may be thought of the President's action, it evinced moral independence and persistence. The issue which took him to Trenton is not one which has greatly stirred the people of the State. Perhaps it ought to have done so. Certainly it is not unimportant that the juries which form one of the essential parts of our courts should be freed altogether from partisan political influence. As a matter of fact, however, this issue has not kept the people of New Jersey aroused; it has not been predominant in discussion among citizens. It is a serious matter for the President of the United States to engage actively in a conflict that pertains purely to State questions, even though they are questions that concern his own State. From the time that he becomes President he belongs as a leader, not to any one State, but to the Nation. It is said that in such a case as this the President is the leader of his party in his State. That is a mistake. When he assumed the larger leadership, he had to give up the smaller. It is impossible for a man to be general-in-chief and captain at the same time. It is further said that in this case it was a matter of unfinished business; that he had undertaken a task, and that loyalty to those who had joined with him made it incumbent upon him to put the matter through and not leave them in the lurch. It is true that under certain circumstances an issue of such great proportion might arise in any State that the Governor who had started to lead his forces might find it his duty to continue the contest even after having been called into the service of the Nation. In such a case it would seem more in keeping with the dignity and duty of his Presidential office to call those who are responsible for the conduct of the State affairs into consultation and conference with him at the Nation's capital. President Wilson has evidently thought the issue of importance enough to continue the fight, and has chosen to do so by going to the State leaders rather than calling the State leaders to him. However it may be in this case, we do not believe that the course which the President has followed is one which should be followed generally.

cepted President Wilson's appointment to this office (subject to confirmation by the Senate, which is beyond doubt), possesses just those qualities. Even when, as The Outlook believes, his judgment was at fault in the investigation of the Board of Water Supply and in the subway matter, no one for a moment questioned his high motive and civic earnestness; while, first as Commissioner of Accounts and later as President of the Board of Aldermen and in his work with the Board of Estimate and Apportionment, and in other ways, he has been invariably a strong influence for economy and efficiency. Rarely does an appointment of this grade receive such wide commendation as being in the public interest. Politically the appointment seems to have been a satisfactory settlement of the difference of opinion between Senator O'Gorman and Secretary McAdoo as to the desirable course. The result, on the other hand, must be anything but satisfactory to Mr. Murphy, although, following the usual Tammany course, he professes friendly acquiescence in what he cannot help. If not classed as a fighting anti-Tammany man, Mr. Mitchel is at least a non-Tammany man with instincts opposed to most Tammany methods. We venture to predict that politics will play small part in his administration as Collector. One of the best possible wishes that can be made for Mr. Mitchel is that, when he ceases to be Collector, he may retire with the same sense of duty performed and advance made that the Collector now at the end of his work must have. Uncompromising in dealing with violators of the law, able in organization, clear headed, and beyond the faintest imputation of political chicanery, Mr. Loeb has earned the respect and gratitude of all good citizens, regardless of party. Doubtless he has made enemies, but they are of a kind whose enmity proves fidelity to the execution of law and to the enforcement of justice.

not declared their intentions of becoming citizens from acquiring land, and as such declarations from the Japanese are now generally refused when offered, the bill is equivalent to a prohibition of Japanese landownership; it has passed the lower house of Arizona, but last week appeared to be in abeyance, probably awaiting the outcome of the California question. It is supposed that the representations made by the Japanese Government to that of the United States as regards the California situation include also a protest against that in Arizona. It is commonly reported that Viscount Chinda has diplomatically represented to our State Department that the Japanese Government considers the California bill contrary both to the treaty and to the spirit of international friendly relations. Governor Johnson, of California, in accordance with his courteous promise to President Wilson that a reasonable time should elapse before the Webb Bill was signed, to give opportunity for any communications on the subject from the National Government, has refrained, up to the time of writing, from signing the bill. As finally passed, the bill is essentially as outlined in The Outlook last week, with the exception that an amendment was adopted, adding to Section 2 (which allows aliens not eligible to citizenship to acquire and enjoy and transfer land so far as prescribed by existing treaty) a clause giving this class of aliens the specific right to lease lands for agricultural purposes for a term not exceeding three years. There has been a rather general expression of opinion by the press of the country that the Webb Bill, as passed, does not controvert the Treaty of 1911, since, in the first place, it expressly guarantees all treaty rights; and, secondly, the Treaty of 1911 does not contain a general and sweeping "most favored nation clause." Even more general is the expression of belief that action should be taken promptly to obtain from the United States Supreme Court final and authoritative decisions as to rights under the existing treaty, and also on the question ultimately involved as to rights of naturalization. Apart from the legal aspect, it is more and more apparent that the large question at the bottom of all such agitations as this alien land law matter and the Californian school question of a few years ago is the widespread belief in the Pacific States that there is, or may be, danger of a wave of Oriental immigration. Mr. Woehlke, in his article in The Outlook last week, brought this out forcefully

66

when he said, The presence of Asiatics in large numbers will always make of California a potential powder barrel." Whether this alarm is justified or not, the vital point is that the question involved is a National one; if more positive action to keep out Asiatic immigration is desired by California, her recourse is to President and Congress; and, on the other hand, it is the duty of the National Government in the future to take the initiative, both through diplomacy and, if needed, through legislation, and thereby prevent such excited agitation as we have lately seen on the one hand in California and on the other hand in Japan.

The Tariff Bill Passes

The passage of the Underwood Tariff Bill by the House of Representatives on May 8 was beyond doubt a tactical triumph for Mr. Underwood as leader of his party; and the President's intimate supporters consider that, as the bill passed contains all the essential features upon which he laid stress, including free wool and the provision for free sugar in the future, it is also a personal triumph for the President. The bill was passed by a vote of 281 to 139. Five Democrats refused to vote with the party, while four Progressives, two Republicans, and one Representative classed as an Independent Republican (Mr. Kent, of California) voted with the Democrats. The bill now goes to the Senate, while the lower house will take up the currency question, and, following the party tactics employed in the tariff matter, will try to find in caucus some measure upon which united party action may be had; if this fails, the currency question will go over to the regular session. Mr. Underwood's final comment on the tariff bill which bears his name is, in effect, that it keeps the Democratic party's promises to the people and that he is confident "that it will bring real relief to the American people in reducing the high cost of living and better adjustment of our business conduct under modern methods.” On the other hand, Mr. Payne, whose name is attached to the present tariff law, asserted that the new bill is a menace to the prosperity of the country and that "it aids foreign laborers by throwing open our markets, and discriminates against laborers in the United States, who are forced to meet unjust competition and an enormous increase of imports from foreign countries."

State versus Nation

The United States Commerce Court has reaffirmed two orders of the Inter-State Commerce Commission. The first is the Commission's order to the Lehigh Valley Railroad Company to lower its rates on coal; the second, and more discussed, decision is that in the conflict between inter-State and intra-State rates. A railway runs from Shreveport, Louisiana, to Dallas, Texas. Most of its course is in the State of Texas. That State has pre

scribed certain transportation rates for freight. In proportion to the distance, they are lower than is the inter-State rate from Shreveport to Dallas. Now, Shreveport and Dallas are competitors for the trade of the intervening territory, most of which is of course situated in Texas. But such an adjustment of freight charges handicaps Shreveport. It ought not to be thus handicapped. The right of the State of Texas to impose rates is admitted. They must not interfere with inter-State commerce rates. Congress alone has power to regulate inter-State commerce.. The pervading purpose of the inter-State commerce law is to prevent unfair discrimination against persons and localities engaged in that commerce. Acting on this, the Shreveport shippers and dealers filed a complaint with the Inter State Commerce Commission. The Commission found that there was unjust discrimination as alleged, and made an order requiring its removal. The Commission also found that the inter-State commodity rates.in question were not unreasonable. As the unlawful discrimination against Shreveport was caused by imposing intra-State rates "lower than the petitioner is justly entitled to charge," that petitioner may increase his Texas rates, for, as the Court says, when the Commission's order was made, it relieved the petitioner from further obligation to observe the Texas rates. The decision is of interest as possibly foreshadowing the United States Supreme Court's decision in the similar Minnesota rate case, which, since 1911, has been before that Court for final adjudication. Certainly no State should regulate railway rates of traffic moving wholly within its borders in a manner to kill traffic with competing localities outside of the State. This is specially true in the Shreveport case, for the Court finds that the Texas rates "were prescribed not with reference to their intrinsic reasonableness, . . . but with the undisguised intention of giving preference and advantage to the dealers of that State as

States have ratified by their Legislatures the joint resolution of the Sixty-second Congress amending the Constitution of the United States so as to provide for the direct election of United States Senators. The Secretary of State has been officially advised of such action by thirty-five States, and unofficial information is authentic that one other State, at least, has taken the necessary action, which provides the required number of thirty-six, or three-quarters of the forty-eight States. As soon as the last necessary official ratification is reported, the Secretary of State will issue his announcement certifying that the Amendment has become valid to all intents and purposes as a part of the Constitution of the United States. To put in force the Amendment, however, it will be necessary for each State, through its Legislature, to provide by statute for the changed manner of electing its Senators; that is, each State must provide the means for getting the names of the Senatorial candidates upon the State ticket. In States in which nominations are made by primary election it will be necessary by statute to provide that the names of Senatorial candidates be placed on the prinrary election ballots, and then, after nomination, that their names be properly certified to be placed upon the official election ballots. During the next two years there may arise some complications due to neglect by Legislatures either now in session or next year to act, or due to the fact that in some States Legislatures meet only every two years. The first general test of the Amendment will come in November, 1914, at which time Senators whose terms expire March 4, 1915, will be re-elected, or others elected in their place. Because there can be no compulsory uniformity in legislation. in the several States, each of the forty-eight States will have to take its own independent action, although there may be, and quite likely will be, a voluntary following of some general

procedure. Idaho has by its Legislature already acted in advance of the announcement of the Amendment, which will make certain the existence of the proper election machinery for the election in November, 1914, of a Senator to succeed Senator Brady, who has just recently been elected by the Legislature of the State to fill the unexpired term, ending March, 1915, of the late Senator Hepburn. The Legislature of Idaho meets only every two years, and if this action had not been taken at this time there would have been no legal provision for the election of a Senator in the fall of 1914, with the result that after the next Legislature had acted there would arise the alternative, after March 4, 1915, of the State's being without one of its Senators, or the calling of a special election to provide for his election under the Amendment. By the terms of the Amendment the Executive of a State may be empowered to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election. He could not appoint a Senator to fill a vacancy, as is the now prevailing custom, unless the State had passed the necessary statute, making its election laws conform to the Amendment. In some of the States, such, for instance, as Wisconsin and Georgia, where by State legislative action Senators are now nominated by the primary, but necessarily formally elected by the Legislature following the action of the primary, the only statutory change that will be necessary will be that eliminating the provision for the election by the Legislature and substituting a proper certification to the election board for the placing of the name of the nominee on the regular election ballot.

2

The recent request of The United States Guatemala to the United and Guatemala States to intercede between Guatemala and her creditors brings up once more the relations between this country and those south of us which are affected by the Monroe Doctrine. The situation is not at all unlike that which was so satisfactorily dealt with in the case of Santo Domingo. Guatemala is a debtor country; and in Great Britain large quantities of Guatemalan bonds are held as against this debt. These bonds, which amount to about ten million dollars, have been outstanding for something like eighteen years, but repeated attempts to obtain payment either of principal or of interest have failed. Great Britain

naturally has been pressing upon Guatemala the need of a settlement; and lately there have been intimations that drastic action might be taken-which perhaps means that Great Britain might wish to take possession of the custom-houses in Guatemala and pay herself out of the proceeds. Nothing is clearer than that the United States does not propose through any interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine to aid South American countries in avoiding their just obligations. On the other hand, we stand ready, as in the case of Santo Domingo, to undertake such a control of the financial situation as will put matters on a satisfactory basis with the foreign country involved, provide for the extension of the debt in a reasonable way, and very probably at the same time improve the domestic financial situation in the debtor country. This is precisely what we did in Santo Domingo, with the result that turmoil ceased, that danger of foreign intervention vanished, and that the country was put on its feet in a most surprising manner. The fixed American policy of not allowing foreign countries to obtain anything like permanent control of territory does not in the least mean that foreign creditors shall be prevented from receiving their just due; and the sooner it is understood in the South American countries that the United States stands for justice and not for support against honorable claims, the better it will be for all parties involved. firm and strong as well as just treatment of the matter is what should be expected from our Government, in accordance with precedents already set.

The Balkan Situation

A

Four interesting things have happened as regards the Balkan situation. First, there has been a cessation of war, due to the armistice agreed upon by Turkey on the one side and the Balkan allies on the other. Second, the peace terms proposed by the Powers and modified by them have been accepted by the allies. Third, the arbitration of the Powers between Rumania and Bulgaria has awarded the town of Silistria to the Rumanians, perhaps with as much reason as the Powers awarded the town of Skutari, now held by the Montenegrins, to the Albanians. The fourth event concerns Skutari. The Montenegrins have not evacuated it, but it looks as if they would evacuate it, if we may believe King Nicholas's despatch last week to Sir Edward Grey, who presides over the Conference of

representatives of the Powers at London. "My dignity and that of my people do not allow me to submit to isolated orders," said the King. "I therefore place the destiny of Skutari in the hands of the Great Powers." "Isolated orders" refers, of course, to Austria's orders." Austria has hypnotized the other Powers into demanding that, with an offset of equal value elsewhere, Montenegro shall relinquish Skutari. The Montenegrin monarch may have concluded that, as a war between him and the Powers would be, of course, absurd, he must perforce ultimately yield to their decision. War with the Powers would probably mean the end of Montenegro. Hence, to save herself, Montenegro bows before Europe. The Montenegrins have sacrificed many thousands of lives in the campaign against Skutari. Until lately the Powers did not object to that campaign. Montenegro now finds herself in a position totally different from that at the beginning of the war, for, in her opinion, the Powers have violated the laws of neutrality. To a Balkan State which, unlike the others, Turkey has never conquered, there is a double chagrin in being compelled to bend before force; first, because it is force, and, second, because of the conviction that it is unjust. Be this as it may, all the world loves a fighter. King Nicholas's fame, together with that of his brave Montenegrins, is secure in any event. He may remember that a mightier than he, Napoleon, once had to bow before the concert of Europe. He may also remember, and with grim satisfaction, that the Skutari incident has called a racial power into more active being. The awakening of the Slav power is the most serious factor in the present European international situation. On this we comment upon another page.

Popular opera? It sounds Popular Opera like a contradiction in terms. Is not opera essentially a diversion of the aristocratic or the rich? Is not at least one row of boxes resplendent with jewelry quite as much an essential of opera as the singers and the orchestra? Are not the costumes in the audience as important as the costumes on the stage? Yet there is a movement on foot to establish popular opera❞—and in the one city above all where it might be least expected-in New York. And, what adds another flavor to the surprise, the movement

66

has been engineered by a club that has been mainly associated with municipal reform. A year ago the City Club of New York gave a luncheon at which the topic for discussion was Opera." Among the guests present were directors and singers of the Metropolitan Opera Company. Thereupon a committee of the club was appointed to investigate the question whether it was possible to produce opera in New York at popular prices "for the people." The Chairman of the Committee was Mr. Edward Kellogg Baird. As a result of a conference with Mr. Otto Kahn, Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Opera Company, a plan was propounded of raising a fund of three hundred thousand dollars. This, it is estimated, will make it possible to produce "opera for the people in the people's language" (which in New York still means English) at prices that people can pay, from two dollars down to twenty-five cents a seat. The Century Theater (originally known as the New Theater) —a theater too large for the ordinary plays-is to be rented for the new venture. The season, as planned, is to last thirty-five weeks, with a possible addition of ten weeks for opera comique. Already a hundred thousand dollars has been subscribed, largely in big sums.- This will cover one-third of the capital needed to finance the company that will carry on the popular opera productions. It is desired that the remaining amount-two hundred thousand dollars in shares-be subscribed by as many individuals as possible. The shares are to have a par value of one hundred dollars each. Stockholders will have preference in the assignment of seats. Altogether the plan seems practical. It certainly is vouched for by men whose practical knowledge of financial undertakings and of opera productions is unquestioned. It has been formulated only after an investigation which included the production of municipal opera in Italy, Germany, France, and other countries, and after the drawing up of a carefully prepared budget. Opinions differ as to the place of opera among the fine arts; but there can hardly be any difference of opinion regarding the great advantage of making all art accessible to those whom Lincoln called the plain people. As long as opera exists (and there is no sign that it will ever disappear) and as long as democracy exists (and that too seems to be pretty much alive), it ought to be possible to bring the two together. The City Club is to