AMERICAN IDEALS 
 
 A SYMPOSIUM 
 
 ADDRESSES BY 
 
 HON. JOHN BASSETT MOORE 
 RIGHT REV. DAVID H. GREER 
 THOMAS MOTT OSBORNE 
 HAMILTON WRIGHT MABIE 
 OSWALD G. VILLARD 
 REAR ADMIRAL ROBERT E. PEARY 
 REV. FREDERICK LYNCH 
 DR. JAMES J. WALSH 
 
 LETTERS FROM 
 
 PRESIDENT EMERITUS CHARLES W. ELIOT 
 CHANCELLOR ELMER ELLSWORTH BROWN 
 
 PUBLISHED BY 
 
 SATURDAY DISCUSSIONS COMMITTEE 
 REPUBLICAN CLUB 
 NEW YORK CITY 
 N. Y. 
 
UNIVERSITY OF 
 ILLINOIS LIBRARY 
 AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN 
 OAK STREET 
 
 PURPOSES 
 OF 
 
 THE SATURDAY DISCUSSIONS 
 
 The Saturday Discussions of the Republican Club of 
 the City of New York were established some years since 
 for the purpose of providing a Forum for a broad and 
 patriotic consideration of questions of vital importance 
 and of local and national interest to the people of the 
 United States. 
 
 These discussions are absolutely non-partisan, non-sec- 
 tarian and non-racial and include questions that are na- 
 tional, international and world-wide. 
 
 The special purpose of the Club is to make these dis- 
 cussions educational, and to aid in elevating the consid- 
 eration of vital questions to a higher plane of apprecia- 
 tion and to contribute to their solution by appealing to 
 the highest sentiment and enlisting the strongest support. 
 
 In this spirit the Club welcomes to its Saturday ros- 
 trum men from all political parties, from all the religious 
 denominations, and from all the races that enter into our 
 national and international life. 
 
 The addresses and communications in this pamphlet 
 were specially prepared for the occasion, and are typical 
 of this new departure of the higher aspirations of a politi- 
 cal club, strong enough in its personality and broad 
 enough in its views to extend its usefulness along patri- 
 otic lines, without losing its identity and without sacri- 
 ficing or neglecting its special political mission. 
 
 EDWARD F. CRAG IX, 
 
 Xew York, March 27, 1915. 
 
 Chairman. 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2017 with funding from 
 
 University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Alternates 
 
 https://archive.org/details/americanidealssyOOmoor 
 
AMERICAN IDEALS 
 
 A Symposium 
 
 Addresses delivered at Saturday Discussions 
 of the Republican Club, March 27th, 1915 
 
 BY 
 
 Hon. JOHN BASSETT MOORE, 
 
 Former Assistant Secretary of State 
 
 Right Rev. DAVID H. GREER, 
 
 Bishop for the Diocese of New York 
 
 THOMAS MOTT OSBORNE, 
 
 Warden, Sing Sing Prison 
 
 HAMILTON WRIGHT MABIE, 
 
 Editor and Author 
 
 OSWALD G. VILLARD, 
 
 of the New York Evening Post 
 
 Rear Admiral ROBERT E. PEARY, 
 
 Arctic Explorer 
 
 Rev. FREDERICK LYNCH, 
 
 Editor and Author 
 
 Dr. JAMES J. WALSH, 
 
 Editor and Author 
 
 Letters received from 
 
 President Emeritus CHARLES W. ELIOT, 
 of Harvard University 
 
 Chancellor ELMER ELLSWORTH BROWN, 
 of New York University 
 
 PUBLISHED BY 
 
 SATURDAY DISCUSSIONS COMMITTEE 
 
 REPUBLICAN CLUB 
 NEW YORK CITY 
 
INTRODUCTION BY 
 
 EDWARD F. ORAGrIN, 
 
 Chairman of the Saturday Discussions Committee 
 
 This is the last discussion of this, the sixth series. We 
 opened in January with a discussion of the topic, “THE 
 EUROPEAN WAR AND AFTER.” We have had an 
 “ARMY DAY” and a “NAVY DAY.” 
 
 We were favored with the presence of Ambassadors and 
 Ministers when we considered the relations between Latin 
 America and the United States. 
 
 We have discussed the future of the Philippines, and 
 have also considered New York State and local affairs. 
 
 To-day we are on a different plane; perhaps a higher 
 one. Some months ago, Prof. Peabody, of Harvard Uni- 
 versity, published a book relating to the characteris- 
 tics of Americans. He stated that a common belief of 
 foreigners was that the acquisition of money was the one 
 great outstanding characteristic of Americans. The wor- 
 shipping of the “Almighty Dollar” was universal. Yet 
 Professor Peabody showed clearly that with all the in- 
 tense eagerness to acquire wealth, there was prevalent 
 throughout this country a high idealism. This permeated 
 all classes, and was steadily developing the highest Ameri- 
 can ideals, and this is our topic to-day, “AMERICAN 
 IDEALS.” 
 
 2 
 
HON. JOHN BASSETT MOORE* 
 Formerly Assistant Secretary of State 
 
 Every great nation has made, to the history and civiliza- 
 tion of the world, some distinct individual contribution. 
 In no case has this been more emphatically true than in 
 that of the United States. The entrance of the United 
 States of America into the family of nations was, as I 
 venture to believe, the most important event of the past 
 two hundred years and one of the most important events 
 of all time. For centuries, transitions of government in 
 Europe had been complicated with settled, fixed tradi- 
 tions. In America the ground was relatively clear, so 
 that the people might plant as they liked and gather the 
 appropriate harvest. 
 
 The Declaration of Independence itself presaged the de- 
 velopment of a theory and a policy which must be worked 
 out in opposition to the ideas that had then long domin- 
 ated the civilized world. Of this theory and policy the 
 keynote was freedom : freedom of the individual, in order 
 that he might work out his destiny in his own way; free- 
 dom in government, in order that the human faculties 
 might have free course; freedom in commerce, in order 
 that the resources of the earth might be developed and 
 rendered fruitful in the increase of human wealth, con- 
 tentment and happiness. 
 
 Intimately associated with the idea of freedom was that 
 of opportunity — equality of opportunity. When the late 
 Chief Justice Fuller was nominated for the Supreme 
 Court of the United States by President Cleveland, the 
 circumstance was recalled that, only a few weeks previ- 
 
 * Hon. John Bassett Moore, who was to open the discussion, was 
 prevented by illness from being present but kindly sent his address 
 which is here given. 
 
 3 
 
oil sly, when his name had not been mentioned in connec- 
 tion with the post of Chief Justice, he opened an address 
 before a club at Chicago with the declaration, “The Re- 
 public is opportunity.” The truth of the declaration was 
 strikingly illustrated in his own case. 
 
 It was inevitable that the American people, possessed 
 of a measure of freedom and of opportunity such as no 
 other people enjoyed, should develop the ideal of dem- 
 ocracy. I, of course, speak of democracy in its broad and 
 philosophical sense and not in the sense of party politics. 
 It is a well known historical fact that the party first pro- 
 fessing the ideal of democracy, as opposed to the conser- 
 vation of existing privileges, called itself “republican.” 
 But, no matter what might be the party title, the broad 
 democratic spirit grew and flourished and eventually 
 carried everything with it. The so-called Federalist 
 party, because it came to be associated with certain poli- 
 cies of unpopular tendency, lost its following and ceased 
 to exist. 
 
 The popular party, first called “republican,” then “dem- 
 ocratic-republican,” and finally simply “democratic,” 
 eventually came to embrace for a time substantially the 
 entire population, and for a considerable period divided 
 on personal rather than on political lines. The election 
 of the President of the United States was practically 
 taken from the hands of the small and select electoral 
 body in which the Constitution had placed it and was 
 transferred by popular action to the people of the United 
 States. Candidates came to be nominated by national 
 conventions, and it was for the purpose of casting their 
 ballots for the one candidate or the other that the elec- 
 tors in the several States were chosen. In recent years 
 an effort has been made still further to popularize the 
 selection of candidates for the Presidency. 
 
 The revolution in national methods was only a reflec- 
 tion of what had been going on in the several States. In 
 colonial times the right of .suffrage was closely re- 
 stricted. In some instances, special moral qualifications 
 were prescribed; in others, religious tests were exacted; 
 but everywhere property qualifications were imposed. An 
 
 4 
 
accomplished student of our political institutions has 
 estimated that, as the result of the conditions thus im- 
 posed upon the exercise of the elective franchise, the 
 number of voters down to the year 1800 was only from 
 15 to 20 per cent, of what the number would have been 
 on the basis of to-day. 
 
 Not only was the number of electors increased, under 
 a system practically based on universal manhood suffrage, 
 but a tendency was manifested to make all offices elective. 
 As a result, not only were executive officers and members 
 -of legislative bodies chosen by popular vote, but even 
 judicial magistrates were placed in a similar category. 
 The system of electing judges by popular vote, which 
 seems first to have been adopted in Georgia in 1812, for 
 the purpose of selecting judges of the inferior courts, 
 was made applicable to all judicial magistrates in Missis- 
 sippi by the Constitution of 1832. The method thus intro- 
 duced was soon adopted in other States, and in time the 
 popular election of judges became general. That it has 
 everywhere worked with entire satisfaction is a claim 
 which even those who are convinced of its general sound- 
 ness would hardly make for it. 
 
 All the movements of this world, whether conservative 
 or radical, tend to go to extremes. The great task of 
 statesmanship is to preserve a proper balance. In one in- 
 stance the desire to secure equality of opportunity was 
 carried so far as to abolish all qualifications for admission 
 to the practice of the law. This was done in Indiana, and 
 was made a part of the constitution of the State. How 
 the system worked may be inferred from the fact that 
 unlearned and unskilled practitioners came to be known 
 as “constitutional” lawyers — a phrase employing, in this 
 particular instance, a certain measure of disrespect. Re- 
 cently, however, this particular privilege of ignorance and 
 incapacity has been done away with by a new constitu- 
 tional provision. 
 
 In this change we have an illustration of the disposi- 
 tion of the American democracy to profit by experience 
 and to correct errors when they are show T n to exist. This 
 is in reality but a manifestation of what may be called 
 the sound conservatism of the American people. No 
 
 5 
 
doubt one of tbe greatest perils to which democracy is 
 exposed is that of the exaltation of inefficiency and in- 
 competency. There may be, and doubtless are, persons 
 who honestly believe that knowledge and experience may 
 beget prejudices which are more to be reprobated than 
 the mistakes that proceed from a want of knowledge and 
 skill. But I am far from believing that this is the genera] 
 sense of the American people. I believe, on the contrary, 
 that they desire the best service that can be obtained and 
 fully appreciate the importance of being well served. 
 
 Another American ideal which I wish to mention is 
 that of legality. The great end of democracy is the in- 
 corporation of its purposes and aspirations in the form 
 of just and equal laws. Acting in what I have called 
 the spirit of legality, the American people have com- 
 mitted to their courts a larger and more important part 
 than is perhaps elsewhere borne by judicial tribunals 
 in the administration of the affairs of the community. 
 
 What a combination of ideals is here exhibited — free- 
 dom, opportunity, legality! In the combination of these 
 ideals we find the true basis of peace, national and 
 international. 
 
 6 
 
ADDRESS OF RIGHT REV. DAVID H. GREER, D. D. 
 Bishop for the Diocese of New York. 
 
 When one of your members, my friend, Mr. Partridge, 
 sent me an invitation to be present on this occasion, I 
 felt uncertain as to whether I should be able to avail my- 
 self of your courtesy and this privilege, because it hap- 
 pened to come at a time somewhat inconvenient for me. 
 I finally said, using the language of the Quaker, that I 
 would come if the Spirit moved me. The Spirit has 
 moved me and I am here. I find, too, I am somewhat in 
 sympathy with the Quaker on another subject which is 
 just now engaging the attention of mankind, and inas- 
 much as that is an absorbing topic of the hour, with a 
 drift somewhat in that direction among the American 
 people, perhaps I may be permitted to speak of it because 
 of its bearing upon American ideals in the course of this 
 discussion. I find that for some reason — I know not 
 what — I am down on the programme as Chaplain, and 
 therefore I shall discuss for a little while this subject 
 from what may be called a “creedal point of view,” and 
 I shall avail myself of the privilige which the Chairman 
 has extended to all the speakers and which your courtesy 
 will permit, to speak very frankly. 
 
 My proposition, then, is this: That war is contrary to 
 the teaching of three enlightened creeds. First, it is con- 
 trary to the teaching of the Christian Creed. That Chris- 
 tian Creed is, I know, variously interpreted, and yet in 
 spite of these different views concerning it, all agree 
 in this, that Christianity was the introduction, the libera- 
 tion into the world, of a great moral force, which, if per- 
 mitted freely and fully to work would effect the moral 
 subjugation and conquest of the world. And why? Be- 
 cause it was the greatest force there is, namely, the force 
 of God, which Jesus Christ reveals as the force of love. 
 
 7 
 
Not love as a feeling or sentimental passion; this is hut 
 a fleeting and evanescent thing, the expression of which 
 is determined by physical or nervous or temperamental 
 conditions: but love as a quality or energy of life, which 
 shows itself or proves itself not in paroxysmal emotions 
 but in human service. It is in short a love for human 
 kind and for all human kind, for foe as well as friend. 
 Not merely for congenial folk or those who by some local 
 tie or natural affinity are related to us. That is easy. 
 Everybody can practice that. The heathen man can do 
 it; and we do not need any Christianity to teach or en- 
 force it. And if that be all that Christianity is, it is not 
 anything worth while and we can get on without it. But 
 that is not all. The love which Christianity teaches and 
 which with its Founder came into the world, which He 
 taught and practiced, for which He lived and died, was 
 a larger love than that, purer, nobler, harder. It was 
 not merely a tribal love, national or racial. That I say 
 again is an easy kind of love, which before Christianity 
 came and outside of Christianity to-day is seen in every 
 tribe and every nation. But Christian love reaches out 
 beyond those tribal lines and limits. The distinctive 
 thing about it is that it is a love not merely for fellow- 
 countrymen but for fellow-creatures. It is not merely 
 a national or patriotic love, although of course includ- 
 ing that and lifting up and exalting that, giving nobler 
 aim and nobler purpose to it, but something else and 
 more. It is a super-national or international love, like 
 that love of Cod which makes His sun to shine on the evil 
 and the good, and His rain to fall on the unjust as on the 
 just. 
 
 And that is what essential Christianity is or what it 
 claims to be. Without that Christian love, for foe as well 
 as friend, as an enforcing sanction, international treaties 
 and arbitral court decrees are but scraps of paper which 
 will shrivel up in flames when once the passion of war 
 breaks out in a nation and like a prairie fire sweeps over 
 the land. Still it may be said, it is said, that in our 
 practical workaday world, with so much raw human na- 
 ture in it, that Christianity love is too high and good 
 for human nature’s daily food, and does not and cannot 
 work. Well, then, what will work? How can we over- 
 
 8 
 
come the evil in the world? If we cannot do it by moral 
 force, can we do it by physical force? That may for a 
 time suppress it, but only for a season; it cannot check- 
 mate it; there is always another possible opening on 
 the board or another possible play, with another com- 
 bination of its parts and pieces, which may make it, and 
 often does make it, more cunning, crafty, rancorous 
 and devilish and also more formidable than it was before. 
 This is not theory; it may have been once, but it is no 
 longer theory but fact ; for now we see that physical force 
 at work in the world upon a tremendous scale, subsidiz- 
 ing to itself all the physical resources and all the in- 
 genious physical inventions of modern civilization. We 
 also see that it is breaking down with a fearful crash and 
 making a sad mess of it. Is it not a time in which to try 
 to inaugurate and establish in the world some other 
 kind of force? How would it do to try this Christianity 
 force? How would it do for our politicians and states- 
 men and leaders in council to try it? If it should be 
 said, as a recent writer remarks, that this Christianity 
 force “would destroy human society by giving to the burg- 
 lar, the bully, the procurer, the fraudulent company 
 promoter, a loose rein,” the answer is that such men 
 are the natural result of the long established policy of 
 physical force, and would have long since died a natural 
 death if the Christianity force had been the policy of 
 the world. We first manufacture our criminals and then 
 punish them, heedless of the fact that our inquity, I 
 should rather say our stupidity, is the same in both cases. 
 
 War is also contrary to the teaching of an enlightr 
 ened twentieth century creed. For one of the things which 
 we of the twentieth century are beginning to see and 
 learn is this — that in spite of all its differences, of time, 
 place, circumstance, race, creed, color or of whatsoever 
 sort, human life is one, of one human piece. That is what 
 with a clearness never before so clear is dawning now 
 upon us, that national terms and forms or racial terms 
 and forms, the Saxon, the Slavic, the Germanic, are sur- 
 face terms and forms, implying or denoting surface differ- 
 entials and surface cleavage lines, and that the real and 
 true and basic term is the human, giving to all nations 
 and to all races a common human kinship and a common 
 
 9 
 
human tie. Not only theoretically but practically we are 
 learning it. For is it not true, practically true, true as a 
 matter of fact, that the field on which we move to-day, 
 think, act, live, in art, in science, in letters, in commerce, 
 is not that part of human life immediately about us, the 
 vicinage of the State, the Nation or the race, but the vic- 
 inage of the world? On that field we move, in that field 
 we toil, in large and broadening lands, and from it our 
 subsistence win, not only for the body but also for the 
 brain. The gate through which we pass to-day, however 
 narrow in itself, opens into the world, and we cannot 
 shut it. It opens into the world, whose treasures now we 
 reap, gather and exchange, whose words and cries and 
 sounds like the noise of many waters we cannot fail to 
 hear, whose compass now we scan, whose pressure now 
 we feel, whose common life we live. 
 
 That is the enlightened twentieth century creed; not 
 sectionalism or nationalism, but cosmopolitanism, affirm- 
 ing and declaring that human life is not many but one, 
 with a common human kindred and a common human tie 
 binding it all together. That is why we instinctively feel 
 that the war which is raging in Europe now is not only 
 a war of nations against nations, or races against races, 
 but that it is a war against the twentieth century, with 
 its great and growing consciousness of the solidarity of 
 human life in all nations, kindreds, tribes and tongues, 
 with its great and growing consciousness that God has 
 made of one blood, one human blood, all nations of men 
 to dwell on the face of the earth. 
 
 Again war is contrary to the teaching of our enlight- 
 ened American creed. When the early pioneers came to 
 this western world, they came not simply to found or 
 build another nation, but a new nation, which should 
 stand for and represent something new among the nations 
 of the earth, something higher and better, something 
 nobler and greater; that here upon this American shore, 
 separated by great oceans from the entanglements of the 
 old world, something new should appear upon the face 
 of the earth like a new island rising out of the sea ; when, 
 with a sublime confidence, not in the essential badness 
 but in the essential goodness of human life, it would reach 
 
 10 
 
some higher and nobler destiny. They came, those early 
 settlers, as Lowell said, not seeking gold blit God. That 
 is not unqualifiedly true. They did come seeking for 
 physical treasure, for their physical well-being ; yet 
 running through and pervading that physical quest 
 and search there was some higher aim shining through 
 it all, there was some brighter vision, the vision of a 
 land whose foundation should be laid deep and strong 
 in God. Their vision was at times faulty and defective, 
 but the important thing is this, that they had a vision, 
 that they believed in it, and were true to it and were 
 ready to suffer for it, and did suffer for it. 
 
 What is our vision to-day, or have we any at all? An 
 old Persian philosopher has said, “Glory not in the fact 
 that you love your country, but glory in the fact that 
 you love your kind.” I should rather put it in this way, 
 glory in your country for the sake of your kind. 
 
 That is the patriotic love which tends to bring out all 
 the best and noblest passions in our human nature. And 
 that is or should be our enlightened American Creed, our 
 patriotic creed or patriotic vision, our power in the pres- 
 ent and our hope for the future, to guide and to save us, 
 to make us a great and strong and united people. For 
 “Where there is no vision the people perish,” or, more lit- 
 erally, “the people are let loose or left to run wild.” Per- 
 haps I can do no better to sum up all I have said about 
 our enlightened American creed than to do so in the 
 words of a gifted and true-hearted American woman 
 which I am permitted to quote: 
 
 This morning - I awoke with a. new thought, to me new but no 
 doubt one that has taken possession of many thinking men and 
 women. We all believe that the Christ spirit alone can bring to 
 humanity true righteousness, and it came to me that His spirit must 
 prevail not only with individuals, even to giving up of life, but also 
 with nations; that a nation must come to so high an understanding 
 of its relations to* other nations that it can and will follow Christ’s 
 example and accept the teaching of His Sermon on the Mount, that 
 it can be reviled and revile not again. If our President will stand 
 firm, holding in check the beastly instincts we have inherited from 
 the brute, our Nation may become the Christ among nations. Why 
 not? Even if it should mean crucifixion, there would be the resurrec- 
 
 11 
 
tion, and the spiritual Christ would be the ruler of humanity. Why 
 should we increase our army and build great ships of destruction 
 even for defence? Would they not be more of a challenge than a 
 defence? Would there not be more safety in using our strength and 
 energy in learning to govern ourselves and in learning the lessons 
 of righteousness in 'our dealings with one another? I am so desirous 
 that Mr. Wilson shall hold firm to his purpose to allow no entangle- 
 ments with any of the warring nations; that he shall be the high 
 rock against which the wild passions of our own countrymen shall 
 beat in vain, that my thought becomes the “soul’s sincere desire.” 
 
 These are the words of the widow of the late President 
 Garfield which she recently wrote to her son, the presi- 
 dent of Williams College, which express so admirably 
 and so well our enlightened American creed and our patri- 
 otic vision, which, if we have the courage to be true to 
 it, will help us to work out that high and noble destiny 
 still undetermined which awaits us in the future. 
 
 12 
 
ADDRESS OF THOMAS MOTT OSBORNE 
 
 Warden, Sing Sing Prison 
 
 When I accepted the invitation to be here this after- 
 noon, although I could be here but a very short time, it 
 was with the understanding, on my part at least, that I 
 was to listen and not to speak, but when I got here I 
 found my name on the programme, and so, without any 
 preface, I am going to plunge at once into my story. I 
 will tell you one or two incidents. 
 
 Many of you may have seen in the newspapers a brief 
 notice within the past week of the death, just a week 
 ago this morning, of John E. Murphy, better known as 
 “Canada Blackie,” who died in the warden’s house in 
 Sing Sing a week ago to-day. I think a very brief story 
 of Blackie’s career will be interesting. In spite of his 
 name, he was not a negro but a Californian of dark 
 complexion, black hair and very piercing black eyes. 
 Some twenty-five years ago, before he was twenty years of 
 age, he was a resident of Joliet Prison in the State of 
 Illinois. He bore on his wrists marks made by hand- 
 cuffs when he was strung up with his hands tied behind 
 his back, with his toes just touching the ground, as a 
 punishment while in that institution. He said to me, 
 somewhat pathetically, a few days before his death, that 
 had he been treated fairly that first time he got into 
 prison, his story might have been different. The fact 
 of the matter was, he developed into an outlaw of singu- 
 lar boldness and ability. 
 
 Thirteen years ago in this State he was concerned in a 
 bank robbery where the watchman was killed. Two men 
 went to the electric chair for that death, and Blackie was 
 sentenced to life imprisonment. For seven years con- 
 fined in the prison at Dannemora, he was a model pris- 
 
 13 
 
oner. Then, whether his story is accurate, that a slight 
 difference of opinion between him and the doctor pro- 
 duced constant nagging until his nerves gave out, or 
 whether his nerves gave out on account of the general 
 prison system, makes very little difference. The fact 
 of the matter was they did give out and he got into 
 constant trouble and determined to make a bold dash for 
 liberty. Together with three other men and armed with 
 a pistol which he manufactured out of a piece of gas 
 pipe and explosives made from match heads, he and his 
 associates succeeded in getting as far as the warden’s 
 office. The four men were overcome, however, and taken 
 down to Plattsburg, where Blackie received an additional 
 ten years to his life sentence. When I first met this 
 prisoner I asked him what his term was — how long — 
 and he said, “Life and ten years,” and when he saw my 
 mouth twitching a little at the reply, he added, “It does 
 seem a little superfluous, doesn’t it?” 
 
 Coming back to Dannemora, he was put not only in 
 solitary confinement, but in the dark cell, for one year 
 and eight months, lying on the stone floor and contracting 
 the disease of which he died last week. After that, of 
 course, the only resource — mental resource — he had was 
 what he could find within himself. He counted the pin 
 holes in his door, he pulled the buttons off his coat 
 and used up some time by getting as far as he could and 
 throwing them over his shoulder and seeing how long it 
 would take him to find them all. After he came out of 
 the dark cell he was in solitary confinement for five 
 years ; in all, he was considered the most dangerous crim- 
 inal in the State of hie w York, as he might very well be. 
 He was so dangerous they did not dare keep him in 
 Dannemora because of rumors of dynamite hidden around 
 the prison yard, and even in the dark cell they couldn’t 
 keep his personality from reaching his fellow-prisoners. 
 He was removed to Auburn and again placed in solitary 
 confinement. When Warden Rattigan began giving free- 
 dom to the prisoners in the State of hiew York, Blackie 
 was very much interested, as he had been interested in 
 the plans for prison reform that he and I had often talked 
 of before the thing really began, and his interest and 
 his feeling became so strong that after the first day 
 
 14 
 
the men spent out in the yard, the thirtieth of last May, 
 Blackie took me into his cell one afternoon and said, “I 
 have something here I want you to give to the warden.” 
 He reached for a can of talcum powder, hollowed out a 
 little hole in the powder and presented me with a key 
 which fitted the lock of his cell. Reaching through the 
 bars, he could unlock his cell at any moment. Then he 
 reached out a steel knife, saying, “There isn’t another 
 man in prison that could have made that.” When he 
 handed me the knife he said, “I intended to use that, but 
 I feel so deeply what Warden Rattigan and you are try- 
 ing to do for the prisoners here that I decided to give it 
 to you. Tell the warden he need not have any anxiety 
 about me, because I am going straight.” 
 
 Next day I brought Blackie out into the yard, and one 
 of the most dramatic scenes I have ever witnessed fol- 
 lowed when this man, after five years in solitary confine- 
 ment and twelve years since he had stepped on the grass, 
 entered the enclosure. The attitude of the other pris- 
 oners toward him was that of hero-worship. You could 
 see that he was a hero in the eyes of those men. The 
 next month he was elected one of the Board of Delegates 
 of the Mutual Welfare League, and was promptly elected 
 one of the executive board, receiving the highest number 
 of votes of any candidate. By September he was one of 
 the most trusted prisoners of the Auburn prison. He 
 was brought to Sing Sing in September in the hope that 
 the climate might benefit him. He was acting and think- 
 ing day and night as to how he could benefit his fel- 
 low-prisoners. He called one of the prisoners up to his 
 room and said to him, “Now, I want you to understand 
 the new order of things. I want you to realize that this 
 is no longer the old system. In this new system you 
 must understand that the warden is your pal,” and so his 
 tremendous influence — perhaps the largest influence in 
 the prisons of any man in the State of New York — was 
 continually exercised to bring about right acting of pris- 
 oners toward the authorities, and to help forward the 
 reign of liberty and order under the self-governing prin- 
 ciple. 
 
 But the disease which had fastened on him in the dark 
 
 15 
 
cells at Dannemora proved too strong, and lie died a week 
 ago to-day. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, which is the right spirit? Which is 
 according to the American ideals? Which is according 
 to the dictates of common sense? The system which 
 brings about the dangerous animal known as “Canada 
 Blackie” or the one which brings that man into line with 
 the forces of righteousness in society, inside and outside 
 the prison? 
 
 If you are a consistent reader of the newspapers, you 
 have seen a good deal about what we are doing up at 
 Sing Sing, and as usual, the newspapers touch for the 
 most part only the superficial aspects of it. I beg you 
 to believe that the superficial aspect is only superficial; 
 that down at the bottom we have a consistent policy. 
 Much has been said about our giving moving picture 
 shows to the prisoners, and although the witnessing of 
 picture shows is far better than keeping them locked up 
 in their cells contracting tuberculosis, I wish you to 
 understand that moving picture shows are not the aim, 
 not the end; the baseball games are not the end; they 
 are only the means of restoring to these men their equil- 
 ibrium, because I believe that my job is to try and send 
 those men back into the world better adapted to lead 
 honest and capable lives than when they came to prison. 
 
 One more story. You have heard a great deal 
 about the “dope” question at Sing Sing, and everyone 
 knows the contracting of the drug habit has been the 
 curse of Sing Sing. Do you know why they have con- 
 tracted that habit? To forget the horrible Sunday after- 
 noons; because the way they celebrated the Lord’s Day 
 was by being locked in their cells all day long, for 
 more than twenty hours shut up in those damp, deadly 
 cells. Now then, there was the most difficult problem 
 that I had to face. How did I handle it? By doing- 
 nothing at all, because I left it to the end. What has 
 happened? It has taken care of itself. Because the men 
 trusted and given responsibility for it have practically, 
 I do not say entirely, wiped drugs out of Sing Sing 
 themselves. To me it has been the most amazing thing 
 in all my experience in life, but I know what I tell you 
 is true. 
 
 16 
 
In January a man came to me. He was a wreck. He 
 was just out of a hospital, having taken a cure for the 
 drug. He had a wife and three children. He wanted 
 to get away from the habit. I asked him, “Have you 
 ever been in prison before ?’ 7 “Eleven times,” he replied. 
 Said I, “I hope you will have the strength to win.” He 
 said, “I will try, but I don’t know, one of the ‘screws’ 
 wants my watch.” He meant one of the officers, because 
 some of the officers peddled drugs inside the prison. 
 And two days afteiuvards I was met by a man who said 
 as he passed, “The watch is gone,” and not knowing 
 how to tackle the problem, still I did nothing. About 
 three weeks ago I met at the foot of the stairs a man; 
 he stood up straight, six feet high, broad shoulders. I 
 said, “Good gracious, I didn’t recognize you.” “Mr. 
 Osborne, I have gained forty pounds.” Said I, “It isn’t 
 possible!” “I don’t believe there is an ounce of ‘dope’ 
 in the place” he continued and added, “I have got my 
 watch.” Said I, “How?” “The ‘screw’ brought it back to 
 me, saying, as he did so, ‘The warden didn’t ask any 
 questions, but December first is coming, and I thought I 
 had better go on the level.’ ” Since that time, I have 
 found, not from one source, but from two or three, that 
 there is very little drug-taking in Sing Sing to-day, and 
 perhaps you will believe that I am not exaggerating the 
 lessening of the drug evil at the prison when I tell you 
 that two of the prisoners recently held up a guard who 
 was bringing the stuff into the jail and made him destroy 
 it. That is what will happen when you treat men accord- 
 ing to American ideals, when you give them responsibility, 
 when you treat them like men. One poet has spoken thus 
 about the English people : 
 
 “Forever they are dreamers who make their dreams come true.” 
 
 We are taught to be a very practical people. Well, 
 we are in some ways, but thank Heaven, we are not alto- 
 gether practical. We are not altogether pursuing the 
 dollar. We have our dreams ; now up there at Sing Sing 
 I have dreamed we could take these mournful wrecks of 
 humanity and turn them out men, and that dream is 
 coming true. 
 
 17 
 
ADDRESS OF HAMILTON WRIGHT MARIE 
 Editor and Author 
 
 We have already crossed the summit and any further 
 remarks on this subject are superfluous. I am sorry Mr. 
 Osborne has gone. I should like to have recalled to him 
 that beautiful and profoundly true statement of a great 
 German idealist more than a century ago: 
 
 As yet lingers the darkness and the twelfth hour, but the time 
 will come when it shall be light and man shall waken from his lofty 
 dreams and find his dreams all there, — that nothing is gone save his 
 sleep. 
 
 We have had a practical demonstration of American 
 idealism, more heroic in itself and in its testimony than 
 anything that anyone can say here. 
 
 At the very outset, our government is the incarnation 
 of the most daring idealism in history. It rests on faith 
 in every man. It is the greatest credit system ever known 
 and Mr. Osborne has carried that fundamental American 
 faith in humanity down into the depths that were, until 
 he came, shrouded in darkness. I don’t mean to say 
 that other men and women haven’t had the vision, but I 
 do mean to say that no man has taken that lamp in his 
 hand and walked so resolutely and firmly down into the 
 subterranean depths of crime as he has. 
 
 If I were asked by a foreigner to name a half dozen 
 books that would bring him in close contact with Ameri- 
 can ideals, I should name Benjamin Franklin’s Auto- 
 biography, a selection of Lincoln’s speeches, Emerson’s 
 Essays, Booker T. Washington’s “Up from Slavery” and 
 Jacob Riis’ “Making of an American.” There, in a little 
 group are the text books of the first undefined ideals of 
 America and the latest application of those ideals. If 
 
 18 
 
yon want to know the ideals of a people you will find 
 them in the men that they honor and love, the men who 
 incarnate the things that are dearest, and who are the 
 most representative Americans. When I say that I mean 
 not simply our heroes, but the men who couldn’t have 
 been made under any other social or political conditions. 
 There are men like Washington, who will remain one 
 of the most impressive figures in America, but who was 
 born under English conditions, with many of the tastes 
 and ideals of an English country gentleman. The three 
 men I am thinking of who were the products of American 
 conditions are Franklin and Emerson and Lincoln. 
 
 Franklin, the master of the art of applying ideas to 
 life, the man who took nothing for granted, but immedi- 
 ately asked himself how it could be improved; the man 
 who made science practical, perhaps the first American 
 scientist ,and yet bringing science out of the laboratory 
 into the streets and homes — Franklin, with his immense 
 practical sagacity. 
 
 It is a grat mistake to imagine that because a nation 
 has the power of dealing with affairs and a keen sense 
 of realities which all great nations must have, that, there- 
 fore, it cannot have the vision. As a matter of fact, 
 every nation that has ever achieved anything has had 
 both the vision and the power of dealing with realities. 
 It was the secret of the Greeks at their best; it was the 
 secret of Holland, of England, of Venice. It has always 
 seemed to me that you could not understand England 
 anywhere but in Westminster Abbey, where, on one hand, 
 stand the men of affairs who have dealt strongly with 
 conditions as they were, and on the other side the men 
 of vision from the time of Spenser to the time of Kipling. 
 The vision and the power that uses it — they must go 
 together. 
 
 Then there is Emerson — a great dreamer, but with his 
 feet firmly on the ground. I have always loved the story 
 of the man who was being driven up from the station in 
 Concord, having come as a pilgrim. Asking the driver 
 some questions about Emerson, he received the response, 
 “A man of considerable property.” Emerson, the 
 
 19 
 
dreamer, the man who has expressed more clearly the 
 American ideals than any other man, who taught the 
 authority of the individual soul, that nothing should 
 come between a man’s inspiration from God and his ac- 
 tion among his fellows — the keeping of a man’s character 
 in touch with his ideals, the great and sacred doctrine of 
 the best American ideals. 
 
 And about Lincoln, of whom it is impossible to speak 
 without a tribute to that beauty of nature which has 
 more and more revealed itself. Aye, gentlemen, if we had 
 done nothing on this continent but produce Emerson and 
 Lincoln, it would not have been settled in vain. By the 
 good fortune of death he has become more and more a 
 revelation to us, for when death touched him, the mortal 
 part disappeared, revealing that immortal thing that was 
 in him, such a precious heritage for us, the finest ideal 
 of America. 
 
 This is still a pioneer country, and the great quality of 
 the pioneer is the sense of being a neighbor to another. 
 They stand together or they fall, so from the very be- 
 ginning, the deepest thing in the American has been the 
 ideal of the neighbor. Lincoln was a great neighbor. 
 Beginning with the little town and broadening into the 
 larger environment, he moved from one neighborhood to 
 another, from the village to the country, from the country 
 to the State, from the State to the section, from the sec- 
 tion to the nation. Everywhere as his observation en- 
 larged his vision enlarged, and so at last he stood, the 
 first man in the nation. His speeches will long remain 
 the text-book of the kind of American life which is ex- 
 pressed when a man begins at the bottom and climbs to 
 the top. He was the most convincing and most eloquent 
 man of his time, the leader who understood his nation 
 and his people, and was in closer touch with them than 
 any other man of his time. 
 
 Who would not give all Mr. Everett’s eloquent address 
 at Gettysburg for the five-minute address that Lincoln 
 made that day? 
 
 In America first neighborhood was the section, and 
 the ideals of the section you will find in Emerson and 
 
 20 
 
Whittier and Bryant the ideals of the sanctity of man 
 and the passion of the neighbor, the two great qualities 
 which Mr. Bryce used to say were the special things 
 in our atmosphere — hopefulness and helpfulness. 
 
 Then the Civil War developed the nation. American 
 literature began to express the national feeling in Lanier 
 and Whitman. Whitman was a great neighbor. Some- 
 times he was more intimate with his neighbor's back- 
 yard than anything else ! but he felt and reported, in his 
 way, the life of the continent. 
 
 Lanier was a great neighbor of the spirit. — a poet of 
 continental sympathies, as contrasted with the New Eng- 
 land and Southern men who preceded him. 
 
 American life is only partially expressed in its govern- 
 ment^ That life is far greater than its political expres- 
 sion. If you want to found a college you don't go to the 
 government. If you want to organize the greatest out- 
 pouring of relief for those who are smitten and dis- 
 tressed, you don't go to the government. You organize 
 everywhere relief committees among the people and they, 
 impelled by a common motive, send their wealth across 
 the sea, simply as an expression of American generosity. 
 The very essence of our life is the sense of neighborliness. 
 We never yet have counted the cost when it came to secur- 
 ing or guarding the things that are precious to us. The 
 root of the agitation against trusts has been the feeling 
 that there was coming an unneighborly spirit in America, 
 and there are certain names that are now symbols of op- 
 pression, not because they are identified with great 
 wealth, but because the country believes that the men 
 who bear them have not been good neighbors. 
 
 It would be easy to define in a word the ideals of the 
 younger literature of the day, but I still find it — in all 
 the excess and the extravagance — the “lunatic fringe of 
 reform," as Mr. Koosevelt has called it — in play and in 
 story, and insistence on a broader conception of the obli- 
 gation and the opportunity of the neighbor. This is no 
 longer a nation of descendants of English-speaking 
 peoples. That was a noble ideal; but the new one is a 
 broader one. We have come to the point where we are 
 
 21 
 
seeing a great and more human America; to-day, as yes- 
 terday, the passion of this people for humanity is ex- 
 pressing itself, not always in permanent forms, nor al- 
 ways in the best forms, nor always in restraint and mod- 
 eration, but as truly as in the days of the struggle for 
 independence, and as later in the struggle for unity, the 
 struggle for neighborliness still goes on. 
 
 John Alexander on the walls of the Carnegie Institute 
 in Pittsburgh has painted a symbolic picture of the 
 American people — a procession of men, women and 
 children of all degrees of social standing, all moving in 
 one direction, all with the light of the future shining on 
 their happy faces, all confident, full of faith, committed 
 to the faith that Paradise lies before us and not behind 
 us. That is the expression of the ideals of American lit- 
 erature worked out in the life of the nation, so much 
 greater than its books or its art or its government. 
 
 22 
 
ADDRESS OF OSWALD G. VILLARD 
 
 of the New York Evening Post 
 
 I wish to speak this afternoon in no other role than 
 that of the son of a family that came to the United 
 States from Rhenish Bavaria when driven out by the 
 guns of the Prussian militarists. No less than two mem- 
 bers thereof had the death sentence of treason imposed 
 upon them — fortunately in their absence. They were 
 among the many who flocked to us from abroad to escape 
 the very evils and burdens of militarism which we are 
 now asked voluntarily to embrace. To them as to me, our 
 American ideals have been those of service to humanity 
 and to liberty, to create, not to destroy. To be a refuge 
 to the oppressed of all nations has been our chiefest aim. 
 Our ideal has been to let the newcomers develop as best 
 they might without putting upon them the great burden 
 of enforced military service, or of supporting a large 
 army and navy. Their happiness upon our soil, the 
 eagerness with which they sought, and seek, our citizen- 
 ship, the passionate loyality that a Franz Sigel, a Carl 
 Schurz, a Jacob Riis, or a Mary Antin, brought to our 
 unarmed country, justifies us in asserting that more 
 than any others, our institutions, however imperfect, sat- 
 isfy the human longing for equality of opportunity, for 
 the right to rise in the social scale in accordance with 
 ability and merit, for equality in Government and in the 
 courts of justice. Now, as one of that stock, as well as 
 the son of a father who followed in the army and navy of 
 the North for four years, from Bull Run to the final cam- 
 paign, I should be untrue and unfaithful to their spirit, 
 if I did not protest with all my might and power against 
 this new doctrine that our American ideals contemplate 
 a nation in arms, either as a citizenry or as professional 
 soldiery, and against the new-born theory that we must 
 devote a still larger portion of our wealth than the sev- 
 
 23 
 
enty-five cents out of every dollar of our income we now 
 devote to the ignoble business of teaching men to kill by 
 wholesale ; that we must hold up to our sons the i deals of 
 the military camp and of the battleship deck, that we 
 must denounce Bernhardism but surrender to its teach- 
 ings, abhor the gospel but accept of its sacrament as 
 something better, finer, nobler, more worth while than the 
 ideals of peace and good will America has cherished 
 heretofore. Let no true American believe this. Let no 
 true American believe for a moment that there is any- 
 thing in the terrors abroad to make us follow in their 
 footsteps of disaster and abjure the wisest teachings of 
 our fathers and forefathers and the founders of our great 
 Republic. Let no one believe that our immunity through 
 one hundred years during which we were unarmed, ut^ 
 afraid and never molested by any foreign nation save 
 England in the aftermath war of 1812, was accidental. 
 Let none consent that we should fling away our peaceful 
 ideals, our traditions, change the policy of all our na- 
 tional existence and abandon the wonderful, the dominat- 
 ing moral position in which the United States to-day 
 finds itself as the arbiter and leader in the neutral senti- 
 ment of the world, without at least waiting for the out- 
 come of the struggle abroad, and reasoning carefully 
 and calmly but in cold blood as to what the cost of a 
 change is going to be. Without awaiting the finish of 
 the war of Nations to benefit by its lessons, we are urged 
 to spend hundreds of millions now, by men who swear by 
 all that is holy, that they alone are patriots, that 
 they alone are the defenders of our national honor and 
 our nationality, and who assert at the same time that they 
 are not militarists, but true pacificists, the greatest lovers 
 of peace we have. 
 
 How familiar the sound, how familiar the pretense! 
 Those of us who have lived abroad at intervals can say 
 these platitudes over backwards and forwards with our 
 eyes shut. They are all pacifists, the militarists the world 
 over, all merely insurance agents to keep our national 
 edifices from burning down, all custodians of the pris- 
 tine virtues — the Austrians, the Germans, the French, 
 the Russians, and the Turkish military men and general 
 
 24 
 
staffs. They all began the same way; every one of the 
 large armies and navies grew out of small ones. 
 
 All this in an hour when no experts the world over are 
 as discredited as the military experts. How have not the 
 prophecies of the professional soldier been made ridicu- 
 lous by the events of Europe! The Germans themselves 
 have proved through daring and courage of their volun- 
 teers that the Prussian worship of regular troops was 
 ill-founded. Von Hindenberg’s new armies, so he and 
 the Kaiser boast, have fought just as well and as suc- 
 cessfully in Poland against the Russians as have the 
 flower of the Imperial Guard. In trench warfare the re- 
 cruit appears the equal of the long trained soldier. The 
 editors of our own Infanty Journal have been trying 
 to make Congress believe that it takes two years to 
 create infantry soldiers. Lord Kitchener, through his 
 Canadian troops, has already made nonsense of this talk. 
 For years military experts the world over have been tell- 
 ing us that in modem battles there could be no bayonet 
 charges ; that hand to hand conflicts were impossible and 
 that the armies would be firing at one another at such 
 ranges as to be practically invisible. The hundreds of 
 thousands of men now bent on killing one another in 
 trenches so close together that hand bombs and grenades 
 may be thrown from one to the other, are a terrible blow 
 to the finality of this judgment. So we were solemnly 
 told by European experts that cavalry ought to carry the 
 lance for shock contests and now we learn that cavalry 
 has lost practically all its value save as a screen. So 
 has the submarine falsified the prophecies of the naval 
 experts and so has the battleship yet to prove in this war 
 that it is worth the horrible price paid for it. And surely 
 we ought never to hear again such balderdash and stuff 
 as certain prominent Americans have put out, claiming 
 that the profession of arms is necessary to preserve the 
 pristine virtues; that long periods of peace make craven 
 and weakling, that military drill is necessary in order 
 to keep alive the manly virtues. From college, factory 
 and shop, from palace and from hovel, have come men by 
 the millions, ready to die for their cause and physically 
 able to withstand any draughts upon their strength. 
 
 25 
 
I believe that I speak in the spirit of historical Ameri- 
 can ideals, at least as I interpret them as a devoted and 
 loyal American citizen, when I say that the time is near 
 at hand when the masses ought to rise in rebellion against 
 this whole theory of war, demanding freedom of trade 
 and harbors throughout the world, a union of nations 
 where there is a union of states within a nation to-day, 
 and internationalism as against nationalism. The thing 
 for all sane men to hope, who believe in democracy, in 
 Christianity, in humanity, in the brotherhood of man, 
 is that the masses will refuse to be food for cannon at 
 the behest of any masters, kings or queens or whatever 
 their titles may be. 
 
 This is the kind of revolution the world needs above 
 all else at this hour — a sweeping, overwhelming uniting 
 against those who rob nations of seventy-five per cent, of 
 their income for war purposes, and take it away from 
 the building of cities beautiful without slums, from the 
 reclaiming of waste lands, of our deserts and our swamps, 
 the developing of our waterways, our water powers and 
 our highways, the true education of our masses, the lev- 
 eling of every barrier of caste and prejudice. In short, 
 militarism withholds vast sums from the amelioration 
 of the lot of the poor, the ill, the suffering, the wronged, 
 the oppressed, and I am for bitter and harsh words about 
 it now and always; I am for turning upon those who 
 counsel that we shall plot to murder other nations and 
 peoples either for offense or defense as true traitors to 
 the nation, faithless to every American ideal, faithless 
 to every teaching of Jesus, faithless to the God-like in 
 humanity itself. 
 
 26 
 
ADDRESS OF REAR ADMIRAL R. E. PEARY 
 
 Arctic Explorer 
 
 I would have much preferred with you to sit here and 
 listen to these masters of thought and expression who 
 are here this afternoon, than to get on my feet and talk, 
 but they have me on the list, so you and I must make 
 the best of it. 
 
 I have always thought I had in a general way an idea 
 of what American ideals are, but when my friend Part- 
 ridge asked me to say something on the subject, I found 
 my conception not sufficiently crystallized for expression. 
 
 Of several I asked the question what are American 
 ideals? My daughter suggested fair play and ambition. 
 A pessimist suggested money getting and graft. One re- 
 ferred me to the preamble of the Constitution. 
 
 Assuming that the ideals of the Constiution are truly 
 ours, and that fair play and ambition and others may be 
 added to them, are these ideals distinctively American, 
 or are they held also by others? 
 
 Would not our assumption of them as distinctively 
 ours, be in the same category as that other fond assump- 
 tion of so many of us, that an American can lick all 
 creation? 
 
 But it seems to me there are two things which may be 
 called American ideals, and which are very generally in- 
 grained in us; one of them the result of our environ- 
 ment and national growth, the other in a way the out- 
 growth of the first. These two things are “bigness” and 
 “realization” (in the sense of accomplishment or effective- 
 ness). 
 
 Could the growth of this country from the original 
 thirteen little colonies hugging the Atlantic Coast — first 
 to the Mississippi — then to the Rocky Mountains — then 
 to the Rio Grande — then to the Pacific — till we are three 
 thousand miles across and fourteen hundred miles from 
 north to south, fail to make an indelible impress upon a 
 breed of men and women vigorous enough to push out for 
 themselves to found a new nation? 
 
 27 
 
I do not speak of our later expansion to the Arctic 
 Circle by the acquisition of Alaska, nor to our circling 
 the world by taking over Hawaii, Samoa, Guam, the Phil- 
 ippines and Porto Rico. These came too late to affect 
 the earlier generations, bred and raised in a country 
 already stretching from ocean to ocean through three 
 thousand miles of boundless resources and possibilities. 
 
 When it came to national advancement and develop- 
 ment, our railroad builders had to think in hundreds of 
 miles, where those of other countries thought in miles — 
 our wheat farmers thought in square miles and town- 
 ships, where those of other countries thought in acres — 
 our financiers thought in billions, where those of other 
 countries thought in millions. 
 
 The second ideal presents somewhat of the paradox 
 of being both a predecessor and a corollary of the first. 
 The sturdy pioneers who in frail craft crossed a wide 
 and stormy ocean to found the beginnings of this coun- 
 try, stood in their own resolute persons for “realiza- 
 tion,” the realization of their dreams of a free home and 
 land. 
 
 Later, realization became a necessity, the essential of 
 success which is the goal of ambition. 
 
 Failure to put through a little railroad might be trivial ; 
 failure with a transcontinental trunk line would be of 
 vital magnitude. Failure in a farm of a few acres meant 
 trying again next year; failure in a thousands of acres 
 ranch was ruin. 
 
 Failure of a million dollar company might not be of 
 special importance; failure of a billion dollar corpora- 
 tion would be a national calamity. And so “realization” 
 became the companion ideal of “bigness.” 
 
 I think of no more striking examples of our superb 
 assurance as a result of these ideals, than our wars with 
 England, and our Monroe Doctrine. 
 
 In one we made war against the greatest sea power ever 
 known and won. In the other we calmly stated to the 
 world “Excuse us but our sphere of influence is an en- 
 tire hemisphere if you please.” 
 
 28 
 
Thus far we have made good. Can we continue to do 
 so? If we keep our ideals before us, yes — if we go to 
 sleep, no. 
 
 There are three recent examples which also illustrate 
 my presentation of “bigness” and “realization” as Ameri- 
 can Ideals. 
 
 From the beginnings of the race, man has dreamed of 
 flying. Americans, the Wright Brothers, solved the prob- 
 lem of true flying, and opened up to us a new world, the 
 world of air. A big thing, a realized thing. 
 
 For four centuries the world strove and waited and 
 dreamed of a ship canal connecting the Atlantic and 
 the Pacific. Americans, Roosevelt and Goethals, solved 
 the problem and gave us the greatest artificial waterway 
 the world will ever know. A big thing, a realized thing. 
 
 For four centuries the world strove and waited and 
 dreamed of reaching the northern axis of the globe. 
 American money and experience solved the problem. A 
 big thing, a realized thing. 
 
 Now, if you assent to my conception of two funda- 
 mental American Ideals and permit me to amend the 
 title of our subject of discussion to-day, and make it 
 “American Ideals and Destiny,” I will add a few words 
 on the latter subject. 
 
 I do not expect to tell you anything new, simply to 
 refresh your memory and to group certain facts. 
 
 With this world map before us, let me call your atten- 
 tion — first, to our position in the southern half of the 
 north temperate zone, the location of maximum crops, of 
 maximum resources, of maximum mentality — second, to 
 our location midway between the two great acres of maxi- 
 mum population, Europe and China — third, to our loca- 
 tion between the two great oceans, the North Atlantic, the 
 ocean of the present, and the North Pacific, the ocean of 
 the future. 
 
 Then let me call your attention to our magnificent coast 
 line on each of these great oceans, and note that the Pan- 
 ama Canal which we have built and which we own. makes 
 these two coast lines practically continuous from Eastport 
 
 29 
 
to Cape Flattery. And here let me say there are those here 
 to-day who will see the Panama Canal a sea level canal, 
 and will see another great ship canal across the American 
 Isthmus at Nicaragua. 
 
 Then let me note to you that in our Pacific Coast, 
 Alaska, the Sandwich Islands, Guam and the Philippines, 
 we control the base and one side of the great triangle of 
 the North Pacific. 
 
 We are in touch with the present, we are in position for 
 the future. 
 
 Then let me call your attention to the fortieth parallel 
 of latitude. Did you ever with map or globe trace the 
 40th parallel of North Latitude around the world, and as 
 you did so recall your history? 
 
 Near that line lay the Phoenician, Chaldean and Baby- 
 lonian Kingdoms. On it lay the Persian Empire. Close 
 by mighty Egypt. Near it Greece, and Imperial Rome, 
 Constantinople, Madrid and Pekin. 
 
 It is the most fateful and suggestive line upon the 
 earth’s surface. The life line of the world’s successive 
 dominating nations. 
 
 That line of destiny bisects this country. Strung along 
 it are New York, Philadelphia., Baltimore, Washington, 
 Chicago, St. Louis and San Francisco. 
 
 Do you believe that all these things are mere chance? 
 I do not. We cannot escape the bigness, the imperial 
 bigness of our destiny, and it is our duty to prevent the 
 retardation, and to assist the advance of that destiny. 
 
 With “bigness” and “realization” our ideals — with im- 
 perial position and prospects our possession — what may 
 we not realize in the future if only we always keep before 
 us the watchwords preparedness and self-oontainedness? 
 
 We cannot stand still. A hundred years from now we 
 shall either be obliterated as a nation, or we shall occupy 
 the entire North American world segment. 
 
 The former is inconceivable, the latter may be nearer 
 than we think. 
 
 30 
 
ADDRESS OF REV. FREDERICK LYNCH 
 
 Editor and Author 
 
 We have had about two hours of speeches, and I, my- 
 self, had several things to say, but they have all been said, 
 and when they have been said better by somebody else, 
 what is the use of saying them all again? 
 
 For five or six minutes, let me draw one or two lessons 
 for this country. Perhaps what has been said may take 
 upon itself new emphasis. I had either the fortune or the 
 misfortune to spend this summer in the nations which are 
 at war. No one could have come through Germany, and 
 no one could have been in France during the beginning 
 of those awful days, and no one could have been in Eng- 
 land, as I was for several days, without having borne in 
 upon him one or two things which he never could eradi- 
 cate from his mind, which were seared there as by hot 
 irons upon his brain. 
 
 I happened to be in company with forty or fifty other 
 Americans, and in talking with them I have found that 
 they also had two impressions drilled into their souls as I 
 had. I will just put these things straight before you. I 
 have been there almost every summer for a, good many 
 years, and after living with the people of Germany and 
 France and England, I find they are all a good deal alike, 
 no matter what you may read. Coming across Europe 
 this summer, the thing that came over me day after day, 
 as it has in previous years, is this: that a civilization 
 based wholly or largely on force will ultimately go down. 
 Civilization has become too big a thing to base it upon 
 force ; it has become a thing of brain and mind and heart ; 
 it has become a thing of spirit. The civilization of Ger- 
 many, in spite of the spell that the false philosophers 
 have put upon it, was a spirit of fine and high and noble 
 
 31 
 
idealism. The spirit of England and France was the 
 same, and the mistake that Europe has been making has 
 been in trying to base that great, superb, growing civili- 
 zation upon force and upon force alone. Now force has 
 failed; force has toppled and gone down, and my friends, 
 I believe the old ideal has gone down with it forever. I 
 am not exaggerating, I have been in Europe. Force, 
 powder, soldiers, everywhere in evidence. I went into an 
 art gallery with a friend, and we both remarked together : 
 ‘‘Notice that every portrait in this room is of somebody 
 who has killed somebody. ” 
 
 A missionary in China, who for several years had been 
 trying to interest one of the high officials in Christianity, 
 one day heard this man was going to visit Europe. He 
 thought, “Now is my chance.” So to the Chinaman he 
 said, “I want you to observe keenly while you are in 
 Europe and see what is the most conspicuous fruit of 
 Christianity that you find.” In three months the Chinese 
 official came back from his tour of Germany, Austria and 
 England, and the missionary ran to meet him, thinking 
 he would be easy prey. “What was the most conspicuous 
 fruit of Christianity you saw in Europe?” asked the mis- 
 sionary ; and with a twinkle in his eye the Chinaman said 
 “Guns.” You know how true that is. 
 
 Leaving aside for the present consideration of what 
 should be an effective army and navy, what I want to see 
 in the United States is a nation that dares go out into 
 the future and lead the rest of the world, as it surely will, 
 and build its great foundations on something higher and 
 finer than mere brute force, which is bound to fail. I 
 want to see a nation that will stand up to the rest of the 
 world and say, “Our justice is our self-defence; our char- 
 acter is our self-defence. We don’t want the territory of 
 any other nation in the world, and we don’t intend to takte 
 it We want to deal justly by all people and we are going 
 to be the friend of every nation in the world that will let 
 us be so.” Our character shall be our great defence, and I 
 don’t believe the United States is in any more danger 
 when she says that than Mr. Thomas Mott Osborne is in 
 danger when he puts these same ideals into practice at 
 Sing Sing. One of the secrets of Mr. Osborne’s success is 
 
 32 
 
that he goes out among the prisoners with no revolver in 
 his pocket. 
 
 Another lesson that came to us as we crossed Europe 
 was this: that the nations are far, infinitely far behind 
 individuals in the state of ethics into which they have 
 come in their relationships to one another; and the one 
 great task of the future will be to bring nations to be- 
 have toward each other as gentlemen do. Gentlemen do 
 not steal; gentlemen do not kill; gentlemen do not settle 
 their disputes by weapons. If we can only bring the na- 
 tions up to the point where they can learn to practice 
 those fine, high things which all gentlemen practice — 
 charity, tolerance, the desire to see both sides of a ques- 
 tion, the desire to get justice and not to get pre-eminence 
 or predominance — then the whole question of war will be 
 settled forever. If we can only get the nations to realize 
 that it is our duty and not our rights by which we live, 
 we will have solved the whole problem of the future. 
 Gentlemen are not going about talking of their rights, but 
 of their duties and of getting rights for others. Christian- 
 ity has come to that stage where we say a Christian is the 
 man who wants to get the rights for the rest of the world, 
 and is not thinking about his own rights, is not thinking 
 about protecting himself, about getting revenge for his 
 honor. Honor’s wounds are generally self-inflicted. He 
 is not thinking of his rights, but he is thinking of his 
 duties; he would not get them, even if he believed in them, 
 if those “rights” meant the destruction of someone else. 
 The nations of this Twentieth Century must come up to 
 this ideal, and I want to see our government brave enough 
 and fearless enough to say to the rest of the world, “We 
 are not concerned everlastingly and eternally, as the na- 
 tions of Europe have been, with avenging our insulted 
 honor. We are thinking of bigger, finer things, just as 
 all gentlemen are everywhere, of rendering what service 
 we can to the world, putting duty as our ideal and not 
 self -protection nor our rights. 
 
 33 
 
ADDRESS OF Dr. JAMES J. WALSH, 
 Editor and Author. 
 
 I think probably the reason I was asked to talk this 
 afternoon is because there are two things in the world, 
 contrast and microbes. I represent, not the microbes, but 
 the contrast. Unfortunately, I was not told anything 
 about Professor Peabody’s book. One must be careful 
 about definitions, you know. Before coming here I turned 
 to the Century Dictionary to see what might be the mean- 
 ing of the word ideal to which one would apply that in- 
 teresting epithet American. There are evidently two lines 
 of thought underlying the word as familiarly used. Ac- 
 cording to one of these an ideal is something that exists 
 only in idea and being confined to thought or imagination 
 is considered impractical and quite unattainable. The 
 other is that an ideal represents a standard of beauty or 
 virtue so high that it is rather a standard of desire than 
 an ultimate object or aim, a mental conception of what 
 is eminently desirable rather than something that we hope 
 to realize in any way. 
 
 Some of our American ideals are rather interesting by 
 contrast. I have just been reading once more something 
 about the fete made for Cimabue’s Madonna when it was 
 carried in triumph through the Streets of Florence. All 
 the people of the quarter of the city in which it was 
 painted, turned out and followed it in procession. Work 
 was stopped for the day in that quarter of the City and 
 they had such a fine time that it was ever afterwards re- 
 called by the invention of a new name for that quarter of 
 the city. I have ventured to ask some friends what they 
 thought would cause the populace in a quarter of the city 
 to turn out in anything like similar fashion to the Cima- 
 bue incident. I may say that they were not agreed as 
 to whether it could be done at all, but some of them 
 
 34 
 
thought that if some new white hope should win the 
 heavyweight championship from Jack Johnson and if his 
 coming were announced any attempt on his part to walk 
 through the Streets would almost surely require the pres- 
 ence of the police to permit traffic to be free. Another 
 friend thought that if the winning team just after the 
 pennant was clinched were to come home to their 
 eponymic town, it is not their home town in any sense of 
 course, there would surely be a similar procession to 
 that which greeted Cimabue’s great picture. 
 
 Last year in the celebration of Shakespeare’s three hun- 
 dred and fiftieth birthday I took occasion to tell some 
 evening High School boys how impossibly dirty was the 
 London of Shakespeare’s day. The boys had great fun 
 laughing at these unrefined Elizabethans. When I sug- 
 gested, however, that these people went to Shakespeare’s 
 plays in such large numbers that they made a large for- 
 tune for him while we cannot keep a Shakespearean play 
 going for more than a week, the laugh died down. One 
 thing is perfectly sure, while we have much more refine- 
 ment than the Elizabethans, they apparently had much 
 more taste than we have. I wonder if the trouble is with 
 our ideals. 
 
 Now I am not going to draw any conclusions. I am 
 just going to leave these contrasts to speak for them- 
 selves and ask whether possibly most of our American 
 ideals have not been concentrated on making ourselves 
 more comfortable in body and not paying very much at- 
 tention to the development of our minds. I don’t think 
 that even I want to say as much as that. I know there 
 is something wrong with our American life. I think that 
 it can be summed up in one of those brief illuminating 
 expressions from the Old Testament, which runs some- 
 thing like this: “The fascination of trifles obscures good 
 things.” We are having a number of good things ob- 
 scured for us, though there never was such a running 
 after trifles of all kinds as just now. We read trifling 
 books, see trifling plays, view trifling motion pictures, 
 hear triflling after dinner speeches and we are missing a 
 lot of good things in life. I wonder if the war with all 
 its seriousness will affect us enough to get us away from 
 
 35 
 
the fascination of trifles that seems to me is overwhelm- 
 ing us. But then my friends say I am a pessimist. I 
 think that I am only someone who has had to live over 
 long with some very self complacent optimists. 
 
 Just now we find ourselves face to face with another 
 material thing. You know we have been boasting about the 
 prosperity of the world. There never before was so much 
 money in the world as now. We have had one hundred 
 years of industrial prosperity. In the old world we are 
 beginning to see one of the flaws of that last hundred 
 years. How much of the vast wealth accumulated should 
 in justice have gone to the workingman who, amid all the 
 boasted prosperity, was seldom able to earn more than a 
 living pittance. Ho you remember, about the middle of 
 the Civil War, on the occasion of the Emancipation 
 Proclamation, Lincoln said: “Perhaps in the order of 
 Providence, for every unpaid-for drop of sweat- of the 
 negro slave there will have to be shed, before we get 
 through with this war, a drop of white, free blood”? 
 Something very nearly like that came. Just at. the pres- 
 ent, Europe is engaged in getting rid of some of the ac- 
 cumulated wealth of the world. Over there they were 
 spending in August Thirty-seven Millions of dollars a 
 day; in September Forty- five Millions a day; in January 
 Fifty-five Millions a day. Already there is Twelve Bil- 
 lions of Dollars gone. Is it possible that somewhere in 
 the order of Providence for every cent that was unpaid 
 to the workmen in an era of world prosperity, we shall 
 have to pay out a dollar of the accumulated wealth of 
 the world? The mills of God do grind slowly, but they 
 grind awfully fine. Were we watching the material far 
 too much and not thinking enough of the spiritual? 
 
 We founded this nation on some of the greatest spirit- 
 ual principles, such as the world never before knew. I do 
 fear sometimes that we have let ourselves down from our 
 high ideals and that some of the things they say of us in 
 Europe are true. 
 
 Just at the present moment, surely, our ideals should 
 all be for peace. You know what an undercurrent of 
 feeling there is that would lead to anything but peace, 
 
 36 
 
however; I am a pacifist but not one of those who thinks 
 that we should have peace just because it will make the 
 world nice and comfortable. If peace ever comes for 
 that reason we shall have a world not worth living 
 in because of its degeneration and selfishness. If the 
 world wants peace it can have it, but it must really want 
 it. The world will never have peace, however, until 
 something of the wonderful spirit of sacrifice that comes 
 into men in time of war can be engendered also in time 
 of peace. 
 
 On August 1st, 1914, when, as was said, modern his- 
 tory began, there were some 25,000,000 men in Europe 
 who thought they had a right to say how their lives 
 should be lived and their careers should be shaped. In 
 those early days of August they learned that they had no 
 rights, that not even the precious home ties and obliga- 
 tions meant anything as compared to their duty to their 
 country. One cannot help but admire the spirit that 
 prompts such devotion to duty. As a consequence a great 
 many of these men are now fighting bravely and help- 
 fully, shoulder to shoulder with hereditary enemies in a 
 spirit of brotherliness. France and England have been 
 supposedly hereditary enemies for centuries. See where 
 they are now. When we are able to foster and develop 
 some of the brotherliness that thus comes out in time of 
 war we shall have a lasting peace, but only when some- 
 thing like that comes. The arguments from prosperity 
 and comfort and convenience mean nothing as against 
 the spirit of war in man. If men but will make half the 
 sacrifices for peace that they do for war then we shall 
 have an enduring peace. 
 
 37 
 
BISHOP GREER’S CLOSING WORD 
 
 There is nothing to reply to. It was announced that 
 this would be a discussion. It has been, rather, a disser- 
 tation along the same lines. There is no opportunity for 
 rebuttal. I agree with everything that has been said. 
 The meeting, it seems to me, has reached its climax. The 
 best thing I can say, after all you have heard this after- 
 noon, and the only thing I can say to you after all you 
 have heard this afternoon, is, “Go in peace.” 
 
 38 
 
LETTERS RECEIVED 
 
 FROM CHARLES W. ELIOT 
 
 President Emeritus of Harvard University 
 
 It will not bo practicable for me to attend the Dinner of 
 the Republican Club in New York City, on Saturday, 
 March 27th. I congratulate you on the subject to be 
 discussed. National ideals account for the differences 
 among nations. We need not be alarmed at the radical 
 diversities in our population, so long as all immigrants 
 come hither in search of freedom and the diffused well- 
 being which democracy produces. 
 
 CHARLES W. ELIOT. 
 
 FROM 
 
 CHANCELLOR ELMER ELLSWORTH BROWN 
 
 of 'New York University. 
 
 At the last moment, imperative demands upon my time 
 prevent me from coming this afternoon to the luncheon 
 of the Republican Club, and participating in the discus- 
 sion of American Ideals. I am deeply disappointed, for 
 I had something to say, and, still more, I wanted to hear 
 what your other speakers had to say. 
 
 I w r a& going to speak of an American ideal in educa- 
 tion. You have heard that education is the only single 
 thing that all Americans believe in with all their heart. 
 But we all believe in different kinds of education. Per- 
 haps w r e believe, too, that every American ought to have 
 a different education from every other American. Some 
 kind of unity in our educational ideal we must have, if 
 we are to continue to be one people. 
 
 39 
 
I would not go the length of trying to hammer our 
 people into national unity as has been done where the 
 military ideal has been predominant. But I think it 
 would be worth while to see whether our education can- 
 not spread abroad something better than the military 
 ideal and make it a national characteristic. 
 
 It is to be hoped that we are finding out what a poor 
 bungling thing war is as a means of accomplishing any 
 good result in our international relations. It is to be 
 hoped that at the same time we are finding out what 
 poor bungling means are now too often employed to ac- 
 complish any good result at home in our industrial re- 
 lations. About the greatest thing that education has to 
 do in the immediate future is to make this American peo- 
 ple a people that is consciously and deliberately bending 
 its efforts toward a better method than that of strikes 
 and lock-outs, and a better method than that of interna- 
 tional war. 
 
 That would mean a people that believes in spiritual 
 forces as the ultimate dependence of human society, and 
 does not believe that brute power and gunpowder can 
 ever be the ultimate depedence of human society. 
 
 ELMER ELLSWORTH BROWN. 
 
 40 
 
NON-PARTISAN SATURDAY DISCUSSIONS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 REPUBLICAN CLUB OF NEW YORK CITY 
 
 SIXTH SEASON, 1915 
 
 Chairmen of Committees of Arrangements for the Several Meetings. 
 Jan. 9th — Mr. Andrew B. Humphrey Feb. 20th~Mr. Edward W. Harris 
 
 Jan. 16th — Mr. J. Henry Smythe, Jr. 
 Jan. 23rd — Hon. Robert W. Bonynge 
 Jan. 30th — Mr. Gerald Stratton 
 Feb. 6th — Hon. Wm. H. Douglas 
 Feb. 13th — Mr. Edward C. Miller 
 
 Feb. 27th — Mr. John A. Dutton 
 Mar. 6th — Mr. Edward R. Finch 
 Mar. 13th — Judge Alfred E. Ommen 
 Mar. 20th — Hon. Wm. S. Bennet 
 Mar. 27th — Mr. Wm. Ordway Partridge 
 Mr. Edward F. Cragin, Chairman 
 Mr. Edward C. Miller, Vice-Chairman 
 Mr. Franklin P. Duryea, Vice-Chairman 
 Mr. J. Henry Smythe, Jr., Secretary 
 
 SUBJECTS AND SPEAKERS. SEASON OF 1915 
 
 Jan. 9. — “The War and After.” 
 
 His Excellency Doctor Bernhard Dernburg, Former Imperial 
 German Colonial Secretary. 
 
 Doctor Henry M. MacCracken, Former Chancellor, New York 
 University. 
 
 Doctor Toyokichi Iyenaga, Professor of History, Chicago Uni- 
 versity. 
 
 Doctor Edwin Bjorkman, (of the American-Scandinavian Foun- 
 dation. 
 
 Chaplain: Rev. William Carter, D.D. 
 
 Jan. 16. — “The Military Needs of Our Country,” “Army Day.” 
 
 Hon. Lind ley M. Garrison, Secretary of War. 
 
 Hon. Henry L. Stimson, Former Secretary of War. 
 
 Col. William Cary Sanger, Former Assistant Secretary of War. 
 Rev. John Haynes Holmes. 
 
 Chaplain: Rev. Chas. C. Albertson, D.D. 
 
 Jan. 23. — "Should the Federal Government Own or Operate or Only Supervise 
 the Interstate Railroads?” 
 
 Hon. James Wesley Bryan, Congressman at Large from Wash- 
 ington. 
 
 Mr. Benjamin F. Yoakum, Chairman of the Board, St. Louis 
 & San Francisco Railway. 
 
 Mr. Thos. F. Woodlock, formerly of the Wall Street Journal. 
 Prof. Edward Sherwood Mead, Professor of Finance, University 
 of Pennsylvania. 
 
 Mr. T. P. Shonts, President Interborough Rapid Transit Co. 
 Chaplain: Rev. Nehemiah Boynton, D.D. 
 
 Jan. 30. — “The Future of Our Navy,” “Navy Day.” 
 
 Hon. Franklin D. Roosevelt, Assistant Secretary of the Navy. 
 Hon. George von L. Meyer, Former Secretary of the Navy. 
 
 Hon. Herbert L. Satterlee, Former Assistant Secretary of the 
 Navy. 
 
 Dr. Frank Crane, Editor and Author. 
 
 Hon. William M. Calder, M. C. 
 
 General Francis V. Greene. 
 
 Mr. S. Stanwood Menken, President National Security League. 
 Chaplain: Rev. William Edgar McCord, Chaplain Seventh 
 Regiment. 
 
 Feb. 6. — “How Can We Create an American Merchant Marine Commensurate 
 with Our Needs?” 
 
 Hon. Rufus Hardy, of Texas, member Congressional Committee 
 on Merchant Marine. 
 
 Hon. Wm. E. Humphrey, member of Congress from Washing- 
 ton. 
 
 Hon. Jas. T. McCleary, former member of Congress from 
 Minnesota. 
 
 Hon. Dudley Field Malone, Collector of the Port. 
 
 Hon. William H. Douglas, former member of Congress from 
 v New York. 
 
 Mr. Edward N. Breitung, owner of the steamship “Dacia.” 
 Chaplain: Rev. Charles L. Goodell, D.D. 
 
■l 
 
 0 
 
 2 
 
 05909623 
 
 Feb. 13. — “What Can the United States Do for Latin America and What Can 
 Latin America Do for the United States?” 
 
 His Excellency, Domicio da Gama, Ambassador from Brazil. 
 
 Senor Ignacio Calderon, Minister from Bolivia. 
 
 Senor Dr. Federico Alfonso Pezet, Minister from Peru. 
 
 Senor Dr. Don Gonzalo S. Cordova, Minister from Ecuador. 
 
 L. S. Rowe, LL.D., Professor of Political Science, Unlversty of 
 Pennsylvana; President of the American Academy of Po- 
 litical and Social Science; Chairman Pan-American Com- 
 mittee cf the Department of State. 
 
 Mr ; H. R. Eldridge, Vice-President of the National City Bank, 
 New York. 
 
 Mr. Chas. M. Muchnic, Manager of the Foreign Department of 
 the American Locomotive Company. 
 
 Professor William R. Shepherd, of Columbia University. 
 
 Chaplain: Rev. William Carter, D.D. 
 
 Feb. 20. — "Is Democracy Gaining Over Aristocracy and the Spirit of Brotherhood 
 Over Race Hatred?" "University Day.” 
 
 Professor William M. Sloane, Professor of Contemporary His- 
 tory, Columbia University, author of "Life of Napoleon 
 Bonaparte,” "The Balkans,” etc. 
 
 Professor William Pickens. Professor of Languages, Wiley 
 University, Marshall, Texas. 
 
 Professor Franz Boas, Professor of Anthropology, Columbia 
 University. 
 
 Professor Jeremiah W. Jenks, Professor of Government and 
 Public Administration, New York University. 
 
 Professor Toyokichi lyenaga, Professor of History, Chicago 
 University, Representing Japanese News Bureau. 
 
 • Professor Philip K. Hittl, President Intercollegiate Cosmo- 
 politan Club of New York, graduate and member of perma- 
 nent staff of the Syrian American College at Beirut, Syria, 
 Lecturer on Semitic Languages, Columbia University. 
 
 Chaplain: Rev. John F. Carson, D.D. 
 
 Feb. 17. — "Should the Suffrage be Extended to Women In the State of New 
 York?” 
 
 Mrs. Inez Milholland Bolssevaln, of New York. 
 
 Mrs. A. J. George, of Boston. 
 
 Mrs. James Lees Laldlaw. 
 
 Miss Lucy J. Price. 
 
 Mrs. Harry Hastings. 
 
 Miss Alice Chittenden. 
 
 - Chaplain: Rev. Howard Duflfield, D.D. 
 
 Mar. e. — “What Should be Embodied in the New State Constitution ?” 
 
 Hon. John Purroy Mitchell, Mayor of New York. 
 
 Hon. Martin W. Littleton, Former Member of Congress from 
 New York. , 
 
 Judge Samuel Seabury, of the Court of Appeals, State of New 
 York. 
 
 Judge William H. Wadhams. 
 
 Chaplain: Rev. Sidney N. Ussher, D.D. 
 
 Mar. 13.— "Shall the Powers of Borough Government Be Maintained as at Pres- 
 ent or Increased or Decreased?” "Borough Day.” 
 
 Hon. Marcus M. Marks, President, Borough of Manhattan. 
 
 Hon. Henry Bruere, City Chamberlain. 
 
 Hon. Lewis H. Pounds, President, Borough of Brooklyn. 
 
 Hon. Douglas Matthewson, President, Borough of Bronx, 
 
 Hon. Maurice E. Connolly, President, Borough of Queens. 
 
 Hon. William M. Calder, M. C. 
 
 Mr. Cabot Ward, President, Park Board, 
 
 Chaplain: Rev. Frank Oliver Hall, D.D. 
 
 Mar. 20. — "The Future of the Philippines.” 
 
 Hon. Wm. Patterson Borland, Member of Congress from Mis- 
 souri. 
 
 General Francis V. Greene, Identified with the Capture and 
 Surrender of Manila, and the Spanish Forces in the Philip- 
 pines, August 13, 1898. 
 
 Dr. Arthur J. Brown. , . 
 
 Martin Egan, formerly with the Manila Times. 
 
 Chaplain : Rev. William Carter, D.D. 
 
 Mar. 27. — "American Ideals.” 
 
 Hon. John Bassett Moore, Former Assistant Secretary of State. 
 
 Right Rev. David. H. Greer, Bishop for the Diocese of New 
 Yoxk. 
 
 Thomas Mott Osborne, Warden, Sing Sing Prison. 
 
 Hamilton Wright Mabie, Editor and Author. 
 
 Oswald G. Villard, of the Evening Post. 
 
 Rear Admiral Robert E. Peary, Arctic Explorer. 
 
 Rev. Frederick Lynch, Editor and Author. - *■ 
 
 l)r. James .T. -Walsh, Editor and Author. 
 
 Chaplain: Right Rev. David/ H. Greer.