pdt ¥ ’ pial fe glacseeaa ata elegy ve viel Peep tires i \nettirennecaiote TALrey 8 wwe Prete dial le 2SePyPe TY Ft of) 2 vTR PERL on ec MER + \eTarens doi v4 tateree Puerta hehehe nett eh4 vi eat e Wear nee OTT acaba lea) wrelDia rit inrye ghih We IShh ieee lee Sinaia penne oa AD SLOTS PLR aie aoe Pn ERT Fithnl arp dep ANY! be a ah * arr eeiaees ' rasisizat bsebrisessirarit iy rir arses be rte meseresie nadeiviperibl sau Reser ra ebatrsr pastistasetecsrwantss reset Rice aa ap ates vem a we sae sear Picea ethetpi trate he tii eres wi ad i sEperterst arwiqeal 9% etsy 4 nt eh aes i Bis 4 hit eee hafieg 7 ret rete Taye Detite nackeel tieteen mi we erie si Weare reesei tere sists Pewee aa evi ee tse hn, behesstas * na tase arte be dirt tyes Os 50m) 0) BU PPRESICA Th TORN THE STAT DL ert! bE OW) BESPES L2H TERA RRL SATII 2: atop ppl feiysna sagcarsearirtiand ar ila seem la bhacese rignatste * aie Parl oleh ese ratet Shar Be tira pate 8 or aie TM POT ATAPSTIT BED Teresi td distr rit i ror Livi ereeesreze ty SP Ai eater, cies abrinmangipesmrt rare fie a u Arse einer ayer wearin sep a ah iret tbptetely Peden iavhictusnaregrsiartoumescapacessthae Fh PMA eH Te iit a) F pepbretmerecetegg Te 9d eta rip Be iperehTo meng Hecer nee at ii Tiprprurtteessa feed sid if stetalgeuigsame sess saa van ota visetsin at 1454) inter Sniaty aut oi al pl bier ayy o tes ep ararietice: Mevslotasasaty) AYPT NP Pe Pte; TordwLacserypt rss pisisavacocialet oe Tatas Peet pals Leket: Peviebatatarah SPAMGEL Se aL PY TIP OEP Fs! be 4 elke eT bE “Eran aT) 215 pasar bt Sacolgeateean toutuntetat sei is domaderessny ‘ Spates s Teed ce Spicer sreneartonrirtet #} Ms Hapa as near iedyy 3 ural ape weariea eters Trent ceetrr arene oseee cae ee bare uke AtvTate oi ovacpta nib Sieethe: seni en wi asa Weak MGT BHT OD TY ne yrynir resi eiarate aeethea: $59 a EEY THOMA ev eHEaE Sew Peaha ATK Sheth eld bee bdisle peo cette blgotey Lbs bss DabshAletiLLd habah-habdiehossioheess a mt Ow tsar pe hha a Mh e WT TET pratt AAA eee cht elnracateles Wu aria ine ipeiTyet totes $ Riri sage creat i 4 Ba lotaagieea ay eh7ete eahre ee ay vente at pa rd sbi anirurwie marizineHn yy te oer Seite ee i intraatn erent beietal Rata aa nen i ee zk te accecrinranarebiannnenenetmecetng * Pert tet eeoin enon coe ait stecipateitststdetaat Us Diluasts a 78 me StH vai. a Guawaing fea a Mharuce res atte ay iricrrn ia 9 a ryt ny Sonkased ptt Ha glaLe bred eins mavens ato asn aid 7 reruns D beippesteet ar bas sig rere! ins berets PAL Beea ltrs ran oat oan sD afaibbale reat i: wee Sees ee er GaN ti STATE MER TG Heese eteaet ae ats fa * atic acer et a Tas aren | 83 ove i Petts Ett Hit sever sti oo rarest va ‘tite os if peigestei tity acta. Weebl pr peabet ess ~ Hak seeeestal se 095 este rineeae ena teeta musta seseeasepaees =eeieaiste Toe a Se rfaleagetis uate iS pat ee RA tite ettiveg can vise ieiitnes emmenuet ste ideane tite SER lesa: ‘TAP, SLG Fs Fe At, ra ws whwT Bee time auaitists bites Cert Arab feg 14 F949 NS SHY. BIR biaey hes potas Vas shepbee 4,s(oPh bie Org NS a beak et : #319 fe heel gress rete RES Aregenle Fee S788: isp ennrmannedbaesereurass tt ie en AN, ct iF nah sire sae F ses aes oe DUS! ah ae aise: ‘eh a SBE a cee es a S buy ee peer aontianeca 3 echoed Sua inyearope erick veerayst ten a Mi: Waste Anke ku ein Slareeteherd Shea prt Ma S Pa pata wnt erMernsrty ah 55a ae BERR Pt) er ner TE rs Maialavarsereeys Att BS UADEISUS Sathana 34 eae asaseclgeaeal oak asonas sy rs ome cay, Sy igs 4" ap ee We PURD Te PPD eevee treaty ieniaset SERCO ye ATNTR RT OE BT: SPH er at aurea kya/ tear Pde sitet Ris: ro Sear asta? 0 pith iamant ce or ae u bs ASPLUD e REDERw PEREAS OE OTE SE = Raed ‘eariteetaacrsatovioennens ssiermth Shears eisteraberserion vr senses Pal tated a = “Nepeeseingeeny si prepssapney sete 1? Saste tlererersist oan ie eases reps pamearner ana sa DhyAee cae ay Save deny: a iad Byes} SAM 9% suv shreaste spate g2aceanegre serait Varnes ges tines nie tgha rebrnieaane iarecaiesed tharateseMby faim taped ueadareescororPet coynistromnerns ee paki tebeabes Srodahl bidde beadeeeeeeeed hails ahaa ae ewe eran TiftecharaeeeatseroceegyoeracessserengReyi ett atin Ne REP NR OREM He SE seeetineegharad atte ett) abersigagees si sesssaererers oe OF 24 RENE LREDEY EOPPLPADED oF fers PsQr arm 08 «ass 20 0280 g) Anat Dame Bang eee ater chs my ManpEgEPINE: iy) Ge aan mS sinpidytgvabepaee at ocerenscarereneyerd oy ier ier ie arent oer hae TTY eyes ertrunar aoe my te at N Ay thgeat oe be ag or scope ynytytadgewiaasea! thecoy worranepaper erases be RRP vt 13) an miacadeT ang ag RanBeEY SALT og Ben} 1 PATA PAULA Deas g) LERLECA BT aepe ny HF BD) aceon ow UT Re ET MAP ee Rew MENG TN: SBegPr tremrwrt Ry Lore sherorecaty saab Ly 1" i ot » eyeavenery SU Te Tierererns cigeenvasasgofoanysreyermney coum eel antese SRD LISI trvenisiahs iota aioe pander aretwreretarermesounypanans 9 6) trod wate it tt A —ytind ae For weaned ot bv ence weer egeeegede beShbe by igo others sédsveDG ULEPD eg EN S++ v id MAY 17 1426 + tare P } 5S Division Do ‘t+ 3 Section «BR & ares me Te ite ae es ho ® ah ee — Kano wee Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2022 with funding from Princeton Theological Seminary Library — https://archive.org/details/worldchancelleri0Obell THE CHICAGO DaILy NEws takes pleasure in presenting this copy of WORLD CHANCELLERIES /0 As a contribution to the cause of world peace, these interviews, originally pub- lished in’ THE CHICAGO DAILY NEWS, are here compiled in permanent form in a limited complimentary edition, of which this copy is Number fa: Fa are a i, ah ie Ya) ” J ws ha S Ee: 7 “ 7 y a re é ara . 2 $e t® ; toad any f ' a so 14 is eS Pat Silos ‘ od on > ee = , = ey ad + fe 7 ‘ a ; , . - 1s ao er) : ‘ ho he ae ee ne s Ve ea | ; | ri dix ss * TAU as * ; * ¥ dé at Bac: ent Sale a y ~ - = - % ' oe , . ; | aor ir | : ' a0 (as wit best . ‘we toe ; p ’ : . J ‘ . “ ’ 7 ov a + . - fa - a © 1 ' ae Sars 1b . ; t 7 oe ' : 2 » s: é wo , : ome é : : 7 " 7 ; ‘ | | 7 y 7 = 7 ‘ : ~ 7 ; g 4 ‘ ( 4 ' = r my 7 ‘ | 7 k , 7 3 ‘7 - % : coat : ys" : 7 pal i ~ - “ = 2 5 c alone wy ; * ee er ; | 7 ~ao . Pa . 7. , 7 =! 7 d ee ‘ #: } r : zy : E 4 oe 5 a Lae is ' - - : ' ; . 7 : ‘ ay soe : 7 . i eas iy.” fs) : * Be ; 7 a, e : : ea! re ern g ; | pz s 4 ‘- s : ¥ * & ” ® - a i r a ~~ al : = - ; 7 , ; 4 ,». > -_ Tr oe - 2 : . i s ; ; sj aah ; | re 4 +4. . i ~ i ras - : aes oh : i cy . = i ef * A / f ’ : . , oS ‘ . tay he 7 ~ : 5 i : oa ; — : : - See ly i oe 2 . : } ie » * - ¥ 7 nee = ¢ ‘oe = 4 a - 7 Z =) 1 e &« ot tx, ae pe ee abt 2 nites “ = ) ' “=> - : : a f < ; ; =h . : 4 ’ i) = a WP ss : Egy af : 7 : i —s —- ’ 7 he 1 a : - ye ~* : . Re a ne: ) S. De en “x = | pe = > : ; “4 oT) con & aa % . y a . : = eer gi. 4 a ia STA pews Pooks R eas ee , = a o 2 ; j oF ~ -_ : air ne 7. ate , eel ‘ 5 ae ee ie ty eve - A try NS y fe meas » Vine i ah } 7 7 : qais-i) z 7 > ‘ 4 “ i “4 1 ‘ ' : ’ aoe / 4 ' i, 7 ad go te ; vt hi ‘ ) ee ss aa ae ed 7 th i & > ar NY 14 1926 re papi Sie ee ' DR. TANG SHAO-YI, China’s Former Minister for For- eign Affairs and Prime Minister—‘‘Grand Old Man’”’ of the Celestials—Lays Bare the Fundamental and Resistless Forces of Chinese Life in Perhaps the Most Fascinating and Moving Utterance That Ever Issued from China in Appeal to the Non-Chinese World. . . 113 119 135 147 loys 166 170 . INTRODUCTION By CALVIN COOLIDGE President of the United States of America In these carefully wrought statements of sentiment and opinion we have, I conceive, a peculiarly suggestive and important achievement in the field of international conciliation. Humanity, with reference to the danger of war, is today ina position different from that which it occupied yesterday. Wars once sprang from varied causes—biological, racial, dynastic, political, commercial, personal. Wars were sought. Wars were planned. Wars were a part of the accepted rationale of organ- ized human life. Those days, we venture to think, are past. But, if they are, it does not follow that the danger of war is past. War may be, and doubtless is, less probable than it was. Its real nature, its horror and unmitigated calamity, are more poignantly and widely realized than they were. Yet, so imperfectly do races and nations understand one another, so perplexing are many of their multiplying relationships, so restless are certain forces of evil, so insecure are the psychological bases of peace, that humanity truly may be said to live constantly in the shadow of the possibility of war. Not in war deliberate, but in war accidental, seems to me to lie the principal present peril. We have a world psychology more inflammable, more explosive, than it ought to be. There is tinder about. There are powder-mines. Any flying spark is dangerous. Our war with Spain, as we all remember, was pre- cipitated by the sinking of the Maine; and the Great War, whatever may have been its antecedents of history and of rivalry, rushed upon the world out of the Serajevo assassina- tions. We need fortification against accidents. We need an international mind more stably balanced against sudden shocks. | It is the distinctive virtue of these discussions, in my view, that they tend to give us such an international mind. One feels their earnestness, their sympathetic quality, their sincerity. One is moved by their eloquence. Almost every major principle xlil and problem of civilized life fall within their range, and their outlook consistently is that of the common interests of man- kind. If racial susceptibilities and nationalistic standpoints are urged with vividness and candor, they thus are urged, as I read them, only in the hope that the world, by gaining fuller knowl- edge of its parts, may be less ignorant of itself as a whole. Before we have the fact, we must have the philosophy, of world peace. All the men here interviewed endeavor to elucidate this philosophy. Their points of view should be of immense educational value. Their cordiality should make for a friendlier interracial and international mood. If cynicism be heard in this connection, I would say that in a meeting of amicable sentiment and well-disposed reasoning there is measureless power for good. Such meetings—such streams of moral and intellectual energy— irrigate the generous hopes and purposes of men. And such streams grow as they flow. They grow as they flow, for, in their long course toward their mighty objective, corresponding tributaries never cease to join them. World peace, a world affair, stands or falls by world opinion. If we are to have world peace, in other words, we must have the necessary world opinion to support it. And, if we are to have this opinion, we must have the right feeling underneath it. Such feeling, in turn, can exist only if races and nations be convinced that aggression and exploitation have had their day, that brute force is to be brought under mental and ethical control, that all-around justice is the fixed purpose—that civilization, in short, is to establish itself conclusively over barbarism. Feeling issues in thought, thought in action. What, therefore, could be more desirable than public expressions calculated to make international feeling what it ought to be, in order that international action may be what it ought to be? Enlightened minds and sympathetic hearts are the hope of the world. Without them, statesmanship can do nothing; with them, it faces no insoluble problem. Public opinion rooted in right feeling has countless victories to its credit. Its triumphs increase through the generations; if they did not, men of all colors and creeds would be on the back track. Public opinion abolished human slavery. It is waging a winning fight in a thousand directions. It is widening the scope and cementing the foundations of humanism in industry and liberty in politics. Give it light! Give it the light of the spirit and the light of the mind! Do this, and we shall march without halting to the permanent relegation of war. XIV America, I need not say, is fervently for peace. This fact stands out boldly in her history. It is written in her treaties, in her diplomacy, and in every utterance that reflects the emotions and convictions of her people. Who can misunderstand the moral, the lesson, the evidence, of the Washington Conference? Could any war-coveting nation, in America’s highly-privileged position, have called or responded to that Conference, or made the self-denying proposals America made and others accepted there? Certainly we, if anyone, were able to follow the old militaristic lines, but we elected to strike an historic blow for peace. Our feelings and purposes are unchanged. We are still against swollen armaments. Our attitude of mind is still that of the Washington Conference. And hence it is that we wel- come, and warmly welcome, every exhibition of peaceful pur- pose, whether it show itself in the region of theory or in the region of practice. Washington, D.C., November 20, 1925. ‘cay tee 4 We i 5 4 fay + Mi * > i pee Tan iy aa ‘ D La ae Ne cleat anf ¥ Pedal ¥ ft ooh eit ’ aL} LA ag Bi ; ayy i Pie i) Origin and Object of the Interviews By EDWARD PRICE BELL Public spirit, whether of local or of general application, was one of the most pronounced and constant characteristics of Victor Fremont Lawson. He was a living, a dynamic citizen, and he knew that the rational interest of the citizen was limited only by the limits of the world. To be of service to statesmanship in the peaceful ordering of human affairs was among Mr. Lawson’s instinctive desires. It entered into his purpose—embodied, indeed, the chief moral element of his purpose—in founding, more than a quarter of a century ago, the Special Foreign Service of The Chicago Daily News. In founding this service, to be sure, Mr. Lawson was after the news; all journalists are after that: it is their elixir of life. But he also was after, and he was determined to get, a reflection of those qualities, idiosyncrasies, customs, and institutions which placed different peoples and civilizations in a light at once true and favorable. “All nations, rightly studied, are likable,’’ was one of Mr. Lawson’s sayings. Appreciation of this fact, he held, must be driven home to peoples as vital to that condition of world sentiment without which there could be no solidly-based world peace. Corres- pondents, therefore, who did what lay in their power legiti- mately to spread respect, admiration, and warmth of feeling among nations were doing their part to simplify the problems of statesmanship and promote the welfare of their fellow-men. Out of this impulse of the great editor grew a school of foreign correspondents who understood, and who understand, the inter- national opportunities and obligations of twentieth century journalism. In the library of Mr. Lawson’s home in Chicago a large window looked through a group of trees upon a beautiful bit of Lake Michigan. It was one of Mr. Lawson’s occasional pleasures to sit at that window and watch the never-resting water. I found him there, on a brilliant mid-winter morning in 1924, his expression uncommonly grave. XVil **May I ask what is on your mind, Mr. Lawson? ”’ He was sitting in a straight-lined chair, legs crossed, right arm caught over the back of the chair, hands clasped, eyes fixed upon mine. “Tl am thinking of Europe,”’ said he. “Of the chaos there?” “Yes. Apparently, it is chaos, material and mental. I can make out no coherence of thought anywhere. Unless the leaders pull themselves together, | am afraid the consequences of the war are going to be even worse than the war itself.”’ Two days later, in a written communication, I proposed to Mr. Lawson that we attempt to get from each of the most responsible officials of Europe a carefully reasoned statement designed to correct existing misunderstanding, allay inflamma- tion, point the way to reconstruction, and define the principles of an established international accord. It was suggested that such statements, published throughout the world, might prove of real service toward a restoration of constructive mental processes. Mr. Lawson gave instant approval to the proposal, and the result was the series of interviews in this volume with Judge Marx, Signor Mussolini, Monsieur Poincaré, and Mr. Mac- Donald, each of whom at that time was the minister of prime responsibility of a great Power in the vortex of the vast Euro- pean imbroglio. Never before did statesmen in such circum- stances, or any circumstances, give so much time, thought, and energy to an effort to make journalism the handmaiden of statecraft in the cause of humanity. Europe is a mighty center of human life. All the world feels the throb of its heart. But it is not all the world. Of this fact I had a sharp reminder in Rome, just after finishing the interview with Signor Mussolini, in the first week of May, 1924. American legislators were hurtling forward with an immigration bill containing a clause painful to Asiatic, especially Japanese, susceptibilities. American naval authorities were evolving plans for elaborate fleet maneuvers in the Pacific. There was talk of the extensive fortification of Hawaii. One particularly capacious American political brain was incubating a scheme for a White League of Nations in the Pacific! Japan’s reaction to all this was reflected in the Italian press. Japanese statesmen were calm, but certain ardent Japanese patriots were far from calm, and a perceptible wave of surprise and uneasiness was passing over the whole of Japanese society. XVill On the “‘train de luxe’’ between Rome and Paris on May 7, 1924, I wrote Mr. Lawson as follows: *“*All sorts of perilous possibilities seem to me to inhere in the Japano-American situation. Unless some agency mediates between the opposing racial forces, clears up the cloudy zone between them, sets them seriously and temperately to investiga- ting and discussing their mutual standpoints, makes themkeenly conscious of whither they are tending, I have little doubt it is only a question of time until we shall have a color-conflict that will deluge the world with blood. I propose that The Chicago Daily News do what it can to fulfill this task of mediation.”’ Immediately on receipt of this letter, Mr. Lawson cabled: *“Your Pacific proposal very attractive. We shall act when you reach home.”’ Six months later, the Coolidge contribution to this symposium having been added to those from Europe, | left Chicago for Canada to ask Premier Mackenzie King to give us the opening interview of the Pacific series. From Ottawa I traveled to British Columbia, pursued our racial investigations along the Pacific coast of the United States to San Francisco, sailed thence to Hawaii, to Japan, to China, and finally to the Philip- pines, ever seeking light upon the question of how warlike ten- dencies in the Pacific might be reversed, and an era of growing general confidence opened in that stupendous theatre of human activity. My work finished, and the ship on which I was return- ing home touching at dawn on August 31, 1925, at the port of Victoria, a newspaper friend entered my cabin and told me Mr. Lawson was dead. “Our Great Adventure’’ was Mr. Lawson’s term for this extensive journalistic endeavor to set the tides of influential world opinion toward sanity, reconstruction, and peace. Though he lived to read all the interviews but two—that of Governor-General Wood of the Philippines and that of Dr. Tang Shao-yi of China—he did not live to know their full effect, nor can this be known; it must belong permanently to the imponderables of the interracial and international situation. But Mr. Lawson knew that a great amount of moral and intel- lectual vigor had been released in a good and urgent cause, and he was too profound a psychologist to require tangible proofs of what that meant. Tangible proofs, however, that substantial good had been done were appearing before Mr. Lawson died. The European xIx interviews were read with care in the European Chancelleries, and especially in those of the Great Powers. That they can have been without beneficial effect upon the official mind of Europe, that they can have failed to contribute something to the amicable and rational spirit which ran through the London and Paris Conferences and culminated in Locarno, does not stand to reason, and is known to be contrary to fact. Marx, Mussolini, Poincaré, and MacDonald expected results from what they did, and it is no secret in the diplomatic world that they were not disappointed. As to the Pacific@Ocean, The Daily News found it enveloped in war-fog and left it clear. All the interviews were published in Hawaii, Japan, China, the Philippines, and throughout the East. They powerfully struck a new note. It wasea note of reality. It was a note of friendship. It was a note of peace. All at once no more was heard of a warlike threat in the American naval maneuvers. People smiled at the talk of a “new Hawaiian Gibraltar in the Pacific.’’” Japan was not creeping up on the Philippines and Guam. She was not crouch- ing for a leap on Australia. There was no nascent, secret, formidable Japano-Chino-Russian anti-Occidental bloc. It all had been a dyspeptic dream! Ambassador Matsudaira, a fine specimen of his race, has testified to his high opinion of the work of The Chicago Daily News in the Pacific. He has done so privately and publicly. He said to me in Washington that the interviews had “im- pressed thinking minds deeply,” that they had “‘greatly aided in creating mutual confidence between the peoples of Japan and the United States,’’ and that they had “‘pleased the whole East.’’ Alfred Sze, the experienced and sagacious Chinese Minister in Washington, declared: ““The tranquillizing effect of the interviews hardly can be exaggerated.’ Personal word from Governor-General Wood shows him in accord with the view, not only that the situation in the Pacific—at all events, for the present—has been tranquillized, but that the cause of law, order, and progress has been strengthened in the Philip- pines. So much for the practical issue of the idea which won the support of Mr. Lawson’s sympathy, prestige, money, and machinery. The interviews have been published in newspaper and in reprint form. They now take their place, as Mr. Lawson wished they should, in book form for free circulation among leaders of thought in all civilized countries, their sole object xx to go some way toward producing that “‘right feeling’’ which President Coolidge accounts indispensable to the solution of the problem of world peace. Constituting, according to the President, “‘a peculiarly suggestive and important achievement in the field of inter- national conciliation,’ the interviews represent 36,000 miles of travel, from sub-arctic blizzards to tropical typhoons, and almost two years of intensive labor. One speaks with modera- tion, I think, in terming them unique; in declaring them with- out prototypes in breadth of conception and thoroughness of execution; in claiming for them as a whole the double character of a landmark in journalistic pioneering and an addition to the historical resources of international thought. Imprimaturs are an original feature of the interviews. These authorizations mean that the matter covered by them was carefully read and formally approved for publication by the officials interviewed. Also, in most instances, the statements were sanctioned by the Cabinets concerned, thus acquiring the literal authenticity and moral authority of great State papers. It is true, therefore, that when we listen to the voices in these pages we hear the messages, not only of individual heads of Governments, but of Governments in their collective quality. Another unprecedented mark of the interviews is that of the commendatory seal of the President of the United States. High politics and a comparatively new branch of journalism unite in a common service. It is a principle, to my mind, capable of useful application over a wide area. Not only statesmen, but specialists and thinkers of every calling, have a natural allegiance with the interviewer for the education of mankind. Fame is power. Fame is responsibility. Names with hypnotic properties are obligated to kindle, enlighten, and direct an attentive world. To do something in this way is the object alike of the conversations in this book, and of the foreword of the President. With what care the interviewees spoke, and how faithful they were to the determining elements of the various situations discussed, we learn from the fact that no essential of any one of the interviews has been discredited by the march of events. We see that in all substantial particulars Marx voiced the spirit of Germany, Mussolini that of Italy, Poincaré that of France, MacDonald that of Britain, Coolidge that of the United States, Mackenzie King that of Canada, Kato and Shidehara that of Japan, Quezon and Osmefia that of the XXi1 independence-seeking Filipinos, Wood that of the Coolidge Administration relative to the Philippines, and Tang Shao-yi that of the Federalists of China. Mr. Lawson’s last words relative to the interviews, written when he learned by cable that the series had been completed in the talk with Tang Shao-yi, were these: ‘‘The end crowns the work, and a great work it has been.” If it was a great work, many minds aside from the eminent men interviewed are entitled to thanks for a part in it, Victor Fremont Lawson first of all, for without his breadth of vision and international neighborliness it could not have been done. Thanks are due also to a group of enlightened diplomats— Wiedfeldt of Germany, Caetani of Italy, Jusserand of France, Howard of Britain, Matsudaira of Japan, Sze of China—and to a long list of obliging experts in the Chancelleries of three Continents. I would make grateful acknowledgment, too, to Miss Jane Addams, Judge Jesse Holdom, and William K. Pattison of Chicago, who cooperated with me in persuading Premier Mackenzie King of Canada to give the first interview on the complex of delicate problems centering in the Pacific. Finally, I cannot say how much I owe to the steady encour- agement and splendid editorial cooperation of Charles Henry Dennis, long Mr. Lawson’s chief editor, and to such colleagues in The Chicago Daily News Service as Leroy T. Vernon of Washington, Edgar Ansel Mowrer of Berlin, Hiram Kelly Moderwell of Rome, Paul Scott Mowrer of Paris, Constantine Brown of Paris, Hal O’Flaherty of London, John Russell Kennedy of Tokyo, James Butts of Peking, and Walter Robb of Manila, members of a faithful and brilliant organization that has made The Chicago Daily News known and respected in foreign political and commercial centers as it is in those of the United States. GERMANY’S HOPE for PEACE Conversations with CHANCELLOR MARX OF GERMANY “Heavy Wars Disarm Peoples in Their Minds: Only the Abolition of the Teachings of War, and of the Objective Symbols of War, Can Keep Peoples Disarmed in Their Minds.” i iv ‘ _ m py ny re + co ¥ ty A FoR a ft ants fy aia wien AY Pi ae , Germany's Hope for Peace ©) 5 talks took place in the library of the Chancellery at a round table beneath the coat of arms of Bismarck and with souvenirs of the Iron Chancellor on every hand. Our interpreter was Dr. Otto Carl Kiep, legal counselor of the Chancellery, a master of English as of German. For a full fortnight we availed ourselves of scraps of time, early and late, between Cabinet meetings, administrative duties and the demands of the electoral campaign, then at its height. Of talking alone there was twenty-four solid hours, and then days and nights of writing, translating, re-translating, revising and revising again. Judge Marx made his final study of my finished draft as he traveled between Berlin and Frankfort in the course of a speaking tour. Appearance of Dignity, simplicity, modesty, sptritual-minded- of Chancellor. ness, instinctive grasp of essentials, broad hu- man sympathy and individual warmth of nature are conspicuous qualities of Judge Marx’s personality. His eyes are gray, his face round and benevolent, his forehead wide and high. He has a white mustache and his hair is cut short all over. He speaks rapidly in a low voice, making oc- casional simple gestures with his hands, and often smiling searchingly into the eyes of those about him. His kindliness, his courtesy, cannot be exaggerated; these, so far as I could observe, never were thrust aside by duty, however urgent and onerous. His gold-rimmed spectacles add to his professorial benignity. From the room where we talked we looked out upon the wooded gardens of the Chancellery—a paradise in summer, al- ready flooded with the melody of the thrush. Flanking these gardens was the colonnade, specially constructed for the strolls and the State-causeries of Bismarck and the old Emperor. Near at hand were the Chancellor’s office, with its great desk and lofty ceilings; Bismarck’s room, with his own roll-top mahogany desk, a bookcase atop, and on the walls portraits of the old Emperor, Von Bulow and the Iron Chancellor himself, a vivid, grim, and powerful figure; the Congress Hall, where the repre- [ Page Five } AAO PE VECO hd B CicHiVAvIN iG) Bo Cee ne ee sentatives of the Great Powers, including Disraeli, met to settle the Eastern question; the Cabinet Room, where there are so many meetings now; the gilded and artistic Salon, with winter garden, scene of magnificent social gatherings in the past; next door the Foreign Office—the whole in the center of the most historic associations of the Wilhelmstrasse, the most famous and aristocratic street of the greatest modern city of Europe. He Has Given Wilhelm Marx, aged 61, was born at Cologne, Notable Service. where he attended the gymnasium. He studied law at Bonn University and entered the legal service of the State in 1884, and he has held many judgeships, including that of the Presidency of the Court of Appeal in Berlin. He is president of the Catholic schools or- ganization of Germany, and of the People’s Catholic Union. For nineteen years he has been a member of the Prussian Diet. For eight years he was a member of the old German Reichstag. He was a member of the German National Assembly and then a member of the new Reichstag. He is the author of numerous works on legal and educational questions. Judge Marx became the German Chancellor Nov. 30, 1923, in succession to Gustav Stresemann, now Minister of Foreign Affairs. *“What are Republican Germany’s chief anxieties and prob- lems?’’ was the opening question. ‘‘All center in the Reparations question. Speaking quite non- rhetorically, this question is pregnant with life or death for Germany. If we be freed politically and economically; if our definitive burden be one we can bear; and, if we receive the foreign financial countenance essential to our solvency, we can erect a stable democratic State, and bring back to our people the prosperity vital alike to them and to those produc- ing and distributing nations that stand in a relation of inter- dependence to them. Denied the advantages I have enumer- ated, we can look forward to nothing but the disruption of our State and the prostration of our economy, with the measureless misery they imply.” ‘Do you regard as synonymous the safety of the Republic and the safety of European peace?”’ “T regard the Republic as a powerful influence for neighbor- liness, reason, and justice in Europe—that is to say, a powerful influence for peace here and everywhere. If the Republic went down before a nationalistic movement, produced and fostered by unrelenting pressure from abroad, such radical develop- [ Page Six ] STR MO ANY FS Fee en aa Rd HAY A Id ments, whether in the direction of the extreme Right or the extreme Left, obviously would be fatal to any sort of fulfill- ment of the Treaty of Versailles. We have met and subdued indescribable difficulties. Our efforts—efforts to cope with the concrete and the unavoidable—have provided, I think, an in- comparable field for the study of history, political economy, finance, and every major problem of organized human life, beset with the most grievous conditions that can afflict a people. Radical dangers, from the extreme Right and the ex- treme Left, have been put down. Republicanism is rooted in the convictions of the people. It can be uprooted only by storms that may break over it from abroad.”’ Loyalty of “‘Your Army is loyal?’ the German “In every crisis before the war, during the war, Army. and since the war, our Army has been loyal. Its traditions, of which it is proud, are strictly adverse to any participation in politics. Its spiritual substance is German. It reflects instinctive Germanic devotion to discip- line. Bolshevism found it adamant. The uprising in Munich under Hittler clearly showed the Army’s attitude to the Repub- lic. Its vicissitudes have given us military and civil names that will live in history beside those of our great leaders of the war and of former times—the man, for example, who stayed the tide of bolshevism; those who grappled with the task of re- building our wrecked social and economic’ structure; those who kept to their posts in the heaviest seas, and helped to steer our waterlogged craft through the countless rocks on the passage.” ““You refer to men like Ebert, von Seeckt, Noske>?”’ “‘To these and many others we owe gratitude. But none seeks prominence; all desire to do their duty to the nation unostentatiously. As long as this sense of duty remains, we face the future, however anxious, not without confidence.”’ Asks General ‘‘How does Republican Germany look upon Disarmament. disarmament?” “‘We have accepted it in principle, and regard it with favor if it be universal. Internationally, Germany al- ready is disarmed. We have neither army nor navy of inter- national meaning. Thus Germany has everything to gain and nothing to lose from the advance of this magnificent ideal. We live encircled by arms and impotent upon the seas. Our fron- tiers are open—no rivers or mountains to shelter us, as Italy [ Page Seven } Was aR ae C oH YAWN IC) Bei hy Sh aR Galea ia has,.as Spain has, as France would like in the Rhine; no com- mand of the air; no protecting waters such as those ridden by Britain’s fleet. Germany stands as the world’s sole great example of disarmament, waiting for other powers tocome up.» ‘“‘Can there be any effective disarmament except a psycholog- ical disarmament? With nations so formidably competent in engineering, mechanics, and chemistry, will not war eternally threaten until all faith in war, and all desire to make war, shall have been eradicated from the human mind?” ‘“‘Psychological disarmament undoubtedly is essential to per- manent peace. How is it to be effected and maintained? Heavy wars, like the Great War, effect it, but they cannot maintain it. War Sufferings ‘‘Consider the privations and sufferings of Breed Peace our nation in the war. Much of this is still Desires. unknown abroad. Even our fighting troops had to submit to severe rationing. As early as 1916 the meat rations were restricted, while clothing and outfit were meager. Thus, apart from the physical and moral hardships of modern warfare, the material conditions ‘under which we pursued the war contrasted vividly with the wealth and abundance of the Allies’ resources, fed mainly from the in- exhaustible supplies of America. Our troops were rushed back and forth, from East to West,from Europe to Asia, withstanding strains patently in excess of those of the average allied units. Such causes cannot be without effect. He who knows from experience what war—modern war—means has no eagerness for its renewal. His experience breeds pacifism of the sound- est and most durable nature. The German nation is saturated with the knowledge and abhors the thought of further war; it desires peace. “This sentiment was particularly marked in 1919. Germany at that time not only yearned for peace but believed implicitly in its realization. Upon this psychology we fain would have built great things. We still hope to do so. But here, as in so many directions, policies and actions beyond our control tend to confound and defeat us. All around us we hear the clash of arms. Military inculcations, war talk, drilling, martial pagean- try, new ingenuity in munitional engineering—every one of them is an influence for the rearming of Germany psychologi- cally, and to negate such influences transcends human power. [ Page Eight | Coren Vin AUN Yi ome ner Ou tee eon ray Rod Poi BAY Cok To Preserve ‘‘We deplore the situation. We have youth Mental who know little or nothing of war. They are Disarmament. subject to war infection, as were their pred- ecessors, who went away to battle shouting, laughing, and singing. Heavy wars disarm peoples in their minds; only the abolition of the teachings of war and of the objective symbols of war can keep peoples disarmed in their minds. If we are to abolish war we must forget war. If we are to abolish war we must fill the minds and souls of our young with the gospel, the emotions and the images of peace.”’ “Your feeling is that the world’s supreme need is peace>”’ *“That certainly is my feeling.” “‘Do you know of a better way than through a League of Nations to get peace>?”’ nNOS: *‘Do you see any peril to nationality or to political and territorial sovereignty in the League as it stands today>”’ “So far as I can see, the League, as such, in practice, does not endanger the freedom of will, the independence, the securi- ty, of any nation. Great powers, democracies, will avoid any organization that threatens to wrest their destiny from their own hands. Preservation of the democratic principle pre- supposes the operation of local knowledge and control. Peoples are not ready for world federalism—for national autonomies related to an over-riding central authority, as, for example, the American States to Washington or the German States to Berlin. The League of Nations, as I understand it, would enthrone reason, justice, and peace, not by the crude and ineffectual in- strumentality of compulsion, but by a peace-breeding volun- tarism based upon international understanding and desire.”’ Germany “Will the German Republic join the League>”’ Would Join ‘‘It will join as soon as it may be permitted to the League. join consistently with what it conceives to be its rightful position among the nations. Other- wise it could not join with any prospect of serving itself or mankind. We should want a permanent place on the Council, for we are not a minor power. Besides, we should not want the League, with our support, to be identified with ex parte points of view respecting post-war adjustments. We should like its outlook upon world affairs to be uninfluenced by passions, pre}- udices, and political expedients with taproots in the war. This stream of world power, which, as Republican Germany hopes, { Page Nine } We Ole Ree LD CloHerAL Ni CO Eee LS ae re ithe ene may become a mighty and resistless stream, should not be poisoned at its source.” ‘‘What would be the effect of America’s joining?”’ “‘Without presuming to suggest to America what she should do in this or any other matter, I should say that American ideals and moral authority cannot be spared from any move- ment destined to dignify and gladden the world with confidence and tranquillity. Reciprocal trust and peace would be hard enough to get, even with every great nation helping to the limit of its power. It is indispensable to any successful peace movement that it embrace all the principal constituents of human strength in the world.” *‘Then you would wish Russia to join?” *‘T should wish all nations to put their shoulders to the wheel in this superlatively important matter.”’ International “You perceive no way for mankind to pro- Good gress harmoniously without some kind of Understanding. body in permanent session functioning for nations somewhat after the manner of a national government in a system of federated states>?”’ ‘“‘T am convinced that the problems common to the nations demand an international body for their regular study and systematic accommodation.” “What do you consider the best method of moving against international ignorance?” ‘““There are many ways leading to rere oe understand- ing. The main condition is good will—the wish to understand and come together. Herein lies the great moral duty of the Press. Propaganda must be done away with; honesty and sincerity must reign. There are, however, other practical methods—for instance, the interchange of children and young folk. Many thousands of German children found homes and succor in neighboring countries like Holland, Switzerland and Scandinavia, when our country was facing famine after the Armistice. These children return to us with hearts full of grati- tude and broader minds. They know there are others than Germans whom they can trust and love. Foreign students com- ing to us and living in German families undergo a similar men- tal and sentimental change. It is an effective way of inter- nationalizing intelligence and fellow-feeling. Exchange of pro- fessors, students, ministers, and publicists is excellent. Who- ever has the welfare of his own country at heart, and appreciates { Page Ten } uC e NW AN ING aneom imriieO. rar He Orton | Prive Ane Oh the universality of the effect of good or ill fortune in any part of the world, will rejoice over all well-judged attempts to moderate excessive nationalism in the interests of the common weal,” Germany's ‘‘What is the housing situation in Germany?” Housing “It is a situation involving bad living conditions, Difficulties. _economic difficulties, and political perplexities. We suffer from a great lack of housing accommo- dation, with its inevitable physical discomforts, moral evils, social detriments, and anxieties for government. During the war we could build no houses. Moreover, we drastically re- stricted rents, and this restriction operated against house con- struction. It became necessary for the State to enter upon a large scheme of cheap housing for the people. To this, objec- tions have frequently been raised in the foreign Press on the ground that it would promote industrial dumping; but we were forced to persist in the scheme, as the homelessness of large numbers of the population was intolerable from the standpoint of both social order and humanity. “State building revenues were raised from the wealthier classes, and the accommodation accorded to each member of the community was restricted by public law. Our rule was one room for one person. Whoever had more rooms was billeted up with lodgers paying a cheap paper-mark rent. Naturally, there arose a desire on the part of persons of means to buy themselves free from billeting. This was allowed by the State on the basis of a payment sufficient to build as many rooms as were withdrawn from the operation of the rule of one room for one person. Thus a certain sum of money was raised, and a cheap construction program was carried out under the direction of our Minister of Public Welfare. This, to a certain extent, helped to relieve the situation. “Experience, however, led us* more and more to give up administrative control of residential property. It was expen- sive and, by keeping down the rent, it rendered house building a non-paying business. Besides, this kind of adminis- tration had the tendency to lead to corruption. Socialism in this realm failed us. The natural incentive to all industrial production—the prospect of earning interest on the capital out- lay and profits thereon—had to be re-established, and we de- cided to return to the principle of private enterprise. Laws restricting rents are being progressively abolished. [ Page Eleven ] Wie) or sae Ce HANG 6 Con SI a aoe eS cee es Housing ‘Unhappily, our housing troubles have not yet Scarcity gone. Rents are rising rapidly and the cost of Is Still Acute. living is following them. Higher costs of living call for more wages and more wages bring back the threat of inflation. Nevertheless, we have taken our de- cision in favor of trusting capitalistic principles to resuscitate the building trade, and we shall stand by this decision. There is not sufficient capital available on our money market to pro- duce.a building boom. Still, we hope the mere fact of housing properties becoming an attractive investment may lead to an increased construction of houses that will mean less unemploy- ment and hence a lightening of the burdens of the State in this respect. ““There is a group of broad facts which strikingly reveals the genesis of our housing problem. For five years during the war house building in Germany was dead. Several hundred thou- sand young men came home from the war eager to get married and start housekeeping. Engaged couples had one reply for the question, ‘When is the wedding to be?’ It was, ‘When we can find a house.’ One year, a year and a half, three years of waiting—it was and still is so all over Germany. Immigrants flowed in upon us from East and West; immigrants from the ceded territories; fugitives expelled from the Ruhr and the Rhineland; thousands of people from Russia, Galicia, Poland, and the dismembered Austro-Hungarian Empire; Germans from the East and the Baltic; boatloads of Germans turned out of countries in which they had found homes and occupation before the war—about 2,000,000 of them in all.’’ No Secret Army ‘‘One hears that Germany is a nation of tax- of Aggression. dodgers; that monetary penalties are, or were, of no avail because of the worthlessness of the mark; that both civil and criminal law in the Republic is dis- credited; that the great industrialists, not the Reich, are Ger- many; that the Republican Government cannot subdue these industrialists; that it is impotent before extra-constitutional military societies financed by the treasuries of big industry; that a masked army of aggression is in process of integration. What can we say on these heads?” “Take the last point first. There is in Germany only one military force of the slightest consequence as such—the Reich- swehr, our Army. It stands unflinchingly for the Republic. It stands for law and order within our borders and for peace [ Page Twelve | Der Reidskanszler. Berlin, den 8. April 1924. Rk.2446. An HerrnE.Price Bel] 1 The Chicago Daily News ivthise. JO Hote] Adlon. Sehr geehrter Herr Price Bell ! Die von Jhnen vorgelegte Aufzeichnung gibt den Jnhalt unserer Gespriche tiber die gegenwadrtigen wirtschaftlichen und politischen Probleme Deutschlands richtig wieder. Jch bestati- ge Jhnen gern, dass unsere Unterhaltungen sich in jeder Hin- sicht auf dem Boden gegenseitigen vollsten Vertrauens abspiel- ten und dass die behandelten Fragen in aller Offenheit eror- tert worden sind. Es war mir ein Vergntigen,durch diese Unterhaltungen zu dem wertvollen Werke beizutragen, welches die Chicago Daily News der internationalen Aufklarung tm Sinne der Volkerver- soOhnung gewidmet hat. Jn ausgezeichneter Hochachtung Ce, Serer VE) CAT INR Xp een tno bey! Bapit Bee ke niet BB An Crk, beyond them—the Republic’s policy, from which on no account will it depart. This myth of a nascent German army of ag- gression should be dismissed from men’s minds once for all. It is a source of nothing but universal evil, warping thought, disfiguring policy, buttressing militarism, postponing recon- struction, dashing the hopes of settled peace. *‘Property, in the days immediately following the war, when there was a general menace of bolshevism, anarchy, and crimes of violence, and when our military resources were compulsorily inadequate to control such a situation—property, including the great industries, sought to defend itself by privately employed guards. These were magnified into the potential units of a formidable army. They never were such and still less are they such now. With the growth of governmental power and a re- turn of the normal orderliness of the German people, these guards, or so-called military bands, became unnecessary and were suppressed. Similarly, we have suppressed as an element of possible disturbance and danger, our fascisti or more ex- treme and demonstrative nationalists. They are not allowed to make military preparations of any kind. : Ways of German ‘‘Now as to tax-dodging, collapse of law and Industrialists. the alleged puissance and implied disloyalty of the leaders of German industry. Again, let us take the last point first. German industrialists are no more an element apart in German life than are American industrialists in American life or the industrialists of any other country in the life of that country. Our industrialists are German, believe in Germany, love Germany, and serve Germany according to their light. What motive or interest could they have in dis- honoring her, in despoiling her, in spreading misery and des- peration among her people? They have their ideas about government and policy, as have the rest of us. But they are not seditionists and they are not trying to establish an in- dustrial tyranny. *‘As regards tax-dodging, I suppose the practice is not wholly unknown in most countries, and even in normal times. Law enforcement, too, always presents difficulties quite generally. Our times for a good many years have not been normal times. We have passed through conditions unforeseeable and un- imaginable—have trodden perhaps the strangest and most be- wildering ground in the whole march of human history. Econ- omic and social disorganization we have plumbed to its depths. [ Page Thirteen } Wir OvoR Wl CuLAIWAWN NCo Bill SSE Ae Re owes We have witnessed financial vagaries that made our best- trained minds reel. In the midst of our embarrassments, falling thick and fast, rushing upon us from unexpected direc- tions, established experience and doctrinaire thinking alike seemed a mockery. Germany's ‘‘There was the so-called ‘flight of capi- ‘Flight of Capital.’’ tal.’ Exporters and industrialists selling their goods abroad hesitated to convert foreign money into paper marks for fear of the losses threaten- ing by depreciation. Besides, they frequently had to purchase their raw materials from abroad and required foreign currency for such transactions. Thus deposits were accumulated abroad sometimes, no doubt, in excess of actual requirements. “But also the great mass of wage-earners and consumers was forced through the effects of depreciation to depart from sound economic principles. Germans were the thriftiest people in Europe. They loved to work and save. It was their life. Monetary depreciations swept away this great, primitive, sus- taining instinct by making any kind of saving impossible. E\veryone’s preoccupation was not to save his earnings but to spend them as quickly as he could, lest they turn to nothing in his hands. Boys and girls, told by their parents to be saving, to hold their money, laughed at the advice. “Do you think us idiots?’ they said. Even public officials formerly completely unconversant with investment transactions, when they re- ceived their salaries, ran as fast as they could to the stock ex- change to convert their money into shares. What else could they do to avoid the consequences of depreciation and still maintain some kind of liquid capital? “It was the same everywhere—this amazing spectacle, this indescribable national moral and material tragedy of agonized earners, by nature provident, dropping their money as if it were on fire. Money is a marvelous thing in a nation. Stable, of fixed worth, enjoying universal confidence, it is not merely a medium of exchange; it is a preservant of values; it is the bedrock of national morale. Destroy its stability and you shock your civilization into ruins. If we have had turbulence; if we have had anarchy; if we have had a collapse of civil and criminal law; if we have shown many signs of a nation shat- tered and desperate, it has been because and only because our people were bereft of everything that makes social sanity and discipline possible. [ Page Fourteen } Cera Vt PAL LIN) ) inva wow eka ho eis horn ORS RIE AN Coe EF The Bankruptcy ‘On the other hand, gold-standard currencies of a Nation. - rushed into Germany as air into a vacuum. Foreigners flocked hither to scoop up our in- flated marks, exchange them for full-value German commodi- ties and retire enriched. From a neutral country, for example, there came a man for a little recreation in Berlin. He lived well at a fashionable hotel, bought in the Unter den Linden a beautiful German gold watch for the mark yield of a few gold notes, returned home and sold his watch for a sufficient profit to cover all his expenses in Germany. Thus the wealth still remaining in the country after the war was subjected to a heavy drain. “‘German employers, like their employes, ran a breathless race with the descent of the mark. Accustomed to pay their workers monthly, they began to pay weekly and finally daily, to minimize the losses from depreciation. For the same reason the workers no sooner received their marks than they hurried to get rid of them for something that would retain its value. “All State functions were harried correspondingly. Money received for taxes lost its value while in course of collection. Obligations were put off in order that they might be met with cheaper currency. Crimes against property multiplied, for necessitous people were disposed to take what the fruits of their labor would not buy. Men and women went into the forests for wood and into the fields for potatoes. Such crimes were punished in accordance with the law, but penalties were often futile against cold and hunger. “‘Contradictory views were held of what should or could be done. We passed highly restrictive and punitive legislation against the flight of capital. All privacy of commercial and banking accounts was set aside. Our methods resembled the bolshevistic inquisition. We turned on the taxation screw as far as practicable. We obtained what foreign currency we could to pay Reparations. But, in the end, all expedients failed, bankruptcy was complete, and payments under the Treaty of Versailles ceased. The Tragedy of ‘It is asserted that we voluntarily extin- the Falling Mark. guished the value of the mark by inflation. On the contrary, we frantically fought to maintain the standard of our money, realizing that depreciation meant confiscation; that lifelong savings would be snuffed out; that the middle and working classes would be impoverished; [ Page Fifteen ] Wit) Scere CoN AS IN GTC. Er Lee ree ae Sine Ea es that the national morale would undergo an unprecedented strain and that our entire social order might be engulfed in disaster. Not any desire of ours, nor any fault or default of ours, reduced the mark to worthless paper; this calamity befell us because of the imposition upon our war-weakened country of burdens greater than it could bear. “We are accused, again, of governmental connivance with industrial and commercial cleverness in ‘siphoning’ wealth out of Germany in the form of the gold deposits abroad derived from the sale of German exports to which | have already re- ferred. It is the allegation that these credits were left in foreign countries to evade Reparations payments. Precisely the con- trary isthetruth. We were struggling to maintain our domestic economy and to discharge the obligations fixed by the Treaty of Versailles. To do these things it was indispensable that our industrial and commercial apparatus should work. If this apparatus worked we must get food and raw materials from other countries, and such commodities were not to be had for the degraded mark. Such accumulations of foreign credit by German exporters as were permitted by the German Govern- ment—and our laws were as stringent as our observation was vigilant—were intended to keep German life and production going, not only to meet domestic needs but to make Repara- tions payments. Individuality of ‘If some exporters built up larger foreign Foreign Credits. credits than the German laws intended they should—and this is not impossible—it was not because of, but in spite of, the policy and the endeavors of the Reich. Our thought and energy in the Wilhelmstrasse were ever directed not to give special help or privileges to the trad- . ing community or any other class of our population, but to serve the Commonwealth, whose interests we believed would be advanced by honestly meeting, so far as possible, all the obligations of the government. ‘Some persons talk as if it were easy for the German govern- ment to enter foreign banks and levy upon German credits there. At the first hint of such a thing American competent circles immediately pointed out its impossibility. Attempts to institute inquiries looking to an appraisal of German credits in the banks of European countries proved futile at the outset as no country would ever tolerate such interference in its bank- ing business. The sanctity of private property would not per- [ Page Sixteen ] Soe CIV re AINE eon dt uae eC in kre ee pee CO) bes Re eee Aves Cone Be mit of any such measure. And we ourselves have that feeling. It probably is not far from the truth to say that to overturn the principle of the inviolability of private property is to over- turn the foundation of our present social and economic or- ganization. So much for the charges that the German Republic deliberately committed against its people the crime of infla- tion and aided and abetted its exporters in an organized at- tempt to swindle the beneficiaries of the Treaty of Versailles.’’ Potential Wealth, ‘‘One hears that Germany is rich and also Actual Poverty. that she is poor.” *‘In a sense, she is both. Potentially, Ger- many is rich; she has certain natural and the sociological elements of great national wealth and power. Actually, German is not only poor but bankrupt. She has the plant for a vast industry, agricultural and commercial, but she has no working capital. Great as were her trading activities during the quarter of a century before the war, she had not time to accumulate the huge reserves of capital of the older business communities. She had relatively little amassed wealth; what she had was consumed during the war, delivered up under the Treaty of Versailles, or has evaporated by depreciation. “Capitalistic industrialism without liquid capital is like a living organism drained of blood; it is'a dead frame. Economi- cally Germany is no longer a vital phenomenon; she is a gigantic skeléton. Understanding, wisdom, forbearance abroad, to- gether with German skill, labor, and thrift at home, can re- clothe this skeleton with strong sinew and healthy flesh, and reirrigate its arteries with blood; ignorance, folly, aggression from outside will arrest rebuilding processes inside, and we shall see an irreparable crumbling of the skeleton’s bones. Censure of other Governments we wish to avoid; we hope their own complexities and perplexities will aid them in appreciating those of the Government of the German Republic.”’ Striving for a “Will you explain how it finally became Balanced Budget. possible for you to return to the gold standard—to establish the rentenmark?”’ “In much of our discussion, necessarily, for the purposes of full explanation to those who have not been in position to fol- low recent German history as closely as Germans have followed it, we have been looking backward; our view has been retro- spective; we have been examining past phases in the quick- [ Page Seventeen ] Wi tO Shae Lam CURA ATEN AC. Encl ele ee ae ee moving drama of post-war German life. There are those who ask: ‘Why did you not establish the rentenmark sooner? Why did you not earlier take a firm stand against the slump of your money?’ My answer is, ‘Because it was impossible.’ “Why was it impossible? It was impossible because the total of our inescapable expenditures was far greater than our wealth-producing capacity. We could get nowhere near a balancing of our budget, and the balanced budget, need- less to say, is the sine gua non of national solvency and of the corollary of national solvency—stable currency. Our problem, so far as Reparations were concerned—and Reparations were only one of our difficulties—was incalculably aggravated by the fact that we could not ascertain what was demanded of us. We were required to shovel against a heap of sand, the sand always running down upon us, and no light reaching us as to when the task would end. It is a kind of labor that almost no conceivable leadership can—if it ought to—induce a nation to perform. Lesson of | “‘France, in recent weeks, has been experiencing France’s some of the trials that come to an incumbered Difficulties. nation in connection with its currency. There has been a struggle to save the franc. If the franc has been hard pressed, if it has fallen, if extraordinary measures have been imperative to arrest its fall, who can wonder that the mark lost its value? France had the powerful financial support of America and England during the war, and those countries have not required her to pay even interest on her debt. Furthermore, France retained all her extensive colonies —even increased her colonial domain—and maintained full economic liberty. ‘France has been collecting from Germany since the war. Germany herself financed her entire war outlay—borrowed nothing from abroad—and shouldered military occupation ex- penses and Reparations deliveries after the war. France, of course, had her vast burden of reconstruction in her devastated territories; but, when all is said, Germany’s financial burdens were immensely heavier. As France did not deliberately sink the franc, so Germany did not deliberately sink the mark. “Return to stable currency in Germany was out of the question while we were floundering in a financial region of bottomless quicksand. [ Page Eighteen | Cw Elev AveN enor ihr ORL OURY Pah Av CE Stability of the ‘‘The rentenmark, so far a successful experi- Rentenmark. ment, based on the experience gained through similar previous attempts made in other coun- tries during the last century and avoiding the errors committed on such former occasions, rests upon just one thing—German solvency. German solvency may have come to stay, and it may not. If it goes, as it went before, it seems inevitable that the rentenmark will go, as the mark went. Our temporary monetary stability is the result of heroic financial efforts made possible by suspending Reparations payments and reducing internal expenditures to the iron minimum. “Impossible Reparations demands—which, happily, we hope the combined foreign experience and judgment focused upon the problem will avert—would crush the foundations of the rentenmark, and involve not only Germany but Europe in continuing disaster. We require a moratorium, or credits, or both, and we require the prudent consideration of those in whose power it lies to prevent us from helping either ourselves or them.”’ Religious “Is religious feeling strong or weak among the Sentiment people>”’ in Germany. ‘Reduced in material fortunes and psychologi- cally depressed, our people in general have sought solace and strength in religion. We have greater church attendances than before the war. This return of the people to religion has been strongly stimulated by the humanitarian work of religious organizations, such as the Catholic Church and the Quakers, and by a national reaction against the spirit of war and against the atheistic tenets of Socialism. Socialism, indeed, in the crush of events in Germany since the war, would seem to have shown many shortcomings, economically and spiritually.” *“‘What are the moral habits and tendencies of the young?”’ “Enforced simplification of life has benefited our boys and girls. It has made them less affected, more serious, keener on healthful pleasures. Our young of the better classes are more democratic. Snobbishness is diminished. We see fewer monocles, patent leather shoes and other signs of dandy- ism. Girls’ dresses are simpler. Our young folk walk more and motor less. Life’s responsibilities have a larger place in their thoughts. Similar remarks apply to the working classes; there is a more natural mode of life all around. But it is true that [ Page Nineteen | Wa OR i iD Co BAW IN: SC Boe Le oe pastors, social workers and teachers complain of other post-war developments; order and discipline among the rising generation have been loosened, respect for authority shattered by the tide of revolution and its after effects; thrift and economy, as already shown, have lost their educational value. The lack of universal military training, with its healthful influence on the bodies and minds of our young men—its education in obedience and self-command—is here perceptible.” Beneficial ‘Motion pictures, the press, the platform, After Effects literature, art, in Germany—are they tending of War. to consolidate or to disintegrate character?” ‘“‘On the whole, I should say, their influence has not proved to be detrimental. The newspapers and the book trade in Germany suffered severely under the economic con- sequences of publishers turned to the printing of foreign books, paid for in foreign currencies. More normal publishing condi- tions, however, have returned of late and the country is the gainer. ‘‘In general, it may be said that the sufferings of the war and its after effects have produced certain beneficial results—simpler life, devotion to work, a desire for spiritual and ethical elevation to replace the materialistic assets lost—and that this develop- ment is also reflected in the different forms of public expression.’ Ideals of ‘What are the basic ideals of modern Germany?” Present-Day ‘‘In a phrase, to build up a happy, prosperous Germany. and powerful democracy, dedicated to peace and civilization. Our conception of education is democratic. It opens the door of advancement to all our people. We believe in and seek humanistic culture, but we also bear in mind the popular need for vocational training. It is our aim to draw upon both classicism and vocationalism in the interests of the Republic itself and in the interests of those responsibilities which it shares with other nations. ‘Individual liberty is the fundamental of fundamentals of the Constitution of the Federation. Personal destiny in no respect is committed to human hands; it is committed to the law. Contrary, in certain particulars, to the situation under the Empire, our citizens are free to migrate, to emigrate, to worship, to work as they will. Men and women have complete legal, civic, and political equality, whether of right or of duty. [ Page Twenty ] Coan ttl VUReS IN ayaa ernnmu eb) Couekoy ike 6 a, rie Oh Ky ea Ar Ca) Marriage, the foundation of family life, rests upon the equal rights of both sexes. ‘“‘It is our purpose as a State, while safeguarding the liberty of the citizen and making of his home an individual sanctuary, to collaborate with him in preserving the purity, health, and social progression of the family. Motherhood, in our view, has a special claim upon the protection and care of the Republic. Opportunities shall be provided by law equalizing the advan- tages, bodily, mental, and social, of illegitimate children with those of legitimate children. Every care will be taken to pro- mote in every practicable way the vigor, sanity, and happiness of the rising generation. Elements of “‘We have no State Church, but levy taxes for Freedom and_ the support of all creeds and denominations in Equality. accordance with their numerical strength. These taxes enable the various religious bodies to de- vote all of their collections to the charities of their choice. Freedom of religion, of the press, of assembly, of speech, of art, science, and teaching is guaranteed under our Constitution. Our education is free and compulsory to the eighteenth year. Private schools require the approval of the State and there must be no separation of pupils having reference to the means of their parents. It is a provision of the Constitution that our education shall be directed to the reconciliation of nations. Every pupil, upon completion of school attendance, receives a copy of the Constitution. “In ultimate essentials the Constitution of the German Re- public, I believe, closely resembles the Constitutions of Britain and the United States. In some respects our system corresponds to that of Great Britain. In other respects it follows American lines and in still other respects we have singularities of our own. Like the American and unlike the British Constitution, ours is written; we have a feeling in such things for definition and relative rigidity. Like the British and unlike the American Constitution ours empowers the President of the Federation, within limits, to dissolve the Reichstag; we favor a prompt method of liquidating deadlocks. There are other differences, but all these instruments of government, as I understand them, presuppose that supreme power proceeds from the people and aspire to forward a vigorous, humane, and peaceful social evolution, based upon the principles of property rights and popular liberty.” [Page Twenty-one | Woe Oconto CSHeVAVON]) Gop E Seto ene eons Light Needed ‘‘What might one transmit, by way of final to Give Peace. word, as Republican Germany’s message to other States and peoples?” ‘“‘Our appeal is for justice in judgment, for fair treatment in spirit, for mutuality of forbearance and respect. I do not wish to discuss the question of the responsibility for the war. I merely would say, in this connection, that no one can under- stand the German people or have in them the confidence they deserve, if such person imagines them capable of deliberately and wantonly setting out to slay and conquer. Mankind in no part of the world is more inclined to peace and to international friendship than are the Germans. “‘It is misunderstanding that causes war. Misunderstanding breeds fear and animosity and the spirit of slaughter. It follows that the world needs light—needs international education. As soon as Germany, now struggling in the thicket of political and economic disorganization, can free her limbs and see her way out of the forest, she will be ready and eager to do her part, both by precept and by example, to advance humanity toward the goal of peace. Progress in that direction, in my opinion, is possible only through concentration of effort, inter- nationally organized. Such an organization would be a clear- ing house of world information and a focal point of world confidence. It is such a role that Germany would wish to see the League of Nations fulfill.” [ Page Twenty-two | od aig ees Pets Resta ee et wis Se \ \ “ust wre DAWA Mk if WL ! AV EnYei 7 RE Bul Re bl Fascismo’s Purposes outlined by PREMIER MUSSOLINI ‘‘Fascismo is the Greatest Experiment in Our History in Making Italians.”’ Benito Mussolini HH cries Kelly Moderwell, Rome Correspondent of The Chicago Daily News, writes of the scene at the inter- view with Premier Mussolini: “Tt took place in the magnificent Chigi Palace, Italy’s present Foreign Office, in the largest and most splendid room of the Palace—that of President Mussolini—at midday, with the din of the Roman streets muffled by thick walls, and with the white Italian light flooding over the forceful apostle of Fascismo at his gigantic desk. “Our hopes—Mr. Bell’s and mine—had fallen low as we waited in an outer reception room. There were three of these rooms, each big enough for a house, and all were crowded with visitors to see the President. There were admirals and generals in their handsome uniforms. There were dignified, solemn- faced, frock-coated officials and committeemen from all over Italy. There were men of science and men of diplomacy. Keeps Appointment ‘“‘How could the President, in circum- on the Minute. stances like these, find even a moment for a newspaper interview? ‘“‘But Mussolini is Mussolini. On the instant of our appoint- ment a secretary came through a lofty doorway and called out, ‘Mr. Price Bell!’ We followed him along several corridors and through two or three ante-chambers to the door of the Presi- dent’s room. There we paused for a few seconds. Then the secretary turned the knob, opened the door, and the vast office of Mussolini lay before us. We had entered at one corner; diagonally across the great expanse of the room in the farthest corner from us sat Mussolini at his desk by a wide, towering window. ““One’s glance involuntarily swept over the room, despite the magnetism of the man. Its walls are hung with battle-axes and strange gray tapestries. There is little furniture, accentuating the immense space. The floor is of beautifully grained hard- wood, smooth as glass. [Page Twenty-five ] Wii O UE RaG Lace) Cv Hi AWN CoE Se rae en a ee Brilliant Listener ‘‘Mussolini rose, stepped from behind his and Talker. desk and walked quickly toward us, erect and stern in bearing, like a soldier. He met us almost half-way, shook hands firmly and cordially, turned and retraced his steps to his chair. There were no hesitations, no preliminaries. Conversation began at once. Occasionally Mussolini used English, occasionally French, but nearly always his own musical and brilliant Italian. He was alternately animated and grave, his fine eyes sometimes gleam- ing playfully, sometimes reflecting what he has passed through since the outbreak of the Great War and what he has faced in his position of supreme political responsibility in Italy. ““We were alone. When I saw Mussolini two years ago in a modest hotel room in Cannes, a young black shirt stood beside me, rifle in hand, motionless during a two-hour interview. But here Mussolini, without guards or secretaries and clad in a smartly-cut morning suit, was no longer dictator of an extra- legal militia, but first minister of the king. He listened. He listened intently, his hands relaxed on the arms of his chair, his head bowed. He seemed to concentrate as much energy on listening as do most orators on speaking.” Word Picture Mr. Bell’s impressions of the remarkable man of Mussolini. interviewed: ‘He is not tall, or raw-boned, or pretty. He is somewhat short and decidedly well-fleshed, but not fat. Those who see mental and moral rather than physical features will, I think, call him handsome. Nor is he at all bad-looking physically. His dark-brown eyes are the talk of Italy. “Mussolini is intensely egoistic and quintessentially Italian. Some might call him affected. I put down his mannerisms not to affectation but to individuality. He is too serious, too re- flective, too sensible of the weight of his cares, too sincere, to be affected. As he talked, now sitting at his huge, flat- topped desk; now rising, pushing back the tails of his morning coat and thrusting his hands into his trousers pockets; some- times advancing his face close to mine and looking hard into my eyes, his right arm uplifted; sometimes appearing to forget I was there, turning away and pitching his words into space— as he did these things I felt in the presence less of a man than of a flesh-and-blood embodiment of a great national passion. “Mussolini has a luminous and powerful intellect. But it is not his intellect that astonishes one. It is his genius. It is [ Page Twenty-six } a) AR ae Wy aa Ra oy ray ae eh IU GPES | Vaan el et ivomie beg kd his spirit. It is the firein him. It is his self-forgetfulness. It is the depth and mystery of his personality. It is his courage; one easily can see him, on the instant and even eagerly, facing death for his principles, as he has done many times. Not Dictator ‘One way, and an accurate way, of describing but Liberator. Mussolini is to say that he is everything neu- tralism is not. ‘It is necessary to act, to move, to fight, perhaps to die,’ he says. This is virtually the alpha and omega of his feeling and philosophy. “They call him dictator. To the unpatriotic, to the anti- social and anti-civilized, to the lawless, to the bolshevists, he is dictator. To Italy—full of sterling human worth as it is full of natural beauty and of historical glory—to Italy, in my judgment, Mussolini is liberator. “IT should be sorry to have these words taken as mere rhe- toric. I am trying to give some idea of a man who has capti- vated a great people and re-created a nation. I am trying to give some idea of a man who has impressed Europe profoundly; who,in my opinion, has served Europe vitally, and who has become a portent and a promise in the civilization of the world.”’ ‘“‘Fascismo, Sig. Mussolini, is the phenomenon we wish to try to understand.”’ “First,” was the reply, ““Fascismo is not merely a party or a movement wholly consumed in the field of politics. It was not born in Italy of a group of people who had elaborated, fixed and made popular a series of solutions of predetermined problems in the life and administration of the Italian State. Fascismo is a spiritual movement. It took form spontaneously among our people, and ata certain point issued in an unforeseen, impulsive and very great manifestation. **To place before oneself the problem of the elements con- tributing to determine this spiritual movement is to place before oneself the most profound and interesting of the his- torical problems of modern Italy, and perhaps of the contem- porary world. Italian life has presented for centuries the curious phenomenon of a disequilibrium between the height, the fine- ness and the energy of our civilization and the inadequacy of our education in citizenship. [ Page Twenty-seven ] Wise RiabraD C BUA N St Cre ei aaa ars ae Education in ‘‘This problem, which the purest and greatest Citizenship. spirit of modern Italy, Dante Alighieri, per- ceived at the moment when the Middle Ages closed, was left by the Risorgimento, not perhaps untouched, but far from a solution. For centuries it has tormented the best consciences of Italy. It has been the agony of the noblest Italian thinkers. It was the very last thought of the dying Cavour. And, unity having been accomplished, it remained for Massimo d’Azeglio to define the problem in a phrase that has become very popular among us: ‘Italy is made; now we must make Italians.’ ‘“‘Fascismo is the greatest experiment in our history in making Italians. What do I mean by ‘making Italians’? I mean creating in Italy an education in citizenship. I mean creating something to destroy this disequilibrium between Italian civilization and Italian political life—this evil which has perturbed our history through all these generations.” How the Movement ‘‘When did the movement take tangible Was Born. form?” “Tt was born materially in 1919, but its origins are further back. Many years before the war the youngest, freshest and most energetic Italian spirits were try- ing impetuously to break the noose that seemed to be binding and suffocating our young State. They were many, but separ- ated. Every one of them was following a dream. With not a few it was a dream of a Socialism that had nothing at all todo with the barbaric desire to destroy society, or with the miser- able questions of thine and mine—a Socialism expressive above all of a desire for liberation and spiritual renewal. “When the Great War broke out, many Italians perceived not only that the historical exigencies of Italy made necessary our participation in the war, but that the warthad given an extraordinary and powerful impulse to the national integration of the Italian people. In every party, even among the extreme Socialists, developed an enthusiasm for war. These pro-war groups were compelled to vanquish the old political class in Italy—a class insensible to the true historical problem of modern Italy and to the vital value the war would have in Italian history. [| Page Twenty-eight ] Ag o Minstero degli Affari steri Ji Capo hi Gabinetto Roma, 30 aprile 1924 Egregio Signore} S.E. il Presidente ha letto accuratamente 41 Fesoconto che Ella ha scritto della sua intervista con lui e ha trovato che il suo pensiero é@ Secatotan Lei fedelmente riprodotto. Feli La felicita e La ringrazia del diligen= te lavoro che Ella ha compiuto e Le invia la fotografh che Ella trovera qui acclusa, come ricordo della inte= ressante Sua visita e come riconoscimento della utile opera che Elle. svolee per una chiara, sincera e diret= ta conoscenza nel pubblico americano del pensiero de= gli uomini di Stato d’Europa. Mi abbia, con i migliori saluti Sig. Edward PRICF BELL ROMA = Hétel de Russie PRR A alan YW ota Rego ata Exe Le Ree Doe ed Saving the War’s ‘‘At the close of the struggle, with victory Spiritual Fruits. established, this caste of politicians, profit- ing by the popular reaction following the frightful bloodshed and suffering, arose once more to regain the upper hand and to take possession of the State. The State, during the years of the war, became identified with the 5,000,000 young Italians who had served in the army. These fresh and valiant spirits, of the stuff that crushed anti-interventionism. feared that their elimination from public affairs by the old caste would mean the destruction of the spiritual fruits of the war, to the deadly detriment of Italian life. “For four years the battle was waged bitterly between the old and the new order. In 1922 the new order conquered, as the interventionists had conquered in 1915. Thus you see Fascismo is not only a movement of armed reaction against revolutionary disorder, but a phase in the history of the Italian people, which, having achieved the unity of its national terri- tory, wished to achieve a higher form of spiritual power.” *“‘Fascismo, then, is both subjective and objective?”’ “Yes; it is a thing of the soul, and a thing of practical politics. It is emotion, theory, and practice; it is sentiment, ideas, and acts; it is something felt, something thought, and something done. Fascismo is a spiritual inspiration, a body of doctrine, and a system of State policy. It is morally resolute and in- tellectually precise. Its ultimate springs must be sought in Italian history and Italian consciousness. As an abstraction, Fascismo is as old as man’s sense of the beauty of great ideals; as a concretion, it is a thing expressing itself in the lives of Ital- ian youth—a thing of energy and daring and a thing inflexibly committed to the principle of sacrifice.”’ Character of “What do you mean, exactly, by ‘sacrifice’>”’ Italy’s Sacrifice. ‘I mean giving up a little to gain enormously more. Social welfare is, at one and the same time, the sum of individual sacrifices and the salvation of the individual. Life is safe, property is safe, personal liberty is safe, constitutionalism survives, only if individuals and classes offer up their selfish interest cn the altar of social well-being. Six hundred thousand Italian boys sacrificed their lives, and more than a million sacrificed bodily soundness, in order that Italian territory might be inviolate and Italian citizens free. Our armies fought for nothing else. Considered by itself, it seems [ Page Twenty-nine ] Wie spine Ld CLIH WAS Nii C sy Et ir Iso De a ee and is a colossal sacrifice; but it was a little thing to give for Italy. ‘‘When we ask labor to be just to capital, or ask capital to be just to labor; when we ask either to forego a ruthless use of its power in its own apparent immediate interests; when we ask both to be socially conscious and considerate, we are urging the principle of sacrifice. But it is that kind of sacrifice which serves both him who makes it and him for whom it is made. It is the only principle compatible with orderly and happy human life. When the fascisti destroyed bolshevism in Italy— those who hate bolshevism will love us, and those who love bolshevism will hate us—they compelled the bolshevists to make a sacrifice. It was the sacrifice, however, of only the privilege the bolshevists were claiming to ruin us all, including themselves. Fascismo Opposed ‘‘It cannot be too strongly affirmed that to False Liberty. Fascismo is not an enemy of true liberty. It is an enemy of false liberty. It is an enemy of the liberty of one person or of any group of persons to take away the liberty of another person, or of the nation as a whole. Our point of view is that when we assert the rights of society we are asserting the rights of every member and of every element belonging to that society. No individual rights or liberties are secure in a State whose national rights and liberties are not secure. Upon social justice rests all jus- tice; social justice is essential to social equilibrium; and social equilibrium is another name for civilization. ‘“Fascismo has committed acts of force; I neither deny nor condemn them. It had colossal difficulties to overcome. Civil war is one of the saddest phenomena of history, but it is not so sad as is the degradation of high national aims. Cromwell and Lincoln faced civil war. And who shall say that the blood shed at Gettysburg contributed less than did the blood shed in the War of Independence to the unity and greatness of the American nation? The Romans used to say, ‘resecare ad- vivum.’ Fascismo has been obliged to cut into the living flesh to restore the health of the Italian nation. It remembers its dead with passion and with reverence, and considers that they died, not for Fascismo, but for Italy. [ Page Thirty } Leys De AL Ie Ye re NS Rog Esso sree ae Poe 2 Loe ds Why Italian Strikes ‘“‘When we suppressed maniacal and dis- Were Stopped. astrous strikes in Italy, particularly in the postal and other public utility serv- ices, there was an outcry in some quarters that we were tramp- ling upon liberty. Upon what liberty? If we were trampling upon liberty, we were trampling upon no liberty except that of the labor agitators to overthrow the State, to enslave the people, to destroy industry and commerce, to threaten our peninsula with famine, and to wipe out the priceless heritage of generations of Italian valor, culminating at Vittorio Veneto. To that sort of liberty Fascismo is, verily, anenemy. And let it be remembered, in connection with all this, that when we struck at the monstrous pretensions of the walking delegates we did not offend honest labor; we lifted up honest labor’s heart from the Alps to the Ionian sea. *“‘It is said that Fascismo is aristocratic. So it is. It believes in a civilization of high ethics and high culture. But in what respect is the spirit of a people, of the common people—I never flatter them—disassociated in sympathy from high ethics and high culture? Fascismo’s aristocracy is the aristocracy of the spirit, the aristocracy of order, of law, against the tumult of the instincts and of popular passions. Charges against me and against Fascismo of hostility to the workers are grotesque. Fascismo’s Attitude ‘‘Work! Who works more than I, with Toward Labor. dozens of committees coming into this room every day and with appeals con- tinually flung on my desk reflecting the urgent needs of the 8,000 communes of Italy—appeals, by the way, not for the ‘liberty’ our opponents declare our people have lost, but for aid in improving the living conditions and safeguarding the health of the masses. Work I regard as the highest virtue of man and as the most powerful manifestation of the health of a people. Italian workers were among the original fascisti, and today Fascismo has a strong majority of them, together with small bourgeoisie who are nearer to the working class than to what you call the middle class. But I prefer that Fascismo’s attitude toward labor should be deduced from its conception of the State, which belongs to no one unless to those who serve it; and the square-cornered, firm, solid, unruffled Italian worker serves his country no less than does any one else.” “Your creed of liberty embraces the economic field>”’ “T am for the greatest economic liberty. The strong State [| Page Thirty-one } WAL OR D0 Sas uti i Corb aA 2yiNG DS Cal Rect ieee bere ome enn ny does not in the least mean the State that wishes to do every- thing for itself and by itself. On the contrary, I am convinced that the stronger the State the greater is the effective liberty within which the economic life develops. Economic enterprise has as much need of liberty at home as of security abroad.” Clearing *‘Fascismo has been destructive as well as con- the Ground. _ structive>’’ “Oh, yes. It had a great fabric to erect—the fabric of a new Italy—and the building site was badly cum- bered. It was cumbered by the debris of socialistic and dema- gogic wrongs and failures. Unwarranted privileges, corrupt politics, bolshevistic madness, uneconomic laws, called for re- moval. House rent ordinances were confiscating property, paralyzing building, and opening before tens of thousands of people the prospect of no roof to cover their heads. Radical laws and regulations shielded strikers. Confiscatory inheritance duties were discouraging thrift and small property and driving capital out of the country. All these deadweights, these post- war deposits, Fascismo swept from the building site of Italian national life—not always, perhaps, doing its work too tenderly —before commencing the erection of the new State.” ‘‘What are some of the constructive achievements?” ““‘Italy’s budget balanced; war fetters on liberty and property broken; confiscatory land legislation scrapped; limited suffrage granted to women; religion reintroduced into the public schools; majority rule asserted over coalescing minorities; tax dodgers rounded up; paper circulation decreased; popular savings enormously increased; death duties abolished in the interest of the family group; outflow of Italian capital stopped and inflow of foreign capital started; the lira appreciated; labor given the eight-hour day; value of government securities enhanced; rail- road trafic augmented; strikes abolished and unemployment reduced almost to the vanishing point. Effects of “Italy is tranquil. Italy is working. The Immigration Laws. equal of her stability is scarcely to be found in Europe. Yet the Italian people are grievously taxed. Proportionately to their economic possi- bilities they are bearing a greater tax burden than any other people in the world. Our economic situation, and consequently our living conditions, are made worse by foreign immigration [| Page Thirty-two } Dy A AN Wubi o Yu ray ing ff) Rott Fo Pera ea) ERO eo 0 NT) Bod laws, which diminish our capacity for finding work for our people.”’ ‘‘What is your opinion of the immigration policy apparently foreshadowed in America?”’ Sig. Mussolini was standing when I asked this question. He fixed his dark brown eyes upon mine, lifted his right hand, and said slowly and solemnly: “‘T should think it very sad if America shut her gates against the people who produced her discoverer. Selective immigra- tion— a He stopped, sat down and bent over a paper on his desk. One knew what he meant. He meant that, as Italians see it, proposals not based upon the principle of selection for fitness, but based upon the principle of race or nationality, seem to find favor in Washington. Thoughtful Italians regard them- selves and Americans as ethnologically the two youngest na- tions of the world—both old stocks modified by innumerable foreign incursions, both melting pots, but both retaining un- impaired their racial primalities. Such Italians feel that neither Italo-Americans nor their brethren at home have done any- thing to forfeit American confidence in them as American citi- zens. Quite the contrary is the belief, and by way of proof one is reminded of the record of Italo-American soldiers in France and of Italian soldiers on the precipitous battlefields of the Alps. Italy Too Small ‘Sig. Mussolini, we should like very much For Its People. to have your honest view of this immigration matter.” “‘It is a matter of deep interest and real importance to Italy. Our emotions are enlisted because of our historical and cul- tural relations with America, and because of our nationalistic identity. Vast numbers of Italians have gone to America, have become loyal American citizens, have fought for America, and yet know and love Italy. These Italo-Americans, as we regard them, are an invaluable link between our civilizations, and a force for the integration of the world. Those of our citizens who go to America and return to us are an influence for Italo- American understanding, and whatever promotes such under- standing is a beneficent thing for both countries. “‘We are by no means ignorant of America’s difficulties in respect of immigration. Her right and duty to protect herself against undesirable aliens are clear. Italy, certainly, would not dream of asking her to accept immigrants likely,to burden or [ Page Thirty-three | Witness "Ls bel GY ORDA IN’, CoE, Lea eee Es eae ee embarrass her. We do not want to send our diseased or insane or dangerous people to the United States. It is of sound Italians we are thinking when we discuss immigration with your coun- try. Our peninsula is too small, too rocky, too hilly, too moun- tainous, to support our 40,000,000 and their increase. Only a third of the little land we have is tillable and we possess few mineral resources. Turn Naturally ‘‘In a word, we are subject to great and Toward America. growing emigratory pressure, and our peo- ple naturally turn toward Columbia. They are good workers, sensible folk, orderly by nature, healthy in mind and body, heirs of a long and triumphant historical strug- gle; they will be a source of strength, not of weakness, to any society they join. We feel it strange that any one’s ideas on immigration in America should appear to favor Germans, for example, over Italians. Only the other day Americans and Italians were fighting together to defeat Germanic tyranny. Besides, there is much greater social unrest in Germany and much more bolshevism than there is in Italy. “TI do not wish to say anything harsh about the Germans, nor about any other people. Neither doI wish to be understood as suggesting that America should admit fewer Germans within her gates. I merely am intimating that I should find it hard to reconcile any American immigration proposals more favor- able to Germans than to Italians with what I conceive to be a rightful appreciation of the virtues of my fellow-countrymen. Italy’s need for larger opportunities for her people was greatly increased by her material sacrifices in the general struggle for freedom. This struggle not only wrecked our economic life but put upon our taxpayers a debt burden amounting to more than six-tenths of our national wealth. I have confidence that full discussion, attended by mutual sympathy, will result in a happy settlement of the Italo-American immigration prob- lem.” “You would say a sense of dignity lies at the core of na- tionality?” *““Absolutely. Without a sense of dignity there is no nation- ality. Without a sense of dignity, indeed, there is no individual- toad { Page Thirty-four | Le TR MAG POL Ya peo tS Rt Ee une Lie ae ee ne Et Would Pay ““What is your feeling about the war debts>”’ the War Debts. ‘“That they should be paid. Debts must be paid. If debts are not paid, there is an end of credit, and it is much better to give up money than to give up credit. Credit is the bedrock of civilization; your Alexander Hamilton was quite right about that. Italy will pay. She can- not pay immediately. She must have time to effect her na- tional economic and financial consolidation. She must have time to work and save.” “You are an idealist, Sig. Mussolini>”’ “Yes; but an idealist who believes in the systematic and quick conversion of ideals into bettered conditionsof human life.”’ *‘How can statesmanship and journalism best serve each other and humanity?” *““By an aggressive and tireless assertion of mental and moral energy. By uttering only the truth. By fearing nothing but infidelity to the truth. By constant readiness to sacrifice them- selves for their fellow men.”’ “What would be your watchword for public men and writers?” ““Fascismo ’s—‘ Duty’.”’ Character the ‘All the time you base yourself upon the Basis of All. = moralities>”’ “There is nothing else for one to base oneself upon. This is the first tenet of Fascismo: Moral character is primary. From the first, fascisti have understood that there could be no political rebirth without a moral rebirth. Physical force, as | have said, sometimes is necessary—Abraham Lin- coln, I repeat, found it necessary—to impose a superior prin- ciple; but order, above all, ought to be defended in the con- sciences of the citizens. Modern States can rest upon nothing but a general sense of duty to the fatherland. For this reason, the moral health of a people is bound up indissolubly with the political fortunes of the country. Fascismo’s immediate task, after breaking the resistance of the caste of politicians that opposed the rebirth of Italy, was to organize the new State; Fascismo’s ultimate and much greater task is to deepen and solidify the country’s civic morality. Hence our parole de jour: ‘Duty.’”’ ““What do you say of classic culture?”’ ‘That, for us, it is the basis of every true civic education. I do not wish to appear to express a principle of universal Page Thirty-five } NARS Tay Se cs Ray Be CUnF An NG 3 Ga? Ee tL Pe a al ee validity, but I believe that, if the classic culture is for us in- dispensable to our self-consciousness, it is for every people one of the most powerful instruments of civilization.” “What is your favorite art?” *‘Music. Because it is the most communicable. Next I like architecture, poetry, sculpture, painting.” Art Promise ‘“‘What do you think of Maeterlinck’s dictum of America. that ‘America has the cruelest commercialism the world ever has known’>?”’ “This Belgian is a great poet. |] doubt if any of his con- temporaries equal him as a psychic analyst. But only a lack of imagination can blind one to the stupendous art promise of the United States. It is still mainly promise, to be sure, for Americans have been busy over other things. But one day it will dazzle the world. One day the Americans will lead civiliza- tion in the fine arts, dimming even the greatest glories of the past. It is all sleeping in their destiny. Intense and mighty in material things they undoubtedly are. Why? Because of youth, simplicity, boundless energy. These qualities in due course will turn from industry, commerce, engineering, me- chanics, to artistic and literary efflorescence. Material America we know; artistic America we are yet to see.” Sig. Mussolini is a great student of history. He examines all phases of human development from the standpoint of historical criticism. ‘“Three cities made history,” he says. If you ask “What three?” he replies: “‘No matter. Cities always make history; villages endure it.’’” Rome, it goes without saying, is one of the three cities of Mussolini’s meaning. Hear him on the Eternal city: “Rome is today, as it ever has been, as it ever will be, the living heart of our race. It is the imperish- able symbol of our vitality as a people. Who holds Rome, holds the nation.”’ State Above Thus he felt when, in the closing days of October, All Classes. 1922, he marched at the head of 50,000 blue- shirted nationalists and black-shirted fascisti to take possession of the capital—a peaceful, disciplined, soldierly host, entering a city equally peaceful, and a city that smothered the marchers with flowers. “What is Fascismo’s attitude to the classes>”’ ““None of us has ever thought of denying the historical func- tion of the social classes. Class struggles are a reality of history. But, precisely because they are, they are not to be isolated { Page Thirty-six Be ie WAS ce No ie oh ROG Eevee a Se ARS A ay from the other realities that form the tissue of history. Class struggles, for example, cannot be abstracted from the reality of the nation. Fascismo rejects the conception—as a matter of fact it has been outgrown in modern scientific thought—that history can be reduced to the struggle of the classes. This con- ception Fascismo rejects in favor of the more organic idea that the classes act within the State according to their several inter- ests, while the State, representing the historical unity of the life of a people, is necessarily above these interests and these struggles. States have, with regard to the classes, a superior aim to attain, a higher task to serve. They dare not permit the struggle of the classes to assume supremacy in the national plife.’’ From the lips of Mussolini have burst many expressions, which, taken alone, would mislead the world concerning his temper and views. For example, he cried out to a great audience on one occasion: “It is blood that moves the wheels of history!”’ This crimson figure of speech would suggest that the present head of the Italian State believes in war for its own sake. Peace Necessary ‘‘Do you>’’ I asked him. to the World. ‘“‘Peace at any cost is as absurd as war at any cost. Neither Italy nor the United States, fortunately for both and for all, followed the peace-at- any-cost doctrine in the late war. One’s country imperiled means that one must fight. One cannot ignore one’s country any more than the tree can ignore its sustaining soil. But | reject with equal energy the doctrine that war can be the major interest of the world. “And, if you want to know something else, namely, my opinion with reference to the world’s interests in peace at this moment, I reply, sincerely and in full consciousness, that peace is necessary to Europe today; and that I, for my part, have directed Italian foreign policy in this sense, solving two of its most essential problems—our relations with Jugoslavia and our relations with Russia. Italy is non-aggressive. Italy wants respect and friendship and is ready to reciprocate them. Italy is absolutely for clear treaty relations with other powers, and for the strictest honoring of such treaties at whatever cost.” Corfu is not a subject of which Mussolini is at all afraid. He is deeply persuaded that the bombardment averted a crisis of the greatest peril to the peace of the world. Responsibility for the massacre of the Italian members of the international [ Page Thirty-seven | Wii me Reneeg CPE AEN Ts Go SE DOFn Laren es Lele Ee commission for the delimitation of the Greco-Albanian frontier, he places squarely upon the shoulders of the Greek Government. “Il struck for international morality,” said he. “‘I struck for the tranquillity of the Balkan States. I struck against war. I struck for civilization.” Favors the Probably no one is more skeptical about “‘beauti- League Idea. ful chimeras,’’ or more scornful of the “‘ideo- logies,’’ than is Mussolini. Yet he is no cynic. He confesses himself ‘‘a deeply religious man,”’ esteems religion ‘ta formidable force that must be respected and defended,”’ and declares against anti-clerical and atheistic democracy, “‘which represents an old and useless toy.’’ He supports the ideal of reduced burdens and perils for humanity through judicious and gradual disarmament, but strongly holds that pietistic idealism in this sphere must not be allowed to expose the treasures of centuries of human toil, valor, and suffering to some sudden new eruption of savagery or tyranny. “What do you think of the League of Nations?”’ “| think everything possible should be done to realize the ideal of the League—the ideal of universal peace based upon justice. At times in their long history Italians have been almost too wide in their thinking and in their sympathies. Still, if they were, I reckon it among their first titles to greatness. Remark- able thinkers—Renan among them—have feared universalism as leading to national decay. But our world is different from what it was before the war. All humanity has a wider vision, a keener sense of fellowship, a quickened conscience toward those who must bear the brunt of war, if war come. ‘Peace with honor, peace with justice, peace that does no violence to any nation’s healthy and righteous self-respect— that, indeed, is something worth struggling for, despite any peril inhering in internationalism. Internationalism would not be safe for a single nation; it is safe for all nations moving in concert toward a rational scheme of political, economic, and cultural intercourse. Nations need, and generally realize that they need, a lasting foundation of pacific co-existence. Such a foundation cannot be had without skillful and patient building, and such building is out of the question without established machinery for conducting international affairs in accordance with deliberately-developed world opinion. Governments and peoples must work together. They can work together only by understanding one another. They can understand one another [ Page Thirty-eight | Pei A SLs atte eS Rig Etieec Dae Lek RRA en Ed only, so to speak, by foregathering in a common council chamber or forum.” The Lessons In the full sense, Mussolini is a veteran of of the Trenches. the World War. He fought for Italy’s inter- vention. When Italy intervened, he went to the front as a private in the IIth Bersagliere regiment. In 1917, through the bursting of a shell, he received thirty-eight wounds. Promoted on the field, and invalided out of the army, he returned to Milan and resumed his editorship of the Popolo d’Italia—for this individualist son of a Socialist father who worked at the forge and of a mother who taught school is by profession a journalist—and in that capacity he continued to support Italian arms until the final victory. “‘Let us never forget the trenches,” said he. ‘‘Their bloody filth those of us who were in them cannot forget. But let us remember some other things. Let us keep our eyes upon the widened horizons men of many nations saw in the trenches. Incalculable sacrifices call for a new phase in the history of humanity. What millions suffered death and mutilation for— the supremacy of the freedom of the human soul over physical force—statesmen should not forget. “Thinkers should prosecute to permanent success the work begun by fighting men. Fascismo is wholly for peace with honor and liberty. Fascismo is wholly for pledging the world, in the proper way, to this cause. I think America should swing into the orbit of this movement. Italy will not oppose the entry of Germany; Germany’s great power should be devoted to peace. Italy will not oppose the entry of Russia. Mankind in solid phalanx for the victory of reason and justice over violence should be triumphant. International unity for peace, in other words, ought to be an irresistible weapon. But man- kind cannot conquer peace with a broken sword.” { Page Thirty-nine } sae ny A Or STEADFAST FRANCE That Nation’s Aims Set Forth by EX-PRESIDENT ann EX-PREMIER RAYMOND POINCARE. With an Appreciation of the French Statesman BY PAUL SCOTT MOWRER “Civilization to France is Not Merely Material Progress; in a Deeper Sense, and in a Higher Degree, it is Moral Progress.”’ ; aM “ard A alee ty ORTH ne i Da OLA PAD CEL EG) | eV Ie cts tT on rn ’ aA ' j tipi py, yl nay Oh ii j q A vy ‘ Vis 5 ee ae f eae Yue beni a vu AR as | F ' ) i 7 te YY AT t 7 t ; } ; Lp ‘ H ; ' Al 5 > “ii it } i] al nis y \ te | A y ; ? ‘ Z vee xf \ 7) ‘ , : . , ‘ af 4 j * ) A ‘ * ti Ay} \ Hi ; \ wat pest i "1 eis 7 4 ' te if ” ' | ig \ i + y i , ; a td ve { a t i ii ae | 4 j : _* i t bite 7 1? 4 * > ye ' ! it A (tae) ‘yl iy i } 4 | Vi : * ’ ) Lay ' , \ y j a ‘ / i ‘ e y ‘ 4 i tj 2 ta ' ' ‘ i ; Lv, , " ol A \ : ,, i i pi fad sf] \ y i oa , / , j4 . haar yi Raymond Poincaré UR conversation opened with this remark: ““We should be happy if your Excellency would expound France’s contribution to history during the decade of the Great War.” Poincaré had been smiling as he welcomed us in the kindliest manner to his beautiful office in the Quai d’Orsay, and spoke rapidly of his appreciation of the interest of The Daily News in France and in the cause of international education. On hearing the words coupling the name of his country with the Great War the old statesman ceased smiling and his short, square face took on that look of mental concentration and moral pertinacity which is his characteristic expression while he is dealing with great matters. “It is a large and fascinating subject,’ he said. “And it is a profoundly affecting subject—the subject of what the France of the Great War did, what she bore, what she gave up, what she suffered, in order that she might live and continue her immemorial role of exponent and champion of free civilization. Why did France fight? How did she fight? What did she fight for? What has the war cost her in life—souls born and unborn—in wounds, in disease, in wealth, in material dis- repair? I will answer.’ Poincaré was speaking calmly and fluently in his vivid, polished French. The Fight “It is history we are to consider. And history for the World’s is a sacred thing, for history is truth. We Liberties. cannot be too careful to establish the truth about the Great War. If we failed to do this humanity could not draw the proper lessons from the past decade of destruction, bloodshed, and immeasurable agony and grief. In certain high intellectual quarters there is a specious, involved, casuistic effort to obscure the truth concerning the Great War and thus to distort and violate history. Let us, once for all, sweep away these gathering mists that veil and deform the historical landscape of the decade. [ Page Forty-three ] WHOM sd el CH ONAVENGS Gas E Sn Lake Regan ce seer eres “Why did France fight? Let us start there. Civilization to France is not merely material progress; in a deeper sense and in a higher degree it is moral progress. Sovereignty in inter- national affairs of the principles of liberty and justice, the right of every people to live concordantly with its own genius, the freedom of every people to work out its own ideals—these are dearer to France than is any nameable material thing. One nation—the Germany of the Hohenzollerns—stood forth in arms against this conception. Its divinity was force, its ambi- tion conquest, its aim to efface the nationalistic liberties and individualities of the world. France fought that divinity, that ambition, and that aim. The Fall of a ‘“‘I am not speaking in the spirit of passion; Heavy Hand. 1 am speaking in the spirit of science; | am speaking in the spirit of history. And I am speaking with a full sense of the responsibility of any one of reputation who presumes to turn educator to the world. It has been said, and it is said, that France is militaristic. Deeply pacific, she has been called warlike. After the mutilation of 1870 she was accused of dreaming of military vengeance. Yet of all this there is not an iota of evidence. After 1870, despite our wounds and wrongs, we adopted Gambetta’s saying that even great evils may be righted by legal means. “Did our forbearance, despite the nobility of our cause, protect us from provocations? What is the record? Every three years after 1905 a heavy hand fell upon the diplomatic table of Europe. Each time, combining dignity with prudence, France averted war. But she did not stay that heavy hand. Only the dullest ears could be insensible of the distant rumble of artillery. Finally in 1914 came the ultimatum to Serbia, known and approved by the Berlin Government. Instantly the Entente strove for conciliation. Germany was adamant. France was commanded to be neutral. To insure this neutral- ity Germany’s troops must occupy Toul and Verdun. What France ‘“‘Awed by the magnitude of the impending Gave Up catastrophe, France’s military leaders—her for Peace. military leaders, mind you, these men who might have been supposed to embody the quintessence of her militaristic aspirations, if she had such aspirations—these leaders sprang into the struggle for peace. They called back our advanced troops. They cried out: ‘There [| Page Forty-four | Se VET A NLD READY OS bcd: ArT Aen al Cn must be no slightest appearance of provocation. There must be no outpost incidents. We must give physical and indubitable evidence of our desire for peace.’ This evidence cost us dearly. We gave up, on this side of the Franco-German frontier, a belt of territory ten kilometers wide, and many a French boy died to take that territory back. **Please remember,’”’ suddenly interjected the speaker, ““I am not pleading for France now. I am pleading for history. I have told you why France fought. Now, how did France fight? As there were two mentalities in conflict, as regards civilization —the Hohenzollern mentality and the mentality of democracy —so there were two antagonistic views respecting methods of warfare. ‘Short and atrocious war’ was the German slogan— not a long war humanely waged. To the spirit of France this seemed a barbarous sophism. *‘Again our scruples of civilization cost us dearly. Just as we had silenced the voice of our rightful claims, just as we had given up our territory the better to prove our love of peace, so we sacrificed our sons to the principles of humanity. We had no recourse to dishonorable ruses. We invented no processes of barbarity. We left to Germany the initiative and the dismal benefit of atrocity. We practiced no deception or bullying to win the sympathy of the neutrals. It was not our agents who made of strikes and assassinations a weapon of propaganda.” Purposes of Your mature judgment is that a German Two Nations. victory would have been a world fatality>”’’ I suggested. Poincaré looked straight at me. “What did the intuition of the world say>?’”’ he exclaimed. “Tt said that France was right. It understcod that freedom was in peril. Virtually all of non-Germanic humanity ap- preciated the true position. Belgium was to be annexed. Northern and eastern France and Poland were to be annexed. Austria was to take Serbia. All the Near East was to be sub- jJugated. Dismemberment for the British Empire. Yoking of all nations under an iron hegemony. Expropriation of prop- -erty-owning classes. German colonies governing every- thing and everybody. Slow denationalization of the democratic masses by the proscription of their ancient culture. For fifty years the military and industrial oligarchy of Germany had been molding the German people for this gigantic work of [ Page Forty-five } Wan OUR LD COMPLE PANE Cae cl Litas Geers Lee ae violence. Even America was menaced in the gravest way, economically and militarily.” *‘And France’s aims?”’ ‘They never have varied. And they always would bear, as they will bear now, the closest scrutiny. We wanted back our two provinces torn from us in 1870 against the will of the in- habitants. We wanted reparation for the ravages suffered. We wanted guaranties of security. For ourselves these things are absolutely all we wanted and all we ever dreamed of claim- ing. But for others we wanted some things. For the Italians, Trent and Trieste; for the Poles, Czechs, Roumanians, Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, for the Danes of Schleswig—aye, even for the Germans themselves—we wanted freedom. It can not be said too often or with too much emphasis that France’s all- inclusive purpose, like the all-inclusive purposes of Britain and America, was to prevent freedom from being trampled into the dirt.” France’s Plan in ‘‘What was France’s peculiar function in War and Peace. the common effort of the Allies and the Associated Powers?”’ “‘Her peculiar function has had two phases. During the actual fighting France was the bastion of the whole defense. Of course, this bastion would have been powerless without its broad and mighty supports. Yet it was the bastion. Upon us fell the heaviest blows. Upon French territory was wrought the unparalleled and indescribable havoc. And France was the cement of the democratic coalition. As other flags gathered about our own, as the coalition grew larger, particular interests began to threaten the prevalence of the general interest. France strove with constancy and with success for the general interest. She did not seek to dominate equals. But she acted as inspirer and counselor, strong in the authority of her own experiences, sufferings and disinterestedness. ““That was one phase of France’s peculiar function in the war. That was France’s function during the military part of the struggle. Her peculiar function since the German army collapsed—as it did collapse and collapse utterly—has been that of defender and champion of the Treaty of Peace. Di- vergences occurred among the Allies—natural divergences. That quality of universality which is one of the traits of the French mind led France consistently and steadfastly to pursue those solutions best calculated to fortify the future against war. [ Page Forty-six } See ae Atte Pa Ata fac) Ba Ror AG Nah C io aes Why France ““We did not always have our way. Our Entered the Ruhr. original war aims, adopted with enthusiasm by fraternal America, should have been carried out in the form of a treaty on the day the Kaiser’s legions went to pieces. Nationalistic interests and passions interfered. Peace-making was strangely complicated. Indeed, ever since 1919 the world has been passing through a crisis of particularism. Close co-operation had its violent reaction. Nations, feeling disillusioned, fell back upon themselves. Con- sequent upon this arose a great danger to the execution of the Treaty. ‘““This danger was a danger for the peace of which the Treaty was and is the corner stone. At last Germany saw developing those fissures for which she so long had worked and prayed. It was a very perilous situation. France threw all her strength into the labor of saving the Treaty, saving the Entente, and keeping the peace. She wore herself out in this effort. Her occupation of the Ruhr was called a special enterprise of domination. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Fidelity to decisions taken in common, the necessity of Reparations, Germany’s clear purpose to exploit the differences among the Allies, a determination to spare the world the scandalous spec- tacle and the moral disaster of fraud triumphant over justice— these, and these only, were the springs of French action in the Ruhr.” The Death Roll ‘‘Do you think the political and journalistic of the War. critics of French policy reflected popular world opinion>”’ ‘I never have thought so. It has been my feeling all along that the peoples of the world were skeptical of the insight or of the good faith of their mentors in this matter. I have been sustained by a consciousness of popular understanding and sympathy. It has’ seemed to me that humanity appreciated the purity of French motives and even rejoiced in the resolu- tion of France that, if she could avert it, there should not be a peace of injustice and of insecurity.” “What has the war cost France?” *‘Ah,”’ said the Prime Minister, “that is a terrible story. There is no more terrible story in the history of mankind. Of men of French blood we mobilized 7,935,000. Of natives (colored troops) we mobilized 475,000. Of our own people 1,038,300 were killed and 249,000 were swallowed in mystery; [ Page Forty-seven ] WY Auer Ren tao CoB ATTN Co Bs Le Perret eee a a We term them ‘the missing.’ Add the killed and missing na- tives to the roll of our losses and you have a total of 1,355,000 men, or 16.2 per cent of the total effectives mobilized. France's “‘Of the entire French population of Europe Staggering Losses. 3.29 per cent perished in the war. This percentage exceeds that of any other State of the Entente. Britain’s loss of life was 1.25 per cent of her population, Italy’s 1.24, America’s 0.10. France has 740,000 maimed men to support. Apart from the human aspect of this fact, think of the economic burden! And we not only lost the lives of the born; we lost the lives of the unborn. In 1913 we had more than 600,000 births; in 1916 we had 315,000 and in 1917 343,000. Since 1915 our excess of deaths over births has been 300,000, without taking account of military losses. Count- ing military losses and birth-rate deficits France’s loss of male population alone during the war was 2,000,000.” ‘‘What of disease>?”’ “‘That question cannot be answered with any approach to definiteness. But any one with imagination will realize that the war inflicted upon France a vast mass of disease. Our cases of tuberculosis alone run into the hundreds of thousands. Deaths from this malady average 100,000 a year with 18,000 new cases, mainly among soldiers back from the trenches and among the children of the occupied regions—pitiable little ones left by the occupying forces in a state of complete neglect and famine.” Enormous ‘“‘And what of material disrepair>?”’ Material Losses. ‘“‘Modern war is an immense industrial undertaking organized to destroy. Look at its balance-sheet in France. Our national fortune before the war was 300,000,000,000 francs ($60,000,000,000). This for- tune, by the capitalized value of pensions and indemnities, by damage to property, by foreign loans, and by the sum of the back rents due for the upkeep of buildings, has been reduced 75,000,000,000 francs, or one-quarter of the entire wealth of the nation. “Our greatest losses were those in the invaded provinces— for four years the stage of an unexampled tragedy of slaughter and destruction. In those provinces at the outbreak of the war there were 1,190,066 buildings of all categories. Armistice day saw 893,792 of these buildings wrecked and 347,374 utterly destroyed. Vast areas of farmland had been partly or wholly [Page Forty-eight ] See the nA La Awe ON OL Ryan tie Ce Es ruined. In an expanse of 8,265,875 acres, nearly half called for much labor to restore it to fertility, and 291,985 acres were so badly damaged that the cost of the labor of restoration would have exceeded the value of the land. Details of “‘No one who viewed the devastation will ever War’s Havoc. get the picture out of mind. It was a scene that all the world should have looked upon and studied in order that all the world might have first-hand knowledge of what modern war is. Half the highways of the ten invaded provinces were in ruins. Just over 60,000 kilo- meters (37,500 miles) of roads required rebuilding. More than 6,000 bridges and culverts were wiped out. And the railroads! Nearly 5,000 kilometers (3,000 miles) of track damaged or destroyed, with 481 bridges gone and 517 shelled and shattered! “Everything suffered accordingly. Waterways fell under the general havoc. More than a thousand kilometers (620 miles) of canals were left as if they never had been. Locks and bridges to the number of 1,212 were demolished. Farm animals by hundreds of thousands were lost—892,388 cattle, 407,888 horses, asses and mules, 58,980 sheep and goats, 24,954 pigs. Industry was battered into the dust. By proved design, and with a science as unerring as it was diabolic, this abominable outrage upon humanity was wrought. To cripple French in- dustry beyond recovery was the German aim. *“Who can forget or forgive what was done to our coal mines and our mining population? Every shaft in a large and busy region was put out of service, though this destruction did not spring from the slightest military necessity. All the mines were flooded. Half the mine railways required rebuilding and our people were compelled to reopen 3,072 kilometers (1,900 miles) of galleries. As for factories, 2,000 were looted, 9,332 were damaged and 3,341 were razed to the ground.” Restoring **These are the facts and conditions lying behind Devastated the Reparations problem?” I asked. Regions. “Precisely. We stand arguing in the midst of these ruins. If I talk about them a great deal it is because they mean a great deal. They mean a great deal materially and they mean even more morally. Justice is in- volved. Ethics is involved. And justice and ethics are vital to civilization. A great wrong has been committed, and no fabric of sophistry, however subtly woven, can cover it up. The Treaty says Germany shall repair these damages. We [ Page Forty-nine | WAC OU RK tae) Cat Agi NICs Foie een ee reed stand on the Treaty, but we have not waited for Germany to meet her obligations; despite an outlay of 34,167,000,000 francs for pensions and personal indemnities, we have ex- pended 66,584,000,000 for property damages. Add to these figures the accumulated interest on the sums thus disbursed and one reaches a grand total of 118,154,000,000 francs that France has paid in Germany’s stead, with a further need of 30,000,000,000 to complete the work of reconstruction.”’ What Germany ‘‘And what has France received from Ger- Has Paid. many?” “German payments to Dec. 31, 1923, ac- cording to the latest figures of the Reparations Commission, re- presents 8,411,399,000 gold marks ($2,001,912,000), of which only 5,692,246,000 gold marks have been distributed, the rest belonging to undistributed or suspended accounts. Of this total France has received 1,804,192,000 gold marks ($429,- 397,000), including 143,995,000 gold marks representing the value of the Saar mines. But out of this amount France has repaid certain expenses, such as the Spa coal advances and the costs of occupation, so that the sum available for Reparations at the end of last year did not exceed 189,777,000 gold marks ($45,166,000). “‘Germany has presented fantastic figures as to her pay- ments. Her economic ruin, which she did nothing to avoid, she thrusts forward to dissimulate her real wealth. On this point the experts’ conclusions were crushingly against her. Yet some people continue to assert that too heavy a burden has been imposed on her. If Germany’s obligations were diminished she alone of all the belligerent nations would have her debt remitted. France, on the other hand, would be forced to go on carrying the advances made in Germany’s stead to repair the damages and also would be under the necessity of paying her own debts to her Allies. Would this be fair? Would it be tolerable? Would it be in the interest of those things for which the free nations fought>?”’ France's ‘France will honor the inter-Allied debts?’ War Debts “Most certainly. France keeps her word. Just To Be Paid. now she is bowed low by her unprecedented obligations and by the results of the unfulfilled obligations of Germany. But she will stand erect again. America fully understands.”’ [ Page Fifty | Sean eee Al Pale tot Are for ak Feet ei Anny Co os Poincaré paused for a moment, reflecting. Then he resumed just a little acridly: ““‘How foolish or wicked are these charges that France is militaristic—wants more war! Some of our critics have seemed to me quite mad. It would be well if they reviewed their utter- ances carefully and said to themselves in seriousness, “After all, are not these the spasms of a fevered sleep?’ ‘*Everyone knows, for example, how pacific in spirit is the United States. France is not a whit less so. Indeed, remember- ing her agony, she desires peace passionately. Her occupation of the Ruhr is merely a surety—a means for the creditor to recover his due. She never dreamed, and never will dream, of imposing on German populations a change of country. What nation, if not the French, knows the meaning of such an im- position? France has an unrelaxing grasp of those principles which constitute her strength—the principles that have made her equal to the pitiless blows that have been’rained upon her. America’s “‘Nothing could be closer than the instinc- Trust in France. tive mutual sympathy between the Ameri- can people and the French people. In war and in peace they have understood each other. Your econo- mists and financiers understand us. It is a long story—that of the bonds which unite these two nations. Their strength has run confluently on the battle field, and it has run con- fluently still more recently in economic struggles more in- sidious but not less vital to the prosperity of this country. Your financiers—not obtuse men, surely—have trusted our policy. Witness their recent fight in defense of the franc. *‘Militarism! France dangerous to European freedom, a menace to her great ally, England, pursuing paths leading to another international catastrophe! What are the military facts of the international position? When peace came in 1918 France reduced her period of military service from three years to eighteen months. Barely 225,000 men are included in a mobil- zation class. Hence the French people now in active service number about 340,000. The Testimony ‘Yet more significant are the army and navy of the Budgets. budgets. In most countries military expenses have been increasing. It is the other way about in ‘militaristic’ France. Our military expenses in 1913 were a third of the general budget; today they are a fifth. Army, navy and air force outlays in France last year aggregated [ Page Fifty-one ] SUN Gite ak Bo | CO SAWING Ce CES SS Sone Ree ers 4,595,002,335 paper francs, or, at the rate of fifteen francs to the dollar, which corresponds roughly to the economic parity, $306,300,000. Compare with this America’s expenditure for like purposes of $708,940,554 and Britain’s of $943,000,000. We spend less than half as much as does America and Britain on our fighting forces, yet there are those who tell us that America and Britain are quite pacific—as, to be sure, they are—while France is planning European hegemony and en- dangering the peace of the world! ‘‘France’s aeronautical expenses are particularly modest, if one reflects upon the ever-increasing role of aviation and upon the rapid deterioration of machines. We have 132 air squad- rons. To think of these attacking England, to read into the French heart the possibility of such an attack—such an ob- scuration of French appreciation of world realities, not to con- sider French sentiment—is to entertain imaginings that trans- port one into the domain of lunacy. But do not forget Ger- many. France, certainly, could not forget Germany, however hard she might strive. There are peace-loving Germans. We are grateful for them. We wish to lift no finger to hamper them. But there are war-loving Germans, too, and the secu- rity of French national life requires that they be borne in mind.” France's Attitude ‘‘France wants a pacific Germany?”’ Toward Germany. ‘‘What other country so much as France has reason to want a pacific Germany? All civilized peoples want a pacific Germany and need a pacific Germany, but France first among them; for, as | have said, France must be the bastion, if Germany move against democ- racy. But the world cannot influence Germany toward peace except by finally and everlastingly convincing her that her brutal war of aggression and of tyranny was a stupendous historical blunder and defeat. France stands for driving this lesson home, not only for Germany’s instruction bus in order that it may be written large and indelibly upon the permanent tablets of the human record.” ““You accept the experts’ conclusions without reservations?” “Without reservations. Germany only has to put into effect the program drawn up by the Reparations Commission and we are ready to re-establish the economic unity of the Reich. On this point we are in complete agreement with Ramsay Mac- Donald and with our Belgian friends. Not at any time in the course of their labors did the experts imply that the re-establish- [ Page Fifty-two } eerie Beat Ad GD Pre Als C98 OC Be: Rumer Age. INS bee at ment of economic unity meant renunciation of the military occupation. Said Mr. Young recently: ‘I do not believe the presence of soldiers can have any effect on the German work- men. Difficulties between the British Government and our- selves on this subject have disappeared and I must render homage to the great courtesy of Mr. MacDonald during these negotiations.” Harmony “Your relations with Britain are thoroughly Among the Allies. friendly>”’ - “They never have been more so. Our mis- understandings have been stepping-stones to a more thorough accord. That we should continue to march side by side for the good of Europe and of the world is a natural issue of our mutual love of freedom. Both our nations are democratic. Both are liberal. My relations with Mr. MacDonald have been particularly cordial.”’ “How do you get on with Sig. Mussolini and the Italy of Fascismo>?”’ “In perfect harmony. In all the decisive moments of our history the essential liberalism of Italy and the essential liberal- ism of France have found firm ground of mutual sympathy. Sig. Mussolini’s Government invariably has shown itself in the kindliest conjunction with my own. There is no divergence between us relative to the major problems connected with the settlement and organization of European peace. All sugges- tions of intrigue, separate action, and cleavage are baseless.”’ *“What do you think of the action of Noske in Germany and of Mussolini in Italy against bolshevism?’’ *‘It goes without saying, I suppose, that any statesman who suppresses instincts of savagery and destruction is a benefactor of his own and of all nations.” France’s View ‘‘What is your attitude to soviet Russia?”’ of Sovietism. “France has no understanding of and no sympathy with the notion of national isola- tion. We desire to be on friendly and fruitful terms with all nations. But there must be a common recognition of the principles of law among peoples in trustful and profitable inter- course. French people invested heavily in Russia to develop her economic capital, her industries, her railroads, lands and mines. Russian acknowledgment of these debts is indispens- able to French confidence in Russia. Moreover, Russia, as the price of our confidence, must indemnify our nationals whom [ Page Fifty-three ] Wy Ors Reels 81D COE wy Gay Sy va Gar is Sandy GEA Be Oe LY BR = she has dispossessed. After all, civilized practices are necessary to civilized relations. My policy toward the soviets has re- mained in agreement with that of the United States. Bolshe- vism presents a difficult problem to occidental mentality. We cannot estimate the movement yet. We do know it is double- faced; Janus bifrons. Bolshevists are at once international revolutionaries and ardent nationalists bent on the work of Ivan the Great and Ivan the Terrible. Let them not bemuse themselves with the thought that occidental humanity is any more ready to lie down under a bolshevist than under a Prus- sian steam roller.”’ “‘Was France ever alarmed by the threat of a bolshevist Germany?” *‘Not in the least. That possibility frequently was lifted up to terrify us. It did not work. We had seen worse things. Even if Germany had become bolshevist France would have remained solid, calm, and free. We are immune against the bolshevist bacillus.” Policy Toward ‘‘What is your view of the proper policy to Colored Peoples. be followed with reference to the colored peoples?” “*] think it should be an idealistic and liberal policy. In the French mind, touching this question, are ideas similar to those which inspired the memorable amendments to the American Constitution. France makes no distinction among men on the basis of religion, race, or color. Our colonies are models of good understanding between the natives and the administrators. Wherever we plant our flag we work for a wider civilization. That our efforts are appreciated was proved by our soldiers out of the heart of Africa and of Asia—men who came to blend their heroism and their blood with the heroism and the blood of the troops of twenty white nations. It has been alleged by our enemies that we sent black soldiers to occupy the factories of the Ruhr. Pure propagandist fiction. Under my ministry not a colored man crossed the Rhine.”’ France’s Devotion ‘‘Do you feel the French character is well to Work. understood outside France?” ““Not everywhere. Quite generally we are considered a frivolous people. Really we are a people pro- | Page Fifty-four | Naeige a A see AL Se Tt BP Ag Cad es foundly penetrated with the seriousness of life, but we clothe our gravity in light-hearted appearances. We have a certain pride in this. Do you conjecture our people had any thought of or desire for idleness after the war because huge reparations were due us from one of the wealthiest countries in the world —a country far wealthier than France, not only in waterways, coal fields, lignite, potash, metallurgical riches, but in agri- culture as well? *‘Not for a moment did France contemplate capitalizing her role as victim. She turned grimly from war to work. And she has been working steadily ever since she laid down the impedi- menta of the battle field. Her economic situation, solidly based on a well-balanced industry and agriculture, is one of the healthiest on the globe. Our exports are growing and our Colonial Empire holds out the certainty of the raw materials and markets essential for our future.” “Your political institutions are stable>’’ *“They are stable because they correspond to our needs. At no time since 1789 have we been attached more devotedly to the ideal of democracy. France’s experienced and high-minded elite are leading our masses toward an ever-expanding realiza- tion of this ideal.” Notable Aids ‘‘You favor a leadership of the elite>’’ to Progress. ““They are the leaven. They represent spirit- uality, intellect, culture—very precious things. It is not enough for a people to have farms, mines, railways, machines, meney. They must have wisdom. They must have sympathy. Without these inestimable intellectual and spiritual qualities international harmony and world peace never can be obtained. Machinery never will pacify humanity; only acute minds, determined wills, and enlightened souls can do this.”’ “Then you are for the classics as instrumentalities of civiliza- tion?” “Yes. They are its solidest prop. Antiquity has bequeathed to us ideas of law and right which are the ultimate foundation of the modern ideal. Until a people shall have assimilated the gist of ancient culture it cannot, in my view, call itself truly civilized. France has studied and debated the great peda- gogical question diligently. We have our strict classicists and our advocates of more room for science and modern languages. But neither school denies immense value to the legacy of [ Page Fifty-five | We 0) Ri bio COLH 2 ACON GG Eri Lote iaeiwa nck parser ce ideas, sentiments and artistic forms coming down to us from Greece and Rome.” France Remains Poincaré rejects the view that the modern Steadfast. world is degenerating. ***Decadence’ has been pronounced,” said he. ‘*‘Too often, no doubt, the minds and souls of the people are ill fed by artists, writers, and the moving picture industry. But no particular technical process is to be blamed. As A‘sop remarked long ago, the tongue can be the worst or the best thing, according to the use made of it. Similarly, motion- pictures and other modes of expression are good or bad. I can conceive of no moral peril sufficiently seductive and potent to make much headway against the prodigious vitality of the French people. The French family is of a quality and strength fit to resist anything. Its religious sentiments are deep, its hold upon traditions firm, its love of truth passionate, its joy in splendid ideals unexcelled. It is this character which trans- lated itself into France’s early and late contributions to his- tory.” Poincaré had been seated at his desk. He rose. “‘My answer to your first question I will put in a nutshell,” said he, as he held my hand. “In the dark decade just past France has given up her sons. She has given up her wealth. She has suffered. She has held fast and is today holding fast— all for the rights of man. Against this great fact casuistry will writhe and twist in vain.” Mr. Mowrer and I had been conducted to the door of the Prime Minister’s room by an ordinary hall porter. Poincaré was alone and opened the door with his own hand. He was dressed in a somewhat worn lounge suit and looked a very simple, if very able, man—a personification of democratic statesmanship. Our whole conversation had taken place with- out the slightest interruption—no coming or going of secre- taries, no ringing of telephone bells, no sounds from the outer world. Faith in the As we were leaving, walking slowly from League of Nations. the Prime Minister’s desk to the door, where the great Frenchman shook hands with us two or three times, I asked him about the League of Nations, “It has my heartfelt allegiance,’”’ said he. “It already has aided powerfully in the task of European pacification and re- [ Page Fifty-six |, ee Me Ets AM LP hea Ag ecesee, OL) Bie RA ab eA ING ee Be construction, notably in Silesia, Austria and Hungary. It is dealing intelligently and zealously with the problem of reduced armaments. It is laboring for international justice, for na- tional security, for political and social equilibrium, for peace— every one of them of great price in the estimation of France. In the work of the League increased precision will come with increased practice. We all are going to school in the complex, almost baffling, business of giving rhythm to the complicated movements of humanity. There is no school of international education comparable with that of the League of Nations. We have excellent plans; all we need besides—and this is a vital need—is a real desire for understanding. It always has been my belief, and I hold this opinion more strongly than ever to- day, that European reconstruction, with its beneficent reaction upon every civilized people, and the peace of the world never could be founded more solidly than upon the friendly co-oper- ation of France, Great Britain, and the United States. In other words, as I stood for the unity of the democracies in the war, so | stand for it now.”’ Mr. Mowrer and I stepped out into the sunlight of the Quai d’Orsay feeling we had been honored with the confidence of a very great man—perhaps, all things considered, the greatest statesman of the greatest decade in the history of mankind. Poincaré the Statesman By PAUL SCOTT MOWRER HY, the reader may ask, has The Daily News chosen W\/ Raymond Poincaré to speak for France, just at a time when, in consequence of the recent elections, a change of government is taking place in this most powerful of continental European countries? For three reasons. First, at the moment when Edward Price Bell asked for and was accorded what is perhaps the most important interview M. Poincaré in a long life of statesman- ship has ever given, M. Poincaré was still the Prime Minister of France and had held that high office consecutively for two and a half momentous years. | Page Fifty-seven } WO) Rvel aD Ge PAINT Pi Chi oe ech Lees Second, there is at present no other statesman in France who has anything like the same prestige or who can speak with anything like the same authority, particularly in reference to foreign affairs. The victory of the Left was nota victory over Poincaré. It was chiefly the result of electoral tactics, and in so far as it involved doctrines it was a revolt of the electors against increased taxes, not against the so-called Poincaré foreign policies. Indeed, so great is the prestige which M. Poincaré enjoys throughout France, precisely as a result of his able conduct of foreign policy, that during the election cam- paign the leaders of the Left scarcely dared to attack him, but saved their political venom to be vented rather against the President of the Republic, Alexandre Millerand. Poincaré’s Third, unless I am mistaken, Raymond Broad Influence. Poincaré is one of the few very great states- men now alive. A well-known English publi- cist, Sisley Huddleston, has called him, without exaggeration, *“‘the man who has more greatly influenced the course of events in Europe since the war than any other continental states- man.” The case may perhaps be put in this way: Three men in turn have dominated world affairs since the war. First, there was the great, misguided and misunderstood figure of Wilson, which blazed gloriously for a few brief months out of the aftermath of battle, then suffered rapid and complete—if not final—eclipse. Next came David Lloyd George to the front of the international stage. His magnetism, his vivid oratory, his astonishing diplomatic gyrations, held everyone fascinated in 1920 and 1921. Then Lloyd George, too, following the failure of the Genoa Conference, faded out of the picture. The third period, that from January, 1922, to the present, has belonged to Raymond Poincaré, and of the three he alone seems likely to have the aims which he set for himself and for his country stamped by history with the sweet and—in politics —rare words, enduring success. Long Active Raymond-Poincaré was born in 1860 at Bar- in Politics. | le-Duc, in Lorraine, and the defeat of his coun- try by Prussia in the war of 1870 made a deep impression on his young mind. His father was a civil engineer. Raymond was educated in Bar-le-Duc and Paris. He was tempted to become a journalist and writer, but finally chose the law, in which profession his success was as immediate as [ Page Fifty-Eight } Ren comedy BO crear Ale se) Fee ee ae IN Co it has since been constant. His legal career and his political career have been conducted side by side. At the age of 29 he was elected to the Chamber of Deputies and for years he specialized in public finance and budgetary questions. At 33 he was chairman of the budget committee. In the same year he was made Minister of Education in the Charles Depuy Cabinet and he has never since been absent long from the councils of the French Republic. He became Premier in the international crisis of 1911 and was elected President of the Republic in 1913. His eminent services in this office during the World War and the Peace Conference need not be recalled here. In 1920, at the end of his term as President, he re-entered the more active political struggle as Senator and devoted him- self to educating French opinion in the all-engrossing questions of foreign policy, as he saw them. It was because of his in- cessantly published and spoken views upon this subject that. he succeeded Aristide Briand as Premier in January, 1922: Has Rare Physically M. Poincaré is small and squarely Personal built and has a square, firm face, a somewhat Distinction. scraggly gray beard and a broad, intellectual forehead. His demeanor is quiet, courteous, even punctilious. He speaks readily and his thought, when he speaks, is clearness itself, but his voice is flat and monotonous. He is indeed the very antithesis of the conception of a French- man which has been popularized outside of France, always calm, always cool and collected, rarely if ever gesticulatory. Of personal magnetism he has none. His power resides rather in his capacity for work, which is prodigious; in his memory, which is rare; in his intelligence, which is superior, and in his firmness of will, coupled—the conjunction is unusual—with a nice sense of realities. Furthermore, he is highly cultivated, shunning social entertainment, loathing everything smacking of demagogy. Doubtless he would be considered by some Am- erican political leaders a hopeless highbrow, but in France that has not yet become an obstacle to political advancement. Poincaré’s The two principal acts of the Poincaré Ad- Outstanding Acts. ministration were the occupation of the Ruhr and the summoning of the committees of experts whose report, accepted by all the Governments con- cerned, will speedily lead, everyone now hopes, to a genuine [ Page Fifty-nine] Wi Ona Re Le Vai CRIN AAT UNC 0 Ei erie gd Been he Peeve tes settlement of the Reparations question. These two acts are inseparably joined. It was only France’s victory in “‘the battle of the Ruhr’ which made possible the successful conclusion of the work of the experts. On this point both the American ex- perts, Gen. Dawes and Owen D. Young, are fully agreed. In other words, when firmness was required Poincaré was un- flinchingly firm; when a time came for moderation and con- ciliation it was he who devised the means by which terms of settlement generally acceptable might be drawn up. To have accomplished either of these would have been notable; to have accomplished both is the work of no ordinary statesman. I know that by his opponents in both internal and external politics, as well as by many otherwise disinterested persons who have not had the opportunity to know him and to see his work at first hand, or who are accustomed to judge hastily from first appearances, an opinion anything but complimentary is entertained of Raymond Poincaré. Yet is it conceivable that there can really be peace in the world without order, without justice, without equity, without respect for the sanctity of contracts? I doubt it. And because of this I think that Ray- mond Poincaré has been pre-eminently the servant of peace. He took the reins of power when France, chagrined and be- wildered by the multifarious onslaughts of her determined opponents, was weakening. In his own vigorous words, he has spared the world the humiliating appearance of fraud trium- phant over justice. For this reason, if for no other, I think he deserves well of all true lovers of peace. | Page Sixty } ‘ Ss -_ s _ Lee, © i % Tr # ih carr) ion ae i _ “RAMSAY MAC DONALD SOCIALISM” Great Britain’s Former Socialist-Labor Prime Minister Outlines His Ideals in Government With a Sketch of the Leader of British Democracy BY HAL O’FLAHERTY ‘‘What the World Needs More Than it Needs Any- thing Else is a Political and Social Shakespeare.” ve five’ na “Ramsay MacDonald Socialism’”’ M: MacDonald was seated alone at his desk in| the Prime Minister’s room at the House of Commons when I entered. Before him lay a deep pile of Foreign Office papers. Tired, grave, intensely preoccupied, he rose, smiled, shook hands, turned and drew low a long, wide blind to break a shaft of afternoon sunshine that had fallen across his mass of documents. We sat down, he looked inquiringly at me, and I asked him these questions: “What is “Ramsay MacDonald Socialism’? What is it as an emotional phenomenon, as a creed, and as a policy? In other words, what is it spiritually, intellectually, and prac- tically>’’ Silent and thoughtful for a moment, Mr. MacDonald, speak- ing deliberately, replied as follows: “In the domain of emotion, of conscience, in the spiritual domain, Socialism isa religion of popular service—a deep en- thusiasm for the physical, mental, and moral well-being of the human family. In the domain of intellect, of thought, of theory, it is a scientific program of social betterment. In the domain of practice, up to the present, it is a gradually develop- ing educational, legislative, and administrative movement in the direction of a realization of its ideals.”’ Striving For “Is there anything atheistic or anti- Human Betterment. Christian about it?”’ “On the contrary, it is based on the Gospels. It signifies a reasoned and resolute effort to Christian- ize government and society. Who denies that there is an ap- palling mass of poverty in the world? Who denies that poverty is both an individual and a social evil? Who is not conscious that poverty is piteous? Socialism is an enemy of poverty. It holds that not charity, but social reconstruction, is the remedy for poverty. ‘Materialism, vulgarity, assertion without sense, domination lacking fineness of mind and soul, forgetfulness of human value —Christianity hates them all, and Socialism hates them all. Socialism would like to make a considerate man, a sympathetic [ Page Sixty-three ] WOR SLUMDy et ChE nMnENTO-G Mae ta 1 CR a Rate man, a generous man, a gentleman, of every man in the world. If it could do this, it would make a Christian of every man in the world, because these qualities carry us away beyond them- selves. “Our age is an amazing age, but it is not a Christian age. Our conquests are conquests of knowledge; we need the con- quests of culture. We have learned to fly physically; we need to learn to fly spiritually. Our great achievements have given us a temperature. We want cooling off. We want to relearn the old lesson of joy in a quiet Sunday. Too many of us regard the Sabbath as a day of burden. Too many of us incline to the ‘brighter London Sunday,’ to the ‘Monte Carlo Sunday,’ to the Sunday of frivolity and of spiritual sterility. Why Socialism ‘‘Socialism is serious. Socialism would re- Is in Revolt. store society to moderation and reflection. It is for purity in the individual life, for purity in the family life, and for intelligence, honor, and courage in politics. We have a shallow world. In it are too many bauble- chasers—people mad about ‘honors,’ gold braid, and things to hang in the lapels of their coats, and with scarcely a thought for the only really important matter—the appetite to do hard unassuming work, human quality. Against all this folly Social- ism is in revolt. If I can make you understand that, you will understand what is, perhaps, the fundamental spiritual fact about Socialism. Socialism, radically, is an ardent longing for an effectual affirmation of the dignity of humanity—a dignity that cannot be dissociated from service. What else is Chris- tianity>?”’ *‘Socialism, as you interpret it, has no faith in violence?”’ “Socialism is sanity, not insanity. It is humanism, not brutalism. It must by its nature abhor violence. Pre-eminently it is intellectual and moral. It fights only with intellectual and moral weapons. It persuades people into its ranks; it does not knout or club them in.” How Socialism “In the light of this Socialism, or Gospel Views Communism. of Labor, how do communism, sovietism and such movements either of the Left or Right look>?”’ “They look bad. They are wrong—all wrong. Socialism is the very antithesis of tyranny. It believes no more in a prole- tarian dictatorship than in a dictatorship of the so-called elite. [| Page Sixty-four ] RAMSAY MAC DD O°eN Avie D Oy ines tae La VI Socialism would break every fetter that binds the minds or limbs of honest women and men.”’ “Socialism commonlyis assumed toimply anti-individualism.”’ “‘An error—a complete error. Socialists are the greatest de- fenders of individualists. They are the only intelligent in- dividualists—if an individualist is one who respects individual- ity. What is the good of an individualism that does not free the individual from conditions that prevent him from being an individual? Personal liberty is individualism, and it is the only conceivable individualism. Socialism is for real, not fictitious, personal liberty. Personal liberty of the real sort can come in no way except through a scientific social organiza- tion that considers human personality first and above every- thing else, and does not enslave it, as is now the case, to the owners of the financial and the industrial machine.”’ Socialists as “Do you deem Socialists the aristocrats Pioneer Thinkers. of political thought>?”’ “There is no doubt in my mind that Social- ists are doing the pioneer political and social thinking of the world. It is one of their characteristics that they have an enormous respect for the human mind as contrasted with the human fist. Our old parties do not think in any living sense. They stand for interests and shibboleths and traditions. They are the parties of the status quo and sticking plaster. “Erect in the presence of their obvious and admitted failure to create a decently ordered civilization, they go on mouthing shibboleths. They have not given the world peace. They have not given it comfort. They have not given it education. They have left much of it ill fed, ill clothed, and ill shod. To millions of workers—persons who constitute the foundation of the social structure—they have not given tolerable homes, and to others in hundreds of thousands they have given no homes of any kind. Yet they never tire of assuring us that they are commissioned of Heaven to lead and to govern their fellow men. And now that I am in office they try to attest their virtue by elaborate comments to prove that in five months | have failed to undo their generations of rule.”’ Characteristics of ‘‘“You believe the Labor Party to be in all the Labor Party. respects greater than the other parties?”’ “Yes, I do. And I will tell you why. It knows more than the other parties know about man as a man, [ Page Sixty-five } Wi tOv hak aL) C CH WASBNGIC Wt ial eet Beata aes ee rather than as an economic unit. It has this greater knowledge for the reason that it has been closer to man than the other parties have been. Man and his struggles have been the Labor Party’s university. Our party knows that when you are deal- ing with matters of political economy you are dealing with the human soul. Now, the human soul is a very big and com- prehensive thing. It is much broader than is Conservatism or Liberalism. Only Socialismis wide enough to accommodate the human soul. And, unless you accommodate the human soul— give it plenty of room—you cannot build a successful society.”’ ““And why not?” ““Because you will have failed to capture, you will have failed to vindicate, that elusive and inestimable thing—that very life-principle of individual and social development—liberty.”’ The Poetry of “I have noticed that Sir Robert Horne, a Common Life. fellow-Scotsman of yours, accuses you Social- ists of poetry.” “Right. And no greater compliment could be paid us. We are poets. There is no good politics without poetry. There is no good anything without poetry. Poetry lies at the heart of human life. Every urchin in the street is a poet. Politics without poetry is barren and disastrous. It is the incurable defect of the old parties that they have no poetic conscious- ness. If they had had this magic possession, they would not have made such a mess of things, for they would have had some conception of the human material with which they were dealing. What the world needs more than it needs anything else is a political and social Shakespeare.”’ “One would gather from what you say that Socialism is especially keen on art and the classics.”’ “Tt is. It is keen on art and the classics because they are humanistic. They humanize man and humanize society. Loveliness in all its forms, material and immaterial, comes within the sympathy and the faith of Socialism. People need meat and drink. They need raiment. They need house room. But none of those things is worth while unless people cherish and feed their souls. No person and no society can perform a more important public service than by patronizing art and classical culture. Even if a country has great poverty and great unemployment, as, unhappily, our country has, its citi- zens should not withhold their money from the purchase of pictures, nor from anything else that delights the hearts and [ Page Sixty-six? RAMSAY MAC DONALD SOCIALISM elevates the minds of young and old. It is a cardinal tenet of Socialism that if we can save the souls of people we can save them altogether.” Socialism’s Attitude ‘“‘You refer to Capital inthe role of patron Toward Capital. of aesthetics and culture. One has heard that Socialism condemns Capital.”’ “Another error. Socialists want to conserve Capital. They are second to none in their appreciation of its worth. If they disliked it, they would let it go on destroying itself. They want Capital conserved and saved from abuse. They want it better used so that income may be better distributed. They want it made servant and not master. And thev look forward to sufficient communal wealth to supply all those facilitiessof art, learning, and leisure which highly civilized communities require. “It is not Capital, it is not wealth, that Socialism condemns. It condemns capitalism as we have known it hitherto. It con- demns cashism. It condemns the system that involved the people of this country in conditions so bad that not only the victims themselves, but humanists like Carlyle and Ruskin, revolted against it. You will remember those conditions— conditions created by the capitalism that came into power with the industrial revolution of the nineteenth century—pro- duced such great reputations as those of Robert Owen, Lord Shaftesbury, and Samuel Plimsoll, who went with all their strength to the rescue of the victims. Inhumanity “Tt was in those conditions that Socialism had of Capitalism. its birth. It was born in England, not in Germany; Marx merely devoted his great critical powers to its fuller definition—and often misled it. I do not deny that capitalism was an improvement on what went before. But it is only an epochal feature of progress. Moral condemnation is therefore out of place. We have to go on perfecting our social life. If we remain where we are the domination of capitalism will crush us out. “Capitalism, cashism, is unhuman and inhuman. That is what is the matter with it. It is unhuman, whereas all the great problems of mankind are human problems. Machinery, markets, profits—capitalism is obsessed by them. It has not a spark of consciousness of the moralities. Mind you, I do not say this of capitalists; I say it of the system. To Socialists, the workingman—whether he work with his muscles or with [ Page Sixty-seven | WV On R aia CEDAR ING Garris: ole ys Ree eet a eee his mind—is not a mere embodiment of economic potentiality. He is not merely the source of a commodity—labor-power and skill—to be bought and sold at market rates. Not Merely an “‘No; in Socialist feeling and thought, the Economic Factor. manual or mental laborer is a human being. He is a creature of emotions and ideas and a great range of interests and powers wholly outside the in- dustrial and economic sphere. We regard every man first.as a man and second as an economic factor. This does not mean at all that we favor laziness, slackness, low industrial efh- ciency, mental and moral slovenliness. Quite the contrary. To deal with a man first as a man—and by ‘man,’ of course I, mean both sexes—is not only to please him, but to stimulate him to the maximum height of his capacities. ‘“‘Even Toryism, to some extent, learned the political wisdom, if not the moral duty, of treating men as men. Great numbers of workers have voted for Toryism. Do you know why? Be- cause of the socialistic sentiments and acts of Tories. In the measure that Toryism combated with success the evils of our overaggressive and unfeeling capitalism it won the confidence and the suffrage of the working class. In ever-increasing num- bers the workers are coming to realize that the true banner of enlightened and humane government is not in the hands of the Tories. That is the reason the Labor Party is getting more powerful every day.” Getting Socialism ‘‘Your opponents, I observe, assert that Under Way. you are out to destroy the economic ma- chine in Great Britain.” “Oh, yes; they assert that. They assert a lot of things that are false or idiotic. Some of them are ignoramuses and some electioneerers. These electioneerers, unable to make further use of the vote-catching cry, ‘Hang the Kaiser!’ are making a scarecrow of Socialism for their party purposes. They are not frightening the country much, and as time goes on they will frighten it still less. British Socialists are not wreckers in any sense—not destroyers, but builders. They are out to build a greater and happier human society in this old home of freedom- loving men. “We are going to carry out our program, but we are not going to do it ‘while the car waits.’ Speaking of cars, you know they are not set in normal motion abruptly. One does [ Page Sixty-eight | Foreign Office, S.W.1. /S i hes Gree RAMSAY MAC DONALD SOCIALISM not start a car suddenly unless one wishes to break the machine. One starts the engine, releases the brake, engages ‘low,’ and lets in the clutch softly. As speed is gathered, one after another the higher gears are engaged, until the car is running sweetly on ‘top.’ There you have our idea of the way to set Socialism running on the highway of political and social practice. How- ever much we should like to start on ‘top,’ and instantly be off at a merry pace, we know it cannot be done. Defending *“‘Some people appear to regard Socialism as a Human Rights. brand new thing—an isolated, rigid, fully- worked-out, finished thing—waiting to be applied in toto all at once. They conceive of it as standing behind the wings, completely dressed, elaborately made up, ready suddenly to take on the stage the place vacated with equal suddenness by a previous actor. It is no such thing. Socialism is already on the stage. It already is playing its part in the drama of progress. But it is steadily qualifying for a more important role. “‘Socialism’s work so far has been that of a defender of the State, and of the lives of the citizens, against encroachments and spoliations by capitalism. Its keen sense of corporate or communal morality has been forcing into law such recognitions of the rights of men as workmen’s compensation, protection of the woman and the child worker, municipal enterprise, the co-operative movement in its entirety. It is futile to argue that capitalism produced any of these humane reforms. They are not its children in any sense or degree. By no possibility could it beget such children. In spirit and in principle these reforms are as far from capitalism as is Christian civilization from savagery. When the capitalist devotes his energy and his money to such things, it is not capitalism he is practicing; it is Socialism.”’ Standing For “What is your attitude to the ca’ canny Honest Service. principle?’ ““T am against it. I am for energy. I am for hard thinking and for hard work. Socialism is not the father of ca’ canny. Capitalism is the father of ca’canny. It would pay only the wages that organized labor could squeeze out of it. Labor’s natural tendency was to say, ‘We will give you only the service you can squeeze out of us.” There is mutuality in human relations. You can have a mutuality of unpleasant- [ Page Sixty-nine ] Wii O viele ae) CHV AG INS CE EA Tes Fee ie a eae) ness and of grudging work, or you can have a mutuality of sympathy and of service. It is this latter toward which Social- ism is moving.” “Would Socialism involve a huge bureaucracy>?”’ ‘Socialism means a huge bureaucracy only in the minds and mouths of those who either misunderstand or choose to mis- represent it. We have no notion of running British industry from Whitehall. Our form of control is not in the least rev- olutionary; our whole conception of changes deemed desir- able is evolutionary. Existing arrangements would be followed in industry except that the men representing the workers— the management, the technicians—would get their jobs by reason of demonstrated ability in less responsible posts. Re- presentative users, also, would have a voice in management. Co-ordination and co-operation would take the place of self- regarding competition. ‘Socialists are not dogmatists. They have no disposition to maltreat facts to fit them into theories. We are patient ex- plorers and pioneers trying to make roads along which the people may go from the less to the more perfect. We may not think, and do not think, precisely as did our grandfathers. I mean there is a new as well as an old school of Socialism. We belong to the new. We have the same vision of human brother- hood, the same conception of right, but we have better plans for translating this vision and this conception into a going political and social concern.”’ Opposed to Class ‘‘You have no class consciousness?” Consciousness. “‘None. Our opponents are the people of class consciousness. They believe in, and seek to perpetuate, a privileged class. For class consciousness we want to substitute community consciousness. We think all the people belong to a seamless society. Any other kind of society is relatively weak and insecure. We did not create class war. Capitalism produced, and always will produce, class war, just as thistles will continue to produce thistles.”’ *“Your conception of Socialism is democratic?” “Socialism is not only democracy; it is the only democracy. Our old parties, the Conservatives and Liberals, are only partly democratic. In other words, in their nature, they are oli- garchic. They do not stand for rule of the people by the people; they stand for rule of the people by a favored section of the people. Socialism alone among extant political and social [ Page Seventy ] RAMSAY MEA Core D OrNgA LD SiO CG MAM ST StM theories represents the idea of pure democratic sovereignty. No people can be purely democratic until it has perfect con- trol over all its interests and destinies. Ungoverned industrial- ism, for instance, and democracy are incompatible.” Bringing Change ‘‘What was your particular meaning when by Development. you stated, in one of your public addresses, that a lack of general intelligence prevented the Labor Party from doing all it wanted to do for society?”’ “Well, the nation needs a lot of educating before it can understand and fully accept Socialist principles. It is, indeed, a matter of education with all of us. We know perfectly well that something very serious is wrong with our social organiza- tion; how to put it right we can learn only by study and experi- ment. We leaders in the Socialist movement are students and experimenters. Scores of government reports on factories and mines, on towns, on housing, on the moral and social condi- tions of the people, show how great is the national need for students and experimenters. ““Revolution in Russia taught us a great lesson. It taught us that revolution is destruction and disaster and nothing more. If | may quote from one of my recent articles, the de- struction we propose is the sort of destruction which takes place when a caterpillar becomes a chrysalis, and the chrysalis a butterfly; the same kind of destruction as went on inside feudalism when the industrial revolution was being matured; the destruction which marked factory legislation, unemploy- ment legislation, the invasion of municipal enterprise on the field of private enterprise. Our ‘destruction’ is merely that of replacing the worse with the better, and doing so scientifically and stage by stage.’’ Nationalization ‘‘Do you still hold, as you did in 1913, that of Lands. nationalization of lands, mines, and railways is the best means of curing social unrest in England?” “That is the next stage in evolution.’ “Can nationalization be attained here without awaiting similar movements in the Dominions and in other countries?” “Yes. We must press on here—sanely, as ] have said, but unsleepingly. Bit by bit we must unfold our policy, and get for it the support of the electors, for we are working under a system of representative democracy. Electors do not vote for ’ [ Page Seventy-one } GUO DS J Care! Boy 29 CHW AN CN Gael ky thas WLC Reni eee ware abstractions. They do not vote for Individualism, or Social- ism, or Christianity. None of these ever can become a true political issue. People vote on definite proposals. Socialism has definite proposals to bring forward, and only as it wins the confidence of the electorate can it put these proposals into operation. “Our constructive scheme touches all the social interests of the population—unemployment, education, housing, agri- culture, management of industry, banking and credit, taxation, international affairs, and municipal policy. Some of them may baffle us at first. We must try again. With all of them we shall deal as expeditiously as we can. Nationalization will not be carried through with a sweep, as in Russia. That would be an antic, and we have no faith in antics. **Some industries, like those of the coal mines and the rail- ways, are now ripe for nationalization. Land—the use to which it is put and the rents derived from it, especially the new increments of socially-created land values—is a matter of immediate State concern. Money’s power over business and politics calls for prompt action by the community, employers as well as workmen. Such experiments as that of the Birming- ham Municipal bank should be extended, with a State bank in supreme control. I am speaking of aims; methods would be determined by wise planning and careful experimentation.” Socialism Stands ‘*You Socialists are anti-Protectionist>?”’ for Free Trade. “Decidedly. So are the British electors, as has been shown by every election since Joseph Chamberlain launched his Tariff Reform campaign more than twenty years ago.” “One hears some talk of uneasiness in the Dominions re- specting your attitude toward the principle of imperial soli- darity.”’ “Such talk turns upon the policy of the Socialist Govern- ment with reference to inter-Empire Preference and the Singa- pore dockyard. In neither case is there the slightest justifica- tion for the talk. We Socialists yield to none as believers in the British Commonwealth of Nations, and as champions of its consolidation and defense. We cannot allow the democratic gains of the past to be attacked by any form of barbarism without putting up a defense. “When the Government of which I am the head decided against Imperial Preference, it was thinking of the solidarity [ Page Seventy-two } RAMSAY MAC DAO UNTAYLS D SOCIALISM of the British Commonwealth, and endeavoring to strengthen the foundations of that solidarity. We do not believe that any Protectionist mechanism whatever will tend to bind the Com- monwealth more firmly together. Any such mechanism would be constrictive at one point or another, and, as we British certainly ought to know, empires are not held together by constriction. Protectionist schemes are parasitic schemes— schemes to give some one artificial benefits at the expense of someone else. We are against them. We are convinced their influence would be, not to integrate, but to disintegrate our Commonwealth of Nations.” Liberty to ‘‘What do you consider the best cement of empire?”’ Preserve “Liberty. Its binding power far transcends that the Empire. of any system of tariffs within the range of the wit of man. To that I add a common human purpose.” *‘And about Singapore?” “With reference to Singapore, I again would emphasize the fact that we are co-ordinationists. We desire to co-ordinate the defense forces of Britain. We desire to co-ordinate them in finance, in policy, and in strategy. We have not a doubt that the closest possible knitting together of the British States is best for them and best for the world. It follows that our decision against an extension of the Singapore dockyard at this time—please bear in mind that we already have a great dock- yard at Singapore, and the question at issue was one, not of building, but of extension—was not at all, in our judgment, a decision out of accord with the interests of imperial unity. *‘Let me explain it. In the first place, I should say our decision was not influenced in the least by the Washington naval agreement. That agreement left us quite free to extend Singapore. What we did was based on other grounds. Singa- pore undoubtedly is a strategic position of immense importance in the Pacific. If we were contemplating war we should develop it for naval operations of the first magnitude. But we are not contemplating war, and we shall not contemplate war unless driven co it by external forces over which we have no control. Working to “‘We are contemplating peace, and we give Maintain Peace. our great world neighbors credit for a similar disposition. Naturally, therefore, in all we do we wish to furnish every prudent evidence of our [ Page Seventy-three } Wi tOve Riba CNEL PAIN GE Orla Beer Lee pacific desires and intentions. We feel we can furnish such evidence, such prudent evidence, in connection with Singapore. We feel so after a very thorough exploration of the whole question. International confidence and co-operation, reduced armaments, and a stable reign of reason in the world—the core of British foreign policy—would not have been forwarded, but would have been set back, if our acts at Singapore had re- flected an expectation of war rather than a hope of peace. ‘““Are we making a bold move? Some think so. But is not world neighborliness worth some risk? Is all our heroism to be reserved for war, and none to be exhibited in the cause of peace? Besides, the risk is not so terrifying as certain of our critics suggest. We have, at any rate, a short time—a limited number of years—during which we can be sure no war will overtake us. I am persuaded that we should use a year or two of this time in endeavoring to establish, or to pave the way for establishing, the ascendency of morals over militarism in this world.”’ “You are an actualist>?”’ “Yes. I believe in dealing with situations as they are to- day, rather than in elaborating abstractions upon hypothetical conditions that may or may not arise a dozen or a score of years hence—especially when these elaborations involve heavy expenditures of money and retard the movement for dic- armament.” Striking Hard ‘‘You deem the present moment the right for Peace. moment to strike hard for peace>”’ “‘Pre-eminently. Immediately after a great war, when peoples are full of loathing for war, when they passionately yearn for peace, when they are exhausted, when they are wise—then is the time to get on with your peace work. Memories of war, like many other memories, fade soon. New blood arrives on the scene. Old suspicions and fears revive, and, almost before you even dimly realize its approach, a fresh horror of bloodshed and destruction is upon you.”’ “You are a nationalist?” ‘Heart and soul. There is something very tender and beauti- ful in the love of one’s country. But a man who believes his wife is the best in his street does not make that a reason for fighting duels with his neighbors. I do not believe in running nationalism too hard. I do not believe in running it to the danger of the general interests of mankind. There is no reason [ Page Seventy-four ] RAMSAY MAIC DO OON AGU D On Aeris Vi for doing anything of that sort. Nationality, fully developed and justly guided, is nothing but a blessing to humanity.”’ Full Faith “You have unfaltering faith that Anglo-French in French friendship will last>’’ Friendship. “If I had not, I should despair of the salvation of European civilization.” “‘Are Anglo-American relations entirely satisfactory>”’ “Entirely. And nothing will be left undone by our Govern- ment to keep them so.”’ “You intend to back up the League of Nations with all your personal and official strength>?”’ “I do. I hope personally to attend the opening of the as- sembly of the League at Geneva in September, and there will be other British representatives. It is the intention of the French Prime Minister also to attend, and I hope there will be many other first-rank statesmen in attendance. It is the pur- pose of my Government to use the League as the main instru- ment for bringing about those international conditions which are necessary to tranquillity, and to all the great human in- terests that hinge upon tranquillity.”’ Supporting the *‘What is your idea of the duty of power- League of Nations. ful nations relative to the League>”’ ““T think it is their duty to help it. I want to see the great peace union complete. It is humanity’s con- cern, and no great nation is likely to hold itself morally irre- sponsible in a matter of concern to humanity. I do not mean that any nation should lose its freedom over the League; | mean rather that all nations should exercise their freedom on behalf of the League. Britain did not lose her freedom when she identified her prestige and energy with the League. No member State did. Every nation should help, but help in its own way. It is essential to national independence, to popular control over policy, that nations do everything they do in their own way. But doing things in one’s own way is a very different matter from not doing them at all. “I think America should help the League, and I think she will, in her own time and way. It is not for us to hurry or admonish her. Her intelligence and moral force are needed in the world. They would be powerful factors for good. Al- ready, though not fully and officially, the Republic is watching, helping, co-operating, in Europe. I thank her. We do not [ Page Seventy-five } W LOR. Lee C HAWN? COE aL) Escher want her to entangle herself, and so to diminish her usefulness to civilization. But we do want to see her great strength and authority systernatically and steadily applied to the solution of the problems with which are bound up the prosperity, happi- ness and peace of the world. ‘How to do that she knows far better than any outsider can tell her.”’ ¢ MacDonald the Statesman By HAL O’FLAHERTY HE genius of Ramsay MacDonald is revealed more fully in the interview which he has granted Edward Price Bell than in any of his speeches or printed works. Since ] came to England some years ago, I have heard among all classes vaguely worded pleas for a change in a system that has failed to fulfill hopes and aspirations. Ramsay MacDonald has voiced for his countrymen their desires. He has put into words what has been in many minds for years. Americans who read carefully and digest this amazingly clear exposition of Socialism must be impressed with its universality ; for it not only brings to the light the desires of men and women here in England, Scotland and Wales, but expresses much of the longing for better social and political conditions in every civil- ized community. It may be said without exaggeration that Ramsay Mac- Donald is a statesman of extraordinary ability and at the same time the world’s foremost rational Socialist. He is an intellectual who, over a period of many years, has trained and developed a mind so well balanced, so filled with hard facts, that he is capable of meeting fearlessly the great men of his | own or other nations. Picture of _ Aside from the limitations enforced by partisan the Prime politics, Mr. MacDonald has won an unusual Minister. degree of popularity for his party and for himself. He has no idiosyncrasies of dress or deportment, but is possessed of a splendid personal presence whether on the floor of the House of Commons or in the rigid formality of Buckingham Palace. In his court dress he has the appearance of a great militarist, but his demeanor and speech are never anything but pacific and democratic. His iron-gray hair and { Page Seventy-six | RAMSAY MAC DEGiNvAc ie SOCIALISM mustache give a stern setting to his swarthy face, and his deepset, dark-brown eyes hold a combative glint. His expres- sion is habitually one of effortless concentration, seldom lightened by a smile. Trained in the best of all schools—the Labor constituencies —Mr. MacDonald has mastered the art of public speaking. For more than twenty-five years he has been on the platform and in the House of Commons perfecting the modulations of a naturally resonant and powerful voice. His well-chosen words are enunciated with a precision unequaled by any other British statesman, with the possible exception of Herbert Asquith. The Equipment Though lacking a classical education, great of a Statesman. Britain’s Socialist Prime Minister brings to his high office a greater first-hand knowledge of the British Dominions, Colonies and possessions, than had any of his illustrious predecessors. He has toured the Far East, studied in Australia and New Zealand, India and Egypt, and has visited frequently the principal countries of Europe. His knowledge of conditions in Canada and the United States is remarkable. Above all else in importance, he knows his coun- try’s problems. He has delved deeply into the underlying causes of social unrest and with painstaking care has chronicled his thoughts upon this subject in books of great breadth and clarity. Prime Minister MacDonald accepted the opportunity of forming a government largely because he considered the time ripe to disprove the myriad misconceptions and false ideas in the public mind as to what a Labor Government would do when it came to power. Great sections of the Tory element were fully convinced that a Labor Government would prove a national disgrace, while others believed the appearance of a Socialist as Chancellor of the Exchequer would bring upon the country financial disaster. The world already knows of the praise heaped upon MacDonald and his ministers soon after the new Government was formed. The praise came largely from the in- credulous who in their surprise at finding the country still safe became perfervid in their congratulations. Five Months Five months have passed since Ramsay of Achievement. MacDonald took over from the Conserva- tives the task of solving Britain’s domestic and external problems, and after a period of groping, complicated [ Page Seventy-seven ] Wav ce GL seelo CitHy AW NIG VEY Dy Ea Rese ies by unexpected changes abroad, he has gone far toward achiev- ing the success which eluded his predecessors. As a major contribution, he has re-established that sympathetic accord with France which disappeared when French troops entered the Ruhr in 1923. With the patience and forbearance of a good friend he has helped Germany regain her confidence and her desire for an equitable reparations settlement. In the narrower field of domestic politics he has not fared so well. He could not cure in a few months the terrible disease of unemployment; nor could he solve the housing problem, which nothing but years of patient effort can effect. The peculiar circumstances of his rise to the Premiership prevented him from acting freely. His party is only a minority under the threatening power of the older parties. It is likely that a new turn of the political wheel will bring a change in the Premiership before the end of this year, but no matter when the change comes, MacDonald has had the satis- faction of carrying his party’s banner courageously to the fore- front of British politics. His name will be written boldly in political history as that of the man during whose term of office the final steps toward a durable peace were taken by the Great Powers of Europe. [ Page Seventy-eight | COOLIDGE: A SURVEY The President’s Mind as Revealed in His Utterances, Oral and Written ‘All These [America’s Achievements] Are But The Reflection, Not of a Select Few, But of a Wonderful People, Great in In- telligence, Great in Moral Power, Great in Character.”’ ‘i ray Wee a a we i) Day) Osh oy Me f mre a Coolidge: A Survey ie WAS toward the end of an October afternoon that, after passing through a square entrance hall and travers- ing a spacious, silent corridor, I was ushered into the Chief Executive’s office at the White House. President Coolidge sat alone at the Presidential desk. His back was to the win- dows that look out over the rear grounds of the Executive Mansion in the direction of the Potomac. Neat, quiet, digni- fied, medium-sized the figure; serious, even sad, the clear-cut, clean-shaven, intellectual face, with its blue-gray eyes, its prominent forehead and.§its flat-lying frame of straight, flaxen hair, tinged with red. Stir and sound—the stir and sound of the White House day —were over. Iwo or three young newspaper men lounged, chatting in low tones, in the square entrance hall. About the inner corridors an occasional colored servant moved noise- lessly. Outside the President’s room, itself strangely muffled, the slanting rays of the sun, flooding out of the West over fall- tinted foliage, threw heavy masses of shadow on the close- clipped lawn. Intent, President Coolidge was dressed in a well- Self-Possessed fitting blue sack suit. His welcome was re- Executive. strained, but kindly, a faint smile lightening his refined features as he rose to shake hands. (It was understood that the President was not to be inter- viewed; he declined to transgress the White House tradition of no direct quotation of the Chief Magistrate.) One is struck instantly by Mr. Coolidge’s self-possession. He makes no gestures, does not fidget, looks steadily into one’s eyes, is almost disconcertingly intent. His voice, though it has a marked twang, is not harsh; there is nothing harsh about the man, despite the inflexible will that many an opponent has found behind his delicate exterior. His words are simple, his sentences crisp—when he stops thinking long enough to speak. His facial expression is naturally pleas- ant, but his smiles seem even rarer than his words. During our entire conversation, after the greeting, he smiled once. [ Page Eighty-one } Wii Rig ie GH BALAN Gi Bp cL) Logik 2 aes tae It was when I reminded him of something John W. Davis had said to me—namely, that Republicans, as men of talent, are relatively grasping, while Democrats, as men of genius, are relatively generous. “‘Interesting,’’ said Mr. Coolidge, clearly amused. A pause. “But I don’t know what he means.” Marks of One had heard much of the President’s An Orderly Mind. analytical mind, of his industry and thor- oughness, of his business-like methods. I looked at his desk. It was covered with papers. There were many different kinds and sizes. But there was no disorder. All appeared to be perfectly classified and arranged, and one easily could imagine that singularly calm man and that singu- larly clear mind dealing with them swiftly. And then there was the striking fact of the President’s coolness and freshness after the tumult of the White House day—after the countless conferences and close labor of many White House days— coupled with the further fact that we sat alone, talking un- disturbed, as if the anxieties and strains of the Presidency were as far away from Mr. Coolidge as they were when he was in his mountain home. Did not system speak here? Coldness and thinness of personality have been attributed to Mr. Coolidge. I did not discover either. His self-command is, indeed, remarkable, and his external appearance does not suggest a raging fire. But personality does not live in external- ities; personality lives within. It is the object of my study of this man’s qualities, traits, and views, as disclosed in his life, work, and public utterances, to detect and to put in plain words what he is like within. It has been said, too, that his mind works slowly. This criticism, in my judgment, springs from that kind of observation which measures mental velocity by verbal fluency. Measured so, without doubt, Mr. Coolidge’s mind works slowly. As I sat watching the President | was more and more im- pressed by his physical slightness and its meaning. Many public men, in the problem of achieving success, have the advantage of big bodies. Some have the advantage of abun- dant whiskers. Some can roar as lions. Some have powerful and dangerous fists. Steam-roller superiorities these. Often they succeed wholly unaided by either brains or morals. Mr. [ Page Eighty-two } CFOS OF COL ive Ones Cate eg Ea tyl tt i tANucia, yeh Curd Fenn vanimubesa. is Coolidge has not a big body. He has no whiskers at all. There is nothing leonine about his vocal equipment. His fists are neither powerful nor dangerous. Yet, in a State of strong men, rich in political gifts and powers, he rose above all his fellows, placed them all behind him, and took and held the center of the stage. Is not this proof of intellect and character? Successes as an Zeal and talent for public service are con- Amherst Student. spicuous in the whole of Calvin Coolidge’s adult life. He was a political philosopher as a boy, and a political philosopher deeply religious and keenly ethical. Almost thirty years ago, when a, senior at Amherst College, he won distinction in the academic world, and won a $150 gold medal by writing, in a contest open to seniors of all American colleges and universities, what was adjudged the best essay on the causes of the American Revolution. This essay, to those who would understand Mr. Coolidge, is worth examining. Its diction—there are about 2,000 words of it—has the terseness and clarity of the author’s mature utterances. Not a line or phrase in it suggests another writer’s thought. Original in form and weighty in substance, it de- picts the American Revolution as a quarrel, not between dif- ferent nations, but between Englishmen devoted to monarchy and Englishmen devoted to democracy. Consistency of | Puritan and Covenanter himself, Mr. Cool- His Career. idge in his prize essay shows how firm is his grasp of the meaning of these terms. He sees the Puritan and the Covenanter as exponents of the most remarkable characteristic of the English-speaking race—its will to be free. He notes Englishmen’s “great love for a king,”’ but reminds his readers that Englishmen “‘drove out one king, rebelled against two and executed three,’ proving that, how- ever much they deferred to the “divine right of kings,”’ they had a superior regard, on occasion, for “‘the divine right of the people.’ His conclusion is that, in the end, this “‘great land of America’’ must have achieved its independence, even if the colonial policy of George III. and Lord North had been wise. Mr. Coolidge’s record is one of extraordinary consistency. Not that he is any worshiper of consistency as such. He prob- ably agrees with Emerson that “‘consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.’’ He has not worshiped consistency, but he has been consistent. He has been consistent because he was [ Page Eighty-three } Wot Oras Lt Ls CSE AIAN Py Goel Br op Loe ec Seis ote, eed ent born prudent, meditative, and far-seeing. He is a child of the Appalachians. Ancestrally and in his own life he had time and space and quietude to think. Look into his religious qualities and propensities, his moral enthusiasms, his concep- tions of political science, his administrative methods of a gen- eration ago and you find them virtually what they are today. Results of Religion Supremely throughout his life Calvin and Learning. Coolidge has believed in two things— religion and education. In all his thought and work he has depended in the past and depends now upon Divine guidance. He thinks there is no promise, no security, without it. “Our nation was founded by men who came over for the sake of religion,’’ he has said. ‘“‘Religion is essential. Without the Church the community goes to pieces. I have seen this again and again in New England. Our nation cannot live without morality, and morality cannot live without religion.” Religion and education, in Mr. Coolidge’s view, are in- separably related. ‘“‘Who teach the clergy>’ he asks. And he replies that the higher education anciently was instituted solely for their instruction. He deckares that not only the higher sciences, but philosophy, morals and religion all center in our colleges and universities. “‘It is not too much to say that in them is the foundation of all civilization and that their influence is all-embracing.’’ He points out that primary schools are a development of higher education, and that with- out such education modern society cannot exist. He states that we all, with or without the higher learning, come within its influence, and that Washington and Lincoln, though both lacked a college education, never would have been heard of but for colleges. Training for All Light on Mr. Coolidge’s spiritual nature is an Essential. found in his abiding love for Amherst. Its whole inspiration and practice delighted him and he places it first among the influences that have molded his life. And what sort of an institution is Amherst? In the language of its founder, it has, and will not deviate from, its “‘original object of civilizing and evangelizing the world by the classical education of indigent young men of piety and talent.’’ To teach men spiritual values is the basic aim of Amherst. “‘And,’’ remarks Mr. Coolidge, “‘the progress of this effort measures the progress of civilization; there is no [ Page Eighty-four | COMA Ee Ue Vic) Shwe tr te ecs seats ~ DA oS. 1 Oy Rt aves Rwy: other principle that men of the present day all over the world need to keep so constantly in mind.”’ Ardent friend and advocate of the classics, Mr. Coolidge yet perceives the necessity of trade, vocational, and technical schools. He states that the courses of instruction in such schools must be pursued “‘with great thoroughness’’—a re- minder of this man’s attitude to every kind of task and duty. ‘‘Equal opportunity of training for all avenues of life,”’ says he, “‘is required by a democracy.’”’ He would teach not only the preacher, the lawyer, the doctor, the engineer, the chemist: not only the artisan, the mechanic, the skilled worker. He would teach the youth of all callings and “re-establish the profession of teaching in public esteem.’’ He recognizes that a great educational system is impossible without devoted, self- respecting and capable teachers. Teaching People Mr. Coolidge never refers to education How to Think. without strongly urging the claims of the classics as an indispensable factor. He says: “This effort for a practical education will be in vain if we look at the practical side alone. Education must teach more than the ability to earn a livelihood; it must teach the art of living. It is less important to teach what to think than to teach how to think. The end sought should be broad and liberal, rather than narrow and technical. The ideals of the classics, the humanities, must not be neglected. After all, it is only the ideal that is practical.’ Democracy—American democracy—holds Mr. Coolidge’s heart in the sphere of politics. He believes to the uttermost in our political forefathers and in our constitutional system. He regards our Supreme Court, now under fire from more than one direction, as the citadel of American justice—the sheet- anchor of our individual liberties. He believes in democracy, but in an alert, critical and militant democracy—a democracy that understands its birthright and is determined to defend it. He points out that selfishness, injustice, and evil are “‘in the world and never rest,’’ and that, if our “fairest government on earth” is preserved, it will be preserved by the individual American, and by him alone. Defender of Individualism is at the base of all Mr. Cool- Individualism. idge’s political, social, economic, and cultural thinking. “‘We have no dependence,” says he, “but the individual. New charters cannot save us. They [ Page Eighty-five | Wie AO Beg se IE, 4B, CNET RA TaN a Cyan ES, TTC mn eos Se Oe may appear to help, but the chances are that the beneficial results obtained are due to interest aroused by discussing changes. Laws do not make reforms; reforms make laws. We cannot look to government. We must look to ourselves. We must stand, not in the expectation of a reward, but with a desire to serve. Politics is the process of action in public affairs. It is personal; it is individual, and nothing more. Destiny is in you.” Government, to be sure, in Mr. Coolidge’s outlook, has a wide field of vital service. It must care for the education of the people, for their health, for their housing and working conditions, for the mentally and physically defective, for the weak in their struggle with the strong. All legislation, he re- marks, should “‘recognize the right of man to be well born, well nurtured, well educated, well employed, and well paid.”’ But government, as this observer sees it, should interfere with individual liberty—should subtract from the privileges of the individual—only to the extent of preventing impingement upon the rights of other individuals. Its function is that of safeguarding and promoting the social welfare, while main- taining conditions of justice and freedom for the individual citizen, strong or weak, rich or poor. His Admiration Significant of Mr. Coolidge’s feeling about for Roosevelt. American politics and American national in- terests is his admiration for Theodore Roose- velt. What Roosevelt loved Coolidge loves. Hear him: ‘His [Roosevelt’s] work goes on. His battle line strengthens. His principles have more defenders, his actions more admirers. His followers are building a shrine at his birthplace to increase the influence of his life. The people whom he loved and trusted and served are the contributors. Here men may come and remember that he re-established a representative government of all the people, reopened the closing doors of opportunity, reawakened the soul of his country, and re-enforced the moral fiber of America.”’ And listen to the President’s final words relative to his great predecessor in the White House: “‘Let the people make pilgrim- ages to this shrine where his great life began, where Theodore Roosevelt learned to kneel in prayer; let them contemplate his works and recall his sacrifices, and, out of their pilgrimage, their contemplation and their recollection, will be born the un- yielding conviction, ‘Greater love hath no man than this’. { Page Eighty-six } nA) Cae Lie ok er a ee eet ce YA) nS) Wadia ea waa His Defence of Close student of government, both in theory Law and Order. and in practice, from early manhood—he went almost immediately from law to politics —Calvin Coolidge has had a lifelong and uncommonly vivid appreciation of the importance of law and order, without which there is no government and no civilization. It was this sense— this appreciation—which decided his position and gave him national renown in connection with the Boston police strike. It has been suggested that he was less strong in that crisis, or at a certain stage of that crisis, than he ought to have been, but those most familiar with the facts believe his conduct left nothing to be desired, and the National Institute of Social Sciences honored him with a gold medal. “It is no accident,’ Mr. Coolidge has said, “‘tnat the people of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts believe in law and order. It is their heritage. When the Pilgrim Fathers landed there in 1620 they brought ashore with them the Mayflower Compact, which they had drawn up in the cabin of that little bark under the witness of the Almighty, in which they pledged themselves, one to another, to make just and equitable laws, and not only to make them, but, when they were made, to abide by them. So that for 300 years that has been the policy and the principle of that Commonwealth. And I shall hold this medal as a testimony to the service that was begun 300 years ago and has continued through these generations; and in the hope that its example may still continue as a beacon light to all civilization.” The Stronghold Mr. Coolidge esteems the United States of Government. Senate, like the Supreme Court, a liberty- conserving institution, and, therefore, a bul- wark of law and order in this country. He holds that the Sen- ate protects “‘not merely the rights of the majority—they little need protection—but the rights of the minority, from what- ever source they may be assailed.’’ His reading of the history of the Senate is that of a story of wisdom and discretion in action for the execution of the public will. He says it functions ‘“‘without passion and without fear, unmoved by clamor, but most sensitive to the right, the stronghold of government ac- cording to law, that the vision of past generations may be more and more the reality of generations yet to come.”’ Educated leadership bears a heavy responsibility in a re- public, according to Mr. Coolidge’s reasoning. All men cannot [ Page Eighty-seven } W Ore Rigber Cy HerARIN Ge cE Lae Us Rohe eS have the higher education; those fortunate enough to get it owe much to their fellow men. They should both reflect and lead public opinion. Coolidge is a nationalist. He reveres our nationalists from Washington to Roosevelt. He sees in jealous and vigorous nationalism nothing prejudicial to intelligent and beneficent internationalism. He admires the nationalistic principle that ‘lay at the foundation of all Washington’s statesmanship.” He declares that ‘““where Cesar and Napoleon failed, where even Cromwell faltered, Washington alone prevailed. He wished the people of his country to be great, but great in their own right. He resisted the proposal that he should be set up to rule them. He adopted the proposal that they should be organized to rule themselves. He carried these principles through to the end. He adhered, not to the cause of France, nor to the cause of England, but to that of America; and with patience and greatness sublime bore the resulting abuse of his country for his country’s good.” Americanism, in Coolidge’s interpretation, is humanism in government. He is all for the idea that the mass is served best by serving the unit. If the unit prospers, if the individual feels he has protection and the open door, the mass prospers and there is national tranquillity. Of government activity affect- ing individual initiative and opportunity Coolidge is in- stinctively suspicious and critical. That is to say, he is the poles apart from Socialism. He thinks Socialism approaches human problems—the problems of society—from diametrically the wrong direction. In his view, personal freedom, private impulse to action, every man possessing inviolate the fruits of his industry, are the sure and the only incentives to progress, as they are the unmistakable marks of human justice. And as the President is for humanism in government, so he is for humanism in industry. He declares that “‘industry must be humanized, or the system will break down.”’ Early Advocate of Liberalism of sentiment on the part of Woman Suffrage. Coolidge is evidenced by his early ap- proval of votes for women. In this matter —and it was an excellent test of the spirit of statesmen—he was in advance of many of his contemporaries on both sides of the Atlantic. For example, Coolidge favored the franchise for women long before Herbert Asquith, outstanding Liberal leader in England, threw his weight into the scales for this [| Page Eighty-eight | THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON October 14, 1924. My dear Mr. Bell :- I have received the article which you submitted to me. It seems to portray in an essentially correct way my views on certain out- standing questions and I am willing that you should use it in this form as the expression of my opinion. Very traly yours, Mr. Edward Price Bell, 1439 Maple Avenne, Evanston, Illinois. Crore cer Lo: Diels Ena te ce eh Yt Sor Uys ey Mey ORES ay epoch-marking reform. It simply never occurred to Coolidge that women were politically inferior to men, that they were less citizens than were men, or that modern society could afford to exclude their intelligence and morality from politics. There are acute observers who have said that Herbert As- quith’s decline as a force in British political life began with his opposition to the enfranchisement of British women. Demagoguery, so far as one can discover from either the speech or the acts of President Coolidge, is alien to his ideas of party expediency and to his temperament. Demagoguery implies insincerity, and no one acquainted with the President suspects him of insincerity. His blood, his deeply religious home life, the mountains among which he grew up, the great instructors who ministered to his mental and moral develop- ment at Amherst, all combined to make him too serious and too wise a man to set any store by demagoguery or trickery of any kind. His Sympathy So, when Calvin Coolidge, for instance, de- For the Worker. clares his sympathy with those who work— work with their hands or with their brains— one safely may take him at his word. He himself is a worker. He always has been poor, and he never has tried to get rich. His fees as a lawyer were so low as to provoke remark all over Massachusetts. Trade-union principles, from the beginning of his public career, have had his tangible support. “‘With proper co-operation between labor and employers,”’ he once said, ‘‘the future prosperity of the country may be doubly assured. Human labor will never again be cheap.”’ But he did not allow labor to dictate to him. When Samuel Gompers wired him to dismiss the Police Commissioner of Boston, he flashed back this reply: ““The right of the police of Boston to afhliate has always been questioned, never granted, is now prohibited. There is no right to strike against the public safety by any- body, anywhere, any time.” Unbounded pride and faith in America are part and parcel of Calvin Coolidge’s character. He sees her “‘steadily march- ing on.” To him her history, her services to freedom, are ‘“‘glorious.”’ ‘““There is,” he remarks, “‘her prosperity. There is the wonderful organization of her government, perfected in its ultimate decisions to reflect the will of the people. There is her system of education, developed in accordance with the public schools established in Massachusetts in 1647. There is [ Page Eighty-nine } Wii LON aD Ci HAIN te ee eee EN ee oes her transportation, superior to that of any other country. There is her banking organization, richer than any other on earth. There is her commerce, which flows to the world mar- kets. There is her industrial plant, superior to that of any other place or time. There is her agriculture, vast beyond the imagination to comprehend.” Achievements of | Are these the result of the genius of a few? A Great People. ‘‘No,’’ answers Mr. Coolidge. “All these are but the reflection of the genius, not of a select few, but of a wonderful people, great in: intelligence, great in moral power, great in character.”’ Adversity seems to this Appalachian thinker a relatively innocuous thing from America’s standpoint. It is prosperity he fears. Not in lack of power, but “‘in the purpose directing the use of great power,’ lies the danger to American civiliza- tion, as Mr. Coolidge sees the future. ‘“There is new peril in our very greatness,’ he comments. “There are all the old dangers in our incompleteness. It is impossible to overlook our imperfections. The war has greatly diminished the substance of some and greatly increased the substance of many. It has already given a new tongue to envy. Without doubt it will give a new grasp to greed.”’ In the whole of President Coolidge’s private and public dis- cussion of America there is an earnest call to high-minded and vigorous citizenship. ‘Society in America is in a healthy state of progress, but it cannot go alone; it must be supported.”’ Turning from the good to the bad in our national life—from the bright to the dark picture—the President says: “‘Schools we have, but a vast amount of illiteracy. Luxury we have, but a wide fringe of degradation and poverty. Great farms we have, but there are those who lack food, and amid a flood of commerce there are those who lack clothing and shelter. Civilization’s “With all the light that comes from learn- Need of Support. ing and religion, with all the deterrent power of organized society, there is an appalling amount of vice and crime. Some say civilization has failed. It has not failed, as anyone can see who looks at his- tory. It must be supported and continued. It cannot be pre- served without effort, and it is not yet done. The work must go on. As society grows more complicated, as civilization ad- vances, the burden of its support is not less; it is more. It was never so great before as it is now.” [ Page Ninety } Ca ume orp la) DPC eticn wer Acai O52) CORE Var AEs ny In The Daily News’ interviews with those great Europeans —Marx, Mussolini, Poincaré, and MacDonald—we find one note firmly struck by all. It is the note, the principle, of sacrifice. These men tell us no society can be splendid, and no society can be secure, unless its citizens are ready for sacrifice. Calvin Coolidge says: ‘““We need wealth and science and justice in human relationship, but redemption comes only through sacrifice. There is no other process that can sustain civiliza- tion; no other law of progress. If we make any headway against the perils of society, it will be by that process. Let justice and the economic laws be applied to the strong. But for the weak there must be mercy and charity—not the gra- tuity which pauperizes, but the assistance which restores. The Rewards ‘Failure means that sacrifice was lacking to of Sacrifice. secure success. Selfishness defeats itself. This has been the malady of every empire that has fallen, from Babylon to Russia. Where there has been success, it has meant that sacrifice has prevailed. It has been the sal- vation of every people from early civilization to the present day. America was laid in the sacrifices of Pilgrim and Puritan and the colonists of that day. It was defended by the sacrifices of the revolutionary period. It was made all free by the sacrifices of those who followed Lincoln, and insured by all who accept him. It was saved by the sacrifices of the World War.” Mr. Coolidge affirms that, if we fill our legions with Gauls and Numidians and other barbarian tribes—if we do not our- selves go out to fight—we shall perish, as Rome perished. ‘‘Man’s salvation comes out of man. Government can aid, it cannot save, man. Civilization is always on trial, testing out, not the power of material resources, but whether there be in the heart of the people that virtue and character which come from charity sufficient to maintain progress. When that char- ity fails, civilization, though it “speak with the tongues of men and of angels,’ is ‘become as sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal.’ Its glory is departed. Its spirit has gone. Its life is done.”’ The Hopeful Revolutionism, in the Coolidge argument, is View of Man. a social menace that can be fought success- fully with only mental and moral munitions. Overt revolutionary acts—incitements to assassination and [ Page Ninety-one ]} WiOvsihen kai OH AS NGS) ESD ee ae en ee esi violence and actual resort to crime—can be and must be punished. They must be crushed under the heel of authority. But beliefs cannot be treated so. Every citizen has a right, guaranteed by the Constitution, to make up his own mind and to express it, so long and so far as it does not signify violence toward those who hold different opinions. “If you are going to resist beliefs,” says the President, “‘you must meet them, expose their fallacy, present the facts which prove them wrong.” Mr. Coolidge thinks our extreme malcontents are “in the pay of the revolutionary authorities of Russia,’’ and he does not dismiss too lightly the peril involved, but he does not regard it as “‘genuinely serious.”’ “T am of a very hopeful disposition,’’ says the Republic’s Chief Executive. You ask him why, and he replies: “‘Because I believe profoundly in my fellow-men.’’ His point of view is that the great mass of mankind the world over is reasonably sane and well disposed. If he did not believe this, as he will tell you, he could not have the confidence he has in popular rule. There is nothing priggish about the President. Admirer though he is of education, of learning, of culture—believer though he is in intellectual leadership for all it may be worth —he is not one of those who fancy that all wisdom is lodged in the cultivated classes. He knows that the soil has a wonder- ful way of enlightening those who live upon it. He knows that many things concealed from the wise and prudent are revealed unto babes. Sources of He is far from thinking America ex- Material Prosperity. travagantly, or exceptionally, material- istic. “‘It is said by some,”’ he observes. “that Americans are bent on only that kind of success which can be cashed into dollars and cents. That is a very narrow and unintelligent opinion. We have been successful beyond others in great commercial and industrial enterprises because we have been a people of vision. Our prosperity has resulted, not by disregarding, but by maintaining, high ideals. Material resources do not, and cannot, stand alone; they are the product of spiritual resources. It is because America, as a nation, has held fast to the higher things of life, because it has had a faith in mankind which it has dared to put to the test of self-govern- ment, because it has believed greatly in honor and truth and righteousness, that a great material prosperity has been added unto it.” | Page Ninety-two | ee OO we Lee) oi Die) Coa ew A ol Sy UO eR Vag eae Y) Devout New Englander, Calvin Coolidge is no sectionalist. He has made friends in all parts of the country, and not least in the South, where his Yankee twang was in strange contrast to the Southern drawl. He has spoken in many places, and wherever he has spoken he has picked up local knowledge; it has surprised not a few of his deputations. Basis for Hear him speak of Virginia—the old Popular Liberties. Dominion of Virginia—and you feel his enthusiasm, as you feel it when he speaks of New Hampshire or of Massachusetts. *‘No other of our States,’’ he reflects, “is so rich in history and tradition. The story of the early attempts at the settle- ment of Virginia, of its lost colony, and of the final success after failure, is all more fascinating than fiction. It has ever been the home of a proud and valiant race of pioneers and their descendants, of the early seventeenth century, strengthened and dignified by a dominant addition of Cavaliers and Hugue- nots, a sturdy and high-minded people, forever jealous of their rights and intent upon guarding and maintaining their liberties. Virginia, in 1619, assembled the first parliament ever con- vened in America. Its House of Burgesses met at Jamestown, and, ever since continual, is the oldest of our legislative bodies.”’ While pointing out that the informal Mayflower Compact of November, 1620, “‘holds a high place among the charters of free government,’ Mr. Coolidge states that ‘“‘the first formal and authoritative charter which established free government on this continent was that granted to Virginia in July, 1621.” Dwelling upon the breadth of the Massachusetts mind, Mr. Coolidge recalls the words of one of the greatest sons of that State, Benjamin Franklin: “‘Above all, Washington has a sense of the oneness of America. Massachusetts and Georgia are as dear to him as Virginia.”’ And the President adds: “‘It is be- cause Plymouth Rock, Bunker Hill, John Adams and Daniel Webster represent the nation that they glorify their State. In that faith Massachusetts still lives.” Strength Lies | Home life, labor and obedience figure promi- in the Homely _ nently in Coolidge’s fundamental conceptions. Virtues. “Tf our Republic is to be maintained and im- proved, it will be, first of all, because of the influences which exist in the home, for it is the ideals which prevail in the home life which make up the strength of the nation. The homely virtues must continue to be cultivated. [ Page Ninety-three ] Wri Oo Roe a> CE AO NA GERM Le Oi Een LE aanies The real dignity, the real nobility, of work must be cherished. It is only through industry that there is any hope for individual development.’” Among the “grave duties and responsibilities’ of those who would preserve “‘the high estate of freedom”’ this philosopher continually names obedience. It is the “‘things unseen”’ upon which he relies—the eternal moralities. Certain of the President’s critics have accused him of per- petually speaking in platitudes. He hears this criticism with complacency. He refers us to the cynical remark about Roose- velt’s rediscovery of the Moral Law, and observes: ““‘What they said derisively let us state seriously. Roosevelt did discover the Ten Commandments, and he applied their doctrine with great vigor in places that had assumed they had the power to discard the Ten Commandments.”’ Calvin Coolidge thinks this country and every other country need, and never can hear too much of, the old but ever-vital principles of individual and national character. He agrees with Samuel Taylor Coleridge that philosophy and moral passion cannot be better engaged than in “rescuing admitted truths from the neglect caused by their universal admission.’’ Cynical highbrowism makes a very small dent on the present occupant of the White House. How Best to Sympathetic toward all nations, and in favor Serve the World. of what he deems prudent and effectual co- operation with other peoples for the common welfare of the world, Calvin Coolidge is vigilant and scrupulous to guard the national sovereignty of the United States from the incidence of any form of extra-American authority. His thesis is that we must be masters in our own house. He is of opinion that that way lies an increase of our strength and there- fore an added ability on our part to serve the general interests of civilization. Far from a “pacifist,” he is a steadfast peace man. Our record on arbitration, our quarter of a century’s membership of The Hague Tribunal, and our long-cherished desire for a world court of justice he recalls with gratification. To the Permanent Court of International Justice he is committed in his first annual message to the Congress, and in his latest pub- lic addresses. He supports warmly the arrangements looking to peace in the Pacific. Rejecting membership in the League of Nations, he has found many w. ys to co-operate with it for the benefit of all peoples—notably, in respect of narcotics, white slavery and public health measures—and he used his [ Page Ninety-four ] Ree) One Lc bt tk Conmeinasniy wi eA 2) Oot Ue f Rie a Visite Ey influence to further the Dawes Plan, including the indispen- sable financial transactions contingent upon that plan. It is interesting and instructive to note that Mr. Coolidge’s attitude toward any sort of super-State is in entire agreement with the standpoints expressed in The Daily News’ interviews with European statesmen. The President announces that we do not intend to permit any foreign nation, nor any group of foreign nations, “‘to make up our minds for us.’ Chancellor Marx, Benito Mussolini, Raymond Poincaré, and Ramsay MacDonald use words to precisely the same effect. Thus Marx: “‘Peoples are not ready for world federalism— for national autonomies related to an overriding central author ity, as, for example, the American States to Washington or the German States to Berlin. The League of Nations, as I understand it, would enthrone reason, justice, and peace, not by the crude and ineffectual instrumentality of compulsion but by a peace-breeding voluntarism based upon international understanding and desire.”’ Mussolini, a nationalist of nationalists, is a strong supporter of the League of Nations, but only because, in his judgment, “‘it can do great things in the world, while leaving the individual nations in complete possession of their self-direction.’’ To Poincaré the League is merely an established means for “‘the friendly co-operation of peace-loving free nations.’’ Suggest to this veteran statesman, with one of the most experienced and astute legal minds in the world, that France’s internal authority is in any way impaired by her membership in the League, and you evoke a smile. Ramsay MacDonald says: “‘] do not mean that any nation should lose its freedom over the League; | mean rather that all nations should exercise their freedom on behalf of the League. Britain did not lose her liberty when she identified her prestige and energy with the League. No member State did. Every nation should help, but help in its own way. It is essential to national independence, to popular control over policy, that nations do everything they do in their own way. But doing things in one’s own way is a very different matter from not doing them at all.” ; The Program Again and again President Coolidge has of a President. acknowledged his sense of America’s inter- national interests and obligations. His first message to the Congress was laden with this sentiment, and it [ Page Ninety-five } Wa ONG rae CetHeCA TUNIC) A Lee cannes Le eee inheres in his view of the fatherhood of God and the brother- hood of man. He has spoken of the wide vision of the Massa- chusetts mind; it was wide enough to accommodate within its understanding and sympathy all the States of the American Union. May we not hope that the Massachusetts mind, or the Appalachian mind, of Calvin Coolidge, regularly as opportunity arises, will bring within its conspectus the whole world, not as an object merely of generous sentiments, but as an object of concrete measures of helpful fellowship? We have examined the spiritual and intellectual background —the broad, sustaining emotions and convictions—of the President. He is a constitutionalist, an individualist, an econ- omist, a tax reducer, a protectionist, an immigration restricter, a world court man, an arms limiter, an enemy of aggressive war, a world co-operator without official and permanent con- nection with international machinery, a pro-agriculturist, and an intense American patriot, as he understands American patriotism. { Page Ninety-six PILLARS OF WORLD PEACE The Problem of the Pacific and a Formula for International Good Relations Discussed by MACKENZIE KING Prime Minister of Canada “Preservation of Tangible Individualities {of Race] Will Preserve Those Intangible [ndividualities Which Are a Source of Universal Enrichment.” ula gs! a Premier Mackenzie King of Canada Wisi: can be done to put the Pacific situation upon a basis of settled peace>”’ Light upon this question, upon the general ques- tion of world tranquillity, upon the nationalistic senti- ments and policies involved, upon the spiritual and mental attitudes of public men likely, in due course, to affect the issue—light upon this intricate and vital congeries of material and immaterial problems was sought without bias and with entire catholicity of sympathy. William Lyon Mackenzie King, Prime Minister of Can- ada, is one of the constituents—and by no means an un- important one—among the human factors of such an inquiry. He is such because he is a leader in a vigorous and growing modern State with a definite and tenaciously-held point of view touching world affairs. Canada has her place, her in- defeasible rights, in the Pacific; and she has her living points of contact wherever a general conflagration might threaten humanity. Canada’s Forceful Influential in Canada, and holding a posi- Prime Minister. tion of high responsibility there, Mackenzie King is of political consequence in a wider field. He is so for two substantial reasons, (1) because he is a Canadian of authority in British imperial councils, and (2) because, as an intermediary or liaison agency—a golden bridge—between Britain and the United States, he frequently can be of service to all concerned in serious matters of diplo- macy. What decisive and weighty forms such service can take —the service of wise and well-disposed Canadian statesmen to the cause of English-speaking harmony—will be apparent when the archives of governments yield their records to history. What is Mackenzie King like personally? He has had the goodness, in his snowy, picturelike capital, dominating the glory of the Ottawa valley and the hills be- yond, to receive me and chat at length. Publicity Mackenzie King never has sought. Through all his party activities; through his remarkable work in adjusting industrial disputes [ Page Ninety-nine ]} Wt OCR Gael Ce ET atA WN OCs SSA LS ans ae ee Ce ree in Canada and in the United States; in his contact with the problems of the Orient, his historic fights against sweating, abuse of the Canadian immigration laws, the opium traffic and other evils—from first to last, in these efforts, which revealed a vigilance and energy rare in the civic realm, Mr. King never was dazzled by the limelight. The Man and My first sight of him was at the door of His Surroundings. the House of Commons. It was the hour of adjournment at 6 o’clock, and members were pouring forth into the main corridors of the parliament buildings. Mackenzie King came last, in a brown business suit, a modest figure of medium height, solidly built, fair complexioned, clean shaven, hair thin on the crown, open countenance good humored, sympathetic, and grave. We went to his private ofiice—the one he had admired as leader of the Opposition and chose to keep when he became Premier, fore- going the office intended for the first minister—a compact room with an air of elegance, on the walls a series of pictorial symbolisms culminating in “‘Vision’’ and “‘Wisdom,”’’ and in one corner a marble bust of Laurier, the lamented old Liberal chieftain. But it was in the Prime Minister’s home—Laurier House, Laurier Avenue, a beautiful residence bequeathed to Mr. King by Lady Laurier, widow of Sir Wilftid, and charmingly ap- pointed and furnished—it was here that the opportunity was afforded for a study of the character, ideas and aspirations of Canada’s ministerial leader. That first impression of him as a man of good-humored seriousness, of sympathy, sincerity, occasional gravity, was confirmed. Qualities of this order color his whole speech and manner in public and in private—no flippancy, no cynicism, no fondness for biting epigram, no hint of shuffling or pretense, no uncharity. A Student of Mackenzie King is a religious man—an old- His Fellow Man. fashioned religious man—who believes, as Lincoln believed, in asking the help of God when duties are heavy and when the path of right and wisdom is obscure or beset with danger. He inspires strong friendships without arousing bitter antipathies. Splendor of character, heroism, move him deeply, as is attested with beauty and power in his book, “‘The Secret of Heroism,” and in his intro- duction to a technical volume written by his medical brother when the latter was slowly dying of an incurable malady. [| Page One-Hundred | ‘ ’ 1 ae jj i i Be i Ue ard ae , v os a : a t ral ¥ ‘ 7 ; A ae - % : - fi ve au Jt A ie? Be ie y, i ware vis aur 7 A o eae 7 7 hey | i | ie) s ‘7 ; ‘ pry ies " ok , 7 ‘a A. ! ; aS eee es ay, Brae, tariaphiet ifrar on hf ¢ eu / po 7 —_ ios : *, hee e vi a ‘Te 7 is vi : - 7 By eee eae ei a “ods : Via! cal ye ae pep é a F 7 ‘ j a nae 4 , 1 ? ‘ . fh ae 1 = a onl ye A iv : ¥ hemi i : » : 7 i v Om | § . i a ne * ; : : = i i ‘ ' 7 a : a vl ; _ 7 » 4 7 r - . Lun sah 7 7 : As hi ahr ‘ j é Sari el ; ; AAG ; - ig é : ' : - = walt wa ' 7 = eal ; ie : ae P = 7 rer: er} 4 : J mn Jatt P _ 40) 1 4 bi : 7 ’ ' ; 7 Pax J é i ih i ¥ "4, ‘ee r im = \ i a : i y 7 r 7 aS eee (on . 7 a : 3 ; A 7 i y 7 : = AS 4 « ’ ' ‘ ' 1 . ‘ et ! 1 a) 4 = | . 5 i > oie : , i : : i A. i 7 ate ee Ate os Un . : Mm : ded, ig a ' a, “s ; , oe Wass, san : 7 ‘4 y 1 ' y ; cad at j saa a Ry pas i. : ‘ v. +e a a ~ vr a + ie i ‘ - 7 , 7 i a 3,097) rane . - : , . Peete ey a ie =~ een a ‘ i Oy bee al - Pe ee ~i | ae oe yu i 7 ma - yy Pia 7 a 7 yee Aa r 2» x a | 7 * ‘ « aS oe Sot? ory eB a Seep &. dl 7 oo 4 a Beatie ‘ 1 nd 7 : : : a - 2% a i pa ie - . ’ Wye a Ponehe uae : sex eared ss aie ys apa oy Ger Ca s | ae ae a, | “ wh Shh ek CANADA Ottawa, February 24, 1925 My dear Mr. Bell: I have read the article which you purpose using as the first of a series on Pacific problems. You have presented my views of the Oriental question in a more syste- matic and possibly a more idealized form than I should have been able to attempt. Your presentation, however, fairly and ably embodies the substance of my thought on the phases of the problem discussed, and you are at liberty to use the article in any way which you may think would be either of interest or of service. Yours sincerely, Mr. Edward Price Bell, Chateau Laurier, Ottawa. Hygiene Ade he om OO Wm Wil Oo en Loy ie Rank AD Ca E: Science and sentiment, industry and humanity, in Mr. King’s view, far from being incompatible, have an essential affinity. His education in economics—he obtained a master’s degree at the University of Toronto, did postgraduate work at the University of Chicago, where he was a resident at Hull House and formed a high opinion of the genius of Miss Jane Addams; received a doctorate of philosophy from Harvard, gained a Harvard fellowship, and pursued his economic studies in Great Britain, France, Germany, and Italy—this scientific education, united with his experience in settling more than fifty trade disputes in Canada, his ten years’ administration as Deputy Minister and Minister of the Canadian Department of Labor, and his prolonged study of industrial warfare and prob- lems in the United States under the auspices of the Rockefeller Foundation, led to the writing of his masterpiece, “Industry and Humanity,’’ wherein he shows the correlation of these elements, and develops the thesis that industrial peace depends upon the fair representation in executive authority of the four parties to industry—capital, management, labor, and the community. His Knowledge of So much for the spiritual, educational, and Pacific Problems. temperamental background of the states- man whose opinions concerning certain world problems this article will try to interpret. In the reality and conclusiveness of moral power, it should be remembered, he is an unquestioning believer. He sets no store by double dealing in statecraft. He believes honesty and the Golden Rule are the only standards for decent people in whatever walk of life. Ask him if the edge of these weapons can be turned by others less bright to him, and he will tell you morality, as he tests it, is more finely tempered and sharper than steel. ““What can be done to put the Pacific situation upon a basis of settled peace?” Intimacy of touch with the task here suggested came to Mackenzie King in the course of some twenty years of official life, many months of which were given to special investigation of Oriental immigration in Canada, of the social strife resulting therefrom in Vancouver, and of related conditions and methods in Japan, China, and India. Out of this systematic examina- tion of a problem of many aspects, and a problem affecting the deepest human emotions, has come a Canadian legislative and administrative position enabling Canadians to feel that [ Page One Hundred One ] Wa sOnmi Reta Ch this Aso N® \Cunb sr ewiss Ne beta aad the Dominion is safe, or reasonably safe, from the danger both of too large an Asiatic population and of embittered relations with the Orient. ‘First,’ to throw an interpretation of Mackenzie King’s thought into direct discourse, “‘those international relations inseparable from the Pacific, if they are to be discussed service- ably, must be discussed candidly; and, if they are discussed candidly, they must be discussed with a high degree of pru- dence and of sympathy. In them, it probably is not too much to say, are bound up not only the happiness of mankind but the whole course and character of future civilization. Value of *‘There is no reason why war should Cultural Interchanges. come in the Pacific; there is every rea- son why it should not—every reason from every angle of observation. Cultural interchange, friend- ly, free, continuous, progressive—this, not war, is what the Orient needs, and what the Occident needs, in the Pacific. Our civilizations, in other words, are not antagonistic, not mutually exclusive, but complementary. This is the great fact for states- men and for all moral and intellectual leaders to grasp and to push powerfully to the front. “War in the Pacific would be a cataclysm to our whole human heritage. Japan, China, all the nations and races of the East, can find means of progress in the West, particularly in the sphere of science as applied to human welfare; and the West can find means of progress in the East, particularly in the spheres of abstract thought and the fine arts. Set up a steady and increasing interchange of these reciprocal advantages, and we shall have a movement tending irresistibly against those sentiments and convictions which, left to drift too far from the influence of a true understanding, might issue in war. Standards of Living “Critics of the Orient note what tney East and West. term ‘lower standards of living.’ What they mean, of course, is that the Oriental masses are satisfied with less than will satisfy the masses of the Occident. Our people demand much in the way of food, clothing and shelter. They require a varied diet, have ideas of quality and style in dress and like comfortable, well-furnished homes. Their wants go far beyond the elementary necessities —to gramophones and pianos, to porcelain and glassware, to motor cars, to pleasant, healthful surroundings, and indeed to everything desirable they can afford. They also demand one [| Page One Hundred Two } POR Reema, Run su rem ed OU Ti De BAGG aE rest day a week, with its attendant features of worship and social relationships. “All these things cost money, and outlay calls for income. Now, if a population of this kind—a population which has reached this stage of development as a result of generations or centuries of life and effort—finds itself in close juxtaposition and competition with a large population of simpler wants, of less exacting or fastidious tastes, enmity and conflict are sure to result. In such a situation it is economically inevitable that the people who are satisfied with less will displace, at least in great numbers of positions, the people who demand more. Simple Living “If the people with more expensive standards and Efficiency. were economically superior to the others— sufficiently superior to redress the economic balance—then, to be sure, the likelihood of trouble would be diminished. But, in the contiguity of Orientals and Occidentals in the Western Hemisphere, it well may be argued that no such superiority has shown itself. Immigrants from the Far East, despite the extreme simplicity cof their customs and tastes, generally have had efficient minds and bodies for the perform- ance of most kinds of work, and for establishing themselves in trade, and consequently have become an economic and social pressure terminating in an approach to violence. “These so-called ‘lower standards of living,’ representing to Western peoples a grim reality, warrant serious thought in the Occident, not merely when they are close at hand, but when they are thousands of miles away on their native territory. In vast disparity of living standards there is the augury of nothing but anxiety to those who are striving for amity and serenity in the world. Disparity of living standards has pro- duced domestic outbreaks; it contains the seeds of international outbreaks, because there is an international as well as a do- mestic competition, and the larger struggle is engaging a grow- ing proportion of the energies of men. Equalization ‘What, then, is the lesson of the inequality of of Standards. the standards of civilized life? Surely it is that these standards, so far as possible, should be equalized. If we do not want, as we should put it, to descend to the standards of the Orient, let us do all we can to lift those standards to the level of our own. How? By maintaining the friendliest relations with the Orient, extending our trade with [ Page One Hundred Three ] We AI Re ass Coe AGS NeUCr EAE asi eet oo ints) it, sending out our missionaries, medical scientists, educators, and engineers to unfold our way of life to our Asiatic brethren —in a word, by spending money, energy, and educational ardor in an endeavor to make the Orientals think as much of our civilization as we think of it. ‘Then there is a further way, and an effective one. We can welcome the international merchants of the Orient to our shores, as we are doing. Wecan welcome more and more their students and their intelligentsia generally. Japanese, Chinese, and Indian students in our universities are all to the good. They are a constantly expanding force for those adjustments and assimilations which alone can bring world harmony. The United States’ allocation of her Boxer indemnity to attract Chinese students to her seats of learning was policy truly en- lightened and humane. Western Ways ‘‘What have these students done, and what of Orientals. will such students always do? They have re- turned, and always will return, to China as missionaries of the Gospel, and as missionaries also of the ideals, culture, and trade of this Continent. Traveling in China, one cannot fail to be impressed by the number and variety of American manufactures seen on every hand. These articles are in trains, in hotels, and in shops—glassware, cutlery, stoves, clocks, canned fruits and vegetables. China’s students tell China of America’s goods. Great Britain, Canada, all Western peoples, well may extend to Oriental students the warmest welcome to their universities. “‘It might be conjectured that one favoring the closest and happiest cultural relations among nations and races must favor a slow approach to uniformity. If world unity meant world uniformity, world unity would attract many persons far less strongly than it does. But unity is not uniformity—consider a bouquet, an ensemble of color, attaining a perfect whole; consider an orchestra of many instruments and melodies, but one magnificent harmony; consider a country, like Canada, of countless diversities of river, lake, prairie, and mountain, but with a unity, after all, that is Canada, and Canada alone. Giving That “Cultural interchange, then—interchange Benefits the Giver. of the things of the mind and soul—is good for the Orient and good for the Occident. We can intermingle in this way, and intermingle to the utmost, { Page One Hundred Four | Beem weer tA) Ki mre down (ON RUD et Rg eA Cy CR but we cannot intermingle physically on any wholesale or un- limited scale without mutual misfortune. Whether we have here an immutable truth few probably would venture to say, but it is a truth practical observers and lovers of peace must recognize as holding the field today. If we achieve tranquillity we must solve the problem as among the races of relative bod- ily isolation and a wide spiritual and intellectual inter-com- munion. Preservation of tangible individualities will preserve those intangible individualities which are a source of universal enrichment. “‘Let no one suppose that any gifts of science, any benefits of any kind, moral, mental, or mechanical, passed on from the Occident to the Orient, will be lost to the giver. Such gifts, such benefits, will return as the years and ages lapse to bless the civilization that sent them forth. This is history; it is the universal moral law—the principle of the certain return of bread cast upon the water. Its working in British-American history, for example, is unmistakable. Britian poured her science, scholarship, jurisprudence, the essentials of her civili- zation, into the New World and into regions more remote, and the result was an allegiance of ideas and ideals. This allegiance, this comparatively homogeneous civilization, with its citadels in the colleges and universities of the Anglo-Saxon world, knew where it stood when an ambition of conquest and a formidable militarism threatened democracy. The Broad Exchange ‘‘What a return we saw of bread cast of Benefits. upon the water! We saw the ideas and ideals, the culture of which I have spoken, take the form of rivers of wealth flowing back to Europe, and of millions of men moving from distant shores to European battle fields. Great Englishmen, great men of British blood, men trained in the schools and colleges of the Old World, men taught the incomparable honor of devoted public service, had not forsaken in vain home and country and comfort and life-long friends to lay the foundations of English-speaking civilization around the globe. “We of North America, citizens of the United States and citizens of Canada, well may recall this background of a history we possess in common. It is a permeating influence. It is a fertilizing power. It is the silent force that all unconsciously keeps us one in aim and purpose, and unites our efforts for man’s advancement. We live in a time of unrest. In our {| Page One Hundred Five ] WY SUA RUSE N aah cetae Celt AGN Cr Rae ae re ee een kindred sentiments and ways of reasoning lies our chief hope of that solidarity which warrants some sense of safety. ““This is no time for English-speaking women and men to cease casting their bread upon the water. Let the New World in its turn pour forth its inspiration and vigor for such service as these may render to other peoples, and especially to those great and virile peoples across the Pacific. In proportion to the impression we make, to the good we do, will be those permanent effects which will make for the unification of man- kind in the rational pursuit of the happiness due to them all. And my conception, as | think I have made clear, is not a one- way conception. While we are ‘casting our bread upon the water I hope our fellow men of the Orient will be acting similarly—that is, teaching us all they can in philosophy, ethics, esthetics, and all the arts of civilized life.”’ Formula for Peace Peace in the Pacific, therefore, and like- in the Pacific. wise world peace, in the opinion of Can- ada’s Premier, have two major pillars— (1) scrupulous mutual regard for racial and nationalistic vir- tues, rights, and susceptibilities; and (2) cultural and com- mercial intercourse making for all-around enlightenment and an ultimate equilibrium, or approximate equilibrium, of life- standards. These pillars, as Mackenzie King reads the out- look in the light of all he has seen and thought, can stand only through a common and amicable recognition of the principle that in the biological, sociological, and psychological situation as we have it today general physical or social blending on the part of widely different races is destructive of the universal interest. On the point of courtesy to foreign governments and peo- ples—the point of the value of caution and consideration on the part of every citizen, and especially of every person in a place of public responsibility, in commenting upon or handling international and interracial questions—on this head Mackenzie King has been uniformly insistent. Throughout his inquiries under royal commission into the causes of immigra- tion from Japan, China, and India, and into the riotous sequel of that immigration, his unvarying civility and fairmindedness won the confidence and esteem of Orientals and Occidentals alike; his fellow-feeling and sense of justice were color blind. [| Page One Hundred Six | Peieiseien AL he ome Oe bee We OR De Pak pA CE Courtesy in In similar spirit have been conceived all his Statesmanship. speeches, State papers, and appeals to Parlia- ment. With what effect? With the effect, as already indicated, that Canada’s legislation and regulative procedure are comparatively unobjectionable to Japanese, Chinese, and Indians, though giving what is deemed adequate assurance against anything resembling a submergence soon or late of white civilization in the Dominion. To explain this legislation and regulative procedure in detail would require much space. In a nutshell, Canada has kept the bald and offensive principle of explicit exclusion out of her laws and has narrowed her gates by administrative constriction until she has come within approximate complete control of Ait: types and numbers of immigrants she wants. ‘Understand!’ I should call it the paramount verb of Mackenzie King’s philosophical grammar. His public career has been a sustained effort to understand, to know, to appre- hend all pertinent feeling and opinion, pefore decision and action. He has read William James responsively. “‘One half of our fellow countrymen,’ wrote that philosopher, “‘remain entirely blind to the internal significance of the lives of the other half.”’ “‘It is so!’’ exclaims the successor of Laurier, and the observation illumines for him the whole range of individual and social discords, national and international, racial and interracial. Mackenzie King puts down to William James’ “‘certain blindness in human beings”’ the origin of “‘every dis- pute and controversy’ of which he has had any “intimate knowledge.”’ National It follows that he approves and anticipates Individualism beneficial effects from international co-oper- and Liberty. ation such as that of the League of Nations. He thinks it should be educative and conse- quently of use in reducing that “‘certain blindness in human beings’” which he has found so evil an influence in industrial and social relations. But Mackenzie King would not have the League mix too minutely in international affairs. He would have it confine its attention to the broadest international ques- tions and keep as its sole object the enforcement of the ac- cepted principles of sportsmanship, of fair play, in world con- troversies. Mr. King is an individualist. Individualism and liberty to him are synonymous terms. Domestically, in his reasoning, the power of the State should be exercised to “‘keep [ Page One Hundred Seven ] Wit Oeth ala) GH AN IN Ca ah aoe ea nee Sn the ring’’—to see that all classes and all citizens have justice— and, internationally, some organization such as the League of Nations should perform a corresponding function for indepen- dent peoples. To the fundamental tenet of democracy—that of each nation’s right to shape its destiny—-Mackenzie King is re- solutely devoted. For the sanctity of this tenet he has been a valiant champion in British imperial council chambers, in dis- patches from Ottawa to London, and on the floor of the Cana- dian House of Commons. World Rule by What he would be unwilling to concede Broad Agreements. to the government of the homeland of the British Commonwealth of Nations, namely, domination of the Dominions, he is not likely to con- cede to any centralized authority aspiring to rule the world. Rule of the British peoples, says Mackenzie King, must spring from a concurrence of policy indorsed by the British peoples in their separate and free qualities. Rule of the world, he goes on logically to observe, must spring from a concurrence of policy indorsed by the world’s separate and several sovereign- ties, Nor does he see any inherent impracticability in the con- ception of world rule based upon national voluntarism. It is, in his judgment, all a matter of understanding and of the eye- sight born of understanding—all a matter of curing that “‘cer- tain blindness in human beings”’ which struck the philosophical intelligence of William James and which confronted Mackenzie King in every capital-and-labor dispute he grappled with in Canada and in the United States. His primary political thesis is that humanity as a whole is reasonable, that it is just, that it loves orderly evolution, that it is human, and consequently that only familiarity with facts is needful to harmony and constructive policy in furthering the prosperity and fortifying the peace of the world. Justice Through ‘‘Democracy”’ is a big word. He who grasps Understanding. its full meaning [| think will hold the master key to Mackenzie King’s philosophy of in- dustry, nationalism and internationalism. He believes precisely the same thing about all of them—that they can have order, [ Page One Hundred Eight | ala LRA oie a eee ORs Di Re Ry MA Gok prosperity, and progress only if their theory and practice give due recognition to every right and every interest concerned. Would you have peace in industry? Then do justice by all the parties to industry. Would you have peace in the nation? Then do justice by all the elements of your citizenship. Would you have peace in the Pacific and throughout the world? Then understand the Pacific. Appreciate its realities. Understand the world. Make room in your heart and mind for all the emotions, all the faiths, all the convictions, all the interests of the infinitely diversified multitudes of our planet. Do this and then join soberly but with firmness of purpose in support of those laboring to construct a skeleton of civilization within which these emotions, faiths, convictions, and interests can find a commodious and stable home. In this last paragraph, to my mind, we have a fairly faithful portrait in ethics and in politics of William Lyon Mackenzie King, grandson of the famous Canadian rebel and patriot, William Lyon Mackenzie, who, if he displayed a certain faculty for indiscretion, at least saw clearly the constitutional road of | Canadian advance and had the intrepidity to point out that road and to call in clarion tones to his compatriots to follow it. { Page One Hundred Nine} es hs Hi ci ae ‘ at he ee # bie i i‘ Gea Me yaa MR. BANCROFT IN TOKYO Methods and Opinions of the Late American Ambassador to Japan “Japan, If | Read Her Aright, Will Not Attempt to Ladle Broth for Her People Out of the Cauldron of War.” ies arpa Le RN it is in ; ; F y ; yy tes ) rs yu Ts he eee aA ry x he th es Cee i ie Gk Wee ome , fi vA va ‘Sh cu elie E tieaet eure ok att as j ly hair as psy oe a ae 6 ST Wat ul, ae Ga A EL Wed « in By: Whsie. my LA i CH MELS Oi tlacae (eee WA ee ’ u yea j Taviit ¢ } We ' iv ea ae AY ait ie hes Pa ie a te f he * P ae fie o Fe! ? ia iG) oe i | oor ey ; y A 5 ‘et "| ANY at fs Mr. Bancroft in Tokyo LERT, sympathetic, practical, candid, tireless, Edgar A Addison Bancroft, though only a few months in Tokyo, left an impression upon the Japanese mind as clear-cut as it was favorable. It may be doubted whether any other man in the American diplomatic service ever accomplished so great a moral result in so short a time. His mind was sanity itself, his character above reproach, his honesty inflexible. Acumen, astuteness, decision, nerve—he had them. But of the miserable subterfuge of the old diplomacy he was as inno- cent as a lamb. There was a great change in Ambassador Bancroft’s appear- ance and condition during the eight weeks of my stay in Tokyo in the early summer of 1925. When I first saw him at his desk, he looked much as he had looked on our last meeting in Chicago. He was gray and his face was lined, but there was the familiar flash in his eyes, his movements were quick, and the grip of his hand was hard. When I saw him finally—on Sunday morning, June 7, in his corner suite in the Imperial Hotel—his eyes were dull, his movements slow, and his hand- clasp slack. This conversation is recorded in my diary of that date: *‘Mr. Ambassador, I wish you would take the first good boat to the States.” “Why?” ‘““Because you are ill.” “Do I look ill?” “‘T am awfully sorry to say you do, and I feel you cannot get well here. You are eating half-cooked vegetables. Be- sides, this alien tide is setting strong against you. Ten days on a good ship and a few weeks in America will make a new man of you. Then you can come back.” Bancroft looked wearily at me for some time. “Bell, I am not very well. But I am going to the country for the summer in a week or so. I[ think I'll get better there. Anyway, I can’t leave this job now. I came for two years and I must stick to it.”’ [Page One Hundred Thirteen | Wit) aie a) Co ETAT IN Sato Pe Lohr oS oe There was no hint of wavering in his decision. Duty was Bancroft’s deity in Tokyo. He went thither under a heavy sense of responsibility. And he also went in no in- considerable perplexity of mind. Japanese mentality he had not studied deeply. He did not know whether he would be able to understand it or not. Many suggestions were made to him concerning methods of dealing with Japanese officials, Japanese personages in private life, the Japanese public, the Japanese press, the English-language newspapers in Japan, the American correspondents in Tokyo, and the religious and business representatives of America in the Japanese Empire. “Of these suggestions,” said the Ambassador to myself in the course of our first conversation, “‘there was a great quantity. They came from persons presumably informed. I| listened to and pondered upon them all. It became clear very shortly that the doctors were in disagreement. Men of equal apparent competence to counsel the newoomer gave mutually destruc- tive advice. It was both wise and unwise, it was both vital and fatal, for me to say or do this, that, or the other thing. Synce there was only a Babel of tongues among the quidnuncs, I determined to trust what horse sense I had brought with me from Chicago.”’ *““And>” “‘And—it worked. I went straight to Shidehara and told him in the plainest English I could muster what was in the minds of our Government and people respecting Japan, and what I had come to Tokyo in the hope of achieving. Our under- standing of each other was perfect from the beginning. His English was as plain as mine. We both wanted the same thing —mutual] trust, mutual friendship, everlasting peace between our two countries—and we both knew in getting these de- siderata practical considerations must not yield to sentimental.”’ ““You found, nevertheless, that Shidehara feels deeply about the discriminatory clause in our immigration law?” ‘I knew that already. But, if I had not known it, Shidehara would have enlightened me. Every Japanese, as a matter of course, aspires to equal treatment in principle for his country- men by all the nations of the world. From us, if quota it is to be, Japan wants the quota, and nothing more. We could give her the quota without admitting a single additional Jap- anese immigrant of the coolie type, and without admitting Japanese immigrants of any sort to a greater number than 150 a year. Good relations between Japan and the United States | Page One Hundred Fourteen MUR. BUA @ Na Gah Or ib I N uO a Koay O are so important from every standpoint that our law and policy are obligated to do everything within reason—every- thing consistent with rational consideration for the founda- tions of our civilization—to satisfy the susceptibilities of the Japanese people and to remove any stigma upon their prestige in the family of Great Powers.”’ “Is the immigration problem the only one now disturbing Japano-American relations?” Sistas, “You believe the heart of Japan, and consequently Japanese policy, to be set on the eventual removal of the discrimination?” “Certainly. Not, however, that Japan would be so foolish as to make it a casus belli.” “Is our attitude throwing Japan back upon Asia and so tending to weaken our general diplomatic position in the world?” “Japan is not turning toward Asia in the sense of turning against us, but a policy that gave us Japan’s full confidence and friendship naturally would strengthen our general diplo- matic position. In other words, the more whole-hearted friend- ship we have the better for us in every way.” “Is it probable that, if we are obdurately unsympathetic toward Japan, an Asian combination of some solidarity will result>?”’ *‘Japan wants no Asian combination inimical to improving relations between her and the Occident. She will not try to enforce her point of view by co-operating in any Asian threat or pretended threat.” *“‘Is soviet diplomacy trying to ‘spill the beans’ as between Japan and America?” “Trying, but not succeeding, and not likely to succeed. Bolshevism’s whole purpose, of course, is a bean-spilling pur- pose. It wants to get the beans out of ‘bourgeois’ into bol- shevik bags—an aspiration fair enough if divorced from brigandage, but hardly tolerable otherwise.” “Do you think the Moscow crew is confident of success?”’ *“Not so confident, I fancy, as it was, but still keeping to its course, and still entitled to serious attention if we prize the beans.” ““What is your estimate of the bolshevik intellect>?”’ “I rate it low. It is an intellect minus the king-pin of a constructive purpose. It is an intellect full of bizarre conceit. Such intellectual vanity as that of the bolshevists cannot sub- [| Page One Hundred Fifteen | We eR ise OE AA iC VE vel er eels ce sist in the same crania with intelligence. There is only one field in which the bolshevik intellect can operate dangerously and that is the field of ignorance—unhappily a broad one. Bolshevism wants watching, not because it is intelligent, but because it is incendiary in a world containing a great deal of inflammable matter.” “Can it make any headway in Japan?” “T may be too optimistic, but your question reminds me of our old friend the snowball climatically misplaced.” “Has Japan any sympathy with reactionary Germany?” “‘None. Japan was attracted by Prussianism for a time, _ but she found it was unsuitable to her and gave it up, Japan- ese aspirations and Japanese political and social thinking now run on lines parallel to those of the western democracies.”’ *‘Is there any biological reason—any reason of life and death —why Japan in her present confines may be dangerous to peace?”’ “‘Not in my view. Japan is astoundingly resourceful in the art of feeding her people. By no means all her arable land is under cultivation. Besides, who can foretell what actual neces- sity might evolve in unheard-of methods of food production? Japan, if I read her aright, will not attempt to ladle broth for her people out of the cauldron of war. She is far too smart for that.” “You feel the decisive mental and moral forces of Japan at this hour are for world peace>?”’ *“That is my feeling.” “You think the talk in America of Japanese aggression against the Philippines or Hawaii is idle?”’ *“T think it is bosh.”’ As I bade goodbye to Ambassador Bancroft on Sunday morning, June 7—I was leaving the next day for China and the Philippines—I said to him: *“What message have you for your friends in Chicago when I next see them?” “Oh,’’ said the Ambassador, smiling more brightly than he had smiled previously at that interview, “‘tell them I am happy and busy in the Land of the Cherry Blossom, but, of course, always longing to come home.” { Page One Hundred Sixteen | JAPANESE VIEW OF THE PACIFIC Conversation With VISCOUNT TAKAAKI KATO Chief of the Imperial Japanese Cabinet “In External Pigmentation We [the Japanese] Are More or Less Different From Other Sections of Humanity, But in Internal Pigmentation We Seem to be About the Same.” | Ne ye ne hie Di i! f + OSG AL iy TWA i! if ia int 4 — ‘ Haine ‘ ‘i yA j ve We j uh ‘ ” i ¥ * at : vA ti ‘am, an f #, i ip Hil) TT I T We ai ahi Tale 4s Pa Pats Y \ é i i Bs roe Ay, eh ‘eA } ‘9 Fay Bi , >) Ont q f ! ’ A : « ’ \ Ls rath aA Rots: ay i i, ; i] 9 a ; ' 1 TAY ‘i 4 M is } mt if Laie Wy By VW ALT AG Pn tele 7 ight) WK ahh ae vas + f ; i oi eae ‘tf wi i A‘ 5 /, y ‘ 4 i 0. lev i “a , A my | Se ey Satay a Pst . Hy ' un <1 WG ere PAO, &, ‘ nen PG ih Abe He bitte sia : ya ‘ Ah od at ter var i i / hh , en Vi o RY } uf aay yy } AP ee ee ea ; - ! es re a 1 ye fi “f r yay j i Vat eee Rene) Di Wet age ' hity ' ht ’ . /> t j f ‘ % : i yy a . 1 4 Y Li 4 2 J } mh J , | \ ’ t Avg ‘ 4 Liat f i 4 / af 4 : ee aay / A dias) y f ’ : : P ' 1 ' ; i ae ; | vi vai ee a ae. ol Pema IN Ee Ser me che aWiee Ohaus HH Ee wy PA rGe bBo Conserving the *““My point is that those observers who Strength of a Nation. represent Japan, because of her rela- tively small productive territory and her large and growing population, as a peril to world peace either are ignorant of both human and natural realities in Japan, or are actuated by studied injustice and enmity toward this country. Our people, as to the vast majority, do not and never will want to emigrate. If they ask the United States and other countries to deal with them on a plane of equality with other civilized peoples—and the Japanese would not be Japa- nese if they did not ask this—it is not with any purpose of inun- dating foreign lands with a Japanese flood. Our people live a simple, hard-working life, but a self-respecting life not devoid of joy, and they probably are as well satisfied as is any other division of the human family. “Emigration. We have been discussing it from the Japanese point of view—discussing it in the concrete. Now let us look at it in the abstract. What does emigration mean? Does it mean the integration or the disintegraticn of a people? Does it mean a consolidation or a dissipation of national strength? On what theory can a nationality perpetuate itself and aug- ment its power by scattering itself over the world? To me, in such a conception, we have a strange idea of strategy. I am against emigration. Only the more daring, enterprising, and capable persons are apt to emigrate. To encourage an efflux of its best blood is, to my mind, an extraordinary way of building up a nation ambitious to play a splendid role in history. I wonder if we sometimes do not flatter ourselves in fancying that alien peoples long to quit their own shores for ours.” One enjoyed the twinkle in Viscount Kato’s eyes. The Manhood Test “It rather wouia seem,” I ventured to in Immigration. remark, “‘that, if Japan fought a foreign war to get a place for her people outside of Japan, she might be forced to fight a civil war to compel them to go and occupy it.” “There are many wee more improbable,’ replied the Prime Minister. ‘‘What broad principle, in your view, should lie at the base of an immigration policy?” “Immigration policies, I think, should take account, not of religion or nationality or race or color or geographical distribu- {| Page One Hundred Twenty-five } Wav Rie CRE AUN a Ge is OL oe eX oe ee ee tion, but of intrinsic human merit—dqualities of manhood and womanhood, soundness of mind and body, and disposition to- ward institutions of law, order, and civil liberty. Japan admits the right, even recognizes the duty, of every State to regulate immigration within its borders. What we do not regard as right, and what we deem ill adapted to promote that inter- racial and international good will which permanent peace builders so highly esteem, is the principle of discrimination among races gua races. To this principle we object. But we are not going to make war about it. We merely are going to argue about it. War will not set the world right; sincere, courteous, well-grounded, illuminating argument may.” Japan Doesn’t Want ‘So you are not going to seize the Philip- the Philippines. pines or Hawaii?” Viscount Kato’s face took on a look of hearty amusement. “Ethics and prudence apart,” said he, ‘“‘we want neither archipelago, nor anything else that is America’s.”’ “You have noted the proclamation of certain politicians in Washington that the world is to have a new Gibraltar?” “esi, *“That it is to be in the Pacific?” ney (fe “That it is to be Hawaii>?”’ NN est-« “What do you think of it?” *‘Domestic matters in Japan leave us no time to deal with domestic matters in America,” said the Prime Minister. “Officially, Japan never has been worried by the movement of American warships in the Pacific>?”’ “‘Why should there be any international concern about the movement of friendly warships anywhere>”’ asked the Japanese statesman. And he added: ‘“‘American warships in the Pacific, British warships in the Pacific, Japanese warships in the Pacific —we consider them all symbols of civilization and peace in the Pacific.”’ The Question of ‘There is in America, I think, considerable Asiatic Alliances. interest in Japan’s relations with Russia, and in speculations respecting what is termed an ‘Asian bloc,’ possibly inimical to the best relations between Japan and the United States.” [ Page One Hundred Twenty-six} SPAS LOAN G robe ViEle rain OLR bit) ber At Gale key bee “*Asian bloc,’’’ said Viscount Kato, speaking with more than usual deliberation, “‘is a phrase with no actual or imagin- able correlative in fact. It is a disembodied phrase. It is one of those phrases which float about the intellectual world as tenuous mists float about the physical world. ‘Bloc,’ in the sense suggested, implies some kind of affinity, of homogeneity, of structural likeness, as a binding substance among the com- ponent parts. There is no such quality or substance for draw- ing or holding together an ‘Asian bloc’ of the sort suggested in the theory of an Asian aggregation of power opposed to the United States. “Japan is individual. Her psychology, like her volcanic islands, stands apart from the mainland of Asia. We are as different from the Chinese as we are from the Americans or the British, and who has detected any identity between the Russians and the Japanese? If we try to establish neighborly relations with China and with Russia, as we always are trying to do, it is not because our hearts have turned away from our Occidental friends in the Pacific; it is because we believe in international amity as a general objective of statesmanship. ‘Orientation’ is a stock word in the vocabulary of international politics. We hear of ‘orientations’ this way and that. If ‘orien- tation’ means a tendency toward international reconciliation, Japan wishes to ‘orient’ in all directions. Commercial Relations ‘‘Our point of view is illustrated by With America. the position of England, which looks Fast and West. English intercourse, political, social, and economic, with the Continent of Europe— her friendship with the European nations—does not detach her from the Atlantic nor lessen her desire for Atlantic friend- ships. Japan has inevitable relations with her neighbors of the Asiatic mainland. She is on good terms with China as a result of mutual consideration. Urgent territorial, economic and social exigencies required a resumption of diplomatic relations with soviet Russia, though Japan has no sympathy with soviet- ism as a political and social system and will permit no com- munist propaganda in this country. I cannot state too strongly that our conciliatory and constructive policy toward the Orient entails no reverse policy toward the Occident. “‘America, particularly, is not a country Japan would choose to alienate. Aside from our historical, cultural, and aspira- [ Page One Hundred Twenty-seven | Wii Othe) COS CAN SINSS§ Cie h Laer Lone ee tte a ame ee tional relationships, and aside from our correlation to the problems of world society—to all of which Japan attaches im- portance—the United States is of immense concern to us commercially and financially. She is our best customer—buys annually more than $250,000,000 worth of our silk alone. Do you think we are likely, in sport or malice, to begin hurling shrapnel or high explosive shells at that market? We need American capital and are getting it. Could we afford to lose the confidence of American wealth? On the other hand, who can spend a day in Japan without appreciating Japan’s com- mercial value to the United States? American material and manufactures form the foundation of our life. Who but a madman, American or Japanese, would dream of thrusting a sword through this interlacement?”’ Co-operation “You do not believe in international blocs>”’ by the Nations. ‘‘] believe in a single human sodality.” “In the League of Nations>”’ “In the master idea of the League of Nations—that of an in- quiring, reasoning, justice-seeking world, inflexibly bent upon settling its questions .and directing its affairs by moral means and not by violence. True, the League takes cognizance of matters beyond the range of Japanese interest and knowledge. Our people, for example, do not know what or where Riga is. But they understand the grand aim of the League—to promote the health, prosperity, and peace of the world—and they are wholeheartedly for that aim.” ““You are a nationalist?” ‘All Japanese are nationalists, and intense nationalists, as is the wont of island peoples.”’ “You do not believe in a super-State?”’ “No. But I believe in independent States working together honestly and generously for the common weal. Such work, of course, necessitates clear and candid statements of national points of view, and no statement of this kind should be taken as offensive or as implying a recourse in any circumstances to force majeure. In other words, every State should be allowed to put forward its case as fully and powerfully as possible, without incurring suspicion of a hidden purpose to pass from unsuccessful arguments to war. International candor is in- dispensable to international understanding and a frictionless internationalism.” [| Page One Hundred Twenty-eight } TAS eA NTE Sule eve be Wao OF Lor Bee Pla; Go TR rin’ Culture and “What is your opinion of classical culture Sound Leadership. as an aid to the concord of peoples?”’ ‘“‘Assuming ‘classical culture’ to signify a high development of the human mind and soul, I suppose one could not exaggerate its worth to civilization. Intelligence and sympathy are qualities of inestimable moment. Our world is shrinking rapidly through mechanical audacity and _ skill. Diverse systems and customs and temperaments are meeting at close quarters. Superficial differences tend to create con- fusion of thought, irritation, suspicion, alarm. Penetration is needful. Fellow feeling, compassion, humanism, are needful. But ‘the classics,” in Japan, does not necessarily mean Latin and Greek. Our written language, you know, is not by alpha- bet, but by ideograph. Of these characters we have some 10,000, so that our students generally have little time to spend upon the Greek and Roman languages and literatures. How- ever, our educational ideals are high and our faith in humanistic culture second to none.” “You favor aristocratic leadership?” “‘If you mean leadership by the best—yes. And the whole of society can and ought to aspire and strive to be of the best. Upon the real aristocracy, the intellectual and moral noblesse, of a community, one need not say, rest especial obligations of leadership and public duty.”’ ‘Is Japan becoming more democratic?” “Undoubtedly. Possibly our people are disposed to go ahead too rapidly. There is little conservatism in Japan—no such repugnance to change as is found in England. If a thing seems good to the Japanese, they say, ‘Let us adopt it at once.’ They are prone to be too quick to reject the old and take the new. We now have universal suffrage and shall see how it works. If there are dangers, I have no great fears. Predisposed to advance swiftly, our people are not destructionists. They are loyal to the throne, proud of their traditions, and passion- ately devoted to the vision of a useful and honorable place for their Empire in the family of free and peaceful nations. “Freedom, I think, we understand. We understand it is not anarchy or license. We understand, on the contrary, that anarchy and license annihilate freedom. This realization is imbedded in the Japanese consciousness. Therefore, I am not alarmed by the strongly progressive nature of our citizens. | am not alarmed by their new enthusiasm for individual liberty and responsibility. I am not afraid of universal suffrage. I am { Page One Hundred Twenty-nine | W OOVARaL> VTA CERN AC iE eis eae hehe persuaded our liberties will deepen our loyalty and invigorate our patroitism. For, after all, how can a man be truly loyal, truly patriotic, unless he be free>”’ Japanese Are “Do you discover, now and again, mis- Like Other People. interpretations of Japanese character>?”’ Viscount Kato chuckled. ‘“‘l read in books some interesting observations on Japanese life,’ said he. “*I read in English and in American books that Japanese babies never cry. Those of us who have Japanese babies know better. I read in books that the Japanese people are always cheerful. In reality, of course, they are like their babies in that when they have something to be glad about they are glad, and when they have something to be sad about they are sad. We have pleasant and unpleasant people, strong- minded and feeble-minded people, wise men and fools, saints and rogues. In external pigmentation we are more or less different from other sections of humanity, but in internal pig- mentation we seem to be about the same.” “You believe mankind to be spiritually of one kin>?”’ sid Wits spc Preserving Japanese ‘‘Do you believe in interracial mar- Civilization. riage?” “*T do not.” ‘And your reason?” “Because I think the overwhelming weight of advantage and happiness lies on the side of racial integrity. Biological consequences do not seem to me to be the main consideration. It is not chiefly a question of physiology or animality. It is a sociological and psychological question. It is a question of emotion and mentality, of where and how one lives, of count- less associative subtleties. It is a human question.”’ “You would preserve Japanese civilization by preserving the Japanese?” “Yes. We feel our civilization, so preserved, has its own distinct value for, and its own distinct place in, the life of the world. Japan never will use her power as a weapon of selfish aggression—the most stupid act a nation can commit—but for the preservation of her Japanese heritage she will make any sacrifice. To the perfection of this heritage our sister nations have contributed much. These contributions we gladly acknowl- edge. Our one desire is to go forward in equal honor with those nations, each placing its special gifts at the service of all.”’ {| Page One Hundred Thirty } DUE AEN ba eae Vallee wen Onn Gk Pie b PoAY Gils aloe Mirroring a Our conversation, to me of absorbing in- Statesman’s Mind. terest, was at an end. It had been unin- terrupted and had lasted two hours. Vis- count Kato accompanied me into the large hallway adjoining the drawing room and stood smiling and bowing, in the charm- ing Japanese way, until I was gone. I felt I had been in the presence of a man whose words were a faithful mirror of his mind. I could understand why Lord Grey took pleasure in his company and had every confidence in his character, and why Viscount Kato’s ambassadorial work in England, where he laid the foundations of Anglo-Japanese friendship, ranks high in the diplomatic annals of Japan. How long he will occupy the great position of Prime Minister of the Japanese Empire | dare not predict. But I do venture the prophecy that so long as he remains Prime Minister his acts will not belie the foregoing exposition of his views. Vis- count Kato admits that Japan has fools as well as wise men. I think he is one of the wise ones. Page One Hundred Thirty-one cree 5, ohh ‘ ny) i's ANOTHER GREAT JAPANESE TALKS Statement of the Views of BARON KIJURO SHIDEHARA Japan’s Foreign Minister ‘Japan Deprecates All Segregative Movements Inimical to the Aggregative Interests of the World.” aS Ne a Ca eh uk WO ait Gee Vy a 4nie ei, 4 i4 } ab Vall ¢ he ee Py AE 14 j Ww s ias ‘} L Ady 4 vue’ s | Dian ‘i © Yei\ nn iy 4 fa ‘ Youre eS ¢ A) , cf u a i) (Pua GP e a7 wie \ ) ; Meh . ‘ ‘7 i t ‘ : 4 i) iw) rey ; it) mA) ivy mf ni \, iv ne EA hae ae x aberrant a i (iba | ae : 2 i) , . . ‘ i) ARN ea ; j ‘ ‘i bel { ie tt a et i hy | 4 tr a" 7 ; ay a ony Ry ai i Tis wens a) WR LA eh) sn sey oe ie har i, +! an ee ae aa as Aas st as ee) Lara ae ee PAL Kiuro Shidehara of Japan ARON SHIDEHARA, Foreign Minister of Japan, re- B ceived me with friendly dignity in his beautiful private room at the Foreign Office in Tokyo. He advanced from his desk to meet me and shook hands firmly. *“‘I am glad to see you,” said he, smiling like an old friend, as he inclined both well-set head and sturdy body—a flash at one and the same instant of culture and of force. “This racial question between America and Japan is always changing,’ said the statesman, speaking in pure English, after we had sat down beneath a wide, lofty window. “It is in a position now markedly different from that which it occupied when I first gave serious thought to it. Do you chance to remember what were called the ‘Morris-Shidehara conversa- tions’ in Washington>?”’ “Very well,” said I. “‘Those conversations were carried on with earnestness. Both Mr. Morris and myself desired nothing else so much as a solution of the Americano-Japanese racial problem satis- factory to both parties. Our discussions were without any feeling except the feeling of mutual respect and friendship. It was said that the problem turned upon the assimilability or unassimilability of the Japanese as members of the American social community. Testing Japanese ‘Touching this question Mr. Morris and | Assimilability. agreed that there had not been time enough to determine whether the Japanese were or were not assimilable in America, as the British and the Scandi- navians, for instance, have proved to be in that country. It had been scarcely more than a quarter of a century—the ‘Morris- Shidehara conversations’ took place five or six years ago— since the Japanese entered America in appreciable numbers. There had not been time to tell whether they would or would not turn out good Americans. ** ‘How,’ we asked ourselves, “can a reliable test be made?’ We agreed that a practicable plan would be virtually to stop further Japanese immigration in America until the Japanese { Page One Hundred Thirty-five } Wir Dake lid) Oi RHE CAN eat EWG ssy bare e, cD already there could be given a chance to demonstrate their quality in respect of assimilation into the general American social body. At this point | emphasized what I deemed a ‘substantial condition, namely, that while the test was pro- ceeding every encouragement be given the Japanese in America to adopt the American standpoint and way of life if they could. The Alien Element ‘I pointed out to my American colleague in Japan. a grave mistake made by Japan with refer- ence to an alien element in our population. This element presents a curious analogy in connection with the problem of the Japanese immigrants in America. I mean a special class of people who are social outcasts. There are said to be 1,200,000 scattered over Japan. Their origin is uncertain and mixed. Some are descended from Chinese and Korean immigrants and some from aborigines. Most of them were originally and for generations engaged in tanning and butchers’ work, considered by Buddhists to be unclean. “T told Mr. Morris about these people, how we ostracized them in old days, how we drove them into settlements apart. I had seen our people doing it. I myself, as a boy, had had my irresponsible part in it. Persons of this class used to appear in front of our house and seek work as menders of our clogs or wooden shoes. They were not permitted to come inside our fence. We threw our clogs out to them, they did their work, threw the clogs back, and we tossed the pay into their hands. We called them unassimilable, while ourselves denying them all opportunity of assimilation. The Error of ““‘We made a mistake. Our course was Making Outcasts. politically, socially, and economically wrong as well as un-Christian and inhuman. These persons are now treated in every way as our equals. But the antagonism fostered by centuries cannot be swept away in a day. They are still with us, still living in their separate com- munities, still in their hearts hostile to us, still a problem to vex social relations, perplex statesmanship, and grieve hu- manitarianism. We should have reached out to welcome them and not to cast them away. If we had done that, they long ago would have merged in our community beyond all trace, and today there would be no irritating problem in Japan such as this particular class presents.”’ [ Page One Hundred Thirty-six ] Tea woaA NEP ope ee Vvanie rene nO we tle rye UAR CAL Aral © Baron Shidehara was thinking and speaking carefully, mani- festly searching his mind for his real meaning and for exact words to express it, imparting to his remarks precision and solidity. From time to time he looked into my eyes as if to say, ‘Are you interested—do you understand me>’”’ His face now and again wore an unrelenting expression, but as the talk proceeded I found him capable of smiling delightedly and of laughing in that fashion which springs only from the liveliest sense of humor. | found also he could relax into simple, easy narrative, as will appear later in his story of the colloquies be- tween himself and the late Lord Bryce. Thoroughly Japanese is Baron Shidehara in physiognomy, temperament, manner, and patriotism, tingling with the spirit of today, but ruled by deliberation and sagacity. American Attitude ‘‘My point of view as expressed to Mr. Toward Japanese. Morris,’’ continued Baron Shidehara, ‘“‘was that America, in dealing with her Japanese population, well might consider our mistake respecting a cer- tain part of our population. It seemed to me, and | so stated, that an attitude of sympathy, of welcome, of invitation to assimilation, might yield a result diametrically different from that of an attitude of coldness or persecution or ostracism. - Parenthetically, I would say that I personally have been sur- prised by what I| have seen in evidence of Japanese assimila- bility to Americanism. I have seen in Tokyo a group of American-born Japanese children who amazed me by their likeness, in dress, speech, and manners, to American children. These little visitors of Japanese blood could not speak a word of Japanese. **Your Ambassador, Mr. Morris,’ the Foreign Minister went on, ‘raised two points in criticism of conditions in Japan relative to the relations of America and this country. He liked neither our law of nationality nor our law of property affecting aliens. At that time a Japanese subject, wherever born, remained a Japanese subject in the view of Japanese law unless and until such subject, by his own act, renounced his Japanese citizen- ship and adopted another. Now, under American law, a per- son born in America becomes an American citizen without any act of his own—acquires American citizenship automatically by virtue of birth in the country. [ Page One Hundred Thirty-seven | WriOr ReLeD Cet WAN FC tare. Let hi omnes eek ee eee Doing Away With “It followed, therefore, that American- Dual Citizenship. born Japanese inherited two citizenships, Japanese and American. Mr. Morris ob- jected to this dual allegiance, and his objection seemed to me reasonable. His position concerning our law of property I also felt able to regard not unfavorably. On my return to Japan, and on becoming Minister for Foreign Affairs, I recommended to the Diet an alteration of our laws of nationality and property in accordance with the point of view urged upon me by Mr. Morris. My recommendation prevailed. Our laws were changed. As to Japanese emigration to the United States, we stopped it in conformity with the terms of the ‘gentlemen's agreement’.”’ **You then felt,’’ I remarked, “‘that Japan had done all she could to clear the way for the test of Japanese assimilability in America and to advance toward a complete Japano-Ameri- can accord?” ‘*‘That is how we felt.” “‘And what should you say of the American response?” When Americans “| will tell you a story,” replied Baron Make Mistakes. Shidehara, his air of close thought passing and a reminiscent smile breaking over his face. ‘“‘] was in Washington when the American Congress took action with reference to the Panama tolls question. Lord Bryce was British Ambassador to Washington then. On the Sunday following the act of the Congress | dropped in, as was my occasional wont, to see Lord Bryce at the British Embassy. In the course of our desultory talk I said to Lord Bryce, ‘Your objection to the tolls bill has been overruled.’ ‘Yes,’ was his reply. ‘What are you going to do about it?’ I inquired. *‘Lord Bryce looked at me calmly. ‘Nothing,’ said he. “There is nothing to be done. There is no use in doing any- thing. The American people may make mistakes. They may commit injustices. But, in the end, they always of their own will put them right. It is in their history.’ On our side—the side of Japan—things had not been going as we should have wished in California. Indeed, almost at the same time that the Congress passed the toll the legislature of California passed the anti-alien land law. Presently Lord Bryce said to me, ‘And what are you going to do about the California situation?’ I replied instantly, “We are going to do what you are going to do—nothing’.” [ Page One Hundred Thirty-eight ] 2h oe -7) : _ - Z ; % a: 7 uy ; pd ey | rh 7 _ : : - ¥ « > " a . ‘My iM : s )-. : z 7 nd or: a a : : \) ? ! Way! = ho : a i i . : 4 i: at L A. ha ae . ro. : ‘ a s . ary f : | at Eg oe ’ a ~ os : ’ ; r i t ; " " / : : . < ~4 > 0 Oe es Pep gs” 2°. 8 a eres ; igs > tat : ; sok 4 og wend DRRWKY ORES CHR Boner SnR ws I WNRAVE KARL EKEKN BRN EITN-HSMH SEN oXES RTP PHANKKS. BSHAARRBKA HRSEr ARP RA CHEERS IRHWK CF NM HARHMAKRATKANAR HREXORASHN ERIM IMRAN TCKNIRKARKRS Jy |) Rey rnn. KeBNIK DS 45 dm $2 dr Qe RS EEN KK SHV KORE KARI NS uQMRRnEeErK Bx KHt+eaekance Tene Heh eS Heo me” NING K” (2 BR THE GAIMUSHO Juno 8, 1925. TOKIO My dear Mr. Price Bell: The manuscript which you were so good as to submit to me gives an accurate idea of the ideas I exoressed to you, and I venture to hove that the franimess with which I discussed these ques- tions will have a friendly reception from your readers. It is my firm conviction that through know. ledge of each other, our two nations will arrive at a sympathetic understanding, the sure foun- dation of friendshin. So if this presentation of the Japanese point of view proves to be even @ Sslignt contribution toward the growth of America's knowledge of Japan, I shall be more than gratified. Let me take this opportunity also to express my appreciation of the spirit of tnis enterprise, which has been undertaken by your great paper, and my unqualified hopes for its success. With best wishes, I am Very sincerely yours, K Ahitehected SG Edward Price Bell, Esq., The Chicago Daily News. PEAT NOR opera Vita rower OLbi Maen: HH Ee tPA Cali Rep A Prophecy of After some unfeigned laughter, Baron Shide- Understanding. hara continued: “Shortly before the wise and delightful British statesman died, we chanced to meet again in Washington. He had come over to speak at the Institute of Politics in Williamstown. He ran down from New York to Washington to call upon some of his old friends at the State Department, and we encountered each other in the reception room. We had a chat. It was of old times in the American capital. Panama tolls came up. ‘You see I was right,’ said Lord Bryce. ‘Yes,’ I agreed, ‘you were right about the Panama canal.’ Lord Bryce glanced at me and we smiled. ‘California,’ said I, ‘still awaits the fulfillment of your pro- phecy.’ ”’ *‘Do you think history,’ I inquired, “will prove Lord Bryce a bad prophet relative to Japan?” *‘No,’” answered Baron Shidehara with emphasis. ‘‘We all in this country, or certainly those of us who know America, retain our confidence in her fundamental love, not only of justice, but of generosity. We believe that one day she will understand us. We believe that her distrust of us, so far as she has any such distrust, will disappear. We believe that a na- tional American demand for justice and fairness and neighbor- liness toward the Japanese in the United States will sweep away all misrepresentation, all misunderstanding, and with them all discrimination by American citizens against the Japanese within their gates and the Japanese race as a race. There will be no trouble about it. Knowledge of facts and conscience will do the work. America and Japan will continue to stand side by side, with friendly sister nations, as guardians of the peace of the Pacific.’ Japan's Views ‘You have no ambition to ‘swamp America,’ on Emigration. with your people?>”’ *‘We have no ambition to swamp any country with our people. We do not want to send America a single Japanese to whom she objects. That would not be good for her or us. It is sentiment and principle and devotion to the amity of peoples—not the wish or necessity of emigration— that actuate Japanese citizens and the Japanese Government in respect of the discriminatory clause in the American immi- gration law.” [Page One Hundred Thirty-nine | WR iT CH. AON GES Deb eR ees “It has been reported in America that the ‘real’ Japan does not welcome the effort in America to have Japan included in the quota. Is this true?” “It is entirely untrue.” “Is the immigration problem the only important problem between Japan and America?”’ ‘It is the only one.” ‘Japan will press for the removal of all forms of discrimina- tion against the Japanese people by whomsoever practiced?” “In a friendly way—naturally.”’ Opposed to “Is it probable that obdurate Occidental Provocative Alliances. indifference to Japanese susceptibilities would issue in an Asian entente of some solidarity?” “‘No. Such an entente would hold out no promise of what we are seeking, namely, all-round recognition of the principle of equality for our people.” “Would such an entente contravene tendencies toward a settled world peace?”’ “Decidedly. Japan deprecates all segregative movements inimical to the aggregative interests of the world. I mean that we are opposed to the development of combinations of powers pursuing particular rather than general world aims. Such combinations, in our opinion, tend to build up the mental and material conditions of warlike conflict. Our conception paral- lels the general conception of the League of Nations as we under- stand the League.”’ *‘Japan’s dominant moral and intellectual forces are for universal and permanent peace?” ‘Beyond all question.” On Bolshevists “Do you think Moscow hopes to exploit and Bolshevism. Japano-American difficulties favorably to its ideas of world-wide communism?” “Tf it so hopes, it will be disappointed.”’ “Do you think Russian communism really intends, if it can, to destroy so-called capitalistic society?” “Its constitution, I believe, contains a clause declaring such a purpose.” “‘Have you any kind or degree of sympathy with the bol- shevists?”” “Tt is not my province to criticize principles of government in any foreign country. I can say, however, that bolshevism, [| Page One Hundred Forty | TAS EMAL IN ES sie eV ble a Wan OP aslo By ep PeA Ge lobe ic so far as | can penetrate it, is utterly repugnant to the elemen- tals of Japanese tradition and character. But I am not without a certain sympathetic feeling toward bolshevists as distin- guished from bolshevism—toward the human beings, that is to say, who have sprung this unexampled and puzzling doctrine upon the world. Most of the bolshevist leaders are Jews. Their blood is the blood of a race long and cruelly persecuted. May not an error of judgment of the modern world, and an emotion, perhaps, of revenge, run in that blood? The Product of “‘Moreover, the Russians now in power Age-long Tyrannies. are survivors or descendants of the age- long tyrannies of the Czars. Their mem- ories are bitter memories. They remember nothing but serf- dom, bloody suppression, denial of human right, exile. How could they have what we should term a normal psychology? How could they be expected to feel anything but terror and enmity with reference to those political and economic systems which, in their imagination, resemble the regimes of the Czars? May they not really believe that we should enslave and exploit them, if we could, and that consequently a passion on their part to extirpate us is a righteous passion? “IT am not answering these questions; I am asking them. | do not understand bolshevist mentality. But I never try to understand anything without a sympathetic exploration of its background. My idea is to seek a cure for the destructive pathology of bolshevists, not by withdrawing from them, but by cautiously and prudently endeavoring to establish an educative intercourse with them. Non-bolshevist nations, | need not say, have no wish to wrong Russia, but every wish to see her orderly, prosperous, and content, and to have her take her place in the peaceful concert of civilization.”’ Progressive Forces ‘‘Do you know of any national govern- in Germany. ment or organized movement with aims pre- judicial to Japano-American friendship?” “‘Not now. China gave some evidence of such a disposition at the time of the Versailles Conference, but I am aware of nothing of the sort in any quarter at present.”’ “Is any part of Japan sympathetic with the reactionary elements in Germany?” *“No, indeed.”’ [ Page One Hundred Forty-ene ] WitOu Ru GC DH ST AMIN FC we Enh on ioe saree an “Do you anticipate any reactionary revival in Germany from Hindenburg’s election?” ““No. My belief is that Germany will persist in the path of democracy and peace.”’ “Is Japan satisfied with the principle of the Open Door in China>”’ *‘That principle cannot be too strictly enforced to suit us.’ *“‘It gives you natural advantages?” “It gives us great natural advantages. Besides, it accords with our idea both of justice to China and of the universal welfare. International grasping for selfish advantage in China would threaten humanity with an immeasurable disaster.”’ Labor’s “Is Japan free from the menace of internal International subversive agitation?” Interest. “Not free from it, but, I think, not seriously threatened, nor more threatened than any other great State. Government everywhere, of course, is beset with new problems in our growingly complex modern political and social existence. For instance, international labor attractions are a fresh concern of government. For the first time in Japan we have had a delegation from Japanese labor visiting the Foreign Office to protest against our measures for preserving order and protecting the rights of our nationals in China. Our reply was that we were not interfering in the strikes as econ- omic struggles but as developments dangerous to life and property. It is a new thing with us—this sign of local labor unrest without the faintest practical local interest. But we are not alarmed over it. I merely mention it as an illustration of the increasing weight of public-order burdens in every part of the world.” Friendship of the Our last words—the last words of an inter- Pacific Powers. view that had occupied the best part of two hours—were relative to the Pacific. As we shook hands at parting, I said to Baron Shidehara: “I may state that Japan values exceptionally an entente with the principal Occidental Pacific powers>?”’ “You may state that with every assurance of accuracy. How highly I personally reckon an entente with the principal Occidental Pacific powers is reflected in my pride that I had a part in drafting the Four-Power Treaty at the Washington Conference.” [ Page One Hundred Forty-two | eee eA CUNY Eo ae Vig Lacuna foo Qtr Cc Pl 2 Es een oA Can lar Le Baron Kijuro Shidehara, born in Osaka prefecture, aged 54, was graduated from the college of law of the Tokyo Imperial University. Entering the Foreign Office in 1896, he rose rung by rung until he became Foreign Minister in June, 1924. His diplomatic career has been long and honorable. In various capacities he has served in Washington, London, Antwerp, and The Hague. From 1915 to 1919 he was Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs. From 1919 to 1922 he won his great popularity at Washington as Japanese Ambassador to the United States. His barony was the reward of his services in the Great War. [ Page One Hundred Forty-three | ‘ - 1 ae tor) a © wines WS, v; : v g ; a, Ve ok +i ' a <9 J FUTURE OF THE PHILIPPINES Interviews with MANUEL QUEZON President of the Philippine Senate SERGIO OSMENA Senator and ex-Speaker of the Philippine Lower House MAJ.-GEN. LEONARD WOOD Governor General of the Philippines “As It Is Deadly to an Individual to Lack Liberty, Reasonable Lib- erty, the Liberty Stopping Only at the Boundary of the Liberty of Others, SoIltIs Deadly foraNationto Lack That LibertyWhich Stops Only at the Boundary of the Liberty of other Nations.’’—Quezon. **Both Life and Liberty Would be Perfectly Safe Under Filipino Sov- ereignty. We Have Proved Our Capacity to Govern.’’—Osmena. “It Is Intolerable That an Uneducated Electorate, Harangued by Political Aspirants to Power and Emolument, Should Frustrate America’s Long, Laborious, and Expensive Struggle to Build a Firmly-Based Christian State in the Philippines, and Also Jar the Delicate Interracial and International Balance in the Pacific Inimically to the Cause of World Peace.’’—Leonard Wood. sf i ie) f ' } Lava i ver, i, ' ie TPA ate | ne eT! foi i wy 4 ti iF ‘ i) Ve? ‘ey Vf wrest a“ } ' WIA! Vg Pahl ral VA baw” Sane a Uren v4 sh iy ; - au VARA SS Ws Ae ie W aly ' ny ' Ai A oh ra : ; i { - KY dig hive.) Avs a *\ Oils Rea ii é t i 4 oe b is . : : fi 4 y 5 i < Aas 7934 ; a } ¥ { ii ‘ i oye kN , rhe Le bs ¥ ah a i* ASS 2, , \ At } an’ Ghee [ § ¢ ‘ F ‘ Pay. i A> 4 i) ‘ seas a viv.) ia5 ’ r 5) a i) vl 7 t A a ‘ i Ki ’ ‘i Fi MI 7 } We ae 38 Nias - ’ ' 1 Fa) i) bi i . | A r Mae Vt { ‘ At vos ia ; ve iP i eres: hes ; zy i Ve ¥ ‘ ; , A ~ 7" a) Kr dbevil \ ‘ i fy i ‘ ) tan +i : ih, \ . ‘ aks e') i : F i" ee a ‘ ’ f! 4 ey a yt he A Mah \ | . week ‘ I als Af é ; é aye pal ‘ t i ¥ y 4 4 iy 4 a ‘ tf vi? ( i A t ‘ wt 4 | +a ‘ a \ ! 7s ¥\ ’ 4 ' - \ hy r : ' é \ ft ‘ TRE, ; i sib \ we ' . ' * oe ; he t a hp f i f vt F R i ¥ = i / hg Tl ryan 1 ig ‘ " WUE at RONEN Wi DA ‘ f Vee @ } 4 o> ae 4 oe ey y <2. aay. ’ Pate ee ey DORON Le ae Ae . : on , 4) Meee, ; 0 : ; oy 7 : ‘ : A ery rs ou ré Raat hol x _ ae, ‘ : ‘a Ad a ee ; ; ; ay ta.) ae zh Aas iw ey : 7 tAANED OAR! a kN gaene F 5 ‘2 haute Ar a haa ate) a } ie ut : Lh id aw a ; : ; , AN bah \ : ne} it ’ \ f nee ieee tape t ‘ . i. ui i"eG ‘ons ie | é eins % | Life salt ight each AAO id ,! 4 a Pi Mer arte? 1s st 7 ‘ hy j : ; 4 j ‘ My i i Be Ay, a 4) RAN gt Nees ie i tS ei Ge ; iz! 7 . yi * = } é 4: df % ate A J ‘ . Sd, Fatye et at OY 4 VS Abit 4 ay Pa ‘ ; ) “yh pear v J yas Fe yh ‘ ; we “ft | ) { ar unl i, on x a) ; aa ; , WY Ge ee eee Weer Poy = ; Pry ‘53 ri mils vel j MEDI, 4 4 : Ni \y » 4 a i A (eau Ny aCe er BL A go Le h Le Ra) rut a Ay is at . aan) et /ia% vs. 4 i ah v : 14 ey ‘ } en q y ia “1 i ee ‘ 4 u iy Rae Manuel L. Quezon i) OU want complete and immediate independence for the Y Philippines>’’ I remarked to President Manuel L. Que- zon of the Philippine Senate, perhaps the most influential Filipino leader at the present time. ““Yes,’” was the reply. “You see no danger to the Philippines or the peace of the Pacific and the world in a withdrawal of the United States from the archipelago and its waters?” “‘None. On the contrary, I think untrammeled statehood for the Philippines would reinforce peace influences in the Pacific and elsewhere.” “You should expect no aggression against the islands from any source?’ “‘Not from any source. When people talk about warlike movements against a free Philippines, they have in mind just one nation. They do not mean Russia or China or France or England. They mean Japan. Let us, therefore, consider the question of what Japan might be expected to do if the Philip- pines were liberated and left to their own resources. I will say . at once that Japan, in my opinion, would not dream of any hostile act toward us and I will explain why I think so. Japan's “In the first place, I believe Japan to be Peaceful Purposes. nonaggressive. I believe both her heart and her mind urge her to international peace. I am convinced she sees no profit, only universal dis- aster, in war. Japan will fight, if I understand her, only to preserve her national security and to defend those rights and interests which seem to her indispensable to her liberty and life. Such rights and interests do not beckon her far afield; they lie within the circumference of her natural and legitimate position in the Far East. “But, for the sake of argument, let us suppose that Japan is not peaceful, but warlike. Even then the Philippines would be of very little use, if any, to her unless she contemplated hostile operations against the United States or Australia, and [| Page One Hundred Forty-seven } Wi Orr issolD GOED SA SINC es, LL Lote es a a every student of Japanese feeling, thought, and policy knows she contemplates no such thing. Were it otherwise—were her instincts and ambitions really running in the direction of ex- pansion by conquest—how could she embark upon such a course? Let us indulge in the fantastic conjecture that she desires to attack the peaceful country of the United States. If Japan Should ‘‘Let us forget the frightful devastation of Attack America. the earthquake of 1923. Let us forget Japan’s financial, industrial, and_ social difficulties and the burdens that closely contiguous foreign problems place upon her statesmanship. Let us put all these things out of mind and assume that the Asiatic Island Empire wants to go to war with the American Republic, the richest and most powerful country in the world. Japan could not strike from the Philippines; at the very least she would need Hawaii, and who does not realize that even so her enterprise would be desperate? The thought that Japan may some day want to attack the United States is to every sane mind too preposter- ous for even hypothetical discussion. *‘As for Australia, Japan knows that any war or attack upon that country would raise against her—on the instant and with all their wealth, armament and indomitable fighting spirit— the combined nations of the Anglo-Saxon world. If Japan “Very well, then. If Japan does not want the Should Seize Philippines as a stepping stone to conquest, the Philippines. would she want these islands as a defensive base? I can conceive of no principle of strat- egy that would cause her to covet them for such a purpose. It is obvious, indeed, that possession of the Philippines would be a source of weakness, not of strength, to the Japanese, if they were attacked. They have Formosa and Formosa is in the right line for their defense and nearer home. If Japan were attacked, she would not scatter her forces; she would concentrate them. If she had naval craft in Philippine waters, she quickly would withdraw them to the support of her main fleet. “Tf the United States removed its authority and its fighting forces from the Philippines, neither Japan nor any other power would molest us. If Japan moved against us, whether Amer- ica did or did not call upon her to halt, Britian would call [ Page One Hundred Forty-eight } Qi ei Le oe os Le ae oUsp p ys , Vato ae . bs Saad 4 2 y “9 os i = ' - ; a ars, 4 SENADO DE FILIPINAS OFICINA DEL PRESIDENTE MANILA July 3, 1925. My dezr Mr. Bell: I have gone over the article which you prepared for publication in the Chicago Daily News, covering our interview on the Philippine question and other problems of the Pacific. I find my views fairly por- trayed therein and I am pleased to authorize you to make such use of the article as you may deem best. With every good wish for you and your great newspaper, I am Yours cordially, Mr. Edward Price Bell, Manila Hotel, Manila. Pama Ue gee bo eens Fl ks Prey oli bale Nees upon her to halt and compel her to halt. Australia’s cry easily would reach to Downing Street and it would be augmented by the cry of every British possession in Asia. Britain would threaten Japan, not from British home waters, but from Singa- pore and Hongkong, and if Japan had naval or military con- tingents here or on their way hither she speedily would recall them to her vital defensive lines. Surveying the whole horizon of possibilities, I can discern no presage of an attempted seizure of this archipelago as a result of an American withdrawal. Japanese Dislike ‘On the economic side also there is an the Tropics. utter absence of incentive to Japan to incur the reprobation of the world by interfering with the freedom of the Philippines. Japan does not want the Philippines for her people. The Japanese are not a tropical people. They are a people of the temperate zones. Their whole organic and temperamental adaptation is to a climate different from that of our latitude. If they do not like weather too cold—as they do not—neither do they like the meteorology of the tropics. Japanese die here in great numbers. We once had some 15,000. They came to work in the hemp fields. Probably not more than 5,000 are left. In all the centuries of the past, before Spain came, during her 330 years here and since she went away, no considerable body of Japanese ever availed itself of its liberty to enter the Philippines at its own will. “Why, then, anticipate at this time an emigratory flood of Japanese in this direction? They will not come. Nor has Japan anything to gain by seeking a preferential industrial or commercial position in the Philippines. Efforts of that kind would run directly counter to her interests, and she knows it, for Japan has an enlightened people and leadership in these days. Orientals Who “‘What she wants in this group of islands Are “‘Possessed."’ is what she wants on the mainland of Asia —the Open Door. It promises her more than anything else. “Open Door’ means equality of opportunity to all States, big and little, and under the egis of this principle Japan not only keeps the good will of the world, but enjoys all the material advantages appertaining to her geographical position relative to the Philippines and the entire Far East.”’ { Page One Hundred Forty-nine | Fe AU Mineo e ae Ihe he: PHHeinlaly hae Nara *“‘What would be the repercussion of Philippine emancipation in British, French, and Dutch possessions in Asia?” Mr. Quezon smiled a somewhat wry smile. *‘Naturally,’” said he, ‘‘every vindication of the rights of man stimulates all who are struggling for the rights of man. Peoples do not like to be ‘possessed.’ They long to be free. Freedom in this archipelago, I have no doubt, would be wel- comed by and would give encouragement to all Asiatics and others under alien rule. I should not be surprised if Britain, France, and Holland would be pleased to see the American flag continue to fly over these islands in perpetuity. But to those nations | will say a word in all friendship. It is this: What their subject peoples ultimately do will not be deter- mined by anything which happens in the Philippines. When Far Eastern ‘‘What do 1 mean? I mean that when the Peoples Strike. millions of the Indies, of Java and Suma- tra, and of China are ripe for freedom they will take their freedom regardless of what the muse of history shall have meted out to the Philippines. If America elects to hold the Philippines she can hold them for all time so far as we can see, because we Filipinos are numerically weak. But look at India! Four hundred millions of people! Forty millions in the Dutch islands—more than in unconquerable France! And China—her people are countless! When those peoples become nationally self-conscious, when they are unified and organized, no power on earth will be able to dominate them or retain so much as a toehold on their territory against their wills.”’ *‘How do you think Australasia would feel over the hauling down of the stars and strips in the Philippines?”’ **Very likely she would be alarmed. But I do not think her alarm would be justified in the smallest degree. White men in the south Pacific fear Japan. Their fear, I am sure, has no basis in fact. It is purely fanciful. But, as I have said, Japan would not dare, whatever might be her desire, to start upon a career of militaristic imperialism. She would not dare to trouble the Philippines and still less Australia or New Zealand. When Colored Races ‘‘If America is defensively of importance Achieve Power. to white civilization in the Southern Hemisphere—as she unquestionably is— it is not because she is in the Philippines. It is because of her | Page One Hundred Fifty }. WeOw Reb BO oe EER CIS SARS Bh Oo DTD SA 1h Nig Sean tremendous, her almost measureless, strength at home, with its unmistakable implications.”’ *“What do you expect to see if and when the Asiatic peoples shall have power commensurate with their numbers?” “IT expect to see the States of the world living together harmoniously on the basis of universal respect for their several political and territorial rights.” “You do not expect that the colored races, by way of retaliation, will attempt to dominate white peoples?”’ “I do not. International education is advancing. We are wise today in at least some things in which we were foolish yesterday. Our wisdom will increase with the years. Both practical knowledge and the humanities, in my judgment, are on the march against the ignorance and the inhumanity of which we have seen so much in history. It will be a century, if not more, before Asia can stand erect in the full majesty of a strength now only potential. By that time, let us hope, the moralities of the world, not armies and navies, will be the sheet anchor of its national liberties.”’ Fruits of *“You think colonial possessions are mischievous?”’ Colonial “T think they tend to breed war. It is a historical Possessions. fact that they have bred war. They bred the World War. Germany came upon the international scene late. Earth’s treasure grounds had been parceled out to her rivals. She wanted colonies. She felt that her greatness, actual and latent, demanded colonies. She was willing to fight for them. She fought and was crushed, but the world was terribly crippled in the process. Colonies are still with us and still a source of bitterness, unrest, and possible war. Nations must give up the idea of seizure, of domination, of obtaining raw materials and trade anyhow, of force—nations must walk in the ways of humanity and justice—if they want peace.” *‘What is your estimate of America’s contribution to Philip- pine development?” ‘It has been a great contribution. America has been remark- able not only for what she has done but also for what she has not done affecting Filipino development. She had it in her power to practice in these islands the creed of the military despot, and she did not do so. She co-operated with us in our efforts to make the Philippines a prosperous country. She pro- moted education, liberal and political. She fostered applied [ Page One Hundred Fifty-one } Pe TIO eR Bas O Shoes airs) ior el te Le hee eat Sn Nes fa science. Economic and financial aid accompanied the Ameri- © cans into the Philippines. All America did and all we did, as we consistently have been led to suppose, were predicated upon the theory that one day the Philippines would be free. We believe the day when they ought to be free has arrived.” Disadvantages ‘‘You think the Filipinos are able to maintain of Alien order and administer justice in the islands?” Control. “Decidedly so. What Filipino of any class or type could wish to see the American flag come down here, if he were able to believe that our civilization would come down with it—that we should have a welter of slaugh- ter, villages on fire, people shelterless and hungry, a stricken country?” *“You do not believe in alien control, however benevolent?” *‘No. Alien control and native progress to the maximum of native capacity are incompatible. For material and for moral reasons | am pleading for the independence of my country. It is arguable, and I consider it true, that mutual benefit may accrue for a time to a dominating country and the country dominated. There has been this time of mutual bene- fit as between America and the Philippines. But, in such a conjuncture, a stage is certain to be reached at which the dominating country begins to stand in the way of the interests, material and moral, of the country dominated. Hampering ‘‘Let us call America the most generous, as she Philippine is the most powerful, nation in the world. She Progress. always, none the less, must remain America. America must come first with Americans. Amer- ican sovereignty must be inviolate. There must be no fiscal arrangements, no fixing of channels of commerce, not con- cordant with American interests, though such arrangements or direction might promote Philippine interests. We claim the right on behalf of the people of the Philippines to consider their interests first, just as America has the right to consider American interests first. We want to make our own tariff laws and our own commercial treaties and do everything else belonging to national sovereignty exclusively with a view to _what is best for the Filipinos. “That is the material side of the matter. Now the moral side, in my opinion, is still more vital from the standpoint of the welfare of the Filipinos. As it is deadly to an individual { Page One Hundred Fifty-two } Wane, Ret isan Can Ay aN OP. kar Ss eo let S to lack liberty, reasonable liberty, the liberty stopping only at the boundary of the liberty of others, so it is deadly for a nation to lack that liberty which stops only at the boundary of the liberty of other nations. Learning Democracy ‘‘When we have our unfettered self- by Its Practice. rule, I dare say we shall make mistakes, but in that respect we shall not be origi- nal or monopolistic. It is by our mistakes that we shall learn. America has aided us to learn much of the art of government, but we can master that art only by self-practice. In politics, as in law or medicine or music or painting, concrete achieve- ment is not in the scholastic sphere, but only in the sphere of scholasticism applied. And, anyway, even in the United States and in England, democracy is still on its trial.’’ “It is better for the Philippines to be ill-governed by the Filipinos than well-governed by the Americans?” *‘By the Americans or any other non-Filipinos.”’ *‘Have the diverse peoples of the islands, with their varied dialects, a recognizable psychic homogeneity—a national soul?” *“‘Indisputably. This national soul already has crystallized in striking national decisions—for independence, for joining America in the World War, against huge landed estates, against applying United States coastwise shipping laws to the Philip- pines. Our people are politically keen and peculiarly demo- cratic. Filipinos’ “There is not a barrio (city, town, village, or National rural district) without its political vigilance, Aspirations. interest and discussion. Ten per cent., over 1,000,000, of our people have the franchise and between 80 and 90 per cent of the registered electors go to the polls on election day. You speak of dialects. We have many. But our major dialects are only three—Tagalog, Visaya and Ilokano—and whoever commands these can make himself understood in every part of the Philippines. All of our people speak one of these languages, which have an extensive printed literature. *‘To regard the Filipino peoples as sentimentally and men- tally diversified in proportion to their diversities of ethnog- raphy or religion or dialect is to misunderstand them com- pletely. They all are Filipinos. They all have nationalistic emotions and aspirations. They are intelligent and proud [ Page One Hundred Fifty-three } FOUR SURRe Ba O ak ei Poe ue ete tel ge wed eek a ee and ambitious. Independence they know would mean equality of opportunity for Filipinos. Of a political or social caste depriving them of their liberties or otherwise wronging them they have no fear. Such reports they dismiss as contrary to their experience and knowledge. Have they not seen their humblest neighbors rise to positions of dignity and influence in the country? Do they not know that nearly all their leaders have been and are of the people? Acceptance of ‘““Take myself, for example. Holding the Democratic premier elective position in the Philippines, Views. I am a farmer’s son, born on the soil, born poor and without influential friends, reared in one of the remotest villages in these islands, compelled to climb over trackless mountains to come to college in Manila.” **So it will be mettle that will count in a free Philippines?”’ “It will be mettle, just as it is mettle in the United States and in every other country where men are free.” “You say you are peculiarly democratic.” ““‘We are so because we are unincumbered by monarchic or oligarchic traditions or institutional inheritances. We have nothing of that sort to destroy. Our ground upon which to erect a pure republic is clear.” “It is alleged that freedom of speech in the Philippines is suppressed—that the people fear their leaders.” “‘That word ‘fear’ should be changed to ‘respect.’ If respect be fear, then the Filipinos fear their leaders, as they have shown on many occasions. Political *‘My advice to any honest inquirer who wishes Alertness of to know whether free speech is or is not sup- Filipinos. pressed in these islands is to go out among the people and sound them on any of the burning questions of the hour. He will get their opinion without any trouble. And, if he be a Filipino politician, and venture to speak or vote against independence, he will discover on election day that while the Filipino people have no reason to fear and do not fear their leaders, their leaders have some reason to fear them. Public opinion in the Philippines is not only unsuppressed, but vocal and militant. We have two parties and they must be careful to learn what the people want. Our electors do not vote by ethnographic group, nor by [| Page One Hundred Fifty-four } Wer Rea sD OM Ni Cred Pl a ns ae Be Band language or dialect, nor according to their religion; they vote as their hearts and minds tell them is right and for the good of the country.” “One is told that an independent Filipino government would solve the Moro problem by stamping out the Moros.”’ *“We practically governed the Moros during the seven years of the last Administration and had no trouble with them, whereas whenever they have been governed by Americans there has been continual trouble with them. Christian ““We naturally understand every element of our Filipinos population better than can foreigners. We never and Moros. have been guilty of persecuting the non-Christian peoples of the Philippines. We have been fair and generous to them in respect of education, roads, sanita- tion, and everything else. From this practice there would be no departure under independence. We believe in educating all our people and promoting their prosperity and happiness in order that we may have a great and contented nation. As for the Filipino leaders, it should be plain to all thinking per- sons, in my opinion, that they can hope for a future only if their country has a future. They cannot build up fame, joy or even enduring material success upon the ruins of their father- land.” “‘What do you think of the Mayo book on the Philippines?”’ “Unilateral, extreme, grossly unfair, passionately dedicated to a particular obsession, destitute of validity as impartial criticism.” Material Side *“Certain advocates of American annexation of the of the Philippines, among the points they Question. make, state that “we need them in our business’.”’ **Ah,”’ remarked Mr. Quezon dryly, “that is not an ethical argument. That is the argument of the sugar. That is the argument of the sisal, the copra, the coconut oil, the tobacco, the rattan, the lumber, the pulp, the dye, the rubber. It is not the argument we expect to prove conclusive with the American people. But even this argument has no value because under an independent Philippines you may have our sugar, tobacco, copra, hemp and the rest.” “‘Opponents of independence describe your argument—the argument for independence—as ‘doctrinaire’.”’ [ Page One Hundred Fifty-five } A i, WU ON Bah Pee ie ee Deo PRAM eee “Our argument is no more an argument of apriority than is that against independence. It is true we base our case, to some extent, upon principles, upon philosophy; but we base it to a larger extent upon the general history of humanity and upon our own particular experience and knowledge. Our argument is a posteriori.” Validity of ‘It is argued that America’s title to the Philip- America’s __ pines is of triple validity, resting upon conquest, Title. purchase, and formal cession.” “Our reply is, first, that conquest is no moral justification for the seizure of a country and the deprivation of its inhabitants of liberty; and, secondly, that purchase is not valid when the seller has no right to sell, and cession not valid when the power enacting it is ceding what belongs to others.” “It is declared that no Malay people, of all the millions of Malays, ever created a nation.” ‘*That is not true. About the thirteenth century there existed a Malay Empire. But, not troubling to question the sweeping dictum concerning the political ineptitude of the Malay race, I should not regard this point as worthy of serious notice. If no Malay people in all the centuries yet has built up a free civilization of its own, I think it high time one were given a chance to try.” If Philippine | ‘“What would happen in the islands if the Freedom Were Congress of the United States declared the Denied. Philippines permanent American territory?” “Our people would be profoundly disap- pointed and depressed. They also would be unutterably sur- prised. I do not think there would be an uprising, but the Philippine question would not be settled. It would live on as an embarrassment to Americans and Filipinos alike. You have promised us freedom. Our people are being educated for free- dom. We Filipino leaders have assured the Filipino people that, if they bore themselves patiently and with dignity, if they strove to lift themselves up, the United States undoubtedly would set them free. They believed us. Their faith is un- shaken today. To destroy their hopes would be immoral, illog- ical, inhuman, and a blunder that history one day inevitably would put right. , [| Page One Hundred Fifty-six | Lt hee ? gy Ne Laie, nai reas a2 _ 5 a - 6 a _ ary ¥ Wee Reels yD GLI aVAGEING eras dele Lo BR bE S Insuring Peace ‘‘“Your great newspaper,’ concluded Mr. in the Pacific. Quezon, placing emphasis on each word, “‘is endeavoring to clarify the problems of the Pacific. It is working for the peace of the Pacific and of the world. I should like to say through The Chicago Daily News that, in my judgment, the peace of the Pacific is in the hands of the United States of America. Japan, I repeat, will not fight America or any other nation except in self-defense. I believe American-Japanese relations would be improved by an Ameri- can withdrawal from the Philippines—not that Japan would lift a finger to get America out, and not that Japan fears American aggression based on these islands, but simply because her going would be interpreted in Japan as a magnanimous act and a definite assurance that the United States has no inten- tion, now or forever, to use her unequaled power for purposes of material or moral domineering in the far east.”’ Sergio Osmena ERGIO OSMENA, long of great, if not decisive, weight in S the public life of the Philippines—he held the speakership of the popular chamber continuously for fifteen years— was 47 on September 9, 1925. He is clean-cut in face and figure, morally earnest, intellectually acute and powerful, unassuming and charming in manner, and remarkably young looking. In his veins is a generous dash of Chinese blood. His appearance is strikingly Chinese and his temperament and mind suggest Chinese rather than Filipino genius. But he is an ardent, if restrained, Filipino patriot. Only one other man in Filipino politics—if, indeed, there be one—can be mentioned in the same breath with Osmena, and that is Senate President Manuel L. Quezon. Quezon has a large admixture of Spanish blood, looks Spanish and shows Spanish temperamental qualities, but he, too, is an ardent Filipino patriot. There hardly could be a sharper contrast than that between these two men. Quezon is blunt, vigorous, af- firmative, rather scornful. Osmena is refined, considerate, [ Page One Hundred Fifty-seven ] PEE AAO okt) oe Oar iMus lao Priel) Loe ricco tae moderate in words, sagacious, fair in judgment, given to rela- tively little utterance and much thought. Leaders of the Both men, however—Quezon is slightly the Nationalist younger—are strong featured, have graceful, Party. well-knit physiques, and esteem smartness of dress. There is latent political rivalry between them. At one time this rivalry issued in a definite rift and Quezon formed a new party to reduce the power of Osmena. Eventually Osmena and Quezon consolidated their parties and now work together at the head of the nacionalistas, the majority party, with the democrata party, a strong organization, in opposition. How long this teamwork will survive the poten- tially conflicting personalities, views, and methods of the Chinese-Filipino and the Spanish-Filipino is uncertain, but their mutual passion for independence may keep them in double harness a good while. Educated in law, philosophy, and letters, and possessing a mind of flexibility and depth, Osmena has been distinguished in the upbuilding of Philippine institutions and in the tech- nical discussion of Philippine constitutional questions from the first days of the civil government following the defeat of the forces of Aguinaldo. Born in the city of Cebu, province of Cebu, among the southern islands, he was a prime figure in local politics, and in 1906, when the Provincial Governors met in Manila to pave the way for the Philippine Assembly, they chose this young statesman as their presiding officer. His political star has been steadily in the ascendent since. Filipino Passion ‘‘You consider there is great moral sub- for Independence. stance to the claim of the Filipinos to independence?’”’ Senator Osmena and I were sitting alone at a tea table in his charming drawing room on a high point in Manila. “Great moral substance,”’ said he, his expression something between a smile and a reminiscent sadness, “‘inheres in any struggle that has cost a people dearly, that exemplifies an aim more precious to them than life, and that inspires them with ever-growing deliberation and tenacity of purpose. Hearing some comments upon the ambition of the Filipinos for a country absolutely their own, one would be inclined to regard this ambition as a new-born thing, as a frivolous thing, as an in- sincere thing, as a shallow and ephemeral sentiment. { Page One Hundred Fifty-eight } Wan? Rin Ls uD ome tie AMONG Con ABs oe Lon Loser edad Beene “It is anything but that. Filipinos have been in moral revolt against foreign domination for an indefinite time. Out of this smoldering fire burst the flames of war first against Spain and then against the United States. Those wars were fought with all that the Filipinos could put into them. General- ship among our leaders attained a high level and there never was any question of the valor of our rank and file. It was an uneven struggle. We carried on as long as we could. Our morale did not fail—not even when our flag came down— but our physical resources did. Filipino Depression “Our national aspiration for freedom in Defeat. survived our disasters in the field. Upon those disasters, indeed, it fed and from them it gained strength. Our heroes, both the known and the unknown, and all the memories of what we had gone through, worked silently but powerfully in the souls of our people. Filipinos said, ‘Heroic things have been done. Filipino women no less than Filipino men have shown themselves great. We were defeated, not because we deserved to be, not because we were stupid or cowardly or in any way unworthy, but because we were materially overwhelmed. A great price has been paid. It cannot be, it shall not be, that that price shall have been paid in vain.” That is what our people said. Those were the mute musings of their hearts. *‘Mute musings they were for only a time. They were such only while we were in the black shadow of our defeat. Ameri- can sovereignty spread quickly throughout the islands. Fili- pinos prominent in the war stood aloof from the partially autonomous provincial and municipal governments set up by the Americans. An impression was produced that every vestige of the Philippine Republic was gone—institutions, flag, the very soul of the Republic, our aspiration for independence. But that impression was delusive. It was utterly false. There were those mute musings | have mentioned, and they were not long in finding articulate and unmistakable expression. Working Toward ‘‘We had fought for independence in the Self-government. field and had lost. What happened then? There was a limited and fleeting surface sentiment for annexation to the United States—for federalism. This sentiment or suggestion had nothing to do with the deep impulses of the people. It belonged to the flotsam and jetsam {| Page One Hundred Fifty-nine ] Peer) Users OSG A te fy Bs Po HD Lal eeePaiaNGies of confused political thought. Filipinos, as to leadership and as to the masses, almost immediately realized that the aspir- ation to be free was irrepressible, and that the struggles for independence begun in war must be continued in peace.” ‘‘And how did the surviving political energy and purpose of the people reveal themselves?” “They revealed themselves in widespread interest in public affairs and in vigorous co-operation with the Americans in the development of a rudimentary Filipino State. Our people took hold of the problems of provincial and local government with enthusiasm and intelligence, and the men of outstanding gifts for leadership set to work to construct a national government. We were given the Philippine Assembly, with representation on the Legislative Commission, and later—Aug. 29, 1916, a luminous day in Filipino history—the autonomous machinery of the Jones law, our Magna Charta. Solemnly and unequivo- cally, in that law, the American people, through their con- stitutional representatives, pledged themselves to grant our independence. Tests of the “Through almost a full decade the Philippine Assembly. Philippine Assembly, with extraordi- nary diligence and wisdom, progres- sively demonstrated the political capacity of the Filipinos. In this work the leaders were guided and sustained by public opinion throughout the archipelago. There was no political lethargy. All the people were as keen as were their chosen representatives to show the world that doubts and misgivings touching our experiment, the first to be tried among a Malayan people subject to the sovereignty of another, were unwarranted. Our electoral battles were contested sharply in the midst of universal attention and the vast majority of our voters went to the polls on election day. “Our parliamentarians, from the opening hours of their opportunity, displayed a consciousness of our national peculi- arities, traditions, and culture and also disclosed parliamen- tary originality. We were not noncreative. We were not blind copyists. We made many departures from American parlia- mentary practice and should have made more except for the dual nature of our form of government and the desirability of adopting methods and procedure with which the Americans were familiar. In our Assembly, for example, we avoided two { Page One Hundred Sixty } SENADO DE FILIPINAS MANILA eae CU, AP LMe a a uy 7 han) ao Le “7 ipa i. bist a ‘per. pe cone Warn Ron iD OD LOAF NS fy Bernd GUUS Dy UE eas AALS SCN) 5 2 A Sac evils—excessive power in a few hands and parliamentary prostration. We preserved the democratic principle in our organization of the House and yet secured the prompt dispatch of public business. Our majority was made effective, but not tyrannical. Though the minority at no time exceeded 20 per cent. of the membership, it was given chairmanships of com- mittees, contrary to the practicein the American Lower House. We believed thoroughly in a minority cohesive and efficient as a vital part of a sound democratic legislature. Enacting “Concern for the good of the people has been Beneficial conspicuous in the whole of our parliamentary Legislation. life. We knew we were on trial. Every member loved his country, longed for its independence, and consequently was actuated by a high sense of responsi- bility. Dereliction wore the color of treason. Expected fratri- cidal antagonisms did not develop. Debates were earnest and sometimes fiery. We have had our tumultuous sessions, as do all the legislatures of the world, even the oldest and most dignified. But, the debates over, the conflicting standpoints put with all the brilliance and force their partisans could com- mand, we all were friends and sincerely indulged in the usual expressions of courtesy and generosity. Our legislative halls are not bear gardens, firmly though some foreign observers believed they would be.”’ *“What is your record relative to popular education>?”’ “Our first measure—the first measure of the Assembly— was an act appropriating a million pesos ($500,000) to build and equip schools in the barrios. Hard words are used about Filipino leaders or politicos. They are represented as disposed to intrench themselves in power and exploit an ignorant and helpless people. If they were so disposed, why should they foster education? Why should they be doing all in their power to produce an educated citizenry? American schools we want to preserve. Every means of elementary and of advanced edu- cation we want to promote. Popular Passion ‘There is no spirit in the world more demo- for Independence. cratic than is that of the Filipino nation, and its abused leaders hold positions of leadership only because of their representative character. If these men entertained wicked designs of exploitation, they [ Page One Hundred Sixty-one } SPP oie BN sy 28 Oe @ isk Sein ik 8 Bet Wd Pe CISC G IS ra en ess would not be found appropriating all the national exchequer will bear for primary instruction, for higher special courses for teachers, and for the establishment of an institution such as the University of the Philippines. Education, as everyone knows, is the relentless and resistless foe of wrong and of tyranny.” “Is there any considerable body of Filipino opinion against immediate and complete independence?”’ ‘“‘No, sir. There may be a few—a very few—men who do not want independence. They are absolutely anti-typical. They are men who think of their money first and of their coun- try afterward. They have no public influence. There is not and never has been a Filipino national party opposed to in- dependence. No man against independence ever has been or can be elected to a post of any kind in the Philippine islands. Our people’s one passion that never will cool and their one vision that never will grow dim are the passion for and the vision of freedom. After all, love of liberty is a universal and immemorial human emotion.” Unity of the “Why should some of your rich men be Filipino Peoples. afraid of independence>”’ “There is no just reason for them to be afraid of independence. Most of them are not. But there are a few whose peculiar mentality and whose special interests and connections turn them away from the independence move- ment. Both life and property would be perfectly safe under Filipino sovereignty. We have proved our capacity to govern.” ““What is your attitude to American capital?” “Our attitude to all foreign capital is friendly, so long as its investment does not move in directions inimical to the prin- ciple of the Philippines for the Filipinos. Every nation has an inalienable right to safeguard its national patrimony.” Christian and “What is the actual position be- Non-Christian Filipinos. tween the Filipinos and the non- Christian elements in the island>”’ “In the first place, we all—Christian and non-Christian— are Filipinos. Religious and ethnologic differences we have as have other nations, but we all are Filipinos. Our national psychic identity has been increasing in definiteness and in vitality with great rapidity for a quarter of a century. This | Page One Hundred Sixty-two } Wa Oe Ri Ca D Ci lA IN GG brew Leo Lo Eve Rn ita Ee development grew naturally out of improved communications of every kind, insular and interinsular, and out of the diffusion of education and cultural influences of all descriptions. Linked together as a nation geographically and acquiring therefrom a distinct national destiny, our peoples long were kept spiritually more or less apart by impassable distances and by a lack of a universal tongue. *‘But good roads, the telegraph, the telephone, the radio, safe and quick inter-island ships and a marvelous awakening of popular intelligence have brought our spiritual and mental unity into precise conformity with our geographical unity. This outcome, of course, was certain from the first. It was only a question of time. We now get national decisions on great public matters as readily and as accurately as they are obtained in the most advanced societies. *“Now, with reference to the Moros and the pagans. Sup- posed irreconcilable hostility between them and the Christian Filipinos is a myth. It is a myth built up and assiduously propagated by two foreign dominations. These dominations strengthened themselves by weakening Filipinos through division. Their theory was to rule by dividing. During the seven years of our greatest degree of autonomy—1914 to 1921 —when Filipinos were given relatively a free hand in dealing with the non-Christians, the wall of prejudice deliberately con- structed between them and their Christian Filipino brothers was torn down. We got on with the non-Christians harmoni- ously. They shared with us the consciousness of nationhood. Our language difficulty—the language difficulty of the Philip- pines as a whole—has been exaggerated to the point of gro- tesqueness. Everyone opposed to independence descants upon our numerous dialects and their fancied segregating and nation- ally disintegrating operation. In truth, three dialects are a key to the entire Filipino mind, not to mention the constant spread of English.” Genuine “There has been continuity of purpose and Legislative practice in your legislative development?” Development. ‘“‘Absolutely. We did not build thoughtlessly. Principles were our guide. We had knowledge of history and of the tried maxims of free government. Be- sides, we had our own experience of civilized life—our long contact with Western ideas—and our own separate and unique {| Page One Hundred Sixty-three | BU Ca ike OcGk SPS hae ead my Bi) Gag BAG (A cot es (de Fe) racial inspiration. There is no other way to constitute a national organism—no other way than by consultation of racial fundamentals in the light of the common culture of the world. We did that. If we had done otherwise—if we had depended altogether upon foreign experience and thought— our title to independence would not be what it is. No great oak can rise from or rest upon anything but its own far- spreading roots. Any student of our parliamentarism will have no trouble in picking out its proofs of originality and catholic eclecticism. I may remark, in passing, that we adopted the national budgetary system some years before the United States adopted it and that our secretaries of departments have the right to appear on the floor of the houses of the legislature.”’ Interpreting “What is the crux of the trouble between the Jones Law. the Philippine Legislature and tlhe Governor- General?” ‘Antagonistic interpretations of our organic law—the Jones law. It is a constitutional controversy. We hold that the in- tent of the law was to confer complete internal autonomy upon the Filipino nation. I say ‘internal autonomy.’ I recognize without question the right and the duty of the United States, having regard to its responsibilities in the existing situation, to exercise sovereignty over our external relations. [| do not contend that we legally can take away from the United States the attributes and functions of sovereignty. But I do contend that the Jones law gives us, and was designed to give us, un- restricted freedom in the weaving of a fabric of internal politi- cal and social economy. It is, in my opinion, inconsistent with the purpose of the Jones law for the Governor-General to veto any act of the Legislature affecting exclusively our domestic affairs. At the heart of the Jones law, as I understand it, is the intention to liberate the Philippine Legislature to act wisely or foolishly, according to its own volition, in developing a democratic government in these islands. We say to the United States, ‘Let us hammer out our own shape upon the anvil of experience’.”’ The Constitution ‘Do you not accept the American consti- Does Not Apply. . tutional principle of the separation of legis- lative, judicial, and executive powers>”’ “That principle does not apply to the Philippines. Our basic law is not derived from the American Constitution. Our govern- | Page One Hundred Sixty-four) Ware ReaD ae her ore INe Ce hE ea LZ LS botnet rari ment is not of the Presidential type. Let meexplain. Parent- hood of the Jones law is found in the act of the American Con- gress of July 1, 1902, and the predecessor of that act was McKinley’s command to the Philippine Commission. Neither the act nor the command, organically, is based on the Con- stitution of the United States. Immediately, their source is the American system of territorial government—more particu- larly the Jeffersonian plan for the government of Louisiana— and, remotely, the system of colonial government existing in America before the thirteen colonies obtained their inde- pendence. In none of the organic charters of the American colonies, nor in any American territorial law, is there identity with the type of government established by the Constitution of the United States. Obviously our Government is not of the Presidential type. We have no President. Our supreme execu- tive is not elected by our people and is responsible to a foreign government. Categorically, moreover, the Supreme Court of the United States has declared that ‘the Constitution did not follow the flag into the Philippines.’ Like a golden thread, through American law and through all American utterances of high official authority, runs the theory that the American people and their statesmen always have meant that the Philip- pines should develop according to their own genius and should be free.”’ Peace for a “You have no doubt a free Philippines Free Philippines. would be peaceful itself and peace-con- serving?” “‘None. We are a peaceful people. We are a law-respecting people. We are a property-cherishing people. We work hard. We ask nothing of America and the world except to let us follow unfettered our path of destiny. We shall cause no trouble. We are not uninstructed in either the arts or the proprieties of diplomacy. Nobody will bother us when America removes her sovereignty. National ambitions are not running in the direction of strife now. Governments and peoples want peace. Statesmen are going into the international council chamber instead of dispatching field marshals at the head of troops. I feel the world is on the threshold of that peace for which it has paid so much and for which it has waited so long.” [Page One Hundred Sixty-five | BU Urrar Or: dNde has Pere ails ea iN ee Governor-General Leonard Wood AJ.-GEN. LEONARD WOOD, Governor-General of M the Philippine Islands, is probably without a rival, Caucasian or non-Caucasian, in his knowledge of the archipelago and the people for which he has supreme immediate responsibility. Certainly Gen. Wood is America’s greatest authority on the Philippine question—one of the most peculiar, important, and difficult questions that ever preoccupied Am- erican statesmanship. Gen. Wood has come to know the Philippines as a result of prolonged first-hand study. This study has been unremittent for more than twenty years. Arriving in the islands in 1903, after his distinguished services in Cuba as Military Governor of Santiago and as Governor-General, he was appointed Governor of the Moro province, comprising the southern islands and Mindanao, populated principally by Moros and pagans—in all some eighteen tribes. Gen. Wood was not only head of the Civil Government, with a Legislative Council, responsible for five districts, but Commanding General of the troops in the Department of Mindanao and Sulu. Intensive Study For three years, in the capacities named, of the Philippines. Gen. Wood was constantly among the people, frequently visiting every tribe and settlement. Then he became Military Commander of the Philip- pine Division, with headquarters in Manila, whence he con- tinued his diligent investigations. Following this work, he studied the Philippines as chairman of the special mission of investigation, together with W. Cameran Forbes, and a staff of experts, in 192]. This investigation lasted four months and covered forty- eight of the forty-nine provinces into which the islands are divided. It was a systematic and thorough investigation of all phases of Philippine conditions, geographic, climatic, natural, human, and governmental. Out of these painstaking inquiries, reaching into 449 cities and towns and involving eleven weeks of travel by sea, rail, motor car, and horse, sprang the great classic on the Philip- pines—the Wood-Forbes Report tothe Harding Administration. In this Report are embodied the fundamentals of the Philippine problem. It is full of illumination to the historical and phile { Page One Hundred Sixty-six } ba . : ; - a olen —inge “eet ieee ee a 5 ae oe “a U - : <> ay soe 7 - 7 7 ¢ ees fp ie le ee = Lar e : = S Weer) La LD eee ey ate Nea es ie an Laer orgy ES Lider sophical mind. Its discoveries and conclusions were the price- less possession of Gen. Wood when he came to the Philippines as the chief officer of the sovereign power, and his knowledge of the islands and the islanders has been ripened and extended by four years of further traveling and by arduous administra- tive experience. American Control Gen. Wood, gray, ruddy, sturdy, dignified, Must Continue. received me in the Governor-General’s pri- vate office, Malacanang Palace, Manila He sat in a wide, tall, dark hardwood chair, with bottom and back of cane, and talked rapidly in a low voice. His voice was so low that now and again I had difficulty in catching every word. For the most part the veteran soldier and administrator wore a look of seriousness, if not severity, but two or three times during the conversation his features relaxed, he smiled, and there was an extremely pleasant look in his blue eyes. He has character. He has magnetism. He has brains. He is not only a military man; he is a thinker and a statesman. *‘What do all your inquiries, experience, and thought tell you we ought to do about the Philippines>’’ I asked the Gov- ernor-General. *‘That we ought to see our great enterprise through,’’ he replied. *‘That we ought to stay here indefinitely?” *“‘Indefinitely.”’ “Why?” ‘Because the work we set out to do is only begun. How long it will take no one can say. If we withdrew now, all we have done would be undone, our investment of blood and treasure would be wasted, twenty-five years of idealistic labor would be thrown away, the Filipino people would be heartlessly be- trayed, and we should do a criminal disservice to the stability and the highest interest of the world.” Education Must ‘You believe the Filipinos to be potentially Come First. capable of self-government?”’ “Potentially, yes. But to translate this potentiality into an actuality will take a long time—somewhere perhaps between a quarter and a half century. It is a matter of rearing and educating occidentally enough Filipinos to govern the country. There are far from enough now. Young educated people are still a small proportion of the population. [ Page One Hundred Sixty-seven | nk Pa be OB kaa 3 iar 0 se We oc der Bd Saad A) ead eb ds Bd SA'S) We need more schools and teachers and a great extension of the English language, which alone can serve as a medium of psychological consolidation among peoples dispersed over thousands of islands and divided by eighty-seven different dialects.” “What are some of the evidences of latent Filipino ca- pacity?” ‘“‘These people are property-loving and law-abiding. They are sympathetic, intelligent, hospitable, and neighborly. Their keenness for education is unsurpassed. Parents are willing to make almost any sacrifice to keep their children in school. Filipino teachers are zealous and hard-working. Intellectual activity is apparent in all directions. Political affairs receive more and more popular attention and there is a growing in- terest in public health and public works. Assimilability to western ideals is marked. Aptitude for politics and a desire to participate in government are conspicuous Filipino qualities. Folly That “But all these things in the Philippines are Brought merely tokens of what can be—not what is— Retrogression. in the way of capacity for self-government. Intellectualism is not a sufficient qualification for the tasks of statecraft and administration. Intellectualism, indeed, may be an evil rather than a good. It is an evil if, as in the Philippines, it tends to run ahead of the more substantial virtues of character. Before you have a government you must have a country to govern; you must have agriculture, industry, commerce, and finance. You must have credit. Too many educated Filipino minds are dazzled by political and profes- sional ambition, too few attracted by the harder and more im- portant tasks of maintaining a civilized society. “That the Filipinos have undeveloped gifts for government has been proved by American experience in the islands. Our earlier efforts here were well-conceived and skillfully executed. They bore excellent fruit. We were making splendid progress. Our Filipino pupils in the theory and practice of democracy, responding eagerly to the experience, ideals, methods, and authority of the Americans, acquired discipline, efficiency, thoroughness, a high sense of responsibility. Then injudicious idealism entered. A great folly was committed. Excessive and too rapid Filipinization from 1914 to 1921 eliminated American experience and installed Filipino inexperience to such an ex- [ Page One Hundred Sixty-eight ] WaerOuoR dali Gre Hi Av eNes Coot Les Recents tent that there was an all-around retrogression, legislative, executive, and judicial and in the Philippine Constabulary. Self-Rule Would ‘‘We must return to our old slow-but-sure Bring Disaster. method; short cuts are alluring but perilous. I do not mean that the system inaugurated by the Jones law—the system of house and senate and sovereign executive—must be abandoned. It probably should be some- what modified and it certainly should be made to work. It did not work during the period of our back-sliding in the Philippines. There was not a strict performance of the duties of the Governor-General under the law. There was too much surrendering of executive authority, combined with too much legislative usurpation, interference of political leaders in the general supervision and control of departments and bureaus and the infection of the civil service with politics. Disastrous socialistic experiments were made and the Philippine National bank lost $35,000,000 gold—one of the darkest pages in Philip- pine history. It has been my work, with the unmistakable good will of the people—of every one but a few leaders—to restore the authority of the Governor-General under the law.”’ ““What do you think would be the immedia¢e results of our leaving?” “Strife, disorder, bloodshed. They might not come instantly but they would come soon. Moros, whom we have disarmed and who want us to stay and protect them, and Christian Fili- pinos would fight. Industry, trade, and credit would be ruined, with the inevitable concomitants of idleness, hunger, and anarchy. We should look back upon the plight of these 12,000,000 people, who never have known what it means to defend or sustain themselves, who never have known any free- dom except what our flag has given them—we should look back upon their plight with national sorrow, pity, and shame. Japanese would come in, not necessarily as an army, but with their vigorous business methods, and Chinese would swarm hither for all sorts of pursuits. As I have said to Filipino friends, “Chinese would hold your valleys; you fellows would be sitting on the hilltops.’ ”’ Unsettling “Would that be all>’’ the Far East. ‘No; that would not be all. We should un- settle the Pacific and the Far East. Weshould create a situation replete with sinister possibilities. Political [| Page One Hundred Sixty-nine } Pauly es OVE i piven eee Poa) o ale here ee ee impotence, social disorganization, and intertribal conflicts in the Philippines would not be allowed to continue for a great while. Civilized strength, from one quarter or another, would move toward this vortex of trouble and suffering and such a movement might precipitate the worst consequences. In any event, the hope of Philippine independence would be dashed for ages if not for all time. Filipino leaders should be able to see these dangers, but they see only a vision of personal power. They are insensate to encompassing realities. They are bent upon gambling with the fate of their own people and with the peace of the Pacific. “Conceivably, this peace might not be broken, but the risk is there, and if there were no other consideration in the matter, that risk should impose upon America a sacred obligation to hold the Philippines until it is reasonably sure that all such peril is past.” Benefits for *‘Our presence here, in existing conditions, Oriental Peoples. is needed on the side of the Occident>” “‘It is needed on the side of both Occident and Orient. Equilibrium between them promises stability; dis- equilibrium threatens instability. Our position in the Philip- pines does not give the Occident overweening strength in the Pacific. It in no sense jeopardizes either the peace or the peace- ful trading rights of any power. We are here with the loftiest ideals, not only toward the Filipinos, but toward all our Asiatic neighbors. We want to live on terms of amity and equality with them all. We stand for the Open Door. Westand fora solution of every industrial and commercial, as well as every political, question on a basis of reason and justice and not of force. We have earned, we have paid for, our right to carry our experiment in the Philippines to full fruition, and mean- while the possession of this archipelago re-enforces our diplo- macy touching all international matters in the Orient, among them the principles of the Washington treaties and the Open Door. Advancing Christian “‘We cannot think of this Philippine Civilization. question,’ said Gen. Wood, with intensi- fied earnestness, “without thinking of civilization as a whole. And civilization, to us, is Christian civilization. We are a stone, if not the keystone, of the arch of Christian civilization in the Pacific. Filipinos, as to all but [ Page One Hundred Seventy ] ETS aa Ba hp B erie Ase Nn Gg Chaba laa hry pectin see a tenth of the population, are Christians. Christianity’s human- izing influence shows in their faces and is recorded in their steady moral advance. Paganism and non-Christianity can be broken down only by the impact of spiritual and cultural in- fluences and these will be projected from the base of a highly- developed Christian Philippines as they cannot be projected from the distant bases of America and Europe. *‘America in the Philippines, in other words, insures the effective deployment of Christianity for the regeneration of the world. These are solemn obligations and great opportuni- ties. We can be false to them only at the cost of treason to that faith which we believe to be essential to the highest human development. Let us go out of the Philippines only when we can leave the torch of that faith in strong hands. If we and those who believe as we believe can Christianize the world, in the full psychic and ethical sense of that phrase, we shall rid it of injustice, of human degradation, of social cleavage and conflict, and of international slaughter. I attach immense importance to developing the Philippines as Christianity’s great peaceful outpost in the Pacific.” Defects of a “You have every respect ‘or the sentiment Childlike People. of nationality>”’ “| have every respect for the sentiment of nationality. But the possession of sovereign national status can be a blessing to a people only when it means national security, when it means sagacity and restraint in foreign affairs, when it means political and economic competence, when it means established law and order, when it means sanitation, education, social justice, personal and religious liberty. Na- tional development of this order can rest upon nothing but the development of the individual citizen. Every society stands or falls according to the presence or absence of ability, per- severance, and self-command in its individual members. No society can be made or preserved by a group of politicians, nor by a group of groups of politicians, however notable their intellectual dexterity. ‘Our task in the Philippines is to bring up the general level of education and efficiency to a point where the individual citizens of competence are sufficiently numerous to support a stable structure of government, of social relations and of in- dustrial and commercial prosperity. There is no such general level of education and efficiency now. Filipinos, despite their [ Page One Hundred Seventy-one ] a) eB PRhg Bes B fda ae ss O F bees Piel lalvearone Neca human charm and their many encouraging moral and mental endowments, are generally unoriginal, non-initiatory, non- constructive, and dilettante. They are too childlike, too feeble, for the heavy burdens of statehood.”’ Liberty Under the ‘‘What will you say of the claim that Fili- American Flag. pino progress to the highest extent is im- possible without liberty?” “I will say that the Filipinos, in their present backward condition, have under our flag the only liberty they can hope to enjoy. Their leaders are ready to give up the substance of liberty in a wild grasp for its shadow; they are ready to lead their people into disaster. Lord Northcliffe was right when he told the Filipinos they had more liberty than any other people in the world—shielded from external and internal molestation, lowly taxed, surrounded by the safeguards and minis- trations of science, blessed with churches and schools and communications, left entirely free to use their hands or brains as best they can, launched on an even keel on the main stream of modern progress. “They talk about liberty. Why, America is the mother of liberty as the term is understood in the world today. It is precisely because we love liberty that we are disinclined to leave these islands prematurely and permit them to relapse into slavery. We came into the Philippines not to take away, but to give, liberty. We cannot accomplish our task by scut- tling. Filipinos can have liberty only if they accept it from the Americans in the form of that comprehensive culture and discipline, those moral, intellectual, and civic virtues, which alone make liberty possible. I note a Filipino leader’s remark that while his people are grateful to America for what she has done here they cannot pay their debt of gratitude in the cur- rency of independence. We are not asking for gratitude. We are not working for gratitude. Our aims are not so low as that. Our aims are to found a strong, free, Christian nation in the West Pacific for the sake of that nation, ourselves, and our fellow men in general.”’ Friends of American ‘‘If the Philippines were near our shores, Rule Muzzled. would your attitude be different>”’ “In that case, I should say, ‘Let them try it.” We could take the risk then. But they are too far away. Once we leave these islands, we are gone for good. We [| Page One Hundred Seventy-two } eee os yh ‘ : wv. @ffice of the Governsr General sHlanila July 14, 1925. Mr. Victor Fremont Lawson, Editor-in-Chief of The Daily News, Chicag 0. Dear Mr. Lawson: Your correspondent in the Pacific, Mr. Edward Bell, in the accom- panying interview, faithfully reflects my feelings and convictions relative to the Philippine problem. It has been a pleas-— ure to ms to do what I could to cooperates with you in your great work of spreading light and sympathy among the nations. Sincerely, Governor — General. Wo One Riri iD Ceri AgiNts Coch ive ree Re) Ba shall not come back. There are no more Perry or Dewey opportunities contiguous to the eastern coastline of Asia.” “‘Is it true that free speech is suppressed in the Philippines by fear of the leaders of the independence movement?”’ *“To a very considerable extent that undoubtedly is true. Nonpolitical Filipinos of education and understanding must be courageous, indeed, if they voice the opinion they actually hold, namely, that it is better for the country as a whole that America should remain as she is for an indefinite time. Surely any thinking person can realize that this naturally would be so. Persons against immediate independence are denounced as traitors—not openly, perhaps, but none the less effectually, for most of the intelligence circulating in the Philippines cir- culates by word of mouth. Ignorance is widespread among the masses. They are for independence, when energetically stimu- lated on the subject by the leaders, for they have not the slightest conception of its practical significance. Can you be- lieve it would be healthy for a Filipino champion of deferred independence to fall among ignorant compatriots to whom he had been described as a traitor? Ignorance *‘Get firmly in mind the fact that there Swayed by Politics. are three classes in this drama of Philip- pine agitation respecting independence. There is the small political class hungry for the loaves and fishes, the enlightened class (larger than the first, but not large enough for prevalence) interested only in the welfare of the people, and the uninstructed bulk of the population. Patriotic and useful public opinion belongs in the main to the second of these classes. It is this public opinion which is suppressed by fear of the leaders—fear of them as instigators of the ignorant majority against any one who counsels prudence and delay in the matter of independence. Relief for this unfortunate situa- tion can be had, of course, only in widening the circle of un- selfish public opinion—only in educating the majority. When observers inquire why it is, if the Filipinos do not want im- mediate independence, that they elect the champions of im- mediate independence, the reply is that the ignorant portion of the electorate is misled by self-seeking politicians.” “And you do not think’ the Filipinos should have what is bad for them, even if the majority wants it?” “I do not. They are not entitled to have what is bad for them, even though they want it, for what is bad for them is { Page One Hundred Seventy-three | POU ay On ees Orn Teh SE. Fe Ph a ie Pa Neer bad for a lot of other people who do not want it. It is intoler- able that an uneducated electorate, harangued by political aspirants to power and emolument, should frustrate America’s long, laborious, and expensive struggle to build a firmly-based Christian state in the Philippines and also should jar the deli- cate interracial and international balance in the Pacific inimi- cally to the cause of world peace.” Filipinos Happy ‘‘Would the masses be satisfied if they were and Satisfied. left alone by the leaders?’ *“‘Perfectly. There is not a more satisfied or happier people in the world. I go among them continually and everywhere am received with the greatest courtesy and hospitality. I have just returned from a voyage of 3,000 miles among the scattered islands. I visited fifty centers of life and motored extensively in the rural regions. I carried no arms. Not a weapon of any kind was needed in my party. Cordial popular welcomes greeted me at every turn. Illiterate though vast numbers of these people are, they know enough to know they never before were so well off in every moral and material way as they are now.” *“What is the percentage of literacy in the islands>?”’’ *‘About 37 per cent., would be a liberal estimate.” “‘Manuel Roxas, speaker of the Philippine House, stated before a congressional committee in Washington that it was over 60 per cent.” | *“Yes, he made that misstatement and others. His statistics were wrong. He compared dialectic differences in the Philip- pines to the slight differences of this kind in the United States. That is ridiculous. There are here eighty-seven distinct dia- lects, many of them as unlike as are the modern Latin lan- guages and some of them differing as radically as do English and German. English is the only hope of a national medium of communication in the Philippines. Samples of ““‘Let me briefly illustrate further how un- Filipino Rule. reliable were the statements of Roxas in Washington. He asserted that during the Administration of Gov.-Gen. Harrison, when that officer, ac- cording to Roxas, abdicated his military duties under the law and left the Constabulary in the Moro region to unre- stricted Filipino command—a period of seven years—there was not a single killing in that region. As a fact, during that [ Page One Hundred Seventy-four } Wii tO ReaD COREA ea Mrs Le ob Ri fen Ba S period, the records show 124 conflicts between the Constabulary and the Moros, 499 Moros dead, 22 Constabulary soldiers dead, 1 officer dead and many wounded on both sides. ““Nor is this the whole story of that ‘peaceful’ reign. In the same region Bogobos killed 50 Japanese over land troubles. It was during the time in question that occurred the most serious breach of public order since the foundation of the Civil Government. That breach consisted in a fight between the Constabulary and the police of Manila. Asa result of thatclash a number of both combatants and innocent citizens were killed and many of the Constabulary were sentenced to death or to life imprisonment. “‘Furthermore, the assertions of Roxas in commendation of the health service were untrustworthy. During the time under review Cholera in the Philippines destroyed 17,000 and small- pox 73,000 lives. We are now free from all sorts of epidemics. In their statistics and in their afhrmations Filipino politicians want checking up.” Obstacles to ““What would be your concluding word of Filipino Progress. counsel to Filipino politicians and to the Filipino intelligentsia in general>?”’ “IT should counsel them at once and without reservation to drop the idea of immediate independence and dedicate them- selves whole-heartedly to co-operation with the Americans in creating a Filipino citizenship capable of orderly, just, pro- gressive, prosperous, and self-defensive democratic rule. For such co-operation the road lies wide, smooth, and open. Petty Filipino politics should be cut out as a cancerous growth. Deliberate annoyance of the representatives of the sovereign power should cease. Abortive extralegalism—abortive, but pernicious—should be abandoned. There should be no petti- fogging opposition to the clear authority of the Governor- General, whoever he may be, under the organic law. If the Philippine Legislature and the Governor-General disagree, and if their disagreement reach a deadlock, then the President of the United States should decide. ““My advice to the educated Filipinos would be frankly to accept all these conditions and to change their appeal to the people from a call to illusory independence to a call to that moral and mental advance which is the sine gua non of real independence.”’ [| Page One Hundred Seventy-five | ea Mele nate Tat ee ee ee oe 6 ve. j ’ ion (29) yy, , a ‘te Cae herr a. Phin CHINA'S RIGHTS AND WRONGS Interview with DR. TANG SHAO-YI ex-Premier, and Progressive Advocate of Chinese Nationalism Based on Enlightened Democracy. “All Chinese are Compounded of the same Spiritual Stuff. China’s Oneness of Spirit is not visible to the Cursory Glance, but it is'there. It is the Ultimate Reality in China. It is China.” hae ; : by ray c ‘ ‘ ‘,/ Pa el ha oe 7 73 oS f ay , ie A F i pitt Fea ay ve a Py esr cks Mi vy Wy ’ ne oe pciis Th ih ua hay rae ae f y £ Wage P : @ China's Rights and Wrongs HATEVER may be the color of the speaker, so far as \ \/ I can discover, only words of respect and affection are spoken of Dr. Tang Shao-yi of China. His character, personality, and mind—the spiritual and mental individuality and worth of the man—constitute perhaps the greatest single, silent, underlying vitality now actuating the slow course of Chinese political and social evolution. Every country in the world, I suppose, has its beloved elder statesman—its “‘grand old man’’—but out of long-past political conditions and struggles few nations, if any, have retained a leader who means so much to them at present as Dr. Tang Shao-yi means to China. Grand old man he is, yet he is only 65, and when I met him at the threshold of his roomy and pleasing home in Shanghai he struck me as at the zenith of his life in both appearance and vigor. China’s Champion I found the famous statesman among of National Unity. his grandchildren. *“These,’’ said he, spreading his arms wide and smiling down at the youngsters on the floor, ‘‘these are mine.”’ Dr. Tang, who became Prime Minister of China on the abdication of the Manchu Emperor in 1912 and who later was appointed Foreign Minister—a portfolio, however, he did not assume—has had experience in virtually every department of the government of his country. He was a high court official in the final days of the Manchu regime. He served under Yuan Shih-kaiin Korea and in Shantung and was active in the sup- pression of the Boxer rising, traveling thereafter to the United States to thank the Washington Government for waiving the Boxer indemnity. He was a member of the first group of students sent by the Chinese Government to be educated in the United States and encountered a stimulating phase of Western civilization in the robbery of his train in a Southern state by Jesse James and a gang of subordinate outlaws. Independence has been the outstanding characteristic of Dr. Tang’s political life. Willing to study facts, to investigate conditions, to hear arguments and to reflect, he acted as he Page One Hundred Seventy-nine ] CAHCEIN VAS SSR Gorin Se ARNG LO eva vn Ge Nes saw fit in the end, even at the cost of breaking with such men as Yuan Shih-kai and Dr. Sun Yat-sen. Dr. Tang is a kind of Daniel Webster or Abraham Lincoln in his devotion to the cause of national unity. Only one government, in his judg- ment, is wide enough for China, and this is a government em- bracing within its jurisdiction every man, woman, and child in whom glows the vital spark of the Chinese race. Marching Toward ‘‘And there is such a spark>’’ I remarked, True Nationalism. as we sat talking in the quiet of the states- man’s drawing room. ‘“‘Most certainly,’’ he replied. “‘All Chinese are compounded of the same spiritual stuff. China’s oneness of spirit is not visible to the cursory glance, but it is there. It is the ultimate reality in China. It is China. Localism, provincialism, centrifu- galism are strong now because we have not yet a conscious- ness of the unity of national interests—not even a conscious- ness of the universality of the Chinese soul. Our dispersed and divided multitudes are unacquainted with one another and ignorant of their interdependence and brotherhood. Our ignorance is but a sign of the vastness of China, our weakness but a portent of Chinese strength in the centuries to come.” “Your national weakness results from aggressive local or provincial strength?” *“‘Unquestionably. All nations—there is not an exception— have had their periods of internal blindness, disunion, and strife. America, for example, did not find herself until she had fought one of the bloodiest civil wars in the history of man- kind. That war revealed the will of the United States to be one. Chinese internal struggles, likewise, reveal the march of the purpose of union. If this purpose were not on the march there would be no hostile local reactions, no uprisings of sec- tions disturbed by the imminence of a new regime pivoted upon central authority. If this purpose of union were not in motion we should have provincial tranquillity, but we should pay too great a price for it. It is better that China should be racked by war than that she should fall short of the high destiny which only nationality and independence can give her. China on the ““What we have in dramatic manifesta- Road to Democracy. tion now are our minor virilities of dis- union. One day these minor virilities of disunion will coalesce in a major virility of union. China co- hesive and vigorous provincially will become China cohesive [ Page One Hundred Eighty } Wel son: Fy alae kD CO EAT eeiN a CE ioe TE Ts tay Rae Ea Eon and vigorous nationally. On that day this motherland of civilization will have its e pluribus unum. Just as strong in- dividual citizens are necessary to strong provincial social uni- ties, so strong provincial social unities are necessary to strong national social unities. Our bedrock necessities, of course, are strong individual men and women, and Chinese men and women, though not of giant stature, are strong in physique, in intelligence, and in morale.” “You are looking forward to democracy in China>?”’ I asked, realizing what a fine picture of democratic manhood Dr. Tang presented as he sat in his straight-backed chair, leaning for- ward, his hands on his knees, his clear, steady, humane, dark eyes fixed upon mine—a plainly dressed, rugged, natural man, as innocent of physical pose as he was incapable of intellectual pretense. “‘Democracy—yes. No political principle can live except the principle of democracy. It is a principle, to be sure, not yet fully brought down from the heights of idealism, but it is being brought down bit by bit and the time will come when we shall possess and practice it in reasonable perfection. That time must come. [f that time were not coming we could anticipate only social dissolution. People are going to rule themselves or not be ruled. Self-rule is the only authority they will recognize as otherwise than tyrannical and insuffer- able. It is a sound instinct, infinitely creditable to man, the last word in the assertion of human dignity. Democratic Spirit ‘“Wider consultation of the people, wider of Young China. suffrage, more democracy, are imperative in China. Bosses and cliques and domi- neering militarists must go. Squeezes, nepotism, favoritism, graft, must go. Forces antagonistic to low standards of public life are mobilizing all over China. Moral retrogression followed the disappearance of the Manchu dynasty, which, after con- quering the country, ruled it for more than two and a half centuries; but this ebb will cease and we shall witness an un- precedented return of the moral tide. Young China is in a glow of patriotic and ethical emotion, responding to educa- tional stimulus, stirred by a sense of age-old disrespect, am- bitious to affirm for China’s millions their rightful place and influence in the comity of nations. ‘Chinese illiteracy is much talked about by foreigners. ‘How,’ it is asked, ‘can these illiterate Chinese maintain a [ Page One Hundred Eighty-one | COHSEN SAC Se RM IV GRE S eSa ALS Na W awe CUR eat republic?’ Well, an elector may be able to read and write and yet be a poor elector. He may lack intelligence and, as he often does, political interest. Look at the millions of eligibles in England and the United States who will not trouble to walk to the polls and cast their ballots on election day. Of what use is their literacy to the democracy of which they are theoret- ically a part? To what purpose, politically, have they learned to read and write? No; democracy is in the spirit and not in the letter; democracy is an affair of sentiment, of understand- ing, of conviction, of a sort of religious public zeal. Confucianism Leads “This zeal is coming to China. China, to Democracy. to a large extent, is unlettered, but it is not unintelligent. China is enlightened, observant, and thoughtful. It has been silent—too silent. It has been patient—too patient. Its silence and patience have been misunderstood, and both China and the world are pay- ing for this misunderstanding. China’s wisdom, which is widely diffused, has sprung from its thousands of books, the essence of which has imbued the public mind. If literacy and political competence were in the relation of producer and product and if literacy were alone in the first position China would not have political competence. But we all know that literate people may be foolish and illiterate people wise, and it follows that literate people may be poor democrats and illiterate people good ones. Confucian literature by itself has given China a democratic birthright.” Dr. Tang paused for a moment and a smile of apparently deep satisfaction shone in his eyes. “Confucius,” he repeated. “‘His great spirit—the light of his soul—has blessed not only China but Asia. Five centuries before Christ his influence had its beginning, and it is incal- culably powerful today. It affects great minds and these transmit its virtue to other minds in ever-widening circles. My old friend, Viscount Shibusawa of Japan, for instance, is a de- voted student of Confucius. He told me he had read our philosophical master every day for sixty years. Before the invention of the automobile Shibusawa carried a copy of Con- fucius in his pocket. Now he carries a copy in his pocket and another in a pocket of his car. If you see the wonderful old gentleman reading as he passes through the streets of Tokyo it is ninety-nine to one he is reading Confucius.”’ { Page One Hundred Eighty-twal) Wait Oa eters Gents Ame NOR G@ Greta Lig ie irae te mea i China’s Relations Returning to the democratic quality of with Japan. China, Dr. Tang said: *“‘Let no one infer from our war lords that the Chinese people like war lords. Observe this tiger skin on the floor. It once clothed a free-ranging and ferocious beast in the forest, but finally this beast fell a victim to the hunter and was skinned. Our ruling generals are ranging somewhat freely at the moment. But they must be wary. Not one of them dares to go home. Not one of them would be safe at home. In this fact and in many others we have proof that the democratic heart of China is sound.”’ “How are China and Japan getting on together latterly>”’ “Our relations are improved. I regard the outlook as favor- able. Premier Kato was the author of the Twenty-One De- mands, but he seems quite changed, appreciating that progress along the lines of those Demands is impossible. Baron Shide- hara’s recent declarations respecting international questions I consider the wisest Japanese utterances of the kind in fifteen years. Tokyo, advantageously to itself and to us all, is enun- ciating great principles of statesmanship and thus reassuring the world.” “Do you know Gen. Baron Tanaka, who tisult is spoken of as Japan’s next Premier?” “Yes, I know him. His political ambitions puzzle me some- what. I easily could think of him as a field marshal leading an army into Manchuria; it is less easy for me to think of him as Prime Minister of Japan. I have no idea what he would do in that position. I have no knowledge of the interests seem- ingly ready to back Tanaka financially, and Japanese parties cannot operate without large funds. Let us hope that the renunciation of a military career by this brilliant soldier signi- fies his arrival at the conclusion that henceforth man’s highest glory is to be sought, not on the field of battle, but in the political council chamber.”’ War Peril in “Is that your conclusion>”’ the Far East. “‘T was born with that conclusion woven into my spiritual texture. That conclusion is in- herited by every true son and daughter of China. Our people are generations ahead of many others in their estimate of war and peace. China is too great to worship the sword. Its power is the power of weakness, not of strength; only the weak need the sword. What wise people would offer homage to a [ Page One Hundred Eighty-three ] CoH DL NUAMSSOP RSI: GPs a Soe AtN (Ba Wr em INe Gsa symbol of destruction? Whoever can translate the dense and superimposed inscriptions on the sword will cast it away with horror, for to read these inscriptions is to read history, and history is soaked with human blood.”’ “Do you think the sword has been sheathed permanently in the Far East>”’ *“*T am afraid not.” *‘Who is going to fight?” ‘““There is great danger that Russia and Japan will fight. Diligent efforts are on foot to adjust Russo-Japanese relations peacefully, but I am not optimistic relative to their issue. Japan is still less disposed today than she was twenty years ago to tolerate a too-near Russian approach on the mainland of Asia opposite the Island Empire. Count Soyeshima of Japan predicted a few weeks ago that Russia and Japan would be at war within ten years. I should not be surprised if such a war came sooner. Both countries desire spheres in Mongolia and Manchuria. Room there should be, and to spare, for both, since Mongolia, with its area of more than 1,300,000 square miles, is one of the principal divisions of China and has a smaller population than has Chicago. Bolshevism as a_ “But room is not the essence of the matter. Growing Menace. Two mutually repugnant orders face each other, the Russian confiscatory, the Japan- ese conservative; the Russian based on a continent, the Japan- ese on an archipelago. Russia, naturally, has aggressive ten- dencies; Japan, naturally, is vigilantly defensive and wishes to establish her first lines of resistance on a periphery as distant as possible from the citadel of her national security. Peril in- heres in this situation, and China can heighten the peril by forgetting her national interests and involving herself in the latent Russo-Japanese conflict. China standing steadfastly apart, scrupulously Chinese, encouraging neither Russian ag- gression nor Japanese adventure on the Asian continent to fore- stall hypothetical Russian aggression, holds out the best promise of peace in the Far East.” “It is asserted that bolshevism already has penetrated deeply into China and that this achievement by the soviet agents is being energetically followed up.” “Bolshevism undoubtedly is at work in China. Soviet money has been used here freely. But the Chinese have not and never will have any natural sympathy with bolshevism. Individual- [ Page One Hundred Eighty-four } WesnOuy Ro Tet) Cer A IN WG eg BP Lie ee Rae babe ism is implanted at the core of Chinese character. Bolshevism can cause serious mischief in China only by projecting itself into our politics in support of one general against another, as, for example, Feng Yu-hsiang of Peking against Chang Tso-lin of Mukden, an eventuality that would bring Japan into the military equation. This would mean war, with China as the cockpit. My hope is that Chinese patriotism and wisdom will avert such a calamity, but I am apprehensive.” Physical and ‘‘Are there proofs of the use of soviet money Spiritual to foment trouble in China by way of embar- Despoilment. rassing the ‘bourgeois’ nations>?”’ “Proofs quite sufficient to convince me, though I myself have not juridical proofs. Moral evidence sometimes is the best evidence. When I see Chinese bolshe- vists who.a little time ago were walking or riding in the cheap and humble riksha, and who now sit back in their motor cars with liveried chauffeurs at the wheels, I do not need the find- ing of a court of law to tell me what has happened and is happening. Bolshevism in China and in other great countries has the financial backing of the Moscow revolutionaries.”’ “Is there in bolshevism anything you like?” _ *“There is in no form of forcible dispossessionism anything I like. I do not want to be dispossessed. I do not want to be despoiled. But, given the choice between the bolshevist, who would take away my flower pots, and the religionist, who would take away my ancestral tablets, I should choose the bolshevist. He, at any rate, is proposing only to rob me materially, where- as the religionist is proposing to rob me spiritually. I could get on happily enough with fewer flower pots, but I can spare none of the symbols of my affections and faith. Upon these | stand and by these I live.”’ Foreign Aggressions ‘But the bolshevists,’’ I ventured to Cause Unrest. say, “are out, according to their own prospectus, not only to seize private property after the manner of the highway robber, but to lay waste the religious and ethical systems of the world.”’ “If that be so,’’ said Dr. Tang, “‘at least one side of their program is fantastic. To seize private property is not beyond the limits of possibility; it is merely a question of accumulating sufficient physical force. But no commander can march an army into an individual soul and seize the treasures cherished there.”’ Page One Hundred Eighty-five | CoH IN JA SOS: RET GU GheS aA Ne Da Chana Crunes ‘“‘Is there in Chinese psychology some morbid or abnormal condition favorable to bolshevist activity?” ‘‘Yes; there is the irritation over the aggression of foreigners against China. This irritation, sense of wrong, resentment, causes social unrest and an instinctive tendency to a rapprochement with any influence hostile to the aggressors. But bolshevism is a faint speck on the situation. What mat- ters and what is going to continue to matter are the native emotions and thoughts and purposes of China. Strikes and riots like those of Shanghai, Hongkong, and Canton may not be caused by the larger agitation in the country—the agitation against extra-territorial courts, concessions, foreign land leases and externally imposed tariffs—but they immediately gain gravity from the deeper trouble. As, volcanically, when a break occurs in the crust of the earth pent-up forces rush for the outlet, so, socially, when there is a rent in the crust of public order repressed resentments concentrate there. No local dis- turbance in China, whatever its cause or nature, can remain really local until the general psychological situation shall have been normalized.” Violence the *‘Is there one evil above others that weighs Outstanding Evil. against amicable relations between the Chinese and the foreigners among them?”’ Dr. Tang, after looking steadily at me for a moment in silence, said impressively: “Yes; there is one dominant evil. It is the evil of violence.”’ **Violence>”’ “Violence. In the whole attitude and behavior of foreigners toward China there is implied or applied violence. This vio- lence is more pronounced on the part of some foreigners than of others, but it is virtually universal in some manner or degree. By powerful foreigners of no nationality are we treated as equals. We are treated as inferiors. We are bullied, and if we resent the bullying we are beaten. Our political freedom is impinged upon and restricted. Our territory is violated. We are forced to yield concessions. Our fiscal liberty and rights are taken away from us. All these things are made possible by violence or the threat of violence. Resentments of “Violence forms the groundwork of nearly Awakening China. all the theory of foreign authority in China; it is an instrumentality of govern- ment; it is deliberately terroristic. Violence implied or applied [ Page One Hundred Eighty-six | Wy Ome Rai CPP sAP Se atCaaise ni Lr at Re hs eee is deemed necessary to keep us in order, to keep us quiescent, submissive, long-suffering, serflike. Terrorism as a means of moral domination leading to physical domination was not liked by Western civilization when Germany had recourse to it in Belgium and France, but the same western civilization uses it against China. ““Let me give you an instance, small in itself, but, thoroughly understood, laden with the full explication of that growing feeling in China which the world must take into account. In one of our treaty ports—one of our ports where Chinese ter- ritory is not Chinese territory—a plain-clothes detective, stroll- ing up a hillside street, cane in hand, finds an old Chinese woman’s basket of oranges too far out on the sidewalk. Does he say to her, “Madam, you must keep your wares off the foot- way?’ No. He raps her over the bare head with his cane, kicks the basket into the street, and coldly watches the oranges rolling away down the gutter. “If a Chinese gets in your way, give him the cane. If a Chinese protests that you have not paid him enough—who ever heard of a Chinese asking much?>—give him the cane. It is the Western idea. For the Chinese, and right here in his own country, too, unless he keeps his mouth shut and walks warily, it is always the cane. I ask you whether this can go on. I ask you if it can do anything but plant the seed of endless trouble.” Arousing the War Dr. Tang had risen from his chair and stood Spirit in Chinese. facing me, his hands held out in a quiet gesture of appeal. *‘Ask The Chicago Daily News to ask the world that,’’ he persisted. “Ask The Chicago Daily News to ask intelligent men anywhere, everywhere, if they think this use of brute force, this systematized inhumanity, is likely to bring relation- ships of peace and mutual benefit between foreigners and the uncounted millions of awakening China. “‘My country must be studied—I will not say restudied— by the world outside of it,’’ said Dr. Tang, resuming his chair. ‘‘Almost nothing about us seems to be understood abroad. China’s character, motives, genius, historical mission, seem to have eluded even the most diligent and penetrating foreign minds. It generally is supposed, since we do not, fight, that we cannot fight—that we have neither the bodily nor the mental requisites of war. It is said we lack the ‘fighting spirit.’ [ Page One Hundred Eighty-seven ]} CcHULEN FA WAS Re DiC ia eS i AN 9 oe Wa CON aed ‘‘What is the truth? We Chinese are hardy and accustomed to heavy burdens. I will show you a Chinese woman 70 years old ascending a hill carrying on a pole across her calloused shoulders two baskets of mortar of a weight to make a strong Western man stagger. We are bodily and mentally fit for war, and we have the morale for war; Chinese are not cowards; they are not afraid to die. Chinese have not learned war because they abominate it. So deep is their abomination of it that generations of foreign imposition and cruelty have not crushed out of their natures their congenital love of peace. “It is the peculiar and unpardonable sin of foreign persecu- tion of China that it tends to deflect the most populous nation in Asia and in the world from the paths of peace to the paths of war. It is said we are divided and in conflict internally. So we are, not so much really as apparently; there is marvelous fundamental cohesion in China. But I admit we have grave domestic troubles. For these are we entirely responsible? We are not. Our domestic ills are aggravated by our foreign ills. Social inflammation in spots, arising from extraterritorial im- pacts, produces pathological phenomena in all our centers of political and social life. Driving China from ‘‘China is not free to free herself from Peaceful Ways. dissension and set up a central govern- ment representing all her people and exposing a solid front to the world. Release all China’s energy for her domestic problems—remove the foreign yokes that in so many places gall and madden her—and she will not be a great while in placing her house in order. It is the tragedy of this momentous question between China and the outer world that we have, on the one hand, a people devoted to peace and militarily weak, and, on the other, powers that still cherish some of their ancient confidence in force, and that are organized and equipped to transform that confidence into instant action. “In a poignant situation that yearly—indeed, hourly—grows more dificult and menacing we only can hope that light will dawn where it is most needed before China shall come under the influence of the conviction that her peaceful and human- itarian aspirations have betrayed her, and that only in prepara- tion for war, if not in actual resort to war, can she find national salvation. I am frankly astonished to see great peoples strug- gling toward world peace through a League of Nations and at the same time pursuing policies in the Orient calculated to [ Page One Hundred Eighty-eight } Wie Omen Tami Cee ra Ami we eran slag yid at Es eaten Lege kate ts drive into militarism the greatest and most peaceful division of humanity known to the history of the world.” Justice Denied, ‘You feel quite certain foreigners are wrong China Grows in esteeming harshness a better quality than W arlike. sympathy for averting Chinese attacks upon them?” “‘Harshness has been tried and has failed. Never before was its failure so general and conspicuous as it is today. It is not especially sympathy the Chinese want; they would like com- mon humanity, of course, but what they demand is justice as justice is understood among civilized States. Firmness on the partiof the powers will not be complained of by the Chinese if that firmness be exercised for what is right. What we com- plain of is a firmness that inflicts political and territorial tyranny, economic and fiscal injustice, and personal brutality.” “It is argued, I observe, that it would not be prudent to do anything to meet the Chinese point of view while your people are creating a disturbance.” “Quite so. While our people are creating a disturbance nothing must be done; when we are docile and hard at work nothing need be done. Result: Disturbance or no disturbance, nothing is done. On this principle the machinery of progress is locked, while the day of reckoning relentlessly approaches. To the powers I say with all the force at my command: Make friends of the Chinese while they are disunited and militarily weak. Do this and they will be to you, as time goes on, not a source of danger and loss, but a source of security and profit. Either foreign magnanimity now or Chinese fighting efficiency sometime will compel justice to China.”’ Other Powers Must ‘Will the Chinese ever forget the wrongs Show Friendship. they allege against foreigners>”’ ““Not forget them, perhaps, but forgive them. If foreigners are magnanimous toward the Chinese now and henceforth, the Chinese of China’s day of power will remem- ber the good deeds and not the bad ones, for the good deeds will be nearer to the Chinese of that generation. Start at once to make the Chinese of united China, whenever that day shall come, grateful for the kindnesses shown their country by foreigners and forgetful of foreigners’ wrongs against them. That way lies happiness in the Orient. That way lies the peace of the Pacific.”’ { Page One Hundred Eighty-nine ] C HY EINSAU SS SUR Gah S VA SIN aL) ieee Eee Dies os “You believe in action.” “In the presence of a serious international problem that grows constantly more serious, to stand still is to await the thunderbolt; to advance perseveringly and prudently is to dissipate the clouds that harbor the thunderbolt. To well- meaning statesmanship throughout the world the call should be: ‘Action!’ Many a war might have been avoided if states- manship had not swung into action too late. Of all spheres of duty that of statecraft is the one in which carelessness, indo- lence, timidity, and procrastination attain their maximum of culpability.” Nations Should Have ‘‘When you speak of abolishing extra- Good Will. territoriality and other conditions offensive to China, have you in mind abrupt measures?” *“Radicalism, but not abruptness, of reform is what we have in mind. We want riddance of every violation of our sovereign status and rights. But we realize this cannot come in the twinkling of an eye. What we demand now, and what our national problems imperatively require, is a well-conceived and determined start on the way to the proposed goal. China is not unreasonable. She appreciates the complexities of a situation that has been long in maturing and presents features calling for patient and statesmanlike handling. *“‘Foreign life and property in China must be safe. China must accord as well as claim the recognized accompaniments of sovereignty in the civilized world. Co-operation is all that is necessary between the powers and our Republic, each side accepting the postulate that only through a just settlement of the problem can tranquillity and prosperity come to either in the Far East. Let the powers give unmistakable proof of willing- ness and purpose to absolve China from every form of foreign interference—letthem meet and formulate and proclaim their pro- gram of emancipation—and the national spirit of our people will rally to the support of our leaders in forming a national govern- ment capable of discharging the functions of a modern State. Why Foreign Lives ‘‘“To my thinking—and how can I be Are Imperiled. wrong about this>—it should be self-evi- dent that the one thing which gives rise to such danger to foreign life and property as prevails in China [ Page One Hundred Ninety ] Wee OW Rel oak) CA EA Nr Con oe lsat Lamy Poh FA tee Le Pai is the knowledge of my countrymen that China has suffered and is suffering great wrongs at the hands of foreigners. Once foreign peoples treat China with the respect and fairness they show one another, there will be no danger here to either their persons or their possessions. Chinese yield to none in their love for the amenities of civilized intercourse. Chinese are friendly folk. None will go further than they, nor sacrifice more, to be just to or serve a fellow man, whatever his color, religion or nationality.” *‘And what would be your final word on peace?”’ Dr. Tang’s expression changed from that of the objective to that of the subjective thinker; his mind had passed from the realm of practical politics to the realm of academic speculation. “If you and I stood together in this greatest commercial center of the Far East one hundred years from today,” said the Confucian seer, ‘““we might be able to shake each other by the hand and say, ‘At last the world has permanent peace.’ Educa- tion is the specific for the disease of war, and education works slowly. We must teach our children that to kill in war is precisely as criminal an act as to kill in civil life. Murder is murder. We loathe murderers. People must understand that war killers are murderers. ‘They must understand that war killing is not a national crime which can be brought home to nobody, but an individual crime from which the guilty cannot escape. Subduing the ‘‘Formule, machinery, superficial and artificial War Spirit. contrivances, will not protect us from war so long as fundamentally—so long as at the roots of our emotional and intellectual natures—we are warlike. We of this era are crammed with potential war. Itisin our marrow, our bones, our blood and fiber. It corrupts our souls and makes them hideous. We do not realize it is a cardinal sin against divinity and humanity. We do not appreciate the disgrace of it, its unutterable ignominy. It is there, deep inside us, await- ing the urge of occasion to leap forth in fury, pitiless as the sea, as convulsions of nature, as primeval fire. “Education alone can subdue this monster. Education can fill our emotional and intellectual natures with a sense of the reasonableness, beauty, majesty, and beneficence of peace. [ am happy to know The Chicago Daily News is educationally active in this great field of international relations, where we know so little and need to know so much. I hope and believe { Page One Hundred Ninety-one ] C OH ION WA 2S ae Relt Gis ts eR AW NID. AW ice Cini Gece its efforts will bear fruit, and | hope its initiative will inspire similar activity, in order that mankind may be awakened to the truth that ‘ignorance is,’ indeed, ‘the curse of God,’ and ‘knowledge the wing wherewith we fly to heaven’.”’ A, e Pas Uae tee 2} 4 aed es ; GAYLORD EEE PRINTEDINU.S.A. D443 .B4 World chancelleries; sentiments, ideas, Princeton Theological Seminary—Speer Library 1 1012 00147 9882