Italy. That Power would then decide their fate. The suggestion recalls the war of 1866 between Italy and Austria, at the close of which Austria returned Venetia, which she had long occupied, to Italy. But in order to "save face" Austria ceded Venetia to France and France then transferred the great North Italian province to Italy, from whom it never should have been taken. Another suggestion is that Turkey cede the Egean Islands to the Powers, as she has already announced her willingness to do in the case of Albania. But in any event, and whatever method be adopted, as the vast majority of the islanders are Greek, there can be little question as to where the ultimate sovereignty should lie. If not this year, then some year we may expect a return of the ancient sway of Greece over these classic lands.

don. It recently contained the report of an address by Mrs. Israel Zangwill at the London Pavilion. The speech discloses a point of view regarding the Balkan war which, we believe, has not yet been appreciated. In the ultimate analysis, according to Mrs. Zangwill, the Balkan victory has been won because every Turkish soldier is a single unit, whereas every married man in the Balkan army counts, more or less, as two. Thus Turkey has not been fighting against four allies, but really against eight! That this is not a fantastical explanation is shown by the part played by the Balkan women in the war. In their native towns and villages they are doing most of the work usually performed by men,” and thus keep things going while the men are at the front. Hence "the real base of the Balkan army is formed by the Balkan women at home." Again, "the Balkan women are actively employed in carrying provisions and ammunition to the forces." Indeed, among the Servians, asserts Mrs. Zangwill," women form the only Army Service Corps." She adds:

Women are doing the cooking, the sewing, the washing, for the soldiers; women are nursing the wounded. Women are dying in the fighting line. And practically all this extra strength and service is on one side only, the side of the allies. What wonder that the Turks have been defeated!

But this is not all. "It is obvious that a people all of whom are able-bodied will be

stronger than a people only half of whom are able-bodied "as is the case with the Turks. It is not so obvious, however, as Mrs. Zangwill is careful to point out, that the difference is not only in quantity, it is also in quality:

The allies have not only proved themselves unsuspectedly superior in fighting strength, they have also proved themselves unsuspectedly superior in morale. . . . When women hold the position that they do in Turkey, it may well be biologically undesirable for the The wife is "a mere cipher in the household."... Women have as far as possible been eliminated. The Turk has treated woman as a sort of indiscretion on the part of the Creator!

race. . .

The present war is a proof of the falsity of this ideal, says Mrs. Zangwill. Hence she feels that this war is not a triumph of Christianity over Mohammedanism so much as the triumph of the Christian position of woman over the Mohammedan position of

woman.

It may be said that in the past the Turks have been great fighters. That was when all the nations were also in an early stage of civilization.... Certainly to-day the Turk has shown his inferiority. Doubtless he might win again were he to be given an advantage great enough to outbalance the handicap of monosexuality.

An instance of the mono-sexual point of view Mrs. Zangwill finds in the case of the Mayflower:

We are all taught that America was founded by the Pilgrim Fathers. This is a half-truth that is worse than a lie. America was founded by the Pilgrim Fathers and the Pilgrim Mothers; indeed, for my part, I should put the Mothers first. The Pilgrim Fathers alone might have conquered America, but I very much doubt whether they would have colonized it. Had these women been mere slaves dragged at the heels of their masters, . . . the New England that we know would never have arisen. 回

...

On January 3 seven A World Tour on Behalf men will start westof Men and Religion ward to travel around the world with the purpose of extending what is known as The Men and Religion Forward Movement. This undertaking is one of the signs of the new spirit in missions. A year ago bands of men were going from city to city in the United States. city to which they came had been prepared for their coming. An organization in the city had studied the people of the city and the conditions under which they lived. Then when the group of experts reached the city,

Each

several days were devoted to public meetings and to the consideration of methods by which conditions could be improved. It was the best kind of "gospel preaching," because there is no better way by which the good news of Christianity can be spread among people than by setting those people to work in some kind of useful service for the good of their fellows. Two of the leaders in this movement were Mr. Fred B. Smith and Mr. Raymond Robins. These two men came to their common task from widely divergent origins. Mr. Fred Smith had long been an evangelistic speaker before Young Men's Christian Associations, while Mr. Robins had been engaged in social work, especially that sort of social work done through settlements. Their union in this common task was a vivid illustration of the fact that religion is not true religion until it is infused with human service, just as human service is not true human service that is not in fused with the spirit of religion. It is these two men, accompanied by a male quartette of the Young Men's Christian Association and by Mr. James E. Lathrop, who will employ the methods of the Men and Religion Forward Movement in the course of a trip around the world. The greater part of their time will be spent in English-speaking communities. Their itinerary will carry them across the continent to San Francisco, and from there in succession to Hawaii, Japan, China, the Philippine Islands, Australia, South Africa, thence to London, afterwards to Zurich, then back to New York, the place of their departure. They can spend but a brief time in each city they visit, but in each place they will have been preceded by an organizing secretary, Mr. H. N. Holmes, who is charged with making the arrangements and preparations through local committees, as was done in this country.

same old New Year's Eve orgies of crime and drunkenness on the streets and in restaurants all over the city." The "Sun" adds: "In fact, the police said yesterday that this was the wildest first of January the city ever has seen. Stabbings, shootings, and false fire alarms came thick and fast." Other reports are less pessimistic. The greater part of the rowdyism apparently occurred after midmight. What the movement started by Mr. Jacob Riis actually accomplished was to provide a sensible and dignified way of rejoicing. A great chorus of six hundred voices in Madison Square sang several choral numbers and led the immense crowd of perhaps 80,000 people in patriotic and familiar songs. At Union Square, at City Hall Park, and at Herald Square similar song services were held-all between the hours of eleven and twelve. The crowds seemed interested and joined heartily in the singing. For next year the suggestion has been made of including a great torchlight procession down Fifth Avenue. The Committee feel that New York has indorsed their protest overwhelmingly, and that something has begun that will change the whole character of the night. They propose at once to organize a Committee for next year and to invite the Christmas Tree Committee to make common cause with them. Mr. Riis's general conclusion and comment, justified, we believe, by the actual facts, is as follows:

We hope that we have begun something which will become an institution in this city on New Year's Eve in the years to come. The great heart of New York is all right. The celebration planned by the Committee went far beyond our expectations. We hardly had expected to do more than register a moral protest against rowdyism on the part of hoodlums and a certain part of the respectable people who turn hoodlums on that night, and in that respect the safe and sane celebration was enormously successful. I believe that New York had a quieter and more dignified New Year's Eve than it has had for many years.

for the delight of angels. Last week The Outlook called to the attention of its readers certain of the more notable of the Christmas Day celebrations. On the 27th a somewhat belated miracle play was given in the Cathedral at Garden City, Long Island. Before the carved screen that separates the crypt from the mausoleum was erected a straw-covered stage backed by a rude but effective representation of a stable door. Children were the actors, and the play was the legend of the little maid that had no arms. It will be remembered that the little maid" was the daughter of the innkeeper at Bethlehem. For her service at the manger-side her arms are miraculously restored. Much of the charm of the play came from the unconscious serenity with which the little actors moved through their simple parts. Chubby Saint Joseph, the lame beggar who lost his crutch before he was healed, the solemn wise man from Ethiopia, and the golden-haired angel so entranced with the movements of the pasteboard star that she forgot to sing, are memories not soon to be forgotten. Somehow the voices and faces of little children bring home as nothing else can the reality, the vitality, and the imaginative beauty of the Christmas tradition.

Rackety-Packety House

One of the Vanderbilt family has made to the children of New York City a New Year's present in constructing for them a Children's Theater, which is erected on the roof of the Century Theater. The first performance was given to invited guests on the Saturday preceding Christmas. The play was Mrs. Hodgson Burnett's "RacketyPackety House." Entering the Century Theater on the first floor, the guest was carried by the elevator to the roof and landed in a hall which gave entrance to the Children's Theater. Entering, he found a room capable of seating an audience of about eight hundred. It is without galleries and has no boxes at the side and none at the stage, but half a dozen or so at the rear of the audience-room. The walls are painted a warm gray, without decoration. The abundant gilding, and often garish ornamentation, characteristic of the modern theater, and sometimes even of the modern church, are conspicuously absent, the only decoration being some plastic figures at the side and above the stage. The house, on the 21st of December, was filled to its

ment.

utmost capacity, more than half the audience being children. Some of the best-known business men of New York were among the guests, and it was pleasant to get this glimpse of the supposedly hard-headed business man surrounded by his children and grandchildren and getting a joyous time from their enjoyIn " Rackety-Packety House" Mrs. Burnett has shown rare ability to understand the child's imagination, though we think the play would have appealed to children more if it had furnished a greater variety of incident. The prelude shows a little girl and her aged nurse in the nursery. She is rejoicing that her old doll-house and the old dolls are to be sent down into the cellar and perhaps burned up, and a new doll-house and new dolls are coming to take their place, and quite disregards the protest of the old nurse against this disposition of the dolls and doll-house with which the little girl's mother played in her childhood. In the rest of the drama the dolls in "Rackety-Packety House" and the dolls in "Tidy Castle" come to life and play their parts in a very simple drama which centers around the elopement of Peter Piper, the hero of " Rackety-Packety House," with the daughter of the Duchess who occupies Tidy Castle. Nearly all the parts were taken by children, but the part of Peter Piper was taken by one of the "midgets," a dwarf no larger than a child of six or eight years of age, and he proved himself a remarkable The Outlook does not favor taking young children to the theater. To do this is apt to rob them of the simpler enjoyments fitted for child life, and apt to make them blasé and dull their enjoyment of the theater when the time comes for their full appreciation of the drama; but, if children are to go to the theater at all, they had better go to the Children's Theater and see such a play as "Rackety-Packety House," rather than the type of play written for adults, and abounding with situations and with dialogues the point of which children sometimes cannot understand and rarely can appreciate.

actor.

Here is the story of how the business men of one community met the demand for municipal improvements and set an example of civic and commercial conduct which is of great significance and which, if more widely followed, would mean a great improvement in civic conditions: Passaic is mainly industrial,

A Business Government by Business Men

and, while within the suburban zone and beautifully situated, has made a bid for an industrial development rather than for the commuter. Naturally, it was recognized that heavy taxation was a burden, and every advantage was therefore given manufacturers without actually giving them freedom from taxation. Their values were made low and for many years were kept low. Manufacturers have added to their plants and increased their business, and surrounding conditions have added to the value of their original investment, but their assessments have not increased materially. Labor was attracted and it helped to make the city better from the manufacturers' standpoint, as it was understood that help of a desirable kind could always be secured. It doubled the city's population each ten years for the past four censuses, with the inevitable result that many municipal improvements which ordinarily come quietly had to be adopted and put into practice quickly. Schools came one after another rapidly. Sanitary conditions, sewage, fire and police protection had to be provided, and the burden, as between the manufacturer and the resident, became uneven. In September, 1911, Passaic adopted a commission government. The budget for the year was made in June. An effort to create a low tax rate by the old Council resulted in much necessary expenditure being unprovided for. The city changed from volunteer to paid fire department; installed automobile apparatus; built a new fire house; increased its police force and its firemen, and installed the Gamewell signal system. It has just completed a new high school, and entered into a contract for a proportionate share of the cost of the Passaic trunk sewer amounting to $700,000. The Commissioners were confronted with the necessity of meeting these obligations, and realized it would mean an enormous increase in taxes upon all of the people unless a remedy were found. They consulted with the manufacturers, pointed out the necessity of meeting the issue, showed how valuations were not on a parity, and that the reason for low taxation as a help to struggling industry was past. The manufacturers were requested to make a statement of value of their plants, buildings, land, and personal, for the purposes of taxation; and most of them responded, with the result that over $5,000,000 was added to the tax ratings and the needed improvements provided for without incurring debt.

MODERN

JEFFERSONIANISM

The President-elect spent his birthday at his birthplace, Staunton, Virginia, where he was warmly received by his fellow-citizens, to whom he made an address, from which we quote the following paragraph:

The one thing that the business men of the United States are now discovering, some of them for themselves and some of them by suggestion, is that they are not going to be allowed to make any money except for a quid pro quo, that they must render a service or get nothing, and that in the regulation of business the Government, that is to say, the moral judgment of the majority, must determine whether what they are doing is a service or not a service, and that everything in business and politics is going to be reduced to this standard. "Are you giving anything to society when you want to take something out of society?" is the question to put to them.

It

This seems to The Outlook admirable. does not seem so to the New York Times," which was one of Mr. Wilson's strongest supporters in the recent campaign. The "Times" presents two objections to what we should have regarded as almost an axiom : first, that the axiom is not contained in the Constitution of the United States-"We do not ourselves find explicit warrant for it in the Constitution which the people have set up as a standard of conduct for their elected representatives, legislative or executive;" and, secondly, "It is hardly one that can be found in the writings of Thomas Jefferson," but is, on the contrary, a view "that might well make Mr. Jefferson, were he living, first gasp and then rage.'

That it is any objection to the maxim laid down by Mr. Woodrow Wilson, that it is found neither in the Constitution of the United States nor in the writings of Thomas Jefferson, appears to us to take high rank among the humors of political discussion. We did not suppose that there was any political writer living in this beginning of the twentieth century so archaic as to insist that the American people in the twentieth century can avail themselves of no principle of conduct not explicitly affirmed in the Constitution of the United States nor found in Thomas Jefferson's writings.

There is no explicit warrant in the Constitution of the United States for the construction of public works by the Nation; but the Nation is carrying on public works on a large scale. There is no explicit warrant in the Constitution of the United States for the

suppression of revolt by a State against the Federal Government; but the Nation expended millions of dollars and sacrificed thousands of lives to suppress such a revolt. There is no explicit warrant in the Constitution of the United States for the acquisition of territory by the Nation; but the Nation has acquired by successive purchases territory which now makes the Nation extend from the Atlantic to the Pacific coast and from the northern Lakes to the Gulf of Mexico. The Nation is a nation, and has a right to do anything which any nation has a right to do except as it is explicitly prohibited by the Constitution. The Constitution is not "a standard of conduct," determining what the Nation may do; it is an order or method prescribed which the representatives of the Nation are to follow in doing what the Nation demands.

As to Thomas Jefferson, it may be true that Mr. Wilson's maxim is not to be found in his writings, but we are by no means sure that if Mr. Jefferson were living this maxim would make him first gasp and then rage." Henry Ward Beecher once said: "I am a Calvinist, because if John Calvin were now living he would believe as I believe." Mr. Wilson might well say: "I am a Jeffersonian, because if Jefferson were now living he would believe as I believe." Jefferson believed in the people-in their intelligence, their virtue, their ability. He feared strong government, because in his time strong governments were founded on disbelief in the people and were organized and carried on to limit their liberty. In our time those who believe in the intelligence, the virtue, and the ability of the people believe in strong government. because they believe the people are intelligent, virtuous, and ab'e enough to make that government an instrument for the promotion of the common welfare. Woodrow Wilson has inherited the spirit of Thomas Jefferson and is applying that principle to conditions which did not exist in Thomas Jefferson's life. The opponents of that principle have inherited the spirit of the old aristocracy and are applying that spirit in the support of a new kind of aristocracy quite as hostile to liberty as was the old one, and less defensible.

It seems almost superfluous to argue for the truth of the axiom laid down by Mr. Wilson. It is almost the first duty of government to prevent men from getting wealth from the community without giving to

the community an adequate compensation. It is for this purpose that government prohibits robbery, theft, forgery, embezzlement, gambling. These are crimes, because by these the criminal gets something from the community for which he has made no adequate return. Greed is sagacious. It discovers new methods of getting from society wealth without making return for it in service, and whenever it does discover such a method and puts it in operation it is the business of government to discover and put in operation a method to prevent this new form of dishonesty. To suppose that greed can avail itself of intelligence in inventing new methods of robbery, and that the community cannot avail itself of new methods for the prevention of robbery; to suppose that greed can employ in the twentieth century all the methods which nineteenth-century experience has developed in the criminal classes, high and low, rich and poor, and that the community can employ no methods for its protection against such criminals if the method is not explicitly found in the Constitution and in the writings of Thomas Jefferson, is to suppose that the unscrupulous have liberty to prey upon the community and that the community. has no liberty to protect itself from them.

This is a doctrine of liberty which "might well make Mr. Jefferson, were he living, first gasp and then rage.”

POPULAR

CABINET-MAKING

On another page we report the results of the activities on the part of newspaper editors in the important task of relieving the President-elect of the duty of making his own Cabinet.

This discussion is worth recording, not because it will or ought to have any great weight in determining how Mr. Wilson's Cabinet will be formed, but because it shows some of the stronger currents of opinion in the country. The bitterness of the attack on Mr. Bryan indicates somewhat the strength of that conservative, not to say reactionary, sentiment with which the progressive element in the Democratic party will have to deal during the coming administration.

Mr. Wilson has been taking counsel with others as well as with himself; there is, however, every indication that he will not delegate the duty of Cabinet-making to the newspapers, but will make his own Cabinet himself.

A President ought to consult with the