thusiastic indorsement when he declared that if the Nineteenth Canon-dealing with what is known as "the open pulpit" was not acceptable it was idle for the Episcopal Church to talk about Christian unity. Mr. Pepper had previously touched the very heart of this discussion in the Episcopal Church when he said that the only regret in connection with the adoption of the Nineteenth Canon was that the Church was not spiritually prepared for it. "The Emmanuel Movement and Its Deeper Meaning," discussed by Professor D.S. Miller, of Columbia University,brought to the front another matter of living interest. A dinner given by the New York Club to the Conference on Tuesday evening brought together a large assembly of the clergy of the diocese of New York, with representative laymen of New York City, and delegates from twenty-one dioceses. Addresses were made by Mr. Stetson, Bishop Greer, the Rev. Dr. Manning, rector of Trinity Church, Mr. Gardiner, and Mr. Mabie. The Conference was notable for its breadth of view and its profoundly religious spirit. Its sessions were significant, not only because of what was said in them, but as an evidence of the rapid growth of the lay movement in the Episcopal Church.

A NEW PHASE OF PAN-AMERICANISM

The Scientific Congress held in Santiago, Chile,

last winter was, as we are informed by a special correspondent, one of the most significant events in the intellectual history of the New World. Here for the first time, and under circumstances free from suspicions of "manifest destiny" or of "doing business," delegates from the United States were enabled to meet their colleagues in science from eighteen other American republics for a consideration of problems of common interest. Not only the Government of this country, but some fifteen of our universities and seven of our learned societies, were represented in the gathering, and forty-five out of the six hundred or more papers presented there were contributed by Americans. How much the advent of the United States was welcomed may be seen in the fact that Washington was fixed as the place, and October

12, 1912, as the date, of the next session. The topics treated by the Congress ranged over the entire field of science, but the idea of intellectual co-operation among the Latin-American republics and between them and the United States held the chief place. It found expression in the formal proceedings of the various sections, in the social functions provided with that boundless hospitality for which LatinAmericans are famous, and above all in the numerous conclusions adopted by the Congress as a whole. Among such conclusions several deserve special mention. They recommended, for example, a comparative study of the political institutions and of the problems and principles connected with the development of the American republics; the establishment of a Pan-American association of international peace and arbitration; the adoption of a system of standard time throughout the Americas; the creation of a PanAmerican American meteorological service; the employment of a uniform method of taking the census, modeled on that of the United States; and the speedy construction of the Pan-American (Intercontinental) Railway. They suggested the organization of future Pan-American Scientific Congresses on a permanent basis; the appointment in each republic of a standing committee charged with the duty of promoting the study and application of the work of the Congress, collaborating for this purpose with the International Bureau of the American Republics at Washington; and the holding annually in each country of a national scientific congress with a scope similar to that possessed by the international body itself. They proposed, also, the establishment in the national library of each state of a bureau that should facilitate an exchange and consultation of works relating to the American republics; the organization, similarly, of an international university bureau that should facilitate communication among the various universities of the American continent; the formation of a Pan-American educational association; and the encouragement of a reciprocal study of English, Spanish, and Portuguese. These conclusions indicate efficient ways of utilizing our intellectual relations with the LatinAmerican republics for the advancement

of a better international understanding. The broadening of our knowledge about our southern neighbors will tend to remove the contemptuous notion, born of ignorance, that they are barely more than half-civilized. On the other hand, when the Latin-Americans come to derive their information about us from sources other than ignorance and mistrust, they will be less disposed to think, as many of them do, that the United States produces much that is big and little that is good. Perhaps the greatest achievement of the Congress was to give to " Pan-Americanism" a meaning and a purpose more definite than it has ever possessed before. As thus newly interpreted, "Pan-Americanism" implies no desire on the part of the American republics for a development isolated from the activities of the world at large, no disposition to acquire a wealth, power, or culture from which other nations are to be excluded, and no feeling of animosity towards the countries of Europe in particular.

THE PROFESSORIAL 'EXCHANGE BETWEEN FRANCE AND AMERICA

M. Abel Lefranc lately arrived in this country from France to take up his work as lecturer at Harvard under the auspices of the Cercle Français. M. Lefranc, the twelfth lecturer on the Hyde Foundation at Harvard, is Professor of French Literature in the Collège de France at Paris, but is more widely known as the discoverer of some twelve thousand verses written by the famous Marguerite of Navarre. He made this discovery while searching the archives of the Bibliothèque Nationale at Paris in connection with the preparation of a history of French mediæval literature. He is an eminent authority on the literature of the first half of the fifteenth century in France. One of Professor Lefranc's predecessors at Harvard, M. René Deumic, the brilliant critic, was lately elected to the French Academy, as was M. Jean Aicard, the poet, in succession to the two distinguished Frenchmen who died last year, Gaston Boissier, the historian and archæologist, and François Coppée, the romancer and poet. van Dyke's long course of lectures on "The American Spirit" at the Sorbonne

Dr.

in Paris has awakened extraordinary interest, and the lecturer was called upon in many other ways to interpret America and American ideals to Paris audiences. They have found him an ideal interpreter, by reason of his clear knowledge of conditions in this country, his charming literary style, and his distinct and effective delivery. Having finished his work in Paris, he is now repeating the course in the provincial colleges and universities.

FOR CONSTRUCTIVE PHILANTHROPY

The weekly journal long known as Charities and the Com

mons has changed its often misunderstood title to The Survey. Originally a mere leaflet record of the doings of the Charity Organization Society of New York in helping helpless ones in the city to self-help, it was enlarged and then combined with The Commons, a publication issued at the famous Chicago settlement of that name. This title of the journal had long ceased to represent its deeper aim, and the wider scope suggested by its new title, as a National journal of that vital civilization which consists in the humanizing of social relations and conditions. In its special line as "a journal of constructive philanthropy, social, charitable, civic," and in its aim "to spread the news of social advance and to recruit workers for the common welfare," The Survey stands for interests which The Outlook upholds, and The Outlook hails it as an effective fellowworker; especially as inspired with a noble enthusiasm for humanity, and an intelligent aim to ascertain and eradicate the causes of social sores, rather than to salve these with emollients. No important advance in this line, whether of effort or of achievement in our own or in other countries, fails of record in its pages, nor do the hindrances to such advance escape exposure. Its editor and chief contributors are recognized authorities in economics and sociology, associated with expert investigators of industrial and living conditions. Church pastors and others to whom a weekly religious journal is indispensable have reason to couple with it this journal of religion applied to the meliorizing of social life.

THE JAPANESE QUESTION There are certain elementary principles all of which should be kept steadily in view if a nation wishes to act justly both by itself and by others. It must insist upon what is necessary for its own healthy life, and this even at the cost of a possible clash; but this insistence on what is due to itself should always be accompanied by all possible courtesy to and fair dealing with others.

These are the principles upon which the people of the United States should act as regards the question of the immigration of the Japanese into this country. The Japanese are a highly civilized people of extraordinary military, artistic, and industrial development; they are proud, warlike, and sensitive. I believe that our people have, what I personally certainly have, a profound and hearty admiration for them; an admiration for their great deeds and great qualities, an ungrudging respect for their national character. But this admiration and respect is accompanied by the firm conviction that it is not for the advantage of either people that emigrants from either country should settle in mass in the other country. The understanding between the two countries on this point should be on a basis of entire mutuality, and therefore on a basis which will preserve unimpaired the self-respect of each country, and permit each to continue to feel friendly good will for the other. Japan would certainly object to the incoming of masses of American farmers, laborers, and small traders; indeed, the Japanese would object to this at least as strongly as the men of the Pacific Coast and Rocky Mountain States object to the incoming in mass of Japanese workmen, agricultural laborers, and men engaged in small trades. The Japanese certainly object to Americans acquiring land in Japan at least as much as the Americans of the far Western States object to the Japanese acquiring land on our soil. The Americans who go to Japan and the Japanese who come to America should be of the same general class that is, they should be travelers, students, teachers, scientific investigators, men engaged in international business, men sojourning in the land for pleasure or study. As long as the emigration

from each side is limited to classes such as these, there will be no settlement in mass, and therefore no difficulty. Wherever there is settlement in massthat is, wherever there is a large immigration of urban or agricultural laborers, or of people engaged in small local business of any kind-there is sure to be friction. It is against the interests of both nations that such unrestricted immigration or settlement in mass should be allowed as regards either nation. This is the cardinal fact in the situation; it should be freely recognized by both countries, and can be accepted by each not only without the slightest loss of self-respect, but with the certainty that its acceptance will tend to preserve mutual respect and friendliness.

But in achieving this policy we should bear steadily in mind that it is our duty to combine the maximum of efficiency with the minimum of offensiveness. Only the National Government can carry out such a policy effectively, and the surest way to do harm is for State, municipal, or other local governments to pass laws which would be ineffective to obtain the real object and yet would produce intense irritation. The best of all possible ways in which to achieve the object is that which the governments of the two countries have now by common agreement adopted; for the Japanese Government has on its own initiative and of its own accord undertaken to prevent the coming hither in any appreciable numbers of Japanese of the classes to which I have referred. This agreement during the last year or thereabouts has worked so well that actually more Japanese have left the country than have come into it, and there has therefore been a diminution of their numbers. If this continues, all difficulties will cease without the need of further action, whether by treaty or by legislation. On the one hand, it is for the common interest of both countries that Japan should effectively and rigorously carry out this policy. On the other hand, it is not only the interest but the duty of America to take no further action until it can be seen whether this policy is successful; and this is just as wise, just as incumbent on us, whether we do or do not believe that it will be successful. The success of the policy must be gauged by its actual re

sults; that is, by the extent to which it arrests the immigration of large bodies of Japanese. If the Japanese Government proves unable to carry its policy through, then undoubtedly this Government, by treaty or by legislation, must protect itself and secure the desired result on its own initiative. But in such a case it would be doubly incumbent upon us to take the action in the way that would provoke the least possible friction and cause the least possible hard feeling. Moreover, we should make it evident that the recognition of the fact that it is to the interest of both races that the masses of both races should be kept apart is in no way incompatible with the heartiest feelings of mutual respect and admiration between the two races.

The fact that all really patriotic and farsighted Americans insist that hand in hand with a policy of good will toward foreign nations should go the policy of the upbuilding of our navy is often interpreted by well-meaning but short-sighted men as being a threat toward other nations, or as being provocative of war. Of the two assumptions the first is utterly unwarranted, and the second is the direct reverse of the truth. We have the right to say, for instance, what immigrants shall come to our own shores; but we are powerless to enforce this right against any nation that chooses to disregard our wishes, unless we continue to build up and maintain a firstclass fighting navy. The professional peace advocate who wishes us to stop building up our navy is, in reality, seeking to put us in a position where we would be absolutely at the mercy of any other nation that happened to wish to disregard our desires to control the immigration that comes to our shores, to protect our own interests in the Panama Canal, to protect our own citizens abroad, or to take any stand whatever either for our own international honor or in the interest of international righteousness. Moreover, those well-meaning but fatuous advocates of peace who would try to prevent the upbuilding of our navy utterly misread the temper of their countrymen. We Americans are ourselves both proud and highspirited, and we are not always by any means far-sighted. If our honor or our interest were menaced by a foreign power, this

Nation would fight, wholly without regard to whether or not its navy was efficient. In the event of a crisis arising, the peace advocates who object to our building up the navy would be absolutely powerless to prevent this country going to war. All they could do would be to prevent its being successful in the war. A strong navy is the surest guaranty of peace that America can have, and the cheapest insurance against war that Uncle Sam can possibly pay.

THEODORE ROOSEVELT.

OUR TARIFF PROGRAMME The debate on the tariff drones wearisomely along, and the country grows tired of it. The House bill proposes some reductions, the Senate bill some other reductions, and both propose increases. How their proposals compare is made plain by the illustrative but incomplete table published in The Outlook for April 24.

The programme which The Outlook proposes to Congress is that it adopt all the reductions suggested by either House or Senate, and none of the increases, and then adjourn and go home. Even so the total reductions will not be great. Business men could then begin business with some assurance as to the conditions on which to base their calculations of prices. They would not have to wait for Congress to decide all the debatable and debated questions concerning other forms of taxation. Next fall, when Congress reassembles, it will know better than it knows now what deficit in the National income will be made by this reduction. Perhaps there will be no deficit; perhaps increased importations will cause the new tariff to give a better income than the old tariff. But if there is a deficiency, Congress can then take up the question of how to supply that deficiency. It will have five possible sources of taxation for this purpose, which it could debate at its leisure: Spirits and tobacco. Stamp tax.

Corporation tax. Inheritance tax. Income tax.

Congress will not need to draw on all these sources to supply any possible deficiency. Were it otherwise-if it had to

draw on them all-the country would be benefited by the substitution of direct for indirect taxation. Then we should know

when we are paying taxes and what taxes we are paying. Now we do not know, and in this case the motto does not apply, "Where ignorance is bliss, 'tis folly to be wise."

THE DEPOSED SULTAN

Thirty-three years ago Abdul-Hamid II came to the throne of his ancestors as ruler of a vast empire extending from Arabia on the south to the Balkans on the north, from Mesopotamia on the east to Tripoli on the west, covering an area of over sixteen hundred thousand square miles, with a total population of about forty million people--the Ottoman Empire. The name comes from Othman, or Osman, the founder of the Turkish Empire in Asia.

Abdul-Hamid II was the second son of Sultan Abdul-Medjid, and the nephew of Abul-Aziz, the Sultan who was deposed in 1876, and who was succeeded by Abdul Hamid's elder brother, Murad V. But Murad had hardly come to the throne before he gave evidences of insanity. Hence, under the Mohammedan law, his deposition was proclaimed by the Sheikul-Islâm, the highest ecclesiastical authority in the Mohammedan communion, one who occupies something of the position, relative to the Sultan, that our Chief Justice does to the President.

Abdul-Hamid was the thirty-fourth ruler of the Osman family, and the twentyeighth since the conquest of Constantinople. The family had been notable long before 1453, when Constantinople was taken. Indeed, it is to be reckoned among the powerful fighting families of the world. In the third century the Turks began to move southward and westward from their original home in the plains of Central Asia. They were not to stop until they had overrun the territory from Bombay on the south to Vienna on the north, and to northern Africa on the west. They conquered many lands; they rightly ruled

none.

Abdul's reign has been one neither of conquest nor of right rule. It has been marked by territorial and moral retro

gression. When, in 1876, he came to the throne, the Ottoman Empire extended to the Danube. Servia was not independent. Bulgaria was not an autonomous principality; Bosnia and Herzegovina, now a part of Austria-Hungary, were still under Turkey's effective sovereignty. Certain districts of the Caucasus and the islands of Crete and Cyprus were undisputed Turkish possessions. The Sultan at Constantinople was still the acknowledged suzerain of Egypt and the Sudan. To-day Turkey is snorn of Servia, Bulgaria, Bosnia, Herzegovina, the Caucasus districts, Crete, Cyprus, and, for all practical purposes, the overlordship of Egypt and the Sudan.

To territorial loss financial dishonor must be added. Turkey's credit has become a jest. The Government publishes no estimates of revenue and expenditure. Turkey is bankrupt. Her people are poor. More than half of the population is unemployed; the rest have half work. This is not surprising when we realize that Turkey has no industries to speak of, has not exploited her mines, and allows the commerce of the country to be conducted for the foreigner's advantage. The result, of course, is starvation for the poor native.

The one material gain made during Abdul-Hamid II's reign has been in the development of the Ottoman army, of which he was the supreme head. In this he followed family traditions. When he came to the throne, the Turkish army was disorganized. It is now a strong fighting force, as was shown in the events of last week, when Constantinople was taken for the first time since 1453, thus reversing a conquest which has meant enslavement into a conquest which means constitutional liberty. The Turko-Greek War in 1897 also showed the army's excellence. A decade before that the Sultan had entered upon his reorganization scheme, and had reconstructed his forces on the German model, employing General von der Goltz, the eminent German military authority.

Of course in the Ottoman Empire material losses were not offset by this gain in military discipline. Yet the material losses, colossal as they were during AbdulHamid's reign, were not the Empire's greatest losses. Whatever of moral force