Dec.First Review Tea

Cents

A CRITICAL SURVEY OF INTERNATIONAL SOCIALISM

VOL III. 10c. a copy Published on the first and fifteenth of the month. $ 1.50 a year No. 18

CONTENTS:PAGE

THE PROBLEM OP NATIONALITY 321Louis C. Fraina

THE MIND OF A CENSORFloyd Dell

INDIA AND THE EMPIRE"Baghi"

PREMATURE PEACE?S. J. Rutgers

CAPTUREDAnna Strunsky Walling

325

326

330

331

PAGETHE MECHANICS OP SOLIDARITY „ 832

Austin LewisTHE LITERARY REVIVAL IN IRELAND 336

Ernest A. BoydCURRENT AFFAIRS 338

L. B. BoudinA SOCIALIST DIGEST:

Russian Socialist Manifesto; Bernstein's Peace Programme; A GermsB-Austro-Hungarian Customs Union; Spanish Socialist Congress.

CORRESPONDENCE :From T. D. O'Bolger; F. J. Gould.

C»pvneM. 1915. by the Nev Kevin Pttbliihinf Att'n. Reprint remitted if credit It gtff*.

The Problem of NationalityBy Louis C. Fraina

I.

THE problem of Nationality cannot be con-sidered simply in its relation to the right ofnations to independence. It is primarily a

problem in the history and economics of Capitalism,-the problem involved in the stage of developmentachieved by the social-economic system contained ina nation, and which determines the form of expres-sion of the nation.

Nationality does not come into being because ofmystical or cultural impulses; it is created by adefinite process of economic development and itspolitical reflex. Nationality is not desirable in itself;it is desirable only as a tool with which to work atparticular stages of our social development. Nor isNationality in itself democratic and progressive; itis that only when the social forces it expresses trendtoward democracy and progress; under differentcircumstances Nationality may be completely reac-tionary.

A very important point to be stressed in a dis-cussion of Nationality, accordingly, is the funda-mental difference between the democratic national-ism of the era of bourgeois revolution and the reac-tionary nationalism of Imperialistic capitalism.Eduard Bernstein proposes that Socialists opposeonly the "new capitalistic nationalism which culmin-ates in Imperialism," and not the "old ideology" ofnationalism "which required the self-government ofthe nation as a centre of culture among other similarcentres." Bernstein's proposal neglects seriouslythe economic and political aspects of the problem, as

determined by the development of capitalist Imperial-ism and its reactionary tendencies. It is impossibleto revive the old democratic ideology of nationalism,since the social conditions underlying its previousexistence are no longer dominant in the economy ofindustrially highly-developed nations. The emphasislaid upon democratic nationalism leaves unconsid-ered the fact that capitalism has turned its backupon the era of its democratic aspirations, and thatconsequently the contemporary expression of Nation-ality is un-democratic.

Nationalism, as much as Imperialism, possessesgeneral characteristics; but to discuss the problemof Nationality in its general characteristics aloneis to miss its real significance. While the essentialeconomic characteristic of Imperialsm is the exportof capital, each national Imperialism has its own dis-tinctive features determined by economic and politi-cal development. The essential characteristic ofNationality is the temporary necessity of the nationas a centre of economic, political and cultural activ-ity ; but the form of expression of Nationality variesas the historical requirements vary. Not only isNationality to-day different in the great capitalistnations from the Nationality of the era of bourgeoisrevolution, but Nationality differs as between differ-ent nations, and nations in process of formation.

These differences are not simply theoretical intheir interest. Important practical conclusions areinvolved. They signify that new social forces havecome into being, fundamentally altering the problemand our attitude toward the problem. The change

322NEW REVIEW.

from Colonialism to Imperialism means not simplya change in the foreign policy of nations, but achange in the economics of Capitalism, a new stagein economic development. The problem of National-ity in its newer aspects has a similar meaning—directly determined by the Imperialistic trend.

The newer Nationalism, in its Imperialistic as-pects, demonstrates that the Great War is not aresult of Nationality as much as a revolt againstNationality. Although there is a peculiar circum-stance involved: that this revolt against Nationalityproceeds along nationalistic lines, the effort of aparticular nation to subjugate other nations in itsown national interest. But in spite of its dynamicexpression, it is fundamentally conditioned by theeconomic urge which seeks to shatter the fetters ofNationality. Industry organized along national lineshas become an obstacle to the development of theforces of production; industry has become interna-tional to a point where it must tear down the barriersof the nation.

II.Nationality, the trend toward Nationality, makes

its appearance simultaneously with Capitalism.Ascending capitalism develops the nation-state,which plays an important part in the overthrow offeudalism and the establishment of the capitalisteconomy. The effort to break the fetters placed uponindustry organized on the basis of the city-stateleads directly to the formation of the modern nation.Ascending capitalism requires freedom of trade with-in as large a territorial unit as possible,national markets exclusively for the national bour-geoisie to develop and exploit; a common system ofcoinage, weights and measures; and a strong centralgovernment to protect and encourage capital, and tocarve out larger territorial limits for the nation.The nation-state develops a sense of solidarity in thepeople of a particular national group, and firmlyestablishes national institutions, a national litera-ture and culture. The nation has conformed essen-tially to economic and geographical facts; while raceand language have been convenient expressions ofNationality, the nation has itself created "race" and"language", and often suppressed them in the ful-fillment of its historic task.

The early struggles of ascending capitalism seek tocreate the national unit along as large territoriallimits as possible, while maintaining order withinthe national domain. The industrialized unit in thenation seeks wider markets, wider sources of rawmaterial,—regions which it can industrially revo-lutionize. The process of expansion is accelerated bya series of bloody wars. All this, in conjunction withother favoring circumstances, leads to the institu-tion of absolute monarchy, directly traceable to therequirements of the bourgeoisie. The bourgeoisie at

this period is only slightly revolutionary, its revo-lutionary expression assuming vitality in the meas-ure that the task of carving out the national frontiersis completed. But, this task accomplished, the socialorganization expressed in the dominance of absolutemonarchy, itself based upon a compromise betweenthe bourgeoisie and the feudal nobility, becomes avery real obstacle to the development of the produc-tive forces. In the efforts to destroy this obstacle,the bourgeoisie initiates its revolutionary era, oneresult of which is the organization of the nationalong democratic and republican lines. It is at thisepoch that the nation assumes a definite and con-crete form.1

But the bourgeoisie becomes frightened of its ownrevolutionary impulses: all bourgeois revolutionsend in dictatorship,—which persist or disintegrateas conditions determine.2 Having accomplishedthe task of destroying the economic fetters upon itsdevelopment, the bourgeoisie becomes indifferent tothe form of government, as long as scope is allowedits economic development. Fear of the proletariat,competition between nations, struggles between vari-ous groups of the ruling class itself, immaturity ofgovernmental experience,—all these circumstancesincline the bourgeoisie toward "strong" government,leaving a merely sentimental feeling for generalliberal principles. A compromise is struck in consti-tutional monarchy.

In this process of developing the nation, revolu-tion and liberal ideas are merely an incidence. Whenthe bourgeoisie has completed the industrial revolu-tion, it discards its liberal ideas and retains only thatirreducible minimum necessary for social control.This minimum varies as the historical requirementsvary.

In nations which completed their national bour-geois revolution sufficiently prior to the era of mod-ern Imperialism to allow their democratic ideas scopefor ascendancy, the reaction against liberal ideas wasonly partly successful; finally working itself out ina republic—as in France—; or an essentially demo-cratic government—as in "monarchical" England.But in nations which completed their national revo-lution almost simultaneously with the advent ofImperialism, democracy in government never estab-lished itself. Germany is the classic type of this newdevelopment,—with Japan a remarkably close par-allel.

The bourgeois revolution in Germany in 1848 wascrushed by the terrific blows of the counter-revolu-

1) It is interesting to note, that the French Revolution, the finest ex-pression of the revolutionary bourgeois era, was compelled by the struggleagainst practically all of feudal Europe to break through the bounds atNationality and project an internatioralism implicit in the concept ofcosmopolite republicanism. But both the internationalism and the revo-lutionary ideology were discarded as economic organization proceededalong national lines.

2) This statement does not require corroborative details, bearing Crom-well and Napoleon In mind. General Washirgton was offered a crown, jmdthere was a strong party with decided monarchical tendencies in the eartrdays or our republic. The recent bourgeois revolution in China ended IBdictatorship.

THE PROBLEM OF NATIONALITY 323

tion. National unity was achieved not as a revoltagainst the feudal class, but with the feudal class ofJunkers in control. Bourgeois democracy remaineda thing of the future. The industrial revolution inGermany strengthened, instead of weakening, themonarchical power. It is fashionable to attributethis development to "Prussia," or to Treitschke andthe peculiarities of the German people. But the re-action, as at previous periods, might have proventemporary (the forces of democracy grew steadily,a whole movement—the Social-Democracy—beingdevoted to the task of completing the bourgeois re-volution) had not a new set of circumstances inter-vened which, instead of finding its interest in theoverthrow of monarchical power, found its interestin its perpetuation,—the advent of Imperialism.

It is not our task at the present moment to discussthe basis of Imperialism, its relation to the economicsof capitalism. It is sufficient for our requirements topoint out that Imperialism assumes the political formof a struggle for the control of territory rich in nat-ural resources and capable of being industrially re-volutionized by the industrialized nation undertakingthe work of "development." Capitalism in its Imper-ialistic phase turns in on itself and reproduces theperiod of its youth, when it struggled for a similarobjective,—with this difference, however: that wherethe earlier struggle created Nationality, the contem-porary struggle for undeveloped territory negatesNationality. This process carries with it a corrolary:as the earlier struggles of capitalism produced warand monarchy, so to-day Imperialism not alone pro-duces war but a tendency toward "strong" govern-ment,—monarchy disguised under a variety of polit-ical forms.3

Germany was united in 1871> and fifteen yearslater its Imperialistic era began. This let loose allthose reactionary tendencies which lead to a revivalof monarchical power. The democratic movementgradually turned Imperialistic, and even the SocialDemocracy became subtly nationalized, until when itexpressed its nationalism at the outbreak of war itsuddenly discovered that its nationalistic positioncommitted it to Imperialism.

German Imperialism rejects the principle ofNationality. The conquest of nations is its politicalobjective, war the medium through which it works.The feudal military caste and the imperial regimeare accepted as means for the prosecution of war andaggression.

The negation of Nationality is not peculiar toGerman Imperialism; it is an attribute of all Imperi-

alism. An Italian Imperialist declaims as follows:"It remains for us to conquer. It is said that all

the other territories are 'occupied.' But there havenever been any territories res mtllius. Strong na-tions, or nations on the path of progress, conquernations in decadence."

A peculiarity of Italian Imperialism, which dis-tinguishes it from other Imperialisms, is that, whilein Germany Imperialism is distinct from nationalism—Imperialism transforming and identifying itselfwith nationalism in order to secure a popular sanc-tion for its purpose—in Italy Imperialism and na-tionalism developed simultaneously and are really acommon movement. This is because Italy was notfully created a nation by its bourgeois revolu-tion. While Italy was created a national state halfa century ago, it was not until some decades agothat a real national sentiment began to animate thecountry. Nationalism and Imperialism developedsimultaneously, and merged into one.4

Imperialism, accordingly, is the negation of Na-tionality because the barriers of the nation are nolonger compatible with the development of the forcesof production. Imperialism seeks to break downthese barriers by means of one nation dominatingother nations. The Socialist solution is not to em-ohasize Nationality, but democratic Federalism.—the submergence of Nationality in a federal union ofthe nations, based upon economic necessity, and or-ganized along democratic lines.

III.The spirit of the demand for new national group-

ings in Europe is just; but the literal fulfillment ofthe demand would emphasize national divisions,create new barriers to the expansive forces of Cap-italism provocative of war, and doom certain nationsto a precarious economic existence.

A stimulating study of the practical aspects ofNationality is contained in Arnold J. Toynbee'sNationality and the War.* It is a really excellentbook in material, scope and treatment,—the onlyadequate study extant of Nationality in its modernEuropean aspects as a practical problem in nationalgroupings.

Toynbee starts out with a fundamental error,which vitiates much of his theoretical discussion,but does not affect—strangely—his practical con-clusions. This error is that Nationality in itself isthe cause of the war. It is an error, however, whichis only partly an error; for Toynbee has in mind the

8) This tendency toward "strong" government is a general phenomenon.In this country it is quite obvious. Imperialism is not the orly factor inthe process. The deeper economic cause, which in itself is a great contri-buting factor toward the rise of Imperialism, is the dominance of great-capital and the decay of the middle class as an independent class. Inthis country the Bryan movement represented the revolt of the middle <-\"sa,the Roosevelt progressive movement the attempt of this class to strike •compromise with plutocracy. This means the abandonment by the middleclaw, the historical carrier of liberal ideas, of Ha liberalism, directlytrmdhif to tin "strong" government of State Socialism.

4) Russia seems on the verge of a similar development. "It(the bour-geoisie) might get along for many years with the aid of internal reforms,especially in agriculture, without further expansion in Asia; that is,through such reforms the development of the internal market might begreatly increased. But internal reforms demand the overthrow of th«Czarism and the abolition of all pre-capitalistic plundering. The Russianbourgeoisie is afraid of the struggle, and so allies itself with Cxsrism, andstrives for new cor quests in the East and South."—Paul Axelrod, NewReview, January, 1915.

5) Nationality and the War. by Arnold J. Toynbee. New York: K. P.Dutton & Co. $2.60, net.

324NEW REVIEW.

eastern field of the war, where the national aspira-tions of the Balkans led directly to the present war.But this is only a minor phase of the war; the nation-al problems of South-Eastern Europe may be fullysolved, but that would not end the struggle betweenAlliance and Entente, it would simply give it a newexpression.

Toynbee's general conclusion is:"The first step toward internationalism is not to

flout the problems of Nationality, but to solve them."How? By accepting—"The principle that the recognition of Nationality

is the necessary foundation for European peace."But in the course of his analysis, Toynbee is com-

pelled to recognize the potency of economics, andsubstantially modifies his conclusion:

"We have to devise a new frontier which shall domore justice than the present national distribution,without running violently counter to economic facts."Again: "Will the centripetal force of economics fin-ally overcome the centrifugal force of Nationality?"

Toynbee emphasizes that in the process of creatingNationality, of securing access to the sea, raw mater-ial and wider markets, Nationality is partly sup-pressed :

"The Hungarians used the liberty they won in1867 to subject the Slavonic population betweenthemselves and the sea, and prevent its union withthe free principality of Serbia of the same SlavonicNationality. This drove Serbia in 1912 to followHungary's example by seizing the coast of the non-Slavonic Albanians; and when Austria-Hungary pre-vented this (a righteous act prompted by most un-righteous motives), Serbia fought an unjust warwith Bulgaria and subjected a large Bulgarian popu-lation, in order to gain access to the only seaboardleft her, the friendly Greek port of Salonika."

The way in which economics dominates National-ity is attested by the Austro-Hungarian Ausgleich,the compromise by which Austria and Hungarymaintain their unity, while each national group isallowed autonomy. The reason for this is economic:"The Ausgleich is simply the political expression ofthe economic situation. The Austrian half of theDual Monarchy corresponds to the industrial regionabove Vienna, the Hungarian half to the agrarianregion below it. Their economic interdependence isrecognized in the common tariff: Hungary abandonsthe possibility of building up an indigenous industryof her own, by protection against Austrian manu-facturers, in order to secure a virtual monopoly ofthe Austrian market for foodstuffs and raw pro-duce."

Toynbee clinches his analysis with a plea for fed-erated nationality:

"The national atom proved less and less capable ofadoption as the political unit. In Central Europe...the Tchechs will be unable to work out their national

salvation as an independent state: the economic fac-tor necessitates their political incorporation in theGerman Empire. In the Balkans the political dis-entanglement of one nationality from another is onlypossible if all alike consent to economic federationin a general zollverein. In the North-East, geograph-ical conditions decree that national individualityshall express itself by devolution within the bond ofthe Russian Empire.6

"In all cases the political unit reveals itself not as asingle nation but as a group of nationalities; yet eventhese groups cannot be entirely sovereign or self-contained. Like the chemist's molecules, they arewoven out of relations between atoms, and are boundin their turn to enter into relation with one another.

"The nationalities of the South-East coalesce in aBalkan Zollverein; the Zollverein as a whole is in-volved by mutual economic interests with itsneighbor molecule, the Russian Empire; similar ne-cessity produces similar contact between the RussianEmpire and Norway or Persia. The simple unina-tional molecules of the West and the complex multi-national molecules of the East and Centre all disposethemselves as parts of a wider organism—theEuropean system."

The practical problem is no longer simply one ofNationality, but of economics plus democracy,—thedemocratic, autonomous federation of nationalitiesand nations. The process of capitalist developmentwhich created the nation at the same time created itas an economic unit. A nation must be an economicunit, otherwise it cannot survive. Virtually none ofthe subject nationalities in Europe can create a na-tion economically self-sufficient. The problem solvesitself if democratically approached.

The larger practical aspects are clear: Insofar asEurope is concerned, democratic federalism is theonly alternative to Imperialism,—the only demo-cratic, peaceful and civilized way of solving the eco-nomic problem involved in Imperialism. But theproblem alters itself in non-European countriesstruggling for Nationality. In China and Mexico,for example, the problem must temporarily be solvedalong strictly national lines,—the development of anational capitalism, national government and insti-tutions. And this suggests the great problem of thenear future: granting that Europe federates, maynot federated Europe crush these backward nations?The new Socialist international must meet this prob-lem with an uncompromising demand for nationalself-government of these peoples. The revolutionaryproletariat alone can compel the democratic federa-tion of the nations of Europe and the ultimatefederation of the world.

6) Toynbee says about Poland: "The majority of the Polish nationunder Russian rule has actually benentted economically by its subjection,and economics have gone far towards settling the political destinies ofthe whole reunited Poland, for whose creation we now hope. Even hereighteen millions canrot stand by themselves, with no coast-line and Mphysical frontiers. She must go into partnership with one of her larcttneighbors."

THE MIND OF A CENSOR 325

The Mind of A CensorBy Floyd Dell

THE old-fashioned censor had a simple ifobjectionable way of thinking. He thoughtthat if people were let alone, they would

read or hear or see what wasn't good for them.He believed he knew what was good for them. Andhe considered it his duty to sift the good from thebad, and to see that the bad was suppressed. In aword, he believed in censorship.

The modern censor doesn't believe in censorship,lie can't, because he is an enlightened person, andenlightened people don't. In regard to the theatres—if he is a theatrical or, say, a moving picture censor—he is particularly opposed to censorship. He feelsthat the theatre especially must be free. To nocensor, he feels, dare we commit the censorship ofthis institution.

You see that the modern censor really is anenlightened person.

The modern censor moreover feels that the under-lying presumption of censorship—the presumptionthat people need protection, most of all — is amistaken one.

The modern censor points out that there is some-tiling wanted even more urgently than the spreadingof moral precepts: and that is the lifting of taboos.Censorship, in whatever hands, he says, mustinevitably find it hard to do other than reaffirm theprevailing popular taboos.

Lest you think this a fanciful description, let mequote Mr. John Collier. Mr. Collier is thefounder of the National Board of Censorship ofMoving Pictures. He has always disbelieved incensorship—not only, he tells us, on grounds ofpracticability, but as a matter of principle. He is notnow actively associated with the Board of Censor-ship, but he endorses its position and general results,and holds its work to be still necessary. He doesnot believe in censorship, however, and feels that thecensorship instituted by himself is a temporaryexpedient. In fact, it was because he did not believein censorship that he founded the Board. Hisexperiences have been only strengthened by hisexperience, and he is firm in the conviction thatcensorship is a bad thing, and that censorship orsome form of artificial control is necessary for thetime being.

In an article in the Survey for October 2, Mr.Collier explains why the National Board wasnecessary, why it continues as the most approxi-mately satisfactory method of film regulation yetdevised, and why he has always been opposed tocensorship. But let me quote:

"Censorship is impracticable and dangerous,

because the means involved are too crude for theends sought; are indeed largely unrelated to the endssought; and because the indirect damage of censor-ship infinitely exceeds the direct good which maybe accomplished.

"Fundamentally, the theatre, while truly an agentof preventive morality in one of its aspects, is inanother aspect just as truly an agent of necessaryadventure—an agent of challenge, of conflict, evenof revolution ...

"These are considerations which indicate thedanger of theatrical censorship to society; theymake of the theatre, from the standpoint of demo-cracy, a tremendously important, even a sacred in-stitution. The theatre is an institution for thedevelopment of the new world-views; such develop-ment is possibly the supreme contribution of ourpresent age to human history. To no censor — tono conceivable agent of government or extra-govern-mental power — dare we commit the censorship ofthis process of spiritual revolution.

"The underlying presumption of censorship—the presumption that protection is the controllingneed of the people—is a mistaken one. The peoplemost of all need not protection but life. That theymay have life in greater abundance: This is the lastmoral command. The only moral protection that isultimately possible, for those who must go theirways in the modern free-moving world, is knowledgeand life.

"Is it too much to suggest that the lifting oftaboos, the bold facing out of realities and of pointsof view, especially in the sphere of sexual interestsis needed no less urgently than the spreading ofmoral precepts? It could be argued, if space per-mitted, that such a lifting of taboos is a necessarypreliminary to the work, which must somehow beperformed, of draining off our vast racial impurity.Cansorship, even in the unconstrained hands of theNational Board of Censorship, finds it extremelyhard to do other than re-affirm or shift the prevail-ing popular taboos."

As an example of the popular taboos which eventhe National Board of Censorship can do no otherthan affirm, I quote the following Rules, one inforce, the other pending adoption:

SECTION 41. "An adequate motive for committinga crime is always necessary to warrant picturingit... It is desirable that the criminal be punishedin some way, but the board does not always insiston this . . . The results of the crime should be inthe long run disastrous to the criminal so that theimpression is that crime will inevitably find one out.The result (punishment) should always take areasonable proportion of the film."

"The National Board of Censorship will condemnthe presentation of complex and intricate themes

326NEW REVIEW

presenting the details of the life of the so-calledwanton heroine and her companion when theseare shown as attractive and successful. It will notallow the extended display of personal allurements,the exposure of alleged physical charms andpassionate, protracted embraces. It will also dis-approve the showing of men turning lightly fromwoman to woman, or women turning lightly fromman to man in intimate sexual relationships. Itprohibits the spectacle of the details of actualphysical fights engaged in between women and dis-approves of all such contests in which a woman isroughly handled. It disapproves also of the con-doning by pure women, in motion pictures, of flag-

rant moral lapses in men, presented in detail and atlength."

Any self-respecting artist, if confronted by suchlimitations in his art, would want to curse God anddie. If moving pictures are ever to become an art,they must be free, not merely to be good, but to bebad. Suckled at the breast of the National Boardof Censorship on the milk of sociological virtue,they will remain infantile. Mr. Collier doubtlessagrees to this — he agrees to everything I couldpossibly say on the subject. He is opposed to Cen-sorship—firmly opposed. There is no use sayinganything. Mr. Collier has said it all. Read hisarticle.

India and the EmpireBy "Baghi"

[This is the second of a series of two articles on India inthe Present Crisis. "Baghi" is the psyeudonym of a prom-inent Hindu Radical. Throughout this article "Hindu" means"East Indian" without reference to his religious affilia-tions.—Ed. NEW REVIEW.]

WHAT is the true significance of the fabulous

aid the Hindu Princes have rendered toEngland in this crisis? Hindu Princes, we

read in newspapers, are the "natural leaders" of theIndian peoples; hence their act and word may wellbe taken as representative of the attitude of theentire Indian peoples. How far this is true we shallnow see.

There are in India about seven hundred noblemenwho bear the various princely titles of Rajas, Maha-rajas, Nawabs, Nizam. But the number of those whohave real ruling powers is less than three dozen. Themore powerful of these potentates indeed bear swayover vast estates. The Nizam of Hyderabad rulesover a kingdom as large as that of Italy. One-fifthof the entire population of India, sixty millions, isunder the rule of the big and small Indian princes.The remaining four-fifths (two hundred and fortymillions) is under direct British administration. Allthe Princes are under British suzerainty. Theystand to the English government in about the samerelationship as the German princes do to the Kaiser,and in some respects as the native British potentatedid to the Norman Kings, after the Norman con-quest. It is a curiously blended system, a super-imposition of imperialism over feudalism.

An illustration may help to clarify the situation.In the original treaty drawn up between the Nizamof Hyderabad and the British government, the for-mer is described as the friend and ally of the latter.This treaty has never been abrogated or modified.But, of course, it has been long ago consigned to ob-livion. The Nizam is to-day in sooth, not an ally but

a subject chieftain of the British government.British policy towards native Princes is highlyelastic. Under the plea that new exigencies call fornew interpretations of the precedents guiding themutual relations of the British and the nativePrinces, it seeks to encroach more and more on staterights. If, as sometimes happens, the oppositionoffered by a state government is very strong, it re-mains stationary, or may for a time, even recede.More frequently, however, it succeeds in makingheadway and takes advantage of every change ordisturbance that occurs in the internal metabolismof the state. Such crises occur, for instance, whenthe ruler of a state dies, or a change in the ministrybecomes necessary. The accesion to the rulershipof a state is hereditary, devolving on the eldest son.But the Imperial government must set its seal ofapproval on the new arrangement. Here comes itschance. When the ruling Prince of Patiala, Maha-raja Bhupendra Singh reached the age of majority,about 1910, the council of regency, composed ofnative statesmen working under the direct controlof Colonel Sir Dunlop Smith, the British resident,who had governed the state during the Prince'sminority, sent word to the Viceroy that the time hadarrived for the Prince to assume the rulership ofhis state. The Viceroy, (it was the late Earl ofMinto) demurred. In his opinion the Prince shouldhave waited a few years more. Meanwhile the statewas groaning under the tyranny of direct Britishadministration — of British officials, like the wilydiplomat, Col. Dunlop Smith, the efficiently rapaciousrevenue-officer, Popham Young, of the devil incar-nate, the Chief of Police, Col. Warburton. The Princeof Patiala was, however, an unusually bold andpugnacious youth and could not easily be put down.So the British Government in effect said: "We giveyou a year's trial. If you succeed in winning our

INDIA AND THE EMPIRE 327

confidence, we will approve the assumption by youof full powers." The Prince understood well enoughin what way to assure and please the British govern-ment. At the first opportunity that offered itself,he made a highly sensational public speech assert-ing his personal loyalty and that of his people to thebenevolent British government. He made largerdonations to the numerous British subscriptionlists, such as that of the King Edward VII memorialfund; he presented to Earl Kitchener an aeroplanefor the use of the British army; and last, but notleast, permitted the notorious Police Chief, War-burton, to launch prosecutions against the AryaSamajists, a band of social reformers. The DonQuixotic efforts of the young Prince to smash thewind-mill of reform and progress, afforded the Im-perial government much glee and eminent satis-faction. After about a year's probation, the Princereceived the customary investiture of full powersfrom the Imperial hands. The hold of the Britishgovernment on the present ruler of Patiala is muchtighter than it was on his grandfather.

The best chance for the Imperial governmentcomes when a ruler dies without leaving a directheir. Out of the several claimants to the throne, theone who is the greatest sycophant of the Britishsucceeds. Such a situation is going to arise in thestate of Jaipur. Affairs of that state well illustrateanother point. Some fifteen years ago, the PrimsMinister of the state was Kanti Chandra Mukerjee,a man whose forceful personality had defied the Im-perial government time and again. Lord Curzon,who was then the Indian Viceroy must have heaveda sigh of relief at the news of the Premier's death.Now began an interesting game of oriental diplo-macy. The British government wanted to have oneof their own tools appointed to the Premiership. TheMaharaja of Jaipur would not have him. He pre-ferred his own man, San Ser Chandra Sen, an oldBengali gentleman. Now Curzon was strenuouslyopposed to the appointment in native states of anyBengalese on account of their alleged nationalistictendencies. The wily Maharaja declared that underthe circumstances he would do without a Prime Min-ister; but nevertheless kept Mr. Sen to do all thework. In about 1910 death took this gentlemanaway and the chance for which the Imperial govern-ment had been waiting offered itself. The Britishdemanded the appointment to Premiership of theirtool, Nawab Fyaz Ali. The Maharaja hated thearrangement from the bottom of his heart. Hewanted, it was rumored, to appoint Sukh Dev Pra-aad, formerly the Minister of Jodhpur, a reallycapable man. All his efforts proved unsuccessful,only showing how a Hindu Prince is helpless againstthe Imperial power. So though the nominal head ofthe state is the Maharaja, the real head is the tool ofthe British government. The only way the Prince

avenges himself, it is said, is by delaying to assignhis signature to papers sent to him by his PrimeMinister. It reminds one of Gladstone's well knownsaying about the late Kingdom of Naples, that itsgovernment was a negation of God.

As every change in the internal economy of thestate—a change in officials for instance—may givethe British overlord an occasion for interference,the Indian states have developed an exceedingly con-servative temperament. Like invalids, they areafraid to try new modes of living, lest any change intheir metabolism might bring on another attack ofthe dreaded malady.

While the British government may at any time re-quisition from the ruler of a Hindu state an accountor explanation of his doings, the people of his ownstate have over him no check or control. The govern-ment of a native state is a purely arbitrary one-manrule. There are no popular representation and con-trol, no constitutional laws or assemblies. The aimof British policy is best served by the maintenanceand continuance of this arrangement. A single in-dividual, a timid or grateful Prince or PrimeMinister, can easily be turned into a tool or a puppet;but not so a constitutional government, deriving itssanction and support from the people.

At the court of every Prince, resides a Britishofficer, called the political agent or resident, who isas if the lever by means of which the Imperialgovernment exerts its influence. He is generallyan accomplished diplomat, who by alternate threatsand cajolery, succeeds in winding the puppet Princearound his little finger. His orders, often veiledas advice or suggestions, come to the Prince as tohow much tribute and in what form should berendered the Imperial government from the re-sources of the State.

The British government exacts from the pettyprincipalities heavy tribute indeed. Permit me tosubmit an illustration. Jhind is a small but in-fluential Punjab state. It has a population of aboutthree hundred thousand—mostly peasant farmers.Its gross annual revenue is about $400,000, smallenough in all sooth for its requirements. About one-fifth of this goes to the privy purse of the Prince;about as much or more for the support of the Im-perial Service Troops (a tribute to the British).What remains, less than $300,000 is a pitifully smallsum for the purposes of administration. Almostevery department, police, judiciary, sanitary andeducational, suffers from a chronic lack of funds.There is evidently not an extra cent to be sent out.Yet the dues of Caesar must be rendered. Take theone year period, 1910-1911:

KING EDWARD DIES:State contributes towards the memorial about 8

per cent, of her entire revenues.

328NEW REVIEW

KING GEORGE ASCENDS THRONES:Coronation in London. State sends deputation.

Expenses between 25-35 per cent of annual revenue.LEUT.-GOV. OF PUNJAB (Louis DANE) BRIT. OFF.

VISITS :Expenses on his entertainment, 38,000 rupees

(about three per cent of annual revenue).

KING GEORGE'S CORONATION IN DELHI :Must have cost the state easily from two to three

hundred thousand rupees, that is about 25 per centof the entire annual revenue.

To sum up, within a single year, or a little over,the state spent in the interests of the British govern-ment a sum of money amounting to two-thirds of itsentire gross income for the period.

Such high finance tricks cannot be performed bymerely starving out the internal administration. Allthe petty reserves and savings are emptied out andresort is often had to borrowing. In levying exac-tions on the native states the British governmentfollows in pitiless and cold-blooded fashion, themaxim, "charge all the traffic will bear."

The British learned that the state of Gwaliar hadan accumulated reserve of some $30,000,000 (En-cyclopedia Britt. ed. 10th and llth). The Imperialmouth began to water. But how to get the temptingmouthful? John Bull's wit was not up to his bovinegreed. So he adopted the direct method of "standand deliver". In the cryptic language of the Encyc-lopedia Brittanica (llth Ed.) two million sterlingwere loaned to the British government of India in1887, and one million sterling later on. That is, theImperial government found an excuse to take overfrom Gwaliar nearly one half of its reserves. TheHindu Princes are so situated, indeed, that for allpractical purposes they function not as the guardiansof their people, but as gun men appointed over themnot by John D., but by John Bull.

We now see the nature of the relationship existingbetween the English government and Hindu princes.So when you read in an English paper that someRajah has made a magnificent donation towards theBritish war fund, paraphrase this statement asthus: "The British government has exacted from acertain Rajah a magnificent tribute." It is a satis-faction to me to see that I can quote in support of mycontention the high authority of the present IndianViceroy, Lord Harding. At the Gwaliar state ban-quet, given on March 31st last, he is reported to havesaid that the outburst of loyal davotion shown bythe ruling Princes was not unexpected by those whoknew the traditions of the states, but it came as arevelation to the outside world. (India, London,April 30th, 1915.) In other words, it is a longestablished tradition for the puppet Princes to keeppaying to the British unceasing tribute, and it wasonly to be expected that at a time like the present,

the amount of tribute should arise to figures fabu-lously high. The promptness with which IndianPrinces responded to the distress call of Britain, isnot surprising either. At the time of the last DelhiDurbar, 1911, King George warned the HinduPrinces, in private interviews, against the influenceof nationalism, and also told them to be ready forthe great European war. So the Princes knew be-forehand that they had to lay by for the evil day.

Take the case of Gwaliar again. Its gross annualrevenue is five million dollars. From this amountmust be met all the multifarious needs of administ-ration of a state extending over twenty-nine thous-and square miles, and inhabited by more than threemillion people. The people are extremely poor, andnone of their essential needs, sanitation, education,are properly attended to. Death and starvation keepever hovering like greedy vultures; and not onedecent college exists for all those three millions. Buthow is then the public money spent? About one-third of the entire gross revenue is absorbed an-nually by the Imperial Service Troops, a little armywhich the state has to keep for the exclusive benefitof the British government, hence the designation,Imperial Service. The Gwaliar force has been re-quisitioned for service in Europe. It consists ofthree regiments of cavalry, two battallions of in-fantry, and a transport corps. The expenditure onit in peace times is about one half a million rupees,annually. The state has also to bear the expenses ofthe European expedition. Over and above this, theruler of Gwaliar has made the following war do-nations to the British: (India, London, April 30th,1915).1. Six aeroplanes, armored and equipped

with guns, estimated cost $250,0002. British War Relief Fund 250,0003. Equipping the Loyalty Ship 200,0004. Motor Cars (Ambulances) 250,000

That is, from a state whose entire annual revenueis $5,000,000 the British government has taken up todate in war contributions, nearly $2,000,000. Like asensible man of the world, the Hindu Prince makesa virtue of necessity. He disguises his helplessnessunder a smile in an assumed spirit of good fellow-ship. A man finds himself suddenly surrounded bya band of armed brigands; yet he retains presenceof mind and pleasantly says: "Hello comrades!Why, of course, you are in need! Please dont mentionit! I am only too glad to help you! Here is mypurse! Good luck!"

We understand why we should not be surprised atthe contribution in men and money which the IndianPrinces are reported to have made to the Britishcause. But the papers have reported that some of theIndian Princes had themselves gone to the front tofight. I am convinced that they will do no morefighting than King George does when he is reported

INDIA AND THE EMPIRE 329

to be visiting the front. Not a single Hindu Princehas yet come to harm. And yet we know they do notcarry charmed lives. Among the notable HinduPrinces reported last Fall to have gone to the Frontwas the Maharaja of Kapur-Thala. But His High-ness, together with his court ladies, is now attendingto his accustomed round of luxuries in this country.Evidently he got tired of leading an inactive andmonotonous life in the wake of the Anglo-Frencharmies. The Hindu Prince's pilgrimage to Europewas a purely dramatic move. It helped to raise theprestige of the British government in the eyes ofthe outside world. The Princes, for their participa-tion in the show, will get a few more empty titles."The Stars of India" will now become the "Suns ofIndia." Under the circumstances, the strange thingis that only a very few Princes have gone to thefront—about twenty out of over seven hundred. Andthe case of each one of these twenty will be found onclose examination to have in it some peculiar twist.What inspired the Kapur-Thala already mentioned,was not a devotion to John Bull, but an ardent feel-ing for Mile. Paris.

Now, when Englishmen speak of a Hindu Prince'sloyalty, what do they exactly mean? Do they meanthat a Hindu Prince is loyal to the British King inthe same sense that an English Duke is; or a GermanPrince is to the Kaiser? In the case of an English orGerman Prince, loyalty is only another name fornational feeling. In the case of the Hindu Prince,obviously it cannot be so. The State and the Nationin India are not controvertible terms. They are in-deed antagonistic conceptions. There can be only onesense in which Hindu Princes can be called loyal."Loyalty consists", says Dr. Thorstein Veblen, "insubservience to the common war-chief and hisdynastic successors." (Instinct of Workmanship, p.161).

Such a sentiment of loyalty would be quite in keep-ing with the rest of the Hindu Princes' habitualsocial outlook, which is feudalistic and medieval.However, there are difficulties. Most of the power-ful Princes have ancient regal pedigrees, and con-sequently possess a keen and haughty pride of race.They regard the British an upstarts, with the man-ners of dealers in hardware. How can noble lords,with mythological pedigrees regard a shop-keeper,however powerful, as their liege lord or war-chief?There are, however, other "Princes" who do not feelquite the same qualms of conscience. For an analogyI refer to Jane Porter's "Scottish Chiefs". Let ussee who are our Princes and Wallaces, and who theRed cummins. For the purpose in hand, the chief-tains of India may well be classified as thus:

I.POTENTIAL WALLACE-BRUGES.

(a) Rajput Princes and their like: e. g. Udaipur

(origin: far back in Middle Ages. Possess haughtyrace-pride; hold the foreigner in contempt.)

(b) "Originally Allies": e. g. Nizam, Baroda, etc.(Sikhs, Maharattas—Hyderabad group. In Eight-eenth Century rivals of the British for Politicalsupremacy. Later on became "allies" on status ofequality.)

II.CAN BE EXPECTED TO BE LOYAL IN VEBLEN'S SENSE.

The Grateful Princes or British Creatures: e. g.Sir Pertap of Idar, Maharaja of Benares; Jam Ran-jit Singh; even Mysore. Have arisen to chieftain-ship by the grace of the British. A duplication ofNapoleon's policy under the Empire, when he createdPrinces like Tallyrand and Marat.

Now it is precisely these Princes falling in groupII—"The British Creatures"—who have been ex-hibiting their "loyalty" with considerable noise andbombast. Their worth, in the eyes of their country-men, is small. But they are extremely useful to theBritish government who employs them to inject someof their "loyalty" into the Princes belonging to thefirst group. The name that will occur in this con-nection to every one's mind, is that of Maharaja SirPertap Singh. This nobleman is a past-master in theart of demonstrating "loyalty" to the ImperialPower. He is Major General of the British Armyand has been in numerous British campaigns. Hehelped Curzon in organising the Imperial CadetCorps. It was only a few years ago that the Britishrewarded him for his loyal subservience, by the be-stowal on him of the rulership of a very petty state,Idar. He, with his small following, have gone to thefront. Pertap is a shrewd old man, and has wieldedenormous influence over a group of young Princes,the foremost among whom are Ganga Singh of Bika-neer, and through him the present Gwaliar, thepresent Alwar, and the late Jodpur. One may fairlydub them as the Mayo College group.

The Mayo College at Ajmere; the Aitchison Col-lege at Lahore and a few others were founded withmoney obtained from the Native States, of course,for the "exclusive education of the Princes and theruling aristocracy". The older generation of Prin-ces feel very suspicious of these institutions wheretheir noble youth, in the name of education, learnto despise their time-honored native luxuries, andto take to all the English vices, including Englishwhiskey and English women. The harem of the"educated and enlightened" Hindu ruler of Jhind ispresided over by an English woman, who beforeentering the harem, used to go about as a circus girlunder her maiden name, Miss Oliver. The atmos-phere of the Court of Jhind is like that of the parlorof a well-to-do Eurasian gentleman.

Various and devious are the means adopted tocreate among Hindu Princes a sentimental attach-ment for things English, dead or alive. All classes

330NEW REVIEW

of people in India look with disapproval upon bothtypes of "loyal Princes"—viz. those whom I havedubbed "British Creatures" on account of theirorigin, and those who have been anglicized throughprolonged contact with either or all of these:—English Tutors, English whiskey and Englishwomen. The fact is that the less subservient aPrince is to the British, the more popular he is. APrince who defies the Imperial government becomesimmediately a popular idol, a national hero:—e. g.the late Tukaji Rao of Indore; and the present Gaek-war of Baroda.

To sum up:The fact that the British government has received

in the present crisis, considerable aid in men andmoney from the Hindu Princes does not signify thatIndia is loyal or devoted to, or even in real sympathywith, the British Cause.

(1) Indian Princes are not organized in a union.They cannot resist Imperial demands. They arehelpless puppets.

(2) If a few of them are "loyal" enough for prac-tical purposes, they are so either through a narrowselfishness; or through corruption by Englishluxury.

(3) As a class they have to play the part of con-servative tyrants. The British governments supportthem in their tyranny.

Premature Peace?By S. J. Rutgers

THERE is a general feeling among belligerent

Socialists against what is called "prematurepeace," a feeling that seems also to prevail

in neutral countries.In Germany, this feeling expresses itself in the

demand for war until British naval supremacy isdestroyed: among the Allies, it assumes the form of"War to the finish" against German militarism.And each group argues that its victory alone willliberate Europe from future wars.

Most workers will admit, that the destruction ofBritish "Navalism" would simply give to some othernation or group of nations the power to rob theworld, and that Imperialism and future wars wouldnot cease. But there seems to be a feeling that thereis a magic power in crushing German militarism. Ifwe ask for the reasons of this feeling, we are mostlikely to hear great noise about Kaiserism, junker-ism, absolutism, barbarism, etc., against which civil-ization and democracy are supposed to be fighting.By this democracy is meant the corrupt financialplutocracy of France and the hypocritical and aristo-cratic government of England. And although fewsocialists will deny that those democracies have onlya slight resemblance to real, proletarian democracy,

there will often be expressed a feeling, that this atleast might be a beginning of something better. Itseems to me, that this "illusion" is a rather danger-ous one, and that it has done much to vitiate socialistopinions about the future.

Already before this war broke out, there was atendency away from democracy. Where the form ofa middle class democracy remained, there was arapid change towards the supremacy of financialcapital with its Imperialistic tendencies. Imperial-ism, the cause of the present war, is the reverse ofdemocracy; and, it is not likely that an Imperialisticwar should end in an approach to democracy.

Whatever may be the outcome of this war, finan-cial capital will become more dominant, with moreImperialism and less democracy. That the war willlead to the ruin of many small capitalists and to anenormous concentration of capital under control ofthe large bankers, needs no proof. This financialcapital has the tendency to conquer the world forprofits, regardless of civilization and without anyscruples as to robbery and murder. Recent eventsall over the world prove this. And if it should hap-pen, as some believe, that an important part of con-centrated capital will be under the direct control ofthe state, it will but strengthen the Imperialistic andanti-democratic tendencies

How can we expect democracy and permanentpeace under such circumstances? A still moreillusory form of democracy, is all that can be ex-pected, and that would be worse than direct govern-ment by plutocracy, even worse than a capitalisticgovernment using a feudal class in its service. Theresults will be the same, only it will be still moredifficult for the workers to recognize the fraud andto fight it

Peace between the nations under capitalism couldbe possible only if the robber-capitalists all over theworld combine in one organization against labor.But this situation, which would be most disad-vantageous to the working class, is by no means tobe expected in the near future, because there is toomuch difference of interests between the capitalisticgroups and because there are no other means fordividing the world than power, a power that ischanging every day with the changing economicdevelopment of the different nations.

In the period of commercial colonialism therecould be to a certain degree, some automatic relationbetween the economic development of a nation andits commerce. Our modern colonial problems are inthe first place problems of investments and monopo-lies, and as soon as there are important modificationsin the relative economic power of nations or groupsof nations, a new orientation is possible only by anappeal to power, which under the circumstances maylead to war.

CAPTURED 331

Only in a future, much farther away than the endof the present war, can there be imagined a develop-ment of capitalism all over the world to such a degreeof equality, that there would be one nation of capi-talists against the workers all over the world. Ifsocialism will prove unfit to get into power beforethis fatal situation will be reached, labor will mostprobably have to go through a series of wars ofwhich the present war is the fearful prelude.

There is only one force, that can stop this dis-astrous fate, if it puts to this gigantic task thewhole of its energy: the international proletariat.But then the workers need an insight into the generallines of development. There must be no optimisticidea about this war being the last war, or that onlyone or another nation should have to be crushed.Let us acknowledge that labor failed all over theworld to oppose Imperialism with the existing na-tional organizations, and let us learn from this defeatto resist the next war as one international organi-zation.

From this point of view, it is not so much import-tant what the national results of this war will be,but it is most important that the working classshould not be weakened to the extent that it will beunable to perform its future task. This does notmean that the issue of the present war is of no con-cern to labor. But the proletariat m'ist have its ownway of fighting and cannot gain by supporting cap-italistic wars. It is the same as with politics. Evenif it should be a concern of labor whether the demo-cratic, the republican or the progressive party shouldbe victorious, this would not prevent socialists fromvoting their own party, whatever the direct resultsmight be.

Labor must oppose every form of militarism, be-cause militarism in its present state of developmentis one of the most important expressions of capitalistinterests, the centre of Imperialism. And grantingthat we have to fight militarism, we surely cannotstop fighting it because it assumes its most aggres-sive form of actual war.

Labor failed all over the world in its fight againstmilitarism, but this should be no reason for puttingour hope on the results of this war, that we vainlytried to prevent. Labor failed and surrendered tocapital, but this very fact makes it rather worthlessto talk about socialist peace programs, behind whichthere is no power and which are doomed to have nopractical effect.

To regain influence, labor first of all will have toregain its class-consciousness, its fighting poweragainst the capitalist class on the national as well ason the international field. This means to put an endto the "Burgfrieden" (civil peace) and to protestagainst national war in the press as well as on thestreet, which no doubt would result in the suspension

of socialist papers and the shooting of the proletarianprotestants. But at the same time the fighting spiritin the trenches would stop, so as to make peace theonly possible issue.

This is the way labor could have a real influenceand such a peace never would be premature. Evenif this should result in a defeat of the capitalisticinterests in the country where the socialist spiritshould prove strongest, such a defeat would mean abig victory for Socialism. Conditions in the leadingEuropean countries have developed far enough tomake it utterly impossible, that one nation shouldkeep another as a vassal state on account of the latterbeing too far advanced in socialist feeling. More-over such a spirit can only develop in mutual support,internationally.

If we expect that labor will not recover during thepresent war, so as to push forward its own way offorcing peace, all we can hope is, that it will immedi-ately regain its self respect and fighting power afterthe war. No doubt the chances will be far betterthen, and the sooner we get this better chance, theearlier our victory. But for this kind of peace wecannot depend upon the battlefield and economic con-ditions beyond our control; and it is dangerous tocherish the illusion of power while neglecting thepower labor could actually have.

CapturedBy Anna Strunsky Walling

H OW insidious it is!The exquisite woman standing in themiddle of the room receiving her friends.

Her interest in him, for the moment so un-feigned, her sympathy so quick and unreserved-she draws him irresistibly to cross over to whereshe stands in the nebulous clouds that always, un-aware to him, had shrouded her class.

So subtly and unalterably different from him, yetshe draws him irresistibly—and suddenly he tra-verses the world yawning between them.

Something begins to give way—his belief in thepeople, in their inviolate strength, in their inalien-able right to all of life. Something gives way, some-thing begins to sink—his faith, his hope flicker andalmost go out. He is not aware of his sudden empti-ness. He feels wonderfully at home in the camp ofthe enemy, wonderfully at ease in the skin-lined denof the despoilers.

The fire in the hearth leaps and casts beautifullights over the exquisite face of his hostess, overthe unparalleled tapestries on the wall. Meaning-less, hopeless, purposeless he stays on.

The waiting world recedes.Empty and cold he remains by the treacherous

warmth of the enemy's hearth.

332NEW REVIEW

The Mechanics of SolidarityBy Austin Lewis

SOLIDARITY cannot be regarded as the result

of a propaganda. No amount of preachingof solidarity will bring about the fact. No

altruistic campaign to persuade the better estab-lished working class into lending aid and comfort tothe less favorably placed in the struggle with theemployer will achieve results.

Altruism has, however, heretofore formed thebasis of such appeals as have been made to the betterpaid portion of the working class on behalf of thoseothers. No wonder it has not succeeded. Altruismis no more appropriate to the labor movement thanto any other of the economic and industrial depart-ments of human life. A comparatively well-to-doartisan will not put himself out on behalf of an un-skilled workman any more than a well-to-do traderfor a small business man, unless by so doing heactually and directly benefits himself.

We have seen that such efforts as have been madeby the crafts towards the organization of migratorylabor and the unskilled have had the well-being of thecrafts in view rather than that of the unskilled whowere the hypothetical beneficiaries.

This does not attribute any particular hard-heart-edness to the crafts. It merely shows the sufficientlyobvious fact- that the members of the crafts arehuman beings, subject to the same laws as otherhuman beings, and that their own economic securityand well-being are their prime considerations.

Solidarity, like all economic and political progress,must come from below, not from above. The craftswill not help the unskilled; hence it follows that theunskilled must help themselves.

But why did the unskilled not help themselveslong, long ago? What reasons have we for suppos-ing that they are more likely to struggle towardstheir emancipation to-day than hitherto? Theunskilled could not hitherto have made a coherentand justifiable attempt at self-emancipation. On thecontrary, the conditions which would render such astruggle at all feasible are only just beginning toappear.

If economics, as Hegel said, belong to the categoryof history, all the manifestations of proletarianstruggle belong also to the same category. No mani-festation of any value can take place until the eco-nomic and industrial environment is suited to theproduction and development of that manifestation.

We have seen the rise of premature proletarianmovements posited on some fine sounding theory, thesaid theory in itself containing much truth. We haveseen also the disappearance of the same movements

accompanied by an inordinate amount of sufferingand disillusionment which might otherwise havebeen saved. The statement of Marx in hisEighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte unavoid-ably recurs in this connection. Says Marx:

"Proletarian revolutions . . . criticize themselvesconstantly; interrupt themselves in their own course,come back to what seems to have been accomplishedin order to start over anew; scorn with cruelthoroughness the half measures, weaknesses andmeanesses of their first attempts; seem to throwdown their adversary only in order to enable him todraw fresh strength from the earth and again to riseup against them in more gigantic stature; constantlyrecoil in fear before the undefined monster magni-tude of their own objects—until finally that situationis created which renders all retreat impossible andthe conditions themselves cry Hie Rhodus, hie salta."

Without committing one's self to the apparentcatastrophism of the latter part of the statementthis continual tendency on the part of the labormovement to retrace its steps and to double backupon itself is a very well established phenomenon.Now and again the theory pushes ahead of the facts,and the abstraction produced makes a false dawnwhich the facts themselves in the long run dispel.

The position of the social democratic movementwith respect to the present European war is an in-stance of just this sort of mistaken enthusiasm.The social democrats were so certain that their poli-tical and anti-military propaganda was destined toprevent a European War that, when the circum-stances arose which called for their active inter-vention, they were paralyzed and horrified at thediscovery that they had no real power. The fact thatthere was no real solidarity of labor in the politicalpropaganda, and that the craft organization of in-dustry gave them no control over the industry, wastaught by one order of mobilization more completelythan by all the arguments of all the syndicaliststhrough many energetic years. Only one thing couldhave stopped that war,—the solidarity of labor.Such solidarity is a fact and not a theory, a factwhich must ultimately confront the governmentsand which, of itself, would be the most complete safe-guard against international war.

Such solidarity results from other economic factsand is the product of automatically working factorsin industrial life. It is not to be had for the preachingor the wishing. No sleek orator can evolve it fromthe sinuosities of tortured speech. It is not made;it proceeds.

THE MECHANICS OF SOLIDARITY 333

Let us consider the question of the former inabil-ity of the unskilled to help themselves, that is to getsuch standing ground as would enable them to makea contest on their own behalf against the employer,on the one hand, and to impress themselves upon therest of the organized trades on the other.

The relation of the unskilled to the trades has notbeen unlike that of the trades to the small bour-geoisie. The young man who started out too poor toafford apprenticeship and whose position in thesocial scale was such as did not entitle him to theadvantage of a trade, looked forward to learningsuch trade as an ultimate or taking advantage of theamount of free land and the frontier, went forth toestablish himself in the wild. The social gulf be-tween the skilled and the unskilled man has alwaysbeen greater than can be understood except by thosewho have had actual experience of it. The small bour-geois had his small property or his small business,the craftsman had his craft, property also, but theunskilled had nothing but physical strength whichwas useless as a basis of organization under an eco-nomic system which constantly dissipated it. Whereindustry rested on a basis of skill, that is specializedcraft training, the possessors of that skill controlledthe labor side of the controversy. For they alonehad the power of actively interfering with the pro-cess of production on the labor side. They were theonly people with whom the employers could treat.Indeed, they were the only persons with whom it waspossible to make treaties, for they were the only per-sons who could organize and make organized de-mands. Since these organizations were possessedof a certain property, namely, skill, they made agree-ments with the employers in terms of property, thatis, they made contracts. By these they agreed toemploy their skill property regularly for an agreedlength of time in accordance with certain agreedconditions.

This state of things marks the position of theAmerican Federation of Labor; it is in fact the just-ification of as well as the reason for its existence.

It is very clear that the unskilled had, under thesecircumstances, no opportunity for organization.They had indeed no mind for organization for therewas clealy nothing in terms of which they couldorganize. It is true, that attempts were made toorganize them at times, such as that of Joseph Archto organize the agricultural laborers of England.But such efforts were spasmodic, transitory, anddoomed to be unrelated to the great labor struggle.

It is evident enough, as it is historically true, thatorganizations of unskilled labor could not be createdwhere the conditions involved the employment ofisolated groups of unskilled, or where the skill of theartisan was the principal factor and the work of theunskilled was entirely subsidiary to and dependentupon the skilled.

This was recognized by the Socialist writers whoapply the term "labor" exclusively to that skilledlabor which they consider capable of organization.The labor movement to the average Socialist is theorganized trade union movement, the organizationof the skilled. Outside of this the mass of the un-skilled are contemptuously regarded as "Lumpenpro-tariat" and generally classified as riff-raff and unor-ganizable material.

Up to now the foregoing has been generally true.Such being the case, criticism of the unskilled forfailure to organize falls in face of the fact that theunskilled could not organize because there was noreal basis on which they could organize.

Attempts to organize on the same basis as that ofthe skilled have been made repeatedly, only to fail.These failures have been charged against the un-skilled, and leaders who have busied themselves withthese organizations have retired disgusted from thetask. They have covered their defeat by proclaimingthat the unskilled are too stupid for organization.

Ignorance and stupidity are the eternal obstaclesto organization and form the burden of complaint ofall whose business it is to teach and discipline. Itmay be granted that large numbers of the unskilledowing to their disadvantageous economic conditionsare lethargic and impervious to an intellectual ap-peal. But this obvious ineptitude is merely relative.The skilled are quite as unreceptive to an appealwhich is purely intellectual. So also it may be said arestockbrokers, university men, lawyers and theclergy. Outside of their own immediate environ-ment and except when the impact upon their mater-ial conditions is very manifest they are all deafto the intellectual appeal. Pure "reason" plays avery insignificant part in human relations and leavesthe vast mass of mankind quite, untouched. Perhapsthere may be some truth in the statement that theunskilled are as a body more stupid than the mass ofmen, but there is no proof that such is the case.

Intellect, pure reason, ability to think, none ofthese have much connection with the basis of organi-zation. Obvious self-interest is the basis.

In the organization of labor the motives are soplain and the results to be attained so material thatvery little demand is made on the reason. Had itbeen otherwise we should certainly never have seenthe organization of the crafts;

They organized because their interest in organi-zation was plain. The material prospects of suchorganization, reduction of working hours and in-crease of pay were easily recognized. The organiza-tion promised these results. Hence the crafts organ-ized even under conditions which appeared to renderthese results remote in many instances and whichrequired immediate sacrifices.

Indeed, their actions have shown so slight a graspof the situation on the intellectual side that the

334NEW REVIEW

results which they have regarded as their objectivewere as a matter of fact but partial results. For adiminution in the number of hours worked may beoffset by a greater intensity of labor during thoseworking hours and an increase in pay may obviouslybe counterbalanced by an increase in the cost of liv-ing. These results have actually occurred and couldhave been easily foreseen with a slight amount ofthought, of which, however, the organizers wereentirely and satisfactorily innocent.

Ignorance and stupidity were no bars to the crea-tion of the organization of the crafts, neither has theperpetuation of such stupidity been any bar to theirgrowth. They have not been the factors which upto now have prevented the development of the organ-ization of the unskilled.

The unskilled have not organized because they hadno apparent reason in organizing, and to tell thetruth they have had no reason to organize until thepresent. With the crafts in control there was nochance for the unskilled.

The unskilled worker's only hope was to get outof his class in some way or other. He had no leverby which he could move the crafts and the employerssimultaneously, and thus pry away the rocks whichlay between him and the free air.

The employers pointing to the unorganized andhungry masses threatened him with extinction if hecontested. The organized employees, pointing to thesame masses, could afford to smile at any attemptto create an organization out of the inferior andshifting material which formed the bulk of unskilledlabor and through which the militant unskilled hadto force his way. On the one hand, the cheapnessand plentif ulness of unskilled labor was the greatestenemy to itself; and on the other hand, the employercould afford to ignore the effort of the unskilled be-cause his business was based upon a contract withthe skilled. As long as he could hold skilled laboreither in the "free" or union form he was secure.Thus we have many times seen the engineers andconductors ruin the chances of the more unskilledrailroad employees. Frequently those trades whichhave had contracts respecting certain technicalprocesses in mining and manufacture have contempt-uously stood by and seen the unskilled beaten to theirknees and have indeed helped to beat them. Thestories of the attempts of unskilled labor to achieveorganization and to gain a fighting ground have awearisome and disgusting sameness. They are arecord of blood and tears.

As regards these movements the claims of solidar-ity have so far been but faintly recognized and as amatter of fact they are largely mythical. No soli-darity and for the most part not even the barestvestiges of ordinary humanity have been shown, un-til very recently, by the skilled crafts for the effortsof the unskilled. Indeed as far as any sympathy

has been shown for the latter by the former, theunskilled might as well have been Kaffirs.

Moreover, the group which was in a position tomake contracts with the employers prided itselfupon that fact. Its members rejoiced that they oc-cupied an intermediary position between the em-ployer and the mass of ordinary labor and gavethemselves, airs in consequences. They considered,and, indeed advertised themselves, as a distinctiveclass. Some of them were recognized by the employeras especially his adherents, as it were his janissaries,upon whom he could rely as a defence against the at-tacks of predatory labor on the outside.

Under such conditions the difficulty, nay the im-possibility, of the organization of the unskilled be-comes at once manifest. No amount of intelligencecould have altered these actual conditions, no con-ceivable sentimental altruism could have caused thearistocrats of labor to turn a friendly eye towardsthe organization of the helpless unskilled.

Their outlook was dark. The entrenched tradeslooked down upon them with contemptuous indiffer-ence, more callous and coarse because more ignorantthan the contempt of the aristocrat for the bourgeois.

But as those who were unable to fit into the narrowgroove of the earlier village life wandered off andbuilt new empires, so the play of economic forces wasin time to bring a condition in which the unskilledwould have the shaping of labor's destinies. Underthe old system of industry in which the crafts hadthe determining voice the very uncertainty of the lifeof the unskilled endowed him with ne'er do wellqualities in the eyes of the respectable, however hardhe might actually work. Indeed the very same stig-ma is today implied in the term "migratory laborer."It is very manifest in the more ordinary expression"hobo." And just as the new nations derived theirorigin from the efforts of the outcast and the dis-reputable to a much greater extent than their respect-able successors will admit, the future of labor be-comes henceforth more closely identified with theprogress of the unskilled.

It is true that long ago, even in the eighties, thedock laborers of London won international fame andset Mr. John Burns on the highbroad to the Britishcabinet by a mass strike of the unskilled. The gasworkers also formed an organization and, althoughcoming under the category of unskilled labor, morethan held their own in the struggle.

Everywhere in the advanced countries those whowere formerly regarded as unskilled riff-raff beganto assert themselves and to show their ability toorganize. In many cases their attempts failed aftera few efforts, in others something like an organiza-tion was formed. This as a rule attached itself to thedominant craft-union organization and went throughvarious vicissitudes, some of them none too credit-

THE MECHANICS OF SOLIDARITY 335

able. "Federal unions" so called sprang into ex-istence only to subside, besmirched frequently withcorruption of one sort or another. Labor organiza-tions which attempted to deal with labor en masse in-stead of with several departmental crafts weretalked about. In fact, the speculative field of thelabor movement was littered with all sorts ofschemes, more or less visionary, for the organizationof labor as a whole.

For a time these merged themselves in the socialistmovement. The socialist's breadth of teaching hisall embracing democracy and idealistic visions im-pressed the imagination of the agitators. The poetsand philosophers of the unskilled therefore threwthemselves ardently into the socialist movement sothat for several years the socialist platform was acurious and discordant discord of the aspirations ofthe unskilled and the wailings of the unsuccessfulsmall bourgeois. The absence of the skilled work-man from the Socialist movement was indeed inthose days quite marked and was so bitterly resentedby the socialists of that time that-they made vehem-ent attacks upon the "pure and simple A. F. of L."and covered its leaders with abuse largely unde-served.

But the entry of the Socialist Party upon an at-tempt at serious politics changed the whole situation.The unskilled very soon discovered that they were,for the most part, without that essential political as-set, a vote, and were consequently not objects ofsolicitude to the politicians. "Labor" to the Socialistmovement began to mean organized labor or at leastsuch "labor" as could be converted into votes. Theunskilled were now assailed with the same epithetsas had been applied to them in Germany and else-where. He was told very plainly that he must con-sider himself a very inferior fellow and was certainlyand swiftly relegated to the rear.

But it will be observed that all this time the un-skilled were becoming recognized. The fact thatthey were abused shows this. They were beginningto play a role in the great movement. It is true thatit was by no means a brilliant role, really quite in-significant. Here and there however appeared move-ments of the foreign, forlorn, and apparently hope-less workers of the unskilled even of the migratoryunskilled, whose advent was received with screamsof abusive derision from the most orthodox and con-ventional of the Socialist politicals.

These movements sometimes, as at McKees Rocks,gained a temporary and precarious triumph. Herethe unskilled having at great sacrifice made notablegains were driven from their position by Americanworking-men who could not endure the sight of for-eign and despised labor achieving any position.

Exposed at every turn to incessant hostility, de-nied the most elementary constitutional rights, har-

ried by constables and magistrates, ridden down bymounted police and shot by deputy sheriffs, the feebleunskilled gradually and slowly and with much ex-penditure of blood and suffering was transformedinto the militant unskilled. And this militant un-skilled differentiated itself from, arose out of andstood above the sluggish torpid mass.

The organized crafts thereupon began to noticethe unskilled. They feared but despised the move-ment, and from the first have approached the ques-tion as a problem affecting not the unskilled pri-marily but the organized skilled crafts. The pointover which the organizers of the crafts have boggledis the possibility of so organizing the unskilled asnot to hurt but really to bolster up the crafts. Couldthe unskilled be persuaded to forego their own ad-vancement for the present material support whichthe crafts must afford them?

But the notion began to spread more and morerapidly among the rank and file of the crafts that,after all, they had something in common with themass of unskilled. The proof of this is seen in theencouraging support which the A. F. of L. unionshave given to the most desperate class of migratorylaborers, as the hoppickers of Wheatland.

Here we get the dawning of a newer and broaderidea of solidarity. It is clear, moreover, that thisidea has not come from any growth of altruismamong the skilled laborers but is the product of cer-tain changes in the industrial process which tend tobreak down the position of the skilled workers.

(Concluded in our next issue)

BOARD OP EDITORS

Frank BohnWilliam E. BohnLouis B. BoudinFloyd DellW. E. B. Du BoisMax EastmanLouis C. FrainaFelix GrendonIsaac A. Hour-men

Paul KennadayRobert Rives La MonteJoseph MichaelArthur LivingstonRobert H. LowieHelen MarotMoses OppenheimerHerman SimpsonWm. English Walling

ADVISORY COUNCIL

Arthur BullardGeorge Allan EnglandCharlotte Perkins OilmanArturo GiovanittiHarry W. LaidlerAustin LewisJohn Macy

Gustavus MyersMary White OyingtonWilliam J. RobinsonCharles P. SteinmetzJ. G. Phelps StokesHorace TraubelJohn Kenneth Turner

Published by the New Review Publishing Association256 BROADWAY, NEW YORK CITY

ALEXANDER FRASERPresident

JULIUS HEIMANTreasurer

LOUIS C. FRAINASecretary

Subscription $1.5* a year in United States and Mexico; six months,$0,75. $1.75 in Canada and (2.00 in foreign countries. Single

copies, 10 cents.

Entered el the Hem fork pott-offlee at tecmi-clat* mall matter.

336NEW REVIEW

The Literary Revival inIreland

By Ernest A. Boyd

AT a time when the excesses of nationalism are

everywhere the subject of discussion it isinteresting to turn to a manifestation of na-

tionality which, so far from suggesting warfare, hasactually softened such elements of dissention as ex-isted prior to its appearance. The "Celtic Renais-sance" as it is popularly, if rather inaccurately,called, is one of the most remarkable phenomena inrecent literary history, yet very little is known ofits origins. Certain personalities such as W.B. Yeatsand J. M. Synge, certain phases, such as The IrishTheatre, have received more attention than has themovement as a whole. It may, therefore, be notamiss to outline briefly the story of the LiteraryRevival in Ireland..

Contrary to what is generally supposed, the sourceof the Revival was not W. B. Yeats, but a writerwho has probably received less attention than thehumblest poet who followed the impulse given byhim to the literary activities of his country.Standish O'Grady, though scarcely known outsidethe circle of Irish writers, was acknowledged byall his young contemporaries as "the father of theRevival." It was he who first directed his brilliantimagination towards the reconstruction of the greatheroic epochs of Irish history and legend. HisHistory of Ireland, completed in 1860, is a mostextraordinary prose epic, in which all the materialpreviously left to antiquarians and philologists isturned into a vivid and eloquent narrative of Irishnationality. Here, for the first time since Gaelic hadceased to be the speech of the people, the great heroesof our antiquity, Cuculain, Finn, Maeve and Deirdre,lived again.

Standish O'Grady followed up this history withnumerous novels and romances of a historical orlegendary nature, and though some are of very slightimportance in themselves, they helped, with his otherwork, to create a body of literature which fascinatedthe young poets of the 'Eighties.' They saw in thisillumination of ancient Ireland the true substanceand spirit of national literature. Not from the hor-rors of the Famine, nor from the sufferings of theRebellion, but from the classic lore of Ireland's anti-quity, could the precious ore of Irish literature beextracted. Fired by the glowing enthusiasm ofO'Grady, they turned to legend and mythology fortheir inspiration. Thus they broke completely withthe purely political tradition which colored Anglo-Irish literature from the decline of Gaelic in the

Eighteenth, down to the period after the Famine inthe middle of the Nineteenth, century.

W. B. Yeats was one of the earliest of the youngpoets to live up to the new tradition he had caughtfrom O'Grady. He boldly attacked the popular idolsof the aggressively patriotic school, and substitutedas the model for his generation, the two older poets,Clarence Mangan and Samuel Ferguson, who alonehad escaped the dominance of the political spirit.With him were associated Charles Johnston, thetranslator of the Upanishads, A. E., the mysticvisionary, John Eglinton, the essayist, and a host ofminor personalities. Yeats fought earnestly on be-half of the artistic standard usually neglected whenonce the soundness of a writer's patriotism wasestablished. He pointed out that hatred of Englanddid not necessarily mean love of poetry, and thatgood verse was not to be measured in terms of poli-tical sentiment. His theories were confirmed by hispractice, for he proceeded to publish his first im-portant volume in 1887, The Wanderings of Oisin,which was immediately recognized as a new thing inIrish poetry.

The study of Oriental philosophy engaged theattention of all in the group, but while Yeats saw inmysticism a source of beautiful imagery and symbol-ism, A. E. felt it to be the expresion of a positivebelief. He was the true mystic of the movement,and has remained so, ever since he first wrote for thetheosophical review founded by himself and hisfriends towards the beginning of the 'Nineties.' In1894 he collected a small volume of his verse, Home-ward, Songs by the Way, which was published inDublin, and marked the beginning of the tendencyto seek publication in Ireland rather than in London,as had previously been the rule. Homeward was atonce greeted as a little masterpiece, and its depth ofvision and beauty of speech have made it a uniquebook in the history of the Revival. It is not thepoetry which appeals to the popular mind, but allwho have sensed the intuitions of inspired visionknow and love it.

Characteristically A. E. at once struck the univer-sal human note which contains but transcends thevoice of nationality. He is the only writer of theRevival who has identified himself with the struggleof humanity as distinct from that of nationality. Astime went on he proved that the mystic poet andpainter was no mere recluse, but could ardentlychampion the cause of the individual against oppress-sion. He has preferred to associate his co-operativework with his family name, George W. Russell, butin every circumstance he remains A. E., the ardentseer of twenty-five years ago. He alone representsthe element which came into the movement at the be-ginning with the young Russian Socialist R. I.Lipmann, the first translator of Lermontov. But the

LITERARY REVIVAL IN IRELAND 337

latter disappeared from Dublin after A Hero of ourTime was published. It is interesting, however, tonote this early contact with the Russian spirit, sinceso widely felt in English literature.

The influence of the Dublin poets was not confinedto their immediate circle. In London a number ofminor poets were caught on the wave of Celticism.Some were influenced by direct contact with Yeatswho lived there for several years, others were simplyechoes of his own writings. Norah Hopper, LionelJohnson, Moira O'Neill and Katharine Tynan areamongst the best known of these disciples, whoeither in London or Dublin, strove to live up to thenew standard of excellence imposed by W. B. Yeatsand his colleagues. Lionel Johnson was interestingas an instance of the attraction exercised by the newIrish poetry upon one who was essentially Englishin his birth and education. He shares with KatharineTynan the distinction of being the only Catholic poetof any importance in the Movement. These twoalone have given expression to Catholicism, Johnsonin the austerely ritualistic English fashion,Katharine Tynan with the simple piety of a peasantgirl. They serve to indicate how small a partCatholicism really is of the Irish spirit. The funda-mentally inartistic nature of Irish Catholicism dis-tinguishes it from the religion of all other Catholiccountries, where the Church has usually been a fac-tor of some aesthetic value.

The Irish Theatre is not the most familiar mani-festation of the Celtic Renaissance, although, curi-ously enough, it was not Celtic at all in its origins.Origially conceived as the Irish Literary Theatre, itran for three seasons under the guidance of EdwardMartyn, George Moore and W. B. Yeats. The twoformer writers were interested mainly in creating atheatre for the performance of literary drama alongthe lines of the Independent Theatre, the the TheatreLibre and the Freie Biihne. The plays most success-fully produced were those of Edward Martyn, whoseMaeve and The Heather Field presented most inter-esting analogies with the works of the great Scand-inavian dramatists. Martyn has remained faithfulto his intention of the Literary Theatre, andthrough him, Dublin has seen the performance ofthe more important works of Ibsen, Strindberg andTchekhov. But Yeats was concerned with poeticplays of legend and with the folk-drama, in which hefelft the germs of national drama must lie. Conse-quently he parted company with Martyn and Moorein order to throw in his lot with a group of actorswho had been working independently in the directionof such a theatre as he wished to establish.

The Irish National Dramatic Company, under thedirection of the brothers W. G. and Frank Fayseemed to provide the nucleus required by Yeats.They were performing peasant plays and had under-

taken a legendary drama, Deirdoe, by A. E. LadyGregory and W. B. Yeats came into this group, andsoon they were given control, with the result—nowfamiliar on both sides of the Atlantic—that the IrishPlayers and the Irish National Theatre came intoexistence. With the exception of Padraic Colum andJ. M. Synge, who both made their debut in 1903, theNational Theatre has produced few peasant play-wrights of literary importance. After the success ofSynge a number of more or less imitative dramatistsattached themselves to the Theatre, and popularityand commercialism dominated the scene. The playsof Yeats have excited no emulation, he remains theonly poetic dramatist in the Movement, while theTheatre he did so much to foster is almost whollyidentified with stereotyped, realistic peasant melo-drama and light farce, whose sole purpose is toamuse. The real fruits of the Dramatic Movementmust be sought in the published works of a few play-wrights, not in the repertoire of the Irish Players.

The weak point in the Revival has been the absenceof good prose. The delightful essays of John Eglin-ton, our only sceptic, were never published for morethan limited circulation. The prose writings of A.E.are only now being collected into a representativevolume. Yeats, of course, has given us two beautifulprose works, The Celtic Twilight and The SecretRose, but he cannot be considered amongst the prosewriters as such. During many years the "pot-boil-ing" fiction of various authors, better known in otherdirections, was the only evidence that the novel wasstill being cultivated in Ireland. It was not untilLord Dunsany published his strange and originalmythology, The Gods of Pegana in 1905, that astandard of prose fiction was set upon the same levelas our poetry and drama.

Finally, in 1912, an intensely national genius wasmanifested in fiction by James Stephens, whoseCrock of Gold appeared in that year. The fantasticimagination of Dunsany was not colored by the Celtictradition to the same extend as was that of Stephens,with whom he may legitimately be compared. Ste-phens having announced himself as a revolutionistin literature by his little volume of poems, Insurrec-tions, substantiated his claim by writing one of themost delightful works of grotesque fantasy andtender imagination, in Anglo-Irish literature. Hisprodigious success announced definitely a new andfinal phase in the evolution of the Irish Literary Re-vival. He showed that the Celtic spirit could expressitself no less beautifully in narrative prose than indrama or verse, and to confute the pessimists, whodoubted if he could repeat the success of the Crockof Gold, he last year published The Demi-Gods awork of a riper if less exuberant mood, which enablesus to forget the failure of the intervening volume,Here are Ladies.

338NEW REVIEW

Current AffairsPreparedness and Democracy

WITH the convening of Congress on the

sixth of this month, the question of"Preparedness" will pass from the "pre-

paratory" stage of preliminary public discussion tothat of "definite results" in the form of laws for theincrease of our naval and military forces and equip-ment. To most people the entire question is merelya matter of dollars and cents,—we are going to spendso many hudreds of millions of dollars a year, andthe question is whether or not the expenditure is"justified." Is there any real necessity for placingthis additional burden on the poor tax-payers, andcouldn't we use our money to better advantage insome other, "more profitable" manner? To some,the question of Preparedness also involves the prob-lem of our international relations: Wouldn't ourmilitary preparations in themselves act as an incen-tive to war, both by developing the military spiritin ourselves and breeding suspicion of our aims andpurposes in our neighbors?

Both of these aspects of the problem are undoubt-edly important, and the objections to preparednesson these grounds are fully justified. There is nodoubt but that the hundreds of millions of dollarsnow contemplated to be expended annually on pre-paredness, could be used, nay, are sorely needed foruse, in works of social amelioration, the necssity ofwhich is conceded on all sides. And there can belittle doubt of the fact that carrying a gun in one'ship-pocket is the most expeditious way of gettinginto a gun-fight. Police records show that it is notthe unarmed man that is most often the victim of thegunman. And our history as a nation shows thatwhat is true of individuals is true of nations. Wehave now existed as a nation for more than a centuryand a quarter and we never had a fight on hand butwhat it was of our own choosing.

It is of course true that the temper of the times haschanged considerably, and that we are now livingin an Imperialistic era in which each "great nation"is out to grab as much of the "unappropriated" por-tions of the globe as possible, and is ready to usearmed force in so doing whenever it becomes neces-sary. We are therefore much more likely to be at-tacked in the future than we were in the past. Butit is similarly true that the chance of our being at-tacked will only arise if we attempt to thwart theImperialistic schemes of any of the "great powers,"by ourselves grabbing some of the things which theycovet for themselves. In other words, the danger ofour being attacked only becomes real if we attemptto play the game of Imperialism.

The policy of "Preparedness" therefore necessarily

means our entry upon an era of "world-politics:" anera in which the menace of war will be constantlyhanging over us, when even our "peace" will benothing but an armed truce liable to be broken atany moment.

But there is an aspect of the "Preparedness" prob-lem which is more important than either of thosejust mentioned.—or even than both of them put to-gether—the effect which the "Preparedness" policymust ultimately have on our governmental systemand the spirit of our political institutions. Thosewho talk so glibly of the necessity of preparing toprotect our country and our democratic institutions,forget—or deliberately overlook—the fact that inorder to adequately "prepare" for this alleged de-fense we must first give up the very institutionswhich we want to defend. For it becomes more andmore manifest that the game of Modern Imperialismis incompatible with democratic institutions. Andthis not merely in the sense that autocratic institu-tions in "colonial possessions" are in the long runincompatible with democratic institutions "at home."But in a more immediate and military sense: demo-cratic institutions at home make it impossible to soadequately "prepare" from a military point of viewas to be able to play the Imperialistic game efficientlyabroad. "Adequate Preparedness" therefore impliessuch a change in our political institutions as willpermit us to acquire the high level of military effici-ency of that model of "preparedness,"—Germany. Ifwe are ever to have an equal chance with that modelof efficiency, we must adopt not only her militarysystem but also her political institutions. That ourmore thoughtful apostles of "Preparedness" are fullyalive to the necessary change, and are ready to makeit, can be seen from an article recently published byProf. Roland G. Usher in the N. Y. Tribune underthe significant title: "Is Adequate PreparednessPossible for the U.S.?"

The sum and substance of this article is that thoseare making a mistake who think that we can prepareadequately by building navies and raising armies."Preparedness is more than enlisting men and mak-ing munitions." The spirit is the thing. And ourgovernment as it now stands does not possess theproper spirit. And not only our government does notpossess it, no democratic government can possess it.Look at England:

"Last August they made up their minds to arm;they voted unlimited money; they secured millions ofvolunteers; they spent money like water to buyequipment and everything else imaginable in theUnited States; they had at their disposal an admin-istration and governmental system rated by the ex-perts as one of the most efficient in the world; theyhad in Kitchener supposedly one of the world'sgreatest military organizers. Yet somehow the armydoes not seem to have materialized as they had ex-

CURRENT AFFAIRS 339

pected. Money, men, equipment, the will to prepare,all these certainly existed to a degree they do notexist here; and yet something more was needed."

What that "more" is, Prof. Usher does not say.He leaves it to us to infer. And the inference iseasy enough: If it is not general efficiency, nor agenius for military organization, what else could itbut the spirit which pervades Germany's social andpolitical institutions? It is these that we must evi-dently copy if we want Adequate Preparedness.

The Socialist Party and Preparedness

S OME time ago Morris Hillquit, the NationalChairman of the Socialist Party, declared in

a public debate with Congressman Gardner that ifwe admit the likelihood of the United States beinginvolved in a serious war, we must go in for Pre-paredness.

"If," he said, "we grant the premise that theUnited States is in danger of becoming involved inwar with a first class foreign power, we must acceptthe conclusion that the country is woefully unpre-pared for such an emergency, and that it is the partof wisdom to strengthen our naval and military de-fenses."

The question as to whether or not we ought to goin for Preparedness is, therefore, purely one of cor-rect diagnosis of the concrete situation as to whetheror not we are likely to become involved in war witha strong adversary. If the diagnosis gives a positiveresult, it is the evident duty of Socialists to line upwith those who want "to strengthen our naval andmilitary defenses."

Now comes the N. Y. Call, the leading press organof the Socialist Party of this country, and suppliesthe diagnosis. Discussing some statements madeby Congressman Crago of Pennsylvania at a meet-ing held under the auspices of the National DefenseLeague, the Call says editorially:

"The pacifist idea seems to be that if we neverseek trouble with other nations we shall have none;that they will not attack us unless we provoke themto do so.

"On the other hand, Crago and the militaristsgenerally assume that the social world is not at allconstructed upon that principle; that it postulatesa fight for feeding grounds, plunder and conquest;that if a nation weak in armaments happens to bewealthy it is a fair mark for more powerfully armedneighbors; that despite their universal professionsof peace they will fasten a quarrel upon us so thatthey may plunder us through force.

"Without doubt our Cragos are right: They recog-nize in this respect the world as it really it, and notas sentimental pacifists regard it, the idealists whoassume that what they think 'ought' to be reallyis.. The Crago view is the Socialist view."

We need not stop here to inquire as to whether ornot the Call is correct in its assertion that the Cragoview is the Socialist view. It is sufficient that it isthe view of the dominant faction of the SocialistParty of this country. And on that subject theopinion of the Call may be. taken as authoritative.

And when we put together these two authoritativeexpressions of opinion as to the position of the Socia-list Party of America on the subject of war and Pre-paredness, we get the following result:

Capitalism, the present dominant economicsystem, generates war, and in the very nature ofthings the two are inseparable. As the capitalistsystem is sure to last for some time yet, this countryis not only likely, but almost certain to become in-volved in war sooner or later; particularly if it re-mains "weak in armaments", for it will then be "afair mark for more powerfully armed neighbors."And once we have granted the premise that theUnited States may become involved in war with apowerful adversary, "we must accept the conclusionthat the country is woefully unprepared for such anemergency, and that it is the part of wisdom tostrengthen our naval and military defenses."

Curiously enough the Socialist party but a fewmonths ago adopted on a referendum the followingamendment to its national constitution, by the over-whelming vote of 11041 to 782:

"Any member of the Socialist party elected to anoffice, who shall in any way vote to appropriatemoneys for military or naval purposes, or war, shallbe expelled from the party".

It will be noticed that this prohibition against vot-ing funds for war or preparedness is absolute andunconditional. It does not permit the taking intoaccount of the likelihood of our being involved inwar. Nor does it even recognize the distinctionbetween aggression and defense.

Under these circumstances it is only fair to ask:Where does the Socialist Party of America stand onthis momentous question ?

If You Buy Books—

You want to concentrateand get efficient service

NEW REVIEW BOOK SERVICE256 Broadway, New York City

340NEW REVIEW

A Socialist DigestA Russian Socialist Manifesto

THE following appeal is the out-

come of a joint meeting of themembers of the Social-Demo-

cratic and Socialist RevolutionaryParties of Russia, which took place ina neutral country on Sept. 5-10, 1915.After thorough discussion of the prob-lems of the war, resolutions were un-animously adopted defining the positionof Russian Socialists towards the warin general and its Russian phase, inparticular. For lack of space the resolutions can not appear in this issue. Theappeal itself though popular in form isextremely interesting not only becauseit sheds a light on the position of agreat mass of Russian Socialists, butalso because of its critical analysis ofthe issues of the Great War.To THE CLASS CONSCIOUS WORKERS OFRUSSIA: We appeal to the class-con-scious workers,—peasants, clerks, ar-tisans,—in short to all who eat theirbread in the sweat of their brow,—whosuffer through lack of material meansand misgovernment.

We send to them our warm greetings,and urgently appeal to them to listento us in this fated period when the en-emy has occupied a large portion ofRussian territory and threatens Kiev,St. Petersburg and Moscow, the mostimportant centres of Russian life.

In the past too our fatherland had tolive through the bloody horrors of aninvasion. But never before was itobliged to withstand an enemy so wellarmed, so skillfully organized—an en-emy whose plundering enterprise hasbeen so carefully planned,—as at pre-sent.

Our fatherland is in an extremedanger. That is the reason why aheavy responsibility rests on theshoulders of the class-conscious work-ing population of Russia.

If you say to yourself that it is im-material to you and your less class-conscious workers as to who conquersin the present international conflictand act accordingly, then Russia willbe crushed by Germany, and if Russiais crushed it is needless to argue thatit will go ill with her allies as well.If, on the other hand you become con-vinced that the defeat of Russia willreact detrimentally on the interests ofits working population and will co-op-erate with all your strength in the de-fence of our country, then Russia andher allies will escape the great dangerthat threatens them.

You will make a great mistake if

you imagine that it is not necessary forthe workers to defend their country. Infact the interests of no other part ofthe population suffer so severely froman invasion of the enemy as those of theworkers. The so-called higher classes,i.e. the more or less well to do can muchmore easily escape the baneful conse-quences of the defeat of their country.The Franco-Prussian war serves as anexample. When the Germans besiegedParis and when prices of necessitiessoared, the poor suffered much morethan the rich. And when Germanyexacted a five milliard "contribution"from conquered France, in the final an-alysis it was the poverty stricken popu-lation that paid the amount. For inorder to pay "the contribution" indirecttaxes were levied, the weight of whichas is well known, falls mainly on thelowest class. But this is not all. Themost pernicious effect of the defeat ofFrance in 1870-71, was the retardationof her economic development, whichserved to check the growth of the liber-ating movement of the working class.You may well comprehend, the slowerthe growth of capitalism in a countrythe later is postponed the liberation ofthe working-class from the exploitationof the upper classes. In other wordsthe defeat of France had an imperiouseffect not only on the immediate inter-ests of her people, but even more, on itssubsequent progress.

The devastation of Russia by Ger-many will inspire our people even morethan did the victory of Germany overFrance. From the economic standpointours is a backward country when com-pared with the countries of WesternEurope. Only after the abolition ofserfdom in 1861 was the slow develop-ment of Russia's productive powers ac-celerated. The quickened developmentof productive powers helped to arouseclass-consciousness among the workers.The revolutionary storm of 1905-1906which seriously rocked the foundationsof the old regime was the inevitable po-litical result of the economic revolutionof Russia in the latter half of the 19thCentury. It may be stated with assur-ance that the faster the productivepowers of Russia develop the soonerwill its workers become class-consciousand the sooner will strike the hour ofthe final fall of Czarism. But the warthrust upon us by Germany threatensto check this favorable development andin this lies the greatest danger for theRussian people, at the present moment.

Wars now call for enormous expend-itures of money.

It is much more difficult for Russia tomeet these expenditures than it is forthe rich countries of Europe. For Russiais a country economically behindthe rest. On the backs of theRussian people even prior to thiswar, was the heavy governmental in-debtedness. Now this indebtednessgrows every moment and besides largeportions of Russia are subjected tocomplete devastation. If Germany winsa complete victory she will demandfrom us an enormous war indemnity incomparison with which the gold thatflowed in 1871 from conquered Franceinto victorious Germany will seem as amere bagatelle. But our victors willnot be content with an indemnity. Themore consistent of the public criers ofGerman Imperialism already contendthat a demand must be made on Russiafor cession of important territory,which besides, for the convenience ofGerman colonists, should be altogethercleared of its present inhabitants.

Moreover enormous war indemnityand cession of Western provinces willnot suffice war conquerors. Even in1904, Russia, because of her criminaladventure in the East, was compelled toconclude a. commercial treaty with Ger-many on very disadvantageous terms.That treaty impeded the developmentof rural economics as well as of manu-facture. It was equally disadvan-tageous to the interests of the agri-cultural and the industrial worker. Youmay easily imagine the treaty whichwill be forced on us by the victoriousGerman Imperialism. EconomicallyRussia will become a German colony.Her future economic development willbe greatly delayed if not altogetherstopped. Agricultural workers forcedout of their villages through necessitywill not have the opportunity to findwork in the industrial centres, and in-stead of becoming class-conscious pro-letarians capable of fighting energetic-ally for their own freedom they will begradually transformed into raggedtramps, ready to serve as the uncon-scious tools in the hands of all sortsof program makers and adventurers.

Degeneration and debasement of aconsiderable portion of the workingclass threatens Russia in the event ofGerman victory. But bad as this all is—it would not be all. After conquer-ing Russia, Germany will no doubt dis-solve the treaty between Russia, France,England, and the other countries ofWestern Europe. Then will be recalled

RUSSIAN SOCIALIST MANIFESTO 341

the sad memory of the union of theThree Emperors. But it is not thatwhich grieves us. The great and in-evitable calamity will be that underthe pretext of a treaty with Russia,Berlin will take upon itself the role ofpreserving "order" in St. Petersburg.We all know how the reactionaries puttheir hopes in "the mailed fist" of theGerman Emperor in the struggle withthe revolutionary movement of 1905-1906. And they were right. For inaddition to international solidarity ofreactionism tried and tested for cen-turies, German imperialists are mater-ially interested in the support of ourold regime, which immeasurably weak-ens the ability of Russia to oppose anexternal enemy. If prior to this daythe movement for the emancipation ofthe proletariat and peasantry has beenblocked by the Russian reaction, in thefuture to these reactionary forces willbe added the mightier force of Germanreaction. And then you may bid fare-well for a long time indeed to yourplans of emancipation.

And what will be the result of Ger-man victory on Western Europe? Afterwhat has been said about Russia weneed hardly expand on the economicmisery which will be thrust on theworking masses of the countries alliedwith Russia. We wish to call your at-tention but to the following: England,France and even Belgium and Italyhave advanced much further politicallythan the German Empire which as yethas not reached even the parliamentarystage. The victory of Germany overthe former countries would mean thetriumph of the monarchical over thedemocratic principle, the triumph ofthe old over the new. If the democraticideal is dear to you, if in your owncountry you seek to substitute for theautocracy of the Czar the rule of thepeople you have no choice but to wishfor the success of our western allies.

Lately one of the members of theDuma, of the extreme left, after justlypointing out in his address the com-plete break-down of the Czar's govern-ment in the defence of Russia, addedthat soon the people themselves willdecide the question of war and peace.That of course presupposes a revo-lution, and the first problem of the re-volutionary government would be a lifeand death struggle with German Im-perialism. Such conduct would becomeincumbent on the Revolutionary Govern-ment both in the interest of the demo-cratic countries allied with us as wellto insure the final triumph of Russianrevolution over the dark forces of inter-national reaction.

Indifference on your part, as to theoutcome of the present war would beequivalent to political suicide i. e. the

refusal to lead the working class in itsmovement toward a better future. Themost important, the most vital economicinterests of the proletariat and thepeasantry demand from you active par-ticipation in the defence of the country.Don't be confused with the argumentsof those who contend that to defendyour country is to shirk your part inthe class-struggle. For firstly, for thesuccessful outcome of the class-struggleare necessary certain social and poli-tical conditions which we will not have,if Germany triumphs. Secondly, if theworking population of Russia must de-fend itself when it is exploited by Rus-sian land holders and capitalists it isincomprehensible why it should bepassive when an attempt is made toplace on its neck the yoke of exploit-ation of German landholders (Junkers)and capitalists, who to our great sor-row are now being supported by a con-siderable portion of the German pro-letariat—traitors to solidarity and theproletariat of other countries. TheRussian proletariat at the same timethat it makes an effort to escape thenoose of exploitation by German Im-perialism, will conduct the class strug-gle in the most effective manner suit-able to the present times. It is alsoargued that in defending our countryfrom the German invasion you are sup-porting the old political order. Thedefeat of Russia is desired by theseshort-sighted people because of theirhatred of the Russian government. Suchreasoning like that of one of the heroesof our great satirist Tschedrin con-fuses the political administration ofthe country with the country itself.Russia does not belong to the Czar butto the Russian people. The Russianpeople in defending Russia, defendthemselves, defend their own cause—their own emancipation. For we havealready pointed out how the old regimewould only be strengthened through aGerman victory.

The Russian reactionaries under-stand this well. With a heavy heartthey defend Russia from Germany. Itis said that as late as last Novemberthe recently retired ministers Maklakoffand Tscheglovitoff submitted to theCzar a report demonstrating the benefitto Russia of peace with Germany. Evenif this is not a fact it is undisputedthat the defeat of Germany would bethe defeat of the monarchical principleso dear to the reactionaries.

Our people will never forgive Czar-ism its incapacity in the role of thedefenders of Russia against the exter-nal enemy. But if the leading class-conscious elements of the populationwill not participate in the defence ofthe country, then the reactionaries maywell shift the blame for Russian defeat,

to the shoulders of the Russian revo-lutionaries, who they will claim havebeen traitors to their country, and thiswill acquit them before some portionof the population—and will benefit re-action.

Your watchword should be victoryover the external enemy. In an activeeffort toward such victory the vitalforce of the people will grow stronger,which eventually will weaken the posi-tion of the internal enemy i. e. ourexisting government. All "revolutionarydemonstrations" in the rear of thearmy fighting with the enemy would beequivalent to treason for it would servethe external enemy at the same timethat it would make easier the positionof the internal enemy for it wouldcreate differences and disputes betweenthe armed forces of Russia on the oneside and the advanced portion of thepopulation on the other.

Even strikes should not be under-taken in these times without first weigh-ing carefully their moral, political andtechnico-military effects.

War it is true will not make our Rus-sian Entrepreneurs more unselfish thanthey were in time of peace. The re-ceipt and execution of a great manyorders from the government, indis-pensable during "mobilization of in-dustry" will cause entrepreneurs asusual to give special attention to theinterests of capital and pay no atten-tion at all to those of labor. You willbe quite right to be indignant at suchconduct. But in every such case whenyou are tempted to resort to a strikeyou should first consider carefullywhether a strike will not hurt the de-fence of Russia. The interests of theindividual should be subordinated tothose of the mass. A worker in a givenfactory should remember that he wouldcommit a great mistake; if having inview only his own interests he wouldforget how bitterly the interests of theentire Russian proletariat and peasant-ry would suffer because of a Germanvictory. It would be folly if blinded bylocal and temporary conditions you willact so as to imperil the entire futureof our movement in the cause of free-dom.

Though you should by no means ceasethe just struggle for the betterment ofyour economic condition and should atall tunes combat any attempt to make itworse, you should not for a moment for-get that not only your external, but in-ternal enemies will utilize any falsestep which you might take. It is quitepossible that the reactionaries are onlywaiting for the opportunity to rousethe workers to local strikes and demon-strations, and in combating and destroy-ing these efforts piecemeal, to leave forthemselves a free hand to conclude a

342NEW REVIEW

dishonorable peace with Germany whichwould preserve their power over theworking class.

In view of the ineffectiveness ofCzarism as a tool of national defense,the opinion is expressed in our ad-vanced circles, that so long as thegovernment of the Czar exists it is notpossible to do anything for the defenceof our country. This point of viewthough natural under the circumstan-ces is nevertheless wholly erroneous.

If the advanced elements of our popu-lation refuse to join in the defence ofRussia until the fall of the existinggovernment they will by that very con-duct postpone the time of its fall. Thetactics which may be characterized bythe formula "all or nothing" are anar-chistic tactics altogether unworthy ofthe discerning leadership of the prole-tariat and the peasantry. The generalstaff of the German army will gladlywelcome the news of this attitule ofour advanced population. For its pur-poses are needed strikes in England,"disorders" in Russia, for these wouldmake easier the execution of its mili-tary program of conquest. You shouldinsist that all our representatives shouldif possible participate actively in allthe organizations which are now beingcreated for the battle with the exter-nal enemy. The firmer are our repre-sentatives established in these theeasier will it be for them to combat theenemy at home. Your representativesshould not only participate in specialtechnical establishments (military andindustrial committees) created to servethe needs of the army, but in all otherorganizations of social and politicalcharacter such as village co-operatives,peasant autonomies, labor unions, sick-benefit funds, Zemstvo and city estab-lishments and the Duma. The situationis such now that we can not reach free-dom except through the road of naturaldefence. But we want you to note thatwe are not counselling the defeat of theexternal foe first and then the over-throw of the enemy at home. It is quitepossible that the overthrow of the lattermay be the preliminary condition to at-tain the deliverance from the Germandanger. The French revolutionists ofthe latter part of the 18th Centurywould never have dealt effectively withthe enemy that was attacking Franceon all sides if they had not adhered tothe extreme and boldest revolutionarytactics. And they had recourse to suchonly in the measure consistent with andparallel to the growth of the movementagainst the old order. They were theacknowledged and irreconcilableenemies of thoughtless demonstrationsas conscious or unconscious tools in thehands of external and internal enemiesof the people. Let those revolutionists

serve to us as an example of both in-cessant revolutionary activity as wellas of sober and careful political insightand circumspection.

We the signers of the appeal belongto different currents of RussianSocialist thought. Among us are So-cial-revolutionists as well as Social-de-mocrats, we differ in great many parti-culars. But we all are definitelyagreed that the defeat of Russia byGermany will be at the same time Rus-sia's defeat in the struggle for freedom.And we believe that guided by this con-

viction all who agree with us shouldco-operate with each other in thefriendly service to their own people inthis its hour of grave danger.

Members of Social-Democratic LaborParty and Party of Social-Revo-lutionists: G. Plechanoff, A. Bach, L.Deutsch, E. Zinovieva Deutsch, E. Axel-rod, E. Bunakoff, N. Avksientieff, A.Lubinoff, B. Voronoff, H. Argunoff.Argunoff.

Members of second Duma: G. Belous-soff, G. Alexinsky.

Sept. 10th, 1915.

Bernsteins' Peace Programme

AT the time the German Party

adopted the "peace manifesto",recently commented upon in

our columns, Edward Bernstein pre-sented a peace programme in the nameof the minority in the party.

Bernstein opens by saying that peacecan only renew friendly, relations be-tween the peoples if it be in conformitywith the resolutions adopted by Inter-national Socialist Congresses: Thesupreme principle insisted upon in theseresolutions is "the right of peoples todecide their own fate": "the SocialDemocratic Party does not admitthe right of conquest of any nation overany other." In the case of countries ofEuropean civiliation which have livedunder foreign rule, no territorial chang-es should take place without the wishesof the people being consulted, and suchconsultation should be supervised byneutral nations so as to ensure perfectfreedom in voting. All adults who hadlived in the country for at least a yearbefore the outbreak of the war shouldhave the right to vote, and self-govern-ment should be given to all subjectpeoples, whether transferred from onePower to another or not, with the rightto decide by vote as to which Statethey should belong. Outside Europeinternational modification should onlytake place under such conditions asguarantee the status of the inhabitantsagainst injury. In order to prevent arenewal of war, Bernstein urges thatinternational law must be perfected bythe following means:

1. Reconstruction of The Hague Con-ference and the establishment of per-manent councils for legislation and ar-bitration.

2. Compulsory arbitration.

3. The suspension of military opera-tions until the quarrel has been submit-ted to arbitration, and all means ofreaching a pacific solution have been ex-hausted. Any state which declares or

prepares for war contrary to these rulesto be treated as an enemy.

4. Questions of war and peace to bedecided by elected representatives.Secret treaties to be abolished.

5. Strengthening of laws relating tothe conduct of war and the protectionof civil populations.

6. The abolition of the right of cap-ture at sea.

7. Internationalisation of waterwaysand transcontinental railways.

8. Adoption of the principle of the"open door" for colonies, protectorates,etc.

9. Abolition-of the right to levy warcontributions, to take hostages, and toinflict measures of reprisal on the in-habitants of an invaded country foracts committed in self-defense by otherinhabitants. The institution of perma-nent commissions to watch over treat-ment of invaded countries and of civiland military prisoners.

Bernstein considers the question ofBelgium in detail, and reaches theisconclusion:

All forcible annexation of Belgianterritory or any interference with Bel-gian autonomy by any state whatevermust be energetically resisted, but fur-ther, it must be added that Germanywithout any provocation whatsoever, asthe Chancellor has himself admitted,violated the neutrality of Belgium indefiance of the law of nations, and hav-ing thus made her way into Belgium tosatisfy her own designs, beat down theresistance of the army and occupied thecountry by force. Germany is there-fore bound in honor to evacuate Bel-gium, in accordance with the solemndeclaration made August 4, 1914, bythe German Ambassodor, Prince Lich-nowsky, to the English Secretary ofState, Sir Edward Grey, and to pay afull and ample indemnity to the peopleof Belgium for the material and moralinjury which they have suffered.

SPANISH SOCIALIST CONGRESS 343

A German Austro-Hungarian Customs Union

I N the Neue Zeit, E. Varga, of Buda-pest, discusses the chances of aGerman-Austro-Hungarian Cus-

toms Union from the point of view ofthe Austro-Hungarian interest. Hereaches the conclusion that they are notvery promising.

As far as Hungary is concernedboth the agrarian and industrial in-terests are decidedly opposed to such aunion, while the workers have thus farnot taken any position one way or theother.

Until a short time ago the Hungarianagrarians were eager for such a union.Their change is so recent that no no-tice of it has thus far been taken inGermany. But to-day the agrarian in-terests in Austria as well as in Hun-gary frown upon the scheme of a cus-toms union. The organ of the Hungar-ian Independence Party, "Magyarors-zag," which is in close touch with theagrarians, said last September:

"We don't know whether the idea ofa customs union sprang spontaneouslyfrom the war sentiment or whether itis merely the beginning of an agitationin that direction. But we protest madvance against such a mischievousscheme. Our protest is so emphaticthat we deem even the discussion of theplan nefarious."

The government thereupon hintedconfidentially to drop public discussionin order not to strain the relationswith Germany.

The reason for the agrarian changeof front is found in the great economicchanges that have taken place in theexport trade of the dual monarchy.Until 1908 the export of agrarian pro-ducts into Germany was considerableas the statistics show. It has sincegreatly fallen off, particularly as tothe products of the large estates. Ryeand wheat, the important staple ar-ticles of such estates, are no higher inprice in Berlin than in Vienna. Hencetheir export to Germany has ceasedwhich naturally had a chilling effectupon the Hungarian agrarians.

But there are also political reasonsfor the opposition. It is a questionwhether the growing political import-ance of the industrial elements in Ger-many will not force a reduction of theduties on grain in order to cheapen thecost of living. But in Austria-Hungarythe political power of the agrarians isso impregnable that they need not fearany change in the agrarian policy of ahigh protective tariff. In Hungary theagrarians are on top. They fear thattheir grip might be broken by a cus-toms union with the industrially highlydeveloped Germany. Hence they pro-

test against the idea of a customsunion.

The Austrian industrialists, on theother hand, have good reasons to fearGerman competition in their homemarket as well as in export. Germanindustry has great geopraphical as wellas economic advantages as comparedwith that of Austria. It has better out-lets on the ocean, richer mineral, coaland alkali deposits; owing to the great-er efficiency of its workers also a great-er output per capita of its industrialproducts. At present, in spite of the highimport duties, Germany steadily in-creases her export into Austria in con-sequence. A customs union wouldplace the Austrian industry at stillgreater disadvantage. It is thereforeself-evident that the Austrian indus-trialists don't want any customs unionwith Germany.

The Hungarian industrialists arepractically in the same boat with theirAustrian brethren. They are now suf-fering from the Austrian competitionthat is not hampered by custom duties.Free imports from Germany wouldmake matters still worse.

From the viewpoint of the Hunga-rian workers a customs union with Ger-many would paralyze many branchesof the Hungarian industry such as iron,machines, chemicals and so forth. Thedemand for labor would diminish. TheHungarian industry is not even now ab-sorbing the labor power set free inmodern agriculture; hence the steadilygrowing emigration. A customs unionwith Germany would make mattersmuch worse. It would tremendously in-crease the industrial reserve army,make wage struggles much more diffi-cult and depress wages and conditionsof labor. Hungary, poor in resources ofcapital, would be a ready field for Ger-man exploitation. Both the Austrianand the Hungarian workers have there-fore good economic reasons to opposethe scheme of a German customs union.

Looked upon merely from the econ-omic position of the workers, from theconsequences of a union upon the labormarket, the question would have to besettled in the negative.

On the other hand, such a union be-tween two or three states is impossiblewithout resulting in a far reachingequalization of industrial institutions.A customs union would require a uni-fied money standard and a unified reg-ulation of banking. It would call for acommon disposition of the revenues andin consequence tend to produce a com-mon financial policy. In Austria-Hungary exists a tobacco monopoly;there are also internal duties uponsome articles of mass consumption, like

petroleum. The new system would haveto take account of that fact.

It is also self-evident that the wholeexternal policy which is really influ-enced by economic forces must be uni-fied in states having a common cus-toms territory. It is impossible to unitestates in one custom territory withoutin the end unifying them also as totaxes and financial matters and exter-nal policy.

From the strictly economic point o*view such a union would have a badeffect upon the Austro-Hungarian la-bor market, as has been pointed out.But for the general condition of theworking classes a closer political af-filiation would produce good results inthe long run.

The author is no admirer of thePrussian Junkers and the Germanbureaucracy. But contrasted with thepolitical outlawry of the workers un-der the brutal, ignorant Magyarclique as represented by Tisza an ap-proachment to the German system ofsocial welfare would be of great ad-vantage to Hungarian labor. Perhapsafter a few decades such political ad-vantages might more than outweigh thepresent economic drawbacks.

Spanish Socialist PartyCongress

A T the opening session of theTenth National Congress ofthe Spanish Socialist Party,

Julian Besteiro, of the Madrid SocialistGroup, said that at no time were theproblems which the Spanish Socialistshave to face so complex. But circum-stances were exceptional for Socialiststhroughout the world. The SocialistParty had not been able to prevent thewar, for the same reason that it had notbeen able to. alter the capitalist system,which was the cause of the war. Social-ists had done their duty in doing all theycould to prevent the war, but no Social-ist could tolerate that the liberty and in-tegrity of his country should be put indanger. Vicente Bario, in the name ofthe General Union of Workers, con-demmed the war in Morrocco, which, hesaid, is ruining Spain at a time when ithas need of all its resources.

Pablo Iglesias declared that the num-ber of Socialists did not greatly varyfrom one Congress to another, but onefound that while the bourgeois Press afew years ago treated them with silence,to-day their resolutions were often con-sidered in connection with the nationalpolicy. This was an undeniable vic-tory. With regard to the Moroccancampaign it was their duty to demon-strate against it on every possible oc-casion.

344NEW REVIEW

CorrespondenceMacy's Defense Plans

To the NEW REVIEW:

ITHINK that Mr. Macy's plan for

national defense (as outlined inyour issue of November 15) is

much too innocent in spirit to be safe.It seems to me totally to ignore the chi-cane and double-dealing as we have seenthem practiced in this country overand over again. I do not recall at themoment the date of the shooting of themarching strikers at McKeesport,but it is not so long ago that Mr. Macycannot recall it. At the tune the menwere shot down at McKeesport, Mr.Carnegie (against whose exactions andbad citizenship the strikers were pro-testing in a peacable way) was at theHague nursing the dove of peace;and it is safe to affirm that he saw nomore contradiction between his fancifuldevotion to peace and the killing ofthese men by policemen he was able tocommander than the Kaiser saw in ov-erriding the "scrap of paper" that, hadhe respected it, would have closed Bel-gium to him as a road to Paris (as hethought). What would be the effectof an army and navy of defense onthe Monroe doctrine?

Likewise, if an army and navy ofdefense were created, and lay like awhite elephant on our hands for somedecades, evidently not earning their salt,does Mr. Macy think there would be noquestion of a journalistic or senatorialnature as to why the nation was beingburdened with them? And if such aquestion were asked, however timidly,is not the late instance of Admiral Mayoto the fore to show us that nationaldefense is a matter of reducing thecitizens of other countries to submis-sion?

No, the simplest psychology of thesituation is that if you give a man agun and he is of a gunning disposition,as he would be if he accepted the pres-ent, it is a silk hat to a thimble that therecipient will prove too much of agentleman to let the present lie idle inhis hands. It would not be good man-ners, good faith or good politics to letit rust.

Besides, Mr. Macy has not made clearwhat we are to prepare to defend our-selves against. Who is going to at-tack us, and by what route and methods,and how will a successful line of com-munication with a home base of sup-plies be maintained by an army invad-ing the United States? It is not fair toask the nation to undertake the cost ofmaintaining nearly a million and a

quarter soldiers (as I understand iscontemplated ultimately) and an ex-tensive navy just to calm the excitednerves of men who are unable to ex-plain the cause of their anxiety.

Lastly, soldiers, time out of mind,have been bad citizens. Civilians can-not get along with them. There is con-stant enmity between them, whether inthe militia camps of Mount Gretna orthe familiar life of our cities. Theyproduce nothing. They grow cholericand pretentious in idleness (as JohnL. Sullivan said, not so politely, of Gen-eral Nelson Miles, when the militaryman refused to speak on the same tem-perance platform with the ring-man atAtlantic City last summer). It does notfollow for a moment that defenseand non-aggression are synonymous.There is not a nation in the Europeanwar at the moment that is not defend-ing home interests: "Deutschland iiberalles." Germany at the moment is suf-fering the throes of self-defense.

For these reasons I do not think thatMr. Macy took the full implications ofhis proposal into account when he prac-tically says that if our politicians crosstheir hearts as they draw up a nationaldefense bill they and their successorswill be governed by a school-room senseof the meaning of defense and aggres-sion ever after. We are now neutrals,but it would not require many oddtwists of the capitalistic-political pendu-lum to see our boats in European watersshooting down allies or Germans indefense of our right to trade. . . Onthe whole I am afraid Mr. Macy setstoo much store by the value of phrases.

P. S. The above I wrote last evening.This morning (Nov. 16) my newspapercontains news of Churchill's refusal tobe made the scapegoat of the war messin England. He affirms that the blun-ders of the war are not the result of acivilian forcing his amateurishness ontried and reluctant officers, but plainblunders committed by the first heads ofthe war situation. Is it worth thewhile of the U. S. to begin a policy ofhaving that kind of a defense at a costlike England's at the moment? Nonation has ever been so defended asEngland.

Philadelphia, Pa. T. D. O'Bolger.

From A British SocialistTo the NEW REVIEW:

NOT many Socialists in Great

Britain have belonged foryears, as I have, to the Inde-

pendent Labor Party (which is mainlyinfluenced by J. R. Macdonald) and theBritish Socialist Party (associated inthe public mind chiefly with H. M.Hyndman); and my independence ofview, due to this and other circum-stances, may perhaps interest Americancomrades, if only by way of a change.For a considerable period before thewar broke out, the Independent LaborParty and British Socialist Party were,to some extent, rivals and eventuallyhostile, the I. L. P. inclining towardsAsquith and Liberalism, and the B. S.P. strenuously criticising Macdonald'sleadership. The war has introducedconfusion. It was only a few days old(August, 1914), when Macdonald,rather hastily making up his mind, con-demned Grey's deceitfulness, con-demned the British government, con-demned the alliance with Russia, anddrew most of the I. L. P. after him. Atthe same time, a section of the B. S. P.split iff from the veteran Hyndman,denounced the war, denounced recruit-ing for the Army, and denounced Hynd-man's anti-German policy. To callthese opposing groups, the one "pro-German" and the other "MilitaristSocialists", would offend each in turn,but to me and others who hold a mid-way position, those terms would, withsufficient accuracy, describe the rivalplatforms.

Macdonald's followers now include amiscellaneous troop of Socialists, Paci-fists, Quakers and Tolstoyans, and anumber of these people have no sym-pathy with the central object of So-cialism, namely, to abolish profit-mak-ing. Many Pacifists sternly and reli-giously condemn the making of profitout of gun-manufacture, but quite cor-dially support the making of profit outof the manufacture of clothes, boots,bread, and the rest.

Macdonald is member of Parliamentfor Leicester (a city in which Iresided eleven years), and if a GeneralElection now took place. I doubtwhether he would again be returned tothe House of Commons, for many Li-berals (Democrats) who formerlyvoted for him, would probably turnagainst him on account of his attitudeon the war. His constant accusationsagainst the policy of his own countryevince a spirit that is more negativistthan constructive.

The whole nation is discussing theadvisability of introducing Conscrip-tion, a Universal Military Service forable-bodied men. Our opinions are very

CORRESPONDENCE 345

mixed. A great number of tradea-anionists suspect that the bourgeoisclasses want Conscription now in orderto exploit labor all the more easily afterthe war. Some people, with theologicalinclinations, talk in a seventeenthcentury style about their conscientiousabjections to slaying their fellow-men.For my part, having renounced theo-logy, I regard this position as obsolete,and, in effect, as anti-social. It is cer-tain we shall never realize the SocialistCommonwealth if we allow groups ofQuakers, Anarchists, or perhaps Capi-talists, to raise conscientious objectionsto the industrial, educational, or mili-tary policy decided on by the generalPublic (that is, the Republic). Minorityviews should always be respectfullylistened to, but they must express them-selves in secular language, and befinally subject to the will of themajority.

As to military service, I believe thelogical Socialist program to be that ofthe Citizen Army, on a system resembl-ing that of the Swiss Confederation.Of course, along with the duty of mento serve in the Citizen Army, should becoupled a socialization of industries,employment for all, and a veto on idle-ness; and this program should applyto all women as well as men. Mean-while, it may be regarded as certainthat, if Kitchener and the Cabinet de-clared compulsory service necessary inorder to attain success in the war, thenation, including the Trades-Unionists,would consent.

Had the Germans refrained from en-tering Belgium, this country might stillhave gone to war, but opinions wouldhave been divided, as in the days of theBoer War; and the whole character ofthe fighting would have been different.The violation of Belgium by Germany,following so close on Austria's attackupon the small nation of the Servians,practically ensured a solid sentimentfor the war. During the last thirteenmonths, this sentiment has deepeneduniversally, and the few politicians whostand aside criticising while millions ofour young men go to the risks of war inFrance and the Dardanelles are notlikely to receive gratitude or honor inthe days after peace is concluded.

American readers who imagine thatI am in favor of the policy that led tothe war are mistaken. To express thebelief that England and her Allies mustgo forward with the war does not im-ply approval of Grey's diplomacy. MostSocialists before the war mistrustedGrey, just as they mistrusted LloydGeorge; that i(J, both these politicianswere considered to be mere represent-atives of bourgeois interests and ideals;and, for myself, I still think that. AllBvrop* baa for years past been in-

fected by militarism. But the Germans,who are naturally inclined to organiz-ing and methodising their ideas, andlifting up their ideas as objects of akind of religious enthusiasm, have beenmore painstaking and thorough-goingand logical in their militarism thantheir fellow-Europeans. This power ofconcentration and devotion, which maybe applied to very noble uses, becomesanti-social when applied to militaryideals. Europe is therefore driven, bya kind of fatality, to expiate its ownmilitarist errors, and millions of Europ-ean democrats are compelled to hopefor the defeat of the Germanic Powersin order to avoid a check to popularliberties and to Socialism.

But I have no sympathy with thefire-eating people who wish to see theEntente Allies enter Berlin, supposingthat event were possible. It appears tome that, in an effective degree, theworst elements of German military po-licy are already checked, and thatadequate benefits will accrue to Europegenerally if the Entente Allies canensure the liberation of Belgium,France, and Servia. If these typicalproblems are decided, the other ques-tions arising out of the campaigns of1914-15 can be satisfactorily solved. Sofar as I have been able to judge, thismoderate demand would be approved bya large mass of opinion in the UnitedStates. But it cannot be claimed thatthe Allies are at present in a positionto enforce even this modest program.Hence, I must say with the deepest re-gret, discussion of Peace Terms is in-opportune, and I fear no service is be-ing done to the cause of reconciliationby making peace proposals just now.

A colossal debt casts its shadow be-fore. Europe will only discover oneway to pay it, and I think England willbe the first to see the true solution,namely, the socialisation of industries.Only by this means can unemploymentbe obviated on the return of the armies,and only by this means can the vast eco-nomies be effected which will be neces-sary to raise the money. The control,or partial control, of various industriesnow exercised by the British Govern-ment supply a lesson, which can be readand understood by all men, in the valueof collectivist methods. This controlstill permits private profits, and istherefore not truly Socialist; but it ist significant first step. Of course,aristocrats and capitalists will fightagainst this change, and raise a thous-and objections to this real UniversalService. This struggle to clear off theWar Debt will carry Europe intoevents which will eclipse the tragedy of1914-15. But the new forces of demo-cracy will to dedicated to this struggle;I mean the masses of the younger So-

cialists, and the dynamic of the WomanMovement. I trust that H. M. Hynd-man, who is, after all, our chief Social-ist, will live to see the opening of thiswonderful drama in human history.

FREDERICK J. GOULD.London, England.

THIRD ANNivtRSARY

N e w R e v i e wto be celebrated by a

Sociable and DinnerSUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION:

"Rebirth of tbe International'

Some extracts from lettersto the Dinner Committee willshow the lively interestaroused.

Artu.ro Giovanni tti: "Ishall be very glad to attendand speak at the Annivers-ary Dinner of the NEW RE-VIEW. The subject for dis-cussion is a particularly fineand alluring one and you areto be congratulated for hav-ing selected it."

/. M. Rubinow: "I need notsay how much I shall appre-ciate being with the many il-lustrious ladies and gentle-men whom you mention inyour letter."

Jacques Loeb: "I gladlyaccept and I 'hope nothingwill interfere with my beingpresent. . . The only thingon which I might speakwould be the scientific inter-nationalism which is also inneed of re-birth."

Mary W. Ovington: "Ishall be very happy to bepresent at the NEW REVIEWDinner and to speak. Thesubject ought to bring us in-spiration."

SPEAKERS:Prof. Jacques LoebArturo GiovannittiW. E. B- DuBoisMeyer LondonL. B- BoudinLouis C. FrainaI. M. RubinowMary W. OvingtonRose Pastor StokesM. Oppenheimer, Chairman

Time: Saturday Evening,December 18th, 7 p. m.

Place: West End Restau-rant, 226 West 125th St.

Price:' $1.00 per cover (in-cluding tips).

Tickets can be secured from:By Mail:

Moses Oppenheimer, 1871Marmion Ave., New York.

In Person:New Review, 256 Broadway,

New York.

WE Do NOTADVERTISE A

BOOKWE CANNOTRECOMMEND

New Review Book ServiceTo Our Readers: The following list of books was

compiled after a thorough survey of the literature ofeach subject. It is not yet complete; more books andsubjects are to be added.

Remember This: We can get you any book of anypublisher. Information gladly supplied.

Send all orders toNEW REVIEW BOOK SERVICE,

VITAL BOOKSON ALLVITAL

PROBLEMSOP THE DAY

The Great War

The Anglo-German Problem, byCharles Sarolea. Written beforethe outbreak of the war, thisbook is an analysis of the conflictof rival Imperialisms. Whileslightly partial toward Pranceand England, it is neverthelessan important contribution to-ward the discussion of the causesof the war. (P) $1.35. Postage10 c. extra.

Pan-Germanism, by Roland G.Usher. Stresses the diplomaticand political duel between theGreat Powers, as an expressionof their economic interests andantagonisms. Portrays the in-evitable onward sweep of theseantagonisms into war. The eco-nomic basis and aims of Pan-Germanism explained. (HM.)$1-75. Postage lOc. extra.

Imperial Germany and the Indus-trial Revolution, by ThorsteinVeblen. A scientific analysis ofthe historical, economic and so-cial factors resulting in Ger-many's phenomenal industrialprogress. Treats the subject fromthe standpoint of material fac-tors and universal history "Es-pecially welcome as a help toclear thinking," says Dr. IsaacA. Hourwieh, (M.) $1-50 pos-tage 12c. extra.

Russia and the Great War, by C. Alexinsky.Written by a Russian Socialist, whodeals with the subject adequately and bm-iantely. An exceptionally valuable book.(S$3.00 postpaid.

Toward International Government, by J. A.Hobson, the author of Imperialism. A fewof the chapters are "A League of Peace";"International Arbitration; its Scope andMethod"; "International Force"; "The In-ternational Executive"; "The Social Contractof Nations"; "Democracy"; and "Interna-tionalism."

Origins and Destiny of Imperial Britian. by Prof.J. A. Cramb. The Imperialism of Great Britaineulogized and explained by a Briton. Indispen-sable to an understanding of the general char-acteristics of modern Imperialism. (DU)»1.60

Nationality and the War, by Arnold J. ToynbeeThe only book extant dealing with this mostimportant subject. Chock full of material, onthe whole ably interpreted. (DU) $2.50, post-paid.

German-World Policies, by Paul Bohrbach. Theaims and ideals of Pan Germanism explaineaby a "liberal" Pan-German. (M) $1.2i,postage 8c. extra.

Italy's Foreign and Colonial Policy, by TommasoTitoni, Italian Minister for Foreign Affairs,1903-1909. Being a selection of his speechesto Parliament. Provides abundant materialfor a study of Italian Imperialism and forthe subtle change in Italian foreign andcolonial policy subsequent to the Austrianannexation of Bosnia-Herzegovina. (DU)$2.50, postpaid lOc extra.

The Export of Capital, by C. K.Hobson. Not a war book, butdeals with the economic basis ofmodern Imperialism—the exportof capital. A scholarly study offoreign investment—its causes;growth, method, effects,etc- Thematerial for a study of the econ-omics of Imperialism. (M.) $2.00,postage lOc. extra-

Socialists and the War, by Wm. English Walling.A documentary study of Socialist participa-tion in, and attitude to, the Great War. In-dispensable for a full and adequate under-standing of the subject. No more importantbook on the war has been published. (H)$1.50, postpaid.

France in Danger, by Paul Vergnet Genuinelydefensive in character, moderate in tore andthoroughly documented. Proves that the na-tion as a whole did not fully realize the Pan-German menace. (DU) $1.00, postage Se.extra.

German Philosophy and Politics, byJohn Dewey. A pragmatic ap-praisal, incisive and conclusive.No man is better fitted thanDewey to write such a book.Concludes with an inspiring In-ternationalism. (H.) $1.00, pos-tage 5e. extra.

Labor Problems

Sabotage, by Emile Pouget, with anIntroduction by Arturo Giovan-itti. A sober presentation of thevalue of Sabotage in the classwar. (K.) 50e. postpaid.

American Labor Unions, by HelenMarot. Covers the whole laborunion movement. Sincerely crit-ical and concretely revolution-ary. Full of facts, and thor-oughly interesting. Written bya trades unionist with a revolu-tionary vision of the immediatefuture. (H.) $1-25, postage 10aextra.

butlgration and Labor, by Isaac A. Hourwick.A study of a vital problem by a specialist.Traces the economic effects of immigratioBupon American development, and shows thebeneficient results. Statistically it is un-assailable, theoretically unanswerable. Evenopponents of the author's idea of unrestrictedimmigration concede the value of the boox,the only one of its kind dealing with thissubject. The Call calls it "an epoch-makingbook." Indispensable to Socialists, radicalsand all interested in the future of labor.The N. Y. Times says, "Fullness of knowl-edge evidenced on every page of this stu-dious book." (P) $2.60, postage 16c extra.

The Militant Proletariat, by AustinLewis. The unskilled workers asa new and revolutionary factorin the American Labor Move-ment. A necessary book. (K-)50 c. postpaid.

Syndicalism, by Louis Levine- Thenew forces in the Labor move-ment vividly expounded- Sym-pathetic and critical. "Most com-prehensie and illuminating studyof revolutionary Syndicalism inthe English language."—Amer-ican Economic Review. Paper,(L. G.) $1.50; cloth, $2.00. Post-age lOc. extra.

Reflections on Violence, by GeorgesSorel. The classic on the phil-osophy of Syndicalism. In thisbook Sorel expounds his famoustheory of "social myths." (HU.)$2.25, postage lOc. extra.

Social Insurance, by I. M. Rubinow,^o only comprehensive book onr.he subject. Includes Employers'Liability, Sick Insurance, Old\ge Pensions, Insurance AgainstUnemployment, fifit. Written hya Socialist and a specialist. (EL)$3.00, postage 12c- extra-

I New Review Book ServiceWages in the United States, byScott Nearing. Proves that alarge portion of American work-ers are unable to maintain a pro-per standard of living. Marshalsthe facts concerning wage the-ories, the cost of living, and theproblems arising out of the stand-ard of living investigations. (M.)$1.25, postpaid,

Labor and Law of Today, by Prot.Luzo Brentano. (P.) $1.50, post-age 8c. extra.

FictionThe Star Rover, by Jack London.

Daring in theme and vivid in ex-ecution, one of the most originalnovels Jack London has written.A California professor, con-demned to death, spends his lasthours writing a Mss. which is atonce a protest against capitalpunishment and a speculation onthe adventures of the soul in va-rious personalities and timesthroughout the ages. (M) $1.50,postpaid.

The Research Magnificent, by H. Q.Wells. The story of a man whofeels that he is born to be a lead-er, one of those enlightened sup-ermen who are to lead humanityout of the mire of present condi-tions, struggles magnificentlyagainst those conditions- It is atonce a wird life-story and pro-found study of the contemporaryworld struggle- "Might almostbe called an epitome of humanexistence." (M.) $1.50, postpaid.

The "Genius", by Theodore Dreiser.A powerful, gripping story ofmodern life in New York. Prankand realistic. Mr. Dreiser is oneof the great writers of the world,a man who is quietly revolutioniz-ing Aflxerican fiction. (L.) $1.50,postpaid-

Violette of Pere Lachaise, by AnnaStrunsky Walling. The life andspiritual development of a rareand beautiful character—a girlof the masses who gives herselfto the cause of social revolution.(ST.) $1.00, postpaid.

The harbor, by Ernest Poole. Presents theAmerican Revolt in fiction. Depicts th«great change? taking place in American life,business, ideals and labor. The central char-acter passes from a blind worship of enter-prise ard efficiency to a deeper knowledge ofhumanity and the labor movement. (H)(1.40, postpaid.

Children of the Dead End, by Pat-rick MacGill. The autobiogra-phy of an Irish Navvy. MacGillhimself comes from the depths,and his rise marks the rise of anew social class in literature.(DU) $1.35, postpaid.

The Rat-Pit, by Patrick MacGill.A novel which voices the life andstruggle of inarticulate unskilledlabor. Realism fused with im-agination and sympathy. A newgenre in contemporary fiction.(D.) $1.25, postpaid-

Tales of Two Countries, by Maxim Gorky. TheRussian tales are typical of the old propa-gandistic Gorky. The Tales of Italy ex.press a new Gorky, mellowed by experience,critical without being a propagandist, ar-tistic as life itself in all its simplicity. They•ing their story into your imagination, andstir with a strange beauty (HU) $1.25,postpaid.

The Story of Jacob Stahl, by J. D.Beresford. In three volumes:The Early History of JacooStahl; A Candidate for Truth;The Invisible Event. Floyd Dellplaces this trilogy among the sixbest novels- Perhaps the finestwork of contemporary Englishfiction. (D) Each $1.35. Theset, $2.75, postpaid.

Jcan-Christophe, by Remain Holland. Thenovel of an age, the epic of an epoch. Itis the history of the struggle of the indi-vidual for self-expression, for a new moral-ity, for the sanctity of the individual; afrank portrayal of the life of a man from theday of his birth to the day of his death; acriticism of contemporary culture, destruc-tive and constructive. The characters aredrawn by the hand of a master, the styleis strong in its simplicity and symphonic Inits sweep Critics agree that it is the great-est novel of the XXth cer.tury, one of thegreatest novels of all time. (E) In threevolumes, each $1.50, postpaid.

Pelle the Conqueror, by MartinAndersen Nexo. A Danish epicof the proletariat. Overwhelm-ing in its truth, sympathy andrealism. A proletarian Jean-Christophe. The first volumedeals with peasant life, the sec-ond volume with life in the in-dustrial city. (H.) Each volume$1.50, postpaid.

The Novels of Dostoevsky, by Feodor Dosto-evsky. A new and superb translation. Thegreatest of Russian novelists. The Brother*Karomazov. "The greatest work of fictionever written, a work so extraordinary thateverything else seems insignificant," saysGeorge Moore. Crime and Punishment: "Itis impossible to read this novel without rev.erently saluting the author's power." saysWilliam Lyons Phelps. Other volumes: TheIdiot; The Possessed; The House of the Dea£;The Insulted and the Injured. The novels orDostoevsky are all of such consistent great-ness, and of such strong appeal that to im-pute supremacy of ore over another is un-just. They should all be read, these novelsof a man who disputes with Balzac the claimof being the world's greatest novelist. Uni-form binding. Each volume, $1.50, postpaid.

Sanme, by Michael Artsibashev. A powerfulnovel which created a sensation in Russia. Th»story of an individualist who scorns all so-cial ties and moral law. (H) 11.36, post-paid.

The Works of Turgeniev, complete,in seven volumes (two volumesin one). An excellent edition inevery respect, good paper andtypography, bound in neat cloth.Formerly sold at $15.00. Pricefor the set (no volume sold sep-arately), $7.50, postpaid.

The Bomb, by Frank Harris. A vivid novelcentering around the Haymarket tragedy >nChicago, in 1887. (X) Regular price, $1.60;our price 90 cents, postage 10 cents extra.

Together, by Robert Herrick. A striking andfaithful picture of American middle-class life,particularly the effect upon the wife of abusiness man's absorption in his business.Portrays the social and industrial conditionsof to-day. (M) $1.50, postpaid.

The Octopus, by Frank Norris. Written aboutfifteen years ago. this novel symbolizes oneof the most important social movements inAmerican history—the rise to power of therailroad interests, and the class struggle be-tween this power and the agrarian interestsof California. Zolaesque in its sweep, mag-nificent from both a social and a literarystandpoint. Perhaps the American nove»(DP) $1.60, postpaid.

The Iron Heel, by Jack London. A brilliantlyimaginative picture of the great revolution ofthe future. Throbs with the spirit of revolt.(M) $1.50, postpaid.

A Man's World, by Albert Edwards. A sig-nificantly modern book, portraying, amongother splendid characters, a keen-minded,courageous, modern woman. (M) $1.25, post-paid.

The Spy. by Maxim Gorky. A novel of the rev-olutionary movement in Russia. (X) Form-erly sold at $1.50, our price 80 cents, post-age 10 cent* extra.

Twenty-Six and One, by Maxim Gorky. Threeof the best of Gorky's short stories. (X)Formerly sold at $1.25, our price 70 cents,postage 10 cents extra.

Sons and Lovers, by H. D. Lawrence. One ofthe finest novels of the newer school ofEnglish novelists. (K) $1.50, postpaid.

Sonnies, by Blasco Ibanez, "the Spar ish Zola."A realistic historical novel, describing thelife of the ancients at the period of thePunic Wars. The picture of Hannibal isunsurpassed; while the novel as a whole,perhaps possesses more life and power eventhan Flaubert's Salammbo. (DD) $1.29,postpaid.

The Red and the Black, by Stendhal. We re-fuse to describe this superb novel. If younever read a work of fiction again, read this.(DD) $1.35, postpaid.

The Crock of Gold, by James Stephens. Amasterpiece of contemporary Irish fiction. Astory of the open air, deep forests, rock-strewn pastures and mountain tops, and ofthe fairy folk of old Ireland with the GodPan and the great Angus Og. "Not anotherbook like this Crock of Gold in English lit-erature. . . The humor and the style areMr. Stephens' own peculiar gift."—LondonStandard. (M) $1.50, postpaid.

The Way of all Flesh, by Samuel Butler. Oneof the finest novels, perhaps the finest, inthe English language. (DU) $1.50, postpaid.

New Review Book ServiceAmerican History

The Rise of the American People,by Roland G- Usher. Presents"a lucid account of results ananot processes." Does not chron-icle the mere sequence of events,but explains the meaning orthose events- A philosophicalinterpretation of American His-tory (C.) $2.00, postpaid.

Social Forces in American History,by A. M. Simons. An economicinterpretation of American his-tory, describing the variousclasses which have ruled andfunctioned from time to time.(M) $1.50, postpaid.

An Economic Interpretation of theConstitution, by Prof. Charles A.Beard. A valuable and stimu-lating book by a thorough stu-dent of the subject. (M.) $2.25,postpaid.

Economic Origins of JeffersonianDemocracy, by Prof. Charles A.Beard. Deals with the periodfollowing the adoption of theconstitution. The conflict be-tween rising Capitalism andAgrarianism. (M.) $2.50, post-paid.

Contemporary History

Present-Day China, by G. L. Hard-ing. An excellent study ofChina and the Chinese Revolu-tion. Particularly valuable forits analysis of the schemes ofForeign Capital for the financialand political subjugation ofChina. The author speaks fromfirst-hand knowledge. (C) $1.00,postage 5 cents extra.

Carranxa and Mexico, by Carlo de Fornaro,The causes of the Revolution, Carranxa'sprogram, and the reconstructive work of thefuture. Stresses the feudal and capitalistaspects of the situation. (K) $1.25, post-paid.

Latin America: Its Rise and Progress. By F.Garcia Calderon. (S) $3.00, postpaid.

Education

Schools of To-Morrow. by John Dewey, (pro-fessor of philosophy, Columbia University)and Evelyn Dewey. Not a dry-as-dust hand-book, but a vital, inspiring study. A Surveyof all the best work that is being carried ontoday in America in the way of educationalexperiment. The authors point to these typ-ical advance posts of progress, search out thetruth that underlies them, and from thesetroths construct the schools of to-morrow.(DU) $1.50, postage 8c extra.

Orient and Ideals of the Modern School, byFrancisco Ferrer, the great Spanish educator,assassinated by the Government of Spain forhis radical ideas. (P) $1.00, postage lOeextra.

Feminism

Women as World-Builders, by Floyd Dell. Astudy of the Feminist movement by means often most representative feminists. Clever,original, these studies relate the Feministmovement to our changing life as a whole.60c. postage 6c extra.

Fear and Conventionality, by Elsie Clews Par-sons. The theme is the outgrowth of conven-tionality from every human being's fear ofevery other human being. The ceremonialismof our intercourse with other people is toprotect ourselves. The final chapter is a de-lightful description of the society of thefuture, where we won't be afraid of eachother, and fear and conventionality willvanish. (P) $1.50, postage lOc extra.

The Old-Fashioned Woman, by Elsie Clews Par-sons. A stimulating scientific discussion. Un-usual in treatment and conclusions. (P) $1.50,postage lOc extra.

Woman and Labor, By Olive Schreiner.theauthor of "The Story of an African Farm,"in a powerful and inspiring volume, discussesbroadly the position of women to-day in thelight of the past, shows the necessity thatthey should partake in the work of the world.(ST) $1.26, postpaid.

The Subjection of Women, By John Stuart MillThe classic on the subject of woman and herproblem. With foreword by Carrie ChapmanCatt (ST) 60c., postpaid.

Woman under Socialism. By August Bebel.Translated from the original German of the83rd edition, by Daniel De Leon. This is oneof the greatest Socialist books ever written.It is a powerful exposure of the shams ofcapitalist morality. This is the book fromwhich garbled extracts are taken to showthat Socialists advocate "free love." (LN)$1.00, postpaid.

ReligionThe Study of Religion, by Morris Jastrow, Jr.

Discusses the methodics of the subject, andshows that religious origins and developmentscannot be understood unless studied in re-lation to the general historical conditions.(S) $1.50, postage lOc extra,

History of the Conflict Between Science andReligion, by Wm. J. Draper. A classic on thesubject. (A) $1.76, postpaid.

The Rise of Religious Liberty In America, bySanford H. Cobb. A historical work of primeimportance. (X) $2.00, postpaid.

The Religieu Revolution of To-Day, by Prof.James Shotwell. <HM) $1.10, postpaid.

Socialism

The 18th Brnmaire of Louis Bona-parte, by Karl Marx. The under-lying class-economic interestswhich created the second Empire.But, more than that, it is a mag-nificent study in the philosophyof history. 50c, postpaid.

Wage Labor and Capital, by EarlMarx. A popular study of thesubject. 50c, postpaid.

Landmarks of Scientific Socialism,Anti-Duehring, by Frederick En-gels. A survey of the Socialistposition, elaborated in contro-versy with Prof. Duehring. $1.00postpaid.

Feuerbach: The Boots of the Social-ist Philosophy. By Frederick En-gels. Translated, with Critical In-troduction, by Austin Lewis. 50c,postpaid.

Anarchism and Socialism, by G.Plechanoff- A masterly study ofthe subject, by one of the fore-most Marxian Scholars of theworld. 50c, postpaid.

Essays on the Materialistic Con-ception of History, by AntonioFabriola, Professor in the Uni-versity of Rome. An elaborationand synthesis of the Socialisttheory of Historical Materialism.$1.00, postpaid.

The Theoretical System of EarlMarx, by Louis B. Boudin,author of "Socialism and War".This is an answer to critics ofMarx, and to some Socialists whocaricature the Marxian doctrines.It is an excellent synthesis of theSocialist ideas of the world, his-tory, society, etc- $1.00, postpaid.

Socialism as it is, by "Wm. EnglishWalling. A masterly study of thecurrents of thought and action inthe Socialist movement beforethe war. A really world-widesurvey of the international move-ment of the working class. (M.)50c, postage 5c extra-

The Larger Aspects of Socialism,by Wm. English Walling. An in-cisive, inspiring book showingthe Socialist trend in modernscience and culture, and modernthought generally. (M.) $1.50,postpaid.

Ethics and the Materialist Con-ception of History, by KarlKautsky. In five parts: Ancientand Christian Ethics; the EthicalSystem of the Period of the En-lightenment; the Ethics of Kant;the Ethics of Darwinism; theEthics of Marxism. 50c, postpaid.

The High Cost of Living, by KarlKautsky. A study of the econo-mic causes for increasing prices;full of facts and figures. 50c,postpaid.

Social and Philosophical Studies,by Paul Lafargue- A series ofkeenly critical studies of thecauses of religion and abstractideas. 50c, postpaid.

New Review Book Service

Socialism in Theory and Practice,by Morris Hillquit. The state-ment or moderate American So-cialism. (M.) $1-50, postpaid.

Capital, by Karl Marx. The great classic ofSocialism. Unrefuted and irrefutable. A

study of the tendeneees and forces in Cap-italist Society.Volume I, "The Process of Capitalist Pro-duction," is practically complete in itself. Itexplains the thteg which, up to the time that

Marx came on the scene, had confused all theeconomists, namely, Surplus Value, 869 pages,J2.00.

Volume n. 'The Process of Circulation ofCapital," explains the part the merchant andthe banker play in the present system, andthe laws that govern social capital. 618pages, $2.00.

Volume III, treats of "The Process ofCapitalist Production as a Whole." Predictsth« rise of Trusts ard makes clear the causeof panics and industrial crises. Shows howthe small capitalist is swallowed. Explainsthe subjects of Land, Rent and Farming.1,048 pages, J2.00.

The set, three volumes, $6.00, postpaid.

Russian Literature

Sanbie. A powerful novel which created a sen-sation in Russia, The story of an individualistwho rejects all Social ties and moral law. (H)$1.85, postpaid.

Tbe Millionaire, and other stories. Artzibasheffsgenius is perhaps at its finest in this book.(H.) $1.36, postpaid.

Breaking Point. Another marvellous picture ofRussian life, universal in its appeal. (H.)$1.35, postpaid.

Dead Souls. The great Russian humorousclassic. The travels and adventures of a like-able rapscallion with a magnificent schemefor making a fortune. Introduction by Ste-phen Graham. (ST) $1.25, postpaid.

Th« Black Mmk. Stories of Russian life writtenwith consummate art and subtle humor. (ST)$1.25, postpaid.

The Kiss. Stories of modern Russia by a writerwhom Tolstoy called the Russian de Mau-passant. (ST) $1.25, postpaid.

Th« Steppe and other Stories. A panorama ofpeasant life on the great plains of SouthernRussia. (ST) $1.25, postpaid.

Miscellaneous

The Cry for Justice. An Anthology of revolt.Edited by Upton Sinclair, with a preface byJack London. Illustrated with reproductionsef social protest in art. The "Cry for Justice"has been culled from the recorded literatureof all ages and compacted into this oneepoch-making volume. This is the first effortthat has made to cover the whole field of theliterature of social protest, both in prose andpoetry, and from all languages and times.Since a number of promir.ent authorities as-sisted the editor this volume is the productof a number of minds; and the collection re-presents not Its editor, but a whole movement,made and sustained by the master—spirits ofall ages. 955 pages, vellum cloth, stamped ingold oa aide and back. $2.00, postpaid.

Statesman** Tear Book. This Is the standardyear book, the greatest collection of politicaland economic information concerning thenations of the world. The wealth, resources,industry, trade, government, etc.,—all thenecessary statistical information is here com-piled from the latest reports of aH nations.(CM.) $3.50, postpaid.

The Mind of Primitive Man, by Prof. FransBoas. A satisfactory idea of the scope of thisgreat work is given by the interesting head-ings in the table of contents: 1. Racial Pre-judices; 2. Influence of Environment uponHuman Types; 3. Influence of Heredity uponHuman Types; 4. The Mental Traits of Pri-mitive Han and of Civilized Man; 6. Race andLanguage; 6. The Universality of CulturalTraits; 7. The Evolutionary Viewpoint; 8.Some Traits of Primitive Culture; 9. Sum-mary; 10. Race Problems in the UnitedStates. (H) $1.60, postpaid.

Cambridge Modern History. 12 vote. (M.), each$4.00, set $48.00, postpaid. This comprehensivehistory of modern times consists of twelveroyal octavo volumes of about 900 pages each,bound in buckram, gilt, and covers the periodfrom the close of the Middle Ages to the pre-sent day. The scope of the work includes 12volumes, as follows: 1. Tbe Renaissance; 2.The Reformation; 8. The Wars of Religion;4. The Thirty Years' War; 6. The Age ofLouis XIV; 6. The Eighteenth Century; 7. TheUnited States; 8. French Revolution; 9. Na-poleon ; 10. The Restoration ; 11. The Growthof Nationalities; 12. The Latest Age. "Themost full, comprehensive and scientific his-tory of modern times in the English language,or in any language." "The Evening Post?',New York.

SPECIAL CUT RATESRegular Club

RsteegularRste

New Review ......... $1.50']The Masses .......... 1.00 1 O QO

2.60J

New Review 1.80)The Inter. Socialist [

Review 1.00 (

New Review 1.601Critic and Guide 1.001(Wm. I. Robinson, M. £>., f

Editor) 2.601

New Review l.SOl"Songs of Labor" 761

(by Morris Rosenfeld) f2.50 j

New Review 1.50"Theoretical System of

Karl Marx 1.00(by L. B. Boudin)

\M

|_90

|JS

QJH)

New Review 1.60 ]"Socialists and the I 0 40

War" 1.60) Z"~"(by Wm. English WMing) >

3.00

Ask us for Combinations on anyMagazine

Send all Subscription to

NEW REVIEW256 BROADWAY, NEW YORK

Current Issue of

The

Intercollegiate SocialistQuarterly Journal of International

Socialism

Symposium on "Peace and Social-ism" by Senator Henri La Fon-taine of Belgium, Winner of theNobel Peace Prize, CharlottePerkins Oilman, Charles Zueb-lin, Bouck White.

Proceedings I. S. S. Labor DayConference.

Other Contributors to this Issue:—John Spargo, Helen L. Sumner,Prof. Herbert A. Miller, HarryW. Laidler, Caro Lloyd andothers.

10 cts. Copy 25cts. Year

Intercollegiate SocialistSociety

Educational Building

70 Fifth Ave. New York City

If you like

PEARSON'SMAGAZINE

at all, you willlike it BETTERthan any other

magazine

Send your name and addresson a postcard to PEARSON'SMAGAZINE, 425 East 24thStreet, New York City, for a

FREE SAMPLE COPYAND SEE; then subscribe

through us—

HERE'S A BARGAIN

New ReviewPearson's

1 yr. $1.601 yr. 1.50

3.00

OUR PRICE - $2,00

New Review

LectureBureau

SPEAKERS:Frank BohnL. B. BoudinIsaac A. HourwichFelix Grendon

and others.

Engagements only for citiesnot more than 100 miles fromNew York City.

Terms: Reasonable, on a sub-scription card basis.

Write Now.

New Review

Lecture Bureau256 BROADWAY

New York City.

A Message From BelgiumBrand Whitlock, United States Minister to Belgium, refer-

ring to a certain Chicago publication, wrote last month:

"... You don't know what a comfort it is to get ThePublic. In the midst of all the horrors of the world it isthe one thing I know of—aside from one's own con-science—and the democratic principle down deep in ourheart—by which to correct one's reckoning. It is a com-pass—never sensational, always calm and pointing in thesame direction."

He was writing of The Public, which WilliaraMarion Reedyhas described as "The Greatest journal of pure democracy inthe world."

All this, however, is a little indefinite.

What IS The Public?The Public is a weekly newspaper that aims to be right

rather than sensational; that aims to give, in concise andplain terms, all the news that will live. It is also an editorialpaper that puts all public questions to the supreme test ofobvious moral principles and stands by the results. While itseditorial policy is as broad as fundamental democracy itself,its editorials and special articles frequently deal with taxation,because taxation is the taproot of democratic government.

Altho I am a socialist of the deepest dye, if I could nothave access to more than one paper or periodical I shouldchoose The Public.—W. R. Eastman, Schenectady, N. Y.

Send in a trial subscription and judge for yourself.

THE PUBLIC, Ellsworth Building, Chicago, 111.

Please send me The Public, I enclose one dollar to cover a year'ssubscription, on the understanding that it will be refunded if I do notlike the paper.

Name

Address

SOCIALISM AND WARBy LOUIS B. BOUDIN

Author of "The Theoretical System of Karl Marx"

A brilliant and adequate Socialist interpretation of the Great War by the foremost Marxianscholar in America.

This book develops a theory of the economic basis of Imperialism that is at once original andsatisfactory.

The general problems involved in the Socialist attitude to ALL wars are brilliantly discussed.

CHAPTERS.L CLEARING THE GROUND. Disposes of the superficial "causes" of the war as advanced by many non-

Socialists and some Socialists.

IL THE ECONOMIC CAUSES OF THE WAR. A brilliant and inspiring application of the Materialist Con-ception of History to contemporary events. Analyzes the relation of Capitalism to war, and the eco-nomic basis of Imperialism. Shows why Capitalism at one stage of its development is peaceful, at an-other stage warlike.

HI. THE IDEOLOGIC CAUSES OP THE WAR. How material interests develop an ideology. Shows how theeconomic interests of "iron and steel" Capitalism develop the ideology of the newer nationalism andtheories of "race upremacy."

IV. THE IMMEDIATE CAUSES OP THE WAR AND THE STAKES INVOLVED. The production of ironand steel as the basis of Capitalist Imperialism; Germany's lead as a producer of iron and steel the causeof her aggression in the present war. The economic reasons for the invasion of Belgium and Servia. Therelation of the Bagdad railway to the present war.

THE WAR AND THE SOCIALISTS,assigns the responsibility.

Traces the cause for the breakdown of International Socialism, and

VL SOCIALIST VS. BOURGEOIS THEORIES. What is the Socialist conception of "race" and "nation"? TheSocialist conception of Internationalism? The Socialist attitude to war? Can Socialists be neutral? Thischapter is a finely constructive piece of work, and applies the class struggle theory to the problems ofnationality.

THE ANALYSIS IS STRICTLY SCIENTIFIC, THE STYLE AND PRESENTATION SIMPLEAND DIRECT.

Price, $1.00 Postpaid

Forthcoming Books

"SOCIALISM" OF NEW ZEA-LAND. By Robert H.Hutchinson.MR. HUTCHINSON studied con-

ditions at first hand in NewZealand. His book is a masterlyanalysis and criticism of StateSocialism in New Zealand. Itscauses and results are described.A chapter on the influence ofthe Great War on State Social-ism lends an added value to thebook.

SOCIALISM AFTER THE WAR.By Louis C. Fraina.THIS is a study of the future

of Socialism in the light of thechanges wrought by the GreatWar. It discusses fully therevolutionary Socialist attitudetoward the more important so-cial problems arising after thewar.

STUDIES IN SOCIALISM. ByIsaac A. Hourwich.THIS is a remarkably sugges-

tive series of studies in socialand economic development.Among the chapters are: "TheTrust and Socialism," "Social-Economic Classes in the UnitedStates," "Industrial Arbitra-tion," etc.

New Review Publishing Ass'll, 256 Broadway, New York City

All good Roads lead to "Rhodes"

'New York's Model Preparatory School99

lesjSenooi 8-IO-l2-l4Q/W.I25-StDo not waste your spare time,

€} Are you occupied during the day?

€| Then take up some study in the evening,

€[ Prepare for College, It takes less than two years.

€]f Study Engineering, Agriculture, Forestry, Medicine,Law, Dentistry, Pharmacy, Etc,

Don't be a Nonentity,

C| You are no better and no worse than hundreds ofothers.

CJ Education counts for more than all the riches in theworld.

<J The Rhodes School offers day and evening courses inall college preparatory subjects. Tuition fees are moderate.

IJ The Rhodes School has an attendance of more than2000 students.

t| Write to us for "List of Rhodes Graduates" whoentered College in September 1915.

€J Write to us for other interesting information aboutRhodes School,

All good Roads lead to "Rhodes"Printed by THE LANGUAGE PRINTERT.344-348 W. 38ft Street, New Tofk, N. T.