit. Cetinje now has a parliament, and its post-office officials have something more to do than smoke cigarettes. Its storekeepers are enriched by the inflow of money; the women respond to the new spirit; for a comparatively large number is going to America, and a few have already gone. The men, especially the old peasants, find this new spirit most trying. One of them, in a little stone hut at Kolasin, said: "The women come home after three years' absence and the devil has got into them. They _sit_ in my presence and demand to eat when I do! "What kind of country is that anyway which encourages such things? Is it a woman's country?" I met one woman whose son I knew in the "States." He is one of the few that have prospered, and he means to stay. His mother's little cottage on the outskirts of Cetinje shows plainly the influence of America. On the walls hang many gaudy calendars, and a crayon portrait of her son, in an elaborate frame. "Tell me," she said, as she pointed to a bulky newspaper printed in Scranton, Pa., and sent by her son, as a curiosity, "how many weeks does it take them to read it?" Her son sends her ten dollars every month, which means fifty kronen. "Only the good Princess has so much money of her own!" the proud mother said; and I am not so sure that even the Princess has it. There must be many such huts; for the postmaster told me that $30,000 came into this little rocky nest in one year; more money than passed through the hands of that postmaster in twenty preceding years. In a country so impoverished, this money cannot help being a blessing. It is true, that after a brief glimpse of Montenegro I left it with feelings decidedly mixed as to the benefits it has derived from emigration. The Prince is less a patriarch than he was and not so accessible to his subjects; for he has felt the force of a revolution, small but significant. The grand opera setting of the villages and towns is being destroyed; men no more strut about like stage heroes, waiting for their cues. The picturesque is going, is almost gone, and will go entirely; poverty, extreme poverty, pinching, grinding poverty is going too, and will soon disappear. Men drink more fiery _raki_ and gamble more; women are beginning to lift up their heads and walk _beside_ the men, not _behind_ them. I am convinced that the relative of the Minister to the Exterior would not now black my boots; for which I rejoice, although the old braves complain and say: "America is a woman's country." Montenegro, hemmed in on three sides by Austria and on the other side by Turkey, and all around by poverty, has found an outlet and relief by way of the sea. Progress has come slowly and from far away and she must pay the price; yet when all is considered, she ought to be glad to pay it. In talking to the postmaster of Cetinje, I referred to my driver's story, about the angel's dropping the stones upon Montenegro, and said: "It must have been a poor sort of angel; for he didn't pick them up again." "Ah, well! He is trying to make up for it. Look here;" and he showed me advices from New York for 1,500 kronen. "If that angel keeps up the good work, we will have a krone for every stone that he dropped on our soil. Don't you say anything against our angel!" XII "THE HOLE FROM WHICH YE WERE DIGGED" It was some sort of saint's day, one of the many; this day, just before the harvest time, served at least one useful purpose. It brought together the _latifondisti_, the landowners, and the _contadini_, the labourers, who, after mass, bargained with one another for the harvest wage. There was a time when the _padrone_ had a dozen men at his heels begging to procure them work; but now the tables are turned, and smartly dressed men court these rough toilers of the Abruzzi, and are happy, when, over a bottle of wine and a hand-grasp, the bargain is sealed. In less than twenty years wages have increased from sixteen to sixty cents a day, and the difference in the attitude of the two classes towards each other is correspondingly great. The withdrawal from the intense congestion in Italy of nearly 2,000,000 toilers in the last ten years, accounts for the change in the economic condition of the common field labourer of that country. No phase of human relations has been left unaffected by this remarkable movement away from the home soil. "Just as you wish, Signor," I heard a man say to one of the upper class. "Three _lire_ and not a _centesimo_ less." The landowner watched the labourer closely, and when he saw him approached by another landowner, ran to him and sealed the bargain. "Ah, Signor! Emigration has done this!" the labouring man said when I entered into conversation with him. "There are not men enough left to do the work, and if it weren't for the hard times in America, I would have charged him two _carini_ (about sixteen cents) more; but there are some men back from America who have not done so well, although they too will not hire out for less than three _lire_. They say that in America they have received three times as much." The gentleman to whom I introduced myself, and who was suspicious that I might be in his parts encouraging emigration, took a different view of the situation. "It is a curse, sir! Why, sir, you rob us of our men; of our strongest men, and leave only the aged, the women and the children! "I have fields still unploughed, although it is June, and the bringing in of my crops will cost me three times as much as it did ten years ago." "Didn't he get a much better price for his produce?" I asked. "Yes, indeed! Perhaps I am no worse off financially than before; but worse than the higher wage is the changed attitude of the common people towards the landowner. Signor, those who come back are worse than the Socialists! The Socialists simply talk and argue; most of our common people cannot understand what they mean. They have always known that God made some rich and some poor, they were content with their cheese and their olives; but these men who come back from America walk through the streets as if they were our equals. They wear just such clothing as we do; shoes without hobnails and starched shirts and collars. "They no longer greet us respectfully as they used to, and the way they spend money looks to these deluded _contadini_ as if they had _found_ it in the streets of New York. "Everybody in my town who has anything to sell, sells it or borrows from his friends in America and goes there. Last year over 1,600 went out of my town, which has less than 6,000 inhabitants. The saints alone know what will become of us! And the worst of it is, Signor, that they lose respect for us!" Travelling from Naples towards Calabria, I noticed in the second-class compartment a group of Italians returning from America for a visit to their native hill town. Among all the people of this class that I had seen, these were the most remarkable. They were better dressed than others, spoke English fluently, were cleanly in their habits and travelled second-class. "Oh, yes! Italy is beautiful!" said one of them, who I afterwards learned was a stationary engineer at New Brunswick, N. J. His finely chiselled face showed his delight as he watched the landscape. "But America is more beautiful on the insides. You ask why? I will tell you. "I was born in a small hill town of 3,000 inhabitants. My parents were poor labourers and I was born in a hole in the wall. I will show you the wall when we come to the town. No windows, no chimney, no nothing. Our goats and pigs had another hole, smaller than ours; but the goats and pigs were not ours, they belonged to the landlord and when the pigs were killed we got half. We had just one meal of the meat and the rest had to be sold to those who could afford to eat it; we couldn't. It was a great day though when we had that taste of meat, and I don't think I have ever tasted such good meat since. Of course we had meat only three or four times a year. "My father and mother both had to work in the fields. They left the hole in the wall at four o'clock in the morning and came back to it at seven in the evening. When I was a baby, my mother carried me along on her back; later my sister carried me and I can't remember the time when one of my sisters didn't carry a baby out into the field. "I worked from the time I was seven; we all worked when there was work to do. I never was hungry when the melons and the figs were ripe; but I never remember having eaten as much bread as I wanted. I remember I wanted to be older than I was, for the children got about an inch more bread for every year, as they grew older. "I went to school to the _padre_, and he taught me the _Pater Noster_ and the _Ave Maria_ and just enough writing to sign my name. When I was fourteen years old, an uncle who lived in New York sent money to my father and mother to come over. Never can I forget when that letter came. I nearly went crazy. I ran around to every hole in the wall and called out: 'We are going to America! We are going to America!' "My father was crazy, too; for he gave the letter-man half a _lira_ for bringing him such a letter and reading to him the good news. Everybody in the town knew of our good fortune; for the letter-man told all those to whom we could not speak, because they were above us. When we went to Naples I thought I was going to heaven, and on the ship, in spite of seasickness, I was happy; because for the first time in my life I had enough bread to eat. "I can't tell you how I felt when we came to New York; but at Ellis Island they turned all my joy into weeping. Two of the younger children had eye disease and they wanted to send all of us back. My uncle said he would take care of us older children, so they let us in and sent father and mother and the younger ones back. It was terribly sad and father and mother cried; but although I too cried, I felt very happy because I would not have to return to Italy. We promised them to come back and here we are." These then were the older children, three sons and one daughter, who had been admitted to their heaven and were now coming home to the _padre_ and _madre_ who had lived in the hole in the wall. "What do you think of emigration?" The young woman answered: "Signor, it works like a miracle! I used to pray many a time, when I went to sleep, that the good saints would work a miracle and wake me in another world, where I could wear real stockings and ribbons, and now my prayer is answered and the miracle has happened." Indeed it was a miracle. "Bessie," as the brothers called her, was transformed and transfigured. She was more "stylish" than the landowner's wife who travelled in the next compartment, and I feel sure that her gown cost more than that of a certain American woman who shared with me the pleasures of the journey Bessie was engaged to be married to a countryman of hers, who is head gardener in a cemetery in one of New York's suburbs. "When we are married we will live in a cottage all our own, Signor, at the edge of that beautiful cemetery; six rooms it has and a bath room!" A miracle indeed! From the hole in the wall to a six-room cottage. Of course this group is not typical. These people went to school in America during their youth. The boys went to night school in New York and the girl went to the public school; they had entered profitable trades. Stone-cutting, engineering and dressmaking. What was perfectly normal in their history was the effect that their going away has had upon the town from which they came. Does the father live in the hole in the wall? No indeed. They sent home money enough to build him a house and buy about fifteen acres of land. The children at home were all sent to school. Yes, times have changed. All the children in that town are sent to school; for the immigrant father writes to his wife: "Let the children learn how to read and write. We who cannot, have to remain beasts of burden, while those who can, rule over us." My travelling companions grew greatly excited as the train drew near their home. They collected their numerous packages and then looked longingly at the town, perched upon a high hill and crowned by a magnificent castle. "Look, Signor, look! You see that wall, the old city wall? You see those holes? I was born in one of them!" Tears stood in Bessie's eyes. No doubt she thought of the six-room cottage and the miracle. The station, in the shadow of the town, was much like other such stations. There was the usual donkey cart. Pompous officials bustled about and a few _carabinieri_ walked up and down, proud of their fuss and feathers. The _padre_ and _madre_ were there, and a throng of brothers and sisters and relatives, who greeted the travellers with noisy and affectionate salutations. Bessie's _madre_ held her at arm's length at first, as if to be sure that this fine _Signorina_ was really the little girl she left behind in New York twelve years ago. Ah, me! It was a love-hungry heart to which Bessie was pressed. And the boys! What pride shone on the father's face! Any father might be proud of them, and I was prouder than the father. "See what America does for your men!" I cried to a portly gentleman who stood beside us at the window, watching the interesting scene. He did not answer; for the train puffed and screeched, and the cars lurched as they were drawn around the curves. For a long time we could see the donkey cart piled high with baggage, the happy people following it. The train came closer and closer to the walls of that ancient town, and on its southern side we saw again the holes in the wall, swarms of little children, a gray, tired donkey and picturesque dirt and confusion. At sight of those holes in the wall, I repeated my remark. "See what America does for your men!" "Ah!" replied the gentleman, "you see only one side of it; the bright side. There is a dark side to emigration, as there is to an olive leaf. We have given you nearly two million of our best men, to do your dirty and dangerous work." "Yes," I replied; "but we pay them a decent wage; more wages in one year than you pay them in ten." It was this remark, the sight of those holes in the wall, and the vision of that six-room cottage in America, which set me to striking the balance for Italy, the country most affected by the good and ill of immigration. Italy has given to America for shorter or longer periods nearly two and one-half millions of men, for whose labour we have paid her a fair wage. At least two million dollars annually to every one of the provinces from which we have recruited this army of men. While not all the money will remain in Italy, most of it has already been invested in land. In 1906, there were at least 50,000 land sales made, and much of the land will become doubly productive as a result of the extreme care which will be given it by this landless class, which has suddenly gained its foothold. The rise in wages which is not far from sixty per cent. is a distinct benefit to the whole country; for a living wage means adequate consumption and increased production. While in some provinces there has been a dearth of labour, Italy is rather remarkable in that there is no danger of its being depopulated, and economically, the entire country is the gainer through emigration. I have heard many complaints, especially in Italy, that we make Socialists and Anarchists out of their once docile peasantry. The facts are these. Crime has decreased in all districts affected by emigration; which however does not prove that the criminal classes have moved to America. There are other reasons. First, improved economic conditions have removed the causes for many crimes. Second, much crime was due to the uncontrolled passions and undisciplined characters of the peasantry; and the sojourn in America has given to many of them the power of self-control. That Calabria in Sicily reports a reduction of about forty per cent. in crimes against the person, is certainly significant. Again, the privileged classes in Italy and other European countries naturally look askance at the spirit of independence which the men bring back with them. Much as we may deplore with the aristocracy the fact that the peasant has lost his fine manners, we can but believe that, on the whole, the loss of docility and the gain in independence are a splendid exchange and of untold benefit to all concerned. Some day, Democracy may teach her children the art of polished manners; let us hope that it may not be at the loss of the democratic spirit. That the peasant looks his master straight in the face and does not cringe; that he demands fair treatment, a comfortable yoke and no pricking with the goad, are as much benefit to Italy and Austro-Hungary, as they are cause for pride to those of us who believe that America has a mission to fulfill in the world. If the Italian has really lost his good manners, we have given him in exchange a spirit of independence which, I admit, is sometimes a little in need of pruning, and with it, a yearning for better things and the possibility of its realization. Public education in Italy has received an impetus directly traceable to the returned immigrant, who saw its value. He was a beast of burden because he knew nothing. The men who were educated had wealth, leisure and all that was denied him and his children. If ignorance is removed from the common people of Italy, especially from those of the Southern provinces, she can well afford to pay double the price she has paid, whatever that price may be. It is also charged against the returned immigrant, that he spreads sedition by bringing home strange religious ideas. "Signor," said a priest to me in the Campagna, "a man came home who had been in America a few years; an ignorant, stupid fellow, and when he came, he invited his neighbours to his house. Not to treat them with wine, as you might think; but to preach to them. Think of the impudence of the man! A common man, uneducated and not a priest! "And the people flocked to hear him! One day shortly after that, there came a real American and he preached to them and they sang. I could hear them singing, Signor, while I was saying mass. The tunes kept going around on the tongues of the people and a few months after, they began building a church. They call it the 'Methodisto' church. "Tell me, what heresy do they teach? My flock is divided; the women are crazy over this new doctrine and they gather the little children and teach them to sing these heretical songs." Undoubtedly, a new element of friction has been introduced into the solidary, religious life of the nation; but it is equally true that, in most of the towns of Italy, destructive ideas have long been at work and have weaned many peasants, especially the men, from the Mother Church, leaving them in an anarchical attitude towards Church and State. The new religious ideals, which are largely the ideals of Protestantism while also acting destructively, have, after all, large constructive powers, and, on the whole, are of undoubted benefit. It is the undisputed testimony of impartial observers, that the Sectarians come home "cleaner" than others, that almost without exception they insist upon temperance and chastity, and that they encourage a sane, intellectual activity. I have given concrete examples of this in other countries; but in Italy these examples could be multiplied. I do not know of a single instance where the introduction of vital religious ideals has not done more good than harm. The work of Rev. Luigi Lo Perfido, a Baptist minister, is somewhat exceptional, yet in the main, typical. He has introduced into the town of Matera a really constructive, liberal, religious movement. This includes, in addition to the simple church services, a coöperative system which has large economic consequences. He has made his church a social and literary centre besides keeping it a spiritual force of acknowledged value. The Church in Italy may regard as a menace this spirit of the Reformation, which it thought dead; but the Church itself cannot fail to be stimulated by the introduction of the leaven. The Mother Church will, perhaps, have to bestir herself to hold the people, by offering them something better than _festas_ and processions. Many observers complain that in Italian towns especially, emigration has left too great a burden upon the women, and that their economic and social condition is worse than before. This is partially true, but is only temporary. The full truth is, that woman is being benefited most by these great changes, although she now suffers most. Just as the _contadino_ in Italy or the _nadelnik_ in Hungary has been freed from the oppression of his masters, by emigration; so the woman in Italy will be freed from the oppression which she is suffering from her "liege lord" who, especially among the peasant classes affected by immigration, is always at his worst in his relation to his wife. If there is one complaint against the returned immigrant which is louder than others, it is that the woman who has been in America is spoiled and that she is a mischief maker among the other women, who are apt pupils. While I do not anticipate that the peasant women of Southern Europe will demand suffrage, they are beginning to demand a voice in the affairs of the household; which has ever been their right, which has long been denied them and which certainly does not indicate that they are spoiled. Neither is there danger of their being spoiled; and it is more than probable that the women of Italy as well as of other immigrant centres, are as much benefited as the men, if not more than they. After seeing the hole in the wall in which Bessie and her brothers were born, and after looking at the matter from all sides, I can still say, and with firmer conviction than before: "So far as my observation goes, I feel certain that emigration has been of inestimable economic and ethical value to the three great monarchies chiefly concerned, namely: Italy, Austro-Hungary and Russia. It has withdrawn inefficient labour and has returned it capable of more and better work; it has lifted the status of the peasantry to a degree which could not have been achieved even by a revolution; it has stimulated the neglected masses, lifted them to a higher standard of living and has implanted new and vital ideals." The hole in the wall in which Bessie and her brother were born brought to my mind anew the prophetic injunction: "Look unto the rock whence ye were hewn, and the hole of the pit whence ye were digged," and aroused in me the spirit of humility; an attitude of mind essential for the appreciation of all the problems and opportunities arising from the presence in our country of these "lesser folk." This attitude of mind ought not to be a difficult one for the average American to attain; because most of his ancestors came out of such holes in the wall--some better, some worse. Even those of whom we no longer think as immigrants, but proudly call our forefathers, who came long ago, came from good, plain, peasant stock; not blue blooded, but of virile red blood. For this we should be deeply grateful; although we are likely to forget it, and also willing to forget it, I fear. Recently I travelled with a friend and his wife. The gentleman, a professional man of high standing, was going on a pilgrimage to his ancestral village in Germany. The wife went there in the firm conviction that the home of his parents must have been some ancient castle; for her husband was a noble fellow indeed. When we found the place where he was born, it was a cow-stable and looked as if it had been none too good for that purpose, even in its palmy days, and my friend discovered that his parents were peasants, so poor that they were sent to America at the expense of the town. Nevertheless, he and his wife are cultured Americans and their children are graduates of our best colleges and universities. Not long ago, in travelling from the East to the West, my neighbour in the coach, a young man of evident good breeding, complained bitterly at the presence of some Russian Jewish immigrants. He hated them all, he said; and had no use for them. I looked into his face, and beneath the ruddy skin and dark, wide open eyes, saw that which only the initiated can readily detect--the racial origin. "May I ask your name?" His name was McElwynne, and his parents were English; but before I had done with him I knew that they had come from Russia, that their name was Levyn and that he was a Russian Jew but one generation removed from the steerage. Quite unintentionally, I once almost broke the heart of a woman in fashionable society. She pronounces her name with a French accent, and I translated it into Slavic; in that language it means a common garden tool, which proves her husband to be of peasant origin. The sight of the hole in the wall in Italy, and of the wretched huts in Hungary and Poland, has quickened my sympathies with the people who come out of them. Even so our fathers and mothers went forth, driven by hunger and dire need, drawn by the dream of better things and sustained by a simple and devout faith. After all, we are brothers. Born out of the womb of poverty, nourished by coarse fare, taught in the hard school of labour and saved from wretchedness by the same good providence. More and more we shall grow into one another's likeness, and that of God, as all have more bread, better air, cleaner homes, good books and an unobstructed view into heaven. For this, "Praise ye the Lord, kings and all people; princes and all judges of the earth!" Praise Him ye Irish and Scotch! Praise Him ye English and Welsh! Praise Him ye Germans and French! Praise Him ye Slavs and ye Latins! Praise Him ye Gentiles and Jews! "Let everything that hath breath praise the Lord! Praise ye the Lord!" PART II With the Incoming Tide XIII PROBLEMS OF THE TIDE The 1,200 steerage passengers who sailed for the United States early in November, 1908, on the steamship _America_, of the Hamburg-American Line, were the advance guard of the vast armies of men which were waiting for the election of Mr. Taft to the presidency. That to them, was synonymous with the return of good times; but before those good times had a chance to prove themselves identical with those which took sudden flight over a year ago, the steamers of all lines were assured their full number of steerage passengers. When the first shipload of them sailed into New York harbour, its humble passengers were hailed as the harbingers of the prosperity which was being anxiously awaited by rich and poor; by native and foreign born; by the citizens of New York and Budapest and by the people of Chicago and Spalato. We, in the United States, have alternated between fear because so many immigrants came, and regret because so many went away; but the recent influx brought joy to all, because the coming again of so many, indicated the return of good times. For our good or ill, for what is better than mere good times, and for worse than financial depression or economic problems, these strangers of all races and nations come and go, helping to make our history and shape our destiny. From the beginning, our history has in a large degree been determined by the migratory movements of larger or smaller groups from the Old World, and unless we have idealized these movements overmuch, those groups which came, unconscious of the gold and the iron slumbering in our hills--which came for "conscience' sake"--those groups have affected our history most fundamentally if not most permanently. Pilgrims, Puritans, Huguenots, Quakers and German Pietists certainly made history. They sailed the treacherous seas and marched into the pathless wilderness, driven by something higher than the mere necessity to sustain life. Subsequently came other Germans, the Irish, Scotch and Scandinavians. They came primarily because of economic distress in the home-land; yet even among those were many groups which came because they were dreamers of dreams, and sought "a city whose builder and maker is God." In one of our Western states are two large communities, one from Holland and one from Germany; both are late comers to this Western world. One of them has built itself into a rather typical Western town and the other is the one successful example of a religious community in this country. Both these groups left prosperous homes in the Old World to seek a place where they might worship God according to the dictates of their conscience; and all this happened in the latter part of the nineteenth century, at the very zenith of our material development. Large and influential groups of these seekers after God may be found throughout the length and breadth of our country; although they may now come out of the heart of Russia, like the Molicani in Los Angeles, California, they come moved by the same impulses which drew the Pilgrims to Plymouth and the Germans to Pennsylvania, and they exhibit the same characteristics. In these days most people believe that when the last Irishman has arrived from Dublin, the Old World will be drained of her best people, and we look upon a certain boundary line in Europe as the division between good people and bad; yet from beyond that line come pilgrim bands in much larger numbers than the casual observer knows, and they are bent upon the same holy errand as that which brought those who came generations ago. In fact the Reformation with its religious and political consequences is making itself felt at this late day in these migratory movements. Large groups driven to the plains of the Volga or the Danube are now coming to the United States; with narrow doctrines, it is true, but with deep convictions, and the churches of the Reformation feel this current in the measure in which they have kept themselves spiritually alert. Yet one must admit that the vast majority of those who come is driven by no higher motive than the economic pressure. Yet it is not always poverty which drives them from their village homes to our cities or from their quiet fields to our noisy shops. They are no poorer to-day than they were fifty years ago when no one thought of moving even a league from the village in which he was born. They are simply obeying an impulse which is extending to the very edges of civilization; an impulse created by discontent. Everywhere men are beginning to believe that God meant them to enjoy the good things of life _now_, and that all men, not merely a privileged class, should be able to enjoy them. Nothing ever quite so rudely shattered the idea of the stability of wealth as the discovery of America and the subsequent migrations there of different groups from different portions of Europe. Wealth had been in a measure entailed, the possession of a class; and poverty was meekly accepted as the divine apportionment to the mass of men. When it was rumoured that gold lay hidden in the mountains across the sea, that no key was needed to gain access to its hiding-place, and that it would belong to any one who dared, the myth was quickly dissolved. Poor men came and got their share of gold--not so often by finding it as by toiling for it. Further and further the truth travelled; slowly, as is the way of truth; until to-day, scarcely anywhere is the prevailing social order or economic status accepted as fixed. The greater the number of men returning from America, even with very moderate wealth, the more the discontent spreads, and men seek the place where this change may soonest be effected. They will continue to come until the economic opportunities at home are appreciably nearer those they find in this strange land. Although at present there is no European country or province from which there has not been some emigration, there are people who have only begun to seek this adjustment; therefore, the force of the tide towards America is destined to increase rather than decrease, and an annual influx of 2,000,000, more, rather than less, may be expected during the next decade. No matter from where the groups come, they will present an economic problem to those who, in a measure at least, have risen to a higher standard of living. Each group will fear that the younger and often cruder body may lessen its chances of maintaining that standard. The Germans, the Irish and the Norse people were not received with open arms by those who preceded them, even those of related race or nationality. This was especially true during the years when war, famine and persecution brought them in large numbers. Now, in turn, all these look askance at the Jew, the Slav and the Italian; while they, like the rest, are ready to close the doors to the vast hordes about to move onward, and, as they believe, upward. It is also interesting to note, that among these late comers, there are decided ideas as to who are desirable immigrants, and who are not. The Slav, if he is a Pole, would exclude his cousin, the Slovak, and both are united in thinking that the Ruthenian is a rather inferior being; while the Ruthenian would debar the Jews, Servians and Croatians from the economic benefits of the land of his adoption. Until now there has been room for all, and they have not presented a serious economic menace, except as they have intensified the general problem of labour. Each group, driven from the lower and coarser tasks, has risen from mine to shop, from shop to store, and from the store into every avenue of business and professional life. Thus far all have been crowded up and not many have been crowded out. No considerable groups of native Americans are bewailing the fact that they cannot find work in the mines; nor would large numbers desire to go back to them from their safer toiling places. The Irish are not mourning because they are not working on sections, nor would they be willing to leave their beats and office chairs from which they are ruling, not only those of us who came after them, but a fair share of those who came before them. They do not care to go back to the track, the pickax and the shovel. Without the Slav, the Italian and the Magyar, that which we call our industrial development would have been impossible. This development does not lessen the economic problem, it intensifies it; but it cannot be proved that no economic problem would exist if, instead of Slav and Latin, the Teutonic races were dominant in this movement. In that case I believe the problem would be more difficult of solution. Let me again frankly admit that I do not regard most immigrant groups of the present type as a serious menace to the other groups, or to the whole economic life, provided they are needed to do the work for which they seem best fitted. At present this is still a matter of proper distribution and presents no such serious difficulty as is commonly supposed; for the immigrant will go wherever he is wanted and a fair wage is assured him. Nor is he quite so eager to herd in cities as we imagine, and no community need be without an adequate supply of labourers, if they are needed for hard, crude labour. There is no work so hard or so dangerous that the immigrant will not attempt it. Like their forerunners in the migratory movement of European races, the present immigrants respond quickly to the American higher standards of living, and in many cases much more quickly than some of the older groups responded. When we speak of the horrors of the East Side of New York, the crowded Ghetto and Mulberry Street with its Italian filth, we forget the days when the Irish possessed the land, "squatting" wherever they could, and living in wretched huts; when the American used to sing: "The pig was in the parlour, and that was Irish too." The pig and the goat have gone, and instead, the Irish have pianos and phonographs in their parlours; but in one generation, many Slavs and Italians, under less favourable conditions, have achieved the same results, minus the pig and goat period. To-day, the merchants in Wilkes-Barre, Scranton, Connelsville and Pittsburg regard the Slav as a great "spender"; and if the Italian is not now like his predecessors, he soon will become so imbued by the American spirit, that, like us, he will live up to his income and beyond it. That phase of the problem so much complained of, which relates to the immigrants' sending the bulk of their earnings to Europe, would not be half so serious if we provided a safe banking system; preferably, Postal Savings Banks. Both the Austrian and Italian governments thus safeguard every penny which is sent abroad, and one cannot blame the toiler who prefers to trust his money to a government in whose financial soundness he has absolute confidence, rather than place it in our own savings institutions, in which we ourselves have but little confidence. The economic problem as presented by the effect of immigration upon the labour market is made less serious by the fact that large numbers of those who come, go back and forth, according to the demand for the commodity which they supply. During our last financial crisis, the sudden withdrawal from competition of half a million toilers, certainly rendered conditions less difficult than they would have been had we drawn for our supply upon those sources in Northern and Central Europe, which have always sent us their surplus population for permanent settlement. Those aspects of the present immigrant population, which are usually pointed out as its defects, have in a large measure helped to make the economic problem less acute; although they have aggravated some phases of it. Foremost among these is the ethnic problem. Possibly because of the bitterness of the race question in the South, the American people have become very sensitive to ethnic differences. All those primitive instincts which were at work in the childhood of the race have risen to the surface and threaten to become permanent factors in our national character. A little more or less pigment in the skin, the shape of a nose or the slant of the eyes, produce in the average American that most primitive of antagonisms--race prejudice. Being a primitive instinct, it defies reason, the commandments of religion and the dictates of humanity. In fact, it often becomes irrational, irreligious and inhuman. During the recent agitation of the Japanese question on the Coast, I discovered that no matter how far removed the ordinary American may be from the seat of the difficulty, the very agitation of the question acts contagiously upon the people of the East as well as of the West. As a result, their feelings towards the Japanese have unconsciously changed for the worse, so that the question has assumed in their minds the qualities and proportions of the Negro problem. To justify its existence, this instinct, if such it is, overemphasizes ethnic differences and minimizes the superior qualities of the race or group involved. It always applies the categoric judgment when the judgment is adverse, and admits grudgingly that in each group or race there are certain individuals who possess good qualities. In visiting nearly every city of the United States where there are groups of Italians, I have everywhere heard it said by those who had dealings with them: "We have no bad Italians, ours are good, the bad ones are elsewhere." In Trenton, N. J., you are told that the bad Italians are in Patterson; but when you are there, nearly every one denies the fact and consigns all the bad Italians to New York. The truth is, that wherever men have had a chance to know the individual Italian, they have discovered that there are good Italians even as there are good Jews and good Slavs, and that there are good and bad in every race. Naturally, when men apply the warped categoric judgment to another race, particularly when that race is in political or economic competition with them, they are likely to magnify the evil in the character of the race, and rarely even admit the good. That this categoric judgment is seldom just, that it leads to antagonisms which actualize themselves in race riots and wars, is certainly very evident. I have watched the development of this prejudice against the Japanese, even as I am most anxiously watching it grow against certain European groups which are ethnically more or less differentiated from the native population, and I am not over confident that we shall solve the ethnic problem without much struggle and stress and strain. Indeed, the ethnic problem can be solved only if we have patience, a measure of sympathy and the sense of justice. There is a subtle force at work, which, to a degree at least, is settling this matter for us--a force which, if we allow it full play, will complete the task whose result will be the miracle of the age. I call it a miracle, advisedly; for the things which seemed fixed, unchangeable, deeply graven in the nature of certain European races, the products of long ages, vanish in a generation. Race characteristics which were regarded as biological are found to be sociological; on the outside of the race, if we might so express it, and not on the inside. The children of the Neapolitans and the Sicilians lose somewhat of their swarthiness; the features lose their sharpness, and as a rule the children grow over the heads of their parents. Indeed, the last named process takes place among natives and aliens alike. The ethnic differences of even the most strongly marked European races will ultimately disappear; that is, if we have patience and sympathy, and, above all, if we mete out that justice which gives every man a chance, regardless of his nationality or race. As a nation we do not possess in an abundant degree these qualities; therefore the ethnic problem is one which may yet postpone its solution until that time when indeed there shall be "Peace on Earth and Good Will to Men." Thus far I have touched upon two problems presented by the return of the immigrant tide: the economic and the ethnic. Another problem presented by this influx of aliens is in that rather indefinable realm called culture. The question is: Will these people be able to appreciate the cultural ideals of America, and make them their own? It would be an insult to my readers to try to make clear to them that the people who come to us are not barbarians or semi-barbarians; although as a rule they are uncultured and not yet in harmony with many of our ideals. I would not even attempt to mention this, were it not for the fact that it is the commonly accepted idea, that we are dealing with the offscouring of Europe. Let me illustrate. Not very long ago, I heard a home missionary secretary of a certain denomination say before an audience of intelligent, Christian people, that "We are landing annually a million paupers and criminals"; and I venture to say that nearly every one who heard that statement believed it. Let us see who these people are who come to us. Slavs, Latins and other Aryan groups, such as Lithuanians, Albanians, and Greeks; of whom the first two have fairly earned the right to be called the oldest inhabitants of the continent of Europe. Next in order are Finns and Magyars, from among the Ugru-Altaic races, Jews and some smaller Semitic groups. The bulk is made up of Slavs, Latins and Semitic peoples. Need I question whether the Latin has in him the qualities which will enable him to appreciate our culture? The Italian who built Florence, whose sons built St. Peter's, painted the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel and carved out of Carrara marble the "Pieta" and the statue of Moses? Need I mention Giotto, the builder, Raphael, the painter, a Dante, a Petrarch, a Savonarola--a hundred masters of the chisel and the brush, of rhythmic rhyme and stately prose, all reared in that Garden of Europe, Italy? Will the Jew learn to appreciate that culture, the best of which was created by his sires? For the glory of our American culture lies in the quality of its manhood and womanhood and that at its best is patterned after men and women whose names would debar them from certain clubs and hotels to-day. Moses, Amos and Hosea, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and in all reverence I mention Jesus and Mary, John, Paul and Peter. Strange to say, it is sometimes necessary to call the attention of intelligent people to the fact that these men and women were not Methodists or Presbyterians or even Episcopalians; and that neither their sires nor their sons came over in the _Mayflower_. Perhaps we need to realize that as Americans we have neither invented nor discovered education, liberty or religion. What we have accomplished is, that we have made gifts to the many, of some of those blessings which in the immigrants' country are the possession only of the few; and that is no small achievement. The problem, the real problem, is: how to feed these people on truly vital knowledge, how to make common to all, the beautiful, the harmonious, the ethical; how to bring to all, the knowledge of that religion which indeed makes free from tribal pride and racial hate and leads men into the freedom of the sons of God. Perhaps the greatest problem still to be solved is, how to interpret to these people the one supreme gift of all these gifts which most of them never possessed--the right of citizenship. Herein lies our real peril; not because the immigrant cannot be made to understand how to exercise this right; but because here we are least efficient, and here we, the earlier comers and their children, have most signally failed. The Scotch-Irish of Pittsburg are not a conspicuous example of good citizenship for the Italians; the Germans of Reading and Lancaster have no overplus of civic righteousness to give the Slavs; the Quakers of Philadelphia have not been moved by the Spirit to teach the Jews how to govern a city righteously; the Yankees of Connecticut and Rhode Island have not ruled their states in such a manner that the crude Lithuanian or the Greek could in all cases follow their example; nor are the Irish of New York in a position to throw stones at the other races. I do not know of a single case where the newer groups have failed to respond to sane, vigorous leadership in the struggle for civic righteousness; while in every large city there are conspicuous examples of many a battle won, because the immigrants have aided the cause. In Scranton, Pa., in the fight for a clean city, the mayor's private secretary, a Russian Jew, did valiant service; while Pittsburg's "cleaning up" has been accomplished because a vigorous attorney of the same race was one of the captains in a campaign which may have vast consequences for the entire state. It ought to be a matter of no little pride to the Jews of Pittsburg, that among its non-corruptible councilmen there was at least one of their race. Prof. Graham Taylor of Chicago, whose worth and work that city does not fully appreciate, has found the Poles of his ward ready to share in the struggle for civic betterment. One of the first "clean" councilmen of the city came from that ward and was a member of the Slavic race. The problem of citizenship is not a problem created by the immigrant, and his presence makes it more difficult of solution, only because we have not provided him with safe leaders and have not ourselves been very good examples. Indeed the primary corrupting influence in every city with which I am acquainted is either of native stock or belongs to the first or second generation of those immigrants whose coming does not disturb us and whose presence we regard as a blessing. These are either German or Irish, and largely of the latter nationality. That phase of the struggle which is directed against the saloon, the newcomer does not understand, and as yet no one has taken pains to enlighten him. We are astonished when we find him opposing our efforts to deprive him of his liquor; but to the Slav, at least, whiskey means life and strength. He would regard being deprived of meat as more reasonable than having his _vodka_ or _palenka_ taken from him. The immigrant needs leaders in whom he can have absolute confidence; leaders who possess the genius of democracy and the spirit of brotherhood; who will have patience with his slow ways. Those of us who are not born to lead ought to realize that a good example is very contagious, and that the love of righteousness and justice is not so foreign to these strangers as some of us imagine. It is in the hope of stimulating both leadership and good example that I have written the following chapters. In that hope I have pointed out how contagiously our example acts upon these groups and how the processes of assimilation are retarded by injustice and prejudice. I have given special attention to the religious life of these newer groups whose interpretation I have attempted, because not only does religion play a large part in their lives; but because I believe that in the field of religion lie the largest possibilities for that kind of assimilation which can make of all these "tribes and tongues and nations" "fellow citizens with the saints"; and of all the "strangers and sojourners," members of the "household of God." XIV THE SLAV IN THE IMMIGRANT PROBLEM In the three groups which form the bulk of our immigrant population, the Slav is now the strongest and the most interesting factor, and is destined to be for some time to come. In spite of his being from the least densely populated regions, he is numerically the greatest and will long maintain his supremacy. There are more than 100,000,000 Slavs, and the territory they occupy is vast, covering half the European continent and reaching far into Asia. These people are scattered in villages, but rarely concentrated in cities; nevertheless, social and political conditions among all of them are now such as to force this most immovable of European races into the great outgoing tide. The majority of Slavic people is of peasant type, and scarcely anywhere has it developed a middle class strong enough to form a bridge upon which to cross the age-long chasm between it and the upper class. This means that poverty and contempt have been accepted as the reward for hard labour, and as the divinely appointed lot of the peasant, who in but few Slavic countries has escaped serfdom, a condition of semi-slavery from which he emerged with insufficient land, or none, with many limitations as to individual ownership and with practically no limitations as to his share of the burden of government support. The masses of the peoples of the Slavic countries have never been above economic want, and have been but slowly awakened to the more expensive demands of our civilization. To the peasant, bread and cabbage to eat, a straw thatched _isba_ to shelter his family, and an occasional pull at the _vodka_ bottle, meant comfort; while to have feather beds, a crowing cock in the barn-yard and a pig killing once a year, was the realization of his wildest dreams. Fully two-thirds of these more than 100,000,000 people do not know what it means to have enough bread to eat, and with the exception of Hungary, many of the countries in which they live do not produce enough foodstuffs to allow every man the ordinary military rations. Nevertheless, they are forced to export a fair share of their crops, in order to bring sufficient money into the country for the support of the government. To people living under such economic conditions, emigrating to America will, for some years at least, be a going from Egypt to the Promised Land; although manna and meat have to be supplied without supernatural intervention and at the constant peril of life and limb. As the Slav has not yet developed a compact middle class, this has had to be supplied by foreigners. Germans, Jews, Tartars, Armenians and Greeks are his merchants and mechanics, his bankers and manufacturers. This condition has fixed the social status of the peasant, placed him under exceptionally burdensome laws and marked him an inferior. His picturesque clothing became his prison garb, and rarely did he have opportunity to exchange it for the commonplace clothing of our civilization. To be a peasant means to be addressed by a personal pronoun which is a mark of inferiority; it means to be bound by customs which are as irksome as an "iron shirt"; it means to be the butt of the ridicule of stage fools, who, after all, only mimic the fools in real life. Military service offered the only escape from this cast, and bravery in battle the only avenue to distinction. Into some regions the industrial life came with its rude call to freedom, with its trumpet notes of revolution, and the half awakened Slav struck; then went to sleep again, murmuring something like a curse, before he closed his eyes. This social disability of the Slavic peasant is being partially overcome by immigration; for the immigrant who has tasted a little of even our crude freedom with its mixed blessings, who wears our sombre clothing, whose feet are shod with our shoes--he it is of whom it might again be said, poetically and prophetically: "How beautiful are the feet of him that bringeth glad tidings of good things." These glad tidings will, for a long time, bring us these millions, in the hope that they too may earn the right to escape their bondage with its attendant limitations and contumely. Economically, always at the edge of want and in the shadow of starvation, and socially always at a disadvantage, the Slavic peasant is also living under galling political conditions which he is only now beginning to feel in all their severity. With but few exceptions, the Slav is an oppressed man; oppressed by alien rulers, who, by force, are trying to wipe out of his consciousness his national memories, and steal from his lips his mother tongue. Where it is not the German or the Magyar who puts him under the yoke, it is some close Slav relative who is practicing on him the Golden Rule in its perverted form. When these conditions do not exist, the Slav bears the yoke of his own making, in the form of Autocracy. It is the distinction of the Slavs that they are the only Europeans who, although not unanimously, believe that Autocracy is the form [Illustration: TWO TYPES OF POLES] of government best suited to their national character. This is certainly true of many Russians, who see in the Czar a divinely appointed autocrat; while many other Slavs of different nationalities dream of the day when they shall bear this same yoke. The Russians also rule, and most severely, their close kinsmen, the Poles, and are not noticeably liberal to the Malo Russ, the Little Russians of the South. Every cruel, political expedient has been used by Russia to subjugate or assimilate these people, who are flesh of her flesh and bone of her bone. One might imagine that the Poles would have learned enough in the school of political adversity to treat their own kinsmen, at least, as they would wish to be treated; but the trials the Ruthenians have endured at their hands are equalled only by what they themselves have endured at the hands of the Russians. That the Poles suffer from the Germans, the Slovaks from the Magyars, the Slovenes and Servians from the Austrians, is only additional evidence that everywhere the Slavic peasant suffers politically, and that there is sufficient cause for the insecurity of his foothold. He realizes this the more, in the measure in which he feels the breath of welcoming freedom from across the seas, which lures him to our turbulent training school in citizenship, and no doubt will continue to lure him. The economic, social and political conditions among the Slavs are such as will for some time in the future make their coming to America in large numbers, a certainty, and it is not out of the question that they will be the determining factor in our civilization. The Slav fits admirably into the place usually assigned the late comers among the immigrants: the bottom rung of the economic ladder. Of rugged physique and docile temper, he is regarded a valuable workman, performing the hardest tasks uncomplainingly, facing attendant dangers courageously, and enduring hardships and sufferings stolidly and without a murmur. Economically, he is never so much of a problem as the immigrant who comes to make his living by his wits; for that is a sphere likely to be crowded by the earlier, or what we might call the more advanced groups. The Slav is docile and patient and need not be regarded as a serious economic menace by those who think that our workmen should demand a decent wage and maintain a fair standard of living. He is not temperate in his habits of either eating or drinking, his tastes in regard to clothing are crude, but not necessarily inexpensive and he squanders too much money for "that which satisfieth not." He spends over thirty per cent. more for drink than the native workman, pays more, according to his wage, for rent, and falls behind only in that mysterious column which the social observer calls "miscellaneous." In the Slavic groups which have been here longest and which contain households, the wife has lifted this mysterious column to a normal figure; for "Mother Vanity" has many daughters among the Slavic women. The Slavic standard of cleanliness suffers by comparison with that of the older groups; although they are widely different in this respect and it is not safe to generalize on that point. In judging the Slav we must take into consideration the housing conditions in America as he finds them, the fact that the men among the Slavs never do woman's work, that many of them come without their wives and that the woman in her native environment has very little time for the finer household duties. She is her husband's partner in all his heavy labour; but must do all her household work unaided. Many of the Slavic groups will be slow to understand and appreciate the higher ideals of our civilization, but our civilization is not so foreign to their genius as we are apt to think. Wherever they have had the slightest opportunity, they have made valuable contribution to it. We must not forget that the Slav gave the world a Copernicus before we gave it a Newton; that he gave it a John Huss before the Germans gave it a Luther; that Comenius, one of the greatest pedagogues, lived and laboured before Froebel and Pestalozzi; and that Turgenieff, Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky, Pushkin and Sienkiewicz stand fairly well beside our makers of literature. I am not blind to some of the defects in the character of the Slavic peoples, in fact I know them so well that I know their source and I realize that they are not rooted in the race, but are the results of _tyranny_. These faults which seem so deeply fixed in the lives of the people can and will be wiped out; although the task may not be an easy one. There is in the Slav a certain passivity of temper, a lack in sustained effort and enthusiasms, an unwillingness to take the consequences of telling the truth, a failure to confide in one another and in those who would do them good, a rather gross attitude towards sexual morality and an undeniable tendency towards Anarchy and intemperance. They have but little collective wisdom, even as they have no genius for leadership, scant courtesy towards women, and other human weaknesses to which the whole human race is heir. To balance these failings, however, they have a deeply religious nature, a willingness to suffer hardship, a genius for self-expression in all forms of art, are usually honest in their business dealings and hospitable to strangers. The danger is, that, in his new environment, the idealistic Slav will grow materialistic, that his phlegmatic temper will not take seriously the burdens of self-government, that in an individualistic atmosphere where "help yourself" is the watchword, latent tendencies towards Anarchy may develop, and that in our social organization which demands both the power of leadership and that of cohesion, he will be a brittle element, incapable of either. Yet I do not fear that Slavic social or religious ideals or even racial characteristics will become dominant among us, even if the Slavs should constitute the bulk of our immigrant population. My reasons are: First: Because these ideals and characteristics are embodied in a peasant population which has little or no influence over its second generation, for it has found a higher social level. To this second generation, neither the speech nor the customs of its parents is attractive. Second: Because the Slav is environed by city life and no matter how compact his neighbourhood may be, elements which make up the urban spirit penetrate into the most densely populated alley, make themselves felt, and become dominant. Third: Because in his native environment the Slav has taken on the ideals of his neighbours more often than he has imposed his upon others. In Asia, he has been influenced by his Mongol neighbours, but has himself not left any visible traces. In Europe, the numerically weak Finn has resisted the force of the Autocratic State and the Orthodox Church; but has left the impress of his genius upon his Slavic neighbours. After centuries of close contact with Slavic government, the Germans in the Baltic provinces of Russia are still more German than Russian. The Czechs of Bohemia, the most virile of all the Slavic peoples, in spite of their stubborn struggle, have not metamorphosed their Germanic fellow citizens into Czechs; although they cannot easily deny the strong influence of their Teutonic neighbours upon themselves. A mere handful of Magyars, almost at the centre of the sphere of Slavic influence, have imposed upon millions of Slavs their language and their ideals. Whatever the causes for these conditions may be, and there are good causes, the truth is, that the Slav has nowhere become a dominant factor in the environment in which he has been placed; and we need neither hope nor fear that his ideals or his characteristics will become ours for good or ill. Again it is true that in America this Slavic peasant population is awakened to its racial and historic heritage, and that feeling may be so artificially fostered by patriotism and religious organizations as to hinder a normal process of assimilation. The Slav, by virtue of being among the most numerous of our new citizens, has a right to demand that the rest of us should know him; for by knowing him, we shall learn to respect him, appreciate the good qualities of his race and help him to overcome tendencies which hinder his full development. We must give the Slav a full chance to know us, the best of us and the best in us--he usually knows the worst. He must have our best interpreted to him in rational terms and ways, and not have it forced upon him by law or by a custom to which he yields but which he cannot understand. I have described the Slav's quality as brittle; perhaps stubborn would be better. You can lead him to the water and can also compel him to drink; but he will stop drinking when you are not looking, and "kick" besides. On the other hand, once he understands and endorses an ideal, he will be loyal to it; stubbornly loyal. Inasmuch as I believe that America's best possessions are those ideals which spring from its religious convictions, ideals inherited from its Judaic and Christian ancestry, I also believe that its effort should be to interpret them to the Slav in practical terms of fellowship and service. How far from these ideals or how near to them the Slav is, I have attempted to show in the next chapter; and to make the task of interpretation easier, I have put the more important Slavic groups with which we have to deal, in their own historic setting. This will, I trust, stimulate in the further study of these people who are worth knowing for what they have suffered, for what they have done and for what they are. XV THE SLAV IN HISTORIC CHRISTIANITY When the sword of Rome, the ideals of Athens and the faith of Judea strove for the mastery of the world, the Slavs were still unknown to history. Upon the middle European plain, along the Don, the Dnieper and the Vistula they lived a semi-nomadic life, at war only with bear, elk and boar, and at peace with the dominant races in the west of Europe which scarcely knew of their existence. Very early in the Christian era, the transition from nomadic to agricultural life took place, and they became so identified with the soil that some of the agricultural terms they used have been embodied in other European languages. The facts that the Slavs inhabited the eastern portions of Europe to its very edge, that Christian civilization was imposed upon them by Byzantine and Roman influences, when both were struggling for the mastery of the Christian world, and that the territory they inhabited became their battle-ground--had great and lasting effect, not only upon their political history but upon their religious life and their national character. The Slavs then are a late product of Christian civilization; an unfinished and inharmonious product which is at its worst, where later Greek and Roman influences touched it, most turbulent where modern Western ideas have suddenly affected it, and at its best and rarest where the Slav's own talents and resources have had a chance for rational development and adjustment. That which complicates the problem presented to us by the Slav is the fact that in spite of his occupying practically contiguous territory, the close family bond was early broken by conquering armies, by rival missionary groups, by invading aliens who came to pillage, barter and trade, and by the influx of his neighbours, who varied all the way from Tartar and Turk to German and Magyar; from Finn and Armenian to Greek and Albanian. When we speak of Slavs to-day we refer to Aryan people, whatever that may mean beyond the fact that they are Europeans, presenting no great ethnic variations; although there is no doubt that Mongol and Finnish blood has found its way into the veins of the Eastern Slavs. We also mean that they speak a closely related language, the Slavic; but which has become so differentiated in time that there are now literatures in Russian, Polish, Czechish, Servian and Bulgarian; each a distinct language, differing in alphabet, grammar, accent or sentence construction. Besides these, there are other dialects, vital enough and varied enough to have created their own literature, and zealously guarded as their mother tongue by the people who speak them. These linguistic differences have aided in complicating the religious and political problems among them. Thus, the Russians and the Poles have been made hereditary enemies, largely, because one received its Christian doctrines from Rome and the other from Constantinople; Ruthenians and Poles in Austria have been pitted against each other in an age-long struggle, by a difference in liturgies; Slovaks and Czechs, almost twin brothers, are little better than strangers to one another, because of a few hooks in the alphabet and a few variations in pronunciation. The whole Southern Slavic group remains politically ineffective because of the dissimilarities of the Cyrilian and Latin alphabets and all that their difference is made to imply. Even when transplanted to America, these contentions are magnified by the churches and governments concerned, which thus are effective in the continued separation of related groups. If the Slavs may be called one race, they certainly present a kaleidoscopic conglomerate out of which emerge three groups: the Western, Eastern and Southern Slavs. Besides their common racial bond, each group is related by language, economic environment, determined by climatic and political conditions, and above all, by religion, which is a stronger bond than even ties of racial kinship. The entire Slavic world is living under the dominion of religion more or less clearly interpreted and understood. This manifests itself in conversation with the people. "God help you on your way!" "Go with God." "Praised be the Lord Jesus Christ!" are common greetings as one journeys along Slavic highways and byways. The names of the Deity and of the Saviour or the Virgin are never uttered without lifting the hat, accompanied by the words: "Slava i cast nyim budi!" Honour and praise to them! The highways among the Western Slavs, who are largely Roman Catholic, are lined by crosses, chapels and shrines; and no matter how wretched the village, its church is well appointed and its peasants are not quite happy at the end of the year, unless its monotony was broken by a pilgrimage to some shrine where the Virgin waits, ready to bestow her blessing of good health or other rich favours supposed to be in her special keeping. Feast days and fast days follow one another in quick succession and no season of the year or event in life is left unhallowed by religious observances. All this is equally true of the Eastern and Southern Slavs who, with but few exceptions, belong to the Greek Orthodox church, and are cast in a religious mold as fixed as the form of the Byzantine _icon_, the symbol of that church. To the Russians, the largest body among the Eastern Slavs, religion is an atmosphere in which they "live and move and have their being." Among them also, church feasts and fasts regulate the days, while either the pleasure or the pain they bring is willingly accepted. Sacrifices of candles and oil are freely offered and no pilgrimage is too wearisome to be undertaken. Visiting the tombs of saints and the dwelling places of hermits is a national mania, and religious ceremonies, which in their origin and meaning are wholly Pagan, take place in hut and palace alike; for no class of Russian society is quite free from gross superstitions. The peasant coachman, who drives his miserable beast over the cobblestone pavement, crosses himself before every chapel and _icon_; while his passenger, be he a general, a university professor or one of the common people, will do the same, with perhaps only a little less unction. Yet, in spite of the fact that religious forms dominate the life of the masses of the Slavs, there are no people in Europe who less understand the real value of religion, whose conduct towards each other is so little affected by it or to whom it is so entirely a mere belief in the mysterious forces of Heaven and Hell which can be appeased by prayers, formulas, sacrifices and pilgrimages. Religion with them has seemingly nothing to do with sobriety, chastity, conquering the will, or the cultivation of the inner virtues. The blame for this lies largely with the clergy, which, whether it is in Russia, Bulgaria or the countries inhabited by the different Servian nationalities, stimulates the superstition of the people and does but little to enlighten or ennoble them. The priests nowhere occupy or deserve the place which they hold among the Western Slavs, and where the Roman Catholic minority has any fighting ground among the Southern Slavs, as in Servia,--there the Franciscans and Trappists tower above the Greek clergy as benefactors of their people and often as true saints and martyrs. My assertion that the Slav is by nature truly religious, and that the clergy is in a great measure to blame for his hopelessly low standards, is proved by the remarkable phenomenon of the sects, which especially in Russia flourish, in spite of persecution. They grew up from within; some of them, supposedly before the Reformation, and still they are being formed and developed. These sects range all the way from the most fanatical, whose members seek salvation in voluntary death or in some revolting form of mortification of the flesh, to large and influential bodies, kinsmen to our Quakers, Baptists and Methodists. It is this hunger for religion which is the most hopeful characteristic of the Slavs, and one which ought to make contact with them less difficult than we usually imagine it to be. The problem is, how to purge these movements from fanaticism when transferred to America; although in our soberer, freer and more practical atmosphere the dangerous elements are apt to be spontaneously corrected. Protestantism, as a manifestation of historic Christianity, antedates among them the German Reformation and was contemporaneous with the earliest movements in England. History clearly shows that the Protestant spirit found kinship among the Slavs and that it is still alive. Evidences of this are the sect of the Bogumils early in the fourteenth century, which has left its traces among the Southern Slavs as far as Bosnia; the Hussite movement so vitally effective in preparing the way for Martin Luther and still a force in the national life of Bohemia--and the various sects among the Russians. This Protestant spirit in its conventional form, as found in Bohemia, in Poland to some extent and among the Slovaks of Hungary, is unfortunately no more a factor than the Mother Church in the shaping of character, in inducing right social relations, or in determining the future of the Slavic race. There are, however, various Protestant forces at work among these people; forces which emphasize spiritual and ethical ideals; such as the missions of the American Board, in Bohemia; the devoted and enthusiastic members of the "Gemeinschaft" in Kattowitz in Silesia, strategically situated where three great empires meet; the Baptist missions in Russia, and above all, the returned immigrant, who comes home, often enthusiastically but sanely, practically and devotedly religious, and with whom rests largely the religious and political future of at least two Slavic nationalities, the Slovaks and the Ruthenians, the latest to be awakened to the economic possibilities in America. The Slovaks for nearly a thousand years have retained their national consciousness, in spite of the fact that long ago they were conquered by the Magyars, who have used every possible means to wean them from their language, the one strong link binding them to their historic past. Patiently they have endured a national martyrdom; although the world at large knows nothing of their sufferings. Whenever they have tried to speak, prison doors have enforced silence. In the struggle between race and race, the Magyars, who themselves were persecuted for freedom's sake, have, in their treatment of the Slovaks, violated every principle of political liberty. In a little village called Hluboka, in the midst of their well tilled acres, lives a group of Slovaks whose Lutheran pastor, John Hurban, was a man who helped to keep alive this national spirit, for which he endured imprisonment and even faced the gallows. In 1892 the people erected a modest monument over his grave, and at its unveiling they were driven from the cemetery at the muzzle of the gun. The son of the dead pastor wrote an article in the public press protesting against this, and he was sent to prison for twelve months. An editor, Ambrosius Pietor, was incarcerated for eighteen months, for writing two articles complaining of the treatment his people received. When he returned home at the expiration of his term, his admirers met him at the railroad station and some young girls presented him with bouquets of flowers. Twenty-one persons who took part in this reception were sent to prison for an average of a month each, and the three young girls, who betrayed their native country by handing this man bouquets of flowers, had to pay fines, aggregating 400 kronen. In 1906, 245 Slovaks were sent to prison, and from 1906 to the present time the number is not far from 500. I have already cited the nature of the offenses for which they are punished. I have mentioned these facts, not because I wish to throw discredit upon the Magyars, for government and people are usually two different things; but because I wish to throw light upon these Slovaks who come to us to do our most menial work and whose worth is obscured by our not knowing them. Their clannishness, the tenacity with which they cling to their native speech, and their attitude towards our Christian and national institutions, find some explanation in the miseries they have endured for the sake of preserving some kind of national or racial entity. I consider these Slovaks among the most unspoiled of all the Slavic peoples; low in the scale of culture, it is true, but of such innate goodness and possessing so many virtues, as to make them most desirable immigrants and splendid material upon which to graft the best of our Christian civilization. Like all Western Slavs they are largely Roman Catholic, but with enough of the Protestant element mixed with it to have given evangelical faith a grappling place. This broader vision with its ethical element has been transferred from America to the Slovaks in Hungary and is now manifesting itself in a company of people, which, though small, is so thoroughly in earnest and ethical as to prove that they can be brought into harmony with the most vital religious ideals. Ruthenians, or Ukranians, as they call themselves, who belong to the Eastern Slavic group, [Illustration: RUTHENIANS The most backward and oppressed of the Slavic people, whose destiny is worked out in America.] are a most unhappy people; degraded by adverse economic and religious conditions, worse if possible than those of the most debased Russians whose closest kinsmen they are. In Austria a majority belongs to the Greek Catholic church, which is a union of the Greek Orthodox and the Roman Catholic churches, maintaining distinct Byzantine dogmas and acknowledging the supremacy of the Pope. There are about 34,000,000 of these people, numerically more important than the Poles, by whom a portion is governed or ill governed and persecuted. Neither have they any chance for full development in Russia where the largest number lives; nor in Hungary, where they make their home on the eastern slopes of the Carpathians. They are now struggling for the maintenance of their national consciousness and are bearing all the unfortunate consequences. In the United States their protest has taken form politically, in a National Ukranian Society, and religiously, in a Ruthenian Free Church, and both deserve sympathetic aid from those who believe in political and religious freedom. The great task of religion in its ministry to the Slav, and that no matter what its ancient form or symbol, will be to make clear to him the difference between God and Cæsar; for religion and nationality, Heaven and the throne, are confused in his mind. It must also teach him that besides its sacramental value it has service value, whose obligations rest upon priest and people alike. Religion must wean him from his ancient enemies, intemperance and superstition, and when it has done this, it has rendered a service which may again make of the Slavs a homogeneous race; great, vital, virile and well prepared to play a leading part in the future history of Europe as well as America, where they are now, numerically at least, the most important element in the great immigrant tide. XVI FROM EPHRATA TO WHISKEY HILL That portion of our history, which began with the inflow of Germans from the Palatinate, seems to most of us a closed chapter; yet in the very heart of the Keystone State, where more than 200 years ago the German pietist began to build its cities, since grown to greatness, the German is still a foreigner. Indeed, he is almost as complete a foreigner as the Slav who lives in the mining patches along the Wyoming arid Susquehanna Rivers. Germanic speech, habits and types survive, and it was in a crowded trolley car in Reading, Pa., just after I had finished a wearisome investigation among the Slavs, that a woman of generously Teutonic proportions said to me: "Setz dich a mahl zu mir her." Let me add that although I had never seen the lady before, I obeyed the summons. First, because there was no other seat vacant, and, second, because I have been long enough in America to obey implicitly when a lady commands. "Du acts wie ein stranger," the good woman continued, taking my hand; and then, discovering that I had a right to act like a stranger, she apologized profusely. She had mistaken me for her family physician. In spite of her evident embarrassment, we began a conversation, and my ears, accustomed as they now are to our rather monotonous and uneuphonic English, refreshed themselves by listening to this new speech--Pennsylvania Dutch. It required thinking in two languages, and that in their most archaic forms. Four generations had passed since my neighbour's ancestors came to this country; yet her English, whenever she attempted it, smacked strongly of the Fatherland, and in an unguarded moment, when my sentences seemed to her rather involved, she said, "Du talkst a bissel zu fast." The trolley took us through the manufacturing centre of Reading and out into the fruitful fields of Lancaster County, and the further I travelled in that state the more I realized the difference between the old and the new Pennsylvania, even in the names called into my ears by the prosaic conductor. Philadelphia does not now suggest Bible times so much as it might; but there are Bethlehem, Nazareth, Emmaus, and Ephrata, each name suggesting at once a sacred atmosphere. Then for the new Pennsylvania are the names of Johnstown, Coalton, Scranton, and Steelton, besides those yet unplaced on the map--names like Hunkeytown, Guinea Hill, Dago Roost, and Whiskey Hill, squatted close to the mines, flanked by culm heaps and huge breakers, and cut through and through by ravines and dirt-clogged rivers. All these towns are destined to disappear long before the last lumps of coal dug there, are burned. The trolley stopped at Ephrata, and my neighbour, who had been in Reading, "bargains zu kaufe im grosse schtore," left the car; but not without admonishing me to be sure to see the cloister of the German Baptist Brothers, which, she said, "is a grosse sight." I needed no admonition, for I was there on a pilgrimage. I had come, to stand face to face with a great past, to visit the old haunts of these German mystics, to lose myself in the all-pervading peace of Ephrata, after having been in the thick of the great industrial war, whose presence was attested even here by the cloud of smoke on the western horizon. This cloud of smoke, although changing into a pillar of fire by night, does not seem to be the guide out of captivity. I suppose one easily reads something into the atmosphere of a place; but I am sure that, even without the pilgrim spirit which brought me there, I should have recognized Ephrata as one of the places in which dreamers have built air castles; and these are castles which have foundations. The archæologist does not see them in the dust; but the sociologist, if he has a sensitive spirit, feels them, especially if he has come from a week's study of Whiskey Hill. One of the men who has written of Ephrata before me says: "There is nothing peculiar about the village itself, or its people." He evidently had no "inner sense," and, moreover, he had never been at Whiskey Hill. Not only is the air of Ephrata "salubrious and the outlook delightful," the street is full of gabled houses one close upon the other. Some of them are commonplace indeed; but many of them are quaint and clean, with deep-set windows full of flower-pots, the green foliage shining through latticed panes, in rich contrast to the white snow almost up to the window-sills. And the people one sees--"commonplace"? People who for nearly two hundred years have clung tenaciously to a strange garb, in the midst of a "perverse and crooked generation," bent upon changing the cut of its coats with every passing season? Women who wear brown bonnets and look as modest as thrushes, whom one sees in single file following the men; women who have resisted the allurements of pokes and toques and picture hats for two hundred years--such women commonplace? Such women are as remarkable as they are rare, and such there are in Ephrata. As I watched them they were going to the modest meeting-house at the edge of the village. I did not follow them, for my way led straight down the main street which ends in the turnpike, over which a toll-gate still hangs. The gatekeeper sits in a little hut among his cronies, smoking the native weed and talking politics--and he who is acquainted with the quality of either ought to know that they are strangely alike. "The cloisters are across the meadow," the toll-keeper informed me. And, pointing to one of his companions, a man of uncertain age and a rather doubtful degree of cleanliness, he said: "And he lives in one of them." "I am not a member," the man volunteered, apologetically. "My wife is." This alone proved him a modern and commonplace. I left him disgustedly, and, stepping over the stile, walked through the snow-covered meadow and along the shores of the Cocalico towards a group of rather ill-shaped, weather-beaten buildings which suggested a deserted farm more than a cloister. The momentary disappointment vanishes, however, as soon as one has a clear view of the peaked-roof buildings in which no outer beauty is visible, but which, with their low doors, narrow cells, and roped stairway, recall to him who knows, the "Chronicon Ephratense," the groping of this Brotherhood after the blessed life here below, seeking communion with God in self-denial, in good works and pious songs. These Brothers fell into all the errors of Christendom and practiced many of its virtues in a single generation. Conrad Beisel, a German mystic, came here to live as an anchorite. His pious life drew others to him, and they progressed to monasticism. When women found them, they all became celibates. They were close to every heresy which threatened the early Church, and were not far from worshipping Conrad Beisel as a reincarnation of Christ; while in the mystic Sophia they came close to the adoration of the Virgin. They practiced communism successfully for over half a century, and branded property as sin long before Proudhon declared it to be theft. They printed Bibles, wrote ecstatic hymns, developed to a remarkable degree the art of illuminating letters, and organized a Sunday-school in which they used some of the so-called modern methods, such as promotion cards, long before the thought came into the mind of Robert Raikes, the founder of the Sunday-school of to-day. They were chaste, frugal, and non-resistant. One of them, Peter Miller, the successor of Conrad Beisel, went to George Washington to plead for the remittance of the death penalty of a man, Michael Wildman, accused of treason. The General told Peter Miller that the severest penalty must be dealt out at a time like that. "If it were not so, I would gladly release your friend." "Friend!" replied Miller; "he is the only enemy I have." This, it is said, made such an impression on General Washington that the pardon was granted. I lingered in the "Saal," the place of worship. Simple and small it is, with plain pine pews, the beamed ceiling hanging far into the room. The walls are covered by charts on which, in exquisite ornamental lettering, Scripture verses and some of the mystic poetry of the Brothers are written. There are also allegorical pictures, naively drawn by the pen, suggesting the thought that in time a new school of religious art might have been developed here. Scarcely half a dozen worshippers, I was told by the cronies at the toll-gate, gather here on Saturday; for the sect is that of the Seventh Day Dunkards, or German Baptists, and it cannot be very long before this sanctuary will be empty and forsaken and its ruin complete. I braved the snow-banks and waded through an unmarked path towards the cemetery where they shall all soon lie. I wandered among the graves, among those who long ago went to their rest and their reward. Here among others are the Sisters Iphigenia and Anastasia and the Brothers Daniel and Gabriel, the headstones of their graves quite covered by the snow. In the centre of the cemetery a stone sarcophagus rises above the snow. It seems to have withstood the ravaging tooth of time, for it stands squarely upon the ground. I brushed aside as best I could the snow which covered the tablet, and read: "Here rests an outgrowth of the love of God, a solitary brother, afterwards a leader, ruler, teacher of the solitary and the congregation of Christ in and around Ephrata. Born in Eberbach, in the Palatinate. Called by his worldly name, Conrad Beisel; but according to his spiritual name, 'Friedsam,' the peaceful one." The snow and the frost clung closely. I could not read it all, but I saw plainly the beautiful German letters cut deep into the stone. "Friedsam"--it was this word which took me back to Whiskey Hill. "Friedsam." No one could be called that on Whiskey Hill. Weather-beaten wooden buildings there are, scaffolded structures, shaken by the vibration of coal-crushing machinery within. From their third or fourth stories down, young boys sit before troughs, along which the coal rushes and rumbles and tumbles. Nine hours a day, in an atmosphere black as night from coal dust, sitting in a cramped and unnatural position, the breaker-boys pick slate from the falling coal by the light of smoky oil lamps directly under their nostrils. Nine hours of this, and many of these boys, mere children, although sworn to be the legal age, which is fourteen, walk homeward like old men. They look so weary, so old, so wizened! They surely are not "Friedsam." An old man climbs down the breaker. He, too, is now a breaker "boy." Only about fifty-six years of age, unfit for the harder work in the mine, he picks slate from the larger lumps. He clings to a bit of broken fence as soon as the fresh air strikes him and coughs so violently that his paroxysm shakes the fence. The boys stand about, jeering; but when a clot of blood comes from the old man's mouth, and another followed by a stream, the boys take to their heels. "_Prach_, dust, got into my lungs," the Slovak miner says. "It can't last much longer." Looking after the boys, and then pointing to himself, he adds, "The beginning and the end of the breaker-boy." I shall never forget the pain written on that man's face as he told me that he came to this country, a young Slovak boy from a village by the river Waag, strong and full of health. He is giving his life-blood drop by drop, drop by drop, for our enrichment. He is unable to walk home; so I lead him. Home! This is his home. A gray, weather-beaten hut, one of thirty, standing on a slant of the hillside, surrounded by culm piles, black and forbidding. There is a street, deeply sunk in mire; for there is no sewerage, and a sickening green scum has gathered in front of every house. I say there is no sewerage--there is not even a decent ditch which might carry the foul stuff away. The hut has three stories, the lowest one built into the hillside, with windows only to the front; the rest of the rooms are damp and cold, not even fit for the storing of vegetables. In one of these holes lives the old, consumptive breaker-boy. Surely this suggests nothing "Friedsam." There are thousands and tens of thousands such "homes" in Pennsylvania, all the way from Pittsburg to Whiskey Hill. Each one of them brings rich revenue to somebody, and all of them reap a rich harvest of death. Six, eight, and ten dollars' rent a month is paid by these miners for a place in which they often die by inches. The battle against filth is not everywhere zealously prosecuted; but I challenge any American woman to do better than some of these Slovak women on Whiskey Hill. Let me take you into one such home--and I came upon it more often than you may think. The room is freshly papered, the work done by the miner's wife, and not ill done. The floor is scrupulously clean; gorgeous pictures of the saints hang on the wall; there is a sewing-machine, and a woman busy at her task of making shirts for her miner husband. There are two rooms, occupied by a family of [Illustration: THE SLAVIC HOME IN HUNGARY A peaceful, little village surrounded by fields of poppies and maize.] [Illustration: THE SLAVIC HOME ON WHISKEY HILL Flanked by culm piles, breakers and mines.] five, and four boarders. I know the home of this woman in Hungary, and the very village from which she comes. I know the clean, straw-thatched cottage, the broad, dusty street, and the waving poppy-field back of the house; and I ask, "How are you getting along on Whiskey Hill?" This is the woman's reply: "Chvala Bohu dobre." Thank God, very well. I have never seen a more beautiful and grateful smile pass over a face, and have never heard a sentence which more fully suggested "Friedsam"; but suddenly her face grows dark; she hears the noise of hurrying horses and the beating of wheels against the rocky street. "The ambulance! O Virgin Mother, protect me!" she cries; for the ambulance stops at her door, and they bring in the mangled body of her husband. He went out a few hours ago and she was "Naomi"--now he is brought home, and she is "Marah." Bitter, very bitter. What happens next on Whiskey Hill? Do people grow excited? Do the neighbours come rushing in? Do the newspapers in the town at the foot of Whiskey Hill take notice how this "Hunkey" came to his death? No, indeed. Nothing happens. The woman laments alone, even as another Marah laments alone in a similar row on another ridge. There are ten women anything but "Friedsam"; for on a neighbouring hill their husbands were slain together, by the fall of one huge rock or the same powder blast. "And nothing happens?" Yes, something happens. The coroner's jury is summoned, and brings in the verdict; the same verdict always, with slight variations, rendered ever since the great companies absorbed the anthracite industry. This is it: "Martin Horvat, aged forty-two, came to his death by a fall of rock in Mine No. 2 on Whiskey Hill, January 30, 1908. The jury finds that the company should have provided the deceased a safe place to work in. It was not the duty of the deceased to pass on the safety of the roof. The deceased is not to blame." (What a comfort!) "We further find that the place in which the deceased worked should have been properly timbered" (which it was not when the accident occurred), "but we do not find that the company was to blame." Who was to blame? The deceased was not, the company was not. I have it--the rock was to blame. Somebody in Wilkes-Barre said, in answer to my query; "These Hungarians are so ignorant." I see now--ignorance was to blame. Every day there are funerals on Whiskey Hill, and after the funeral a feast, and after the feast a glorious spree. Whiskey Hill has earned its name, although it might be called Beer Hill just as appropriately. The saloons not only outnumber the churches; they outnumber the stores, schools, churches, undertakers' shops, and culm hills combined, and a man might make a living by picking up the empty beer barrels that lie in the ravines. There are enough empty bottles lying in the runs, to clog the flow of the creek in the spring, when the current becomes strong enough to make its way through the ooze and slime. Ignorance and beer are to blame--and avarice, especially avarice. For the first two the miner is to blame, but only in part. This ignorance is an inheritance, often a condition arising from the fact that he is in a strange country, to whose language he is deaf and dumb. The drinking, too, is an inheritance, and often also a condition arising from the circumstances under which he must live and work. Granting, however, that he is ignorant and intemperate, up here on Whiskey Hill and on hundreds of other hills no attempt is being made by any one to dispel this ignorance. Neither his masters nor his priests are doing it. His priests, perhaps, are more content with his ignorance than his masters, for to the master he might be worth more if he knew more. The priest is sure of the opposite result as far as he is concerned. No one on Whiskey Hill tries to curb intemperance by teaching the "Hunkey" the hurt of it to his bank account, to his body, to his chances of coming alive out of the mine. His priest usually drinks freely, and many a saloon license in Pennsylvania bears the signature of the priest as one of the petitioners. Even those people who are eager to make laws to curb or prohibit the sale of liquor, ignore entirely the education of the "Hunkey," although he is now, and more and more will be, a great factor in the political and social life of the state. Avarice is to my mind the basic fault in all the history of accidents in the mines of Pennsylvania. It is an avarice which thinks human life cheaper than timber, and considers it easier to pay funeral expenses than to support schools and pay teachers. It corrupts politicians to the degree that there is seemingly nothing more to corrupt; and if half the charges are true that are made openly by the newspapers in the coal regions, against the mine inspectors, they certainly are hopelessly debased. Of the one thousand people slain annually in the anthracite coal region, two-thirds are chargeable to one of three causes: ignorance, intemperance, and avarice. Inasmuch as these causes could in a large degree be removed by the people of Pennsylvania, it follows that the people are to blame. Twenty-three thousand lives have been sacrificed in the coal-mining industry in the United States in about ten years! Read it again! Twenty-three thousand people had to give up their lives for the light and heat and speed which we enjoyed in the last ten years. Twenty-three thousand men! Almost I envy the Brothers Daniel and Gabriel and the Sisters Iphigenia and Anastasia the time in which they lived, when the waters of the Cocalico turned their wheels, when they printed books and illumined letters, when they could do their share in pushing this world forward without sacrificing the lives of an army of men to what we call progress. That time will never return, in spite of Rousseau and Ruskin and Tolstoy; but we must have a time, and have it soon, when we shall be able to do all that we are doing without such slaughter. Nothing is worth doing and nothing is worth having unless, like Conrad Beisel, we have a "new name in the Lord." For myself, if I lived in Pennsylvania, it should not be "Friedsam" but "Streitsam"--not the peaceful one, but the fighter. XVII FROM THE LOVCZIN TO GUINEA HILL According to ordinary railway standards the car was only half full, for each passenger was the fortunate possessor of an entire seat. Reluctantly enough, one or the other of my fellow travellers gave to some newcomer the space which allowed him some freedom for the movements of his body; but when a dozen foreigners entered the car at a wayside station, every man and woman moved defiantly to the outer edge of the seat, determined that not one of the intruders should share it. Ordinarily the conductor sees to it that such monopoly of privilege is properly rebuked; but this time he apologized for the presence of the immigrants by saying that the smoking-car was "jam full of Dagos already." Meekly enough, the men stood in the aisle, glad of the privilege of standing in the car, which carried them from the scene of their labours to the distant city where the signora and the bambini awaited them. I made room for one of the men, and for a time employed all my senses to discover if possible the reason for their receiving such treatment. I smelled neither garlic nor whiskey, although I was soon engaged in conversation with my neighbour and thus had a good chance to detect either. He wore blue jeans overalls, which, while not stylish garments, are certainly honest clothing. There was no crease down the middle, but they had creases all over. His hands were not unclean; although the soil of honest labour was upon them. In no way was he different from the American working man of the same class, except that he did not chew tobacco and therefore did not indulge in the practice which usually accompanies that accomplishment. In order to ascertain what chances there were for English conversation, I addressed him in that language, and his answers in broken English were certainly more entertaining than the abrupt "yes" or "no" which one often receives from the native fellow traveller, to whom it is usually a matter of indifference whether or not the time hangs heavily on one's hands. At the next station the smoking-car was relieved of its surplus passengers, and my neighbour with all his countrymen was driven into it with rough gestures. I am very proud of the courage I displayed by turning in my seat and addressing the man who sat behind me. "Won't you please tell me," I said, hesitatingly, "why you wouldn't share your seat with one of those men?" I fully expected him to say, "It's none of your business," but his stern face relaxed for a moment as he replied, with a rising inflection, "Dagos," and then looked as stern as before. I was not satisfied by that answer and said so. This opened the way for an argument, and conversation was soon in full swing. "What right have those Dagos to come to this country, anyway?" he retorted, when I pleaded that those men had paid their fares and had the same right that he had, to a seat. I soon discovered that neither logic nor ethics was his strong point; so I thought I would try him on history. "Do you know," I asked, "who was the first 'Dago' that came to this country?" For a moment he put his thinking apparatus to work; then he said, and I am quoting his words exactly: "I suppose it was somebody by the name of Macaroni, who sold bananas when he landed in New York, and talked an outlandish gibberish." "No," I replied, "his name was Christopher Columbus, and if it had not been for that 'Dago' you would still be undiscovered." I had great difficulty in making my fellow traveller believe that there are cities in Italy more beautiful than Pittsburg; but when I told him that a "Dago" built the largest church in the world, his materialistic sense was touched and he began to listen respectfully to what I said. "The same 'Dago' who built that church carved statuary so beautiful that whenever any man wishes to free the 'imprisoned splendour of the stone' (I did not quote Michael Angelo to him, however), he has to go to see what that 'Dago' has done. "And that same man," I continued, "painted a ceiling which is one of the great art wonders of the world. His name is Michael Angelo." "I never heard of him." "I know of another 'Dago'" I continued, emphasizing "Dago," "who painted a picture for which even _you_ might be willing to pay $500." "I'd like to see it!" When I mentioned Raphael and the Sistine Madonna, he did have some vague idea of what I was trying to convey to him; for these were fairly familiar names. Then he fell upon me savagely. "But you don't mean to say that these 'Dagos' that come over here are anything like Michael Angelo or Raphael!" To which I replied: "No, they are not; but neither are you anything like George Washington or Abraham Lincoln." Then I returned to the perusal of my newspaper. That man was an average American of the middle class, a representative of the bulk of our population, and he, in common with many of his countrymen, is criminally ignorant of the people who will soon have his weal and woe in their hands. The Italian, the Greek, and the Syrian are usually called by the classic names "Dago," "Roundhead," or "Guinea," and the Slavs, be they Poles, Servians, Slovaks, or Montenegrins, are called "Hunyaks," "Hunkies," and "Slabs"; and I once heard the owner of a great industrial establishment call them "Bohunks." It was not an ignorant or malicious friend of mine who said of a Jew, a man of scholarly attainment and a common acquaintance, "He is a pretty decent Sheeny." I have no quarrel with the fact that the average American is ignorant of the historic place which these people hold among the nations, and of the great age-long struggle through which some of them have passed and are still passing, that they may preserve their identity as a people. I am thoroughly incensed, however, that nearly every one of the names applied to them is an expression of contempt, an offhand judgment of inferiority. After all, it is not even that which makes me take up the cudgel for them, because they must and will prove for themselves that they are perfectly human like the rest of us, and that in all essential things they will grow like us as soon as they have the same privileges which we have had, who came after the first "Dago" had discovered the way to this land of opportunity. What really _does_ burden me and make me cry out is the consequences which result from such ignorance as I have cited, and because of which I was on that train travelling to Guinea Hill. Guinea Hill differs from Whiskey Hill in that it bears many other fantastic names and in that there are fewer saloons. The beer-kegs do not lie about in such unpicturesque confusion, and the Slavs who live there come from the shores of the Adriatic and the bleak mountains of Montenegro. The huts in which they live on Guinea Hill are even worse than those of the earlier comers from the north of the Slavic world. I am told that they were built some thirty years ago, and no sacrilegious hand has touched them since, to paint them or to change their original primitive, dry-goods-box architecture. They seem to have sunk into the refuse of the mines, and the sociological investigators, who know the housing conditions in Pennsylvania, declare them to be "the worst in the state," which phrase would be eloquent from meaning were it not so common as to lose its force. Living in these wretched huts among stunted trees, the leaves of which are shrivelled and blackened by coal dust, I found young men with whom I had walked among the olive groves near Spalato. These young men had rowed me across the Boche de Cattero, easily the most magnificent bay in Southern Europe, and had shared with me the luscious figs which they carried in their shirt bosoms. I saw many a man whom I first knew beneath the deep shadow of the Lovozin, the historic mountain of Montenegro, whence the spirits of departed heroes still call to fight against Christianity's hereditary foe--the Turk. When last I saw these youths they wore garments of red and white cloth, richly embroidered, with their belts full of costly weapons of ancient pattern, and their fierce mustachios stretching out defiantly like long, double-pointed daggers. Here on Guinea Hill they all wear the sober garb of miners, their mustachios are shorn of their fierceness, their weapons have disappeared, their shooting is done in the darkness of the mine, and they rarely shed any blood but their own. I went to Guinea Hill because I am partly responsible for the presence there of some of these Southern Slavs. Many years ago, when I visited their mountain fastness, numbers of them were at the verge of starvation. The crops on their scant fields had failed; fighting the Turk had grown to be a fruitless and profitless occupation; Russia, their ally and the godmother of their little principality, who in the past sent thither what surplus of foodstuffs she possessed, was herself living on borrowed money and charity, so that nothing remained for these warriors except to starve or seek for work. I suggested to Prince Nicolas that he permit them to go to the "land of the free and the home of the brave." Not one of them, however, was then willing to leave his rocky cradle home for the unknown fabled land so far away, and they remained on their bleak mountains to take half-rations or none, waiting for the realization of Russia's Asiatic dream in which lay wrapped their own future. The Japanese war and the subsequent Russian revolution were like the eagles' stirring the nest, and the young eagles began to flutter in the exaltation of their first flight, as they sought the shores of our far-away country. Four or five thousand of these braves exchanged the hilt of the sword and the butt of the gun for the shovel and the pickax, and the shadow of the towering Lovczin for the shadeless Pennsylvania hills. There I found them digging coal as bravely as they had fought the Turk, but known to their American masters only as "Hunkies" or "Guineas"--no one discovering in their open, honest faces a superior race--every one scenting in them drunkards, brawlers, and incendiaries. The usual results of such ignorance followed, in that they have been treated with an injustice which makes them quite unconscious of the fact that they have found the land of "liberty, equality, and fraternity." I have verified nearly every complaint which they have made to me, for I know how easy it is for sensitive men to exaggerate their wrongs; but I found that they knew only about half of what they suffered, the other half being mercifully hidden from them by their ignorance of the language and the customs of our country. After pay-days and feast-days the magistrates of the towns around seek them to arrest them, and the fine they must pay is always twice, three times, and in some cases ten times as great as that imposed upon the American offenders. After trials which make a Russian military court seem fairly decent, they are railroaded into jails and workhouses, and I now soberly confess that as a stranger I would rather fall into the hands of the police of Moscow or St. Petersburg than into those of the protectors of the law in most of our industrial centres in Pennsylvania and out of it. The citizens of Pennsylvania may be comforted by knowing that Indiana, Ohio, and Illinois, in their lower courts, are as unjust to the stranger as their own state. In one town in Ohio there is, or was, a mayor who is reputed to have made $9,000 a year out of the fines imposed upon foreigners for petty offenses, usually for drunkenness or brawling. This ingenious official arrested alien drunkards under the statute of the state which allowed him to fine them as high as thirty dollars, while the native was arrested under the statute of the town and fined three dollars for his spree. The Indianapolis police arrested a Slovak woman for the heinous crime of picking up coal on the tracks. On the coldest day of the year she was taken from her home and children and driven to the workhouse, in spite of the fact that she was in an advanced stage of pregnancy. The terrible results of this inhuman treatment were, of course, what might be expected. Such facts have led the citizens to organize an Immigrant Protection League, which makes it its business to see that the immigrant is not exploited by the courts. On Guinea Hill every "Roundhead," as he is commonly called, despises the court for its undignified procedures and its perspicuous dishonesty. The judges' contempt for the immigrant, as well as that of other executive officers, rankles and hurts beyond the telling, causing people who might become stanch, loyal, and heroic citizens, to hate and despise our institutions. If in time of turmoil and economic distress they become lawless, as I firmly believe they will, we shall reap only what we have sown. In our present hysteria about Anarchy it is well to remember that it feeds on injustice, that it cannot grow--in sane minds at least--if a nation deals out justice impartially, and that it would die out completely if as a people we would live somewhere within hailing distance of Mount Sinai. I do not ask any sentimental consideration in our law courts for the Slavic or the Italian offender. Deal with him firmly; punish him if punish we must; but let the man who steals a coal mine be not dealt with more leniently than the woman who picks up coal on the track. Let the Jewish thief suffer, if he has stolen the railway's old iron; but let him who steals a whole railway also suffer in proportion to the magnitude of his crime. I have asked for the aliens, and shall not cease asking until I am heard: First, that we learn to know them. The people of Montenegro, Poland, Hungary, and Italy are worth the knowing. If struggle for liberty means anything in the character of a nation, then these people have character; for their fields are drenched in martyrs' blood. Where in Hungary the poppy grows reddest, or in Italy the figs are most luscious, there the common people have shed their blood heroically. Besides that knowledge, which, if it did no more for us, would at least enlarge our mental horizon, I ask for common, fundamental justice; not only for the sake of the alien but for our own sake. I ask and shall continue to ask for justice--justice, which is the least if not the most that we are capable of giving them. At present I do not ask, for I cannot expect it, that enlightened justice which is love, the divinest human gift. I ask for just plain, common, every-day justice. "As ye would that" your own offenders should be done by, so do ye even unto the alien. This is as far from the Golden Rule as Guinea Hill is from the Lovczin; but it is the most we may expect, although not the most for which we ought to ask. Not a hundred miles away from Guinea Hill, at the Hazleton Young Men's Christian Association, I want to show you what enlightened justice can do for the "Roundhead." I came down from the Hill disheartened and sad, and, stepping into the office of that rather remarkable Young Men's Christian Association building, I saw a man, with dust-cloth and broom, walking about with the peculiarly graceful stride of the mountaineer. "That's Gabriel--not the archangel; but an angel, anyway," Mr. Hill, the secretary, told me. "Go from garret to cellar and you will find no dust or disorder. The small boy, that bane of the Young Men's Christian Association, fears him and loves him in turn. I don't see how we could get along without Gabriel." "Kiss my cheek, Gabriel, and wish me well." And Gabriel kissed my cheek and wished me well, just as he used to in his Montenegrin home, when kinsman met kinsman upon the war-path as they fought their ancient enemy, the Turk. Now, no weapons bulged from Gabriel's belt, his clothing was faultlessly American, his once furious mustachios had fallen beneath an American barber's shears, and his battle-field was this splendidly equipped building. Officially, he was the janitor; but he was also the self-appointed and beneficent dictator, feared by all evil-doers and breakers of rules, and beloved by all who could appreciate a faultlessly kept building. "You must see his room," the genial secretary said, with a twinkle in his eyes, and we followed Gabriel to the topmost story. He opened the door of his room with pardonable pride, for Prince Nicolas, the ruler of his country, whose bedroom I have seen and in whose throne-room I have had audience, cannot boast of an apartment so neat and clean or so gorgeously decorated. Besides the comfortable furniture, unrivalled in Gabriel's home-land, the walls were hung with pictures which reflected prevailing American tastes. Celluloid toilet articles lay upon the bureau, while many books and newspapers betrayed how this janitor spent his spare time. Gabriel's face was radiant from pride, and so was mine; while added to my pride was a pleasurable feeling to which I could give no other expression than to ask for another fraternal kiss, which he gave me with a resounding smack. When we returned to the lobby, I looked over the group of men gathered there to meet me, and my wits were tested to place each man according to his nationality. I looked into the face of one young man, a veritable giant, and before he opened his lips I said, "You are a Dalmatian." "Yes, yes," he replied, "from Ragusa." Again I looked into his deep eyes and finely chiselled features. Yes, it was the type one sees beneath the half-ruined porticoes of ancient palaces, where young men play the _tambouritza_ and young maidens listen behind latticed windows; where old men dream dreams of the Ragusan Republic and its vanished glory, when it vied with Venice in maritime power, although it never gained her ascendency. Now it is dying a slow and a forgotten death, beneath shading palm trees, while its warrior sons, the bluest blood of Dalmatia, are sent to dig coal in Pennsylvania, and its _guslar_ minstrels make music for the merry-makers at Coney Island. What a fine specimen this is which Ragusa has sent us! Ask the secretary about him and he will tell you that he is intelligent, cleanly, temperate, and frugal; yet in Pennsylvania he is just a "Hunky." Other members of the Young Men's Christian Association are loth to see him on the gymnasium floor with them, and to most Americans he is only an undesirable immigrant from Southern Europe--something to be dreaded. "I am an Italian," very proudly says the next man who grasps my hand, and, looking into his face, I ask doubtfully, "From Italy?" for his face shows Slavic lines. "From Triest," he adds. Ah! now I understand. That is where Italian, Slav, and German meet--and fight, as is the custom of all good Austrians; for each race claims superiority over the others, and in most of them flows the blood of all three races. "You must come to see my kindergarten and my church." I promise; for he is quite an important factor in the redemption of Little Italy. The next man is a Slovene from the neighbourhood of Agram, the next a Slovak, then a Pole, and "last but not least," a Bohemian. All these are gathered here beneath the sheltering wing of this archangel Gabriel, janitor of the Young Men's Christian Association and self-appointed, beneficent dictator and preserver of the peace. He preserves the peace by carrying out, bodily, offending or offensive visitors--a task for which he is well fitted. One of his ancestors plunged into the thick of Turkish foes, dragged a magnificent Pasha from his horse and carried him across the intervening space in the face of a rain of bullets, one of which struck him. He fell with his burden; but, quickly recovering his footing, held the Pasha safe by the throat with one hand, pulled a pistol with the other, and in a moment argued the distinguished prisoner into taking him upon his shoulders. Carried thus by the Turkish officer, he came riding into camp and presented his trophy to his commander, saying, "This is a fine horse I have brought to you, my captain;" and then fell swooning to the ground. The building over which his descendant, Gabriel, watches, is as safe as a fortress. There are only two things which this brave fears. One is the steam boiler which provides the building with heat. Steam is an unknown force in his native land, which even the fiery horse has not yet invaded; so, no matter how often Gabriel is instructed, no matter how often he is reassured, when the steam bubbles and hisses he flees for safety; and to this day, valves, screws, wheels, and radiators are terrifying mysteries to him. Gabriel's other dread is--women. Not that he dislikes them; on the contrary, you should see his face all aglow from pleasure when a woman looks at him, and yet "trembling takes hold upon him as upon the inhabitants of Philistia," and he returns to his task as if beaten by an enemy, all discouraged and distraught. Rightly used and wisely directed, men like Gabriel can become a power among us. Over the various nationalities of Southern Europe now coming here in great numbers, such men can wield an influence more potent, perhaps, for the peace of the world than the Hague Tribunal. Nine men of nine nationalities grasped hands in that Young Men's Christian Association lobby at Hazleton, Pennsylvania, and formed a circular chain like unto the chain formed by the ancient Slavic heroes when they swore fealty to old "Duchan." Thus did we pledge our faith to this new country as we exhorted one another to patience, to justice, and to love. In leaving Hazleton I was asked by one of its citizens, "What will these foreigners do to America when they get the power?" My answer was, "They will help you save it, or they will aid you in destroying it. It is very much in your own power whether they shall be 'leaven' or 'dynamite.'" P. S. Gabriel has left Hazleton. He is now in New York, a valuable member of the Immigrant Department of the Presbyterian church, and they say that this Montenegrin is "leaven" and not "dynamite." XVIII THE JEW AND THE CHRISTIAN Of all animals, man is the most brutal. Naturalists still disagree as to the reason for his cruelty, but whatever it be, he has not often stopped to ask himself the cause. He hates and smites and slays, simply because he hates. It is true that man's historic brutalities are hidden under the gloss of what he calls patriotism or preservation of the race; but if the average man were asked the cause for his own unbridled hate of other races, he could give no intelligent answer. That race hatred is a primitive passion is no doubt true, that it is seemingly ineffaceable is also true; for neither education nor religion has obliterated it; indeed both, strange to say, seem to have intensified it. Even the religion of Jesus Christ, whose main endeavour was to break down the tribal prejudices and hate of races, has not only failed to accomplish its object, but in its historic manifestation has in many cases aggravated it. Whatever the cause, be it the old tribal spirit, the ethnic motive or the opposing religious dogmas; whatever has been endured by one or other of the races and for whatever cause, the Jewish race has suffered for all causes, has suffered everywhere, has suffered long, and has not yet seen the end of its sufferings anywhere. There is no country in which the Jews have been in any large numbers, where they have not endured and are not now enduring persecution. There is no country to-day of which we can say that the causes which led to their persecutions have been removed. This is as true of Germany as it is of Russia, and as true of the United States as it is of Austro-Hungary. Every fair minded Jew knows this, and because he knows it he would rather not talk about it or hear it talked about. Every fair minded Gentile knows it, although perhaps he would not be willing to acknowledge it, even to himself. Undoubtedly, there must be reasons for an attitude so universal, and before we can apply any remedy, it is necessary to analyze the disease. First: The Jews have been able to maintain the tribal spirit during periods when it was breaking down all around them. The tenacity necessary for this and the extremely exclusive methods used, blocked every avenue of social approach and aroused the suspicion of their neighbours. Whether these neighbours were Egyptians, Assyrians, Romans, Greeks, Slavs or Teutons, they hated the Jews because they kept themselves separate. The feeling of superiority which the Jew felt, soon degenerated into contempt for the Gentile and was fostered by the fact that the mass of the people with whom he came in contact was beneath him culturally, using the word in its broadest sense. The Jew could read and write when his Gentile neighbours did not know the alphabet. The Gentile bowed down to stocks and stones, to priests and Pope, while the Jew held his head erect and covered, even in the presence of Jehovah. The people who thus voluntarily excluded themselves from Gentile society were finally kept aloof by law, and when their masters became their equals, and in some respects their superiors, the way of approach was effectually blocked; until now, the aversion of the Gentile for the Jew is fixed, and seems almost ineradicable, much as the Jew may wish to free himself from it. Second: Religious prejudice is another vital factor leading to this antipathy between Jew and Gentile; although it is not the only one. It manifested itself early in some of the New Testament writings, grew more intense as the church began to overshadow the synagogue, reached its height during the crusades and is still a compelling force among the common people all over the world. The myth that Jews used the blood of Gentile children for their Passover feast very early gained currency, and this, coupled with the fact that it is the anniversary period of Christ's crucifixion and resurrection, has always made Easter time a season of brutal outrages against the Jews. In reality, the Church has never been quite blameless in these fanatical outbreaks; although it is also true that Church dignitaries at all times have tried to shield the Jewish victims. In most cases, however, they have made no effort to put out the fire until after it was well started, and consequently were too late. Yet I firmly believe that religious prejudice alone does not account for this feeling, because it exists in irreligious and religious people alike; among those who are quite indifferent to the fact that Jesus lived and who have but a vague and distant interest in His crucifixion. The late Prof. Nathaniel S. Shaler of Harvard, one of the most broad-minded observers, after an exhaustive study of the subject, comes to these conclusions.[1] "The greater number of those who have helped me in this inquiry note that there is, on contact with those who are characteristic Jews, a distinct and peculiar state of mind aroused by the intercourse. They are conscious that the feeling is other than that which they experience when they meet those of their own race; but there is, as might be expected, no clear agreement as to the precise nature of the impression. "So far as I have been able to gather, the state is emotional and instinctive, being in effect the same as that which is always excited by contact of racially different men. To support and explain this primitive emotion, there is a natural effort to find some peculiarities of aspect or demeanour in the neighbour. As to what these idiosyncrasies are, there is a considerable difference of opinion. The greater number of the observers agree that there is a failure on the part of the Jews to respond in like temper to the greeting which they send them; they agree further that there is generally a sense of avidity, a sense of the presence of the seeking, in the Jew, for immediate profit, a desire to win at once some advantage from the situation, such as is not immediately disclosed, however clear it might be to an interlocutor of his own race. Several have stated that the offense came from a feeling that the Jew neighbour was smarter than themselves, having keener wits and a mind more intent on gainful ends. Others state that the Israelite spirit makes a much swifter response to the greeting the stranger gives them than the Aryan, and that the acquaintance is forced to such a degree as to breed dislike. "This last noted feature in the contact phenomena of Israelites and Aryans appears to me a matter of much importance, especially as it accords with my own experiences and with observations formed long before I began to devise and criticise theories on this subject. As one of the Deans of Harvard University, I have been for ten years in a position where I have to meet from year to year a number of young Hebrews. It has been evident to me from the first that these youths normally respond more quickly to my greeting than those of my own race, and that they divine and act on my state of mind with far greater celerity. They are in fact so quick that they are often where I am, in my slower way, about to be, before I am really there. This would make them at times seem irritating, indeed, presumptious, were it not interesting to me from a racial point of view. To those who are in nowise concerned with such questions, this alacrity is naturally exasperating, especially when the movement is not only one of wits but one of sympathies. "We all know how disagreeable it is to have the neighbour call on us for some kind of affectionate response, before we are ready to be moved, and how certain is such a summons to dry the springs which else might have yielded abundantly. In our slow, Aryan way, we demand an introductory process on the part of the fellow man who would successfully appeal to our emotions. Our orators know this, and provide ample exordiums for their moving passages; none ventures in the manner of the Hebrew prophet to assume that his hearers will awaken at a cry. "In observations made for me by young men, students in Harvard College, and thus under my own eyes, so to speak, I have confirmation of the hypothesis that an important part of the difficulty of social contact between these diverse people is due to the difference in the way their minds work when they come together. It is an unhappy fact that the last wave of anti-Semiticism, that which led to the semblance of persecution in Germany and to the abomination of the Dreyfus incident in France, swept across the Atlantic and affected to a considerable extent the social position of the Jews in the United States. They became unwelcome in clubs, and in hotels; their daughters were not admitted to certain private schools; and in various ways the unhappy people were made to feel the ancient burden as in this country it had not come upon them before. "Of this resurgence of dislike, the Hebrew students had some, though not a serious share. Thirty years ago, when the Jews began to be an appreciable element among the students of this university, there was no evidence whatever of dislike to them. They took their places among their mates with no reference to their race; that indeed seemed, so far as I could discern, to be quite unnoted. Following on the last European epidemic of hatred to the Israelites, there has developed among this body of students an evident dislike for their fellows of that race. The feeling is by no means universal or intense; it is condemned by the greater part of the leaders of opinion among these young men; yet it is sufficient to be noticeable and to awaken keen regret in all those who love the catholic and human motive which so long has inspired that school. One of my helpers in the effort to find the reason for this state of mind summed up his acute observations in the statement that when one spoke to the Jew kindly, 'the fellow climbed all over you.'" I agree with nearly all Professor Shaler says; but I am sure that there are two facts which he does not sufficiently emphasize. First: The anti-Semitic feeling was carried to Harvard on the wave which came from France during the Dreyfus trial. This is important; for it proves my point that race antipathies are contagious, and that it does not matter whether the contagion springs from an ethical or unethical source. The psychological law for this lies in the now fairly well explored field of the "mob" and is a common phenomenon from which many races have to suffer. The second point made by Professor Shaler is that which refers to the Jewish mind. That quick response which the Jews give, which is so obnoxious to the Gentile, was certainly not disagreeable to Jehovah; for if we trust Holy Writ, He often held converse with them and made the quick Jewish mind the vehicle of His thought. This quality of the Jewish mind made an Amos hear the roaring of the Lord's voice in the lonely wilderness; it made an Isaiah hear the call of Jehovah amid the din of the traffic of Jerusalem, and brought to the ears of a Paul the heavenly voice, on the road to Damascus. This quality of the Jewish mind also betrays his "seeking for immediate profit" and explains the repulsion felt by Professor Shaler's friends, and felt by American people in academic circles and out of them. In my judgment the difference between the Jew and other commercial people lies largely in the fact that the Jew cannot so well conceal his desire to make profit. It is written upon his mobile face and conveys itself in the shrug of his shoulders and the upturned palms of his hands. For that reason the Jew is not successful in those forms of business which demand that their commercial features be hidden. He does not make a good life insurance agent, for here one must assume the rôle of a benefactor; nor does he make a good book agent; for in that work one must seem disinterestedly interested in the entire family or sell the book as a great favour to a few cultured people in the community. Although the Jew, especially in America, becomes a fairly clever gambler, he is a poor match for the Gentile in the game of poker, and for a long time to come he will have to keep out of games in which the mask one assumes determines their success; even as he will have to continue to do business in scrap iron and not in railroads, in pawn-shops and not in politics. In my experience with Jewish tradespeople in America, I am convinced that the sense of immediate profit is no less present in the Gentile mind than it is in that of the Jew, and that the Gentile does not always completely conceal it. There is at least one sphere out of which the Jew keeps his business more carefully than does his Gentile competitor, and that is the sphere of religion. I have yet to see Jewish hymnals invaded by advertisements, as are those of some Gentile congregations, and although the Jew is a direct descendant of those traffickers whom Jesus drove out of the temple, he has managed to keep his synagogue much more free from commercialism than his critics have their churches. In the great and solemn moments of life, he is not nearly so practical as the funny papers would have us believe. At the birth of a child, at the marriage feast and at the death-bed, he shows his natural idealism and gives, forgives and forgets. All this is not quite so true of other commercial peoples, notably the Americans. The following instance may not be typical nor may it prove the rule, and would no doubt be attributed to a Jew, had it not occurred in the college town in which I live and where all the clothing dealers are Gentiles, if not Christians. One of them was suddenly taken to a distant city to be operated on for appendicitis, and the next day a local paper contained the following advertisement: "I have gone to Rochester, Minn., to have my appendix cut out. This will be a great cut, but it will not compare with the cut I am making in clothing at my store on the corner of X and Y Streets." After the operation, while the man hovered between the unknown places, a second advertisement appeared. "I am having a hot time holding down a bed in this hospital; but it does not compare with the hot time my competitors will have in meeting my prices in clothing at my store, on the corner of X and Y Streets." My readers will agree with me that this "beats the Jews." The question of business standards is a very different matter, and that I wish to discuss in another chapter. I have not set myself the task of playing the apologist for the Jew or for any of the groups of which I treat. I freely acknowledge that there are disagreeable qualities in the Jew which explain in a measure, at least, the prejudice aroused by him. Foremost, I suppose, is the type which, when it is most pronounced, is apt to be unpleasant and unsympathetic. The offenses against good taste in dress are marked in many of them; but that lies more in the air with which the clothes are worn than in the clothes themselves. They are usually such as fashion dictates, and not in all cases more extreme than those worn by many Gentiles. The love of display is to some degree common to both Jew and Gentile; but is more noticeable among Jewish women, because they cannot conceal their feelings as well as the Gentile woman can. The Jewish woman who has "arrived" and knows it, wants the whole world to know it also; while the Gentile woman, especially the Gentile American woman, wears her first imported gown and diamonds as if her swaddling clothes had been made in Paris and her original baby pins encrusted with jewels. Still more apparent is a certain arrogance, a most annoying characteristic, especially in a people which ought to have the quality of humility in a large degree. The Jew recognizes this in his fellow Jew if not in himself, and no one more deplores it. He calls it Jewish _chuzpa_, Jewish "cheek," and it is, perhaps, one of the greatest causes for the social barriers raised against him. It is found in the Jewish beggar and in the Jewish millionaire. It is an ancient fault; for long ago, "Jeshurun waxed fat, and kicked." It is a quality which leads many eminent Jews to acts of unwisdom, such as protests against Christmas exercises in the public schools; the resolution passed by a recent conference of Jewish Rabbis, that America is not a Christian country, and other acts equally unadvised. This, also, has its causes, which are found among many peoples suddenly released from disabilities and given social and political rights. In order to introduce my main theme, the relation of the Jew to the Christian, I have tried conscientiously to analyze the causes which obstruct the social contact between Jew and Gentile. There are real antagonisms arising from the Jewish mind and habits, which are historic inheritances and cannot be easily overcome; but which have made it often a hard task for the Christian to be a real Christian towards his Jewish neighbour. There are other barriers, however, and they exist first, in the historic development of Judaism and second, in the nature and content of historic Christianity. The Jew is heterogeneous in cultural development. There are Orthodox Jews, wrapped in cabalistic mysticism, who have never moved an inch along the pathway of progress; to whom not only each word written in the law of Moses has divine origin and divine meaning, but to whom each word has as many meanings, as it has letters and dots and dashes. Upon these Jews, all the fetters of legalism are still rivetted, and to them, tradition and revelation are one and the same. There are less Orthodox Jews who have progressed as far as the philosopher Mendelssohn led them a century ago. There are nationalistic Jews to whom Zion is beckoning, and who hear the voice of the prophet bidding them "possess the land" and promising that "the ransomed of the Lord shall return and come to Zion, with songs and everlasting joy upon their heads" and that then, "sorrow and sighing shall flee away." There are modern Jews, who have forsaken the law and the ordinances, the Sabbath and the full moons, to whom the reformed synagogue is merely a connecting link with the historic past. There are rationalistic Jews to whom Karl Marx is the Messiah, and the Socialistic commonwealth, Jerusalem; and there are just Jews, who eat Kosher food because they like it, to whom Mammon is the Messiah and their business the Holy of Holies. To none of these does Christianity in its historic development appeal very strongly: First, because becoming a Christian means separation from the race; for heterogeneous as the Jews are in cultural development, so homogeneous are they in their racial consciousness. This is something which baffles analysis; it is the strongest example of race cohesion which we have. People who have lost national unity, who have diverged widely in religious beliefs and ceremonial observances, who are as far apart in culture as Greek and Barbarian, are still one as a race, and the man is _Anathema_ who breaks the racial tie. It matters not whether he does it to escape persecution, to gain preferment, or from deep conviction; to his fellow Jews it is always apostasy. That the broad-minded Jew may have a race consciousness which breaks through the ties of blood, they admit; but he must not become a Christian, even if to him Christianity is the only escape from the narrow tribal idea and from his own outgrown race consciousness, into the broader realm where he can say that he is a member of the human race, and as such is under the obligations of brotherhood to all men. In the second place, Christianity in its ceremonies, its ecclesiastical practices and its theology, is repellent to all these Jews, from the extreme radical to the extremest Orthodox. Anything which has even a semblance of idolatry, the slightest suspicion of Polytheism, must be obnoxious to the Jew; for he has been smitten by hail, drought and pestilence, and has been led into captivity because his unregenerate nature delighted in the worship of Baalim, and because he forsook Jehovah who dwelt between the Cherubim and the Seraphim. Then, too, the methods used to win the Jew to Christianity have aroused his opposition. In the Old World, until comparatively recently, he was forced once a year to attend church and listen to a sermon preached with the avowed object of his conversion. Needless to say, it rarely, if ever, converted him. The modern method as it manifests itself in Jewish Missions is no less repellent to him; although he is not forced to listen to the missionaries' sermons. Naturally, the converted Jew, who is an official converter, is usually under suspicion, although that suspicion is not always justified. With this question of race consciousness and habits, the Jew alone can deal, and he, unfortunately, is not always in the frame of mind required to adjust himself to the feelings of the Gentiles. He will therefore have to bear the consequences which lie in the social realm and may soon reach into the economic. The task of historic Christianity in its relation to the Jew is not an easy one. It cannot unmake itself or readily adjust itself to his likes and dislikes in theology; nor can it recede from its endeavour to make propaganda for the faith which it believes should be universal. I have the conviction that when Christ comes fully to His own in the church, He will also come to His own in the synagogue; certainly no sooner, and perhaps not much later. When He emerges from the tangle of Greek philosophy, Roman legalism and Byzantine traditionalism--when "in deed and in truth" He becomes the Gentile's Messiah, He will also become the Messiah of the Jew. As a working basis for the right relation between Jew and Gentile, I wish to quote Rabbi Sonnenschein, formerly of Des Moines, Iowa, in words spoken by him to a colleague in the Christian ministry. "I want to live so, that when you see me, you will say: 'There goes Rabbi Sonnenschein, who is a Jew; yet he is a better Christian than I am.' And I want you to live so, that when I see you, I will say: 'That man is a Christian; but he is a better Jew than I am.'" XIX THE JEW IN THE IMMIGRANT PROBLEM The Jew has nearly always been an immigrant and a problem. Nowhere is he accepted as indigenous; neither in Russia, where he has lived for centuries, nor in New York, where he will soon represent the bulk of population. He is as much a stranger on his home soil in Palestine as upon the rawest bit of ground staked into a city, in Wyoming or the Dakotas. His going is nowhere regretted at the time and his coming is not welcomed; while his remaining in a place leads to the development of prejudice, which has its root in various causes, already discussed. In a peculiar sense, his coming in large numbers is felt by the toiler and the trader; by the most antagonistic Gentile groups and by those Jews who came earlier, from some more favoured spot in the culture centres of Europe. The religious development of the Anglo-Saxon people, influenced more often by the Old Testament than by the New, as well as their familiarity with the Bible, has kept the Jew who lives among them immune from the grosser consequences of Anti-Semitism. [Illustration: A JEW OF THE POORER TYPE A product of persecution and orthodoxy.] [Illustration: A JEW OF THE FINER TYPE A Russian Jew; cultured, artistic and cosmopolitan.] Jehovah's chosen people have often been regarded with peculiar interest by the Anglo-Saxons, if not always treated with marked favour; yet even among them, this feeling has gradually undergone a change, until, their coming has become a cause for special inquiry by the English Parliament and one of the chief difficulties of the whole immigrant problem, as it affects our cities. I have had peculiar opportunities to note the development of these changes, and believe that the Jew has been too optimistic regarding his future in the United States; while the Gentile is too pessimistic as to the gravity of the Jewish problem. A clergyman in the city of New York whose fame is international, who is in constant contact with the best type of Jews, startled me not long ago by saying that the Jewish problem in the city of New York was in a most acute stage. In analysing his own feelings, he said: "No matter what you do, you're up against it; no matter how you prepare yourself to act the brother towards them, they won't let you succeed. You can't love them and you don't dare hate them." Mr. Robert Watchorn, the ex-commissioner of immigration, told me that after an address in which he minimized the problem of immigration, a well-known citizen of New York came to him and said that in twenty years Kisheneff will have its counterpart on the East Side. One of the most liberal Jewish rabbis in this country, whose addresses teem from the most extreme optimism as to the future of his race in America, will be amazed to hear that because he was invited to preach the baccalaureate sermon in a Western state institution of learning, a large number of the class absented itself from that service. In commenting upon it, I heard one of the number say to another, in unacademic, campus language: "Tough luck, boy. They've invited a Sheeny to preach our baccalaureate. It's an insult to the class!" The fact that twenty per cent. of the students at Columbia University are Jews, has led a number of Western boys to say to me: "We won't go to Columbia. There are too many Jews there." No less brutally frank expressions I have heard in the shops in which I have worked, and in hotel lobbies where I have loitered; so that while I may not regard the Jewish problem as the most serious in the general one of immigration, I certainly regard it as one of the most sensitive to approach and one of the most difficult to solve. I usually ask four questions regarding every immigrant group, and the answer determines, in my own mind at least, the desirability of its coming to the United States. The four questions are: First, Do we need them? By that, I mean, will they perform some useful function which is necessary and which the earlier comers cannot or will not perform? This is entirely an industrial question and can be safely answered only by the economist, who knows the field in all its bearings. My conviction, based upon no such accurate knowledge, is that we most need those groups which live by their muscle, rather than by their wits; the toiler, rather than the trader. If my theory is correct, this would exclude many Jews; although I am sure that they have performed many important functions in the industrial sphere, both in the realm of manual labour and out of it. Some such discrimination seems to me fair, for it would bar classes, rather than races, and would affect equally other commercial people, such as the Greeks, Armenians and Syrians. Whether or not this first question is fundamentally sound, of one thing I am sure. Half the ill feeling against the Jews would vanish if they would give themselves in any large numbers to the mechanical trades and to agriculture. Second, Does the group which seeks admission have the same economic ideals which characterized the earlier groups? This refers to standards of living as well as to standards of making the living. The Jew answers well to the first part of the question; in fact, better than the Latin or the Slav. Although he may be compelled to eat plain and coarse food, he craves the richer and daintier fare; if he has to live in a tenement on the East Side, he does it with an eye to a flat in Harlem; for the Jew has never ceased looking for the "land flowing with milk and honey," or longing for the "flesh-pots of Egypt." His standard of living is not low, but as some one has said: "elastic." He may eat red herring to-day, but to-morrow he will eat carp with garlic sauce; that is, if he can afford it. He will control his historic appetite in order to "get on," and it is the subordination of health and decency to this desire which often makes him an economic problem, if not a menace. But when he has attained, he is no miser. His children must have the best education, and his wife the most expensive clothing; he will save his children from the sweat shop if he can, and his wife whether he can or not. He is not willing to live off his children or on the town; although he is not always above living on his more fortunate brethren, whom he thus gives a chance to earn the divine favour by bestowing alms; he rarely sinks into pauperism. The agencies which minister to pleasure, the theatre, the concert hall and vaudeville, would lose a fair share of their patronage if Jews were excluded from them. The Jew is neither a total abstainer, nor is he intemperate, and his expenditure for alcohol, compared with that of the Irish, is about as one to a hundred. None dreads the coming of Jews into a neighbourhood more than the saloon-keeper, and some of the vilest localities in New York have been made fairly decent by the expansion of the Ghetto. One of the most difficult questions to answer is, whether Jewish ideals of making a living accord with those which characterize the older groups. The popular judgment is that they do not. It is commonly charged that the Jew degrades the industries upon which he enters; that as a competitor he is unscrupulous and as an advertiser, dishonest. "Jewing down" is a phrase too well known in commercial life to need interpretation. Whether it is the "quality of the Jewish mind" which has created this judgment, as Professor Shaler indicates, or whether it is the quality of his moral nature, I am not in a position to determine. All I can say with a sense of assurance is, first, that the business morality of the Jew not only compares favourably with other commercial groups which are coming to the United States, but is generally admitted to be higher than that of the Greeks and Armenians. Second, That the so-called Jewish business ethics, which in reality are Oriental and not essentially Jewish, and are also prevalent on the continent of Europe, do not compare favourably with the straightforward business methods traditional in America. Third, That the Jew has adopted these American standards in the lines of business which he controls, and that in every city he is counted among its most substantial and reliable business men. Fourth, That although the methods used by large numbers of Jews in business are often questionable, as is often the business itself, they have a remarkably clear record in the sphere of high finance, and that it is most fortunate for the well-being of the Jews in America that the so-called "Captains of Industry" are a native product. Roughly speaking, then, the charges that the Jew is an unfair competitor in the industries and in business may be true; yet if the case were put to a jury which could to some degree free itself from prejudice, the result would probably be a disagreement. What could not be easily denied is, that the sense of truth in the Jew from the east of Europe, notably from Poland, is low. I quote Mr. H. S. Lewis of London, a Jew, and an unprejudiced authority.[2] "One is sometimes tempted to conclude in despair that the bulk of the Polish immigrants have no sense of truth whatever. No more painful spectacle can be witnessed than the hearing of a summons at an East-End police court, where the parties concerned are foreign Jews. Obvious perjury on the slightest provocation is committed in case after case. The comments of Judge Bacon at the Whitechapel County Court on this fact have been at times severely criticised by the Jewish press. His generalizations may have been too sweeping, being based on his experience of petty litigation, where the seamy side of life is necessarily prominent. At the same time, his remarks have been based on a substantial substratum of truth. It is the experience of most visitors among the foreign poor for charitable societies, that although absolute imposture is exceptional, falsehoods with regard to the details of cases are constantly met with. "It is to this taint of untruthfulness that most of the other defects of the foreign Jews are to be traced. I fear that it cannot be denied that their standard of business morality is often defective. A statement of this kind may be regarded as unfair, and it is, of course, difficult to put it to any exact test. An illustration is, however, afforded by a return of convictions, periodically issued in the minutes of the London County Council, for the use of false weights and measures and kindred offenses. Judging by the names of the offenders, an altogether undue proportion of them appear to be foreign Jews. "We meet also in East London with far too many cases where the Bankruptcy laws are evaded by persons who pass through the courts and reappear in business with suspicious celerity and without apparent loss." The testimony of Rev. Max Wertheim of Ada, Ohio, ought to have some weight--it concerns the Americanized Jew. He was a rabbi at Dayton, Ohio, and after passing through various religious crises, became a Baptist, and is now doing devoted work on a small salary. Naturally, he has not received the most generous treatment from his former co-religionists, and would hardly flatter them. In answer to my question whether he found any difference in business standards between his Jewish and his Christian flocks, he unhesitatingly said that there was no difference. More weighty is the testimony which Prof. Graham Taylor gave recently before a Christian Brotherhood. "I know as good Christians among the Jews as among the churches." I am quite sure that basically there is no difference; although I should characterize some Jewish methods as mean, and those of some Gentiles as dangerous. In making this distinction, however, I realize that "wooden nutmegs," high-bottomed fruit boxes, sun-kissed apples at the top of the barrel and gnarled ones at the bottom, as well as other tricks of the native trade, are mean enough; while the methods of the theatrical trust, the adulteration of foods and drugs, the white slave trade and other questionable forms of business engaged in by both Jew and Gentile, may be called both mean and dangerous. It is also interesting to note that in the great industrial struggle the Jew is represented largely on the capitalistic side; but on the other hand, some of the strongest leaders in the labour unions and many of the Socialists of the rank and file are Jews; consequently the _vox populi_ may condemn them for being both. The third question is: Does the group possess ethnic qualities that will prevent normal assimilation, and therefore will increase race friction already dangerously strong? Disagreeable as is the Jewish type when very pronounced, it is undergoing such rapid changes where the environment is favourable, that it does not present a serious barrier to assimilation. The issues of intermarriage are exceptionally good and the resultant types normal. Yet in spite of the vanishing type, the Jews are a peculiar people and will long remain so. Their historic inheritance and their religious traditions, no less than their attitude towards the Gentiles and the attitude of the Gentiles towards them, will naturally keep them a group apart. The hostile attitude on both sides ought not to be strengthened, and I believe that for a period at least, Jewish emigration from the east of Europe should cease. Not because I believe the Russian Jew inferior, but merely because he is numerous and the ethnic and cultural difference between him and the native is so marked as to aggravate an antipathy already intense; this the Jews themselves feel. A Jewish merchant, who lives in a certain town in the Middle West, told me that strong Anti-Semitic feelings were aroused in the community by the arrival there of Russian Jews, and that as soon as they moved away the feeling vanished. Another Jewish merchant told me that in visiting various places with a view to locating his business, his first inquiry was: "Are there any Russian Jews in the town?" He said that business for the Jew is better where there are no Russian Jews. The feeling of the Americanized Jew towards this new immigrant was thus expressed by one of them: "We have to stand by them, but we wish they hadn't come." My fourth question refers to the attitude of the groups towards our social and political ideals. If the family ideal is the basis of our social and political life, it is certainly safe in the keeping of the Jew, who, if he errs at all in that direction, errs in making the well-being of the community or state, secondary to the well-being of his family. In spite of the fact that divorce, according to the rabbinic law, is easily obtained, almost as easily as in some of our Western states, it is rarely resorted to. Sexual immorality, wife desertion and divorce, become more common among the Jews only under stress of changed economic and religious environment. The criminal record of the Jew is still good; although he is under suspicion of merely being too shrewd to be caught. In the so-called lesser and meaner crimes, such as receiving stolen goods and pocket-picking, he has almost a monopoly; while in burglary and murder his record is fairly clean. At present there are no reliable statistics on this point, and there is much chance of juggling with figures, for friend and foe alike. The report of the Commission of Immigration of the state of New York presents a table of foreign born white offenders in the state's prisons in 1904, but unfortunately does not classify the Jews as such. However, if one took the entire number of criminals tabulated under the countries from which the Jews come, namely: Austria, Hungary, Russia and Poland, and counted all as Jews--a procedure manifestly unfair, even then the prison population of the state of New York contains over twelve per cent. more Irish than all the natives from these four countries, who of course are not all Jews, but represent different faiths. In lieu of reliable statistics, therefore, I must trust to my own experience. I have found that grosser criminality among the Jews is a more abnormal phenomenon than among most of the newer immigrant groups. In my intimate acquaintance with a number of Jewish communities in Europe, I know some as large as 10,000 souls, where such crimes as theft, robbery and murder are never committed; yet where cheating, fraudulent bankruptcy and receiving stolen goods are not uncommon. The Jew has done himself almost irreparable injury by his protest against the reading of the Bible, and Christmas exercises in the public schools and in his attitude towards Sunday laws. In both cases he has shown himself intolerant, and has alienated staunch friends whose help and sympathy he may need in the day of tribulation. As a citizen and patriot, he is everywhere giving evidence of his devotion; while in the struggle for the coming of a better day in the government of our cities and of the state, he has done his full share; indeed, among the newer immigrant groups, he has furnished to that cause by far the largest quota. There are several points at which the Jew does not satisfactorily answer the questions I ask. He provides far too large a number of those, who, as a class, seem unnecessary at the present stage of our economic development; he presents too solid a differentiated group, will retard proper adjustment and increase existing race antagonisms. His attitude towards the manifestation of the religious spirit in our public schools, his intolerance towards certain religious practices which are fundamentally ethical and social, but not necessarily sectarian, will more and more alienate those Americans who have been most hospitable towards him and upon whose good will he is dependent, economically and socially, if not politically. These, I think, are the sore spots of the problem; and if the Jew is as shrewd as he is painted, he will look to their healing; while if the American is as charitable as I think him to be, he will give the Jew full time for reconvalescence. XX FROM FIFTH AVENUE TO THE GHETTO It has always been dangerous for the common mortal who was the spokesman of his kind to eat at the king's table; for the tyrant at close range proved an admirable host and pleasant gentleman, whose tender meats and delicate wines covered a "multitude of sins." When, after having eaten _lunch_ on the East Side for a week, one receives an invitation to _luncheon_ on Fifth Avenue, even the most scrupulous may temporize, and I confess that, feeling highly flattered, I tossed my scruples to the winds and accepted the invitation. The feast began for me, when my eyes rested on the splendid architecture of the palatial residence, its furnishings, marbles and pictures, which appealed to my artistic sense and almost reproduced the atmosphere of the refinement and culture of those lands in which they had their birth. In the winter garden where fountains played, and rare flowers nodded their bedewed heads, filling the air with fragrance, I forgot the squalor of the East Side and the darkness and dampness of that raw, February day. With the luncheon I was less pleased; for frankly, I prefer noodle soup and _Gulyas_ to French snails and terrapin. To my plebeian palate the snails tasted like mucilage flavoured with garlic, and the terrapin like fricasseed Turkish towels. Of more importance than the menu was my host, whose every word betrayed the consciousness of his power and his ignorance of those lesser folk, as whose champion he had invited me to be his guest. "What can be done to stay the power of Socialism?" "How can we keep out Black Hands and Anarchists?" To him, immigrants, Socialists and Anarchists were synonymous terms. My speech was not yet dulled by the luncheon or my brain clouded by the smoke of his Havana cigars, and I gave him such plain answers as I might have given after lunching on noodle soup and _Gulyas_. My words were as unpalatable to him as his snails and terrapin were to me; for I told him that Anarchists live in brown stone houses and that Socialism is being fed and nourished on Fifth Avenue. Our views were as far apart as our bank accounts, and to argue with him seriously would have been as useless as it would have been poor taste. He became more human as the luncheon progressed from its airy and aristocratic entrées to the more democratic and substantial roast beef and potatoes. When we reached pumpkin pie, one of the few connecting links with his humble past, he had quite lost his critical sternness, and asked my advice upon so delicate a matter as how to give his wayward sons a grappling place for the upbuilding of character. I suggested work in the Settlements; but he regarded them with suspicion, declaring that they are irreligious and a breeding place for Socialism. He listened with indifference to my defense of these institutions which I regard as among the most valuable agencies we have for the common good. I suggested some public service for the community or the state. "Politics?" he asked quizzically; "it's a dirty game. I want my boys to help me take care of the interests I have." I did not know what those interests were, nor did I care to inquire, and luncheon being over, I rose to take leave. "Where are you going?" asked my host, rather abruptly. "To the East Side," I replied. He wondered whether I was not afraid to go there, and when I told him that I felt safer in the Ghetto at night than I should feel two blocks west of his palace, he asked whether he might accompany me. Knowing the free and easy ways of the Ghetto I assured him a hearty welcome; so we left his home together and took the car for Houston Street and Avenue B to attend the _Gulyas_ banquet to be given by the "Bolsover Sick and Benefit Association," in its hall on Houston Street. Sunday afternoon is the day on which the East Side looks its best. Its squalor is temporarily hid beneath the festal garb of the rest day; the children are still clean after their weekly scrubbing, and the mothers sit on the stoops, gossiping and watching with the Old World timidity their agile flocks playing in the middle of the street, also fairly clean in comparison with its condition on the busier work days, when the refuse of push-carts and ash cans covers it. My millionaire host evidently found pleasure in this human mass. He saw children who seemed happier than his own; for although they had fewer pleasures, they had no governess to dog their footsteps, no maid to keep them from exertion and no fear of microbes or bacteria. Here in the Ghetto all the unrestrained child nature asserted itself, and being children they had no thought for the morrow and having been born in America, they were boisterously happy. My host decided that after all humanity on Houston Street is not so different from that on Fifth Avenue. The women, especially the younger ones, were gowned as fashionably although less extravagantly; pony coats being the style on Fifth Avenue were also found on Houston Street, and most of the women who paraded both streets looked very much as if they belonged to the same herd. Hats were as expansive if not as expensive in this hemisphere of the social world as in his own; while pride and social prejudice were common properties of both. Our entrance into the lodge room, on the fourth floor, over a _Kosher_ restaurant, was announced by the outer guard, after which a committee came out to meet us. Then pledging us to secrecy we were escorted to places of honour at the right and left of the Grand Master of the lodge. The small room was completely filled by over one hundred members, and after the business under discussion was finished, we were duly introduced and addresses of welcome were made by officers and prominent members. I doubt that my fellow guest ever listened to addresses which he enjoyed more than those he then heard, spoken in broken yet picturesque language; and I am sure he never before realized that such lofty sentiments lodged in such humble hearts and amid such forbidding surroundings. These hundred and more men, we were told, were bound together in fellowship to help one another when unemployed, to support and nurse one another when sick, to pay the last honours to the dead and to protect the widows and the orphans. And that was not all. It is the object of this lodge to work for mutual intellectual improvement, and although politics are tabooed, the lodge strives to develop noble, patriotic ideals among its members. Of the men who spoke, I have known some from their childhood, and all of them since their arrival in the United States. It will not break the pledge of secrecy to say a word about these men, typical immigrants from Hungary. The Grand Master was born in a Jewish home in which the best traditions of the Hebrew faith were adhered to. I have been there many a time carrying messages from son to parent, and it was always a delight to meet the saintly old father and mother who have never ceased being homesick for their boy. He has gone through a hard school in America, from sweat shop to laundry; and now he is a letter carrier. The Past Grand Master is a wood-worker who tried business, but failed and is now back at his bench. Another is a metal worker, and his calloused hands prove that he obeys the Divine injunction, and earns his bread by the sweat of his brow. The man who proposed our being made honorary members of the lodge had entered the University of Vienna, suffered moral bankruptcy and ran away to America. He is a cloak presser. The man who seconded his motion is a waiter, the prodigal son of a rich father, brought low by his iniquities; but kept from utter ruin by the fellowship of these men. I know the record of them all; good and bad records, like those of other groups of men; but every one of them is now earning his daily bread and is contributing something to the wealth and the weal of the great city. My millionaire friend frankly confessed that he had never seen a "bunch" of men which impressed him more favourably than these--and well they might impress him; for they all looked like toilers. Labour had bent their forms, parched their skin and shadowed their eyes. It was a long meeting, until far into the night. Several times the outer guard had announced that the _Gulyas_ was ready; but not even the odour of its rich sauce which pervaded the building could stop the flow of eloquence, once set in motion, or curb the eagerness with which rival candidates battled for office. At last the Grand Master smote his desk with his gavel for the last time and the "meetunk" was adjourned. In proper order and ceremoniously, we were conducted to the basement of the _Kosher_ restaurant. The steaming _Gulyas_ was on the tables, beer and wine awaited the thirsty guests and the banquet began even before all the members of the Bolsover Association were fairly seated. My companion looked askance at the bowls of _Gulyas_ with its red gravy; but it wooed his appetite through his nostrils and he gained sufficient courage to take a piece of the well cooked meat with its dripping sauce. Then I saw him eat as I had not eaten of his French snails and terrapin. The members of the Society drank their modest measures of beer and Hungarian wine as toast followed toast. It had been my privilege not long before to have a conference with President Roosevelt, and as I rose to toast the chief magistrate of the United States, I repeated a few of his trenchant sentences. "Elyen! Elyen!" the men shouted when I mentioned his name; and when I said that the President had expressed to me the hope that we strangers should so live that the country which gave us "sanctuary," a place to work in and to live in, might be proud of us--the enthusiastic "Elyens!" seemed unending. After the banquet, the man who had successfully run for the secretaryship invited us to come into his home, not far away. My host, having had a taste of the East Side and wanting more, readily accepted the invitation. We found this home in the second story of a tenement house on East Ninth Street. We entered through the kitchen, and in the one other room, living room, sleeping room and nursery combined, was the man's wife with their three daughters. The youngest was in bed, the older one was reading, while the oldest was entertaining friends--two or three girls and a young man, her "steady company." The room was crowded, but clean, and my Fifth Avenue friend sat down and looked at the novel picture before him. The young people chatted about the recent ball of the Bolsover Sick and Benefit Association, of clothes and beaux; very much as they talk of balls and clothes and beaux on Fifth Avenue. Refreshments were offered us, and then the father told of his good fortune in having been elected secretary of his lodge. Every one was delighted; but the younger daughter, this little Jewish child, said: "Papa, why don't you run for president, once?" He replied: "My child, don't you knows that I gets paid for being secretary, and gets nothing for being president?" Upon which, this child of the Ghetto faced her father half angrily, crying: "Why, papa, don't you know that honour is more than money?" We left the tenement house together and walked across to Broadway, all along that gaily lighted thoroughfare, illy named the White Way. Theatres and concert halls were being emptied, and we were jostled by the crowds. My friend spoke never a word until we reached the marble steps of his home. Then, pressing my hand, he said, with almost a tenderness in his voice: "Honour is more than money." XXI FROM LAKE SKUTARI TO LAKE CHAUTAUQUA When I told a group of friends that I was to speak to the Albanians of Jamestown, N.Y., one of them, who knew both her history and her geography uncommonly well, said, questioningly: "Albanians? Are those the people with white hair and pink eyes?" Then, realizing that Albinos and Albanians are not identical, and being genuine enough not to conceal her ignorance, she asked: "Do you mean the people from Albany, N.Y.?" She may be pardoned for not knowing who the Albanians are, although they are one of the oldest European peoples, who have kept a corner of that continent turbulent, in the attempt to wrest from their master, the Turk, the right of political existence. One cannot say that the Balkan would have been a peaceful nook had it not been for these Ghegs and Tosks, as the two main divisions of the Albanians are called; but certainly, the history of Turk, Greek and Southern Slav would have been different had it not been for the Albanians' clinging tenaciously to ancient rights, and their many struggles against continuous oppression. [Illustration: ALBANIANS ON LAKE SKUTARI The most savage of the Balkan people. ON LAKE CHAUTAUQUA The newest of the Pilgrims, attending the Congregational church, Jamestown, N. Y.] The new régime in Turkey feels this Albanian iron in its veins, for one of the leaders in the new parliament is of this race, as are many of the most virile editors of Turkish newspapers. Both officers and privates in the army which wrought the overthrow of the Sultan are of these same people, who regard themselves as superior to the Turks and to whom no greater insult can be given than to call them by the name of their oppressors. In my travels through the Balkan, I have often passed through some portion of Albania, which is a narrow strip of land along the Adriatic, between Montenegro and Greece, with much of its interior inaccessible. Its savage state was encouraged by Turkey, which maintained there a borderland against the power and ideals of the West. Every village was an armed camp, every house a fortress. Tribal warfare never ceased; neither the holy seasons of the Church nor harvest time knew the blessings of peace. Every Albanian was a soldier or brigand and sometimes both, loyal to those to whom he had sworn loyalty; but the musket was law between him and the stranger, and the bullet its executor. Trained for slaughter, the Albanians spurned common theft, but did not shrink from murder, for pillage or for revenge. The last time I saw them at home, was on the shores of Lake Skutari, retreating to their native mountains in the Albanian Alps, after having pillaged a Montenegrin village, one of the few prosperous enough to make a raid worth while. They were resting on a rocky hillside, and as I attempted to take a snapshot, they resisted religiously, good Mohammedans that they were, by emptying their rifles after me, doing no more damage than frightening my worn-out team into a gallop. To say that the next time I saw them, was in the prayer-meeting room of a Congregational church, describes graphically the difference between then and now; for it was a docile, conventional looking company of men that I met; their fierce mustachios shaved or cropped, their muscular bodies clothed in the commonplace garments of our civilization. Their eager, black eyes alone spoke of the hot, Albanian blood in their veins not yet chilled in our cool, workaday atmosphere. Neither Gheg nor Tosk ever had a chief like the one who led them that night in singing the "Shcipetari" song, the battle hymn of Albania; for he who wore the red skullcap of the chief and beat time as they sang, whose placid face was lighted by a deeper passion than their own, was an American,--Arthur Baldwin, Patent Attorney and lover of common folks. One by one he had gathered them as they drifted into the city by the lake. "Dagos" they were called; homeless, neglected and treated with scorn. One after another they swore fealty to their new chief, until now every one of them acknowledges the sovereignty of his passion over them. Half savage as the Albanian is, he has a fine feeling for womanhood. Woman is man's fortress; for he is safe from the enemy's bullets when in her company, and she may kill the man who has broken his troth with her. While the men are loyal to Mr. Baldwin, they feel for Mrs. Baldwin a sacred awe, and well she deserves their reverence; for she has been mother and sister to these homeless youths and has taught them the English language by a method of her own. Most of the Albanians in Jamestown, and many of those who have scattered east and west from there, carry with them Mrs. Baldwin's letters, which are the English lessons for the week, combined with cordial greetings, a word of good cheer, and advice. In the prayer-meeting room of that church of the pilgrims, these newest of the pilgrims sang that night their national hymn. Ce me gne te Kollozhégut, Ch'u fillua Shocerija, Ce me gne te Kollozhégut Ch'u fillua Shocerija Ch'u fillua, brénda m'u ne Sofijé Per skoli nde, Shciperi. Ch'u fillua, brénda m'u ne Sofijé, Per skoli nde Shciperi. Burra, burra djéma, burra djém, Burra djém perpicuni. Burra, burra djéma, mbuhuni, Mbushuni mé dashuri. S'jémi Gréker as Bulgare, Jémi trima Shcipetare S'jémi Gréker as Bulgare, Jémi trima Shcipetare Dhente Zoti la me la, Afer ghér nde Pérendi, Dhente Zoti la me la, Afer ghér nde Pérendi. Burra, burra djéma, burra djém, Burra djém perpicuni. Burra, burra djéma, mbushuni, Mbushuni mé dashuri. The music is savagely martial, although the words are commonplace; for the Albanian, like the rest of us, is thanking God that he is not as other people, especially the detested Greeks and Bulgarians. After the singing, the men danced. Shades of the Puritan ancestors! Dancing in a prayer-meeting room! But inasmuch as these were semi-civilized people, the dance was decent and full of religious symbolism. The men swayed their agile bodies to the wild notes, bent the knee, then two by two joined hands, forming a cross; thus making their dance an act of worship. Then I spoke to them of their mountain home and of this one; of their old tribulations and their new opportunities; of their old feuds and their new friendships. When I finished, they crowded around me and pressed my hand, because they had found one who knew them, their fierce nature and their unsurpassed devotion to their native land. I could not help thinking of their brothers who, ten years before, chased me along the shore of Lake Skutari with guns. While I am sure that Mr. and Mrs. Baldwin would not desire praise for the work they are doing among these people, the methods they have used and the spirit which has animated them are so remarkable as to deserve emulation. Their basis of approach to the Albanians was undisguised and unadulterated friendship. They liked common folks. As other people on the shores of Lake Chautauqua liked automobiles or steam yachts of particular makes, so among folks, the Baldwins liked Albanians. Being their friends, they wanted to do them good, and what they most needed was ability to understand English; so they taught them English and with the new language they have given them the atmosphere of home and impressed upon them the need of character to save them from the new temptations. Wiser than some others who have attempted to do good to strangers, they restrained their religious ardour and left Greek Orthodox and Mohammedan undisturbed in their faith, except as by their example they taught them that love is more effective than its symbols and deeds more vital than creeds. Neither have they tried to deaden the old patriotism; and the one great, starry virtue of the Albanian which is almost unparalleled, is his devotion to his country. After I had spoken that night, I was escorted to a restaurant kept by one of them, and there over the steaming coffee we talked of Albania's griefs and hopes. Mr. Baldwin knew every nook and corner of the country and its history. He spoke of Albania as if he had been cradled among those far-away mountains, instead of on the placid plains of the Middle West. He deplored the fact that they had no schools in which their own speech was taught, that religion held them apart, through factions of Greek Orthodox, Roman Catholics and Mohammedans; and he talked of Scanderberg, their national hero, as if he were speaking of Washington or Lincoln. Mr. Baldwin had invited me to Jamestown, to counsel with his men, who are doing the most menial tasks to earn money for Albania. At that time all was dark in Turkey, and a visionary alone could have held out hope for an autonomous Albania. Practical American that I have become, I told them to save their money, start bank accounts and become prosperous Americans. They knew better; at least they had more faith. They were then training a man in an American college, for political and social leadership; a young Albanian noble, who spoke eight languages, had faith in God and man and, above all, in Albania. Until long past midnight I talked of peace while they talked of war; I spoke of submission, while they talked of resistance; I thought I knew Turkey and the Turk, while they had faith in Albania and the Albanians. The recent developments prove that their faith was better than my knowledge. When the Jamestown Albanians scattered as far east as Natick, Mass., and as far west as St. Louis, Mo., their old friends aroused interest in them everywhere. In Natick, Mass., a devoted pastor, Rev. Morris H. Turk, has matched the Jamestown work for these "twentieth century pilgrims" as he calls them. He has learned enough Albanian to lead in devotions, and has fitted out a chapel with chancel, altar and pictures. "We began," he says, "where the Greek Orthodox church left off. We secured some Albanian hymn-books from Monastir, and thus we were enabled to conduct a somewhat formal religious service, largely in the Albanian language. Socials, entertainments, receptions, picnics and other diversions supplement the religious and educational work done at Natick. "The results have been remarkable. Two of the men are fitting for college, a dozen or more have blended completely into the parish life, and best of all, a hundred or more have had the uplift of friendliness and acquaintance with our American ideals." Mr. Turk is making a tour of Albania this summer for the express purpose of rendering his service to these people more effective; to see life from their view-point and to acquire a better knowledge of their difficult language. Mr. Guy J. Fansher writes from Boston, where he has become interested in them: "Their love of country is very strong and, like the old Hebrew prophets in Israel and Judah, we find it necessary to carry on whatever religious work we may wish to do side by side with their love of country. This same love of country has been evidenced in their translating of the Orthodox Church ritual into the Albanian and using that in their church service monthly in a rented hall. "I found the men apt to stay indoors too closely, so during the winter gave them work in gymnastics, using dumb-bells, basket-ball, etc. We had some flash-light pictures taken of these classes, which the boys were eager to buy and send home. "The men are close readers of the daily papers, soon get interested in politics (were strong for Taft), get out naturalization papers as soon as possible, and are proud to be in America. They soon learn to dress in neat suits of brown which is very becoming to them with their dark skin and hair. "The men seem to have good control of their habits, seldom drinking to excess; the cigarette is always with them, however; the social vice is not theirs to any great degree; they are neat about their rooms and do not crowd together as the Italians or Jews. These things have rather assisted our work among them; their exceeding shyness has been hard to overcome; they must be led, not driven." "They must be led, not driven," and Mr. Baldwin adds: "They must be trusted, not suspected; loved, and not merely tolerated." The events in Turkey have surprised every one who has an interest in the Balkan question. The young Albanian noble, already referred to, is back in Albania, somewhere near Lake Skutari, helping shape the future of his country; for he is a leading member of the Albanian Committee. On Lake Chautauqua his countrymen still work and pray and hope for an autonomous Albania, with schools and churches in which they shall be free to use their language and in which they shall have privileges commensurate with their sacrifices and with the burdens they have borne for Turkey. Then they will sing in Kortia the song they sang in Jamestown, when we parted before the early dawn of a winter's morning. It was a national hymn, which the Albanians have a right to sing, although they sing it under the crescent banner of Turkey; for it is a translation of our--"America." O Zot Ti fucimath, Ndihna si ghér tashi Te lutémi; Lardi tet'apeme Mé ghithe zémere: Per dashurimne T'ent Ce shoheme. XXII THE PROTESTANT CHURCH AND THE IMMIGRANT The one institution in America most gravely concerned with the coming and staying of the immigrant is the Protestant church. Each ship-load of people from Southern and Southeastern Europe increases the already crowded Roman Catholic parishes, lays foundations for the perpetuation of the Greek Orthodox church in the United States and enlarges the tents of Israel whose camps encircle the dying churches. The Protestant church, in our great cities, pointing to the decrease in her membership, as evidence of her peril, and bravely singing "Onward Christian soldiers, Marching as to war," moves into the suburbs, away from the congested masses and among the attenuated few. That the Protestant church has endured thus far, that its ideals are still dominant, that its preachers' voices are still heard in the tumults of our Babels, is direct evidence that somewhere her foundations rest upon bed-rock and that the Christian faith and practice, as she understands them, are essential in the solution of the problems of our civilization. Because I believe this, I am not frightened by figures but am concerned with forces. It is not a question of the ability of the church to increase, but of her willingness to decrease, if necessary, in the attempt to communicate to these masses, from all races and religions, her passion for humanity and her devotion to the Divine. I am not at all concerned regarding the inability of the Protestant church to adjust other men to her creeds or to adjust herself to theirs; but I am deeply concerned with her inability or unwillingness to make good her professions of democracy, and to relate herself in some vital way to these new citizens who are satiated by creeds, but are hungry for brotherhood; upon whom, like a curse, rest the damp and mould of tombs and chapels, but who have been untouched by the power of the living, redeeming Christ, as He has incarnated Himself in His followers. So long as these people are within the sphere of Foreign Missions, in "Greenland's Icy Mountains," or some other remote and romantic place, they are the subjects of prayer and the recipients of gifts of men and money; but when drawn into the radius of one's immediate neighbourhood, they become a peril which threatens everything, from the price of real estate to the foundation upon which the church rests. There is no question that in many cases the Protestant church is facing this problem in an admirable spirit; although very often expressing it in a way calculated to alienate rather than to attract. On the whole there is a growing desire to serve this new host of men, to help them adjust themselves more easily to their new environment and to make of them conscious human beings, consecrated Christians and efficient citizens. There are to-day increasing numbers of Protestant Christians who have broken away from the old prejudice against the Roman Catholic church. It is not their desire to alienate faithful communicants from the church in which their individual and national life has root and being; but they recognize certain facts. First, that in this new influx of immigrants there is an appreciably large number of men who have fallen heir to Protestant traditions, without fully realizing their spiritual inheritance and their moral obligations. To these, the American Protestant churches owe the duty of interpreting their common faith in its practical terms. Second, the church realizes that numbers of men, more than are commonly supposed, among Roman Catholics, Greek Orthodox and Jews, are lost to their respective churches. Many of them revert to infidelity and Paganism, and the Protestant church is under obligations to interpret its faith in rational terms to these, who have been touched by the rationalism of our times. One cannot believe that it is good for such men to be left under the influences of these reactions which may become dangerous to the well-being of the individual and of the State. Third, the church finds itself surrounded by large masses of men, ignorant of our language, of the laws of health and of the land. They come from countries in which neither Church nor State has attempted to lift them out of ignorance and its attendant superstition; and whenever the churches in whose bosoms these people have starved in the Old World do not make amends here in the New, the Protestant church is called upon to lift them into a better knowledge of the nature of religion and into a better conception of human relations, both for her own sake and for the sake of the communities which she wishes to serve. This she must do, even if it brings her under suspicion of proselyting; although with my knowledge of nearly all the agencies engaged in this task in the United States, I am convinced that the spirit in which this work is undertaken is not the spirit of the proselyter. Indeed, one of the growing weaknesses of the Protestant church in America is the loss of those deep convictions which make proselyting easy; while the number of those who have the courage zealously to pronounce their shibboleths is growing smaller every day. The spirit of the following letter justifies its quotation, for it is an admirable example of the way in which one Protestant church is trying to meet the immigrant problem. ---- AVENUE CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH, HARTFORD, CONN., _Pastor's Study, December 17, 1907_. I am writing this letter to you as an office-bearer in the church and one who is influential in forming church sentiment and policies. It concerns the relation of our church to the Jews who are crowding into the streets about the church in ever-increasing numbers. The Standing Committee has earnestly and sympathetically considered the subject, as befits a matter of the first importance to our church. The settling of these Jews close about us is easily the event of greatest importance in recent years in the field of this church. It would be folly, and in the end impossible, for us to look upon their presence with indifference. We must not drift in this matter. We must have, as a church, an intelligent and positive policy towards them. What shall it be? Some of us have probably looked upon the coming of the Jew as a misfortune. Is he not also an opportunity? May we trace the providence of God in settling him about our very doors? I believe that we may. This faith grows in me, as one who believes that Christ is to be Saviour of all the nations. A rabbi in Boston said recently, "The liberty and friendliness of America will put the severest strain upon Jewish exclusiveness that it has ever met. The persecutions of Europe have failed to dissolve our nationality: the kindness of America may succeed." In the light of this sentiment, which I share, and with a great confidence in the Gospel, I propose that we undertake definitely a Christian ministry to these Jews. I recognize that an attempt at immediate propagandism would probably be as ineffective as it would be unwise. I appreciate that probably few if any open conversions will reward our labours for many years. What then shall we attempt? To impress upon them the spirit of the Gospel by living alongside them as Christians should: this first and chiefly. Let us do this in the hope that as their old-world superstitions and narrowness yield to the light of America, they will thus choose the Gospel instead of infidelity. Many of them are already choosing the latter. How shall we begin? By treating the Jew as we want to be treated. In other words, by treating him not as a Jew, but _as a man_, each on his own merits. Recognize always that there are both good Jews and bad Jews, as well as good Yankees and bad Yankees. Make the acquaintance of both men and women: and of their children too. Give them a fair chance to show their quality. They are neighbours. They are interested in our schools. They are fellow citizens. These common interests give opportunity to know them and, if we will, their homes also. Our government by its franchise and its schools welcomes them to an equal opportunity to show and to develop their character. The churches have not shown a like spirit. Shall the state be more Christian than the church? This proposal of course includes our attitude towards the Italians and all other foreigners among us. I speak especially of the Jews because they are far the most numerous and most difficult to reach. If a score or even a dozen of us should undertake to show them the spirit of brotherhood that is our Christian boast, and should seek to get our other church-members to do the same, it would not be a month before they would be feeling and speaking of our good will towards them. Meanwhile we can be watchful for opportunity for some special ministry to them or their children, a ministry which shall be welcome both to them and us. The habit of Christian neighbourliness outlined above will lay the foundation of mutual confidence and knowledge necessary for such a special ministry. Have you faith and patience for such a long campaign? Will you quietly enlist for it and try to persuade others to do the same? If so, will you kindly tell me of it? We will undertake to keep one another informed of any news of progress. You will understand why this letter and your talks with others about this subject should be confidential. In the name of Him who was a Jew, YOUR PASTOR. The Presbyterian church has given proof of the spirit of its intent by putting the department of Immigration in charge of Rev. Charles Stelzle, a splendid champion of the rights of labouring men, a man with the broadest social and religious outlook and a stranger to Pharisaic cant. The Rev. Howard N. Grose, D.D., the home mission secretary of the Baptist church, and the men associated with him in the Home Mission Council of the Evangelical churches, seem to me to possess that broad outlook upon life, that appreciation of true values which render impossible their attempting any narrow, sectarian propaganda. The action of the International Committee of the Y.M. C. A. in placing its work for "Young Men and Boys of Foreign Parentage" in charge of so competent an authority as Dr. Peter Roberts, the author of "Anthracite Communities,"--and the equipment by the State Committee of Pennsylvania of "The Expedition for the Study of Immigration" with its plans for a group of well trained college men as secretaries for immigrants, are additional evidences of the spirit which animates Protestantism in its relation to the immigrant. There are, however, two fundamental mistakes which the Protestant church has made in her attempt to solve the problem she faces. First, in the kind of results she tries to obtain. Second, in the kind of men she has sent to represent her among the immigrants. The American Protestant of the Evangelical type has carried his business into the church, but not always the church into his business. He expects in the church, results which can be tabulated under the head of profit and loss, just as he expects them in his counting-room. [Illustration: FACULTY AND AMERICAN STUDENTS AT THE MISSIONS-HAUS, KATTOWITZ The young men are members of the Pennsylvania Y. M. C. A. Expedition for the Study of Immigration. The school is strategically situated where three empires meet. It is non-sectarian and interdenominational; permeating the East with Christian ideas.] "Immediate results!" is the cry of the constituents of missionary enterprises, and the result is, that where they cannot be legitimately produced, conversions are simulated for loaves and fishes. I do not mean to say that missionaries have not so preached and practiced the Christian faith, as to produce in their hearers a desire to adjust their own lives to these new standards; for I know of innumerable cases of this kind among all races and nationalities. However, the stress laid upon "immediate results," the praise and money lavished upon those who can produce them, the "showing off" of this or that kind of converted foreigner, the neglect of those who face real difficulties honestly, and cannot humbug those who support them, put severe temptation in the way of missionaries and often unconsciously taint their whole endeavour. If the Christian religion expresses itself in unselfish devotion to the noblest cause,--the service which the immigrant needs must be performed without an eye constantly upon church records. The Social Settlement is under no such strain, and its work is like "casting bread upon the water" without expecting it back, "buttered" after a few days. For a long time and even for all time with some individuals and groups, the church must be willing to follow this Biblical example set by an institution which some ill informed people suspect of being irreligious. The error which the church has committed in sending poorly prepared men to minister to these immigrants is in many cases as irreparable as it is inexcusable. An ignorant priesthood is more bearable than an ignorant ministry, and when ignorance is coupled with insincerity, as it is in many cases, the wrong done to both parties is incalculable. In their haste to "do something," and in their eagerness to get quick results, nearly all Protestant churches have pushed into the ministry "converted foreigners," many of whom misrepresent the church which sends them and become a stumbling-block to honest seekers after truth and an insult to the people to whom they are sent. An example of this lack of wisdom is shown in one of the most interesting missions of a really valuable type, developed in West Pittston, Pa., by a devoted young American woman who, in a remarkable degree, won the confidence of the Lithuanians there. She lived and laboured among them and created a centre of influence which gave great promise of being permanent in its effect. Her work, however, was much too indefinite and slow for the "hustling" church which supported her; so a converted Lithuanian was employed, who in his eagerness to save souls told the people whom he gathered to hear him preach, that they would all be damned if they continued going to the Roman Catholic church. The result was what one might expect. The Lithuanians immediately forsook the mission and went to the prohibited church. As a rule, the work to be done demands American born men and women who are imbued by the spirit of service, who have some linguistic talent and much consecrated common sense. The converted foreigner, even if well trained, will be met with suspicion by many groups; for to them he is a traitor to their religion and to their national life, the two being inseparable to them. No such objection can be made to the American worker, who, if he brings patience to the tedious task of winning confidence, if he has an honest desire to live unselfishly for the people of a neighbourhood, if he gives everything and expects nothing as a reward, may be assured that such service will be accepted and will work out its results in God's own time. If converted immigrants are sent among these people, they should have a long testing time; a tutelage and training which, while giving them a thorough equipment for their task, will not spoil them for the humble work it will involve. There are but few theological seminaries properly equipped to train men for this great work, and still fewer in which there is sufficient spirit of democracy among teachers and students to receive "immigrants" and treat them like brothers. In many small, industrial communities where the "immigrants" are a problem, its solution is merely a question of the attitude of the churches towards them. Nothing can be more repellent than the attitude of the average Protestant Christian towards the immigrant of to-day. As a rule he is prejudiced, is grossly ignorant of the historic and religious background of the strangers and meets every one of them with suspicion. At a recent Summer School of the Y. M. C. A. it was my privilege to teach a class of young college men numbering about 150. They were studying this problem, and the questions asked, a few of which I quote, prove the assertion just made. "Do not three martyred presidents prove that the immigrant is an Anarchist and ought to be excluded?" "Is it not true that ninety per cent. of the criminals in the United States are foreign born?" "Do not foreign governments dump their rubbish of criminals and paupers upon our shores?" "Is the Constitution of the United States safe in the hands of people who crucified Jesus?" "Did not our forefathers come to fight for liberty, and do not these people come to despoil us?" The questions asked displayed such animosity and such ignorance, that to print them all would seem like slandering our Western colleges and the churches in which these young men were reared. The churches and the Y. M. C. A.'s have no small task in converting their membership to some Christian view-point of these, their neighbours; even if they cannot be converted to a spirit of brotherliness. The following instance, while not typical, shows the attitude of Y. M. C. A. memberships in many industrial communities, towards the immigrant. An Association in Pennsylvania wished to enlarge its building and solicited funds in the shops of its own community. Slav and Hungarian day labourers subscribed $2,000, every cent of which was paid; which cannot be said of all the money subscribed by Americans. Some of these foreigners were anxious to learn English, and one of the rooms in the building--not the best--was opened to them and a teacher procured. When one of these boys used some of the public conveniences in the building, the American membership notified the secretary that the "Hunkies" must not be admitted to the building; and they were not, in spite of the fact that they had helped pay for its erection. While no other such gross injustice has come to my knowledge, I know of many Y. M. C. A.'s in which an Armenian or Greek would be excluded from such a thoroughly religious privilege as taking a bath. Wherever a church or Y. M. C. A. has shown itself hospitable to the strangers it has had as many of their souls to keep as it has cared to have; but most of them prefer to save the foreigner by "absent treatment." The feeling of the strangers regarding the efforts which the churches are making on their behalf in so-called missions, which are often repellently unclean and devoid of any saving grace, is explained in the following letter, written by a graduate of Oberlin Seminary, a young Pole, whose spirit and intelligence the letter itself reveals. BRECKSVILLE, OHIO, OCTOBER 14, 1907. _Prof. E. A, Steiner, Grinnell, Iowa._ MY DEAR DR. STEINER:--Your plan for the solution of our foreign problem, as you indicated it in your articles in _The Congregationalist_ of last year and as you outlined it to me in our conversation in Cleveland last week, is excellent; and I wish to tell you that I am in thorough sympathy with it. My own personal experience in the foreign work convinces me that the easiest, most economical, and most effective way of solving the foreign problem is through the American church and the American worker directly. This for the following reasons: First, mission work established for the foreigner strictly in his own tongue is not particularly acceptable to him, and to some it is even offensive. The foreigner regards himself to be a Christian, and, consequently, resents the idea of mission work done distinctly for his particular benefit in order to make a Christian of him. Second, a worker of his own nationality is looked upon by him with suspicion. As you expressed it, he is regarded a traitor, and is not to be trusted too much. When I was in the work, I had that experience over and over again; I felt that my countrymen, that is, a good many of them, when they found out that I was a Pole and not a Roman Catholic, had grave doubts as to whether it was safe for them to trust me. Third, by coming to the mission, the foreigner feels that he is committing himself too much all at once--something which he is very unwilling to do. Then, too, in the mission he is too conspicuous, and thus too much exposed to persecution from his countrymen. Fourth, our greatest hope is, not in the grown-up generation, but in the growing generation--the children and the young people; and these can be reached more easily through the American church than through a mission of their mother tongue, because they want to be regarded, not as foreigners, but as Americans. These difficulties would, to a large extent, be obviated if we tried to reach the foreigner directly through our American churches and other religious organizations and through American workers acquainted with the history of the different peoples, their characteristics, habits, and ways of thinking and looking at things, and to a certain extent with their language also, and in perfect sympathy with them. Of course, the work done at present by the mission ought not to be discontinued; it has its place and its value; but it ought to be supplemented by this better and, as I believe, more effective method which you have in mind and which you propose to our churches for adoption. Sincerely yours, PAUL FOX. I do not quote this letter because it approves my plan; for I do not hold dogmatically to any one method. The work of saving men is desperately hard and there are a thousand ways of doing it. More important than any plan is a right attitude; for in all human contact it is the spirit within the man or institution which counts, and not the precise method of approach. Wherever an approach has been made in the right spirit towards the foreigners, they have responded in kind, and many Protestant churches have been enriched by their presence, by the ardour of their faith and their willingness to sacrifice for their convictions. There is, as I have said before, no institution in the United States which will be so profoundly affected by the immigrant as the Protestant church. Without him she will languish and die and with him alone she has a future. Already the Roman Catholic proclaims the conquest of America, and while that conquest is not complete, it soon will be, unless Protestantism wakens to the wealth of its heritage and its great opportunity; unless with a real sympathy and passion it teaches, preaches and practices the religion of Jesus. The Protestant church need not rival the Roman Catholic church in building stately places of worship, or clothe herself in gorgeous vestments, or read ancient liturgies. The immigrant comes from just such environment, and nothing that the Protestant church can do in this direction will be as beautiful and as impressive as that which he has left behind. The one way and the only way in which she can enter into a successful rivalry with the ancient, Apostolic church, is in reviving the ancient, Apostolic passion for humanity. Having quoted so many letters, I may perhaps be pardoned for quoting a small part of one written long ago, at a time when the church faced a crisis not unlike the one which she faces to-day. "If there is therefore any comfort in Christ, if any consolation of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any tender mercies and compassions, fulfill ye my joy, that ye be of the same mind, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind; doing nothing through factions, through vainglory, but in lowliness of mind each counting other better than himself; not looking each of you to his own things, but each of you also to the things of others. Have this mind in you which was also in Christ Jesus: who, being in the form of God, counted it not a prize to be on an equality with God, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself, becoming obedient even unto death, yea, the death of the cross. Wherefore also God highly exalted Him, and gave unto Him the name which is above every name; that in the name of Jesus, every knee should bow, of things in heaven and things on earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." XXIII TWENTY-FIVE YEARS WITH THE NEW IMMIGRANT It is now twenty-five years since I landed in the United States with a group of Slovaks from the district of Scharosh in Hungary. I followed them across the sea and watched this historic movement of the Slavs, who until then had remained practically dormant where they had been left by the glacier-like movement of their race, the pressure of the invader or the fate which governed Eastern European politics. It was a fascinating experience to see these forgotten children of an unresponsive soil coming in touch with a civilization of which they had never dreamed; to see the struggle of emotions in their usually impassive faces, as they saw the evidences of European culture and wealth in the Northern cities through which we passed. What fear crept into their hearts and drove the healthy blood from their cheeks when for the first time they saw the turbulent sea. The ocean was vaster and the fear of it most real to us who sailed out of Bremerhaven in the steerage of the steamer _Fulda_; for we were the forerunners of a vast army of men which had scarcely begun to think of leaving its age-long bivouac. The Slav has never taken kindly to the sea, and the "_More_" held unconquered terrors. It is difficult now to describe the incidents of that first landing in New York, for in rapid succession the experience has been so often repeated; and all the joys, fears and hopes which repeatedly I have shared with hundreds and thousands of men are so blended in my memory into one great wonder, that either analysis or description seems vain. It is strange and yet natural, no doubt, that I remember the trivial incidents of that first landing. The attempt on the part of some of my Slovaks to eat bananas without removing the skins; their first acquaintance with mince pie, which they declared a barbarous dish; our first meal on American soil, in a third rate boarding-house for immigrants, and the injunction of one of the earlier comers: "Don't wait for anybody, but grab all you can. In this country the motto is: 'Happy is the man who can help himself!'" I remember the lonely feeling that crept over us as we found ourselves like driftwood in the great current of humanity in the city of New York, and the fear we had of every one who was at all friendly; for we had been warned against sharpers. I remember our pleasure in the picturesque ferry-boat which carried us to New Jersey, its walking-beam seeming like the limbs of some great monster crossing the water. Then crowding fast upon one another come memories of hard tasks in gruesome mines and ghostly breakers; the sight of licking flames like fiery tongues darting out at us, from furnaces full of bubbling, boiling metal; the circling camps of the coke burners who kept their night's vigil by the altars of the Fire God. There are memories of dark ravines and mud banks, choked by refuse of mill and mine; the miners' huts, close together, as if space were as scarce on the earth as compassion for the stranger. I remember the kindness of the poor, the hospitality of the crowded, the hostility of the richer and stronger, who feared that we would drive them from their diggings; and the unbelief of those to whom I early began preaching the humanity of the Slav--rough and uncouth, but human still, although he has scarcely ever had a fair chance to prove it. Of the names of the various towns through which I passed, in which I worked and watched, I particularly remember four: Connelsville, Scranton, Wilkes-Barre, Pa., and Streator, Ill., all of them typical coal towns. In none of them were my people received with open arms, although they rarely met with organized hostility. In Scranton and in Streator, they still remember our coming and our staying. Since then, I have repeatedly visited all these four places upon errands of investigation and interpretation. I always dreaded going back to them; not only because it would revive painful memories of a very hard apprenticeship, but because I could not avoid asking myself if the optimism with which I have treated the problem of immigration, by voice and pen, would be justified. What if the Americans in these cities should say: "We have lived with these Slavs for twenty-five years and more; we have been with them day after day, while you have flitted about the country. We know better than you do. We told you the 'Hunkey' was a menace when he came, and he is a menace still." I well know that my readers and my auditors have often criticised my optimism, and especially the sympathetic note with which I approach this problem, regarding which they are always more skeptical the more remote they are from it. I have tried to modify my view of the problem by facing it in all its bearings; I have not shrunk from seeing the worst of it. In fact I know American cities best from that dark and clouded side. I know the Little Italies, the Ghettos, the Patches around the mines, the East Side of New York and the West Side of Chicago; although I have never been the full length of Fifth Avenue and have never seen the famous North Shore drive. I am familiar with penitentiaries, jails, police courts and even worse places; for I wanted to know to what depths these leaden souls can sink, and I fear that I have more anxiety as to their nativity than their destiny. Yet, having seen the worst of the bad, I never lost my faith in these lesser folk and my optimism remained unclouded. One fear alone assailed me; that what my critics said _to_ me and _of_ me was true. "He is an immigrant himself, and of course it is natural that he should see the brighter side of the problem." To me, that was the severest and most cutting criticism, just because I feared it might be true; yet I have honestly tried to see the darkest side of this question, both as it affected the immigrant and the country that received him. I have listened patiently to jeremiads of home mission secretaries about these "Godless foreigners." I have read the reports of Immigrant Commissions, and all the literature written the last few years upon this subject, and I am still optimistic, and disagree with much that I have heard and read. Many authors who have written regarding this question had no first-hand information about it. They knew neither the speech nor the genius of these new people; they had a fixed belief that all civilization, culture and virtue, belong to the north of Europe and that the east and southeast of that continent are its limbo; and they relied upon statistics, which at best are misleading, when used to estimate human conduct and human influences. Typical of this class of literature is a recent pamphlet upon the subject, which, judging from the excellent biography appended, must be based upon extensive reading; yet the author comes to this conclusion: "Assimilation in the twentieth century is a very different matter from assimilation in the nineteenth. In many respects, the new immigration is as bad as the old was good."[3] There are several facts which this author has forgotten, as have those from whom he draws. First, the older immigrant is not yet assimilated. In the agricultural counties of Mr. Edwards' own state, there are townships in which the English language is a foreign tongue, although the second generation of Germans already plows the fertile fields of Wisconsin; and there are cities where the Germans have thoroughly assimilated the Americans. There are places of no mean size in Pennsylvania, which are as German as they were 200 years ago, and as far as the Irish everywhere are concerned, it is still a question what we shall be when they have done with us. I venture to predict that the twentieth century immigrant will assimilate much more quickly and completely than the immigrants of the eighteenth and the early half of the nineteenth centuries assimilated. Beside the fact that the process is going on much more rapidly than ever before, as I asserted, my theories are corroborated by Professor Ross, of the University of Wisconsin, whose book is suggestive if not conclusive. Speaking of the assimilation of the immigrant, he says: "On the whole, those who come now Americanize much more readily than did the non-English immigrants of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Not only do they come from lesser peoples and from humbler social strata, but, thanks to the great rôle the United States plays in the world, the American culture meets with far more prestige than it had then. Although we have ever greater masses to assimilate, let us comfort ourselves with the fact that the vortical suction of our civilization is stronger now than ever before."[4] Neither is any one prepared to _prove_ that the "new immigrant is as bad as the old was good." It is very interesting that when authors and speakers quote statistics, as they usually do, to prove the criminal nature of the new immigrant, they do not differentiate between the older and the newer groups. If they did, and would let statistics determine the issue, they would find that the new immigrant is good and the old bad; yes, very bad. The following tables, quoted from the Report of the Commission of Immigration of the State of New York, are worthy the close study of Mr. Edwards and the authors upon whom he has relied.[5] STATISTICS REFERRING TO FOREIGN-BORN OFFENDERS COMMITTED TO NEW YORK STATE PRISONS AND PENITENTIARIES DURING 1904. _Total Number of Prisoners Committed_ Major Minor Offenses. Offenses. Total. Aggregate 3,679 26,136 29,815 Total white 3,345 24,969 28,314 Native white 2,266 16,759 19,025 Native white of native parentage 1,223 10,266 11,489 Native white of foreign parentage 732 4,500 5,232 Native white of mixed parentage 263 1,505 1,768 Native white of unknown parentage 48 488 536 Foreign-born whites 1,075 8,158 9,233 Whites of unknown nativity 4 52 56 Negroes 330 1,139 1,469 Mongolians ... 1 1 Indians 4 27 31 _Foreign-Born White Offenders by Nativity_ Major Per Minor Per Offenses. cent. Offenses. cent. Austria 48 4.5 259 3.2 Canada 68 6.3 435 5.3 Denmark 5 0.5 28 0.3 England and Wales 67 6.2 655 8.1 France 19 1.8 119 1.4 Germany 212 19.7 1,136 13.9 Hungary 15 1.4 83 1.0 Ireland 148 13.7 3,569 43.9 Italy 255 23.7 601 7.3 Mexico ... ... 6 0.1 Norway 7 0.7 46 0.5 Poland 30 2.8 232 2.8 Russia 119 11.0 392 4.9 Scotland 17 1.6 220 2.7 Sweden 14 1.3 163 2.0 Switzerland 4 0.4 43 0.5 Other countries 47 4.4 171 2.1 ----- ----- ----- ----- Totals 1,075 100.0 8,158 100.0 PAUPERS ADMITTED TO ALMSHOUSES IN NEW YORK STATE DURING YEAR 1904. BY NATIVITY AND LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN THE UNITED STATES. All paupers admitted 10,272 Per cent. of white paupers admitted: Native 44.0 per cent. Foreign-born 56.0 per cent. _Foreign-Born White Paupers Admitted in 1904, by Nativity_ Country of Birth Per cent. Per cent. Ireland 54.3 Germany 18.7 England and Wales 6.4 Canada (including Newfoundland) 4.3 Scandinavia 2.0 France 0.9 Scotland 2.0 ------ =88.6= Italy 3.5 Hungary and Bohemia 0.6 Russia and Poland 3.3 Unknown 4.0 ----- =11.4= ----- =Grand total= =100.0= What is more striking still is the following table which seems to prove that the new immigrant does not increase his percentage in the criminal column materially, in fact that there is a slight tendency to decrease it.[6] _Foreign-Born Offenders According to Years of Residence in the United States_ Major Per Minor Per Years Offenses. cent. Offenses. cent. Under one year 36 3.3 86 1.0 One year 79 7.2 229 2.8 Two years 63 5.8 297 3.6 Three years 52 4.8 285 3.4 Four years 40 3.6 177 2.2 Over four years 824 75.3 7,143 87.0 ----- ----- ----- ----- Totals 1,094 100.0 8,217 100.0 I am not trying to prove that the old immigration was worse than the new; I do not believe that these statistics prove it, in spite of their appearing to. But they do prove conclusively that statistics of this kind are absolutely unreliable in furnishing tests of the moral fiber of this or that group. Far more reliable is the verdict of various communities after twenty-five years' experience with the newer immigrant. Take for example the city of Streator, Ill., which has steadily grown in size and in the number and variety of its industrial establishments; a development which could not have taken place without the new immigrant. There are certain unprofitable seams in the mines which the English-speaking miners would not have worked; even as there are less profitable veins which the Slav does not care to touch and which are being worked by Sicilians, new upon the scene. It is true that out of the 500 Welsh miners there are only about fifty left; but the 450 were pushed up and not out and are in no position to complain. They have moved on to farms and have grown prosperous while some of the most lucrative business in the city is theirs. It does seem a great pity that a skilled trade like mining should have passed into the hands of unskilled labourers; but for this, the invention of machinery is to blame, and not the foreigner. Had comparatively cheap labour been unavailable, the genius of the American would not have stopped until he had all but eliminated the human element, as he has done in many other trades in which unskilled foreign labour is not a factor. Twenty-five years ago I "squatted" near mine No. 3 with my men from Scharosh. It was as wretched a patch as miners' patches always are. We bunked twenty in a room and took as good care of our bodies as conditions permitted; so that when we went down-town we were cleanly if not stylish. My men soon learned to drink whiskey like the Irish, swear like the English and dress like the Americans. After twenty-five years the patches around the mines in Streator are practically gone, and the homes there are as good as the Welsh or English miners ever had. Some of the newer additions in that growing city are occupied entirely by Slavs and do them credit. Nor has the Slav been content to remain in the mines; he, too, has begun to move out and up. He owns saloons and sightly stores in which his sons and daughters clerk, and it would take a very keen student of race characteristics to distinguish the Slavs from the native Americans. "Do you see that young man at the entrance to the Chautauqua?" said Mr. Williams, its public spirited secretary. "Racially, his father is as sharply marked a man as I have ever seen, and the son, a graduate of Harvard, looks as if his forefathers had all grown up in the salt air of the New England coast." Here in Streator were the people who have lived with the new immigrant a quarter of a century and more, and I have spoken to them three times, in my most optimistic vein; many a man and woman has said: "You are right, they make splendid citizens." "They are good neighbours." "They are as human as we are, and they are proving it." This, in spite of the fact that in Streator as in Connelsville and in hundreds of industrial towns, they have been met with suspicion and have been treated with injustice. "They are a great strain upon our political institutions," said Mr. Williams, himself once a Welsh miner, pushed out of the mine by the Slav and now one of the leading citizens of Streator. But Mr. Williams knows that the year I lived in Streator, when the Slav had no vote or influence, politics in that city were already corrupt and that the corrupters were native Americans, whose ancestors harked back to the _Mayflower_, and who were rewarded for their corruption by high political offices. In truth, when the Slav came to this country, there was nothing left to corrupt, in Scranton or Wilkes-Barre, in Connelsville or Streator; or, indeed, in all Pennsylvania and Illinois. The Slav now has some political power; but as yet he has not produced the "grafter." I do not say that he _will_ not; but when he does, small blame to him. In one of the four cities which I have mentioned, I shared with a group of Poles the vicissitudes of the first few weeks in a boarding-house, a combination of saloon and hotel, common in Pennsylvania, and usually offering more bar than board. One evening an American came among us; a splendid type of agile manhood. When my men saw him, they said: "This is a prince!" They did not know that he was a politician. He shook hands with every one of us, and I said to the men: "This is democracy!" Poor fool! I did not know that it was the day before election. Then he marched the men to the bar, and said to the barkeeper: "Fill 'em up." And as they drank the fiery stuff, no doubt they thought they were in Heaven, and forgot that they were in Pennsylvania. When the whiskey took effect, they were marched into a large hall, where other Poles, drunk as they, were congregated; speeches were made, full of the twaddle of political jargon which they did not understand, and when morning came, these Poles, so intoxicated that they did not know whether they were North Poles or South Poles, were marched to the voting-place and sworn in. I have told this story in each of the four places referred to, and in the place where it occurred, a judge, who was among my audience, said to me: "Don't tell that story again." "Why not? It is true," I replied. "Yes," he said, "it is perfectly true; but you'd better save your strength. In this city, not only the foreigners, who are not citizens, vote; but the dead vote, long after they have become citizens of Kingdom Come." One of these same Poles recently took me through the Capitol of Pennsylvania at Harrisburg. With great pride he guided me from foundation to dome, pointing out those objects of interest which every stranger must see, as if they were the memorials of noble deeds of valour. They consist of wood, painted to imitate marble, chandeliers of base metal, to be sold by the pound, at fabulous prices, and among many other spurious things, a safe, supposed to be fire-proof and burglar-proof, but which was not politician-proof, for an ordinary gimlet bored a hole into its corrupt heart. What was distressing to me was not so much that the State paid millions for this veneered and varnished fraud, but that my Polish guide pronounced the word _graft_ with evident relish and without fear or shame. I do not doubt that the presence of the new immigrant is "a great strain upon our political institutions"; but not greater than the old immigrant was, and still is. This certainly is true of Pennsylvania; for there are counties in that state, into whose wilds the new immigrant has not yet penetrated, and where those who have been living off its fat acres since their birth--the sons of immigrants who came 200 years ago--hold their right of franchise cheap. I am told that in these counties nearly every vote can be bought for five dollars. This may be idle rumour; but the fact remains and can be proved by any one who chooses to investigate, that Scranton, Wilkes-Barre, Connelsville and a hundred other cities and towns, are better governed now than they were before Slav, Latin and Jew came to live in their Patches and Ghettos. This is true in spite of our having tried to corrupt these new citizens from the very hour when they received their political rights, and that when they had no rights, we treated them with neglect and scorn. The mayor of Greensburg, Pa., a man of the newer and better type of administrators, whose territory is completely environed by the coke regions and has an almost totally foreign population--says: "They make reliable citizens. They can be trusted absolutely. Their worst enemy is drink; but when a foreigner comes before me and is fined, if he has no money and I let him go home, he will come the next day to pay his fine even if he lives ten miles from town. Yet in spite of the fact that the 'Hunkey' and the 'Dago' have helped build up Greensburg, and have enriched its citizens, they are still held in contempt by the majority of its people." This same official told me that a few years ago when the Italians celebrated their Independence Day, the _High School boys_ of that city threw decayed vegetables at them and their national flag. Without the slightest reserve I can say this: Wherever an enlightened official, like this mayor, or teachers of the public schools, ministers of the Gospel and business men, have come in real contact with the new immigrant, their verdict was entirely different from that of Mr. Edwards and many of the professional writers upon the problem which the foreigner represents. There are some places in the United States where I have found the immigrant a menace, and one of them is in Pittston, Pa. There the Italian is really bad; there he is an Anarchist and a murderer. But in Pittston I discovered the really bad American, an Anarchist and a murderer; although he may be the owner of some of the mines or a high official in the town. In that city, every law which governs mining has been openly violated, and there is at least one mine in the place which is nothing but a deep hell-hole and is known as such by the men compelled to work in it. It is a mine in which anything may be had for a bribe and anything may be done without fear of punishment. In one of the last communal elections, the candidate for its highest office kept open house, with beer and "booze" in one of the miners' shacks; young boys, not out of their teens, were allowed to drink to intoxication, and the candidate already mentioned was not an Italian or a Slav or a Jew; but an American, unto the tenth generation and a member of a Protestant church. I do not rejoice in writing this or in telling it as I have had to tell it in the towns affected, and to the very men who have thus offended. It is painful to me, because, after all, I do not feel myself so closely identified with the immigrant as with the American. While my sympathies are with the immigrant, they are much more with this, my country, and with that circle of the native born, whose ideals, whose hopes and whose aspirations have become mine. I am not greatly concerned with immigration, per se; that is a subject for the economist, which I am not. It is for him, if he is skilled enough, to know whether we can afford to keep our gates open to the millions who come, or when and to whom to close them. Narrowly, or perhaps selfishly, I am concerned for those who are here; that they be treated justly, with due appreciation of their worth, and that they may see that best in the American which has bound me to him, to his land and to its history; to its best men living, and to those of its dead who left a great legacy, too great to be squandered by a prodigal generation. Knowing how great this legacy is, and yet may be for the blessing of mankind, I am pleading for this new immigrant. If we care at all for that struggling, striving mass of men, unblessed as yet by those gifts of Heaven which have blessed us, let us prove to these people of all kindreds and races and nations, that our God is the Lord, that His law is our law and that all men are our brothers. XXIV FROM CHAOS TO COSMOS While passing through a pleasure park in one of the European capitals I met, quite by accident, my fellow passenger on the Italian steamer, the Puritan rebel; she who smoked cigarettes, drank cocktails, was divorced and had gone to the Old World in search of a more congenial moral atmosphere and a husband with braid and buttons. Now she was drinking the cup of unrestrained pleasure, and having nearly drained it, it was beginning to taste bitter. Officers and attachés, Grand Opera, frivolous plays and care-free crowds, were beginning to pall upon her and she was unmistakably homesick; although she did not confess to that last fact. "I suppose," she said, "you can't get rid of Puritanism, when once it gets into your blood. It's an hereditary disease." "And it is contagious," I added. "I thought," she continued, "that at home we were small and narrow and that over here I should find a larger freedom; but you can't turn around here, without finding the bars up--racially, religiously, socially and politically. The only unobstructed passage is the way to Hell." Hers were large, black, dreamy eyes and the shadows of disappointment passed over them. Then, to shake off the gripping seriousness from her mood, she said, with a forced smile: "I am going to see the Merry Widow to-night with my Captain. They are both inane. Meeting you has made me blue, I fear; you remind me of my father." She said this reproachfully, I thought; although she added: "Let us sit down and talk things over. My daughter and the maid are listening to the music and I have nothing to do until my Captain comes to meet me." "Now please listen to me," I said when we were seated. "I was born over here, right in this city. My playground was this very park. I have tasted the best this city can offer a boy, as well as its worst. "Listen," I said again; for her eyes wandered to the gay crowds. "I also know your home city, and I wouldn't give one block in Hartford, Conn., not speaking from the commercial standpoint, for this whole magnificent city, with its Cathedral, its Grand Opera, its royal castle, its officers and its Merry Widow. Do you ask why? Just watch this crowd and let me interpret it to you. Those boys now passing are Bohemians, apprentices; and they are talking Czechish to make themselves obnoxious to the Germans whom they hate and who hate them, more than your forefathers hated the devil. "Do you see that Bosnian? Notice his smile as he sells a jack-knife to the Austrian soldier. His smile would be more genuine if he could knife this detested 'Schwab,' his enemy and the conquerer of his country. "Those men with the needle-pointed moustaches are Magyars, and they hate the Slavs and Germans and every one else who will not speak their language. "The officers with the red fez are Turks, as you know; just now they despise everything Austrian, and not without reason. "The picturesque nurse maids, wheeling the babies, do not have those soldiers with them to protect Austria's 'infant industries'; they are Slovaks, aliens of the aliens, and the unprotected prey of the soldiers. The Jews here add to the chaos; for all these races hate them and they reciprocate in kind." "We have all these people in Hartford! What of it?" My companion impatiently interrupted my explanations. "This," I replied. "These people have lived for many hundreds of years, in chaos and confusion. Each in his little world, hemmed in by the pride of his race or the hate of other people. Each day the barriers grow taller and the hate grows stronger. "I lived in it for a good many years, and it is an awfully little world one is locked into; yet it is as big and terrible as Hell. That being branded by the marks of your race, by the speech your ancestors have bequeathed you, by your blood or your religion, and isolated as if you were a leper, while your heart yearns for the larger fellowships--all that I have felt from my youth." "Haven't you felt it in America, too?" "Yes; but with a difference, a tremendous difference. There they may shut one from the social contact, but there remain the public schools, the libraries, the churches and settlements. And what schools you have in Hartford! I have been in schoolrooms there, in the first grade, where 90% of the children were of alien birth, and at a glance I knew their nationality. "Italians, miniature old men and women, although scarcely seven years of age. "Serious, little black-eyed Jews, with the burden of ages upon their bent backs. "Polish boys and girls, with small foreheads, as if some tyrant had trampled upon their heads. "Armenians, sad-looking, dark-skinned creatures, haunted by the remembrance of their village street, red from the blood of the slain. "Syrian children, out of the very village in whose meadows the angels sang when Christ was born; but who have never known either peace or good will. "I went to the second and third grades, and there it seemed as if the hand of a good angel had already passed over those marked and marred faces; I could almost hear the voice of the All-Father saying: "'I will blot out the transgressions which have been transgressed against you.' "They looked like children who were beginning to live the real life of the child in a really human world, and were having a chance to grow into the human likeness. "I have been to your High School, and there the marks were all but obliterated; there was 'neither Jew nor Greek, neither Roman nor Barbarian'; they were all a new people." Now, my Puritan rebel was listening attentively enough; so I continued: "In America, something happens which cannot happen here. Over there, the fiber, the tissue, that mysterious fluid which we call life or soul, the very nerve cells change, under the benign influences of the heritage left by your fathers; that heritage which you despise--you"--I repeated, and I said it angrily; "you, who expatriate yourself for the sheen of braid and buttons, for Grand Opera and Viennese waltzes! You expatriate yourself [Illustration: SLAVIC WOMEN THE ONE WHO STAID AT HOME THE ONE WHO EMIGRATED] from a country where there is more idealism to the square inch than in all this country, in spite of its statuary, its music and its aristocracy. "I'd rather live in Connecticut, the wife of a humble artisan, than here, the 'consort' of a Count or Duke." "You talk exactly like my father," she repeated. "Do I? I'm glad of it. I told you that Puritanism is contagious. Maybe I caught it from your father, and if I were sure that I have caught it, I would be sure of more moral fiber than you will get here, if you stay a hundred years. "That Puritanism which you despise will make cosmos out of chaos; for in spite of its narrowness, there is in it the passion for humanity. It cries for justice, for freedom, for equality, even if it too often burdens itself with theological dogmas hard to understand and harder to believe. "After all, the best thing in your country is, not that you give the weaker a chance to grow strong, and the broken the blessing of healing--the best of it is, that those of us who are just what we are, have a chance to help in the doing. It's the work that a man or woman can do over there that counts. "Yes, go back, crawl back, if necessary, to sober Connecticut; to its pure women and its undemonstrative men, who do not make meaningless compliments, after the fashion of your Captain; but who will at least think no evil of you and who will treat you with real courtesy, when there is need of courteous action. "You want art? You fear you will miss it? They are doing something worth while at home, in bronze and marble; but they are doing more wonderful things in human flesh and spirit. "I have seen wretched Italian children who came from where they make little fairies out of Carrara marble, yet they were crooked without and within; and I have seen them grow tall and beautiful and pure, by the grace of God and the passion of some noble woman. That, after all, is the supreme art. "Music? You can have Grand Opera in New York composed of all the stars in the operatic firmament; yet I have heard music, sweeter, better and truer, sung by children in the Settlements. "I have seen a Christmas at Hull House, in Chicago, which surpassed any Grand Opera. I am sure if angels come down to earth and care for our mundane pleasures, they must have struggled for a front seat there. "Fifty children of nearly all the races under Heaven sang the songs of their home-land, all the way from those they used to sing under the dark pines of Norway's farthest crag, down to those sung by Sicilian children beneath the palms of their ever sunny land. "Together they sang those Heaven-born prophecies of 'Peace on earth, good will to men'; and as I heard the blended voices of Jews, Catholics, and Protestants, Greeks, Italians and Syrians, I felt that the ancient prophecies are being fulfilled, at least in spots, on our then unknown continent. "Go home. Learn to find pleasure in that classic art of making home. Learn how to find joy in giving children a chance to live and laugh, to look towards manhood and womanhood from a mountain top and not from a cage. Catch the rhythm of that new poetry which is now in the making; which speaks in its sonnets of justice, in its epics of war against all human wrong and in its lyrics of a sublimer and a larger love." "There comes my Captain!" said my victim, with a sigh of relief; "and I must go." Yes, there he stood; all braid and buttons, or just braid and buttons, a waxed moustache, a waxen smile and clicking spurs. Gracefully he bowed as he offered his arm, in such a charming manner as could not be easily reproduced by any mere American. Thus they left me to my solemn musings, while the living tide swept by me, each drop in the great current antagonistic to the other. Unbidden there arose before me the ship, laden by human freight, leaving America, carrying representatives of these same races and nationalities alien and hostile to each other: Slavs and Magyars, arch foes of centuries' standing; Northern and Southern Italians, looking with scorn at one another; Jews and Gentiles, Greeks and Bulgarians, Albanians and Montenegrins. All of them had come out of the chaos wrought by ages of hate and centuries of warfare. But in America, many of them had learned to live together without scorn on the lip or hand on the sword-hilt. The walls which separated them were weakened, if not broken down, and like blind men they felt for one another in the dark; sometimes missing the larger brotherhood, but often finding it. The Pentecost of which prophets and seers have dreamt, which is to repair the ruin wrought in the human family by the building of its towers of Babel, cannot be so far away. The cosmos may yet come out of the chaos, and there is no spot of earth on which this creative act can be performed as well as in our America. The land is vast enough and rich enough; no barrier of language divides the East from the West; the North and the South are almost one, after an internecine war; and in spite of our melting of metals and slaughter of cattle and growing of corn--in spite of souls made hard and unresponsive to anything but money--like the [Illustration: GENERAL AND MRS. RICIOTTO GARIBALDI AT THE FOOT OF HIS FATHER'S MONUMENT IN ROME "It is just like you Americans--you go to work to make your dreams come true."] cash register we have invented; in spite of my Puritan rebel and her numerous company--in spite of all that, our land is still full of dreamers of dreams, who yet are awake and practical enough to make their dreams come true. "It is just like you Americans," said General Riciotto Garibaldi, to my "boys," as they stood together at the foot of his father's monument in Rome; while he listened to the story of their journeyings in the immigrants' land, living in their huts in Hungary, Poland and Italy, learning their language and their ways, that they may know how to minister to their needs over here, and bind us to them and them to us. "It is just like you Americans. We Italians think about those things and make poetry; you go to work at a great dream to make it true." My faith in the dreams of the great dreamers has never wavered. I knew that the prophet's vision was not a _Fata Morgana_, and that the words of the Son of Man came straight from the fountain of truth. Believing in them and believing in American manhood and womanhood, in their altruism and in their faith, and believing in the essential humanity of our crowding alien host--I believe that cosmos is being created and that chaos will disappear. Finally, what we teach the immigrant by precept or by example, he will become. He will bequeath our virtues or our vices, not only to the next generation which will spring with virgin strength from his loins; but through thousands of invisible channels, he will send these blessings or curses to the ends of the earth. The issues of the Kingdom of God in this generation are with America. APPENDIX I CLASSIFICATION OF THE NEW IMMIGRANT GROUPS The new Immigrant groups which are more difficult to classify according to race, nationality and religion: _The Slavs_ I. Western Slavs _Nationality_ _Name_ _or political division_ _Religion_ Bohemian The Kingdom of Bohemia Roman Catholic or Czech a province of Austria Protestant Moravians Moravia Roman Catholic a province of Austria Protestant Poles Poland Roman Catholic divided by the European powers into The Russian province of Poland The German province of Posen The Austrian province of Galicia Slovaks A number of districts in Roman Catholic Hungary chiefly in and Protestant near the Carpathians Wends Settlements in Germany, Roman Catholic Prussia and Saxony Protestant 2. Eastern Slavs Russians Russia Greek Orthodox {Little Russians Southern Russia Greek Orthodox {Ruthenians Galicia and {Russniaks Hungary Greek Catholic 3. Southern Slavs Servians The Kingdom of Servia Greek Orthodox some districts in Southern Hungary Greek Orthodox Croatians Croatia Roman Catholic a province of Hungary and Greek Orthodox Montenegrins Montenegro Greek Orthodox an independent principality Bosnians Bosnia and Herzegovina Greek Orthodox and Provinces of Austria Roman Catholic Herzogovinians Mohammedan Dalmatians Dalmatia Greek Orthodox a province of Austria Roman Catholic Slovenes Carinthia Roman Catholic or Griners Carnolia Protestant Provinces of Austria Bulgarians Czardom of Bulgaria Greek Orthodox Districts in Southern Hungary _Eastern European Groups_ _Non-Slavic_ Magyars Kingdom of Hungary Roman Catholic and Protestant Finns Finland Protestant a semi-independent province of Russia Roumanian Kingdom of Roumania Greek Orthodox Roman Catholic Lithuanians District in Russia Roman Catholic and Protestant Greeks Kingdom of Greece Greek Orthodox Albanians Albania Greek Orthodox a province of Roman Catholic Turkey and Mohammedan _Groups from the Ottoman Empire_ Armenians Asia Minor Armenian Catholic Church Gregorian Church Protestant Syrians Syria {Jacobite a province of Syrian church {Maronite Turkey {Ancient Syrian (Roman Catholic) APPENDIX II NET IMMIGRATION TO THE UNITED STATES 1899-1908 There is much misapprehension in the popular mind, both as to the number of immigrants arriving in the United States, and those remaining for permanent residence. Until 1907, all aliens arriving were enumerated; but of those departing, no record was kept. The Commissioner General of Immigration arrived at the figures of net immigration given below, by estimating the departures according to figures obtained during four months in 1907, when the returning tide of immigration was normal. The year 1908 shows an abnormally small increase, due to the industrial depression in that year, when the returning tide of immigration was very strong. The following tables show that a large number return every year, and I am inclined to believe that the estimated figures of the net increase are too high, and that the permanent increase of the foreign-born population cannot be calculated from this insufficient data. The net gain in our foreign born population in the last ten years is estimated as 5,240,200 which is 68% of the total immigration. ========================================================================== Ratio estimated net Alien arrivals. immigration -------------------------------- bears to Accepted Other Total Total alien Net accepted Year. immigration alien alien departures immigration immigration figures. arrivals. arrivals. estimated. estimated. figure. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1899 311,715 [7]45,000 356,715 172,837 183,878 59 per cent. 1900 448,572 65,635 514,207 206,351 307,856 69 " 1901 487,918 74,950 562,868 209,318 353,550 72 " 1902 648,743 82,055 730,798 220,103 510,695 79 " 1903 857,046 64,269 921,315 247,559 673,756 79 " 1904 812,870 27,844 840,714 332,019 508,695 63 " 1905 1,026,499 33,256 1,059,755 385,111 674,644 66 " 1906 1,100,735 65,618 1,166,353 356,257 810,096 74 " 1907 1,285,349 153,120 1,433,469 431,306 1,007,163 78 " 1908 782,870 141,825 924,695 [8]714,828 [8]209,867 27 " -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total 7,762,317 753,572 8,510,889 3,275,689 5,240,200 ========================================================================== APPENDIX III INDUSTRIAL DEPRESSION AND IMMIGRATION The following table, giving the number of immigrant aliens admitted from June 30, 1907 to June 30, 1908, is of special interest, because it shows marked decrease during that period of industrial depression. The figures are from the report of the Commissioner General of Immigration. The increase in the number of those from Roumania is probably in Jewish immigration, following a period of renewed anti-Semitic disorders. Should a change occur in the political status of the Russian Jews, a large decrease of that group of immigrants may be expected. While it is not likely to occur soon, Jewish immigration will also be retarded by the fact that the economic conditions in the Russian empire are growing better. The greatest decrease may be expected from Austria-Hungary, where drastic emigration laws have been passed, and are rigorously enforced; especially against the Slavs, whose withdrawal in large numbers has imperilled agricultural and industrial enterprises in Hungary. IMMIGRANT ALIENS ADMITTED, FISCAL YEARS ENDED JUNE 30, 1907 AND 1908, SHOWING INCREASE AND DECREASE FOR EACH COUNTRY. -------------------------------------+----------+---------+------------ | | |Increase (+) Country of last permanent residence. | 1907. | 1908. | or | | |decrease (-) -------------------------------------+----------+---------+------------ Austria-Hungary | 338,452 | 168,509 | -169,943 Belgium | 6,396 | 4,162 | - 2,234 Bulgaria, Servia, and Montenegro | 11,359 | 10,827 | - 532 Denmark | 7,243 | 4,954 | - 2,289 France, including Corsica | 9,731 | 8,788 | - 943 German Empire | 37,807 | 32,309 | - 5,498 Greece | 36,580 | 21,489 | - 15,091 Italy, including Sicily and Sardinia | 285,731 | 128,503 | -157,228 Netherlands | 6,637 | 5,946 | - 691 Norway | 22,133 | 12,412 | - 9,721 Portugal, including Cape Verde and | | | Azore islands | 9,608 | 7,307 | - 2,301 Roumania | 4,384 | 5,228 | + 844 Russian Empire and Finland | 258,943 | 156,711 | -102,232 Spain, including Canary and | | | Balearic islands | 5,784 | 3,899 | - 1,885 Sweden | 20,589 | 12,809 | - 7,780 Switzerland | 3,748 | 3,281 | - 467 Turkey in Europe | 20,767 | 11,290 | - 9,477 United Kingdom: | | | England | 56,637 | 47,031 | - 9,606 Ireland | 34,530 | 30,556 | - 3,974 Scotland | 19,740 | 13,506 | - 6,234 Wales | 2,660 | 2,287 | - 373 Other Europe | 107 | 97 | - 10 |----------+---------+------------ Total Europe |1,199,566 | 691,901 | -509,353 -------------------------------------+----------+---------+------------ APPENDIX IV SUGGESTED CHANGES IN IMMIGRATION LAWS I. The examination of all emigrants at the port of embarkation. _Objections_ (_a_) The maintenance of an expensive machinery which will be hard to direct and control. (_b_) The possible objections of the governments concerned. (_c_) The prospective emigrant will necessarily have taken the most serious steps; and rejection at the port of entry will not be a much greater misfortune than rejection at the port of embarkation. (_d_) That it will be practically impossible for political offenders to leave their country. II. "That in addition to the restriction imposed by the laws at present in force, the head tax of four dollars now collected, should be increased to ten."[9] _Objection_ This would increase the number of immigrants who come here without their families, and consequently would react upon the United States both morally and financially. _Suggestion_ That the ten dollar head tax be collected from adults, and that the present tax of four dollars remain in force for children and possibly for mothers. III. "That each immigrant, unless he be a political refugee, should bring with him not less than twenty-five dollars, in addition to the amount required to pay transportation to the point where he expects to find employment." There is no valid objection to this demand--and the vast majority of immigrants are able to meet it. IV. "That immigrants between the ages of fourteen and fifty years should be able to read a section of the Constitution of the United States, either in our language, in their own language, or in the language of the country from which they come." _Objection_ The demand for such a test is not unreasonable, and is humane in that it exempts the young and the aged; but it does not take account of the fact that in most immigrant groups, the education of the woman has been neglected--and that the enforcement of such a law would have the same effect as that which relates to the increase in the head tax. _Suggestion_ That the literacy test be not applied to the wives of immigrants. INDEX Albania, 300, 302, 305-307 Amerikansky Schtore, 108 Anarchist, 291, 322 Anti-Semitism, 286 Armenia, 351 Austria, 287 Bacon, Judge, 283 Baldwin, 302, 305-306, 309 Beisel, Conrad, 232 "Bessie," 170 ff. Black Hand, 291 Calabria, 174 Campagna, 176 Cattero, Boche de, 248 Chautauqua, 305, 309 Chicago, 86, 87 Chorvat, Jan, 130 ff. Columbus, 244 Connecticut, 200, 353 Connellsville, 192, 331, 341, 344 Constitution of United States, 323 Cracow, description of, 112; hatred of Germany in, 113; Jews in, 113; political condition in, 114 Criminals, 322 Czechs, 212 Dalmatia, conditions in, 138; government, 139; America a blessing to, 147 Dowie, Charles A., 89 Edwards, R. H., 334, 336, 345 Ellis Island, 170 Emigrants, views of Americans, 82 ff.; effect of return of, 72-75 Fansher, Guy J., 308 Gabriel, 256 ff. Garibaldi, 357 "Gemeinschaft," 222 Greensburg, Pa., 344 Grose, Howard N., 317 Harrisburg, 343 Hartford, 315, 349, 351 Harvard, 264-266, 340 Hazleton, 353 ff. Hungary, 260, 287, 295 Huss, 209 Hussite movement, 221 Introduction, letters of, 112 Italy, church of, 177; dark side of emigration from, 173; effect of emigration on Italy, 166; on wages, 174; on education, 175; on religion, 176; on women, 178; on economic conditions, 179; on purchase of land in, 174 Italians, bad, 195 Jamestown, 306-307, 310 Japanese question, 194 Jew, the, prevalence of persecution of, 260; Jewish feeling of superiority, 261; religious feeling alone does not account for prejudice, 262; Prof. Shaler's comparison of Jewish and Gentile students, 264; Jewish incapacities, 267; the Orthodox, 272; nowhere indigenous, 275; characteristics, 279 ff. Kisheneff, 277 Kopaniczari, meaning of word, 93; savage appearance, 94; view of fires, 94; of cameras, 95; of medicine, 96 Kortia, 310 Lewis, H. S., 282 London County Council, 283 Lo Perfido, Luigi, 177 Luther, Martin, 210, 221 Matera, 177 _Mayflower, The_, 341 Medical science in Trenczin, 96, 97 Methodist Church, 176 Molocani, 187 Monastir, 307 Montenegro, Prince of, 153; minister of exterior of, 152; festivities of, 154; emigration from, 155; neighbours of, 156, 164; legend of origin, 158; national dress of, 160 Passover, Feast of, 262 Pennsylvania, 334, 342 Pietor, Ambrosius, 223 Pittston, Pa., 320, 345 Poland, best type of, 116; in miniature, 117; federation of, 122 Police, American, 49; Indianapolis, 251; Moscow, 250; St. Petersburg, 250 Polish labourer in America, 65 Polish nobleman, a, 119 Polish peasantry, American influence on, 118 Postal Savings Bank, 193 Ragusa, guslar of, 142, 149 ff.; returned emigrants in, 143; and Coney Island, 144; an evening in, 145 Roberts, Peter, 318 Rohacek, 134 Roosevelt, 297 Ross, Prof., 335 Rousseau, 241 Roy Sisters, the, 132 Ruskin, 241 Ruthenians, 78, 190, 207 Scanderberg, 306 Scharosh, 329, 339 Scranton, 163, 192, 200, 331, 341, 344 Shaler, Prof. N., 262, 266-267 Sicilians, 339 Skutari, 301, 305 Slavs, progress in social scale, 23; slow to emigrate, 93; lack of initiative, 118; future of, 120; characteristics of, 121, 205 ff.; numerical supremacy, 203; condition at home, 204; dangers in Slavic emigration, 211; industrial development impossible without them, 191; late product of civilization, 215; an Aryan people, 216; Southern group of, 217; Western group, Catholic, 218; priests among, 220; the reformation among, 221; speech, 77; conception of Slovaks, 190; ideas of drink, 201 Slovak, slowness of, 125-127; evangelistic effort among, 134; returned emigrants, 128, 136 Sonnenschein, 275 Spalato, 185, 248 "Stary Kray," 24, 25 Stelzle, Charles, 317 Streator, Ill., 331-332, 338, 391 Syrian children, 352 Taft, President, 309 Taylor, Prof. Graham, 200, 284 Third class travel, 77, 79 Tolstoi, 241 Trenton, N. J., 195 Turk, M. H., 307-308 Vienna, University of, 296 Waag, the River, 124 Wages, 166 Wallachians, 78 Watchorn, R., 277 Welsh miners, 339 Wilkes-Barre, 192, 238, 331, 341, 344 Y. M. C. A., 258, 318, 323-324 _Printed in the United States of America_ * * * * * HOME MISSIONS _JOHN T. FARIS_ _Author of "Men Who Made Good"_ The Alaskan Pathfinder The Story of Sheldon Jackson for Boys. 12mo, cloth, net $1.00. The story of Sheldon Jackson will appear irresistibly to every boy. Action from the time he was, as an infant, rescued from a fire to his years' of strenuous rides through the Rockies and his long years' of service in Alaska, permeate every page of the book. Mr. Faris, with a sure hand, tells the story of this apostle of the Western Indians in clear-cut, incisive chapters which will hold the boy's attention from first to last. _JOSEPH B. CLARK, D.D._ _The Story of American Home Missions_ Leavening the Nation: New and Revised Edition. _International Leaders' Library._ 12mo, cloth (postage 10c.), net 50c. This standard history of the Home Mission work of all denominations in America, has been thoroughly revised and brought up-to-date. _MARY CLARK BARNES and DR. LEMUEL C. BARNES_ The New America Home Mission Study Course. Illustrated, 12mo, cloth, net 50c. (post. 7c.); paper 30c. (post. 5c.). This, the regular text-book for the coming year is on the subject of immigration. The author is eminently fitted for writing on this theme as she has been a worker among immigrants, and has given much time to studying the problem. _LAURA GEROULD CRAIG_ America, God's Melting Pot Home Mission Study Course. Illustrated, 12mo, paper, net 25c. (postage 4c.). The subject chosen for study this year, Immigration, covers so wide a field that it was thought best to prepare a supplemental text book from an entirely different standpoint. The author has written a "parable study" which deals more with lessons and agencies than with issues and processes. _LEILA ALLEN DIMOCK_ Comrades from Other Lands Home Mission Junior Text Book. Illustrated, 12mo, paper, net 25c. (postage 4c.). This book is complementary to the last volume in this course of study, Dr. Henry's SOME IMMIGRANT NEIGHBORS which treated of the lives and occupations of foreigners in our cities. This latter tells what the immigrants are doing in country industries. Teachers of children of from twelve to sixteen will find here material to enlist the sympathies and hold the interest of their scholars. * * * * * BIOGRAPHY _DAVID LIVINGSTONE_ The Personal Life of David Livingstone By W. Garden Blaikie, D.D. Complete Authorized Edition, with Portrait and Map. _International Leaders' Library._ Cloth, (postage 10c.), net 50c. For fifteen years this book has remained the Standard Life of Livingstone. The book is of especial interest just now when all the world is observing the Centennary of Livingstone's birth. "After all the years that have intervened it still remains the most complete, authentic and inspired of all the biographies of Livingstone."--_The Bookman._ _FRANCES WILLARD_ Frances Willard: Her Life and Her Work By Ray Strachey. With an Introduction by Lady Henry Somerset. Illustrated, 8vo, cloth, net $1.50. A notable new life of the great temperance advocate written by an English woman from an entirely new standpoint. Mrs. Strachey, the granddaughter of the author of "A Christian's Secret of a Happy Life," had immediate access to Miss Willard's letters, journals and papers, and the benefit of her grandmother's advice and knowledge. Israel Zangwill says of the book, "A masterpiece of condensation, an adequate biography of perhaps the greatest woman America has produced. Nobody can read this book without becoming braver, better, wiser." _MRS. S. MOORE SITES_ Nathan Sites: With an Introduction by Bishop William F. McDowell. Oriental Hand-Painted Illustrations. 8vo, cloth, gilt top, net $1.50. This is one of the notable books of the year. China looms large in current political and religious interest, so that this life story of one who for nearly half a century has been closely identified with social and religious reform in that country must have a large place in current literature. The book is more than ordinarily notable also because of its profuse and beautiful illustrations. _G. L. WHARTON_ Life of G. L. Wharton By Mrs. Emma Richardson Wharton. Illustrated, 12mo, gilt top, cloth, net $1.25. A biography of a pioneer missionary of the F. C. M. S., written by a devoted wife who shared the experiences of her husband in a long service in India and Australia. It is a life of unusual interest and an important addition to the annals of modern missionary effort. _ROBERT E. SPEER, D. D._ The Foreign Doctor: "The Hakim Sahib" A Biography of Joseph Plumb Cochran, M.D., of Persia. Illustrated, 12mo, cloth, net $1.50. Dr. Cochran came to a position of power in Western Persia which made his life as interesting as a romance. He was one of the central figures in the Kurdish invasion of Persia, and was the chief means of saving the city of Uramia. In no other biography is there as full an account of the actual medical work done by the medical missionary, and of the problem of the use of the political influence acquired by a man of Dr. Cochran's gifts and opportunities. _HENRY D. PORTER, M.D., D.D._ William Scott Ament _Missionary of the American Board to China._ Illustrated, 8vo, cloth, net $1.50. A biography of one of the most honored missionaries of the Congregational Church, whose long and effective service in China has inscribed his name high in the annals of those whose lives have been given to the uplift of their fellowmen. _MARY GRIDLEY ELLINWOOD_ Frank Field Ellinwood _Former Secretary Presbyterian F. M. Board_ His Life and Work. Illustrated, cloth, net $1.00. A charming biography of one of the greatest missionary leaders of the Nineteenth Century.--_Robert E. Speer._ _ANTONIO ANDREA ARRIGHI_ The Story of Antonio the Galley Slave With Portrait, 12mo, cloth, net $1.25. "Reads like a romance, and the wonderful thing about it is that it is true. A fervid religious experience, a passion for service and good intellectual equipment were his splendid preparation for a great missionary work among his countrymen in America."--_Zion's Herald._ _GEORGE MULLER_ George Muller, The Modern Apostle of Faith By FREDERICK G. WARNE. _New Edition, including the Later Story of the Bristol Orphan Home._ Illustrated, cloth, net 75c. "What deep attractiveness is found in this life of the great and simple-hearted apostle."--_Christian Advocate._ _KINGSTON DE GRUCHE_ Dr. Apricot of "Heaven-Below" Illustrated, 8vo, cloth, net $1.00. "No one who has read this book will ever afterwards repeat the threadbare objection, I don't believe in missions."--_Continent._ _A "Vade Mecum" on Immigration_ The Immigrant An Asset and a Liability By FREDERIC J. HASKIN Author of the "American Government" _Illustrated, 12mo., cloth, net $1.25_ The wide-spread attention focused on this theme makes "THE IMMIGRANT, An Asset and a Liability" especially timely. No other book of this kind gathers into itself the consideration of so many phases of the subject and for this reason it admirably supplements the several text books on the topic. In brief, lucid replies it answers questions like these: "Why do the immigrants come?" "How do they come?" "How are they treated at ports of entry?" "What helps and what hindrances meet them?" "Where do they go?" "What are the relations of immigration and the white slave traffic?" "Who is the padrone?" "What is peonage?" "How does the new immigrant live?" "What of the future?" Mr Haskin has succeeded to a remarkable degree in investing the subject of Immigration with intense interest. The story of the greatest human migration of all the ages is told in vivid, incisive and picturesque style. The three centuries of this great world movement are spread out before the reader like a panoramic parade of all nations. Accurate historical statement, philosophic presentation of the underlying principles and a judicial consideration of the ultimate influence on our country characterize this latest and in many respects most satisfactory and complete handbook. FOOTNOTES: [1] "The Neighbours," pp. 110-114. [2] "The Jew in London," Russel-Lewis, pages 171-173. [3] "Studies on American Social Conditions. Immigration." By Richard Henry Edwards, p. 9. [4] "Social Psychology," Ross, p. 140. [5] Report of Commission of Immigration of the State of New York, pp. 182 and 185. [6] Report of Commission of Immigration of the State of New York, p. 183. [7] Estimated. [8] Actual figures. [9] Protect the Workman. John Mitchell, _The Outlook_, Sept. 11, 1909. 
41443	----	THE AUDIENCIA IN THE SPANISH COLONIES AS ILLUSTRATED BY THE AUDIENCIA OF MANILA (1583-1800) BY CHARLES HENRY CUNNINGHAM, Ph. D. Adjunct Professor of History in the University of Texas UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS BERKELEY 1919 PREFACE It seems proper to say at the outset that a general study of the Spanish colonial system convinced me of the need of an extended investigation of the audiencia, which was the central institution in the colonies. It was, however, the circumstance of my being situated in Manila for some years and thus having at my disposal the original documents bearing upon the history of the audiencia which was situated there that led me to study this particular tribunal. At first sight it may appear that something of direct applicability to Spanish-American conditions, which would have been gained by the study of the Audiencia of Mexico, or Guadalajara, or Lima, has thus been lost. Nevertheless, if it is borne in mind that the audiencia system was common to all the Spanish colonies, and that the laws by which it was constituted and regulated applied to the different political divisions of America as to the Philippines, the assumption will not seem wholly unjustified that the Audiencia of Manila may be taken as a typical legal and political institution. A large part of the time expended in collecting the materials upon which this book is based was spent in the various depositories in Manila. The most notable group of documents there is to be found in the Philippines Library, and it is with pleasure that I express here my obligations to Dr. James Alexander Robertson, the librarian; for not only did Dr. Robertson place at my disposal all the resources of the library, but he contributed generously from his adequate knowledge of Philippine history and afforded continual inspiration during the course of my labors in Manila. I am also deeply conscious of the assistance so kindly rendered by Don Manuel Artigas, chief of the Division of Filipiniana, and by Don Manuel Yriarte of the Philippine Archive. In addition to research in the Philippines Library, the Philippine Archive, and the Audiencia Records in Manila approximately three years have been spent in the archives of Spain. The main centre of my work, of course, has been the Archive of the Indies at Seville, where I was given free access to all the available materials, and every facility was extended to me by the chief of the archive, Don Pedro Torres Lanzas, and by his obliging assistants. I am also indebted for many courtesies to Don Miguel Gómez de Campillo of the National Historical Archive at Madrid, and to Don Juan Montero, chief of the archive at Simancas. The object of this prefatory note would not be achieved if I failed to express adequately my acknowledgment to my teacher and friend Professor Frederick J. Teggart, of the University of California. His inspiration led me to appreciate the importance of institutional studies; his continued encouragement has helped me over the hard places in the work; and I am conscious now of the extent to which he has sought, by vigilant criticism, to guard me against precipitateness. I am indebted to Professor Herbert Bolton for valuable aid and for advice in the final presentation of the manuscript; to Dr. Charles Wilson Hackett for a systematic revision of the Bibliography and of the footnotes; to Professor E. C. Barker for advice and assistance; to Professor W. R. Shepherd and Professor Francis S. Philbrick for their criticism of portions of this book; and to Messrs. A. H. Allen and Morse A. Cartwright of the University of California Press for their many manifestations of courtesy and patience in the supervision of its publication. To Professor H. Morse Stephens of the University of California and to the generous order of the Native Sons of the Golden West I am indebted for the rare opportunity of two years of foreign residence and research in the various archives of Spain. Finally, my greatest indebtedness is to my wife, who has cheerfully given up the pleasures and conveniences of life among friends in home surroundings to accompany me to less pleasant places, in order that I might succeed in the work which I have undertaken. Charles H. Cunningham. University of Texas, Austin, Texas, March 1, 1918. CONTENTS Pages Preface v-vii Introduction 1-7 CHAPTER I The Audiencias of the Spanish Colonies 8-31 CHAPTER II The Establishment of the Audiencia of Manila (1583-1598) 32-82 CHAPTER III The Judicial Functions of the Audiencia 83-120 CHAPTER IV The Judicial Functions of the Audiencia: The Residencia 121-159 CHAPTER V The Semi-Judicial and Administrative Functions of the Audiencia 160-192 CHAPTER VI The Audiencia and the Governor: General Relations 193-225 CHAPTER VII The Audiencia and the Governor: The Military Jurisdiction 226-258 CHAPTER VIII The Audiencia and the Governor: Conflicts of Jurisdiction 259-303 CHAPTER IX The Audiencia and the Governor: The Ad Interim Rule 304-361 CHAPTER X The Audiencia and the Church: The Royal Patronage 362-409 CHAPTER XI The Audiencia and the Church: The Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction 410-444 Bibliography 445-462 Index 463-479 INTRODUCTION The audiencia was primarily a judicial tribunal. It has been considered almost entirely as such by these modern historical writers who have referred to it in passing. Its legislative, administrative, executive, and ecclesiastical functions have received little attention. This may be owing to the fact that little or no documentary study of the audiencia has heretofore been made. A great deal of attention has been devoted in this book to the non-judicial functions of the audiencia. A chapter has been given, indeed, to its purely judicial activities, but the chief purpose of this investigation has been to show that the audiencia was more than a court of justice, and to bring out its governmental and ecclesiastical functions. This study will be confined, chronologically, to the period extending from the time of the creation of the audiencia, at the close of the sixteenth century, to the end of the eighteenth. This limitation is advisable, first, because the vastness of the subject requires it, and second, because the audiencia became more concerned with judicial and less with administrative, political, and economic affairs through the constitutional changes which were made at the close of the eighteenth and at the beginning of the nineteenth centuries. The audiencia thus loses its interest, from our present viewpoint, after the eighteenth century. Again, it may be said that owing to the loss of colonies by Spain in the early nineteenth century, and the general anarchy that prevailed after 1810, a continuation of an intensive study beyond that period would be without value because its subject-matter would be no longer characteristic. In assuming that the Audiencia of Manila was typical of all the audiencias in the Spanish colonial system, it is not claimed that the tribunal in the Philippines was identical in every function and detail with those of the other colonies of Spain. It is no doubt true that local conditions brought about pronounced differences and that each audiencia had its own local characteristics and powers, which differed from those of the others. The subject is so vast, however, and the research required for a comparative study of all these institutions would be so extensive that it would occupy more than a lifetime to complete it. The main interest of this investigation does not lie in the organization, the scope, nature, or detailed powers of the audiencia as an institution of the Philippines, but in its larger relation to the general field of Spanish colonial history and government. It applies to the entire field of Spanish colonial administration. It is related to the government of Perú, New Spain, Cuba, and other colonies wherein there were audiencias, and where functions similar to those of the Manila tribunal were exercised. The establishment of all these audiencias was part of the same movement, and the act of their creation was the product of experience gained in Spain through efforts at centralization there. The audiencias of the colonies were alike dependent on the Council of the Indies; common institutions and departments of government existed in Spain for the control and regulation of the tribunals of the colonies. All were of equal judicial rank before the Council of the Indies, and cases appealed to the latter from the several audiencias were treated in the same manner and considered as having equal rank and importance. The general powers and attributes of these audiencias were prescribed in the same code, the Recopilación, and general laws and cédulas of reform were expedited from time to time and sent to the tribunals of all the colonies. Such is the basis, therefore, of the claim that this is in reality a study of the audiencia as an institution, illustrated particularly by the history of that of the Philippines. A study of the audiencia of any colony is concerned with all of the problems that came up in its life--with legal, political, ecclesiastical, and social conditions. It will be seen that the audiencia was the one tribunal which regulated, checked, and often controlled both church and state in the colonies; it represented the king, and its duty was to see that the royal commands were obeyed; it was the royal audiencia. Isolated as were the officials of the Philippines, in those distant seas, removed from any but the most remote influence of the home government, beset on all sides by hostile forces, and dependent on themselves alone, conditions there present an especially favorable field wherein to note the ultimate possibilities of the authority of the audiencia. It is the design of this treatise to examine conditions in the Philippines under the aspects noted, and to assign them their place in the history of Spanish colonization. The investigation of what was, beyond doubt, the most important and many-sided institution in the Spanish administration of the Philippines provides a means of approach to that larger field of study. A survey of the Spanish colonial system or a study of the government of any one colony will reveal the fact that political life and power there were vested chiefly in three institutions. Upon these the peace, prosperity and security of each colony largely depended. These institutions were the audiencia, the office of viceroy, or captain-general, and the church. By means of the two former the royal interests in the colony were represented, and through the latter one of the chief aims of Spain's colonial system was effected, namely, the conversion of infidels and the subsequent care of their souls. The church added to its own power in various ways. No study of Spanish colonial institutions would be complete which failed to consider the church as a political power. It is to a consideration of these three chief factors of colonial government, and their interrelation, that this study will be dedicated. After a review of the circumstances surrounding the establishment of the Audiencia of Manila, we shall devote ourselves to a detailed study of the audiencia itself. We shall first notice the audiencia's judicial functions as a court of ordinary justice and secondarily as a court of residencia. The second part of this section will be concerned with the semi-judicial and administrative functions of the audiencia. The title of captain-general was primarily of military significance, and it was exercised alike by viceroys and governors; the official designation of the former being "my viceroy and captain-general" and that of the latter being "my governor and captain-general." Not all governors were captains-general. The viceroys in the larger divisions and the captains-general in the smaller ones represented the king as head of the church and state in their several districts. Because these officials were so powerful and their duties so multitudinous, they came into contact with every department of the government. The audiencias came into relation with these officials most frequently. It is therefore necessary to study the governor and captain-general first from the viewpoint of his position as chief executive of the colony and as representative of the king. The frequency of their relations and the identity of their spheres of authority suggest that we give attention to the conflicts of jurisdiction of the governor and audiencia; finally, we shall take note of the occasions on which the audiencia assumed the government on the event of a vacancy, noticing the laws authorizing such action and the principles underlying them. The importance of the church in the Spanish colonial system has already been alluded to. The extent of its power and the frequency and importance of its relations with the audiencia demand considerable attention. After studying the general phases of the relations of the audiencia and the church, we shall see that the tribunal exercised ecclesiastical authority of a very pronounced character. This power it derived from two sources: first, from the authority that was entrusted to it by virtue of the royal patronage; second, from its status as a court of justice with jurisdiction in ecclesiastical affairs similar to that which it had as an ordinary tribunal of justice. The above is an outline of the plan of this book. That which impresses the modern student most with regard to Spanish administrative machinery was its failure to effect deliberately the division of powers which, with our traditions, we consider essential to a well-balanced government. The terms "executive" and "judicial" are employed in this book, as they were in Spain's colonies, to designate functions rather than departments. The viceroy, as president of the audiencia, had cognizance of certain judicial matters, and more or less participation in them, though he was forbidden to act as judge, especially over affairs in which he had already officiated as executive. The audiencia likewise shared many executive functions, yet it was not judge of its own acts, for when judgment was passed on the administrative acts or judicial pronouncements of an oidor, either on appeal or by review of sentence, that magistrate was expected to retire, or to be occupied with some other case. So, while there was no judicial department with solely judicial functions, or a legislative or executive department, as they are known in some modern states, there existed certain interrelations which did not entirely result in confusion, as one might suppose. On the contrary, it may be often noted that as a resultant of this system, men and acts of an exceedingly well-balanced and statesmanlike character were produced. We shall see, moreover, that they were far from meriting the disapprobation that is frequently heaped upon so-called Spanish governmental incapacity. The defects which appear so conspicuous in Spanish administration were largely due to the extremely methodical turn of the Spanish official mind, the vastness of the empire which was to be governed, and the lack of facilities available for efficient administration. It was a government of expedientes, literally a government on paper. All acts, estimates, budgets, and plans had to be drafted and written out, duplicates and triplicates of each report had to be made, advice had to be taken, and opinions rendered, whether the matter went any further than the theoretical stage or not. We do much the same in our modern age, but inventions and labor-saving devices have fortunately spared us much of the time and effort which a few centuries ago had to be expended to accomplish proportionate results. The apparent unwieldiness of the Spanish colonial empire would have been materially reduced by the use of the telegraph, cable, steamship, typewriter and carbon-paper. An effort has been made that this should be something more than a theoretical dissertation. A knowledge that certain laws were promulgated is only half of what is necessary in a study of this character. It is imperative to understand how these laws were applied, and whether they were efficiently and effectively carried out. Every phase of the audiencia's history has, therefore, been illustrated wherever possible with one or more concrete cases, taken from actual practice. Many of these illustrations are comparatively insignificant by themselves, involving persons of no historical importance and concerning matters of a seemingly trivial nature. Nevertheless, it has been necessary to consider these matters carefully because they were typical and true to actual conditions, and because they reveal better than anything else could the affairs which were the concern of the audiencia, showing the part played by the tribunal in the life of the colony. In the preparation of this work due deference has been paid to the standard authorities usually cited by writers of Spanish-American history. So little attention has been given by students of Spanish colonial history to the audiencia as an institution, however, that the present writer has been obliged to depend almost entirely on the hitherto untouched documentary material in Spain and the Philippines, and to place almost his sole reliance upon it. This material consists of laws, cédulas, royal orders, ordinances, correspondence, and lastly, but most important, records of cases and actual happenings in the form of letters, memorials, reports, complaints and contemporary accounts. These latter convey, as nothing else can, an idea of how the laws were carried out, what was their effect, what part the audiencia played in the interpretation and execution of the law, and the relations of the tribunal to the other authorities and institutions of government. Of this sort of material there is much, and in its light the history of the Spanish colonies and of their institutions yet remains to be written. CHAPTER I THE AUDIENCIAS OF THE SPANISH COLONIES The Spanish system of colonial administration was an adaptation beyond the seas of fundamental administrative, judicial and ecclesiastical institutions and principles which had grown up and had proved serviceable throughout a long period of successful use in Spain. As the audiencias and their allied officials had shown themselves to be efficient as agencies of centralization in the isolated provinces of Spain, so they were utilized, by the organization which they effected, to bring the colonies nearer the mother country. When Spain was confronted with the necessity of governing her vast empire, it was natural that she should profit by her former administrative experience, and make use of those institutions of government which had proved successful at home. The purpose of the present chapter is to emphasize the fact that, these institutions which had served in Spain, and were still in process of development there, were utilized in all of the colonies. The Philippine audiencia, which will be more particularly studied in subsequent chapters, was not a rare and isolated exception, but rather an integral part of a great administrative system. [1] This will more clearly appear from a sketch of the early development of colonial administration. In accordance with the terms of the concession made by the Catholic Monarchs at Santa Fé on April 30, 1492, Columbus was given the title of "Admiral, Viceroy, and Governor of the Undiscovered Lands and Seas of the Indies." [2] He was likewise entrusted with the duty of proposing three candidates for the government of each colony, and from these three names the king was to select one. It was further provided that the alcaldes and alguaciles for the administration of justice should be named by Columbus, and that he should hear appeals from these minor judges in second instance. This is a brief outline of the first government and judiciary provided for the New World. It is improbable that this arrangement was the product of any great amount of study or reflection. It was formulated before the New World had even been discovered, and this scheme, as well as the conditions of commerce and tribute which went with it, were largely proposed by Columbus, and acceded to by the Catholic Monarchs without anticipation of the tremendous consequences which were to come from that voyage of discovery and those which were to follow it. When Columbus undertook his second and later voyages the Catholic rulers began to modify the conditions of the original compact by sending royal representatives with him to take account of his expeditions. The difficulties which Columbus had in the government of his West Indian colony are too well known to be more than referred to here. Through the influence of Fonseca, and the gradual realization of the tremendous size and importance of the new dominions, the rulers of Spain began to feel that a mistake had been made in granting to this Genoese sailor and to his heirs the complete proprietorship and government of this distant empire. The abrogation of the contract was a natural consequence. It was the repudiation of a colonial system which had been created in the dark, and formulated without a knowledge of the conditions and problems to be met. Such an arrangement was foredoomed to failure, and if the colonies were to be administered successfully, reform was necessary. In 1507, the towns of Española petitioned the king for the same privileges and forms of government as were possessed by the towns of Spain. The request was granted, and municipal rights were bestowed upon fourteen towns. These concessions included the privilege of electing their own regidores and alcaldes ordinarios [3] and the rights of local legislation and administration of justice. The principle was subsequently enunciated that, inasmuch as the kingdoms of Castile and of the Indies are under one crown, the laws and the order of government of one should be as similar to and as much in agreement with the other as possible; our royal council, in the laws and establishments which are ordered, must strive to reduce the form and manner of their government to the style and order by which the kingdoms of Castile and León are governed and ruled, to the extent that the diversity and difference of the lands and nations permit. [4] In 1511, a tribunal of independent royal judges was constituted in the colony of Española to try cases appealed from the town magistrates and the governor. [5] This judicial body may be considered as the predecessor of the royal audiencia which was established fifteen years later. The organization and purpose of the tribunal were exactly similar to those of the courts existing in the frontier provinces of Spain before the establishment of audiencias. The chief reason for its creation was the need of checking the abuses of an absolute governor. This tribunal was composed of three magistrates, who were possessed of the licentiate's degree, designated as alcaldes mayores, and appointed by the king. They were empowered to hear and determine appeals from the governor and from his tenientes and alcaldes. [6] These magistrates, acting collectively, became at once official organs for the expression of the needs of the colony in non-judicial matters, frequently presenting memorials to the Council of the Indies independently of the governor. [7] The crown had already assumed direction of the administrative and executive affairs of the colony of Puerto Rico, on August 15, 1509, by naming a special governor for that island. On July 25, 1511, Diego Colón, son of the discoverer, was named governor of Española, and of the other islands and of the mainland discovered by his father. This latter act of royal intervention did not confirm, but rather abrogated in practice, the claims of this same Colón to the inheritance of the provinces which had been given formerly to his father. This act maintained the pre-eminence and authority of the Spanish monarchs in these territories. [8] The further growth and development of the West Indian colonies, and especially the increasing Spanish population, called for the establishment of a more efficient tribunal of administration and justice. This need was met in the creation of the first audiencia in America, that of Santo Domingo, which was established September 14, 1526. The law, which has been cited already, providing that the administration of the Indies should be patterned in all ways after the governments of Castile and León, shows very clearly the natural influence of the early history and institutions of Spain. The audiencias established in the colonies were at first similar in jurisdiction and organization to those of Spain, which country had already succeeded in governing provinces that were, in effect, almost as isolated and as far from actual contact with the court as were the Indies. The audiencia of Spain had proved of immense value as an agency of direct control. It had been found satisfactory under conditions very similar to those in the Indies, which were not regarded as foreign possessions, but as integral parts of Castile, being the property of the monarchs of that kingdom, and under their personal direction. Before proceeding with a description of the growth of the audiencia system, it is desirable, first, to note the establishment in Spain of two organs for the administration of colonial affairs. These may be examined here conveniently, because their creation antedated the institution of the audiencia in the colonies. The first, chronologically, as well as in importance, was the Casa de Contratación, which was created January 10, 1503. [9] This essentially commercial body was intended at first to supervise the import and export trade of Spain with the colonies, and to arrange for the sale and distribution of imported articles, concessions of cargo to individuals, the lading and discharging of cargo, and the collection of duties. The functions of this body were soon amplified to the extent that it was given jurisdiction over emigration to the colonies. In 1509 it was granted further authority over certain criminal cases relating to trade, and in 1510, letrados were added to the tribunal of the Casa for the better determination of legal affairs. As established in 1503, the Casa de Contratación consisted of a treasurer, auditor (comptroller), and factor. [10] That the institution flourished and increased in importance may be deduced from the reform of Philip II, on September 25, 1583, whereby the above mentioned officials were retained and a royal audiencia was created within the Casa. This was composed of three jueces letrados and a fiscal, besides the numerous subordinate officials who usually accompanied the judicial tribunal. [11] Though at first it exercised some of the functions which belonged later to the Council of the Indies, it came subsequently to be subordinate to that body. [12] It was transferred to Cádiz in 1717, and was suppressed by the royal decree of June 18, 1790. [13] its remaining attributions being assumed by the Consulado of Seville. [14] The beginnings of the Council of the Indies may be noted in the creation of a special committee of the Council of Castile for the supervision of administrative affairs in the colonies. This was eight years after the establishment of the Casa de Contratación, when another need than the purely commercial, for which the Casa de Contratación had served, began to be felt. [15] The inadequacy of the system devised by the Catholic Monarchs at Santa Fé had already become evident. The problems of administration in the colonies were making clear the need of a more effective system of regulation. Just as the number of suits to be tried before the old tribunal de la cort del rey had increased to such an extent that the king could no longer attend to them personally, so the problems of administration in the new colonies demanded more attention and regulation than could be provided by the administrative machinery at hand. The functions of this new tribunal, if it may be designated as such at this time, do not seem to have been clearly expressed at first, at least by any law or decree now at hand, but it appears that they were advisory rather than administrative. It soon became evident that a distinction had to be made between the prerogatives of this council and those of the Casa de Contratación. During the early history of these two tribunals there was considerable conflict of jurisdiction between them. It is probable that until the reform of August 4, 1524, was promulgated, active supervision of colonial affairs was maintained by the Council of Castile, both the Casa de Contratación and this new tribunal of the Indies acting under its direction. Charles V gave new life to the tribunal of the Indies on the above date by assigning to it definite legislative and administrative powers, putting at its head Loaysa, the general of the Dominican order and his own confessor. The Council was further modified by Charles V in 1542, and by Philip II in 1571, in the following terms: It is our royal will that the said council shall have the supreme jurisdiction in all our occidental Indies ... and of the affairs which result from them, ... and for the good government and administration of justice, it may order and make with our advice, the laws, pragmatics, ordinances and provisions, general and particular, ... which ... may be required for the good of the provinces ... and in the matters pertaining to the Indies, that the said our council be obeyed and respected, and that its provisions in all, and by all be fulfilled and obeyed in all particulars. [16] The Council of the Indies, as established in 1524, consisted of a president, a high chancellor, eight members who were lawyers, a fiscal, two secretaries and a lieutenant chancellor. [17] All these were required to be of noble birth and qualified by experience and ability to carry to a successful issue the high responsibilities which they were called upon to discharge. [18] Besides there was a corps of accountants, auditors, copyists, reporters and clerks. The number of these last-mentioned functionaries was enormous, especially in subsequent years, when correspondence with twelve or thirteen different colonies was maintained. The Council of the Indies was the high court of appeal to which all cases from the colonial audiencias came for final adjudication. It was, however, not only a court of appeal in judicial matters, but also a directive ministry for the supervision of the administrative acts of the colonial audiencias and executives. The unqualified success of the Audiencia of Santo Domingo, both as a tribunal of justice and as an administrative organ, led to the general establishment of the institution throughout the Spanish colonial empire. The audiencias which were created in Spain's colonies from 1526 to 1893 follow in the order of their establishment. [19] Santo Domingo, created September 14, 1526, consisting of a president, four oidores, [20] and a fiscal. Mexico, [21] created November 29, 1527, consisting of two chambers or salas, a criminal and a civil, a president, eight oidores, four alcaldes del crimen, and two fiscales for civil and criminal cases respectively. Panamá, created February 30, 1535, with a president, four oidores and a fiscal. Lima, created November 20, 1542, with two chambers, a civil and a criminal, a president, eight oidores, four criminal alcaldes, and two fiscales, as in Mexico. Santiago de Guatemala, created September 13, 1543, with a president, five oidores, and a fiscal. Guadalajara, created February 15, 1548, with a president, four oidores, and a fiscal. Santa Fé (New Granada), created July 17, 1549, with a president, four oidores, and a fiscal. La Plata (Charcas), created September 4, 1559, with a president, five oidores, and a fiscal. San Francisco de Quito, created November 29, 1563, with a president, four oidores, and a fiscal. Manila, created May 5, 1583, with a president, four oidores, and a fiscal. Santiago de Chile, created February 17, 1609, with a president, four oidores, and a fiscal. Buenos Ayres, created November 2, 1661, with a president, three oidores, and a fiscal; recreated July 2, 1778, when Buenos Ayres was made a viceroyalty. Caracas, created June 13, 1786, with a regent, three oidores, and a fiscal. Cuzco, created February 26, 1787, with a regent, three oidores, and a fiscal. Puerto Rico, created June 19, 1831, to consist of a president, regent, three oidores, and a fiscal. Havana, created September 26, 1835, reorganized June 16, 1838, to consist of a regent, four oidores, and two fiscales. [22] Puerto Príncipe, transferred in 1797 from Santo Domingo, reorganized September 26, 1835, to consist of a regent, four oidores, and a fiscal. This audiencia was suppressed and its territory added to that of Havana on October 21, 1853. It was recreated on February 22, 1878, and on May 23, 1879. Santiago de Cuba, created September 26, 1835, to consist of a regent, four oidores, and a fiscal. This audiencia was later suppressed, and its territory was added to the Audiencia of Havana; it was again reformed and added to Puerto Príncipe on February 22, 1878. Cebú (Philippines), created February 26, 1886, to consist of a president, four magistrates, a fiscal, and an assistant fiscal. Vigán (Philippines) created on May 19, 1893, to consist of one chief justice, two associates, a prosecuting attorney, and an assistant prosecutor. It will be noted that the audiencias of Mexico and Lima contained the greatest number of magistrates. They were divided into two salas, a civil and a criminal, with appropriate judges and fiscales for each. [23] The judges of the criminal branch were designated as alcaldes and not as oidores. These audiencias were at first conterminous in territorial jurisdiction with the respective captaincies-general of those names, but they enjoyed no greater power or pre-eminence before the Council of the Indies than the audiencias of the lesser captaincies-general. In the words of the royal decree of establishment, there are founded twelve royal audiencias and chanceries ... in order that our vassals may have persons to rule and govern them in peace and justice, and their districts have been divided into governments, corregimientos and alcaldes mayores who will be provided in accordance with our orders and laws and will be subordinate to our royal audiencias and to our Supreme Council of the Indies ... and may no change be made without our express order or that of the Council. [24] Many changes were made in the territorial jurisdiction of the various audiencias. The audiencias of Lima and Mexico, in addition to their jurisdiction over their respective viceroyalties, exercised governmental authority over the adjacent districts when the viceroys were absent; the Audiencia of Lima over Charcas, Quito and Tierra Firme (Panamá), and that of Mexico over what was later Guadalajara, the Philippines, and Yucatán. All of these, except the latter, came to have audiencias, with the usual powers and authority. [25] The first seven audiencias were founded by Charles V. Three were created by Philip II. The audiencias of Santiago de Chile and Buenos Ayres were established by Philip III and Philip IV, respectively. The greater number of these audiencias was created at the time of the most rapid extension of the tribunals in Spain; their establishment was part of the same general tendency; they were therefore closely related. When the audiencias of Santo Domingo and Mexico were formed, there had been already in existence in Spain the chanceries of Valladolid, and Granada. Thirteen audiencias were established in Spain after those of Santo Domingo and New Spain were created in the colonies. The two Spanish audiencias mentioned above were designated as models for the tribunals of the Indies, and the principle was laid down that if a necessary provision was omitted from the laws of establishment of the colonial audiencias, "all the presidents and audiencias of those our realms are ordered to preserve the order and practices which are followed in the chanceries of Granada and Valladolid." [26] Territorially, the audiencias of Santo Domingo, Mexico, and Lima were the nucleii from which and around which most of the other audiencias were established. Being the first in their respective sections, they included more territory than they could govern with facility; thus it later became necessary to divide up their districts. Santo Domingo held sway at first over Española, Cuba, and Puerto Rico, with authority also over Venezuela and subsequently over Louisiana and Florida. [27] New Granada was conceded an audiencia in 1549, and to this province were added the possessions of Panamá when the audiencia of that name was suppressed. The Audiencia of Mexico, created eight years before New Spain was made a viceroyalty, had territorial jurisdiction at first over a vast empire, which was later divided into smaller governments with audiencias. Its limits, as defined in the laws of the Indies, extended on both oceans from the Cape of Florida to the Cape of Honduras, and included Yucatán, and Tabasco. [28] The audiencias of Guadalajara, Santiago de Guatemala, and Manila all set definite limits to the jurisdiction of the Audiencia of Mexico. The Audiencia of Lima had authority at first over most of Spanish South America, but its scope was in the same manner diminished from time to time by the establishment of the audiencias of Santa Fé, La Plata (Charcas), Quito, Santiago de Chile, and Buenos Ayres. Before the Audiencia of Cuzco was instituted in 1787, jurisdiction over that ancient city and district was divided between the audiencias of Lima and La Plata; Árica, although it belonged to the district of Lima, was not governed under that jurisdiction, but was administered by a corregidor directly responsible to the audiencia at Charcas. [29] Chile and Panamá were subordinate governmentally to the viceroy of Perú, but the audiencias were independent. [30] Cuba was early divided into two districts under the rule of captains-general, those of Havana and Santiago de Cuba. [31] By cédula of February 24, 1784, Havana was made independent of the Audiencia of Santo Domingo in administrative matters. Aside from the one at Puerto Príncipe, audiencias were not created in Cuba, however, until 1835 and 1838, respectively. Prior to this, Cuba was subject to the Audiencia of Puerto Príncipe, the successor of Santo Domingo, in judicial matters, as the governments in Cuba were military. However, military cases were carried before the captains-general of Havana and of Santiago de Cuba, respectively. [32] Although all the audiencias had the same rank before the Council of the Indies, both as political and judicial tribunals, those of Lima and Mexico may be said to have been tribunals of the first class, for reasons which we have noted. Indeed, it must be remembered that it was the individual captaincy-general that had an audiencia, whether the captaincy-general happened to be a viceroyalty or not. Judged by the amount of power they exercised, there were three classes of audiencias: those of the viceroyalties, of the captaincies-general, and of the presidencies. On this basis of classification, it may be said that the first-mentioned were the superior institutions. In matters of military administration, the captains-general had the same power as the viceroys, while the audiencias exercised less intervention in the government than in the presidencies. In the latter, the audiencias (and presidents) exercised governmental functions as well as judicial, with appeal to the viceroy. Though they had no military power, and their scope was strictly limited in financial affairs, these audiencias actually governed their districts. This the audiencias of the viceroyalties never did, except when they governed ad interim. Before proceeding with a study of the powers and duties of the colonial audiencias, it would be well to compare them, as to extent of jurisdiction and authority, with those which were in operation in Spain. Were they equal? Did the colonial institutions, on account of their isolation, exercise prerogatives which were unknown to the tribunals of the Peninsula, or vice versa? These questions were answered by Juan de Solórzano y Pereyra, a distinguished Spanish jurist, oidor of the Audiencia of Lima in 1610, and subsequently councillor of the Indies. [33] Solórzano y Pereyra illustrates fourteen points of difference wherein the audiencias of the colonies exceeded those of the Peninsula in power and authority, in these matters exercising jurisdiction equal to the Council of Castile. This, he said, was "on account of the great distance intervening between them and the king or his royal Council of the Indies, and the dangers which delay may occasion." Therefore, he said, the audiencias had been permitted many privileges and powers denied to the audiencias of Spain. The most important of these powers were as follows: jurisdiction over residencias of corregidores; the right to send out special investigators (pesquisidores); supervision over inferior judges--seeing that they properly tried cases under their authority, care for the education and good treatment of the Indians in spiritual and temporal matters, and the punishment of officials who were remiss in that particular; the collection of tithes; the assumption of the rights and obligations of the royal patronage, as well as jurisdiction over cases affecting the same, the building of churches, the installment of curates and holders of benefices, and the inspection and possible retention of bulls and briefs. The colonial audiencias were instructed to guard the royal prerogative, and were authorized to try all persons accused of usurping the royal jurisdiction. They were to see that officials, lay and ecclesiastical, did not charge excessive fees for their services, limiting especially those exorbitant charges which priests were apt to demand at burials, funerals, marriages and baptisms. The colonial audiencias were given supervision over espolios, [34] collecting, administering and disposing of the properties left by deceased prelates, and paying claims of heirs and creditors. Another duty was the restraining of ecclesiastical judges and dignitaries through the recurso de fuerza. [35] This authority had been permitted to the chanceries of Valladolid and Granada, only. Although viceroys and governors were granted special jurisdiction over administrative matters, they were authorized to call upon the acuerdos [36] of the audiencias for counsel and advice whenever an exceptionally arduous case presented itself. The audiencias were permitted to entertain appeals against the rulings of viceroys and presidents, but these appeals could be carried again to the Council of the Indies. In the same manner that affairs of government belonged to the private jurisdiction of the executive, so did financial matters, according to Solórzano y Pereyra. In these, however, the viceroy or governor was assisted in the solution of perplexing problems by the acuerdo general de hacienda, a body composed of oidores, oficiales reales [37] and contadores. On the death, disability, or absence of the viceroy or governor and captain-general it was ordered that the government should pass under the charge of the entire audiencia. Lastly, Solórzano y Pereyra pointed out that while the sole duty of the Spanish oidores was to try cases, the magistrates of the colonial audiencias were called upon for a number of miscellaneous functions, such as those of visitador, or inspector of the provinces, or of other departments of the government, as asesor of the Santa Cruzada, [38] as inspector of ships, as auditor de guerra, as asesor of the governor, and as juez de las executorías, under commission of the Council of the Indies to collect and remit to the government receiver all money derived from fines and penalties imposed by official visitors (visitadores), judges of residencia, etcetera. [39] With the exception of the entertainment of the recurso de fuerza, none of the above-mentioned functions could be exercised by the audiencias of Spain. Although the colonial audiencias were to a large extent patterned after those of Spain, they had greater power and exercised more extensive functions almost from the beginning. This was chiefly owing to the added responsibilities of government resulting from the isolation of the colonies and their distance from the home government. The audiencias in Spain remained almost purely judicial. There was no need or opportunity for them to encroach upon the executive, or to usurp its functions, because of the control exercised by its immediate representatives. In the colonies the audiencias were themselves established as the agents of the royal authority, with the special duty of limiting the abuses of the officials of the crown. In this capacity, aside from their customary duties, the tribunals exercised far-reaching authority of a non-judicial character. It is desirable to point out in this connection that all the colonial audiencias utilized the same law in common. Cédulas, edicts, and decrees were issued to them from a common source, to be executed under similar circumstances, or on particular occasions when local conditions demanded such action. The great code of 1680, the Recopilación de leyes de los Reinos de las Indias, has already been described as containing laws, both general and particular, for the regulation of the colonial audiencias. [40] In the foregoing paragraphs attention has been directed briefly to the relations of the audiencias and executives with each other, and with the central government. Some notice at least should be given to the means by which the will of the executive and judiciary was enforced and executed upon and in the local units, the provinces and towns. We have already seen that the offices of the corregidores, alcaldes mayores and the alcaldes ordinarios developed in Spain, the first with jurisdiction over the larger districts, the alcaldes mayores over the smaller areas and large towns, and the alcaldes ordinarios in the municipalities. In a general sense, this system was carried into the colonies; the corregidores and alcaldes mayores were in charge of the large provinces and districts, the alcaldes ordinarios were the judges of the Spanish towns. Much the same intercourse and relations existed between these officials in the colonies as had been characteristic of the similar ones of Spain. But there were some differences: while in Spain the alcaldes were in most cases city judges, subject to the corregidores, [41] in the colonies there was little or no difference between alcaldes mayores and corregidores. They were most frequently appointed by the executive, sometimes independently, sometimes by the assistance and advice of the audiencia, as judges and governors of the provinces, although the laws of the Indies provided for their appointment by the king. The practice developed of designating them locally, and of sending their names to Spain for confirmation. Each alcalde mayor or corregidor resided at the chief town of his province and combined in himself the functions of judge, inspector of encomiendas, administrator of hacienda and police, collector of tribute, vicepatron and captain-general. [42] He was assisted by officials of a minor category, frequently natives, who exercised jurisdiction over their fellows. The law also provided for a teniente letrado to assist the alcalde or corregidor, [43] but in the Philippines there was no such official, except at irregular intervals in the Visayas. These chiefs of provinces were responsible to the audiencias in matters of justice and to the viceroys or captains-general in administrative affairs. In Indian relations and in questions involving encomiendas they were subject to the executive, who had jurisdiction in first instance, with appeal to the audiencia. The tribunal could grant encomiendas in default of the regularly appointed executive. In financial matters the corregidores and alcaldes mayores were responsible to the executive, but they acted as the agents of the treasury officials (oficiales reales) in the collection of the revenue. In their provinces they supervised the building of ships, the construction of roads and bridges, the repartimientos or polos [44] of Indians, and the planting of tobacco when the tobacco monopoly existed in the Philippines. In these matters they were responsible to the governor, viceroy, or superintendent, and to the various juntas reales and committees, of which at least one oidor was always a member. Tributes from the Indians, tithes from the encomenderos and other kinds of local taxes were collected by the alcaldes mayores and corregidores. Acting for the vicepatron, these officials represented the subdelegated authority of the king over the monasteries and churches of their provinces. They officiated at the formal bestowal of benefices, they were expected to maintain harmonious relations with the priests and friars in their provinces, and to check, by their personal presence and intervention, if necessary, any tendency on the part of the churchmen to abuse the Indians or to impose upon them. In like manner they were supposed to prevent the ecclesiastical judges from exceeding their power, and particularly from transgressing the royal jurisdiction, which frequently occurred in the earlier years when that authority had not become clearly defined or firmly established. As the churchmen with whom these officials had to deal derived their authority from the higher prelates and the provincials of the orders and often acted by their direction, their opposition to the local officials of the civil government was frequently so effective that the latter were obliged to appeal to the audiencia. The latter tribunal had the power necessary to deal with these cases, and to restrain the offending churchmen, by bringing pressure to bear upon their prelates and superiors. The provincial governors also had certain military duties. In the northern provinces of New Spain they had charge of defense, with responsibility to the viceroy. [45] In the Philippines, however, and in certain parts of New Spain, where the captain-general took the place of the viceroy, alcaldes mayores and corregidores acted as lieutenants of the captains-general, exercising authority of a military character. [46] They were required to defend their provinces and districts against invasions, insurrections, Indian outbreaks, and disturbances. They were authorized to impress men for military service. Local conditions in Mexico, Perú, Central America, and the Philippines caused some differentiation in these matters. This description will serve to convey an impression of the nature of the duties of these officials and the way in which they acted as the agents of the captain-general, viceroy, and audiencia. [47] It has been already pointed out that the alcaldes mayores and corregidores had extensive judicial duties; a mere restatement of that important fact will suffice at this time. In subsequent chapters we shall study in detail numerous illustrations and instances of the judicial functions of the provincial judges. It has been noted also that the alcaldes ordinarios were the judges of the Spanish towns. So they were in the Philippines, but, as there were only four or five Spanish towns in the archipelago, the alcaldes ordinarios do not assume great prominence in this study. These alcaldes were usually chosen by the ayuntamientos (municipal councils), though they were appointed on some occasions by the governors. As the Spanish towns enjoyed special privileges conferred by the king, their judges were not a part of the regular judicial hierarchy, but were dependent on their ayuntamientos or the governor. However, an oidor was usually delegated to inspect the work of the alcalde ordinario. With this introductory view of the general field of Spanish colonial administration, and this presentation of the characters and elements which are to assume important roles in this discussion because of their frequent relations with the audiencia, we may enter upon a more detailed study of a single institution. It has been emphasized especially that the audiencia in the Philippines was only an integral part of the governmental machinery used in the colonial empire of Spain. It is clear, therefore, that we are not studying an isolated tribunal, for every royal cédula promulgated to the Philippine audiencia was in some way related to those issued to ten or eleven other audiencias of equal status or similar character. Although the Philippines were apart physically, this institution, with its relation to the provincial and colonial governments on one hand, and the home government on the other, brought the colony as close as possible to Spain, and to the other colonies. It is certain that the growth of audiencias was a part, not only of colonial, but of Spanish historical and institutional development. These institutions served the same purpose in the colonies that they accomplished in Spain; they were utilized for the administration of justice, and to check the excesses and abuses of officials. They were important because they facilitated a greater degree of centralization. They converged the provincial, colonial, intercolonial and home governments in the same manner as the audiencias in Spain brought about unity in provincial and national judicial administration. CHAPTER II THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE AUDIENCIA OF MANILA (1583-1598). The conditions which determined the establishment of an audiencia in the Philippines differed little, if at all, from those in Spain's other colonies. All of Spain's dependencies were situated at great distances from the mother country; the Philippines were farther away than any. Furthermore, the Philippines were isolated and could not be successfully maintained, if dependent on, or identified with any other colony; distance and other factors which we shall note made undesirable and impracticable a continuance of established relations with New Spain. If, however, the governor of the Philippines came to be almost absolute in his authority, his absolutism differed in degree rather than in kind from that of the governors and viceroys of other colonies. The contiguity of China and Japan, the constant danger of military invasion and naval attack by outside enemies and the dependence of the colony on the commerce of China also made the case of the Philippines somewhat different from that of the colonies in America. In general, the situation in the Philippines called for a distinct audiencia with the same powers and functions as were exercised by the audiencias of the other colonies. A system for the administration of justice in the Philippines had been definitely established and organized before the audiencia was inaugurated in 1584. Many prominent features of the judicial and administrative systems of Spain and America had been already introduced into the Islands. At the head of both judicial and administrative affairs was the governor and captain-general, who was practically absolute, and whose authority was final except in certain matters of litigation which could be appealed to the Audiencia of Mexico. Subordinate to him were the alcaldes mayores and corregidores, whose functions have been already noted. In the Philippines, as elsewhere, the latter officials acted as magistrates and governors of provinces, combining judicial and administrative attributes. Directly subordinate to them were the encomenderos, whose holdings, including lands and Indians, may be said to have constituted the unit of the Spanish colonial land system until the close of the eighteenth century. [48] As in Spain, so in the Spanish towns of the Philippines, there were alcaldes ordinarios, or municipal judges, elected by the citizens in some cases, or appointed by the governor in others. [49] But the system as established was defective in many respects. The governor and captain-general was chief judge, executive, and commander of the military forces. In him were centralized all the functions of justice and government, exercised in the provinces through the alcaldes mayores and corregidores. The latter officials he appointed ad interim, supervised their administrative duties, and heard judicial cases appealed from them. He likewise exercised supervision over the oficiales reales, who were entrusted with the collection, care and expenditure of the funds of the colony. [50] During the period before the establishment of the audiencia, the governor exercised complete control over all branches and departments of the government,--provincial, municipal, and insular--in matters of justice, administration, and finance. The centralization of all this authority in the person of one official made his position responsible and powerful, but capable of much abuse. And it was the abuses incidental to the exercise of absolute power by the governor that led to the establishment of the Audiencia of Manila. Probably the most important indirect reason for the establishment of an audiencia in the Philippines may be noted in the abuses connected with the administration of the encomiendas. These may be attributed both to the powerlessness and inefficiency of the governors, and to their cupidity and deliberate favoritism to the encomenderos. As a result of the rapid spread of these encomiendas, [51] settlements, or agricultural estates, for such they were, and their location in distant and widely separated parts of the Archipelago, the encomenderos came to have increased responsibilities and powers. They were far removed from the central authority at Manila. They were infrequently inspected by the alcaldes mayores and corregidores in whose districts they were situated. Indeed, the encomiendas had spread so rapidly in the Philippines that the governmental machinery provided by Spain was unable to provide for them. In 1591, for example, there were 267 encomiendas containing 667,612 souls. These were supervised by twelve alcaldes mayores. [52] One hundred and forty priests were provided to minister to this large congregation of natives. The Philippine government, with an autocratic military governor at its head, had been originally designed for one settlement or province, and not for an extensive military possession, distributed over a widely separated area, with insufficient means of communication and transportation. Under the conditions outlined above, the encomenderos were permitted to forget the benign purposes for which they had been originally entrusted with the care and protection of the natives. The Indians on the encomiendas were reduced to the condition of slaves. They were mistreated, overtaxed, overworked, cheated, neglected, flogged, and abused. [53] Their protectors had become their exploiters. The churchmen who were supposed to act as their guardians and spiritual aids were insufficient in number to render effective service. Many of the latter served the interests of the encomenderos, and the latter were decidedly unfavorable to the introduction of more priests. The local officials of government and justice were in most cases too far away to care for and protect the natives, or even to visit the more remote encomiendas in their districts. Moreover, many of them were themselves encomenderos, perpetrating abuses on their own tenants, and accordingly little inclined to sacrifice their own interests for the protection of the natives on other encomiendas. Finally, the governor, located at the distant capital, was possibly ignorant of the real state of affairs; at any rate, he failed to enforce the laws which commanded humane treatment of the natives, leaving to the encomenderos, the alcaldes mayores, and corregidores the administration of the provinces and the supervision of the encomiendas. [54] Efforts had been made for the correction of these abuses and to bring about a more effective control of the encomiendas by the governor. Early in the history of the Islands the king had empowered governors and viceroys to grant encomiendas for life, with thirty years' remission of tribute, to those who had participated in the conquest. Legaspi and Lavezares, the first two governors of the Philippines, had given encomiendas without limit to favorites, relatives, and friends; consequently, when Sande became governor, he was obliged to direct much of his attention to the eradication of the resultant evils, and he attempted to establish the encomiendas on a profitable and honest basis. He dispossessed many of the holders of these large tracts, and reserved them for the crown, as royal encomiendas, thus creating a revenue for the newly established and financially embarrassed government. [55] Sande made royal many of the hitherto unprofitable encomiendas which had been in private hands. [56] On account of these acts Sande became very unpopular in Manila, and so unpleasant were his relations with the residents that, having no protection or recourse, he was obliged to give up his command, practically driven from the Islands by his enemies. The only person in the Philippines who exercised any sort of check on the governor was the bishop, with whom he was ordered to consult frequently. These consultations were often productive of bitter quarrels. The first prelate of the Philippines, Bishop Salazar, arrived in 1581, and throughout his ecclesiastical administration exercised influence of a far-reaching character. It was he who first showed the need of a royal audiencia to check the encroachments of the governor on the prerogatives of the church, for the protection of the natives, and for the safeguarding of the royal interests. Bishop Salazar was a determined opponent of Governor Sande, whom he accused of excessive indulgence in trade and the extortion of large sums from the encomenderos. On June 20, 1582, he wrote to the Council: "if I were as rich as Governor Sande, I would engage to pay any sum of money." He also testified that "the government here is a place for the enrichment of governors; they carry away as much as 400,000 ducats, knowing that they will have to pay a share of it at the residencia, but they steal enough to do that also." [57] The government of the Philippines, prior to the establishment of the Audiencia of Manila, during the period 1565-1584, was subordinate to the viceroy and to the audiencia in Mexico. The time required for the transmission of documents and correspondence, the fewness of ships available for the voyage between the Philippines and New Spain, and the unsatisfactory means of communication resulting therefrom, seriously inconvenienced the residents of the colony. In matters of government and justice appeals had to be taken to Mexico. This proceeding involved great loss of time and expense, and was especially inimical to the administration of justice. The assignment and regulation of encomiendas, the supervision of financial affairs, the control of the Chinese trade, the dispatch of the galleons to New Spain, and the assignment of cargo-space on these ships, were all matters which, at that great distance, and at that time, called for divided control. The execution of all these duties was too great a charge for the human frailties of one man; the governor could do it neither honestly nor well. The necessity was apparent of having a central government in Manila which would be self-sufficient in itself; that is, independent of New Spain, and at the same time capable of repairing its own defects. The relations which existed between the Manila government and the authorities of New Spain are illustrated by a letter which Governor Gonzalo Ronquillo de Peñalosa wrote a month later than the correspondence above alluded to. In this letter he announced the arrival of a ship from Mexico, which, he said, bore nothing but charges against him. These complaints, he alleged, had been formulated by agents of Dr. Francisco de Sande, his predecessor, whose residencia he had conducted and whom he had deprived of his office as governor. Ronquillo wrote that nevertheless, Sande has been received in that royal audiencia of Mexico as oidor, as a result of which all those who love justice may well despair. They meddle with my government from Mexico, giving orders to my corregidores without consulting me, and addressing private individuals in regard to the supplies, directing them to keep watch over this or that matter; they impose grave penalties upon me, and no matter how small the affair may be, they refuse to listen to me or to hear my side of the question. [58] He concluded by pointing out the inconsistency of his position, subject as he was to Sande, the man whom he had displaced because of the former's unfitness to occupy the post of governor. Although Governor Ronquillo de Peñalosa did not ask for an audiencia on this occasion, he did petition for an educated assistant to aid him in the administration of justice. "The trouble here," he wrote to the king, in the letter above quoted, "is that the people are of such a nature that, at the same time when justice is done to one, an enemy is made of another person." The rule of Ronquillo de Peñalosa as governor was distinctly typical of the possibilities of an absolute executive, far removed from the restraining influence of the courts, with scarcely any limitation upon his operations. Appointed as he had been for life, with proprietary attributes, and with the power of naming his successor, Ronquillo de Peñalosa was the first governor sent out from Spain in pursuance of the policy of entrusting frontier commands to military men who were fitted by profession and experience to deal with situations which demanded the qualities of the soldier, rather than those of the administrator and politician. An attempt thus seems to have been made to remedy the ills which had been characteristic of the administration of Lavezares and Sande by entrusting the governor with more centralized power--an attempt to correct the evils of absolutism with the mailed fist and more absolutism, backed by military power. The bishop, who at this time kept the court well informed of the weaknesses of the government, as they appeared to him, sent many complaints against Ronquillo de Peñalosa, as other churchmen had done against former governors. Not only did the bishop himself write repeatedly, but he influenced the municipal and ecclesiastical chapters of Manila to send protests against the governor's misrule. It was largely owing to Salazar's influence that Captain Gabriel de Rivera (or Ribera) was sent to Spain with a petition signed by most of the influential men of the colony, asking for various reforms. Among these the establishment of a royal audiencia was especially requested. [59] On the occasion of Ronquillo's death in 1583, the bishop called attention to the straits into which the colony had fallen as a result of the tyrannical methods of the deceased governor. [60] He described Ronquillo's efforts to prevent residents from appealing to the audiencia and viceroy of New Spain. He stated that the Indians had been unjustly treated by the encomenderos and alcaldes mayores, for when appeals had been made to the governor, the latter, on a plea of being too busy to occupy himself with such minute details, had ordered the alcaldes mayores to settle the questions at issue without disturbing him. Ronquillo was said to have engaged extensively in commerce, monopolizing the ships to the exclusion of the merchants, and forcing large loans from the officials and residents, who did not dare to refuse him, lest all their privileges be taken from them. He had established private encomiendas in nearly every town in Luzon, appropriating the income therefrom, instead of turning the proceeds into the royal treasury. [61] This the prelate conceded to be in accordance with the conditions of the governor's appointment, but it was nevertheless unjust, as the privilege of holding encomiendas was denied to other officials, and the treasury of the colony was in need of the revenue which had been daily enriching the governor. The bishop accused the governor of seizing Indians, placing them en encomienda wherever and whenever he found them, irrespective of whether they were already free, or whether they belonged on other encomiendas. These acts, he said, had caused the Indians to be dissatisfied and rebellious, and he evidently was of the opinion that a revolt was impending when he penned this memorial. "Many times I have prayed," he wrote, "that God should close the natives' eyes in order that they may not see the weakness and the little power with which we might resist them in case they should arise to put down these evils." The bishop closed this memorial with a vigorous protest against the continuance of the hereditary principle in the succession of governors in the Philippines. He made the general recommendation that in the future governors should be appointed by the king, with a view to securing men of administrative and executive ability. He brought forth strenuous objections to the accession of the ex-governor's nephew. Diego Ronquillo de Peñalosa, who was not fitted to occupy the post of governor. If the latter assumed the government, the bishop could see nothing in store for the colony but a continuation of the evil days which had been extant throughout the administration of the elder Ronquillo, "who had spent all his time in gathering wealth for himself by means of trade, shutting his eyes and ears to those who asked justice of him." Salazar expressed the opinion that "had Gonzalo Ronquillo de Peñalosa spent as much of his time in making conquests and discoveries as he had in making packages [of merchandise], the prosperity of the Islands and the general welfare would have been his chief aim." [62] Although the decree establishing an audiencia in the Philippines was promulgated before the above memorial reached court, there is no question but that the influence of Bishop Salazar did much towards bringing about the creation of a tribunal in the Islands. Indeed, Salazar has been given all the credit for this by more than one authority. [63] While the bishop did exert an important influence in bringing about this change, the support which he received from residents of the colony was also of immense advantage. Many individuals, aggrieved by the abuses of the executive, wrote vigorous complaints against "the tyranny of an absolute governor, who alone and unchecked, reserves to himself excessive power." Their letters emphasize the injustice of having appeals carried to Mexico, "where the people of Manila never get their deserts, and where they suffer on account of the distance." Various encomenderos had been wronged by the acts of the governor in dividing their encomiendas, and reducing the number of Indians thereon; they had appealed to Mexico, and after waiting over two years, had despaired of ever getting any return for the money and the time which they had spent in litigation at the distant capital. As a possible means of relief they requested the establishment of a royal audiencia at Manila. [64] Another person who exerted considerable influence toward the establishment of an audiencia in the Philippines was Captain Gabriel de Rivera, who went to Madrid for that purpose. He was the first procurador general de las islas del poniente, and it was his duty to represent at court the needs of the colony, and of its inhabitants. [65] Rivera acted as the personal agent of Salazar in his advocacy of the establishment of an audiencia, and it was largely due to his efforts that the institution was established when it was. In his memorial of February 16, 1582, Rivera criticized the existing administration in the Philippines, the proprietary governorship, and the control over commerce which the governor had exercised. The latter had levied the almojarifazgo and other customs duties in defiance of the royal cédulas forbidding them, and without consulting the wishes of the merchants or officials. Rivera alleged that the almojarifazgo and the alcabala were ruining the commerce of the Islands. [66] His memorial treated extensively of the abuses which had occurred in the administration of the encomiendas, and he pointed out numerous defects in the judicial system of the colonies. He suggested the establishment of a royal audiencia to consist of three judges, having criminal and civil jurisdiction, without appeal to any other tribunal than the Council of the Indies. The audiencia as outlined by him was to have administrative powers as well as judicial; it was to govern as a commission, with a governor at its head, chosen for a term of six years. [67] This scheme, he said, if put into operation, would result in no increased expense to the crown or colony. He proposed the abolition of the three oficiales reales, suggesting the substitution of three oidores in their places, thus extending the jurisdiction of the audiencia to matters of finance. The new tribunal should likewise take cognizance of the assignment of encomiendas, and see that in all cases the royal will was obeyed. The audiencia should exercise supervision over the alcaldes mayores in their relation to the encomiendas, with a view to remedying the existing abuses and seeing that justice was done to the Indians. The audiencia should hear cases appealed from the alcaldes mayores and corregidores instead of allowing these suits to be heard by the governor or sent to Mexico. Rivera also urged that there should be a special defender of the Indians as a part of the audiencia. [68] Enough has been noted of the evils of the government as it existed before the establishment of the audiencia to understand the reasons for the creation of the tribunal. The whole matter summarizes itself in the excesses of the governor, and the necessity of protecting all classes of society from his absolutism. These abuses called for the establishment of a tribunal nearer than New Spain, which would, in a safe and expeditious manner, impose the necessary limitations upon the governor, insure an equitable collection and an economical expenditure of the public revenue, and bring about particularly the elimination of official corruption. It was desirable to protect the merchant in his legitimate business, to insure stability in the relations of church and state, and to obviate the existing evils in the administration of the provincial governments. The latter meant the assignment of encomiendas in accordance with the law to deserving individuals instead of to friends and relatives of the governors, or to other prominent officials of the colony. It also meant that the natives on these encomiendas should be protected from the rapacity of the encomenderos. It was realized that an effort should be made to insure the imparting of religious instruction to the natives in partial return for tribute paid by them. Finally, it meant the establishment of a tribunal which would have power to enforce the law prescribing that the alcaldes mayores and corregidores should exercise faithful supervision over these matters which were within their jurisdiction. A tribunal was needed, not merely to hear such appeals as might come to it by process of law, but with authority to intervene actively in affairs of government, checking the abuses of the governor and protecting the community from his absolutism. The proposition to establish an independent audiencia in Manila was opposed by the viceroy and audiencia of New Spain. The latter tribunal wrote a letter of protest to the Council of the Indies, demanding that in matters of government and justice the colony of the Philippines should continue to bear the same relations to the viceroyalty of New Spain as did Guadalajara. [69] Rivera answered these objections in a special memorial, stating that the isolation of the Philippines alone justified the establishment of an audiencia and an independent government. He also pointed out that the nearness of Japan and China and the necessity of dealing with them required the presence of a sovereign tribunal in Manila. He asserted that the colony could deal directly with the Council of the Indies more profitably than through the Audiencia of Mexico. The latter mode of procedure was indirect and cumbersome and it exposed litigants to the meddling of the oidores of Mexico in matters which they did not understand. [70] Finally, the Audiencia of Manila was established by decree of Philip II on May 5, 1583, in the following terms: Whereas in the interests of good government and the administration of our justice, we have accorded the establishment in the city of Manila in the Island of Luzon of one of our royal audiencias and chanceries, in which there shall be a president, three oidores, a fiscal, and the necessary officials; and whereas we have granted that this audiencia should have the same authority and preeminence as each one of our royal audiencias which sit in the town of Valladolid and the city of Granada of these our realms, and the other audiencias of our Indies: now therefore we order to be made and sent to the said Island our royal seal, with which are to be stamped our decisions which are made and issued by the said president and oidores in the said audiencia. [71] The jurisdiction of the tribunal, it is to be noted, extended throughout the Island of Luzon and the rest of the islands of the Archipelago, as well as over "the mainland of China, whether discovered or yet to be discovered." The decree which provided for the foundation of the Audiencia of Manila consisted of three hundred and thirteen sections. Although the audiencia was subsequently abolished for a few years, it was re-established in 1598 and these articles were again utilized. It is therefore worth while to notice the most important provisions of the law of establishment, which was to serve as a foundation for the audiencia during a period of approximately three hundred years. The first thirty-eight sections were devoted to the creation of the tribunal, to a definition of its jurisdiction over civil and criminal cases, and to a determination of the proper method of procedure in them. The audiencia was to have authority to try cases of appeal from gobernadores, alcaldes mayores, and other magistrates of the provinces; it also had jurisdiction over civil cases appealed from the alcaldes ordinarios of the city and original jurisdiction over all criminal cases arising within five leagues of the city of Manila. Appeals were to be tried by revista (review) before the tribunal. Cases of first instance (vista) were not to be tried in the tribunal, excepting those to which the government was a party, or the above-mentioned criminal cases. The judgment of the audiencia was usually to be final in ordinary suits, and always in criminal cases. Those involving the government, and civil suits exceeding a certain value were appealable to the Council of the Indies. Notice of appeal to the latter tribunal had to be served within one year after the objectionable decision was rendered, and the party appealing the case was obliged to post financial bonds covering the expenses of suit in case the final judgment were not favorable to him. The decision of the audiencia was to be executed in all cases, even though an appeal to the Council of the Indies had been made. The procedure followed in the chanceries of Valladolid and Granada was to be enforced in the Audiencia of Manila except when the contrary was especially ordered. Investigations might be made by one judge, but the concurrence of two was necessary for all decisions involving the reversal of a former judgment, or in cases wherein a certain amount was at stake. In the latter case, an assistant judge might be chosen from outside the audiencia to assist the regular magistrate. The audiencia was forbidden to act alone in the selection of judges of residencias or pesquisidores; it was commanded not to interfere with governors of provinces, but it had the right, when, charges had been made by private individuals, to conduct investigations of governors' official conduct. The audiencia was empowered to investigate the judges of provinces. Magistrates were forbidden to hear cases affecting themselves or their relatives, and when a case involving more than one thousand pesos was before the tribunal, and no oidor was eligible to try it, an alcalde ordinario might serve in the place of a regular magistrate, with appeal to the Council of the Indies. Criminal charges against the oidores were to be tried by the president, with the assistance, if need be, of such alcaldes ordinarios as the latter might select. No relative of the president or of an oidor could be appointed legally to a corregidor-ship or to an encomienda. Oidores were eligible for appointment by the president from time to time to inspect the administration of justice and government in the provinces. Oidores were forbidden to receive fees from or to act as advocates for any private person, and they could not hold income-yielding estates in arable land or cattle. Oidores were forbidden to engage in business, either singly or in partnership, nor could they avail themselves of the compulsory services of Indians under pain of deprivation of office. Any person could bring suit against an oidor. As noted above, such cases would either be tried by the president or by an alcalde ordinario on the president's designation. Such cases might be appealed to the Council of the Indies. The audiencia, according to the terms of its establishment, had extensive authority over matters of government. In case of the death or incapacity of the president, the audiencia was to assume control of affairs, the senior oidor filling the post of president and captain-general, with special charge over military matters. Under such circumstances the administrative and executive functions were to be administered by the audiencia as a body. The governor, who was also president of the audiencia, was ordered to make a complete report annually to the Council of the Indies on the state of the government and the finances of the colony, including an account of the gross income and expenditures, a survey of conditions of the encomiendas and corregimientos, as well as a report on the conduct of officials, including oidores. In fact, all matters that came regularly under the care of the executive were to be covered in the annual report of the governor and captain-general of the Islands. The president was empowered to delegate the oidores, in turn, to make tours of inspection in the provinces. The magistrates, as visitors, were to inquire into the character of service rendered by the alcaldes mayores in the administration of government and justice. They were to note the state of the towns and their needs, the means taken for the construction and preservation of public buildings, and the condition of the Indians on the encomiendas. They were to see whether they were faithfully and efficiently instructed in religion, or whether they were permitted to live in ignorance and idolatry. Reports were to be made by the visitors on the state of the soil, the condition of the crops and harvests, extent of mineral wealth and timber in the provinces under investigation, weights and measures, and in fact, everything that had to do with the general welfare. On these trips the oidores were authorized to take such action as they felt to be necessary. Two oidores were also required to make weekly inspections of the prisons of the colony. The decree of establishment also directed that certain phases of ecclesiastical affairs should claim the attention of the audiencia. The chief duty of the tribunal in that regard was to keep the ecclesiastical judges from exceeding their authority, and the practices of the audiencias of Spain were especially prescribed as a precedent for the local tribunal. The audiencia was charged with supervision over the assignment of benefices, and especially with the settlement of the property and estates of bishops and archbishops who died in the Islands. The audiencia was ordered to permit nothing to be done which would be in prejudice of the rights and prerogatives of the church. The tribunal was instructed to assist the prelates on all occasions when they petitioned for royal aid. It was also to see that properly accredited bulls were read and applied in the Spanish towns, but not in the native villages. As noted above, suits involving the royal treasury and the collection of money for the government were to be reviewed and decided before any other that might come up in the royal audiencia. It was the duty of the fiscal to prosecute these cases in the interest of the government. At the beginning of each year the president and two magistrates were to audit the reports of the oficiales reales, and if these reports were not duly and properly rendered, the salaries of these officials were to be withheld. After auditing the accounts the committee was to count the money in the royal treasury. The oidores who did this extra work were to receive an allowance of twenty-five thousand maravedís (about 56 pesos) in addition to their regular salaries. The authorization of the audiencia was necessary for the payment of extraordinary expenses not appearing in the regular budget and these disbursements were made subject to the later approval of the Council of the Indies. The audiencia was held responsible in these matters by the Council. Full reports of expenditures made on the responsibility of the audiencia were to be made to the Council, and the oidores were held accountable in their residencias for their votes cast in the junta or acuerdo de hacienda, as the committee was called. The audiencia was given supervision over the administration of the estates of deceased persons; it was to examine the accounts of executors and see that the wills of the deceased were faithfully executed and that all was done in accordance with the law. For this purpose an oidor was delegated each year with authority to dispose of these cases in the name of the audiencia. In a subsequent chapter the duties and activities of this administrador or juez de bienes de difuntos will be enlarged upon. Considerable space in this decree was devoted to prescribing the rules for the trial of cases involving Indians, with a view to securing justice both in their administration by the encomenderos and in the supervision which the alcaldes mayores exercised over the encomenderos. The provision was made that "our said president and oidores shall always take great care to be informed of the crimes and abuses which are committed against the Indians under our royal crown, or against those granted in encomiendas to other persons by the governors." The audiencia was directed to exercise care that "the said Indians shall be better treated and instructed in our Holy Catholic Faith, as our free vassals." The audiencia was required to exercise care that suits involving Indians were neither lengthy nor involved, that decisions were reached promptly and without unnecessary litigation, and that the rites, customs, and practices to which the Indians had always been accustomed should be continued in so far as was practicable. The audiencia and the bishop were to see that there was a person appointed in each village to give instruction in religion. Alcaldes mayores were ordered not to dispossess native chiefs of their rule or authority; they were, on the contrary, to appeal cases involving them without delay to the audiencia, or to the visiting oidor. The audiencia was to devote two days a week to hearing suits to which Indians were parties. Encomenderos were to be protected by the audiencia in the possession of their encomiendas. A proportionate amount of attention in this cédula is devoted to outlining the duties of the fiscal, who, from many points of view, was the most important official directly connected with the tribunal. It was his function to appear as prosecutor for the government in all cases tried before the audiencia, and he was forbidden to serve as the advocate of any private person during his term of office. He should devote his attention especially to matters involving the exchequer. He was to prosecute all cases of appeal from the alcaldes mayores and corregidores on behalf of the government, and "he was to take care to assist and favor poor Indians in the suits that they have, and to see that they are not oppressed, maltreated, or wronged." The fiscal, ordinarily, was not to prosecute unless it were on the complaint of some person, but in cases of notorious injustice, or when judicial inquiry was being made, he could take the initiative on his own account. It was his duty to perform any and all legal acts which were consistent with his position, and which were designed to bring about justice or to secure the royal interests. The remaining sections of this decree, and, in fact, the greater part of it, are devoted to establishing the duties of the fiscal and the minor officials of the audiencia, to fixing a tariff of fees to be charged for notarial and other legal work and to the determination of other matters which are of no great consequence to the purposes of this chapter. Among the minor officials attached to the audiencia were the alguacil mayor and his two deputies. These were to act as the executive officers of the court and were empowered to make arrests, serve papers and execute similar functions. Their duties, as a whole, were much like those of the English or American constable or sheriff. They might arrest, on their own initiative, persons whom they caught in crime, as, for example, those playing forbidden games of chance, or indulging in immoral practices, typical particularly of the Chinese. The alguacil was responsible for the maintenance of the prison of the audiencia; for this purpose he could appoint a certain number of jail-wardens. There were also clerks of court and notaries, chosen by royal appointment. Their duties were those customarily required of such officials, not differing from those of today. The audiencia likewise had official reporters, similar to the court reporters of the present day. Advocates and attorneys practicing before the audiencia had to fulfill certain prescribed requirements in regard to learning, training, and general ability. Receivers, bailiffs, jail-wardens and interpreters each received their due amount of space and attention in this cédula. The interpreters were to assist the Indians who were defending themselves in a Spanish-speaking court. Among their duties was the translation of the testimony of witnesses, of the questions of attorneys and the rulings of the courts into the native dialects, or into the Spanish language, as the circumstances might require. These interpreters were also required to assist the natives in the formulation of legal documents. All these minor officials were to be regulated in the collection of fees by a legal tariff. Finally, the audiencia was provided with an archive within which were to be deposited and kept the great seal of the government, and all official papers, including records of cases and official acts. The new audiencia having been provided for, Santiago de Vera, the recently appointed governor and captain-general of the Islands and president of the new tribunal, arrived at Manila on May 28, 1584. In accordance with the new law, it was his duty to govern the Philippines in the capacity of executive and military commander, and at the same time preside over the audiencia in its respective judicial, advisory, and administrative capacities. The first session of the audiencia was held on June 15, 1584. [72] The new tribunal was officially brought into being with much pomp and ceremony, including a procession of the president and magistrates in their robes of office, and the celebration of divine service in the cathedral by the bishop. The president and each of the oidores subsequently made lengthy reports to the Council of the Indies on the inauguration of the tribunal. The most direct and striking consequence of the establishment of the audiencia in Manila was the discord which it engendered between the various officials and functionaries of the government. Whereas, before the inauguration of the tribunal, the chief ill of the colony had been the unrivaled absolutism and the high-handed proceedings of the governor, now, with the division of power newly effected, the creation of new departments, and the checking of one official against another, strife and contention took the place of despotism. There were but few misunderstandings between the oidores over their judicial duties. The functions of the audiencia, as a court, were clearly defined and distinctly understood. Although appeals were made from the audiencia to the Council of the Indies, as appeals are always made from a minor court to a superior tribunal, there was little dissatisfaction with the body in the exercise of its purely legal functions. Its value in protecting the natives on the encomiendas from the tyranny of their masters, the facility rendered to the administration of justice by making appeal to New Spain unnecessary, and the advantage of having immediately at hand a tribunal with plenary powers were readily recognized. The chief objection to the tribunal developed as a result of the audiencia's interference in matters of government and administration. Disputes arose between the governor and the oidores, and among the oidores themselves. The lack of experience in the local field of the president and magistrates may have been one of the causes of the unsatisfactory conditions immediately following the establishment of the audiencia. Another and possibly a more important reason lay in the nature and wording of the articles of establishment. A certain amount of confusion existed in the minds of all as to the extent of power which the audiencia should have in governmental and ecclesiastical affairs. No definite distinction had been drawn between the powers of the president and those of the oidores in matters of government, and the former at once accused the latter of infringing upon the jurisdiction of the executive. The oidores, on the other hand, claimed that their advice should be taken in all matters of appointment, defense, patronage--both ecclesiastical and secular--finance, commerce and interior administration. They began to intervene actively in those matters, to the displeasure of the governor and treasury officials. All the oidores as well as the fiscal, wrote lengthy memorials and reports to the king, offering advice on this affair or that, and criticising the governor, the bishop, and the oficiales reales for acts done within their own spheres of authority. In sending these reports and in making these suggestions, the magistrates did not question their own authority and they resented exceedingly the objections and charges of interference by those concerned. An illustration may be noted in the letter written on July 3, 1584, by Oidor Melchoir Dávalos to the king. After several clear intimations that he would like to be governor in case a vacancy should arise and after modestly setting forth his own qualifications and virtues, Dávalos wrote a faithful and vivid account of the expeditions which had been made recently against the Mohammedan Sulus. He petitioned for a suspension of the law forbidding slavery in order that Spaniards might avail themselves of captive Moros as slaves. [73] He made several recommendations in regard to the Chinese, stating particularly that he was devoting himself to a study of the kind of government best fitted for the Chinese in Manila. He complained that the Chinese merchants were draining the Islands of silver, bringing as many as thirty-four shiploads of Chinese cargo a year. Since nothing of commercial value was produced in the Philippines, they could take away nothing else than silver. This incessant drain on the coin imported from Acapulco was resulting in the impoverishment of the colony and constituted a source of danger to New Spain as well. The exportation of money was contrary to royal orders and distinctly prejudicial to the economic interests of the realm. Dávalos recommended immediate action in the matter. He then discussed military affairs, alleging that the pay of the soldiers was insufficient, and their condition miserable. The first and third of the matters touched upon by the oidor in his memorial, namely, the war in Mindanao and the condition of the soldiers, belonged to the private jurisdiction of the governor and captain-general, [74] the control of the Chinese coming later under the jurisdiction of the governor, as captain-general, with special inhibition of the interference of the audiencia. [75] This letter furnishes a good illustration of the interference of an oidor in matters of government. The desire to interfere does not seem to have been confined to one individual, but was apparently characteristic of all the magistrates of the audiencia. [76] The extensive field over which the oidores claimed cognizance is shown by a series of memorials which were sent by the audiencia as a body to the court under the date of June 26, 1586. [77] They are noted here because they illustrate the diversity of the interests of the oidores, and because their devotion to these various matters was characterized as unjustified meddling by the governor and the other opponents of the audiencia. The concern which the oidores manifested in the miscellaneous affairs of government constituted, no doubt, an indirect reason for the temporary removal of the tribunal in 1589. These memorials suggested reform in many departments of government. The inadequate state of defense and the demoralized condition into which the garrison had fallen was the subject of one letter. Attention was called to the necessity of obtaining more funds for the fortifications of the Islands. Reference was made to the continual danger of Japanese invasion. Another letter dealt with financial affairs. The public exchequer was reported to be in bad condition, as there was not enough money in the treasury to pay the expenses of government. The oidores recommended that their own salaries should be paid out of the treasury of Mexico. They suggested an increase of tribute as a means of securing more money. This, they alleged, could be done in justice, since the amount of tribute paid by the natives of the Philippines did not equal that levied upon the Indians of New Spain. [78] The oidores reported an increase of 5000 pesos in the revenues of the colony as profits from the sale of certain offices which had formerly been bestowed gratis by the governor upon his friends, the righting of this wrong being effected through the influence of the fiscal and oidores who officiated as members of the junta de hacienda. While ostensibly seeking means for the enlargement of the income of the Islands, as noted, the oidores protested against a recent royal order which had required that the proceeds returned from vacant encomiendas should be placed in the public treasury. They objected that this would take away all hope of reward from soldiers and subjects "who have served your Majesty, reducing them to poverty, with no means of support after a long career of service." [79] In other words, the audiencia is here seen registering its objections to the conversion of private into royal encomiendas, notwithstanding the fact that this would mean greater revenue for the government. The inconsistency of this attitude was pointed out by Magistrate Dávalos in his letter of June 20, 1585. [80] Another petition which may reflect some discredit upon the audiencia was one which asked for the abolition of the one and one-half per cent tax on imported money, and for the elimination of the three per cent almojarifazgo. Both of these taxes bore heavily on the Chinese and on the Spanish merchants of Manila. "These two taxes," wrote the oidores, "are drawing the life-blood from the Chinese, who would otherwise bring products of great value to our shores." The oidores had commenced this memorial by showing the financial needs of the colony. They had requested assistance from the treasury of Mexico, yet, in the same communication, they proposed to abolish three of the most profitable sources of colonial revenue that existed. These recommendations not only illustrate the wide sphere of influence of the magistrates, but they also seem to confirm the allegations which were often brought against them, charges, indeed, which they proffered against one another--that each was more interested in trade than in the welfare of the government. Notwithstanding the fact that the economic life of the colony depended on the Chinese trade, the evidence seems to indicate that, even this early in the history of the tribunal, its magistrates had personal interests to serve. In the letter referred to above, Dávalos, who seems to have been a dissenting party to all these proceedings, charged his contemporaries with being guilty of undue mercantile activity. In this same memorial the oidores warned the Council against the Portuguese influence in China, deploring the existence of Macao as a rival to Manila as a trade emporium in the Orient. The audiencia warned the court against the influence and operations of Pedro Unamanú, the successor to Captain Gali, who had gone to China and Macao, supposedly to take on a cargo of Chinese silks. This was in defiance of the law which forbade Spaniards to trade in China, and it was also contrary to the instructions of the viceroy and audiencia of New Spain. In this connection the oidores stated that they had recommended to Governor Santiago de Vera that Unamanú should be arrested and punished for diverting his voyage in the interests of private trade. In accordance with the advice of the tribunal the governor had sent orders to Macao, summoning the leader of this expedition back to Manila; these instructions, however, the governor of Macao was unable to fulfill. [81] This memorial shows that the oidores considered it to be their duty to inform the court fully as to the part which the audiencia played in this affair. The matter at hand constituted a question of disobedience of the law, and the Audiencia of Manila had done what it could to enforce it. The tribunal had assumed a role quite as important as that of the governor. The episode shows also that the audiencia was consulted by the governor in this matter, which was purely governmental. It would not be unfair to suggest that a potential factor in stimulating the oidores and merchants of Manila to prevent the voyage of Pedro Unamanú or the Portuguese to China for trading purposes must have been the desire to safeguard the Spanish interests in the Chinese trade, and particularly those of Manila, which were the sole reliance of the colony. It was essential that this commerce should be prevented from falling into the hands of other individuals or nations. This memorial also dealt with ecclesiastical affairs. In it was set forth the audiencia's arguments in certain contentions which the tribunal had had with the bishop, illustrating the fact that the audiencia was opposed not only by the governor but also by the ecclesiastical authorities. It appears that the king had formerly granted to the church courts a large share of temporal jurisdiction in the Islands. This former concession now stood in the way of the royal prerogative and caused endless conflicts between the civil and ecclesiastical judges. The audiencia took the ground that by virtue of its own establishment the authority of the church courts over civil matters was at an end. This the prelate declined to admit. Attention was also directed by the audiencia to the opposition which Bishop Salazar had manifested toward the claims advanced by the civil government for extending its jurisdiction over all the non-Christian tribes, the bishop alleging that Pope Alexander VI had ceded authority only over such Indians as had been christianized. [82] In truth, the bishop had found after two years of conflict that the presence of the audiencia had not entirely solved the problems of administration, but, on the contrary, had increased the complexity of many of them. He had differed seriously with the oidores on several occasions. The ministers had opposed him not only in the larger questions of government and ecclesiastical administration, but in matters of ceremony as well. This was more than the prelate could endure. He appealed some of these disputes to the governor and that official, after having neglected these matters for a long period, finally referred them to the audiencia, which promptly made the settlements in its own favor. [83] Salazar's influence went far toward bringing about the removal of the tribunal, as it had helped in causing its establishment in 1584. The complaints of the bishop against the audiencia brought forth a royal reprimand for carrying on continual disputes with the audiencia. The prelate defended himself against these charges in a memorial dated June 24, 1590. [84] He stated that these petty matters of form and ceremony were of no great consequence. He accused the governor of seeking to stir up discord between him and the audiencia. As a matter of fact, he said, the relations between him and the audiencia were far more harmonious than they had been between the tribunal and the governor, and on many occasions he had been called in to settle disputes between the functionaries of the civil government. "It is well known," he wrote, "within the city and outside of it, that had I not entered as mediator between the president and oidores there would have been no peace. It would not have been possible for me to mediate if there had not been friendly relations between them and me." [85] The unpopularity of the audiencia from 1584 to 1586 is proved by the fact that practically all the authorities in Manila--mercantile, ecclesiastical, political, and even the magistrates themselves--united in recommending its recall. On June 26, 1586, a series of petitions was directed to the Council from various personages and organizations of the city asking that the audiencia be removed. These included the municipal cabildo, the bishop, the governor, certain military officials, and, lastly, several oidores (all, in fact, excepting Dávalos). These greatly regretted the mistake which had been made in the establishment of the audiencia, conceded that it had been a failure, and represented that the financial burden which its presence had imposed had been too great for the colony to bear. [86] It is certain that the continual conflicts which had resulted from the presence of the audiencia had not produced a salutary effect on the government. The audiencia itself wrote to the Council at the same time: "There has been in this tribunal, between the oidores and the president, continual misunderstandings as to jurisdiction, which we have decided to submit to your Majesty to ascertain whether precedence in these matters belongs to the president or to the oidores." The Manila cabildo recommended the re-establishment of the governorship with centralized authority: the power to grant titles, offices and encomiendas, with exclusive authority over the latter. This would include the power of appointing encomenderos in the name of the king. The recommendation was made by the cabildo that consultative authority in matters of government should be conferred on the ecclesiastical and military officials. It was also suggested that a defender of the Indians should be appointed other than the fiscal, for the latter, by nature of his office, was their prosecutor rather than their defender. It was the current opinion, this memorial went on to state, that the local prelate should be restored to his former place as defender of the Indians, and that he should have authority to dispossess encomenderos, if necessity for such action arose. It has already been stated that Oidor Dávalos was the only official of importance who would not join in these representations. He believed that the audiencia was necessary to the prosperity of the colony, and that, if properly controlled, it would prove beneficial. He believed, moreover, that the governor was the chief element of discord in the colony, and that his influence had rendered inefficacious the efforts of the audiencia to keep peace and to enforce the laws. In a letter to the king, [87] just a year before the memorial described above, Dávalos had represented Governor Santiago de Vera as a schemer, aiming to get absolute control of the government. De Vera, he said, had gone so far as to influence the bishop and clergy to recommend, against their better judgment, the abolition of the audiencia. The governor realized that the tribunal was the one obstacle in the way of the fulfillment of his designs and had used every possible means to discredit and humiliate the audiencia and its magistrates. Dávalos asserted that the appeal of cases to Mexico would inflict great inconvenience on the people of Manila. He renewed the argument that Spain should have some sovereign body at that great distance from the mother country. He enlarged on the future possibilities of the conquest and rule of the entire Orient by Spain, pointing out the value of the Philippines as a base of operations. It was, therefore, of the greatest importance that the Islands should be provided with the proper sort of government. Dávalos was especially bitter in his denunciation of Governor De Vera, who, he said, had even resorted to force in order to intimidate the magistrates and had called a council of military officials on one occasion for consultation in matters of justice and government. The governor was accused of violating the laws which had forbidden officials to hold encomiendas; he had given the best posts in the government to relatives, and had completely set aside the judgments which Dávalos had rendered in his capacity as juez y administrador de bienes de difuntos. The audiencia had been powerless to oppose De Vera, largely, Dávalos inferred, because a majority of the magistrates were under his influence. However unfavorable were the above comments on the governor, the picture which De Vera drew of himself in a letter to Archbishop Contreras, [88] at that time viceroy of New Spain, is exceedingly interesting by way of contrast. In his own words, the governor had grown "old and worn" in his Majesty's service. According to him, the audiencia was of no service to the government, and only a drawback, making his own duties as governor doubly heavy, especially "since the Council [of the Indias] so poorly seconds my efforts ... everything concerning the government and war in these islands depends on the president. He must attend to everything punctually; and, in order to comply with his Majesty's commands, he must pay over and spend from the royal treasury what is necessary for the affairs of government and of war." He complained that the audiencia had interfered with his administration of the finances and had suspended the payment of the drafts which he had drawn on the treasury. He had no recourse on account of the delay necessary before an appeal to the Council of the Indies could be answered. He complained that the audiencia had meddled with affairs of government on trivial pretexts, rendering him practically powerless. During this period the internal troubles of the colony were supplemented by the interference of the viceroy and audiencia in Mexico. The latter had been reluctant to surrender their former authority over the Philippines. There were conflicts of jurisdiction between the viceroy and the governor and between the two audiencias over a number of matters, among which affairs of a commercial nature were preëminent. Both the authorities at Manila and those of Mexico claimed jurisdiction over the galleons which plied between Manila and Acapulco. [89] Numerous protests were made during this early period against what was considered the unauthorized interference of the Mexican authorities. Those in Manila felt that inasmuch as they had an audiencia which was co-equal in power with that of New Spain, they should be independent of the viceroyalty in all the affairs of justice, government, and commerce. The combined memorials of the residents and officials of Manila, which we have already noted, were presented at court by a new procurator, Fray Alonso Sánchez. The latter, a Jesuit, was a churchman of high standing, and his abilities were recognized both at Madrid and in Rome. Besides carrying commissions from the secular officials, he represented the bishop, but the latter, distrustful of the influence at court of a Jesuit commissioned by the secular government, with which the prelate was constantly at war, determined to send one of his own supporters to Spain to represent his interests. The emissary of Salazar was Fray Francisco Ortega, of the Augustinian order. Ortega followed Sánchez to Spain and rendered valuable service as procurator of his order at Madrid. [90] In written memorials and in personal interviews with the king and with members of the Council of the Indies, Sánchez summarized all the arguments heretofore given, asking for the abolition of the audiencia. The newness of the country, the sparseness of the population and the poverty of the inhabitants, according to his argument, made such an institution a financial burden. If it were continued, the salaries of the magistrates would have to be paid from Mexico. An audiencia in Manila was not necessary, he urged, since the chief element of the population was military, and hence under martial law and jurisdiction. Even before the establishment of the audiencia it had been necessary to send but few cases to Mexico; indeed, alleged Sánchez, lawsuits seldom arose in the colony, and the presence of the audiencia encouraged rather than prevented litigation among the few merchants who lived in Manila. The discord caused by the presence of the tribunal and the continual lawsuits which it encouraged among the Spaniards had a disquieting effect on the natives, who had no need of such an institution, and who did not even understand its purposes. The audiencia, instead of serving as a protection to the natives, was an instrument of tyranny. The Spaniards, understanding the use of a court which would enforce the contracts made between them and the ignorant Indians, were often supported in the seizure of the latter's property, which act, in reality, amounted to deprivation and legalized robbery. Sánchez stated that the natives had been terrorized by the audiencia. The magistrates, versed in the legal customs and practices of Spain rather than of the Indians, were unfit to administer justice in the Philippines. Sánchez also emphasized the international phases of the audiencia's existence in the Philippines, though with conclusions slightly different from those which we have already noted. He stated that the presence of the audiencia had caused the Portuguese, in China, formerly friendly, to be distrustful of the Spaniards, and this had resulted in a considerable diminution of trade. This change of attitude he attributed to the wording of the cédula by which the tribunal had been created, extending its jurisdiction throughout the "entire archipelago of China." Sánchez concluded his appeal with the statement that some act was necessary to restore the confidence of the Portuguese, whose influence, exerted upon the Chinese, could spell ruin for Spain's Far Eastern colony. The cancellation of that claim to China would remove all evidence of Spanish bad faith; it would show to the Portuguese that the Spaniards had no desire to encroach on their rights, and through the restoration of commerce and prosperity the future of the colony would be assured. [91] Sufficient has been presented to show that the audiencia, as established in 1584, was not a success. The chief objection to the tribunal was not its influence as a court; the real fault seems to have lain in the indefiniteness of the articles of establishment which gave it administrative powers, co-ordinate with the governor and captain-general. Almost every difficulty occurred in the administrative field. The audiencia also failed to preserve harmony between church and state and added to these complexities by itself having dissensions with the bishop. The petty character of the men who constituted this particular government, their personal selfishness, and their eagerness to take advantage, in dishonest ways, of the time and the distance which separated the colony from the royal control, contributed to the failure of the institution at that time. The audiencia was scarcely established, and it certainly did not have time to adjust itself to the new conditions with which it found itself surrounded, before it was removed. It would seem that the authorities in Madrid were somewhat hasty in withdrawing the audiencia, for it had proved its efficacy throughout the entire Spanish empire. The ill success of the Audiencia of Manila at this time does not prove that the institution was a failure, or that its establishment was a mistake, for seven years later it was returned and continued without interruption until 1898, and continues still as then reorganized. The statement of Philip II on November 25, 1595, "that experience had proved it to be unnecessary in a land so new and unsettled" [92] can hardly be justified in view of subsequent events. The causes of the breakdown of the first audiencia may be found in the circumstances of the time, the personnel of the tribunal, the indefiniteness of the laws which created it, the novelty of the situation to magistrates and officials and their failure to adapt themselves to their duties and to one another. As an institution of reform the audiencia did not have time to adjust itself to a permanent status. The king, in compliance with the demands of the various organizations and individuals of Manila as communicated by their respective envoys, abolished the Audiencia of Manila by royal cédula on August 9, 1589, ordering the Viceroy of New Spain to take the residencias of all officials who had been identified with the Manila government. To carry out these orders Licentiate Herver del Coral was sent from Mexico to Manila, where he arrived in May, 1590, in company with the new governor, Gómez Pérez Dasmariñas. [93] Santiago de Vera, the ex-governor, was promoted to a magistracy in the Audiencia of Mexico; the oidor, Pedro de Rojas, was made teniente and asesor to the governor, while the former oidor, Rivera, and Fiscal Ayala, were left without office. [94] The regular organization for the administration of justice in the provinces was left precisely as it had been when the tribunal was in existence. The alcaldes mayores and the corregidores still functioned as judges of first instance and as governors of the provinces. The alcaldes ordinarios remained the judges of first instance in the city of Manila. These judges tried cases with appeal to the governor, and the judgment of the latter was final in cases involving a value of a thousand ducats or less. Cases of a higher category might be appealed from the decision of the governor to the Audiencia of Mexico, and thence, if again appealed, to the Council of the Indies. The audiencia of three magistrates and a fiscal was replaced by a governor, who was both captain-general and sole judge. He was assisted in the latter capacity, as above noted, by a teniente and asesor, a lawyer, who advised him in legal affairs and prepared his judicial decisions for him. This reform was made on the representation of Fray Sánchez, that Manila had no need of a judicial system more pretentious than that of any Spanish provincial town. That city was accordingly reduced to the rank of a city or district, with dependence in judicial and administrative matters on New Spain, in whose audiencia appeals from the governor of the Philippines were heard. With these new reforms the leading authorities in Manila professed to be greatly pleased. Bishop Salazar, who was the most influential person in Manila at this time, expressed his satisfaction to the king in a letter dated June 24, 1590. [95] He suggested, however, that the continuance of the audiencia might have been satisfactory could its members have been paid from the treasury of New Spain. He reported the arrival of the new governor, and stated that the latter had already given evidence of a desire to govern wisely and justly. Salazar's optimism in regard to the good intentions of the governor could not have been long continued, for Morga tells us that in the first year of the government of Gómez Pérez Dasmariñas the need of an audiencia was felt by many. [96] At that time, all the powers of government were centralized in the governor, and there was no immediate authority to which the people could apply for relief. Salazar had many disputes with the governor over questions relating to the respective spheres of the church and state, and from the decisions of the executive the prelate had no recourse. Dasmariñas, on reporting these matters to the king, stated that the bishop had interfered in the matter of the collection of the tribute, the government of the encomiendas, the Chinese trade (in which, the governor alleged that the prelate had an unpriestly interest), and in the administration of justice. [97] The prelate had interpreted the removal of the audiencia as constituting a re-establishment of the concession formerly made to the church of extensive control in the administration of government and justice. He claimed that ecclesiastical judges should have the same civil jurisdiction as they had exercised before the audiencia was first founded. This, of course, the governor would not tolerate. Bishop Salazar was so displeased with the turn which affairs had taken in Manila that he determined to leave the Islands, and passage being placed at his disposal by the willing governor, the bishop set out in July, 1592. [98] On his arrival in Spain, Salazar concerned himself principally with religious matters, securing some valuable reforms. Among the latter was the erection of the Philippines into an archbishopric and the creation of three subordinate bishoprics. Salazar showed the desirability of the restoration of the audiencia as a preventive check on the excesses of the governor, but this change was not made as an immediate consequence of his recommendations. A cédula was issued on January 17, 1593, which outlined with more definiteness a judicial system for the Islands. This reform confirmed the position of the governor as nominal head of the judiciary, with jurisdiction over appeals from the lower courts, but it decreed that these cases should be tried by a letrado. The governor's final and conclusive jurisdiction was extended to all cases not exceeding a thousand ducats in value. Cases of a greater value might be appealed to the Audiencia of Mexico. [99] The governor was given authority to name a protector of the Indians. [100] The above changes were followed shortly by the cédula of August 18, 1593, by which the title of teniente de capitán-general y asesor de gobernador y capitán-general de las Islas Filipinas was bestowed on Don Antonio de Morga, who was probably the most efficient jurist and one of the most versatile officials that Spain ever sent to her Asiatic dependency. [101] Morga was at this time not only successor to the audiencia in judicial matters, but also attorney-general and sole legal adviser to the governor. His predecessor, Pedro de Rojas, was transferred to Mexico, in pursuance of the idea, as alleged in the order of transfer, of removing from the Philippines all the members of the old audiencia, so that the new scheme, as revised at that time, might be allowed to work itself out without prejudice. Before his departure, the residencia of Rojas was conducted by Morga. Even the reforms of 1593 did not suffice to make the administration of justice satisfactory to all parties. From the large amount of correspondence which exists, embodying complaints against the harsh methods of Dasmariñas and his successor, Tello, three letters may be cited which show the attitude of the various officials of the colony towards the re-establishment of the audiencia. The first of these was written by Governor Dasmariñas himself, and it may be in some ways surprising to note that he asked for the restoration of the audiencia. His reasons, in part, however, were different from those advanced by his contemporaries. Dasmariñas was of the opinion that an audiencia would be effective in the nullification of the interdicts and excommunications imposed by the archbishop and the local prelates, which he claimed were working havoc with the civil government. [102] The treasury officials complained that the absolute government of the executive was contrary to the interests of real hacienda. Their objections to the prevailing system were voiced in the second of the memorials alluded to above, that of Francisco de la Misa, factor of the royal treasury of Manila. [103] Misa said that under the former arrangement the audiencia had audited the accounts of the royal treasury and of the city of Manila each year. In this way the accounts had been well kept and the funds properly accounted for. The removal of the audiencia had left the governor with authority over the nomination of the officials of real hacienda, as well as the supervision of the accounts. Since Dasmariñas had been governor, no accounts had been rendered by the minor officials of the treasury, and, as a consequence, their superiors had been unable to make up their reports for the Contaduría of Mexico. The governor's attention had been called to this deficiency repeatedly, but the latter had displayed no interest in the state of the colony's finances, which, said Misa, exceeded all other matters in importance. "This comes," the factor observed, "from placing in charge of Your Majesty's finances a soldier, unfitted to do else than command troops, and then unchecked by an audiencia, so far distant from your royal person." The laxity of the governor and of his subordinates seems to have resulted in the loss of much revenue. Misa also showed that there had been many irregularities in the sale of offices, deficiencies which the presence of an audiencia would have checked. Instead of selling the minor clerkships of the exchequer, the governor had given them to his friends. Two offices, which were by no means insignificant, those of the chief clerkships of government and of justice, respectively, had been sold formerly for four thousand pesos each. The governor, however, had preferred to have them on his civil patronage list; this would not have been permitted had an audiencia been present to enforce the law. The governor was charged by Misa with extravagance in the expenditure of the revenue of the colony. The payment of the salaries of new appointees to offices, friends of the governor, had made heavy drains on the treasury. The king, by repeated cédulas, had forbidden the designation of an excessive number of alcaldes and corregidores because of the desirability of economizing the resources of the colony. While the audiencia was in existence its consent had been necessary for the creation of new judicial districts, but since the recall of the tribunal, the governor had trebled the number of provincial officials, and, in addition, had permitted each to have a salaried assistant. According to Misa, various other evils had resulted from the absolutism of the governor, among which were numerous abuses which he had tolerated in the galleon trade. It was alleged that Spanish merchants in Mexico had sent money to agents in Manila, and in that way had caused the legal amount brought from Acapulco for investment on the annual galleon to be exceeded. [104] This, the factor stated, was due partially to the laxity and corruption of the Acapulco officials, who had permitted the galleon to leave that port with more than the authorized amount of money. The governor of the Philippines, however, could have prevented this abuse had he been so inclined, as the ships' manifests were always subject to his inspection on arrival at Manila. The money sent by the merchants of Mexico was invested in merchandise in the Islands and these goods were shipped back to Acapulco on the galleon, thus excluding the commerce of the local merchants. The latter were growing poorer daily while the governor and his friends were waxing richer. The governor had also exercised favoritism in the distribution of cargo space, thus rewarding his friends and punishing his enemies. [105] Since the suppression of the audiencia these abuses had increased, as there had been no authority in Manila to hold the governor in check. This memorial, from Misa, which was carefully considered at court, went far toward demonstrating that the restoration of the audiencia would have beneficial results, so far as the administration of real hacienda was concerned. The third of the letters referred to as reflecting the attitude of the Manila officials toward the re-establishment of the audiencia and ultimately contributing to its restoration, was directed to the court by Antonio de Morga, the efficient lieutenant-governor. Morga, as did Misa, placed great emphasis on the need in Manila of a more efficient system for the administration of the exchequer. Morga was moderate in his characterization of the governor, alleging that Dasmariñas had been brought completely under the influence of the ecclesiastics. He expressed the belief that an audiencia would aid in combatting what he termed the retrogression of the colony under the influence of the priests. "There should be someone," he wrote, "to oppose the ecclesiastics in a land so far away from the Audiencia of Mexico; for, no matter what question is sent there for decision, at least two years must elapse before despatches can be returned." [106] No official was better qualified to explain the needs of the colony in matters of justice than Morga, for he was at that time, in reality, the supreme court of the Islands. The audiencia, after an interregnum of seven years, was restored by a cédula promulgated by Philip II, November 26, 1595. [107] The tribunal was to consist of a president, who should also be governor and captain-general, four oidores, a fiscal, and various subordinates. The history of the former audiencia and the reasons for its suppression and re-establishment are summarized in the cédula as follows: I established an audiencia in that city and province in order that everything might be governed by means of it, and that justice might be administered with the same universal equality, mildness, and satisfaction desirable; after its establishment I ordered it suppressed as experience proved it unnecessary in a land so new and unsettled; in its place I sent a governor, and though his administration was excellent, yet, inasmuch as that community had grown, and I hope that it will continue to grow, I have thought it advisable to found and establish the said audiencia again. In this cédula, which was addressed to Governor Tello, the king pointed to the increased importance of the Philippines, and to the many expeditions by which the Island of Luzón and other islands of the Archipelago had become pacified and more densely settled. The increase of commerce with the Chinese was also cited as a reason for providing the Islands with a more stable government. It was stated that in the administration of justice there should be as much efficiency as possible without the loss and inconvenience involved in appealing cases to Mexico. The governor would have more time for his increasing administrative and military duties if disengaged from his former judicial functions. The cédula continued: You [the governor] may find it advisable to have by you persons with whom to take counsel, in order that matters may be considered with the requisite conformity and by a sufficiently large body of advisers; for these reasons I have decided to form an audiencia; ... you shall be its president, holding that office with those of my governor and captain-general. [108] Together with this decree of re-establishment the king issued special instructions to Tello, prescribing in detail the relations which the governor was to observe with the audiencia. These instructions, in general, sought to prevent the recurrence of the misunderstandings which had been so fatal to the earlier tribunal. The governor and oidores were ordered to co-operate in the formulation of commercial regulations, with a view, particularly, to securing the Chinese trade, in the enforcement of the pancada, [109] the consideration of ways and means to prevent money from passing to China, in matters of taxation and finance, encomiendas, and the pacification and government of the wild tribes. By these instructions, it is important to note, the function of advising the governor in administrative matters was definitely bestowed upon the oidores. "Matters of importance," the cédula prescribed, "the said president-governor shall discuss with the oidores of the said audiencia, so that the latter, after consultation, may give him their opinion." [110] The governor and the magistrates were jointly charged to do all possible to discourage Indians and Spaniards from wasting their means in fruitless and petty lawsuits. The natives, according to this new reglamento, should always be protected against the designs of those who would take undue advantage of them. The governor was moreover instructed to confer with the archbishop and audiencia in ecclesiastical affairs, and the prelates were especially forbidden to excommunicate and issue declamations from the pulpit against the officials of the civil government, such as were constantly proclaimed when Salazar was bishop. Priests were not to meddle with the civil government, or with the pancada, or with any form of trade. The audiencia as reformed, with the powers and duties noted, began its life in Manila on May 8, 1598. The inauguration of the tribunal was attended with general rejoicing, and a celebration characterized by great formality and pomp. The royal seal was conducted through the city in a procession which was composed of all the royal and clerical dignitaries. Church, state, and citizenry united in expressing satisfaction at the restoration of the tribunal, with its consequent prospect of an efficient government and administration of justice. Reforms were made in the scope and composition of the audiencia at various times during its existence. It developed from a commission of three magistrates, with a president at its head, with definite and ill-expressed powers over a vast archipelago, whose population was sparse and scattered, to a double-chambered tribunal of appeal in second and third instance, with definite jurisdiction over a well-organized commonwealth. It would be highly desirable, did space allow, to review chronologically the important reforms which were made in the organization, scope and jurisdiction of the Audiencia of Manila throughout its history. The most important of these, however, will be noted incidentally in the following pages. The audiencia, from the time of its renewal onward, typified and represented the royal authority, and its tenure was more continuous than the governorship. Eight times subsequently did the audiencia assume the reins of government in lieu of the governor. It became the most reliable channel through which the royal authority made itself felt in the Islands, and it was especially utilized by the court as a check on the governor. [111] Whenever occasion arose, the audiencia interposed as the intermediary and arbiter between dissenting parties in the name of the sovereign, and its decrees were listened to with respect. It was no longer a temporary organization, and so firmly established was it henceforth that no person seriously considered its recall a possibility. Through a period of three hundred years the audiencia exercised its functions. It was first and always a judicial body. It shared executive and administrative duties with the governor. It frequently exercised attributes of an advanced legislative character. It participated in the government of the provinces. It shared the authority of the royal patronage in the control of ecclesiastical affairs. These various activities will be studied in subsequent chapters. CHAPTER III THE JUDICIAL FUNCTIONS OF THE AUDIENCIA The audiencia was first and always a tribunal of justice. It was established for the purpose of trying cases and settling disputes. Had it no other functions than the purely judicial, however, it would not have played the important part which it did in colonial administration during two hundred years of its existence. Its chief interest to the student of history and government will not be so much its activity as a judicial institution as the relations it bore to other departments of the government. Its extraordinary powers and functions developed incidentally at first through the establishment of the institution in colonies where no other agency existed to deal with the unforeseen problems and necessities which arose from time to time. The gradual assumption and exercise of non-judicial functions are therefore the chief characteristics to be noted in the history of the Audiencia of Manila. The aim of this chapter, however, will be to study the audiencia in its capacity as a civil judiciary and to clear the way for the discussion in subsequent chapters of the wider, and from the present viewpoint, more notable fields of its activity. An effort will be made to describe its judicial procedure, the kinds of cases which it tried, the limitations on its jurisdiction--what courts were inferior to it, and what authority was superior. This investigation will be made from the viewpoint of the historian, rather than from that of the student of jurisprudence, subject to such limitations as a lack of knowledge of the law may impose. We shall first consider the procedure of the audiencia as authorized by the laws of the Indies, illustrating this procedure by the citation of actual cases in practice. The powers and duties of the Audiencia of Manila as defined in the special decree of establishment of May 5, 1583, have been set forth in the preceding chapter. By this decree the audiencia was granted civil and criminal jurisdiction in cases of appeal from the lower courts and original jurisdiction in those affecting the government, and the conduct of its officials. The authority of the audiencia in the latter cases was exercised through the appeals which came to it from the special investigators and visitors who tried these officials in first instance. The laws of the Indies, after prescribing the time of meeting and the hours of the daily sessions of the audiencia, made their first important judicial regulation by forbidding viceroys and presidents to assist in the determination of suits. Cases must be tried by the properly qualified oidores, yet the president (viceroy or governor) was to sign the decisions with the magistrates. [112] Unless the president were a lawyer, he was even denied cognizance of military cases. The audiencia had jurisdiction over appeals from the viceroy or governor in all government matters to which any official or private citizen might take exception. [113] In case of disagreement between the audiencia and the president, it was prescribed that the question at issue should be carried to the Council of the Indies. In case the majority of the audiencia agreed to follow a certain course of action, the viceroy or president was forbidden to contravene or oppose that action. Instead, he was ordered to abide by it, appealing to the Council of the Indies for final settlement of the contention. [114] There were many laws regulating the relations between the audiencia and the governor, most of which will be noted in greater detail in a subsequent chapter. The most important were the laws which ordered that the viceroys of New Spain and Perú should leave to the audiencias entire jurisdiction over residencias, questions involving the marriage relation [115] and the administration of property of deceased persons. [116] A law especially referring to the Philippines ordered the Audiencia of Manila to abstain from interfering with the government of the Chinese in the Parián. [117] This did not forbid the trial on appeal of cases relating to the Chinese, since in practice the audiencia had authority to take cognizance of such cases. Certain extra duties were required of the oldest oidor of the audiencia, who was known as the decano. He was given complete authority over the tribunal in the absence of the president. He might assign cases to the magistrates, designate judges for special duties and determine all matters relating to the interior organization and government of the tribunal. These functions were assumed, after 1776, by the regent, and the prerogatives of the office of decano became merely nominal, except when the regent was absent. In audiencias whose size permitted it, the oldest oidor, or the regent, after that office was created, could determine whether sessions should consist of one or two salas. [118] An audiencia was legally constituted, however, if only one magistrate were present. [119] The audiencia was commanded to guard its proceedings with great secrecy, and such rules were formulated for its magistrates as would enable the tribunal to uphold its dignity, and command the respect of the commonwealth. Cases of first instance were tried by inferior judges who were below the category of oidores. [120] As noted in a former chapter, these judges were the alcaldes ordinarios, alcaldes mayores, and corregidores. The former tried civil and criminal cases in the towns and cities and the last two exercised extensive jurisdiction in the provinces. Cases were appealed from them to the audiencia. [121] The audiencia was forbidden to concern itself with cases of first instance, excepting certain criminal suits which originated within five leagues of Manila. [122] A separate sala, for the trial of criminal cases was created in the audiencias of Lima and Mexico. The magistrates serving in these salas were designated as alcaldes del crimen. They had jurisdiction in first instance over the criminal cases arising within five leagues of the capital, as referred to above, and in second instance over those appealed from the provincial judges. [123] The oidores in these audiencias confined themselves to civil suits, but in audiencias where there were no alcaldes del crimen, the oidores were authorized to try both civil and criminal cases. [124] The magistrates of the Audiencia of Manila had both criminal and civil jurisdiction, as that tribunal belonged to the latter class. When the number of oidores present was insufficient to do the work of the audiencia, alcaldes ordinarios or alcaldes mayores who had the necessary qualifications might be transferred temporarily to the tribunal. When acting as oidores they could not try cases over which they had formerly exercised original jurisdiction. [125] A system of procedure was prescribed for the trial of cases before the audiencia and the order fixed in which these should come up for consideration. It was ordered that two slates should be kept, one for cases classified according to their importance and another for those to be tried by rotation. Cases of the first category and those which were especially urgent might supersede the latter, but when there were none of the former the second slate was to be adhered to. Cases relating to real hacienda took precedence over all others. The president was instructed to see personally that these cases should not be subjected to delay and that at least one day a week should be set aside for their adjudication. Next in importance were cases involving infractions of royal ordinances and laws. Probate cases were given one day a week. Two days weekly were set aside for the consideration of suits which arose between Indians and between Indians and Spaniards. Cases involving the poor, however, were to take precedence over these. The audiencia was made responsible for the good treatment of the Indians and it was charged with the obligation of seeing that all suits to which Indians were parties should be tried without loss of time. Delays resulting from the carelessness of lawyers and from their eagerness to profit at the expense of the natives were discouraged. Matters of slight importance which pertained to the Indians were to be dispatched by decrees of the audiencias and viceroys; this provision was designed to avoid contentious litigation, to which the natives were characteristically inclined. It also sought thereby to protect them from dishonest judges and lawyers. Any and all of the cases mentioned in this paragraph were considered to be of such importance that they were classified among the first to be tried and determined prior to those involving property, commercial affairs, and ordinary transactions. Of the latter cases those already decided were to be reopened before the hearing of new cases of the same class. Cases involving the poor were to be given speedy consideration. [126] Length of waiting should be the criterion for the consideration of the remaining cases. The audiencia was empowered to compel testimony from all persons and authorities. [127] As already noted, the oidores of audiencias which did not contain alcaldes del crimen were authorized to entertain appeals from persons who had been condemned to death. [128] The same was true of all other criminal cases that were admitted to appeal. Members of religious and military orders were not exempted from the jurisdiction of the audiencia. [129] The laws regulating the audiencia's jurisdiction in civil cases seem to have varied according to the time and the policy of the government. The audiencia exercised both original and appellate jurisdiction, as we have already noted. Most of the civil suits tried by the tribunal were appealed to it from inferior judges. A law was made in 1563 ordering that cases involving less than twenty pesos might be tried by verbal process. [130] This law would seem to have excluded cases of less than that value from appeal to the audiencia, as the processes had to be committed to writing in order to be appealed. The cédulas of November 26, 1573, and August 10, 1574, fixed the minimum amount that might be appealed at six pesos of eight reales, or 3000 maravedís. [131] Charles V in 1542 promulgated an important law for the regulation of appeals to the audiencia. It provided that the smallest amount that might be appealed should be 300,000 maravedís (667 pesos). [132] This law was re-promulgated on September 24, 1568, and on September 22, 1626. [133] The provisions of these laws, however, probably applied only to such cases as might come from provincial justices, since appeals from city judges and ayuntamientos could be taken over by the audiencia with less trouble and expense, because of the proximity of the tribunal. As a matter of fact, this opinion is seemingly substantiated by a new law, dated June 13, 1634, which ordered that an appeal from an ayuntamiento should not be received in an audiencia unless the suit involved a sum greater than 60,000 maravedís, or 133 pesos. [134] This was considerably less, it will be seen, than the amount fixed as the limit by the law immediately preceding it, which was promulgated in 1626. The laws establishing the finality of the jurisdiction of the audiencia were also altered from time to time. The earliest law on the subject, dated April 24, 1545, ordered that no appeal should be made from the tribunal in cases involving less than 6000 maravedís (13.3 pesos). [135] This limit was raised to 200 pesos by cédulas of April 4, 1558, and March 4, 1559, and by the ordinance of 1563. [136] In 1542, the jurisdiction of the audiencia was made final in all cases appealed from the ordinary courts. [137] The execution of all decisions which were not appealable was rigidly required. [138] By the ordinance of 1563 it was stipulated that sentences of review which had been confirmed by the audiencia could not be appealed again, no matter how large a sum was involved. [139] This was partially abrogated by the law of February 13, 1620, which ordered that cases involving 6000 pesos of 450 maravedís each, already terminated on review by an audiencia, might be further appealed to the king. [140] Decisions were reached by the concurrence of a majority of the magistrates trying the case. When there were only two oidores present a decision had to be unanimous. In case the full quota of magistrates were present and the votes were equally divided, the fiscal might be called in to decide the case, but if the latter were prosecuting the case, or were otherwise incapacitated, a duly qualified lawyer might be chosen to serve as a special magistrate. [141] This rule did not apply to the revision of sentences in civil cases wherein the value exceeded 300,000 maravedís; in these the concurrence of three magistrates was necessary. [142] A record of the judicial decisions of the magistrates was kept in the official journal of the audiencia. Decisions and legal papers had to be signed by the magistrates involved. Oidores who registered dissenting opinions were obliged to affix their signatures to the autos with those who had voted in the affirmative, but the negative votes were also recorded. [143] While the audiencia might repeal the written opinion of an inferior judge in review of sentence, the revision of verbal decisions of alcaldes ordinarios could be accomplished only when the alcalde in question had been summoned before the tribunal and the reasons for his decision had been investigated in his presence. [144] The audiencia, therefore, exercised appellate jurisdiction over civil and criminal cases tried in first instance by the judges of the provinces. If an alcalde mayor or other inferior judge failed to comply with the instructions laid down for his guidance, or if he were guilty of an abuse in the administration of justice, he was held to account by the visiting oidor who was dispatched at regular intervals for the inspection of the provinces--and for the judicial scrutiny of the provincial courts. In cases of notorious injustice special pesquisidores, usually oidores, were sent at once for the correction of the abuse in question, at the expense of the offending officials. [145] These, if found guilty of wilful disobedience, were punished in accordance with the gravity of their offenses. The audiencia had appellate jurisdiction in these cases. [146] The visiting oidores imposed fines in accordance with a tariff which had been formulated by the audiencia and approved by the Council of the Indies. [147] All fines levied by the audiencia, either upon officials or individuals could be remitted by the president with the consent of the acuerdo. [148] It was the policy of the government to give the audiencia final jurisdiction in as many cases as possible. It was desirable to endow the colonial tribunals and authorities with sufficient power to make them worthy of respect. At the same time it was necessary to relieve the Council of the Indies of the duty of hearing the vast number of individual suits which would inevitably come to it if that tribunal were made too accessible. The Council was occupied with appeals in government and justice from all of Spain's colonies. It has been noted that the limit of value of cases which could be appealed from the audiencia to the Council of the Indies was raised in 1620 from 200 to 6000 pesos. This would seem to indicate a growing tendency to confine suits involving individuals to the colonial tribunals, thus increasing the importance of the audiencias, and at the same time making the Council of the Indies more exclusively a tribunal of administration. This change, however, was never completely effected, despite the various expedients adopted to discourage the appeal of individual cases. Persons appealing were obliged to guarantee the expenses of suit. The great cost, the delays, and the distance altogether made appeal difficult. Appeals of longer standing than two years were not received from the Philippines in the Council of the Indies. [149] An investigation of the records shows that most of the cases appealed to the Council of the Indies involved administrative law in some form, having to do either with the prosecution of officials, their removal from office, the prosecution of bondsmen, residencias, conflicts of jurisdiction, or with appeals from the decision of the audiencia in commercial and ecclesiastical matters. The gradual extension of the jurisdiction of the audiencia over encomiendas may be cited as an example of the changes in the authority of the tribunal and in its relation to the Council of the Indies. The first important legislation in regulation of the encomienda was the celebrated law of Malines, promulgated in that city by Charles V, on October 20, 1545, and enunciated at successive dates until 1610. The law prescribed the course which was to be pursued by the audiencia in suits between individuals relative to encomiendas or the Indians thereon. In these contentions the Council of the Indies and not the audiencia was the final arbiter. The duty of the latter tribunal was to collect evidence in these cases, taking the testimony of witnesses for both sides and remitting all papers, sealed, to the Council of the Indies. The council, on consideration of the evidence, rendered the final decision. The audiencia had to conclude its part of the investigation and file its report within a period of three months. This time limit was extended to six months in 1554. The purpose of this law was to guarantee justice in the assignment and retention of encomiendas by removing them from the control of the audiencias, whose magistrates, as experience had proved, often allowed themselves to be influenced by local prejudices. Encomiendas were to be assigned by the king, in theory at least, and no other authority save the monarch and his council could exercise jurisdiction over them. [150] The audiencia was, however, authorized to act as the protector of persons holding Indians on encomiendas, to see that they were not unjustly deprived of or wrongfully disturbed in their holdings. In case a person were thus deprived of his Indians, the audiencia was empowered to restore conditions to their former state. If the aggressor persisted, or cared to contest the right of his opponent to the Indians in question, the audiencia was ordered to observe the law of Malines, collecting all the evidence in the case, and forwarding it to the Council of the Indies for final decision. The frequency of litigation, however, and the vast number of unimportant cases which arose under the provisions of the law of Malines came to demand too much of the time and attention of the Council of the Indies, thereby causing many delays in suits involving encomiendas. In order to remedy this defect, Philip III, on April 17, 1609, conferred on the audiencia jurisdiction over all cases involving encomiendas, repartimientos, [151] tributes, and despoliations of Indians up to the value of a thousand ducats. [152] Cases involving a greater value were still to be settled in conformity with the law of Malines. Finally, in 1624 it was ordered that in suits which did not involve more than three Indians and in cases wherein the costs of litigation exceeded the amount in dispute, the decree of the governor should prevail. For obvious reasons, the audiencia could not concern itself with such cases, but when the value of the Indians justified the attention of the tribunal, its decisions were final, taking precedence over those of the governor. [153] This, then, was the final status of the jurisdiction of the audiencia over encomiendas as set forth in the laws of the Indies. In the Philippines the authority of the tribunal in regard to them was neither executive nor legislative, except in such cases and on such occasions as we shall refer to later. The judicial authority of the Audiencia of Manila over encomiendas was indisputable. Having indicated the general basis upon which the authority of the audiencia rested, we may more precisely define its jurisdiction by reviewing a few of the most characteristic cases which were tried in the tribunal in accordance with the laws already discussed. The statement has been made that at the time of its establishment the audiencia was needed as a court of justice and that it was removed in 1589 for political reasons rather than because of the inadequacy or failure of the institution as a tribunal of justice. In the preceding chapter we saw that the audiencia was designed to relieve the executive of judicial duties, such as the trial of cases appealed from the alcaldes mayores of the provinces and the alcaldes ordinarios of the city. These functions, up to the time of the establishment of the audiencia, had been exercised by the governor. This had resulted in favoritism and in a perversion of justice to the private ends of the governor and of his friends. Perhaps the chief evil under the system had proceeded from the governor's double jurisdiction, as both executive and judge, over cases involving encomiendas and encomenderos. The governor assigned encomiendas in the name of the king, and he was also judge with final jurisdiction over all suits involving them, the law of Malines being impossible of execution in the Philippines before the establishment of the audiencia, and after its withdrawal in 1589. [154] The same was true in regard to commercial cases, and complaints were ever arising against the governor's high-handed proceedings in the allotment of cargo space on the galleons to his friends, and his monopolization of the best Chinese goods that came to Manila. The governor, as in the assignment of encomiendas, enjoyed an undue advantage in these matters, for at the same time that he was the executive with the power of bestowing these favors, he was the sole judge in all contentions which arose regarding commerce. It was therefore distinctly in the interests of justice that a supreme court should be established, and it is easy to understand why those who had profited by the absence of the audiencia should oppose its restoration, and why others should take the opposite view. Soon after the audiencia was abolished in 1589, arguments were presented at court for its restoration. From the large number of petitions that were presented, two, aside from those discussed in the preceding chapter, may be cited here because they illustrate the disadvantages from a judicial point of view of having the administration of justice in the hands of the governor, with appeal to Mexico. Francisco de la Misa, factor of the treasury of Manila, wrote a memorial to the king on May 31, 1595, [155] referring to the delay which had arisen in the trial of suits involving encomiendas: the jurisdiction of the governor was not final; appeals had to be carried to the Audiencia of Mexico and cases involving a thousand ducats or more had to be taken from that tribunal to the Council of the Indies; [156] this meant two appeals and much delay. He mentioned certain cases which had been pending two years, and showed that, because of the delay to which they had been subjected in Mexico, it would be at least two years more before the decisions could be returned. Misa said that conditions had reverted to the state which had existed before the audiencia was established; a much larger number of cases was awaiting trial than the governor and his lieutenant could attempt to try. These difficulties were multiplied by the fact that there was no fiscal, an officer whose services as legal adviser to the government and as prosecuting attorney were indispensable. [157] Misa petitioned for a reform of the law which had established the governor as judge of ultimate recourse in cases involving one thousand pesos (ducats) or less. He believed it advisable to reduce the limit of the value of cases settled in the colony from one thousand to four hundred pesos and appeal all those exceeding the latter sum to the Audiencia of Mexico. It would result in a more equitable administration of justice, he stated, if the trial of important cases were conducted in second instance before that tribunal. This practice, though subject to great delay, would have the advantage of guaranteeing the review of these cases by a competent and properly qualified magistracy rather than by a biased and tyrannical executive. He alleged that four hundred pesos in the Philippines meant as much as a thousand elsewhere. Another suggestion advanced by Misa was that suits and investigations involving real hacienda should be tried by competent judges, rather than by the governor, whose own personal interest in the cases was often too great to ensure fair trial. Another evil pointed out by Misa, and a fairly typical one throughout the history of the colony, was the delay and uncertainty of the residencia. This defect was particularly apparent at this time because all cases of residencia had to be sent to Mexico, since there was no tribunal in Manila with jurisdiction on appeal over these official investigations. Misa described the plight of various alcaldes mayores, corregidores, and other officials who had been investigated and suspended from office, awaiting the outcome of the residencia. There were no persons to take their places; as a result, the suspended officials were without gainful employment, while their districts and offices reverted to a state of lawlessness, barbarism and disorder, without governor, judges, or incumbents. The governor had attempted to remedy the trouble by making temporary appointments from among the removed officials, but this he had no authority to do; moreover, the reinstatement of officials whose conduct was under investigation was subversive of the best interests of government and justice. The governor's action in these cases had raised a storm of protest in the colony, yet he was forced to take these steps in preference to leaving the natives without government and protection. Misa presented this picture of the state of affairs in the colony to show the evil results of the absence from the Philippines of a tribunal with authority to conduct residencias and to provide offices. While this series of complaints was not followed by an open advocacy of the establishment of a royal audiencia in Manila, the defects which were pointed out showed the desirability of putting an end to the governor's intervention in judicial matters. There can be no question but that the arrival at court of such letters showed clearly the need of a tribunal at Manila for the administration of justice. Complaints were also directed against this state of affairs by Antonio de Morga, lieutenant-governor of the Islands. This official argued that the commonwealth required an audiencia in order to secure a more equitable administration of justice. [158] He called attention to the overcrowded docket of the court over which he presided and emphasized the impossibility of the satisfactory termination of the cases waiting to be tried. That the defects referred to in these communications were appreciated at court is evidenced by the cédula of May 26, 1595, which emphasized the necessity of administering justice in the Philippines with "universal equality, mildness and satisfaction." [159] Nevertheless the presence of a tribunal had the effect of encouraging the inhabitants of the Islands to litigation. It has been said that there have been more lawsuits in the Philippines than in any other country of the same size and population, which remark probably would apply to any country where the Spanish judicial system had lately obtained. This condition was no doubt due to the fact that adequate facilities existed whereby the natives could go to law. Lawyers and judges were ever unduly ready to encourage and hear any suits which might arise if there were any way in which profit might be derived therefrom. Pardo de Tavera, in discussing these phases of the legal history of the Islands, states that the laws protected the native, but at the same time they kept him in a state of perpetual tutelage. Judgments were passed by native magistrates in suits between natives in the later days of Spanish rule, but in general throughout the period of Spain's domination suits were prosecuted under the direction of a protector of the Indians in case one party to a suit was a Spaniard, or when the rights of the natives were in any way jeopardized or injured by a Spaniard. "In this manner Spanish prestige was preserved, inasmuch as it was no longer an Indian who asked for the punishment of one belonging to a superior race, but a Spaniard who took up the Indian's cause and conducted the suit against another Spaniard." [160] Thus it may be seen that in Spain's judicial system the means were provided, in theory at least, whereby the meanest native could obtain justice, not only among his fellows, but in cases to which members of the superior Spanish race were parties. The declared purpose of the whole system of legislation for the Indies was the material and spiritual well-being of the Indians. [161] The officials of the government, the churchmen, and the encomenderos were especially charged in their commissions and in official correspondence to make the protection and welfare of the Indians their chief concern. Attention has just been directed to the office of protector of the Indians. The fiscal, or one of his assistants, attended to that duty in the Audiencia of Manila, while agents (agentes fiscales) were especially commissioned by the fiscal to act in that capacity in the provinces. [162] We have also noted that the oidores were charged with the duty of protecting the Indians when officiating as visitors in the provinces. Such cases, also those involving decisions of corregidores and alcaldes mayores by which the natives were dealt with unjustly, were appealable, under certain circumstances, to the audiencia. These cases commanded the immediate attention of the tribunal, to the exclusion of other business. [163] Among the vast number of cases at our disposal which illustrate the jurisdiction of the tribunal over such matters, the following may be selected as typical. On May 16, 1796, the fiscal brought a charge in the audiencia against the governor, exposing the sufferings inflicted upon the Indians of the barrio of Santa Ana by the corregidor of Tondo [164] in connection with the construction of a road. The audiencia refused to consider the case in first instance, as the matter was not contentious, but it recommended that the fiscal should make the charges before the governor and have him render a decision upon the matter; if exception were taken to his decision the case could be appealed to the audiencia. The oidores found that they were without jurisdiction over the case in first instance and they declared that their entertainment of the suit would be in violation of the laws of the Indies. [165] The fiscal appealed from the judgment of the audiencia. The Council of the Indies, in a return communication dated May 13, 1798, [166] approved the ruling of the audiencia, affirming that in cases of the nature referred to, the fiscal, as protector of the Indians, should submit testimony in behalf of the latter to the governor, who should consider whether the Indians had been wronged and render his decision accordingly. If exception were taken to the decision of the governor, the case could then be appealed to the audiencia. While these appeals and this litigation were in progress, the Indians were being subjected to repeated hardships. This case is illustrative of the ineffectiveness of the system for the administration of justice in Spain's colonies. It had taken two years for this appeal to be carried to Spain and receive the attention of the Council of the Indies. The answer had yet to be returned, probably requiring at least a year more for the return of the Vera Cruz and Acapulco galleons and for the proper proceedings to be carried on in the Manila tribunal. It is questionable whether the Indians in whose interests this was ultimately done ever received any benefit from these legal proceedings. The case which has just been described involved the trial and punishment of a corregidor in the defense and protection of the natives. It is important to note that this case was ordered to be tried in first instance by the governor and not by the audiencia. The jurisdiction of the latter tribunal in second instance was confirmed by the king on this occasion. By the law of October 9, 1812, and by others made pursuant to the Constitution of 1812, the audiencia was given jurisdiction in first instance over cases involving provincial officials, and particularly judges. In regard to the care and protection of the Indians, which was involved in this controversy, the law provided that such cases should be treated originally by the corregidores and alcaldes mayores with appeal to the audiencia. [167] But this case dealt primarily with the official conduct of a corregidor, over whom the governor had more direct jurisdiction. The cédula of May 13, 1798, which constituted the reply of the king to the appeal of the fiscal in the case described above, ordered that henceforth in cases affecting the relations of the corregidores and alcaldes mayores on the one part and the Indians on the other, the fiscal, audiencia, and governor should act in acuerdo, in that way avoiding friction and quarrels over jurisdiction. [168] That the audiencia did not always try cases relating to the Indians with requisite promptness, is evidenced by the many and repeated letters of the king to the tribunal, to the fiscal, as protector of the Indians, and to the regent, chiding these officials for delay. On many occasions the royal zeal for justice in the treatment of the Indians, based on a lack of knowledge of the true nature of the Filipino, completely overruled all considerations of practicability and common sense. As an illustration of this, on June 20, 1686, certain natives of the province of Bulacán sent false evidence to the Council of the Indies; this testimony was taken in preference to that remitted by the audiencia, the decision of the latter body being reversed by the Council of the Indies. The audiencia refused to allow the execution of the new judgment; the oidores all offered to resign in protest, and the regent, at the risk of removal, reopened the case. It was proved by the testimony of a number of officials and by the confessions of the natives who had perjured themselves that the evidence upon which the Council had acted was false. [169] A record of these proceedings was remitted to the Council and that tribunal promptly reversed its former decision. Further illustrations of the authority of the audiencia in cases involving natives may be seen in suits which arose from time to time over the illegal treatment of the latter by the friars and the unjust occupation of the natives' lands by the religious orders. These suits afford illustration, also, of the services of the audiencia as an agency to force persons to show their titles to lands which they held. [170] This jurisdiction will be given more detailed treatment in the proper place, but the brief citation of one or two cases among many seems advisable to illustrate the activity of the audiencia in protecting the Indians, both by trying suits involving them and by actually intervening in their behalf. Various revolts broke out among the Indians near Manila from 1740 to 1750. These insurrections were said to have been provoked by the encroachments of the Augustinians and Dominicans on the lands of the natives. The matter was called to the attention of the home government, and Pedro Calderón Enríquez, an oidor, was ordered to investigate the charges made against these religious orders and to ascertain the validity of their claims to the lands in question. The friars, when ordered to submit titles to a secular judge, refused to comply, claiming ecclesiastical exemption. In the face of their opposition, Calderón dispossessed the friars of the lands which they were said to have usurped and which they were continuing to hold without legitimate title, restoring the lands to the crown. The case was appealed to the audiencia and that tribunal upheld the visitor. Calderón also found that the University of Santo Tomás and the Dominicans, in collusion with a clerk of the audiencia, had taken lands from the native town of Sílang in 1743. Calderón restored the lands to their rightful owners and his act was approved in judicial review by the audiencia. The friars took exception to this by appealing to the Council of the Indies. The Council notified the audiencia of its affirmation of the judgment of Calderón and further stated that the lands of Sílang, Imús, San Nicolás, and Cavite had been unjustly seized and should be restored. This was not only an affirmation but an extension of the sentence of the oidor, made by the Council after the royal fiscal (of the Council of the Indies) had reviewed all the evidence presented in the case. This suit shows the efforts made to carry out the royal intention that the natives of Spain's colonies should be justly treated. It also shows the respective jurisdictions of the audiencia and Council of the Indies as courts of review and appeal in adjusting disputes between the church and the Indians. In addition to the above, the audiencia exercised jurisdiction over the religious themselves, both as individuals and as subjects of the king, punishing them for violation of the civil laws of the realm to which they were amenable as subjects. An illustration of this is furnished by the following case which occurred in 1617. Two Augustinian provincials were murdered, one, Fray Gerónimo de Salas, by poisoning, and his successor, Fray Vicente Sepúlveda, by strangulation. A tribunal of friars, composed of nine prominent members of the Augustinian order, was appointed by the bishop for the investigation of the crime. This body, after due consideration, caused six members of the order to be apprehended; four of them were believed to be guilty of the murder and two were suspected of connivance at the crime. On July 31, 1617, these six culprits were handed over to the civil government, and on September 2 of that year, the four guilty ecclesiastics were condemned to death by the audiencia, while the other two were sentenced to six years of service in the galleys. This case illustrates the extent of ecclesiastical jurisdiction exercised respectively by the church and government tribunals under the fuero mixto. [171] The former, on this occasion, made the preliminary investigations and handed the culprits over to the secular authority with recommendations; the latter conducted the trial, passed sentence and saw to its execution. The trial and conclusion of this case covered the remarkably short period of thirty-three days. [172] Speaking generally, the authority of the audiencia over ecclesiastical affairs extended to disputes between orders, between the government and the church, or its representatives, to cases relating to land titles, to those alleging abuses of the Indians by the friars, to cases involving the royal patronage, and to cases of fuerza. [173] As the question of the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the audiencia will be discussed more fully in subsequent chapters, no effort will be made at this time to particularize concerning its authority over church affairs, it being merely desirable to suggest the fact here that the audiencia had jurisdiction in suits involving the church and the civil government and in those which had to do with the protection of the natives from the abuses of the ecclesiastics. Records of thousands of cases exist to show the different kinds of suits tried judicially in the audiencia. Civil and criminal matters came up in the tribunal as in all other courts of law, and hence, as such, merit only passing attention. Among civil cases possibly the most typical were those relating to encomiendas. It must be borne in mind that the Spaniard, however mistakenly from the theoretical point of view, regarded the encomiendas as property in the same sense as a modern farmer regards his farm as property. He paid a rental or tax to the government, he engaged in agriculture for gain, and, as we have seen, the moral duty of protecting, uplifting, or educating the Indians rested but lightly on his conscience. Therefore, as these cases are discussed in the following pages, the value of the property and not the treatment of the Indians on the encomiendas is the first consideration. As already stated, the law of Malines reserved for the Council of the Indies final action in all encomienda suits involving more than one thousand ducats. [174] Many suits involving encomiendas came up prior to the establishment of the audiencia; the defects apparent in the trial of these cases by the governor show clearly the need of an audiencia at that time. The earliest case noted in this connection was prosecuted in 1580 by the asesor of the governor against Doña Lucía de Loaxa, the widow of an encomendero, with the object of dispossessing her of an encomienda held at Butuán, Mindanao. [175] She was charged with having nullified her title by marriage to another encomendero, since the law forbade married women to hold encomiendas. In her defense she alleged that the desire of the governor to enforce the law was only pretense, since many married women in the Philippines held encomiendas. She stated that the governor desired to deprive her of her property in order that he might bestow it upon a friend. This case was carried to the Council of the Indies, and it illustrates the effectiveness of the law of Malines, which took from the governor authority over a case in which he was interested and gave final jurisdiction to the tribunal in Spain. The papers pertaining to this case were returned to the governor with orders to do as the law commanded. The defendant was accordingly removed from the encomienda. Another case was disposed of in a slightly different manner. On January 22, 1581, Juan Gutiérrez de Figueroa, second husband of Magdalena Rodríguez, widow of an encomendero of Mindanao, filed suit before the governor praying to be continued as possessor of an encomienda which his wife had held prior to her marriage to him. He brought the suit on the grounds that he was a soldier and was accordingly deserving of reward. This case, in accordance with the provisions of Malines, came within the jurisdiction of the governor. He denied the petition, but the soldier appealed the case to the Council of the Indies and that tribunal again reversed the decision of the governor on May 23, 1584. In January, 1582, Bishop Salazar, as protector of the Indians, brought suit before Governor Ronquillo de Peñalosa against Juan de Ayala, a Spaniard holding various encomiendas in different parts of the Island of Luzón, but resident in Manila. Two specific charges were brought against Ayala. He was said to have reduced the Indians on his encomiendas to the status of slaves, which was forbidden by the law of November 9, 1526. [176] He had also violated the law which prescribed that encomenderos should live on their encomiendas, [177] and give their personal attention to the Indians thereon. Ayala adduced testimony to prove that this law was a dead-letter and that it was disregarded by most of the encomenderos. He even showed that there were many of them residing in Spain who held encomiendas in Spain and Perú. Governor Ronquillo felt that the evidence at hand was insufficient to justify a decision in this case, so he permitted it to be carried to the Council of the Indies. The latter tribunal rendered its decision on June 24, 1584, communicating to the Audiencia of Manila its ruling that Ayala should be allowed to retain the encomiendas in question, but the president and oidores were especially charged to enforce the law prohibiting slavery in the Indies. The procedure in these cases confirms the laws already alluded to, which were promulgated before the establishment of the audiencia, that the governor should have jurisdiction in suits involving less than a thousand ducats, with appeal to the Council of the Indies. It would also appear, from the data at our command, that the audiencia inherited the governor's former authority in these matters. During the period from 1583 to 1589, and after the re-establishment of the audiencia in Manila, this tribunal exercised authority over suits involving encomiendas. There is so much sameness in the nature of these cases that little would be added by describing them. There appears evidence of considerable conflict of jurisdiction, however, between the governor and the audiencia over the adjustment of the latter to the new situation relative to the encomiendas. Governors Acuña, Tello and Fajardo sought on various occasions to retain jurisdiction over suits involving encomiendas on the basis of the law of Malines, notwithstanding the fact that the audiencia had been given the duty of trying such cases. When appeals were made to the Council of the Indies, that tribunal made clear its determination that the audiencia should try suits involving encomiendas, but that in administrative matters relating thereto the will of the governor should prevail, unless his decision were contested through legal channels. An illustration of such difference of opinion may be noted in the letter written by Governor Juan Niño de Tavora on August 4, 1628, to the Council of the Indies. Tavora complained of the action of the audiencia in regard to the disposal of a case involving an encomendero who had married the widow of another encomendero, and who had tried to unite and hold both their encomiendas after marriage. The governor contended that two persons holding encomiendas by previous right should choose the more desirable one and relinquish the other, in accordance with the practice in other places. Especially should this be done in the Philippines, he held, because there were so few encomiendas in the Islands. The fiscal approved of this suggestion and made a motion before the acuerdo of the audiencia that this course should be pursued, but, as no laws had been promulgated on the subject, there was no precedent to follow. The audiencia accordingly declared that such a course as the governor had suggested would not be legal. Tavora petitioned the Council of the Indies for a ruling on the subject. The Council sustained the governor in its consulta of January 15, 1630. There was apparently no limit to the value of suits involving encomiendas which might be tried in the audiencia, and appealed to the Council of the Indies. There exists the record of one case in which the encomienda was valued at 223,000 pesos. In this suit the fiscal proceeded against Doña Juana Leal and Francisco de Rebolledo, residents of Mexico, for possession of an encomienda held in the Philippines. This case affords an illustration of the delays to which the course of justice was subject, it being appealed to the Council of the Indies in 1612, and not finally settled till 1620. A suit involving an encomienda valued at 430,102 pesos came before the audiencia in 1703, when two residents of Manila, named Delgado and Abaurrea, were dispossessed of an encomienda by the governor. The encomienda was awarded immediately to Juan de Echevarría and Antonio de Endaya. The latter were prosecuted in the audiencia by the dispossessed encomenderos, and the tribunal, in compliance with the law of Malines, made the prescribed investigation, recommending that the governor's action should be disapproved, since the evidence showed that the persons installed on the encomienda were distant relatives of the governor. The Council adopted the recommendations of the audiencia in this case, ordering that the original encomenderos should be restored to their estate, and that this breach of royal commands should be registered against the governor to be answered in his residencia. Another suit, of a similar nature to that described above, was brought in the audiencia in 1713 against Juan de Rivas, who had been assigned two encomiendas in Leyte and Cebú, respectively, by the governor, thus depriving one Saramiento who had held them formerly. The plaintiff claimed that he had made great improvements on these estates, spending all his income thereon, and as yet had received no profits from the lands. He petitioned, therefore, that these encomiendas should be bestowed upon him for another term. [178] The audiencia withheld its judgment on this case, referring it to the Council. That body, after seeking the advice of the royal fiscal and contador, recommended to the king that Saramiento should be allowed to retain the encomiendas for another term, and it was accordingly done, a royal order to that effect being expedited on May 29, 1715. It is notable how frequently the action of the audiencia or that of the governor was confirmed by the Council of the Indies. In most of the cases which have been described, the original papers, including letters, autos and testimonios, each expediente [179] containing from one hundred to two thousand pages, are marked "seen by the Council", "action of the governor confirmed", or "no action to be taken"; the original decisions being thus confirmed. It may be concluded, therefore, from this brief study that the audiencia had appellate jurisdiction as a court of law over suits involving encomiendas, and, furthermore, that the tribunal acting in that capacity placed a very effective and definite check on the governor in his executive control over encomiendas. Property suits, aside from those involving encomiendas, were numerous. One noted case may be cited in which the heirs of Governor Fausto Cruzat y Góngora in 1703 brought suit to recover money owed by Gaspar Sánchez and Bernardo de Guirós to the ex-governor. The audiencia failed to award the sum, which approximated 8000 pesos. The case was appealed to the Council of the Indies and the decision was reversed, the plaintiffs being awarded the money originally sued for, with costs of suit. A similar case was brought by the children and heirs of Governor Bustamante against Juan de Nebra, general of the galleon. The case was tried in the audiencia and the tribunal decided in favor of the defendant. The case was appealed to the Council of the Indies and the decision was reversed. [180] In 1736 Gaspar Thomé, a Frenchman, sued the estate of a deceased debtor, Juan de Olerte, for 2000 pesos. [181] The case was appealed to the Council of the Indies, and fully two hundred pages of documentary material exist, carefully annotated and digested, to show how thoroughly and with what formality a suit of even that small import was tried. We have already noted the tendency of the government to discourage the appeal of property suits to the Council of the Indies. The jurisdiction of the audiencia was final, for the most part, in suits involving sums from 200 to 6000 pesos. As matters of trade were always important in the life and politics of the Islands, commercial suits commanded a large share of the attention of the audiencia. Up to 1769 the jurisdiction of the audiencia was supreme in matters relating thereto, [182] but on December 13 of that year a consulado was established at Manila, thereby relieving the audiencia of much of its former control over commercial affairs. [183] The consulado, from the time of its establishment, was an ever-present thorn in the side of the audiencia and conflicts over the respective jurisdictions of the tribunals [184] were continually arising. We may briefly cite one or two cases to illustrate the respective jurisdictions of the audiencia and the tribunal of the consulado. On December 26, 1806, action was brought by two Spaniards against the British firm of Jacob Smith and Company on account of the inferior quality of goods sold to the plaintiff by that firm. [185] Suit was brought originally in the audiencia, but the consulado applied to the governor for jurisdiction in the case on the ground that, as a commercial suit, it should be tried in the consulado. [186] The governor awarded jurisdiction to the audiencia. The consulado re-appealed the case, but the Council sustained the governor's decision on the ground that this was a suit between a private individual and a merchant which should be tried in the audiencia, the tribunal which usually tried cases between individuals. The function of the consulado, the royal decree stated, was to try suits of a commercial character which arose between merchants. [187] An occasion on which the jurisdiction of the audiencia was unquestioned may be noted in the suit which was appealed to the Council of the Indies from the audiencia in 1698, over the wrecking of the galleon "San Francisco Xavier". The admiral, Don Esteban Ramos, was held accountable for the silver carried on the ship and the merchants of Manila sued him for what they had lost in the wreck. [188] It was charged that Ramos had landed the silver, but was seeking to conceal that fact, claiming instead that it was lost. The case was appealed to the Council by the defendant. [189] The Council referred the case to the Junta de Guerra, [190] and that tribunal reversed the decision of the audiencia, declaring that Ramos was a faithful servant of His Majesty, and still a poor man. There was no possibility of his having the silver. Ramos was transferred to the Atlantic flota. [191] The royal fiscal, in the opinion rendered for the guidance of the junta, made the comment that frequently the oidores of colonial audiencias were influenced, against their own ideas of justice, by the opinions and wishes of the most powerful residents. Such was possibly the case in Manila on this occasion. This statement at least shows that those in control at Madrid were aware of some of the fundamental weaknesses of the colonial audiencias. Another typical case, indirectly connected with commerce, occurred in 1713, when the fiscal of the audiencia prosecuted three captains, Enrique Boynont, Fernando Gall and Diego Brunet, who had arrived at Cavite in command of French merchant and exploring ships, without the royal permission to trade in the Islands. These captains, who were foreigners, of course, were charged with smuggling, and were brought before the royal audiencia. The charges against them were not proved, and in due time the cases were dismissed. [192] The laws of the Indies authorized the governor and the alcaldes del crimen to try cases of strangers, [193] but in Manila, where there were no magistrates of this category, such cases were tried by the audiencia. Perhaps the most important commercial suit that was ever tried in the Audiencia of Manila, came before that tribunal in 1656, when several residents of Mexico were excluded from the use of the galleon and their goods confiscated. This action was in accordance with repeated cédulas and regulations which reserved the space in the galleon for the exclusive use of the Manila merchants and authorities. Mexican traders, who had from time to time shipped goods on the galleons, were forbidden to crowd out the Manila merchants, who depended on that trade exclusively. The fine levied on this occasion amounted to 273,133 pesos. The case was appealed to the Council of the Indies, the aforesaid decision was upheld, and the sum was finally ordered paid in Mexico. [194] During the greater part of the audiencia's existence there was no consulado in Manila and the jurisdiction of the audiencia in commercial cases extended to suits between merchants for space on the galleon. The tribunal had jurisdiction over the trial of officials for dishonesty in the assignment of galleon space: investigations of officials charged with reserving more than their due share of space, and such other cases as are mentioned in the laws of the Indies as being the concern of the consulados of Lima and Mexico. [195] Officers of the galleons were tried for mistreating seamen, for smuggling, for exceeding the limit of merchandise allowed, for giving passage to lewd women and to persons travelling on the galleons without permission. They were tried for carrying more slaves than they were allowed by law to carry, for charging exorbitant prices of passage, and for failing to turn in accounts of money collected. Commanders were often held criminally responsible for carelessness in navigation and for shipwrecks. These cases were tried in the tribunal of the consulado after 1769. The audiencia had appellate jurisdiction over all residents of the colony, both natives and Spaniards. All crimes committed within five leagues of the city of Manila were ordered to be tried by the oidores in first instance, [196] but unless they were of extraordinary importance, special investigators, usually alcaldes mayores or alcaldes ordinarios, were delegated to try them in the name of the audiencia. [197] As already stated, most of the criminal cases arising in the colony were tried in first instance in the provinces by the alcaldes mayores. Cases appealed to the audiencia were reviewed in that tribunal. The trial consisted of an examination of the summary or abstract of the case as it was originally tried by the lower judge and, if errors were found to exist, the decision was either reversed or the case was remanded to the judge who first had tried the case, for second trial. [198] The audiencia did not try the case with the defendant present. It merely reviewed the proceedings of the lower judge. Criminal cases were not ordinarily appealable to the Council of the Indies. The procedure in criminal cases was generally so similar to that already described that it is unnecessary to give any illustration of the audiencia's criminal jurisdiction. Most of the cases that eventually reached the audiencia involved Spaniards, native caciques, and half-castes. Natives who were charged with robbery, murder, and crimes of a depraved nature were usually of a class unable to finance appeals to the audiencia. This fact probably accounts for the scarcity of criminal cases appealed during the first two centuries of the audiencia's existence. [199] However, the reforms of the nineteenth century brought an increased number of cases into the audiencia by systematizing the administration of justice, differentiating the judgeships from administrative offices, and providing for greater facility of appeal. [200] It is probable that in criminal as well as in civil cases, Spaniards derived considerable benefit from the fact that the audiencia was composed of magistrates of their own nationality. High officials, no doubt, escaped the consequences of their misdeeds more easily than did men of more modest social and political attainments. This is shown by the well-known case of the murder by Governor Fajardo of his wife on July 21, 1621; this came up before an audiencia which was composed of judges who were largely under the governor's domination. The tribunal gave the matter a cursory investigation, after which the governor was allowed to go unpunished. [201] We shall see that proceedings were different, however, when officials under investigation were charged with offenses against the government. The residencia, which dealt with such charges, was a pitiless form of inquisition in which the officiating magistrate was in duty bound to find his victim guilty, if possible. Criminal cases of a character slightly different from those described above were prosecuted by the government for the infraction of any governmental regulation, or for the evasion of the payment of taxes or duties. The collection of revenues devolved upon the oficiales reales and they were ordered to accomplish their duties in this particular, if possible, without the assistance of the courts. [202] Numerous cases did come up in the audiencia, however, involving the prosecution of individuals for violations of the alcabala, quinto, and the tax on the export of silver (comisos). Persons assisting in the apprehension of violators of these laws were rewarded with a part of the proceeds of the fine, the remainder becoming the property of real hacienda. On October 6, 1783, the final jurisdiction in cases of smuggling and non-payment of the king's fifth was taken from the audiencia, appeals being authorized to the Council of the Indies. [203] Reference has already been made to the services of an oidor as special auditor de guerra. This, as well as other matters relating to the jurisdiction of the governor and captain-general over military matters, wherein the audiencia had no authority, will be noted when an examination is made of the relations of the governor and audiencia in a subsequent chapter. Suffice it to say here that the audiencia did not have jurisdiction as a court over soldiers or military affairs. Closely related to the subject of the defense of the Islands, and the exercise of judicial authority over soldiers was the special jurisdiction which the governor had over matters relating to the Chinese. This subject will be treated in greater detail when we discuss the relations of the audiencia and the governor. During the first two centuries of its existence the audiencia had jurisdiction as a judicial tribunal in the cases and instances which have been noted. It had civil and criminal authority, original and appellate. Its decisions were final in civil suits on claims for six thousand pesos or less. Criminal cases were settled in the audiencia. The judicial authority of the audiencia was impeded during the greater part of its history by the failure of the government to entrust it with complete jurisdiction in all civil and criminal matters, and by the tendency of the latter to interfere in matters of minute and insignificant detail, which should have been left to the magistrates of the tribunal. The Constitution of 1812 and the reforms made in pursuance thereof really effected the changes which had long been needed. The audiencia's jurisdiction was made final in all civil suits and increased in administrative cases; thereafter no appeals were made to the Council of the Indies unless they involved administrative law. Cases involving official dishonesty, incapacity, residencia, pesquisas, treason, disputes between audiencias and other tribunals over conflicts of jurisdiction, and questions of the interpretation of the law were still carried to Spain. These were important steps for the improvement of colonial judicial procedure; they served to simplify it, preventing a multiplicity of cases from being carried to Spain which should have been settled within the colony. These tardy reforms left to the home government more time in which to occupy itself with questions of governmental policy, leaving to the audiencias more authority and responsibility in purely judicial matters, thus giving to them a greater prestige in the commonwealths wherein they were situated. The qualifications for the magistracy were also raised at this time, although it cannot be said that the magistrates of the audiencias were at any time incompetent or lacking in ability. The audiencias of the colonies were given equal status with those of the Peninsula, and were thus elevated in dignity and standing to the rank of tribunals of the first order. The chief defects of the colonial judicial system of the seventeenth century were thus corrected, though somewhat tardily. It is unfortunate indeed that these changes applied only to a mere skeleton of Spain's former colonial empire. In this chapter we have discussed the audiencia as a formal court of justice, with methods, practices, and traditions little different from those of any tribunal of justice. However, it had judicial authority more extensive and far-reaching than has yet been indicated. Among the different kinds of cases over which the audiencia had jurisdiction, perhaps none was more important, and certainly none was more exclusively peculiar to the Spanish judicial system than suits of residencia. So distinct and extraordinary was that phase of judicial activity that it merits consideration apart from a discussion of the audiencia's functions as an ordinary court of law. In the following section we shall note its jurisdiction as an administrative court over suits wherein the government was a party and wherein the object was not only to punish offenders, but to act as a preventive of official misconduct. CHAPTER IV JUDICIAL FUNCTIONS OF THE AUDIENCIA; THE RESIDENCIA [204] The purpose of the residencia was to uphold the morale of colonial service by making officials answer for all their acts in a judicial examination held at the close of their terms. It may be said that the fear of the residencia was almost the sole incentive to righteous official conduct or efficient public service, and it will be seen that the audiencia exercised very pronounced authority in this. Indeed, the audiencia had general supervision in a semi-judicial capacity over the services of officials and public servants in the colonies. It was the function of the audiencia to send reports to the court relative to the conduct, work, or attitude of any employee or official of the government, or of any resident of the colony. These reports were known as informaciones (pareceres) de servicio. [205] The tribunal itself was ready at all times to hear complaints against provincial governors and judges, treasury officials, magistrates, governors, or, in fact, any and all officials holding their positions by virtue of the king's commission. [206] Charges might be made by a wronged party or by anyone whose knowledge of an abuse was sufficient to justify charges. Heavy penalties were imposed upon persons making false or unsubstantiated charges. [207] Complaints against alcaldes mayores and corregidores were most likely to be made during the regular investigation of the visiting oidor, which, as we have noted, occurred every three years, but sufficient complaint might be made to justify the dispatch of a special investigator at any time. [208] The findings of the above inspections might be reviewed by the audiencia and lead to the suspension and dismissal of the official under investigation. [209] The final action had to be confirmed by the Council of the Indies in case the person concerned were a royal appointee, but in these matters the action of the local officials was usually approved. For the removal of oidores and oficiales reales a slightly different method was pursued. A magistrate of the audiencia was designated to investigate the case, the evidence was submitted to the Council of the Indies and final action was taken by it and not by the audiencia. [210] Any and all charges brought against an official in these investigations, even though he were cleared at the time, might be revived in the residencia. Suspensions from office were made by the governor with the advice and consent of the audiencia. The governor had the legal right to make temporary removals, but on account of the seriousness of such an act, and the considerations depending upon it, he usually preferred to have the support of the magistrates in the matter. The governor, as vicepatron, could suspend prelates and other church officials, but he seldom, if ever, exercised his powers to the full extent. The audiencia at Manila, on the other hand, actually drove the archbishop from the city on various occasions. The suspension and the removal of members of the ordinary clergy from their districts was a frequent occurrence, but churchmen were not subject to residencia. The audiencia had no authority to suspend or remove the governor, though the magistrates could and frequently did bring charges against the governor which led to his dismissal. Governors actually suspended and removed oidores at times, though such acts were protested as violations of the law which authorized only the Council of the Indies to remove these officials. Briefly, the procedure in making these removals was as follows: the governor and audiencia investigated the conduct of an official whenever circumstances demanded it; the latter was either suspended and recommended for removal, such recommendations being made by the audiencia to the governor or to the Council of the Indies, according to the rank of the official, or the tribunal could make the removal itself. [211] If exception to the action of the audiencia were taken, all the papers relative to the case were forwarded to the Council of the Indies, and if good reasons were found to exist for the action of the lower court the Council approved its action. [212] This, was not the residencia as usually considered. Of the various authorities at our disposal, Bancroft gives the most acceptable characterization of the residencia. He defines it as an examination held, or an account taken, of the official acts of an executive or judicial official within the province of his jurisdiction during the term of his incumbency. This, Bancroft says, was done at the expiration of the term of office or at stated periods, or, in case of malfeasance, at any time. [213] The principle underlying the institution of the residencia was bequeathed to the Spaniards by the Romans, being similar to and probably derived from their law which gave the right of accusation to any Roman citizen against an office-holder. The residencia was conducted by a judicial official, and it combined the features of a general survey of the career of the official under investigation, an auditing of his accounts and a formal trial. Its purpose was to ascertain whether or not the official had faithfully executed his duties and it served to clear him if he were proved honest, giving him a clean certificate of recommendation. If he were found guilty of official misconduct or dishonesty he was apprehended, degraded, and punished, according to his deserts. Professor Bourne has written in regard to the residencia: The residencia ... was an institution peculiar in modern times of the Spanish colonial system. It was designed to provide a method by which officials could be held to strict accountability for all acts during their term of office.... To allow a contest in the courts involving the governor's powers during his term of office would be subversive of his authority. He was then to be kept in bounds by realizing that a day of judgment was impending, when everyone, even the poorest Indian, might in perfect security bring forward his accusation. In the Philippines the residencia for a governor lasted six months and was conducted by his successor and all the charges made were forwarded to Spain.... The Italian traveller Gemelli Careri who visited Manila in 1696 characterizes the governor's residencia as a "dreadful Trial", the strain of which would sometimes "break their hearts." Professor Bourne stated that it was the opinion of De Pons that "the severities of the residencia could be mitigated, and no doubt such was the case in the Philippines. By the end of the eighteenth century the residencia seems to have lost its efficacy." [214] It is important to note at the outset that the residencia was not conducted periodically alone, but that it might be held at any time in the career of an official. The term pesquisa was applied to the form of residencia which was carried out by a special investigator (pesquisidor), sent when serious charges were made against the conduct of an official. [215] In the investigation which took place the official might be fined, or if grave offenses were proved, he might be removed from office. Appeals might be made from the pesquisidor to the audiencia and to the Council of the Indies. In fact, the judgments of the pesquisidor were always reviewed in the local tribunal unless the investigating judge had been commissioned by the Council of the Indies. The distinction which has been made here between the formal residencia which occurred at the close of the term of office and the pesquisa which might take place whenever serious charges were made, was first emphasized in laws promulgated by Charles V in 1538, and by Philip II in 1591; these aimed to put a stop to the excesses of certain governors, corregidores, and ministers of justice, who, relying on the practice then prevailing of taking residencias only at the close of the official term, had committed unlimited excesses. The new laws, above referred to, stated that although it had never been the royal wish that residencias of royal appointees should be taken without notice having been sent first to the monarch, the above circumstances had made it necessary for them to be taken when charges were made. This cédula, therefore, authorized the taking of residencias whenever the best interests of the service required it. [216] This cédula was followed by another which forbade the sending of special investigators or judges of residencia against governors of provinces, unless persons of responsible character presented charges against them, giving bonds to cover the costs. An investigator was thereupon sent to conduct the trial of the official under examination. [217] This matter is covered in slightly different terms in the law of June 19, 1620. According to that enactment, a receptor [218] might be sent to conduct the preliminary investigations of corregidores and ordinary justices when these demanded instant attention and could not await the formal residencia. If, as a result of this inquiry, the guilt of the official seemed apparent, a more complete investigation was made by a judge appointed by the president and audiencia in acuerdo. [219] The authority to determine whether cases merited investigation or not and whether an inquiry should be made, belonged to the acuerdo, while the designation of the judge rested with the governor. [220] The judges sent on these missions were not at first authorized to pass final sentence, their decisions being subject to review in the audiencia before execution. However, by the law of May 5, 1576, this added authority was bestowed upon the oidores who conducted special investigations, or residencias. [221] Appeals might be made to the audiencia and, if the sentence imposed the death penalty or permanent removal from office, the appeal might be carried to the Council of the Indies. [222] The final approval of the Council was required before action could be taken with regard to any royal appointee, except in those cases wherein the fine did not exceed one thousand pesos. [223] The oidores, it seems, did not always act as impartial judges when entrusted with these investigations; they were often influenced by the extra reward obtained for these services, and frequently by prejudice against the officials under investigation. Such were the charges implied by Governor Fajardo in 1619 when he wrote: It is always to be believed that the auditors (oidores) to whom the inquiries are entrusted, ought to make them, not only as judges, but as interested parties, so that sinister inquiries should not be sent to your Majesty's royal Council to defraud your royal treasury and the merits of those who have served well. I assure your Majesty that I have heard that many inquiries have been made with less justification than might be advisable. [224] A typical illustration of the jurisdiction of the audiencia in an investigation of this sort, and of the delay to which the minor officials were subjected, is shown in the case of Antonio Pimentel, governor of the Marianas, [225] whose residencia was taken in the decade following 1711. In this case may be seen the distinction between the formal residencia, conducted at the close of the regular term of office, and an investigation of charges brought during the incumbency of the official. This case illustrates both forms of investigation, for it originated in a charge of treason brought against Pimentel, who, it was said, had furnished food and water to the crews of two English vessels, enemies of Spain, and subsequently these same ships had captured the galleon, "Nuestra Señora de la Encarnación". The conduct of the case was given to magistrate Torralba, who, on his arrival at Guam, sent Pimentel in chains to Manila. Notwithstanding his defense of ignorance of a state of war existing between Spain and England, he was sentenced to the forfeiture of the bonds which he had posted on assuming office, and in addition was deprived of his position as governor at Guam. This sentence was rendered January 23, 1712, and was approved by the audiencia in review on July 24, 1714. [226] The tribunal sentenced Pimentel to prison and ordered that his residencia should be taken; accordingly, an examination was made of all his official acts as governor. Pimentel, therefore, had not only to stand investigation for the particular act which had brought about his removal, but he was also subjected to a residencia covering his entire career as governor. It may be noted that the two forms of investigation were separate and distinct on this occasion. Owing to the death of Governor Lizárraga, to the imprisonment of Oidor Villa, and to the state of anarchy surrounding the administration of Torralba as governor, Pimentel was forced to languish in prison several years while he waited residencia. The appointment of Luís de Tagle as his successor and judge of residencia was dated June 25, 1717. This occasion was one on which the successor of a governor took his predecessor's residencia, owing, the commission said, to the distance and the irregularity of communication between Manila and Guam. A letter of the audiencia, dated August 9, 1718, advised the governor that there were 427 unfinished cases on the docket of the tribunal, and chief among those that ought to be decided without delay was the review of the residencia of Pimentel; it was added that there seemed to be no prospect that a boat could get to Guam before 1719. The record of the termination of this case probably reposes somewhere in the archives, tied in an aged, yellow packet, bound by Spanish red tape. In summary, it may be said that there were two kinds of investigations of official conduct, one taken at the completion of the regular term of office and the other at any time when the needs of the service required it. They both had the same ultimate purpose of holding officials responsible for misconduct in office, of giving to all persons an opportunity of having justice done to them and of deterring office-holders from future misdeeds. Practically all of the colonial officials were subject to residencia. The most sensational and widely known residencias were, of course, those of viceroys and captains-general, but oidores, treasury officials, encomenderos, alcaldes mayores, corregidores, admirals, generals, captains, and constructors of galleons were likewise examined in this way. [227] The visitors and special investigators who were sent to examine the government of the provinces and the state of the Indians on the encomiendas were also subject to residencia. Residencias were exacted of all minor officials at the same time that their superiors were examined. [228] Clerks, notaries, secretaries, alcaldes ordinarios, regidores, and other officials of a minor category were investigated at the same time that the governor was examined, an alcalde or an oidor being delegated by the new president to review their official conduct. The examination of these minor officials seems to have become more and more perfunctory and there was a tendency during the latter part of the nineteenth century to continue them in office, even without investigation. When, for instance, Governors Basco y Vargas and Marquina gave up their offices this formality was omitted. [229] The practice of taking the residencias of minor officials was definitely abandoned on August 24, 1799, and a rigid inspection by the audiencia of their official acts was authorized. [230] Much contradictory legislation appears in the laws of the Indies relative to the method of taking residencias; this due to the reforms made from time to time. These laws were formulated for a growing empire. A chronological review of them will show that the residencia was at first more or less of an experiment. Indeed, all the colonial institutions were in the early periods passing through an experimental stage and these seemingly contradictory laws were promulgated or repealed, according to their success or failure when put into effect. Whenever, therefore, two laws appear to be in conflict, the one of later date will be found to supersede and repeal the earlier one. [231] In illustration of this characteristic of the laws of the Indies we may note the following example: The cédula of December 4, 1630, ordered that the residencia of the governor should be taken by his successor. This law was seldom, if ever, observed. Owing to the distance from Spain and New Spain, and the consequent length of time consumed in voyages, to the unhealthful climate, and to the dangerous military campaigns in which the governors were compelled to engage, death frequently intervened before the successor of a governor arrived. These conditions (which were characteristic of all of Spain's colonies) did not prevent the residencia from being taken, but caused the law to be modified by the cédula of December 28, 1667, according to which judges for the residencias of viceroys and presidents-governor and captains-general were to be designated by the court. The period of four months, which had been authorized for the taking of residencias by the cédula of August 30, 1582, was extended to six months. [232] A change was necessary, the new law declared, in order to put a stop to the incessant strife, and the malice which had been shown by viceroys, governors, and ministers in the taking of residencias. The king determined that henceforth the judge of residencias should be designated by the court. The magistrate usually named was the decano. After 1776 the regent almost invariably conducted these investigations. The important reform of August 24, 1799, ordered that judges of residencia for governors, viceroys, presidents, governors-intendant, corregidor-intendants, and presidents of the Council of the Indies should be appointed by the king. [233] The first residencia to be conducted in the Philippines in accordance with the new law of November 28, 1667, was that of Governor Salcedo, in 1670. This governor had been removed by the commissary of the Inquisition on October 10, 1668, and Francisco Coloma, the decano, was ordered to take his residencia. [234] Coloma's intervention in the matter was protested by the audiencia in a letter to the Council of the Indies, dated April 7, 1670, on the grounds that the senior oidor was also the asesor and possible successor of the governor, and for that reason he was disqualified from taking the latter's residencia. [235] The audiencia suspended the proposed action of Coloma, pending the reply of the Council of the Indies. In addition to the protest of the audiencia, the fiscal, on May 20, 1670, sent a report of the case to the court, which act was in fulfillment of his regular duties as fiscal, as prescribed by the laws of the Indies. [236] The notes from Manila were effective in bringing about the desired results. Upon receipt of the communications, the Council of the Indies, on June 17, 1671, ordered the nullification of all former cédulas, cancelled Coloma's appointment to take the residencia in question, on the grounds that he had been the governor's asesor, and appointed Fernando de Montemayor, the oidor next in rank, to conduct the residencia of the governor. [237] Salcedo had already been dead three years, and two more transpired before his residencia was completed and the autos thereof reviewed by the Council. The laws provided ample opportunity for appeal in cases of residencia. The cédula of November 17, 1526, ordered that appeals might be made to the Council of the Indies from judges of residencia in cases involving liabilities in excess of 600 pesos. [238] Many appeals were made to the Council in accord with this law, and the time of the tribunal was consumed in the consideration of matters comparatively of small importance. To obviate this defect the law was changed on August 7, 1568, to provide that no case could be appealed to the Council of the Indies unless the sentence imposed capital punishment or deprivation of office. [239] The cédula of June 23, 1608, ordered that if the fine imposed upon the governor and ministers of the Philippines did not exceed one thousand pesos the case should be finished in the audiencia. [240] Cases involving a greater amount were to be appealed to the Council. Sentence of judges of residencia were not to be executed pending the trial of appeals to the audiencia and the Council of the Indies. [241] Philip IV initiated further reforms in regard to appeal in 1636. Ordenanza LVI, promulgated at that time, provided that "the said Council [of the Indies] may only have jurisdiction over the visits and residencias of the viceroys, presidents, oidores, and officials of our audiencias and accountants and officials of the tribunals of accounts, officials of the treasury and those of the governors provided by the Council with our titles." [242] Ordenanza LXII, issued at the same time, ordered that "in the visits and residencias which are seen and determined in our Council of the Indies," cases did not have to be referred to the king for consultation, excepting when, in "the residencias of viceroys, presidents, and oidores, alcaldes del crimen, and fiscales of our royal audiencias of the Indies and governors of the principal provinces there, condemnations of corporal punishment, privation or suspension from office result against them." [243] In these cases the Council was ordered to submit its decisions and all papers bearing thereon to the king before passing judgment, so that the final judgment might be rendered by the sovereign in person. The Council could take final action in the residencias of military and naval officials without consulting the king. It was, of course, impossible for the sovereign to give his personal attention to any of these matters, but the last word was pronounced in these suits by responsible ministers of the court who stood high in the royal estimation. Officials were usually obliged to submit to residencia before leaving the colony, also before their promotion to higher posts. [244] Owing, however, to the paucity of ships plying to New Spain and to the length of time elapsing between sailing dates, officials could give bonds and leave before the residencia was completed. [245] This was permitted only to men of good character, whose services had been uniformly satisfactory, and who were destined to some other post wherein their services were indispensable. The investigation was then conducted in the absence of the official concerned. [246] It was decreed by the cédula of December 30, 1776, that an annual deduction of one-fifth of the total salary of the governors and viceroys respectively should be made, until sufficient money had been taken out to cover the probable costs and liabilities of their residencias. [247] This was a special assessment, distinct from the media anata, [248] and the money deducted thereby was to be returned if nothing detrimental were proved in the residencia. The last year's salaries of alcaldes mayores and corregidores were withheld, pending investigations of their official conduct and a rendering of accounts of collections made by them. [249] If an official were cleared of all guilt, the money which had been withheld was returned and the costs of residencia were defrayed by the royal treasury. [250] In case the official were found guilty of misconduct, he had to forfeit his deposits, back-salary, bonds, and frequently to pay a large fine in addition. The amount of the penalty, of course, depended on the extent of the guilt. It may be said that in the Philippines the royal treasury suffered no serious embarrassment through having to bear costs of residencia. The judges of residencia who served as such in addition to their regular duties, received an additional compensation which varied according to the place where the residencia was held, its distance from the capital, and other circumstances. [251] This was modified by a reform of the nineteenth century which awarded extra pay only in the case the official were fined. This, of course, was intended to afford the examining judge a stimulating interest in the case. Still later the system of giving extra pay for residencias was abolished. [252] A detailed survey of the governor's residencia in the Philippines would illustrate the influence of the audiencia in such investigations. Unfortunately the story would be long and little space remains for such a purpose. During the first two centuries of Spanish rule in the Islands the residencias of the governors were especially stringent, many of these officials suffering deprivation of office, imprisonment, and exile. The families and dependents of some were reduced to the last extreme of poverty, while the victims themselves spent years in some distant province, unable to defend themselves from their enemies. Many victims of the residencia were purposely put aside in order that no appeal could be heard from them. One would occasionally find relief at last in a tardy pardon or in a modification of sentence, obtained through friends at home, when these could be reached, but more often death would intervene before the exercise of executive clemency or revision of sentence could be obtained. The factors of petty spite, malice, and personal ambition entered to an extensive degree in the rendering of testimony at a residencia. A governor, recently arrived in the colony, would be full of zeal and ardor to inaugurate a successful administration, and make a good record for himself. The first duty that presented itself on his arrival was that of taking or supervising his predecessor's residencia. Frequently, before arriving at Manila, the new governor would be in full possession of a complete record of the misdeeds of his predecessor, and the residencia of the latter was as good as taken. [253] Oidores, merchants, alcaldes, treasury officials, and churchmen, compelled to stand aside and see a governor take his choice out of the best things, leaving for them only the husks, were not slow in bringing charges at the official residencia. [254] A new governor, desirous of demonstrating his intention of starting an honest and vigorous administration, hearing nothing but evil of his predecessor, would naturally lend himself as an instrument to the malcontents. A fiscal, after spending six years in conflict with a governor, could be depended on to bring strenuous prosecution against him. A magistrate with enmity in his heart for the governor whose residencia he was to take, was no fit person to conduct an impartial investigation. While as a rule the residencias of governors were severe, due largely to the presence of the audiencia, that of Dr. Sande, the first governor to submit to this investigation, illustrates the evils of the residencia as conducted before the establishment of the audiencia. His successor, Governor Ronquillo de Peñalosa, conducted Sande's residencia and sentenced him to pay a heavy fine, but he appealed the case to the Audiencia of Mexico, by which tribunal, in the meantime, he had been commissioned oidor. We have noted in an earlier chapter Ronquillo's comments on the abject state into which the administration of justice had fallen when a man could be promoted to a magistracy in a tribunal which had jurisdiction over his own case on appeal. [255] However, after the establishment of the audiencia, and until the close of the nineteenth century, the residencia went to the other extreme, and was, as a rule, exceedingly rigorous. We may briefly note a few of the most severe residencias in which the influence of the audiencia told against the victim. In 1625, Gerónimo de Silva, temporary governor, was imprisoned by the audiencia because he failed to pursue the Dutch after their defeat in 1617. The real difficulty lay in the fact that Silva had incurred the enmity of the senior oidor, who ultimately conducted the residencia, because Silva's arrival in the Islands deprived that magistrate of the command of the military and naval forces of the Islands. Again, Governor Corcuera, after nine years of very successful rule, during which he distinguished himself in several campaigns of conquest and incidentally aroused the hostility and jealousy of the oidores, was arrested on charges made by the audiencia on the arrival of Governor Diego Fajardo in 1644. An oidor, who was the personal enemy of Corcuera, was designated to conduct the residencia, the ex-governor was fined 25,000 pesos and was imprisoned five years while the magistrates of the audiencia delayed the transmission of the papers which permitted a rehearing of the case. At last his defense was sent to the Council, the fine was remitted, he was given salary for the period of his exile, and the post of governor of the Canaries was conferred upon him. Although the audiencia was responsible for the injustice in this case, Fajardo, as president and governor, was held answerable in his own residencia for his conduct toward his predecessor. Governor Simón de Anda y Salazar, one of the most successful governors the Islands had ever known, was made to suffer from the personal malice of the oidores when he gave his last residencia in 1776. [256] Among the offenses which were proved against him was that of exercising prejudice in conducting the residencia of Oidor Villacorta, conducted under his supervision. The residencia had been rigorous, due no doubt to personal enmity between the oidor and the governor, extending over a period of many years. He was also fined 4000 pesos as a price for his excessive zeal in the prosecution of the residencia of his predecessor, Governor Raón, who had friends in the audiencia to defend his memory and champion his cause. [257] Anda was also shown to have absolved certain officials of real hacienda of financial responsibility, permitting them to leave the Islands without the consent of the audiencia. These and other charges proved against him were said to have caused his premature death in 1776. Governor José Basco y Vargas, another very efficient governor, [258] but one who had been opposed throughout his term of office by the audiencia, was heavily fined in 1787 by the oidor designated to conduct the investigation. The decision of the judge of residencia was reversed by the Council of the Indies, however, and Vargas' exceptional merits were recognized to the extent of his being appointed to the governorship of Cartagena, with the rank of rear admiral. In taking the residencia of Vargas, the audiencia had disagreed so completely that the tribunal was obliged to resort to the extreme measure of appointing a churchman as arbiter. Fray Gerónimo Caraballo, the curate of Quiapo, was designated for that duty. Aside from the above brief references to notable cases in which the audiencia exercised jurisdiction over the residencias of governors, allowing itself to be influenced by considerations other than those of justice, it seems desirable to review in detail at least one case of the residencia of a governor, to show more particularly just what authority was exercised by the tribunal, and just how that authority was exercised. We may select for this purpose the residencia of Governor Felix Beringuer de Marquina, which was the last to be conducted under the old laws, and the last, accordingly, of the severe residencias. [259] As governor and superintendent of real hacienda Marquina assumed such power as no other governor had ever exercised. He was opposed at every turn by the audiencia and probably no other governor ever had so many of his measures vetoed or opposed by the home government as he. The fiscal and oidores brought many charges against him; these finally culminated, before the expiration of his term, in the royal order of February 19, 1792, for the taking of his residencia. The regent, Agustín de Amparán, was put in possession of the special charges which had been made against Marquina. According to these the governor had been careless in defending the Islands against the Moros, who had insulted and robbed with impunity the various settlements, with no effort having been made to check their advance. The governor had transgressed in numerous instances the sphere of the audiencia and had substituted his own authority. He was said to have been guilty of immoral relations with certain Spanish women of the colony, having deliberately and maliciously separated an intendant from his wife on one occasion by ordering the former to a post of duty where no woman could go; he had amassed a great fortune through trade and by diverting the proceeds of the royal revenue to his own private advantage; he had permitted merchants to conduct business without proper licenses; he had allowed foreign merchants to remain in Manila under conditions forbidden by law. [260] These and many others were the charges brought against Governor Marquina. They may be considered as typical of the accusations which were usually brought against governors in their residencias. Amparán was commanded by the royal order above-mentioned to remove Marquina to some spot outside Manila where he could not interfere with the residencia, but whence he could be summoned at any time, to give testimony in his own behalf. [261] The regent was instructed to ascertain from the treasury officials whether Marquina should not be required to post more than the usual amount of bonds in view of the grave charges against him. It seems that the law already cited requiring an annual deduction of one-fifth of the governor's salary to cover residencia had been abrogated by a royal order dated February 13, 1782; hence there was some apprehension lest Marquina had not deposited sufficient money. [262] In compliance with these orders Marquina was relieved of his office in September, 1792, and was sent to Laguna de Bay, about thirty miles from Manila. After five months' delay, the investigation was inaugurated and it was concluded by July 22, 1793, but Aguilar, the new governor, intervened and suspended the sentence on the ground that Marquina had not been given sufficient opportunity to defend himself. Up to this time Marquina had not testified directly. Aguilar ordered that the ex-governor should be brought to Manila and that a lawyer should be appointed for his defense. This was done and the charges which had been made against him were duly answered. This evidence could not be incorporated in the official papers of residencia, for they had been finished and closed by the regent, but it was forwarded to Spain under separate cover. [263] The official papers of Marquina's residencia, as formulated by the regent of the audiencia, arrived before the Council of the Indies in due time, together with Marquina's defense which had been sent separately. The glaring injustice of the investigation as conducted by Amparán and of the official evidence transmitted, was patent to the fiscal of the Council. He refused to receive any testimony not incorporated in the official papers of the case. Marquina was allowed a retrial by the Council. This resulted in a further delay of three years; during this period Marquina remained in the provinces with the exception of the time spent in Manila giving testimony in his second residencia, which was taken under the direct supervision of Governor Aguilar. Immediately after his second trial Marquina was transferred to Mexico, but he was obliged to deposit an additional 50,000 pesos before his departure from Manila. In the ultimate judgment Marquina was pronounced guilty of many offenses in addition to those mentioned in the charges previously outlined. He had shown favoritism in the dispensation of official favors; he had authorized the expenditure of public money for private ends; he had neglected defense and agriculture; he had been negligent in the supervision of the various departments of real hacienda and particularly of tobacco; he had infringed on the jurisdiction of the royal audiencia. He had indulged in private trade and had granted special favors to foreign merchants. [264] The regent fined him 40,000 pesos outright and, moreover, he was condemned to pay into the royal treasury an additional fine of 16,000 pesos to cover certain illegitimate profits made through granting unlawful trading concessions to an Armenian merchant. This sentence was not executed immediately, as it had to be confirmed by the Council of the Indies. On review of the findings and recommendations of the regent, the Council declared that since the proceedings at the trial of Marquina had been irregular and the governor had already suffered the consequences of his own misdeeds, the fine imposed by the judge of the residencia in Manila might be reduced to 2000 pesos with costs of trial. Marquina on October 12, 1797, asked to be excused from the payment of the 2000 pesos, but the Council denied his petition, declaring that he had been treated with great consideration and mercy and that nothing more could be done in his behalf, especially since he had not been adjudged innocent of the charges which had been made against him. [265] Marquina's trial illustrates all the characteristics, the delays, terrors, and ramifications of a typical residencia of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Continued complaints against him caused Marquina's residencia to be taken before the expiration of his official term. The regent of the audiencia was commissioned by the court to conduct the investigation because Marquina's successor had not arrived. That magistrate was prejudiced against Marquina on account of having witnessed the governor's continual malfeasance in office. He was unable to conduct an impartial investigation, and the audiencia, likewise prejudiced, would not intervene in behalf of the ex-governor. The wrongs done to Marquina in his trial were so patent that the Council of the Indies ordered a new hearing. A severe sentence was finally passed by the judge in Manila, but it was modified by the Council of the Indies through considerations of justice. The residencia occupied ten years, and during the greater part of that time the ex-governor remained in exile--a victim of his own misdeeds, the faulty residencia system, and the hostility of the audiencia. The customary severity of the residencia was only mitigated in this case by the presence of an impartial governor, who, unlike most governors whose desire was to harass their victims, sought to secure a fair trial for his predecessor. To accomplish this he was obliged to work against, rather than in co-operation with the audiencia. The above method of conducting residencias of governors, presidents, viceroys, and superintendents was modified, as already mentioned, by the reform of August 24, 1799. The new law provided that the court, instead of the new governor, should appoint the examining judge. The latter was no longer empowered to pronounce sentence of any sort. He was only to conduct the investigation in the future, remitting the autos of the case to the Council of the Indies for final determination and sentence. [266] Again, on March 16, 1797, the royal order of December 30, 1777, was re-enacted and the practice was revived of deducting annually one-fifth of the salaries of officials whose incomes were 8000 pesos a year or more. [267] This law was again promulgated on January 18, 1848. Its purpose was to secure the retention of a sufficient sum of money to guarantee all losses incident to the residencia. It apparently continued in force until July 7, 1860, when governors and captains-general were declared exempt from these discounts. [268] We shall now examine more particularly the jurisdiction of the audiencia over the residencias of minor officials of the colony. It has already been pointed out that the residencias of provincial judges and governors, alcaldes ordinarios and reales oficiales were taken by judges appointed by the president of the audiencia, with appeal to the tribunal. These cases, under certain circumstances, might be taken on second appeal to the Council of the Indies. The practice in these investigations may be best understood by noting the development of the law regarding them, for, as we have already noted, the residencia was the product of years of administrative experience, during which various methods were tried, and rejected or adopted as they were found respectively inadvisable or efficacious. The earliest cédula on the subject, that of November 17, 1526, ordered that the audiencia should try all appeals from judges of residencia, wherein the amount involved did not exceed 600 pesos. A law of Philip II, dated 1563, forbade viceroys, presidents, and audiencias from sending judges of residencia or other investigators against judges of provinces, unless complaint had been lodged against those officials by a person willing to post bonds and pay the costs in case the charges proved to be false. [269] The cédula of September 3, 1565, laid down the principle that the residencias of officers appointed by viceroys and presidents should be taken by commission of those who appointed them. [270] As regularly appointed corregidores and alcaldes mayores held royal commissions, [271] they did not, according to this law, give residencia to judges appointed by the governor. The Council of the Indies, therefore, should name judges to investigate the official conduct of its own appointees. As a matter of fact, however, the Council delegated this authority to the governor and audiencia. This latter practice was authorized by a clause in the cédula of September 3, 1565, which provided that residencias of the officials referred to should be taken under supervision of the audiencias in the districts wherein the officials resided. This meant that while the audiencia was not to interfere in the taking of the residencia itself, the tribunal was to see that the laws regarding residencias were faithfully executed. The law of March 11, 1591, ordered that if the conduct of corregidores, alcaldes mayores, and other magistrates demanded that their residencias should be taken before the completion of their term of office, the viceroys, presidents, or governors should appoint judges for the purpose. [272] Nothing was said in this cédula relative to the authority of the audiencia in this matter, but the law of January 19, 1608, gave to the audiencia the right to try residencia cases on appeal from the sentences of these special judges. The laws of June 3 and June 19, 1620, provided that the governor and audiencia should decide in acuerdo whether the residencia of a gobernador, corregidor, or an alcalde mayor should be taken. Neither the governor nor the audiencia was to have complete authority in the matter, but each should participate, the audiencia assisting in the decision as to whether the case merited investigation and the governor making out the commission and appointing the judge if an investigation were necessary. The audiencia, alone, was authorized to appoint judges of residencia for judicial officers only. [273] The interference of the audiencia in the residencias of governors, corregidores, alcaldes mayores, and other justices and ministers provided by royal appointment was definitely forbidden by the cédula of April 20, 1639, as this jurisdiction was declared to belong to the Council of the Indies. [274] Although we have evidence that the Council did exercise such jurisdiction, it was always on review of cases appealed from the audiencias. While the above prohibition forbade the audiencia from taking the residencias of these officials it did not restrain the tribunal from participating in the decision as to whether a residencia should be taken, or in the review of the autos of residencia. An illustration of the intervention of the Council of the Indies in residencias of alcaldes mayores is shown in the case of Josef Tormento, alcalde of Caragara. On June 6, 1786, he was sentenced in residencia to a pecuniary penalty, perpetual deprivation of office, and two years' exile from Manila. This sentence was confirmed in review by the audiencia on October 8 of the same year. The Council modified this sentence, however, approving the fine, but cancelling the other provisions. [275] In 1803 the incumbent of the same post, Antonio Mateo, was incarcerated by order of the audiencia, pending investigation of the charge made against him that he had used the funds of his office for private trade. It was shown, however, that this official knew the location of a quicksilver deposit of great value, whereupon the governor had him removed from prison, ordering the suspension of the charges against him, notwithstanding the protests of the oidores. The fiscal concurred in the action of the governor. The audiencia appealed the case to the Council of the Indies, alleging conspiracy between the governor and the fiscal. The Council, however, on examination of the case, approved their action, ordered the charges to be dismissed, and gave directions that the alcalde mayor should be restored to his former position or given another of equal category as soon as possible. [276] Although the cédula of August 24, 1799, gave the audiencia the right to conduct the residencias of corregidores and alcaldes mayores, this case involved certain interesting features which should be pointed out in this connection. In the first place, it shows the manner in which the Council of the Indies exercised ultimate authority in matters of residencia. Again, it reveals the influence which the fiscal and even the governor might have in determining whether suit should be brought, [277] and finally it indicates that expediency might constitute an important factor in the ultimate results of a case of this kind. The practice of granting jurisdiction over the residencia of an official to the authority that appointed him seems to have been followed repeatedly. This principle was enunciated in the cédula of August 20, 1758, but on August 8, 1764, a royal decree authorized viceroys and presidents to name judges of residencia for all officials holding royal appointments, with the condition that the autos should be forwarded to the Council of the Indies. This law was repealed on April 23, 1769. [278] The cédula of August 24, 1799, which has been mentioned several times in this chapter, was a reform of the greatest importance in the history of the residencia. Prior to its promulgation, all officials had to give residencia, but this law abolished that universal requirement. It provided that residencias of corregidores, alcaldes mayores, and subdelegate-intendants should be taken only when charges had been made against them. This might occur at any time during their term of office, or at the close of their service. These investigations had to be concluded within four months, but if charges were not made against an official his past record was not investigated. The length of time consumed in all residencias except those of viceroys was limited to four months. The period allotted for these investigations was divided into two parts. [279] During the first half, edicts or notices of residencia were posted throughout the district of the official concerned. These were printed in Spanish and in the common dialect, so that natives and others concerned might read and know that the official was giving up his post and that charges might be brought against him, setting forth any misconduct, undue harshness, tyranny or dishonesty of which he had been guilty during his term of office. These notices invited them to register any complaints which they might wish to make and gave them sixty days in which to do it. At the close of this period the judge of residencia opened an investigation in the town wherein the official under examination had resided, usually the capital of the province. The actual trial of residencia might consume sixty days, or it might be perfunctory in its character and occupy a much shorter period, the entire question of time depending on the amount of evidence presented against the retiring official. On the other hand, as we have seen, the residencia of a governor might occupy ten years. If the judge were taking a residencia in the provinces he was frequently delayed in arriving at his post of duty, owing to the pressure of other business, or to the uncertainty of transportation facilities. In that event, he could not open the judicial investigation until the allotted period had almost transpired. In the trial, two distinct lines of investigation were usually pursued: charges which had been made against the official were investigated and the records of his office were examined. The discovery was frequently made through this procedure that the official had embezzled money belonging to the government, usually investing it in private ventures. The inquiry might show that he had been careless in the execution of the duties of his office, remiss in his attention to encomiendas, particularly neglecting the Indians thereon, or too ignorant and incompetent to try properly, record, and transmit the autos of the cases which had come to him in first instance. These defects might not become apparent until they were revealed in this examination. The judge of residencia would seem to have been well occupied during the time that he was conducting the investigation. He received and reviewed all charges made. In addition to auditing the records of the office, he had to pursue inquiries as to the truth of these charges. He examined witnesses both for and against the defendant, and was supposed to give the official under investigation every opportunity to defend himself. He was relieved, however, of the trouble and responsibility of checking up the financial accounts of the official under residencia. This important matter was turned over to the treasury officials, who ascertained shortages, and held the bondsmen of the official under investigation responsible. [280] The judges of residencia, and the oidores making investigations and reviewing cases of residencia were ordered to confine their examinations to "criminal and legal matters and charges which result against those under residencia." [281] After all the evidence had been taken and the case had been duly tried, the judge of residencia was authorized to render sentence. Sentences were executed by the examining judge if the penalty did not exceed twenty-five thousand maravedís. The latter cases were not appealable. If the fine were less than two hundred ducats and the defendant desired to appeal, he was obliged to pay the fine or deposit the amount thereof. His case would then be reviewed by the audiencia and in order to effect this, notice of appeal had to be submitted in sufficient time to permit the record of the entire case to be reduced to writing. If, on review, the audiencia found that the defendant was not guilty of the charges which had been brought against him, the money taken as a fine or deposit was restored. If the amount of the fine exceeded two hundred ducats, or if the defendant had been convicted of serious crimes, the judge was authorized to take the proper and necessary steps for the detention of the prisoner and the seizure of his property pending a new trial in the higher tribunal. [282] Cases involving more than one thousand pesos could be carried to the Council of the Indies. A thoroughly typical case, illustrating all of the ramifications of a provincial official's residencia, was that of Francisco Fernández Zéndera, alcalde mayor and military captain of the province of Ilocos. [283] It was investigated first by a judge appointed by the acuerdo, it was reviewed by the audiencia and it was finally carried to the Council of the Indies. It was characteristic in another sense, namely, in that twelve years passed before the matter was settled. After Zéndera had occupied his post three years, complaints against him were brought to the attention of the fiscal. In his capacity as prosecuting official and as protector of the Indians, he made a motion before the audiencia in acuerdo, that a judge of residencia should be sent to conduct an investigation of Zéndera's official conduct. The following charges against Zéndera had been sent to the governor, and on the basis of these, the fiscal, governor, and audiencia decided to conduct the investigation: First, Zéndera had compelled natives to work for him on his own estates, building houses, granaries, fences, tilling the soil and planting crops, from two hundred to three hundred men having worked for him continually, without pay or food; second, the arbitrary methods of this alcalde mayor left the natives without money with which to buy their food or to pay their tribute; third, not only were the men forced to labor, but the women were obliged to sew, spin and embroider without pay, and the product of their labor was confiscated by the alcalde mayor. The audiencia and the governor, in acuerdo, having taken note of these charges, commissioned Angel Moguel, chief secretary of the government, to conduct the residencia of the alcalde. Moguel was put in possession of the necessary documents and departed at once for Vigán, the head city of the province. On November 7, 1782, he posted notices to the effect that Zéndera's residencia was to be taken, calling on the residents to make formal charges against him. Moguel suspended Zéndera from office and accepted 20,000 pesos from two of his friends as bonds to cover the residencia, this sum offsetting the valuation of the properties for which Zéndera was responsible. These were additional to other bonds which Zéndera had posted on his accession to office. For some unassigned reason, only twenty-five days were allowed for the filing of complaints, but during this time eighty-eight charges were made, most of which were variations of those mentioned above. Zéndera was said to have been uncompromising in his administration of justice; he had imposed excessive fines; he had imprisoned the natives without giving them opportunities for defense; he had refused to allow them to appeal their cases. [284] Not being a lawyer, he lacked sufficient qualifications for the proper conduct of trials; moreover he had refused to employ a teniente or asesor. He had failed to supervise and enforce the instruction of Spanish, and he had done nothing to assist in the education of the natives. Zéndera was charged with having suppressed all commerce except his own, going so far as to arrest merchants of other provinces who came to Ilocos to trade. This he had done to secure his own monopoly in commercial matters. He had, moreover, suppressed the trade of the Ilocanos with the Igorrotes. He had failed to segregate the men from the women in the provincial prison. It was said that he had neglected to publish the governor's edicts (bandos) from Manila. He had shown partiality to Spanish priests in preference to the native clergy. He was charged with having taken rice as tribute at a low price, turning it over to the treasury officials at a higher rate, thereby making great profits for himself. Zéndera was found guilty of almost every charge made against him. The sentence of residencia was pronounced by the judge commissioned for the purpose on August 13, 1782. The defendant was fined 8000 pesos and sentenced to deprivation of office for a period of eight years. [285] The audiencia, in turn, reviewed the case, and that tribunal, on May 20, 1783, finding the autos of the case incomplete, ordered Moguel back to Vigán for a second time to complete the investigation. The judgment of residencia after this second investigation was made was the same as before, and the case was carried to the Council of the Indies on November 7, 1785. It seems that in this case the audiencia was somewhat slow in granting the appeal, for on February 19, 1788, a cédula was expedited which ordered the audiencia to forward all the autos in its possession bearing on the case. The final judgment of the Council of the Indies was rendered March 23, 1794. The fine of 8000 pesos was reduced to 3000 pesos, and the portion of the sentence which had ordered a deprivation of office was remitted altogether. [286] The cédula of August 24, 1799, already referred to, greatly altered the applicability of the residencias to provincial as well as insular officials. Its greatest importance was due to the fact that it authorized investigations of corregidores, alcaldes mayores, and sub-delegate intendants only when charges were made against them; otherwise it was assumed that their official conduct had been satisfactory, and accordingly no residencias were held. Before the officials could be transferred to other posts they were obliged to show certificates of clearance from former positions. The audiencia was given final jurisdiction over the residencias of these officials, with inhibition of appeal. At the same time the tribunal was denied jurisdiction in any instance over the residencias of viceroys, captains-general, presidents, governors, treasury officials, oidores, and intendants. [287] After the suppression of the Council of the Indies on March 24, 1834, the latter cases were finished in the Supreme Tribunal of Justice, and that tribunal continued to exercise this jurisdiction till the close of the nineteenth century. [288] The cédula above referred to abolished the residencias of tenientes letrados, alcaldes ordinarios, regidores, clerks, procurators, syndics, alguaciles, and other minor officials. In place of the formal investigation and judgment after the term of office was completed, the audiencia was given more complete control over their official acts, with the duty of seeing that justice was administered, jails inspected and kept clean, prisoners given a speedy trial and not molested with undue exactions, and the police supervised. The tribunal was also empowered to see that the ayuntamientos conducted their elections impartially and that the municipal officials executed their duties faithfully. In this way the formal investigation at the close of the term of these minor officials was replaced by a more efficient supervision of their acts by the audiencia. The constitutional reforms of the early nineteenth century gave to the audiencia original jurisdiction over the trial of judges of first instance, with appeal to the Supreme Tribunal of Justice. This authority was suppressed in 1815, and continued so until 1835, when it was restored to the audiencias of the colonies. Although the reform of August 24, 1799, recognized the residencias of alcaldes mayores, tenientes, and corregidores, merely transferring jurisdiction over these to the audiencias, it would seem that this investigation retained less of its former severity from this time onwards. In fact, some authorities infer that the residencia was abolished after 1799. [289] This was not the case, however, as the residencia was recognized by laws promulgated as lately as 1870. [290] The audiencia also had jurisdiction over the residencias of galleon officials. These had to submit to residencia at the termination of each voyage. An oidor was designated by the governor for the inspection of the ship, for the examination of its papers, for the consideration of complaints against the officers of ill-treatment of passengers and crews during the voyage. [291] An investigation was conducted on the occasion of the loss of a ship. Then a thorough inquiry was made in an endeavor to discover negligence on the part of the admiral, general, or other officials. The exercise of a similar authority over cases involving the loss of galleons has been discussed in the preceding chapter. In pursuance of this authority, Magistrate Torralba was commissioned in 1710 to take the residencia of the officers of the galleon "Nuestra Señora del Rosario y San Vicente Ferrer", which was wrecked in the Straits of San Bernardino on the voyage from Acapulco in 1709. [292] As great diligence had been shown by them in landing the treasure and sending it overland, the matter was dropped. A similar investigation was conducted in 1743 in the case of the galleon "Cobadonga", which was captured by the British. The charge was made that neither the "Cobadonga" nor her convoy, "El Pilar", had offered any resistance, and that the latter had deserted the galleon and had taken refuge in flight. [293] The officers were arrested and thrown into prison on charges brought by the fiscal, but they were cleared in the investigation which proved that the ships were not in a condition to fight. The various laws and cases which have been cited in this chapter show that the trial of residencia of captains-general, treasury officials, oidores, intendants, alcaldes mayores, and alcaldes ordinarios was a judicial function over which the audiencia had a large share of authority. It is safe to say that no residencia was ever taken in the Philippines, after the audiencia had been established there, in which that tribunal did not exercise some degree of authority. As the laws and regulations of the residencia varied at different times, the extent of the jurisdiction of the audiencia in this matter was not always the same. The audiencia either assisted in the examination of the charges or in the designation of the judge. The magistrate selected was usually an oidor. Oidores were liable to designation to conduct inquiries, and the audiencia, as a tribunal, tried these cases in review. The tribunal exercised supervision over the work of the investigating judge. The case was either finished in the audiencia, or reviewed there and appealed to the Council of the Indies through the action of the audiencia. The Council of the Indies was the supreme arbiter in all cases, prior to 1799. Subsequently the Council, or the Supreme Tribunal of Justice after 1834, retained final jurisdiction over the residencias of the higher officials only. In the residencias of provincial or local officials the jurisdiction of the audiencia was final. CHAPTER V THE SEMI-JUDICIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTIONS OF THE AUDIENCIA. Aside from the activities which have been described, the magistrates of the audiencia rendered important services in various administrative capacities. From the beginning until the end of the eighteenth century the oidores were assigned to special commissions or judgeships with jurisdiction over such miscellaneous secular and ecclesiastical matters as did not come readily under any other department or authority. In practically all cases these functions involved the oidores in their individual capacities rather than as magistrates of a tribunal of justice. Though their work was independent of the audiencia, their decisions were reviewed in the audiencia in many cases. In short, it may be said that when any unforeseen or unclassified matter came up for solution, it was usually assigned to a magistrate of the audiencia. The exercise of these extra functions was especially characteristic of the history of the audiencia down to 1785, when the reforms of the intendancy were introduced throughout the Spanish colonial empire. These important reforms grouped these administrative functions about a central head, the superintendent, and lessened the duties of the oidores in these matters, confining the magistrates more particularly to judicial duties. It may be said, however, that the oidores exercised these extra functions practically till the end of the eighteenth century, which period comprised the greater part of the existence of the colonial audiencia. The laws of the Indies empowered the president of the audiencia to designate oidores to serve on these commissions. Additional compensation and travelling expenses were given for these extra services. [294] The president was forbidden to send magistrates on commissions to places outside the district of the audiencia, which, of course, would have been impossible in the Philippines. Appointment to some of these commissions was considered by the magistrates as highly desirable. Frequent disagreements arose over these appointments, and the king was obliged to issue pacificatory cédulas, from time to time, to allay the discord and strife which arose over the appointments to the more lucrative of these places. The principle was laid down repeatedly that special commissions should be assigned fairly among the ministers, and that in their distribution only the aptitude of the magistrates for the particular tasks should be considered. [295] The term of service for these special posts was a year. No change was allowed in the incumbency of a particular commission unless on account of death, sickness, or removal for incompetency. Appointments to these extra duties were made in the royal name, and appointees were obliged to make reports to the court on the termination of the commission held. Magistrates were held responsible for their service in this capacity in their residencias. In large audiencias such as Mexico, Lima, and Buenos Ayres in the eighteenth century, many commissions of this character were served by regular commissioners who held no other posts, but in the smaller colonies such as the Philippines, Puerto Rico, and Cuba, they were held by oidores when the duties connected with the commissions did not entail sufficient work to occupy all the time of the appointee. The most important and profitable commissions were awarded to the senior magistrate of the audiencia. He was charged permanently with the duty of seeing that all the decrees, fines, and decisions of the Council of the Indies were executed, collections being made in accordance with the instructions of that body. These included fines imposed in residencia and other penalties exacted on different occasions by the audiencia, or by the Council of the Indies. Among the latter were confiscations of property and fines for smuggling, for the illegal exportation of silver, and for the evasion of the king's fifth, [296] the alcabala and the almojarifazgo. The senior magistrate was authorized to retain as compensation three per cent of the amount collected, and he was ordered to give account to the audiencia of collections made by him in accordance with the law. [297] Another magistrate was asesor of the Santa Cruzada, and it was his duty to give legal advice and to act as special attorney for that department of ecclesiastical activity. [298] The president, fiscal, and the senior oidor concurred in the acuerdos which treated of matters pertaining to real hacienda. [299] This was known as the junta ordinaria. A tribunal of appeals above the junta ordinaria was created later, and in its activities, also, the magistrates of the audiencia participated. [300] The audiencia also heard judicially certain cases of appeal involving the royal treasury, but magistrates who had participated in the junta mentioned above were not allowed to hear again the cases in which their previous vote had been given. Each oidor served in turn for the period of six months on the board of auctions. [301] Magistrates were appointed by the governor, yearly, in turn, to serve as inspectors of the government. In this capacity they were expected to examine and report on the administration of justice and on the work of the audiencia, the royal treasury and the officials connected therewith, visitors, provincial officials and those of the city of Manila. The inspecting magistrate was authorized to examine the records of these officials and to use any other legitimate means in performance of his special duties. [302] An oidor was designated by the president to make periodical inspections in the provinces. This official had to attend to a variety of matters while on visits of inspection. He was required to make a census of the towns, and inquire into the prosperity of the inhabitants; to audit the accounts of the town officials, and to see whether the provincial governor or magistrate had been faithful in the execution of his duties. He was supposed to visit the encomiendas and note the treatment of the Indians thereon, to find out whether the natives were properly and sufficiently instructed, or whether they were permitted to remain in idolatry and idleness. He inspected the churches and monasteries, seeing that they contained the requisite number of religious and no more, and noting whether the natives under the charge of the ecclesiastics were well treated. In the same way he inspected the curacies of the towns. The visiting oidor was especially required to give careful attention to the corregidores and alcaldes mayores, inspecting their judicial and administrative activities and holding them responsible for any irregularities, especially with regard to the treatment of the Indians. The visitor was required to inspect inns and taverns, to ascertain whether they observed the regular tariffs, and whether the drugs sold in the provinces were of good quality. He also inspected highways and bridges. If the visitor found anything wrong he was authorized to take immediate steps, on his own responsibility, to remedy the defects, reporting any action taken to the audiencia without delay. As seen in the last chapter, the immediate consequence of the visit was frequently the residencia of the official inspected. The visitor was provided with sufficient funds to defray his expenses, so that he would not be a burden on the encomenderos or Indians. The president of the audiencia was forbidden to order visits to the same province more frequently than once every three years, unless, after an investigation, such action was declared necessary by vote of the acuerdo. [303] The audiencia exercised supervision over certain matters of church finance. These included tithes, the funds of temporalities, and of certain charitable societies, and jurisdiction over the adjustment of estates and properties left by deceased prelates. In connection with the latter was the duty of auditing the accounts of benefices which were subject to the royal patronage whenever a transfer of occupants was made. These matters, though miscellaneous in their character, and accordingly pertinent here, may be reserved for a subsequent chapter which will be dedicated to a discussion of the relations of the audiencia and the Church. An oidor in the Philippines served as judge of medias anatas. [304] These taxes were levied upon the salaries of all officials of royal appointment, except ecclesiastics, these exactions varying in amount from one-half the first year's income to one-tenth of the gross salary of each official. The cédula of June 2, 1632, [305] ordered the judge-commissioner of medias anatas to surrender the money which he had collected to the treasury officials who in turn were to transmit it to Spain. [306] More definite information as to the nature of the duties of the judge-commissioner of these funds may be gathered from the cédula of December 14, 1776, by which Oidor Félix Díaz Quejada y Obrero was appointed as commissioner of medias anatas in the Philippines. This magistrate was authorized to retain four per cent of all that he collected. This percentage, the cédula stated, was the same as was paid to the commissioner of medias anatas of New Spain. The cédula ordered Quejada to collect this tax from all royal appointees, but not from governors of towns or Indian caciques who were elected yearly, and who, of course, were not royal appointees. Appeals from judgments of the commissioner of medias anatas were to be entertained in the Council of the Indies only, and not in the audiencia. [307] It has been pointed out already in this chapter that the effect of the reforms of the intendancy was to limit the jurisdiction of the oidores over special commissions. This is especially true of those relating to finance. An illustration of this is shown in the disputes which occurred between the oidores and the governor, over the conservatorships of betel, [308] wine, tobacco, playing-cards, and cockpits. When these sources of income developed in the latter part of the seventeenth century, their supervision, as usual, had been conferred on oidores with title of asesores or jueces-conservadores (judge conservators). [309] This was done in disregard of the laws of the Indies, wherein was expressed the desirability of conferring these assessorships, if possible, on properly qualified officials, other than oidores. The magistrate holding a commission was to attend to the legal duties and adjudicate all suits in connection therewith. The latter regulation was made in order that when the cases were brought to trial the magistrate might not be incapacitated by having rendered decisions in them ahead. The law continued in the following strain: when a case so urgent and extraordinary offers itself that an oidor must be appointed, warning is hereby given that ... the same magistrate who tried the case originally may not be judge. [310] This law conceded that oidores might serve when other magistrates were not available. Governor Marquina, superintendente subdelegado de real hacienda from 1789 to 1793, refused to permit oidores to serve as asesores of the monopolies of betel, wine, and tobacco. These magistrates claimed, however, that they were entitled to the appointments, since they had occupied these positions before July 26, 1784, the date of the creation of the intendancy in the Philippines. They conceded that they had been relieved of jurisdiction over these rents on that date, and that the authority formerly exercised by them had been assumed by the intendant. [311] By the cédula of November 23, 1787, however, the intendancy had been abolished and the government restored to "the state and condition which had previously existed." [312] This would mean that the oidores should again hold these asesorías, and on the basis of this reasoning they demanded that the governor should return them. The oidores did not tamely submit to a deprivation of their posts as asesores on the occasion of the establishment of the intendancy. They complained to the king, alleging that these appointments belonged to them by their own right. The king inquired of Governor Basco y Vargas why the oidores had not been designated for these duties. The governor replied that the supervision of the rents had been assumed by the intendant, but that their direction belonged at that time to the governor and superintendent, by virtue of the cédula of November 23, 1787. [313] He stated that the oidores had no right of their own to these asesorías, since the faculty of appointing asesores had been conferred on the governor (or viceroy) by the laws of the Indies, [314] and in times past governors had appointed lawyers who were not oidores. There was therefore no obligation on the part of the governor to give these places to oidores; indeed, the laws of the Indies had emphasized the undesirability of doing so. [315] Basco y Vargas, in pursuance of this conception of his rights and duties, combined all of these asesorías under the direction of one office, placing them under the orders of his own asesor, leaving oidores in charge of each minor asesoría, except that of tobacco, which was placed under the immediate direction of the governor's asesor. The king approved this action, giving the new official a new title, that of asesor de todo lo directivo y lo económico de la superintendencia subdelegada de la real hacienda de Filipinas. [316] The local authority appointed Magistrate Castillo y Negrete to this new position at once, but the king, on the ground that the law [317] forbade an oidor to hold such an office, disapproved of the appointment and gave the place to Rufino de Rivera, who had formerly been auditor de guerra and asesor de gobierno. As soon as Governor Marquina assumed office, he relieved the magistrates of the audiencia of all share in the administration of these monopolies, combining all these branches of real hacienda under the asesor above mentioned. On August 3, 1791, the audiencia protested against the acts of the governor, basing its claims to a continuance of authority on the cédula of March 20, 1790, by which the king had authorized the oidores to administer all the monopolies except tobacco. On August 16, 1791, Governor Marquina answered the complaint of the audiencia in a memorial of his own, in which he set forth his position in summarized form, giving a history of the entire contention, and defining his position with precision and clarity. [318] He claimed that the cédulas which had been issued up to that time had recognized the right of the governor to dispose of these asesorías, which did not and never had belonged to the oidores by their own right. As superintendent of real hacienda, he (the governor) was judge-conservator of all the asesorías, and by cédula of March 20, 1790, he had been authorized to control them through his asesor. The latter official had also been ordered to administer the rent of tobacco directly as the agent of the governor and to supervise the others in the governor's name. The oidores had been forbidden to hold these positions, except under exceptional circumstances, which, in Marquina's judgment, did not exist at this time, [319] since there was present in the colony a special asesor whose duty it was to supervise these monopolies. The audiencia would have to try certain cases on appeal as a judicial body, and oidores who had already rendered decisions as judge-conservators could not justly render decisions when the same cases were appealed. He declared that he had the approval of the king in his contention, and was therefore confident of his position. The governor's will prevailed, and the magistrates were deprived of the commissions which they had formerly held; these were given over to regular officials of real hacienda. Contentious cases, however, that did not pertain exclusively to finance were tried on appeal in the audiencia and that body exercised regular, but not special, jurisdiction in them thereafter. One of the most important offices which the oidores were called on to perform was that of juez de difuntos. The duties of this office consisted largely in the administration of the funds and property of persons who died intestate, or without heirs in the colony. This work was entrusted to the colonial audiencia as a body in 1526, and any judge therein might be delegated from the tribunal for the adjustment of an estate. The first law providing for a special administrator was proclaimed at Valladolid on April 16, 1550. It stated that many of the heirs of persons who died in the colonies had been defrauded of their rightful dues by the carelessness, omission, illegal procedure, and usurpation of the ministers who had diverted the property to their own uses; this condition of affairs made reform imperative. Viceroys and presidents of royal audiencias, while retaining power of removal for cause, were commanded henceforth to name, at the beginning of each year, an oidor from the local audiencia to act as juez de difuntos. [320] This judge was authorized to collect, administer, rent, sell, and have general supervision over the property of deceased persons to the same extent that the audiencia previously had. The acts of the judge were appealable to the audiencia of the district wherein he officiated. On December 15, 1609, a law was proclaimed by Philip III which extended the term of this judge from one to two years. The early laws provided no extra salary for the juez de difuntos. It was prescribed that his decisions should be respected by the audiencia and by the other officials of the government, the viceroys and presidents being especially instructed not to allow any other official to usurp his functions. In case the juez de difuntos should fail to execute his duties, or should exceed his powers, it was the duty of the fiscal to bring the abuse to the attention of the audiencia, and that tribunal was supposed to see that the proper methods were enforced. The jurisdiction of this special magistrate was to extend to the settling of the estates of intestates, and of testates leaving property to persons in Spain. His authority was valid over the property of deceased officials, merchants, and encomenderos, and it might be extended to the cases of foreigners. He also assisted in the disposal of property left by clerics. When the latter died intestate, the proceeds of their estates were added to the fund known as the bienes de difuntos. No distinction was made between property left by them and that left by civil employees of the government or private citizens. If these priests had made testaments, it was the duty of the juez de difuntos to see that the property reached the donees without the interference of the prelates. [321] As in other cases noted in this and in former chapters, so in the administration of the estates left by intestate decedents the laws seem to have undergone considerable change. In 1526, Charles V ordered that such estates were to be administered under the supervision of the audiencia. In 1550, the place of special juez de difuntos was created in each audiencia, the post to be filled by a magistrate designated by the president. In 1653, Philip IV added to the importance of the office by decreeing that all intestate cases should be administered by a special juez de difuntos, irrespective as to whether the heirs were in Spain, or at the place where the death took place. [322] This law provided that if children or descendants were left whose legitimacy was unquestioned, the heirs being in the colony, or if a will legally attested and witnessed were left, the case was to be settled in the ordinary courts. If there were doubt, however, as to the validity of the claims of persons representing themselves as descendants, or if there were no heirs, the case would then be administered by the juez de difuntos. Settlements made by the ordinary justices were not reviewed in the royal audiencia. The authority accorded them frequently afforded pretexts for their intervention in cases which should have been settled by the juez de difuntos, particularly when heirs were left in Spain and in other colonies. A number of disagreements arose over this point, but all doubt was conclusively settled by the cédula of January 31, 1772, which awarded such jurisdiction to the juez de difuntos. [323] This was confirmed by the law of September 28, 1797. Foreigners residing outside the dominions were not allowed to inherit property left to them in the colonies, even though they were lineal descendants. [324] Heirs or others claiming property left by deceased persons must appear in person, or have others appear for them, properly authorized, and must prove conclusively their rights as heirs or creditors. The cédula of September 28, 1797, was a codification and a reclassification of all previous laws on the subject of this jurisdiction. The provisions of this law, briefly stated, were as follows: (1) These judges should not under any circumstances have jurisdiction over property left by will, or without will, when the heirs were present and when there was no question of their right to the property. (2) In order that these judges have power of intervention, it must be well known or appear by judicial process that either all the heirs or the greater number of them were absent. (3) They were not to have jurisdiction over property left by Indians or caciques. (4) They should not usually have authority to settle up the estates or property of native clerics, because their heirs would presumably be present. These cases were therefore subject to the jurisdiction of the ordinary courts, unless it were shown that there were heirs in Spain. Under no circumstances should the ecclesiastical authorities have intervention in these cases. (5) When the heirs were present, the audiencia was ordered to enforce the law which forbade the intervention of both the juez de difuntos and the ordinary judge. [325] In these cases the heirs were allowed to assume their property intact, without its being sold and thereby costs incurred. (6) The practice which had hitherto been followed by the juez de difuntos of diverting a fifth of the property of those who died intestate for the repose of the souls of the dead should cease from that time onward, and the proceeds of said property should be handed over without deduction to the heirs and relatives of the deceased, in accordance with the cédula of June 20, 1766. [326] (7) The juez de difuntos was forbidden to intervene in the settlement of estates or property left to heirs by will. [327] It would appear, then, that the oidor detailed as juez de difuntos had jurisdiction over cases of intestacy, over the settlement of property when no heirs were apparent, or when there was doubt as to the existence of heirs, and in cases where the designated testamentary donees were outside the colony. The ordinary justices administered estates in two capacities, namely, when testaments were to be executed, the heirs being present, or when they acted as agents for the juez de difuntos. The latter was privileged to call upon the corregidores, alcaldes mayores, and other ordinary justices to execute provisions in the provinces, and these officials were obliged, when so designated, to settle estates subject to the supervision of the juez. [328] When the heirs were resident in Spain, or in some colony other than the Philippines, the estates of deceased persons were sold and the money was set aside to be remitted to Spain. The collective sum of these properties, sold and unsold, was designated as the bienes de difuntos. [329] At stated periods the juez de difuntos was required to turn over the funds that he had collected, or received in the execution of his duties, to the oficiales reales, first deducting three per cent of their gross amount for his services. [330] His accounts, which were sent to the Council of the Indies, were also audited by these officials, and the audiencia likewise held him accountable for any abuses or errors other than financial. He was also held responsible in his residencia. The fiscal was his prosecutor in case of suit. The juez de difuntos, on his part, was authorized to require reports from the agents and administrators who served him in the provinces, and all necessary safeguards were taken for his protection. [331] Theoretically, the juez de difuntos, acting through the oficiales reales, sent such money as he had collected to the Casa de Contratación of Seville, or, after June 18, 1790, the date of the extinction of that body, to the juez de arribadas in Cádiz. [332] Thence it was distributed among the heirs in various parts of Spain, or, in case no heirs were found, it was to remain in a fund by itself, until otherwise appropriated or disposed of by the crown. The money was sent at the risk of the heirs, eighteen per cent of the gross amount being deducted to pay the costs of transfer. [333] In actual practice, however, the funds derived from the Philippines were retained at Manila, itemized accounts of them being forwarded to Acapulco, the proper amount being deducted there from the annual subsidy. [334] This rendered unnecessary the actual transfer of money. The juez de difuntos in Mexico received the funds from the Philippines, together with reports and accounts relating thereto, and remitted them to Spain. There occurred many instances in which this magistrate in Mexico found mistakes in the reports rendered by his subordinate in Manila. A great deal of criticism was made from time to time, of alleged irregularities in the administration of these funds in the Philippines; in fact, successive royal cédulas repeatedly charged the Philippine officials with maladministration. [335] The general superintendent of finance, Aparici, in a report to the Council, stated on July 19, 1797, that these funds had never been properly accounted for, and that glaring defects--even dishonesty, had always existed. [336] These faults, he alleged, were owing to the fact that the funds were not directly administered, but were paid into the treasury of Mexico, and that because of this roundabout method direct control could not be exercised. Although this high official pointed out these defects and made recommendations for the betterment of the service, no change was made, and the funds continued to be remitted to Mexico until 1815, when the suspension of the regular galleon eliminated the possibility of this practice. [337] The juez de difuntos was frequently opposed in the exercise of his special jurisdiction by other officials of the colony. Many cases involving these conflicts of jurisdiction were appealed to the Council of the Indies. Among the most frequent were the quarrels which took place between the captain-general and the juez de difuntos over the question of the special military jurisdiction of the latter, and the claim of the juez de difuntos to administer the property of military and galleon officials. For example, on July 6, 1757, the juez appealed to the Council for jurisdiction over the property of a deceased galleon official on the basis of the rights conceded to him by the laws of the Indies; [338] the governor claimed the right to administer this property on the ground that the galleon officials were appointed by him, and that they were held by the laws of the Indies to be under the military jurisdiction. This case was decided in favor of the juez de difuntos, and may be considered as having established a precedent for his subsequent jurisdiction over such cases. [339] Probably the most notable case of conflict between the civil and military jurisdictions and one which involved the juez de difuntos occurred at the time of the death of the lieutenant-governor and king's lieutenant, Pedro Sarrio. The latter had left his property by will to his brother, the Marqués de Algorja, a resident of Alicante. He had appointed a resident of Manila as executor. The governor claimed that the right to administer the property belonged to the executor. The juez de difuntos, on the ground that Sarrio had left heirs in Spain, contended that the funds should be administered by him, as the executor did not have authority to transmit the property to Spain. This case was carried to the Council of the Indies; no record appears of its ultimate solution, but it is illustrative of the commonly accepted principle that the juez de difuntos should have authority over the administration of all property which had to be transmitted to Spain for distribution among heirs. [340] The governor's contention against it was based on the fact that Sarrio was a military official. As we have already seen, the law of August 29, 1798, authorized the settlement of the property of soldiers by special military courts. [341] Other sources of frequent dispute were the respective claims of the juez de difuntos and the oficiales reales for jurisdiction over property left by persons who were indebted to the royal treasury at the time of their death. On the occasion of the death of the corregidores of Tondo and Ilocos, in 1776 and 1778, respectively, without having made wills, the oficiales reales took steps to make an immediate seizure of the property of the deceased officials. They demanded that all documents and papers pertaining to the cases should be surrendered at once into their hands in order that the amount owing to the government might be collected. Governor Basco y Vargas interposed on the ground that since these officials had died intestate, the settlement of their property should be effected by the juez de difuntos; it being incumbent upon the oficiales reales to present the claims to the judge. [342] Shortly after this decision had been rendered, the alcalde mayor of Tayabas died, leaving a deficit of 7000 pesos, and the officials of the royal treasury immediately brought suit in the audiencia on the basis of the laws of the Indies for jurisdiction in the case prior to that of the juez de difuntos. They alleged that the law provided that the treasury officials should have precedence in collections, and that debts due to the real hacienda should be settled prior to all others. Moreover, they claimed that all officials should assist them in making these collections and that no restrictions should be placed upon their activities. Further evidence in support of the contentions of the treasury officials was submitted in the substance of the royal cédula of April 23, 1770, which declared that these judges should be entrusted exclusively with the collection of royal funds. "Furthermore," the cédula stated, "if any case shall arise which pertains to finance and at the same time to the juez de difuntos, the latter may not make the advocation, because, however favorable may be his jurisdiction, that of the royal treasury is more favorable." [343] The oficiales reales insisted that they should not be required to go before the juez de difuntos for any purpose, since the laws of the Indies [344] gave them the power of inspecting the accounts of the juez de difuntos and of keeping and administering these funds. [345] The more recent cédula of October 13, 1780, had decreed that the accounts of the juez de difuntos should be approved by the treasury officials, and on this basis they were able to advance claims to seniority. This dispute, though brought for adjudication before the audiencia, was not settled by the tribunal. The evidence pertaining to the case was collected and referred to the Council on December 22, 1786. The cédula which finally disposed of the matter was issued May 4, 1794, in the following terms: It is indisputable that the ministers of our real hacienda are authorized to have jurisdiction over all debtors of my royal treasury ... with preference to the ordinary jurisdiction of the juez de difuntos, or to the judge commissioned to settle property of intestates or to pay creditors; ... the accounts of my real hacienda shall be settled by my royal judges before the juez de difuntos may have cognizance. [346] By this decree it was definitely established that the treasury officials should have precedence over the regular judges in the settlements of estates of officials and individuals against whom the royal treasury had claims. After the demands of the government were paid, those of private individuals might be settled, and it was ordered that the juez de difuntos, as the champion of individual claims, should always give precedence to the oficiales reales who represented the interests of the government. The organization for the administration of these funds presented a complete hierarchy. The actions of the juez de difuntos were subject to review by the Audiencia of Manila. The funds from the Philippines were deducted from the subsidy at Acapulco, and forwarded to the Casa de Contratación of Seville (or the juez de arribadas at Cádiz, after 1790) by the juez de difuntos of Mexico. The heirs in Spain were then found, and the money transferred to them, less discounts covering costs of transmission to Spain. In case appeals were made from the decision or settlement of the juez de difuntos, the records of his proceedings in the case under consideration were reviewed by the Council of the Indies. The method of procedure there was to refer these documents and accounts to the Contaduría General, where all accounts for the Council were audited and settled, and the recommendations of that tribunal were accepted. The constitutional reforms of the nineteenth century gave the audiencia increased authority in the final settlement of these matters, and its decision was made final in practically all contentious cases, though, of course, final judgments involving heirs who were resident in Spain might still be appealed by them to the Council of the Indies or the Supreme Tribunal of Justice. Aside from the activities of the magistrates as members of the juntas de hacienda, described earlier in this chapter, it would perhaps be safe to assert that the tribunal exercised general supervision over financial affairs in the colony until the time of the establishment of the intendancy (1785-87). Correspondence between the Council of the Indies and the Audiencia of Manila would seem to indicate that the magistrates were expected to transmit, and did send, in fact, reports on colonial finances to the Council of the Indies. Among the reports of the oidores about twenty of these periodical statements have been found, covering irregularly the period from 1609 to 1780. No doubt a complete set exists. These generally embody a detailed audit of the accounts of the oficiales reales. Numerous commissions were also sent to the audiencia from time to time, ordering the magistrates to give special attention to financial affairs, such as the collection of licenses from Chinese; to see that tithes were efficiently collected and reported, to see that the tax on metals (mined) was paid, and offering special rewards in case of apprehension. It has already been shown that the king on August 8, 1609, asked the audiencia whether the king's fifth had been commuted to a tenth in the Philippines. On July 21, 1756, the audiencia reported on the number of ships that had entered the harbor of Manila during the year before. On May 4, 1760, Francisco Leandro de Viana, the fiscal, charged the merchants of Manila with wholesale fraud in the payment of the almojarifazgo, paying only 3% when the law of 1714, then in force, had ordered the payment of 8%. Viana's report charged the oidores with responsibility for this deliberate violation of the law, alleging that the oidores had been profiting thereby. It was on this occasion that the fiscal recommended the establishment of a consulado at Manila, which would remove from the magistrates of the audiencia all temptation to use their positions for private profit in violation of the commercial laws of the realm. [347] The part played by the magistrates in the administration of the trade with Acapulco may also be mentioned here. This will be discussed in a subsequent chapter. [348] Apart from the extra duties and commissions already noted, the audiencia was utilized for a variety of purposes which are too miscellaneous to be classified, but too important to be omitted from this discussion. Duplicates of executive orders relating to subjects far removed from the jurisdiction of the audiencia as a court, were sent to it, with instructions that the tribunal take note of numerous matters, such as seeing that the laws were properly executed, observing the effect of reforms, and reporting on their availability and adaptability at various times and places. Copies of new laws relating to civil and ecclesiastical affairs were sent to the audiencia for its information. The above practices were never more prominently evident than during the constitutional reforms from 1810 to 1823. [349] That period, of course, was a time of change and stress, and the audiencia seems to have been regarded as the one stable authority in the Philippines. Cédulas and executive orders were issued to the audiencia without regard to the department of government to which they applied. By the cédula of June 14, 1811, the audiencia was made responsible for the execution of all the orders of the superior government. On March 18, 1812, oaths of all civil and judicial officials were ordered to be administered by the audiencia. A royal order was received by the Audiencia of Manila on January 19, 1813, which forbade the existence of free-masonry in the Islands. The audiencia was made responsible for the execution of all these cédulas and decrees. On August 6, 1813, the tribunal acknowledged receipt of the law of April 25, 1810, which forbade foreigners to land in the Islands without passports. The audiencia was again made responsible for the execution of the reforms of 1812, 1815, 1823, 1834, and 1835, by which the entire administrative and judicial systems of the colony were reorganized. The conduct of officials was continually under the observation of the oidores, and special reports were frequently sent to the Council from the audiencia in review of the progress of the government in general, or in elucidation of some special phase of it. [350] A few more examples of these investigations which were charged upon the oidores may be reviewed here, together with the reports made by the magistrates in compliance with royal instructions. The king, on August 9, 1609, wrote to the audiencia, asking for information concerning the truth of a certain report which had come to him regarding a custom practiced among the natives before the arrival of the Spaniards, and which was said still to be in operation. It had been asserted that the children of a free man and a slave woman would be half-slave and half-free, and the progeny of these children by subsequent marriage would be classed as a fourth, an eighth, or a sixteenth slave or free. It was said that the natives recognized varying degrees of freedom and slavery. The king, in the letter above referred to, expressed a desire to know the truth of these reports, and he ordered the audiencia to instruct him fully concerning these alleged practices and customs. He called attention to the existing law which forbade Spaniards to hold slaves, and he requested information as to how great a hold this barbarous custom had upon the natives, and how it might be eradicated with the least possible inconvenience and loss. [351] The audiencia was required to submit data regularly concerning the religious orders, showing the number of friars belonging to each order and designating the provinces that were held by each. The tribunal was often asked to make recommendations for the regulation of the religious. As we shall note in a subsequent chapter, one of the regular duties of the audiencia was to send in a yearly report on the number of religious arriving in or departing from the Islands. The tribunal had jurisdiction over the royal colleges and universities; it exercised supervision over courses of study and instruction given in them, and the oidores reported concerning these matters from time to time. The audiencia kept the court informed as to the number of Spaniards in the Islands, the occupation of each, and his attitude toward the government. It reported on the number of Chinese and other foreigners in the Islands, the amount of tribute paid by the Chinese, and the extent of the Chinese trade. From time to time the magistrates were asked by the court to make special reports on these or other subjects. They were required to report from time to time on the number and services of the officials of the government, major and subordinate, whether they were all needed, the quality of their services, and what reforms could be made to effect greater economy and efficiency. The audiencia was especially charged with the duty of seeing that the provincial officials were not so numerous as to be a burden on the natives. The government realized that oppression of the Indians would result from the presence of too many Spaniards among them, and the effort was continually made to limit the number of these undesirables. The audiencia, in short, was the representative of the king in all these matters. On several occasions the audiencia assumed the initiative, or assisted materially, in the accomplishment of various functions of an extraordinary character. It played an important role in checking the epidemic of smallpox which ravaged the Islands from 1790 to 1794. On January 18, 1790, Governor Marquina reported that this disease had been playing havoc with the Indians in various parts of the Islands. [352] He had raised 2385 pesos by voluntary contributions from different officials and corporations, and had appointed a committee to administer the funds. This committee consisted of representatives of the different religious communities and the consulado, the archbishop, the chief of the contaduría, the fiscal, the regent and the magistrates of the audiencia. Soon after this letter was written Marquina's residencia was taken, and the king, on January 24, 1794, wrote to the regent, asking him to act as executive of the general committee already appointed to conduct the campaign against this epidemic, and to report what progress had been made in combatting it, suggesting that a general committee of sanitation should be constituted to handle such cases in the future. [353] In the cédula of November 26, 1765, we find another illustration of the extraordinary functions of the magistrates of the audiencia. The governor was ordered on this occasion to appoint a committee to consider ways and means of remedying the damage done to agriculture and commerce in the Islands as a result of the depredations of the English upon their occupation of various parts of the Islands. This committee was to consist of the fiscal as president, the oidores, the chief of the contaduría, the alcaldes ordinarios of the city, and the alcaldes mayores of the districts immediately outside the city. It was ordered to meet at stated periods to discuss and recommend ways and means of improvement, proper taxation, and other measures calculated to bring about a revival of agriculture. This committee was the forerunner of the Sociedad de Amigos del País, which was established during the administration of Governor José Basco y Vargas. [354] The variety of the functions of the audiencia is well illustrated by a report made on July 20, 1757, in compliance with a royal order of inquiry as to how much money should be expended by the Philippine government on the inauguration ceremonies of the governor. [355] Besides noting an added duty of the tribunal, this is illustrative of the pomp and ceremony utilized to impress the inhabitants of the colonies with the grandeur of Spain and her government. After a lengthy investigation, the audiencia stated in reply that the government of Perú had been authorized to spend 12,000 pesos in the reception of a viceroy, while New Spain could spend 8000 pesos. As much as 4000 pesos had been spent in Manila in times past. Since the Philippines was a colony of less importance than these, and the governor there was of inferior rank to the viceroy, and as even these sums were extravagant, it was the opinion of the tribunal that the government at Manila should limit itself to an expenditure of 2000 pesos. This may be considered as an example of the work accomplished by the oidores in checking the excesses of the other officials and departments of the government. [356] The audiencia had general authority over the inspection and censorship of books which were printed in the colony or imported. This power was conceded by a series of laws promulgated at different times from 1556 to 1668. [357] At the earlier date it was ordered that no book treating of the Indies should be printed without first having been inspected, approved, and licensed by the Council of the Indies, and none could be introduced into the Indies without the express permission of that body. [358] Books of fables and other profane publications were not allowed in the colonies under any circumstances. The Council of the Indies, by enactment of May 8, 1584, authorized the audiencia to publish books and dictionaries in the native dialects, and a later law stipulated that twenty copies of each book should be sent to the Council of the Indies to be placed on file there. [359] The oidores and the oficiales reales whose duty it was to inspect the ships which arrived from New Spain were ordered to search for forbidden and heretical books, but in doing this they must act in conformity with the expurgatories of the Inquisition. [360] By cédula of October 10, 1575, and of December 2, 1580, the right to print books of prayer and of divine service for Spain and the Indies was conceded to the monastery of San Lorenzo. This same cédula ordered that viceroys, presidents, and oidores should see that no other service-books were used in the churches and monasteries, and that books printed by any other agency should not be permitted to enter the Islands. [361] In conformity with the above regulations, the Audiencia of Manila, on July 21, 1787, suppressed a book which had been written by the commissary of the Inquisition, on the ground that this functionary had published it on the authority of the archbishop alone, and without authorization of the Council of the Indies, as was required by law. The case was appealed by the commissary to the Council, and the latter body, while approving the action of the audiencia in suppressing the book, and reprimanding the archbishop, after an examination of the volume, allowed its publication in conformity with the laws of the Indies. [362] Taken together, the relations of the audiencia and the commissary of the Inquisition in most matters, and particularly in the publication of books, were harmonious, and the same strife and trouble did not occur in the Philippines that developed in Mexico, Naples, and Perú over the question. [363] On January 26, 1816, the audiencia forbade the publication of any book without its express permission. [364] As a result, considerable trouble arose with the governor and the fiscal, neither of whom had been consulted when the auto was passed. The fiscal contended that the audiencia was violating the law which had reserved to the Council the power to give licenses for the publication of books; moreover, it was asserted, the law required the governor and audiencia to act in acuerdo in matters pertaining to the suppression and licensing of books, the tribunal not being authorized to proceed alone. The audiencia contended in reply that these laws could no longer be interpreted to mean that the governor should have authority over matters of a purely judicial nature, such as these were, because he was no longer president of the audiencia, and hence not a judicial official. [365] The tribunal furthermore based its contention on two enactments--one, a royal order dated October 1, 1770, which directed certain prelates to apply to the audiencia for permission to have a religious work published, and the other, dated July 21, 1787, already cited, by which the king confirmed the refusal of the audiencia to allow the publication of a work prepared by the commissary of the Inquisition, when he had failed to seek the authority of the audiencia. It is clear, however, that on this occasion the audiencia was guilty of deliberate misinterpretation of the law in its own favor. The Council of the Indies had the final right to decide as to the contents of the book, and the audiencia merely suspended publication, pending the action of the Council. The audiencia was never given the power to pass finally on the contents of books, except those dealing with languages and dialects. The ultimate right of passing on all religious publications was retained by the Council of the Indies, while the audiencia was authorized merely to suspend the publication and circulation of books which had not complied with the above royal ordinances. After the suppression of the Council of the Indies and the establishment of the Supreme Tribunal of Justice, there was a tendency toward giving the colonial governments a wider degree of latitude in such matters. It has been noted already, in the cédula of October 9, 1812, and in subsequent reforms, that all matters of a contentious nature should be settled in the audiencias and not carried to the tribunal in Spain. A further reform in the censorship of books was made on October 4, 1839, when the control of these matters was placed in the hands of two censors, appointed by the acuerdo and the archbishop, respectively. In case a decision were made to suppress a certain book, a legal proceeding had to be instituted before the fiscal, who became the arbiter if a disagreement arose between the censors. Seizure was justified on the grounds that the publication contained something contrary to the legitimate interests of the throne or of the religion. Condemned books were not only seized, but sent from the colony. [366] The responsibilities of censorship were thus shared until October 7, 1856, when, on account of the many disagreements which had arisen as a result of this divided authority, the superior government decreed that a standing board of censors should be created, to consist of eight members, four to be appointed by the archbishop and four by the governor. This board was to be presided over by the fiscal of the audiencia. [367] Among other important functions of a non-judicial character was the audiencia's duty of keeping the archives of the government. The tribunal had a number of records in which entries were made concerning its work. [368] A registry was kept of the votes of the oidores in suits involving a hundred thousand maravedís or more. Further, separate records were kept of all resolutions of the acuerdo relative to government and finance, respectively, Thursday afternoon of each week being devoted to the latter. Likewise, a book of cédulas and royal provisions was kept by the audiencia, and on the basis of these the tribunal formed all judgments and gave advice when requested. Separate files were kept for copies of all royal orders, cédulas and letters, one for secret, and the other for open correspondence. In another volume an account was kept of the amounts received from fines and from funds liquidated for the expenses of justice. As already stated, lists were also maintained of all persons residing in the colony, with an account of their quality and work, their attitude toward the government, their occupation, and, if they were officials, the nature and character of their services. [369] The audiencia kept a book of residencias, which has been described in a former chapter. Also records of persons coming to and leaving the Islands, with appropriate entries concerning them, were preserved in this archive. Besides the special duties of the oidores indicated in this chapter, there were others which will be described later in more detail. The residencia has been already treated. Other duties will be noted in connection with the relation of the audiencia and the governor. Some are more closely related to the religious and the ecclesiastical institutions of the colony, and merit special treatment in that connection. The audiencia, moreover, had extensive functions in relation to the commercial and economic life of the colony. A fuller comprehension of these numerous activities may be gained in the following chapters where they are discussed in connection with two of the most powerful factors in the colony's life--the governor and the church. CHAPTER VI THE AUDIENCIA AND THE GOVERNOR: GENERAL RELATIONS The audiencia was brought into closer and more frequent relationship with the governor than with any other authority in the colony. The governor was president of the royal audiencia and hence was nominally its chief magistrate. This brought him into touch with its functions as a court. The governor was chief executive of the colony, and in that capacity was responsible for administrative, financial, and military affairs. It will be noted that the audiencia, in various ways, exercised powers of intervention in all of these matters. The official title of the governor of the Philippines up to 1861 was governor, captain-general, and president of the royal audiencia. [370] a combination of three important functions. In his capacity as governor, he was chief executive of the civil government, with authority over all administrative departments, including finance, and over ecclesiastical affairs. As captain-general, the governor was commander-in-chief of the military forces, with the special duty of providing for the defense of the Islands. As president of the audiencia, the governor retained his authority as executive while entering the field of the judiciary. Though he could not act as judge, himself, nevertheless we have seen in former chapters that he exercised extensive authority over the tribunal, its procedure, and its magistrates. It will accordingly be our aim in this chapter to discuss the general relations of the audiencia and the governor. These include administrative, financial, and ecclesiastical functions, and those involving the government of the provinces. To these will be added such further observations as remain to be made concerning the judicial relations of the governor and audiencia, leaving apart for discussion in another chapter as an integral subject, the military jurisdiction and the respective participation of the audiencia and the governor in the matter of defense. Generally speaking, the governor of the Philippines occupied the same relative position, within and without the colony, as did the viceroy in New Spain, and during the greater part of the history of the Islands he was independent of the government of New Spain and was responsible to the Spanish court directly, in the same manner as the viceroy. [371] The independence of the Philippine government may be said to have been practically complete, with such exceptions as will be mentioned in a subsequent chapter, treating of the ad interim rule, after the re-establishment of the audiencia in 1598. The governor was the chief administrative official of the colony, and the provincial governments derived their authority from him; he was the royal vice-patron, and in this capacity he bore the same relation to the church in the colony as the king did to the church in Spain. Likewise as the king was the theoretical head of the state, and was limited and assisted in the exercise of his authority over the empire by the Council of the Indies, so the governor and captain general of the Philippines (and the viceroy in New Spain and Perú) was the head of the colony, and was limited by the audiencia. The audiencias of all the colonies were equally dependent on the Council of the Indies. Professor Bourne very aptly characterizes the office of governor of the Philippines and its relations to the audiencia. He writes: The Philippine Islands were constituted a kingdom and placed under the charge of a governor and captain general, whose powers were truly royal and limited only by the check imposed by the Supreme Court (the Audiencia) and by the ordeal of the residencia at the expiration of his term of office. Among his extensive prerogatives was his appointing power which embraced all branches of the civil service in the islands. He also was ex officio the President of the Audiencia. His salary was $8000 a year, but his income might be largely augmented by gifts or bribes. The limitations upon the power of the Governor imposed by the Audiencia, in the opinion of the French astronomer Le Gentil, were the only safeguard against an arbitrary despotism, yet Zúñiga, a generation later pronounced its efforts in this direction generally ineffectual. [372] Juan José Delgado, who gives us perhaps the most comprehensive and realistic survey of the Philippines of any of the ecclesiastical historians of those Islands, describes the nature of the office of governor as follows: The governors of these Islands have absolute authority to provide and to attend to all that pertains to the royal estate, government, war; they have consultations in different matters with the oidores of the royal audiencia; they try in the first instance the criminal causes of the soldiers, and they appoint alcaldes, corregidores, deputy and chief justices of all the Islands for the exercise of government, justice, war, ... and besides many other preëminences conceded by royal decrees to the presidency of the royal audiencia and chancery. [373] The governors of these Islands [he wrote] are almost absolute, and are like private masters of them. They exercise supreme authority, by reason of their charge, for receiving and sending embassies to the neighboring kings and tyrants, ... they can make peace, make and declare war, and take vengeance on those who insult us, without awaiting any resolution from the Court for it. Therefore many kings have rendered vassalage and paid tribute to the governors, have recognized them as their superiors, have respected and feared their arms, have solicited their friendship, and have tried to procure friendly relations and commerce with them; and those who have broken their word with them have been punished. [374] The governor of the Philippines, like the viceroy of New Spain, was the administrative head of the colony, and as such exercised supervision over all the departments of the government, likewise over ecclesiastical affairs. He was directed to devote himself to the service of God, and to labor for the welfare of the souls of the natives and inhabitants of the provinces, governing them in peace and quietude, endeavoring to bring about their spiritual and moral uplift and their numerical increase. The governors (or viceroys) were instructed by the laws of the Indies to provide all things which are convenient for the administration and execution of justice, ... to maintain the government and defense of their districts, exercising very special care for the good treatment, conservation and augmentation of the Indians, and especially the collection, administration, account and care of the royal exchequer. They were instructed, in short, to do all for the provinces under their charge [375] that the king, himself, might do. The laws of the Indies ordered the audiencia, the religious authorities and the civil officials to acknowledge the governor [or viceroy] as their chief. The laws emphasized as the special duties of the governor the supervision and augmentation of the finances, the defense of the colony, and general supervision over all officials, executive and judicial, central and provincial. Foremost among the responsibilities of the executive was that of supervising the administration of the colonial exchequer. In this, however, he was assisted by the audiencia. The customary oficiales reales were among the first officials created for the Philippine government, and they were responsible to the governor. At the time of the creation of the audiencia, it was ordered that the governor and two oidores should audit the accounts of the oficiales reales, but this power was transferred to Governor Dasmariñas when the audiencia was removed in 1589. In 1602 the right of inspection of accounts was returned to the oidores, [376] but the governor, it was stated, as executive head of the government, was responsible, and he exercised direct intervention in these matters, limited only by the annual inspection of the oidores. During the greater part of the history of the Islands the governor exercised supervision over the collection and the administration of the public revenue, in accordance with the law, [377] and he was required to be present at the weekly meetings of the junta de hacienda, of which two magistrates were members, there to pass on all financial measures and to authorize expenditures. [378] The governor had control over the sale of offices, jointly with the oficiales reales, but from the correspondence on these subjects it is clear that the audiencia was designed to check the governor's authority in that particular. [379] The governor was forbidden to authorize extraordinary expenditures from the treasury without express royal permission, except in cases of riot, or invasion. [380] This regulation was almost impossible of faithful execution, and as his duties increased and became more complicated, the governor was unable to give as complete attention to these matters as the laws of the Indies prescribed. Although the governor had these financial powers, he could not decide cases appealed from the oficiales reales. These were regarded as contentious cases and as such were resolved by the audiencia. [381] In Mexico and Lima, wherein there were higher tribunals of accounts than in Manila (contaduría mayor), the audiencia did not have this jurisdiction. From 1784 to 1787 the governor was temporarily deprived of the leadership in financial matters by virtue of the Ordinance of Intendants, but the oidores retained membership in the colonial board of audits, together with the intendant, who had taken the governor's former place as the responsible head of the colony's finances. In 1787 the governor was restored to his former position with respect to the exchequer, with the official title of superintendente subdelegado de real hacienda. It is sufficient to say that the governor's relation to this new department did not materially lessen the authority of the audiencia with regard to the finances of the colony. Although the appointing power was claimed by many governors as their sole prerogative, the audiencia imposed a very decided check on their exercise of this authority. The governor had the right to make appointments in all departments of the government, except in certain so-called offices of royal designation, to which the governor made tentative appointments, subject to subsequent royal confirmation. [382] Although the law of February 8, 1610, exempted appointments made by the governor of the Philippines from the necessity of royal confirmation, [383] in practice these nominations were sent to the court for approval in the same manner as were those from Spain's other colonies. The audiencia intervened in the matter of appointments in two ways. In case it succeeded to the government on the death of the governor the tribunal exercised all the prerogatives of appointment. [384] When the governor was present he was obliged to refer the names of all candidates to the acuerdo. [385] This was made necessary because the governor, being new to the Islands and unfamiliar with local conditions, was not so well fitted to pass upon the merits of candidates for office as were the oidores who had become permanently identified with the interests of the colony and whose opinion was of weight in these matters. Thus it came about that the audiencia exercised joint authority with the governor in making appointments. [386] The question of the relative authority of the audiencia and governor in making appointments was a source of conflict throughout the history of the Islands. When the governor submitted the name of a candidate to the acuerdo it was the duty of the magistrates to furnish all the information possible regarding the character, fitness, and ability of the person under consideration for the position. If the audiencia and the governor should disagree and the latter still persisted in an appointment, it was the duty of the audiencia to submit, forwarding all evidence relative to the candidate to the Council of the Indies, the latter body ultimately taking such action as it deemed best. When the nominations of the governor reached the Council of the Indies for confirmation, that tribunal relied extensively upon information furnished by the audiencia concerning the candidates under consideration. As already stated, the king retained the right to appoint certain so-called "officials of royal designation." These varied at different times, but, in general, included corregidores, alcaldes mayores, oficiales reales, oidores, regents, and, of course, viceroys, governors, and captains-general. [387] All these officials, except those last named, could be temporarily designated by the executive. Although the law placed corregidores, alcaldes mayores, and oficiales reales in this category, their designation by the court, like the confirmation of encomiendas, was usually nominal. Many of these offices were filled in Spain and Mexico, while some appointees were named from the Philippines, and probably in the majority of the latter cases the royal appointment merely amounted to a confirmation of a temporary appointment made by the governor. The post of governor of the Philippines was filled temporarily by the viceroy of New Spain until about 1720. In the same manner the governor of Ternate was named by the Philippine executive, with the advice and consent of the audiencia. These ad interim appointments were valid until the king made them regular by confirmation, or sent persons from Spain to hold them permanently. When a vacancy occurred among the offices of royal designation, it was the governor's duty to forward a list of candidates, or nominees, and from this list the king, or the Council of the Indies in his name, made a permanent appointment. [388] In the meantime a temporary appointment was often made by the governor, in acuerdo with the audiencia, and the name of the appointee was placed first on the list remitted to the court. This procedure was followed in the appointment of encomenderos, corregidores, alcaldes mayores, and treasury officials. It was seldom done in the cases of oidores and fiscales, who, because of their special or professional character, were usually sent directly from Spain or from New Spain. Unless there were special reasons to the contrary, for instance, the filing of an adverse report by the audiencia, or a protest on the part of residents, the governor's temporary appointments were usually confirmed and made permanent. Temporary appointees with salaries exceeding 1000 pesos a year only received half-salary until their appointments were confirmed. [389] At least two years and frequently four transpired before the regular appointment arrived, and as the terms were from three to five years for the majority of these offices, the governor's candidate was usually the incumbent a considerable portion of the time, whether his nomination were confirmed or not. Neither relatives nor dependents of governors or oidores could be legally appointed to any office. [390] This mandate was often violated, as we shall see. It was the duty of the regent and the fiscal to certify to the court that appointees were not relatives of the governor or oidores. [391] In an instruction directed exclusively to the Philippine audiencia, the king ordered the tribunal to see that offices were bestowed only upon persons "who by fitness or qualifications are best able to hold them." [392] It appears that this law, or another promulgated about the same time, gave to the fiscal and the oidores the right to pass on the qualifications of encomenderos, alcaldes mayores, corregidores, and other minor officials, on condition that preference should be given to conquerors, settlers, and their descendants. Governor Alonso Fajardo remonstrated that this new practice hampered the work of the governor, and created difficulties between him and the oidores. [393] A yet later law, dated October 1, 1624, gave the governor (and viceroy) the right to make temporary appointments of all judicial officials, without the interposition of the audiencia. [394] On February 22, 1680, the power of making permanent appointments of alcaldes mayores and corregidores was vested in the governor and the audiencia. [395] In view of this law, the Audiencia of Manila claimed and actually exercised authority in the appointment of provincial officials from that time onward. Vacancies in the audiencia itself were filled temporarily by the governor. In case the audiencia were governing ad interim it could designate magistrates from the outside to try cases, but the power of the audiencia, as provided by these laws, was secondary to that of the governor if he were present. Under no circumstances were permanent appointments to the audiencia to be made by any authority other than the king and Council. In case there were a vacancy in the office of fiscal the junior oidor was authorized to fill the place. [396] Conversely, it also occurred that when an extra oidor was needed, the fiscal might be temporarily designated to fill the place. [397] It was also ordered that if the fiscal could not be spared from his office on account of his numerous and important duties, a lawyer might be named to act as fiscal ad interim. [398] In New Spain an alcalde del crimen took the place of the junior oidor when the latter occupied the fiscalía. There were no alcaldes del crimen in the Philippines, but the cédula of February 8, 1610, above cited, was always quoted as furnishing justification for the appointment of oidores ad interim by the governor. [399] In a subsequent chapter we shall refer to several occasions on which this was done; indeed, entire audiencias were re-constituted by certain governors. The audiencia was required to see that the appointees designated by the governor duly complied with the requirements of residencia; likewise that they were properly installed in office, and that they did not serve in offices for which they had neither authority nor qualifications. [400] Notwithstanding the variety and the conflicting character of the laws bearing on matters of appointment, a careful consideration of law and practice leads to the conclusion that the governor, as chief executive, had the power of making appointments, but in the execution of this duty he was ordered to consult the audiencia, although, strictly speaking, he was not obliged to follow its advice. If there were good reasons for not appointing an official recommended by the governor, the oidores could send representations to the Council of the Indies, setting forth their objections, and the Council might confirm or nullify the appointment, as it chose. The audiencia could make appointments if it were in temporary charge of the government. The authority which the audiencia exercised in regard to appointments varied according to circumstances. If the governor were new at his post, weak or indulgent, the audiencia exercised more extensive authority than was conceded by the laws. If the governor were experienced, efficient, and a man of strong personality and dominating character, the tribunal exercised less power in regard to appointments, and, in fact, in all other matters pertaining to government. Closely related to the appointing power was the duty which the governor had of submitting annually to the court a list of all the officials of the colony, with comments on the character of their services, and with recommendations for promotion or dismissal from office. [401] The oidores were included in these reports. [402] It was also the function of the governor to report on the administration of justice. [403] The governor was instructed to inform the court in case the oidores engaged in forbidden commercial ventures, either directly, through the agency of their wives, or through other intermediaries. [404] He was authorized, moreover, to investigate and report on the public and private conduct of the magistrates and of their wives as well [405] and to exert himself to see that their actions were at all times in consonance with the dignity of their rank and positions and of such a character as would reflect credit on the royal name and entitle them to the respect of the residents of the colony. The confidential reports of the governor to the king might include all of these matters, and many others too numerous to mention. On the other hand, the audiencia, as a body, was authorized to direct the attention of the Council to any irregularities of which the governor might be guilty, and thus a system of checks and balances was maintained. [406] However, the oidores were forbidden to make charges individually. This injunction was so frequently disregarded that it was practically a dead-letter. Typical of the governor's authority over all the officials of the colony, and incidentally over the oidores, was his power to grant or withhold permission to marry within the colony. The earlier laws on this subject absolutely forbade viceroys, presidents, oidores, alcaldes, or their children to marry within their districts. [407] Deprivation of office and forfeiture of salary were the penalties for infraction of these regulations. These laws were followed by others which required the president (viceroy or governor) to report immediately to the Council the case of any magistrate guilty of violating the law forbidding the marriage of officials. [408] It was not until 1754 that a law was promulgated providing for special marriage dispensations to be granted by the Council of the Indies upon the recommendation of the president of the audiencia. [409] In 1789 the president was authorized to concede permission to accountants and treasury officials, but not to oidores. [410] The prohibition was applied to magistrates until 1843, and the only condition under which they were permitted to marry within the colony was by virtue of the express permission of the supreme tribunal in Spain. In 1848, the president of the audiencia was authorized to grant marriage licenses to magistrates on condition that the contracting parties were "of equal quality, customs, and of corresponding circumstances," permission having first been obtained from Spain, [411] the president alone passing upon the requisite qualifications. The chief reason for the restrictions and prohibitions placed on the marriage of magistrates seems to have been the conviction that officers of justice would compromise themselves by marriage, acquiring vast numbers of relatives and dependents, thereby making it impossible to render impartial decisions or administer justice as evenly and dispassionately as they would were they not so familiarly known in their districts. It was also necessary to prevent officials from lowering their dignity by union with natives and half-castes. The marriage of officials with natives of the Philippines was not regarded with favor at any time by the Spanish government. It seems that the above prohibition did not apply with the same force to fiscales as to magistrates. This is illustrated by a case which arose in 1804 when Fiscal Miguel Díaz de Rivera was deprived of his office by royal decree for having married without the permission of the Council of the Indies. [412] The fiscal had married the daughter of the corregidor of Pangasinán, who was a colonel in the Spanish army. The mother of the girl was a Eurasian from Madras, and had been a subject of Great Britain. Under the date of May 27, 1805, Díaz sent a petition to the king, bearing the endorsement of Governor Aguilar, demanding his restoration to office. Among the reasons cited for the proposed reinstatement of the fiscal, it was said that Díaz, being a prosecutor and not a magistrate, was not subject to the same regulations and conditions as the oidores, whose judicial duties rendered impossible their marriage within the Islands. Aguilar stated that the purpose of the law had been to debar ministers from making such marriage connections as would diminish the respect which the community should have for them as oidores of a royal audiencia, thus undermining their standing as magistrates. In this instance there could have been no case of degradation because of the high standing of the mother and father. Moreover, a fiscal could not be regarded as a magistrate, and the same laws did not apply to both classes of officials. As an outcome of these representations Díaz was restored to office by the royal decree of October 13, 1806. [413] A duty similar to that just noted, inasmuch as it was indicative of the authority of the governor over the oidores, was his power to examine and try criminal charges against the magistrates. A law which was in force from 1550 to 1620 ordered that the president should be assisted in the trial of criminal charges against oidores by alcaldes ordinarios. On September 5, 1620, this law was modified by the enactment of another, which ordered that in cases involving imprisonment, heavy fines, removal from office, or the death penalty, the governor should make the investigation and refer the autos to the Council of the Indies for final judgment. This law still left the trial of oidores for misdemeanors in the governor's jurisdiction, but in cases of sedition or notorious offenses which required immediate action in order to furnish a public example for its effect on the natives, the president was required to confer with the audiencia, and to act in accordance with its judgment. By this law the president was forbidden to make more than temporary suspensions of oidores from their offices. In no case could they be permanent unless first approved by the Council of the Indies. [414] Notwithstanding this law, it may be noted that certain governors went so far on some occasions as to remove, imprison, and exile magistrates and to appoint a new audiencia. [415] The judicial power of the governor over such cases was further altered by the Royal Instruction of Regents of June 26, 1776, by which he was forbidden to impose any penalty on the oidores without the concurrence of the acuerdo and the regent. [416] The president and the acuerdo could rebuke and discipline oidores, privately, when their conduct demanded it. Even on such an occasion as this the magistrate was to be given full opportunity to defend himself. If a private investigation of the conduct of an oidor were necessary, the inquiry could be still conducted by the senior magistrate. [417] Oidores, on the other hand, had no jurisdiction over the trial of charges against the president, unless it were in his residencia. In this event the investigation might be conducted by a magistrate designated by the governor or by the Council of the Indies. [418] Aside from his executive and military duties, the governor was president of the royal audiencia. This arrangement had the advantage of giving him an opportunity to know and appreciate the legal needs of the colony. It brought him in constant contact with judicial minds, and his position in this regard was no doubt calculated to keep him in the straight and narrow path of the law. Nevertheless, the governor, who was usually a soldier, but seldom a lawyer, did not participate as a magistrate in the trial of cases, and his activities in the tribunal were directive, rather than judicial. His opinions in all legal and administrative matters were prepared by his asesor. [419] As president of the audiencia the governor exercised two important powers. One authorized him to divide the audiencia into salas and to designate oidores to try cases within the tribunal, to inspect the provinces, to take residencias, or to attend to semi-administrative matters, such as have been noted in the preceding chapter. [420] The other was the power to decide whether a contention was of judicial, governmental, military, or ecclesiastical character, and to assign it to the proper department or tribunal. [421] This power was significant because it made the governor the supreme arbiter between all conflicting authorities in the colony. Frequently he decided disputes between the audiencia and the ecclesiastical courts, between the audiencia and the consulado, or between the oidores and the oficiales reales in matters relative to the jurisdiction of these tribunals over questions at issue. While the magistrates were allowed to proceed practically without interference in affairs of justice, the governor was instructed to keep himself informed concerning the judicial work of the audiencia. [422] While forbidden to alter the judgments of the tribunal or to tamper with its sentences, [423] he could excuse or remit fines with the consent of the oidores. The governor could commute sentences in criminal cases. The final pardoning power rested with the king and it was exercised upon the recommendation of the governor or the prelates [424] and the Council of the Indies. There were exceptional occasions, however, on which the governor assumed the responsibility of pardoning criminals. After the creation of the office of regent in the audiencias of the colonies, in 1776, the governor's position as president of the audiencia became purely nominal, the regent actually officiating as chief justice, though the president was still legally required to affix his signature to all judicial decisions of the tribunal. The frequent and extended absences of the governor from the capital and the multiplicity of his administrative duties prevented him from attending to these matters with requisite promptness, and injustice consequently resulted from the requirement. Many complaints were made from 1776 onward against this condition of affairs, with the result that a modification in the existing law was made on October 24, 1803, making valid the signature of the regent to all decisions of the audiencia, when the governor was absent from the colony on expeditions of conquest or tours of inspection. [425] At all other times the governor, as president, affixed his signature to all legal acts and autos, although he did not participate in their decisions. The law remained thus until 1861, when the governorship was separated from the presidency, the acuerdo was abolished, and the regent was made president of the audiencia with authority to sign all judicial decisions. [426] We have already noted that the governor exercised special judicial powers, independent of the audiencia. Among these the military jurisdiction stands pre-eminent, and it will be discussed separately in the following chapter. The governor was also empowered to try Indians in first instance, with appeal to the audiencia. [427] The actual trial of these cases, however, was delegated to the alcaldes mayores and corregidores with appeal to the audiencia. It was impossible for the governor, occupied as he was with the multitudinous affairs of his office, to concern himself personally with the thousands of petty cases among the Indians, or between Indians and Spaniards. He had jurisdiction over suits involving the condemnation of property through which public roads were to pass. [428] The special jurisdiction of the governor, assisted by the audiencia, over cases affecting the royal ecclesiastical patronage will be discussed later. The laws of the Indies would seem to indicate that both the governor and the audiencia exercised independently the power to exile undesirable residents from the colony. It was stipulated that if sentence of exile were passed by the governor and the offenders were sent to Spain, the necessary papers, issued by the governor, should accompany them. [429] If the decree of banishment were imposed by the audiencia in its judicial capacity, the governor was forbidden to commute the sentence or otherwise interfere in the matter. [430] The audiencia frequently sentenced criminals or other undesirables to spend terms of varying lengths in the provinces or in the Marianas. This, as we have seen, was commonly one of the trials connected with the residencia. We have a noteworthy illustration of the action of the audiencia in acuerdo with the governor in the banishment of Archbishop Felipe Pardo, who was exiled by the acuerdo of the audiencia and Governor Juan de Vargas Hurtado, in 1684. Vargas was succeeded the same year by Governor Curuzaelegui, who recalled the prelate from exile and forced the audiencia to endorse the act of recall. Closely related to the governor's jurisdiction over banishment was his jurisdiction over cases of persons entering the Islands or departing from them without royal permission. [431] He exercised final jurisdiction here over civil and ecclesiastical authorities, encomenderos, and private persons. The law forbade any person to enter or leave the Islands without the royal permission, and the governor was charged with the execution of this law. Encomenderos were not to leave the Islands on pain of confiscation of their encomiendas. [432] While the laws of May 25, 1596, and of June 4, 1620, gave authority to the governor over the religious, relative to their entrance into the Islands and departure therefrom, [433] the cédula of July 12, 1640, authorized the audiencia to enforce the law on this subject; especially was the tribunal to see that no ecclesiastics departed for Japan and China without the proper authority. [434] Although there can be no doubt of the finality of the governor's jurisdiction in this matter, yet the audiencia exercised an advisory power, and an authority to check irregularities, particularly with a view to seeing that the governor did his duty and fulfilled his obligations in the matter. Numerous instances exist to show that whenever this subject was treated in a royal order or decree, copies of the law were sent to the audiencia for its information. On other occasions when there was reason to believe that there had been irregularities in the procedure of a governor, the audiencia complained to the Council of the Indies. This was done for example in 1779 when Governor Sarrio conceded permission for several priests to go to Mexico. This action the audiencia claimed to be irregular, since the Council of the Indies had not been notified or consulted. The king, on March 6, 1781, approved the action of the governor on the basis of the laws above referred to. [435] Besides his judicial authority the governor shared legislative functions with the audiencia. We have noted in an earlier chapter that the acuerdo passed ordinances for the domestic welfare and local government of the colony. It prescribed rules and issued regulations for merchants, encomenderos, and religious, in accordance with the rulings for royal ecclesiastical patronage. The acuerdo developed from the advisory power of the audiencia. The king in his first decrees ordered the viceroys and presidents to consult with the oidores whenever the interests of the government demanded it, [436] and if necessary the opinions of the magistrates could be required in writing. When an agreement was reached upon a given subject, they voted in acuerdo and gradually that acuerdo came to have the force of law. On many occasions the acuerdo prevailed over the governor's will. There was no constitutional basis for this, and the acuerdo, when it became a legislative function in passing ordinances and overruling the governor himself, assumed prerogatives which were never exercised by the audiencias of Spain. [437] The laws of the Indies established the governor as the sole executive, and forbade the audiencia to interfere with the government. [438] The governor, occupied by his extensive administrative and military duties, came to devote less attention to the judicial side of his office, which was left almost entirely to the audiencia. So it developed that the acuerdos in reference to judicial matters--the establishment of tariffs and rules for their observance and the dispatch of pesquisidores and visitors to the provinces, came in the latter eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries to be increasingly the concern of the audiencia. The authority of the tribunal in these matters was recognized by the Constitution of 1812 and the reforms made in pursuance thereof. [439] In the same manner the acuerdo came to be recognized in governmental and administrative matters. The enactments of these legislative sessions of the audiencia were known as autos acordados. They ultimately came to embrace a wide field. The audiencia passed laws for the regulation of the provinces; it made rulings which the alcaldes mayores and corregidores were to follow in the collection of tribute; it prescribed their relations with the parish priests; it issued regulations for the conduct of the friars and the ordinary clergy relative to the royal patronage. Laws were passed for the encouragement of agriculture and industry and the regulation of commerce. Rice, tobacco and silk culture, the production of cinnamon and cocoanuts, the breeding of fowls, the regulation of cock-fighting, cloth-making and ship-building all came in for their share of attention in the acuerdo. [440] The audiencia, in the exercise of the acuerdo power, passed ordinances for the enforcement of the laws forbidding the unauthorized departure of persons from the Islands; it helped to fix the rate of passage on the galleons and on the coast-wise ships. It made regulations for the Chinese in the Parián, it prescribed the conditions under which licenses might be issued to Chinese merchants and it passed ordinances for the better enforcement of the laws prohibiting the immigration of the Chinese. The acuerdo concerned itself with the maintenance of prisons and the care of prisoners, the residencias of provincial officials, the auditing of accounts, the collection of the revenue, and the supervision of the officials of the treasury. Ordinances were passed enforcing the general law which ordered that the natives should not live together in Christian communities without marriage, that they should attend religious ceremonies, that they should be instructed in religion, and that they should not be exploited, either by the civil or ecclesiastical authorities. It is, of course, understood that the audiencia in no way trespassed the authority of the church in issuing these regulations; indeed it was quite the contrary; these ordinances were passed on the basis of the authority of the royal patronage, with the design of assisting the vice-patron (the governor) in the execution of his duties, and the church was aided rather than impeded thereby. It must be remembered, of course, that the governor, as president of the audiencia, presided in these acuerdos, and that in most cases, actually, as well as in theory, these autos acordados were his will. There were many occasions in the history of the Islands when the acuerdo was influential in the formulation of far-reaching reforms. The well-known "Ordinances of Good Government," issued by Governor Corcuera in 1642 for the observance of the provincial officials, and repromulgated with modifications by Cruzat y Góngora in 1696 and by Raón in 1768 were formulated by the acuerdo. [441] Similarly were those formulated that were proposed by Marquina in 1790. The local regulations for the consulado, established in 1769, were formulated by the audiencia largely on the recommendations of the able fiscal, Francisco Leandro de Viana. In the same manner the new plan of constitutional government given to the Philippines in 1812 was drafted by the audiencia at the request of the Council of the Indies. [442] Likewise the plans for the government of the intendancy were submitted to the acuerdo by Governor Basco y Vargas in 1785. Indeed, these, as well as the scheme of 1787-8, were actually written by two magistrates of the audiencia, the former plan by Oidor Ciriaco Gonzales Carvajal, subsequently intendant, and the latter by Oidor Castillo y Negrete. [443] There were occasions when the audiencia enacted administrative measures in which the governor failed to participate. These were especially noticeable during the administrations of Acuña, Fajardo, and Corcuera--governors who spent much of their time away from Manila. A more recent instance of this occurred in 1790 when the natives of the province of Ilocos revolted against a tyrannical and dissolute alcalde mayor. The acuerdo, notwithstanding the objection of Governor Marquina, removed the offending official and appointed another, and this action was subsequently approved by the king. [444] According to the laws of the Indies the authority of removal and appointment of such officials rested with the governor. [445] The tendency of the acuerdo to act in civil affairs without the advice or presence of the governor was checked by the royal order of November 12, 1840, wherein the audiencia was ordered not to attempt to carry its acuerdos into execution without the authority of the superior government. [446] The evil effects of the audiencia's intervention in provincial government were pointed out in 1842 by Sinibaldo de Mas, when he wrote: "the government of the provinces is in charge of an alcalde-mayor, who is at once judge of first instance, chief of political matters, subdelegate of the treasury, and war-captain or military commandant, for whose different attributes he is subject to authorities distinct from one another." [447] The audiencia was deprived of its acuerdo power in governmental matters by the Constitution of 1812, but it was still retained in judicial affairs. In 1815 and again in 1823 on the restoration of the monarchy, the full acuerdo power as practiced before 1812 was resumed by the audiencia. Official recognition of the acuerdo was made publicly by Governor Torres, who succeeded Enrile on March 18, 1834. In his inaugural address this governor avowed his purpose to be the extension and improvement of commerce, the army and agriculture, "but, in order to develop these to their highest extent, and to realize the utmost success in my administration," he said, "I count on the co-operation of all the authorities, and particularly of the real acuerdo, of which I have the honor to be president." [448] The audiencia was finally excluded from the acuerdo in administrative matters by the reform of July 4, 1861; since then the tribunal has been purely judicial, the legislative functions of government having been assumed by the Administrative Council (Consejo de Administración) of which the president and fiscal, and usually two oidores at least were members. Thus, even after the reform of 1861, the oidores continued to participate in legislative functions, though the audiencia as a body did not. [449] Typical of the multitudinous duties of the governor, and illustrative at the same time of his relations with the audiencia, were the various subjects treated in the Instruction of the king to Governor Pedro de Acuña, dated February 16, 1602, [450] which is chosen for citation here because of its comprehensive character, and also because of its availability. Beginning with the reminder that the governor should confer with the Viceroy of New Spain whenever necessary, this comprehensive paper treated first of the defense of the Islands against the Japanese, and of the maintenance of a garrison in Mindanao. The matter of tribute was taken up, and the desirability was shown of having the natives pay tribute in kind rather than in money. It was said that the latter method encouraged the natives to indolence, for as soon as they had earned enough money to pay their tribute they ceased work altogether. The governor was advised to consult with the audiencia in regard to this matter. The king ordered the governor to cut down expenses and to economize by the elimination of as many offices as possible. He recommended, in particular, the abolition of the offices of corregidor and alcalde mayor. The king warned Acuña against a continuation of the dishonesty of past governors in the lading of ships for New Spain. He declared that thereafter the allotment of freight should not be left to the friends of the governor, but the matter should be personally supervised by the governor and an oidor. The frauds which had been common also in the assignment of encomiendas in the colony must cease; to effect this the governor was temporarily deprived of jurisdiction over this matter. Who was to assign the encomiendas in the future was not divulged. [451] The governor was instructed to see that the salable offices were not conferred on the relatives of the oidores, nor given to his own relatives, but that they should be disposed of to persons offering the most money for them. It had been charged that governors and audiencias had connived together in the past to deprive persons of offices to which they were legitimately entitled. This had been done by allowing favorites to hold more than one office, and by favoritism in the sale of these positions. These abuses must be stopped, the king said; it was ordered that in the future no person should be allowed to hold more than one office, that as many of these as possible should be sold, with unrestricted competitive bidding. The governor and the fiscal were ordered to exercise care and diligence in the inspection of the returning galleon, to see especially that it brought no unregistered money from persons in Mexico. Acuña's predecessor, Tello, had recommended that west-bound galleons should stop at the Ladrones to leave priests and soldiers, and to minister to the needs of Spaniards already there. This was authorized and the governor was instructed to see that it was done. The governor was also ordered on this occasion to make an investigation of the audiencia. Complaints had been coming to the court for a long time against the laxity of the tribunal in the administration of justice, and of the commercial activities of the oidores. The governor was to aid the fiscal in the prosecution of any oidores who were remiss, to the extent of sending them under arrest to New Spain if the charges against them justified such action. This Instruction, it will be noted, required the governor to intervene actively in practically all the governmental affairs that came up in the colony. He was to exercise authority with regard to defense, finance, and revenue. He was to exercise supervision over provincial affairs so as to insure the good treatment of the natives and the beneficent administration of the encomiendas. He was to give his attention to the galleon trade and to the disposal of offices within the colony. If doubt or difficulty arose in any of these matters of administration, he was to demand from the audiencia, its assistance, counsel, and support. The governor was also authorized to see that justice was administered effectively, though he was not to intervene directly in that matter, except to see that abuses were eradicated. This Instruction shows that the governor was regarded as the chief executive of the government. He was the responsible head in the judicial, administrative, and military spheres. The audiencia, on the other hand, had consultative functions, aimed to assist the governor when he required it, but to restrict him when he sought to exceed his powers. Instructions similar to this were given to many succeeding governors. A citation of these would prove nothing new, however. In the same manner that the Instruction to Acuña gives us an idea of the relative functions of the audiencia and the governorship in 1602, so the criticisms of the able Spanish diplomat, Sinibaldo de Mas, written in 1842, aid us in estimating their respective spheres in the nineteenth century. This opinion is valuable because it summarizes the result of two hundred and fifty years of the interaction of these political institutions in the Islands. Mas showed the reason for the establishment of the intendancy, and the conferring of added powers upon the audiencia and criticized the relations existing between the governor and these institutions in the following terms: To set some balance to his power (that of the governor), because of the distance from the throne, certain privileges and preëminences have been granted to other persons, especially to the Audiencia, even to the point of making of the latter a court of appeal against the measures of the chief of the islands. Besides, the revenues have been removed from his jurisdiction, and the office of the intendant has been constituted, who obeys no others than the orders communicated to him by the ministry of the treasury from Madrid. It is very obvious that this single point is quite sufficient to paralyze completely the action of the governor-general. Besides, since there are many matters which require to be passed on by distinct ministries, it happens that two contrary orders touch the same matter, or that one order is lacking, which is enough to render its execution impossible ... a chief may detain a communication, even after he has received it, if it does not suit him. This system of setting obstacles in the way of the governor of a distant colony is wise and absolutely necessary, ... there results rather than a balance among the various departments of authority a confusion of jurisdictions, the fatal fount of eternal discord. [452] Mas made extensive quotations which were calculated to show "the great confusion and contrariety of the orders to governor and audiencia." This characteristic of the laws of the Indies has repeatedly been referred to in this treatise, and we shall note its results in a subsequent chapter dealing with the conflicts of jurisdiction between the audiencia and the governor. It is clear, therefore, that the decision of the governor was not final in administrative affairs. Persons dissatisfied with his executive actions or decisions in such matters were privileged to appeal to the audiencia. If the findings of the tribunal differed from those of the governor, and if the governor were still unyielding, his will was to be obeyed but the case was thereupon appealed to the Council of the Indies. [453] If the case were one of law and justice the governor, on the other hand, was instructed to abide by the decision of the audiencia, but he was privileged to carry the case to the Council of the Indies. Thus it was that each of these authorities had a sphere wherein its word was law, and its decisions final in the colony. It was prescribed, however, that when there were differences of opinion between the governor and the audiencia an effort should be made both by the governor and the audiencia to avoid notorious disagreements which would furnish a bad example to the natives, or otherwise degrade the dignity of the royal tribunal or governor. Viceroys, presidents, and audiencias were forbidden to take action in cases wherein there was doubt as to their jurisdiction, or wherein there was a question as to the advisability of taking final action. [454] It would appear, therefore, from this survey of the laws, that the audiencia was provided with ample means for restraining the action of the governor. This it could do either by admonition, by appealing from his decisions in administrative matters, or by blocking him in the acuerdo. It was evidently the design of those who planned the legislation of the Indies to guard at all times against the excesses of an all-powerful executive. Such was certainly the purpose of the establishment of the audiencia, both in the Americas and in the Philippines. Taking into consideration the three hundred years of Philippine history, however, it cannot be said that in the actual operation of the government these precautions were entirely effective. According to the laws of the Indies the governor, as executive, had his own sphere in which the oidores were forbidden to interfere. [455] In the light of our investigation, however, it would appear that this exclusive field was exceedingly limited, and that even it was continually subject to the encroachments of the audiencia. In the exercise of his military authority the governor was independent of the tribunal, although we shall see that on some occasions the audiencia exercised military jurisdiction in an executive capacity, and that there were times when the governor was glad to call upon the audiencia for assistance in this matter. As president of the audiencia the governor exercised considerable authority during the first half of the history of the colony, but from 1776 to 1861 his position as president was merely nominal, and at the latter date it was abolished. He was the chief administrative official of the colony, and his authority in this particular was more far-reaching than in any other. In this, however, he was limited by the acuerdo of the audiencia, which developed, as we have seen, from an advisory to a legislative function, and ultimately had the effect of limiting the governor in his hitherto exclusive field. CHAPTER VII THE AUDIENCIA AND THE GOVERNOR: THE MILITARY JURISDICTION The isolation of the Philippines, their distance from the home country and New Spain, and their proximity to the colonies and trade routes of rival nations, made the problem of defense the foremost consideration. This was almost equally true of New Spain, Perú, and the West Indian colonies, all of which were exposed to the attack of outside enemies, though, of course, they were neither as isolated nor as far away as the Philippines. The necessity of being ever on the alert, constantly prepared to resist invasion and to put down insurrection, gave a military character to the governments of these colonies. The viceroys and governors were in most cases trained soldiers. In addition to their other prerogatives, they exercised the office and title of captain-general and as such they commanded the military and naval forces of their colonies, inadequate as these forces sometimes were. During the first two hundred years governors and viceroys were largely selected on the basis of their past military exploits on the continent or in America. The administrations of the different Philippine governors of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries were characterized rather by their devotion to military affairs than by economic improvements or administrative efficiency. The supervision of judicial and governmental affairs was thus left for long periods in the hands of other officials and authorities, to be reclaimed or fought over by the governors when their time was not taken up by military conquests. It is practically agreed among all authorities who have written on the Philippines that the leading consideration and necessity of the government during two hundred years was military defense. These writers comprise officials who saw service there and commentators who visited the Islands and studied the government. In their recommendations and comments they unite in urging that the defense of the Islands should not be neglected; that the governor should be given adequate forces with sufficient jurisdiction over them and over the other elements of the colony to defend it successfully from invasion or insurrection. It was the policy of the government throughout the history of the Islands to conserve and keep intact the governor's military jurisdiction. We have noted in an earlier chapter that one of the main reasons for the suppression of the audiencia in 1589 was that it interfered too extensively with the military jurisdiction of the governor. During the decade following the extinction of the tribunal, the military governors were given almost unlimited powers, until their abuses led to the re-establishment of the tribunal to guard against these excesses. We shall see in the following chapter that the limitations placed upon them by the audiencia were always a source of complaint by the various governors. Governor Acuña went so far as to recommend the suppression of the tribunal because the needs of the colony were military and had to be met by the firm action of a soldier, without the interference of a body of magistrates. [456] Similar recommendations were made by a majority of the succeeding governors, but more especially by Fajardo, Corcuera, Vargas, Arandía, and even by Anda who had risen from the post of oidor to that of governor and military commander. [457] The conviction that the government should be pre-eminently military was not held by governors alone. Fernando de los Ríos Coronel, procurator of the Philippines at the Court of Madrid in 1597, urged that the government should be of a military character and that the practice of sending soldiers to govern the Islands should be continued. [458] This opinion was also advanced by Fray Alonso Sánchez, procurator of the Islands at Madrid in 1589, and the emissary whose arguments were chiefly instrumental in bringing about the suppression of the audiencia. [459] Francisco Leandro de Viana, the most efficient fiscal that the Islands ever had, and afterwards councillor of the Indies, recognized the military attributes of the governor's position. He urged a separation of the spheres of the governor and the audiencia, recommending that the former should attend solely to war and government, while the latter should confine itself to matters of justice. [460] This opinion was shared by Juan José Delgado, the able Jesuit historian, who expressed the conviction that the "islands need disinterested military governors, not merchants; and men of resolution and character, not students, who are more fit to govern monasteries than communities of heroes." [461] Delgado recommended that governors of the Philippines should be picked men, selected for their military qualities. The distance and isolation of the colony and its proximity to the great empires of China and Japan made defense the first requisite. Delgado believed that a soldier would be less amenable to bribes and that commercial ventures would be less attractive to him. [462] He recommended that governors should be absolute in affairs of government and war and that all departments and officials of the government should be subject to him. While most of the independent commentators writing on the subject seem to have conceived of the duties of the governor as savoring more of war than of peace, we may note that Manuel Bernáldez Pizarro, for many years a resident and official in the Philippines, writing in 1827, urged that the governors there should be efficient administrators rather than soldiers. It must be remembered, however, that the political conditions in the Philippines during his period were widely different from those of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries when the Islands were constantly exposed to the attack of outside enemies and liable to insurrections within. The chief problems of the nineteenth century were administrative, rather than military. He pointed out that governors had already exhibited too much of the militant spirit in dealing with the problems of government, "not heeding the opinions and customs of the country, but depending on the force of arms," or their asesores. [463] This had the effect of causing dissensions between the governor and audiencia, and the resultant discord had furnished a very bad example for the natives and residents of the colony. The characteristic tendency throughout the history, of the Islands to lay stress on the military side of the governor's position was commented on by Montero y Vidal, the modern historian of the Philippines, in the following terms: The authority of the governor-general is complete, and so great a number of attributes conferred on one functionary, incompetent, as a general rule, for everything outside of military affairs, is certainly prejudicial to the right exercise of his duty; ... since 1822 the government has always devolved upon an official; a general, and in the case of his death, a segundo cabo, and, in case of the death of the latter, a commandant of the naval station. [464] The preservation of the peace and the maintenance of the defense of the Islands was the chief responsibility and the most important duty of the governor and captain-general. Although the audiencia was ordered to do all that it could to assist, nevertheless the tribunal was strictly forbidden to restrict or hinder the governor in the execution of his military duties. [465] The governor's position as commander-in-chief of the king's forces, and his pre-eminence in military affairs, were generally recognized. Notwithstanding the fact that the early laws conferred exclusive military powers on the governor, a glance at three hundred years of Spanish colonial history will show that the audiencias participated in these matters in two different ways. In fact, an analysis of the military jurisdiction shows the presence and the exercise, in general, of two kinds of activity. These consisted, first, of a special judicial system for the trial of persons under military law and distinct from the civil jurisdiction, and second, of the control and disposition of the military forces of the Islands, and their utilization for defense. One, therefore, was judicial, the other was administrative, but both of these forces of activity were within the military sphere. The problem of this chapter, therefore, consists in determining the conditions, circumstances, and extent of the audiencia's participation in military affairs, and of its relation to the authority and jurisdiction of the governor and captain-general. As commander-in-chief, the governor was at the head of a special judicial system for the trial of soldiers under the military law. This judicial system was independent of the audiencia, and the latter body, during the greater part of the history of the Islands, was denied jurisdiction in these cases, even on appeal. [466] We have already noted, however, the tendency of the law to excuse these busy executives from direct participation in ordinary judicial activities. Notwithstanding the governor's status in the above-mentioned particular, he seldom intervened personally in the trial of such cases. His position with regard to the military jurisdiction was similar to his relation with the audiencia, of which he was president, but over which he seldom presided. The actual trial of the criminal cases of soldiers was conducted in first instance by military tribunals and magistrates. Most prominent among the latter were the castellán and the maestre de campo. The captains, themselves, had certain judicial authority within their companies. [467] Appeals were made from these military judges of first instance to the captain-general. If there had been notorious injustice or a grave infraction of the law in the trial of a case of first instance, it was the governor's duty either to refer the case to some other magistrate than to the one who originally tried it, or to a special judicial tribunal. An oidor might be designated to serve in this tribunal. When the magistrates served in this capacity they were responsible entirely to the governor and were not identified with the audiencia. Oidores frequently objected to this service, but the governor was usually able to enforce these demands, which were in accordance with the laws and approved by the home government. The captain-general exercised the pardoning power. Under some circumstances cases might be appealed to Spain, but in these suits, most of which involved personal crimes and misdemeanors, the decision of the captain-general or the local military tribunal was usually final, if for no other reason than the fact that the soldiers in Manila lacked the means to carry their cases further. Those cases which were appealed usually involved principles of law desirable to be tested by reference to a higher tribunal. The junta de guerra de Indias received all appeals from the military officials of the colonies and solved all questions of a judicial or administrative character that were carried to it. The junta de guerra consisted of four ministers of the Supreme Council of War who were designated to sit with an equal number of ministers of the Council of the Indies. [468] It was, in fact, the executive committee and at the same time the special tribunal of military affairs for the Council of the Indies. It passed upon such military questions as were nominally referred to it by the president of the Council of the Indies, although these cases automatically came to this junta without the intervention of the president of the Council. It had jurisdiction over appeals in cases affecting soldiers tried in first or second instance in the colonies, over the administrative matters of armament and defense: the equipment of fleets and military operations, garrisons, military supplies, and munitions. It also tried appeals from the tribunal of the Casa de Contratación, and, in fact, it exercised general supervision over that institution in its various activities. This was the machinery which existed for the adjudication of military cases during the greater part of the history of the Islands, the magistrates of the audiencia officiating as auditores de guerra when designated by the governor. [469] The royal decree of January 30, 1855, made a radical reform in this particular, adding two new magistrates, an auditor de guerra and an auditor de marina and to some extent relieving the ministers of the audiencia. These magistrates were appointed by the Minister of War and had original and secondary jurisdiction over cases involving soldiers and sailors of the fleet. These new magistrates served as ministers of the audiencia when their special duties permitted, and they were ordered to consult with the governor from time to time in regard to matters pertaining to their respective fields. Though the audiencia was forbidden to concern itself with cases which belonged to the military jurisdiction, the regent and two magistrates of the tribunal, acting with the auditor de guerra or the auditor de marina, could resolve themselves into a special court for the trial in second instance of cases pertaining to the respective fields of the last two officials. [470] Two or three cases may be described here which illustrate the method of procedure in the trial of military cases by the tribunals. On January 22, 1787, a royal order was issued on the recommendation of the junta de guerra de Indias, approving of a sentence of death pronounced upon a soldier in the Philippines four years before. This soldier had been sentenced in first instance by the castellán. The captain-general, on appeal, affirmed the sentence, and the junta de guerra approved the proceedings when the case was appealed a second time. [471] Another case, and one which illustrates the slowness of the proceedings of this junta, as well as the nature of its jurisdiction, was that of a soldier who had set fire to a powder magazine, causing it to explode, thereby killing several persons. The culprit was sentenced by the consejo ordinario de guerra, a sort of local military and strategic committee, composed of local military officers (in this case a kind of court-martial), [472] but Governor Basco y Vargas, upon the advice of his asesor, suspended sentence, directing the case to the junta de guerra. Nothing was done, however, and on December 10, 1788, Governor Marquina, successor to Basco y Vargas, wrote to the president of the Council of the Indies, calling attention to the fact that this soldier had been in prison for six years awaiting the action of the Council of the Indies. [473] The matter was then referred to the junta and the sentence was approved by that tribunal. As in all other departments and activities of government, so in this, there were many opportunities for conflict between the audiencia and the governor as to authority over cases which by their nature bordered on the sphere of both the civil and military jurisdictions. The governor who had the power to assign cases to whatever tribunal he chose, often took advantage of his position to bring the trial of civil cases within his own military sphere. Among these were suits involving the militiamen. These were subject to the military jurisdiction when they were under arms, and at other times, being civilians, they were subject to the civil authorities. [474] An instance of a case of this kind occurred in 1800. A militiaman, Josef Ruy, had killed an Indian, and the audiencia, on the basis of its authority over Indians, had sentenced the culprit to death. The governor, after sentence was passed, reopened the case on the ground that as a member of the militia, Ruy was subject to the military and not to the civil jurisdiction, although the militia was not at that time in active service. The judgment of the audiencia was therefore suspended. The case, meanwhile, had been appealed to the Council of the Indies, and that tribunal had approved the sentence of the audiencia, apparently without taking note of the fact that the case involved the military jurisdiction. A short time afterward the Council received a second report from the audiencia, stating that jurisdiction over the case had been surrendered to the governor on account of its military character. This procedure was accordingly approved by the Council. Soon after, report came of the receipt by the audiencia of the former judgment of the Council, relative to the action first taken by the audiencia, with the information that since the will of the Council was known, the governor had surrendered the prisoner again to the jurisdiction of the audiencia. Disgusted at the contradiction and cross-purposes at which the authorities in the Islands were working, the king decreed on March 27, 1802, that cases involving Indians should be tried in the audiencia, but that this poor wretch had been tried and retried, condemned and condemned over again so often that he had already expatiated his crime. He was accordingly authorized to go free. [475] The king administered a severe reprimand to the governor and oidores on this occasion for their insistence on these small points of personal dignity in which the real purpose of the law was entirely overlooked in the pompous insistence of these officials on what they imagined to be their own particular rights. The case just alluded to began in 1792, and was carried through ten years of petty strife. The blame for this cannot be ascribed entirely to the magistrates of the audiencia, or to the governor, who had to act in accordance with the law as he interpreted it. The real fault lay in the failure of the Spanish governmental system to place implicit confidence in the judgment and ability of its servants. Considering the final ends of justice, it made little difference whether sentence was pronounced upon this individual by the governor as military commander, or as president of the audiencia. It is true that the authorities might have compromised on many occasions; indeed, from the viewpoint of history it may be said that they should have done so, instead of so often wasting their energies on these petty battles. These incessant disputes were encouraged and facilitated by the ease with which appeals could be made to Spain, thus hindering the immediate execution of decisions. The Council of the Indies interfered in details which should have been left entirely to the colonial authorities. This interference encouraged appeal, and matters of no relative importance to Spain's colonial empire frequently occupied a large share of the attention of the sovereign tribunal. Colonial officials were not entrusted with the authority and responsibility which they should have had, and the central government wasted its time attending to small affairs which should have been concluded by subordinates in the colonies. The governor frequently claimed jurisdiction over cases involving retired soldiers on the grounds that they had once been under the fuero militar. He also claimed jurisdiction in suits affecting widows of soldiers, all of which, in accordance with the law of December 11, 1788, should have been tried by the audiencia. [476] Another abuse frequently perpetrated by the governor was the assumption of jurisdiction over suits for the payment by military officials of bonds which they had assumed for defaulted civil officials. [477] In doing this he was encroaching on the rights of the oficiales reales, and these were always supported by the audiencia in the contentions which arose over this question. Cases involving conflicts of jurisdiction between the civil and military authorities were appealed to the Council of the Indies, and there, after considerable delay, the proper sphere of authority was always determined. While the audiencia as a tribunal was forbidden jurisdiction in the trial of cases involving war, we have already shown that the governor exercised the right of designating oidores to try cases of this nature on second appeal. The power of enforcing this right depended entirely on the governor. Frequently the efforts of the governor along these lines were attended with much difficulty as were those of Governor Marquina in 1789 when he sought to designate an oidor to assist in the trial of Antonio Callejo, naval artilleryman on a frigate of war. The case had first been tried before the proper military judge, but it was referred on appeal to a tribunal of which an alcalde ordinario of the city was a member. The governor designated Oidor Yuguanzo to act as a member of this tribunal for the trial of the case of Callejo on review. The magistrate begged to be excused on the ground that all his time was occupied with the trial of civil cases in the audiencia. The governor called on all the other oidores successively, and all declined to act. At last he peremptorily ordered Yuguanzo to serve, telling him that if he objected he might carry the matter to the king in the regular way, which, according to the laws of the Indies, was to comply with the governor's demands, under protest, while appealing the question of disagreement to the Council of the Indies. [478] This was accordingly done, the magistrate basing his claim to exemption on the law which prohibited the governor from sending oidores on commissions outside the audiencia. [479] The governor at the same time filed a memorial which forestalled all the arguments of the oidor. [480] He stated that the real cause of the disinclination of the magistrates of the audiencia to serve as auditores de guerra was their indolence, and not the pressure of their excessive duties. It was contrary to their ideas of dignity to be associated with the acting auditor de guerra, who was not a letrado, and it was therefore considered a sacrifice of their own personal dignity. The governor stated that no argument could justify such an attitude on the part of the oidores. The inconsistency of their position was further shown, he alleged, by the fact that they had served regularly on the tribunal of appeals of the consulado, in company with two merchants who were not even lawyers. Hence there could be no reason for their refusal to serve with an alcalde ordinario. The governor based his right to call upon the regular magistrates for this service on that section of the laws of the Indies applying to Española, Nuevo Reino, and Tierra Firme, which declared that jurisdiction over cases affecting soldiers belonged to the captain-general with inhibition of the audiencia, and that soldiers, during the time they were under arms, should not be tried on criminal charges. [481] The governor, according to this law, might call upon a magistrate to serve as special auditor de guerra for the determination of cases in second instance. Finally, by April 20, 1784, the king had extended this rule to all other colonies. [482] Although we have no record of the reply of the tribunal in Spain, the strength of the governor's position could not well be questioned, especially since he was resting his case on a law made in 1784, which was completely up-to-date, while the magistrate's contention was based on one promulgated in 1609. [483] Aside from the duty of the oidores to try military cases when commissioned by the governor to do so, it will be seen that the tribunal itself exercised much more extensive authority in the actual administration of military affairs. Two factors may be said to have contributed to this. One was the fact that the audiencia was frequently consulted by the king or governor in regard to the defense of the colony. The other may be seen in the actual assumption of the government at various times by the audiencia, and the successful defense of the Islands by the military forces under the leadership of the oidores. Notwithstanding the fact that the governor's recognized sphere of action was military, and in spite of the repeated prohibitions against the interference of the tribunal in these matters, the audiencia received considerable official encouragement and authorization to interest itself in military affairs. As the problems of general administration were too serious for the solution of one man without advisors, so the governor also found it frequently undesirable to assume sole responsibility for military affairs. The audiencia shared the acuerdo power in these matters to a lesser degree than it did in government. The hostility of the Japanese in the early years, the fear of the Chinese, the danger of native outbreaks, the raids of the Moro pirates, and the incursions of the Portuguese, Dutch, and English aroused the fears of the commonwealth to such an extent that defense was felt to be a matter of common concern. The governor, upon whom legally rested the obligations and responsibilities of defense, was glad to share these duties with any authority that could be of assistance. The history of the Philippines is replete with instances in which the audiencia either gave counsel in matters pertaining to defense, or took an active part in resistance. There were even occasions on which it advocated offensive warfare. [484] We have seen in an earlier chapter that the audiencia manifested a keen interest in military affairs immediately upon its establishment. In the chapter on the establishment of the tribunal we noted the memorials of individual oidores and of the audiencia as a tribunal, advising the governor and the king as to the necessity of conquering the Moros, and on the best way of putting down insurrections in the Islands. The question of defense against the Portuguese and the Dutch was also discussed in the letters of the oidores. In some cases their advice was considered, on other occasions the governor complained against them for exceeding their jurisdiction. One of the most noteworthy instances of the recognized intervention of the oidores in military matters was on April 19, 1586, when a council, called together by Governor Sande and consisting of the governor, the bishop, and the oidores, considered the immediate occupation of China. This was urged by Governor Sande, but he was overruled by the moderate counsels of the bishop and magistrates. [485] No better illustration of the willingness of the governor to share his military responsibilities can be given than the reliance of Governor Dasmariñas on the religious authorities for advice in military affairs, after the suppression of the audiencia in 1589. [486] He consulted with them on ways and means of defending the colony against the Japanese, whose threatening attitude during his administration rendered precarious the continuance of Spanish power in the Islands. On one occasion he consulted the religious orders as to the advisability of expelling all Japanese and Chinese traders from Manila. The accumulation of provisions against a possible siege, the seizure of the persons and property of all Japanese residents, the establishment of a place of refuge for women, children, and sick persons in case of invasion, and the appropriation of the property of the natives as a pledge of their good behavior in the event of hostilities, were measures proposed by the governor to the religious for their consideration. Dasmariñas, on another occasion, asked the advice of the Augustinians, Dominicans, and Jesuits as to the best manner of dealing with an insurrection in Zambales, and the religious authorities, after quoting scholars, saints, and theologians, made lengthy recommendations. [487] These facts make clear the unwillingness of this governor to take the initiative in affairs pertaining to his own special province. He was content to ask and receive the advice of priests, monks, and magistrates, on military affairs. He was willing to seek the counsel of any and all available persons or authorities who could or would advise him. It is, of course, clear that the audiencia, when in existence, would be preferred as a source of advice and counsel to a community of religious. Not only did the governor set a precedent of seeking the advice of the audiencia during this early period, but the king often sought the opinion of the magistrates in regard to military affairs. Various matters were referred by the sovereign to the oidores at different times: questions involving the building of walls and fortifications of Manila, and the number and size of cannon needed for the proper equipment of the latter; the audiencia was asked whether it would be better to bring gunpowder from New Spain or to manufacture it in the Islands; the magistrates were required on several occasions to furnish information as to the number of men needed for the defense of the Islands, and whether the natives would make good soldiers. The audiencia furnished information to the king concerning the availability of the various Philippine woods for shipbuilding, and it furnished estimates as to the probable cost of ships both for commerce and war. [488] All these matters were supposed to come within the special military jurisdiction of the governor, yet, not only that official, but the king himself, required the advice of the magistrates on these questions. The conquest of Mindanao and the war in the Moluccas were also subjects of correspondence between the court and the local audiencia. [489] The king, on various occasions, requested information of the oidores concerning the natives and their attitude towards law and order, whether the various tribes were quiet, by nature peaceful or warlike, and what measures, in the opinions of the magistrates, would be best in dealing with them. The audiencia was consulted on other occasions as to the best manner of fortifying the Visayan Islands against the attacks of the Moros, and northern Luzón against the Chinese and Japanese, the possible cost and most suitable locations of fortifications, and their availability and probable value in repelling invasions. The reliance of the governor and the court upon the magistrates of the audiencia for advice in the matter of defense was not characteristic only of the early years of Philippine history. In 1744 Governor Torre submitted his scheme for the fortification of the city of Manila to the audiencia before he sent it to the king for final approval. [490] Torre was aided by a regular council of war (consejo de guerra) of which the oidores were members and he submitted questions relative to the defense of the Islands to this council. In 1746, this local council of war reported on the advisability and feasibility of manufacturing guns and powder in the colony. [491] Governor Obando, writing in 1748 to the king, and commenting on the relationship of the previous governor with the audiencia in the matter of defense, divided between his predecessor and the audiencia the responsibility for the payment of ten thousand pesos to bribe the Dutch to keep away from the city, and not to reduce it. [492] In a subsequent chapter we shall discuss the important part played by the audiencia in the defense and surrender of the Islands to the British in 1762. These incidents, taken at random from various governors' administrations, show that the audiencia was required to do all that it could to assist the governor and captain-general in the defense of the colony. It was also called upon to advise the court on military affairs; thus it was frequently able to assist in formulating and guiding the policies of the home government with regard to defense and military administration. In this way an indirect, but distinct check was placed upon the governor in his own field, and an incapable or radical executive was thus prevented from endangering the peace and security of the colony. But the influence of the audiencia operated much more effectively in defense of the colony than through the advice which it rendered either to the king or to the governor. From 1601 to 1625, during which period the residents of the colony were continually alarmed by the unceasing encroachments of the Dutch, the audiencia was frequently obliged to assume responsibility for the defense of the colony. In 1600 and 1601, when Francisco Tello de Guzmán was governor, Antonio de Morga, the senior oidor, led an expedition against the Dutch pirate Van Noordt and defeated him in Manila Bay. In 1607, the audiencia, then in charge of the government, maintained the defense of Manila and Cavite against the Dutch. [493] While Governor Pedro de Acuña was absent in the Moluccas in 1605-1606 on a campaign of conquest, the audiencia entertained and responded to a petition from the king of Tidore for assistance in resisting the oppression of the king of Ternate. The war in the Moluccas was continued by the interim government of the audiencia (1606-1608). The audiencia repeatedly assumed charge of the government during the frequent absences of Governor Juan de Silva (1609-1616) on expeditions of conquest; and it governed two years after his death (1616-1618). Under the leadership of Oidor Andrés de Alcaraz the military and naval forces of the Islands repeatedly repelled the invasions of the Dutch. [494] Of special merit was the work of this oidor in the preparation and equipment of a fleet of seven galleons which he led in the battle of Playa Honda, on April 14, 1617. In order to raise money with which to meet the expenses of this campaign, the audiencia was compelled to resort to the extraordinary recourse of seizing the money of Manila merchants on its arrival from Acapulco on the galleon. It also forced loans from residents and officials who were in the colony. The audiencia authorized the sale and the payment in advance for space on the galleon of the coming year. Alcaraz, in a report to the king, stated that the oidores had labored with diligence for the defense of the colony, personally concerning themselves with the casting of artillery, the drilling of soldiers, the obtaining of supplies, and in otherwise preparing the city for more adequate defense. [495] Under the leadership of the able soldiers and captains-general, Juan Niño de Tavora (1626-1632), Sebastián Hurtado de Corcuera (1634-1635), and Diego Fajardo (1644-1653), the audiencia interfered but little with the notable military operations of that period. Exception to this statement must be made in the cases of the capture and relinquishment of the island of Formosa in 1629 and 1642, respectively. The audiencia was unreservedly opposed to the proposed conquest of the island by Governor Tavora, who, nevertheless, undertook the expedition and carried it to a successful conclusion. When Governor Corcuera decided that the position of the Spaniards in Formosa was untenable and resolved to withdraw the garrison, the audiencia was equally forceful in its remonstrances. It sent charges to the court against the governor, alleging that this loss, and that of the Moluccas the year before would assuredly lead to the greater disaster of the loss of the Philippines. [496] The important part played by the audiencia in the defense of Manila against the British in 1762 will be discussed in another chapter. While Governor Rojo and the majority of the oidores were in the city, surrounded by the enemy, Oidor Anda y Salazar, who had been sent to the provinces as visitor, organized and maintained a defense against the enemy. When he was commanded by the governor to surrender, he refused, successfully maintaining the claim that as the sole, legally-appointed oidor who had not surrendered, he was both audiencia and governor, and as such his actions were legal. His claims were recognized and approved by the king. This is perhaps the most peculiar and extraordinary example of the audiencia's assumption of military power. The frequent assumption of the government by the audiencia, with responsibility for matters of defense and military administration may be cited as an additional reason for its reluctance to entirely abandon its interest in these affairs on the arrival of a governor. Notwithstanding this, and the additional fact that the king and governor frequently consulted the audiencia on military affairs, the tribunal did not always seek to retain preëminence in military affairs. This fact is shown by a letter which the audiencia wrote in 1598, acknowledging that "the only cases in which the governor is entitled to entire jurisdiction are those over soldiers--and these cases he may try independently, since he is captain-general." [497] There were numerous other occasions on which the audiencia unreservedly recognized the jurisdiction of the governor, often protesting against his excesses in military matters, but going no further than to register its protestations. For instance, it charged Governor Fajardo with carelessness in the outfitting of ships to resist the Dutch. One ship, it was said, was so poorly equipped that it sank before it left port. Fajardo was moreover accused of removing the commander of one of these ships, substituting his fifteen-year-old brother, Luís Fajardo, at a salary of 40,000 pesos. The audiencia contented itself with remonstrances against these wrongs, but it made no attempt to interfere. [498] Fajardo had his way in these matters, but he would have been compelled to answer for them personally in his residencia had he not died before that investigation took place. The governor's accountability for the government of the Chinese was closely related to his jurisdiction over military affairs. The Chinese were regarded with great suspicion by the residents of Manila, who lived in constant fear of an outbreak in the Parián, or of a descent upon the coast of Luzón by Chinese from without. The problem of the Chinese was therefore essentially one of defense, and as such it was entrusted to the governor and captain-general. Nevertheless, the audiencia claimed the right to intervene in many matters pertaining to the government of these people, and there was much dissension between the oidores and the governor over this question. The governor on some occasions rigidly resisted the claims of the audiencia to exercise jurisdiction over the Chinese, and on others he invited the participation of the tribunal. This state of affairs was brought about by the seeming conflict of the laws bearing upon this question. The earliest legislation to be found in the laws of the Indies dealing with the government of the Chinese was enacted on April 15, 1603. [499] This law forbade the alcaldes ordinarios to exercise jurisdiction over suits of the Chinese in the Parián, but it ordered that all cases involving them should be tried by a special alcalde of the Parián with right of appeal to the audiencia. A special judge was thus created by this law, with jurisdiction over the Chinese. [500] The purpose of this enactment was to establish a system of judicial procedure for the Chinese, whereby the latter might be kept apart from the Spaniards and natives in judicial as well as in governmental administration. This necessity was partly based on economic considerations, and partly on racial and religious reasons; it was designed essentially for the protection of the Spaniards. [501] On the basis of the above law of April 15, 1603, the audiencia immediately proceeded to concern itself with the government of the Chinese. It claimed jurisdiction particularly over the right to issue licenses allowing Chinese to reside and trade in the Philippines. This authority was also claimed by the governor and captain-general, who was responsible for the defense of the Islands. The audiencia also proceeded to issue regulations for the Chinese trade, laying itself open to the charge of selfish interest in these commercial activities. Complaints against the audiencia's intervention reaching the court, new regulations were issued on November 4 and December 1, 1606, which forbade the audiencia to concern itself with anything relative to the government and administration of the Parián, or with the Chinese who might come to the Islands for the purpose of trade, except at the solicitation of the governor. [502] In the letter accompanying these orders, the king informed Governor Acuña that although the Chinese in the Parián were under his charge, he was to take no important steps for their government without first consulting the audiencia. The inference of this law is clear, therefore, that the audiencia might have other activities than the purely judicial. This implication gave rise later to a considerable difference of opinion, but in consequence of this law the governor was established as the fountain of authority in Chinese affairs, with the oidores in a secondary position. On June 12, 1614, Philip III re-enacted the above law with some modifications. The fiscal was made legal protector of the Chinese. He was ordered to advise the alcalde of the Parián in legal matters pertaining to them, and the alcalde was to take no important steps without the advice and assistance of the fiscal. [503] The governor was ordered not to allow any ordinary or special judge, alcalde del crimen, or oidor, to exercise jurisdiction in first instance over civil suits or criminal cases of the Chinese, or to make inspections in the Parián. The last clause of this law, however, qualified and rendered dubious the effect and meaning of the entire enactment, by adding, "unless in a case so extraordinary, necessary and imperative that it may appear convenient to limit this rule." It will not be extraneous to point out here that this was a common weakness of many laws, by which they were frequently rendered entirely inapplicable. In this case, for example, the evident object was to prevent the oidores from interfering in Chinese affairs, thus guaranteeing the government and administration by officials who were endowed with knowledge and understanding of their racial characteristics and peculiarities, while centering the ultimate responsibility for them in the governor. It was realized, however, that exceptional cases might arise in which some other procedure might be advisable, and accordingly a loophole was left whereby the entire law could be nullified. The audiencia was thus given a basis for intervention in the government of the Chinese whenever it suited the convenience of the magistrates. This defect is emphasized here because this particular exception justified the intervention of the audiencia on many occasions, and was a cause of continual contention between the governor and the audiencia in Chinese affairs. Although it is difficult to settle conclusively the question of the extent of jurisdiction which the governor and the audiencia, respectively, exercised over the Chinese in the Parián, a few cases may be presented in this connection to show that both the governor and the audiencia were justified by royal authority in advancing claims to control. On December 4, 1630, the king wrote a scathing arraignment of the audiencia for having entertained an appeal from the Chinese over the head of the governor, practically disregarding the latter, and for making recommendations relative to the Chinese and to military affairs, which questions were entirely outside its province. [504] One of the items of the report of the recent visitor-general to the Philippines, Licentiate Francisco de Rojas y Ornate in 1629, had been a charge that the audiencia had condemned and fined a Chinese merchant for smuggling munitions of war into the colony, after the latter had proved that he had been acting under the instructions of Governor Silva. [505] The visitor-general took the position that this case was entirely within the military sphere; therefore the governor's decision was final, and the audiencia was proceeding without jurisdiction in attempting to deal with it. The king called upon the tribunal to justify its action in the matter. [506] It is to be noted that in this case the point at issue was not that the audiencia was interfering with a Chinaman who should have been punished by another authority, but that in assuming jurisdiction the audiencia had infringed on the special prerogatives of the governor with regard to war and government. The frequency and seriousness of the Chinese insurrections in the early seventeenth century, and the fear of a hostile invasion from China, placed all questions of dealing with the Chinese upon a military basis, hence the authority of the governor. Much correspondence of various kinds might be cited to show that the governor was encouraged to consult the audiencia on Chinese affairs. Not only was the governor expected to do this, but the king himself directed many letters to the "governor and audiencia" and to the "governor and oidores," in which he asked for advice and information bearing upon Chinese affairs. As we have already seen, cédulas treating of these matters were frequently expedited to the "governor and audiencia." The audiencia was requested by the royal authority on August 8, 1609, to submit information as to the truth of various statements by persons in the Islands that the Chinese were carrying away vast quantities of silver. The audiencia was ordered to enact measures which would stop this abuse, which, if persisted in, would inevitably result in an impoverishment of the Philippine community and government. The oidores were asked to suggest a course of action which would result in the retention of the Chinese trade and at the same time prevent the Chinese from doing irreparable damage to the royal exchequer in the ways alluded to. [507] In further illustration of the same subject, we may note the instructions of the king to Governor Silva, dated March 27, 1616. On this occasion the king prescribed a course of action for the governor to follow in case of the invasion of the Islands by the Chinese and Japanese. He was especially directed to prevent a union of the Chinese in the Parián with the forces of the expected invaders. Silva was ordered to take no steps without first consulting the oidores. [508] On July 25, 1619, having received news of the insubordination of the Chinese in Manila and of the danger of a revolt among them, the king wrote to the "president and oidores" expressing the belief that too many Chinese had been admitted to the Islands and that thereafter only enough should be permitted to man the ships and carry on trade. [509] The authorities to whom this letter was directed were charged not to allow the royal will relative to this matter to be disregarded, which, of course, implied the exercise of an executive power on the part of the magistrates, in addition to consultative authority. Again, on December 31, 1630, the king wrote to the governor and audiencia, stating that there had been received at the court from the Chinese of the Parián, a series of memorials, letters and petitions, complaining against the rigor of Spanish administration and requesting that they might be governed by mandarins, governors and alcaldes mayores of the "Chinese nation." The king signified his unwillingness to comply with their request at this time, and accordingly ordered the governor and audiencia to permit no changes to be made. [510] On July 27, 1713, the tribunal, acting in a legislative capacity, decreed that within thirty days "all Moros, Armenians, Malabars, Chinese and other enemies of the Holy Faith" should be lodged in the Parián when visiting Manila, or when living there temporarily for purposes of visit or trade. Penalties were also prescribed for the infraction of the above law. [511] This affords one illustration out of many which could be cited of the legislation of the audiencia in Chinese affairs. [512] On May 14, 1790, the king wrote to the "governor and president of the royal audiencia" and also to the tribunal, ordering the re-establishment of the Parián. This Chinese quarter had been abolished since 1756. It was agreed that the Chinese in this district should be ruled by an alcalde, who should also hear cases in first instance, with appeal to the audiencia. It was furthermore decreed that the Chinese population in the Islands should be fixed at 4000 and that each individual should be taxed at the rate of six pesos per capita. [513] This tax was to be collected by the cabecilla of the Chinese, a sort of local leader, subject to the alcalde of the Parián. This cédula, the king stated, was originally suggested by the acuerdo of the audiencia, and had been submitted for royal approval, which had been duly conceded. This correspondence, which shows the real operation of the government much more accurately than the citation of laws alone could do, makes it quite clear that throughout the history of the Islands, notwithstanding the existence of many cédulas to the contrary, the audiencia exercised advisory power in regard to the government of the Chinese. This authority was repeatedly recognized by the governor and by the king himself. After the inauguration of the superintendency of real hacienda at Manila in 1787, the incumbent of that office was made largely responsible for the Chinese. This was probably so arranged because the care and administration of the Chinese at that time involved questions of finance rather than of war and defense. It will be remembered, too, that, during much of the time, the office of superintendent was combined with that of governor. A number of disputes arose between the governor and the intendant after the latter office was created in 1785, [514] but after the union of the governorship with the superintendency, no further occasion of dispute arose. During the greater part of the nineteenth century, the peculiar nature of the office of intendant gave to the latter official the duty of collecting the licenses of the Chinese, subject to the superintendent. There yet remains something to be said regarding the administration of justice among the Chinese, and we must note certain typical disputes and disagreements which arose in that connection. That the audiencia had authority to try cases in second instance involving the Chinese has already been stated. Likewise the oidores were liable to special delegation to try cases of an extraordinary character which arose among the Chinese, as, for example in 1786, when Oidor Bolívar y Meña was designated to try in first instance charges which had been made against Chinese bakers in the Parián, who were said to have put a quantity of powdered glass in bread which they had made for the Spaniards. This case was regarded as one of more than ordinary significance, as involving treason and insurrection, and it was accordingly tried by an oidor who had been especially delegated for the purpose by the governor. [515] The question of Chinese jurisdiction is further illustrated by a dispute which arose in the colony between the audiencia and the governor, and which was carried to the king by the latter functionary on June 30, 1793. Oidor Moreno had ordered the arrest of the Chinese cabecilla of the Parián on a criminal charge. [516] The detention of the Chinaman was conceded to be justifiable, but Governor Marquina alleged that Moreno had entirely disregarded the cédula of October 11, 1784, which had ordered that in case of the arrest of any royal official, notification should be served to the governor in sufficient time for him to take the proper precautions for the safeguarding of any of His Majesty's property which might be in the care or under the protection of the official in question. He said that this particular arrest was typical of the petty interference of the oidores and illustrative of the slight pretexts upon which they frequently upset the whole system of government and caused untold annoyances. On account of the many difficulties in the collection of the tribute which had presented themselves as a consequence of the arrest of this particular Chinese official, and because the latter was especially efficient, the governor had asked the audiencia to permit the cabecilla to be excused on condition that he should bind himself to return to the custody of the audiencia after he had collected the taxes. This the tribunal had refused. The government, as a consequence, had been put to much inconvenience in finding a substitute, and the sum collected had been considerably less than was usually obtained, owing to the lack of experience of the new collector. After the cabecilla had been in prison over four months, he was brought to trial, and nothing being proved against him, he was freed. The audiencia, however, had won its point, and had manifested its right to the last word in judicial affairs relating to the Chinese. The difference between the appellate jurisdiction of the audiencia in contentious cases involving Chinese and in administrative matters which it did not have is illustrated by a case which came up in 1794 and lasted through twelve years of litigation. In the year aforementioned, the ayuntamiento of Manila brought suit before an alcalde ordinario of the city against a Chinese, Augustín Chagisco, on a charge of the failure of the latter properly to fulfill a contract which he had made to supply the city with meat. The alcalde ordinario, before whom suit had been brought in first instance, cancelled the contract, and the Chinese appealed to the audiencia. The tribunal, after due consideration of the case, restored Chagisco to his status as provider of meats (abastecedor de carne) for the city. Instead of appealing the case as one of law, the ayuntamiento wrote to the king on January 19, 1796, alleging that the audiencia had interfered in behalf of a Chinese whose services the ayuntamiento had discontinued as provider of meats, over which matter the audiencia had no jurisdiction. The king immediately gave expression of his approval of the stand of the ayuntamiento, being of the impression that the question at stake was one of appointment only. [517] At the same time the king demanded a full explanation from the oidores as to why they had interfered in this matter which was so far removed from their jurisdiction. The audiencia, in reply, sent all the records and testimonios of the suit to the Council, and that tribunal called upon the ayuntamiento in due time to explain why it had misrepresented the case. After a long period of acrimonious correspondence between the Manila authorities, the case was concluded on February 19, 1806, by a reversal of the earlier decision, and His Majesty sent a letter of congratulation and approval to the audiencia in appreciation of its stand in the matter. [518] The king informed the tribunal that it had been entirely regular in its proceedings, having reversed the decision of the alcalde ordinario in a legal suit which had been appealed by the Chinese to the audiencia in protest against the adverse decision of the lower court. Without carrying this discussion further, it is clear that the audiencia had general appellate jurisdiction in cases involving the Chinese. These cases, when they originated in the Parián, were tried in first instance by special judges for the Chinese, but suits brought against a Chinese who lived outside, or suits of a semi-public nature, as the one just noted, might be tried in first instance by the ordinary judges. It has also been noted that oidores were sometimes delegated to try cases in first instance involving treason or insurrection of Chinese. In regard to matters of government, it may be said that the governor was held responsible, but even in these the oidores participated in an advisory capacity. CHAPTER VIII THE AUDIENCIA AND THE GOVERNOR: CONFLICTS OF JURISDICTION Although it may be said that the relations of the governor and the audiencia were comparatively peaceful and harmonious throughout the history of the Philippines, there were many conflicts of jurisdiction and these struggles for power assume great prominence on account of their bitterness. An investigation of the principles underlying them and the arguments advanced by the contending parties will go far towards explaining the relationship of the audiencia with the governor. Certain factors and conditions were always prevalent in the colony to cause trouble and provoke enmity between the governor and the oidores. Chief among these were the rivalry between them for commercial profits, jealously of power and advancement, and the desire on the part of all, and particularly of the governors, to enrich themselves. Officials tended to regard their appointments as commissions to engage in profitable ventures and business undertakings--opportunities which were to be immediately improved. It is probable that the presence of the audiencia did more to check this tendency than any other agency, for the documents bearing on the history of the colony are replete with charges made by oidores and fiscales against governors. It is also true that the oidores did effective work in correcting the misdeeds of the provincial governors and justices on their official tours of inspection. That the audiencia should accomplish this result was to be expected, since the leading purpose of its establishment was to check the excesses of the governor. The other side of the question cannot be neglected, however, for charges were made in sufficient number against the oidores. It is with these charges and counter-charges, memorials, complaints, and arguments that the present chapter is concerned. The method to be pursued in this chapter will be that of indicating in all fairness both sides of these conflicts, not with the purpose of seeing which side was right, but with the object of obtaining the respective viewpoints of the governors and magistrates. We shall first consider evidence which was submitted in behalf of the audiencia against the governor, and in turn, that of the governors against the oidores. This method of procedure is the only one feasible since the materials here utilized consist mostly of arguments for or against the governor or audiencia, respectively. We have already seen that the first notorious disagreement in the colony arose between Bishop Salazar and Governors Ronquillo de Peñalosa and Santiago de Vera. This occurred before the establishment of the audiencia. The audiencia was in fact established partly to have an impartial tribunal present to arbitrate such disputes, and partly to check the excesses of the governor. [519] We have also given attention to the charges made by Oidor Dávalos against his fellow-magistrates and the governor shortly after the audiencia was established. It has been noted that the incessant quarreling between the governor and the audiencia from 1584 to 1589 was one of the causes for abolishing the tribunal at the latter date. From 1590 to 1595 the governor was supreme in matters of government, war, and justice. It was clearly shown during this period that the discord of a quarrelsome tribunal was eminently to be preferred to the unchecked abuses of an autocratic governor. In 1595 the audiencia was re-established by royal enactment; from that date onward it became a permanent part of the government, notwithstanding the fact that its relations with the other institutions of the colony were not harmonious. There were two complaints most frequently made against governors. One of these was their commercial excesses and the other, their abuse of the power of appointment. The former consisted of the monopoly of galleon space for themselves, or their friends, the acceptance of bribes from merchants for various favors, or the manipulation of the Chinese trade in some way for their own advantage. The tendency of governors to appoint their friends and relatives to office, notwithstanding the royal prohibition, and the apparent inability of the audiencia to prevent this was a source of complaint, especially during the early years of the colony. [520] Dishonest proceedings in the sale of offices, including the retention of the money received and the disposal of offices to friends for nominal sums, were among the irregularities of the early governors. These abuses the magistrates often knowingly permitted in return for some favor allowed them by the governor. That the laws which forbade these abuses of the power of appointment had been openly and flagrantly violated was a charge brought up repeatedly in the residencias of governors and magistrates. An examination of the correspondence of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries would almost lead to the belief that the home government despaired of ever righting these wrongs, and left them unpunished, rather directing efforts towards reform in other channels in the hope of remedying greater defects. Perhaps no governor more flagrantly disregarded the audiencia and the royal authority which it represented, or more frequently laid himself open to complaints on account of his violent conduct than Alonso Fajardo, who ruled from 1618 to 1624. Numerous charges were brought against him by the audiencia, some of which concerned itself, and some had to do with the general administration of the government. It was charged that Fajardo sought to usurp the judicial functions of the tribunal, and to assume control of the administration of justice. He had on one occasion broken up a session of the court during the trial of a certain person for murder, ordering a sergeant to take him out and hang him. Fajardo defended himself against this accusation by alleging that the criminal was a sailor from the royal fleet, whom he, as captain-general, had already condemned, and that the audiencia was acting illegally in entertaining the case. Fajardo was said to have released prisoners at his own pleasure, and to have abused the pardoning power. He had made threats of violence against the magistrates in the court-room. The audiencia not only complained against this governor's interference with the exercise of its functions as a court, but it manifested a wider interest than the purely judicial by complaining against the excesses of the governor in his own administrative field. The charge was made that Fajardo had bought up due-bills and treasury certificates from the soldiers and other creditors of the government, at less than their face value, and had presented them to the oficiales reales, realizing the full amount on them, and retaining the proceeds. He was charged with exacting large sums from the Chinese in exchange for trading privileges, retaining the money himself instead of putting it into the treasury. He was said to have forced loans from the merchants in order to make up financial deficits, and to have taken money out of the treasury, secretly, at night. Another charge brought against him was that of allowing favorites to go out and meet the incoming ships of the Chinese, thereby obtaining for himself and for them the choice parts of the cargoes in advance of the merchants of Manila. [521] There is no evidence that the tribunal was able to put a stop to these abuses. Oidor Álvaro Messa y Lugo, in a letter written to the king on July 20, 1622, continued the campaign which had been started by the audiencia against this governor. He claimed that Fajardo had sought to prevent officials and private citizens from sending complaints to Spain against him by examining all the outgoing mail before it left the colony. The oidor showed that wastefulness, private trade, bribery, carelessness in the administration of the exchequer, neglect of shipbuilding, corruption, and personal violence were among the misdeeds of this governor. Messa reported that he had tried unsuccessfully to authorize the auditing of the accounts of the galleon for two successive years, in accordance with the royal instructions which ordered that it should be done at the termination of each voyage by the fiscal and two oidores. [522] Messa said that the governor feared to have the colony's finances examined for it was well known that they were in a deplorable state. One instance of the governor's financial ingenuity which was given by Messa, illustrates the limitations placed by the audiencia on the governor's appointing power. The audiencia relieved the secretary of government, Pedro Muñoz, of his office upon the expiration of his term, selling the place to Diego de Rueda for 8000 pesos. Fajardo dispossessed Rueda and restored the office to its former incumbent for 1500 pesos. The audiencia's action in disposing of this office without the consent of the governor was justified by a law promulgated on November 13, 1581, ordering that offices should be bestowed only upon persons of such qualities and attributes as met with the approval of the royal justices. [523] The governor emerged triumphant in this contest, however, because it was generally recognized at that time that his word should be final in matters of appointment. Although we have seen in a former chapter that the governor consulted with the audiencia when an important appointment was to be made, the audiencia's intervention in matters of appointment depended largely on the strength of the tribunal and the relations existing between it and the governor. During this administration the audiencia was notoriously weak and harmony did not exist. The memorial presented by Messa y Lugo was chiefly concerned with the story of his own arbitrary arrest and imprisonment at the instigation of Fajardo on trumped-up charges, as he alleged. The judicial inquiry lasted two months, and it furnishes an excellent example of the power of a governor over a weak audiencia. The occasion for the investigation had been a disagreement between the governor and the oidor over the latter's claim to act as administrator of the property of Oidor Alcaraz, who had died in office. The governor, by the appointment of a magistrate favorable to himself as juez de difuntos, had hoped to control the administration of the property, since Messa was under sentence of residencia, and the remaining magistrates of the audiencia were favorable to him. Moreover, Fajardo wished to forestall certain charges of misgovernment which he knew that Messa was prepared to make against him. Consequently the governor designated an alcalde of the city to conduct the residencia. Messa was given practically no opportunity to defend himself. His property was sequestrated, even to his wife's clothing. Seeing that he could not obtain justice, he escaped from prison and took refuge in a Dominican convent. Messa, from the seclusion of the monastery, challenged the legality of the governor's procedure. According to his contention, the previous law authorizing the governor to name an alcalde ordinario to try an oidor, was now a dead-letter. Its chief defect had been that an alcalde, who was the creature of the governor, would always aim to render a decision pleasing to his master. He urged that the law then in force authorized the governor to proceed with the trial of an oidor, only upon consulting the audiencia, and moreover that resulting condemnations, if they were personal or corporal, should be confirmed by the Council of the Indies. [524] Messa therefore claimed that the governor had no authority to proceed with this case alone, since "those nearest (your Majesty), as are the auditors (oidores), cannot be imprisoned or proceeded against except by your Majesty or the royal Council, or by your order." The oidor then proceeded to show the extent to which, in his opinion, the governor might intervene in the sessions and proceedings of the audiencia. He wrote: The president, in virtue of his superintendency over the Audiencia, may ordain to the auditors what may be the just and reasonable in matters that pertain to the government and its conservation; and even, in the heated arguments that are wont to arise between the auditors, has authority, in case the nature of the affair might require it, to retire each auditor to his own house, until they make up the quarrel; and, should he deem it advisable, he may inform your Majesty. For the ordinance does not say that the president and alcaldes shall proceed, arrest, sentence and execute justice in criminal cases affecting the auditors. [525] This is the interpretation which Messa placed upon the law giving authority over the trial of magistrates of the audiencia to the governor. Messa then proceeded to discuss other matters relative to the respective spheres of the governor and audiencia. The governor had broken open the chest of the audiencia, extracting a large sum and spending it without accounting for the expenditure, and without any beneficial results. He was guilty of four murders, one of his victims being his wife. The audiencia should be empowered to try him for these crimes, but it lacked jurisdiction. During his term Fajardo had exercised such absolute power that justice had been paralyzed and litigants were holding back their suits from trial because justice could not be obtained in the audiencia. The governor had sent from the Islands more than a million pesos in goods and money, all of which he had obtained through fraudulent and illegitimate means. The governor had quarreled finally with the oidores who had remained faithful to him; one of these had become incapacitated through sickness, while the other had taken refuge in a Jesuit convent. The audiencia was thus dissolved. The governor, feeling the need of a tribunal, withdrew the charges against Messa, and ordered the latter to come back and resume his office. The oidor complied, but his hostility toward the governor had in no way abated. Messa concluded his memorial with the request that a visitor should be sent to the colony to investigate the charges which had been made against the governor, and at the same time to restore the audiencia to its rightful position in the colony. He stated his conviction that the office of governor should be abolished, and that the audiencia should be empowered to act in his place. This belief he justified by the statement that the audiencia had already successfully acted in the capacity of governor and had administered affairs with great satisfaction. The power which the governor had of imprisoning and chastising magistrates of the audiencia who dared to oppose him, enabled him to emerge victorious in his struggles with that body. He was even able to completely suppress the audiencia. Nevertheless he was obliged, through the need of the tribunal which he had vanquished, to restore it again, although it was opposed to him. In no less than three cases governors, in order to comply with the law requiring that there should be at least one oidor of royal appointment, were obliged to restore to the audiencia magistrates who had formerly been under arrest. Being in possession of all the powers of an executive, the governor was usually able to reduce the audiencia to subserviency, unless the dispositions of the opposing oidores were such that they would not submit. On the whole, the audiencia seemed unable to check the excesses of the governor, by virtue of its authority, and the oidores were obliged to confine themselves to protests and appeals to the king; these, only after years of delay, effected the removal or punishment of the governor and the appointment of another to continue his excesses. The complaints which Messa made on this occasion resulted in bringing to the Islands a visitor who conducted a lengthy, though somewhat tardy, investigation. Fajardo was already beyond the punishment of earthy kings and tribunals. But his property was seized and his heirs were fined; aside, however, from the removal of various of Fajardo's subordinates, the government was but little better for the protestations and appeals made by the audiencia. The oidores, instead of obtaining the desired reform measures, were usually rewarded for opposing a tyrannical governor and appealing to the court for support, by a reprimand for quarreling and an admonition to be quiet and peaceful, to preserve harmony, to attend strictly to their own affairs, and to abstain from interference with the government. Indeed, judging from the many similar replies which the oidores received in answer to their charges against governors, it appears that the preservation of harmonious relations between the officials of the colony was much more important than good government. Usually, however, in these struggles between the audiencia and the governor the contentions of one side or the other were based on law and justice. The effectiveness of the Spanish colonial government would have been greatly increased had the Council of the Indies taken advantage of these opportunities to investigate the principles at stake and support the right side, rather than by issuing impotent injunctions and remonstrances. The most significant controversy which ever occurred in the Philippines between the governor and the audiencia arose in connection with the banishment of Archbishop Pardo in 1683. It is not the purpose here to give a detailed account of the Pardo controversy, which will be discussed again in connection with the relations of the audiencia and the church. However, since this episode involves certain incidents illustrating important phases of the relationship of the governor and the audiencia, it is desirable to refer to it here in considerable detail. The real occasion for this conflict was the defiance of the laws of the royal ecclesiastical patronage by the archbishop, who insisted on making ecclesiastical appointments without consulting the governor. The governor appealed to the audiencia for support, and the tribunal exercised jurisdiction over the case on the basis of its right to try cases of fuerza and to prevent ecclesiastical judges from infringing on the civil jurisdiction. Juan Sánchez, the secretary of the audiencia, relates that, owing to the interference of the Dominicans and Jesuits, and their harsh public criticism from the pulpit of the audiencia and government, "the royal Audiencia felt obliged to advise its president, then Don Juan de Vargas, that he should apply a corrective to these acts." [526] This corrective was the banishment to Spain of certain individuals of the Dominican order to answer for their misdeeds and ultimately the exile of Archbishop Pardo from the city. It is enough to say that Governor Juan de Vargas Hurtado and the audiencia acted in harmony on this occasion, presenting a solid front to the ecclesiastical power. When the new governor, Curuzaelegui, arrived, however, he forced the audiencia to ask pardon and absolution from the archbishop, which the magistrates did on their knees. The new governor disgraced Vargas in the residencia, waiving for a time the residencias of the oidores. Pardo was recalled from exile, and the audiencia was forced to legalize his restoration to his see on October 25, 1684. Thus the new governor and the archbishop triumphed over the combined forces of the ex-governor and the audiencia. It is clear that the power of the new governor was derived chiefly from his status as royal vicepatron, acting in conjunction with the archbishop. This power Vargas had formerly employed in co-operation with the audiencia, and thereby both had gained their victory over the prelate before the arrival of the new governor. Curuzaelegui used the same authority to recall Pardo; and in so doing he was probably the only governor in the history of the Islands who ever supported a prelate against the advice of the audiencia. The combination of a governor and an audiencia was much more frequent, as we shall see. The position of the governor was strengthened, also, by his commission to conduct the residencia of Vargas, and the respect which the audiencia had for him was increased by the fact that in judging the ex-governor's misdeeds he was also authorized to hold the oidores responsible for all their official opinions and acts in acuerdo with the disgraced governor. [527] Another source of the governor's strength was to be found in the royal instructions which he carried with him to stop the quarrels previously existing in the colony. The oidores very prudently submitted to the new governor, and therefore, for a time, they were patronized by the latter, who utilized their intimate knowledge of local affairs to aid him in obtaining control of the government and familiarizing himself with it. Meanwhile he literally held the residencia over their heads. The attitude of the new governor toward the audiencia during the first six months may be described as conciliatory. That he did not act with entire independence of it is attested by the fact that when Vargas appealed to the tribunal against the ecclesiastical penalties imposed by the archbishop, the governor signed the act ordering the absolution of his predecessor. When the archbishop persisted in his intention to humiliate Vargas on the ground that the Inquisition demanded such action, the new governor threatened again to expel the prelate if he did not desist. [528] His pacificatory efforts also resulted in a temporary cessation of the hostility between the archbishop and the audiencia; he held private conferences with the oidores, manifesting repeatedly his determination to proceed harmoniously with them. As a result of this treatment, the magistrates were emboldened to urge that the return of the prelate was contrary to law, and inconsistent with all precedent. Finally, unable to resist the pressure exerted by the archbishop, and obtaining advance information of the royal condemnation of the audiencia for its acts in the banishment of Pardo, the governor arrested, imprisoned, and exiled the magistrates, temporarily reconstituting the tribunal with local and more subservient members. [529] Curuzaelegui's proceedings were thenceforth as high-handed as they had formerly been conciliatory, and from that time onward the residents of the colony were subjected to the rule of an absolute governor, aided by an unscrupulous and vindictive prelate and a subservient audiencia. Just before his imprisonment, Magistrate Bolívar, in a letter to the Minister of the Indies, described the chaos existent in Manila as follows: Here there is no will, save that of a governor, since he is absolute, we all had to acquiesce, under compulsion and pressure, in the restitution of the archbishop; [530] ... to state the case in few words, the archbishop does whatever suits his whim, without there being anyone to restrain him. [531] Fray Luís Pimentel, a Jesuit, in a letter which he wrote to a friend, stated that the arrest of the oidores by the governor had been inspired by personal spite and a desire for revenge. He had desired to punish magistrates Viga and Bolívar, particularly for their opposition to him in matters of administration and in his trading-schemes. The governor was also said to have been actuated by a suspicion that these oidores had formulated elaborate charges of misgovernment against him, and he desired to prevent these complaints from reaching the king. [532] Pimentel proceeded to relate that the governor then found himself embarrassed without the aid of an audiencia, and had accordingly formed another of his own selection. This body was careful to execute the governor's will in every particular; consequently there was no check on his misrule. This new audiencia approved all the acts of the archbishop and refused to entertain the appeals of the ex-governor, royal decrees were despatched against the preachers (Jesuits) who zealously proclaimed from the pulpits the arbitrary and malicious character of the recent acts, and the Dominicans alone had the privilege to utter whatever absurdities they pleased in the pulpits.... No authentic statement of the evil deeds of these years can be sent to the court for the scriveners are intimidated and will not give official statements of what occurs, except what may be in favor of the governor and the archbishop. Item, (this) is written in much distrust and fear, on account of the numerous spies who go about prying into and noting everything that is done. [533] Pimentel stated that the archbishop, who was a Dominican, had used this rupture between the governor and the audiencia, and the favor of the governor, particularly, as an occasion and pretext for imposing on the Jesuits and Franciscans. He had deprived them of their lands and parishes, and had obtained many favors for the Dominicans and Augustinians at the expense of the rival orders. "It seems as if the governor had come to the islands," Pimentel wrote, "for nothing else than to encourage the Dominicans in their rebellious acts, to trample on the laws, to abolish recourse to the royal Audiencia, to sow dissension, to be a tyrant, to disturb the peace, and to enable the archbishop to secure whatever he wishes, even though he imposes so grievous a captivity on the commonwealth." [534] The Pardo controversy and its consequences show the extremes to which a weakened audiencia was reduced on occasion by a new governor who came to the Islands, armed with recent royal decrees instructing him to bring about peace and order. Curuzaelegui, assisted by the royal visitor, who bore instructions even more recent than those of the governor, imprisoned and exiled the oidores, confiscated their property and brought about their ruination and death. He then appointed another audiencia of his own choice. All these acts were strictly legal, and in accordance with his instructions. The governor's conduct before the appointment of the visitor was more lenient and tolerant than afterwards. This shows that he realized the necessity of fulfilling the royal will, the policies of which were entrusted to Valdivia for execution, even at the expense of harmony with the local tribunal. Had he not been assured of the support of the church on the one hand, and of the royal approval on the other, as shown by the commission of Valdivia, it is improbable that he would have broken with the audiencia, or would have attempted to use his power so extensively. The presence of an audiencia was necessary to the government of Curuzaelegui. This is shown by his conciliatory attitude toward the tribunal of Vargas, until he knew that it was under the condemnation of the king, also by his own act in forming a new one. This controversy clearly illustrates the extent to which a governor might use his power, and it shows, on the other hand, the indispensable character of the audiencia, even at a time when it was least powerful. Curuzaelegui, in the name of the king, completely obliterated the legally constituted audiencia, appointing another to serve until it could be legalized by regular appointment. Chronologically speaking, the next great struggle which throws light on the subject which we are considering, occurred during the administration of Governor Bustamante (1717-1719). The audiencia was reduced to a deplorable state of helplessness and inefficiency on this occasion, and the circumstances surrounding its relationship with the governor were in many ways similar to those which have been described. For a period of two and a half years antecedent to the coming of Bustamante, the government of the Philippines had been nominally in the hands of the audiencia, but in reality, under the control of the senior magistrate, Torralba. One of the first acts of Bustamante, after his arrival in the Islands, was to take the residencia of Torralba, and this investigation led him to make serious charges against the other magistrates. In the residencia which followed, the finances of the colony were found to be in bad condition, and all the officials of the civil government, as well as many of the churchmen, were discovered to be deeply interested in private trade, to the neglect of their duties and to the detriment of the government. Large amounts of money were found to have been smuggled without permission into the colony on the galleon from Mexico. The accounts of the treasury department were discovered to have been loosely kept, and many of the officials, including magistrates of the audiencia, were found to be serving without financial guarantees. [535] Bustamante immediately took steps to re-organize the government and to place the finances of the colony on a sound footing. He put a stop to the smuggling, forced the merchants to pay the authorized duties, and imposed fines on those who had been guilty of negligence and misconduct. At the end of six months the efforts of Bustamante had netted a sum of 293,000 pesos to the royal treasury. His successful efforts towards clearing up the finances of the colony, making every person pay his just dues without regard to position, rank, or affiliation, and the seeming harshness of his methods incurred general hostility and contributed largely to his downfall. [536] His investigation of the finances was said to have revealed a shortage of over 700,000 pesos, for which he held Torralba and the other magistrates responsible, putting, most of the blame, however, on Torralba. All but one of the magistrates were arrested and incarcerated in Fort Santiago. Before this was done, however, Bustamante asked the advice of the archbishop, the religious corporations, and the universities, as to what steps he should take in the matter. He recognized that he would be seriously embarrassed without an audiencia, but the investigations which he had made showed that all of the oidores were guilty of misappropriation of the government funds. Would he be justified in forming an audiencia of his own selection, composed of duly qualified lawyers, with one minister of royal designation remaining? It was his opinion that the presence of one regularly appointed magistrate would lend legality to the entire tribunal, so he asked advice as to which of the three oidores would be most suitable to retain. He cited as a precedent in favor of his reconstitution of the audiencia the action of Governor Curuzaelegui in 1687 and 1688 when he exiled and imprisoned the oidores and reformed the audiencia with his own appointees. Bustamante proposed to do exactly what Curuzaelegui had done, that is, to act as president himself, appointing the fiscal as oidor, and designating a duly qualified lawyer and an assistant fiscal to fill the other vacant places. Bustamante expressed an apparently sincere desire to do justice to all. He desired, particularly, that the administration of justice in the courts should be allowed to proceed without interruption and without that loss to the commonwealth which would come from the absence of a tribunal. [537] The replies given by the orders on this occasion involve important laws and principles which underlie the nature of the audiencia and its relation to the governorship. The archbishop, in a subsequent report to the king on the government of Bustamante, stated that all the religious authorities in the colony advised the governor against the destruction of the audiencia, and questioned the authority of the prelate to constitute another. [538] It seems, however, from an investigation of the letters, that the Jesuits counseled the governor in favor of the proposed action. The reasoning of the Jesuit theologians was as follows: there should be retained in the Philippines, according to the Recopilación de Indias, [539] four oidores and a fiscal for the proper administration of justice, and if the fiscal were the only remaining member of the old audiencia he would become an oidor in case of a vacancy, by virtue of the recognized law. [540] Owing to the multitudinous duties of the oidores and to the great importance of the audiencia, great harm would arise if there were not enough magistrates. Since the governor's jurisdiction extended to all departments of government, it was the opinion of the Jesuits that it was incumbent on him to take such steps as might seem necessary for the preservation of the government. This was specially imperative since it was his duty to see that there was no delay or neglect in the administration of justice. Inasmuch as the audiencia was indispensable to him as vicepatron in its jurisdiction over ecclesiastical affairs, and because of its consultative powers in all affairs of government and finance, the governor should have the right to create an audiencia, if one did not exist, or if the members who were regularly constituted by royal appointment were incapacitated from service. [541] The opinion of the Dominicans of the University of Santo Tomás differed widely from that advanced by the Jesuits. Their advice coincided with that of the archbishop, being to the effect that it would not be convenient to qualify one of the ministers alone, but that all of them should be restored to the audiencia. This meant that Bustamante should recede from his position, remove all the oidores from prison, and accept them as an audiencia. If the three oidores deserved punishment it would be unfair to the remaining two magistrates to exempt one, and such action would lay the governor open to charges of inconsistency and favoritism. The Dominicans contended that only the king in council could suspend or remove oidores, and that such power was not given to any other authority, not even to a viceroy. [542] Though in Sicily and Naples this right is granted, in the Indies the contrary is true, because only the king that appointed them may suspend them, and it is commanded that the viceroys must not interfere with or impede their jurisdiction. [543] The Dominicans were of the opinion that the governor had authority to discipline the oidores, but in so doing he could not go so far as to remove them from the tribunal unless commanded to do so by the Council of the Indies. Whatever disciplinary action the governor might decide on, it should not be taken on his own authority, but in the execution of the orders of the Council of the Indies. This opinion, the Dominicans alleged, was in accordance with the laws of the Indies. [544] They cited, in support of their argument, an instance in which the king reproved Gálvez, the Viceroy of New Spain, because, without the authority of the Council, Gálvez had suspended a magistrate of the Audiencia of Mexico, whom he should have honored and to "whom he should have accorded the treatment of a colleague." [545] The Dominicans expressed the opinion that the prosperity of the Islands and the welfare of the government depended on the audiencia, and though it might be desirable to remove the oidores for personal guilt, it could not be done in this case without wrecking the entire government. The king, himself, had shown respect for the inviolability of the audiencia when, in 1710, he had judged all the ministers to be equally guilty of not having fulfilled the laws and ordinances on the occasion of the coming to the Islands of the Patriarch of Antioch, [546] satisfying himself with the removal of the decano only and allowing the other magistrates to remain. Disregarding the advice of this learned body, turning a deaf ear to the protestations of the archbishop, and heeding only the counsel of the Jesuits, which was more favorable to his wishes, Bustamante proceeded to execute his own will in a manner which proved distasteful even to the order whose advice he was following. [547] He arrested and imprisoned the guilty magistrates and created a new tribunal out of his own clientele, leaving only Villa, a former magistrate, in office. The latter protested against the action of the governor, and retired to the convent of Guadalupe, near Pásig. Informed that there was a conspiracy against his life and needing the counsel of some person, or persons, on whom he could rely, Bustamante was well-nigh desperate. His government, as it then stood, lacked the complexity of legality which the presence of one oidor of royal nomination would have given it. In order to remedy this defect he released Torralba, the guiltiest of the former magistrates, and the man under arrest for the defalcation of 700,000 pesos of the king's revenue. Torralba's crimes had been notorious, and the act of Bustamante in associating himself with a person of the unsavory reputation and the unpopularity of Torralba not only divorced him from whatever popular sympathy he might have had among the residents of the colony, but it aroused the hostility and antagonism of the Jesuits who had been heretofore the governor's friends. Aside from the unfortunate character of the act, it was also illegal, being contrary to the law which directed that in case an oidor were suspended from his place he should not be restored without the consent of the king and the Council of the Indies. [548] The newly constituted audiencia busied itself at once with the task of government. Archbishop de la Cuesta, among others, questioned the legality of the tribunal's opposition to the excommunication of its members. He was arrested by the governor, and then arose the contest which culminated in the murder of Bustamante, in the suppression of his audiencia and in the first officially recognized government by a prelate in the Philippines. The archbishop reappointed all the former magistrates to office, with the exception of Torralba, and the misdeeds of the government of Bustamante were saddled upon the ex-magistrate. Two noteworthy considerations stand out prominently in connection with this struggle; first, the influence of the governor over the audiencia, and his power to deprive regularly appointed magistrates of their positions and to constitute a new audiencia if he chose, notwithstanding the prohibition of the laws, and, second, the complete control by a governor over an audiencia which he had created. It is not necessary to state that the Madrid government discredited all the later acts of Bustamante's administration, including the recall of Torralba, who was a self-confessed criminal under arrest, when restored by the governor. There is nothing to show, however, that the king disapproved of the acts of Bustamante in creating a new audiencia, unless it were the royal approval of Cuesta's act of reconstituting the old tribunal. Torralba, in his residencia, was made to suffer for all the misdeeds of his government (in reality that of the audiencia, Torralba being decano, 1715-1717), as well as for those of Bustamante (1717-1719). The audiencia, after it had been reconstituted by the archbishop-governor, neglected to investigate the causes of the governor's death, alleging as a reason that this proceeding will greatly disturb the community; that to proceed against these persons will be to cast odium on and grieve nearly all the citizens, since the commotion was so general; that all those who went out on that occasion did so "in defense of the ecclesiastical immunity, the preservation of this city, the self-defense of its inhabitants, and the reputation of the [Spanish] nation;" and that to carry out this plan would be likely to cause some disturbance of the public peace. [549] In a word, the influence of the archbishop was sufficient to keep the audiencia from undertaking a formal investigation of the causes of the governor's death. It was quite generally recognized that the murder had been committed in the interests of the prelate, probably by an assassin who had been in his pay, or in that of his friends, the Jesuits. This is another illustration of the subserviency of the audiencia to the governing power, on this occasion a churchman, who had actively participated in the removal of his predecessor. An interesting though ineffective protest was made by the audiencia against the appointment of José Basco y Vargas as Governor of the Philippines in 1778. A communication was sent to the court describing the abject state into which the king had degraded the audiencia by subordinating it to a man whose title and rank as Captain of Frigate gave him only the right to be addressed as You, while each of the magistrates enjoyed the title of Lordship. The Council rejected the complaint as an absurdity, after which certain oidores conspired to bring charges against Basco y Vargas, to arrest him and to make Sarrio governor. The latter had been ad interim governor after the death of Anda, and he was at that time the beneficiary of the title and position of segundo cabo, or second in command of the king's forces in the Islands. Sarrio refused to join the magistrates in their revolt against the governor. Basco y Vargas was informed of their treason, and it is significant that he complied with the royal laws, not by attempting to punish the offenders himself, but by sending the recalcitrant magistrates to Spain where they were dealt with by the Council of the Indies. [550] This was only a prelude to the discord which existed throughout the administration of this able governor. The king was obliged to issue special cédulas on various occasions, ordering a cessation of the perpetual discord. [551] Basco y Vargas formed a society for the advancement of the economic interests of the Islands, [552] and in that, as well as in his successful organization of the profitable tobacco monopoly, he was opposed by the audiencia. The tribunal claimed that the governor was limiting its sphere of authority in inaugurating these reforms. [553] Basco y Vargas recommended and brought about the separation of the superintendency of real hacienda from the rest of the government. This the audiencia also opposed, but in the contest over jurisdiction which ensued between the governor and the intendant, the governor and the audiencia acted in complete harmony, because this new official threatened their mutual interests and prerogatives. [554] Outlawry and highway robbery became so common throughout the Islands during the term of Basco y Vargas that the governor appointed prosecutors, sheriffs, and judges-extraordinary to assist in the preservation of order, which the alcaldes mayores were not able to accomplish by themselves. The audiencia, feeling that this was a grave intrusion upon its prerogatives, appealed to the king and succeeded in bringing the sovereign displeasure upon the head of the governor. The royal cédula stated that there was no need of these additional officials. The judicial machinery which had been provided for the Philippines from the beginning was sufficient. The governor was warned, furthermore, to abstain from meddling with the jurisdiction of the audiencia. [555] This case confirms the statement already made in this treatise that during this period and, in fact, after the establishment of the regency in 1776, the governor exercised a diminished authority in judicial affairs. When Basco y Vargas took his office as governor of the Philippine Islands, he was obliged to subscribe to two oaths, one as governor, and the other as president of the audiencia, but he was warned by a special decree of the king to keep from confusing these two functions as former governors had done. [556] Many disagreements took place between the audiencia and Governor Marquina, who succeeded Basco y Vargas. Marquina quarreled with the audiencia over almost every act of government in which he had relations with the tribunal. Marquina was said to have repeatedly disregarded the acuerdo and to have done as he pleased in matters wherein the audiencia had been or should have been consulted. There was a bitter contest in 1789, shortly after the arrival of this governor, because he had excused various officials of real hacienda from appearing when summoned to the audiencia to serve as witnesses. Marquina did this, he claimed, because they were needed in the provinces as financial agents, and because their absence from their posts of duty would entail a grave loss to the government. The audiencia solved the matter by forwarding all the correspondence relative to these cases to the Council of the Indies. It may be said that Marquina, in exempting these witnesses, was acting in his capacity as president of the audiencia, but in his solicitude that no loss should occur to the royal exchequer he was acting as superintendent of real hacienda, which was within his authority. [557] In 1790 Marquina recommended the abolition of the audiencia on the grounds that its continued presence constituted an obstruction to the harmonious working of the machinery of government. He said that the tribunal was a powerful weapon in the hands of men who used it for their own personal advancement. In the place of an audiencia he suggested the substitution of three asesores, one for civil and criminal cases, one for real hacienda, and another for commerce and the consulado. These asesores would have jurisdiction over the cases which corresponded to these three departments. This scheme, he believed, would effectively provide for all the judicial cases arising in the Islands. [558] To this scheme, however, the Council paid no heed. Considerable attention has been given in another chapter to the charges made by the audiencia against Marquina at the time of his residencia. These complaints show that a state of continual disagreement had existed between these two authorities throughout the entire term of the governor, and the bringing of these charges was instrumental in making Marquina undergo a very strict investigation. Personal jealousy was no small factor in these continual recriminations. At no subsequent date, however, were the large issues at stake which were characteristic of the struggle between the audiencia and the governor at the time of Fajardo, Curuzaelegui, and Bustamante. Those were death-struggles on the issue of whether the audiencia should be an independent tribunal or whether it should be subservient and subject to the governor. During those struggles the tribunal was momentarily suppressed, or converted into an instrument, in the hands of the governor. But these were exceptional cases, and during the greater part of the long period of three hundred years the relations between the audiencia and the executive were not so discordant as they would seem to have been, judging by the instances cited in this chapter. The audiencia, on all occasions of dispute with the governor, was able to offer a formidable resistance to his so-called encroachments on the prerogatives of the tribunal. Although the governor, on most of the occasions noted above, occupied the stronger position, owing to his more recent instructions, the support given to him by the church, and his control of the residencias of the magistrates, nevertheless it may be said that either authority was sufficiently powerful and independent to be respected as an antagonist by the other, and each was indispensable to the other. These disagreements have been discussed in the foregoing pages largely from the view-point of the audiencia. Practically all the charges and complaints which have been cited were made in behalf of the audiencia, and these show the magistrates in almost all cases to have been acting in defense of their rights against usurpation and tyranny. Fairness demands, however, that the other side should be presented in the same manner. [559] Reference will now be made to a few of the many memorials heretofore unquoted, which were sent by various governors in protest against the alleged excesses of the audiencia. As a first instance we may note the criticisms which Governor Gómez Pérez Dasmariñas made of the first audiencia which served from 1584 to 1589. We shall also consider the complaints which Dasmariñas made against Pedro de Rojas, former oidor and later teniente and asesor of that governor (1589-1593). Dasmariñas came to the colony shortly after the first audiencia had been suppressed and from his correspondence one may estimate the prevailing opinion of the tribunal which had been recently removed. The governor wrote as follows: As the royal Audiencia was here so haughty and domineering, he (Pedro de Rojas) retains that authority and harshness, with which he tries to reduce all others as his vassals. In the matters of justice that he discusses, he is unable to be impartial, but is in many matters very biased. This is because of his trading and trafficking, which the president and all the auditors (oidores) carried on from the time of their arrival--and with so great avidity, trying to secure it all to themselves, that I find no rich men here beside them. This is the reason why Rojas ... and the auditors opposed the pancada in order that the consignments of money sent by them to China might not be known--which, at last, have come to light. [560] The governor charged the audiencia, moreover, with having opposed the three per cent tax levied for the construction of the city wall. Indeed, he accused the magistrates of having influenced the friars to oppose all his acts as governor. He referred to the commercial excesses of the oidores, saying: "If the matter of inspection and the residencia held here had fallen to my order and commission, as it fell to that of the Viceroy of Nueva España, I would have proved to your Majesty the investments of past years." He concluded with the statement that Rojas had been so busy with gain that he had been unable to attend to his other duties; he was "puffed up with the authority and name of auditor" (i. e., oidor). He protested against the transfer of Rojas to an office in Mexico, "for," he wrote, "such men go delighted with their interests and gains from trade here, they are fettered and biased by their relations with the trade of this country." Thus we see that even this early in the history of the Islands, the oidores as well as the governors were accused of a predominating interest in commercial affairs. Governor Pedro de Acuña recommended the suppression of the audiencia in 1604, although he said that he had had no serious trouble with that tribunal. His chief reason in favoring its removal was that an appreciable saving would be realized thereby. The audiencia was, moreover, very unpopular in Manila. He alleged that the name of oidor was so odious that it was in itself an offense. He stated that affairs had come to such a pass that because I, in conformity to what your Majesty has ordered, have attempted to maintain and have maintained amicable relations with the auditors; and have shown, on various occasions, more patience and endurance than the people considered right; and more than seemed fitting to my situation, in order not to give rise to scandal; some have conceived hatred for me, publicly saying that ... I was neglecting to look after them, and that I could correct the evil which the Audiencia was doing. But as I cannot do that, it has seemed to me the best means to let the public see that there was good feeling between me and the Audiencia. [561] Here we have the case of a governor, who, in order to get along in harmony with a quarrelsome and unpopular audiencia, gave way to it on many occasions, and even incurred the displeasure of the residents of the colony on account of what seemed to them to be the governor's easy-going attitude. His zeal for the king's service, as he expressed it, moved him to recommend the abolition of the tribunal. He said that the audiencia would not be missed if it were removed, since there were only twelve hundred residents in the colony and there were few cases to be tried. Most of the suits arising in the Islands could be adjudicated by the alcaldes ordinarios and appeals could be sent to Mexico. The acuerdo, or administrative session, Acuña alleged, existed in name only. Acuña made practically the same charges that have been so often repeated already in this chapter. The magistrates had interfered in the appointment of officials, which the governor claimed as his sole prerogative. Each magistrate was accompanied on his journey to the Islands by a vast company of relatives and dependents, who came to get rich. These persons ultimately monopolized all the offices. Notwithstanding the king's orders which forbade that offices should be held by relatives of oidores, the governor was placed in such a position that if he did not allow these persons to hold office, the magistrates would take revenge by opposing him at every turn, thus ruining the success of his administration. [562] The same was true of trade, for these relatives had to live, and if the government could not support them, they had to be assigned privileges and advantages in trade, which the oidores by virtue of their official positions could guarantee. [563] In view of all these abuses and evils which, directly or indirectly, proceeded from the audiencia, Acuña maintained that all the powers of government, war and justice, should be concentrated in the office of governor and captain-general. The country, he said, was more at war than at peace. It was essentially military, by virtue of its location and isolation. Acuña contended that all authorities and departments of the government should therefore be dependent on a military chief rather than on a high court of justice which was out of sympathy with the spirit and needs of the colony. In a government so new as that of the Philippines, the same laws and punishments should not be enforced so rigidly as in more settled parts, yet the magistrates of the audiencia had failed to understand that their functions in a colony of this character should be in any way different than those of a similar tribunal in Spain. Acuña stated that there had been occasions in which the audiencia, in possession of partial evidence in regard to a military matter, had interfered with an action which the governor had wished to take. He had thus been rendered powerless to exercise sovereignty which rightfully belonged to him, and which, if put into effect, would no doubt have been for the best interests of the colony. In addition to the above representations, the governor laid great stress on the financial advantages which would be derived from a suppression of the tribunal. He stated that the colony was short of money, a condition of which the magistrates were well aware, yet they always insisted on being the first to collect their own salaries, to the exclusion, if necessary, of all other officials in the colony. [564] With the money saved from the abolition of the audiencia, an armed fleet could be provided for the defense of the Islands. This was badly needed, and there was no other way of obtaining the necessary ships. The Chinese rebellion of the year before [565] had caused a diminution of 46,000 pesos in the commercial duties collected, [566] and the consequent shortage of money in the treasury of the colony furnished further reasons for the dismissal of this useless and burdensome tribunal. Acuña admitted that the institution of the audiencia might be successful in larger dependencies of Spain, where the people were prosperous and where the government had an assured income, but in the Philippines, where the citizens were poor, with scarcely any means of support, and harassed by many magistrates and their dependents, the audiencia had been a failure and a serious burden. Acuña's concluding statement very aptly sizes up the situation and voices his demand for the abolition of the tribunal. He wrote: The difficulty which presents itself to me in this matter is that, if the Audiencia is abolished and everything left in charge of the governor, there will be but slow and poor remedy for the grievances and disorders which may occur. For they must be taken to the Audiencia of Mexico, which is so far away that the aggrieved ones would consume both life and property before the business was settled ... all say that they consider government by one person the best, when he governs justly. These men (who believe in the above) know what the governor can do without the Audiencia, and with it; and they believe that it is better when there are not so many to command them, for they have never seen the audiencias redress illegal acts by the governors.... Although there is no doubt that much of what this paper recounts occurs in other regions where there are audiencias, it must be remembered that in this country, which is the newest of all and more engaged in war than any of the others; and where the hardships of conquest and maintenance are so omnipresent; and your Majesty has little profit or advantage, except the cargo of cloth which goes to Nueva Hespaña (sic), and which is divided among all; and as the resources of the country are so scant that there is no place to go in order to seek a livelihood outside of Manila: there is much criticism in this matter, and the people are much aggrieved at seeing themselves in the utmost part of the world, harassed and troubled by so many magistrates and officers and their dependents, and at having so many to satisfy; and that matters are in such a state that he who has an auditor for a protector may, it appears, go wherever he wishes and with as much as he wishes, and he who has not must be ruined. [567] This brings us to the administration of Governor Alonso Fajardo (1618-1624), whose relations with the audiencia we have already shown to have been very unpleasant. Fully as many charges were brought against the oidores by that governor as were put forward by the magistrates against him. According to Fajardo, the oidores had so used their power of appointment that it amounted to virtual dictation. Fajardo, like Acuña, found his control over the filling of offices greatly diminished. He energetically protested against the proposition which had been made to increase the size of the court from four to five magistrates. He stated that the amount of legal business which came before the tribunal did not justify an augmentation of the number of oidores; he recommended that the magistrates should spend their time more advantageously, and waste less in quarreling among themselves and in wreaking their passions on their rivals. Like Acuña, Fajardo complained against the presence of so large a number of relatives and personal followers of the oidores, whose lust for office had to be satisfied. [568] The magistrates had engaged in trade through intermediaries, and had spent the time which should have been devoted to the administration of justice in devising schemes whereby they and their agents could get the most out of forbidden commercial transactions, and at the same time be protected in their illicit activities. Fajardo claimed that the magistrates had abused their positions to such an extent that they had become an intolerable incumbrance to the colony. Strife and discord between the audiencia and the governor were perhaps more bitter during the administration of Fajardo than at any other time in the history of the Islands. This governor accused the magistrates of deliberately attempting in all petty and inconsequential ways to harass him into compliance with its desires. He wrote that he had done everything possible to keep peace with the oidores, even at a sacrifice of the respect of the other elements of the colony. [569] This testimony is practically identical with that submitted by Governor Acuña in 1604. The influence of the tribunal in the matter of appointments, judging by this and by other statements and allegations already quoted, and by the laws themselves, must have been great. The tendency to fill offices with friends and relatives was characteristic not only of the magistrates, but of the viceroys and governors as well. More laws are to be found in the Recopilación which guard against such abuses by governors and viceroys than by the magistrates of the audiencia. [570] Bearing in mind, of course, that there are two sides to the question, it is at least clear that the audiencia was successful in one of the purposes for which it was created--namely, that of preventing the governor from exercising entire control over appointments. We have the confession of Governor Fajardo here and of Governor Acuña in the preceding paragraphs that those governors were unable to prevent the oidores from filling offices with their own friends. Although we have been following the governor's side of the question in these last few pages, we have noted in the preceding chapter that the laws of the Indies gave to the audiencia the right of participating in acuerdo with the governor in matters of appointment. Governor Fajardo's method of referring matters to the audiencia for advice is interesting. Instead of submitting questions to the acuerdo for the general advice and opinion of all the oidores, he was said to have sought to escape the obligation of acting in accordance with the advice given him, by asking the oidores for their individual opinions concerning matters on which he desired advice. The audiencia took exception to this method of procedure, alleging that he was thus escaping the responsibilities of the acuerdo. Fajardo defended himself against the accusation by the statement that the oidores met together so seldom that he had been unable to submit questions to the magistrates collectively in accordance with the law. Fajardo also complained against the failure of the oidores to comply with his instructions in regard to the inspection of the provinces. He stated that the magistrates disliked to bestir themselves from their inactive and indolent lives amid the comforts of Manila, and no inspections had been made during the three years prior to the date of this letter. Philip III, without raising his voice in indignation or decreeing any punishment upon those officials who had refused to execute his decrees, mildly solicited that they should devote their care and attention to the matter in the future. He remonstrated that this was the only way in which the facts relating to the country and to the interests and needs of its people could be ascertained. These inspections are very essential, since they are based on the relief of miserable persons, and in no way can the condition of affairs be fully ascertained unless by means of these inspections; and the most advisable measures can hardly be well understood, if the condition and facts of what ought to be remedied and can be bettered are not known. Hence I again charge you to pay especial attention to these inspections. The Audiencia is commanded to observe the orders that you shall give in your capacity as president so that each auditor, when it concerns him, may observe his obligations and go out on the inspections. [571] In reply to these observations, the Council ordered Fajardo to make recommendations for the reform of the government, stating that such suggestions as he would make would be duly considered and observed. [572] On his arrival in the Islands, Fajardo, as yet unfamiliar with the duties and conditions of his office, expressed his unwillingness to recommend the entire abolition of the audiencia, preferring to have present a council which he could consult regarding the problems of his new office. The tribunal in the Philippines was probably not so important as were those in Spain, under the immediate supervision of the king, "where," as he expressed it, one obtains strict justice, administered by upright and holy men--the people here considering that those who are farthest from meriting that name are those who are farthest from the presence of your Majesty and your royal counselors.... In what pertains to me, I do not petition you for anything in this matter, since in no respect can it be ill for me to have someone to consult, and who will relieve me in matters of justice. [573] Fajardo's act in forming a new audiencia after he had suppressed the real one shows that the audiencia was essential to him in the two particulars mentioned by him in the above letter. That his attitude towards this question was somewhat altered by three years' experience as governor of the Philippines is shown in his memorial of July 21, 1621. On this occasion Fajardo argued against the continuation of the tribunal, showing himself to be of the same opinion as Acuña, who, it will be remembered, contended that because the colony was military in character, there should be one person to control affairs, without any interference whatsoever. He wrote: I beg your Majesty that while it shall last (the war) you may be pleased to discontinue the Audiencia here, as it is this that most hinders and opposes the administration and the government, ... This is the enemy which most afflicts this commonwealth, and most causes dissensions, parties, factions, and hatred between the citizens--each auditor persecuting those citizens who are not wholly of his own faction, especially those who extend aid and good-will toward the governor, against whom, as it seems, they show themselves always in league. They always make declarations of grievances [against him] because they are not each one given, as used to be and is the custom here, whatever they may ask for their sons, relatives and servants; and they habitually discredit the governor by launching through secret channels false and malicious reports, and afterward securing witnesses of their publicity. They even, as I have written to your Majesty, manage to have religious and preachers publish these reports to which end, and for his own security, each one of the auditors has formed an alliance with the religious order which receives him best. [574] He summarized as follows: I consider this government much more difficult, with the auditors of this Audiencia, than it is or would be even if there were more war, for that war which they cause within its boundaries appears beyond remedy, on account of their abilities and rank. [575] An abundance of evidence exists on both sides of this controversy; letters of complaint against the governor and charges against the oidores by the governor. The vividness and apparent directness of the charges and the apparent sincerity of both the governor and the oidores make it extremely difficult, and, in fact, quite impossible to decide on the basis of the evidence presented, who was right or wrong, which charges, true or untrue, and who was really responsible for the difficulties. It would appear that the king was prone to sympathize with the governor rather than with the audiencia, for in practically all cases the decision of the sovereign was adverse to the tribunal. The fact that the governor was the royal representative was probably a large factor in securing him the support of the home government. Yet, on the other hand, the audiencia was in the same sense the royal tribunal. Governor Fajardo affords an example of a successful military man who, having won fame for himself in the wars of the continent, but without legal knowledge or administrative experience, was called to the government of a distant and isolated colony, with the responsibility of continuing in harmonious relations with a hostile civil and judicial tribunal on the one hand, with whose powers and functions he was not familiar, and an equally hostile religious institution on the other. Men of military training usually had great contempt for the abilities and good intentions of priests and lawyers in those days, and it was frequently evident, both by their actions and by their own confessions, that conquistadores of the stamp of Fajardo, Acuña, and Corcuera were little fitted for the exercise of administrative and governmental functions, however useful they might be in adding to the domain of the Spanish empire. Thus, there being present in the colony a tribunal of trained lawyers who were at the same time capable and experienced administrators, the governors became accustomed to rely on them for advice and assistance, in compliance with the commands of the laws of the Indies. As one governor of military tastes and training succeeded another, each lacking administrative ability and experience, the audiencia came to assume an increased share in the governmental activity of the colony. This tendency was accentuated by the fact that the governor was absent from the capital city on campaigns of conquest and defense a large share of his time. Ability as a soldier and commander was always the chief criterion for the selection of a governor and captain-general, and military affairs were given more attention by far than matters of administration. Spain's policy of selecting soldiers instead of administrators for the post of governor went far towards making the audiencia more than a court of justice, and towards giving it a share in the executive functions of government. This tendency was also furthered by the fact that the audiencia came to assume the entire administration on the death or absence of the governor, a power which it did not always exercise well, but which it always relinquished with reluctance. The Salcedo affair in 1668-1670 emphasizes other differences than those of the audiencia and the governor, yet reference should be made to it in this connection, because, after all, the oidores were concerned indirectly in the struggle. An examination of the data at our command will reveal the fact that the refusal or failure of the oidores to intervene in behalf of the governor led to his defeat and humiliation by the commissary of the Inquisition. The audiencia might have prevented that disaster had the magistrates been so inclined. Before Governor Salcedo was arrested, imprisoned and sent to Mexico in 1668 by the commissary of the Inquisition on charges of a purely ecclesiastical character, the two oidores, Bónifaz and Montemayor, were consulted by the enemies of the governor as to the legality of the proposed action. There is every reason to believe that the entire plot was worked out beforehand with the fore-knowledge and consent of the oidores. Inharmonious relations had existed before the arrest of the governor between Salcedo and his associates, because of his independence and his unwillingness to provide offices and opportunities for commercial profit for their relatives. The exact part which the audiencia played in the arrest of Salcedo is not known, since the entire plot was schemed and executed under the cloak of the Inquisition; but the fact remains that Oidores Montemayor and Bónifaz each hoped to assume the management of governmental affairs upon the exile of Salcedo. Indeed, the ambitions of Bónifaz were realized. The removal of Salcedo culminated in the usurpation of the government by Bónifaz, in the exile of Montemayor, his rival, to the provinces, and in the complete suppression of the audiencia for a year. It is said that Bónifaz, through a usurper, ruled beneficently and well, and that he little deserved the sentence of death which was pronounced on him by the Council of the Indies. The authority for the assertion that his rule was meritorious was ecclesiastical and hence, in this case, possibly questionable. [576] It is certain, at least, that Bónifaz and his government were under the complete domination of the church. [577] It has been frequently stated in this chapter, that jealousy and rivalry were always determining factors in the relationship of the audiencia and the governor. A new executive, until familiar with the duties of his station, was always glad to seek the advice and assistance of the oidores, meanwhile permitting the audiencia to assume many functions which belonged to him as governor. A new governor was gracious, and agreeable to all, and we find that most of the favorable comments made concerning governors by magistrates, prelates, and officials were pronounced when the environment was new to them or to the governor. When the routine of official duties became irksome and opportunities for private profit presented themselves, as always happened in the course of time, friction arose, and jealousy and discord took the place of the goodwill and harmony which at first seemed so promising. The most contaminating influence in the colony was the commercial spirit. Governors and magistrates engaged in trade on a large scale, and the churchmen also yielded to the commercial instinct. The latter assertion will be enlarged upon in its proper place; proof of the commercial activities of governors and magistrates has already been given. The resentment of the oidores always led them to place every conceivable opposition in the way of the governor when it was seen that he was obtaining more than his fair share of profit from trade, appointments, or indulgences to the Chinese. This led to a refusal to ratify his appointments in many cases, to oppose him in the acuerdo, to incite the residents of the colony against him, and to do everything possible to make a failure of his administration. Governors on the other hand might employ one of two methods in dealing with the magistrates. That most commonly pursued was to allow them a liberal share of the booty, commercial or political, the latter obtained by permitting them to disregard the law by giving offices to their relatives and followers, thereby purchasing their favor. The other method was to meet their charges with counter-charges, which were probably as truthful, though usually not so serious as those which the magistrates made against them. The administrations of those governors who openly opposed the audiencia and sought to keep it within the limits of its jurisdiction as a judicial tribunal, were most notable for their conflicts. The Court of Madrid was unable to remedy these defects in colonial administration. It could and did discipline the officials by sending an occasional visitor, or by forcing them to give vigorous residencias, but these punishments only led to greater abuses in order to reimburse themselves for the fines which they had to pay. Officials were able to send away large sums of money and consignments of merchandise, and then, after having paid liberal penalties, they returned to Spain and lived in comfortable retirement. Acceptance of the office of governor, oidor, corregidor, or alcalde mayor was made with a foreknowledge that disputes would arise, enemies would bring accusations, and punishments would be meted out, whether deserved or not. This condition led to the abuses which have been noted, and the recriminations and struggles between authorities. From the view-point of these officials the Philippines were neither governed for the good of the natives nor for the residents, nor for the honor of Spain, nor for the propagation of the Catholic religion, but merely for the profit and advancement of those who were on the ground to take advantage of their opportunities. They were struggles for profit; pure and simple contests between the officials either to get all the proceeds possible from their offices or to keep other officials from getting all, and thus to get a share for themselves. There were exceptions, of course, to the conditions and circumstances just noted. Some able and well-intentioned men came to the Islands, as came to all of Spain's colonies, among whom may be mentioned Oidor Antonio de Morga, the fiscal, Francisco Leandro de Viana, and Governors Anda y Salazar, Basco y Vargas, Aguilar, Enrile, and others of the nineteenth century when opportunities for gain were somewhat diminished. Some of these officials erred on the side of over-strictness, and their efforts to restrain the avarice of their colleagues and to infuse the spirit of honesty into their administrations united the opposition and led to battles as violent and unrelenting as those which were fought when all parties were dishonest. In a chapter which deals alone with the conflicts of jurisdiction which occurred between the governor and the audiencia, it would be possible to arrive at an entirely mistaken conclusion. Disagreements and differences were frequent as well as pronounced, yet the history of the Philippines throughout the three hundred years of Spanish rule is not a record of perpetual strife. It is, of course, understood that no effort has been made in this chapter to describe all the struggles which occurred in the Islands between the audiencia and the governor. Those which have been reviewed were selected for the purpose because they illustrate, in a general way, the subjects over which disagreements arose, and the principles underlying them. We have noted, in general, that the audiencia exercised functions and prerogatives which were not conferred upon it by the laws of the Indies. The type of men who were appointed to the office of governor and captain-general made inevitable the accretion of power in the hands of the magistrates. The audiencia gradually came to assume more attributes than the solely judicial ones. Necessity compelled the governor in many instances to entrust the tribunal with many of his own functions because of his lack of skill and experience as an administrator or on account of his devotion to military affairs. In these ways the acuerdo came to be legislative as well as advisory; the frequent absence of the governor, or his death, led to the audiencia's assumption of the governorship and the tribunal was always reluctant to surrender the administrative powers once gained. Jealousy between officials and the resultant conflicts of authority may be classified together as a cause of strife. These difficulties resulted in part from the fact that the sphere of authority of each official was not defined with exactness in the laws of the Indies, and also because those laws were often countermanded by later cédulas of whose existence the colonial officials were not always aware. Spanish laws were frequently repealed and subsequently put in force without notice; this was always a source of confusion. Then again the exceptional opportunities for trade offered by the transfer of the rich oriental cargoes at Manila tempted oidores and governors alike. The trading privileges conceded by the government did not always end when the limit of permission was reached. Some officials, and particularly governors, could command more than their rightful share of galleon space; this led to disputes and recriminations which often interfered seriously with the government. We have noted that the appointing power which belonged nominally to the governor and which was shared by the oidores was also a source of much trouble. The knowledge that the residencia would ultimately bring about the punishment of guilty officials and enemies, the distance and isolation of the colony, and the length of time necessary for communication--all these factors made it possible for officials to commit excesses. Another cause of discord was what might be termed the reaction of the executive against the increased power and authority of the audiencia. This accretion of power was due to the complete dependence of the governor on the tribunal in administrative matters, especially at the beginning of his term, the increasing power of the acuerdo, the superiority of the audiencia as a court of appeals from the decisions of the governor, and the fact that the latter always needed the presence of the audiencia to lend legality to his government. It may be stated, nevertheless, that the governor actually held the more powerful position in the colony, and that he most frequently emerged victor in the various struggles with the audiencia. Various reasons may be assigned for this. The governor was the personal representative of the king, and in this capacity he had the backing of the home government. He commanded the military forces in the colony. The authority of the royal patronage was vested in the governor; he was thus often able to command the support of the church and clergy in his struggles with the audiencia. The authority over the disposal of offices, either by sale or appointment belonged legally to the governor, although this power was effectively disputed and often shared by the audiencia. The governor employed the last-mentioned power on some occasions to the extent of reforming and reconstituting the audiencia, thus making the government entirely dependent on him. A new governor always carried with him a more recent appointment than those of the oidores whom he found in the colony, and aside from this he usually possessed definite instructions embodying the royal will on all current issues. The control of the residencias of the oidores was usually in the hands of the governor, and lastly, the laissez faire attitude of the Spanish government, its extreme conservatism, and its apparent reluctance to correct the evils and abuses which were reported to it--all these were potent factors in leaving the balance of power as it had been, in the hands of the governor, notwithstanding the presence of the audiencia. A previously quoted statement made by a famous British historian in his description of the relative powers of the viceroys of New Spain, and Perú, and their respective audiencias, may be used here, with equal effect, to characterize the situation in the Philippines, and to summarize this part of our discussion: "They (the magistrates of the audiencia) may advise, they may remonstrate; but in the event of a direct collision between their opinion and the will of the viceroy (governor), what he determines must be brought into execution, and nothing remains for them but to lay the matter before the king and the Council of the Indies." [578] CHAPTER IX THE AUDIENCIA AND THE GOVERNOR: THE AD INTERIM RULE The most extensive non-judicial activity in which the audiencia participated at any time was its assumption of the provisional government of the colony during vacancies in the governorship. Aside from the ten different occasions on which this was done, the audiencia very frequently assumed control of the government when the exigencies of defense and foreign conquest rendered necessary the temporary absence of the governor. This was true at irregular intervals during the administrations of Governors Pedro Bravo de Acuña (1602-1606), Juan de Silva (1609-1616), Juan Niño de Tavora (1626-1632), Sebastián Hurtado de Corcuera (1635-1644) and Diego Fajardo (1644-1653). The administrations of these several governors were characterized by extensive military operations, largely in a foreign field, and the audiencia not only took over governmental affairs but it assumed the obligations of defense during their absence. On such occasions, of course, the tribunal retained its exercise of judicial functions. Since the audiencias in Perú and New Spain assumed the government much earlier than did the audiencia in the Philippines, and as the laws authorizing the rule of the audiencia were promulgated first to meet conditions in those viceroyalties, it seems advisable to inquire into the circumstances surrounding the establishment and development of this practice there. Having done this, we shall proceed to a study of the ad interim rule of the Audiencia of Manila, noting particularly the causes of the success or failure of its administration and the effect of this practice upon the subsequent relations of the audiencia and the governor. The first law in the Recopilación authorizing the assumption of the government by an audiencia was promulgated as early as March 19, 1550. This law provided that in case of a vacancy in the office of Viceroy of Perú, the audiencia there should succeed to the governments of Perú, Charcas, Quito and Tierra Firme, and that the three last-named subordinate audiencias should obey the mandates of the Audiencia of Lima until a permanent successor to the viceroy was named. [579] This law was proclaimed again on November 20, 1606. Even before the promulgation of the above law the audiencias of Lima and Mexico had assumed control of the government in their respective viceroyalties. Shortly after the death of Francisco Pizarro, the conqueror, an audiencia was sent to Perú, arriving at Lima in January, 1544, in company with Blasco Núñez Vela, the first viceroy. The rigidity and thoroughness with which this new executive enforced the New Laws which were entrusted to him met with the opposition of the residents of the colony, and the audiencia accordingly removed him from his position as viceroy and suspended the operation of the code referred to, assuming charge of affairs itself. [580] Its rule was brief, however, for on October 28, 1544, it invited Gonzalo Pizarro, the brother of the conqueror, into the city and turned the government over to him, proclaiming him Governor and Captain-General of Perú. During the period from 1544 to 1551, until the arrival in Perú of Viceroy Mendoza, the audiencia exercised control of governmental affairs. It made and unmade captains-general and viceroys, irrespective of royal appointments. It suspended the New Laws of 1542 and its commands were obeyed. From 1550 to 1551 it governed alone. In these incidents we note that the audiencia actually assumed the government ad interim prior to the time of the promulgation of the law of March 19, 1550, exercising administrative as well as judicial powers, thirty-five years before the Audiencia of Manila was created. "To it (the audiencia) were confided in the beginning and later in the absence of the viceroy," writes Moses, "all matters with which governmental authority might properly deal." [581] He further states that "the audiencia in its executive capacity, failed to justify the expectations of the king, and a new order of things was introduced by the appointment of a viceroy" (Mendoza, April 17, 1535) for New Spain. [582] These powers were not only exercised by the Audiencia of Lima, but also by a second tribunal which was created in 1549 at Santa Fé de Bogotá. The latter body was endowed permanently with both judicial and administrative powers, appealing important cases to the superior government at Lima. This audiencia had the status of a presidency. Its president was often captain-general, visitador, and senior magistrate, and in exercising the functions of these various offices he was in all respects the most powerful official in New Granada, always being able to enforce his will over the other magistrates. At times this official acted with entire independence of the Viceroy of Perú. [583] The exercise of military functions by this president and audiencia is especially to be noticed in the part they played in putting down the Pijáo Indian revolt in 1565. [584] On the whole, however, judging by the strife prevailing in the colony, the various struggles between the oidores and the president, and between the audiencia or president and the archbishop, the government could never have been considered successful. The official corruption which became apparent as a result of the pesquisas and residencias held during the rule of the Audiencia of Santa Fé could scarcely have encouraged the home government to entrust that tribunal with the administration of affairs in the future. The defects referred to above in connection with the government of the Audiencia of Santa Fé did not deter the Spanish crown from founding the Audiencia of Charcas in 1559. This tribunal, "like the audiencias established elsewhere, exercised not only judicial, but also administrative powers." [585] It had jurisdiction over the neighboring city of Potosí. Again we may note the case of the Audiencia of Santiago de Chile, which was established on August 27, 1565. Its members arrived in 1567 and the audiencia was installed at Concepción "as the supreme court of the colony, and, at the same time, in accordance with the royal decree, it became the administrative head of the government. In this latter capacity it undertook to reorganize the military forces." Later, in 1568, Melchoir Bravo de Saravia assumed the office and functions of the governorship of Chile (1568-1575) and the audiencia became a judicial tribunal, without other attributes. [586] We may gather from these various citations taken from the early history of the audiencias of South America that these tribunals not only exercised the authority of governing ad interim, but that they had permanent governmental and administrative powers as well. It would seem, as Professor Moses has suggested, that the original purpose of the Spanish government had been to entrust the executive and administrative functions in the dependencies to the audiencia, and that the endowment of the viceroys and captains-general with extensive executive powers was an expedient to which Spain was obliged to turn after the breakdown of the audiencia as an administrative agency. The main fact to be emphasized in this connection is that during the period of the promulgation of the laws which we are now studying, the minor audiencias were exercising regular governmental powers. The Audiencia of Mexico, which was created in 1527 to check the excesses of Hernán Cortés, had participated in governmental affairs even before the events described above. This tribunal, which was composed of four magistrates, with the notorious Guzmán as president, conducted the residencias of Cortés and his followers, and after obtaining control of the government, administered affairs to suit its own convenience. [587] It was at this time, and as a result of these abuses, Bancroft tells us, that the Spanish government decided to establish a viceroyalty in New Spain, with a semiregal court and regal pretensions. A new tribunal was left in charge of governmental affairs while this reform was being inaugurated. This second audiencia governed with great satisfaction, correcting the abuses of its predecessor and devoting itself to various improvements. [588] Although the audiencia of 1528-1535 exercised the administrative functions above mentioned, Bancroft brings forth no evidence in support of the theory that it was ever the royal intention to entrust the institution of the audiencia permanently with administrative authority. He states that as early as 1530, three years after the establishment of the first tribunal in Mexico, the sovereigns had already decided to establish a viceroyalty. Although the audiencia was entrusted with the government for a few years, the above facts would seem to indicate that this was only a temporary arrangement. The audiencia's chief attributes were judicial, and we have repeatedly noted that the principal object of its establishment, aside from the administration of justice, was to check the abuses of the captain-general. Cortés retained his rank as captain-general after the audiencia was established. The conqueror was in reality reduced to a secondary position, and he was compelled repeatedly to acknowledge the supremacy of the audiencia. His commission was recognized by the tribunal on its arrival, but soon after its establishment the oidores exhibited a royal order requiring that "Cortés, in all his operations, should consult the president and oidores and act only on their approval." [589] Even in his field, as commander of the military forces, Cortés was subordinated to the tribunal, and the audiencia and the conqueror quarrelled bitterly over practically all matters which presented themselves for solution. The audiencia had been created to meet extraordinary and unusual conditions. It was the business of the tribunal to correct the abuses which had previously been inflicted on the colony by Cortés, and it did so. On the arrival of Mendoza in 1535, however, the audiencia surrendered the control of administrative affairs, and it did not assume them again, except in the regular way in conjunction with the viceroy, until it next served to administer the ad interim government. [590] The first legal provision for the succession of the audiencia in Mexico, according to Bancroft, was contained in the royal instructions to Visitor Valderrama, who arrived in Mexico in 1563. These instructions, says Bancroft, provided that in the event of the death or inability of the viceroy to discharge his duties, the audiencia should rule temporarily. [591] This was indeed timely, in view of the death of Viceroy Velasco on July 31, 1564. The audiencia, which was legally authorized to take charge of the government, was under investigation when the death of the viceroy occurred, and the tribunal was dominated during the first half of its rule by the visitor, who, Bancroft tells us, was virtually viceroy. [592] Valderrama dismissed two of the oidores, and sent them to Spain. The audiencia was even less able to administer justice during the early part of its ad interim government than it had been when the viceroy was alive. After the departure of the visitor, however, the audiencia inaugurated a season of proscription and reprisal which bade fair to include every opponent of the oidores in the colony. Matters had reached a very unsatisfactory state, indeed, when the new viceroy, the Marqués de Falcés, arrived at Mexico on October 14, 1566. [593] In view of the fact that the next important law dealing with the question of the succession was not promulgated until 1600, a continuance of this survey of affairs in New Spain will not be necessary. The audiencia there did not again assume the government until 1612, and then only for a very short period. We have already noticed the conditions under which the Audiencia of Mexico was created, and the various occasions on which it assumed charge of the government. Though entrusted with the government upon its establishment, the example set by three years of its unsatisfactory rule convinced the Spanish monarch of the unwisdom of entrusting such governmental authority to the audiencia permanently. Therefore, a viceroy was sent out in 1535, and it was not until 1563 that the first law was promulgated which provided for the temporary government by the audiencia when there was a vacancy in the office of viceroy. This was thirteen years after such a law had been promulgated for Perú, and fourteen years after an audiencia had been created, with all the functions of government, at Santa Fé de Bogotá. The cédula of February 12, 1569, following in sequence that of March 5, 1550, provided that the faculty of filling vacancies among the oficiales reales, in case of death or removal from office, should rest with the viceroy, president, or the audiencia, if the latter body were governing. [594] This, of course, was a recognition of the principle of the assumption of the government by the audiencia. This law was not confined in its application to any particular territory, but was general in its scope and applicable wherever an audiencia existed. It was later confirmed by the cédula of August 24, 1619. [595] The next law dealing with the subject of succession was promulgated on January 3, 1600. It applied especially to New Spain, and it provided that in case of a vacancy in the office of viceroy, either by death or by promotion, the audiencia should assume charge of the government of the provinces there, and it should execute the duties which ordinarily devolved upon the viceroy, performing them "as he could, would and ought to do." It furthermore ordered the subordinate Audiencia of Guadalajara, under such circumstances, to obey and fulfill the orders which the Audiencia of Mexico might give or send, in the same manner as it would do, were those orders issued by the viceroy. [596] Under a separate title on this same date the assumption of the government of the minor dependencies of Perú and New Spain by the respective audiencias was authorized in case of the illness or absence of the viceroy. In other words, this law authorized in New Spain the same procedure in case of the death or absence of the viceroy as had already prevailed in South America for half a century. The above laws form a precedent for the subsequent authorization of the Audiencia of Manila to assume charge of the government on the death of the governor. This authorization was given on April 12, 1664, but the Audiencia of Manila, like those of Mexico and Lima, had already assumed the functions of the executive on four earlier occasions, and the king, in the cédula of 1664, merely recognized, with some qualifications, a practice which had been followed in the Philippines for half a century. A cédula dated as early as September 13, 1608, had authorized the nomination in advance by the Viceroy of New Spain of a resident of the Islands to assume the governorship on the death of the regular governor. [597] The intention of this law seems to have been to guard against the ills incident to a vacancy in the governorship by an arrangement whereby some person should be appointed in advance and thus be ready to assume the command without delay. Whatever the royal intentions may have been, this law was never effective in bringing about the benefits for which it was designed. In fact, this particular provision met with general dissatisfaction in the Philippines, and the audiencia, acting in accordance with the custom observed in other parts of Spain's dominions, continued to govern on the demise of the governor, ruling two or three years on some occasions, until the arrival of a temporary governor, sent from New Spain. So flagrantly was the prescribed method of procedure violated in the Philippines that in 1630, Visitor Francisco de Rojas y Ornate reminded the Council of the Indies of the existing law (that of 1608) and recommended that henceforth on the death of a governor the audiencia should have nothing to do with administration, but that one of three persons secretly designated by the viceroy should take over the government at once, thus eliminating all possibility of the interference of the tribunal. [598] The irregularities and inconveniences arising from the inefficacy of the law of 1608 led to the promulgation of the cédulas of January 30, 1635, and of April 2, 1664, and to the enactment of the consulta of September 9, 1669. These regulations applied exclusively to the Philippines, and they legalized the intervention of the audiencia in governmental affairs on the death of the governor. The first of these admitted the right of the audiencia to administer political affairs, but ordered that military defense should be in the hands of a person appointed in advance by the Viceroy of New Spain. The cédula of April 2, 1664, ordered that the audiencia should serve temporarily during vacancies in the governorship until the temporary appointee of the viceroy should arrive. This law further prescribed that the audiencia should assume charge of political affairs while the senior magistrate should take over the military command. He was to see that the forces and defenses of the Islands were adequately kept up, and that the soldiers were disciplined; he was authorized to command them in case of insurrection or invasion. The consulta of September 9, 1669, above referred to, re-enacted the cédula of April 2, 1664, but in addition it specifically ordered that the viceroy should not designate a temporary governor until news of the death of the regular incumbent was received, and then that no resident or native of the Philippines should be appointed. [599] The Council of the Indies, by the law of September 29, 1623, had already sought to guard against any undue assumption of power on the part of the audiencia by ordering that when the viceroy was absent from the capital city, but within his own district, he should still retain his status as governor, and neither the audiencia nor any of the oidores should interfere in governmental affairs. [600] This law was not applicable to the Philippines alone, but it was of general validity, throughout Spain's dominions. The control of the audiencia in governmental affairs was only to become effective when the governor was absent from the colony, or incapacitated through sickness or death. Otherwise the governor's sphere of authority was to be recognized by the tribunal. A variety of laws exist in the Recopilación prescribing the duties and conduct of the audiencia when it had charge of governmental affairs, and defining the relationship which should exist between the oidores under such conditions. The magistrates were ordered to proceed harmoniously and moderately both in the execution of governmental affairs and in the administration of justice, not erring either on the side of excessive severity, or of undue moderation. They were to devote special attention to the increase and care of the royal revenue during these times. [601] The right to grant encomiendas, essentially the function of the governing authority, was conceded to the audiencia when it acted in the capacity of governor. All such concessions ultimately had to be confirmed by the king. On these occasions, also, the audiencia filled vacancies and made appointments. However, the oidores were warned against discharging officials and vacating offices in order to fill them with their dependents and friends. [602] All appointments made by the audiencia were to become void after the arrival of a regular governor, unless they had subsequently received the royal confirmation. When a vacancy arose, it was the duty of the senior magistrate to propose a candidate, but the actual filling of the place was to be effected by the acuerdo vote of the entire audiencia. [603] The laws provided that the audiencia, as a body, should exercise two distinct types or classes of powers when in charge of the government. These were designated as governmental and military. The exercise of these functions was assigned respectively to the audiencia as a body, and to the senior magistrate, individually. While an effort was made to insure the fair and equal participation of all in government in case of a vacancy, the senior magistrate assumed the position and honors of the executive, though not granted all the governor's powers. [604] In the functions and duties of administration all the magistrates were to participate. As noted above, each was to have a share in the exercise of the appointing power, the administration of colonial finances, participation in the acuerdo, and in every other function except defense, which was entrusted to the senior oidor. In this capacity, the oidor was always the most prominent figure in the government. Among those who distinguished themselves through the exercise of this power were Rojas, Morga, Alcaraz, Bónifaz, Coloma, Montemayor, and above all, Anda. Although these men were assisted and supported by their colleagues of the audiencia, and the parts played by the latter were not without importance, the periods of rule of the audiencia are always identified with the names of the senior oidores, while those of the ordinary magistrates are forgotten. A complete understanding of the governmental functions and authority of the audiencia, and the relation of the latter to the other departments of government under these conditions may best be obtained by a review of the circumstances and conditions of the audiencia's rule during vacancies in the Philippines. The first occasion which in any way approached the temporary rule of an audiencia in the Philippines was in 1593, after the murder of Governor Gómez Pérez Dasmariñas. Pedro de Rojas, who had been a magistrate of the audiencia when it was suppressed in 1589, was at that time sole judge, with the additional rank of lieutenant-governor and asesor, standing next to the governor in authority. [605] After the death of Gómez Pérez Dasmariñas, Rojas had occupied the governor's chair less than a year when he was succeeded by the deceased governor's son, Luís Pérez Dasmariñas, who became governor on the authority of a royal order found among the papers of his father, whereby he was given the power to name his successor. [606] His tenure seems to have been only temporary, however, for as soon as news reached the court of the death of the elder Dasmariñas, Francisco Tello de Guzmán was appointed permanent governor and an audiencia was sent to the Islands, arriving at Manila in 1596. [607] Meanwhile Rojas was succeeded as lieutenant-governor and asesor by Antonio de Morga. According to Montero y Vidal, Dasmariñas turned over the government to Morga in 1595, but it is more probable that Morga assumed the temporary governorship when Dasmariñas was in Cambodia and elsewhere fighting against the Dutch. In fact, this conclusion is confirmed by Zúñiga. [608] At any rate, Morga administered both governmental and military affairs on several occasions when the various governors were absent from the Islands, engaged in expeditions of conquest. On the suppression of the audiencia in 1589, the administration of justice remained entirely in the hands of the lieutenant-governor and asesor. This position was first occupied by Rojas, and later by Morga, who succeeded to the same judicial duties and enjoyed the same prerogatives as had formerly belonged to the audiencia. In the absence of the tribunal, therefore, they assumed functions which elsewhere were carried out by the audiencia on the death of the governor or viceroy, partly because they had taken the place of the audiencia, and partly because they were lieutenants-governor. After the audiencia was re-established in 1598, Morga continued in charge of military affairs when the governor was absent or dead, while the audiencia administered the government, not by virtue of any laws relating especially to the Philippines, but seemingly because this was the general practice in all of Spain's colonies. Morga's defense of Manila against the Dutch in 1600 has been referred to in an earlier chapter. Not only did the audiencia do much in defense against outside enemies at this time, but it carried on offensive operations against them in the Moluccas after the deaths of Governors Tello and Acuña. The Japanese who were residing in the city also caused trouble, and the audiencia was under the necessity of taking repressive measures against them. [609] In 1606, while Governor Acuña was absent from the colony, the fortification of Cavite, the equipment of a fleet and the defense of the city were undertaken and carried out successfully by Oidor Almansa. [610] Then on the death of Governor Acuña the audiencia succeeded to the government and it managed affairs from June 24, 1606, to June 15, 1608, with Almansa in charge of military affairs. The various governmental matters with which the audiencia concerned itself during this period are shown in a memorial which it sent to the king on July 6, 1606. After reporting the death of Governor Acuña, and its succession to the government, the audiencia took up questions of finance and commerce. It stated that the money in the treasury was insufficient for the necessary expenses of the colony, owing to the extraordinary outlays which had been necessary to defray the costs of the wars and expeditions which had been undertaken at this time. The audiencia suggested that the galleon returns be increased from 500,000 to 1,000,000 pesos a year. It was pointed out in this connection that the total cost of transporting goods from Manila to Acapulco, including freight and duty, aggregated thirty per cent of their value, leaving to the merchants a profit of only 350,000 pesos. The oidores admitted that this arrangement might have been ample and satisfactory when the colony was small or when there was peace, but at that time, when the inhabitants of the colony had been forced to expend so much of their revenue for defense, a larger return was necessary. [611] Further recommendations were made regarding commerce and the management of the galleons. It was said that their great size encouraged smuggling; in order to avoid this, and at the same time to contribute to the revenues of the colony, it was urged that the ships should carry cargo to the limit of their capacity, instead of being restricted to an insufficient amount. Large reductions of salaries of ships' officers, soldiers, and sailors were urged. The oidores did not think it advisable to forbid the crews and officers of the galleons to trade, however, since their interest in the cargo would encourage them to be obedient and loyal. [612] The audiencia concluded its memorial with an appeal for the reform of the freight and customs charges on the galleon. The abolition of all fixed duties was recommended; instead, it was suggested that these duties be graduated to meet the regular expenses of the colony as they were incurred year by year. This recommendation was made on the basis of the theory that duties should not be levied for the benefit of the king's exchequer, but only for the support and maintenance of the merchants and inhabitants of the colony. [613] This memorial would seem to indicate that the audiencia, when acting in the capacity of governor, exercised considerable authority and assumed entire responsibility for the commercial and financial affairs of the colony. Zúñiga, after describing the success of Oidor Almansa in putting down an insurrection of the Japanese, characterized the administration of affairs by the audiencia during this period as follows: The Royal Audience conducted themselves with great approbation in the civil administration, until the year 1608, when Don Rodrigo Vivero of Laredo, who was named by the Viceroy as Governor ad interim, arrived at Manila, and having had great experience in the management of the Indians in New Spain, he availed himself of it on this occasion, giving instructions to that effect to the chief judges, and other ministers of justice. He governed with much satisfaction for one year, when he delivered up the insignia of his office, and returned to Mexico. [614] Vivero arrived in the colony on June 15, 1608. Vivero was the first of the military governors appointed from New Spain. Under this and succeeding arrangements, these governors exercised absolute control of military affairs, while the audiencia concerned itself solely with matters of government, the senior magistrate, of course, not participating in military affairs. Vivero was relieved in 1609 by Governor Juan de Silva, who had a permanent appointment and served for seven years. Silva's administration was characterized by his military exploits, chief among which was his defense of the colony against the attacks of the Dutch pirate, Wittert, and subsequently of Spielberg. These frequent expeditions gave the audiencia many opportunities to assume charge of affairs, and after Silva's death in the Moluccas the tribunal ruled from April 19, 1616, to June 8, 1619. During a part of this time Andrés de Alcaraz, the senior magistrate, exercised the duties of captain-general, successfully defending the city against the Dutch. On September 30, 1617, the office of military governor devolved on Gerónimo de Silva, who was especially designated for the post by the royal order of March 20, 1616. [615] He was not an oidor, however, but had served as governor of Ternate, having recently returned from the Moluccas. [616] While the post of captain-general devolved upon Silva, the audiencia retained control of administrative affairs in the colony until Alonso Fajardo y Tenza, the next royal appointee, arrived on June 8, 1618, to enter upon the duties of governor and captain-general. As we have already seen, Alcaraz was relieved of his military responsibilities on September 30, 1617, and was at once obliged to submit to residencia. In this trial he was compelled to answer for his failure to warn the Chinese traders, who usually approached the Islands at that time of the year, of the presence of the Dutch. As a result of his oversight in this matter, a large quantity of merchandise, including provisions for the city, had fallen into the hands of the enemy. He was also held accountable for the disaster which had occurred to a portion of the Spanish fleet in the battle of Playa Honda through the appointment of the son of one of the oidores to its command. [617] Alcaraz, senior oidor, who was legally responsible for defense, was compelled to answer for the failure of this inefficient commander. The choice of a relative of one of the oidores was a violation of the laws of the Indies. [618] Although Oidor Alcaraz seems to have acquitted himself well of his duties as commander of the military forces, seven galleons were lost in an expedition to the Moluccas during the rule of the audiencia, and considerable difficulty was experienced in fixing responsibility for this disaster. Alcaraz claimed that Silva was answerable; the latter maintained that the audiencia was to blame, and the audiencia disclaimed responsibility because, it alleged, "the audiencia was entrusted with government and not war." In an investigation ultimately made in 1625, Silva was deprived of his office and was prevented from leaving the Islands. Governor Fajardo has left us a number of comments and criticisms of the work of the audiencia as governor. His observations are timely and appropriate, since the tribunal had been in charge of the government for two years preceding his rule, and he was brought intimately in touch with the deeds and mistakes of the previous administration. [619] Fajardo's comments relate to the abuse of the appointing power by the audiencia, and the failure of that body to provide adequately for the defense of the colony. In support of the former charge, Fajardo said that the magistrates had appointed several officials for life, which was forbidden by the laws, since the audiencia was only permitted to fill offices for the period of its rule. [620] The audiencia had also infringed upon the prerogatives of the governor by the permanent bestowal of encomiendas. Fajardo stated that when he arrived in the Islands he found all the offices and encomiendas filled with friends and dependents of the oidores. Thus as a direct consequence the success of his administration was impaired by the presence of officials who regarded him, their chief, with hostility. He cited an instance in which similar infringements upon the rights of the viceroy by the Audiencia of Mexico had been nullified by the royal veto, and he urged that some definite cédula or law should be promulgated relative to these matters in the Philippines. [621] The difficulty of fixing responsibility for the loss of the galleons in the expedition to the Moluccas led Fajardo to criticise the practice of allowing the audiencia to assume control of affairs during vacancies. He regarded it as a cumbrous proceeding which could only result in chaotic and incompetent government. No better results could be expected when a body of magistrates and lawyers undertook to rule an isolated colony, and especially when one of them assumed responsibility for military affairs, which could not be successfully carried out by any but a military man. He emphasized the necessity of locating responsibility for every department of government in a central authority. He recommended the designation of "two military men of such standing and ability that, when the governor and captain-general is absent, they might succeed to those duties." [622] He considered it advisable that during vacancies, as well as when the regular governor was present, authority should rest with one person and not be scattered or divided among a number of magistrates. Gerónimo de Silva had been given a commission from the viceroy to assume the post of captain-general, and upon the demise of Fajardo in 1624, he took charge of military affairs, while the audiencia retained the government. Silva's responsibility for the loss of the ships in 1617, already referred to, as well as for other disasters in 1624, caused him to be removed from the command and confined in Fort Santiago where he remained until released by the new temporary governor, Fernando de Silva, who arrived in 1625. The latter commanded the military forces, while the audiencia administered the government. [623] Of far-reaching importance was the action of the audiencia in 1624, in nullifying the action taken by the former governor, Alonso Fajardo, relative to the construction of a seminary for Japanese priests and students. This edifice had been partially constructed when the audiencia took over the government. It is interesting to note that the oidores, although not collectively responsible for the defense of the colony, took a stand on this occasion in a matter which had to do with the common security. The objections of the oidores were significant. The location of the seminary within three hundred feet of the wall was thought to be unwise in view of the danger of a Japanese revolt. The Japanese emperor had signified his disapproval of Christianity on many occasions by banishing and torturing numerous friars who had gone to Japan from the Islands. He had forbidden the worship and propagation of Christianity in his empire. There were at that time rumors of an impending conquest of China and the Philippines by the Japanese, consequently the audiencia did not wish to invite the emperor's wrath upon the colony by attempting to proselyte his subjects. The audiencia thought best to stop this before the displeasure and enmity of the Japanese were incurred. Fear of the loss of trade with China, dread of an alliance of the Japanese with the Dutch, making probable a concerted attack on the Philippines, and the danger of an outbreak of the Japanese already within the colony in conjunction with an attack by those without, were all considerations which induced the audiencia to take responsibility upon itself in this matter. [624] The official correspondence of the governor following immediately upon the administration of an audiencia is always valuable as showing the state of affairs under the preceding rule. That of Fernando de Silva coincides closely with the correspondence of Governor Fajardo in charging the audiencia with many misdeeds, chief among which were the abuse of the appointing power and the concession of encomiendas without authorization. Silva, on his accession to the governorship, also found the finances of the colony in a bad condition, great waste having been incurred in their administration. There had been neither peace nor order; the oidores had quarreled among themselves, and residents were leaving the city as a consequence of this turmoil. The oidores had, without cause, dismissed all the officials appointed by Fajardo, filling their places with their friends. [625] The following account of the excesses of the audiencia was given by Silva: Under pretext of the arrest and removal of Don Geronimo de Silva, Licentiate Legaspi, ... exercised the office of captain-general, carrying the staff of office and making them lower the banners to him, and address him as "your Lordship," and his wife as "my lady." He immediately appointed his elder son to the post of sargento-mayor of this camp, and his younger son to a company, while another company was assigned to a relative of Auditor Matias Flores y Cassila (also an oidor). Others were assigned to brothers of the said Don Matias, the fiscal, and other auditors, except Don Albaro (Messa y Lugo), who refused to have anything given to his household. Upon seeing the illegality of these appointments, I issued an act declaring them vacant and restoring those posts to those who had held them before. [626] That the king had not entirely lost confidence in the audiencia, notwithstanding the above complaints, is attested by the instruction issued by the Council of the Indies to Francisco de Rojas y Ornate, royal visitor to the Philippines. [627] This communication, which was dated August 17, 1628, approved the stand which the audiencia had taken in insisting that all money obtained from Chinese trading-licenses should be put into the royal treasury and accounted for by the oficiales reales before it was spent. It appears that the governor had hitherto used this money as an extra fund upon which to draw for the expenses of the colony. The king also approved the attitude of the audiencia in denying to persons in New Spain the right of using the Manila galleon for the shipment of their goods, and in refusing to allow money sent by them to the Islands to be invested in the Chinese trade. Silva contended that the audiencia had no right to intervene in either of the above matters, but in this Silva was not sustained, Rojas y Ornate being instructed to see that Governor Tavora respected the action of the audiencia in the two particulars referred to. [628] The audiencia assumed management of political affairs in 1632, on the death of Governor Juan Niño de Tavora, but neither the audiencia as a body, nor the senior oidor personally were entrusted with the military command. This responsibility devolved on Lorenzo de Olazo, the maestre de campo, who had been designated by the viceroy of New Spain to assume temporary charge of military affairs. He was succeeded the following year by Juan Cerezo de Salamanca, who had been sent from Mexico by the viceroy as soon as the death of Tavora was announced in that city. Cerezo served ad interim for three years, and during his administration the audiencia acted solely as a judicial body, not attempting to interfere in governmental or military affairs. [629] It was under the rule of this governor that important expeditions were undertaken against the Moros in the South, and the first fort and settlement were made at Zamboanga. It is to be especially noted that in the appointment of Olazo and Cerezo in 1632 and 1633 respectively, the senior oidor was deprived of the control of military affairs. This had been done also in 1617 and in 1624 when Gerónimo de Silva, governor of Ternate, had taken charge of military affairs during vacancies in the regular governorship. Temporary appointments had been made on two different occasions by the Marqués de Cerralbo, Viceroy of New Spain, once in the sending of Fernando de Silva after the death of Governor Fajardo, and on this occasion, when Cerezo de Salamanca took the place of Governor Juan Niño de Tavora, after the audiencia had governed a year. Experience had shown that the assumption of the military command by the senior oidor was not productive of the most satisfactory results. It was not to be expected, of course, that a magistrate would administer military affairs with the skill of a captain-general, and we have seen that various governors recommended that the practice should no longer be continued. So it came about that the law of 1608 was revived, and the viceroy appointed a temporary governor to assume control of military affairs, the audiencia being restricted to judicial and administrative functions. In 1633, on the accession of Cerezo de Salamanca, the audiencia was deprived of the right of intervention in the last mentioned activity, and was confined to its judicial duties alone. This was confirmed by the cédula of January 30, 1635, which relieved the Audiencia of Manila of all jurisdiction over military affairs during vacancies, ordering that they were to be administered by a temporary appointee of the viceroy. [630] Nevertheless, considerable opposition to this method of filling vacancies in the governorship had developed within the colony. This is shown in various protests which came from the Islands from time to time. These are set forth with great clarity in the correspondence of the governors. Corcuera, in a letter written to Philip IV on June 30, 1636, stated that these temporary governors had allowed persons in Mexico to make large fortunes out of the Philippine trade, and that the governors had devoted most of their time when in Manila to serving as agents of the residents of Mexico. Corcuera, however, seemed to regard the audiencia as incapable of government, for he claimed that in the brief term of a year in which the tribunal had ruled, three years prior to his accession, it had run the colony into debt from 80,000 to 100,000 pesos. He charged the oidores with the same dishonest practice as had been alleged against Governor Fajardo, namely, that they had issued due-bills in payment of debts and had bought them up later at less than their face value, realizing the full amount on them upon their presentation to the treasury later. He stated that these warrants were not only bought by the oidores, but by practically all the officials of the government. During Cerezo's term a sum in excess of 100,000 pesos was said to have been paid out to officials as usury. [631] Corcuera presented a scheme of reform designed to remedy the evils resulting from the succession either of the audiencia or of an irresponsible military commander to the ad interim governorship. He recommended that the regularly appointed governor should be assisted by five commissioners, who should be military men, holding the respective commands of Fort Santiago, Cavite, the Port of Manila, Formosa, and the Parián. These were to be eligible in the order named in case of a vacancy. This plan, like so many of the schemes of the soldier governors, only took cognizance of the military side of the governor's office. The marked tendency of these commanders was to continually underestimate the administrative and political phases of their positions. The plan of Corcuera was not adopted, however, and the viceroy continued to appoint temporary governors to succeed the audiencia when it assumed the government ad interim. Governor Diego Fajardo, on July 10, 1651, wrote a letter to the king protesting against the policy of appointment which was then in force. He said: I should be unfaithful to Your Majesty if I did not advise you of the inconveniences arising from the appointment of governors by the Viceroy of New Spain; the practice of sending money from Mexico for investment in this colony has continued and increased, to the exclusion and deprivation of the merchants of these Islands.... Investments have been made by the viceroys through the agency of others. [632] Fajardo urged that the audiencia should be permitted to retain the government as it had done formerly. He showed the advantages accruing to the colony from a continuity of policy which would result from the rule of the oidores. He showed that the incursions of the viceroys and residents of Mexico upon the galleon trade would more likely be checked by the oidores than by any other agency, adding moreover that this particular matter should be attended to at once since the life and prosperity of the colony depended on the control of the Acapulco and Chinese commerce by the merchants of Manila. [633] A similar argument was presented by Governor Manrique de Lara in a letter written July 19, 1654. This governor urged that a commission of magistrates, familiar with the needs of the colony through experience and long residence, was better fitted to rule for the common good than a stranger, appointed by a distant viceroy, coming to the Islands as most of the temporary governors had done, with the sole purpose of exploitation. [634] Probably the sentiments of the residents and officials of the Philippines were best and most effectively expressed on this subject in the letter written by the audiencia to the king on July 19, 1654. [635] The audiencia, on this occasion, described the inconveniences resulting from the appointment of a resident of the Islands by the Viceroy of New Spain. It was alleged that these appointees, being already established in the Islands as merchants, officials, lawyers, and even as soldiers, spent all their time in the service of their own special interests. The commercial abuses of these appointees were said to be notorious. The presence of so many relatives, friends, and business connections made it impossible for these temporary rulers to officiate properly as presidents of the audiencia, or to administer the affairs of the government with diligence and impartiality. As a result of the general dissatisfaction in the colony, which was reflected in the above letters, and in compliance with the repeated requests previously made for reform, the law of April 2, 1664, was proclaimed, and followed by the consulta of September 9, 1669, which has been already referred to. These laws still recognized the right of the Viceroy of New Spain to appoint governors temporarily, but these were no longer to be designated in advance from the residents of the Islands. While the senior magistrate was to have charge of military affairs, he was to seek the advice of such military officials as were stationed in the colony, "exercising very particular care and vigilance in all that pertains to military affairs, endeavoring to keep the presidios well stocked and provided with all the defenses necessary for whatever occasion may arise." This, then, was a return to the practice which had prevailed prior to September 13, 1608, when the Viceroy of New Spain was first authorized to appoint a temporary governor in advance of the death of the incumbent. Although the audiencia assumed the government with partial legal justification from 1593 onward, the period from 1664 to 1719 may rightly be said to constitute the era of the audiencia's authorized rule. An occasion for the exercise of the new law occurred in 1668, when Governor Diego de Salcedo was arrested and imprisoned by the commissary of the Inquisition. In accordance with the law of April 2, 1664, just referred to, the audiencia was entitled to assume the government until the arrival of the provisional governor from New Spain. A dispute arose between the two most eligible oidores, Francisco de Coloma and Francisco Montemayor y Mansilla, for the honors of the military command. Coloma had been commissioned as magistrate of the Audiencia of Manila before Montemayor, who maintained his claim to the headship of military affairs on the grounds that he had arrived in the Philippines earlier than Coloma. [636] These two officials were unable to agree as to their respective rights, and Juan Manuel de la Peña Bónifaz, junior magistrate of the audiencia, took advantage of the discord to further his own interests. Put forward by the commissary of the Inquisition and by the ecclesiastical element of the colony as arbiter in the contention between his two colleagues, he solidified his own power until he was able to usurp the entire government. He issued orders to the soldiers, compromised with Coloma, exiled Montemayor, enacted financial and governmental measures, appointed his friends to office, and in general acted the part of a dictator, combining in his own person all the functions of the military, judicial and executive departments. [637] The audiencia, of course, was entirely suppressed. Certain ecclesiastical authorities state that he governed with greater consideration and fairness than many of his predecessors, and that his rule was more just than that of the audiencia had been. [638] The spirit of his administration was particularly favorable to the churchmen, by whose favor he gained office, and by whose aid he was able to retain his position. His successor, Manuel de León, was appointed regular governor as soon as news of the arrest of Salcedo reached Spain. Bónifaz was apprehended and sentenced to pay the customary penalty for treason, but death intervened and defrauded the king's justice. It may be considered, in a sense, that Bónifaz conferred a service upon the colony by forcibly putting an end to the disputes which had been prevalent between the rival oidores whose claims could not have been settled for three years at least--the time necessary for the Council of the Indies to transmit to the distant colony a ruling on the points at issue. The audiencia next took over the government in April, 1679, on the death of Governor León, and it retained control of affairs until the arrival of Governor Juan de Vargas Hurtado in September, 1678. The rule of the tribunal on this occasion was without sensational features. Oidor Francisco de Coloma, in whose favor the Council of the Indies had declared in the dispute described above, assumed charge of military affairs, serving as captain-general until his death. His seniority was acknowledged by Montemayor, who was called back from exile to a place in the audiencia. [639] The inefficiency of the audiencia as a governing agency as shown in the episode just described was surpassed by the state of utter impotency to which the tribunal was reduced during the Pardo controversy in 1684. Though at first successful in exiling the archbishop, the audiencia and Governor Vargas were later completely undone by the intriguing of the new governor, Curuzaelegui, with the prelate to discredit the previous administration. The struggle ended in the restoration of the prelate, the residencia of Vargas and the appointment of a new tribunal which was calculated to be more subservient to the commands of the new governor and the prelate. This audiencia assumed the government after the death of Curuzaelegui on April 17, 1689, with Alonzo de Ávila as chief executive. [640] The events of the Pardo controversy prepared the way for a period of rule by an audiencia in which the entire government was dominated by the ecclesiastics. Archbishop Pardo and his successors were the real governors and the victory of the church over the various officials of civil administration lowered the moral tone of the entire government. Corruption flourished and the vigor of the administration decayed. [641] It is clear that the depravity of the civil government proceeded largely from the weakness of the audiencia and its submission to the governor. The latter was under orders from no less an authority than the king, himself, to put an end to the disputes between church and state in the colony and to bring about peace; it also happened that the situation in the colony at that time caused the governor to lean towards the side of Pardo and his supporters. The audiencia was entirely disregarded both by Governor Curuzaelegui and by the court, which may be attributed in some measure to that policy of the Spanish government previously alluded to--that of sacrificing principle in order to preserve harmony. There is no doubt but that the weakness and inefficiency of the audiencia during these two controversies contributed largely to the subsequent decision of the court to deprive the audiencia of the right of governing ad interim. The last occasion on which the audiencia regularly assumed the government of the Islands, and one which demonstrated still more conclusively the inefficiency of the audiencia as governor, occurred in 1715, after the death of Governor Lizarraga. His rule had been uncommonly quiet and peaceful, and the period of extortion and strife which succeeded it furnished a marked contrast to that governor's administration. The audiencia ruled from February 4, 1715, to August 9, 1717, with Oidor José Torralba as senior magistrate. The reports sent by Torralba to the court during the two years of his service as military commander show that the audiencia as a body played a very small part in the government. This was again the rule of a dictator. We have seen in a former chapter that Torralba was held accountable in his residencia for a deficit of 700,000 pesos which developed during this period; [642] it is difficult to understand how this could have been possible had the senior magistrate concerned himself solely with military affairs. Concepción states that Torralba, inflated by his position, and ambitious of getting absolute control of the government, drove from office the oidores who dared to oppose him. [643] He refused to honor the royal cédula of April 15, 1713, which ordered the reinstatement of Oidor Pavón to his place as senior oidor since the fulfillment of this order would have deprived Torralba of his command. Torralba reported great progress in the repair and restoration of royal and municipal warehouses, hospitals, convents, and churches during his administration. The wall of Manila was re-built and new bronze guns were cast and placed thereon. As acting captain-general, Torralba inspected Fort Santiago, and, "noting grave needs both in construction and in the morale of troops," made the necessary repairs, reforms and corrections. [644] He concerned himself also with the promotion and appointment of military officials. These latter acts were vigorously resisted by the maestre de campo, and by other military officials, as encroachments on their authority. They ultimately sought to bring about the nullification of all Torralba's "unjustifiable acts of interference within the military sphere." [645] Whether animated by a sincere desire to see the natives justly treated, or rather by his natural dislike of the friars, Torralba intervened on various occasions for the protection of the Indians against the encroachments and abuses of the churchmen on the encomiendas and in the native towns. These acts were carried out in the name of the audiencia, and in accordance with the law, ultimately meeting with the approval of the Council of the Indies. [646] A great deal of dissatisfaction, both at the court and in the colony, had resulted from the audiencia's assumption of the government at various times since 1664. We have already noted that the restoration of this authority to the audiencia was attended by the disgraceful quarrel between Coloma and Montemayor and the usurpation of Bónifaz in 1668. The Pardo controversy did not produce a favorable impression of the activities of the audiencia. Torralba's dictatorship in the name of the audiencia from 1715 to 1717, conspicuous for the huge deficit in which it culminated, demonstrated the unfitness of the audiencia to be entrusted with the rule of the Islands. Indeed, it may be said that the various experiments made by the monarchs during the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries for the purpose of perfecting a system whereby the governorship could be satisfactorily filled ad interim had failed to demonstrate or develop any authority capable of maintaining harmony or decent government. Co-operation among the authorities of the colony was practically unknown. The royal disapproval was passed upon practically all the official acts of these interim administrations. The thirst for personal glory, and the desire for private gain invariably induced some official who was stronger than his contemporaries to assume control of affairs; thus the government of the colony was made repeatedly to subserve personal ends, and civil and political life was characterized by its strife and discord. The probabilities that the temporary administration of the audiencia would not be entirely successful had been recognized from the beginning, and in order to guard against its misrule the king had authorized the appointment of a temporary governor by the Viceroy of New Spain. It was unavoidable, however, that the audiencia should govern until the arrival of this official. For a time the alternative was tried of allowing the maestre de campo to assume the military command, but this resulted in such an incompetent rule that the former prerogatives of the audiencia were restored. Whether the audiencia was capable of governing successfully or not, it certainly had the power to make or mar the government of any other person or authority, whether he was regularly appointed by the king, or chosen temporarily by the viceroy. The church, as represented by a succession of triumphant archbishops, had exercised the preponderance of power and authority throughout the forty years of strife, ending with the death of Governor Bustamante. We need not be concerned here with the various struggles and disagreements with governors and audiencias, but the fact remains that the church was the only institution existing during this period which was able to present a solid and united front to its enemies, or which manifested any symptoms of power, unity or royal approbation. The culmination of ecclesiastical power was virtually reached on October 11, 1719, when Governor Bustamante was murdered by emissaries of the church and Fray Francisco de la Cuesta, Archbishop of Manila, assumed the vacant governorship. Zúñiga, the Dominican historian, says that the archbishop declined the governorship on this occasion, but was subsequently prevailed upon to accept it. [647] It is certain that the tribunal was in no state or condition to take charge of affairs; its administration had been discredited by the murder of its protector, its senior magistrate had been proved an embezzler in his residencia, and the remaining members of the tribunal were not qualified to remain in office. Oidores Villa and Pavón, removed by Torralba and Bustamante, were restored by the archbishop, and were content to recognize him as president of the audiencia. Each of them had his own claims to the position of acting-governor and had Cuesta not occupied the governorship with their consent, these oidores would either have been languishing in banishment as punishment for having resisted the prelate, or they would have been struggling for the honors of a position occupied by a pretended mediator, as on former occasions. So there can be no doubt that it was best for all concerned that the church was powerful at this time; the colony had had enough of strife and murder and there was urgent need of some authority with sufficient power to bring about peace. It is sufficient to say that the audiencia renounced its claims to the government, and, according to Zúñiga, who devotes an unusual amount of space to this important epoch in the ecclesiastical history of the Islands, the people were very content with the archbishop's rule after the injustice and oppression of Bustamante. [648] It may be noted that the archbishop exercised complete authority over the audiencia, even to the extent of restoring oidores who had been unlawfully dismissed, and of acting as an intermediary between magistrates. He was master of the situation and his interim rule was preferred by the sovereign and by the people to that of the audiencia. The royal order of September 8, 1720, legalizing the government of the prelates, applied not only to the administration of Cuesta, but it established a precedent for the temporary rule of four prelates. [649] In compliance with this decree, three sealed envelopes (pliegos de providencia) were sent to the audiencia to be placed unopened in the archives of that tribunal, and the seals were to be broken only on the death of the governor. These envelopes were accompanied by an order from the king, directing that the person mentioned in the first envelope should be recognized as temporary governor. In case of his absence or incapacity to serve, the second envelope was to be opened and the directions contained therein were to be followed, and if these could not be complied with, the third envelope was to be opened. No further necessity for the observance of this law of succession arose until after the death of Governor Gaspar de la Torre, when, on August 15, 1745, the first envelope was opened in the presence of the audiencia. The post of archbishop being vacant at this time it became necessary to follow the directions prescribed by the second envelope. It was found that Fray Juan de Arrechedera, Bishop of Nueva Segovia, had been designated as the governor's successor. The audiencia relinquished the control of affairs into his hands and he governed for a period of five years. It would seem that the ecclesiastical calling of this governor in no way incapacitated or hindered him in the execution of his duties. His administration was characterized especially by various measures taken for the defense and fortification of the Islands. He suppressed several insurrections in Ilocos and Cagayán, dispatching military forces under the command of alcaldes mayores against the revolting natives. He repelled several Moro raids and made treaties of peace with the Sultan of Sulu. [650] There is no evidence of discord between the governor and the audiencia during this period. Although Archbishop Trinidad arrived and took possession of his see on August 27, 1747, he made no attempt to take charge of political affairs. [651] He permitted Arrechedera to continue as governor for three years, handing over to him a royal mandate, for the absolute expulsion of the Chinese [which was never] ... carried into execution, the interest of the Governor being too deeply involved in the suspension of it, the Chinese paying him a contribution for his forbearance. The Archbishop found that Arrechedera was strongly attached to this nation, and he became so far a convert to his sentiments on this subject that he did not put the royal order in force.... This seems to have been the only error committed by this illustrious prelate during the time he held the government. In all other respects his conduct reflected the highest honour on him. [652] The third time the government was taken over by a prelate was in 1759 on the death of Governor Arandía. On this occasion it became necessary to open the third pliego de providencia. The metropolitan see of Manila and the diocese of Nueva Segovia being vacant, Bishop Espeleta of Cebú was the senior prelate of the Islands. Shortly after the accession of Espeleta, Manuel Rojo, the new archbishop, arrived, commanding Espeleta to vacate the governorship at once. Rojo refused, citing the precedent established by Bishop Arrechedera. Espeleta appealed to the audiencia for support, but the oidores were unable to agree on the question, two of them, Calderón and Galbán supporting Rojo, and the other two remaining in favor of the retention of the governorship by Espeleta. The question was left to the fiscal, Francisco Leandro de Viana, who advised that the matter should be carried to the Council of the Indies for final settlement. [653] It transpired, therefore, that Espeleta retained the governorship from 1759 until 1761, and he did very effective work in repelling the raids of the Moros, who had been ravaging the provinces with impunity for some time. The prosecution of Dr. Santiago Orendaín occupied a large share of Espeleta's attention during his administration. This controversy should be noted here because it illustrates the relations between the audiencia and an ecclesiastical governor. Orendaín had been the advisor (asesor) of Governor Arandía, and was held responsible for the repressive measures taken against the church during the administration of the latter. The rule of an unscrupulous prelate presented an excellent opportunity for revenge and Orendaín's prosecution was unanimously demanded by the ecclesiastical element of the colony. The magistrates also welcomed the opportunity to retaliate upon a hitherto successful, but unpopular, rival. The fiscal brought action against Orendaín, who sought refuge in an Augustinian convent, whereupon the civil authorities forced an entrance into the asylum, seizing Orendaín and imprisoning him in Fort Santiago. The provisor of the ecclesiastical court excommunicated Magistrate Villacorta, who had exculpated Orendaín in his trial, but the ban was disregarded by the audiencia. A division over the question arose in the tribunal, and matters were assuming a threatening aspect, when the authorized appointment of Governor Rojo arrived. Espeleta gave up his office, and the first act of the new governor was to restore Orendaín to full favor as his counsellor. The affair of Dr. Orendaín illustrates a phase of Spanish colonial administration which is too characteristic to be left unnoticed here. Aside from the influence which Orendaín exercised over Governor Arandía, his persecution shows the measure of personal rancour which even a prelate might put into his administration, spending practically two years in the pursuit of revenge. In this he was supported by the audiencia. In this affair neither the church nor the audiencia were animated so much by motives of right and justice as they were influenced by personal feelings. The rule of Archbishop Rojo from 1761 to 1764 was a notable one in the history of the Philippines. The principal event during his administration was the capture of Manila by the British. This furnished the occasion for the resistance of Oidor Simón de Anda y Salazar, in the name of the audiencia, both to the English and to the archbishop who had ordered his surrender. These events show the complete incapacity of an ecclesiastical governor of Rojo's type and personality to fulfill the military requirements of his position. In the operations of Anda we note how a man of decisive action, energy, courage, and loyalty was able to force the issue and deprive the archbishop-governor of the executive functions which he had assumed legally, but which he was unable to dispense. This episode illustrates, furthermore, the general disregard of the laws which placed the governorship in the hands of a man who was unfit for its exercise, showing again that in the selection of a person to carry out the duties of governor the military side of the situation could not be disregarded. Anda, at the time of the accession of Rojo, was a junior magistrate in the audiencia, having arrived in Manila on July 21, 1761. [654] The British squadron entered Manila Bay on September 22, 1762. The British subsequently attacked the city, the fall of which seemed imminent on account of the neglectful state into which the defense had fallen. [655] The proposition was made to the archbishop-governor by Fiscal Francisco Leandro de Viana and the audiencia that Oidor Anda should be dispatched to the provinces with the title of Governor and Captain-general of the Islands for the purpose of maintaining and defending them under the sovereignty of the Spanish monarch, [656] and "in order that he might keep the natives quiet in their Christian instruction and in their obedience to the king." [657] The archbishop refused to accede to this proposition on the grounds that "neither he nor the Audiencia had any authority to create a governor and captain-general, which was the proper privilege of his Majesty; and that it was enough to give him the title of visitor of the land ... and ... of lieutenant of the captain-general." [658] This was done, therefore, and Anda left on the night of October 3, 1762, with these titles and powers. It is important to note that Anda was not given the title of governor and captain-general, but that as oidor he was commissioned visitador de tierras and teniente de gobernador y capitán general. [659] The authority to designate oidores as visitors of the provinces was a function regularly exercised by the president of the audiencia and authorized by the laws of the Indies. [660] It appears from the above that Anda was sent to the provinces to defend them against the English. This was the main object as stated in the original proposition of the audiencia. Zúñiga states the purpose of the departure of Anda to have been "to maintain the islands in obedience to the King of Spain," [661] and this is corroborated by the testimonies of Anda, [662] Viana [663] and of Rojo, [664] himself. In view of these facts, Rojo's failure to co-operate with Anda, his proneness to listen to those who counseled surrender, his complete reversal of tactics in repeatedly summoning Anda to abdicate, and his willingness even to betray Anda into the hands of the British are almost inexplicable. [665] Anda organized a provisional government in his capacity as lieutenant-governor. He disregarded the repeated summons of the archbishop to return to the city and surrender to the British. In a letter to the archbishop, dated October 21, 1762, Anda justified his position and made clear that he was not acting on the basis of any delegation of power as captain-general, which authority, he acknowledged, still rested with Rojo. He stated that he had been appointed visitor-general of the provinces "with the real mission of protecting them if the English captured Manila;" in case this happened he was to solicit the aid of prelates, religious and alcaldes mayores in defending the Islands. He complained that Rojo had already "endeavored to influence the prelates, religious and natives to submit to the British." [666] He urged that Rojo should desist from his opposition to his efforts, pointing out the great desirability of their co-operation. When Anda became convinced of the infirmity of Rojo and the uselessness of further attempts at co-operation with him he completely changed his attitude towards his own position and towards the question of the defense and government of the Islands. While he had hitherto recognized Rojo as governor and captain-general, he now assumed the position that the archbishop was a prisoner in the city and he therefore refused to recognize the orders of the latter. Anda issued a call to all loyal inhabitants to defend the honor of Spain. He ordered the alcaldes mayores to pay no heed to the dispatches and commands issued by the archbishop or the British in the city. He set himself up as governor and captain-general of the Islands, subsequently moving his capital to Bacolor, Pampanga. He obtained possession of the funds of the royal treasury, which had been sent to the province of Laguna when the English had appeared, and he turned a deaf ear to the demands of the archbishop that the money should be returned to the city in order that it might be applied on the payment of the four million-peso war indemnity imposed by the victorious British. Anda enlisted a military force aggregating eight thousand men, and he successfully prevented the enemy from doing more than capture Cavite, Pásig, and a few other places of minor importance. Notwithstanding the demands of the British, who had placed a price of four thousand pesos on his head, and the entreaties of the archbishop, Anda resisted until he was assured that peace was definitely arranged between Spain and Great Britain. [667] The justification which Anda offered for his conduct was as follows: the regular governor and the audiencia (excepting himself) were prisoners in the city of Manila; their positions and places were therefore vacant, and Anda, as the sole oidor who was not incapacitated, should accordingly succeed and had succeeded to the management of political affairs and defense. He was both audiencia and governor. In support of his contention that he himself was the legally constituted audiencia, he cited the law promulgated by Philip III on August 14, 1620, declaring that "in some of the audiencias of the Indies it has happened, and it might happen still that the oidores being absent and ... only one remaining, ... in such cases the audiencia is to be conserved and continued with only one oidor." [668] Anda had been a legally appointed oidor on special delegation to the provinces when the city fell into the hands of the British; the governor and the remaining oidores had become prisoners and were civilly dead; being the only magistrate of the audiencia yet on duty, he was at once audiencia and governor. He stated that he would surrender his office to the archbishop and audiencia when both had regained their liberty, but he warned the archbishop that if he went to the extreme of surrendering the Islands, he (Anda) "would in no wise obey so unjust and absurd a treaty," and furthermore stated that if the British wished to rule the country, they would have to conquer it first. He expressed the conviction that neither the archbishop nor any other authority except the king had the power to surrender the Islands. [669] In these arguments and sentiments Anda was supported by the fiscal, Francisco Leandro de Viana, and by Oidores Galbán and Villacorta, who subsequently escaped from the city and joined him in the provinces, aiding him in his resistance to the invaders. Although the British had agreed in their terms of capitulation that the audiencia should continue in the exercise of its normal powers in Manila, [670] that tribunal and the archbishop were virtually prisoners; the idea of their recognition therefore appears almost an absurdity. The oidores acted as members of the council of war which considered the proposition made by the British for the surrender of the city, but if we may trust the testimony of Viana, the archbishop, influenced by his favorites, Monroy and Orendaín, forced the magistrates to sign the articles of capitulation. Viana says that in the various matters which came up for solution after the city had surrendered, the oidores were formally consulted, but the archbishop followed his own counsel, or that of his favorites. [671] The position of Rojo after the escape of the fiscal and the oidores was an exceedingly unpleasant one. The English commander complained that the prelate and the audiencia had failed to keep the agreement which had been made between them; in escaping, the fiscal and the oidores had violated their oaths; the indemnity had not been paid; the provinces had not surrendered and Anda was still continuing his resistance. The sack of the city was threatened. These conditions made Rojo redouble his efforts to betray Anda and to get possession of the treasure which had come on the patache, "Filipino". The British offered remission of tribute to all natives then in insurrection who would surrender. Anda was charged with responsibility for the danger with which the city was threatened. He was said to have prevented the fulfillment of the treaty between Rojo and the British. To this Anda replied that he had not been a party to the treaty. The state of perpetual worry in which Rojo was kept brought about his death on January 30, 1764. Even before this he had practically lost his status as governor and the British were treating with Anda for the surrender of the Islands. [672] This continued until the legitimacy of the position of Anda was recognized by Governor Torre. [673] A statement of the above facts aids in clarifying our view of Anda's position. It certainly can be said that there was neither an audiencia nor a governor with sovereign powers in Manila; this lack furnished a reasonable basis for Anda's claims. However clearly it was established that a vacancy existed in the governorship, his position would have been sufficiently tenable had it been based solely on the grounds that the archbishop had delegated him as lieutenant of the captain-general, with military powers. The archbishop-governor had granted him that title and those powers for the very purpose for which he had utilized them, namely, for the defense of the Islands against the British. In view of the support which was extended to Anda in his contention that he was governor and captain-general as long as the archbishop and the regularly constituted audiencia were prisoners, it is not easy to understand why it was necessary for him to justify himself by advancing the claim, first, that he was the audiencia, and, second, that he was the governor because he had the authority of the audiencia. The only accountable reason for this was probably the necessity of nullifying the commands of the archbishop which were being issued from the captured city. He may have felt that such measures were imperative in order to gain and retain the respect of the natives and provincial officials who were not under his immediate influence and who were consequently more independent and inclined to be insurrectionary and riotous. Yet, it is hardly possible that the legal arguments advanced in support of his claims were understood by this class. It does not appear, moreover, that Anda was entirely justified in his argument by the laws. No doubt he was right in regarding himself as the audiencia, on the basis of the laws cited by him. However, the law did not at that time authorize the succession of the audiencia to a vacancy in the governorship. The cédulas of September 8, 1720, and of August 15, 1731, were still in force in the Philippines, and by virtue of these and by the special cédula promulgated in 1761 in favor of Rojo, an ecclesiastic was authorized to act as governor in case of a vacancy. According to law and precedent, the post vacated by the archbishop-governor should have been filled by the bishop of Nueva Segovia, and by the bishop of Cebú, respectively. It is true that neither of these ecclesiastics put forth any effort to maintain their legal rights, probably for the reason that they realized their incapacity to organize and conduct the defense of the Islands as well as Anda had done. The audiencia had not succeeded to the government since 1715; it had been forbidden to do so in 1720 and subsequently. It is therefore difficult to understand how Anda could have seriously advanced the claim that in his capacity as sole oidor he should succeed to the government. Aside from the opposition of the archbishop, there does not seem to have been any great difference of opinion on the question of whether Anda could rightfully claim the prerogatives of the audiencia and governorship at the same time. Rojo paid no attention to the legal arguments advanced by Anda, but contended that both the governor and the audiencia were still in full possession of their powers and in complete enjoyment of their liberties within the city. No comment is to be found on Anda's contention in the royal dispatches which were sent in answer to his reports. It is important to note, however, that after the death of the archbishop, and after the restoration of peace, the fiscal was of the opinion that the government should go to Fray Ustáriz, bishop of Nueva Segovia. [674] In this opinion he was seconded by Oidor Galbán. It would seem that Anda was supported in his resistance to Archbishop Rojo and the British largely on grounds of expediency. This is clearly brought out in a letter which Fiscal Viana wrote to the king on October 30, 1762, stating his opinion that: Since the Audiencia and governor are unable to exercise their duties, Anda, as the only active and unembarrassed minister who is able to retain his place under the authority of Your Majesty, has declared himself governor, royal audiencia and captain-general. It is evident that, being a prisoner, the archbishop cannot be governor and captain-general, and it is equally certain that the government and office of captain-general falls back on the audiencia and the oldest oidor. [675] This argument savors of expediency and sound practicability rather than of interest in the legal quibble. Had Viana been convinced of the legality of Anda's claims he would not subsequently have supported Ustáriz. Viana contended that neither the archbishop nor the audiencia enjoyed sovereign powers when they were prisoners. Anda, on the other hand, was in such a position that he could utilize his legal powers; he used them to good advantage and effectively, therefore he was entitled to recognition. Aside from the question of legality, it is important to note that Anda was the only person who was able to exercise sovereign powers during this time. It is certain, moreover, that he prevented the Islands from falling into the hands of the British and that he maintained the continuity of the sovereignty of Spain in the Islands from 1762 to 1764. During his rule in the provinces he exercised practically all the functions of a normal government. Aside from the management of military affairs he administered the finances and levied tribute. As noted above, he contrived to obtain possession of the royal treasure which had been sent to Laguna; he was consequently better equipped financially than he would have been otherwise, and better than his rivals in the city. His finances were also augmented by the favorable circumstance of his capture of the "Filipino" which was returning from Acapulco with the proceeds of the sale of her former cargo. [676] Other functions of a semi-military and governmental character were exercised by Anda in his capacity as acting governor. In some of these matters he was assisted by the fiscal and audiencia in the latter part of his administration. He regulated the prices of provisions in order to prevent them from attaining prohibitive proportions. He did all that he could to further and encourage interprovincial trade. He issued orders in regulation of wages. In order to discourage drunkenness he forbade the sale of nipa wine except in small quantities. He discouraged the importation of wine from Laguna. He took measures to prevent the Chinese from counterfeiting or chipping coins, and he declared what should be legal tender. He forbade the shipment of provisions to the beleaguered city and refused to permit the natives under his jurisdiction to shelter or otherwise assist an Englishman. He prevented secular priests from communicating with the archbishop. In order to encourage service in the army he exempted natives from the polo, or labor tax, and he also made certain exceptions to the general rule for the payment of tribute to offset the decree of the British who had offered wholesale exemption from the payment of tribute in order to attract the natives. Anda issued very severe orders to prevent looting and extortion on the part of his soldiers. Because of the alliance between the Chinese and the British, Anda was obliged to take repressive measures against the former. He forbade games of dice, cock-fighting and card-playing so as to raise the morale of the natives, to prevent thefts and to encourage law and order. He prescribed the death penalty for theft. Anda's rule was little less than a dictatorship, with all the powers of government centered in himself and in his immediate advisors. [677] It has already been pointed out that when Anda's resistance gave certain assurances of success, the fiscal, Viana, and the oidores, Galbán and Villacorta, escaped to his capital, attached themselves to his cause and assumed a share in his government. Anda was willing to recognize them as magistrates of the audiencia, and as such they officiated. Villacorta made some trouble for Anda, however, by claiming the right to act as governor on the ground that he was Anda's senior in the audiencia. This was generally recognized, but Anda refused to accede to his demands, and the matter was dropped for a time. [678] Anda found that his colleagues, Viana and Galbán, were of the opinion that Bishop Ustáriz was legally entitled to the office of governor, but there was some doubt in their minds whether he should be invited at that time to act as governor. Anda consulted the Bishop of Camarines and that prelate expressed his willingness to submit to the decision of the audiencia. The Augustinians and Dominicans were of the same opinion, but the Jesuits and Franciscans told him, that in the then (sic) situation of the islands he alone could preserve the public tranquillity, and on that account he ought to retain the supreme authority. This diversity of opinion was not very gratifying to Señor Anda, and although the troops were in his favour, he was by no means desirous of having recourse to violence. [679] Shortly after the death of Archbishop Rojo, Anda received dispatches informing him that peace had been restored between Spain and England; [680] at the same time the British received orders to evacuate the city. Now that Anda's presence in the field as military commander was no longer absolutely required, a three-cornered fight arose among the supporters of Villacorta, Ustáriz and Anda. Each of these contenders was able to advance a reasonable claim. Villacorta was certainly the senior magistrate, and thus he had a better right legally to the office than Anda. Ustáriz was bishop of Nueva Segovia and as such, was entitled to the governorship according to the most recent law. "Anda had in his favor the circumstance of having defended the islands, and of having prevented the English from advancing to the northern provinces; and, above all, he commanded the troops, who were attached to him, and this served to check the pretensions of the others." [681] The arrival of the interim governor, Francisco Xavier de la Torre, put an end to these disputes. He had been dispatched to the Islands by the Viceroy of New Spain with the title of teniente del rey (king's lieutenant), and in accordance with his instructions he assumed the temporary government on March 17, 1764, which he retained until the arrival of Governor Raón in July, 1765. Anda's residencia was taken by his successor, and it was found that the finances of the colony had been faithfully and honestly administered during his administration. He was able to account for all of the money taken from the "Filipino", turning over two million pesos of these funds to the new governor, accounting for the balance. Anda was recalled to Spain, where he was presented at court, receiving the personal thanks of the sovereign. [682] Torre's accession to the governorship marks the discontinuance in the Philippines of the practice of allowing the archbishop to take charge of the government during vacancies. On no subsequent occasion in the history of the Islands did an ecclesiastic take over the rule of the Islands. [683] It would seem that this plan of succession was abandoned quite generally throughout Spain's dominions, though there is no instance in which the rule of a prelate ever resulted quite so disastrously as in the Philippines from 1762 to 1764. Torre's accession marks the return to the practice introduced in 1608 and followed from time to time throughout the history of the Islands. The audiencia, as a tribunal, concerned itself no further with the temporary government of the Islands. On September 30, 1762, a new cédula authorized the appointment of a teniente del rey by the viceroy of New Spain, and the succession of this official was ordered in case of a vacancy. This law was repromulgated on two subsequent occasions, the first time on November 23, 1774, and again on July 2, 1779. [684] The plan of succession which it authorized was followed quite generally in the subsequent history of the Islands, until the separation of New Spain in 1821 rendered impossible the appointment of a teniente by the viceroy. Anda's government was the last occasion on which the audiencia, in reality or in theory, ever attempted to rule by its own right, except by association with the teniente del rey, with whom it acted in the usual advisory capacity, as authorized in the above-mentioned laws. By the Royal Instruction of Regents of 1776, the regent was authorized to act as president of the audiencia during the absence of the governor, and in case there were no regent, the senior magistrate of the audiencia was to take his place. [685] This law was confirmed by the cédula of August 2, 1789, which ordered that viceroys and presidents, on going outside of their capitals, "should assign to the regents the faculties for the dispatch of the most important and immediate affairs." [686] A subsequent law, dated July 30, 1779, stated that "these important and immediate affairs" did not include "the duties and functions of the captain-general." Again, the royal order of October 23, 1806, [687] commanded that the audiencia should in no case take control of the government when there was a vacancy, but that the name of the temporary governor should be contained in an envelope which was to be opened on the death of the governor, or on his absence from the district. In case provision had not been made in this way, it was ordered that the government should be taken over by the ranking military officer of the colony, if he were higher than the grade of colonel; if not, the regent or decano should be temporary president, governor and captain-general, without ceding the exercise of any of the functions of this office to the audiencia. [688] This law was suspended by the royal order of July 12, 1812, and by the decree of November 2, 1834, which ordered that the segundo cabo, or lieutenant-commander of the king's forces should succeed the governor and captain-general. [689] It is important to note that these laws were applicable throughout the Spanish colonial empire. Subsequent vacancies in the Philippines were filled by military men, and the audiencia refrained from interference with the government. Considering the question in its broadest phases, it cannot be said that the audiencia administered the ad interim rule with a great degree of success. This method of filling vacancies in the governorship failed for a number of reasons. Owing to the divided composition of the tribunal, the rivalry and personal jealousy of the magistrates and the perpetual quarrels and struggles which arose as a consequence, the periods of its rule became wild scrambles for power in which the strongest survived and reaped all the benefits of office. By their example, the oidores stimulated others to wrong-doing, and in their efforts to secure advantages for themselves they oppressed the residents, Spanish and native, with the burden of their misrule. They did not scruple to indulge in dishonest practices whenever occasion offered; indeed, they went out of their way to seek such opportunities. Perhaps the gravest defect of the rule of the audiencia lay in its failure as an executive, owing to the divided character of its composition. There was much jealousy, but neither unity nor centralized responsibility. In their governmental capacity the oidores frequently enacted measures and made recommendations of a statesmanlike character, although they did not always succeed in enforcing them. The magistrates were neither experienced legislators nor trained soldiers, and the latter defect seems to have been a cause of considerable dissatisfaction, especially among the military classes. These were naturally jealous of an assumption of military power by lawyers, whose commands they refused to obey. Nevertheless it must be conceded that such individual oidores as Morga, Alcaraz, Almansa and Anda acquitted themselves of their military duties with great credit when called upon. The reform which gave the government to the churchmen was designed to obviate the defects expressed above. It was believed that a prelate would not be open to so many ventures of a questionable and mainly commercial character. Moreover, the archbishops in Mexico and elsewhere had fulfilled the duties of the executive on former occasions with a fair degree of success. The church was the most powerful, highly centralized and unified institution in the Philippines at the time when both the audiencia and the governorship were weakest. The ecclesiastical authority had repeatedly triumphed over the civil government, and the former gave promise of being able to control matters more effectively in the future than the audiencia had done in the past. The rule of the churchmen did not remedy matters, however, except that it produced harmony through the exercise of force. During the rule of the archbishops, with the exception of that of Rojo, the audiencia was so completely dominated by the ecclesiastical power that the tribunal could scarcely be considered a factor in the government. There were various defects in the rule of the ecclesiastics. Of these, perhaps the most prominent was their failure to meet the military requirements of the position. Because of the natural incongruity existing between ecclesiastical and military duties, they were obliged to delegate the command of the troops to military leaders, who thus exercised an influence never realized by them during the rule of the audiencia. Archbishop Rojo was unwilling to trust the problem of defense to any other person, though unable to cope with the situation himself. Hence Anda forced his way to the front because he was fitted to command and Rojo was not. As administrators and executives the prelates were as efficient as any others, but they were never able to reconcile successfully the opposition of the civil, political, and commercial elements, who were displeased with the rule of an ecclesiastic. Surprising as it may seem, the government of a prelate was usually most unsatisfactory to the churchmen and religious authorities. If the prelate-governor were a friar, his rule was resented by the members of all the rival orders. If he were a secular priest, he was opposed by the friars of all the orders. The failure of Rojo was enough to condemn the practice of permitting ecclesiastics to assume the government, but aside from that, there was a more significant and fundamental reason. The increasing political authority of the church at that time, both in the colonies and in the mother country, its widespread and almost irresistible dominance over temporal affairs, demanded a radical change of policy whereby this dangerous ecclesiastical power could be checked. The rule of Anda, though technically based on that law which gave the succession to the tribunal, was not a typical instance of the government of the audiencia, nor did that period present all the features of such a rule. The influence of the audiencia as a body was practically nil. Anda governed because he was a strong man, not because he was sole oidor or because he was lieutenant-governor. His government was virtually a dictatorship, based on military power, but, nevertheless, just and benevolent. His extra-judicial actions met with the king's approval, because they were efficient. History will show that the Audiencia of Manila assumed temporary charge of the government because the distance and isolation of the colony rendered such a course necessary and because it was thought that the audiencia was best fitted to assume control. The government by the audiencia in the Philippines was not an isolated incident, but was typical of the entire Spanish colonial empire. Owing to the conditions which we have noted, and judged by the standards which constitute good government, the rule of the audiencia was neither successful nor satisfactory. Its most far-reaching defect, as far as the relations of the audiencia and the governor were concerned, lay in the wholesale exercise of administrative and military functions by the magistrates of the audiencia. This impaired the quality of their services as impartial magistrates and contributed in most cases to an insatiable thirst for power. The magistrates were loath to surrender the exercise of these governmental activities on the accession of the succeeding governor, the audiencia displaying a marked tendency to continue in the exercise of administrative control. This, then, was a decided cause of strife and dissension between the audiencia and the governor. CHAPTER X THE AUDIENCIA AND THE CHURCH: THE ROYAL PATRONAGE The audiencia was frequently brought into contact with the powerful ecclesiastical organization in the Philippines. We have already referred in this book to some of the notable occasions of this relationship. Before the establishment of the audiencia the church exercised an extensive authority in governmental affairs. The ecclesiastics aided the civil government by administering justice in the provinces when there were no civil courts. The prelates of the Islands, the provincials of the religious orders and even the friars advised the governors and provincial officials on Indian affairs and the administration of the encomiendas. When the advice of the church was solicited by the home government as to the advisability of removing the audiencia, the suggestions of Fray Alonso Sánchez and Bishop Salazar went far toward bringing about a final solution of the problem of government in the Philippines. [690] These were some of the ways in which the influence of the church was impressed upon the audiencia. The creation of an audiencia, with judicial and advisory functions, put an end to the exercise of these extraordinary powers by the church and tended to confine its activities to the ecclesiastical field. Nevertheless, the prelates continued to advise the governors in administrative matters throughout the entire history of the Islands. Their influence was especially strong in matters relating to the natives, their government and protection, and the archbishops even went so far at times as to give advice on questions of foreign policy. Most of the time this counsel was solicited and was well received. From 1650 onwards, as we noted in the last chapter, the church waxed exceedingly strong in the Philippines and the prelates not only advised, but dominated governors and audiencias. In 1668, Governor Diego Salcedo was unseated, imprisoned and exiled by the commissary of the Inquisition, while a pliant magistrate of the audiencia took over the government and administered affairs in a manner entirely satisfactory to his ecclesiastical supporters. The period from 1684 to 1690 showed the weakness of the audiencia when opposed by a powerful prelate allied to a hostile governor. And in 1719 the church reached the climax of its power by bringing about the murder of a governor, and then succeeding him, overcoming every opposing element in the colony, including the audiencia. From that time onward the prelates governed during vacancies in the governorship--something which the audiencia had failed to do. Finally, in 1762, Simón de Anda y Salazar assumed the reigns of government and the obligations of defense, an act which was sanctioned technically because he was an oidor but really because he was an able man, capable of accomplishing what the church had failed to do. In this chapter it is not our purpose to review the historical facts of the relations of the audiencia and the church or the growth of clerical influence over the audiencia. These matters have been referred to in earlier chapters. It is rather the design to study here the influence which the audiencia, in its turn, exercised in ecclesiastical affairs, noting whence it derived its authority and what was the nature of its powers. The audiencia was established as the ultimate local authority, co-ordinate with the governor (or the viceroy in New Spain or Perú), for enforcing the laws of the royal patronage. [691] Not only was it authorized to act as a tribunal in these matters, but also to officiate as an active executive agent. It is clear that although the governor was the royal vicepatron, he was not expected to act alone and unsupported in dealing with the powerful and often hostile ecclesiastical authority. In former chapters of this treatise attention has been given to the considerations which forced him to share the duties and responsibilities of government, finance, commercial supervision, and even military affairs with the audiencia; the support of that body was even more necessary in dealing with the powerful ecclesiastical organization. The authority which the audiencia exercised jointly with the royal vicepatron was based upon the law ordering our viceroys, presidents, oidores and governors of the Indies to see, guard, and fulfill (the laws), and in the provinces, towns, and churches (in the Indies) to see that all laws and pre-eminences which pertain to our royal patronage are guarded and fulfilled, ... which they will do by the best means that may appear to them convenient, giving all the orders and instructions necessary to the end that all (the instructions) that we may give shall be carried out in due form; and we pray and charge [692] our bishops and archbishops, deans, and ecclesiastical chapters of the metropolitan and cathedral churches and cathedrals and all the curates and occupants of benefices, clerics, sacristans and other ecclesiastical persons, and the provincials, guardians, priors and other religious of the orders, in so far as it is incumbent upon them, to guard and fulfill them (the laws and preëminences of the king) and see them fulfilled and obeyed, conforming with our viceroys, presidents, audiencias and governors as much as may be appropriate and necessary. [693] In accordance with this law the audiencia exercised the right of intervention in practically all matters to which the authority of the vicepatron extended. Foremost among these were the supervision and administration of ecclesiastical revenues, the administration of vacant benefices, the extension of missionary influences and the construction of churches and monasteries. The audiencia, moreover, had authority over the reception and installation of prelates, parish priests, and regulars, and their removal for cause. In all these matters the audiencia was responsible directly to the king and made reports thereon; in fact, it may be said that the tribunal, in co-ordination with the vicepatron, served as a connecting link between the church in the Islands and the royal council in Spain. An analysis of the relations between the audiencia and the church will show that the tribunal exercised two kinds of ecclesiastical powers. These may be regarded respectively as executive and judicial. Although it was in their union that the audiencia exercised its most extensive and far-reaching power of ecclesiastical control, it is advisable for several reasons that these powers should be considered as distinct from one another. They will therefore be discussed separately in this treatise. In this chapter we shall consider only the first of these powers--the one which was most directly concerned with the maintenance of the royal patronage--namely, the authority which the audiencia exercised co-ordinately with the governor in the supervision and control of the church in the colony. Although there appears to have been no conflict of authority between the governor and the audiencia over their mutual relations under the laws of the royal patronage, it is advisable at the outset to settle one difficulty which may present itself in this connection. Many of these powers which the audiencia exercised were conferred upon the vicepatron exclusively. Indeed, a study of the laws alone would suggest the possibility of a conflict of jurisdiction between the governor and the audiencia in matters relating to the royal patronage. In actual practice, however, the governor shared the powers of ecclesiastical supervision with the audiencia, and their relations were harmonious in all matters appertaining thereto. Indeed, there is record of fewer conflicts between the audiencia and the governor in this field of activity than in any other. It would seem that the intervention of the audiencia in ecclesiastical matters developed in the same manner and for the same reason as it came to have authority in matters of government, finance and military administration. The manifest impossibility of the successful administration of the many affairs of civil and ecclesiastical government by the governor (or viceroy in New Spain and Perú) made inevitable the division of power, which, though real, was not always formally recognized by the laws. The audiencia was the only body available with which the governor (or viceroy) might share these responsibilities. Its judicial character, and the talent, training, and administrative ability and experience (wider than that of the governor himself) of its members made it the logical institution to which the executive should naturally turn for advice and assistance. Not only did he require counsel, but the moral and physical support of a tribunal of weight and authority was invaluable in dealing with the united forces of a powerful ecclesiastical hierarchy. This is the best possible explanation of that gradual assumption of authority by the audiencia which seems to have been so indefinitely, yet freely conceded, and which apparently grew up neither in conflict with the law nor yet entirely in accord with it, but which, now recognized, and now ignored, was never denied or prohibited. The cédula of October 6, 1578, in explanation of the various forms of address in the expedition of royal cédulas, was designed to make clear the respective jurisdictions of the vicepatron and the audiencia in ecclesiastical as well as in other governmental affairs. It ordered that when our royal cédulas refer in particular to the viceroys, they alone shall attend to their fulfillment without other intervention; if they designate the viceroy, or president or audiencia, they shall all attend to their execution in accordance with the opinion of the greater part of them that are in the audiencia, and the viceroy or president shall not have more than one vote like the rest that may be present, provided that this do not contravene the superior government which we regularly commit to our viceroys and presidents. [694] While more than a joint authority with the vicepatron cannot be claimed for the audiencia, and that authority not necessarily coequal, this cédula established beyond question the royal intention of recognizing the audiencia as a support and an aid to the governor. This law applied to all the affairs of government, not pertaining any more extensively to the ecclesiastical than to the administrative sphere, but this cédula, together with what actually happened, may be taken as evidence that the audiencia was meant to have jurisdiction in ecclesiastical affairs when royal cédulas granting or assuming the exercise of such jurisdiction were addressed to it. The right of the officials of the civil government to interfere in questions of patronage was seldom seriously questioned by the churchmen, although there were some notable instances in which religious authorities objected to this exercise of power. Bishop Salazar, in his opposition to the plan of Fray Alonso Sánchez at the court of Madrid (1593-1595), expressed his disapproval of the interference of the governor and audiencia in questions of patronage. His opposition is further attested by several of his letters and declarations enunciated previous to that time. [695] He admitted that the civil government, by virtue of the bulls of Alexander VI and Julius II, should act as the defender and champion of the church, but he opposed any further participation in ecclesiastical affairs by the civil power. Salazar's arguments are worth noting because they were advanced during the formative period of the Islands' history. It was during his prelacy that the basis of all future relations of church and state was established. The arguments of Bishop Salazar were repeated with little variation by Archbishop Poblete in his controversy with Governor Salcedo in 1665 and later by Archbishop Pardo in 1686. [696] In considering this question, the calm and impartial judgment of a scholar is eminently preferable to the passionate arguments of a prelate deeply concerned in the outcome of the dispute. Let us turn from the field of original research to a modern Spanish writer on church history and law. Fray Matias Gómez Zamora, writing from the vantage ground of the modern day, characterizes the acts of the government officials of the earlier era as excessive and unjustified by papal bull or ecclesiastical canon. He even goes a step farther when he declares that "many royal decrees and cédulas were wrongfully issued, without proper basis." He cites examples to prove his contention and among these he points to the foundation of churches and monasteries by civil authorities without the confirmation of the prelate, alleging that such practices were entirely illegal. [697] In like manner, he criticises the cédulas of October 19, 1756, and of June 24, 1762, which bestowed upon the governor jurisdiction as vicepatron, [698] with the right of settling whatever questions might arise. "But," he writes, "it is clear that the viceroys, the audiencias and the governors did not have, nor could they have spiritual jurisdiction over the persons or property of the ecclesiastics, because in no case can power which is delegated be greater than he to whom it is delegated." [699] Thus does this distinguished writer attack the foundation of the entire institution whereby Spain controlled the church in her colonies during a period of three hundred years. Notwithstanding the fact that the governor was the civil head of the church in the colony, it would be possible to fill this chapter completely with quotations of laws which were addressed to the audiencia in recognition of its right of intervention in ecclesiastical matters. The necessity of reserving space for specific cases illustrative of history and practice permits only a scanty summary of the most important of these laws. In practically all these cases the audiencia participated conjointly with the vicepatron. The interposition of the audiencia was authorized in the calling of provincial councils and synods, and the resolutions of these bodies had to be examined by the viceroys, presidents, and oidores to see that they were in accordance with the laws of the royal patronage. [700] The audiencia was empowered to examine all papal bulls and briefs and to suspend those which had not been properly authorized by the Council of the Indies. Disputes between prelates and arguments of churchmen based on bulls and briefs were to be referred by the audiencia to the Council of the Indies. The audiencia was authorized to enforce all properly authorized bulls and briefs and to exercise care that the ecclesiastical courts were granted their proper jurisdiction in accordance with canon law. [701] The audiencia was authorized to enforce the law which forbade laymen to trade with priests. Punishment in the latter case was not meted out by that tribunal, but the offending churchmen were handed over to the prelates. [702] The audiencia, viceroy, and governors were commanded to exercise supervision over the prelates and provincials, receiving from the latter annual reports on the state, membership, and progress of the religious orders and the work performed by them, which information in turn was forwarded to the Council of the Indies. [703] All possible assistance was to be furnished by the audiencia and governor to missionaries remaining in the Philippines or going to Japan. [704] The governor and audiencia were ordered to supervise closely the work of ecclesiastical visitors in the provinces, exercising special care that the natives were not imposed on or abused. The oidores were prohibited from interference with the internal government of the religious orders. [705] Members of orders could not usually be removed by their provincials without the consent of the vicepatron and the audiencia, the authority of the latter extending to the removal and exile of offending priests. [706] The audiencia was ordered to make every possible effort to preserve harmony among the religious and to adjust all differences arising between the orders, or within them. [707] The tribunal was authorized to keep prelates from exceeding their authority in passing judgment on erring priests, especially to see that no punishments were imposed such as would interfere with the prerogatives of the civil government. [708] The following brief summary of laws of the early period, although possibly repeating data already given, shows the extent of the participation of the audiencia in the regulation of ecclesiastical affairs: [709] All ecclesiastics holding office were first to gain the recognition of the viceroy, president, audiencia or whatever authority might be in charge of the province. A list of the members of each order was to be furnished by their provincial to the governing authority. Any changes subsequently made in the membership of the orders had to be reported in the same way. The names of all religious teachers were to be submitted to the audiencia, governor or other authority in control, for inspection and approval. The audiencia was instructed to inform itself relative to the efficiency of the clergy and of religious teachers working among the Indians, and to see that those lacking in educational qualifications or in general capacity were not permitted to enter the Islands. [710] Notices of removals or of new appointments made among the clergy were to be sent to the governor, audiencia, and to the bishop. [711] The jurisdiction of the audiencia under the royal patronage extended to practically all classes of churchmen and church affairs. [712] By the cédulas of August 4, 1574, and of October 25, 1667, the audiencia acquired the right of passing on the credentials of prelates who came to the Islands. That tribunal was entrusted with the duty of seeing that bishops and archbishops carried with them the duly attested confirmation of the Council of the Indies, and no prelate was allowed to leave the Islands unless he had the permission of the governor or audiencia. [713] The tribunal exercised a check on the governor in this particular and saw to it that in granting this permission he did not show favoritism or otherwise violate the laws of the royal patronage. Two striking illustrations of the audiencia's jurisdiction over the inspection of the credentials of the prelates and higher churchmen occur in the history of the Philippines. In 1674, Francisco de Palóu, a French bishop who had been engaged in missionary work in China, was cast upon the shores of the Philippines. The audiencia immediately dispatched orders for his detention, and he was not permitted to return to his district on the ground that his presence and jurisdiction in China constituted an encroachment on the rights of Spain. China had been conceded to Spain by Alexander VI, and by virtue of the royal patronage, the right of making ecclesiastical appointments and the exercise of jurisdiction there were prerogatives belonging to the Spanish crown. [714] A similar case occurred in 1704, when Archbishop Tourón, a French delegate destined for China, arrived in Manila. He was received by the governor and audiencia, as he bore a legally executed commission from the pope for the visitation of all the churches in the Orient, and for the settlement of all ecclesiastical controversies which had arisen there. The royal acuerdo considered that the dispatches and credentials which he carried were in accordance with the law. Tourón was accordingly permitted to set up an ecclesiastical court. He suspended Archbishop Camacho from his office and freed from prison some of the worst criminals in the Islands. He ordered the regulars to submit to diocesan visitation; but they refused to obey him since they had already rejected the efforts of the archbishop to enforce the principle. The Council of the Indies ultimately disapproved of the admission of this foreign ecclesiastic without the authorization of the Spanish government [715] and as a consequence ordered the removal of the governor and senior oidor, heavily fined the remaining magistrates and reduced Archbishop Camacho to the position of Bishop of Guadalajara. [716] In its joint capacity as assistant to the vicepatron and as a high court with jurisdiction over ecclesiastical cases, the audiencia settled disputes between rival claimants to positions of authority in the church, particularly to the position of archbishop. The law which had been in force up to 1619 prescribed that the ecclesiastical chapter should fill the vacancy with a temporary incumbent, but some effort had already been made to have the senior bishop succeed to the post. Bishop Arce of Cebú was opposed to this plan on the ground that each prelate had more than he could do in the proper administration of his own bishopric. [717] Nevertheless it may be noted that on January 22, 1630, Arce was made acting archbishop of the metropolitan see of Manila by virtue of the acuerdo of the audiencia and the vicepatron. [718] Arce's accession to the post was in accordance with a papal bull which had been promulgated with the king's approval at some date between 1619 and 1630. There had been a three-cornered fight between the ecclesiastical chapter, the Bishop of Cebú, and the Bishop of Nueva Segovia, and this conflict had been settled by the acuerdo in favor of Arce, while the chapter appealed to the Council of the Indies. When Guerrero, the new appointee, arrived, he immediately laid claim to the office, which Arce refused to surrender on account of an irregularity in the archbishop's appointment. Arce appealed to the audiencia, but the tribunal refused to authorize any innovations. [719] In a statement to the king, dated October 17, 1655, he related that in 1629 the governor and audiencia had solicited that he come to Manila and take the place vacated through the death of Archbishop Serrano. This would seem to indicate that the audiencia had acted solely on the basis of its authority derived from the royal patronage, but in settling the dispute among the various ecclesiastical authorities it also acted judicially. Guerrero's credentials finally came, apparently executed in the proper form and they were referred to the audiencia by the governor. The tribunal, when it had satisfied itself that the commission was valid, placed thereon the stamp of its approval and accepted Guerrero as archbishop. Then the latter, in the words of Governor Corcuera, presented himself "in the royal court of justice (the audiencia) before which he appeared to be presented [to his see], he swore upon the gospels not to interfere with your Majesty's jurisdiction, to respect your royal patronage, and to be always your royal vassal." [720] In other words, he took his oath of office as archbishop in the audiencia. The above may be considered as a typical case of the temporary designation of a prelate for the archbishopric of Manila by the audiencia. To cite further instances of a similar nature would be unnecessary. The tribunal continued to inspect the credentials of bishops and archbishops before they were admitted to their posts throughout the history of the Islands. This practice was followed even during the period from 1660 to 1762 when the church counted for more as a political institution than either the audiencia or the governor. [721] The audiencia exercised intervention in the removal of curates from their parishes. [722] As noted, already, these removals were made by the vicepatron upon the recommendation of the prelate concerned. Of course, when the audiencia was governing ad interim it made these removals itself. It also intervened when the vicepatron was present on occasions when he requested the support of the tribunal or failed to act himself. The judicial authority of the audiencia, exercised through its entertainment of appeals from curates who had been removed, will be considered in the next chapter. A great many reasons for removals were purely ecclesiastical, such as questions of the private lives and conduct of priests and friars and their insubordination and non-compliance with ecclesiastical or monastic rules. With these matters the audiencia did not concern itself unless deportation was involved, or the offenses of the priests constituted crimes against the civil government. There is record of many removals from curacies because of infractions of the marriage laws by priests, such, for instance, as uniting heathen Chinese with Christian women, which was a violation of the pragmatic law of March 23, 1776. Such cases, and indeed all which had to do with removals from curacies after 1795, were settled by ecclesiastical tribunals with appeal to the papal delegate, without the intervention of the audiencia. [723] The operation of the removal of regulars for cause was slightly different. Unless the regular was the holder of a parish and subject to episcopal visitation, the prelate had no jurisdiction over him, and neither the governor nor the audiencia could interfere in the matter, unless such intervention was requested by the provincial. [724] When the deportation of regulars not holding curacies was decreed, the consent of the vicepatron or audiencia, acting for him, was necessary. This was usually given on the recommendation of the provincial, and the exile accordingly became an act of the civil government. The formal consent of the Council of the Indies was necessary for all deportations of this character, but the complete exercise of this prerogative gradually devolved upon the vicepatron, who notified the Council of the act. [725] The crimes of priests or ecclesiastics against the law and order of the realm were punishable in the same manner and by the same agency as the simpler violations of ordinary subjects. Attention has already been given in another part of this treatise to a case in which the audiencia, in 1617, tried and punished six Augustinian friars who had been convicted of murder. [726] Their guilt was first ascertained by a preliminary investigation within the order, after which they were handed over to the audiencia. The statement has been made above that the audiencia was not allowed to interfere in the internal régime of the convents or monasteries. [727] However, when the provincials of the orders were unable to keep the friars in subordination they frequently called upon the civil government for support and assistance. This was done in 1715 when the Castilian Recollects rebelled against their provincial, incorporated themselves into a separate chapter, and entrenched themselves in the convent at Bagumbayan, outside the Manila wall. Oidor Torralba, then acting as governor and vicepatron, came to the support of the provincial upon appeal. He cannonaded the recalcitrants, arresting and imprisoning them on their surrender, and finally banished their leaders. [728] On this same occasion, it may be noted, the provincial solicited the aid of the archbishop, whose interference the rebellious friars had resisted as an attempt at episcopal visitation. The disciplinary jurisdiction over priests and friars referred to above suggests a similar authority which the audiencia exercised over the prelates. Within the period of one year after the installation of Archbishop Guerrero at Manila in 1636, the governor, with the support of the audiencia, had banished this same prelate and his ecclesiastical provisor, [729] condemning the former to pay a fine of 2000 ducats. The governor contrived also to influence the judge-conservator [730] to pronounce a ban of excommunication upon them both, in return for a like censure that had already been passed on the governor by the prelate. [731] The banishment of Archbishop Poblete by Governor Salcedo and the audiencia prior to the arrest of that governor by the commissary of the Inquisition, the exile of Archbishop Pardo in 1684, and the imprisonment of Archbishop de la Cuesta by Governor Bustamante and the audiencia in 1719, are incidents in the history of the Islands which serve well as illustrations of the disciplinary and coercive jurisdiction of the vicepatron and audiencia over the churchmen. These events need only be referred to here, as they have already been discussed in relation to other phases of the history of the audiencia. As visitors of the provinces, the oidores were required to inspect the ecclesiastical work of the parish priests and to note their care and treatment of the Indians. [732] In the exercise of these duties they were protected by a law which forbade prelates to proceed against them with censures while they were carrying on such investigations. Le Gentil, the noted French traveller, who visited the Islands during the middle of the eighteenth century, testified that the oidores did not fulfill their duty with great faithfulness. Le Gentil stated that on account of their dependence on the hospitality of the priests when travelling from place to place in the provinces, the visitors' inspections were merely perfunctory and of little value. [733] The above testimony is not corroborated, however, by the report of Oidor Francisco Guerela who was sent to Camarines in 1702 to take account of tribute and to inquire into the state of the encomiendas. He reported that in the curacies which were administered by the Franciscans there was an entire absence of religious instruction, the natives were mistreated, and they were permitted to continue in idolatry, drunkenness, and superstition. Neither the priests nor the alcaldes mayores exerted any uplifting or civilizing influence. The alcaldes mayores, it was alleged, connived with the priests to defraud the natives by the imposition of excessive tribute and by the exaction of all sorts of fraudulent ecclesiastical tithes. The oidor in this case sought to remedy this state of affairs by dispatching reformatory edicts against the friars, and by posting notices and copies of royal decrees and cédulas designed to inform the natives of their rights under the law and to warn them against the imposture of the friars. Whereupon the Franciscans appealed to the Bishop of Camarines and persuaded him to excommunicate the oidor on the grounds that he had usurped the ecclesiastical jurisdiction. This appeal to the papal delegate was in direct violation of the cédula mentioned above, protecting such visitations against ecclesiastical censure. The oidor appealed to the audiencia and that body solicited the prelate by ruego y encargo to remove his censures. The audiencia would go no further, however, as two of the magistrates were personally hostile to Guerela, hence the oidor was obliged to remain in the provinces at the mercy of the friars. After six months of isolation, Guerela, who was broken in health, sent an appeal for aid to the king on June 20, 1702. This memorial embodied a full account of his attempts to make necessary reforms in the provinces subject to his visitation. [734] It was presented to the Council of the Indies on October 14, 1706. [735] Three observations might be made from this incident. First, there was little vigor, promptitude, or effectiveness in the Spanish judicial system as therein exemplified. It took four years for this petition to be presented to the Council and considerably more time for an answer to be made. Secondly, this affair shows to what extent petty spite and private quarrels interfered with good government and efficient administration. Thirdly, it illustrates the fact that the entire civil government, including the audiencia, was very much under the domination and influence of the ecclesiastics. An inspection which was similar to that just described was made by Oidor José Torralba, in 1713, in the provinces of Albay and Cebú. Torralba was unable to complete his work, owing to his recall to Manila, where he was obliged to resume his place in the audiencia on account of the insufficient number of magistrates present in the tribunal. It seems that in the provinces subject to his visitation, the former charges of the Franciscans had been turned over to the seculars, most of whom were natives. Torralba reported that under the careless and incompetent administration of the parish priests, the churches had gone to ruin and all Indian instruction had been abandoned. In his report he commented unfavorably on the stupidity and immorality of the native clergy, alleging that in them lay one of the causes of the poverty and degradation of the people. He recommended the restoration of the regulars. [736] Torralba's recommendations were not followed. Either because of his hurried departure from the provinces where he left his work unfinished, or because of the disinclination or lack of authority of the audiencia and vicepatron, no definite steps were taken at this time for the amelioration of the condition of the people or for the reform of the clergy. That the interests of the friars were vigorously and effectively championed at the court is evidenced by the royal decree of June 14, 1714, which was dispatched not alone to the Philippines, but which was made general in Perú and New Spain. [737] It forbade the governors and audiencias using their authority as vicepatrons to justify their interference with the interior administration of the convents and monasteries of the orders, which it was complained they were doing without authorization. This decree particularly emphasized the principle which has already been set forth in this treatise that the vicepatrons and audiencias should not concern themselves with the discipline and punishment of friars not holding curacies. The promulgation of this decree was brought about as a result of the efforts of the commissary of the Franciscan order in Madrid. Not only were the oidores required to inspect the work of the parish priests, but the audiencia, in the exercise of the royal patronage, was authorized to receive, assist, and supervise the ecclesiastical visitors who came from Spain or Mexico, or were designated from the ranks of the local clergy to inspect the orders. [738] These visitors were also authorized to inspect friars who were in charge of parishes, [739] and when on these tours of inspection they might be accompanied by the prelate in charge of the curacies retained by the friars under inspection. The audiencia was to co-operate in all possible ways with these visitors, and should any question arise between them and a prelate over jurisdiction, the tribunal was to do everything possible to bring about a harmonious adjustment of the points of difference. This is illustrated by a case which arose in 1776, when Fray Joseph Pereyra was given a royal commission to make a general investigation of the Augustinian order in the Philippines. Fiscal Andrade of the audiencia demanded that Pereyra should submit all his documents for inspection on the basis of the royal patronage and other laws, [740] but the audiencia, under the presidency of Governor Anda, refused to support the fiscal. The king, on April 6, 1778, rebuked the audiencia for its failure to support the royal patronage, citing two cédulas, those of July 2 and of October 14, 1773, respectively, in which he had already admonished the vicepatron in that particular. [741] The failure of the audiencia and governor to exercise all their prerogatives in support of the royal patronage on these various occasions can probably be attributed to dissensions within the tribunal and to the corrupting influence of the church. The statement has frequently been made in this treatise that the audiencia served as a connecting link between the court and the colony. It constituted a channel through which a large amount of correspondence was carried on, and one of the duties most frequently required was that of furnishing special and regular reports and informaciones [742] on various subjects connected with the church. [743] Notwithstanding the vast number of ecclesiastics present in the colony, who could and did make special and regular reports, and were indeed required to make them, the audiencia was frequently called upon to render reports on precisely the same subjects as those covered by the churchmen. In this way points of view other than the ecclesiastical were obtained. Thus the advice of magistrates, lawyers and men in active touch with the government served to temper ecclesiastical opinion in the same way that the advice of prelates exercised an influence on matters purely governmental. Taking into consideration their position in the colony, the oidores were better qualified to obtain and impart information concerning the church than most authorities. To indicate the vast field of special subjects in which the oidores were required to report, various instances may be mentioned. On July 1, 1598, the king desired information concerning the alleged need of a greater amount of space on the galleon for the support of the bishopric of Nueva Segovia. The archbishop and the bishop of that diocese had both recommended that more cargo-space be given to the church. The king desired to know whether, in the opinion of the oidores, the privilege of shipping two hundred tons would be sufficient for the needs of the bishopric in question. [744] Again, on December 7, 1610, the audiencia was called upon to forward to the Council of the Indies evidence bearing upon a dispute between the natives of Quiapo and the Jesuits over lands claimed by the latter society. [745] On another occasion the king requested of the audiencia a report concerning the work, deserts, and financial condition of the convent of Santa Clara, which had asked for royal aid. [746] Frequently the audiencia was called upon to take a census of the number of priests, secular and regular, in the Islands and to report on the size of each order, the number of friars holding secular curacies in each, and the number of missionaries. [747] It came to be its regular duty to furnish these reports at stated intervals, and when, for some reason, it failed to render them, a royal reprimand was forthcoming. A yearly report was also made on the number of friars entering the Islands, how many had gone to China, the number of souls ministered to by each order, how large was each province, and how many people there were in each curacy. [748] It is interesting to know that the churchmen were also held responsible for this information and that reports on these same subjects were required of the prelates and provincials. [749] It is evident that the report of the audiencia was utilized as a check to prevent misrepresentation on the part of the friars, especially since it was always the object of each order to prove that it was over-worked and in urgent need of more members. As friars were sent to the Islands at the royal expense, [750] and as they were supported after their arrival by the royal treasury, the exercise of economy was always desirable. On the other hand, it was to the interest of an order to make its requirements and accomplishments appear as great as possible. Another function which the audiencia came to exercise by virtue of its authority in behalf of the royal patronage was that of general supervision over the colleges and universities. In the laws of the Indies this duty was imposed upon the viceroys and governors, [751] and nothing was said of the authority of the audiencia in that particular. According to the laws of the Indies, in fact, the audiencia had little jurisdiction or authority over colleges, universities and seminaries, but as the administration of these was entirely in the hands of the church, the audiencia came to exercise much the same authority over education that it did over other church activities. [752] Oidores and fiscales were forbidden to act as rectors, but they might participate in the law examinations to satisfy themselves whether the standard of instruction in the royal universities and colleges was sufficiently high, and whether the education, training and ability of candidates for the licentiate's degree gave evidence of their fitness. [753] According to the royal decree of November 27, 1623, the University of Santo Tomás was founded in the Philippines with the advice of the governor and acuerdo of the audiencia. [754] Here again that tribunal may be seen in the act of assuming non-judicial functions which primarily belonged to the governor through the unwillingness or inability of that official to act alone. The audiencia early exercised advisory powers in educational affairs. The Jesuits as early as 1585 had requested permission to found and establish a college or seminary in Manila, and the king, on January 11, 1587, requested of the audiencia a report on the general conduct, progress and accomplishments of the Jesuit order, asking in particular what benefit would accrue from the establishment of a Jesuit college in Manila. The audiencia, in its report of June 25, 1588, characterized their work as very effective, the learning and ability of their personnel remarkable, but in the opinion of the oidores there was scarcely any need of a college in Manila at that time, and there were no means of supporting one. [755] When Santo Tomás became a royal university in 1648, the Jesuits were obliged to sue in the audiencia for the right to continue the bestowal of academic degrees. Their request was denied by the tribunal, but the decision was reversed by the Council of the Indies in 1653. [756] On May 3, 1722, San José was made a royal college and was subjected to the visitation and patronage of the audiencia. In 1769, when the Jesuits were suppressed, an attempt was made to continue San José as a secular institution under the supervision of the audiencia. This brought forth such determined opposition from the Dominicans and from the friends and supporters of Santo Tomás that on June 30, 1778, a cédula was issued ordering the audiencia to close San José and hand over all students in attendance there to the archbishop, so that they might be placed in secular colleges and seminaries. [757] This was done, and the audiencia rendered to the Council of the Indies a report on the administration of the finances pertaining to the transaction. The revenues derived from all unsold properties belonging to the Jesuits were included in the temporalities, and the income from these were transmitted to the royal treasury. Subsequently the archbishop attempted to assume jurisdiction over these Jesuit properties and funds, and to this the audiencia objected. In 1784 the matter was finally settled by the decree of the king in answer to an appeal which had been carried by the prelate from the audiencia to the Council of the Indies. He sustained the audiencia and forbade the prelate from interfering with these temporalities. The Dominicans were more successful in the maintenance of an educational institution. [758] On the occasion of the extension of the charter of the University of Santo Tomás on May 17, 1680, the king ordered "my president and the auditors of my Audiencia of that city, and request and charge the archbishop of the city, the bishops of the said islands, the ecclesiastical and secular cabildos, the superiors of the orders, and any other of my judges and justices," ... to acknowledge the University of Santo Tomás as a beneficiary of the royal patronage. Its title was formally extended on June 21, 1681, by act of the audiencia. [759] The tribunal not only exercised the right of patronage over the Dominican university, but also over the College of San Juan de Letrán, a seminary for boys which was founded in 1640 and maintained by the Dominicans as an adjunct to Santo Tomás. Reports, recommendations, and informaciones exist in abundance to prove that the audiencia exercised considerable influence in the life and history of these institutions. The tribunal celebrated acuerdos to improve the instruction in mathematics, physics, law and medicine. It provided for the examination of students, passed on their credentials, made regulations for the bestowal of degrees and decided upon the fitness of prospective teachers. [760] It supervised the records of these institutions, audited their finances and sent reports to the king and Council concerning the work of the universities and colleges. In its jurisdiction and authority over these educational institutions the audiencia served in behalf of the sovereign as his royal tribunal. These were royal universities, endowed with special royal charters and privileges and it was fitting that they should be controlled by the royal audiencia in the king's name. In addition to this, as they were administered by the church, the audiencia and the vicepatron exercised joint control over them, in the name of the royal patronage in the same manner that they supervised other ecclesiastical activities. As we have already noted, the audiencia exercised jurisdiction over matters of church finance. The most notable examples of its control may be seen in the administration of tithes, [761] the funds of temporalities, obras pias, funds of the Crusade, and espolios of the prelates. The audiencia was authorized to guard the royal interest in the matter of the collection and the administration of tithes, particularly with a view to seeing that over-ambitious churchmen did not obtain more than their share, and that in the collection of the tithes they did not oppress the natives. The special care of the oidores was to see that tithes be not paid directly to the prelates. [762] In fact, these funds were to be administered by the civil government, and prelates were not to be allowed to interfere with their collection. No changes were to be made in the authorized manner of collecting these funds on the responsibility of colonial officials. Recommendations for reform should be made to the Council of the Indies either by the prelate or by the audiencia. [763] The audiencia was ordered to see that the proper division and distribution of tithes were made, and that the two-ninths of the gross sum collected was duly set aside for the crown, in accordance with the law. [764] Further evidence that the audiencia was regarded as the instrument of the royal will in these matters is afforded by the circumstances leading up to the reforms of 1768 and 1786; and it should be noted particularly that the king and Council relied on that tribunal for advice and assistance in the drafting and execution of these measures. A number of tentative laws and proposals for changes in the system of collection and administration of the tithes was sent to the audiencia, from time to time, prior to 1768, and the magistrates were required to submit opinions as to the availability and applicability of the proposed measures. In 1768 a decree was issued fixing the tithe at ten reales per Indian. Previous to that year a number of religious orders owning large tracts of agricultural land had refused to pay these taxes, and the audiencia, by virtue of the royal order of September 25, 1768, was ordered to enforce the law, which it did, even proceeding to the seizure of the chattels of the recalcitrant friars. [765] On December 11, 1775, the audiencia passed an ordinance diminishing the tithes to be paid by natives, mestizos, Chinese and Japanese by one-half real per person. [766] On July 12, 1778, the king asked the audiencia to submit evidence on the question of whether the law worked any hardship on the inhabitants of the colony, and whether encomenderos and friars were paying their share. [767] At the same time, and on the same date, the royal approval was given to the auto which the audiencia had enacted on December 11, 1775. The recommendations of the audiencia were also largely followed in the decree of January 20, 1786, which was merely a repromulgation of an earlier auto of the audiencia, which ordered that tithes should not be collected directly from the Indians unless the latter were owners of lands. Otherwise they were to be collected from the landlords. [768] By subsequent laws the audiencia was temporarily deprived of its jurisdiction over tithes. When the Philippine government was reorganized in 1787 by the Ordinance of Intendants, many of the special commissions which had been previously retained by the magistrates were ceded to the superintendent of real hacienda. The actual collection of tithes was made the duty of the superintendent by cédula of October 6, 1792, [769] but because of its relation to the royal patronage the audiencia, in practice, found it convenient to retain control. Governor Aguilar, who was also superintendent of real hacienda, wrote to the king on July 31, 1799, [770] alleging that there was no reason why the audiencia should exercise this authority, when, by virtue of its financial nature, this duty belonged to the superintendent. He stated that the audiencia had been given this jurisdiction when there had been no other authority for the collection of tithes, but that as it was not a controversial matter, there was no reason for the continuance of this condition. In the letter referred to Aguilar stated that he had attempted to put his interpretation of the law into execution, but in so doing had been opposed by the audiencia. The answer to this appeal does not appear in connection with the original, but the royal cédula of April 21, 1803, restored to the audiencia jurisdiction over the collection of tithes. [771] It may be said, however, that with the creation of the superintendency the audiencia was shorn of many of the miscellaneous functions with which it had been formerly endowed. The funds of the temporalities, however, did not come under this category. They were greatly augmented in 1767 when the Jesuits were suppressed, and as was usual with such miscellaneous and unclassified duties, as well as on account of the audiencia's relation to the royal patronage, the administration of these funds came under the charge of an oidor whose official title was "administrator of the funds of the temporalities." [772] Nevertheless, the audiencia's share of direct control over these funds was still considerable. On January 23, 1803, a cédula was issued ordering that the money of the temporalities and obras pias should be put at the disposal of the acuerdo of the audiencia. [773] A report was submitted to that tribunal by Superintendent Aguilar on July 20, 1804, in accordance with this cédula. The report of Aguilar showed a balance on hand of 151,625 pesos waiting to be sent to Spain by the first transportation. In 1809, the jurisdiction of these funds was completely restored to the audiencia, with the provision that the oidores who acted as their administrators should receive a three per cent commission. As the funds were constantly drawn upon, and there were no further confiscations of property of this sort, they can be accounted as of little importance, yielding practically no revenue from that date. Owing to the continual appeals of the government for money with which to defray the expenses of putting down the various insurrections from 1808 to 1814 and subsequently, the funds of the temporalities, like every other peso that came into the treasuries of the colonies, were sent to Spain as rapidly as they were collected. [774] The audiencia also audited the accounts of the obras pías, though its jurisdiction over these funds was often opposed. [775] The chief foundations of the obras pías in Manila were the Santa Misericordia and San Juan de Diós. The wealth and power of the Misericordia became so great, [776] and so well did it profit by the various immunities extended to it, that by the early part of the eighteenth century it had become the object of the distrust and envy of all classes of Manila society. It was chiefly disliked because it had been permitted to utilize so much free space on the galleon. Other inconveniences had arisen from its participation in trade, wherein, possessed of so many advantages, it was enabled to derive profits and benefits that were denied to competing merchants in the colony. Complaints were made against it by certain religious orders, merchants, treasury officials, oidores, and the governor, himself. It was the consensus of opinion among these that the accounts of this society should be inspected by the government, and, in accordance with these recommendations, a cédula was expedited, ordering the society to submit its accounts to the audiencia for inspection and approval. [777] The suspicions of the general public were confirmed, and the popular distrust increased when the inspection of Oidor Calderón revealed that the finances of the society had been carelessly kept, and that the books contained numerous discrepancies. The scrutiny of the oidor showed the existence of a deficit of 383,437 pesos; that is, the records called for property in the hands of the society to the value of that sum which could not be found. The Misericordia, in a series of protests, accounted for the discrepancies by alleging that the audiencia had declared many of its debtors bankrupt. Relief from the inspection was requested on the grounds that the local feeling and the prejudice of the oidores would cause them to be unfair to the society. It pleaded that the inspection should be made by the chief accountant of the Council of the Indies (contador de cuentas) once in five years. In this request it was supported by the recommendation of this official. [778] On April 19, 1755, the cédula of November 9, 1747, was modified on the basis of these protests, and in lieu of the annual inspection of the oidor was substituted the requirement that once in three years the Misericordia should submit its own accounts. [779] This brought forth a storm of protest from the residents of Manila, headed by Governor Arandía, who went to some length to describe the abuses which had arisen in the past from the unrestricted liberty which the Misericordia had enjoyed. He accused the society of dishonest political practices, interference with the government, bribery and corruption. He said that behind its commercial operations there existed a veiled scheme by which the church was seeking to monopolize the trade of the Islands. [780] The opposition of the governor and residents bore fruit to the extent that a compromise was made in the royal cédula of February 21, 1759, which restored the practice of having oidores inspect the accounts of the Misericordia, though the examination was to be held only once in five years. This, of course, was sufficiently lenient to defeat the entire scheme. Oidores were forbidden to interfere with the property of the society at any other time and in any other manner. [781] The Misericordia maintained a stubborn and vigorous resistance to the principle of visitation by the audiencia, but as far as may be judged by the data at hand, the law was not changed again, and the audiencia continued to exercise supervision. That the audiencia was prone to overstep its authority in the matter of these inspections is shown by an incident which occurred in 1776-1777. In the regular quinquennial inspection of the records of the Misericordia a number of abuses were uncovered. The funds were found to have been carelessly administered, and the books inaccurately kept, owing to the negligence, incapacity, and corruption of the members to whom the funds had been entrusted. Governor Sarrio, as vicepatron, appointed Oidor Calderón as receiver and administrator of the funds, with the charge that the oidor should suspend all payments until the accounts were straightened out. The Misericordia protested and on April 25, 1778, the king ordered the governor and audiencia to desist from further interference with the funds of the society, the royal disapproval being based on the cédula of February 21, 1759, which, while authorizing the inspection of the books of the society, forbade any minister "to interfere with or interrupt said House in the administration or distribution of its funds." [782] The cédula of February 21, 1759, was reaffirmed on repeated occasions when the Misericordia refused to submit its books to the audiencia. The last law touching upon this particular question was promulgated on August 2, 1787, when it was decreed that the accounts, books, records, and work of the Misericordia and its officials should be subject to the inspection of the audiencia. [783] Not only was the opposition of the Misericordia a source of dispute between that society and the audiencia, but the matter of financial inspection caused disputes between the audiencia and other officials and departments of the government. The reforms of 1787 made trouble between the superintendent and the audiencia. Since this was a financial matter, the former claimed the right of auditing these accounts, which the audiencia refused to concede for the reason that it had always had supervision over these funds (when the right was exercised by any secular authority). The question was definitely settled by the cédula of January 22, 1803, which ordered that "the money of temporalities, pious funds, and charitable societies should be put at the disposal of the acuerdo, and that if any matters relative to those branches were then pending before the superintendent, they should be remitted at once to the audiencia." [784] This was accordingly done by Governor (and Superintendent) Aguilar, [785] and after that time the jurisdiction of the audiencia was no longer questioned. Shortly after the establishment of the consulado of Manila in 1769, a bitter dispute arose between that body and the audiencia for jurisdiction over cases involving the commerce of the Misericordia. On the basis of the cédula of July 8, 1774, the consulado claimed exclusive jurisdiction over all disputes involving trade which arose between merchants. It advanced the contention that in all suits involving losses of galleons the society should be considered in the case of an individual merchant. The audiencia, basing its claims on the royal patronage, declared the consulado to have exceeded its powers, in assuming the jurisdiction described above, and fined several of its members. The consulado appealed the case, and in reply the king promulgated a cédula on June 7, 1775, declaring that neither to the audiencia nor to the consulado belonged the jurisdiction over such cases, but that they should be tried in first instance by the Council of the Indies. [786] The reasons assigned for this decision were that the consulado could not try such cases because merchants constituted its membership and because the fiscal and two oidores also belonged to its tribunal. Neither the audiencia nor the consulado, accordingly, could impartially try commercial suits between merchants and the Misericordia; accordingly thereafter all evidence should be submitted to the Council for special action. The audiencia and the governor had supervision over espolios and vacant benefices. [787] When a prelate entered into office it was his duty to file with the fiscal an inventory of all properties belonging to him at the time of his advent to the diocese. [788] On the occasion of his death a treasury official was designated to estimate and administer the property left, pay the debts of the deceased churchman, execute his will with regard to his property in accordance with the law, and turn over the residue to the royal treasury. This process was known as taking the espolio. The espolio of a deceased prelate was taken, according to the early laws, by an official of the royal treasury, who was designated by the president for the purpose, and who officiated under the supervision of the audiencia. The tribunal verified the autos and substantiated the proceedings of the agent. [789] Whether any modifications in the manner of collecting, distributing or accounting for the funds or properties derived from these espolios were made elsewhere is not clear, but in the Philippines the abuses which arose in the settling of these ecclesiastical estates and benefices made the personal intervention of the oidores necessary on a number of occasions. By royal cédula of June 23, 1712, it was ordered that in all the audiencias of the Indies the magistrate next in rank to the senior oidor should be constituted as the private judge, who, with the concurrence of the oficiales reales, should have jurisdiction over and should proceed against, receive and collect all the products and rents of the vacant archbishoprics and bishoprics until the day on which the new prelates should take possession of their offices, proceeding with full cognizance ... to the collection ... of whatever might be due, ... with the assistance of the oficiales reales who in this matter are subject to the royal audiencia. [790] By this same law the audiencias, viceroys, presidents and tribunals were forbidden to interfere with this judge in the execution of his duties, or to impede the execution or the law in any manner whatsoever. The estates of prelates were thus placed on a basis similar to that occupied by the properties of civilians, which, we have noted, were administered by a special magistrate of the audiencia. This cédula also provided that all money left as a residue, after the debts of the prelates were paid, should be sent to the king for distribution. In view of the above-mentioned law, the practice followed in 1715, on the death of Bishop Gorospe of Nueva Segovia, seems to have been a direct violation of the royal command, and somewhat different from the usual method of settling the estates of prelates. As soon as Gorospe died at Magaldán, Pangasinán, the alcalde mayor of the province sent immediate notification to the governor and audiencia. The tribunal, in acuerdo, on the motion of the fiscal, authorized the alcalde mayor and the treasury officials to take the espolio of that prelate, which order was duly complied with. [791] The audiencia also dispatched a formal notification to Archbishop de la Cuesta and the metropolitan chapter, designating the former as the ecclesiastical governor of the bishopric. [792] The significant feature of this espolio is that it was taken by an official as inferior in rank as an alcalde mayor through the express authorization of the audiencia, instead of being conducted by the second magistrate of the audiencia as the law directed. It is possible that the arrival of the cédula of June 24, 1712, had been delayed, or that this may have been a case, so frequent in the Spanish colonies, of compliance without obedience. Certain it is that the conditions of life and travel in the provinces were of such a character that an oidor would have found it more comfortable to remain in the capital and delegate the disagreeable duties of the espolio in a far-distant province to the resident alcalde mayor. Attention has already been called to various complaints made by governors and others against the disinclination of the magistrates to submit to the inconveniences of provincial inspections. Again, it is very probable that the time and attention of the magistrate whose duty it should have been to take this espolio were occupied with more important judicial duties. [793] The citation or further multiplication of data relative to espolios would be monotonous and unprofitable. Sufficient has been said already to show the extensive participation of the audiencia in the administration and settlement of the estates of prelates and the assignment and care of vacant benefices. It may be noted, however, that the audiencia suffered little if any diminution of its authority over the espolio through the Ordinance of Intendants. That code deprived the oficiales reales and oidores of the duty, formerly incumbent on them, of taking espolios and conferred it upon the intendants and corregidor-intendants of provinces. However, it was still required that the papers relative to the proceedings should be submitted afterward to the audiencia for legalization and approval. [794] Appeals and cases of litigation arising from them were to be settled in the audiencia. This decree made little difference in the procedure in the Philippines, as the corregidor-intendants were never instituted there, and the oidores continued in the settlement of these matters, subject to the designation of the superintendent, who, it will be remembered, was also governor and president of the audiencia. The tribunal passed, as always, on all acts of espolio and heard cases affecting them on appeal. In this manner the properties of the prelates were administered in a conservative and legal manner and the interests of the crown were safeguarded. The audiencia exercised joint authority with the vicepatron over questions relating to the construction of churches and the conservation of ecclesiastical property. No monastery, convent, college, hospital, or other religious institution could be founded without the consent of the king, and this permission was obtained through the viceroy, governor, or audiencia upon the recommendation of the prelate of the diocese. [795] The laws of the Indies conceded that matters which did not admit of delay could be settled by the president and audiencia. [796] In fact, as early as August 15, 1620, Governor Fajardo acknowledged receipt of a letter from the king in which occurred the statement that "no church or convent, not even a chapel, ought to be, or can be, founded unless concurrent with your permission, and that of the Audiencia." [797] It was provided that all petitions of religious orders for permission to construct convents and monasteries should be referred to the council, with the recommendations of the audiencia, but in actual practice, when the advice of the audiencia was in the affirmative, the vicepatron gave the desired consent, reporting on his action to the Council of the Indies. Thus we see that the governor and audiencia in reality exercised complete authority in uncontested cases. A large number of communications written to the audiencia by the royal authorities exist, illustrating the nature and extent of the influence of the audiencia in these matters. In 1604, the king learned that the Augustinians of Cavite had founded a convent with no other authority than that of the governor. This was contrary to the laws of the royal patronage and the audiencia was ordered to correct the abuse, and to see that the royal orders were obeyed in the future. [798] On another occasion the audiencia was ordered to correct certain abuses of the Jesuits, who had dispossessed the natives of their lands and had built various structures thereon. The lands were ordered to be returned to their rightful owners and the buildings destroyed. [799] The ambitions of the friars to construct monasteries, convents and hospitals, and otherwise to manifest their powers and add to their increasing strength had to be checked frequently. The audiencia was called upon to do this throughout the history of the Islands. Possibly the best illustration of the authority of the audiencia in these matters may be noted in the part which it played in restraining the Augustinians from the further extension of their influence during the period from 1763 to 1778. The entire matter was summarized in the consulta of the Council of the Indies dated December 10, 1777, and the cédula of April 6, 1778, with unfavorable results for the Augustinians. On November 17, 1770, the provincial of this order applied for permission to construct a convent in Cavite and solicited an appropriation of four thousand pesos for this purpose. It was suggested that the money should be supplied either by the income from vacant benefices or from the profits of the sale of betel to the natives. The provincial laid special claim to royal aid on the extraordinary justification that the convent of his order at Imús, Cavite, had been bombarded and destroyed by the British in 1763. On August 16, 1772, the Council of the Indies referred the matter to the Audiencia of Manila and the tribunal, after an exhaustive investigation of the subject, recommended non-compliance with the provincial's request. In its report, the audiencia reviewed the former attempts of this order to extend its power and influence. On December 2, 1765, it had tried to obtain permission to construct a convent at Nagtaján, which the audiencia and Fiscal Viana frustrated. The Augustinians tried again on February 20, 1766, asking for permission to build at Bagumbayan. This plan the audiencia was also able to defeat. On August 16, 1772, this same order, impatient at the delay of the Council in answering its petition of November 17, 1770, and still persistent, solicited permission from the governor alone, not alluding to the fact that a petition of this sort was at that time pending before the Council of the Indies. This request was considered in the acuerdo with unfavorable consequences for the Augustinians. The report of the audiencia was forwarded to the court and was there reviewed by Francisco Leandro de Viana, formerly fiscal of the Audiencia of Manila and at that time a member of the Council. Viana recommended that not only should the desired permission be refused but a rigid investigation of the legitimacy of titles to properties held by the Augustinians should be made. He regarded as especially reprehensible the deliberate effort on the part of the provincial to obtain this permission from the governor in view of the unfavorable attitude of the Council of the Indies and of the laws ordering that licenses for the construction of convents should be given only by the Council of the Indies, after consultation with the prelate of the ecclesiastical district and with the audiencia, governor, or viceroy. [800] In this way, due very largely to the influence of the audiencia, the efforts of this order to extend its authority were checkmated. This may be considered as a typical case of the intervention of the audiencia in behalf of the royal patronage. It will be noted in another connection that the audiencia was called upon, from 1680 to 1720, partly as a tribunal of justice and partly as an agent of the royal patron, to investigate the titles of the lands of the friars, and, by this proceeding, the tribunal deprived the orders of much of the property which they had usurped. [801] It may also be noted that an oidor regularly inspected the royal hospital at Manila, [802] and when prelates and curates were transferred from one district or parish to another, property left by them was inventoried and taken under the direction of the audiencia. [803] These measures were designed to insure the security and conservation of royal property. In summary, it may be said that the audiencia possessed joint authority with, but not equal to the vicepatron in the regulation and supervision of religious affairs. As a tribunal, and as an agent of the civil government, the audiencia supported and assisted the vicepatron. At times, indeed, it acted in his stead. We have seen that the audiencia labored in the interests of the royal authority when it passed on the acts of provincial synods and councils, and it inspected bulls and briefs before they were allowed to become operative in the colony. It sought always to bring about a peaceful settlement of disputes between prelates, curates, and religious orders. Acting in the interests of the civil government, the oidores made inspections in the provinces, noting the work of the friars and parish priests in their particular fields, giving special attention to the treatment afforded to the Indians by their ecclesiastical protectors. The tribunal acted as the patron of the royal colleges and universities. It regulated the administration of ecclesiastical finances, devoting especial attention to tithes, obras pías and espolios. And finally, as we have just noted, it was endowed with considerable authority in determining the advisability of authorizing the construction of churches, monasteries, and convents, or of permitting the orders to extend their influence in various parts of the colony. The intervention of the audiencia in these matters was recognized by the court at Madrid and by the ecclesiastics of the Philippines. CHAPTER XI THE AUDIENCIA AND THE CHURCH: THE ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION In the same manner that the audiencia performed the functions of a civil court, so did it exercise jurisdiction as a superior tribunal or court of appeal over prelates, church tribunals, and ecclesiastical judges. It will be our purpose in this chapter to determine the relations of the audiencia with the various ecclesiastical tribunals and to direct attention to the occasions on which it acted as a court, either with original or appellate jurisdiction in ecclesiastical cases. In this particular phase of the investigation an effort will be made to distinguish between the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the audiencia and its acts relative to the royal patronage. Not only may this distinction be made for conveniences of discussion, but it will be readily seen that the character of the powers and jurisdiction exercised was widely different. When acting as a tribunal of appeal over prelates, provincials, and ecclesiastical courts the chief concern of the audiencia was the administration of justice. When acting in defense of the royal patronage, as noted in the preceding chapter, its authority was primarily executive and administrative, designed always to safeguard the interests of the civil government. It is, of course, true that all the power exercised by the civil government over the church proceeded from authority invested in the former by the laws of the royal patronage. [804] Nevertheless, it must be observed that there were times when the audiencia exercised the function of an impartial, disinterested court, with no aim or object other than that of maintaining simple justice. It may be conceded, for example, that the authority which the audiencia exercised in the settlement of disputes between religious orders and between the prelates and the regulars partook of the same judicial character as the jurisdiction which it had in settling disputes between civil corporations and individuals. The intervention of the audiencia for the protection of the Indians from the abuses of the churchmen, [805] its entertainment of the recurso de fuerza [806] and its function as a court of appeals for the protection of the natives against ecclesiastical tribunals may be said to have constituted acts in defense of the royal interests as well as in securing the ends of common justice. In restraining church authorities from the intemperate use of the interdict, [807] or from a too liberal extension of the right of asylum, [808] the audiencia was not seeking the ends of justice (though judicial proceedings were instituted) so much as it was defending the royal prerogative and protecting the officials of the civil government. This may also be said of its efforts to prevent the abuse of power by the commissary of the Inquisition. In these last-mentioned activities, therefore, the audiencia may be said to have acted in defense of the royal patronage, though in all these cases its method of procedure was that of a court of justice. The church in the Spanish colonies had its own judicial tribunals for the trial and settlement of cases arising within it which did not concern the civil government. [809] The division of authority between the civil and ecclesiastical courts and the respective jurisdictions of each are described by Professor Moses, who writes: The courts of the civil government and not the ecclesiastical authorities considered ... all questions involving the limits of bishoprics, the rights and prerogatives of the holders of benefices, controversies between ecclesiastical councils and their bishops and archbishops concerning the administration of the Church, all disputes between parish priests and their parishes, in a word, all cases that in any manner touched the royal patronage. Even matters spiritual and cases between persons of a privileged tribunal were not excepted from the civil jurisdiction; but certain cases might be brought before the viceroy, and, if desired, an appeal might be taken from the viceroy's decision to the audiencia. [810] It will be our function in this chapter to determine the participation of the civil courts in these matters. The power of intervention in ecclesiastical matters which was exercised by the civil tribunals was always a source of discord in the Philippines. The attitude of the churchmen on this question is well shown by a letter written January 20, 1688, by Fray Alonso Laudín, procurator in Madrid for the Franciscans of the Philippines, in protest against the encroachments of civil government. He wrote that the principal causes of trouble in the Philippines are the disagreements which continually exist between the royal audiencia and the ecclesiastical judges; ... the ministers of the royal audiencia, by virtue of the royal patronage of Your Majesty whom they represent, ... hold ... that the audiencia has ecclesiastical jurisdiction over the Church and over purely ecclesiastical persons, over spiritual cases and the administration of the Holy Sacrament, ... and spiritual and territorial jurisdiction in regular and secular parishes. [811] Laudín described the helplessness of the ecclesiastical judges and the ineffectiveness of their jurisdiction, circumscribed as it was by that of the civil magistrates. He stated that all the judicial acts of the ecclesiastical ordinaries were rendered null by the magistrates of the audiencia and that the ecclesiastical authorities were reduced to such a condition that they did not know where to turn for relief or remedy, as even the papal decrees were rendered ineffectual by the encroachments of the civil jurisdiction. He stated that "the ecclesiastical judges see in all this a meddling and interference with the ecclesiastical jurisdiction, which has always been allowed, but they cannot hereafter give fulfillment to the provisions of the audiencia, even at the risk of expulsion from their districts." Laudín was of the opinion that the laws had been misinterpreted by the civil officials and that the king had never intended that the churchmen should be so entirely shorn of their powers. He concluded his appeal with the solicitation that such laws should be made as would determine the questions at issue and bring about harmony between church and state in the Islands. This should be done, he said, "in order that each may be caused to see clearly the duties and jurisdiction which belongs to him and that each may freely make use of his own powers and prerogatives, and thus avoid suits and other disagreements." The laws of the Indies prescribed that the most harmonious relations should prevail between the ecclesiastical and civil magistrates. The audiencia was commanded to aid the prelates and ecclesiastical magistrates in the exercise of their jurisdiction, neither interfering with them nor permitting them to be molested by other civil authorities. [812] These laws, like those of the royal patronage, not only gave to the civil government a commanding position with relation to the church, but they established the magistrates as the supervisors and guardians of the church courts. It was the duty of the audiencia, on the other hand, to guard strictly the prerogatives of the civil magistrates, and, in fact, those of all officials of the government, and not to allow the ecclesiastics to infringe on their jurisdiction through acts of fuerza, interdicts, or by any other illegal means. [813] The ecclesiastical courts were forbidden to try laymen or those subject in first instance to the jurisdiction of the civil courts. They were forbidden to imprison private subjects, or embargo or sell their property without first seeking the consent and co-operation of the secular arm. [814] They were forbidden to try any cases except those involving the church, and they could not, without the aid of the civil authorities, impose fines or condemn persons to labor. [815] In general, they were solicited to work in harmony with the audiencia, and to give all possible assistance to that body. [816] Wherein doubt existed or where there was reason to believe that an action might constitute an interference with the civil prerogative, the ecclesiastical judges were ordered to ask the advice of the secular authorities. The ecclesiastical and secular magistrates were enjoined to aid each other actively when occasion demanded, the prelates supporting the audiencia, and the latter dispatching provisions to its magistrates and subdelegates in support of the ecclesiastical judges and tribunals. [817] The laws cited above did not become effective suddenly, but were evolved through a long period of dissension and dispute between the ecclesiastical and the civil authorities. Before the audiencia was established in the Islands, the parish priests, friars, and ecclesiastical ordinaries in many cases exercised the duties of local judges in both the spiritual and temporal spheres. There can be no question but that the church rendered very efficient service in this particular, especially under the leadership of Bishop Salazar. [818] The surrender of their prerogatives by the ecclesiastics was gradually though reluctantly made as the civil courts became more firmly established in the Islands. At first, the entire clergy, with few exceptions, from the bishop to the most isolated parish priest, opposed the change, and regarded the assumption of their former powers by the civil authorities as unauthorized usurpation. [819] It was with great difficulty that the churchmen were able to adjust themselves to the new conditions. They were required frequently to aid the civil authorities in the apprehension of criminals and in the obtaining of testimony, thus co-operating generally in the administration of justice. [820] A noteworthy conflict arose when the audiencia summoned Bishop Salazar before it to testify as an ordinary witness, and to explain his own actions on various occasions, in retarding the work of the civil courts. These summonses he regarded as detracting from his ecclesiastical immunity. Subsequently, the audiencia was admonished that on no occasion should churchmen be called to act as witnesses. [821] So it came about that although the intervention of the audiencia was prescribed by the laws of the Indies and admitted elsewhere in the Philippines, owing to the strength of the ecclesiastical organization, and its former prominence in affairs of government, the assumption of its legal power by the audiencia was necessarily gradual. Nevertheless, the tribunal ultimately attained extensive authority in ecclesiastical affairs, an analysis of which will now be made. The audiencia exercised jurisdiction as a high court of appeal over suits to which the religious orders were parties. Most of these cases originated in misunderstandings or contentions over jurisdiction, titles to land, and over the claims relating to occupation of provinces under the royal patronage, which the various orders advanced. Most frequent of all were the suits between the orders, as to jurisdiction over provinces. An example of this is furnished by the contention which arose in 1736 between the Jesuits and the Recollects for the exclusive right to minister in Mindanao. Another case of a similar nature was the adjudication of a dispute between the Recollects and the Dominicans for spiritual jurisdiction in the province of Zambales, as a result of which the Recollects were finally ordered to confine their missionary activities to Mindoro. [822] Another case was the dispute between the Franciscans and the Observant friars. A large number of the latter arrived in the Islands in 1648 with letters from the Viceroy of New Spain. They were at once given territory which had been previously assigned to the Franciscans. On the basis of a brief of Urban VIII, prohibiting the occupation of the same province by two different orders, the Franciscans brought suit in the audiencia with the result that the newcomers were not only dispossessed of the province that had been assigned to them, but their patents and briefs were cancelled on the grounds that they were not properly authorized by the Council of the Indies. [823] Reference was made in the last chapter to the suits which occurred between the Jesuits and Dominicans, the two orders most extensively interested in higher education, for the right to maintain universities in Manila. The greater number of these disputes, in fact all of them, seem to have been based on the rivalry of their two colleges and on their zeal for royal favor and patronage. When Santo Tomás became a royal university in 1648, and was empowered to grant degrees as such, the Jesuits brought suit in the audiencia for the right to confer honors of a like character in their college of San José. The audiencia denied their petition; the case was appealed to the Council of the Indies, and the higher authority decided that both institutions should enjoy equally the privilege of conferring scholastic honors. [824] The rivalry and bitter feeling between these two orders did not cease with this settlement, but in 1683 the Dominicans again brought suit in the audiencia, seeking to limit the educational activities of the Jesuits. The matter was again carried to the Council of the Indies. Although the decision was made in favor of the Jesuits, the disagreements between the two orders, the charges and counter-charges, and the influence of Archbishop Pardo, a Dominican, in behalf of his own order, went far beyond the authority of the audiencia, whose efforts to restrain them were entirely ineffectual. [825] Even the natives themselves, at times, went so far as to sue the religious orders in the audiencia. This was done in 1738 when the mestizos of Santa Cruz brought suit against the Jesuits, because the latter had sought to make the residents of Santa Cruz pay for certain improvements in the parishes of that district. These improvements had been authorized by the Jesuits, and from them the society had derived great benefit, while the residents had derived no particular good from them. [826] In 1737, on complaint of the natives, an investigation was conducted by Oidor Calderón which put a check upon certain transactions of the Jesuits in the province of Batangas. It was proved that they had collected rents repeatedly from the Indians for lands to which they had no title. The most significant and decisive judicial authority which the audiencia exercised in ecclesiastical matters, and that which was productive of more conflicts and opposition on the part of the church than any other cause, was the jurisdiction of the tribunal over the secular church courts, at the head of which was the metropolitan tribunal of the archbishop. The method of intervention most frequently followed in cases appealed from the archbishop was by the entertainment of the recurso de fuerza. [827] In this way the civil jurisdiction, acting through the audiencia, could intervene for its own protection, and by means of this special procedure that tribunal actually did restrain the ecclesiastical judges more frequently and effectively in important cases than in any other way. It was on the grounds of fuerza that the audiencia justified its action in practically all cases of interference with the jurisdiction of the church courts. Cases of fuerza were those which came to the audiencia through the abuse of their judicial powers by prelates or ecclesiastical judges; cases, literally, in which the latter had usurped or trespassed the authority of the civil courts or government. [828] The execution of the decision of an ecclesiastical judge could be suspended by an edict of the audiencia on the grounds of fuerza, while the case was being investigated by that tribunal. [829] The civil government usually took the initiative in these appeals, but there were occasions in the history of the Islands in which ecclesiastical authorities and tribunals interposed recursos de fuerza against the archbishop. In dealing with these cases the audiencia first ascertained whether fuerza had been committed and then, if the results of the investigation were affirmative, the tribunal was empowered to raise the fuerza (alzar or quitar la fuerza) [830] and place limitations upon the ecclesiastical authority in order to prevent future abuse of power. [831] The audiencia was without authority to fine prelates, bishops, or ecclesiastical judges, but it had sufficient jurisdiction to remedy excesses and restore conditions to their former state. The tribunal was urged to use the utmost discretion in dispossessing offending prelates and judges of their benefices or positions, [832] as a punishment for fuerza, and not to proceed to such lengths except in exceptional cases, wherein the strictest measures were necessary. On such occasions the audiencia might exile the offending ecclesiastic, giving account of its act to the Council of the Indies. [833] All proceedings of this nature had to be carried on secretly and with the greatest possible dispatch and brevity, [834] and all churchmen who were deprived of their benefices through the recurso de fuerza had the privilege of an appeal to the Council of the Indies. [835] In the treatment of cases of fuerza an informal judicial hearing was given; the spirit of the proceeding was supposed to be that of a harmonious investigation, in which both sides, ecclesiastical and civil, were mutually and equally concerned in the solution of a given problem, and in ascertaining wherein error had been committed. The object of this proceeding was said to be the furtherance of the interests of the crown, the salvation of souls and the spread of the benevolent influence of the church. That the spirit of peace and harmony failed to manifest itself at many of these investigations, is shown by the bitter contests which arose between the civil and ecclesiastical judges as results of the entertainment of the recurso de fuerza. The spiritual authorities alleged on these occasions that they regarded the restraining action of the government as presumption, unauthorized by ecclesiastical canons. In the well-known Pardo controversy (1683-1689), references to which may be found in any history of the Philippines, there occurred many occasions on which the audiencia was obliged to avail itself of the recurso de fuerza. By this means the audiencia sought to restrain Archbishop Pardo from usurping the civil jurisdiction and that of the religious orders and of the metropolitan chapter. Interference with these orders was in violation of the royal patronage, the ultimate authority over them being the patron and not the archbishop. Such action, therefore, became a civil offense, punishable by the civil tribunals, the highest of which and the one properly equipped to deal with such cases, was the audiencia. It will be noted that Pardo paid the penalty of exile for repeatedly ignoring the audiencia and its right of interposition through the recurso de fuerza, and the subsequent ineffectiveness of the audiencia was due to reasons and conditions other than the decline of the authority and importance of the recurso de fuerza. This controversy which is more fully described in preceding chapters affords the best example extant of the operation of the recurso de fuerza, its nature and effects, hence the citation of minor cases is rendered unnecessary. Closely related to the question of fuerza as illustrating the jurisdiction of the audiencia over the church courts, occurs that of the interdict. A price which the civil authorities frequently had to pay for the entertainment of the recurso de fuerza, or any other opposition, in fact, to the unrestricted authority of the ecclesiastics, was the penalty which usually accompanied the interdict, of being forbidden to participate in religious rites and ceremonies, or to continue receiving the customary spiritual consolations and benefits of the church. [836] The authority of the audiencia to restrain the excessive use of this weapon by the ecclesiastics may be considered to have been judicial in its nature, since the prelates, by undue use of the episcopal censure, went beyond their ecclesiastical jurisdiction and encroached upon the royal prerogative. A form of judicial inquiry was instituted to ascertain the act and degree of encroachment; indeed, the excessive use of the interdict was interpreted to constitute fuerza, and the method just described was employed by the tribunal to combat it. We may turn again to the Pardo controversy for an example of the intervention of the audiencia to restrain a prelate from excessive use of the interdict. Pardo, after his return from exile, fulminated censures against ex-Governor Juan de Vargas and the entire audiencia which had supported him against the archbishop. The ban against the oidores was quickly removed, technically on the grounds that the magistrates were still royal officials, but in reality for the sake of expediency. Vargas, however, was not absolved. The audiencia, according to the existing laws, had the right to force the prelate to remove the ban, [837] but owing to dissensions within the tribunal, the opposition of the new governor, the increasing power of the archbishop, the certainty that the royal authority had already disapproved of its acts, and the impending visitation of a royal commissioner (Valdivia), who had instructions to settle the discord and strife at Manila at any cost, the oidores thought it best not to take this step. The archbishop refused to absolve Vargas because of the technical reason that his case came under the jurisdiction of the Inquisition. The audiencia was expected to restrain the interdict whenever this ecclesiastical prohibition interfered with the government or incapacitated the officials thereof from executing their duties. The interdict was not to interfere with the royal prerogative, nor was it to be imposed for insignificant causes or personal reasons. [838] The audiencia was given the special injunction not to interfere with censures generally, but to permit them to be applied in needful cases, the oidores bearing in mind only the requirement that these ecclesiastical measures should not be allowed to interfere with the civil government. [839] It had frequently been the practice of the prelates to pronounce censures against oidores and alcaldes, who, in proceeding with their duties as inspectors of the provinces, encroached upon what the churchmen regarded as their own particular and private jurisdiction. This, of course, was forbidden, and the audiencia, by way of fuerza, usually entertained appeals from these officials of the civil government and set aside all such acts on the part of the representatives of the church. Reference was made in the last chapter to the circumstances surrounding the effort of Oidor Guerela to inspect the province of Camarines. This magistrate was excommunicated by the bishop of that diocese and was compelled to remain in banishment five months, the audiencia refusing to set aside the censure on account of the personal animosity of the magistrates toward Guerela. Nevertheless, prelates were enjoined to obey the audiencia when that tribunal ordered the cancellation or suspension of an episcopal censure or prohibition. [840] When an appeal was made to the audiencia from such an act by an alcalde, oidor, visitor, or other official at some distance from the capital, the prelate was expected, upon the judicial summons of the audiencia, to suspend his censure until the facts of the case had been ascertained, and the decision of the tribunal had been rendered. [841] This was the law, but occasionally, as in the case of Guerela, local circumstances rendered impossible or undesirable the fulfillment of the law. It has been shown in the preceding chapter that before the coming of the audiencia, the church had utilized the weapon of excommunication on very slight pretext, and it had been partly for the purpose of restraining this abuse that the audiencia was established. [842] The early governors, especially, had many difficulties with this phase of ecclesiastical high-handedness and the letters of such executives as De Vera, Tello, Dasmariñas, and Morga complained continually against this particular abuse of power by the prelates, [843] regretting the lack of any authority to set aside these excessive acts on the part of the churchmen. All the above-mentioned governors had been excommunicated for various acts in opposition to the ecclesiastical power. Governor Ronquillo, in the characteristic letter which is quoted in another part of this treatise, reported that the audiencia, after its establishment, had effectively restrained the excesses of excommunication on the part of the church. [844] Indeed, during the twenty-five years succeeding Ronquillo's term as governor, the audiencia had so frequently set aside ecclesiastical censures, and so completely terminated the abuses of the privilege of sanctuary by friars and priests, in fact so generally held at naught the principle of ecclesiastical immunity, that the king, on November 13, 1626, was obliged to issue a special cédula in restraint of his Manila tribunal and for the protection of the ecclesiastical jurisdictions. [845] Examination of a large number of cases shows that the method by which the audiencia set aside excommunication was usually through an ultimate reliance on force. Nevertheless, taking three hundred years of the history of the Philippines into consideration, there were relatively few cases in which matters went so far that the audiencia actually had to use force, the case being usually that the judicial protest of the tribunal against an abuse of this kind was sufficient. Theoretically, any act of excommunication or interdict was suspended, ipso facto, by the intervention of the audiencia pending further investigation, and the prelate was required to abide by the decision of the tribunal. The following typical cases may be cited to show that the audiencia frequently did rely on the civil power, as a last resort, for the enforcement of its injunctions. In 1623, an oidor was excommunicated for having violated the ecclesiastical sanctuary in seizing Juan Soto de Vega, a fugitive from justice, who had taken refuge in the cathedral. The audiencia, finding itself opposed by the metropolitan court, sent a constable to arrest the provisor who had fulminated the excommunication, threatening the latter with a fine of two thousand pesos and banishment if he did not desist and cancel the censure. The archbishop, who at first supported the provisor, was put under military guard at the behest of the audiencia. The Jesuits then used their good offices in behalf of the government, as a result of which the matter was arbitrated and peace was brought about. [846] In 1636, however, the archbishop and provisor were banished and fined heavily, because they persisted in a censure which the audiencia had restrained. Their continual refusal to harken to the commands of the vicepatron and the royal tribunal and their insistence on the censure were adjudged to constitute fuerza. This case originated in the violation of the right of asylum by the governor and the arrest of a murderer who had taken refuge in the Augustinian convent. So open was the defiance of the civil government that the criminal was executed in the courtyard, under the very windows of the convent wherein were congregated the prelate and his supporters who were commanded not to touch the body for three days. [847] The archbishop was removed from his convent by soldiers at the command of the acuerdo and banished to the island of Corregidor, where he remained twenty-six days, after which mediation was effected and the weak old prelate, tottering with age, was restored to his metropolitan capital. [848] Montero y Vidal states that this case is interesting and important as a test of the power of the governor; for many persons, he alleges, did not believe that the governor could raise an interdict. [849] That he was enabled to do so, with the support of the audiencia and with the aid of his military forces there can be no question. Some reference should be made at this time to the abuses of the interdict by Archbishop Pardo. This prelate went so far as to place a ban upon the church of the Jesuits because it contained the dead body of an offending oidor. For reasons other than the lack of legal authority, the audiencia was powerless to restrain his censures at that time. On another occasion the audiencia and governor, by placing armed guards at the doors of the Dominican church and preventing the celebration of services therein, suppressed an interdict which had been issued through the influence of that order on behalf of Archbishop Pardo. Governor Bustamante claimed that he was acting in accordance with his own properly constituted authority in 1719, when he appointed his own audiencia, set aside repeated interdicts, penetrated the asylum of the church, arrested the archbishop and defied the entire ecclesiastical organization. He seems to have exceeded his powers no more flagrantly than did some of his predecessors under like circumstances; yet, for personal and political reasons, he was unable to count on the support of the other elements of the colony in this struggle with the ecclesiastical power and the battle ended disastrously for him. Acting-Governor Anda, relying on armed force alone, defended Manila against the British, achieved victory for his cause and secured the approbation of the king in the face of repeated ecclesiastical censures from Archbishop Rojo. These incidents, which occupy a prominent place in the history of the Philippines, illustrate the usual method by which ecclesiastical censures were set aside in actual practice, either by the audiencia or by the vicepatron, who was supported by the tribunal. A department of the church over which the audiencia did not have such complete authority, either judicially or administratively, was the Inquisition. Properly speaking, there was no tribunal of the Holy Office in the Philippines, the Inquisition being represented in Manila by a commissary. [850] This representative was sufficiently powerful, however, to constitute a worthy opponent for the civil power and one who, on account of the immunities which he enjoyed and because of the secret methods which he was able to employ, kept all the tribunals and authorities of the civil government at a respectful distance. Although the laws of the Indies directed that the inquisitors who were sent to the colonies should present their titles to the audiencias and viceroys, this did not give the civil authorities any advantage over them. The audiencia was expected to formally receive the inquisitors and to pay them all due respect. [851] At the time of the establishment of the Inquisition in Manila, no audiencia as yet existed. From the very beginning, however, the dignitaries of the Inquisition were placed under special royal protection, with complete power over their own sphere. Officials of the government and all other persons were warned and enjoined not to interfere with or oppose them in any way. As early as May 22, 1610, the Council of the Indies placed itself and all subordinate audiencias and governors in a position inferior to that of the Inquisition. The interference of civil magistrates with the inquisitors in behalf of the government was forbidden, [852] even the ordinary means of protection were denied them. The recurso de fuerza could not be employed, nor could the interdicts of the inquisitors be raised, even in notorious cases of their infringement upon the royal jurisdiction. [853] Little change was made in these laws until the latter part of the eighteenth century. The oidores were ordered to lend such secular aid as might be required, and were originally instructed to obey the mandates and carry out the orders of the inquisitors without inquiries into the religious reason for any action the latter might take. Each judge, ecclesiastical or royal, was to limit himself strictly to his own particular field and thus conflicts of authority were to be avoided. The laws of the Indies prescribed many regulations which were designed to induce harmony and co-operation between the officials of the Inquisition and those of the civil government. Viceroys, audiencias and governors were authorized to execute the sentences of the representatives of the Inquisition and to extend to them every facility and assistance. [854] Oidores and executives were forbidden to open the mail or tamper with the correspondence or legal documents of the inquisitors. [855] Oidores and fiscales were authorized to give legal advice to the judges of the Inquisition when counsel of this kind was required. [856] The inquisitors were to be given precedence over the officials of the civil government in everything pertaining to the official duties of the former, but in questions of civil administration and in matters of ceremony, the oidores took precedence over inquisitors, unless the latter enjoyed higher rank by virtue of some other office. [857] The tendency of the laws, however, through a period of two hundred years, was to delimit and circumscribe the authority of the Inquisition in matters bordering on the jurisdiction of the civil government. This is seen, especially, in the offense of polygamy, which, up to 1754, was dealt with solely by the Inquisition. By the cédula of March 19th of that year, polygamy was brought under the fuero mixto; [858] the same law ordered that prisoners, after punishment by the inquisitorial tribunal for heresy, should be dealt with by civil judges for an offense against the laws of the realm. On September 7, 1766, this crime was again made punishable solely by the Inquisition, but on August 10, 1788, jurisdiction over cases of polygamy was taken entirely from the Inquisition and given to the royal justices. [859] This may be considered as indicative of the decline of the authority of the Inquisition in the eighteenth century. The inquisitors, of course, were not permitted to exercise jurisdiction over the Chinese, or over the aboriginal inhabitants of the Islands. [860] In its relations with the civil power in the Philippines, and particularly with the audiencia, two charges have been brought against the Inquisition. The first was that in the early years of the Islands' history, it was utilized by the prelates for the more complete usurpation of powers belonging to the civil government and the audiencia. The tribunal, of course, was left entirely without recourse, by virtue of the exemptions and immunities of the Inquisition mentioned above. On July 20, 1585, the audiencia, in a letter to the king, cited several instances in which Bishop Salazar, unwilling to cede his claims to jurisdiction over certain civil offenders, handed them over to the commissary of the Inquisition, instead of surrendering them to the audiencia, to which jurisdiction over such cases belonged. The audiencia, appealing to the king for aid, alleged that the prelate had taken undue advantage of the civil power, "by sheltering himself behind the Inquisition, ... where the audiencia has no jurisdiction." [861] This charge was also brought against Salazar by the Jesuit, Sánchez, in his memorial of 1591. [862] It is significant that no decree was issued during the earlier era which authorized the audiencia to repair the abuses of the inquisitors, although on many occasions the audiencia and the local court of the Inquisition were respectively enjoined to confine themselves to their own particular fields of authority. [863] The second charge made against the Inquisition was that it allowed itself to be influenced, utilized, and possessed by individuals and private interests for their own selfish ends. Under these conditions the audiencia was powerless; the Inquisition openly fought the government and vanquished it entirely on various notable occasions. There may be found no better illustration of this than the Salcedo affair in 1667 and 1668, during which the commissary of the Inquisition was the instrument of the governor's enemies, proceeding to such excesses in his zeal that he ultimately proved to be the agent of his own downfall. [864] The various sacerdotal historians of the Philippines, in treating of the Salcedo affair, agree that the failure of the audiencia to do its duty in checking the so-called excesses of the governor led the prelate and the ecclesiastical dignitaries of the colony to turn to the Inquisition for relief. [865] Among the acts of treason and heresy of which Governor Salcedo was said to have been guilty, the most conspicuous were his negotiations with the Dutch at Batavia for the conquest by them of the city of Manila. [866] This was the leading pretext for his arrest. We have already mentioned in a former chapter that the conduct of the oidores was not above reproach on this occasion. Immediately after the removal of the governor, a dispute arose between magistrates Coloma and Montemayor for the control of affairs, only to be settled by the usurpation of the government by the ecclesiastical candidate, Bónifaz. With Salcedo out of the way and the audiencia intimidated and powerless, the Inquisition and the ecclesiastics ruled with a high hand for a period of three years, until the arrival of the new governor, Manuel de León, in 1671. [867] The audiencia, after it had been reconstructed by Governor León, gave some account to the king of the excesses of "Fray Joseph de Paternina, religious of the order of San Agustín, and commissary of the Holy Inquisition, who has been so vain and haughty since the imprisonment of Governor Salcedo, a thing very unfortunate for these Islands." [868] The most harmful result of the affair, in the estimation of the audiencia, was the growing feeling on the part of the people of the Philippines "that the Inquisition (was) the most powerful agency there, and that every person in the colony was subject to it." The effrontery of the commissary was said to have gone so far on one occasion that he entered the acuerdo session of the audiencia and violently interfered with its proceedings, forcibly arresting and carrying away persons attendant thereupon. This defiant and insolent act was the greatest offense that could be offered to the royal authority, and the audiencia felt that if a continuance of these excesses were tolerated the royal tribunal would be despised and held at naught by the very citizens who should regard it with the most veneration. A list of the acts of aggression on the part of the commissary was submitted by the audiencia at this time. He had commuted a sentence pronounced by the tribunal and had excused various fines imposed by the tribunal, declaring publicly that it was not necessary to obey the acts of this body of lawyers. He had excommunicated all the magistrates of the audiencia, who remained for a long period without recourse and without the privileges of religious communion. He had interfered on behalf of an encomendero who was on trial before the audiencia. He had produced such a state of affairs that the impotence of the civil government was a subject of common jest, even in the mouths of the natives. The supporters of the government had been reduced to a panic of fear, not knowing where the wrath of the Inquisition would fall next. The commissary, on the other hand, had fortified himself with claims of immunity and had acted in defiance of royal and ecclesiastical law by erecting a tribunal of which he was the head, notwithstanding the fact that such an institution was forbidden in the Philippines. The audiencia presented this picture of affairs in its memorial, admitting its incapacity to cope with this powerful institution, whose acts were prepared and executed in secrecy. The evil situation for which he was responsible could only be repaired by an appeal to Mexico. Meanwhile the government and people in the Philippines were compelled to suffer the consequences of his assumption of authority. There was no tribunal or any other agency in the Philippines able to place an effective check on the triumphant inquisitor. The only relief that could come was furnished on June 4, 1671, in the appointment of a new commissary, who was ordered to arrest Paternina and send him back to New Spain. This timely relief emanated from the tribunal of the Inquisition of Mexico, which by this act manifested its disapproval of all that had been done by its ambitious agent. On August 12, 1672, the Council of the Indies also disapproved of Paternina's acts in connection with the establishment of a Philippine tribunal. [869] The new commissary did nothing toward the continuance of the tribunal which his predecessor had established illegally. With these manifestations of the royal support, the audiencia, which had been reconstituted on the arrival of Governor León, regained its authority and proceeded ably to second the executive in his struggle with the powerful ecclesiastical organization. The new commissary, who had lost his papers in a shipwreck, appealed to the tribunal for recognition and support in a struggle which he had undertaken against the Franciscans. Through the aid given him by the audiencia, he imprisoned the provincial and definitor of that order. Then the audiencia reconsidered its decision and effected the liberation of the two prisoners on the ground that the title of the commissary did not authorize him to act at this time. [870] In interfering with and actually cancelling the acts of the commissary, the audiencia was exceeding its authority, for the laws prescribed that his decisions could be reversed only by his immediate superior, the tribunal of Mexico. However, the audiencia maintained that it was acting in accordance with the law which authorized it to receive and recognize inquisitors. On this occasion it was merely deciding that the commissary was acting without proper authority since his credentials had never arrived. [871] At this time, the moral standing of the Philippine agent of the Inquisition was at a very low ebb, both in Manila and Madrid, which, of course, influenced the decision of the audiencia. The Salcedo affair and the succeeding events make it clear that neither the authority of the audiencia nor of the Inquisition was unlimited. The fear and respect with which the latter institution was regarded contributed to its momentary triumph. The audiencia did not interfere with or seek to restrain the acts of the commissary; indeed, the tribunal connived at the exile of the vicepatron since the oidores expected to profit from the act. During these three years the Inquisition allied itself practically to every interest in the colony which had been opposed to the governor. The royal interests were for a time forgotten and wholly unchampioned, owing to the weakness of the audiencia, the removal of the governor, and the united front presented by the ecclesiastical element. This condition was altered by the arrival of a new governor who bore evidence of the disapprobation of the superior government. The tribunal of Mexico discountenanced the acts of its former representative, and that disapproval was further emphasized by the adverse attitude of the Council of the Indies. The audiencia was restored to its proper position, and, in conjunction with the vicepatron, it resumed its status as the agent of the royal will. So it may be asserted that the supremacy of both authorities was relative, recognition depending partially on local circumstances and ultimately on the attitude of the superior government. In fact, it may be said that the latter was the deciding factor. In the struggle itself, before the decision of the home authorities was rendered, the preponderance of power was enjoyed by the Inquisition. This was owing to the advantages which law and precedent had given to it as a privileged ecclesiastical tribunal, although the efficacy of the Inquisition lay for the most part in the immunities which were extended to it and in its swift, unexpected and secret methods. Its ultimate defeat on this occasion, and the continued abuse of its power, did much to detract from its prestige and authority in the Philippines. [872] During the eighteenth century considerable authority over the Inquisition was given to the civil courts. The former position of supremacy, wherein its authority could not be so much as questioned by a secular tribunal, was gone forever. On August 2, 1748, a decree was promulgated whereby chanceries, audiencias, and corregidores were authorized to restrain any inquisitorial tribunal from maltreating its own prisoners. [873] This same law provided for the punishment by the civil courts of inquisitors who contravened this law. This was the first regulation which really gave to the audiencia the power necessary to restrain the acts of the Inquisition. We find no indication of any such liberal legislation in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, but by the time this law was promulgated, the power of the church in Spain was considerably reduced and that of the Inquisition was already on the decline. By a number of subsequent laws the Inquisition was gradually but surely limited in power and authority. We have already noted that on August 10, 1788, jurisdiction over the crime of polygamy and over cases involving the infraction of the marriage relation was taken from the Inquisition and given to the civil courts. [874] By the cédula of December 12, 1807, authority was given to the royal justices to receive inquisitors, inspect their titles and to assign them to their districts, assisting them in all possible ways. The civil authorities were ordered to guard against an excessive number of these functionaries. The magistrates were especially instructed to act as guardians of the royal prerogative in dealing with the representative of the Inquisition and to report to the superior government on their relations with them. By this cédula the authority of the inquisitorial agents was distinctly limited to matters of faith, with appeal to the tribunal of the Inquisition. The magistrates were ordered to see that these instructions were followed. [875] In this way the civil authorities, and particularly the magistrates of the audiencias, became the guardians of the royal prerogative against the agents of the Inquisition, who were kept within the proper bounds of a purely religious jurisdiction. It would be desirable, did time and space allow it, to illustrate further the jurisdiction of the audiencia over ecclesiastical affairs by showing in detail the part which the tribunal played in the friar lands litigation [876] and in the disputes over ecclesiastical visitation in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries in the Philippines. It will be sufficient here to state that the government sought at irregular intervals and with varying degrees of success, to make the orders prove titles to lands in the same manner that was required of other corporations and individuals. [877] The audiencia, as a tribunal, and the individual magistrates as special commissioners, participated judicially in the examination of these titles and in the correction of the abuses which were discovered. The oidores, when serving as special magistrates for the verification of these titles, officiated in a double capacity. By the very nature of the services rendered they were judges. They were also agents of the royal patron and as such they represented the person of the king, ascertaining whether the royal rights had been usurped or infringed upon. Closely similar to the jurisdiction of the audiencia as a court of final resort in the testing of the titles to lands occupied by religious orders was that which it exercised in the matter of ecclesiastical visitation. This was a question of a more thoroughly religious character which did not concern the civil government as intimately as did the matter of friar lands. In general, it may be said that the audiencia was utilized by both sides in the various disputes which arose in connection with ecclesiastical visitation. During the ecclesiastical administrations of Archbishops Salazar, Serrano, Poblete, Camacho, Pardo and Justa y Rufina, practically until the end of the eighteenth century, this question was continually agitated. These archbishops attempted to visit and inspect the curacies which were held by friars in lieu of secular priests. [878] The archbishops relied on the audiencia for assistance in the enforcement of their claims and the friars sought its protection as a court of justice to shield them from the visitation of the prelate. As in the matter of the friar lands, so in this question, the audiencia acted both as a tribunal of justice and as an agent and champion of the royal patronage. Indeed, the laws of the Indies established the audiencia as a tribunal and as a compelling authority for the enforcement of ecclesiastical visitation. [879] The archbishop was directed to appeal to the audiencia or vicepatron for assistance in the subjection of offending curates, [880] but he was forbidden to visit the regulars in their convents, [881] which, of course, did not prevent his visiting them when in charge of curacies. On the other hand, the audiencia was forbidden to entertain appeals on the ground of fuerza from regulars who objected to the visitation of the prelates. [882] Local conditions in the Philippines did much toward determining the character of the support rendered by the audiencia both to the archbishops and to the friars. During the later months of the Pardo controversy, when the audiencia had been demoralized by the triumph of the archbishop and the visitor, Valdivia, the decision of the tribunal had but little weight and the prelate did as he wished in regard to the matter of visitation. In Camacho's time, when the friars were on the point of leaving the Islands rather than submit to visitation, the audiencia and the governor wisely counseled moderation and completely abandoned the obstinate prelate. During Anda's term of office the question was again taken up, but the effort to enforce the principle was abandoned because the government could not find seculars, either Spanish or native, to take the place of the friars who threatened to leave the Islands if visitation were insisted upon. The magistrates likewise rendered invaluable service in imparting legal advice to the vicepatron, friars and others interested. They also kept the court informed as to what was actually transpiring in the colony. It may be seen, therefore, that the audiencia participated in two important ways in the enforcement of episcopal visitation. It was primarily a court; it acted as agent of the royal patron. In these capacities the influence of the tribunal was greatest. It also exercised functions of an advisory character in aiding the authorities concerned to ascertain their rights according to the existing law. [883] In summarizing the results of the investigation with which this chapter has been concerned, it may be said that the audiencia constituted a court of appeal in ecclesiastical cases wherein the services of an impartial, non-ecclesiastical tribunal were required, or wherein the defense of the royal jurisdiction against the aggression of the churchmen was involved. In defending the civil government from ecclesiastical usurpation the audiencia acted in defense of the royal patronage. Nevertheless, in the cases noted, namely, in settling disputes between orders, between the secular church and the orders, between either of these and the civil government, in entertaining recursos de fuerza, in restraining the interdict, and the abuses of the Inquisition, the audiencia acted by judicial process as a tribunal of justice, and not in the capacity of an administrative committee or an executive agent, as in the cases which have been heretofore described. BIBLIOGRAPHY LIST OF PRINTED WORKS CITED Alcedo, Antonio de Diccionario geográfico-histórico de las Indias Occidentales ó América. 5 vols. Madrid, 1786-1789. Altamira y Crevea, Rafael Historia de España y de la civilización española. 3d ed, 4 vols. Barcelona, 1913. Álvarez de Abreu, Antonio Extracto historial. Madrid, 1736. Antequera, José María Historia de la legislación española, desde los tiempos más remotos hasta nuestros dias. 2d ed., Madrid, 1884. Artigas, Manuel El servicio de aduanas en Filipinas. Madrid, 1895. Bancroft, Hubert Howe History of Central America. 3 vols. San Francisco, 1882-1887. History of Mexico. 6 vols. San Francisco, 1883-1888. Barrows, David P. A history of the Philippines. Indianapolis, 1905. "The governor-general of the Philippines under Spain and the United States," in The Pacific Ocean in history (Stephens and Bolton, editors), 238-265. New York, 1917. Beleña, Eusebio Bentura Recopilación sumaria de todos los autos acordados de la real audiencia y sala del crimen de esta Nueva España. 2 vols. Mexico, 1787. Blackmar, Frank W. Spanish institutions of the Southwest. Baltimore, 1891. Blair, Emma Helen, and Robertson, James Alexander (editors) The Philippine Islands, 1493-1898. 55 vols. Cleveland, 1903-1909. Blumentritt, Ferdinand Consideraciones acerca de la actual situación política de Filipinas. Barcelona, 1889. Bolton, Herbert Eugene Guide to materials for the history of the United States in the principal archives of Mexico. Washington, 1913. Texas in the middle eighteenth century; studies in Spanish colonial history and administration. Berkeley, 1915. Bourne, Edward Gaylord Discovery, conquest, and early history of the Philippines. Cleveland, 1907. Spain in America, 1450-1580. New York, 1906. "The Philippine 'situado' from the treasury of New Spain," in The American historical review, X, 459-461. Buzeta, Manuel, and Brave, Felipe Diccionario geográfico, estadístico, histórico de las islas Filipinas. 2 vols. Madrid, 1850-1851. Cánovas del Castillo, Máximo Noticias históricas, geográficas, estadísticas, administrativas y militares de las islas Filipinas. Madrid, 1859. Castro, Agustín Mariá de Reseña sobre la guerra de los Ingleses. Manila, 1765. Cavada y Méndez de Vigo, Agustín de la Historia, geografía, geología y estadística de Filipinas. 2 vols. Manila, 1876. Chapman, Charles E. The founding of Spanish California; the northwestward expansion of New Spain, 1687-1783. New York, 1916. Chirino, Pedro Relación de las islas Filipinas í de lo qve en ellas an trabajado los padres de la Compañia de Iesus. Rome, 1604. Colección de Autos acordados de la real audiencia [y] chancillería de Filipinas. 5 vols. Manila, 1861-1866. Colección de documentos inéditos para la historia de España. 113 vols. Madrid, 1842-1912. Colección de documentos inéditos relativos al descubrimiento, conquista y colonización de las posesiones españolas en América y Oceanía, sacados, en su mayor parte, del Real Archivo de Indias. 42 vols. Madrid, 1864-1886. Colección de documentos inéditos relativos al descubrimiento, conquista y organización de las antiguas posesiones españolas de ultramar. Segunda serie. 13 vols. Madrid, 1886-1887. Colección de las leyes, decretos, y declaraciones de las cortes y los reales decretos, órdenes, etc., desde 1837 hasta Diciembre, 1845. 13 vols. Madrid, 1845. Continued from 1846 as the Colección legislativa de España. Colección del real decreto de 27 de Febrero de 1767 para la ejecución del extrañamiento de los regulares de la Compañia. Madrid, 1767. Colección legislativa de España. 180 vols. Madrid, 1810-1898. Colín, Francisco Labor evangélica, ministérios apostólicos de los obreros de la Compañia de Iesus, fundación y progresos de su provincia en las islas Filipinas. Nueva edición ... por el P. Pablo Pastels. Barcelona, 1900-1902. [First ed. Madrid, 1663.] Cómyn, Tomás de Estado de las islas Filipinas. Madrid, 1820. Concepción, Juan de la Historia general de Philipinas. 14 vols. Manila, 1788-1792. Coroléu é Inglada, José America, historia de su colonización, dominación é independencia. 4 vols. Barcelona, 1896. Craig, Austin The former Philippines through foreign eyes. Manila, 1916. Craig, Austin, and Benítez, Conrado Philippine progress prior to 1898. Manila, 1916. Crétineau-Joly, Jacques Clemente XIV y los Jesuitas, ó sea la historia de la destrucción de los Jesuitas. Madrid, 1848. Histoire religieuse politique et littéraire de la Compagnie de Jésus. 5 vols. Paris, 1859. Cunningham, Charles Henry "Origin of the friar lands question in the Philippines," in The American political science review, X, 463-480. "The ecclesiastical influence in the Philippines," in The American journal of theology, XXII, 161-186. "The inquisition in the Philippines," in The Catholic historical review, III, 417-445. "The institutional background of Spanish-American history," in The Hispanic American review, I, 24-39. "The question of ecclesiastical visitation in the Philippines," in The Pacific Ocean in history (Stephens and Bolton, editors), 223-237. New York, 1917. "The residencia in the Spanish colonies," in The Southwestern historical quarterly, XXI, 253-278. Danvila y Collado, Manuel El poder civil en España. 6 vols. Madrid, 1885-1886. Historia del reinado de Carlos III. 6 vols. Madrid, 1893. Significación que tuvieron en el gobierno de América la casa de contratación de Sevilla y el consejo supremo de Indias. Madrid, 1892. Decretos creando y organizando el cuerpo de administración civil de Filipinas. Madrid, 1870. Decretos de la Reina Doña Isabel II, ... desde 1834 hasta Diciembre de 1836. 2 vols. Madrid, 1835-1837. Decretos del rey Don Fernando VII ... desde el 4 de Mayo de 1814, hasta fin de Diciembre de 1831 ... y ... desde 1832, hasta fin de Diciembre de 1833. 18 vols. Madrid, 1818-1834. Delgado, Juan Historia general sacro-profana, política y natural de las islas del Poniente, llamadas Filipinas. Manila, 1892. Desdevises du Dezert, Gastón L'Espagne de l'ancien règime. 3 vols. 1897-1904. "Vice-rois et capitaines gènèraux des Indes espagnoles a la fin du XVIII e siècle," in the Revue historique, CXXV, 223-264; CXXVI, 14-60, 225-270. Díaz, Casimiro Conquistas de las islas Filipinas. Valladolid, 1890 [First ed. 1718.] Elliott, Charles Burke The Philippines; to the end of the military regime; to the end of the commission government. 2 vols. Indianapolis, 1916, 1917. Escriche, Joaquín Diccionario razonado de legislación y jurisprudencia. 3d ed., 2 vols. Madrid, 1847. Estadística de las causas criminales, negocios civiles y expedientes de gobierno despachados por la audiencia de Manila durante el año de 1876. Manila, 1877. Estadística general de los negocios terminados y pendientes de despacho en la real audiencia de Filipinas en fin de año de 1867. Manila, 1869. Estadística judicial de negocios despachados por la real audiencia de Cebú en 1886. Cebú, 1887. Suplemento al diccionario razonado de legislación y jurisprudencia. Madrid and Santiago, 1851. Fabie, Antonio María Ensayo histórico de la legislación española. Madrid, 1896. Fernández Martín, Manuel de Compilación legislativa del gobierno y administración civil en ultramar. 15 vols. Madrid, 1888-1898. Ferrando, Juan Historia de dos PP. Domínicos en las islas Filipinas. Madrid, 1870-1872. Fonseca, Fabián, and Urrutia, Carlos de Historia general de la real hacienda. 6 vols. Mexico, 1845-1853. Ford, Worthington Chauncey "Public records in our dependencies," in American Historical Association, Annual report, 1904, 131-147. Washington, 1905. Foreman, John The Philippine Islands. London, 1906. Gaceta de Manila, La Publicación oficial, diaria, en la que aparecían todos los decretos, reales órdenes y demás disposiciones dictadas por las autoridades en las cuestiones de gobierno, fomento, hacienda, estado, gracia, y justicia, administración.... Fué creada en substitución del Boletín Oficial por real orden de 18 de Mayo de 1860 y publicó su último número el 12 de Agosto de 1898. Manila, 1860-1898. Garcia Icazbalceta, Joaquín Don Fray Juan de Zumárraga. Mexico, 1881. Gómez Zamora, Matias Regio patronato, español é indiano. Madrid, 1897. Govantes, Felipe María de Compendio de la historia de Filipinas. Manila, 1877. Vida de Don Simón de Anda y Salazar. Manila, 1862. Grau y Monfalcón, Juan Memorial informatorio al rey ... por la ... ciudad de Manila sobre las pretensiones de aquella ciudad, é islas, y sus vecinos, y moradores, y comercio con la Nueva España. Madrid, 1637. Justificación de la conservación, y comercio de las islas Filipinas. Madrid, 1640. Griffin, George Butler "A brief bibliographical sketch of the Recopilación de Indias," in Historical Society of Southern California, Publications, 1887. San Francisco, 1888. Hackett, Charles Wilson "Delimitation of political jurisdictions in Spanish North America to 1535," in The Hispanic American historical review, I, 40-69. Hartzenbusch, Eugenio Apuntes para un catálogo de periódicos Madrileños. Madrid, 1894. Helps, Arthur The Spanish conquest in America. 4 vols. New York, 1900-1904. M. Oppenheim, ed. [First ed., London, 1855-61.] Hernáez, Francisco Javier Colección de bulas, breves y otros documentos relativos á la Iglesia de América y Filipinas. 2 vols. Bruselas, 1879. Histoire de la persecution de deux saints evêques par les Jesuites, ... l'un Dom Bernardin de Cardenas, evêque du Paraguay dans l'Amerique meridionale, l'autre Dom Philippe Pardo, archêveque de l'Eglise de Manila, metropolitaine des isles Philippines dans les Indies Orientales. Manila, 1691. Humboldt, Alexander von Political essay on the kingdom of New Spain. 4 vols. London, 1811. Instrucción que los virreyes de Nueva España dejaron á sus sucesores. 2 vols. Mexico, 1873. Jagor, Feodor Viages por Filipinas tradueidas del alemán por S. Vidal y Solar. Madrid, 1875. Juan de la Concepción See Concepción. Lafuente, Modesto Historia general de España. 25 vols. Barcelona, 1889-1890. Lannoy, Charles de L'expansion coloniale du Portugal jusqu' au début du XIXe siècle, in Lannoy and Vander Linden, Histoire de l'expansion coloniale des peuples européens: Portugal et Espagne. Bruxelles, Paris, 1907. La Pérouse, Jean Francois de Galaup Voyage de La Pérouse autour du monde. Paris, 1797. Lea, Henry Charles A history of the inquisition in Spain. 4 vols. New York, 1906-1907. The inquisition in the Spanish dependencies. New York, 1908. Legentil de la Galaisière, Guillaume, Joseph Hyacinthe Jean Baptiste Voyage dans les mers de l'Inde, fait par ordre du roi, à l'occasion du passage de Vénus, sur le disque de soleil, le 6 juin 1761, & le 3 du même mois 1769. 2 vols. Paris, 1779-1781. Leroy, James A. The Americans in the Philippines. 2 vols. Boston and New York, 1914. "The Philippine 'situado' from the treasury of New Spain," in The American historical review, X, 929-932; XI, 722-723. Review: Blair and Robertson (editors), The Philippine Islands, 1493-1898, in The American historical review, XI, 681-687; XII, 143-145; 912-915. Leroy-Beaulieu, Paul De la colonization chez les peuples modernes. 2 vols. Paris, 1902. Lowery, Woodbury The Spanish settlements within the present limits of the United States, 1513-1561. New York, 1901. Malcolm, George A. The government of the Philippine Islands, its development and fundamentals. Rochester, 1916. Mallat de Bassilau, Jean Les Philippines; histoire, géographie, moeurs, agriculture, industrie et commerce des colonies espagnoles dans l'Oceanie. 2 vols. Paris, 1846. Marichalar, A., and Manrique, Cayetano Historia de la legislación y recitaciones del derecho civil de España. 9 vols. Madrid, 1861-1872. Martínez Alcubilla, Marcelo Diccionario de la administración española, peninsular y ultramarina. 12 vols. Madrid, 1868. Martínez de Zúñiga, Joaquín An historical view of the Philippine Islands: exhibiting their discovery, population, language, government, manners, customs, productions and commerce. Translated by John Mayer. London, 1814. Estadismo de las islas Filipinas, ó mis viajes por este país.... Publica esta obra por primera vez extensamente anotada W. E. Retana. 2 vols. Madrid, 1893. Historia de las islas Filipinas. 2 vols. Sampaloc, 1803. Mas, Sinibaldo de Informe sobre el estado de las islas Filipinas en 1842. Madrid, 1843. Maurtua, Victor N. Antecedentes de la Recopilación de Indias. Madrid, 1906. Medina, José Toribio Bibliografía española de las islas Filipinas (1523-1810). Santiago de Chile, 1897-1898. Historia del tribunal del Santo Oficio de la inquisición en Chile. 2 vols. Santiago de Chile, 1890. Mendízabal, Francisco Investigaciones acerca del origen, historia y organización de la real chancillería de Valladolid, su jurisdicción y competencia, in Revista de archivos, bibliotecas y museos, tercera época, XXX, (1914), 62-72; 243-264, 437-452. Madrid, 1914. Mendieta, Gerónimo de Historia eclesiástica Indiana. Mexico, 1870. Montemayor y Córdoba, Juan Francisco Sumarios de las cédulas, ordenes y provisiones reales ... para la Nueva España y otras partes. Mexico, 1678. Montero y Vidal, José El archipiélago Filipino y las islas Marianas, Carolinas, y Palaos; su historia, geografía y estadística. Madrid, 1886. Historia general de Filipinas desde el descubrimiento de dichas islas hasta nuestros días. 3 vols. Madrid, 1887-1895. Morga, Antonio de Sucesos de las islas Filipinas. Obra publicada en Méjico el año de 1609, nuevamente sacada á luz y anotada por José Rizal. Paris, 1890. [First ed., Mexico, 1609. English translation by Henry Stanley, London, 1868.] Moses, Bernard South America on the eve of emancipation. New York, 1908. The establishment of Spanish rule in America. New York, 1898. The Spanish dependencies in South America. 2 vols. London, 1914. Murillo Velarde, Pedro Historia de la provincia de Philipinas de la Compañia de Jesus. Manila, 1749. Navarrete, Martín Fernández de Colección de los viages y descubrimientos que hicieron por mar los Españoles desde fines del siglo xv. 5 vols. Madrid, 1825-1837. New laws of the Indies for the good treatment and preservation of the Indians (1542-1543). London, 1893. Ordenanza general formada de orden de Su Majestad para el gobierno é instrucción de intendentes subdelegados y demás empleados de Indias. Madrid, 1803. Ordenanzas para el régimen y gobierno de la real Audiencia de Manila con el reglamento para su secretaría, aprobadas las primeras por real decreto.... Manila, 1868. Pardo de Tavera, Trinidad Hipólito Biblioteca Filipina. Washington, 1903. Reseña histórica de Filipinas desde su descubrimiento hasta 1903. Manila, 1906. "The judiciary of the Philippine Islands," in Census of the Philippine Islands, I, 389-410. Washington, 1905. "The power of the monastic orders," in Census of the Philippine Islands, I, 340-346. Washington, 1905. Parrás, Pedro Joseph Gobierno de los regulares de la América. 2 vols. Madrid, 1783. Pastels, Pablo See Colín, Francisco. Misión de la compañia de Jesús de Filipinas en el siglo XIX. 3 vols. Barcelona, 1917. Pérez y López, Antonio Xavier Teatro de la legislación de España é Indias. 28 vols. Madrid, 1791-1798. Pons, Francisco Raymond Joseph de A voyage to the eastern part of Tierra Firma, or the Spanish Main, in South America, during the years 1801, 1802, 1803 and 1804. Tr. [from the French] by an American gentleman. New York, 1806. [First ed., Paris, 1806.] Prescott, William H. History of the conquest of Mexico. Philadelphia, 1890. Priestley, Herbert I. José de Gálvez: visitor-general of New Spain, 1765-1771. Berkeley, 1916. Puga, Vasco de Provisiones, cédulas, instrucciónes de su magestad de esta Nueva España (1525-1563). 2 vols. Mexico, 1878-1879. [First ed., Mexico, 1563.] Real ordenanza de 13 de Octubre para el restablicimiento é instrucción de intendentes de provincias y exércitos. Madrid, 1749. Real ordenanza para el establicimiento é instrucción de intendentes de exército y provincia en el virreinato de Buenos Ayres. Madrid, 1782. Real ordenanza para el establicimiento y instrucción de intendentes de exército y provincia en el reino de la Nueva España. Madrid, 1786. Reales ordenanzas formadas por el superior gobierno y real acuerdo de estas islas en 26 de Febrero de 1768. Para el buen gobierno de los gobernadores, corregidores y alcaldes mayores de sus provincias. Manila, 1834. Recopilación de leyes de los reinos de las Indias. 5th ed., 2 vols. Madrid, 1841. [1st ed., 4 vols., Madrid, 1681; 2d ed., 4 vols., Madrid, 1754; 3d ed., 4 vols., Madrid, 1774; 4th ed., 3 vols., Madrid, 1791.] Retana, Wencesláo Emelio Catálogo abreviado de la biblioteca Filipina. Madrid, 1898. Ricafort, Mariano Reglamento para establecer la comisión de policía, ordenada con acuerdo de la real audiencia de las islas Filipinas. Sampáloc, 1826. Robertson, James Alexander Bibliography of the Philippine Islands. Cleveland, 1908. "Catholicism in the Philippines," in The Catholic historical review, III, 375-391. "Legaspi and Philippine colonization," in American Historical Association, Annual report, 1907, I, 143-156. Washington, 1908. "Notes on the archives of the Philippines," in American Historical Association, Annual report, 1910, 423-425. Washington, 1912. "The social structure of, and idea of law among, early Philippine peoples; and a recently-discovered pre-hispanic criminal code of the Philippine Islands," in The Pacific Ocean in history (Stephens and Bolton, editors), 160-191. New York, 1917. Robertson, William The history of the discovery and settlement of America. New York, 1858. [First ed., London, 1777.] Rodríguez Bérriz, Miguel Diccionario de la administración de Filipinas. 17 vols. Manila, 1887. Rodríguez San Pedro, Joaquín Legislación ultramarina, publicada con la colaboración de Chorot, Pierre, y Gonzales Junguitú. 16 vols. Madrid, 1865-1869. Roscher, Wilhelm Georg Friedrich The Spanish colonial system. E. G. Bourne, ed. New York, 1904. Salazar, Domingo de Carta relación de las cosas de la China y de los Chinos del Parián de Manila, enviada al rey Felipe II desde Manila el 24 de Junio de 1590. Madrid, 1897. Salazar, Vicente de Historia de la provincia de santissimo rosario de Philipinas. Manila, 1742. San Agustín, Gaspar de Conquistas de las islas Filipinas. Madrid, 1698. San Antonio, Juan Francisco de Chrónicas de la apostólica provincia de San Gregorio de religiosos descalzos de N. S. P. S. Francisco en las islas Philipinas, China, Japón. 3 vols. Manila, 1738-1744. Santa Cruz, Baltasar de Tomo segundo de la historia de la provincia de Santo Rosario de Filipinas. Zaragoza, 1693. Schmidt, Gustavus The civil law of Spain and Mexico. New Orleans, 1851. Schurz, William Lytle "The Chinese in the Philippines," in The Pacific Ocean in history (Stephens and Bolton, editors), 214-222. New York, 1917. "The Manila galleon and California," in The Southwestern historical quarterly, XXI, 107-126. Shepherd, William R. Guide to the materials for the history of the United States in Spanish archives. Washington, 1907. Smith, Donald Eugene The viceroy of New Spain. Berkeley, 1913. Sobre una reseña histórica de Filipinas. Colección de articulos que han visto la luz pública ... en refutación de los calumniosos errores que el Doctor T. H. Pardo de Tavera ha escrito contra las beneméritas ordenes religiosas de Filipinas en su reseña histórica, impresa en Manila. Manila, 1906. Solórzano Pereira, Juan de Política Indiana. Madrid, 1776. [First ed., Madrid, 1647.] Superior decreto sobre las funciones que debe llenar el Sr. Intendente de Manila tocante al tesoro agricultural é industrial del reino. Manila, 1829. Stephens, H. M., and Bolton, H. E. (editors) The Pacific Ocean in history. New York, 1917. Ulloa, Antonio de, and Juan y Santacilla, Jorge Noticias secretas de América. Londres, 1826. [Abridged and translated into English, Boston, 1851.] United States, Library of Congress Bibliography of the Philippine Islands: a list of books with references to periodicals on the Philippine Islands in the Library of Congress. Washington, 1903. Vander Linden, Herman L'expansion coloniale de l'Espagne jusqu'au début du XIXe siècle, in Lannoy and Vander Linden, Histoire de l'expansion coloniale des peuples européens: Portugal et Espagne. Bruxelles, Paris, 1907. Veitia Linaje, Joseph de Norte de la contratación de las Indias Occidentales. Seville, 1672. Vindel, Pedro Biblioteca oriental ... relativas á Filipinas, Japón, China y otras partes de Asia y Oceanía. Madrid, 1911. Worcester, Dean Conant The Philippines, past and present. 2 vols. New York, 1914. Zamora y Coronado, José María Apéndice al registro de legislación ultramarina. Havana, 1835. Biblioteca de legislación ultramarina en forma de diccionario alfabético. 7 vols. Madrid, 1844-1849. Zúñiga See Martínez de Zúñiga, Joaquin. MANUSCRIPT MATERIALS FROM THE ARCHIVE OF THE INDIES [884] I. Audiencia de Filipinas. (a) Ramo Secular. 1584-1700: Consultas originales correspondientes de esta Audiencia. 67-6-3. [885] 1568-1808: Registros de oficios y partes: reales ordenes dirigidas á las autoridades y particulares de la audiencia. 105-2-11 to 18. 8 legajos. 1594-1698: Decretos originales correspondientes á dicha audiencia. 67-6-4. 1600-1700: Peticiones y memoriales sueltos decretados por el Consejo. 67-6-5. 1567-1699: Cartas y expedientes del Gobr. de Filipinas vistos en el Consejo. 67-6-6 to 17. 12 legajos. 1583-1699: Cartas y expedientes del presidente y oidores de esta audiencia vistos en el Consejo. 67-6-18 to 26. 7 legajos. 1564-1699: Cartas y expedientes de los oficiales reales de Filipinas vistos en el Consejo. 67-6-29 to 33. 5 legajos. 1565-1650: Cartas y expedientes de personas seculares de dicha audiencia. 67-6-34 to 42. 9 legajos. 1629-1791: Reales cédulas, mercedes y informes sobre encomiendas. 105-2-24. 1651-1699: Cartas y expedientes de personas seculares de esta audiencia. 68-1-1 to 2. 2 legajos. 1616-1700: Confirmaciones de encomiendas de Indios. 68-1-5 to 16. 12 legajos. 1572-1691: Autos y otros papeles del Gobernador de Filipinas Don Juan de Silva contra los oficiales reales sobre uso excesivo de sus oficios. 68-1-21. 1670: Expediente formado de los procedimientos de Don Francisco Samaniego Tuesta, Oidor de la Audiencia de Manila. 68-1-23. 1615-1837: Materias gubernativas. 105-3-12. 1608-1762: Cartas y expedientes del presidente y oidores de aquella audiencia. 68-4-12 to 35. 24 legajos. 1622-1825: Reales cédulas, nombramientos y informes acerca del presidente, oidores y subalternos de la audiencia. 106-2-15. 1651-1850: Duplicados de gobernadores de Filipinas. 105-4-7 to 24; 105-5-1 to 24; 105-6-1 to 24; 105-7-1 to 24; 106-1-1 to 27; 106-2-1 to 14. 111 legajos. 1670-1831: Inventario de cédulas y consultas. 105-2-5. 1671-1756: Indices de la correspondencia del gobor., auda., oficiales reales y sugetos particulares del distrito de aquella real audiencia. 68-2-30. 1675-1765: Cartas y expedientes del gobernador de Filipinas. 68-3-4 to 33 and 68-4-1 to 11. 40 legajos. 1684-1744: Expediente sobre la expulsión de los Sangleyes. 68-5-16. 1685-1688: Testimonios de autos obrados en Acapulco, Méjico y Filipinas, en razón de descubrir los bienes del gobernador de Manila, Don Juan de Vargas Hurtado y su cuñado Don Francisco Guerrero Ardila. 68-1-24. 1687-1690: Testimonios de autos sobre la rebelión, conversión y expulsión de los Sangleyes de China. 68-1-25. 1699-1760: Cartas y expedientes del Virrey de Nueva España que tratan de asuntos de Filipinas. 68-3-1 to 3. 3 legajos. 1703-1850: Duplicados del presidente y oidores de la Audiencia de Filipinas. 106-2-17 to 25; 106-3-1 to 28; 106-4-1 to 21. 58 legajos. 1711-1722: Expte. sobre la restitución de las plazas de oidores de la Audiencia de Manila á Don Gregorio Manuel de Villa y Don José Antonio Pabón; y lo resuelto contra Don José Torralba, oidor de la misma audiencia. 68-5-30 to 31. 2 legajos. 1715-1727: Expte. sobre los procedimientos del Gobr. Don Fernando Bustillo Bustamante y sobre la muerte violenta que sufrió dicho gobernador y su hijo. 68-6-1 to 5. 5 legajos. 1718-1784: Expte. sobre competencia entre el gobernador y audiencia sobre remisión a España bajo partida de registro de Don Diego Martínez de Araque, regente de la misma y otros ministros. 106-5-1 to 3. 3 legajos. 1728-1829: Remisiones al consejo, cámara y ministros. 105-3-10 to 11. 2 legajos. 1729-1748: Gobiernos de los capitanes generales, Marqués de Torre Campo, Don Fernández Valdés Tamón, Don Gaspar de la Torre, é interino del Obispo de Nueva Segovia. 105-3-25. 1740: Duplicados de la causa criminal y prisión de Don Cristobal Pérez de Arroyo, fiscal de aquella audiencia, remitido por el gobernador. 106-4-23 to 28. 6 legajos. 1746-1767: Gobierno del capitán-general, Marqués de Obando. 105-3-26. 1752-1762: Gobiernos de los capitanes-generales, Don Pedro Manuel de Arandía y Don José de Crispo. 105-4-1. 1753: Correspondencia del Gobernador Marqués de Obando, dando noticias del estado de aquellas Islas. 105-4-2. 1755-1789: Expediente sobre expulsión de los Sangleyes ó Chinos Católicos por delitos de infidelidad y otros durante la ocupación de la plaza por los Ingleses. 107-2-27 to 30. 4 legajos. 1759-1821: Correspondencia con gobernadores. 105-4-3 to 4. 2 legajos. 1762-1766: Expediente de la reclamación hecha por Inglaterra de dos miliones de pesos capitulados en la toma de la plaza de Manila. 107-3-1 to 2. 2 legajos. 1765-1824: Informes sobre materias gubernativas. 105-3-13 to 14. 2 legajos. 1769-1780: Gobierno del Capitán-General Don Simón de Anda. 105-4-5. 1776-1787: Gobierno de los Capitanes-Generales Don José Vazco y Vargas y Don Felipe Veringuer de Marquina. 105-4-6. 1691-1819: Informe sobre el ramo de tributos y renumeración de Indios. 108-1-9. 1682: Materias de real hacienda. 107-3-12. 1733-1824: Materias gubernativas de la real hacienda. 107-3-11. 1751-1833: Expte. sobre bienes de difuntos. 107-3-9. 1755-1830: Cuentas de tributos, contribución directa y ramo á cargo de los corregidores y alcaldes mayores. 108-1-10 to 13. 4 legajos. 1759-1833: Cuentas de real hacienda. 107-7-25 to 32; 108-1-1 to 8. 16 legajos. 1762-1765: Expte. relativo al sitio y toma de Manila por los Ingleses. 107-3-3 to 6. 4 legajos. 1773-1821: Expedientes de provisiones de empleos de real hacienda. 107-3-13 to 14. 2 legajos. 1783: Expte. sobre avalúo de la alcaicería de San Fernando, manejo, ejercicio y facultades de su castellano y lo actuado contra Don Fernando de Mier y Noriega que fué el primero. 107-3-8. 1787-1849: Duplicados de superintendentes é intendentes de ejército y real hacienda. 107-5-15 to 31; 107-6-1 to 31; 107-7-1 to 21. 69 legajos. 1784-1787: Expediente sobre establicimiento de intendencias y sub-intendencias. 107-5-14. 1794: Expte. de Don Frco. Fernández Cendero, Alcalde Mayor y Capitán de Guerra de la provincia de Ilocos, sobre su residencia pendiente de informe de la audiencia. 106-5-4. (b) Ramo Eclesiástico. 1579-1697: Cartas y expedientes del Arzobispo de Manila. 68-1-32 and 33. 2 legajos. 1569-1700: Cartas y expedientes de los misioneros de Filipinas. 68-1-37 to 41. 5 legajos. 1570-1696: Cartas y expedientes de personas eclesiásticas de Filipinas. 68-1-42 to 44. 3 legajos. 1586-1700: Cartas y expedientes del cabildo eclesiástico de Filipinas. 68-1-35 to 36. 2 legajos. 1597-1698: Cartas y expedientes de los obispos sufraganeos de Manila, á saber, Nueva Segovia, Nueva Cáceres, Santissimo Nombre de Jesús o Cebú. 68-1-34. 1626-1795: Reales cédulas y informes sobre diezmos. 108-5-24. 1681-1689: Testimonios de autos respectivos al Arzobispo de Manila y otros. 68-2-1 to 2. 2 legajos. 1692: Expte. sobre la extrañeza y prisión del Arzobispo de Manila Don Fray Felipe Pardo y discordias ocuridas entre las religiones de Santo Domingo y la Compañia de Jesus. 68-2-4 to 5. 2 legajos. 1702-1832: Consultas de materias y provisiones eclesiásticas. 108-5-21 to 22. 2 legajos. 1726-1815: Reales cédulas y informes sobre medias anatas y mesadas eclesiásticas. 108-5-19. 1751: El Gobernador Marqués de Obando da cuenta con testimonio de los informes que se han podido adquirir sobre el número de religiosos que hay en aquellas islas y de los que necesitan para la reducción de los indios gentiles. 108-6-27 to 28. 2 legajos. 1760: Expte. del Obispo de Cebú, gobernador interino de aquellas Yslas y el Arzobispo de Manila sobre en cual de los dos había de recaer el mando de ellas. 108-6-29. 1762: Expte. sobre embargo de bienes de Don Santiago de Orendain y su mujer Doña Maria Dominga Arráez, vecinos de Manila, por deudas al ramo de bulas de la Cruzada y otros excesos. 108-7-18 to 19. 2 legajos. 1769: Pliegos remitidos al Consejo por el arzobispo para S. S. sobre el estado de curato y fundamentos de los regulares para eximirse de la jurisdicción del diocesano. 108-6-5 to 6. 2 legajos. 1772: Expte. sobre la remoción de los religiosos de S. Agustín de las doctrinas de la Provincia de Pampanga, secularización de curatos de aquellas Yslas y sujeción de las religiones al real patronato y visita de los ordinarios. 108-6-31 to 35. 5 legajos. 1777: Expte. sobre competencia entre el Arzobispo de Manila, Obispo Sufragano de Nueva Cáceres, vice-patrono real y fiscal de la real audiencia, por disposición al presbítero Don Vicente Ygnacio de Arroyo del curato de Santa Cruz. 108-6-36. 1778: Expte. sobre aprobación de las ordenanzas de la Casa de Misericordia de Manila é el permiso concedido para que esta pueda remitir sus cuentas sin intervención de la real audiencia. 106-5-8. 1778: Expte. de la real audiencia sobre el espolio del Arzobispo Don Manuel Antonio Rojo y demandas introducidas contra él. 108-7-1 to 2. 2 legajos. 1780: Cuatro exptes. unidos sobre pago de diezmo por los religiones y naturales de aquellas Yslas, sin embargo de no estar en practica.... 108-7-3. II. Secretaria de Nueva España. (a) Ramo Secular y Eclesiástico. 1630-1759: Consultas y decretos originales. 68-2-8 to 12. 5 legajos. 1671-1756: Indices de la correspondencia del gobernador, audiencia, oficiales reales y sugetos particulares del distrito de aquella audiencia. 68-2-31. (b) Ramo Secular. 1724: Expte. sobre el registro del galeón de Filipinas nombrado el Santo Cristo de Burgos que hizo viage el año 1723 desde el puerto de Cavite al de Acapulco. 68-6-11. 1728-1732: Expte. de la Hermandad de la Misericordia de Manila sobre amplificación de sus facultades y privilegios. 68-6-16. 1735-1741: Expte. sobre los 162,992 pesos que se sacaron del comercio. 68-6-23. 1739-1746: Testimonio de autos originados sobre la visita y composición de tierras encargadas al Oidor Don Pedro Calderón, del Consejo de S. M. 68-6-26. 1740-1744: Expte. sobre la prisión y causa criminal seguida contra Don Cristobal Pérez de Arroyo, fiscal de la Audiencia de Manila. 68-6-28 to 31. 4 legajos. 1741-1751: Exptes. y autos sobre la sublevación de los pueblos tagalos y otros por vejaciones recibidas de los religiosos de Santo Domingo y San Agustín, pacificados por el Oidor Pedro Calderón. 68-6-40 to 44. 5 legajos. 1743: Testimonio de autos de la visita que hizo el Oidor Don José Ygnacio de Arzadún, remitidos por la Audiencia de Manila. 68-3-32 to 35. 4 legajos. 1743-1753: Exptes. sobre la presa que hicieron los Ingleses del navío Covadonga y libertad de los oficiales que mandaba.... 68-6-38 to 39. 2 legajos. 1745-1755: Exptes. del subdelegado Don Pedro Calderón de la Barca sobre tierras. 68-6-45. 1752-1755: Expte. sobre las altercaciones sufridas por el comercio de Filipinas á causa de las novedades introducidas por el Gobernador Marqués de Obando. 68-6-50-51. 2 legajos. 1756-1758: Expte. sobre los excesos cometidos por el Gobernador Don Pedro Manuel de Arandía. 68-6-53. 1644-1760: Provisiones de plazas togados de la Audiencia de Manila. 69-1-1. 1654-1745: Testimonios de autos que se hallaron sin cartas de remisión entre los papeles del distrito de la Audiencia de Manila. 69-1-13 to 17. 5 legajos. (c) Ramo Eclesiástico. 1660-1761: Cartas y expedientes de personas eclesiásticas del distrito de aquella audiencia. 69-1-24 to 29. 6 legajos. 1604-1696: Expedientes sobre la visita de los religiosos por los ordinarios. 69-1-30 to 32. 3 legajos. 1691-1696: Exptes. sobre que en las vacantes del arzobispado de Manila, gobierne el cabildo eclesiástico. 69-1-34. 1698-1704: Expediente sobre la resistencia hecha por las religiones á presentar sus títulos de las tierras y estancias. 69-1-37. 1702-1761: Cartas y expedientes del Arzobispo de Manila. 69-1-18 to 20. 3 legajos. 1704-1719: Expte. sobre causa formada á Fray Bartólome Marrón, de la Orden de Predicadores, por un manifiesto esto que imprimió y publicó sobre varios puntos de real patronato. 69-1-38. 1710-1730: Expte. sobre corregir las ordenanzas del Colegio Seminario de San Felipe, etc. 69-1-40. 1730-1740: Tres testimonios de autos pertenecientes á un expediente ... del cabildo eclesiástico de Manila, sobre organización de boletas. 69-2-1. 1737-1746: Expte. sobre erección de un seminario para la educación de religiosos misioneros de la Orden de San Agustín. 69-2-3. NOTES [1] Vander Linden, in his L'expansion coloniale de L'Espagne (p. 360), states that the Philippine audiencia exercised fewer governmental functions than did the audiencias of New Spain and Peru. It is true that the jurisdiction of the Audiencia of Manila was confined to a territory which was politically and economically of less importance to Spain and to the world in general than New Spain and Perú. It is the conviction of the writer that the distance and isolation of the Philippines, their proximity to Japan, China, and the hostile colonies of the Portuguese and the Dutch, the necessities of self-dependence and defense, the corruption of the governors and officials and the problem of dealing independently with the ecclesiastical organization within the colony, forced the Audiencia of Manila to take upon itself powers and responsibilities as extensive, at least, as were assumed by the Audiencia of Mexico. [2] "Título expedido por los Reyes Católicos, 30 de Abril, 1492," in Navarrete, Colección de viages, II, 9-11; also see Vander Linden, op. cit., 277-283; 338. [3] See Altamira, Historia de la civilización española, II, 477-480; Bancroft, History of Central America, I, 247-288; Helps, Spanish conquest, (1856), I, 187-227: In the Spanish colonies an alcalde was usually an ordinary judge, not always trained in the law to the extent of being a letrado or togado. An alcalde ordinario or an alcalde de ayuntamiento tried cases in first instance. An alcalde mayor or an alcalde de partido might try cases on appeal from these. Generally speaking, alcaldes ordinarios were town judges, in contrast to alcaldes mayores who had provincial jurisdiction as well. Alcaldes ordinarios and regidores were members of the town ayuntamientos or cabildos (municipal councils). Regidores did not exercise judicial functions. [4] Recopilación de leyes de los reinos de las Indias (hereinafter to be referred to as the Recopilación), lib. 2, tit. 2, ley 13. For an account of the Recopilación, see footnote 40, below. [5] Bancroft, History of Central America, I, 269; see note 27 of this chapter. [6] In some of the early Spanish colonies the alcalde was elected by his fellow-townsmen. He exercised the functions of judge and chief executive, subject to the governor, or adelantado, and in the absence of the latter assumed the government of the colony. Alcaldes in new settlements or on expeditions were different in character and exercised functions distinct from those of the alcaldes of the later periods. This earlier type probably existed in Española under Columbus (see Bancroft, History of Central America, I, 175, 330, note 7). That their duties varied in different colonies may be deduced from the statement of Bancroft that "the alcaldes mayores of New Spain under Cortés were merely entrusted with judicial powers ... later those of San Luís Potosí and other places acted also as lieutenants for captains-general, and exercised, in other respects, the duties and ceremonies of governors" (Bancroft, History of Mexico, III, 520). The term, therefore, does not always convey a clear impression of the exact nature of the duties attached to the office. [7] Bancroft, History of Central America, I, 269. [8] Altamira, Historia, II, 479. [9] Bourne, Spain in America. 222; Vander Linden, L'expansion coloniale de l'Espagne, 339; see note in Bancroft, History of Central America, I. 280-283. [10] Bourne, Spain in America, 222; Moses, The Spanish dependencies in South America. I, 250-1; see Col. Doc. Ined., XXXI, 139-155. [11] Recopilación, 9-1-2, 5. [12] Ibid., 2-2-82, auto 36; Desdevises du Dezert, Espagne de l'ancien régime. Les institutions. 100-101; see Veitia Linaje, Norte de la contratación de las Indias Occidentales, passim. [13] Zamora y Coronado, Biblioteca de legislación ultramarina, 1, 450-451; II, 374 et seq.; also Recopilación, 9-1-1, note 1; Vander Linden, op. cit., 344. [14] Desdevises du Dezert, op. cit., 100. [15] Escriche, Diccionario, I, 578; see Desdevises du Dezert, Les institutions, 95-102; Robertson, History of America, IV (Book VIII), 21. [16] Recopilación, 2-2-2. [17] By the royal decree of March 24, 1834, the Consejo de Castilla and the Consejo de Indias were amalgamated. In place of these was created the Tribunal Supremo de España é Indias, with judicial functions and a Consejo Real de España é Indias for governmental and administrative affairs. On September 28, 1836, the Consejo Real de España é Indias was suppressed. On July 6, 1845, the Consejo de Estado assumed charge of affairs pertaining to the Indies, with a separate Ministerio de Ultramar. This reform was re-enacted on September 24, 1853 (Martínez Alcubilla, Diccionario, III, 313-315; Escriche, Diccionario, I, 578-579). [18] It became the practice in later years to reward successful colonial administrators, including viceroys, governors, and magistrates, with membership in this council. Among those so elevated were Juan Solórzano y Pereyra, magistrate of the Audiencia of Perú, José de Gálvez, visitor of New Spain, Governor Simón de Anda y Salazar, and the able fiscal, Francisco Leandro de Viana, of the Philippines. These men rendered very distinguished service in the colonies. [19] Recopilación, 2-15-2 to 14; see Danvila y Collado, Reinado de Carlos III, III, 151-157. No attempt is made here to indicate all subsequent changes. [20] Oidor, a ministro togado who heard and sentenced civil suits in an audiencia (Escriche, Diccionario, II, 661). In this treatise the Spanish term oidor will be retained throughout to designate a magistrate of that particular class. Oidor is sometimes incorrectly translated into "auditor", which in English means a reviewer of accounts (Spanish, contador). The Spanish term auditor has a special meaning, referring to a particular kind of magistrate, as auditor de guerra, auditor de marina or auditor de rota (Escriche, Diccionario, I, 369-371). Blair and Robertson, in their Philippine Islands (Cleveland, 1908), have used the terms oidor and "auditor" interchangeably, or rather, in almost all cases they have translated oidor as "auditor", but this usage will not be followed here for the reasons given. The oidor is also to be distinguished from the alcalde del crimen. The latter existed only in the larger audiencias of Mexico and Perú, or in Manila, Havana or Puerto Rico in the later nineteenth century. Alcaldes del crimen in the sixteenth, seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were subordinate in rank to oidores, but by virtue of the reforms of 1812, 1836 and 1837, the latter were required to be togados, and the ministers of all the audiencias were placed in the same class. (Escriche, Diccionario, I, 154; I, 363-369; II, 661; Bancroft, History of Central America, I, 297; see also Pérez y López, Teatro de la legislación, XXI, 351-369; IV, 525-528; Martínez Alcubilla, Diccionario, I, 525-526.) [21] The original cédulas refer to this audiencia as La Audiencia Real de la Nueva España--see Puga, Provisiones, cédulas, f. 7. [22] Zamora y Coronado, Biblioteca, I, 452; I, 483-486; Martínez Alcubilla, Diccionario, VIII, under "Justicia". See also Danvila y Collado, Reinado de Carlos III, VI, 157-158. [23] By the royal decree of May 23, 1879, the audiencias at Havana and Manila were each given a civil and criminal sala and a fiscal was provided for each sala as in the audiencias of Mexico and Lima. When it was necessary, oidores could be transferred from one sala to the other.--Colección legislativa de España, CXXII, 1093-1100. [24] Recopilación, 2-15-1. [25] See Professor Shepherd's brief description of the governmental machinery of Spain's colonies, in his Guide to the materials for the history of the United States in Spanish archives, 10-12; note also the articles recently published by Desdevises du Dezert in the Revue historique (CXXV, 225-264; CXXVI, 14-60, 225-270) under the title of "Vice-rois et capitaines généraux des Indes espagnoles a la fin du XVIII siècle." [26] Recopilación, 2-15-17. [27] Ibid., 2-15-2. Although the Recopilación and Danvila y Collado (cited in note 19) give the date of the establishment of the Audiencia of Santo Domingo as 1526, the royal decree issued at Pamplona, October 22, 1523, is addressed to nros oydores de la audiencia real de la Ysla Española (A. I., 139-1-6, tom. 9, fol. 225). There are various references antedating 1526 in this and the following legajo. [28] Ibid., 2-15-3. For the exact limits of this audiencia see Puga, Provisiones, cédulas, ff. 12-13; 47-48, and Hackett, "Delimitation of political jurisdictions in Spanish North America to 1535," in Hispanic American Historical Review, I, 60, note 102. [29] Ibid., 2-15-13, 14, 15. [30] Ibid., 5-1-2, 3; 2-15-4, 12. [31] Ibid., 5-1-16. [32] Zamora y Coronado, Biblioteca, I, 486-487. The following will give some idea of the size and rank of the respective audiencias of the Spanish colonies in the later eighteenth century. This table was compiled from the Reglamento de 4 de Mayo, 1788 (Pérez y López, Teatro, IV, 522-524). Audiencia. No. of No. of Magistrates. Salary of Total Salas. fiscales. regent, budget, pesos. pesos. Lima 2 2 15 10,000 95,000 Mexico 2 2 15 9,000 85,500 Charcas 1 2 5 9,725 43,745 Chile 1 2 5 9,720 43,740 Buenos 1 2 5 6,000 36,726 Ayres Manila 1 2 5 7,000 31,500 Guadalajara 1 2 5 6,600 29,700 Guatemala 1 2 5 6,600 29,700 Santo 1 2 5 6,600 29,700 Domingo Santa Fé 1 2 5 6,600 29,700 Quito 1 2 5 6,600 29,700 Cuzco 1 1 3 9,000 27,000 Caracas 1 1 3 5,000 18,200 [33] Solórzano y Pereyra, Política Indiana (Madrid, 1647). This was the first great general work on the political institutions of the Indies, and probably the most valuable and comprehensive of its kind ever published, barring possibly the Recopilación. It comprises history, description, law, discussions of suits and cases, litigation and legal citations. Its ample title-page states that it is "divided into six books, in which, with great distinction and study, are treated and resolved all matters relating to the discovery, description, acquisition and retention of the Indies, and their peculiar government, as well as concerning the persons of the Indians and their services, tributes, tithes and encomiendas, as concerning spiritual and ecclesiastical affairs and doctrine, inquisitors, commissaries of crusade and of the religious. And in regard to temporal affairs, concerning the secular magistrates, viceroys, presidents, audiencias, the Supreme Council and its junta de guerra, including a setting forth of the many royal cédulas which have been despatched for the latter." Solórzano y Pereyra contributed largely to the codification of the laws of the Indies. [34] See Chapter X of this book. [35] Recurso de fuerza, see footnote 3, Chapter XI of this work. [36] The origin and nature of the acuerdo is explained in Chapter VI, note 78, of this book; see also Chapter III, note 37. [37] The oficiales reales consisted of the tesorero (treasurer), contador (accountant) and factor (disbursing officer and supply agent). See Recopilación, 8-4-34, 35; 8-2-5, 6. The laws of March 2, 1618, and of November 17, 1626, ordered that in colonies having audiencias the acuerdos de real hacienda should be attended by the president (governor or viceroy), fiscal, senior oidor, and oficial real, respectively. In case there were no audiencia, the session should then consist of all the oficiales reales and the governor, and then the votes of the treasury officials should be final (Recopilación, 8-3-8, 11, 12). Under certain circumstances the factor was assisted by a veedor and a proveedor. The duties of the latter officials were largely administrative (ibid., 8-4-38 to 39). Bancroft (History of Mexico, III, 520) states that "the provinces of royal officials [oficiales reales] were merely revenue districts whose heads received their appointment from the king, and administered their office under a certain supervision from the viceroy and governors attending their councils; yet they were responsible only to the tribunal of finance in the viceregal capital, and this again reported direct to Spain." See also Priestley, José de Gálvez, 76-82. [38] Bull of the Santa Cruzada, the apostolic bull by which the popes conceded certain indulgences to those who went to the conquest of Jerusalem, and later to the Spaniards who contributed alms to aid in the war against the Africans. It was called cruzada because the soldiers wore crosses as emblems (Escriche, Diccionario, I, 462). Funds for this purpose were raised in the Philippines, paid into the insular treasury and deducted from the subsidy at Acapulco (Recopilación, 1-20-24). As noted above, an oidor acted as asesor of these funds (ibid., 2-16-23). [39] Solórzano y Pereyra, Política Indiana, II, 271-279. [40] The first attempt at the codification of the laws for the governing of the colonies was made in New Spain in 1545, when the ordinances for the government of that viceroyalty and audiencia were printed. This collection was given the royal approval in 1548. A similar compilation was made in Perú in 1552 by Viceroy Mendoza. The first intimation of a universal code is to be found in the recommendations of the fiscal of the Council of the Indies, Francisco Hernández de Liebana, in 1552. On September 4, 1560, Luís Velasco, viceroy of New Spain, was ordered to print a compilation of laws for the Audiencia of Mexico. This commission was given to Oidor Puga of that tribunal and executed in 1563. In 1569 Viceroy Francisco Toledo was ordered to make a similar compilation for Perú, but the work was not completed at that time. The first volume actually printed by authority of the Council was accomplished in 1593. This was the beginning of the code of the Indies, but the volume which was published pertained only to the regimen of the Council of the Indies itself, and made no regulations for the colonies. A more extensive collection of provisions, letters, orders and cédulas was published on the authority of the Council by Diego de Encinas, a clerk of that tribunal, in 1596. In 1603, the Ordenanzas reales para la Casa de Contratación de Sevilla y para otras cosas de las Indias were printed in the same city. Another ordinance was published for the regulation of the contaduría mayor. Various compilations were made by the oidores from time to time, either for their own use, or in compliance with the royal commands. Among the latter, perhaps the most famous and certainly the most useful was that of Juan de Solórzano y Pereyra, oidor of the Audiencia of Perú and later a member of the Council of the Indies. This collection was made at Lima in compliance with the commission of Philip IV, issued in 1610. The work, consisting of six volumes, received the stamp of royal approval on July 3, 1627. In 1623 León Pinelo published a Discurso sobre la importancia, forma, y disposición de la recopilación de leyes de Indias. On April 19 of that year Pinelo was ordered to make an examination of all the existing laws and cédulas relative to the government of the colonies, printed or in manuscript, with a view to codification. A magistrate named Aguilar y Acuña was ordered to collaborate with him. The result of these proceedings was a Sumario de la Recopilación General, which continued under process of compilation for a half century. It was finally perfected and published in 1677. In 1668 Pinelo's work was issued as the Autos acordados y decretos de gobierno del Real y Supremo Consejo de las Indias. Although the collection was practically ready by 1677, it was not officially accepted until May 18, 1680. On that day it was promulgated by Charles II, king of Spain. On November 1, 1681, the work was ordered published by the India House, and the Recopilación de los Reynos de Indias was issued at Madrid in four volumes. Subsequent editions were printed in 1754, 1774, 1791 and 1841. The last-mentioned contains in its index reforms down to 1820. A Recopilación Sumaria was published in Mexico in two volumes in 1787. The compilations of Zamora y Coronado, Rodríguez San Pedro and Pérez y López, cited repeatedly in this work, contain later laws, and serve in the place of the Recopilación for the more recent periods. Authorities: Solórzano y Pereyra, Política Indiana, I, Introduction; G. B. Griffin, "A brief bibliographical sketch of the Recopilación de Indias" in Historical Society of Southern California, Publications, 1887; Fabié, Ensayo histórico de la legislación española; Puga, Provisiones, cédulas, (1563); Garcia Icazbalceta, Bibliografía Mexicana del siglo XVI, (1886), 25-26; Bancroft, History of Mexico, III, 550-551; History of Central America, I, 225-288; Antequera, Historia de la legislación española, 480-483. [41] Altamira, Historia, IV, 165-166. [42] Recopilación, 5-2-2, 3, 7, 15, 19, 28. In this case a local military functionary. [43] Ibid., 37, 39, 41; Moses, Establishment of Spanish Rule in America, 83-84; Vander Linden, L'expansion coloniale de l'Espagne, 345-361. [44] Repartimientos or polos; referring to the forced labor of natives on public works, such as ship and road-building. The provincial officials exercised supervision over this obligatory service, and were held responsible for the proper execution of the laws appertaining thereto (Blair and Robertson, The Philippine Islands [hereinafter cited as Blair and Robertson], XIX, 71-76). [45] Cartas y expedientes de gobernadores de Durango, (1591-1700), Archivo de Indias, Sevilla, [hereinafter cited as A. I.,] 66-6-17, 18 (these numbers refer to archive place); Cartas y Expedientes del Virrey de Mégico que tratan de asuntos de Guadalajara (1698-1760), A. I., 67-2-10 to 13. These two series contain hundreds of letters on this subject, as do other series, relating to Nuevo León, Nueva Galicia, Nueva Vizcaya, and New Mexico. [46] This was true of San Luís Potosí and Guadalajara in New Spain. See Bancroft, History of Mexico, III, 520; History of Central America, I, 297; Moses, Establishment of Spanish rule in America, 83. [47] Bancroft (History of Central America, I, 297) defines the corregidor as a magistrate with civil and criminal jurisdiction in the first instance, and gubernatorial inspection in the political and economic government of all the towns of the district assigned to him. There were corregidores letrados (learned in the law), corregidores políticos (political and administrative), de capa y espada (military) and políticos y militares (administrative and military). When the corregidor was not a lawyer by profession, unless he had an asesor of his own, the alcalde mayor, if possessed of legal knowledge, became his advisor, which greatly increased the importance of the last-mentioned official. The alcalde mayor was appointed by the king. It was required that he should be a lawyer by profession, twenty-six years of age, and of good character. Practically, in cases of this kind, when the governor was not a letrado, civil, criminal, and some phases of military authority devolved on the alcalde mayor; the first two ex-officio, and the latter as the legal advisor of the military chief. In new colonies this officer was invested with powers almost equal to those of the governor.--See Recopilación, 5-2. [48] The first encomiendas in the Philippines were granted by Legaspi in 1572 (Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 42-43). The encomenderos ruled the Indians in their care with little interference from alcaldes mayores, corregidores, or governors. Vander Linden especially emphasizes the fact that the encomenderos were not supposed to act as the private masters of the Indians on their holdings, but were to act as the representatives of the king (Vander Linden, L'expansion coloniale de l'Espagne, 345-346). The laws of the Indies specified that the encomenderos were to protect, aid and educate them, seeing particularly that they were taught the Catholic Faith (Recopilación, 6-8, 9, 10, 11; esp. tit. 9, laws 1-4). The encomenderos, in the guise of benefactors, guardians and protectors of the Indians, supervised the labor of the latter on the encomiendas, drawing remuneration therefrom, collecting tribute from them, and retaining a share of that. Aside from the very intimate relationship of the encomenderos as the guardians of the Indians in spiritual and temporal things, they were not considered as officials in the same sense as were the alcaldes mayores and corregidores. Dr. Pardo de Tavera characterizes the duties and relations of the encomenderos to the Indians as follows: "The encomenderos were the first Spaniards after the conquest and pacification of the colony who represented the civil authority of Spain in the Islands: they were obliged to maintain order and secure the well-being of the Indian residents of their encomiendas or holdings, and to defend their tenants against any encroachments on their rights by the Spaniards, soldiers, alcaldes, and judges; and to endeavor to bring their tenants together in towns and furnish them with opportunities to be converted to the Christian religion, and to help them build churches and convents ... encomenderos were charged with the succor and support of the people on their holdings in case of any calamity, famine or public disaster, and they were prohibited from charging tribute in bulk against the various barangayes, that is to say, they should not make the chiefs of a family or tribe responsible for the payment of tribute by the various members, nor were the encomenderos allowed to use force to secure the payment of a tribute. When an encomendero received a tribute from his people, he thereupon was considered to have assumed the duty of acting as their protector" (Pardo de Tavera, Philippines census [1905], I, 330). Suffice it to say that, theoretically, the encomenderos were the fatherly protectors and benefactors of the helpless, childlike natives, and their every act was to be for the good of their wards. [49] Antequera, Historia de la legislation española, 486-487; Bourne, "Historical introduction," in Blair and Robertson, I, 56. [50] Recopilación, 6-8-38 to 39; 8-9-20 to 24. It seems that the oficiales reales merely supervised the collection of tribute, which was really accomplished in the provinces by the alcaldes mayores and corregidores, who acted as their agents. Martinez de Zúñiga, An historical view of the Philippine Islands, I, 2; Ordinances of Good Government, Blair and Robertson, L, 191-264; Recopilación. 6-5-64; Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 380-385. [51] The Relación of Miguél de Loarca, alcalde mayor of Arévalo, Panay, gives us a good idea of the rapidity with which this institution spread within ten years in the Philippines. It indicates the extent to which the encomienda was utilized as a means of opening up and settling the country. This report is dated June 12, 1582. At that time there were three principal centers of administration in the Islands: Manila, Cebú and Arévalo. About thirty encomiendas were located close to Manila, ten were near to Cebú, and fifteen near to Arévalo under the jurisdiction of Loarca. The latter group consisted of about 20,000 Indians. Encomiendas varied in size from 250 to 1500 natives, but the ideal encomienda was supposed to contain 500 souls. By cédula, of August 9, 1589, royal authority was extended for the increase of the size of encomiendas in the Philippines to 800 or 1000 persons, if necessary, in order to bear the greater expenses of instruction and defense. This was bitterly opposed by the churchmen on account of the additional missionary labors incumbent on the priests assigned to these larger encomiendas (Cédula of August 9, 1589, A. I., 105-2-11). Philip II, on November 30, 1568, had ordered that no encomienda should yield more than 2000 pesos (Recopilación, 6-8-30). Loarca states that there were also encomiendas in the Camarines provinces in southeast Luzon and in IIocos, in the north of the same island. These encomiendas were under the jurisdiction of the alcaldes mayores and corregidores governing those provinces. (Relation by Loarca, Blair and Robertson, V, 35-187.) [52] Report of Governor Dasmariñas on the encomiendas of the Philippines, May 31, 1591, in Blair and Robertson, VIII, 96-141. [53] Blair and Robertson, VII, 269-294, Salazar to the Governor, January 25, 1591; Reply of the Governor [no date], ibid., 294-300; Carta del Obispo de Manila sotre la muerte de Ronquillo y los excesos que este cometió..., A. I., 68-1-32; Memorial de las cosas ... dignas de remediar en la Isla, Zulueta Papers. Place numbers not given. These are examples of the hundreds of complaints, mostly by churchmen, against the abuses of the encomenderos. It would be impossible to cite them all. The Zulueta Papers are transcripts from the Archive of the Indies of Seville, the National Library of Madrid, and the British Museum. They were copied under the direction of a Filipino scholar, Señor Zulueta. These Papers are now in the Philippines Library at Manila. [54] On June 4, 1620, the governor of the Philippines was authorized to bestow encomiendas, with the provision that if he neglected to do so for a period of sixty days the vacant holdings should be bestowed by the audiencia. On October 24, 1655, Philip IV ordered that acting viceroys and acting governors should be limited to the faculty of providing encomiendas ad interim, subject to the subsequent ratification of the Council of the Indies (Recopilación, 6-8-8, 1-4, 5, 8, 11, 22). [55] Blair and Robertson, III, 304-306. [56] In this connection may be noted the distinction between the two classes of encomiendas which was made for purposes of administration. Private encomiendas were those which had been granted to private persons, conquerors, discoverers, soldiers, or persons who paid a regular rent, usually a third of the gross tribute collected. These were originally granted for life, and might be held for two subsequent generations. Later (after 1655), the usual period of confirmation was ten years, for persons who rented encomiendas as a business proposition. The royal encomiendas were situated near cities or ports and the income from them was reserved for the expenses and necessities of the royal estate, the payment of salaries, and other governmental expenses. Private encomiendas became royal on the death of an incumbent if he had no heirs, or on the expiration of the contract. The tribute from royal encomiendas was collected by the royal treasury. Morga's Sucesos, Blair and Robertson, XVI, 157; also ibid., VIII, 27; see Bourne, "Historical introduction," ibid., I, 39-40. On June 7, 1597, the king, as a suggestion for the increase of funds for the maintenance of the government, wrote to the audiencia that a greater number of royal encomiendas should be established, and that the governor should not be permitted to assign so many to private persons (King to the Audiencia, June 7, 1597, A. I., 105-2-1). On February 16, 1602, the king again addressed the audiencia on the subject of the royal encomiendas, desiring to know why the tribute from them had so materially decreased, it having reached the low mark of 2500 pesos. In answer, the same reason for this falling off was suggested as in the letter above quoted, namely, that the governor had assigned many encomiendas to his friends (King to the Audiencia, February 16, 1602, A. I., 105-2-1). Francisco de la Misa, factor of the royal treasury of Manila, in a letter to the king, dated May 31, 1595, stated that the royal encomiendas, which had been established to provide revenue for the payment of the salaries of alcaldes mayores, tenientes, oficiales reales, and even that of the governor, had diminished greatly in number, so that not enough revenue was derived from them to meet the expenses for which they had been created. Misa concluded with a recommendation that eight royal encomiendas of the value of 8000 pesos a year should be established out of the first private encomiendas that were vacated (Misa to the King, May 31, 1595, A. I. 67-6-29). [57] Salazar to the Council of the Indies, June 20, 1582, A. I., 68-1-32. [58] Ronquillo de Peñalosa to the King, July 15, 1582, A. I., 67-6-6. [59] Morga's Sucesos, Blair and Robertson, XV, 59-60; Carta del Obispo de Manila sobre la muerte de Ronquillo, y de los excesos que este cometio, ... A. I., 68-1-32. [60] Ibid. [61] The cédula of March 1, 1551, had forbidden the bestowal of encomiendas on ministers of justice, treasury officials, viceroys, ecclesiastics, and governors. According to the terms of the appointment of Gonzalo Ronquillo de Peñalosa as proprietary governor, he had been allowed an encomienda in each principal town. See Recopilación, 6-8-12. [62] Op. cit. [63] Including the two principal Spanish historians of the Philippines, Martínez de Zúñiga (Estadismo, I, 243) and Montero y Vidal (Historia general, I, 88). [64] These letters, dated June 18, 1583, are among the Zulueta Papers at Manila. [65] A procurador, according to Escriche (Diccionario, II, 759), "is one who, by virtue of power or faculty conceded by another, acts in his name." There were in later times several procurators representing different interests of the Philippines at the Court of Madrid. The associated merchants had one or more, the consulado, each religious order, etc. These procuradores were usually lawyers, not infrequently men who had been in the islands. An interesting parallel might be noted between the procuradores and the American colonial agents of prerevolutionary days. Zúñiga here gives Rivera entire credit for the bringing of the audiencia to Manila--op. cit., I, 175. See note 16, supra. [66] The alcabala (al que vale, "according to value") was a percentage tax levied on goods (movable and immovable) sold or exchanged. Merchants were held accountable for the payment of this tax, and for this purpose their accounts were examined by royal officials at regular intervals (Escriche, Diccionario, I, 143). It was first introduced into the Indies by Philip II in 1574, having been levied in Spain as early as 1079, though not in its perfected form. In accordance with the tariff of November 1, 1591, it was exacted from merchants, apothecaries, encomenderos (having farms and cattle-ranches), ragpickers, cloth-makers, silversmiths, goldsmiths, blacksmiths, and shoemakers. An alcabala was paid on wine. By the cédula of June 7, 1576, the rate of alcabala was fixed at two per cent. In Perú it was raised to four per cent during the administration of the Conde de Chinchón as viceroy and was collected at that rate there until the cédula of July 26, 1776, raised it to six per cent. This rate was paid thereafter in the Spanish colonies (Recopilación, 8-13-1 to 14, notes, 2 and 4), except for an increase in the rate to 8 per cent in 1782, to meet the added expenses of war. The old rate of 6 per cent was restored in 1791 (transcripts of these cédulas exist in A. I., 87-1-20). Exemptions from this tax were made in favor of churches, monasteries, and prelates when they bought or sold goods not for profit. When they engaged in commerce for its own sake they were obliged to pay the alcabala in the same way as laymen (Recopilación, 8-13-17). Goods belonging to the Santa Cruzada, provisions bought, sold or stored which were destined for the poor, and munitions of war paid no alcabala (ibid., 18-23). Indians were also exempted under certain circumstances (ibid., 24; see entire Title 13 of Book 8, Recopilación, for further specifications regarding the payment of this tax). In 1568 Philip II exempted the Philippines for thirty years. As noted above, the alcabala was not introduced regularly into the Indies until 1574, though it was levied in individual cases as early as 1558. Even earlier than this Pizarro had obtained the right to levy it in Perú for a period of a hundred years (ibid., 8-13-1; note 1), but Philip II ordered it paid in the Philippines on August 9, 1589 (ibid., 9-45-66). The almojarifazgo, like the alcabala, had been utilized early in the history of the Peninsula and because a productive source of revenue, it was introduced into the Indies. The earliest law dealing with this tax in New Spain was promulgated by Charles V on October 18, 1553, exempting cargoes which had already paid the tax in Spain. On June 24, 1566, and on December 28, 1568, Philip II ordered a five per cent export tax on all goods leaving Seville for the Indies (the ordinance of December 28, 1562, having fixed it at two and a half per cent) and an import tax in the Indies on these same goods of ten per cent, making in all a tax of fifteen per cent. Wine was to pay a ten per cent import and export tax respectively, making a total of twenty per cent paid on that commodity (ibid., 8-15-1, 2, 8). The law of April 21, 1574, ordered a two and a half export and a five per cent import tax on goods shipped between colonies (ibid., 10). On August 9, 1589, a three per cent almojarifazgo was authorized in the Philippines, with exemptions on provisions, munitions, and other specified articles brought to the Islands by the Chinese, Japanese, Siamese, and Borneans (ibid., 22, 24). The tax on Chinese merchandise was raised from three to six per cent on November 20, 1606 (ibid., 23). Chinese goods from the Philippines paid a ten per cent almojarifazgo at Acapulco. This tax was also paid on leaving the Philippines or other New Spain ports and on entrance at Acapulco (ibid., 21). For exemptions see Recopilación, 8-15-26 to 30. [67] Rivera to the King, February 16, 1582, A. I., 1-1-2/24. [68] A legal defender of the Indians was wanted in this case to serve them in the courts. The bishop, at this time, was protector of the Indians and in that capacity had protested against the abuses of the encomenderos. The bishop, of course, could not enter the courts and defend the Indians in litigation. The law of March 17, 1593, which ultimately established a defender of the Indians in Manila, filled the need voiced by Rivera. The law referred to read as follows: "The protection and defense of the Indians in the Philippines was entrusted by us to the bishops there, but having recognized that the latter cannot conform to the demands, autos and judicial summons which require their personal presence, we order that our president-governor shall name a protector and defender of the Indians, assigning to him a sufficient salary from the taxes levied pro rata upon the Indians who are under the royal jurisdiction and on private encomiendas, without touching the revenues of our royal hacienda which are for other purposes. And we declare that this does not signify that it is our intention to deprive the bishops of the superintendence and protection of the Indians in general" (Recopilación, 6-6-8). Philip II, on January 10, 1589, restored the office of protector or defender of the Indians in the Indies generally. It was stated in this law that as a result of the earlier abolition of the office many inconveniences and injustices had arisen. The law authorized the appointment of a person of good character and morals to the office (ibid., 1). The reform of April 9, 1591, required that the appointee should be a lawyer, and that there should be a defender of the Indians attached to each audiencia (ibid., 3). The reform of March 11, 1784, provided that the fiscales should name these protectors in the future. (Ibid., note 1.) [69] The Audiencia of Guadalajara was at that time subordinate to the Viceroy of New Spain in matters of war, government, and finance (hacienda). Ibid., 2-15-47, 49 to 54. [70] Rivera to the King, June 26, 1583, A. I., 1-1-2/24. [71] Foundation of the Audiencia, Blair and Robertson, V, 274-318; VI, 35-43; also in A. I., 1-1-3/25, the latter being the original cédula, signed by the king and ministers. [72] Ibid. [73] Permission had been granted by Philip II on July 4, 1570, to enslave Mindanaos. A second cédula permitting the Spaniards in the Philippines to do this was promulgated by Philip III on May 29, 1620. This act was rendered justifiable in the eyes of the Spaniards by the fact that they were dealing with semi-savages who were of the Mohammedan faith, and accordingly the ceaseless enemies of the Spaniards. Recopilación, 6-2-12. [74] Recopilación, 3-10-13, 14; see Chapter VIII of this book. [75] Recopilación, 2-15-55, promulgated November 4, 1606; see also 6-18-5 and 5-3-24. [76] Dávalos to the King, July 3, 1584, A. I., 67-6-18. [77] Audiencia to the Council of the Indies, June 26, 1586, A. I., 67-6-18. [78] The Recopilación is singularly indefinite regarding the rate or amount of tribute to be assessed in New Spain. Beyond the stipulation that tribute levied under the supervision of viceroys, presidents, and audiencias should be moderate and just, practically nothing is said as to the amount that should be collected (See cédulas of June 19, 1536, and September 29, 1555, Recopilación, 6-5-21), excepting certain increases as stipulated in the law of November 1, 1591 (ley 16). According to the laws just cited, the rate was to be fixed by the officials mentioned above. By cédula of December 19, 1534, the oficiales reales were empowered to fix the rate of tribute (ibid., 28). Reductions in the rate of tribute were to be authorized by the fiscal and oficiales reales (ibid., 29). Apparently the rate varied according to the locality (ibid., 1 to 5, 16, 17), and in the cédulas of 1536 and 1555, cited above, consideration was given to the rate formerly paid by the Indians to their caciques. Fonseca y Urrutia (Historia de la real hacienda, I, 417 et seq.) tell us that the tribute paid in the province of Tlascala in 1572 was 13 reales; in 1564 the rate for New Spain was fixed at two pesos, and in 1600 it was reduced to one peso of eight reales. (Bancroft, History of Mexico, II, 586-9.) Humboldt (Political Essay, II, 431-2) states that there had been a gradual diminution of tribute paid by the Indians during the hundred years preceding his visit. In 1601, he states, Indians paid 32 reales tribute and 4 reales additional, de servicio, in all, about 23 francs. It had been reduced, little by little, till the amount actually paid was from 5 to 15 francs, and, "in the greater part of Mexico," he states, "the head-tax amounts to 11 francs." Archbishop Benavides, of Manila, writing in 1600 (Zulueta Papers, date and place number not given) pleaded for the abolition of the tribute in the Philippines, stating that while the collection of tribute in New Spain was justifiable because the natives had been accustomed to paying tribute before the Spaniards came, the custom was entirely new in the Philippines, since the native princes had never levied tribute. On the other hand, various persons writing from the Philippines at different times urged that the tribute there should be increased to the rate imposed in New Spain. The money value of the tribute in the Philippines was fixed at eight reales by Legaspi. It could be paid either in gold or in kind. De Morga tells us that the encomenderos made great profit by receiving the payment in rice, cotton, cloth, fowls, and other commodities, at a cheap rate, selling those same articles later to the improvident natives at greatly increased prices (Morga's Sucesos, Blair and Robertson, XVI, 159). When Dasmariñas arrived as governor in 1590, the tribute was raised from eight to ten reales (cédula of August 9, 1589, Recopilación, 6-5-65, also A. I., 105-2-11). While the eight reales were to be appropriated by the encomenderos, the additional two reales were to be distributed between the religious and military governments in proportions of one-half to one and a half (Blair and Robertson, XVI, 160). In the instructions of May 23, 1593, to Governor Dasmariñas, reference was made to a current rate of eight reales (ibid., IX, 249), so it would seem that the local rate had been reduced from ten to eight reales at some date between 1589 and 1593. On February 16, 1602, the rate was restored at ten reales (Recopilación, 6-5-65), and was so continued until a subsequent regulation made optional on the part of the natives the payment of the ten reales or four reales and a fowl. On August 19, 1623, Fray Juan de Balmaseda complained that the encomenderos were making the natives pay ten reales in addition to the fowl and that the above law was thus resulting in the payment of sixteen reales tribute (A. I., 68-1-63). Accordingly, on November 21, 1625, a cédula was issued which eliminated the substitution of the fowl, and the rate was restored at ten reales, payable in gold or silver (A. I., 105-2-1). The king, in response to complaints against the collection of tributes in the provinces of Camarines and Albay, issued a cédula on September 25, 1697, ordering the observance in the Philippines of Book 6, Title 5, of the Recopilación de Indias, which meant the correction of the abuse above referred to (A. I., 68-4-12). It would seem that the rate of ten reales was levied throughout the seventeenth century. [79] Audiencia to the Council of the Indies, June 26, 1586, A. I., 67-6-18. [80] Dávalos to the King, June 20, 1585, A. I., 67-6-18. [81] Pereyra to Santiago de Vera, July 10, 1597, A. I., 68-1-33. [82] This involves the real patronato, which will be dealt with in Chapter X of this book. [83] Dávalos to the King, June 20, 1585, A. I., 67-6-18. [84] Memorial of Salazar, June 24, 1590, A. I., 67-6-67. [85] Ibid. [86] Memorials of the organization and officials of Manila for the removal of the royal audiencia, June 26, 1586, A. I., 68-1-33. [87] Dávalos to the King, June 20, 1585, A. I., 67-6-18. [88] Santiago de Vera to Contreras, June 20, 1585, Blair and Robertson VI, 67-68. [89] See Recopilación, 9-45, for regulations of the galleon trade between Acapulco and Manila. By these laws, promulgated from 1583 to 1636, the governor of the Philippines was given authority in Manila over the dispatching, manning, lading, and control of the galleon (see Recopilación, 9-45-3, 4, 20, 24, 29, 40, 41, 42, 44, 45, 59). He retained these powers until the latter part of the eighteenth century, when the abuses resulting from his control were eliminated (Martínez de Zúñiga, Estadismo, I, 268). [90] Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 94-95; Martínez de Zúñiga, An historical view, I, 183-186; see Ortega's Memorials to the King, Blair and Robertson, IX, 95-119. [91] Memoria y consultas de Fr. Alonso Sánchez (no date given), A. I., 67-6-27; see also Juan de la Concepción, Historia general de Filipinas [cited hereinafter as Concepción, Historia general], II, 103-184. These agreements are interesting because they show how intensely nationalistic were the respective sentiments of the Spaniards and Portuguese with regard to their Asiatic colonies, notwithstanding the fact that since 1580 the home governments of the two nations had been united. This correspondence illustrates the fact that the Portuguese regarded their former colonies as still distinctively their own. [92] Royal cédula for the restoration of the Audiencia of Manila, November 25, 1595, A. I., 106-4-19. [93] Morga's Sucesos, Blair and Robertson, XV, 65-66. [94] Suppressed Audiencia to the King, June 20, 1590, Blair and Robertson, VII, 208-211; also Recopilación, 2-15-181. [95] Salazar to Felipe II, June 24, 1590, Blair and Robertson, VII, 252. [96] Morga's Sucesos, Blair and Robertson, XV, 75. [97] Dasmariñas to Felipe II, June 20, 1591, Blair and Robertson, VIII, 142-168, passim. [98] Salazar, on reaching the Spanish court, was made first archbishop of the Philippines. He died on December 4, 1594, before he could assume his new post. [99] Cédula of January 17, 1593, Blair and Robertson, VIII, 315. [100] Ibid.; see also cédula of same date in Recopilación, 6-6-8. [101] Morga remained in the Philippines throughout a period of eight years and during this time distinguished himself as a lawyer and judge, administrator, soldier, and later as a historian. It was due to his energies as senior magistrate that Van Noordt, the Dutch free-booter, was defeated at the entrance of Manila Bay. Morga, in his Sucesos, already quoted several times, has left us a scholarly view of conditions as they existed at the time of his residence in the Islands. Morga left the Philippines on July 10, 1603, with a promotion to the Audiencia of Mexico; he served in New Spain for several years and in 1616 he was again promoted to the post of president of the Audiencia of Quito. [102] Dasmariñas to the King, December 6, 1595, A. I., 67-6-18. [103] Misa to the King, May 31, 1595, A. I., 67-6-29. [104] The amount legally permitted to be taken to the Philippines at this time was 500,000 pesos (subsequently 1,000,000 pesos). The galleon, on the voyage from Manila to Acapulco, could carry merchandise to the registered value of 250,000 pesos (later 500,000 pesos). This regulation was first enacted January 11, 1593 (Recopilación 9-45-6, 9). On the same date residents of New Spain were forbidden to trade in the Philippines and the entire Philippine and Chinese trade was expressly reserved to subjects in the Philippines. The latter were given the exclusive privilege of sending goods to New Spain (ibid., 1). They were permitted to buy only from the Chinese merchants who came to Manila (ibid., 34).--See Martinez de Zúñiga, Estadismo, I, 266-270. [105] Cédula of January 11, 1593, Recopilación, 9-45-44. [106] Morga to Philip II, July 6, 1596, Blair and Robertson, IX, 271. [107] Ordinance for the re-establishment of the Audiencia of Manila, November 26, 1595, A. I., 106-4-19; also in Blair and Robertson, IX, 189-191. [108] The Archbishop of Manila, in a letter to the king, on August 15, 1624, stated that the principal motive which influenced Philip II to re-establish the audiencia at the time of Governor Tello, was that in a district so remote and distant from his royal presence the governors might not be so absolute, but that there might be a superior arm to check them, and to prevent their extortions from innocent people (Blair and Robertson, XXI, 95). It is certain, too, that the audiencia was also destined to champion the royal prerogative in the face of the encroachments of the higher officials of the church. This need was especially urged by Morga. Grao y Monfalcón, the procurator of the merchants of Manila at the court in 1636, wrote on June 13 of that year: "In the year 590 the royal Audiencia of Manila was suppressed ... and its suppression must also be reckoned among the hardships of that city ... because of those which it suffered until the year 597, when the Audiencia was reëstablished (sic)." (Blair and Robertson, XXVII, 189). [109] Pancada, the wholesale purchase of the goods brought to Manila by the Chinese. These goods were bought by a committee of two or three persons, acting for the governor and ayuntamiento, then sold or apportioned among the merchants of the city in proportion to the amount of money which they were able to invest. This arrangement was designed to give all the merchants a chance to buy and at the same time to prevent the Chinese from selling at exorbitant prices (Cédula of January 11, 1593, Recopilación, 9-45-34.) [110] Cédulas of May 5, 1583, and May 25, 1596, Recopilación, 2-15-11. It will be noted that this authority was granted to the first audiencia established in Manila. This same faculty was conferred by the Ordenanzas nuevamente formadas para el régimen y govierno de la audiencia nacional de Manila, Art. I, Chap. 1, Sec. 1 (A. I., 106-4-19). [111] Martínez de Zúñiga has this to say concerning the work and purpose of the tribunal: "The royal audiencia was established to check the despotism of the governor, whom it has never impeded, because its learned members were always the weaker, and the governor may send them as prisoners to Spain, exile them to the provinces to take census, or imprison them in Fort Santiago, as has been done" (Martínez de Zúñiga, Estadismo, I, 244). [112] Recopilación, 2-15-32. [113] Ibid., 34-36, 44. [114] Ibid., 41. [115] Certain phases of these questions remained within the jurisdiction of the church courts. [116] Recopilación, 2-15-53. [117] Parián, a market-place; the name given to the quarter set aside by the government wherein the Chinese were confined. This restriction was imposed in 1603, to give added security to the city of Manila, endangered by a Chinese uprising at that time.--See Montero y Vidal, Historia general, III, 146-148; Recopilación, 2-15-55; 5-3-24; 6-18-5. [118] Ibid., 2-15-64; 2-16-16 to 20. [119] Ibid., 2-15-180. [120] Ibid., 70. See Chapter I of this book. [121] Ibid., 71. [122] Ibid., 3, 5, 67. See Chapter I, note 20, for distinction between oidores and alcaldes del crimen. [123] Ibid., 68; 2-19-2. [124] Ibid., 1, 3. [125] Ibid., 2-15-63, 71. [126] Ibid., 2-15-74 to 85. [127] Ibid., 90-91. [128] Ibid., 93. [129] Exemption from the jurisdiction of the civil authority having been claimed by the military and religious orders of Santiago, Calatrava, and Alcántara, Philip IV, on April 1, 1635, gave jurisdiction over these orders to the audiencias.--Ibid., 96. [130] Ibid., 5-10-1. [131] Ibid., 2. [132] According to the Recopilación, 5-13-1 (laws of October 20, 1545, February 13, 1620, and the Ordinance of Audiencias [1563]), the value of the peso was fixed at 450 maravedís. [133] Recopilación, 2-15-88. [134] Ibid., 5-12-20. [135] Ibid., 5-12-29. [136] Ibid., 5-10-3. [137] Ibid., 5-13-8. [138] Ibid., 4, 7. [139] Ibid., 5-10-4. [140] Ibid., 5-13-1. [141] Ibid., 2-15-97. [142] Ibid., 88. [143] Ibid., 103, 107, 108. Magistrates were forbidden to sign decisions during office hours--valuable time which should be devoted to hearing cases (ibid., 109). [144] Ibid., 105. [145] Ibid., 117. Pesquisidores were special investigators with extraordinary executive and judicial powers who were sent out by the home or central government when need arose to correct abuses in colonial or provincial administration. Visitadores (visitors) were sent regularly to inspect the government of a province or colony. The governor was supposed to dispatch visitors to examine the work of alcaldes mayores and corregidores every three years. [146] Ibid., 118. [147] Ibid., 178. [148] Recopilación, 5-15-21. Acuerdo, the joint consultative action of the governor and audiencia. See Chapter VI of this book and note 78 of the same chapter. [149] Ibid., 5-13-3. The periods of validity of cases appealed from the audiencias of Ultramar varied with the distance and the time necessary for the transmission of autos to the Council. The time assigned by the laws of the Indies was as follows: Chile, one and a half years, Tierra Firme, New Granada, Santo Domingo, New Spain, one year, and the Philippines, two years. This law was promulgated first on September 24, 1621, and again on March 30, 1629. [150] Recopilación, 2-15-123 to 133. [151] Ibid., 133 (1563). Helps (Spanish conquest, I, 102, 103-104) states that the repartimiento system was originated in 1496, from the requirement of Columbus that the natives of Hispaniola should pay him a certain quantity of gold as tribute. In view of the inability of the natives to meet the demands of the Spaniards in regard to the precious metal, "the villagers were ordered to make (and work) the farms in the Spanish settlements. This may be considered as the beginning of the system of repartimientos, or encomiendas, as they were afterwards called." In a subsequent chapter the same author tells of the difficulty which Ovando had in compelling the Indians to live among the Spaniards, to pay tribute and accept religious teaching. Ferdinand and Isabella, in a letter dated December 20, 1503, directed Ovando to compel the Indians to deal with the Spaniards, to work for wages, to go to mass, to be instructed in the faith, and further, that they should do all these things "as free persons, for so they are." ... "Ovando adopted the following system," says Helps; "he distributed Indians amongst the Castillians, giving to one man fifty, to another a hundred; with a deed that ran thus: 'to you, such a one, is given an encomienda of so many Indians, with such a Cacique, and you are to teach them the things of our Holy Catholic Faith'. The word encomienda ... was a term belonging to the military orders, corresponding to our commandery or preceptory; and this term naturally enough came into use with the appointment, as governors in the Indies, of men, who held authority in those orders, such as Bobadilla and Ovando." (See also Bancroft, History of Central America, I, 262.) "With respect to the implied condition of teaching the Indians 'the Holy Catholic Faith' it was no more attended to from the first than any formal clause in a deed, which is supposed by the parties concerned to be a mere formality." "We have now arrived," continues Helps, "at the climax of the repartimiento system. That which Bobadilla did illegally, was now done with proper formalities on parchment: ... We may notice again that the first repartimientos made by Columbus ... apportioned to any Spaniard, whom he thought fit, such and such lands, to be worked by such a Cacique and his people--a very different procedure to giving men--a feudal system, not a system of slavery."--Helps, Spanish conquest, I, 138-139. [152] Recopilación, 2-15-129. [153] Ibid., 127. [154] Ibid., 5-15-181. [155] Francisco de la Misa to the King, May 31, 1595, A. I. 67-1-29. [156] In this and in other letters of officials in the Philippines we find the amount frequently referred to as 1000 pesos, although in the Recopilación (2-15-129 [1609]) the jurisdiction is fixed at 1000 ducats. According to law 181 (1589), the authority of the governor (the audiencia had been suppressed) was extended to cases of the same value. [157] It is probable that Misa meant that there was not sufficient distinction between the governor's asesor and the teniente de gobierno. This combined post was filled by Pedro de Rojas until 1593 and then by Antonio de Morga. These officials were the private advisers of the governors in legal matters, and active magistrates at the same time. [158] Memorial of Antonio de Morga, July 6, 1596, Blair and Robertson, IX, 271 et seq. [159] Cédula of May 26, 1596, A. I., 106-4-19. [160] Pardo de Tavera, in Census of the Philippine Islands, I. 335. [161] Recopilación, 1-1, 2, 3; 5-1. [162] King to the President and Oidores, February 16, 1602, A. I., 105-2-1; Cédula of October 25, 1870; Colección legislativa de España, CV, 449-463; Cédula of April 12, 1875, ibid., CXIV, 516-524. [163] Recopilación, 2-15-81, 83. [164] Tondo is now a district or ward of the city of Manila. At the time referred to here, the barrio of Santa Ana (small district under a teniente of a corregidor or alcalde mayor) was within the jurisdiction of the corregimiento of Tondo. [165] Recopilación, 2-15-71, which forbade the trial of alcaldes and provincial officials before the audiencia. [166] Council of the Indies to the Fiscal, A. I., 105-2-10. [167] Recopilación, 5-2-3; 2-15-81, 83. [168] This decision conforms with the Recopilación, 5-2-3, 4, and 2-15-68; 117. These laws give to the audiencia and the governor jurisdiction over excesses of the provincial judges and executives, and over cases appealed from them. Ibid., 2-16-44 gave jurisdiction to the viceroy over criminal charges against oidores and alcaldes. [169] Council of the Indies to Audiencia, December 16, 1687, A. I., 105-2-1. The facility with which witnesses may be procured is from one point of view a great aid to the administration of justice in the Philippines today. See Elliott, The Philippines to the end of the military règime, 246-8. [170] Royal decree on Usurpation of Indian Lands, November 7, 1751, Blair and Robertson, LXVII, 27-34. See Cunningham, "Origin of the friar lands question in the Philippines" in Political science review. X, 465 480. [171] Fuero mixto, in this case a fuero or concession to the ecclesiastical government of jurisdiction over secular matters. See note 53, Chapter XI, of this volume. [172] Audiencia to the King, September 27, 1617, A. I., 67-6-20. Three of these friars were hanged at once, and one, Juan Ocádiz, escaped to New Spain. He was said to be the illegitimate son of Doña Ana of Austria (see Blair and Robertson, XVIII, 82-88). [173] Recopilación, 2-15-134 to 153; 2-16-15; 2-18-29, 30; 1-4-3, 20; 1-6-26, 39, 57; 1-7-18, 29 to 31; 2-15-146, 147, 149. See note 3, Chapter XI, of this volume. [174] Recopilación, 2-15-129. [175] This case and the others dealt with in this section involving encomiendas are to be found in the Inventario de los pleytos en la real audiencia de Manila que se hallen en el rl. y supremo consejo de las Indias y remiten al rl. archivo en Sevilla según rl. orden de Julio de 1787. The key to the above exists in the Inventario de autos de la Essma. la Cámara de Indias, IV, 453, A. I. [176] Recopilación, 6-2-1. This prohibition was first imposed by Charles V on the above date and subsequently by Philip II and Philip III (see laws 1 to 14, same title). [177] Ibid., 6-9-11, 13. [178] The laws of the Indies (Recopilación, 6-19-6) authorized the governor of the Philippines to assign encomiendas ad interim for the period of six years (promulgated August 25, 1646). By the laws of May 1, 1774, and June 8, 1792, the period was made five years in all the colonies except Perú; in the latter it was six years (note to Recopilación, 8-22-1). We have record of the extension of an encomienda in the Philippines to the Hospital of San Juan de Diós for four years by Governor Marquina on July 10, 1789. The cofradía had held this encomienda for ten years, and on its petition the governor made this additional concession, subject to royal confirmation (A. I., 107-5-18). The above episode is at variance with the statement of Bancroft (History of Central America, I, 264) that the encomienda system came to an end in 1721. Helps states that the encomienda system "remained in full force until the reign of Charles The Third of Spain, at which period, it appears, it was annulled."--See Helps Spanish conquest, IV, 240. [179] Expedientes are defined in Blair and Robertson, LII, 72, note 28, as "all the papers belonging to any matter, judicial, legislative, or executive, consisting of orders, opinions, reports, and all other measures." A testimonio is a duly attested and certified statement or number of statements submitted as proof or evidence concerning a given matter. Testimonios include transcripts of letters, cédulas, autos, and expedientes on a particular subject, usually bound together. They may extend over a period of a hundred years or more, showing step by step the factors leading up to the formulation of any auto, or cédula, or given as reasons for a particular action taken by an official or tribunal. Testimonios form a large part of the material in the Archive of the Indies. They are of the same value as originals, and they are certainly more available and legible because frequently more recently written. [180] Inventario, op. cit. [181] Note the appeal of a case involving less than 6000 pesos, which was contrary to the laws of the Indies. (Recopilación, 5-13-1). [182] Martínez de Zúñiga, Estadismo, I, 245. [183] Decree for establishment of the Consulado, in Manila, December 13, 1769, A. I., 108-3-17. [184] The consulado was an organization of the merchants of certain authorized cities of the Spanish empire. A consulado had to be established by royal authorization. The tribunal of the consulado was composed of two consuls and a prior, who were chosen for terms of two years and one year respectively. They were chosen by twelve electors who in turn were designated by the members of the consulado. The tribunal de alzadas was composed of an oidor and two merchants. The latter constituted the final court of appeal in the colony in commercial cases and exception to their decisions could be taken only in the Council of the Indies.--Martínez de Zúñiga, Estadismo, 245-246. [185] Council of the Indies to the Audiencia, January 21, 1808, A. I., 105-2-18. [186] Recopilación, 9-46-40. [187] Ibid., 9-46. This section of the laws of the Indies establishes the consulados of Lima and Mexico, and lays down regulations for them. [188] This was before the time of the Consulado of Manila. [189] Inventario, op. cit. [190] The Junta de Guerra, was the committee of the Council of the Indies with jurisdiction over military and naval affairs. When questions of this nature came to the Council they were referred to the Junta, where decision was made and referred back to the Council. See notes 17 and 36, Chapter VII of this book. [191] Inventario, op. cit. [192] Ibid. [193] Recopilación, 2-1-14; see also 9-27-35, 37, 2-2-39, also 9-27-3, 5, 13, 28, 29, 40, 47. These laws forbid the entrance of foreign ships and individuals to the ports of the Indies. [194] Real Acuerdo de 17 de Julio, 1656, A. I., 67-6-22. (The final action of the Council is indicated without date on the margin of the auto of the Audiencia.) [195] Recopilación, 9-46-28; 9-45-13. [196] Ibid., 2-15-111. [197] Ibid., 71. [198] Foreman, Philippine Islands, 241. The laws regulating the trial of cases on appeal may be noted in Recopilación, 5-9, 10, 11, 12, 13. [199] The following figures have been taken from various reports of the audiencia to the Council of the Indies, and they show the number of criminal cases tried in the tribunal in the years designated: 1710--51 cases ... report dated December 11, 1711; A. I., 105-2-9. 1774--34 cases ... report dated December 25, 1776; ibid. 1776--48 cases ... report dated March, 1778; ibid. 1779--53 cases ... report dated July 30, 1780; ibid. 1786--99 cases ... report dated May 1, 1778; A. I., 105-2-10. 1789--51 cases ... report dated June 4, 1790; A. I., 105-2-10. 1795--38 cases ... report dated April 4, 1798; A. I., 105-2-10. 1822--641 cases ... report dated July 3, 1823; A. I., 106-4-21. According to Desdevises du Dezert ("Vice-rois et capitaines généraux des Indes espagnoles," in Revue historique CXXVI, 59, 60) the Audiencia of Lima decided 89 civil cases on appeal from February 11, 1788, to January 5, 1789. At the end of this period there were 122 cases waiting on the docket. In the chamber of first instance of the same audiencia 72 cases were tried and 124 remained to be tried at the end of approximately the same period. In the criminal sala during the year 1788, there were 7 death sentences rendered, 16 sentences for robbery, 14 cases tried involving personal injury, 15 for carrying arms in face of the prohibition of the law, and 6 cases of adultery. The magistrates excused themselves for this rather contemptible showing by alleging that the membership of the tribunal had not been complete, to which the king made answer that there would have been sufficient judges had not the latter continually absented themselves on the smallest pretexts. The charge of indolence was also frequently brought against the magistrates of the Audiencia of Manila. [200] See Colección legislativa de España, LXIV, 105-147 (Royal Decree of January 30, 1855). Cédula of December 6, 1858, in Rodríguez San Pedro, Diccionario de legislación ultramarina, VII, 69. Cédula of March 10, 1857, ibid., VIII, 39. Royal Decree of July 4, 1861, Colección legislativa de España. LXXXVI, 1-45. The basic principle of these reforms are to be found in the Constitution of 1812, Martínez Alcubilla, Diccionario, III, 408-458, and in Las Ordenanzas Nuevamente Formadas para el Régimen y Govierno interior de la Audiencia Nacional de Manila en cumplimiento de la Ley de 9 de Octre de 1812, sobre arreglo de tribunales. A. I., 106-4-19. [201] Blair and Robertson, XX, 35-43, 147, 168, 196-198. [202] Recopilación, 8-10-16. [203] Cédulas of October 6, 1783, and of November 19, 1805, A. I., 105-2-18. [204] See Cunningham, "Residencia in the Spanish colonies," in the Southwestern historical quarterly, XXI, 253-278. [205] Ibid., 2-33, 1, 6; literally, a report on character of services. [206] Ibid., 5-11. [207] Ibid., notes 1 to 4. [208] Ibid., 2-31-1. [209] Ibid., 5-12-9. [210] Ibid., 5-11-6; see also, 5-12-14. [211] Ibid., 5-15-36 to 39; 7-1-10 to 13. [212] Ibid., 5-12-7 to 9. [213] Bancroft, History of Central America, I, 250-1. Special emphasis should be placed upon the last clause of the above definition. The periodical residencia was not the sole means for the removal of officials in the Spanish colonies. The conclusion seems to have been reached by many historians that officials were permitted to conduct themselves carelessly, running their offices to suit their own personal convenience from the date of their appointment, in the assurance that their tenure was sure until the termination of a specified term, and that the periodical residencia was the only occasion on which they might be held to answer for their sins. Only the most scant attention has been given by modern writers to the residencia. See Bourne, "Historical introduction," in Blair and Robertson, I, 50-52; Moses, Establishment of Spanish rule in America, 172; Vander Linden, L'expansion coloniale de l'Espagne, 349. [214] Bourne, "Historical introduction," Blair and Robertson, I, 51-52; see De Pons, Voyage, II, 25; Churchill, Voyages, IV, 427-428; see also Barrows, "The governor general of the Philippines, under Spain and the United States," in The Pacific Ocean in history, 246. [215] Recopilación, 7-1; 2-15-117. [216] Ibid., 5-15-19. [217] Ibid., 20. [218] A receptor was a clerk of court, who on special authorization or commission of a tribunal was dispatched to institute judicial proceedings on behalf of the court.--Escriche, Diccionario, II, 794. [219] Recopilación, 7-1-16. [220] Ibid., 5-15-21. [221] Ibid., 7-1-14. [222] Ibid., 5-12-31. [223] Ibid., 5-15-38. [224] Fajardo to Felipe III, August 10, 1619; Blair and Robertson, XVIII, 276. [225] The Marianas were the islands of the Ladrone Group situated 1200 miles east of the Philippines. [226] Expedientes relativos á la residencia de Don Antonio Pimentel, Governador de las Marianas, A. I., 68-4-17 and 18. [227] Recopilación, 5-15-3, 4, 8, 10-18. [228] Ibid., 5-15-11, 24. [229] Having been excused by the cédulas of July 7, 1789, and January 15, 1795, A. I., 105-2-5. [230] Recopilación, 5-15, notes 4, 11. When the residencia of a viceroy or president was taken, the oidores were also held responsible for all opinions given conjointly with him in the acuerdo. [231] Sinibaldo de Mas, the able Philippine critic of the nineteenth century, says in regard to the above characteristic of the Recopilación and its laws: "Since the Leyes de Indias are not a constitutional code, but a compilation made in the year 1754 [a footnote amends this statement with the information that the Recopilación was first made in 1681] of royal orders despatched at various epochs and by distinct monarchs, ... there results ... a confusion of jurisdictions."--Mas, Internal political condition of the Philippines, Blair and Robertson, LII, 70. Dr. James Alexander Robertson, in his article on "Legaspi and Philippine colonization" (see American Historical Association, Annual report, 1907, I, 150 and note), characterizes the laws of the Indies as "that mass of contradictory legislation," largely "ecclesiastical in tone," ill-digested, and "utterly at variance with one another." Dr. Robertson also states that "it is from a too close following of these laws and a too great neglect of actual conditions that writers on the colonial policy of Spain have at times fallen into error." On the other hand, it may be said, that not enough use has been made by modern writers of the laws of the Indies, and there is need of such investigation as will test that oft-repeated statement that the laws of the Indies were not enforced. Up to the present, Latin American scholarship has been content with a rehashing of Helps and Prescott, for the early periods, omitting the seventeenth century and the greater part of the eighteenth altogether, and fixing on Juan y Ulloa, Robertson, and Humboldt as the great all-determining authorities for the latter periods of Spanish colonization. These, indeed, have been supplemented by a few ecclesiastical histories, each of which has been written to prove a particular thesis. The present writer dares to believe, after some attempt to harmonize the laws of the Indies with actual practice, that these laws were actually used as a basis of colonial government, and that, while not always effectively enforced, they were by no means a dead-letter until Spain actually lost her colonies and are not today, for it is easy to see in the laws of the Indies the fundamentals of the institutions of present-day Spanish America. [232] Recopilación, 5-15-1. [233] Cédula of August 24, 1799, in Rodríguez San Pedro, Legislación ultramarina, III, 280-281. [234] Papeles relativos á la residencia del gobernador Salcedo. Inventario, op. cit.; also A. I., 67-6-10, 67-6-11, 67-3-4. [235] Since all legal advice was furnished the governor by his asesor, Coloma would be examining his own acts. [236] Recopilación, 2-18-27. [237] Cédula of June 17, 1671, A. I., 82-6-10. In view of these proceedings, Salcedo's letter of June 25, 1665, in praise of the services of Coloma and Montemayor is interesting (A. I., 67-6-9). [238] Recopilación, 5-12-8; 2-16-46, provided for appeal of cases carrying death penalty. [239] Ibid., 5-12-31. [240] Ibid., 5-15-38. [241] Ibid., 39. [242] Ibid., 2-2-58. [243] Ibid., 64. [244] Ibid., 5-15-3. [245] There were two kinds of bonds, those posted at the beginning of a term of office, and special bonds of residencia, given at the time of that investigation. The last-mentioned were not required if the office were not a responsible one or if the charges were not sufficiently serious. [246] Recopilación, 5-15-3; this cédula was annulled by that of May 21, 1787; see note to law 3 of the same title. [247] King to Basco y Vargas, December 30, 1776 (A. I., 107-5-20). These annual deductions of one-fifth were first authorized on August 26, 1757, on the recommendation of the Council of the Indies. They were discontinued by the consulta of March 2, 1773, it being ordered that governors should only post the customary bonds with the president of the Council of the Indies. We see here that the practice was restored on December 30, 1776. This requirement seems to have been confined to governors of the Philippines (A. I., 105-2-21). [248] Recopilación, 8-19; see notes 11 and 13, Chapter V of this book. [249] Recopilación, 8-26-17. [250] Ibid., 5-15-42. [251] Ibid., note 12. [252] Royal decree of November 20, 1841, in Rodríguez San Pedro, Legislación ultramarina, I, 282; see also royal order of December 3, 1844 (for Cuba), ibid., 287. [253] Officials, desirous of ingratiating themselves into the favor of the new executive, frequently journeyed by land and sea from Manila as far as the Straits of San Bernardino. The privilege thus gained of returning to Manila in company with the new governor, gave them the unrestricted or unqualified opportunity to poison his mind with tales of the misdeeds of the incumbent, and insinuations as to the wealth which the latter had heaped up for himself through the exercise of dishonest methods. [254] The residencia of a governor presented a splendid opportunity to his enemies for revenge. A governor was always in a fair way to make enemies; consequently any such awaited the residencia of their former oppressor with great eagerness. In case a governor did make fair profit out of his office, and there were many opportunities for profit, commercial and otherwise, legitimate and illegitimate, his enemies gave him no rest at the time of his residencia. (According to Martínez de Zúñiga [Estadismo. I, 242] the emoluments of the governor, aside from his salary, aggregated 20,000 pesos a year.) It is probable that most of the governors were dishonest, as the opportunities for corruption were numerous, and the temptations offered by the position were too powerful to be resisted by any human being. Thousands of miles from Spain, in an age of slow communication, entrusted with the assignment of all sorts of lucrative offices, encomiendas, and commercial privileges, and having friends, relatives, and special interests to serve, a governor was surrounded by countless officials who were eagerly awaiting their share of booty, and who were ready at a moment's notice to turn traitor if they could gain by such an act. It may be said of the Spanish colonial governor as was said of Verres of old, that in stealing, one must steal threefold, once for himself, once for his judges, and once to pay the penalty. [255] Chapter II of this book. [256] Montero y Vidal, Historia general, II, 253-258. Anda, as it will be noted later, spent an earlier term of service in the Philippines. He first came to the Philippines during the administration of Governor Arandía, as oidor of the audiencia. He had therefore been obliged to submit to residencia on a previous occasion; in 1764 a review was made of his official conduct as oidor, and especially of his acts in defiance of Archbishop Rojo, in setting up claims to the governorship of the Islands and resisting the British. His conduct was approved, and he received high honor and promotion at the court, being advanced to membership in the Council of Castile. On November 19, 1769, he was granted an annual pension of 3000 pesos for life. On September 8, 1777, this pension was continued in favor of his eldest son (A. I., 106-4-4). [257] Anda had more than the usual number of residencias to supervise at the beginning of his term. Owing to some misapprehension on the part of his predecessor, Governor Raón, no residencia was required of La Torre, the teniente del rey who took over the government in 1764. Owing to the anarchical condition in Manila consequent upon the invasion of the British, and the ecclesiastical rule preceding that event, neither Arandía, Espeleta, nor Rojo had given residencia. The audiencia and Raón in acuerdo on October 26, 1768, voted that governors' residencias should be dispensed with, and apparently believed that this action settled the matter. On November 9, 1770, the Council of the Indies disapproved of this stand, fined Raón (who had died the preceding July), and ordered Anda to take the residencias of Arandía (governor, 1754-1759), Espeleta (archbishop-governor, 1759-1761), Rojo (archbishop-governor, 1761-1764), Oidor Villacorta, and Governor Raón. These orders he complied with, conducting the investigations with his characteristic thoroughness, though Rojo and Raón were dead. Villacorta was imprisoned and heavily fined. The sentences against Arandía, Raón and Villacorta were moderated by the Council of the Indies on September 9, 1772.--A. I., 105-2-31. [258] As we shall note in another chapter, José Basco y Vargas inaugurated the reforms of the intendancy in the Philippines, retaining the post of governor, while Ciriaco Gonzales Carvajal was first intendente de guerra y real hacienda.--A. I., 105-3-5 and 107-5-19; see Chapter V, note 20, of this work. [259] This residencia was held under the same laws that had prevailed throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. A feature common to them all, particularly, was the fact that the regent, or some other colonial magistrate conducted the investigation and gave sentence, which might be appealed to the Council of the Indies. This gave an opportunity for great injustice to be done to the governor by his enemies, and it did not give him an impartial hearing. The laws of 1799 still permitted a local magistrate to collect the evidence, but the decision was rendered by the Council of the Indies. [260] Audiencia to the King, June 28, 1791, A. I., 108-4-18. [261] Instructions to Amparán, February 19, 1792, A. I., 105-2-10. [262] Instructions were also given at the same time for investigations of the official conduct of numerous persons who had been identified with the government of Marquina. Among these were Helarión Pastor, fiscal de la real hacienda. Manuel de Sota, contador de cuentas. Francisco Múñoz, teniente del rey. Rufino Suárez Rivera, asesor, and Miguel Formento, clerk of the treasury. A separate commission was made for the residencia of each of these. [263] The just and honorable conduct of Marquina's successor on this occasion may be contrasted with that of his various predecessors, whose unfairness, bigotry, and stupidity had caused governors Corcuera, Silva, and Torralba, victims of residencia, to be seized, imprisoned, and exiled without opportunities for defense, while their investigations were being conducted. This case serves well to illustrate the fact that by the close of the eighteenth century the residencia had grown more humane. [264] He was charged with having entered into a conspiracy with an Armenian merchant to secure trade which should have gone to Spanish merchants. In this particular venture he had made a profit of 16,000 pesos and in so doing he had not only violated the laws of the Indies which forbade officials to trade (Recopilación, 2-16-54, 62), but he had connived at the infraction of another law which forbade trade to foreigners (ibid., 9-27-1, 5, 7 and note 2). [265] It is an interesting commentary on Spanish methods that, notwithstanding Marquina's misgovernment in the Philippines, he was promoted to the post of viceroy of New Spain, which position he held from 1800 to 1803. Desdevises du Dezert, in his article on "Vice-rois et capitaines généraux des Indes espagnoles" (Revue historique, CXXV, 241), shows that Marquina continued his peculations while viceroy of New Spain, engaging in the smuggling trade with Jamaica, and enriching himself to the extent that in thirty-two months he was able to send twelve million pesos on his own account to Spain. Desdevises du Dezert inadvertently refers to Marquina as having come from the Marianas to Mexico. He came from the Philippines and not from the Marianas. [266] Recopilación, 5-15, notes 4 and 5. [267] Reales resoluciones del Consejo, 4 de Marzo, 1794, A. I., 106-4-18; Royal Order of January 18, 1848, Rodríguez San Pedro, Legislación ultramarina, I, 290. [268] These discounts were "considered subversive of their authority [that of the governors]; ... the best guarantee of their acts is not a discount of some thousands of pesos, which is always penurious when compared with the honor and dignity of the persons called, on account of their elevated character and distinguished services, to hold these posts, and if, in former times, this practice had some foundation in the tardiness of communication between the Peninsula and these provinces, it does not exist today in view of the frequency of communication which enables said authorities to consult with the government of Her Majesty in all the steps which are considered necessary in the territory of their command."--Royal order of July 7, 1860, in Rodríguez San Pedro, Legislación ultramarina, I, 287. [269] Recopilación, 5-15-20. [270] Ibid., 4. [271] Ibid., 5-2-1, 2, 7. [272] Ibid., 5-15-19. [273] Ibid., 7-1-16; 5-15-21. [274] Ibid., 2-15-69; see 2-2-58, 64. [275] King to the Fiscal, September 29, 1788, A. I., 105-2-10. [276] King to the Audiencia, October 6, 1806, A. I., 105-2-18. [277] Recopilación, 2-18-27. [278] Ibid., 5-15, note 4. [279] Ibid., 5-15-27 to 49. [280] Ibid., 8-1-28; 5-15-35. Heavy penalties were prescribed for those who offered insecure financial guarantees (ibid., 5-15-33 to 36). [281] Ibid., 34. [282] Ibid., 39, 40. [283] Expediente de Don Frco. Fernández Zéndera, alcalde mayor y capitán de guerra de la provincia de Ilocos. ... su residencia pendiente de informe de la audiencia, 1794, A. I., 106-5-4 and 5. The papers relating to this trial easily aggregate 4000 pages. [284] It was said that he had shown favoritism in his dealings with some of the barangay (district) chiefs, allowing them unbridled license in the collection of tribute and in the enforcement of compulsory labor, most of which they utilized for their own, or for his, benefit. One chief was said to have gone so far as to forcibly take carabaos from the natives when the latter were working them in the fields. Zéndera had, of course, extended favors to these barangay chiefs in exchange for reciprocal advantages. (The alcaldes mayores ruled the native population through these chiefs at this time. Later they utilized the gobernadorcillos, who were native or mestizo governors of the small towns.--See Malcolm, The government of the Philippine Islands, 64-72.) It was also charged that he had allowed cock-fights whenever requested, instead of restricting these to holidays and Sundays as the law prescribed. On these occasions he collected two reales from each entrant, and in addition he took the slain birds, alleging that they were for the consumption of the inmates of the provincial prison. Testimony was produced to show that the prisoners had never eaten fowl. [285] In taking the residencias of corregidores and alcaldes mayores the audiencia frequently took great responsibility upon itself. On July 10, 1800, on taking the residencia of Luís Rodríguez Varela, alcalde mayor of Pangasinán, the audiencia suspended the decoration of the pequeña cruz, which had been conferred upon this official by the royal authority. The deprivation, in this case, was tentative, pending the investigation of the charges which had been made of shortages in the finances of his province.--Audiencia to the King, July 10, 1800, A. I., 106-4-18. [286] The original sentence probably denied to Zéndera the privilege of holding the office of alcalde mayor only, since he occupied the post of regidor of the city of Manila, pending the appeal of his case to the Council of the Indies. It is evident, therefore, that the sentence which was pronounced upon Zéndera did not apply to all positions of honor and trust. [287] Cédula of August 24, 1799, Recopilación, 5-15, notes 4 and 5; see also Rodríguez San Pedro, Legislación ultramarina, I, 282. [288] Escriche, Diccionario. I, 578; see also royal order of November 20, 1841, and of January 18, 1848, in Rodríguez San Pedro, Legislación ultramarina, I, 282; 290. When the Intendancy was established in 1784-7, an effort was made by the newly created officials to escape the residencia. The entire term of the first intendant, Carvajal (or Carbajal), had been devoted to an assertion of his independence of the governor and audiencia. Carvajal interpreted the law requiring all officials of the government to give residencia every five years to the Department of Justice as not applying to him or his subordinates. He pointed to the stipulation in the ordinance which created his department, and established its independence of the executive and judiciary. The king disapproved of his attitude and ordered that henceforth the officials of real hacienda should give residencia in the same manner as other officials, in accordance with the laws of the Indies. (King to Carvajal. July 29, 1788, A. I., 107-5-19, citing Recopilación, 2-15-69; 5-15-15 and Ordenanza de Intendentes de Buenos Ayres, Art. 305.) This decree ordered that the residencias of the intendants and their assistants should be submitted to the audiencia. The cédula of August 24, 1799, so frequently cited in this chapter, gave final jurisdiction to the audiencia over the residencias of intendentes-corregidores, but it decreed that superintendents should give residencia directly to the Council of the Indies. [289] Martínez Alcubilla (Diccionario, XI, 477) and Escriche (Diccionario, II, 819) state that the cédula of August 24, 1799, abolished the residencia. The latter states that the residencia was eliminated because of the corruption of judges, and as the judges of residencia had proved to be a grave infliction on the towns, mistreating witnesses and defendants on many occasions, it was thought advisable to discontinue the practice of holding these investigations. Escriche also quotes extracts from the laws of August 24, 1799, September 26, 1835, and November 20, 1841, wherein were provided regulations for the future continuance of the residencia. Cases involving viceroys, captains-general, and presidents of audiencias were to be tried in the Supreme Tribunal of Justice in first instance. Alcaldes mayores, corregidores, military and political governors who were not presidents were to be tried in the audiencias which exercised jurisdiction over their districts. [290] See Cédula of July 7, 1860, in Rodríguez San Pedro, Legislación ultramarina, III, 287; royal order of July 25, 1865, ibid., X, 99; royal order of October 25, 1870, Colección legislativa, CV, 442-465. The eminent authority, Manuel Bernáldez Pizarro, writing from Manila on April 26, 1827, deplored the laxity which was characteristic of the method of conducting trials of residencia, and recommended that they be made more effective and just. He criticized especially the prevailing system of holding the alcaldes mayores to a strict accountability; who, he wrote, "as they have permission to trade, are more tempted to evade or infringe the laws; and many persons are appointed to that office 'who lack all the qualifications necessary for any public office whatever,' ... not only have they used their authority to possess themselves of the property of the Indians ... and defrauded the Indians with unjust exactions; but they have humiliated the religious, stolen moneys from the king ... [and] have thrown the provinces into a condition of effervescence and of conspiracy against the government." (Blair and Robertson, LI, 212, 212-213.) Pizarro recommended a more stringent residencia as a means of remedying these defects. [291] Recopilación, 5-15-17 and 18; 9-45-42. [292] Governor to Council of the Indies, January 4, 1710, A. I., 68-4-15. [293] Concepción, XI, 132-234 (Anson's depredations). [294] Recopilación, 2-16-40; see also 7-1-15. [295] Law of November 10, 1818, A. I., 106-4-19; see Real instrucción dada á los regentes de las audiencias, 20 de Junio de 1776, in Rodríguez San Pedro, Legislación ultramarina, VII, 22-28; Zamora y Coronado, Apéndice. 19-33. [296] A tax on silver, gold and other metals (as well as on pearls) mined in the Indies. This tax was first authorized on February 5, 1504 (Recopilación, 8-10-1). Philip II conceded a commutation of this tax to ten per cent in favor of adelantados, their successors and other early settlers (ibid., 4-3-19). A draft of a letter exists in A. I., 106-6-6, written about 1585 by Governor Sande of the Philippines, asking for an extension of this dispensation.--See Blair and Robertson, IV, 87, par. 114 and note. On August 8, 1609, the king inquired of the Manila audiencia whether the tax was a fifth or a tenth.--A. I., 102-2-1. [297] Ibid., 2-16-19 to 22. [298] Ibid., 23. [299] Ibid., 24. This junta is to be distinguished from the real contaduría, which was composed of the oficiales reales. See Martínez de Zúñiga, Estadismo, 246. [300] This was the junta superior de la real hacienda, created for Manila by the law of July 24, 1784. It was one of the reforms of the intendancy. It cannot be said, however, that these reforms became effective until 1787, though the cédulas of July 17 and 24, 1784, which ordered them, were received in Manila on December 5, 1785. These cédulas ordered the formation of a government locally, which would conform to the general principles of the intendancy and which were laid down in the cédulas referred to. These plans had to be referred to Spain on appeal. Subsequently the Ordinance of Intendants of Buenos Ayres was applied to the Philippines.--A. I., 107-5-14. Until January 11, 1791, all appeals from the junta superior were heard in the Audiencia of Manila. The cédula of that date, received in Manila on June 30, 1793, ordered that such appeals should be carried to the Council of the Indies.--A. I., 107-5-22. The junta superior de real hacienda did much toward relieving the audiencia of its advisory functions as in matters of finance and commerce. Many evidences of this may be noted in the reports and correspondence of the superintendente de real hacienda de Manila.--A. I., 107-5-14; 107-5-15 to 31; 107-6-1 to 31; 107-7-1 to 21. Priestley (José de Gálvez, 338-9) shows that even after the establishment of the intendancy in New Spain, the audiencia retained the administration of crown lands, notwithstanding the provisions of the new laws which ordered that they should be controlled by the junta superior. See also ibid., 302-3. [301] Recopilación, 2-16-34. [302] Ibid., 2-15-169. [303] Ibid., 2-31-1 to 3. [304] Ibid., 8-19 (general subject of medias anatas). Holders of ecclesiastical benefices were subsequently obliged to pay the media anata, although they were especially exempted by the cédula of June 2, 1632. The media anata (civil and ecclesiastical) was paid until December 28, 1846, when this tax, together with the lanza (a tax formerly paid by the nobility, but subsequently required of all classes in lieu of military service) was abolished (Martínez Alcubilla, Diccionario, I, 407). [305] Ibid., 8-19-1 and 2. [306] The cédula of July 3, 1664, reorganized the system of medias anatas, authorizing their division into two separate allotments, one payable at the court on the appointment of the official concerned, and the second within or at the end of eighteen months after his appointment, at the capital of the district wherein he served. Guarantees had to be given that the second payment would be made when due, and interest was charged at the rate of eight per cent a year on the amount remaining to be paid (ibid., 4). [307] Cédula of December 14, 1776, A. I., 105-2-16. [308] The extensive use of the betel-nut by the natives of the Philippines encouraged the Spanish government to monopolize its production and sale, and a considerable revenue was derived from it. In 1786 the profit from the sale of betel was 16,770 pesos (Report of Intendant, January 8, 1788, A. I., 107-5-15), and the next year the sum collected was 15,207 pesos (Report of Intendant, June 21, 1789, 107-5-18). Other monopolies during the same period yielded as follows: Tobacco, 258,743 pesos; wine, 73,636 pesos; cockpits, 8,375 pesos; tributes, 174,494 pesos (Report of Intendant, June 21, 1789). [309] Juez conservador (civil), a judge named por privilegio del rey, with private jurisdiction over the civil affairs of some community or guild, for the protection of its interests and estates or the collection of its rents (Escriche, Diccionario, II, 260). [310] Recopilación, 3-3-35. [311] Report on the establishment of the Intendancy in Manila, December 5, 1785, A. I., 107-5-19. [312] Testimonio and transcript of the royal cédula of November 23, 1787; King to Marquina, June 15, 1791, A. I., 105-2-10. [313] The first intendant, Ciriaco Gonzales Carvajal, was given the title of intendente de guerra y real hacienda, by virtue of the cédulas of July 17 and 24, 1784. By the reform of November 23, 1787, the duties of his office were united to those of the governor, whose title, under the new arrangement, was gobernador y capitán general y superintendente de la real hacienda (A. I., 105-3-5 and 107-5-19; see Chapter IV, note 55, of this work.) [314] Recopilación, 3-3-35. [315] Basco y Vargas to the King, May 9, 1786, A. I., 107-5-19. [316] Cédula of March 20, 1790, A. I., 107-5-19. [317] Recopilación, 3-3-35. [318] Marquina to the Audiencia, August 16, 1791, A. I., 107-5-19. [319] Recopilación, 3-3-35, cited in notes 21 and 24 of this chapter. [320] Ibid., 2-32-1. [321] Ibid., 7 and note; 8. [322] Ibid., 43. [323] Ibid., 42, note 4; 47, note 7. These cases may be noted in A. I., 68-4-12. [324] Ibid., 44. The cédula of July 16, 1776, ordered the confiscation of property left by foreigners, forbidding that it should be sent outside of the realm either by the juez de difuntos or by the testamentary executor. In accordance with this regulation the superintendent, in 1800, seized the property of a Spaniard who had married a lady of Madras. The Spaniard had left a will providing for the transfer of his property to his wife, naming an executor to administer the will. This was opposed by the juez de difuntos, but when the case was appealed the action of the superintendent was approved (Aguilar to Soler, July 8, 1800, A. I., 107-5-24). [325] See Recopilación, 2-32-42. [326] A case appealed to the Council of the Indies on June 4, 1806, involved the property of Antonio Rodríguez de la Peña, deceased. Rodríguez had bequeathed 35,875 reales to his father; the Augustinians claimed 11,875 reales, or one-third of the entire estate, for prayers said in behalf of the soul of the departed one. The contaduría general in Madrid refused to allow payment (Aparici to the Council of the Indies, June 4, 1806, A. I., 107-3-8). [327] Recopilación, 2-32, note 7. [328] Ibid., 10. [329] Ibid., 32-33, 40, 60. [330] Ibid., 16, 32, 33. [331] Ibid., 16-18, 27-29, 31. [332] Ibid., 46, and note. [333] Ibid., 48-56, 59. The report to the Council of the Indies of Pedro Aparici, general superintendent of real hacienda, on July 8, 1805, shows in detail the method of settlement in Spain. This report was submitted to cover the administration of the property of Alberto Reyes, who died in Manila in 1803. The statement was as follows: Total property left 123,700 r. Executor's commission 741 r. 16 m. Administration 1,237 r. Expenses 123 r. 18 m. Total deductions 2,102 r. Balance to be distributed among heirs 121,598 r. Two-thirds left to brother as per will 81,066 r. One-third left to parents as per will 40,532 r. Another illustration of the disposal of money left under slightly different circumstances may be noted in the Royal Order of February 14, 1800, to the juez de arribadas at Cádiz. The king ordered the transmission of 8024 pesos to the royal treasury because of the impossibility of finding the heirs of Antonio Manuel Pereda, who died at Manila in 1767. By the terms of his will, 2000 pesos had been left to the Third Order of St. Francis, 200 pesos to poor widows and orphans, and the balance was left to his mother. The lady had died, however, and as there were no heirs apparent, the money was ordered transferred to the royal treasury (A. I., 107-3-9). These large sums, constantly on hand, intact and available, were always a source of grave temptation to governors and treasury officials. Loans were frequently taken from this fund for ordinary or unusual expenses of the government. At first the juez de difuntos objected forcibly to the governor's seeming disregard of the royal instructions regarding these funds. The laws of the Indies had commanded that they should be held inviolable (Recopilación, 57, 70). As noted above, the practice had arisen of making deductions from the subsidy equivalent to the amount of bienes de difuntos produced in the Philippines, and of retaining the money in Acapulco. This practice worked havoc with the fulfillment of the law which had ordered that these funds be preserved intact. The governor and the treasury officials had fallen into the practice of appropriating such available funds as existed in the caja de difuntos for purposes of local administration, with the assurance that the money would be properly accounted for in Mexico. Governor Anda seems to have been a leading offender in this matter. In 1767 he borrowed 19,729 pesos from the juez de difuntos and in 1768 another sum of 30,000 pesos was taken (Landazurri to the Council of the Indies, May 22, 1770, A. I., 107-3-9). By the cédula of October 9, 1777, the king approved the action of Governor Anda in borrowing from these funds on three other occasions to the extent of 25,000, 14,206, and 24,477 pesos, respectively, for the fortification of the city. It was ordered that this should not be done again, however, except under extraordinary circumstances (A. I., 107-3-9). After being permitted for a long period of time, the practice which the Manila authorities had followed of making these deductions was finally disapproved by the home government. In 1806, because of the non-arrival of the galleon with the subsidy, the governor (and superintendent) authorized an advance of 54,049 pesos from the bienes de difuntos, which sum constituted the entire amount on hand. On April 25, 1815, the fiscal of the contaduría general de las Indias handed down an adverse opinion on this action (A. I., 107-3-9). Although the practice of allowing small loans from the funds of deceased persons had been practiced in the Philippines in case of exceptional circumstances, it was his opinion that the whole proceeding had been contrary to the laws of the Indies (Recopilación, 2-32-57). He advised that in the future there should be no interference with this money until the deduction had been authorized by the juez de difuntos in Mexico, and the judge should act only after he had received the report of the corresponding official in the Philippines. If the above advice were followed, at least a year would pass before the report of the Manila judge could reach Mexico, and be returned. It was not to be supposed that the officials in the Philippines would wait for any such formality when in need of money for the current expenses of government. This is another example of the cumbrousness and lack of expedition of Spanish colonial administration, as affected by time and distance. It will be noted, also, that this practice had been going on since the time of Anda (1768), and the Council of the Indies did not pronounce against it decisively until 1815. The particular litigation which brought about its condemnation arose in 1806 and continued throughout a period of nine years. [334] Ibid., 60. See the articles on the Philippine situado by E. G. Bourne and James A. Leroy in the American historical review, X, 459-461, 929-932; XI, 722-723. [335] Cédulas of November 26, 1776, September 9, 1778, October 13, 1780, June 12, 1783, February 17, 1786, A. I., 107-3-9. [336] Aparici to the Council of the Indies, July 19, 1797, A. I., 107-3-9. An examination of a few typical accounts of this department will show that the sums involved were always considerable. On June 6, 1767, the juez de difuntos in Manila had 45,563 pesos on hand; on June 17, 1781, 31,009 pesos; on June 29, 1783, 27,636 pesos; on July 28, 1801, 40,827 pesos (see reports of various jueces de difuntos. A. I., 107-3-9). The total receipts of the office of juez de difuntos in Manila for the year terminating January 25, 1819, were 10,750 pesos. Payments against the fund that year were 27,747 pesos, which were made possible by a balance on hand at the beginning of the year of 52,900 pesos (Report of Vicente de Posadas, Juez de Difuntos de Manila, January 25, 1819, A. I., 107-3-9). On March 31, 1828, the funds of this department amounted to 32,657 pesos (A. I., 107-3-9). [337] The last state galleon left Manila for Mexico in 1811, and the last ship sailed from Acapulco to Manila in 1815 (Foreman, Philippine Islands, 243; and Montero y Vidal, Historia general, II, 413, note). The galleon service was suppressed by decree of the Cortes, September 14, 1813.--Ibid., 412. [338] Recopilación, 2-32-7. [339] Villacorta to the Council of the Indies, July 6, 1757, A. I., 106-4-15. The evidence of this case also exists in A. I., 107-3-9, and is cited in connection with a later dispute of the same character. [340] Marquina to the Council of the Indies, June 18, 1790, A. I., 107-5-18. [341] Recopilación, 2-32, note 2. [342] Ibid., 5-12-14. Basco y Vargas to the King, June 6, 1778, A. I., 105-2-9. [343] Cédulas of April 23, 1770, October 13, 1780, and May 4, 1794, A. I., 105-2-10. [344] Recopilación, 2-32-28. [345] Ibid., law 25. [346] Cédula of May 4, 1794, A. I., 105-2-10. [347] A. I., 106-4-17; 108-3-17; 105-2-10 to 32. See Bibliography under "Manuscripts used." [348] The author has at his disposal abundant data for each subject covering each decade and century, showing that the powers mentioned were characteristic throughout. It is to be hoped that the reader will appreciate the impossibility of giving more than a few citations for each case, not because they are not available, but because there is not room for them. It was the writer's original plan to write two additional chapters, one on the commercial duties of the audiencia, and another on the financial powers. Because of a lack of space these chapters have been omitted. [349] A. I., 106-4-18. [350] As noted in the preceding chapter. [351] King to the Audiencia, August 8, 1609, A. I., 105-2-1. [352] Marquina to the King, January 18, 1790, A. I., 105-2-10. [353] King to the Regent of Manila, January 24, 1794, ibid. [354] See, Plan económico del gobernador de Filipinas José Basco y Vargas, 1 de Septre, 1779, y carta que lo acompaña, No. 157, de 11 de Dicre de 1779 (printed); A. I., 106-1-14; see Barrows, History of the Philippines, 242. [355] Memorial of July 20, 1757, A. I., 106-4-15. [356] See Moses, South America on the eve of emancipation, 27-31, for an account of the festivities and formalities at the installation of the viceroy at Lima. It will be noted that the audiencia played an important part in the ceremonies. Professor Moses here utilizes a description contained in Juan y Ulloa, Voyage, II, 46-50. [357] Recopilación, 1-24-1 to 15. [358] Ibid., 1 and 2. [359] Ibid., 3; 15. The cédula of October 10, 1752, gave to the audiencia the right to authorize the publication of legal treatises, ordinances and enactments. The regent was given control over this matter by the Instrucción of June 20, 1776 (A. I., 106-212). See Montero y Vidal, Historia general, III, 304 and 485, with reference to the publication of the autos acordados of 1866. [360] Ibid., 7 and 12. [361] Ibid., 8. [362] Ibid., 1 and 2. [363] See Lea, The Inquisition in the Spanish dependencies, 70, 204, 265; 444-446. [364] Acuerdo of January 26, 1816, A. I., 106-4-19. [365] The constitutional reforms of 1812 included the separation of the governorship from the presidency of the audiencia. In 1814 the governor was again made president, and the offices were not entirely separated until 1861. The governor's intervention in matters of justice was merely nominal, however, after the creation of the office of regent, in 1776.--Cédula of March 11, 1776, A. I., 106-2-12; Royal Instruction to Regents, June 20, 1776, in Rodríguez San Pedro, VII, 22-23; Ordenanzas para el gobierno de la Audiencia de Manila, 9 de Octubre, 1812; A. I., 106-4-19; Acuerdo de 15 de Enero, 1814, ibid. [366] Montero y Vidal, III, 30. [367] Ibid., 251. [368] Recopilación, 2-15-156 to 166. [369] On the basis of this the governor compiled and sent to Spain a yearly report on the work of the magistrates, prosecutors, and subalterns of the audiencia, setting forth the salaries paid and character of services rendered, making recommendations for promotion or complaints against these officials. Vacancies in the tribunal were reported at the same time and in the same manner. [370] Recopilación, 2-15-11. Note the brief discussion of this relationship in Smith, The viceroy of New Spain, 152-156. Dr. Smith shows that the chief purpose of the Spanish government in establishing the viceroy and audiencia together was to guarantee a check and balance of one upon the other. Quoting Revilla Gigedo (Instruction, Article 20), he says: "The presidency of the audiencia places the viceroy at the head of that body but not to give orders to it, as even his acts in matters of justice are subject to it; and although he is present at its sessions, which is very difficult, considering the grave and continuous occupations which so vast a command imposes upon him, he does not have a vote in matters which are regularly dealt with there--that is, matters of justice." Dr. Smith shows (162) that the effect of the later laws of the eighteenth century was to deprive "the viceroys absolutely of any part in the procedure of the administration of justice, either alone or in company with the other judges, voting with them in the audiencia" (from Revilla Gigedo, Instruction, Article 64). The limitation of the governor of the Philippines in legal matters is discussed further on in this chapter. [371] See Moses, Establishment of Spanish rule in America, 70-71. Philip III ordered the viceroy of New Spain to "give aid to the governor and captain-general of the Philippines in whatever may occur, and above all ... to send him on demand whatever may seem necessary of arms, men, munitions, and money for the conservation of those Islands, salaries, and presidios, and other matters under his care (Recopilación, 3-4-13)." The viceroys also exercised a certain degree of authority over the despatch of the galleons from Acapulco (ibid., 9-45-25 to 31, 47, 74 to 76). Aside from the points indicated, the Philippines were normally as independent of New Spain as the latter was independent of the Philippines. [372] Bourne, "Historical introduction," Blair and Robertson, I, 49-50. [373] Delgado, Historia de Filipinas, 212-215. [374] Delgado illustrates this statement as follows: "The legitimate King of Borney, who had been dispossessed of his kingdom ... begged for help from Don Francisco Sande, Governor of these Islands. Governor Sande went with his fleet, fought with and drove away the tyrant, and put the legitimate king in possession; the latter rendered obedience to the governor, appointed in the place of the King of España, and subjected himself to this crown as vassal and tributary." Further on he writes, "His Majesty also ordered Sande, by a decree of April 9, 1586, to sustain friendship with China, and forbade him to make war; for, as some authors say, Sande had the intention of conquering that Empire, ... although it may be said that the idea was simply speculative; the Council forbade it, and ordered him thenceforth to observe what was prescribed" (ibid., see Blair and Robertson, XVII, 317-320, whose translation differs slightly from the above). [375] Recopilación, 3-3-2; 63, 64; 3-14-1, 33. [376] Instructions to Acuña, February 16, 1602, Blair and Robertson, XI, 273-4. [377] Recopilación, 3-3-55; 3-2-33. [378] Ibid., 3-3-56; 2-15-159. [379] King to the Audiencia, December 4, 1777, A. I., 105-2-9. It was seen in the preceding chapter, that the audiencia reported to the Council of the Indies on the finances of the colony. [380] Recopilación, 3-3-57. [381] Ibid., 2-15-76 and 77. [382] Ibid., 3-2-1 to 6; 2-15-172. Governors and viceroys were authorized by the cédula of April 20, 1776, to make permanent appointments to offices whose salaries did not exceed 400 pesos (ibid., 3-2, note 2). [383] Ibid., 3-2-67. [384] Ibid., 3-2-1, 10 to 12, 47, 48; 8-4-24. [385] Ibid., 3-2-8. [386] Villacorta to the King, July 6, 1767, A. I., 106-4-15. [387] Recopilación, 3-2-3, 4 and note, 21, 22, 47, 70; 5-2-5, 7, 8-4-1. [388] Ibid., 3-2-1, 2, 3, 8-4-1. [389] Ibid., 51. After February 20, 1785, this regulation applied only to offices yielding more than 2000 pesos a year.--Ibid., note 17. [390] Ibid., 27. [391] Ibid., 33, 38. [392] King to the Audiencia, August 9, 1609, A. I., 105-2-1. [393] Fajardo to the King, December 10, 1621, Blair and Robertson, XX, 138-140. [394] Recopilación, 2-15-34; 5-12-24; 2-16-29. [395] Ibid., 2-2-70. [396] Ibid., 3-2-45; 2-16-29. [397] Although a sufficient number of oidores were usually present in Manila to suffice for the judicial needs of the audiencia, on many occasions there were only two or three available. When but few cases were before the tribunal, the junior oidor could easily be spared to act as fiscal. However, when a magistrate was needed, owing to the multiplicity of cases to be tried, or the absence of two or more magistrates on special commissions, the need was very urgent, and the fiscal was then liable to be called upon to serve. [398] Recopilación, 2-16-30. [399] Ibid., 3-2-67. [400] Ibid., 2-15-173 and 174. [401] Ibid., 3-3-70. [402] Ibid., 3-14-6, 7; Felipe III to Fajardo, December 13, 1620, Blair and Robertson, XIX, 174-175. [403] Recopilación, 3-14-5, 6, 8. [404] Ibid., 2-16-59, 62 to 64; 3-3-39. A confirmation of the latter was so often reported that it seems to have been expected, and nothing was done about it. It would seem that practically every official in the colony conducted a mercantile business as a side-issue. [405] Felipe IV to Fajardo, October 9, 1623, Blair and Robertson, XX, 259; Recopilación, 2-16-66, 67. [406] Recopilación, 2-15-36, 39, 40. [407] Ibid., 2-16-82 to 84. [408] Ibid., 87. [409] Ibid., 82, note 20 (Cédula of January 23, 1754). [410] Cédula of July 13, 1789, A. I., 107-5-20. On June 21, 1784, the Council of the Indies recommended that permission to marry within his district be accorded to Oidor Ciriaco Gonzales Carvajal (A. I., 105-3-2); the same concession was recommended in the case of Oidor Felipe Cisneros, June 30, 1788 (A. I., 105-3-4), and again to Francisco Xavier de Mendieta, January 22, 1791 (A. I., 105-3-5). [411] Royal order of April 3, 1848; Rodríguez San Pedro, Legislación ultramarina, VII, 79. [412] Royal order of December 2, 1804, A. I., 106-4-18. [413] Royal decree of October 13, 1806, A. I., 106-4-18. [414] Laws of May 3, 1605 and September 5, 1620, Recopilación, 2-16-43 and 44. [415] This was done, for example, by governors Fajardo and Bustamante, while this law was still in force (1618-1624 and 1717-1719, respectively). The observation of this law in Chile was commanded in a royal order expedited to the president of the audiencia there on September 22, 1725; see Recopilación, 2-16, note 13. [416] Ibid., note 14. [417] Ibid., 2-16-51. [418] Discussed in Chapter IV of this treatise. [419] Governors, captains-general, and viceroys were assisted by an asesor, or legal adviser, who gave his opinion in all matters of law that came up for solution. The necessity for this official developed through the fact that as most governors were soldiers, they were incapable of rendering judgment on legal and administrative questions. As counselor to the governor, this official bore the same relation to the executive as the fiscal did to the audiencia. The asesor was held responsible in the residencia for all decisions rendered by the governor in matters of justice, and in governmental affairs the governor and asesor were jointly responsible. Frequently the asesor was able to block completely the work of the audiencia and his opinion nullified the judgments of magistrates who were as learned in the law and as well qualified, if not better, than he. Martínez de Zúñiga (Estadismo, I, 224) discusses the influence of the asesor in the following terms: "Expedientes are sent to one of the two royal fiscales to ascertain their legality; afterwards they are sent to the asesor whom the governors must consult; the latter place (of asesor) is a very good one, ... besides 2000 pesos as salary it has its private revenues in addition to 500 pesos yearly from each of the royal monopolies (discussed in Chapter V of this volume). There are many persons in Manila who are exempted from ordinary justice through their military connections or on account of being employed in the royal monopolies, and as they depend on him, he exercises great power; ... there are few who desire him for an enemy, for when they least think of it they are in need of his favorable opinion in some expediente which they have brought before the government." The laws of the Indies forbade that an oidor should act as the governor's asesor if any other appointee with the requisite qualifications were available (Recopilación, 3-3-35, and note). See cédula (and accompanying expedientes) of September 26, 1756, A. I., 106-4-16. [420] Recopilación, 2-15-61 to 63, 169; 2-16-12, 31, 32. [421] Ibid., 2-15-38. [422] Ibid., 3-3-36, 38. [423] Ibid., 3-3-60. Relative to the relations of the viceroys and audiencias of the Spanish colonies, Robertson (The History of America, IV, 19-20) says: "The Spanish viceroys have often attempted to intrude themselves into the seat of justice, and with an ambition which their distance from the controul (sic) of a superior rendered bold, have aspired at a power which their master does not venture to assume ... the viceroys have been prohibited, in the most explicit terms, by repeated laws, from interfering in the judicial proceedings of the courts of Audience, or from delivering an opinion, or giving a voice with respect to any point litigated before them. In some particular cases, in which any question of civil right is involved, even the political regulations of the viceroy may be brought under review of the court of Audience, which in those instances, may be deemed an intermediate power between him and the people, as a constitutional barrier to circumscribe his jurisdiction. But as legal restraints on a person who represents the sovereign, and is clothed with his authority, are little suited to the genius of Spanish policy; the hesitation and reserve with which it confers this power on the courts of Audience are remarkable. They may advise, they may remonstrate; but in the event of a direct collision between their opinion and the will of the viceroy, what he determines must be brought into execution, and nothing remains for them, but to lay the matter before the king and the Council of the Indies." [424] Recopilación. 3-3-27, promulgated July 19, 1614, conferred general pardoning power on the viceroy. [425] Regent to the King, July 9, 1793, A. I., 106-4-18; Cédula of October 24, 1803, A. I., 105-2-10. [426] Royal decree of July 4, 1861, Colección legislativa, LXXXVI, 1-45. [427] Recopilación, 3-3-65. It is to be noted that the New Laws of 1542 conferred on the audiencias the duty of protecting the Indians. Professor Moses, in his Spanish dependencies in South America, I, (212-3), says: "The audiencias were commanded to inquire into the treatment which the Indians had received at the hands of governors and private persons; and, in case of excesses and ill-treatment, the guilty parties should be punished.... While it was acknowledged that some persons had a sufficient title to hold Indians, it was ordered that when the number held was excessive, the audiencia should gather the necessary information and reduce the allotments made to the said persons in a fair and moderate quantity 'and place the rest under the Crown'." [428] Ibid., 53. [429] Ibid., 3-3-61; 3-4-7. We have a notable illustration of this in the banishment of Archbishop Poblete by Governor Salcedo (1663-1668) as a result of the resistance of the former to Salcedo's intervention in ecclesiastical matters on the basis of the royal patronage. Salcedo did not solicit the aid or intervention of the audiencia in this matter. [430] Ibid., 2-16-8. [431] Ibid., 3-3-58; King to Audiencia, March 6, 1781, A. I., 105-2-9. [432] Instruction to Tello, May 25, 1596, Blair and Robertson, IX, 229, 232-233, 238-239. [433] Recopilación, 1-14-29 to 31. [434] Ibid., 31. [435] King to the Audiencia, March 6, 1781, A. I., 105-2-9. [436] Recopilación, 3-3-45. [437] This is treated in the first chapter of this book. See Solórzano, Política Indiana, II, 271-279. [438] Recopilación, 2-15-11. [439] Constitution of 1812, Martínez Alcubilla, III, 408 et seq.; Acuerdo for the promulgation of the Constitution of 1812, Montero y Vidal, III, 404; Acuerdo of January 15, 1814, Ordenanzas, etc., A. I., 106-4-19; Cédula of September 26, 1835, Zamora y Coronado, Apéndice, 41-138; Royal Decree of January 30, 1855, Colección legislativa, LX, 105-147; see also Royal Instruction to Regents, June 20, 1776, and Cédula of April 8, 1778, in Rodríguez San Pedro, Legislación ultramarina, VII, 22-28. [440] Ordinances enacted by the Audiencia of Manila, June 13 to December 19, 1598, Blair and Robertson, X, 293-316; Ordinances etc., January 7, to June 15, 1599, ibid., XI, 1-81. Reference may also be made to the five volume Colección de autos acordados de la real audiencia ... de Manila, 1861-1866; see also Estadísticas de las causas y expedientes de gobierno despachadas por la audiencia de Filipinas durante el año de 1876. For New Spain we have the Recopilación sumaria de algunos autos acordados de la real audiencia de Nueva España, Mexico, 1787. Of similar import and character was the well-known collection of Puga, cited in the bibliography of this volume. See also Solórzano, Política Indiana (2 vols.). [441] Blair and Robertson, L, 191-264; see, also, Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 380-385, also correspondence relative to the modifications of these ordinances by Raón in A. I., 105-4-5. Marquina's efforts along this line may be noted in A. I., 105-4-6. [442] Acuerdo of January 15, 1814, A. I., 106-4-19; see also Montero y Vidal, Historia general, III, 404; 430. [443] Carvajal to the King, December 5, 1785, A. I., 107-5-14; Carvajal to the Audiencia of Manila, December 29, 1787, A. I., 107-5-15; Testimonio del expediente sobre poner la real jurisdicción y el gobierno y policía de estas islas en el ser y estado que tenían antes, December 20, 1788, A. I., 107-5-18, 105-3-5. [444] King to the Audiencia, August 13, 1793, A. I., 105-2-10. [445] Recopilación, 3-2-70 (after 1680), 67. [446] Rodríguez San Pedro, Legislación ultramarina, VII, 67. [447] Mas, "Internal political condition of the Philippines," in Blair and Robertson, LII, 70-73. Mas was a Spanish diplomatic official stationed in China, who visited the Islands in 1842 on a semi-official mission. This writer was not favorably impressed with the effectiveness of the acuerdo. He wrote: "Whatever difficulty occurs in the fulfilment of an order, it must be solved by means of a conference and advice [consulta], from which a reply is not obtained until from twelve to fourteen months." Instead of governmental matters being referred to the acuerdo, Mas stated that they were referred to Spain, hence there was great delay. He stated that the governor scarcely decided any question by himself, and those which were solved in the colony were referred to the asesor, and "from this practice," he continued, "arises the system of expedientes, which reigns, and which is so fatal to the prosperity and good government of the country, since very often the arrangement that appears good to some, is contrary to the opinions or interests of others.... Thus much valuable time is lost and the expedientes result in only a waste of paper, besides great injury to the islands. The governor often has to conform to the opinions expressed in the expediente, although he knows they will be the cause of injustice. On the other hand, the governor is often directly at fault, because he enforces his own opinion on his assessor (sp.), who has often obtained his position through favoritism and is not a lawyer, and decides questions according to the will of the governor.... The chiefs of the various departments carry on correspondence with the directors-general of their respective departments in Madrid, without the knowledge of the governor, a fact that increases the confusion and disorder." (See also Revilla Gigedo's description of the evils of the expediente in New Spain [1790]. Smith, The viceroy of New Spain, 190-191.) This description of the Philippine government in 1842 would seem to indicate that aside from the limitations imposed upon his rule by the audiencia, the governor was obliged to contend with a number of other officials, departments, and regulations, which effectively prevented him from exercising absolute power, even at the sacrifice of efficiency. We note in this description, moreover, that tendency of Spanish colonial government which has been emphasized so often in this treatise--namely, the failure of the home government to leave to the colonial officials sufficient scope of action or authority to deal adequately with the ordinary problems of government. Up to the end of the eighteenth century the audiencia was the only civil authority or tribunal present to exercise any check on the executive in administrative affairs. However, in the last century the importance of the audiencia in this regard was diminished by the creation of other departments, ministries, and offices, by the elimination of time and space, due to the progress of invention, which brought the colonies nearer to Spain, and finally by the fact that the tribunal itself was more and more confined to judicial affairs. [448] Governor Torres to the Queen, March 18, 1835, A. I., 106-4-21. [449] Colección legislativa de España, LXXXVI, 1-45. Elliott, in his Philippines to the end of the military regime, p. 242, states incorrectly that this reform took place in 1865. Mr. Elliott did not make use of the sources. It is to be noted, too, that Dr. Barrows in his article on "The governor general of the Philippines," in The Pacific Ocean in history makes contradictory statements relative to this matter. On page 242 he asserts that the governor was president of the audiencia till 1844, and on page 248 the statement occurs that "a further specialization of 1861 deprived the governor-general of his judicial powers." [450] Instruction of the King to Governor Acuña, February 16, 1602, Blair and Robertson, XI, 263-88. [451] Fray Sánchez, in his memorial of July 26, 1586, stated that the audiencia had stopped the practice of conceding encomiendas (A. I., 67-6-27), which the governors had followed prior to its establishment. Nevertheless the governor's authority to bestow encomiendas was recognized by the royal instructions to Governor Dasmariñas, issued May 25, 1593 (Blair and Robertson, IX, 232). The statement of Sánchez may be interpreted to mean that the audiencia had stopped the abuses which had been perpetrated by various governors in bestowing encomiendas on their friends. Encomiendas were conceded by different governors in the Philippines throughout the eighteenth century. This matter has been discussed in an earlier note. [452] Mas, "Internal political conditions of the Philippines, 1842," Blair and Robertson, LII, 69-70 and note. The keen observations of this official on social and governmental conditions in the Philippines are peculiarly pertinent, and they are as true in many regards today as they were seventy-five years ago. He recommended a regency to govern the Philippines, consisting of the governor as president, a military commander and an intendant of finance. The audiencia, according to his plan of reform, was to be limited to judicial affairs, with appellate jurisdiction over civil, criminal, and commercial cases. Instead of the audiencia as a court of appeals against the governor, the regency was to entertain appeals from the audiencia. Many of his ideas were incorporated into the new laws of the last half of the nineteenth century (ibid., 78-85). [453] Recopilación, 5-12-22; 2-15-35; 36, 41. [454] Ibid., 3-3-51. [455] Ibid., 2-15-35, 36, 41; 3-3-2, 34, 42; 3-14-1; 5-12-22. [456] Acuña to Felipe III, July 15, 1604, Blair and Robertson, XIII, 235. Acuña stated that the soldiers and military officials were "discontented and grieved at the ill-treatment which the said auditors accord them; and at seeing that they are hindered by them, an auditor commanding at his will the arrest of a captain, official, or soldier, without cause or reason, and interfering in all the details of service--even going so far as to inspect their quarters, and send them to the public prison, for very trivial affairs, against all military precedents." The governor said that when affairs went on in a peaceful and orderly way, it was because the oidores were not interfering with them. He stated that it was the opinion of all right-thinking men that soldiers were of more use in the colony than judges (ibid., 237). [457] The terms of these governors were as follows: Fajardo, 1618-1624; Corcuera, 1635-1644; Vargas, 1678-1684; Arandía, 1754-1759; Anda, 1762-1764, 1770-1776. [458] Rios Coronel to the King, June 27, 1597, A. I., 67-6-19; see also Bourne, "Historical introduction," in Blair and Robertson, I, 53, note. [459] These arguments are noted in detail in Chapter II of this volume. [460] Viana to Carlos III, May 1, 1767, Blair and Robertson, L, 126-135. [461] Delgado, 212-215, reproduced in Blair and Robertson, XVII, 316. [462] "But," he continued, "if a man come to these islands with the intention of escaping his natural poverty by humoring the rich and powerful, and even obeying them, the wrongs accruing to the community are incredible" (ibid., 317). [463] Reforms in Filipinas, April 26, 1827, by Manuel Bernáldez Pizarro, Blair and Robertson, LI, 219; see 213-218. [464] Montero y Vidal, Archipiélago Filipino, 162-168. "The Spanish régime in Filipinas lasted 333 years.... During that time there were 97 governors--not counting some twenty who served for less than one year each, mostly ad interim, and the average length of their terms of office was a little less than three and one-half years, a fact which is an important element in the administrative history of the islands" (Blair and Robertson, L, 74, note 46). [465] Recopilación, 3-3-3. [466] Ibid., 3-11-1 to 3. [467] Ibid., 3-11-1, 2, 3 to 10; 3-10-3, 11; 5-10-15. [468] Ibid., 2-2-72, 74, 77; Consulta de 18 de Febrero de 1673 sobre atribuciones de la Junta de Guerra de Indias, A. I., 141-5-8. [469] Auditor de guerra, "the juez letrado, who has jurisdiction in first instance over cases under the military law, subordinate to the captain or commandant-general of an army or province" (Escriche, Diccionario, I, 369). [470] Royal order of January 30, 1855, Colección legislativa de España, LXIV, 105-147. [471] Royal order of January 22, 1787, A. I., 107-5-16. [472] That the consejo de guerra was something more than a (tribunal of) courtmartial and that it actually participated in the administration of military affairs may be seen in the cédula of June 22, 1599, which authorized the local consejo to act with the audiencia and cabildo in restraining the military officials in the provinces from imposing undue exactions on the natives, assessing them too heavily or confiscating their property in the equipment of military forces in time of threatened invasion (Recopilación, 3-4-3). [473] On March 12, 1781, Governor Basco y Vargas complained to the king against the inconvenience of having to appeal the decisions of the local council of war to the Supreme Council in Madrid. This was the practice followed in other parts, he said, but it was undesirable in the Philippines on account of the isolation and the distance. He recommended instead that these cases should be appealed to a board consisting of the governor and two asesores--one his own, and the other an oidor to be designated by him. This recommendation was not accepted (A. I., 106-1-18). [474] Audiencia to Váldez, December 11, 1788, A. I., 107-5-16. [475] Royal order of March 27, 1802, A. I., 107-5-16. [476] Case of Don Diego Salvatierra, November 20, 1792, A. I., 105-2-10. [477] Case of Don Josef de Áviles, November 2, 1792, A. I., 105-2-10. [478] Recopilación, 2-16-12; 2-15-36. [479] Ibid., 2-16-11. [480] The memorial which the governor sent in answer to the arguments of the oidor was an interesting exposition of his opinion of the audiencia. He said that the lack of time alleged by the oidor was a mere pretense, as the regular sessions of the audiencia did not exceed three hours a day. The governor stated that none of the oidores were occupied more than that length of time, excepting those who had special conservatorships of cockpits, tobacco, cards, betel, and wine. The suits of Spaniards and Indians were few, he alleged, since most of the questions involving commerce were tried in the tribunal of the consulado (Governor Marquina to the superintendent-general, July 10, 1789, A. I., 107-5-18); see Chapter III, note 88. [481] Recopilación, 3-11-2. [482] Ibid., note 2. [483] See citation of the cédula of January 24, 1773, applicable to Perú, wherein an oidor was permanently charged with the duty of serving as auditor de guerra (ibid.). [484] Morga states that after the audiencia was established in May, 1584, "they (the oidores) began to attend to the affairs both of justice and of war and government" (Morga's Sucesos, Blair and Robertson, XV, 60). [485] Memorial of April 19, 1586, Blair and Robertson, VI, 197-233. The purpose of the proposed expedition was declared to be to "forestall the danger that the French and English, and other heretics and northern nations, will discover and navigate that strait which certainly lies opposite those regions--that of Labrador." A note suggests that this probably referred to the St. Lawrence River. Delgado says that Governor Sande called this council together on April 9, 1586, evidently meaning Santiago de Vera, as the latter became governor in 1584, and Sande left the Islands in 1580. De Vera's signature is affixed to this petition. Other letters of special importance, from the audiencia or individual oidores to the court, entirely or in part on military affairs, written during this period, may be noted in Blair and Robertson, VI, 56-65, 157-233, 254-264, 265-274, 311-321, XVII, 251-280, and throughout this series from Volumes VI to XXXV (1584-1650) especially. The general subject is covered in A. I., 67-6-6 to 26. [486] Luzón Menaced, Blair and Robertson, VIII, 284-297. We shall see, in the next chapter, that Governor Bustamante, on a similar occasion, asked for the written advice of the various ecclesiastical authorities and corporations on the question of whether he had a right to remove and appoint oidores without express royal authorization. [487] Opinions of the religious communities on the war with the Zambales. January 19-20, 1592, Blair and Robertson, VIII, 199-233. [488] Audiencia to the King, January 7, 1597, A. I., 105-2-1. [489] A. I., 105-2-1 to 10 are replete with documents illustrating this phase of the relation of the audiencia and the governor. [490] Torre to the King, July 26, 1744, A. I., 108-2-21. [491] Report of Council of War, June 18, 1746, A. I., 108-2-21. See note 17 of this chapter, which deals with the local council of war. On the occasion referred to, it acted as a courtmartial. It also had power to advise the governor, and even to prevent the military officials from taking steps which would inflict injustice on the natives in connection with military operations. Here it may be seen that magistrates were actually members of this council, and in this capacity they advised the governor as to the best means of fortifying and defending the Islands. The laws of the Indies are singularly lacking in definite statements as to the legal composition and membership of this council. [492] Obando to the King, August 15, 1748, A. I., 108-2-21. [493] Morga's Sucesos, Blair and Robertson, XV, 205-237. [494] Martínez de Zúñiga, An historical view, I, 239-241. [495] In recommending the services of Licentiate Madrid y Luna, oidor of the Manila audiencia, Alcaraz wrote to the king as follows: "On that account, and for the good accomplished by his services in this Royal Audiencia, the said Licentiate Madrid claims that your Majesty should grant him as a reward permission to marry some of his seven daughters and three sons in Mexico" (Alcaraz to Felipe III, August 10, 1617, Blair and Robertson, XVIII, 52). [496] Formosa lost to Spain, Blair and Robertson, XXXV, 128-162. [497] Audiencia to the King, July 15, 1598, A. I., 67-6-18. [498] Audiencia to Felipe III, August 8, 1620, Blair and Robertson, XIX, 77-89. [499] Recopilación, 5-3-24; also A. I., 105-2-1. [500] Recopilación, 2-15-55. Don Antonio de Morga, writing in his Sucesos in 1609, described the Chinese government of the Parián as follows: "The Chinese have a governor of their own race, a Christian, who has his officials and assistants. He hears their cases in affairs of justice, in their domestic and business affairs; appeals from him go to the alcalde-mayor of Tondo, or of the Parián, and from all these to the Audiencia, which also gives especial attention to this nation and whatever pertains to it" (Morga's Sucesos, Blair and Robertson, XVI, 197). See W. L. Schurz, "The Chinese in the Philippines," in The Pacific Ocean in history, 214-222. [501] The Chinese were altogether too shrewd in business for the other residents of Manila. The desire to avoid trouble and to keep from provoking the Chinese to rebellion were also factors, and there were institutional and religious reasons. The Chinese were of different race and heritage and their practices and beliefs were regarded by the Catholic Spaniards as altogether heathenish and heretical, and judging by almost any standard of morality and cleanliness it must be conceded that some of them at least were indecent and revolting. [502] Cédula of December 1, 1606, A. I., 105-2-1. [503] Recopilación, 6-18-6. [504] King to the Audiencia, December 4, 1630, A. I., 105-2-10. The Chinese had asked the king on this occasion to remove Governor Tavora. The magistrates, jealous of the governor, and desiring to see him dispossessed of his office, forwarded this request to the king. [505] Royal instructions to Gerónimo Ortiz y Capata; February 4, 1631, A. I., 105-2-1. [506] King to the Audiencia, December 4, 1630, A. I., 105-2-10. [507] King to the Audiencia, August 8, 1609, A. I., 105-2-1. [508] King to Governor Silva, March 27, 1616, A. I., 105-2-1. [509] King to the President and oidores, July 25, 1619, A. I., 105-2-1. [510] King to the President and oidores, December 21, 1630, A. I., 105-2-1. [511] Acuerdo of July 27, 1713, A. I., 68-4-17. [512] Attention was called in the last chapter to the acuerdo power of the audiencia in Chinese affairs. It was seen there that the audiencia passed ordinances regulating the Chinese trade, also their organization and manner of living in the Islands. [513] King to the President and oidores, May 14, 1790, A. I., 105-9-10. This tax was collected from the Chinese in 1852, when Jagor, the celebrated German traveller, visited the Islands. Chinese who were engaged in agriculture paid merely the tribute of twelve reales, which was collected from natives as well. In addition to the tax of six dollars (probably Mexican, which were equivalent to the silver peso) merchants paid an industrial tax of twelve, thirty, sixty, or one hundred dollars, according to the amount of business transacted (Blair and Robertson, LII, 57-58, note). [514] Consulta of June 28, 1786; Intendant Carvajal to King, December 31, 1787, and other letters; A. I., 107-5-15. [515] Testimonio de autos sobre sublevación de los sangleyes, substanciados y determinados por el oidor, Don Pedro Sebastián Bolívar y Meña, 1686-1690, A. I., 68-1-27. [516] Marquina to the King, June 30, 1793, A. I., 107-5-22. [517] King to the Audiencia, November 30, 1797, A. I., 105-2-18. [518] King to the Audiencia, February 19, 1806, ibid. [519] See Chapter II, notes 61 and 64 of this book. The study which Dr. David P. Barrows has recently made of the office of governor and captain-general is of value in showing the continuity, and at the same time the evolution of the office from Spanish times to the present. Dr. Barrows states that Miguel López de Legaspi became governor and captain-general of the Philippines when the office was created in 1567. The original cédula of establishment and appointment is in Blair and Robertson, III, 62-66, and bears the date of August 14, 1569. See Barrows, "The governor-general of the Philippines under Spain and the United States," in The Pacific Ocean in history. p. 239. [520] Fiscal to the King, July 21, 1599, Blair and Robertson, XI, 114, 115; Maldonado to the King, June 28, 1605, ibid., XIII, 307-315. [521] Audiencia to Felipe III, August 8, 1620, ibid., XIX, 87-89; see also Messa y Lugo to King, July 30, 1622, ibid., XX, 161-163. [522] Messa y Lugo to the King, July 30, 1622, ibid., XX, 162-163; see Recopilación, 9-45-3. [523] Recopilación, 8-20-1. [524] Recopilación, 2-16-43 and 44. [525] Messa y Lugo to the King, op. cit., 186. [526] Blair and Robertson, XXXIX, 177. [527] In accordance with Recopilación, 5-15-2. [528] Foreman, Philippine Islands, 60; Blair and Robertson, XXXIX, 208-219. [529] The governor arrested and imprisoned magistrates Zalaeta and Lezana before the arrival of Valdivia. Oidor Viga was exiled to Samar and Bolívar was sent to Mariveles. Both of these last-mentioned magistrates died in exile. By the time Valdivia arrived Fiscal Alanis was the only person connected with the former audiencia who was left to be punished. His residencia was taken and his property confiscated (Blair and Robertson, XXXIX, 135, 231-233, 277, 281-295). [530] Bolívar to Valdez, June 15, 1685, ibid., 221. [531] Ibid., 223. [532] Pimentel to Rodríguez, February 8, 1688. Blair and Robertson, XXXIX, 240. Pimentel accused the governor of scandalous conduct, "in the matter of chastity, not sparing any woman, whatever may be her rank or condition; and he keeps some worthless women who serve as procuresses for conveying to him those whose society will give him most pleasure." Pimentel stated that the archbishop and the friars of the city did nothing to check this conduct, but knowingly permitted it. [533] Pimentel to Rodríguez, February 8, 1688, XXXIX, 239-240. [534] Ibid., 242-243. [535] Torralba to the King, June 23, 1718, A. I., 68-4-18. When Governor Bustamante arrived in Manila in 1717, Torralba's services as oidor and temporary governor, extending over a period of eight years, were investigated. Wholesale bribery was the leading charge against him. He had levied blackmail on alcaldes mayores, encomenderos, and Chinese and Spanish merchants. He was also charged with the misuse of government funds, and was held responsible for large deficits. It was said that he had sent his wife to Macao with most of this ill-gotten money. In his residencia he was fined 120,000 pesos, exiled forever from Madrid, Manila and New Spain, and was reduced subsequently to such poverty that he was compelled to beg. He died a pauper in the hospital of San Juan de Diós, in Cavite, in 1736. [536] Government of Bustamante, Blair and Robertson, XLIV, 151; this account (pages 148-165) is a summary of Concepción, Historia general, IX, 183-424; see also Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 410-429. [537] Consulta del gobierno de Filipinas sobre la formación de aquella audiencia, 2 de Mayo de 1718, Zulueta Mss., Manila. [538] Report of Archbishop de la Cuesta on the Bustamante Affair, June 28, 1720, Blair and Robertson, XLIV, 182-195. [539] Recopilación, 2-15-11. [540] Ibid., 2-16-29. [541] Contestación de la Compañía de Jesús, 6 de Mayo de 1718, Zulueta Mss., Manila. [542] Recopilación, 2-16-93. [543] Opinión de la Universidad de Santo Tomás, 9 de Mayo de 1718, Zulueta Mss., Manila. [544] Recopilación, 2-16-44. [545] The legal phases of this question together with the opinions of the royal fiscal and the leading councillors are set forth in the consulta of the Council of the Indies of March 18, 1720, A. I., 68-2-8. In this consulta an effort is made to fix responsibility for the murder of the governor, and to determine the legality of his acts. [546] This refers to the reception of the French papal delegate, Tourón, who came to the Islands to inspect the archbishopric, and who was received by the audiencia without the authority of the Council of the Indies. This will be treated further in Chapter X of this book. [547] Fr. Diego de Otazo, the Jesuit confessor of Bustamante, in a letter to his superior, described the power of the governor and his treatment of the audiencia as follows: "Here, my father," he wrote, "the governor takes away and establishes, gives, commands, unmakes and makes more despotically than does the king himself;... Royal decrees are not sufficient; for either he hides them, or he does not fulfill them as he ought. The Audiencia does not serve [as a check] on him, for he suppresses and he establishes it, when and how he pleases; nor do other bodies, whether chapters or [religious] communities (dare to oppose him), ... for he does the same thing [with them]. And never do there lack pretexts for doing thus, even though such bodies are appointed by the king; and with the pretext that account of the matter has already been rendered to Madrid, what he has begun remains permanently done, or else he proceeds to change it, as seems good to him." (Letter of Diego de Otazo, S. J., November 19, 1719, Blair and Robertson, XLIV, 175.) [548] Recopilación, 2-16-93. [549] Government of Bustamante (from Concepción), Blair and Robertson, XLIV, 161. [550] Recopilación. 2-16-43, 44, 46. [551] King to Basco y Vargas, December 10, 1783, A. I., 105-2-10. [552] Sociedad de los Amigos del País, an economic, commercial, and agricultural society established in the Philippines by Governor Basco y Vargas in 1780.--Original autos and plans for society in A. I., 106-1-14. [553] Audiencia to the King, December 17, 1788, A. I., 106-4-17. [554] Expedientes sobre establecimiento de intendencias y subintendencias en Filipinas, A. I., 105-1-17, 107-5-18, 105-3-5, 146-6-13. [555] King to the Audiencia, August 1, 1788, A. I., 105-2-10. [556] King to Basco y Vargas, October 9, 1777, A. I., 105-2-9. [557] Audiencia to the King, December 23, 1789, A. I., 106-4-17. [558] Montero y Vidal, Historia general, II, 324, note. [559] For further testimony bearing upon the formative period of the audiencia's history, see Chapter II of this volume, wherein are described the conflicts attendant on the establishment of the audiencia in the Philippines. [560] Dasmariñas to Felipe II, June 6, 1592, Blair and Robertson, VIII, 253. [561] Acuña to Felipe III, July 15, 1604, Blair and Robertson, XIII, 232. [562] Acuña continued as follows: "If the governors do not consent to this (the appointment of the relatives and dependents of oidores), the auditors dislike them, and seek means and expedients whereby the worthy persons to whom the said offices and livings are given shall not be received therein. Accordingly the governors, in order not to displease the auditors, give up their claims and dare not insist upon them" (ibid., 234). [563] Acuña further commented on their commercial abuses: "The said creatures and connections of the said auditors trade and traffic a great deal in merchandise from China; and the citizens complain that it is with the auditors' money (their own or borrowed), and that with the favor they receive they cause great injury to the commonwealth, for they take up the whole cargo. They desire to be preferred therein, and in buying the cloth and in every other way, try to take advantage. If the president wishes to remedy this they do not cease to offer him little annoyances; for the auditors know how to magnify themselves, in such a manner that they give one to understand that any one of them is greater than he; and they attain this by saying that what the president or governor does they can cancel, and that what the auditors decree has no appeal, recourse, or redress" (ibid., 234-5). Acuña testified that the magistrates had rendered life unpleasant for the residents of the colony, because of their selfishness. He continued: "the resources of this land are scanty, but if there is anything good the auditors also say that they want it for themselves; and when there is a Chinese embroiderer, tailor, carver, or other workman, they proceed to take him.... Such benefits do not extend to the citizens; but rather, if any of these things are available, the said auditors demand them and by entreaty and intimidation get possession of them. It is the same thing in regard to jewels, slave men and women, articles of dress, and other things.... We are compelled to overlook these things, and others of more importance, that we may not experience worse trouble; ... as your Majesty is five thousand leguas from here and redress comes so slowly" (ibid., 235-236). [564] Their salaries must be preferred, he wrote, "even if it be from the stated fund for the religious orders, bishops, ministers of instruction, and for the military forces, who are before them in order,--they have difficulties and misunderstandings with the royal officials (ibid., 236) ... as the treasury is always straitened (sic), and, on account of the great care which the auditors take to collect their salaries, as it cannot be so prompt as they would wish, they seek borrowed money from the citizens--who give it to them, willingly or unwillingly, each one according to his means or designs. From this follow difficulties, to which they pay no heed; as some of them demand these loans from persons who are parties to suits at the time, who grant these to the auditors in order to place them under obligations, and profit by them" (ibid., 239). [565] The rebellion referred to here occurred in 1603. It was said to have been instigated by two mysterious mandarins who came to Manila for the alleged purpose of searching for a mountain of silver, which was located near Cavite. On the Eve of St. Francis the Chinese made their attack with great success, owing, the ecclesiastical element claimed, to the personal intervention of St. Francis, who appeared on the walls and led his followers to victory. In this revolt 24,000 Chinese were hunted down and slain. In 1639 another rebellion occurred. A third insurrection of the Chinese took place in 1660. In 1763 the Chinese joined with the British in their attack on the city. It is estimated that Anda, in his campaign in the provinces, put an end to 6,000 Chinese. Another massacre, and the last in the history of the Islands, took place in 1820. This was an uprising of the natives against all foreigners who were thought to be responsible for the plague of cholera then raging (Foreman, Philippine Islands, 108-119; A. I., 105-1 to 10 and 68-1-27). [566] The entire dependence of the colony on the Chinese trade is attested by Concepción (Historia general, IV, 53). He states that: "Without the trade and commerce of the Chinese these dominions could not have subsisted." Morga, in his Sucesos (349), further testifies: "It is true the town cannot exist without the Chinese, as they are the workers in all trades and business, and are very industrious, working for small wages." [567] Acuña to Felipe III, July 15, 1604, Blair and Robertson, XIII, 239-241. [568] Fajardo described "the oppression caused by the multitude of relatives and followers (of the auditors); their appropriation of the offices and emoluments, to the injury of the meritorious; their hatred and hostility to those who unfortunately fall out with them; their trading and trafficking, although it be by an intermediary, since they, being men of influence, buy the goods at wholesale and protect their agents." He stated that this caused him great embarrassment and made good government almost an impossibility (Fajardo to Felipe III, August 10, 1618, Blair and Robertson, XVIII, 126). [569] "The auditors," Fajardo wrote, "have few important matters that oblige them to close application, (and) they must apply the greater part of their time to devising petty tricks on the president in order to vex and weary him, until, [as they hope] not only will he allow them to live according to their own inclination but also their relatives and followers shall, in whatever posts they desire, be employed and profited. And since harmony has never been seen here without this expedient, one would think it easy to believe such a supposition" (Fajardo to the King, August 15, 1620, Blair and Robertson, XIX, 120-121). [570] Recopilación, 8-20, 21, 22. [571] Decree written on margin of letter: Fajardo to the King, August 15, 1620, Blair and Robertson, XIX, 136. [572] Ibid., 122. [573] Fajardo to Felipe III, August 10, 1618, Blair and Robertson, XVIII, 126. [574] Fajardo to the King, July 21, 1621, Blair and Robertson, XX, 53. [575] Ibid., 54. Fajardo continued as follows: "To such a point has it (the dissension) gone that if this country were not involved in the perils of war as it has been, and as they are still threatening it, I should beseech your Majesty to place it in charge of some other person, who would be more interested in documents. But may God not choose that I should be relieved from the service of your Majesty, in which from the age of fifteen years I have been engaged; ... It would be no little pleasure to me to be employed in naval and military affairs and other things in which, with my counsel and my personal aid, I might be able to help; and to know that the matter of auditors and their demands, their rivalries, and their faultfinding, should concern another."--Ibid., 55-56. [576] Concepción, Historia general. VII, 168 et seq.; see Lea, Inquisition in the Spanish dependencies. 299-318, and Cunningham, "The inquisition in the Spanish colonies; the Salcedo affair," in the Catholic historical review, III, 417-445. The Salcedo affair will be more fully discussed in Chapter XI, of this book, which treats of the relations of the audiencia and the church; citations 60-72, Chapter XI. [577] See Augustinians in Philippines, in Blair and Robertson, XXXVII, 235, 239, 269-273. [578] Robertson, History of America, IV, 20. See Chapter VI, note 54, of this book. [579] Recopilación, 2-15-46. [580] Moses, The Spanish dependencies in South America. 1, 221. The Council of the Indies manifested its disapproval of the acts of the audiencia and of Pizarro by commissioning Pedro de Gasca as president of the Audiencia of Lima. Gasca was ordered to restore that viceroyalty to the sovereignty of Spain, and to do whatever the king would do under like circumstances. This was in May, 1546. "He (Gasca) was at the head of every department of the administration," writes Professor Moses; "he might raise troops, appoint and remove officers, and declare war; he might exercise the royal prerogative of pardoning offenses; and was especially commissioned to grant an amnesty to all who had been engaged in the rebellion. He was authorized to revoke the ordinances which had caused the popular uprising and the overthrow of Blasco Núñez; and, returning to the earlier practice, he might make repartimientos, or confirm those which had been previously made. In accordance with his expressed wish, he was granted no specific salary, but he might make any demands on the treasuries of Panama and Peru." Ibid., I, 225. [581] Ibid., I, 264. [582] Ibid., I, 267. [583] Ibid., I, 276-301. See Recopilación, 2-15-8. [584] Ibid., II, 82. [585] Ibid., II, 16. [586] Ibid., I, 361. [587] Bancroft, History of Mexico, II, 273-295. [588] Ibid., II, 318-340; 367-381. [589] Ibid., II, 410. [590] An audiencia was created at Compostela, Nueva Galicia, in 1548. This tribunal bore the same relation to the audiencia and viceroy in Mexico as did that of Santa Fé de Bogotá to those in Lima. The Audiencia of Nueva Galicia had both judicial and administrative functions, exercising its jurisdiction over the partidos and corregimientos, with their respective alcaldes and corregidores. It concerned itself, moreover, with projects of conquest, discovery, the development of mines, and internal improvement. Subsequently this audiencia was transferred to Guadalajara and given that name. See Recopilación, 2-15-7. [591] Bancroft, History of Mexico, II, 586. [592] Ibid., II, 602-7. [593] It is interesting to note that in 1564, while the Audiencia of Mexico was governing ad interim, the voyage of Legaspi and Urdaneta was undertaken, and the first permanent settlement was made in the Philippines by authorization of that tribunal. Bancroft (History of Mexico, II, 599-600) is both indefinite and inaccurate in his account of the expedition of Legaspi and Urdaneta to the Philippines. He says: "Finally on the 21st of November, 1564, the squadron sailed, and after a prosperous voyage, reached Luzón, where Legaspi founded the city of Manila." It is well known that Legaspi did not sail directly to Luzón, as Bancroft implies, but he visited a number of islands in the Archipelago before he settled at Cebú on April 27, 1565. Manila was not formally claimed until May 19, 1571 (Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 39; Martínez de Zúñiga, An historical view, 113-119). Bancroft (op. cit., II, 743) states that Manila was founded in 1564 by Miguel de Legaspi. Manila was a prosperous commercial center before the Spaniards came to the Islands. Dr. James A. Robertson in his article entitled "Legaspi and Philippine colonization" (see American Historical Association, Annual report, 1907, I, 154), states on the basis of original documents that "this well-situated and busy trade center was erected into a Spanish city on June 3, 1571, and on the 24th the necessary officials were appointed." Dr. Robertson states in a note (p. 154) that "possession was taken of Luzon, June 6, 1570." [594] Recopilación, 8-4-24. [595] Ibid., 3-2-47. [596] Ibid., 2-15-47 and 48. [597] King to the Audiencia, November 23, 1774, quotes the cédula of September 13, 1608, as testimonio; A. I., 105-2-9. A copy of this cédula also exists in A. I., 67-6-3. [598] Testimonio al acuerdo de 19 de Julio de 1654, Audiencia de Manila, A. I., 67-6-3. See Recopilación, 2-15-58. [599] Copies of the cédula of January 30, 1635, and of April 2, 1664, and of the consulta of September 9, 1669, exist in A. I., 67-6-3. [600] Recopilación, 2-15-45. It will be seen that this law was slightly modified by laws promulgated in the eighteenth century. [601] Ibid., 60. [602] Ibid., 56; 3-2-12, 13, 53, 28-33. [603] Ibid., 9-11. [604] Ibid., 10. [605] Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 94; Martínez de Zúñiga, An historical view, I, 184-192. [606] Ibid., I, 192. [607] Ibid., I, 199. [608] Montero y Vidal, op. cit., I, 106-107; Martínez de Zúñiga, op. cit., I, 195. [609] Morga's Sucesos, Blair and Robertson, XVI, 61. [610] Acuña designated Almansa to supervise military affairs instead of Oidor Maldonado, who was in reality senior magistrate, and as such should have assumed the direction of military affairs in accordance with the practice elsewhere, and in compliance with the laws of the Indies. The fiscal objected to this illegal procedure, as he termed it, alleging that the governor was not authorized by law to choose his own successor. He pointed out that, according to the existing laws, the senior magistrate should succeed to the military command by his own right, without the interference either of the governor or the audiencia. Notwithstanding this protest, Almansa continued to hold the post of acting captain-general, for which it was said that he was better fitted than Maldonado. [611] Audiencia to Felipe III, July 6, 1606, Blair and Robertson, XIV, 140-148. These demands were ultimately met by a subsidy from the treasury of New Spain. It may be remarked in this connection, that the oidores were probably interested in somewhat more than increased revenue for defense, since they were known to have been absorbed in commercial ventures. This episode marks the beginning of a struggle on the part of the Manila merchants for increased trading privileges--a battle which continued until the close of the eighteenth century. They were opposed by the merchants of Cádiz and Seville, and it was in the interest of these last-mentioned cities that the Manila trade was restricted (Royal order of November 10, 1605, and King to the Audiencia, February 6, 1606, A. I., 105-2-1). [612] Although the laws of the Indies forbade the oidores from trading (Recopilación, 2-16-59, 60, 62, 64, 66), and the correspondence of the period shows that the oidores were at first denied trading privileges, (King to Conde de Monterrey, April 14, 1597; A. I., 105-2-1), they were allowed to send to Spain sufficient cloth, silk and other dress materials for their own use and for that of their families (Recopilación, 2-16-63). This last-mentioned privilege was abused, however, until the right of each official to send only a limited amount of cargo on the galleon was generally recognized. For example, the cargo list of the galleon "Trinidad" in 1753, shows that ministers were assigned six boletas, or bales, of the nominal value of 125 pesos each--that being only half the amount usually allowed. This reduction, effected by Governor Arandía, caused much opposition on the part of the audiencia (Expediente of January 30, 1754; A. I., 108-3-11). The officials having first claim on the right to send goods in the galleon were those of the municipal cabildo of Manila. On March 27, 1714, they were conceded the right to ship 132 fardillos, the specifications of which were not given. It was mentioned, however, in the consulta which recommended this bestowal that this was a re-enactment of the grant of 1699, and that it was the policy of the king to be generous to the regidores in this matter because they were not given salaries (A. I., 68-2-8). The royal order of June 30, 1786, bestowed on the regidores the right to ship one ton of goods. This right was confirmed by the consulta of October 7, 1789 (A. I., 105-3-5). The cédula of April 25, 1803, conceded five boletas, each valued at one hundred pesos, to each regidor. The oidores were each allowed ten boletas by this cédula (A. I., 106-2-15). [613] Audiencia to Felipe III, July 6, 1606, Blair and Robertson, XIV, 147. [614] Martínez de Zúñiga, An historical view, I, 230-331. [615] Ibid., I, 239, et seq.; Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 162, et seq. [616] Martínez de Zúñiga, op. cit., I, 241; Montero y Vidal, op. cit., I, 166. [617] Inventario de Residencias, A. I. op. cit. [618] King to the Audiencia, August 9, 1609, A. I., 105-2-1. [619] See Chapter VII, notes 49 to 56. [620] Recopilación, 2-15-56; 3-2-47; 3-2-11 and 12. [621] Fajardo to Felipe III, August 10, 1618, Blair and Robertson, XVIII, 127. In regard to the points covered in the above letter of Fajardo, the audiencia legally lacked the power of granting encomiendas at this time, although it undoubtedly bestowed them, nevertheless. The power to grant encomiendas for the period of its temporary rule was granted October 24, 1655. Moreover, by cédulas of May 25, 1596, August 24, 1619, and September 5, 1620, the audiencia was conceded authority to make temporary appointments to offices when it assumed the government ad interim (Recopilación, 2-15-56; 3-2-47; 3-2-11 and 12). [622] Fajardo to Felipe III, August 10, 1618, Blair and Robertson, XVIII, 124-125. [623] Martínez de Zúñiga, An historical view, I, 250-251. The latter Silva was a relative of the viceroy, the Marqués de Cerralbo. He was well known in the Philippines, where he had formerly resided and married the daughter of an influential resident. He held the temporary governorship about a year. It was during his administration, and through his efforts, that the first Spanish expedition was made to Formosa, Silva having ordered the alcalde mayor of Cagayán to land there with a military force and establish fortifications. This was done; thereupon a large number of Dominican friars sought and obtained permission for the spiritual conquest of the Island. Zúñiga says that the latter "exerted themselves with such zeal, that in a short time they built several towns, and were able to number the greater part of the natives among the professors of our faith" (ibid., I, 252-253; Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 180-181). [624] Audiencia to the King, July 24 and August 15, 1624, Blair and Robertson, XXI, 84-97. [625] Silva to Felipe IV, August 4, 1625, Blair and Robertson, XXII, 62-78. [626] Ibid., XXII, 66. The governor estimated the services of the magistrates in a special report to the king on July 30, 1626. He stated that Messa was "an upright judge, and zealous in the service of your Majesty." His comments on the other three were as follows: "Geronimo de Lagaspi does what his two sons wish, whom, on account of their reckless lives, the governors cannot employ, and thus they are unable to satisfy their father, who is not contented except with favors. Don Juan de Valderrama does as his wife says; and Don Matias Flores, although a young man, is less harmful;... He makes all the profit he can from the office, and on the whole is not acceptable to the community, which is always disturbed by him" (Silva to Felipe IV, July 30, 1626, Blair and Robertson, XXII, 102). [627] Instructions to Francisco de Rojas y Ornate, August 17, 1628, A. I., 105-2-1. [628] See Royal Instructions to Rojas y Ornate and Tavora (duplicates), June 4, 1627, A. I., 105-2-1. [629] Martínez de Zúñiga, An historical view, I, 264-266, Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 189-200. The method of filling vacancies in the governorship during this period was described in a letter from Governor Corcuera, Cerezo's successor, to the king, dated June 30, 1636. He wrote: "Your Majesty has conceded to your viceroys of Nueva España authority, in case of deaths and vacancies in this government, to send commissions to those who are to have charge of military matters; and until the arrival of the regularly appointed governor you order them to send another governor from Mexico" (Corcuera to Felipe IV, June 30, 1636, Blair and Robertson, XXVI, 150). [630] Cédula of January 30, 1635, A. I., 67-6-3. [631] Corcuera to Felipe IV, June 30, 1636. Blair and Robertson, XXVI, 150 et seq. [632] Fajardo to the King, July 10, 1651, A. I., 67-6-9. [633] Ibid. [634] Governor Lara to the King, July 19, 1654, A. I., 67-6-9. [635] Cédula of April 2, 1664, with testimonios of former cédulas and correspondence on succession, A. I., 67-6-3. [636] These two magistrates had come to the Islands on the same ship; Montemayor had disembarked at Cagayán and had come to the city by land, arriving a few days earlier than Coloma (Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 336). [637] Events in Filipinas, 1668, Blair and Robertson, XXXVII, 23-63; also correspondence of Governor Manuel de León, and consultas of the Council of the Indies on Salcedo Affair, 1670-1673, A. I., 67-6-9, 10, 11; 67-6-3. For a more extended account of this episode, see Cunningham, "The inquisition in the Philippines; the Salcedo affair," in the Catholic historical review, III, 417-445. [638] Augustinians in the Philippines, 1641-70, Blair and Robertson, XXXVII, 273-275; also Consulta of Council of the Indies, July 16, 1674, A. I., 67-6-3. [639] Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 354-361. [640] Ibid., I, 375. See Chapters X and XI of this book. [641] There is no question of the harmful effects of the intervention of the church in the government on this occasion. For a general survey of this subject throughout the history of the Philippines, see the author's article entitled "The ecclesiastical influence in the Philippines" (1565-1850) in The American journal of theology, XXII, 161-186, and Robertson, "Catholicism in the Philippine Islands," in The Catholic historical review, III, 375-391. [642] See Chapter VIII, note 16. On June 30, 1716, Torralba forwarded an elaborate memorial to the king, showing that the finances were in an excellent state, a net gain of 38,554 pesos having accrued to the treasury since the beginning of the audiencia's rule. On the day that this report was filed there existed in the treasury, according to Torralba's figures, a favorable balance of 294,000 pesos. This report contains the following interesting data: Income from the subsidy, 250,000 pesos; betel monopoly, 13,167 pesos; tributes, 109,152 pesos; royal auctions, 20,377 pesos; medias anatas, 16,373 pesos; almojarifazgo, 20,377 pesos; wine monopoly, 14,000 pesos (Report of Torralba on Financial Affairs, June 30, 1716, A. I., 68-4-18). In a letter dated July 8, 1716, Torralba reported his compliance with the cédula of October 10, 1713, by means of which the king had appealed for a "free gift or contribution on the part of the inhabitants of the Islands to assist in putting down a Catalonian conspiracy." Torralba stated that the audiencia had seen to the fulfillment of this command and had collected the sum of 7,042 pesos (Torralba to King, July 8, 1716, A. I., 68-4-18). [643] Concepción, Historia general, IX, 44, et seq. Pavón, it will be remembered, had been removed for advising Governor Zabalburú to receive the French papal delegate, Tourón. In 1718 all of Torralba's acts against Tourón and Villa were nullified by the Council of the Indies, and those officials were restored to office, while Torralba was condemned to perpetual exile (A. I., 68-2-8). [644] Torralba to the King, July 15, 1715, A. I., 68-4-18; another report of Torralba on the same subject, dated September 1, 1717, exists in A. I., 68-2-8. [645] Royal Fiscal to the Council, August 21, 1719, A. I., 68-4-18. [646] Torralba to the King, June 15, 1716 [with approval of Council indicated on margin], A. I., 68-4-18; Recopilación, 6-8, 6-9, 6-10. [647] Martínez de Zúñiga, An historical view, II, 37-40. [648] Zúñiga, who was favorable to the rule of the churchmen, writes: "There never appeared less confusion at an insurrection than on the present occasion, every individual seeming satisfied with his lot in being relieved from unjust oppression and violence. The archbishop, who had assumed the reins of government, was the only person whose mind was not at ease; but in a short time he was restored to tranquillity by the arrival of a royal order, enjoining him to suspend the Governor from his office, and imprison him; replace the Royal Audience on the same footing as before; set at liberty Señor Velasco (an oidor who had been imprisoned by Torralba), and assume the reins of government himself, which was exactly what had been effected by the late disturbance."--Martínez de Zúñiga, op. cit., II, 39-40. [649] Royal order of September 8, 1720, A. I., 106-4-16. Testimonio of cédula of November 23, 1774, A. I., 105-2-9. Two years later, the home government showed its disapprobation of the rigorous acts of Cuesta by demoting him from his place as Archbishop of the Philippines to the minor post of Bishop of Mechoacán in New Spain (Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 432). The assumption of the government by Cuesta invited the suspicion that he had been a party to the murder of the governor. Seven archbishops had already ruled on various occasions in New Spain (Bolton, Guide, 469-470). It is surprising that such an attempt to solve this problem was not made earlier in the history of the Philippines. [650] Martínez de Zúñiga, op. cit., II, 84-95; Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 480-495. [651] Martínez de Zúñiga says he carried a special government commission as governor ad interim, and his refusal to accept the office was later used as a precedent by Bishop Espeleta in his refusal to turn over the governorship to Archbishop Rojo (Zúñiga, An historical view, II, 89). Evidently he had all the qualifications necessary to fill the office of governor, for he had been a member of the Audiencia of Quito for seventeen years, and had been also a member of the Council of the Indies (Blair and Robertson, XLVIII, 145-146). [652] Martínez de Zúñiga, An historical view, II, 89-90. [653] Opinion of Pedro Calderón Enríquez, July 26, 1759. Opinion of Francisco Leandro Viana, July 31, 1759, Autos of Appeal, August 3, 1759, A. I., 106-4-16. Montero y Vidal (Historia general, II, 8) states that Espeleta used intimidation to secure the office. [654] Anda was sixty-two years of age when he left Manila to undertake the defense of the provinces (Blair and Robertson, XLIX, 211). [655] Relación de la conquista de Manila por los Ingleses y presa del galeón de Santísima Trinidad en el mes de Octubre de 1762. A. I., 107-1-15. [656] Manifiesto of Viana, March 8, 1762, A. I., 107-3-2. [657] Rojo's Narrative, Blair and Robertson, XLIX, 210. [658] Ibid., 210-211. [659] Testimonio del Secretario de Cámara, 13 de Noviembre, 1762. A. I., 107-3-2. [660] Recopilación, 2-31-1 to 14. [661] Martínez de Zúñiga, An historical view, II, 180. [662] Testimonio del Secretario de Cámara (authorized and sworn to by Anda), 13 de Noviembre, 1762, A. I., 107-3-2. [663] Testimonio del fiscal, Francisco Leandro de Viana. 8 de Marzo, 1763. A. I., 107-3-2. [664] Rojo's Narrative, op. cit., Testimonio de D. Antonio Díaz, (ayudante de Rojo) ... 28 de Noviembre de 1762, A. I., 107-3-4. [665] Montero y Vidal (Historia general, II, 67; see, also, note 114, Blair and Robertson, XLIX, 176) summarizes the life and character of Archbishop Rojo as follows: "This prelate was more imbecile than traitor.... His obstinacy in submitting the Islands to the dominion of the English; his struggles against Anda ... his absolute ignorance of his powers ... his pardonable ignorance of whatever concerned the military defense of the archipelago, his calm submission to whatever the English advised, even in matters clearly opposed to the integrity and interests of Spain ... give an exact idea of the capacity and character of the unfortunate one who had the misfortune in such an anxious time to exercise a command for which he was lacking in intelligence, valor and in all other attributes necessary to its successful accomplishment." Le Gentil (Voyage, II, 252) characterizes him as follows: "Archbishop Rojo was a capable man for the management of finances; he was clever in business and very zealous for the service of the king; but he did not understand anything of military affairs; ... he was between two fires, and being of an irresolute disposition, he did not know which way to turn, ... besieged on one side by oidores, on the other side by monks, he would not (otherwise) have waited till the English were on the assault." Charges of indecent living and riotous conduct were made by Anda in his various letters to the Archbishop. While the English were at the gates of the city, the prelate was passing his hours with indecent women. Anda stated that Rojo alternated between the dance-hall and the pulpit, leaving to others the question of defense. Anda stated that Rojo had allowed himself to be influenced by the traitorous Santiago de Orendaín, refusing to listen to the more loyal counsel of the king's ministers (Blair and Robertson, XLIX, 132-160). Francisco Leandro de Viana, the fiscal, believed that the archbishop neither wished to be a traitor to the king nor to his country, but he asserted that he (Viana) was the only person in the colony who was so charitable in his opinion. He felt that Rojo's stand was a result of his incapacity, timorousness, irresolution and ignorance. Viana, like Anda, commented on the archbishop's lasciviousness and immorality (Viana to Rojo, March 1, 1763, A. I., 107-3-2). Zúñiga, the ecclesiastical historian, seeing through priestly eyes, affirmed that Rojo was guilty of only one error during his rule. This was his engagement to pay four millions of pesos to the English and to deliver up the Islands to them (Martínez de Zúñiga, An historical view, II, 239). [666] Anda to Rojo, October 20, 1762, Blair and Robertson, XLIX, 153-154. [667] When news of the temporary suspension of hostilities reached him in July, 1763, Anda refused to place confidence in the assurances either of the British or of the archbishop. He held out until the arrival of the new governor, Francisco Xavier de la Torre. See Anda to Rojo, July 29, 1763, A. I., 107-3-4. [668] Recopilación, 2-15-180. [669] Anda to Rojo, October 30, 1762 (with testimonios of witnesses), A. I., 107-3-3; Recopilación, 2-15-57 and 58. On October 20, 1762, Anda wrote as follows: "I said and I repeat that the presidency and government fell to the royal Audiencia; and I add that the latter is conserved and continued in me, that I am the sole and only minister, that by my absence from that capital because of the commissions confided to me at a convenient time, I remained free from the enemies ... so that in my person is met the prescriptions of law clxxx of the above-cited book and título, since my associates are lacking and have been imprisoned with your Excellency in the fatal loss of that capital." (Blair and Robertson, XLIX, 136). [670] Relación de la conquista de Manila por los Ingleses, ... 1761-1764, A. I., 107-1-15. [671] Memorial of Viana, March 8, 1763, A. I., 107-3-2. [672] Blair and Robertson, XLIX, 172-175. [673] Report of Governor Francisco Xavier de la Torre on the Negotiations for the Evacuation of the City of Manila, 1764, A. I., 107-1-15. [674] Martínez de Zúñiga, An historical view, II, 234. [675] Viana to the King, October 30, 1762, A. I., 107-3-2. [676] By this seizure the sum of 2,253,111 pesos was realized in the interests of his government and at the same time, of course, it was kept from falling into the hands of the British. Anda subsequently reported to Governor Torre that the capture of the treasure of the "Filipino" made possible the conservation of the Islands, "and that the English did not leave them completely desolate, since without this aid, the subsistence of the state would have been impossible." (Anda to Carlos III, June and July, 1764, Blair and Robertson, XLIX, 299). The fact that the galleon carried a cargo of over two million pesos affords no small insight into the way in which the merchants and officials obeyed the law which forbade an annual return exceeding 1,000,000 pesos. See Martínez de Zúñiga, Estadismo, I, 266-270. [677] Anda to Carlos III, June 22, 1764, Blair and Robertson, XLIX, 262-268. [678] Martínez de Zúñiga, An historical view, II, 234-235. [679] Ibid., II, 235; see Montero y Vidal, Historia general, II, 65-66. [680] Montero y Vidal, op. cit., II, 68-70. The treaty of peace between England and Spain was signed on February 10, 1763. Notice had been served on Anda several times that suspensions of military operations had been authorized, but the oidor-gobernador was suspicious, and would not respond to the overtures of the British. The Spanish troops under Anda's command entered Manila on June 10, 1764, and the British forces evacuated the same day. Montero y Vidal (op. cit., II, 71) states that the new governor, Torre, feigned illness on the day of the transfer of sovereignty that Anda might be enabled to receive the keys of the city and thus not be deprived of the honors which he had so faithfully earned. [681] Martínez de Zúñiga, An historical view, II, 241. [682] Anda was made Councillor of Castile on November 6, 1767. A life's pension was bestowed on him on November 19, 1769. He remained in Spain until 1770 when he returned to the Philippines as governor (A. I., 106-4-4). [683] In Mexico two prelates governed ad interim after this time--Peralta in 1787 and Beaumont in 1809. Bolton, Guide, 469-470. [684] Cédulas of November 23, 1774, and July 2, 1779, A. I., 102-2-9. [685] Articles 61 and 63, Royal Instruction of Regents, Rodríguez San Pedro, Legislación ultramarina, VII, 22-28. This Instruction transferred to the regent all the powers and prerogatives which formerly belonged to the senior magistrates of the audiencias. These are defined in Recopilación, 2-15-57 and 58. [686] Recopilación, 2-15, note 16. [687] Ibid.; also A. I., 102-2-9. [688] Royal order of October 25, 1806, Recopilación (1841), II, Apéndice. [689] Rodríguez San Pedro, Legislación ultramarina, I, 90-91. [690] Concepción, Historia general, III, 336, et seq. This is discussed in Chapter II of this volume. Original materials exist in A. I., 68-1-32. [691] The royal patronage in the Indies was based on the bulls of Alexander VI, dated May 4, 1493, and November 16, 1501, and on that of Julius II, dated July 28, 1508. By the first two bulls the temporal and spiritual jurisdiction of the Indies was conceded to the monarchs of Spain and by the last one the universal patronato was given. Aside from the responsibilities of government, this concession involved the duty of christianizing the natives and the right of collecting tithes from them. By virtue of these papal bulls the Spanish rulers were granted the right of nominating prelates for the Indies, the assignment of benefices and provinces to the different orders, the confirmation of minor ecclesiastical appointments, and, in fact, general supervision and control over the regular and secular clergy in the colonies (Recopilación, 1-6-1 to 7). By these acts the pope was relieved of all direct responsibility for the spiritual government of Spain's over-sea dominions, his authority being limited to the approval of prelates nominated by the Spanish king and to other ecclesiastical duties of a nominal character. The patronato real in Spain furnished a precedent for that of her colonial empire. Although the royal patronage in Spain and in the colonies were closely associated, the beginning of this relationship may be found in the early years of Spanish history, when concessions were granted by the king to nobles, cities, and similarly, to churchmen, in exchange for fealty of some sort. For example, the vast tracts of land in Spain were received by the church as a gift from the state, wherefore the state reserved the right to declare who should hold these lands and enjoy these privileges and also the power to dictate the conditions under which they were to be held. The right of appointment by the crown to vacant benefices and to all the higher church offices were applications of this principle. (See Cunningham, "The institutional background of Latin American history," in the Hispanic American historical review, Vol, I, pp. 24-39.) The concession of 1501 by Alexander VI was only one of a number of privileges of the sort accorded by the popes to the Spanish crown. The emperor, Charles V, obtained from Pope Hadrian VI the perpetual right to nominate prelates and abbots to vacant benefices. In 1543 the Spanish government further demanded and received the concession that all posts within the church in Spain and her colonies should be held by Spaniards. In 1538 the right of the church to issue bulls and briefs affecting the colonies was limited. In 1574 Philip II declared that the right of patronage belonged privately to the king. As a result of this, says Professor Altamira, "the Spanish clergy considered itself more closely bound to the king than to the pope, ... more dependent on the court than on the curia, ... more eager for the privileges of the crown than for the rights of the church, ... the bishops were obliged to obey the monarch more than the archbishop." (Altamira y Crevea, História, III, 418-19.) The laws of the royal patronage centralized the supervision and control of the clergy of the Philippines in the person of the governor of the Islands. The latter was vicepatron and representative of the king in ecclesiastical matters. He was the responsible head of church affairs in the Islands so far as these matters concerned the government. He was legally authorized and required to receive and assign prelates, to confirm minor appointments by the prelates to parishes and curacies, to make removals from the same when necessary, to make temporary assignments of provinces to the regulars and to support the prelates in the exercise of episcopal visitation. His consent was necessary to the suppression, division, or union of districts, curacies and parishes, and no priest could leave the Islands without his consent. The king was patron, but the exercise of his authority in the colonies was delegated to the respective viceroys and governors. See entire title of Recopilación, 1-6; for general observations on the royal patronage see Gómez Zamora, Regio patronato: Parrás, El gobierno de los regulares de la América, I, 2-16; Mendieta, Historia eclesiástica, 20-21, 186-196; Hernáez, Colección de bulas, 12-28. [692] This is a translation of ruego y encargo, which form civil officials were required to employ on all occasions in addressing ecclesiastical officials. The king himself observed this rule and his act was supposed to form a precedent for general use within the Spanish colonial empire. [693] Recopilación, 1-6-47. [694] Ibid., 2-1-10. Laws 11 and 12 of the same title did not in any way diminish the authority of the royal audiencia. Law 11, dated May 16, 1571, antedating the one above quoted, declared that although cédulas on governmental subjects were occasionally addressed to the "president and oidores," the viceroys and presidents might have private jurisdiction over these matters. Law 12, dated April 6, 1638, recognized the fact that ministers of justice were frequently addressed on (governmental) subjects, which, it declared, should not be construed to prejudice the viceroy's pre-eminence in these matters. [695] Concepción, as cited in note 1 of this chapter. Salazar's arguments are outlined in Chapter II of this treatise. [696] Archbishop Pardo's well known opposition to the exercise of governmental control on the basis of the royal patronage and his resistance to the pretensions of ultimate superiority over the church which the temporal government claimed and assumed are referred to in another part of this treatise. In a letter written by the archbishop relative to the ecclesiastical controversy bearing his name, Pardo made the assertion that no person was more zealous to encourage or conform to the royal authority than he, for he realized the necessity of complete temporal jurisdiction over all things secular. He stated that he had always encouraged the ecclesiastics to comply with the just demands of the civil government, "for it is just," he wrote to the king, "to observe the temporal things over which Your Majesty has providence, since the secular power must be obeyed, ... yet I cannot offend the royal person by allowing him or his servants to transgress the rules or authority of God without interposing my influence against it, even at the risk of being disgraced; ... while I am allied to the civil authority in things secular, I am the superior in spiritual matters." He continued: "God has placed side by side the ecclesiastical and temporal authorities and the latter were intended to be subject to the former, and therefore, the temporal ministers ought to cede to the spiritual, according to the rules of the Holy Catholic Church. It is manifestly unjust, therefore, that a governor, maestre de campo, or other royal official should command or summon to justice a prelate who is charged with the welfare of the souls of the people of his commonwealth" (Pardo to King, September 7, 1686, A. I., 68-1-44). A violent, though ineffective resistance was maintained by the church when Governor Simón de Anda y Salazar sought to abolish certain practices observed in the chanting of mass. Anda based his action on his authority as vicepatron. In his stand he was supported by the archbishop and by two suffragan bishops. However, Bishop de Luna, of Camarines, who was also papal delegate, violently opposed "sending [a copy of] this scandalous mandate to the royal Audiencia--a body consisting of three magistrates, to whom an appeal may lie against the governor" (Letter of a Franciscan Friar, December 13, 1771, Blair and Robertson, L, 318-319.) That a soldier should be the final arbiter in a question belonging so pre-eminently to the ecclesiastical sphere, seemed to this bishop to be entirely subversive of the interests of religion and he turned to the audiencia for protection and support. The governor sent a squad of soldiers to arrest the prelate, and the latter was forced to leave the Islands. In 1770, Governor Anda was vehemently opposed by the ecclesiastical authorities of the colony in his efforts, as the churchmen described it, "to interfere in the governmental and judicial rights and pre-eminences of the church." This was during the struggle over the question of episcopal visitation; in this matter the governor supported the archbishop. The former had gone so far as to declare that the friars had neither the right nor the authority to administer the sacraments. The replies of Fray Sebastián de Asunción, a Recollect, and of Antonio de San Próspero, of the Augustinians, attacked the whole foundation of the royal patronage, claiming that the church should be given entire control in ecclesiastical matters. According to their views the attention of the governor should be confined to administrative affairs (Expediente de los provinciales de Filipinas, 15 de Julio, 1772, A. I., 107-7-6). As these friars were the provincials of their orders, their opinions are of value in reflecting the ideas of the religious in the Islands on the subject of episcopal visitation. These opinions were contrary to the accepted practices and to the ideas of men of higher standing in Spain's colonial empire. Archbishop Pardo's well-known opposition to the exercise of governmental control on the basis of the royal patronage gave him pre-eminence in these same matters. [697] Gómez Zamora, Regio patronato, 330 et seq. [698] Ibid., 330-354. [699] Ibid., 378. [700] Recopilación, 1-8-2, 3, 6. A dispute concerning the jurisdiction of the audiencia over the findings of synods arose in 1773 and again in 1776, when the Bishop of Nueva Segovia protested against the ruling of the audiencia that all the deliberations of a provincial synod which had been held in that bishopric should be submitted for its approval. The bishop appealed to the Council of the Indies and that body approved the action of the audiencia (King to the Audiencia, October 19, 1776, A. I., 105-2-9). [701] Recopilación, 1-9-2, 7, 10. [702] Recopilación, 1-13-23. [703] Ibid., 1-14-1, 20, 42; 3-14-3. [704] Ibid., 1-14-34, 38. [705] Ibid., 44, 67. [706] This law was nullified by the cédula of August 1, 1795, which forbade the intervention of the vicepatron and audiencia in these matters. See Recopilación, 1-6, note 17, also 1-14-37. [707] Ibid., 68. [708] Ibid., 71, 75. [709] Cédula of June 1, 1574, Blair and Robertson, XXI, 27-31. [710] Cédula of November 14, 1603, Blair and Robertson, XXI, 50-52, note. [711] Royal order of April 6, 1609, A. I., 105-2-1. [712] Recopilación, 1-14; 1-7-54. [713] Ibid., 1-7-1, 36. [714] Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 357-358. Illustrative of this same authority on the part of the audiencia and the Council of the Indies was the consulta of the latter tribunal, enacted January 22, 1781. The Audiencia of Manila had called the attention of the home government to the fact that the nomination of Fray Manuel de Obelar, a Dominican, to the post of apostolic vicar of the province of Fukien, China, had been irregular because it had lacked the formality of presentation by the Spanish monarch. Other nominations, namely, those of 1753 and 1759, were cited as examples wherein this formality had not been lacking. The Council of the Indies recommended to the King that the nomination should be accepted and that an ayuda de costa should be voted, but that His Holiness should be notified through the Spanish ambassador in Rome that in the future the requirements of the royal patronage should be observed, and that no appointments in China, Spain, or in the Spanish colonies should be made without the consent of the Spanish monarch (A. I., 105-3-2). [715] Recopilación, 1-6-31 and 1-14-12, treat of the admission of foreign prelates and visitors to ecclesiastical posts within the Spanish colonial empire. The latter law stipulates, in addition, that all bulls must be confirmed by the Council of the Indies before their introduction into the Indies. [716] Tourón proceeded to China, where he continued his inspection. He revoked many of the privileges of the Spanish friars there and forced their retirement to Manila (consulta of the Council of the Indies on the report of the proceedings of Cardinal Tourón in China, February 24, 1710, A. I., 68-2-8). That his proceedings were recognized by the Spanish government is shown by the consulta of April 21, 1708, whereby 4000 pesos were voted to defray the expenses of Tourón in the Philippines and China. This money was added to the Philippine subsidy in Mexico (ibid.). [717] Arce to Philip III, July 30, 1619, Blair and Robertson, XVIII, 238-239. [718] Díaz, Conquistas, II, 267, et seq.; Martínez de Zúñiga, An historical view, I, 259. [719] Tavora to Philip IV, July 8, 1632, Blair and Robertson, XXIV, 224-228. [720] Corcuera to Philip IV, June 30, 1636, Blair and Robertson, XXVII, 21. [721] The cédula of December 15, 1797, authorized the installation of the Bishop of Nueva Segovia as archbishop in the vacant see of Manila, on the death of the incumbent, in accordance with the requirements of the royal patronage. On September 8, 1800, the Bishop of Cebú was designated as archbishop in the same manner. The installations were made by the vicepatron on the strength of these cédulas, with the understanding that the latter were to be followed by the proper papal bulls, executed in due form. Cédulas of December 15, 1797, and of September 9, 1800, A. I., 105-2-18. [722] The vicepatron had a right to do this in conjunction with the prelate until August 1, 1795, when authority was bestowed upon the latter without the interference of the civil government. Recopilación, 1-6-38, note 17. [723] Cédula of August 1, 1795, and of September 16, 1803, A. I., 105-2-10; Recopilación, 1-6, note 17. [724] Recopilación, 1-14-71 to 75; the entire title (14) of this book deals with the general subject of the religious orders. The method of procedure in such cases may be illustrated by the efforts of the government to correct the abuses of Fray Alonso Zamudio, an Augustinian, who was in charge of a parish, and who therefore was subject to episcopal visitation. He was charged with immoral and vicious conduct. The provincial of his order made an investigation and reported that the evidence brought against him would warrant his prosecution. He recommended the removal of the friar, which, he stated, he could not himself bring about because Zamudio was acting as a parish priest. The provisor of the archbishopric recommended the banishment of Zamudio, which act was carried out by the governor in acuerdo with the audiencia. A ruego y encargo was dispatched by the tribunal, soliciting the surrender of the friar. He was accordingly handed over to the civil authorities and was incarcerated in Fort Santiago until the sentence could be executed (Información del juez-provisor, y testimonio de los abusos del fraile Alonso Zamudio, May 21, 1650, A. I., 67-6-9). [725] Recopilación, 1-14-71, 72. An illustration of the operation of this sort of banishment may be noted in the case of three Augustinian friars whose deportation was requested by their provincial. The request was ignored by Governor Anda, whereupon the provincial wrote directly to the court; consequently on April 13, 1777, the king ordered the audiencia to see that these three friars were returned to Spain; Anda was advised to give more attention in the future to matters pertaining to the royal patronage (King to the Audiencia, April 13, 1777, A. I., 105-2-9). [726] This has been discussed in Chapter III of this treatise. [727] Recopilación, 1-14-67. [728] Concepción, Historia general, IX, 190; Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 400-401. [729] "Provisores and vicarios generales exercise the ordinary ecclesiastical jurisdiction throughout the entire territory of the diocese and reside in the head city of the bishopric or archbishopric" (Escriche, Diccionario, II, 453). The magistrates and other judicial functionaries of the ecclesiastical jurisdiction will be described at greater length in the succeeding chapter. [730] Juez-conservador, an ecclesiastical or secular (not civil) judge named by the pope with jurisdiction or power to defend a particular church, monastery or convent. (Escriche, Diccionario, II, 260). [731] Nuns of St. Clare to King, Blair and Robertson, XXVI, 24. [732] Recopilación, 2-31-1, 8; 6-10-8, 9. [733] Le Gentil, in Blair and Robertson, XXVIII, 218. [734] Recopilación, 3-14-28. [735] Guerela to the Council, June 20, 1702, A. I., 68-4-12. [736] Report of Torralba, July 20, 1713, A. I., 68-4-16. Torralba was charged in his residencia with having received bribes from the Franciscans for making this report, which was favorable to them and which was designed to bring about the restoration of the curacies to the friars of that order. [737] Royal decree of February 14, 1713, A. I., 68-4-18. [738] Recopilación, 1-14-42 to 46; 1-7-21 to 31; 1-6-49; 2-15-146 and 147. [739] Royal decree of December 31, 1622, Blair and Robertson, XX, 253. [740] Recopilación, 2-18-18. [741] King to the Audiencia, April 6, 1778, A. I., 105-2-9. [742] Información, a legally-attested document establishing proof of some act or crime (Escriche, Diccionario, II, 156). In the broader sense an información was an opinion or a body of evidence on a special topic drawn up and legally attested by the proper authority. These informaciones appear to have been submitted by the audiencia, or by individual oidores, contadores, oficiales reales and others, but in all cases they were legally drawn up and sworn to. An información was always a special report, drawn up in compliance with a request or command and is thus to be distinguished from a regular yearly or semi-annual report. [743] Recopilación, 2-23-13, 12, 15. [744] King to the Audiencia, July 1, 1598, A. I., 105-2-1. [745] King to the Audiencia, December 7, 1610, Blair and Robertson, XVII, 151-152. [746] King to the Audiencia, August 17, 1628, A. I., 105-2-1. [747] Recopilación, 1-14-1. [748] Ibid., 1-14-31 to 34, 38, 40, 91, 92; 2-33-11 to 15. Hundreds of these reports appear in A. I., 105-2-1 to 10. [749] Recopilación, 1-14-2, 3, 4. [750] Ibid., 1-14-90, 91, 20. Missionaries were so badly needed in the colonies in the sixteenth century that they were sent free of expense. The governors and viceroys were commanded to pay particular attention to them, assisting and providing for them in all possible ways. "Until the members of the different orders were enabled, by their sufficient numbers and increased prosperity, to establish themselves in communities ... both king and pope extended privileges and protection to them in order to facilitate the labors of their calling." (Bancroft, History of Mexico, III, 702.) [751] Recopilación, 3-14-4. [752] Ibid., 1-22-7. [753] Ibid., 19. [754] Ibid., 1-22-53. [755] Audiencia to Felipe II, June 25, 1588, Blair and Robertson, VI, 318. The Jesuits, on July 8, 1598, again requested permission to bestow the degrees of licentiate and doctor, urging that the distance from Europe was so great that the universities there were inaccessible to students of the Philippines. At that time the petition of the Jesuits was not granted, but that order succeeded in getting permission to establish the college of San José in 1601. This institution was enabled to maintain itself without royal aid until 1767. Its chief support was derived from the immense wealth of the society and from the large donations of individuals. [756] Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 283-294; Pastel-Colín, Labor evangélica, III, 414-418. [757] Cédula of June 30, 1778, A. I., 105-2-9. [758] The college of Santo Tomás was founded on August 15, 1619, eighteen years after the foundation of the rival college of the Jesuits. Due largely to the guiding influence and paternal care of a number of Dominican archbishops it grew and prospered. It became a royal university in 1645 and its title was extended at various times subsequently (Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 169 [note], 283). [759] Blair and Robertson, XXXVIII, 78-80. [760] A number of testimonios exist in A. I., 105-2-6 bearing on suits of natives and Chinese mestizos who aspired to enter the royal university. In later years they were admitted, but these institutions were primarily intended for the children of Spaniards. Of especial interest was the suit brought in the audiencia by the Chinese mestizo, Francisco de Borja, against the University of Santo Tomás for the degree of master of arts, which the educational institution refused to grant on account of the nationality of the plaintiff. The suit was carried to the Council of the Indies, and that tribunal, after requiring the opinion of the royal fiscal, declared in its consulta of July 17, 1780, that the laws of the Indies (Recopilación, 1-22-57) denied to mestizos, Chinese, and mulattoes the right of studying in the royal universities, but once having qualified, however, there was nothing in the origin or nature of an infidel that should prevent his receiving his degree (A. I., 105-3-1). Another question which was deliberated with much care was whether illegitimate children should be admitted as students or qualified as licentiates. [761] Ecclesiastical tithes (diezmos), according to Martínez Alcubilla, were "taxes upon the products of the earth which the producers paid from the entire product of their labor, without deduction of the expenses to which they were put, or consideration of the capital invested" (Martínez Alcubilla, Diccionario, V, 412). Escriche defines the ecclesiastical tithe as "the part which is paid by the faithful for the maintenance of the ministers of the church," usually consisting of a tenth of their products, although at times it was less, varying with the use and custom of the locality (Escriche, Diccionario, I, 638). This payment was required from merchants, farmers and encomenderos (Recopilación, 1-16-1 to 10). In 1537 Viceroy Mendoza was directed to exact tithes from the natives (Bancroft, History of Mexico, III, 666). This was again ordered by the cédulas of July 12, 1778, and January 20, 1786 (A. I., 105-2-9). Subsequently the agricultural estates of friars were made liable to the payment of tithes. As early as 1655 the Jesuits in New Spain were obliged to pay tithes on all crops and productions of their estates (Bancroft, History of Mexico, III, 668). The purpose to which these funds were theoretically devoted was the support and maintenance of the church. The right of collecting and administering them was conceded to the crown by Pope Alexander VI in the bull of November 16, 1501, in "full, absolute and irrevocable ownership, with the condition that the crown should assist the church with a sum sufficient for the decent support of divine worship, its prelates and ministers" (Recopilación, 1-16-1 and 23). The cédula of April 29, 1648 reaffirmed and amplified this bull, ordering in addition that one-third of all money arising from vacant benefices should be set aside for the support of the church, while the residue should be sent to Spain (ibid., 1-7-41; see also 1-16-28 and Article 8, Real Ordenanza de Intendentes de Buenos Ayres; Robertson, History of America, IV [Bk. viii], note XXXII). On February 3, 1541, Charles V prescribed that the tithes should be divided into four equal parts, two of which were to go to the prelate and chapter of the diocese, while the remaining two parts were to be further separated into ninths (novenos), of which two were to be reserved for the crown, three for the construction of churches and hospitals, two for salaries of curates, and the remaining two portions were to be set aside to pay the dignitaries and subalterns of the diocese (Recopilación, 1-16-23). In case the portion reserved for the salaries of curates proved insufficient, the royal treasury guaranteed a yearly stipend of from one hundred to a hundred and twenty pesos to each priest. This cédula was amended by the regulation of March 28, 1620, which provided that the royal ninths should be taken from the gross amount of tithes paid in (Recopilación, 1-16-25). So it developed that the crown came to assume entire jurisdiction over the administration of the tithes, retaining a portion of these episcopal rents for non-ecclesiastical purposes. The royal share was placed in the treasury and was administered by the oficiales reales, leaving only seven-ninths of the money actually obtained to be expended for the support of the church. These funds were collected in the provinces by the provincial revenue officials, subject to the supervision of the alcaldes mayores, who were responsible in turn for this particular matter to an oidor and a royal treasury official of the central government (Ibid., 1-16-1, 30). These novenos were not infrequently farmed out in New Spain, and at the auctions thereof frauds were as repeatedly committed as at the sales of other royalties. Instructions were issued ordering the Audiencia of Mexico to investigate the nature of these transactions. In March, 1728, the royal novenos were leased for a period of nine years at $19,000 annually. When this lease expired they were let again for a similar period at $20,000 a year (Bancroft, History of Mexico, III, 666-668 and note 57); see Priestley, José de Gálvez, 249-253, for data on the administration of tithes in New Spain. [762] Recopilación, 1-16-11, 3. [763] Ibid., 13. [764] Ibid., 24; also Real Ordenanza de Intendentes de Nueva España, Art., 193. [765] Royal order of September 25, 1768, A. I., 107-5-23; see also Royal decree of July 9, 1785, A. I., 106-2-15. [766] Testimonios accompanying auto of December 11, 1775, A. I., 105-2-9. [767] King to the Audiencia, July 12, 1778, A. I., 105-2-9. [768] Decree of January 20, 1786, repromulgated December 16, 1796, A. I., 105-2-10. While the laws of the Indies make no mention of the requirement that the natives should pay tithes, the above cédulas expressly order it. This is interesting, in view of the fact that Gómez Zamora, in his Regio Patronato (381 et seq.) says that in the Philippines the natives were not called upon for tithes. Montero y Vidal (Historia general, III, 179) cites the cédula of May 23, 1801, which exempted Indians from the payment of tithes. [769] Montero y Vidal, Historia general, III, 179; also King to the Audiencia, October 6, 1792, A. I., 105-2-10. [770] Aguilar to Soler, July 31, 1799, A. I., 107-5-23. [771] On August 17, 1853, the superintendent of real hacienda of Manila made an effort to revive the payment of tithes, which practice had become extinct. He ordered the religious provincials to present in the administración general de tributos lists of all taxable property under their jurisdiction (Montero y Vidal, Historia general, III, 178). [772] While the temporalities were originally the endowments of the sovereign for the support of the clergy, in the Philippines at this time they were chiefly derived from the sale of jewels, lands, live-stock, and other chattel properties of the Jesuit order, which had been suppressed in 1769. Property to the value of 2,000,000 pesos fell into the hands of the government on this occasion. The temporalities did not include convents, school buildings, colleges, churches and church furnishings. The latter were turned over to the archbishop and the secular church. [773] Cédula of January 22, 1803, A. I. 107-5-29. [774] A very instructive and hitherto unexplored field of investigation lies in the reports of the different officials and bodies in the colonies which were entrusted with the duty of collecting and forwarding money to help Spain in putting down the various revolts of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. We may note the letter of Governor Aguilar, dated July 20, 1804, in which he reported compliance with the royal order of June 20, 1798, relative to the raising of money for the purposes indicated. He had opened two public subscriptions for "voluntary offerings" to aid in putting down the Catalonian revolt of 1798. In the first subscription, 80,946 pesos were raised and in the second, 15,397 pesos. The Dominicans alone gave 5000 pesos, the magistrates of the audiencia, the members of the consulado, the contadores, oficiales, reales, obras pías, prelates, temporalities, the Compañia de Filipinas, the monte pio militar, the veteran soldiers, religious orders and other organizations and individuals each contributing their share. Aguilar reported that subscriptions had been opened in all the provinces by the corregidores, alcaldes mayores and intendentes. The various provinces and districts contributed on this occasion as follows: Tondo, 11,059 pesos; Laguna, 2768 pesos; Cebú, 300 pesos; Albay, 85 pesos; Cápiz, 318 pesos; Leyte, 21 pesos; Antique, 4 pesos; Samar, 1090 pesos; Zambales, 41 pesos; Calamianes, 1607 pesos; Mindoro, 221 pesos. This money was sent to the Viceroy of New Spain, and was forwarded to Spain by him together with the remittances collected for the same purposes in that viceroyalty. Reports of alcaldes mayores show that these assessments (contribuciones voluntarias or directas, or donativos voluntarios) varied from half a real from the poorest Indian to five hundred pesos from the wealthier landlords and merchants. In many cases these assessments practically amounted to confiscations (Aguilar to the King, July 20, 1804, A. I., 105-3-23). On June 18, 1806, the king acknowledged receipt of money which had been confiscated from the common funds of the village communities (King to Aguilar, June 18, 1806, A. I., 105-2-18). Hume, in his Modern Spain (158), says that in 1809 the colonies contributed 3,000,000 pounds sterling for the relief of the home government. Priestley, José de Gálvez, 370-71, sheds some light on the matter of these forced contributions in New Spain. [775] Martínez Alcubilla, Diccionario, X, 719. The obras pías were charitable associations or corporations, usually under ecclesiastical control, which were founded and supported by persons who contributed or willed their money for beneficent objects. In Manila there were two leading societies of this character, the Santa Misericordia and San Juan de Diós. The former was a branch of a larger organization of the same name, which had originated in Portugal, and was quite generally established throughout Spain, Portugal and their colonies. A branch was founded in Manila in 1596, with the object, as stated in the articles of establishment, of erecting and maintaining a college for orphan children, the support of the poor, and particularly of the orphans and widows of soldiers. This society flourished from the beginning under the favor of certain governors and oidores and by their assistance and by that of other friends, and through the endowment by the government of a large amount of free space on the galleon, it became a wealthy and powerful institution. San Juan de Diós, which was organized as a brotherhood, was established in the Philippines in 1617 with avowed charitable purposes. In the cédula of February 10, 1617, the king ordered the audiencia at Manila to place the hospitals under the care of this brotherhood (Blair and Robertson, XLVII, 164-165). Though it did not attain the wealth or importance of the Misericordia and it never had the extensive relations with the government of the other society, it did exceedingly valuable work in the Islands, going far toward accomplishing the purposes for which it was founded. [776] By 1660, the Misericordia had received in contributions the sum of 356,363 pesos. In 1619, the treasury at Manila had become so exhausted by the expenses involved in resisting the Dutch that Governor Fajardo borrowed from the society the sum of 39,599 pesos. Later Governor Corcuera exacted a loan of 104,609 pesos. In all, up to 1670, an aggregate of 441,909 pesos had been borrowed from this wealthy society for the current expenses of the government. In 1762-3 the Misericordia contributed the sum of 195,588 pesos as tribute money to the British and was, according to its own accounts, despoiled of 301,597 pesos, making a total of 506,184 pesos, and leaving a balance of 193,246 pesos (Procurador de la Misericordia de Manila al Rey, 23 de Julio, 1764, A. I., 106-5-8). The capital of the Misericordia of Manila on January 31, 1755, was estimated at 701,477 pesos (Informe del Contador de Cuentas, 31 de Enero, 1755, A. I., 106-5-8). In the occupation of Manila by the British and in the loss and despoliation of property suffered thereby, the Misericordia received a blow from which it never entirely recovered. By July 20, 1804, the capital of the society had dwindled to 151,625 pesos (Aguilar to the King, July 20, 1804, A. I., 107-5-29). [777] Cédula of November 8, 1747, with testimonios of previous correspondence, A. I., 106-5-8. [778] Informe del Contador de Cuentas del Consejo de Indias, 31 de Enero de 1755, A. I., 106-5-8. [779] Cédula of April 19, 1755, A. I., 106-5-8. [780] Arandía to the King, July 24, 1757, A. I., 106-5-8. [781] Cédula of February 21, 1759, A. I., 106-5-8. [782] King to the Audiencia, April 25, 1778, A. I., 105-2-9. [783] Cédula of August 2, 1787, A. I., 105-2-10. [784] Aguilar to the King, July 20, 1804, A. I., 107-5-29. [785] The capital of the society was at that time estimated at 151,625 pesos. [786] King to the Audiencia and Consulado, June 7, 1775, A. I., 105-2-9. [787] The term espolio was applied to the properties which archbishops and bishops left at the time of their death, such property having accumulated when they were in office. All possessions of deceased prelates reverted to the crown in accordance with the cédula of March 25, 1620. The rents from vacant benefices accumulated from the time of the death of a prelate to the appointment of another to succeed him (Escriche, Diccionario, I, 735; Bancroft, History of Mexico, III, 699). The money derived from espolios and vacant benefices was aggregated to the royal treasury for such subsequent distribution as appeared necessary for the relief of cathedrals, parishes, colleges, asylums, and charitable institutions. [788] Recopilación, 1-7-38, 39. [789] Ibid., 37, 40. [790] Cédula of June 24, 1712, A. I., 68-4-17; Recopilación, 1-7, note 8. [791] Auto de Espolio of Bishop Gorospe, May 28, 1715, A. I., 68-4-18. [792] In the colonial bishoprics the temporary successor of a deceased prelate was usually designated by the local diocesan chapter. If, as was the case in the Philippines, the latter body were lacking, the archbishop, by virtue of his position, became temporary ecclesiastical governor, with jurisdiction over the revenues of the diocese. The benefice was considered vacant until the appointment of a regular bishop. [793] A fairly typical example of an espolio was that of Bishop Arévalo of Nueva Cáceres, rendered by the audiencia on July 19, 1759. The total sum left by that prelate was 19,000 pesos. The leading items of the espolio were: costs, 1919 pesos; bequest to College of Santo Tomás, 2000 pesos; bequest to the cathedral of Nueva Cáceres, 400 pesos; bequest to the brother of the deceased, the Marquis of Monte Castro, 1000 pesos. The remaining portion was paid to creditors in sums varying from 20 to 300 pesos, leaving something over 6000 pesos for the crown (Auto de Espolio, 20 de Julio, 1759, Audiencia de Manila, A. I., 106-4-16). On June 14, 1774, the audiencia reviewed the autos of espolio of the Bishop of Cebú, the total of which aggregated 11,210 pesos. The papers were duly forwarded to the Contaduría General, at Madrid, and were approved by that tribunal on June 20, 1778 (A. I., 105-2-9). Owing to the anarchical conditions prevailing at the time of the death of Archbishop Rojo, his espolio had to be postponed until June 26, 1777, and the royal treasury received 3078 pesos therefrom. The prelate left a valuable library to the College of San Ildefonso in the city of Mexico, and 13,617 pesos in money to be distributed among his personal creditors and heirs (Consultas del Consejo, 20 de Marzo, 1778, A. I., 108-7-1 and 2; 105-3-2). The large sum of 12,000 pesos was netted to the royal treasury by the espolio of Bishop Espeleta of Cebú on May 6, 1783 (A. I., 105-2-10). By way of contrast, the fact may be noted that the espolio of Archbishop Santos y Rufina yielded 92 pesos. (Auto de Espolio del Arzobispo Santos y Rufina, 20 de Octubre, 1792, A. I., 105-2-10.) [794] Real Ordenanza de Intendentes de Nueva España, Artículos 227, 228, 229. [795] Recopilación, 1-3-1; 1-4-25. [796] Ibid., 1-2-14. [797] Fajardo to the King, August 15, 1620, Blair and Robertson, XIX, 163. [798] King to the Audiencia, June (?) 1604, A. I., 105-2-1. [799] King to the Audiencia, October 30, 1634, A. I., 105-2-1. [800] Recopilación, 1-3-1, 1-6-2. The expediente covering this case is in A. I., 105-3-1. The cédula of April 6, 1778, and testimonios are in A. I., 105-2-1. [801] See Cunningham, "Origin of the friar lands question in the Philippines," in The American political science review, X (August, 1916) pp. 465-480. [802] Recopilación, 1-4-20. [803] Ibid., 1-2-20. [804] See Note 2 of the preceding chapter. [805] Recopilación, 2-16-138. [806] See Note by A. P. Cushing, in Blair and Robertson, V, 292. Escriche (Diccionario, I, 838-9) defines fuerza as "the wrong which an ecclesiastical judge does to a party when he assumes jurisdiction over a case which does not belong to him, or when he fails to observe the rules prescribed by the laws and canons, or when he unjustly denies appeal." Recurso de fuerza is defined as the reclamation to a civil judge, made by a person believing himself aggrieved by an ecclesiastical judge, imploring the protection of the former in order that the fuerza or violence may be terminated or undone. There are three ways mentioned by Alcubilla in which an ecclesiastical judge may commit fuerza: 1. When he assumes jurisdiction in a purely temporal case, which by its very nature is not rightfully subject to his authority. 2. When, by trying a case whose jurisdiction belongs to him, he fails to observe the method and form prescribed by the laws and canons. 3. When he refuses to allow appeals which should be rightfully allowed (Martínez Alcubilla, Diccionario, V, 807). [807] Recopilación, 2-15-148, 149. The interdict, as defined by Escriche (Diccionario, I, 712), is a prohibition, mandate, or censure, pronounced by an ecclesiastical authority by which is prohibited the use of certain spiritual privileges which are common to all. The effect of the interdict may be to prohibit Christian burial, the administration of the sacraments or the celebration of divine services. Exception may be made in rare cases of baptisms, confirmation and confession for the dying. Even though the interdict may be pronounced it does not prohibit the saying of mass in a low voice behind closed doors and without the ringing of bells. A priest who violates the interdict may be pronounced "irregular", but a layman who does so may incur the penalty of excommunication (see Catholic Encyclopedia, under "Interdict"). [808] This refers to the privilege extended by the church to offenders against the laws of the realm, who were allowed to take refuge from the civil authorities in a church or convent. This practice was recognized by the government. By a bull of Clement XIV, the right of extending asylum was limited to a few churches only, the number of these depending on the population of the town or city. Those guilty of certain specified crimes of the most heinous character were denied the privilege of sanctuary. The act of sheltering oneself under the protection of God was supposed to be spontaneous and not premeditated. The privilege was often abused by individual churchmen (Escriche, Diccionario, I, 353). [809] A clarifying description of the ecclesiastical jurisdiction has been given by Escriche. He defines it as "the power of the Church for the trial and adjudication of civil and criminal affairs exercised either by its own right or by concession of princes." This jurisdiction, says Escriche, is of two kinds, inherent (spiritual) and privileged (temporal). After classifying the different cases which fall naturally under each category, he describes the tribunals for the interpretation of canon law. "The ecclesiastical jurisdiction," he writes, "the inherent, as well as the privileged, is exercised, in first instance, by the bishops and archbishops in their respective dioceses, in the second, by the metropolitan with respect to the suffragans, and in the third, by the papal delegate. The bishops and archbishops do not exercise the jurisdiction by themselves but by means of their provisores or vicarios. These latter may be either generales or foráneos.... The term provisor or vicar-general is used to designate him who exercises the ordinary ecclesiastical jurisdiction in the entire territory of the diocese and resides in the episcopal city situated therein; ... foráneos are the others established as delegates in certain parts of the diocese in order to facilitate the administration of justice; no appointments to these offices may be made without the royal approbation. The authority of the provisores and vicarios cease by death of the prelate from whom they obtained the nomination, and is reassumed by the cabildo or chapter, sede vacante, which selects persons to succeed them" (Escriche, Diccionario, II, 453). Escriche further describes this hierarchy of ecclesiastical judges: "The metropolitans, then, are the ordinary judges of first instance with regard to the archbishoprics and at the same time they are the judges of appeal from the suffragans, and, accordingly, they are accustomed to appoint, aside from the provisores or vicarios, ordinarios who discharge the functions of judges of first instance. As the obispos exentos are not subject to a metropolitan, but directly to the holy see, recourses of appeals from their decisions go to the papal delegate." The cases of appeal from the metropolitans and other ecclesiastical judges were heard in third and last instance by the tribunal known as the rota of the papal delegate, which was composed of the nuncio of the pope, and the ecclesiastical auditors appointed by the crown. The ecclesiastical courts of the Philippines conformed generally, in organization and limits of jurisdiction, to the scheme outlined in the preceding paragraphs. The three bishops of Nueva Segovia, Camarines, and Cebú had their courts in the chief towns of their respective dioceses. They were assisted by the customary provisores. Appeals were carried from them to the court of the metropolitan which was located in Manila; this latter tribunal consisted of the archbishop, the vicar-general, and a notary. Above this court was that of the papal delegate who tried cases of appeal from the lower tribunal in accordance with canon law. In conformity with a bull of Gregory XIII, dated May 15, 1572, the authority of the papal delegate in appeal cases was final; "he might overrule and even supersede the metropolitan, as being the judge in final appeal." The Bishop of Camarines most frequently acted as papal delegate (Blair and Robertson, XLII, 27, Note 4). Aside from these courts there was that of the commissary of the Inquisition whose jurisdiction will be subsequently noted. Each order, also, had its own judicial machinery for the settlement of cases arising within it. The courts of the orders were presided over by their provincials, generals and commissaries, and were composed of those dignitaries and other magistrates selected in accordance with their own rules. Special investigators or visitors were also delegated to try cases arising within the orders, and to make inspections, ascertaining the general character of the work of the orders, the conduct of their dignitaries and the regularity of their administration. [810] Moses, South America on the eve of emancipation, 126. [811] Carta de Fr. Francisco de Laudín ... al Consejo de Indias, 20 de Enero, 1668, A. I., 68-1-44. [812] Recopilación, 1-7-54; 2-15-150; 3-1-4; Escriche, Diccionario, II, 453. [813] Recopilación, 1-10-1, 2. [814] Escriche, Diccionario, II, 453. [815] Recopilación, 1-10-4, 6, 7, 12; 1-7-12. [816] Ibid., 11. [817] Ibid., 2-15-153; 1-10-13; 3-1-3. [818] As an example of this we may refer to the work of the Augustinians in bringing to the light of judicial scrutiny the abuses of certain encomenderos against the Indians of Mindanao. This was in 1581, before the audiencia was established. The offending encomenderos were brought to Manila and tried by Bishop Salazar, who temporarily deprived them of their holdings and sentenced them to imprisonment and fines (Governor to the King [day and month not given], A. I., 67-6-6). [819] The opposition of Salazar to what he termed the encroachment of the civil jurisdiction was based on the assumption that the royal patronage did not extend to tribes which lived in an uncivilized and savage state. He contended that the pope had not conceded this, consequently, as bishop, he had entire jurisdiction without interference from the audiencia or governor over the Mohammedans (as he termed all non-Christians) and the Chinese (A. I., 1-1-3/25). [820] Cabildo de Manila to the King, A. I, 68-1-35. [821] Fajardo to Felipe III, August 15, 1620, Blair and Robertson, XIX, 155. The pendulum seems, however, to have swung in the other direction at times. In 1604, the audiencia was charged with having tried members of religious orders in absentia without giving them a chance to summon witnesses or otherwise to defend themselves (King to Audiencia, October 30, 1604, A. I., 105-2-1). That the audiencia did not always have power to discipline the friars for infractions of the royal laws in 1626, is attested by the case of an Augustinian who led an assault on an alcalde mayor in Batangas, destroyed his house, maltreated his person, and, in the presence of the natives, publicly accomplished his disgrace. The king demanded from the audiencia a statement of all the facts of the case so that he and the Council might take proper steps for the punishment of the offending religious and the protection of His Majesty's servants in the future (King to Audiencia, May 21, 1623, A. I., 105-2-1). The audiencia conducted an investigation and forwarded the papers relative to the case to the court for final action. See Chapter X, note 35. [822] Blair and Robertson, XXVIII, 314-15; see XLI, 22-25, 134, 231-4, 239, 255. [823] Montero y Vidal, Historia general, 283-284. [824] Letter of Fray Miguel de Solano, May 7, 1753, A. I., 67-6-4. [825] Orellana to Carlos II, February 24, 1683, Blair and Robertson, XXXVIII, 81-85. [826] Concepción, Historia general, IX, 107. There are records of many suits of this character throughout the history of Juan de la Concepción. The original documents relating thereto are to be found in A. I., 105-3-1 to 10. See also A. I., 67-6-3, 67-6-9 to 11. [827] See note 3 of this chapter. [828] Martínez Alcubilla, Diccionario, V, 807. [829] Recopilación, 1-10-10; 2-15-136. [830] Alzar or quitar la fuerza was the act on the part of a royal tribunal of abrogating, annulling, or reforming the effects of violence committed by an ecclesiastical judge.--Escriche, Diccionario, I, 839. [831] Recopilación, 2-15-134, 135. [832] Ibid., 2-15-143. [833] Ibid., 144. [834] Ibid., 152 and 142. [835] Ibid., 2-2-4. [836] Escriche, Diccionario, I, 712. [837] Recopilación, 2-15-148: See expediente on affairs in the Philippines, 1690, A. I., 67-6-3. [838] Ibid., 1-7-47. [839] Ibid., 2-15-149. [840] Ibid., 1-10-9. [841] Ibid., 10; 2-15-136. [842] This is discussed in the preceding chapter. [843] A. I., 1-1-3/25; Blair and Robertson, VIII, 275-281; X, 79, 245-275. [844] Ronquillo to the King, July 12, 1599, A. I., 67-6-6, cited in the preceding chapter. [845] Cédula of November 13, 1626, A. I., 105-2-1; for cases of the excommunication of viceroys and oidores and other matters relating to the Inquisition in Perú and in New Spain see Lea, The inquisition in the Spanish dependencies, 191-298, 319-451. [846] Corcuera to Felipe IV, September 25, 1623, Blair and Robertson, XXVI, 104-107. [847] Martínez de Zúñiga, An historical view, I, 268. [848] Relation of 1635-1636, Blair and Robertson, XXVI, 39-40; see also Corcuera to Felipe IV, Blair and Robertson, XXVI, 60-127; Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 195-196. [849] Montero y Vidal, op. cit., I, 193-197. [850] The Inquisition, as represented by one commissary and three alternates (who were usually bishops) was established in the Philippines on March 1, 1583. The commissary of the Inquisition had for his special field all questions of faith and heresy, clearing away the errors and superstitions against the dogma and the lax opinions which pervert Christian morals (Pérez y López, Teatro, XXVIII, 208). The Inquisitor of the Philippines was instructed, on his arrival, to present his papers "to the ecclesiastical and lay chapters in order that they might receive him and recognize him in so high and holy an office." The Inquisition was represented continuously in the Philippines until 1813. With the introduction of this dignitary may be noted the presence in the Philippines of at least five authorities with ecclesiastical jurisdiction. The ordinary ecclesiastical tribunals dealt with contentions within the Church. The papal delegate tried cases which had been appealed from these ecclesiastical courts. The regular orders had their own particular tribunals for the rule and discipline of their members and the audiencia exercised such ecclesiastical jurisdiction as we have noted in this chapter. There may be slight wonder, therefore, in view of the presence of so many ecclesiastical tribunals with similar powers, that there were frequent conflicts of authority. [851] Recopilación, 1-19-1. [852] Law of May 22, 1610, Recopilación, 1-19-2. [853] The authorized proceeding in such a case was to appeal to the General Council of the Inquisition, which held its sessions at the court. This tribunal was authorized to nullify or reverse any harmful act or decision which the ordinary inquisitors might resolve upon. (Cédula of March 10, 1553, Recopilación, 1-19-4). [854] Recopilación, 1-19-18, 19. [855] Ibid., 16. [856] Ibid., 21 and 22. [857] Ibid., 3-15-78. [858] "When a case may be tried indistinctly either by an ecclesiastical or lay judge it is said that the case is of the fuero mixto and then either of the two judges may take up the case, but the judge who begins it must be the last to try it" (Escriche, Diccionario, I, 832-833). [859] See note to Recopilación, 1-19-4. [860] Le Gentil, II, 172. Recopilación, 6-1-35. [861] Audiencia to the King, July 20, 1585, A. I., 67-6-18. On June 26, 1586, the audiencia recommended the discontinuance of the Inquisition in the Philippines on the ground that it had been utilized "as a citadel for the shelter of those desirous of resisting the royal authority" (Audiencia to the King, A. I., 68-1-33). Archbishop Santibañez, on the other hand, was desirous of converting the inquisitorial authority into a tribunal to consist of two ecclesiastics and one oidor. He argued that the distance from Mexico made procedure cumbersome, and it was manifestly unjust that residents of the Philippines should be judged by a foreign court (referring to the tribunal in Mexico.--Santibañez to Philip II, June 24, 1598, Blair and Robertson, X, 151). These same sentiments were expressed sixty years later by Francisco Bello, procurator at Madrid for the religious orders. The Council of the Indies returned the petition which had been submitted by this last-named ecclesiastic, to the Viceroy of New Spain, and to the Audiencia and Archbishop of Manila, respectively, for their advice. The consensus of opinion was against the idea of creating a tribunal in Manila, partially on account of the expense. It was also shown that such a reform would have meant a loss of power to the viceroyalty of New Spain, and by the adoption of such a suggestion there would be created a powerful tribunal which would seriously inconvenience the authority and supremacy of the audiencia and the archbishop at Manila (Consulta of the Council of the Indies, March 15, 1659, A. I., 67-6-22). [862] Cited already in various connections, particularly in Chapters II and X of this treatise. [863] In the Philippines, archbishops were frequently able to combine the functions and offices of metropolitan prelate and commissary of the Inquisition. This gave greater pre-eminence to the archbishop and made the situation more difficult for the civil authorities. We have already noted an illustration of this in the case of Archbishop Pardo (1683-1689). Being also commissary of the Inquisition, he refused to grant absolution to ex-Governor Vargas, claiming that his authority as sole inquisitor was not sufficient to justify such action on his part without first receiving advice from the tribunal in Mexico. [864] Lea, in his well-known work on The inquisition in the Spanish dependencies says that "while this branch of the Inquisition (referring to that in the Philippines) accomplished so little for the faith, it was eminently successful in the function of contributing to the disorder and confusion which so disastrously affected Spanish colonial administration" (p. 308). For a more detailed account of this episode see Cunningham, "The inquisition in the Philippines: the Salcedo affair," in The Catholic historical review, III, 417-445. [865] The leading church historians of the Philippines--Martínez de Zúñiga, Salazar, Fonseca and Concepción--were naturally unfavorable to Salcedo in their accounts of the events of his administration. All agree, however, that Salcedo was a man of energy and precision, who, at the beginning of his rule, gave promise of universal satisfaction. The correspondence of the civil officials who were contemporaneous with the governor, and the letters of Salcedo himself show that his chief concern was the enforcement of the laws and the elimination of the ecclesiastical and commercial graft with which the administration of the government of the Philippines was permeated on his arrival in the Islands (Letters of Coloma, Bónifaz, Montemayor, León, and the Municipal Cabildo, 1670-1, A. I., 67-6-3; see also note to Ventura del Arco Mss., in Blair and Robertson, XXXVII, 262). Zúñiga, however, states that Salcedo's commercial reforms were only intended for the benefit of himself and his friends, and that he reserved the chief articles of trade for himself, leaving only second-rate and spoiled goods for the merchants. This same historian states that the governor arranged for the early departure of the galleon on one occasion, with his goods on board, leaving those of the majority of the merchants unshipped (Martínez de Zúñiga, An historical view, I, 307-308). Fonseca charges him with avarice, maintaining that all classes of society in Manila were disgusted with the governor's commercial transactions and were shocked at his exile of the archbishop. This historian relates that "the magistracy, the army, the merchants, arts and industries, ... all raised their voices against the badly directed government of Salcedo, determining to over-turn him; representative citizens of Manila petitioned the audiencia, asking that it deprive him of the government, ... and the royal acuerdo determined to do so, but at the last moment the judges disagreed over the question of whose signature should precede the others; this question remained in litigation, and blocked the action of the royal acuerdo" (Fonseca, Historia de la provincia de santissimo Rosario. Libro V, Capítulo VIII, quoted in Sobre una reseña histórica, 92). Concepción, the Augustinian historian, confirms the above, and gives a more clarifying reason for the failure of the audiencia to oust the governor--namely, that the latter was sharing his commercial profits with the magistrates, thereby purchasing their favors; the oidores were therefore reluctant to take action against the governor (Concepción, Historia general, VII, 137-138, 162-200). [866] Salcedo was charged with plotting to sell the Islands to the Dutch and with surrounding himself with Flemings, one of whom was a Calvinist. It was alleged that he had already sent large sums of money to Macao, including a large part of the funds in the Manila treasury, and that he was preparing to depart in person. It was said moreover that he intended to return in command of a Dutch squadron and capture the colony for Holland. It is evident that there was no lack of charges against Salcedo (The original correspondence and consultas of the various tribunals which considered the charges against Salcedo may be noted in A. I., 67-6-3. See Blair and Robertson, XXXVII, 37-60, Lea, The inquisition in the Spanish dependencies, 299-318, and the ecclesiastical authorities mentioned in the preceding note). Dr. Pardo de Tavera, in his account of the arrest of Governor Salcedo, says that "in 1668, Governor Salcedo had some difference with (the friars) ... and the archbishop and as a result, the latter decided to avenge themselves, plotting with the military officials, regidores and merchants to bring him before the Inquisition. They made a conspiracy and, one night while the governor slept, the conspirators, among whom were the provincial of the Franciscans, the guardián of the convent of that order in Manila, and various other ecclesiastics, entered his room, surprising him while he slept, and placed him in irons. He was thus taken to the convent of the Franciscans, but considering the latter insecure, they carried him to that of San Augustín, loading him with a heavy chain" (Pardo de Tavera, Reseña Histórica, 37). After a period of imprisonment in Manila, Salcedo was ordered to Mexico for trial by the tribunal of the Inquisition, as the local authority was without authority to take further action in the matter. Salcedo never reached his destination, however, as he died at sea. This was subsequently the fate of Paternina, the inquisitor who was responsible for his disgrace. [867] That Governor León had a trying position to fill may be believed by his description of affairs as he found them in Manila, and of his struggles to restore the royal authority to its proper status. He gave a full account of "the excessive presumption of the commissary of the Inquisition in the arrest of Don Diego Salcedo, my (his) predecessor, and his interference in matters wherein he had no real jurisdiction." León reported having prevailed upon the royal audiencia to order the commissary to refrain from meddling in affairs which did not concern the Inquisition. The ways of the Inquisition he described as "dark and secret;" it was "a danger and a fearful power," a "monster, feared by all," working, not in the light of day, but insidiously, constituting a sinister power whose strength was not fully realized (León to Council, June 10, 1671, and July 4, 1672; Consulta of the Council of the Indies, July 16, 1674, A. I., 67-6-3). [868] Audiencia to the King, June 15, 1671, A. I., 67-6-10. [869] Consulta of the Council, August 12, 1672, A. I., 67-6-10. [870] Montero y Vidal, I, 356. [871] Acuerdo of August 24, 1672, A. I., 67-6-10. [872] While the Salcedo affair accurately depicts the power which the Inquisition assumed on a particular occasion, the episode cannot be said to illustrate its power and influence throughout the history of the Islands. Indeed, never on any former or subsequent occasion did the Inquisition constitute such a menace to the state. It was generally prevented from exercising too much power in the Philippines by its own isolation. Represented by a single agent, who was not always on good terms with the other ecclesiastical authorities there, and who was thousands of miles from his immediate superior, the tribunal of Mexico, he was confronted and opposed by the combined civil, secular and monastic powers. Owing to these circumstances, the commissary of the Inquisition in the Philippines could not, single-handed and unaided, constitute a long-continued danger to the commonwealth. [873] Reales resoluciones no recopiladas, Pérez y López, Teatro, XXVIII, 207. [874] Recopilación, 1-19, note 2. [875] Ibid., note 1. This tendency culminated in the decree of February 22, 1813, which suppressed the Supreme Tribunal of the Inquisition and renewed the jurisdiction of bishops and vicars over cases involving the faith, as had been the practice before the Inquisition was instituted. All property belonging to the Inquisition reverted to the crown. Soon after the restoration of Ferdinand VII the Inquisition was revived, against the will of that monarch, it is said, but it was again abolished by the decrees of March 9, 1820, and July 1, 1835. As a result of the suppression of the Tribunal of the Inquisition on March 9, 1820, and the transfer of its authority over matters of faith to the vicars and bishops, Escriche says that "in the exercise of their jurisdiction some of these prelates exceeded their authority and established in their respective dioceses juntas de fé, which turned out to be in reality inquisitorial tribunals with practically the same authority which former tribunals had exercised. They inflicted corporal and spiritual punishments and guarded in their ministry the most inviolable secrecy." As soon as reports of this unexpected assumption of authority came to the notice of the government, Ferdinand hastened to order the suppression of these self-constituted tribunals, without immediate success, however. Escriche tells us that they continued their excesses for some time, "depriving accused persons of the means of defense, keeping from them the names of persons testifying against them," flagrantly disregarding the dispositions of the brief of Pius VII, dated October 5, 1829, in prohibition of exactly these abuses. On February 6, 1830, a cédula was expedited which authorized appeals in cases of this nature until three conforming decisions were rendered. The decree of July 1, 1835, abolished these tribunals, ordering the prelates to exercise jurisdiction with appeal to the Department of Grace and Justice (Escriche, Diccionario, I, 773). [876] The author has treated this subject in a separate monograph entitled "The origin of the friar lands question in the Philippines," in The American political science review, X, 463-480. [877] The friar lands litigation began in 1687 and continued until 1751. The efforts of the government met with considerable opposition. The oidores who were charged with the inspection of the titles to these lands frequently abandoned their commissions and recommended that the friars be left alone. However, in the year last mentioned, the opposition of the Franciscans, the last of the resisting orders, was overcome (Correspondence regarding friar lands exists in A. I., 68-4-12 and 68-6-26). See also the Camacho Controversy, Blair and Robertson, XLII, 25-116; Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 385, et seq.; Concepción, Historia general, VIII, 192-206; Philippine Census, I, 342-343; Sobre una reseña histórica by the Dominicans of Manila, 65-89. [878] "In America [and in the Philippines] the monks were given a somewhat unusual position. According to the canon law they were not able to hold beneficed curacies, but the extent of the American field, and the limited number of the clergy available to occupy it, induced Leo X, Adrian VI, Paul III, Clement VIII, and Pius V to permit them to become parish priests. Under this order a very large number of these parishes in America in the first century were occupied by friars. But in the middle of the eighteenth century, this privilege was withdrawn, leaving them only two friars in a conventual province" (Moses, South America on the eve of emancipation, 138-139). [879] See Cunningham, "The question of ecclesiastical visitation in the Philippines," in The Pacific Ocean in history, 223-237. [880] Recopilación, 1-15-28. [881] Ibid., 29. [882] Ibid., 31. [883] Valuable materials, for the most part original, on the visitation controversy may be found in Blair and Robertson, XXIV, 247; XXIX, 191; XLII, 25-116; XX, 87; XXI, 32-78; XXXVII, 193-200. See also A. I., 69-1-29, 68-4-16, 106-4-21, 105-2-9, 106-4-31. Montero y Vidal (Historia general, I, 86-87, 295, 398; II, 134-138, 257 et seq.) presents a good secondary account of the subject. [884] This legajo list was obtained from the index of the collection of manuscripts in the section known as Audiencia de Filipinas, of the Archive of the Indies in Seville. The aim is only to present legajos which contain material on the audiencia. A more complete list covering all the Philippine material in this depository may be found in Blair and Robertson, LIII. [885] The above system of reference to documents in the Archive of the Indies is used universally, and it has been employed consistently in this treatise. The manuscripts are wrapped and tied in bundles (legajos), which, in turn, are to be found in large cases (estantes), and the shelves (cajones) of the cases are numbered. The meaning of the above reference therefore is Estante 68, Cajón 6, Legajo 3, indicating that legajo number 3 is to be found on Shelf 6 of Case 68 of the Archive. A legajo contains in the neighborhood of 2,000 pages of hand-written manuscript. The documents may be originals, certified copies or ordinary drafts or duplicates. They are supposed to be grouped according to subject-matter, and usually the materials in a given cajón deal with a phase of the same question. Legajos in a given cajón and manuscripts in a given legajo, roughly speaking, are arranged chronologically, though in many cases they have lost their original order owing to careless handling. This description is sufficient to identify any document to which this classification is applied, as these numbers are not duplicated, though often the documents are, and copies of the same manuscript may be found in different cajones. 
47043	----	_SOCIAL QUESTIONS OF TO-DAY_ EDITED BY H. DE B. GIBBINS, M.A. THE ALIEN INVASION * * * * * SOCIAL QUESTIONS OF TO-DAY. _Edited by H. de B. GIBBINS, M.A._ Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._ MESSRS. METHUEN announce the publication of a series of volumes upon those topics of social, economic and industrial interest that are at the present moment foremost in the public mind. Each volume of the series is written by an author who is an acknowledged authority upon the subject with which he deals, and who treats his question in a thoroughly sympathetic but impartial manner, with special reference to the historic aspect of the subject. _The following form the earlier Volumes of the Series_:-- =1. TRADE UNIONISM--NEW AND OLD.= G. HOWELL, M.P., Author of _The Conflicts of Capital and Labour_. [_Ready._ =2. PROBLEMS OF POVERTY:= An Inquiry into the Industrial Condition of the Poor. By J. A. HOBSON, M.A. [_Ready._ =3. THE CO-OPERATIVE MOVEMENT TO-DAY.= G. J. HOLYOAKE, Author of _The History of Co-operation_. [_Ready._ =4. MUTUAL THRIFT.= Rev. J. FROME WILKINSON, M.A., Author of _The Friendly Society Movement_. [_Ready._ =5. THE COMMERCE OF NATIONS.= C. F. BASTABLE, LL.D., Professor of Political Economy in the University of Dublin. [_Ready._ =6. THE ALIEN INVASION.= W. H. WILKINS, B.A., Secretary to the Association for Preventing the Immigration of Destitute Aliens. (With an Introductory Note by the Right Reverend the Bishop of Bedford.) [_Ready._ =7. THE RURAL EXODUS:= Problems of Village Life. P. ANDERSON GRAHAM. [_In the Press._ =8. LAND NATIONALIZATION.= HAROLD COX, B.A. [_In the Press._ _The following are in preparation_:-- =9. MODERN LABOUR AND OLD ECONOMICS.= H. DE B. GIBBINS, M.A. (Editor), Author of _The Industrial History of England_. =10. ENGLISH SOCIALISM OF TO-DAY.= HUBERT BLAND, one of the Authors of _Fabian Essays_. =11. ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH MEN.= Rev. C. W. STUBBS, M.A., Author of _The Labourers and the Land_. =12. CHRISTIAN SOCIALISM IN ENGLAND.= Rev. J. CARTER, M.A., of Pusey House, Oxford. =13. THE EDUCATION OF THE PEOPLE.= J. R. DIGGLE, M.A., Chairman of the London School Board. =14. POVERTY AND PAUPERISM.= Rev. L. R. PHELPS, M.A., Fellow of Oriel College, Oxford. =15. CONTINENTAL LABOUR.= W. MAXWELL. =16. WOMEN'S WORK.= LADY DILKE. * * * * * THE ALIEN INVASION BY W. H. WILKINS, B.A. (_Clare College, Cambridge_) AUTHOR OF A MONOGRAPH UPON "THE TRAFFIC IN ITALIAN CHILDREN" WITH AN INTRODUCTORY NOTE BY THE RIGHT REVEREND THE BISHOP OF BEDFORD Methuen & Co. 18, BURY STREET, LONDON, W.C. 1892 [_All Rights reserved_] * * * * * RICHARD CLAY & SONS, LIMITED, LONDON & BUNGAY. * * * * * TO The Right Honourable the Earl of Dunraven, K.G., THE LEADER OF THE MOVEMENT FOR PROTECTING OUR PEOPLE AGAINST THE INVASION OF THE DESTITUTE AND WORTHLESS OF OTHER LANDS, This Little Volume is Dedicated, IN GRATEFUL ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF MUCH ENCOURAGEMENT, AND MANY KINDNESSES. * * * * * AUTHOR'S PREFACE. My object in writing this little book has been to collect together in a popular and readable form the main facts connected with the question of destitute immigration. I have endeavoured to set forth as concisely as possible the evils consequent upon our present system, and to place before the public the leading arguments in favour of some moderate and judicious restriction of the influx of the destitute and worthless of other countries. In doing so, I have studiously avoided identifying this important question with any particular party, or any particular creed. It is a matter which concerns the nation as a whole, and it is one in which men of all creeds and parties--Jew or Christian, Liberal or Conservative--may unite together for good. The advisability of restricting our present system of unchecked destitute immigration is a matter upon which there exists considerable difference of opinion. In giving expression to my earnest convictions, I ask for that same indulgence which I willingly extend to those who may differ from my conclusions. W. H. WILKINS. 15B, ARLINGTON STREET, S.W. _January 1892._ INTRODUCTORY NOTE. I have been asked to write a short preface to a work in which the author proposes to afford the public information with respect to the immigration of destitute aliens into this country. He will discuss the evil incident to an immigration that is practically uncontrolled; and he will suggest the lines in which, in his opinion, remedial legislation should be promoted. The subject is one of very great importance, and I am confident it will be approached by the writer in a dispassionate spirit. He must know that he will fail of his object unless it is perfectly clear he is not influenced by any prejudice against the race to which the greater part of the destitute immigrants are known to belong. He will make it abundantly clear there is no desire or intention to forbid the man who is persecuted, either for his religious creed or his political opinions, from finding an asylum among us. It is the opinion of many who have given to this subject much consideration, that the destitute foreigners who come to England in such numbers exchange into a condition that is hardly less tolerable, than that from which they have fled in the lands of their birth. It is said they exercise an influence that is morally and socially to the hurt of those among whom they come to dwell. It is contended that they injuriously compete with our own people in the labour market. It is often urged that they compel our people to seek a home and employment in other lands, because of the glut they cause in the labour market, and because of their readiness to accept wages and to be content with conditions of living which are unacceptable, and something more than merely unacceptable, to the Englishman. These allegations require to be investigated. It is important to ascertain what the number of foreign immigrants really is, and what is their condition when they land among us. It is desirable we should know what provision is made, if any, for their reception, and what becomes of the men, women, and children, who are said to arrive in London in large numbers, and for the most part absolutely destitute. Is overcrowding, with its consequent miseries and ills, appreciably increased in the East End of London? These are questions on which the public ought to be informed, and the guardians of the health, and morals, and general well-being of the people must desire to be enlightened on these matters. If the evils that are said to be the results of the immigration of destitute aliens are found to exist, it will be for our legislators to devise in their wisdom the appropriate remedy. I will only venture to express one opinion with reference to this difficult and intricate subject. I am of opinion it is not safe to allow things to remain as they are without thorough investigation. On the part of the immigrants there is a widespread feeling that they are the victims of unjust aspersions; on the part of the native population there is a disquieting feeling that the authorities are indifferent to their interests, and careless of their sufferings. The antipathy of race to race is consequently and injuriously fomented. It is not to the good of the whole community that this state of things should be allowed to continue. If this book shall help to throw light upon the matters in dispute, and influence public opinion to move the authorities to investigation, and, if the evils said to follow upon unrestricted immigration are found to exist, to endeavour to remove them by legislation--it will not have been written in vain. R. C. BEDFORD. CONTENTS. CHAP. PAGE I. THE GENERAL ASPECT 1 II. INCREASE AND EXTENT 17 III. JEWISH IMMIGRATION 35 IV. ITALIAN IMMIGRATION 54 V. ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL CONSIDERATIONS 68 VI. WOMAN'S BITTER CRY 85 VII. THE SANITARY DANGER 95 VIII. THE SOCIAL EVIL 104 IX. LAWS AND CUSTOMS OF EUROPEAN COUNTRIES 115 X. THE EXAMPLE OF THE UNITED STATES 127 XI. THE COLONIAL ASPECT 136 XII. THE REMEDIES 147 * * * * * APPENDIX A. SOME OBSOLETE ALIEN ACTS 157 " B. THE ALIEN ACT OF WILLIAM IV. 161 " C. ITALIAN LAW AS TO VAGRANTS 167 " D. THE DANISH ALIEN LAW 169 " E. SUMMARY OF THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES 176 " F. SOME COLONIAL IMMIGRANT ACTS 179 " G. LIST OF TRADES UNIONS WHICH HAVE CONDEMNED PAUPER IMMIGRATION 186 INDEX 189 THE ALIEN INVASION. CHAPTER I. THE GENERAL ASPECT. The unrestricted influx of destitute aliens into the United Kingdom is a matter which has for some time past attracted a considerable amount of public attention. Within the last few years a Select Committee of the House of Commons has inquired into this question, and has published a report acknowledging its extent and recognizing some of its evils. The Sweating Committee of the House of Lords has dealt with it indirectly, so far as it concerned the subject in hand. Trades Unions and Labour Congresses have passed resolutions condemning, in a more or less general way, the present system of unchecked and unsifted immigration. But it is only quite recently that it has advanced to a place within the realm of practical politics. Few public questions have ripened so quickly as this has done. Last year[1] it was discussed, it is true, but only in an academic way, as one of those matters which loom among "the dim and distant visions of the future." To-day it is emphatically one of the questions of the hour. The Electorate is considering it, the Press--that sure reflex of public opinion--is discussing it, and the leaders of political parties, forced by the growing pressure from beneath, are making up their minds about it. The reasons for this are not very far to seek. Two great causes have tended to bring this question to the front at the present time. One, the recent edicts promulgated by the Czar against his Jewish subjects in Russia, edicts with which no right-thinking man can have any possible sympathy, and which necessarily have the result of driving many thousands of Russian Jews to seek their fortunes anew in other lands; the other, the action this year[2] of the United States Government, in passing a law which has had the effect of practically closing the Atlantic ports to the poorer class of aliens altogether. Now since the inevitable tendency in the movement of peoples is from East to West, and since Great Britain, after America, is admittedly the country to which the greatest portion of these Eastern immigrants come, it follows, as a matter of course, that the action of the American Government in thus shutting their doors to the refuse population of the Old World, cannot fail to have the effect of greatly intensifying the evil here. Our little overcrowded island is really the only place left for them to come--the only country among all the nations of Europe, with one insignificant exception, which has not seen fit to protect its own people against the influx of the destitute and unfit of other lands. These are the two principal causes which have forced this question to the front. There is another also which will prevent its ever again sinking into the background. It is this. The working-classes of this country, with whom rests the balance of political power, have taken the matter up, and, having once taken it up, they will not let it drop. On this I shall dwell more fully later on. I merely allude to it now, as one of the factors which will have to be considered in dealing with this problem. In taking a general survey of the situation, the first thing that strikes one is the isolated action of England in this matter, when compared with other nations. It may be laid down as an axiom admitting of no cavil, that it is the duty of every State to deal with its own paupers and undesirable citizens; and moreover it is obvious that this desirable state of affairs can only be brought about by other countries refusing to admit them. This common-sense view has been adopted by all other European countries, except Portugal, which has practically no immigration at all, and can scarcely, therefore, be said to count; by all our principal colonies, notably, Australia, Tasmania, New Zealand, and Canada; by the great Republic of the United States, and in a general sense by nearly every civilized nation throughout the world. Those of our colonies which have not prohibitory statutes, have the power, and use it too, of passing restraining laws from time to time as need requires, which effectually meet the purpose for which they are enacted. All through Europe there are either laws prohibiting the admission of undesirable aliens, or the police regulations and local customs render their continued residence impossible. Even the well-to-do Englishman who goes abroad, for no other purpose than to spend his money, finds himself compelled, should he remain in one place for any length of time, to contribute, in all sorts of ways, to the taxes of the country in which he resides. Rightly so too, since he enjoys the benefit of the protection which the State affords to him. In particular instances this rule may seem to press hardly on individuals, since in Germany, for instance, even an Englishwoman who gives a few lessons in her native tongue is compelled to pay a tax upon her earnings, a tax in some cases so large as to make the pittance she obtains hardly worth the earning. Yet those aliens who are sent to us from other countries--I speak now of the destitute and unfit--contribute nothing to our taxes, nothing to our national welfare, nothing to our national defence; they take everything and give nothing in return, even worse than nothing, since their habits and their customs exercise a most injurious effect upon the English community with whom they come in contact. What then can be urged against England following the example of other countries in this matter? Nothing but a mere sentiment that she is a country free and open to all, and that all who will should find a refuge upon her hospitable shores. This is a sentiment worthy of all honour, but hospitality may be carried too far, and in this instance it is not a question of its exercise, but of its abuse. There is a homely maxim that "Charity begins at home," and if this be true of individuals it is no less true of nations. The first duty of the father of a household is towards his own family. He must not give bread to others while his own children are starving. He must not give shelter to the stranger, and drive his sons and daughters out into the cold. In the same way, the first duty of a nation is to its own kith and kin. It must not open its arms to the surplus population of other lands, while its own people are clamouring in vain for work. Yet this is the case, and while every day destitute aliens are pouring in, Englishmen are driven from the land of their birth to make room for them. Speaking last year at Liverpool, upon the subject of our rapidly-increasing population, Lord Derby is reported to have said that "Emigration is the only palliative." On all subjects connected with population Lord Derby is a great authority; but of what avail, I would ask him, is it to recommend emigration as a panacea for our social ills, when for every hundred of our people taken away, a leak remains behind by which thousands more of an immeasurably inferior calibre come pouring in, by whom the conditions of existence are made harder than before, and the standard of comfort and decency in the home-life of our people is infinitely lowered? As illustrative of this it may be mentioned that at Leeds, where there is a very large and increasing foreign colony, some £500 was spent in 1887 in emigrating English children to Canada; and evidence was given before the Sweating Committee to the effect that one day a party of 500 emigrants, mostly young men in the full prime of their health and vigour, sailed out of Tilbury Docks, and at the same time another vessel, having on board 700 foreigners, came in. Truly, we are an eccentric nation! It was George Cruikshank who in allegory drew a map of England with a board on a pole stuck in the centre, and on it the following notice to Europe, "Rubbish may be shot here." It was a caricature, and like all caricatures subject to exaggeration, but it contained within it the germs of a great truth. But even Cruikshank little dreamed that these people would ever arrive here at the rate of 40,000 and 50,000 per annum. Had he done so the notice would rather have run, "No admittance." "Oh," but I hear some say, "you would check this influx, but what of the people we emigrate to other countries?" I would answer that there is no just or fair comparison to be drawn between the people we send away, chiefly young and able-bodied men, and the wretched, under-sized, destitute immigrants we gain in exchange. As things are at present all schemes of emigration and colonization, however well-meaning, are beside the mark. We are drawing out of the barrel and pouring in at the top. More than that, we are drawing out good wine and pouring in bad. It is idle to talk of reprisals, because, as I have already pointed out, other countries have taken steps to guard against this evil. No other civilized nation will take our paupers, our criminals, our lunatics, our outcasts. Why then, in the name of common sense, should we be compelled to take theirs? Many attempts have been made to confuse this simple issue. Many red herrings have been drawn across the track. It has been said, without one jot or tittle of evidence, that this demand for some moderate measure of restriction, veils behind it a desire to check foreign immigration altogether. Nothing could be farther from the truth. No objection can be urged against foreign immigration as a whole, but only that part of it which exercises an injurious effect upon our own people. There are, for instance, at the present time many foreigners in England employed in different professions and vocations, as teachers of languages, clerks, waiters, cooks, artisans, and so forth. These are in no sense an evil, for they supply a felt want, and are decent and cleanly in their habits and mode of living. Many of them are gradually absorbed into our national life, and become good and useful members of the community. The skilled labourer, the decent artisan, the man with brains to work, or with money to spend, is always welcome to our shores. Such were the Huguenots. They had not much money, perhaps, but they brought with them something more precious than mere wealth,--the brain, the bone, the muscle, and the manufacturing talent of France. They introduced into England arts and manufactures hitherto unknown, and they added to the lustre of their adopted country by contributing to the science and the literature of the day. They were in fact the _fine fleur_ of the French nation. A similar influx was that of the Flemings, which took place at an earlier period of England's history. The Flemings, who introduced into our country the finer kind of weaving, first came to England during the reign of Edward III. The weavers of England were then unable to produce any of the better kinds of cloth, and the difficulties and expense of having to send abroad whenever any material was required superior to the coarse home-made product were necessarily great. Under these circumstances, it was obviously a wise policy of the English king to induce the Flemish weavers to come over to England, and to bring their looms with them. The high wages offered, and the prospect held out of ample employment, soon brought large numbers. A like policy was pursued by several of the other English kings who reigned during the period which elapsed between the death of Edward III. and the accession of Edward VI., and there was from time to time a considerable influx of skilled artisans of all classes. In the reign of Edward VI. it appears however that public opinion had veered round. The influx of Flemings and of foreigners generally had become so considerable, that there was a general agreement on the part of the native-born population that it was no longer necessary to hold out inducements to foreign craftsmen, since their presence in large numbers destroyed the demand for good English work, and acted detrimentally upon the interests of English tradesmen. Accordingly we find the citizens of London petitioning the Privy Council to put a stop to this foreign influx, but the only result appears to have been that an estimate, or census, was taken of all the foreigners then resident in London. One must not infer, however, from the case of the Flemings that the advent of the foreigner was always welcome, or that the outcry against him in the reign of Edward VI. was a new thing. The history of the alien in Great Britain has yet to be written, and space does not permit of its being dwelt upon to any great extent here. Yet in looking back upon the legislative enactments of the Plantagenets and early Tudor kings, which have been briefly referred to elsewhere,[3] one cannot but be struck at the way in which popular opinion--of which these acts were doubtless the outcome--wavered on this subject. The generous treatment accorded to the Flemings and other skilled foreign craftsmen who came to England from time to time contrasts strangely with the harshness with which foreigners were treated at other times. In 1155, for instance, there was an anti-foreign outcry, and many foreigners--in fact all that could be found--were first plundered of their worldly goods, and then banished from the kingdom. Later on they were allowed to return, though still compelled to suffer certain disabilities. At one time the popular prejudice against foreigners was so great that their lives and property were always in danger, and they suffered much unfair treatment. The wise policy of Edward III. removed many of these disabilities, and a special Act was passed in the reign of Richard II. by which they were relieved still more. These Acts were those rather of the king and the upper classes than of the common people, among whom the animus against the foreigner was still so strong that that bulwark of English liberty, trial by jury, was to the alien of no avail, since any charge brought against him, whether true or false, almost invariably resulted in his conviction by a British jury. To do away with this injustice the Enactment of 1430 was passed, which provided that an alien, if he so wished, might be tried by a mixed jury, of whom half were to be Englishmen and the other half foreigners. This singular Statute remained in force until 1870, when the Naturalization Act of that year abolished the privilege of the alien to claim a mixed jury. This Act also repealed all previous Acts except the now well-known Act of 6 & 7 William IV. cap. II., which provides for the registration of aliens, and to which further allusion will be made later on. Harsh and unnecessary as some of the enactments which were directed against aliens during the reigns of the Plantagenet kings appear to us now, we may congratulate ourselves on the fact that even in the reigns of the Plantagenet kings our Statute Book was never disgraced by such an unjust measure as the French _Droit d'Aubaine_, which confiscated to the Crown the whole of the property of an alien, thus leaving him destitute in a foreign country. This Statute was repealed in 1791. It was revived by the Code Napoleon, but only for a brief space, and was finally abolished the year after Napoleon's downfall at Waterloo. The _Droit d'Aubaine_ was of considerable antiquity, having been doubtless modelled on the alien laws of ancient Athens, under which similar confiscations of the property of an alien took place, though, in spite of the severity of their laws, the Athenians always welcomed the foreign craftsmen and the artists and skilled workmen of other nationalities. In Rome under the Republic somewhat similar laws to those of Athens existed against the alien, but with the Empire all disabilities were swept away, and Rome gladly welcomed all who ministered to her luxuries and to her pleasures. It is hardly necessary to say that no unprejudiced person would desire England to revert to the harsh measures of the Plantagenet and Tudor kings, still less to stain her Statute Book by such a measure as the _Droit d'Aubaine_, however great might be the provocation. Yet the memory of those acts need not prevent us from considering dispassionately, and with due regard to the changed circumstances of our age and country, the advisability of passing some wise and judicious measure for the sifting of alien immigration at the present time. The objection to all the measures to which allusion has been made is, that they were directed against foreigners simply because they were foreigners, and not for the reason their presence militated to any considerable extent against the well-being of the English community, and certainly not because they added to overcrowding, to destitution, or to disease. The Flemings and the Huguenots have their parallels to-day in the foreign teachers of languages, in the French cooks and milliners, in the German clerks, cabinet-makers, and waiters; in the Italian cooks, manufacturers of Venetian glass, &c.; in the skilled craftsmen of whatever nationality who arrive upon our shores. Against these no reasonable objection can be urged. They are useful members of the community, we gain by their presence among us, and their advent is a welcome one. But it cannot be seriously contended that the Flemings and the Huguenots have their parallel in the destitute and degraded immigrants from East of Europe, or the vagrant and vicious aliens from the South. Whatever our sympathies towards these people may be, there is every reason why we should not welcome them here. As things are, these new arrivals add in a manner altogether out of proportion to their numbers to the miseries of our poor in the congested districts of our great towns, to which they invariably drift. There are many practical ways in which we can show our sympathy with the persecuted Russian Jews if we wish to do so, notably by combining to divert the stream of immigration from our own densely populated little island, and by helping the would-be immigrants to move on to some new land beyond the seas. This we may do; but for their own sake, and for the sake of our people, we should try to prevent them from coming here. With an imperfect knowledge of the facts we are hardly in a position to judge of the action which the Russian Government has seen fit to take against its Jewish subjects. On the surface it certainly appears that a great wrong has been done, a wrong which is also a blunder, but we must remember that we have not yet heard what there is to be urged on the other side. We can scarcely be expected to credit without adequate proof all the hearsay tales of Russian oppression. Isolated instances do not suffice. If a Russian were to make a collection of all the instances of murder, outrage, and misery which unhappily still stain the annals of our law-courts, he would hardly present to his compatriots a faithful picture of English life. Is there not just a possibility that we may be condemning Russia on somewhat similar evidence? It is said,--one cannot say how truly,--that the system of usury and extortion practised by many of the Russian Jews upon the peasantry has, in a large measure, tended to bring about the present state of things. Again we are told that the increase of Russian Jews has of late been so rapid that there is a danger, if things go on at the present rate, of the orthodox Slavs being swamped by a section of the population little in sympathy with the Government under which they live. These are some of the reasons, we are informed, which have led to the adoption of harsh measures against the Russian Jews. On the surface such reasons seem very inadequate, and with the measures which are said to flow from them no right-thinking man can have sympathy. For her difficulties with her Jewish population Russia has only herself to thank. The long years of oppression to which they have been subjected have degraded them, until their ignorance and dislike of their masters have become a danger to the State. Anything which savours of a religious persecution is abhorrent to all liberal-minded men; and if it be true, as alleged, that the present sufferings of the Russian Jews are inflicted upon them because of their faith, then our sympathies with the victims of such an unholy persecution cannot be too great. At the same time we are not in a position to dictate to Russia. Some zealous and well-meaning people tried the experiment at a meeting at the Mansion House last year, with the result that they were virtually told to mind their own business. The "protest," however, had one unfortunate consequence. The repressive measures were made more drastic than before, and the unfortunate Hebrews, naturally interpreting the sympathy shown to them as an inducement to come here, have since arrived upon our hospitable shores in greater numbers than before. In support of this opinion may be quoted the following paragraph which appeared in the supplement of the _St. Petersburger Zeitung_ last June. "We hear that a charitable association has been formed, with the praiseworthy object of assisting the Russian Jews out of their present miserable situation. An opportunity is to be given them of emigrating to those countries where sympathy has been publicly expressed for them. The first thing this association intends doing is to send the Jews by Libau and Riga to London, where public opinion has clearly enough shown itself to be on their side. For this purpose four steamers are to be chartered to carry these Jews to the banks of the Thames at the lowest possible rates, and it is expected that it will take the whole of the summer to carry out this plan. The philanthropists in St. Petersburg hope that the friends of the Jews in England will give them their hearty support, and help to provide for these poor creatures when they arrive in London." This is taking us at our word with a vengeance! Surely for the sake of these poor immigrants themselves it is high time that some means should be found to prevent their arriving here in such numbers. The miseries which many of the Russian Jews undergo in the East End of London and some of our large provincial cities must be as bad as those which they have endured in the inhospitable land from whence they came. In some cases their lot here must be even worse. Quite recently an instance of the sufferings which these poor creatures undergo came to light in Whitechapel. Adolphe Cashneer, a Russo-Jewish immigrant, was summoned before the coroner of East London[4] to give evidence as to the death of his infant child. The man, who was unable to speak a word of English, stated that he had been out of work for six weeks--he worked in the cheap tailoring trade--that the mother had received no medical attention except a midwife at confinement, no food but three-halfpennyworth of milk a day, and a share of a fowl which lasted them five days, and for which the husband had pawned his trousers. The deceased child had no clothes but a napkin to cover it. It lived only one week and then died of starvation! The doctor in describing the wretched room where these poor people lived, said there were no sheets or blankets on the bed, the mother had no proper clothing, and there was no food beyond some sour milk in a dirty glass, quite unfit for human consumption. A more impressive object-lesson of the evils of our present system of unchecked and pauper immigration than that unfolded in this tale of sordid misery it would be impossible to conceive. And yet this is by no means an isolated case. Dr. Dukes stated that he continually came across such cases. He went on to say in his evidence at the inquest:--"I continually come across such cases as this.... The poverty in the East End is terrible." Instances like this cannot but strengthen the argument against admitting destitute aliens here. Strangers in a strange land, these miserable new-comers find themselves worse off than they were before. They are not themselves benefited, and the only result is that they intensify the awful struggle for existence which is going on daily and hourly among the poor in our large cities. It has been said that to limit this influx would be to endanger that right of asylum which has ever been one of England's boasts and glories. It is not so. Were a careful and judicious measure passed for the sifting of alien immigration, it would be quite possible to insert a clause, similar to that which has been inserted in the new American Act, which runs as follows:--"That nothing in this Act shall be construed to apply to or exclude persons convicted of a political offence, notwithstanding the said political offence may be designated as a 'felony, crime, infamous crime, or misdemeanour involving moral turpitude,' by the laws of the land whence he came, or by the court convicting." Such is the law in the "land of the free." England, no less than America, is the home of civil and religious liberty She has great and glorious traditions; they are illustrated by her treatment of the Walloons, the Huguenots, the slave-traffic, and all political refugees from time immemorial. Yet in the past she has not hesitated from time to time to pass such laws as need and occasion required. To this the Statute Book is a witness,[5] and her traditions would not be reversed because in the present day she found it necessary, in the interests of her own people, to adopt some means for checking this latter-day invasion. What is asked for is not an offensive but a defensive measure. England has gained much in the past by her generous treatment of political refugees. But it must be apparent to every thoughtful man that the question assumes a very different aspect when we have to deal not with the influx of a few thousands of skilled workmen at isolated periods of our history, but with the invasion of some thirty or forty thousand every year of the class which under ordinary circumstances would go to fill the poor-houses and penitentiaries of Eastern Europe. Such a constant pouring in of unskilled labour of necessity disorganizes the labour market, and compels the displacement of English workmen who are unable to compete on equal terms with rivals such as these. The results are plainly shown in the trades and districts chiefly affected. These immigrants undo by their presence in our midst all the good which our philanthropists and social reformers have been labouring for ages to create. It may be true that in the strictly legal sense of the word comparatively few of them are paupers, since, as Lord Derby has recently expressed it, "they are quite able to make their own living." But what a "living" is it? The living of a savage or a dog, and certainly not one which we like to see Englishmen or Englishwomen degraded to, or forced into competition with, in the land that gave them birth. Boast as we may of the succour which we are ever ready to afford to the oppressed ones of the earth, it is obvious that we must first look to the interests of our own people. Our supineness in this matter has allowed the evil to grow to a magnitude it ought never to have reached, and thus the difficulties surrounding it have been greatly increased. The Government of the day will incur a grave responsibility if they do not speedily devote their earnest attention to this matter. There are signs all around us that before long something will have to be done. At a time when the country is being convulsed with conflicts of labour against capital, and when thousands of our wage-earning classes are looking in vain for work; at a time when the condition of the poor in our great cities is engaging the active attention of our philanthropists, and the columns of the press teem with appeals for the aid of the homeless and suffering; this ever-increasing addition to the ranks of our unemployed, with its inevitable tendency to aggravate our social evils, is calculated to inspire feelings of alarm and dismay among all those who have the welfare of our people seriously at heart. CHAPTER II. THE INCREASE AND EXTENT. That the immigration of destitute and undesirable aliens takes place on a large and increasing scale, is a fact placed beyond the reach of controversy or denial. The Select Committee of the House of Commons appointed to inquire into the subject, reported that the immigration of aliens into this country had been greater since the date of the last Census (1881) than at any recent period of our history; an opinion which they arrived at from the evidence of a number of eminent authorities. Mr. John Burnett, Labour Correspondent of the Board of Trade, who was specially deputed in August 1887 to make inquiries into the Sweating System in the East End of London, reported that matters were much worse there of late years, because of "the enormous influx of pauper foreigners," an opinion which he arrived at from his own personal observation, and from the statements of the people themselves. Mr. Burnett's report was corroborated in its main features by Dr. Ogle, whose work it is to prepare the statistical part of the Census, and whose opinion on all such matters stands deservedly high. Let us also take the opinion of people who have lived in the invaded districts, and who can therefore speak from practical experience. Mr. Henry Dejonge, a cigar-maker, who had lived in the East End for fifty years, said before the Immigration Committee:--"The increase has taken place since the Russian War of 1856. Since then it has been gradual, but sure; there has been a very large increase the last eight years.... In a certain street in Whitechapel the shops are mostly kept by foreigners. In Wentworth Street, out of eighty-five shops, there are forty-eight in the hands of Russian and Polish Jews." Mr. Simmons, a dress-trimming maker, said that he was born in Spitalfields, and could date back in his recollection, "and where there were then two Jews, there are forty now, or even more--say sixty. I know a street which when I was a boy there was not a Jew in, and now it is completely full of them." The agent to the Whitechapel Committee of the Charity Organization Society (Mr. Thurston) was of opinion that the population in the district of Whitechapel would be half foreign and half British. "Some of the streets that were occupied by British workpeople have been entirely cleared, and are now occupied by Jews." The Rev. H. A. Mason, Vicar of All Saints, Stepney, a well-known and devoted clergyman, who has laboured for the last eighteen years among the lowest of the London poor, reckons that there has been an increase of 1000 foreign Jews in his parish during the last seven years, and this at the sacrifice of the British population. He also testified to the ill-feeling existing between them and the British part of the population who found themselves being thus ousted. The Bishop of Bedford, Dr. Billing, referring to Spitalfields, where he had laboured for twenty years, said:--"I know that during the last four years whole streets have become entirely occupied by Jews, foreign Jews, where there was not a Jew before." The Report of the Committee of Guardians of the Whitechapel Union stated in 1887:--"There can be no doubt that the number of foreign residents--chiefly very poor--in the Whitechapel Union and adjacent districts, is largely on the increase, and that each year sees some new locality, or localities, invaded by the foreigner and abandoned by the English poor. No statistics are needed in support of this statement, since it is obvious to every one who knows the East End. It is not a mere redistribution of poor, and the substitution of one class for another in a certain locality; it is the immigration into the district of a class of foreign poor, who seem heretofore to have existed on the mere border-land of civilization, who are content with any shelter, and to share that shelter with as many of their class as can be crowded into it." A mass of similar evidence might be given by experts whose opinions are above contradiction or cavil. But it is unnecessary to multiply witnesses. A visit to East London will give one the best of all possible evidence--that of one's own eyes. In Whitechapel, the increase during the last ten years has been enormous. Whole streets are now filled with foreign Jews, notably Old Montague Street, Chicksand Street, Booth Street, Hanbury Street, and the teeming courts and alleys adjoining. It is easy to imagine oneself to be in a foreign city. Strange habits and customs, and foreign faces surround one; and a foreign language is heard on every side. There are multitudes of little eating-houses with Hebrew letters on the windows, signifying thus "Kosher"--meat prepared in the Jewish fashion--is there supplied. There are foreign Jewish tradesmen who drive a thriving trade in catering to the peculiar wants of this foreign population, supplying every need, even down to "smoked beef and sausages from Warsaw," a delicacy which the Polish and Russian Jew especially affects. There is even a foreign newspaper half printed in "Yiddish," and the sentiments expressed therein are often of the most dangerous order. On the walls and other available spaces, one sees advertisements in Yiddish, and enterprising tradesmen go in for Yiddish handbills. There are Yiddish clubs and gambling-hells, and little Jewish lodging-houses without end. In fact everywhere the signs of this foreign invasion are dominant, to the complete--or almost complete--exclusion of the English element. That particular quarter of London is like the Ghetto of a continental city. The Chief Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police stated in his last Report that "a growing number of such passengers (viz. destitute foreigners) arrive in London, chiefly on board vessels running under the German flag." After noticing that by one line plying between Hamburg and Tilbury, no less than 4000 such passengers, 80 per cent. of whom appeared to be quite destitute, arrived in 1890, as compared with 2390 in 1889, the Chief Commissioner notices that "from 4000 to 5000 additional arrived in London in 1890," and adds, "Though some of these only pass through London on their way to America, it may be taken that the majority of them settle there." His conclusion is:--"The police reports unanimously state that there has been a marked increase of late in the number of arrivals in this country." This report is dated 17th January, 1891. The increase is by no means confined to London alone. The Chief Constable at Manchester reported (29th December, 1890), as the result of inquiries of several shopkeepers and housekeepers from Poland and Russia who have resided in Manchester for some years, that "all are unanimously of opinion that the numbers of their countrymen who have immigrated into the city have increased during the last few months." He reports farther (10th January, 1891), "that there are said to be 15,000 to 16,000 Jews in Manchester, and of their number it has been estimated that at least 70 per cent. are said to be Russian Poles. No correct information can be obtained as to the proportionate number of the whole who are in destitute circumstances, or of the total increase in the numbers of these classes which has actually taken place in the year 1890; but there can be no doubt that the Jewish people have very largely increased in numbers in this city during the last few years." The Liverpool Chief Constable reported (January 1891):--"There is no doubt, as far as can be ascertained, that the immigration of destitute Polish and Russian Jews into this city has somewhat increased during the past twelve months." The Chief Constable at Glasgow reports, on the authority of the honorary treasurer of the Jewish Board of Guardians, that about 200 poor Polish immigrants arrive in that city yearly. There are a good many foreign Jews settled in Glasgow. In Leeds, the Chief Constable reported (December 1890), that there is a continuous immigration of destitute aliens--Polish and Russian Jews. A member of the Jewish Board of Guardians informed him "that the number of Jewish immigrants arriving in Leeds during the last twelve months would, in his opinion, be about 2000 persons"; but on this there appears to be a difference of opinion. Leeds is a place which calls for more than a mere passing notice, since it is probably more directly interested in the question of alien immigration than any other provincial town in England. The incoming tide flows on unchecked, and helps to swell the poorer population of Leeds to an alarming extent. In a Report of the Sweating System at Leeds, Mr. Burnett, Labour Correspondent to the Board of Trade, wrote:--"As elsewhere these people (the Jews) may be almost said to form a foreign colony in the heart of an English town, and Leeds has now its Jewish quarter just as the East End of London has. They have settled down in a district called the Leylands, and they have taken such complete possession of it, that in the Board School of the locality, 75 per cent. of the children are Jews. The streets in the Leylands are beginning to assume distinctly foreign characteristics. The names above the shops are foreign, and the notices in the windows are printed in Hebrew characters. The words spoken are unintelligible to English ears, and about the race of the children in the streets and the people at the doors there can be no mistake." More recent evidence is afforded by the _Yorkshire Post_ "The great majority of the arrivals," writes this journal,[6] "are Russian and Polish Jews, who on landing upon English soil, at once move to the centre of the clothing industry, most of them with little or no money in their pockets, many of them without a trade in their hands, and not a few of them trusting for safe dealings to their English vocabulary, which is limited to one word, 'Leeds.' ... It is quite evident that there has been an increase during the present year. The persecution of the Semitic race in Russia has driven immense numbers to seek in this country the hospitable shelter that is denied them in the land of their birth, and a not inconsiderable proportion of them having heard of Leeds as an earthly Paradise for outcasts and wanderers, direct their steps towards the West Riding capital immediately the Hamburg boat lands them at Hull." Among the evidences of the greater influx into the Jewish colony of Leeds is the increased number of applications for help that are being received almost every week by the Jewish Board of Guardians, and by those who have the control of the relief funds connected with the various Hebrew congregations of the town. No official return is kept of the number of foreign Jews who come into Leeds, or of those who leave it; absolutely accurate information as to the exact number of the foreign colony in Leeds is therefore not to be obtained. But the Report of the Board of Trade, issued in the spring of 1891, estimates the Jewish population at 10,000. There are those, however, who put the number higher than that, the estimate going up as high as 15,000, or even beyond it. Be that as it may, it is certain that there has been a very large increase in 1891. How great is this increase is shown by the following quotation from a circular recently issued to the subscribers of the Leylands Gospel Temperance Mission, signed by the Superintendent of the Mission. The Leylands is a district of Leeds. The circular says:--"Careful inquiries have been made into the great changes rapidly taking place in the Leylands, owing to the enormously increased proportion of Jews settling there. As a result of this, the Byron Street Wesleyan Chapel has been given up and sold to the Jews, the Roman Catholic Chapel is also given up, and the English and Irish portion of the district is removing. A carefully-prepared estimate has been given of the changes during the past two years, as follows:--In 1889 there were in the Leylands 1300 houses. Of these 621 were occupied by Jews. In 1890, 765 were occupied by Jews, an increase in one year of 144 houses taken by Jews. At present, out of 1300 houses, 900 are occupied by Jews (between 30 and 40 of them as workshops), only leaving about 400 houses in the district occupied by English and Irish." To return to London. In addition to the facts already quoted, we have the evidence of the Jewish Board of Guardians, evidence surely above suspicion, since that body is by no means prone to exaggerate the evil of destitute immigration. In the Annual Report of the Board for 1890, it is stated that the total number of cases of foreign Jews "entertained" during that year amounted to 3534. Taking ten years, we find that in 1880, 2588 cases were relieved, _exclusive_ of Loan and Industrial Departments, at a cost of £18,354; in 1890, 3351 cases were relieved, _exclusive_ of Loan and Industrial Departments, at a cost of £21,648. The total of absolute gifts in 1880 was £5528; in 1890, it had run up to £10,776, or nearly double. Moreover, the Emigration Committee of the Board testify to a decrease in the number of people assisted to emigrate in 1890. They admit that, owing to the United States Immigration Laws, they have to use the greatest circumspection to prevent any cases being assisted that are likely to be refused admission on the other side. The Russian Relief Fund Committee also admit that owing to persecution in Russia they no longer assist Eastern immigrants to return home even in cases where it is desirable to send men back to look after their families. They state that a "large number" of refugees have been assisted by them to settle here since 1882, and that they succeed in gaining a livelihood in London. From special inquiries which have been instituted by the Association for preventing the Immigration of Destitute Aliens, it is computed that during the spring, summer, and autumn months of the present year (1891) some 500 a week of these alien immigrants have arrived at the port of London alone. Of these nearly 80 per cent. appeared to be in a destitute condition. It is to be noted that these figures do not include those who are stated to be provided with through tickets to other countries; and though some may possibly return again to the land from whence they came, the probability is that most of them remain to glut the already overcrowded labour market in the East of London. A few, generally of the least destitute class, drift on to the manufacturing centres in the North of England; but the alien population of the provincial cities is mainly recruited from other ports--Hull, Leith, Grimsby, and Southampton. We now come to the last link in this chain of evidence as to the increase and extent of alien immigration--the official returns of the Board of Trade. I have purposely delayed considering these returns until the last, as they are in many ways incomplete and unsatisfactory. Still as they are so frequently appealed to by those who seek to minimize this evil, one must refer to them also. As an instance of the way in which they have been kept, it may be stated at the outset that, excepting as to London and Hull, the information has only been obtained from the various ports since the 1st of May 1890, and only as to London and Hull is a comparison possible with the previous year. Still even on this unsatisfactory basis we find that 29,885 aliens arrived from the Continent, at twenty-one British ports, between May and December 1890, and at two others in the whole year, not intending to proceed to America; whilst the arrivals in London were 4400 more in 1890 than in 1889, and in Hull 1320 higher.[7] And this in spite of the fact that nearly 1,000,000 persons were maintained under the Poor Law in Great Britain during 1890! The returns issued by the Board of Trade for 1891 are even more alarming. The total of aliens "not stated to be _en route_ to America" who arrived in the United Kingdom during the ten months ending the 31st of October, 1891, amounted to no less than 32,877. These figures appear upon the showing of the official returns, and taking them as they stand, how people, however optimistic, can derive any consolation from them, it is not easy to imagine. But there is no doubt that were these returns actually complete, carefully prepared, and accurately checked, it would be found that the number of aliens who arrived upon our shores would be very much in excess of the number given. The actual numerical work of compiling the returns is done at the Board of Trade; but the collection of material is directed and superintended by the Commissioners of Customs; and the efficiency of the work turns upon the way in which the Alien Act of William IV. is administered. Summing up briefly the chief provisions of that Act, which are given _in extenso_ elsewhere,[8] it will be seen that--(_a_) The master of a vessel arriving from a foreign port is to declare in writing to the chief officer of the Customs at the port of arrival, the number of the aliens who are on board, or have landed from his vessel; and to give the names, rank, occupations, and description of such aliens, so far as he shall be informed thereof; and if a master omits to make such declaration, or wilfully makes a false one, he is liable to a penalty. (_b_) Every alien on arrival is to declare in writing to the chief officer of Customs at the port of debarkation, his name, description, etc., and every such officer is to register the declaration, and deliver to the alien a certificate, which is to be given up to the chief officer of customs at the port of departure, when the alien leaves the country. (_c_) The chief officer of Customs at every port is to transmit to one of Her Majesty's principal Secretaries of State--in practice the Home Secretary--a copy of the master's declaration, a copy of the certificate given to the alien, and the certificate which the alien gives up on leaving the country. This sounds all very well in theory, and there is no doubt that if the provisions of the Act were carried out to the letter, we should be in possession of what we have not now--actual statistics, which must precede legislation. But the question is, what about the practice? Mr. Lindsey, the chief of the Long-room at the London Custom-house, told the Immigration Committee in 1888 that the Act had long since fallen into desuetude; and that only at the ports of London and Hull did the masters of vessels, at that date, report the number of aliens on board, or make any declaration whatever, while no means at all existed for checking the lists supplied. Indeed, it would be quite possible, he considered, for vessels to land "thousands of aliens" without the Customs authorities being able to find it out. No declarations were made or certificates given to aliens on arrival, or received from them on departure, as directed by sec. vi. of the Alien Act of William IV. It is evident, therefore, that up to that date the Act had been allowed to become practically obsolete. After the Immigration Committee had used their Report in 1889, in which they recommended that measures should be taken to secure with more frequency and greater accuracy an estimate of the amount of alien immigration into the United Kingdom, tardy steps were taken to obtain certain statistics; but it was not till May 1890, and after questions had been frequently asked in either House of Parliament, that alien lists were taken at ports other than London and Hull. Even now, though an attempt has been made to procure lists of aliens from a considerable number of ports, yet on the face of the monthly returns the lists are, admittedly, very imperfect. The lists received from Dover, Folkestone, and Harwich are only partial; while other ports of considerable importance, such as Lynn, Newhaven, Southampton, and many of the western ports, are omitted altogether. In all cases the masters of the vessels are perfectly able to shirk their duties if so inclined; so that not only are the returns very incomplete, but even the statistics given are very untrustworthy. I have the best authority for making this charge as to the untrustworthy nature of the statistics given, which is so strenuously denied by those who put their faith in the official returns. My authority is a letter written to me on the 23rd April, 1891, by the Secretary of the Customs, in which he says:--"I am directed to acquaint you that the Department does not undertake in any way to check the returns of aliens made by the captains of the vessels, under the requirements of the Act of William IV.; and that the Customs Boarding Staff, as at present arranged, could not undertake such a duty without additional expense to the public, even if directions to that effect should be received from the Government." This is perfectly natural and reasonable as coming from the Customs. The letter is merely quoted here to show that it is impossible to place faith in the present returns. It practically admits the whole contention: the alien lists are unchecked, and therefore unsatisfactory. A glance at the way in which they are prepared will show how unsatisfactory they are. As we have already seen, the provisions of the Alien Act of William IV. have been allowed to fall into disuse, and the penalties for neglect of carrying them out are never enforced. Hitherto even such returns as have been sent in, have been loosely and carelessly prepared. In some cases masters of ships have neglected to render any returns of the aliens on board their vessels; in others, the duty, instead of being performed by the captain or master of the vessel, as the Act requires, has been delegated to some inferior officer, with the result that the work has been performed in a hasty and perfunctory manner. But, however carelessly these lists are prepared, the Custom House authorities accept them just as they are, and no provision has been made for checking them. It is obvious that statistics prepared in such a manner are of no great value. Yet it is upon the authority of such returns as these that we are asked to disbelieve the evidence of our own eyes, and to admit that the matter is not of sufficient urgency to claim the attention of the Government. With regard to the steps which the Board of Trade are said to be taking to ensure more accurate statistics, it was stated by Sir Michael Hicks-Beach last session that in future the number of aliens on board the incoming vessels would be every now and then counted, and comparisons made with the master's returns. "Every now and then" is very vague; and until a check is systematically and regularly imposed upon the number of alien passengers on every ship arriving at all the ports, we cannot be sure of obtaining accurate returns. This vague promise on the part of the President of the Board of Trade was made--it should be noted--after a prolonged correspondence had taken place between that Department and the Association for Preventing the Immigration of Destitute Aliens. The Association, on the strength of the letter from the Secretary of the Customs, already quoted, had asked the permission of the Board of Trade--as the returns were admittedly unchecked--for its agent to be allowed, at the Association's expense, to go on board the incoming vessels for the purpose of checking the returns rendered by the masters. This request was met by _non possumus_[9]; and the Board of Trade wrote to say that though they had "no reason to believe that the returns hitherto received have been in fact inaccurate, arrangements have been made for a further check to be applied to the returns in future by the officers of the Customs when on board the ships." How far these vague promises given on the part of Sir Michael Hicks-Beach in the House of Commons, and by the Department in the letter quoted, have been redeemed, it is impossible to say. The promise of a "further check" is not more reassuring, than Sir Michael Hicks-Beach's "every now and then," especially when we bear in mind that it had been admitted that hitherto there had been absolutely no check at all. All that one knows for certain is that up to the present no action has been taken against the masters or owners of any ships, if the lists have been found to be incorrect. Such then is a sketch of the way in which the Government figures are obtained, and of the efforts which have been made to secure their greater accuracy. In compiling the alien lists in the future, some more definite information should also be forthcoming as to the means, nationality, and destination of the immigrants. The distinction "_en route_ to America" is altogether inadequate for practical purposes. As matters stand, it is the only clue afforded us for judging which of the immigrants are merely birds of passage, or which come to settle here. Of course some of those who are "not stated to be _en route_ to America" return again to the Continent; but against that unknown and altogether hypothetical number, may fairly be set the incomplete nature of the returns, and the practice so generally followed in preparing the alien lists of counting two children as one adult. As most of the immigrants against whom complaint is chiefly made do not come here alone, but with their families--and often large families--this is a point to be noted in considering the actual numerical value of the Board of Trade returns. Therefore, in making a rough estimate, I do not think I shall be far wrong if I consider the number of aliens classed in the Board of Trade returns as "not being _en route_ to America," as practically representing about the number of those who remain here. As matters stand, it is of course at present impossible to give the exact number; but such an estimate would be approximately correct. Nevertheless, in a letter to the _Times_ in the month of August last, an official of the Board of Trade, writing under the _nom de guerre_ of "Facts," did not hesitate to charge me with "attempted misrepresentation," and "an intention to create prejudice," because I estimated that the number of aliens quoted in the official returns as "not being _en route_ to America," would probably represent about the number of those who come here to settle. The animus displayed in this letter was doubtless engendered by the remembrance of a previous epistolary duel. Opinions may differ as to the importance to be attached to this question of alien immigration; they may differ also as to the value of the Board of Trade returns; but however this may be, to write letters under a feigned name to the papers, deliberately accusing one's opponent of bad faith, is a method of conducting or prolonging a controversy happily rare. Though you may disagree with another man's views, you have no right to accuse him of dishonesty because he happens to differ from you. After the correspondence in the _Times_ took place, a note was appended to the monthly returns issued by the Board of Trade, to the effect that it was not implied "that the aliens not stated to be _en route_ to America, come to this country for settlement; there being in fact a large emigration of foreigners from this country, while many of the aliens arriving from continental ports return again to the Continent." This clears the ground a little, and so far the correspondence cannot be said to have been altogether barren of results. The announcement that there is a large emigration of foreigners from this country is quite gratuitous, however, since we know that the number of aliens who came here _en route_ to America, in the ten months ending 31st October, 1891, amounted to no less than 88,617. That does not affect the matter under consideration in the slightest. But the statement that "many of the aliens arriving from continental ports return again to the Continent" cannot be allowed to pass so easily. How is this conclusion arrived at? No account of foreigners leaving this country for European ports is taken. Of course many return, but who are they? Principally tourists, business men, and the better class of foreigners, against whom no complaint is made. But the great bulk of these _are not included in the official returns at all_, for the alien lists received from Dover, Folkestone, and Harwich, the three ports to which that class of foreigner generally comes, "show only deck passengers, and persons who on landing proceed by train as third-class passengers."[10] In making a fair estimate, therefore, the better class of foreigner can hardly be taken into consideration at all. This reduces the number of those included in the official returns "who return again to the Continent" to a _minimum_. Those against whom complaint is made--the _residuum_, the worthless, and the unfit--remain with us. They could not return to the Continent even if they wished to do so, for the simple reason that they would not be received back again. The law, for instance, in Hamburg is to the effect that no person without means is to land at that port. Hamburg is the great port from which the destitute aliens take ship to England; and therefore it is apparent that though steamship companies may land upon our shores any number of destitute or semi-destitute passengers they please, they dare not take back these same passengers to Hamburg, even if they should wish to go. Hence, it may be fairly said that this "immigrant emigration," upon which the Board of Trade appears to lay so much stress, is inconsiderable, and at any rate does not touch the class against which complaint is chiefly made. Against it, is to be set the incomplete nature of the lists actually rendered; the fact that the returns are not received from _all_ the ports of the United Kingdom; the untrustworthiness of such as are received; and the practice in preparing them of counting two children to one adult. If all these considerations be balanced against the unknown number of aliens "who return again to the Continent" or move on elsewhere, it certainly cannot be said, that, in estimating the number of those who are stated to be "not _en route_ to America," as the approximate number of those who remain here, one is guilty of exaggeration. If anything, one under-estimates rather than overstates the case. The fact of the matter is, that all attempts to bolster up the official returns, so long as they are compiled in the present manner, is foredoomed to failure. They are about as unsatisfactory and as inadequate as they can well be, and the distrust with which they are viewed is widespread. The importance of trustworthy official statistics upon this matter can hardly be overrated. So long as they are wanting, there will always be a tendency to exaggerate the evil on the one hand, and to minimize it on the other. Things are bad enough as they are, and there is nothing to be gained by exaggeration. It is greatly to be hoped that the present Government, which has done much in the way of good and useful reform, will take steps to wipe away this reproach--for it is nothing less than a reproach--that, while we have such admirable statistics as to the imports of merchandise, the returns as to the importation of human beings should remain in their present imperfect state. CHAPTER III. JEWISH IMMIGRATION. In this chapter I propose to consider the nature of the immigration. At the outset of this particular aspect of the question, it is necessary to make it clear that one is animated by no sentiments of racial or religious animosity. Nothing could be more undesirable than to treat this question as a sectarian question, or to cast any slur upon the Hebrew faith. Nothing would harm the movement more than to create a _Judenhetze_ in England, the home of religious liberty; and therefore whenever the term "Jew" is used throughout this volume, it is used merely to distinguish between other races and nationalities, and from no desire to arouse the _odium theologicum_. This disclaimer may seem unnecessary to some, but it is important to emphasize it, because if there is one thing hateful to the people of this country, it is religious intolerance; if there is one thing dear to them, it is that liberality which in matters of this kind recognizes no distinctions of faith or creed. It is perfectly true that a large proportion of these undesirable visitors are Jewish by race and religion. But that has nothing to do with the objection to them; it would be just the same if they were Christians, Mahommedans, Buddhists, or sun-worshippers. The objection to them is simply this, that by coming into certain trades and industries in this country, they subject our own people to a constant and unfair competition, which renders it impossible for them to obtain a decent livelihood, and tends directly to militate against their physical, financial, social, and moral well-being. In this matter there is nothing of race, nothing of religion, except so far as this, that we recognize that our first duty should be towards our own nation, our own flesh and blood. Nor is this objection by any means confined to destitute foreign Jews; it holds equally good with regard to vagrant and vicious Italians, idle Hungarians, degraded Chinese, and all the other undesirable specimens of those nationalities which go to make up the motley horde. Still it is idle to deny, in dealing with this question, that though the immigrants are of all nationalities, by far the greater part of those objected to is composed of Russian, Roumanian, and Polish Jews, drawn from the class which goes to swell the poor-houses and penitentiaries of Eastern Europe. In the previous chapter I have dwelt upon the numbers of this particular class of alien immigrants. It is not necessary, therefore, to go over the same ground again. It suffices to point out that this increase, which would be undoubtedly serious if it were distributed impartially throughout the United Kingdom, assumes a far more formidable aspect when we consider its distribution in particular localities and particular trades. The invading hordes of destitute Jews appear to flock chiefly to our great centres of population, such as the East End of London, and to the great manufacturing cities of the North--Birmingham, Leeds, Manchester, Liverpool, Newcastle-on-Tyne, Glasgow, Edinburgh, and some other Scotch towns. Now it is evident that thickly-populated districts do not require immigration, but emigration. It is evident also that the Jew in England is not pastoral, but gregarious. Experts, whose opinions must be listened to with all deference, tell us that many of the foreign Jews have in them the making of good colonists and admirable agriculturalists. It may be so; but those who come here appear to show a marked distaste for agricultural and all pastoral pursuits. No one in England ever comes across a Jewish farmer, or a Jewish agricultural labourer. These immigrants invariably turn their backs on thinly-populated districts; and wherever our people are most closely huddled together, wherever the struggle for existence is keenest, there will the greatest number of foreign Jews be found, with the inevitable result that the conditions of life become even harder than before. It is very necessary to consider the distribution of this unlimited immigration, if we are to form an adequate idea of the injury it works upon our own people. It is impossible not to feel compassion for these poor Jewish immigrants, when we consider the condition in which the great majority of them land upon our shores. They are often of poor physique, and always scantily clad. In most instances, they are without money at all; others have a few thalers, or roubles, or marks, as the case may be; and of these they are quickly eased by the loafers, touts, and rascals of all descriptions who hang about the docks waiting their arrival, and professing to show them where to lodge for the night, or where to find employment. One ceases to wonder at the destitute condition in which these unfortunate people arrive on our shores, when we consider the discomforts and miseries which they have to undergo before they arrive at our ports. So far as the Jewish immigrants are concerned, it may be said that fully 70 per cent. of those who have arrived at the port of London during the present year have come from Russia or Poland. The edict in Russia has gone forth for their departure, but before departing it is necessary for them to obtain a passport and other official documents, which have to be paid for at the time of application, and are subsequently required to be shown to the Russian officials before crossing the frontier. I believe that some negotiations are now pending with regard to relaxing the severity of the passport regulations; but at present the possession of a passport is a _sine quâ non_. To avoid the expense and trouble of obtaining these documents, many subterfuges are resorted to, to enable the Jews to leave unnoticed; but on arriving at the frontier _en route_ to Hamburg, and being found without these documents, many of the emigrants are subjected to the grossest maltreatment and robbery. It is said that many of them have been robbed of every coin, and almost every article they possess, and are sent across the frontier in an absolute state of beggary and destitution. Many cases are known to the officials of the Jewish Charitable Institutions in London, where whole families have had, in consequence of being thus robbed, to tramp on foot through Germany ten or sixteen days, in order to reach Hamburg _en route_ to London. When once they arrive at Hamburg, the departure of these persons is by some mysterious means, which I have been unable to ascertain, directly provided for. It is not an expensive journey, the passage to London from Hamburg being about sixteen shillings English money per head for the adults, and the children come half-price. These are approximately the fares charged by Messrs Perlbach, who do a thriving trade in bringing these people across. I say "approximately," for Messrs Perlbach have met all my requests for information with a _non possumus_. Of course such a cheap rate does not admit of many comforts. The emigrant has to find himself all food and bedding. In most cases the boats are entirely devoid of sufficient accommodation for passengers; and being under a foreign flag, they do not come under our Board of Trade regulations here. The accommodation on board the boats plying between Hamburg and London is miserably insufficient; and doubtless it is no better between Hamburg and other English ports. The voyage from Hamburg to London usually occupies from forty to sixty hours, according to the weather; and during the whole of this time these poor people are herded together rather like cattle than human beings. Men, women, and children are crowded together in the stifling atmosphere between the decks; some lying on bundles of foul and dirty rags, others squatting on the bare deck itself. It is a terrible picture of famished and suffering humanity. No one thinks of taking off his clothes during the passage, and few have either the inclination, or the opportunity, to wash themselves or their children. The sanitary arrangements are simply abominable. The following account, given by the special commissioner of a London evening journal, which has done much to bring this evil prominently before the public, and to which I gladly acknowledge my indebtedness, may with advantage be quoted here. The special commissioner travelled over from Hamburg as a "destitute alien" on board Messrs. Perlbach and Co.'s steamship _Minerva_. In his report he describes his experience as follows[11]-- "By the time I got on deck darkness had set in, and nearly all my fellow-aliens had stowed away the pocket-handkerchiefs or canvas-bags containing their belongings in one or other of the two holds, which were to form their place of residence for the next two nights at any rate. I saw some scores of eyes peering at me for the first minute or two; then when curiosity as to the new arrival had abated, I sat down in a dark corner and quietly examined my surroundings. The greater portion of the deck was taken up by large boxes covered with sheets of canvas, and extending to a height in some places of perhaps eight or ten feet. On the top of these, and in the narrow passages between them, the emigrants sat or stood, breaking the stillness of the evening with the hollow laugh or clamorous chatter. Most of them were young women, wearing shawls on their heads, and clad in soiled, faded, and torn finery. Some of them were men, young or middle-aged, but so enfeebled and spiritless that one might have fixed their age at nearer seventy than thirty. A few were old women, bent, emaciated, and almost lifeless. All, with few exceptions, were yellow with dirt, and smelt foully.... I thought it to be about time to go and look after my sleeping quarters. There were two places from which to choose. One of these, according to the inscription on the entrance, was constructed to hold thirty-four persons, the other twenty-nine. The German ships are subject to practically no regulations as to space; and I inferred there must be on board about one hundred deck passengers.... I made my way to the larger of the two steerage cabins. When I got to the top of the gangway, the stench which issued from the semi-darkness beneath was pretty nearly unendurable, and it was even worse down-stairs, when blended with the heat from the bodies of the emigrants. But the scene which the place presented was still more disgusting. The apartment was about the breadth of the ship near the narrow end in width, and scarcely so long. In the centre a single oil-lamp was hanging, which threw out a feeble, flickering light. On each side a couple of platforms were erected, one over the other, with about two and a half feet between them, divided into spaces in some places a little over two feet broad, and not divided at all in others. Here men, women, and children were lying on the bare boards partly undressed, some in one direction, some in another. Young men lay abreast of young unmarried women, chatting jocularly, and acting indecently, and young children were witnesses of all that passed. The greater portion of the floor was taken up with boxes, on which such of the emigrants of both sexes as had not been able to obtain the ordinary sleeping accommodation were reclining as best they might." That was the first night of the voyage; the second is described by the commissioner as follows:-- "My second night's experience in the hold I need say little about; the horrors of the place were increased by the accumulation of filth, which had taken place by the ever-increasing indisposition of the passengers the longer we were at sea.... Through the long weary hours I sat there sleepless, I was only too glad when the light of morning made a promenade possible on deck." Such are some of the miseries of the journey. It is small wonder then that under such circumstances, when the vessels reach London, these unfortunate people present a most squalid, dirty, and uninviting appearance. The journey is a wretched one; and at the end of it things are no better; for when London is reached, these poor creatures are cast adrift to fight for themselves, in a population already teeming with starving, dying thousands. The steamers that bring these aliens to London always land them at one of three places--Tilbury Docks, the Upper Pool, or St. Katherine's Docks. Wapping is the worst of the three places of landing. Here the steamers lie out in the middle of the Thames; the passengers are bundled into boats, the watermen in charge of which will endeavour before landing to get as much out of them as they possibly can. They are landed in different places, their luggage is thrown out of the boat, and they find themselves alone in a strange land unable to make known where they wish to go. But they are not left long in their loneliness. A number of human sharks, generally foreign Jews also, surround them, anxious to see in what way they can take advantage of their ignorance and friendlessness. The worst foes that have to be contended against are some of the East End boarding-house keepers. These men will meet the new-comers, address them in "Yiddish," say that they are connected with some of the Jewish charities, and tell them that they must allow their luggage to be collected. When this is done, they get together as many as possible before being stopped by the real agents of the Jewish Homes, and march them off, not to where the unfortunates think they are going, but to some of the boarding-houses in Spitalfields. Arrived there, the aliens undergo a process of sifting. Those who are absolutely destitute, and without money or baggage, from whom there is nothing to be got, are quickly dismissed, and sent in charge of a child to the Poor Jews' Temporary Shelter in Leman Street. But those who have money and baggage are advised to stay a day or two until they can "look about them." Then the fleecing commences. A charge is made of from two shillings to five shillings a week for a wretched shake-down bed; but the lodger has to pay the full week if he only stays one night. Food is charged in proportion. The next morning, as soon as the lodger has finished his breakfast, a man is deputed to go with him in search of employment. This man will tramp his victim all round London, it need scarcely be said with no success; in the evening he will bring him back to the boarding-house, saying they must try again the next day. The following morning the same routine is gone through, and with the same result. For each day's service a charge of five shillings is made. These gross charges are made day after day until the unfortunate individual has nothing left but his luggage. The boarding-house keeper sympathizes with his dupe; he tells him he is not an unkindly man, and will lend him a trifle on his luggage. This little is soon swallowed up in the cost of living, and when it is all gone the boarding-house keeper informs him he is very sorry, but he must have his room for some one else. The man is turned into the street, friendless, penniless, and homeless, and finds himself in very truth a "destitute alien." Thus such an one becomes in a few weeks precisely in the same plight as those who arrive with literally nothing at all. Of those, said the Bishop of Bedford in his evidence before the House of Lords' Committee, "They almost stand in the market after arrival with barely any clothes to cover them, and without a penny in their pockets." In this veritable slave-market they hang about in droves, waiting for the sweater to come and hire them, which he does sometimes in person, sometimes by means of an agent, and sometimes by means of his wife. (What a terrible type of womanhood must be a sweater's wife!) Of course these poor creatures are at the sweater's mercy. They are ignorant of the country, of its language, of its laws, and are compelled to take any terms he may offer. To call the place where these transactions are carried on a "slave-market" is perhaps an abuse of terms, since, in a strictly literal sense, nobody buys and nobody sells; but that it is a traffic in human beings cannot be denied. Almost any Sunday morning during the spring, summer, and autumn months, at the corner of Goulston Street, Whitechapel, for instance, may be seen a varying number of men drawn up in a line against the wall. In front of them stands a man who engages--I will not say sells--them to the sweater, who gets his victims to sign a paper, binding them to work for so many weeks and at so much money in the sweating dens. It is a pitiful sight. Most of these men are newly-arrived foreign paupers, chiefly Polish Jews. The boat from Hamburg arrives every Saturday at the docks, and the agent who meets them conveys them to some Jewish shelter where they remain until Sunday morning, when he leads them to this place. Most of them as they stand there have the high boots and fur cap distinctive of the Russian peasant. Want and long service are plainly written on their emaciated forms, and along with these a certain patient and dogged intention of purpose. Often the sweater will give them at first only their food and lodgings, such as it is. The salary given them varies from two to three shillings per week; their food is horrible, so is their lodging. They will work fourteen, sixteen, and eighteen hours a day, and they will sleep in the den in which the work is done. They suffer hunger, cold, heat, and vermin. They are without the help of relations, acquaintances, or protection. They agree to pay back a certain sum if they break their engagement; and as this is impossible for them to do, they remain practically slaves, working for nothing, or next to nothing. Most of them have to learn a trade at first, during which period they earn nothing, and are glad to submit to any terms the sweater may think fit to impose. The slang term for such persons is "greener," and in many respects the condition of a "greener" is worse than that of a slave. By and by when he has learnt his business, which in the cheap tailoring trade, for instance, would be the machine work, he receives a small wage, from six to seven shillings a week, barely sufficient to maintain existence. As a rule the "greeners" are very quick to learn, and as they progress they earn a little more; but their position is precarious, being liable to be discharged at a moment's notice. The work is precarious too, and the wages are irregularly paid. Sometimes there is nothing to do for weeks and weeks. Their food is of the scantiest, the refuse of fish and a little bread being the principal articles of diet. The length of hours for which they work--I speak now of the cheap tailoring trade--averages from fourteen to fifteen hours a day, or 100 hours a week. The Bishop of Bedford said:--"I have myself seen these poor creatures at work up till two in the morning, and I have found that they were again at work, the same people in the same room, at seven o'clock in the morning." Again he said:--"You can tell work is being done on the Sabbath, by the blinds being drawn. There is no holiday at all." Moreover, the surroundings amid which they work are deplorable and filthy in the extreme. That, however, will be touched upon more fully in a subsequent chapter. Again, in the cheap boot trade, the "greener" is at first put to work as a "sew-round hand." If he does well at this, in a short time he will proceed to "finishing," and he is advanced to other branches of the work as his proficiency may warrant. The master bootmaker, who in nine cases out of ten was once a "greener" himself, is called a "boot-slosher." The "greener" will generally lodge at the house of the "slosher" who employs him; and as many as sixteen or seventeen of these "greeners" have been known to lodge in his house at the same time. The daily food, as a rule, consists of a piece of hard stale bread, dipped in salad oil. The bread is bought from a barrow in the street, and consists of the stale unsaleable loaves collected from various bakers' shops in the neighbourhood. The "greener" may supplement this possibly with a little weak coffee or cocoa; or, if he wishes to indulge in an unusual extravagance, he will invest in a piece of dried cucumber, pickled in salt and water; or perhaps two or three "greeners," by way of a treat, will go shares in a few Dutch herrings, also pickled in salt. The dried pickled cucumber is known as "Wally-Wally," and a herring is known as a "Deütcher." These articles are sold in large quantities in the East End. It must not be supposed, however, that these men remain always in this position. When they have learned to speak the language and to know their way about, they will make better terms for themselves. By degrees they gradually get on. After being in the "slosher's" shop for six or eight months, they learn sufficient to enable them to go into the boot manufactories kept by foreigners, and to apply for work to take out in large quantities. By a process of gradual development, the "greener" becomes a "slosher" himself, and in the fulness of time he may be seen walking about the East End, accosting and offering employment to the first batch of recently-arrived immigrants he sees. More probably he will meet them at the railway-station and waterside; or if in a more extensive way of business, he will write to Hamburg to some of the agencies there, stating that he can find work for so many men. When he gets them into his clutches he treats them in precisely the same way as that in which he himself has been treated. Thus does this evil system go on and flourish. After a time the foreign Jew begins to accumulate money; and though he still continues his frugal diet of "Wally-Wally" and "Deütcher," he launches forth a little in other ways. The long Russian coat is discarded, and with it the Hessian boots and fur cap. He bedizens himself out with a quantity of cheap flashy jewellery, and possibly goes in for mild theatrical amusements. There is a small theatre in a certain small court in Whitechapel, where well-known English plays are acted in "Yiddish." Here may be seen the smart young foreign Jews and Jewesses, arrayed in all their glory, on every night of the week except Friday, when the Hebrew Sabbath, which nearly all Hebrews outwardly respect, commences. He may also perhaps join the "Chovevi Zion"--Hebrew for "lovers of Zion"--a society which sprang into existence in the East End of London about twelve months ago; or he may possibly--very probably--join one of the many little gambling-hells so greatly affected by the foreign Jew. Worst of all, he may drift into one of the secret socialistic or foreign revolutionary societies which abound in that part of the metropolis. That such societies exist cannot be doubted. They are formed of the class of men who marched to Hyde Park the other day, with a banner inscribed "Down with the Czar." These societies have papers of their own circulated among themselves, written in "Yiddish," breathing the vilest of political sentiments--Nihilism of the most outrageous description. Thus whole districts in the East of London are as foreign as in Warsaw, or the Ghetto--when there was a Ghetto--in Rome. In considering the nature of Jewish immigration, allusion should also be made to a species of infamy which, I am credibly informed, has been carried on for some time past at the London Docks. Many of the immigrants are young women, Jewesses of considerable personal attractions. Men-sharks, and female harpies of all descriptions, are on the look-out for them as soon as they disembark. The young women are approached, and asked in "Yiddish" whether they are in want of work. The answer of course is in the affirmative, especially as many of these young Jewesses arrive in a friendless condition. "Then," comes the suggestion, "you had better come and stay with me until you get it," or "I can put you in the way of obtaining it." Of course this dodge does not always succeed, for many young Jewesses are by no means so guileless as they appear to be. But in two cases out of three it does. The girl, friendless and unprotected, goes off with her interlocutor, and then the old shameful story is repeated. She stays in the house until the little she has is more than due for board; her efforts to earn an honest living are in vain; and when she is destitute, she is told she must either leave the place, minus even her little baggage, or earn money at the expense of her virtue. Such a dilemma, in nine cases out of ten, presents only one means of escape; and the girl goes to swell the number of the lost and degraded of our great cities. One of the worst features of this system is, that the decoy is largely carried on by Englishmen and Englishwomen, and by no means confined to foreigners alone. Happily, a Jewish Ladies' Rescue Society has been recently formed, and its efforts have done something to mitigate the evil. An official from this society goes down to the docks for the purpose of warning female immigrants, and advising them where to find employment. But the difficulty still remains, and a very serious one it is. When we come to inquire into the causes which bring so many of these foreign Jews to our shores, we find that in addition to the two principal reasons--the persecutions in Russia, and the American Immigration Laws, which render their admission to that country impracticable--there are other agencies at work as well. The existence of these agencies is a disputed question; but from inquiries which have been made, there is every reason to believe that many of the East End sweaters have agents abroad working on their behalf. The victims are caught by advertisements in the obscure Continental papers inserted by the "greener slave-agent," who sends batch after batch of poor Jews to this country, and they soon find their way into the sweaters' dens by means of the addresses given them. This method of advertisement is perhaps not so extensively carried on as formerly, but it still exists. Again, there is also the suspicion, which deepens almost into a certainty, of the existence of what is known in America as "steamship-solicitation." It is highly probable that some of the steamship companies principally concerned in bringing these people to England, have agents on the Continent engaged in persuading poor Jews, and poor foreigners generally, to come to this country with the delusive idea that they will find plenty of employment, and plenty of pecuniary assistance here. The notices which the Government have recently caused to be posted up at some of the European ports, may do something to nullify this; but the fact remains that there are several German steamship lines doing an enormous business in bringing these Jewish immigrants to our shores, and there are owners of British vessels also engaged in the same traffic. In America, where it had reached a very great extent, this "steamship-solicitation" has been declared illegal. How far the steamship agencies act in collusion with the sweaters' agents in England, it is not possible to say--or, indeed, if they are in collusion at all. One can only notice that all things work together in a very remarkable manner. A slight clue to the puzzle is afforded by the fact that in Leeds (according to the Report of the Chief Commissioner of Police) there exists a firm of money-lenders who advance money to Jewish applicants having friends in Russia and Poland, which is employed for the purpose of bringing them to this country. This will explain how some, at any rate, of these destitute immigrants manage to pay their passage-money to England. There is another cause also, which is more controversial, but which must be touched upon all the same, since it is a very potent one in attracting destitute Jews to England. I allude to the well-known munificence of the wealthy English Jews, who are ever ready to help their poorer brethren. The admirably organized system of benevolence which they have gradually built up by means of charitable organizations, shelters, and similar institutions, constitutes nothing less than an open advertisement to the poor Jews all over Europe to come to England and have their wants supplied. I admit that these institutions are not intended to have that effect, and that many leading English Jews endeavour to discourage this immigration; but all the same they tend to have the result of drawing people here. In Leeds, for example, the Jewish Board of Guardians give the new arrivals a small grant until they have obtained work, and if they know no trade, and are willing to learn one, the Jewish Board will make them an allowance until they are able to earn something for themselves. In London, as I have before stated, the number of cases relieved by the Jewish Board of Guardians in 1890, _exclusive_ of Loan and Industrial Departments, was 3351, representing with dependent families 12,047 individuals, and this at a cost of £21,648. Of course, this refers to the resident Jewish population as well, the operations of the Russian and Board Conjoint Committee not being included in this statement. In fairness it should be stated that the Jewish Board of Guardians also assist many to emigrate, and generally endeavour to reduce the mischievous effects of charitable agencies to a _minimum_. But there are other _institutions_ whose philanthropic activity assumes a more questionable shape. Such, for instance, is the "Poor Jews' Temporary Shelter," which it can hardly be doubted attracts many destitute Jews to this country, since in 1888 it provided board and lodging for a period of from one to fourteen days to 1322 homeless immigrants. A similar charge has been brought against the "London Society for Promoting Christianity among the Jews." I have gone very carefully into this charge, and find that it is a groundless one. Not only is the Society opposed to the wholesale influx of foreign Jews, but the number of Jews converted through its influence is incredibly small. For instance, we learn from the last Annual Report that only 145 "young Hebrew Christians" were presented to the Bishop for Confirmation by the Chaplain during the ten years of his chaplaincy, or an average of about five a year. The annual income of the Society is £35,000! I write of what I know. There are agitators in the East End of London who could arouse a _Judenhetze_ to-morrow by merely holding up a finger. It is only the moderating influence of others which restrains them. But this influence, already strained to its utmost, will not avail for ever. If the ceaseless immigration of Russian and Polish outcasts is not brought to an end, there will be an anti-Jewish movement in Whitechapel, in Leeds, and the other centres of population affected by this evil. The irritation will develop. This would be a great social calamity, and one above all others to be avoided. These are the principal considerations which occur to one in writing on the subject of Jewish immigration. Again let me repeat, in endeavouring to sift this apparently endless influx, there need be no anti-Semitic feeling in the matter. There is a German proverb, "Every nation has the Jew it deserves." We have these our native-born English Jews, of whom we are all proud. Sober, thrifty, industrious, law-abiding and patriotic, they are a valuable and an integral portion of our community. But with these destitute foreigners it is widely different. They bring bound up with them all the vices and habits generated by centuries of oppression and degradation. Something must be done to divert this stream before it swells into an overwhelming flood. How long is this invasion to go on? Until Russia has emptied half--the worst half--of her Jewish population on our shores? The question is one for English Jews themselves. If an anti-Semitic feeling breaks out in this country, it will be because of this Russian influx, which apparently is being allowed to go on unchecked. What are the wealthy and powerful English Jews doing to check it, to focus public opinion upon it, to urge the intervention of Parliament? Apparently nothing. Surely it is not too much to expect that a movement for judiciously restricting and diverting this alien influx, should have the support of the wealthy English Jews; and this not only because of their poor co-religionists who come here to find only fresh misery awaiting them, but also in gratitude to the country under whose enlightened rule they have amassed their wealth, and attained their present influence. There is another reason also for urgency. No one who has had any practical experience in this matter can be blind to the growing dislike and antagonism with which these destitute immigrants are viewed by the native working population with whom they come in contact. This feeling is gathering in intensity day by day. An outbreak of this nature would be a disgrace and a reproach to our vaunted civilization, and it would be almost certain to be followed by that most dangerous phase of popular excitement--panic legislation. Surely it would be wiser statesmanship to do something now, while the matter can be considered reasonably and dispassionately, than to wait until the smouldering embers of discontent burst into a blaze, the flames of which it may be difficult to check. CHAPTER IV. ITALIAN IMMIGRATION. Presiding at the annual meeting of the "Society of Friends of Foreigners in Distress," which was held in April last (1891), Count Deym, the Austro-Hungarian Ambassador, stated that "the charity was founded as far back as 1806, and that the necessity for it had now increased a hundredfold. During the past year the Society paid £2151 to 285 poor foreigners, in regular instalments of from two and sixpence per week to five shillings per month, and £1357 in casual relief to 4264 persons of almost all nationalities." This is only one of the many similar societies existing in London for the aid and relief of poor and destitute foreigners--other than those which are exclusively Jewish. Such Societies are the Société Française de Bienfaisance à Londres, Société Belge de Bienfaisance à Londres, the German Society of Benevolence, which relieves Germans, Austrians, and even Russians; and the Italian Benevolent Society. It is unnecessary to enter into detailed statistics as to the amount of money expended yearly by the different Societies, or the number of members relieved; but some idea of the extent of their operation may be gathered by the fact that over £1100 was expended last year by the Italian Benevolent Society alone. Of late years the immigration of Italians has increased to an alarming extent. London and our large provincial cities are crowded with a class of Italians who are for the most part non-producers. The Italians were amongst the earliest immigrants here, and in many respects they are the most undesirable. In this condemnation, I do not of course include those Italians who upon arriving in England take up some definite trade or employment, and who are skilled labourers, and industrious, law-abiding citizens. Unfortunately the great bulk of Italian immigrants differ widely from such as these; they are, for the most part, the idle, the vicious, and the destitute, who come here simply to pursue that nefarious course of vagrancy and begging which is now so rigidly forbidden in their native land. They bring with them slothful and degraded habits, and where they congregate to any extent, their influence upon our own people cannot fail to be otherwise than injurious. Many of them arrive here absolutely destitute, and go at once to the Italian Consulate and beg for alms, or ask how to be put in the way of begging. The Consulate does everything in its power to discourage these people from coming to England, but they come all the same. Some of them are trained professional beggars, versed in every trick and dodge of the trade of mendicancy. Others are socialists and revolutionists of the worst type, who endeavour to use the liberty enjoyed by them here, in forming secret revolutionary societies, and in preaching the most dangerous doctrines. They work so secretly that few have any knowledge of their real influence and numbers. I am informed by an Italian gentleman, whose name I am not at liberty to give, but who has exceptional opportunities of proving the truth of his statements, that the increase of foreign and secret revolutionary societies in the Metropolis has recently been very great. The same authority writes to me in a recent letter:--"There is a large influx of destitute Italians going on: there is no work for them to do here, and they will not return home.... I believe there is a real danger in allowing aliens of all nationalities to arrive so freely in such conditions, while not socialism but anarchy is now preached in the open streets of the quarters especially resorted to by them. The result will be some serious trouble very soon, especially in winter."[12] These are not the careless words of a superficial observer, but the deliberately expressed opinion of one who holds an official position, and has intimate knowledge of the facts. With the object lesson which the recent Italian riots in the United States has presented to us, there can be little doubt that in the rapid increase of these revolutionary societies of indigent foreigners lurk the elements of a very grave political and social danger. Thus we seem to have drifted into a position somewhat analogous to that of Rome in the closing days of her Empire. Juvenal in the second of his _Satires_ complained that Rome had become a sink for the vices and iniquity of the known world. Johnson imitated this _Satire_ in the following vigorous lines:-- "London, the needy villain's general home, The common sewer of Paris and of Rome; Condemned by fortune and resistless fate, Sucks in the dregs of each corrupted state." Juvenal was not alone in his complaint. Horace had said somewhat the same thing before. The Satirists had certainly ample opportunities of observing the facts. When Rome was newly founded it was desirable and even necessary to encourage immigration, because citizens and soldiers were sorely needed to defend the infant State. But when Rome had advanced to the height of her Imperial power, the immense influx of foreigners attracted to the Eternal City by her wealth and by her luxury, was most calamitous. The native population of Rome were reduced to permanent pauperism, or were driven away to the colonies. The yeomanry of Italy disappeared; they took service in the Legions, and were sent away to distant settlements, their place in Rome being taken by large bodies of imported slaves, who brought with them all the habits and vices generated by long centuries of oppression and wrong. "The salvation of a country lies in its middle class." Such was the wise _dictum_ of Aristotle; but in the latter days of the Roman Empire the middle class was wanting. How fatal was this, is clearly seen by the different powers of resistance that Rome exhibited at different periods of her history. Under the Republic, when the middle class was dominant, though Italy was several times invaded, the native population always proved too strong for the invaders. When under the latter days of the Empire the middle class was wanting, and there was nothing but fabulous wealth and prodigal luxury on the one hand, and abject poverty and consequent misery on the other, the heart of the State became corrupt; and as soon as the Barbarians had broken through the cordon of Legions at the frontier, the mighty Roman Empire sank to rise no more. Historical parallels are often misleading, and this analogy, like other analogies, may of course be carried too far; but it is in some respects a close one. When Rome in the height of her Imperial splendour welcomed all nationalities who ministered to her profligacy and luxury, it was a sign of the canker which in time ate away the heart of the Empire. So too, England in the Victorian era--an era of prosperity unequalled even by Imperial Rome--throws open wide her arms to receive the destitute, the criminal, and the worthless of other lands, heedless of the injury which the influx of such a class must work upon her own community, and forgetful that the first duty of the State is towards its own people. The saddest aspect of this question of Italian immigration is the traffic in Italian children, which has been for so long carried on in this country under the auspices of the _padroni_, and which continues to flourish despite all the efforts which have been made to check it. "Child-slavery in England" it has been called; and certainly the condition of these poor children is in many respects little better than that of slaves. I have spoken and written so much about this matter,[13] that there is little now left to be said; still, in spite of laying myself open to the charge of repeating an oft-told tale, I must needs allude to it once more, since no treatise upon Italian immigration would be otherwise complete. The traffic is carried on in this wise:--The children are brought over from Italy by men who obtain them from their parents upon payment of a very small sum; for a few ducats annually (a ducat equals 3_s._ 6_d._), and upon undertaking to clothe and feed them. The parents who thus dispose of their children are for the most part poor peasants living in Calabria, and the south of Italy. Sometimes the parents will bring the children to England themselves, and sometimes they are confided to relations; but often it is a traffic, and they sell their children into what is a veritable slavery without troubling about their future, and glad to be relieved of the responsibility and expense of their maintenance and education. The _padroni_--that is the masters--having thus gained possession of the children, they bring them to England. Some travel by railway, but many of them actually journey on foot, walking from town to town, village to village, all the way up to Dieppe or Calais, and from thence crossing over to our shores. The children are imported here simply for the purpose of following one or the other of the vagrant professions in the streets of London and throughout the country. They are sent out early in the morning with an accordion, concertina, or other instrument, and told to sing or play before houses, and then to wait for money. As a rule they do not openly beg for alms, as this would bring them within the reach of law; but they just stand and wait, and benevolent persons, attracted by their picturesque appearance, are moved to compassion, and give them money, ignorant or forgetful of the fact that this money benefits them personally not at all, but the _padrone_ whose property they are. The _padroni_ are often very severe, and treat the children just like slaves. If they do not bring home a sufficient sum they are cruelly beaten and ill-treated, kept without food or nourishment, and sent hungry to bed. Very often these poor children do not get home from their weary rounds until past midnight, and they are often found utterly worn out, and fast asleep under an archway or upon a doorstep. They are wretchedly lodged, huddled together, four or five sleeping in a bed when they have one to sleep in at all; and being private houses, their lodgings are not in any way open to inspection or improvement. The traffic is most lucrative, and the gains the _padroni_ make out of these children are very large--so much so indeed, that after a few years they are able to retire to Italy and to live as country gentlemen afterwards. Sometimes a child will bring home as much as 10_s._ or more a day; and as often one _padrone_ has as many as fifty children under his care, spread about in companies in London and in the country under the supervision of his confederates, it will be seen that the total amount of a number of small sums accumulating daily must be very large. Of course sometimes the children bring home very little, and sometimes nothing at all; but the penalty in this case is to be beaten and kept without food, so fear stimulates their efforts, and they do not often return quite empty-handed. The effects of this evil system upon its victims is necessarily very bad. They do not go to school, they become very idle, and begin early to drink, smoke, and take all kinds of vices. They grow up immoral, illiterate, vicious, and low; a degraded class, exercising a most undesirable influence among the surrounding population. The girls especially all go to the bad, because they are sent into low drinking-shops, public-houses, and similar places. When they grow up, they all become beggars and vagrants by profession, and always remain so, for they have learned no other trade, and many can neither read nor write. Some remain in England, but many go over to Italy, and bring over children themselves. Sometimes, when they are seventeen or eighteen years old, they run away from the _padrone_ and set up on their own account. Many efforts have been made to put a stop to this disgraceful traffic; but hitherto everything seems to have fallen short of the mark. The Italian Benevolent Society has been untiring in its efforts to stop the trade. So long ago as 1876 the Society went on a deputation to the London School Board, with the result that it was decided to compel these children to go to school in the same way as if they had been English children. But the _padrone_ was equal to the occasion. He removed his _troupe_ from Saffron Hill, to the outlying districts of Deptford, Greenwich, and Hammersmith. There the School Board takes no action, and there the children dwell in large numbers, free to ply their trade, and secure from compulsory education. The Children's Protection Act was also another step in the right direction, and it has certainly ameliorated the state of affairs; but for various reasons, chiefly because the limit of age is rather too low, it does not seem to go to the root of the evil. Several suggestions to remedy this state of affairs have been made, all worthy of consideration. One is that there should be a tightening of the compulsory action of the School Boards all over the country. It is illogical that these children should be compelled to go to school in London, and in the country allowed to roam where they please. Doubtless this would have a very good effect, and the gains of the _padroni_ would be sensibly diminished. Another suggestion is, to increase the limit of age laid down in the Children's Protection Act to eighteen years of age in the case of persons of both sexes, thus bringing the Act into accord with a drastic law which was passed in Italy in 1873,[14] and which has been found very effectual there. This course, however, is obviously open to objection, since it might press hardly upon individual cases. The most effectual remedy would be to adopt the plan followed in America, namely, to stop these children at the port of arrival, and the _padroni_, and send them all back at once to their own country. In all European countries they are expelled, or refused admission. Such a course, however, would require a special law, and that necessarily will be some time in coming. The question is:--what is to be done in the meantime? That the evil still continues to flourish there can be no manner of doubt. The _padroni_ do not confine their attentions only to children, but frequently bring over whole families as well. A case came to light in Birmingham this year,[15] of a _padrone_ named Delicato, who had brought over an Italian family--a father, a mother, and two daughters. At the end of two years the record of that unfortunate family was as follows:--The father was paid £2 for two years' work and discharged; the mother had previously been sent back to Italy, because from ill-health she had become practically useless to her master. One of the daughters Delicato had seduced, and she is still living with him; the other daughter ran away and married, and her husband brought an action to recover her earnings. When the case came before the Court, the whole transaction was exposed. Inquiries were also instituted as to the antecedents of Delicato, and it was found that he had been carrying on this nefarious trade for years, and had three separate establishments in different parts of the country. It was found that this man had seduced no less than three young girls who had been committed to his care, and then abandoned them. This is no uncommon occurrence, for the _padroni_ are men utterly without principle, and thoroughly bad in every way. The parents are almost as bad as the _padroni_, as the following instance will show:--An Italian named Mancini was recently[16] charged before the Bow Street Police Court for causing a child to solicit alms. It was a case of heartless cruelty. The little girl, his daughter, was engaged in dragging a heavy barrel-organ about the streets. At intervals she stopped and turned the handle, her father meanwhile standing a little way off to see what coppers she obtained. It was raining at the time the man was taken in charge, and the child's boots were saturated with water, and her clothes literally drenched. She was only nine years of age. Another instance of the rapacity of the _padroni_ is illustrated by the following case, of even more recent date.[17] A young ice-cream vendor named Romano brought an action against his master, Auguste Pampa, at the Brompton County Court, for the recovery of four months' wages. It appeared that Romano had arrived in this country in a state of absolute destitution. Pampa, a compatriot, agreed to give him work, and an agreement was drawn up between them. It set forth that Pampa engaged Romano for one year to sell ice-cream in the streets of London; that he should be paid £1 2_s._ a month, and that Pampa should board and lodge him, and provide him with clothes. The plaintiff said that the defendant used to send him out in rags in all sorts of weather, and that he literally had no clothes to cover him. The judge gave a verdict for the plaintiff. The case throws a strong light upon the fate of Italian immigrants in London, and upon the class of Italians who come here. The best way to put down this infamous traffic, in default of restrictive legislation, is undoubtedly to lose no opportunities of bringing the painful facts before the public. If once the charitable public could be made to understand that the money they give to those little ones benefits them personally not at all, but goes to swell the gains of the rapacious _padrone_, who laughs and grows rich upon the sufferings of his victims, the supplies would be cut off at their source, and the dream of the _padrone_ to return to sunny Italy and live there as a country gentleman, vanish for ever. Few have any conception of the extent or nature of Italian immigration. Signor Righetti, the Secretary of the Italian Benevolent Society, estimates the number of Italians in London alone at upwards of 9000. In this estimate his opinion is corroborated by Signor Roncoroni, Secretary of the _Societá dei Cuochi e Camerieri_, who states that out of this 9000, 2000 are employed as Italian cooks and waiters in London. These of course can in no sense be objected to, because they are skilled labourers. Of the remaining 7000, the vast majority are either organ-grinders or ice-cream vendors. The head-quarters of the organ-grinders is--or was--at Eyre Street Hill, a steep and narrow thoroughfare forming a connecting link between Leather Lane and Coppice Row in Clerkenwell. There are a few minor settlements in Kensington, another in Notting Hill, a third in Somers Town; but the principal foreign colony is situated at Eyre Street Hill. Eyre Street Hill has tortuous ins and outs, and numerous blind alleys, in each and all of which Italians swarm. The Italian ice-cream barrow has become as familiar a picture in London street-trading as the apple-stall, baked chestnuts, or baked potato stove. The profits derived from the sale of this unwholesome compound are said to be very satisfactory; and certainly the quantity manufactured must be enormous. There is a depôt for ice on Eyre Street Hill. All day long, during the summer months, may be seen there waggon-loads of ice-cubes, which are afterwards broken up for the purpose required. Also the vendor of lemons does a brisk business in the same locality, and likewise the milkman--or rather, I should say, the man who sells what passes for milk. The ingredients of the ice-cream may possibly be found harmless enough; but the way in which the compound is prepared is in the last degree objectionable. The manufacture is often carried on in the living-room of the family, the condition of which is filthy and disgusting in the extreme. Near Leather Lane there is one short street of high black houses, the windows of which are patched and plugged with paper and rags. The passages and stairs are dilapidated and filthy, and the sanitary conditions simply abominable. In almost every room of each of these houses, resides at least one ice-cream maker, and vendor. Such a room will serve as a living and sleeping room for a whole family--the man, his wife, and a numerous progeny. The inhabitants of this foreign colony work all the week with their ice-barrows or their barrel-organs, but Saturday evening is, with them, a time of relaxation and pastime. With the natives of the sunny South, not to enjoy is not to live; and though I do not include in the numbers of those who amuse themselves, the miserable little victims of the _padroni_, the comparatively well-to-do Italians always go in for amusing themselves as soon as they can afford it. Dancing is the chief pastime of these people. On Saturday nights they regularly assemble together for this purpose, the women arrayed in the picturesque attire of their native country, and the men in their holiday garments likewise. As I have never been to one, I cannot say how these gatherings are conducted. They are not carried on in licensed premises, but in the cellars and kitchens of private houses, where admission to strangers is denied. Probably they are harmless enough. One thing is tolerably certain, refreshments are not supplied on the premises. There are plenty of public-houses hard by; and an observant person standing in the bar of one of them while the dancing is going on in an adjoining house, will note from time to time a sudden inrush of several couples still flushed and panting from the Terpsichorean exercise in which they have been indulging; who after a hearty draught of something in a pewter pot will rush off, and dance away again. On Saturday night the tap-rooms of the taverns in the vicinity of Saffron Hill are well filled; and brisk business is done in drinkables. The company, however, is not exclusively Italian; there being a goodly number of Irish besides. The Italians are credited as a race with having a sensitive ear for music. One can only say that those of their countrymen who come over here and inflict upon us the ear-torturing melodies of their barrel-organs and accordions sadly belie the reputation of their country. When once asked in the House of Commons if he could do anything to put down this nuisance, Mr. Goschen replied that it was a difficult matter, inasmuch as many derived great pleasure from the music of the barrel-organ. Such an answer leads one to suppose that Mr. Goschen has not such a keen ear for music as he has an eye to finance, and also that he is ignorant of the true facts. Even on a superficial aspect the nuisance is intolerable; but that is the least part of the evil. When we come to look beneath the surface of the seemingly careless existence of these Italian street musicians, and see the cruelty, hardships, and injustice which is undoubtedly bound up with the system, we shall recognize that it is high time that something was done to put down what is not only an intolerable nuisance, but also an evil trade. For a nation which was foremost in abolishing the slave-trade, to tamely tolerate in its midst an inhuman traffic like this, is something worse than an anachronism--it is a disgrace, and a reproach upon our vaunted civilization. CHAPTER V. ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL CONSIDERATIONS. The economic aspect of this many-sided question is undoubtedly one of the gravest and most worthy of consideration. The unlimited influx of cheap, destitute, foreign labour, cannot but exercise a prejudicial effect upon the wages of the native working-classes. It forces the decent British workman to compete on unequal terms with those who are willing to work for any wage--however meagre--for any number of hours, and amid surroundings filthy and disgusting in the extreme. I do not of course say that it has this effect upon wages in all industries, but only in those trades which the evil has yet reached. These are not great trades, perhaps, in the sense of the textile or metal industries, but they are considerable industries all the same, and they give employment to hundreds of thousands of men and women. In the trades and districts chiefly affected, this is the agency which reduces the price of labour to a level below that upon which Englishmen and Englishwomen can with decency and self-respect exist, and which renders effectual combination impossible. Every one with any practical knowledge of business, will admit that it is the lowest price which rules the market. If then we have a body of men combining together for the purpose of getting what they consider to be a fair wage, how can they maintain that combination, if, when a strike occurs, or any little dispute arises between employer and employed, by which the employed hope to get a little better terms for themselves, the destitute foreigner steps in ready to undersell them, and to work for little or next to nothing at all? Nor, as things stand, can the employers be greatly blamed either. In these trades few of them are great capitalists, the battle of life is pretty hard on them too, and in struggling to better themselves, they naturally seize every legal means that offers. One of the worst features of this system is the "multiplication of small masters." The subject is a tempting one, but space forbids me to dwell on it. I would only say that the competition among these small employers is almost as fierce as the competition among the employed. Much indignation has been directed against the "sweater," the bloated human spider, who, according to _Alton Locke_, sucks the life-blood of his victims, or who more recently has been presented to us in the pages of _Punch_ as a gorgeously-apparelled, champagne-drinking, cigar-smoking Hebrew, who, as he rakes in his gold, laughs and grows fat upon the sufferings of the wretched creatures sacrificed to his greed. Such monsters do exist. Of that there can be no doubt. They are by no means exclusively Hebrews, neither are they confined to the tailoring trade alone; nor is it necessary to go as far as Whitechapel in search of them. But a dispassionate study of the facts will show that the great bulk of the "sweaters" are very poor; and that with their profits driven down by competition, they can hardly make a living. In fact, both employers and employed are alike the victims of this fierce competitive struggle, and of the craze for cheapness at any cost. The result is that the market is flooded with a quantity of cheap and inferior articles which injure the trade, and destroy the demand for good English work. At present, the two trades most affected are the cheap tailoring and boot-making. In the former, as a direct consequence, all the horrors of "sweating" reign supreme. In the latter, the cheaper kind of work is now taken by foreigners entirely; hundreds of Englishmen who were formerly employed in it at a fair wage are driven out of employment, and now seek in vain for work. "Oh," but I hear some say, "they can turn their hands to something else." But it is not so easy for a man who has been apprenticed and brought up to a certain trade, to turn his hand to "something else." His craft is his bread, his trade is his capital; it is dear to him, for upon it he has lavished all his skill, all his energies. It is hard that he should be robbed of it by the foreigner. These two trades are not the only ones affected. In the cabinet-making, chair-turning, cigar-making, cheap fur trade, and other industries, the same evil is beginning to work, and always with similar baleful results. Labour is displaced; Englishmen are robbed of their work; and if they do not become paupers or something worse, they are driven from their homes to seek their fortunes anew in some distant land. The evil effect of this unchecked immigration upon the price of labour is very marked. I have collected together a few articles made by "sweated" workpeople in the East End, and have traced out the cost of labour in each instance. These samples include a wooden "Windsor" chair, solidly put together, and neatly turned; it was sold for 1_s._ 9_d._, and the price paid for making it was 2-1/2_d._ A fur collarette of hareskin, dyed gray and lined--really a very decent-looking article--was sold for 1_s._ 6_d._; labour received, 1-3/4_d._ A pair of button boots, leather-lined throughout, were bought for 3_s._ 11-1/2_d._; labour received 2-1/2_d._ for the "lasting" (_i.e._ sewing, heeling, and putting together); this 2-1/2_d._ did not include nails, wax, thread, all necessary to the work, which had to be found by the workman. Three pairs of boots can be "lasted" in an hour. There is also the "finishing," which costs 2_d._, and five pairs can be "finished" in an hour. But the most striking instance of all is that of a knickerbocker suit, well-made, and properly adorned with braid, made by a "sweated" workwoman in the East End. It was bought at a shop for 2_s._ 11_d._, and the woman received for making it 5-1/2_d._; which wretched pittance did not include needles, thread, and material used in the binding, all of which had to be found by the person "sweated." Now, I put it fairly and dispassionately to any unprejudiced person, if honest labour has no better reward to offer than this, what wonder if thousands of our people, in despair of earning a decent livelihood, are driven into vice and degradation--the men to drink, the women to prostitution? Much has been said and written about the exact number of these alien immigrants, which, as has already been pointed out, in the present dearth of trustworthy statistics, cannot be accurately ascertained. It is not merely a question of numbers. I submit that it matters comparatively little to the main argument whether the arrivals in one particular year were a few thousands more or a few thousands less, or the precise numbers of "those who return again to the Continent," when there are already so many of these indigent foreigners in our midst. Even supposing for the sake of argument--I do not for one moment admit it--that the numbers arriving are comparatively small, they would still have a very bad effect upon the price of wages, in the trades and industries upon which they entered. The inflow of a comparatively small number into a neighbourhood where much of the work is low-skilled and irregular, will often produce an effect which seems quite out of proportion to the actual number of the invaders. From the native labourer's point of view, the mere fact of the presence of these low-living foreigners, ready as they are at any moment to step in and undersell his labour, constitutes a standing menace to his interests. In all the trades in which they are employed, the rate of wages is being perpetually beaten down. Thus it follows that any argument drawn from the number of these destitute aliens, as compared with the total population of the United Kingdom, is obviously wide of the mark. We must consider their distribution in particular localities and particular trades; more than that, in order to arrive at any valuable result, we must examine also into the local and trade distribution of foreign labour _conjointly_. In this connection the evidence comes almost entirely from the East End of London. As we have seen, the two trades principally affected are the cheap tailoring and boot-making. Let us consider the latter first. Mr. Freak, Secretary of the Shoemakers' Society, stated before the Immigration Committee, that over 10,000 foreigners were engaged in the boot-making trade in the East End of London. He said:--"Until within ten or fifteen years ago, the Jew foreigners did not affect our trade much; but by degrees they have taken the work that men generally learned their trade on, such as the commoner class of work. They simply have taken it to themselves entirely, and the effect has been that hundreds of our men have to walk about, particularly in winter-time, who used to be employed on that class of work. These Jew foreigners work in our trade at this common work sixteen or eighteen hours a day, and the consequence is, they make a lot of cheap nasty stuff that destroys the market, and injures us. And if we have a strike on, or any little dispute occurs in our trade, when we might otherwise get a little better terms for ourselves, they go and take the work at any price, and so defeat our ends in getting or attempting to get our proper wages." Mr. Freak reckons that about 25 per cent. of the persons engaged in the _whole_ of the boot and shoe trade in the city of London are foreigners; but that the commoner kind of work is monopolized by foreigners entirely. He further said that the introduction of this pauper labour has seriously affected the rate of wages received by the English operatives, not of course so much in the best shops, but very greatly in the commoner class of work. It had also the effect of reducing the employment of a large number of Englishmen, and of driving hundreds out of work altogether. He went on to say:--"I know that at the time when I first came to London, any one could get work at the middle or common class of goods; and now they are sent out to the homes or given to the sweaters, who take them on the system that they are working themselves in the way I have mentioned; and the price is reduced so low that to work single-handed a man could not get his living. He has to sweat his children or his wife; and if a man and his wife and children do not want anything more than just bread and cheese and sleep, then they might get a living out of it; because some of these Jews who come over will not come out of the house for a whole week. They will sleep in the same place where they work day after day. They simply get food and the barest raiment to cover them, and that is all they can get for their work. I do not think that these foreign Jews have created any new industry; but they have made the industry in common work more beastly, and I do think that they are doing an injury in our foreign markets by the stuff that they make, because a great quantity of it is made of cardboard and composition. The leather that is put into the sole is simply a bit of veneer. It is simply a thin sole covered over a composition--clump as we call it. It is composed of shreds of leather, ground up, and stuck together." Now let us consider the cheap tailoring trade in the East End. It appears, upon the evidence of Dr. Ogle, whose work it is to prepare the statistical part of the Census, and whose opinion upon all such matters stands deservedly high, that of the persons engaged in the tailoring trade, in the parish of St. George's-in-the-East, over 80 per cent. are foreigners. Mr. Zeitlin, Secretary of the Jews' branch of the Tailors' Association, himself a Russian Jew, stated before the same Committee that there were altogether employed in the East End of London about 25,000 tailors, of whom 10,000 are men and 15,000 women. Out of the 10,000 men, "mostly foreigners and not born here," three-parts are Jewish, and one part not Jewish; and of the women three-parts are English, and one part Jewesses. Mr. John Burnett, Labour Correspondent of the Board of Trade, who was specially deputed in August 1887 to make inquiries into the Sweating system in the East End of London, reported that matters were much worse there of late years, because of the "enormous influx of pauper foreigners." He made a rough calculation that of some 20,000 tailors in the East End of London, 15,000 were foreigners--that is, persons not born in England; and of the remaining 5000, nearly all were Jews born in England, who might almost be described as foreigners also, since in their habits and their customs they have nothing in common with the native community. He stated that there were not more than 250 Englishmen employed in the cheap tailoring trade in the whole East End of London. They have all been driven out by Jews. There is, however, still a considerable employment of Englishwomen. Mr. Burnett also drafted a memorandum on the immigration of foreigners, and in it he stated that in respect of the trades and districts chiefly affected by it, the evil had assumed serious aspects. He considered that London, Birmingham, Leeds, Manchester, Newcastle-on-Tyne, Glasgow--to some extent Edinburgh, and also some other Scotch towns--were affected by the evil. There is of course the general lack of actual statistics as to the precise amount of the foreign population in these towns; but the Glasgow Trades' Council, for instance, though it has no specific information to hand on the subject, states generally that the tailoring in that city is overrun by Polish Jews. Mr. Burnett contemplates the time when the ready-made clothing trade will be entirely in foreign hands. The presence of foreign immigration is felt also, though to a lesser extent, in cabinet-making and other trades. In the cabinet-making trade, Mr. Burnett estimates that of 23,000 persons engaged in it in London, 4000 are foreigners, chiefly Germans, and many of them German, Russian, and Polish Jews. He draws a distinction between the Germans pure and simple, and the German, Russian, and Polish Jews, for this reason. The Germans are found in the superior workshops of the West End, and they are found receiving the same rate of wages as their English shop-mates; but in the cases of the Russian and Polish Jews at the East End, they are receiving a much lower rate when they are employed, and they are employed on inferior work under entirely different conditions. The foregoing considerations make it clear that the effect of foreign immigration upon the condition of our own workmen is not to be measured by the small percentage foreigners bear to the general population of the United Kingdom; but by their distribution in the particular trades of particular localities. It is impossible to deny the displacing power of so large an addition to labour, in trades already overcrowded. The fact that under such circumstances the new-comers find employment, infers of necessity the displacement of labour previously employed. It implies also the denial of employment to natives anxious to obtain it. Nor is this large intrusion of a foreign element confined in its effects to the displacement of native labour alone. It brings down to its own level labour that is not displaced. In all trades that do not require long apprenticeship and technical skill, the supply of labour is greatly in excess of the demand. Competition to obtain employment is in consequence cruelly severe. The inevitable results are, the evasion of the law respecting factories and workshops, the reduction of wages to the lowest minimum, and the extension of the hours of work to the utmost limits of human endurance. The effect of foreign immigration upon our labouring population is far greater than might at first be supposed. Its inevitable effect is the degradation of all the native labour employed, to the level of the foreign labour which is brought into competition with it. When the struggle is between those accustomed to a higher, and those accustomed to a lower standard of life, the latter can obviously oust the former and take their work. Just as a base currency drives out of circulation a pure currency, so does a lower standard of comfort drive out a higher one. What do competent authorities say on the subject of native labour? Mr. Goodman, who was a member of the Executive Committee of the Liverpool Tailors' Society, stated in his evidence before the House of Lords' Committee, that fifteen years ago the Sweating system only existed to a very limited extent in Liverpool; but that now it was carried on in a most extensive manner. He said that he accounted for its existence to a very large extent by the influx of foreigners, principally Jews. "At the present moment, fully two-thirds of the sweaters in Liverpool are foreigners; the majority of whom, as I have already stated, are not tailors at all, and have never served one hour in the tailor trade properly as an apprentice. I was told by a Jew some time ago, and he made a serious complaint to me on that head, that he was already finding the competition of his own people so severe, that being a practical man, he should have to do as they had done in many cases, lower his prices, or else he could not make a living. The competition, even amongst the Jews, is getting so severe that the prices are constantly tending to decrease; and I believe that to-day they are very much lower than they were a few years ago in Liverpool, through this competition of foreigners amongst themselves, together with their competition with the natives." Mr. Allen, Secretary of the Master Tailors' Association in Liverpool, stated that, "As an Association, we have discussed the matter, and we are opposed to it in the main (_i.e._ foreign immigration), and we passed a resolution that the importation of pauper aliens be prohibited with this condition, the prohibition not to extend to skilled workmen imported under contract." Mr. Keir, General Secretary of the Amalgamated Society of Tailors, thus moderately and dispassionately stated the case:--"I hardly know that it would be wise to stop immigration altogether. That would be an unnatural and hardly fair way of doing the thing; but I think it ought to be regulated in some way, and that the poorest, and most miserable, and the unskilled, perhaps, of foreign labour ought not to be thrown upon the markets of England to oppose and to act detrimentally to the interests of the English people. I do not think it would be wise, and I don't know that we could advocate, and I am sure any intelligent man would not advocate altogether, the complete prohibition of foreign labour; but at the same time I think there must be, or ought to be, some means devised whereby skilled labour should contend against skilled labour in a fair and straight market. It is not skilled labour against skilled labour; it is poverty thrown in our midst, and it is poverty competing with itself, as it were; and struggling in that way, and the manner in which they live, the food they eat, and the circumstances under which they exist, deprive them altogether of the comforts of home, you may almost say, as far as Englishmen, Scotchmen, or Welshmen are concerned." One point remains to be noted. It has been urged that these immigrant aliens do not enter upon native trades, but introduce new industries of their own. If that were really the case, such a contention would undoubtedly have much weight. The Huguenots established new industries of silk, glass, and paper; the Flemings introduced the finer class of weaving into England; in both of these cases the alien influx was beneficial. But it cannot be seriously maintained that these low-class Jewish immigrants have stimulated or created new wants. They have created no new trade; they have debased old ones. I admit that they almost monopolize the cheap clothing trade, but even here they have created no new _kind_ of industry. The power of the German, Russian, or Polish Jew, accustomed to a lower standard of life, to undersell the English worker in the English labour market must be admitted by all, though the exact importance of it is, I know, a disputed point. The industrial degradation of the "sweated" workers arises from the fact that they are working surrounded by a "pool of unemployed," or superfluous supply of labour. So long as this standing pool remains, and so long as it is ever being augmented by the endless influx of cheap, destitute foreign labour, so long it is difficult to see how the wages of the low unskilled workers can be materially raised. Let the pool be gradually drawn off, and wages will rise, since the combined action of the workers will no longer be able to be defeated by the eagerness of the foreigner to take their work and wages. But the pool can never be drawn off until the stream which so largely recruits it is cut off at its source. If once this foreign influx is stopped, it will decrease by the natural process of evaporation. Let us take a national view. The true standard of a nation's prosperity is to be found in the prosperity of its working-classes. The higher the rate of wages the better is the condition of the working-classes; the cheaper the labour of a country, the lower the condition of the people therein. One of the surest signs of the real rise of a nation is the elevation of the masses in their wages, their habits, their homes, their scale of living, and their condition generally. Anything which tends to reduce the price of labour tends also to reduce the labourer's standard of comfort and prosperity, and there can be no manner of doubt that this continuous influx of destitute foreigners does tend both directly and indirectly to reduce the profits of the wage-earning classes. Wages follow certain inexorable laws of supply and demand. If the supply of human labour exceeds the market demand, then the men will be beaten down; and how can the supply do otherwise than exceed the demand, when the market is being continually flooded by the influx of the cheapest kind of foreign labour? "Unrestricted immigration," said a witness before the United States Committee, "is the degradation of American labour." If that be true in a country of such enormous resources as the United States, how much more true must it be in our own densely-populated little island? It is the high rate of wages which has given to the American workmen their unexampled prosperity as citizens. It is the recognition of this truth which has induced the United States Government to guard its doors so jealously against the entrance of the destitute and unfit of other lands. And they are right, not only on economic grounds, but for other reasons as well, since all history teaches us that in the long run degraded labour is sure to avenge itself upon all the classes above it. "Rely upon yourselves; by societies, combinations, and well-directed strikes, you can secure higher wages and better conditions for yourselves." Such are the words of the "old" Trades Unionism, and in the main they are true enough. But in this instance they fall beside the mark; for, as I have already pointed out, combination is rendered impossible by this fierce competition of destitute labour from abroad. In the industries affected, any man or woman, or any body of men or women, who refused to work upon the sweating prices quoted, would be simply turned away, and their places filled by the foreigner. They are literally living from hand to mouth. They know that if they lose their wage one week, they will be destitute the next, and starving the week after. Under these circumstances it is not surprising to find that there exists among the native working-classes the strongest feeling against the great and increasing invasion of their rights. This feeling is not only confined to the trades chiefly affected, it is rapidly spreading throughout the country. So far as I have been able to judge, the feeling among the working-classes in favour of restrictive measures is practically unanimous. A vast majority of the great Trades Unions and Labour Organizations--not only those immediately affected, but others as well--have passed strongly-worded resolutions on the subject, recognizing that though the evil may not yet have sensibly affected their particular industry, yet it tends indirectly to do so. That the labour organizations are fully alive to the importance of this question is shown by the following letter, taken almost at random from hundreds of similar communications which have reached me during the last few months. It is from the Secretary of the "National Society of Amalgamated Brassworkers," Birmingham.[18] The arguments are so clearly and cogently put, that they are well worthy of being quoted here. "The Executive desire me to say that they are unanimously of opinion that the time has come when the State should regulate, in the interests of British labour, the immigration of destitute aliens; and that they have observed with alarm the injury done to their brethren in the East End of London and other parts of the country by this element of unfair competition. My Executive desire me also to say that these conclusions are arrived at reluctantly, as they would like this country to be a really happy England, giving welcome to the oppressed of every land. While, however, they hold this view strongly, they are also of opinion that this broad principle must not be allowed, to any appreciable extent, to be the means of pauperizing English men and English women. The unchecked admission of this force has spread enough misery; and it is hoped that your efforts will bring about such restrictions as will put an end to an evil which has been the means of providing a surplus labour market to become a ready prey to the sweater." These are weighty words. They come from an important Society, which, though its members have not yet felt the shoe pinch themselves, they recognize the truth of the old saying, "If one member suffers, all the other members suffer with it." This utterance does not stand alone; it is but an echo of the opinion of similar organizations throughout the country.[19] The English workman is naturally patient and law-abiding. It is his nature to suffer and be strong. All that he asks for--and surely it is not an unreasonable request--is that he should be allowed a fair field for his energies in the land that gave him birth. If this be denied him, then, sooner or later, will follow consequences, which, to quote Herbert Spencer, "no man may tell in language." It is because this movement is so essentially a workingman's movement that I am confident of its ultimate success. Let us look the situation in the face. The balance of power has passed into the hands of the wage-earning classes--three-fourths of the electorate are wage-earners; I use the word in its widest sense. Therefore, it follows as a matter of course, that just as the land-owning classes when they had the power made laws in their interests; and the trading-classes when they had the power passed laws for their interests; so the working, wage-earning classes of this country, now that they have the power, will use it to protect and advance their interests likewise. And what can touch their interests more nearly than this unrestricted immigration of destitute foreign labour? "The flowing tide is with us." Whatever may be the immediate interests of the hour, labour questions constitute the politics of the future. There are signs all round the world that social problems and labour questions are gradually taking the place of older issues over which men have contended. There is no likelihood now of a war about creeds, no dynastic contest is now on the cards; the rivalries of nations and of races are not as potent as they were; but the lot of the "dim millions," the labouring-classes, who were ignored by all the warriors and statesmen of the past, is now forcing its way to the front. The contest which is gathering will not be around "exhausted factories and obsolete policies," as Mr. Disraeli said in 1852, but living problems, coming home to the hearts and to the firesides of all labouring men. Labour legislation is the legislation of the future; and it needs no prophetic eye to foresee that one of the leading measures in the labour programme of the future will be to protect the English working-men against this perpetual pouring in of destitute foreigners. Hitherto in only one constituency, Lewisham, has this question found a prominent place in an electioneering programme. We all know the result of that election. As it was at Lewisham, so will it be before long in every urban constituency throughout England. "Why," the working-classes are asking, "should we be robbed of our birthright by the refuse population of other countries?" Why, indeed! People are beginning to see that a great and crying evil flourishes in our midst; and when that fact has been thoroughly digested, means will soon be found to remedy it. CHAPTER VI. WOMAN'S BITTER CRY. The woes of the East End workwomen form no new theme. They are as old as the "Song of the Shirt"; even older. In spite of Hood's inspired poem, which when it appeared rang like a tocsin through the land, the miseries of the needlewoman's lot have not only remained unalleviated, but they have gathered in intensity as the years rolled on. How comes it that in these days of social politics and remedial legislation, the condition of such a numerous body should have gone from bad to worse? The answer is not far to seek. They have no votes; the politician passes them by. They have no money to spend, no time to strike, no strength to combine, the agitator ignores them. The class for which I plead, is voiceless, voteless, inarticulate, helpless. These poor women have never been consulted as to whether they are content to pay the price needed to continue the so-called "traditions" of England with regard to the unrestricted entrance of the refuse population of other countries. They are not likely to be consulted, since they are powerless; no one angles for their votes, for they have none to give. The strong man in his strength when confronted by this alien invasion can battle with it, or when the contest is hopeless, he can retire before it. The world is open to him, and in other lands beyond the seas he may find that fair field for his energies which is denied him in the land of his birth. But the weak woman in her weakness, what of her? She must perforce remain to feebly fight on single-handed in the unequal struggle; and when her weakness conquers her, when her strength fails her, she can only lie down and die. This is a terrible alternative, is there no other? Yes, there is another, infinitely more terrible, infinitely more horrible--the streets. If we apply the four leading features of the "sweating" disease--low wages, long hours, irregular employment, unsanitary conditions--to women, we shall find that in each case the absolute pressure is heavier upon the weaker sex. This is not to be wondered at. Physically weaker than men, women receive a smaller amount of work, and a lower rate of wages, especially in unskilled labour. Combination can do nothing for them; it does not reach them. The mass of women-workers labour either at home or in the small "sweating dens"; the long hours, the excessive labour, and the under-feeding, crush out all the spirit and strength of resistance they possess, and with them combination is impossible. But it is upon the system of "out-work" that "sweating" thrives, and it is this "out-work" that women, more especially married women, chiefly engage. One would think that the very weakness of women, the duties of maternity, the care of children, ought to secure them some respite in this industrial struggle, but it is not so. We are always boasting of our civilization and our Christianity, yet these humanitarian considerations avail nothing. On the contrary, they only handicap women the more, and tell fatally against them in the competitive battle. The commercial competition of to-day in the cheap clothing trade, intensified as it is by the influx of the foreigner, positively trades upon the maternity of women-workers. These poor creatures have no time for the pure tender delights of motherhood; they have no opportunity of attending properly to their children, or to the many other little duties which gather around the English word "home." To the low-class foreign Jew this matters little, for the word "home" to him has no meaning at all; but to Englishmen and to Englishwomen it offers a terrible problem. What "hope of our race" can we expect from the feeble, half-starved, and wholly overworked Englishwoman, who is thus thrust into the furnace of this fierce foreign competition! There is another consideration also to be faced, which I have already hinted at. The unrestricted immigration of destitute aliens tends directly to increase prostitution in London and our large cities. This is a startling proposition; let me proceed to demonstrate its truth. A witness giving evidence before the Sweating Committee, described the sweater's dens as "the most filthy, poisoning, soul-and-body-killing places imaginable." Even to stand at the open door of one of such places, and to breathe the foetid air which rushes forth, is well-nigh unendurable to persons not hardened to such conditions. Yet it is in such places as these that Englishwomen are compelled to work side by side with the foreigner. To the foreigner it seems not to matter so much; to the Englishwoman, sooner or later, it is certain death. But I hear some say, "How about the Factory Regulations?" In theory the Factory Regulations are admirable; in practice they are utterly inadequate. Their provisions are constantly evaded. Women are kept working in these dens from 6 a.m. until 8 p.m., 10 p.m., or even midnight; or the intention of the Act is frustrated by their being given work to do at home. A case was mentioned before the House of Lords' Committee of a girl eighteen years of age, who worked from seven in the morning to half-past eight at night, for wages ranging from 3_s._ to 8_s._ a week. On Fridays she worked from 6 a.m. to 5 p.m. (eleven hours), that being considered half a day, and paid for accordingly. All sorts of tricks are played to evade the Factory Inspector. His first appearance in the street is notified all along the sweating dens by a preconcerted signal. When he arrives at the door, he is kept in parley for a minute or two. Meanwhile the women and girls are smuggled away, and by the time he is admitted there is not a woman visible. They lend themselves, poor creatures, to this deception, because they know that if they did not, plenty more could be found who would. The result is that they are utterly at the sweater's mercy. Even the time that ought to be allowed for meals is often infringed upon. A woman who availed herself of a full hour for dinner would be liable to instant dismissal. Even the half-hour for tea is frequently denied them; the tea is put down by their side, and they swallow it as they work. Such is the case of women working in the sweating dens. Those who work at home are scarcely better off. They must, through the constant pressure of this foreign competition, labour from dawn till late at night to procure the barest subsistence, a subsistence not sufficient to keep them in health and strength. One wretched garret is all they can afford. Here they labour, and live, and die--no one heeding. In the winter they do without fire, and often the workers put on their backs, for the sake of warmth, the garments they are not actually engaged upon. Oftentimes it is not the woman alone, but her whole family who have to share this single room. It is impossible for a woman, working these excessive hours, to keep the room clean; and the consequence is that, especially in hot weather, it becomes infested by vermin, which find their way into the garments in process of making. The takers-in of the work in the larger houses, it is stated, kill the worst of these vermin with their shears as they examine their garments! Few of us would consider that any sum could compensate for such grinding toil under such awful conditions. Yet what do these poor women get for their labour? I have already quoted the case of a girl who earned from 3_s._ to 8_s._ a week for over thirteen hours a day; but many girls in the East End factories do not earn more than 2_s._ or 3_s._ a week! Working by the piece, a woman is paid 5_d._ for making a vest; 7-1/2_d._ for making a coat. She can by fifteen hours' work make four coats in a day, which comes to 2_s._ 6_d._; but out of this has to be deducted 3_d._ to a button-holer for making the button-holes, and 4_d._ for "trimmings," which means fire, ironing, and soap, all necessary for her work. A boy's knickerbocker suit is made at prices varying from 4-1/2_d._ to 10-1/2_d._ complete, according to the amount of work. For a suit made at 9_d._ the sweater gets 1_s._ 3_d._, leaving him a profit of 6_d._ Before destitute immigration set in, in such a volume, and prices were consequently higher, such a suit would have been sold at 3_s._ 6_d._, which would have admitted of a larger profit, and consequently higher price for labour. Other prices are--a shirt, sold in a shop for 7_s._ 6_d._, is made for 1_s._; and men's trousers are made outright at as low a price as 4-1/2_d._ per pair. The price paid by a sweater to a woman for machining trousers, runs from 1-1/4_d._ to 3-1/4_d._ per pair, and out of this she has to find cotton and "trimmings." If she does this at home she pays 2_s._ 6_d._ a week for the hire of a sewing-machine. The "finishers," as the women are called who press the garments, put on the tickets, and generally make them ready for sale, are paid from 2_d._ to 2-3/4_d._ a pair; but they lose a good deal of time in getting their work examined, and have frequently to stand three or four hours at a time. It is an invariable rule that no seats are provided for women when they take their work to the sweaters. If the examiner finds the first two or three pairs of trousers faulty, he will not go through the whole work, but throws them at the unfortunate woman, and tells her to take them back and alter them. In this way she loses two days in doing one day's work. Shirt-makers who make by machine the common kinds of shirts, are paid 7_d._, 8_d._, and 9_d._ per dozen shirts for machining. They can machine 1-1/2 dozen sevenpenny shirts in a day, by working till midnight and later. The shirt-finishers, who make the button-holes by hand and sew on the buttons, get 3_d._ a dozen shirts, finding their own cotton, and can finish 1-1/2 dozen to 2 dozen in a day. Silk mantles, costing in the West End shops from £1 to £25, are made throughout in the East End for 7-1/2_d._ apiece, out of which the sweater pays the actual maker 5_d._ The common mantles are made at 5_d._ apiece; price to the worker, 3_d._ to 3-1/2_d._ Bead-trimmings are made by girls who, working twelve hours, earn from 8_d._ to 1_s._ 2_d._ per day. Mackintoshes are made at from 10_d._ to 1_s._ apiece. Mrs. Killick, a trouser-finisher, told the Sweating Committee that she could not make more than 1_s._ a day, working from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. She had a sick husband and three children, and out of her earnings she paid 2_s._ a week rent. She chiefly lived on tea and a bit of fish. What a glimpse of patient heroism and noble self-denial does the evidence of this poor woman afford! Five or six years ago these women made nearly double; the competition chiefly caused by the influx of cheap labour from abroad, has reduced prices some 40 or 50 per cent. Now, even the miserable wages earned are irregularly paid. The sweaters frequently keep their workers waiting for their money, and the more disreputable ones will cheat them out of their just dues. Work too is precarious; there are slack times during the year, when the workers may be idle for weeks together; yet they must still pay rent, and keep body and soul together--if they can. And this brings me back to the proposition from which I started. How body and soul are kept together in the case of girls under such circumstances as have been detailed, it is not difficult though very painful to imagine. Working from dawn till night in hideous filth and squalor unutterable, for a wage which does not suffice to buy the barest necessaries (a wage cut down ever lower and lower by the fierce competition from the shoals of destitute foreigners landed in London week by week), hundreds, nay thousands of young women--Englishwomen, our sisters--eke out their wretched earnings by means of the street. The Pharisee and the Self-righteous pass by on the other side and condemn them; but it is not these poor unfortunates who are to be condemned, but the system which makes such a state of things possible. The Vicar of Old Ford, in his evidence before the House of Lords' Committee, mentioned cases he knew of where young girls of thirteen, who work in this cheap tailoring trade, were leading an immoral life. In one instance, two sisters, one twelve and the other ten years of age, had already embarked upon a life of shame. One of these girls had been sent out by her stepmother, because the family "had to live." Another instance, if possible more horrible still, was related to me by a clergyman in the East End of London, of a case which had come under his notice, though not before it was too late. It was that of a woman, an Englishwoman, a seamstress, who with her husband was engaged in the cheap tailoring trade at the usual sweating prices. All went fairly well for a time, for the two were able by their united efforts to earn a living, and to maintain themselves and their little children in a state of comparative decency and comfort. But one winter the husband, never a strong man, fell ill and died. The wife laboured on, managing by some almost superhuman effort to earn enough for herself and the children, and to keep body and soul together. Then the slack time, so greatly dreaded by all those engaged in the "sweating trade," came on, and there was nothing to be done for weeks and weeks. In despair this woman, who had hitherto led a blameless life, took to the streets. "It was wrong," the moralist and purist will say, "wrong and reprehensible to the last degree. Is there not the workhouse for such people, is there not parochial relief, are there not charitable agencies, free dinners, clothing clubs, district visitors without end? Could she not have applied to one of these instead of drifting into sin?" It may be so. All that I know is, that she and her children were starving, and that the sin brought its own punishment, for the poor woman never recovered from the horrors of that awful winter. The shame of it all seemed to settle on her as a blight, and the following year she died, broken-spirited, and broken-hearted, one more victim sacrificed to this infamous system of starvation prices and ruinous competition. Most of the English girls to be seen at night in Oxford Street and the Strand, to say nothing of their even more degraded sisters in Whitechapel, are, or have been, tailoresses. How these poor creatures manage to exist at all, even when they eke out their wretched earnings by the price paid for their dishonour, it is not easy to see. The key of the mystery is to be found in their mutual help of one another. Even amid all their degradation and shame, many of them retain that divine instinct of self-sacrifice which in all ages has been the noblest part of womanhood. Dim it may be and undeveloped, but still it is there, evidenced daily by many little acts of kindness, many little generous deeds towards those who are more miserable and more suffering than themselves. "It is mostly the poor who help the poor." I will go further and say, it is mostly the wretched who help the wretched, for between them exists that intimate knowledge of each other's sorrows which is the truest bond of sympathy. Under happier circumstances these poor women might have lived honest and virtuous lives. As it is, they have to work side by side with men of all nationalities, under unhealthy and objectionable conditions--conditions subservient of all sense of decency. This, combined with the utterly inadequate wage, naturally leads to immorality, with its attendant satellites of drunkenness, disease, and death. Thus the burden of wretchedness and crime goes on, ever increasing in volume and intensity. How can it be otherwise when the ranks of the lost in our large cities, are thus being continually recruited from within and from without? Every now and then the public conscience is startled by the news of some awful tragedy--some poor creature done to her death in Whitechapel. It is but a bubble bursting on the surface, which oozes up from the black depths of vice and misery beneath. One of the most potent causes of this vice and misery is undoubtedly the unlimited pouring in of destitute and objectionable foreigners. Again I ask, Can nothing be done to rescue these women--our sisters--from the attendant horrors of this fierce and degrading foreign competition? Can nothing be done to place the price of their labour upon such a level as to enable them by honest work to lead virtuous and happy lives? _Usque quo Domine?_ Lord, how long? Such is the bitter cry of the workwomen in East London. CHAPTER VII. THE SANITARY DANGER. The sanitary conditions amid which the great majority of these alien immigrants labour and live may truly be described as appalling. It is a remarkable thing that just as the lower organisms of animal life are capable of living under circumstances which are intolerable to higher organisms, so can these people exist--and even to a certain extent thrive--in an atmosphere and amid surroundings which to the more highly-developed Englishman and Englishwoman mean disease and death. Cleanliness and sanitation are peculiarities of Western rather than of Eastern nationalities. When Peter the Great went back to Russia after his famous visit to London two centuries ago, he left behind him such a filthy habitation, that the cleansing of it had to be defrayed by an especial grant from the Exchequer. This is a matter of history; and if rumour is to be believed, a similar experience in connection with the visit of an Oriental potentate has occurred in very recent years. If this sort of thing is incidental to the visit of Eastern Princes, how much rather then is it liable to accompany the wholesale inundation of poor and degraded foreigners, who flock into London and our large cities from every country in Europe? In treating of this sanitary aspect, in order to avoid any possible charge of exaggeration, I prefer to quote the statements of unimpeachable authorities rather than to advance any theories of my own. The surroundings amid which these people are content to labour and to live are deplorable and filthy beyond description. To quote from the Majority Report of the Sweating Committee--a Report which has been attacked because of the undue moderation of its language, and which certainly cannot be said to unduly exaggerate the evil:-- "Three or four gas-jets may be flaring in a room, a coke fire burning in the wretched fire-place, sinks untrapped, closets without water, and, altogether, the sanitary conditions abominable. A witness told us that in a double room, perhaps 9 feet by 15 feet, a man, his wife, and six children slept, and in the same room ten men were usually employed, so that at night eighteen persons would be in that one room. These witnesses alluded to the want of sanitary precautions, and of decent and sufficient accommodation, and declared that the effects of this, combined with the inadequate wages earned, had the effect of driving girls to prostitution." The state of the sweaters' dens in East London is revolting beyond measure, and resembles rather the description of Dante's _Inferno_, than the abodes of a professedly civilized people. Here is the description of one taken almost at random from a mass of evidence teeming with similar details. A Factory Inspector, who described it, says it gives a fair idea of all the rest, and he certainly ought to know, seeing that some 4000 factories and "workshops innumerable" are under his inspection. He says:-- "You find a filthy bed, on which garments which are made are laid; little children, perfectly naked little things, lying about on the floor and on the bed; frying-pans and all sorts of dirty utensils with food of various descriptions on the bed, under the bed, over the bed, everywhere; clothes hanging on a line, with nothing more than a large gas-stove with the ashes all flying about, and the atmosphere so dense that you get ill after a night's work there; and that is the reason I am deaf now." In respect of sanitation, the foreign Jews appear to be the worst offenders. The Sanitary Committee of the Jewish Board of Guardians admit in their Report that of 880 houses visited by the inspector, 623 were defective, and below the standard required by the Local Authority. Of these no less than 341 were in Whitechapel alone. To quote a few samples:-- "In Whitechapel, some so-called 'Model Dwellings' exist, in which the drain of a water-closet had been entirely stopped up for three weeks prior to the visit of the Inspector, while two of the cellars (inhabited) were flooded with sewage, and had been so flooded for four days past. At another place, where a noxious odour had prevailed for years, the refuse which the Committee succeeded in causing to be removed from the basement room, contained among its various components the dead bodies of five cats, a dog, and a rabbit. The water-closet drains of three other houses were discovered on the Inspector's visit to have remained in a choked condition for three, five, and six weeks respectively. At a house in St. George's-in-the-East, three boot-finishers were found at work in a front basement room, while the adjoining back basement room was flooded with sewage, which forced its way up a gully supposed to be protected by a bell-trap. The cover of this trap, as is generally the case with these appliances, was absent, and thus the sewer had direct and unobstructed communication with the interior of the house." This extract is taken bodily from the Report of the Sweating Committee of the Jewish Board of Guardians. They are writing of their own people, and are certainly not likely to exaggerate the state of affairs. The habitations of the Italians are little better; in fact in many ways they are just as bad. The sanitary arrangements of the cheap dwellings around Saffron Hill, where the Italians mostly abound, leave everything to be desired. On this subject I had lately some conversation with an officer of the Italian Benevolent Society. He described to me a sleeping-room--it often served as a living-room as well--in one of the ordinary dwelling-houses in the neighbourhood of Saffron Hill. In this one room, neither very lofty nor very large, may frequently be found a dozen persons herded together rather like cattle than human beings, sleeping promiscuously as follows:--In one bed, or what serves as a bed, a married couple; in the next, two young girls; in a third, a single young man; in the fourth, three or four children of different ages and sexes--and so on. Owing to the lack of ventilation, and the number of human beings crowded in the room--to quote the words of my informant--"the stench was awful." The result of all this upon the victims, both physically and morally, can easily be imagined. Another instance was that given by Inspector Holland to Mr. Biron the magistrate.[20] An Italian, who was summoned for sending his little girl out begging, was traced to his home, and there the police inspector found the parents occupying a miserably furnished little apartment in Aldis Mews, with six children. The room, which "smelt horribly," contained a single bed, under which were kept the appliances for making ice-cream; and Inspector Holland also found the room to be inhabited by a dog, a cat, a monkey, and several white mice. The moral of all this is obvious, viz. that these people are able to live under conditions amid which it would be impossible for an average Englishman to exist at all. Therefore it is only one more illustration of the unfair nature of this unnatural competition. There is, however, another point to be noted in connection with this sanitary aspect. The conditions under which work is done in the sweaters' dens, and in their homes by these unfortunate people, largely assists in the spreading of infectious diseases. I refer of course more especially to the cheap tailoring trade. Some materials carry infection very quickly. Dr. Bate, a medical officer of health in the East End of London, speaks, in his evidence before the Sweating Committee, of infection being carried far and wide by the garments being often made up in rooms where children are lying ill with small-pox, scarlet fever, and other maladies. He had seen the garments thrown over the children's beds; and a case is mentioned of a child covered with measles being wrapt up in one of the half-made garments to keep it warm. And yet the articles made under such conditions are sold in the cheap, ready-made clothes-shops all over London and throughout the provinces. Nor are matters in the foreign quarters of the provincial towns much better. From Manchester, from Leeds, from Liverpool, from Glasgow, the same tale reaches us, of the filthy habits of these foreign immigrants, and their neglect of all sanitary precautions. For instance, at Meadow Bank, an outlying district of Winsford, there is a large colony of Poles and Hungarians. They are employed in some local salt works, and were especially brought over to England some years ago in consequence of a strike in the Salt District, and now fill the places which were formerly occupied by Englishmen. A description of the way in which these people live, will best show how impossible it is for decent English workmen to compete against them. It is best told in the words of Dr. Fox, the medical officer of the District Board of Health. In his report he writes:-- "To say that these people are living together like beasts would be an insult and a libel upon beasts. Beasts would be better provided for than are those human beings. In the first place the rooms are, without exception, overcrowded. Again, they are destitute of furniture. The beds are trays covered with filthy straw; the bed-clothing is entirely constituted of filthy sacking. The men sleep in their clothes, even in their boots. The windows are rarely if ever opened; the beds in point of fact being many of them never empty; one set of workmen occupying them by day, and another by night. The atmosphere is necessarily foul, foetid, and pestilential to persons of ordinary susceptibilities; and yet, in the absence of larders, and kitchens, and separate living-rooms, in this foetid, stinking atmosphere the food is stored and cooked. Arrangements for washing there are none, except the outside taps. In one room six men and one woman are sleeping, unmarried, promiscuously; and in another, a man, his wife, and daughter--fourteen years of age--were occupying one bed. Canal-boats are palaces and temples of cleanliness, comfort, and morality, compared with this horrible colony of Bohemianism." It is not possible to say anything which would add to this tale of horror. The facts speak for themselves. Dr. Fox, though subjected to a severe examination before the House of Commons' Committee, maintained that there was not a syllable of exaggeration in his report, though in consequence of public attention having been attracted by its publication, a slight improvement had since taken place in some minor details. There was no necessity, it should be noted, for these foreigners to live in the way they did. In this instance they were paid a sufficient wage for them to exist under decent and sanitary conditions. It was simply that they preferred doing so, and were but following the instincts of a nature which had become engendered in them by long years of filthy and degraded habits. Yet it was to make room for such as these that the English workmen were ousted, and are being ousted daily, in the great manufacturing centres of Great Britain. The question is, therefore, how long are these people to be allowed to pour in upon us unchecked, bringing with them their foreign habits and customs, and living in conformity with these alone, an outstanding defiance to English law, and a serious danger to the health and well-being of the surrounding English community? Is it right or just that our people should be forced by this unnatural competition to live and toil side by side with such people, surrounded by bad light, bad air, bad food, bad water, bad smells, bad and degrading occupations--by every circumstance which depresses the vital energies, and leaves them an easy prey to pestilence? But we are told that to shut our doors upon these aliens would be to reverse England's traditions. I maintain that we have lavished sympathy enough upon them already, and that it is now necessary for us to keep a little of our sympathy for our own flesh and blood. It is impossible to over-estimate the importance of sanitation. Where it is neglected, disease and death surely follow. Doctors tell us that more human beings are killed in England every year by unnecessary and preventible diseases, than were killed at Waterloo or Sadowa, and the great majority of these victims are children. Preventible diseases, according to Sir Joseph Fayrer, still kill 125,000 per annum, entailing a loss of labour from sickness estimated at £7,750,000 per annum. "Why then," as the Prince of Wales[21] asked, "are they not prevented?" Sanitary legislation is all very well, but it deals with effects and not with causes. Such dens as those described, not by my imagination, be it noted, but by unimpeachable authorities, are nothing less than breeding-houses of pestilence. If we swept them clean to-morrow others would soon be found as bad, for the filthy and unsanitary habits of these immigrant aliens are bred in the bone, and wherever they go they take them with them. It cannot be healthy for a nation to have such a sore as this existing in its side, yet we allow this plague-spot to continue in our midst, and to spread its contamination far and wide. If we wish to perpetuate that healthy, sturdy stock which has made England what she is, we must prevent the strain from being defiled by this ceaseless pouring in of the unclean and unhealthy of other lands. "A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump," and nothing is more contagious than dirty and unsanitary habits. The physical health of the people should be the first care of the State, for upon it depends not only the present, but the future, of our race. _Salus populi suprema est lex_--and before this inviolable law all other considerations must bow. The Majority Report of the Sweating Committee--from which Lord Dunraven dissented--complacently recommended the more frequent use of "limewash" in the sweaters' dens and workshops where these indigent foreigners chiefly congregate. But it will require a great deal more than "limewash" to whiten this hideous evil. People who bring with them filthy and unsanitary habits are a standing source of danger to the rest of the community. Cattle from an infected district are refused admission to our ports; surely the health of even one of the meanest of our people is of more importance than many cattle. CHAPTER VIII. THE SOCIAL EVIL. Closely bound up with the sanitary danger, indeed inseparable from it, is the social evil. The value of healthy habitations, of personal cleanliness, of pure air, of a sufficient but not exorbitant amount of work--all that in fact tends to produce the _mens sana in corpore sano_--all this is fully acknowledged and known; yet we freely throw open our doors to a class whose habits and customs admittedly militate against all these powerful agencies for good. The unlimited pouring in of destitute and degraded foreigners tends both directly and indirectly to increase our national burden of pauperism, vice, and crime. With regard to the first part of this statement it is often objected that but few of these foreign immigrants come upon the rates, and that our workhouses and penitentiaries show comparatively faint signs of their presence. This is a half-truth, and like all half-truths it conceals a most dangerous fallacy. _Nulla falsa doctrina est, quae non permisceat aliquid veritatis._ On the surface I admit the plausibility of the objection. In Leeds, for instance, where the foreign colony has reached abnormal proportions, the total number of Jews chargeable to the common fund of the Leeds Union, at the time when particulars were furnished to the Board of Trade in the early part of this year (1891), was only 62. The numerous Jewish and Foreign Benevolent Societies and Charitable Institutions are far too careful to allow their people to come upon the rates more than they can possibly help. But that the whole tendency of this destitute foreign immigration is to force those of our English working-classes, who are in any degree affected by it, into pauperism or something worse, cannot for one moment be denied by those who have any practical knowledge of the poor in the crowded centres of population to which these undesirable foreigners flock. In proof of this assertion, I may quote the opinion of the Mile End Board of Guardians, who believed that this destitute foreign immigration had "a deteriorating effect upon the moral, financial, and social conditions of the people." The Whitechapel Guardians of the poor also deplore the substitution of the foreign for the English population. The result, they say, is the lowering of the general condition of the people. The Hackney Board of Guardians also, after an exhaustive inquiry, arrived at the opinion that the unchecked immigration of destitute foreigners was a serious social danger, reducing wages to a "starvation point." They supported their decision by a series of practical and convincing arguments which only lack of space prevents my quoting in full.[22] If a life of honest labour has no better reward to offer than the meagre wages and attendant horrors of the sweaters' dens, can it be wondered if in despair of earning an honest livelihood, hundreds, nay thousands, of our people are tempted to abandon the unequal struggle, and to drift into idleness, drunkenness, and vice? I have endeavoured to show in a previous chapter how this unnatural competition forces Englishwomen upon the streets; but that, alas! is not the only resultant form of vice. A great social reformer[23] once said that "he had found a man's sobriety to be in direct proportion to his cleanliness." Without admitting the universal accuracy of this opinion, there is no doubt that it contains within it the germs of a great truth. Drunkenness, that endless source of misery and crime, is not in itself so much a cause as an effect, the effect of the loss of that innate sense of self-respect which forms one of the great barriers between the man and the beast. "When we examine into the ultimate cause of a dangerous class," writes Canon Kingsley,[24] "into the one property common to all its members, whether thieves, beggars, profligates, or the merely pauperized--we find it to be this loss of self-respect. As long as that remains, poor souls may struggle on heroically, pure amid penury, filth, degradation unspeakable. But when self-respect is lost, they are lost with it. And whatever may be the fate of virtuous parents, children brought up in these dens of physical and moral filth cannot retrieve self-respect. They sink, and they must sink, into a life on a level with the sights, sounds, aye, the very smells, which surround them." All this is true enough. But how, I would ask, is it possible for our people to maintain this precious sense of self-respect when they are forced daily and hourly into contact with those who appear to have no more idea of decency, cleanliness, and comfort than the beasts which perish? The whole physical circumstances of their lives fight against them. To the great bulk of these immigrant aliens, the word "home," that word so sacred to English ears, around which so many associations cling, has no meaning at all. They appear to have only one dominant passion, the love of gain;--not that they gain much, poor creatures, still it is there;--and in their pursuit of it they are willing to accommodate themselves to the meagre wage, the lengthy hours, and the filthy surroundings already described. With this exception they appear to be indifferent to everything which makes life worth the living, to have no happiness in the past, no pleasures in the present, no hope in the future. With our own people it is different. However degraded they may be, there exists among them the longing for enjoyment. "Not to enjoy is not to live." Moral and intellectual enjoyments many have none; and in default of these, they betake themselves to the lowest forms of animal enjoyment; snatching at their pleasures greedily, foully, all the more fiercely because their opportunities of enjoyment are so limited. Can we wonder that these things are so? Can we judge them harshly? God forbid! A well-known social reformer, for whose work and opinions I have the greatest respect, has written:--"It is a fact apparent to every thoughtful man, that the larger portion of the misery that constitutes our social question arises from indulgence, gluttony, drink, waste, profligacy, betting, and dissipation."[25] This on the surface is true enough; but when we come to examine more closely into the problems of poverty, we shall find that though intemperance, unthrift, self-indulgence, and inefficiency are unhappily the common vices of the poor, yet these vices are not so much the _causes_ of poverty, as the _effects_ of it. The Rev. S. A. Barnett, of St. Jude's, Whitechapel, who knows the East End of London so thoroughly, does not find the origin of poverty in the vices of the poor. Terrible as are the results of drunkenness, unthrift, and self-indulgence, it is not possible, if we view the facts dispassionately, to regard these as the main sources of poverty. We shall rather look upon these evils as the natural outcome of the fierce struggle for existence, which is carried on under our present industrial conditions. Morality is admittedly the truest and most real end of man, and therefore on a superficial aspect it is natural to represent the miseries of the very poor to be chiefly occasioned by their own faults. It is a comfortable view to take, for it at once lightens the responsibility of the rich man, and it salves his conscience by the specious plea that after all the poor and the wretched have brought half their troubles upon themselves; and as they have made their beds, so must they lie. But this is rather the attitude of the Pharisee than of the philanthropist, and the moral and social problems of our age and country will never be solved if approached in such a spirit. It is a cruel and unholy thing thus to intensify the struggle for existence among our own people by the ceaseless immigration of those, who, to quote the words of the Bishop of Bedford, "are at once demoralized and demoralizing."[26] Few have had more practical experience of the crowded East End of London than Dr. Billing, and he has given eloquent testimony to the injury worked upon our own people there by this wholesale invasion. In this fierce battle for life, of what use is it to utter trite platitudes about the "survival of the fittest," since, as another great authority, Lord Dunraven, has pointed out, "the fittest in this instance are those who are able to exist upon the lowest possible diet, in the greatest possible filth, and subject to the greatest amount of hardships and misery"?[27] Englishmen and Englishwomen were not formed thus to live, and thus to toil. They cannot do so without contracting diseased habits of body and mind--without becoming brutalized, in fact. They lose their self-respect, and go to swell that degraded class into which the _weaker_ as well as the _worst_ members of society show a perpetual tendency to sink--a class which not respecting itself does not respect others, which has nothing to lose and all to gain, and in which the lowest passions are ever ready to burst out and avenge themselves by frightful methods. That is why it is, at the present hour, in the crowded courts and teeming alleys of East London, there exist all the elements of something even more terrible in its way than the misery which brought about the French Revolution. It has been said that "A great city is a great evil." But paradoxical as it may seem, it is also a great good, since it provides employment for many thousands who otherwise would starve. Still it cannot be denied that the abnormal increase of our great cities, and the gradual depopulation of our country districts, form one of the most serious social problems of our time. There is a constant movement going on from the country to the town. This is due to many causes, one of which is undoubtedly the introduction of machinery, which, whilst lessening the work for labourers in the agricultural districts, at the same time creates an extraordinary demand for "hands" in our manufacturing centres. Another cause is the higher rate of wages, and the bustling customs of the town, which never cease to offer attractions to young people starting in life. The result of this steady current of human beings flowing away from the country to the town is disastrous to both. Every great city in England is rapidly approaching a state of congestion; and in rural places there is a great dearth of workers, the supply falling very far short of the demand. If the 30,000,000 human beings in England and Wales all had food and lodging, there would be no cause for anxiety; but a large number of them are very poor, and wholly unable to support themselves. In 1890 no less than 671,000 persons received Poor Law relief, of whom 462,000 were relieved outside, and 179,000 inside the workhouse. In London alone 5000 able-bodied men were relieved every day, at a cost to the Metropolitan rate-payers of £188,000 per year. Twenty-four out of every hundred, or nearly one quarter of those who died in London last year, died either in the workhouses, hospitals, or lunatic asylums. Therefore, considering this question of foreign immigration generally, and foreign Jewish immigration in particular, we must take into account the nature of its distribution and the gregarious habits of the Jewish immigrants. The weekly arrival of hundreds of semi-starving foreigners must of necessity have a serious effect upon our unskilled labour market in London and our great provincial cities, to which the immigrant aliens principally flock. All thinking persons will admit that it is of more importance to protect our own workmen than to preserve our traditional character for hospitality, if it can be shown--and I consider it can--that the exercise of such hospitality tends to degrade the social condition of the native workers. Why then add to the difficulties of this problem by letting in yearly thousands of these foreigners, chiefly the "lowest class of the lowest class," who, parasites that they are, flock at once to our great centres of population, and prey upon our people, underselling their labour, and taking the bread from their mouths? We live in the days of a great social upheaval. We hear on all sides of the great "Labour movement." What does it mean? What is at the bottom of it all? Only the desire of our labouring classes to seek for themselves some alleviation of their lot; some increased opportunity for leisure; some better remuneration for their labour; some surer provision against sickness and old age. They are seeking--not always by the best and wisest methods perhaps, but that is not their fault--how to make their lives better and broader, healthier and happier. With these desires every right-thinking man is in sympathy. The complete realization of their dream may be Utopian perhaps--I do not know. But even if it be, what is there to blame in this divine discontent? "Unless above himself he can Exalt himself, how mean a thing is man!" How are these longings to be gratified?--how are they to be even partially realized, while this unchecked flood of destitution and degradation pours in upon us from abroad? We hear much in these days of schemes for elevating and evangelizing the masses of the poor in our great cities. All honour to such schemes, whether they succeed or whether they fail, for the motive which animates them is good. But it cannot be too often insisted upon, that spiritual and intellectual necessities do not arise until some decency of physical conditions has been first attained. Among the "submerged tenth," as they have been called, decency of physical conditions will never come to pass until steps have first been taken to forbid the entrance of the unclean and unhealthy of other lands. So long as the bare struggle for existence absorbs all the energies of our very poor, they cannot be civilized. I do not underrate the greater worth of the moral life as compared with the purely physical life; but we must begin at the lowest rung of the ladder before we can ascend to the highest. As things are, the dregs of our slum population have neither the time, the energy, or the desire to be clean, thrifty, intelligent, or moral. In our haste we must not blame them. What they want first of all is better food, and more of it, warmer clothes, better shelter, higher wages, and more permanent employment. Unless we can first assist them to obtain these material desires, all our efforts to awaken the higher part of their natures will be in vain. Some perhaps will object that many of these poor creatures are so brutalized, so criminal, so degraded, that they have no higher nature left to awaken. I do not believe it--I will never believe it. However degraded a human being may be, however handicapped from his birth by the circumstances of his life, and even handicapped before his birth by the transmitted vices of his progenitors, there still is implanted in him, dormant and infinitesimal though it may be, that spark of the divine nature which alone separates man from the beast. In writing on the social aspect of this evil, it is well to make one's meaning quite plain. I do not of course mean to say--no one can say--that to restrict the immigration of the destitute, the criminal, or the worthless, would be a panacea for all our social ills. Far from it; but it would at least remove from their way, one of the most potent causes of degradation in the material and social condition of the poor in our large cities. Until something has first been done to check this evil, charitable agencies, religious movements, colonization and emigration schemes will be beside the mark. However much good they may do here and there--and I freely admit the amount of good that such movements have done, and are doing every day--they will fail to go to the root of the evil, since they deal with effects and not with causes; they treat the symptoms, but not the disease. Emigration is worthless while this continuous influx is allowed to go on. At the best, emigration is a drastic remedy only to be applied in the last resource. If, like the Great Plague, or Fire of London, emigration carried off the diseased, or swept away foul and unhealthy tenements, it might possibly be regarded with more complacency. But under existing circumstances this is just what emigration does not do. We must bear in mind that we can no longer draft off our social failures to other countries. Even our colonies now refuse to take the "wreckage" of the mother country. The people we emigrate now, are just those we can least afford to lose. And there is another consideration. Of the thousands we emigrate yearly, most are men, young, healthy, and vigorous. Of the women, all--or nearly all--are virtuous and industrious. In either sex the residuum, both men and women, and more especially women, remain behind. "Bad men die, but bad women multiply," once said a lady whose name is a synonym for all that is charitable and good, when urging the advisability of giving the fallen sisterhood of our great cities a chance of beginning life over again in some new land beyond the seas. These are pregnant words, but under our present system little or no provision is made for carrying them into effect. Things have come to such a pass, that while we emigrate the flower of our population, the industrious, the vigorous, and the courageous; the feeble, the idle, and the worthless remain with us; and this undesirable increment is ever being augmented by the refuse population of other countries. Look at it from whatever point we will, it cannot be right that these things should be. CHAPTER IX. LAWS AND CUSTOMS OF EUROPEAN COUNTRIES. The laws and customs of Europe with regard to the treatment of destitute and undesirable immigration vary considerably. For the purpose of convenience in dealing with this aspect, the European countries may be roughly divided into three classes, (_a_) Those which have decrees and restrictions both for prohibiting the admission of destitute aliens, and for expelling such as have resided in their territory, when for divers reasons they should appear to be unwelcome or undesirable acquisitions. (_b_) Those which have laws and local regulations for the expulsion of aliens, but none prohibiting their admission into the country in the first instance. (_c_) Those which take no steps in the matter at all. To the first of these three classes belong Austria, Denmark, Belgium, the Netherlands, Bulgaria, Roumania, Saxony, and Bavaria. To the second class, Spain, Sweden and Norway, Greece, Germany (all States except the two previously specified), Italy, Hungary, Servia, Montenegro, and in a lesser degree, France. To the last belong Portugal, and until the other day, Turkey. The remaining country is Russia; but having been unable to obtain any very definite information concerning it, I have hesitated to classify it with any of the above. It will be best to take these classes and countries _seriatim_. In Austria the regulations vary slightly with regard to particular provinces; but, speaking generally, special instructions have been issued to the frontier police, with the result that all vagrant aliens, deserters, suspicious-looking foreigners who are not able to give a proper account of themselves or as to the sufficiency of their means, foreign pedlars, workmen and artisans who on entrance into the country are uncertain of obtaining immediate employment, or whose papers are unsatisfactory, or whose means for travelling are insufficient--all these are at once to be refused admission, and to be turned back at the frontier. The only exception to this rule is the case of foreign day-labourers and artisans, who are entitled by reason of reciprocity to the same treatment as Austrian subjects of the same class receive in the States to which these belong, whose appearance gives rise to no suspicion, and who having regular passports are obliged, in order to return to their homes by the most direct route, to pass through Austrian territory. By the Ordinance of 1867, foreign beggars, mountebanks, singers, musicians, jugglers, rope-dancers, gipsies, and other vagrant people, proprietors of wax-works, owners of menageries and similar exhibitions, unless they have first obtained a licence to exhibit the same in the Empire, are also refused admittance and turned back at the frontier. As to continued residence, by the General Communal Laws a Commune can refuse to allow foreigners to reside in its district, if they, together with their belongings, do not lead a blameless life, or if they become a burden upon public charity. By the Banishment Law of 1871, the Communal Police are also empowered to forcibly expel from the territory all idle or vagrant foreigners, discharged convicts, and foreign prostitutes, especially if these pursue their immoral trade without strictly observing the police regulations, if they are suffering from venereal disease, if they cause a public scandal by their behaviour, or if they seduce young people. Such, in brief, are the laws which regulate and restrict alien immigration in the Austrian Empire, as distinct from the kingdom of Hungary. Through the courtesy of M. de Bille, the Danish Minister at the Court of St. James's, who kindly procured for me from Copenhagen a copy of the Decree of 1875, and other law-records, I have been enabled to make a detailed study of the laws of Denmark which bear upon this question.[28] The law of 1875, containing the regulation in force in regard to foreigners and travellers in Denmark, is a very drastic one. Briefly summarized, it amounts to this. The _status_ and liberties of the foreign workman or servant, employed or seeking employment in Denmark, are defined with very great attention to detail; the most uncompromising regulations are laid down for the prevention of the entry of all foreigners who may be found destitute of sufficient means for their support; and even of those who are in search of work under any circumstances, except under strict conditions. The first Article contains a positive prohibition against the admission into the country of foreign gipsies, itinerant musicians, leaders and exhibitors of animals, acrobats and jugglers, who seek to gain a livelihood by vagrant performances. Foreigners in search of work are not admitted, except on the condition that they are provided with a document of identity from a public functionary. From the succeeding Articles of the same law it appears that foreigners who are not possessed of any claim for maintenance in Denmark, and are destitute of the means of subsistence, are to be expelled by the police, and the method of expulsion is very carefully detailed. Even those who find employment are constantly under the supervision of the police, and have pass-books, which, at every change of domicile or of employment, must be _visé_ by the police as well as by the employers. There can be no doubt that the severity of the law is very effectual in exterminating the evil against which it is aimed. On the other hand, it in no way deters considerable numbers of foreign skilled artisans from seeking and obtaining employment in Denmark, as any one with any knowledge of the country would speedily discover. The majority of such foreigners appear to be Germans. In Belgium the measures which the Government is authorized to take with the view of protecting the country against the dangers which the presence of destitute foreigners involve, are based upon several laws and decrees which have been passed from time to time as need required. They are interesting having regard to the strikes and labour-troubles which have taken place in Belgium during recent years. By a decree of the Provisional Government of 1830, all foreigners unprovided with a Government authorization, are bound to show that they possess means of livelihood; if not, they are at once to be sent back to their own country. They are even liable to be brought before the Juge de Paix, who may condemn them to a short imprisonment, or send them to the agricultural colony of Hoogstraeten, where native vagabonds are confined while at the disposal of the Government. Since 1850, however, foreigners are not as a rule brought before the Juge de Paix, instructions having been given to the police authorities directing them to reconduct to the frontier at once, and of their own accord, any foreigner arriving in Belgium and being evidently destitute, or a vagabond. A report of the arrest and a certificate of expulsion are, in this case, addressed to the Administrator of the Public Safety, at the time when the foreigner is sent out of the country. This summary procedure is followed both in the interest of the Treasury as saving expense, and in that of the foreigners themselves, who thus escape a prolonged detention. When at a seaport, and especially at Antwerp, foreign sailors are without means of existence, the Maritime Commissaries endeavour to find them an engagement on a ship about to sail; they are only conducted to the land frontier if these efforts fail. Formerly aliens, who were arrested for not having sufficient means of subsistence, were allowed to choose the frontier by which they might leave the kingdom. Of late years, however, this right of choice has been considerably curtailed on account of the attitude assumed by neighbouring countries. These countries have not unnaturally showed a marked disinclination to becoming a sort of rubbish-heap for Belgium. Even little Luxemburg revolted at this state of affairs, and a Convention was concluded with the Grand-Duchy by which it was agreed that only natives of the country, Italian subjects or Swiss citizens (these being _en route_), should in future be forwarded across the Luxemburg frontier. The German frontier is now absolutely closed to destitute persons expelled from Belgian territory who are not of German nationality. Holland has also followed suit, and the Dutch authorities reconduct into Belgium by _visé_, a great number of aliens, transferred by prison vans to Lanaken. The law regulating the admission and expulsion of foreigners from the Netherlands dates from 1849. Article I. of this law lays down as the first and indispensable condition on which foreigners can be admitted into the Netherlands, the possession by them of "sufficient means of subsistence, or the faculty of acquiring such means by work"; and upon the strength of this condition, and under the provisions of Article IX. of the law, foreigners found on Netherlands territory in a destitute condition and without any ostensible means of earning a living, may be expelled from the country; and, in fact, numbers of persons so situated are expelled every year. All foreigners "dangerous to the public peace" are also subject to immediate expulsion. The law and custom in force in the petty European States of Bulgaria and Roumania is as follows. In Bulgaria the constantly increasing number of vagrants in the capital of Sophia, as well as in the coast of the Black Sea, and on the Danube, has compelled the Government of the Prince to increase the staff of police, in order, by a more extensive supervision, to put an end to the difficult position in which the Bulgarian population is admittedly placed by alien vagrancy and destitution. The police authorities are therefore bound to keep a strict watch on the strangers arriving in the country, or residing there without occupation, and to have recourse to the immediate expulsion across the frontier of the Principality of all those who are unable to afford surety of their intention to remain, or who attract notice by their destitution, suspicious character, or culpable actions. In Roumania, though there are no general Regulations existing on the subject, the invariable custom is, that persons who are evidently in a state of indigence are not admitted to the country, unless they could prove that they possessed the means of subsistence. In the German Kingdom of Saxony, though there are no laws on the subject, it is competent for the authorities to prohibit the admission or residence of destitute aliens. In Bavaria also the competent police authorities are allowed to expel a foreigner from the kingdom if this course should appear to be of public expediency; and besides this, the Minister of the Interior is empowered to refuse entrance into the kingdom to foreigners who may be liable to become either a public nuisance or a public burden. We now come to the second class, namely, those countries which have laws and local regulations for the expulsion of aliens, but have neither law nor custom for prohibiting their admission into the country in the first instance. Of these we will first take Germany, including all the States with the exception of the kingdoms of Bavaria and Saxony. It is held by international law, that each State has the power of expelling from its territory aliens who may have rendered themselves obnoxious or dangerous to it. Destitute persons convicted of vagabondage or begging, or who, after becoming destitute, have been unable to procure a subsistence for themselves within a period of time laid down by the police, can be placed under arrest, and be handed over to the Government police ("Landespolizei"), who in aggravated cases can consign them to the workhouse; but destitute aliens thus handed over to the police authorities, instead of being consigned to the workhouse, are as a rule expelled at once from the territory of the Empire. In the little kingdom of Würtemburg, the Royal "Oberamts" (provincial administrative authorities) have an uncontested right to expel aliens from the kingdom. This right is generally exercised when it is proved or even suspected that the alien is unable to maintain himself; nor are such aliens entitled to any relief from the communal or charitable institutions of the country. In Sweden, by a Circular published in 1886, addressed to the Governors of the Provinces, foreigners found without resources in this country, and in a state of vagrancy, are directed to be sent back by the authorities to their own country at the expense of the Swedish Government; in case the country to which the person belongs be so situated that he cannot be forwarded there without having to wait on the road within the boundaries of any other country, due notice is given to the authorities at the place to which the person is sent. As regards the treatment of destitute aliens in Norway, should there be any found in that country, they are taken care of by the police, and forwarded to their own country, the expense being charged in the police accounts. Thus it will be seen the custom in Sweden and Norway is perfectly identical; only there is this difference in the latter country, there are no laws, Royal or municipal, which sanction the practice; it rests entirely upon custom. The law in Spain amounts to this, that if a foreigner after due inquiry is proved to be a vagrant, he is forced to leave the country. The definition of a vagrant, according to the law of Spain is, it should be noted, as follows:--"A person who has no property or income, no habitual profession or trade, nor any known or legitimate manner of living." In Italy no special law exists, the residence of aliens in that country being regulated by the common law; but should such persons in the same manner as indigent natives take to begging, or if they engage in no fixed or useful labour, they can be arrested as idle persons, and dealt with by the judicial authorities, who can inflict a punishment upon them, and expel them from the King's dominions. Forcible expulsion is, however, only recurred to as an extreme measure. Usually, aliens are sent back to their own country with a _foglio di via_, or pass. In Switzerland the matter is met by the local enactments of the different Cantons. Minute rules are laid down as to the permit of residence to foreigners. Destitute aliens, bad characters, tramps, and suspects are liable to an imprisonment on bread and water, from four to eight days' duration. They are then conducted to the frontier and expelled. The custom observed in Servia, Hungary, Greece, and Montenegro is all much the same. Either by penal codes, or by the unwritten, but equally stringent, law of custom, the foreigner who is found in any of these countries without visible means of subsistence, and who has no occupation, is requested to leave the country by the authorities, and should he fail to comply, he is forcibly conducted to the frontier and expelled. The case of France, however, calls for more than passing remark in that it differs considerably from the custom in vogue in most European countries. There is no positive or direct legislation properly so called for the purpose of prohibiting aliens destitute or otherwise from entering French territory. The question of expulsion is governed by the law of 1849, which is applicable to the whole of France. By Article VII. of this law, "Le Ministre de l'Intérieur pourra, par mesure de police, enjoindre à tout étranger voyageant ou résidant en France de sortir immédiatement du territoire Français et le faire conduire à la frontière." This law, however, it should be noted, emanated from an idea of social and political protection; it had no economical design, and it does not touch the question of destination. There is a Bill at present lying before the Chamber of Deputies for the purpose of amending the law of 1849; it has been lying there five or six years, and has not yet been proceeded with. On immigration, properly so called, France has only at present legislated for her colonies on purely special points. The silence of the Statute Law on this subject is to be accounted for on various grounds. France recruits her population in other ways than by the normal growth of the inhabitants within her territory. Statistics show that of late years the number of births in France has remained stationary, but that notwithstanding this, her population has not ceased to increase; this fact being due to the influx of immigrant aliens, which is growing larger from year to year. The fact that France has become a country of immigration like America and Australia is a surprising phenomenon. "It may not be impossible," writes M. Edouard Clouet, the advocate at the Court of Paris, "that these new economical conditions will have some influence on future legislation, and call for specific measures." Such measures, however, are still in the future, and the astounding fact remains that the immigration of aliens into France is estimated at an average of about 100,000 souls per annum, while the native population is stationary, if not decreasing. The only European country which has no law or recognized custom in dealing with destitute aliens is Portugal. Until quite recently I should have included in this category Turkey as well; but in October last (1891) the long-suffering Ottoman Government, in order to prevent the danger which would result to the public health from the influx of Jewish immigrants from Russia, resolved in future to forbid their entry into Ottoman territory. The Porte also requested the British Ambassador at Constantinople to cause a warning to be conveyed to British shipowners to refuse passages to Jewish immigrants, who will not be allowed by the maritime authorities to land. This prohibition applies not only to immigrants from Russia, but from any quarter whatsoever, whether in Western or Eastern Europe. Individuals will be allowed to pass, but not families. On the subject of alien immigration into Russia, or the continued residence of destitute aliens therein, I have been unable to obtain any definite information. The protective policy of Russia in purging the Empire of all alien influences, whether good or bad, is well known, and needs no comment here. The expulsion of resident Germans from Russian territory unless they consent to become naturalized, and the recent edicts promulgated against the Jews, are however illustrations of my meaning. In this Russia differs from all other European countries. They are all willing to admit the desirable alien, the skilled artisan, the foreigner who is decent and law-abiding in his habits and mode of life. It is only the destitute, the vagrant, the convict, the suspect, the evil-liver that they object to. But Russia, it would seem, has a dislike to all alien influence, whether for good or for evil. To sum up, therefore, it appears that in all European nations--with one insignificant exception--some measures, more or less drastic, are taken either for prohibiting the admission, or for the expulsion of destitute and undesirable aliens. This policy is the deliberate outcome of years of thought and legislation. It is framed in the interests of the native population in each country, and is in all cases fully in accordance with the popular will. It is generally recognized throughout Europe that it is the duty of every State to deal with its own paupers and undesirable citizens, and it is recognized also that the only way to bring about that desirable end, is by other countries politely but firmly refusing to admit them. Thus it may be safely said that in the continent of Europe all countries liable to suffer from undesirable immigration have taken steps to guard themselves against it--with one single exception. That exception is Great Britain. CHAPTER X. THE EXAMPLE OF THE UNITED STATES. Twenty years ago it was a common calculation in the United States that every new immigrant was worth a thousand dollars to the particular State in which he settled. A farm might be had for practically nothing by anybody who chose to apply for it. In those comparatively early days, what are now flourishing States west of the Mississippi, were then, in parts, wild unpeopled wildernesses, and the country could not afford to be very discriminative as to either the character or the means of particular immigrants. Thus for many years America was the camping-ground of the social refuse of Europe. Irish paupers driven forth by famine and political misrule went West in tens of thousands, to become, many of them, prosperous farmers and worthy citizens of their adopted country. But there came also, in almost countless hordes, immigrants of a far less desirable, and, as the sequel has proved, dangerous kind: Fenians and apostles of dynamite from Ireland; secret societies from Italy, whose gospel was murder and brigandage; Nihilists from Russia, and Socialists from Germany, driven forth almost at the point of the bayonet by their own Governments; Russian and Polish Jews, fleeing in terror before the fanatical persecution of the Czar. All this heterogeneous mass of inflammable human material has at length become a standing menace to the United States, endangering her friendly relations with foreign countries, as well as the freedom her own people enjoy under their present form of government. Of course there were compensating advantages, but the evil of unrestricted immigration has of late years reached such an extent that the old sturdy race, the descendants of the English Puritans, who made the great Republic of the West, have been in danger of being gradually swallowed up by foreign-born populations. In a certain sense it may be said that the history of immigration into the United States has been synonymous with the history of the nation itself; but it is evident to all unprejudiced minds, that the motives which induced those early immigrants, the Pilgrim Fathers, to leave their native land and settle in the New World, were very different from the motives which actuate the greater numbers of those who are pouring into the United States at the present day. In fact, the time from the landing of the Pilgrim Fathers down to the year which witnessed the inauguration of the first President of the United States, may not unfitly be regarded not as the period of immigration, but of colonization. Since then the rapid growth of the population--though of course largely due to natural causes--has been greatly accelerated by immigration. Immigration into the United States appears to come in tidal waves. It has its flood and its ebb; but each decade, with the exception of the war period, shows that the new flood is higher than its predecessor. The magnitude of this influx of alien immigrants is best shown by the Annual Reports which have been issued by the late Board of Commissioners of Emigration of the State of New York. Without troubling my readers with unnecessary statistics, I may say briefly from calculations which have been made, the total number of immigrant aliens who arrived at the port of New York from the 5th May, 1847, until the 31st December, 1890 inclusive, was 10,050,936. It should be noted that at least two-thirds of the whole number of alien immigrants who come to the United States from other countries, arrive at the port of New York. This large influx has arisen from a variety of causes. One of the most potent undoubtedly has been steamship solicitation. A regular "brokerage" business has gradually been established. Some of the steamship companies have as many as two thousand agents in Europe, and their sub-agents and solicitors are to be found in every district on the Continent. These sub-agents receive liberal commissions, varying from fifty cents to two dollars for each immigrant passenger obtained. This naturally leads, not only to their selling the tickets which are required, but also to their endeavouring to create a fresh demand by solicitation and inducement. These agents picture in the most glowing terms to the poor peasants of Europe the future which awaits them in the New World. On the strength of the false representations made to them, the peasants are often induced to sell out their little homes, and to spend a life's savings in the purchase of a through passage to America. Oftentimes they will even borrow money for the passage at a ruinous rate, and the agents will advance the tickets, taking a mortgage of whatever property is of value for payment. In some cases the money is refunded, but in most cases the agent becomes the owner of the property by foreclosure; and the poor peasants in a few months find themselves and their families in a strange land, without money, friends, or employment. Upon arrival, they are taken in charge by a "labour boss," who herds them together in a tenement house, and hires them out at wages he dictates, and which he shares with his victims. Abundant evidence was given before the Select Committee of the House of Representatives, recently appointed to inquire into immigration, as to the truth of these statements. For instance, it appeared that one combination in Galicia induced 12,406 emigrants to emigrate to the United States within the period of fourteen months. Another and more indirect cause is the fierce competition which rages among the steamship lines and the different railroads. In 1888 a war of rates broke out among them, so that in that year an emigrant could travel from Liverpool to Chicago for ten dollars, or about two guineas in English money. This low rate offered exceptional facilities to foreign governments, poor-law guardians, and charitable institutions, to rid themselves of the burden of persons unable to support themselves and their families, by simply purchasing for them tickets, and shipping them off to America. The chief offender in this respect appears to have been the British Government; and the Poor Law Guardians in Ireland, who by the Land Act of 1881 were advanced money to assist emigration, especially from the poorer and more thickly populated districts of Ireland. Various charitable societies in Europe and the United Kingdom were no less active. The so-called "Tuke Committee" assisted over 8000 persons to emigrate from Ireland in three years, 1882-85. The Prisoners' Aid Society also assisted convicts to emigrate, while the Central Emigration Society and the Jewish Board of Guardians established in London, have both been active in sending their paupers, and the least desirable portion of the population, to America. Switzerland, Sweden, Italy, and Germany also help to swell this alien invasion--Germany more especially with regard to that most undesirable class of emigrants, liberated criminals and discharged convicts. There exists, for instance, in Munich, a society with several branches, especially formed for the purpose of enabling discharged convicts to begin life over again in some far-off land, and the land almost invariably selected is the United States. Another method of evading the Contract Labour Law, and of drawing large numbers of immigrants to the United States, is the systematic advertising for labourers by employment agencies through the British and European newspapers. From evidence which came before the Select Committee investigating at Boston, it appeared that the Freestone Cutters' Association of New England had advertised in the English and Scotch papers for journeymen, agreeing to pay fifty cents per hour for work. The applicants were directed to call upon the agents signing the advertisement in London. These agents made no contract with the men, and so evaded the letter of the Contract Labour Law; but they came to New England on the representation that employment should be found. As the freestone cutters in England only get tenpence an hour, or about twenty cents in American money, the prospect of largely increased wages naturally induced many of them to go over to America. This is only one instance out of many; and to quote the Immigration Committee's Report, "Where good wages are paid, advertisement abroad has become of common occurrence; the workmen here are thereby brought to terms, or the market becomes overflooded with labourers, and wages are reduced." In connection with this must also be considered the immigration coming into the United States over the Canadian border. During the last six months of 1890, it is estimated that over 50,000 European immigrants landed in Canada, and reached the United States, coming by this circuitous route to avoid inspection. There is also another point to be noted, viz. that large numbers of Canadians come into the United States for work, wages being 40 per cent. higher in the United States than in the Canadian provinces. Several hundreds of these people cross over the border from Windsor to Detroit every morning, and find employment in the stores, seed-houses, and so forth, and return to their homes every evening. So much for the causes which have led to this wholesale invasion. We will now consider its undesirable results. The effect of immigration upon American labour is especially marked. As was shown by the Report of the Ford investigation of 1888, the pauper and lower classes of Europe have crowded into the American factories to such an extent, that in many of the large industries, notably the cigar trade, tailoring trade, and the shirt manufacturing trade, what was fifteen years ago 90 per cent. American and 10 foreign, is now 90 per cent. foreign and 10 per cent. American. Frequently upon differences arising between employers and employed as to the price of wages, foreigners were imported to take the place of American workmen, and the wages were consequently reduced. In fact, the tendency of foreign immigration is constantly to lower the standard of wages which the American labourer has hitherto enjoyed. The only persons opposed to restricting it are the great manufacturers and contractors, whose interest is obviously to keep the price of labour at its lowest level. Another danger of indiscriminate immigration is plainly shown in the riots which have taken place in New York and other places during the last twenty-five years. In 1863, in the city of New York, when the famous draft riots took place, no American dared to display the flag of his country without running the risk of having his house burned and destroyed. Recent outbreaks of Nihilists, Anarchists, and Socialists, in the city of Chicago, and the still more recent lynchings at New Orleans, are further illustrations of my meaning. This political danger is deepened by the short period of time in which immigrants may become eligible for citizenship, and thus invested with political power. In several States the immigrant is admitted to citizenship after only one year's residence, and while he is still to a great extent ignorant of the laws, language, and customs. The right of citizenship thus conferred is very liable to be abused. American politicians, like other politicians, are very prone to yield to their prejudices without sufficiently regarding the interests of the people at large. The German vote in many localities controls the action of political leaders on the liquor question. The Irish vote favours, and largely influences, the policy of antagonism to Great Britain. The social effects of this increasing immigration are also very strongly marked. There is an abnormal representation of the foreign poor in the workhouses and penitentiaries of the United States; and there can be little doubt that the effect of deporting to America the destitute, the worthless, and the criminal, has largely added to the burden there of pauperism, vice, and crime. How keenly alive American statesmen are to the evils which result from unrestricted immigration, is shown by a perusal of the Acts which have been passed upon the subject. The Acts, other than those regulating the immigration of Chinese labourers, are three in number, viz.:--The Act to regulate immigration approved by Congress in 1882, the Contract Labour Law of 1885, and the recent Act to amend all previous laws, which was approved by Congress on the 3rd of March of this year, and which came into force on the 1st of April last.[29] I do not propose to dwell upon the provisions of those Acts in detail; they are given in full elsewhere;[30] but section 1 of the new Act, which specifies the class of aliens henceforth to be excluded from the United States, deserves to be quoted in full:--"All idiots, insane persons; paupers, or persons likely to become a public charge; persons suffering from a loathsome or a dangerous contagious disease; persons who have been convicted of felony or other infamous crime or misdemeanour involving moral turpitude, polygamists, and also any persons whose ticket or passage is paid for with the money of another, or who is assisted by others to come." The right of asylum to political and religious refugees is maintained intact by the insertion of a special proviso. The working of the Act is very simple. The immigrants are stopped at the port of arrival and inspected, and the steamship companies are compelled to take back at their own expense all those who are refused admission; and heavy penalties of fine and imprisonment are dealt out to those who attempt to break or to evade the law. This course of action, though it may seem to press hardly in individual cases, has been found to have an excellent deterrent effect, for as soon as steamship companies know that they bring over such passengers at their own risk, they refuse to bring them at all, and the evil to a great extent is nipped in the bud. Now, if such measures of self-defence have become thus early in her history imperative with a young country like America, with a habitable area of _more than 3,000,000 square miles_, and a population of not more than 65,000,000, what are we to think of an old country like England, with an area of _a little over 32,000,000 acres_, and a population, according to the census of 1881, of near 25,000,000 souls--and probably of over 30,000,000 now--compelled to spend annually some £7,000,000 on the relief or support of her own three-quarters of a million of paupers--leaving her ports, more especially the port of London, free for the entrance of a huge foreign and degraded population, from every country in Europe, which statistics demonstrate to be largely on the increase? It is impossible for Englishmen not to feel a certain amount of envy at the energy and firmness which the American Government has displayed in excluding undesirable aliens. If such action be good, where the vast territories of the United States are in question, what must be thought of the _laissez-faire_ policy which allows our little British Islands to be overrun by the class of foreigner which America so rigorously excludes? CHAPTER XI. THE COLONIAL ASPECT. In this chapter I propose not only to deal with the general laws for restricting destitute and undesirable immigration into some of the principal colonies, but also the particular laws for prohibiting the immigration of Chinese. Sir Charles Dilke, in a general summary of colonial policy on this matter, writes:--"Colonial labour seeks protection by legislative means, not only against the cheap labour of the dark-skinned or of the yellow man, but also against white paupers, and against the artificial supply of labour by State-aided white immigration. Most of the countries of the world, indeed, have laws against the admission of destitute aliens, and the United Kingdom is in practice almost the only exception."[31] The main object of all the general laws passed upon the subject appears to be the same, namely, to prevent the colonies from becoming the "dumping-ground" of the destitute, lunatic, vicious, and criminal population of older countries, including in several instances the mother country as well. With regard to Chinese immigration, two objects are apparent: first, to protect the native population from foreign competition in the different branches of industry, the effect of which is materially to lower wages, and reduce the standard of comfort of the colonial artisan or labourer; and secondly, to guard against the political dangers which the presence of a numerous alien race occupying an inferior position could not fail to bring about. To take the general laws first. The principal colonies which have passed statutes on the subject are Canada, Victoria, South Australia, Tasmania, and New Zealand. In New South Wales, Queensland, Western Australia, the Cape Colony, and Natal, there are no similar statutes; but these colonies have the power, in the case of a threatened influx of undesirable immigrants, of passing restraining Acts, which effectually meet the purpose for which they are required. I now give a summary of the principal general statutes actually passed, other than those which exist for the immigration of Chinese. They are given in more detail elsewhere.[32] In Canada, the Immigration Act of 1886 enacts that the Governor-General may by proclamation prohibit the landing of destitute, pauper, or diseased immigrants; also of the criminal and vicious; and arrangements are made for the immediate return of the vessel and the prohibited immigrants to the port of Europe whence they came. In Victoria, the owner of the ship is compelled to give a bond of £100 to the immigration officer for every passenger he may bring, being "either lunatic, idiotic, deaf, dumb, blind, or infirm, or likely in his opinion to become a charge upon the public, or upon any public or charitable institution." Penalties are enacted for refusing to execute the bond, which, it should be noted, is applicable to the master of any _British_ or foreign navigable vessel; the only exemption being in favour of crews that are shipwrecked, or her Majesty's land and sea forces. By the Immigration Act of South Australia, passed in 1872, paupers are practically forbidden to land. In Tasmania, the Passengers Act, 1885, enacts in the same way as Victoria, that a bond of £100 shall be given to the collector at the port of arrival, by the master of any ship (except one plying from one port in the colony to any other), who attempts to land any passenger in Tasmania, being "either lunatic, idiotic, deaf, dumb, blind, or infirm, or from any cause unable to support himself, or likely to become a charge upon the public." As in Victoria, the bond is applied to the maintenance of the said passenger, and penalties are enforced in the case of the refusal to execute it. Provisions are also made with regard to ships undergoing quarantine. In New Zealand, the "Imbecile Passengers Act" of 1882 is practically identical with that of Tasmania. Such are the principal general Colonial Acts. We now come to the vexed question of Chinese Immigration. It would be well to mention in passing that a particularly drastic Act was passed in British Columbia in 1884, which spoke of the "pestilential habits" of the Chinese, and stated that they "habitually desecrate graveyards by the removal of bodies therefrom." These expressions were termed "peculiarly offensive" by the Chinese Ambassador in London; but apparently his protest was of no avail, for in 1885 another and still more drastic Act was passed, which effectually prohibited all further Chinese immigration to British Columbia. It is, however, with Chinese immigration into Australasia that we are more immediately concerned. For many years the immigration of Chinese into Australia was very large, causing great irritation throughout the colonies, more especially among the working-classes, who thus found the price of their labour undersold. Many attempts, more or less successful, were made for the purpose of restricting the undesirable influx. In 1887 Commissioners were dispatched by the Emperor of China to the Australasian colonies, for the purpose of inquiring into the condition of the Chinese residing therein. These Commissioners found that in each of the colonies they visited, a poll-tax of £10 was imposed upon Chinese subjects, from which the subjects of other powers were exempted, and also that various laws had been enacted by some of the Colonial Legislatures against the Chinese. Upon receiving this report, a complaint was forthwith lodged at the Foreign Office by the Chinese Minister accredited to the Court of St. James's, pointing out that these restrictions and laws were at variance with treaty obligations and international usage. Upon receipt of this protest, Lord Salisbury communicated with Lord Knutsford, with the result that a circular letter was dispatched from the Colonial Office to the Governors of all the Australasian colonies, enclosing a copy of the letter from the Chinese Minister, and requesting to be furnished with full information on the subject. The receipt of this circular created quite a _furore_ in Australia, where public opinion was already greatly excited on the subject. The replies received in answer to it were numerous and varied; but one dominant note sounded through all of them, namely, that at all hazards the Chinese must be restricted from emigrating to any part of Australasia. The Despatch prepared by the Ministers of New South Wales, and telegraphed to the Colonial Office by Lord Carrington, who was then Governor, is of especial interest. It deserves to be quoted _in extenso_, since it sums up the whole case in favour of the colonies. "Australian feeling is much exercised in reference to Chinese immigration and the inquiry made by the Marquis of Salisbury,"--so runs the Despatch.--"Your Excellency's advisers beg chiefly to explain that the law of the colony for some years past has imposed the restrictions of a poll-tax of £10 on each immigrant, and a limitation of one immigrant to every hundred tons of the ship's burden; but owing to recent occurrences, severer measures are now demanded throughout all the colonies. This state of things has given rise to new reflections in dealing with a difficulty which threatens to become a calamity. As these colonies form an important part of the Empire, it is submitted that our cause of contention is of sufficient national concern to be taken up by the Empire; if we have no voice in the making of treaties, it seems only just that our interests should be considered and exercised by those who exercise that power. We learn by public report that the United States Government have entered into a treaty with the Government of China, by which Chinese immigration into America is no longer permitted. We fail to see why Australia may not be similarly protected. On behalf of this colony we desire, through your Excellency, to impress upon her Majesty's Imperial advisers the more prominent phases of the Chinese question, as it specially and almost exclusively affects the Australian section of the British people. Firstly, the Australian ports are within easy sail of the ports of China; secondly, the climate, as well as certain branches of trade and industry in Australia, such as the cultivation of the soil for domestic purposes, and tin and gold mining, are peculiarly attractive to the Chinese; thirdly, the working-classes of the British people, in all the affinities of race, are directly opposed to their Chinese competitors; fourthly, there can be no sympathy, and in the future it is to be apprehended that there will be no peace, between the two races; fifthly, the enormous number of the Chinese population intensifies every consideration of this class of immigration in comparison with the immigration of any other nation; sixthly, the most prevailing determination in all the Australian communities is to preserve the British type in the population; seventhly, there can be no interchange of ideas of religion or citizenship, nor can there be any intermarriage or social communion, between the British and the Chinese. It is respectfully admitted that the examination of these principal phases of the question can only lead to one conclusion, namely, that the Chinese must be restricted from emigrating to any part of Australasia. It will be seen that while the question scarcely touches the people of the United Kingdom, it vitally concerns these great colonies, whose importance in their political and commercial relations entitles them to be protected by the diplomatic influence and the powers of treaty which belong to the Empire. With renewed expressions of our loyal attachment to her Majesty, we urge that immediate steps be taken to open such negotiations with the Emperor of China as will result in affording permanent security to the Australian colonies from the disturbance of Chinese immigration in any form; the matter is too grave and urgent to admit of long delay. However desirable it may be to avoid the irritation and conflict of interests which may arise from local legislation of a drastic character, if protection cannot be afforded as now sought, the Australian Parliaments must act from the force of public opinion in devising measures to defend the colonies from consequences which they cannot relax in their efforts to avert." This representation on the part of New South Wales was followed by similar ones from all the Colonial Governments to whom the circular had been addressed. From Victoria came an intimation stating the statutes already in force, and the intention of the Victorian Government to carry out the law to its utmost letter. From Queensland, the Government wrote to say that they were determined to restrict the influx of Chinese, because it had been proved by experience that they had become formidable competitors with European labour in almost every branch of industry; some branches, such as cabinet-making, having been practically monopolized by them in several of the Australian cities. And, as owing to their habits of life, the cost of subsistence was to the Chinese very much less than to Europeans living in accordance with European habits; and the effect of their unrestricted competition was undoubtedly to materially lower wages, and to reduce the standard of comfort to European artisans and labourers. There was also the insuperable objection that the Chinese could not be admitted to an equal share in the political and social institutions of the colony; and under the present colonial system every citizen is allowed to have a voice in the government of his country; and the presence, in considerable numbers, of an alien race occupying an inferior position could not fail before long to bring about very serious troubles, which would probably necessitate a radical change in political institutions, and entirely alter the future history and development of Australia. Despatches were also received from New Zealand, Tasmania, Western Australia, and in fact all the Australasian colonies, stating that the greatest excitement prevailed upon this question, and that there was a general determination to prevent the continued immigration of Chinese. The upshot of all this was that in June of the same year a conference of representatives of the Australian Governments of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland, Tasmania, and Western Australia, was held at Sydney, with the result that the poll-tax which had given so much offence to the Chinese Government was remitted, but a number of resolutions were passed which have since been embodied in the different Chinese Immigrant Acts and statutes, which amended all the previous Acts which had been passed on the subject. It is unnecessary to quote these Acts in detail, but their provisions may be briefly summarized, as limiting the number of Chinese to be brought to the colonies by vessel; increasing the penalties for violation of the law; and prohibiting alien Chinese from voting at elections of the local authority of the colony. Certain exceptions are made in the case of Chinese immigrants who are British subjects, of certain Chinese officials, and of the crews of vessels who do not land in the colony. These Acts, which are now in force, have been found very effectual for the purpose for which they were required. The action of the Colonies in this matter did not meet with the approval of the Colonial Office; but since it was evident that the Colonies were determined to prevent Chinese immigration at all hazards, no further word of remonstrance was heard from Downing Street. There is no doubt that the point affecting labour upon which colonial workmen felt most strongly, and upon which they are thoroughly agreed, is the desire to discourage emigration. Colonial labour seeks protection by legislative means, not only against Chinese, but also, as we have seen, against the artificial supply of labour by State-aided immigration, and other means. The colonial workmen are opposed not only to the reception of the destitute from abroad, but even to the assisted emigration of persons able to work. They argue that if assisted English emigration is encouraged, inferior workmen will come out to the colonies, and bring down wages to the European level. The agitation against the Chinese in particular, however, is no new thing. So far back as 1854 the second Governor of Victoria reported to the Home Government that he thought the introduction of the Chinese into Australia undesirable. "Australia for the Australian" has for a long time been the prevailing cry; and to that may be added, "Canada for the Canadian." Colonial labour, whether in Canada or Australasia, desires to limit competition. The Chinaman is a most dangerous competitor. He is an excellent workman, but at a very low standard of comfort. The colonial artisan, on the other hand, has a much higher standard of comfort than the ordinary European labourer. His pay is high, and his hours are short. He is educated, and he is independent. He has plenty of leisure for amusement, and he regards all his privileges as rights, and he fully intends to keep them. We cannot blame him either; and it cannot be said that he takes a purely selfish view of the case, since in the Dockers' Strike the Australian workmen sent large sums to England where no return was possible. After all, the Chinese are only a small population in our white colonies; but this is because of the difficulties which have been thrown in the way of their coming in. Were it not for this, they would be numerous indeed. The Blue-book of July 1888, as we have seen, shows how determined the Colonies are to forbid Chinese immigration at all hazards. Their action in this matter has been in many respects contrary to the letter of the law; but as Sir Henry Parkes, the Premier of New South Wales, said, when charged by the Assembly for having broken the law, "I care nothing about your cobweb of technical law; I am obeying a law far superior to any law which issued these permits, namely, the law for the preservation of society in New South Wales." The Australian Intercolonial Conference had declared the Chinese to be "an alien race, incapable of assimilation in the body politic"; and acting upon these conclusions, Sir Henry Parkes declared--"Neither for her Majesty's ships of war, nor for her Majesty's representative on the spot, nor for her Majesty's Secretary of State for the Colonies, do we intend to turn aside from our purpose." Lord Knutsford telegraphed to know by what law New South Wales shut out the Chinese; and the reply which he received, in effect was, that both laws and treaties must give way to the strength of colonial feeling. After that, the Imperial Government did well to be silent, for to have enforced the law, or to have enforced the treaties, would have been to have risked an open rupture between the Colonies and the mother country. This anti-Chinese feeling is often spoken of as another phase of protection; but it is worthy of note that Sir Henry Parkes, whose vigorous utterances I have quoted above, is a free-trader. Such in brief are the principal colonial laws on this subject, both in a general sense, and more particularly with regard to Chinese immigration. These laws are the legislative outcome of the almost passionate demands of the colonists. The significant fact is, that unlike the mother country, the Colonies cannot bring forward the plea of overpopulation, since in all of them there are vast tracts of territory still uninhabited, and in Australia only the fringe of the vast continent is at present populated. Yet in their own interests the Colonies have found it necessary to pass such stringent laws as those described. The moral is obvious. If young countries like our Colonies, which require a large working population, find it necessary to shut out the destitute, the unfit, and the undesirable--and are able to do so with the greatest possible success--surely the mother country, where there are already too many mouths to fill, may be expected to follow their example. CHAPTER XII. THE REMEDIES. In this chapter let us very briefly consider the best way in which this wrong may be set right. Several suggestions have been made for dealing with this question apart from legislation; some of them have been acted upon, but none seem to go to the root of the evil. Among these well-meaning but unsuccessful efforts, may be classed the recent action of the Government in causing notices to be posted up at some of the principal European ports, warning intended immigrants of the state of the labour market here, and of the hardships that await them. This sounds very well in theory, but in practice it may be doubted if it has had the effect of stopping one single immigrant from proceeding on his journey. For in nine cases out of ten, that journey is already nearly accomplished before the notice catches his eye. A Russian Jew, for instance, who had travelled all the way from the heart of Russia to Hamburg, would hardly be likely to turn back at the eleventh hour. What is there for him to do but to go forward all the same? He has made all his preparations, broken up his home, sold his little stock, and perhaps expended a life's savings in the purchase of a through ticket to that new land where he has been told all good things are; and by the time he reaches the port it is too late for him to turn back even if he could. But would he if he could? I very much doubt it. "Whatever happens," he may argue, "things cannot be much worse with me than they have been." Besides, he may have the direct, or indirect, promise of employment through some sweater's agent, or he may have heard--such news travels fast--of the "shelters," of the relief-funds, of the soup-kitchens, of the loan and industrial departments of the Jewish Board of Guardians, and of the numerous foreign "Benevolent Societies," or of other similar charitable organizations for foreigners in distress, which abound in London. The Chief Commissioner of the Police writes in his Report[33]:--"It cannot be ascertained that any societies are in existence in London to offer direct inducements to immigrants; _but, undoubtedly the prospect of shelter and assistance till work is obtained, which some hold out, acts as an indirect inducement to many_."[34] "Whatever happens," the immigrant argues to himself, "I shall not actually starve." He proceeds on his journey, notices and warnings notwithstanding, and in due time arrives here, one more unit to intensify the awful struggle for existence which is daily and hourly going on among thousands in London and our large provincial cities. What, then, is the remedy? The answer is simple. In the words of the Select Committee upon Immigration--"It is clear that the only way effectually to check the immigration of foreign paupers is to stop them at the port of arrival." This is the course adopted in the United States and in Germany. The police regulations at Hamburg are to the effect that no person without means is allowed to land at that port; and if found to have been taken there and landed, the captain of the vessel in which the person sailed, is liable to a penalty of 300 marks, and moreover is compelled at his own expense to take the destitute person away from Hamburg. As we have already seen, in the United States and our principal colonies, similar laws exist to forbid the landing of destitute and undesirable aliens, while other European countries have also taken steps to guard themselves against them. Though the details may vary in particular instances, the principle in all cases remains the same. England could not do better than adopt some similar plan, and compel the steamship companies to take back to the place where they first took them on board, all persons whom they attempted to land at our ports, who were unprovided with the means of subsistence, mentally or bodily afflicted, or likely in any way to become a public nuisance or a public burden. But it will require a special Act of Parliament to compel the steamship companies to do this, and every effort should be made to get such an Act placed upon the statute-book. The mere knowledge that such a law existed would exercise an excellent deterrent effect, and serve to keep away thousands and thousands from our shores; for directly the steamship companies knew that they brought such passengers at their own risk, they would speedily cease bringing them at all, and would exercise that same circumspection in bringing people here, which they now have to exercise in the case of other countries. Such, I submit, would be an effectual remedy. It has much to recommend it from a practical point of view. It is no visionary scheme; it has been tested by experience in other countries, and has been found to work admirably. Why should it not work equally well here? But at the same time it is idle to deny, having regard to the present state of public business, and to the fact that the life of the present Parliament is ebbing fast, that any legislation on this subject must of necessity be tardy. In the meantime there is much to be done. That the working-classes of this country are already alive to the danger may be seen in a moment by glancing at the long list of Trades Unions and labour organizations which have already condemned it.[35] But that the other classes which make up the electorate are equally convinced of its urgency may be doubted, and the reason is obvious--it does not touch them so nearly. Therefore, no opportunity should be lost of bringing the real facts of the case before the public. With this object the present little book has been written, and if it should have the effect of causing any to pause and consider the importance of this question, the reason for its existence will have been more than justified. "There is a general agreement that pauper immigration is an evil, and should be checked." This much was admitted by the House of Commons' Committee in their Report, and they went on to say that "the objections to such a proposal are not based on grounds of policy in any instance, but upon the difficulty of carrying such a measure into effect." Furthermore, they admitted that though they were not prepared to recommend legislative interference just at present, because of the "great difficulties" in the way, yet "they contemplated the possibility of such legislation becoming necessary in the future, in view of the crowded condition of our great towns, the extreme pressure for existence among the poorer part of the population, and the tendency of destitute foreigners to reduce still lower the social and material condition of our own poor." This Report was issued in 1889. Little more than two years have elapsed since its publication, and already it must be admitted the danger has greatly increased. It may be asked--Are the difficulties which surround this question likely to become less by waiting for the future? Are they not rather liable to become greater as time goes on, and the evils lamented by the Committee assume more formidable aspects? To admit the existence of an evil, to deplore its effects, and yet to shrink from proposing any remedy because there are difficulties in the way, is a very lame and impotent conclusion. Such a proceeding may or may not agree with the political exigencies of the moment, may or may not be desirable from a party point of view; but it shows a deplorable lack of the courage of conviction, and of the higher order of statesmanship. A problem which other nations under similar circumstances have successfully solved, is surely not one from which English statesmen should shrink, because of the difficulties besetting its solution. Let us analyse these difficulties. One, we are frequently told, is the short sea passage between the Continent and England, which would render it practically impossible for us to adopt a similar plan to that already existing in other countries. But if at Hamburg they can effectually prevent the landing of destitute persons from England, surely in England we can prevent the landing of destitute persons from Hamburg--the port from which the great bulk of these objectionable aliens generally come? The difficulty in the one case is no greater than the difficulty in the other. That objection is easily disposed of. But the other impediment--the lack of trustworthy statistics--is more serious, since without statistics there can be no legislation. I have already alluded to the Board of Trade Returns, and have endeavoured to show how utterly worthless they are for all practical purposes. The same dearth of information was the great stumbling-block in the way of the House of Commons' Committee. To that, its chairman, Sir William Marriot, has testified.[36] "The difficulty was," he said, "that there was no means of getting correct information; and it was a most extraordinary thing, that, though we had some witnesses from the Board of Trade, they were utterly unaware of certain Acts of Parliament which ought to be carried out by them, namely, the Act of William IV.; and we discovered that, although the people were calling for fresh legislation, there was a law existing by which we could get information at every port in England." Such was the state of affairs then. It is not much better now. Returns are not taken from every port in England; important ones--Southampton for instance--being still omitted; those from three of the most important ports are only partial; and from all they are loosely prepared, only checked "now and then," and the penalties for violation of the Act are never enforced. How can such returns be considered satisfactory? If they really want us to know the exact dimensions of the extent of alien immigration, there can be no difficulty in the way. The Act exists; it is only for the Government to put it into force; it is only a question of method, of means, and of men. But if they do not want us to know, that is another matter, and pressure should be brought to bear until the required information is forthcoming. Such then is the remedy, such are the difficulties in the way of its being applied. They are easily surmounted. The real _crux_ of the question is this. Is such a remedy justified by the circumstances of the disease? I submit, for reasons already given, that it is. State intervention is an extreme measure; as a rule it is better to let natural laws take their course, to see what can be done by individual effort, mutual help, organization, and combination. Men of the school of thought of Mr. Herbert Spencer and Mr. Auberon Herbert would probably denounce such a measure as "socialistic," in that it would limit the freedom of the individual, and limit the utility of his individual capital by forbidding him to employ it in certain ways. I admit the plausibility of their strictures in many instances, but not in this one. The key-note of such a measure as that which I have indicated, would be to help the weak, and to protect those who are not able to help themselves. Speaking generally, I am not a believer in what is termed "grandmotherly legislation." You cannot make men sober, religious, industrious, or moral by Acts of Parliament. The experiment has been tried, and failed. But you can at least remove all the stumbling-blocks in the way of their becoming so. In this particular instance, individual effort has been tried and failed. It has been found to be useless in stemming the tide of pauperism and degradation which pours in upon us from abroad. Therefore, in the last extremity, we resort to the State as the natural protector of our people. It has been urged as an objection to such a measure that it would violate the principles of Free Trade. The fact that this movement is supported by many whose fidelity to Free Trade principles is above suspicion, is a sufficient answer to that objection.[37] But even were it otherwise--what then? Free Trade is not a fetish. It was made for man, and not man for it. There is no such thing as Free Trade in human bodies. You cannot argue that the economic laws which are applicable to goods should govern man. You cannot confuse humanity with commodities. You may exclude commodities by a tariff if you please--that is not an immoral principle. You may let in commodities freely if you choose; but to let in human bodies to compete with those who are natives of the soil, who are your flesh and blood, and who already have the greatest difficulty in supporting life--to allow this, because to shut them out would be violating the principle of Free Trade, is to sacrifice a principle to a name. Lastly, it has been said that to prohibit the destitute and unfit of other countries would be a dangerous and a mischievous innovation. Prohibition in itself is no innovation. We already prohibit many things which tend to our national hurt--false coins, disease in animals, in special shapes in human beings, products dangerous to life and limb, besides various things touching our revenue. Prohibition, therefore, in this instance, would only be extended in a fresh direction. Nor can it be declared contrary to the laws of the land or the principles of the Constitution. Such an objection is founded upon ignorance, and not on fact. The Alien Acts of the Plantagenets and early Tudors; the Proclamation of Mary against the French, of Elizabeth against the Scots; the Peace Alien Acts, and the War Alien Acts of the Georgian era; and, in a lesser degree, the Chartist Act of the present reign--a perusal of these will tend to convince any dispassionate student of our history, that while this country has always been desirous of welcoming the persecuted and oppressed of other lands, national interests have ever been deemed to have the prior claim. I do not wish to go over again the arguments already adduced in favour of some judicious restrictive measure. To do so would be to weary and not to edify. It will suffice, in conclusion, to say that they may all be summed up in the memorable words of Sir George Grey, when introducing the Chartist Act of 1848:-- "The grounds on which it is proposed, are simply those which this country has always maintained, and has every right to maintain, namely, that of self-protection." APPENDIX A. SOME OBSOLETE ALIEN ACTS.[38] STATUTES OF RICHARD II. In 1390, by a statute of Richard II., it was declared "That no alien person should trade without proof given that he would expend half the value of his merchandise in other merchandise here." In 1392, after stating that the Free Trade Acts of Edward III. were a great hindrance and damage to cities of the realm, it was declared that "no foreign merchant shall sell or buy within the realm to any other foreign merchant to sell again. That no foreign merchant should sell at retail within the realm, except provisions, and as to some provisions only in large quantities." ACT OF HENRY IV. This Act was followed in 1402 (Henry IV.), by provisions forbidding any carrying of the proceeds of such trade out of the country, except in the shape of other merchandise bought in exchange. ACT OF HENRY VI. _re_ "HOSTS." By an Act of 1439 (Henry VI., not repealed until this century), it was enacted, "That all alien merchants shall be under the survey of certain persons, to be called Hosts or surveyors, to be appointed by the mayors of the several cities, and to be good and creditable natives expert in merchandise; such Hosts to be privy to all sales and contracts of the aliens. Aliens to sell all their merchandise within six months on paying a forfeiture. The Hosts to keep books only to register all contracts, etc., of aliens, and deliver a transcript thereto to the Exchequer. The Hosts to have two shillings in the pound on all such contracts, and to be sworn to be faithful, and any alien refusing to submit to these regulations, to be imprisoned until security be given to comply with them." ACT OF RICHARD III. In 1543, in the reign of Richard III., it was enacted--"That no person not born under the King's obeysance shall exercise or occupy any handicraft, or the occupation of any handicraftsman, in this realm of England; and shall (after date then fixed) depart into their own country again; or else be servants of such of the King's subjects only as be expert and cunning in such feats, wits, and crafts, which the said stranger can occupy." PROCLAMATION HENRY VII. EXPULSION OF SCOTS. In the reign of Henry VII. 1491, when the death of James III. of Scotland had strained the relations between the two kingdoms, an Act was passed simply in these words--"All Scots, not made denizens, shall depart this realm within forty days after proclamation, upon paying a forfeiture of all their goods." MARY I. EXPULSION OF THE FRENCH. In the reign of Queen Mary there is a Statute against the French, which also directed their departure from the realm, and based it by the preamble not only on political grounds, but because the influx of such strangers tended to the diminishing of subjects of the realm, and the treasury of the sovereign. ELIZABETH. By simple proclamation Elizabeth expelled the Scots. ALIEN ACTS OF THE GEORGIAN ERA. Provisions as to aliens in the Georgian and Victorian eras are of three kinds--(_a_) War Alien Acts; (_b_) Peace Alien Acts; (_c_) Registration Acts. The Alien Acts contain regulations for expulsion of aliens, if the State requires it. In war time it is more stringent. All these Acts contain provisions as to registration. The history of these Acts briefly is as follows:--In 1793 (the French Revolution) first Alien Act, which being of a stringent character became the model. War Alien Act; this continued with amendments until the Peace of Amiens, 1802. Then for a year there was a Peace Alien Act, followed in the following year by a War Alien Act, when the Peninsular War began. With the French Restoration there was in 1814 a Peace Alien Act, followed again in the year ensuing by a War Alien Act, with the temporary restoration of the French Empire, and again by a Peace Alien Act, when the power of Napoleon was finally crushed. This last Statute was renewed by biennial Continuance Acts, until in 1826 expulsion clauses were entirely removed, and registration only remained. CHARTIST ACT, 1848. The registration was modified by the Alien Act of William IV. in 1836, and the only interruption to its course has been the Chartist Act of 1848, which was an Expulsion Act, passed for one year. APPENDIX B. THE ALIEN ACT OF WILLIAM IV. ANNO SEXTO GULIELMI IV. REGIS. CAP. XI. An Act for the Registration of Aliens, and to repeal an Act passed in the Seventh Year of the Reign of His late Majesty for that Purpose. [_19th May, 1836._] [Sidenote: 7 G. 4. c. 54. repealed.] Whereas in the Seventh Year of the Reign of His late Majesty an Act was passed, intituled _An Act for the Restoration of Aliens_: And whereas it is expedient that the said Act should be repealed, and that Provisions in respect of Aliens should be made in lieu of the Regulations therein contained: Be it therefore enacted by the King's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the Authority of the same, That the said Act shall be and is hereby repealed. [Sidenote: Masters of Vessels arriving from Foreign Parts to declare what Aliens are on board or have landed from their Vessels. Penalty for Omission of Declaration. Not to extend to Foreign Mariners navigating the Vessel.] II. And be it further enacted, That the Master of every Vessel which after the Commencement of this Act shall arrive in this Realm from Foreign Parts shall immediately on his Arrival declare in Writing to the Chief Officer of the Customs at the Port of Arrival whether there is, to the best of his Knowledge, any Alien on board his Vessel, and whether any Alien hath, to his Knowledge, landed therefrom at any Place within this Realm, and shall in his said Declaration specify the Number of Aliens (if any) on board his Vessel, or who have, to his Knowledge, landed therefrom, and their Names, Rank, Occupation, and Description, as far as he shall be informed thereof; and if the Master of any such Vessel shall refuse or neglect to make such Declaration, or shall wilfully make a false Declaration, he shall for every such Offence forfeit the Sum of Twenty Pounds, and the further Sum of Ten Pounds for each Alien who shall have been on board at the Time of the Arrival of such Vessel, or who shall have, to his Knowledge, landed therefrom within this Realm, whom such Master shall wilfully have refused or neglected to declare; and in case such Master shall neglect or refuse forthwith to pay such Penalty, it shall be lawful for any Officer of the Customs, and he is hereby required, to detain such Vessel until the same shall be paid: Provided always, that nothing herein-before contained shall extend to any Mariner actually employed in the Navigation of such Vessel during the Time that such Mariner shall remain so actually employed. [Sidenote: Alien on Arrival from Abroad to declare his Name, Description, etc., and produce his Passport.] III. And be it further enacted, That every Alien who shall after the Commencement of this Act arrive in any Part of the United Kingdom from Foreign Parts shall immediately after such Arrival present and show to the Chief Officer of the Customs at the Port of Debarkation, for his Inspection, any Passport which may be in his or her Possession, and declare in Writing to such Chief Officer, or verbally make to him a Declaration, to be by him reduced into Writing, of the Day and Place of his or her landing, and of his or her Name, and shall also declare to what Country he or she belongs and is subject, and the Country and Place from whence he or she shall then have come; which Declaration shall be made in or reduced into such Form as shall be approved by One of His Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State; and if any such Alien coming into this Realm shall neglect or refuse to present and show any Passport which may be in his or her Possession, or if he or she shall neglect or refuse to make such Declaration, he or she shall forfeit the Sum of Two Pounds. [Sidenote: Office of Customs to register the Declaration, and deliver a Certificate to the Alien.] IV. And be it further enacted, That the Officer of the Customs to whom such Passport shall be shown and Declaration made shall immediately register such Declaration in a Book to be kept by him for that Purpose (in which Book Certificates shall be printed in Blank, and Counterparts thereof, in such Form as shall be approved by One of His Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State), and shall insert therein the several Particulars by this Act required in proper Columns, in both Parts thereof, and shall deliver one Part thereof to the Alien who shall have made such Declaration. [Sidenote: Officer of Customs to transmit Declaration, etc. to Secretary of State.] V. And be it further enacted, That the Chief Officer of the Customs in every Port shall within Two Days transmit a true Copy of the Declaration of every Master of a Vessel, and a true Copy of every such Certificate, if in _Great Britain_, to One of His Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State, and if such Alien shall have arrived from any Foreign Country in _Ireland_ he shall transmit a true Copy of such Declaration and of such Certificate to the Chief Secretary for _Ireland_. [Sidenote: Certificate of Alien departing the Realm to be transmitted to Secretary of State.] VI. And be it further enacted, That any Alien about to depart from this Realm shall before his or her Embarkation deliver any Certificate which he or she shall have received under the Provisions of this Act to the Chief Officer of the Customs at the Port of Departure, who shall insert therein that such Alien hath departed this Realm, and shall forthwith transmit the same to One of His Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State, or to the Chief Secretary for _Ireland_, as the Case may be, in like Manner as herein-before is directed in respect to the Certificate given to an Alien on his or her Arrival in this Realm. [Sidenote: New Certificates to be issued in lieu of such as are lost.] VII. And be it further enacted, That if any Certificate issued to any Alien by virtue of this Act shall be lost, mislaid, or destroyed, and such Alien shall produce to One of His Majesty's Justices of the Peace Proof thereof, and shall make it appear to the Satisfaction of such Justice that he or she hath duly conformed with this Act, it shall be lawful for such Justice and he is hereby required to testify the same under his Hand, and such Alien shall thereupon be entitled to receive from One of His Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State, or from the Chief Secretary for _Ireland_, as the Case may be, a fresh Certificate, which shall be of the like Force and Effect as the Certificate so lost, mislaid, or destroyed. [Sidenote: Certificate to be granted without Fee. Penalty.] VIII. And be it further enacted, That all Certificates herein-before required to be given shall be given without Fee or Reward whatsoever; and every Person who shall take any Fee or Reward of any Alien or other Person, for any Certificate, or any other Matter or Thing done under this Act, shall forfeit for every such Offence the Sum of Twenty Pounds; and every Officer of the Customs who shall refuse or neglect to make such Entry as aforesaid, or grant any Certificate thereon, in pursuance of the Provisions of this Act, or shall knowingly make any false Entry, or neglect to transmit the Copy thereof, or to transmit any Declaration of the Master of a Vessel, or any Declaration of Departure, in manner directed by this Act, shall forfeit for every such Offence the Sum of Twenty Pounds. [Sidenote: Penalty for forging Certificates, etc.] IX. And be it further enacted, That if any Person shall wilfully make or transmit any false Declaration, or shall wilfully forge, counterfeit, or alter, or cause to be forged, counterfeited, or altered, or shall utter, knowing the same to be forged, counterfeited, or altered, any Declaration or Certificate hereby directed, or shall obtain any such Certificate under any other Name or Description than the true Name and Description of the Alien intended to be named and described, without disclosing to the Person granting such Certificate the true Name and Description of such Alien, or shall falsely pretend to be the Person intended to be named and described in any such Certificate, every Person so offending shall, upon Conviction thereof before Two Justices, either forfeit any Sum not exceeding One hundred Pounds, or be imprisoned for any Time not exceeding Three Calendar Months, at the Discretion of such Justices. [Sidenote: Prosecution of Offences.] X. And be it further enacted, That all Offences against this Act shall be prosecuted within Six Calendar Months after the Offence committed; and all such Offences shall be prosecuted before Two or more Justices of the Peace of the Place where the Offence shall be committed, who are required, in default of Payment of any pecuniary Penalty, to commit the Offender to the Common Gaol for any Time not exceeding One Calendar Month, unless the Penalty shall be sooner paid, where such Penalty shall not exceed the Sum of Twenty Pounds, and forthwith to report to One of His Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State, or to Chief Secretary for _Ireland_, as the Case may require, the Conviction of every Offender under this Act, and the Punishment to which he is adjudged; and no Writ of Certiorari or of Advocation or Suspension shall be allowed to remove the Proceedings of any Justices touching the Cases aforesaid, or to supersede or suspend Execution or other Proceeding thereupon. [Sidenote: Not to affect Foreign Ministers or their Servants; nor Aliens who have been resident Three Years, and obtained Certificate thereof; no Aliens under Fourteen Years of Age.] XI. Provided always, and be it further enacted, That nothing in this Act contained shall affect any Foreign Ambassador or other Public Minister duly authorized, nor any Domestic Servant of any such Foreign Ambassador or Public Minister, registered as such according to Law, or being actually attendant upon such Ambassador or Minister; nor any Alien who shall have been continually residing within this Realm for Three Years next before the passing of this Act, or who shall hereafter at any Time complete such Residence of Three Years, and who shall have obtained from One of His Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State, or from the Chief Secretary for _Ireland_, a Certificate thereof; nor any Alien, in respect of any Act done or omitted to be done, who shall be under the Age of Fourteen Years at the Time when such Act was so done or omitted to be done: Provided always, that if any Question shall arise whether any Person alleged to be an Alien, and to be subject to the Provisions of this Act, is an Alien or not, or is or is not subject to the said Provisions or any of them, the Proof that such Person is, or by Law is to be deemed to be, a natural-born Subject of His Majesty, or a Denizen of this Kingdom, or a naturalized Subject, or that such Person, if an Alien, is not subject to the Provisions of this Act or any of them, by reason of any Exception contained in this Act or otherwise, shall lie on the person so alleged to be an Alien and to be subject to the Provisions of this Act. [Sidenote: Commencement of Act.] XII. And be it further enacted, That this Act shall commence and take effect from and after the First Day of _July_ in the present Year. [Sidenote: Act may be altered this Session.] XIII. And be it further enacted, That this Act may be amended, altered, or repealed by any Act to be passed in this present Session of Parliament. APPENDIX C. ITALY. (Translation.) LAW FORBIDDING THE EMPLOYMENT OF CHILDREN IN VAGRANT PROFESSIONS, DEC. 21, 1873. Article 1.--Whoever should entrust, or under any plea should deliver, to Italian subjects or to aliens, persons of either sex under the age of 18, although children or under the guardianship of the persons entrusting them, and whoever, whether Italian subjects or aliens, should receive them for the purpose of employing them within the kingdom in any way and under any name in the exercise of vagrant professions such as jugglers, conjurers, clowns, itinerant players or singers, tight-rope dancers, diviners of dreams, exhibitors of animals, mendicants, and such like, shall be punished with imprisonment from one to three months, and with a fine from 51 to 250 lire. Article 2.--Whoever within the kingdom should keep with him in the exercise of the said vagrant professions persons under the age of 18, not being his children, shall be punished with imprisonment from three to six months, and a fine from 100 to 500 lire. Article 3.--Whoever should entrust, or deliver, within the State, or should take abroad for the purpose of entrusting or delivering to Italian subjects or aliens, persons under the age of 18, although children or under the guardianship of the persons entrusting them; and whoever, whether an Italian subject or alien, should receive such minors in order to take them, entrust, or deliver them abroad for the purpose of employing them in any way and under any name in the exercise of the before-said vagrant professions, shall be punished with imprisonment from six months to a year, and with a fine from 100 to 500 lire. Article 4.--Italian subjects who should keep with them in a foreign State, in the exercise of the before-said vagrant professions, persons of Italian nationality, under the age of 18, shall be punished with imprisonment from one to two years, and a fine from 500 to 1000 lire. If it should appear from the proceedings that the minor had been abandoned, or that he had seriously suffered in health through want of food, bad treatment, or ill-usage, or had on that account to turn away or abscond from the person in whose charge he was, the imprisonment may be extended to three years. Article 5.--This article treats of persons who should take these minors by violence or fraud for the purpose of employing them as above, in which case the punishment may be as much as seven years' imprisonment. Article 9.--This article makes it compulsory, under penalty of fine, for parents or guardians who have entrusted minors for the above purpose, to declare them to the Mayor of the town in which they reside in Italy, or to the Diplomatic or Consular Authorities, if abroad, within three months from the date of the law. Article 10.--This article makes it compulsory for persons, whether in Italy or abroad, who keep minors with them, to declare them under penalty of fine, and within four months from the date of the law, to the Mayors in Italy, and to the Ministers and Consuls abroad. The minors must at the same time be returned to their families both in Italy or from abroad at the expense of the persons who have them in charge, or through the Diplomatic or Consular Authorities. Articles 11 and 12.--The said Diplomatic or Consular Authorities must keep a register of such minors with all particulars, and give information to the Minister of the Interior. Article 13.--When there are no parents, or guardians, or other persons who can take care of such minors, they shall be placed in a public educational or industrial establishment until they are of full age, or when they have learnt a trade or business. APPENDIX D. DENMARK. (This Act may be taken as a specimen of Alien Laws in European countries.) (Translation.) LAW ON FOREIGNERS AND TRAVELLERS. We, Christian IX., &c., make known the Rigsdag has passed, and we with our approval confirm, the following Law:-- 1. Passports abolished, but may be required of inhabitants of countries in which Danish travellers are obliged to be furnished with them. Residence in the country forbidden to foreign gipsies, musicians, exhibitors of animals, &c., acrobats and conjurers, and such like persons, gaining their livelihood by wandering about. Entry into the country forbidden also to all foreigners in search of work, unless they are provided with a document of identity from a public functionary. 2. Foreigners who are not possessed of any claim for maintenance in this country, and are destitute of the necessary means of subsistence, as well as those who, under the provisions of Article 1, are not allowed to settle in the country, shall be as soon as possible sent out of it, or turned out of it by the police. In connection herewith an injunction can be given by police certificate to the party concerned not to allow himself to be found again in the country, with a notification of his liability under Article 22 if he violates the order. 3. Foreigners not in possession of right of maintenance in the country, who seek to support themselves by manual or other bodily labour, either as servants or, without legalizing themselves as travelling artisans, by any species of work necessitating journies from place to place, have to announce themselves to the Chief of the Police in whose jurisdiction they arrive, or as soon afterwards as they set about seeking such means of existence, to the Chief of the Police in whose jurisdiction they are resident at the time. 4. The Chief of the Police to whom application is made under the preceding Article, shall investigate whether the party is in a condition in which it can be reasonably expected that he can and will support himself in this country by lawful labour; he must in this connection look carefully into the accuracy of the documents of identity which the applicant exhibits; and also exact assurance that the applicant is either guaranteed work or service, or is in possession of sufficient means to provide himself with subsistence on a modest scale for eight days, and afterwards to leave the country. Should the Chief of Police, after this examination, find that extended residence can be conceded to the applicant, he shall provide him with a residence-book, prescribed by the instructions of, and at the price fixed by, the Ministry of Justice, in the drawing up of which book provision is made for the certifying of the documents of identity; in the contrary event care must be taken to send or remove the applicant out of the country. The foregoing provisions are also to be applied to all foreigners mentioned in Article 3, who, at the period when the present Law comes into operation, are found resident in the country without having procured means of subsistence, an allowance of one month being made to them in which to notify themselves to the Chief of Police in the place of their residence. Should they be provided with a journey-book, mark shooting-book, or other document of identity, they receive a residence-book, delivered at the cost of the police fund, in which the certificate of their documents of identity are set forth. In the residence-book it is notified that it is given in place of the former document of identity, which the applicant must nevertheless preserve, and produce when required to do so. 5. Any one in possession of a residence-book who shall wish to leave the police jurisdiction in which he resides, shall notify his intention to the police of the place, with a statement of the extent of his journey. The police shall make inquiry how far the applicant is in possession of the necessary means to arrive at the place indicated, and how far he is assured either of work or of subsistence, or, in the contrary case, whether he is provided with the means of modest subsistence for eight days after his arrival. If the applicant cannot guarantee the aforesaid, he can be sent or removed out of the country. Should no ground be found for his removal, notification of his announcement shall be certified in his book, and also leave for his journey, granted by the Chief of Police in accordance with the indicated wishes of the applicant; and further, a general sketch of the route by which the journey shall be made, and of the time in which it is to be accomplished, which arrangements must not be altered without sufficient ground, except by leave of the police. 6. On arrival at destination, as also when the individual concerned, during his journey, passes the night at any market town, or in Frederiksborg, Frederiksværk, Sikheborg, Nörresundby, and Lögstör, or remains in any country place for more than twenty-four hours, the residence-book must be exhibited to the police, who shall certify such exhibition in the book itself. 7. The holder of the book, when he has not found work or subsistence for eight days after he last notified the police, is bound to notify himself anew to the police of the place in which he happens to be, and can then, if not in possession of the means of modest subsistence for eight days, be expelled or sent out of the country. He who has had no work for six weeks shall in all cases be sent or removed from the country, unless he can prove how during that period he has supported himself in a lawful manner. 8. Every one who engages a foreigner to work must see that the latter is provided with a residence-book. When the foreigner quits his employment he (the employer) must certify in the book how long the employment has lasted. In case of his refusal, the holder of the book shall at once notify the police, who shall insert in the book the necessary certificate. Any conviction for offence must be certified in the book. The individual concerned can apply for a new book without such certificate if during the last five years he has not been convicted of any offence. 9. In all cases treated in Articles 5 to 8 the party concerned, should he at the period at which the notification should be made, not find himself in the parish or market town where the Chief of Police resides, may address himself to the local constable. The latter shall, in the stead of the Chief, pursue the necessary inquiry, and should the book be found in order, and the applicant fulfil the further conditions for continued residence in the country, he (the constable) shall insert the necessary certificate in the book; in the contrary case, he must refer the applicant to the Chief of Police, to whom the book must at once be remitted. Should the certificates which the said functionary notifies require an injunction in a formal Protocol, the costs are to be charged to the police account. In coast districts, so far as the present Law is concerned, the district Commissioners shall act in place of the Constables. 10. The dispositions of Articles 5 to 9 do not apply where the parties have continuous service, or only leave one employment to enter at once upon another. As long as such is the case the residence-book serves as a mark-book, and the conditions to be observed remain valid during the service. The notice of servants' arrival and departure, which, by the Law of the 10th May, 1854, paragraph 60, were to be made to the parish priest, shall for the future be made to the constable, who shall certify in the book the notices given, and report the same in the Protocol as above. 11. Should the book be lost, notice must at once be given to the police. Should nothing appear, either from the information given by the owner or from any other source, of a nature to excite suspicion that the book has been purposely made away with, a new one shall be supplied, in which shall be recorded such information as to his previous residence in the country as can be procured without prolonged inquiry. In the contrary event, the party shall at once be sent out of or removed from the country, with such injunctions as are required by Articles 1 and 2. 12. The obligation to be provided with a residence-book exists also where the party gains his livelihood in this country, and he, moreover, is regarded as a native-born subject for the purposes of this Law. The party concerned can claim a book furnished with a certificate of his observance of this obligation. 13. He who has no rights as a native-born subject, and has not any claim to maintenance in this country, can, if he has not had continuous residence in this country for two years, be sent or removed out of it, by order of the Minister of Justice, when his conduct gives occasion therefor. In the case of removal or expulsion, in respect of which the Minister of Justice can designate the modifications prescribed in Article 16, which, in the circumstances, may be found suitable, such injunction can be given by order of the Minister as is set forth in Article 2. 14. When, under the provisions of this Law, residence is refused to any one, the said person is to remain under the observation and surveillance of the police until sent out of the country. 15. All certificates mentioned in the preceding paragraphs shall be given gratuitously, except those for leaving a commune mentioned in Article 10, second portion, which shall be taxed at 25 ore each. For the payment of the certifying of journey-books is granted a sum in compensation out of the Treasury chest, calculated on the average of the receipts on this account during the last five years. 16. In all cases named in this Law removal from the country shall be effected under police direction, and in the cheapest manner compatible with the circumstances, by railway, waggon, by sea, or on foot, so that hired conveyance is only used in rare exceptions. Removal shall be effected without escort by a compulsory pass from the Chief of Police, so that the party, by means of conveyance as aforesaid, and as far as possible under control, shall be sent direct out of the country. The pass shall contain the necessary details of the route, the police authorities to whom the bearer shall present himself, as well as the amount given for subsistence money. Only when the means of conveyance aforesaid fail can the party be permitted to depart, and the Chief of Police shall appoint in the pass a period in which the journey must be completed; but such freedom of travel shall not be conceded to persons who have been convicted of vagrancy or mendicancy. When a person is sent by one authority to another by such a pass, the documents of identity are to be sent after him; and if he departs by rail or by sea, due notice of his coming must be given by telegraph to the police at the place of his destination. In the event of any such removals, care must be taken that the party is provided with the necessary clothing; that he is not suffering from itch or any other contagious disease, and also that his state of health is not such as to prevent the removal being carried out. 17. The expenses incurred in removals in virtue of this Law, as also the expenses of maintenance and lodging until departure, and of clothing and watching in cases provided by Article 13, are to be paid out of the Treasury chest, and the expenses of those falling under Article 1, who are not permitted to reside in the country, are to be paid by themselves so far as they have the means. In all other cases, the expenses, including subsistence money, are to be paid by the communal funds of the locality, according to the specially given injunctions, but may be advanced by the police chest of any place. The Chief of Police from whose jurisdiction any one is removed as aforesaid, must take care that any expenses incurred thereby in another jurisdiction, are immediately settled. 18. The right conceded to itinerant workmen to seek for the ordinary assistance given by Guilds and Corporations is abolished. 19. He who, for payment, lets out to any one lodgings either by the day or by the week, or who gratuitously houses unknown or vagrant personages, is bound to inquire of such information as to their name, position, and last place of sojourn. The statements received must, in Copenhagen and in all market towns, including Frederiksborg, Frederiksværk, Sikheborg, Nörresundby, and Lögstör, be communicated before noon on the morrow in writing to the police, and elsewhere within twenty-four hours to the constable, and in coast districts to the Commissary, accompanied according to circumstances with observations as to any ground which may appear for doubting the accuracy of the statements made. The police can require all keepers of hotels, inns, and lodging-houses, and the waiters therein, instead of giving daily notice as above, to keep a book authorized by the police, which shall at any time be open to the inspection of the latter. With regard to such persons who, under Article 6, are obliged to announce themselves to the police, it is incumbent on all who shelter them to see that such announcements are duly made. 20. Every one is bound, when required by the police either on account of information given in virtue of the preceding paragraph or of other special circumstances, to prove further that he is the person whom he professes to be, or to adduce such information as to make this probable. 21. Every town and parish Council must see that twice a year lists are compiled by which every house proprietor shall show within eight days, exactly for every house the number of persons resident therein, as well as their names, occupation, age, and the date of their taking up residence in the commune. For residents in Copenhagen the Regulations in force hitherto remain valid. 22. Violations of the prescriptions of Articles 2, 11, and 13, are to be punished with imprisonment on bread and water for 6 � 5 [_sic_] days, or hard labour for 180 days. Whoever, by false representations to the police, contrives that the residence-book furnished to him does not answer to his real name, or who wilfully tears out leaves therefrom, or makes use of documents of identity not his own, or who lends those given for his own use to another, or who deliberately makes false statements under Articles 19, 20, and 21, shall be punished, if no heavier sentence is provided by the law, with confinement on bread and water for 2 � 5 [_sic_] days, or with simple imprisonment for two months, or hard labour for sixty days, or under extenuating circumstances, with a fine of from 5 to 100 crowns. Deviations from the route prescribed in a police pass, or neglect to accomplish the journey in the prescribed time, unless reasonable excuse can be alleged, are to be punished with imprisonment, of not more than five days on bread and water. (_Vide_ Penal Law, section 25.) Other violations of this Law to be punished with fines of from 2 to 50 crowns. Prosecutions under this Law to be brought by the Public Prosecutor. So soon as any sentence of fine imposed by this Law is read or communicated to the offender, shall the fine, when the sentence is undisputed, or the offender declares himself satisfied therewith, be at once exacted, paid, and in default of payment, without any appeal to the authorities, forthwith expiated in accordance with the prescriptions of the Law of the 16th February, 1866, upon the expiation of fines. 23. Certain Laws repugnant to the provisions of this Law are repealed. 24. This Law, which has no operation in the Faro Isles, shall come into force on the 1st July, 1875. Dated at the Amelienborg, the 15th May, 1875. (Signed) CHRISTIAN R. APPENDIX E. SUMMARY OF THE THREE PRINCIPAL ACTS OF THE UNITED STATES. I.--THE "ACT TO REGULATE IMMIGRATION," 1882. Section 1 provides for the levying of a duty of fifty cents on all alien passengers arriving at any port in the United States. The money thus collected goes to form the "Immigrant Fund," which is used for the purpose of defraying the expenses of carrying out the Act, and for the care of the immigrants who arrive at the ports in sickness or distress. By Section 2 the Secretary of the Treasury is charged with the general supervision of immigration business. He is empowered to enter into contracts with such State Commissioners or Boards as may be designated by the Governor of any State, to take charge of the Local immigration of the ports within the said States. It authorizes the State Commissioners to appoint persons to go on board the ships when they arrive at the ports, and if "on such examination there shall be found among such passengers any convict, lunatic, idiot, or any person unable to take care of himself or herself, without becoming a public charge, they shall report the same in writing to the collector of such port, and such persons shall not be permitted to land." Section 3 gives the Secretary of the Treasury wide discretion as to the regulations which he may deem fit to issue from time to time. Section 4 enacts that "all foreign convicts, except those convicted of political offences, upon arrival shall be sent back to the nations to which they belong." Lastly--and this is most important--"the expense of the return of such passengers as are not permitted to land shall be borne by the owners of the vessel in which they came." II.--THE ALIEN CONTRACT LABOUR LAW, 1885. By Section 1 it is made unlawful for any person, company, etc., to prepay the transportation, or in any way assist the importation, of aliens under contract to perform labour made previous to the importation. Section 2 declares that all such contracts shall be void in the United States. Section 3 imposes a penalty of one thousand dollars for each violation of Section 1. Section 4 declares that any master of a vessel knowingly bringing any such labourers into the United States, is guilty of a misdemeanour, and will be fined five hundred dollars for each labourer, or six months' imprisonment, or both. Section 5 makes certain exceptions to the excluded classes, in the case of a skilled workman engaged to carry out a new industry not already established in the United States, and so forth. In 1885 further sections were added to this Act, providing for the examination of ships; for the non-landing of prohibited persons; for the return of such persons by Boards designated by the Secretary of the Treasury; and for compelling the expense of the return of such persons to be borne by the owners of the vessels which brought them to America; the owners and masters of vessels refusing to pay such expenses, not being allowed to land at, or clear from, any port in the United States. III.--THE IMMIGRATION ACT OF 1891. The new Act may briefly be analyzed as follows:--Section 1 specifies the classes of aliens henceforth to be excluded from admission to the United States, viz.--All idiots, insane persons, paupers, or persons likely to become a public charge; persons suffering from a loathsome or a dangerous contagious disease; persons who have been convicted of felony or other infamous crime or misdemeanour involving moral turpitude; polygamists; and also any persons whose ticket or passage is paid for with the money of another, or who is assisted by others to come, unless it is satisfactorily shown on inquiry that such person does not belong to any of the foregoing excluded classes, or to the class of contract labourers excluded by the Act of 1885. As in the Act of 1882, the exclusion of persons convicted of political offences is carefully guarded against. Section 2 provides for the more vigorous enforcement of the Act of 1885. Sections 3 and 4 declare that immigrants coming to the United States through the solicitation of advertising agents in Europe shall be treated as violators of the law, and steamship companies are prohibited from encouraging such immigration. Section 5 specifies ministers of religion, persons belonging to the recognized professions, and professors of colleges or seminaries, as persons not to be excluded under the Act of 1885. Section 6 provides penalties of fine and imprisonment up to a thousand dollars, or a year's imprisonment, or both, for violation of Act. Section 7 establishes the office of Superintendent of Immigration under the Treasury Department. The remaining sections of the Act may be summarized as follows:--(_a_) That the names and nationalities of immigrants shall be reported on arrival, and that they shall be promptly inspected by authorized agents empowered to decide upon their right to land. (_b_) Provision is made for the better inspection of the Canadian, British, Columbian, and Mexican borders, (_c_) That State and municipal authorities may exercise such jurisdiction over immigrant stations as may be necessary for the public peace, (_d_) That all immigrants who come in violation of the law shall be immediately sent back to the ships that brought them to the port; or if that be impracticable, they may be returned at any time within a year after their arrival. Any alien who may become a public charge within a year from his arrival shall be sent back to the country from whence he came. (_e_) That the Federal Courts shall have full jurisdiction in all cases arising under this Act. APPENDIX F. STATUTES PASSED BY THE COLONIES TO RESTRICT PAUPER IMMIGRATION. CANADA. The Immigration Act, 1886 (R.S.C. 1886, c. 65, secs. 23 and 24) enacts as follows:-- [Sidenote: The landing of pauper immigrants may be prohibited.] Sec. 23. The Governor-General may by proclamation, whenever he deems it necessary, prohibit the landing of pauper or destitute immigrants in all ports or any port in Canada, until such sums of money as are found necessary are provided and paid into the hands of one of the Canadian immigration agents, by the master of the vessel carrying such immigrants, for their temporary support and transport to their place of destination; and during such time as any such pauper immigrants would, in consequence of such orders, have to remain on board such vessel, the Governor in Council may provide for proper anchorage grounds being assigned to such vessel, and for such vessel being visited and superintended by the medical superintendent or any inspecting physician of the port or quarantine station, and for the necessary measures being taken to prevent the rise or spread of diseases amongst the passengers in such vessel and amongst people on shore.--32 and 33 Vict. c. 10, s. 16. [Sidenote: Landing of vicious immigrants may be prohibited.] Sec. 24. The Governor-General may, by proclamation, whenever he deems it necessary, prohibit the landing in Canada of any criminal, or other vicious class of immigrants designated in such proclamation, except upon such conditions for insuring their re-transportation to the port in Europe whence they came with the least possible delay, as the Governor in Council prescribes; and such conditions may, if the Governor in Council deems it necessary, include the immediate return, or the return with the least possible delay, of the vessel and such immigrants to the said port--such prohibited immigrants remaining on board until such return of the vessel.--35 Vict. c. 28, s. 10. VICTORIA. The Passengers, Harbours, and Navigation Statute, 1865 (No. 255), enacts as follows in secs. 36-39:-- [Sidenote: Bond to be given for passengers being lunatic, etc.] 36. If the immigration officer, or assistant immigration officer, shall certify that any passenger shall have arrived in Victoria on board any ship as aforesaid (_i.e._ any British or foreign navigable vessel of any kind carrying passengers, except vessels plying from any one port in Victoria to any other port therein) being either lunatic, idiotic, deaf, dumb, blind, or infirm, and likely, in his opinion, to become a charge upon the public, or upon any public or charitable institution, the immigration officer shall require the owner, charterer, or master of such ship, within seven days after her arrival to execute with two sufficient sureties, jointly and severally, a bond to her Majesty in the sum of 100_l._ for every such passenger, conditioned to pay to the Treasurer of Victoria all moneys or expenses which shall or may be laid out or incurred within the space of five years from the execution of the said bond for the maintenance or support of such passenger; and the said sureties shall justify before and to the satisfaction of the said immigration officer, and shall by their oath or affirmation satisfy him that they are respectively residents in Victoria, and each worth treble the amount of the penalty of such bond over and above all their liabilities. [Sidenote: Principal immigration agent to report as to forfeiture.] 37. If any passenger for whom any bond shall have been given as aforesaid, shall at any time within five years from the execution thereof receive maintenance or support from any public or charitable institution in Victoria, the payment incurred for the maintenance and support of such passenger shall be provided for out of the money collected in and under such bond to the extent of the penalty therein mentioned, or such portion as shall be required for the payment of such maintenance or support; and it shall be the duty of the principal immigration agent, upon representation made to him, to ascertain the right and claim of the Treasurer of Victoria to payment of the amount so expended for the maintenance and support of any such passenger, and to report the same to the Governor in Council; and the said report shall be conclusive in the matter, and shall be evidence of the facts therein stated; and such bond may be put in suit, and the penalty, or as much thereof as shall be required to defray the expenses of such maintenance or support, may be recovered by suit or information on behalf of her Majesty, and in the name of a law officer in any court of competent jurisdiction. [Sidenote: Penalty for refusing to execute bond.] 38. If the owner, charterer, or master of any ship on board which such passengers, specially reported, shall have been carried, shall neglect or refuse to execute a bond as aforesaid within seven days, after being so required as aforesaid, he shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding 100_l._ sterling, in addition to his liability under the said bond; and such ship shall not be cleared out until the said bond shall have been executed, and the said penalties shall have been paid. [Sidenote: Act not to extend to Government immigrants, etc.] 39. These provisions ... shall not extend to immigrants brought to Victoria at the public expense, nor to shipwrecked mariners brought to Victoria without charge by the master of some other ship than that in which they were wrecked, nor to the crews of ships who shall have signed articles for the whole voyage, nor to her Majesty's land and sea forces. SOUTH AUSTRALIA. Sec. 15 of the Immigration Act, 1872, enacts as follows:-- The Governor in Council may from time to time frame, annul, alter, and vary such regulations as may be necessary for declaring what persons shall be eligible for immigration to the said Province (_i.e._ South Australia), and generally for carrying out the provisions of this Act; and all such regulations, and all instructions which may from time to time be transmitted to any immigration agent, shall be forthwith published in the _South Australian Government Gazette_ for general information, and shall be, within one week from their publication, if Parliament be then sitting, or, if not, then within one week from the next meeting of Parliament, laid upon the table of each House of Parliament. The above Act was passed to "encourage and assist immigration into South Australia, and to provide for the control and supervision of such immigration." Pauper emigrants would not, in all probability, be allowed to land. TASMANIA. The Passengers Act, 1885, enacts as follows:-- [Sidenote: Bond to be given for certain passengers.] Sec. 3. If the collector (at the port of arrival) shall certify that any passenger shall have arrived in Tasmania on board any ship (except one plying from any one port in the Colony to any other port therein) being either lunatic, idiotic, deaf, dumb, blind, or infirm, or from any cause unable to support himself, or likely, in the opinion of the collector, to become a charge upon the public, or upon any public or charitable institution, the collector shall require the owner, charterer, or master of such ship, within seven days after her arrival, to execute a bond to her Majesty in the sum of 100_l._ for every such passenger. [Sidenote: Conditions of the bond.] 4. Every such bond shall be entered into with at least two sufficient sureties, and the person giving such bond and his sureties shall be bound jointly and severally to pay to the Treasurer of Tasmania all moneys and expenses which shall be laid out or incurred within the space of five years from the execution of the said bond for the maintenance or support of such passenger; and the said sureties shall justify before and to the satisfaction of the collector, and shall by their oath or affirmation satisfy him, that they are respectively residents in Tasmania, and each worth treble the amount of the penalty of such bond over and above all their liabilities. [Sidenote: Provisions as to ships quarantined.] 5. Whenever any such ship or the passengers by such ship shall have performed quarantine in accordance with any law for the time being in force, then the period within which the owner, charterer, or master shall be required to give such bond shall be within seven days after such ship or passenger has or have performed quarantine and been duly discharged therefrom. [Sidenote: Bond to be applied to maintenance.] 6. If any passenger for whom any bond shall have been given as aforesaid, shall at any time within five years from the execution thereof receive maintenance or support from any public or charitable institution in Tasmania, the amount expended for the maintenance and support of such passenger shall be provided for and repaid as herein-after provided out of the moneys collected under such bond, to the extent of the penalty therein mentioned, or such portion thereof as shall be required for the payment of such maintenance or support. [Sidenote: Authority in charge of institution to report as to forfeiture of bond.] 7. It shall be the duty of the authority or person having the control or charge of such public or charitable institution, to ascertain the right and claim of the Treasurer of Tasmania to payment of the amount so expended for the maintenance and support of any such passenger, and to report the same to him with all such information as may enable the Treasurer to recover the moneys due. [Sidenote: Bond may be put in suit.] 8. Every such report shall be conclusive in the matter, and shall be evidence of the facts therein stated; and every such bond may be put in suit, and the penalty, or as much thereof as shall be required to defray the expenses of such maintenance or support, may be recovered by suit or information on behalf of her Majesty, and in the name of a law officer in any court of competent jurisdiction. [Sidenote: Penalty for refusing to execute bond.] 9. If the owner, charterer, or master of any ship shall neglect or refuse to execute a bond in any case within the provisions of this Act within seven days after being so required as aforesaid, he shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding 100_l._, and the payment of such penalty shall not be deemed to exonerate such owner, charterer, or master from being compelled to execute such bond as by this Act provided; and such ship shall not either during or after the expiration of the said period of seven days be cleared out unless and until the said bond shall have been executed and the said penalty has been paid. [Sidenote: Act not to extend to Government immigrants, etc.] 10. The provisions of this Act shall not extend to immigrants brought to Tasmania either wholly or partly at the expense of the Colony, nor to shipwrecked mariners brought to Tasmania without charge by the master of some other ship than that in which they were wrecked, nor to her Majesty's land and sea forces. [Sidenote: Recovery of penalties.] 11. All penalties incurred under section 9 shall be recovered in a summary way before any two or more Justices of the Peace in the mode prescribed by the Magistrates' Summary Procedure Act (19 Vict., No. 8); and any person who thinks himself aggrieved by the imposition of any such penalty, may appeal against the same in the mode prescribed by the Appeals Regulation Act (19 Vict., No. 10). NEW ZEALAND. The Imbecile Passengers Act, 1882 (No. 58), is the same as the Tasmania Act above cited, and need not, therefore, be set out in detail. The only differences are-- (1.) The word "New Zealand" must be read throughout instead of "Tasmania." (2.) In secs. 3 and 5, "fourteen days" must be read for "seven days." (3.) In sec. 4, after the words "maintenance or support of such passenger," the words "by or in any public or charitable institution in New Zealand" must be inserted. (4.) In sec. 8, instead of the words from "defray" to the end, the following must be read: "defray the charges incurred in such maintenance or support, may be recovered on behalf of her Majesty in the manner provided by the Crown Suits Act, 1881." (5.) The following must be added as sec. 9:-- All moneys recovered or received under any such bond as aforesaid shall be paid by the Commissioner to the public or charitable institution, by or in which any such passenger #/ /# may have been maintained or supported as aforesaid. (6.) Instead of sec. 11 read as sec. 12:-- All penalties incurred under sec. 10 (sec. 9 of the Tasmanian Act) shall be recoverable in a summary way before any two or more Justices of the Peace. APPENDIX G. LIST OF SOME OF THE PRINCIPAL LABOUR ORGANIZATIONS AND TRADES UNIONS WHICH HAVE CONDEMNED UNRESTRICTED ALIEN IMMIGRATION. The Blackburn Power-Loom Weavers' Protection Society. National Society of Amalgamated Brassworkers. Steam-Engine-Makers' Society. Amalgamated Society of Engineers. Operative Bricklayers' Society. Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen. Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners. Boiler-Makers' and Iron Ship-Builders' Society. Amalgamated Association of Operative Cotton-Spinners. Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants of England, Ireland, Scotland, and Wales. Miners' Association (Durham). Sailors' and Firemens' Union. British Steel Smelters' Amalgamated Association. The Amalgamated Hammermen's Trade Association. Liverpool and Vicinity United Trades' Council. London Trades' Council (Special sub-committee). Operative Bakers of Scotland National Federal Union. Cardiff, Penarth, and Barry Coal Trimmers' Protection and Benefit Association. National Union of Boot Clickers and Rough Stuff Cutters. Durham County Colliery Enginemens' Association. Operative Cotton Spinners' Society. The United Pointsmen and Signalmens' Mutual Aid and Sick Society. Sailors' and Firemens' Union--Green's Home Branch. Quarrymen's Union. Oldham Provincial Card and Blowing Room Operatives' Association. St. Helen's Association of Colliery Enginemen. Dockers' Union. West Bromwich, Oldbury, Tipton, Coseley and Bradley Amalgamated Association of Miners. United Operative Plumbers' Association of Great Britain and Ireland. Birmingham Operative Brass-Cock Finishers' Society. West Riding of Yorkshire Power-Loom Weavers' Association. Protective and Provident Society of Women working in Trades in Oxford. National Amalgamated Coal-Porters' Union of Inland and Sea-borne Coal Workers. Progressive Union of Cabinet-makers. London Potters' Trade Society. Liverpool Operative Ship-painters. Society of Compositors. Operative Lace-Makers' Society. The Operative Plasterers' Association. The Tin and Iron Plate-Workers' Society. The Society of House Decorators. The Shoemakers' Association. The Master-Tailors' Association (Liverpool); and many others. INDEX. Action of the United States, 2 Alien Act of William IV., 26, 161 Alien Acts, English, 157 Alien Lists, how prepared, 29 Aliens do not create New Industry, 79 Aliens who return to Continent, 32 Allen, Mr., Evidence of, 78 _Alton Locke_, 69 Amalgamated Brassworkers, 81 American Act of '91, 134, 177 American Immigration, 126 American Labour, 132 Amusements of Foreign Jews, 47 Amusements of Italians, 65 Anti-Semitic Feeling, 35 Arrival of Aliens, 42 Association for Preventing Immigration, &c., 24 Asylum, Right of, 14 Attempts to confuse issue, 6 "Australia for the Australians," 144 Australian Immigration, 137 Austria, 116 Barnett, Rev. S. A., 107 Barrel Organs, 65 Bate, Dr., Evidence of, 99 Bavaria, 121 Bedford, Bishop of, 18, 143 Belgium, 118 Boarding-house, Jewish, 42 Board of Trade Returns, 25 Boot-slosher, 46 Boot Trade, Cheap, 46 British Columbia, 138 Bulgaria, 120 Burnett, John, Evidence of, 17, 75 Burnett's Report (Leeds), 22 Cabinet-making Trade, 75 Canada, 137 Canadian Act, 137 Canadian Immigration, 132 Causes of Immigration, 49 Chair-turning, 70 Chartist Act, 155, 160 Cheap Clothing Trade, 74 Children's Protection Act, 61 Chinese Immigrants Act, 143 Chinese Immigration, 139 Chinese Minister protests, 139 Chovevi Zion, 47 Clouet, E., 124 Colonial Workmen, 144 Combination useless, 60 Condition of Aliens, 42 Conference at Sydney, 143 Contract Labour Law, 177 Correspondence in _Times_, 31 Craving for Enjoyment, The, 107 Cruelties of _Padroni_, 59 Cruikshank's Allegory, 5 Customs, Letter from, 28 Dangers of _Judenhetze_, 51 Decoy for young Jewesses, 48 Degradation of Labour, 76 Dejonge, Henry, Evidence of, 18 Delicato, The Case of, 62 Denmark, Laws of, 167 Derby, Lord, 4 Destitution of Immigrants, 11 Dilke, Sir C., 136 Discomforts of Journey, 38 Disraeli, Mr., 83 Distribution of Jewish Immigration, 36 Dockers' Strike, 144 Drunkenness, an Effect, 106 Dunraven, Lord, 108 Economic Aspect, The, 69 Emigration rendered useless, 113 European Countries, 115 _Evening News and Post, The_, 39 Example of the United States, 127 Factory Inspector's Evidence, 97 Factory Regulations evaded, 88 Fayrer, Sir Joseph, 102 Feeling of Working-classes, 81 Ford Committee, The, 132 Foreign Revolutionary Societies, 56 France and Immigration, 123 Freak, Mr., Evidence of, 73 Free Trade, 154 Fur Trade, The, 70, 71 Gains of _Padroni_, 60 Galicia, 130 Georgian Era, The, 159 Germany and Aliens, 121 Goodman, Mr., Evidence of, 77 Goschen, Mr., 66 Goulson Street, 44 Grandmotherly Legislation, 153 Greece, 123 "Greener," The, 45 Green's _History_, 7 Grey, Sir George, 155 Hackney Board of Guardians, 105 Hamburg, Law of, 149 Henry IV., Act of, 157 " VI., " 158 " VII., " 158 Hicks-Beach, Sir M., 29 Holland, Inspector, 99 Home-work, 86 Huguenots, The, 7, 10 Ice-cream Vendors, 64 "Immigrant Emigration," 33 Increase of Immigration, 17 Individual Effort useless, 153 Infectious Diseases, 99 Injustice of Russia, 8 Irish in the United States, 127, 130 Isolation of England, 3 Italian Children, 54 Italy, Law of, 167 Jewish Board of Guardians, 24, 51, 97 Jewish Immigrant, Troubles of, 37 Jewish Immigration, 21, 33 Jewish Ladies' Rescue Society, 49 Jews, Foreign, Unsanitary habits of, 97 Jews in Russia, 8 Juvenal's Satires, 56 Keir, Mr., Statement of, 78 Killick, Mrs., 90 Kingsley, Canon, 106 Labour Legislation, 83 Labour Movement, 111 _Laissez-faire_ Policy, 135 Leeds, Immigration into, 23 Lengthy Hours of Work, 45, 88 Lewisham Election, 84 "Limewash," 103 Lindsay, Mr., Evidence of, 27 List of Trades Unions, 186 Liverpool, Aliens in, 21 Loss of self-respect, 106 Manchester, Aliens in, 20 Mancini, Case of, 63 Mansion House Meeting, 10 Marriott, Sir W. T., 152 Mason, Rev. W. A., 18 "Meadow Bank" Case, 99 Mile End Board of Guardians, 105 Model Dwellings, 97 Moral View, The, 107 Multiplication of small masters, 69 Munich Society, 131 National View, A, 79 Netherlands, The, 119 New South Wales, 139, 145 New Zealand Act, 138, 184 Norway, 122 Official Returns, 25 Ogle, Dr. W., Evidence of, 17, 74 Old Ford, Vicar of, 91 Ottoman Government, 124 Out-work, System of, 86 _Padroni_, The, 58 Pampa _v._ Romano, 63 Parkes, Sir Henry, 145 Pauperism and Immigration, 104 Peter the Great, 95 Pilgrim Fathers, 128 Police Reports, 20 "Pool" of Unemployed, 79 Portugal, 124 Practice of counting Aliens, 31, 33 Preventible Diseases, 102 Prince of Wales, 102 Prohibition, 154 Prostitution, Increase of, 87 Queensland, 142 Refugees, 14 _Residuum_, The, 33 Restrictive Measures, 149 Richard II., Statute of, 157 Roumania, 120 Russian Edicts, 2 Russian Jews, 9 Russia's Injustice, 8 Russia's Policy, 125 Sanitary Aspect, The, 95 Sanitary Legislation, 102 Sanitation, Importance of, 101 Saxony, 120 Select Committee of Immigration, 150 Sentimental Objection, 4 Simmons, Mr., Evidence of, 18 Social Evils, 104 Socialistic Legislation, 153 Society of Friends of Foreigners in Distress, 54 Steamship Solicitation, 49, 129 Survival of the Fittest, 108 "Sweater," The, 69 Sweaters' Dens, 102 Sweating Committee, The, 96, 102 "Sweating" prices, 71, 89 Sweden, 122 Switzerland, 123 Tasmania, 3 Thurston, Mr., Evidence of, 18 Trades Unionism, 81 Traditional Policy, 14, 154 Traffic in Italian Children, 58 Trustworthy Statistics, Need of, 34 "Tuke" Committee, The, 130 Turkey, 124 United States Legislation, 176 Urgency for Legislation, 151 Victoria, the Chinese, 137, 144 Wages paid to Women, 89 Whitechapel, 94, 97 Woes of the Workwoman, 85 Women driven on the Streets, 91 Würtemburg, Laws of, 121 Zeitlin, Mr., Evidence of, 74 THE END. _Richard Clay & Sons, Limited, London & Bungay._ FOOTNOTES: [1] _i.e._ 1890. [2] _i.e._ 1891. [3] _Vide_ Appendix A. [4] _Daily Telegraph_, January 6, 1892. [5] _Vide_ Appendix A. [6] 15th September, 1891. [7] Statistical Tables relating to Emigration and Immigration, 1890. [8] _Vide_ Appendix B. [9] Letter from Board of Trade, 15th June, 1891. [10] _Vide_ Monthly Returns of the Board of Trade. [11] _The Evening News and Post._ [12] 26th October, 1891. [13] Letter to _The Times_, August 23rd, 1890, and elsewhere. [14] _Vide_ Appendix C. [15] 1891. [16] 24th August, 1891. [17] 2nd October, 1891. [18] 10th June, 1891. [19] _Vide_ Appendix. [20] _Times_, 26th June, 1890. [21] Congress of Hygiene and Demography, August 1891. [22] _Vide_ Majority Report, Hackney Board of Guardians, April 1891. [23] The late Canon Kingsley. [24] _Great Cities, and their Influence for Good and Evil._ [25] Arnold White, _Problems of a Great City_. [26] Speech, Public Meeting of "Association for Preventing Immigration of Destitute Aliens," July 1891. [27] Speech, House of Lords, June 1890. [28] _Vide_ Appendix. [29] 1891. [30] _Vide_ Appendix. [31] _Problems of Greater Britain_, vol. ii. p. 314. [32] _Vide_ Appendix. [33] 17th January, 1891. [34] The italics are my own.--W. H. W. [35] _Vide_ Appendix G. [36] Speech at Inaugural Meeting of the Association for Preventing Immigration of Destitute Aliens, May 1st, 1891. [37] Mr. Sydney Buxton, M.P., Right Hon. E. Heneage, M.P., Mr. W. McArthur, M.P., and many others. [38] For the information contained in Appendix A I am indebted to Mr. C. J. Follett, C.B. * * * * * Transcriber's Notes: Missing footnotes anchors were corrected. All footnotes were moved to the end. Page ii, "Capitaland" changed to "Capital and." Page 7, "artizans" changed to "artisans." Page 20, opening quotation mark added. Page 32, "espitolatory" changed to "epistolary." Page 66, "semmlingly" changed to "seemingly." Page 110, "wrould" changed to "would." Page 113, "wromen" changed to "women." Page 151, "diposed" changed to "disposed." Both "padrone" and "padroni" were used in this book. 
41291	----	NEW HOMES FOR OLD * * * * * _Americanization Studies_ SCHOOLING OF THE IMMIGRANT. Frank V. Thompson, Supt. of Public Schools, Boston AMERICA VIA THE NEIGHBORHOOD. John Daniels OLD WORLD TRAITS TRANSPLANTED. Robert E. Park, Professorial Lecturer, University of Chicago Herbert A. Miller, Professor of Sociology, Oberlin College A STAKE IN THE LAND. Peter A. Speek, in charge, Slavic Section, Library of Congress IMMIGRANT HEALTH AND THE COMMUNITY. Michael M. Davis, Jr., Director, Boston Dispensary NEW HOMES FOR OLD. Sophonisba P. Breckinridge, Professor of Social Economy, University of Chicago ADJUSTING IMMIGRANT AND INDUSTRY. (In preparation) William M. Leiserson, Chairman, Labor Adjustment Boards, Rochester and New York THE IMMIGRANT PRESS AND ITS CONTROL. (In preparation) Robert E. Park, Professorial Lecturer, University of Chicago THE IMMIGRANT'S DAY IN COURT. (In preparation) Kate Holladay Claghorn, Instructor in Social Research, New York School of Social Work AMERICANS BY CHOICE. (In preparation) John P. Gavit, Vice-President, New York _Evening Post_ SUMMARY. (In preparation) Allen T. Burns, Director, Studies in Methods of Americanization _Harper & Brothers Publishers_ * * * * * [Illustration: THE COMING OF NEW AMERICAN HOME MAKERS] AMERICANIZATION STUDIES ALLEN T. BURNS, DIRECTOR NEW HOMES FOR OLD BY S. P. BRECKINRIDGE PROFESSOR OF SOCIAL ECONOMY UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO [Illustration] HARPER & BROTHERS PUBLISHERS NEW YORK AND LONDON 1921 * * * * * NEW HOMES FOR OLD Copyright, 1921, by Harper & Brothers Printed in the United States of America * * * * * PUBLISHER'S NOTE The material in this volume was gathered by the Division of Adjustment of Homes and Family Life of Studies in Methods of Americanization. Americanization in this study has been considered as the union of native and foreign born in all the most fundamental relationships and activities of our national life. For Americanization is the uniting of new with native-born Americans in fuller common understanding and appreciation to secure by means of self-government the highest welfare of all. Such Americanization should perpetuate no unchangeable political, domestic, and economic regime delivered once for all to the fathers, but a growing and broadening national life, inclusive of the best wherever found. With all our rich heritages, Americanism will develop best through a mutual giving and taking of contributions from both newer and older Americans in the interest of the commonweal. This study has followed such an understanding of Americanization. FOREWORD This volume is the result of studies in methods of Americanization prepared through funds furnished by the Carnegie Corporation of New York. It arose out of the fact that constant applications were being made to the Corporation for contributions to the work of numerous agencies engaged in various forms of social activity intended to extend among the people of the United States the knowledge of their government and the obligations to it. The trustees felt that a study which should set forth, not theories of social betterment, but a description of the methods of the various agencies engaged in such work, would be of distinct value to the cause itself and to the public. The outcome of the study is contained in eleven volumes on the following subjects: Schooling of the Immigrant; The Press; Adjustment of Homes and Family Life; Legal Protection and Correction; Health Standards and Care; Naturalization and Political Life; Industrial and Economic Amalgamation; Treatment of Immigrant Heritages; Neighborhood Agencies and Organization; Rural Developments; and Summary. The entire study has been carried out under the general direction of Mr. Allen T. Burns. Each volume appears in the name of the author who had immediate charge of the particular field it is intended to cover. Upon the invitation of the Carnegie Corporation a committee consisting of the late Theodore Roosevelt, Prof. John Graham Brooks, Dr. John M. Glenn, and Mr. John A. Voll has acted in an advisory capacity to the director. An editorial committee consisting of Dr. Talcott Williams, Dr. Raymond B. Fosdick, and Dr. Edwin F. Gay has read and criticized the manuscripts. To both of these committees the trustees of the Carnegie Corporation are much indebted. The purpose of the report is to give as clear a notion as possible of the methods of the agencies actually at work in this field and not to propose theories for dealing with the complicated questions involved. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Publisher's Note v Foreword vii Table of Contents ix List of Tables xiii List of Illustrations xv Introduction xvii CHAPTER I. FINDING THE NEW HOME 1 The First Adjustments 1 Homes Studied 6 Dissolving Barriers 14 II. FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS 19 Separated Families 20 Keeping Boarders 23 The Man Without a Family 27 The Single Woman 29 The Migrant Family 32 From Farming to Industry 34 The Wage-earning Mother 39 Changed Duties of a Mother 43 Paternal Authority Passing 47 III. THE CARE OF THE HOUSE 54 New Housekeeping Conditions 54 Demands of American Cookery 58 Water Supply Essential 60 Overcrowding Hampers the Housewife 62 Women Work Outside the Home 65 Housing Improvement 66 Government Building Loans 75 Instruction in Sanitation 80 IV. PROBLEMS OF SAVING 85 Present and Future Needs 85 Unfamiliarity with Money 88 Irregularity of Income 91 Reserves for Misfortunes 92 The Cost of Weddings 98 Christenings and Fête Days 103 Buying Property 105 Building and Loan Associations 109 Postal Savings Banks 111 Account Keeping 115 V. THE NEGLECTED ART OF SPENDING 117 The Company Store 119 Shopping Habits 122 Modification of Diets 130 Furniture on the Installment Plan 134 New Fashions and Old Clothes 135 Training Needed 138 Co-operation in Spending 141 VI. THE CARE OF THE CHILDREN 149 The Unpreparedness of the Immigrant Mother 150 Breakdown of Parental Authority 153 Learning to Play 157 Parents and Education 159 Following School Progress 163 The Revolt of Older Children 169 Relations of Boys and Girls 174 The Juvenile Court 181 VII. IMMIGRANT ORGANIZATIONS AND FAMILY PROBLEMS 187 Safety in Racial Affiliations 188 Local Benefit Societies 192 National Croatian Organizations 196 Care of Croatian Orphans 199 Organizations of Poles 201 Polish Women's Work 203 Lithuanian Woman's Alliance 209 Ukrainian Beginnings 215 Growth of National Organizations 218 VIII. AGENCIES OF ADJUSTMENT 222 Immigrant Protective League 223 A National Reception Committee 227 The Public School 230 The Home Teacher 236 Settlement Classes 238 Co-operation of Agencies 240 International Institutes 243 Training for Service 248 Home Economics Work 254 Government Grants in England 263 The Lesson for the United States 266 Mothers' Assistants 268 Recreational Agencies 272 IX. FAMILY CASE WORK 277 The Language Difficulty 280 Standards of Living 286 Visiting Housekeepers 289 Knowledge of Backgrounds 298 Training Facilities Needed 301 The Transient Family 304 Need for National Agency 307 APPENDIX 313 Principal Racial Organizations 313 Czech 313 Danish 314 Dutch 315 Finnish 315 German 316 Hungarian 317 Italian 318 Jewish 319 Jugoslav 324 Lithuanian 326 Polish 327 Russian 329 Slovak 330 Swedish 331 Ukrainian 331 Menus of Foreign Born 333 Bohemian 333 Croatian 335 Italian 335 Slovenian 340 INDEX 343 LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE I. Number and Per Cent of Families Carrying Life Insurance and Average Amount of Policy According to Nativity of Head of Family 94 II. Number and Per Cent of Immigrant Home Owners in Different Chicago Districts 107 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS The Coming of New American Home Makers _Frontispiece_ A Railroad Camp for Immigrant Workers in a Prosperous Suburban Community, 1920 _Facing p._ 4 An Immigrant Railway Worker Lives in this Car with His Wife, Six Children, and Three Dogs " 4 Even a Boarding House of Eighteen Boarders in Five Rooms is More Cheerful than a Labor Camp for Men Alone " 24 Almost at the End of the Journey " 32 Floor Plan of Houses in Poland _Page_ 55 This Pump Supplies Water to Four Families _Facing p._ 60 A Community Housing Plan _Page_ 73 Italians Have Their Own Financial Center and Labor Market in Boston _Facing p._ 110 It's a Long Way from This Elaborate Czecho-Slovak Costume to the Modern American Styles " 136 A Slovak Mother, Newly Arrived " 150 Immigrant Children Acquiring Individual Initiative in a Montessori Class at Hull House " 160 Who Will Welcome Them? " 192 Lithuanian Mothers Have Come to a Settlement Class " 238 A Case-work Agency Found Four Girls and Eighteen Men Boarding with This Polish Family in Four Rooms " 288 INTRODUCTION The following study is the result of effort on the part of several persons. Miss Helen R. Wright, formerly research assistant of the Chicago School of Civics and member of the staff of the Massachusetts Immigration Commission of 1914, had much to do with the planning of the inquiry, the framing of such schedules as were used, and the organization of certain portions of the information gathered. Through Miss Laura Hood, long time a resident of the Chicago Commons, it proved to be possible to obtain many intimate views with reference to the more subtle questions of family adjustment in the groups that are of special interest in such an inquiry as this. Certain questions of uniformity in method and style of presentation were determined by the editorial staff of the Study of Methods of Americanization. For the final drafting of a considerable portion of the study, especially in the earlier chapters, the members of this editorial staff are responsible, though the writer is glad to acknowledge full responsibility for all conclusions drawn or recommendations offered. SOPHONISBA P. BRECKINRIDGE. _April_ 15, 1921. NEW HOMES FOR OLD I FINDING THE NEW HOME The great westward tide of immigration has again begun to rise. Annually to the ports of entry and to the great inland centers of distribution come thousands of immigrant families, strange men and women with young children, unattached girls, and vigorous, simple lads. With few exceptions no provision by native Americans has been made for their reception in their new places of residence. Communities of kindly-intentioned persons, because of their lack of imagination and their indifference, have allowed the old, the young, the mother, and infant to come in by back ways, at any hour of day or night. Frequently they have been received only by uncomprehending or indifferent railroad officials or oversolicitous exploiters. THE FIRST ADJUSTMENTS It is not strange that in most American communities there is no habit of community hospitality. Communities are in themselves transitory and fluid. Many of the native born have as yet become only partially adjusted to their physical and social environment. At least the childhood of most of our older generation was spent under the influence of those who had either migrated or immigrated. "_Nous marchons tous._" We are all "pilgrims and strangers." Some have come sooner, and some have come later, and except for the colored people and those in territory acquired in 1848 and in 1898, all have a common memory of having come deliberately either _from_ something worse or _to_ something better. All have come from where they were into what was a far country. While the earlier arrivals are making their own adjustments, there are knocking at their gates strangers from a more distant country speaking a foreign tongue, accustomed to totally different ways of living and working. Their reception, however, need not be an impossible task. On their arrival they are formally admitted, and information as to their origin and destination must be supplied. Methods could be devised for receiving them in such a way as to make them feel at ease, and for interpreting to them the changed surroundings in which they must find a home and a job in the shortest possible time. If discomfort and confusion were the only distress into which the strange group fell, the situation might be only humiliating to our generous and hospitable spirit and could be easily remedied. But the consequences of failure to exercise hospitality at the beginning endure in lack of understanding on the part of both groups. The immigrant fails to find natural and normal ways of sharing in the life of the community, and becomes skeptical as to the sincerity of perfectly well-meaning, but uninformed, professions on the part of the older residents. Spiritual barriers as definite, if not as easily perceived, as the geographical boundaries of the "colonies" formed in the different sections of our cities, develop. This is often true in connection with the foreign-born men and tragically more true of the women. One Italian woman in Herrin, Illinois, for example, who had lived nineteen years in this country, told an investigator for this study that she had never received an American into her home as a guest, because no American had ever come in that spirit. A Russian woman had lived in Chicago for nine years and had, so far as she knew, not become acquainted with any Americans. Several instances were found in which efforts have been put forward to secure the united effort of the whole community, and yet large groups of immigrants have remained substantially unaware of these efforts and were entirely untouched by them. There are several other attitudes, too, that have perhaps blinded some to the need of provision for community hospitality. One attitude might be characterized as that of the "self-made man." Hardship may have either of two different effects. In one person it will develop sympathy, compassion, and a desire to safeguard others from similar suffering. In others it may lead to a certain callous disregard of other people--a belief that if one has been able to surmount the difficulties others should likewise be able. If not, so much the worse. This kind of harshness characterizes the attitude of some of those immigrants who have come at earlier dates toward those who have come later. [Illustration: A RAILROAD CAMP FOR IMMIGRANT WORKERS IN A PROSPEROUS SUBURBAN COMMUNITY, 1920] [Illustration: AN IMMIGRANT RAILWAY WORKER LIVES IN THIS CAR WITH HIS WIFE, SIX CHILDREN, AND THREE DOGS] It is like the occasional successful woman who is indifferent to the general disadvantages of her sex, and to the negro who makes for himself a brilliant place and argues that color is no handicap. In talking to women about bringing up their children, it was a significant fact that some of the women who had had no trouble with their own children said that where there is trouble it is the fault of the parents. The following comment, for example, was on the schedule of Mrs. D., a Polish woman who has been in this country since 1894, and has three children, aged twenty-five, twelve, and six. "If a child is not good, Mrs. D. blames his mother, who does not know how to take care of children. She thinks they are too ignorant." There is also the sense of racial, national, or class superiorities. The virtue of the Anglo-Saxon civilization is assumed; the old, as against the new immigration, is valued. There are many who crave the satisfaction of "looking down" on some one, and it makes life simpler if whole groups--"Dagoes," "Hunkies," "Polacks," what you will--can be regarded as of a different race or group, so that neither one's heartstrings nor one's conscience need be affected by their needs. The difficulty is increased by a similar tendency of immigrants to assume the superiority of their people and culture and so hold aloof from the new life. This assumption of superiority on both sides tends to hinder rather than to further mutual understanding. Clearly, if we are to build up a united and wholesome national life, such attitudes of aloofness as have persisted will have to be abandoned. If that life is to be enriched and varied--not monotonous and mechanical--the lowly and the simple, as well as the great and the mighty, must be able to make their contribution. This contribution can become possible, not as the result of any compulsory scheme, but of conditions favoring noble, generous, and sympathetic living. The family is an institution based on the affection of the parents and their self-sacrifice for the life and future of their children. Of all institutions it exemplifies the power of co-operative effort, and demands sympathetic and patient understanding. This is perhaps especially true of the foreign-born family. This discussion of the family problems of the foreign-born groups in relation to the development of a national consciousness and a national unity is based on the belief that no attempts at compulsory adjustment can in the nature of things be successful. Sometimes the interests of the common good and of the weaker groups demand for their own protection the temporary exercise of compulsion, but the real solution lies in policies grounded in social justice and guided by social intelligence. HOMES STUDIED The material in this study is of a qualitative sort. No attempt has been made to organize a statistical study. The problems of family life do not lend themselves to the statistical method except at great cost of time and money. A large body of data with reference to conditions existing during the decade just prior to the Great War, exists in the reports of several special government investigations, especially the report of the United States Immigration Commission, that of the United States Bureau of Labor relating to conditions surrounding women and child wage earners, and that of the British Board of Trade on the "Cost of Living in American Towns." The regular publications of certain government bureaus, especially the United States Children's Bureau, the Bureau of Home Economics in the United States Department of Agriculture, and the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, were found useful. These publications have been studied so far as they discuss the problem of family life. Their contents are presented only in illustration or in confirmation of statements made. The material collected is of two kinds. First, there are facts dealing with the different agencies organized to help in solving these problems. This information was gathered largely by correspondence. Questionnaires were sent to case-work agencies dealing with family problems, which are members of the American Association for Social Work with Families and Home Service Bureaus of various Red Cross Chapters, asking their methods for attacking these difficulties and their advice as to the best methods worked out. The supervisors of Home Economics under the Federal Board for Vocational Education were asked to what extent they had included foreign-born housewives in their program and the special plans that had been worked out for them; the International Institutes of the Young Women's Christian Association were asked to describe their work with married women. The methods of certain agencies in Chicago--the United Charities, the Immigrants' Protective League, some of the settlements--were studied more carefully through interviews with their workers and through a study of individual records. Officers of the national racial organizations were interviewed about their work on family problems. In addition to these a limited number of co-operative stores in Illinois were studied. Mining communities in Illinois, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia were visited, as well as certain of the newer housing projects, such as Yorkship Village in New Jersey, Hilton Village in Virginia, Bridgeport, Connecticut, Lowell and North Billerica, Massachusetts and several towns in New Mexico. The government investigations already referred to had made certain needs of the foreign born very clear. It seemed unnecessary to go over that ground again, but it was necessary to know whether those needs still existed. An attempt was made to learn this through interviews with leaders of various national groups and by obtaining schedules from a limited number of selected families. A word should be said as to the information obtained from these sources. The leaders selected were, in the first instance, men and women whose leadership in their own group had been recognized by election to important offices in their national organizations. These men and women then frequently suggested others whose position was not so well defined to an outsider, but whose opinion was valued by members of the group. Most of the persons interviewed were able to speak English readily. They were people who were close enough to the great mass of immigrants to be familiar with their problems, their needs, their shortcomings, and their abilities, and at the same time were sufficiently removed from the problems to be able to view them objectively. Some were persons of more educational and cultural background than the majority of immigrants, some of them had been born in this country or had come when they were young children; but there were more who came to this country from the same Old-World conditions as the majority of their countrymen and had worked their way through the same hard conditions. They were probably exceptional in their native ability. No attempt was made to fill out a questionnaire from these interviews. An outline was prepared of points to be covered, but frequently no attempt was made to adhere to the outline. Rather, these persons were encouraged to talk on the family problems in which they were most interested, and to which they had given most thought--to enable us to see them as they saw them with their knowledge of the Old-World background from which their people had come. They were also asked to suggest possible ways of meeting the more pressing needs of their people. Adequate expression can never be given to the obligation under which those busy men and women who gave so generously and graciously their time and their thoughts have placed us. Our very great indebtedness to them is acknowledged, as without their aid this study in the present form would have been impossible. The demand made upon them could be justified only by the hope that the contacts thus established may prove in some slight degree profitable to them if only in giving them assurance that there are those to whom their problems are of real interest. The women from whom family schedules were obtained were slightly different, and the information sought from them was obtained in a different way. They were for the most part women who did not speak English well enough to carry on an extended conversation in it. While they were not very recent immigrants and hence were not going through the first difficulties of adjustment, most of them were women who had not yet worked their way through to the same place reached by the women with whom the more general interviews were had. They were, in general, very simple people, too absorbed with working out their problems to have had much time for reflection. We asked them to tell us of their early experiences and difficulties as they recalled them, and of their present ways of treating some of the problems. This information was taken in schedule form. Not enough schedules were obtained to be of statistical value--there were only ninety in all--but the families chosen are believed to be more or less typical. They were selected with the advice of leaders of their group or were known to our foreign-speaking investigators, who had a wide acquaintance in several groups. That is, we have tried so far as possible to see the problem with the persons, if not through the eyes of the persons whose fellow countrymen we wished to know. We do not mean to suggest that other and very important groups might not have been studied, but we tried to learn of others; and sometimes because we could not find the clew, sometimes for lack of time, it proved impossible to go farther. We feel that we have obtained an insight into the situation among the Polish in Chicago and in Rolling Prairie, Indiana; the Lithuanians, Bohemians, Slovaks, Croatians, Slovenians, nonfamily Mexicans, Russians--both family and nonfamily--and Italians in Chicago; Italians in Herrin and Freeman, Illinois, and Canonsburg and Washington, Pennsylvania; and the Ukrainians in Chicago and in Sun, West Virginia. Besides the large body of evidence with reference to these groups, we have suggestions from many interested and kindly persons of other groups. The Magyars and the Rumanians, particularly, we should have liked to know better, and we have had most suggestive interviews with certain of their leaders. We were not able, however, to follow the leads they gave, and therefore do not claim to speak for them, except to express the feeling of the need for greater understanding and appreciation. With reference to those groups discussed, it should be noted that some, such as the Polish, Bohemian, Lithuanian, Italian, are among the largest of the great foreign colonies in Chicago, the growth of a long-continued immigration. They live in the different sections of the city, in crowded tenement districts, or in more recently developed neighborhoods for whose growth they are responsible. The Croatian and Ukrainian groups are newer groups, and are therefore poorer. The Croatians are moving into houses which the Bohemians are vacating. In the Russian and Mexican groups we have the current evidence that the old problem of the nonfamily man is still with us. The Poles in Rolling Prairie, Indiana, are a prosperous farming community living in modern farmhouses with yards and orchards. There are women still alive who can tell of the earlier days, when just after their arrival they lived in one-room houses made of logs and plastered with mud. Then they helped their husbands to fell trees and clear the land. Like other pioneer women, these women have contributed to the "winning of the West." The grandmothers tell of these things. The mothers remember when, during the winter, the children went to school for a few months, they were laughed at because of their meager lunches, their queer homemade clothes, and their foreign speech. The young people now go to school at least as long as the law requires and sometimes through high school. The mining towns in Illinois and Pennsylvania need not be described. Their general features are familiar. Although extended information with reference to the life of the various groups was not obtained, mention will be made of certain facts that are of importance to this study. While the numbers are not great, it is hoped that certain methods may be worked out for approach to the problems of the groups studied, that will prove suggestive in attacking the problems of other groups not included here. No two groups are alike; but the experience with one or with several may develop the open-minded, humble, objective attitude of mind and that democratic habit of approach that will unlock the doorway into the life of the others and exhibit both the points at which community action may be desirable and the direction such action should take. DISSOLVING BARRIERS The purpose of this book is to help in the adjustment of immigrant family life in this country. The immigrant will feel America to be his own land largely to the extent that he feels his American home to be as much his home as was his native hearth. To define what makes a home is harder even than to achieve one. Perhaps more than any other human institution the home is a development, the result and component of innumerable adjustments. This growth comes about largely spontaneously, without conscious effort on the part of its members, except that of living together as happily as possible. There is among most housewives, whether native or foreign born, a certain complacency about housekeeping and bringing up children. Housekeeping is supposed to come by nature, and few women of any station in life are trained to be homemakers and mothers. The native born, in part consciously through their own choice and in part blindly moved by forces they do not understand, have been gradually moving away from the old tradition of subordination on the part of the wife and of strict and unquestioning obedience of children. In the general American atmosphere there are suggestions of a different tradition. In the old country the mother knew what standards she was to maintain and, moreover, had the backing of a homogeneous group to help her. In this country she is a stranger, neither certain of herself nor sure whether to try to maintain the standards of her home or those that seem to prevail here. As a matter of fact, these difficulties are usually surmounted, so that by the time the foreign-born housewife has lived here long enough to raise her family she has learned to care for her home as systematically and intelligently as most of her native-born neighbors, who have not had her difficulties. Sometimes they have learned from the members of the group who have been here longer; and sometimes they have learned by going into the more comfortable American homes as domestic servants. In the American domestic evolution a scientific and deliberate factor has been introduced. Students of family life have conducted inquiries into domestic practices, needs, and resources, and applied the researches of physiologists, chemists, economists, and architects. The result has been the discovery of certain standards and requirements for wholesome family life. It must be admitted that the attempt at formulation of standards for family life encounters difficulties not found in the field of education or of health, where the presence and service of the expert are fairly widely recognized. For many reasons the subject of the _minima_ of sound family life has been more recently attacked and is, in the nature of things, more difficult of analysis and especially of formal study. The impossibility, for example, of applying to many aspects of the family problem the laboratory methods of study or of examining many of the questions in a dispassionate and objective manner, must retard the scientific treatment of the subject. There are, however, some aspects of family life with reference to which there may be said to be fairly general agreement in theory if not in practice in the United States. The content of an adequate food allowance is generally agreed upon by the students of nutrition, and the cost and special features of an adequate diet for any group at any time and place can therefore be described and discussed. In the matter of laying the responsibility for support of the family on the husband and father, at least to the extent of enabling the children to enjoy seven years of school life and fourteen years free from wage-paid work and the resulting exploitation, there is wide agreement embodied in legislation. Such standards are becoming gradually adopted and incorporated into domestic life through the slow processes of suggestion, imitation, and neighborly talks already mentioned. While the slow establishment of social standards is required for a complete and adequate adjustment of family life on the basis of specialists' discoveries, many systematic and formal efforts can be made which will forward and accelerate the process. These efforts can help to remove the feeling of strangeness, perhaps the greatest obstacle in adjusting home life; they should seek to connect with the appreciations and sense of need already felt by the women who are to be influenced. There is necessity for thorough inquiry into what are the points of contact in these problems for immigrant women; what are their present customs and standards in which the specialists' knowledge can be planted with the prospect of a promising combination of seed and soil. This study indicates how great is the need of search for the possibilities of just such organic connections. Pending such further studies, this report can do two things: First, it can exhibit, so far as possible, the difficulties encountered by foreign-born families in attaining in their family relationships such satisfaction as would constitute a genuine feeling of hominess, and make the immigrant home an integral part of the domestic development in this country. Second, the report can suggest the deliberate and systematic methods which can be effective in introducing the immigrant family and specialists' standards to each other. The services of social agencies have been largely in this field, and it is hoped that they may find in this book lines for increased usefulness. Incidentally, evidence will be presented to show that, in allowing many of these difficulties to develop or to remain, the community suffers real loss, and it is hoped that in the following chapters suggestion will be found of ways by which some of these difficulties may be overcome and some of the waste resulting from their continued existence be eliminated. II FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS It is impossible to discuss the problems of adjustment of the family life of the immigrant to life in this country without taking notice of several factors that complicate the problem. There is first the disorganization in family life that is incident to the migration itself. The members of most of the families that come to this country are peasants who are almost forced to emigrate by the fact that the land they own will not support the entire family as the children grow up and establish families of their own. There was, for example, among the families visited for this study, a family from the Russian Ukraine. The man's father was a peasant farmer with six acres of land and a large family of children. The income from this small property was supplemented by hiring out as laborers on the large estates near by. As the boys grew up they left home. Two had already come to America when the father of this family left in 1910. At the time he left there were thirteen people trying to get their living from six acres of land. Another family from the same country were trying to live on the income from the farm of the man's father, who had four acres of land and five sons. SEPARATED FAMILIES In such families, and even in less extreme cases, it is evident that the cash needed for the emigration of the whole family is difficult to secure. It often happens, therefore, that the family does not emigrate as a group, but one member--usually the man--goes ahead, and sends for the rest as soon as he has earned enough to pay their passage. It is then some time, usually from two to four years and occasionally longer, before he is able to send for his family. One Ukrainian man interviewed in this study came in 1906, leaving his wife and four children in the old country. He had difficulty in finding work he could do, wandered from place to place, never staying long in one place, and it was eight years before he had saved enough to send for his family. Another man, a Slovenian, came in 1904, and was here seven years before he sent his wife money enough so she could follow him. Separations of this kind are often destructive of the old family relationships. What they mean in suffering to the wife left behind has been revealed by some of the letters of husbands and wives in a collection of letters in _The Polish Peasant_,[1] especially in the Borkowski series. These are letters written by Teofila Borkowski in Warsaw, to her husband, Wladek Borkowski, in America, between the years 1893 and 1912. During the early years the letters usually thanked him for a gift of money and referred to the time when she should join him in America. "I shall now count the days and weeks. May our Lord God grant it to happen as soon as possible, for I am terribly worried," she wrote in 1894. As time goes on the intervals between the gifts grew longer, and she writes imploring him to send money if he is able, as she is in desperate need of it. In 1896 she had been ill and in the hospital. "When I left the hospital I did not know what to do with myself, without money and almost without roof ... so I begged her and promised I would pay her when you send some money" (p. 353). And in 1897 she wrote: For God's sake what does it mean that you don't answer?... For I don't think that you could have forgotten me totally.... Answer me as soon as possible, and send me anything you can. For if I were not in need I should never annoy you, but our Lord God is the best witness how terribly hard it is for me to live. Those few rubles which you sent me a few times are only enough to pay the rent for some months.... As to board, clothes, and shoes, they are earned with such a difficulty that you have surely no idea. And I must eat every day. There are mostly days in my present situation when I have one small roll and a pot of tea for the whole day, and I must live so. And this has lasted almost five years since you left (p. 353). She is pathetically grateful when money is sent. Thus in 1899 she writes: I received your letter, with twenty rubles and three photographs, for which I send you a hearty "God reward!" I bear it always in my heart and thought and I always repeat it to everybody that you were good and generous, and you are so up to the present (p. 358). Her sufferings are not confined to financial worries and lack of a place to eat and sleep. There is apparently a loss of social prestige and a falling off of friends. The letters also show what was evidently a real affection for her husband, and that at times his silence was even worse than his failure to send money. Thus in 1905, when the money and the letters were very irregular, she writes a letter (p. 362) in which no reference is made to her economic situation. After asking if he received her last letter, she continues: It is true, dear Wladek, that you have not so much time, but my dear, write me sometimes a few words; you will cause me great comfort. For I read your letter like a prayer, because for me, dear Wladek, our Lord God is the first and you the second. Don't be angry if I bore you with my letters, but it is for me a great comfort to be able to speak with you at least through this paper. Her financial situation grows steadily worse, and in 1912 she writes that she is "already barefooted and naked." The series closes with a letter from a friend stating that she is ill and in the hospital, "not so dangerously sick, but suffering very much ... and very weak from bad nutrition and continuous sorrows." He closes: "And please write a little more affectionately. Only do it soon, for it will be the best medicine for your wife, at least for her heart" (p. 368). KEEPING BOARDERS The life of the man who has come ahead has been made the subject of special study from time to time,[2] especially with regard to the housing conditions in which he lives--as a lodger or a member of a nonfamily group of men. It has been shown in all these studies that whatever the plan worked out, he adapts himself either to a life of intimate familiarity with women and children not his own, or to a life in which children and women have little part. In connection with the present study, the living conditions of some of the Mexicans and Russians in Chicago were studied. As in the past, the men were found living in one of the following ways: as a lodger in the family group, as a boarder paying a fixed sum for room and board, or as a member of a group of men attempting to do their own housekeeping. The Mexicans studied included 207 men, of whom 197, or 95 per cent, are unmarried. The Russians included 112 men, of whom 65, or 58 per cent, had wives in Russia. It is interesting to note that 136 of the 207 Mexican men were boarding, usually with a Mexican family, 37 were lodgers, and 34 were doing co-operative housekeeping. Among the Russians, on the other hand, there were 25 doing co-operative housekeeping, and 85 living with family groups, of whom only a few paid a fixed sum for room and board, while the others paid a fixed rate for lodging and the food bill depended on the food that was consumed. [Illustration: EVEN A BOARDING HOUSE OF EIGHTEEN BOARDERS IN FIVE ROOMS IS MORE CHEERFUL THAN A LABOR CAMP FOR MEN ALONE] Four variations were found in the method of paying for food: (1) The landlady buys all the food for the group and her family on one account. The total bill is divided by the number of boarders plus the head of the family, the wife and children getting their food as partial compensation for her services. (2) Each lodger has his own account book, in which is entered only the meat purchased for him. He pays this account himself. The other food purchased is entered in the landlady's book, and divided in the same manner as before. (3) Each lodger has his own account and buys what he wants. Instead of paying for what he has bought, he pays his share of the total food bought during the week. (4) Each lodger has his own account, the family has its own, and each pays his own. Whatever expedient is adopted as a substitute for normal family life, the result is unsatisfactory. The men studied almost without exception preferred living as boarders with a family group, if possible. This preference is easily understood, as it meant less work for the men, who, in co-operative groups, had to do women's work as well as their own, and it also seemed a closer approximation to normal living. For the sake of these advantages they were willing to put up with housing conditions that were worse than those of the men who tried co-operative housekeeping. Thus 56 per cent of the Russian men in co-operative groups had the four hundred cubic feet of air per man that is required by law, and only 35 per cent of those living with family groups had this requirement. The presence of a lodger in the family, moreover, is attended with great discomfort to the family. He is given the best accommodations the house affords and the family crowds into what is left. Thus, in the family groups with whom the Russians were living, only 18 per cent of the adult members of the family had the four hundred cubic feet of air required by the city ordinance for a person over twelve, as compared with 35 per cent of the boarders or lodgers, and forty of the fifty-three children in the groups were deprived of the two hundred cubic feet of air space that is prescribed for them. The people with whom we have conferred in this study have said again and again that the lodger in a family meant restriction and deprivation for the family, and especially for the children. One Lithuanian woman who came to this country when she was two years old, says she well remembers the "utter misery" of her childhood, due to the lodgers. They were given all the beds and any other sleeping arrangements that could be contrived, and the children slept on the floor in any corner. Their sleep was often disturbed by people moving about. Sometimes they were wakened and sent to the saloon to get beer for a group of lodgers who sat up late playing cards and drinking. She remembers, too, the constant quarreling over the food bill, and thinks that is very common. The complicated system by which the accounts are kept, to which attention has already been called, makes suspicion on the part of the lodger only too easy. Several people have spoken of the unsteady character of the lodger and the practice of staying up late, drinking. One of the women interviewed said that the family life was much easier, now that it was no longer necessary to keep lodgers, for when there were lodgers in the house they always had beer, and her husband would drink with them. Other people have spoken of the women drinking with the lodgers, and it was said that anyone who read the foreign-language newspapers would see many such advertisements as: "I am left alone with my three children; my wife has gone off with a lodger. Anyone having information, please communicate with..." THE MAN WITHOUT A FAMILY Life in a men's co-operative housekeeping establishment is usually more difficult, for upon them falls the burden of maintaining cleanliness in the household, and in many cases preparing their own meals. Some of the Mexican men visited at nine o'clock in the evening were preparing food for the next day's lunch. An important consideration here is the high cost of living under such conditions. The immigrant woman may not be a skillful buyer, but the immigrant man is evidently a most extravagant one. Among the Mexicans, for example, it was found that the men living in co-operative groups paid practically as much for the food which they themselves prepared as the men living in boarding houses paid for board and room. Their food cost seven to eight dollars per man per week. These studies showed the same lack of opportunities for wholesome recreation and for meeting nice girls, as well as the same restlessness of the men as did earlier studies. This was especially noticeable among the Mexicans, who spoke with longing of their Mexican dances that lasted two days and were held almost every week-end, and of the band concerts to which they could often go. No matter how poor their furniture, most of them had one or two musical instruments which they played, and usually there was one phonograph for the group. They found these poor substitutes for group music, where they could have not only the music but the social time. In brief, these studies of nonfamily men in 1919 show that the problem of adequate housing and some form of normal social life for the men who come ahead of their families is a recurring one. The nationality of the group changes as one immigration wave succeeds another. With the change in nationality come minor changes in the needs and desires of the group, but the main problem remains the same. It should never be forgotten that the impressions these men receive during their early life in the United States form the basis of their judgment concerning American life. Moreover, the life they lead during this period of separation from their families must inevitably affect their family relationships when family life is re-established, whether it be in this country or in the country from which they come. The first national recognition of the needs of the men was evident in the plans of the United States Housing Corporation.[3] These provided for separate lodging houses for men, where each man had a room of his own, with an adequate amount of air space, and where bathing and toilet facilities were provided. Recreational needs were met by having a smoking room, reading room, and billiard room in each house, and, unless provided elsewhere in the community, bowling alleys in the basement. It has been repeatedly emphasized to us that the men would not be satisfied unless a lodging house for them were run by some one who could speak their language, knew their national tastes, and could understand their problems. The availability of houses of this type to the immigrant men in nonfamily groups would depend to a great extent on their administration, but it is apparent that such a housing plan is not impossible of attainment. THE SINGLE WOMAN It is not always the man who comes alone to this country. Often the girl comes in advance of the others and sends money back to bring over her parents and younger brothers and sisters. Attention has been called again and again to the hazards for the girl thrown on her own resources in a strange country among people she does not know, whose language she does not understand.[4] She has, in fact, the same problem to solve as the man who has come alone, but she is further hampered both by economic and social handicaps. She is probably from a country where the life of a woman has been protected and circumscribed, and to find herself in a country where the conditions and status of women are freer, makes both for confusion and complications. A false step is of more serious consequence to her than to a man, and without guidance and assistance she may sometimes take this in ignorance or thoughtlessness. Equally changed are her living conditions here. She has the same ways of living open to her that are open to the man--boarding or lodging with a family group or setting up a co-operative household with a group of girls. The girl living in the latter way does not have as many difficulties as the man in the same situation, for women are used to doing housework. Yet if men find it too difficult to be both wage earners and housekeepers, it is surely too hard for girls. If, on the other hand, the girl finds lodging with a family group, life is not much easier, for she is expected to help with the household tasks, even though she is charged as much as the man lodger, who usually is exempt from any household responsibility. The inevitable assumption that any extra tasks of housework or sewing should fall to the women may make for a disproportionately long and tedious day for the woman lodger. The compensation of having the protection and sociability of a family group may thus be outweighed by the burden of overwork. Added to this, the prevalent necessity of overcrowding the households with boarders, puts a hardship upon women that often is not felt by men. The need of providing adequate and safe lodging for the girl away from home has been felt in many places and by numerous organizations. Too often facilities have appealed only to the native born or thoroughly initiated immigrant girl. The International Institute of the Young Women's Christian Association has helped immigrants to find suitable homes. This has local branches in more than thirty cities, many of which are helping to meet the housing problems of the immigrant girls. The government, in its housing projects, provided accommodations for the single girls similar to those provided for single men. They built boarding houses for from seventy-five to a hundred and fifty girls, with separate rooms and adequate toilet and bathing facilities. Each floor had a matron's office, so placed as to overlook the entrance and access to the sleeping quarters, and there was either a reception parlor or alcove for every twenty women, or a large parlor with furniture arranged for privacy in conversation. An assembly hall was provided with movable partitions and set stage. Kitchenette, sitting room, and sewing room were provided on at least alternate floors, and the building contained an infirmary and laundry for the use of the girls.[5] Information is not at hand as to whether any of these houses were used by groups of immigrant girls. Similar houses could, however, easily be made useful for them if care were taken to put them in charge of some one who understood the problems of the foreign-born girl. More desirable still are projects undertaken by groups of foreign-born women themselves.[6] In this way the problems and tastes of the different nationality groups are taken into consideration, confidence and co-operation on the part of the girls more easily won, and an independent and ultimately self-directed plan will be realized. [Illustration: ALMOST AT THE END OF THE JOURNEY] THE MIGRANT FAMILY Even when all the family has reached this country the problems of migration have not always ended. Many families do not establish a permanent home in the first place in which they settle, but move from place to place, and in each place there is a new set of conditions to which to adjust themselves. Of the ninety families visited in Chicago for this study, information on this point was obtained from only forty-two. Nineteen of these came directly to Chicago, but twenty-three had lived in other places. Five of them had been in the Pennsylvania mining district around Pittsburgh, two had been in North Dakota on a farm, two had been in a New Jersey manufacturing town, and the others had been at widely different places in other cities--New York, Philadelphia, Galveston, Texas, Boston--in small towns in the Middle West, and on plantations in Louisiana. Some had moved several times. A Polish family, for example, had lived first in Boston, then in New York City, then somewhere in Canada, before they finally settled in Chicago. Another Ukrainian family, from Galicia, lived first in one mining town in Pennsylvania, then in another in the same state, and later moved to Chicago. The mother, who is a very intelligent woman, described her first impression of America when she, with her four children, arrived in the little mining town. She said that immigrants were living there, everything was dirty and ugly, and she was shocked by the number of drunken men and women she saw on the streets, "having not been accustomed to see them in the old country." She wished to return immediately and did not even want to unpack her belongings. For a whole year she lived amid these squalid surroundings, until her husband got work in another town where conditions seemed a little better. Sometimes these changes mean family separations, as the man again goes ahead, as he did in coming to this country. The experience of a Polish family is typical. When the family first came to this country they went to Iron Mountain, Michigan, where the father worked in the ore mines until he lost his health. Then a sister of his wife, who was living in South Chicago, invited him to visit her family, and offered to get work for him in the steel mills. He came, living with his sister-in-law, and after a few months obtained work in the mills. Then the mother and children followed him. FROM FARMING TO INDUSTRY Another fact to which attention should be called is the adjustment in family life required by contact with the modern industrial system. Some of the immigrant groups come from countries more developed in an industrial way than others, but none of the newer groups come from any country in which the factory system has become so prevalent as in the United States. In the old country the family still exercised productive functions as a unit. It had access to tillable land, and was an essential part of an industrial system that is still organically related to the stage of development of the country. It had, therefore, within itself, the sources of self-support and self-determination. The civilization of which it was a part may be a declining civilization; but the conditions of life were those to which the wife and mother were accustomed. She took them for granted, felt at home among them, and was not conscious of being overwhelmed by them. In the modern American industrial community, however, the family as a whole is generally divorced from land. It is not a unit in relation to the industrial organization, but in its productive function is usually broken up by it. For the family must live, and yet its income is dependent, not upon its size nor the volume of its needs, but upon the wage-earning capacity of the man under the prevailing system of bargaining. That the resulting income has often been wholly inadequate, even according to the modest standards set by dietetic experts and by social investigators, is testified to by an enormous body of data gathered during the decade preceding the Great War.[7] It is unnecessary to review these studies in detail, but attention may be called to the findings of the Immigration Commission. Of the foreign-born male heads of households studied, 4,506, or 34.1 per cent, earned less than four hundred dollars a year at a time when dietetic experts agreed that five hundred dollars was a minimum below which it was dangerous for families to fall. Seventy per cent earned less than six hundred dollars. These figures may be said to come from "far away and long ago," but while there has not been time for widespread inquiry, there is a considerable body of evidence indicating that the same condition prevails to-day. Wages have increased greatly during the war, but with the increase in prices there is doubt as to whether real wages have increased or decreased. Certainly the increase has been irregular and uneven, affecting the workers in some industries much more than in others. The New York State Industrial Commission made a study of the average weekly earnings of labor in the factories of the state. They found that between June, 1914, and June, 1918, wages had increased 64 per cent.[8] The United States Bureau of Labor Statistics made a study of food. Taking the year 1913 as the base, or 100, wages in 1907 were 92 and the retail prices of food, 82, and in 1918 wages were 130 and food 168. That is, the price of food increased much more rapidly than the average union wage scale between 1907 and 1918.[9] As a result of these low earnings, the wife and children in many immigrant families have been forced into the industrial field and even then the resulting incomes have often been inadequate. The Immigration Commission found that almost one third of the foreign-born families studied had a total family income of under five hundred dollars, and almost two thirds had incomes less than seven hundred and fifty dollars. Not only is the family income often inadequate and composite, but precarious and uncertain. The need for food is a regularly recurring need; the demand for labor may be seasonal, periodically interrupted, and in time of crisis wholly uncertain. Although child labor laws have been enacted in many states and by the United States Congress, they are comparatively recent. Their absence in earlier years has had its inevitable effect on many foreign born. Many of the leaders in the immigrant groups who came here when they were still children, tell of stopping school and going to work. One Lithuanian woman, who is among the more prosperous of the group in Chicago, said that she stopped school when she was twelve, and went to work in a fruit-packing concern, working ten hours a day and earning five dollars a week, which she gave to her father. Another worked as a cash girl in a downtown store at the age of thirteen. Similarly, in one of the Russian families now living in Chicago, the girls were fourteen and nine when they came to this country and settled in a New Jersey town. The older was sent to work at once, and the younger a year later. Now, after nine years in this country, neither girl can speak English. The present laws are not always efficiently enforced, and the child of the foreign born suffers especially from such failure to enforce the law. In one of the mining communities of Illinois, visited in the spring of 1919, Italian boys as young as twelve were found working in the mines. In New Mexico, children of twelve and ten, and even younger, were taken out of school each year in the spring to go with their fathers to work on other men's farms or to herd sheep. Our investigator was impressed, in Rolling Prairie, with the need of including agriculture among the occupations from which young children are prohibited as wage earners. THE WAGE-EARNING MOTHER Of the mother's work, notice must be taken. People interviewed in this study were almost unanimously of the opinion that immigrant women were adding to the family income in many cases. If the children are too young to be left alone, the father's inadequate income is supplemented by taking lodgers. Too often, however, the mother works outside the home for wages. Indeed, a number of people were of the opinion that the employment of women has increased during the war. Among the more recently arrived Bohemians, for example, it was said that mothers of small children were going to work as never before, because taking lodgers was not possible, as single men have not been coming in such large numbers since the war. The older settlers felt that they must take advantage of the relatively high wages offered women to make payments on property. Lithuanian observers say that partly because of prejudice against it, Lithuanian married women have not gone out of their homes to work until recently. With the war, the increased cost of living, the higher wages offered to women, and the appeal that was made to their patriotism, many women had gone into industry, especially to work in "the yards." Ukrainian and Slovenian women are also said to be working in large numbers, but Croatian women are still said to stay in their homes and contribute to the income by taking lodgers. In addition to this testimony, which was obtained from leaders of the national groups, there is also the information obtained from individual families. Of the ninety women from whom information was obtained in Chicago, twenty were working outside their homes and twenty-four had lodgers at the time of the study. When it is remembered that these families were those who have worked their way through the first difficulties, these figures become doubly significant. There is, for example, a Ukrainian family from the Russian Ukraine. It consists of the parents and four children between the ages of three and fifteen. Ever since the family came to the United States they have had one or more lodgers to help them pay the rent. At present they have three men paying four dollars a month each; and as the father, who had been working in the stockyards for nineteen dollars a week, was discharged two months ago, the wife has been working in a spring factory to support the family. Then there is a Polish family, composed of the parents and four children under fourteen, two of them children of the man by a former wife. The father has been in this country since 1894, but his wife has been here only since 1910. For two years after their marriage the wife worked at night, scrubbing from 6.30 to 9.30 p.m., and received twenty-four dollars a month. Then there was an interval while her children were babies, during which she did not work, but the family lived on the earnings of the father. For the last two years, however, his work has been slack, first because of a strike, and later due to an industrial depression in his trade, and the mother is again at work, this time in a tailor shop, earning ten dollars a week. The effect of the mother's work in decreasing the child's chances for life has been made clear by the studies of the Children's Bureau in Johnstown,[10] Montclair,[11] and Manchester,[12] in all of which a higher rate of infant mortality was shown for children of mothers gainfully employed. The effect of the mother's work on the family relationship and the home life of the family group is, of course, not measurable in absolute terms. The leaders of the various national groups, however, have repeatedly emphasized the fact that the absence of the women from the home has created entirely new problems in the family life. They have pointed out that while the peasant women have been accustomed to work in the fields in the old country, their work did not take them away from their homes as the work in this country does. If they were away there was usually some older woman to take care of the children. Here the work of the mother frequently results in neglect of the children and the home. In recognition of this fact attempts have been made to solve the problem. Among Slovenians it was customary, before the war made it impossible, to send the children back to the old country to their grandmothers to be cared for. One priest said he had seen women taking as many as twelve children to a single village. The Ukrainians in Chicago have talked of establishing a day nursery to look after their children, but the people are poor, and it has not been possible to raise the money. In the meantime children are not sent to the day nurseries already established, but are commonly taken to neighbors, some of whom are paid for taking care of ten or twelve children. This arrangement constitutes a violation of the city ordinance requiring day nurseries to be licensed, but is evidently a violation quite unconsciously committed by both parties to the transaction. A group of nonworking Lithuanian women heard that neglected children were reported to the settlement in the neighborhood. One of the women investigated, and found many children locked in houses for the day, with coffee and bread for lunch. One child, too small to shift for himself, was found with his day's supply of food tied around his neck. The women decided to open a nursery in charge of a Lithuanian woman who would be able to speak to the children in their own language, as few children below school age spoke English. The original plans were to accommodate ten or twelve children, but as soon as the nursery opened there were so many women wanting to leave their children there that it took as many as thirty children. The nursery was maintained for about eighteen months, and was then closed because of the difficulty of raising the necessary funds. Some such plan must be developed that takes care of the foreign-born mother's work if she is forced to supplement the family's income outside of the home. The organization of family life that has grown up parallel with the industrial system assumes her presence in the home. When misfortune makes this impossible some provision for caring for the children must be found. CHANGED DUTIES OF A MOTHER Another changed condition in the life in this country is that the family group is usually what the sociologist calls the "marriage" group, as distinguished from the "familial" group, which is generally found in the old country. The grandmothers and maiden aunts, who were part of the group in the old country, and who shared with the mother all the work of the household, are not with them in this country. The older women are seldom brought on the long journey, and the maiden aunt is either employed in the factory system, or she sets up a house of her own, so that in any event her assistance in the work of the household can no longer be relied on. It is perhaps the grandmother that is missed the more, because it was to her that the mother of a family was wont to turn for advice as well as assistance. This decrease in the number of people in the household is not compensated for by the diminution in the amount of work, which is another fact of changed conditions. For in this country the housewife no longer spins and weaves, or even, as a rule, makes the cloth into clothing. She does not work in the fields, or care for the garden or the farm animals, all of which she was expected to do in the old country. The loss of the older women in the group, however, means that what tasks are left must all be done by her. The duties of the housewife may not be as many, but the work they involve may be more. This is true, for example, in the matter of feeding the family. In Lithuania soup was the fare three times daily, and there were only a few variations in kind. Here the family soon demands meat, coffee, and other things that are different from the food she has cooked in the old country.... Occasionally the situation is further complicated by the insistence of dietetic experts that the immigrant mother cannot feed her family intelligently unless she has some knowledge of food values. In other words, the work of the housewife was easy in the old country because it was well done--if it was done in the way her mother did it--and conformed to the standards that she knew. It could thus become a matter of routine that did not involve the expenditure of nervous energy. Here, on the other hand, she must conform to standards that are constantly changing, and must learn to do things in a way her mother never dreamed of doing them. And there is the new and difficult task of planning the use of the family income, which takes on a new and unfamiliar form. In spite of all that has been taken out of the home the duties of the housewife remain manifold and various. She is responsible for the care of the house, for the selection and preparation of food, for spending the part of the income devoted to present needs, and for planning and sharing in the sacrifices thought necessary to provide against future needs. She must both bear and rear her children. The responsibilities and satisfactions of her relationship with her husband are too often last in the list of her daily preoccupations, but by no means least in importance, if one of the essentials of a home is to be maintained. The enumeration of the tasks of any wife and mother throws into relief the difficulties of the foreign-born mother. The all too frequent cases where homes are deprived of her presence emphasize how indispensable she is. All case-work agencies have had to grapple with the problem of families suffering this deprivation. It is these motherless families that make us realize how many tasks and responsibilities fall to the lot of the mother. There was a motherless Russian family, consisting of the father and six children, the oldest a girl of thirteen and the youngest a five-month-old boy. For a time the family tried to get along without asking advice of an outside agency. The baby was placed with friends, and the thirteen-year-old girl stopped school to care for the five-room flat and the other four children. In a short time the family with whom the baby was placed wanted to adopt him, and refused to keep him longer on any other condition. At this time the Immigrant's Protective League was appealed to for help in placing the baby where he would not have to be given for adoption. They found the father making a pathetic attempt to keep the home and children clean, and the oldest girl, Marya, trying hard to take her mother's place. The best plan they were able to work out for the family was institutional care for the youngest two children, nursery care outside of school hours for the next two, and the two oldest left to take care of themselves, although given lunch at the school. Marya, of course, was sent back to school, and she and her father share the housekeeping. PATERNAL AUTHORITY PASSING A third change should be taken into account. There is a marked difference between the general position of women and children in relation to the authority of the husband and father in this country and that in the old country. It is indicated in both general opinion and express statutory amendment in this country, although not in the so-called common law. The latter, in common with practice in the native lands of immigrants, provided that marriage gave the husband the right to determine where the domicile should be, the right "reasonably to discipline" wife and children, the right to claim her services and to appropriate her earnings and those of the children, the right to take any personal property (except "_paraphernalia_" and "_pin money_") she might have in full ownership, the right to manage any land she might become entitled to, and the right to enjoy the custody of the children, regardless of the maintenance of his conjugal fidelity, in the absence of such obscene and drunken conduct on his part as would be obviously demoralizing to the young child. There existed no adequate provision for enforcing the father's performance of either conjugal or parental obligations, and the result has been the development of two bodies of legislative change. One of these has granted to the wife certain rights as against the husband, on the theory that the wife retains her separate existence after marriage and should retain rights of individual action. The other body of statutes imposes on the man the duty of support, making abandonment or refusal to support punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both. The theory of this legislation is that the support of wife and children is to be a legally enforceable duty, which may rightly be laid upon the man because of his special interest and special ability. Moreover, through the establishment of the juvenile court, the community has undertaken, not only to say that support must be given, but to set a standard of "proper parental care" below which family groups are not to be allowed to sink and still remain independent and intact. By creating the juvenile probation staff, an official assistant parent is provided. In the same way, by authorizing commitment of children to institutions, the dissolution of the home that falls persistently to too low a standard is made possible. The common law, as accepted in the various states, was not entirely uniform, but it was substantially the universal family law; now the states differ widely in the body of statutory enactments developed in this field. All have some laws recognizing the claims of children to have their home conditions scrutinized--though they may have no express juvenile-court law, all recognize to some extent the separate existence of the married women--though only twenty-one have given the mother substantial rights as against the father over their children, and they all recognize the parent's duty to secure the child's attendance at school, and have imposed some limitation on the parent's right to set his young child to work. In other words, in all the states the idea of the separate existence of the wife and of the interest of the community in the kind of care given the child has been embodied in legislation. These statutes have been enacted by legislatures composed largely, if not exclusively, of men, and register the general change in the community attitude toward the family group. An unlimited autocracy is gradually becoming what might now be termed a constitutional democracy. But the law of the jurisdictions from which most of the immigrant groups come, undoubtedly represents a theory of family relationship not widely different from that underlying the common law. The South Italian group, in which the right of the father to discipline wife and daughter is passed on to the son, may represent an extreme survival of the patriarchal idea; but almost all the foreign-born groups hold to the dominion of man over woman, and of parents over children. Immigrant groups evidence their realization of the changed conditions in different ways. Among the Ukrainians in Chicago, for example, it is said that, whereas in the old country the men kept complete control of the little money that came in, here they very generally turn it all over to their wives. Some of them have laughed, and said that America was the "women's country." Among other groups, notably the Jugo-Slav and the Italian, there is said to be a general attempt to keep the women repressed and in much the same position they held in the old country. Sometimes the woman perceives the difference in the situation more quickly than her husband. Then if he attempts to retain the old authorities in form and in spirit, she may submit or else she may gradually lead him to an understanding. But she may not understand and yet may rebel and carry her difficulty to the case-work agency. One of the settlements in Chicago is said to have become very unpopular with the men in its neighborhood, as it has the reputation of breaking up families, because women who have been ill treated by their husbands have gone to the settlement to complain, and have there been given help in taking their complaints to court. The Immigrant's Protective League in Chicago receives many complaints from women who have learned that their husbands have not the right to beat them or their children. One Lithuanian woman, who had been in this country six years, came to the league with the statement that her husband often threw her and their eight-year-old son out of the house in the middle of the night. Another Lithuanian woman living in one of the suburbs took her three children and came to Chicago to her sisters, because her husband abused her, called her vile names, and beat her. When the husband was interviewed he agreed not to do so again, and his family returned to him. Of course, the theory underlying even the feminist "married woman's property laws" included not only her enjoyment of rights, but her exercise of legal responsibility; but the restrained exercise of newly acquired freedom is evidence of high social and personal development. And the women in the foreign-born groups come from the country, the village, the small town. They have had little education, their days have been filled with work, so that there has been little time for reflection, they come from a simple situation in which there was little temptation to do wrong. They find here, on the other hand, a situation which is complex in the extreme, and in which there are elements that tend to make matters especially difficult for women. Attention has already been called to the confusion created by the lodger in the home and the special temptation to the woman to desert her husband for the lodger. The relative scarcity of women in the group, the presence of large numbers of men who cannot enter a legal marriage relationship because they have wives in the old country, the spiritual separation that often results from physical separation caused by the man's coming ahead to prepare a place--all these are undoubtedly factors that enter in to make difficult the wise use of her freedom. Native endowment, moral as well as physical and mental, varies among these women as among other women. Confronted with this confused and difficult situation, the change from the old sanctions, the old safeguards, even the old legal obligations, is difficult. It is inevitable that a few will find themselves unequal to the task of readjusting their lives. The father of one family came to the Immigrant's Protective League in Chicago, asking help because his wife had turned him out of his home. He said that she drank and was immoral. Instead of caring for the home and the two-year-old child, she spent her time behind the bar in her brother's saloon, having "a good time" with the customers. She had deserted six weeks before, but he had found her and had had her in the Court of Domestic Relations, where he had been persuaded to take her back. He said she was still drinking and still neglecting the child. Shortly after asking the help of the league, the father ran away, taking with him the child whom the mother left alone in the house while she went to the "movies." The women who assert themselves in their new rights are in a small minority. A young Polish woman complains that the women of her group are too submissive even in this country, and "bear beatings just as their mothers did in the old country." In the great majority of foreign-born families, as in all families, the question of the legal rights of the woman is never raised. The habits and attitudes formed under the old system of law and customs are carried over into the life in the new country, and are changed so gradually and imperceptibly that no apparent friction is caused in the family group. Moreover, in many cases where the woman perceives her changed position she is able to make her husband see it too, and she herself is able to work her way through to a new understanding. It is interesting to note that the women of the foreign-born groups who have worked their way through are now bending their energies toward helping the women who have not yet started. FOOTNOTES: [1] Thomas and Znaniecki, _The Polish Peasant_, vol. ii, pp. 298-455. [2] See _Report of U. S. Immigration Commission_, vol. viii, pp. 662-664. Also _Report of Massachusetts Immigration Commission_, 1914, pp. 64-69. Also "Studies in Chicago Housing Conditions," _American Journal of Sociology_, vol. xvi, no. 2 (September, 1910), pp. 145-170. [3] United States Department of Labor, _Report of United States Housing Corporation_, vol. ii, p. 507. [4] See Annual Reports of the Immigrants' Protective League, 1909-18; Massachusetts Immigration Commission, 1914, pp. 58-64; Abbott, Grace, _The Immigrant and the Community_, pp. 55, 56, and 68 fol. [5] _Report of the United States Housing Corporation_, vol. ii, p. 508. [6] See John Daniels, _America via the Neighborhood_, chap. iii. [7] See among other studies Chapin, _The Standard of Living Among Workingmen's Families in New York City_ (Russell Sage Foundation Publication, 1909), p. 234; Byington, _Homestead, the Households of a Mill Town_ (Russell Sage Foundation Publication, 1910), p. 105; Kennedy and others, _Wages and Family Budgets in the Chicago Stock Yards District_ (University of Chicago Settlement, 1914), pp. 78-79; _Eighteenth Annual Report of the U. S. Commissioner of Labor_; U. S. Bureau of Labor, _Report on Condition of Woman and Child Wage Earners in the United States_, vol. xvi, "Family Budgets of Typical Cotton-mill Workers," pp. 142, 250; _Report of the U. S. Immigration Commission_, vol. xix, p. 223. [8] _United States Bureau of Labor Monthly Review_, July, 1919, p. 48. [9] _Ibid._, March, 1919, p. 119. [10] "Infant Mortality, Results of a Field Study in Johnstown, Pennsylvania," U. S. Children's Bureau Publication No. 9. [11] "Infant Mortality, A Study of Infant Mortality in a Suburban Community," U. S. Children's Bureau Publication No. 11. [12] "Infant Mortality, Results of a Field Study in Manchester, New Hampshire," U. S. Children's Bureau Publication No. 20. III THE CARE OF THE HOUSE The work that the housewife must do in the care of the house is the maintenance of such standards of cleanliness and order as are to prevail. It includes the daily routine tasks of bedmaking, cooking, sweeping, dusting, dishwashing, disposing of waste, and the heavier work of washing, ironing, and periodic cleanings. NEW HOUSEKEEPING CONDITIONS The foreign-born housewife finds this work particularly difficult for many reasons. In the first place, housekeeping in the country from which she came was done under such different conditions that it here becomes almost a new problem in which her experience in the old country may prove of little use. The extent to which this is true varies from group to group. To understand the problems of any particular group, careful study should be made of the living conditions and housekeeping practices in the country from which it came. Some of the women with whom we have conferred have described housekeeping as they knew it in the old country. These descriptions are suggestive of the character of the change and the difficulties involved. Mrs. P., a Polish woman from Posen, for example, said that: Houses in the village in which she lived were made of clay, with thatched roofs, clay floors, and about ten feet high. They were made in rows, for four families or two families, with one outer door opening from a hall into which the doors from all the dwellings opened. Each dwelling had one small window, and a fireplace. Water was out of doors. In the four-family house there were two chimneys. The outside door did not open into the road. [Illustration: FLOOR PLAN OF HOUSES IN POLAND] The floors were covered with sand, and new sand was put on when the room was cleaned. The fireplace had a hook from which hung the kettle, and in one corner was the oven, a little place set off by a board covered with clay. Walls were whitewashed. Mrs. P. said that the housework is much more difficult in this country, with the cleaning of woodwork, washing windows, care of curtains, carpets, and dishes, and more elaborate cooking. In the old country the family washing was done only once a month, except in cases where there were small children. Then it was done weekly; and if the family lacked sufficient clothing, the washing had to be done oftener. There the meal was one dish, from which the entire family ate; here there is a variety of food and each person has his own plate and eating utensils, so that even the dishwashing is a greater task. In coming to this country many women do not see that the windows need washing or that the woodwork should be cleaned, etc. The beds were made of boards covered with straw, not as a straw mattress. Sheets were laid over the straw to make it softer. Each person had two pillows, very large and full, so that they sleep in a "half sitting" position. Feather beds are used for warmth, and no quilts or blankets were known in the old country. Lithuanian women, likewise, have pointed out that at home most of the women worked in the fields, and that what housekeeping was done was of the simplest kind. The peasant house consisted of two rooms, one of which was used only on state occasions, a visit from the priest, a wedding, christening, or a funeral. In summer no one sleeps in the house, but all sleep out of doors in the hay; in winter, women with small children sleep inside, but the others sleep in the granary. Feather beds are, in these circumstances, a real necessity. Thus the bed that is found in this country is unknown in Lithuania, and the women naturally do not know how to care for one. They not only do not realize the need of airing it, turning the mattress, and changing the bedding, but do not even know how to make it up properly. Other processes of housekeeping--dishwashing, scrubbing, and washing--prove equally difficult, and it is said that most of the women do things in the hardest possible way, chiefly because the processes are different here and they lack the technique to do their work in the easier way. Naturally, too, when work in the fields has occupied most of their time, they lack also habits of order and routine in their household tasks. The Italian women, especially those from southern Italy and Sicily, have also spoken of their difficulties in housekeeping under new conditions. In Italy the houses, even of the relatively well-to-do peasants, were two-room affairs with earthen floors and little furniture. The women had little time to give to the care of the house, and its comfort and order were not considered important. The experience in doing the family washing is said to typify the change. In Italy washing is done once a month, or at most, once a fortnight, in the poorer families. Clothes are placed in a great vat or tub of cold water, covered with a cloth on which is sprinkled wood ashes, and allowed to stand overnight. In the morning they are taken to a stream or fountain, and washed in running water. They are dried on trees and bushes in the bright, Italian sunlight. Such methods of laundry work do not teach the women anything about washing in this country, and they are said to make difficult work of it in many cases. They learn that clothes are boiled here, but they do not know which clothes to boil and which to wash without boiling; and as a result they often boil all sorts of clothing, colored and white, together. In Italy washing is a social function; here it is a task for each individual woman. DEMANDS OF AMERICAN COOKERY Cooking in this country varies in difficulty in the different national groups. In the case of the Lithuanians and Poles, for example, the old-country cooking is simple and easily done. Among others it is a fine art, requiring much time and skill. The Italian cooking, of course, is well known, as is also the Hungarian. Among the Bohemians and Croatians, too, the housewives are proverbially good cooks and spend long hours over the preparation of food. Croatian women in this country are said to regard American cookery with scorn. They say that Croatian women do not expect to get a meal in less than two or three hours, while here all the emphasis is on foods that can be prepared in twenty or thirty minutes. It is not always easy to transplant this art of cookery, even if the women had time to practice it here as they did at home. The materials can usually be obtained, although often at a considerable expense, but the equipment with which they cook and the stoves on which they cook are entirely different. The Italian women, for example, cannot bake their bread in the ovens of the stoves that they use here. Tomato paste, for example, is used in great quantities by Italian families, and is made at home by drying the tomatoes in the open air. When an attempt is made to do this in almost any large city the tomatoes get not only the sunshine, but the soot and dirt of the city. The more particular Italians here will not make tomato paste outdoors, but large numbers of Italian families continue to make it, as can be seen by a walk through any Italian district in late August or early September. In general, in the groups in which cooking was highly developed, a great deal of time was devoted to the preparation of food. If the housewife wishes to reduce her work in this country, she finds that some of the ingredients which make our cooking simpler are unknown to her. The Bohemians, for example, do not know how to use baking powder, and the same is true of the women in Lithuanian, Polish, and Russian groups, where the art of cooking is less developed. With this lack of experience in housekeeping under comparable conditions, the foreign-born housewife finds the transition to housekeeping in this country difficult at best. As a matter of fact, however, the circumstances under which she must make the change are often of the worst. She is expected to maintain standards of cleanliness and sanitary housekeeping that have developed with modern systems of plumbing and facilities for the disposal of waste that are not always to be found in the districts in which she lives. Even a skillful housewife finds housekeeping difficult in such houses as are usually occupied by recently arrived immigrants. WATER SUPPLY ESSENTIAL In the first place, there is the question of water supply. Cleanliness of house, clothing, and even of person is extremely difficult in a modern industrial community, without an adequate supply of hot and cold water within the dwelling. We are, however, very far from realizing this condition. In some cities[13] the law requires that there shall be a sink with running water in every dwelling, but in other cities even this minimum is not required. The United States Immigration Commission, for example, found that 1,413 households out of 8,651 foreign-born households studied in seven large cities, shared their water supply with other families. Conditions have improved in this respect during the last decade, but it is a great handicap to efficient housekeeping if water has to be carried any distance. Further inconvenience results if running hot water is not available, which is too often the case in the homes of the foreign born. [Illustration: THIS PUMP SUPPLIES WATER TO FOUR FAMILIES] Cleanliness is also dependent, in part, upon the facilities for the disposition of human waste, the convenient and accessible toilet connected with a sewer system. These facilities are lacking in many immigrant neighborhoods, as has been repeatedly shown in various housing investigations. For example, in a Slovak district in the Twentieth Ward, Chicago, 80 per cent of the families were using toilets located in the cellar, yard, or under the sidewalk, and in many cases sharing such toilets with other families. One yard toilet was used by five families, consisting of twenty-eight persons.[14] The danger to health, and the lack of privacy, that such toilet accommodations mean have been often emphasized. In addition, it enormously increases the work of the housewife and makes cleanliness difficult, if not impossible. There is also the question of heating and lighting the house. Whenever light is provided by the oil lamp, it must be filled and cleaned; and when heat is provided by the coal stove, it means that the housewife must keep the fires going and dispose of the inevitable dirt and ashes. In the old country the provision of fuel was part of the woman's duties; and in this country, as coal is so expensive, many women feel they must continue this function. Here this means picking up fuel wherever it can be found--in dump heaps and along the railroad tracks. A leading Bohemian politician said that he often thought, as he saw women prominent in Bohemian society, "Well, times have changed since you used to pick up coal along the railroad tracks." OVERCROWDING HAMPERS THE HOUSEWIFE The influence of overcrowding on the work of the housewife must also be considered in connection with housekeeping in immigrant households. That overcrowding exists has been pointed out again and again. Ordinances have been framed to try to prevent it, but it has persisted. In the studies of Chicago housing a large percentage of the bedrooms have always been found illegally occupied. The per cent of the rooms so occupied varied from 30 in one Italian district to 72 in the Slavic district around the steel mills. The United States Immigration Commission found, for example, that 5,305, or 35.1 per cent, of the families studied in industrial centers used all rooms but one for sleeping, and another 771 families used even the kitchen. Crowding means denial of opportunity for skillful and artistic performance of tasks. "A place for everything and everything in its place," suggests appropriate assignment of articles of use to their proper niches, corners, and shelves. One room for everything except sleeping--cooking, washing, caring for the children, catching a breath for the moment--means no repose, no calm, no opportunity for planning that order which is the law of the well-governed home. Yet there is abundant evidence that many families have had to live in just such conditions. The housework for the foreign-born housewife is often complicated by other factors. One is the practice to which reference has been already made of taking lodgers to supplement the father's wages. In discussing this subject from the point of view of the lodger, it has been pointed out that the practice with reference to the taking of boarders and lodgers varies in different places and among different groups. The amounts paid were not noted there, but they become important when considered together with the service asked of the housewife. Usually the boarder or lodger pays a fixed monthly sum--from $2 to $3.50, or, more rarely, $4 a month--for lodging, cleaning, washing, and cooking; his food is secured separately, the account being entered in a grocery book and settled at regular intervals. Sometimes the lodger does his own buying, but the more common custom is to have the housewife do it. Occasionally he does his own cooking, in which case payment for lodging secures him the right to use the stove. More rarely, as in some of the Mexican families visited in Chicago in 1919, he is a regular boarder, paying a weekly sum for room and board. Just what keeping lodgers means in adding to the duties of the housewife can be seen from the following description of the work of the Serbo-Croatian women in Johnstown, Pennsylvania:[15] The wife, without extra charge, makes up the beds, does the washing and ironing, and buys and prepares the food for all the lodgers. Usually she gets everything on credit, and the lodgers pay their respective shares biweekly. These conditions exist to some extent among other foreigners, but are not so prevalent among other nationalities in Johnstown as among the Serbo-Croatians. In a workingman's family, it is sometimes said, the woman's working day is two hours longer than the man's. But if this statement is correct in general, the augmentation stated is insufficient in these abnormal homes, where the women are required to have many meals and dinner buckets ready at irregular hours to accommodate men working on different shifts. The Serbo-Croatian women who, more than any of the others, do all this work, are big, handsome, and graceful, proud and reckless of their strength. During the progress of the investigation, in the winter months, they were frequently seen walking about the yards and courts, in bare feet, on the snow and ice-covered ground, hanging up clothes or carrying water into the house from a yard hydrant. WOMEN WORK OUTSIDE THE HOME Another factor that renders housekeeping difficult is the necessity of doing wage-paid work outside the home, to which reference has already been made. Women interviewed have repeatedly emphasized the difficulties that this practice creates in connection with the housekeeping. A recent study of children of working mothers, soon to be published by the United States Children's Bureau, carried on at the Chicago School of Civics and Philanthropy, obtained the testimony of the mothers as to the difficulties involved. This study showed that in many cases the household duties could not be performed at the proper time; 60 women, for example, of the 109 reporting on this question, said that they did not make their beds until night; 105 said their dishes were not washed after each meal, but in 41 cases were washed in the mornings, and in 56 not until night. Three washed them in the morning if they had time, and five left them for the children, after school. Many women who worked outside the home did their housekeeping without assistance from other members of the family. This meant that they had to get up early in the morning and frequently work late at night at laundry or cleaning; 49 women, for example, washed in the evening; 25 washed either Saturday, Sunday, or evenings. HOUSING IMPROVEMENT Enough has probably been said to show that the work of caring for the house under the conditions existing in most immigrant neighborhoods, is unnecessarily difficult for the foreign-born housewife. The most obvious point at which these burdens might be lightened so that the housewife could have time for other duties, would appear to be through improvement of housing. With an awakened realization of this fact, both on the part of the foreign-born woman herself and the community of which she is an inevitable part, will come the solution of these difficulties. A protest, however inarticulate or indirectly expressed by her, will find its response in a growing realization that plans for improvement must be developed. The several housing projects that have already been offered are suggestive of the problems and possibilities along this line rather than useful as hard-and-fast solutions. They not only meet the needs of the more inadequate immigrant housing conditions, but provide improvement upon most native-born conditions. In this connection interest naturally centers on the war-time housing projects of the United States government, on the experiment of the Massachusetts Homestead Commission at Lowell, and on certain enterprises carried out by so-called limited dividend companies. The first two are especially interesting, in that they recognize that supplying houses to the workers is not a function that can be wholly left to private initiative. It is not possible to discuss these projects in detail, nor is it necessary.[16] It is sufficient to consider them here with reference to the contributions they might make in helping the immigrant housewife. In the first place, they provide for a toilet and a bath in every house, and a supply of running water that is both adequate and convenient. In the matter of kitchen equipment there is an attempt to provide some of the conveniences. Both provide a sink and set wash-tubs equipped with covers. They must be set at a minimum of thirty-six inches from the floor in the United States plans. Both make provision for gas to be used for cooking, although the coal stove is accepted. The kitchens in the Massachusetts houses are also provided with kitchen cabinets, with shelves under the sink, and with a drain for the refrigerator. In other ways also consideration for the housewife is evidenced. Electricity is urged for lighting, passages through which furniture would not go are avoided, the size of the living room is adapted to the sizes of the most commonly purchased rugs, etc. Study of the Massachusetts plans reveals other interesting features, such as the care given to the location of the bathroom and the attention to the size of the doors, so that the mother at work in her kitchen can watch the children at play in other rooms. Both projects are interesting also in that they realize the necessity of a "front room" or parlor, and prescribe a minimum number of bedrooms--three in the Massachusetts, and two in the United States experiment. Both require closets in every bedroom wide enough to receive the men's garments on hangers, and rooms of such size that the bed can stand free of the wall and out of a draught. It is evident that the plans for houses in both projects provide very definite improvements in the matter of the conveniences to which the immigrant is not accustomed in the houses at present available to him. Some limitations, however, become apparent by comparing them with the recommendations of the Women's Subcommittee of the Ministry of Reconstruction Advisory Council, England. That committee emphasizes the importance of electricity for lighting, and urges "that a cheap supply of electricity for domestic purposes should be made available with the least possible delay." The American plans agree that electricity is the preferred lighting, but gas is accepted by the United States government, although not by the Massachusetts plan. There is no suggestion of developing a cheaper supply of electricity. The English women also suggest the desirability of a central heating plant as a measure that would lessen the work of the household, afford economies in fuel, and render a hot-water supply readily available. They urge, therefore, further experimentation with central heating. The American plans have no suggestions to make at this point, but accept the coal stove or the separate furnace in the higher-priced houses as the means of heating. While they provide for hot water, no suggestions are made as to how this is to be supplied. It is presumably done by a tank attached to the range, which means that hot water is not available when there is no fire in the range; that is, in summer and during the night. It should also be noted that these plans make no suggestions for co-operative use of any of the equipment of the household. There is another point at which the architects and builders failed to take sufficient notice of the problem of lightening the women's work--namely, in their attitude toward the separate family home as compared with the multiple family dwelling. The Massachusetts Commission was, by the terms of the Act creating it, limited to the provision of one or two-family houses; the United States government standards were definitely against the building occupied in whole or in part by three or more families. Tenement and apartment houses are considered generally undesirable, and will be accepted only in cities where, because of high land values, it is clearly demonstrated that single and two-family houses cannot be economically provided, or where there is insistent demand for this type of multiple housing. This judgment, however, has by no means met with universal approval. Those architects who think in terms of the woman's time and strength consider the merits of the group and of the multiple house. For example, those who planned the Black Rock Apartment House Group in Bridgeport, Connecticut, the open-stairway dwellings, the John Jay dwellings on East Seventy-seventh Street, New York City, and the Erwin, Tennessee, development, maintain that the advantages of the separate house in privacy, independence, and access to land can be secured by the multiple arrangement. Not only can economies in the use of the land be practiced, but protection and assistance for the women and children can be obtained, and there is the possibility of devices for convenient and collective performance of many tasks. It is unnecessary to review the arguments for the one or for the other. It is evident that the group house, and perhaps the multiple house, offer such inducements in the economy of space and the possibility of assigning areas of land to definite and anticipated uses, that their further adaptation to family needs must be contemplated. It is generally assumed that the family group wants the separate house. The question of interest for this study is one of the desire of the immigrant groups in this respect. Their preference should be an indispensable element in the formulation of housing standards. There is not, however, a great deal of evidence on this subject. The fact that immigrants live in the city in the congested districts may only indicate that they have had no choice in the matter. Most of the officers of certain immigrant building and loan associations interviewed for this study thought there was a preference for the single-family dwelling when it could be afforded. That also is the belief of the investigators in this study, who think that the use of multiple houses indicates not the immigrants' desires, but their acceptance of what is before them, and that the dream of almost every immigrant family is to have a house of its own, to which is attached a little garden. How far the desire for the separate house is confused with the desire for the garden would be difficult to say. It is certain, however, that in general the immigrant has known only one way to have the garden, and that was by having a separate house. There is universal agreement that especially the foreign-born family desires access to land for whose cultivation they may be responsible, and whose produce both in food and in flowers they may enjoy. Recently, however, certain architects have been interested in working out plans by which this advantage might be retained for dwellers in group or tenement houses. They have pointed out that one advantage of the group and multiple house is the setting free of spaces to be more skillfully adapted to the size and composition of the family. Attention may be called to certain devices that are urged by experienced architects in the matter of the use of land. For example, in the Morgan Park, Minnesota, development of the Illinois Steel Company, the architects have developed interesting plans in connection with their low-cost houses. These are all group houses, with a front space opening on an attractively planned street. At the rear of the house is a latticed porch--a small area graveled, but not grassed--and then the alley. Across the alley is the rear garden, which may thus be fenced in and kept separate from the house lot. [Illustration: A COMMUNITY PLAN SUBMITTED BY MILO HASTINGS IN THE AMERICAN HOUSING COMPETITION, 1919, SHOWING THE U VARIATIONS, THE BACK SERVICE STREET, THE PROVISION FOR REAR GARDENS, AND THE OPEN AREAS ON WHICH ALL THE HOUSES WILL FRONT (Reprinted by permission from the Journal of the American Institute of Architects, June, 1919)] Interesting suggestions on this point are to be found in the two articles, to which prizes were given by the American Institute of Architects in the June and July, 1919, numbers of their journal. There is much experimentation yet to be done, as the question of the separate house with its separate plot of ground is by no means a settled one. It is particularly desirable that the interest of the foreign born be enlisted, both that they may contribute to the solution of the question and that they may become acquainted with all the possibilities of access to the land which are being worked out. In spite of some defects and the need for further experimentation along the lines suggested above, there is no doubt that the projects of Massachusetts and of the Federal government mark a very real advance. The most pressing need is to construct a sufficient number of these houses so that they may be available for immigrant groups. One means of doing this is by the employer's building houses for the workers to buy or to rent. Although this has sometimes been found to help solve the housing situation, factors may enter that limit its usefulness. The industrial relationships between employer and employee may be such that subsidy for housing by employer would hinder rather than help. Where a community is largely comprised of one industry it may be very unwise for the industry to go so far toward the control of community affairs. Labor unrest in the northern iron ranges can be traced in part to such company provision of housing and sanitation. The limited dividend company, organized not for profit, and operating under the careful supervision of a governmental department, is another solution. This agency has been particularly successful in Massachusetts under the stimulus as well as under the supervision of the Massachusetts Homestead Commission, and is undoubtedly capable of further development. GOVERNMENT BUILDING LOANS Another possibility is that the local or state government advance the money and enable the worker to buy his own home. That is the plan adopted by the Massachusetts Homestead Commission in its experiment at Lowell. It is also one of the policies adopted by the Canadian government, which will loan money to provincial governments to be advanced for building houses on land owned (a) by the provincial or municipal government, (b) by the limited dividend company, (c) by the workman himself. This latter plan would probably commend itself most readily to the foreign-speaking groups. Direct loans by the local government to the worker are advocated in the careful and thorough plan worked out by Mrs. E. E. Wood.[17] One suggestion is a proposed amendment to the Postal Savings Law, authorizing loans from postal savings deposits to workers with annual incomes not in excess of twelve hundred dollars. The investigation of the application is to be in the hands of the nearest local housing board. A suggested amendment to the Farm Loan Act is that housing loans be made by the Farm Loan Board on the same terms on which farm loans are now authorized. It is interesting to note that this plan contemplates the continued activity of the building and loan associations with which the foreign born are already familiar. It suggests that the first loan be given by the government and the association be content with a second mortgage, receiving in return the greater stability that is secured from a transaction carried on under governmental supervision. According to Mrs. Wood's report, before 1915, 700,000 houses had been built or acquired in the United States through the aid of building and loan associations.[18] She thinks that the moderately paid wage earner, but not the unskilled worker, was benefited. This conclusion is disputed by officers of four building and loan associations in Chicago interviewed in connection with this study. That the associations reach the foreign-speaking groups seems to be evident from the names in the Annual Report of the auditor of the state of Illinois for 1918. The Bohemians had the largest number of societies, and the Poles were second. The Italians alone of the large national groups were unrepresented. Mrs. Wood's plan also calls for a national housing commission in the Department of Labor, to be created under congressional act, with organization and powers analogous to those exercised by the Federal Board for Vocational Education. For the use of this commission it is proposed that a fund be created by the issue of bonds, from which loans could be made to certain designated agencies for the clearance of congested areas and the increase of housing facilities. The Federal legislation is to be supplemented according to Mrs. Wood's plan by state legislation, including: 1. A restrictive housing law, a constructive housing law, and a Town Planning Act. This plan contemplates a state commission on housing and town planning through which the Federal aid for the state would be made available; to which should be intrusted the responsibility of investigating and approving or disapproving housing schemes proposed by local agencies and associations. 2. A state fund similar to the Federal fund is proposed, and definite suggestions for its use are worked out. For the local authorities, local housing and town-planning boards, probably with the county as the basis of organization, are proposed. This housing fund, composed of the Federal fund, the state fund, and in some cases local funds, is to be used to make loans to municipalities, housing organizations that are not organized for profit, limited dividend companies, co-operative associations, or even employers. The plan contemplates that the lowest paid wage earners, among whom are numbered a large per cent of the foreign born, should continue to rent; but the landlord should not be a private individual seeking to make profit from providing the workers with shelter. The plan also takes note of the plan for co-partnership ownership adopted by the United States Housing Corporation. The main features of this arrangement are: 1. Ownership vested in a local board of trustees bound to operate the property in the interest of the tenants and until the property is fully amortized in the interest of the government. 2. Formation of a tenants' association to which all residents of three months are eligible on payment of small yearly dues. This association to elect a tenants' council to act as directors of the association, to confer with the board of trustees, and to carry out such duties as trustees direct. 3. Any tenant may become a co-partner by applying for bonds to the amount of 25 per cent of the value of his dwelling, and accompanying his application with a cash subscription of one half per cent of this. 4. Tenant co-partners are given a voice in the management by the right to elect trustees, the number increasing with the amount of subscriptions to bonds. 5. Tenant co-partners granted remission of one month's rent a year. 6. Tenant co-partners leaving or desiring to discontinue as co-partners have the right to sell their bonds to trustees at par. Mr. A. C. Comey, the author of the plan, says of it:[19] Such a co-partnership scheme as this will present to workmen a unique opportunity for saving, for not only will they get as high a rate of interest as a safe investment justifies, but they will be to a large degree custodians of their own security and will thus be able to protect their investments in much the same way as actual home owners. On the other hand they will avoid most of the pitfalls of home owning, such as loss through deterioration of a neighborhood, forced sales in case of departure, and inability to realize on assets locked up in private homes. Moreover, they will tend to develop a high degree of community spirit, usually so lacking among apartment dwellers, and thus take more interest in public affairs and become better citizens generally. These are advantages which it would be especially desirable for the foreign-born groups, as many of them have experienced the pitfalls of home ownership. It is a complicated system and would have to be explained in detail to the various groups. The medium for such explanations is at hand in the foreign-language press and in the immigrant societies, and the effort that it would involve is surely worth making. It should also be noted that it is not so complicated a system as the land tenure in many of the countries from which the immigrants come. INSTRUCTION IN SANITATION The subject of housing reform as a means of easing the housewife's task was considered first, as it is useless to talk of helping her in her work until she is given some of the conveniences with which to work. It is evident, however, that that is not all that is necessary for the foreign-born housewife. She is not accustomed to the use of a house of the size contemplated by the proposed plans--the Italians, Lithuanians, Poles, Russians, Hungarians, and doubtless others have known only the one and two-room house--and there is always the possibility that, given more rooms, they may be used to take in more lodgers. Such was the case, for example, in the relatively adequate houses provided by the United States Steel Corporation at Gary. It is not necessary, however, to use the method of that corporation, and turn out of the houses persons who need instruction in the use of the house. Persuasion and instruction in the uses of the special features of the house could have been tried. It might have been possible for the rent collector or a sanitary inspector with a social point of view to establish friendly relations on their regular visits to the families. With confidence gained and tact displayed, much in the way of education could be accomplished. To construct houses so that each room can serve one and only one purpose would in part meet the difficulties. Above all, patience and a realization of the difficulties that the foreign-born housewife meets, are essential. A point on which some architects lay special stress in the structure of low-cost houses is the devotion of the entire first floor to cooking and living uses--not sleeping. That is, the living room, dining room, and kitchen are either combined or so open into each other that no temptation is offered to close off part for sleeping purposes. The bedrooms are then on the second floor, each room having only one door, and the bathroom and the storage space are slightly elevated above the second and offer no temptation to be used for purposes other than those for which they are designed. If, then, families inexperienced in the use of modern accommodations come into the community, they may perhaps be helped to an understanding of modern devices by the experience of living in houses arranged in this way. Both the rent collector, if it be a case of tenancy, and the building official, if it be a case of ownership, should not only understand the principles of sanitation and hygiene, but should understand the people they serve. To render the best service to immigrant groups, such officials must speak the language of the group and understand something of its peculiarities. They should, in fact, be public assistant housekeepers, through whose assistance the gradual and voluntary initiation of our foreign-born neighbors into community life can take place. New standards of efficiency and new amenities can be developed. Our community life might, then, be freed from the old physical dangers connected with human adjustment to physical surroundings, and take on new dignities suitable to a democratic and adequate life for the whole people. There remain the difficulties described at the beginning of the chapter, which come from the fact that the processes of the work of caring for the house are different in this country from those in the country from which the foreign-born housewives came. These difficulties are not so easy to solve as those of housing. They are undoubtedly surmounted as time goes on, but it is a gradual process. Many forces are at work. Necessity is probably the primary one. The foreign-born woman early learns to use American cooking utensils and fuel because they are all she can get. She has to feed her family with the only food the store at the corner furnishes. American furniture and furnishings soon attract her attention, and she is curious as to their purposes and uses. In part, the foreign-born housewives have learned from one another; that is, from the members of the group who have been here longer; and in part they have learned by going into the more comfortable American homes as domestic servants. Those who have done the latter are, usually, the girls who come alone or the elder daughters of the family. In some communities, such as a Bohemian community near Dallas, Texas, it is said to be well understood that the girl will learn domestic science by a kind of apprenticeship in the home of her employer. When she has learned what she thinks sufficient, she leaves to practice in her own home and to show her family how things should be done. The limitations and difficulties of domestic service for the inexperienced immigrant have been well set forth in the reports of various protective societies.[20] But the foreign-born women with whom we have conferred in this study have repeatedly emphasized the advantages that come from being shown how to do housework under the conditions in this country. Yet women of the "new" immigrant groups enter domestic service much less than those from the "old" ones. In the end, no doubt, many foreign-born housewives have learned to care for their homes and raise their families as systematically as their American neighbors, who have had fewer difficulties to contend with. It is, however, a wasteful system which leaves the instruction of the immigrant housewife to the chance instruction she can gain from fellow countrywomen who have themselves learned only imperfectly. If the community only realized what the difficulties were for the housewife from a different civilization, it would undoubtedly stretch out a friendly and helping hand to assist her over the first rough path. Whatever form this help takes, it must be offered in the spirit of friendly co-operation, and not of didactic superiority, if the desired result is to be gained. FOOTNOTES: [13] Details may be secured from the National Housing Association, 105 East Twenty-second Street, New York City. [14] Chicago Housing Studies, _American Journal of Sociology_, vol. xx, p. 154. [15] Children's Bureau Publication No. 9, "Infant Mortality, Johnstown, Pennsylvania," p. 29. [16] See Edith Elmer Wood, _The Housing of the Unskilled Wage Earner_; _Report of Massachusetts Homestead Commission_; _Reports of United States Housing Corporation_. [17] Edith Elmer Wood, _Housing of the Unskilled Wage Earner_, chap. viii. [18] Edith Elmer Wood, _Housing of the Unskilled Wage Earner_, p. 233. [19] _Survey_, June 28, 1919. [20] See _Annual Report of the Immigrants' Protective League, 1910-1911_, and Abbott, _The Immigrant and the Community_, chap. v, "The Special Problems of the Immigrant Girl." IV PROBLEMS OF SAVING There has been in the past much harsh and thoughtless criticism of the foreign-born groups, because of the extent to which they have seemed able and willing to subordinate present necessities and enjoyments to provide for certain future contingencies. PRESENT AND FUTURE NEEDS Many of those who come to this country are in debt for their passage. Others have left near relatives at home who must be helped to come over. Some have come, intending to establish themselves and to be married here. Some expect to take back a part of their earnings to better the condition of those left behind. Their coming, whether to stay permanently or to return, often does not relieve them of their obligations to the group in the old country. One of the strongest impressions that the reader gets from the letters in _The Polish Peasant_ is that of the frequency with which relatives in the old country ask for money from the one who has gone ahead. It is not only his wife and children, or aged parents, that ask for money, but all the members of the wider familial group, and sometimes even friends with no claim on the score of kinship. The purposes for which they ask money are various; in the Borek series, for example, a son of the family is asked to send money because the family is in debt and has taxes to pay; to send money for the dowry of his sister; for a forge; for a sewing machine, and for a phonograph. He is also told that if he sends money home it will not be wasted, but will be put out at interest. Other claims for money are put forward in other series, possibly the most common one being a request for a steamship ticket. The letters show clearly that it is customary to send money for fête days, "name days," or birthdays, Christmas, Easter, and other occasions. A failure to do so brings reproach coupled with a reminder that others who had gone from the village had sent money. In the Wrobelski series the family ask money from the member in this country for a new church at home. Every Sunday the priest reads aloud the names of those who have contributed. It therefore seems to the immigrant imperative that from his present earnings certain amounts shall be set aside. When the first hard times are past and the members of the immediate family are reunited, there comes the reaction to the experience of depending on the money wage. There arises the fear of disaster growing out of interruption of the income, or misfortune involving especially heavy expenditure. The United States Treasury Department in its "Thrift" campaign lays down the doctrine _save first_ and _spend afterward_.[21] This is what the members of the foreign-born groups have long been doing, and probably this policy is the only possible basis for a rational use of one's resources. Yet doing this gives rise to comment on the "low standard of life." And thrift often seems to border on miserliness. Indeed, the problem is by no means so simple as the use of the categorical imperative would indicate. The whole question of deciding between the claims of the present and of the future is a very difficult one. The economist gives us little definite help. He lays down the so-called "rule of uses" and tells the housewife so to apply her resources that the utility extracted from any unit may be at least as great as if that unit were applied elsewhere. Now the foreign-born housewife, like other housewives, has certain resources of money and time and strength, and these she wishes to distribute wisely. But she labors under many disadvantages, of which it is only fair to take notice. UNFAMILIARITY WITH MONEY In the first place, her income is in an unfamiliar form. There is first the fact that the money units are strange to her. A woman who recently came over, being called on to make an unexpected payment, handed her purse to a fellow traveler, asking that the required amount be taken out. In the second place, for many there is the difficulty growing out of the exclusive dependence upon money payments, when before there were both money and the products of the land. The fact should always be kept in mind that, to the extent to which the foreign born are from rural districts, they have the difficulty experienced by all who are forced to adjust themselves to an economy built on money, as distinguished from an economy built on kind. In the country where things are grown, there is little opportunity for acquiring a sense of money values. It is then peculiarly difficult to value in terms of the new measure those articles with which one has been especially familiar under the old economy. For example, when vegetables and fruits have been enjoyed without estimating their value, it is difficult to judge their value in money. While meat was before thought out of reach, it may be purchased at exorbitant rates under the new circumstances, because one has no idea of how much it should cost. Evidence as to this kind of difficulty is found among all groups. It takes the form, sometimes, of apparent parsimony, sometimes of reckless and wasteful buying. The Lithuanians seem, for example, to experience difficulties of this kind everywhere. The small farmer in Lithuania was accustomed to an irregular cash income at harvest time. Sometimes it carried over from one year to another, while young stock was growing. He had little need of money except for extraordinary expenses, such as those for farm machinery, or building. The local store, which was usually co-operative, carried only such imported articles as salt, sugar, spices, tea, and coffee. All other foods were produced at home or secured through neighborly exchange. All the clothing for the family was of home manufacture, even to the cloth. If a boy were sent to school in the nearest large town, his board was paid with poultry and dairy products. The tenant laborer had house rent free, a garden, a cow, a few pigs, and all the poultry he cared to raise, in addition to the yearly wage of from 125 to 150 rubles a year. Other farm laborers had board and clothing in addition to their wage of 25 rubles a year. Women received 3 rubles a year for farm labor, in addition to board and all ordinary clothing. The food provided by the farmers was coarse and monotonous, but it was plentiful and nourishing. Laborers were housed in two-room log or board houses, with thatched roofs; farm workers without families slept in the farmer's granaries and ate at a common table. To the inexperienced peasant the daily wage of $1.50 and $2 in the United States seemed ample, but it was not long after the family arrived before it was found inadequate. The situation becomes still more confusing if employment is seasonal and irregular. In Lithuania, contracts were made by the year and unemployment was unknown. Through apprehension they begin to adopt a low standard of living in order to economize, a practice now common in many Lithuanian communities in this country. They have never paid rent in their native country, so one of their first instincts is to economize at that point in the new country by taking lodgers. Among other national groups there are evidences of the same difficulties. Bohemian women, it is said, buy recklessly at first, spending money for jewelry and all sorts of things they see for sale in the neighborhood stores. Ukrainian women control the expenditure of the family income here, but in the village life in Galicia they never had much money to spend; the table was supplied from the farm, clothing was of home manufacture, furniture was seldom bought. They are, therefore, when they first come, little fitted by previous experience for wise expenditure of the family income. IRREGULARITY OF INCOME To these difficulties are added those connected with the uncertainty and irregularity of wage payments and with the length of intervals recurring between these payments. The ways in which periods of unemployment and consequent cessation of income are met are illustrated by the following experiences described by those with whom we have conferred. The story of how the mother or children have gone out to work, of how boarders have been taken into the home, savings have been spent, money has been borrowed from friends, or charity has been accepted, occurs over and over in the experience of all the national groups. A Ukrainian mother tells how she and the older children at various times have worked during the father's unemployment. A few years ago, when it lasted for two years, she was no longer strong enough to work, and they sold their home in order to keep the children in school. Another Ukrainian family has of late depended upon the earnings of the children and savings, but there have been times when they had nothing in the house but water, and could not buy food. A Polish mother borrowed money of the Jewish grocer when her savings were gone and her earnings insufficient. One Bohemian family had to draw on their savings in the building and loan association during a year of unemployment. RESERVES FOR MISFORTUNES It is easy, then, to understand how out of the most meager present income some provision for possible disasters will be attempted. The urgency of this claim of the future explains the fact that the possession of a balance at the end of the year constitutes no evidence that the income for the year has either been adequate or been regarded as adequate. The social investigator has found savings taken from the most inadequate incomes; and judgment has been sometimes passed on the "low standard of life" of the immigrant, when a moment's sympathetic consideration of the problem would have discovered the explanation in the ever-present fear of being caught unprepared. The occasions for which this provision is made are, to be sure, not all of the nature of an unexpected disaster; they are, often, the ordinary events of life. There is, first, the constant possibility of sickness and of death. After the establishment of the family group, these perhaps make the first claim on the family's savings. The fear of these events may be so great that even the well-being of the children in the present may be sacrificed. For example, a Polish widow with two children, who was being supported by the United Charities in Chicago, was found to have a bank account of $192.57 which she had saved from her allowance of $3 a week in addition to her rent. When the visitor talked with her about it, she explained that she was afraid of dying and leaving her children unprovided for, and that her husband had always told her to put away part of her income. While the need for providing for dependents is thus felt, most wage earners realize that they cannot during their own lifetime lay aside enough money to provide for their children. The most that they can do is to provide some life insurance. Even this, in most cases, must be entirely inadequate, since the premiums mean a great drain on the family's resources. In a study of 3,048 families in Chicago, the Illinois Health Insurance Commission found that 81.9 per cent of all the families carried some kind of life insurance. The average amount of the policy, however, was only $419.24. The following table shows for the various nationalities in the group the per cent carrying insurance and the average amount of the policy.[22] TABLE I NUMBER AND PER CENT OF FAMILIES CARRYING LIFE INSURANCE, AND AVERAGE AMOUNT OF POLICY ACCORDING TO NATIVITY OF HEAD OF FAMILY ================================================================= | TOTAL | PER CENT | AVERAGE NATIVITY OR RACE OF HEAD OF | NUMBER OF | WITH LIFE | AMOUNT FAMILY | FAMILIES | INSURANCE | OF POLICY -----------------------------|-----------|-----------|----------- All families | 3,048 | 81.9 | $419.24 | | | United States, colored | 274 | 93.8 | 201.48 Bohemian | 243 | 88.9 | 577.58 Polish | 522 | 88.5 | 353.48 Irish | 129 | 88.4 | 510.72 United States, white | 644 | 85.2 | 535.56 German | 240 | 85.0 | 416.49 Lithuanian | 117 | 79.5 | 170.38 Scandinavian | 232 | 75.4 | 401.58 Other | 225 | 75.1 | 410.96 Jewish | 218 | 63.8 | 465.09 Italian | 204 | 57.8 | 403.94 ================================================================= It is interesting to note that the Bohemians are among the national groups showing the largest per cent (88.9) of families having life-insurance policies. They also show the largest average policy ($577.58) of any national groups, including the native-born white. The method by which this particular provision is made is often through the fraternal order, the benefit society, and the form of commercial insurance known as industrial insurance. The fraternal orders that are used by foreign-born groups are usually societies of their own national group, such as the Polish National Alliance, the Croatian League of Illinois, the Lithuanian National Alliance. They differ from the benefit societies, such as the Czecho-Slav Workingman, the Znanie Russian Club, and the Congrega di Maria Virgine del Monte Carmelo, in that the fraternal orders are organized under the state laws governing fraternal insurance societies, are incorporated, and usually have a more than local membership. Most of the benefit societies are small local societies without national affiliation, often not observing good insurance principles and without the needed succession of young lives. These types of insurance were made the subject of special study by the Illinois Health Insurance Commission of 1919. The judgment of the Health Commission as to the value of these organizations is, that the fraternal societies, although they are democratic, co-operative, and nonprofit-seeking organizations, thus being particularly attractive to wage earners, are often not on an actuarially sound basis.[23] The benefit societies of the foreign born present an even more precarious means of providing for future needs.[24] Sooner or later they find that the dues must be increased, their membership declines, and the period of decay sets in. Industrial insurance provides a safer method than either of these, but it presents a number of other disadvantages.[25] The policies are usually small, sufficient only for burial expenses, and the rates are relatively high because of the bad risk among the wage earners, and especially because of the expense of weekly collections. Here, as everywhere, the poor who must buy in small quantities get relatively less for what they pay. It is often urged against industrial insurance that it makes no real provision for dependents, and merely pays for a somewhat elaborate funeral. It must be borne in mind that the funeral, however modest, is an expense that often places the family in debt, and that even the thriftless will try to make some provision for it. The following expense account of the funeral of a Polish man is typical of the accounts received during this inquiry, and exhibits no unusual expenditure when compared with American customs: Embalming $ 11.00 Casket 65.00 Crape and gloves 2.50 Candles 3.00 Hearse 11.00 Carriage 9.00 Grave 12.00 Outside box 6.00 Total $119.50 It is a matter of common knowledge that unscrupulous undertakers often obtain possession of the insurance policy and make the charge for the funeral equal to the whole amount. This may, in part, explain the criticism that the funerals in foreign-born families are often unnecessarily expensive. An Italian woman interviewed, the president of one benefit society and a member of four others, speaks of going to buy a casket at the time of the death of a friend during the influenza epidemic. The cheap, wooden casket cost $150. The next day, when she went with another friend to the same undertaker, the casket which had been $150 cost $175. She could not understand how such prices could be allowed, and exclaimed, "The government regulates prices of flour and sugar, and why not such things as the cost of coffins in times like these!" There may also be expenses connected with the service itself. In some churches the tolling of the bells must be paid for by the mourners, and sometimes it is the poorest who will insist that the bells be tolled the longest. In a church in South Chicago it is said that the parishioners paid for the chimes with the definite understanding that the bell-tolling at funerals should no longer be a special charge. The need of provision against sickness and death is keenly felt in every immigrant community. One of the older women, who had been frequently called into the homes in cases of sickness and death, said that in sickness there was never money for the doctor, or night clothes, or bedding, and in case of death never enough of anything. THE COST OF WEDDINGS After providing for sickness and death, a family must lay aside the sum necessary to secure an advantageous marriage for the daughter, and to meet her family's share of the wedding. Similarly, the young man anticipates marriage as a natural development in his life. It is interesting to consider the share of the cost borne by the girl's family and that borne by the young man, and to notice also certain customs connected with the wedding itself that contribute toward the expense. The customs connected with weddings which have grown up in the old country may, when transplanted, mean an expense which seems entirely out of proportion to the family's economic status, especially when American customs are added to those of the native country. An Italian woman says that weddings were, as a rule, much simpler in Italy than in the United States. There a maid of honor and "other frills," such as automobiles, flowers, and jewelry, were unknown. A large feast, usually of two days' duration, was customary, and is continued here, even in a city. A hall must be rented for the dance, and when food prices are high the cost is enormous. To avoid the expense of renting a hall which would cost $100 for six hours, a recent Italian wedding reception in Chicago was held in the butcher shop owned by a cousin of the bridegroom. The living rooms in the rear were used for the dinner, and the shop itself became the ballroom. The floor was crowded, and the children had to be turned out into the street to play, but the enjoyment of the party was evidently not at all lessened by the somewhat incongruous surroundings. The fact that there is near by not only a great settlement where a comfortable hall might have been available, but likewise a park house similarly equipped, is perhaps indicative of a failure of these institutions to meet the very needs of the neighborhood they are designed to serve. It is an Italian custom for the father of the bride and the father of the bridegroom to share the expense of the feast, although the bridegroom sometimes pays for the music and the hall, and the bride's family furnish the food. An Italian pastry dealer says that the amount spent for pastries varies from $15 to $120, and an equal amount is spent in home baking. For well-to-do families the expenditures may be much larger; for example, one family recently spent $200 for pastry alone. There is, however, a feature of the wedding feast which reduces the cost to the family. It is customary, when the party is assembled after the wedding, for the bride to be placed on a "throne," and the guests place their presents of money in her lap. Money is usually given, although useful articles for the home are sometimes included. The greater the number of guests invited perhaps the lower the net cost of the ceremony. The other principal expense of the Italian bride's family is for the bridal linen and the girl's underwear. These, of course, vary with the circumstances of the family. These articles are usually the accumulation of several years. The bridegroom pays the other costs. He buys not only the household furniture and his clothing, but the wedding ring, earrings, a gift for the bride, and some of her clothing. If the girl is poor he may even buy her underwear and the linens. It is said that these things often cost all the bridegroom's savings, and that the couple start married life with nothing saved for emergencies. The expense of the bridegroom in a recent Italian wedding in Chicago was $2,000. It is the custom for the man to buy for the bride a complete costume for two days--the wedding day and the eighth day--when the newly married couple return the calls of the wedding guests. An Italian saleslady in a store in the Italian district says that the amount usually spent on the bride's clothes is $200 or $250. The very least spent in these days is $100, and the outfit may cost as much as $500. When the family is a recently arrived one, the man usually accompanies the girl or her mother to the store and pays the bills on the spot. Among other groups as well as among the Italians it seems to be customary for the bridegroom to bear part of the expense of the wedding and of the bride's outfit. The Polish bridegroom often gives $50 to the bride, and she buys her clothes, linens, and the food for the feast. The Russian girl gives a white handkerchief to the groom, and he pays for her dress. Another item in the expenses of a wedding is the cost of photographs. It is the custom in most foreign-born groups to have large photographs, not only of the bride and groom, but of the whole wedding party. The Polish people also have another picture of the bridesmaid taken with the best man. These photographs cost as much as $30 a dozen and at a higher rate if less than a dozen are ordered. The number ordered depends on the economic condition of the family, but the minimum is six of each. The pictures of the bridal party are the largest and most expensive and are usually given only to the immediate family and the attendants. The smaller pictures of the bride and groom are given to all the friends and relatives, especially those in the old country. This is an important means of keeping up the connection with those at home. An enlarged and colored copy framed in an ornate gilt frame is usually ordered for the newly married couple, and is an added expense. The cost of automobiles is also important. The bridal party, and sometimes the guests whom it is desired to honor, are taken to the church, then to the photographer's, and then to the hall where the feast and dance are held. Sometimes as many as six automobiles are observed drawn up in front of one of the little photographers' shops in an immigrant district. Many people seem to think that the festivities among the foreign born are becoming simpler. The extravagance is perhaps again a question of the transition to a money economy. The ceremony in the old country was an occasion for great celebration, with feasting and dancing for several days, but was perhaps not expensive when the necessary articles were produced at home or received in exchange for home products. Here the immigrant family does not at first realize the real value of the money which seems so plentiful, and the old customs are not only carried out, but elaborated because of the added feeling of prosperity. In many ways the old customs are now being modified. Among the Polish, for instance, the guests used to give presents of money, practically buying a dance with the bride. The custom has been frequently abused here, as the men have divided their gifts into small parts and demanded many dances with the bride, often causing her to dance so much as to cause serious fatigue. For this reason we heard of one bride who simply "walked with the plate" instead of dancing. Another story is told of a wedding in a Polish community, at which the men threw dollars at a plate. The one who was successful in breaking the plate might dance with the bride. This Polish custom of giving money gifts offsets to a large extent the cost of the wedding. Among three Polish families visited, one whose wedding cost $200 collected $60; another spent $150 and collected $160; and a third spent $200 and collected $300. But this custom, too, tends to disappear in the second generation. A young Russian couple, for instance, were opposed to a regular collection, but the parents, who consider it the blessing to their daughter, could not resist each leaving a ten-dollar bill as they left. The young people were embarrassed, but the other guests quickly followed the suggestion, and $100 was collected. CHRISTENINGS AND FÊTE DAYS This naïve solicitation of gifts is also practiced on the occasion of the christening of the infant. An unmarried godmother may be preferred because, having no children of her own, she is more able to make handsome gifts at the time and to continue her contributions. One young Russian girl, whose marriage with the father of her unborn child was arranged by a social worker, asked the new friend to serve as godmother, and then expected an outfit for the infant in christening robes, little veils, and other articles, costing about $75. Observers interested in customs in immigrant districts say that the custom of soliciting gifts at christenings was modified during the war. Among Polish families, for example, each guest used to make a present in money to the child who was christened. During the last few years it has become more and more customary for the collection to be taken for the benefit of Polish war orphans. The amount collected is then announced in the paper and serves as a source of prestige to the family. There are also numerous fête days and religious celebrations which call for special expenditure. It is impossible to consider all these here, but attention should be called to an important event in the religious life; namely, the occasion of the first communion. The expenses for the confirmation of a boy are not great. He usually has a new suit and wears a flower in his buttonhole. He must have beads, prayer book, and, if he is Polish, a candle. One little Polish girl who made her first communion in the summer of 1919 had an outfit that cost her $30. This did not represent the entire cost, as she had several parts of the outfit given to her; her godmother made the dress, although the little girl herself furnished the material; the veil with the wreath of flowers was given her by a nun who had taken an interest in her, and the candle, which it is still customary in Polish churches to carry, was given by a cousin who is a nun. She had to buy the material for her dress, white slippers, stockings, and long white gloves, beads, flowers, and photographs. If she had herself borne all the expense, a minimum estimate of the cost would be $50. BUYING PROPERTY A third motive for saving is the desire for home ownership or for acquiring land. There is no doubt that to own a home of their own is the desire of most immigrant families. Many of them come from countries where the ownership of land carries with it a degree of social prestige that is unknown in more highly developed communities of the modern industrial civilization. Representatives of the Bohemians, Lithuanians, Poles, and Italians have all emphasized the fact that their people want to own their own homes, and bend every energy toward this end, so that the whole family often works in order that first payments may be made or later payments kept up. The Croatians, Slovaks, Hungarians, and Slovenians are also said to be buying houses, although, as they are newer groups, they have not yet done so to the same extent as the other groups. The Serbians, Rumanians, Bulgarians, and Russians in Chicago are, on the other hand, said to be planning to return in large numbers to the old homes in Europe, and hence are not interested in buying property in this country. Their feeling for the land and their desire to own their homes in the country in which they decide to settle is said to be as strong as in the other groups. The longing for home ownership was apparent in the family schedules we obtained, and in studies of housing conditions[26] in certain districts of Chicago we find additional evidence of the immigrants' desire to own their own homes, and the way in which this desire leads many to buy, even in the congested districts of the city. The following table gives the number and the percentage of home owners in eight selected districts. It will be noted that the percentage of owners varied from eight in one of the most congested Italian districts known as "Little Sicily," to twenty-four in the Lithuanian district. The strength of the desire for homes can also be measured by the sacrifices which many of the families make to enable them to acquire property. It means in some cases the sacrifice of the children's education, the crowding of the home with lodgers, or the mother's going out to work. In fact, immigrant leaders interviewed seem to think that women's entrance into industry during the war was largely due to the desire to own their own homes. After the title to the house is acquired, it is often crowded with other tenants to help finish the payments. TABLE II NUMBER AND PER CENT OF IMMIGRANT HOME OWNERS IN DIFFERENT CHICAGO DISTRICTS ================================================================ | | NUMBER | DISTRICT | TOTAL | OF | PER |FAMILIES| OWNERS | CENT --------------------------------------|--------|--------|------- Bohemians--10th Ward | 295 | 36 | 12 Polish--16th Ward | 2,785 | 355 | 13 Italian--"Lower North" Side | 1,462 | 119 | 8 Italian--19th Ward | 1,936 | 208 | 9 Polish and other Slav--South Chicago | 545 | 100 | 18 Lithuanian--4th Ward | 1,009 | 241 | 24 Slovak--20th Ward | 869 | 148 | 17 Polish, Lithuanian, other Slavic--29th| | | Ward, Stockyards District | 1,616 | 298 | 18 ================================================================ The housing studies in Chicago furnish many illustrations of this sacrifice.[27] For example, among the Lithuanians in the Fourth Ward, there was a landlord who lived in three cellar rooms so low that a person more than five feet eight inches tall could not stand upright in them. The kitchen, a fair-sized room with windows on the street--though its gray-painted wooden walls and ceiling served well to accentuate the absence of sunlight, was merely gloomy, but the other two rooms were both small and dark, with tiny lot-line windows only four square feet in area. In one of these rooms, 564 cubic feet in contents, the father and one child slept; the other, which contained only 443 cubic feet, was the bedroom of the mother and two children. One of the highly colored holy pictures common among the Lithuanians and Poles, though it hung right by the window, was an indistinguishable blur. The agency through which the purchase is made may be either the real-estate dealer of the same national group, or, more commonly, the building and loan association. The real-estate agents to whom the foreign-speaking immigrants go are like the steamship agents, the immigrant bankers, the keepers of special shops. Those who are honest and intelligent render invaluable services; those who wish to exploit have the same opportunity of doing so that is taken advantage of by the shyster lawyer, the quack doctor, the sharp dealer of any kind who speaks the language and preys upon his fellow countrymen. Reference has been made in an earlier chapter to the services rendered by the building and loan associations in enabling the foreign born to obtain homes. They also render services in providing the means for safe investment for those with only small sums to invest. BUILDING AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS These societies are frequently organized along national lines. For example, among those listed in 1893 by the United States Commissioner of Labor[28] are the Bohemian Building and Loan, organized February 1, 1886; the Bohemian California Homestead (February 15, 1892); the Bohemian National Building Loan and Homestead (January 30, 1888); the Bohemian Workingmen's Loan and Homestead (April 20, 1890); the Ceska Koruna Homestead (May 6, 1892); the King Kazimer the Great Building and Loan (January 27, 1886); the King Mieczyslaus the First National Building Loan and Savings Bank (June 3, 1889); King Zigsmund the First Building and Loan (April 15, 1891). December 1, 1918, there were 681 such organizations in Illinois; 255 of these were in Chicago and the majority were conducted and patronized by the foreign born. The following is briefly the method by which the building and loan associations perform the two services of providing for investment and lending money on homes:[29] The stockholder or member pays a stipulated minimum sum, say one dollar, when he takes his membership, and buys a share of stock. He then continues to pay a like sum each month until the aggregate of sums paid, augmented by the profits, amounts to the maturing value of the stock, usually $200, and at this time the stockholder is entitled to the full maturing value of the share, and surrenders the same. A shareholder who desires to build a house and has secured a lot for that purpose, may borrow money from the association of which he is a member. Suppose a man who has secured his lot wishes to borrow $1,000 for the erection of a house. He must be the holder of five shares in his association, each share having as its maturing value $200. His five shares, therefore, when matured, would be worth $1,000, the amount of money which he desires to borrow.... In a building and loan association the money is put up at auction, usually in open meeting on the night or at the time of the payment of dues. Those who wish to borrow bid a premium above the regular rate of interest charged, and the one who bids the highest premium is awarded the loan. The man who wishes to build his house, therefore, and desires to borrow $1,000, must have five shares of stock in his association, must bid the highest premium, and then the $1,000 will be loaned to him. To secure this $1,000 he gives the association a mortgage on his property and pledges his five shares of stock. To cancel this debt he is constantly paying his monthly or semimonthly dues, until such time as the constant payment of dues, plus the accumulation of profits through compounded interest, matures the shares at $200 each. At this time, then, he surrenders his shares, and the debt upon his property is canceled. [Illustration: ITALIANS HAVE THEIR OWN FINANCIAL CENTER AND LABOR MARKET IN BOSTON] In some cases the sums paid are fifty or even twenty-five cents a week, and the shares may be $100 instead of $200. Among some groups shares are taken in the name of each of the children, and the investment constitutes an educational fund. There are those, however, for whom the building and loan has not provided adequate opportunity for deposit and safe investment. It is probable that the building and loan has proved most efficient for the income group $1,500-$1,800. For the group below that, home ownership is for the time impossible. As a device for saving, for both the lower and higher income groups, who come from countries familiar with similar devices, the postal savings banks are supposed to offer efficient, honest, and convenient service. POSTAL SAVINGS BANKS These banks were established under an act that went into effect June 25, 1910. Under this law, as amended May 18, 1916, persons over ten years of age may deposit any amount, providing the balance to the credit of one depositor does not exceed $1,000. Two per cent interest is paid on deposits, and there is provision for exchange of deposits for United States bonds of small denominations. The facilities thus provided were immediately taken advantage of by the foreign-born groups, and the postal savings banks became almost banks for the foreign born. That is, in September, 1916, 375,000, or 80 per cent, of the total number of depositors were persons of foreign birth, and they owned 75 per cent of the deposits. In proportion to population the deposits were in 1916 about eleven times as great as those of the native born (due allowance being made for the age of the two population groups). The Greeks, Italians, Russians, and Hungarians, all coming from countries in which there are postal savings arrangements, found it especially easy to make use of them. The department felt, however, that the facilities could be greatly extended, even among the foreign born. Therefore, circulars describing the organization, methods, and advantages were distributed. They were written in the following languages: English, Bohemian, Bulgarian, Chinese, Croatian, Danish, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Hungarian, Italian, Japanese, Lithuanian, Norwegian, Polish, Portuguese, Russian, Ruthenian, Serbian, Slovak, Slovenian, Spanish, Swedish, and Yiddish. In spite of the fact that this system is characterized not only by security, but also by certain democratic and convenient features especially serviceable to many foreign born, there are certain limitations to which Professor Kemmerer has called attention in the following statement: As a matter of fact, the interest rate paid is so low that it makes a very weak appeal to the class of people who deposit in the postal savings banks. Their motive is primarily security. The government is now realizing large profits from the postal savings system--for 1916 the estimated profit was $481,816--and this profit is coming from a class of people in the community, the thrifty poor, from whom it is bad social policy to take it. Of course it would be administratively impracticable to pay interest to depositors on average daily balances--no savings banks do that. Would it be expecting too much, however, to ask for our postal savings depositors the allowances of interest on half yearly or even quarterly balances? Moreover, is it unreasonable to ask the Board of Trustees, in view of the nomadic character of our foreign-born population which patronizes the postal savings system most, to devise a simple system of transfer by which a depositor who is changing his place of residence may transfer his postal savings account without forfeiting his accumulated but yet undue interest?[30] Not only should the postal savings bank law be amended, rendering it more flexible and more attractive, but there should also be enacted in those states in which no such legislation is yet on the statute books, laws regulating the conduct of banks, steamship companies, and all agencies receiving deposits or otherwise performing banking functions. It is clear that the foreign born, during the early years of their residence in the United States, encounter all the difficulties of others whose incomes are inadequate and precarious, and are also the easy victims of special forms of exploitation. In addition, they find themselves unfamiliar with the standards and customs connected with the great events of family life. In the matter of weddings and funerals and other ceremonial occasions there is no reason to expect them to be wiser, more economical, and farsighted than the native-born group. In the adjustment between future and present needs, foreign-born housewives need, as most housewives need, instruction in the art of spending, in the selection of food and clothing, and the variety of demands for which provision must be deliberately made in a modern industrial community. In an earlier and simpler situation provision for these needs was made without conscious effort. In this connection it is interesting to note that the "Thrift Leaflets" prepared by the United States Department of Agriculture and the Department of the Treasury for the war saving stamps thrift campaign, urged care in the use of articles and dealt with prevention of waste rather than with saving. Obviously, if goods were more carefully used, more could be saved and invested in the securities thus being indirectly urged. It is conceivable, however, that wise use may mean the purchase of better food, the selection of more satisfactory clothing, and the enjoyment of better housing, rather than investment in government or any other securities. The thrift campaigns of the United States Treasury proposed standards of saving only for those receiving an income of $1,200 or more, with the exception of unmarried persons earning as much as $780. ACCOUNT KEEPING The basis of sound saving or spending is the account book, carefully kept over an interval of time, allowing comparison between the outlay and enjoyment as experienced at different periods. Such account books are being urged by the extension departments of the state agricultural colleges in co-operation with the Departments of Agriculture. Most account books that have been so far devised are, however, quite difficult and uninteresting, even for the American housewife, demanding classifications of items which require too much time and consideration. An account book on a weekly basis, providing very simple divisions of the expenditures of the household, and giving space also for the personal expenses of the various members of the family, has been published by the Committee on Household Budgets of the American Home Economics Association.[31] These books could be easily issued in different languages and be made available for the foreign-born housewife. She, like all housewives, would be benefited by seeing what she is spending her money for. It would lead to a definite planning of her expenditures. By this means it could be suggested that things may have changed in value for her in the new country. Old wants are replaced by new ones, and a new system of saving and spending might be worked out. FOOTNOTES: [21] Haskins, _How Other People Get Ahead_, Savings Division, United States Treasury Department, p. 4. [22] _Report of the Health Insurance Commission of Illinois_, p. 223. [23] _Report of the Health Insurance Commission of the State of Illinois_, pp. 443-483. [24] _Ibid._, pp. 523-532. [25] _Ibid._, pp. 483-497. [26] Chicago Housing Conditions, _American Journal of Sociology_, vol. xvi, p. 433; vol. xvii, pp. 1, 145; vol. xviii, p. 509; vol. xx, pp. 145, 289; vol. xxi, p. 185. [27] Chicago Housing Conditions, ix, "The Lithuanians in the Fourth Ward," _American Journal of Sociology_, vol. xx, p. 296. [28] _Ninth Annual Report of the United States Commissioner of Labor on Building and Loan Associations_, p. 56. [29] _Ibid._, pp. 12-13. [30] Kemmerer, _Postal Savings Banks_, pp. 100-104. [31] _Thrift by Household Accounting and Weekly Cash Record Forms_, published by the Committee on Household Budgets, American Home Economics Association, 1211 Cathedral Street, Baltimore, Maryland. V THE NEGLECTED ART OF SPENDING Saving is the problem of _over there_, and of the future. Spending is the problem of _here_ and _now_, and in the expenditure for present needs as well as in saving for future wants the foreign-born housewife meets with special difficulties. She is handicapped by the kinds of places at which she must buy, because of language, custom, and time limitations, as well as the grade of article available. Through the complicated maze of choices open to her she must steer her way to obtain for her family the highest returns for an all too small expenditure. The art of spending, too often neglected by her native-born sisters, takes on added difficulties for the untrained immigrant woman. From the point of view of the housewife the desirable thing is that the transaction of buying her household goods and food and of selecting her house, shall be as simple as possible. It should be made easy for her to know the quantity and to judge the quality of any article she considers, so that she may the more easily compare its possible use to her with the use of other articles that might be secured for the same amount of money. It is also important that she have as definite ideas as possible as to the range of the demand for different kinds of goods, so that she may buy as few as possible of the goods on which the price of special risk is placed. In many cases she needs really expert advice. In the absence of such help she may do her buying in either of two states of mind. She may think that all merchants are cheats, there "to do her and to do her first," or she may think that she has a right to expect from the dealer frank and kindly advice. In the present state of the retail organization she may find either attitude. In shops kept by her co-nationals she will naturally have the utmost confidence. This puts the small neighborhood stores in a position of peculiar privilege, and makes it doubly easy for them to take subtle advantage of the unwary customer. Even when the dealer takes no special advantage of his customer, in following the general practice of the trade, he can create innumerable situations in which her problem is rendered more, rather than less, complicated. The indefinite package is substituted for the definite weight or measure. The "bars" of soap vary in weight and in composition. The trade _mark_ used to tell her that X made goods whose quality she knew; the trade _name_, based on incalculable sums spent in skillful advertising, tells her nothing that is of intrinsic use to her. It connects a name with a repeated suggestion that she buy. By the trading stamp, the premium, and the bargain counter the merchant tries to persuade her that she is getting more than she pays for. He appeals to the gambling instinct and introduces into a drab life something of the excitement of the roulette table. THE COMPANY STORE In mining communities and other places in which there are "company stores," there is the pressure exercised by the employer to force the employee to deal only with the company store, even when there are other stores in the neighborhood. The United States Immigration Commission had something to say on this point. It made it clear that, while there are instances of an employer giving his employees a fair deal when he becomes merchant and they purchasers, the combination of employing and merchandising functions is often perilous. Even if the employee appears to have a choice, he fears the loss of his job if he does not buy at the company store. The evils connected with so-called "truck payments" have long been recognized. They change only in form when the company check replaces the old payment in kind.[32] In some states this evil has been recognized by legislation prohibiting the combination of industrial and merchandising functions. Where such is the case, as in Pennsylvania, the statute is evaded. A separate corporation is organized by the same individuals, or a store is conducted by an individual who is a member of the mining corporation. Where there is a "store" administered in any of these ways, "company checks" may be issued between pay days. Or "store books" may be issued, the items purchased being recorded, and deducted on pay day from the wages of the employee. The Immigration Commission published a table[33] of the expenditures at such stores, the amounts deducted from the wages, and the proportion of earnings left to be collected at the end of the month, illustrating the confusing effect of these practices on the housewife whose income should be a settled and regular amount. While some of the Croatians and Magyars spent hardly a fourth or a third of their earnings at the company store, others in the same national groups collected on pay day less than a fifth or even less than a tenth of their earnings. From this balance must come the payments for rent, medical service, entertainment, school, for all things other than food, clothes, and furniture. It may be that in some cases the employee is able to secure at the company store as good articles as he can obtain elsewhere and for the same prices, but this is by no means common. In West Virginia it was found necessary to enact legislation forbidding a company which ran a store to charge its own employees higher prices than the employees of other companies were charged.[34] The Immigration Commission found not only that in some cases the stock was inferior and the prices high, but that there was a sense of compulsion that made it almost impossible to adjust income and needs. It is hardly necessary to point out that the supply of housing accommodations by the employer has the same influence as the supply of food and clothing. The power as employer may be, and often is, exerted to fix the conditions under which the family life goes on; and the tenant is deprived of the experience of selecting, of choosing, of balancing what one gives with what one gets.[35] A similar objection may be raised to payment of wages by check. In the old days, before the world went dry, one service the saloon was frequently called on to render was that of cashing checks. Either payment in "lawful money" or an opportunity to exchange at once for lawful money is the only method of paying wages that gives the housewife her full opportunity. SHOPPING HABITS The immigrant housewife is restricted by her ignorance of places and methods of marketing, and so feels the necessity of buying in the immigrant neighborhood. Among the 90 Chicago families from whom schedules were obtained, representing Bohemian, Croatian, Italian, Polish, Russian, Serbian, Slovak, Slovenian, and Ukrainian groups, 72 purchased all their food in the neighborhood stores, 2 kept their own stores, and only 16 were seeking bargains in other localities. Among these 16, 5 were going to larger business centers near their neighborhood, 4 bought in downtown department stores, 1 used a mail-order house, 1 went to a well-established "cash and carry" store, 2 bought in the wholesale markets, and only 2 took advantage of the co-operative association of their own group. The 72 families who were marketing exclusively in their own neighborhoods were patronizing for the most part stores owned by foreign-speaking people or those employing foreign-born salesmen to attract the housewives of particular groups. A Croatian woman says that when she tries to do her marketing downtown she sees many new things and would like to ask what they are used for, but she does not know how to ask. In her neighborhood store the grocer can easily explain to her. One Polish woman reads the advertisements in the papers and buys where there is a sale. She thinks that an alleged Polish co-operative is expensive and prefers the large department stores, but for the first few years she bought everything in her neighborhood where the clerks speak Polish. The prevalence of the immigrant store may be illustrated by a detailed study that was made of the Sixteenth Ward in Chicago. The population of the ward is predominantly Polish, with an intermingling of Jewish, German, and Slovak in the southern portion. In the twenty-five blocks there are 113 retail stores, 44 of which are grocery and delicatessen stores, meat markets, and bakeries. In one block there are 5 grocery and delicatessen stores, and at least 1 in every block which has any stores. Most of these shops are small and crowded, with family living rooms in the rear. For the most part, the nationality of the proprietor is that of the majority in the block, and there are only 14 proprietors of all the 113 stores who are not Polish. The difficulty with the language, however, extends beyond merely talking in the store. A Ukrainian mother, who admits being afraid to go beyond her own neighborhood, is perhaps typical of many foreign-born mothers to whom a trip to the central shopping district is a strange and terrifying adventure. There is also the question of the means with which to buy. An Italian mother says that she buys at the chain store when she has the cash, and at other times in the Italian stores where, although the prices are higher, she can run a charge account. The system of buying on credit at the local store is spoken of as practically universal in all the foreign-born groups. The purchaser carries a small blank book, in which the merchant enters in large figures merely the sum charged, with no indication of what was bought or the amount. The account is settled on pay day by the man of the family. There is, of course, every chance for inaccurate entry. It is not surprising, then, that one hears from many sources that buying food is generally extravagant. Women often do the buying. Whether or not it is the more common among foreign-born families than among native born for the children to be sent to the store, we cannot say. Since the marketing is done so largely in immigrant stores, there is perhaps not the need for an English-speaking member of the family to do the purchasing. We find among 89, 43 mothers who still do all their own buying, 32 who allow the children to do part, 4 who share the task with the father, and only 10 who never do any of the buying. In this last group of 10 families there are 7 in which the children do all the marketing and 3 in which it is done by the father. Even the skilled housekeepers have little experience in buying. At home they were used to storing vegetables in quantities; potatoes in caves, beets and cabbage by a process of fermentation, other vegetables and fruits by drying. In the United States this sort of thing is not done. There is, in the first place, no place for storage, and the initial cost of vegetables is high and quality poor, and the women know nothing of modern processes of canning. It is difficult to discover the general practice with regard to the quantity of food bought at one time, since it must necessarily vary considerably. Meat, milk, bread, perishable fruits and vegetables must usually be purchased daily. As for staple food, the thrifty housewife will buy in as large quantities as she can afford in order to save both money and time. Reference has been made, however, to the lack of storage space and the consequent necessity of buying very little at one time. Thirty-three, or two fifths, of the 81 foreign housewives who were interviewed on this subject report that they buy food in daily supplies; 1 buys twice a day and 1 for each meal. Forty, however, buy in larger quantities. Twenty-nine for the week and 11 for a month at a time. Six say that they buy whenever they have the money. It must never be forgotten that among the lower-income groups, to have more in the house is to have more eaten, and that cannot be afforded. Besides the high prices, one of the other limitations of the foreign-born neighborhood store is the low quality of the food. This may be illustrated by a description of the markets in one Lithuanian neighborhood back of the stockyards, where men are working at low-grade labor in the yards, and the women are keeping lodgers, where few speak English and not many ever go more than a few blocks from home. The typical market in this neighborhood--and there are sometimes as many as ten in a block--is a combined meat market and grocery store. Such stores are found in the poorer neighborhoods of every settlement. Stock in all these stores is the same; there is a great deal of fresh meat, apparently the poorer cuts, scraps, etc.; shelves are filled with canned fruits, canned vegetables, canned soups, and condensed milk; there is much of the bakers' "Lithuanian rye bread," and quantities of such cakes as are sold by the National Biscuit Company. No fresh vegetables are to be seen in any of these stores. The reason given by shopkeepers is that they are little used in the neighborhood and that the truck wagons supply the demand. Women who actually depend upon these stores and the truck wagons for all their supplies find them very unsatisfactory. No really fresh vegetables are to be found in either stores or wagons, they say. In commenting upon this situation, several persons have expressed a belief that the restriction of diet among Lithuanian immigrants was largely due to the fact that the markets afford so little variety, and that an effort to extend the stock in the stores would find a response in the community. These stores, however, are widely different from those found in Italian neighborhoods. Practically all the food used by the Italian families of one such neighborhood is bought in these stores. In this district the population is as dense as back of the stockyards, and the families have comparable incomes, the men being engaged in unskilled occupations and their earnings being supplemented by the earnings of women and children. The number of food stores in a block is about the same as in the other district, but the stock carried differs greatly. Here, in place of shops that carry only meat, canned goods, and potatoes, cabbages, and beets, the greengrocery stores largely predominate. There are four or five greengrocery shops to one meat market, and these stores have a surprising variety of fresh vegetables and fruits all the year. The variety of salad greens is remarkable. More Swiss chard, mustard, dandelion leaves, endive, squash blossoms and leaves, escarole, are to be seen in one little Italian store than in a half dozen American markets. Legumes are in stock in great quantity and variety--there are some little stores that do not handle greengroceries, but carry large stocks of legumes. Every store has a large case of different varieties of Italian cheese, and the variety of macaroni, spaghetti, and noodles is amazing to an American. Fish is frequently sold from stalls along the street, and on Friday fish wagons go about through the district. Sometimes meat is sold from wagons, but less to Italians than to other nationalities living in the neighborhood. Certainly one effect of the organization of these shops on the basis of nationality is to prevent the members of one group from gaining the advantage of dietetically better practices followed in other groups. The Lithuanian and Italian neighborhoods described happened to be in widely separated districts of the city, but often similar differences may be observed between two shops within the same block that serve different national groups. It is clear that the retail trade, being unstandardized, gives no help to the immigrant woman in the matter of efficient buying. There is as yet no fine art of service in this field based on careful accounting of cost and service. Obviously there is great waste in the number of stores, in the number of persons engaged in conducting them, in the needless duplication of even such meager equipment as is found in them. This waste will reflect itself in needlessly high prices which, while they mulct the buyer, bring the seller little gain. Evidently, then, little or no help is given through the system of retail trading to the foreign-born housewife in the matter of adapting the diet of her family to American or dietetic requirements. Yet food demands a large share of the income. In the latest report on the cost of living in the United States, in only 8 out of 45 cities were the food demands met by less than 40 per cent of the entire expenditure in the group whose incomes were between $900 and $1,200.[36] Those cities were: Pana, Illinois 39.4 Buffalo, New York 38.9 Wilmington, Delaware 38.9 Dover, New Jersey 38.8 Indianapolis, Indiana 37.6 Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minnesota 37.6 Steubenville, Ohio 37.3 Fort Wayne, Indiana 35.6 The lowest proportion was in Fort Wayne, where over a third of the income was required for feeding the families in this income group. MODIFICATION OF DIET No extensive study of the dietary practices of the different groups, either here or in the old country, has been undertaken, but considerable evidence has been secured in substantiation of the fact that their old-country practices are being modified in this country. This is not being done consciously in response to dietetic requirements, but often blindly in response to what seem to be American customs or necessities. There has been some conflict of testimony with regard to the changes in the Czecho-Slovak and Croatian groups. The Italians are said by all to have made very slight changes in their diet in this country. The Lithuanians, Poles, Russians, and Ukrainians, on the other hand, are said to have made very radical changes. The modification that is spoken of most frequently and that is of gravest concern to many of their leaders, is the increased use of meat. Attention has already been called to the explanation of this in the fact that the price of meat was prohibitive at home, and that fruit, vegetables, and dairy products were enjoyed without expenditure of money. The large number of stores in which meat is offered for sale, although undoubtedly reflecting the general wishes of the group, offers constant suggestion to the individual purchaser to buy meat. The naïve belief that much meat must be eaten by men doing manual labor is said to be another factor. Excessive use of coffee is said by visiting housekeepers and others familiar with dietetic problems to be one of the most serious faults of the diet of many groups, especially the Slavic groups. It is a general custom to put the coffee pot on the stove in the morning and leave it there all day for any member of the family to help himself to coffee when he wants it. This is entirely a new habit which has been learned in America, as coffee was almost unknown in the poorer groups in the old country. One explanation that was given by a foreign-born woman was that these families were used to a diet of soup at home, and that as they gave this up in this country they felt the need of some liquid to replace it. One Polish woman who was asked if she had changed her diet in this country, replied, "Naturally, at home everyone had soup for breakfast, and here everyone has coffee and bread." Another change that was reported over and over again was the use of more cakes and sweet rolls. This seemed to be considered a peculiarly American change, as was evidenced by the families who reported that they had not changed their diet, as they didn't like the American diet of cakes. Some of them, indeed, were very scornful of what they considered the American diet, saying among other things that they could not afford to eat steak and chops every day, that they did not like sweets, that their "men" would not eat "out of a can," that they did not like fried things. Their ideas of American diet were gained in part from the food in restaurants, in part from what the children learned in cooking lessons in school, and in part from general suggestions that they have picked up. Undoubtedly misguided social workers who have tried to give advice on diet without themselves knowing much about it, are responsible for some of these ideas. In a certain mill town in Massachusetts, for example, a social worker employed by the mill discovered what she thought was the cause of the paper falling off the walls in the fact that the people boiled their food. She therefore went in and taught them to fry meat and other foodstuffs. The problem of how far the immigrant groups should be encouraged to modify their diet can be determined only after a careful study of their dietary practices. The price and quality of food available to immigrants must be ascertained. Their habits, customs, and preferences must be thoroughly understood. There can be no question, however, that help should be given them in making the modifications required by the changed environment. There have been a number of suggestions of the best way to accomplish this. Visiting housekeepers or visiting dietitians have been suggested and will be discussed later. It is highly probable that help must first be given to immigrant women in their homes before they can be persuaded to attend any classes or demonstrations outside of their homes. They must gradually be persuaded to take advantage of the help obtainable in this way. That the whole problem of diets suited to special needs of people is being considered is evidenced by the fact that it has been suggested that food be sold by units of energy value. Dr. Graham Lusk, for example, proposed at a time of great distress in New York that the Health Commissioner attempt to persuade grocers to prepare "Board of Health baskets" which would provide 10,000 calories daily for a family of five at a minimum cost.[37] The United States Commissioner of Labor indorses the idea in the following words, "There are no insuperable obstacles in the way of selling bread, beef, pork, eggs, milk, cabbage, onions, corn, sugar--by the 100 or 1,000 calories."[38] Professor Murlin has advocated that manufacturers be compelled to place on food containers the calorie content of the package. If such a plan could be worked out, the dietetic virtues and weaknesses of the different groups could serve as a basis for the special form in which foodstuffs were marketed in different areas. Any such project as applied to the foreign born is far from accomplishment. It is suggestive of a new attitude which does not continue to leave the matter of diet to chance. FURNITURE ON THE INSTALLMENT PLAN In the purchase of furniture and of clothing there is the temptation to buy on the installment plan. This plan is open to all the objections ordinarily brought against buying on credit. The buyer is tempted to overestimate his ability to pay in the future, and he may not take the same trouble to calculate the actual value of his purchase as when he pays money down. In the past the form of sale has often been such as to place him peculiarly at the mercy of the seller, who might find it more profitable to reclaim the possession of goods on which a considerable share of the price has been paid than to extend the time of payment and allow the payment to be completed. The superintendent of the Bohemian Charitable Association says, for example, that it is very common for newly married people to load themselves with debt for household furniture, and that at least two thirds of the stoves which are commonly bought on the installment plan are taken back by the dealers before payments are finished. The immigrant from the rural community may be quite unused to purchasing furniture of any sort, and may be easily persuaded to buy what he thinks is "American style." The Lithuanian peasant, for example, had little furniture at home. In the cottage of two rooms, one was used on the occasion of the visit of the priest or at the time of a wedding or funeral, and contained nothing but the shrine and the dowry chest of the daughters. The walls were decorated with paper flowers and cheap lithographs. In Lithuanian homes here one is struck by the fact that among the more prosperous the same sort of furniture is seen in all the houses. This consists of the heavy oak and leather sets of three or four large pieces usually sold on the installment plan by stores in the immigrant districts. It is not beautiful, and there is no reason to think that it is distinctly American, but the immigrant is not in a position to know that. NEW FASHIONS AND OLD CLOTHES Then there is the unsolved problem of clothing. As in the case of food, so with dress; the general effect of the organization of the department stores in the different neighborhoods can be only misleading and confusing. Many misleading devices that would no longer deceive the older residents are tried again on the newcomer. The women at first find it difficult to judge of values and prices. The local stores are there with the bargain counter and the special sale and all the other devices. The Poles and the Lithuanians with whom we have talked have dwelt especially on the helplessness of their countrywomen in the hands of the unscrupulous merchant or the shrewd clerk. Clothing presents to even the enlightened and the sophisticated a most difficult problem in domestic management. "Fashion wears out more garments than the man." The anthropologist, the physiologist, and the sociologist are all concerned to explain why the clothing worn to-day is often so unsuited to bodily needs as well as to the demands of beauty and fitness.[39] To a very real extent practices of waste prevail in the selection of clothing, and to that extent neither reason nor art finds a place in the scheme. Where an attempt at economy is made, the influence of the new science of hygiene is impeded by old ideas of durability. So that from the well-to-do of the community comes little suggestion that can be of service in directing the expenditures for clothing of any other group. [Illustration: IT'S A LONG WAY FROM THIS ELABORATE CZECHO-SLOVAK COSTUME TO THE MODERN AMERICAN STYLES] The foreign born are faced with a particularly difficult problem. They often come from places where dress served to show where one came from, and who one was. In the United States, dress serves to conceal one's origin and relationships, and there results an almost inexorable dilemma. Follow the Old-World practice, and show who you are and where you come from, and the result is that you remain alien and different and that your children will not stay with you "outside the gates." Or follow the fashion and be like others, and the meager income is dissipated before your eyes, with meager results. The Croatians have emphasized the waste of American dress and the immodest styles often worn, while the Italians have chiefly dwelt upon the friction between parents and children. In some neighborhoods Jewish agents go about offering clothing on the installment plan at prices much higher than those charged even in inefficient neighborhood shops. Shoes are particularly a source of difficulty, both those for the younger children and those for the older boy or girl who goes to work. In some neighborhoods where the older women go barefooted and are thought to do so because they wish to cling to their Old-World customs, they are simply saving, so that the children may wear "American shoes." Certainly the foreign-born woman who undertakes to manage her family's affairs in an American community is confronted by no easy task. The question arises as to what might be done to render that task less difficult. The dull of sight cannot lead the blind at a very swift pace. But certain steps might be taken to simplify the problems for all consumers, including the foreign born. In fact, whatever renders the system of retail dealing less chaotic and less wasteful will benefit all. The establishment of markets for foodstuffs at appropriate places where grower and consumer can meet, and certain costs of double cartage can be eliminated, is, for example, a recognized item in reform of the present food traffic. TRAINING NEEDED The importance of the spending function of the housewife must be brought home more clearly to great numbers of women. Too few native-born housewives realize that they have any problem to work out, or that there may be an "art of spending." None of the ninety foreign-born women interviewed had received any instruction in buying except advice from friends or from their own children. What little instruction they had received had been concerned only with cooking. Not one of these women recognized any difficulty in buying except the difficulty of speaking the language well enough to ask for things or to understand how much they cost, or of getting the wherewithal to pay. It is by the slow process of continual suggestion that both women consumers and distributing agencies will be awakened to the problem. Evidence of this awakening is already apparent. Schools and colleges, with their domestic-science and household-budgeting courses, are raising the question among an ever-widening circle of people. Banks and brokers with their special woman's department are advising and suggesting ways of spending that save. Newspapers, magazines, and clubs are discussing household problems. Organizations, public and private, have worked out ways and means of helping women budget their expenditures. So far these varied efforts have reached chiefly the American women. But no one group is isolated to-day, and as some awaken they set in motion the waves of thought and action that reach their foreign-born neighbor. Her institutions of press and bank respond with information and assistance. Inevitably better housekeepers will result. In the meantime, all possible assistance must be given. It is therefore especially important to establish contacts between agencies already responsible for developing an art in household management and the leaders among the various foreign-born groups. Provision should be made for young women from among those groups to obtain a higher education than has been commonly thought necessary by them or than has in many cases been possible from a pecuniary standpoint. Much could undoubtedly be accomplished by the establishment in connection with departments of home economics and household arts in the various colleges of funds making possible the compilation of material bearing on these particular points. Scholarships and fellowships can be made especially available to young women from among these groups who desire to pursue their education in these lines. The household arts departments of the various universities are attempting to plan a "standardized dress," the social workers are developing a list of garments,[40] and an estimate of expenditures for the use of case-work agencies in the care of dependent families,[41] the Young Women's Christian Association is carrying on a health campaign[42] directed particularly at the problem of proper shoes. In the meantime the Sunday papers carry full-page advertisements describing in specious and misleading terms the bargains in clothing to be had the following day, and the merry round continues. The tragedy works itself out both in the dissipation of the income and in the friction created between parents and children, to which reference will be made in another place. But perhaps more important is the possibility of modifying the practices of the retail trade itself. Restrictions have been placed about the trade in such legislation as has been passed against fraudulent advertising and other fraudulent practices, as well as by the so-called pure food laws of the United States and of the various states. And some influence has been exercised on the conditions under which goods are made, or under which they are sold, by the Trade Union Label League and by the Consumers' League. Neither of these organizations would, however, directly touch the life of the foreign-born housewife. CO-OPERATION IN SPENDING The question arises as to whether help is to be expected from co-operative distribution, which has had such an extraordinary history in England and been highly developed in a number of the other European countries. There is always the temptation to recall the winter evening in December, 1844, when twenty-eight weavers, of whom two were women, opened in Toad Lane, Rochdale, Lancashire, a little shop, and began to sell themselves the necessities of life. Their remarkable services in England have not been confined to their business undertakings, but have always included important educational activities. In America there have for many years been a few co-operative stores, some succeeding, some failing, most of them working out their plans independently without connection with other similar stores from whose experience they might profit. Within the last few years, however, the number of such stores has greatly increased and the need for closer union has been felt. This has resulted in the formation of the Co-operative League of America. Education in co-operative buying is its main purpose. At what appears to be the beginning of an important period in the extension of the movement in this country it is worth while to consider how far the existing co-operative stores in this country are helping the foreign-born women. Anything that assists her to lower the cost of living is beneficial. Although sound practice dictates that consumer's co-operatives sell their goods at prices current in their neighborhood, the profits to the members appear in the return of a per cent of all purchases. In proportion as the local stores are able to supply the housewife with all her goods, the saving on the purchase of her daily needs will be more appreciable. Her interest in the enterprise will make her demand both greater variety and better quality of goods. Moreover, there may be other than material gains to the foreign-born woman from her contact with a co-operative. If it is one formed by her countrymen, where her mother tongue is spoken, it may be her first and for a long time her only contact with anything outside her home. Natural timidity will readily be overcome if she can go around the corner to a store kept by people who speak her language and understand her wants. As confidence is established she may venture to other neighborhoods or centers of distribution where more advantages can be gained. But unless she gains the confidence which few immigrant women have at first, she is an alien and isolated unit in a vast, strange country. Eventually she may become a member of a co-operative store. If she does this, perhaps the most benefit to the foreign-born woman results. Her incorporation into this country may well be said to have been started when she has become an active member of an institution which is a part of American life. The benefits are those which result to any individual from participation in a going concern. Sharing responsibilities and evolving policies for a joint enterprise have educational implications that no other activity can supply. The question, then, may be raised as to the extent to which a development of the co-operative methods in the United States may be looked to as likely to become an important educational agency in intelligent spending for the foreign housewife, enabling her to develop in her task something of a technique. As to the possibility of developing co-operative societies because the ordinary trade is wasteful, it should be recalled that the retail trade in the United States, while wasteful, is probably not less, but rather more efficient than in other countries. Moreover, in the United States there are often lacking those conditions that give rise to a sense of a permanent division of interest between those who sell and those who buy. In fact, when the foreign-language store exists, there may be a tie between shopkeeper and purchaser. In communities in which there is an apparent division of interest between the foreign born and the native, or between two foreign groups, the national bond may grow into a social bond that for a time at least would serve as the basis for the collective action by one group against the other group. If the dealers then belong to the outside group, or if the dealers of the foreign-born group seem to betray their fellow countrymen, there may develop a movement strong enough to carry over into organization. Among some groups, such as the Finns, the language constitutes a permanent barrier for the adult members of the group, and with a skillful and intelligent leadership the co-operative undertakings may be expected to prosper for a very considerable period of time. The immigrants have probably twice as many successful co-operative stores as the native born. In a community like a mining town, that is almost or altogether an industrial community, with no leisure class, the pecuniary resources of all are fairly well known to all, and the temptation to spend conspicuously is therefore lacking. It will be recalled that these are the communities in which the employers have specially abused their power by forcing the employees to buy at company stores. In such communities there are always considerable numbers of competent, efficient, intelligent persons. Under a specially able leadership, a special hardship through high prices, or a condition of special exploitation, the co-operative store may be expected to develop. Then, too, a sense of identity of interest may find its basis in trade-union membership or in membership in a special trade, as was the case with the miners in a store at Staunton, Illinois, where the union managed the store for years at a profit. With the exception of these few bonds, however, there are lacking in most communities several elements present in the foreign experience that have undoubtedly contributed materially to the success of co-operative enterprises. There is, in the first place, the lack of stability caused by the rapid movement from group to group. The older people do not speak English; the children learn English and often do not want to speak the language of their parents. They want to be American and to buy as Americans buy. They therefore resent any organization that tends to emphasize their foreign origin. Also no sense of class consciousness among customers arouses antagonism against retailers. In the cities, particularly where there are large foreign colonies, the retail trade in those colonies, especially the trade in foodstuffs, is largely in the hands of fellow countrymen whose background is much the same as that of their customers. Most of the stores are small, and the proprietors, who are not skilled in modern business methods, do not make much more than a living from their stores, so that there is no great contrast in prosperity to arouse a feeling of antagonism. On the contrary, the proprietor and his family usually live in the district--often over the store--in much the same condition as the rest of the group. They are friends of all, and by their knowledge of the group can meet certain needs and appear to serve as a connecting link between the separate group and the general community. How far the desire of the more ambitious group members to open up a shop of their own acts as a deterrent to interest in co-operation would be difficult to estimate, but it seems probable that this has some weight. On the other hand, attention may be called to the fact that the retail trade, and especially the marketing of food, has been so slightly reduced to an art, it is still so empirically and wastefully carried on, that there are many possibilities of reasonable success of co-operatives. For a time, at least, this will be true if the undertaking is on a modest scale and does not seem worthy of attack by a relatively powerful group. Among the obvious wastes are those connected with the transportation (cross freights), the display and salesmanship, the marketing of novelties, and the use of the indefinite measures. Besides these there are the bad debts resulting from careless credit transactions, the waste involved in deliveries of packages, the waste of the repeated purchase of articles known to be regularly needed. Wherever any group can be led to consider the wastes involved in these methods of doing business, their good sense will make them perceive easily the folly of persisting in those ways, and the practice of this minimum of self-restraint will serve as a basis for a considerable balance, out of which dividends may accumulate. The use of the co-operative idea has, therefore, great possibilities as the basis for discussing the wastes of the present system and for deliberation as to the best or as to any possible way out. In other words, experimenting in democratic organization in obtaining the necessities of life is an important next step. As in the matter of copartnership in relation to housing, co-operative distribution may serve as a point of departure, an object lesson worthy of closer study and experimental imitation. Especially would the experience of the Women's Co-operative Guild be helpful in bringing the idea to the attention of the influential women among the various groups. The importance of doing this cannot be overestimated. For, as has been so often suggested, the wastes of retail dealing, while probably not so great here as in some other countries, are so enormous that great economies are possible from even a slight rationalizing process.[43] The development of a general consciousness of the nature and extent of these wastes would in itself serve as a corrective. Moreover, the experience of the co-operative enterprise may often be carried over into legislative policy, and in this way give to the community the benefit of the experiment tried by a group. Co-operators in England have both initiated and backed such social legislation as the Trade Boards Act, the provision for general maternity care under the Ministry of Health, and other measures. FOOTNOTES: [32] See Freund, _Police Power, Public Policy and Constitutional Rights_, secs. 319-321. [33] _Report of the United States Immigration Commission_, vol. vi, pp. 318, 319. [34] _United States Immigration Commission Reports_, vol. vi, p. 95, "General Survey of the Bituminous Coal Mining Industry." See also pp. 650, 651. [35] _United States Immigration Commission Reports_, vol. vi, pp. 544-545, on the subject of "Housing by Employers." See Wood, _The Housing of the Unskilled Wage Earner_, p. 114 ff. [36] United States Bureau of Labor Statistics _Monthly Labor Review_, May, 1917, p. 147, and June, 1919, p. 101. [37] Lusk, _The Science of Nutrition_ (Third Edition), pp. 562, 570. [38] United States Bureau of Labor Statistics _Monthly Labor Review_, vol. ix (July, 1919), p. 4. The analogy is drawn between the sale of food by calorie and the sale of coal by the British thermal unit. [39] See Thomas, _Sex and Society_, chap. vii; Veblen, _Theory of the Leisure Class_, chap. vii; Anthony, _Feminism in Germany and Scandinavia_, chaps. v and vi, "Dress Reform." [40] _The Chicago Standard Budget for Dependent Families_, p. 18. [41] _Ibid._, p. 14. [42] New York daily papers, September 18, 19, 20, 1919. Reports of International Conference of Women Physicians under Auspices of Young Women's Christian Association. [43] See, for example, King, _Lower Living Costs in Cities_. VI THE CARE OF THE CHILDREN The care of the children is the most important of the mother's duties. It cannot be thoroughly done under modern conditions unless the mother has leisure to inform herself about conditions surrounding her children at work and at play, and to keep in touch with their interests, especially as they grow older. It includes caring for their physical wants, bathing them and keeping them clean when they are little, feeding them, providing their clothing, taking care of them when they are sick; it also includes looking after their education and training, choosing the school, seeing that they get to school regularly and on time, following their work at school as it is reported on the monthly report cards, encouraging them to greater efforts when their work is unsatisfactory, praising them when they do well, and, above all, giving them the home training and discipline that they need. It is the mother who can teach the children good habits, forming, as only the home life can form, their standards of right and wrong; it means watching them at their play or seeing that they play in a place that is safe without watching. As they grow older it means a general supervision of their recreation and their companions, judging surrounding influences, having in mind the dangers that lie in the way of the unwary maiden and the perils of the impetuous boy. Times have changed since she was young, and amid a great variety of choice she must decide for her children which are harmless influences and diversions. In the case of the older girls it means the serious problems of clothes, of amusements, of earnings, of prospective mating. The mother shares many of these tasks with the father. Responsibility for discipline, decisions, and training must be joint, but the actual carrying out of these duties is the mother's. Usually the older children help with the care of the younger, but the final responsibility rests upon the mother. [Illustration: A SLOVAK MOTHER, NEWLY ARRIVED] UNPREPAREDNESS OF THE IMMIGRANT MOTHER Looking after the physical well-being of the children is primarily a matter of maintaining them in health, and hence the discussion of these problems is left to the division of this study devoted to that subject. It is sufficient here to note that it is a peculiarly difficult problem for the foreign-born mothers. Modern knowledge of child feeding and modern ideas with regard to daily bathing are of recent origin. In many of the countries from which these women come they are unknown. A Croatian lawyer, who translated some of the Children's Bureau publications, was very much interested in the one on the care of the child of pre-school age. He told the investigator that there was nothing like that in his country, and he hoped that this translation might be used to reach the women in Croatia. If this is true in matters that pertain to the physical welfare of children, it is even more marked in matters affecting their education and training. The modern idea is that the child should not be trained and disciplined to be subservient to the parent, but should be helped to develop his own personality. It is based on a greater respect for the intelligence of the child and on the idea that the early placing of the responsibility for his acts on the child himself will better train citizens for a changing world, and especially for democracy. These ideas are of comparatively recent formulation, many of them dating from the impetus given to the study of the child by modern psychology. Although of gradual growth, they have been for a long time implicit in the current practices of the most enlightened section of the community. They are understood by a relatively small part of the community. They are acted on by much larger groups, so that it is common to hear members of the generation that is passing lament the lack of discipline of the children to-day. The situation is complicated by the fact that many people who talk the most about developing the child's personality stop in practice with the removal of restraints, without attempting the more difficult task of developing his sense of responsibility. The point to note is that the native born, in part through their own conscious choice and in part blindly moved by forces they do not understand, have been gradually moving away from the old tradition of strict and unquestioning obedience such as is exacted by military authorities. With the immigrant parents the situation is very different. The countries from which they come are not republics, and hence the opportunities for training for intelligent citizenship have been lacking, especially in the lower economic groups. The idea of the government has often been rather to foster that training that makes for good soldiers. Moreover, the civilizations from which most of these people came were at the time static, so that the evils of blind obedience and rigid conformity were not present to the same extent as in our more rapidly moving civilization. Thus the tradition of absolute obedience of child to parent remained practically intact. Wherever this tradition existed the usual method of enforcement was corporal punishment, generally inflicted with a strap. It is not intended to assert that a great deal of child beating was prevalent in the old country; in most cases the child learned quickly that the penalty of disobedience was the strap, and threats became as effective as its actual use. BREAKDOWN OF PARENTAL AUTHORITY The immigrant brings with him to this country this tradition of the authority of the parent, with no thought of doing anything but maintaining it here. There are, however, forces at work in this country that tend to make this impossible. There are suggestions of a different tradition in the general atmosphere. Many immigrants absorb these suggestions unconsciously, as they absorb those of a wider freedom for women. More important, however, is the development of the child. Circumstances of his daily life force him to take the lead in many situations. This has been pointed out in a study of the delinquent child, where it is said:[44] Obviously, many things which are familiar to the child in the facts of daily intercourse in the street, or in the school, will remain unknown or unintelligible to the father and mother. It has become a commonplace that this cheap wisdom on the part of the boy or girl leads to a reversal of the usual relationship between parent and child. The child who knows English is the interpreter who makes the necessary explanations for the mother to the landlord, the grocer, the sanitary inspector, the charity visitor, and the teacher or truant officer. It is the child again who often interviews the "boss," finds the father a job, and sees him through the onerous task of "joining the union." The father and mother grow accustomed to trusting the child's version of what "they all do in America," and gradually find themselves at a great disadvantage in trying to maintain parental control. In the face of this situation the conduct of the immigrant parent generally follows along one of three very distinct lines: (a) he modifies his methods in family discipline little by little, himself unconscious of the implications, or (b) he stubbornly attempts to retain the old authority undiminished, or (c) he abandons the old system without having anything to put in its place. The first method of behavior is probably the most common; it usually leads to little difficulty within the family group if the parents' modifications are made as fast as the child becomes aware of the newer ideas. The attempt to maintain the old system in its entirety may also be accomplished without disturbance if the child is willing, and probably in most cases it is maintained without serious opposition on the part of the child. Abandoning the old system without substituting something better is probably the least frequent reaction to the situation, but it is one that is especially dangerous in immigrant groups. The native-born parent who relaxes all discipline has this advantage over the foreign born; in general he can at will demonstrate his superior knowledge, and the child looks up to him and takes his advice, while the foreign-born parent is peculiarly helpless because the child thinks that his own knowledge, demonstrably superior in some things, extends to all fields. The relative frequency of these different modes of reaction would be a difficult matter to determine. They were all evident from the facts about discipline obtained from the families visited in this study. To some extent the maintenance of the old system intact may be judged by the prevalence of corporal punishment as a method of enforcing obedience. A doctor of a Lithuanian district said that one thing he was very anxious to see disappear was the strap, which could now be seen in almost every home. Fifty-four of the eighty-seven families from whom information was obtained said that they used whipping as a method of punishment. In most of the cases there was nothing to indicate with what the child was whipped, but in five it was definitely stated that a strap was used. In very few cases was there any attempt to punish the child in private. It was usually stated that the whipping was done before all the other members of the family. Two or three families stated that they did not whip the children on the street. A significant fact was the frequently repeated assertion that the children were whipped because they were too young to understand anything else. An interesting state of transition was seen in some of the thirty-three families who had abandoned whipping but had not given up the idea of absolute obedience. It is evidenced in comments like the following: "They are not whipped. Father threatens with a strap." Or, "It [whipping] is not necessary. Father speaks, and children obey." Some families had relaxed the discipline sufficiently to be apparent to our investigators, who made such comments as "Children are making a terrible noise, but nobody seemed to mind." It has already been said that whatever the reaction, the training of the children usually takes place without visible disaster to the family group. This is especially true while the children are young. As they grow older the dangers that are inherent in such a situation become more marked. The figures on juvenile delinquency show that an unduly large proportion of juvenile offenders are children of foreign-born parents. This subject will be discussed more fully at a later point in the chapter in connection with the problem of the older boy and girl. It is important to emphasize here that the foundation for later trouble is often laid while the children are young, and hence consideration of the effect of modern ideas on discipline and training should begin with the very young child. LEARNING TO PLAY One of the needs of the growing child that is much emphasized in modern ideas of child culture is an opportunity for wholesome play. The foreign-born mother, from a rural district in Europe, where children were put to work helping the parents as soon as they could be in any way useful, frequently does not recognize this need, and hence does not even do those things within her power to secure it. From some opportunities which she and the children might enjoy together, she is cut off by lack of knowledge of English. A Bohemian woman, for example, said that she did not go with her husband and the children to the moving pictures, as she could not read the English explanations and often did not understand the pictures. Even when the need is recognized it is still a very difficult problem. In the old country, when the child was too little to work, he could play in the fields quite safe, in sight of his mother at her work. In the city, however, especially in the congested districts, which are the only ones known to immigrants when they first come, the child cannot play in his own yard, for there is nothing that can be called a yard. The alternatives are the city streets with their manifold dangers, or the public playground. From the point of view of physical safety as well as in giving a place for more wholesome play, the public playground is obviously the more desirable. The provision of playgrounds, however, is everywhere inadequate, in some places much more so than in others. In Chicago, which is probably better equipped in this respect than most cities, there are large districts that have no easy access to a playground. Many of the women that were asked where their children played said that they played on the streets, not because the parents thought it safe, but because they could not go to a playground alone and the mother had not time to take them. It was interesting, too, to learn that some of the parents who preferred the playground, and whose children played there, did not think the children should be left there alone. In one Bohemian family the grandmother took the two little boys to the playground and stayed with them as long as they stayed. In part, then, the problem of play space is a problem in housing reform. All the newer housing projects make provision for a space for this purpose, either by the individual yard or where the multiple house is used, by one playground for every three or four families. Housing reform, however, comes slowly and immediate relief could be given by the provision of many more public playgrounds. It is obvious that these must be so directed and supervised that children can be left with perfect safety. It would also be necessary to see that the foreign-speaking mothers were informed of the advantages of the playground and convinced of its safety for their children. The supervision of children's play in streets and vacant lots could be greatly extended. The establishing during certain hours of "play zones," from which traffic is excluded and in which the younger children and their mothers could be taught simple games and dances, has been found successful. PARENTS AND EDUCATION In the matter of education the state has relieved the parent of a large part of the responsibility by legislation prescribing the ages during which the child must attend school, and in some states the grade he must reach before leaving school. In spite of this there still rests with the parent the responsibility of choosing the school, getting the child to school promptly and regularly, following his progress, deciding whether he shall go beyond the time prescribed by law. The choice of the schools means for most immigrant groups, a choice between the public and the parochial school. In very large numbers of cases the parochial school is chosen. The reason for this is only in part the influence of the church, although this undoubtedly counts for a great deal. The people we have interviewed in this study have repeatedly pointed out that it is not only for religious education and training that the foreign-born parent sends his child to the parochial school, but that it is also because he wants him to learn the language of his parents, the history and traditions of the country from which he came, and to retain a respect for the experiences and associations that remain of great importance to the parents. Another reason that has often been given for sending the children to the parochial school is the lack of discipline in the public schools. This has been especially emphasized by Italians, but it has also been spoken of by members of other groups. There can be no question that the parochial school, under the tradition of authority maintained by the church, is much nearer in its idea of discipline to the ideas the immigrant brings with him from the old country, than is the public school whose system of training the immigrant parent does not understand and has not had made clear to him. [Illustration: IMMIGRANT CHILDREN ACQUIRING INDIVIDUAL INITIATIVE IN A MONTESSORI CLASS AT HULL HOUSE] The problem of the immigrant parent with regard to the education of his child is more difficult because of the change in the position of the child in this country, which he usually does not understand. At home the child was important, not as an individual, but as a member of the family group, and home decisions about the child took into account the needs of the family in the first place and only secondarily the welfare of the child.[45] This reversal of emphasis is confusing to the immigrant parents. Taken in connection with the fact that many of the immigrants are from countries where education is not compulsory, it leads them to sacrifice the welfare of the child at many points. It seems of much greater importance, for example, that the work of the household should be done than the child should get to school every day. The study of the reasons for absence in two of the immigrant neighborhoods of Chicago[46] shows the frequency with which children are kept out of school because of the needs of the family. Thus, of 1,115 children who were absent from school during a certain period 131 were out to do work at home; 81 were kept at home because of sickness in the family; 42 stayed home to interpret or run errands. One boy, for example, was kept to watch fires for a sick father while his mother "got a day's work"; another had stayed at home because his sister's baby was in convulsions and his mother had not been able to get him ready to go to school; John was staying at home because his mother had gone to see a doctor and wanted him to look after the children, who did not like to go to the day nursery; Bruno, aged twelve, was found at home helping his mother wash, but he explained that he had really stayed out to go "to tell the boss" that his father was sick; Genevieve, aged twelve, who had been absent fourteen half days and tardy twice within a month, was found alternately tending the shop and taking care of three younger children and of a sick mother, although her father was well able to hire some one to come in and help care for the family while the little girl was at school. In the rural districts the failure to understand the necessity of complying with the compulsory education law is even more marked. In the Rolling Prairie group of Polish families many of the children were not sent to school until after two families had been fined for not sending them. There was the expense for clothes and books, and the extra work for the mother. The roads were bad, the children often had no shoes, even in winter, and, above all, the parents had no understanding of why they should go. After the prosecution, however, the school law was obeyed. The parents' attitude toward the problem of keeping the child in school comes out quite naïvely in the answers given to visitors for this study. The following comments, given in the quaint but forceful English of our foreign-speaking investigators, show what is meant: Mother (a Russian woman with three children) visited school when teacher demanded her to send daughter to school when she wished her at home to help. Mother (a Polish woman with six children under fourteen) feels that children study too much and ought to help their parents more. Father (Italian) thinks there should be laws for protection of parents as well as child labor. FOLLOWING SCHOOL PROGRESS Following the child's progress at school is a difficult matter for parents who themselves have not had the benefit of education, or even for those who have been educated under a different system. It is, however, not impossible for them to do so; by means of reports in the language they can understand, by talking to the teachers or some one of the school authorities who knows about the child's work, they can keep closely enough in touch with his school record to enable them to give help at the point where it is most needed. Many of them do this in spite of the inherent difficulties and in spite of difficulties which the school itself puts in their way. An Italian father in a little Illinois mining town brought out with pride the last report of his little girl and showed the visitor that she had an average of 90 per cent. In the families studied in Chicago a few were evidently trying to keep in touch with their children's schooling. Thus of one family it is said: "Mother not only goes to school entertainments, but follows up the children's work with the teachers, consults them, and accepts their advice." This family is Bohemian, and both mother and father are well-educated leaders in progressive Bohemian circles in Chicago. In another Bohemian family the parents were also making an effort in this direction, but, being less well equipped, their difficulties were greater. The schedule says: Mother never visits school as she cannot understand English. Parents are very much concerned about their boy who brought a poor mark from school. After family consultation, daughter visited teacher, who advised them to take the boy out of Bohemian school (a nationalistic school to which he went after school hours), because he might be overworked. These are, however, exceptional cases in the families studied. Among the Bohemians and Slovaks, to be sure, a considerable proportion of the mothers visited the school occasionally or knew some of the children's teachers. Among the families of the more recent immigrants it was almost unheard of for the parents to visit the school. Of the eleven Russian families studied not one reported any visits to the school or contact with the teachers, and only two of the Ukrainian families. One of these visited only when the children did not behave. This mother said that she thought she should know more about her children's school work, but that she had felt so much in the way when she visited the school that she finally stopped going. An almost inevitable consequence of this failure to make contacts with the school is that the parents remain quite unaware of what their children are learning there. An attempt was made in our study of selected families to get the parents' opinion of the work the children were given at school, but very few parents felt they knew enough about the work to express an opinion. A few to whom reference has already been made thought the children gave too much time to study and not enough to helping their parents, one or two spoke of the lack of discipline, a few others thought the schooling must be all right as the children learned to speak English. A Ukrainian mother of two children, the oldest eight, "believes that it must be good, for the children speak English and the oldest girl can read and write." Sometimes the failure to understand what the children are doing brings unnecessary worry. A Hungarian mother, speaking of the education of her children, expressed regret that they were not taught carpentry. The visitor turned to the eleven-year-old boy and asked him if he didn't have manual training. He replied that he did, but "she doesn't understand." A careful study of the answers to the questions in our attempt to get parents' attitude toward the children's schooling shows, then, that while a few exceptional parents have been able to follow their children's schooling, the great majority of them have not. It suggests that some of them are willing and ready to do it if only some of the obstacles were removed, and that there are also a large number who do not realize the necessity of it, and for whom something more must be done. The opportunity of the school, and various devices for rendering aid at this point, that have been tried, will be discussed in a later chapter. The failure of the parents to understand not only means confusion and worry for them, but for the child lack of the help and sympathy at home that they might have. It becomes more serious as the child reaches the age when he is no longer compelled by law to attend school, and the decision as to whether or not he shall go on rests with his parents. When the parents have not known about the work he has been doing, and have no means of judging how much or how little he has learned, they are obviously in no position to make a decision about his further education. There are many forces at work to influence the immigrant parent to put the child to work at once. There is, first of all, in many cases, economic pressure. Sometimes the child's earnings are actually needed to make up the family budget for current expenditures. In some families, however, his earnings are not so much needed as desired, to help in buying property more often than for any other reason. In these cases it seems clear that the attitude toward the child as a means of contributing to the welfare or prestige of the family is a very important factor. One Polish doctor with whom we conferred emphasized this point. He said that the Polish parent expected to stop work at an early age and live on the earnings of his children. Hence he took his children out of school as soon as the law allowed, and had them start work. Another factor that undoubtedly plays an important part is the parent's own lack of education. Never having had any opportunity for more than the most elementary education, it is only natural that it should seem that a child who had spent seven years in school should be fairly well educated. This attitude is strengthened if he has succeeded without education or if the people whom he looks upon as successful have had little education. He is further confirmed in this attitude very often by his failure to realize the extent of the change in conditions and the ever-increasing complexity of the situation with which his child will have to deal. Thus he often fails to understand that an education that was quite adequate for the simple life in the old country is far from sufficient for life in this country to-day. Some of the people with whom we conferred were of the opinion that many of the parents from groups oppressed in Europe failed to realize the full significance of the freedom here. There the higher positions and the professions had been closed to them on account of race or class, and many of them were not aware that here they would be open to their children if they could give them the necessary education and training. There are, fortunately, forces at work to counteract this tendency to take the children out of school at the earliest possible moment. There is, too, among the foreign born, a very general desire to have their children do office work rather than manual labor, and an understanding that this means more than a grammar-school education. There is a certain naïve faith in the benefits of education even though they are not understood. This is particularly strong in people to whom the schools have been closed by a dominant race in Europe--the Jews from Russia, for example. And in proportion as the parents become educated so that they feel their own limitations, they appreciate education for their children and strive to give it to them. There is no doubt that all these influences are felt in the foreign-born groups, but they win out gradually against the force of the traditions by which the parent is guided in his decision to take the child out of school. The American community could hasten their action by helping the foreign-born parents to understand. There have been some attempts to enlighten the parents. The work of the Vocational Guidance Bureau in Chicago should be mentioned in this connection. When a child wants to leave school to go to work they explain to the parents the importance of keeping the child in school, and suggest means by which this can be done. This happens, however, only after the decision and plans have been made to put the child to work. The bureau has been handicapped in dealing with foreign-born parents by its lack of foreign-speaking visitors. An attempt of a different order has been made to reach the Bohemian farmers in Nebraska. A professor in the state university has for a number of years gone out to these farming communities, urging in public speeches given in Bohemian the necessity of higher education for the children, and especially for the girls. THE REVOLT OF OLDER CHILDREN The problem of the older boy and girl is by far the most difficult of the parents' problems. Reference has already been made to the fact that it is as the child grows older that the difficulties of maintaining the old system of parental authority become more apparent. It is at this time that the child sees that system is out of date, and then, if ever, he rebels against it. There is considerable evidence that the parents, on the other hand, feel the importance of maintaining their authority at that period of the child's life more than at any other. There are several reasons for this, among the more important being the fact that the child has reached an age when he can be economically helpful to the family group, and that the parents see dangers in his path. In other words, the maintenance of parental authority seems to be tied up with the control of the child's earnings and the maintenance of certain conventions regarding the association between young people of different sexes.[47] The immigrant parent very generally asserts his legal right to the entire earnings of his minor child. In fact, the child often continues the practice of giving up his wages until his marriage. Out of forty-three families studied, in which there were children of working age, thirty-five parents took the entire earnings of the children. The amount that the parent should give back to the child is not fixed by law or by custom, and it is at this point that conflict between the child and the parents is likely to arise. The parents frequently expect to continue to provide for the boy and the girl of working age as they did when they were younger, and to recognize their maturity only by giving them small sums weekly for spending money. In the case of girls even this slight concession is not made, and the girl has to ask her mother for everything she wants. In only four of the thirty-five families in which the children turned in all their earnings was an allowance of as much as $3 a week given. In the others the working child was given 25 cents, 50 cents, or 75 cents a week, usually on Sunday, or was given no fixed sum but "what he needs." In a Slovak family a girl of sixteen earning $13 a week, and one of fourteen earning $9 a week, were each given 50 cents each pay day; a boy of fifteen in a Slovenian family, earning $15 a week, received 50 cents on Sunday; two Slovak girls of eighteen and sixteen years, earning $45 and $80 a month, turned in all their earnings and got back "what they asked for." It is not surprising that a boy or girl should chafe under the system even if the resentment stopped short of open rebellion. In the families studied in which there was no evidence of friction it seems to have been avoided either by such a firm establishment of the authority of the parents while the child was young, that the child had not yet questioned it, or by wise use of the child's earnings for the benefit of the child. In several instances it was reported that they gave the child "all she asks"; one girl was being given lessons on the violin, which she specially desired. In these cases the issue did not appear to have been raised, but we have no reason for thinking the children were satisfied with the arrangement. In other families the beginnings of friction could already be seen. A Russian woman said that her two working girls, aged seventeen and fourteen, did not need money, and in the presence of the investigator refused the request of one for money for a picture show, telling her that men would pay her way. The eight parents who did not take all their children's earnings had not all changed their practices voluntarily. In some cases it was done because the children refused any longer to turn their earnings in. When the parent takes the entire earnings of the child and continues to bear the burden of support, there is probably no question on which the ideas of the child and those of the parent are so likely to conflict as on the question of clothes, especially clothes for the girl. The chaotic and unstandardized condition of the whole clothing problem has been pointed out in an earlier chapter, and attention has been called to the fact that it is one of the causes of conflict between parent and child. It is only natural that the young girl should want to look as well as possible, and it is to be expected that the girl of foreign-born parents should quickly learn at school or at work the prevailing opinion that to be well dressed is to be dressed in the latest fashion. She is also in a position to observe how quickly the fashions change, and thus early learns the unimportance of quality in modern clothing. She undoubtedly underestimates its importance because her models are not those on display at the highest-grade department stores, where the beauty of the quality occasionally redeems in slight measure the grotesqueness of form; she sees only the cheap imitations displayed in the stores in her own neighborhood. In her main contention that if she is to keep up with the fashions she need not buy clothing that will last more than one season, she is probably right. It is natural also that this method of buying should be distressing to her mother, who has been accustomed to clothes of unchanging fashions which were judged entirely by their quality. When to her normal distress at buying goods of poor quality at any price there is added an outrage to her native thrift, because the price of these tawdry fashionable goods is actually greater than for goods of better quality, it is not surprising that she and her daughter should clash on the question of what to buy. The question of shoes is said to be a special point of conflict. The girls insist on costly high-heeled, light-colored boots, while the mother sees that she could buy at less than half the price better shoes, more sensible, and of better quality. The conflict is more acute in proportion as the mother has lived an isolated life in this country and has not herself tried to keep up with American fashions. It is interesting to note that workers in the Vocational Guidance Bureau in Chicago state that this desire of the girls for expensive clothes is a leading motive in causing them to leave school to go to work. RELATIONS OF BOYS AND GIRLS The most serious of the problems in connection with the older boy and girl is that of the relations between the sexes. In the old country the situation was much more easily defined. The conventions were fixed, and had changed very little since the mother was young. In Italy, for example, daughters never went out with young men, not even after they were engaged. The same is said to be true in most of the other countries from which our immigrants have come. In Croatia, Serbia, and Bohemia it is unheard of for a young woman to go out alone with a young man. Moreover, coming as so many of these people do from small villages or rural communities, they have been used to a single-group life which is impossible in a city. As one Italian woman has expressed it, work and recreation went hand in hand in the old country. During the day there was the work of both men and women in the fields in congenial groups, and in the evenings songs and dancing in the village streets. The whole family worked and played together with other family groups. It is not intended to assert that there were no problems with young people in the old country, for undoubtedly there, as everywhere, some of the young would be wayward and indifferent to the conventions. The point is that there the mother knew what standards she was to maintain and had, moreover, the backing of a homogeneous group to help her. In this country not only is she herself a stranger, uncertain of herself, not sure whether to try to maintain the standards of her home or those that seem to prevail here, but the community of which she is a part is far from being a homogeneous group and has apparently conflicting standards. The immigrant mother, then, has to decide in the first place what standards she will try to maintain. The old standards can scarcely be maintained in a modern community where the girls go to work in factories, working side by side with men, going and coming home in the company of men. It is manifestly impossible for the mother to watch her daughter at work. In the old country this was possible as long as she stayed on the farm. And when at school and at work she is constantly thrown with men, it is impossible to regulate her social hours by the old standards and to see that they are all spent under her mother's eye. Moreover, any attempt to do so is likely to provoke resentment, as a girl naturally thinks that if she can take care of herself at work she is equally well able to do so at play. Furthermore, the character of the recreation has undergone almost as great a change as the character of the work. With the change from the country to the city, it has already been suggested that the old group life with its simple pleasures, which the whole family shared, has become impossible. If the mother then tries to see that her daughter has social life in which she herself may share, she either cuts her off from most of the normal pleasures of young people of her age, or the mother finds herself in places where she is not wanted, and where no provision has been made for her entertainment. Most immigrant parents, except those from southern Italy, recognize the impossibility of maintaining the old rules of chaperonage and guardianship of the girls. One of the Slovak women with whom we conferred said that in all her circle of acquaintance there was only one mother who was attempting to bring her daughter up by the old standards and was not allowing her to go places in the evening where the mother might not accompany her. All the others were allowing their daughters more freedom than they thought desirable, but they did not know what else to do. The Italian parents, on the other hand, try to guard their girls almost as closely as they did in Italy. It is not especially to be wondered at, for what the immigrant father or mother sees is usually the worst in American city life. If the daughter could not be trusted alone or unchaperoned in a village in which they knew most of the people and all the places of amusement, is she any more safe in a city in which, as one foreign-born mother says, "You don't know what is around the corner from you"? Moreover, realizing only the danger to the girl, and not being able in his ignorance to explain to her or to protect her in any other way, the father often resorts to beating the girl to enforce the obedience which generations have taught him is due to him. The head of the Complaint Department of the Cook County Juvenile Court in Chicago said that while cases of immorality were very rare among Italian girls, the attention of the court was called to a great many who rebelled at this attempt at seclusion and ran away from home, often contracting hasty and ill-advised marriages. While most parents of other nationalities see that the old standards cannot be maintained, there is a great deal of confusion as to what standards are to be considered right. This is illustrated by the following incident. A very intelligent Jugo-Slav woman, in discussing the problem, said that she did not know what she would do in her own family, as she hated to think of her girls adopting American standards. The matter had been brought to her attention recently by the conduct of two girls with a young Serbian officer who was visiting in this country. As he walked up one of the boulevards two girls, who were utter strangers to him, had flourished small feather dusters in his face by way of salutation. This woman was very much surprised to hear that the investigator disapproved of this; she had supposed it was just our "American freedom." As long as the mother does not understand this tradition of freedom between the sexes nor realize its limits, it is natural that she should accept her daughter's dictum that everything she wants to do is "American" and that it is hopeless for the mother to try to understand. In many of the families visited in this study it was evident that the mother had completely given up trying to understand either the conditions under which her children work or how they get their recreation. One mother, for example, said that she knew where her daughter worked when it was a well-known place, but otherwise not. Another said that her children told her where they worked, but she never remembered the names, for she knew that they would mean nothing to her. Several said they did not try to advise their children about their work, because they knew they didn't understand. One Russian mother was very much worried about the future of her two boys, aged seventeen and thirteen. The older was working as a cash boy, earning twelve dollars a week, and the younger was working outside of school hours, sewing caps. The mother said that their father had learned one trade and followed that, but that her children changed work every two or three months. She seldom asked why they changed, because she did not understand conditions in Chicago. Most of the women confessed to being equally at sea with regard to their children's amusements. Some of them accepted with resignation the fact that they could not understand, saying, as one woman did, that she thought they had too much freedom, but that young people lived very differently here. Some of the mothers, on the other hand, while thinking that young people in general had too much freedom, thought that they did not need worry about their own children, because they had been able to make companions of their daughters. A few even were found who approved of the freedom allowed to young people, but thought children should be taught "more morality." It is scarcely possible to say too much of the failure of the American community to assist the immigrant family at this point. It has neither tried to make the fathers and mothers understand modern American ways, nor has it exercised any community supervision so that the girl is in reality safe at work and at play. Furthermore, some of the agencies from whom the most help might have been expected have deliberately passed over the mother to educate the child, hastening the process by which the child becomes Americanized in advance of his parents. The Church has had its share, as may be seen from the statement of one priest who holds a responsible position in the Church in Chicago. He believes that the parents are usually too advanced in years to assimilate or utilize whatever instruction is given them. In his opinion the ignorance of the parent is responsible for many bad tendencies in the children, but the difficulty can be corrected more surely and satisfactorily by dealing directly with the children. The attitude of the public schools is illustrated by an interview with the principal of a public school in an immigrant neighborhood. He says that his contact has been only with the children. The foreign-born parents of the first generation are, in his opinion, "so incorrigibly stupid" that any attempts to educate them are a waste of time. The only possible way, he thinks, of reaching the parents is through the children. THE JUVENILE COURT We should not expect the Juvenile Court, dealing as directly as it does with problems resulting from the breakdown of family discipline, to be itself a cause of breakdown. Nevertheless, interviews with court officers show a certain lack of understanding and the use of methods which, instead of relieving the situation, only aggravate it. When the case of a delinquent girl, for instance, comes to court, the officers believe that it has usually gone too far for the court to do anything with the family. The child is often placed out in a family home, always an American family; and the probation officer supervises the child and the foster home, but pays no attention to the child's own home, where younger children may be growing up in the same way and to which, ultimately, the delinquent girl should be allowed and encouraged to return. The probation officers know very little of the old-country background of the people with which they deal, and are often not clear as to the differences in nationality. The foreign-born parent's ignorance of laws and customs, and his inability to speak English, make him appear stupid to the officer. As a result, he may be ignored as quite hopeless. In the absence of the court interpreter the child may be called upon to interpret to the parent the whole proceedings in court. While this is less common now than it was a few years ago, there is no reason to believe that the child is less used as interpreter between the probation officer and the parent at home. From the records of the court proceedings it is often quite evident to the reader that the foreign-born parent has little idea of the reasons why he or his child should have been brought to court. In one Bohemian family studied the eldest boy, aged sixteen, was in the State School for Delinquent Boys. The parents seemed utterly unaware of the serious nature of the boy's offenses and of the blot on his record. They seemed to regard the school for delinquents somewhat as more prosperous parents are wont to regard the boarding school. In fact, they expressed regret that the boy was soon to be released. Yet this boy had been in the Juvenile Court three times; the first time for truancy, and the other two for stealing. The attention of the community is usually called to the difficulties of the foreign-born parents only when a complete breakdown occurs, resulting in juvenile delinquency. This result is, however, comparatively rare. Most families work their way through without getting into a situation that calls public attention to their family affairs. There is no question, however, that there is often a lack of harmony in the home. Sometimes the child of working age leaves home, to board perhaps in the same neighborhood or to contract a hasty marriage. Occasionally there are situations in which the ordinary relations of parent and child have been completely reversed, and the children have assumed responsibility for the management of the home and the family. For instance, the Juvenile Court was asked by the neighbors to investigate conditions in a Polish family, in which a six-year-old boy was said to be neglected. The investigation showed no real neglect from the point of view of the court, but a situation that needed supervision. The mother was a widow and had, besides the six-year-old boy, two daughters aged seventeen and nineteen. Both girls were born in Austria. The father had preceded his family to the United States, and for five years the mother had worked and supported herself and the children in the old country before he was able to send for them. He seems not to have had a very good moral influence over the children, but had been dead several years. The daughters were both supporting the mother, who was doing one or two days' work a week. The daughters turned over all their earnings to the mother, but said that she was a poor manager and never had anything to show for it. They themselves had managed to buy new furniture and clothes for themselves. They said they were ashamed to go out with their mother, who remained unprogressive, would not dress as they liked, and would not manage the home as they wished. The girls told the officer that they did not take her out with them, but gave her money to go to the "movies." Yet she would do nothing but sit at home and cry. At one time the boy was accused of stealing coal from a neighbor. The oldest girl wanted her mother to investigate, but the mother would not go near any of her American neighbors. The daughter herself found out that the child had really taken the coal from a neighbor, and whipped him. Gradually the daughters, especially the older one, have assumed entire control of the family. The mother can no longer discipline even the six-year-old boy. Since the daughter has undertaken to correct him, he pays no attention at all to his mother. The probation officer has tried to restore a more normal family relationship, and has tried to help the girls to understand their mother's position. She still speaks with pride of the five years in the old country when she supported them alone, and when she was really of some use to them. The older daughter threatened for some time to leave home if her mother could not be more agreeable. When the court officer remonstrated, she said that of course she would leave her furniture, and could not be convinced that that would not entirely compensate. Later she did leave home, and took some of her furniture. The family are Catholics, but the mother no longer goes to church, and, though the girls go, the priest seems to have had no influence over them. Although the great majority of the foreign-born parents succeed in bringing up their children without the children becoming delinquent, the minority who are not successful is large enough to cause grave concern. This has been shown in all figures in juvenile delinquency. A study of delinquent children before the Cook County Juvenile Court shows that 72.8 per cent of the 14,183 children brought to the court between July 1, 1899, and June 30, 1909, had foreign-born parents.[48] A special study of 584 of these, who were delinquent boys, showed 66.9 per cent with foreign-born parents.[49] A comparison of the nativity of the parents of children in the Juvenile Court with the proportion of each group in the married population of Chicago indicates that the number of parents of delinquent children in the foreign-born group is disproportionately large. That is, the foreign born form 57 per cent of the married population of Chicago, while "at least 67 per cent of the parents of delinquent boys of the court were foreign born, and there is reason to believe that the true percentage is above 67."[50] This preponderance of children from immigrant homes must not be taken to mean that children of foreign-born parents are naturally worse than the children of American parents. It confirms the fact that immigrant parents have special difficulties in bringing up their children and are in need of special assistance. It suggests very forcibly the danger to the community in continuing to ignore their special needs. FOOTNOTES: [44] Breckinridge and Abbott, _The Delinquent Child and the Home_, p. 66. [45] See Thomas and Znaniecki, _The Polish Peasant_, vol. i. [46] Abbott and Breckinridge, _Truancy and Nonattendance in the Chicago Schools_, chap. viii, p. 129. [47] See Jane Addams, _Twenty Years at Hull House_, chap. xi. [48] Breckinridge and Abbott, _The Delinquent Child and the Home_, p. 57. [49] _Ibid._, p. 61. [50] Breckinridge and Abbott, _The Delinquent Child and the Home_, p. 62. See _U. S. Twelfth Census Population_, vol. ii, p. 314, Table XXXII. VII IMMIGRANT ORGANIZATIONS AND FAMILY PROBLEMS In the former chapters an attempt has been made to set out some of the difficulties encountered by foreign-born families who attempt to establish themselves in the United States. The discussion has dealt with the problem as though the community were one factor and the immigrant family another factor, and as though the solution to be arrived at could be discovered by bringing them into new relations to each other. This treatment is justified, in view of the fact that even a slight analysis makes it clear that certain modifications in governmental and social machinery are highly desirable. When the limitations imposed by the war on freedom of migration have been removed, the possibility of dealing more wisely and more humanely with incoming family groups must be considered. In a very real sense, during any period when the volume of immigration is considerable, the community _is_ one factor and the immigrant _is_ another factor, and a partial solution is to be found in a new treatment of the relationships between these two. But in another sense the discussion is inadequate and perhaps misleading. The relationship between the community and the immigrant is not mechanical, but organic. So soon as he is admitted, he is in fact a part of the community, and what will be done, what can be done, depends in part at least upon the extent to which that relationship is developed. The currents of the community life must flow through and both enrich and be enriched by the life of the newcomer. If these currents are obstructed, he neither shares nor contributes as he might. These channels of intercourse, however, have often been so obstructed that contacts have been denied. That segregation and separation have characterized the life of many of the groups for considerable periods of time has become a commonplace, and it has been generally known that the life of these different foreign-born groups was separate from the general life of the community, and the life of one group separate from the life of other groups. But the fact that within these separate groups was developed often a fairly rich and highly organized life has not been so widely recognized. SAFETY IN RACIAL AFFILIATIONS During the war, for example, the community became aware of the fact that within these national groups there had developed more or less powerful and efficient organizations formerly active in behalf of political interests in the old country, capable, at least, of fostering a spirit of clannishness, of perpetuating the language, customs, and ideals of an alien population in the midst of American life, and of keeping alive in this country national and racial antipathies brought from Europe. Leaders in the European struggle came to these groups and obtained pecuniary support and political adherence. Recruiting for military service among the foreign born was successfully carried on. Leaders of active societies among the different Slavic groups have stated quite freely that a spirit of unity and of nationality has been consciously fostered in America by these societies, so that, when the time came for the oppressed nation to strike for freedom in the European struggle, the representatives of the race in this country might stand solidly behind such efforts. It is impossible, after the exhibition of the generous support given among foreign-born groups during the war to the efforts of the United States, to raise the question of their loyalty; but their separateness has been far greater, their exclusion from many community efforts and activities far more complete, than the leaders among them had realized. The leaders among the foreign born do not wholly blame the leaders of the "American" group; they seem to feel that immigrants who came at an earlier date are in part to blame. These earlier arrivals knew what immigration meant, and might have been expected to help open the way for those who came afterward, but were, in fact, chiefly concerned to get ahead and to leave old associations behind. This was the opinion expressed by a Bohemian business man prominent in both local and national organizations. He also said that the reason that had in the past led to the formation and support of these organizations had ceased to exist; but now that the European struggle against oppression had ended for his people, and leaders understood how separate the life of the foreign-born groups had been, these very societies could be used to establish a variety of contacts and to develop among the foreign born a wider interest in the United States and its problems. Particularly the ability to act together learned during the war should be used to develop effective co-operation. As the organization of these societies is discussed in another volume in this series, they will not be described here, except as they affect the position of women and so exercise an influence upon the adjustment of family life.[51] Possibly the most significant fact revealed in the course of the study has been the extent to which foreign-born groups have been inaugurating and developing educational and social movements, and establishing institutions and agencies, quite independent of the Federal, state, or local agencies at work along the same general lines. On the other hand, the national educational and welfare movements carried on by the "American people" have ignored the organization and leadership in the foreign-born community. This has been the case to an amazing extent, even when the public efforts have been ostensibly based upon studies of conditions existing in cities with a population that is largely of foreign birth. When no channels of communication between the immigrant and the larger community seem to have been established, we have been concerned to inquire how such channels can be most effectively created. The barriers that through ignorance, indifference, and misunderstanding on either side have been allowed to grow up must be broken down. We have tried to follow up such avenues of communication as have opened naturally before us, after becoming acquainted with some of the leaders in the different groups. The organizations with which we have become somewhat acquainted are representative of the types found in all the main Slavic groups and among the Lithuanians, Hungarians, Rumanians, and Greeks. Suggestions applicable to them indicate a basis of co-operation with a very large proportion of our foreign-born population. A list of the principal racial organizations in the United States is included in the Appendix. Information about local branches of these organizations can usually be secured by correspondence. LOCAL BENEFIT SOCIETIES The first incentive to organization among all the groups seems to have been the precarious economic situation during the years of effort to get a foothold here. The first association of the newly arrived immigrant is one of mutual aid. "Benefit" will be found as the basis of the important foreign-born organizations, no matter what new purposes may have been taken on with the establishment and progress of the group as a whole. [Illustration: WHO WILL WELCOME THEM?] In the interviews we have had with the leaders among the groups the point has been repeatedly emphasized that Americans can never appreciate the situation of immigrants during their first ten years in this country. The strangeness, the poverty, the pressure to send money home, the inadequate, irregular income, the restriction to the low-skilled job--"there is in America, at first, nothing for an immigrant but the shovel"--the lack of knowledge of money values and ignorance of American domestic and social practices--these conditions drive the immigrants into co-operative effort. The appeal sent out by a Russian national society organized in 1912 begins with some such words as these: While we are in this country we are doing the lowest kind of work, and many accidents happen to us; if we do not belong to an organization we are without help.... The purpose of our brotherhood is to help our brethren in a strange country. Not even in associated effort can they always find security, however. One of the reasons now being given very often by immigrants seeking passage back to Europe is their feeling of uncertainty about their future here. They say that America is all right so long as a man is young and strong enough to do the hard work in the industries, but they cannot see what is in store for them as they grow older, for they cannot save enough to provide for themselves; in Europe, a little land and a cottage are assurance of the necessities for old age. There are, of course, many cases in which there is failure within the group as there is neglect without. Exploitation of immigrants by their fellow countrymen, and the evils of fraudulent banks, steamship companies, "tally-men," are well known. At the same time there is a great mass of neighborly service and of kindness of the poor to the poor, and of the stranger to the more recent comer. Benefit societies based either on neighborhood associations here or on village association in Europe, soon grow up. These are usually self-assessment societies, in which each member pays a small sum each month, often only 25 cents. Out of the funds thus raised, a sick benefit of from $3 to $5 a week is paid. On the death of a member an assessment of from 50 cents to $1 is laid on the surviving members, and the resulting sum is paid to the bereaved family, helping to meet the funeral expenses. Such societies are not incorporated, their officers are usually without business training, and they are often unstable. They include, however, a considerable proportion of the more recent immigrants, who, through fear of falling into distress and dread of charity, are influenced to keep up the membership. In addition to the money benefit, these neighborhood societies often mean friendly interest and help in nursing, in the care of the children, and in household work. As the fees are low and as provision for the sick benefit seems very important, a person often belongs to several such societies. Owing to the instability of these organizations the effort is often made to combine them and to establish them on a sound financial basis as national fraternal insurance societies. These societies substitute fraternal insurance for the sick and death benefit. As the immigrant family gains a foothold in the new community the members are likely to join a national fraternal insurance society or, in the second generation, an organization of the type of the Catholic Order of Foresters, Knights and Ladies of Security, Tribe of Ben Hur, or Woodmen of the World. The national fraternal insurance society is, among the Slavs, highly organized. Often in one national group as many as three flourishing societies will be found, with membership determined by religious or political preferences. As they exist now, these societies are all much alike, differing in the elaborateness of their organization in accordance with the period covered by the immigration of the group or with the strength of its cohesion in America. Leaders who wish to communicate directly with the great body of their co-nationals in America, do so through the channels provided by these organizations. As the group develops a feeling of confidence, the insurance function becomes less urgent. In fact, officers of the national societies predict that the societies will gradually abandon the field of insurance and develop along other lines. Many societies already admit a considerable number of uninsured persons, who join in order to share in other enterprises. It would be neither possible nor profitable to describe all the groups, but the organization of a Croatian society and the relation of women to certain societies in the Polish and Lithuanian groups will be briefly discussed. NATIONAL CROATIAN ORGANIZATIONS The strongest societies among the Croatians are the National Croatian Society of 50,000 members, and the Croatian League of Illinois of 39,000 members, sometimes called the "New Society," which in spite of its name is really a national organization. The purpose of the National Croatian Society is set forth in its constitution: ... to help people of the Croatian race residing in America, in cases of distress, sickness, and death, to educate and instruct them in the English language and in other studies to fit them for the duties of life and citizenship with our English-speaking people, to teach them and impress upon them the importance and duty of being naturalized under the laws of the United States, and of educating their children in the public schools of the country; these purposes to be carried out through the organization and establishment of a supreme assembly and subordinate assemblies of the Croatian people with schools and teachers. Those eligible to become members are: Croatians or other Slavs who speak and understand the Croatian language, of all creeds excepting Jews. All between the ages of sixteen and fifty may be admitted, provided they are neither ill nor epileptic nor disabled, are not living in concubinage, and have not been expelled from the national society. The structure of the society is quite elaborate, and the conditions of admission and of membership, the organization and conduct of the lodges, the relations among the lodges and between a lodge and the national society, are all carefully specified in the constitution and by-laws. Lodges are often organized on a sex basis, and in a community in which there is a lodge for men and a lodge for women, no one of one sex can be admitted to the lodge organized for the other. There is no special notice taken of women's interests in the structure of the national society, but there are local women's lodges, and women constitute about one tenth of the total membership. The functions of these local lodges, aside from their official relation to the national organization, as specified by the by-laws, are: ... to assist those members who do not know how to read and write (either an officer or member shall, at least once a week, teach such members reading and writing); to establish libraries for members and gradually supply the same with the best and most necessary books; to hold entertainments with a view to building up the lodge treasury and to provide for brotherly talk and enjoyment. The officers and members of some of the local lodges in Chicago have endeavored to develop and extend the social and recreational features of the lodges to meet what they believe to be one of the greatest needs of their people, but the efforts have so far met with little success. Failure has been attributed to conditions found in the community and to the altered circumstances of family life in America. It has been difficult to find suitable meeting places, as Croatian people have no halls of their own and do not feel at home in the neighborhood recreation center. Any kind of recreational activity planned is, of necessity, so different from that to which these men and women are accustomed, that it does not interest them at once. Large families of small children make it impossible for men and women to take their recreation together, or for women to leave their homes at all except for a very short time. Leaders whom we have consulted feel, however, that it is only through the development of such organizations within the group that Croatian women can be drawn into any social or recreational activities in considerable numbers; for, because they feel peculiarly strange and ill at ease when with persons who are not of Croatian origin, they lead secluded lives. The important projects of the National Croatian Society have been the raising of funds for the establishment in each large colony of a national headquarters under the name Croatian Home, and for the erection and maintenance of an invalid home. A "National Fund," into which each member pays a cent a month, is created for the "culture and enlightenment of Croatians." The orphan children of members of the society are given the preference in the distribution of any benefit paid from the national fund. CARE OF CROATIAN ORPHANS The Croatian community in the United States has been peculiarly confronted with the problem of care of orphan children. The estimated number of orphan children is large in proportion to the number of Croatian families because a very large proportion of the Croatian men work at low-grade labor in the steel industry, in which fatal accidents are common. At the last convention of several of the national societies, the representatives agreed to form a new national council especially to undertake the care of orphan children and to raise funds for this cause. The plan was formed to buy a tract of land in the vicinity of Chicago, on which an orphan home and training school were to be erected. The sum of $10,000 was devoted to the site and $100,000 to buildings. As free thinking has spread rapidly among Croatians in America, it was intended to establish a nonsectarian institution and to take children of free-thinking parents away from the Roman Catholic schools as well as to provide for children who should be later orphaned. Through contacts established in the course of this study, the leaders in this group have been led to inquire concerning American methods of child care. Attention was directed to the latest standard discussions on the subject.[52] After some consideration of the method of caring for dependent children by placing them in family homes, the Chicago Croatian committee decided to delay action on the erection of a costly institution, to take time for further study and to hold a conference with the national committee representing the other Croatian societies interested. In the meantime action has been taken to change the name of the new national organization from the "Society for the Erection of a Croatian Orphanage" to the "Society for the Care of Croatian Orphans," and the by-laws of the society are being rewritten so that the movement need not be committed to institutional care at the outset, but will be free to choose in the light of the best information at hand. Some of the leading members of the committee are convinced that placing-out should be included in their plan, but feel that it may take some time to convince the Croatian people of this wish to delay operation until the question can be freely discussed throughout the whole Croatian community in America. Plans are now being made for the national committee, representing all the societies interested, to confer with the representatives of public and private child-placing agencies. The question arises as to how relations may be established between such organizations in the separate national groups and those in the American community who are concerned with improved methods in the care of dependent children. Until provision is made that such information will be shared with members of groups like these as a matter of course, there is great loss and waste. ORGANIZATIONS OF POLES The Polish people are, no doubt, the most highly organized of the Slavic nationalities. It may be said that Chicago is their national center in the United States, and the headquarters of the three great national fraternal insurance societies, the Roman Catholic Union of America, the Polish National Alliance, and the Polish Women's Alliance. As these organizations are much alike in general plan, a description of the organization, character, and methods of work of one will give an idea of them all. While these societies have always been divided upon political issues, and while there has been at times considerable bitterness in the antagonism between them, they have been able to unite their efforts in important undertakings for the general welfare of the Poles throughout the United States. Common interest in the Polish cause during the war, too, has united them as never before, and there is every reason for the confident expectation that they will co-operate in any new projects undertaken for the benefit of the Polish community in America. The Polish National Alliance is the largest single organization. In addition to providing insurance, this society carries on, through its national organization, extended work of a social and educational character. There is, for example, among its "commissions," an Emigration Commission for aiding immigrants, which is charged with the duty of framing rules for the proper supervision of homes established for the care of newcomers. Under this Commission the Alliance has maintained immigrant aid stations in New York, Baltimore, and Boston. In New York there is a home in which immigrant girls and women arriving alone may be accommodated until relatives can be located. The Chicago office co-operates with the offices at the ports of entry in securing information about relatives of Alliance members, and in case of special necessity arranges to have immigrants destined for Chicago met at the station. As relatives are supposed to be notified of the expected arrival before the women leave New York, the Chicago office has done little in this direction. The need for such services, however, has been made clear in the Annual Reports of the Immigrants' Protective League, showing the numbers of unattended Polish girls coming to Chicago to be much larger than the number in any other national group. The Polish National Alliance has been carrying on a number of projects, both for the Polish people throughout the country and for the local community in Chicago. During the war many forms of work that had been developed for the service of Poles in the United States were laid aside for the more urgent needs of the time, and the funds of this organization were devoted to the support of the Red Cross and of other relief work. When the needs especially arising out of the war have been met and the necessity for sending relief to Poland is no longer urgent, these projects, abandoned for the time, will be taken up again. Polish immigration has for a time ceased. In the opinion of the Poles in Chicago it will be very light for years after the war, so that projects hereafter undertaken will be concerned with the welfare of the community as it has become established in the United States. POLISH WOMEN'S WORK There is a Women's Department, directed by a committee of fifteen women members. The central government frames regulations for this department "conformably to the requirements of a given moment." An illustration of its activities can be found in a movement initiated to maintain oversight of the employment of Polish girls and women. A great many Polish girls go into domestic work in private homes and in hotels and restaurants. Because girls from the rural districts in Poland find customs and living conditions here so different the societies have undertaken to study the problem. In order to investigate places of employment the women found they must represent a regularly licensed employment agency. Some delay in securing a license has held up their work, but they plan to establish in the near future a "Polish Women's Employment Agency." Many cases came to their attention showing the need of protective work and legal aid for workingwomen, so that in 1917 the "Polish Women's Protective League" was organized to provide free legal advice and aid to Polish workingwomen. The official organ of the Polish National Alliance is a weekly publication, _Zgoda_. There is a daily, the _Dziennik Zwaizkowy_, that has a semi-official status. The Women's Department is represented in the official organ by one page of ordinary newspaper size, without illustration. In the daily paper one page each week is devoted to items of especial value to women. Different material is used in the two issues, but both give considerable space to such subjects as household management, the care of children, and problems of health and hygiene. There is, in fact, a marked development among the Polish, Bohemian, Slovenian, and Lithuanian groups, of a definite division between the men's and the women's departments. This began first in the local lodges as they grew from mere meetings for the payment of dues into something more in the order of a center for the discussion of questions of importance in group or family life, or for action on those questions. A woman who, more than eighteen years ago, organized one of the first lodges in the Polish National Alliance said that in the lodges of mixed membership women were supposed to have the same rights and privileges as men. As a matter of fact, she said that they had no voice in matters in which they felt their interest as women were especially concerned; the women were always in the minority, and there were very few who would even voice an opinion in the presence of men. The older women in the community came, therefore, to feel that there were many problems of vital interest and importance for the immigrant woman upon which action would never be taken in the lodge meeting, in which there was a mixed membership. They believed, too, that the meetings of the local lodge might become a real source of help to the newly arrived immigrant women. The women's lodge was therefore formed, and to the first meetings came women who still wore the handkerchiefs over their heads. Some of the more prosperous members protested that they did not want such women as these in the lodge, but the leaders insisted that their purpose in organizing women's lodges had been to reach through them just such women. The leaders felt that women who knew little of American life and customs would gradually acquire that knowledge by coming into the lodge. A lodge of this kind under the leadership of progressive women of the older immigration has become a center in which are discussed many of the questions the women have to face for the first time. The plan in the Polish National Alliance is to have lodges so organized that women from Russian Poland may be in one, those from Galicia in another, or to organize lodges on the basis of the neighborhood association in the United States. It is hoped that by such a plan as this the more backward women may be drawn into some of the social activities of the Polish community. Although English has not been the language of the meetings, women have been encouraged to learn English as soon as possible after their arrival. The older women urge the younger women to acquire the language. They have learned the importance of a knowledge of the language to the mother of boys and girls who are growing up in surroundings of which the mother knows little, and where custom and convention are so different from those to which she was accustomed. With the multiplication of women's lodges came the demand on the part of the women for representation in the national organization. As a result, the Women's Auxiliary has been given an official place, and women have been elected to the national board of directors. Polish women have felt that the welfare of the group as a whole is largely dependent upon the fitness of the women to meet the new situation. They have recognized the fact that, because of the national attitude toward women, Polish women of the class represented by the bulk of the immigration are very backward. They have therefore sought to inaugurate a campaign for the education of women on a national scale. Another interesting development has been the growth of national organizations for women alone. One of the earliest and best known of these is the Polish Women's Alliance, an example of organized effort of women to deal with their own problems on a national scale. The leaders in this enterprise were women who, through their own experiences as immigrants, and through contact with those who came later, had come to realize both the nature of the problems women were called upon to meet and the different position of women in America. One of the women who had been active in inaugurating the movement spoke of the extreme difficulty of such work in the Polish community because of the prejudice against women's taking part in anything outside of their homes. Some of the more advanced women thought that the welfare of the whole Polish community was retarded by the ignorance and indifference and prejudices of the women which kept them clinging to Old-World methods and customs entirely unsuited to the new conditions. They hoped that by building a clubhouse for women, with library and reading rooms, a large hall for assemblies, and small rooms for clubs and classes, they might gradually interest the women in something outside their homes. No one thought it possible, however, for women to organize in this way, much less to carry on a national movement and to build a clubhouse, as they have succeeded in doing. Some leading women felt that education must come, if at all, through the women's own efforts, and that the education involved in work for the organization more nearly than any other experience touched the needs of these women, in that it drew them out of their older habits and encouraged them to take the initiative and so to gain the self-confidence they lacked. The organization was at first possible only because of the benefit features through which the support could be gained of men and women who had no interest or confidence in such educational projects as attempt to interest the women in clean streets, satisfactory disposal of garbage, and improved housing conditions. This movement does not represent hostility to the great joint organization. Most of the women interested in developing the movement have been members of the Polish National Alliance; but they have thought that to give the women a sense of confidence it was necessary to have a women's organization, quite independent of the men's. And there have developed then the three relationships between men and women: (1) the Women's Department as one of the divisions of work in the Alliance; (2) the Women's Auxiliary to the men's society, and (3) the National Women's Organization, in which men are not members. LITHUANIAN WOMAN'S ALLIANCE The idea of the separate woman's organization finds an interesting illustration in the Lithuanian Woman's Alliance. This national society, independent of any other organization, was organized in 1915 in Chicago. Only Lithuanian Catholic women who are in good standing in the Church are admitted. The society has now grown, until there are over five thousand members in different Lithuanian communities throughout the United States. The society was organized for the education of Lithuanian women in America. Those interested in the organization recognized that it would be very difficult to obtain support for such a movement among women of the type they most wished to interest unless it had the indorsement of the Catholic Church. There are two departments, an educational (_Absvieta_) and a benefit (_Pasalpa_). It was recognized by the leaders that little appeal could be made to women for an educational enterprise, for the majority of women are too ignorant and indifferent; but like the Polish women they knew that "benefit" would appeal to every immigrant woman, for all belong to at least one friendly insurance society. The poorer women and the more recent immigrants are associated in the little parish self-assessment societies, in which each pays a small monthly fee, usually twenty-five cents. Membership in a substantial fraternal insurance society costs more than they can afford to pay. The Lithuanian Woman's Alliance provides insurance for 35 cents a month. The benefit department provides for the payment of a death benefit of $150, and $5 per week will be paid upon request to any member who is sick more than two weeks. In each case in which benefit is granted, two visitors are appointed to make arrangements for hospital care if necessary, and to render any other needed assistance. The idea back of this organization has been to help immigrant women to adjust themselves to the new circumstances of life in America; the method chosen has been through education along general and very practical lines, beginning at the point where the women themselves have come to recognize their needs. The fact that few of these women can read even in their own language makes it very difficult to reach them. At present, however, the task seems less difficult than ever before. The fact that fewer lodgers are taken, that in some cases the higher wages have lessened the pecuniary problems--even the fact that women have been drawn outside the home to work--these facts, together with the activities of women in war work, have served to give them a sense of identity with the American community; so that there is now a greater demand for English lessons than ever before. Many women now realize the necessity of speaking the English language, and women who read in Lithuanian are eager to learn to read English so that they "may know what is in the attractive-looking magazines they see on the news stands." The educational department is open to all women, whether they wish to avail themselves of the benefit or not, but the benefit department is open only upon condition that members also take part in the educational movement. Dues in the educational department alone are ten cents a month. The educational program is to be carried on through the local lodge and the official organ, _Woman's Field_, issued monthly by the central committee. The magazine, aside from such space as is needed for official notices, is devoted to educational material. A typical number includes articles on questions of general interest to women everywhere. Emphasis is laid on the necessity for women's learning English and assuming the duties of citizenship. One page each month devoted to questions of general hygiene and the care of children is edited by a Lithuanian woman physician. A page or section is given to instruction in the preparation of food, as the Lithuanians realize that one of the gravest problems for their people here has been that of diet. Space is given to articles about Lithuania, "so that the young people may know that they need not be ashamed of their country." The educational work planned for the local lodge includes instruction along many lines. Classes are held two evenings a week in the parish halls. The work of one of the more active lodges gives an idea of the scope of the undertaking. This chapter numbers over fifty members. Regular monthly meetings for the payment of dues and transaction of business are held on Sunday afternoon in the parish hall. After the business is finished there is a social hour. Weekday classes have been held on two evenings each week; on one, English and sewing classes are held; on the other, cooking and housekeeping classes. Women who have had greater advantages in Europe as well as in the United States give their services as teachers. All courses are planned for women who have had very little opportunity in either country; the president of one of the lodges said, in explaining their program, "You know Lithuanian women are not high up like American women--they do not know how to keep house or cook or take care of babies." On one evening in the week the whole time is devoted to housekeeping. The church hall has been equipped with a gas stove, a set of cooking utensils, dining-room table, linen, dishes, and silver. Lessons are given in the preparation and serving of a meal. Some attention is given to food values, but the object is mainly to show women how to prepare wholesome food as economically as possible. Processes of canning, preserving, and drying fruits and vegetables are demonstrated, as they are wholly new to most of the women. The women are also shown how to scrub, wash dishes, and care for clothing. Reference might also be made to a local society organized by Lithuanian women about twelve years ago on a mutual-benefit basis, for educational purposes, which were stated in the constitution to be: ... to provide sick and death benefit; to organize Lithuanian women for a better and larger education; to provide evening and day classes in reading, writing, sewing, sanitary housekeeping, and the care of children; to provide lectures, books, and programs to interest women in health and education; to encourage friendship among Lithuanian women, and provide social life; to provide scholarships for students seeking higher education; to encourage writers; to encourage women to read the newspapers in Lithuanian and English. These women, who have all been in the United States for a considerable period, and know the needs of the newcomers, have fitted up a housekeeping center in the public park center in their neighborhood. They have a kitchen and dining-room equipment consisting of a stove, a set of cooking utensils, and a dining table with service. Here cooking classes are held once a week, the lessons given by the women who are skilled in cookery. The attempt is made to create an interest in food values, in proper cooking, and in wise spending. In housekeeping lessons, washing, scrubbing, washing windows, and even dishwashing and the setting of the table are taught. Classes in English have been organized, but these women have suffered as others have suffered from a lack of teachers skilled in teaching this kind of a group, and from a lack of classroom material suited to their needs. The Polish and the Lithuanian societies illustrate the organized effort of women in those groups in which the group life is highly developed, in which a number of women have become conscious of separate needs and undertake to assist in the development of others of their sex. UKRAINIAN BEGINNINGS Among the Ukrainian women the beginnings of this process can be observed, but in this case there is common effort on the part of the most progressive men and women in behalf of the more backward women. We are told that the Ukrainian women have much greater authority and responsibility in the United States than in the Ukraine, so that some men say that here "the laws are made for women." They spend the money, discipline the children, and direct the household life. Many of the women have been poorly fitted, by their inferior status at home, for their new duties, and the Ukrainian Women's Alliance was organized in 1917 by both men and women in an attempt to meet this situation. This organization, too, is based on the benefit idea, which all the women can understand, but plans are already laid for a comprehensive educational program to be carried out not only through educational centers in the local lodges, but through a magazine of national circulation. This is a complete innovation, as there has never before existed among the Ukrainians a woman's association, nor has any attention been paid to their interests in Ukrainian publications. The organ of the Alliance had in October, 1919, put out four issues, and met with so cordial a response that its next number was double the size of the first numbers and the sales at news stands were sufficient to cover the cost of these first numbers. The contents of one number indicate the purposes sought by its publication. Of the articles, one describes the organization of the Alliance, one discusses the relation of the institution of the home to the community, with special stress laid on the responsibilities of the mother in the home, one explains the woman-suffrage movement and urges the importance of woman's place in government. There is a department devoted to diet, food values, and recipes, and one devoted to hygiene, with special emphasis on child care. In some of the other national groups the number of men is still so far in excess of the number of women that the energies of the group seem to have been absorbed in dealing with the problems of the men or of getting a foothold as a group. ITALIAN WOMEN UNORGANIZED This does not apply to the Italian community. While benefit societies among the Italians are very numerous, there has until recently been little movement toward a national organization similar to those among the Poles and Lithuanians. The deep division in dialect, custom, and feeling between people from different sections of Italy accounts for the number of societies as well as for the lack of affiliation among them. Three of the largest societies in Chicago, in which membership is largely Sicilian, are now affiliated, but no effort has been discovered to make use of the organization as a basis for domestic educational enterprise. Women are admitted to many of the societies on the same terms as men, but rarely attend meetings. There are many small self-assessment societies for women alone, but they have no social or educational feature; members seldom meet, and dues are often sent in by children. The idea of using their own organizations as a means of carrying on educational work among women is a novel one in the Italian community, but it is being recognized as a possible method of attacking the great need for education in maternal and infant welfare, in the care of small children, and in sanitary housekeeping. The Italian physicians, for example, realize that the women need instruction, and the Italian Medical Association, in May, 1919, planned a series of lectures for mothers, in Italian, on these subjects, but found that there were great difficulties in reaching the mothers with such material. It is therefore very important that every device be tried for reaching the more intelligent women, who with the helpful neighborliness that exists in all the neighborhoods would share with their less-informed sisters the benefits of their aroused interests. GROWTH OF NATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS It is clear, then, that highly organized societies established primarily for mutual insurance often undertake educational and social projects which tend to overshadow their original purpose as the economic position of the members of the national group becomes more stable. Leaders who are inaugurating national educational movements in the less well-established groups are consciously using the benefit feature because of its universal appeal, and employing the general methods and machinery of the fraternal insurance organization. Modification of the official machinery is the inevitable result of the change in purpose. We find, for instance, that the local lodge, originally only a meeting for the payment of dues, becomes a center for discussion of problems of concern to the local community or to the national group, and often the field in which the educational program planned by the national society is carried out. The official organ, designed to carry official communication and news, tends to subordinate this function to the educational and cultural features. To a certain extent it becomes a national educational journal. It is to be noted that with the separation of men's and women's lodges and the growth of the influence of women in the national policy of the society, the section of the official organ devoted to the interests of women is extended. The very real problem of the immigrant woman in adjusting herself and the family life to the new conditions here, is given greater consideration. As these organizations have been so efficiently developed, and as the leaders in the different groups hope for a united group where before there has been a separate and segregated one, it seemed worth while to consult the representatives of the different groups in some detail with reference to the method of using educational material dealing with family adjustment. The subject of child care seemed the most obviously pertinent and interesting, and a section of the United States Children's Bureau Study on the Pre-School Child was submitted for their consideration with the question as to its adaptation to the needs of the various groups. All to whose attention it was called agreed that it was material of the highest importance, and that if translated it would prove of greatest interest. A translation was therefore presented to these representatives for their consideration. Again, all agreed that the only questions were the extent to which the material would have to be explained in terms of foodstuffs and methods of care familiar to the women in the different groups. All agreed that the material should be given to the women in small doses graphically presented. The installment plan should be the rule. All agreed that illustrations would greatly add to the interest and the ease with which the lesson would be understood. And all agreed that a very effective way of arousing and maintaining interest would be to call in to conference representatives of the different important agencies, the Church, the school, the midwife, the doctor, to obtain common consideration of the material with reference to its more exact adaptation to the needs of the particular group. Several editors agreed that much of the material could be used without such conference if it were only skillfully translated--which is a difficult and costly process. The Foreign Language Information Service of the National Red Cross has begun this work, and finds a hearty reception for its translations of such material. But the editors likewise thought that such conferences as have been described would have very great effect in securing co-operation in the use of the material. It is clear that the same general method could be applied to the use of other similar material bearing on problems of family adjustment, or on the other aspects of adjustment; but in the field of family adjustment there is available a great body of information and suggestion organized by the expert members of the various Federal bureau staffs for the purpose of accomplishing just the end we have under consideration. This is true not only of the work done by the United States government, but by the state and city governments as well. The development and maintenance of an agency which could make available to foreign-speaking groups through their own organizations the material already awaiting use, would correspond with the hopes and the intentions of leaders among the various groups, facilitate their work, and make possible a fine and a fruitful co-operation among elements that have in the past been separate, if not hostile. FOOTNOTES: [51] See John Daniels, _America via the Neighborhood_. [52] Such as the Russell Sage Foundation Studies: Slingerland's _Child Placing in Families_; Hart's _Preventive Treatment of Neglected Children_, and Ralph's _Elements of Record Keeping for Child-helping Organizations_. VIII AGENCIES OF ADJUSTMENT In the first six chapters an attempt has been made to set out certain difficulties with which foreign-born family groups are confronted on arrival. It has become clear that certain services skillfully rendered might prevent a great deal of needless suffering, discomfort, and waste, and also greatly facilitate the adjustment of the family to the new surroundings. The services that would be appropriate to the needs of all housewives might be classed under (1) the exercise of hospitality; (2) supplying information and opportunities for instruction; (3) assistance in the performance of household tasks. Suggestions that these services might prove useful are not based wholly on theory, and attention may at this point be directed to the work of certain agencies which have attempted to do these various things. The suggestion has been frequently made that the immigrant should be the object of certain protective care during the journey across the ocean and on arrival.[53] The proposal here is that the community would gain enormously through the creation of devices for the exercise of a community hospitality. This should include the receiving and distributing of new arrivals in such a way as to assure their being put into touch, not only with their relatives and friends, but with the community resources which could be of special service as well. Attention has been called to the efforts put forth by organizations among the foreign-speaking groups. The possibility of their more efficient and wider activity should be always kept in mind. But the work of the Immigrants' Protective League of Chicago, in behalf of unaccompanied women and girls, illustrates both the nature of the task and the way in which the development of such services requires a familiarity with the governmental organizations and a capacity for utilizing official agencies not to be found among the groups most needing help. IMMIGRANTS' PROTECTIVE LEAGUE The work of this society has been referred to a number of times, and its methods and special objects should perhaps be briefly summarized. Its organization in 1907 grew out of a desire to assist the immigrant girls coming into Chicago, with special reference to their industrial relations. The objects described in the charter of incorporation are, however, much wider than this. They were: ... to apply the civic, social, and philanthropic resources of the city to the needs of foreigners in Chicago, to protect them from exploitation, to co-operate with the Federal, state, and local authorities, and with similar organizations in other localities, and to protect the right of asylum in all proper cases. (By-Laws, Art. II.) The services of the organization have been taken advantage of by members of all the national groups in Chicago, and these services have included meeting immigrant trains and distributing arriving immigrants to their destination in the city, prosecuting the agencies from which the immigrant suffered especial exploitation, visiting immigrant girls, securing appropriate legislation, and in general making known to the community the special needs of the newly arrived immigrants. The League has from the beginning made use of the services of foreign-speaking visitors, and the volume and success of its work has varied with the number of these visitors, the extent to which they represented groups in need of special aid, and their skill as social workers. At the time of the publication of the last report, the following languages besides English were spoken by these visitors: German, Bohemian, Italian, Lettish, Lithuanian, Magyar, Polish, Russian, Slovak, and Yiddish. Many aspects of its work do not bear on this discussion, but the following brief passages from the annual reports indicate the way in which the work in behalf of unaccompanied girls developed. During the past year and a half the League has received from the various ports of arrival the names and addresses of the girls and women destined for Chicago. All of these newly arrived girls and women have been visited by representatives of the League able to speak the language of the immigrant. Four, and part of the time five, women speaking the Slavic languages--German, French, Italian, and Greek--have been employed for this work. In these visits information has been accumulated in regard to the journey to Chicago, the depot situation, the past industrial experience of the girls, their occupation in Chicago, wages, hours of work, their living conditions, the price they pay for board, and whether they are contributing to the support of some one at home. On this basis the League's work for girls has been planned. (_Annual Report, 1909-10_, p. 13.) In these visits many girls needing assistance are found. The most difficult ones to help are those for whom the visitor sees a danger which the girl is unable to anticipate. Often a girl is a pioneer, who comes in advance of her family, and the friend or acquaintance whom she knows in Chicago undertakes to help her in finding her first job and a place to live, and then leaves her to solve the future for herself. If she should be out of work or in trouble she has no one whom she can ask for advice or help. In cases of this sort all that the visitor can do is to establish a connection which will make the girl feel that she has some one she can turn to in case of trouble or unemployment. (_Annual Report, 1909-10_, p. 15.) Sometimes the League's visitor can do little more than offer the encouragement which the girl so much needs during the first few years in America. Usually she tries to persuade the girl to attend the nearest night school; sometimes she helps her in finding work, or a proper boarding place; sometimes, when the immigrant is educated, she has to quite sternly insist that any kind of work must be accepted until English has been learned. Some girls are discovered only after it is too late to prevent a tragedy. In the cases of two girls, one Polish and the other Bohemian, who had been betrayed by the uncles who had brought them to this country, the results were especially discouraging because the efforts to punish the men failed and one of the girls who had suffered so much from the uncle whom she thought she could trust was deported. (_Annual Report for the Year Ending January 1, 1914_, p. 11.) It is clear that such a plan involved the distribution of information from the ports of entry to the places of destination,[54] and the development of instrumentalities through which the immigrant on arrival at his destination can be placed in contact with those from whom help of the kind needed could be expected. A nation-wide network of agencies for such hospitality, with headquarters at the ports of entry, is seen to be necessary from the descriptions of the services to be rendered. The development of such machinery by the Federal Immigration Service, as at present organized, may be unthinkable; but with a change in personnel and with a wider understanding of the nature of the problem, the apparently impossible might be realized. In the meantime, the service need not wholly wait on this remote possibility. There are agencies, both public and private, which with enlarged resources might undertake a considerable portion of this task and develop more completely both the methods of approach and a body of persons skilled in this particular kind of service. Such work as that done on a small scale by the Immigrants' Protective League is especially instructive. The resources of that organization for all its tasks have been limited, so that visitors have been only to a slight extent specialized, except in the matter of language. But with enlarged resources, so that a larger number and better trained visitors might be employed, this gracious and important hospitality might be widely exercised. A NATIONAL RECEPTION COMMITTEE As this visiting developed among the different groups, several results could be anticipated. Just as the needs of the unaccompanied girls have been learned in this way, the needs of the families in the different groups could become more exactly understood, and devices for meeting those needs more efficiently worked out. It would perhaps be possible to urge the woman to learn English when she is first confronted with the strangeness of her situation, and before she slips into the makeshifts by which she later is apparently able to get on without learning English. Instruction in English might be made to appear the path of least resistance, if it were made attractive and available to the immigrant housewife at a sufficiently early moment. These visitors might preferably be English-speaking members of the foreign-speaking groups. If there were a sufficient staff, they might also render many similar services to other women in the foreign-born groups. They could persuade those who have not yet learned English to come into English classes; they could organize groups for instruction in cooking, child care, house and neighborhood sanitation; and gradually accumulate both additional knowledge as to the need and experience in meeting it. A point to be emphasized in connection with this service is that it is not related in any way to the problem of dependency, but is directed wholly toward meeting the difficulties growing out of the strangeness of the newcomer to the immediate situation. By developing a method for lessening the difficulties connected with the migration of any group from one section to another differing in industrial or social organization, light would be thrown on analogous problems such as the movements among the negroes from the South to the North during the war, or of the mountain people to the cotton-mill villages at an earlier date. Another point to be emphasized is that while the method of approach and of immediate service can be developed independently, and while the amount of discomfort and genuine distress that can be prevented is very great--as is shown in the experience of families whom such organizations as now attempt work along this line have aided--the opportunity for swift and efficient adjustment will be dependent on the development of a body of educational technique. It has been made clear that there are certain kinds of information that should be given to the newcomers, with reference, for example, to the change in the legal relationships within the family group, the new responsibilities of the husband and father, and the rights of wife and children to support. Attention has been called to the need of giving instruction regarding sanitary and hygienic practices, with reference to the new money values, and to the new conditions under which articles of household use are to be obtained, to the requirements in food and clothing, particularly for the children, in the new locality as compared with that from which the family comes. And, as has been suggested, above all there is always the question of teaching English. Sometimes the necessary facts can be conveyed briefly and immediately. Sometimes patient individual instruction will be necessary. Sometimes group or class instruction will be the proper device. It is highly important, then, that these various forms of instruction be developed into a technique. Courses of instruction to be given according to these different methods to those for whom a particular method is appropriate must be organized, and a body of teachers developed. The question then arises as to the extent to which this task has been undertaken and the agencies that have undertaken it. As to the first great body of material, it may be said to have been ignored. Only when one is summoned to the Juvenile Court of Domestic Relations, or when one learns of another's being summoned, is the body of family law called to the attention of the group. In English, in cooking, and child care, some agencies have attempted instruction. They are the public school, organizations like the Immigrants' Protective League, the State Immigration Commission, the social settlement, recreation centers of various kinds, the Young Women's Christian Association in its International Institutes. The possibilities in the work of these agencies are numerous. THE PUBLIC SCHOOL The public school touches the foreign-born family at two points: First, in the compulsory education of the children, and second, in the opportunities that it offers to the adult members of the family to learn English, to fit themselves for citizenship, and to adjust their lives to the new community. The adaptation of the public schools to these tasks belongs properly to another section of this study.[55] In so far, however, as the school contributes through its attitude toward the parent to a breakdown in family discipline, and in so far as it tries or does not try to instruct the foreign-born housewife in the art of housekeeping, it is concerned with problems that are primarily family problems. It may be of interest, then, to cite certain evidence obtained from foreign-born leaders and typical foreign-born families as to the relationship existing between the schools and foreign-born parents, the methods used by the schools in the education of foreign-born women, and their apparent success or failure. Reference has already been made to the place that the school sometimes plays in the breakdown of family discipline, because of ignorance on the part of the teachers concerning the social and domestic attitudes prevailing among the foreign-born groups. The school has, in fact, been able to take so little account of the mother that so long as things run fairly smoothly she is usually unable to realize that she has any place at all in the scheme. Again and again, to the question as to whether she visits the school where her children go, comes the answer, "Oh no, my children never have any trouble in school." As long as they are not in trouble she is not called into consultation. She may even be made to feel quite unwelcome if she is bold enough to visit the schoolroom, so she very soon comes to the conclusion that the education of her children is really none of her business. Sometimes the teacher thoughtlessly contributes to the belittling of the parent in the eyes of the child. An Italian man tells the story of a woman he knew who whipped her boy for truancy and then went to consult the teacher. But instead of a serious and sympathetic talk, the teacher in the child's presence upbraided the mother for punishing the child. The child of foreign-born parents, as well as the native-born child, often learns in the public school to despise what is other than American in dress, customs, language, and political institutions, and both are thus influenced to despise the foreign-born parent who continues in the old way. There is, of course, often a failure on the part of the teacher to uphold the dignity and authority of the parents in the native-born group, and the need of bridging the gap between school authorities and parents has been recognized by the organization of the Parent-Teachers' organization as well as of the Patrons' Department of the National Education Association. It may be that at a later date, when certain general fundamental questions of co-operation have been dealt with, devices for meeting the difficulties of special groups of parents will be developed. On the subject of courses of instruction attention has been called to the many points at which the foreign-born housewife needs instruction and assistance in familiarizing herself with the new conditions under which she lives. When there exists such a universal and widely felt need which could be filled by giving instruction in a field in which the material is organized and available, the opportunity of the school is apparent. Not only courses in English, in the art of cooking, in the principles of selection and preservation of food, but those describing the peculiarities of the modern industrial urban community as contrasted with the simple rural community, could be planned, methods of instruction could be developed, and regular curricula could be organized. There are, to be sure, certain inherent difficulties to be met in the instruction of housewives. The old saying, "Man's work is from sun to sun, but woman's work is never done," has been so long accepted as the expression of the inevitable that it is difficult to persuade anyone, most of all the housewife herself, that she can manage to give an hour or two a day to learning something new. Her time seems never her own, with tasks morning, afternoon, and night. Nor is it only a question of overwork. Undoubtedly careful planning is uncommon, and the tradition that woman's place is in the home has its effect. In fact, there is a vicious circle; she cannot study because her housekeeping is too arduous, but it is so partly because she does not take time to learn better ways of doing her work. There is, moreover, among most housewives, whether native or foreign born, a certain complacency about housekeeping and bringing up children. Housekeeping is supposed to come by nature, and few women of any station in life are trained to be homemakers and mothers. If they take any training it is generally designed to fit them to earn a living only until they are married. They do not realize how useful certain orderly instruction might be. Moreover, instruction for foreign-born housewives must include the subjects needed for homemaking as well as English. Having survived the first hard adjustments it is difficult to persuade the foreign-born mother that she has any need for speaking English when housekeeping is all that is expected of her. The situation is often complicated, too, by her age at immigration and her lack of education in the old country, which make her particularly ill-fitted for ordinary classroom instruction. Besides these difficulties there are certain prejudices to be met. The middle-aged woman does not wish to study English in classes with her children of working age or others of their age. She dreads the implication of this association. Many of the foreign-born mothers also have a hesitancy about going into classes with men, as they feel a mental inferiority, and many prefer not to be in classes with students from other national groups. The most frequent criticism by immigrant leaders interviewed is the inelasticity of the public-school methods. The classes are usually held three or four nights a week, and no housewife should be expected to leave home as often as that. The groups are composed of both men and women and of all nationalities, disregarding well-known prejudices that have already been mentioned. A more fundamental criticism than these has reference to the failure to adopt or devise new methods of instruction for persons who cannot read or write in their own language, and who have arrived at a period in their lives when learning is extremely difficult. The classes are often conducted in English by day-school teachers, who are accustomed to teaching children and who are entirely unfamiliar with the background of the immigrant woman and her special problems. There are reports also of the unwillingness of the school authorities to relax formal requirements, with reference to the minimum number for whom a class will be organized. Often it is necessary to "nurse the class." In Chicago sixteen women have in the past been deprived of a class because the Board of Education refused at the time to open the schools to groups of less than twenty. THE HOME TEACHER The home teacher in California is an interesting educational device, of which much is to be expected. The Home Teacher Act, passed by the state legislature April 10, 1915,[56] permits boards of school trustees or city boards of education to employ one "home teacher" for every five hundred or more units of average daily attendance. The home teacher is to work in the homes of the pupils, instructing children and adults in matters relating to school attendance and preparation therefor, also in sanitation, in the English language, in household duties, such as purchase, preparation, and use of food and clothing, and in the fundamental principles of the American system of government and the rights and duties of citizenship. She is required to possess the following qualifications: 1. A regular teacher's certificate under the State Education Law. 2. Experience in teaching and in social work. 3. Good health. 4. Ability to speak the language of the largest group in the district. 5. Complete loyalty to the principal of the school. 6. Tact and patience for a delicate task. 7. Ingenuity in adapting all circumstances to the main purpose. 8. An incapacity for discouragement. 9. Comprehension of the reasons and objects of the work. 10. Finally, above all and through all, a sympathetic attitude toward the people, which involves some knowledge of the countries and conditions from which they came, and what "America" has meant to them.[57] Her salary is paid from the city or from district special school funds. The law authorizing the use of home teachers was enacted largely through the efforts of the State Commission of Immigration and Housing, and was from the first intended to be used for the benefit of foreign-born families. The first experiments were financed by the Commission of Immigration and Housing and by private organizations, such as the Daughters of the American Revolution, the Council of Jewish Women, and the Young Women's Christian Association. According to the latest report[58] there are twenty official home teachers at work in eight cities of the state. The Commission says of the purpose of this plan: The interpretation of the need in California departs from that conceived elsewhere. There have been so-called home teachers in a dozen cities, of several Eastern states, for a number of years, but their purpose is to do follow-up work for absent, irregular, subnormal, or incorrigible children, and they are more properly visiting teachers. The home teacher, as we conceive her purpose, seeks not primarily the special child--though that will often open the door to her and afford her a quick opportunity for friendly help--but _the home_ as such, and especially the mother who makes it. This discrimination as to aim and purpose cannot be too much emphasized, or too consistently maintained, for the care of abnormal children, important as it is, can by no means take the place of the endeavor to Americanize the _families_ of the community.[59] SETTLEMENT CLASSES The social settlements are in many cases situated in congested city districts, and they have always dealt very directly with the family groups in their neighborhood. Settlements have, in fact, probably more than any other social agency, tried to become acquainted with the Old-World background of their neighbors in order to establish friendly relationships. The settlement ideal has included the preservation of the dignity and self-esteem of the immigrant, while attempting to modify his habits when necessary and giving him some preparation for citizenship. [Illustration: LITHUANIAN MOTHERS HAVE COME TO A SETTLEMENT CLASS] Classes in English and Civics, mothers' clubs, and housekeeping classes have been part of the contribution of the settlement to the adjustment of family life. Seventeen settlements in Chicago, for example, have conducted during the last year 36 clubs and classes of this kind for non-English-speaking women. Among these there are 9 English classes, 8 sewing classes, 10 cooking classes, and 9 mothers' clubs, with varied programs. These classes have been conducted with a flexibility that is often lacking in the public-school classes. They are usually held in the daytime at the hour most convenient for the group concerned, and by combining social features with instruction the interest of the women is maintained longer than would otherwise be possible. Sometimes the classes are conducted in a foreign language, but they are generally taught in English, occasionally with the assistance of an interpreter. The classes are usually small, so that considerable personal attention is possible. The season during which it seems possible to hold such classes lasts from September or October until June, and it seems necessary to expend considerable effort each year in order to reorganize them. Trained domestic-science teachers are used for most of the cooking and sewing classes. The English teachers and mothers' club leaders are, however, usually residents in the settlement or other volunteers with little training or experience in teaching adults. They often find it quite difficult to hold the group together. Very valuable work is done, however, especially in the cooking classes. Many such classes were organized to teach conservation cooking; for instance, in an Italian class, the women were taught the use of substitutes for wheat that could be used in macaroni; in another the cooking teacher took Italian recipes and tried to reproduce their flavors with American products which are cheaper and more available than the Italian articles. What is gained in flexibility may, of course, be counterbalanced by a loss of unity. The settlement teaching lacks, on the whole, a unity and organization that the public school should be better able to provide. CO-OPERATION OF AGENCIES Sometimes co-operation among several agencies may be advantageous in meeting the various difficulties presented by the task of teaching adult foreign-born women. Such co-operation was developed between the Immigrants' Protective League of Chicago, the public schools, the Chicago Woman's Club and the Women's Division of the Illinois Council of Defense. The Board of Education of Chicago, in 1917, passed a resolution to the effect that whenever twenty or more adults desired instruction in any subject which would increase their value in citizenship, the school would be opened and a trained teacher provided. The Immigrants' Protective League then undertook to organize groups who would take advantage of this opportunity and to keep the groups interested after they had been organized. The Chicago Woman's Club and the Council of National Defense undertook to supply kindergarten teachers to care for the children whose mothers were in the class, and the Visiting Nurse Association supplied nurses to examine the children, to advise mothers with reference to their care, and to make home visits when the condition of the children rendered this necessary. The League visitors made very definite efforts to organize campaigns for acquainting the housewives of various neighborhoods with the opportunity thus provided, and for persuading the women to "come out." The services of the foreign-born visitors have been particularly valuable in the work of organization. These visitors certainly put forth valiant efforts in behalf of the plan. The Lithuanian and Italian visitors, for example, made in three instances 40, 96, and 125 calls before a class was organized, and even then less than twenty enrolled for each class. They have found it necessary to make visits in the homes of women whom they hoped to draw out, and have also used posters, printed invitations, and advertisements in foreign-language newspapers. Nor have their efforts ceased when the class was organized. Often misunderstandings occur, the attendance begins to dwindle, and great efforts must be made to discover the cause and to bring back the members. The classes organized in this way have usually been small, composed of housewives of a single national group. Considerable individual attention is given the members of the class, and the foreign-speaking visitors attend the classes so that they may interpret when necessary. The plan has been carried out, of course, on an extremely restricted stage. The efforts have been limited almost entirely to English and cooking classes, and instruction in other phases of household management has been quite incidental. The teachers supplied by the Board of Education have not, of course, always possessed social experience and training. The classes are sometimes short lived. In the case of a Lithuanian cooking class, to which the teacher came too late to give the lesson, or too weary to give the lesson, it was necessary to reorganize the group. Where the teachers change, the group will dwindle, and the efforts of the visitor will have been substantially wasted. The subject matter is often poorly adapted to the needs and desires of the foreign housewife. A new domestic-science teacher, for instance, gave to a group of Lithuanian women seven consecutive lessons on pies, cakes, and cookies, in spite of the organizer's request for lessons on "plain cooking." At times, as has been pointed out, the teacher is wholly ignorant as to the habits and tastes of the immigrant. There is, sometimes, an ill-advised attempt to substitute American dishes for foreign dishes instead of modifying or supplementing the well-established and perfectly sound dietetic practices of the foreign-born group. The Lithuanian visitor of the Immigrants' Protective League, in speaking of the difficulties she had encountered in keeping together the classes she organized for the public school, says she has often been able to get together a group of women who want lessons in English and in cooking. The plan has been to give cooking lessons in English. The women have come, perhaps, three or four times. The first lesson would teach the making of biscuits; perhaps the second dumplings; the third sweet rolls. The teacher would be very busy with her cooking and talk very little. Then the women would not come back. They did not want to learn to make biscuits, about which they cared nothing; they were busy women and were aware that they were not getting what they wanted or needed. INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTES Another specialized agency for work with the foreign-born groups is the International Institute of the Young Women's Christian Association. This association has attempted in a short period of time to develop over a wide area this form of service, so that between the spring of 1913 and March, 1919, there had been established 31 of these organizations, most of them in industrial centers in different parts of the United States. In general, their work, as outlined in the After-War Program of the association, includes (1) a foreign-language information office, (2) home visiting for newly arrived women and girls, (3) case work in connection with legal difficulties, sickness, and emergencies, and (4) work with groups, including organized classes and informal gatherings. The last are to be especially designed for women and girls unable or unwilling to attend night schools, and there is to be a persistent urging upon the public school of the importance of socialized methods in work for women. The use of foreign-language visitors is considered to be one of the most important features of these undertakings. Although few of the institutes have been able to secure enough workers to reach all the language groups in the community, provision can usually be made for the most numerous groups. Among the 18 replies to questionnaires sent to these institutes only 4 show less than 3 languages spoken by visitors, 10 have as many as 4 or more, and 4 have 8 or 9 languages. These 18 institutes employ 76 foreign-language visitors. Forty-six of these are themselves foreign born. These visitors represent a great variety in training and experience, but the institute secretaries think that on the whole they are more valuable than native-born visitors would be even if these native-born visitors were more highly trained. The training of these particular visitors, while varied and often apparently inadequate, is on the whole surprisingly good. Fifteen of the 46 have had some college training; 3 have had kindergarten training, and 4 nurses' training. Eight have had previous case-work experience; 4 have lived in settlements. Eight have taken training courses given by the association, varying from a few weeks to several months at the national headquarters. A number have had religious training of one kind or another, 2 in a school for deaconesses, 12 as prospective missionaries, and 1 in a theological seminary. The 18 International Institutes report the establishment of 134 clubs or classes in which married women are members, having an enrollment of 894 foreign-born married women. The subject most generally taught is English. Among 134 clubs and classes, 101 are organized exclusively for the teaching of English, and 7 others combine English with cooking or sewing. Some attempt is made to teach housekeeping in classes. Ten of these are organized for cooking or sewing, 7 for English and cooking or sewing, and there are 13 mothers' clubs with subjects of such general interest as health, the care of children, and home nursing. In addition to the organized clubs and classes, most of the institutes have given lectures in foreign languages to larger groups of women subjects such as "Women and the War," "Liberty Bonds," "Thrift," "Food Conservation," "Personal and Social Hygiene," "The Buying of Materials," and "What the English Language Can Do for You." Most classes are composed of a single national group, but classes are reported in which there are Polish and Ruthenian, Slovak and Polish, Greek and Lithuanian, Armenian and French, and Portuguese, Magyar and Slovak, and "mixed" nationalities. English is used in practically all classes which are primarily for the teaching of English. Fourteen of the institutes, however, have foreign-speaking workers to interpret whenever the women do not understand the teacher. In answer to the question as to the success of the institute in connecting married women with classes in public evening schools, three reply that they have had no success because the public schools do not use foreign-speaking workers and the women cannot understand the teachers who speak only English. The institutes conduct vigorous campaigns to acquaint the mothers with their work, using posters, printed invitations, announcements at schools, notices in foreign papers, and particularly home visits by foreign-speaking workers. With regard to home visiting it appears that there has not yet been time to work out a program for the teaching of improved standards of housekeeping, personal hygiene, and proper diet. The institutes, however, lend their foreign-speaking visitors as interpreters to other agencies organized for particular phases of work in the home, such as Visiting Nurse associations, Infant Welfare societies, Anti-Tuberculosis societies, and Charity Organization societies. A very real effort is often made to reconcile foreign-born mothers and Americanized daughters. Those responsible for some of the institutes realize very keenly the significance of the problem, and impress upon the children they meet their great interest in the Old-World background of the parents, their appreciation of the mother's being able to speak another language besides English, their pleasure in old-country dances, costumes, and songs. They try in every way possible to maintain the respect of the daughter for her foreign-born mother. In home visits they try also to explain to the mother the freedom granted to American girls, the purpose of the clubs for girls, and the need for learning English themselves to lessen their dependence upon the children. TRAINING FOR SERVICE It is obvious that the efficiency of the work of these various organizations can rise no higher than the level of efficiency and training of the workers available for such service. It is, therefore, most important that the materials necessary for the rendering of these services be made available at the earliest possible moment. Such materials include compilations of data with reference to the different groups, courses of study developed so as to meet the needs and educational possibilities of the women, devices such as pictures, slides, charts, films, for getting and holding attention of persons unused to study, often weary and overstrained and lacking confidence in their own power to learn. It is also clear from the experiences of these various agencies that, while giving this instruction is essentially an educational problem, it is for the time so intimately connected with the whole question of understanding the needs of the housewife in the different foreign-born groups, of developing a method of approach and of organization, and of trying out methods of instruction as well as experimenting with different bodies of material, that for some time to come experimentation and research should be fostered at many points. There should, for example, be accumulated a much larger body of knowledge than is now available with reference to the agencies existing among the foreign-born groups in the various communities from whom co-operation could be expected; there should be a much more exact body of fact as to the needs of the various groups of women; at the earliest possible moment the material available with reference to these household problems, child care, hygiene and sanitation, distribution of family income, should be put into form available for use by the home teacher, the class teacher, the extension workers, and the woman's club organization. In the Appendix are some menus of four immigrant groups, which illustrate the kind of material which would be useful. By stipends and scholarships promising younger members from among the foreign-born groups should be encouraged to qualify as home teachers and as classroom and extension instructors in these fields. This would often mean giving opportunity for further general education as preliminary to the professional training, for many young persons admirably adapted to the work come from families too poor to afford the necessary time at school. Scholarships providing for an adequate preparation available to members of the larger groups in any community, would give a very great incentive to interest in the problem and to further understanding of its importance on the part of the whole group. In addition to scholarships enabling young persons to take courses of considerable length, there might be stipends enabling older women of judgment and experience to qualify for certain forms of service by shorter courses. Those who can speak enough English could take advantage of certain short courses already offered by the schools of social work. Others who do not speak English could be enabled to learn enough English and at the same time to learn to carry on certain forms of service under direction. As has been suggested, lack of resources in face of an enormous volume of educational work is one factor in this lack of teachers trained to meet the needs of women in the foreign-born groups and of material adapted to their class or home instruction. The question, then, has been raised as to whether the supply both of teachers and of material could be increased and whether, if these resources were available, they would be utilized by the great national administrative agencies to which reference has been made. The following plan has been approved as thoroughly practicable by leading officers and members of the American Home Economics Association, including several heads of departments of home economics in the state colleges, by other educators interested in the field of home economics, as well as by representatives of the States Relations Service, the Bureau of Home Economics Department in the United States Department of Agriculture, the Federal Board of Vocational Education, and the Home Economics Division of the United States Bureau of Education. The unanimous judgment of those consulted is that if such a plan could be carried out for the space of three years, the Federal service would be vivified and enriched and the educational institutions enabled to develop training methods from which a continuous supply of teachers and teaching material could be expected. OUTLINE OF PLAN I. Creation of committee composed of officers of American Home Economics Association, representatives from the United States Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Home Economics, the States Relations Service, the Home Economics Division of the United States Bureau of Education, the heads of departments of home economics in the state colleges, the technical schools and teacher-training schools, Federal Board for Vocational Education. II. Increasing supply of teachers and teaching material. 1. Provision for assembling material in food, household management, including expenditures, and child care, particularly, and adapting this material to the needs of the members of the different foreign-born groups, by supplying salaries for two persons experienced in teaching, who would devote themselves to the preparation of classroom material, leaflets, charts, etc.--$2,400 $4,800 2. The granting of stipends to graduate students who would work at institutions approved by the committee and who would do practice teaching with such groups. In the assignment both of the stipends and of the institutional patronage, the interests of both urban and rural women would be taken into account by supplying scholarships for ten graduate students to teach under supervision and to assemble material under direction, these to be awarded by the committee with due regard to needs of rural and urban women--$750 $7,500 3. Securing the services of several highly skilled home-economics teachers, under whose supervision the practice teaching, and the preparation of these students would be carried on, and developing through advice teaching centers for the use of such material wherever possible, by supplying salaries for four persons to supervise and direct teaching--$4,000 $16,000 4. Securing teachers who are experienced housewives, who with short courses might assume certain teaching functions, supplying stipends, $75 a month for four months ($300) for fifty women who, selected under rules drawn up by the committee, would take short training courses, to be organized under the direction of individuals or departments or institutions approved by the committee $15,000 III. There would, of course, be necessary a director of the work, who could be either one of the salaried teachers chosen as leader or an executive secretary. In any case clerical expenses and the costs of certain items incident to the instruction would be required. The experiment should be assured for a term of three years. The problem can be dealt with adequately only by state-wide and nation-wide agencies, and should as soon as possible be taken over by nonsectarian educational agencies. But the public-school system is at present wholly without the equipment necessary for the performance of these functions. It is not only not national; it is in many states not even state-wide in its supervision and standards. In Illinois, for example, the school district is the unit, and until a board was created in 1919 to deal with the problems of vocational training, the control exercised by the state was negligible. The situation in an Illinois mining town illustrates the waste resulting from treating these questions as local questions. The town referred to is a mining town, lying partly in one and partly in another county. The only public school available is in one county, and it is said to be overcrowded. The road from a settlement in the other county to the school is said to be impassable all winter or in bad weather. It leads over a mine switch that is dangerous as well. The parents complained that the small children could not go so far, that there were no play facilities, that the location was secluded, so that it was dangerous for girls, that the term was too short, and that the attendance of the children seems unimportant to the school authorities. As the community was almost altogether Italian, the parents would have preferred a woman teacher for the girls over ten or twelve years of age. A more intelligent and a more incisive indictment of an educational situation than this criticism expressed by the Italian families in this remote mining community could hardly have been drawn. It is inevitable that similar dark spots should continue, so long as no central agency is responsible for the maintenance of a minimum opportunity everywhere. Of course it is not to be expected that those jurisdictions that so neglect the children will care for the adult. Many states have the central agency that could take over the work. And there exist Federal agencies able with enlarged resources to adapt their work to meet many of these needs. The United States Children's Bureau has published bulletins in simple form containing such information as every woman should have concerning the care of mothers and young children. Only the lack of resources has kept that bureau from undertaking to bring these facts to the knowledge of all mothers, including the foreign born.[60] HOME ECONOMICS WORK In the so-called States Relations Service of the Department of Agriculture, established under the Smith-Lever Act,[61] and in the Federal Board for Vocational Education, there are agencies which, if developed, can establish national standards in these fields and do work of national scope. These acts constitute, in fact, so important a step in the direction of nationalization of these problems that items in the statutes creating them may be of interest here. The first of these Acts provides for co-operative effort on the part of the United States Department of Agriculture and the state agricultural colleges. There is an agency provided to "diffuse among the people of the United States useful and practical information on subjects relating to agriculture and home economics, and to encourage the application of the same." This Act refers especially to the needs of the rural population, and the work done under it consists of instruction and practical demonstration in agriculture and home economics to persons not attending or resident in the agricultural colleges. The methods should be such as are agreed on by the Secretary of Agriculture and the officials of the state colleges benefiting under the earlier Act of 1862.[62] To carry out this co-operative effort, an appropriation was provided, beginning at $480,000--$10,000 for each state--and increasing first by $60,000 and then by $500,000 annually, until after seven years a total of $4,500,000 was reached, the increase to be distributed among the states in proportion to their rural population. By the Smith-Hughes Act of February 22, 1917, both teachers and supervisors, as well as training for teachers and supervisors in the fields of agriculture, home economics, industrial and trade subjects, were provided.[63] The Federal Board for Vocational Education consisted of the Secretaries of Agriculture, Commerce, and Labor, the United States Commissioner of Education, and three citizens appointed for terms of three years, at $5,000 a year. One of these three is to represent the agricultural interests, one the manufacturing interests, and one labor. The board was given power to make studies, among other subjects, of home management and domestic science. While instruction under the first of these Acts may be given by means of home demonstrations, it is limited under the second Act to such as can be given in schools and classes. This Act provides for co-operative effort between the Federal government and the states. The large sum of $200,000 for the support of the board, and considerable sums for certain minimum contingencies, were appropriated. Major appropriations were provided for, beginning with $500,000 for paying salaries for teachers and supervisors in agriculture, and increasing by $250,000 until the sum of $3,000,000 was reached, to be distributed in proportion to rural population among the states on condition that the states take appropriate action consenting to the Act and appropriating dollar for dollar (Section 2). A similar appropriation was provided for the teaching of trade, home economics, and industrial subjects, beginning with $500,000, increasing by $250,000 annually, until the amount of $3,000,000 was reached, this to be appropriated in proportion to the urban population in the various states. Certain minima were prescribed, and it was laid down that not more than 20 per cent of the amount allotted for salaries should go to teachers of home economics (Section 3). No part of the appropriation is to pay for buildings or for work done in private institutions (Section 11). In the same manner as in the earlier Act an initial appropriation of $500,000 was made toward meeting the cost of training teachers and supervisors in agricultural trade, home economics, and industrial subjects, these to increase by installments of $200,000 and then by $100,000, until $1,000,000 was reached, to be distributed among the states in proportion to population. Certain conditions were prescribed as to the action to be taken by the states, and the appropriation by the state of "dollar for dollar" toward the training of these persons was required. Questionnaires regarding the application of their work to the needs of foreign-born groups were sent to the State Supervisors of Home Economics functioning under these Acts, but few replies were received. In general, the replies indicate that the work has in many cases not been extended to meet the needs of foreign-born housewives. A few replies, however, are illustrative of what might be done with increased resources and effective interest on the part of the state and of the local community. From Lake Village, Arkansas, came the following graphic account of the work of the home demonstration agent: I was very much interested in having you write to me concerning the work with the Italian women in Chicot County. When I first came into the county I was entirely inexperienced as far as this kind of work goes, but in time I saw that the Italians needed help and I wanted to give them what they needed most. I became acquainted with the Catholic priest, as he was an Italian and could help me in talking and becoming acquainted with the people. The priest proved to be a very interesting man and helped me very much. In a short time I learned to speak a few words of Italian, which pleased the people very much. They seemed to feel that I was their friend, and wherever I saw a dusky face in town or country I would greet them with the words, "_Como stati_," which is to say, "How goes it?" or, "How are you?" and I would be answered with an engulfing grin and a flow of jargon, not a word of which I could understand, but with smiles and nods I would go on, having won a friend. The first work I did among the Italians was to go into their homes and look at their gardens, show them how to prune their tomato plants, dry their fruit and vegetables, can their tomatoes and beans, and bathe their babies. Not long after there were sewing and "cootie"-removing demonstrations, as well as removing head lice and care of heads and bodies taught with actual demonstrations. All of my work has been taken with the most cordial attitude, and the methods have been adopted and used. This year I hope to have more work done among them than last, on the same line and others. They now come to me when they are in trouble or in need of help, and this makes me feel that they consider this office is their friend, not a graft or money-making concern. In Akron, Ohio, a home demonstration agent, under the Department of Agriculture and the Ohio State University Home Economics Department, has been definitely attached to a public school in Akron's most foreign-born district. Her special project is home demonstration work with foreign-born women, and each lesson is a lesson in English as well. The worker hopes to have an apartment equipped as a plain but attractive home, where all this work can be done. The home supervisor in Massachusetts reports that the state-aided, evening practical arts classes have offered instruction to groups of foreign-born women in Fall River and in Lowell. In Fall River there were classes in cooking and canning for French women, and classes in home nursing for a Portuguese group. In Lowell there were classes in cooking for Polish women, and classes in cooking and dressmaking for Greek women. These classes were conducted by foreign-speaking teachers, with the help of interpreters. The work of the Syracuse Home Bureau included four projects: (1) Garden project, (2) Nutrition project, (3) Clothing project, and (4) Publicity project. The outline of the work under (2) and (3) is given below: NUTRITION PROJECT 1. _Home Demonstration Work._ In co-operation with the Associated Churches and Charities--United Jewish Charities and School Centers--the agent goes into the home, making herself a friend of the family, taking necessary supplies with her, but using whatever utensils the housewife may have. She demonstrates simple, nourishing, economical foods, teaches the proper feeding of children, etc. She also suggests food budgets and plans their use. The leader of the organizations reports that much is being accomplished with families which otherwise could not be reached. Help with clothing work is also given sometimes. 2. _Group Demonstrations._ In co-operation with the Americanization work and churches, where this seems desirable, to groups of women. 3. _Class Work in Cookery._ In co-operation with units from the Girls' Patriotic League, International Institute, and factories. 4. _Education in Food Values._ Talks have been given at various schools in regard to proper luncheons and menus submitted to assist in this work. Conferences have been held with Y. W. C. A. manager in regard to luncheon combinations. Menus for the week, with grocery order, have been submitted for the use of social workers. Aid is being given in planning the meals for undernourished children at a special school. Talks are to be given to the children. 5. _Home Bureau Day._ Friday afternoon is "at home" day for members and their friends at the Thrift Kitchen. Talks or demonstrations are given each week, and an exhibit in the window during the week corresponds with the subject. 6. _Classes for Volunteer Aids._ Classes for volunteer aids are being formed. These are to be two types. One class for experienced housewives, to deal particularly with the problem of presentation, and another class for college girls, to give them the simple principles of food values and preparation, taking up at the same time the method of presentation. It is hoped to use these aids particularly in the home demonstration work, which is already developing beyond the capacity of the trained workers. 7. _General Use of the Thrift Kitchen._ The kitchen is engaged by various church committees to do cooking in large quantities for church suppers. Various organizations use it to prepare special foods for institutions. We are encouraging the use of the kitchen by any individual or organization for any purpose. The only charge is for the gas used, besides a nominal charge of five cents for the use of the kitchen. The work is done under the supervision of one of the agents. CLOTHING PROJECT 1. _Sewing Classes._ In co-operation with units from the Girls' Patriotic League, International Institute, and factories. A sewing unit often follows a cooking unit with the same group. 2. _Sewing Demonstrations._ These are being given at some of the home demonstrations, as the need arises. 3. _Millinery Classes._ In co-operation with the Girls' Patriotic League, International Institute, and factories. 4. _Millinery Demonstrations_ are being held for mothers' clubs connected with the church, and home demonstrations are given when needed. The Rolling Prairie community mentioned above, too, benefited from a co-operative "County Project" work undertaken in 1913-14, under the supervision of Purdue University. A course given during the year in the rural schools was continued during the summer, open to all children over ten and required of graduates from the eighth grade. The County Superintendent of Schools, the County Agent under the university (States Relations Service) and County Board of Trustees (La Porte County) sent teachers into all parts of the county teaching the boys farming, stock raising, and gardening, and the girls canning, sewing, bread making, cooking vegetables, and laundry work, or if they preferred, gardening. The teacher gave an hour and a half every ten days at the home of each child. At the end of the summer there were exhibits and prizes in the shape of visits to the state fair, to the university, to Washington, or to the stock show in Chicago. The Polish children who took prizes and who went to the university (some of them had never been on a train) became enthusiastic about going to high school and college, and some are going to high school. The fact that they took prizes interested the whole group, and the experiment affected the agricultural and domestic practices of the community. The sad ending to the story is that the township trustees have never been willing to assume again the expense of the teachers' salaries, but the possibilities in the co-operative method are evident. The States Relations Service and the work of the Federal Board for Vocational Education are based on the so-called principles of the "grant in aid," which gives promise of both developing and encouraging local initiative and of obtaining "national minima" of skill and efficiency. Certainly the lack of any national body and often the lack of any state machinery with power to encourage local action and with facilities for gathering and comparing data, reduced the rate at which progress is made. For example, the device of the home teacher planned by the California Commission on Immigration and Housing, was only slowly taken over by the education authorities of California. GOVERNMENT GRANTS IN ENGLAND The experience of the English Board of Education may be noticed in this connection. Owing to the interest in national vigor aroused by the rejection of recruits during the Boer War, England took steps to provide food for the underfed school children and medical supervision of the health of the school children. This resulted in the accumulation of a great body of evidence showing the need of improvement in the conditions and household management in the homes from which these children came. Both schools for mothers and infant classes have been recognized as appropriate extensions of the work of the education authority, and the national character of the problem has been embodied in provision for the grant in aid.[64] The conditions on which grants to schools for mothers and infant classes are made, set a standard for those communities desiring help from the central authority, and furnish a basis of judgment as to the work of any local authority. Those conditions are stated as follows: A school for mothers is primarily an educational institution, providing training and instruction for the mother in the care and management of infants and little children. The imparting of such instruction may include: (_a_) Systematic classes. (_b_) Home visiting. (_c_) Infant consultations. The provision of specific medical and surgical advice and treatment (if any) should be only incidental. (_d_) The Board of Education will pay grants in respect of schools for mothers, as defined in Article II of their Regulations for the year 1914-15, subject to the following qualifications: (I) That an institution will not be recognized as a school for mothers unless collective instruction by means of systematic classes forms an integral part of its work; (II) That grant will only be paid in respect of "infant consultations," which are provided for women attending a school for mothers; (III) That grant will only be paid in respect of expenditure on "home visiting" of children registered at a school for mothers if neither the sanitary authority nor County Council undertake to arrange for such visiting; (IV) The fact that a school for mothers receives a grant or assistance from a sanitary authority (or a County Council) or its offices will not disqualify it from receiving a grant from the Board of Education. Thus the institutions included under the title "schools for mothers" have for their main object the reduction of infant sickness and mortality by means of the education of the mothers. They train the mother to keep her baby in good health through a common-sense application of the ordinary laws of hygiene. The training may be given by means of personal advice from doctor or nurse to individual mothers, by home visiting, and by means of collective teaching and systematic classes.[65] It is necessary to distinguish these "schools for mothers," which were educational, from the maternity centers maintained by the Local Government Board, intended to provide prenatal care of expectant mothers. During the year 1917-18, two hundred and eighty-six such schools for mothers received aid from the central authority. The work of representative schools, as described in the medical officer's report,[66] includes instruction in hygiene, principles of feeding, needlework, and boot repairing. In the same way the infant classes or nursery schools are to be distinguished both from day nurseries which may, if they comply with stated conditions, receive grants, and from infant consultations.[67] It is interesting to note that these items in the educational program are closely related to the plan under which _Mothercraft_ is taught to (1) the older girls in the public elementary schools, and (2) the girls between fourteen and eighteen in the secondary and continuation schools. Under the stimulus of the possible grant in aid from the central authority and of the supervision and advice of the central authority, this work is developed by the local authority. The day nursery or infant class is made to serve the purpose of training the older girl as well as of training and care of the young child. The argument here is not affected by the fact that under the recent Act providing for a Ministry of Health, these functions are surrendered by the education authority to the New Ministry of Health, as are those of the Local Government Board. Certain functions remain educational, and must develop in accordance with educational principles. Others are sanitary and call for inspection and supervision. THE LESSON FOR THE UNITED STATES It is not suggested that the development in the United States be identical with that in England. It is true that there are two specialized agencies referred to under which such work could be developed. Should a United States Department of Education or of Health be created, conceivably such functions could be assumed by either; and it is most interesting to notice that, with reference to this very problem, the method is already recognized as important and embodied in the educational program of the state of Massachusetts. Under a statute enacted in 1919,[68] the State Board of Education is authorized to co-operate with cities and towns in promoting and providing for the education of persons over twenty-one years of age "unable to speak, read, and write the English language." The subjects to be taught in the English language are the fundamental principles of government and such other subjects adapted to fit the scholars for American citizenship as receive the joint approval of the local school committee and the State Board of Education. The classes may be held not only in public-school buildings, but in industrial plants and other places approved by the local school committee and the board. In the words of the Supervisor of Americanization,[69] "this provides for ... day classes for women meeting at any place during any time in the day. The establishment of such classes is especially urged." The development of the Federal agencies will probably be most efficiently stimulated if a considerable amount of such work is attempted by local authorities and such social agencies as have been described. If not only local educational bodies, but schools for social work, organizations like the Immigrants' Protective League and the Department of Home Economics, the State Immigration Commissions, and the Young Women's Christian Association, could train efficient visitors, prepare and try out lesson sheets on the essential topics, and develop teaching methods, the different branches of the Federal service would undoubtedly be able to avail themselves of such material and of such personnel as would be supplied in this way.[70] The plan outlined earlier in the chapter for educational work for foreign-born women would be a step in this direction. MOTHERS' ASSISTANTS Attention has been called to the fact that many housewives, either because the husband's income is inadequate or because their standard of family needs is relatively high, or because there is some special family object to be attained, become wage earners and are away from their home during the hours of the working day. The devices used by these mothers for the care of the family during their absence have been described. The previous discussion has also made clear the fact that for many women of limited income who do not attempt wage earning, the task of bearing children and of caring for the home is too heavy, especially during the time when the children are coming one after the other in fairly rapid succession. The visiting nurse may help in time of illness; the midwife may come in for a few days immediately after the child is born; the man may be very handy and helpful; the older girl or boy may stay at home from school; but it is evident that some agency should be devised for rendering additional assistance to such mothers. The day nursery suggests itself, and its possibilities are easily understood; but it is an agency that has been developed in response to the demand of married women for the chance to supplement the husband's earnings, or of widows and deserted women to assume the place of breadwinner. For the kind of assistance we have in mind, some such agency as the mother's helper, proposed by the English Women's Co-operative Guild, is suggested. This proposal was developed as an item in a program for adequate maternity care, but has been extended in its application so as to include all women who are attempting to carry the burden we have described. It expresses the widening recognition that the volume of tasks expected of the housewife as mother and caretaker is greater than one woman can be expected to perform. It rests also on the conviction that such assistance is professional in character and should be standardized in skill. Experiments in this field might well be undertaken by the same agencies that attempt to receive and introduce the newly arrived groups, and as rapidly as the method becomes established the functions could be taken over by the appropriate specialized agency, whether public or private.[71] For example, the two following recommendations recently offered by official bodies in England illustrate the need to which we are calling attention. The first is taken from a memorandum prepared at the request and for the consideration of the Women's Employment Committee. HOME HELPS Closely linked with the problem of skilled midwifery, care of the working mother is the problem of arrangement for her domestic life during her disablement. In the _Home Helps Society_ a movement has been inaugurated which, if widely extended on the right lines for clearly subsidiary purposes, would prove of incalculable benefit to working mothers, and so to the general community. The scheme provides, on a contributory basis, the assistance of trained domestic helpers for women who are incapacitated, especially in illness or childbirth, from attending to the normal duties of the home. A Jewish society has been in existence for twenty years to meet the needs of poor Jewesses in the East End of London, but the general scheme came into existence under the Central Committee for Employment of Women to provide employment for women who have been thrown out of work owing to the war. Three months is considered an average period of training, but a shorter time is sanctioned in special cases. The women are trained under supervision in the homes of families and in certain approved institutions. In the Jewish society no special period of training is demanded. If a candidate is competent upon appointment she is sent out at once. In Birmingham similar help is afforded by what is known as the "nine days'" nursing scheme, and Sheffield has a provision for a municipal allowance to a mother needing such help in a special degree. North Islington Maternity Center has a local scheme for home helps, managed by a subcommittee. Encouragement has been given to these schemes by the sympathetic interest in them of the medical women acting for the London County Council as inspectors, under the Midwives' Act. Similar arrangements have been proposed in various parts of the country. The second is from the Report of the Women's Advisory Committee of the Ministry of Reconstruction on the Domestic Service Problem. SUBCOMMITTEE ON HOME HELPS After meeting several times this committee came to the conclusion that, in the light of the evidence that had been given before them, it was not advisable for them to proceed further without reference to the committee which was dealing with the question of subsidiary health and kindred services, as the question of the provision of Home Helps intimately affected that committee also. The committee on Home Helps passed the following resolution: That with a view to preventing sickness which is caused by the unavoidable neglect of children in their home, the Local Government Board should be asked to remove the restriction which at present confines the provision of Home Helps to maternity cases, and to extend the scope of the board's grant for the provision of such assistance in any home where, in the opinion of the local authority, it is necessary in the interests of the children that it should be given, and agreed that if the Subsidiary Health and Kindred Services Committee were prepared to adopt it in their report it would be undesirable to continue their own sittings. The resolution was adopted by that committee, and the Home Helps' Committee was dissolved. We are not unconscious of the great need that exists for further preventive measures in connection with health services, more especially as regards children, and we think that the question of Home Helps must first be explored in this connection. We are of the opinion, however, that as regards help with domestic work, the position of the wives of professional men with small incomes, and of the large army of men of moderate means who are engaged in commerce and industry is becoming critical, and that some form of municipal service might help to solve this most difficult problem. RECREATIONAL AGENCIES The public parks, playgrounds, and recreation centers, and the social settlements, constitute the main community provision for the social and recreational activities of immigrant groups living in the congested sections of industrial cities. Certain problems in the adaptation of the services and resources of such agencies to the needs of an immigrant neighborhood have been brought out in our consultation with representative men and women from various nationalities living in different sections of Chicago. The history of Dvorak Park may serve to indicate the nature of some of these problems. Established when the population of the district it was designed to serve was almost exclusively Bohemian, this small park was given its distinctively Bohemian name, and the district chosen was Bohemian. It became at once a popular recreation center for the neighborhood, as the facilities provided in the playground and field house were admirably suited to the needs of the people. Representative men and women who have kept in touch with the later immigrants of their nationality speak with greatest enthusiasm of the value of the park to the Bohemian community. Its services in relieving the monotony of the lives of immigrant women, and especially of mothers of large families, is noteworthy. For those to whom it is accessible it provides a type of entertainment which they really enjoy. It is said, in fact, that women who begin going to the park take a new interest in life. The moving pictures are especially popular. The director, a man thoroughly familiar with the lives of the families of the settlement, has sought to adapt the service of the park to their needs. Special entertainments for women with little children are given in the afternoon while older children are in school, and mothers are encouraged to bring the babies. Mothers who have begun going to the park themselves feel greater security in allowing the older boys and girls to go to the evening entertainments and dances because they learn that there is trustworthy supervision. During the last few years, however, there has been a great change in the character of the neighborhood surrounding Dvorak Park. Bohemians have moved away, and their places have been taken by Serbo-Croatians. The newcomers have found churches, schools, and public halls established by the Bohemian people, and the impression has gone out that the public park also is a national recreation center for Bohemians. No criticism of the management of the park has been made by leaders among the Croatians, who believe the director has earnestly sought to meet the requirements of the two groups impartially, frequently asking the advice and co-operation of well-known Croatian men and women. They do feel that it is unfortunate that the popular idea that the place is intended for Bohemians only is too deep to be easily eradicated. In Chicago some of the older immigrant groups have made provisions for their recreational needs by building national halls, auditoriums, and theaters; and in groups representing later immigration, funds are being raised for the same purpose. In many instances it is admitted that the public recreation centers in the immediate vicinity of the settlement afford adequate space and facilities for the requirements of the group. The reasons given for failure to take advantage of such opportunities or for duplicating such splendid community resources are varied. When analyzed, they are on the whole indicative of shortcomings in park management, which might be overcome if park supervision could be made a real community function. In a Polish district, for instance, the people in the vicinity of one of the most completely equipped parks in the city have come to regard it with suspicion as the source of a type of Americanization propaganda too suggestive of the Prussians they have sought to escape. In a Lithuanian district, officers of societies which make use of clubrooms in the recreation centers say they prefer the rooms to any they can rent in the vicinity, but they often feel in the way and that their use of the building entails more work than attendants are willing to give. The Lithuanians, too, speak of feeling out of place in the parks. There has been little evidence that in any section of the city people of foreign birth feel that as community centers these parks are in a sense their own. The social settlement, which shares with public recreation centers the functions of providing for the social life and recreation of immigrant communities, is confronted by many of the same problems, often rendered the more difficult from the fact that it is usually regarded as even more alien to the life of the group than the park, and its purposes are less understood. Members of Polish, Lithuanian, Italian, and Ukrainian groups, who have expressed their own appreciation of the aims of the social settlement, and the highest personal regard for settlement residents whom they have known, believe that the "American" settlement can never reach the masses of people most in need of the type of service it offers. Repression under autocratic government in Europe and exploitation in America have made them suspicious, and they are apt to avoid whatever they cannot understand. It is believed that these types of service, undertaken with a more thorough knowledge of the point of view of the immigrant and with the indorsement and co-operation of recognized leaders of the groups to be served, would much more nearly meet the needs of the people least able to adjust themselves to the new situations. FOOTNOTES: [53] See Abbott, _The Immigrant and the Community_, chap. i; _Report of the Massachusetts Immigration Commission_, 1914; _Reports of the Immigrants' Protective League of Chicago_. [54] As is contemplated in the Act creating the New York Bureau of Immigration and Industry. See Birdseye, Cummin's and Gilbert's _Consolidated Laws of New York Supplement, 1913_, vol. ii, p. 1589, sec. 153; and _Laws of 1915_, chap. 674, sec. 7, vol. iii, p. 2271. [55] See Frank V. Thompson, _Schooling of the Immigrant_. [56] _Statutes of California, 1915_, chap. xxxvii. The home teacher should not be confused with the visiting teacher; a device in social case work. [57] _A Manual for Home Teachers_ (published by the State Commission of Immigration and Housing), 1919, p. 13. [58] _Ibid._, p. 19. [59] _A Manual for Home Teachers_, 1919, p. 8. [60] See also Report of the Children's Bureau on "Children's Year" and "Back to School Drive." [61] 38 U. S. Statutes at Large, p. 372 (May 8, 1914). [62] The so-called "Land Grant" colleges (1862). 12 U. S. Statutes at Large, p. 503. [63] 39 Statutes at Large, p. 929. [64] See Report of the Chief Medical Officer of the Board of Education for 1910 (Cd. 4986). See also Education (Provision of Meals Act, 1906), L. R. 6, Ed. 7, chap. lvii, widened in 1914 to include holidays as well as school days, and enlarging the discretion of the authorities as to the purpose. See also L. R. 7, Ed. 7, chap. xliii, an Act to make provision for the better administration by the central and local authorities ... of the enactments relating to education. [65] Reports of Commissioners of Education, 1914-16, pp. 29-31. [66] _Annual Report of the Board of Education_, 1917, pp. 12-13. [67] _Annual Report of the Board of Education_, 1917, pp. 10-12. [68] Acts of 1919, chap. 295. [69] Mr. John J. Mahoney, see _Americanization Letter, No. 1_, September 11, 1919, Department of University Extension, Massachusetts Board of Education. [70] See _First Annual Report of the Massachusetts Bureau of Immigration_, p. 38. [71] _Memorandum on Subsidiary Health and Kindred Services for Women_, prepared by Miss A. M. Anderson, C. B. E., p. 5. IX FAMILY CASE WORK The discussion up to this point has dealt with the family which has not fallen into distress. It has been confined to problems of adjustment. But there are numerous families which fall into distress and need the services of the social case-work agency. Because of limitations of space and because the principles applying to their care and treatment apply to other kinds of service, the following discussion will treat only of agencies concerned with the care of immigrant families in need of material aid. Of the 8,529 families cared for by the Cook County agent, 6,226 were from the foreign groups, and of the 569 under care by the Cook County Juvenile Court in its Funds to Parents' Department, 386 were foreign born.[72] Attention is called, however, to the fact that the special application to the care of foreign-born families of the principles supposed to guide the conduct of good agencies in their care of any family calls for the elaboration of much more skillful devices and for much more extensive and closely knit organization than has yet been developed. This chapter deals only with these special applications of general case-work principles. The principles of care in any case of need are: (1) That such care shall be based on adequate understanding of the immediate individual problem; (2) that it shall be adapted to the special need; (3) that it shall look toward the restoration of the family to its normal status; and (4) that treatment, whether in the form of relief or service, shall be accompanied by friendly and educational supervision and co-operation. These are no simple tasks when the family is English speaking, native born, and when no particular difficulties arise from difference in language and in general domestic and social habits. With the non-English-speaking family, the agency is faced with difficulties at each of these points. There is first the problem of getting at the facts as to the nature and extent of the distress and the occasion of the family breakdown. In addition to the foreign-born families who actually need material assistance there are many who, because they are laying aside part of their income either to meet past debts or future needs, are living below the standard prevailing in their community. This family needs to be urged to spend more rather than to save. Unless the agency coming in contact with it digs below the apparent poverty and finds the real income, it will be tempted to give pecuniary aid rather than the personal service the family is in need of. Its service must not result in increased dependency. Special care in applying this principle of all good case work needs to be exercised in the case of the foreign-born family. Moving from one continent to another, with almost every element in the situation changed, makes the adjustment of the family to normal and healthy standards a delicate and important one. We have been told, for example, by thoughtful members of the Italian group, that in their judgment their fellow-countrymen are often led, through unwise alms-giving, not only to pretend to be poorer than they are, but to live in conditions of squalor detrimental to their well-being. In fact, in order to understand that normal state from which the family departs when its members become applicants for aid from a case-work agency, the representatives of the agency must have at command facts with reference to the standards and practices prevailing in the particular community from which the family under consideration comes. Only then can the need of the family be estimated with any degree of exactness. When the facts are learned and the nature and extent of the need are understood, there is the question of resources available for treatment and the question of methods to be used in building and maintaining the family life and in fostering the process of adjustment between its life and that of the community as a whole. To be able fully to utilize resources, to forecast the effect of certain kinds of care, it is surely desirable for the agency to know the life of the national group into which the family has come, the resources to which the family itself has access, and the ways in which others of the group expect care to be given. THE LANGUAGE DIFFICULTY The social case-work agency is faced, then, with several quite different and quite difficult problems in equipment. There is first the question of overcoming the language difficulty. The use of the foreign-speaking trained visitor would probably be regarded as the best way of doing this. The supply is so inadequate that the choice has been generally between a person speaking the language and a person knowing something of methods of case work. And unless the visitor is a fairly competent case worker she would probably better be used as an interpreter and not be given responsibility or allowed to make decisions. The use of an interpreter gives rise to many difficulties.[73] Because these difficulties are so universal and so important to the full use of the opportunities lying before the case-work agency, an attempt was made to obtain information as to the practice and as to the desires of a number of case workers. Case-work agencies, the district superintendents and visiting housekeepers in the United Charities, the Jewish Aid, the Juvenile Court in Chicago, relief societies in other cities, and the Red Cross chapters throughout the country, were consulted. Six of the ten districts of the United Charities had foreign-speaking visitors. There were 14 in all--3 Italian, 8 Polish, 2 Bohemian, and 1 Hungarian. Nine of these speak other languages besides their own. All the Jewish Aid Society visitors speak Yiddish. The Funds to Parents' Department of the Juvenile Court has no foreign-born workers, but the Probation Department has 3--Polish, Italian, and Bohemian. The five Red Cross chapters answering the questionnaire--New York, Brooklyn, Rochester, Buffalo, and Philadelphia--all employ foreign-speaking visitors--11 Italian, 8 Polish, 8 Yiddish, and 2 Russian. Sixty-one of the members of the American Association for Family Welfare Work replied to questions about their methods of work and the devices they had found successful. Twenty-eight of these were not doing work with foreign born or were not doing work along the line indicated. The other 33 described their work and their difficulties, and made suggestions. Twenty-two of the thirty-three agencies did not make use of the foreign-language visitor, although Fall River in the case of the French, and Topeka in the case of the Mexicans, overcame the language barrier by the fact that their secretaries spoke the language of their largest foreign-born group. Three others did not have foreign-born visitors on their staff, but reported that they had foreign-born volunteers. It is interesting to note that among the 22 cities without foreign-language visitors there are 9 cities with over 100,000 inhabitants, and all but 2 of them have large immigrant populations. The other 13 cities on the list are all places of less than 100,000 inhabitants, and it is probable that the case-work agencies in most of them do not have more than one worker. The case-work agencies in some cities with large foreign-born populations come in contact with many of the foreign-born families in distress, but not in sufficiently large numbers to take the entire time of a visitor. In other cities, however, a large part of the work is with foreign-speaking families. In Stamford, Connecticut, for example, 70 per cent of the families cared for are foreign born, and 44 per cent are Italian. In Paterson, New Jersey, 120 of the 840 families were Italian. Eleven case-work agencies did employ foreign-born or foreign-speaking visitors. Eight of these were in cities of over 100,000 population--New York City, Philadelphia, Boston, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Milwaukee, Cambridge, and Grand Rapids. The other three were in smaller places; Waterbury, with a population of 73,000, El Paso with 39,000, and Kenosha with 21,000. While these 11 agencies do employ foreign-speaking workers, it appears in every case that they either do not have workers of all the groups with which they work, or do not have enough foreign-language workers to do all the work with the foreign-speaking groups. New York City, for instance, has 5 workers who speak Italian, of whom only 1 is an Italian and served in the course of a year over 1,000 Italian families. Philadelphia has only 1 foreign-speaking worker, who speaks Italian and some Polish. It reports the number of families as 526 Italian, 229 Polish, 69 Russian, and 43 other Slav. There is, however, a decided difference of opinion as to the value of the visitor from the foreign-born group. All the agencies testify to the difficulty of getting workers with the same education and training demanded of the English-speaking visitor. One of the district superintendents of the United Charities of Chicago, who in despair of her work with interpreters began to use foreign-born visitors, speaks of success with exceptional individuals, but says: For the most part the foreign workers we have had have gained a certain facility in handling the general run of cases, but there is a discouraging lack of initiative or daring in their efforts. They seem to go just so far. It has seemed hard, too, to strike the happy medium in their attitude toward their own people; they seem either blindly sympathetic or peculiarly indifferent. In part I feel that this is an impression they give as a result of their lack of power of self-expression, and lack of confidence in themselves--this would undoubtedly be remedied by further education. As a result of my efforts with about ten foreign workers I have traveled a complete circle in my way of thinking. I have come back to the conclusion that we cannot get satisfactory results if we accept very much less in the way of scholastic training or life experience, than is required of other workers. Most of the agencies that have tried foreign-speaking visitors feel that in spite of these disadvantages it is a gain to the agency to have such visitors on the staff. This is especially true with those agencies that have or have had visitors with educational equipment that is comparable with that of most of their English-speaking visitors. One agency, for example, has only one foreign-born visitor, a Russian who speaks several languages and had a teacher's-training course in Russia. The superintendent reports her "gratifyingly successful in her work with foreign families." The Charity Organization Society in another city is divided in opinion about the foreign-born visitor. During the panic of 1914-15 they had a Russian man who had had a good technical education at the University of St. Petersburg, and two years in a medical school in this country. The assistant case supervisor of that organization reports that he not only accomplished a great deal with the unemployed men in the district, but also helped the district workers to understand the Russian, Slavic, Lithuanian, and Bohemian families in the district, and "demonstrated what the possibilities might be if we could have foreign-speaking people with requisite training and the proper spirit to work intensively with the families." On the other hand, the superintendent of this organization, who was not with them in 1915, says that their experience with foreign-born case workers has not been successful, and suggests as an alternative the instruction of American case workers in foreign languages. The New York society agrees that better results are obtained by having native-born case workers learn the language of the group with which they are to work. They have found it possible to have native-born workers learn Italian, and have found them better workers than any Italians they have employed who were people of less background and training. STANDARDS OF LIVING Secondly, there is the problem of building up in the family asking and receiving aid, domestic standards appropriate to the life in the community. This raises, first, the question of the responsibility of the case-work agency for the adjustment of the family life to such standards in household management and in child care as might be formulated on the basis of expert knowledge of community needs; secondly, the question as to ways in which such adjustment may be accomplished if the agency feels under an obligation to undertake it. A number of the thirty-three case-work agencies which discussed this subject indicated that they thought this task one that should not be assumed by the case-work agency. Four agencies said they were doing nothing in this direction, though one of these was looking forward to the employment of a visiting housekeeper. One agency said that there was no difference in this respect between the care of native born and foreign born, and that all families were given such instruction as occasion demanded. Seven agencies met the problem by co-operating with some of the public-health nursing organizations, especially the baby clinics, and one of the agencies said that the nurses were doing all the educational work possible. Four other agencies supplied milk and co-operated with the public-health organizations of the community and also with visiting housekeepers in the service of settlements. Two supplied milk where it seemed necessary, and three co-operated with agencies teaching food conservation. One of these supplied interpreters, organized classes, and helped the agent of the County Council of Defense to make contact with women in their homes. Another co-operated with a class of college students who were making a dietary study. The third had its own organization, which taught the use of substitutes and their preparation, in war time. Its work differed from that of others in that it was not organized for war-emergency purposes and was under the control of the case-work agency. Several agencies mentioned the fact that their visitors gave advice as the case required, and it is probable that this is done in other cities also. Such advice, of course, would not necessarily conform to the standards formulated by home economics experts, but rather to the common-sense standards of the community at large, or rather that circle of the community from which the majority of charity visitors come. The difficulties inherent in such a situation were recognized by the secretary of one society, who wrote, "Our staff has made an effort to become somewhat familiar with dietetics, but is having difficulty with foreign families because of failures thoroughly to understand their customs and the values of the food to which they are accustomed." Other agencies are not so definite in their view of the problem. Thus one reports that they are not successful in their work on the diet problem because "the Italians, Polish, and Lithuanians prefer their own food and methods of preparing it." Another says, "They seem to know their own tastes and _will_ do their own way mostly." In Chicago some of the superintendents explain their difficulties in raising housekeeping standards by characterizing the women as "stubborn," "indifferent," "inert," "obstinate," "lazy," "difficult but responsible," "easy but shiftless, and not performing what they undertake." It is only fair to state that these were usually given as contributing causes of difficulties. Most of the superintendents saw clearly that the main difficulties were in the circumstances under which the people had to live, and the defects in their own organization, which was handicapped by lack of funds and workers. [Illustration: A CASE-WORK AGENCY FOUND FOUR GIRLS AND EIGHTEEN MEN BOARDING WITH THIS POLISH FAMILY IN FOUR ROOMS] There is little that need be said about the work of these agencies as to other phases of the problem of housekeeping. Only one does anything to help the women buy more intelligently, except in the way of such spasmodic efforts as are made by visitors who have only their own practical experience to guide them. Similarly, little is done to teach buying or making of clothing except that in some instances women are urged to join classes in sewing. One agency speaks of teaching the planning of expenditure by the use of a budget. Most of the agencies that leave the problem of diet to the public-health nurse leave to her also the problem of cleanliness, personal hygiene, and sanitation. The majority of the agencies report, however, that their visitors are continually trying to inculcate higher standards. One agency says it is the stock subject of conversation at every visit. No agency reports any attempt to reach the women in a more systematic way than by "preaching." One agency only, that in Topeka, Kansas, reports anything that shows a realization of the peculiar problems of the foreign-born woman in this subject. In Topeka, American methods of laundry are taught to Mexican women in the office of the Associated Charities. VISITING HOUSEKEEPERS On the other hand, there are twelve agencies that approach the problem, or at least attempt to approach the problem of household management from a scientific standpoint, so that the work done shall be a serious attempt to adjust the standards of the foreign-born women to the standards formulated by the home economics experts for families "under care." There are several methods used in this work. The first and most common is the employment of visiting housekeepers by the case-work agency; another is that of referring families to another agency especially organized to give instruction in the household arts, such as the Visiting Housekeepers' Association in Detroit; a third is the one used in New York City, that of a Department of Home Economics within the organization, and still another, used in Boston, is a Dietetic Bureau. The cities in which there are visiting housekeepers in connection with the case-work agency are Chicago, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Worcester, Fall River, Cambridge, Stamford, and Springfield, Illinois. In Brooklyn the visiting housekeepers are not employed by the case-work agencies, but are student volunteers from Pratt Institute. The visiting housekeeper in Springfield has worked almost exclusively with English-speaking families, and the one in Worcester "has had at different times foreign-speaking families." In other words, in two cities with large foreign-speaking populations the visiting housekeepers only occasionally helped immigrant families to adjust their standards and methods of housekeeping to the new conditions found in this country. The work that is expected of a visiting housekeeper has been frequently described. As it demands the combined qualifications of a case worker and a skilled worker in home economics, an attempt was made to learn the education and training of the various workers in the field. Information was available in only a few cases, but these cases seem to point to the fact that the visiting housekeeper is usually trained for one phase of her work only--either as a case worker or as a home economics expert. In either case she can be expected to give the type of service her position demands only in the field in which her interest and training lie. Interviews with the five visiting housekeepers employed by the two largest relief agencies in Chicago in general bear out the impressions obtained from the statements of the agencies in other cities. None of those in Chicago speaks the language of the people with whom she works, though one agency is now training a young Italian girl to be a visiting housekeeper. Most of the visiting housekeepers claimed very slight knowledge of what the diet of the family was in the old country, although they had considerable knowledge as to what was customarily eaten here. They had made very little study of the habits and tastes of their group; and although they were agreed that in most families the diet was inadequate, they had apparently not looked far for the cause. Ignorance of food values and ways of preparing food seemed to them the chief reason; poverty, racial prejudice, and laziness might be secondary features. Since the visiting housekeepers deal almost entirely with dependent families under the care of a relief agency, their work in helping the women provide for the clothing needs of the family is quite largely concerned with making over old clothing. In the effort to raise the standards of cleanliness and sanitation the visiting housekeepers meet with great difficulty. One thinks the greatest difficulty is indifference on the part of the housewife and a lack of anything to which the visitor can appeal; another thinks that her greatest difficulties are that the mothers are usually overworked, that frequently they are kept worn out by having one child after another in close succession, and sometimes a woman has had to contend with a drunken husband. These cases she finds especially difficult to deal with. Some of them lay stress on the economic factor and point to the fact that most of these families are deprived of the conveniences which would make housekeeping a comparatively simple task. As one of the visiting housekeepers has said: With modern equipment, steam heat, electric utensils, and new and sanitary apartments, it is not a difficult task to keep the quarters fresh and clean, but in rickety, shadowy apartment buildings or houses where the floors are worn and rough, with no hot-water service, and too often without even gas for lighting, we can at once recognize the trials and handicaps which confront the housewife in the poorer districts.[74] The visiting housekeepers interviewed saw many discouraging features of their work. All stated that improvement came very slowly. One worker stated that she had worked three years in her district and she had some families under care all the time, but that she was just beginning to see the results of her efforts. Others pointed out that their constant supervision was essential, that as soon as they relaxed their efforts at all the families dropped back to their old habits. There was, however, general agreement that in time, by much expenditure of effort, constant visiting, teaching, and exhorting, they did help some families to a better standard of living. It was impossible to get an estimate from most of them as to how many families they thought they had helped, but the worker in one district said that for the three years it would not be more than five or six. Two workers who estimated the number of families with which they could work at one time, put the number at between twenty and twenty-five, and both thought that they could do much better with twenty than with twenty-five. They did not know with how many families they were working at present, but thought they were not trying to do intensive work with many more than that number. The explanation of failure may be that not enough care was taken to make the Old-World habits of cooking and diet the starting point of instruction in the use of American foods, utensils, and diets. Such procedure would be based on sound pedagogy in starting from the known and familiar and leading to the new and unaccustomed. However, it may be true that even after sound methods have been given a thorough trial, arduous effort still will fail to bring desired results. Case-work agencies, however efficient, may not be fitted to raise the standards of living in the homes of immigrant dependent families. It may be taken care of by other community forces and only be effected in the way that the independent family's standards are changed and improved. The task for the case worker is to help the family make the natural connections with their neighborhood and community, which are the most effective means for creating and sustaining social standards. Certain limitations to the present work of the visiting housekeeper appear in the above discussion. These are, the lack of persons with combined training in case work, home economics, and knowledge of immigrant backgrounds, the limited number of families with whom intensive work can be done, especially if the visiting housekeeper tries to do all the work with the families she visits, the hardship to the family in the duplication of visitors if the visiting housekeeper tries to render only specialized services to a larger number of families. Attempts have been made to overcome these limitations while still retaining the visiting housekeeper. In Cleveland the visiting housekeepers do all the work with the families assigned to them, as well as instruct the other visitors in the elementary principles of home economics and give advice on individual families, as occasion requires. Their work has been materially lightened by the adoption of a standardized budget prepared under the direction of a well-known expert in home economics. The superintendent of the Cleveland organization expressed himself as well satisfied with the work of the visiting housekeepers. It should be noted that one of the visiting housekeepers in that city not only is a skilled case worker with good training in home economics, but also is of foreign-born parentage and speaks most of the Slavic languages. In other cities, however, notably New York and Boston, case-work agencies have given up the employment of the visiting housekeepers. In New York there is a Home Economics Bureau and in Boston a Dietetic Bureau. The organization of the two bureaus differs, but the underlying principle is the same. Both are organizations of home economics experts, who give advice to the regular case workers both as to general principles and as to individual problems. They also make studies from time to time of problems in national groups. As its name would indicate, the scope of the New York organization is wider. It takes up problems of clothing and other phases of household management as well as of food. The advantages claimed for this plan are that the home economics experts can devote their time exclusively to their own field. The visitors are thus enabled to advise the individual families with more effect than can the specialized worker. The question as to the best way of rendering to the family under care this combination of services is by no means yet decided, and it is evident that further experiment in the various methods is necessary. They are, in fact, not mutually exclusive, and perhaps combinations of various kinds of the skill of the home economics expert, of the skilled social worker, and a generalized helper, may yet be developed. A third task to which some agencies address themselves is that of providing educational opportunities for the immigrant family. This effort often consists first of inducing the mother herself to enter a class, and, second, of securing the attendance of the children at the public school rather than at the non-English-teaching parochial school. The difficulties in the way of securing the mothers' attendance at a class have already been described. It need only be pointed out here that the case worker who has won the mother's confidence may often persuade her to go when the stranger will fail. Where a regular allowance is given and support for a considerable period is contemplated, it has been treated as something in the nature of a scholarship or educational stipend and conditioned on the mother's fulfilling definite requirements in the way of better qualifying herself to use the allowance. The subject of establishing connections between the members of the families and such educational opportunity has been somewhat confused by the fact that the case-work agency often depends upon the settlement to supply certain recreational facilities for the children in the families, and there is a temptation to use the settlement club or class rather than the school for the mother. With reference to having the children attend the public school or the school in which all instruction is given in English, it would be less than frank to ignore the difficulty often occasioned in the past by the nationalistic and separatist Church. The society may be faced with a real dilemma here, since it desires the co-operation of the Church and is loath to weaken any ties that may help in maintaining right family life. And so, when the Church conducts the school in which the mother tongue is used, and in which English is either inadequately taught or not taught at all, the relief agency may be practically forced into a policy involving the neglect of English in the case of both mother and children. KNOWLEDGE OF BACKGROUNDS These have been some of the fundamental difficulties in the relationship between the case-work agency and the immigrant family. The knowledge of the Old-World background and the impressions made by the experience of emigrating that should illumine all the work of the agency, are generally lacking to the case worker. Of course there are brilliant exceptions. One district superintendent of the Boston Associated Charities, for example, whose work lies in the midst of a Sicilian neighborhood, will have no visitors who are unwilling to learn the language and to inform themselves thoroughly concerning the history and the habits of the neighbors. Her office has been equipped so that it takes on somewhat the appearance of a living room. It is made attractive with growing plants; an Italian and an American flag are conspicuous when one enters the room; a picture of Garibaldi and photographs of Italian scenes are on the wall. Books on Italy are to be found in the office, and with the aid of an Italian postal guide the superintendent has made a card index of the home towns from which her families come. From one town in Sicily of seventeen thousand inhabitants, 108 families have come to the district office. Such an index is acquired slowly and must be used with great discretion. It is of assistance to one who understands how to use it, but it may suggest hopeless blunders to workers unfamiliar with the group. In making plans for the care of families, leading Italians, such as physicians of excellent standing, with a practice in the district, a member of the Harvard faculty who has unusual interest in his less fortunate fellow countrymen, and others who have special knowledge along certain lines, are consulted. One of the workers connected with the Vocational Guidance Bureau in Chicago has been trying an interesting experiment in the same direction of establishing contacts with the group among which she works. Many of the children who come to the Bureau for jobs are Polish children. She is, therefore, taking lessons in the Polish language from an editor of one of the Polish papers in the city, and through his interest has secured board and room in a home for working girls that is run by one of the Polish sisterhoods. In a month's time she has learned a vocabulary of some hundred and fifty Polish words, and has gained an insight into the Polish attitudes toward some of their problems that she considers invaluable. She found the Polish people with whom she consulted as to the best means of learning the language very much interested and anxious to be helpful in any way in their power. It is, in fact, clear that by the interpreter, or the foreign-speaking visitor, or the American visitor who learns the foreign tongue, the language difficulty must be overcome. In the case of the foreign-born visitor it should be noted that workers coming from among the various groups encounter difficulties not encountered by the American visitor. They seem to the members of their group to enjoy very real power, and they are often expected to grant favors and to exert influence. A Polish visitor in the office of a relief society in Chicago finds it very difficult to explain to her friends why they do not always receive from her fellow workers what they ask. In another neighborhood three Italian sisters, better educated than their neighbors, have become visitors. One works for the Catholic, one for the nonsectarian, charitable agency, and one for the social-service department of the public hospital. They seem to have a real "corner" on the aid given to applicants from their groups. TRAINING FACILITIES NEEDED It is clear, then, that before case-work agencies can be adequately equipped to perform these services, the supply of visitors trained as has been suggested will have to be increased, and certain bodies of material with reference to the various national groups will have to be organized and made available in convenient form, both for use in courses in colleges and schools of social work and in the offices of the societies. One way in which an effort might be directed toward bringing about an increase in the supply of trained visitors would be the establishment of scholarships and fellowships in schools of civics and of social work, by which able persons from among the different national groups might be encouraged to take advantage of such opportunities as those institutions provide. This procedure has been elaborated in Chapter VIII in connection with service to nondependent families. Special funds might also be provided in connection either with the various agencies or with schools of social work, which would render possible the collection and organization of such facts as would be valuable in understanding the problems presented by families from any special group. This body of fact would, of course, increase as sound, sympathetic, and thorough work was developed. Such studies would include information about the communities from which different groups come, as, for instance, the practice and influences prevailing in different villages in southern Italy, in Sicily, in northern Italy. The religious, national, and village festivals differ in almost every place. A native of Villa Rosa now receiving care from a public-health agency in Chicago has carefully pointed out to a visitor the differences between the festivals of Palermo and Villa Rosa. The different ways of preparing for and meeting the great events of family life, such as death, marriage, birth, are of vital importance. Most important are the food practices, and the attitudes toward the care and discipline of children. A similar point has been developed in Chapter VIII and it need not be stressed. The fact is that while really sound and thorough case work cannot be done without such information, few agencies have such information, and all devices for accumulating it should be made use of. The gathering of this body of information and its application require considerable time. In the meantime, while differences of opinion among the existing agencies on such questions as the use of the foreign or the native-born visitor who speaks the foreign language, the visiting housekeeper, or the specialized bureau, are being worked out, specialized agencies for dealing with the problems of the immigrant family should be developed. Such agencies as the Immigrants' Protective League could prove of very great service in discovering promising visitors, in accumulating experience as to the nature of those problems, and in furnishing opportunities to professional students for practice work under supervision. Further, there is the question of the resources within the group and the ways in which they can be taken advantage of. Reference has been made to the problem of securing and retaining the co-operation of the national Church. There are often national charitable societies. The case worker should be able to explain the methods and purposes of her society to these immigrant societies; but often there is a complete failure to interpret, and the two agencies go their separate ways, sometimes after the demoralization of the family both try to serve. A few years ago a group of foreign-born men, prominent in business and politics in Chicago, organized a charitable association within their own national group. They felt that the United Charities did not understand their people and were not meeting their needs. These men had no understanding of accepted case-work principles, and the superintendent of the society herself says that she does not use scientific methods and does not co-operate with the United Charities. She doubts whether her organization is doing much good, but she sees that the lack of understanding of the traditions and habits of the people on the part of the United Charities cripples their work among her people. THE TRANSIENT FAMILY The case-work agency as now organized might be equipped with trained foreign-speaking visitors and with visiting housekeepers or dietetic experts who know their neighborhoods, and the needs of the situation would still be far from fully met. It was pointed out in the first chapter that many immigrant families have to change their place of residence, often more than once, before they settle in a permanent home. The nature of their hardships and the slender margin of their resources have been pointed out. Special misfortune may therefore befall them at any point in the experimental period of their journey, as well as after they have reached their final and permanent place of residence. The important moment in social treatment, as probably in any undertaking, is in the initial stages. "The first step costs." This brings us to the enormously important fact that distress outside the relatively small number of larger communities in which there are skilled case-work agencies, either public or private, will probably mean contact either with the poor-law official under the Pauper Act, if it is a question of relief,--or with some official of the county prosecuting machinery or of the inferior courts, if it is a question of discipline. The case of an Italian woman may serve to illustrate the contact with both these groups of officials. Mrs. C. was married in 1902 in a Sicilian village, at about sixteen years of age. In October, 1906, the husband came to the United States. In November, 1907, she and her one surviving baby, a girl of two, followed, going to the mining town in western Pennsylvania where he was working. There they lived until March, 1913, occupying most of the time a house owned by the company for which he worked. About 1913 she moved with her children to a near-by city, where, on June 3, 1914, she was arrested for assault, and the next day for selling liquor without a license and selling liquor to minors. After some delay she pleaded guilty and was sentenced to pay the costs of the prosecution ($76.42), and released on parole. She then seems to have moved to a mining town in Illinois, and there lived with Mr. A. as his wife until March, 1916, when he was murdered. The union paid his funeral expenses of $186.75, and she also, as his widow, received his death benefit of $244.33. Through the summer of 1916 the Supervisor of the Poor gave her $3 every two weeks. On May 20, 1916, she applied for her first citizenship papers, and on September 1st she was awarded an allowance of $7 a month under the Mothers' Aid law, this being granted her under her maiden name, as mother of a child born in Illinois in 1915. She was helped not only by the public relief agencies, but by the priest ($11); and the Queen's Daughters, a church society of ladies, gave her the fare to Chicago, where the Italian consul gave her money to go home again. The undertaker and other kind persons gave her and the children aid. By December the union and the county agent both thought it would be well to shift the burden of her support, and gave her the fare back to Chicago. By the time she reached Chicago she was a very skillful and resourceful beggar. In Chicago she was a "nonresident," ineligible for a year to receive public relief under the Pauper Act and for three years under the Mothers' Aid law; and so she obtained from a Protestant church, from the Charities, and from an Italian Ladies' Aid Society relief of various kinds and in various amounts. The story is a long and a continuing one. Two points are especially important from the point of view of this study. One is that the burden not only of her support, but of her re-education, fell ultimately upon Chicago agencies, and the cost to them is measured as it were by the inefficiency of her casual treatment at the hands of both the courts and the less competent relief agencies along the way. The other is that such varied treatment leaves its inevitable stamp of confusion and disorganization upon the life of such a family. To find American officials getting very busy over selling liquor without a license, and at the same time ignoring adultery or murder committed in an Italian home, must surely result in confusion with reference to American standards of family relationship and to the value placed on life by American officials. NEED FOR NATIONAL AGENCY Irrespective of whether the family is of the native-born or foreign-born group, the problem of the case of those in distress should not be regarded as solely a local problem. It is indeed of national importance. Poverty, sickness, illiteracy, inefficiency, incompetence, are no longer matters of peculiar concern to a locality. The causes leading to these conditions are not local; the consequences are not local. The agency that deals efficiently with them should not be entirely local. Yet at the present time there is lacking not only a national agency and a national standard; there is often lacking a state agency and a state standard.[75] In Illinois, for example, the Pauper Act is administered in some counties by precinct officials designated by county commissioners; in other counties by the township officials.[76] The Mothers' Aid law is administered in Illinois by the juvenile court, which in all counties except Cook County (Chicago) is the county court. There is no agency responsible in any way for the standardization of the work of these officials, and niggardly doles or indiscriminate relief without either adequate investigation or adequate supervision, often characterizes the work of both.[77] Not all states are in as chaotic a condition as Illinois. A few states have developed a larger measure of central control. Massachusetts, California, and New Jersey, for example, secure a certain measure of standardization in the administration of their Mothers' Aid laws by paying part of the allowances, in case the central body approves--the State Board of Charities in Massachusetts,[78] and California,[79] and the State Board of Children's Guardians in New Jersey.[80] Pennsylvania secures this by assigning to the Governor the appointment of local boards and providing central supervision, while in other cases there may be inspection, the preparation of blanks and requiring reports. A member of the State Board of Education is supervisor of the Mothers' Aid law administration in Pennsylvania.[81] The case cited above illustrates the way in which the demoralizing effects of unskillful treatment in Pennsylvania and then in Illinois lasted into the period in which Chicago agencies tried to render efficient service. It would not be possible to develop at once a national or Federal agency for rendering aid to families in distress. Nor would such an agency be desirable if characterized by the features of the old poor law. But the development of a national agency for public assistance will undoubtedly be necessary before such problems as these can be adequately dealt with. It should be based on such inquiries as the United States Children's Bureau and other governmental departments can make as to the volume and character of the need and the best methods for dealing with that need. Undoubtedly the Grant in Aid, as proposed in the bill introduced into the Sixty-fifth Congress to encourage the development of health protection for mothers and infants, will prove the quickest path to a national standard. Careful study into the kind of legislative amendment necessary in the various states in order to reduce the chaos now existing in the exercise of these functions should also be made. The present is in many ways an unfortunate moment at which to suggest the necessity of developing such an agency. The War Risk Bureau, created to provide certain services for the families of soldiers and sailors and others in the service, through the failures and imperfections of its service, has discouraged the idea of attempting such tasks on a national scale. It should be recalled, however, that the assignment of the War Risk Bureau to the Treasury Department concerned with revenue instead of to the Children's Bureau concerned with family problems, rendered it practically inevitable that such limitations of skill would characterize its work. Neither a taxing body nor a bank should be chosen for the supervision of work with family groups. The "home service" work of the American Red Cross constituted such a national agency during the period of the war, and if the so-called "peace-time program" is successfully developed, the need urged in this chapter may be met. The efficient local private agencies suffer in the same way from the lack of a national agency and a national standard in case work. The American Association for Social Work with Families, and the National Conference of Social Work, attempt by conference and publication to spread the knowledge of social technique and to improve the work done by existing societies. But there are whole sections, even in densely populated areas, in which there exists no such agency. If, then, the benevolence and good will of the community are to be embodied in such service for foreign-born families that fall into distress as will not only relieve but upbuild the life of the family, interpret to them the standards of the community, and help them to become a part of the true American life, a national minimum of skill and information must be developed below which the agencies for such care will nowhere be allowed to fall. From the experience both of these foreign-born families and of the communities into which they finally come we learn again the doctrine laid down a hundred years ago by Robert Owen, that the care of those who suffer is a national and not solely a local concern. FOOTNOTES: [72] _Charity Service Reports, Cook County, Illinois_, Fiscal Year 1917, pp. 74, 350. [73] Richmond, _Social Diagnosis_, p. 118. [74] V. G. Kirkpatrick, "War-time Work of the Visiting Housekeeper," in the _Yearbook of the United Charities of Chicago_, 1917, p. 18. [75] _Illinois Revised Statutes_, chap. cvii. [76] _Illinois Revised Statutes_, chap. xxiii, sec. 298. [77] Abbott, E., "Experimental State in Mothers' Pension Legislation," _National Conference of Social Work_, 1917, pp. 154-164, and _U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Bulletin, No. 212_, p. 818. See also _Institution Quarterly of Illinois_, March, 1916, p. 97. [78] _Massachusetts General Acts, 1913_, chap. 763, sec. 3. [79] _Deering's Political Code of California_, sec. 2283 fol., p. 571. [80] _New Jersey Acts, 1915_, p. 206 fol. [81] _Laws of Pennsylvania, 1914_, p. 118; _1915_, p. 1085. APPENDIX PRINCIPAL RACIAL ORGANIZATIONS The following list of racial organizations has been generously compiled by the Bureau of Foreign Language Information Service of the American Red Cross. Only those of national scope have been included, with the exception of those starred, which, although not strictly national, have a more than local importance. It contains those organizations and societies doing benevolent, philanthropic or educational work, and, in a few instances, those primarily political or religious in character whose activities have been extended to include other work. The list was compiled in March, 1921, and, although it is reasonably inclusive, the organizations, the officers, and the addresses are constantly changing. CZECH Catholic Sokol Union Secretary: 5798 Holcomb Street. Detroit, Michigan Council of Higher Education Secretary: P. A. Korab Iowa State Bank, Iowa City, Iowa Czecho-Slavonian Fraternal Benefit Union Secretary: August R. Zicha 516 East Seventy-third Street, New York City Czechoslovak National Alliance Secretary: Ferdinand L. Musil 3734 West Twenty-sixth Street, Chicago, Illinois Czechoslovak National Council of America President: Dr. J. P. Percival 3756 West Twenty-sixth Street, Chicago, Illinois National Federation of Czech Catholics in America Secretary: John Straka 2752 South Millard Avenue, Chicago, Illinois Sisterly Benevolent Union, Supreme Lodge Secretary: Mrs. Marie Zemanova 4934 Broadway, Cleveland, Ohio Society of Taborites Secretary: Fr. Cernohorsky 3416 East Fifty-third Street, Cleveland, Ohio Sokol Gymnastic Organization of America Secretary: Thomas Vonasek 1647 South St. Louis Avenue, Chicago, Illinois Union of Czech Women Secretary: Mrs. Marie Zemanova 180 Forty-first Street, Corona, New York United Czechoslovak Legion of America Secretary: Lada T. Krizek 3742 East 140th Street, Cleveland, Ohio Western Czech Fraternal Union Secretary: L. J. Kasper 307 Twelfth Avenue East, Cedar Rapids, Iowa DANISH The Danish Brotherhood in America Supreme Secretary: Frank V. Lawson Omaha National Bank Building, Omaha, Nebraska The Danish Sisterhood in America Supreme Secretary: Mrs. Caroline Nielsen 6820 So. Carpenter Street, Chicago, Illinois DUTCH *Eendracht Maaht Macht President: G. Verschuur 65 Nassau Street, New York City Nieuw Nederland President: A. Schrikker Netherland Consulate, New York City FINNISH Finnish Apostolic Lutheran Church Office of National Secretary, care of Valvoja Calumet, Michigan Finnish Branch, Industrial Workers of the World Office of National Secretary, care of Industrialisti 22 Lake Avenue, North, Duluth, Minnesota Finnish Congregational Church of the United States Office of National Secretary, care of Astorian Sanomat Astoria, Oregon Finnish Lutheran National Church Office of National Secretary, care of Auttaja Ironwood, Michigan Finnish Lutheran Suomi Synod Church of America President: Rev. John Wargelin Hancock, Michigan Finnish National Temperance Brotherhood National Secretary: Mrs. Hilma Hamina Ishpeming, Michigan Finnish Socialist Organization of the United States National Secretary: Henry Askeli Mid City Bank Building, Chicago, Illinois Knights of Kalova National Secretary: Matti Simpanen 5305 Sixth Avenue, Brooklyn, New York Ladies of Kalova National Secretary: Miss Martha Hamalainen 266 Pleasant Street, Gardner, Massachusetts Lincoln Loyalty League of Finnish-Americans Secretary: J. H. Jasbert 1045 Marquette Building, Chicago, Illinois Swedish-Finnish Sick Benefit Society of America Secretary: John Back Box 27, North Escanaba, Michigan GERMAN American Gymnastic Union (Turners) First President: Theo. Stempfel Fletcher American Nat. Bank, Indianapolis, Indiana German Beneficial Union Supreme President: Louis Volz 1505-07 Carson Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania National Federation of German Catholic Societies President: Michael Girten 915 People's Gas Building, Chicago, Illinois North American Association of Singing Societies President: Charles G. Schmidt 2000 Central Avenue, Cincinnati, Ohio North-Eastern Association of Singing Societies President: Carl Lentz 77 Broad Street, Newark, New Jersey Order of Harugari Grand Treasurer: Henry F. Raabe 30 Vanderveer Street, Brooklyn, New York Order of the Sons of Herman Grand Secretary: Richard Schaefer New Britain, Connecticut Workmen's Sick and Death Benefit Fund Seventh Street and Third Avenue, New York City HUNGARIAN American Hungarian Reformed Society Secretary: Steve Molnar 269 Plymouth Street, Toledo, Ohio *First Hungarian Literary Society of New York Secretary: Joseph Partos 317 East Seventy-ninth Street, New York City First Hungarian Miners Sick Benefit Society of Ben Creek Secretary: Stephen Beres Box 244, Cassandram, Pennsylvania *First Hungarian Sick Benefit and Funeral Society of New Brunswick Secretary: Joseph Kopencey Box 511, New Brunswick, New Jersey *First Hungarian Sick Benefit Society of East Chicago and Vicinity Secretary: Kovacs A. David 620 Chicago Avenue, East Chicago, Indiana *Hungarian Public Association of Passaic Secretary: Julius Faludy 127 Second Avenue, Passaic, New Jersey *Hungarian Rakoczi Sick Benefit Society of Bridgeport Secretary: Steve Koteles, Jr. 626 Bostwick Avenue, Bridgeport, Connecticut *Hungarian Reformed Benefit Society of Pittsburgh and Vicinity Chairman: Andrew Hornyak 600 Hazelwood Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania *Hungarian Reformed Sick Benefit Society of Windber and Vicinity Secretary: Joseph Molnar 542 R. Road Street, Windber, Pennsylvania Kohanyi Tihamer's Hungarian Workman's Sick Benefit Society of Hungary and America Secretary: Julius Sipos Box 240, Homer City, Pennsylvania Roman and Greek Catholic First Hungarian Sick Benefit Society of Benwood Secretary: Ignac Kiss R. F. D. No. 2, Box 346, Wheeling, West Virginia Saint Laszlo Roman and Greek Catholic Hungarian Sick Benefit and Funeral Society of Johnstown and Vicinity Secretary: John Angyal 205 Third Avenue, Johnstown, Pennsylvania Saint Istvan Hungarian Workman's Sick Benefit Society of Snow Shoe Secretary: Antal Polczar Box 62, Clarence, Pennsylvania United Petofi Sandor Association Secretary: Bela K. Bekay 2196-98 West Jefferson Avenue, Detroit, Michigan Verhovay Aid Association Secretary: Stephen Gabor Room 809-811 Markle Bank Building, Hazelton, Pennsylvania Workman's Sick Benefit and Literary Society Secretary: Joseph Kertesz 350 East Eighty-first Street, New York City ITALIAN Italian War Veterans 244 East Twenty-fourth Street, New York City Order of Sons of Italy in America President: Stefano Miele 266 Lafayette Street, New York City JEWISH Alliance Israelite Universelle 150 Nassau Street, New York City Alumni Association of the Hebrew Union College Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati, Ohio American Jewish Committee 31 Union Square West, New York City American Jewish Congress 1 Madison Avenue, New York City American Jewish Relief Committee 30 East Forty-second Street, New York City American Union of Rumanian Jews 44 Seventh Street, New York City Baron de Hirsch Fund 80 Maiden Lane, New York City Bureau of Jewish Social Research 114 Fifth Avenue, New York City Central Conference of American Rabbis Temple Beth El, Detroit, Michigan Council of Jewish Women Executive Secretary: Mrs. Harry Sternberger 305 West Ninety-eighth Street, New York City Council of Reform Rabbis 1093 Sterling Place, Brooklyn, New York Council of Y. M. H. and Kindred Associations 114 Fifth Avenue, New York City Dropsie College for Hebrew and Cognate Learning Broad and York Streets, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Eastern Council of Reform Rabbis 1093 Sterling Place, Brooklyn, New York Educational League for the Higher Education of Orphans 336 Engineer's Building, Cleveland, Ohio Federation of Bessarabian Jews in America 52 St. Mark's Place, New York City Federation of Galician Jews and Bukovinian Jews in America 66 Second Avenue, New York City Federation of Jewish Farmers of America 175 East Broadway, New York City Federation of Lithuanian and Latvian Jews in America 6 Ludlow Street, New York City Federation of Oriental Jews of America 42 Seventh Street, New York City Federation of Russian and Polish Hebrews in America 1822 Lexington Avenue, New York City Federation of Ukrainian Jews in America 200 East Broadway, New York City Hadassah 55 Fifth Avenue, New York City Hai Resh Fraternity St. Joseph, Missouri Histadrut Ibrith 55 Fifth Avenue, New York City Hebrew Sheltering and Immigrant Aid Society of America 229-231 East Broadway, New York City Hebrew Technical Institute for Boys 36 Stuyvesant Street, New York City Hebrew Technical School for Girls Second Avenue and Fifteenth Street, New York City Independent Order of B'nai B'rith 1228 Tribune Building, Chicago, Illinois Independent Order of Brith Abraham 37 Seventh Avenue, New York City Independent Order Brith Sholom 510-512 South Fifth Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Independent Order Free Sons of Israel 21 West 124th Street, New York City Independent Western Star Order 1227 Blue Island Avenue, Chicago, Illinois Independent Workmen's Circle of America, Inc. 9 Cambridge, Boston, Massachusetts Industrial Removal Office 174 Second Avenue, New York City Intercollegiate Menorah Associations 600 Madison Avenue, New York City Intercollegiate Zionist Association of America 55 Fifth Avenue, New York City Jewish Academicians of America 125 East Eighty-fifth Street, New York City Jewish Agricultural and Industrial Aid Society 174 Second Avenue, New York City Jewish Agricultural Experiment Station 356 Second Avenue, New York City Jewish Central Relief Committee 51 Chambers Street, New York City Jewish Chautauqua Society 1305 Stephen Girard Building 21 South Twelfth Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Jewish Consumptive Relief Association of California 207 South Broadway, Los Angeles, California Jewish Consumptive Relief Society 510-512 Kittredge Building, Denver, Colorado Jewish National Workers Alliance of America 89 Delancey Street, New York City Jewish People's Relief Committee 175 East Broadway, New York City Jewish Publication Society of America 1201 North Broad Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Jewish Socialist Federation of America 175 East Broadway, New York City Jewish Socialist Labor Poale Zion of America and Canada 266 Grand Street, New York City Jewish Teachers Association Secretary: A. P. Schoolman 356 Second Avenue, New York City Jewish Teachers' Seminary 252 East Broadway, New York City Jewish Teachers' Training School of the Misrachi Organization 86 Orchard Street, New York City Jewish Theological Seminary of America 531 West 123d Street, New York City Jewish Welfare Board 149 Fifth Avenue, New York City Joint Distribution Committee 20 Exchange Place, New York City Kappa Nu Fraternity 2937 Schubert Avenue, Chicago, Illinois National Association of Jewish Social Workers Secretary and Treasurer: M. M. Goldstein 356 Second Avenue, New York City National Conference of Jewish Social Service 114 Fifth Avenue, New York City National Desertion Bureau Secretary: Charles Zusser 356 Second Avenue, New York City National Farm School 407 Mutual Life Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania National Federation of Temple Sisterhoods 62 Dutenhofer Building, Cincinnati, Ohio National Jewish Hospital for Consumptives 3800 East Colfax Avenue, Denver, Colorado National Jewish Immigration Council 18 Maiden Lane, New York City National Union of Jewish Sheltering Societies 229-231 East Broadway, New York City Order Brith Abraham 266 Grand Street, New York City Order Knights of Joseph 311-312 Society for Savings Building Cleveland, Ohio Order of Sons of Zion 55 Fifth Avenue, New York City Order of the United Hebrew Brothers 189 Second Avenue, New York City Pi Tau Pi Fraternity New Orleans, Louisiana Progressive Order of the West 406-407-408 Frisco Building Ninth and Olive Streets, St. Louis, Missouri Red Mogen David of America 201 Second Avenue, New York City Sigma Alpha Mu Fraternity 277 Broadway, New York City The Mizrachi Organization of America 86 Orchard Street, New York City The Union of Orthodox Rabbis of the United States and Canada 121 Canal Street, New York City The Workmen's Circle 175 East Broadway, New York City Union of American Hebrew Congregations Cincinnati, Ohio Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America 125 East Eighty-fifth Street, New York City United Order of True Sisters 317 West 139th Street, New York City United Orthodox Rabbis of America 121 Canal Street, New York City United Sons of Israel, Inc. 18 Boylston Street, Boston, Massachusetts United Synagogue of America 531 West 123d Street, New York City Women's League of the United Synagogue of America 531 West 123d Street, New York City Young Judæa 55 Fifth Avenue, New York City Z B T Fraternity 237 West Eighty-eighth Street, New York City Zionist Organization of America 55 Fifth Avenue, New York City Zionist Society of Engineers and Agriculturists 122 East Thirty-seventh Street, New York City JUGOSLAV Carniolian Slovene Catholic Union 1004 North Chicago Street, Joliet, Illinois Croatian League of Illinois 2552 Wentworth Avenue, Chicago, Illinois Croatian Union of the Pacific 560 Pacific Building, San Francisco, California Jugoslav Benevolent Society "Unity" 408 Park Street, Milwaukee, Wisconsin Jugoslav Catholic Benevolent Union Ely, Minnesota Jugoslav Republican Alliance 3637 West Twenty-sixth Street, Chicago, Illinois Loyal Serb Society Srbadia 443 West Twenty-second Street, New York City National Croatian Society 1012 Peralta Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Serbian Federation Sloboda 414 Bakewell Building, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Serbian Orthodox Federation Srbobran Sloga Twelfth and Carsons Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Slovene Benevolent Society 1064 East Sixty-second Street, Cleveland, Ohio Slovene Catholic Benevolent Association 420 Seventh Street, Calumet, Michigan Slovene Croatian Union Fifth South Borgo Block, Calumet, Michigan Slovene Free Thinkers Association 1541 West Eighteenth Street, Brooklyn, New York Slovene Workingmen's Benevolent Association 634 Main Street, Johnstown, Pennsylvania *Slovenic Benevolent Society "St. Barbara" Forest City, Pennsylvania Slovenic National Benefit Society 2657 S. Lawndale Avenue, Chicago, Illinois Southern Slav Socialistic League 3639 West Twenty-sixth Street, Chicago, Illinois The Holy Family Society 1006 North Chicago Street, Joliet, Illinois Western Slav Society 4822 Washington Street, Denver, Colorado Young National Croatian Society President: Mark Smiljanich 2857 South Ridgeway Avenue, Chicago, Illinois LITHUANIAN American-Lithuanian Catholic Press Association Secretary: Rev. V. Kulikauskas 2327 West Twenty-third Place, Chicago, Illinois Auxiliary of Lithuanian Red Cross Secretary: Rev. Petraitis 147 Montgomery Avenue, Paterson, New Jersey Knights of Lithuania Secretary: Vincas Ruk[vs]telis 3249 South Halsted Street, Chicago, Illinois Lithuanian Alliance of America Secretary: Miss P. Jurgeliute 307 West Thirtieth Street, New York City Lithuanian National Fund Secretary: J. Kru[vs]inskas 222 South Ninth Street, Brooklyn, New York Lithuanian Patriot Society Secretary: J. Sekys 101 Oak Street, Lawrence, Massachusetts Lithuanian Roman Catholic Alliance of America Secretary: J. Tumasonis 222 South Ninth Street, Brooklyn, New York Lithuanian Roman Catholic Charitable Association Secretary: John Purtokas 4441 South Washenaw Avenue, Chicago, Illinois Lithuanian Roman Catholic Federation of America Secretary: J. Valantiejus 222 South Ninth Street, Brooklyn, New York Lithuanian Roman Catholic Women's Alliance of America President: Mrs. M. Vaiciuniene 442 Leonard Street, N. W., Grand Rapids, Michigan Lithuanian Total Abstinence Association Secretary: Vincent Ba[vc]ys 41 Providence Street, Worcester, Massachusetts St. Joseph's Lith. Roman Catholic Association of Labor Secretary: A. F. Kneizis 366 West Broadway, South Boston, Massachusetts The People's University Secretary: Dr. A. L. Graiciunas 3310 South Halsted Street, Chicago, Illinois NORWEGIAN Knights of the White Cross Care of Nora Lodge 1733 North Kedvale Avenue, Chicago, Illinois Sons of Norway Secretary: L. Stavnheim New York Life Building, Minneapolis, Minnesota POLISH Association of Polish Women of the United States General Secretary: Mrs. L. H. Dziewczynska 6723 Fleet Avenue, Cleveland, Ohio Polish Alliance of New Jersey General Secretary: J. Wegrocki 84 Tyler Street, Newark, New Jersey Polish Falcons Alliance of America General Secretary: K. J. Machnikowski Cor. South Twelfth and Carson Streets, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Polish Military Alliance of the United States of America General Secretary: P. Balecki 450 Pacific Avenue, Jersey City, New Jersey *Polish National Alliance of Brooklyn General Secretary: V. G. Nowak 142 Grand Street, Brooklyn, New York Polish National Alliance of the United States of North America General Secretary: J. S. Zawilinski 1406-08 West Division Street, Chicago, Illinois Polish Roman-Catholic Alliance General Secretary: J. Grams 6924 Worley Street, Cleveland, Ohio Polish Roman-Catholic Association General Secretary: L. F. Szymanski 755 Twenty-third Street, Detroit, Michigan *Polish Roman-Catholic Benevolent Association of Bay City General Secretary: J. Lepczyk 1112 Fifteenth Street, Bay City, Michigan Polish Roman-Catholic Union 984 Milwaukee Avenue, Chicago, Illinois Polish Socialists Alliance of America General Secretary: R. Mazurkiewica 959 Milwaukee Avenue, Chicago, Illinois Polish Women's Alliance of America General Secretary: Mrs. J. Andrzejewska 1309-15 North Ashland Avenue, Chicago, Illinois Polish Union General Secretary: J. Dembiec Room 824, Miners Bank Building, Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania Polish Union of America General Secretary: F. Zandrowicz 761-765 Fillmore Avenue, Buffalo, New York Human Catholic Alliance of America General Secretary: W. Gola 59 Fourth Street, Passaic, New Jersey The Polish Roman-Catholic St. Joseph Union General Secretary: A. Kazmierski 2813 Nineteenth Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania RUSSIAN League of Russian Clergy 43 Reed Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania North American Ecclesiastical Consistory Archbishop Alexander 15 East Ninety-seventh Street, New York City Russian Brotherhood Organization of U. S. A. P. O. Box 475, Olyphant, Pennsylvania Russian Collegiate Institute 219 Second Avenue, New York City Russian Independent Orthodox Brotherhoods 34 Vine Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Russian Independent Society 917 North Wood Street, Chicago, Illinois Russian National Organization P. O. Box 2066, Bridgeport, Connecticut Russian National Society 5 Columbus Circle, New York City Russian Orthodox Catholic Mutual Aid Society 84 Market Street, East, Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania Russian Peasants' Union 324 East Fourteenth Street, New York City Russian Society "Nauka" 222 East Tenth Street, New York City *Union of Russian Citizens 1522 Fifth Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Women's Russian Orthodox Mutual Aid Society P. O. Box 512, Coaldale, Pennsylvania SLOVAK Catholic Slovak Sokol Secretary: Michael Kudlac 205 Madison Street, Passaic, New Jersey First Catholic Slovak Ladies' Union of the United States President: Mrs. Frantiska Jakaboin 600 South Seventh Street, Reading, Pennsylvania National Slovak Society in United States of America Secretary: Joseph Duris P. O. Box 593, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Slovak Gymnastic Union of Sokols Secretary: Frank Stas 283 Oak Street, Perth Amboy, New Jersey Slovak Protestant Union President: Jan Bibza 409 South Second Street, N. S., Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Tatran Slovak Union President: Samuel Vrablik 2519 South Ridgeway Avenue, Chicago, Illinois The First Catholic Slovak Union President: Andrej H. Dorko Marblehead, Ohio Zivena, Benefit Society of Slovak Christian Women of the United States of America President: Mrs. C. E. Vavrek 3 Stark Street, Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania SWEDISH American Society of Swedish Engineers Secretary: N. V. Hansell 271 Hicks Street, Brooklyn, New York Scandinavian Fraternity of America P. O. Box 184, Spokane, Washington (Membership consists of Norwegians, Danes, and Swedes) The American Union of Swedish Singers President: Hjalmar Nilsson State Capitol, St. Paul, Minnesota The Order of Vasa President: Carl Festin 610 East Seventy-fifth Street, Chicago, Illinois *United Swedish Societies of Greater New York President: John Olin Anderson's Assembly Rooms, Sixteenth Street and Third Avenue, New York City (Consists of two delegates from each local society) UKRAINIAN Providence Association, Inc. President: Eugene Yakubovich 827 North Franklin Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania The Ukrainian Federation of the United States, Inc. President: Miroslav Sichinsky 166 Avenue A, New York City Ukrainian Mutual Aid Society, Inc. President: M. Porada 3357 West Carson Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Ukrainian National Association, Inc. President: Simon Yadlowsky 83 Grand Street, Jersey City, New Jersey Ukrainian National Committee President: V. B. Lotozky 30 East Seventh Street, New York City Ukrainian Women's Alliance President: Mrs. C. Zubrich 932 North Okley Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois Ukrainian Workingmen's Association, Inc. President: George Kraykiwsky 524 Olive Street, Scranton, Pennsylvania Union of Brotherhoods President: George Hylak 107 Grant Street, Olyphant, Pennsylvania MENUS The following menus have been obtained from housewives who were glad to share in an effort toward better understanding between foreign-born groups and agencies either of adjustment or for case work. This small body of material is illustrative of the kind of information that is easily available to the agency and that would illumine the treatment of the families under care. The menus given are those actually used by housewives of different nationalities during the periods indicated. A list of recipes will be found in another volume of this Study.[82] BOHEMIAN These menus were given by a Bohemian woman whose methods of cooking have changed very little in America. She has learned new ways of preserving vegetables and fruits, but uses those methods only when they seem to her more inexpensive than her earlier practices. In other respects the diet is said to be typical of the diet of a Bohemian family of moderate income in Moravia. BREAKFAST Oatmeal with milk. Coffee, bread with butter or jelly. There is always fruit in the house and the child of five is given bread and jelly at ten o'clock in the morning. LUNCH Usually a meatless soup is served for lunch, or a simple dish of rice or vegetables. Eggs cooked in various ways, milk, bread, butter, and jelly, and baked porridge called "kashe" made from farina, rice or millet, cooked with milk and sugar and butter, are also used at lunch. DINNER The dinner menus do not vary much. Soup made from meat stock is eaten every week day except Wednesday, when there is roast meat and no soup. On Sunday both soup and a roast are served. The meat from the soup is served with a variety of sauces and gravies. Dumplings are used often when Americans would serve potatoes. Rice and noodles are also used instead of potatoes. Such vegetables as beans, spinach, carrots, cabbage, kohl-rabi, sauerkraut, and salads are sometimes eaten with the meat instead of the sauce with dumplings. The following are typical menus: Soup. Meat with sauce and dumplings. Apple sauce or preserves. Coffee. Bread and butter. Soup. Meat with sauce and potatoes. Stewed fruit. Coffee with homemade raised tarts. Soup. Meat, beans, sauerkraut. Apple sauce. Coffee. Bread and butter. CROATIAN The following menus represent the diet of a Croatian family of moderate income. The family came from a village near Zara, and the influence of the Italian customs upon the food habits of the Dalmatians is indicated in the use of polenta. August 6, 1919: BREAKFAST--5 A.M. One cup of coffee with one or two slices of bread. Coffee is made very strong, the cup filled two thirds full of hot milk; the coffee and some cream added. SECOND BREAKFAST--9 A.M. A soft-boiled egg, with bread. One cup of coffee. The custom of having a second breakfast is Croatian. In this family it has been possible to keep it up in this country because the hours for a street-car conductor can be arranged to allow it. DINNER--12.30 P.M. Beef soup with dumplings. Soup meat with sauce. Mashed potatoes (browned). Bread. Coffee. SUPPER--7 P.M. Soup with rice (from same stock as was used at noon). Cabbage. Bread. Coffee. Fruit. August 7, 1919: BREAKFAST Early breakfast is always the same. The second breakfast varies little; sometimes bread and cheese or bread and meat sandwiches are eaten instead of the soft-boiled eggs. DINNER Goulash. Polenta. Lettuce salad. Coffee. SUPPER Spaghetti with tomato sauce. Celery. Bread. Coffee. ITALIAN (Sicilian) The following menus represent the diet of a Sicilian family from Palermo. They have been in America over twenty years, but their diet has changed little. There are ten persons in the family--the mother and two unmarried daughters, a married daughter, her husband and four children. The children are seven, five, and three years, and ten months. Food for the children is prepared separately. For breakfast they have cereal, milk, bread, and stewed fruit; for lunch, rice or potato, bread, milk, and the green vegetables cooked for the family if not cooked with tomato sauce. For supper the children have bread and milk. It is not common in Italian families to make so much difference in the diet for children; they are usually fed on the highly seasoned dishes the family eat, but in this family the mother prepared special food for her children, and her daughter is doing the same and planning their diet even more carefully. Summer menus: Monday, August 11, 1919: BREAKFAST Coffee or chocolate. Toast. Italian cookies. For children, bread and milk or oatmeal and milk. The coffee is made strong, but is served with hot milk--the cup half or two thirds filled with milk before coffee is poured in. Very often nothing is eaten with the coffee. LUNCHEON--Noon Cold sliced meat (left from Sunday). Tomato and lettuce salad. Bread. Fruit. DINNER Spaghetti with tomato sauce. Stuffed peppers. Bread. Fruit. Tuesday, August 12, 1919: BREAKFAST Same every morning. LUNCHEON Stew made of long, slender squash, potatoes, onions. Bread. Fruit. DINNER Broiled veal. Fried potatoes. Fresh tomatoes with French dressing. Boiled string beans. Bread. Fruit. Wednesday, August 13, 1919: LUNCHEON Boiled greens with olive oil. Fresh tomatoes. Bread. Cheese. Fruit. DINNER Macaroni with peas. Diced potatoes with tomato sauce. Breaded asparagus. Fruit. Thursday, August 14, 1919: LUNCHEON Breaded fried liver. Sauce for meat made of vinegar, sugar, chopped orange rind, and bay leaves. Boiled greens with olive oil. Bread. Fruit. DINNER Macaroni à la Milanese Sauce of finocchi, bread crumbs, anchovi. Potato cakes. Fruit. Friday, August 15, 1919: LUNCHEON Egg tamale. String beans, French dressing. Bread. Fruit. DINNER Fried fish. Fresh tomatoes. Cucumbers. Bread. Fruit. Saturday, August 16, 1919: LUNCHEON Potatoes and eggs. Greens with vinegar. Bread. Fruit. DINNER Broiled steak. Corn. Potatoes. Salad. Bread. Fruit. Sunday, August 17, 1919: BREAKFAST Coffee. Italian pastry. DINNER Homemade macaroni with tomato sauce. Veal pot roast. Corn. Eggplant. Bread. Fruit salad. The menus given are typical of the diet during the summer. A great variety of vegetables is used. Winter menus: Monday: BREAKFAST Coffee or chocolate. Bread, toast, or Italian cookies. LUNCHEON Stew of spinach, lentils, and onions. Baked apples. Bread. Coffee. DINNER Macaroni with tomato sauce. Meat (left over from Sunday). Bread. Coffee or wine. Tuesday: Breakfast is always the same. LUNCHEON Egg tamale (egg, cheese, and bacon). Baked potatoes. Bread. Fruit. DINNER Soup with macaroni. Meat with vegetables, potatoes, carrots, cabbage, onions, etc. Bread. Fruit. Wednesday: LUNCHEON Salmon, lemon juice. Spinach with olive oil. Bread. Fruit. DINNER Macaroni with navy beans. Fried eggplant, with tomato sauce and cheese. Bread. Fruit. Thursday: LUNCHEON Soft-boiled eggs. Fried green tomatoes. Bread. Baked apples. DINNER Breaded pork chops. Potatoes. Spinach. Fruit Salad. Bread. Friday: LUNCHEON Egg omelet. Chocolate. Bread. Stewed fruit. DINNER Fish with tomato sauce. Stuffed green peppers. Bread. Fruit. Saturday: LUNCHEON Broiled liver. Lettuce salad. Bread. Fruit. DINNER Lima beans with celery, onions, and tomatoes. Stuffed artichokes. Bread. Coffee. Fruit. Sunday: BREAKFAST Coffee and Italian fried cakes. DINNER Macaroni with tomato sauce and chopped meat. Pot roast. Peas. Ice cream. SUPPER Rice cooked in milk with egg. Cake. Coffee. SLOVENIAN Menus given by a Slovenian woman show the diet of a family of moderate income whose food habits have not been modified in America. Certain European customs are observed; no desserts are served, and no baking powder is used. Sweet cookies, raised with yeast, and fresh fruit, are given to children who are allowed candy, so that they may not feel deprived of sweets when they see other children eating candy at school. The older children have learned to prepare new "American" dishes at school, but these are not used at home, as the whole family prefer the Slovenian diet. BREAKFAST Coffee, bread and butter. (Breakfast is always the same.) 10 A.M. An egg, a sandwich, or a cup of milk for parents. Fruit for children. LUNCH 1. Rice cooked with mushrooms, celery, onions, and spice. In cold weather fifteen cents' worth of pork is cooked with the rice. Water with fruit juice to drink, or the water from cooked fruit. 2. Buckwheat cakes, eaten with cooked dried fruit or jelly. 3. Barley and beans cooked together. Colored beans are used, and must be tried to see whether they will cook in the same time as the barley. Olive oil, bacon or sausage, and a little garlic are added. 4. Millet (kasa) cooked in milk with sugar, then baked in the oven fifteen minutes and served with milk. 5. French toast. 6. Corn-meal mush, fried, with sauerkraut. "A good quality of corn meal is used, bought in Italian districts." Boiling water is poured very slowly into a dish of meal, and allowed to stand twenty minutes. Mush is fried in butter, eaten with sauerkraut, cooked dried fruit or honey. 7. Noodles with Parmesan cheese. 8. Noodles with baked apples. 3 P.M. Coffee, bread with butter or jelly. (Coffee is very weak for children; a great deal of milk is added.) DINNER 1. Beef soup with farina dumplings. Meat (from the soup) eaten with a relish. Potatoes. Turnips. Bread. 2. Vegetable soup. Roast meat. Vegetables. Bread. Water. FOOTNOTE: [82] Michael M. Davis, _Immigrant Health and the Community_. INDEX A Abbott, Edith, 153, 161, 186, 308 Abbott, Grace, 223 Agencies: Adjusting immigrants American, 222-276 Case work, 277-311 Immigrant, 187-221 Studied, 7-8 Agriculture: Legislation, 38, 76, 254-257 Workers, 34-35 Akron, Ohio: Home Demonstration Agent, 259 American Association for Family Welfare Work, 281 American Association for Social Work with Families, 7, 310 American Home Economics Association: Committee on Household Budgets, 115, 250-252 American Institute of Architects: Articles on Housing, 72-74 American Red Cross: Chapter Case Work, 281 Home Service, 7, 310 Americanization: Agencies and instruments American organizations, 222-276 Case-work organizations, 277-311 Immigrant organizations, 187-221 Factors, 14-18 Anderson, A. M., 270 Anthony, Katharine Susan, 136 B Baltimore, Maryland: Polish National Alliance, 202 Banks: Postal Savings, 111-115 Benefit Societies: Life and Health insurance, 94-95 Organization, 192-196, 201 Birdseye, Clarence Frank, 226 "Board of Health Baskets," 133 Boarders: Relation to family problems, 23-27, 52, 63-64 Bohemia: Customs in, 174 Bohemians: Building and loan association, 76, 109 Child care, 158, 164, 182 Cookery, 59 Dvorak Park, Chicago, 273-274 Home ownership, 105, 107 In Chicago, 11 Nebraska, 169 Life insurance, 94 Menus, 333-334 Postal Savings circular, 112 Spending habits, 90, 122, 134-135 Unemployment, 92 Boston, Massachusetts: Boston Associated Charities Office of District Superintendent, 298 Case-work agencies, 283, 295 Dietetic Bureau, 296 Polish National Alliance, 202 Breckinridge, S. P., 153, 161, 186 Bridgeport, Connecticut: Black Rock Apartment House Group, 70 Study of housing project, 8 British Board of Trade: Cost of living in American towns, 7 Brooklyn, New York: Red Cross Chapter, 281 Visiting housekeeper Pratt Institute, 290 Brooks, John Graham, viii Buffalo, New York: Cost of living, 129 Red Cross Chapter, 281 Building Loans: Government, 75-80 Building and loan association: Agency for buying homes, 109-111 In Chicago, 76 Bulgarian: Home ownership, 106 Postal Savings circular, 112 Bureau of Education: Home Economics Division, 251, 268 Bureau of Labor: List of building and loan associations, 109 Report of U. S. Housing Corporation, 29, 32 Statistics, 7, 129 Women and child wage earners, 6 Buying: Immigrant problem, 117-148 C California: Home teachers, 236-237 Mothers' Aid Laws, 308 California Commission of Immigration and Housing, 237-238 Cambridge, Massachusetts: Case-work agencies, 283 Visiting housekeepers, 290 Case Work: With immigrant families, 277-311 Case Workers: Foreign speaking, 281-286 Training, 298-304 Catholic Order of Foresters, 195 Chicago: Agencies, 8 Board of Education, 241-243 Building and loan association, 76, 110 Case work, 281, 298-299 Croatian, 197 Elementary schools, 161-162 Foreign born, 303-304 Immigrants' Protective League, 8, 46, 51, 52, 203, 223-227, 240, 303 Playgrounds, 158 Recreational, 273-276 Settlements, 50, 239-240 United Charities, 8, 281 Visiting housekeepers, 290-291 Visiting Nurses' Association, 241 Vocational Guidance Bureau, 169, 174 Women's Clubs, 240-241 Delinquent children, 185-186 Families, 93-94 Homes, 33 Housing, 62, 105-108 Italian wedding, 100 Russian women, 3 Shopping habits, 122-123 Study of races, 11-12, 50, 61 Women in industry, 40 Child Labor: Legislation, 37-38 Children: Care of, 4, 41-43, 149-186 Croatian, 198-201 Children's Bureau: Child care publications, 7, 219-221, 254 Infant mortality studies, 41, 64 Chinese: Postal savings circular, 112 Christenings, 103-104 Church: Chimes, 97 Relation to parents, 180 Classes: Cooking, 228, 233, 240-243, 259-260 Cleveland: Case-work agencies, 283 Visiting housekeepers, 290, 295 Clothing: Problem of parents, 135-141 Comey, A. C., 79 Community: Recreation agencies, 272-276 Relation to immigrant, 169, 180, 187-192, 223 Company store, 119-122 Consumers' League, 141 Cook County, Illinois: Charity Service Report, 277 Juvenile Court, 185-186, 277, 281 Cookery: American demands, 58-60 Classes, 228, 233, 240-243, 259-260 Co-operation: For immigrant education, 240-243 Co-operatives: Housekeeping, 24, 27-29 In America, 141-148 In England, 141-148 Court: Domestic relation, 53 Juvenile, 181-186, 277, 281 Croatia: Customs, 174 Croatians: Child care, 151 Cookery, 58 Home ownership, 105 In Chicago, 11 League of Illinois, 94 Menus, 334-335 Organizations, 196-201 Postal Savings circular, 112 Spending habits, 122, 130, 137 Women in industry, 40 Croatian League of Illinois, 196 Cummin, John, 226 Czecho-Slovak: Czecho-Slovak workingman, 95 Diet changes, 130 Organizations, 313-314 D Dallas, Texas: Bohemian Community, 83 Daniels, John, 32, 190 Danish: Organizations, 314-315 Postal Savings circular, 112 Day Nursery: Lithuanian, 41 Death: Provision against, 92-93, 96 Department of Agriculture: Bureau of Home Economics, 7, 251 States Relation Service, 254-262 Thrift campaign, 114 Detroit: Visiting Housekeepers' Association, 289 Diets: Modification, 130-134, 249, 333-341 Dover, New Jersey: Cost of living, 129 Dutch: Organizations, 315 E Earnings (_see_ Income) Economy: Built on money, 88 Education: Immigrant, 240-243 Women, 265-266 Parents' problem, 159-169 El Paso, Texas: Case-work agencies, 283 England: British Board of Trades, 7 Domestic Service Problem, 271-272 Government Grants Schools for mothers, 263-265 Ministry of Reconstruction, 68, 271 Rochdale, Lancashire Co-operative, 141 Women's Co-operative Guild, 269 Women's Employment Committee, 270-271 English: Postal Savings circular, 112 Erwin, Tennessee: Housing, 70 Expenditures: Budget, 139 F Fall River, Massachusetts: Case-work agencies, 281 Visiting housekeepers, 290 Immigrant schools Classes for women, 259-260 Family: Adjustment by organizations American, 222-276 Case work, 277-311 Immigrant, 187-221 Child care, 149-186 Problem, 6, 14-18 Relationships, 19-53 Farm Laborers: Unfamiliarity with money, 89-90 Farm Loan Act: Proposed Amendment to, 76 Federal Board for Vocational Education: Supervisors of Home Economics, 7 Work, 251, 256-262 Fête Days: First communion, 104-105 Finnish: Organizations, 315-316 Postal Savings circular, 112 Foreign Language Information Service, 220, 313-332 Fort Wayne, Indiana: Cost of living, 129 Fosdick, Raymond B., viii Fraternal Societies (_see_ Benefit) Sound basis of, 94-95 French: Postal Savings circular, 112 Freund, Ernst, 119 Funerals: Expense, 96-97 Furniture: Buying, 134-135 G Gay, Edwin F., viii German: Life insurance, 94 Organizations, 316-317 Postal Savings circular, 112 Gilbert, Frank Bixley, 226 Girls: Conventions for, 174-175 Delinquent, 181 Safety, 180 Work, 179 Glenn, John M., viii Grand Rapids, Michigan: Case-work agencies, 283 Greeks: Organizations, 192 Postal Savings banks Use of, 112 Group life: In old country, 175 In America, 175 H Hart, Hastings Hornell, 200 Health: Problems, 150-151 Health Insurance Commission of Illinois: Study of Chicago families' life insurance, 93-95 Homes: Ownership, 78-80, 105-111 Relation to Child care, 149-186 American organizations, 222-276 Case-work organizations, 277-311 Immigrant organizations, 187-221 Studied, 6-14 Home Economics: Work, 254-263, 289-298 Home Visitors: International Institute, Y. W. C. A., 245 Training, 248-250 Work of, 247-248 Hood, Laura, xvii Housing: Immigrant problem, 23-32, 54-84 Play space, 158 Housewives: Duties, 43-47 Instruction, 234-235 Problems Children, 149-186 Housing, 23-32, 58-84 Saving, 85-116 Spending, 117-148 Hungarians: Child care, 165 Home ownership, 105 Housekeeping problems, 80 Organization, 191, 317-318 Postal Savings banks, 112 I Illinois: Building and loan organization, 109 Child labor, 38 Council of Defense, 240-241 Co-operative stores, 8 Italians, 3, 11-12 Mining communities, 8 Mothers' Aid Law, 308 Pauper Act, 307 Public schools, 253 Illinois Steel Company: Employees' houses, 72 Immigration: "Old" and "New," 5 Stream of, 1 Immigrants: Adjustment, 1-2, 6, 193 Co-operatives, 143-145 Relation to community, 167-168, 180, 187-192, 223 Immigrant Heritages, 1-186, 247-248 Importance to case worker, 298-301 Immigrant Newspapers (_see_ Separate Races) Immigrant Organizations: Life and Health Insurance, 94-95 List of principal racial, 313-332 Relation to family problems, 187-221 Immigrants' Protective League, 230, 268 Chicago, 8, 46, 51, 52, 203, 223-227, 240, 303 Income: Children, 170-171 Inadequacy, 35-39 Irregularity, 91-92 Indianapolis, Indiana: Cost of living, 129 Industry: Women in, 39-43 Workers, 34-35 Infant mortality: Study, 41, 64 Insurance: Life Fraternal, 93-95 Industrial, 95-96 Irish: Life insurance, 94 Italians: Building and loan association, 77 Case work with, 298-299, 305-307 Child care, 163, 177-178 Family problems, 50 Home economics work in Arkansas, 258-259 Housekeeping problems, 57-58, 65, 80 In Illinois mining town, 253 Life insurance, 94 Medical Association, 218 Menus, 335-340 Organizations, 95, 217-218, 318 Postal Saving banks, 112 Saving problems, 92-93, 97, 105, 106 Spending habits, 122, 124 Clothing, 137 Diet changes, 130 Neighborhood stores, 127 Studied, 11-12 Italy: Backgrounds, 57-58, 175, 298-299, 302 Houses, 57 J Japanese: Postal Savings circular, 112 Jewish: Life insurance, 94 Organizations, 319-324 Jewish Aid Society: Case work, 281 Jugoslav: Child care, 178 Family relationships, 50 Organizations, 324-326 Juvenile Court: Case work, 277, 281 Child care, 181-186 Juvenile Delinquency: Children of foreign-born parentage, 156, 181-186 K Kemmerer, Edwin Walter, 102 Kenosha, Wisconsin: Case-work agencies, 283 King, Clyde Lyndon, 148 Kirkpatrick, V. G., 293 Knights and Ladies of Security, 195 L Lake Village, Arkansas Work with Italians, 258 Language: Barrier in case work, 280-286 Legislation, Federal: Agricultural, 76, 254, 256-257 Housing (proposed), 77 Mothers' Aid, 309 Pure Food Acts, 141 Restriction on Retail Trade, 141 Legislation, Foreign countries: Government Grants, 264-265 Legislation, State: Company stores, 120-121 Education, 159, 265-266 Home teacher, 236 Housing (proposed), 77 Mothers' Aid, 308 Pure Food Act, 141 Regulating banks, 113 Restriction on retail trade, 141 Wives' rights, 48-50 Lithuanians: Child care, 155 Family problems, 26, 39-43, 51 Home ownership, 105-106 Housekeeping problems, 56, 58-59, 80, 107 Life insurance, 94 National Alliance, 94 Organizations, 191, 209-215, 326-327 Postal Savings circular, 112 Saving problem, 89-90 Spending habits Clothing, 136 Diet changes, 130 Furniture, 135 Studied, 11 Lithuania: Employment in, 89 Lithuanian Women's Alliance: Organ, "Woman's Field," 212 Work, 209-214 Living: Cost In United States, 129 Lowering through co-operatives, 142 Standards, 286-289 Lodgers (_see_ Boarders) Lowell, Massachusetts: Classes for immigrant women, 259 Lusk, Graham, 133 M Mahoney, John J., 267 Massachusetts: Housing project--study in Lowell, 8 North Billerica, 8 Legislation Education--immigrant, 265-266 Mothers' Aid Laws, 308 Social worker in, 132 Massachusetts Bureau of Immigration, 267 Massachusetts Homestead Commission: Experiment at Lowell, 75 Limited dividend company, 75 Massachusetts Immigration Commission, 223 Men: Family Legislation controlling, 48-50 Shopping by, 124-125 Nonfamily, housing, 23-24, 27-29 Menus, 333-341 Merchants, 118-119 Mexicans: Boarders, 64 Civil status, 24 Study in Chicago, 11 Milwaukee, Wisconsin: Case-work agencies, 283 Ministry of Reconstruction: England Housing recommendations, 68 Minneapolis, Minnesota: Cost of living, 129 Money: Immigrants' unfamiliarity, 88-91 Payment in lawful, 121-122 Morgan Park, Minnesota: Illinois Steel Company houses, 72 Mothers, immigrant: Aid law, 308 Assistants, 268-270 Child care, 150-151, 164-165, 172-174, 178-180, 247 Relation to family, 39-47 N National Croatian Society: Work of, 196-199 National Conference of Social Work, 310 Nebraska: Rural community Higher education in, 169 New Hampshire: Manchester, study of infant mortality, 41 New Jersey: Mothers' Aid Laws, 308 Yorkship Village (Study of Housing), 8 New Mexico: Child labor, 38 Study of several towns, 8 New York City: Case-work agencies, 283 Visiting housekeepers, 290, 295 Home Economics Bureau, 296 John Jay Dwellings, 70 Polish National Alliance, 202 Red Cross Chapters, 281 New York State Industrial Commission: Study of earnings, 36-37 Norwegian: Organizations, 327 Postal Savings circular, 112 O Occupation: Change in, 34-35 Ohio: State University, 259 Owen, Robert, 310 P Pana, Illinois: Cost of living, 129 Parent: Problem with children, 149-186 Paterson, New Jersey: Case-work agencies, 283 Pennsylvania: Company stores, 120 Infant mortality, Johnstown, 41, 64 Italians, 12 Mining communities, 8 Mothers' Aid Laws, 308 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Case-work agencies, 283 Red Cross Chapter, 281 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Case-work agencies, 283 Visiting housekeepers, 290 Playground: Inadequate provision, 158 Poland: House in, 55-56 Polish: Building and loan associations, 77 Child care, 4, 162, 163, 183-184 Commercial co-operatives, 123 Family relationships, 21-23, 33, 34, 53 Home ownership, 105, 107 Housekeeping problems, 54, 59, 80 In Chicago, 11 Rolling Prairie, Indiana, 11 In industry, 40-41 Life insurance, 94 Newspaper Dziennik Zwaizkowy, 204 Organizations, 201-209, 327-329 Postal Savings circular, 112 Recreation, 158 Saving problems, 93, 96, 102 Spending habits, 122-123 Clothing, 136 Diet changes, 130 Vocational Guidance, 299-300 Polish National Alliance: Organs, 204 Women's department, 203-207 Work, 94, 201-203 Polish Women's Alliance, 201, 207-209 Portuguese: Postal Savings circular, 112 Postal Savings banks, 111-115 Postal Saving Law (proposed) Amendment, 76, 113 Pratt Institute, 290 Punishment: Methods, 155-156 R Ralph, Georgia G., 200 Recreation: Agencies, 272-276 Benefit societies, 197 Juvenile, 157-159, 176, 177 Richmond, Mary Ellen, 281 Rochester, New York: Red Cross Chapter, 281 Rolling Prairie, Indiana: Child labor, 38-39 Co-operative county project, 261 School attendance, 162 Roman Catholic Union of America (Polish), 201 Roosevelt, Theodore, viii Rumanians: Home ownership, 106 Organization, 191 Russell Sage Foundation, 200 Russian: Child care, 163, 165, 172, 179 Family problems, 23, 38, 46-47 Home ownership, 106 Housekeeping problems, 59, 80 In Chicago, 3, 11 Organization, 95, 191, 329-330 Postal Savings banks, 112 Saving problems, 103 Spending habits, 122 Diet changes, 130 S St. Paul, Minnesota: Cost of living, 129 Sanitation: Instruction 80-84 Saving: Problem, 85-116 Scandinavian: Life insurance, 94 Schools, private: Selection by parents, 159-160 Schools, public: Elementary Parents' relationship, 159-169, 180, 253 Immigrant Relation to home, 230-238 Co-operation with agencies, 240-243 Schools: Rural Attendance, 162 Serbia: Customs, 174 Serbians: Home ownership, 106 Spending habits, 122 Serbo-Croatian: Dvorak Park, 273-274 Housekeeping problems, 64 Postal Savings circular, 112 Settlements: Relation to homes, 50, 239-240, 273-276 Sickness: Incentive for saving, 86, 92 Slingerland, R., 200 Slovaks: Child care, 164, 171, 176-177 Home ownership, 105, 107 Organizations, 330 Postal Savings circular, 112 Spending habits, 122 Studied, 11 Slovenian: Child care, 171 Family problems, 20 Home ownership, 106 Menus, 340-341 Postal Savings circular, 112 Spending habits, 122 Studied, 11 Women in industry, 40 Smith-Hughes Act, 256-257 Smith-Lever Act, 254 Social Workers: Relation to immigrant spending habits, 132, 140 Society for Care of Croatian Orphans, 201 South Chicago, Illinois: Church, 97 Spanish: Postal Savings circular, 112 Spending: Immigrant problems, 117-148 Springfield, Illinois: Case-work agencies Visiting housekeepers, 290 Staunton, Illinois: Co-operative store, 145 Stamford, Connecticut: Case-work agencies, 282-283 Visiting housekeepers, 290 State Immigration Commission, 267 Steubenville, Ohio: Cost of living, 129 Stores: Company, 67-69 Co-operative, 141-143 In Staunton, Illinois, 145 Immigrant, 122-123, 126, 144 Syracuse Home Bureau: Work Projects, 260-261 Swedish: Organizations, 331 Postal Savings circular, 112 T Teacher Training: Work with immigrant women, 248-254 Teachers: Home, in California, 236-237 Thomas, W. I., 136 Thomas and Znaniecki: Letters from Polish Peasant, 21-22, 85-86, 161 Thompson, Frank V., 231 Thrift: Government campaign, 87, 114 Topeka, Kansas: Social work agencies, 281 Trade Union Label League, 141 "Tribe of Ben Hur," 195 U Ukrainians: Alliance, 122 Child care, 165 Family problems, 20, 33 In Chicago, 11, 50 Sun, West Virginia, 12 Organizations, 331-332 Postal Savings circular, 112 Savings problems, 90-92 Spending habits, 122-123 Diet changes, 130 Women in industry, 40 Ukrainian Women's Alliance: Organ, 216 Purpose, 215-216 United Charities: Case work, 281, 283 In Chicago, 8 United States Housing Corporation: Plan for copartnership ownership, 78 United States Immigration Commission: Reports studied, 6 Company stores, 120-121 Earning, 36 Housing, 60-61 United States Steel Corporation: Houses, 80 United States Treasury Department: Thrift campaign, 87, 114 War Risk Bureau, 310 Universities: Ohio State, 259 Purdue, 261 V Veblen, Thorstein B., 136 Visiting Dietitians: Modifying diets, 133 Training, 248-252 Virginia: Hilton Village Housing project, 8 Visiting Housekeepers: Agencies, 286, 289-298 Modifying diets, 133 Voll, John A., viii W War, 35, 36, 187-188, 202-203 Waterbury, Connecticut: Case-work agencies, 283 Wedding customs, 99-100, 102-103 Dowry, 86 West Virginia: Legislation on company store, 121 Study of Mining communities, 8 Ukrainians, 12 Williams, Talcott, viii Wilmington, Delaware: Cost of living, 129 Women: Croatian, 198 Education, 234-236, 240-243, 265-266 Employment, 65 Family relationships, 47-53 Lithuanian organizations, 209 Polish organizations, 201-209 Ukrainian organizations, 215-216 Women's Co-operative Guild, 148 Wood, E. E., 67, 75-77 Woodmen of the World, 195 Worcester, Massachusetts: Case-work agencies Visiting housekeepers, 290 Wright, Helen R., xvii Y Yiddish: Postal Savings circular, 112 Y. W. C. A.: Health campaign, 140 International Institute, 7, 31, 230, 237, 243-248 THE END * * * * * Transcriber's Notes: Obvious printer's errors were repaired. Hyphenation variants in the original were retained. Appendix: [vc] is a "c" with a caron, [vs] is an "s" with a caron. 
34080	----	HISTORY OF CANADA PART I (NEW FRANCE) _C. P. LUCAS_ HENRY FROWDE, M.A. PUBLISHER TO THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD LONDON, EDINBURGH, NEW YORK, TORONTO AND MELBOURNE A HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY OF THE BRITISH COLONIES VOL. V CANADA--PART I HISTORICAL BY C. P. LUCAS, C.B. OF BALLIOL COLLEGE, OXFORD AND THE COLONIAL OFFICE OXFORD AT THE CLARENDON PRESS MDCCCCI OXFORD PRINTED AT THE CLARENDON PRESS BY HORACE HART, M.A. PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY CONTENTS PAGE CHAP. I. EUROPEAN DISCOVERERS IN NORTH AMERICA TO THE END OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 CHAP. II. SAMUEL CHAMPLAIN AND THE FOUNDING OF QUEBEC . . . . 35 CHAP. III. THE SETTLEMENT OF CANADA AND THE FIVE NATION INDIANS 79 CHAP. IV. FRENCH AND ENGLISH DOWN TO THE PEACE OF UTRECHT . . 123 CHAP. V. THE MISSISSIPPI AND LOUISIANA . . . . . . . . . . . 147 CHAP. VI. ACADIA AND HUDSON BAY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 CHAP. VII. LOUISBOURG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191 CHAP. VIII. THE PRELUDE TO THE SEVEN YEARS' WAR . . . . . . . . 216 CHAP. IX. THE CONQUEST OF CANADA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250 CHAP. X. THE CONQUEST OF CANADA (_continued_) . . . . . . . . 289 CHAP. XI. GENERAL SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329 APPENDIX I. LIST OF FRENCH GOVERNORS OF CANADA . . . . . . . . 350 APPENDIX II. DATES OF THE PRINCIPAL EVENTS IN THE HISTORY OF CANADA DOWN TO 1763 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 351 LIST OF MAPS 1. Map of the French and English possessions in North America in the middle of the eighteenth century 2. Map of New England, New York, and Central Canada, showing the waterways 3. Map of Louisbourg 4. Map of Quebec [Illustration: Map of the French and English Possessions in NORTH AMERICA in the Middle of the 18th Century] {1} HISTORY OF CANADA CHAPTER I EUROPEAN DISCOVERERS IN NORTH AMERICA TO THE END OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY [Sidenote: _The British possessions in North America._] The British possessions in North America consist of Newfoundland and the Dominion of Canada. Under the Government of Newfoundland is a section of the mainland coast which forms part of Labrador, extending from the straits of Belle Isle on the south to Cape Chudleigh on the north. The area of these possessions, together with the date and mode of their acquisition, is as follows:-- _Name._ _How acquired._ _Date._ _Area in square miles._ Newfoundland Settlement 1583-1623 40,200 and Labrador 120,000 Canada Cession [Quebec] 1763 3,653,946 [Sidenote: _British possessions in North America and West Indies contrasted._] In the Introduction to a previous volume,[1] it was pointed out that all the British possessions in the New World have one common feature; viz. that they have been, in the main, fields of European settlement, and not merely trading stations or conquered dependencies; but that, in other respects--in climate, in geography, and in what may be called the strata of colonization--the West Indian and North American provinces of the Empire stand at opposite poles to each other. It may be added that, in North America, European colonization was later in time and slower in development than {2} in the central and southern parts of the continent; and, in order to understand why this was the case, some reference must be made to the geography of North America, more especially in its relation to Europe, and also to its first explorers, their motives, and their methods. [Footnote 1: Vol. ii, _West Indies_, pp. 3, 4.] [Sidenote: _Geographical outline of America._] The Old World lies west and east. In the New World the line of length is from north to south. The geographical outline of America, as compared with that of Europe and Asia, is very simple. There is a long stretch of continent, with a continuous backbone of mountains, running from the far north to the far south. The mountains line the western coast; on the eastern side are great plains, great rivers, broken shores, and islands. Midway in the line of length, where the Gulf of Mexico runs into the land, and where, further south, the Isthmus of Darien holds together North and South America by a narrow link, the semicircle of West Indian islands stand out as stepping-stones in the ocean for wayfarers from the old continent to the new. [Sidenote: _North and South America._] The two divisions of the American continent are curiously alike. They have each two great river-basins on the eastern side. The basin of the St. Lawrence is roughly parallel to that of the Amazon; the basin of the Mississippi to that of La Plata. The North American coast, however, between the mouth of the St. Lawrence and that of the Mississippi, is more varied and broken, more easy of access, than the South American shores between the Amazon and La Plata. On the other hand, South America has an attractive and accessible northern coast, in strong contrast to the icebound Arctic regions; and the Gulf of Venezuela, the delta of the Orinoco, and the rivers of Guiana, have called in traders and settlers from beyond the seas. [Sidenote: _South America colonized from both sides, North America only from the eastern side._] The history of colonization in North America has been, in the main, one of movement from east to west. In South America, on the other hand, the western side played almost from the first at least as important a part as the eastern. {3} The story of Peru and its Inca rulers shows that in old times, in South America, there was a civilization to be found upon the western side of the Andes, and the shores of the Pacific Ocean. European explorers penetrated into and crossed the continent rather from the north and west than from the east; and Spanish colonization on the Pacific coast was, outwardly at least, more imposing and effective than Portuguese colonization on the Atlantic seaboard. The great mass of land on the earth's surface is in the northern hemisphere; and in the extreme north the shores of the Old and New Worlds are closest to each other. Here, where the Arctic Sea narrows into the Behring Straits, it is easier to reach America from the west than from the east, from Asia than from Europe; but to pass from the extremity of one continent to the extremity of another is of little avail for making history; and the history of North America has been made from the opposite side, which lies over against Europe, where the shores are indented by plenteous bays and estuaries, and where there are great waterways leading into the heart of the interior. [Sidenote: _The rivers of North America._] [Sidenote: _English colonization in North America._] The main outlets of North America are, as has been said, the St. Lawrence and the Mississippi; while, on the long stretch of coast between them, the most important river is the Hudson, whose valley is a direct and comparatively easy highroad from the Atlantic to Lake Champlain and the St. Lawrence basin; and here it may be noticed that, though a Bristol ship first discovered North America, and though, from the time of Ralegh onwards, North America became the main scene of British colonization, the English allowed other nations to secure the keys of the continent, and ran the risk of being cut off from the interior. The French forestalled them on the St. Lawrence, and later took possession of the mouth of the Mississippi. The Dutch planted themselves on the Hudson between New England and the southern colonies, and New York, the present chief city of English-speaking America, was once New Amsterdam. Of all {4} colonizing nations the English have perhaps been the least scientific in their methods; and in no part of the world were their mistakes greater than in North America, where their success was eventually most complete. There was, however, one principle in colonization to which they instinctively and consistently held. While they often neglected to safeguard the obvious means of access into new-found countries, and, as compared with other nations, made comparatively little use of the great rivers in any part of the world, they laid hold on coasts, peninsulas, and islands, and kept their population more or less concentrated near to the sea. Thus, when the time of struggle came, they could be supported from home, and were stronger at given points than their more scientific rivals. If the French laid their plans to keep in their own hands the Mississippi, the Ohio, and the St. Lawrence, and thereby to shut off the colonies of the Atlantic seaboard from the continent behind, those colonies had the advantage of close contact with the sea, of comparatively continuous settlement, and of yearly growing power to break through the weak and unduly extended line with which the competing race tried to hem them in. But this contest between French and English, based though it was on geographical position, belongs to the Middle Ages of European colonization in America: let us look a little further back, and see how the Old and the New Worlds first came into touch with each other. [Sidenote: _Bacon on the discovery of North America._] In his history of King Henry VII, Bacon refers to the 'memorable accident' of the Cabots' great discovery, in the following passage:--'There was one Sebastian Gabato, a Venetian living in Bristow, a man seen and expert in cosmography and navigation. This man, seeing the success and emulating perhaps the enterprise of Christopherus Columbus in that fortunate discovery towards the south-west, which had been by him made some six years before, conceited with himself that lands might likewise be discovered towards {5} the north-west. And surely it may be he had more firm and pregnant conjectures of it than Columbus had of his at the first. For the two great islands of the Old and New World, being in the shape and making of them broad towards the north and pointed towards the south, it is likely that the discovery first began where the lands did nearest meet. And there had been before that time a discovery of some lands which they took to be islands, and were indeed the continent of America towards the north-west.'[2] Bacon goes on to surmise that Columbus had knowledge of this prior discovery, and was guided by it in forming his own conjectures as to the existence of land in the far west; and it is at least not unlikely that, when he visited Iceland in 1477, he would have heard tales of the Norsemen's voyages to America.[3] [Footnote 2: Spedding's edition of Bacon's works, 1870, vol. vi, p. 196.] [Footnote 3: For this visit, see Washington Irving's _Life and Voyages of Columbus_, bk. i, ch. vi.] [Sidenote: _Pre-Columbian explorations._] It would be out of place in this book to make more than a passing reference to the much-vexed question, how far the New World was known to Europeans before the days of Columbus and the Cabots. Indeed, if all the stories on the subject were proved, the fact would yet remain that, for all practical purposes, America was first revealed to the nations of Europe, when Columbus took his way across the Atlantic. It was likely that, when his discovery had been made, men would rise up to assert that it was not so great and not so new as had been at first imagined. The French claimed priority for a countryman of their own;[4] stories of Welsh and Irish settlement in America passed into circulation; the romance of the brothers Zeni was published, a tale of supposed Venetian adventure in the fourteenth century to the islands of the far north; and it was contended, more prosaically and with greater show of reason, that Basque fishermen had frequented {6} the banks of Newfoundland, before that island was discovered for England and thereby earned its present name. [Footnote 4: Cousin of Dieppe, who claimed to have discovered America in 1488, four years before Columbus reached the West Indies.] [Sidenote: _Voyages of the Norsemen._] The story of the Norsemen's voyages has a sounder foundation than any other of these early traditions and tales. Iceland is nearer to Greenland than to Norway: it has been abundantly proved that colonies were established and fully organized in Greenland in the Middle Ages; and it seems on the face of it unlikely that the enterprise and adventure of the seafaring sons of the north would have stopped short at this point, instead of carrying them on to the mainland of America. [Sidenote: _Their alleged discovery of North America._] The Norse are said to have come to Iceland about 875 A.D., where Christian Irish had already preceded them; and, in the following year, rocks far to the west were sighted by Gunnbiorn. A century later, in 984, Eric the Red came back from a visit to Gunnbiorn's land, calling it by the attractive name of Greenland. About 986, Bjarni Herjulfson, sailing from Iceland to Greenland, sighted land to the south-west; and, a few years later, about the year 1000, Leif, the son of Eric, who had brought the Christian religion to Greenland, sailed in search of the south-western land which Bjarni had seen. The record of his voyage claims to be the record of the discovery of America. He found the rocky barren shores of Labrador and Newfoundland, and called them from their appearance Helluland, or 'slateland.' He passed on to the mouth of the St. Lawrence and to Nova Scotia, calling it Markland, or the 'land of woods.' Then sailing still further south, he came to a land where vines grew wild, and which he called Vinland. This last was, it would seem, the New England coast, between Boston and New York; and here in after times, for a like reason, English settlers gave the name of Martha's or Martin's Vineyard to an island, which lies close to the shore south of Cape Cod.[5] In Vinland, it is stated, a Norse colony was {7} founded a few years after Leif's visit; and trade--mainly a timber trade--was carried on with Greenland down to the year 1347, after which all is a blank. [Footnote 5: A little further to the south on the coast of New Jersey, or Maryland, Verrazano 'saw in this country many vines growing naturally' (Hakluyt, vol. iii, p. 360, 1810 ed.).] No authentic inscriptions or remains, indicating Scandinavian discovery or settlement in America, have, it is said, been found anywhere outside Greenland, except at one point in the very far north;[6] and in their absence these northern tales cannot be absolutely verified. It can only be said that, in all probability, America was known to the Northmen in the Middle Ages, but that what happened in these dark days in the extreme north of Europe and the extreme north of America has no direct bearing upon the history of European colonization. [Footnote 6: See Justin Winsor's _Narrative and Critical History of America_, (vol. i, chap. ii) on 'Pre-Columbian Explorations.' The writer says, 'Nowhere in America, except on an island on the east shore of Baffin's Bay, has any authentic runic inscription been found outside of Greenland.' Reference should be made to the first chapter of Mr. Raymond Beazley's _John and Sebastian Cabot_ ('Builders of Greater Britain' series, 1898), in which the dates and particulars of the Norse discovery of America, as given above, are somewhat modified.] [Sidenote: _The way to the East._] At the time when modern history opens, there were two parts of the world which were--to use the Greek philosopher's phrase--'ends in themselves.' One was Europe or rather Southern Europe, the other was the East Indies; and the great problem was to find the best and shortest way from the one point to the other. [Sidenote: _Africa and America places on the road._] The overland trade routes through Syria and Egypt--by which Genoa, Venice, and the other city states of the Middle Ages had grown rich--had fallen in the main under Moslem control; and, accordingly, the growing nations of Europe began to take to the open sea. On the ocean, India can be reached from Europe either by going east or by going west. In the former case Africa comes in the way, in the latter America; and the position of these {8} two continents in the modern history of the world is, in their earliest stage, that of having been places on the road, not final goals. The Portuguese tried the way by Africa and succeeded. Vasco de Gama rounded the Cape, sailed up the eastern coast of Africa, and crossed to India. The Spaniards set sail in the opposite direction, and, failing in their original design, found instead a New World. Let us suppose that the conditions had been reversed, that Southern Africa, when reached, had proved as attractive as the West Indies; that its shores had been fertile and easy of access; that its rivers had been navigable, and that its turning-point had been as distant as Cape Horn; that, on the contrary, Columbus had discovered a channel through America, where he sought for it at the Isthmus of Darien, had found the American coasts and islands as little inviting as Africa, and behind them an expanse of sea no wider than the Indian Ocean. In that case America would have remained the Dark Continent, to be passed by, as Africa was passed by, on the way to the East; and hinging on this one central fact, that the Indies were the goal of discovery, the whole history of colonization would have been changed. As it was, the Spaniards, in the first place, found their way barred by America; and, in the second place, found America too good to be passed by, even if a thoroughfare had been found. Thus they assumed that they had really reached the Indies on their furthest side; and, by the time that the mistake had been finally cleared up, the riches and wonders of the New World had given it a position and standing of its own, over and above all considerations respecting the best way to the East. America then was discovered by being taken on the way to some other part of the world; it could not be passed by like Africa; and it was more attractive than Africa. Thus it was early colonized, while the great mass of the African {9} continent was left, almost down to our own day, unexplored and unknown. [Sidenote: _Reasons why the discovery and settlement of North America was later than that of Central and South America._] This statement, however, only holds true of that part of America which the Spaniards made their own; and the further question arises--Why was the discovery and settlement of North America a much slower process than the Spanish conquest and colonization of Central America and the West Indies? The north of Newfoundland is in the same latitude as the south of England; the mouth of the St. Lawrence lies directly over against the ports of Brittany; a line drawn due east from New York would almost pass through Madrid: therefore it seems as though sailors going westward from Europe would naturally make their way in the first instance to the North American coast; and, as a matter of fact, Cabot probably sighted the shores of Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, or Labrador before Columbus set foot upon the mainland of South America. [Sidenote: _Spain and Portugal the natural centres for Western discovery._] [Sidenote: _The Spaniards went to the south-west._] There are, however, ample historical and geographical reasons for the fact that, at the beginning of modern history, the stream of European discovery and colonization took a south-westerly rather than a westerly direction. The main course of European civilization has on the whole been from south-east to north-west. Its centre gradually shifted from Asia Minor and Phoenicia to Greece, from Greece to Rome, and finally from the shores of the Mediterranean to those of the Atlantic. The peninsula of Spain and Portugal stands half-way between the inner and the outer sea, and accordingly geography marked out this country to be the birthplace of the new and wider history of the world. Further, at the time when modern history begins, the Spaniards and Portuguese were better trained, more consolidated, more nearly come to their prime, more full of expansive force than the peoples of Northern Europe; so that their history combined with their geographical position to place them in {10} the front rank among the movers of the world. But Spain and Portugal look south-west: both countries are hot, sunny lands, and, while adventurers to the unknown would in any case be more attracted to regions where they would expect light and heat and tropical growth and colour, than to the bare, bleak stretches of the north, most of all would a southern race set out to find a new world in a southerly or south-westerly direction. Again, as has been seen, the early explorers were seeking for a sea-road to the Indies; and, as the tales of the Indies were glowing tales of glowing lands, men were more likely at first to start in search of them by way of the Equator than by way of the Pole. And they had guidance in their course. The Canaries, Madeira, and the Azores, lying away in the ocean to the south-west, were the half-mythical goals of ancient navigation. The Spaniards would naturally make for them in the first instance, and so far help themselves on their westward way. Wind and tide would prescribe the same line of discovery. The way to the West Indies is made easy by the north-easterly trade winds, whereas the passage to North America is in the teeth of the prevailing wind from the west. Those who take ship from Europe to North America meet the opposing force of the Gulf Stream; voyagers to the south-west, on the contrary, are borne by the Equatorial Current from the African coast to the Caribbean Sea. [Sidenote: _The West Indies more attractive than North America._] Easier to reach than North America, the West Indies and Central America were also more attractive when reached. The Spaniards found riches beyond their hopes, pearls in the sea, gold and silver in the land, and a race of natives who could be forced to fish for the one and to mine for the other. When they had discovered the New World, there was every inducement to make them forthwith conquer and colonize in countries where living promised to be more luxurious than in their own land. Adventurers to North America, on the contrary, found greater cold than they had {11} left behind them in the same latitudes in Europe, desolate shores, little trace of precious metal, and natives whom it was dangerous to offend and impossible to enslave. In the far north the cod fisheries were discovered, and furs were to be obtained by barter from the North American Indians; but such trade was not likely to lead to permanent settlement in the near future. Its natural outcome was not the founding of colonies, the building of cities, and the subjugation of continents, but, at the most, repeated visits in the summer time to the Newfoundland banks, or spasmodic excursions up the course of the St. Lawrence. Thus, for a century after Columbus first sailed to the west, while Central and South America became organized into a collection of Spanish provinces, the extreme north was left to Basque, Breton, and English fishermen; and the coast between the St. Lawrence and the Mississippi, where the English race was eventually to make its greatest effort and achieve its greatest success--this, the present territory of the United States, was, with the exception of Florida, little visited and scarcely known. [Sidenote: _Effect of finding mineral wealth in Central America._] The discovery of minerals in a district brings about dense population and a hurried settlement. Men come to fisheries or hunting-grounds at stated times, and leave to come again. The progress of agricultural colonization, if steady and continuous, is usually very slow. Thus, where Central America gave gold and silver, there adventurers from Europe hurried in and stayed. The fisheries of Newfoundland saw men come and go; the sea was there the attraction, not the land. The agricultural resources of Virginia and New England were left undeveloped by Europeans, until the time came when business-like companies were formed by men who could afford to wait, and when enthusiasts went over the Atlantic not so much to make money as to live patiently and in the fear of God. [Sidenote: _The North-West Passage._] But, though the sixteenth century passed away before men's eyes, which were dazzled with the splendour of the {12} tropics, had given more than passing glances to the sober landscape of North America, discoverers from Cabot onwards were not idle; and from the first, the ever powerful hope of finding a new road to the Indies took adventurers to the north-west in spite of cold and wind and tide. Because North America was unattractive in itself, therefore men seem to have imagined that it must be on the way to something better; and also, because it was unattractive in itself, they did not wait to see what could be made out of it, but kept perpetually pushing on to a further goal. They argued, as Bacon shows in the passage already quoted, and argued rightly, that in the north the Old and New Worlds were nearest together, and that here therefore was the point at which to cross from one to the other. They found sea channels evidently leading towards the west; they saw the great river of Canada[7] come widening down from the same quarter; and thus, long after the quest of the Indies had in Central America been swallowed up in the riches found on the way, in North America it remained the one great object of the men who went out from Europe, and of the Kings who sent them out. [Footnote 7: The idea that there was a way to the Indies by the St. Lawrence long continued. Thus Lescarbot writes (_Nova Francia_, Erondelle's translation, 1609, chap. xiii, p. 87) of the great river of Canada as 'taking her beginning from one of the lakes which do meet at the stream of her course (and so I think), so that it hath two courses, the one from the east towards France, the other from the west towards the south sea.'] As the first discoverer, Cabot, set sail to find the passage to Cathay, 'having great desire to traffic for the spices as the Portingals did,'[8] so all who came after during the century of exploration kept the same end firmly in view. Francis I of France dispatched Verrazano to find the passage to the East; Cartier, the Breton sailor, came back from the St. Lawrence with tales which savoured of the Indies, of 'a river that goeth south-west, from whence there is a whole {13} month's sailing to go to a certain land where there is neither ice nor snow seen'[9]--of a 'country of Saguenay, in which are infinite rubies, gold and other riches'[10]--of 'a land where cinnamon and cloves are gathered';[11] and his third voyage was, in his King's words, 'to the lands of Canada and Hochelaga, which form the extremity of Asia towards the west.'[12] Frobisher's voyage in 1576 led to the formation of a company of Cathay. As early as 1527, Master Robert Thorne wrote 'an information of the parts of the world' discovered by the Spaniards and Portuguese, and 'of the way to the Moluccas by the north.' Sir Humphrey Gilbert published 'a discourse' 'to prove a passage by the north-west to Cathaia and the East Indies'; and Richard Hakluyt himself, in the 'epistle dedicatory' to Philip Sydney, which forms the preface to his collection of _Divers Voyages touching the discovery of America_,[13] sums up the arguments for the existence of 'that short and easy passage by the north-west which we have hitherto so long desired.' In short, the record of the sixteenth century in North America was, in the main, a record of successive voyagers seeking after a way to the East, supplemented by the fishing trade which was attracted to the shores of Newfoundland. [Footnote 8: Gomara, quoted by Hakluyt, vol. iii, p. 30 (1810 ed.).] [Footnote 9: Hakluyt, vol. iii, p. 278.] [Footnote 10: Ibid. p. 281.] [Footnote 11: Ibid. p. 285.] [Footnote 12: See Parkman's _Pioneers of France in the New World_ (25th ed., 1888), p. 217.] [Footnote 13: Published in 1582; edited by the Hakluyt Society in 1850.] [Sidenote: _The early voyagers to North America were of various nationalities._] The two men who opened America to Europe were of Italian parentage--Columbus the Genoese, and Cabot, born at Genoa, domiciled at Venice.[14] The two great trading republics of the Middle Ages at once crowned their work in the world, and signed their own death warrant, in providing Spain and England with the sailors whose discoveries transferred the centre of life and movement from the Mediterranean {14} to the Atlantic. The King of France too turned to Italy for a discoverer to rival Columbus and Cabot, and sent Verrazano the Florentine, at the end of 1523, to search out the coasts of North America. [Footnote 14: As to Cabot's parentage see below, p. 18. If the voyages of the Zeni were genuine, the Venetians could have claimed a yet older share in the record of European connexion with America.] At the first dawn of discovery those coasts were not wholly given over to French or English adventurers. Though Florida was the northern limit of Spanish conquest and settlement, Spanish claims extended indefinitely over the whole continent; and the French King's scheme for the colonization of Canada, in 1541, under the leadership of Cartier and Roberval, roused the suspicion of the Spanish court as an attempt to infringe an acknowledged monopoly. The Portuguese at the very first took part in north-western discovery, and with good reason; for it was their own Indies which were the final goal, and they could not afford to leave to other nations to find a shorter way thither than their own route round the Cape. Thus it was that Corte Real set out from Lisbon for the north-west in the year 1500, having 'craved a general license of the King Emmanuel to discover the Newfoundland,' and 'sailed unto that climate which standeth under the north in 50 degrees of latitude.'[15] We find, too, records of Portuguese working in the same direction under foreign flags. In 1501 two patents were granted by Henry VII of England to English and Portuguese conjointly to explore, trade, and settle in America;[16] and, in 1525, Gomez, who had served under Magellan, and who, like Magellan, was a Portuguese in the service of Spain, set out from the Spanish port of Corunna to search for the North-West Passage.[17] [Footnote 15: See Purchas' _Pilgrims_, pt. 2, bk. x, chap. i. A brief 'collection of voyages, chiefly of Spaniards and Portugals, taken out of Antoine Galvano's Book of the Discoveries of the World.'] [Footnote 16: See Doyle's _History of the English in America_, vol. i, chap. iv.] [Footnote 17: See Justin Winsor, vol. iv, chap. i, p. 10.] [Sidenote: _The Basque fishermen._] Basque fishermen were among the very first visitors to Newfoundland, and, even after the North American continent {15} was becoming a sphere of French and English colonization, to the exclusion of the southern nations of Europe, the Spaniards and Portuguese still held their own in the fisheries. The record of almost every voyage to Newfoundland notices Spanish or Portuguese ships plying their trade on the banks.[18] A writer[19] in the year 1578, on 'the true state and commodities of Newfoundland,' tells us that, according to his information, there were at that date above one hundred Spanish ships engaged in the cod fisheries, in addition to twenty or thirty whalers from Biscay; that the Portuguese ships did not exceed fifty, and that those owned by French and Bretons numbered about one hundred and fifty. Edward Hayes, the chronicler of Gilbert's last voyage in 1583, relates how the Portuguese at Newfoundland provisioned the English admiral's ships for their return voyage, and adds that 'the Portugals and French chiefly have a notable trade of fishing upon this bank.'[20] [Footnote 18: See Parkman's _Pioneers of France in the New World_ (25th ed., 1888), pp. 189, 190, and notes.] [Footnote 19: Anthony Parkhurst. The letter was written to Hakluyt, and published in his collection, vol. iii, p. 171.] [Footnote 20: Hakluyt, vol. iii, p. 190.] In the middle of the eighteenth century, the Spanish Government still claimed for its subjects the right to fish on the Newfoundland coast, among other grounds on that of prior discovery, a claim which was only finally relinquished under the provisions of the Peace of Paris in 1763;[21] and, writing {16} about the same date, the author of the _European Settlements in America_ noted that the Spaniards still shared in the fishery.[22] [Footnote 21: As to the question whether Basque fishermen had found their way to Newfoundland before Cabot, see the note to p. 189 of Mr. Parkman's _Pioneers of France in the New World_. The reasons for thinking that these fishermen forestalled Cabot seem to be--(1) the argument of probability; (2) assertions of old writers to that effect; (3) the application of the Basque name 'Baccalaos' to Newfoundland, and the statement of Peter Martyr that Cabot found that word in use for codfish among the natives; (4) the claim advanced by the Spanish Government to right of fishing at Newfoundland on the ground of prior discovery by Biscayan fishermen. As to this last point, see _Papers relative to the rupture with Spain, 1762_. One source of friction at this time between Great Britain and Spain was what Pitt styles in a dispatch (p. 3) 'the stale and inadmissible pretensions of the Biscayans and Guipuscoans to fish at Newfoundland.' As to this claim, the Earl of Bristol, British minister at Madrid, writes (p. 53), 'With regard to the Newfoundland fishery, Mr. Wall urged, what I have also conveyed in some former despatches, that the Spaniards indeed pleaded, in favour of their claim to a share of the Bacallao trade, the first discovery of that island.'] [Footnote 22: _European Settlements in America_, pt. 6, chap. xxviii, 'Newfoundland.' The author (? Burke) says, 'The French and Spaniards, especially the former, have a large share (in the fishery).'] Hayes, who has just been quoted, tells us that more than thirty years before he wrote, i.e. about 1550, the Portuguese had touched at Sable Island and left there 'both neat and swine to breed.' In the same way they left live stock at Mauritius on their way to and from the East; and in like manner the Spaniards landed pigs at the Bermudas[23] on their early voyages to the West Indies. [Footnote 23: See vol. i of this series, p. 163, and vol. ii, p. 6 and note. Lescarbot states that the French Baron de Léry, who attempted to found a colony in North America in 1518, left cattle on Sable Island. See Parkman's _Pioneers of France_, p. 193, and Doyle's _History of the English in America_, vol. i, chap. v, p. 111.] [Sidenote: _Names in North America indicate visits from Southern Europe._] If evidence were wanted that, in the oldest days of movement from Europe to the West, southern sailors did not go only to tropical America, it would be found in the naming of the North American coasts and islands. The first point on the coast of North America, sighted by the first discoverer--the Italian Cabot--was spoken of under the Italian name of Prima Terra Vista. The name Baccalaos[24] tells of voyages of the Basques, as Cape Breton of visitors from Brittany; and, {17} after Corte Real's voyages, the east coast of Newfoundland was, as old maps testify, christened for a while Terra de Corte Reall.[25] Soon, however, the Spaniards found Mexico, Peru, and Central America enough and more than enough to absorb their whole attention; the Portuguese were over-weighted by their eastern empire and Brazil: and North America was given over, first to be explored and then to be settled, by the peoples of the north of Europe; who gathered strength as their southern rivals declined, and whose work was more lasting because more slow. [Footnote 24: 'Baccalaos' is the Spanish name for codfish. It is of Basque origin. Cabot, it is stated, gave the name generally to the lands which he found. The name was subsequently applied more especially to Newfoundland. Thus Edward Hayes in his account of Sir Humphrey Gilbert's last voyage, under the heading 'a brief relation of the Newfoundland and the commodities thereof' (Hakluyt, iii, 193), speaks of 'that which we do call the Newfoundland and the Frenchmen Bacalaos.' Various small islands, however, in these parts were also given this name by different writers. At the present day, on the maps of Newfoundland, an islet off the east coast, at the extreme north of the peninsula of Avalon, bears the name of Baccalieu. See Parkman, p. 189 note as above, and the chapter on the voyages of the Cabots in Justin Winsor's history, vol. iii.] [Footnote 25: The name 'Labrador' is supposed to have been derived from the fact that some North American natives, brought back in one of the ships which accompanied Corte Real on this second voyage, were said to be 'admirably calculated for labour and the best slaves I have ever seen.' Hence the name 'Laboratoris terra,' or Labrador. On Thorne's map (1527) printed in the _Divers Voyages to America_, there appears 'Nova terra Laboratorum dicta.' Sir Clements Markham, in his edition of the _Journal of Columbus, Cabot, and Corte Real_ (Hakluyt Society, 1893, Int. p. 51, note), says: 'There is no reference to Labrador in any of the authorities for the voyages of Corte Real. The King of Portugal is said to have hoped to derive good slave labour from the lands discovered by Corte Real. That is all. The name Labrador is not Portuguese; and Corte Real was never on the Labrador coast.' Another derivation given is: 'This land was discovered by the English from Bristol, and named Labrador because the one who saw it first was a labourer from the Azores.' One more derivation is that Labrador was the name of the Basque captain of a fishing-vessel. See Justin Winsor, vol. iv, chap. i, pp. 2, 46, and Parkman's _Pioneers of France in the New World_, p. 216, note.] [Sidenote: _The Cabots._] On March 5, 1496, King Henry VII of England granted a patent to 'John Cabot, citizen of Venice,' and to his three sons--Lewis, Sebastian, and Sancius--empowering them 'to discover unknown lands under the king's banner.'[26] Under this patent--'the earliest surviving document which connects England with the New World'[27]--North America was discovered. [Footnote 26: Quoted from the marginal note to the patent. See Hakluyt's _Divers Voyages touching the discovery of America_, published by the Hakluyt Society, 1850, p. 21.] [Footnote 27: From Doyle's _History of the English in America_, vol. i, chap. iv.] Almost every point connected with the voyages of the Cabots is dark and doubtful. What the father did and what {18} the son, whence they came, and whither they went, is all uncertain. The tale of Columbus and his voyages is known to all the world; but readers are left to grope after the Cabots, as the latter groped after the strange wild regions of the north-west. John Cabot, it would seem, was a Genoese who settled in Venice. There he was admitted to the rights of citizenship. He married a Venetian lady, and in Venice probably his three sons were born and passed their childhood. He travelled on the sea, visiting the coasts of Arabia, and forming, it may be, schemes to discover a new route to the far East. He came to England, having previously attempted to gain support for his projected voyages in Spain and Portugal, and he took up his residence in either London or Bristol. The exact date of his arrival in this country is unknown; but, either shortly before or shortly after he came, Columbus crossed the Atlantic for the first time in 1492. The news gave a stimulus to other would-be discoverers, and encouraged the Kings of Europe to further their plans. Hence Cabot and his sons obtained their patent in 1496. It was little that King Henry VII gave to the Italian sailors. Their voyages were to be made 'upon their own proper costs and charges,' and in return for his licence, the King was to receive a fifth of the profits. The enterprise was countenanced but not supported by the state, and the English Government in these early days, as in the times which came after, left the work of discovery and colonization in the hands of private adventurers. Bristol was the port of departure, and a Bristol book contains the following notice of the voyage:--'In the year 1497, the 24th of June, on St. John's day, was Newfoundland found by Bristol men in a ship called the _Matthew_.'[28] John Cabot and Sebastian his son probably both sailed in the _Matthew_, and they commanded a crew of English sailors. The voyage {19} was a short summer venture, beginning in May and ending with the close of July or the beginning of August. America was seen and touched, the land-fall being either the northern end of Cape Breton island, or the coast of Labrador, or Cape Bonavista in Newfoundland. The English flag was planted on American soil, but no exploration took place; nothing was achieved but the one great fact of discovery. In the following February, new letters patent were issued--on this occasion to John Cabot alone; and a second time, in the summer of 1498, the ships started from Bristol. Again, it is conjectured, both father and son were on board; and this time the North American coast seems to have been skirted from the region of icebergs and the banks of Newfoundland as far south as the Carolinas. In reference to this second voyage, Sebastian Cabot wrote that he sailed 'unto the latitude of sixty-seven degrees and a half under the North Pole,' and 'finding still the open sea without any manner of impediment, he thought verily by that way to have passed on still the way to Cathaio which is in the East.'[29] The way to the East, however, was left unopened, to tantalize after-comers, and to be a kind of 'will o' the wisp,' leading men on to barren shores and Arctic seas, though the continent which they had already found was worth all the riches of the Indies. [Footnote 28: Barrett's _History and Antiquities of Bristol_ (Bristol, 1789), p. 172.] [Footnote 29: From Ramusio, quoted in 'a note of Sebastian Cabot's voyage of discovery' (Hakluyt's _Divers Voyages_, p. 25). For the much-vexed question of the Cabots and their voyages, reference should be made to _John Cabot the Discoverer of North America and Sebastian his son_, by Henry Harrisse, London, 1896; to the _Journal of Columbus, Cabot, and Corte Real_, edited for the Hakluyt Society by Sir Clements Markham, 1893; to Doyle's _History of the English in America_, vol. i, Appendix B, 'The Cabots and their Voyages'; and to Mr. Raymond Beazley's _John and Sebastian Cabot_ ('Builders of Greater Britain' series, 1898). The result of a great deal of learning is after all little but conjecture.] [Sidenote: _Corte Real._] The next great voyager to North America was Gaspar Corte Real, a Portuguese. Twice he sailed to the north-west, in 1500 and 1501, on the earlier voyage sighting Greenland {20} and the east coast of Newfoundland, and on the later working north from Chesapeake Bay. He was lost on the second voyage; and his brother Miguel, who went in search of him in 1502, after finding 'many entrances of rivers and havens,' was lost also.[30] [Footnote 30: The voyages of the Corte Reals are given in Purchas' _Pilgrims_, pt. 2, bk. x. See Justin Winsor, vol. iv, chap. i, on Cortereal, Verrazano, &c. See also the volume of the Hakluyt Society referred to in the previous note.] [Sidenote: _French explorers._] At the beginning of the sixteenth century, if not earlier, Frenchmen took their place among the explorers of the world, and the Norman and Breton seaports began to send their ships across the Atlantic. Denys of Honfleur is said to have reached the Gulf of St. Lawrence in 1506; in 1508, Aubert of Dieppe brought American Indians back to France; and in 1518 Baron de Léry made the first, a stillborn, attempt to found a French colony in North America.[31] [Footnote 31: See above, p. 16, note 23.] [Sidenote: _Verrazano._] At the end of the fifteenth century, the consolidation of France had been completed by the marriage of Charles VIII with Anne of Brittany, and from this time France began to compete with Spain. Francis I came to the throne in 1515, and his personal rivalry with Charles V, German Emperor and Spanish King in one, quickened the competition between the French and Spanish peoples. Thus it was that the French court turned its attention to the work of exploration, and Francis sent forth the Italian Verrazano with four ships from Dieppe 'to discover new lands by the ocean.'[32] Sailing at the end of 1523, Verrazano was driven back by tempest; but, starting again, he left Madeira to cross the Atlantic on January 17, 1524. He reached the shores of Carolina; then coasted northward, landing at various points; and, having sailed as far north as {21} Newfoundland--'the land that in times past was discovered by the Britons (Bretons), which is in fifty degrees'--he 'concluded to return into France.' [Footnote 32: From 'The relation of John Verarzanus,' given in Hakluyt's _Divers Voyages_, p. 55, and there also headed 'The Discovery of Morum Bega' (Norumbega). It is given too in the ordinary collection, vol. iii, p. 357.] He brought home to his King a sober and systematic report of the North American coast--a report which meant business, and was not tricked out with vague surmises and impossible tales; but, within a year from his return, the strength of France was for a while broken at the battle of Pavia. He himself died soon afterwards, hanged, it is said, by the Spaniards as a pirate; and for ten years there is no record of any French explorer following in his steps, though French ships found their way over the ocean to the cod-fisheries of Newfoundland. [Sidenote: _Cartier._] The year 1534 is a memorable one in the annals alike of France and of North America. It is the year from which must be dated the first beginnings of New France on the banks of the St. Lawrence. The discoverer of Canada was Jacques Cartier, a Breton sailor of St. Malo. He went out to explore the unknown world, not at his own risk, but as the agent of Brian Chabot, High Admiral of France. Sailing from St. Malo, on April 20, 1534, he came to Newfoundland, passed through the straits of Belle Isle, and entered the Gulf of St. Lawrence. He sailed into Chaleurs Bay under the July sun, describing the country as 'hotter than the country of Spain, and the fairest that can possibly be found';[33] and, having set up a cross on Gaspé Peninsula, he reached St. Malo again on September 5, bringing with him two Indian children as living memorials of his voyage. [Footnote 33: Hakluyt, vol. iii, p. 257.] He had discovered a hot, fair land, widely different from the bleak and rock-bound coasts of Newfoundland and Labrador; and the good report which he brought of his discoveries was more than enough to find him backing for a second venture. Accordingly, in the following year, on May 19, 1535, he sailed again from St. Malo, and, reaching {22} the straits of Belle Isle after storm and tempest, took his way, the first of European explorers, up the great river of Canada. He moored his three ships below the rock of Quebec--then the site of Stadaconé, a native Indian village, and the dwelling-place of a chief Donnaconna, who is styled in the narrative the Lord of Canada. There he left his two larger vessels, and pushed on in his pinnace and boats to the town of Hochelaga. That town, the Indians had told him, was the capital of the land; and he found it, palisaded and fortified in native fashion, where Montreal now stands.[34] The Frenchmen were received as gods by the Indians; they were asked, like the Apostles of old, to touch and heal the sick; and, ever mindful of the duty of spreading the Christian religion, they read the gospel to their savage admirers in the strange French tongue, to cure their souls if they could not mend their bodies. [Footnote 34: As Mr. Parkman points out (_Pioneers of France_, p. 212), Quebec and Montreal were in old days, as now, the centres of population in Lower Canada. 'Stadaconé and Hochelaga, Quebec and Montreal, in the sixteenth century, as in the nineteenth, were the centres of Canadian population.'] Returning down stream to their ships, they passed the winter underneath Quebec, amid ice and snow, stricken with scurvy, and distrustful of their Indian neighbours; and at length, on the return of summer, they set sail for France, carrying away the Indian chief Donnaconna and some of his companions, to die in a far-off land. They reached St. Malo in the middle of July, 1536, and so ended Cartier's second voyage to 'the New found lands by him named New France.'[35] [Footnote 35: End of the narrative of Cartier's second voyage in Hakluyt, vol. iii, p. 285.] [Sidenote: _Failure of Roberval's attempt at colonization._] Between four and five years passed, and then the Breton sailor set out again. This time a definite scheme of settlement was projected, the instructions were more elaborate than before, the preparations were on a larger scale. The money {23} was found by the crown, and the King was to receive one-third of the profits. A French nobleman, De Roberval, was to go out as the King's lieutenant in the New World, and was given the title of Lord of Norumbega,[36] while Cartier was appointed Captain-General. The objects of the expedition were to explore, to colonize, and to convert the heathen; and its leaders were, like Columbus, empowered to recruit colonists from the prisons at home. Cartier set out in advance of Roberval, in May, 1541. Again he sailed up the St. Lawrence, reached in his boats a point above Montreal, and, as before, wintered on the river; but this time at the mouth of the Cap Rouge, some way higher up than Quebec. His leader, Roberval, did not start till April, 1542; and, when in June he reached St. John's harbour in Newfoundland, he was met by Cartier, who had broken up his colony in disgust, and was on his way home to France. In spite of Roberval's remonstrances, Cartier left by night on his return voyage, and the Lord of Norumbega went on alone to the St. Lawrence. He planted his settlement at Cap Rouge, where Cartier had last sojourned, but it proved a miserable failure. The supplies were insufficient, the Governor turned out a savage despot, and after about a year the colony came to an end. [Sidenote: _Norumbega._] [Footnote 36: As to Norumbega, see Parkman's _Pioneers of France_, pp. 216 and 253, notes, and Justin Winsor, vol. iii, chap. vi, on 'Norumbega and its English explorers.' The writer of this latter chapter (p. 185) says the territory of Norumbega never included Baccalaos, 'though Baccalaos, an old name of Newfoundland, sometimes included New England.' Norumbega, an Indian name, covered the district now included in the state of Maine, and was sometimes extended to New Brunswick and Nova Scotia on the north, and part of New England on the south. Michael Loki's map (1582) makes Norumbega the whole district between the river and gulf of St. Lawrence and the Hudson. The river of Norumbega was the Penobscot, and on it a city of Norumbega was given a fabulous existence. Lescarbot (_Histoire de la Nouvelle France_, 1609, bk. i, chap. i) speaks of 'pais qu'on a appellé d'un nom Alleman Norumbega, lequel est par les quarante cinq degrez.'] With this disappointing and disastrous failure, the curtain fell on the prologue of the great drama of New France, and did not rise again for more than fifty years. For the French, {24} as for the English, the sixteenth century was a time of exploring, of training, of making experiments; and it was not till the seventeenth century dawned that permanent colonization began. Then in the Bourbons the French had rulers who, with all their faults, were abler and stronger than the princes of the house of Valois; and in Champlain they had a leader as daring as, and more statesmanlike than, Cartier. But it was by Cartier that the ground had been broken and the seed first sown. His voyages made Canada[37] in some sort familiar to Europeans. He opened the St. Lawrence to be the highway into North America,[38] and he gave to the hill above the native town of Hochelaga the name of the Royal Mount, which is still perpetuated in Montreal. He brought the French into Canada, and, though his settlement failed, the French connexion remained. Fishermen and fur-traders followed in his steps, and in fullness of time the New France, which his discoveries conceived, was brought to birth and grew to greatness. [Footnote 37: For the meaning of the name 'Canada,' see Parkman's _Pioneers of France_, p. 202, note. It is of Indian origin, probably meaning 'town.' Cartier called the country about Quebec Canada, having Saguenay below and Hochelaga above. Donnaconna, the native chief at Quebec, was called Lord of Canada.] [Footnote 38: On his second voyage Cartier sailed into a bay at the mouth of the St. Lawrence, where he stayed from the eighth to the twelfth of August, and 'named the said gulf St. Lawrence his bay' (Hakluyt, iii, 263), St. Lawrence's Day being the 10th of August. Hence the river, which he called the river of Hochelaga or the great river of Canada, derived its name. See Parkman, p. 202.] [Sidenote: _English exploration in North America in the sixteenth century._] [Sidenote: _Hore's voyage._] [Sidenote: _Acts of Parliament relating to the Newfoundland fisheries._] A Bristol ship[39] having first discovered North America, it might have been expected that the years succeeding Cabot's voyages would have been fruitful in English adventure to the West; but, as far as records show, little was done by Englishmen during the first half of the sixteenth century to open up the New World; and even Cartier's bold exploits roused little or no spirit of rivalry in Great Britain. Indeed, all through {25} this century no English voyager seems to have turned his mind to Canada and its river. The explorers went to the Arctic seas, the would-be colonizers to Newfoundland or Virginia. Between 1500 and 1550 two voyages alone have been actually chronicled, though passing reference is made to others. Of these two, the first was in 1527, when Albert de Prado, a canon of St. Paul's, sailed with two ships in search of the Indies, reaching Newfoundland and the North American coast. The second was in 1536, under a leader named Hore--a voyage of which a graphic account is given in Hakluyt. On the coast of Newfoundland the adventurers suffered the last extremes of starvation, until at length even cannibalism began among them; and the survivors owed their safety to the coming of a French ship, which they seized and in which they returned home. It is clear, however, that before the middle of the century the Newfoundland fisheries had become a recognized branch of English trade, for the traffic was safeguarded by two Acts of Parliament, one passed in 1540, in Henry VIII's reign, the other in 1548, in the reign of King Edward VI. The object of the second Act was to prohibit the exaction of any dues by way of licence from men engaged in the Iceland or Newfoundland fishing trade, and Hakluyt's note upon it is that 'by this Act it appeareth that the trade out of England to Newfoundland was common and frequented about the beginning of the reign of Edward VI, namely, in the year 1548.'[40] [Footnote 39: For this passage, see Doyle's _History of the English in America_, vol. i, chap. iv.] [Footnote 40: Hakluyt, vol. iii, p. 170.] [Sidenote: _Return of Sebastian Cabot to England._] About this date Sebastian Cabot again appears upon the scene. In 1512 he had entered the Spanish service; and, after a visit to England, had returned to Spain, where, from 1518 to 1547, he held the appointment of Pilot-Major to the King and Emperor Charles V.[41] At the end of 1547 or the beginning of 1548, he was induced in his old age to come back to the land, for and from which, more than half a century {26} before, his or his father's great discovery had been made; and King Edward VI rewarded his services by appointing him Grand Pilot in England. His mind was still set on finding a way to the Indies by the Northern Sea. He became governor of 'the mystery and company of the Merchant Adventurers for the discovery of regions, dominions, islands, and places unknown'; and in Hakluyt's pages[42] may be found his instructions 'for the direction of the intended voyage for Cathay.' [Footnote 41: See _The Dictionary of National Biography_, s. v.] [Footnote 42: Vol. i, p. 251.] [Sidenote: _The North-East Passage and Sir Hugh Willoughby._] [Sidenote: _The Muscovy Company._] The company was not finally incorporated by royal charter till 1554-5, but in the preceding year, 1553, they sent out an expedition of three ships to try for a North-East Passage. The leader of the expedition, Sir Hugh Willoughby, was, with the crews of two ships, frozen to death on the coast of Lapland; but Richard Chancellor, the captain of the third ship, reached the port on which the town of Archangel now stands, and made his way overland to Moscow. This was the beginning of British trade with Russia. The Merchant Adventurers became known as the Muscovy Company, and their efforts were directed to the overland traffic between Asia and Europe, which came by Bokhara, Astrakhan, and the Volga, to the meeting of the east and west at Novgorod. [Sidenote: _Martin Frobisher._] But, important as was this new development of trade, the British explorers, whose names have lived, still took their way for the most part over the Atlantic, making ever for the West. In June, 1576, Martin Frobisher sailed from Blackwall to the north-west 'for the search of the straight or passage to China.'[43] He sighted Greenland; and, sailing west, came to the inlet in the American coast, north of the Hudson Straits, which, after him, was called Frobisher Bay. This arm of the sea he took to be a passage between the two continents, the right-hand coast, as he went west, seeming to be Asia, the left-hand coast America. He came back {27} to Harwich in October, bringing with him a sample of black stone supposed to contain gold; and thus, to the vain hope of a short passage to the Indies, he added the more dangerous attraction of possible mineral wealth in the Arctic regions. Men's hopes were raised; a company of Cathay was formed, with Michael Lok for governor; and, as their Captain-General, Frobisher sailed again in May, 1577, 'for the further discovering of the passage to Cathay.'[44] Again he sighted Greenland. Again he reached the bay which had been the turning-point of his former voyage. He took possession of the barren northern land in his Queen's name; and, when he came back in September, 'Her Majesty named it very properly Meta Incognita, as a mark and bound utterly hitherto unknown.'[45] The voyage was fruitless, but the stones brought home were still thought to promise gold, and so, in the following May, Frobisher started once more on a third voyage to the north. Fifteen ships went with him from Harwich, bearing 'a strong fort or house of timber'[46] to be set up on arrival in the Arctic regions, and intended to shelter one hundred men through the coming winter. The hundred men included miners, goldfiners, gentlemen, artisans, 'and all necessary persons'[46]--as though this desolate region were to become the scene of a thriving colony. They set sail, reached the coast of Greenland, and claimed it in the Queen's name. They fell in with the Esquimaux; they crossed the channel now known as Davis Strait to the Meta Incognita; and they came back in the autumn with no result beyond the report of a new imaginary island. This was the end of Frobisher's enterprise, but in the next forty years other English sailors followed where he had gone before, and opened up to geographical knowledge fresh stretches of icebound coast and wintry sea. Davis, Hudson, Baffin, and others, gave their names to straits and bays, but it is impossible here to trace the record of their courage and endurance. {28} No quest has ever been so fruitful of daring, patient seamanship, none has ever been so barren of practical results, as that for the North-West Passage. What Frobisher went to find in the sixteenth century, Franklin still sought in the nineteenth: and through all the ages of British exploration has run the ever receding hope of finding a short way through ice and snow to the sunny lands of the East. [Footnote 43: Hakluyt, vol. iii, p. 52.] [Footnote 44: Ibid. p. 56.] [Footnote 45: Ibid. p. 104.] [Footnote 46: Ibid. p. 105.] [Sidenote: _Sir Humphrey Gilbert._] In Great Britain the sixteenth century was the age of adventurers, casting about for ways to other worlds, or freebooting where Spain and Portugal claimed ownership of land and sea; but in that time two men stand out as having had definite views of settlement, and as having been colonizers in advance of their age. They are Sir Humphrey Gilbert and his half-brother, Sir Walter Ralegh. Edward Hayes, the author of a narrative of Gilbert's attempt to found a colony in Newfoundland, speaks of him as 'the first of our nation that carried people to erect an habitation and government in those northerly countries of America,'[47] and no nobler Englishman could well be found to head the list of English colonizers of the New World. Chivalrous in nature, bold in action, he was at the same time 'famous for his knowledge both by sea and land';[48] and it was his _Discourse to prove a passage by the north-west to Cathaia and the East Indies_, which is said to have determined Frobisher to explore the north. [Footnote 47: Hakluyt, vol. iii, p. 185.] [Footnote 48: From Fuller's _Worthies of Devonshire_.] [Sidenote: _His patent of colonization._] In June, 1578, Gilbert obtained from Queen Elizabeth his celebrated patent 'for the inhabiting and planting of our people in America.'[49] The grant was a wide one. It gave him full liberty to explore and settle in any 'remote heathen and barbarous lands, countries, and territories, not actually possessed of any Christian prince or people'; and it constituted him full owner of the land where he settled, within {29} a radius of two hundred leagues from the place of settlement. It was subject only to a reservation to the Crown of one-fifth of the gold and silver found, and to a condition that advantage should be taken of the grant within six years. For three or four years Gilbert's efforts to colonize under this patent were fruitless; he organized an expedition which came to nothing, and other men, to whom he temporarily resigned his rights, were equally unsuccessful. [Footnote 49: Hakluyt, vol. iii, p. 174.] [Sidenote: _His voyage to Newfoundland._] At length, on June 11, 1583, he set sail from Cawsand Bay, near Plymouth, to try his luck for the last time in the western world. There were five ships, one of which was fitted out by Ralegh,[50] and one, the _Golden Hind_, had for its captain and owner, Edward Hayes, the chronicler of the voyage. The company numbered 260 men all told, including shipwrights, carpenters, and other artisans, 'mineral men and refiners,' 'morris dancers' and other caterers of amusement 'for solace of our people and allurement of the savages.'[51] These last were evidence that more was projected than mere temporary exploration. It was intended, writes Hayes, 'to win' the savages 'by all fair means possible'; and with this end in view the freight of the ships included 'petty haberdashery wares to barter with those simple people.' On the third of August the little fleet entered the harbour of St. John's in Newfoundland, where they found thirty-six ships of all nations. They came expecting resistance, but met with none. When Gilbert made known his intention to proclaim British sovereignty over the island, the sailors and fishermen present seem to have willingly acquiesced; and when he wanted to revictual and refit his ships, the necessary supplies were readily forthcoming.[52] [Footnote 50: This ship deserted soon after starting.] [Footnote 51: Hakluyt, vol. iii, pp. 189, 190.] [Footnote 52: Hayes says, 'The Portugals (above other nations) did most willingly and liberally contribute' (Hakluyt, vol. iii, p. 192). See above, p. 15.] [Sidenote: _Newfoundland declared to be a British possession._] The want of a settled authority, of some guarantee for law {30} and order, in the harbours and on the coasts of Newfoundland, was no doubt felt by those who came year by year to the fisheries, and Sir Humphrey Gilbert's name and high repute may well have been known to others than his own countrymen. Two days after his arrival he took formal possession of the land, with ceremony of rod and turf, in the name of his sovereign; the arms of England were set up; three simple laws were enacted--providing that the recognized religion should be in accordance with the forms of the Church of England, safeguarding the sovereign rights of the Queen of England, and enjoining due respect for her name; and then Gilbert issued land grants as proprietor of the soil. In the words of one of the accounts which Hakluyt has preserved,[53] 'he did let, set, give, and dispose of many things as absolute Governor there, by virtue of Her Majesty's letters patents.' [Footnote 53: Peckham's account, Hakluyt, vol. iii, p. 209.] Thus was Newfoundland declared to be a British possession, and such are its claims to be our oldest colony. The annexation was complete in form and substance; no protest was entered against it by those whom it concerned; land was granted by the recognized proprietor, and nothing was wanting to constitute a claim which should last, and has lasted, to all time. Frobisher proclaimed the sovereignty of England over Arctic lands, but his proclamation was as barren as the shores over which it extended. Gilbert, on the contrary, went to a place where European sailors had long foregathered; he went there as an English Governor; his authority was unquestioned, his grants were accepted, and when he read his commission and set up the arms of England at the harbour of St. John, he took the first step, and a very long step, towards British dominion in the New World. [Sidenote: _Gilbert's death._] Gilbert had great hopes of finding precious metal in Newfoundland; and his principal mining expert, a Saxon, {31} promised him a rich yield of silver from the ore which was collected in the island. That ore, however, was lost early on the voyage home, and the miner himself was lost with it in the wreck of the largest ship--the _Delight_. A far greater loss, however, was in store for the ill-fated expedition. They left St. John's on August 20, making for Sable Island, which had been stocked years before by the Portuguese.[54] In a few days the _Delight_ foundered on a rock; and the weather became so bad that, at the end of the month, Gilbert consented to make for home. He was in the smallest ship, the _Squirrel_, a little ten-ton vessel, as being the best suited to explore the creeks and inlets of the American coast; and, in spite of the remonstrances of his companions, he would not leave her on the return voyage. 'We are as near heaven by sea as by land,' were his last words, before the ship went down in the middle of the Atlantic with all on board; and thus, fearless and faithful unto death, he found his resting-place in the sea. The story is one which stands out to all time in the annals of English adventure and English colonization. It was meet and right that the founder of the first English colony should be a Devonshire sailor of high repute, of stainless name, chivalrous, unselfish, strong in the fear of God. It was no less meet that his grave should be in the stormy Atlantic, midway between the Old World and the New. Thus those who came after had a forerunner of the noblest type; and the ships, which from that time to this have carried Englishmen to America, may ever have been passing by where Humphrey Gilbert went to his rest. [Footnote 54: See above, p. 16.] [Sidenote: _Sir Walter Ralegh._] [Sidenote: _His attempts to colonize Virginia._] Gilbert's half-brother, Sir Walter Ralegh, was cast in the same mould, but the record of his doings lies in the main beyond the range of this book. Virginia and Guiana were the scenes of his attempts at colonization, not Newfoundland or the coasts and rivers of Canada. In 1584, the year after {32} Gilbert had been lost at sea, Ralegh obtained from Queen Elizabeth a patent which was practically the same as Gilbert's grant of 1578; and, at the end of April, he sent out two ships, commanded by two captains named Amidas and Barlow, to explore and report upon a likely place for an English settlement.[55] [Footnote 55: Accounts of this and the following voyages are given in the third volume of Hakluyt. See also the first book of John Smith's general history of Virginia, _The English Voyages to the Old Virginia_, in Mr. Arber's edition, _The English Scholar's Library_.] They sailed more towards the south than previous English explorers, and eventually reached the island of Roanoke, which is now within the limits of North Carolina. Everything seemed bright and sweet and healthful, and the natives of the country were friendly and hospitable, 'such as live after the manner of the golden age.'[56] So they came back in the autumn with a story full of hope for the future, and the virgin Queen christened the land of promise Virginia. [Footnote 56: Hakluyt, vol. iii, p. 304.] Ralegh lost no time in sending out settlers. In the next year, 1585, seven ships started with 108 colonists on board. The expedition was commanded by Sir Richard Grenville, and among other captains with him was Thomas Cavendish, afterwards celebrated, like Drake, for sailing round the world. Ralph Lane, a soldier of fortune, was chosen to remain in charge of the colony, and with him was Amidas, the explorer of the previous year, who was styled 'Admiral of the country.' They went by the West Indies, touching at the Spanish islands of Porto Rico and Hispaniola, and, at the end of June, they reached Roanoke. Here they formed their settlement, and, when Grenville and his ships left in August and September, they brought back as bright a report as Amidas and Barlow had given the year before. Already, however, before Grenville's departure, there had been friction between the Indians and the new-comers; and, as months went on, the new-born colony became in constant {33} danger of extermination. Still Lane contrived to hold his own, exploring north and west, gleaning reports of pearls and mines, and a possible passage to the south sea, until the winter and spring were past and the month of June had come again. A fleet of twenty-three ships was then seen out at sea, and, to the joy of the settlers, proved to be an English expedition under Sir Francis Drake, who was returning home laden with spoils from the Spanish main. Drake, at Lane's request, placed one of his ships with seamen and supplies at the disposal of the colony; but a storm arose, and the ship was blown out to sea. Daunted by this fresh trouble, the settlers determined to give up their enterprise and return home. They asked for passages on board Drake's vessels: the request was granted; and they abandoned Roanoke only a fortnight before Grenville arrived with relief, long expected and long delayed. Finding the island deserted, Grenville left fifteen men in possession and himself came home. So far, Ralegh's scheme had failed; but the failure was due to untoward circumstances, not to the nature of the country, and he still persevered in his efforts. The very next year, in 1587, he sent out a fresh band of settlers, 150 in number; giving them for a leader John White, who had taken part in the former expedition. The arrangements for forming a colony were more fully organized than before; and to White and twelve Assistants Ralegh 'gave a charter and incorporated them by the name of Governor and Assistants of the city of Ralegh in Virginia.'[57] When the colonists reached Roanoke, they found that the fifteen men left by Grenville had disappeared, driven out, as they learnt, by the Indians. Notwithstanding, they renewed the old settlement; and, in the face of native enmity, began again the work of colonizing America. Before the end of the summer, White sailed for England, to give an account of what had been done; and, on his return home, Ralegh prepared to send {34} relief to the colony. But war with Spain was now on hand, freebooting was more attractive than colonizing, one attempt and another to send ships to Virginia miscarried; and when at length, late in 1589, White reached the scene of his settlement, he found it dismantled and deserted. So ended the first attempt to colonize Virginia. Success was not to come for a few more years, until the sixteenth century had passed and gone. [Footnote 57: Hakluyt, vol. iii, p. 341.] [Sidenote: _General results of the sixteenth century._] Before 1600, Newfoundland had been annexed by Great Britain, but not one single English or French colony had as yet taken root in America. Nevertheless the century was far from barren of results. The way had been made plain, the ground had been cleared, the wild oats of adventure and knight-errantry had been sown, and the peoples were sobering down to steadier and more prudent enterprise. Beaten on the sea, raided and plundered in their own tropical domain, the Spaniards were ceasing to be a terror and a hindrance to the nations of Northern Europe; and, as the latter grew from youth to lusty manhood, the map of the great North American continent unfolded itself before their eyes. Then Champlain went to work in Canada, and John Smith in Virginia; Jesuits on the St. Lawrence, and Puritans in the New England states; and so the grain of mustard-seed, cast into American soil, grew into a great tree, which already, before three centuries have ended, bids fair to overshadow the earth. N.B.--The references to Hakluyt made in the notes above are to the 1810 edition. Among modern books most use has been made in this chapter of:-- PARKMAN'S _Pioneers of France in the New World_; DOYLE'S _History of the English in America_, vol. i; and JUSTIN WINSOR'S _Narrative and Critical History of America_. Reference should also be made to Sir J. BOURINOT'S monograph on 'Cape Breton,' first published in the _Proceedings and Transactions of the Royal Society of Canada_, vol. ix, 1891, and since published separately. {35} CHAPTER II SAMUEL CHAMPLAIN AND THE FOUNDING OF QUEBEC The history of Canada has been so often and so well told, that an attempt simply to reproduce the narrative would be worse than superfluous. The scheme of the present series is, in the field of colonization and within the present limits of the British Empire, to trace the connexion between history and geography; and from this point of view more especially the story of New France will be recorded. [Sidenote: _New France._] Various parts of the world, now British possessions, were once owned by other European nations, notably by the Dutch or French. The last volume of the series dealt with what was in past times a dependency of the Netherlands, the Cape Colony, the mother colony of South Africa. The present volume deals with a land which the French made peculiarly their own; where, as hardly anywhere else, they settled, though not in large numbers; not merely conquering or ruling the conquered, not only leaving a permanent impress of manners, law, and religion, but slowly and partially colonizing a country and forming a nation. Lower Canada, the basin of the St. Lawrence, was rightly included under the wider name of New France, for here France and the French were reproduced in weakness and in strength. It was a land well suited to the French character and physique. Much depended on tactful dealings with the North American Indians, a species of diplomacy in which Frenchmen excelled. The commercial value of Canada consisted mainly in the fur trade, an adventurous kind of traffic more attractive to the {36} Frenchman of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries than plodding agriculture or the life of a counting-house. On the rivers and lakes, coming and going was comparatively easy; the short bright summers and the long winters made the country one of strong contrasts. To a bold, imaginative, somewhat restless people there was much to charm in Canada. But Canada meant far less in earlier days than now it means. It meant the banks of the St. Lawrence and its tributaries, and of the lakes from which it flows. The Maritime Provinces of the present Dominion, or at any rate Nova Scotia, were not in Canada properly so called, but bore the name of La Cadie or Acadia,[1] and the great North-West was an unknown land. [Footnote 1: For the derivation of the name 'Acadia,' see Parkman's _Pioneers of France in the New World_, p. 243, note. _Cadie_ is an Indian word meaning place or region. 'It is obviously a Micmac or Souriquois affix used in connexion with other words to describe the natural characteristics of a place or locality' (Bourinot's monograph on 'Cape Breton,' _Proceedings and Transactions of the Royal Society of Canada_, vol. ix, sec. 2, p. 185). For the name 'Canada,' see above, p. 24. note 37.] By the end of the seventeenth century the French had three spheres of influence and colonization in North America--the country of the St. Lawrence, the seaboard between the mouth of the St. Lawrence and the New England colonies, and Louisiana at the mouth of the Mississippi. To join them and encircle the English colonies was the aim of French statesmanship. It was an impossible aim, inevitably frustrated by geographical conditions and by want of colonists; but the conception was a great one, large as the new continent in which it was framed, and able men tried to work it out, but tried in vain. [Sidenote: _The French as colonizers._] Much has been written of French methods of colonization; writers have been at pains to enumerate the shortcomings of the French, and have carefully explained whence those mistakes arose. But there is less to wonder at in the failures than in the great successes to be credited to France. Being {37} part of the continent of Europe, and ever embroiled in continental politics, when she competed with England as a colonizing power, she competed with one hand tied.[2] Changeable, it is said, were the French and their policy; their kings and courtiers may have been changeable, but the charge does not lie against the French nation. [Footnote 2: This is pointed out in Professor Seeley's _Expansion of England_, course i, lecture 5.] They were trading up the Senegal early in the seventeenth century, and there they are at the present day. From the dawn of their colonial enterprise they tried to obtain possession of Madagascar; they have their object now. Nearly four centuries ago they fished off the coasts of Newfoundland, and England has good cause to know that they fish there still. To the St. Lawrence went Cartier from St. Malo, and by the same route generations of Frenchmen entered steadily into America, until Quebec had fallen and the St. Lawrence was theirs no more. The French were versatile in their colonial dealings; they were quickly moving and constantly moving; but they saw clearly and they followed tenaciously; they were strong and staunch, and they proved themselves to be a wonderful people. Yet there must have been some element of weakness in the French character, in that they bred and obeyed bad rulers who did not live for France, but for whom France was sacrificed; who crushed liberty, political and religious, who drove out industry with the Huguenots, and squandered the heritage of the nation. Englishmen, comparatively early in their history, reckoned with priests first and with kings afterwards. They did most of their work at home before they made their colonial empire; they colonized new worlds as a reformed people; the French tried to colonize under absolutism and priestcraft. It might not have been so, it probably would not have been so, if the religious policy of the French Government had been other than it was. {38} The Huguenots, if not persecuted and eventually in great measure driven out, would have given France the one thing wanting to make her colonization successful, the spirit of private enterprise independent of court favour, the child and the parent of freedom, the determined foe of a deadening religious despotism. [Sidenote: _Attempts at French colonization in Brazil and Florida._] In the sixteenth century, after Cartier's voyages to the St. Lawrence, we hear little of the French in North America. The Breton fishermen followed their calling, crossed the Atlantic year after year, and came back with cargoes of fish and with furs procured by barter with the Indians; but no French settlement was founded either in Canada or in Acadia. In France itself the last half of the century was a time of civil war; the massacre of St. Bartholomew took place, the house of Valois came to an end, and in 1589 Henry of Navarre became King of France. Before his accession to the Crown, two attempts at French colonization were made, in Brazil and in Florida. The colonists were mainly Huguenots, and their enterprise was backed by the great Protestant leader Coligny. The earlier attempt, designed to plant a settlement on the harbour of Rio Janeiro, was short-lived, because ill led by a violent tyrannical man, Villegagnon. The first settlers arrived in 1555; by the end of 1558 they had all disappeared. Still more tragical was the outcome of the venture in Florida. In 1562 a band of would-be colonists sailed from Dieppe, under the command of Jean Ribault. They reached Florida in safety, and built a small fort towards the northern end of the peninsula, in which thirty men were left behind while Ribault returned to France. In the following year, the survivors of the thirty came back to Europe, having abandoned the fort and experienced every extremity of thirst and hunger while crossing the Atlantic in a ship of their own making. Again in 1564, a Huguenot expedition, under René de Laudonnière, sailed for Florida, and the settlers planted themselves on the {39} St. John's river, then known as the river of May. In 1565 Ribault joined them with reinforcements and supplies. Well known from its surpassing horror is the story of the French settlement. A Spanish force under Menendez, a fanatic as treacherous and as savage as Philip II himself, took up a position to the south where the town of St. Augustine now stands, and overpowering the Frenchmen in detachments, butchered them with every accompaniment of cruelty and guile. The French fort passed into Spanish hands, but within three years time an avenging freebooter came from France, Domenic de Gourgues; the Spaniards in their turn were shot and hung, and the banks of the St. John's river were left desolate. Ill managed, badly supported were these French ventures to Brazil and Florida. Had they been well led and given some little encouragement and assistance, the result might have been far different. Protestants might have gained a firm foothold in Central and Southern America. France might have won from Spain and Portugal a great domain. As it was, the attempts resulted in utter failure, and great opportunities were lost never to be regained. [Sidenote: _La Roche's patent._] As the sixteenth century drew to a close, a patent was issued by the French King to a Breton nobleman, the Marquis de la Roche, to colonize in North America. The terms of the patent were preposterously wide, conferring sovereignty over Canada, together with a monopoly of trade. The results were proportionately small. La Roche set sail in 1598, in a single ship with a cargo of convicts. He landed them at Sable Island, off the coast of Nova Scotia, and sailed back to France, leaving them to their fate. Five years later, in 1603, eleven of the number, who had survived, were rescued and brought home again. [Sidenote: _Chauvin and Pontgravé._] [Sidenote: _De Chastes._] About a year after La Roche's fruitless voyage, in 1599 or 1600, two other Frenchmen, Chauvin, a sea captain, and Pontgravé, a St. Malo merchant, also obtained a patent to {40} colonize in Canada. Their object was to monopolize the fur trade, and they attempted a settlement at Tadoussac, where the Saguenay river flows into the St. Lawrence. During a whole winter a small party was left at the station, but no permanent colony was formed; and a second and third voyage had no lasting results. Chauvin died, and in 1602 or 1603 a new patent was granted to De Chastes, a man of rank and station, who associated with himself Pontgravé, and secured the services of Samuel Champlain. [Sidenote: _Samuel Champlain._] In order of time, Champlain's name stands second in the list of the men to whom New France in America was due. It stands second in time to the name of Cartier; in order of merit it heads the list. Cartier was a great explorer, but his work ended with discovery; Champlain founded a colony. The history of Canada as a French possession has gained in attractiveness, in that it began and ended with a high-minded, chivalrous leader. It began with Champlain, it ended with Montcalm. Born on the shores of the Bay of Biscay, the adventurous son of a seafaring father, Champlain fought for the King in Brittany, and was given by him a retainer in the shape of a small pension. The war over, he travelled for two years in the Spanish Indies, and, visiting Panama, conceived the idea of a ship canal across the isthmus. After his return home, he took service under De Chastes' company, and in 1603 sailed with Pontgravé for the St. Lawrence. The voyage was one of exploration only. Champlain ascended the river as far as Montreal, gathering geographical information from the Indians, but attempting no settlement; and when he returned to France in a few months' time, he found that his employer, De Chastes, was dead. [Sidenote: _De Monts' patent._] [Sidenote: _The first French settlement in Acadia._] [Sidenote: _Port Royal._] Yet another royal patent was granted, in 1603, to De Monts, a Huguenot gentleman of the French court, its object being the colonization of Acadia, and Acadia being defined as extending from the fortieth degree of north latitude, which runs {41} through[3] Philadelphia, to the forty-sixth degree, which is north of Montreal. De Monts took into partnership the members of De Chastes' company, and in 1604 two vessels sailed for America. They carried a mixed freight, Huguenots and Roman Catholics, gentlemen of fortune, and vagrants impressed under the King's commission. De Monts and Champlain were on board the first ship, Pontgravé followed in the second, with supplies for the future colony. They steered not for the St. Lawrence, but for the coast of Nova Scotia; and entering the Bay of Fundy they discovered Annapolis harbour, which was given the name of Port Royal. The first settlement, however, was made on an islet off the mouth of the St. Croix river, which now forms the boundary between New Brunswick and the state of Maine; and there through the winter De Monts and Champlain stayed with a scurvy-stricken company, numbering seventy-nine in all, of whom nearly half died. On the return of spring and the advent of relief from France, the leaders coasted south along the shores of Maine, and of what were in after years the New England states; and coming back to their station in August, they moved the settlement across the Bay of Fundy, and established themselves on the inlet of Annapolis harbour. De Monts then returned to France, leaving Pontgravé and Champlain to hold the post through the winter of 1605. [Footnote 3: For De Monts' patent see the _Calendar of State Papers_, Colonial, 1574-1660, p. 4, entry 10, Nov. 8, 1603. It was a patent 'for inhabiting Acadia, Canada, and other places in New France,' and De Monts was appointed the French King's Lieutenant-General 'for to represent our person in the countries, territories, coasts, and confines of La Cadia from the fortieth to the forty-sixth degree.'] [Sidenote: _Lescarbot._] In the following summer, ships came back from France just in time to prevent the settlement at Port Royal from being broken up in despair. They brought with them the advocate Lescarbot, the historian of New France. Again there was exploring down the American coast, and again Champlain and his associates held their own through the winter. The {42} outlook of the little colony was promising. The season was mild, the natives were friendly, supplies were plentiful, gardens were laid out and corn was sown. But in the late spring of 1607 news came from home that the patent had been cancelled, and before the summer ended Port Royal was abandoned. [Sidenote: _De Poutrincourt._] [Sidenote: _Jesuit influence._] For nearly three years the place was left desolate, and then, in 1610, one of De Monts' associates came back again. It was the Baron de Poutrincourt, to whom the harbour, when first discovered, had been granted by De Monts. The Jesuits were at the time strong at the French court, stronger still after the assassination of King Henry IV in this same year. They, or the ladies of the court, who were their tools, bought shares in the venture, and Jesuit priests went out to Acadia, thwarting and quarrelling with Poutrincourt and his son. Both the two great dangers which always threatened and finally ruined the French power in North America came into being at this date, the exclusive influence of the Jesuits and English competition. [Sidenote: _Argall's raid from Virginia._] [Sidenote: _Destruction of Port Royal._] In 1606 the Virginia company was incorporated, and in the following year British colonization on the mainland of North America began with the founding of Jamestown. There are many miles of coast between Acadia and Virginia, between the Bay of Fundy and Chesapeake Bay, but French and English soon crossed each other's paths. In 1613 a ship sailed from France, sent out under Jesuit influence, with a view to founding a settlement on the North American coast. After touching at Port Royal, the party sailed southwards to the coast of Maine, and landed in the region of the Penobscot river. Hardly had their tents been set up on the shore, when an English ship came in sight, captured the French vessel, which was lying at anchor, uprooted the would-be colony, and took all the Frenchmen prisoners. The invaders hailed from Jamestown; they were commanded by Samuel Argall, an unscrupulous freebooter. {43} His pretext was that the Frenchmen were taking up ground within the limits of the patents granted by the English King to his subjects, but his act was little more than piracy. Some of the Frenchmen were set adrift in an open boat, and eventually reached France in safety; the rest were carried prisoners to Jamestown, whence Argall set sail again, commissioned by the governor of Virginia to attack Port Royal. He reached, plundered, and burnt the fort, its commander, Biencourt, with the rest of the settlers, being absent in the fields, for it was harvest time; but the colony was not finally blotted out, and the French still kept a foothold in Acadia. [Sidenote: _Champlain on the St. Lawrence._] Champlain's first voyage to North America in 1603 had taken him to the St. Lawrence. From 1604-7 Acadia had been the scene of his labours, until De Monts' patent had been revoked. In 1608 he returned to the river of Canada. On the line of the St. Lawrence he carried out the work of his life, and by its banks he died. In the course which French colonization in America and its first great leader took, may be traced the influence on history of geography and race. [Sidenote: _Comparison of English and French colonization in North America._] [Sidenote: _English colonial enterprise in the seventeenth century the result of private co-operation._] In English colonial history, as writers on the subject have pointed out,[4] the age of adventure was distinct from the age of settlement. Ralegh was the latest product of the times of romance, an his attempts at colonization were premature and unsuccessful. To some extent a similar distinction may be made in French colonial history: Cartier may be taken as a representative of the earlier age, Champlain of the later; but the line of demarcation is much fainter, much less real, in the case of the French than in that of the English. To English and French alike adventure had meant private enterprise, usually but not always countenanced by kings, generally carried out under cover of royal licences or patents, so vague as to be almost meaningless, granted one day, liable to be {44} cancelled the next. When the age of romance passed away in England with the passing of the sixteenth century, adventurers in the ordinary sense in great measure disappeared, with the exception of the Arctic explorers, who, like Hudson and Baffin, still sailed to the desolate North. Private enterprise, on the other hand, not only survived, but it grew stronger, more business-like, more independent of court favour. It was private enterprise still, but under new forms, the enterprise not of individual freebooters, or of knights errant, but of associations of citizens, some of the associations being chartered commercial companies, while others were bands of colonizers and colonists united by a common antagonism and a common creed. Their objects were not in the air, they did not live in dreamland, they went out or sent out others, not so much to discover new lands, as to occupy and appropriate lands which had already been found, to make new English homes on the other side of the Atlantic. [Footnote 4: See e.g. Doyle's _History of the English in America_, vol. i, chap. vi.] [Sidenote: _The new patents of English colonization._] [Sidenote: _Motives of English colonization in the seventeenth century._] [Sidenote: _The English kept near to the sea._] In theory the commercial companies were, like the individual patentees of the former generation, working under the authority of the Crown. Indeed that authority was far more strongly proclaimed than before, and for vague generalities were substituted very definite restrictions; but this was only a sign of a new time. It indicated that a stage had been reached when more was known, when practical business was being taken in hand, and when, therefore, the slipshod patents, which had hitherto sufficed, would no longer avail. Because private enterprise really meant more, therefore the Government said more, and the very defining of the work and circumscribing of its sphere made the results sounder, more lasting, and more substantial. It was not the lust of conquest, it was not the glamour of adventure, it was not a wish to proselytize in religion or to add new provinces to the domain of a European kingdom which made the English colonize North America. There were two {45} main motives at work. One was the desire to find or to do something which would pay, the other was a longing to live under more independent conditions than existed in the mother country. The settlers went to lands where natives dwelt, and, therefore, dealings with the North American Indians in war and peace ensued; but the English did not go to the New World in the main to conquer or to convert the Indians, they went to live and to make their living pay. Instinct was at work in English colonization, the instinct of self-preservation, of extension, of always moving a little further and winning a little more; but there was no high scheme of universal dominion for the English King or the English creed. Against any such views the New England colonies were a living protest, and in Virginia, Maryland, or Carolina they found no place. All of these colonies were prosaic, unromantic communities: they were groups of Englishmen, living, grumbling, working and squabbling, with varieties of opinions and differences of outward forms, half protected, half worried by the home Government, building up unconsciously, illogically, amid much that was mean and small, what was to be in the end a mighty nation. Instinct, too, kept the colonists for the most part near to the sea. They fringed the Atlantic over which they had come, and ever renewed their strength as more emigrants came in; they strayed no doubt to some extent as years went on, taking up farms inland and clearing the backwoods; but, on the whole, there was continuity of colonization, a gradual widening of the belt of settlement, expansion on the part of the settlers themselves, as opposed to planting in the heart of the continent military outposts, or isolated mission stations. [Sidenote: _The French colonized inland._] [Sidenote: _Comparison of French colonization in Canada and Dutch colonization in South Africa._] With the French in Canada the case was different. Except in Acadia and Cape Breton Island, and to a limited extent in Newfoundland, they had no hold on the sea coast: and Acadia had for many years little connexion with the {46} land of the St. Lawrence. Canada, as a sphere of colonization, began when the open sea had been left far behind. It was an inland territory with a great river and great lakes. No two parts of the world are more unlike than Canada and South Africa. Canada has a river highway into it, excellent water communication by lake and stream, and, until the Rocky mountains are reached, no mountain barriers are interposed to cut off the interior from the coast regions or one district from another. South Africa is almost devoid of natural harbours, its rivers are valueless for purposes of navigation. Its ranges of hills or mountains rise one behind the other, barring the way from the coast to the interior, severing one section of the territory from another. Yet, curiously enough, somewhat similar results followed from diametrically opposite geographical conditions. No two races in the world were and are more unlike each other than the Dutch and the French, unlike in character, in tradition, in political and religious training. But the Dutch in South Africa and the French in Canada resembled each other in this, that they were and remained very few in number, planted in an unlimited area, and that men lived in either case under a rigid system. The restrictive rule of the Netherlands East India Company in South Africa led to trekking, to wandering in the wilderness, and the difficulties of communication increased the wandering tendency, because the wanderers, who wished no longer to be controlled by the government at Cape Town, could not easily be followed up. The French rule in Canada was restrictive too, restrictive in matters of politics, of commerce, and of religion. It was a despotism which allowed no vestige of freedom or self-government; but it was a far stronger and more active despotism than that of the Netherlands Company. The Dutch sought a trade monopoly, the French a territorial dominion. The Dutch were at pains to minimize their responsibilities. The French policy was {47} one of conquest and conversion; they looked to holding in subjection the lands and the peoples of the New World. They worked under a government which was absolute, but whose absolutism, in the main, encouraged perpetual moving forward, and they worked in a land where moving forward was comparatively easy. Thus dispersion ensued on a greater scale than in South Africa. The negative force which promoted trekking in the Cape Colony was present also in Canada--antipathy to a rigid system, to hard and fast rules; and the counterpart of the Dutch voortrekkers, though under very different conditions, was to be found in the Canadian fur-traders and _coureurs de bois_. But in South Africa the positive force was wanting which shaped Canadian history, the forward policy of an ambitious state. The agents of the French Government in Canada, military and religious, went far afield--adventurous and enterprising, intriguing with savage races, establishing outposts in the interior, strong to carry out a preconceived plan of a great French dominion. The malcontent Dutchmen in South Africa moved slowly and sleepily away in their wagons to be out of reach; the country aided their intent by being difficult of access. Along the rivers and the lakes of Canada the Frenchmen lightly passed, those who worked the will of the Government as well as those who were impatient of control. [Sidenote: _Contrast between English and French in North America._] The rivalry then between the two European nations who colonized North America, the English and the French, was rivalry at every point. It was a conflict of race, of religion, of geographical conditions, of new and old, of European government and American colonists. On the one side were seaboard settlements, comparatively continuous, in which there was much instinct and little policy, much freedom and little system; where the population steadily grew by natural causes and by immigration, democratic communities in which the real work was done from below, the products of {48} a wholly different era from that which preceded it, and in which picturesque adventurers had failed to colonize. On the other side were the beginnings of continental colonization along the natural lines of communication. The dispersion was great, the settlers were few, the settlements were weak. All was done from above, except where unlicensed adventurers roamed the woods. The elements of an older day were preserved and stereotyped, attractive but unprogressive. Old forms transplanted to a New World did not lose their life, but renewed it. Feudal customs took root in the soil. Despotism, supported by the Roman Catholic Church, did not survive merely, but grew stronger. The adventurer remained an adventurer, and did not turn into a businesslike colonist. There was much that was great, there was more that was uniform, but there was little or no growth. [Sidenote: _Elements of strength on the French side._] The ultimate outcome of such a contest must necessarily have been, in the course of generations, the triumph of the side on which were the forces and the views of the coming time. But, while the struggle lasted, the French gained not a little from being less vulnerable than the English, as being more dispersed; from being better situated for purposes of attack; from being organized, so far as there was organization, under one government and one system instead of many; from the extraordinary energy and quickness of some of the French leaders in Canada; from the strong military element in the population; from the fanatical devotion of the French missionaries; and last, but not least, from the Frenchmen's better handling of the natives. [Sidenote: _The waterways of North America._] The sources of the Mississippi are close to the western end of Lake Superior, and the eastern half of North America is therefore nearly an island, created by the Mississippi, the great lakes, the St. Lawrence, and the sea. An inner circle is formed by the Mississippi, the Ohio, Lakes Erie, Ontario, and the St. Lawrence, the head waters of the Ohio river being within easy distance of Lake Erie. The course of the Ohio {49} is from north-east to north-west. It flows, very roughly, parallel to the Alleghany mountains, and drains their western sides. The Alleghanies in their turn are parallel to the Atlantic, and between them and the sea is a coast belt from north to south. Here was the scene of the English settlements. Here, cut off by mountain ranges from the Mississippi valley and from the inland plains, the Virginians and the New Englanders made their home. 'The New England man,' writes Parkman, 'had very little forest experience. His geographical position cut him off completely from the great wilderness of the interior. The sea was his field of action.'[5] [Footnote 5: _The Old Régime in Canada_, chap. xxi, p. 399 (14th ed., 1885).] [Sidenote: _The Hudson river and Lake Champlain._] But there is one direct route, with nearly continuous waterways, from the Atlantic seaboard to the St. Lawrence. It runs due north up the Hudson river, is continued by Lakes George and Champlain between the Adirondack mountains on the west, and on the east the Green mountains of Vermont; and from the northern end of Lake Champlain it follows the outlet of that lake, the Richelieu river, for seventy to eighty miles into the St. Lawrence. The head waters of the Hudson are hard by Lake George, but at the present day navigation ceases at Troy, 151 miles from the sea, where is the confluence of the Mohawk river, and from whence the Champlain canal runs direct to Lake Champlain. The distance from Troy to Lake George is in straight line about fifty miles. This route was all-important for attack and defence in the wars between England and France, and it was well for Great Britain that, at a comparatively early stage in the colonization of America, she took over the Dutch settlements in the valley of the Hudson, gaining control of that river and linking New England to the southern colonies. [Sidenote: _The St. Lawrence._] From the mouth of the Hudson at New York to where the Richelieu joins the St. Lawrence, a straight line drawn on {50} the map from south to north measures rather under 400 miles. It is much the same distance, on a very rough estimate, from the confluence of the Richelieu and the St. Lawrence to the point where the St. Lawrence opens into the sea. This point is generally taken to be the Point de Monts, which is on the northern bank of the river, in north latitude 49 degrees 15 minutes, and west longitude 67 degrees 30 minutes, though the Gaspé peninsula, on the southern side of the estuary, extends much further to the east. Thus the centre of the St. Lawrence basin is equidistant from the mouth of that river and from the mouth of the Hudson,[6] and between these two points, before the days of railways, there was no easily accessible route from the sea to Montreal. [Footnote 6: Hennepin in _A New Discovery of a vast Country in America_ (English ed., London, 1698, pt. 2, p. 129), speaking of the St. Lawrence, says: 'The middle of the river is nearer to New York than to Quebec, the capital town of Canada.' This is of course incorrect, but it shows appreciation of the directness of the route to the St. Lawrence by the Hudson river.] Following up the St. Lawrence from the Point de Monts, at about a distance of 140 miles, the mouth of the Saguenay is reached on the northern side. There stood and stands Tadoussac, in old days a great centre of the fur trade, and the earliest foothold of the French in Canada. From the mouth of the Saguenay to Quebec is about 120 miles, and from Quebec to Montreal is rather over 160. Nearly halfway between Quebec and Montreal, over seventy miles from the former and over ninety from the latter, is the town of Three Rivers, situated on the northern bank of the St. Lawrence, at its confluence with the St. Maurice river, one of the oldest and one of the most important French settlements in Canada. Here is the limit of the tideway, and above this point the St. Lawrence expands for some thirty miles into Lake St. Peter. At the upper end of this lake or expanse of river, on the southern side, the Richelieu joins the St. Lawrence, with the town of Sorel at {51} its mouth, and forty-five miles higher up is Montreal. From Montreal to Kingston, where the St. Lawrence issues from Lake Ontario, is a distance of 180 to 190 miles by river, past rapids well known to readers and to tourists, and past the Thousand islands. Thus the total length of the St. Lawrence, from the lakes to the opening into the gulf, is rather over 600 miles. [Sidenote: _The great lakes._] The great lakes of the St. Lawrence basin cover a surface of nearly 100,000 square miles--an area larger than that of Great Britain. Lakes Ontario and Erie, connected by the Niagara river, continue the direct line of the St. Lawrence, Lake Erie more especially lying due south-west and north-east; but from the extreme end of this last-named lake the channel of communication takes a sharp curve to the north in the Detroit river, Lake St. Clair, and the St. Clair river, which link together Lakes Erie and Huron. Lake Huron, the centre of the whole group, stretches back towards the east and south-east in Georgian Bay, while on the north-west it is connected with Lake Michigan by the straits of Michillimackinac or Mackinac, and with Lake Superior by St. Mary's straits and rapids, the Sault St. Marie. The rivers which feed Lake Superior are the head waters of the St. Lawrence, and one of them, the St. Louis, which enters the lake at its extreme western end, has its source hard by the source of the Mississippi. The total length of lake and river on the line of the St. Lawrence is over 2,000 miles. [Sidenote: _The route of the Ottawa river._] It has been said that Lakes Ontario and Erie continue the main course of the St. Lawrence in its south-westerly and north-easterly direction, that the channel which feeds Lake Erie at its western end comes down from the north, and that the central lake which is then reached--Lake Huron--breaks back towards the east. Thus the direct line from Montreal to the centre of the lake system is not up the St. Lawrence, but along one of its largest tributaries, which enters the main river at Montreal. This tributary is the Ottawa, flowing {52} from the north-west in a course broken by falls and rapids. One hundred and thirty miles from its confluence with the St. Lawrence, just below the Chaudière falls, now stands the city of Ottawa, the capital of the Canadian Dominion, connected with Lake Ontario by the Rideau canal; and rather under 200 miles above Ottawa, where the Mattawa river enters from the west, there is nearly continuous water communication in a due westerly direction with Lake Nipissing, which lake is in turn connected by the French river with the great inlet of Lake Huron known as Georgian Bay. Champlain early explored this route--the direct route to the west, and along it as far as Lake Nipissing now runs the Canadian Pacific Railway. French river flows into the northern end of Georgian Bay. At its south-easternmost end, that bay runs into the land in the direction of Lake Ontario; and in the middle of the broad isthmus between the two lakes lies Lake Simcoe. [Sidenote: _Canada a geographical federation._] Such in rough outline is the basin of the St. Lawrence. It is a network of lakes and rivers which finds no parallel, unless it be in Central Africa. The present Dominion of Canada is not merely a political federation; it is a federation of regions which are geographically separate from each other. There is the eastern seaboard, the old Acadia; there is the basin of the St. Lawrence; there are the plains of the North-West and the regions of the Hudson Bay; and there are the lands of the Pacific coast. Only one of these four regions, the basin of the St. Lawrence, was the main scene of early Canadian history. Acadia comes into the story, it is true, but until the eighteenth century only indirectly, in connexion with the English colonies on the Atlantic coast rather than with the French in Canada. English and French collided on the shores of Hudson Bay; they collided also in Newfoundland; but Hudson Bay and Newfoundland alike were outside the sphere of Canada. The great prairies of the North-West were a possibility of the distant future; but not {53} till the days of railways did the western half of the present Dominion come within the range of practical politics. Along the St. Lawrence and its tributaries the drama of Canadian history was played; the furthest horizon was the Mississippi and the whole line of the lakes; a nearer view was bounded by the Ohio valley; while the immediate foreground was formed by the St. Lawrence from Quebec to Lake Ontario, the centremost point being the confluence of the Richelieu with the main river. Movement, constant movement, these waterways suggested; exploration, adventure, and ultimately conquest; pressing onward by strength or skill through a boundless area, with something unknown always beyond; making portages round impossible rapids, forcing paths through interminable forests, dealing with half-hidden foes. The land was one for the traveller, the explorer, the missionary, the soldier, the hunter, the fur-trader, but not so much for the settler and the agriculturist. Thus it was that the age of adventurers was perpetuated along the St. Lawrence, while the English colonists between the Alleghanies and the sea were living steady lives attached to the soil. [Sidenote: _The main object of North American exploration was a route to the East._] The great motive force of modern adventure was, as has been seen, the search for a direct route to the East. Engaged in this search Henry Hudson, in 1609, piloted the Dutch into the Hudson river.[7] Champlain's first expedition up the Ottawa was due to a lying tale that along that river had been found a way to the sea. La Salle, the explorer of the Mississippi, had his mind ever set on the East, and his Seigniory above Montreal was named La Chine; for, 'like {54} Champlain and all the early explorers, he dreamed of a passage to the south sea, and a new road for commerce to the riches of China and Japan.'[8] Many long years passed before the geography of North America was known with any accuracy, and in the meantime the recesses of the continent, from which the rivers flowed, seemed to hide the secret of a thoroughfare by the West to the East. Similarly, from the time when Columbus sought for and thought he had found the Indies in the New World, down to our own day, the natives of America have been known as Indians. [Footnote 7: Hudson in 1609 sought for a North-West Passage about the fortieth degree of latitude. 'This idea had been suggested to Hudson by some letters and maps which his friend Captain Smith had sent him from Virginia, and by which he informed him that there was a sea leading into the western ocean by the north of Virginia.' See _A Bibliographical and Historical Essay on the Dutch Books and Pamphlets relating to New Netherland_, by G. M. Asher, LL.D. (Amsterdam, Frederick Müller, 1868), Introd. pp. xxv, xxvi.] [Footnote 8: Parkman's _La Salle and the Discovery of the Great West_ (1885 ed.), p. 8.] [Sidenote: _The Indians of North America._] [Sidenote: _The Algonquins._] The two native races, with which the history of Canada is mainly concerned, are the Algonquins and the Huron Iroquois. The former were far the more numerous of the two, and were spread over a much larger area. They included under different names the Indians of the lower St. Lawrence, of Acadia, New England, and the Atlantic states as far as the Carolinas--the Montagnais, the Abenakis, the Micmacs, the Narragansetts, the Pequods, and others. The Delawares, too, were members of the race, and Algonquin tribes were to be found on the Ottawa, at Lake Nipissing, on the further shores of the great lakes, in Michigan and Illinois. From the day when Champlain joined forces with them against their hereditary foes the Iroquois, they ranged themselves for the most part on the side of the French. [Sidenote: _The Huron Iroquois._] The Hurons or Wyandots and the Iroquois were distinct from the Algonquins and akin to each other. When Cartier visited the St. Lawrence, the native towns which he found on the sites of Quebec and Montreal seem to have been inhabited by Indians of this race; but by Champlain's time the towns had disappeared, and those who dwelt in them had sought other strongholds. Though related in blood and speech, these two groups of tribes were deadly foes of each other. The Hurons, like the Algonquins, were allied to the {55} French; the Iroquois, guided partly by policy and partly by antipathy to the European intruders into Canada and their Indian friends, were as a rule to be found in amity with the English. The region of the upper St. Lawrence and of Lakes Huron, Erie, and Ontario, was the home of the Huron Iroquois race. The Huron country lay between Georgian Bay of Lake Huron and Lake Simcoe. South of the Hurons, the northern shore of Lake Erie and both sides of the Niagara river were held by the Neutral Nation, neutral as between the Iroquois and the Hurons, and akin to both. The Eries on the southern side of Lake Erie, and the Andastes on the lower Susquehanna, were also of Huron Iroquois stock; but the foremost group of the race, the strongest by far, though not the most numerous, of all the North American Indians, were the Iroquois themselves, the celebrated Five Nations of Canadian story. [Sidenote: _The country of the Five Nations._] The Erie canal, which, in its 352 miles of length, connects Lake Erie at Buffalo with the Hudson river at West Troy and Albany, runs through the country of the Five Nations. That country extended along the southern side of Lake Ontario from the Genesee river on the west to the Hudson on the east, while due north of the Hudson, the outlet of Lake Champlain to the St. Lawrence, the Richelieu river, was in old days known as the river of the Iroquois. The Mohawk river, along which the Erie canal is now carried, was, on the Atlantic side, the highway to the land of the Iroquois, and it bore the name of the best known of the Five Nations, the whole confederacy being sometimes spoken or written of as Mohawks.[9] The route up the river provided nearly continuous communication by water between the Hudson and Lake Ontario. From its confluence with the Hudson the Mohawk was followed to the head of its navigation, whence there was a short portage of about four miles {56} to Wood Creek, a stream running into the Oneida lake, and the Oneida lake was linked to Lake Ontario by the Oswego river. All this line was under Iroquois control; and the westernmost of the Five Nations, the Senecas, commanded also the trade route to Lake Erie. [Footnote 9: The Mohawks, however, were not the strongest of the five in number. They were outnumbered by the Senecas.] [Sidenote: _The Five Nations._] The name 'Iroquois' is said to be of French origin: the true title of the Five Nations was an Indian word,[10] signifying 'people of the long house.' Their dwellings were oblong in form, often of great length; and, as were their dwellings, so also was their dwelling-place. Side by side the Five Nations stretched in line from west to east, as may be told by lakes and rivers in New York State, which to this day bear their names. Farthest to the west were the Senecas; next came the Cayugas, the people of the marsh. The third in line, the central people of the league, within whose borders was the federal Council house, were the Onondagas, the mountaineers; the Oneidas followed; and easternmost of all were the Mohawks.[11] [Footnote 10: Hodenosaunee.] [Footnote 11: In a report of a committee of the Council held at New York, Nov. 6, 1724, on the subject of a petition of the London merchants against the Act of 1720, given in Colden's _History of the Five Indian Nations of Canada_ (3rd ed., London, 1755), p. 226, the Five Nations are placed as follows: the Mohawks but 40 miles due west of Albany, and within the English settlements; the Oneidas about 100 miles west of Albany, and near the head of the Mohawk river; the Onondagas about 130 miles west of Albany; the Cayugas 160; and the Senecas 240.] [Sidenote: _Small numbers of the Iroquois._] [Sidenote: _Their geographical position. They held the border line between French and English._] In all the history of European colonization no group of savages, perhaps, ever played so prominent a part as the Iroquois; none were so courted and feared; none made themselves felt so heavily for a long period of years together. This fact was not due to their numbers, for they were comparatively few, and Parkman estimates that 'In the days of their greatest triumphs their united cantons could not have mustered four thousand warriors.'[12] Yet they attacked and {57} blotted out other Indian races equal to or outnumbering themselves. They nearly destroyed the French settlements in Canada; and all through the contest between Great Britain and France in America, they were a force to be reckoned with by either side. Their alliance was sought, their enmity was dreaded. Their strength was due to the geographical position which they held, and to their national characteristics; while their policy was influenced by the differing conditions of the white people with whom they had to deal. Their home has been described. It was the southern frontier of central Canada, the borderland between the French and English spheres of trade and settlement. Here they lived, in a position where a weak race would have been ground in pieces between opposing forces, but where a strong race, conscious of its advantages and able to use them, could more than hold its own. 'Nothing,' wrote Charlevoix, 'has contributed more to render them formidable than the advantage of their situation, which they soon discovered, and know very well how to take advantage of it. Placed between us and the English, they soon conceived that both nations would be obliged to court them; and it is certain that the principal attention of both colonies, since their settlement, has been to gain them or at least to engage them to remain neuter.'[13] [Footnote 12: _Conspiracy of Pontiac_ (1885 ed.), vol. i, chap. i, p. 21. Charlevoix says: 'All their forces joined together have never amounted to more than 5,000 or 6,000 fighting men' (_Letters to the Duchess of Lesdiguières_, Engl. tr., London, 1763, p. 185). On the other hand, in _A Concise Account of North America_, by Major Robert Rogers (London, 1765), p. 206, it is stated that 'when the English first settled in America they (the Iroquois) could raise 15,000 fighting men.'] [Footnote 13: Charlevoix, as above, pp. 184-5.] [Sidenote: _Their strength of character and policy._] A strong race the Iroquois were. In cruelty and endurance, in bold conception and swift execution, they had few, if any, rivals among the natives of North America, and in their grasp of something like state policy they had no equals. As savages, pure and simple, they reached the highest level; they might indeed have had a greater and more lasting future, if their level had not been so high. The Kaffir races of South Africa in our own time have produced good {58} fighting material; some of their leaders have shown skilful generalship and no small statecraft; but they have been loosely knit together, little bound as a whole by the ties of country or of kin; and from this very weakness has come their salvation, in that they could and can be recast in a new mould. It was not so with the North American Indians, least of all with the Iroquois. They were stereotyped in savagery, and, when the white men came among them, it was too late for them to change; but, as savages of the most ferocious type, as ruthless murdering hunters of men, they developed an organization which was evidence at once of intellectual and physical strength, and of a wild kind of moral discipline. [Sidenote: _Their political organization._] It is rare to find among savages a confederacy which will outlive a single expedition or one season's war. When there is cohesion, it is usually under savage despots like the Zulu Kings, who habituate their followers to military discipline, and keep them attached partly by fear and partly by the memory or hope of successful bloodshed; but among the Five Nations the rule of one man had no place, and, though warring was their normal condition, the federation lasted in peace as well. They were doubly federated. Not only were there five nations or tribes, but there were also eight clans which included the whole of the Five Nations, members of each clan being found in each nation. The five nations had in fact originally been one, composed of eight clans. Each clan was named after some beast or bird, which formed its totem or coat of arms, the three leading clans bearing those of the tortoise, the bear, and the wolf.[14] The {59} clan tie was a family tie; the members of each clan, to whichever nation they belonged, were as brothers and sisters, and there was no intermarrying between them. Inheritance ran in the female line, and the children belonged to the mother's clan. The clans gave the chieftains to the separate nations and to the confederacy. The highest chiefs were known as _sachems_, a civil rather than a military title, and the Council of fifty sachems formed the principal governing body of the league, the place of honour being given to the head sachem of the Onondagas. There was also a Council of subordinate chiefs, and a wider body, a Senate--in whose deliberations men of age and experience took part, irrespective of hereditary rank. The form of government was the same for each of the five nations as for the whole confederacy. There was no law but much custom, despotism was unknown, and so was anarchy. There was something Homeric about the Iroquois. Like the Greeks of the legendary age, they were perpetually fighting in spasmodic fashion, with great cruelty, with every form of guile as well as force; and when not fighting they held innumerable councils, making many and long-winded speeches. Apart from personal bravery, the one sound element in their system and character was, strange as it may appear, some measure of what the early Greeks valued under the term [Greek: aidos] or reverence. The Iroquois reverenced long-standing customs, social position, and the voice of age. War was their trade, but the highest dignities attached to the civil chieftain more than to the successful warrior. They dealt out shameless violence to all beyond their pale, but within the ranks of their own people they recognized much more than mere physical strength or skill in butchery. [Footnote 14: These three leading clans so put into the shade all the others that in some old writers these alone are recognized. Thus Colden says (vol. i, p. 1): 'Each of these nations is again divided into three tribes or families, who distinguish themselves by three different arms or ensigns, the tortoise, the bear, and the wolf.' A full account of the Iroquois organization is given by Parkman in the first chapter of the _Conspiracy of Pontiac_, and in the introduction to _The Jesuits in North America_. See also the chapter on Canadian and Iroquois Indians in Sir J. G. Bourinot's _Canada_, in the 'Story of the Nations' series. It will be seen from the note to the Introduction, p. lv, of _The Jesuits in North America_ (1885 ed.), that the number of the clans as given above, and their presence in each tribe, is not absolutely certain.] [Sidenote: _The Iroquois in some respects resembled the Spartans._] In their organization they had advanced beyond the stage {60} which is outlined in the Iliad. They were far more democratic than the Greeks of Homeric time. In savage sort they framed and kept a polity of the kind which Aristotle tells us is the most perfect type of constitution, being a mixture of oligarchy and democracy. The hereditary principle was strong, but chieftainship did not pass from father to son owing to the rule of female succession. The councils of the nation found place for all whose qualifications were for the public good. High standing, age, experience, eloquence, strength of arm, all were recognized in this strange community. To Sparta Colden likens the confederacy of the Five Nations, in that, in either case, the national customs trained the minds and the bodies of the people for war;[15] but the likeness extends to other points as well. As far as a Greek state and a band of North American savages can be compared, in their social and political training, in their inflexible rules, in their recognition of merit combined with unswerving adherence to the principle of priority of families and clans, no less than in their heartless indifference to pain whether inflicted on themselves or others, the Iroquois Indians resembled the citizens of the famous Greek state. But whatever comparison may be made with either ancient or modern communities, the story of the Five Nations presents the curious problem of a group of savages of the very worst type, who yet in some sort solved the difficulties which the most civilized peoples find so great--those of reconciling democracy with hereditary privileges, and federal union with local independence. [Footnote 15: P. 14., 'On these occasions the state of Lacedaemon ever occurs to my mind, which that of the Five Nations in many respects resembles, their laws and customs being in both framed to render the minds and bodies of the people fit for war.' Parkman, too, says of them, 'Never since the days of Sparta were individual life and national life more completely fused into one'; see _The Jesuits in North America_ (1885 ed.), Introduction, p. lx.] [Sidenote: _Principle of adoption among the Iroquois._] Constantly weakened by the strain of war, to some extent {61} they renewed their strength by the principle of adoption.[16] Of the prisoners whom they took, most were put to death with nameless tortures, but many were admitted to their tribes; and in one instance they incorporated a whole people. This was the Tuscaroras, a kindred tribe from the Carolinas, driven north by war with the colonists early in the eighteenth century. About 1715, they were admitted into the league as a sixth nation, though not on equal terms, and were assigned a dwelling-place among the Oneidas and Onondagas. [Footnote 16: 'They strictly follow one maxim, formerly used by the Romans to increase their strength, that they encourage the people of other nations to incorporate with them' (Colden, p. 5).] [Sidenote: _Their sphere of influence._] [Sidenote: _Their feud with the French._] The tribes of the Huron Iroquois stock were agriculturists to a greater extent than the Algonquins. In other words, they had passed out of the nomad stage and made permanent homes. Still, they lived in great measure by the chase; they were born hunters as they were born warriors, and furs and beaver skins were the products which they bartered for the white man's goods. The Five Nations hunted and raided far beyond the limits of their cantons. In 1687, Dongan, Governor of New York, wrote of them: 'The Five Nations are the most warlike people in America, and are a bulwark between us and other tribes. They go as far as the South Sea, the North-West Passage, and Florida to war.'[17] Their interests as well as their pride demanded that on the upper St. Lawrence, as well as on Lakes Erie and Ontario, their power should be paramount. As far as other groups of Indians were concerned, they ensured their object, conquering and in great measure exterminating the Hurons, the Neutral Nation, and the Eries; but they knew well that the few Frenchmen in Canada were more dangerous to their ascendency, and possibly to their existence, than any native tribe or race, however numerous. The French began by making the Iroquois their foes. Champlain had hardly {62} settled at Quebec, when he joined the Hurons and Algonquins in an expedition against them. Thenceforward the Five Nations were the enemies of France. This result would probably have followed in any case, and it is difficult to suppose that one early action determined all succeeding history. It was rather the beginning of an inevitable struggle for the control of the upper St. Lawrence and of the Canadian fur trade. On all sides of their own country the Iroquois, like other masterful peoples, extended their sphere of influence; but their real outlet was to the north, towards the lakes and the great river. On this side the white men were most active and restless, ever sending their emissaries a little further on, ever putting themselves in evidence in some new tribe or village.[18] The French were not content to live outside the Indians; nor were they content, having found a resting-place, to stay there. To be in and among the natives, to control and to convert them, to be the recognized protectors of the land and its peoples, to be the ultimate recipients of the produce of the country, and the guardians of the channels by which the produce was conveyed--no smaller aims sufficed for the French in Canada. In the pursuit of these objects they directly competed with the Iroquois Indians. Great was the territory, few in number were the Frenchmen and Iroquois alike; but they were rivals for ascendency on the same river, and there was not room for both. [Footnote 17: _Calendar of State Papers_, Colonial, 1685-8, No. 1160, pp. 328-9, Dongan to the Lords of Trade, March, 1687.] [Footnote 18: 'But this justice must be done to the French, that they far exceeded the English in the daring attempts of some of their inhabitants, in travelling very far among unknown Indians, discovering new countries, and everywhere spreading the fame of the French name and grandeur' (Colden, p. 35).] Because they were enemies of the French, the Iroquois naturally became the allies of the English; but before they had much, if any experience of the latter, they had come into contact with a third European people, the Dutch on the Hudson river. [Sidenote: _The Dutch on the Hudson river._] [Sidenote: _New Netherland._] In 1609, the year after the founding of Quebec, Henry {63} Hudson, an Englishman in the Netherlands service, sailed at the beginning of September into the river which still bears his name, seeking, as he sought till his death, a North-West Passage to Asia. The name of New Netherland was formally given to the scene of his discovery in 1614, and in 1615 a small fort was built on Manhattan Island--the first little seed of the city of New York. In 1621, the Netherlands West India Company came into being; and in the following year New Netherland, with the beaver trade, which was its chief attraction, was placed in the hands of the company. In settling on the Hudson the Dutch conflicted with English claims, and the Government of the Netherlands seem to have recognized that there was a flaw in their title. However, the existence of New Netherland as a Dutch possession continued till the year 1664, when it was surrendered to an English force sent out by the Duke of York, who had obtained from his brother, Charles II, a grant of the territory. The English occupation was confirmed by the Peace of Breda in 1667; and though a Dutch fleet recovered the colony in 1673, in the following year, by the Treaty of Westminster, it was finally given up to the English. New Amsterdam, afterwards New York, was the chief settlement of New Netherland; but Dutch trade and colonization extended up the valley of the Hudson, where tracts of land were obtained by _patroons_ or large landowners, who were granted exclusive privileges by the company on condition of planting families of settlers upon their holdings. The chief inland colony was Rensselaerswyck, called after an Amsterdam merchant of the name of Rensselaer, and its centre was Fort Orange, now Albany; while on the Mohawk river, about twenty miles above its confluence with the Hudson, and rather less in a direct line from Albany, was the settlement of Schenectady.[19] [Footnote 19: For an account of the Dutch on the Hudson see _A Bibliographical and Historical Essay on the Dutch Books and Pamphlets relating to {64} New Netherland_, by G. M. Asher, LL.D. (Amsterdam, Frederick Müller, 1868), referred to above. See also Justin Winsor's _Narrative and Critical History of America_, vol. iv, chap. viii.] [Sidenote: _Friendship between the Dutch and the Iroquois._] Traders wherever they went, all the world over, the Dutchmen were at pains to keep peace with the Iroquois. Their dealings with them were on the same lines as the dealings of their countrymen with the Hottentots in the early days of the Cape Colony.[20] They bought and sold, and got good value for their money, paying, for instance, no more than forty florins for Manhattan Island. But the mere fact of paying for what they took was in their favour, for it was a recognition that the natives were the rightful owners of the land. In course of time they came into conflict with the Mohican Indians along the banks of the Hudson; but with the Five Nations, the nearest of whom were the Mohawks, they were ever in friendship. They were not actually in the Mohawk country, but on its borders; they were neighbours, not intruders; they took the furs which the Indians had to barter, giving in exchange European goods, and notably firearms. Thus Albany became a friendly meeting-place between the Iroquois Indians and the white men of the Hudson colony. The two peoples did not clash with one another in any way, but met as friends and equals, and supplied each others' wants. [Footnote 20: See vol. iv of this series, chap. ii, p. 43.] The one object of the Dutch being to trade, and the whole people being traders, a twofold result followed, promoting friendly relations between them and the Mohawks. Not only did the Indians realize that they had nothing to fear, and much to gain, from having for their neighbours Europeans who had no views of war or conquest, and through whose agency they could arm themselves against the more aggressive Europeans on the Canadian side; but also, as we may well suppose, the Dutch traders included the best of the Dutchmen, which was not the case with either the French or the English. At any rate, we read that the Dutch in the Hudson valley 'gained the hearts of the Five Nations by {65} their kind usage',[21] and in memory of a Dutchman named Cuyler, whom the Indians held in special honour, the Iroquois in after years always gave to the British Governor of New York the title of 'Corlaer'.[22] [Footnote 21: Colden, vol. i, p. 34.] [Footnote 22: Parkman's _Count Frontenac_ (1885 ed.), p. 93, note.] [Sidenote: _The English inherited the Iroquois alliance._] Into this kindly heritage the English entered;[23] and, though their treatment of the Indians left much to be desired, the alliance, if often strained, was, in the case of the Mohawks at any rate, never sundered; and finally, at the close of the War of Independence, many of the Five Nation Indians, after fighting for England, migrated into Canada, and were assigned lands in the province of Ontario, where their descendants are still to be found. In the words of the Indian orators, a chain of friendship held together the English and the Iroquois. 'Our chain,' they said, 'is a strong chain, it is a silver chain, it can neither rust nor be broken';[24] and it would be difficult to overrate the advantage which accrued to the English colonies from their traditional alliance with the strongest natives of North America. [Footnote 23: Colden, as above, 'In 1664, New York being taken by the English, they likewise entered into a friendship with the Five Nations.'] [Footnote 24: Colden, p. 125.] [Sidenote: _The founding of Quebec._] In the summer of 1608, Champlain founded the first French settlement at Quebec. A year before, the English had settled at Jamestown in Virginia. A year later, the Dutch found their way to the Hudson. Till his death, at the end of 1635, the story of Champlain is the story of Canada. His colleagues in the new enterprise were men with whom he had already worked in Acadia--De Monts and Pontgravé. De Monts had obtained from the King one year's monopoly of the Canadian fur trade, and two ships which he sent to the St. Lawrence were in charge of Pontgravé and Champlain respectively. Pontgravé, the merchant, stayed at Tadoussac through the summer, bartering with the Indians and coming to blows with Basque traders, who held {66} the French King's patent of little account. Champlain, the explorer, went higher up the river, and erected wooden buildings by the water-side, on the site of the lower town of Quebec. There he stayed through the winter, while his friend went home, and, when Pontgravé returned in the following summer, travels and adventures began which made Champlain's name great among the Indian tribes of Canada. [Sidenote: _Champlain's explorations and collision with the Iroquois._] His first expedition, in 1609, was to the lake which is still called after him. He went as an ally of the Huron and the Algonquin Indians against their enemies the Iroquois. Up the St. Lawrence, up the Richelieu, and on to Lake Champlain he took his way, and at the head of the lake, somewhere near the site where Fort Ticonderoga afterwards stood, the white men's firearms dispersed the warriors of the Five Nations and won a victory. The summer of 1609 ended, and Champlain went back to France, returning to Canada in the following spring.[25] [Footnote 25: Canada was first known as New France after Champlain's return to Europe, in 1609 (Charlevoix's _Histoire Générale de la Nouvelle France_, 1744 ed., vol. i, bk. iv, p. 149).] [Sidenote: _His difficulties in France._] De Monts' monopoly had expired and had not been renewed, but none the less he and his associates persevered in their enterprise, opening up the trade of the St. Lawrence, while others shared the profits. Again Champlain joined forces with the friendly Indians against the Iroquois, and a second victory was the result. Before the summer of 1610 ended, he was back in Europe, having learnt in the meantime that his friend and patron, King Henry IV, had been stabbed to death in the streets of Paris. On his next visit to Canada, in 1611, he cleared the ground for a future settlement at Montreal, having noted its advantages as a meeting-place for the Indian tribes from the Ottawa and the great lakes. The late months of that year and the whole of 1612 he spent in France, trying to devise some organization under which the work of building up the French power in Canada {67} might be successfully carried on. There was now no company in existence, there was no royal mandate; personal favour and protection had passed away with the death of Henry of Navarre. The French court was a scene of growing priestly influence and of numberless intrigues; while New France on the St. Lawrence was a 'no man's land,' infested in summer time by crowds of fur-traders, who owned no rule and knew no law, in winter deserted by white men, except the few struggling settlers at Quebec. To form some kind of trade's union under an acknowledged authority was the one thing needful, and with a view to this end Champlain sought for and obtained the patronage of a member of the royal house. The Count de Soissons, a Bourbon prince, was appointed Lieutenant-General of the King for New France, and when he died, shortly after his appointment, the place was taken by another Bourbon, the Prince of Condé. The deputy of these princes was Champlain himself; he was given control over the Canadian fur trade, and he endeavoured to reconcile the rival interests of the western ports of France by forming a combination of traders, to which all could be admitted who had an interest in Canada. The scheme was partially carried out, but unfortunately jealousies, commercial and religious, precluded the establishment of a single united company. [Sidenote: _The imposture of Nicolas de Vignau._] To make money by trade for himself or others was not the first object of Champlain's life. Exploration, with the Indies as its final goal, was in his mind, and the formation of a colony which should indeed be New France. While he still sojourned in Europe, a Frenchman, Nicolas de Vignau, came back from Canada, telling a tale that up the Ottawa river and beyond its sources he had found an outlet to the sea. Early in 1613 Champlain recrossed the Atlantic, went up the St. Lawrence to Montreal Island, and thence, taking De Vignau with him, followed the course of the Ottawa as far as the �le des Allumettes. He went no further. The {68} story of a way to the sea was exposed, as a cunningly devised fable, by the Indians of the upper Ottawa, among whom the impostor had sojourned when he concocted his lies; and, but for Champlain's interposition, he would then and there have paid for his falsehood with his life. Champlain, however, spared him, retraced his steps, and went back again to France, where he spent a year and more before he again visited Canada. [Sidenote: _The Recollet friars._] [Sidenote: _Le Caron._] [Sidenote: _The first mission to the Hurons._] Towards the end of May, 1615, he reached Quebec. He brought with him this time a small band of missionaries, four friars of the Recollet branch of the Franciscan order; and now mission work began in Canada. One of the friars, Le Caron, with twelve other Frenchmen in the company, visited for the first time the Huron country, and Champlain followed close upon his steps. Ascending the Ottawa for the second time, he passed the point which he had reached two years before, and by the Mattawa river and Lake Nipissing came to the shores of Lake Huron. Coasting southward along Georgian Bay, he found himself at length among the Huron towns, where Le Caron was already busy preaching a new faith to the heathen. An expedition against the Iroquois had been determined on, and with the Huron warriors and their allies, Champlain set out for the enemy's land. His route took him across Lake Simcoe, down the series of small lakes which feed the river Trent, and by that river to Lake Ontario, then seen by him for the first time. Crossing the lake, he landed at the site of Oswego, and marched into the midst of the Five Nations' cantons. From the military point of view the expedition was a disastrous failure, for an attack on a palisaded Iroquois town miscarried, Champlain himself was wounded, and the invaders retreated beaten and disheartened. Among the Hurons Champlain spent the winter; next year, returning down the Ottawa, he came back to Quebec, in the midsummer of 1616, and subsequently he sailed for France. {69} [Sidenote: _Result of the first eight years of New France._] Eight years had now passed since the founding of Quebec. Lakes Huron and Ontario had been reached, the Ottawa route had been explored, the friendship of the Hurons had been secured at the price of enmity with the Iroquois, missionaries were converting or trying to convert the Indians, and fur trading was briskly carried on; but colonization had made as yet little or no way. There were a few permanent residents at Quebec; but lower down at Tadoussac, and higher up at Three Rivers and Montreal, where in the summer white men and coloured foregathered to exchange their wares, in the winter no Frenchmen were to be found, unless it were one or other of the much enduring Recollet missionaries. In France it was the trade of Canada, not its settlement, that was matter of concern. As in the case of Newfoundland, the merchants of the western seaports of England set themselves to keep the island from being permanently colonized, anxious that the fishing traffic should remain in their own hands: so in the case of Canada, the merchants of the western seaboard of France regarded colonization as at best a useless expense, at worst a measure by which they might lose command of the fur trade. The climate of Newfoundland and of the St. Lawrence region was not such as to induce Englishmen or Frenchmen to make these lands their homes. Rather they seemed places for summer trips alone, to be left in winter icebound and desolate. Trade interests and nature combined to check the colonization of Canada; that anything was done in the way of settlement in the early years of the seventeenth century was due to missionary enthusiasm and to the foresight and tenacity of Champlain. [Sidenote: _Dispute among French traders._] [Sidenote: _Company of the One Hundred Associates formed by Richelieu._] He had formed a company of merchants, chiefly connected with Rouen and St. Malo, who nominally controlled the trade of the St. Lawrence; but they were not at one amongst themselves, some were Catholics, others were Huguenots, while the merchants of La Rochelle refused to join the combination, {70} and traded in defiance of the monopoly which the rival towns claimed to possess. Various changes followed. About the beginning of 1620, Condé was succeeded as Viceroy of New France by the Duc de Montmorency, and in 1625 the latter sold his office to his nephew the Duc de Ventadour. In 1621, the privileges enjoyed by the Rouen and St. Malo company were transferred to two Huguenot merchants, the brothers De Caen: the result was ill feeling, and on the St. Lawrence open feuds between the old and the new monopolists, until in 1623 some kind of union was formed. Eventually, in 1627, all former privileges were annulled, and the control of Canada passed into the hands of a new strong company, known as the One Hundred Associates, at the head of which was Richelieu. [Sidenote: _Building of the fort at Quebec._] During these troubled years, amid the squabbles of conflicting interests, the one source of strength and steadfastness for the Frenchmen on the St. Lawrence was Champlain's own personality, while the two principal events were the building of the fort at Quebec, and the coming of the Jesuit missionaries. As Lieutenant of the King and representative of the Viceroys of New France, Champlain's difficult task was to hold the balance even between the rival traders and to maintain some semblance of law and order along the water highway of Canada. In former years, as an explorer he had obtained unrivalled influence among the Indians; now, as Governor, he brought the same qualities of tact and firmness into play in keeping the peace among his turbulent countrymen. From 1620 to 1624, he was continuously in Canada, and on the rock of Quebec he built a fort stronger and more substantial than the wooden buildings which abutted on the river below. Well situated, able to withstand ten thousand men,[26] such was an English account a few years later of this fort, when enlarged and completed--the fort {71} St. Louis at Quebec. The merchants grudged the money and the men for the work, but the building of a substantial fortress on the St. Lawrence was a step forward towards the French dominion of Canada. [Footnote 26: _Calendar of State Papers_, Colonial, 1574-1660, p. 139, under the year 1632.] [Sidenote: _Coming of the Jesuits to Canada._] [Sidenote: _Their policy._] [Sidenote: _Supported by the French Government._] The year 1625 was the year in which the first Jesuit missionaries came into Canada. In that year the Duc de Ventadour became Viceroy of New France: he was closely connected with the Jesuit order, and began his régime by sending out priests at his own expense. Their coming marked an epoch in Canadian history. The Franciscan brethren, who were already in the field, and who welcomed the new-comers on their arrival, were men of a different stamp. Devoted missionaries, they kept to their work; they claimed, outwardly at least, no religious monopoly; they had no wish to control the temporal power; and they lived at peace with all men. The Jesuits, on the other hand, imported religious despotism. The Jesuit emissaries were brave men, none more so; they were self-sacrificing to an extreme, venturesome and tenacious, indifferent to danger, and fearless of death. They were tactful in their dealings with the Indians, and were trained in a school of diplomacy which has never been excelled. But they were the champions of exclusiveness, and the enemies of freedom. Their coming meant that one form of religion was to supplant all others--that the spiritual power was, as far as in them lay, to dominate all things and all men; and that while much was to be done, it was to be done for instead of by the colonists and the natives, from above instead of from below, on a rigid system--strong in itself but inimical to healthy growth, to that variety of life, of thought, and of outward form which helps on the expansion of a young community. From their training and their organization, the Jesuits would in any case have had great influence on the fortunes of the land to which they came; but their influence was greater in that their despotic views harmonized for the time being with the policy {72} of the Bourbon Kings and their ministers. For absolute monarchy had taken root in France; and in the French dependencies, as in the mother country, there was to be henceforth political and religious despotism. That the spiritual power might grow too strong was a distant danger, and in France hardly a practical possibility. In the meantime Kings and priests went hand in hand, co-operating against liberty in church and state alike. Protestantism meant liberty. The Jesuits abhorred the Huguenots because they deemed them heretics: the French Kings and their ministers oppressed them rather on political than on religious grounds, but were glad to use the religious argument in support of political aims. [Sidenote: _Oppression of the Huguenots in France._] [Sidenote: _Its effects in Canada._] [Sidenote: _The Huguenots excluded from New France._] On the death of Henry IV in 1610, his young son, Louis XIII, became King of France. In 1624 Richelieu became his minister. In 1627 the discontent of the Huguenots culminated in the open revolt of the town of La Rochelle; and its fall, after a ten months' siege, gave the King and the cardinal mastery over the Protestants of France. The effect on Canada of this unsuccessful rising was twofold. It involved the exclusion of Huguenot settlers, and it involved also the hostility of England. The patent granted in 1627 to the company of New France, known as the One Hundred Associates, provided that every colonist who went out to Canada must be a Catholic, and when in the following year Richelieu received the submission of the Rochellois, he was well able to enforce this arbitrary provision. It is difficult at the present day to comprehend a policy, initiated and approved by a statesman of consummate ability, which could not but result in blighting the infancy of the greatest French colony. The English colonies were in the main pre-eminently homes of freedom, dwelling-places for men whose political and religious opinions found scant favour in the United Kingdom. For the English race the New World redressed the balance of the Old; and though the {73} colonists who went out from Europe to America, were in their turn prejudiced and narrow-minded, their want of tolerance was not forced upon them from without, and members of one or other unpopular sect, when persecuted in one province, could find refuge in another. Maryland was a British colony, founded under Roman Catholic auspices; its neighbour, Pennsylvania, was founded and dominated by Quaker influence; throughout British North America there were examples of all opinions and of all creeds. The men on the spot quarrelled with and persecuted each other; but persecution and exclusion were not ordained from home. It would have been bad for the British Empire if from all settlements, which the English formed and maintained, Roman Catholics had been rigidly kept out; but it was far worse for France when her Kings and ministers closed the French colonies to the Huguenots. [Sidenote: _Merits of the Huguenots as colonists._] [Sidenote: _War between England and France._] The Huguenots were the best of the French traders; they were men of substance; they were capable, enterprising, and resolute. They were beyond others of their countrymen, the pioneers of trade and colonization, and had led the way in the New World. De Monts was a Huguenot, the De Caens were Huguenots, Champlain himself is said to have been of Huguenot parentage. The exclusion of the French Protestants from Canada meant depriving Canada of the class of Frenchmen who were most capable of colonizing the country and developing its trade. Their fault, in the eyes of the French Government, was their independence; that they did not conform to the state religion, and that by not conforming they were politically an element of danger. But what was deemed a fault in France would, in colonizing America, have been a virtue; inasmuch as in the field of adventure, trade, and settlement in new lands, the men who are least bound by old-world systems and traditional views are of most value. If fair play had been given to the French Protestants, Canada would have been far stronger than it {74} ever was while it belonged to France, and probably it would have continued to belong to France down to the present day. For the closing of Canada to the Huguenots, followed as it was afterwards by their ejection from France, not only weakened France and her colonies, but strengthened the rival nations and their colonies. The French citizens who had begun to build up the French colonial empire, helped to build up instead the colonial empires of other European nations; and the oppressions which they suffered brought them the sympathy, at times the armed sympathy, of the Protestant nations of Europe. The rising of the citizens of La Rochelle was accompanied by war between England and France. Buckingham's expedition for the relief of the city, ill planned and ill led, was a fiasco, completing the ruin of the Rochellois instead of bringing them relief; but on the other side of the Atlantic, where English adventurers could take advantage of a time of war without being hampered by court favourites, there was a different tale to tell. [Sidenote: _David Kirke_] Sir William Alexander,[27] a Scotch favourite of James I, had in the year 1621 obtained from the King a grant of Acadia, or, as it was styled in the patent, Nova Scotia. The patent was renewed by Charles I. When war broke out between Great Britain and France, Alexander combined with certain London merchants, styled 'Adventurers to Canada,' or 'Adventurers in the Company of Canada,' to strike a blow at the French in North America. Prominent among these merchants was George Kirke, a Derbyshire man, who had married the daughter of a merchant of Dieppe. Three ships were fitted out under the command of Kirke's three sons, David, Lewis, and Thomas, David Kirke being in charge of the expedition. The Kirkes were furnished with letters of marque from the King, authorizing {75} them to attack French ships and French settlements in America; and, well armed and equipped, they sailed over the Atlantic, entering the St. Lawrence at the beginning of July, 1628. [Footnote 27: A further account of Sir William Alexander is given below, p. 173.] [Sidenote: _attacks the French on the St. Lawrence_] [Sidenote: _and destroys a French fleet._] Below Quebec was the trading station at Tadoussac, and higher up than Tadoussac, less than thirty miles below Quebec, there was a small farming establishment--a 'petite ferme'--at Cape Tourmente, whence the garrison at Quebec drew supplies. Kirke took up his position at Tadoussac, and sent a small party up the river, who burnt and rifled the buildings at Cape Tourmente and killed the cattle. He then dispatched some of his prisoners to Quebec and called upon Champlain to surrender. The summons was rejected, though the garrison was in sore straits. The Iroquois had been of late on the warpath, and the inroads of Indians on the one hand and of English on the other, meant starvation to the handful of men on the rock of Quebec. Yet Richelieu had not been unmindful of Canada. While these events were happening, a French fleet of eighteen vessels had sailed from Dieppe, laden with arms and supplies, and bringing also some settlers with their families, and the inevitable accompaniment of priests. It was the first effort made by the newly formed French company, an earnest of their intention to give strength and permanence to New France. The expedition reached Gaspé Point, at the entrance of the St. Lawrence; but between them and Quebec were the Kirkes and their ships. Instead of moving up the river to attack Quebec, the English admiral went down the river to intercept the new-comers. The English ships were but three to eighteen; but the three ships were fitted and manned for war. The French vessels were transports only, freighted with stores and non-combatants, unable either to fight or to escape. On July 18, Kirke attacked them, and seventeen out of the eighteen ships fell into his hands. Ten vessels he emptied and burnt, the rest of his prizes, {76} with all the cargo and prisoners, he carried off in triumph to Newfoundland. [Sidenote: _First English capture of Quebec._] There was bitterness in France when the news came of this great disaster; there was distress and hopelessness at Quebec, where Champlain still held out through the following winter. Kirke had gone back to England; but when July came round again in 1629, he reappeared in the St. Lawrence, with a stronger fleet than before. The Frenchmen at Quebec were by this time starved out, they had no alternative but to surrender; and on July 22, 1629, the English flag was for the first time hoisted on the rocky citadel of Canada. There was little booty for the conquerors, nothing but beaver skins, which were subsequently sequestrated, and Canadian pines were cut down to freight the English ships. Kirke's ships carried back to England Champlain and his companions, who thence returned to their homes in France; and Quebec was left in charge of an English garrison. [Sidenote: _Convention of Susa and Treaty of St. Germain-en-Laye._] [Sidenote: _Canada given back to France._] The Merchant Adventurers had done their work well. With little or no loss, unaided by the Government, they had driven the French from Canada and annexed New France. Had Queen Elizabeth been on the throne of England, she would have scolded and then approved; and would have kept for her country the fruits of English daring and English success. The bold freebooter, Kirke, would have found favour in her eyes; she would have honoured and rewarded him, as she honoured and rewarded Drake. But the Stuarts were cast in a different mould, and no English minister at the time was a match for Richelieu. Before Quebec had fallen, Charles of England and Louis of France had concluded the Convention of Susa, on April 24, 1629; and the Treaty of St. Germain-en-Laye, signed nearly three years later, on March 29, 1632, definitely restored to France her possessions in North America.[28] No consideration was {77} embodied in the treaty for the surrender of Canada, but State Papers have made clear that the price was the unpaid half of Queen Henrietta Maria's marriage dowry. For this sum, already due and wrongly outstanding, Canada was sold. It was a pitiful proceeding, unworthy of an English King, but typical of a Stuart. It is noteworthy that early in the seventeenth century both the Cape and Canada might have become and remained British colonies. In 1620 two sea captains formally annexed the Cape, before any settlement had as yet been founded at Table Bay; but their action was never ratified by the Government at home.[29] Nine years later Kirke took Quebec, and again the work was undone. So the Dutch in the one case, and the French in the other, made colonies where the English might have run their course; and generations afterwards, Great Britain took again, with toil and trouble, what her adventurers, with truer instinct than her rulers possessed, had claimed and would have kept in earlier days. It is noteworthy, too, that state policy was in great measure responsible for the earlier French loss of Canada, as it was mainly responsible for the later. It is true that Quebec was taken while the French Protestants were still to some extent tolerated, and that a Protestant, De Caen, was selected to receive it back again, when the Treaty of St. Germain-en-Laye was carried into effect. But there were Huguenots on board Kirke's ships, serving under a commander whose mother was of Huguenot blood; and the schism which had broken out in France and {78} culminated for the time in the siege and fall of La Rochelle, left the best of the French traders and colonizers half-hearted servants of France. Canada was given back, but it was given back to the French Government rather than to the French people; and, as years went on, the St. Lawrence saw no more of the stubborn, strong heretics who had sung their Protestant hymns on its banks. Frenchmen, as gallant as they were, had afterwards the keeping of Canada; but, state-ridden and priest-ridden, they lacked initiative and commercial enterprise. Freedom was to be found in the backwoods among the _coureurs de bois_, but it was the freedom of lawlessness, unleavened by the steadfast sobriety which marked the Calvinists of France. [Footnote 28: The Convention of Susa provided that all acts of hostility should cease, and that the articles and contracts as to the marriage of the English Queen should be confirmed. The Treaty of St. Germain-en-Laye, or rather one of two treaties signed on the same day, provided for the restitution to France of all places occupied by the English in New France, Acadia, and Canada. Instructions to make restitution were to be given to the commanders at Port Royal, Fort Quebec, and Cape Breton. General de Caen was named in the treaty as the French representative to arrange for the evacuation of the English. The places were to be restored in the same condition as they had been in at the time of capture, all arms taken were to be made good, and a sum was to be paid for the furs, &c., which had been carried off.] [Footnote 29: See vol. iv of this series, pt. 1, p. 19.] [Sidenote: _Death of Champlain._] In July, 1632, the French regained Quebec. In May, 1633, Champlain came back to Canada. For two and a half years he governed it under the French company, and on Christmas Day, 1635, he died at Quebec in the sixty-ninth year of his age. New France owed all to him. Amid every form of difficulty and intrigue, in Europe and in America, among white men and among red, he had held resolutely to his purpose. His life was pure, his aims were high, his judgment sound, and his foresight great. He lived for the country in which he was born and for that in which he died; but 'the whole earth is the sepulchre of famous men',[30] and not in France or Canada alone is lasting honour paid to his name. [Footnote 30: Thuc., bk. ii, chap. xliii (Jowett's translation).] NOTE.--For Canadian history down to the death of Champlain, see, among modern books, more especially PARKMAN'S _Pioneers of France in the New World_, and KINGSFORD'S _History of Canada_, vol. i. {79} CHAPTER III THE SETTLEMENT OF CANADA AND THE FIVE NATION INDIANS [Sidenote: _Colonization by the medium of Chartered Companies characteristic of the nations of Northern Europe._] To trade and to colonize through the medium of Chartered Companies has been characteristic of the nations of Northern Europe. Chartered Companies have not been peculiar to England. The Dutch worked entirely through two great companies; the Danes adopted the same system; and various companies played their part in the early history of French colonization. Herein lay the main difference, in the field of colonial enterprise, between the northern peoples and the southerners who had preceded them. In the case of Spain and Portugal all was done under the immediate control of the Crown. These two nations were concerned with conquest rather than with settlement; and, if the Portuguese were traders, their commerce was not the result of private venture, but was created and supported by the Government. The Spaniards and Portuguese were first in the field. East and West lay before them, and they divided the world in secure monopoly. The northerners came in--they came in tentatively; policy kept the Governments in the background for fear of incurring war, and freedom of individual action was more ingrained in these races than in the Latin peoples of the south. So freebooters sailed here and there, at one time honoured, at another in disgrace; merchants took shares in this or that venture, and Chartered Companies came into being. [Sidenote: _French Chartered Companies._] In the case of Holland, the Netherlands East India Company and the Netherlands West India Company practically {80} included the whole nation: the state and the companies were co-extensive. In England, the companies were really private concerns, licensed by the Government, often thwarted by the Government, but, in the main, working out their own salvation or their own ruin, as the case might be. In France there was a mixture of the northern and the southern systems, as of the northern and the southern blood. There, as in England, the companies were private associations, but Court favour was to them the breath of life. Kings and ministers constantly interfered, created and undid, conferred licences and revoked them, until in no long time the Chartered Company system lost all that makes it valuable, and Frenchmen learnt to look to the Crown alone. [Sidenote: _The company of the One Hundred Associates._] Trade jealousies hampered the beginnings of Canadian settlement; there was neither free trade in Canada nor unquestioned monopoly. To cure this evil Richelieu, in 1627, brought into being the company of the One Hundred Associates, nominally a private association, really the offspring of the Government. Its sphere extended from Florida to the North Sea, and from east to west as far as discovery should extend along the rivers of Canada. It controlled all trade except the fisheries, and it enjoyed sovereign rights in so far that it was entitled to confer titles and tenures, subject to the approval of the Crown. The chief officers were to be nominated by the King, but under the Sovereign the company was feudal lord of New France; of its soil and its inland waters, with all that they produced. A statesman projected the company, and, with keen insight into the wants of New France, Richelieu laid down as one of the terms of its charter that settlers were to be introduced in specified numbers, especially and immediately settlers of the artisan class; but these provisions were made to a large extent barren by excluding the Huguenots. At the outset the new French company, with all its backing, was foiled in its efforts by the English Merchant Adventurers. The first transports {81} sent out, bearing settlers and supplies, were captured by Kirke. Quebec fell and New France was lost. The Convention of Susa and the Treaty of St. Germain-en-Laye were signed and executed, and the One Hundred Associates resumed their charge of Canada. Under them Champlain held the government of New France till he died, being succeeded by a soldier, M. de Montmagny, who reached Quebec in June, 1636. [Sidenote: _Three Rivers. Montreal. Sorel._] In 1634, while Champlain was still alive, a fort was begun at Three Rivers. The first permanent settlement at Montreal dates from the spring of 1642, and in the same year Fort Richelieu was founded on the site of the present town of Sorel,[1] where the Richelieu--the river of the Iroquois--joins the St. Lawrence. For many years Quebec, Three Rivers, and Montreal practically comprised New France. Outside them were fur-traders and Jesuit missionaries, carrying their lives in their hands. A few farms were taken up along the river above and below Quebec, but colonization was almost non-existent, and small groups of priests and soldiers at two or three points on the St. Lawrence feebly upheld the power of France in North America. [Footnote 1: 'So called from M. de Saurel, who reconstructed the fort in 1665' (Kingsford's _History of Canada_, vol. i, p. 185).] [Sidenote: _Slow progress of Canada up to 1663._] The company of the One Hundred Associates lasted till 1663, and little they did for the land or for themselves. At the end of their tenure, the whole French population of Canada hardly reached 2,500 souls. It had been an integral part of the company's programme to people Canada with French men and French women, but, inasmuch as Huguenots were rigidly excluded, the motive for emigration was wanting. The Catholic citizens of France were comfortable at home. They might wish to trade with Canada, but they did not wish to spend their lives there. The soldiers of France went out only under orders; they looked for brighter battlefields than the North American backwoods. Priests and nuns {82} alone felt a call to cross the Atlantic, to face the most rigorous winters and the most savage foes. The French religion was firmly planted in North America during these early years, but the French people were left behind. De Montmagny was Governor for twelve years, till 1648. His successors under the company's régime were D'Ailleboust, De Lauzon, the Vicomte d'Argenson, and Baron d'Avaugour. Under the Governors there were commandants of the garrisons at Three Rivers and Montreal; and from 1636 onwards there was some kind of Council for framing ordinances and regulating the administration of justice, the Governor and the leading ecclesiastics being always members, and representatives of the settlers being from time to time admitted. In 1645, moreover, the company was reorganized, and the fur trade, which had been vested in the Associates, was handed over to the colonists. Notwithstanding, there was little increase of strength and little growth of population till the year 1663, and up to that date the history of Canada is no more than a record of savage warfare and missionary enterprise. [Sidenote: _The foundation of Montreal._] Religious enthusiasts founded Montreal, and the foundation of Montreal was a challenge to the Iroquois. Always the enemies of the French, the Five Nations saw in the settlement a new menace to their power. Above the Richelieu river, they looked on the St. Lawrence as more especially within their own domain; and when Frenchmen took up ground on the island of Montreal, the Indians resented the intrusion with savage bitterness and with more than savage foresight. On the part of the French, state policy had nothing to say to the new undertaking, nor was it a commercial venture. It was simply and solely the outcome of religious zeal untempered by discretion. [Sidenote: _The Jesuits in Canada._] [Sidenote: _They did not promote colonization._] The Jesuits had abundantly advertised in France the spiritual needs of Canada. They had much to tell, and they told it well, skilful in narrative as they were bold in action. {83} They attracted money to the missionary cause, they enlisted brave men, and, still more, brave and beautiful women. Convents were founded in America, and hospitals; priests and nuns led and lost heroic lives, to widen the influence of the Roman Catholic Church, and to convert the heathen. The deeds done, and the sufferings endured, commanded, and still command admiration, yet withal there was an element of barrenness in the work; it was magnificent, but it was not colonization. It was unsound in two main essentials. First and foremost, liberty was wanting. The white men and the red were to be dominated alike: North America and its peoples were to be in perpetual leading strings, prepared for freedom in the world to come by unquestioning obedience on this side the grave. The Protestant, however narrow and prejudiced in his dealings and mode of life, in theory held and preached a religion which set free, a gospel of glorious liberty. The Roman Catholic missionary preached and acted self-sacrifice so complete, that all freedom of action was eliminated. There was a second and a very practical defect in the system. What Canada wanted was a white population, married settlers, men with wives and children. What the Jesuits asked for, and what they secured, was a following of celibates, men and women sworn to childlessness. The Protestant pastor in New England lived among his flock as one of themselves; he made a human home, and gave hostages to fortune; a line of children perpetuated his name, and family ties gave the land where he settled another aspect than that of a mission field. The Roman Catholic priest was tied to his church, but to nothing else. At her call he was here to-day, and, it might be, gone to-morrow. He more than shared the sufferings and the sorrows of those to whom he ministered, but his life was apart from theirs, and he left no children behind him. Martyrs and virgins the Roman Catholic Church sent out to Canada, but it did not send out men and women. In comparing {84} English and French colonization in America, two points of contrast stand out above all others--the much larger numbers of English settlers, and the much greater activity of French missionaries. Both facts were in great measure due to the influence of the Roman Catholic religion, and notably to the celibacy of its ministers. [Sidenote: _Religious enthusiasts in Canada._] Histories of Canada give full space to the names, the characters, and the careers of the bishops, priests, and nuns who moulded the childhood of New France, and to the struggle for supremacy between the Jesuits and rival sects. We have portraits of the Jesuit heroes Breboeuf, Lalemant, Garnier, Isaac Jogues, and many others; of the ladies whose wealth or whose personal efforts founded the Hôtel Dieu at Quebec and at Montreal; of Madame de la Peltrie, Marie Guyard the Mère de l'Incarnation, Jeanne Mance, and Marguerite Bourgeoys; of Laval the first of Canadian bishops; but the record of their devoted lives has only an indirect bearing on the history of colonization. It will be enough to notice very shortly the founding of Montreal, and the episode of the Huron missions, as being landmarks in Canadian story. [Sidenote: _Montreal settled by a company connected with St. Sulpice._] Montreal, it will be remembered, had been in Cartier's time the site of an Indian town, which afterwards disappeared. Champlain had marked it out as a place for a future settlement, and the keen eyes of the Jesuits looked to the island as a mission centre. It had become the property of De Lauzon, one of the One Hundred Associates and afterwards Governor of Canada, and he transferred his grant to a company, the Company of Montreal, formed exclusively for the service of religion, and especially connected with the priests of St. Sulpice. The first settlers numbered about sixty in all, in charge of a chivalrous soldier, De Maisonneuve, and including one of the religious heroines of the time, Mdlle. Jeanne Mance, who was entrusted with funds by a rich French lady to found a hospital. They arrived in Canada in 1641, {85} and in spite of the warnings of the Governor, who urged that they should settle within reach of Quebec on the Island of Orleans, they chose their site at Montreal in the same autumn, and in the following spring began to build a settlement. Ville Marie was the name given to it at the time, the enterprise being dedicated to the Virgin. At the first ceremony, on landing, a Jesuit priest bade the little band of worshippers be of good courage, for they were as the grain of mustard seed; and now the distant, dangerous outpost of France in North America, which a few whole-hearted zealots founded, has become the great city of Montreal. [Sidenote: _The influence of religion on colonization._] Religion has been a potent force in colonial history. On the one hand it has promoted emigration. It carried the Huguenots from France to other lands. It peopled New England with Puritans. On the other hand, it has sent forerunners of the coming white men among the coloured races, bearers of a message of peace, but too often bringing in their train the sword. As explorers and as pioneers, missionaries have done much for colonization; but from another point of view they have endangered the cause by going too fast and too far. In South Africa, a hundred years ago, the work, the speeches, and the writings of Protestant missionaries led indirectly to the dispersion of colonists, to race feuds, and to political complications which, but for this agency, would certainly have been postponed, and might possibly never have arisen. Similarly in Canada, Jesuit activity and forwardness added to the difficulties and dangers with which the French settlers and their rulers had to contend. [Sidenote: _Montreal and the Five Nations._] The Governor, who vainly attempted to dissuade the founders of Montreal from going so far afield, was right in his warnings. Very few were the French in North America, their struggle for existence was hard, their enemies were watchful and unrelenting. Safety lay in concentration, in making Quebec a strong and comparatively populous centre, in keeping aloof from the Iroquois, instead of straying within {86} their range. To form a weak settlement 160 miles higher up the river than Quebec, within striking distance of the Five Nations, was to provoke the Indians and to offer them a prey. This was the immediate result of the foundation of Montreal. Year after year went by, and there was the same tale to tell: a tale of a hand to mouth existence, of settlers cooped up within their palisades, ploughing the fields at the risk of their lives, cut off by twos and threes, murdered or carried into captivity. Moreover, between Montreal in its weakness and the older and stronger settlement at Quebec, there was an element of jealousy. What with rival commandants and rival ecclesiastics, controversy within and ravening Iroquois without, the early days of the French in Canada were days of sorrow. [Sidenote: _The Huron missions._] Far away from civilization in the seventeenth century was Montreal, but further still was the Huron country. The first white man to visit the Hurons was the Recollet friar, Le Caron, in the year 1615, and from that date onward, till Kirke took Quebec, a very few Franciscan and Jesuit priests preached their faith by the shores of Georgian Bay. Suspended for a short time, while the English held Canada, the missions were resumed by the Jesuits in 1634, foremost among the missionaries being Father de Breboeuf, who had already worked among the Hurons, and came back to work and die. Few stories are so dramatic, few have been so well told[2] as the tale of the Huron missions. No element of tragedy is wanting. The background of the scene gives a sense of distance and immensity. The action is comprised in very few years, years of bright promise, speedily followed by absolute desolation. The contrast between the actors on either side is as great as can be found in the range of human life, between savages almost superhuman in savagery, and Christian preachers almost superhuman in endurance and {87} self-sacrifice; and all through there runs the pity of it, the pathos of a religion of love bearing as its first-fruits barren martyrdom and wholesale extermination. [Footnote 2: By Francis Parkman in _The Jesuits in North America_.] Between Lake Simcoe and Georgian Bay the Hurons dwelt, accessible to the Frenchmen only by the Ottawa river and Lake Nipissing, for the Iroquois barred the alternative route up the St. Lawrence and by Lake Ontario. Montreal was left far behind, and many miles of a toilsome, dangerous route were traversed, until by the shores of the great freshwater sea were found the homes of a savage but a settled people. To men inspired by religion and by Imperial views of religion, who looked to be the ministers of a world-wide power, including and dominating all the kingdoms of the earth, the greatness of the distances, the remoteness of the land, the unbounded area of unknown waters stretching far off to the west, were but calls to the imagination and incentives to redoubled effort. But, ambitious as they were, the Jesuits were not mere enthusiasts: they were practical and politic men, diplomatists in the American backwoods as at the Court of France. Not wandering outcasts, like the Algonquins of the lower St. Lawrence; not, like the Iroquois, wholly given to perpetual murder; with some peaceful impulses, traders to a small extent, and tillers of the ground, and above all, since Champlain first came among them, sworn allies of the French--the Hurons seemed such a people as might be moulded to a new faith, and become a beacon attracting other North American natives to the light of Christianity. So the Jesuit fathers went among them in 1634, and in 1640 built and fortified a central mission station--St. Marie--a mile from where a little river--the Wye--flows into an inlet of Lake Huron. To convert a race of suspicious savages is no easy task. The priests carried their lives in their hands. They were pitted against native sorcerers, they were called upon to give {88} rain, they were held responsible for small-pox. Yet year by year, by genuine goodness and by pious fraud, they made headway, until some eleven mission posts were in existence among the Hurons and the neighbouring tribes, the most remote station being at the outlet of Lake Superior. The promise was good. Money was forthcoming from France. There were eighteen priests at work, there were lay assistants, there was a handful of French soldiers. Earthly as well as spiritual wants were supplied at St. Marie, and far off in safety at Quebec was a seminary for Huron children. It seemed as though on the far western horizon of discovery and colonization, the Roman Catholic Church was achieving a signal triumph, its agents being Frenchmen, and its political work being credited to France. Yet after fifteen years all was over, and the land was left desolate without inhabitants. The heathen learnt from their Christian teachers to obey and to suffer, but in learning they lost the spirit of resistance and of savage manhood. As in Paraguay, a more submissive race, under Jesuit influence, dwindled in numbers, so even the Hurons, after the French priests came among them, seem to have become an easier prey than before to their hereditary foes. [Sidenote: _Destruction of the missions by the Iroquois._] [Sidenote: _Dispersion of the Hurons._] In July, 1648, the mission station of St. Joseph, fifteen miles from St. Marie, was utterly destroyed, the priest in charge was shot dead, and 700 prisoners were carried off. In the following year 1,200 warriors of the Five Nations swept like a torrent through the Huron cantons, fifteen native towns were attacked, ravaged, and burnt, and the brave priest, De Breboeuf, was tortured and slain. Other devoted missionaries shared his fate; the shepherds were slaughtered, and the survivors of the flock were scattered abroad. For the Hurons made little or no attempt to defend themselves; fear came upon them and trouble; they fell down, and there was none to help them. The fort at St. Marie stood, for even the Iroquois hesitated to attack armed walls; but its purpose {89} was gone with the slaughter and dispersion of the Huron clans. The priests who still lived abandoned it, and spent a miserable winter with a crowd of Indian fugitives on a neighbouring island in Lake Huron. There too they built a fort; but famine and the Iroquois followed them, and in 1650 they left the country, taking with them to Quebec some 300 Huron converts. The refugees were settled on the Isle of Orleans; yet even there, five or six years later, they were attacked by the Iroquois, and at length they found a secure abiding-place at Lorette, near the banks of the river St. Charles. The rest of their kinsfolk were scattered abroad. Some were incorporated in the Five Nations. Others, driven from point to point, were found in after years at the northern end of Lake Michigan or at Detroit, and, under the new name of Wyandots, played some part in later Canadian history; but the Huron nation was blotted out, the Huron country became a desert, and the light which had shone brightly for a few years in the far-off land was put out for ever. [Sidenote: _Weakness of the French in Canada._] Most readers of the story of the Huron missions will study it mainly as an episode in religious enterprise. They will note the heroism of the Jesuit priests--their faithfulness unto death, their constancy under torture and suffering not surpassed by the stoicism of the North American Indians themselves. They will mourn the failure of their efforts, the butchery, the martyrdom, but will record that all was not absolutely thrown away; for even in the lodges of the Five Nations we read that some of the nameless Hurons held to the faith which their French teachers loved and served so well. But this is not the true moral of the story. The significance of the events lay in proving the French to be weak and the Iroquois to be strong, in demonstrating with horrible thoroughness that the white men in Canada were powerless to protect their friends, in thus making more difficult what was difficult enough already, in retarding the progress of {90} European colonization in Canada. The want of concentration, the attempt to do too much, the somewhat paralysing influence of the particular form of the Christian religion which the French brought with them--all these elements of weakness came out in connexion with the Huron missions; and meanwhile precious years were lost to France which could not be afterwards made good; for in these same years the English, not producing martyrs and heroes, so much as fathers of families, were taking firm root in North American soil, plodding slowly but surely along the road to colonization. [Sidenote: _The strength and ferocity of the Iroquois._] The Iroquois were like man-eating tigers. The taste of human blood whetted their appetite for more. Fresh from the slaughter of the Hurons, in 1650-1 they fell upon the Neutral Nation, whose home was on the northern shore of Lake Erie, stretching to the east across the Niagara river. The Neutrals had held aloof from Iroquois and Huron alike, whence their name; but their neutrality did not protect them from utter extermination at the hands of the Five Nations. Over against them on the southern side of the lake were the Eries, second to none as ferocious savages, and known to the French as the 'Nation of the Cats.' Their turn came next, in 1654-5. They fought hard, behind palisades and with poisoned arrows; but they too were blotted out, and only on the south were left native warriors to cope with the conquering Iroquois. These were the Andastes, on the line of the Susquehanna river, who year after year gave blow for blow, until they too succumbed to superior numbers. Nothing withstood the Five Nations; yet their fighting men were few, and their losses great. For the time they nearly ruined the French cause in Canada, but in the end their work of destruction rendered the triumph of the white man more inevitable and more complete. They broke up and killed out tribes, whose forces, if united to their own, might have overwhelmed the Europeans; and in doing so {91} they sapped their own strength. They kept up their numbers only by the incorporation of natives who had learned to look to Europeans for guidance and support; and in course of time, fallen from their high estate, they found salvation not as leaders of red men but as allies of white. [Sidenote: _Mission of Le Moyne to the Five Nations._] It seems marvellous that the confederation held together, and there were, it is true, occasional outbursts of inter-tribal jealousy and suspicion. Difference of geographical position tended to difference of policy. The most determined foes of the French were the Mohawks--the easternmost nation, supplied with firearms by the Dutchmen at Albany, and having easy access to the St. Lawrence. At the other end of the line the Senecas had their hands full in the Erie war, and were little disposed, while it lasted, to molest the Europeans. In the centre, the Onondagas, always few in numbers and already recruited by captive Hurons, were minded to attract to their ranks the Huron refugees at Quebec. So about the autumn of 1653, overtures of peace were made to the French, even the Mohawks for the moment dissembling their enmity; and in the following year a Jesuit priest, Le Moyne, was sent as an envoy to the Iroquois country. The mission was notable in more ways than one. Le Moyne was the first white man to follow up the St. Lawrence from Montreal to Lake Ontario, and his journey marked the beginning of diplomatic relations between the French and the Iroquois. Thenceforward there was always the nucleus of a French party among the Five Nations, the elements of a divided policy in lieu of solid hostility to the French. Here was an illustration too of the value of the Jesuit priests to the French cause, as well as of the danger of employing them. None equalled these priests in the statecraft necessary for dealing with savages, but none were at the time in question so ready in season or out of season to promote a forward policy, involving future complications and dispersion of strength. {92} [Sidenote: _Attempt at a French settlement among the Five Nations._] Le Moyne's mission was to the Onondagas, and its result was an application from that tribe that a French settlement should be established among them. The invitation was accepted; and in the summer of 1656 between forty and fifty Frenchmen established themselves on Lake Onondaga, in the very heart of the Iroquois country. It was a desperate enterprise. The men could ill be spared from Quebec, and they were but hostages among the Five Nations. The Indians pretended peace, but even while the Onondagas were escorting the Frenchmen up the river, the Mohawks attacked the expedition, and subsequently under the very guns of Quebec carried off Huron captives from the Isle of Orleans. For a little less than two years, the small band of French colonists remained amid the Onondagas, in hourly peril of their lives; and finally, towards the end of 1658, at dead of night, while the Indians were overcome by gluttony and debauch, they launched their boats and canoes on the Oswego river, reached Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence, and found themselves once more at Montreal. It was a fit ending to the first stage of Canadian history--a hopeless venture, a confession of weakness, a hairsbreadth escape. So far there had been no colonization of Canada. There had been one wise, far-seeing man--Champlain. Brave soldiers had come from France, and still braver priests. There had been going in and out among the natives, toil and hardship, adventure and loss of life. But the French had as yet no real hold on Canada. Between Quebec and the Three Rivers--between the Three Rivers and Montreal, not they but the Iroquois were masters of the St. Lawrence. A trading company claimed to rule: its rule was nothingness. Within Quebec bishops and Governors quarrelled for precedence: under its walls the Mohawks yelled defiance. Montreal, the story goes, was only saved by a band of Frenchmen, who, in a log hut on the Ottawa, sold their lives as dearly as the heroes of Greek or Roman legend; and to crown it all, {93} at the beginning of 1663, the shock of a mighty earthquake was felt throughout the land, making the forts and convents tremble, sending, as it were, a shiver through the feeble frame of New France. [Sidenote: _The One Hundred Associates surrender their charter._] It was the prelude of a better time. In March, 1663, the One Hundred Associates surrendered their charter to the Crown. A century later, by the Peace of Paris in 1763, France lost Canada. In those hundred years a fair trial was given to French colonization. How much was done to leave the impress of a great nation on Canada, the province of Quebec to-day will testify. Wherein the work was found wanting is told in history. [Sidenote: _The Company of the West._] In 1663, we read, Canada became a Royal Province. It passed out of the keeping of a company and came under the direct control of the French King and his ministers. The statement requires some modification, for in 1664 Colbert created a new Chartered Company, the Company of the West, whose sphere, like that of the Netherlands West India Company, included the whole of the western half of the world, so far as it was or might be French--America North and South, the West Indies, and West Africa. Canada was within the terms of its charter, which included a monopoly of trade for forty years and, on paper, sovereign rights within the wide limits to which the charter extended. Thus the members of the company claimed to be feudal Seigniors of the soil of New France and to nominate the Council of Government, with the exception of the Governor and Intendant; while from the dues which they levied the cost of government was to be defrayed. Such was the outline and the intention of the scheme: the actual result was that the carrying trade was monopolized by the company, together with one-fourth of the beaver skins of all Canada, and the whole of the traffic of the lower St. Lawrence, which centred at Tadoussac. Out of their monopoly they paid all or part of the expenses of government, {94} but the administration practically remained in the hands of the Crown. Like its predecessor, this company was a miserable failure. It lasted for ten years only, and during those years it was an incubus on Canada. [Sidenote: _Chartered Companies ill suited to France._] The truth was that Chartered Companies were alien to the genius of France, or at any rate of Roman Catholic France--the France of the Bourbons. Her greatest ministers, Richelieu and Colbert, were, it is true, loth to discard the system. They wished to give French merchants a direct interest in building up a colonial empire. They saw the English working by means of companies. They saw the Dutch giving to the state the outward semblance of private enterprise. Companies, they argued, would promote French trade and colonization, as they had promoted the trade and colonization of rival nations. But Richelieu and Colbert were despotic ministers of arbitrary Kings; the companies which they created were as lifeless and as helpless as their titles were high-sounding and pretentious. They lasted as long, and only as long, as they were backed by the Crown. They were swept away as easily as they were formed; and they left no lasting impress on French colonial history. [Sidenote: _Canada under the Crown._] We may take it then that, in 1663, Canada in effect passed to the French King and became what would now be styled a Crown Colony. Strong hands ministered to it, and it grew in strength. New France was fostered, was ruled and organized, was supplied, though sometimes sparingly, with means of defence and offence. It was developed on rigidly prescribed lines. It was given a social and political system. Capable and enterprising men were concerned in making its history, and its history was made on a distinct type imported from the Old World, and little modified by the New. What this system was, and how far under it the colonists were able to cope with their coloured foes, will be told in the remaining pages of this chapter. [Sidenote: _The Government of Canada._] [Sidenote: _The Supreme Council._] The Government of Canada was a despotism. Under the {95} King of France, whose word was law, the whole power was centred in the Governor, the Intendant, and the Council, known at first as the Supreme Council, afterwards as the Superior or the Sovereign Council. This Council was created by royal edict in April, 1663. It was at once a legislative body, and a High Court of Justice. It consisted of the Governor, the Intendant, the bishop, and five other councillors, afterwards increased to seven, and again to twelve. The councillors were appointed by the King, and held office usually for life. They deliberated, they legislated, they judged, they wrangled among themselves; they followed the lead of Governor, Intendant, or bishop, according as one or the other was strongest for the time being, and the strongest for the time being was the man who had the ear of the King and his minister. [Sidenote: _The law of Canada._] [Sidenote: _The courts of justice._] The law of the land was the Customary Law of Paris, supplemented by three kinds of ordinances. There were the royal edicts sent out from France and registered by the Council in Canada; there were the decrees made by the Council; and in the third place, there were the ordinances of the Intendant, who was invested with legislative authority by the King. The Council, as has been stated, was a judicial as well as a legislative body. It was the court of appeal for the colony, and in early days it was also a court of first instance. There were minor courts of justice, too, established by the Council, and three judges of the three districts of Quebec, Three Rivers, and Montreal respectively, appointed by the King. In addition, the feudal Seigniors[3] of Canada exercised a petty, and usually little more than nominal, jurisdiction among their vassals, while the Intendant enjoyed {96} extensive judicial powers, emanating from and subordinate to the King alone. [Footnote 3: The judicial powers of the Seignior varied. In a very few cases the Seignior could administer _haute justice_, i.e. try crimes on the Seigniory which were punishable with death. For all important cases there was right of appeal. See Kingsford's _History of Canada_, vol. i, p. 365, and Parkman's _Old Régime in Canada_ (14th ed.), pp. 252, 269.] [Sidenote: _The Governor._] The highest executive officer was the Governor. He had control of the armed forces, and was responsible for the peace and safety of New France. He called out the militia when he thought fit; foreign policy and native policy were in his charge. In old and troubled times distance gave to the Governors of colonies and provinces actual power far exceeding the terms or the intent of their commission. They were the men on the spot. They held the sword; and, when a serious crisis arose, their word was obeyed. Especially was this the case in Canada, cut off for half the year from communication with France, and girt with foreign and with savage foes. Few years passed without wars or rumours of wars. Each Canadian settlement was a garrison; and strength, if not full authority, tended to centre in the hands of the commander of the forces, the trained soldier who held for the time the Governorship of Canada. [Sidenote: _The Intendant._] Yet, unless he had, like Count Frontenac, great force of character, or was in favour at the Court of Versailles, and when war was not imminent, his influence was hardly more, it was often less, than that of the Intendant. The Governor was the representative of the Crown. The Intendant was the King's agent, the steward of his province, his own man. He was a civilian, usually a lawyer, and therefore, in most cases, of greater business capacity, and more skilled in penmanship, than the Governor with his military training. His intimate relations with King and minister, coupled with experience of legal advocacy, tended to give more weight to his representations than to those of the Governor at the Court of France. The Intendant, not the Governor, presided at the Council; and as legislator or judge, he was responsible to the King alone. In time of peace, and in matters of internal administration, he had perhaps more real power than the Governor, and even when fighting times called the {97} soldier to the front, the Intendant, dealing with supplies and accounts, controlled in great measure the sinews of war. [Sidenote: _The bishop._] By the side of the Governor and the Intendant at the council sat the bishop, spiritually supreme, and with power by no means confined to spiritual matters. How strong, politically, was the Church in France before the Revolution, the cardinal prime ministers bear witness, and the priest-ridden wives and mistresses of the Bourbon Kings. It was stronger still in Canada. Priests formed no small part of the scanty population of New France; they made a large part of its history. The schools and hospitals were built by the Church, and the Church owned much of the land. Well organized and disciplined, with clear and definite aims, the ministers of the Church made their power felt in council chamber and in palace; too often they ruled the rulers; and the first and greatest bishop of Canada, Bishop Laval, made or unmade the Governors of New France. [Sidenote: _Defects in the political system of New France. Centralization of power._] Such was the political system of Canada, while Canada was a province of France. Power was centralized, and the ordinary safeguards of freedom were wholly wanting. Executive, legislative, and judicial functions were placed in the same hands. There was not a shred of popular representation, there was not even a vestige of municipal rights.[4] Canada was good for priests and, to some extent, for soldiers; there was room in it and a living for an agricultural peasantry, and for the trapper and backwoodsman, who was a law to himself. Where the St. Lawrence flowed by the island of Montreal, or under the rock of Quebec, there were the beginnings of cities with dwellers in them, but there were no citizens in Canada. [Footnote 4: Count Frontenac on first arriving in Canada attempted to give the Canadians some voice in the government by calling together the three estates, and by allowing the citizens of Quebec to elect three aldermen. He incurred the royal displeasure by his proceedings, and his measures came to nothing. See Parkman's _Count Frontenac and New France_ (14th ed.), pp. 16, &c., and see below, p. 107.] {98} [Sidenote: _Friction between the officials._] Though power was centralized, it was not entrusted locally to one man alone. The maxim of despotism is _Divide et impera_; and on this principle the Kings of France ruled Canada. The Governor and the Intendant each corresponded directly with the King and his minister. Each was wholly independent of the other, and yet their respective functions were not clearly enough defined to prevent friction and deadlock. The other members of the Council were subordinate neither to the Governor nor to the Intendant, in so far that they were appointed, and could be removed, by the King alone. For this division of authority there was some excuse. On the assumption that both the Governor and the Intendant might be thieves, it was prudent to set a thief to catch a thief. The system minimized the possibility of tyranny in a distant dependency, where the colonists had no voice in making the laws, and no control over the administration. One all-powerful officer might have become a tyrant; but two or more, if evilly disposed, might be trusted to expose each other's misdoings with a view to securing favour at home. Chartered Companies took the same line in this respect as the French Kings. The British East India Company held their Governor-General in check through his Council; the Dutch East India Company created in their dependencies the office of Independent Fiscal, which corresponded in great measure to that of Intendant.[5] But the plan devised by Louis XIV and Colbert for the government of Canada had grave defects. Division of authority meant weakness, where strength was urgently needed; it led to personal jealousy, to party feeling, to corruption, and to intrigue; it lessened the sense of responsibility, for each officer could throw the blame on another; and it left the fortunes of Canada in the hands of the man who, for the time being, had, irrespective of any office he held, the {99} strongest character, or the least scruple, or the largest share of Court favour. [Footnote 5: See vol. iv of this series, pt. 1, p. 75 and notes.] [Sidenote: _Emigration from France to Canada._] [Sidenote: _The settlers and_] The King of France created the government of Canada. He created also the people. In less than ten years from the date when he took the colony in hand the population was more than doubled. Shiploads of male emigrants were sent out from France, and cargoes of future wives and mothers. Wedlock was prescribed, celibacy was proscribed, bounties were, in Roman fashion, given to early marriages and to large families. The privilege of remaining single was reserved for priests and nuns; the lay members of the community were bidden to be fruitful and multiply, and they obeyed the King's commands with much success. They were honest folk, the Canadian settlers, not convicted felons sent out from French prisons. No doubt there were among the emigrants men and women who were glad to leave France, and of whom France was glad to be rid; but there was no convict strain in the population, and the _coureurs de bois_, unlicensed though they were, were not mere outlaws, like the Australian bushrangers. [Sidenote: _the Feudal System._] [Sidenote: _Canadian feudalism was purely artificial._] When an emigrant came to Canada, he could not return to France without a passport, but he might possibly drift into the backwoods or to the Dutch or English colonies. Efforts were therefore made to attach him to the soil. For this purpose a kind of Feudal System was introduced, somewhat diluted to suit the place and the time. The essence of feudalism in bygone days had been military tenure and oligarchy. Time had been in France when the nobles were stronger than the King, but in the reign of Louis XIV they were little more than courtiers. They had become ornamental rather than useful; yet even under a Bourbon despotism, tradition, long descent, ownership of wide and well-cultivated lands, and rights over a considerable number of serfs or peasants, gave the French noblesse considerable social influence. In Canada feudalism had no military {100} aspect. There was, it is true, a Canadian militia, but it had no connexion with the feudal tenure of land. Very few of the Canadian Seigniors were of noble birth, all were poor, their honours were brand new, their domains were backwoods with occasional clearings, their vassals were nearly as good men as themselves. The Feudal System in Canada was not born of the soil, it was simply a device of a benevolent despot for allotting and settling land, for artificially grading and classifying an artificially-formed people, and for giving to a new country some element of old-world respectability. [Sidenote: _The Seigniors._] [Sidenote: _The Habitans and their tenure._] The Seignior held his land, in most cases, directly from the Crown. He held it as a free gift from the King by title of faith and homage. He held it on condition of bringing it into cultivation; and, if he sold his Seigniory, one-fifth of the price as a rule was paid to the Crown. There was no immemorial title to the land. The title was given by an arbitrary overlord, and by the same could be revoked. The condition of cultivation was annexed in order to promote settlement, and inasmuch as most Seigniors, owing to poverty and the size of the holdings, could not themselves fulfil the condition, they granted lands in turn to other settlers, who held of them as they held of the King. These other settlers were the _Habitans_, the cultivators of the soil, and their tenancy was the tenure of _cens et rente_, whence they were known in legal phrase as _Censitaires_. In other words, they paid a small rent in money, or in kind, or in both. If they sold their holdings, the Seignior received one-twelfth of the purchase-money. They were required to grind their corn at the Seignior's mill, to pay for the privilege of fishing one fish in every eleven caught, and to comply with sundry other small demands, in addition to having justice meted out occasionally at the Seignior's hands. These conditions may have been found in some instances petty and annoying, but to Frenchmen of the seventeenth {101} and eighteenth century they can hardly have been onerous. They were limited and safeguarded, as they had been created, by the royal will; and it was not till the year 1854, after Canada had known British rule for nearly a hundred years, that they were swept away. That a purely artificial system should have lasted so long and caused apparently so little friction and discontent, argues no little skill in those who invented it, and proves that it was not ill suited to the wants, and harmonized with the traditions, of the colonists of Canada. It is impossible to imagine the Puritan settler in New England submitting to such minute regulations, taking his corn to a Seignior's mill, baking his bread at a Seignior's oven, paying homage to another settler set over him by a distant King. But Frenchmen could be drilled and organized. They understood being planted out in rows, like so many trees. Their religion and their training tended to unquestioning obedience, and they throve in quiet sort under restrictions which the grim and stubborn New Englander would have trodden under foot. [Sidenote: _Military colonization in Canada._] [Sidenote: _The Carignan Regiment._] Though feudalism on the St. Lawrence had no military basis, military colonization played a great part in the early settlement of Canada. The Intendant, Talon, Colbert's right-hand man in his Canadian schemes, took in this matter the Romans for his model. As the Romans planted military colonies along the frontiers of their provinces, including Gaul itself, so Colbert and Talon determined to ensure the security of Canada by placing a barrier of soldier-colonists on the border. There was a famous French regiment known as the Carignan-Salières Regiment. It had been raised in Savoy by a Prince of Carignan. It had lately fought with distinction side by side with the Austrians against the Turks, and in 1665, under Colonel de Salières, was sent out to Canada, the first regiment of the line which had ever landed in New France. The main outlet for Iroquois incursions was the line of the Richelieu river. On that river forts were {102} built and garrisoned, and along its banks and also along the St. Lawrence, between the mouth of the Richelieu and the island of Montreal, time-expired soldiers were planted out as settlers. Officers and men alike were given grants of land and bounties in money, and the soldiers were kept for a year by the King, while building their houses and clearing their land. The theory was that the officers should be Seigniors, and that the soldiers who had served under them should become tenants of their old commanders. Where the lands were most exposed, the houses were grouped together within palisades. Elsewhere they were detached from one another, forming a line of dwellings along the river-side, whence the settlements were known as _côtés_. [Sidenote: _Size of the Seigniories._] The usual size of a Seigniory, whether granted to a soldier or to a civilian, was four arpents in front by forty in depth. In other words, an arpent[6] being rather less than an acre, the frontage of a Seigniory was about 260 yards long, while the depth was about 2,600, or a mile and a half. This long hinterland contained the corn land, the timber, and the hunting-grounds, but the most valuable and distinctive feature in the Seigniories was the river frontage. In a word, Canadian colonization consisted of a series of river-side settlements, forming a long, narrow, military frontier, with a wilderness behind. [Footnote 6: The _arpent de Paris_ was .845 of an acre or 36801.7 English square feet; therefore one side of the arpent was about 64 yards.] [Sidenote: _Strong contrasts in Canadian history._] Such was the colony, its land, and its people. There is no exact parallel to be found in the story of other European colonies. None of them, perhaps, started with such very strong contrasts. Canada was not a seaboard colony, it was a purely inland colony; yet its settlements were so many little ports, and its active life was mainly by, and on, the water. It was pre-eminently not a colony of towns or of townsfolk, yet Quebec was as much the heart of Canada as Paris was of France, and the conquest of Canada consisted {103} in the taking of Quebec and Montreal. It was not a plantation colony, it was not a mining colony, it was not a pastoral colony; it was a colony of agriculturists and hunters, and its trade, such as it was, came not so much from agriculture as from the chase. No colonists were ever more carefully drilled and organized than the Canadian agriculturists; none ever lived a life of more unbounded freedom than the Canadian _coureurs de bois_. The drilling and organization of the one element, and the roving enterprise of the other, combined to produce a good fighting population; but the extremes in either case were too great to result in forming a community, which should be at once stable and progressive. What was natural in Canada was not colonization. What was colonization, that is to say permanent European settlement in the land, was purely artificial. The system of settlement was cleverly conceived, and skilfully as well as humanely carried into effect; but it depended not on law so much as on the personal will of an absolute master. It was wanting in safeguards, it was wanting in elasticity, it stunted individual effort, and it contained no element of growth. A full-blown colony was called into being under regulations which implied childhood, and the result was to leave the Canadians contented so long as they knew no other rules of life, but to leave them standing still, while their English rivals, neither too lawless nor too conservative, grew out of infancy into clumsy manhood, and proved their strength when the fullness of the time was come. [Sidenote: _Arrival of De Tracy, De Courcelles, and Talon._] On June 30, 1665, the Marquis de Tracy arrived at Quebec. He had been appointed by the King of France Lieutenant-General for the time being of all his American possessions, including the West Indies; and, before coming to Canada, he had visited Cayenne and the French West India Islands. His mission was temporary, to put the colony in a proper state of defence, and to inaugurate the system of administration devised by the King. The new Governor {104} of Canada, De Courcelles, and the Intendant, Talon, landed in September of the same year. They were good men for their respective posts--the one a keen soldier, the other, Talon, a born administrator, whose power of organization and creative genius left a lasting mark on New France. [Sidenote: _Operations against the Iroquois._] The most pressing need of the colony was security against Iroquois raids. Before the year 1665 ended, three forts had been built on the Richelieu; one, Sorel, at its mouth, a second below the rapids at Chambly, a third at some little distance above the rapids. The line of communication was strengthened by the construction of sixteen or seventeen miles of road from Chambly to the bank of the St. Lawrence opposite Montreal, and in the following year a fourth fort was built near the northern end of Lake Champlain. [Sidenote: _Expedition of Courcelles;_] The Frenchmen determined to strike soon and hard at the Five Nations. In January, 1666, in dead of winter, Courcelles led an expedition against them up the Richelieu, by Lakes Champlain and George, on to the head waters of the Hudson river. The route, well known in after years, was unfamiliar then, and instead of turning to the west into the country of the Mohawks, the Frenchmen found themselves in the middle of February near the small Dutch settlement of Schenectady, where they were challenged as invaders of an English province, for in 1664 the Duke of York had become proprietor of New Netherland. It was news to the French commander that the valley of the Hudson had passed into British hands--unwelcome news, and would have been more unwelcome, had he foreseen the results of the change on after history. Of all events which strengthened the English cause in America against the French, the most important perhaps was the substitution of English for Dutch ownership of the present State of New York. At the time, no rupture took place between French and English, and, after an interchange of courtesies, Courcelles led his troops back to Canada, losing men through cold and privation, and {105} by the hands of the Mohawks, who dogged his retreat. He had achieved nothing, yet the daring of his venture seems to have impressed the Indians, and he had gained knowledge which was soon to tell. [Sidenote: _and of Tracy._] In September of the same year he set out again with 1,300 men, the whole commanded by Tracy in person. This time no mistake was made as to the route. The hearts of the Mohawks failed them. They fled before the invaders, leaving their strongholds empty and undefended. Each village in turn was burnt to the ground, the stores were destroyed or carried off, and, homeless and starving, the Indians were glad to make peace with the French, leaving Canada unmolested for some years to come. During those years the colony grew stronger, the administration was recast, the settlements were organized, and, beyond the line of colonization, explorers carried French influence further to the west. In 1667, Tracy returned to France. In 1671, Courcelles and Talon followed him. In 1672, Count Frontenac came out as Governor to Canada. [Sidenote: _Prominence of individual leaders in the early history of Canada._] It has been noted above how great are the contrasts in the story of Canada, and, so far as it was colonized, how much in the system was artificial, how little was the result of natural growth. The record of Canada, as compared with that of the English colonies in America, is much more a series of biographies, much less a chronicle of a community. Of the great men, whose lives and doings make up Canadian history in French times, it may be said that some created Canada, while others were Canada's own creations. In other words, some were in but not of Canada; they came out from France to make, to rule, to save, or to try to save, the French colony on the St. Lawrence; while others, though many of them also came out from home, and all of them were in their way builders of New France, yet were the outcome of Canada itself, the result of the unbounded freedom of its backwoods, {106} their deeds being done and their lives spent mainly beyond the limits of the Canadian settlements. To the first class belong, among others, Champlain (though Champlain's name might in truth appear in either list), Talon, Frontenac, and Montcalm. The second class comprises the names of explorers such as La Salle, of Du Luth, the noted _coureur de bois_, and of Iberville, the bold guerilla chief, who raided the English in Newfoundland and on Hudson Bay, who carried out La Salle's unfinished work in Louisiana, and of whom, when dead, Charlevoix wrote: 'The late M. d'Iberville, who had all the good qualities of his country without any of its defects, would have led them (his countrymen) to the end of the world.'[7] [Footnote 7: Charlevoix's _Letters to the Duchess of Lesdiguières_, Eng. tr., 1763, p. 104.] Of these last there will be more to tell. Of the former class it may be said that, while not children of Canada, their influence on the history of the colony and their distinction in Canadian annals was in proportion to the extent to which New France was the land of their adoption. If we except discoverers, the three greatest names in Canadian history are Champlain, Frontenac, and Montcalm, all three of whom died at Quebec. [Sidenote: _Count Frontenac._] The strongly marked contrasts characteristic of Canada and its story are illustrated in the case of Count Frontenac. Like other Governors, before and after him, he came out from the very centre of civilization, the Court of France: from serving in the finest army in the world, he came to rule a barbarous borderland, and to command troops, the majority of whom were backwoodsmen or native Indians, or at best a half-disciplined militia. He did not come young to the work. He was fifty-two on his arrival. When he was appointed Governor for the second time, in 1689, he was in his seventieth year. He had great merits and great defects. He was pretentious, arrogant, violent and overbearing, {107} insubordinate to his employers, somewhat unscrupulous in his policy, and not cleanhanded in repairing his broken fortunes. On the other hand, he was resourceful, fearless, and determined; he stood by his friends, he was not unkindly, he had in many respects broad views, and above all he believed in Canada, its fortunes, and its peoples. He had in a high degree the admirable French quality of adapting himself to places and to men. He was trusted and revered by the Indians beyond any other French or English Governor, for, while he refused to treat them as equals, he humoured their customs and to some extent walked in their ways. His force of character impressed native and colonist alike. He took Canada in hand at a time of danger and disorganization. When he died, he left her on the lines of prosperity and possible greatness. [Sidenote: _His first government._] The term of his first government lasted for ten years, from 1672 to 1682. They were years of constant wrangling and worry. He was at daggers drawn with the Jesuits, and his quarrels with his colleagues on the Council, notably the Intendant, Duchesnau, were similar to the disputes between Warren Hastings and Francis at another time and place. The end of it was that both Frontenac and Duchesnau were recalled; but Frontenac had left his mark, and after seven years' interval, during which two governors failed, he was sent back at a critical time to Canada. [Sidenote: _His attempt to introduce political representation._] [Sidenote: _Jealousy between Quebec and Montreal._] Two incidents in his first administration may be picked out as illustrating the boldness of his character, and implying foresight and breadth of view unusual in a French Governor under Louis XIV. The first was his crude attempt, already noticed,[8] to form a kind of Canadian parliament on the old French model, with the three estates of clergy, nobles, and people. It was a rash step to take immediately after his arrival, when he could not have known the conditions of the colony, and must have known well the wishes of the King. {108} It brought upon him a severe reprimand from home, and his scheme came to nothing. But the step, if ill timed, was in the right direction. Some semblance of popular assembly would have done much for Canada, if only as tending to create a national sentiment and to allay local jealousies. For among the many elements of weakness in the colony in its early days was the semi-independence of Montreal. Montreal was the commercial dépôt for the upper St. Lawrence, the Ottawa, and the great lakes. It was the meeting-place of French and native fur-traders. In it centred the natural wealth of Canada, and to it resorted the most enterprising and the least settled part of the population. It was jealous of the older settlement of Quebec, which was the seat of government, the centre of law and order, and which, being nearer the sea, commanded the import and export trade with Europe. Under its feudal Seigniors, the Sulpician monks, Montreal claimed to have some voice in the appointment of the local Governor; and Perrot its Governor, in the early days of Frontenac's first administration, defied within the limits of his district the authority of the Governor-General, and imprisoned his officers. [Footnote 8: See above, p. 97, note.] [Sidenote: _Founding of Fort Frontenac._] The second event to be specially noted was the building of a fort on the northern bank of the St. Lawrence, at the point where it flows out of Lake Ontario. The place was known to the Indians as Cataraqui. It is now the site of the town of Kingston. The new fort, built in 1673, the year after Frontenac came to Canada, was named after him, Fort Frontenac. Its building marked the onward movement of the French. Hitherto their main concern had been to secure mastery of the central St. Lawrence between Quebec and Montreal, together with the command of the Richelieu river. Among the Iroquois, they had fought chiefly with the Mohawks, the easternmost and nearest of the Five Nations. But before Frontenac came, and long before the central St. Lawrence was wholly safe, traders and missionaries had {109} gained knowledge of the western lakes, and Fort Frontenac was built to be at once a new outpost of the colony, guarding the upper reaches of the St. Lawrence, and a starting-point for further exploiting the trade routes of the west. By building it, the Frenchmen made good their claim to the river of Canada for its whole length from the lakes to the sea, and planted themselves at the entrance of a new and vast system of waterways. As the St. Lawrence on its upward course broadens into Lake Ontario, so, as the French went further west, the story of Canada widens out. From the tale of two or three river settlements it slowly grows into the history of a continent. The struggle becomes more and more a struggle not so much for bare existence as for supremacy. The Iroquois were a deadly danger still, but the danger largely consisted in the fact that behind them was a strong and, as a rule to them, a friendly European colony--the English State of New York. Every year intensified the rivalry between French and English. Every year showed that both sought to control the trade of the west. The main practical issue, for the time being, was whether the furs from the lake region should come down the St. Lawrence to Montreal and Quebec, or be diverted to Albany through the country of the Five Nations. The Iroquois held the key of the position, and they knew it. Unless they could be taught either to fear or to love the French, there was little hope for Canada. [Sidenote: _The French come into contact with the Senecas._] As the French moved up the St. Lawrence, and along Lake Ontario, they passed along the line of the Five Nations, and came directly into conflict with the furthermost and the strongest of the five, the Senecas. After Tracy's successful expedition against the Mohawks in 1666, the Iroquois gave comparatively little trouble for some years. They knew well the difference between a strong and a weak _Onontio_, as they styled the Governor of Canada, and for Courcelles, and his successor Frontenac, they had a wholesome respect. {110} When Frontenac was recalled, in 1682, there was a different tale to tell. [Sidenote: _Frontenac recalled and succeeded by La Barre._] His successor in that year was La Barre, an old soldier of some distinction, who had been Governor of Cayenne, which he recaptured from the English. In Canada he proved to be an irresolute commander and an incapable administrator, notable even among Canadian officials for greed of gain. The Iroquois became more and more menacing. The Senecas especially, at the western end of the line, who had never yet felt in any measure the weight of the French arm, raided the Indians of the Illinois, who were nominally under French protection, threatened the tribes of the lakes, and were in a fair way to master the trade on which Canada depended. There had been some prospect of a rupture between the Five Nations and the English, owing to border forays on Virginia and Maryland; but in 1684, at a great council held at Albany, the old alliance was solemnly renewed. There was no hope from this quarter for the French. [Sidenote: _His expedition against the Iroquois._] [Sidenote: _Its failure._] [Sidenote: _He is succeeded by De Denonville._] La Barre, whatever may have been his faults, was in a most difficult position, but made up his mind to take the offensive, hoping by a demonstration of force to bring the Iroquois to terms. Having collected troops and native allies, he moved up the St. Lawrence in the summer of 1684, from Montreal to Fort Frontenac. There he waited while his force sickened with malarial fever. After delay he moved his men across to the southern side of Lake Ontario, and encamped at a place called La Famine, where more men went down with fever. There, at length, deputies of the Iroquois came to meet him. He talked swelling words, but the state of his camp gave them the lie. He made a kind of truce, in which the Indians practically dictated the terms, and he retreated down the river again, having encouraged his enemies, disgusted his allies, brought embarrassment on the colony, and procured his own recall. He was succeeded in the following year by the Marquis de Denonville. {111} [Sidenote: _His expedition against the Senecas._] [Sidenote: _Posts placed at Niagara and Detroit._] Denonville was at once more capable and more honest than La Barre, but he had still greater difficulties to contend with. The Iroquois were now quite out of hand, and Dongan, the able Governor of New York, was taking a stronger line than was the wont of most Governors in the English colonies, making a bold bid for the control of the lake region. However, ample reinforcements were sent from France with orders to attack the Five Nations, and in the summer of 1687 the French Governor set out with an overwhelming force against the Senecas. His troops, nearly 3,000 in all, mustered at Irondequoit Bay, halfway along the southern shore of Lake Ontario. From thence a route led southwards to the chief town of the Senecas. Many of the Seneca warriors were out of the country at the time, and the French, advancing in strength, dispersed the savages who remained, reached the town, already burnt and deserted, and after destroying corn and devastating the neighbouring land, returned to the lake. A fort was then built at the further end of the lake, below Niagara,[9] to command the junction of Lakes Erie and Ontario, as in the previous year a stockade had been constructed on the strait of Detroit, to control the passage from Lake Huron to Lake Erie; after which the Governor returned to Montreal. [Footnote 9: In March of this same year Dongan was urging on the Lords of Trade the building of an English fort at Niagara, or as he called it, Oneigra, 'near the great lake on the way whereby our people go hunting and trading. It is very necessary for our trade and correspondence with the Indians, and for securing our right to the country' (_Calendar of State Papers_, Colonial, 1685-8, p. 328).] [Sidenote: _Fruitlessness of the expedition._] [Sidenote: _The massacre of Lachine._] The French, to quote Colden's words,[10] had 'got nothing but dry blows by this expedition.' Denonville had not done enough. He had enraged the confederate Indians without crippling them. A few months before, with odious treachery, he had ordered some friendly Iroquois to be kidnapped and sent to France to serve in the galleys. The tribesmen of the prisoners neither forgave nor forgot, and in less than two {112} years' time they paid the debt. On the island of Montreal, some eight miles above the town to the south-west, at the head of rapids now cut by a canal, and at the lower end of the broad reach of the St. Lawrence--which bears the name of Lake St. Louis--was the settlement of Lachine. At the beginning of August, 1689, at dead of night and under cover of a storm, many hundred Iroquois warriors broke in upon the settlers. Two hundred of the French were butchered there and then. One hundred and twenty were carried off, some to be tortured and burnt almost within sight of their countrymen, others to be gradually done to death in the lodges of the Five Nations. A detachment of eighty French soldiers was also cut to pieces, and outside forts and palisades the country was a scene of death and desolation. [Footnote 10: _History of the Five Nations_ (3rd ed.), vol. i, chap. v, p. 82.] [Sidenote: _Abandonment of Fort Frontenac. Recall of Denonville and return of Frontenac._] The horrors of Lachine stand out in Canadian history as a kind of Sicilian Vespers or Massacre of St. Bartholomew. The upper part of the colony, Montreal and its neighbourhood, was paralysed with terror, and once more, for a moment, the Iroquois seemed to threaten the very existence of New France. It was not so in fact. Below Three Rivers Canada was safe, and the savages did not, as in old days, parade their triumph beneath the cliffs of Quebec. Meanwhile Denonville had already been recalled, his last act being to order in his panic the evacuation and destruction of Fort Frontenac; and the old Frenchman, after whom that fort had been named, came back in his seventieth year to save and to rule Canada. [Sidenote: _Callières._] Another competent man returned with Frontenac, after a short visit to France--Callières, the Governor of Montreal. He was a strong second in command, and, when Frontenac died, was appointed to succeed him, and carried on his work. The two commanders arrived in the autumn of 1689, to find all in confusion and distress; but Frontenac was not forgotten. His presence gave confidence, and even among the {113} Iroquois his name secured respect. It was his habit to see with his own eyes, to take his own line, to act with promptitude and decision. These qualities, when coupled with ten years' previous experience of the colony, were invaluable at a crisis. He might quarrel with Intendants, browbeat Councillors, and denounce Jesuit priests; but to the settlers he gave security, to the adventurous backwoodsmen of the West he was a congenial leader, and to the Indians he was the great _Onontio_, whose actions matched his words. [Sidenote: _Confidence restored by Frontenac._] [Sidenote: _His dealings with the Indians._] For the time he was not in a position to carry war into the Iroquois country, and the Iroquois would not listen to friendly overtures. He contented himself, therefore, with strengthening the forts and defences of the colony and with issuing proclamations to the wavering tribes of the lakes. It was one thing when La Barre or Denonville spoke, it was another when the words were those of Frontenac. His next step was to intimidate the English allies of the Five Nations, and to send three raiding parties into New England and New York. This was the kind of irregular warfare for which the Canadians were best suited. All three expeditions were successful; and their success, coupled with two defeats of parties of Iroquois on the Ottawa, by Du Luth in 1689 and Nicolas Perrot in 1690, both noted leaders of _coureurs de bois_, gave new heart to Canada. Before the summer of 1690 ended, the Indians of the upper lakes came down in force to trade at Montreal, and the grey-headed Governor-General of New France led the war dance, hatchet in hand, appealing to savages in savage fashion, as only a versatile Frenchman could. It was a typical proceeding. French priests turned heathens into Christians, but left them on their savage lines. French hunters lived among Indians, adopting Indian garb and Indian methods; and the great Governor of Canada, who of all others was a ruler of men, led a yelling crowd in their native prelude for war, as sure in {114} self-esteem, as sure in the esteem of his company, as if he were treading a minuet in stately fashion at the Court of Versailles. The English had no such address; but not having it they ran less risk for the future of their kind. They kept the heathen, for the most part, outside their pale. They did little to convert them. They did little to befriend or protect them. But the English race remained stronger and purer in its dour isolation than the assimilated and assimilating Frenchmen of what was then Upper Canada. [Sidenote: _Insecurity of the French settlers above Three Rivers._] Raids and counter raids went on. Of the part which the English took in the fighting, something will be said presently. So far as the struggle was between the French and the Five Nations, the scene of action was either the Ottawa river, or the angle between the Richelieu and the St. Lawrence. Always important, as being the direct trade route from Lake Huron, the Ottawa was more important now, seeing that there was a larger population in Canada than in bygone days dependent on the fur trade, and that since Denonville's abortive expedition against the Senecas, the massacre of Lachine, and the evacuation of Fort Frontenac, the French had lost command of the upper St. Lawrence. The corner of land lying between Chambly on the Richelieu and Montreal was the old battlefield of French and Iroquois. By this line, before Tracy's expedition of 1666, the Mohawks had raided Canada; by this line, once more, their war-parties came. Below the Three Rivers, at Quebec and in its neighbourhood, there was no fear of the Indians, though there was both apprehension and reality of English invasion, and distress from English blockade of Canadian trade. But in the upper half of the colony, of which Montreal was the centre, there was no security for life or property outside fortifications and stockades. [Sidenote: _Madeleine de Verchères._] Some twenty miles below Montreal, on the southern bank of the St. Lawrence, in the troubled belt of land between that river and the Richelieu, was the Seigniory of Verchères. {115} There was on it a fort and a blockhouse, which, in the last week of October, 1692, was the scene of one of the most picturesque episodes in all the annals of border warfare. The Seignior, a military man, was absent, the fort was nearly empty, for the able-bodied men were working in the fields, when the Iroquois came down on the place. The Seignior's daughter, Madeleine de Verchères, a girl of fourteen, took charge of the fort, having for a garrison, over and above women and children, two terrified soldiers, one hired man-servant, one refugee settler, an old man of eighty, and two small boys, her brothers. She gave the command, she placed each at his post, she misled the savages by a show of imaginary force, and watching day and night she held them at bay, until, at the end of a week, a party of soldiers came to her relief from Montreal. Years afterwards the tale of the siege was taken down from her own lips; and her name lives, and deserves to live, in the history of Canada. The girl's heroism is the chief, but not the only, point of the story. That the Mohawks should have prowled round the fort for a week without seriously attempting to take it, and without finding out that it was nearly defenceless, shows how helpless and stupid these noted warriors were when face to face with a fortification. On the other hand, that a post, only twenty miles distant from Montreal, was left for a week without relief, proves how paralysed, or at least how weakened, were the French by a long series of Indian incursions. This was in Frontenac's time; but Frontenac had the English on his hands, and was short of men. Had it been otherwise, there would have been no beleaguering of girls in forts, and Canada would have lost a pretty story. [Sidenote: _Revival of the French cause._] As it was, the scale soon turned in favour of the French. In dead of winter, at the beginning of 1693, a mixed body of Canadians and Indians broke in upon the Mohawk towns, and, in spite of a somewhat disastrous retreat, inflicted considerable loss on their persistent enemies; while later {116} in the year, at the bidding of the sturdy old Governor, a strong party of _coureurs de bois_ came down the Ottawa, convoying a long pent-up and most welcome cargo of furs. This 'gave as universal joy to Canada as the arrival of the galleons give in Spain';[11] and Frontenac was hailed as the father of the people. [Footnote 11: Colden's _History of the Five Nations_ (3rd ed.), vol. i, chap. ix, p. 159.] [Sidenote: _The Iroquois complain of English inaction._] More soldiers came out from France, and the Iroquois began to lose heart. Many of their warriors had fallen, and not a few, converted by the Jesuits, had settled in Canada, being known to their heathen countrymen as the 'praying Indians.'[12] From the English colonies little or no help had come, beyond supplies of arms and ammunition. The councils at Albany produced on the English side pretentious speeches, criticism, encouragement, and promises which were never fulfilled; but the words of the Indians were more to the point, 'the whole burden of the war lies on us alone ... we alone cannot continue the war against the French by reason of the recruits they daily receive from the other side the Great Lake.'[13] They had been faithful to the English alliance, more faithful than the English deserved, and more faithful than any civilized nation would have been under like circumstances; but they tired of fighting singlehanded, and the chain of the covenant began to rust. [Footnote 12: The converted Iroquois were settled at Caughnawaga, which was on the south bank of the St. Lawrence, at the Sault St. Louis, and directly opposite Lachine. They were often called Caughnawagas.] [Footnote 13: Colden, vol. i, chap. x, p. 176.] [Sidenote: _Their policy towards the French._] [Sidenote: _Barbarity of Frontenac._] In default of active aid from the English, there were two policies open to them--to make terms with the French, and to detach from the French cause the Indian tribes of the lakes. They pursued both policies at once: they invited Frontenac to meet them and the English at Albany; he refused. He refused also to come to a meeting at Onondaga. {117} They then sent a deputation to Quebec in 1694; and Frontenac offered a peace which should include the Indian allies of the French and exclude the English. Two nations of the confederacy were ready to accept these terms; the other three rejected them, and there was no peace. In the meantime the Iroquois intrigued with the Lake Indians, and, attracted by the prospect of English goods, the latter came near exchanging the French alliance for combination with the Five Nations and the English. To prevent this result, Frontenac and his officers had resort to infamous methods. Not only at the forest post of Michillimackinac, but at Montreal itself, the French compelled the wavering Indians to burn Iroquois prisoners to death, in order to make peace impossible, and joined themselves in the torture and butchery. Few worse instances of barbarous policy are recorded in history. [Sidenote: _Fort Frontenac reoccupied._] Such means alone would not attain the desired end. Nothing, the Governor knew, would avail except acknowledged mastery over the Five Nations. The most obvious confession of weakness on the French side in Denonville's disastrous time had been the evacuation of Fort Frontenac; and never had Denonville's successor slackened his determination to reoccupy the post, which, if he had arrived in Canada a day or two earlier, would not have been abandoned. The time came in the summer of 1695. A force, secretly and quickly gathered, was sent up from Montreal; the walls of the fort still standing were repaired; and the Iroquois were startled by the news that the post, which they most dreaded, and which most menaced their confederacy, was again manned by a French garrison. Frontenac was just in time. The day after the expedition started, orders came from France that the fort should not be reoccupied; but he refused to recall his troops, and set himself to justify, by further measures, his disobedience to the home Government. [Sidenote: _Frontenac's expedition against the Five Nations._] In July, 1696, he set out from Montreal at the head of {118} over 2,000 men. The military strength of Canada was well represented; there were French soldiers of the line, Canadian militia, and friendly Indians. With the old Governor went his best officers--Callières leading the van of the march, Vaudreuil bringing up the rear. The force reached Fort Frontenac, crossed Lake Ontario, and, landing at the mouth of the Oswego river, worked their way up, by stream and lake and portage, towards the goal of the expedition--Onondaga, the central town and meeting-place of the Five Nations. What had happened before happened again. The Indians retreated into the forest before superior numbers, leaving the French a barren conquest over the smouldering ashes of the native town and the standing corn. The Oneidas' village and maize fields were also laid waste, and then the invaders retraced their steps. [Sidenote: _Death of Frontenac._] Though the expedition was recorded by the French as a success, Frontenac had done no more than Denonville in his march against the Senecas, and a writer on the English side contemptuously refers to it as 'a kind of heroic dotage'.[14] The show of force, however, seems to have had the effect of inclining the Iroquois to peace, of proving once more that the French were more active than the English, and that the arm of _Onontio_ was longer than that of the Governor of New York. Early in 1698 came news of the Peace of Ryswick. The Five Nations were subjects neither of England nor of France, but both Canada and New York claimed them. Sturdily to the last, Frontenac repelled English pretensions and half-hearted Indian advances; but the hand of death was upon him, and on November 28, 1698, he died at Quebec, in the seventy-eighth year of his age. [Footnote 14: Colden, vol. i, chap. xii, p. 202.] [Sidenote: _His services to Canada._] He had rid Canada in a great measure from the scourge of murdering savages. He had humbled the Iroquois to some extent; he had certainly won their respect. How he withstood the English in open warfare, and how he {119} encouraged Frenchmen of his own bold type to explore and to claim the far West, remains to be told. He was a great man for the time and place, great in fearlessness, in self-reliance, in foresight, and in unflinching tenacity of purpose. The element of bombast and arrogance in his character helped him, as it helped other Frenchmen, whose names have lived, in handling native races. As a ruler of wild men, whether coloured or white, he was unsurpassed. The ruthlessness of his policy has left a stain upon his memory; but he gave life and confidence to Canada in time of trouble, and but for him there would have been no future for New France. [Sidenote: _The Iroquois make peace with the French._] His deeds and his character bore fruit immediately after his death. At the invitation of his successor, Callières, a general meeting of all the Indian tribes was held at Montreal, in 1701, to which the Iroquois condescended to send representatives. Peace was made; and the French, whom the Five Nations had brought to the brink of ruin, emerged from the contest as acknowledged arbitrators between the native races of North America. [Sidenote: _Causes which inclined the Iroquois to peace. Loss of numbers._] Thus, with the close of the seventeenth century, came in effect the close of the life-and-death struggle between the Five Nation Indians and the Canadian settlers. What were the causes which brought the Iroquois to terms? The first and most potent was loss of numbers. Continual bloodshed had reduced the male population of the confederates by half;[15] and mixture by adoption, it may well be supposed, had brought some alloy into the old fighting breed. When white men meet coloured men in war, there is always the same tale to tell. The white men suffer reverses, as long as they are a handful, and until the native race has lost a certain proportion of its warriors. Then strength, and knowledge, and discipline prevail; and the issue is no longer in doubt. But no other coloured race in the history of colonization fought with Europeans, man for man, like the Iroquois, and never {120} submitting, treated sullenly as equals only when the white race were absolutely superior in numbers. Big battalions in the end usually determine the course of history. They certainly decided the fate of North America. Numerical strength turned the scale in favour of the French, as against the Iroquois. It subsequently turned the scale in favour of the English, as against the French. [Footnote 15: See Parkman's _Count Frontenac_, last page, note.] [Sidenote: _Personality of Frontenac._] The second cause which influenced the Iroquois was Frontenac's personality. In dealing with him the Indians dealt, and knew that they dealt, with a man who in the greatest straits would never give way an inch. There was no compromise in his policy. He meant to be master; the savages knew it, and respected him accordingly. He did not live to complete his work, and it was not thoroughly completed; but he lived long enough to cripple the Five Nations, and after his time their strength declined. [Sidenote: _Shortcomings of the English._] A third cause was the failure of the English. They missed their opportunities. The path of English colonization has been strewn with lost opportunities. The end has been achieved in most cases, and in most parts of the world; but it has been achieved only after long years of toil, expense, and loss of life, which a little foresight might well have avoided. There was no Frontenac on the English side, no man who went in advance of his Government, who framed and forced a strong policy. One Governor of New York, the Irishman Dongan, was active and determined, but those who came after did little. The element of compromise in the English character, and in the policy of the English Government, made itself felt. Colony was jealous of colony, petty legislatures wrangled, and farmers resented being called to fight instead of sowing or harvesting their crops. Over and above all, whether as friends or as foes, the Frenchmen stretched out their right hands to the native races of North America; the English lived their lives apart, and for the time they paid the penalty. {121} [Sidenote: _Founding of Detroit._] [Sidenote: _La Mothe Cadillac._] Thus the Five Nations made peace with the French at Montreal. At the very same time, at Albany,[16] they gave the English a title to the lake regions. In the year 1686, by Denonville's orders, Du Luth, with a party of _coureurs de bois_, established a French outpost on the strait (Detroit) between Lakes Huron and Erie,[17] his object being to prevent the fur trade of the upper lakes passing down that way to the Iroquois country, and thence to the English market at Albany. The post was not maintained; but some years afterwards a more permanent occupation took place. Frontenac had died; but he left behind him men trained in his school, keen on a forward policy, on holding in the interests of France and in their own the passes of the West. Such a man was La Mothe Cadillac, who in 1694 had been sent to take command at Michillimackinac. He urged upon the French Government the importance of controlling the outlet from Lake Huron to Lake Erie, and, having obtained their consent, was the founder of the city of Detroit. He began the work in July, 1701, but before his expedition actually reached the place, the Five Nations took alarm, recognizing that Detroit, like Fort Frontenac, would limit their range and endanger their power. [Footnote 16: The great meeting at Montreal was held on Aug. 4, 1701. The deed of cession referred to in the text was dated July 19, 1701.] [Footnote 17: See above, p. 111.] [Sidenote: _The Iroquois cede their hunting-grounds to the King of England._] They sent representatives of all their nations to Albany, and there, on July 19, 1701, ceded to the King of England their 'beaver hunting-ground,' retaining for themselves the right of free hunting. The deed was of the most formal character, attested by the totem marks of all the Five Nations.[18] It is an interesting document, setting forth that the Iroquois had already subjected themselves and their lands 'on this side of Cataraqui (Ontario) lake wholly to the Crown of {122} England,' and conveying to the King a wide area to the north of the lake, which the Five Nations claimed as their hunting-ground in right of conquest. The tract was estimated at 800 miles in length by 400 in breadth, extending on the north to Lake Superior, on the west to Chicago, and it specifically included Detroit,[19] the French designs on which were stated as the reason for making the cession. A white man's hand must have drawn the deed. It gave away the Iroquois entirely. Hitherto they had stubbornly rejected any English claim to sovereignty. Brother the Governor of New York had been, but not father, and no allegiance had been offered to the King of England; but in the conveyance William III figured as 'the great lord and master' of the Five Nations, and on paper the acknowledgement of British sovereignty was complete. [Footnote 18: A certified copy in manuscript sent home at the time may be seen at the Record Office, and a printed copy is included in the New York documents.] [Footnote 19: Spoken of in the deed in one place as 'Tiengsachrondio alias Fort de Tret.'] It was a piece of parchment only, and as such and no more the Iroquois probably regarded it; but it embodied a small element of fact. These hardheaded, hardhanded Indians were gradually being worn down by the white men on either side, owing such measure of independence as they still retained not so much to their own fighting strength as to the constant enmity between Great Britain and France. When war broke out again, after Queen Anne's accession, they remained for the most part neutral; what they had claimed and conveyed as their hunting-ground passed more and more under French control, while, as the result of Marlborough's victories on the other side of the Atlantic, their own land and its cantons was awarded to Great Britain in 1713 by the Treaty of Utrecht.[20] [Footnote 20: Clause xv of the Treaty of Utrecht ran as follows: 'The subjects of France inhabiting Canada, and others, shall hereafter give no hinderance or molestation to the Five Nations or Cantons of Indians subject to the dominion of Great Britain nor to the other natives of America who are friends to the same.'] [Illustration: Map of New England, New York & Central Canada, showing the Waterways] {123} CHAPTER IV FRENCH AND ENGLISH DOWN TO THE PEACE OF UTRECHT Down to the date of the Treaty of Utrecht, the Iroquois formed the first line of the foes of Canada. Behind them were the English. [Sidenote: _Little communication in early times between Canada and the English colonies._] [Sidenote: _Route from the Atlantic to Quebec by the line of the Kennebec._] After Quebec had been in 1632 given back to France, the English on the Atlantic coast, and the French on the St. Lawrence, for many years came little into contact with each other. In Acadia the two nations overlapped, with results which are told elsewhere, and it was the same in Newfoundland; but the French colonists at Quebec and the English colonists at Boston or in Virginia were far apart. We read of an English traveller finding his way, in 1640, from the coast of Maine, up the Kennebec river and by the Chaudière, to Quebec, his journey being noted as an explorer's feat with an ultimate design of reaching the North Sea; while a few years later, in 1647-51, the same route became better known, and was taken by French emissaries of peace to the New England states. [Sidenote: _Proposals for a treaty between the English and French colonies._] Negotiations were then on foot, at the instance of Winthrop, Governor of Massachusetts, for a treaty of commerce between the English and French colonies in North America, and it was suggested that they should keep peace with each other even in the event of war in Europe between the respective mother countries.[1] Such a treaty {124} might have been made and kept, if there had been no native question; but each side had Indian friends and Indian foes, and could not afford to alienate the one or add to the number of the other. The French wanted New England support against the Iroquois, and with the Iroquois the New Englanders had no quarrel. Thus the friendly overtures between the two parties came to nothing; but Frenchmen on the river of Canada and Englishmen by the open sea went their own ways, having no direct dealings with each other in war or peace. [Footnote 1: A like sensible policy was pursued in the little island of St. Kitts, when first colonized by French and English. They agreed to keep the peace whether or not France and Great Britain were at war. See vol. ii of this series, chap. iv, p. 135. See also Kingsford's _History of Canada_, vol. ii, p. 426.] [Sidenote: _The English take New York._] A change came when the English, in 1664, took possession of New York. They too had now a river--the Hudson--which carried them inland; they became neighbours and friends of the Five Nations; and their natural line of expansion was in the direction of the St. Lawrence and the great lakes. From this time onward collision between French and English was inevitable, and it was equally inevitable that the colony of New York should be the central point of the contest. [Sidenote: _Want of union between the English colonies._] Before the Dutchmen on Manhattan Island and in the valley of the Hudson became subjects of the British Crown, they had themselves absorbed the Swedish colonists on the Delaware. The result, therefore, of New York becoming a British province was to link together the British colonies on the Atlantic seaboard. It has been said above that English colonization in North America was more compact and more continuous than French. In other words, though the English colonists many times outnumbered the French, they were less dispersed through the wilderness. But the compactness and continuity was comparative only. Continuity of English colonization meant little more than that the lands claimed by one colony were coterminous with those claimed by the next, and that no other European nation could plant {125} a settlement between the Alleghanies and the sea without committing a trespass and fighting for its place. There was no continuity of what would now be called effective occupation. Colony was divided from colony by many miles of forest and backwood. Separately they were planted. Their surroundings, their traditions, their interests were all distinct. Sprung in the main from one stock, and speaking one language, they had little else in common. They had not even the bond of a common religious creed. [Sidenote: _Dissensions in New York._] Within each single colony there was division still. Settlements and homesteads were often far from one another, and political or religious dissensions supplemented geographical separation. New York was an instance in point. Alone among the colonies, it had a good waterway for any distance inland; but there was little community of interest between the settlers at Albany or Schenectady, and the seaport at Manhattan Island, except so far as the latter commanded the import and export trade of the Hudson valley. The settlers at the mouth of the Hudson were merchants and seafaring men. The settlers inland were farmers, landholders, and traders with the Indians. The former were exposed to attack by sea, but recked little of the French in Canada or their Indian allies. The latter had nothing to fear from a hostile fleet, but were constantly in danger from an inroad from Canada. Then there were feuds of race and religion. The English overpowered the Dutch, and with the English came in the rule of the Duke of York, Roman Catholic influence, and a policy too often dictated by France. [Sidenote: _Leisler's rebellion._] The Revolution, which turned out the Stuarts in England, was followed by a rising in New York. There was a cleavage, not so much on lines of race, as on those of politics and religion. The extreme Protestants and Republicans, whose stronghold was in and about the town of New York, rose against the existing system, which was upheld by the more {126} moderate and aristocratic section of the population, who were stronger up country, and were supported by such men as Schuyler, the chief magistrate of Albany. Jacob Leisler, a German, led the revolutionary party, and in 1689, backed by the militia, he deposed the Lieutenant-Governor and took the government into his own hands. He played the part of Cromwell for two years until, in 1691, regular troops were sent out from England, when he was deserted by his followers, imprisoned, and hanged; and the ordinary methods of colonial government were resumed. [Sidenote: _Want of union made the English impotent against the French._] Colony being thus divided from colony, and the one colony which directly abutted on Canada being divided against itself, it was long before the English made any headway against the French on the St. Lawrence. At almost any given date the French had a larger number of regular troops available, supported by Canadian rangers, whose life was spent in border warfare--the whole being under one Governor, who was, as has been seen, invariably a man of considerable military experience. On the sea the English could more than hold their own, but the sea-route from New York or Boston to Quebec was long and troublesome. If such an expedition was taken in hand, there could be no secrecy and no speed in the matter. There was gathering of ships and transports; discussions as to the quota of each colony; selection of a leader because he was a good neighbour or a popular citizen, rather than for any naval or military capacity. There was sailing round the coast, taking Acadia on the way, and finally arrival before Quebec after men and ships had dropped off and the French had been forewarned and forearmed. Thus down to the date of the Treaty of Utrecht English efforts against the French in Canada amounted to little more than giving arms and supplies to the Five Nations, making occasional counter raids by land, and still more occasional demonstrations by sea. {127} [Sidenote: _First proposal for joint action against the French._] It will be remembered[2] that in February, 1666, the French commander, Courcelles, on his bold midwinter expedition against the Mohawks, strayed from his route, and found himself near Corlaer or Schenectady, where he learnt that the English had become masters of New York, and that there was an English garrison at Albany. This was the first intrusion of the French into the Hudson valley. Tracy's expedition against the Mohawk towns later in the same year gave Colonel Nicolls, the first English Governor of New York, occasion to invite the New England colonies to join him in attacking the French. They refused, fearing that, if they sided with the Iroquois, they would be exposed to attack from the Abenakis, who were on their borders, and who were friends of the French, foes of the Five Nations. Some twenty years then passed without open rupture. New York was retaken by the Dutch and regained by the English. The colonization of Canada went on. The Iroquois remained comparatively quiet, and in Frontenac's first term of administration western exploration and western trade began to determine French policy in Canada and English policy in New York. [Footnote 2: See above, p. 104.] [Sidenote: _Thomas Dongan._] [Sidenote: _Meeting between the English Governors and the chiefs of the Five Nations._] [Sidenote: _Bad feeling between French and English._] In 1683, after Frontenac had come to Canada for the first time and gone again, New York was given in the Irish Catholic, Thomas Dongan, a Governor of strength and foresight. In the following year, at a conference held at Albany, at which Lord Howard of Effingham, the Governor of Virginia, was present, the alliance between the English and the Five Nations was formally confirmed; and, assured of English aid and protection, the Iroquois turned their strength against Canada. Though there was peace between Great Britain and France in James II's time, the relations between New York and Canada were the reverse of friendly. The French knew that the Five Nations were backed by the English. Dongan on his part was resolved that the {128} trade of the West should not be left exclusively in French hands. Angry letters passed between him and Denonville, English and Dutch traders on the lakes were intercepted by the Canadians, and a party from Montreal captured and looted three English trading posts on Hudson Bay. In 1688 Dongan was recalled, and in the following year news reached the American colonies of the Revolution in England. [Sidenote: _French plan for attacking New York._] [Sidenote: _Frontenac's raiding parties._] The expulsion of the Stuarts and the accession of William III to the throne of Great Britain meant war with France; and at this critical moment Frontenac came back to Canada. He came back with a plan, devised by Callières and approved by the King, for attacking New York by land and sea. A stillborn scheme it proved, through untoward delays, but its conception indicated that New York was recognized by the French Government and its advisers as the key of the position in North America. While plans were being laid by the French for the invasion of New York the Iroquois invaded Canada, and the massacre of Lachine faced Frontenac on his return in 1689. Next year he sent out against the English colonies the three expeditions which have been already mentioned.[3] [Footnote 3: See above, p. 113.] [Sidenote: _The capture of Schenectady._] The first started from Montreal in depth of winter, following the familiar route of the Richelieu and Lake Champlain, and intending to strike a blow at Albany. The men were picked for the work, Frenchmen and Indians, about 250 in all, led by the best of Canadian rangers, such as Le Moyne d'Iberville and his brothers. They toiled through ice and snow, and, turning off from the path to Albany, in the darkness of a winter's night they fell upon the Dutch settlement of Schenectady. It was the time of Leisler's movement, when New York was in the throes of revolution. The village was unguarded, its gates were open, its inmates were asleep. A blockhouse manned by eight or nine militiamen from {129} Connecticut was stormed, and the scene was one of helpless massacre. [Sidenote: _The attack on Salmon Falls and Falmouth._] The second party, smaller in number, consisting of some fifty French and Abenaki Indians, left Three Rivers towards the end of January, and near the end of March made a night attack on the settlement of Salmon Falls, on the borders of New Hampshire and Maine. Again the English, sleeping and unprepared, were murdered in their beds, and the murderers, making good their retreat, joined forces with the third and strongest party, which had set out from Quebec to attack the settlement of Falmouth at Casco Bay. Falmouth stood where the town of Portland in Maine now stands. There was a fort at the place--Fort Loyal--into which the outlying settlers gathered with their families when the attacking force of four or five hundred men appeared. After a short defence the commander, Sylvanus Davies by name, surrendered on solemn promise, according to his own circumstantial account, of quarter and freedom for the whole company. The terms were immediately broken, and all the English were massacred or carried into captivity. [Sidenote: _Effect of the French raids._] Thus three separate raids on the English colonies, sent out under Frontenac's orders in the year 1690, were all successful. They were well devised, and carried out with skill, courage, and determination. The English and Dutch settlers, on their side, showed the greatest negligence and little stubbornness or competence in self-defence. The immediate result was to invigorate the French and their Indian allies; but the causes of their momentary success were the causes of their ultimate failure; and even at the moment these marauding exploits threatened new danger to Canada. The French succeeded because, leagued with savages, they in all things likened themselves to their companions, they habited themselves in Indian dress, their warriors were ferocious as Indian warriors, their priests hounded on to blood. They succeeded because their trade was war not peace, {130} because they were roving adventurers who had only their lives to lose, ravening among quiet men of substance who had homes and wives and children to be plundered and slain. It was as certain that in course of time the cause of the English colonists would prevail, as that the Highland clans, who in Scotland marauded their southern neighbours, would eventually be broken, or that the Five Nations themselves, if left to fight alone, would eventually go down before the settled life of Canada. [Sidenote: _They tended to unite the English colonists._] On this occasion three blows were struck, nearly at the same time, at three separate points in a long undefended line. The adoption of this policy by the French, and still more the fact of its success, in reality tended to remove the one great obstacle to British supremacy in North America. When Sylvanus Davies, taken at Fort Loyal and carried prisoner to Quebec, asked Frontenac the reason for the savage raid on the Casco Bay settlement, he was told that it was reprisal for the support given to the Iroquois by New York. His rejoinder, which was to the effect that New England should not be called upon to answer for the doings of New York, showed how little community of sentiment or interest existed in the English colonies. The one great source of weakness to the English cause, the greatest source of strength to the French, was the disunion of the English colonies and their indifference to each other. Consolidation could come only through partnership in suffering, and pressure from a common foe. This was the lesson which Frontenac taught, when his border ruffians carried havoc from the head waters of the Hudson to the sea-coast of Maine. [Sidenote: _The colonies determine to attack Canada._] The lesson was never fully learnt as long as the Atlantic colonies were British possessions and Canada was French; but for a time the French outrages produced some semblance of common action on the other side; and at a conference held at Albany, in 1690, it was resolved to attack Canada by land and sea. The land expedition, taking the route {131} of Lake Champlain, was a failure, ending in a small raid on the French settlement of La Prairie; and the main effort was made by sea. On sea the New Englanders showed the way, led by the men of Massachusetts. [Sidenote: _Massachusetts takes the lead._] [Sidenote: _Capture of Port Royal._] The 'Bostonnais,' as the French called them, were dangerous foes of Canada. Puritans, Republicans, sea-fighters, sea-traders, they were all that the Canadians were not. They were strong in numbers too. At the end of the seventeenth century, Boston was a town of some 7,000 inhabitants, and the population of the whole colony was estimated at not far short of 50,000, against less than 15,000 French in Canada. At the very time that the French and Indian raid on Casco Bay took place, a fleet of seven or eight ships with 700 men on board sailed from Boston for Acadia, took possession of Port Royal with other French settlements on the Acadian coast, and returned in little more than a month's time with prisoners, booty, and renown. [Sidenote: _William Phipps._] The commander of the expedition was William Phipps, a typical product of the seaboard colonies. Starting as a New England ship-carpenter, he had turned rover and buccaneer; and finding a sunken Spanish treasure-ship, had won himself riches and a knighthood. He was brave, not too scrupulous or cleanhanded, a good seaman, and a patriotic man. He was well fitted for irregular warfare on a small scale, but his capacity was limited, and he did not rise to the level of greatness. After his success in Acadia, Phipps seemed obviously the man to achieve the conquest of Canada. [Sidenote: _Condition of Quebec._] Sixty years had passed since David Kirke took Quebec. A better leader than Phipps, he had had an easy task in starving out an infant settlement. The interval had been for Quebec a time of comparative peace. Sheltered on the land side by Three Rivers, Montreal, and the military outposts of the Richelieu, the town was practically safe from the Iroquois, while civil wars and Stuart Kings in England prevented invasion from the sea. One year and another {132} the furs which came down the river, or the supplies which were brought from France, were intercepted; but in the main the capital of New France enjoyed security and peace. It had grown, but was a very small town still, ill fortified, except by nature, and, if fortune and skill had combined, might well have been taken. But in 1690 there was no luck and little skill on the attacking side. The land campaign, which was to have kept Frontenac and his best troops at Montreal, failed just in time to enable all the available French forces to concentrate at Quebec. England, when asked by Massachusetts to help the expedition by arms and ammunition, sent nothing; and, while the appeal was being made, valuable time was lost. Phipps was at first too leisurely and afterwards too impatient to succeed, and wind and weather befriended the Frenchmen in Quebec. [Sidenote: _Phipps' expedition against Quebec._] [Sidenote: _Its failure._] It was the ninth of August when the New England commander sailed from Nantucket with thirty-four ships, and soldiers and sailors to the number of 2,200 men. It was the sixteenth of October when he anchored before Quebec. He sent a pompous summons to surrender, which provoked an insulting reply, and then prepared to land his troops below the town, to attack it in rear, while his ships opened fire in front. It was a hopeless enterprise. The night after the English fleet appeared, strong reinforcements came in from Montreal, and Frontenac had at his disposal not far short of 3,000 fighting men. On the eighteenth, the New England levies were landed on the Beauport shore, having the river St. Charles between them and Quebec. They were between 1,200 and 1,300 in number, commanded by Major Walley. Short of food and supplies, sickening in the wet weather, out-numbered by disciplined troops and Canadian rangers, who fought under cover and with the advantage of the ground, they could do nothing but prove themselves brave and stubborn men. Phipps on shipboard gave them no support, wasting his ammunition in a wild and useless cannonade {133} against the face of the cliff and the walls of the upper town; and in ten days time all the men were re-embarked and the ships set sail for home. [Sidenote: _Boldness of the attempt._] So ended in complete failure the attempt of Massachusetts to take Quebec. Yet it was a bold and masterful effort on the part of one undeveloped English colony. It had in it the elements of strength, and under different conditions might have earned success. As it was, the citizen soldiers and sailors of Boston, led by an ex-ship-carpenter, faced Count Frontenac and all the trained strength of New France, their retreat was unmolested, and their failure was hailed as a miraculous deliverance for Quebec.[4] [Footnote 4: Phipps, before he made his attack, was told by French prisoners of the path up the cliff above the town, by which Wolfe subsequently took Quebec; but he preferred to attack from Beauport.] [Sidenote: _Death of Phipps._] Phipps had not proved himself to be a great commander. He failed too as Governor of Massachusetts, to which post he was appointed in the following year; but he had the merit of dogged determination to fight the French in Canada; and, had he lived longer, he might again have tried his hand at besieging Quebec. A few weeks after his repulse and return to Boston, he sailed to England to urge upon the home Government an active policy against New France, and that policy he continued to advocate until he died, in 1695, at the early age of forty-four. [Sidenote: _Wheeler's abortive expedition._] On either side, the true line of defence was to carry war into the enemy's country. It was thus that Frontenac defended Canada. It was by constant raids that the Iroquois maintained their position; and the counsel which those astute savages gave to their English friends was to combine and attack Quebec. 'Strike at Quebec,' urged Phipps on the English Government; 'strike at Boston and New York' was the advice which the leaders of Canada one after another tendered to King Louis. No help had been sent from England to the late expedition against Quebec, but Phipps' {134} subsequent representations led to an English fleet being dispatched to the West Indies in the winter of 1692, under command of Admiral Wheeler. The ships were intended to take Martinique, then to go on to Boston, and embarking a force of New Englanders under Phipps to sail for Quebec. Again there was a failure. Wheeler lost more than half his soldiers and sailors in the West Indies from yellow fever; and, when he reached Boston in midsummer of 1693, bringing the sickness with him, the Massachusetts Government decided that it was hopeless to attempt to carry out the scheme. [Sidenote: _Fighting on the New York frontier._] [Sidenote: _New York protected by the Iroquois._] In spite of the massacre at Schenectady, New York suffered less than New England from border war. In 1691, in a second attack on the French settlement of La Prairie over against Montreal, the English and Dutch colonists achieved some success, carrying out the raid which they had planned, and cutting their way back hand to hand through a party of French troops who tried to bar their retreat. The Iroquois were the salvation of New York. Their raids into Canada safeguarded the rival colony, and when the Five Nations were not on the warpath, the French hesitated to attack their English allies, for fear of provoking a fresh incursion of savages. It has been seen that the Iroquois tended more and more to a policy of neutrality, worn by constant fighting, tired of English inaction, and discerning that their true interest lay in siding with neither French nor English. Still, with the exception of their converted countrymen settled in Canada, they were not likely to band with the French against the English. To do so would have been to break with old ties and traditions, to close their best market, to combine with their deadliest foes against friends of long standing, whose faults had been after all but faults of omission. This the French knew well: they were content to leave New York alone, provided they themselves were left alone by the Iroquois, and so long as {135} the traders of New York did not seriously threaten their command of the West. [Sidenote: _The Abenakis on the borders of New England._] It was otherwise in the case of New England. The Abenaki Indians on the borders of the New England colonies had always been in the French interest. Jesuit influence was strong among them: they had been taught that Christianity could go hand in hand with ferocity, and that murder of white heretics might be not only a pleasure but a duty. Here the object of the French was not to keep the Indians quiet, but to spur them on. As they dreaded lest their Indian allies on the upper lakes should come to terms with the Iroquois,[5] and enforced barbarities to make peace impossible, so in the closing years of the seventeenth century and the early years of the eighteenth, they incited the Abenaki warriors against the border settlements of Maine and New Hampshire, butchering, looting, carrying into captivity, their one object being to keep alive the taste of blood, lest, lured by the prospect of peaceful and profitable trade with the neighbouring English, the Abenakis should drift apart from New France. [Footnote 5: See above, p. 117.] [Sidenote: _Port Royal reoccupied by the French._] [Sidenote: _French and Indian raids on York, Wells, and Oyster River._] A Canadian officer, Villebon, was specially deputed to take charge of Acadia, and organize war-parties against the English settlers. He reoccupied Port Royal, and at the beginning of 1692 the work of massacre was taken seriously in hand. The first point of attack was the border settlement of York on the sea-coast of Maine: it was laid waste early in February, with all the usual horrors of Indian warfare. In June, another seaside settlement--Wells, about twenty miles to the north of York--was attacked by a large party; but some thirty militiamen, headed by a determined officer, Convers by name, made a stubborn defence, and beat off the assailants. Two years later the settlement at Oyster River was surprised, and its inhabitants killed or carried off. [Sidenote: _Backwardness of the New Englanders in self-defence._] There was one way, and one only, to put a stop to this {136} destructive warfare; to build strong forts in advanced positions; to give them adequate garrisons under competent officers; to patrol the frontier constantly with bodies of armed border police, and to harry the Indian marauders by land and sea. New England--and New England meant Massachusetts--was perfectly able to adopt and to maintain such a policy. The New Englanders were many against comparatively few; they had as a rule command of the sea; but the colonists did not like the expense or the personal service which was involved; the Boston citizens did not feel the full force of the blows which struck the outlying farms and homesteads; and the petifogging Government too often employed men to command who knew little or nothing of soldiering. [Sidenote: _Fort Pemaquid._] [Sidenote: _Chubb's treachery._] There was one point, in particular, which should have been strongly fortified and strongly garrisoned. This was Fort Pemaquid, on the sea-coast between the mouths of the Kennebec and the Penobscot. It was to New England, and to the Abenakis, what Fort Frontenac was to Canada and to the Iroquois, an advanced post covering the English colonies and menacing the Indians. In 1689, most of the English garrison having been withdrawn, it had been surprised and taken by the Abenakis. In 1692, Phipps, then Governor of Massachusetts, acting under orders from the King, rebuilt and regarrisoned it. Iberville, sent by Frontenac in the following year, with two ships of war, reconnoitred the fort but did not venture to attack it. In 1696, it was in charge of an incompetent commander, Chubb, who made himself odious to the Indians by a gross act of treachery. Some Abenaki chiefs had been invited to the fort under pledge of personal safety, to exchange prisoners; and, acting under instructions from Stoughton, Lieutenant-Governor of Massachusetts, Chubb laid an ambush for them, killed some and kidnapped others. [Sidenote: _Surrender of Pemaquid._] It was a proceeding as impolitic as it was immoral, and quickly brought retribution. Early in 1696, two ships of {137} war came out from France, and, taking on board troops from Quebec, coasted round the Acadian peninsula, capturing on the way some English vessels, including an armed frigate. Off the mouth of the St. John the French received reinforcements, sent down by Villebon from his Fort Naxouat, which stood higher up the river; and a further band of Indians joined them at Pentegoet, the fort of the French adventurer St. Castin, at the mouth of the river Penobscot. The expedition led by Iberville, St. Castin, and others sailed on to Pemaquid, and on August 14 demanded its surrender. Chubb returned a contemptuous reply, and backed his words by promptly surrendering next day, on condition of safe conduct for himself and his men. He went back to Boston in safety and disgrace, and a year later was murdered by Indians. [Sidenote: _Abortive French expedition against Boston._] The loss of Fort Pemaquid was a serious blow to the English, and in the next year, 1697, the French Government determined to follow up their success by attacking Boston. A strong fleet was sent out to Newfoundland under the Marquis de Nesmond. Its orders were to defeat any English vessels off that coast, and sailing south to the mouth of the Penobscot to take up Canadian troops and Indian allies. The expedition was then to proceed to take Boston, and, having accomplished this object, to overrun the whole of New England to the north of that city. Frontenac had the land forces in readiness, proposing to take command himself; but on this occasion the French took a leaf out of the English book; the fleet was detained by contrary winds till the summer was past, the combination failed, and all the grand scheme came to nothing at all. For Boston read Quebec, and the record of this failure might be the record of one of the stillborn enterprises, by which the English from time to time hoped to reduce Canada. [Sidenote: _Treaty of Ryswick._] [Sidenote: _War of the Spanish Succession._] The Treaty of Ryswick signed in 1697, and formally proclaimed in America in 1698, settled nothing. It gave {138} breathing-space to Louis XIV and his enemies, and, while it lasted, there was a respite from border forays for the English colonies in North America. But no attempt was made to adjust boundaries, or to remove causes of past and future disputes, and the only specific provision, which the treaty contained with regard to America, referred to Hudson Bay. Both sides knew that the truce was not likely to be long-lived, and its end came when, in 1701, the King of France promised the exiled James II on his deathbed to acknowledge his son as rightful King of England. In the following year war broke out again, the War of the Spanish Succession, the war which, after Marlborough's victories, ended with the Peace of Utrecht. [Sidenote: _French raids on Wells, Casco Bay, Deerfield, and Haverhill._] It was in Europe that the battle of the American colonies was fought, in Flanders and at Blenheim, rather than on the St. Lawrence or on the coasts of Acadia and New England. There was fighting in America, but it was in the main fighting of the same indecisive kind as had gone before--murder, pillage, and the like; and history repeated itself with singular fidelity. On May 4, 1702, war was declared: in August, 1703, the old work of raiding the New England frontier was resumed. The settlement at Wells, which had suffered before, was the first to suffer again; the neighbouring settlements, as far as Casco Bay, were marauded by the Abenaki Indians; and the fort at Casco was hard beset, until relieved by an armed vessel from Massachusetts. In the following year, at the end of February, 1704, the village of Deerfield was attacked by night by some 250 French and Indians. It stood on the Connecticut river, on the north-western frontier of Massachusetts, and at the date of the attack contained in all nearly 300 human beings. Of them about fifty were killed, and over 100 were carried off, among the latter being the minister of the place, John Williams, who survived to tell a tale of almost incredible loss and suffering in a narrative entitled _The Redeemed Captive returning to Sion_. A similar {139} attack was made, in 1708, on the village of Haverhill on the Merrimac river, which cost the lives of about fifty villagers; and one after another the border settlements, during these troubled years, were infested by savages appearing from and disappearing in the backwoods under cover of night. The authors of the outrages were the French rulers of Canada; their agents were in the main converted Indians; the series of raids was not so much the spontaneous movement of natives against white men, as a crusade against heretics, prompted and led by Europeans, and carried out by Indian warriors on the lines of Indian warfare. There was much vicarious suffering. The past inroads of the Iroquois into Canada led to years of retaliation on New England: retaliation on New England induced the New Englanders in their turn to attack Acadia. [Sidenote: _Port Royal threatened by Major Church and Colonel March._] In 1691, the year after Phipps had taken Port Royal, a new charter was granted by the Crown to Massachusetts, which included Acadia within the limits of the colony. But in the same year, and in the very month of September in which the charter was given, the Frenchman Villebon reoccupied Port Royal, and four years later, Massachusetts, unwilling or unable to make good its claim, petitioned the British Government to take over its rights and responsibilities in regard to the Acadian peninsula. Whether in English or in French hands, Port Royal remained a small, ill-fortified, and poorly defended post, constantly open to, and constantly threatened with attack. In 1704, after and in consequence of the French raid on Deerfield, a buccaneering force from New England, under Major Benjamin Church, appeared before it, having previously burnt the Acadian settlement of Grand Pré, but sailed away without venturing to attack the fort. In 1707, a stronger expedition was sent from Massachusetts and the neighbouring colonies under Colonel John March; but again, though the troops landed, skirmished, and began a siege, the enterprise came to nothing. {140} [Sidenote: _Samuel Vetch._] In 1709 preparations were made for more vigorous and more effective action. In the previous year the colony of Massachusetts resolved to appeal to the British Government for help from home to attack Canada. Their emissary to England was Samuel Vetch, a notable man of the time in North American history. He was a Scotchman, the son of a Presbyterian minister, born and bred in Puritan surroundings; he had served in the Cameronian regiment, and had fought on the continent in William III's armies. After the Peace of Ryswick he went out with other would-be colonists to the Isthmus of Darien, and, on the failure of the scheme, came over to New York. There he married and engaged in trade with Canada, gaining a knowledge of New France, its river, and its people, which subsequently stood him in good stead. Like Phipps, he was a shrewd, self-made man, whose enemies accused him, apparently with reason, of illicit dealings; like Phipps, he had seen the world outside New England and New York; and, having seen it and having taken stock of Canada as well as of the English colonies, he was a warm advocate, as Phipps had been before him, of united and aggressive action against the French. [Sidenote: _His mission to England._] [Sidenote: _British aid promised to New England._] Quite recently, in 1705, he had been in Canada, to negotiate exchange of prisoners and a treaty of peace between Massachusetts and the French. Both Dudley, the Governor of Massachusetts, and Vaudreuil, the Canadian Governor, were inclined to peace, but the negotiations broke down in consequence of Vaudreuil's demand that the other English colonies in North America should also be included in the treaty--a condition which Dudley was not in a position to guarantee. Vetch was for some little time on this occasion both at Quebec and at Montreal. When, therefore he visited England in 1708, he brought with him accurate first-hand knowledge of the enemy's land and people. He was well received. Marlborough's victories supported his plea for a decisive campaign in America, and early in 1709 he was {141} sent back over the Atlantic with the promise of a fleet and five regiments of British troops amounting to 3,000 men. The colonists on their part were to raise contingents of specified strength, and attack by sea was to be combined with a land expedition by way of Lake Champlain. [Sidenote: _Attitude of the colonies._] [Sidenote: _Land expedition under Colonel Nicholson._] [Sidenote: _Its retreat._] Even now some of the colonies hung back. Pennsylvania, out of reach of French attack and dominated by Quakers, sent no help in men or money. New Jersey sent money but no men. New York however abandoned its neutrality, threw in its lot with New England, and persuaded some of the Five Nations to take up arms again against the French, the Senecas only, under the influence of a skilful French agent, Joncaire, holding aloof. Fifteen hundred men were gathered for the land march, and, under the command of Colonel Francis Nicholson, advanced to Wood Creek, which is connected with Lake Champlain. He entrenched himself there, and his outposts came into collision with the advance guard of a French force sent to surprise him under Ramesay, Governor of Montreal. The French fell back to Chambly, and Nicholson waited week after week for news of the English fleet, until pestilence broke out among his troops, and he was compelled to retreat. [Sidenote: _Non-arrival of the English fleet._] Meanwhile at Boston every preparation had been made, according to the orders of the English Government. Men, stores, transports were gathered, but all to no purpose, for no fleet came. It was due in May, and not till October came the news that the ships and men intended for America had been sent instead to Portugal. Once more there was a respite for Canada, once more the hearts of the English colonists were made sick by hope deferred. They had done their part, and all the trouble and expense and, in Nicholson's army, loss of life had been for nought. [Sidenote: _Fresh representations to the home Government._] Yet the representatives of Massachusetts still pressed the home Government to take action against New France. Nicholson went to England at the end of the year, and {142} pleaded the cause of the colonies, pleading it with authority, as having been Lieutenant-Governor of New York and Governor of Maryland. One of the Schuylers too followed him to England from New York, bringing a party of Mohawk chiefs to see and be seen. [Sidenote: _Reduction of Port Royal by Nicholson._] If Canada were not to be invaded, at least Port Royal might be taken, and Imperial aid was promised to attain the latter object. An English force, timed to reach Boston in March, 1710, arrived there in July; and in September Nicholson sailed for Port Royal at the head of a strong expedition. He reached it on September 24. For a week there was some fighting, but the French were hopelessly outnumbered; and on October 1, the fort surrendered. Port Royal, henceforth known as Annapolis, now passed in permanence into English hands, and with it the English became masters of all Acadia. [Sidenote: _Political changes in England._] [Sidenote: _Jeremiah Dummer._] [Sidenote: _The expedition of 1711._] [Sidenote: _Its arrival at Boston._] After taking Port Royal Nicholson returned to London, again to urge an attack on Canada. Before he arrived, there had been in August, 1710, a change of ministry. Godolphin had been dismissed, and Marlborough's enemies, Harley and Bolingbroke, were in power. Bolingbroke had in his service a New Englander, trained at Harvard University--Jeremiah Dummer--who had become agent of Massachusetts in England, and who set forth in pamphlets the colonists' case, and urged the vital importance of conquering Canada. His writings, combined with the personal representations of Nicholson, persuaded ministers, who were anxious to father an enterprise which might weigh in the balance of public opinion against Marlborough's victories; and in April, 1711, fifteen men of war, with forty-six transports, sailed for America, carrying seven regiments of the line, five of which were from the army in Flanders. The regulars numbered 5,000 men, exclusive of sailors and marines, and they were to be supplemented on arrival by colonial levies. They reached Boston, after a fair passage, towards the end of June. {143} [Sidenote: _Feeling of the colonists._] The force was fully strong enough to take Quebec, provided that two requisites were forthcoming--the hearty co-operation of the colonists and capable leaders. The colonists did their part, but not with a whole heart and not without misgivings. They had asked for British troops, but, notwithstanding, there was a suspicion in the minds of many that a strong force landed in America might be used to subvert colonial liberties, and to reduce the communities of New England to the position of Crown Colonies. The French knew that such a spirit was abroad, and did their best to foster it. It was fostered too by other causes. There was something new in the action of the British Government. The American settlers were accustomed to refusal of aid from home, to promises of aid made but not fulfilled, to tardy and inadequate assistance. But on the present occasion an unusually large force of veteran troops arrived at Boston at a fortnight's notice. [Sidenote: _The expedition sails from Boston._] Nicholson landed with the news of the coming fleet on June 8, on the twenty-fourth the fleet appeared. Its destination had been kept secret, and it was provisioned only for the voyage to America. On its arrival, therefore, it was necessary to impress men and supplies: pilots too were wanted and were not forthcoming: the King's officers found the colonists difficult to deal with: the colonists resented peremptory orders, and sheltered deserters from the army and the fleet. Still the authorities of Massachusetts loyally backed the expedition; preparations went forward; and on July 30 the ships set sail for the St. Lawrence, carrying, in addition to the English forces, two Massachusetts regiments, which numbered about 1,500 men, and were commanded by Vetch, now Governor of Annapolis. [Sidenote: _Nicholson's advance towards Lake Champlain._] [Sidenote: _Admiral Walker and General Hill._] The orthodox plan of invading Canada involved a twofold attack, by land on Montreal, by sea on Quebec. Accordingly, while the fleet was sailing round the North American coast, Nicholson collected troops at Albany, and advanced as far as {144} Wood Creek at the head of 2,300 men, 800 of whom were Iroquois. Thence he intended to push his way down Lake Champlain. He was a competent commander, but the leaders of the main expedition were not. Little is known of the admiral, Sir Hovenden Walker, and it does not appear why he was chosen for so important a post. The general, Hill, familiar enough to London society as Jack Hill, had hitherto shown no military capacity. Marlborough had set his face against his promotion, and he owed his rise entirely to Court favour, for he was brother of Abigail Hill (Lady Masham), now the ruling favourite of Queen Anne. Sister and brother alike had been befriended by the Duchess of Marlborough; by intrigue, Abigail Hill had supplanted her benefactress in the Queen's favour; and with her aid Harley and Bolingbroke, themselves arch-intriguers, turned out Godolphin and procured Marlborough's disgrace. The price of her assistance was the appointment of her incompetent brother to command seasoned troops well fitted to conquer Canada. [Sidenote: _Disaster to the fleet in the St. Lawrence._] Rounding Nova Scotia and Cape Breton Island, the fleet, on August 18, put into Gaspé Bay. By the evening of the twenty-second it was at the mouth of the St. Lawrence, and in foggy weather the unskilful admiral, many miles out of his course, headed straight for the northern shore of the river, under the impression that he was too close to land on the southern side. At dead of night he was roused from his berth with the unwelcome news that the ship was among breakers; and turned her head just in time to avoid running upon rocks. The ships which followed his disastrous lead were not so fortunate, and eight of the transports were dashed to pieces on the reefs with a loss of about 1,000 lives.[6] The place where the catastrophe occurred was one of the {145} rocky islets, known as the Egg Islands, about twenty miles to the north of the Point de Monts. [Footnote 6: According to one English account 884 soldiers were lost, according to another 740 soldiers and women. The number of sailors lost is not given.] [Sidenote: _The expedition abandoned._] For two days the ships were busied in picking up survivors from the wrecks. On the twenty-fifth a council of war was held, and it was resolved to abandon the expedition. A message was sent to recall Nicholson and his troops from their advance on Montreal; the fleet sailed back to Sydney harbour in Cape Breton Island. A suggestion to attack Placentia in Newfoundland was rejected. The New England transports returned to Boston, and the English fleet went home to Portsmouth,[7] where--to complete the fiasco--the admiral's ship blew up, costing the lives of some 400 seamen. [Footnote 7: Swift, in the _Journal to Stella_, says that the ship blew up in the Thames, but the accident seems to have taken place at Spithead; see Kingsford's _History of Canada_, vol. ii, pp. 468-9. There are various references to this expedition and to Hill in the _Journal to Stella_. Hill was subsequently placed in command at Dunkirk, while that port was being held as security for the execution of the terms of the Treaty of Utrecht.] Of the two commanders, Hill escaped formal censure. Luckily for him, Swift's bitter pen was at the service of the political clique with which he was connected. Walker, more culpable, was also less fortunate: deprived of his command he emigrated first to South Carolina and afterwards to Barbados, where he died, having written his own version of the expedition,[8] which in no way tended to redeem his reputation. [Footnote 8: _A full account of the late Expedition to Canada_, by Sir Hovenden Walker (London, 1720).] [Sidenote: _Ignominious end of the expedition._] Such was the end of the enterprise, intended to eclipse the great deeds of Marlborough. There have been many shortcomings and many disasters in the military annals of England, but few instances are on record of so much incompetence, verging almost on cowardice. Phipps' expedition against Quebec was a complete failure, but at least he led his band of untrained farmers and fishermen safely up and down the St. Lawrence, and gave Count Frontenac a taste of powder and shot. Walker and Hill, {146} with the best of ships and the best of men, blundered and turned back at the mouth of the river; at the first mishap they abandoned everything. No wonder the Frenchmen deemed that the saints watched over Canada. [Sidenote: _The Treaty of Utrecht._] The result can hardly have confirmed the American colonies in their allegiance to England. As a matter of fact, England had been fighting their battle against France, but her successes had been on the other side of the Atlantic; whereas in America, under the eyes of the colonists, there had been little but failure. One substantial gain there was--the capture of Port Royal; but this easy feat had been previously achieved by Massachusetts alone without any aid from home. The conquest of Canada, which had been well within reach, now seemed as far off as ever; and the Treaty of Utrecht--which, if Marlborough had been left to follow up his career of victory, and if a commander of his choosing had been sent with his troops across the seas, might have forestalled the famous treaty of fifty years later--did not even secure the whole seaboard to England, or confine the French to the river of Canada. Acadia, according to its ancient limits, was ceded to the British Crown, the French gave up their possessions in Newfoundland, and their hold on Hudson Bay: but on a section of the Newfoundland coast they were granted fishing rights, to be a fruitful source of future trouble; and, keeping Cape Breton Island, they reared in it the fortress of Louisbourg, to be a stronghold second only to that of Quebec. Once more England lost her opportunity, and the settlement, which should have been made in 1713, was postponed till 1763. NOTE.--For the substance of chaps. iii, iv, and v, see among modern books, KINGSFORD'S _History of Canada_, vols. i and ii, and the following works of Parkman: _The Jesuits in North America_; _The Old Régime in Canada_; _Count Frontenac and New France_; _La Salle and the Discovery of the Great West_. {147} CHAPTER V THE MISSISSIPPI AND LOUISIANA [Sidenote: _French and English views in North America._] What were the French and English fighting for in North America? The answer seems obvious, for North America itself. But what did North America mean? It had a different meaning to different interests. The New Englander cared for little but the New England colonies, and the immediately adjacent lands and seas. To the Acadian settlers the Acadian peninsula, to the Canadian _habitant_ the banks of the St. Lawrence, were all in all. The inland colonists of New York had in their minds not merely the safety of their colony, within its ill-defined boundaries, but also paramount influence over the Five Nations, and unrestricted trade with the western Indians. Longheaded governors of New York and Massachusetts took a still wider view; but the widest of all was held by the French Governors of Canada, and by the roving Canadians, who, with restless spirit and undaunted enterprise, claimed seas and rivers before they were reached or known, magnifying tales of far-off lands and peoples, building in the air and bringing down to earth a fabric of continental dominion. As a rule, the English view was too circumscribed, the French view was too diffuse. The strength of the English lay in effective occupation within narrow limits; the French committed the blunder of perpetually forcing competition upon rivals who had larger resources; but to them belonged the great merit of grasping in some sort the true meaning of North America, and never letting slip the problems of the future. {148} [Sidenote: _The search for the Western sea._] The explorers' aim was always to reach the further sea. That it must be somewhere to the west, in the opposite direction to the homes from whence they came, they knew or conjectured; but of the immense distance at which it lay, and of the Rocky Mountain barrier which must be surmounted to find it, they were wholly ignorant. They followed the water, and, when they had gained some knowledge of the great lakes, they reached the closely adjoining sources of the tributaries of the Mississippi, the Wisconsin, the Ohio, and the Illinois; and, borne with the stream, they came in due course not to the west but to the south, not to the Pacific but to the Gulf of Mexico. [Sidenote: _The missionaries and Western discovery._] There was the usual mixture of motives--love of adventure, love of gain, political ambition, religious fervour. There was rivalry and competition. One trader or band of traders was jealous of another. One man or set of men was backed by the Governor for the time being, another secured the favour of the Intendant. Missionaries played a great part in exploration. At first they led the van of discovery; they were always in or near the front rank; but, as years went on, and as the simple desire of adding to geographical knowledge, of opening new fields for France and for Christianity, became more and more alloyed with commercial greed, the ministers of religion, when heart-whole themselves, realized that the multiplication of trading posts in the backwoods meant lawlessness of white men, deterioration of natives; and they no longer gave hearty support to the bold French adventurers whose enterprise opened up the West. [Sidenote: _The gates of the waterways of Canada._] It will be noticed, on reference to a map of Canada--or rather of that part of the Dominion which was comprised in New France--not only that there is water communication from end to end, from the extreme west of Lake Superior to the Atlantic, but also that there are very distinct points along the way, which are, so to speak, natural toll-bars, {149} where the waters narrow, where the rivers or lakes meet. Here the explorer must pass to reach a goal beyond; here the trader could intercept traffic; here the missionary was sure to find Indians to be converted, and _coureurs de bois_ to be reclaimed; these were the places which must be occupied by the would-be sovereigns of North America. Consequently, at these points of vantage along the route, at one time and another, mission stations, trading posts, and forts were planted. Montreal itself, at the head of the colony, at the beginning of its hinterland, commanded the junction of the Ottawa and the St. Lawrence. At Cataraqui, where the St. Lawrence leaves Lake Ontario, Fort Frontenac was built. A little above the outlet of the Niagara river into Lake Ontario and below the falls, another French fort was reared, Fort Niagara; while on the channel between Lakes Erie and Huron was the fort of Detroit. The Iroquois, as we have seen, knew as well as the French the value of these positions: they feared and resented the building of the forts, as limiting the range of their power, and taking from them the control of the fur trade. On the upper lakes there were at least two posts of prime importance: one was the Sault St. Marie at the junction of Lake Huron and Lake Superior, the other was Michillimackinac at the junction of Lake Huron and Lake Michigan. It must not be supposed that the points mentioned were occupied in chronological order, as they have been enumerated above; or that there was any regular series of occupants, that the explorer came first, followed by the missionary, the trader, and so forth: but the net result was that French enterprise and French statesmanship took and kept the gateways on the highroad of Upper Canada. [Sidenote: _Lake Michigan._] [Sidenote: _Michillimackinac._] [Sidenote: _Green Bay._] [Sidenote: _The route to the Mississippi from Green Bay,_] Lake Michigan was known to the French as the 'Lac des Illinois.' The narrows where it joins Lake Huron were the straits of Michillimackinac, now Mackinac or Mackinaw; and on their northern side stood the trading station of the {150} same name, and the mission of St. Ignace. Within the straits on the western side, is a large indentation, forming a sheet of water which runs south-west, nearly parallel to the main lake. This was at first called, after certain Indians who lived on its shores, the Baie des Puans; but it was subsequently named the Grande Baie, and this title was corrupted into Green Bay, its present name. The Fox river flows into the head of Green Bay, and, if the upward course of this river is followed through Lake Winnebago and beyond, a point is reached at which the waters of the Wisconsin river are not more than a mile and a half distant. The Wisconsin is a tributary of the Mississippi. [Sidenote: _and from the end of Lake Michigan._] A slightly longer portage was needed to reach the Mississippi basin from the end of Lake Michigan. Still it was a matter of very few miles to leave the lake, where the city of Chicago now stands, and to strike one or other of the branches of the Illinois river, the nearest being the stream known as Des Plaines. Canoes launched on that stream were carried down into the Illinois, and so to the Mississippi at a point far south of its confluence with the Wisconsin. [Sidenote: _The Ohio route._] For adventurers bold enough to diverge from the line of lakes, and to pass overland within reach of the dreaded Five Nations, there was yet a third route, more direct than the other two, to the great river. It was a route well known in after years, and followed the course of the Ohio. The Ohio, the 'beautiful river,' for such is the meaning of its name,[1] is formed by the junction of two rivers, the Alleghany and the Monongahela. At their junction, in the middle of the eighteenth century, the French founded Fort Duquesne, and where Fort Duquesne stood is now the city of Pittsburg. The northern branch, the Alleghany, takes its rise near the southern shore of Lake Erie. One of its affluents flows out of Lake Chautauqua, about eight miles south of Lake Erie, at the point where there is now the small town of Portland; {151} another, the Rivière aux Boeufs, now called French Creek, is very little further from the lake, over against Presque �le and the present town of Erie. A day's march through the forest would therefore bring a traveller from Lake Erie to a stream which, when in full volume, would carry his canoe into the Alleghany, the Ohio, and so to the Mississippi far down its course. No wonder the line of the Ohio became, when geographical knowledge had made some way, a central feature in French politics and French strategy in North America. [Footnote 1: The name was given it by the Iroquois.] [Sidenote: _The head waters of the Mississippi closely adjoin the St. Lawrence basin._] From the above it will be seen how closely the head waters of the Mississippi adjoin the St. Lawrence basin, how short the land journey was from the one to the other. The natives of North America made exploration difficult, but from a geographical point of view, the discoverer's path was comparatively easy. [Sidenote: _Early exploration on the upper lakes._] The upper lakes, Lakes Huron and Superior, were visited and explored before there was any adequate knowledge of Lakes Ontario and Erie, and there is no record of white men passing from Lake Erie to Lake Huron by the strait of Detroit before the year 1670. The Five Nations barred the upper St. Lawrence, and the Niagara river and portage; but they did not control to the same extent the alternative route from Montreal to Lake Huron by the Ottawa river. Thus it was that the Jesuits found their way to the Hurons, on Georgian Bay, long before any mission enterprise was attempted on the lower lakes, and as early as 1640 there were Jesuit missionaries at the outlet of Lake Superior, the Sault St. Marie. Later, after the dispersion of the Hurons, there was for a while a mission at the western end of Lake Superior, the place being known as La Pointe, and the mission as the mission of St. Esprit. [Sidenote: _Jean Nicollet._] The first white man to reach Lake Michigan was Jean Nicollet. He was a native of Cherbourg, and had come to Canada as early as 1618. Sojourning among the Nipissing {152} Indians, he heard from them of the western tribes; and, listening to Indian tales, seems to have conjectured that a people might be reached in the far West who could be none other than Chinese. With these pictures in his mind, he went, about 1635, as an ambassador of peace to the Puans or Winnebagos, who dwelt on the Green Bay of Michigan, and arrived among them, so the story goes, in an embroidered dress of Chinese damask, as being appropriate to the people whom he hoped to find. He did not find Chinamen, but came near finding the Mississippi; and a claim was made in after years on his behalf that he actually was the first discoverer of that river. The claim however must be disallowed, and the honour of discovering the great river belongs to the two Frenchmen, Joliet and Marquette, who did not reach it till 1673. [Sidenote: _Promoters of discovery._] After the destruction of the Huron missions, it was difficult enough for some years to keep life in the struggling colony of New France; and it was not until the King had taken Canada in hand, had sent out soldiers and settlers, had commissioned Tracy and Courcelles to curb the Iroquois, and the Intendant, Talon, to introduce order and system, that progress was made in exploring and opening up the West. The promoters of exploration were Talon himself, before he returned to France; and subsequently the Governor, Frontenac; the Sulpician and Jesuit missionaries, especially the latter; and laymen adventurers, the foremost of whom was Robert Cavelier, Sieur de la Salle. La Salle's name is for all time connected with the Mississippi, but Joliet and Marquette were before him in reaching the main river. [Sidenote: _Joliet and Marquette._] Of these two companions in travel, Louis Joliet was a layman, though connected with the Jesuits by early training. Born in Canada, he had been sent by Talon to look for copper by Lake Superior, and was subsequently picked out to discover the mysterious river. Jacques Marquette was a Jesuit priest, of the earlier and purer type--a saintly man, {153} humble and single in mind, who early wore his life away in labouring for his faith. He had come out from France in 1666, and about the year 1668 was sent as a missionary to the upper lakes. On the shores of Lake Superior he ministered to Huron and Ottawa refugees at the mission of St. Esprit, where he heard from Illinois visitors of the great river, and from which point, though he knew it not, one feeder of the Mississippi, the St. Croix river, is at no great distance. A Sioux raid broke up the mission, and with the retreating Hurons he established himself at Michillimackinac, where, about 1670, he founded the mission of St. Ignace. About the same time, a mission was also established at the head of Green Bay, and from this point the two travellers, at the end of May, 1673, went forward to the Mississippi. [Sidenote: _They reach the Mississippi._] The course up the Fox river and across Lake Winnebago had already been taken by other missionaries, who had not, however, gone as far as the Wisconsin. That river was now reached, and on June 17 it carried the explorers' canoes out into the Mississippi. Down stream they went, past the mouths of the Illinois, the Missouri, and the Ohio, until they came to the confluence of the Arkansas river. There they turned, assured in their own minds that the outlet of the Mississippi was in the Gulf of Mexico--not, as had been supposed, in the Gulf of California--and fearing lest, if they lost their lives at the hands of Indians or of Spaniards,[2] the tale of their discovery might be lost also. They came back by way of the Illinois and Des Plaines rivers, made the portage to Lake Michigan, and reached Green Bay at the end of September, having made known to white men the great river of the West. [Footnote 2: The lower Mississippi had long been known to the Spaniards.] [Sidenote: _Their return._] [Sidenote: _Marquette's second journey and death._] Joliet went back to Quebec to report to the Governor, losing all his papers by the way in the rapids of Lachine. He lived to visit Hudson Bay and the coasts of Labrador. Marquette, in broken health, stayed rather more than a year {154} at the Green Bay mission. Then, in the winter of 1674-5, accompanied by two French _voyageurs_, he revisited the Illinois river, carrying for the last time his message of Christianity to savages, who heard him gladly, and followed him back, a dying man, as far as Lake Michigan. In the month of May he embarked on the lake, making for Michillimackinac; but, as he went, the end came, and he was put on shore to die. His companions buried him at the lonely spot where he died, but at a later date his bones were brought to Michillimackinac by Indians who had loved him well, and were laid to rest with all reverence in the chapel of his own mission. [Sidenote: _La Salle._] [Sidenote: _His Seigniory at Lachine._] Marquette, like David Livingstone at a later date, was a missionary explorer. He was carried forward by a faith which could remove mountains. La Salle was cast in another mould. His gift was not religious enthusiasm, but the set purpose of a resolute, masterful man, who made a life-study of his subject. He was born at Rouen, the birthplace of much western enterprise, and went to Canada in the same year as Marquette, the year 1666. An elder brother, who was a Sulpician priest, had gone out before him; and from the Sulpicians, as feudal lords of the island of Montreal, La Salle obtained a grant of the Seigniory of Lachine, eight miles higher up the river than Montreal itself. Here he laid out a settlement, but, as the name 'La Chine' testifies,[3] his mind was set on finding a route to China and the East, and in 1669 he gave up his grant, receiving compensation for improvements, and spent what little money he had in beginning his work of discovery. [Footnote 3: See above, p. 53.] [Sidenote: _He reaches the Ohio._] His early wanderings have not been clearly traced, but there is no reason to doubt that, in the years 1669-71, he found his way from Lakes Ontario and Erie through the Iroquois country to the Ohio. It was perhaps a more difficult feat to accomplish than the subsequent discovery of {155} the Mississippi by way of the lakes. The land journey was longer, and took the explorer well within range of the Five Nations. His success proved his capacity for treating with natives--a quality in which he resembled his staunch friend and supporter Count Frontenac. [Sidenote: _His character._] Among white men he had, like Frontenac, many enemies, suspicious priests and jealous merchants. The Jesuits had little love for a man who had no love for them; and the Canadian merchants regarded him as a dangerous rival, recognizing no doubt the element of tenacity in his character. It was the character of one who could hold as well as find, and who was not likely to rest content with the barren honours of discovery. There were in him contradictory elements, and his strength was balanced by failings, which became more conspicuous in the later stages of his adventurous career. He was not in all points a typical Frenchman. He had, it is true, address in dealing with North American Indians; he could lay his case well before the Court and the ministers of France. He enjoyed the friendship and countenance of Count Frontenac, and from more than one of his companions in travel, notably Henri de Tonty, he won unbounded devotion. But he was wanting, as a leader, in tact and sympathy. Solitary and self-contained, facing all dangers, enduring all privations, he spared neither himself nor others. Mutiny and desertion were in consequence rife amongst those who served him, and in the end he lost his life at the hands of his own followers. He had statesmanlike conceptions. He mapped out New France, in his own mind, as extending from sea to sea, from the Gulf of St. Lawrence to that of Mexico. Like other Frenchmen, he went too far and tried to do too much; but, if he made mistakes, he was at least no visionary. Until the last stage of his career, his ends were clearly kept in view, and he measured the means to attain them, though he did not always measure aright. [Sidenote: _La Salle at Fort Frontenac._] He gave up one Seigniory to find the Ohio. It was not {156} long before he obtained another. Count Frontenac came out to govern Canada, for the first time, in 1672; and determined, as has been told,[4] to build a fort at the outlet of Lake Ontario. Guided, it would seem, by La Salle's advice, he built it in 1673, at the mouth of the Cataraqui river. In 1675, La Salle, who had paid a visit to France in the autumn of the previous year, became by royal grant Seignior of the new fort and settlement, to which he gave the name of Fort Frontenac. It was a strong position to hold, whether for making money by trade or for prosecuting westward discovery; and bitter was the jealousy against the young Frenchman, who, at thirty-two years of age, and after no more than nine years' residence in Canada, had in spite of strong opposition achieved so much. [Footnote 4: See above, p. 108.] [Sidenote: _His plans for Western discovery._] Two years he remained at Cataraqui, rebuilding and strengthening the fort, clearing the ground and constructing small vessels for trading purposes on Lake Ontario: then, ready to move forward again, he went back to France in 1677, and laid before the King and Colbert a further memorial for permission to discover and colonize the countries of the West. He asked to be confirmed in his Seigniory at Fort Frontenac, to be allowed to establish two other stations, and to be given rights as Seignior and Governor over whatever lands he might discover and colonize within twenty years. He promised, if his request were granted, to plant a colony at the outlet of Lake Erie, and to waive all claim to any share in the trade between the Indians of the western lakes and Canada. [Sidenote: _He is given a royal patent._] These conditions are worth special note. La Salle was prepared to assure to France one more link in the chain of rivers and lakes: he was prepared too to disarm trading jealousy by renouncing any plans for intercepting the existing fur trade. He asked in return for a free hand to the south-west, in the lands of the Ohio, the Illinois, and the Mississippi. The answer of the King, given in May, 1678, was permission 'to labour at the discovery of the western parts of New France {157} ... through which to all appearance a way may be found to Mexico,'[5] and for that purpose to build forts and enjoy possession of them as at Fort Frontenac. The concession was limited to five years; and, while a monopoly in buffalo skins was granted to the petitioner, he was prohibited, as he had contemplated, from trading with the tribes whose furs came down to Montreal. [Footnote 5: Quoted by Parkman in his _La Salle_ (11th ed.), p. 112.] [Sidenote: _Henri de Tonty._] [Sidenote: _Father Hennepin._] Having secured this patent, La Salle raised funds in France for the furtherance of his enterprise; and in July, 1678, set sail from La Rochelle to Canada, taking with him an Italian officer, Tonty, who had been recommended to him by the Prince de Conti, and whose subsequent faithfulness to his leader became almost proverbial. A companion of a different kind joined him on his return to Canada, Father Hennepin, a Flemish friar, a brave and sturdy traveller, but a man of great personal vanity and convicted of telling more than travellers' tales. He published an account of his travels in La Salle's lifetime, and, after his death, put forth a new edition,[6] claiming to have anticipated La Salle in descending the Mississippi to the sea. The story has been proved to be an absolute imposture, the more discreditable that it was an attempt to rob a dead man of honour dearly bought. [Footnote 6: The first book, published at Paris in 1683, was entitled _Description de la Louisiane nouvellement découverte_. The second, published at Utrecht in 1697, was headed _Nouvelle découverte d'un très grand pays situé dans l'Amérique_.] [Sidenote: _La Salle builds a fort at Niagara._] On his return from France, La Salle dispatched a party of men in advance to Lake Michigan, to trade and to collect stores against his own arrival. He then set himself, taking Fort Frontenac as his basis, to plant a post at the mouth of the Niagara river below the falls; and, above the falls, to build a ship of some appreciable size for the navigation of the upper lakes. The plan was well thought out. He would hold both ends of Lake Ontario; and, the continuity of advance being broken by the falls of Niagara, he would have, above the {158} falls, an armed vessel plying for merchandise between Niagara and the end of Lake Michigan, where again there should be another fort or factory to safeguard the portage to the waters of the Mississippi. [Sidenote: _Suspicions of the Senecas._] It was specially necessary to hold both ends of Lake Ontario, for here was the land of the Senecas. Jealously and sullenly they watched the Frenchmen's work, through the winter of 1678-9, not wholly reassured by a visit from La Salle himself to the chief town of the tribe; but they attempted no armed opposition. Thus the beginning was made of the first Fort Niagara,[7] on the eastern bank of the river, in the angle formed by its junction with Lake Ontario; while on the same side of the water, five miles above the falls, where a stream called the Cayuga creek enters the main river, a ship was built bearing the name and the emblem of the _Griffin_, the appropriate arms of truculent Count Frontenac. [Footnote 7: Denonville's fort, referred to above, p 111, was a later structure.] [Sidenote: _The voyage of the 'Griffin' to Michillimackinac._] [Sidenote: _Loss of the ship._] On August 7, 1679, the _Griffin_ started on her voyage up Lake Erie. On the tenth--the feast of Sainte Claire--she had passed up the Detroit river and was in Lake St. Clair. Against the strong current of the St. Clair river, she found her way into Lake Huron, and, buffeted by storm and wind, reached in the course of the same month the mission of St. Ignace at Michillimackinac. Of the advanced party of traders sent there in the previous year, some had deserted; others, who remained true, were found at Green Bay with a rich store of furs; and on the eighteenth of September La Salle parted with his vessel, sending her to carry back the furs to the portage at Niagara. He never saw the ship again, and her fate was never known. Foundering, it would seem, in Lake Michigan, she left her owner to wait in vain for her return, in want of food, in want of stores for his onward march, with followers whom he could not trust, with Indian tribes to master or appease, with winter making the way harder and the wilderness more drear. {159} [Sidenote: _La Salle builds a fort at the end of Lake Michigan._] [Sidenote: _He descends the Illinois river._] After dispatching the _Griffin_ homeward, La Salle pushed on in canoes to the south-eastern end of Lake Michigan. There, at the mouth of the St. Joseph river, which he called the Miami, he built a fort. December came on, but forward he went, up the St. Joseph, across to the Kankakee, a tributary of the Illinois, and down that stream and the Illinois river to where the Illinois Indians were encamped for the time near the present town of Peoria. His plan had been to build another ship on the Illinois, and sail down that river and the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico. [Sidenote: _He builds Fort Crèvecoeur on the Illinois._] [Sidenote: _He returns to Canada._] The new year, 1680, opened badly for his enterprise. The Indians were suspicious, his men were deserting, no news had come of the ill-fated _Griffin_. Yet he held staunchly to his purpose. Again he reared a fort--Fort Crèvecoeur--a little lower down the Illinois than the Indian camp, and again in the far-off wilds, in dead of winter, he turned his men to shipbuilding. Without fittings and supplies it was impossible to proceed, and, accordingly, he determined to go back himself and bring the needed stores. Leaving Tonty in charge of the fort, he retraced his steps to Lake Michigan. At Fort Miami he learnt beyond question the loss of the _Griffin_. Across the then unknown peninsula of Michigan he took his way, reached the Detroit river, struck Lake Erie, and, passing by way of Niagara, arrived at Fort Frontenac in sixty-five days from leaving the Illinois, having in March and April achieved a feat of travel almost unparalleled even in the early history of Canada. Going down to Montreal, he obtained supplies, and again set his face undaunted to the West. [Sidenote: _He goes back to the West._] [Sidenote: _Iroquois raid on the Illinois._] [Sidenote: _Tonty lost_] As he came and went, he heard of nothing but disaster. The men left at Fort Crèvecoeur under Tonty's command broke out in open mutiny, and some of them were intercepted on their way back to Fort Frontenac, having destroyed the forts on the Illinois and St. Joseph, looted their employer's property at Michillimackinac and Niagara, and being minded {160} to crown their villainy by killing La Salle himself. They met their fate--were shot or imprisoned--and La Salle pushed on to Tonty's succour. Towards the close of the year he was back on the Illinois river, only to find a scene of utter desolation. In his absence, the Iroquois had invaded the land and swept all before them. Skeletons of men and women, empty huts, an abandoned fort, the hull of a half-built ship, all told a tale of brutish warfare and a ruined enterprise. Tonty was not to be found; and, after following the Illinois down to its confluence with the Mississippi, La Salle returned to Lake Michigan, and wintered on the St. Joseph river at Fort Miami, which had been destroyed by the mutineers but was again rebuilt. [Sidenote: _and found._] [Sidenote: _His adventures._] With the spring of 1681 there came a gleam of hope. The western Indians, terror-stricken by the Iroquois--and Indian immigrants from the east, driven out by the English colonists--gathered for protection to the brave, enduring Frenchman, took him for their leader, and hearkened to his word. News came that Tonty was in safety at Green Bay; and at length, about the end of May, La Salle and he joined hands again at Michillimackinac. Tonty had a tale of heroism to tell. Left in charge of the garrison at Fort Crèvecoeur, he had gone, according to his leader's instructions, to prospect a site for a fort a little higher up the river. When his back was turned, his followers destroyed the fort, carried off the stores, and left him with five other Frenchmen, two of whom were Recollet friars, among the Illinois Indians. True to his trust, he stayed among them, when the hordes of the Five Nations broke in, bent on destruction. Between the contending forces he held his life in the balance, vainly striving to stem the tide of massacre; and, having done all that man could do, found his way back to the lakes, saved by his own fearless honesty and by respect for the French name. [Sidenote: _Hennepin's travels on the upper Mississippi._] [Sidenote: _Du Luth._] Of the expedition which started in the ill-fated _Griffin_, there was still another prominent member to be accounted {161} for. This was Father Hennepin. Before La Salle turned home from Fort Crèvecoeur in the spring of 1680, he sent two Frenchmen of his company, and with them Father Hennepin, to explore and to trade on the upper Mississippi. Hennepin and his companions went down the Illinois; and, ascending the Mississippi, fell among the Sioux or Dakota Indians. Carried off to the Sioux lodges, in the present State of Minnesota, the Frenchmen sojourned among them for some months, half captives and half guests, until they were found by Du Luth, fur-trader and _coureur de bois_, who had already explored these regions, and had crossed from Lake Superior to the Mississippi by the line of the St. Croix river. In his company, Hennepin returned up the Wisconsin; and, before the year 1680 ended, was safe at Michillimackinac. In the following year he went back to Montreal; and soon afterwards, returning to Europe, published the book to which reference has already been made. He was the first European to describe the upper Mississippi and its tributaries, and the Falls of St. Anthony preserve the name of his patron saint--St. Anthony of Padua. [Sidenote: _La Salle descends the Mississippi._] [Sidenote: _Fort Prudhomme built on the Mississippi._] The descent to the sea, which in after years he falsely claimed to have made, was soon afterwards achieved by La Salle. After rejoining Tonty at Michillimackinac, he went back with him to Fort Frontenac and Montreal, and once more procured men and money to renew his enterprise. Again turning west, he reached Fort Miami late in the autumn of 1681, and on the shortest day his expedition left Lake Michigan. Crossing from the St. Joseph to the Chicago creek, and from the latter to the Des Plaines river, the northern tributary of the Illinois, they embarked--fifty-four Frenchmen and Indians, including thirteen women and children--in six canoes, and took their way steadily down stream. They joined the Mississippi, they passed the mouths of the Missouri and Ohio. Halfway between the Ohio and the Arkansas, {162} on the east bank of the Mississippi, they built and manned a small wooden fort, naming it Fort Prudhomme after one of their number who for a while lost himself in the woods. Again holding on their course, under softer skies than those of Canada, they reached the mouth of the Arkansas river, whence Joliet and Marquette had turned back; and there, among friendly and wondering Indians, they proclaimed the French King lord of the land. Below the Arkansas they came to other Indian tribes, such as the Spaniards had known, who, under dome-shaped roofs, worshipped the sun. At length the river parted into three channels, as it neared the sea; and, dividing into three parties, the bold voyagers soon met again on the shore of the Gulf of Mexico. [Sidenote: _La Salle reaches the Gulf of Mexico._] [Sidenote: _Louisiana._] It was April 9, 1682, when, on the southernmost edge of the new domain, a column was reared inscribed with the arms of France and with the name of _Louis le Grand_. The secret of the great river was won at last, from its source to its mouth; and, claiming all the lands which it watered for the Crown of France,[8] La Salle called them by the name 'Louisiana.' [Footnote 8: In La Salle's proclamation the basin of the Ohio was excluded from Louisiana, as the words are 'from the mouth of the great river St. Louis, otherwise called the Ohio' (Parkman's _La Salle_, 12th ed., p. 286).] [Sidenote: _He returns up stream._] [Sidenote: _The colony on the Illinois._] [Sidenote: _Fort St. Louis._] His canoes could not face the open sea, so the explorers retraced their course up stream. They suffered from want of food, the natives attacked them, and La Salle himself was sorely stricken by fever, which kept him many weeks at Fort Prudhomme. It was not till September that he reached Michillimackinac, and rejoined Tonty, who had gone on before him. The winter of 1682-3 was spent in establishing a colony of French and Indians on the Illinois. The place selected for the purpose was on the southern bank of the river, some distance above the site of Fort Crèvecoeur, where a high precipitous cliff towered over wood and stream. The rock had been marked by La Salle in his former sojourn on {163} the river, and it was during Tonty's visit to the spot[9] that Fort Crèvecoeur was looted and left. Had the Illinois river been the Rhine, the rock would in mediaeval times have been crowned by the castle of a border noble; and on its summit was now built a wooden fort, Fort St. Louis of the Illinois. Round the fort the Indians gathered for protection and for trade, the peasantry as it were of the western wilderness, clustering under the shelter of a feudal stronghold; for in virtue of the royal patent, La Salle was the Seignior of the place. It promised to be a strong outpost of French dominion, if its connexion with Canada was kept intact. [Footnote 9: See above, p. 160. A full description of the rock, known afterwards as 'Starved Rock,' is given in Parkman's _La Salle_ (12th ed.), pp. 293-4, and note.] [Sidenote: _Opposition to La Salle in Canada._] [Sidenote: _He returns to France._] New France was made by a few individual men, of whom La Salle was one. Their work was perpetually undone by want of efficient co-operation, or rather by efficient antagonism, on the part of their fellow countrymen. Fort Frontenac, Niagara, armed and trading vessels on the upper lakes, Fort Miami, where the lakes end, a fort on the Illinois--constituted the basis of a scheme worthy of support, but support was wanting. Frontenac had been recalled in 1682; and his successor, La Barre, leagued with the enemies of La Salle, cut off his supplies, detained his men, maligned him to the King, seized his Seigniory at Fort Frontenac, and sent an officer to take possession of the fort on the Illinois. La Salle had but one remedy left, to appeal to the King in person; and with that object he sailed for France in 1683, never to see Canada again. His troubled fighting life was soon to end, and its closing scenes were crowded with disaster. He seems to some extent to have lost his balance, to have acted with insufficient knowledge, and to have changed hardihood into recklessness. Yet in all that he attempted there was continuity of aim from first to last, and his final wild adventure, as it seemed to be, had its bearing on the story of the Canadian Dominion. {164} The patent, which had been given to him in 1678, authorized discovery, trade, and the building of forts, but said nothing of founding colonies. The policy of the French Government was always in the main a forward policy; but the French King and his ministers had the good sense to discourage proposals for colonizing the backwoods, because they saw the obvious danger of dispersing through a large area the scanty population of New France. It was therefore easy for La Salle's enemies to denounce his schemes as opposed to the royal will, as drawing off colonists from the St. Lawrence, where they were sorely needed, and teaching the able-bodied men of Canada to become not _habitans_ but _coureurs de bois_. These were the charges which La Salle had to rebut. He met them by propounding a still bolder plan than his former ventures, and he induced the King to give his sanction to an enterprise for French colonization on the shores of the Gulf of Mexico. [Sidenote: _His schemes for colonization on the Gulf of Mexico._] It happened that, at the date when he arrived in Paris, there was bad blood between France and Spain, resulting for a short space in open war. The Spaniards claimed to exclude French ships from the Gulf of Mexico, and King Louis, with his minister Seignelay, Colbert's son, contemplated meeting these claims by taking and holding a post on the Gulf. Some scheme of the kind had already been submitted to them by a Spanish refugee from Peru, Count Penalossa by name; and when La Salle advanced similar proposals, suggesting the establishment of a French colony on or near the mouth of the Mississippi, to be connected with Canada, and to be the basis for attacking and conquering the northern province of Mexico, New Biscay, his words fell on willing ears. He spoke with authority. Alone among Frenchmen at the Court of France, he had reached the mouth of the great river, and could tell to a King, with lust of conquest, a story of lands to be won for France, and of peoples ready to follow her lead. {165} [Sidenote: _The plan accepted, and La Salle reinstated in favour._] The result was that La Salle's rivals in Canada were discomfited, and peremptory orders were sent to La Barre to restore his Seigniory at Fort Frontenac and his station on the Illinois; while an expedition, destined for the Gulf of Mexico, was fitted out at La Rochelle, and eventually sailed on July 24, 1684. [Sidenote: _La Salle's motives._] What was in La Salle's mind in suggesting this southern adventure can only be conjectured. Was it the last desperate stake of a ruined gambler? Or was it an over-sanguine attempt to realize the great object of his life, to master the far West by moving up instead of down its waterways, by entering not through Canada, where every step would be dogged by jealousy and intrigue, but through the mouths of the Mississippi, where climate and natives would be less formidable foes than the Governor of Canada and his unscrupulous clique of confederates? If, as it is reasonable to suppose, he still clung with the determination of his character to the western enterprise, in which he had already achieved so much, he added to it a highly-coloured picture of conquest in Mexico; and he drew his map of Mexico as adjoining the lands on the Mississippi, omitting in ignorance most of the wide area of intervening territory, now included in the State of Texas. [Sidenote: _The expedition sails._] [Sidenote: _It reaches the West Indies and the Gulf of Mexico._] [Sidenote: _Landing on the shores of Texas._] Four vessels set sail, freighted with all things necessary to found a colony, carrying soldiers, artisans, married women, and young girls. They were a doomed company; from first to last all went wrong. There was divided command, and Beaujeu, the admiral of the ships, a Norman like La Salle, had with some reason little confidence in the expedition or its leader. They made in the first instance for St. Domingo, but one of the four ships which was carrying the stores was cut off by Spanish buccaneers before reaching the island. At St. Domingo, La Salle was laid low with fever; and, while he was between life and death, his followers rioted and sickened on shore. After a delay of two months, the {166} expedition started again, weakened by desertion and disease. The ships entered the Gulf of Mexico, passed--without knowing it--the mouths of the Mississippi, and on New Year's Day, 1685, anchored off the coast of Texas. Somewhere on this coast, in the vicinity either of Matagorda Bay or of Galveston Bay, La Salle effected a landing, where a series of lagoons that lined the shore concealed, as he thought, the main outlet of the Mississippi. Disaster still attended the enterprise: one of the ships was wrecked on the reefs, the natives of the land proved unfriendly; and when Beaujeu, the admiral, having given what help he could, sailed away in the middle of March, he left behind on desolate shores a despondent band of French men and women groping for a river which could not be found, in present trouble and without clear guidance for the future. [Sidenote: _Founding of Fort St. Louis._] [Sidenote: _Distress of the settlement._] [Sidenote: _Attempt to reach Canada._] Skirting the sea-line, the would-be colonists had reached a large bay, into the head of which a river ran; and on the banks of this stream La Salle formed a settlement, to which, as to his colony on the Illinois, he gave the name of Fort St. Louis. Gathered within palisades, the settlers worked and waited, dwindling in numbers, while their leader explored, but explored in vain. Setting out at the end of October, 1685, La Salle returned in the following March, having accomplished nothing and having lost his last vessel, a small frigate, the _Belle_. Again in a month's time, towards the end of April, 1686, he set out to make his way to Canada; once more, in October, he returned to the fort, baffled and disappointed. His followers were sadly reduced in numbers: of some 180, no more than forty-five were left; and of them he could trust but few. Return to France was cut off, and from France time had shown that no help was forthcoming. There was no alternative but to make one more attempt to reach Canada, and thence to bring rescue to the fort in Texas. [Sidenote: _Death of La Salle._] It was a forlorn hope at best, but the attempt was made. {167} Half of the company remained at the fort. The others, including La Salle's brother, the Abbé Cavelier, and two young nephews, followed La Salle himself on his northward journey. It was on January 7, 1687, that the party set out to make their way painfully over prairies, across rivers, through forest, thicket, and scrub. On March 19, near the Trinity river, La Salle fell dead, ambushed and shot by his own men. No career ever had a more squalid or pitiable ending. It ended in commonplace mutiny and murder. Three or four scoundrels, discontented and badly handled, nursed their personal grudges against a severe and domineering leader, until, in an outbreak of irritation, they killed three of his immediate following and the leader himself. [Sidenote: _Fate of his company._] The brother escaped; so did one of the nephews, and Joutel, a gardener's son from Rouen--the most honest and capable of the band--who afterwards told the unvarnished tale. They companied for a while with the murderers, roaming among the Indians of the west, until one and another of the guilty men fell by each other's hands or strayed into savagery. In the end seven Frenchmen, with the help of Indian guides, reached the Arkansas river, found an outpost established there by Tonty, made their way thence to the Illinois, and so to Canada and France. On the Illinois and in Canada they concealed, from policy or fear, the fact of La Salle's death. In the dead man's name his brother, the coward priest, obtained from Tonty advances for his home journey; and it was not till after he was safe in Europe, in the autumn of 1688, that the tragedy came to light. [Sidenote: _Indifference in France as to La Salle's death._] Few seemed to care. A man had gone, who by the age of forty-three had achieved great deeds, had dared and suffered much; but he was a man who had few friends and many enemies, and he served a Government in whose eyes failure was a crime, and to which gratitude was unknown. {168} An order was given that, if the murderers reappeared in Canada, they should be arrested, and with that order the name of La Salle passed out of official ken. [Sidenote: _Extermination of the colony in Texas._] [Sidenote: _Tonty's faithfulness._] The Government made no attempt to relieve the hapless exiles in Texas. They were left to perish, just as, many years before, the Huguenot settlers in Florida had been abandoned and betrayed. Tonty alone was mindful of his friend. Already, in 1686, before La Salle had started on his last march, he had descended the Mississippi to its mouth, and had searched the coast in vain, hoping to bring succour and relief; and when, in the autumn of 1688, he knew the full truth, again he started, to save if possible the remnant of the expedition. He penetrated to the Red river and beyond, but could not reach the fort in Texas; and it was from Spanish sources that the fate of the last settlers was afterwards known. An expedition from Mexico, sent to root out the intruders, found the fort a desolate ruin. The Indians had been beforehand in the work of destruction, and had butchered or carried off the inmates, two or three of whom exchanged captivity among savages for Spanish prisons. [Sidenote: _Importance of La Salle's work._] Such was the end of La Salle's last venture--misery, ruin, death, and, for the time, comparative oblivion. Yet his name lives in history and deserves to live, and his work was not all undone. We look back not merely on his hardihood and his sufferings. We see in him not only an explorer of the boldest type; but he stands out pre-eminently as the man, who, above all others, grasped the conception of a North American dominion, which should be from sea to sea--based on the great geographical factor in North America, its nearly continuous water communication--and in which the natives of North America should be banded together in war and peace, under the leadership of France. From the mouth of the St. Lawrence to the mouth of the Mississippi, by river and lake, his vision was that Frenchmen and their native subjects should come and go, carrying from fort to {169} fort, from settlement to settlement, the produce of forest and prairie, the wealth of the West. It was a great conception, too great to be realized; but it harmonized with the genius of the French people. Their gift was to be ever moving, their strength was not to sit still. What success they won was on the lines that La Salle marked out. With all his failures, he knew the land and he knew his race. [Sidenote: _Colonization of Louisiana by Iberville._] The eighteenth century had not ended before the colonization of Louisiana became more than a dream. Tonty continued to urge it. The English threatened to take it in hand; Spain was reasserting her claim to the ownership of the Gulf of Mexico; and, lest the French should be excluded altogether, Le Moyne d'Iberville, best of Canadian leaders, obtained permission to sail for the Mississippi. More skilful than La Salle, or better informed, he reached its mouth in March, 1699; but the first settlements were made to the east of the river, at Biloxi in the present State of Mississippi, and on Mobile Bay. It was not till the year 1718 that the city of New Orleans was first founded by Bienville, Iberville's brother, who at intervals governed Louisiana for many years. Bandied about from Crown to company, and from company to Crown, the prey of speculators, the scene, like Canada itself, of artificial settlement and regulated colonization, Louisiana made but slow progress. Yet in time it became a factor to be reckoned with in North American history, and to connect it with Canada was in the eighteenth century the aim of the rulers of New France. [Sidenote: _The Illinois abandoned by the French._] In 1702, Tonty left Fort St. Louis on the Illinois to join Iberville in the south, and, except for a few years at a little later date, that fort was abandoned. The Indians, too, who had gathered round it, dispersed; some of them moved down to the Mississippi; and connexion between Canada and Louisiana was afterwards sought not so much by the Illinois river, as by the line of the Ohio, the earliest scene of La Salle's discoveries. {170} CHAPTER VI ACADIA AND HUDSON BAY In the last chapter the main stream of Canadian history has been followed down to the Treaty of Utrecht. New France was essentially the colony on the St. Lawrence; but with the story of Canada proper the story of Acadia is interwoven, and Acadia under another name now forms part of the Canadian Dominion. To complete the tale to 1713, it is necessary to go back to the early days of settlement in the present Maritime Provinces of the Dominion. Some notice must also be made of English commercial enterprise on the northern side of Canada, the shores of Hudson Bay. [Sidenote: _Acadia._] Acadia, Acadie--a name which the French took from the Indians[1]--included an ill-defined region. Whoever held it, at any given time, naturally claimed as large an area as possible, and, after it was ceded to Great Britain by the Treaty of Utrecht, the question of the boundary was a fruitful source of trouble. Under the French, Acadia was roughly coterminous with the present provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, and part of the State of Maine; but Acadia proper was the peninsula of Nova Scotia. There, and on the immediately adjoining coast of the mainland, the fighting and the raids took place. It was not until after the Peace of Utrecht was signed that Cape Breton Island, whose name recalls the nationality of early voyagers to North America, became, under the new title of �le Royale, a renowned stronghold of France; while Prince Edward Island, the �le de {171} St. Jean, played little part in the early history of North America. [Footnote 1: See above, p. 36, note.] [Sidenote: _The peninsula of Nova Scotia._] Linked to the continent by the isthmus of Chignecto, sixteen miles in breadth, the peninsula of Nova Scotia runs for some 300 miles north-east and south-west, parallel to the North American coast. From that coast it is separated on the southern side of the isthmus by the Bay of Fundy--the Baie Françoise as it was called in old days--a bay into which the sea runs strong and which divides at the head, forming on the left, the mainland side, Chignecto Bay, on the right the Basin of Mines. The shores of this latter land-locked basin were in the eighteenth century a well-known scene of Acadian settlement, and here stood the village of Grand Pré. On the same side of Nova Scotia, lower down than the Basin of Mines, is Annapolis harbour, better known in old days as Port Royal. The opposite sides of New Brunswick and Maine are deeply indented by the estuaries of various rivers--the St. John, the St. Croix, now the border stream between Canada and the United States, and, further south, the Penobscot and the Kennebec, names that constantly occur in the story of Acadian and New England warfare. Cape Sable--the sand cape--is the southernmost point of Nova Scotia: midway on the Atlantic side of the peninsula is Halifax harbour, formerly known as Chebucto; and on the north the narrow strait known as the Gut of Canso divides Nova Scotia proper from Cape Breton Island. Cape Breton Island on the south, Newfoundland on the north, mark the entrance of the Gulf of St. Lawrence. They are the buttresses of the main gateway of Canada. [Sidenote: _Geographical importance of Acadia._] Sea-girt and sea-beaten was and is Acadia, with broken shores and many bays, where fishermen and freebooters came and went: a land to nurse a hardy race in small and scattered settlements, nestling in nooks and corners by inlets of the sea. Its importance did not lie in natural riches, but in its geographical position. It was the borderland of French and {172} English colonization. Whoever held in strength Acadia and Cape Breton on the one side, and Newfoundland on the other, could command the river of Canada. [Sidenote: _Acadia was in the English sphere of colonization, but was all important to France._] Taking the two spheres of colonization, the seaboard settlements of the English on the one hand, the inland river settlements of the French on the other, it is clear that Acadia naturally belonged to the former; it was within the sphere of which Boston was the centre, not within that which was ruled by Quebec. The coasts of Maine, of New Brunswick, and of Nova Scotia prolong the shores of New England: any dividing line has been made by man not by nature. The Boston fishermen went faring north, not into strange waters or by foreign coasts, for land and sea were as their own. Between Quebec and Port Royal, on the other hand, there was no natural connexion, yet the possession of Acadia was of more vital importance to France than to England. With Acadia in French hands the New England colonies could still grow in strength; but English occupation of Acadia, Cape Breton, and Newfoundland meant the beginning of the end for New France, the closing of the St. Lawrence, if England kept command of the sea. Thus it was that in the negotiations which ended in the Treaty of Utrecht the French King fought hard to keep Acadia, and, thwarted in this endeavour, made the most of Cape Breton Island, rearing in it the strong fortress of Louisbourg. [Sidenote: _Early settlers in Acadia._] Acadia then was a borderland, and its history resembled that of other borderlands. Its first settlers were French, and the majority of the scanty population remained French in language, in tradition, in religion, in sympathy; but for years rival adventurers squabbled and fought, with doubtful allegiance to England or France. [Sidenote: _The De la Tours._] We have seen how in 1613 the freebooter Argall,[2] sailing up from Virginia, destroyed Poutrincourt's settlement at Port Royal. In spite of this disaster, Biencourt, {173} Poutrincourt's son, with a handful of Frenchmen, few but sturdy, still held fast to the shores of Acadia. Among them was a French Huguenot, Claude �tienne de la Tour, who with his son, Charles de la Tour, had come out from France in or about the year 1609. When the Port Royal settlement was broken up, he crossed over to the mouth of the Penobscot, and held a station there until the year 1626, when he was driven out by an expedition from New England. Biencourt appears to have died either in Acadia or in France about the year 1623, and the younger La Tour became the foremost man among the French settlers, holding a small fort near Cape Sable, which seems to have been known by various names--Fort Louis, Fort l'Omeroy or Lomeron, and Fort or Port Latour. In 1627, according to the ordinary account, the father went to France to interest the French Government in the fortunes of Acadia, and to secure the position and title of Governor for his son. It was the year in which Richelieu founded the company of the One Hundred Associates, and in 1628 a French squadron was sent out to America. The ships were intercepted by David Kirke, and Claude de la Tour, who was on board, was carried a prisoner to England. [Footnote 2: See above, p. 42.] [Sidenote: _Sir William Alexander._] [Sidenote: _His patent._] [Sidenote: _Nova Scotia._] Acadia had by this time acquired a second name, its present name of Nova Scotia. A Scotch scholar of some repute, William Alexander, born near Stirling, became tutor to Prince Henry, son of James VI of Scotland and I of England, and rose to high favour at Court. He was a prolific writer, composed tragedies and sonnets, and after the King's death completed a metrical version of the Psalms which James had begun. In 1621 Sir William Alexander, as he then was, obtained from the King a grant of the Acadian peninsula, Cape Breton Island, and all the mainland from the St. Croix to the St. Lawrence, the whole territory within these wide limits being given the name of New Scotland or Nova Scotia. The terms of the charter were of the most liberal kind, and {174} Alexander was constituted Lieutenant-General for the King, with practically sovereign powers. The grant was made as an appanage of the kingdom of Scotland; and, in seeking for and obtaining it, Alexander seems to have been stimulated by the fact that an English charter had lately been given to Fernando Gorges in the region of New England. In other words, the patent represented the effort of an energetic Scotchman to bring his country and his people into line with the English in the field of western adventure. [Sidenote: _Alexander's scheme of colonization._] [Sidenote: _The baronets of Nova Scotia._] Cape Breton Island he made over to another Scotchman, Sir Robert Gordon, of Lochinvar, and went to work to find settlers for the rest of his domain. His scheme was not taken up warmly; two ships were sent out in 1622 and 1623, but no settlement was formed, and he found himself involved in a debt of 6,000 pounds. He tried to rouse enthusiasm for the colonization of New Scotland by publishing a pamphlet entitled _An Encouragement to Colonies_; and, finding that it met with little response, he hit upon the device of inducing the King, who a few years before had created baronets of Ulster, to establish also an order of baronets of New Scotland. The recipients of the honour were to have grants of land on the other side of the Atlantic, and the fees which they paid would, it was hoped, recoup past losses and provide funds for future colonization. [Sidenote: _Renewal of the patent by Charles I._] King James having died, his successor Charles I, in 1625, renewed Alexander's patent, and formally ratified the creation of the Nova Scotian order, the honours being to a certain extent taken up under pressure from the King. A new expedition was now set on foot, but in the meantime news came that Richelieu had formed a rival company, and that the French were preparing to make good their old title to Acadia. The prospect of foreign competition gave fresh vigour to the enterprise; Kirke offered his services to Alexander, and in 1628 captured Richelieu's squadron; while earlier in the same year four ships in charge of {175} Alexander's son landed a party of settlers safely at Port Royal, who established themselves on the site of the old French settlement. In the following year Kirke took Quebec. [Sidenote: _The elder La Tour joins Alexander._] The elder La Tour, we have seen, was brought a prisoner to England. There he seems to have transferred his allegiance to Great Britain, in the words of an old record to have 'turned tenant'[3] to the English King. According to one account, he married a maid of honour to the Queen. At any rate, he threw in his lot with Alexander, was created a baronet of Nova Scotia, and in 1630 received for himself and his son--also created a baronet--two baronies in the Nova Scotian peninsula. In the same year he seems to have returned to Acadia with some more Scotch colonists, and vainly attempted to induce his son, who was still holding the fort near Cape Sable, to come over to the British cause, and take up the grant and honours which had been conferred upon him. The son, we read, would yield neither to persuasion nor to force, and the elder La Tour apparently went on to the Scotch settlement at Port Royal. [Footnote 3: _Calendar of State Papers_, Colonial, 1574-1660, pp. 119-20.] [Sidenote: _Fort Latour built._] [Sidenote: _Acadia restored to France._] Already, in 1629, the Convention of Susa had been signed between the Kings of England and France. Charles La Tour received a message of encouragement from France; and, coming to terms with his father, crossed over to the mainland, where he built Fort Latour at the mouth of the river St. John.[4] In 1631 he was appointed Lieutenant-Governor by the French King; and in 1632 the Treaty of St. Germain-en-Laye restored to France 'all the places occupied in New France, Acadia, and Canada' by British subjects. [Footnote 4: The exact date at which the La Tours founded the fort is very uncertain.] [Sidenote: _The Scotch settlement at Port Royal abandoned._] This treaty put an end to Scotch colonization of Acadia, and nothing is now left to tell of Alexander's enterprise beyond the name of Nova Scotia. The Scotch emigrants returned {176} home, or were lost among the outnumbering French, and the old station of Port Royal was either at the time or a few years afterwards entirely deserted. The site on the northern or western side of Annapolis Basin was subsequently known as Scots Fort; but the later Port Royal, which Phipps and Nicholson took, was situated five miles away, on the other side of the estuary, and is now the town of Annapolis. [Sidenote: _Death of Alexander._] Alexander never made good his losses. He died in 1640, in high honour and position, having been Secretary of State for Scotland and ennobled as Earl of Stirling and Viscount Canada; but he must have learnt, as all who had dealings with the Stuarts learnt, not to put his trust in princes; for his well-meant scheme to make a New Scotland, which should rival New France, ended, through the tortuous policy of the King whom he served, in utter failure. [Sidenote: _Razilly, Denys, and D'Aunay._] Isaac de Razilly was sent by Richelieu to receive Acadia back from Alexander's representatives, upon the conclusion of the Treaty of 1632, and to be Governor of the country. With him went out, among other settlers, Nicholas Denys, a native of Tours, and Charles de Menou de Charnizay, known also as the Chevalier d'Aunay. Acadia now became the scene of intestine feuds between Frenchmen with rival claims and interests. [Sidenote: _French adventurers in Acadia._] It is exceedingly difficult to trace the relations between the various adventurers, where they went and what they did. Razilly, who was Governor-in-chief, settled at La Héve on the Atlantic coast of Nova Scotia. D'Aunay seems to have driven out the New Englanders from the Penobscot, and taken possession of Pentegoet at its mouth. Charles La Tour held his fort on the estuary of the St. John, his father having died or disappeared from the story, and raided, in or about 1633, an outpost established by the Plymouth settlers at Machias, north of the Penobscot. Denys formed trading stations at Chedabucto, now Guysboro, at the eastern end of the Nova Scotian peninsula, and in Cape Breton Island, {177} leaving to posterity an account of Acadia and Cape Breton, in his book entitled _Description des Costes de l'Amérique Septentrionale_.[5] [Footnote 5: Charlevoix's account is that Acadia was divided into three provinces, both for government and for ownership. Razilly had the superior command over all, and was given Port Royal and the mainland south to New England; Charles La Tour had the Acadian peninsula, excluding Port Royal; and Denys had the northern district from Canso to Gaspé, including Cape Breton Island. This leaves out D'Aunay, and the arrangement, if it existed, was modified, inasmuch as Razilly settled at La Héve, and Charles La Tour was on the river of St. John.] [Sidenote: _Feud between D'Aunay and Charles La Tour._] Razilly died in 1635 or 1636; his brother, Claude de Razilly, assigned his rights in Acadia to D'Aunay, and between the latter and Charles La Tour a deadly quarrel ensued. D'Aunay, it would seem, re-established Port Royal on the present site of Annapolis, making it the principal settlement of Acadia instead of La Héve. His rival, La Tour, had strong claims both on France and on Acadia. He had been far longer in the country than D'Aunay, he had in trying circumstances retained his allegiance to the Crown of France, he had been given a commission by the King, and moreover something was owing to him in virtue of the grants which Alexander had made in 1630 to his father and himself, which grants appear to have been subsequently construed into a transfer of the whole of Alexander's patent. However, D'Aunay had the ear of the French Court. It is stated[6] that, in 1638, the King prescribed certain boundaries between the two rivals, but the delimitation had no effect; for in 1640 La Tour seems to have attacked Port Royal, with the result that he was taken prisoner with his wife, both being released at the intercession of French priests. In the next year, 1641, D'Aunay obtained an order from home which revoked La Tour's commission and empowered his enemy to seize him, if he refused to submit, and send him prisoner to France. La Tour now turned for help to New England, and, in 1643, after long and scriptural {178} debates by the Puritans as to the lawfulness of aiding 'idolaters,'[7] succeeded in hiring four ships at Boston to join him in raiding D'Aunay's property. In the following year, however, an emissary from D'Aunay came to Boston to protest against English interference; and in October, 1644, a convention was concluded between the New Englanders and D'Aunay, providing for mutual peace and free trade. [Footnote 6: By Haliburton in his _History of Nova Scotia_, vol. i, p. 53.] [Footnote 7: The younger La Tour was not, like his father, a Huguenot.] [Sidenote: _Madame La Tour._] [Sidenote: _D'Aunay gains possession of Fort Latour._] D'Aunay had now the upper hand, and Madame La Tour becomes the heroine of the story. She had followed her husband's fortunes with undaunted courage, and had been to France to plead his cause. Going on to London, she took passage on board ship, the master contracting to take her to Fort Latour. Instead of carrying out his contract, he wasted time in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and finally landed her at Boston, where she brought an action against him and was awarded damages of 2,000 pounds. Reaching Fort Latour, she was attacked there by D'Aunay in 1645,[8] while her husband was absent, and the garrison reduced to a very few men. She held the fort, notwithstanding, with so much determination, and in spite of treachery within the walls, that D'Aunay agreed to a capitulation, by which all the lives of the defenders were to be spared. The terms were broken as soon as he obtained possession of the fort, and the whole of the garrison was put to death, with the exception of Madame La Tour and one man who was spared to act as hangman to the rest. Madame La Tour herself was compelled to witness the execution with a rope round her neck, and three weeks afterwards she died. [Footnote 8: According to Haliburton, D'Aunay besieged Madame La Tour in the fort twice, being beaten off the first time. Kingsford gives the date of the siege as 1647.] [Sidenote: _Later career of Charles La Tour._] Ruined and an outlaw, La Tour found his way to Newfoundland, where he tried in vain to enlist the aid of the {179} English governor, Sir David Kirke. He is said also to have visited Quebec and Hudson Bay, and in his distress to have made an ill return for the kindness which had been shown to him at Boston, by raiding a ship from that port and ejecting her crew on to the Nova Scotian coast in the middle of winter. Ultimately, in 1650, D'Aunay died, and La Tour, who must have had a keen eye to business, some little time after married the widow. New complications now arose. A creditor of D'Aunay, Le Borgne by name, came out from France to enforce his claims against D'Aunay's property, and in virtue of those claims to take possession of Acadia. He first attacked Denys[9] at Chedabucto, and took him prisoner. He was next preparing to attack La Tour, when events took a wholly different turn, and the English again became masters of Acadia. [Footnote 9: Denys went to France and secured, in 1654, the restitution of his property, together with a commission as Governor from Cape Canso to Cape Rosiers or Race, i.e. of Cape Breton, Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland. He was then raided by another Frenchman, Giraudière. He seems to have eventually given up his stations in Cape Breton, and in 1679 was at Quebec, old and blind.] [Sidenote: _The English under Sedgwick take Acadia._] Cromwell, in 1654, sent out an expedition to take Manhattan Island from the Dutch, Major-General Sedgwick being in command. Peace being made with the Netherlands, the force intended to drive the Dutch out of Manhattan was turned against the French in Acadia; and in quick succession, Sedgwick reduced the fort at Penobscot, La Tour's station on the St. John, and Port Royal, where Le Borgne was at the time.[10] Mazarin attempted to recover these posts under the twenty-fifth article of the Treaty of Westminster of November 3, 1655; but, less complaisant than the Kings who {180} preceded or who followed him, Cromwell refused to entertain the proposals for a transfer. [Footnote 10: Sedgwick was shortly afterwards sent to Jamaica, where he died in June, 1656. In Appendix xxviii to Carlyle's _Oliver Cromwell_, reference is made to the taking of the French forts in Acadia, with the following characteristic but not very accurate note: 'Oliver kept his forts and his Acadie through all French treaties for behoof of his New Englanders. Not till after the Restoration did the country become French again, and continue such for a century or so.'] [Sidenote: _La Tour and Temple become owners of Acadia._] [Sidenote: _Death of La Tour._] La Tour now turned to account the fact that he had been created a Nova Scotian baronet and received a grant from Alexander; he became a British subject; and on August 10, 1656, letters patent were issued by which he became, under the name of Sir Charles La Tour, joint owner of Acadia with Sir Thomas Temple and William Crowne. Very shortly afterwards he sold his interest to Temple, but appears to have remained in Acadia, where he died in 1666. [Sidenote: _Acadia restored to France by the Treaty of Breda._] Temple, who received a commission from Cromwell as Governor of Acadia, and went out there in 1657, laid out money in the country and carried on trade with energy and success. He maintained the existing stations, planted a new settlement at Jemseg on the St. John river, higher up than Fort Latour, and drove out a son of Le Borgne, who attempted to reoccupy La Héve; but, like Alexander before him, he suffered at the hands of the Stuarts, for Charles II, after renewing his commission as Governor and creating him a baronet of Nova Scotia, subsequently, in spite of remonstrances from Massachusetts, restored Acadia to France by the Treaty of Breda, in 1667, in return for French concessions in the West Indies. Temple attempted to dispute the extent covered by the treaty, but with no effect; and, in 1670, the whole area became again a French possession. Temple retired to Boston with a promise of 16,200 pounds which he never received, and finally died in London in 1674. The above is a bare recital of early days in Acadia, when it was, in effect, no man's land. The story might be made picturesque, with La Tour and his first wife for hero and heroine, with some embellishment of Alexander's scheme, and a little dressing of D'Aunay, Denys, and the other adventurers who come on the scene; but in truth it is a very slender record of two or three Frenchmen and Englishmen, who did a little trade or a little fishing on desolate {181} shores, and who plundered each other in rather squalid fashion--left to themselves by their rulers, except when their acts or their claims had a bearing on international questions. [Sidenote: _Acadia under French rule._] When Temple retired in 1670 in favour of a new French commander, De Grandfontaine, the total number of settlers in Acadia did not exceed 400. Some new French colonists now came in: the beginning of settlement was made at Chignecto and the Basin of Mines, and communication was for a time opened by land between Acadia and Quebec. The great majority of the French inhabitants were at Port Royal; but Pentegoet on the Penobscot was the seat of government, until, in 1674, it was taken and plundered by a Dutch privateering vessel, the same fate befalling the fort of Jemseg on the St. John river. Chambly, who had succeeded Grandfontaine as Commander in Acadia, was carried off a prisoner to Boston, and Pentegoet was for the time abandoned by the French. Two years later, in 1676, it was occupied by the Dutch; but the latter were in their turn driven out by the New Englanders,[11] and the place passed into the hands of a Frenchman notable in Acadian border warfare, the Baron de St. Castin. [Footnote 11: In the Government records at The Hague, under date Oct. 27, 1678, there is a claim of the Netherlands West India Company against Great Britain to the forts of Penobscot and St. John in Acadie and Nova Scotia, and a request that they may be allowed to remain in quiet and peaceable possession thereof.] [Sidenote: _St. Castin at Pentegoet._] He was a Béarnese, and had come out to Canada as an officer in the Carignan Regiment. Finding, like other Frenchmen, a charm in forest life, he drifted off to Acadia and lived as an Indian among Indians, a devout Roman Catholic, but in other respects a native chief, with his squaws and following of savage warriors. He established himself at Pentegoet, on or near the site of the old fort, where Castine now stands; he raided and was raided; in time of peace making money by trade, in time of war joining in the border forays. For Pentegoet was the southernmost {182} station of the French, standing on soil claimed by the English, and granted by Charles II to the Duke of York. Similarly, Pemaquid, near the Kennebec, established in 1677, was the northernmost post of the English; and, if there was a line between the two nations, it was between Pentegoet and Pemaquid. But French influence extended to the Kennebec river, and Indian converts of French priests were to be found in the immediate neighbourhood of Pemaquid. [Sidenote: _French priests and the Abenaki Indians._] In 1676, the war between the New Englanders and the neighbouring Indians, known as Philip's war, came to an end, leaving bitterness between the conquered natives and victorious colonists. Hatred of the English meant love of the French; and the Abenaki Indians of Acadia and Maine, under the tutelage of fanatical and unscrupulous French priests, became trained to enmity with the heretics; many of them migrated to mission stations in Canada; while those who remained behind were ever ready to obey the call to murder and pillage. In Acadia, even more than in Canada proper, the Indian as a convert became the tool of the Frenchman, and the Frenchman lent himself to the barbarism of the Indian. The full effects of the unnatural blend were seen and felt a little later on; but for twenty years after the Treaty of Breda and the restoration of Acadia to France, there was more often peace than war between the English and the French; and the Boston fishermen were, about 1678, licensed for the time being by the French Commandant, La Vallière, to ply their trade on the Acadian coasts. [Sidenote: _French Governors and colonists of Acadia._] With some trading of this kind and with a good deal of privateering, the years passed by. Perrot, who had been Governor of Montreal and had distinguished himself even among French officials of the time for corrupt practices, succeeded La Vallière in 1684, with a commission as Governor of Acadia. Still intent on enriching himself by illicit trade, he was recalled in 1687, and his place was taken by Meneval. The latter, like Perrot, was subordinate to the {183} Governor-General of Canada, and the number of colonists whom he ruled was, according to a census held in 1686, 858, 600 of whom lived at or near Port Royal, and the remainder chiefly at Beaubassin at the head of Chignecto Bay, and on the Basin of Mines. [Sidenote: _Acadia ceded to England by the Peace of Utrecht._] In 1688, Andros, then Governor of the New England colonies, plundered St. Castin's station at Pentegoet; the French and Indians retaliated, taking the fort of Pemaquid in the following year; and there followed a long series of butcheries and reprisals, of which an account has already been given in a preceding chapter, the taking of Fort Royal by Phipps in 1690, and, in 1710, its final surrender to Nicholson. In the end, the Treaty of Utrecht provided in its twelfth article that 'all Nova Scotia or Accadie with its ancient boundaries' should be 'yielded and made over to the Queen of Great Britain and to her Crown for ever.' [Sidenote: _Henry Hudson sails to the Arctic regions and is lost._] [Sidenote: _The search for the North-West Passage._] [Sidenote: _Button._] We have seen[12] that, in 1609, Henry Hudson led Dutchmen into the present State of New York, and left his name to the river on which the city of New York stands. In the following year, he took service under an English syndicate, to make a further attempt to find a North-West Passage to the Indies. In April, 1610, he started in a small ship, the _Discovery_, found his way through Hudson Straits into Hudson Bay, wintered at the extreme south-eastern end of James' Bay, and, cast adrift by his mutinous followers in the following summer, never saw home again, 'dearly purchasing the honour of having this large Strait and Bay called after his name.'[13] The Arctic seas, where he met his death, and where his name has lived through the centuries, were visited again and again by English explorers, still seeking for the North-West Passage. One voyager after another went out, hoping to return by China and the East. In April, 1612, Captain Button set forth with two ships, one of which was {184} Hudson's old vessel, the _Discovery_, reached the western coast of Hudson Bay--which was long called after him, Button's Bay--wintered at Port Nelson, at the mouth of the Nelson river, and returned in the autumn of 1613. [Footnote 12: See above, p. 63.] [Footnote 13: Oldmixon's _British Empire in America_ (1741 ed.), vol. i, p. 543.] [Sidenote: _Royal charter granted to the Merchants Discoverers of the North-West Passage._] His instructions had been drawn up by the young Prince of Wales, Prince Henry, who died not long afterwards; and three months after Button started, the merchants at whose expense both his expedition and Hudson's had been fitted out, were incorporated under royal charter as the 'Company of the Merchants of London Discoverers of the North-West Passage,' having the Prince of Wales as governor or 'Supreme Protector,' and including among many well-known names that of Richard Hakluyt. [Sidenote: _Gibbons._] [Sidenote: _Bylot and Baffin._] In 1614, the _Discovery_ was sent out again under the command of Captain Gibbons, but returned in the same year, having penetrated no further than Hudson Strait. In 1615, Bylot and Baffin set sail for the North, again taking with them the _Discovery_; they too returned in the same year, concluding that the North-West Passage was not to be found by the way of Hudson Straits. Once more, in the next year, 1616, the same men went out, and once more the stout old ship, the _Discovery_, carried them, the voyage resulting in the exploration of Baffin Bay. For two years after their return there was a respite from Arctic voyages, but in 1619 Captain Hawkridge led a fresh expedition, which proved a failure. [Sidenote: _Luke Foxe and Thomas James._] Much money had now been spent in the attempt to find a North-West Passage, and little had been achieved; but after an interval of twelve years, in 1631, two more Arctic voyages took place. One expedition was commanded by a Yorkshireman, Luke Foxe, the other by Captain Thomas James, who was connected with Bristol. The former was backed by London merchants, the latter was a Bristol venture; but both received sanction and encouragement from the King. James' voyage was unfortunate and barren of result; but Foxe, {185} though he did not find the Passage, which was the one aim and object of all these early attempts, completed the exploration of Hudson Bay, and penetrated further north than previous sailors by the way of what is still known as Fox Channel. [Sidenote: _The period of discovery in the far North followed by trading enterprise._] With these two voyages the first chapter in Arctic discovery comes to an end. As in the record of English colonization we have a distinct break between the time of discovery and adventure on the one hand, and the time of trade and settlement on the other, so even in the far North there was a time of exploration, followed after an interval by a time of trade. All the early voyages, which have been recounted above, were voyages of discovery, and, though they were fitted out for the most part by syndicates of merchants, their object was not to bring back furs, or to establish trading stations, but to search for a new route to the East.[14] [Footnote 14: A most excellent account of the early voyages in search of a North-West Passage is given in Mr. Miller Christy's Introduction to the _Voyages of Foxe and James to the North-West_ (Hakluyt Society, 1894).] [Sidenote: _Zachariah Gillam._] [Sidenote: _Radisson and Des Groseilliers._] Forty years passed away and, in the year 1668, an English ship once more found its way into Hudson Bay. The ship was named the _Nonsuch_, her commander was Captain Zachariah Gillam, and Prince Rupert seems to have had a hand in sending her out. The expedition was designed to establish trade with the Indians, and Gillam wintered in James Bay, near where Hudson had wintered in 1610, building a fort called Charles Fort at the mouth of a river which was named Rupert river. The fort was subsequently known as Fort Rupert or Rupert House. It is stated that this new enterprise was undertaken in consequence of information received from two French settlers in Canada named Radisson and Des Groseilliers, and that the latter was on board Gillam's ship, while Radisson had embarked on another vessel which started from England with Gillam, but put back on account of stress of weather. {186} [Sidenote: _French claims to priority in Hudson Bay._] How far these two Frenchmen contributed to the beginning of trade in Hudson Bay, and to the founding of the Hudson Bay Company, has been a matter of much controversy. The question was originally of some importance, for French claims to priority of occupation in the Arctic regions rested in large measure on the real or the alleged doings of the two adventurers. Like the rest of the world, they must have heard of the existence of Hudson Bay, for the voyages to discover the North-West Passage, though not made by Frenchmen, were not made in secret; and they had gathered information from the Indians of Canada as to the possibilities of fur trading in these northern regions. They had more than once attempted, between 1658 and 1663, to make their way by land to the bay, but never seem to have reached its shores; and the first recorded overland visit from Canada, is that of a French priest, Albanel, who, in 1671-2, journeyed from Quebec to Lake St. John, and thence, by the line of the Rupert river, came to the sea, to find an English factory already established at the mouth of the river. [Sidenote: _Incorporation of the Hudson Bay Company._] [Sidenote: _Rupert's Land._] Gillam returned to England in 1669, and on May 2, 1670, the Hudson Bay Company came into existence. On that day Charles II issued a royal charter, creating a corporate body under the title of 'The Governor and Company of Adventurers of England trading into Hudson's Bay.' Prince Rupert was the first Governor; Albemarle, Ashley, and Arlington were among the original grantees. The preamble of the charter recited that the persons named had 'at their own great cost and charges, undertaken an expedition for Hudson's Bay, in the North-West part of America, for the discovery of a new passage into the South Sea, and for the finding some trade for furs, minerals, and other considerable commodities'; and in their corporate capacity the Company were constituted absolute lords and proprietors, with a complete monopoly of trade of all the lands and seas 'that lie within the entrance of the straits, commonly called Hudson's {187} Straits,' so far as they were not already actually granted to or possessed by British subjects, or the subjects of any other Christian Prince or State. The charter enacted that 'the said land' should be 'from henceforth reckoned and reputed as one of our plantations or colonies in America, called Rupert's Land.' [Sidenote: _Operations of the company._] Armed with practically unlimited powers over an unlimited area, the company lost little time in sending out ships and establishing factories. In addition to Fort Rupert at the south-eastern end of James Bay, Fort Hayes, or Moose Fort, was constructed at the south-western end of the bay, at the mouth of the Moose river; and some distance to the north of the latter fort, Fort Albany was placed at the outlet of the Albany river. Voyages were also made to the mouth of the Nelson river, on the western shore of Hudson Bay, but no attempt was made to plant a factory there till the year 1682. [Sidenote: _Collision between French and English in Hudson Bay._] [Sidenote: _A Canadian company formed._] It was in that year and at Fort Nelson, as it was called, that French and English first came into collision in the far North. Radisson and Des Groseilliers, who had taken service with the English in consequence of being fined by the Governor of Canada for making their early journeys without his licence, subsequently returned to Canada, and piloted their countrymen by sea into Hudson Bay. A company was formed in Canada in 1682, the Compagnie du Nord, and sent out an expedition from Quebec with these two men on board. They reached the Nelson river; a few days before they arrived a Boston vessel appeared on the scene, and a few days subsequently a vessel came from England, sent by the Hudson Bay Company to build a fort. After a short interval the French overpowered the English; but two years later, in 1684, Radisson and Des Groseilliers having in the meantime again come back to the Hudson Bay Company, that company recovered its fort, and the French lost their footing on Hudson Bay. {188} [Sidenote: _Attack made overland from Canada on the English forts on Hudson Bay._] In the following year two Frenchmen passed overland from the bay to Canada by the Abbitibbi river, Lake Temiscaming, and the Ottawa; and it was determined to send a Canadian expedition by that route to attack the factories of the Hudson Bay Company. The rulers of Canada viewed with distrust English settlements to the north of New France, as they feared and distrusted the English colonies on the southern side, and they determined if possible to strangle them in infancy. Denonville was now Governor of Canada; and early in the year 1686 he dispatched a party of soldiers and Canadians to attack the forts on Hudson Bay. It was the kind of expedition in which French Canadians excelled, indifferent to privation and hardship, trained to toil through ice and snow, through unknown forests, making the rivers the highways for sleigh or canoe. Their leader was De Troyes, and with him went three sons of the celebrated Le Moyne family, including the most noted of them, Iberville. The Frenchmen followed the line of the Ottawa and the Abbitibbi, and in June, 1686, surprised and took Fort Hayes on the outlet of the Moose river. Crossing the eastern end of James Bay on the floating ice, they next reached Fort Rupert, seized a ship which was moored in front of the fort, and overpowered the fort itself. The sea was by this time open to navigation, and in canoes and the captured vessel the victorious Frenchmen turned west to attack Fort Albany. There was here some semblance of siege, but the little English garrison was forced to capitulate, and leaving Iberville in charge of the fort, which was renamed Fort St. Anne, De Troyes returned in November to Canada. [Sidenote: _Complaints of the Hudson Bay Company against the seizure of their forts._] [Sidenote: _The English forts recovered._] This successful raid was organized and carried out in a time of peace between the English and French Crowns; and, when the Englishmen who had been taken prisoners at the forts found their way home, the Hudson Bay Company laid the case before the Government, demanding satisfaction for the wrong done and restitution of their property. {189} There was little likelihood of redress while James II was King of England. On November 16, 1686, he concluded a treaty of neutrality with the French King, the Treaty of Whitehall; and a mixed commission of French and English was appointed to inquire into the claims of the company. No settlement was arrived at: in 1688 came the Revolution in England; in 1692 the battle of La Hogue crippled the French at sea; and at length, in 1693, an English expedition was sent to Hudson Bay which recovered all the forts in James Bay. [Sidenote: _Iberville takes Port Nelson and the forts in James Bay._] [Sidenote: _They are recovered by the English._] The northernmost post of the Hudson Bay Company, the post on the Nelson river, or rather on the Hayes river, which flows into the same estuary, had not been taken by the French in their buccaneering expedition of 1686. It was known indifferently as Port Nelson or Fort York. It was at some distance from the forts in James Bay, and promised to be an outlet for trade from the regions west of the great lakes. It had been threatened by the French in 1690, and in October, 1694, the bold and restless Iberville, who had returned to Canada in 1687, appeared before it with two ships. After a short siege it capitulated, and was renamed Fort Bourbon; and Iberville followed up his success by recapturing the forts in James Bay. Thus, by the middle of 1695, the French held every post in Hudson Bay. In the next year came English ships, and all the positions were regained for England. [Sidenote: _Fresh raid by Iberville._] [Sidenote: _The Peace of Ryswick._] [Sidenote: _The Peace of Utrecht._] [Sidenote: _Hudson Bay secured to England._] Once more, in 1697, Iberville appeared on the scene. He had in the meantime taken Fort Pemaquid on the Acadian frontier, and overrun Newfoundland; and starting from Placentia, with four ships of war sent out from France, he made sail for Hudson Bay. The destination was Port Nelson; but the vessels became separated, and with a single ship, Iberville, when nearing the fort, came into collision with three armed English merchantmen. The bold Frenchman closed with them, one to three, sank one of the vessels, took a second, {190} while the third made its escape. A heavy gale came on, his own ship was driven ashore and broken up; but landing with his men, he was rejoined shortly afterwards by the rest of the French squadron, and laying siege to the fort compelled it to capitulate. This feat of arms took place early in September, 1697; on the twentieth of the same month the Peace of Ryswick was signed, and under its terms the French were placed in possession of all the Hudson Bay forts, with the exception of Fort Albany.[15] They held them down to the year 1713, when the Peace of Utrecht in no uncertain words gave back to Great Britain 'to be possessed in full right for ever, the Bay and Straits of Hudson, together with all lands, seas, seacoasts, rivers and places situate in the same Bay and Straits and which belong thereunto, no tracts of land or of sea being excepted, which are at present possessed by the subjects of France.' Boundaries, which by the treaty were to be defined, were never fixed; but no French ship appeared again with hostile intent in Hudson Bay until the year 1782. [Footnote 15: The manner in which the Treaty of Ryswick worked out in favour of the French in Hudson Bay is explained, as far as it can be explained, in Kingsford's _History of Canada_, vol. iii, pp. 39-41.] NOTE.--For the first part of the above chapter, see KINGSFORD'S _History of Canada_, vol. ii. Sir J. BOURINOT'S _Cape Breton_ (referred to above, p. 34, note). The same author's _Canada_, in the 'Story of the Nations' Series, chap. vii, and Dr. PATTERSON'S Paper on _Sir William Alexander and the Scottish Attempt to Colonize Acadia_, published in the _Proceedings and Transactions of the Royal Society of Canada_, vol. x, 1892. For the second part, see KINGSFORD'S _History of Canada_, vol. iii. Two books have recently been published on the Hudson Bay Company, viz: _The Remarkable History of the Hudson's Bay Company_, by GEORGE BRYCE, M.A., LL.D., and _The Great Company (1667-1871)_, by BECKLES WILSON. {191} CHAPTER VII LOUISBOURG [Sidenote: _Cape Breton Island under the provisions of the Peace of Utrecht._] [Sidenote: _Importance of the island to France._] The Treaty of Utrecht provided that 'the island called Cape Breton, as also all others both in the mouth of the river of St. Lawrence and in the gulf of the same name, shall hereafter belong of right to the French, and the Most Christian King shall have all manner of liberty to fortify any place or places there.' It was an important provision. Driven from Acadia and Newfoundland, with the reservation of certain fishing rights along a specified part of the Newfoundland coast, the French would have lost the seaboard altogether but for the possession of these islands at the entrance of the river of Canada. A French eye-witness of the siege of Louisbourg in 1745 described, in a contemporary pamphlet, the value of Cape Breton Island to France. It was used, he says, to provide a place for the French settlers who were leaving Newfoundland after the cession of that island to Great Britain by the Treaty of Utrecht, but 'this was not all. It was necessary that we should retain a position that would make us at all times masters of the entrance to the River which leads to New France.'[1] Similar testimony to its value is given by an English writer. 'Cape Breton Island is a subject no good Englishman can write or read with pleasure. The giving of it to the French by the Treaty of Utrecht may prove as great a loss to the Kingdom, as the Sinking Fund amounts {192} to or even the charge of the last war.'[2] Cape Breton, in short, kept open for France the mouth of the St. Lawrence, and the story of New France became more than ever the story of that river, and of the waterways which connected it with the far West, and with the newborn French colony in Louisiana. [Footnote 1: _Louisbourg in 1745_, the anonymous _Lettre d'un habitant de Louisbourg_, translated and edited by Professor Wrong (Toronto, 1897), p. 26.] [Footnote 2: Oldmixon's _British Empire in America_ (1741 ed.), vol. i, p. 37.] From 1713, for thirty years, there was nominally peace between Great Britain and France. In 1743, English troops assisted the Austrians and defeated the French at the battle of Dettingen; but war was not formally proclaimed between the two powers until the following year, 1744, when it lasted for four years, being terminated by the Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle in 1748. During the years of so-called peace, French Governors, French priests, French explorers and border leaders lost no opportunity of strengthening the French position in North America. [Sidenote: _Controversy as to the boundaries of Acadia._] Intrigue and covert force were notably at work in Acadia. By the Treaty of Utrecht, King Louis ceded to Great Britain 'all Nova Scotia or Accadie with its ancient boundaries.' What were the ancient boundaries? They were left to be demarcated by commissioners of the two nations; but no demarcation ever took place, and meanwhile French on the one hand, and English on the other, construed the term 'Acadia' according to their respective interests. While Acadia was French, the French widened, the English narrowed, the area to which the name might apply. When Acadia became English, the contention was reversed; and the French, who had included in Acadia a large extent of mainland, claimed that the peninsula of Nova Scotia alone was covered by the terms of the treaty. [Sidenote: _The Acadians and French intrigues._] Within that peninsula there were, at the time when the treaty was signed, some two thousand French settlers--a simple peasantry, uneducated, priest-ridden, of the same type as the _habitans_ of the St. Lawrence; but more primitive, {193} more old-fashioned, clinging to their homes, to their national traditions, to their faith. Under the fourteenth article of the treaty, French subjects were given liberty to remove themselves within one year; if they preferred to remain and become subjects of the British Crown, they were to enjoy the free exercise of the Roman Catholic religion 'as far as the laws of Great Britain do allow the same.' The Acadians themselves did not wish to leave their farms and homesteads, nor did the English, when they took over Acadia, wish to lose the white settlers of the peninsula, who might reasonably be expected to become loyal and valuable citizens. The French authorities, on the other hand, desired to remove them in order to populate their own territories and deplete the ceded lands. Thus from the outset the intention of the treaty was frustrated, and the unfortunate Acadians suffered between two masters. As years went on, English and French views alike changed. The French, having by priestly influence rendered the Acadians thoroughly disaffected to English rule, and having year by year stronger hope of recovering Acadia, wished the Acadians to remain where they were, a growing hostile population around a weak English garrison. The English, on the other hand, seeing the impossibility of securing the loyalty of the peasantry, wished to be rid of them, and in the end deported large numbers of them to other lands. [Sidenote: _Annapolis neglected by the home Government._] The main agents of mischief were on the one side French priests, political and religious fanatics, who threatened and cajoled their flocks; on the other the British Government, which left Acadia to take care of itself. It is deplorable to read the accounts given of Annapolis, as Port Royal was now called, and of the state of its garrison. What should have been the strong and thriving capital of a British province, remained for years nothing more than practically a very weak outpost in the enemy's country. [Sidenote: _The Acadians and the oath of allegiance._] A long time passed in vainly attempting to make the {194} Acadians swear allegiance to the King of England. At length, in 1730, Governor Philipps reported that he had succeeded in persuading each adult member of the population to 'promise and solemnly swear on the faith of a Christian that I will be thoroughly faithful and will truly obey his Majesty George II'; but the adoption of this form of words had little effect on the minds or the conduct of the French settlers. Strength to insist on loyalty and to punish traitorous dealing was not supplied from home; the Governors were unable to enforce their proclamations, and the governed were irritated by orders which were not carried into effect. Meanwhile, from 1720 onwards, Louisbourg grew up in artificial strength, the Dunkirk of America, the most powerful fortress on the Atlantic coast. Money and soldiers came out from France, while the British possession almost under the guns of the fortress was starved and neglected. To reconquer Acadia for the French, writes the eye-witness of the siege of Louisbourg in 1745, 'it was only necessary to appear before this English colony ... and to land a few men'; and yet in 1745 Acadia had been in British keeping for thirty-five years. [Sidenote: _The Abenaki Indians._] On the mainland, French policy was the same as in the Acadian peninsula, nominally to keep the peace, secretly to incite the natives to war. For generations the Abenaki Indians had raided at frequent intervals the New England frontier; yet fear and the necessities of trade might at length have kept them quiet, had it not been for the instigation of the Canadian Government and its priestly agents. In 1713, and again in 1717, Abenaki chiefs had come to terms with Massachusetts; but there could be no peace as long as the savages were carefully instructed that the English were the enemies of their religion and the robbers of their lands. The savages were in truth in a hard case. Peace meant the aggressive growth of the white men's settlements, inevitable encroachment on the red men's heritage. War {195} meant cutting off the New England trade, and inadequate support from France. They sent to Quebec to ask what aid they might expect from Canada. 'I will send you in secret,' said the Governor Vaudreuil, 'tomahawks, powder, and shot.' It was such a reply as the English Governors of New York had been wont to give to the Iroquois; and the Abenakis, like the Iroquois, were little satisfied with it. To fight the battles of France while the French looked on, was not what the Indians wished or understood. Yet their priests taught them to do it, and the Canadian Government stiffened their resolution by sending in mission Indians from Canada. [Sidenote: _Sebastian Rasle._] [Sidenote: _His mission destroyed and himself killed._] [Sidenote: _Peace between the Indians and New Englanders._] The foremost French emissary among the Abenaki Indians at this time was a Jesuit priest, Sebastian Rasle, keen in controversy, uncompromising in zeal, a bitter foe of the English, but not so utterly inhuman as were some of his colleagues. His mission was among the Norridgewocks, high up on the Kennebec river, where the head waters of that river flowing down to the Atlantic are at no very great distance from the Chaudière river which runs into the St. Lawrence. Against this place, in August, 1724, a strong body of men was sent from Massachusetts. They rowed up the Kennebec in whaleboats, and, landing at some distance below the Indian village, marched on it, and took it by surprise. Rasle was shot dead, the Indians were killed or dispersed, their homes were burnt to the ground; and the expedition returned in safety, having struck a strong and relentless blow at a centre of French and Indian hostility to the English colonists. War went on for some little time longer, and the English raided the tribes of the Penobscot. At length, in 1726, the Indians came to terms; and a peace was concluded which lasted for many years, dépôts being established at various points, where the natives could to their advantage barter furs with the traders of New England. [Sidenote: _The Indians were the tools of the French Government and its agents._] The principal point to notice in the dreary record of {196} murder and pillage is the attitude of the Canadian Government and their superiors in France. Letters were intercepted, proving beyond dispute that the Indians were acting under the direct encouragement of the French authorities. In time of peace and nominal friendship the old struggle was ever going on. North America was a chessboard. On the French side the Indians were in front, pawns in the game. Behind them was the King temporarily in check, bishops or their representatives, half-breed knights of tortuous movement, and the castles of Louisbourg and Quebec. [Sidenote: _Oswego._] [Sidenote: _Fort Rouillé or Toronto._] The mouth of the Niagara river had long been held in intermittent fashion by the French, and by 1720, in spite of jealous opposition on the part of the Five Nation Indians, a permanent fort was built there. The English in their turn, in the year 1727, established and garrisoned a trading fort at Oswego, on the southern shore of Lake Ontario,[3] Burnet, the Governor of New York, finding the necessary funds, as the colonial Legislature would not vote the money. The establishment of this station was a serious blow to French trade, nullifying to a large extent the advantage of holding Niagara. In vain the Canadians tried to incite the Five Nations to destroy it; and in vain, in 1749, they planted a rival post, Fort Rouillé, at Toronto,[4] on the other side of the lake, to command the direct route to Lake Huron by Lake Simcoe. To Oswego the Indians brought their furs, and the traffic enriched the Iroquois and their English neighbours in New York. [Footnote 3: See the letter from Governor Burnet to the Board of Trade, dated New York, May 9, 1727: 'I have this spring sent up workmen to build a stone house of strength at a place called Oswego, at the mouth of the Onnondage river, where our principal trade with the far Nations is carried on. I have obtained the consent of the Six Nations to build it.' Papers relating to Oswego in O'Callaghan's _Documentary History of New York_, vol. i, p. 447.] [Footnote 4: The name of Toronto appears before the founding of this fort. On the old maps, i.e. on Delisle's map of Canada, published in 1703, Lake Simcoe appears as Lake Toronto.] [Sidenote: _Crown Point._] But, menacing as was this outpost on the lake to the {197} commercial interests of Canada, greater danger threatened both New England and New York from another move made by the French. Far up on Lake Champlain, at the point where the lake narrows into a wide river, stretching many miles to the south, there is a small isthmus on the western side standing out boldly in the lake. It was known to the English as Crown Point; and here in 1731, at the instance of a well-known French officer, the Chevalier Saint Luc de la Corne, the French built a fort commanding the strait, and named it Fort St. Frederic. The English colonies protested, but did not use united force to back their protests; and the position remained, fortified in time of peace, an evidence of French claims and a base for future attack. [Sidenote: _War between England and France._] [Sidenote: _An outpost at Canso overpowered by the French, who threaten Annapolis._] War began again in March, 1744, and in May the French commander at Louisbourg took action. There was a small fishing village at Canso, on the narrow arm of the sea which divides Nova Scotia from Cape Breton Island. It was guarded by a blockhouse, garrisoned by about eighty English soldiers. A far stronger force from Louisbourg came against it, the garrison surrendered, and the place was burnt. The Frenchman who commanded the expedition, Duvivier, a descendant of La Tour, was then sent to attack Annapolis, and appeared before it in August. Ill fortified, ill garrisoned, the little town had at least a good English officer in charge--Major Mascarene, of Huguenot descent. The French offered terms of capitulation, threatening the arrival of more troops from Louisbourg; but these reinforcements did not arrive, the Acadians did not rise in mass, and in September the besiegers disappeared, having effected nothing. [Sidenote: _New England and Acadia._] Neglected by the British Government, Acadia was valued by New England. Massachusetts had in past years taken and held Port Royal, and knew well that English interests in America were not compatible with the French regaining the Acadian peninsula. The taking of Canso, the attempt {198} to take Port Royal or Annapolis, roused the 'Bostonnais,' and led to an enterprise second to none in colonial history. [Sidenote: _William Shirley._] The Governor of Massachusetts at the time was William Shirley. A Sussex man, son of a merchant in the City of London, bred to the law, he had gone out to Boston in 1731, and in ten years' time, by judicious pushing, became Governor of the colony. He was a layman with military instincts, and, taking up the rôle of Cato, never ceased to preach to the ministers at home and to his fellow colonists on the spot, that Canada must be conquered, and the French driven from North America. His policy was good and clearsighted, his military ability was of no large order; but, like William Phipps, while he loved himself, he loved his country also; and eventually, after falling under a cloud, and being relegated to the government of the Bahamas, he came back to end his days in Massachusetts as a private citizen, and was buried at Boston in 1771. [Sidenote: _His scheme for attacking Louisbourg._] To this enterprising man, it is said, the idea of attacking Louisbourg with colonial forces was suggested by William Vaughan, a New Englander, interested in the fishing trade on the coast of Maine. The scheme seemed a wild one. A fortress strong, as far as the newest military skill and unlimited money could strengthen it, was to be attacked and taken by untrained colonists. Yet there were solid hopes of success, and the dream came true. The English prisoners, carried from Canso to Louisbourg, had been sent on to Boston, and told of the actual condition of the French. The garrison at Louisbourg was not very numerous: they were ill commanded and mutinous. If the fortifications were formidable, within them were the elements of weakness. [Sidenote: _The scheme adopted by Massachusetts._] [Sidenote: _William Pepperell._] Shirley called the Massachusetts Assembly together in secret session, and propounded his scheme for an expedition against Louisbourg. The scheme was rejected. Soon afterwards a petition in its favour was presented from Boston and other coast towns: the question came again before the {199} Assembly, and the proposals were carried by one vote. All the English colonies down to and including Pennsylvania were invited to help; but, though New York sent a little money and a few guns, the enterprise was practically left to New England alone. Massachusetts contributed about 3,000 men, Connecticut, 500; and William Pepperell, shipbuilder and merchant of Kittery Point, Maine, was named as commander. He was of Devonshire descent, a colonel of militia, and, though he had little military experience, he was a man of good judgement and common sense. [Sidenote: _Admiral Warren._] A request had been sent to England for ships of war, and Warren, the English commodore at Antigua in the West Indies, was asked to bring his squadron. When the message reached him, he was without orders from home, and refused to sail; but almost immediately afterwards permission came, and he left at once for the North American coast, joining the expedition, which had already started, at their rendezvous at Canso. [Sidenote: _The expedition starts._] It was on March 24, 1745 that the New Englanders left Boston; on or about April 4 the transports began to arrive at Canso. They carried men who knew little or nothing of scientific warfare, and for whom amateur strategists had drawn up fantastic plans of campaign; but they were colonists of tough English breed, their Puritan proclivities had been strengthened by the Methodist revival, and the great preacher, George Whitfield, had given to Pepperell for the motto of the expedition 'Nil desperandum Christo duce.' [Illustration: Map of Louisbourg] [Sidenote: _Louisbourg and its surroundings._] 'Louisbourg is built upon a tongue of land which stretches out into the sea and gives the town an oblong shape. It is about half a league in circumference.'[5] The tongue of land in question is part of a larger peninsula running out to the south and east from the coast of Cape Breton Island. The little promontory, which was covered by the {200} town and fortifications of Louisbourg, has an almost due easterly direction, and it is prolonged to the east by reefs ending in a small rocky island, on which the French erected a battery to command the mouth of the harbour, the channel being about half a mile wide. The harbour lay to the north and north-east of the town; on the other side was the ocean. To the west of the whole peninsula, of which the Louisbourg promontory was but a small part, is a large semicircular bay, known as Gabarus Bay. Surrounded by the sea on all sides but one, on that one side--the western side--the town was strongly protected by a ditch and rampart, outside which was marshy ground. Moreover, almost due north of the town, on the edge of the harbour, was a battery, known as the Grand Battery, over against the Island Battery which has been already mentioned. Nature, French money, and French engineers had combined to make a stronghold, which seemed almost impregnable. [Footnote 5: From the anonymous _Lettre d'un habitant de Louisbourg_, translated by Professor Wrong, pp. 27, 28.] [Sidenote: _The French garrison._] The garrison consisted of between 500 and 600 regular troops, with 1,300 to 1,400 militia.[6] Among the regulars were Swiss soldiers, who had mutinied at the preceding Christmas time and infected their French comrades with the spirit of insubordination. They mutinied, it was said, about their rations, as to the 'butter and bacon' which the King supplied. In Louisbourg, as elsewhere in Canada, peculation was rife, and officers and commissaries made profit at the privates' expense. The Governor, Duquesnel, had died in the previous October. His successor, Duchambon, was not the man for a crisis. The walls were there and brave men behind them, but confidence in a determined and prescient leader was wanting; and, as the consequence of maladministration, we read that 'the regular soldiers were distrusted, so that it was necessary to charge the inhabitants with the most dangerous duties.' [Footnote 6: It is difficult to make out from the _Lettre d'un habitant_ whether or not the 1,300 to 1,400 men included the regulars, but probably not.] {201} [Sidenote: _The English land in Gabarus Bay._] [Sidenote: _The Grand Battery occupied by the English._] Having waited for about three weeks at Canso, and rebuilt and garrisoned the blockhouse, the New Englanders went on to their destination. On April 30 the transports sailed into Gabarus Bay, making for Flat Point, three miles due west of Louisbourg. A small French force was detached to oppose them; but the boats made good their landing, two miles further to the west, at a little inlet called Freshwater Cove. Here the whole force of 4,000 men was disembarked; and, two days later, a party under Vaughan, having marched behind the town, found the Grand Battery deserted and occupied it, turning its guns in due course upon their rightful owners. The precipitate abandonment of this battery by the French, on the ground that its defences were inadequate, proved a fatal blunder, giving the besiegers a firm position in the rear of the town, whereas the direct attack was over swamp and marsh. [Sidenote: _Beginning of the siege._] [Sidenote: _Capture of the 'Vigilant.'_] The siege now began in earnest. Warren's squadron, which was at a later stage reinforced from England, blockaded the harbour, and on May 19 achieved an important success in capturing the _Vigilant_, a large French ship of war, whose supplies of food and ammunition, destined for the garrison, passed instead into the hands of the besiegers. Warren could not however enter the harbour, as long as the Island Battery commanded the entrance. [Sidenote: _Spirit of the New Englanders._] The bulk of the work fell on the land force, and well they did it. Ill clothed, ill housed, suffering so much from exposure and privations, that at one time out of 4,000 men little more than one-half were fit for duty, without transport, dragging the guns themselves across the morasses, without skilled engineers, and with hardly any trained gunners, they none the less pushed the siege with boisterous audacity, mingling religious fervour with schoolboy recklessness. They fought better in this way--their own way--than by adhering to strict military rule, and their commander, William Pepperell, knew his men. His was a difficult task. {202} There was some little friction between the King's man and the colonist, but, on the whole, Warren on the sea and Pepperell on the land worked in harmony, due in no small measure to the tact and good sense of the New England commander. [Sidenote: _The besiegers threatened from the mainland._] There was a further danger to the besiegers, of attack from the mainland side. Canadians and Indians were reported to be marching to the relief of the garrison. They were a party sent from Canada to besiege Annapolis, who drew off and marched for Louisbourg on receiving an urgent message for help from Duchambon, but arrived only in time to hear that the town had surrendered and to retreat again in safety into Acadia. [Sidenote: _Attempt on the Island Battery, which fails._] As long as the Island Battery remained intact, it was or seemed impossible to attack from the sea. Accordingly an attempt was made to take it. At midnight, on May 26, a storming party put out in boats from the Grand Battery, and rowed to the strongly fortified rock on which the Island Battery stood. The result was an entire failure. Firing under cover, the French wrecked many of the boats, and shot down the soldiers who landed. The English lost 189 men, being nearly half the attacking force, 119 of whom were taken prisoners. It was clear that the battery could not be taken by assault, and the besiegers proceeded gradually to cripple it by mounting guns on Lighthouse Point, being the opposite side of the narrow entrance to the harbour. These guns did good execution, and, while the Island Battery lost its sting, the defences of the town on the land side were steadily weakened by the besiegers' fire. [Sidenote: _Final assault threatened._] [Sidenote: _The town capitulates._] At length Warren and Pepperell decided that the time had come to assault the town simultaneously by land and sea. The French saw what was intended; they were worn with fatigue and anxiety; their houses were riddled with shot and shell; and the townspeople urged the Governor to capitulate. Fair terms were granted by the English commanders, who knew that their own position was none too secure. The {203} garrison was allowed to march out with the honours of war, and safe transport to France was guaranteed to the officers and men, as well as to the inhabitants of Louisbourg, on the promise that none should bear arms against England for the space of a year. On these conditions Duchambon surrendered, and on June 17, after a siege of forty-seven days, the English became masters of Louisbourg. [Sidenote: _Warren and Pepperell._] The capitulation was made jointly to Pepperell and Warren. The French eye-witness of the siege is at pains to distinguish between them; for Warren he has nothing but praise, for Pepperell the reverse. 'Mr. Warren,' he writes, 'is a young man about thirty-five years old, very handsome, and full of the noblest sentiments.' Against Pepperell he brings charges of bad faith in carrying out the terms of the capitulation, adding, 'What could we expect from a man who, it is said, is the son of a shoemaker at Boston?' As a matter of fact, Pepperell, on occupying Louisbourg, kept his undisciplined men well in hand, much to their disgust, and little loot rewarded their weeks of toil and suffering. To Warren's sailors, on the other hand, there accrued a large amount of prize-money; for, by the device of keeping the French flag flying after the surrender of the town had taken place, various French vessels were decoyed and captured. [Sidenote: _The success mainly due to the colonists._] In after years, when the American colonies had taken arms against the mother country, men argued as to whether the taking of Louisbourg was due to the English sailors and their commander, or to the colonists. As a matter of fact, neither without the other could have achieved success, but the enterprise was conceived by the colonists, on the colonists fell the brunt of the fighting, and to them, not to England, the chief credit was due. 'The enterprise,' says the French writer already quoted, 'was less that of the nation or of the King than of the inhabitants of New England alone.' It was in truth a wonderful feat, and till our own times it was never sufficiently appreciated. {204} [Sidenote: _Reception of the news in England, and at Boston._] There was rejoicing in England; but England in the year 1745, the year of the Jacobite rebellion, had other sights before her eyes, and other sounds in the ears of her people. It may well have been, too, that joy at success over the enemy of the nation was alloyed by uneasy and unworthy consciousness of the growing strength and self-confidence of the New England beyond the sea. But to Boston the tidings were tidings of unmixed joy and pride. The Lord had risen to fight for His chosen people, the dour and stubborn Puritan, and the stronghold of the idolaters was laid low. 'Good Lord,' said the old and usually long-winded Chaplain Moody, in his grace before dinner at the end of the siege, 'we have so much to thank Thee for that time will be too short, and we must leave it for eternity.'[7] [Footnote 7: Quoted in Parkman's _A Half Century of Conflict_ (1892 ed.), vol. ii, p. 153.] [Sidenote: _Sermon at Boston on the event._] A General Thanksgiving was held at Boston on Thursday July 18, 1745. At the South Church in that city the Rev. Thomas Prince, one of the pastors, preached on the great New England victory. He took for his text 'This is the Lord's doing: it is marvellous in our eyes'; and his sermon, which has been preserved to us,[8] well illustrates the view which the Puritans of Massachusetts took of their success. The hand of the Lord was visible to them in every detail of the 'most adventurous enterprise against the French settlements at Cape Breton and their exceeding strong city of Louisbourg, for warlike power the pride and terror of these northern seas.' The preacher recounted the advantages which the island gave to France, its abundance of pit coal, its commodious harbours, 'its happy situation in {205} the centre of our fishery at the entrance of the Bay and River of Canada.' He noted the natural and artificial strength of the walled city, added to for thirty years, until Louisbourg became 'the Dunkirk of North America, and in some respects of greater importance.' He traced the finger of God in the circumstances preliminary to and attending its capture; how the British prisoners, carried to Louisbourg, on their return to Boston brought information 'whereby we came to be more acquainted with their situation and the proper places of landing and attacking'; how the New Englander had accounts 'of the uneasiness of the Switzers there for want of pay and provision'; how the weather was fair, the men were willing, supplies were plentiful; how God guided the decision of the Court of Representatives, and timed the arrival of 'the brave and active Commodore Warren, a great friend to these Plantations.' The landing, the taking of the Grand Battery, the 'happy harmony between our various officers,' even disease, reverse, toil and labour, all were signs of a particular Providence working out His great design and leading His people into a place of shelter. Thus was Louisbourg taken 'by means of so small a number, less than 4,000 land men, unused to war, undisciplined, and that had never seen a siege in their lives.' 'As it was,' said the preacher, referring to the Treaty of Utrecht, 'one of the chief disgraces of Queen Anne's reign to resign this island to the French, it is happily one of the glories of King George II's to restore it to the British empire.' The measure of joy at the taking of Louisbourg must also have been the measure of disappointment at its subsequent retrocession by the terms of the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle. [Footnote 8: _Extraordinary events, the doings of God, and marvellous in pious eyes_. Illustrated in a sermon at the South Church in Boston (New England), on the General Thanksgiving, Thursday, July 18, 1745. Occasioned by taking the city of Louisbourg, on the isle of Cape Breton, by New England soldiers, assisted by a British squadron. By Thomas Prince, M.A. Pamphlet, Boston and London, 5th ed. 1746. Dedicated to H. E. William Shirley.] [Sidenote: _Subsequent career of Pepperell_] Of the two men who led the English to victory on this memorable occasion, Pepperell was made a baronet--the first colonist to receive that honour: he lived to help his countrymen still further in their struggle with France. Through his exertions a royal regiment was raised in {206} America, and the New England shipping yards added a fine frigate to the British navy. He died in 1759, holding the commission of Lieutenant-General in the British army. [Sidenote: _and Warren._] Warren, in 1747, took part, as second in command, in Anson's naval victory over the French off Cape Finisterre, and in the same year he was elected member of Parliament for Westminster. He died in 1752, at the age of forty-nine, one of the richest commoners in England; and a monument to him stands in the north transept of Westminster Abbey. It tells that he was a 'Knight of the Bath, a Vice Admiral of the Red Squadron of the fleet, and member of the City and Liberty of Westminster'; but it does not tell how close was his sympathy with the English in America, married, as he was, to an American lady, and owner of estates in Manhattan Island and on the Mohawk river; nor, amid the verbiage of eighteenth-century adulation, is there any mention of the part which he took in helping the New England colonists to conquer Louisbourg. [Sidenote: _The New Englanders garrison Louisbourg._] [Sidenote: _Relieved by regular troops._] The New Englanders garrisoned Louisbourg for the better part of a year. The soldiers were discontented, with some reason. Their success had brought them little or no profit: they wanted to be back on their farms: the town which they occupied was dismantled and insanitary; pestilence broke out, and 'the people died like rotten sheep.'[9] Shirley came up from Boston to keep the soldiers quiet, but not till April, 1746, were the colonists relieved by regular troops, sent from Gibraltar. Warren then took sole command for a short time, being succeeded by another sailor, Commodore Knowles. [Footnote 9: Quoted in Parkman's _A Half Century of Conflict_, vol. ii, p. 166.] [Sidenote: _Preparations for invasion of Canada._] [Sidenote: _The plan miscarries._] Shirley intended the capture of Louisbourg to be but the beginning of the end, the end being the conquest of Canada. The French Government, on the other hand, were determined to recover their fortress. Each was for the time disappointed. In the early months of 1746, the colonies, {207} elated by their recent and great success, cheerfully answered to the call for soldiers to invade Canada. The home Government promised eight battalions, and had them ready for embarkation at Portsmouth; the plan of campaign--the usual plan of dual invasion by the St. Lawrence and Lake Champlain--was duly outlined; Quebec was thrown into a state of alarm and hurried preparation, when, as so often before, all came to nothing, owing to the shuffling and delays of the ministers of the Crown, in this instance the incompetent Duke of Newcastle. The troops destined for America were diverted to Europe; one more opportunity was lost; one more nail was driven into the coffin of colonial loyalty. Realizing, as the autumn of 1746 drew on, that an invasion of Canada was now out of the question, Shirley determined to attack the French advanced position at Crown Point with the New York and Massachusetts levies; but this plan, too, was frustrated by news of a coming fleet from France, and the fears of Quebec were transferred to Boston. [Sidenote: _Failure of a counter expedition by the French._] The fleet in question left La Rochelle at midsummer in the year 1746. It consisted of twenty-one ships of war and a number of transports, carrying 3,000 troops. The whole was under the command of the Duc d'Anville. Disaster in the form of tempest and pestilence attended the expedition from first to last. The ships were scattered on the ocean, and it was not until the end of September that the admiral, with three ships, reached Chebucto (now Halifax) harbour. Here, while waiting for the rest of the fleet, he died; and the vice-admiral, D'Estournel, arriving immediately afterwards, saw no hope for the shattered expedition but to return to France. His officers, on the other hand, urged an attack on Annapolis, and D'Estournel, in a fit of mortification and mental distress, put an end to his life. The command now devolved on the Marquis de la Jonquière, a naval officer, who had gone out on board the fleet to take over the {208} government of Canada. He waited into October at Chebucto, the Acadians brought him provisions, but his men still died of disease day by day. He sailed for Annapolis, but encountered fresh storms off Cape Sable; and at length the miserable remains of the fleet made their way back to France, the loss of life having been, it was said, 2,500 men. In the following year, 1747, La Jonquière again set out from France in another fleet, but again he failed to reach Canada; the ships were encountered and defeated off Cape Finisterre by Anson and Warren, and the outgoing Governor of Canada was carried a prisoner to England. [Sidenote: _Canadian raids._] The main operations of the war were supplemented by the usual series of raids from Canada. In the winter of 1745, Fort Saratoga, thirty-six miles from Albany, was attacked and taken by French and Indians from Crown Point; the place was burnt, and its inhabitants were carried into captivity. It was again reoccupied by the English, but in 1747 was evacuated and burnt as indefensible, to the disgust of the Five Nation Indians, who looked upon the proceeding as evidence of weakness and cowardice. Another successful French attack was made, in August, 1746, on Fort Massachusetts, standing on an eastern tributary of the Hudson, on the line of communication between Albany and the Connecticut river. In short, for three years, the borders of New York, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire were harried by Canadians and Indians, using the French fort at Crown Point as their base. [Sidenote: _French success at Grand Pré._] But the most notable success in this petty warfare was achieved on the Acadian frontier. The isthmus of Chignecto, which connects the Nova Scotian peninsula with the mainland, was, at the time of D'Anville's expedition, held by a comparatively strong force of Canadians under De Ramesay. Fearing for the safety of Annapolis and the rest of Acadia, Shirley sent reinforcements from Massachusetts, consisting of some 500 men under Colonel Noble, who in December, {209} 1746, reached the Basin of Mines, and occupied the village of Grand Pré. They were quartered throughout the village, taking no sufficient precautions against surprise; Ramesay therefore, on hearing of the position, determined towards the latter end of January to attack them. He had with him the best of the Canadian partisan leaders; and unable, owing to an accident, to take personal charge of the expedition, he placed the command in the hands of Coulon de Villiers. In the depth of winter, with sledges and snow-shoes, the French set out; they started from the isthmus on January 23, on February 10 they were on the outskirts of Grand Pré. Under cover of night, one party and another attacked the detached houses in which the English were lodged; Colonel Noble and over seventy of his followers were killed; sixty were wounded, fifty-four were taken prisoners. The rest capitulated, on condition of safe return to Annapolis; and on February 14 they marched out, leaving Grand Pré in the hands of the French, who in their turn shortly afterwards retired to their old position at Chignecto. It was a brilliant feat of arms, but, like most of these border attacks, had no lasting effect. Grand Pré was in a few weeks' time reoccupied by the English; and not long afterwards the French retired from the Acadian frontier into Canada. [Sidenote: _Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle._] [Sidenote: _Louisbourg given back to France._] The war, known in history as the War of the Austrian Succession, had brought to none of the combatants much honour or profit. On the continent the Austrians and their English allies met with little success, on the sea the French were equally unsuccessful. The end was a peace, as between England and France, based on the principle of mutual restitution, such a peace as left the seeds of future war. England gave back Louisbourg and Cape Breton Island, France gave back Madras, which had surrendered in 1746 to Labourdonnais. The treaty contained the somewhat humiliating {210} provision, that English hostages should be given to France until the restitution of Louisbourg had actually taken place. [Sidenote: _Foundation of Halifax._] [Sidenote: _The peace from the English and from the colonial point of view._] In July, 1749, the French re-entered their fortress; and in the same year a large body of settlers was sent out by the British Government to Chebucto harbour, where the city of Halifax was founded. The settlement was designed to be a rival to Louisbourg. Its foundation was evidence that the Imperial Government was at length not wholly indifferent to the value of Acadia; and Halifax is almost unique, among English cities in America, in having owed its origin to the direct action of the State. But no founding of new townships, we may well imagine, could compensate the New Englanders for losing the fruits of their victory. It is said that the first answer of King George II, when pressed to give back Louisbourg to France was that it belonged not to him but to the people of Boston. If these were his words, he spoke truly; the Massachusetts men had won the town, and England gave it away. Yet on no other terms could peace be secured; and it is not easy to pass a fair criticism on the transaction. Then, as now, England had to reckon with conflicting interests within her Empire. Then, as now, she had self-governing colonies which necessarily did not see eye to eye on all points with the mother country. The horizon of New England was bounded by the Atlantic, and the fate of a factory in the East Indies, or even international arrangements on the continent of Europe, were beyond the colonists' ken. They saw only that their blood and their money had been given in vain, and that the fortress, which they had wrested from France, was hers again. English statesmen, on the other hand, looked east as well as west; and near home, across the Channel, was the spectacle of campaigns that brought more loss than gain. As successful war in Europe had given Acadia to the English, so want of success in the {211} same quarter reacted on America. The account was made up, the balance was struck, and the retrocession of Louisbourg was the price of peace. But it was a heavy price to pay, for it seemed to have been paid by the American colonists alone; and, had not another war soon followed, and Louisbourg been again taken by a general whom the Americans loved, the Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle might have passed into history as not merely a disappointment but an irretrievable disaster. [Sidenote: _Western discovery._] French exploration in North America followed, as has been seen, the line of the lakes and the rivers. From Louisiana, in the first half of the eighteenth century, various expeditions were made in a westerly direction--up the Red River, the Arkansas, the Missouri, and its tributary the Kansas river--the object of the French explorers being to enter into friendly relations with the Comanches and other Indians of the western plains, and gradually to open up trade with New Mexico and the city of Santa Fé; in other words, to reach Spanish America, an object which did not commend itself to Spain. [Sidenote: _Knowledge gained of Lake of the Woods and Lake Winnipeg._] [Sidenote: _Fort built in the Sioux country._] Before the year 1700, the course of the upper Mississippi was known. Nicolas Perrot, in or about 1685, is said to have established posts where the river widens out into Lake Pepin; and further north, French _coureurs de bois_, or _voyageurs_, as they began to be called, gained information of the Lake of the Woods, and of the Lac des Assiniboines, now Lake Winnipeg. The principal Indian tribes in the regions of the upper Mississippi were Sioux; and, with a view to making them friends to France, and penetrating through their country to the western sea, the Jesuit traveller Charlevoix recommended, in 1723, that a mission should be established among them. A few years later, in 1727, a company was formed for trading in the Sioux country, and built a new fort on Lake Pepin called, after the then Governor of Canada, Fort Beauharnois. The Sioux, however, {212} proved intractable neighbours, and ten years later the fort was abandoned. [Sidenote: _Verendrye._] In 1728, there was a small French outpost at Nipigon, at the western end of Lake Superior, on its northern side--where the river Nipigon flows from the lake of the same name into Lake Superior. The commander was Pierre de Varennes de la Verendrye, son of a lieutenant of the Carignan Regiment, who had settled at and been Governor of Three Rivers. As a young man, La Verendrye had crossed the sea to fight in the armies of France, and had been badly wounded on the field of Malplaquet. He lived to leave his name high in the list of western explorers. At his distant station on Lake Superior, he heard the stories that Indians brought, mixture of fact and fable, of waters to the west that led to the long-sought-for sea; he offered to follow up the clue, and, with the usual opposition from jealous Canadian merchants, and the usual barren authority from the French Government to explore at his own expense, in return for the grant of a monopoly of the fur trade to the west and north of Lake Superior, he gave the rest of his life to western discovery. [Sidenote: _The water-parting on the west of Lake Superior._] As the water-parting between the basin of the St. Lawrence and that of the Mississippi is hardly marked by any height of land, so the divide between the chain of lakes which feed the St. Lawrence and the more westerly waters, of which Lake Winnipeg is the centre, is a slight rise of ground which it is difficult to distinguish on the maps. A low range of hills runs round the western end of Lake Superior, at the highest point not more than 1,000 feet above the level of the lake. These uplands separate the tributaries of Lake Superior and the St. Lawrence from the feeders of Lake Winnipeg. There were two routes across the divide, one leaving Lake Superior at Thunder Bay, near the point where Port Arthur now stands, and following for a short distance the present line of the Canadian Pacific Railway; {213} the other a little further south, leaving the lake at or near Pigeon river, and going westward along the present boundary line between Canada and the United States. On this latter route was the Grand Portage, by which the _voyageurs_ crossed the water-parting at about sixty miles distance from Lake Superior, and reached Rainy Lake. Rainy Lake drains into the Lake of the Woods, and the Lake of the Woods drains into Lake Winnipeg. This last great lake, fed by the Saskatchewan, the Assiniboine, the Red River, and many other rivers and lakes, finds its outlet by the Nelson river to Hudson Bay, and a chain of posts carried from Lake Superior to Lake Winnipeg would tend to divert the western fur trade from Hudson Bay to the St. Lawrence. [Sidenote: _Verendrye's journeys and forts._] [Sidenote: _His sons near the Rocky mountains._] In the summer of 1731, La Verendrye started west by the Grand Portage; and in the next eight or nine years established posts along the water line, from Rainy Lake to where the Saskatchewan river enters Lake Winnipeg from the north-west. One of these forts or stations was Fort La Reine on the Assiniboine river, which formed the starting-point for an advance over the western plains through what is now the State of Dakota. In 1742, two of his sons made their way from the Assiniboine to the Missouri, crossed the latter river, and, traversing the prairies in a westerly and south-westerly direction, reached the country drained by the tributaries of the Yellowstone river. How far they went is matter of conjecture, and doubt is thrown on their claim to have been the first discoverers of the Rocky mountains. It is stated that, on January 1, 1743, they came in sight of high mountains, which are supposed to have been the Bighorn range in Wyoming and Montana, an eastern buttress of the Rocky mountains, lying in front of the Yellowstone National Park; but no mention is made in the story of snowy peaks, such as would indicate discovery of the great mountain barrier of America. The explorers {214} came back in fifteen months' time. Their father died in 1749, and, like other pioneers, they reaped but little fruit, in honour or in profit, from all their labours. They did not find the western sea, they possibly did not descry the Rocky mountains; but to La Verendrye and his sons it must be credited that a new water area in the far west was fully made known to the world, and that trade routes were opened beyond the basin of the St. Lawrence and the basin of the Mississippi, reaching to the great Saskatchewan river and to the waters which flow into Hudson Bay. [Sidenote: _The Rocky mountains._] The Rocky mountains, as we know them, were not known in the eighteenth century.[10] In 1793 Sir Alexander Mackenzie crossed them far in the North, by the line of the Peace river, and reached the Pacific Ocean on the coast of British Columbia; but the full revelation of the main range dates from the year 1805, when Lewis and Clarke followed the Missouri to its source, and thence made their way over the mountain barrier to the western sea. In short, as long as Canada was New France, and for years afterwards, it was for trading and for colonizing purposes a region of inland waters; it was not also, as it now is, a land of plains, with a background of giant mountains, and behind them the further ocean. Yet it was to reach the further ocean that Europeans first came into Canada, and the earnest expectation of the earliest {215} explorers has in our own time found more than fulfilment in a Dominion from sea to sea. [Footnote 10: In Jeffreys' _American Atlas_, 1775, the Assiniboils (sic) or St. Charles river is prolonged to the Pacific by a dotted line, entitled the 'River of the West.' Below it a range of mountains is traced from north to south, with the note, 'Hereabouts are supposed to be the mountains of bright stones mentioned in the map of the Indian Ochagach.' In Carver's _Travels through North America in 1766-8_, published in 1778, p. 121, the Rocky mountains 'are called the Shining Mountains from an infinite number of chrystal stones of amazing size with which they are covered, and which, when the sun shines full upon them, sparkle so as to be seen at a very great distance.' Morse's _American Geography_, 1794, shows the Rocky mountains on the map of America. In the text they are called 'Shining Mountains.' In Arrowsmith's _Map of North America_, dated 1795-6, they are called Stony Mountains. In a later edition of 1811 the name 'Rocky Mountains' appears.] NOTE.--For the substance of the above chapter, see KINGSFORD'S _History of Canada_, vol. iii; PARKMAN'S _A Half Century of Conflict_; Sir J. BOURINOT'S _Cape Breton_ (referred to above on p. 34, note); and _Louisbourg in 1745_, the anonymous _Lettre d'un habitant de Louisbourg_, edited and translated by Professor WRONG, (Toronto, 1897). {216} CHAPTER VIII THE PRELUDE TO THE SEVEN YEARS' WAR The fifteen years from the Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle in 1748 to the Peace of Paris in 1763 include the most stirring and picturesque times in the history of Canada. They were masculine years, when, in all parts of the world, great men did great things. They were the years when Montcalm and Wolfe fought and died on the St. Lawrence; when Robert Clive mastered India; when Chatham redeemed England from littleness; and when Frederick of Prussia became known for all time as Frederick the Great, by standing grimly foursquare against the continent of Europe in the Seven Years' War. [Sidenote: _The southern colonies drawn into the struggle with France._] The Seven Years' War only began in 1756; but before that date, before war between France and England had formally been proclaimed, French and English were fighting hard in North America. We have the same sphere of war as before, and in large measure the same plans of campaign, trouble and conflict in and on the borders of Acadia, siege and capture of Louisbourg, attack up the St. Lawrence against Quebec--at last a successful attack, and prolonged fighting along the line of Lakes George and Champlain. The Five Nation Indians played their part in the war, though a more subordinate part than in earlier times; the cantons most within range of the English remaining under English influence and being more adroitly managed than in earlier days, while the westernmost tribes, the Senecas, inclined to the French side. But a new feature came into the struggle, the {217} result of the inevitable advance of white men on either side in the course of years. The English colonies to the south of New York began to take a more active part than formerly in the conflict with France. The Virginians appeared on the scene, and among the Virginians was prominent the name of George Washington. The great French scheme of holding the rivers of North America and their basins implied that the English colonies should not cross the Alleghany mountains. Great schemes never allow for the ordinary every day work of nature and man. It was certain that, as the English multiplied, they would go further and further afield; and in due time, from Pennsylvania and from Virginia, English traders and backwoodsmen made their way into the valley of the Ohio. [Sidenote: _The Ohio._] [Sidenote: _Celeron de Bienville._] The Ohio, which La Salle first made known to the world, is, as has been pointed out, the connecting link on the inner line of the North American waterways--starting from the confines of the St. Lawrence basin near the shores of Lake Erie, and reaching the Mississippi comparatively low down in its course. The outer line is much more extensive, continuing along the great lakes until from Lake Michigan the Mississippi is reached by the Wisconsin or the Illinois. Along this outer line the French had hitherto worked. It took them more directly to the far West; and, passing along it, they only skirted instead of traversing the region where the Iroquois were in strength; but, had they allowed the English to lay firm hold of the Ohio valley, Canada and Louisiana would have been severed, and down the Ohio would have come a challenge to French sovereignty over the West. Thus it was that, in the year 1749, the year after the Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle was signed, the Governor of Canada, the Marquis de la Galissonière, sent one of his officers, Celeron de Bienville, to register the claims of France to the Ohio river and the lands which it watered and drained. [Sidenote: _His mission to the Ohio._] Starting up the St. Lawrence from the island of Montreal, {218} Celeron landed on the shores of Lake Erie; and, making a portage to Lake Chautauqua, reached the head waters of the Ohio. Down stream he went, into the Alleghany, down the Alleghany to where, meeting the Monongahela, it becomes the Ohio, and down the Ohio to the confluence of the Miami river, not far from the site of Cincinnati city. Here he left the Ohio, and, ascending the Miami, crossed overland to the Maumee river, on which there was a small French post. The Maumee flows into the south-western end of Lake Erie, and down its stream he returned to Canada. [Sidenote: _English intrusion into the Ohio valley._] At various points along the route he buried leaden plates, with inscriptions asserting the title of the King of France to the lands of the Ohio and its tributaries; and he affixed to trees the arms of France on sheets of tin, to tell all comers that the French were lords of the country. It was time that some assertion of French claims was made in these regions. He found parties of English traders, as he went, and the Indians showed no love for France. There had been for some time past a migration of Indians into the Ohio valley. Many of the Iroquois had settled there: and if among the various races, notably among the Delawares, there were those whose traditional sympathies were with the owners of Canada, there were more who appreciated the present benefit of English trade. Prominent among the friends of the English were the Indians of the Miami confederacy, whose centre was at Pique Town or Pickawillany on the Miami river. [Sidenote: _The Ohio company._] Celeron came and went. He had made a demonstration on behalf of France, but not a demonstration in force. His expedition was memorable as the prelude to coming events; but no definite action was taken for about three years. La Galissonière was succeeded as Governor of Canada by the Marquis de la Jonquière,[1] who died in 1752, and was {219} followed by the Marquis Duquesne. Meantime, an Ohio company was formed on the English side, consisting mainly of Virginians, and English traders and emissaries were active among the Indians of the Ohio. Yet the English, like the French, achieved no tangible results. Pennsylvania and Virginia were jealous of each other, and the Legislature in each state opposed the Governor. Both Assemblies were invited to build a fort at the junction of the Alleghany and Monongahela rivers, which formed the key of the position; but both refused. [Footnote 1: De la Jonquière had been named Governor of Canada in 1746, and made two unsuccessful attempts to reach Quebec, one in that year on board D'Anville's fleet, and a second in 1747, when he was taken prisoner in the fight off Cape Finisterre (see above, pp. 207, 208). He finally arrived in 1749.] [Sidenote: _The French attack the Miamis._] Thus matters drifted on until, in June, 1752, a Frenchman, Langlade, came down from the lakes with a band of Indian warriors, attacked the Miamis at Pickawillany, took the town, and killed its chief--who was known to the French as La Demoiselle, and who was feared by them as a warm friend of their English rivals. The place was a centre of English trade, there were English traders in it when the attack was made, and this French success was the beginning of action, on a larger scale than had hitherto been attempted, for the conquest and control of the Ohio valley. [Sidenote: _Halifax._] Founded in 1749, Halifax, on the coast of Nova Scotia, was, in 1752, a town of 4,000 inhabitants. Had the settlement been made thirty years earlier, immediately after the Peace of Utrecht instead of after the Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle, the story of Acadia would have been a different and probably a happier one. Mascarene at Annapolis, and Shirley at Boston, saw the necessity of introducing English settlers into the peninsula in order to balance the French malcontents, and the British Government, when giving back Louisbourg to France, recognized at length that steps must be taken to strengthen the English hold on Nova Scotia. It was determined to recruit the English, or at any rate the Protestant, {220} element in the population from Europe, from the North American colonies, and from the ranks of the men who were withdrawn from Louisbourg; and Chebucto harbour on the Atlantic coast of the Nova Scotian peninsula was selected as the scene of a new township to be well fortified and strongly garrisoned. [Sidenote: _The first settlers at Halifax._] [Sidenote: _Cornwallis._] Here was created the city of Halifax, called after the Earl of Halifax, at the time 'First Lord of Trade and Plantations.' In founding it, the English had regard to the methods by which the French had established their colonies on the St. Lawrence. Halifax was in its origin a military colony. The first settlers consisted largely of officers and privates of the army and navy, who, when peace was concluded, received their discharge and who were supplemented by a certain number of labourers and artizans. Parliament voted 40,000 pounds in aid of the initial expenses. Free passages, free grants of land, and the cost of subsistence for a year after landing were provided, privileges which secured a considerable number of colonists; 1,400 immigrants were landed from the first batch of transports at Chebucto harbour,[2] and others followed. A good Governor was appointed, Colonel Edward Cornwallis, uncle of Lord Cornwallis who surrendered at Yorktown and ruled India. [Footnote 2: It is difficult to make out the numbers. The above figure is given by Cornwallis in a letter to the Lords of Trade, July 24, 1749 (see Mr. Brymer's _Catalogue of Canadian Archives_, 'Nova Scotia,' p. 142). On the other hand passages were taken for over 2,500 (p. 138). Haliburton says, 'in a short time 3,760 adventurers with their families were entered for embarkation.' Parkman puts the number at about 2,500, including women and children, Kingsford at 1,176 settlers with their families. Parliament for some years continued to make annual grants for the colonization of Nova Scotia, 'which collected sums,' says Haliburton, 'amounted to the enormous sum of 415,584 pounds 14_s_. 11_d_.'] [Sidenote: _The Lunenburg settlement._] Old soldiers do not always make good colonists, and Cornwallis wrote home complaining of their want of industry, contrasting the English unfavourably with a few Swiss who were among the newcomers, and suggesting that an effort {221} should be made to introduce Protestant emigrants from Germany. Accordingly, German Lutherans were brought over through an agent at Rotterdam, the majority of whom were, in 1753, planted out at Lunenburg, a little to the south-west of Halifax, on the same side of the peninsula. Thus the outer margin of Nova Scotia was being sparsely colonized with English, Swiss, and German Protestants, while on the side towards the mainland, along the shores of the Bay of Fundy, the Roman Catholic Acadians remained French in heart and sympathies. [Sidenote: _The commissioners to fix the limits of Acadia._] [Sidenote: _Designs of the French on Acadia._] For three years following the Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle, the French and English commissioners, appointed to determine the limits of the French and English possessions in North America, wrangled at Paris, William Shirley being one of the English delegates; but they never came to any conclusion. The French now refused even to concede that the whole of the Acadian peninsula belonged to England, and wished to confine English sovereignty to its southern coasts. They were in fact resolved by bluff or by force either to regain Acadia, or, in default of attaining that object, to make its condition one of permanent insecurity and unrest. As related in the last chapter,[3] immediately after the Peace of Utrecht the intention of the French Government had been to transplant the Acadians to French soil, to Cape Breton Island and to Prince Edward Island, then known as �le St. Jean. For this policy they subsequently substituted the more dangerous plan of not removing the Acadians, but encouraging them to consider themselves still as French subjects while remaining under the British flag. After the Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle was signed, however, they reverted to their project of transplantation, finding that the British Government were resolved no longer to treat their subjects in Acadia as neutrals, and realizing that the Governor had now force at his back. [Footnote 3: See above, p. 193.] {222} [Sidenote: _Position of the Acadians._] [Sidenote: _Attitude of Cornwallis._] The Acadians claimed to be exempt from bearing arms in defence of their country and their country's rulers, in other words against the French and the Indian allies of the French. They were not free agents; they were terrorized by the French Government and the French priests, notorious among whom was a ruffian named Le Loutre, Vicar-General of Acadia. Spiritual excommunication and Indian hostility threatened them, if they acted with loyalty to the British King, whose subjects they had been for nearly forty years. How faithless and unscrupulous was the policy of the French is abundantly shown by official dispatches, proving that the Canadian Governor, La Jonquière, with the sanction of the French Government at home, accepted and endorsed Le Loutre's villainous schemes for preventing the Acadians from taking the full oath of allegiance, and for instigating the Indians of the peninsula to murder the English settlers. Cornwallis treated the Acadians with kindly firmness. Some of them asked to be allowed to leave the country, and he promised permission to those who should obtain passports, when peace and tranquillity were restored. For the moment he declined to allow them to cross the frontier, as it would mean sending them among French and Indians, who would compel them to bear arms against the English Government. [Sidenote: _Beaubassin occupied by English troops._] [Sidenote: _Fort Lawrence._] The frontier, as far as any line was provisionally recognized, was a little stream on the isthmus of Chignecto. On the mainland side the French had occupied a hill called Beauséjour, on the Nova Scotian side was the village of Beaubassin. In April, 1750, Cornwallis sent a force of some 400 men under Major Lawrence to occupy a position at or near Beaubassin, and to guard the isthmus. On his arrival, Lawrence found Beaubassin in flames. Le Loutre and his Indians had set fire to the place, and compelled the hapless residents to cross over to the French lines. The English left, but returned in September in stronger force; their landing was disputed by Le Loutre's savages, who were driven off, {223} and a fort was built and garrisoned, called after the name of the commander, Fort Lawrence. [Sidenote: _Murder of Captain Howe._] French and English now faced each other across a narrow stream, the French completed their fort at Beauséjour, and the temper of Le Loutre's Indians was shown by a horrible incident, the murder of an English officer, Captain Howe. Howe had gone out in answer to a flag of truce, which appeared from the French lines; but the bearer of the white flag was an Indian disguised in French uniform, who lured the Englishman into an ambush, where he was mortally wounded. The French themselves attributed this act of wanton wickedness to Le Loutre. [Sidenote: _Colonel Lawrence._] [Sidenote: _Acadian emigration._] In 1752 Cornwallis returned to England, and was succeeded as Governor of Acadia by Colonel Hopson, who had been in command at Louisbourg, when that town was given back to France; the latter was, in the autumn of 1753, succeeded by Colonel Lawrence. The Acadian population, which in 1749 numbered between 12,000 and 13,000 souls, five years later was reduced to little more than 9,000. The emigration which caused the reduction in numbers was largely the result of a French terror, and on the mainland, or in the �le St. Jean, the unfortunate emigrants endured misery unknown in their old homes in Acadia. Those who find in the subsequent rooting up of Acadian settlement an instance of English cruelty with little parallel in history, would do well to remember that the process had already been going on at the hands of the French; and the lot of the Acadians under the French flag was in no wise preferable to the fortunes of those who were carried, as it were, into captivity in the English colonies. [Sidenote: _De Vergor._] [Sidenote: _Surrender of the French fort Beauséjour._] The catastrophe, of which so much has been made in prose and verse, happened in the year 1755. It was not an isolated incident, but part of a general plan--which for the time miscarried--of breaking the French power in North America. The commandant of the French fort at {224} Beauséjour was De Vergor, son of Duchambon who surrendered Louisbourg in 1745. He owed his position to Bigot, the notorious Intendant of Canada. By his side, and with as much or more authority, was Le Loutre, the evil genius of Acadia. The French contemplated attack on the English: Lawrence, in communication with Shirley, determined to forestall them. Some two thousand men came up from Massachusetts, enlisted under John Winslow--a name which New Englanders honoured--and, landing at the isthmus early in June, joined the English garrison at Fort Lawrence, the whole force being under Colonel Monckton. In a few days' time the bombardment of the French fort began; but, before there had been any serious fighting, De Vergor surrendered. The garrison marched out with the honours of war, and Fort Beauséjour was renamed Fort Cumberland. [Sidenote: _The French driven from Acadia._] [Sidenote: _End of Le Loutre._] This success was speedily followed by the capitulation of another French fort at Baie Verte, at the northern end of the isthmus, and by the evacuation of a post on the mainland, at the mouth of the river St. John. The whole of Acadia on both sides of the isthmus thus passed into English hands. De Vergor some time afterwards was put on trial at Quebec for his feeble and incapable conduct, but influential friends procured his acquittal; and he remained in Canada to earn further obloquy, as commandant of the French outpost which was surprised by Wolfe in his memorable climb by night up to the Plains of Abraham.[4] Le Loutre disappeared from the scene of his wickedness in North America. He fled in disguise to Quebec, and, sailing for France, was taken prisoner and spent eight years in captivity in the island of Jersey. He seems to have died in his bed in France--a better fate than he deserved. [Footnote 4: See below, pp. 306, 307.] [Sidenote: _The expulsion of the Acadians._] The victory of the English arms was followed by the removal of the bulk of the Acadian population from Acadia. This policy had been determined upon as the only practicable {225} alternative to unqualified obedience. Such obedience, until it was too late and the die had already been cast, the Acadians refused to give. They would not swear heart-whole allegiance to King George; they had abetted his enemies year after year; many of them had actually borne arms against the English; and with Louisbourg in threatening strength in the immediate neighbourhood, with manifold other difficulties to face--for before the actual expulsion Braddock's defeat and death on the Monongahela river had occurred--it was absolutely necessary for the English authorities to make the Nova Scotian peninsula permanently safe. The time to strike was while there was an adequate force on the spot, and before the Massachusetts contingent returned to Boston. Sternly and relentlessly Governor Lawrence took his measures; at Beaubassin, at Annapolis, round the shores of the Basin of Mines, where the most pleasing features of Acadian settlement were to be found, the majority of able-bodied men were secured; and, as the transports came up, groups of peasants were carried off to other lands. In the actual work of expulsion, no unnecessary harshness appears to have been used; families were as a rule kept together, and went out hand in hand into exile; but they were taken, an ignorant and bewildered crowd, from the homes of their childhood, and were transported, helpless and hopeless, to distant countries, where there was another religion and another race. The pity of it was that, after forty years of so-called English government, the Acadians never believed that that Government, when it threatened or decreed, would be as good as its word. When therefore the blow came, it stunned a people who had been bred in the belief that much would be said and nothing would be done. [Sidenote: _The number transported._] [Sidenote: _Their fate._] Some 6,000 in all were removed, out of a total population of a little over 9,000. Of these, over 3,000 had had their homes round the Basin of Mines, the majority of whom {226} were dwellers in the village and district of Grand Pré. The others came from the isthmus, or from Annapolis. They were dispersed abroad among the English colonies in North America, from Massachusetts southwards; but the colonies were not all willing to receive them, and from Virginia and South Carolina many were sent on to England. Some, it is said, found their way to Louisiana, while of those who had escaped transportation a certain number took refuge at Quebec. A considerable remnant was left behind in Acadia, and some of the exiles 'wandered back to their native land to die in its bosom';[5] but those who were left behind in Acadia, and those who returned, were not enough to leaven to any great extent the future history of the peninsula. [Footnote 5: From Longfellow's _Evangeline_.] [Sidenote: _Different views as to the policy of expulsion._] What judgment may fairly be passed upon this measure of expulsion? The traditional view has been that the removal of the Acadians from Acadia was an injustice and a crime--an arbitrary and cruel act, parallel on a smaller scale to the earlier expulsion of the Huguenots from France. According to this view the English were oppressors, rooting out and carrying captive a harmless and innocent peasantry-- Men whose lives glided on like rivers that water the woodlands, Darkened by shadows of earth but reflecting an image of heaven. Longfellow has given us this picture in _Evangeline_, and it has been drawn in similar outlines by various hands. In the foreground are bands of terror-stricken peasants, driven on board ship amid mourning and lamentation. In the background are burning homesteads, emptiness where there had been plenty, desolation where yesterday the children played. A different view is given by later writers who have more closely tested the facts. Their conclusion is that the expulsion of the Acadians, stern and even cruel as it was, was more or less a political necessity; that the Acadians {227} themselves were sinners as well as sinned against; and that they were sinned against more by men of their own race and religion than by the English. This latter view is probably nearer the truth. There is always, especially in England, a tendency to sympathize unreasonably with the weak against the strong, and, when severe measures are taken, to condemn those measures almost unheard. The Acadians, in their primitive agricultural life, in their farms gathered round the village church, were picturesque objects of sympathy; and, whenever a fine or a punishment is inflicted on a whole district or on a whole community, the innocent no doubt suffer with the guilty. But there are conditions under which no lasting effect can be produced without collective dealing, and the Acadians were not transported beyond the sea until for many years half-measures had been tried, and tried in vain. These farmers had been gently treated under English rule; many of them had been born and brought up under it; a large proportion of their number had requited the treatment by actively abetting or tacitly conniving at the unceasing petty warfare, by which French borderers and Indian savages year after year took English lives and pillaged English homes. Was it unreasonable that, if they would not be loyal subjects in Acadia, they should be moved elsewhere, and that, instead of being sent to increase the hostile population of Canada, they should be dispersed among the British colonies on the North American coast? It must be remembered that the tale of their sufferings has probably not been minimized. French writers would naturally exaggerate what actually occurred, and American accounts, until recent years, would not be likely to be unduly friendly to England. It must be remembered, too, that half as many as were transported by the English had already been induced or forced by the French to emigrate to their possessions; and we have it on French evidence that those who, {228} when the sentence of expatriation was passed, took refuge in Canada, suffered as much as or more than their compatriots suffered in the English colonies. [Sidenote: _True causes of the catastrophe._] It is difficult to blame Colonel Lawrence for the step which he took under the conditions of the time and place. On the other hand, it is difficult to believe that the Acadians fully deserved their doom. The responsibility for the wholesale misery, in which a small community was involved, must be shared between the French Government and its agents on the one hand, notably the priests, and on the other the British Government in earlier years. Had the French been loyal to the terms of the Treaty of Utrecht, had they ceased to instil the spirit of disaffection into the minds of men who were no longer their subjects, had they discountenanced instead of encouraging acts of barbarity, had they not made religion a cloak for maliciousness, and used the ministers of religion as political agitators of the worst and most unscrupulous type, Acadia and the Acadians would have prospered under the British Government as Canada and the Canadians prospered in after years. Again if, when Acadia was ceded by the treaty, Great Britain had recognized her responsibilities, had given adequate protection and enforced the law, loyalty and obedience would have brought happiness in its train, and a generation would have grown up not attempting the impossible task of serving two masters. The true verdict of history on the melancholy episode is this. The misery which befell the Acadians was the result of not using force at the right time, and of the evil potency of priestcraft. [Sidenote: _French forts established on the route from the great lakes to the Ohio._] Before Acadia had been depopulated, much had happened in the west. Always unready, the English colonies let slip the opportunity of occupying the upper valley of the Ohio, and the French seized the opening which their rivals might have closed. Early in 1753, the Canadian Governor, Duquesne, sent a force of considerable strength under an {229} old and tried officer, Marin, to establish communication between the great lakes and the Ohio, and to hold the route by a chain of forts. Launched upon Lake Erie, Marin and his men held their way past the point where Celeron had landed; and, instead of taking the portage to Chautauqua, disembarked further along the southern shore of the lake at Presque �le, where the town of Erie now stands. Here a fort was built, and a road cut southwards through the woods for about 21 miles to the Rivière aux Boeufs. This stream, now known as French Creek, flows into the Alleghany river, and is navigable for canoes when the water is high. Where the road struck the river a second fort was built, called Fort Le Boeuf. Thus the way was cleared from the lakes to the sources of the Ohio, and either end of the portage was guarded by a blockhouse. [Sidenote: _Distress of the French._] So far the enterprise had succeeded, and success had produced the usual effect upon the wavering Indian mind, inclining the tribes of the Ohio to the side which took the initiative and gave outward and visible signs of strength. But the French were only at the outset of their enterprise. As the year wore on, their ranks were thinned by disease; their commander, Marin, died; and, when winter came, but three hundred men were left to hold the forts on Lake Erie and French Creek. The intention had been to push down the latter river, and, where it joined the Alleghany, to build a third fort. This fort in turn was to be a starting-point for a further advance to the main objective, the junction of the Alleghany and the Monongahela rivers. [Sidenote: _The routes to the Ohio._] [Sidenote: _Fort Cumberland._] All through early Canadian history, we find the clue to the various movements on either side is studying the waterways. As in the centre of the two conflicting lines of advance, the English moved up the Hudson and the French up the Richelieu, to find their battleground on Lakes George and Champlain, so further to the west, in the region of the Ohio, the Alleghany and its feeders brought the French down from {230} Canada, while the English moved north along the line of the Monongahela and its tributary the Youghiogany. These streams take their rise amid the parallel ranges of the Alleghanies, in that border country of the three States of Virginia, Maryland, and Pennsylvania, which was the scene of the hardest fighting between North and South in the American Civil War. Near where the Monongahela starts on its northern course to the Ohio, but divided by mountains, is the source of the northern branch of the Potomac, which runs into the Atlantic. This latter river flows at first north-east between two mountain ranges; and, where it turns to the east, cutting its way through the hills, a small stream, known as Wills Creek, joins it from the north. At this point was a station of the Ohio Company, shortly afterwards called Fort Cumberland, after the English duke. This was the base of the British advance; but mountains had to be crossed to reach the Monongahela valley; it was easier to come down from Canada to the Ohio than to march upon it from the Atlantic side. [Sidenote: _Robert Dinwiddie._] The Lieutenant-Governor of Virginia, in the year 1753, the titular Governor being in England, was Robert Dinwiddie, a cross-grained Scotchman. He had none of the arts of popularity, but none the less was a watchful guardian of his country's interests. Like William Shirley in Massachusetts, he was a determined opponent of French pretensions; but he was less tactful than Shirley in managing a colonial Legislature, and less happily placed, in that the Legislatures of the southern provinces were far behind the New Englanders in public spirit. Hearing of the French advance from Lake Erie, he lost no time in making a counter claim, and sent a messenger to Fort Le Boeuf to warn off foreign trespassers from what he conceived to be the domain of the King of England. The messenger was George Washington, just come to man's estate. [Sidenote: _George Washington's first mission._] [Sidenote: _Apathy of the southern colonies._] In November, 1753, Washington left Wills Creek. In {231} January, 1754, he returned to Virginia, having in the depth of winter traversed the frost-bound backwoods, and risked his life in crossing the Alleghany river. His journey in either direction took him by the old Indian town of Venango, at the confluence of the French Creek with the Alleghany, where there had been an English trading house: this was now occupied by a French outpost. There could be no doubt that the Governor of Canada intended to be master of the Ohio. Still the British colonies remained apathetic or half-hearted. Virginia voted 10,000 pounds; North Carolina gave some money; a handful of troops in Imperial pay was placed at Dinwiddie's disposal; but the money and the men were utterly inadequate to the occasion, and Pennsylvania, the state which, with Virginia, was most concerned, did nothing at all. For Pennsylvania was the home of Quakers and Germans, the former averse to war on principle, the latter indifferent to the conflicting claims of alien races. [Sidenote: _The French build Fort Duquesne._] The crisis came on apace. In February, 1754, a month after Washington's return, Dinwiddie sent a small detachment over the mountains to build a fort at the junction of the Monongahela and Alleghany. While the work was in hand, a strong Canadian force came down in April from the north and overpowered the Virginians. A fort was built, but it was a French fort, and became memorable in history under the name of Fort Duquesne. Dinwiddie determined to drive the French back, if possible, from this new position, and he set Washington to the task--impossible to perform with the only available troops, amounting to 300 or 400 men. [Sidenote: _Washington marches on Fort Duquesne._] [Sidenote: _Death of Jumonville._] [Sidenote: _Surrender of Fort Necessity and retreat of Washington._] From Wills Creek to Fort Duquesne was a distance of 120 to 140 miles, with two ranges of mountains to be crossed, before half the journey was accomplished, and the Monongahela reached. Making a road over the first range, the main range of the Alleghanies, Washington, about the end of May, reached open ground known as the Great Meadows, having still in front of him the Laurel hills, through which {232} the two branches of the Monongahela find their way to the Ohio. A few miles further on, guided by Indian scouts, he surprised an advance party sent out from Fort Duquesne, and killed their commander, Jumonville. Assassination was the term which the French applied to the death of this officer, claiming that he was the peaceful bearer of a summons to the English to retire from the land; but there is no reason to doubt that Washington was justified in using force, and that the Frenchman was killed in fair fight. Returning to his camp, and entrenching it under the suitable name of Fort Necessity, the English commander awaited a counter attack. Small reinforcements reached him, and he pushed on over the Laurel ridge; but, hearing that the French were advancing in force, fell back again to Fort Necessity. Stronger in numbers, the French, from their base at Fort Duquesne, marched forward under Jumonville's brother, Coulon de Villiers; and, after a nine hours' fight, Fort Necessity surrendered; the English, under the terms of the surrender, retreated across the Alleghanies, and the French returned in triumph to Fort Duquesne. For the time, they were beyond dispute masters of the Ohio valley, and the young Virginian, whose name now stands first in the great history of the United States of America, crawled back over the mountains, defeated and undone. American history is great as a whole, but the back records of its component parts are full of what is mean and contemptible. We are accustomed, in the chronicles of the English race, to trace the errors of its rulers, and to find them put right by the good sense and strong character of the people; but, if we turn to the provincial annals of the American States, when the fate of the continent seemed to be trembling in the balance, the rulers sent out from home must be credited with patriotism and some measure of foresight, while the peoples were or appeared to be selfish and blind. New England alone stands out in a brighter light, ready to {233} sacrifice money and men in the national cause. With the enemy on their borders, the New Englanders knew what the danger was; further south the Alleghany mountains bounded the horizon of the colonists. State Assemblies squabbled with their Governors, each little province was passively indifferent to or actively jealous of its neighbour, all alike were with good reason suspicious of the mother country; while on the other side the fighting strength of Canada, centralized under a despotic Government, one in aim and sympathy, was menacing and dangerous out of all proportion to the resources of the country or the numbers of its people. [Sidenote: _Movement towards union of the English colonies._] Yet some attempt had been made at concerted action on the part of the English colonies. It emanated from the Government at home. In September, 1753, the Lords of Trade wrote round to the Governors of the various North American provinces, directing them to invite their respective Legislatures to adopt a uniform policy towards the Indians. In consequence, a conference was held at Albany, at which seven of the colonies were represented--Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, and Maryland. The Commissioners met representatives of the Five Nation Indians, whose hereditary friendship for the English cause was fast turning into hatred and contempt. They pacified the angry Indians to some extent, and renewed the old covenant of friendship, then turned to constitution-making, at the instance of Franklin, one of the Commissioners from Pennsylvania. [Sidenote: _Franklin's scheme._] [Sidenote: _It is not accepted._] Franklin had a scheme for North American union, comprising a President appointed by the Crown, and a general Council elected by the taxpayers of the colonies, the number of representatives of each colony to be determined by the amount of taxes paid. Plenary powers were to be given to the President and Council, including even power to make war and peace. Had the scheme been carried out, North America would have become one great self-governing colony, {234} in some respects more independent, in others more restricted than the self-governing colonies of Great Britain at the present day. Franklin's proposals, though his fellow commissioners were inclined to approve them, pleased neither the colonies nor the mother country. They were premature. The colonies were too jealous of their local liberties to accept the scheme. The mother country still distrusted the colonies, and dreaded the strength which union would bring. Moreover, the immediate necessity was united action, not constitutional change. The French must first be driven back; and with this object Dinwiddie made an earnest appeal to the ministry in England. [Sidenote: _Troops sent from England and from France._] [Sidenote: _The 'Alcide' and the 'Lys' intercepted by Admiral Boscawen._] The appeal was not made in vain; two regiments of infantry, the 44th and 48th, now the Essex and Northampton regiments, were ordered to embark for Virginia, and sailed from Cork in January, 1755, with Major-General Braddock in command. The French Government, taking alarm, ordered out 3,000 men under Baron Dieskau, a German serving in the French army; and at the beginning of May, 1755, eighteen French ships sailed from Brest carrying to Canada the troops and their commander, and taking out at the same time a new Governor-General, the Marquis de Vaudreuil. Most of the vessels reached their destination in safety; but two, the _Alcide_ and _Lys_, were intercepted by the English Admiral Boscawen, off the coast of Newfoundland, were fired into, and compelled to surrender.[6] There was still supposed to be peace between Great Britain and France, but the backwoods of America and the waters of the Atlantic echoed to the sounds of war. [Footnote 6: The _Alcide_ was overpowered by the _Dunkirk_, commanded by the afterwards famous Admiral Lord Howe.] [Sidenote: _Scheme of the English campaign against Canada._] At four points, according to the English plan of campaign Canada was to be threatened and the French advance was to be checked. Braddock, with his two English regiments, was to march on Fort Duquesne. From Albany the second and {235} the third expeditions were to start. One, marching due north, was to master Crown Point on Lake Champlain; the other, taking the route of the Five Nation cantons, and having for its advanced base Oswego on Lake Ontario, was to reduce the French fort at Niagara. The fourth effort was to be made in Acadia. This last enterprise proved successful, as has already been seen, Shirley having previously prepared the way by building a fort on the mainland behind the peninsula, at the portage between the Kennebec and the Chaudière rivers. What fate befell the other expeditions must now be told. [Sidenote: _General Braddock._] History has been unkind to General Braddock. His name is associated for ever with a great disaster in North America, as the name of Wolfe is linked to a crowning victory. Like Wolfe, Braddock was mortally wounded on the field of battle; he was defeated, and obloquy was heaped on his name. Wolfe triumphed, and all men spoke well of him. The accounts of Braddock are largely derived from the spiteful gossip collected by Horace Walpole, and from the writings of Franklin--never a lover of the mother country, and, after the War of Independence, glad, like others of his countrymen, to throw the blame of an English defeat upon a commander sent out from England. We have a portrait given us of a brutal, blustering, and incompetent soldier, a man of coarse habits and broken fortunes, with little to recommend him but personal honesty and courage. 'Braddock is a very Iroquois in disposition,'[7] writes Horace Walpole. Before the fatal battle the same writer tells us in the same letter, 'the duke (of Cumberland) is much dissatisfied at the slowness of General Braddock, who does not march as if he was at all impatient to be scalped.' After the disaster he writes, 'Braddock's defeat still remains in the situation of the longest battle that ever was fought with nobody.'[8] The {236} Braddocks of England, with all their failings, have deserved better of their country than the Horace Walpoles. [Footnote 7: _Letters of Horace Walpole_ (Bohn's ed., 1861), vol. ii, p. 459 (Letter of Aug. 25, 1755).] [Footnote 8: Ibid. p. 473 (Letter of Sept. 30, 1755).] Born in 1695, the son of an officer in the Coldstream Guards, and an officer of the Guards himself, he was sixty years old when sent out to America by the Duke of Cumberland. He had the reputation of being a very severe disciplinarian, and yet we have Walpole's own admission that while serving at Gibraltar, 'he made himself adored.'[9] He was criticized by Franklin as being too self-confident, and as having too high an opinion of European as compared with colonial troops; but, on the other hand, the scanty colonial levies which reached him had not shown high fighting qualities, and his care for transport and supplies, together with his anxiety to conciliate and use the Indians on the line of march, were evidence of prudence and military forethought. Burke wrote of him as 'abounding too much in his own sense for the degree of military knowledge he possessed';[10] but probably Wolfe's judgement upon him was sound, that 'though not a master of the difficult art of war, he was yet a man of sense and courage,'[11] and we may reasonably infer that the shortcomings of the colonists were unjustly visited on his head. [Footnote 9: _Letters of Horace Walpole_, p. 461 (Letter of Aug. 28, 1755).] [Footnote 10: _Annual Register_, 1758, p. 4.] [Footnote 11: Wright's _Life of Wolfe_, p. 324.] [Sidenote: _Braddock's march on Fort Duquesne._] Late in February, 1755, the English troops and their commander reached Hampton in Virginia, at the entrance of Chesapeake Bay. In due course they were sent up the Potomac to Alexandria, where in April Braddock met the Governors of the various colonies, including Shirley, and settled with them the plan of campaign. He himself prepared to march on Fort Duquesne by the route which Washington had taken, but found endless difficulty in obtaining horses, wagons, and supplies. Virginia and Pennsylvania were still half-hearted, and inclined to think that the danger {237} of French invasion was a scare created in the interests of the Ohio Company. It was not the first time, and not the last, that a real crisis has been interpreted as the work of a designing few. However, a base was established, as before, at Fort Cumberland on Wills Creek, and early in June the march began. The force consisted of about 2,000 men, 1,350 of whom belonged to the two regiments of the line. There were some 250 Virginia rangers, and the rest were detachments from New York, Maryland, and the Carolinas. The troops were formed in two brigades, under Sir Peter Halkett and Colonel Dunbar. Washington, ill with fever, was attached to Braddock's staff, by the General's own request. Steadily and well the advance on Fort Duquesne was made; a road was cleared through forests and over mountains; and every precaution was taken against surprise. But progress was inevitably slow; and, at a distance of forty miles from Fort Cumberland, Braddock, on Washington's advice, resolved to push forward with the larger half of his troops, leaving the remainder with the heavy baggage to follow under charge of Colonel Dunbar. The object was to reach Fort Duquesne before reinforcements could arrive from Canada. [Sidenote: _The fight on the Monongahela._] At the end of the first week in July, Braddock was eight miles distant from the French fort, at a point where a little stream, called Turtle Creek, flows into the Monongahela. He was on the same side of the latter river as the fort, which stood on the right bank of the Monongahela, in the angle which it forms with the Alleghany; but the direct route passed through country suitable for ambuscade; and he therefore resolved to make a short détour, crossing the Monongahela, and recrossing it lower down the stream. On July 9, the movement was successfully carried out; no opposition at either ford being offered by the enemy. The troops moved on; and, early in the afternoon, at a little distance from the river, as the line of march crossed a shallow {238} forest-clad ravine, there was a sudden check; a French officer sprang out in front of the advancing column, and forthwith, in a moment, at his signal, the thickets were alive with foes. [Sidenote: _Rout of the English._] The scene which followed was one not uncommon in the story of colonial warfare. The first attack was answered by artillery fire; the French commander, De Beaujeu, was killed, and many of the Canadians fled. But the majority of the enemy, with whom the English had to deal, were Indians, who dispersed on this side and on that, hiding behind trees, and attacking either flank of the column, active and noisy out of all proportion to their numbers. The English vanguard fell back, the supports crowded up, the redcoated soldiers stood in close formation, an easy mark for the invisible foe. They fired at nothing, for nothing could be seen; all around was a hideous din, from every side came bullets dealing death. The men were bewildered, the ammunition began to fail, confusion turned into panic, and, when at length the order for retreat was given, there was a headlong flight. [Sidenote: _Braddock mortally wounded._] The survivors rushed across the river, taking with them the General mortally wounded; no stand was made at the first crossing or at the second; and when, in about two days' time, the fugitives reached Dunbar's camp, many miles distant, they found panic prevailing there also. The retreat was continued to Fort Cumberland, stores, guns, and wagons being abandoned; and not many days after Fort Cumberland had been reached, Dunbar marched off with the remains of the regular troops to Philadelphia. [Sidenote: _Death of Braddock._] Braddock had shown conspicuous bravery, if not conspicuous judgment, on the battlefield. He was shot through the lungs as the retreat began, and bade his men leave him where he fell. They carried him, however, from the fight; and for four days he lingered, reaching Dunbar's camp, and dying at Great Meadows on July 13. Of 1,460 {239} British and colonial officers and men who took part in the battle, nearly 900 were killed or wounded. Those who escaped, escaped with their lives alone. On the French side the numbers engaged appear not to have exceeded 900, three-fourths of whom were Indians. The English force included over 1,200 regulars; the battle therefore resulted in a crushing defeat of troops of the line by a smaller number of Indians, with a sprinkling of Frenchmen and Canadians, led by French officers. [Sidenote: _Blame for the disaster._] The disaster was attributed to the incompetence of the General, and the bad quality of the regular troops; it was said that the few Virginians who were present fought well, in contrast to their English comrades; that, knowing bush fighting, and taking cover, they were driven into the open by Braddock, only to be shot down like the rest. These accounts must be taken with reserve; the testimony of Washington and others was prejudiced in favour of the colonial and against the British soldier; Braddock did not live to give his own version of the matter; and the two regular regiments, having been brought up to strength since their arrival in America, included many colonists in their ranks. Yet it must be supposed that, as the column neared its destination unopposed, there was some slackening of precaution, for which the General must be held to blame; while Wolfe set down the defeat to the bad conduct of the infantry, writing in strong terms of the want of military training in the English army, as compared with the armies of the continent.[12] [Footnote 12: Wright's _Life of Wolfe_, p. 324.] [Sidenote: _Bad conduct of the colonies of Virginia and Pennsylvania._] But, even if the defeat and rout on the Monongahela was due to the shortcomings of the English troops and their commander, we may well ask why troops from the mother country were needed to protect the frontiers of the two strong colonies of Virginia and Pennsylvania. The whole story shows these colonies in the worst possible light. They {240} had ample warning of the importance of securing Fort Duquesne; they allowed it to fall into the hands of the French; they threw on the mother country the onus of recovering it: they hindered Braddock rather than helped him; and, when he failed, they debited him and his men with the whole blame of failure. It was not wonderful that soldiers fresh from England should be stampeded at their first venture in forest warfare, but it was wonderful that the men on the spot should be so utterly indifferent to the calls, both of patriotism and of self-interest, as to contribute to the disaster. [Sidenote: _They suffer in consequence._] Bad as was the failure, it was a blessing in disguise. The colonies concerned were for a time left to bear their own burdens; French and Indians harried their frontiers; homesteads and villages were burnt; women and children were butchered or carried into captivity. While sleek Quakers and garrulous Assembly men prated of peace and local liberties, the outlying settlements were given over to fire and sword; until the southern colonists began to learn the lesson, which New England had long since learnt, that the first duty of any community is self-defence. [Sidenote: _William Johnson._] [Sidenote: _His influence with the Five Nation Indians._] On the Mohawk river, about thirty miles to the north-west of Albany, there lived a nephew of Sir Peter Warren, named William Johnson. He had come out to America in 1738, when he was twenty-three years old, to manage estates which his uncle had bought on the confines of the Five Nation Indians. He lived a semi-savage life, in a house constructed as a fort and named Fort Johnson or Mount Johnson, taking to wife first a German woman, and then an Iroquois. His position among the Indians was not unlike that which the Baron de Castin had held in bygone years on the Penobscot. He knew and understood the natives and their ways, he spoke their language, and his honest dealings contrasted favourably with the rascalities of the border traders. He was a type of man, more common on the French side than on the English, {241} who lived within, not outside, the circle of native life; and, having these versatile attributes, it is almost superfluous to add that he was an Irishman. For the rest, Johnson was a man of force and energy, whose tact and talents were by no means confined to the backwoods. He did good service to his King and country, and was not at all inclined to hide his light under a bushel. His value to the English cause in North America cannot be overestimated. His personal influence among the Mohawks counterbalanced the influence of the Frenchman Joncaire among the Senecas at the other end of the confederacy; and, being appointed Superintendent of, or Commissioner for, Indian affairs, he, and he alone, kept alive the old covenant of friendship between the English and the Five Nation Indians. [Sidenote: _He commands the expedition against Crown Point._] [Sidenote: _Building of Fort Edward._] When it was decided to send an expedition against Crown Point, Shirley gave him the command, and Braddock confirmed the appointment. He had no military experience, though he was a colonel of militia; but the whole force under him consisted of colonists, preferring to be led by a man who knew the country and its people than by a trained soldier. Preparations were made for raising 6,000 to 7,000 men. Massachusetts, as usual, contributed the largest levy; the other New England colonies and New York sent or promised smaller forces, and some 300 Mohawk Indians joined the expedition, finding that it was commanded by the white man, whom of all others they trusted and loved. The actual numbers engaged, however, did not much exceed 3,000 fighting men. In July they met at Albany and moved up the Hudson, for about forty-five miles, to the 'Carrying Place,' the spot where the portage begins to the waters which run to the St. Lawrence. Here, on the eastern side of the Hudson, a beginning was made of a fort, called for the time Fort Lyman, after Phineas Lyman, second in command of the expedition, but a little later rechristened Fort Edward. [Sidenote: _Course of the Hudson._] The Hudson river rises in the Adirondack mountains, to {242} the west of Lake George, and flows in a south-easterly direction, until it reaches a point south-west by south of the southern end of the lake. Here for some miles it takes a due easterly course, at right angles to the line of the lake, until, at Sandy Hill, near where Fort Edward was founded, it turns due south, and flows due south into the Atlantic. It appears to prolong to southward the line of Lake George and Lake Champlain; but the watersheds are distinct, the two lakes in question drain to the north, and eventually discharge through the Richelieu river into the St. Lawrence. [Sidenote: _Lakes George and Champlain._] They form a long narrow basin running north and south between the Adirondacks on the west and the Green mountains of Vermont on the east. No stream of any size feeds Lake George; it stretches for between thirty and forty miles from south-west to north-east, overshadowed by the Adirondacks; and, narrowing at the northern end, finds an outlet into Lake Champlain by a semicircular channel, which enters the larger lake from west to east. This channel is broken by rapids, and in the angle which it forms with Lake Champlain stands Ticonderoga. Lake Champlain is here a broad river rather than a lake, having narrowed into the similitude of a river from where, fifteen miles further north, the isthmus of Crown Point juts out on the western side of the lake. But it does not end at Ticonderoga, where it meets the waters of Lake George. It continues southwards in a direct line, very roughly parallel to Lake George, still narrowing in its upward course, through the marshes known as the Drowned Lands, past a little subsidiary lake on the western side known as South Bay, over against which now stands the small town of Whitehall, and ending in a stream known as Wood Creek. The sources of Wood Creek are but a few miles distant from the point, already noted, where the Hudson turns south to form the central valley of New York State, and where Johnson, in the summer of 1755, was busy constructing Fort Lyman. {243} [Sidenote: _Johnson encamps at the end of Lake George._] Johnson's objective was Crown Point; and to reach it he had a choice of two parallel routes, either of which involved a portage from the Hudson watershed to that of Lake Champlain. He could take either the western line by Lake George, or the eastern line by Wood Creek. He chose the former, and making a road for fourteen miles from Fort Lyman to the head--the southern end--of Lake George, encamped there at the end of August with over 2,000 men, leaving 500 men behind to garrison Fort Lyman. [Sidenote: _Dieskau at Crown Point._] The French in the meantime had not been idle. When Dieskau arrived in Canada with his troops, it was intended that he should operate on Lake Ontario, and reduce the English outpost at Oswego; but, as soon as news came of Johnson's expedition, the plan was changed, and he hurried up the Richelieu with reinforcements to protect Crown Point. By the time that Johnson reached Lake George, there were assembled at Crown Point over 3,500 men--French soldiers, Canadians, and Indians. [Sidenote: _He advances to Ticonderoga and up the southern arm of Lake Champlain,_] The two alternative routes from Fort Lyman to Crown Point converged at Ticonderoga, or, as the French called it, Carillon. Dieskau therefore moved forward to that place, to block the English advance. He had not yet learnt that Johnson was encamped at Lake George, but was under the impression that the advanced guard of the English, instead of the rearguard, was at Fort Lyman. Accordingly, he laid his plans to push rapidly up the southern arm of Lake Champlain, and to take Fort Lyman before reinforcements could arrive; or, if Johnson had already marched to Lake George, to cut the line of his communications. French and English were in fact advancing, or preparing to advance, south and north respectively, on parallel lines. [Sidenote: _and cuts Johnson's communications._] A flying column of 1,500 men set out from Ticonderoga; the water carried them as far as South Bay, where they left their boats, and marching thence through the forest between Lake George and Wood Creek, they struck the road which {244} Johnson had made from Fort Lyman to the lake, at a point three miles from the fort, eleven from the lake. They had thus intercepted Johnson's communications and cut him off from his base of supplies. From prisoners Dieskau learnt the disposition of Johnson's forces, and he took counsel whether to attack the fort or the encampment by the lake. Capture of the fort had been the original object of the march; but in deference to the Indians, who little loved assault on fortified positions, it was decided to take the second alternative and advance on the lake. [Sidenote: _Johnson's counter plan._] [Sidenote: _The English fall into an ambush._] Meanwhile, warned of what had happened, Johnson prepared a counter-stroke. What Dieskau had done, he could do also; if the Frenchman had cut his communications, he in his turn could intercept Dieskau's line of retreat; and, with this object, on the morning of the eighth of September, a force of 1,000 men was sent out from the camp to strike the French in the rear. The whole formed a pretty picture of backwood manoeuvres; but, like the Boers in South Africa, the Canadians proved themselves more mobile than the English, and more skilful in ambuscade. At three miles distance from the camp, after an hour's march, the English fell into a carefully-laid trap. On the road in front were the French regulars; in the forest on either flank Canadians and Indians lay in wait for their prey. Advancing without due precaution, though they had a band of Mohawks with them, the English were completely surprised; the head of the column was driven in on the rear, the whole force became (in Dieskau's words) like a pack of cards, and fell back with heavy loss in rout to the camp, the retreat being partially covered by a detachment sent out by Johnson on hearing of the engagement. [Sidenote: _The French attack the camp and are defeated._] [Sidenote: _Dieskau taken prisoner._] At the camp hasty preparations were made for defence, behind wagons and fallen trees, and in a short time the enemy appeared. The French regulars attacked boldly and well, but the Canadians and Indians were out of hand, the {245} commander of the Canadians, Legardeur de Saint Pierre, having already been killed. For three or four hours there was furious firing; but the English had artillery, the French had not, and this advantage, coupled with the lines of defence, decided the issue. Dieskau was disabled by a wound; the attack slackened; at length the defenders left their entrenchments and charged their foes, and late in the afternoon the whole French force was routed and fled, leaving their wounded General in the hands of the enemy. Some of the Canadians and Indians had already fallen back to the scene of the morning's fight, intent on scalps and plunder. Here a scouting party from Fort Lyman fell upon them, and, after a hard struggle, drove them into further retreat. Both sides lost heavily, but the balance of the day's fighting was unquestionably in favour of the English. On the French side the regulars showed to more advantage than their colonial and Indian allies, and Dieskau deserved a better fate than wounds and captivity. While lying wounded, we read, he was again shot by a French deserter, and, when he was brought into the English camp, the Mohawks, whose chief had been killed, threatened his life. Johnson, however, who had himself been wounded, took every care of his prisoner; in due course he was sent over to England; and eventually, disabled for further service, he returned to France, where he died in 1767. [Sidenote: _Results of the fight._] [Sidenote: _Fort William Henry._] The most was made of this repulse of the French. It came as a set-off to the defeat of Braddock. Johnson was made a baronet and received 5,000 pounds. The Lac du Sacrement he had already renamed Lake George, the encampment at the head of the lake blossomed out into Fort William Henry, and another of the King's sons provided the name of Fort Edward for the fort at the Carrying Place. Yet the object of the expedition was not achieved; no attempt was made at a further advance; the French were unmolested in their retreat, and retained their hold on Crown Point and {246} Ticonderoga also. Johnson remained encamped by the lake, with a force raised to a total of 3,600 men, until November was drawing to a close, when, a garrison being left to hold Fort William Henry through the winter, the rest of the army disbanded to their homes. [Sidenote: _Shirley's advance to Lake Ontario._] While Johnson was moving north from Albany to attack Crown Point, William Shirley went west, with the intention of reducing the French fort at Niagara and cutting off Canada from the upper lakes. He started from Albany in July with some 1,500 men, mainly colonial troops in Imperial pay, and took his way along the line of the Five Nation cantons. He moved up the Mohawk river, past Schenectady and past Johnson's home, made the portage from the Mohawk to the stream called, like the feeder of Lake Champlain, Wood or Wood's Creek, which runs into Lake Oneida, and by the outlet of that lake, now the Oswego river, to Lake Ontario. [Sidenote: _Oswego and Niagara._] [Sidenote: _The expedition abandoned._] Where the river joined Lake Ontario stood the small English fort of Oswego, founded in 1727, and regarded with the utmost jealousy by the French.[13] The French fort at Niagara was 130 to 140 miles to the west of Oswego, while due north of the latter place, at a distance of over fifty miles across Lake Ontario, was Fort Frontenac. The garrisons of both the French forts had been reinforced on hearing of Shirley's advance, and an attack on Fort Niagara involved the danger of a counter attack on Oswego from Fort Frontenac. On the other hand, Fort Frontenac was fully strong enough to repel any direct attempt to take it. The English, moreover, experienced great difficulty in collecting provisions or an adequate fleet of boats, and after some weeks' delay it was resolved to abandon the expedition. Before October ended, Shirley returned to Albany by the way he went, leaving 700 men to garrison Oswego and strengthen its defences, communications with Albany being maintained by two blockhouses which had been built at either end of the {247} four miles' portage between the Mohawk river and Wood Creek--Fort Williams on the Mohawk river, where the town of Rome now stands, and Fort Bull on Wood Creek. [Footnote 13: See above, p. 196.] [Sidenote: _Results of the year's campaign_] Thus the campaigning of the busy year 1755 came to an end. The main forces on either side disbanded, or went into garrison for the winter; Washington and a few hundred Virginians tried to safeguard the harried frontiers of the southern colonies; Robert Rogers, boldest of New England rangers, went scouting up the line of Lake George. The forts stood isolated in the wintry backwoods, waiting for the stirring times which were coming on forthwith. [Sidenote: _in favour of the French._] Neither French nor English had much cause to boast of the results of the year's fighting. On either side a General had been sent out from Europe; the English General had been killed, the French General had been wounded and taken prisoner. But, on the whole, the French had undoubtedly gained and the English had lost. The English had taken the offensive, they had planned attack all along the line, and in the main their schemes had conspicuously failed. Only in the extreme east had they achieved substantial success. Acadia had been permanently secured, if there could be security as long as the fortress of Louisbourg remained in French hands. In the extreme west they had been badly beaten, and the French had acquired full control of the Ohio valley. On Lake Ontario they had done nothing at all. On the main central line of advance they had set out to take Crown Point, and had to be content with repelling a counter attack by the French. The more New England had been concerned in the war, the better the English had fared; the further west or south they operated, the greater was their want of success. [Sidenote: _Effect of geography on the English side of the war._] The most striking feature to notice in the events of the year is the effect of distance, when not counteracted by steam and telegraphy. It will be noted how far removed in every sense was America from Europe in the middle of the {248} eighteenth century, and how far removed in every sense were the American colonies from one another. Here was fighting going on at all points on the border line of French and English America, and yet France and England were nominally at peace. New England was raising her levies with patriotism and spirit, meeting a common foe with common feeling, and, it may be added, with common sense. New York and Virginia could, on the other hand, scarcely be prevailed upon to move; while Pennsylvania was as indifferent as though the fighting had been on another continent. We may and must put down much to political causes, to social and religious prejudices; and Canada proved that, even in the eighteenth century, long distances did not necessarily preclude concerted action; but, where settlement had begun and continued for generations at widely different points on the American continent, and on absolutely separate and independent lines, war and peace were alike localized, and there was little or no cohesion between the colonies and the mother country, or between one colony and another. The history of the English North American colonies had been the history not of one but of many communities. No uniform system held them together, no sentiment of the distant past was strong enough to counteract geography. Only, as colonization spread in the long course of years, the dwellers in one province came into contact with the dwellers in another, and both the one and the other came face to face with the French advance. Then the pressure of common danger made for union, and the race instinct gathered strength. The mother country sent out soldiers; colonists were enlisted in royal regiments to supplement the provincial militias; and in clumsy, most imperfect fashion, the English in North America began to shape themselves into a nation. One keen English observer, at any rate--General Wolfe--saw at once the present defects of the English colonies in North America, and the great future which lay before them. {249} 'These colonies,' he wrote in 1758, 'are deeply tinged with the vices and bad qualities of the mother country.' But he added, 'This will, some time hence, be a vast empire, the seat of power and learning. Nature has refused them nothing, and there will grow a people out of our little spot, England, that will fill this vast space, and divide this great portion of the globe with the Spaniards, who are possessed of the other half.'[14] [Footnote 14: Wolfe to his mother, Louisbourg, Aug. 11, 1758 (Wright's _Life of Wolfe_, p. 454).] NOTE.--For the above see KINGSFORD'S _History of Canada_, vol. iii, and PARKMAN'S _Montcalm and Wolfe_. The period dealt with in this and the two succeeding chapters is covered by A. G. BRADLEY'S recent work, _The Fight with France for North America_ (1900). {250} CHAPTER IX THE CONQUEST OF CANADA [Sidenote: _The Seven Years' War._] In May, 1756, Great Britain declared war against France. In June, France declared war against Great Britain. The war between these two nations formed part of the Seven Years' War, one of the most widely extended and, in its results, one of the most decisive in history. In the first number of the _Annual Register_, for the year 1758,[1] Edmund Burke wrote: 'The war, into which all parties and interests seem now to be so perfectly blended, arose from causes which originally had not the least connexion, the uncertain limits of the English and French territories in America, and the mutual claims of the houses of Austria and Brandenburg on the Duchy of Silesia.' After three years of the war, in September, 1759, Horace Walpole wrote in his laughing style, 'I believe the world will come to be fought for somewhere between the north of Germany and the back of Canada.'[2] [Footnote 1: p. 2.] [Footnote 2: _Letters of Horace Walpole_, vol. iii, p. 249 (Letter of Sept. 13, 1759).] [Sidenote: _Numerical superiority of the English in America._] On the continent of Europe, Great Britain had Frederick of Prussia for an ally; on the other side were France, Austria, Russia, and Sweden. Beyond the Atlantic, a French population in Canada, Acadia, and Louisiana of less than 90,000 souls was ranged against British colonies with a population at least thirteen times as numerous. One or other of the larger British colonies, taken alone, was better peopled with white colonists than Canada. {251} [Sidenote: _Official corruption in Canada._] [Sidenote: _Bigot and his gang._] Nor was want of numbers the only disadvantage under which Canada laboured. The currency, principally paper money, was depreciated. Provisions were scarce, seeing that the farmers were constantly called away to fight, and that supplies from beyond the sea were liable to be intercepted. The government was corrupt, and the high officials cheated the King on the one hand and the _habitans_ on the other with the greatest impartiality. Canadian history, all through its course, as long as Canada was a province of France, was tainted by official corruption. The officials were traders also, and the public service was largely in the hands of commercial rings. What happened in the mother country happened also in her greatest colony. One official's wife became another official's mistress, and the husband who gave up the wife was rewarded with pickings at the expense of the public and of the Crown. The evil was at its worst in the last days of New France. The Intendant was then Bigot, a clever Frenchman who had come out in 1748, and round him gathered a gang of unscrupulous adventurers, whose misdeeds were fully brought to light after the crisis was over and the colony was lost. Among them were Cadet, butcher and contractor, who was made Commissary-General; Péan, Varin, and others, who, one at Quebec and another at Montreal, formed stores and created monopolies, buying and selling at artificial prices, sucking the life-blood of an extravagant Government in France and of a poor community in America. [Sidenote: _Vaudreuil._] In past years, supreme authority in Canada had been shared between the Governor and the Intendant, and quarrels in abundance had arisen between the holders of the two offices; but, at the time when the Seven Years' War began, the Governor and the Intendant were at one. The Intendant Bigot, and the Governor De Vaudreuil, were on excellent terms. Vaudreuil, son of a previous Governor-General of Canada, received his appointment in 1755, having {252} already been Governor of Louisiana. He was a vain man, of some but not great capacity, called to high office in a difficult time, and not equal to the task which was imposed upon him. Surrounded by cleverer and more unscrupulous men of Bigot's type, he did nothing to check the evils which were ruining Canada. [Sidenote: _Division between Canadians and Frenchmen._] [Sidenote: _Different classes of troops engaged in the war._] The principal point to note about him is that he was a Canadian by birth. This fact was the source of mischief. In lieu of the old feud between the Governor and the Intendant, there came into being a new line of cleavage, which tended to divide the mother country from the colony. The Governor had always been supreme in military matters; but, when war in North America grew to be more than a series of border forays, it became necessary to send out skilled generals from France. Dieskau was sent, and after him came a greater man, Montcalm. Friction then arose between the Governor and the General, accentuated in consequence of the Governor being a Canadian. All the Governors of Canada, including Vaudreuil, had seen service, or had at any rate been trained to war, but they were usually either sailors or connected with the forces which were attached to the navy and under the Minister of Marine. On both the English and the French side in North America there were, at the time of the Seven Years' War, three classes of troops engaged. On the English side there were the regular regiments sent out from home, and brought up to strength by recruiting in the colonies. There were also regiments entirely raised in the colonies, but still royal regiments in the pay of the Crown, such for instance as the four battalions of Royal Americans, first raised by Loudoun's orders, and famous in after times as the 60th or the King's Royal Rifle Corps.[3] Lastly, there were the purely colonial levies. On {253} the French side there were in the first place regiments of the line from France. In the second place there were the _troupes de la Marine_, regiments or companies mainly raised in France, but permanently stationed in Canada, to form a standing garrison and to develop into military colonists. In the third place there was the Canadian militia, including all the adult males between the years of fifteen and sixty. Only the first of these three classes of troops was under the direct command of the General from France. After Montcalm's arrival they numbered rather over 4,000 men, about one-fourth of whom were in garrison at Louisbourg. The _troupes de la Marine_ amounted at most to about 2,500 men. The Canadian militia on paper numbered 15,000, but very few of them were to be found in the field at any given time or place. The General corresponded with the Minister for War; when in action he took command of all the forces present, but the nominal Commander-in-Chief was the Governor, who was by way of directing the campaign, and who reported to the Minister of Marine. Thus, both at home and in Canada, there was divided responsibility at a time when all depended on the most complete co-operation and single control. [Footnote 3: They were originally the 62nd or Royal American Regiment of foot. The men were chiefly German and Swiss Protestants, and about one-third of the officers were of the same nationalities. On the disbanding of Shirley's and Pepperell's Regiments, which were numbered 50th and 51st, the Royal Americans became the 60th Regiment. Their motto, 'Celer et audax,' is said, without much authority, to have been first given them by Wolfe.] [Sidenote: _The strength of Canada._] The strength of Canada, on the other hand, consisted in the divisions of her adversaries, the separate grumbling English colonies; in the incompetence of the English Government at home; in the fact that the routes for attack from Canada favoured quick movement from the base; and most of all in the support which the Frenchmen received from the red men, notably from the mission Indians. The Indians went hand in hand with the Canadians; the one and the other loved irregular warfare; the one and the other answered {254} to the call of the Governor of Canada, rather than of the General who looked on war as he had known it in Europe--more scientific, more continuous, better controlled, and more humane than the savage outbursts of killing and plundering which were the product of American backwoods. [Sidenote: _Canadian raid on the route between Albany and Oswego._] As winter turned into spring, in 1756, before war had been proclaimed in Europe, and before Montcalm had come out, the Canadians made a move. The most distant and isolated English outpost was Oswego on Lake Ontario. Its communication with Albany depended on the two little forts which, as told in the last chapter,[4] had been constructed to guard the four miles' portage between the Mohawk river and Wood Creek, the stream which feeds Lake Oneida. Towards the end of March, a party of Canadians and Indians, sent by Vaudreuil and commanded by an officer named De Léry, surprised the fort on the latter river, Fort Bull, killed or captured the small garrison, and destroyed the building with all its contents. The damage was repaired by Shirley, in whose eyes Oswego was of supreme importance, and who, in the winter of 1755, had formulated new schemes for a comprehensive campaign against Canada, including as before the reduction of the French forts on Lake Ontario. [Footnote 4: See above, pp. 246, 247.] [Sidenote: _Weakness of Oswego._] [Sidenote: _Colonel Bradstreet._] If this last object was to be achieved, it was absolutely necessary that Oswego should be made so strong in men and munitions, as not merely to hold its own, but to dominate the rival forts at Frontenac, Toronto, and Niagara. These conditions were very far from being fulfilled, and Shirley can hardly be acquitted of blame in the matter. The garrison of Oswego was weakened by winter sickness, the fortifications were hopelessly incomplete, the supplies were scanty and uncertain. The French raid in March was followed by a strengthening of the French positions on Lake Ontario, and Coulon de Villiers, a well-known Canadian leader, took up new ground at Sandy Creek to eastward of, and at no {255} great distance from, the English fort. From Albany, early in the summer, Shirley sent up supplies to Oswego in charge of a strong body of colonists under Colonel John Bradstreet, a New Englander who did other good service later in the war. Bradstreet reached his destination in safety, but on his return up the Oswego river, at the beginning of July, was attacked by Villiers, whom he beat off after heavy fighting and considerable loss on either side. [Sidenote: _French designs on Oswego._] Vaudreuil was as determined to drive the English from Lake Ontario, as Shirley was to secure for his countrymen control over the navigation of the lake; and at the time that Bradstreet's fight took place, Montcalm had already been some weeks in Canada. The French knew from the reports of their scouts the weakness of Oswego, they knew too that the English were concentrating in another direction for an attack on Ticonderoga: an advance in force on Oswego was likely to succeed: if not successful, it would at least draw off some of the English troops from the main campaign. Accordingly, an expedition was taken in hand, commanded by Montcalm in person. [Sidenote: _Montcalm marches against it._] In July, Montcalm was at Ticonderoga. Returning rapidly to Montreal, he pushed up the St. Lawrence to Fort Frontenac; and early in August, moving his troops by night, crossed Lake Ontario, at the outlet of the St. Lawrence, passing to Wolfe Island, and thence to Sackett's Harbour in the south-eastern corner of the lake. Here a force of Canadians, including the remains of Villiers' troops, was awaiting him; and he advanced with about 3,000 men, including three regiments of the line, and an adequate supply of artillery, some of the guns having been taken from General Braddock's force. Undiscovered by the English, the expedition moved westward, the main body coasting the shore, the Canadians marching on land, until at night time, on August 10, they took up a position at little more than a mile's distance from Oswego. {256} [Sidenote: _Position of Oswego._] There were at this time, in consequence of Shirley's efforts, three forts at Oswego or Chouaguen, as the French called it. The old fort and trading house stood on the western bank of the Onondaga or Oswego river, where it enters the lake. On the same side of the river, about 600 yards to the westward, was a 'small unfinished redoubt, badly enough entrenched with earth on two sides.'[5] It was called a fort, and pompously named Fort George, but, as a matter of fact, it was used as, and was little better than, a cattle-pen. On the eastern side of the river, over against the old fort, at a distance of 470 yards, was a newly-built, square-shaped blockhouse, known as Fort Ontario. It was built wholly of timber; and, while strong enough to resist such firearms as Indians could bring, it was of no avail against artillery. [Footnote 5: See 'Papers relating to Oswego,' in O'Callaghan's _Documentary History of New York_, vol. i, pp. 488-503.] [Sidenote: _The French attack._] [Sidenote: _Oswego surrenders._] The French prepared to bombard this eastern fort, but, before their trenches were complete, it was evacuated, and the garrison was withdrawn across the river. The abandonment was inevitable, but it sealed the fate of the main fort, which, for protection on the lake and river side, depended on Fort Ontario. One day's fighting saw the conclusion of the matter. The French brought their guns into position by the side of the abandoned fort; and, firing across the river, riddled Fort Oswego. At the same time, Canadians and Indians forded the river higher up, and attacked on the southern side. The English commander, Colonel Mercer, was killed: the troops, consisting mainly of convalescents and recruits, were not in condition for a stubborn defence; women and children found no shelter from the enemy's fire; the position was hopeless, and the garrison surrendered. The prisoners, who were carried off, numbered about 1,600; guns, boats, and supplies fell into the hands of the French, the forts were burnt to the ground, and every vestige of British occupation was for the time obliterated. {257} [Sidenote: _Effect of the fall of Oswego._] The news of the fall of Oswego, after so many years of British occupation, caused consternation in England. Colonel Daniel Webb, who at the time was bringing up reinforcements along the line of the Mohawk and Wood Creek rivers, beat a hurried and discreditable retreat, burning the forts at the Carrying Place[6] and blocking the waterway with fallen timber. In England the blow followed on that of the capture of Minorca, for which Byng was made a scapegoat. 'Minorca is gone, Oswego gone, the nation is in a ferment,' wrote Horace Walpole; and again, 'Oswego, of ten times more importance even than Minorca, is so annihilated that we cannot learn the particulars.'[7] It was in truth a great success for France, the result of a plan boldly conceived and brilliantly executed. The garrison had been taken completely by surprise; in four days from the date when Montcalm landed within reach of the forts, he had achieved his object, and left the English no foothold on Lake Ontario. The defeat of Braddock had given to France command of the Ohio; the fall of Oswego gave her undisputed mastery of the lakes. All the west, and all the ways to the west, were now in her hands, and her forces could be concentrated on the central line of advance to the south up Lake Champlain. There already some way had been made, for, in addition to holding Crown Point, the French were now firmly planted at Ticonderoga. [Footnote 6: Fort Williams was rebuilt in 1758, and named Fort Stanwix. See below, p. 282.] [Footnote 7: _Letters of Horace Walpole_, vol. iii, pp. 41, 42 (Letter of Nov. 4, 1756).] Great as were the immediate material results of Montcalm's success, the indirect moral advantage which the French derived from it was greater still. Oswego, Burke reminds us in the _Annual Register_ for 1758,[8] was 'designed to cover the country of the Five Nations, to secure the Indian trade, to interrupt the communication between the {258} French northern and southern establishments, and to open a way to our arms to attack the forts of Frontenac and Niagara.' A few pages later, he describes the effect of the disaster in the following words: 'Since Oswego had been taken, the French remained entirely masters of all the lakes, and we could do nothing to obstruct their collecting the Indians from all parts, and obliging them to act in their favour. But our apprehensions (or what shall they be called?) did more in favour of the French than their conquests. Not satisfied with the loss of that important fortress, we ourselves abandoned to the mercy of the enemy all the country of the Five Nations, the only body of Indians who preserved even the appearance of friendship to us. The forts we had at the Great Carrying Place were demolished, Wood Creek was industriously stopped up and filled with logs, by which it became evident to all those who knew that country that our communication with our allied Indians was totally cut off, and, what was worse, our whole frontier left perfectly uncovered to the irruption of the enemy's savages.' [Footnote 8: pp. 13, 29.] [Sidenote: _The Iroquois discouraged._] The effect of what had happened on the minds of the Five Nation Indians was disastrous. Oswego had covered their cantons, it had been the entrepôt of trade between them and the west. They saw it swept away with little or no resistance. They saw Webb hurry back towards Albany, only anxious, as it seemed, to quit the country unmolested. Hesitating constantly between the French and English alliance, they had now every reason to prefer the former; and, had it not been for Johnson's influence with the Mohawks, the Iroquois would, for the time at any rate, have abandoned the English cause in disgust and contempt.[9] [Footnote 9: Sir William Johnson, writing to the Lords of Trade on Sept. 10, 1756, says: 'Oswego in our hands, fortified and secured by us, and our having a navigation on Lake Ontario, was not only a curb to the power of the French that way, but esteemed by the Six Nations, whenever they joined our arms, as a secure cover to them and their habitations against the resentment of the French.' Later in the same letter he speaks of the fort as 'the barrier of the Six Nations,' and says that, in consequence of its capture, 'the spirit they had recently shown in our favour was sunk and overawed by the success of the French' (O'Callaghan's _Documentary History of New York_, vol. ii, pp. 733, 734).] {259} Moreover, the achievement differed in kind from the ordinary Canadian raid. Troops had been moved, artillery brought up, transport organized in rapid, skilful fashion, which betokened leadership of no ordinary kind; the new General from France had at once made himself felt, and friend and foe alike recognized that Canada was being defended and the English colonies attacked by a soldier of high order in the Marquis de Montcalm. [Sidenote: _Montcalm._] Few characters in colonial history are so interesting and attractive as that of Montcalm. Interest attaches to him not only on account of his own personality, but also because he illustrates the better side of the soldier-aristocrats of France. Born in 1712, near Nîmes in the south of France, he came out in middle life to North America, having seen hard fighting in various parts of the continent, and owing the Canadian command to his own merits, not to Court influence. He was the head of his family, owner of the ancestral estate, straitened in means, and with ten children to provide for; loving his home, loving his mother, his wife and children, following arms as his profession for honour and for a livelihood. He was well educated, and in every sense a gentleman of France, with a quick, impetuous Southern spirit, but the heart of an affectionate and chivalrous man. His coming lifted the war on the Canadian side to a higher plane; he used the savage tools which he found to hand, but he did not love them,[10] nor did he love the corruption and chicanery which made the Government of New France a squalid {260} reproduction of the Government at home. A great man--Champlain--brought New France to birth; her end was ennobled by the death of Montcalm. Of his military talent it would be difficult even for an expert to judge, for it must always be a matter of doubt how far Montcalm, like Wolfe, may have been 'felix opportunitate mortis.' Neither the one nor the other was tried in the command of big battalions on European battlefields; but in quick aggressive movement, such as resulted in the capture of Oswego, as well as in the patient defensive tactics which he displayed at Quebec, Montcalm proved himself to be a skilful commander. [Footnote 10: This is contrary to what Wolfe wrote, when before Louisbourg, to Amherst. 'Montcalm has changed the very nature of war, and has forced us, in some measure, to a deterring and dreadful vengeance' (Wright's _Life of Wolfe_, pp. 440, 441). But none the less it was the case that, with Montcalm's arrival, war on the French side became what it never had been before, something more than a series of semi-savage raids.] [Sidenote: _Levis, Bourlamaque, and Bougainville._] He was ably supported by his second in command, De Levis, who lived to be a duke and a marshal of France, and a third good officer, Bourlamaque, came out at the same time. Montcalm's own aide de camp was De Bougainville, more famed in after years on sea than land. His name stands first in the list of French navigators; he was the rival and contemporary of Captain Cook. Good leaders France sent out to America in the spring of 1756, but she sent few troops with them. The campaign on the continent absorbed her strength, and New France was lost in consequence. [Sidenote: _The English leaders. Webb, Abercromby, and Loudoun._] [Sidenote: _Recall of Shirley._] Montcalm and his officers arrived in May; in June and July three English commanders appeared on the scene--Colonel Daniel Webb, General Abercromby, and Lord Loudoun. Of these three, Webb in a subordinate command and Loudoun as Commander-in-Chief were failures. Abercromby, possibly the best of the three, was not a success; he was in Wolfe's opinion 'a heavy man.'[11] The trio were a type of the soldiers that the English Government chose, while England, to quote the Prussian King Frederick's words, was in labour, and before she brought forth a man. While sending out inadequate officers from home, the Government recalled William Shirley, who, whatever his faults may have been, embodied more than any one man in America {261} enterprising and heart-whole resistance to the national foe. He left on the arrival of Loudoun, having to the last used all his influence to prepare manfully for the coming campaign. Thus the summer of 1756 found the two sides ill matched in point of commanders; if the chances of war were at all even, the forces led by Montcalm could not fail to outwit and surprise the troops which were guided by the slow-moving Scotch laird, the Earl of Loudoun.[12] [Footnote 11: Wright's _Life of Wolfe_, p. 451.] [Footnote 12: John Campbell, Earl of Loudoun, had served in the Highland campaign of 1745. In America he appears to have shown himself wanting in quickness, in tact, and in strategical ability. Franklin accused him of indecision. The colonial saying about him was that he was like the sign of St. George over an inn, always on horseback but never moving on. There is a pleasant notice of him in Boswell's _Life of Johnson_, when Boswell and Johnson dined at his house on the tour to the Hebrides.] [Sidenote: _Robert Rogers._] Yet the English had some useful men among them, though not in the first rank. William Johnson has already been noticed. John Winslow, who had adequately commanded the New England contingent in Acadia, was now in charge of the provincial troops at Fort William Henry, near Johnson's old camping-ground at the southern end of Lake George. In the same force was Robert Rogers, of New Hampshire, whose name is still borne by a cliff on Lake George, known as 'Rogers' Rock.' Rogers raised and commanded companies of New England scouts, known as the Rangers, which were multiplied as the war went on, and as the value of the men and their leader became more apparent. His journal is a model of clear, concise military writing, recounting in straightforward fashion feats of extraordinary daring and hardihood. As Johnson in his mastery over the Indians rivalled and perhaps excelled the French, so no Canadian partizan understood border warfare better than Robert Rogers. We read that on one occasion, when he had been reported as killed and the report proved false, the Indians in the French interest, who had been committing atrocities, repented from fear when they learnt that Rogers was still alive, and blamed {262} the French for encouraging them, as they said, to do the actions for which vengeance awaited them. It was something to have on the English side men who, in the Canadian style of fighting, were as good as or better than the Canadians themselves; and, in the absence of competent generals, fighting backwoodsmen, like Robert Rogers, at least served to remind Canada that the English colonies had a nasty sting. [Sidenote: _End of the campaign of 1756._] The programme for 1756--Shirley's programme--had included an advance to and from Oswego, and an advance from Fort William Henry against Ticonderoga. When Loudoun arrived, he countermanded the first movement, though he subsequently sent Webb too late up the Mohawk river in order to reinforce Oswego. Montcalm's swift action then disconcerted all English plans, Oswego was lost, the forward move down Lake George was countermanded, and the summer ended with nothing for the English to record but one crushing defeat. [Sidenote: _Fruitless French attack on Fort William Henry._] In November, the main body of the troops on either side went back into winter quarters, and Fort William Henry was left in charge of a small garrison of between 400 and 500 men, belonging to the 44th Regiment and the Rangers, commanded by Major Eyre. In the early spring of 1757, an attempt was made to surprise them by an expedition sent up from Montreal under the command of Rigaud de Vaudreuil, brother of the Governor of Canada. The attacking force started towards the end of February, and on March 19 appeared before the fort. The next day they offered terms of surrender, which were refused; and, after vainly attempting to reduce the fort till the twenty-fourth, they retreated down Lake George, having burnt some boats and outbuildings, but otherwise inflicted little loss. [Sidenote: _Loudoun's abortive expedition against Louisbourg._] The spring came on, and the early summer, and Loudoun matured a plan, which he had formed for attacking Louisbourg in force, as a preliminary to a further attack on Quebec. {263} His plan was accepted in London, and the Government determined to send out a strong fleet to co-operate with him, the rendezvous to be the harbour of Halifax. Like previous schemes of the same kind, the enterprise failed through untoward delays. The fleet under Admiral Holborne, consisting of fifteen ships of the line, and conveying transports with from 5,000 to 6,000 men on board, did not sail till May 5, and did not reach Halifax till early in July. Loudoun, meanwhile, had drawn off the bulk of his troops, including Rogers and his Rangers, from the New York frontier; and, after vainly waiting at New York for news of the English Admiral, set sail for Halifax on June 20, reaching his destination on the last day of that month. The combined forces were nearly 12,000 strong, but the time for attack had gone by. Hearing of the English preparations, the French Government had sent a fleet at least as strong as Holborne's across the Atlantic, under Admiral La Motte; and the English commanders learnt that Louisbourg was being defended by ships as numerous as their own, and by a garrison in which the troops of the line alone were said to number 6,000 men. The enterprise was accordingly abandoned. In the middle of August Loudoun re-embarked the majority of his troops for New York. Holborne twice reconnoitred Louisbourg in the hope of bringing on a sea-fight. The second time, in the middle of September, a storm shattered his vessels, and the whole expedition utterly collapsed.[13] 'It is time,' wrote Horace Walpole[14] in despondent terms, 'for England to slip her own cables and float away into some unknown ocean.' On {264} his way back to New York, Loudoun was met with bad news--that Fort William Henry had fallen. [Footnote 13: While Loudoun's troops were waiting at Halifax, he employed them in raising vegetables. In consequence, Lord Charles Hay, who was third in command, charged him with expending the nation's wealth 'in making sham fights and planting cabbages.' Lord Charles Hay was sent back to England, and a court-martial was held upon him, but the incident served to bring ridicule on the expedition.] [Footnote 14: _Letters of Horace Walpole_, vol. iii, p. 103 (Letter of Sept. 3, 1757, written before the final break-up of the fleet).] [Sidenote: _Montcalm prepares to attack Fort William Henry._] When he started for Louisbourg, he left Webb in command of the small forces which remained to cover the New York frontier. He seems to have thought that the troops were sufficient not only to hold the French in check, but also to threaten Ticonderoga. Montcalm, on the other hand, saw his opportunity and determined, while he had superior numbers, to strike a blow which should rival his former achievement at Oswego. Throughout July the French troops concentrated at Ticonderoga, provisions were brought up, and a road was made past the rapids, by which Lake George discharges into Lake Champlain. A number of Indians were gathered from all quarters to join in the expedition, mission Indians taught to kill the heretic English, and savages from the wild and barbarous west. Scouting parties went forth, some along Lake George, others up the parallel southern arm of Lake Champlain; and, with Robert Rogers far away in Nova Scotia, they did much damage, on one occasion killing or taking prisoners two out of three hundred New Englanders. At the end of the month the main advance began. [Sidenote: _The fort and its surroundings._] Fort William Henry was about thirty miles distant from the French lines. It was a strong square fort, built near the southern edge of Lake George, a little to the west of the spot where Sir William Johnson two years before had formed his camp. The road from the fort to Fort Edward ran for a short distance due east, skirting the shore of the lake, and then turned inland to the south and south-east. On rising ground to the east of the road, beyond the point where it took the southward turn, the English had an entrenched camp, separated from the fort by swampy ground. After the attack on the fort in the preceding spring, Major Eyre and his troops had been replaced by others under the command of Colonel Monro, the main body consisting of 600 {265} men of the 35th, now the Sussex Regiment. When news came that the French were on the point of advancing, Webb sent up 1,000 colonial troops from Fort Edward; and, when the attack began, Monro had with him about 2,400 men, while Webb, who had only 1,600 men left at Fort Edward, sent urgent messages to New York for reinforcements. [Sidenote: _The French advance._] On July 30, Levis moved forward with the French vanguard, marching along the western shore of Lake George; the main body of troops under Montcalm followed in boats on August 1, the whole force amounting to between 7,000 and 8,000 men. Two detachments, one commanded by La Corne, the other by Levis, marched round the fort, and took up positions on its southern side, to cut off communication with Webb; La Corne occupied the road to Fort Edward, while Levis encamped a little further to the west. Montcalm landed his big guns at a little inlet, still called Artillery Cove, about half a mile in a direct line from the fort, and, after a summons to surrender on August 3, began his trenches on the night of the fourth. [Sidenote: _The fort surrenders._] A far better defence was made than at Oswego. For four days the garrison held out bravely, hoping for relief from the south. Their guns were heard at Fort Edward; the urgency of their case was known; but Webb, though some 2,000 militia had reached him, felt himself too weak to make any advance. At length the situation became hopeless, and on August 9 Monro surrendered. The terms of capitulation were that the garrison should be escorted to Fort Edward, on condition that they would not serve again for eighteen months, and that all French prisoners taken in the war should be restored. The fort with all that it contained was handed over to the French. The surrender included the entrenched camp as well as the fort: the fort was evacuated; and the whole garrison, with the exception of a few sick and wounded, were gathered into the camp, retaining their arms, but without ammunition. {266} [Sidenote: _The massacre of Fort William Henry._] Before night fell, the French Indians plundered the fort, and butchered some of the sick. Early on the following morning, the English troops began their march to Fort Edward; the Indians broke in among them, seizing and stripping men, women, and children; and, at a signal given by the Christian Abenakis from the Penobscot--Indians who had known the teaching and training of men like Le Loutre--a wholesale massacre began. Montcalm and his officers, however, used every effort to protect the English, with the result that not more than fifty were murdered, and 600 carried off, 400 of whom were promptly recovered; and the broken band of fugitives in due course found their way to Fort Edward. [Sidenote: _Blame attaching to the French._] This was the episode well known in colonial annals as the massacre of Fort William Henry, told of in history and in romance.[15] The horrors have no doubt been exaggerated, if, as appears to have been the case, the death-roll did not exceed the number given above. Still it was a horrible incident, and brought righteous discredit on the French cause. Though Montcalm, when the mischief had begun, acted with promptitude and vigour, it was well within his power to have prevented the possibility of any such outrage. His Indians numbered but 1,800, and he had 3,000 regular troops from France to hold them in check. The Canadian militia, too, numbered 2,500 men; but probably the seed of the evil lay in the disinclination of the colonial French and their officers to interfere with their Indian allies. It had become the tradition in Canada to live down to the Indians in matters of war, to attach them and to hold them by humouring their savage instincts; and it may well be believed that, if Canadian soldiers or Canadian officers were concerned in seeing the terms of capitulation carried out, they would prefer injuring the English to offending the Indians. Three years later, in the advance on Montreal, we read of {267} Sir William Johnson, under Amherst's orders, strongly repressing the Iroquois' lust for French blood, and Amherst reporting that not a peasant woman or child had been hurt, nor a house burnt, since he entered the enemy's country. Better control of the savages in their employ gave the English fewer friends among them, but in the end it was one, and not the least, of the causes of their gaining the supremacy in North America. [Footnote 15: e.g. in Fennimore Cooper's _Last of the Mohicans_.] [Sidenote: _Webb's conduct._] It was disputed at the time, and is still matter of dispute, whether Webb from Fort Edward might have saved the fort by the lake. The view generally taken of his conduct was probably coloured by the memory of his frightened retreat down the Mohawk river in the preceding year. He could muster but 4,000 men all told; and, had he advanced and met with disaster, no force would have been left to keep Montcalm from marching on Albany, and possibly on New York itself. He risked nothing, and possibly he was wise; but the catastrophe which happened within his reach was in part, rightly or wrongly, debited to his account, and the feeling deepened in England and in America that on the English side leaders of men were sadly wanting. [Sidenote: _The French raid the German Flats._] One more success was scored by the French before the winter came on. In October, Vaudreuil sent out from Montreal a raiding party of the old type, consisting of about 300 Canadians and Indians under an officer named Belêtre. They went up the St. Lawrence into Lake Ontario, landed on its southern shore, at some distance east of the ruins of Oswego, crossed to the portage between the Mohawk and Wood Creek, where the forts were no longer standing, and moved down the Mohawk to raid the outlying settlements. Between the head waters of the Mohawk and Schenectady, on the northern side of the river, was the district known as the German Flats, where German colonists had been planted about the year 1720. They came from the Palatinate, and their group of houses bore the name of the settlement or village {268} of the Palatines. In the second week of November, Belêtre's party broke in among them, burnt houses and barns, killed cattle, horses, and some of the inhabitants, carried off over a hundred prisoners, and retired in safety in face of a weak detachment from a little English fort on the other side of the river, and of a stronger body of troops whom Lord Howe brought up from Schenectady too late to retrieve the disaster. [Sidenote: _The French triumphant in North America._] [Sidenote: _William Pitt._] This was the end of the campaign, the high-water mark of French successes in North America. At the end of 1757, the English had been beaten at all points. They had failed to attack Louisbourg, they had been driven from Lake George, the country of the Five Nation Indians was nearly cut off, all hold on the rivers and the lakes was gone. The outlook was dark in the extreme: it is always darkest before dawn, and as a matter of fact dawn had already begun; for William Pitt, who had been dismissed from office in April, was recalled by the unanimous voice of the people of England before the end of June, and, leaving to the incompetent Duke of Newcastle the name of Prime Minister, controlled, as Secretary of State and Leader of the House of Commons, the soldiers, the sailors, the subsidies and the foreign policy of his country.[16] [Footnote 16: Lord Chesterfield in a letter to his son dated May 18, 1758 (1775 ed., vol. iv, p. 137, Letter 298), wrote as follows of the Newcastle-Pitt combination: 'The Duke of Newcastle and Mr. Pitt jog on like man and wife, that is, seldom agreeing, often quarrelling, but by mutual interest upon the whole not parting.'] [Sidenote: _Want of a leader on the English side._] The wars of England have usually run the same course. They have begun with blunders and reverses, but ended in success. The English do not love war, and are rarely prepared for it. They begin fighting in half-hearted fashion, before the nation makes up its mind that the cause is worth a real effort and serious expenditure of money and life. There is groping about for a leader, for some one who will say distinctly what is to be done, and will prove as good as {269} his word. If such a man is found, the people will follow; they forgive a man who makes mistakes provided, as the saying is, that he makes something. Then the resources of the country are concentrated and utilized, and under articulate and sympathetic leadership the cause of the nation prospers. If England in the year 1757 needed some one controlling will, much more was the want felt in her North American colonies. The demoralization caused by feeble ministries in England had its baleful effect in America; nerveless government at home strengthened the centrifugal tendencies of the colonies. Nothing but common danger gave them any common life; and, though Pitt's advent to power partially corrected the evil, Pitt was in England not in America. To the end the uniting force came from without rather than from within: the colonies followed the lead of Pitt and his generals, but to the mother country not to the colonies was due the conquest of Canada. [Sidenote: _Distress in Canada._] That Canada must be conquered, when England made her effort, was inevitable. The French appeared triumphant; they had moved forward; they had struck heavy blows; but behind the fighting line, even on the surface, they were in straits. The garrison of Fort William Henry had not been taken prisoners to Canada, because Canada could hardly feed them;[17] and the winter of 1757, which followed the brilliant campaign, was a winter of distress. Bread was wanting; horses were eaten for meat; the troops were mutinous and only kept in order by Levis' firmness and tact; the finances were in a ruinous condition; there were winter gaieties and winter gambling, but Canada before its conquest was in much the same condition as the mother country on the brink of the Revolution. [Footnote 17: Similarly, after the fall of Oswego, Horace Walpole wrote, 'The massacre at Oswego happily proves a romance; part of the two regiments that were made prisoners there are actually arrived at Plymouth, the provisions at Quebec being too scanty to admit additional numbers.' _Letters of Horace Walpole_, vol. iii, pp. 44, 45 (Letter of Nov. 13, 1756).] {270} [Sidenote: _French plan of campaign for 1758._] Both sides laid their plans for the coming year. The French scheme included a movement by Levis from Fort Frontenac on Lake Ontario, across to the site of Oswego, and thence, after securing the alliance or the allegiance of the Iroquois, down the Mohawk valley, so as to co-operate with the main army under Montcalm advancing from Ticonderoga. The success of this project of Vaudreuil's, which was never carried into effect, presupposed that the bulk of the English troops would again be drawn off to attack Louisbourg, for it was known or suspected in Canada that another attempt on Louisbourg was in contemplation. [Sidenote: _Pitt's plan._] Pitt's plan of campaign was not new or original. The experience of long years had painfully taught what were the points where Canada must be attacked, if any permanent success was to be achieved. First and foremost was Louisbourg. With Louisbourg in English hands, the St. Lawrence could be blocked and Canada starved out. But the English minister had no intention of denuding the inland frontier of the British colonies, in order to take the French fortress in Cape Breton. On the contrary, he laid his plans also for an advance on Ticonderoga, and for the recovery of Fort Duquesne. He conceived no new scheme, but into old schemes he put new life. The novelties which he introduced were abundance of English troops, prompt instead of dilatory movement, and above all capable leaders--inspired with his own spirit, and in their turn inspiring the men whom they led. There was to be an end of the 'delays, misfortunes, disappointments and disgraces,'[18] which had so long been associated in the English mind with war in America. [Footnote 18: _Annual Register_ for 1758, p. 70.] [Sidenote: _Strong English forces sent to America._] On December 30, 1757, he addressed a circular letter to the Governors of the North American colonies, asking for levies of 20,000 men. On February 19, 1758, a strong fleet set sail for Halifax, to be directed against Louisbourg, while other English squadrons blocked the French ports {271} in Europe, and kept the enemy's ships from crossing the Atlantic. It was a rare thing for an English expedition for America to start betimes, instead of waiting for orders and counter orders, until the season for active work was far spent. It was unheard of, too, for so many English troops to be sent into the New World. Twelve thousand soldiers, nearly all regulars, took part in the Louisbourg expedition. Abercromby on Lake George commanded, when summer came on, 15,000 men, of whom fully 6,000 were regulars. Six thousand men took part in the march against Fort Duquesne, of whom 1,600 were Imperial troops. Thus in the year 1758 England had more than 20,000 regular soldiers employed in North America, enough force, as Lord Chesterfield thought, when coupled with the colonial troops, 'to eat up the French alive in Canada, Quebec, and Louisbourg, if we have but skill and spirit enough to exert it properly.'[19] [Footnote 19: Lord Chesterfield to his son, Feb. 8, 1758 (1775 ed., vol. iv, p. 124; Letter 293).] [Sidenote: _The English commanders._] The skill and the spirit were forthcoming also, though not at once in full measure, and not at all points. Loudoun was recalled. Abercromby was left to take his place, but with him was placed as brigadier a young officer of rare promise, Lord Howe. Jeffrey Amherst was picked out to command the troops against Louisbourg, and of his three brigadiers one was Lawrence, the Governor of Nova Scotia, and another was Wolfe. In the further west, the command of the expedition against Fort Duquesne was given to a resolute Scotch soldier, Forbes. Gradually in his choice of officers Pitt sifted the chaff from the grain, young men were brought to the front, merit was preferred to seniority. Amherst was forty-one years of age, Wolfe was thirty-one, Howe was thirty-three. Lord Chesterfield wrote of them in February, 1758, 'Abercromby is to be the sedentary and not the acting commander. Amherst, Lord Howe, and Wolfe are to be the acting and I hope the active officers. I wish they may agree.'[20] [Footnote 20: Ibid.] {272} [Sidenote: _The fleet sails for Louisbourg. Admiral Boscawen._] The fleet which sailed for North America, carrying the hopes and the fortunes of England, was commanded by Admiral Boscawen. He had seen service in the East and West, off Cartagena and Pondicherry; and it was he who in the year 1755, before France and England were at war, had, as has already been told, attacked and taken the two French ships, the _Alcide_ and the _Lys_, off the North American coast.[21] He had Churchill blood in his veins, for Arabella Churchill was his grandmother; and he was known as 'Old Dreadnought,' after a ship of that name which he had commanded. He was a determined, hard-fighting sailor, with little respect for neutrality in time or place if there was a chance of striking a blow for England. [Footnote 21: See above, p. 234.] [Sidenote: _Amherst._] His colleague, General Amherst, like Wolfe, was born in Kent. Joining the Guards in 1731, he made his name on the Continent. He was present at Dettingen and Fontenoy, and served on the Duke of Cumberland's staff. Unlike most of the commanders of the time, he lived to be an old man, and was Commander-in-Chief of the English army before he died; but his good work was all done in America in the years 1758-60, while he was still in early middle age, and when he conquered Canada. He was a good soldier of the cautious type, not wanting either in vigour or determination, but making sure of each point before he moved further. What Carlyle says of the Parliamentary general, Lord Essex, might be said of Amherst--he was a 'somewhat elephantine' man. [Sidenote: _The first and second siege of Louisbourg compared._] The ships took time to go over the sea, and did not reach Halifax until well into May. On the second of June they sailed into Gabarus Bay and came in sight of Louisbourg. The second siege and capture of Louisbourg was very similar to the first, except that in 1758 much larger forces were engaged on either side, and more military skill was shown than in 1745. The earlier siege was, on the English side, {273} as far as the land forces were concerned, purely a colonial venture. On the later occasion very few colonial troops were employed. The French had in garrison 3,000 regulars, and the residents of the town who bore arms made up nearly another thousand, the besiegers on land outnumbering the besieged in the proportion of three to one. In harbour there were twelve French ships of war, with a complement of 3,000 men--no match for Boscawen's overpowering fleet. The fortifications of Louisbourg were strong, but not so strong as they were reputed. It was stated that prior to 1755 nothing had been done to repair the damage done in the first siege.[22] The French had a good commander, the Chevalier de Drucour; and his wife, according to the accounts of the time, was as brave as himself. In 1758 the English landed in the same place as in 1745; the siege took almost exactly the same number of days; the Grand Battery on the north shore of the harbour was, as before, evacuated by the French; once more the English mounted guns on Lighthouse Point, from which the French had retired, and battered to pieces the Island Battery, which guarded the mouth of the harbour. Again, as in 1745, a small force of Canadians and Indians tried to make a diversion from inland, and again the attempt was quite ineffectual. The seas and the skies, however, in spite of the time of year, were far less kind to the besiegers on the later than on the earlier occasion. [Footnote 22: In the _Annual Register_ for 1758, pp. 179-81, is given a translation of a letter from Drucour, the French Governor of Louisbourg, after he had been taken prisoner to England. It is dated Andover, Oct. 1, 1758. Referring to the defences of Louisbourg, he speaks of 'a fortification (if it could deserve the name) crumbling down in every flank, face, and courtine, except the right flank of the King's bastion, which was remounted the first year after my arrival.'] [Sidenote: _Landing effected by Wolfe._] The real difficulty was the initial difficulty, that of landing on an awkward coast in bad weather, with an enemy lining the shore. The French had made full preparations, and had {274} their men, guns, and batteries ready along the fringe of Gabarus Bay; while, for nearly a week, surf and fog made any attempt at landing impracticable. At length, at daybreak on June 8, three strong parties under the three brigadiers put out in boats from the transports, and rowed for the shore at three separate points. The main effort was intended to be made on the extreme left, at Freshwater Cove, by the party commanded by Wolfe. As the boats neared the land, the French opened a heavy fire, and Wolfe signalled a retreat; but, by happy accident or by design, one or more of the boats misinterpreted the sign, and made good their landing a little to the right of the cove, where the cliff gave some slight shelter from the enemy's fire. The rest then followed in support, and, with no slight loss of men and boats, the English carried the French position, and drove their opponents back within range of the Louisbourg guns. [Sidenote: _The siege pressed._] The disembarkation now went on under difficulties. On June 18 the siege guns were landed, and gradually the English formed their encampment, drew their lines, and opened their trenches, beleaguering the fortress on the western side, where the peninsula on which the town of Louisbourg stood joined the mainland. The lines started from the sea at Flat Point cove, and extended in a semicircle for about two miles inland. Meanwhile, on the twelfth of June, Wolfe had marched round the harbour, and subsequently mounted his guns at Lighthouse Point on the opposite side. By the twenty-fifth he had silenced the Island Battery, and thus commanded the mouth of the harbour, where the French in consequence sunk several of their ships to bar any attack by Boscawen. The town was now fully invested by land and sea; such French ships as still remained were cooped up in the harbour, and the fall of Louisbourg was merely a question of time. But the operations took time. The besiegers had the same difficulty as had been experienced in 1745, in advancing {275} across a belt of swamp. Day and night passed in incessant work, under fire of the enemy's guns, and interrupted by sorties of the garrison; but slowly and surely the trenches were drawn nearer to the town. On the twenty-first of July three out of the five remaining French ships took fire from a shell and were destroyed, and on the twenty-fifth the two last were successfully attacked by a detachment of English sailors, who rowed into the harbour at night time, and among whom was James Cook, not yet known to fame. One ship was grounded and burnt, the other was towed off by its captors. [Sidenote: _The town surrenders._] [Sidenote: _Louisbourg dismantled._] This bold feat brought matters to a climax. The land defences were in ruins, the garrison was worn out, there was nothing to stop a general assault by land and sea. On the twenty-sixth the French Governor asked for terms. Unconditional surrender was demanded and refused; but before the message of refusal reached the English camp, it was withdrawn, at the instance, it was said, of the Intendant or Commissary-General, who represented the civilian element in the town. The articles of capitulation were signed, between 5,000 and 6,000 French soldiers and sailors became prisoners of war, and on July 27 the English forces entered Louisbourg. Two years later, in 1760, all the fortifications were demolished, and the town was practically blotted out. No chance was left of again handing back to France a fortress which had so long threatened English interests in America. Halifax was henceforth to be unrivalled on the coast; and at the present day the once famous harbour of Louisbourg is in the keeping of Cape Breton fishermen. [Sidenote: _Wolfe's services at Louisbourg._] [Sidenote: _Time lost by the English._] The English Parliament voted thanks to Amherst and Boscawen; but to Wolfe, who as a subordinate was not mentioned, the thanks of the nation were mainly due. He 'shone extremely at Louisbourg,'[23] wrote Horace Walpole, and Walpole owns that he did not love him. Had he been {276} in supreme command, the siege would probably have ended earlier, and greater results would have been achieved. His own view, at any rate, as expressed in a private letter written after his return to England, was that both during the siege and after it valuable time was lost.[24] It is certain that when the expedition was sent out, more was hoped from it than the capture of Louisbourg alone. On May 18, 1758, Lord Chesterfield wrote: 'By this time I believe the French are entertained in America with the loss of Cape Breton, and, in consequence of that, Quebec; for we have a force there equal to both those undertakings, and officers there now that will execute what Lord L---- (Loudoun) never would so much as attempt.'[25] The French on their side, as we learn from a subsequent letter from Drucour, were aware of the importance of prolonging the siege, in order to prevent Abercromby being reinforced, or an attack being made on Quebec;[26] and all honour is due to the memory of the brave {277} French commander for the determined stand which he made. Before the siege ended, Abercromby had been beaten back from Ticonderoga, and breathing time had been given to the defenders of Canada. [Footnote 23: _Letters of Horace Walpole_, vol. iii, p. 207 (Letter of Feb. 9, 1759).] [Footnote 24: 'We lost time at the siege, still more after the siege, and blundered from the beginning to the end of the campaign' (from a letter written Dec. 1, 1758; Wright's _Life of Wolfe_, p. 465). Similarly, Wolfe wrote from the camp before Louisbourg, on July 27, 1758, the day after the capitulation: 'If this force had been properly managed, there was an end of the French colony in North America in one campaign' (Wright, p. 449).] [Footnote 25: Lord Chesterfield to his son, May 18, 1758 (1775 ed., vol. iv, p. 136; Letter 298).] [Footnote 26: See the letter already quoted above, p. 273, note. Drucour is explaining why he would not allow the French ships to leave Louisbourg harbour, 'It was our business to defer the determination of our fate as long as possible. My accounts from Canada assured me that M. de Montcalm was marching to the enemy and would come up with them between July 15 and 20. I said then "if the ships leave the harbour on June 10 (as they desire), the English admiral will enter it immediately after," and we should have been lost before the end of the month, which would have put it in the power of the generals of the besiegers to have employed the months of July and August in sending succours to the troops marching against Canada, and to have entered the river St. Lawrence at the proper season.' In a 'Scheme for taking Louisbourg,' which was submitted to Pitt by Brigadier Waldo (who had been on Pepperell's expedition) on Nov. 7, 1757, fourteen days were given to Louisbourg to hold out when once duly invested, and an attack on Quebec was contemplated as the immediate result of its fall (Brymer's _Report on Canadian Archives_, 1886, pp. 151-3).] [Sidenote: _Wolfe returns to England._] Yet it was but the end of July when Louisbourg fell, and, if Wolfe had had his way, the ships would have gone on to Quebec. Even Amherst might have gone on but for the bad news from Abercromby, which confirmed his habitual caution, and retarded instead of quickening his movements. One officer, Lord Rollo, was sent to reduce the �le St. Jean; another, Monckton, cleared the valley of the St. John river on the mainland. Wolfe was dispatched to Gaspé Bay and the mouth of the St. Lawrence, to harry the settlers and the fishermen; and when he had accomplished his task, which was little to his taste, he sailed for home angry and disappointed that more had not been done, and that his advice had not been taken. Amherst, in the meantime, had gone with six regiments to reinforce Abercromby at Lake George. [Sidenote: _The Maritime Provinces finally secured to England._] The capture of Louisbourg secured to England all that should have been hers when the Treaty of Utrecht was being negotiated. The English were now in full occupation of the Maritime Provinces of Canada. More than half of the comparatively small French population of Cape Breton was, at the people's own wish, shipped to France; and of the residents in the �le St. Jean, mainly Acadian refugees, a large proportion was similarly transported, while others found their way to Canada. Cape Breton was attached to Nova Scotia, to be subsequently separated from that province and again rejoined. The �le St. Jean was placed under the same Government, and before the century ended, in the year 1799, its name was changed to Prince Edward Island in honour of the Duke of Kent, the father of Her late Majesty Queen Victoria. [Sidenote: _Abercromby's advance._] By Loudoun's recall, Abercromby was left in chief command of the British forces in North America. He had with him, {278} as one of his brigadiers, Lord Howe, who commanded the 55th Regiment. In May, 1758, he was at Albany preparing for the summer's work. In June he moved up to the end of Lake George, where his force, amounting to 15,000 men, gathered to drive the French back on Canada. The colonies had answered well to Pitt's appeal, and contributed 9,000 men to the total. On July 5 the army embarked in boats; on the sixth they landed without opposition at the northern end of the lake, on the western side of the water, and began their march on Ticonderoga through the forest, having on their right the semicircular stream which connects Lake George and Lake Champlain. [Sidenote: _Lord Howe killed._] The right centre column was led by Lord Howe, and, as the soldiers groped their way through the dense thickets, they stumbled across a party of French, who had been sent out to reconnoitre, had also lost their way, and found their retreat cut off. A confused skirmish followed, with more numerical loss to the French than to the English; but Howe was shot dead, and his life by common consent meant the life of the expedition. All night the army remained under arms in the forest, and on the morning of the seventh marched back to the landing-place. [Sidenote: _The approach to the French position at Ticonderoga._] It was a matter of very few miles to the French position. The river, which carries the waters of Lake George into Lake Champlain, and enters the latter lake at Ticonderoga, has a course of about eight miles; but they are eight miles of a semicircle, and the distance in a straight line from Lake George to Ticonderoga is much shorter. The English had landed at the head of the river; about two miles lower down rapids begin, and here was the portage leading from the head to the bottom of the rapids, and forming the chord of an arc, the arc being between three and four miles of broken water. The lower bridge of the portage, where there was a sawmill, was well within two miles of the French Fort Carillon. At the head of the rapids the French had held an advanced {279} post, which was withdrawn on the approach of Abercromby's army, and, when the main force of that army landed to wander in the forest, a detachment was sent on down the river and occupied the deserted position. On the seventh, while the main body again was resting at the landing-place, Bradstreet was sent forward to the post at the bottom of the rapids, which was also found to be deserted, and here on the evening of the seventh the main body encamped, the bridge being repaired, and the encampment being on the same side of the river as Ticonderoga. [Sidenote: _Montcalm's dispositions._] Montcalm, who was joined by Levis on the night of the seventh, had with him rather under 4,000 men, the majority of whom were regulars. Outnumbered as he was by three or four to one, his position was perilous in the extreme, for his retreat could easily be cut off. He determined, however, to make a stand, and on rising ground on the inland--the western--side of the little peninsula on which Fort Carillon or Ticonderoga[27] was built, at a distance of rather over half a mile from the fort, he formed at the eleventh hour entrenchments of timber, fringed on the outside by a network of 'felled trees, the branches pointed outwards,'[28] and carefully laid so as to entangle and annoy the enemy. [Footnote 27: Ticonderoga, according to Rogers' _Journals_ (p. 22, note), is an 'Indian name signifying the meeting or confluence of three waters.'] [Footnote 28: Abercromby's dispatch to Pitt, July 12, 1758.] [Sidenote: _The English repulse at Ticonderoga._] [Sidenote: _Retreat of Abercromby._] Against this position Abercromby ordered an attack on July 8. He had been told by French prisoners that Montcalm's force was stronger than it actually was, and that further reinforcements were shortly to arrive. In consequence he hurried his movements, and without bringing up any guns, which apparently he had left behind him, he determined, thinking that the entrenchment had not been completed, to trust entirely to the bayonet. The result was the inevitable result of a frontal attack, delivered in the open, against an enemy fighting under cover and undisturbed by {280} artillery fire. For four hours charge after charge was made, and at the close of the day the English had achieved nothing and had lost nearly 2,000 men. The casualties in the Black Watch alone amounted to 500. Abercromby had still 13,000 men left, but he had no stomach for further fighting. On the following day he ordered a retreat, and the whole force went back to the southern end of Lake George. [Sidenote: _Triumph of Montcalm._] At Oswego and at Fort William Henry, Montcalm had shown how to concentrate superior forces at a given point rapidly and effectively, and how to use them when concentrated to the best possible advantage. At Ticonderoga, he showed how to make the most of very inferior numbers, by utilizing every natural and artificial advantage, and every mistake of the foe. It was a great triumph for him; it produced joy in Canada, and discouragement in England; but, as Mr. Parkman points out, it is difficult to see how he could possibly have succeeded, if Abercromby had taken any other course than the one which he actually took. Wolfe summed up the matter aright, when, in the following December, he referred in a private letter to 'the famous post at Ticonderoga, where Mr. Abercromby by a little soldiership and a little patience might, I think, have put an end to the war in America.'[29] [Footnote 29: Wright's _Life of Wolfe_, p. 469.] [Sidenote: _Tribute to Lord Howe._] Almost as disastrous as the repulse itself was the death of Lord Howe, which preceded it. The eldest of three distinguished brothers, the second of whom was the famous admiral, and the third the not so successful general in the American War of Independence, he was not thirty-four years old when he was killed, and had only landed in America in the previous year. Yet he had lived long enough for all men to speak well of him, and all to love him. In his dispatch giving an account of the operations, Abercromby wrote: 'He was very deservedly universally beloved and respected through {281} the whole army.'[30] Pitt testified in more stilted phrases that 'he was by the universal voice of army and people a character of ancient times, a complete model of military virtue in all its branches.'[31] Wolfe loved him dearly, and his letters show how highly he valued 'his abilities, spirit and address.'[32] He writes of him as 'the very best officer in the King's service,' as 'the noblest Englishman that has appeared in my time,' as 'truly a great man.' 'This country has produced nothing like him in my time; his death cannot be enough lamented.' Similar testimony is given by Robert Rogers, the Ranger, who was with the force when he fell: 'This noble and brave officer being universally beloved by both officers and soldiers of the army, his fall was not only most sincerely lamented, but seemed to produce an almost universal consternation and langour through the whole.'[33] But the most striking honour to his name and memory was paid by the province of Massachusetts. In 1759 the Court of Assembly ordered a monument to him to be placed in Westminster Abbey, which still records 'the sense they had of his services and military virtues, and of the affection their officers and soldiers bore to his command.' Burke, in the _Annual Register_ for 1758,[34] gives the clue to the affection with which the colonists regarded Lord Howe: 'From the moment he landed in America he had wisely conformed, and made his regiment conform, to the kind of service which the country required.' Howe's life, he adds, was 'long enough for his honour, but not for his country.' In truth, had he lived, and had Wolfe lived, the history of the English in America might have been widely different. Two men who in youth had so inspired their time, and so impressed American colonists with the sense of leadership, might well {282} have averted the War of Independence, or by military genius have given it another issue. [Footnote 30: Abercromby to Pitt, July 12, 1758.] [Footnote 31: _Grenville Correspondence_, vol. i, p. 262.] [Footnote 32: Wright, pp. 426, 448, 450, 465, 469.] [Footnote 33: Rogers' _Journals_, p. 114, note.] [Footnote 34 pp. 72, 73.] [Sidenote: _Bradstreet takes Fort Frontenac._] From July to October Abercromby remained at one end of Lake George, and Montcalm, who had received heavy reinforcements, at the other. Parties of Rangers and Canadians attacked each other on the Wood Creek line, but the main bodies were inactive. The presence of the English force had the advantage, however, of holding in their front so large a number of the enemy that the latter were unable adequately to protect other positions, and in consequence they lost Fort Frontenac. That competent officer, Colonel Bradstreet, had already proposed an expedition against this point, and when he renewed his proposal after the battle of Ticonderoga, Abercromby gave his consent, and spared him 3,600 men for the purpose, noting that 'he is not only very active, but has great knowledge of the country.'[35] [Footnote 35: Abercromby to Pitt, July 12, 1758.] In August he moved up the Mohawk, took his troops past the Carrying Place from that river, where, on the site of Fort Williams, General Stanwix was busy building a new fort, reached the ruins of Oswego, put out across the lake, and on August 25 landed close to Fort Frontenac. By the twenty-seventh he had the fort at the mercy of his guns, and the small garrison of a little over a hundred men surrendered. The prisoners were sent on parole to Montreal, to be exchanged for a corresponding number of English; the fort was burnt, and guns, ships, and supplies were carried off or destroyed. It was an excellent piece of work for the English side; 'a great stroke,' as Wolfe wrote on hearing of it.[36] Great material damage was caused to the French by, temporarily at any rate, cutting their communications with the west, and intercepting supplies which had been intended for {283} the forts on the Ohio and on the upper lakes. The moral effect was greater still. The time-honoured French fort on Lake Ontario, the earliest French post on the lakes, had been with little effort taken and blotted out, reminding the waverers among the Five Nation Indians that, in spite of reverses, the English arm was strong and far-reaching, and the English alliance was for them a valuable asset. [Footnote 36: Letter of Sept. 30, 1758 (Wright's _Life of Wolfe_, p. 457). In another letter (p. 465) he writes: 'Bradstreet's coup was masterly. He is a very extraordinary man.'] [Sidenote: _Amherst becomes Commander-in-Chief in North America._] Early in October Amherst came up to Abercromby's camp, and the two generals decided not to make a further attempt on Ticonderoga until the following year. 'General Amherst,' wrote Wolfe, 'thought the entrenchments so improved as to require more ceremony in the second attack than the season would allow of.'[37] The troops were accordingly sent into winter quarters, and in November Abercromby received a letter of recall. Amherst became in his stead Commander-in-Chief of the British forces in North America. [Footnote 37: Wright's _Life of Wolfe_, p. 469.] [Sidenote: _The expedition against Fort Duquesne._] By the end of October campaigning was over for the year in the east, and in the centre; but it was not so in the west, where Brigadier-General Forbes was marching on Fort Duquesne. [Sidenote: _General Forbes._] Forbes was an older man than the other English commanders, who achieved success in the war; and he seems to have been over sixty in the year 1758.[38] He proved himself to be a man of great fortitude and resolution, tactful in dealing with colonists or Indians, a brave, sure, and careful soldier. His task was to give security to the harried frontiers of Virginia and Pennsylvania, and to clear the French out of the Ohio valley. With this end he had to collect and equip a force, the large majority of whom were provincials; to get money and men out of two colonies, which were very jealous alike of the mother country and of {284} each other; to make choice between two conflicting routes, and to detach the Ohio Indians as far as possible from the French cause. [Footnote 38: For his age see Kingsford's _History of Canada_, vol. iv, p. 192, note. He has been generally put down as a younger man.] [Sidenote: _Reasons why the expedition made slow progress._] A long time was taken over the preliminaries, and over the expedition itself, the object of which was not attained until the end of November; but the delays were not only the consequence of want of transport, and of Forbes' own ill health, they were also the result of design. The longer the English kept their enemies waiting to be attacked, the fewer those enemies were likely to be; for the Indians, and the militia of New France, did not love to keep the field for any long time together. Moreover, as Forbes wrote to Pitt,[39] October and November were the best hunting months for the Indians, which they were therefore not willing to devote to war; while, on the other hand, they were months when the leaves fell and left the backwoods easier to reconnoitre and less easy for ambuscade. [Footnote 39: Letter of Forbes to Pitt, Oct. 20, 1758.] [Sidenote: _Preparation for advance._] [Sidenote: _A new route taken._] Forbes came to Philadelphia in April; and through the early summer months his force gradually assembled, and moved to the front. When the numbers were complete, they amounted to over 6,000 men, in the main southern colonists, but including a strong regiment of Highlanders. The second in command was a good man for the work, Bouquet, one of the Swiss officers of the Royal Americans. The advanced base was formed at Raestown, now Bedford, in Pennsylvania, distant about ninety miles from Fort Duquesne. It was some thirty miles north-east of Fort Cumberland, from which Braddock had started on his disastrous march; and a keen controversy arose as to whether the old route should be followed, or a new road taken. Opening a road to the Ohio meant, when the fighting was over, giving to the State, within or near whose boundaries the road ran, control of the trade. Virginia accordingly pressed for the old and more southerly route, Pennsylvania for the northern line. In spite {285} of Washington's arguments, the latter was chosen; it was shorter and more direct, and on the whole presented fewer natural difficulties than the other. The first forty miles led due west over the main Alleghany range and the Laurel hills, to a place called Loyalhannon; and by the end of August Bouquet had a road cut to this place, a dépôt established, and preparations made for carrying on the track through fifty miles of less difficult country to Fort Duquesne. [Sidenote: _An advance attack on Fort Duquesne repulsed with loss._] [Sidenote: _The Ohio Indians desert the French._] Every care was being taken by the commanders; but notwithstanding, before the end came, there was in a smaller measure a repetition of Braddock's reverse. In the middle of September, Major Grant, an officer of the Highlanders, obtained permission from Bouquet to march out from Loyalhannon with between 700 and 800 men,[40] for the purpose of reconnoitring Fort Duquesne. He arrived at night time close to the fort; intended a night attack, which miscarried; repeated the attempt to attack on the following day, and having broken up his force into small parties, was badly beaten and himself taken prisoner. The total British casualties numbered about 280, the survivors finding their way back to Bouquet at Loyalhannon. 'This was a most terrible check to my small army,' wrote Forbes,[41] but the reverse was more than counterbalanced shortly afterwards by a success of a different kind. From the first Forbes had spared no pains to secure the friendship of the Indians; and in October, in large measure through the good offices of a Moravian missionary, a general council was held, at which the tribes of the Ohio made their peace with the English, deserting the French cause as rats leave a sinking ship. [Footnote 40: Forbes' own dispatch mentions 900.] [Footnote 41: Forbes to Pitt, Raestown, Oct. 20, 1758.] [Sidenote: _The final advance on Fort Duquesne._] [Sidenote: _The fort abandoned by the French and occupied by the English._] It was November before Forbes joined Bouquet at Loyalhannon. He was broken in body, but resolute to carry {286} through the expedition, in spite of the lateness of the season. The road had been cut to within easy reach of the French fort; and, on November 18, 2,500 men, picked out of the force, advanced in three columns, carrying with them only what was absolutely necessary in the way of supplies, and their brave commander on a litter. At a day's march from Fort Duquesne, it was reported that the fort had been evacuated and burnt; and when the English reached it on the twenty-fifth, they found that the news was true. Weakened by the desertion of the Indians, and by having disbanded some of the militia, whom he could not feed, in want of the provisions which Bradstreet had intercepted at Fort Frontenac, the French commander, De Ligneris, saw no alternative but to blow up the fort, and retreat more than a hundred miles up the Alleghany to the junction of that river with French Creek, leaving the valley of the Ohio in English hands, as events proved, for ever. [Sidenote: _Foundation of Pittsburg._] [Sidenote: _Death of Forbes._] For the moment Forbes' chief care was to build at once on the site of Fort Duquesne a temporary stockade, which could be held by a small garrison through the winter. In the following year a permanent fort was built. The name of Fort Duquesne was exchanged for that of Fort Pitt, and the city of Pittsburg still recalls the statesman who recovered for the British colonies the rich western lands which are watered by the Ohio. 'I have used the freedom of giving your name to Fort Duquesne,' wrote Forbes to Pitt two days after he had reached the fort, 'as I hope it was in some measure the being actuated by your spirit that now makes us masters of the place.'[42] The honest soldier, whom the English minister sent to do the work, and who did it when the colonies concerned should have done it for themselves, did not long survive his success. Patient and suffering, John Forbes was carried back to Philadelphia, where he {287} died in the following March, having shown a steadfast, single-minded devotion to duty, rare even in the rich record of British soldiers. [Footnote 42: Forbes to Pitt, Pittsburg, Nov. 27, 1758.] [Sidenote: _Results of the campaign of 1758._] [Sidenote: _Canada receives little help from France._] With the English occupation of Fort Duquesne, the campaigning of 1758 in North America came to an end. It been a long season, and for England distinctly a successful though also to a certain extent a disappointing one. 'I do not reckon that we have been fortunate this year in America,' wrote Wolfe on December 1; 'our force was so superior to the enemy's that we might hope for greater success.'[43] He wrote in ignorance that Fort Duquesne had been taken, but, notwithstanding, his view of the situation was the true one. At Louisbourg, Fort Frontenac, Fort Duquesne, there had been great and substantial successes. At Ticonderoga there had been a bad check; but the French had made nothing of it afterwards. They were now on the defensive and playing a losing game. Yet that more might and should have been done by the English commanders with their great superiority of numbers cannot be doubted. Had Wolfe been in Amherst's place, and Lord Howe in Abercromby's, the year 1758 might well have been the last year of French rule in North America. But the end was only postponed for a short time, the resources of Canada in men and in supplies were becoming insufficient to sustain the war: the country was practically in a state of blockade; and Bougainville, who was sent at the beginning of winter to France to plead the cause of Canada, met with little success. A very few soldiers, some supplies, and honours for the generals, were the result of his mission. France was engrossed in the war in Europe, and not as many hundreds were sent to North America as England sent thousands. Vaudreuil, in the meantime, was intriguing against Montcalm, whose genius and determination had prolonged the unequal {288} fight, and on whom, with Levis and Bourlamaque, lay the heavy burden of defending a ruined State, and checking, at this point and at that, the flowing tide of English invasion. [Footnote 43: Wright, p. 464.] NOTE.--For the above see, among modern books, KINGSFORD'S _History of Canada_, vols. iii and iv; PARKMAN'S _Montcalm and Wolfe_; and WRIGHT'S _Life of Wolfe_. {289} CHAPTER X THE CONQUEST OF CANADA (_continued_) When Wolfe reached England from Louisbourg in November, 1758, he wrote to Pitt offering himself for further service in America, 'and particularly in the river St. Lawrence, if any operations are to be carried on there.'[1] Before Christmas, Pitt had appointed him to command an expedition in the coming year against Quebec. [Footnote 1: Wolfe to Pitt, Nov. 22, 1758 (Wright's _Life of Wolfe_, p. 464). There was some misunderstanding as to his return to England. See the correspondence quoted by Mr. Kingsford in the note to vol. iv, p. 155, of his _History_.] [Sidenote: _Wolfe's early life and character._] Wolfe was born at Westerham, in Kent, on January 2, 1727, and was therefore not thirty-three years old when he was killed at Quebec in September, 1759. He was the son of a soldier, and received his first commission before he was fifteen. He was present at Dettingen, and at Culloden; and, subsequently to the latter battle, after an interval of fighting in the Netherlands, where he distinguished himself at the battle of Laffeldt, he was stationed for a considerable time in Scotland. Service in the Highlands, it may be noted, in Jacobite times, was not bad training for service in North America. In September, 1757, after the outbreak of the Seven Years' War, he took part in the expedition against Rochefort, to the south of La Rochelle, on the west coast of France--an enterprise as utterly barren of results as was the Duke of Buckingham's venture against the same area of coast when Charles I was King. Lord Howe and Wolfe {290} were among the few who gained any credit from the expedition. In the following year, Wolfe served at Louisbourg. Horace Walpole writes of him: 'Ambition, activity, industry, passion for the service, were conspicuous in Wolfe. He seemed to breathe for nothing but fame, and lost no moments in qualifying himself to compass his object.'[2] These words are partly true, but do not tell the whole truth. Wolfe was ambitious, active, and industrious, but he cared for more than fame alone. His dramatic death in the hour of victory, while he was still very young, makes it impossible to form an adequate estimate of his real worth as a soldier; but all that is known of him points to his having been, in spite of persistent ill health, a great military genius, and a rare leader of men. He seems to have resembled Nelson in his fighting qualities, and to have had the same lovable nature, coupled with a higher standard of life. Like Nelson, in warfare he always took the offensive if possible--took it, as at Quebec, in spite of smaller numbers and a less favourable position. 'An offensive, daring kind of war will awe the Indians and ruin the French,' were his words to Amherst in a letter written after the taking of Louisbourg.[3] [Footnote 2: Walpole's _Memoirs of the Reign of King George II_ (1847 ed.), vol. iii, p. 171.] [Footnote 3: Louisbourg, Sept. 30, 1758 (Wright, p. 457).] Like Nelson, he loved his men, and his men loved him. According to the old story, when the Duke of Newcastle told the King that Wolfe was mad, the King expressed a wish that he would bite his other generals. This was precisely what Wolfe did. He infected to some extent those above him, to a great extent those under his command. He was a man after Pitt's own heart; wherever he was, he made himself felt, giving a living fire and force to the army. Coupled with this vitality was a thorough knowledge of his profession, gained not only on actual battlefields and {291} training-grounds, but also from voluminous reading.[4] Nature gave him a hot temper and fearless independence of spirit; he was in consequence impatient, and perhaps unduly critical, of the mistakes of those above him; but he was the soul of honour and chivalry, and his private life was marked by tender love for his mother, stanch attachment to his friends, and kindness to all dependent upon him, including dumb animals. In his lifetime he enjoyed 'a large share of the friendship and almost the universal goodwill of mankind.'[5] In a word, English history has produced no truer type of hero than James Wolfe. [Footnote 4: In Wright's _Life of Wolfe_, pp. 342-5, is given a letter of Wolfe's, dated July, 1756, recommending a long list of books for a young soldier to read. Reference is made at the beginning of the letter to a French book recently published (Turpin's _Essai sur l'art de la guerre_), and it is interesting to find that Forbes, in a letter to Pitt from Raestown, dated Oct. 20, 1758, stated that in his march on Fort Duquesne he was acting on the principles laid down in that book.] [Footnote 5: From the 'Character of General Wolfe' in the _Annual Register_ for 1759, p. 282.] [Sidenote: _Wolfe's brigadiers. Monckton. Murray. George Townshend. Carleton. Howe. Admiral Saunders._] At the siege of Louisbourg, Wolfe was one of three brigadiers under General Amherst. When he was given the command of the expedition against Quebec, three brigadiers were placed under him--Monckton, Townshend, and Murray. They were all of noble birth, and two of them at any rate were good soldiers. Monckton, the senior of the three, had shown his efficiency in Acadia, and at the siege of Louisbourg. Murray proved his worth both before and after the capture of Quebec, in a civil as well as in a military capacity. The least satisfactory of the three was George Townshend, elder brother of the better known Charles Townshend, not wanting in capacity, but deficient in loyalty to his commander; a somewhat jealous and bitter-natured man, who had the backing of political and aristocratic connexion. Horace Walpole writes of him as a man 'whose proud and sullen and contemptuous temper never suffered him to wait for thwarting his superiors till risen to a level {292} with them. He saw everything in an ill-natured and ridiculous light--a sure prevention of ever being seen himself in a great or favourable one.'[6] The Quartermaster-General of the force was Guy Carleton, afterwards Lord Dorchester, well known in Canadian history, a great personal friend of Wolfe's, though out of favour with the King. Howe, younger brother of the man whose untimely death Wolfe so deeply lamented, commanded the light infantry, and led them in the van of the force up the cliffs of Quebec. Lastly, an admirable officer was in charge of the fleet, Saunders, who nineteen years before had sailed round the world with Lord Anson in the _Centurion_. [Footnote 6: _Memoirs of the Reign of King George II_ (1847 ed.), vol. iii, pp. 171, 172.] [Sidenote: _Small number of troops commanded by Wolfe._] [Sidenote: _Start of the expedition._] The troops, whom Wolfe and his officers commanded, were too few for the difficult task with which they were entrusted. They were to have numbered 12,000; as a matter of fact their total did not reach 9,000. Some were in America already, but the large majority sailed from England with Wolfe and Saunders, leaving England in the middle of February, anchoring at Halifax at the end of April, moving on to Louisbourg in May, when the ice was disappearing, and arriving in front of Quebec towards the end of June--a small squadron, under Admiral Durell, having already ascended the St. Lawrence in advance of the main fleet. As they went up the river, 'the prevailing sentimental toast amongst the officers' was 'British colours on every French fort, port, and garrison in America.'[7] [Footnote 7: From Knox's _Historical Journal of the Campaigns in North America_ (London, 1769), vol. i, p. 279.] [Sidenote: _General plan of campaign in North America._] The expedition against Quebec was only part of a general plan of campaign. While Wolfe was operating in the St. Lawrence, it was intended that Amherst, the Commander-in-Chief, with a larger army, should move northward by way of Lake Champlain; and, reducing the French forts at {293} Ticonderoga and Crown Point, make his way to the St. Lawrence, in time to co-operate with Wolfe's force, or to draw off a number of the defenders of Quebec for the protection of Montreal. As events turned out, Amherst gave little support to Wolfe. On the contrary, the main French army under Montcalm went to and remained at Quebec; and Wolfe, with the smaller force and far the more difficult enterprise to undertake, had to rely on his own resources alone. Montcalm had probably gauged the respective merits of Amherst and Wolfe. Had Amherst been in command of the Quebec expedition, and Wolfe leading the central advance, it is reasonable to suppose that the French general would have entrusted the defence of Quebec to a smaller force, and with the bulk of his army would have confronted the more dangerous English leader on the line of Lake Champlain. [Sidenote: _Amherst's difficulties._] Amherst, however, it is fair to note, had, as Commander-in-Chief, to direct his attention to other points as well as the direct northern line of advance. When the spring opened, the forts on the Mohawk river had been re-established, and Fort Duquesne was held by the small garrison which Forbes had placed there. But Oswego was still desolate, and the English had no post on Lake Ontario. The French held a strong position at Niagara; they commanded the routes from the lakes to Fort Duquesne; they could bring reinforcements of Canadians and Indians from the west as well as up the St. Lawrence--if any could be spared from this quarter. Forbes, the leader in the west, was dead. Under these circumstances a cautious commander, though not perhaps a brilliant one, might hesitate to invade central Canada until some further security was attained on the western side. [Sidenote: _Prideaux sent against Niagara._] [Sidenote: _Haldimand attacked at Oswego: he beats off the French._] General Stanwix was accordingly sent to reinforce Fort Duquesne, and, having made that position secure, to press forward, if possible, up the Alleghany and French Creek rivers, in order to co-operate with another force which, under General Prideaux, was ordered to ascend the Mohawk river, {294} reoccupy Oswego, and from Oswego as the base to attack Niagara. Prideaux concentrated his troops at Schenectady towards the end of May, about 5,000 in number, including two regiments of regulars. Sir William Johnson joined him with Indian warriors from the Five Nations; and with him too, as second in command, was Colonel Haldimand, like Bouquet a Swiss by birth, and twenty years later Governor-General of Canada. Strengthening the outposts on the line of communication as he advanced, Prideaux made his way to Oswego, and, leaving Haldimand there to rebuild the fort, started westwards on July 1 for Niagara, carrying his men in boats along the southern shore of Lake Ontario. Soon after he left, Haldimand's force at Oswego was attacked by 1,000 Canadians and Indians, who came up the St. Lawrence under the command of St. Luc de la Corne; but, though taken by surprise, the garrison beat off their assailants with little loss. [Sidenote: _Fort Niagara._] The French fort at Niagara was in good condition for defence. It stood in the angle between the Niagara river and the lake, on what is now the American side of the river; a road had been made past the falls, and there were two outposts, one above and the other below the falls. A competent French officer, Pouchot, was in command; his garrison, when the English appeared, numbered 500 men more or less, and he sent messages to bring up reinforcements from the forts on the Ohio route--Presque �le, Fort Leboeuf, and Machault or Venango--in addition to Indians and Rangers from Detroit and the west, who were already coming down to the aid of Canada. [Sidenote: _Death of Prideaux._] [Sidenote: _Johnson takes command and defeats the French relief force._] [Sidenote: _Surrender of Niagara._] On July 8 Prideaux summoned the fort to surrender, and, his summons being rejected, began to invest the place. No great skill was shown in the investment, and on July 20 the English general was accidentally killed by the bursting of a shell from one of his own guns. The command devolved on Johnson, who heard that a relief {295} force was coming down Lake Erie--a force which numbered at least 1,200 men all told, and was led by some of the best border fighters in Canada, including Ligneris, who had in the preceding year been in charge of Fort Duquesne. Johnson marched out to intercept them on the road between the fort and the falls, attacked them at once in front and on the flank, and gained a complete victory. The French officers were taken prisoners, their troops were utterly routed and broken up, and the survivors retreated westward to Detroit, abandoning Lake Erie and the whole of the Ohio country. It was on July 24 that the fight took place, and on the following day Pouchot, having verified the news of the French defeat, surrendered Niagara. One of the terms of the surrender was that the prisoners should be protected from the Indians by an English escort, the massacre at Fort William Henry being evidently borne in mind; and on this condition six hundred Frenchmen were sent to New York. [Sidenote: _Result of its fall._] Thus, for the second time, Sir William Johnson had rendered signal service to the English cause; and with the fall of Niagara the French lost all command of the lower lakes. Their only communication now with Detroit and the far West was by the old route of the Ottawa river, and their scheme of conquest in the lands of the Ohio was wholly and for ever undone. 'The taking of Niagara broke off effectually that communication, so much talked of and so much dreaded, between Canada and Louisiana; and by this stroke one of the capital political designs of the French, which gave occasion to the present war, was defeated in its direct and immediate object.'[8] On hearing of the success, Amherst sent up General Gage to replace Prideaux, with orders to come down the St. Lawrence and join in the combination against central Canada; but the force was small, Gage, like Amherst, was cautious, and the summer passed {296} away without any further success by the troops on Lake Ontario. [Footnote 8: _Annual Register_ for 1759, p. 34.] [Sidenote: _Amherst's advance._] [Sidenote: _The French abandon Ticonderoga and Crown Point._] While Prideaux and Johnson were operating against Niagara, Amherst had begun his northward movement. He had carefully secured his communications by fortified posts, and, before June ended, had gathered a force of 11,000 men at the southern end of Lake George, the scene of so many encampments and so much fighting. On July 21 he embarked his troops, followed the line of Abercromby's advance in the previous year, found the famous entrenchment, which had foiled Abercromby's troops, deserted, but the fort itself still held. On the evening of the twenty-sixth, however, deserters brought news that the garrison was in retreat, and shortly afterwards a loud explosion told its own tale. Ticonderoga had been abandoned and blown up. The French commander opposed to Amherst was Bourlamaque, and his orders were to fall back before the English to the outlet of Lake Champlain, where a small island in the Richelieu river, the �le aux Noix, could easily be defended, blocking the enemy's advance on Montreal. He had a force of over 3,000 men, the rearguard of which, consisting of 400 men, had held Ticonderoga for two or three days, to cover the retreat of the main force. On August 1, Crown Point was found to be abandoned also, and the way north, down Lake Champlain, lay open to the invaders of Canada. Amherst entered Crown Point on August 4, and on the following day wrote to Pitt: 'I shall take fast hold of it, and not neglect at the same time to forward every measure I can to enable me to pass Lake Champlain.' [Sidenote: _Amherst's inaction._] Now was the time for the quick aggressive movement which Wolfe practised and preached, but the Commander-in-Chief fell miserably short of the occasion. August went by, and September, but Robert Rogers and his Rangers, who harried the French Indians on the river St. Francis {297} north-east of Lake Champlain, were the only fighting members of Amherst's army. Time was spent in constructing a new fort at Crown Point; in making a road eastward from Lake Champlain, opposite Crown Point, to the Connecticut river; in building vessels to overpower four little armed sloops, which represented French naval enterprise on the lake. In the middle of October Amherst embarked his troops to go north, met with wind and storm, returned to Crown Point, and made all snug for the winter. This was not the way to conquer Canada: the real work was done by another man at another place. While the main English army loitered on the shores of Lake Champlain, Wolfe had laid down his life in victory on the Plains of Abraham. [Illustration: Map of Quebec] [Sidenote: _The harbour of Quebec._] [Sidenote: _The northern bank of the St. Lawrence._] By a Canadian Act of 1858, the harbour of Quebec, for the purposes of the Act, is defined as extending from the Cap Rouge river, about eight miles above Quebec, to the Montmorency, about the same distance below the city. At Quebec, and for many miles above, the St. Lawrence is a tidal river. Below Quebec the river flows due north-east, and is divided into two channels by the island of Orleans, which also lies due north-east and south-west, being twenty miles long with a maximum breadth of six miles. The inland--the south-western--end of the island points directly at the rock of Quebec, which runs out from the northern shore of the St. Lawrence, facing straight down the river, at four miles distance from the island. The two channels, looking up stream, unite at the end of the island, and form a semicircular basin just below Quebec, where the northern shore recedes. Immediately above this basin the rock of Quebec on the north of the river, and Point Levis on the southern mainland, jut out towards each other, narrowing the St. Lawrence to a breadth of considerably less than a mile. Above Quebec the upward course of the river is still south-west by west. The northern bank is continuously steep, and at five to six miles' distance from Quebec on this side is Sillery Cove. {298} Between two and three miles further on, nearly due west, is Cap Rouge. Over against Sillery the Chaudière river flows in from the south, forming in old days a possible route to the St. Lawrence for those who followed up the course of the Kennebec from the coast of Maine.[9] [Footnote 9: See above, p. 123.] Miles of river-side cliff culminate in the promontory on which Quebec stands, and the south-western end of which is known as Cape Diamond. From the river above the town, Quebec, if man combined with nature, was almost inaccessible. Below, the eastern side of the city is girt by the winding River St. Charles, beyond which are the meadows of Beauport, with shoals in front and high ground behind; and, past the little Beauport river, which is very roughly equidistant from the St. Charles and the Montmorency, the northern bank of the St. Lawrence is again more or less fringed with steep ground as far as, and beyond, the falls, over which the Montmorency takes its way into the great river. [Sidenote: _The strength of the French position._] Nature had given Quebec a position of unique strength; man had added fortifications; and, when Wolfe came before it, 16,000 soldiers, including French, Canadians, and Indians, were mustered for its defence, under one of the most skilful generals of his day. There was a garrison in Quebec itself; but the main army was encamped below the city, and lined entrenchments from the St. Charles to the Montmorency, Montcalm's head quarters being on the further side of the Beauport river. To defeat an army nearly double the strength of his own, and to take the citadel which, since the days of Kirke and Champlain, had proved impregnable, was the hopeless task assigned to Wolfe. It was a task which he accomplished. [Sidenote: _Wolfe's troops superior in quality to Montcalm's._] [Sidenote: _Importance of commanding the river._] [Sidenote: _Co-operation of English army and navy._] Over and above his own leadership, he had two points in his favour. His troops were better than those commanded by Montcalm. The majority of Montcalm's men were Canadian militia, disinclined for long continuous service, {299} which kept them away from their farms, and, while excellent for raiding purposes or for fighting under cover, not to be relied on if ever they should be brought face to face with English regiments in the open field. Wolfe, moreover, gained complete command of the river. Such ships as the French possessed had been sent high up the St. Lawrence out of harm's way; and, though the guns of Quebec commanded the river strait immediately below the rock, as the siege went on some of the English vessels, and many boats, were taken past the promontory, so that the St. Lawrence was securely held both below and above the city. In war and in peace English sailors and soldiers have known how to support each other. At the sieges of Louisbourg the admirals co-operated in every possible way with the leaders of the land forces, and equally hearty was the co-operation of the two arms of the service before Quebec. Admiral Saunders, with Durell and Holmes, did all that men could do to second Wolfe in his difficult enterprise. [Sidenote: _The island of Orleans occupied._] [Sidenote: _Vaudreuil's fireships._] [Sidenote: _Point Levis occupied._] Piloted by Canadian prisoners or by their own determined seamen, the British ships had threaded their way up the St. Lawrence, and on June 26 anchored on the southern side of the Isle of Orleans. That night a party of Rangers landed on the island, meeting with some slight opposition, and the next day the whole force disembarked and marched across the island towards its westernmost point, the Point of Orleans. There the city of Quebec came in full view, 'at once a tempting and a discouraging sight.'[10] Hardly had the troops landed when, on the same day, a heavy storm broke upon the English ships, and drove some of the transports ashore; while, little more than twenty-four hours later, a new danger threatened the fleet in the form of fireships sent down from Quebec. This was a pet scheme of Vaudreuil, but, like the author of the scheme, the ships did nothing more than splutter and make a noise, scaring the {300} English outpost at the Point of Orleans. Some stranded, others were towed ashore by the English sailors--none of them reached the fleet which they were intended to destroy. On the evening of the next day, the twenty-ninth, part of Monckton's brigade was carried across the mile and a half of water which separates the island of Orleans at its westernmost point from the mainland on the southern shore; on the thirtieth the rest of the brigade was landed, and occupied Point Levis. Here batteries were erected under fire from Quebec; and, after a futile, half-hearted attempt had been made to dislodge the English by a party of Canadians, who crossed the river higher up on the night of July 12, the guns opened fire on the city opposite, and began the work--which went on for weeks--of knocking its buildings to pieces. [Footnote 10: _Annual Register_ for 1759, p. 35.] [Sidenote: _Landing effected on the northern shore below the Montmorency._] [Sidenote: _Division of Wolfe's force._] [Sidenote: _The English ships gain the upper river._] [Sidenote: _Montcalm on the defensive._] Before the batteries at Point Levis were complete, Wolfe had sent troops across to the northern shore of the St. Lawrence, lower down the river, and occupied the heights on the eastern side of the Montmorency river, which more or less commanded the extreme left of the French line, where Levis was stationed. The movement was not effected without some loss to the Rangers, who were ambushed by a party of Indians. The latter had crossed the Montmorency by a ford above the falls, but the ford was too securely guarded on the French side to justify any attempt on the part of Wolfe's small force to attack in this direction. It was the English general's plan to reconnoitre and threaten every point in turn of the French position, to divide the enemy's forces if possible, and if possible to induce Montcalm to take the offensive. With this object, Wolfe ran great risks. One part of his army was at Point Levis, another below the Montmorency, a third small detachment held the Point of Orleans. On July 18 his ships began to run the gauntlet of the Quebec batteries and reach the upper river, while boats were dragged overland by Point Levis to co-operate above the city. A still further division of the attacking force {301} was then made, and Carleton was sent some eighteen miles up stream to land and raid on the northern shore. But though the movement drew off a certain number of French troops from the Beauport lines to watch the enemy above Quebec, Montcalm persisted in playing a waiting game, in making no attack, and running no risk. His policy was no doubt a sound one. It is true that Quebec was being riddled with shot and shell, that the farmers and villagers in the country round were suffering, that the Canadians and Indians were losing heart at the apparent inaction of their leaders, but time and place were on the side of the French, and as the weeks went on the wisdom of patient defence became more and more apparent. [Sidenote: _Frontal attack on the French lines by the Montmorency._] At the end of July, Wolfe determined to try to force the French entrenchments where they abutted on the Montmorency river. The plan involved a frontal attack on a very strong position, and it was only possible to make the attempt when the tide was out. At low tide the Montmorency could be forded below the falls, and the General proposed to land Monckton's brigade on the shore of the St. Lawrence, above the Montmorency, in face of the French lines, and to support it by marching Townshend's and Murray's troops, who held the heights below the Montmorency, across the ford at the mouth of the latter river. The two forces converging were to carry an advanced French redoubt which stood on the flat a little beyond high-water mark, and, if the French still refused battle, to assault the heights beyond. [Sidenote: _The English repulsed with heavy loss._] Monckton's men, embarked mainly at Point Levis, were moved up and down the river through the day, keeping the French in doubt as to where the attack would be made. A ship of war was anchored in a position to cover the ford of the Montmorency, while two large flat-bottomed boats carrying guns, or, as Knox called them, 'two armed transport cats (catamarans) drawing little water,'[11] were taken in {302} close to shore, and left to be stranded as the tide went out. Towards evening the water was low, the guns opened fire, and, after some delay in finding a landing-place, the men began to disembark on the muddy edge of the river. The Grenadiers, with some of the Royal Americans, who were first landed, rushed forward and seized the redoubt, which the French abandoned. They then hurried on, without waiting for the main body of troops, to attack the higher ground behind. This premature movement ruined the enterprise. Advancing without order or formation up slippery slopes, in a storm of rain, under heavy fire, the Grenadiers were hurled back to the redoubt with a loss of over 400 men, and were brought off by Wolfe, who saw the uselessness of repeating the attack in the deepening shades of evening. Some of the troops were re-embarked, the others retreated in good order across the ford, and the day ended in failure, though the bulk of the English army had taken no part in the fight. In his General Order on the following day Wolfe commented severely, and with reason, upon the 'impetuous, irregular, and unsoldierlike proceedings' of the Grenadiers, reminding them that 'the Grenadiers could not suppose that they alone could beat the French army.'[12] The blame for the disaster rested solely with the soldiers of the advanced party, who, in eagerness to attack, lost all order and discipline; but the effect was much the same as though the leaders had blundered. The small English army had lost a number of men, who could ill be spared; the defenders of Quebec gained heart, their enemies were correspondingly dispirited. [Footnote 11: Knox, vol. i, p. 354.] [Footnote 12: Knox, vol. ii, p. 1.] [Sidenote: _Operations on the upper river._] [Sidenote: _Levis sent to Montreal to oppose Amherst._] Wolfe still held his ground below the Montmorency, but moved more of his men than before above Quebec. Here Murray was placed in command, with Admiral Holmes in charge of the ships and boats. Bougainville, with 1,500 men, was detached by Montcalm to watch the enemy's {303} movements and to guard the northern shore; but, on both sides of the river, both above and below the town, the English spread havoc and destroyed supplies. The waterway being blocked by Holmes' vessels and the country round Quebec being desolated, Montcalm's army could only be fed by a toilsome overland transport of many miles, until the means of transport failed, when provisions were again sent down the river, running the blockade usually under cover of night. Meanwhile, early in August, the French had learnt of the fall of Niagara and the abandonment of Ticonderoga and Crown Point, and to meet Amherst's expected advance Levis was sent up to Montreal with 800 men. In this respect, and in no other, Amherst's operations helped Wolfe. As events turned out, it was of incalculable importance to the English that, when the battle of Quebec took place, Montcalm's able lieutenant was not on the field. [Sidenote: _Critical position of Wolfe._] [Sidenote: _His illness._] [Sidenote: _His brigadiers recommend an attempt above the city._] The position of the French was critical, but that of the English was more critical still. The summer was waning. The English troops were dwindling in numbers from casualties and disease. Worst of all, when the middle of August was past, worn in mind and body, Wolfe was laid low with fever in the camp at Montmorency. On his life, as the soldiers who loved him knew, hung all the hopes of the expedition. While recovering, but still unable to move, he submitted to his brigadiers three alternative plans for attacking Montcalm's lines. They met on August 29, and, rejecting all three proposals, counselled an attempt above the city. 'We are of opinion,' they wrote, 'that the most probable method of striking an effectual blow is to bring the troops to the south shore, and to carry the operations above the town. If we can establish ourselves on the north shore, the Marquis de Montcalm must fight us on our own terms. We are between him and his provisions, and between him and the army opposing General Amherst.'[13] Their {304} advice, which was unanimous, was taken without demur, and Wolfe proceeded with the desperate task of putting it into execution. [Footnote 13: Wright, p. 545.] [Sidenote: _Wolfe's despondency._] That he had little hope of success is shown by the tone of his correspondence. In his last dispatch to Pitt, dated September 2, he wrote, 'there is such a choice of difficulties, that I own myself at a loss how to determine.'[14] To Admiral Saunders, two or three days before, he had written of himself as 'a man that must necessarily be ruined';[14] and in his last letter to his mother, written on August 31, he spoke of being determined to leave the service at the earliest opportunity.[14] Townshend, meanwhile, in private, criticized him much as Wolfe himself had criticized his superior officers the year before. 'General Wolfe's health,' he wrote to his wife, 'is but very bad: his generalship, in my poor opinion, is not a bit better.'[15] Yet, sick and despondent as he was, Wolfe did not lie down in the furrow. For past failures he blamed no one but himself; manfully he faced the future in all its gloom; and, if Townshend felt little confidence in his leading, the soldiers knew better; and he led them to victory. [Footnote 14: Wright, pp. 548, 549, 553.] [Footnote 15: From the _Townshend Papers_. The letter is quoted in full by Kingsford in his _History of Canada_, vol. iv, p. 226, note.] [Sidenote: _Disposition of Wolfe's army at the end of August._] At the end of August, the following was the disposition of the English forces. Murray, with Admiral Holmes, was operating above the city; Monckton was at Point Levis, and near him Admiral Saunders, with the main English fleet, was anchored in the basin of Quebec. Wolfe himself, with Townshend, was still encamped on the northern shore below the Montmorency; and Admiral Durell, with the rearguard of the fleet, was watching the river below. Amherst's successes were known to Wolfe and his colleagues, but they soon learnt also that no help could be expected from him. September was on them, and at the end of September, or at {305} latest by the middle of October, the campaign would close. Whatever had to be done must be done quickly. [Sidenote: _The camp at the Montmorency broken up, and the troops moved up the river._] [Sidenote: _Montcalm deceived._] On September 3 the English camp by the Montmorency was broken up, and the troops were moved to the Point of Orleans and Point Levis. On the fifth, Murray's troops, which had returned to Point Levis, were marched up the southern shore and embarked on Holmes' vessels; they were followed by battalions of Monckton's and Townshend's brigades; and by September 7 nearly 4,000 troops, with the necessary supplies, were moving up and down the river above Quebec, menacing a landing at this point or at that, wearying Bougainville's force, now raised to 3,000 men, which, with its head quarters at Cap Rouge, was required to keep pace with the enemy's fleet, and to guard the heights on the northern bank of the St. Lawrence. Montcalm knew that the English force above Quebec had been strengthened; but he seems not to have known the full extent of Wolfe's preparations. English forces at Point Levis and on the island of Orleans still faced the Beauport lines, while Saunders' fleet lay directly off Quebec. The French general regarded Wolfe's movements on the upper river as feints; the main attack, if attack there should be, he expected below the town. [Sidenote: _Preparation for the final attack._] There was bad weather on September 7 and 8, and Wolfe landed a large proportion of his men from the crowded transports high up on the southern shore. Early on the twelfth they were put on board again, and orders were issued for the coming night. Two days' provisions each soldier took with him; and in the General Order, the last which Wolfe issued, officers and men alike were bid to 'remember what their country expects from them.' It was a signal such as Nelson gave at the battle of Trafalgar. [Sidenote: _The landing-place selected._] On September 10, looking through his telescope from the southern shore across the river, Wolfe had noted a path running up the opposite bank from a little cove rather more {306} than a mile and a half higher up the river than the citadel of Quebec. The place was known as the Anse au Foulon, and now bears the name of Wolfe's Cove. The bank is between 200 and 300 feet high, and at the top were to be seen the tents of a French outpost. Here he determined to attempt a landing. On the night of the twelfth the troops, whom he had on board, were to drop down the river with the ebbing tide, half going on in boats, the rest following in the transports, while another smaller force, left under Colonel Burton at Point Levis, was to move up the southern shore, to be ferried across in support of the attack. Saunders, meanwhile, as night came on, was to threaten the Beauport lines. [Sidenote: _Fortune favours Wolfe._] Fortune had hitherto been unkind to Wolfe; now all went well. The many chances which a night attack involves, when the crisis came, all favoured the English. Their boats, as they came down stream, were taken by the sentries for French provision boats, which had been expected. Bougainville, who, before night fell and before the tide turned, had seen the ships drift up stream instead of down, was completely misled. Montcalm looked for danger from the fleet in front of him, and knew not what the tide was bringing down. [Sidenote: _The descent of the river._] [Sidenote: _The landing._] [Sidenote: _French picket surprised._] [Sidenote: _The heights gained and line of battle formed._] It was about two o'clock in the morning of the thirteenth when the boats cast off from the ships, and took their way down stream. Howe led with twenty-four men of the light infantry, who had volunteered for the first ascent. Close behind was Wolfe himself; and it has been told in many books, how, as the stream bore him on in darkness to glory and the grave, he repeated the well-known lines of Gray's Elegy.[16] The leading boat was carried a little below the spot where the path runs down to the shore. About four o'clock in the morning, an hour before daybreak, the men scrambled up the side of the wooded cliff, and surprised the French picket at the top. Its commander, Vergor, who had surrendered {307} Fort Beauséjour in Acadia, was wounded when trying to escape, and taken prisoner. The way being clear, the rest of the troops followed. The boats, having discharged their first cargo, brought off the remainder of the force from the transports, and carried over Burton's men from the opposite bank. About six o'clock, the daylight of a cloudy morning showed the whole army at the top of the cliffs; and, moving forward towards Quebec, Wolfe formed his line of battle within a mile of the city, on the part of the plateau known as the Plains of Abraham. [Footnote 16: Gray's _Elegy written in a Country Churchyard_ was first published in 1751.] Between four and five thousand men had been landed; but some were kept in reserve, or left to guard the landing, and less than 4,000 men formed the fighting line. Monckton's brigade on the right abutted on the edge of the cliffs. Murray held the centre with three regiments, the 47th, the 58th, and the 78th Highlanders.[17] Townshend was posted on the left. The left could be turned, for the force was too small to extend across the plain; and therefore, while the rest of the troops faced Quebec, Townshend's men, drawn up at right angles to their comrades, fronted the high ground known as the Côte St. Geneviève, which overlooks the river St. Charles above the city. Howe's light infantry covered the rear. One gun[18] had been dragged up the cliff; but, when the fight began, the English had no other artillery. The French in this respect were in not much better case, {308} for they hurried to the battlefield with few big guns to back them. The fight was one of infantry alone. [Footnote 17: The 78th Highlanders, who fought with Wolfe, were not the ancestors of the present regiment of that number. The regiments of the present day who carry Quebec on their colours are the 15th (1st battalion East Yorkshire Regiment), the 28th (1st battalion Gloucestershire Regiment), the 35th (1st battalion Royal Sussex), the 43rd (1st battalion Oxfordshire Light Infantry), the 47th (1st battalion Loyal North Lancashire), the 48th (1st battalion Northamptonshire Regiment), the 58th (2nd battalion Northamptonshire Regiment), and the 60th Rifles (two battalions).] [Footnote 18: Townshend's dispatch of Sept. 20 says distinctly 'we had been able to bring up but one gun.' Knox, on the other hand, says, 'About eight o'clock we had two pieces of short brass six-pounders playing on the enemy' (Knox, vol. ii, pp. 70, 128).] [Sidenote: _Montcalm hurries to give battle._] Saunders' pretence at landing on the Beauport shore had kept Montcalm's army on the alert all the night. At six in the morning, riding towards Quebec, the French general learnt that the English had landed, and saw in the distance the enemy's lines. He brought his troops from Beauport with what speed he could; crossed the St. Charles; passed by or through the city; and marshalled his force beyond for instant fight. He had with him, it would seem, not more than 5,000 men. The garrison of Quebec remained within the walls, and a large proportion of the army did not leave their encampment, for the further lines by the Montmorency were some miles distant, and the shore had still to be protected. He might have waited to bring up more troops, and to give time to Bougainville to operate in the enemy's rear; but his communications were threatened, his supplies were short, Wolfe, if given breathing space, could throw up entrenchments, and with his command of the river, make his position absolutely safe. The one hope was to hurl him back over the cliffs, while yet his foothold was insecure; and to strike before the ardour of the Canadians and Indians had time to cool. [Sidenote: _The battle of Quebec._] [Sidenote: _Defeat of the French._] [Sidenote: _Death of Wolfe._] Between nine and ten o'clock the French were in battle array, and advanced over a little ridge which lay between Wolfe's army and Quebec. Wolfe's soldiers had had two hours' rest, and steadily moved forward, reserving their fire by the General's orders. At forty yards' distance the word of command was given; and two volleys of musketry decided the battle. The fire came from the whole English line, the French fell like corn under the reaper's scythe, a charge with bayonets and claymores followed, 'the Highlanders chased them vigorously towards Charles river, and the 58th to the suburb close to John's Gate.'[19] Montcalm's army {309} became a routed rabble. Stricken already earlier in the fight, Wolfe on the right, while preparing to lead the final charge, received his death wound. He was carried to the rear; heard, while still conscious, that the enemy were in flight; turned on his side, thanked God, and died in peace. [Footnote 19: Knox, vol. ii, p. 71.] [Sidenote: _Death of Montcalm._] [Sidenote: _Monckton wounded._] [Sidenote: _Townshend in command._] It was all over before noon. The English casualties numbered between six and seven hundred, the French lost double that number, and they too were bereft of their leader. As Montcalm retreated towards Quebec with his flying troops, he was shot through the body. He reached a house in the city, lingered for some hours, and, before the following day broke, like Wolfe he had gone to his rest. 'It was a very singular affair,' was Horace Walpole's cold-blooded comment; 'the generals on both sides slain, the second in command wounded; in short, very near what battles should be, in which only the principals ought to suffer.'[20] The French lost not only Montcalm, but also the officer next in rank on the field. On the English side, Monckton, who would have succeeded Wolfe, was severely wounded, though he was able, on the fifteenth, to sign a short and simple dispatch, reporting the 'very signal victory'; and the command devolved on Townshend. Threatened by Bougainville, who came up too late from behind with 2,000 men, and retreated again, Townshend recalled his troops and entrenched them; cannon and supplies were brought up from the river, and communication with the ships was made safe. [Footnote 20: _Letters of Horace Walpole_, vol. iii, p. 258 (Letter of Oct. 19, 1759).] [Sidenote: _Disorderly retreat of the French._] Behind the St. Charles the French were all in confusion. Vaudreuil called a council of war, and determined on an immediate retreat, abandoning all the lines which Montcalm had held so long and so well, and leaving the garrison of Quebec to surrender, as soon as provisions failed. The retreat began that same night with no semblance of order; and, circling inland past the English lines, the fugitives made {310} their way towards Montreal, hurrying in panic far beyond Cap Rouge, where Bougainville was still stationed, to Jacques Cartier, thirty miles distant from Quebec. [Sidenote: _Siege of Quebec._] [Sidenote: _Levis rallies the French too late._] [Sidenote: _The city surrenders._] With Wolfe and Montcalm expired the genius of either army. It was characteristic of Wolfe that, while dying, he sent an order to cut off the French retreat; but in the interval between the battle on the thirteenth and the capitulation of Quebec on the eighteenth, we do not read that any attempt was made to intercept the French, nor did Saunders land men to occupy the deserted Beauport lines. Townshend steadily made his trenches and besieged in form; while the French commandant of Quebec, Ramesay, with a weak garrison, and little or no food, was urged by his own people to capitulate. He had orders from Vaudreuil to surrender in due time, and, though counter messages came, they came too late. Too late Levis at Montreal had heard of the disaster; hurrying back, he turned the beaten troops at Jacques Cartier; he started with them on the eighteenth to save Quebec; but on that very morning Quebec was given up. The afternoon before, an assault on the town was threatened above, while a landing from the river was threatened below. Distrusting the promises of relief, Ramesay yielded to the pressure put on him by soldiers and civilians alike; at eight o'clock, on the morning of the eighteenth, the terms of surrender were signed; and that same day advanced parties of the English army held the gates of Quebec. [Sidenote: _Murray left in charge._] [Sidenote: _Saunders sails for home,_] The English commanders debated whether or not they could hold the city through the coming winter, and determined at all hazards to do so. Murray was placed in command with a garrison of about 7,000 men; a month passed in repairing the fortifications, in landing and storing supplies; and on October 18, Admiral Saunders, with the first portion of the fleet, set sail for England. As he neared home, at the entrance of the Channel, he learnt that Hawke was about to engage a French fleet from Brest. He sailed {311} off to join him 'without landing his glory,'[21] but came too late, for Hawke had already fought his fight and won his victory in Quiberon Bay. Saunders had deserved well of his country, for without his active, untiring support the land forces would never have taken Quebec. He outlived Wolfe for sixteen years, and was privately buried in Westminster Abbey in December, 1775. [Footnote 21: Letter from Horace Walpole dated 'November 30th, of the great year' (1759), vol. iii, p. 268.] [Sidenote: _and Townshend._] Townshend, too, went home, his enemies said, to exaggerate his own merits and belittle Wolfe's memory. An anonymous letter to 'an honourable brigadier-general,' attributed to Junius among others,[22] appeared in the following year, and attacked him with bitterness, some of which he probably deserved. He passed into political life, and as Viceroy of Ireland achieved a doubtful repute. [Footnote 22: See the _Grenville Papers_, 1852, 3rd ed. Introductory notes relating to Lord Temple and the authorship of Junius at the beginning of vol. iii, pp. lxxxviii-xc.] [Sidenote: _Wolfe's body brought to England._] Wolfe's body was brought to England, and buried where his father had been laid earlier in the year, in the vaults of Greenwich parish church. A monument to him, voted by Parliament, stands in Westminster Abbey, and his name lives, and will for ever live, in the hearts of men. [Sidenote: _Cotton's letters to Grenville._] The news of his victory and death, and of the fall of Quebec, reached England on October 17. It came but two or three days after his latest dispatches, which gave little hope of success. There are two interesting letters among the _Grenville Papers_, written to Grenville by the Rev. Nathaniel Cotton, from on board the _Princess Amelia_ at �le Madame in the St. Lawrence. The first is dated August 27 to September 6; the second bears the date of September 20. The first, repeating former letters, is not hopeful. It points out the insufficiency of Wolfe's force, the necessity of co-operation on the part of Amherst; and it refers to 'unrevealed causes' militating against the enterprise, {312} which may be taken to mean want of harmony between Wolfe and Townshend. The later letter begins with the following words: 'I have the satisfaction to acquaint you that through the smiles of Providence we are in safe and quiet possession of Quebec.'[23] [Footnote 23: _Grenville Papers_, vol. i, pp. 318-26.] [Sidenote: _Reception of the news in England._] Very dramatic was the revulsion of feeling in England, when all was known. No submarine cables then told the story of the war from day to day. Only a few dispatches and letters at long intervals were brought over the Atlantic, recording at first slow progress, then reverse, disappointment, and the General's sickness and despondency. The rock of Quebec seemed still impregnable; and, as the bright summer waned into autumn, public confidence gave place to gloom. Then in mid-October, when to North American lands the Indian summer gives a second brightness, tidings came from over the sea that the victory was won, and that the price paid for it was the life of Wolfe. There followed, as Burke well said, a 'mourning triumph.'[24] Joy was sobered by the sense of loss, and the picture of a desolate home appealed, as it always appeals, to Englishmen's minds. They thought of the mother, lately widowed, now childless, whose sickly son had been her joy and pride; and many, we may not doubt, thought also of the French home, whose master had gone out and came not again. [Footnote 24: _Annual Register_ for 1759, p. 43.] [Sidenote: _Was Wolfe's attack a great military feat?_] The question naturally suggests itself, whether Wolfe's landing and attack was a desperate venture, justified only by success, the last throw of the dice by a man who had described himself as one who must necessarily be ruined; or whether it was the supreme effort of a military genius? It is impossible to study the story without coming to the conclusion that the second is the true view. No doubt fortune favoured him; no doubt the enterprise was full of risk; but from first to last as little as possible was left to {313} chance, and from first to last a master mind made itself felt. The main point to remember is that he had secured absolute command of the river; wherever therefore he landed, on high ground not commanded by the enemy's guns, if for a few hours only he could make good his landing, his way of retreat was absolutely safe. Montcalm knew this, and hence his immediate attack. Then we have the movements which baffled Montcalm and Bougainville alike; we have time and place calculated to a nicety, every commander and every man told what to do and doing it, the landing effected by break of day, the battlefield carefully selected, the men duly rested, the battle line cautiously and safely formed, the respective merits of the two forces accurately gauged--the one, in Wolfe's own words, a small number of good soldiers, the other 'a numerous body of armed men (I cannot call it an army).'[25] There was no rush or hurry about the landing, the advance, or the fight. The soldiers kept their fire till told to use it: they charged when and not until their leader bade them. The whole was a thought-out feat of steady daring. [Footnote 25: Wolfe to his mother, Aug. 31, and to Lord Holderness, Sept. 9 (Wright's _Life of Wolfe_, pp. 553, 563).] [Sidenote: _If Wolfe had not succeeded._] Another question which is worth considering is: What would have been the result if Wolfe had not succeeded, if Quebec had not been taken, and the English fleet had sailed off down the St. Lawrence, either carrying the army home, or leaving it, as at one time during the siege had been contemplated, to go into winter quarters at the �le aux Coudres lower down the river? A failure would have been recorded, and Wolfe above all others would have so regarded it; but, notwithstanding, the expedition would not have been in vain. Quebec would have been left in ruins, the banks of the St. Lawrence, with emptied farms and homesteads, would have been a scene of desolation; though Montcalm would have lived to fight again, Canada in all human probability {314} must have fallen. For Canada was being starved out; and, if the French Government a year before could spare but few troops and supplies for New France, much less were the necessary troops and supplies likely to be forthcoming after another year of exhausting war on the Continent. On December 16, Amherst wrote to Pitt from New York: 'From the present posts His Majesty's army is now in possession of, if no stroke was to be made, Canada must fall or the inhabitants starve.' He wrote with information given him by one of his officers, Major Grant, who had been a prisoner in Canada. Grant's words were: ''Tis believed that the colony, though in great distress, may subsist for a year, without receiving supplies from France'; but it could only subsist by using up all the live stock in the land. The English command of the water was killing Canada, the farmers and peasantry were sickening of the war; though Amherst wrote after the fall of Quebec, the saving of Quebec would in no way have fed Canada. [Sidenote: _Results of his success on the future history of Canada._] Unless, then, some great reversal of existing conditions had taken place, or unless peace had been declared, Canada would have been conquered, even if Wolfe had not triumphed and Quebec had not fallen in September, 1759. But widely different would have been the result on after history, and herein lies the true lesson to be drawn from the record of the siege and capture of Quebec, and of the death of Wolfe and Montcalm. It is the most conclusive answer, if answer were needed, to those--fifty years ago they were many--who ignore or minimize the effect of sentiment on the making and the preserving of nations. The noble picturesqueness of the story, its accompaniments of heroism and death, were of untold value in the work of reconciliation; and of untold value was the legacy to a yet unformed people of one of the great landmarks in history. In a sense, which it is easier to feel than to express, two rival races, under two rival leaders, unconsciously joined hands on the Plains of Abraham. The {315} noise of war seemed to be stilled, the bitterness of competing races and creeds to be allayed, by sharing in an episode which appealed to all time and to all mankind. The dramatic ending of the old order blessed the birth of the new; the instinct of human pathos brought men together; and out of divergent elements made a nation. Born far away in different lands, in death Wolfe and Montcalm were not divided; and the soil on which they died has become the sacred heritage of a people, whose union is stronger than the divisions of religion, language, and race. [Sidenote: _Successes of England in 1759._] In the _Annual Register_ for 1759,[26] summing up the results of the year to Great Britain, Burke wrote: 'In no one year since she was a nation, has she been favoured with so many successes, both by sea and land, and in every quarter of the globe.' It was a bright year for England in every sense of the word. The sun had shone upon her soil and upon her arms. In America, in India, at Minden, at Quiberon, she had triumphed. 'I call it this ever warm and victorious year,' wrote Walpole on October 21, 'we have not had more conquest than fine weather. One would think we had plundered East and West Indies of sunshine.'[27] [Footnote 26: p. 56.] [Footnote 27: _Letters of Horace Walpole_, vol. iii, p. 259 (Letter of Oct. 21, 1759).] [Sidenote: _The winter at Quebec._] [Sidenote: _Levis' plans for recovering the city._] The winter which followed was a trying one for the garrison at Quebec. They held the battered town, amid constant rumours of attack, ill provided with warm clothing, with scanty supplies of firewood, suffering much from sickness, and, as Knox tells us, in arrears of pay, 'from which they might derive many comforts and refreshments under their present exigencies.'[28] Outposts were established at Point Levis, Sainte Foy, Lorette, and Cap Rouge; and here and there skirmishes took place with parties of the enemy. Levis was at Montreal, bent upon recovering Quebec. When the English fleet had left, he sent messages to France to ask that {316} provisions might be sent as early as possible in the coming year, with ships of war, timed to arrive in the St. Lawrence before the English should return, and numerous enough to hold the river for France. Meanwhile, he debated whether or not to attack Quebec in mid-winter, and attempt to carry it by a _coup de main_; but eventually determined to await the coming of spring and the opening of the waters. Thus the anxious winter passed, and the middle of April came. Attack became imminent, and Murray knew it. He ordered the French residents to leave Quebec, called in his outposts, and with a force sadly reduced by sickness awaited Levis' army. [Footnote 28: vol. ii, p. 241.] [Sidenote: _His advance in the spring of 1760._] At the end of October the effective strength of the garrison had been 7,313. On March 1 the number of fighting men, owing to scurvy and other diseases, was reduced to 4,800;[29] and, though April, with its milder weather, saw the beginning of recovery, the English force was greatly outmatched by the enemy, for Levis had with him, all told, at least 10,000 men.[30] About April 20, the French advance from Montreal began. The troops were brought down the river in ships and boats, and, landing some thirty miles above Quebec, crossed the Cap Rouge river and marched on to Lorette and Sainte Foy. [Footnote 29: Knox, vol. ii, p. 267.] [Footnote 30: Knox gives the French numbers as 15,000, against 3,140 English (p. 295).] [Sidenote: _The battle of Sainte Foy, and defeat of the English._] On April 27, Murray offered battle at Sainte Foy; but the French made no move, and he fell back to Quebec, leaving Levis to occupy Sainte Foy that same night. Before seven o'clock on the next morning he marched out again, bent on fighting, if possible, before Levis had secured his position, and anxious not to be cooped up behind the fortifications of Quebec, too weak to withstand a vigorous bombardment. The English force numbered 3,140 men, with eighteen pieces of cannon; and, as the men carried entrenching tools, it {317} would seem that Murray contemplated throwing up lines outside the city. The battle took place on the same plateau where Wolfe and Montcalm had fought; it lasted about the same time, for two hours; but the result was widely different. Seeing the French still on the march, and not yet in battle order, Murray ordered an immediate attack. His artillery did good execution, and, on the right and left wings, the light infantry and the Rangers respectively won an initial success. But the tide soon turned. On the right the advancing English were drawn into swampy ground; on the left they came under fire from French troops covered by the woods. Outnumbered and outflanked, the whole force was compelled to retreat into Quebec, having lost their guns and 1,100 men. The French losses appear to have been heavier, numbering according to some accounts from 1,800 to 2,000 men. [Sidenote: _Critical position of Murray._] [Sidenote: _Levis loses his opportunity._] Murray's position was now exceedingly critical. Two days after the battle no more than 2,100 soldiers were returned as fit for duty; but the General and his men were fully determined not to lose Quebec. On May 1 he sent off a frigate to Louisbourg and Halifax to hasten relief; and, day and night alike, officers and men worked with common spirit, strengthening the defences, and mounting the guns. The French lost their opportunity. Had they attacked the town at once, before the garrison had recovered from the effects of the defeat, 'Quebec would,' in Captain Knox's opinion, 'have reverted to its old masters';[31] and the leisurely nature of Levis' operations seems to bear out the view, to which French prisoners gave currency, that he had only intended to invest the town, and wait the arrival of a French fleet. [Footnote 31: p. 301.] [Sidenote: _Relief of Quebec._] He landed his stores and munitions at the Anse au Foulon, Wolfe's landing-place, and gradually pushed forward his lines, while the English position in front of him steadily {318} grew stronger, and in the besieged garrison confidence took the place of despondency. A storm on the river, it was reported in the city, cost the French guns, provisions, and ammunition. Bourlamaque, who, as an engineer by training, was placed in charge of the siege, was wounded; and when, on the forenoon of May 9, a strange ship sailed up the river into the basin of Quebec, and hoisted the English colours, little doubt could be left that any attempt to regain the city would be in vain. The ship in question was the _Lowestoft_ frigate, and she brought 'the agreeable intelligence of a British fleet being masters of the St. Lawrence, and nigh at hand to sustain us.'[32] The news, in Captain Knox's words, was as grateful as when the garrison of Vienna, hard pressed by the Turks, beheld Sobieski's army marching to their relief. [Footnote 32: Knox, vol. ii, p. 310.] [Sidenote: _Retreat of Levis._] But one swallow does not make a summer, and some days passed before any other British ships appeared. On May 11 the French batteries opened, answered by 150 guns from Quebec: and bombardment went on without much damage, until, on the evening of the fifteenth, the _Vanguard_ ship of war and the _Diana_ frigate anchored before Quebec. The next morning the British ships passed up the river at flood tide, and attacked a small French squadron above the city. The French commander, Vauquelin, made a brave fight, but his few little vessels were nearly all destroyed. On that night and on the seventeenth, the French were in full retreat with the English at their heels. Guns, scaling ladders, baggage, ammunition, sick and wounded, were left behind. The siege of Quebec was raised, the English, after the disastrous battle of April 28, not having lost more than thirty men; and Murray, by his brave and able defence, made more than amends for his previous reverse. [Sidenote: _Reception in England of the news of Murray's defeat and subsequent relief._] In England the news of his defeat, followed after a short interval by the news of his relief, resulted in a curious reproduction of the excitement of the previous year. In a letter {319} dated June 19, 1760, Mr. Jenkinson in London wrote to Grenville, 'We all here blame Mr. Murray, and are not at all satisfied with the reasons he assigns for leaving the town to attack the enemy ... As it is, however, I understand that there are no expectations that it (Quebec) can be saved, and indeed I am told that Murray himself gives little reason to hope it. The relief from Amherst is certainly impossible, and I do not think that he has ever shown activity enough to make one hope that he would make an attempt vigorous enough, even if there was a mere chance of success.'[33] On the following ninth of July, we have in the same _Grenville Papers_ a letter from the Duke of Newcastle to Lord Temple, referring to 'the great and almost unexpected event of recovering Quebec and turning the loss entirely upon the French.'[33] Similarly Horace Walpole, on hearing the bad news, wrote: 'We are on a sudden reading our book backwards.' The good news came, and he chronicled it with 'Quebec is come to life again.'[34] Many cold and hot fits had been the result of news from North America since the year 1755; but, with the failure of Levis to retake Quebec, English anxiety as to the issue of the strife was finally dispelled. What was left was work for which Amherst was eminently suited, steady crushing out of the remains of resistance, slow and certain invasion, where no brilliant effort was needed or required. [Footnote 33: _Grenville Papers_, vol. i, pp. 343-5.] [Footnote 34: _Letters of Horace Walpole_, vol. iii, pp. 317, 323 (Letters of June 20 and 28, 1760).] [Sidenote: _The final advance on Montreal._] [Sidenote: _Murray ascends the river._] A threefold English advance on Montreal was planned. Murray was to move up the river from Quebec. Brigadier Haviland was to force the passage of the �le aux Noix at the end of Lake Champlain, and strike the St. Lawrence opposite Montreal. Amherst himself, with the main army, starting from Oswego on Lake Ontario, was to come down the river from the west. Murray was first in motion. He embarked {320} 2,400 men on ships and boats, and on July 14 took his way up stream, followed and joined on August 17 by two regiments from Louisbourg, which was being dismantled and abandoned. The troops went slowly up the river, passed French outposts at various points, landed here and there, here and there exchanged shots, and were often supplied with provisions by the peasantry, who preferred bargaining to fighting, and many of whom took the oath of allegiance. At Sorel, at the mouth of the Richelieu river, Bourlamaque was stationed with a comparatively strong force to prevent a junction between Murray and Haviland, who was coming down from Lake Champlain; but no battle took place, and, after Murray had reluctantly burnt the deserted houses of the inhabitants of Sorel, who were absent in arms, the English on the river, and the French on either bank, moved onward side by side towards Montreal. By the end of August, Murray was encamped on an island a few miles below Montreal, gradually gathering intelligence of Haviland's and Amherst's advance; and on September 7 he landed on the island of Montreal itself. During the voyage up the river two facts had become manifest. One was that the country higher up the St. Lawrence was less impoverished, and supplies were more plentiful, than in the neighbourhood of Quebec. The other was that the Canadians, who still had something to lose, were anxious for peace. The constant advance of the English, the obvious futility of Vaudreuil's boasts and threats, the good treatment of the inhabitants who offered no resistance, had due effect. The country side surrendered, the militia deserted, the French regulars began to follow suit; and the few remaining troops, driven back on Montreal, recognized the hopelessness of their position. [Sidenote: _Haviland's advance._] Haviland started from Crown Point on August 11 with about 3,500 men, including Rogers with some of his Rangers, and a few Indians. He took with him also some {321} light artillery. The boats which carried the force made their way to the northern end of Lake Champlain, entered the Richelieu river, and on the twentieth landed some of the troops on the eastern bank of the river, over against the �le aux Noix. Here Bougainville was stationed with a considerable force, behind fortifications which had been strengthened in the previous winter. Some miles further on down the Richelieu river, at St. John's, another French force was in position, under an officer named Roquemaure. Bougainville gave Haviland, in Knox's words, 'the trouble to break ground and erect batteries';[35] but the English, having attacked and taken the French vessels which lay below the �le aux Noix, and cut off the garrison's retreat by the river, Bougainville crossed from the island to the western bank on the twenty-seventh, and made his way with difficulty through the woods to St. John's, where he joined Roquemaure. On the twenty-eighth the few men left on the �le aux Noix surrendered; on the twenty-ninth the French abandoned St. John's also; the fort at Chambly surrendered on September 1; as Haviland advanced, the Canadians deserted wholesale; and the remains of Bougainville's and Roquemaure's troops, falling back to the St. Lawrence, joined Bourlamaque's force, and were carried over to the island of Montreal. By September 6, Haviland's army was encamped at Longueuil on the southern shore of the river, directly opposite Montreal. [Footnote 35: Knox, vol. ii, p. 394.] [Sidenote: _Amherst's advance._] [Sidenote: _La Présentation._] By the end of July, Amherst's army was assembling at Albany. The colonial troops came up slowly, and valuable time was lost. The General moved on to Schenectady, left that place on June 21, and reached Oswego on July 9. At Oswego he stayed for a month, waiting for the full complement of the expedition, and collecting the boats on which the force was to descend the St. Lawrence. Sir William Johnson joined him with a number of Indians, {322} while the white troops reached a total of 10,000 men, rather more than half of whom were regulars. On August 10 the army embarked. They sailed and rowed to the end of Lake Ontario, entered the St. Lawrence, made their way through the Thousand Islands, and by the fifteenth reached the French mission station of La Présentation, now Ogdensburg, at the mouth of the Oswegatchie river, where the Abbé Piquet--the apostle of the Iroquois, as he was called--had, since the year 1749, endeavoured to win the Five Nations to the French.[36] [Footnote 36: See _Documentary History of New York_, vol. i, pp. 433-40 (Papers relating to the early settlement at Ogdensburg). The Abbé Piquet retired in this year (1760) to Louisiana, and thence to France, where he died in 1781. His mission on the Oswegatchie river, or Rivière de la Présentation, was a good sample of the aggressive French missions in Canada. Its object was to bring over the western tribes of the Five Nations to the French religion and French interests.] [Sidenote: _Fort Levis taken._] [Sidenote: _Amherst before Montreal._] A little lower down, on an island in the St. Lawrence, at the head of the rapids, the French had a fortified outpost. They called the island �le Royale, and the fort upon it Fort Levis. The officer in charge was Pouchot, who had commanded at Niagara in the preceding year, and had been exchanged with other prisoners. From the eighteenth to the twenty-fourth of August, Amherst attacked the fort. From either bank, and from the neighbouring islands, the British guns poured in their fire, supported by the armed vessels of the expedition; and on the twenty-fifth, after a brave defence, Pouchot surrendered. On the thirty-first, Amherst began the descent of the rapids, watched by La Corne and a band of Canadians. A number of boats were lost, and eighty-four men were drowned; but the main body was carried safely onward, and by September 5 reached the �le Perrot, a few miles above the island of Montreal. On the sixth, Amherst landed at Lachine, and, marching forward, encamped that night directly in front of Montreal. [Sidenote: _Negotiations for surrender._] [Sidenote: _Montreal capitulates, and with it the whole of Canada._] The next day the French commanders negotiated for {323} surrender, Murray having meanwhile landed on the island, and begun his march towards Montreal, on the opposite side to that on which Amherst was encamped. Vaudreuil and Levis tried to extract better terms from Amherst than the latter was inclined to grant; and Levis, in particular, strove hard to modify the provision that all the French troops in Canada should lay down their arms, and not serve again during the war. His protests were in vain. Amherst returned answer in strong words, that he was resolved by the terms of the capitulation to mark his sense of the infamous conduct of which the French troops had been guilty, in exciting the savages to barbarities in the course of the war. With 2,400 men opposed to about 17,000 in the three English forces, the Frenchmen had no option but to surrender. On September 8 the terms of capitulation were signed, and the whole of Canada passed into the keeping of Great Britain. [Sidenote: _Amherst on the conduct of the French Indians._] Amherst's reference to French dealings with the Indians, and to the dealings of the Indians in French employ, the authority for which is Captain Knox's book, deserves to be noted. When two white races are pitted against each other in savage lands, the final mastery will rest with the one which, less than the other, comes down to the savage level. The French had sinned more than the English in this respect; and it is significant that, at the surrender of Niagara, they stipulated for protection against the Indian allies of the English, and that at the surrender of Montreal they made a similar request. On the second occasion Amherst answered, and answered truly, that no cruelties had been committed by the Indians on the English side. A few days before, at the taking of Fort Levis, a large proportion of Johnson's Indians had deserted when not allowed to use their scalping knives; and probably the majority of the English shared Captain Knox's opinion of them, that 'this is quite uniform with their conduct on all occasions whenever {324} opportunity seems to offer for their being serviceable to us.'[37] The truth was that the English did not love the Indians or Indian ways; they suffered in consequence while the fate of war was still in the balance; but in the end they gained, as a ruling race, for the humanity of Amherst and the men whom he commanded stood to the credit of Great Britain in the coming time. [Footnote 37: Knox, vol. ii, p. 413. According to Knox, Johnson collected 1,330 Indians belonging to seventeen tribes. This number was reduced at the time of embarkation to 706, and afterwards by desertion to 182.] [Sidenote: _End of the war._] With the capitulation of Montreal, the war in North America ended. Already in the past July some French ships bringing supplies, which had reached the Baie des Chaleurs in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, had been followed up and destroyed in the Restigouche river by Commander Byron; and while Montreal was being given up, a detachment from the English garrison at Quebec reduced the French outpost at Jacques Cartier. The surrender of Montreal included all Canada, and Robert Rogers was sent by Amherst to take over Detroit, Michillimackinac, and other of the western outposts of New France. They were peaceably occupied at the time, but three years later were the scene of hard fighting in consequence of the dangerous Indian rising under Pontiac. Amherst himself left Canada almost immediately, but remained in America as Commander-in-Chief, having his head quarters at New York, until peace was signed, when he returned to England. Vaudreuil and his subordinates went back to France, to be brought heavily to account for their shortcomings; and until the peace, or rather until Pontiac's revolt had been put down a year later, Canada remained under military rule. [Sidenote: _Canada under military rule._] There were three Governors, subordinate to the Commander-in-Chief--General Murray at Quebec, Colonel Burton at Three Rivers, and General Gage, who eventually took over {325} Amherst's command, at Montreal. Matters seem to have gone in the main smoothly. The Canadian people, worn with war, desired only rest and fair dealing, and fair dealing they received at the hands of the British commanders, among whom Murray was a conspicuously humane man. Criminal jurisdiction was placed in the hands of British officers, but civil cases were left to be settled by the captains of militia in the various parishes according to the custom of the people, with the right of appeal to the Governor. More publicity was given by proclamation to the orders and regulations of the Governors than had been the case in French times; and though the status was one of military occupation, there was a nearer approach to freedom, or at any rate more even-handed justice, than in the days when Bigot and his confederates robbed the peasantry in the name of the French King. [Sidenote: _Events in Europe._] [Sidenote: _Death of King George II._] [Sidenote: _Rise of Bute and resignation of Pitt._] Meanwhile events moved fast in Europe. The fall of Montreal was followed in a few weeks' time by the death of King George II. He died on October 25, 1760, and with the accession of George III there came a change in English policy. The 'King's friends,' as they were called, by intrigue and bribery gradually gained power. Bute, the royal favourite, led them, and strongly supported a peace policy. In March, 1761, he became a Secretary of State, and in the following October Pitt resigned. Success had perhaps told against the great English minister. The main work to which he had put his hand had been accomplished; among the colleagues who intrigued against him, or who resented his imperious leadership, there may well have been in some minds an honest wish to give the country rest and to lighten the heavy burdens which war imposed. Already peace negotiations with France had been opened, but the discovery that the French Government had formed a secret compact with Spain stiffened Pitt's policy, and he urged the desirability of striking the first blow and declaring war against {326} Spain. On this issue he parted company with the other ministers, except Lord Temple, and retired from office. A few months later, in May, 1762, Newcastle resigned, and Bute was left supreme. [Sidenote: _Greatness of Pitt._] No eulogy on Pitt can exaggerate the services which he rendered to England. 'He revived the military genius of our people, he supported our allies, he extended our trade, he raised our reputation, he augmented our dominions.'[38] He gave to the world a splendid illustration of an English statesman who was as good as his word; who, unlike the ordinary run of Parliamentary leaders, did not shift his course or seek for compromise. He believed in the destiny of his country, and shaped that destiny on world-wide lines. His faults, which were not few, are forgiven by his countrymen, for he loved England much. [Footnote 38: _Annual Register_ for 1761, p. 47.] [Sidenote: _War with Spain._] [Sidenote: _English reverse in Newfoundland._] The mean men who supplanted him could not undo what he had done. The beginning of the year 1762 saw them at war with Spain, and still Englishmen struck blow after blow. In 1761, while Pitt was still in office, Belle �le, off the French coast, had been taken, and in the West Indies and in India there had been gains. In 1762 more West Indian islands were captured, and Spain lost for the time Havana in the West, the Philippines in the East. Curiously enough the one reverse experienced by the English was in North America, St. John's in Newfoundland being surprised and taken in June, 1762, though it was recovered in the following September. [Sidenote: _The Peace of Paris._] In spite of continued success Bute was resolved on peace, the negotiations being entrusted to the Duke of Bedford, who was one of the extreme peace party. The preliminaries were concluded in November, 1762; they were approved by Parliament, and on February 10, 1763, the Peace of Paris was signed. Under its provisions the French King renounced all pretensions to Nova Scotia or Acadia, and ceded 'in full {327} right Canada with all its dependencies, as well as the island of Cape Breton and all the other islands and coasts in the gulf and river St. Lawrence.' A line drawn down the middle of the river Mississippi defined the inland frontier; all territory on the left side of the river, 'except the town of New Orleans and the island in which it is situated,' being ceded to Great Britain. Two clauses, however, in the treaty marred the completeness of the cession. They renewed the rights of fishing and drying on part of the Newfoundland coast, which had been given to French subjects by the Treaty of Utrecht; and they ceded in full right to the King of France the islands of St. Pierre and Miquelon, to serve as a shelter to French fishermen, on condition that the islands should not be fortified. Here were the seeds of future trouble, sown by other hands than those of Pitt. Yet, considering the character and inclinations of the men who held power in England at this critical time, the country had reason to congratulate itself on the result of the negotiations.[39] Spain paid for her interference in the quarrel with France by the loss of Florida, which became a British possession; in turn she received from France Louisiana. Thus the Seven Years' War ended, {328} closing the story of New France; and on the line of the St. Lawrence, under British rule, grew up the Canadian nation. [Footnote 39: Lord Chesterfield's views on the preliminaries of the Peace of Paris, not yet fully known when he wrote, are interesting. In a letter dated Nov. 13, 1762 (1775 ed., vol. iv, pp. 190, 191, Letter 328), he writes, 'We have by no means made so good a bargain with France (i.e. as with Spain), for in truth what do we get by it except Canada, with a very proper boundary of the river Mississippi, and that is all? As for the restrictions upon the French fishery in Newfoundland, they are very well _per la predica_, and for the Commissary whom we shall employ, for he will have a good salary from hence to see that those restrictions are complied with, and the French will double that salary, that he may allow them all to be broken through. It is plain to me that the French fishery will be exactly what it was before the war.... But, after all I have said, the articles are as good as I expected with France, when I considered that no one single person, who carried on this negotiation on our parts, was ever concerned or consulted in any negotiation before. Upon the whole then the acquisition of Canada has cost us four score millions sterling.'] NOTE.--For the above, see the books specified at the end of the preceding chapter. In these two chapters the original dispatches have been consulted, and much use has been made of KNOX'S _Historical Journal of the Campaigns in North America_ (London, 1769). {329} CHAPTER XI GENERAL SUMMARY In order to sum up the story of New France, it is proposed in the present chapter to try to answer the four following questions. What effect had geography on the history of Canada down to the year 1763? Why did France lose Canada? What were the respective merits and defects of the French and English systems and policies in North America? And lastly, was the contest between the two powers and the victory of one inevitable, and was it beneficial? These four questions overlap each other, and the answers involve considerable repetition of what has gone before; but a short general summary may be useful to those who care to study the earlier history of Canada in reference to the general history of colonization. [Sidenote: _Position of the French among colonizing nations._] From the time of Columbus down to the middle of the nineteenth century, five nations, all on the western side of Europe, were mainly concerned in carrying European trade, conquest, and settlement into other parts of the world. They were the Spaniards, the Portuguese, the Dutch, the French, and the English. Of these five nations, the Spaniards had what may be called a continental career. They overran and mastered an immense area of mainland. The Portuguese, the Dutch, and the English, on the other hand, while they differed from each other in many points, were alike in this, that they were traders and seafarers, not so much attempting an inland dominion, as securing footholds on sea coasts, peninsulas, and islands. The French stood midway between the Spaniards and the other three nations. They were not {330} continental conquerors to the same extent as the Spaniards, they did not confine themselves to the fringes of the land to the same extent as the Portuguese, the Dutch, and the English. They were what France made them to be. [Sidenote: _Twofold character of France and the French._] France is an integral part of the continent of Europe; but it is also, with the exception of the Spanish peninsula, the westernmost province of that continent; and it has a long indented seaboard open to the Atlantic. The country has a double outlook, its people have had a twofold character and a double history. It is noteworthy that, while the French, to judge from the greatest event in their history--the French Revolution--and to judge from their writing and thought, have been the most thorough and logical, the most uncompromising of peoples, their record has yet been in a sense one of continual compromise, or at least one of perpetual combination of opposite extremes. The northern and southern races, the northern and southern religions, have had their meeting-ground in France. France, which has been notable for violent political changes, had and has the strongest element of conservatism in its population. No nation is more quick-witted than the French, yet in none is there more plodding industry. [Sidenote: _Canada well suited to be a sphere of French colonization._] In the fullness of time, the French people had their call to take part in the over-sea expansion of Europe, and they found their way to Canada. They entered the New World at its widest point, where the American continent extends furthest from west to east; but they entered it also at the point where the interior of the continent is most accessible from the sea by means of a great navigable river and a group of lakes. Thus the advent of the French into Canada meant the coming of a people, who in their old home were partly continental, partly sea-going, into a sphere of colonization, which was a vast extent of continent, but which at the same time was more intersected and more dominated by water than perhaps any other portion of the mainland of the globe. {331} Like came to like when the French came to Canada. Their old home had given them at once the instincts of land conquerors, and the knowledge of men whose way is on the waters. Quick to move and loving motion, they found the route into the New World to be one which invited and facilitated quick movement; for, important as is inland water communication at the present day, it was all important before the days of railways. The great highroad of North America was the St. Lawrence, and that highroad became owned by a quick, ambitious people, who were not content to remain as traders by the side of the sea. [Sidenote: _Greatness of the St. Lawrence water system._] The combination of accessibility from the open sea, of length of navigable waters, and of volume of waters, makes the St. Lawrence basin almost, if not quite unique. Up to Three Rivers, 330 miles from the sea, the St. Lawrence is a tidal river. Up to the Falls of Niagara, 600 miles from the sea--nearly as far as London is from Berlin--there is no break of navigation. From the westernmost point of Lake Superior to the Atlantic is a distance of 2,000 miles--much further than is the distance from London to St. Petersburg. Lake Superior alone is larger in size than Scotland. [Sidenote: _It is almost connected with the basin of the Mississippi, of Hudson Bay, and of the Hudson river._] [Sidenote: _Colonization in Canada was colonization by water._] Further, this wonderful chain of waters, as has been pointed out, is nearly continuous with the Mississippi basin on the southern side, and on the north-western side with the lakes and rivers which drain into Hudson Bay; while one of the smaller affluents of the St. Lawrence, the Richelieu river, carries into the St. Lawrence the waters of Lake Champlain and Lake George, the southern end of Lake George being but very few miles distant from the upper waters of the Hudson river, which flows into the Atlantic. In short, Canada, within its ancient limits, was a network of inland waters. Here was a continent to be conquered and settled by water rather than by land, and the congenial task of conquering and attempting to settle it was allotted by Providence to the French. {332} [Sidenote: _The geography of Canada favoured motion._] Canada then suited the French, and the French suited Canada; but the effect of the geography of Canada on an incoming race, with the instincts and the characteristics of the French, was to stimulate their natural inclination to attempt too much and to go too fast and too far. The incomers moved quickly along the lines of communication, and went into the heart of the continent; but permanent settlement lagged behind, and was confined to the edges of the inland waters. For, while nature had given to Canada, in her rivers and lakes, the best of roads, away from those rivers and lakes the land was difficult to penetrate. Thus Canada was colonized only by the water side, and what settlement there was, was characterized by length without breadth; while, beyond the point where continuous settlement ended, the very easiness of movement carried forward enterprising French officers, priests, and traders, until there was a skeleton outline of French dominion, which was never filled in, from the Gulf of St. Lawrence to the Gulf of Mexico. [Sidenote: _Settlement held close to the water side._] [Sidenote: _Two distinct kinds of colonists in Canada._] Geography, too, had this effect upon the population. The rivers were so entirely all in all, that they made the settled portion of the French Canadians very settled, and the fluid portion very fluid. Those who wished to stay in one place stayed by the river bank, which was the roadside, because it was the roadside, and because behind and away from the river there was not open ground but dense forest. Those, on the other hand, who were inclined to roam, were carried by the waters wheresoever they wished, with the backwoods at hand, should hiding-places be required. Thus Canada bred two distinct species of colonists, the _habitans_ of the central St. Lawrence, and the _voyageurs_ or _coureurs de bois_. As in their old home, so still more in their new, the French race comprised contradictory elements. [Sidenote: _Effect of the Canadian climate on colonization._] [Sidenote: _It made against continuity_] Climate counts for much in the formation of a people, and in determining its history. The climate of Eastern {333} Canada inclines to extremes. It favours quickness but not continuity of action. The summer is short, but very hot and bright; the winter is long and severe, but again not unfavourable to movement over the frozen surface of water and ground. Eastern Canada is not by nature a land open all the year round to steady work, but one in which settlers have a limited time wherein to till the ground, followed by a long, close season; while wanderers can in summer and winter alike indulge their vagrant instincts. The tendency therefore of the Canadian climate, as regards its influence on an incoming race, with a restless and impatient element in its character, was to stimulate the restlessness, and to discourage colonization in the sense of attachment to the soil. [Sidenote: _and against the policy of the French Government._] In winter, the St. Lawrence is closed to shipping. Consequently New France was for several months in each year cut off from all communication with the mother country. Here again the effect of climate was to break continuity of colonization; and, moreover, the forces of nature were employed against the policy of the French Government, for the effect of long breaks in communication must have been to develop a separate life in New France, evidence of which is to be found in the jealousy existing, in Vaudreuil's and Montcalm's time, between natives of France and natives of Canada; whereas the unaltering aim of French Kings and ministers was simply to reproduce France in America, and to keep the colony under constant and rigid control from home. The effects of the summer, therefore, on Canada were counteracted by winter isolation; and one more element of contradiction was introduced into French history in North America. [Sidenote: _Canada had no minerals._] [Sidenote: _This was one cause of the small population._] The natural products of a country are an important factor in making its people. Canada, as compared with most other fields of colonization, with Spanish America for instance, or the East Indies, was a poor land. It had practically no mineral wealth, though traces of iron and copper were found {334} in the region of Lake Superior. In the earlier part of the eighteenth century Charlevoix wrote: 'The first source of the ill fortune of this country, which is honoured with the name of New France, was the report which was at first spread through the kingdom that it had no mines; and they did not enough consider that the greatest advantage that can be drawn from a colony is the increase of trade. And to accomplish this, it requires people, and these peoplings must be made by degrees, so that it will not appear in such a kingdom as France.'[1] The great weakness of Canada was the paucity of the white population. Had mines been discovered, the colony would no doubt have been much stronger, for a far greater number of colonists would have come out from France; and, while the character of the people would have been, in a sense, at least as restless as it actually was, the restlessness would have been localized in the mining areas, which would have become large centres of population. [Footnote 1: Charlevoix's _Letters to the Duchess of Lesdiguières_, giving an account of a voyage to Canada (Eng. translation, 1763, p. 31). The letters began in 1720.] [Sidenote: _Agriculture, fisheries, and fur-trading._] In the absence of minerals Canada depended on agriculture, fisheries, and fur-trading. Of these three industries, agriculture alone conduced to permanent settlement. The fisheries did not directly much concern the life of the colony up the St. Lawrence river, for the fishing-grounds were mainly in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and on the coasts of Newfoundland and Acadia; nor did fishing, when the fishermen found their principal market in Europe, and were in great measure domiciled in Europe, contribute much to the colonization of North America. Fur-trading again, the great speciality of Canada, made for movement and for wandering life, not for colonization. This is pointed out by Charlevoix, who dwells upon the evil results of giving licences to trade, as encouraging vagabondism, and notes as {335} the second cause of the ill fortune of Canada, the want of resolution in its people, and their constant moving from place to place, instead of carefully selecting a place for settlement and staying there.[2] [Footnote 2: Charlevoix (as above), pp. 31-5.] The real wealth of Eastern Canada was, as it still is, agricultural; but the history of colonization proves that agricultural colonies, while very sound and sure, progress very slowly; and to the impatient, enterprising Frenchman, who was inclined to seek fortune over the seas, farming in Canada, with a Canadian winter to face, offered little attraction. It is true that the English North American colonies were also agricultural colonies; but they had a great advantage over New France, in that their coasts were open all the year round, resulting in a maritime trade, which could never be enjoyed by Canada. Moreover New England, at any rate, was peopled by colonists who went out, not to make their fortunes, and not to build up a dominion for their King, but to make their homes, and their children's homes, on the agricultural pattern, in as kindly a soil as, and in a kindlier climate than, that of Canada. [Sidenote: _Canada better suited for war than peace._] New France then was a country where movement was easy, and where the incentives to settlement were not great; and in its white population, or at any rate in a large proportion of that population, there was a strong element of restlessness, added to great power of conciliating and assimilating savages; while the religious and political policy of its rulers was, in the main, a forward policy. The result was that the Canadians were more successful in motion than at rest, in making war than in keeping peace. 'The English Americans,' writes Charlevoix, 'are entirely averse to war because they have much to lose; they do not regard the savages, because they think they have no occasion for them. The youth of the French, for the contrary reasons, hate {336} peace, and live well with the savages, whose esteem they gain during a war and have their friendship at all times.[3] [Footnote 3: Charlevoix (as above), p. 27.] [Sidenote: _The Canadians as fighters._] The Canadians were to the English settlers in New England or New York, very much what the Highlanders of Scotland, in past centuries, were to the dwellers in the Lowlands. Their forte was in raiding their English rivals; and, as they were better qualified to excel in war than in peace, so in war they were more capable of quick, spasmodic action, than of bearing continuous and steady strain. 'They seem not to be masters of a certain impetuosity, which makes them fitter for a _coup de main_, or a sudden expedition, than for the regular and settled operations of a campaign. It has also been remarked, that amongst a great number of brave men, who have distinguished themselves in the late war, there have been few found who had talents to command. This was perhaps because they had not sufficiently learnt how to obey.'[4] On the other hand, it must be remembered that Canada also contained a stationary population on the banks of the St. Lawrence, who more and more, as years went on, learnt what war meant and preferred peace; and that the colony was not devoid of trading centres, the largest of which were Quebec and Montreal, and all of which, including for instance, Niagara, Detroit, and Michillimackinac, were inland ports. [Footnote 4: Charlevoix (as above), p. 104.] [Sidenote: _The English had the better position in North America, larger numbers, and command of the sea._] If the above was the effect of geography on the history of France in North America, it is not difficult to answer the question, Why did the French lose Canada? They lost it because the English had the better position in North America; because the English population in North America largely outnumbered the French; because, when the crisis came, the English made their main effort in North America, whereas the French devoted their resources and their energies primarily to continental war in Europe; and lastly, because {337} the English secured command of the sea, and in consequence command of the St. Lawrence also. But then the further question arises: What produced this balance of advantage on the English side? [Sidenote: _There is no valid reason why the English originally secured the better geographical position in North America._] It is not easy to determine why the better lot in North America, as regards geography, fell to Great Britain and not to France. It was hardly a question of prior discovery. The first pioneer for England, Cabot, struck the New World at Newfoundland or Cape Breton, far north of what became the main sphere of British colonization. The first authenticated pioneer on behalf of France, Verrazano, found his way to the present shores of the United States. The French connexion with the St. Lawrence dated from Cartier's voyages; but those voyages, though they gave the right of discovery, did not result at the time in effective occupation. It was little more than an accident that the English settled in Virginia and New England, and the French in Acadia and on the St. Lawrence; though the fact of having found the St. Lawrence, and the attraction of a great river, which might be the long-wished-for, and long-dreamt-of, highroad to the far East, may well have dictated to French instincts where New France should be. At any rate, the English gained the great initial advantage of a far larger seaboard, open at all times of the year, and a climate which was more favourable to European colonization. 'Along the continent of America which we possess,' wrote Wolfe from Louisbourg in 1758, 'there is a variety of climate, and, for the most part, healthy and pleasant.... Such is our extent of territory upon this fine continent, that an inhabitant may enjoy the kind influence of moderate warmth all the year round.'[5] [Footnote 5: Wolfe to his mother, Aug. 11, 1758 (Wright, p. 454).] [Sidenote: _English superiority in numbers mainly due to French policy towards the Huguenots._] With this advantage, it was natural that there should be greater immigration into the English colonies than into Canada. But this was not the only, or the main, cause of the superior numbers in the English colonies. The main {338} cause was the policy of the French Government, and especially its religious policy. The most fatal mistake made by the French in regard to North America was the exclusion of the Huguenots. The men who wished to leave England went to the present United States. The men who wished to leave France were not allowed to go to Canada, and went in considerable numbers to England and her colonies. The effect, therefore, of Roman Catholic exclusiveness was that, though France had a far greater population than England, the greatest French colony failed for want of colonists. Nor was it only a matter of quantity, but a matter of quality also. The Huguenots were the type of men who would make homes, create business, and build up communities beyond the seas. They were of the same strong fibre as the New England Puritans. In the competition of the coming time, New France was doomed in consequence of being closed to the French Protestants. [Sidenote: _Numerical superiority of the English forces in North America in the Seven Years' War._] [Sidenote: _Canada was conquered by Great Britain, not by the English colonies._] When the Seven Years' War came, the English colonists in North America outnumbered the French by thirteen to one; but, at the moment, superiority in numbers was largely counterbalanced by the want of union in the English colonies, whereas Canada was one. Therefore the issue largely depended on the forces and the leaders sent out by the two mother countries respectively. England, inspired by Pitt, sent out abundant troops. France, inspired by Madame de Pompadour, kept nearly all her troops to fight Frederick of Prussia, with his few English and Hanoverian allies. The result was the defeat of the French in North America, and the British conquest of Canada. Whatever might have been the result if the crisis had been postponed, it was not the British colonists but the troops from England, who, in 1758-60, decided the fate of North America. It is customary, in writing accounts of the colonial wars of Great Britain, to emphasize the merits of the colonial soldiers, who have the advantage of knowing the country and the mode of {339} fighting appropriate to it; and to depreciate the regulars sent from home. Reverses, like that of Braddock, are written and read from a colonial point of view; and in America, more especially, the colonists' side has been emphasized in consequence of the results of the subsequent War of Independence. But, as a matter of fact, excellent as were some of the colonial troops, such as Robert Rogers' Rangers, Canada was conquered by soldiers from England under able English generals like Wolfe and Amherst; and similarly the burden of the defence of Canada fell mainly on Montcalm and the few regiments which had been spared to him from France. [Sidenote: _The English command of the water._] As the French kept for war on the continent of Europe the troops which should have been sent to North America, so they allowed the English to gain control of the water, over which alone troops and supplies could be sent to New France. 'The possession of Canada,' writes Captain Mahan, 'depended upon sea power.'[6] After the victory of Hawke in Quiberon Bay, and other English successes on sea, Burke, in the _Annual Register_ for 1760,[7] wrote that France 'was obliged to sit, the impotent spectator of the ruin of her colonies, without being able to send them the slightest succour. It was then she found what it was to be inferior at sea.' Especially important was the command of the water to those who would hold Canada, for two reasons; because Canada, poor and undeveloped, was dependent on supplies from Europe, to a greater extent than the English colonies[8] in North America; and because she could and must be attacked by the St. Lawrence. [Footnote 6: _Influence of Sea Power upon History_ (6th ed.), p. 294.] [Footnote 7: p. 9.] [Footnote 8: Thus Charlevoix (as above, p. 38) says Canada 'has always had more from France than it could pay.'] The command of the sea meant the command of the St. Lawrence; and the command of the St. Lawrence was indispensable for the reduction of Quebec and Montreal. The downfall of New France began when the Treaty of {340} Utrecht took from her, in Acadia, the best part of her scanty seaboard; the downward process was arrested when Louisbourg, taken by Massachusetts, was restored to the French; it began again with the second capture of Louisbourg. The seaport was taken in one year; in the next the river port, Quebec, was lost also. This would not have happened had the French not divided their energies so completely as to give Great Britain superiority on the water. They attempted too much at home, and the same fault, if we turn to consider their system and policy in North America, was carried into the New World. [Sidenote: _French and English systems and policies in North America compared._] It is roughly true to say that in North America the French had a definite policy and a definite system; but the policy, though brilliant in conception, was quite impracticable, and the system was radically unsound. The English in North America, on the other hand, had rarely any policy and never any system. [Sidenote: _Hopelessness of the French scheme for dominion in North America._] The French policy was an imperial policy. It was clear, consistent, and far-reaching. The object aimed at was a French dominion in North America, the lines of communication being the two great rivers, the St. Lawrence and the Mississippi. Canada and Louisiana were to be joined; the English were to be kept between the Alleghanies and the Atlantic; the French King was to be lord of all; the French religion was to be supreme; the Indians were to be converted and made French in sympathies and interests. The scheme was brilliant, but it was impossible; and it is difficult to understand why it is considered by historians to have been so dangerous to the future of the British colonies. White men of one race, sparsely scattered over two sides of a gigantic triangle, were to control white men of another but equally masculine race, thirteen times as numerous, who held the base of the triangle, the base being the seaboard. The attempt became more impracticable every year, for every year the actual preponderance of numbers on the English {341} side increased, and every year the white men gained on the red men, who alone could make the realization of the French dream even conceivably possible. [Sidenote: _French native policy._] [Sidenote: _Its merits._] Ample reference has already been made to the dealings of the French with the Indians. There is much to praise and much to blame in what may be called the native policy of France in North America. The object of the French Government was, as Charlevoix points out, to 'frenchify' the savages;[9] and, as an instance of the value of the Indians to the cause of France in America, he cites 'the Abenaquis, who, though few in numbers, were during the two last wars the principal bulwark of New France against New England.'[9] With the exception of the Five Nation Indians, the natives of North America were almost wholly on the side of the French as against the English, in spite of the fact that the English offered them a better market and sold them better wares. The reason was that the French relations to the Indians were more human than those of the English. No doubt, among the English colonists were Quakers and Moravians, whose tenets bade them deal gently with the people of the soil; and on the New York frontier, from Dutch times, there had been friendship, sometimes warmer sometimes cooler, between the Dutch and the English colonists on the one hand, and the Iroquois on the other. But the ordinary English colonist's view of the red man was the Old Testament view--hard, exclusive, and often cruel. The Puritan New Englander took the land of the heathen in possession, and from his standpoint there was not room in it for him and them. Widely different was the French view. The Indians were not to be excluded from, but incorporated in, the French dominion. The King of France, and his representative the Governor of Canada, were to be the fathers, and the Indians were to be the obedient and trusting children. The missions taught the {342} same lesson. The Indians were not to be exterminated, but to be fruitful and multiply as dutiful children of France and of the Roman Catholic Church. On these lines the French acted consistently from first to last; and their unaltering policy contrasted favourably with the halting, uncertain dealings of the English, which changed from year to year, and were different in the different colonies. The way to win a black man's or a red man's affections is to treat him, if not as an equal, at least as a man, and to be constant in the treatment. For this reason, the Indians loved the French better than the English. Very rarely on the English side appeared a man, like Sir William Johnson, who possessed the mixture of firmness and sympathy which attracted and conciliated the Indians, and which was common among the French. [Footnote 9: Charlevoix (as above), pp. 34, 35.] [Sidenote: _Its defects._] But there was a very dark side to the French policy and system in regard to the North American Indians. In the first place, as has been abundantly shown in the preceding pages, the French authorities, temporal and spiritual, kept the savages on their side by sanctioning, or at least not repressing, their savagery; and notably the mission Indians of Canada, the special protégés of the priests, were foremost in barbarous warfare against white Christians of a different shade of religion. In the second place, the political system of Canada, which indirectly created the Canadian vagrants, the _coureurs de bois_, produced, in doing so, indianized Frenchmen, differing little from frenchified Indians. Here again we can take Charlevoix's testimony. He writes that 'some vagabonds, who had taken a liking to independency and a wandering life, had remained among the savages, from whom they could not be distinguished but by their vices.'[10] If the French were more human than the English in their dealings with the Indians, they were more human for evil as well as for good; and, whatever was the result on the Indians, {343} there is no question as to the result on the French and English respectively, of their different lines of action towards the red men. The English race gained greatly in the end in soundness and in progress, from keeping outside the Indian circle and not coming down to the Indian level. [Footnote 10: Charlevoix (as above), p. 34.] [Sidenote: _Merits of French settlement in Canada._] It has been said above that the French system in North America was radically unsound. It was unsound, in that it was based on political and religious exclusiveness. There was the one great fundamental mistake of excluding the Huguenots, and there were various other important defects. But, on the hypothesis that the most independent and most progressive element in France was to have no place in New France, it is open to question whether the system of colonization, which Louis XIV, Colbert, and Talon devised, and which remained the basis of the colony, deserves the somewhat severe criticism which it has received at the hands of historians. It is true that the system was most artificial, that it contained no element of freedom or self-government, and that when, long years after it came into being, many of the restrictions were removed in consequence of the English conquest of Canada, the colonists were deeply sensible of the relief. It is true, too, that reaction against these restrictions, while still in existence, produced the semi-savage race of _coureurs de bois_, and that, through placing the power in the hands of a few individuals, without providing any check of local representation or local public opinion, an atmosphere of wholesale corruption and intrigue was produced. But none the less there was an undoubted element of soundness and strength in the settlement of New France; and a considerable amount of shrewdness was shown in taking a certain material from the old country and placing it in the New World, under familiar conditions. The military side of the colonization was skilfully handled; and the peasants, who had been in tutelage in France to lord, to King, and to Church, found themselves in their new homes {344} under similar guidance, instead of being turned into strange ways, for which by bringing up they were not fitted. The system, artificial as it was, produced permanent settlement of considerable strength and great tenacity, which, under a more liberal régime, has resulted in the French-speaking Canadian people of the present day. [Sidenote: _Canada, as compared with the English colonies, was one._] [Sidenote: _The English colonies were separate from the mother country, and from each other._] There were divisions in Canada, and various contradictory elements in its history; but, as against foreign rivals and for purposes of offence and defence, the colony was one, under one Government and one Church, and in line with the mother country. Widely different was the case of the English colonies. They were rarely in harmony with the mother country, or with each other. They had little or no instinct of imperialism. They had the instinct of self-preservation, and if seriously attacked were to some extent prepared, unless Quaker influence was dominant, to protect themselves, and to accept aid from the mother country. But their traditions and their inclinations made for peace, not for war; for isolation, not for union. Their forefathers' aim and object had been to create and maintain separate and self-dependent communities, not to be in substance amenable to home control. Here is a French view of the New Englanders given by the anonymous eye-witness of the siege of Louisbourg in 1745: 'These singular people have a system of laws and protection peculiar to themselves, and their Governor carries himself like a monarch.'[11] If the fault of the Canadian system was too rigid uniformity and too complete subordination to the mother country, the English colonies suffered from the opposite extreme, from utter want of uniformity and complete absence of system. Different constitutions, different shades of religious beliefs, different phases of settlement--all created disunion. Common origin made a bond with the mother country, but the Governors {345} sent from England could tell those who sent them how deficient was the habit of obedience to the British Crown. [Footnote 11: Professor Wrong's translation, p. 37.] [Sidenote: _The English colonists alone no match for Canada._] [Sidenote: _Shortcomings of the home Government._] Common danger alone produced occasional signs of common action. The New England colonies, whose borders were most within reach of French raids, and whose shores reached to Acadia, showed far the most public spirit, and far the most power of combination. The southern colonies awoke only when the French in the Ohio valley did them active and present hurt; but, with many times the numbers of the Canadian population, the English colonies as a rule showed themselves to be no match for Canada. The first decisive treaty in North America--the Peace of Utrecht, which gave Acadia to Great Britain--was the result of fighting by English, not colonial soldiers, and not in America, but in Flanders under Marlborough. The second decisive treaty, the Peace of Paris in 1763, was the result of fighting in America, but mainly by British not colonial troops, and under British generals. The 'Bostonnais' alone among the English colonists were objects of apprehension to the French; and, if it were not for the record of Massachusetts and her smaller neighbours, the English colonies in North America before the year 1763 would in manhood and public spirit compare poorly with Canada. With equal truth it may be said that, in the matter of having a clear and consistent policy in North America, Great Britain compared very poorly with France; and the apathy of the colonies may fairly be attributed in large measure to their uncertainty as to what on any particular occasion might be the attitude of the King and the ministers in England; whether support would be forthcoming or withheld, and whether, if forthcoming, it would involve some sacrifice in return. It is very noticeable how often a promised force from home either was never sent or sent too late; it is noticeable too how difficult it was for Governors who opposed French claims and pretensions, such as Dongan of New York, in the seventeenth century, and William Shirley {346} of Massachusetts, in the eighteenth, to persuade the home Government of the justice of their views. Like her colonies, England was as a rule averse to war; and as her colonies were inclined to keep her at arm's length, so she was inclined to leave them, within limits, to take care of themselves. [Sidenote: _English compromise._] In the case of North America, while French and English were competing there, the English through their Government acted as they always have acted, during the whole course of their foreign and colonial history. They did, they undid, they compromised, until at length in Pitt there came a man who gripped the nettle, and the end was reached which might with infinitely greater ease have been attained many years before. When Quebec was in its infancy, the English under Kirke conquered it; the English King gave it back, and then the French dominion in North America took root. After Marlborough's wars the Peace of Utrecht gave Acadia to England, but gave it in terms so vague that the French continued to claim much or most of it; at the same time it left Cape Breton Island to France, and sowed the seeds of an apparently perennial controversy between Great Britain and France with regard to fishing rights on the coast of Newfoundland. There was more war, and the colonists took Cape Breton Island. Under the terms of the next treaty the English Government restored it to France. Then came the final war and the final peace; England gained all Canada, but, with that strange liking which Englishmen seem to have for leaving a frayed end in their treaty arrangements, the British Government confirmed the fishing rights of France on the Newfoundland coast, and added thereto possession of the two small islands of St. Pierre and Miquelon. It was not policy, it was not system, which gave North America to the English rather than to the French, and yet there was a certain gain even from the utter absence of both policy and system. Natural forces had more play on the English side than on the French, and in a sense it might {347} be said of the English colonies that their strength was to sit still. [Sidenote: _Was the contest between Great Britain and France in North America inevitable and beneficial?_] The last question to be asked, and if possible to be answered, is: Was the contest between France and Great Britain in North America, and the victory of one of the two powers, inevitable, and was it beneficial? From the English point of view, the answer to part of this question is a foregone conclusion. If there was to be a contest, it seems evident, if we look back on the past, that the English must have in the end prevailed. It is impossible to imagine that the French colony of Canada, with a population at the time of the conquest of considerably under 100,000, could dominate the English colonies with a million and a quarter inhabitants. Equally certain does it appear that to Canada the British conquest was a blessing in disguise, and the Canadians in a very short time realized what they had gained by the change of administration. In Mr. Parkman's words, 'a happier calamity never befell a people than the conquest of Canada by the British arms.'[12] [Footnote 12: _The Old Régime in Canada_ (end).] But the question, whether a decisive war between the two races in North America was inevitable, is one which may well be asked and answered, inasmuch as a similar question has in our own day troubled many minds in regard to other parts of the world where colonizing races have been side by side. Surely, it might be said, and probably was said, there was room enough in the great continent of North America for both French and English to work out their national destinies, without trying to supplant each other. In a sense this was no doubt true; and the truth is not vitiated by the fact that the French scheme of policy was not compatible with the presence of the English race in North America, on the supposition that the latter race would be allowed to extend its bounds by natural increase and progressive settlement _pari passu_ with the French. {348} [Sidenote: _No natural frontier between New France and the English colonies._] The interesting point, however, to notice is that there was no natural frontier between Canada and the English colonies, at the time when they came into serious competition; for the line of the Alleghanies, even if recognized, could fully delimit only the more southerly colonies. To use a modern term, two separate spheres of influence in North America had not been marked out by nature. But in new countries, unless there is some strongly defined natural line of division, it is true to say, however paradoxical it may appear, that there is not room for two incoming white races to colonize as equals side by side. It is precisely when the land is thinly populated, and when therefore the population is in a fluid condition, that collisions will and must occur. Given a continent like Europe at the present day, the geography of which is accurately known, the resources of whose soil in every part have been fully gauged, and whose surface has been for many generations parcelled out in effective occupation, one province to one race, another to another; then, when the peoples are crystallized in their respective moulds, war is not inevitable; and when war arises, it is the artificial result of political naughtiness and ambition, unless indeed it be the effect of some inaccuracy in the map, which needs to be adjusted. In new fields of colonization, on the other hand, wars are not artificial; they are natural, and not only natural but sometimes absolutely necessary to future happiness and welfare. Just as Europe was herself once in the melting-pot, so the lands which Europeans have settled and are settling, if they are to be the homes of strong peoples in days to come, must, when rival races are planted there, be the scenes of armed strife. Colonial wars which end where they began, with indecisive treaties tending to further bloodshed, may well be the subject of national sorrow and regret; but it is otherwise when a great issue has been achieved, and when it has been decided once for all what lines shall be laid down for the {349} future of a great country, not yet peopled as it will be in the coming time. Then the millions of money, which seem to have been wasted, are found to have been invested for the good of men; and the mourners for the lost sorrow not as without hope, inasmuch as those who have gone have died that others may live. The foundations of peoples are the nameless dead, who have been laid amid North American forests or under the bare veldt of South Africa. {350} APPENDIX I LIST OF FRENCH GOVERNORS OF CANADA PERIOD Samuel de Champlain . . . . . . . . 1632-1635 Chevalier de Montmagny . . . . . . . 1636-1648 Chevalier d'Ailleboust . . . . . . . 1648-1651 Jean de Lauzon . . . . . . . . . . . 1651-1657 Vicomte d'Argenson . . . . . . . . . 1658-1661 Baron d'Avaugour . . . . . . . . . . 1661-1663 Sieur de Mésy . . . . . . . . . . . 1663-1665 Marquis de Tracy . . . . . . . . . . 1665-1667 Chevalier de Courcelles[1] . . . . . 1665-1672 Comte de Frontenac . . . . . . . . . 1672-1682 Sieur de la Barre . . . . . . . . . 1682-1685 Marquis de Denonville . . . . . . . 1685-1689 Comte de Frontenac . . . . . . . . . 1689-1698 Chevalier de Callières . . . . . . . 1699-1703 Marquis de Vaudreuil . . . . . . . . 1703-1725 Marquis de Beauharnois . . . . . . . 1726-1747 Comte de la Galissonière . . . . . . 1747-1749 Marquis de la Jonquière . . . . . . 1749-1752 Marquis Duquesne . . . . . . . . . . 1752-1755 Marquis de Vaudreuil[2] . . . . . . 1755-1760 [Footnote 1: While Tracy was in Canada he was Governor-General, and Courcelles was Governor.] [Footnote 2: Son of the previous Governor of that name.] {351} APPENDIX II DATES OF THE PRINCIPAL EVENTS IN THE HISTORY OF CANADA DOWN TO 1763 YEAR North America discovered by Cabot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1497 Cartier's first voyage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1534 Cartier's second voyage and discovery of the St. Lawrence . . . 1535 Champlain's first voyage to North America . . . . . . . . . . . 1603 Founding of Port Royal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1605 Quebec founded by Champlain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1608 Hudson discovers the Hudson River . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1609 Hudson discovers Hudson Bay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1610 Port Royal destroyed by Argall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1613 Grant of Acadia to Sir W. Alexander . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1621 Company of the One Hundred Associates incorporated . . . . . . 1627 Quebec taken from the French by Kirke . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1629 Treaty of St. Germain-en-Laye. Canada restored to France . . . 1632 Death of Champlain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1635 Founding of Montreal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1642 Acadia taken by the English . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1645 Destruction of the Huron Missions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1648-50 Company of One Hundred Associates dissolved and Canada taken over by the French Crown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1663 New York taken by Great Britain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1664 Expedition of Tracy and Courcelles against the Five Nations . . 1666 La Salle comes to Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1666 Treaty of Breda. Acadia restored to the French . . . . . . . . 1667 La Salle supposed to have discovered the Ohio . . . . . . . . 1669-71 Incorporation of the Hudson Bay Company . . . . . . . . . . . . 1670 Count Frontenac's first government . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1672-82 Founding of Fort Frontenac . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1673 Joliet and Marquette reach the Mississippi from Lake Michigan . 1673 Treaty of Westminster. New York finally ceded to Great Britain 1674 La Salle descends the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico . . . . 1682 La Salle's expedition to Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1684-5 Treaty of Whitehall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1686 Forts in Hudson Bay raided by Iberville . . . . . . . . . . . . 1686 Death of La Salle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1687 Massacre of Lachine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1689 Count Frontenac's second government . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1689-98 Port Royal taken by Phipps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1690 Phipps' expedition against Quebec . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1690 Peace of Ryswick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1697 First colonization of Louisiana by Iberville . . . . . . . . . 1699 Founding of Detroit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1701 Callières' Treaty with the Five Nation Indians . . . . . . . . 1701 Five Nation Indians acknowledge supremacy of Great Britain . . 1701 Port Royal taken by Nicholson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1710 Expedition of Walker and Hill against Quebec . . . . . . . . . 1711 Peace of Utrecht. Hudson Bay and Acadia ceded to Great Britain 1713 English fort built at Oswego . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1727 Western discoveries by the Verendryes . . . . . . . . . . . . 1731-43 First siege and capture of Louisbourg . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1745 Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1748 Halifax founded . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1749 Fort Duquesne built by the French . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1754 Expulsion of the Acadians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1755 The _Alcide_ and the _Lys_ taken by Boscawen . . . . . . . . . 1755 Braddock defeated on the Monongahela . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1755 Johnson's victory over Dieskau at Lake George . . . . . . . . . 1755 Oswego taken by Montcalm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1756 William Shirley recalled . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1756 Abortive attempt against Louisbourg by Loudoun and Holborne . . 1757 Fort William Henry taken by Montcalm . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1757 Pitt comes into power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1757 Louisbourg taken by Amherst and Wolfe . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1758 Abercromby defeated at Ticonderoga and Lord Howe killed . . . . 1758 Fort Frontenac taken by Bradstreet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1758 Fort Duquesne taken by Forbes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1758 Fort Niagara taken by Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1759 Ticonderoga and Crown Point taken by Amherst . . . . . . . . . 1759 Battle of Quebec. Deaths of Wolfe and Montcalm. Quebec surrendered to the English . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1759 Surrender of Montreal and final conquest of Canada . . . . . . 1760 Resignation of Pitt. Bute comes into power . . . . . . . . . . 1761 War between Great Britain and Spain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1762 Peace of Paris. Canada ceded to Great Britain . . . . . . . . . 1763 INDEX Abbitibbi River, the, p. 188. Abenakis, the, 54, 127, 129, 135, 136, 138, 182, 194, 195, 266. Abercromby, General, 260, 271, 276, 277, 279, 280, 282, 283, 287, 296. Acadia, meaning of name, 36 _n_. -- and Acadians, 42, 43, 45, 52, 123, 131, 142, 146, 170-90, 192-4, 221-8, 235, 250, 337, 345, 346. Adirondack Mountains, 49, 241, 242. Adventurers to Canada, Company of, 74, 76. Aix-la-Chapelle, Peace of, 192, 205, 209, 211, 216, 217, 219, 221. Albanel, 186. Albany, 56 _n._, 63, 64, 91, 109, 110, 116, 121, 125-7, 130, 208, 234, 241, 246, 258, 267, 278, 321. -- River, the, 187. Albemarle, 186. Albert de Prado, 25. _Alcide_, the, 234 and _n._, 272. Alexander, Sir William, 74, 173-6. Alexandria, 236. Algonquins, the, 54, 61, 62, 66, 87. Alleghany Mountains, 49, 53, 217, 230-3, 285, 340. -- River, the, 150, 151, 217-9, 229, 286, 293, 331. Amazon, the, 2. Amherst, Lord, 259 _n._, 267, 271, 272, 275, 277, 283, 287, 290, 291, 296, 297, 303, 304, 311, 314, 319-24, 339. Amidas, 32. Andastes, the, 90. Andros, 183. Annapolis and Harbour, 41, 142, 143, 171, 176, 177, 193, 197, 202, 207-9, 219, 225, 226. Anne of Brittany, 20. -- Queen, 122, 144, 205. Anse au Foulon, 306, 317. Anson, Admiral, 206, 208, 292. Argall, Samuel, 42, 43, 172. Arkansas River, the, 153, 161, 162, 167, 211. Arlington, 186. Arthur, Port, 212. Artillery Cove, 265. Ashley, 186. Assiniboine, the, 213. Aubert of Dieppe, 20. Baccalaos, 15 _n._, 16 and _n._, 23 _n_. Bacon, 4, 12. Baffin, 27, 44, 184. -- Bay, 7 _n_. Baie des Puans. _See_ Green Bay. -- Françoise. _See_ Bay of Fundy. -- Verte, 224. Barlow, 32. Basques, the, 5, 11, 14-17, 65. Beaubassin, 183, 222, 225. Beauharnois, Fort, 211. Beaujeu, Admiral, 165, 166. -- de, 238. Beauport River and Shore, 132, 133 _n._, 298, 301, 305, 306, 308, 310. Beauséjour, 222-4, 307. Bedford, 284. -- Duke of, 326. Belêtre, 267, 268. Belle �le, 326. -- -- Straits of, 1, 21, 22. Biencourt, 172, 173. Bienville, 169. Bighorn Mountains, 213. Bigot, 224, 251, 252, 325. Biloxi, 169. Bjarni Herjulfson, 6. Bolingbroke, 142, 144. Bonavista, Cape, 19. Boscawen, Admiral, 234, 272-5. Boston, 6, 123, 126, 131, 133, 134, 137, 141, 142, 145, 178, 180, 181, 198, 199, 204 and _n._, 206, 210. 'Bostonnais,' the, 131, 198, 345. Bougainville, 260, 287, 302, 305, 308-10, 313, 321. Bouquet, 284, 285, 294. Bourbon, Fort, 189. Bourgeoys, Marguerite, 84. Bourlamaque, 260, 288, 296, 318, 320, 321. Braddock, General, 225, 234-41, 245, 257, 284, 285, 339. Bradstreet, Colonel, 255, 279, 282 and _n._, 286. Breboeuf, 84, 86, 88. Breda, Peace of, 63, 180, 182. Bristol, 4, 18, 19, 184. Brittany and Bretons, 11, 12, 15, 16, 22, 38. Buckingham, Duke of, 74, 289. Bull, Fort, 247, 254. Burke, 236, 250, 312, 315, 339. Burnet, Governor, 196. Burton, Colonel, 306, 307, 324. Bute, Lord, 325, 326. Button, 183, 184. Button's Bay, 184. Bylot, 184. Cabots, the, 4, 5, 9, 12-19, 337. Caens, the De, 70, 73, 77 and _n_. Callières, 112, 118, 119, 128. Canada and Canadians, 12-14, 21, 244, 245, 269. -- meaning of name, 24 _n_. Canso, Cape, 177 _n._, 179 _n._, 197-9. -- Gut of, 171. Cap Rouge River, 297, 298, 305, 310, 315, 316. Cape Breton Island, 16, 19, 45, 77 _n._, 144-6, 170-4, 179 _n._, 191, 192, 197, 199, 204 and _n._, 209, 221, 270, 276, 277, 326, 346. Carignan, Prince of, 101. Carignan-Salières Regiment, 101, 181, 212. Carillon. _See_ Ticonderoga. Carleton, Guy, 292, 301. Cartier, 12, 14, 21-4, 37, 38, 43, 54, 337. Casco Bay, 129-31, 138. Castine, 181. Cataraqui, 108, 121, 149. Cathay, 12, 13, 19, 26-8. Cats, Nation of the. _See_ Eries. Caughnawaga, 116 _n_. Cavelier, Abbé, 167. Cavendish, Thomas, 32. Cayuga Creek, 158. Cayugas, the, 56 and _n_. Celeron, 217, 218, 229. Chabot, Brian, 21. Chaleurs Bay, 21, 324. Chambly, 104, 114, 141, 181, 321. Champlain, 24, 34, 40-3, 52-4, 61, 65-70, 75, 76, 78, 81, 92, 106, 260, 298. -- Lake, 3, 49, 55, 66, 104, 128, 131, 141, 197, 207, 216, 229, 235, 242, 243, 246, 264, 278, 292, 293, 296, 297, 319, 321, 331. Chancellor, Richard, 26. Charles I, 74, 76, 174, 289. -- II, 63, 180, 182, 186. -- V, 25. -- VIII, 20. -- Fort, 185. Charlevoix, 56, 106, 211, 334, 335, 339 _n._, 341, 342. Chastes, de, 40, 41. Chaudière Falls, 52, 123. -- River, 195, 235, 298. Chautauqua Lake, 150, 218, 229. Chauvin, 39. Chebucto, 171, 207, 210, 220. _See also_ Halifax. Chedabucto, 176, 179. Chesapeake Bay, 20, 42, 236. Chesterfield, Lord, 271, 276, 327. Chignecto Bay, 171, 181, 183. -- Isthmus of, 171, 208, 209, 222. Chouaguen. _See_ Oswego. Chubb, 136, 137. Chudleigh, Cape, 1. Church, Major, 139. Churchills, the, 272. Cincinnati, City of, 218. Clarke, 214. Colbert, 94, 98, 101, 156, 343. Coligny, Admiral, 38. Columbus, 4, 5 and _n._, 8, 9, 13, 14, 54, 329. Comanches, the, 211. Compagnie du Nord, 187. Company of the West, 93. Condé, 67, 70. Connecticut, River, 138, 208, 297. -- State of, 129, 199. Convers, 135. Cook, 260, 275. Corlaer. _See_ Cuyler. Cornwallis, Colonel E., 220. -- Lord, 220, 222. Corte Reals, the, 14, 17 and _n._, 19, 20. Cotton, Rev. N., 311. Courcelles, De, 104, 105, 109, 127, 152. Cousin of Dieppe, 5 _n_. Crèvecoeur, Fort, 159-63. Cromwell, 179 and _n._, 180. Crown Point, 197, 207, 208, 235, 245-7, 293, 296, 297, 303, 320. Crowne, William, 180. Cumberland, Duke of, 235, 236, 272. -- Fort, 224, 230, 237, 238, 284. Cuyler, 65. D'Ailleboust, 82. Dakota, 213. D'Anville, 207, 208, 218 _n_. D'Argenson, 82. Darien, Isthmus of, 2, 8, 140. D'Aunay, 176-80. D'Avaugour, 82. Davies, Sylvanus, 129, 130. Davis, 27. -- Strait, 27. Deerfield, 138, 139. Delawares, the, 54, 218. _Delight_, the, 31. Denonville, Marquis de, 110-4, 118, 121, 128, 188. Denys, Nicholas, 176, 179 and _n._, 180. -- of Honfleur, 20. Des Groseilliers, 185, 187. Des Plaines, the, 150, 153, 161. D'Estournel, Admiral, 207. Detroit, 51, 89, 111, 121, 122, 149, 151, 158, 159, 294, 295, 324, 336. Dettingen, Battle of, 192, 272, 289. Diamond, Cape, 298. _Diana_, the, 318. Dieppe, 20, 38, 74, 75. Dieskau, Baron, 234, 243-5, 252. Dinwiddie, Robert, 230, 231, 234. _Discovery_, the, 183, 184. Dongan, Governor, 61, 111 and _n._, 120, 127, 128, 345. Donnaconna, 22. Drake, Sir Francis, 32, 33, 76. 'Drowned Lands,' the, 242. Drucour, Chevalier de, 273 and _n._, 276 and _n_. Duchambon, Governor, 200, 202, 203, 224. Duchesnau, 107. Dudley, Governor, 140. Du Luth, 106, 113, 121, 161. Dummer, Jeremiah, 142. Dunbar, Colonel, 237, 238. Dunkirk, 145. -- the, 234 _n_. Duquesne, Fort, 150, 231, 232, 234, 236, 237, 270, 271, 283-7, 291 _n._, 293. -- Governor, 219, 228. Duquesnel, 200. Durell, Admiral, 292, 299, 305. Dutch, the, 46, 47, 53, 62-4, 77, 79, 128, 329, 330, 341. Duvivier, 197. Edward, Fort, 242, 245, 264-7. -- VI, 25, 26. Egg Islands, 145. Elizabeth, Queen, 28, 30, 32, 76. Emmanuel, King, 14. Eric the Red, 6. Erie, Lake, 48, 51, 55, 56, 61, 90, 111, 121, 149, 151, 154, 158, 217, 218, 295. -- Town of, 151, 229. Eries, the, 61, 90. Eyre, Major, 262. Falmouth, 129. Fernando Gorges, 174. Finisterre, Cape, 206, 208, 218 _n_. Five Nations. _See_ Iroquois. Flat Point, 201, 274. Florida, 14, 38, 39, 80, 168, 327. Fontenoy, 272. Forbes, 271, 283-6, 291 _n._, 293. Fort Albany, 187, 188, 190. -- Hayes, 187, 188. -- le Boeuf, 229, 230. -- Orange, 63. Fox Channel, 185. -- River, 150, 153. Foxe, Luke, 184. France and the French, 12 and _n._, 14-24, 35-7, 42, 43, 45, 77, 78, 113-9, 250, 251, 329. Francis I, 12, 20. Franciscans, the, 71. Franklin, 28, 233-6, 261 _n_. Frederick the Great, 216, 250, 260. French and English, 123-46, 216-24, 329. -- Creek, 151, 229, 231, 286, 293. Freshwater Cove, 201, 274. Frobisher, Martin, 13, 26-8, 30. -- Bay, 26. Frontenac, Count, 96 and _n._, 105-10, 112-21, 127-33, 146, 152, 155, 156, 158. -- Fort, 108, 109, 114, 117, 118, 121, 136, 149, 156, 157, 159, 161, 163, 165, 246, 254-5, 258, 270, 282, 286, 287. Fundy, Bay of, 41, 42, 171, 221. Gabarus Bay, 200, 201, 272, 274. Gage, General, 295, 324. Galissonière, Marquis de la, 217, 218. Galveston Bay, 166. Garnier, 84. Gaspé Bay, 144, 177, 277. -- Peninsula, 21, 50, 75. Genoa and Genoese, 7, 13, 18. George Lake, 49, 104, 216, 229, 242, 243, 245, 261, 262, 264, 265, 271, 277, 278, 282, 296, 331. -- II, 194, 205, 210, 225, 325. -- III, 325. Georgian Bay, 51, 52, 55, 86, 87, 151. 'German Flats,' the, 267. Germans, the, 231, 267. Gibbons, Captain, 184. Gibraltar, 206, 236. Gilbert, Sir H., 13, 15, 16 _n._, 28-32. Gillam, Captain Zachariah, 185, 186. Giraudière, 179 _n_. _Golden Hind_, the, 29. Gomez, 14. Gordon, Sir R., 174. Gourgues, Domenic de, 39. Grand Battery, the, 200-2, 205, 273. Grand Pré, 139, 171, 209, 226. Grande Baie. _See_ Green Bay. Grandfontaine, 181. Grant, Major, 285, 314. Great Meadows, 231, 238. Green Bay, 150, 152-4, 158, 160. -- Mountains, 49, 242. Greenland, 6, 7, 27. Grenville, Sir R., 32, 33. Gunnbiorn, 6. Guyard, Marie, 84. Haldimand, Colonel, 294. Halifax City and Harbour, 171, 210, 219-21, 263 and _n._, 270, 272, 275, 292. Halkett, Sir Peter, 237. Hampton, 236. Harley, 142, 144. Haverhill, 139. Haviland, 319-21. Hawke, Admiral, 310, 311, 339. Hawkridge, Captain, 184. Hay, Lord C., 263 _n_. Hayes, E., 15, 16 and _n._, 28, 29. -- River, 189. Helluland, 6. Hennepin, Father, 157, 161. Henry, IV, 38, 42, 66, 67, 72. -- VII, 4, 14, 17, 18. -- Prince of Wales, 173, 184. Hill, Abigail, 144. -- General, 144-6. Hispaniola, 32. Hochelaga, 13, 22 and _n._, 24 and _n_. Holborne, Admiral, 299, 302-5. Hopson, Colonel, 223. Hore, 25. Howard of Effingham, Lord, 127. Howe, Captain, 223. -- Colonel, 292, 306-7. -- Lord, 268, 271, 278, 280, 281, 287, 289. Hudson, the, 3, 23 _n._, 49, 50 and _n._, 53, 62-5, 104, 124, 125, 130, 208, 229, 241. -- Bay, 52, 106, 128, 138, 146, 153, 170-90, 213, 214, 331. -- Bay Company, 186-9. -- Henry, 27, 44, 53 and _n._, 63, 183, 184. -- Straits, 26, 183, 184. Huguenots, the, 37, 38, 41, 70, 72-4, 77, 80, 81, 168, 226, 338, 343. Hundred Associates, 70, 72, 80-2, 93, 173. Huron, Lake, 51, 55, 68, 69, 87, 111, 114, 121, 149, 151, 196. Hurons, the, 54, 55, 61, 62, 66, 68, 86-92, 151, 152. Iberville, 106, 128, 136, 137, 169, 188, 189. Iceland, 6. �le aux Noix, 296, 319, 321. �le des Allumettes, 67. �le de St. Jean. _See_ Prince Edward Island. �le Madame, 311. �le Perrot, 322. �le Royale, 322. _See_ Cape Breton Island. Illinois, the, 110, 148, 150, 153, 154, 156, 159, 162, 163, 217. Independence, War of, 65, 280, 282, 339. Indians, the, 54, 342, &c. Indies, the, 10, 12, 13, 26. Irondequoit Bay, 111. Iroquois, the, 54-62, 64-6, 75, 81, 82, 108-23, 134, 216, 233, 258 and _n._, 267. Island Battery, the, 200-2, 274. Jacques Cartier, 310, 324. James, Captain T., 184. -- I, 74, 173, 174. -- II, 127, 138, 189. -- Bay, 183, 185, 187-9. Jamestown, 42, 43, 65. Jemseg, 180, 181. Jesuits, the, 34, 42, 70-2, 82-91, 151, 152, 155. Jogues, Isaac, 84. Johnson, Fort, 240. -- Sir William, 240-6, 258, 261, 264, 267, 294-6, 321, 323, 324, 342. Joliet, Louis, 152-4, 162. Joncaire, 141, 241. Joutel, 167. Jumonville, 232. Kankakee, the, 159. Kansas River, the, 211. Kennebec, the, 123, 136, 171, 182, 195, 235, 298. Kingston, 51, 108. Kirkes, the, 74-7, 81, 86, 131, 173-5, 179, 298, 346. Kittery Point, 199. Knowles, Commodore, 206. Knox, 301, 307 _n._, 315, 317, 318, 321, 323, 324 _n_. La Barre, 110, 111, 113, 163, 165. Labrador, 1, 6, 9, 19, 153. La Cadie. _See_ Acadia. Lac des Assiniboines. _See_ Lake Winnipeg. Lac des Illinois. _See_ Lake Michigan. Lachine, 53, 112, 114, 116 _n._, 128, 153, 154, 322. La Corne, 197, 265, 294, 322. 'La Demoiselle,' 219. La Famine, 110. Laffeldt, Battle of, 289. La Héve, 176, 177 and _n_. La Hogue, Battle of, 189. La Jonquière, Marquis de, 207, 218 and _n._, 222. Lake of the Woods, 211, 213. Lalemant, 84. La Mothe Cadillac, 121. La Motte, Admiral, 263. Lane, Ralph, 32, 33. Langlade, 219. La Peltrie, Madame de, 84. La Plata, the, 2. La Pointe, 151. La Prairie, 131, 134. La Reine, Fort, 213. La Roche, Marquis de, 39. La Rochelle, 69, 72, 74, 78, 157, 165, 207, 289. La Salle, 53, 106, 152, 154-69. Latour, Fort, 173. -- -- 175, 178. La Tours, the, 173, 175, 177-80. Laudonnière, René de, 38. Laurel Hills, 231, 232, 285. Lauzon, De, 82, 84. Laval, Bishop, 84, 97. La Vallière, 182. La Verendrye, 212-4. Lawrence, Fort, 223, 224. -- Governor, 222-5, 228, 271. Leboeuf, Fort, 294. Le Borgne, 179, 180. Le Caron, 68, 86. Legardeur de St. Pierre, 245. Leif, 6, 7. Leisler, Jacob, 126, 128. Le Loutre, 222-4, 266. Le Moyne, 91, 92. Léry, 254. -- Baron de, 16 _n._, 20. Levis, 260, 265, 270, 279, 288, 300, 303, 310, 315-7, 319, 323. -- Point, 297, 300, 301, 304-6, 315. Lewis, 214. Lighthouse Point, 202, 273, 274. Ligneris, 286, 295. Lok, Michael, 27. L'Omeroy, Fort. _See_ Fort Latour. Longueuil, 321. Lorette, 89, 315, 316. Loudoun, Earl of, 252, 260-4, 271, 276, 277. Louis XIII, 72, 76. -- XIV, 98, 107, 138, 162, 164, 192, 343. -- Fort. _See_ Fort Latour. Louisbourg, 146, 172, 191-214, 216, 219, 220, 223-5, 247, 253, 259 _n._, 262-4, 270-7, 289-92, 299, 317, 320, 337, 340, 344. Louisiana, 36, 106, 162 and _n._, 169, 211, 217, 226, 250, 252, 295, 340. _Lowestoft_, the, 318. Loyal, Fort, 129, 130. Loyalhannon, 285. Lunenburg, 221. Lutherans, 221. Lyman, Fort, 241-5. -- Phineas, 241. _Lys_, the, 234, 272. Machault. _See_ Venango. Machias, 176. Mackenzie, Sir A., 214. Maine, State of, 23, 41, 42, 123, 129, 130, 170-2, 182, 198, 298. Maisonneuve, 84. Mance, Jeanne, 84. Manhattan Island, 63, 64, 124, 125, 179, 206. March, Colonel, 139. Marin, 229. Markland, 6. Marlborough, Duke of, 122, 138, 140, 142, 144, 146, 345, 346. Marquette, Jacques, 152-4, 162. Martha's or Martin's Vineyard, 6. Maryland, 45, 73, 110, 142, 230, 233, 237. Mascarene, Major, 197, 219. Massachusetts, 131-3, 136, 138-43, 146, 147, 180, 195, 197-9, 208, 226, 230, 233, 241, 281, 340, 345. -- Fort, 208. Matagorda Bay, 166. _Mathew_, the, 18. Mattawa River, the, 52, 68. Maumee River, 218. May, River of, 39. Mazarin, 179. Menendez, 39. Meneval, Governor, 182. Mercer, Colonel, 256. Merchants Discoverers' Company, 184. _Merrimac_, the, 139. _Meta Incognita_, the, 27. Mexico, 17, 155, 157, 164, 165, 168. -- Gulf of, 2, 153, 155, 159, 164-6, 169, 332. Miami Fort, 159-61. -- River, 218. Miamis, the, 218, 219. Michigan, Lake, 51, 54, 89, 149, 153, 154, 157-61, 217. Michillimackinac, 51, 117, 121, 149, 153, 154, 158-62, 324, 336. Micmacs, the, 54. Minden, Battle of, 315. Mines, Basin of, 171, 181, 183, 209, 225. Miquelon, 327, 346. Mississippi, the, 2-4, 36, 48, 49, 53, 148, 153, 156, 159-62, 166, 168, 169, 217, 327, 340. Missouri, the, 153, 161, 211, 213, 214. Mobile Bay, 169. Mohawk River, the, 49, 55 and _n._, 56 and _n._, 63, 206, 240, 246-7, 254, 257, 267, 270, 282, 293. Mohawks, the, 55, 64, 65, 91, 92, 104, 105, 108, 109, 114, 115, 127, 142, 241, 244, 245, 258. Mohicans, the, 64. Monckton, Colonel, 224, 277, 291, 301, 305, 307. Monongahela River, 218, 219, 225, 229-32, 237, 239. Monro, Colonel, 264, 265. Montagnais, the, 54. Montcalm, 106, 216, 252-5, 259-62, 264-7, 270, 276 _n._, 279, 280, 282, 287, 293, 298, 300-3, 305-10, 313-5, 333, 339. Montmagny, De, 81, 82. Montmorency, Duc de, 70. -- River, 297, 298, 300-5, 308. Montreal, 22-4, 41, 50, 51, 54, 66, 67, 69, 81, 82, 92, 95, 102, 108-15, 131, 134, 145, 154, 157, 161, 217, 251, 255, 262, 267, 296, 303, 310, 319-25, 336, 339. Monts, de, 40-3, 65, 66, 73. Moody, Chaplain, 204. Moose Fort. _See_ Fort Hayes. -- River, 187, 188. Moravians, the, 285, 341. Murray, 291, 301, 302, 304, 305, 307, 310, 316-20, 323-5. Muscovy Company, the, 26. Nantucket, 132. Narragansetts, the, 54. Naxouat, Fort, 137. Necessity, Fort, 232. Nelson, Fort, 187, 189. -- River, 187, 213. Nesmond, Marquis de, 137. Netherlands East India Company, 46, 79. -- West India Company, 63, 79, 181 _n_. Neutral Nation, 55, 90. New Amsterdam, 3, 63. -- Biscay, 164. -- Brunswick, 23 _n._, 41, 170-2. Newcastle, Duke of, 207, 268 and _n._, 290, 319, 326. New England, 3, 6, 11, 23 _n._, 45, 54, 124, 139, 147, 172, 197-9, 210, 241, 248, 335-7, 341, 344, 345. Newfoundland, 1, 6, 9, 11, 13-25, 30, 34, 37, 45, 52, 69, 76, 106, 123, 146, 171, 172, 178, 179 _n._, 234, 334, 337, 346. New France, 22-4, 35, 66 _n._, 67, 70, 80, 81, 97, 148, 251, 314, 329, 335, 341. -- Hampshire, 129, 135, 208, 233. -- Jersey, 6 _n._, 141, 233. -- Mexico, 211. -- Netherlands, 63, 104. -- Orleans, 169, 327. -- Scotland, 174, 176. -- York, Town and State of, 3, 6, 9, 49, 63, 65 _n._, 124, 128, 134, 141, 147, 183, 199, 208, 233, 237, 241, 242, 248, 263, 265, 267, 295, 314, 336. Niagara, Falls of, 157, 158, 294, 295, 331. -- Fort, 111 and _n._, 149, 158, 159, 196, 235, 246, 254, 258, 293-6, 303, 336. -- River, 51, 90, 151, 157, 196, 294. Nicholson, Colonel, 141-3, 145, 183. Nicollet, Jean, 151. Nicolls, Colonel, 127. Nipigon, Fort and River, 212. Nipissing Indians, 151. -- Lake, 52, 54, 68, 87. Noble, Colonel, 208, 209. _Nonsuch_, the, 185. Norridgewocks, the, 195. Norsemen, 5, 6. North-West Passage, 183-6. Norumbega, 23 and _n_. Nova Scotia, 6, 9, 23 _n._, 36, 39, 41, 170-6, 264, 271, 277, 326. Ogdensburg, 322 and _n_. Ohio, the, 4, 48, 53, 148, 150, 151, 154, 156, 161, 162 _n._, 169, 217-9, 232, 257, 283-6, 294, 345. Oneida, Lake, 56, 246, 254, 282. Oneidas, the, 56 and _n._, 61, 118. Oneigra, 111 _n_. Onondaga, 116, 118. -- River, 196 _n_. Onondagas, the, 56 and _n._, 59, 61, 91, 92. Ontario, Fort, 256. -- Lake, 48, 51-6, 61, 87, 91, 108-11, 118, 149, 151, 154, 158, 196, 235, 243, 246, 247, 254-8, 267, 270, 283, 293, 294, 319, 322. Orleans, Island of, 85, 89, 92, 297, 299, 300. -- Point of, 300, 305. Oswegatchie River, 322 and _n_. Oswego, 196 and _n._, 235, 243, 246, 254-8, 260, 262, 264, 265, 267, 269 _n._, 270, 280, 293, 294, 319, 321. Ottawa, City of, 52. -- River, 51, 66-9, 87, 92, 108, 114, 149, 151, 188, 295. Oyster River, 135. Paris, Peace of, 15, 93, 326, 327, 345. Péan, 251. Pemaquid, Fort, 136, 137, 182, 189. Penalossa, Count, 164. Pennsylvania, 141, 199, 217, 219, 230, 231, 233, 236, 239, 248, 283, 284. Penobscot, the, 23 _n._, 42, 136, 137, 171, 176, 179, 181 and _n._, 195, 240, 266. Pentegoet, 137, 176, 181, 182. Pepin, Lake, 211. Pepperell, W., 199, 202, 203, 205, 252 _n_. Pequods, the, 54. Perrot, Governor, 108, 113, 182, 211. Philadelphia, 41, 284, 286. Philip's War, 182. Philipps, Governor, 194. Phipps, William, 131-4, 139, 140, 145, 183, 198. Pickawillany, 218, 219. Pigeon River, 213. Pique Town. _See_ Pickawillany. Piquet, Abbé, 322 and _n_. Pitt, 15 _n._, 216, 268 and _n._, 269, 271, 284, 286, 291 _n._, 296, 304, 314, 325-7, 346. Pittsburg, 150, 286. Placentia, 145, 189. Plains of Abraham, 224, 297, 307, 314. Points de Monts, 50, 145. Pontgravé, 39-41, 65, 66. Pontiac, 324. Portland, 129, 150. Port Royal, 41-3, 77 _n._, 131, 135, 139, 142, 146, 171-3, 175-7, 179, 183, 197, 198. Portsmouth, 145, 207. Portugal and Portuguese, 3, 8-10, 14-9, 29 _n._, 39, 79, 329, 330. Potomac, the, 230, 236. Pouchot, 294, 295, 322. Poutrincourt, 42, 172. Presque �le, 151, 229, 294. Prideaux, General, 293-6. Prima Terra Vista, 16. Prince Edward Island, 170, 179 _n._, 221, 277. -- Rev. T., 204. -- Rupert, 185. Prudhomme, Fort, 162. Puans, the. _See_ Winnebagos. Puritans, the, 34, 85, 204, 338, 341. Quakers, the, 73, 231, 240, 341, 344. Quebec, 22-4, 35-78, 95, 97, 102, 123, 146, 172, 179, 186, 207, 224, 226, 251, 260, 262, 269 _n._, 271, 276 and _n._, 289, 291-3, 297-320, 336, 339, 340, 346. Quiberon Bay, 311, 315, 339. Radisson, 185, 187. Raestown, 284, 291 _n_. Raleigh, Sir W., 3, 28, 29, 33, 43. -- City of, 33. Ramesay, 141. -- 208, 209. -- 310. Rasle, Sebastian, 195. Razilly, de, 176, 177 and _n_. Recollet Friars, the, 68, 69, 160. Red River, the, 211. -- -- -- 213. Rensselaer and Rensselaerswyck, 63. Restigouche, 324. Rhode Island, 233. Ribault, Jean, 38, 39. Richelieu, 70, 72, 75, 76, 80, 94, 173, 174, 176. -- Fort, 81. -- River, the, 49, 50, 53, 82, 101, 102, 104, 108, 114, 128, 131, 229, 242, 243, 296, 320, 321, 331. Rideau Canal, 52. Rio Janeiro, 38. Rivière aux Boeufs, 151, 229. _See also_ French Creek. Roanoke, 32, 33. Roberval, 14, 23. Rochefort, 289. Rocky Mountains, 46, 213, 214. Rogers, Robert, 247, 261-4, 296, 320, 324, 339. Rogers' Rock, 261. Rollo, Lord, 277. Roman Catholics, 41, 48, 73, 83, 88, 221. Rome, 247. Roquemaure, 321. Rouen, 69, 154. -- and St. Malo Company, 69, 70. Rouillé, Fort, 196. Royal Americans, 252 and _n._, 302. -- Mount. _See_ Montreal. Rupert, Fort or House, 185, 187, 188. -- Land, 187. -- River, 185, 186. Ryswick, Peace of, 118, 137, 140, 190. Sable Cape, 171, 173, 208. -- Island, 16 and _n._, 31, 39. Sackett's Harbour, 255. Saguenay River, 13, 24 _n._, 40, 50. St. Anne, Fort, 188. -- Anthony, Falls of, 161. -- Augustine, Town of, 39. -- Castin, Baron de, 137, 181, 183, 240. -- Charles, River, 89, 132, 298, 307-9. -- Clair, Lake and River, 51, 158. -- Croix, River, 41, 171, 173. -- -- -- 153, 161. -- Esprit, Mission of, 151, 153. -- Francis, River of, 296. -- Frederick, Fort, 197. -- Germain-en-Laye, Treaty of, 76, 77 and _n._, 81, 175. -- Ignace, Mission of, 150, 153, 158. -- John's, 321. -- -- (New Brunswick), 137, 171, 176, 177 _n._, 180, 181, 277. -- -- (Newfoundland), 29-31, 326. -- -- Lake, 186. -- -- River (Florida), 39. -- Joseph, River of, 159-61. -- Lawrence, Gulf of, 20, 24 _n._, 171, 334. -- -- River of, 2-4, 6, 9, 12 and _n._, 35-8, 43, 46, 48-55, 65-71, 108, 109, 149, 168, 173, 191, 212, 241, 255, 267, 289, 292, 298-301, 321, 331-4, 339. -- Louis, Fort of (Illinois), 163, 169. -- -- -- (Quebec), 71. -- -- -- (Texas), 166. -- Malo, 37, 39. -- Marie, Station of, 87, 88. -- Mary's Straits. _See_ Sault St. Marie. -- Maurice, River of, 50. -- Peter, Lake, 50. -- Pierre, Island of, 327, 346. Sainte Foy, 315, 316. Salières, Colonel de, 101. Salmon Falls, 129. Sandy Creek, 254. -- Hill, 242. Santa Fé, 211. Saratoga, Fort, 208. Saskatchewan, the, 213, 214. Sault St. Louis, 116. -- -- Marie, 51, 149, 151. Saunders, Admiral, 292, 299, 304-6, 308, 310, 311. Saurel, Monsieur de, 81 _n_. Schenectady, 63, 104, 125, 128, 134, 246, 267-8, 294, 321. Schuyler, 126, 142. Scots Fort, 176. Sedgewick, Major-General, 179. Seignelay, 164. Seigniors, the, 100, 101. Senecas, the, 55 _n._, 56 and _n._, 91, 109-11, 118, 141, 158, 216, 241. Seven Years' War, 216, 250-2, 327, 338. Shirley, William, 198, 206-8, 219, 221, 224, 230, 235, 236, 241, 246, 252 _n._, 254-6, 260, 345. Sillery, 297, 298. Simcoe, Lake, 52, 55, 68, 87, 196 and _n_. Sioux, the, 153, 161, 211. Smith, John, 34. Soissons, Count de, 67. Sorel, 50, 81, 104, 320. South Africa, 46, 47. -- Bay, 242. -- Carolina, 145, 226. Spain and Spaniards, 8-21, 34, 39, 79, 153, 162, 211, 326, 329, 330. Spanish America, 211. -- Succession, War of, 138. _Squirrel_, the, 31. Stadaconé, 22 and _n_. Stanwix, Fort, 257 _n_. -- General, 282, 293. Stirling, Earl of. _See_ Alexander. Stoughton, 136. Stuarts, the, 76, 125, 176. Sulpicians, the, 108. Superior, Lake, 48, 51, 88, 122, 148, 149, 151-3, 161, 212, 213. Susa, Convention of, 76 and _n._, 81. Susquehanna River, 55, 90. Sweden and Swedes, 124, 250. Swift, 145 and _n_. Sydney Harbour, 145. Tadoussac, 40, 50, 65, 69, 75, 93. Talon, 101, 104-6, 152, 343. Temiscaming, Lake, 188. Temple, Lord, 319, 326. -- Sir T., 180, 181. Terra de Corte Reall. _See_ Corte Real. Texas, 165, 166, 168. Thorne, Robert, 13. Thousand Islands, the, 51, 322. Three Rivers, 50, 69, 81, 82, 92, 95, 112, 129, 131, 331. Thunder Bay, 212. Ticonderoga, 66, 242, 243, 246, 255, 257, 262, 264, 270, 278-80, 282, 283, 287, 293, 296, 303. Tonty, Henri de, 155, 157, 159-63, 167-9. Toronto, 196 and _n._, 254. Tourmente, Cape, 75. Townshend, 291, 301, 304, 305, 307, 309-12. Trent River, the, 68. Trinity River, 167. _Troupes de la Marine_, 253. Troy, 49. Troyes, de, 188. Turtle Creek, 237. Tuscaroras, the, 61. Utrecht, Treaty of, 122 and _n._, 123, 126, 138, 145 _n._, 146, 170, 172, 183, 190-2, 205, 219, 221, 228, 277, 327, 339, 340, 345, 346. Valois, House of, 24, 38. _Vanguard_, the, 318. Varin, 251. Vasco de Gama, 8. Vaudreuil, Governor (father), 118, 140, 195. -- (son), 234, 251, 252, 254, 255, 267, 270, 287, 299, 309, 310, 320, 323, 324, 333. -- Rigaud de, 262. Vaughan, William, 198, 201. Vauquelin, 318. Venango, 231, 294. Venice and Venetians, 13 and _n._, 18. Ventadour, Duc de, 70, 71. Verchères, Madeleine de, 115. -- Seignory of, 114. Vergor, de, 224, 306. Vermont, 49, 242. Verrazano, 7 _n._, 12, 14, 20, 337. Vetch, Samuel, 140, 143. _Vigilant_, the, 201. Vignau, Nicholas de, 67. Villebon, 135, 137, 139. Villegagnon, 38. Ville Marie, 85. _See_ Montreal. Villiers, Coulon de, 209, 254, 255. Vinland, 6. Virginia, 11, 25, 31-4, 42, 43, 45, 53 _n._, 110, 123, 127, 172, 219, 230, 231, 234, 236, 239, 248, 283, 284, 337. -- Company, 42. Virginians, the, 217, 219, 231, 239. Walker, Admiral, 144-6. Walley, Major, 132. Walpole, Horace, 235, 236, 250, 257, 263, 269 _n._, 275, 276, 290, 291, 309, 315, 319. Warren, Commodore, 199-203, 205, 206, 208, 240. Washington, George, 217, 230-2, 236, 237, 239, 247, 285. Webb, Colonel D., 257, 258, 260, 262, 264, 265, 267. Wells, 135, 138. Westerham, 289. West Indies, the, 1, 8-10, 32, 103, 134, 180, 199, 326. Westminster, Treaty of, 179. -- -- -- 63. Wheeler, Admiral, 134. White, John, 33. Whitehall, Town of, 242. -- Treaty of, 189. Whitfield, George, 199. William III, 122, 140. -- Henry, Fort, 245, 246, 261, 262, 264, 266, 269, 295. Williams, Fort, 247, 257 _n._, 282. -- Rev. J., 138. Willoughby, Sir Hugh, 26. Wills Creek, 230, 231, 237. Winnebago, Lake, 150, 153. Winnebagos, the, 152. Winnipeg, Lake, 211-3. Winslow, J., 224, 261. Winthrop, Governor, 123. Wisconsin, River, 148, 150, 153, 161, 217. Wolfe, General, 216, 235, 236, 239, 248, 253 _n._, 259 _n._, 260, 271, 272, 274-7, 281, 283, 287, 289-93, 296-317, 337, 339. -- Island, 255. Wolfe's Cove, 306. Wood Creek (Lake Champlain), 141, 144, 242, 243, 282. -- -- (Lake Oneida), 56, 246, 247, 254, 257, 258, 267. Wyandots, the, 54, 89. Wye, the, 87. Wyoming, 213. Yellowstone Park and River, 213. York, Duke of, 63, 104, 125, 182. _See also_ James II. -- Fort, 189. -- Settlement of, 135. Yorktown, 220. Youghiogany, the, 230. Zeni, the brothers, 5, 13 _n_.