The Project Gutenberg eBook of New York Times Current History; The European War, Vol 2, No. 4, July, 1915, by Various

E-text prepared by Juliet Sutherland, Linda Cantoni,
and the Project Gutenberg Online Distributed Proofreading Team
(http://www.pgdp.net)

CURRENT HISTORY
A MONTHLY MAGAZINE
THE EUROPEAN WAR
JULY, 1915

THE LUSITANIA CASE

President Wilson’s Reply to Germany

Account of the Resignation of William J. Bryan as
American Secretary of State

True to the intimation in his note to President Wilson, Mr. Bryan has made public in full his reasons for resigning while American relations with Germany were strained. His statements are given herewith, together with comments in Europe and America on the causes and consequences of Mr. Bryan's act. The German reply to President Wilson's note of May 13 on the Lusitania case and the American rejoinder of June 9; the sending to Berlin of Dr. Anton Meyer-Gerhard, as arranged by Ambassador von Bernstorff in the White House on June 4, in order to explain more fully to the German Government the American policy and public feeling in this country; the Stahl perjury case, relating to the German charge that the Lusitania was armed; the question whether the American steamer Nebraskan was torpedoed on May 26 in the German submarine "war zone"; the controversy over exportations to the Allies of American munitions of war: the agitation for a stronger army and navy in the United States, and the meeting in Independence Hall, Philadelphia, on June 17, when 109 of the foremost men in the United States took steps toward forming a League of Peace among all the nations of the earth—these, as recorded below, form a new chapter in American history.

THE GERMAN MINISTER FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS TO THE
AMERICAN AMBASSADOR AT BERLIN.

The undersigned has the honor to make the following reply to the note of his Excellency Mr. James W. Gerard, Ambassador of the United States of America, dated the fifteenth instant, on the subject of the impairment of many American interests by the German submarine war.

The Imperial Government has subjected the statements of the Government of the United States to a careful examination and has the lively wish on its part also to contribute in a convincing and friendly manner to clear up any misunderstandings which may have entered into the relations of the two Governments through the events mentioned by the American Government.

With regard firstly to the cases of the American steamers Cushing and Gulflight, the American Embassy has already been informed that it is far from the German Government to have any intention of ordering attacks by submarines or flyers on neutral vessels in the zone which have not been guilty of any hostile act; on the contrary the most explicit instructions have been repeatedly given the German armed forces to avoid attacking such vessels. If neutral vessels have come to grief through the German submarine war during the past few months by mistake, it is a question of isolated and exceptional cases which are traceable to the misuse of flags by the British Government in connection with carelessness or suspicious actions on the part of the captains of the vessels. In all cases where a neutral vessel through no fault of its own has come to grief through the German submarines or flyers according to the facts as ascertained by the German Government, this Government has expressed its regret at the unfortunate occurrence and promised indemnification where the facts justified it. The German Government will treat the cases of the American steamers Cushing and Gulflight according to the same principles. An investigation of these cases is in progress. Its results will be communicated to the Embassy shortly. [1] The investigation might, if thought desirable, be supplemented by an International Commission of Inquiry, pursuant to Title Three of The Hague Convention of October 18, 1907, for the pacific settlement of international disputes.

In the case of the sinking of the English steamer Falaba, the commander of the German submarine had the intention of allowing passengers and crew ample opportunity to save themselves.

It was not until the captain disregarded the order to lay to and took to flight, sending up rocket signals for help, that the German commander ordered the crew and passengers by signals and megaphone to leave the ship within ten minutes. As a matter of fact he allowed them twenty-three minutes and did not fire the torpedo until suspicious steamers were hurrying to the aid of the Falaba.

With regard to the loss of life when the British passenger steamer Lusitania was sunk, the German Government has already expressed its deep regret to the neutral Governments concerned that nationals of those countries lost their lives on that occasion. The Imperial Government must state for the rest the impression that certain important facts most directly connected with the sinking of the Lusitania may have escaped the attention of the Government of the United States. It therefore considers it necessary in the interest of the clear and full understanding aimed at by either Government primarily to convince itself that the reports of the facts which are before the two Governments are complete and in agreement.

The Government of the United States proceeds on the assumption that the Lusitania is to be considered as an ordinary unarmed merchant vessel. The Imperial Government begs in this connection to point out that the Lusitania was one of the largest and fastest English commerce steamers, constructed with Government funds as auxiliary cruisers, and is expressly included in the navy list published by British Admiralty. It is moreover known to the Imperial Government from reliable information furnished by its officials and neutral passengers that for some time practically all the more valuable English merchant vessels have been provided with guns, ammunition and other weapons, and reinforced with a crew specially practiced in manning guns. According to reports at hand here, the Lusitania when she left New York undoubtedly had guns on board which were mounted under decks and masked.

The Imperial Government furthermore has the honor to direct the particular attention of the American Government to the fact that the British Admiralty by a secret instruction of February of this year advised the British merchant marine not only to seek protection behind neutral flags and markings, but even when so disguised to attack German submarines by ramming them. High rewards have been offered by the British Government as a special incentive for the destruction of the submarines by merchant vessels, and such rewards have already been paid out. In view of these facts, which are satisfactorily known to it, the Imperial Government is unable to consider English merchant vessels any longer as "undefended territory" in the zone of maritime war designated by the Admiralty Staff of the Imperial German Navy, the German commanders are consequently no longer in a position to observe the rules of capture otherwise usual and with which they invariably complied before this. Lastly, the Imperial Government must specially point out that on her last trip the Lusitania, as on earlier occasions, had Canadian troops and munitions on board, including no less than 5,400 cases of ammunition destined for the destruction of brave German soldiers who are fulfilling with self-sacrifice and devotion their duty in the service of the Fatherland. The German Government believes that it acts in just self-defense when it seeks to protect the lives of its soldiers by destroying ammunition destined for the enemy with the means of war at its command. The English steamship company must have been aware of the dangers to which passengers on board the Lusitania were exposed under the circumstances. In taking them on board in spite of this the company quite deliberately tried to use the lives of American citizens as protection for the ammunition carried, and violated the clear provisions of American laws which expressly prohibit, and provide punishment for, the carrying of passengers on ships which have explosives on board. The company thereby wantonly caused the death of so many passengers. According to the express report of the submarine commander concerned, which is further confirmed by all other reports, there can be no doubt that the rapid sinking of the Lusitania was primarily due to the explosion of the cargo of ammunition caused by the torpedo. Otherwise, in all human probability, the passengers of the Lusitania would have been saved.

The Imperial Government holds the facts recited above to be of sufficient importance to recommend them to a careful examination by the American Government. The Imperial Government begs to reserve a final statement of its position with regard to the demands made in connection with the sinking of the Lusitania until a reply is received from the American Government, and believes that it should recall here that it took note with satisfaction of the proposals of good offices submitted by the American Government in Berlin and London with a view to paving the way for a modus vivendi for the conduct of maritime war between Germany and Great Britain. The Imperial Government furnished at that time ample evidence of its good will by its willingness to consider these proposals. The realization of these proposals failed, as is known, on account of their rejection by the Government of Great Britain.

The undersigned requests his Excellency the Ambassador to bring the above to the knowledge of the American Government and avails himself of the opportunity to renew, &c.

MR. BRYAN’S RESIGNATION

It is with sincere regret that I have reached the conclusion that I should return to you the commission of Secretary of State, with which you honored me at the beginning of your Administration.

Obedient to your sense of duty and actuated by the highest motives, you have prepared for transmission to the German Government a note in which I cannot join without violating what I deem to be an obligation to my country, and the issue involved is of such moment that to remain a member of the Cabinet would be as unfair to you as it would be to the cause which is nearest my heart; namely, the prevention of war.

I, therefore, respectfully tender my resignation, to take effect when the note is sent, unless you prefer an earlier hour.

Alike desirous of reaching a peaceful solution of the problems, arising out of the use of submarines against merchantmen, we find ourselves differing irreconcilably as to the methods which should be employed.

It falls to your lot to speak officially for the nation; I consider it to be none the less my duty to endeavor as a private citizen to promote the end which you have in view by means which you do not feel at liberty to use. [2]

In severing the intimate and pleasant relations which have existed between us during the past two years, permit me to acknowledge the profound satisfaction which it has given me to be associated with you in the important work which has come before the State Department, and to thank you for the courtesies extended.

With the heartiest good wishes for your personal welfare and for the success of your Administration, I am, my dear Mr. President, very truly yours,

THE HON. WILLIAM JENNINGS BRYAN
Formerly Secretary of State of the United States
( Photo from Bain News Agency )

THE PRESIDENT TO SECRETARY BRYAN.

I accept your resignation only because you insist upon its acceptance; and I accept it with much more than deep regret, with a feeling of personal sorrow.

Our two years of close association have been very delightful to me. Our judgments have accorded in practically every matter of official duty and of public policy until now; your support of the work and purposes of the Administration has been generous and loyal beyond praise; your devotion to the duties of your great office and your eagerness to take advantage of every great opportunity for service it offered have been an example to the rest of us; you have earned our affectionate admiration and friendship. Even now we are not separated in the object we seek, but only in the method by which we seek it.

It is for these reasons my feeling about your retirement from the Secretaryship of State goes so much deeper than regret. I sincerely deplore it.

Our objects are the same and we ought to pursue them together. I yield to your desire only because I must and wish to bid you Godspeed in the parting. We shall continue to work for the same causes even when we do not work in the same way.

ROBERT LANSING, SECRETARY OF STATE AD INTERIM.

The Hon. William Jennings Bryan having resigned the office of Secretary of State, I, Woodrow Wilson, President of the United States of America, do hereby, in conformity with the provisions of Sections 177 and 179 of the Revised Statutes, and of the act of Congress approved February 9, 1891, authorize and direct the Hon. Robert Lansing, Counselor for the Department of State, to perform the duties of the office of Secretary of State for a period not to exceed thirty days, until a Secretary shall have been appointed and have qualified.

THE HON. ROBERT J. LANSING
Who Was Called by the President to Take Charge of the State Department
after Mr. Bryan's Resignation
( Photo from Paul Thompson )

PRESIDENT WILSON’S
REPLY TO BERLIN

You are instructed to deliver textually the following note to the Minister of Foreign Affairs:

In compliance with your Excellency's request I did not fail to transmit to my Government immediately upon their receipt your note of May 28 in reply to my note of May 15, and your supplementary note of June 1, setting forth the conclusions so far as reached by the Imperial German Government concerning the attacks on the American steamers Cushing and Gulflight. I am now instructed by my Government to communicate the following in reply:

The Government of the United States notes with gratification the full recognition by the Imperial German Government, in discussing the cases of the Cushing and the Gulflight, of the principle of the freedom of all parts of the open sea to neutral ships and the frank willingness of the Imperial German Government to acknowledge and meet its liability where the fact of attack upon neutral ships "which have not been guilty of any hostile act" by German aircraft or vessels of war is satisfactorily established; and the Government of the United States will in due course lay before the Imperial German Government, as it requests, full information concerning the attack on the steamer Cushing.

With regard to the sinking of the steamer Falaba, by which an American citizen lost his life, the Government of the United States is surprised to find the Imperial German Government contending that an effort on the part of a merchantman to escape capture and secure assistance alters the obligation of the officer seeking to make the capture in respect of the safety of the lives of those on board the merchantman, although the vessel had ceased her attempt to escape when torpedoed. These are not new circumstances. They have been in the minds of statesmen and of international jurists throughout the development of naval warfare, and the Government of the United States does not understand that they have ever been held to alter the principles of humanity upon which it has insisted. Nothing but actual forcible resistance or continued efforts to escape by flight when ordered to stop for the purpose of visit on the part of the merchantman has ever been held to forfeit the lives of her passengers or crew. The Government of the United States, however, does not understand that the Imperial German Government is seeking in this case to relieve itself of liability, but only intends to set forth the circumstances which led the commander of the submarine to allow himself to be hurried into the course which he took.

Your Excellency's note, in discussing the loss of American lives resulting from the sinking of the steamship Lusitania, adverts at some length to certain information which the Imperial German Government has received with regard to the character and outfit of that vessel, and your Excellency expresses the fear that this information may not have been brought to the attention of the Government of the United States. It is stated in the note that the Lusitania was undoubtedly equipped with masked guns, supplied with trained gunners and special ammunition, transporting troops from Canada, carrying a cargo not permitted under the laws of the United States to a vessel also carrying passengers, and serving, in virtual effect, as an auxiliary to the naval forces of Great Britain. Fortunately these are matters concerning which the Government of the United States is in a position to give the Imperial German Government official information. Of the facts alleged in your Excellency's note, if true, the Government of the United States would have been bound to take official cognizance in performing its recognized duty as a neutral power and in enforcing its national laws. It was its duty to see to it that the Lusitania was not armed for offensive action, that she was not serving as a transport, that she did not carry a cargo prohibited by the statutes of the United States, and that, if in fact she was a naval vessel of Great Britain, she should not receive clearance as a merchantman; and it performed that duty and enforced its statutes with scrupulous vigilance through its regularly constituted officials. It is able, therefore, to assure the Imperial German Government that it has been misinformed. If the Imperial German Government should deem itself to be in possession of convincing evidence that the officials of the Government of the United States did not perform these duties with thoroughness the Government of the United States sincerely hopes that it will submit that evidence for consideration.

Whatever may be the contentions of the Imperial German Government regarding the carriage of contraband of war on board the Lusitania or regarding the explosion of that material by the torpedo, it need only be said that in the view of this Government these contentions are irrelevant to the question of the legality of the methods used by the German naval authorities in sinking the vessel.

But the sinking of passenger ships involves principles of humanity which throw into the background any special circumstances of detail that may be thought to affect the cases, principles which lift it, as the Imperial German Government will no doubt be quick to recognize and acknowledge, out of the class of ordinary subjects of diplomatic discussion or of international controversy. Whatever be the other facts regarding the Lusitania, the principal fact is that a great steamer, primarily and chiefly a conveyance for passengers, and carrying more than a thousand souls who had no part or lot in the conduct of the war, was torpedoed and sunk without so much as a challenge or a warning, and that men, women, and children were sent to their death in circumstances unparalleled in modern warfare. The fact that more than one hundred American citizens were among those who perished made it the duty of the Government of the United States to speak of these things and once more, with solemn emphasis, to call the attention of the Imperial German Government to the grave responsibility which the Government of the United States conceives that it has incurred in this tragic occurrence, and to the indisputable principle upon which that responsibility rests. The Government of the United States is contending for something much greater than mere rights of property or privileges of commerce. It is contending for nothing less high and sacred than the rights of humanity, which every Government honors itself in respecting and which no Government is justified in resigning on behalf of those under its care and authority. Only her actual resistance to capture or refusal to stop when ordered to do so for the purpose of visit could have afforded the commander of the submarine any justification for so much as putting the lives of those on board the ship in jeopardy. This principle the Government of the United States understands the explicit instructions issued on August 3, 1914, [3] by the Imperial German Admiralty to its commanders at sea to have recognized and embodied, as do the naval codes of all other nations, and upon it every traveler and seaman had a right to depend. It is upon this principle of humanity as well as upon the law founded upon this principle that the United States must stand.

The Government of the United States is happy to observe that your Excellency's note closes with the intimation that the Imperial German Government is willing, now as before, to accept the good offices of the United States in an attempt to come to an understanding with the Government of Great Britain by which the character and conditions of the war upon the sea may be changed. The Government of the United States would consider it a privilege thus to serve its friends and the world. It stands ready at any time to convey to either Government any intimation or suggestion the other may be willing to have it convey and cordially invites the Imperial German Government to make use of its services in this way at its convenience. The whole world is concerned in anything that may bring about even a partial accommodation of interests or in any way mitigate the terrors of the present distressing conflict.

In the meantime, whatever arrangement may happily be made between the parties to the war, and whatever may in the opinion of the Imperial German Government have been the provocation or the circumstantial justification for the past acts of its commanders at sea, the Government of the United States confidently looks to see the justice and humanity of the Government of Germany vindicated in all cases where Americans have been wronged or their rights as neutrals invaded.

The Government of the United States therefore very earnestly and very solemnly renews the representations of its note transmitted to the Imperial German Government on the 15th of May, and relies in these representations upon the principles of humanity, the universally recognized understandings of international law, and the ancient friendship of the German Nation.

The Government of the United States cannot admit that the proclamation of a war zone from which neutral ships have been warned to keep away may be made to operate as in any degree an abbreviation of the rights either of American shipmasters or of American citizens bound on lawful errands as passengers on merchant ships of belligerent nationality. It does not understand the Imperial German Government to question those rights. It understands it, also, to accept as established beyond question the principle that the lives of non combatants cannot lawfully or rightfully be put in jeopardy by the capture or destruction of an unresisting merchantman, and to recognize the obligation to take sufficient precaution to ascertain whether a suspected merchantman is in fact of belligerent nationality or is in fact carrying contraband of war under a neutral flag. The Government of the United States therefore deems it reasonable to expect that the Imperial German Government will adopt the measures necessary to put these principles into practice in respect of the safeguarding of American lives and American ships, and asks for assurances that this will be done.

THE LUSITANIA’S “GUNS”

In a Washington dispatch of June 2, 1915, to The New York Times , the following report appeared:

In his conversation with President Wilson today the German Ambassador said that he had obtained evidence through means of affidavits that the Lusitania was an armed vessel, as asserted by the German Government. The affidavits to which Count von Bernstorff referred have been placed in possession of the State Department, which has turned them over to the Department of Justice for an investigation as to the statements sworn to and the character of the individuals making them.

HIS EXCELLENCY COUNT JOHANN VON BERNSTORFF
German Ambassador to the United States

One of the affidavits is made by Gustav Stahl of 20 Leroy Street, New York City. He says:

On the day prior to the sailing of the Lusitania, I was asked by my friend, A. Lietch, who was employed as first cabin steward, to help him to bring his trunk aboard. In the course of the evening we went on board, without being hindered by the quartermaster on guard. After having remained some time in the "gloria," (steward's quarters,) we went to the stern main deck. About fifteen to eighteen feet from the entrance to the "gloria," on port and starboard, respectively, I saw two guns of twelve to fifteen centimeters. They were covered with leather, but the barrel was distinctly to be seen. To satisfy my curiosity I unfastened the buckles to ascertain the calibre of the guns. I could also ascertain that the guns were mounted on deck on wooden blocks. The guns were placed about three feet from the respective ship sides and the wall could be removed at that particular place.

On the foredeck there were also two guns of the same calibre and covered in the same manner. They were placed at about fifteen to twenty feet from the entrance of the crew's quarters, and four feet from the ship side, where the wall could also be removed.

Josephine Weir, who describes herself as a New York boarding house keeper, provided another affidavit. She swore that Lietch, who is named in Stahl's statement, told her he was to sail on the Lusitania as a steward, and when she spoke of the danger from German submarines, he said:

A man named Grieve has an affidavit that he heard Lietch make this statement to Mrs. Weir.

In an affidavit furnished by one Bruckner it is stated that he saw a cannon on the Lusitania. He was standing on the dock in New York at the time, he avers.

The affidavits were supplied to the State Department by the German Embassy in order to support the allegation, contained in the German response to President Wilson's note of May 13, that the Lusitania was an armed vessel.

By The Associated Press.

WASHINGTON, June 2.—The four affidavits as presented to the State Department by the German Embassy alleging that guns were carried by the Lusitania are believed to constitute the evidence to which the German Government referred in its last note. Should it develop that the Foreign Office had been misinformed, German diplomatists said, an acknowledgment of the mistake would not be withheld.

These affidavits were not made public by either the embassy or the State Department, but the character of the individuals who made them and their testimony is being made the subject of a quiet investigation. Those officials who had seen the statements, however, were confident that they could not be accepted as disproving the testimony given by Inspectors whose duty it was to search for guns.

THE ARREST OF STAHL.

Gustav Stahl, the former German soldier who made an affidavit that he saw four guns mounted on the Lusitania on the night before it sailed from this port on its last voyage and who disappeared immediately after the affidavit was made public, was produced by Secret Service men before the Federal Grand Jury yesterday afternoon at a proceeding to determine whether Paul Koenig, alias Stemler, who is the head of the detective bureau of the Hamburg-American Line, and others unnamed, had entered into a conspiracy to defraud the United States Government. The fraud is not stated specifically, and the charge is a technical one that may cover a variety of acts.

Stahl, who speaks little English, affirmed through an interpreter to the Grand Jury that he had seen the guns on the Lusitania. He was questioned for two hours and a half and told his story with great detail.

As he was leaving the Grand Jury room he was arrested by United States Marshal Thomas B. McCarthy on a complaint made on information and belief by Assistant District Attorney Raymond H. Sarfaty that Stahl had committed perjury in his testimony before the Federal Grand Jury. Stahl was held in bail of $10,000 by United States Commissioner Houghton and locked up in the Tombs.

Stahl was the only witness heard by the Grand Jury in the proceedings against Koenig. It was learned that Stahl had been in conference with Koenig before he made the affidavit, and that his affidavit had passed through Koenig's hands before it went to Ambassador Bernstorff, who submitted it to Secretary of State Bryan.

The proceedings against Koenig were initiated to establish the charge that Koenig used improper influence to induce Stahl to make the affidavit.

While Stahl was waiting in the Marshal's chamber in the Federal Building, after his arrest, for the arrival of Edward Sandford, a lawyer, of 27 William Street, who had been assigned to act as his counsel, he was asked, through an interpreter:

Stahl is about 27 years old and slightly under middle size. He has a round, somewhat rosy countenance, dark hair getting very thin in front, and parted in the middle, dark-brown eyes and a small, closely-cropped dark mustache. He was calm and smiling, ready with his answers, and very insistent and emphatic in repeating that he had seen the guns on the Lusitania.

He was neatly dressed in a dark mixed suit, with a new straw hat, a green tie on which was a stickpin with a dog's head in porcelain, brightly polished tan shoes, and lavender socks with scarlet-embroidered flowers.

Raymond H. Sarfaty, being duly sworn, deposes and says that he is an Assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York.

That on the 10th day of June, 1915, there was then and there pending before the Grand Jury of the United States in and for the Southern District of New York, a certain proceeding against one Paul Koenig, alias Stemler, and others, upon a charge of having conspired to defraud the United States, in violation of Section 37, U.S.C.C.; that on the said 10th day of June, 1915, the foreman of said Grand Jury, Frederick M. Delano, an officer duly empowered and qualified to administer oaths in the proceedings before said Grand Jury, duly administered an oath to the said Gustav Stahl, that he would testify to the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, with respect to the aforesaid matter then being presented before the said Grand Jury; that the said Gustav Stahl, at the time and place aforesaid, and within the district aforesaid, and within the jurisdiction of this court, after said oath was administered, knowingly and fraudulently committed perjury, and that he testified in part, in substance, and effect as follows:

That on the 30th day of April, 1915, the said Gustav Stahl went aboard the steamship Lusitania at the City of New York, in the Southern District of New York, with one Neal J. Leach; that while on said steamship he saw four guns on one of the decks of said steamship, two forward and two aft; that the said guns were mounted on wooden blocks; that the said guns were covered with leather.

That affiant is informed and believes, and therefore avers, that, whereas, in truth and in fact, the said Gustav Stahl did not, on the 30th day of April, 1915, go aboard the steamship Lusitania at the City of New York, in the Southern District of New York, with one Neal J. Leach, nor did he, the said Gustav Stahl, go aboard the steamship Lusitania on said last mentioned date; and the said Gustav Stahl did not see four guns on the deck of the said steamship, two forward and two aft, nor did he, the said Gustav Stahl, see four guns on the deck of said steamship mounted on wooden blocks; nor did he, the said Gustav Stahl, see four guns on the deck of said steamship covered with leather.

That the said matters testified to before the said Grand Jury by the said Gustav Stahl, as aforesaid, were material matters in the investigation aforesaid; against the peace of the United States and their dignity, and contrary to the form of the statute of the United States in such case made and provided.

That to disclose the source of affiant's information at this time might defeat the ends of justice.

Wherefore, affiant prays that said Gustav Stahl may be arrested and imprisoned, or bailed, as the case may be.

This complaint was read to Stahl when he was taken before Commissioner Houghton, being interpreted for him, sentence by sentence. When the name of Neal J. Leach was read as the alleged steward who had taken him aboard the Lusitania, Stahl exclaimed: "Not Neal." In his affidavit he had described the steward as "A. Leach." A steward named Neal J. Leach went down when the Lusitania was torpedoed.

When that part of the complaint was read which said that Stahl had not seen guns on the Lusitania, he exclaimed in German:

After the complaint had been read, Commissioner Houghton asked about bail. Assistant District Attorney Roger B. Wood, who conducted the proceedings before the Grand Jury, said:

Commissioner Houghton fixed bail at that figure. He then asked Stahl if he had anything to say, and the prisoner replied:

Commissioner Houghton then asked if he had a lawyer. Stahl replied that he had not, and that he had no means to employ one.

"No," replied Stahl; "I should like to have Mr. Sandford, who acted for me yesterday and the day before."

He referred to Edward Sandford of 27 William Street, who was counsel for Carl Buenz, a Director of the Hamburg-American Line, and for other officials of that line, who were indicted by the Federal Grand Jury on March 1 on the charge of conspiring against the United States by making out false clearance papers and false manifests for the collection of customs in connection with the steamships Fram, Somerstadt, Lorenzo, and Berwind, which were loaded with coal and provisions intended for the German cruiser Karlsruhe and the auxiliary cruiser Kaiser Wilhelm der Grosse.

Commissioner Houghton assigned Mr. Sandford as counsel for Stahl. The Commissioner then asked Stahl if he had any friends in the room, to which Stahl with a smile, replied in the negative.

"I would like to have the date of June 24 set for the hearing," said Assistant District Attorney Wood. "The Grand Jury which is now holding this investigation will probably continue its hearings until then."

After the hearing adjourned Stahl was asked where he had been since his disappearance. He replied in German:

"I don't want anybody to know," he said. "I have had so many visitors in the past few days that I don't want any more, if I can help it."

He was asked if he was a German reservist, and he replied that that was his business. Other questions got the same response. He denied that he knew Paul Koenig, the Hamburg-American detective, but he admitted he knew Stemler, which is a name sometimes used by the detective. When he was informed that he was to spend the night in the Tombs he said:

He seemed disappointed when he was told that he would have to go there alone. Stahl was asked if Josephine Weir, who had signed a corroborative affidavit, knew of his whereabouts during his hiding. He refused to answer this question, but of Josephine Weir he said in English:

Stahl sat smoking a cigar and laughing in the best of temper until a flashlight powder was exploded unexpectedly. He put both hands to his face and hid in a corner made by a wall and a filing cabinet, but when he realized that his picture had been taken he ran to a man whom he thought to be a Federal employe, and protested in German. A little later Mr. Sandford arrived with another interpreter and went into consultation with his client.

Stahl went to Albany on June 4, the day after his affidavit was made public. While a search was being conducted in this city and surrounding cities by Federal agents and newspapers, Stahl was in hiding in Albany, his expenses there being paid for him by a confidential adviser sent with him.

Instead of relaxing after a few days, the search for Stahl grew more rigorous. When it was seen that there was little chance of keeping Stahl in permanent seclusion and that the extraordinary character of the disappearance of the German Ambassador's chief witness against the Lusitania was arousing intense nationwide interest, Paul Koenig, the Secret Service man of the Hamburg-American Line, decided that it would be better if he were found at once.

On Monday of this week Koenig and Mr. Sandford called on Inspector Lamb of the Customs Service and told him that Stahl was at Albany and would be available if the Federal officials wanted him. Superintendent William M. Offley, of the special agents of the Department of Justice, had at that time some strong clues as to Stahl's whereabouts.

On Tuesday Stahl and his personal conductor arrived in this city from Albany and were met by Superintendent Offley and Special Agents Adams and Pigniullo. Stahl was taken to the office of Superintendent Offley in the presence of Mr. Sandford, who was asked to take part in the proceedings in the interests of fair play, although he was not then Stahl's lawyer.

At this examination and at a second one held on Wednesday, Stahl repeated his charge that he had seen guns on the Lusitania. He showed great familiarity with the details of the construction of the Lusitania.

At the end of the examination it was urged by representatives of the Hamburg-American Line that Stahl should stay under the watch of the Federal agents in order that, if he told a different story later, there could be no charge that outsiders had tampered with him. Stahl remained with the Government detectives on Tuesday, Wednesday and yesterday, although he was not under arrest. When he appeared yesterday before the Grand Jury it was under a subpoena.

Assistant District Attorney Wood said yesterday that the charge of perjury had been lodged against Stahl on the strength of the statement by the Collector of the Port, Dudley Field Malone, that there were no guns aboard the Lusitania.

"We can bring fifty witnesses," he said, "to prove that the Lusitania had no guns on board and that Stahl is guilty of perjury."

Mr. Wood was asked if there was any evidence that Stahl had ever been in the employ of the German Consul-General at this port or of Captain Boy-Ed, Naval Attaché of the German Embassy, who is said to be the head of the German Secret Service here. Mr. Wood refused to discuss either question. When he was asked if the investigation promised to involve any man of importance, he said:

"I don't know. We are holding the Grand Jury investigation to find out all that we can about the case."

After consulting with Stahl, Mr. Sandford said that he would not represent the prisoner but would seek to get a good lawyer for him at once. When asked if he represented Koenig, he refused to say. He was asked if he knew anything about the charge against Koenig. He said:

"No. The charge of attempting to defraud the Government is a charge on which the Government can get anybody at any time for anything."

CAPT. TURNER’S DENIAL.

At the opening of the Court of Inquiry today into the torpedoing of the steamship Lusitania on May 7, two outstanding points were vividly impressed. One was that the Cunarder was unarmed. The other was that the ship was proceeding at reduced speed, eighteen knots an hour, only nineteen of her twenty-five boilers being used, the result of her effort to save in coal and labor.

Sir Edward Carson, the Attorney General, in outlining the evidence in the hands of the Crown, adverted impressively to President Wilson's note to Germany on the sinking of the Lusitania in which the President informed the German Government that it was wrong in assuming that the Lusitania was equipped with masked guns and manned by trained gunners. "We have ample evidence to disprove the German lie that the Lusitania was armed," said the Attorney General. "Aside from the word of witnesses we have that of President Wilson in his recent note to Germany, based upon investigation made by officials under him. The sinking of the Lusitania was murder."

Sir Edward lifted a newspaper clipping of the President's note from the table and slowly read the passage disposing of the German allegation that the Lusitania was an armed auxiliary.

Captain W.T. Turner, who seemed slightly grayer than before the Lusitania was torpedoed, in that way alone showing the strain under which he has been since his ship was sunk under him, gave evidence that there was not one gun on the Lusitania's deck, and declared that the German assertion that the steamer was armed was a "sheer lie."

CAPTAIN WILLIAM T. TURNER, R.N.R.
Commander of the R.M.S. Lusitania
( Photo from Underwood & Underwood )

STAHL INDICTED FOR PERJURY.

In The New York Times of June 19 appeared the following report of the Grand Jury's indictment of Stahl on a charge of perjury and the announcement that the Federal investigation will be continued:

Gustav Stahl, the alleged German reservist, who made an affidavit that he had seen guns on board the Lusitania on the day before she sailed on her last voyage, was indicted on a charge of perjury by the Federal Grand Jury yesterday. The perjury charge is based on his testimony before the Grand Jury, during which examination he repeated that he had seen the guns on the Lusitania as set forth in his affidavit filed by the German Embassy in Washington and now in the hands of the State Department.

The name of Paul Koenig, who, it is said, was known to Stahl as Stemler, and who is the chief of the secret service of the Hamburg-American Line, is mentioned by name in the indictment. The indictment sets forth that on June 10 there was pending before the Grand Jury an investigation concerning Koenig and others and that Stahl was among the witnesses called in the course of that investigation. It then goes on to say that Stahl testified in substance and to the effect that on April 30 he went aboard the Lusitania, then with one Leach, and that while on the vessel he saw four guns on one of the decks of the steamship, two forward and two aft, and all mounted on wooden blocks and covered with leather. The indictment further charges that at the time of so swearing Stahl did not believe it to be true that he had been on board the Lusitania and had seen the four guns.

The indictment, in conclusion, charges that there were no guns upon the decks of the Lusitania on April 30. "Therefore," the Grand Jury charges, "that Stahl, after taking an oath before a competent officer to truly depose and testify, did willfully, knowingly and feloniously and contrary to his said oath, depose and state material matters which were not true and which he did not then believe to be true, and thereby did commit willful and corrupt perjury against the peace of the United States and their dignity and contrary to the form of the statute of the United States in such cases made and provided."

Stahl will be arraigned before Judge Russell in the criminal branch of the United States District Court on Monday. He is now in the Tombs in default of $10,000 bail. Should he be convicted of perjury he may be sentenced to prison for five years or fined $10,000, or both.

The indictment of Stahl does not mean that the Government's investigation of the Lusitania affidavits, and the way in which they were procured, is at an end. On the other hand it is proceeding vigorously. Three witnesses, all Government officials, were before the Grand Jury yesterday in connection with the case. Heinz Hardenberg, who was found in Cincinnati a week ago today and brought here to be examined by the Grand Jury, has not yet appeared before that body, although the Government agents insist they can produce him when his testimony is desired.

THE NEBRASKAN CASE.

The American steamer Nebraskan, Captain Greene, from Liverpool May 24 for Delaware Breakwater, was torpedoed yesterday evening by a submarine at a point forty miles west-southwest of Fastnet, off the south coast of Ireland. [Captain Greene's report, given below, says the Nebraskan was "struck by either mine or torpedo."]

The sea was calm at the time. The crew at once took to the boats and stood by the steamer. It was soon ascertained that the Nebraskan was not seriously damaged, but she had been struck forward, and her foreholds were full of water.

The crew returned on board and got the vessel under way. No lives were lost among the crew. The Nebraskan did not carry any passengers.

This information was received at the British Admiralty in London, and it was at once communicated to the American Embassy.

Immediately she was struck the Nebraskan began calling for help by wireless. Brow Head received the wireless communication at 9 P.M. yesterday from Crookhaven.

A message to Lloyd's from Kinsale, Ireland, says that the Nebraskan passed that point at 11 o'clock this morning. She was down at the bows, but was proceeding under her own steam, and flying the signal: "I am not under control."

The vessel passed Queenstown in the afternoon on the way to Liverpool. She was proceeding at eight knots.

A message to The Star from Liverpool says that the name and nationality of the Nebraskan were painted in large letters on her sides. She was in water ballast.

A message to Lloyd's says that an armed trawler went to the assistance of the Nebraskan and stood by her all night.

The report that the Nebraskan had been torpedoed caused surprise to American officials here. Apparently the affair occurred before 9 o'clock last night.

Last evening was clear, and the period between 8 and 9 o'clock is the twilight hour in the British islands at this season.

The German submarine campaign is continuing actively. Dispatches from Norway state that the people of that country have been aroused by the sinking last week of the Norwegian steamer Minerva and the attempt to torpedo the Iris, which went to her assistance.

The steamer Cromer, loaded with passengers, had a narrow escape from being torpedoed while bound for Rotterdam yesterday. A submarine fired a torpedo without warning. It missed the ship by only fifteen yards. According to the Captain's story, told to Rotterdam correspondents, the periscope was seen 500 yards distant, and then the wash of the torpedo, which was moving so rapidly that nothing could be done to avoid it. The attack occurred at a point four miles north of North Hinder Lightship.

The first news of the Nebraskan having been disabled off the southwest coast of Ireland was received on May 26, at the office of the American-Hawaiian Line in a message from the Captain, which read:

Struck by either mine or torpedo, forty-eight miles west of Fastnet. Am steaming under convoy to Liverpool. Water in lower hold. No one injured.

Map indicating sites of attacks on American ships or American lives in the German submarine war zone. The damage to the Nebraskan was sustained on May 25, last.

Three dispatches concerning the Nebraskan incident were received at the State Department at Washington on May 26—one from Walter H. Page, the American Ambassador in London, and two from Robert P. Skinner, the United States Consul General in London. The dispatch from the Ambassador said:

Urgent. Report at midnight last night to British Admiralty from Lands End states that American steamer Nebraskan torpedoed forty-five miles south by west of Southcliffe, crew taking to boats. British trawler standing by now reports Nebraskan still afloat and making for Liverpool with four holds full of water. No lives reported lost.

Admiralty reports American steamer Nebraskan, Liverpool for Delaware Breakwater, torpedoed forty miles south by west of Fastnet. Crew in boats. Standing by. Weather fine.

Nebraskan proceeding to Liverpool under own steam about 8½ knots, crew having returned on board. Apparently no lives lost. Extent of damage unknown.

In an Associated Press dispatch from Crookhaven, Ireland, on May 26, this report appeared:

It was learned today that a submarine was seen last night off the southern coast of Ireland. She was sighted soon after 9 P.M., near Barley Cove, which is about ten miles from Fastnet. The mishap to the steamer Nebraskan is reported to have occurred shortly before 9 o'clock, about forty miles from Fastnet.

A steamer was seen outside Crookhaven, which lies just north of Barley Cove, at about 9 o'clock last night. As she approached in the direction of Fastnet Lighthouse two loud reports of a gun were heard. A boat in Crookhaven Harbor went in the direction of the steamer which put about and was lost to sight.

Several residents of Crookhaven turned out and went along the shore, keeping a sharp lookout. They sighted a submarine off Cove, near the mouth of a little creek. One of the men on shore fired two shots with a rifle at the man in the conning tower of the submarine. The submarine dived immediately, but soon rose again further out. Three more shots were fired at her and she again disappeared.

The detailed report on the Nebraskan incident by Lieutenant Towers of the American Embassy in London, as submitted by Ambassador Gerard to the State Department, is thus described in a Washington dispatch to The New York Times of June 16, 1915:

Evidence indicating that the American steamer Nebraskan was torpedoed by a German submarine on May 25, was obtained by the State Department today when it received a long mail report from Ambassador Page at London containing the results of the investigation conducted by the American Consul General at Liverpool upon the arrival of the Nebraskan at that port.

Ambassador Page's mail report contained the detailed report made by Lieutenant John H. Towers, Naval Attaché of the American Embassy at London, who made a technical and expert examination of the Nebraskan in drydock at Liverpool. Lieutenant Towers's report contained a number of photographs of the shattered fore section of the hull of the Nebraskan, but the most interesting feature of the report consisted of exhibits in the form of what Secretary Lansing described as "fragments of metal."

While officials would not make known the character of these fragments or the details of the report until they had opportunity to carefully examine the data, it was learned tonight that the report indicated that the Nebraskan was torpedoed, and that the fragments sent with the report consisted of portions of the shell of a torpedo, which were found in the hull of the Nebraskan.

The report also contained the depositions of three of the officers of the Nebraskan, taken by the Consul at Liverpool, including the statement of the Captain and the Chief Engineer. The latter stated that at 8:24 o'clock on the night of May 25, after the flag of the Nebraskan had been hauled down, he observed a white streak in the water perpendicular to the ship on the starboard side and a severe shock was almost instantly felt, followed by a violent explosion abreast of No. 1 hold.

The report of Lieutenant Towers showed that the hatch covers of No. 1 hold were blown off, also the cargo booms above it, and that the bottom plating and pieces of the side of the ship were blown up through two decks of the ship.

THE “FRAGMENTS OF METAL”

The following appeared as a special dispatch from Washington to The New York Times , dated June 17:

Despite the extreme secrecy of officials, indications were abundant in Washington tonight that the case of the American steamer Nebraskan, believed to have been torpedoed by a German submarine, was assuming great importance in the eyes of the United States Government. One evidence of this is found in the unusual pains that are being taken to determine by indisputable evidence whether the Nebraskan, which was damaged by an external explosion off Fastnet Rock, on May 25, was the victim of a torpedo or a mine.

Despite the reports forwarded by Ambassador Page, the Administration is unwilling to base its conclusions in the Nebraskan case on the verbal evidence it already possesses. It has determined upon an independent expert, technical, and scientific examination of the "fragments of metal" that have been sent by Ambassador Page, in conjunction with the photographs that have been received. This investigation is being conducted by experts of the Navy Department, and will probably take about ten days. Robert Lansing, the Secretary of State ad interim, refused tonight to discuss the "fragments of metal" received from Ambassador Page in connection with the Nebraskan case further than to say that the reports received yesterday, with the photographs and accompanying exhibits, had been referred to the Navy Department. Josephus Daniels, Secretary of the Navy, said tonight that the report had been referred to experts of the Navy Department for a confidential report to be submitted to the State Department.

Neither at the State Department nor from any official or officer of the Navy Department was it possible to obtain any further clue as to the character of the reports.

It was learned that the reports accompanying the set of photographs and "fragments of metal" were not the original reports on the Nebraskan case, made by Lieutenants Towers and McBride, which were received by the State Department last week, but were in the nature of a second set of supplementary reports, based on actual examination of the battered bow of the Nebraskan and the technical examination of the interior of her forward compartment. This examination was made by Lieutenants Towers and McBride, while the Nebraskan was in a drydock at Liverpool. Photographs of the interior and exterior of the steamer's hull were taken by the naval experts.

The "fragments" in question will be analyzed metallurgically for the purpose of ascertaining precisely what metal they contain. Generally speaking, torpedoes are made of a higher grade of metal, within and without, than that used in the construction of mines. The exterior metal of torpedoes consists of nickel steel and copper, and the interior mechanism includes the same kinds of metal and brass. The exterior shell of a mine is generally made of less expensive material, such as galvanized iron, but the interior mechanism and clock-work are of finer metal.

In the examination being conducted by the Navy Department the metallurgical nature of the fragments will be ascertained after their size, shape, contour and character have been very carefully studied by a large number of naval experts who will endeavor to ascertain not only the character of the naval engine of destruction these fragments once fitted, but also the particular portion of torpedo or mine the fragments constituted. These studies and tests are to be conducted partly in the Navy Department, partly at the Washington Navy Yard, partly at the naval proving grounds at Indian Head, Md., and partly at the experimental station at the Naval Academy at Annapolis.

All the naval experts in Washington qualified to have a hand in the tests will be utilized. There are some naval experts outside of Washington, within a few days' reach of the city, who will be summoned here to participate in the examination. It is understood the examination will continue about ten days before any report can be formulated for submission to the State Department.

While this unusual care is being exercised in the tests of the fragments, it is understood that there is nothing in the conclusions thus far drawn in the reports to indicate that the fragments were once part of a mine, and that the reports as they stand indicate that the Nebraskan was hit by a torpedo. This is the conclusion the Administration is expected to draw from the evidence unless the technical examination of the fragments nullifies this evidence.

Dr. Meyer-Gerhard’s Mission

In a cable dispatch from Berlin, via London, dated June 2, 1915, the following complaint of lack of official news from Washington and of means for obtaining it was made known by the German Government:

The German Foreign Office is unable to communicate with Count von Bernstorff, the Ambassador at Washington, except by wireless in plain language, and even this mode of communication is uncertain during periods when the static conditions of the atmosphere are unfavorable.

Reports which reach the newspapers are regarded with suspicion, not only because they come exclusively through British channels, but on account of their contradictory character.

One set of reports intimates that the German counter-proposals have been found to harmonize with Mr. Bryan's plan of providing for a period of investigation in cases of international conflict, while other advices reproduce various American editorials, declaring that the German note is utterly unacceptable, and demanding that steps of varying degrees of aggressiveness be taken.

While waiting, the time is being utilized by some of the more aggressive German newspapers and writers of the type of Reventlow to launch abusive articles against the United States and President Wilson's policy, but the press and public generally seem desirous of avoiding anything which might increase the tension between the two Governments while the German note is under consideration. In this they are acting in complete accord with the Foreign Office, which apparently is sincerely anxious to preserve friendly relations with the United States and deprecates any publication which would tend to inflame the feelings either in Germany or America.

There seems to be no doubt that the Foreign Office would rejoice at a solution consistent with German interests, and it is considered here that one of the unfortunate features of the situation is the inability of the Foreign Office to cope with the chronic firebrands of the press.

This complaint was followed by the news, published by The Chicago Herald on June 4, that a special arrangement had been effected by Ambassador Bernstorff in his conference with President Wilson on June 2, as follows:

With the approval of the President of the United States, Count von Bernstorff, the German Ambassador in Washington, has sent a special agent to Berlin to discuss the American view of the Lusitania tragedy with the German Government.

The agent is Dr. Anton Meyer-Gerhard. He sailed today for Denmark. It is not believed that his voyage will be interfered with. Mr. Gerhard's connection with the great question between the United States and Germany has been guarded with the utmost secrecy. It leaked out only when inquiries were made regarding his departure in such a hurry. Mr. Gerhard himself could not be seen.

The suggestion that Mr. Gerhard go to Berlin was made by Count von Bernstorff to the President at the White House conference on Wednesday. The Ambassador described to the President the difficulties he experienced in transmitting information to his Government. He cannot use the cables, which are in the possession of the Allies. So far as wireless is concerned, conditions make it almost impossible to send anything but the briefest dispatches. As a result, Germany is not well informed in regard to the reasons controlling the policy of the Administration or the state of public sentiment. If his Government were adequately informed the Ambassador is confident that it would look at the demands of the United States in a different fashion.

The President apparently appreciated the view presented by the Ambassador. In any event, he authorized him to send an agent to Berlin, and it is presumed that thereupon he was apprised of the identity of the man selected. Count von Bernstorff vouched for Mr. Gerhard as thoroughly informed on the entire diplomatic situation as well as upon the condition of public sentiment. In addition, he is carrying full explanatory reports from the Ambassador himself.

[Dr. Meyer-Gerhard arrived in Berlin via Copenhagen on June 16 and reported at the German Colonial Office. While en route The Providence Journal and The New York Tribune published stories, varying in detail, to the effect that the United States Government had been hoaxed into obtaining safe conduct into Germany for a Dr. Alfred Meyer, reported to be a German buyer of munitions of war in this country, either under the name of Dr. Anton Meyer-Gerhard, falsely given, or under Meyer-Gerhard's protection. On receiving assurances to the contrary from Count von Bernstorff, Secretary Lansing announced on June 18 that the charge was false.]

Germany’s Press Opinion

Editorial comment of the German newspapers on President Wilson's note of June 9 was reported by The Times staff correspondent in Berlin on June 12 as being "surprisingly restrained and optimistic." Captain L. Persius, the naval critic of the Berliner Tageblatt, which is close to Dr. von Bethmann-Hollweg, writing under the caption, "On the Way to an Understanding," said:

An agreement is possible and the Washington Government shows an honest desire to arrive at an agreement. This is characteristic of the American note. There is no evidence of rattling the sabre, as those who viewed American statesmen and American conditions rightly anticipated. The hopes of our enemies who have already rejoiced at the thought that the Stars and Stripes soon would be floating beside the union jack and the tricolor are proved false, and one can anticipate that the answer of our Government will put aside that last stumbling block to doing away with all differences. The note indicates that America by no means takes the position that the German Admiralty must issue an order to end the submarine warfare before any negotiations can be entered upon. Giving up submarine warfare is only hinted at by implication. Germany's humanity is appealed to entirely in general terms and merely the expectation is expressed that the lives of American citizens and their property will be spared in the future.

A willingness is expressed to help make England give up the plan to starve out Germany. The giving up of the attempt to starve Germany out on the part of England is the most important point for us. The main interest will centre in future upon it. Will England declare herself ready to return to the basis of the London Declaration? Will she no longer place any difficulties in the way of neutral commerce, and in particular will she remove the declaration of the North Sea as a war zone? We will wait and see if the English statesmen have learned that Germany can't be starved. We can await Great Britain's decision with quietness.

President Wilson's note creates no new situation between Germany and America, but its honorable and carefully weighed tone will help to clear up the existing situation. There can be no difference of opinion about Mr. Wilson's final aim—that the lives of peaceful neutrals must be kept out of danger. What we can do and what America must do to achieve this will require negotiations between us and America, which must be conducted with every effort toward being just and by maintaining our standpoint in the friendliest spirit.

The colored reports spread by our enemies are not borne out by the text, which contains no trace of an ultimatum. The tone is friendly and free from all brusqueness. The contents are only a rewriting of the earlier standpoint, and it will be a matter for further negotiations to state again the arguments advanced by Germany and to justify them. It would be premature to comment on individual points, particularly those of a technical nature. One can rejoice, however, that the Wilson note is so couched as not to preclude a possibility for further negotiations promising success.

He gives the German Government an opportunity to send further proofs in the Lusitania case and declares his willingness to negotiate between Germany and England relative to mutual concessions having a bearing on submarine warfare. This offer, to be sure, would have been decidedly more valuable if he had expressed a willingness to take the initiative. But be that as it may, in the further negotiations America will see that on the German side exists an honorable desire to deal with friendly suggestions in a friendly spirit. In any event, the situation resulting from the American note is such that it is apparent that in the statement trumpeted abroad that America had also entered the ranks of our enemies the wish was father to the thought.

The alarming messages which the Reuter Bureau appended to the Bryan resignation must be all taken back today. There is neither an ultimatum nor any threatening language toward Germany in the note. To be sure, the difference between America's and Germany's conception of the submarine warfare remain. The Americans for the present simply will not see that the best protection against endangering the lives of American citizens is for Americans not to go aboard English ships.

Over the question of whether the Lusitania carried ammunition or not, which for us is not in question, the present inquiry will throw some light. In any case, the English hope and prophecy that the new note would mean a rupture in the German-American negotiations have not been fulfilled. For everything else we can wait with calmness.

The morning edition of the Vossische Zeitung, commenting on the summary, merely said:

The contents and tone of this note make it inexplainable that the break between Wilson and Bryan was on its account. After Bryan's declarations we had expected a note which might conjure up danger of a German-American war. Mr. Bryan, who heads all the American peace associations and likes to hear himself popularly referred to as the Prince of Peace, apparently wants to appear as the savior from this danger for reasons of internal politics, so as to win peace friends among the German-Americans, Irish, and Jews with a view to the Democratic Presidential nomination. Mr. Wilson, on the other hand, hopes as negotiator between England and Germany to play the rôle of arbiter mundi and through a great success in foreign politics assure his position at home. The new Secretary, Mr. Lansing, has been long considered a coming man. He has by no means been considered an out-and-out friend of England.

The Morgen Post, in a particularly sane two-column editorial, expresses Germany's genuine satisfaction over America's hearty offer of good offices, and says:

There is no tinge of threat or high-handed tone toward Germany in the note. On the contrary, its tone is quiet though earnest throughout, and in several places it strikes a note of whole-hearted friendship and seeks to leave a way open for further friendly negotiations. No doubt the German Government will accept America's proffered good offices with pleasure. It will be interesting to see what attitude the English will now take. If they will revise the contraband list set up by themselves and desist from making difficulties for neutral commerce with Germany, and, above all, let foodstuffs and textile raw materials through unhindered to Germany, then so far as we are concerned the submarine warfare can cease.

Let the English continue to violate international law whereby they forced us to resort to the use of the submarine as a weapon against their commerce, and we will never allow ourselves to be persuaded to give up this weapon, the only one we have to protect us against violation at the hands of England and with which we can punish England for her unlawful conduct. Should America's good offices prove to be in vain it will be not ours but England's fault, and the Americans will then readily understand that the reproach of an inhuman mode of warfare must be laid at the doors of England and not Germany.

It will soon be seen whether President Wilson employs the same measure of energy against the English as against us. We sincerely hope so because of the friendly, hearty tone of his note. "The American Government cannot admit that the proclamation of a war zone may be made to abbreviate the rights of American citizens?" Really not? We recall that at the beginning of the war England declared the whole North Sea as a war zone and the Americans did not get excited at that time. We had a right to protest bitterly at America's attitude then, but we will forget about it at the present moment. America has proffered her good offices, and we will not doubt that her intentions are honorable and meant in good faith.

It is certain that the note does not simplify the serious situation, and it is equally certain that it does not completely bar the way to a peaceful and friendly understanding. The American Government holds fast to the principle that submarine warfare on merchantmen is inconsistent with the principles of justice and humanity, but the German Government has never left the slightest doubt that it only decided on the submarine warfare because the English method of scorning all previous rules of naval warfare forced Germany to a counter-war on commerce with the submarine.

But there seems to be no reason why the German and American Governments should not get together in a joint discussion looking toward some other form of naval warfare. This presupposes that England, which took the first step in the commerce war, also takes the first step to end it. At the same time the question must be investigated of how ammunition shipments to our enemies can be reconciled with the eternal principles of humanity featured by the American note.

While there may be some practical difficulties, there can be no doubt of Germany's willingness to help to bring about a modification of the naval war along more humane lines. The answer to the American note must, of course, take most carefully into account all the diplomatic, political, and military exigencies, and it will be several weeks before it is ready to be handed to the American Ambassador, especially as we must wait to hear Dr. Meyer-Gerhard.

But it must be said now that the German people, now, as formerly, lay great value on a continuation of unclouded relations with the United States, whose war for freedom it once greeted with rejoicing, and within whose borders millions of Germans have found a new home.

Count Reventlow, Germany's "enfant terrible" who has been a consistent thorn in the flesh of the German Foreign Office because of his anti-American utterances, struck a surprisingly restrained and moderate tone in the Tageszeitung:

The question is not how it may be possible to do away with all differences of opinion under all circumstances, but whether it is at all possible to do away with them without rendering the submarine war impotent. This standpoint contains nothing unfriendly, nothing brusque against the United States. The practical question remains whether we can preserve our German standpoint and still come to an understanding with America. If Mr. Wilson holds to his non-recognition of the war zone, with all its corollaries, then we cannot see how we can possibly come to a real understanding.

On the other hand, the question arises whether President Wilson would continue to cling to that standpoint if certain modifications and mutual guarantees could be brought about which under certain circumstances would render American passenger traffic safe.

A newspaper war between advocates of a friendly settlement and the "no compromise" representatives soon began to rage. Naval writers in particular urged that Germany could not afford to yield an iota regarding the principles and practice of submarine warfare, but the very violence of their attacks upon the advocates of an understanding indicates that the latter are not without influence.

The Cologne Gazette points out editorially that the German press in general has shown satisfaction that President Wilson's communication offers opportunity for an understanding, and expresses the belief that diplomacy on both sides of the Atlantic will work with zeal and good-will to this end. It adds:

It is quite certain the German Government, at least, will do this, and will be generally supported therein by the people. It would be pure imbecility to seek to drag in without necessity a ninth or tenth enemy for ourselves, even though its participation in the war should be limited to supplying the Quadruple Alliance with money and munitions. We say without necessity; for recognition of the fact that Germany is acting in self-defense in using the torpedoes of its submarines against hostile merchantmen so long as England maintains its business blockade against us should, we believe, be a condition which the United States should recognize as preliminary to negotiations.

In a leading article entitled "Bad Advice" the Cologne Gazette takes the Lokalanzeiger to task for attempting to palliate the British "starving-out policy" and exportations from America of war supplies. Conceding that the cutting off of supplies is an accepted method of warfare, it states that international law provides expressly that this weapon may be used only in the form of an effective blockade. It holds that no effective blockade of the German coasts has been declared, however, and that Germany therefore is deprived of the possibility of taking action against blockading ships.

Regarding the exportation of munitions from the United States, the Gazette adopts the argument of Philip Zorn, German member of The Hague Tribunals, that, although the convention adopted at The Hague justifies sales by private firms, a neutral State is bound to prohibit sales of this nature when the commerce in arms assumes such magnitude that continuation of war is directly dependent thereon. He says:

"That the German representatives [at The Hague] voted in favor of permission to deliver arms is incontestable," the article continues, "but there is a great difference between stamping every sale of arms by a private firm in a neutral State as a violation of international law—this was what the German representatives objected to—and arguing that to supply enormous quantities to one group of belligerents alone, and to devote practically the entire available industry of a country thereto, is consonant with the spirit of true neutrality."

Captain von Kuehlwetter, the naval expert of the Tag, points out that the American note passes over in silence the German representations regarding the British Admiralty's instructions to merchantmen to seek cover under neutral flags and to attack submarines under this cover. He declares this is the kernel of the whole argument and the justification for the German policy. He adds:

If a submarine attacks such a ship there is an outcry about barbarians who violate international law and endanger innocent neutral passengers, but if a ship attacks a submarine then it is a brave act of a daring shipper, to whom is given a commission, a gold watch, and a diploma.

Press Opinion of the Allies

BRITISH COMMENT.

A.G. Gardiner, editor of The London Daily News, writing in that paper on June 12, says the rupture between President Wilson and Mr. Bryan is one of the great landmarks of the war. He goes on:

Whatever other significance the event may have, it is conclusive evidence of the failure of German diplomacy in America. The Kaiser has made many miscalculations about nations and about men, but no greater miscalculation than that which he has made in regard to President Wilson and the United States.

He is not alone in that. There has been a good deal of ignorance on the same subject in this country. In the early stages of the war there was a mischievous clamor against the United States in a section of the press, which has never quite got rid of the idea that America is only a rather rebellious member of our own household, to be patronized when it does what we want and lectured like a disobedient child when it does not.

President Wilson has assumed in these ill-informed quarters to be a timid academic person, so different from that magnificent tub thumper, Roosevelt, who would have been at war with Mexico in a trice, and would, it was believed, have plunged into the European struggle with or without an excuse.

If there was misunderstanding here on this subject, we cannot be surprised that the Kaiser blundered so badly. He, too, believed in the schoolmaster view of Woodrow Wilson. A man who had refused such a golden opportunity of annexing Mexico must be a timid, invertebrate person, who had only to be bullied in order to do what he was told. Moreover, was there not a great German population to serve as a whip for the Presidential blank and see that he did not send the polite, the gracious, the supple Prince von Bülow to Washington?

That courtly gentleman was dispatched to Italy to charm the Italian Nation into quiescence. For the Americans he needed another style of diplomacy, and he sent thither the stout and rather stupid Dernburg to let President Wilson and the Americans know that Germany was a very rough customer and would stand no nonsense from anybody.

It was a fatal blunder, the blunder of a people who had been so blinded by materialism that they do not seem to have so much as the consciousness that there is such a thing as moral strength on earth. No one who had followed with intelligent understanding the career of President Wilson could have doubted that he had to deal with a man of iron, a man with a moral passion as fervid as that of his colleague Bryan, but with that passion informed by wide knowledge and controlled by a masterful will, a quiet, still man, who does not live with his ear to the ground and his eye on the weathercock, who refuses to buy popularity by infinite hand-shaking and robustous speech, but comes out to action from a sanctuary of his own thoughts, where principle and not expediency is his counselor.

It is because no man in a conspicuous position of the democratic world today is so entirely governed by principle and by moral sanctions that President Wilson is not merely the first citizen of the United States, but the first citizen of the world.

President Wilson's note gives Germany every opportunity of saving her face if she desires to do so. Not only is it phrased in the most friendly terms, but it invites a submission of further evidence regarding the Lusitania's alleged guns and even the resumption of negotiations with Great Britain through American intermediacy. Here are the vistas of a negotiation which might keep the diplomatists of Berlin and Washington happily employed till the war is over; only the President insists once more that the submarine outrages must stop while the negotiations are in progress. It is this last point, firmly submitted at the end of the note, which gives significance to the whole. Obviously, without it the note would be nothing but an abdication on the part of the United States, and it is because it is not that Mr. Bryan disapproves it.

We do not question the sincerity of Mr. Bryan's attachment to the cause of arbitration; but it is strange that he does not see what a disservice he does to arbitration by accepting and preaching a travesty of it. When there is litigation between individuals over an alleged wrong, the first condition is that the wrong shall stop for the interim—a result effected through an interim injunction between nations. There is no judge to grant such an injunction. It has to be obtained by mutual consent unless it is obtained by arbitration. It simply means a license to the wrongdoer to continue his wrongdoing for as long as he can make the arbitration last, which, where the time is important, will be all that he wants. To accept such a doctrine, as Mr. Bryan apparently does, is simply to put a premium on the wrongdoing and a very heavy discount on arbitration.

Mr. Bryan resigned, according to his own explanation, because he thought President Wilson's note to Germany would endanger the cause of peace. It might, therefore, have been supposed that the American note was to be a departure from the previous American policy; but now that President Wilson's note is published we are puzzled to find the reason for Mr. Bryan's action. The note contains nothing new; it merely affirms in a friendly manner the position taken up by the United States—a position founded upon the generally accepted principles of international law. It testates the claim which America has always made, that a belligerent has no right to sink a presumably innocent merchantman and endanger the lives of its crew and passengers, but must first determine the character of its cargo and establish its contraband nature and must secure the safety of the people on board. This is obviously a stand in the cause of humanity. We might call it the irreducible minimum of the rights of neutrals; for it is clear that, if a Government allows its subjects to be slain in cold blood and its ships to be destroyed, it abandons the primary function of a Government.

The first impression made upon most readers of the new American note to Germany will be, we suspect, that it is extremely polite and quite harmless. They will ask in wonder what Mr. Bryan could have found in it sufficiently menacing to call for his resignation. To many people it will seem that Mr. Bryan altogether misjudged the effect of the American reply. They will find it difficult to believe that any diplomatic dispatch could in the circumstances be more courteous or more restrained. It observes all the forms of international politeness, with, if anything, almost exaggerated punctiliousness.

Yet it is possible that Mr. Bryan is as nearly right as he ever is. The vital passages in the note are those in which the United States Government "very earnestly and very solemnly renews the representations of its note" of May 15, and again asks for assurances that American lives and American ships shall not be endangered on the high seas. In other words, the United States still presses for an official disavowal of the acts of German submarine commanders, still demands reparation for the American lives lost in the Lusitania, and still calls for a promise that no similar outrage will be perpetrated in future.

The note presented to Germany on behalf of the United States Government is a firm and courteous document—the courtesy at least as obvious as the firmness—stating the position of the President very much on the lines expected, and leaving us to wonder even more than we did before why Bryan thought it necessary to resign his Secretaryship. The spirit of the second note is exactly that of the first.

The gist of President Wilson's note lies in the last half dozen words and proceeds. It remains to be seen what answer will be made to this categorical demand. The general opinion in the United States appears to be that it will not be a refusal. Germany, it is thought, will begin by making concessions enough to prevent the abrupt conclusion of conversations, and will finally extend them sufficiently to preserve friendly relations with the Republic.

It would be rash to express a decided view, but we shall not be surprised should this forecast prove to be correct. The feeling in Germany is very bitter against the Government and people of the United States; but it seems unlikely that the Government in Berlin will allow the ill-temper of the public to influence its conduct. The semi-official Lokalanzeiger is already deprecating an unfriendly attitude toward the United States. There is nothing in the note to suggest that a policy such as the American newspapers seem to expect from Germany would be doomed to failure. The American people, we are told, are determined to attain their ends, but they welcome every prospect of attaining them by peaceful means.

The note, it is observed, not only does not shut out further conversations, but gives a distinct opening for them by its treatment of von Jagow's renewed intimation that Germany would gladly accept American good offices in negotiations with this country as to the character and conditions of maritime war. The Wilhelmstrasse can discover in this and some other passages material for procrastination if it so desires.

PRAISE FROM CANADA.

President Wilson's second message to Germany will rank with his first one as a document that at once convinces and convicts—convinces of the sincerity of the President that he is "contending for nothing less high and sacred than the rights of humanity," and convicts the nation to whom it is addressed of being responsible for the fact that the men, women, and children on the Lusitania were sent to their death under circumstances "unparalleled in modern warfare."

The note is not only dignified and statesmanlike, but it breathes a spirit of tolerance and Christianity that is as noteworthy as it is admirable. There is in it not even a suggestion of a threat, no word of bluster, no breath of jingoism. It is sound, sensible, firm, resolute, self-contained, magnanimous even. It does not incite to war, but, instead, appeals to the highest principles of justice and right.

But though the words are conciliatory and the spirit admirable, there is not the least abatement of the insistence upon the principles which the President formulated in his earlier message and laid down for the guidance of Germany and for the protection of the American people. The way is now open to Germany either for peace or for war. The decision is left with her.

FRENCH COMMENT.

Germany must choose between having the services of America in proposing to the Allies a moderation of their blockade, conducted with the strictest humanity, and the cessation of torpedoing neutral ships, the continuation of which exposes Germany to a diplomatic rupture with the United States, if not to war. Assuredly this prospect caused Bryan's resignation.

It is in every way worthy of a great country conscious of its dignity, its rights, and its duties. It has not the tone of an ultimatum, since it is couched in courteous terms, but it is energetic, and it requires Germany finally to cease recourse to false expedients.

The United States, representing in this case the civilized world, places the sacred rights of humanity above considerations of the military order, to which Germany subordinates everything. They are resolved, so far as concerns American subjects, to have those rights respected.

The essence of the note is, first, measures required by humanity must be taken, and afterward, if desired, will come discussions of a new regulation of naval warfare. If Germany insists on putting herself outside the pale of humanity she will suffer the consequences.

ITALIAN COMMENT.

The Corriere della Sera of June 12 compares the attitude of Secretary Bryan to that of former Premier Giolitti, leader of the party which sought to prevent war with Austria. It says Mr. Bryan's action probably will have the same effect in America that Signor Giolitti's intervention had in Italy, and that it will strengthen public opinion in favor of President Wilson.

It will give him greater power in this important moment, defeating men who are ready to lower the prestige and honor of the country.

The United States, the greatest neutral nation, has with this document assumed a special rôle, that is, the defense not of a particular group or interest, but the interest of civil humanity; to guard those principles of common right which above any particular right constitute the sacred patrimony of humanity. She raises her voice, whose firmness is not diminished by the courtesy of the language.

We do not know if Germany will be able to understand the significance, but if she does not she will commit a grave error—the gravest perhaps in the immense series made by her in this war. Mr. Wilson seems to persevere in the hope that Germany will listen to the American admonition. Germany must not forget that the longer the hope the more violent will be the reaction.

The note is not only not a declaration of war or the prelude to a declaration of war, but a species midway of humanitarian sentimentalism and lawyerlike arguments which can have, at least for the present, but one consequence, that of encouraging Germany in intransigentism—that is, the maintenance of her point of view regarding naval warfare.

American Comment on Mr.
Bryan’s Resignation

The New York Times of June 14, 1915, presented the following condensed quotations condemning unsparingly Mr. Bryan's retirement from the Secretaryship of State, gathered from newspapers throughout the United States, and classified according to their professions of political faith:

DEMOCRATIC NEWSPAPERS.

If Mr. Bryan goes on, he will share the detestation of the most despised character in American history.

The new note to Germany puts Emperor William and former Secretary Bryan in the same hole.

His propaganda is designed and intended "to defeat the measures of the Government of the United States" in violation of Section 5, [of the law of treason.]

If Germany is misled into actions still further violative of our rights, the resultant hostility will be very largely attributable to Mr. Bryan.

The President's clear head may now be trusted the more that his methods of thinking are relieved of opposition in the Cabinet.

Wilson, not Bryan, strikes the note to which the hearts of the American people respond.

Mr. Bryan's diplomacy has not been of the type that has inspired the confidence of the American people.

The bald and ugly fact will remain—he deserted his chief and his Government in the midst of an international crisis.

An obstacle has seen fit to remove itself; it has substituted harmony for discordance.

Mr. Bryan has shabbily infringed that good American doctrine that politics should end at the water's edge.

The Germans torpedo one "Nebraskan." Oh, for a "Busy Bertha" that could effectually dispose of the other one!

The reason given for his resignation ... approximates disloyalty, if nothing else; a monstrous statement.

REPUBLICAN NEWSPAPERS.

A man with such a cheaply commercial conception of the post held by so long a line of American statesmen was by nature disqualified for it.

Instead of promoting a peaceful settlement, Mr. Bryan practically throws his influence in the other balance.

He has not filled the place with dignity, ability, or satisfaction, nor yet with fidelity; a cheap imitation.

The seriousness of the situation is all that prevents Mr. Bryan's foreign policy from being laughable.

Those newspapers that said Mr. Bryan was in bad taste made a slight mistake. He is a bad taste.

Impossible for a man of Mr. Bryan's ability and love of the limelight to remain longer wholly obscure in this national crisis.

Childish policies and small politics, even if the Nobel Peace Prize is at stake, must not be considered by an American statesman.

It is characteristic of Mr. Bryan to shut his eyes to arguments and facts when he reaches the ecstacy of sentimental conviction.

Knowing his disposition to watch out for the main chance ... that Mr. Bryan will be a candidate for the Senate from Nebraska is almost a foregone conclusion.

Calculated to create prejudice and misgiving against the American note and to mislead foreign opinion.

Mr. Bryan could have found no better way of causing the President embarrassment at this crisis.

President Wilson has had his own way in State Department affairs, to the minimization of Secretary Bryan, almost at times to the point of humiliation.

A pacifist temporarily bereft of reason and lost to sense of patriotic duty; a misplaced figurehead.

The inefficiency and ineptness of the Secretary of State have been a reproach to the country.

PROGRESSIVE NEWSPAPERS.

The only person who has been talking war and giving out the impression that he thought this note meant war.

INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPERS.

How far he will carry his treachery by actual machinations against Mr. Wilson remains to be seen.

His convictions are all wrong; his retirement should be heartily welcomed by the country.

How much longer, as Cicero asked Catiline, does he intend to abuse our patience?

Bryan's obsession by the peace-at-any-price propaganda bordered on the fanatical.

As a private citizen he will be less a menace to the peace of the nation than he has been as Secretary of State.

The statement [Bryan's] is simply an effort to corral for himself a large voting element in the population.

If war does come Mr. Bryan will be the one American held most responsible for the trouble.

Lagged superfluous on a stage in which he played no part beyond that of an amanuensis, and hardly even that.

GERMAN-AMERICAN PRESS.

Under the caption, "He Kept His Vow," the evening edition of the New-Yorker Staats-Zeitung, which for months had been referring to Secretary Bryan as "Secretary Bryan Stumping," as opposed to "Secretary Lansing Acting," said on June 9:

As unreservedly as we believe that he [Mr. Bryan] is sacrificing high office to a principle—something that seems to be incomprehensible not alone to American politicians; readily as we pay him tribute that a man in public life has again had the courage to act, despite the machinations of editorial offices, pulpits, and the counting rooms of money agents; clearly as we see again his latest act, the old Bryan, who can sacrifice nothing to utilitarianism, everything to an idea, no matter how fantastic it may be, nevertheless it must not be left unmentioned that his exit out of the Wilson Cabinet was under all circumstances only a question of time. Bryan may want to be a candidate in 1916, a rival of Wilson; there may be a political motive at the bottom of the dramatically staged resignation; the fact remains that two hard heads, Wilson and Bryan, could not permanently agree. One had to yield; one had to go. Just as Bismarck had to go when Wilhelm II. felt himself safe in the saddle, so Bryan had to yield as soon as Woodrow Wilson himself took the reins, all the reins, into his hand.

Whether the departure of Bryan will exercise great influence on the course of events, so far as relations with Germany are concerned, is an open question. At all events, the peace party in Congress and in the country as a whole has found a leader who is a fighter, who today still has a large following in Congress and out of it. And in Congress, through the masses, the question must finally be decided. Meanwhile, is it to be assumed without further ado that President Wilson himself stands diametrically opposed to the peace views of Bryan? We do not believe that. We are even today still of the opinion that Wilson desires war with Germany as little as does Bryan, the friend of peace, who has just let his deeds follow his words.

Bryan's stand for fair play forces his resignation. Bryan's resignation at this critical moment is the greatest service the Commoner has ever rendered his country, because it has aroused the people to see the danger of the foreign policy now pursued by the President.

It is evident that Mr. Bryan, believing that Wilson and Roosevelt will be the next Presidential nominees, now sees the opportunity to secure the German vote for himself, but Mr. Bryan's hypocrisy will fool no one, particularly the Germans.

Mr. Bryan will be a greater power for peace out of the Cabinet than in it. As a member of the Cabinet diplomacy muzzled him, but now as a private citizen he can and will be outspoken, and his voice for peace will carry far more weight than the manufacturers of war munitions, Wall Street, would-be Generals, Colonels, and Captains, and the jingo press.

The people will choose Mr. Bryan's side if the President persists on a way which may lead to war and must lead to dishonor.

Mr. Bryan will have the support of all sane Americans on any reasonable proposition which will keep this country out of war. Mr. Bryan, with all his faults, evidently has his principles.

He would not be a man had he signed the death warrant for what he regarded as the crowning deed and success of his life's work. And, because this was asked of him, many a person will say the Scotch in the President's veins did not deny itself in the manner which compelled Mr. Bryan's resignation, although keeping up the appearance that it came of Bryan's own free will because of a disagreement over principles.

Bryan's resignation comes as the biggest surprise of the year to all those of pro-German proclivities who were heretofore laboring under the impression that Bryan represented the spirit in the Cabinet that savored of anything but a square deal for Germany.

Mr. William Jennings Bryan, by his resignation and by his reasons of his resignation, caused us fear that President Wilson's second note to Germany would be full of thunder and lightning, and would lead at best to a severance of the diplomatic relations between the two countries, the friendship of which grew almost to be a tradition.

Our surprise is just as great as it is pleasant. The note of the President is in its tone sound and friendly, and excludes the possibility of hostilities. Germany, though she had many reasons to complain about a hostile disposition on the part of the people, the press, and the Government of the United States, will readily admit that our Government is in duty bound to protect American lives and American property, even though she should have been justified in torpedoing the Lusitania. President Wilson seems to be willing to admit such justification and invites Germany to submit her evidence. This means an invitation to further negotiations, to which President Wilson was apparently opposed in his first note.

It is inexplicable why Bryan could reconcile the signing of the first note, which was of a much more assertive tone, with his sentiments and principles, and then refuse his assent to this one, characterized by dignified friendliness. Mr. Bryan must either have become extremely touchy and particular over night, or somebody must have been fooling somebody else. At any rate, the American note is a guarantee of continued peace as to the issues now pending.

Mr. Bryan’s Defense

In a statement headed "The Real Issue" and addressed "To the American People," issued on June 10, 1915; in a second statement, appealing "To the German-Americans," on June 11; in a third, issued June 12, on the "First and Second German Notes," and in a series of utterances put forth on three successive days, beginning June 16, Mr. Bryan justified his resignation and offered what he styled a practical working solution of the problem of bringing peace to Europe. These statements were preceded by a formal utterance about his resignation, published on June 10. Their texts are presented below.

THE REASON FOR RESIGNING.

My reason for resigning is clearly stated in my letter of resignation, namely, that I may employ, as a private citizen, the means which the President does not feel at liberty to employ. I honor him for doing what he believes to be right, and I am sure that he desires, as I do, to find a peaceful solution of the problem which has been created by the action of the submarines.

Two of the points on which we differ, each conscientious in his conviction, are:

First, as to the suggestion of investigation by an international commission, and,

Second, as to warning Americans against traveling on belligerent vessels or with cargoes of ammunition.

I believe that this nation should frankly state to Germany that we are willing to apply in this case the principle which we are bound by treaty to apply to disputes between the United States and thirty countries with which we have made treaties, providing for investigation of all disputes of every character and nature.

These treaties, negotiated under this Administration, make war practically impossible between this country and these thirty Governments, representing nearly three-fourths of all the people of the world.

Among the nations with which we have these treaties are Great Britain, France, and Russia. No matter what disputes may arise between us and these treaty nations, we agree that there shall be no declaration and no commencement of hostilities until the matters in dispute have been investigated by an international commission, and a year's time is allowed for investigation and report. This plan was offered to all the nations without any exceptions whatever, and Germany was one of the nations that accepted the principle, being the twelfth, I think, to accept.

No treaty was actually entered into with Germany, but I cannot see that that should stand in the way when both nations indorsed the principle. I do not know whether Germany would accept the offer, but our country should, in my judgment, make the offer. Such an offer, if accepted, would at once relieve the tension and silence all the jingoes who are demanding war.

Germany has always been a friendly nation, and a great many of our people are of German ancestry. Why should we not deal with Germany according to this plan to which the nation has pledged its support?

The second point of difference is as to the course which should be pursued in regard to Americans traveling on belligerent ships or with cargoes of ammunition.

Why should an American citizen be permitted to involve his country in war by traveling upon a belligerent ship, when he knows that the ship will pass through a danger zone? The question is not whether an American citizen has a right, under international law, to travel on a belligerent ship; the question is whether he ought not, out of consideration for his country, if not for his own safety, avoid danger when avoidance is possible.

It is a very one-sided citizenship that compels a Government to go to war over a citizen's rights and yet relieve the citizen of all obligations to consider his nation's welfare. I do not know just how far the President can legally go in actually preventing Americans from traveling on belligerent ships, but I believe the Government should go as far as it can, and that in case of doubt it should give the benefit of the doubt to the Government.

But even if the Government could not legally prevent citizens from traveling on belligerent ships, it could, and in my judgment should, earnestly advise American citizens not to risk themselves or the peace of their country, and I have no doubt that these warnings would be heeded.

President Taft advised Americans to leave Mexico when insurrection broke out there, and President Wilson has repeated the advice. This advice, in my judgment, was eminently wise, and I think the same course should be followed in regard to warning Americans to keep off vessels subject to attack.

I think, too, that American passenger ships should be prohibited from carrying ammunition. The lives of passengers ought not to be endangered by cargoes of ammunition, whether that danger comes from possible explosions within or from possible attacks from without. Passengers and ammunition should not travel together. The attempt to prevent American citizens from incurring these risks is entirely consistent with the effort which our Government is making to prevent attacks from submarines.

The use of one remedy does not exclude the use of the other. The most familiar illustration is to be found in the action taken by municipal authorities during a riot. It is the duty of the Mayor to suppress the mob and to prevent violence, but he does not hesitate to warn citizens to keep off the streets during the riots. He does not question their right to use the streets, but for their own protection and in the interest of order he warns them not to incur the risks involved in going upon the streets when men are shooting at each other.

The President does not feel justified in taking the action above stated. That is, he does not feel justified, first, in suggesting the submission of the controversy to investigation, or, second, in warning the people not to incur the extra hazards in traveling on belligerent ships or on ships carrying ammunition. And he may be right in the position he has taken, but, as a private citizen, I am free to urge both of these propositions and to call public attention to these remedies, in the hope of securing such an expression of public sentiment as will support the President in employing these remedies if in the future he finds it consistent with his sense of duty to favor them.

“THE REAL ISSUE.”

You now have before you the text of the note to Germany—the note which it would have been my official duty to sign had I remained Secretary of State. I ask you to sit in judgment upon my decision to resign rather than to share responsibility for it.

I am sure you will credit me with honorable motives, but that is not enough. Good intentions could not atone for a mistake at such a time, on such a subject, and under such circumstances. If your verdict is against me, I ask no mercy; I desire none if I have acted unwisely.

A man in public life must act according to his conscience, but, however conscientiously he acts, he must be prepared to accept without complaint any condemnation which his own errors may bring upon him; he must be willing to bear any deserved punishment, from ostracism to execution. But hear me before you pass sentence.

The President and I agree in purpose; we desire a peaceful solution of the dispute which has arisen between the United States and Germany. We not only desire it, but, with equal fervor, we pray for it; but we differ irreconcilably as to the means of securing it.

If it were merely a personal difference, it would be a matter of little moment, for all the presumptions are on his side—the presumptions that go with power and authority. He is your President, I am a private citizen without office or title—but one of the one hundred million of inhabitants.

But the real issue is not between persons, it is between systems, and I rely for vindication wholly upon the strength of the position taken.

Among the influences which Governments employ in dealing with each other there are two which are pre-eminent and antagonistic—force and persuasion. Force speaks with firmness and acts through the ultimatum; persuasion employs argument, courts investigation, and depends upon negotiation. Force represents the old system—the system that must pass away; persuasion represents the new system—the system that has been growing, all too slowly, it is true, but growing for 1,900 years. In the old system war is the chief cornerstone—war, which at its best is little better than war at its worst; the new system contemplates a universal brotherhood established through the uplifting power of example.

If I correctly interpret the note to Germany, it conforms to the standards of the old system rather than to the rules of the new, and I cheerfully admit that it is abundantly supported by precedents—precedents written in characters of blood upon almost every page of human history. Austria furnishes the most recent precedent; it was Austria's firmness that dictated the ultimatum against Serbia, which set the world at war.

Every ruler now participating in this unparalleled conflict has proclaimed his desire for peace and denied responsibility for the war, and it is only charitable that we should credit all of them with good faith. They desired peace, but they sought it according to the rules of the old system. They believed that firmness would give the best assurance of the maintenance of peace, and, faithfully following precedent, they went so near the fire that they were, one after another, sucked into the contest.

Never before have the frightful follies of this fatal system been so clearly revealed as now. The most civilized and enlightened—aye, the most Christian—of the nations of Europe are grappling with each other as if in a death struggle. They are sacrificing the best and bravest of their sons on the battlefield; they are converting their gardens into cemeteries and their homes into houses of mourning; they are taxing the wealth of today and laying a burden of debt on the toil of the future; they have filled the air with thunderbolts more deadly than those of Jove, and they have multiplied the perils of the deep.

Adding fresh fuel to the flame of hate, they have daily devised new horrors, until one side is endeavoring to drown noncombatant men, women, and children at sea, while the other side seeks to starve noncombatant men, women, and children on land. And they are so absorbed in alternate retaliations and in competitive cruelties that they seem, for the time being, blind to the rights of neutrals and deaf to the appeals of humanity. A tree is known by its fruit. The war in Europe is the ripened fruit of the old system.

This is what firmness, supported by force, has done in the Old World; shall we invite it to cross the Atlantic? Already the jingoes of our own country have caught the rabies from the dogs of war; shall the opponents of organized slaughter be silent while the disease spreads?

As an humble follower of the Prince of Peace, as a devoted believer in the prophecy that "they that take the sword shall perish with the sword," I beg to be counted among those who earnestly urge the adoption of a course in this matter which will leave no doubt of our Government's willingness to continue negotiations with Germany until an amicable understanding is reached, or at least until, the stress of war over, we can appeal from Philip drunk with carnage to Philip sobered by the memories of a historic friendship and by a recollection of the innumerable ties of kinship that bind the Fatherland to the United States.

Some nation must lead the world out of the black night of war into the light of that day when "swords shall be beaten into plowshares." Why not make that honor ours? Some day—why not now?—the nations will learn that enduring peace cannot be built upon fear—that good-will does not grow upon the stalks of violence. Some day the nations will place their trust in love, the weapon for which there is no shield; in love, that suffereth long and is kind; in love, that is not easily provoked, that beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things; in love, which, though despised as weakness by the worshippers of Mars, abideth when all else fails.

THE GERMAN-AMERICANS.

Permit me to address a word to you, as one American citizen speaking to fellow-citizens in whose patriotism he has entire confidence. It is natural that in a contest between your Fatherland and other European nations your sympathies should be with the country of your birth. It is no cause for censure that this is true. It would be a reflection upon you if it were not true. Do not the sons of Great Britain sympathize with their mother country? Do not the sons of France sympathize with theirs? Is not the same true of Russia and of Italy? Why should it not be true of those who are born in Germany or Austria? The trouble is that the extremists on both sides have mistaken a natural attachment felt for birthplace for disloyalty to this country.

The President has been unjustly criticised by the partisans of both sides—the very best evidence of his neutrality. If he had so conducted the Government as to wholly please either side it would excite not only astonishment, but misgivings, for partisans cannot give an unbiased judgment; they will of necessity look at the question from their own point of view, giving praise or blame, according as the act, regardless of its real character, helps or hurts the side with which they have aligned themselves.

The fact that the Administration has received more criticism from German-Americans than from those in sympathy with the Allies is due to the fact that, while both sides are at liberty under international law to purchase ammunition in the United States, the Allies, because of their control of the seas, have the advantage of being able to export it.

It is unfortunate that partisan supporters of Germany should have overlooked the legal requirements of the situation and have thus misunderstood the position of the Administration. The Administration's position has not only been perfectly neutral, but it could not have been otherwise without a palpable and intentional violation of the rules governing neutrality.

This Government is not at liberty to materially change the rules of international law during the war, because every change suggested is discussed, not upon its merits as an abstract proposition, but according to the effect it will have upon the contest. Those who wanted to lay an embargo upon the shipments of arms defended their position on the ground that it would hasten peace, but it is strange that they could have overlooked the fact that the only way in which such action on our part could hasten peace would have been by helping one side to overcome the other.

While the attacks made upon the President by the extremists of both sides were very unjust, it was equally unjust to suspect the patriotism of those who took sides. I feel well enough acquainted with the European-born Americans to believe that in a war between this country and any European power the naturalized citizens from that country would be as quick to enlist as native-born citizens.

As I am now speaking to German-Americans, I am glad to repeat in public what I have often said in private, and would have said in public before but for the fact that it would not have been proper for one in my official position to do so—namely, that in case of war between the United States and Germany—if so improbable a supposition can be considered—German-Americans would be as prompt to enlist and as faithful to the flag as any other portion of our people. What I have said in regard to German-Americans is an introduction to an appeal which I feel it my duty to make to them.

First, if any of them have ever in a moment of passion or excitement suspected the President of lack of friendship toward the German Government and the German people, let that thought be forgotten, never again to be recalled. I have, since my resignation, received numerous telegrams from German-Americans and German-American societies commending my action. I think the senders of these telegrams understand my position; but that no one may mistake it let me restate it. The President is not only desirous of peace, but he hopes for it, and he has adopted the methods which he thinks most likely to contribute toward peace.

My difference from him is as to method, not as to purpose, and my utterances since resigning have been intended to crystallize public sentiment in support of his efforts to maintain peace, or, to use a similar phrase, "Peace with Honor." But remember that when I use the phrase "Peace with Honor" I do not use it in the same sense that those do who regard every opponent of war as favoring "peace at any price." Peace at any price is an epithet, not a true statement of any one's position or of the policy of any group. The words are employed by jingoes as an expression of contempt, and are applied indiscriminately to all who have faith in the nation's ability to find a peaceful way out of every difficulty, so long as both nations want peace.

The alarmists of the country have had control of the metropolitan press, and they have loudly proclaimed that the prolongation of negotiations or the suggestion of international investigation would be a sign of weakness—and everything is weakness that does not contain a hint of war. The jingo sees in the rainbow of promise only one color—red.

Second—Knowing that the President desires peace, it is our duty to help him secure it. And how? By exerting your influence to convince the German Government of this fact and to persuade that Government to take no steps that would lead in the direction of war. My fear has been that the German Government might, despairing of a friendly settlement, break off diplomatic relations, and thus create a condition out of which war might come without the intention of either country.

I do not ask you to minimize the earnestness of the President's statement—that would be unfair, both to him and to Germany. The sinking of the Lusitania cannot be defended upon the facts as we understand them. The killing of innocent women and children cannot be justified, whether the killing is by drowning or starving.

No nation can successfully plead the inhumanity of her enemies as an excuse for inhumanity on her own part. While it is true that cruelty is apt to beget cruelty, it cannot be said that "like cures like." Even in war, we are not absolved from the obligation to remedy evils by the influence of a good example. "Let your light so shine" is a precept that knows no times nor seasons as it knows neither latitude nor longitude.

Third—Do not attempt to connect the negotiations which are going on between the United States and Germany with those between the United States and Great Britain. The cases are different, but, even if they were the same, it would be necessary to treat with each nation separately. My personal preference has been to repeat our insistence that the Allies shall not interfere with our commerce with neutral countries, but the difference on this point was a matter of judgment and not a matter of principle. In the note to Great Britain, dated March 30, this Government said:

In view of these assurances formally given to this Government, it is confidently expected that the extensive powers conferred by the Order in Council on the executive officers of the Crown will be restricted by "orders issued by the Government" directing the exercise of their discretionary powers in such a manner as to modify in practical application those provisions of the Order in Council which, if strictly enforced, would violate neutral rights and interrupt legitimate trade. Relying on the faithful performance of these voluntary assurances by his Majesty's Government the United States takes it for granted that the approach of American merchantmen to neutral ports situated upon the long line of coast affected by the Order in Council will not be interfered with, when it is known that they do not carry goods which are contraband of war or goods destined to or proceeding from ports within the belligerent territory affected.

There is no doubt that our Government will insist upon this position—that is an important thing, the exact date of the note is not material. My reason for desiring to have the matter presented to Great Britain at once was not that Germany had any right to ask it, but because I was anxious to make it as easy as possible for Germany to accept the demands of the United States and cease to employ submarines against merchantmen.

There is no reason why any German-Americans should doubt the President's intentions in this matter. I am sure that every one upon reflection recognizes that our duty to prevent loss of life is more urgent than our duty to prevent interference with trade—loss of trade can be compensated for with money, but no settlement that the United States and Germany may reach can call back to life those who went down with the Lusitania—and war would be the most expensive of all settlements because it would enormously add to the number of the dead.

Fourth—I hope that Germany will acquiesce in the demands that have been made, and I hope that she will acquiesce in them without conditions. She can trust the United States to deal justly with her in the consideration of any changes that she may propose in the international rules that govern the taking of prizes. The more generously she acts in this matter the greater will be the glory which she will derive from it. She has raised a question which is now receiving serious consideration, namely, whether the introduction of the submarine necessitates any change in the rules governing the capture of prizes. The position seemingly taken by Germany, namely, that she is entitled to drown noncombatants because they ride with contraband, is an untenable position. The most that she could insist upon is that, in view of the introduction of this new weapon of warfare, new rules should be adopted, separating passengers from objectionable cargo.

If the use of the submarine justifies such a change in the law of blockade as will permit the cordon to be withdrawn far enough from the shore to avoid the danger of submarine attack, may it not be found possible to secure an international agreement by which passengers will be excluded from ships carrying contraband, or, at least, from those carrying ammunition?

It would require but a slight change in the shipping laws to make this separation, and belligerent nations might be restrained from unnecessarily increasing the contraband list if they were compelled to carry contraband on transports as they now carry troops.

Personally, I would like to see the use of submarines abandoned entirely, just as I would like to see an abandonment of the use of aeroplanes and Zeppelins for the carrying of explosives, but I am not sanguine enough to believe that any effective instrument of warfare will be abandoned as long as war continues.

The very arguments which the advocates of peace advance against the submarine, the aeroplane, and the Zeppelin are advanced for them by those who conduct war. The more fatal a weapon is the more it is in demand, and it is not an unusual thing to see a new instrument of destruction denounced as inhuman by those against whom it is employed, only to be employed later by those who only a little while before denounced it.

The above suggestions are respectfully submitted to those of German birth or descent, and they are submitted in the same spirit to naturalized citizens from other countries. To the naturalized citizen this is the land of adoption, but in one sense it may be nearer to him than it is to us who are native born, for those who come here are citizens by voluntary choice, while we are here by accident of birth. They may be said to have paid a higher compliment to the United States than we who first saw the light under the Stars and Stripes. But, more than that, it is the land of their children and their children's children, no matter for what reason they crossed the ocean. They not only share with us the shaping of our nation's destiny, but their descendants have a part with ours in all the blessings which the present generation can, by wise and patriotic action, bequeath to the generations that are to follow.

SEES CHANGE IN TONE OF PRESS.

On the same day with this outgiving Mr. Bryan issued a statement expressing his gratification over what he termed a change in the tone of the press regarding the note. The statement follows:

I am glad to note the change in the tone of the press in regard to the note to Germany. From the time the papers began to publish forecasts down to yesterday the jingo editors have been predicting that the matter would be dealt with with "great firmness"; that Germany would be told that there must be no more delay in the acceptance of this country's demands, &c.

Instead of waiting until the note was issued they put their own construction upon it in advance, and colored it to suit their own purposes. It is a relief to find the papers now emphasizing the friendly tone of the note, and pointing out that it does not necessarily mean war.

Something has been gained if the warrior journalists at last realize that the country does not want war, but that, on the contrary, it will support the President in his efforts to find a peaceful solution of the difficult problem raised by the use of the submarine against merchantmen.

In giving out his statement Mr. Bryan supplemented it with the following anecdote:

"While I am personally against war, I am in favor of the country having what it wants. If the country wants war, let it have war, but let it first find out if the country does want war. If it becomes necessary to ascertain the sentiment of the country, I suggest that a ballot be taken; let those who want war vote for war and those opposed to war vote against it, and let the vote be taken with the understanding that those who vote for war will enlist for war and that those who vote against war will not be called upon until after those who want war have exhausted their efforts."

"I still believe," added Mr. Bryan, "in the right of the people to rule, and think the Congressman's suggestion might insure deliberate action on the part of the voters."

Mr. Bryan was reminded of the suggestion of some of his friends that in case of war he would be one of the first to enlist. He replied:

I do not want to talk about war, but on one occasion I enlisted to defend my country on the first day war was declared.

GERMAN-AMERICAN OPINION.

Commenting on Mr. Bryan's appeal, the evening edition of the New Yorker Herold on June 12 said:

The arguments which Mr. Bryan dishes up will not be agreed to by most citizens of German descent, but the open discussion of the various points can only be useful.

So far as influencing the German Government is concerned, we are convinced that in Berlin they will not forget for an instant how terrible a warlike conflict between the two countries would be, particularly for the Germans in America. In view of the many bonds of blood that link the German population of our country with the old Fatherland, a war with the United States would be regarded practically as fratricidal, as a calamity which, if in any way possible, must be avoided. Mr. Bryan may rest assured of this.

The influence of the German-Americans is required less in Germany than here, at this point and place, in the United States. Here the jingo press is raging and seeking to fire minds to war, not in Germany.

Mr. Bryan's proclamation will disappoint only those who hailed him when he published his reasons for leaving the Cabinet; but we find in his last document the confirmation of what we have always thought of the man and the politician Bryan, namely, that he considers all means right if they suit his political intentions.

Mr. Bryan's appeal directed chiefly to American citizens of German birth exhibits an astonishing lack of tact as well as lack of judgment. The former Secretary of State seems to be going on the presumption, like many other native Americans not actuated by a feeling of prejudice or race hatred, that German-Americans have left their hearts behind them in the old country and are, therefore, unable to feel as true American citizens should feel toward their country and everything involving its destiny.

Mr. Bryan's appeal, especially the one directed to German-Americans, will not, can not, and should not meet with the slightest response.

Bryan's appeal to the Germans, while it may be classed as patriotic, was unnecessary, and Dr. Dernburg, Germany's special envoy, practically voiced the same sentiments in his farewell address in New York Friday night. Bryan's well-known prohibition tendencies, however, preclude the idea that he was bidding for German-American votes.

Mr. Bryan might well have abstained from issuing his statement to the German-Americans. To make any impression he should have explained why he now thinks it the duty of neutrality to furnish contraband to England, when in 1914 he stated in his Commoner that the President had blazed a new way when he, without conference with other nations, committed this nation to the policy that furnishing the "contraband of money" was inconsistent with the spirit of neutrality. What are the influences that have now changed his views? Mr. Bryan is neither frank nor consistent, hence not impressive.

A “SOFTENED” NOTE.

[The First and Second German Notes.]

My attention has been called to a number of newspaper editorials and articles which, in varying language, asks the question, "Why did Mr. Bryan sign the first note to Germany, and then refuse to sign the second?" The argument presented in the question is based on the supposition that the two notes were substantially the same and that the second note simply reiterates the demands contained in the first. They then declare it inconsistent to sign one and refuse to sign the other. The difference between the two cases would seem obvious enough to make an answer unnecessary, but, lest silence on the subject be taken as an admission of inconsistency, the following explanation is given:

The notes must be considered in connection with the conditions under which they were sent. The first note presented the case of this Government upon such evidence as we then had. It was like the plaintiff's statement in a case, his claim being based on the facts as he presents them. I did not agree entirely with the language of the first note, but the difference was not so material as to justify a refusal to sign it. Then, too, I was at that time hoping that certain things would be done which would make it easier for Germany to acquiesce in our demands.

The three things which I had in mind which, in my judgment, would have helped the situation were: First, an announcement of a willingness upon our part to employ the principle of investigation, embodied in our thirty peace treaties; second, action which would prevent American citizens from traveling on belligerent ships or on American ships carrying contraband, especially if that contraband consisted of ammunition; and, third, further insistence upon our protest against interference of our trade with neutrals. I thought that these three things were within the range of possibilities, and that two, or at least one was probable.

Some weeks have elapsed since the first note was sent, and we have not only failed to do any of these things hoped for, but Germany has in the meantime answered and in her answer has not only presented a number of alleged facts which, in her judgment, justified the deviation which she has made from the ordinary rules applicable to prize cases, but she has suggested arbitration. A rejection of the arguments which she presented and of the allegations made, together with a reiteration of the original demands, creates a very different situation from that which existed when the first demand was made.

As I have before stated, my fear has been that, owing to the feeling existing in Germany, the Government might, upon receipt of such a note under such circumstances, break off diplomatic relations and thus create a situation out of which war might come without the intention of either side. I am sure that the President does not want war and I am confident that our people do not want war; I have no reason to believe that either the German Government or the German people desire war.

But war, a calamity at any time, is especially to be avoided now because our nation is relied upon by both neutrals and belligerents as the one nation which can exert most influence toward bringing this war to an end. If we were, by accident, to be drawn into the conflict, we would not only surrender the opportunity to act as a mediator, but we might become responsible for drawing other nations into this contest. When we see how one nation after another has been dragged into this war we cannot have confidence in the ability of any one to calculate with certainty upon the results that might follow if we became embroiled in the war.

No one would be happier than I if the President's plan results in a peaceful settlement, but no one was in position to say what effect our note would have upon Germany, or what results would follow if she, in anger, broke off diplomatic relations, and I was not only unwilling to assume the responsibility for the risks incurred—risks which no one could with any degree of accuracy measure—but I felt that, having done all I could in the Cabinet, it was my duty to undertake, outside the Cabinet, the work upon which I have entered.

I have no doubt that the country will unanimously support the President during the war, if so great a misfortune should overtake us, but I believe that the chances of war will be lessened in proportion as the country expresses itself in favor of peace—not "peace at any price"—but peace in preference to a war waged for the redress of such grievances as we have against Germany—at least against war until we have given to Germany the opportunity which we are pledged to give to Great Britain, France, and Russia—to have every difference of every character submitted to an international commission of investigation.

I would contend as earnestly for the application of the treaty principle to the Allies as I contend for it in the case of Germany. If the principle is sound, it ought to be applied to every country with which we have a difference, and if it ought to be applied at all I think it is better to suggest it in the beginning than to accept it later after a seeming reluctance to apply it.

I understand that Secretary Lansing has already given out a statement, correcting an inaccuracy which appeared in this morning's paper. I appreciate his kindness.

It is true that I saw the final draft of the note just before my resignation took effect, but it contained an important change. I had no knowledge of this change at the time my resignation was tendered and accepted. This change, while very much softening the note, was not, however, sufficient, in my judgment, to justify me in asking permission to withdraw my resignation.

As Germany had suggested arbitration, I felt that we could not do less than reply to this offer by expressing a willingness to apply the principle of the peace treaties to the case. These treaties, while providing for investigation of all questions, leave the nations free to act independently after the international commission has concluded the investigation.

STATEMENTS ON THE WAR IN EUROPE.

Mr. Bryan on June 16 gave out the first of three statements about the present war, and in it he predicts that a conference will be held at the close of the conflict to revise the rules of international law. The present rules, in Mr. Bryan's opinion, "seem to have been made for the nations at war rather than for the nations at peace."

The statement contains a hint to President Wilson in the concluding paragraph which says that "in all history no other peacemaker has ever been in position to claim so rich a blessing as that which will be pronounced on our President when the time for mediation comes—as come it must." Its text follows:

I shall tomorrow discuss the origin of the war and the reasons which led the nations of Europe to march, as if blindfolded, into the bloody conflict which now rests like a pall over the fairest parts of the Old World; today let us consider the war as it is and the injury it is doing to the neutral nations.

The war is without a precedent in the populations represented, in the number of combatants in the field, in daily expenditures, in the effectiveness of the implements employed, in the lists of dead and wounded, in the widespread suffering caused and in the intensity of the hatreds aroused.

No class or condition is exempt from the burdens which this war imposes. The rich bear excessive taxation and the poor are sorely oppressed; the resources of today are devoured and the products of tomorrow are mortgaged. No age is immune. The first draft was upon the strong and vigorous, but the Governments are already calling for those above and below the ordinary enlistment zone.

The war's afflictions are visited upon women as well as upon men—upon wives who await in vain a husband's return, and upon mothers who must surrender up the sons whose support is the natural reliance of declining years. Even children are its victims—children innocent of wrong and incapable of doing harm. By war's dread decree babes come into the world fatherless at their birth, while the bodies of their sires are burned like worthless stubble in the fields over which the Grim Reaper has passed.

The most extreme illustrations collected from history to prove the loathsomeness of war are overshadowed by new indictments written daily; the most distressing pictures drawn by the imagination are surpassed by the realities of this indescribable contest. Surely we behold "the pestilence that walketh in darkness and the destruction that wasteth at noonday."

Neutral nations cannot look on with indifference—the ties that bind them together are too strong, the relationship too intimate. This is especially true of the United States. We have a composite population, every nation of Europe having contributed liberally to our citizenship. These our countrymen, themselves born abroad or immediately descended from foreign-born ancestors, cannot but take a likely interest in the conduct as well as in the results of the war, and a still larger circle shares the concern of those directly connected. Not a soldier falls on either side but the sorrow expressed in his home finds an echo at some fireside in the United States.

But, aside from sentimental considerations, neutral nations suffer serious disturbances because of the war. Duelists, when dueling was in fashion, were careful to select a place where they could settle their personal differences without harm to unoffending bystanders, but warring nations cannot, no matter how earnestly they try, avoid injury to neutrals. As the nauseous odors of a slaughterhouse, carried on the breeze, pollute the air in every direction, so the evil influences emanating from these wide-extended battlefields taint the atmosphere of the whole political world. War is an international nuisance. Nearly every neutral nation finds new domestic problems thrust upon it and old problems made more difficult.

No American citizen can note without deep concern the manner in which war questions have intruded themselves into our politics—overshadowing economic issues and stimulating agitation in favor of enlarged appropriations for military and naval purposes. Business is deranged and expensive readjustments made necessary, while commerce with foreign nations is seriously interrupted. Fluctuations in price abroad are reflected in the markets of the United States. A fall of one cent in the price of cotton means tens of millions of dollars to our producers and merchants. Added to this, freight rates and insurance premiums have been increased to cover the greater risks incident to war.

Scarcity of ships is one of the greatest commercial embarrassments caused by the war. We have depended largely upon foreign ships to carry our commerce, and we could not but suffer when the merchantmen of one side were driven from the sea and a part of the merchant fleet of the other side was withdrawn for Government use.

The neutral nations are put to a great expense to preserve neutrality and are constantly in danger of being embroiled in the war without intention or fault on their part.

The rules of international law seem to have been made for the nations at war rather than for the nations at peace. It is almost impossible to alter these rules during the war, because any material change, affecting as it would the interests of belligerents, would be a seeming violation of neutrality. As soon as peace returns there will be a demand for an international conference on the subject. The presumption should then be given to peace, for peace, not war, is the normal condition. If nations are determined to fight they should, as far as possible, bear their burden themselves and not be permitted to transfer it to the nations which avoid war by resorting to reason instead of force.

Under the stress and strain of the titanic struggle in which they are engaged, each side has felt itself justified in encroaching upon the rights of neutrals. The ocean highways, the common property of all, have been to some extent appropriated for war purposes, and delicate diplomatic questions are forced upon the neutral nations. Just at this time, when these questions are most acute, the belligerent Governments are least able to deal with them with the calmness and poise which their great importance demands.

No wonder every neutral nation is increasingly anxious for the war to end; but of all the neutral nations ours has the most reason for the return of peace—most reason to set its face resolutely against participation in this war. This nation, the head of the neutral group and the sincere friend of all the belligerents, is in duty bound to set an example in patience and self-restraint.

In all history no such opportunity has ever come to any other nation as that which is destined to come to the United States. In all history no other peacemaker has ever been in a position to claim so rich a blessing as that which will be pronounced upon our President when the time for mediation comes—as come it must.

“PREPAREDNESS” AND WAR.

That military preparedness provokes war is the conclusion drawn by Mr. Bryan in the second utterance in his series of three concerning the European conflict and war in general. It reads:

The conflict now raging in Europe has been described as "The Causeless War," but since no one would be bold enough to lay the blame for such an unholy situation upon an overruling Providence, it must find its origin in acts for which man, and man alone, is responsible.

It is not a race war; on the contrary, the races are quite inexplicably mixed. Latin joins with Saxon; the Frank is the ally of the Slav; while in the opposing ranks Teuton and Turk fight side by side.

Neither is it a religious war. On the Bosporus the Cross and the Crescent make common cause; Protestant Kaiser and Catholic Emperor have linked their fortunes together and hurl their veteran legions against an army in which are indiscriminately mingled communicants of the Greek Church, of the Church of Rome, and of the Church of England.

Nor yet is it a rivalry between families. The leading actors in this unprecedented tragedy are related by blood, but kinship seems to be a negligible factor—it explains neither friendships nor enmities.

No. Race, religion, and family, each with many wars to answer for, can plead not guilty in the present inquiry. So far as can be judged, there appears upon the surface no cause that by any known standard can be regarded as adequate for such a cataclysm as we are now witnessing.

The notes that passed from chancellery to chancellery were couched in most friendly language. These notes could not have been intended to deceive. Sovereigns visited each other and were received with every evidence of cordiality and good-will. This hospitality could not have been insincere.

Each ruler declared that he did not wish war; would they all say this if an adequate cause for war had actually existed? They have all denied responsibility for the war—would they have done so if they had regarded the war as either necessary or desirable?

But there is even better proof, aye, indisputable proof, that no sufficient cause existed, viz., the conclusion to be drawn from inaction.

Would not these rulers have busied themselves trying to save their subjects by the eradication of the cause had they known of the existence of such a cause? Would they have spent their time in social festivities and in exchanging compliments had they known that they were on the brink of war? It is inconceivable! It would be a gross libel on them, one and all, to charge such a wanton disregard of their sacred duty.

What, then, was the cause? If I have correctly analyzed the situation, the war is the natural result of a false philosophy. Theories of life are invisible, but they control for good or for evil. They enter our very being, and may be as deadly to the moral man as germs of disease, taken into the body, are deadly to the physical man. The fundamental precept of this false philosophy is that "might makes right." It is not proclaimed now as loudly as it once was, but it is often acted upon in particular cases by those who would be unwilling to indorse it as a general principle.

The individual makes this maxim his excuse for violating three commandments that stand in his way; this maxim also leads nations to violate these same three commandments for the same purpose, but on a larger scale.

Strange that men should fail to apply to nations the moral principles which are now so generally applied to the individual units of a nation!

The tendency is to condemn the violation of these commandments, not in proportion to the injury done, but rather in inverse proportion. No one will dispute the validity of the injunction against covetousness as long as the object coveted is of little value or not greatly desired, but the last and all-inclusive specifications, viz., "or anything that is thy neighbor's," is sometimes interpreted by nations to except a neighbor's vineyard or a neighbor's territory. Covetousness turns to might as the principle to be invoked, and the greater the unlawful desire the firmer the faith in the false principle.

Conquest is the word used to describe the means employed for securing the thing desired, if the force is employed by a nation, and conquest violates the commandments Thou Shalt Not Steal and Thou Shalt Not Kill.

By what sophistry can rulers convince themselves that, while petit larceny is criminal, grand larceny is patriotic; that, while it is reprehensible for one man to kill another for his money, it is glorious for one nation to put to the sword the inhabitants of another nation in order to extend boundaries?

It is a mockery of moral distinctions to hang one man for taking the life of another, either for money or in revenge, and then make a hero of another man who wades "through slaughter to a throne, and shut the doors of mercy on mankind."

As in the case of the individual, the violation of the commandments Thou Shall Not Covet, Thou Shalt Not Steal, and Thou Shalt Not Kill, are usually traceable to the violation of the first great commandment—Thou Shalt Have No Other Gods Before Me—that is, to the putting of self before service of the Creator.

The violation of these commandments by nations is not always, but usually, due to selfishness—the putting of supposed material advantages before obedience to the Divine Law.

War is occasionally altruistic in purpose and the soldier always exhibits unselfishness of high order, but, as a rule, conflicts are waged for selfish ends.

The individual finds that Jehovah's justice cannot be evaded; for wrongdoing works its own punishment on the wrongdoer in the form of perverted character when he escapes the penalties of human law. The nation is as powerless to repeal or to ignore with impunity the laws of God—"Though hand join in hand they shall not be unpunished."

If I have made it clear that the doctrine that might makes right is the most common cause of war, we may pass to the consideration of a maxim quite sure to be applied in war, namely, that "like cures like"—the theory upon which retaliation rests.

The two are so closely allied that it is almost inevitable that those who indorse the former will resort to the latter—one representing the spirit of will, the other its most familiar manifestation. Rivalry for rivalry in wrongdoing—a neck-and-neck race to the bottomless pit. And yet there are many believers in the gospel of force, who have brought themselves to think that cruelty can be cured by greater cruelty—that the only way to win an antagonist away from inhuman acts is to surpass him in inhumanities. Absurdity of absurdities!

But might must find a pretext for arming itself; and what is the pretext? There was a time when men openly advocated war as a thing to be desired; commended it to each generation as a sort of tonic to tone up the moral system and prevent degeneracy, but we have passed that day.

Now all join in the chorus for peace. And how, according to the jingoes, shall peace be insured? "By preparedness," say these sons of Mars. Prepare, all prepare; equip yourselves with the most modern implements of destruction; arm, drill, get ready, and then stand with fingers on a barrel of a musket and preserve peace—you preserve it until some one, by accident or design, gives the signal—then all fall upon each other with cries for blood. Preparedness is the kindling; opportunity is the match.

We dare not trust the peace of the world to those who spend their time in getting ready for wars that should never come. Half the energy employed in preparing for war would effectually prevent war if used in propagating the principles which make for peace.

Instead of preventing war, preparedness provokes war, because it is impossible to coerce the people into bearing the burdens incident to continuous and increasing preparation without cultivating hatred as if it were a national virtue. There must be some one to fear; some other preparing nation that must be represented as plotting for war.

Hate sets up sham standards of honor and converts every wound into a festering sore; hate misunderstands; hate misinterprets; hate maligns its supposed adversary, while every contractor, battleship builder, and manufacturer of munitions of war applauds.

How can preparedness prevent war, if all prepared? Each step taken by one nation toward more complete preparedness excites the other nations to additional purchases and new levies, until all have exhausted their productive industries and menaced their moral progress.

The doctrine that preparedness will prevent war will not stand the test of logic, and the conflagration in Europe shows that it fails when tested by experience.

If any nation is without excuse for entering into a mad rivalry with the belligerent nations in preparation for war it is the United States. We are protected on either side by thousands of miles of ocean, and this protection is worth more to us than any number of battleships. We have an additional protection in the fact—known to every one—that we have the men with whom to form an army of defense if we are ever attacked, and it is known also that we have the money, too—more money than we would have if the surplus earnings of the people had been invested in armament. We not only do not need additional preparation, but we are fortunate in not having it, as now it seems impossible for a nation to have what is called preparedness on slight notification.

The leading participants in the present war are the nations that were best prepared, and I fear it would have been difficult for us to keep out of this war if we had been as well prepared as they.

Happily for our nation, we have in the White House at this time a President who believes in setting the Old World an example instead of following the bad example which it has set in this matter. What an unspeakable misfortune it would have been if in such an hour as this the nation had been under the leadership of a President inflamed by the false philosophy which has plunged Europe into the abyss of war.

HOW TO END THE WAR.

The concluding argument of ex-Secretary Bryan for permanent peace among the great powers was published on June 18, 1915. The statement follows:

Having considered the war as it is and the injury which it does neutrals, and then the origin of the war and the causes which led up to it, we are now ready to make inquiry as to the way out—that is, the means by which hostilities can be brought to an end and permanent peace restored. To state in a sentence the propositions which I shall proceed to elaborate: Mediation is the means, provided by international agreement, through which the belligerent nations can be brought into conference; time for the investigation of all disputes is the means by which future wars can be averted, and the cultivation of international friendship is the means by which the desire for war can be rooted out.

What are the nations fighting about? No one seems to know, or if any one does know, he has not taken the public into his confidence. We have been told, in a general way, that the Allies are fighting against "militarism" and in defense of "popular government," and that Germany is fighting in defense of "German culture" and for the nation's right to "a place in the sun." But these generalities are so differently interpreted as not to convey a definite idea. When the President offered mediation at the very beginning of the struggle the answers which he received from the various rulers were so much alike that one telegram might have served for all. The substance of each answer was, "I did not want war and I am not to blame for the war that now exists." But that was ten months ago; the question now is not whether those in authority in the belligerent nations did or did not want war then; we may accept their answers as given in good faith, but the important question is still unanswered. "I did not want war" may have been deemed sufficient at the time the answers were given, but the real question is, "Do you want war now? If not, why not say so?"

The months have dragged their bloody length along—each more terrible than the month before—and yet the crimson line of battle sways to and fro, each movement marked by dreadful loss of life. While warriors die and widows weep, the sovereign rulers of the warring powers withhold the word that would stop the war. No Chief of State has yet said, "I do not want war." No one in authority has yet publicly declared his willingness to state the terms upon which his nation is ready to negotiate peace. Are not these dying men and these sorrowing women entitled to know definitely for what their nation is fighting? Is it territory? Then how much territory, and where is it located? Is it the avenging of a wrong done? Then how much more blood must be spilled to make atonement for the blood already shed? Some day accumulated suffering will reach its limit; some day the pent-up anguish which this war is causing will find a voice. Then, if not before, the rulers in the war zone will pause to listen to the stern question, "Why do we die?"—the question which shakes thrones and marks the furthermost limits of arbitrary power.

And is not the outside world entitled to know the price of peace? Must the neutrals bear the penalties which war necessarily visits upon them, and yet remain in ignorance as to the issues at stake? Their trade is interrupted, their citizens are drowned, they are the victims of stray bullets—have they no right to know what it is that, being done, will draw down the curtain of this dark tragedy? Has any nation a purpose for continuing this war which it does not dare to state to the world, or even to its own people?

Surely neither side thinks it can annihilate the other. Great nations cannot be exterminated—population cannot be wiped out by the sword. The combatants, even though the war may have made them heartless, will shrink from the task of carrying this slaughter beyond the point necessary to win a victory. And it must be remembered that war plans often miscarry. Predictions made at the beginning of the war have not been fulfilled. The British did not destroy the German fleet in a month, and Germany did not take Paris in two months, and the Russian Army did not eat Christmas dinner in Berlin. But even if extermination were possible, it would be a crime against civilization which no nation or group of nations could afford to commit. If it is vandalism to destroy the finest specimens of man's workmanship, is it not sacrilege to engage in the wholesale destruction of human beings—the supreme example of God's handiwork? We may find cases of seeming total depravity among individuals, but not in a nation or in a race. The future has use for the peoples now at war; they have a necessary part in that destiny which mankind must work out together regardless of these ebullitions of anger. The Lord might have made all flowers of one kind, of one color and alike in fragrance—but He did not. And because He did not, the world is more beautiful. Variety, not uniformity, is the law among men as well as among the flowers. The nations which are actively participating in this war are what they are because of struggles that have lasted for centuries. They differ in language, in institutions, in race characteristics, and in national history, but together they constitute a great living bouquet that is of surpassing beauty.

We may put aside, therefore, as wholly impracticable, if not inconceivable, the thought that this war can continue until one side has annihilated the other. What, then, can be the purpose? The complete domination of Europe by one nation or group of nations? The absurdity of such a plan is only second to the absurdity of the thought that either side can annihilate the other. The world is not looking for a master; the day of the despot is gone. The future will be gloomy indeed if the smaller nations must pass under the yoke of any power or combination of powers. The question is not who shall dictate on land, or who shall dominate upon the sea. These questions are not practical ones. The real question is, not how a few can lay burdens upon the rest, but how all can work together as comrades and brothers.

Even if it were possible for one side to force the other side to its knees in supplication, even if it were possible for one side to write the terms of the treaty in blood and compel the other side to sign it, face downward and prostrate on the ground, it could not afford to do so; and unless the belligerents have read history to no purpose, they will not desire to do so. Time and again some nation, boastful of its strength, has thought itself invincible, but the ruins of these mistaken and misguided nations line the pathway along which the masses have marched to higher ground. Despotism has in it the seeds of death; the spirit that leads a nation to aspire to a supremacy based on force is the spirit that destroys its hope of immortality. Only those who are unacquainted with the larger influences can place their sole reliance on the weapons used in physical warfare. They see only the things that are transient and ephemeral; they do not comprehend the higher truth that "the things that are seen are temporal; the things that are unseen are eternal."

Christian nations need to read again Christ's prayer upon the Cross, "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." All the participants in this war have sinned enough to make them anxious to exhibit that forgiving spirit which is the measure of the forgiveness which can be claimed.

When can peace be restored? Any time—now, if the participants are really weary of this war and ready for it to end. If any nation is not ready, let its ruler state in clear, distinct, and definite terms the conditions upon which it is willing to agree to peace; then if an agreement is not reached the blame for the continuance of the war will be upon those who make unreasonable demands.

What can be done by the advocates of peace? First, they can crystallize the sentiment in favor of peace into a coercive force, for public opinion at last controls the world. There is a work which the neutrals can do; they can offer mediation, jointly or severally. It is not an act of hostility, but an act of friendship. The Hague Convention, to which all the Governments are parties, expressly declares that the offer of mediation shall not be considered an unfriendly act. The duty of offering mediation may seem to rest primarily upon the United States, the largest of the neutral nations, and the one most intimately bound by ties of blood to all the belligerents. The United States did make an offer immediately after the war began. But why not again and again and again, until our offer or some other offer is accepted? Why not stand at the door and knock, as we would at the door of a friend if we felt that the friend was in need and that we could render a service?

But our action or failure to act need not deter any other neutral country from acting. This is not a time to stand on ceremony; if any other country, for any reason, no matter what that reason may be, is in a better position than we to tender its good offices, it should not delay for a moment. It is for the belligerents to decide which offer, if any, they will accept. I am sure they will not complain if, following the promptings of our hearts, we beseech them to let us help them back to the paths of peace.

Will they object on the ground that they will not consent to any peace until they have assurances that it will be a permanent peace? That suggestion has been made—I think both sides have expressed a desire that the peace, when secured, shall be permanent—but who can give a pledge as to the future? If fear that the peace may not be permanent is given as the reason for refusal it is not a sufficient reason. While no one can stand surety for what may come, it is not difficult to adopt measures which will give far greater assurance of permanent peace than the world has ever known before.

Second—The treaty in which they join should provide for investigation by a permanent international commission of every dispute that may arise, no matter what its character or nature. The United States has already made thirty treaties embodying this principle, and these thirty treaties link our country to nearly three-quarters of all the inhabitants of the world. We have such a treaty in force between the United States and four of the countries now at war—Great Britain, France, Russia, and Italy. The principle of this treaty has been accepted by three other belligerents—Germany, Austria, and Belgium—although treaties with these nations have not yet been negotiated. These seven warring nations have indorsed the principle embodied in these treaties, namely, that there shall be no declaration of war or commencement of hostilities until the subject in dispute has been investigated by an international commission. Why cannot they apply the principle as between themselves? What cause of war is of such magnitude that nations can afford to commence shooting at each other before the cause is investigated? A treaty such as those which now protect the peace of the United States would give a year's time for investigation and report, and who doubts that a year's time would be sufficient to reach an amicable settlement of almost every difficulty?

Does any one suppose that the present war would have been begun if a year's time had been taken to investigate the dispute between Austria and Serbia? It will be remembered that Serbia had only twenty-four hours in which to reply, and it will also be remembered that during this brief time the rulers of the Old World endeavored to find a means of preventing war. If they had only had some machinery which they could have employed to avert war, how gladly would they have availed themselves of it! The machinery provided by treaty can be resorted to with honor—yes, with honor—no matter how high a sense of honor the nation has. The trouble has been that, while the nations were abundantly provided with machinery for conducting war, they possessed no machinery for the promotion of peace. A year's time allows passion to subside and reason to resume its sway. It allows man to act when he is calm instead of having to act when he is angry. When a man is angry he swaggers around and talks about what he can do, and he often overestimates his strength; when he is calm he considers what he ought to do. When he is angry he hears the rumbling of earthquakes and the sweep of the hurricane; when he is calm he listens to the still small voice of conscience.

Third—While the period of investigation provided for in our treaties will go far toward preventing war, still even a year's deliberation does not give complete protection. In order to secure the investigation of all questions without exception it was necessary to reserve to the contracting parties liberty of action at the conclusion of the investigation. War is thus reduced from a probability to a mere possibility, and this is an immeasurable advance; but the assurance of permanent peace cannot be given until the desire for war is eradicated from the human heart. Compulsory periods of investigation supply the machinery by which nations can maintain peace with honor if they so desire; but the final work of the advocates of peace is educational—it is the cultivation of the spirit of brotherhood condensed into the commandment "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." Is it impossible to imagine a civilization in which greatness will be measured by service and in which the rivalry will be a rivalry in doing good? No one doubts that the lot of each member of society would be infinitely better under such conditions; why not strive to bring about such conditions? Is it visionary to hope and labor for this end? "Where there is no vision the people perish." It is a "death grapple in the darkness 'twixt old systems and the Word." The old system has broken down; it can let loose the furies, but it cannot bind them; it is impotent to save. The question is not whether the Word will triumph—that is certain—but when? And after what sufferings?

Thomas Carlyle, his voice rising clear and strong above the babble of Mammon, asked, in the closing chapters of his French Revolution:

"Hast thou considered how Thought is stronger than Artillery Parks, and (were it fifty years after death and martyrdom, or were it two thousand years) writes and unwrites Acts of Parliament, removes mountains, models the World like soft clay? Also how the beginning of all Thought worth the name is Love."

The truth which he uttered is still truth, and no matter who uttered it, the thought is the thought of Him who spake as never man spake; who was described in prophecy as the Prince of Peace; whose coming was greeted with the song of "Peace on earth; good-will to men," and whose teachings, when applied, will usher in the enduring peace of a universal brotherhood.

Bryan, Idealist and Average Man

By Charles Willis Thompson

The subjoined estimate of William J. Bryan's character and public career, which appeared in The New York Times of June 9, 1915, is by the hand of one of its staff writers who has specialized in American national politics.

T HE plain man of the prairie became Secretary of State when William J. Bryan did; the prairie then entered diplomacy, international controversy. The secret of all that has puzzled the land in his behavior lies in that fact. His hold on the West lies in the fact that he is in himself the average man of that country, with that man's ideals, aspirations, defects, and drawbacks. There seems nothing strange or funny in a Secretary of State who goes to New York and signs temperance pledges, or holds Billy Sunday's platform in Philadelphia, when you get a few miles away from the cities; and if it seems a little queer to New York to find the Secretary of State undertaking to demolish the Darwinian theory, there are plenty of regions where the Darwinian theory is regarded as a device of the devil to upset the Mosaic cosmogony. Chesterton says that Dickens never wrote down to the mob, because he was himself the mob; and Bryan never talked down to the men of the prairie for the same reason.

He is not a man of culture, nor of reading. He has been around the world, but when he came back the books and articles he wrote were such as might have been published as guide books or in encyclopedias; he could have written them without leaving home. Travel had no broadening or polishing effect upon his mind.

The vast influence he still has is due to the fact that the common man, with all his mistakes and gaucheries, speaks in him, and that when the common man hears his own thoughts spoken in Bryan's voice he knows that the accent is sincere. Bryan may have taken up this or that particular issue because it sounded like a vote-maker, but none of them represented the least divergence from his course as a whole, which has always been honestly bent in a certain plain direction. He never hesitated to be in a minority and never dodged a fight. He is an innocent theorist, who frequently goes wrong because of the simplicity of his mental processes; but he acts upon his theories, right or wrong, with an intrepidity and a whole-hearted courage in which the ordinary man sees the qualities he himself would like to have, and dreams he has. His mind is not broad, but it is strong; he is always sure he is right, and always ready to fight for his beliefs, and he keeps his hold upon his followers because he is not below them, and not much above them, and because they know he is honest and sincere.

In 1906, the Democratic Party, picking itself out of the wreckage of Parker's defeat, was yearning to reunite. "Big business," assaulted and bruised and banged about by President Roosevelt, was ready to come into line. Roosevelt or his candidate could be defeated in 1908 only by Democratic harmony. Bryan was abroad, traveling, and somehow his distant figure looked less appalling than the near-by figure in the White House. The East did not ask him to recant his radicalism, but only not to talk about it. He arrived in New York, and business went to hear him make a harmony speech. If he made it, business would support him for President. He made the speech; he declared for Government ownership of railroads. Business, roaring with pain, fell back into the Republican arms, and Bryan was defeated for President. No, Bryan is not an opportunist—not in things that really matter.

William Bayard Hale once accurately described him as "essentially a preacher, a high-class exhorter, a glorified circuit rider." There are vast spaces of our country still populated by men and women of the old-fashioned kind; Chesterton describes them as "full of stale culture and ancestral simplicity." They are the descendants of the Puritans—intellectually, at any rate—they look askance on cards, dancing, and the stage; they are the kind of folks who peopled the Mississippi Valley in Lincoln's day and Massachusetts in John Hancock's. Bryan does not talk down to that type for votes; he is that type. Colonel George Harvey, with sarcastic intent, alleged that Bryan became a white-ribboner after hearing a little girl recite "The Lips That Touch Liquor Shall Never Touch Mine." There are regions which would accept that parable as Gospel truth, and much to Bryan's credit.

Salem, Ill., is a little town which fairly shrieks at you its pre-eminence as a picture of that type. As you pass through its orderly little streets, with its little frame houses, all of the same kind and all neat and unassuming, with its dirt roads and its typical Town Hall, set correctly back behind a correct little patch of grass in a neat square, you feel instinctively that the Darwinian theory must be avoided in your Salem conversation. You know at once that the same families have lived there for generations. So they have; one of them was Bryan's, and he was born there on March 19, 1860.

Of course, he was the valedictorian of his class—Illinois College, 1881. Of course, he became a lawyer; and, of course, in the Middle West, that involved politics. He lived now in Lincoln, Neb., in a Republican district, but he was a Democrat. There was a landslide in 1890. The whole country went Democratic, and many a forlorn hope leader in some hide-bound Republican district was swept into Congress, Bryan among them. He made a great speech on the tariff, which won him instantly a national reputation; but Lincoln had recovered its Republican poise, and he did not go back to Congress. He added to his reputation in his own State, however, as editor of its chief Democratic organ, The Omaha World-Herald, and went to Chicago as the head of its delegation to the National Convention of 1896.

At a moment when David B. Hill's masterly presentation of the gold-standard case and Tillman's failure in his effort at rejoinder had thrown a wet blanket over the silverites, Bryan came forward with his "Cross of Gold" speech. The cheering delegations carried him around the hall on their shoulders. None of the candidates before the convention was dominating or really of Presidential size; the convention was deadlocked for many ballots, and at last it turned to Bryan and nominated him.

His defeat by McKinley really marked the beginning of his career as a national leader. Despite the accident which had made him the Democracy's nominal leader, he demonstrated that he was the ablest of the radicals into whose hands it had fallen, and his nominal chieftainship became a real one. It was evident from the beginning that he would be renominated in 1900. When the Spanish war broke out he offered his services and became Colonel of the Third Nebraska Regiment. The Republican Administration was taking no chances on his getting any military glory, and it marooned him in Florida till after the war. He returned good for evil by going to Washington, uniform and all, and dragooning reluctant Democratic Senators into voting for the treaty with Spain whereby we acquired the Philippines. This was one of his incidental opportunisms; he believed it would give the Democrats a winning issue, that of imperialism. The cast of Bryan's mind is such that he always gets his winning issues on wrong end foremost; it gave the Republicans a winning issue, that of imperialism.

Bryan went down to defeat again in 1900, on this new issue, and as usual epitaphs were written over his political grave. It is a favorite parlor game; but Bryan never stays dead, because there is something enduring in him. What is it? That same spokesmanship for the average man of many regions, the man of the little parlor with the melodeon or parlor organ, the plush-bound photograph album and the "History of the San Francisco Earthquake" bought by subscription from a book agent, and the grandfather's clock in the corner of the hall.

But in 1904 the Democratic leaders, tired of defeat, turned desperately to the opposite wing of the party. The radical leaders, really opportunists, forswore or hid their convictions for the sake of victory, tried to teach their unskillful tongues the language of conservatism, and joined in with the conservatives in the nomination of Parker. But Bryan did not yield; he forswore nothing, hid nothing, and he fought a lonely fight, the bravest of his life.

His fight was of one man against a multitude. Alone, he had to be everywhere; he was in the Committee on Resolutions, in the Committee on Credentials, on the floor of the convention, speaking, fighting, working, twenty hours a day. He had no one to help him; all his fellows were on the other side, strangling their convictions and fighting against him. He was insulted on the platform, even by fellow-radicals; he was elbowed aside and snarled at by men who had been more radical than himself; attempts were made to deny him a hearing. Nothing could daunt him or perturb him; he fought on until Parker was nominated, went to his hotel at dawn as the convention adjourned, and fell into his bed in utter collapse. A doctor was summoned, who said that Bryan must instantly give up all work and undergo treatment.

That evening the news came that Parker had refused to run unless the word "gold" was written into the platform; the convention was thrown into panic; the sick man rose from his bed and entered the wild and turbulent hall, white-faced, breathing with difficulty, sweat pouring down his face, and there took up the work again, single-handed still. He fought on all night, was defeated again, and went under the doctor's hands. Those speeches in that convention were really the greatest of his life, though they may not read as well as others; each of them was a battle.

Parker's defeat by Roosevelt again erased that ever-recurring epitaph over Bryan's political grave. It was evident at once that nothing could prevent him from being again the candidate in 1908. Again he was defeated, and again the epitaph was jubilantly rewritten. He was extinguished, he would never again be an influence in the party; it was, to use the phrase of 1896, 1900, and 1904, "the end of Bryan."

Again the epitaph had to be erased. He was so far from being extinguished that he became the dominating force of the convention of 1912. There is no doubt in the mind of the writer, who was there, that Bryan had given up all hope of running for President, because, as he expressed it in a thrilling midnight speech at that convention, he recognized at last that he had too many enemies ever to expect to win. But he did determine to be a king-maker if he could not be a king, and king-maker he was.

Not even the convention of 1904 showed Bryan in better light as a fighter than that of 1912. He was determined that the reactionaries should not control the convention. At the beginning he was defeated, but defeat never affected Bryan in the least in all his life, and this time, as usual, he only went on fighting. When the convention rejected him for Temporary Chairman and elected Parker, the embodiment of all he opposed, he merely took a fresh hold and fought harder.

When he swung Nebraska from Champ Clark to Wilson he had won, and thereafter Wilson's nomination was only a question of time. He was the centre of violent scenes, as when maddened men swept down upon him and shook their standards in his face and seemed on the verge of assaulting him. When he tried to get a hearing and the opposition shouted him down, he simply climbed up on the platform beside the Chairman and forced them to hear. Once, while the whole convention seemed to be yelling at him, and he stood in the midst of a whirlwind of angry noise, ex-Governor McCorkle of West Virginia, jumping up and facing him, shrieked in a voice heard above the cyclone: "Are you a Democrat?"

"My Democracy has been certified to by six and a half million voters. But," pointing his palm-leaf fan at McCorkle, with magnificent contempt, "I will ask the secretary to record one vote in the negative if the gentleman will give me his name."

He won; Wilson was nominated. He brought his great following into line for an Eastern man, and Wilson was elected. The new President, following a precedent set by Taylor, Garfield, and Harrison, made him Secretary of State.

Then Bryan showed a new side of his character to the country. He effaced himself in Wilson's interest; he became a loyal subordinate, accepting a minor place cheerfully and laboring with might and main to make the Administration a success. It is chiefly due to his efforts that it was one for its first two years. The new President was unknown to most of his party, and the legislation he recommended would have met with internal opposition but for Bryan. The Secretary whipped his followers into line even for legislation so repugnant to them as the Currency bill, and the Presidential program went through. In two years Mr. Wilson had become a definite personality to the country, and had a following of his own; but his initial success was due to Bryan, and but for Bryan Mr. Wilson might have had to face a party as divided as did Cleveland, and might have seen his Administration wrecked as Cleveland's was.

Mr. Bryan hoped to make an enduring name for himself as Secretary of State. In the years that had elapsed since he was Colonel of the Third Nebraska he had become an ardent pacifist, and he dreamed of going into history with a title greater than that of any other statesman who ever lived—for such, surely, would have been the meed of the man who abolished war. That mind of his, honest as the day, but far from great; strong but not broad, sees everything as simple, not as complex. Is there a wrong? Why, then, abolish it; it is as simple as A B C. War is wrong; therefore let us stop it. How? Why, get everybody to agree not to fight without taking a year to look into the thing. And he busied himself drafting and negotiating treaties with all the world to get it to agree to this simple but certain remedy. The "glorified circuit rider" was at the head of the Department of State of the United States. If anybody had suggested to him that there were nations which no treaty could bind, he would have answered, in the style of the prayer-meeting exhorter, "Ah! I have a higher faith in human nature." So he worked busily, building himself his niche in the temple of fame, and meanwhile the greatest war in history broke out.

With such a mind as has been described, it is evident that this event could not shake Mr. Bryan's confidence in himself or his remedies. To him it was obvious that the war came because the nations involved had not signed his treaty; if they had, Germany would have abided by it; would not have dreamed of treating it as a scrap of paper; would have waited the prescribed year, and Austria would have given Serbia the same time to reply to her ultimatum. The mischief was done, but he set about heroically to repair it; he sought to have the United States intervene as a peacemaker; he sought to prevent the United States from protecting its citizens on the high seas, since that seemed likely to lead to war; and at last, finding his efforts of no avail, he resigned.

No one who had seen him in his unequal fights for his principles on less momentous occasions could doubt that he would fight for them to the end on this greatest one. There is no parallel to his action in American history. So far as its political aspects are concerned, the nearest thing to it is Blaine's resignation from Harrison's Cabinet in 1892; but that only faintly resembles it. Blaine did not resign because of any difference in principles, but because he wanted to fight the Administration; and the superficial resemblance lies only in the similarity of the relations of the two Presidents to their Secretaries of State.

Bryan leaves the Cabinet saddened, but not disillusioned. When he had been Secretary of State two months he said that he would not have taken office "if I thought there was to be a war during my tenure." "I believe," he added, "there will be no war while I am Secretary of State, and I believe there will be no war so long as I live." It has not come out that way; it might have so easily come out that way if only Germany had signed that treaty of his! But he is not disillusioned; nothing can disillusion him; his ideal is still only a day or two ahead of him, and he resigns to fight for it, since fight for it in the Cabinet he cannot any longer.

In the Name of Peace.

By LAVINIA V. WHITNEY.

(After Kipling.)

A World League to Enforce Peace

By William Howard Taft, ex-President of the United States.

President Wilson on June 15 denied the statement, cabled from Europe, that the United States was the only great neutral Government that had not encouraged the movement among neutral nations looking to a conference of neutrals to end the European conflict. To this Government, said the President, answering a direct inquiry, had been given no more opportunity than everybody knew in furthering a neutral movement for peace. He stated that this Government had supported everything of the sort as far as it could legitimately. It had done everything that was for peace and accommodation, he added. But the great drawback has been that none of the warring Governments has directly, that is officially, indicated that it would respond sympathetically to any suggestion that it become a party to a movement to end the war. The idea of a league of neutral nations, having for its object a concerted effort to bring about peace, is reported to be in the back of the President's mind, and members of the Cabinet have given some thought to the suggestion, which might contemplate the firm maintenance of neutral rights if peace could not be obtained, but the situation has not developed to a point where the American Government is ready to make a definite move.

Meanwhile, as the outgrowth of a series of meetings held in the Century Club, New York, terminating in a call for a conference signed by a National Provisional Committee of 109 members headed by ex-President Taft, an organization known as the League to Enforce Peace, American Branch, was formed on June 17, 1915, in Independence Hall, Philadelphia. The purpose of the conference was explained by Mr. Taft in his address as President, which appears in full below.

M Y fellow-seekers after peace, we thank you for your cordial greeting. In calling this meeting my associates and I have not been unaware that we might be likened to the tailors of Tooley Street, who mistook themselves for the people of England. We wish first to say that we do not represent anybody but ourselves. We are not national legislators, nor do we control the foreign policy of this Government. A number of us were invited to dinner at the Century Club (New York) by four generous hosts, who were deeply interested in devising a plan for an international agreement by which, when this present war shall cease, a recurrence of such a war will be made less probable.

We are not here to suggest a means of bringing this war to an end; much as that is to be desired and much as we would be willing to do to obtain peace, that is not within the project of the present meeting.

We hope and pray for peace, and our hope of its coming in the near future is sufficient to make us think that the present is a good time to discuss and formulate a series of proposals to which the assent of a number of the great powers could be secured. We think a League of Peace could be formed that would enable nations to avoid war by furnishing a practical means of settling international quarrels, or suspending them until the blinding heat of passion had cooled.

When the World Conference is held our country will have its official representatives to speak for us. "We, Tailors of Tooley Street," will not be there, but if, in our sartorial leisure, we shall have discussed and framed a practical plan for a league of peace, our official representatives will be aided and may in their discretion accept it and present it to the conference as their own.

There are Tooley Streets in every nation today and the minds of earnest men are being stirred with the same thought and the same purpose. We have heard from them through various channels. The denizens of those Tooley Streets will have their influence upon their respective official representatives. No man can measure the effect upon the peoples of the belligerent countries and upon the peoples of the neutral countries—the horrors and exhaustion that this unprecedented war is going to have. It is certain they all will look with much more favorable eye to leagues for the preservation of peace than ever before.

In no war has the direct interest that neutrals have in preventing a war between neighbors been so closely made known.

This interest of neutrals has been so forced upon them that it would require only a slight development and growth in the law of international relations to develop that interest into a right to be consulted before such a war among neighbors can be begun. This step we hope to have taken by the formation of a Peace League of the Great Powers, whose primary and fundamental principle shall be that no war can take place between any two members of the league until they have resorted to the machinery that the league proposes to furnish to settle the controversy likely to lead to war.

If any member refuses to use this machinery and attacks another member of the league in breach of his league obligation, all members of the league agree to defend the members attacked by force.

We do not think the ultimate resort to force can be safely omitted from an effective League of Peace. We sincerely hope that it may never become necessary, and that the deterrent effect of its inevitable use in case of a breach of the league obligation will help materially to give sanction to the laws of the league and to render a resort to force avoidable.

We are not peace-at-any-price men, because we do not think we have reached the time when a plan based on the complete abolition of war is impracticable. So long as nations partake of the frailties of men who compose them, war is a possibility, and that possibility should not be ignored in any League of Peace that is to be useful. We do not think it necessary to call peace-at-any-price men cowards or apply other epithets to them. We have known in history the most noble characters who adhered to such a view and yet whose physical and moral courage is a heritage of mankind.

To those who differ with us in our view of the necessity for this feature of possible force in our plan, we say we respect your attitude. We admit your claim to sincere patriotism to be as just as ours. We do not ascribe your desire to avoid war to be a fear of death to yourselves or your sons; but rather to your sense of the horrors, injustice, and ineffectiveness of settling any international issue by such a brutal arbitrament. Nevertheless, we differ with you in judgment that, in the world of nations as they are, war can be completely avoided.

We believe it is still necessary to use a threat of overwhelming force of a great league with a willingness to make the threat good in order to frighten nations into a use of rational and peaceful means to settle their issues with their associates of the league. Nor are we militarists or jingoes. We are trying to follow a middle path.

Now what is the machinery, a resort to which we wish to force an intending belligerent of the league—it consists of two tribunals, to one of which every issue must be submitted. Issues between nations are of two classes:

First—Issues that can be decided on principles of international law and equity, called justiciable.

Second—Issues that cannot be decided on such principles of law and equity, but which might be quite as irritating and provocative of war, called non-justiciable.

The questions of the Alaskan boundary, of the Bering Sea seal fishing, and of the Alabama Claims were justiciable issues that could be settled by a court, exactly as the Supreme Court would settle claims between States. The questions whether the Japanese should be naturalized, whether all American citizens should be admitted to Russia as merchants without regard to religious faith, are capable of causing great irritation against the nation denying the privilege, and yet such nations, in the absence of a treaty on the subject, are completely within their international right, and the real essence of the trouble cannot be aided by a resort to a court. The trouble is non-justiciable.

We propose that for justiciable questions we shall have an impartial court to which all questions arising between members of the league shall be submitted. If the court finds the question justiciable, it shall decide it. If it does not, it shall refer it to a Commission of Conciliation to investigate, confer, hear argument, and recommend a compromise.

We do not propose to enforce compliance either with the court's judgment or the Conciliation Commission's recommendations. We feel that we ought not to attempt too much—we believe that the forced submission and the truce taken to investigate the judicial decision or the conciliatory compromise recommended will form a material inducement to peace. It will cool the heat of passion, and will give the men of peace in each nation time to still the jingoes.

The League of Peace will furnish a great opportunity for more definite formulation of the principles of international law. The arbitral court will amplify it and enrich it in their application of its general principles to particular cases. They will create a body of Judge-made law of the highest value. Then the existence of the league will lead to ever-recurring congresses of the league, which, acting in a quasi-legislative capacity, may widen the scope of international law in a way that a court may not feel able or competent to do.

This is our plan. It is not so complicated—at least, in statement. In its practical application difficulties now unforeseen may arise, but we believe it offers a working hypothesis upon which a successful arrangement can be made.

We are greeted first by the objection that no treaties can prevent war. We are not called upon to deny this in order to justify or vindicate our proposals as useful. We realize that nations sometimes are utterly immoral in breaking treaties and shamelessly bold in avowing their right to do so on the ground of necessity; but this is not always the case. We cannot give up treaties because sometimes they are broken any more than we can give up commercial contracts because men sometimes dishonor themselves in breaking them. We decline to assume that all nations always are dishonorable, or that a solemn treaty obligation will not have some deterrent effect upon a nation that has plighted its faith to prevent its breach. When we add to this the sanction of an agreement by a number of powerful nations to enforce the obligation of the recalcitrant and faithless member, we think we have a treaty that is much more than a "scrap of paper"—and we base our faith in this on a common-sense view of human nature.

It is objected that we propose only to include the more powerful nations. We'll gladly include them all. But we don't propose to have the constitution of our court complicated by a demand for equal representation of the many smaller nations. We believe that when we have a league of larger powers the smaller powers will be glad to come in and enjoy the protection that the league will afford against the unjust aggression of the strong against the weak.

It is suggested that we invite a conference of neutral nations to bring about measures for present peace and to formulate demands as to the protection of neutral rights. This may be a good plan, but, as Kipling says, that is another story.

The League to Enforce Peace

Personnel and Text of the Resolutions Adopted

RESOLUTIONS.

[Adopted in Independence Hall, Philadelphia, June 17, 1915.]

Throughout 5,000 years of recorded history, peace, here and there established, has been kept, and its area has been widened, in one way only. Individuals have combined their efforts to suppress violence in the local community. Communities have co-operated to maintain the authoritative state and to preserve peace within its borders. States have formed leagues or confederations or have otherwise co-operated to establish peace among themselves. Always peace has been made and kept, when made and kept at all, by the superior power of superior numbers acting in unity for the common good.

Mindful of this teaching of experience, we believe and solemnly urge that the time has come to devise and to create a working union of sovereign nations to establish peace among themselves and to guarantee it by all known and available sanctions at their command, to the end that civilization may be conserved, and the progress of mankind in comfort, enlightenment, and happiness may continue.

We, therefore, believe it to be desirable for the United States to join a league of nations binding the signatories to the following:

1. All justiciable questions arising between the signatory powers, not settled by negotiations, shall, subject to the limitations of treaties, be submitted to a judicial tribunal for hearing and judgment, both upon the merits and upon any issue as to its jurisdiction of the question.

2. All other questions arising between the signatories and not settled by negotiation shall be submitted to a Council of Conciliation for hearing, consideration, and recommendation.

3. The signatory powers shall jointly use forthwith both their economic and military forces against any one of their number that goes to war, or commits acts of hostility, against another of the signatories before any question arising shall be submitted as provided in the foregoing.

4. Conferences between the signatory powers shall be held from time to time to formulate and codify rules of international law, which, unless some signatory shall signify its dissent within a stated period, shall thereafter govern the decision of the judicial tribunal mentioned in Article 1.

There were half a dozen brief speeches in favor of the report. John Wanamaker did not think the report went far enough. He had hoped the conference would send out a message to the warring nations that would make them pause and think. He could not help but favor the report, he added, but felt that it, standing alone without any further action, would be laughed at by those on the other side of the Atlantic.

It is expected the Executive Committee will meet in the near future to adopt plans to carry out the objects of the league. One of the things that probably will be done, according to members of the Executive Committee, will be to start a propaganda in this country with a view to having the United States Senate adopt measures in line with the object of the league. Mr. Taft said today that, judging by its action in rejecting treaties in the past, the chief stumbling block to the aspirations of the league would be the Senate. Steps will also be taken to get European countries interested in the league.

ORGANIZATION.

German-American Dissent

By Hugo Muensterberg.

The subjoined letter from Hugo Muensterberg, Professor of Psychology at Harvard University, is addressed to Augustus J. Cadwalader, Secretary of the National Provisional Committee for the League to Enforce Peace.

Dear Sir: I beg to express my thanks for the courtesy of the invitation to attend the conference of the League of Peace in Independence Hall under the Presidency of the Hon. W.H. Taft. I feel myself, of course, in deepest sympathy with the spirit of justice and peacefulness which has suggested the foundation of such a league. Nevertheless, I beg to be excused from attendance, as I am convinced that this time of international excitement and prejudice is unfit for the crystallization of new forms for the common life of the nations.

I venture, however, to add that I feel in any case grave doubts of the value of any plans which aim to secure future peace by the traditional type of agreements and treaties. We live in the midst of a war in which one belligerent nation after another has felt obliged to disregard treaties and to interpret agreements in a one sided way. Only yesterday Italy, without any reason of vital necessity, annulled an agreement and a treaty which had appeared the firmest in European politics, and which yet failed in the first hour of clashing interests. A psychologist has no right to expect that the national temper of the future will be different.

Moreover, the Supreme Court of the United States has sanctioned the idea, which is shared practically by all nations, that treaties are no longer binding when a situation has changed so that the fulfillment of the agreement would be against the vital interests of the nation. We have learned during the last ten months how easily such disburdening changes can be discovered as soon as the national passions are awakened.

The new plan depends upon only one new feature by which the mutual agreement is to be fortified against the demands of national excitement. The plan of the League of Peace promises the joint use of military forces in case that one nation is unwilling to yield. But the world witnesses today the clear proof that even the greatest combination of fighting forces may be unable to subdue by mere number a nation which is ready to make any sacrifice for its convictions. One hundred and fifty millions are attacked by eight hundred and fifty millions, by joint forces from five continents, which moreover are backed by the economic forces of the richest country in the world; and yet after ten months of fighting one million prisoners, but no other hostile soldiers, stand on German soil. After this practical example the plan merely to join the military forces will less than ever appear a convincing argument in an hour in which a nation feels its existence or its honor threatened. For a long time we heard the claim that the Socialists and the bankers would now make great wars impossible; both prophecies have failed. The threat that the warring nation will have to face the world in arms will be no less futile. But the failure in this case will be disastrous, as the terms of such an agreement would draw many nations into the whirlpool which would have no reason of their own for entering the war.

The interests of strong growing nations will lead in the future as in the past to conflicts in which both sides are morally in the right and in which one must yield. We have no right to hope that after this war the nations will be more willing to give up their chances in such conflicts without having appealed to force. On the contrary, the world has now become accustomed to war and will therefore more easily return to the trenches. The break between England and Russia and finally the threatening cloud of world conflict between Occident and Orient can already be seen on the horizon; the battles of today may be only the preamble. In such tremendous hours the new-fashioned agreements would be cobwebs which surely could not bind the arms of any energetic nation.

But, worst of all, they would not only be ineffective—they would awake a treacherous confidence. The nations would deceive themselves with a feeling of safety, while all true protection would be lacking. The first step forward toward our common goal must be to learn the two lessons of the war of today and to face them unflinchingly; mere agreements do not and can not bind any nation on the globe in an hour of vital need, and the mere joining of forces widens and protracts a war, but does not hinder it. We must learn that success for peace endeavors can be secured only from efforts to avert war which are fundamentally different from the old patterns of pledges and threats. These old means were negative; we need positive ones.

If a psychologist can contribute anything to the progress of mankind, he must, first of all, offer the advice not to rely on plans by which the attention is focused on the disasters which are to be avoided. Education by forbidding the wrong action instead of awaking the impulses toward the right one is as unpromising for peoples as it is for individuals. We must truly build up from within. But a time in which the war news of every hour appeals to sympathies and antipathies is hardly the time to begin this sacred work, which alone could bring us the blessed age of our vision, the United States of the World.

Chant of Loyalty.

By ELIAS LIEBERMAN.

American Munition Supplies

The Alleged German Plot to Buy
Control of Their Sources

The following dispatch from Washington, dated June 8, 1915, appeared in The Chicago Herald:

President Wilson and his Cabinet considered today the known fact that German interests, reported backed by the German Government, are negotiating for the purchase of the great gun and munition of war plants in this country.

Secretary McAdoo of the Treasury laid the matter before the Cabinet. He had information from Secret Service agents of the Government who have been following these German activities for some weeks. It is reported today, confirming The Herald dispatch of last night, that the plants for which negotiations are on include that of Charles M. Schwab at Bethlehem, Penn.; the Remington small arms works at Hartford, Conn., and the Cramp works at Philadelphia, which, it is said, Schwab is about to acquire; the Metallic Cartridge Company, the Remington Company, and other munition and small arms works.

Included in the Schwab plant holdings are the Fore River Shipbuilding Company, Massachusetts, and the Union Iron Works, San Francisco, where it is reported parts of submarines are being made for English contract, shipment being made through Canada.

This new move of the Germans involves the outlay of hundreds of millions, a gigantic financial operation in the face of war needs and conditions. It is one of the most sensational developments of the present conflict in connection with the United States. Its consummation inevitably would lead this country into serious disagreement, if not conflict, with Great Britain and the Allies.

The latter will demand the fulfillment of their contracts with these concerns. The German move is to prevent this delivery of munitions of war. With the consummation of the purchases, the German owners could refuse to fill these contracts. They will not fear suits for broken contracts.

The whole matter is fraught with such possibilities of danger to this country that Attorney General Gregory and the experts of the Department of Justice have taken up the question with a view to interposing legal obstacles. It may become necessary, it was suggested today, to prevent such a sale on the grounds of public welfare because of strained relations with Germany.

Secretary McAdoo will not disclose who are the agents for the German interests seeking to purchase the munitions plants, or who are the financial backers. The Secret Service men are believed to know these details, having been on the investigation for three weeks. Rich Germans in the United States are believed to be interested.

Charles M. Schwab, head of the Bethlehem Company, came here two weeks ago in response to an urgent summons. He saw Secretary McAdoo, Secretary Daniels, and other officials. At that time it was given out that he was conferring as to details of supplies to be furnished this Government under contracts for new warship construction about to be awarded. It is now understood that Secretary McAdoo sought information as to the negotiations under way at that time for the purchase of the munitions plants in this country by the German interests.

The report of Secretary McAdoo today stirred the Cabinet as deeply almost as the resignation of Secretary of State Bryan. Complete reports were asked and the Secret Service arm of the Government will be required to furnish immediately more complete and detailed information.

Of the efforts to obtain control of the munitions companies, The Providence Journal of June 9, 1915, reported:

Acting under the personal instructions of the German Ambassador, several German bankers of New York have been working together for the last week on preliminary negotiations for the purchase of every large plant they can lay their hands on which is now engaged in turning out munitions of war for the Allies.

Count von Bernstorff, Dr. Dernburg, and two well-known German bankers held a conference at the German Embassy in Washington on Tuesday, June 1. At that conference the Ambassador outlined in detail instructions he had received the day before from Berlin to proceed with this propaganda, and he declared to the three men there present that his Government considered the success of the plan as of vital importance, superseding every other phase of the war situation.

The bankers at once returned to New York, and at a meeting next day with Captain Boy-Ed and several other men at the German Club outlined their plan of campaign.

For months past the German Ambassador has been in possession of a list of factories all over the country engaged in turning out munitions of war for the Allies. Last Saturday a concerted movement was begun toward securing a majority control of many of these plants.

When one of the bankers at the conference in Washington asked the Ambassador if he had any conception of the magnitude of the financial problems involved in the scheme he replied that his Government was fully prepared to pay everything necessary, and repeated that the fate of the empire might rest on the success or failure of the plan. He then added these words:

The activities of the representatives of Count von Bernstorff in this matter have already brought them up to the point of negotiation, or attempted negotiation, with the Fore River Shipbuilding Company, the Remington Arms Company, the Bethlehem Steel Company, and the Union Metallic Cartridge Company.

Government officials, when notified of this new propaganda yesterday, were a unit in declaring it was impossible to believe that such a scheme could be carried through successfully. In the first place, they pointed out that activity of this kind would be a direct violation of the Sherman act, and, secondly, a case of conspiracy would lie against individuals attempting such a movement for wholesale violation of contracts, which would become necessary in order to carry the plan to its successful conclusion.

The moment the German agents in New York began to disclose their purpose, several cunning individuals who have had some slight connection with the contracts for supplying the Allies with various materials have deliberately put themselves in the path of these agents under the pretext that they already had contracts, or were about to be given contracts, and have already mulcted the German Government of many thousands of dollars.

In two specific cases men have talked of having contracts for picric acid—the manufacture of which necessitates the most skilled training, with most expensive and complicated machinery, and which is only being attempted in four places in this country, and were promptly paid off, on their pledge that they would violate these alleged agreements. One of these deals was made in the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel last Saturday.

Another case, which is fully authenticated, is that of a Western dealer in horses, who delivered 1,500 horses to the port of New Orleans for the British Government last January. As soon as he ascertained what the German agents were doing, he produced his receipt for delivery of his first and only order, and declared he was now searching for 5,000 horses, in addition, for the British Government. On his pledge to abandon this search, he was given $2,500 by German agents.

The keen anxiety of the German Government, acting through the embassy in Washington, to deprive the Allies of any shipments of war materials that they can possibly stop is based on the result of calculations made in Berlin and forwarded to this country two weeks ago, which profess to show that the Allies cannot possibly arm their increasing forces or secure ammunition for their great numbers of large guns from their own resources, and that they must have the help of this country in order to accomplish their purpose. The German representatives also thoroughly believe that without this assistance the Allies cannot continue and complete an aggressive campaign, driving the Kaiser's armies out of Belgium and France.

In The New York Times of June 9, 1915, appeared the following statement of counter-negotiations to checkmate the German operators in America:

Negotiations for the purchase of arms and ammunition manufactories in this country have been under way for some little time, it is asserted, but so quietly have they been conducted that no hint of them became public until yesterday. Yet, coincident with their disclosure, came yesterday, also, announcement of a contract for the manufacture for the Allies of shrapnel and high explosive shells on the greatest scale yet undertaken by an American corporation, which revealed as could nothing else how carefully these supposedly secret dealings had been discovered, watched, and checkmated by the Allies.

This contract, all but the smallest details of which are said to be settled, is to be taken by the General Electric Company, directors of which admitted that the total involved would be at least $100,000,000 and might run far in excess of this figure. In fact, the order was spoken of as limited more by the capacity of the General Electric's plants than by any restricting order of the Allies.

The significance of this contract does not lie wholly, or even chiefly, in its size, for the American Locomotive Company recently closed a $65,000,000 contract with the Allies for shells. What is considered of especial note is that less than a week ago an official of the General Electric stated emphatically that his company had not taken any orders and was not negotiating for any despite the fact that for some time a proposal to specialize in war orders had been under consideration. Less than a week ago the company had reached a negative decision and less than a week ago there was no reason to suppose that it would rescind this decision.

J.P. Morgan & Co., fiscal agents for Great Britain and France in the matter of war supplies, then entered the field. Charles Steele, a partner in the banking house, is a Director of the General Electric Company and negotiations went forward rapidly. These were conducted with a secrecy which exceeded that even of the German interests with the other arms and ammunition companies, but there are several factors which, it is known, were of prime importance in effecting the General Electric's change of policy.

In the past much valuable time has been lost in the distribution of orders among a score or so of concerns which have had facilities for making shells, ordnance, and so forth. Competitive bidding for parts of contracts has held back the finished product and successful bidders have frequently been handicapped by inability to obtain necessary machinery.

Now plans for accelerating manufacture in all war lines have been launched by David Lloyd George, the new British Minister of Munitions, and in the shadow of his influence J.P. Morgan & Co. have practically brought to a conclusion plans to centre future war orders in a few great companies, with the General Electric Company as the dominant unit.

The extent to which the banking house used its tremendous influence is problematical, but it is history that Mr. Lloyd George has been bringing all pressure to bear to increase England's supplies, and with them the supplies of the remaining allies, since British purchasing agents are, to a large extent, looking after the interests of France and Russia, and it may be inferred that the Morgan firm has been as active as possible in carrying out the wishes of the European nations.

Persons in touch with the progress being made in war orders state that the British authorities have become greatly concerned over their supplies of ammunition at hand and in process of manufacture. While orders aggregating many hundreds of millions of dollars have been placed in this country and Canada, deliveries have been disappointing. Canadian plants got to work early in the war, but the delay in ordering supplies in the United States and other neutral countries has seriously affected the efficiency of the allied armies in France and Poland, it is said.

The experience of the American Locomotive Company is typical of the situation. After negotiations which covered several weeks, the company procured a contract which is said to amount to approximately $65,000,000 for shells. During the discussion of terms, and even before, the Locomotive officials were busy buying the necessary lathes and other machinery, but installation of equipment and the training of men could not be done in a few days. The contract was definitely closed six weeks ago, but the company has only begun to turn out the shells at its Richmond plant, and it was said in authoritative quarters that several weeks more would pass before anything like a substantial output would be possible.

The centring of manufacture in a single, or a few, great plants carries the additional and chief advantage to Great Britain and the Allies, that no efforts of Germany can now cut off their ammunition supply. The stoppage of this supply has been one of Germany's chief concerns since the war began, and by embargo propaganda here and by the attempt to create sentiment she has tried to cut down the supplies reaching the Allies from this country.

Well-founded gossip in Wall Street has had it that early rises in the stocks of munition-making concerns were occasioned not so much by the acquisition of war orders as by efforts of German agents quietly to buy up control of these companies in the open market. These devices failing, it is said, orders for ammunition and other supplies have been placed by Germany with no hope of receiving the goods, but merely to clog the channels against the Allies. With the General Electric and other co-operating companies pledged to the Allies this danger will cease to exist.

The concerns selected to join with the General Electric for what will thus amount practically to a combination of resources for rapid manufacture will be those whose equipment, with a few alterations, can be adapted to the new work.

The General Electric Company, according to a Director, is in a position to begin turning out shells at a high daily rate, and, under present plans, the company will not sublet any of the $100,000,000 order. There are facilities available in the plants at Schenectady, Lynn, Harrison, Pittsfield, and Fort Wayne to carry on the work rapidly and without interfering with the ordinary electrical manufacture now being conducted.

Wall Street offered one of the first evidences that things of moment were occurring in the war supply situation. Bethlehem Steel shot forward 10 points, to 165, a new high record, although Mr. Schwab's company was not mentioned in connection with fresh contracts.

It is believed that when the proposed concentration of munition making occurs the Bethlehem Steel Corporation and other companies which already have booked sufficient contracts to keep them busy for some time will not be included.

Stock of the Studebaker Corporation was in large demand as the result of reports that about $7,000,000 of additional war orders had been taken for artillery wheels, motor trucks, and harness. Tennessee Copper shares were strong after it became known definitely that the concern had arranged with the du Pont Powder Company for an increased monthly supply of sulphuric acid. Toward the close of business stocks generally reacted, being influenced by the desire of many traders to keep out of the market until the tenor of President Wilson's note to Germany was known.

But despite the many physical manifestations of unusual activity, officers and Directors of the companies mentioned as those on which Germany had set her eyes were uniformly non-committal when they did not positively deny that there was truth in the story.

William J. Bruff, who is President of the Union Metallic Cartridge Company and a Director of the Remington Arms and Ammunition Company, said:

"I don't think there is any truth in it. Yes, I am certain that no offer of any kind has been made by Germany to buy the two companies. I would know if such offers had been made and I haven't heard of them, except such reports as I have read in the newspapers."

"I have not heard that Germany or any one else has offered to buy the Bethlehem Steel Company. If such an offer were made, Charles M. Schwab would be the man who would know it."

The New York Times of June 10, 1915, included this report of Charles M. Schwab's purposes with respect to the control of the Bethlehem Steel Company:

There is not the least danger of German interests getting control of the Bethlehem Steel Company and breaking the concern's contracts with the British for arms and ammunition, it was made known yesterday from an authoritative source. This same authority had no information that, as alleged by The Chicago Herald and The Providence Journal, and quoted in The New York Times yesterday, the same interests were seeking to obtain control of other companies.

What blocks the attempts of the German agents, in the case of the Bethlehem Steel Company, for one thing, is that the majority of the stock of the concern is not in the market. Contrary to rumors that have lately been floating about hotel corridors and into and out of the brokers' offices adjacent to them, Charles M. Schwab still owns the majority of stock. This much Mr. Schwab emphatically confirmed to a Times reporter yesterday at the St. Regis. That he had no intention of selling he asserted just as emphatically.

At the same time the information is authoritative that agents representing the German Government or German interests have approached Mr. Schwab, not once, but several times, since the beginning of the war, asking that negotiations be opened. It has been intimated that interests, private or Governmental, were willing to pay any price that Mr. Schwab would name for his controlling interest.

Figures running into scores of millions have been named in offers, it being the understanding that the prospective owners simply wished to buy the big plant—the only one in the world that now compares with that of the Krupps, with the possible exception of that of the Schneiders at Creusot—and shut it up, in order to stop the vast sales of munitions of war to the Allies, and the filling of contracts so big that their delivery has hardly begun. Mr. Schwab, it is understood, could get today $100,000,000 or more for his stock in the Bethlehem Company.

It was established yesterday that more or less directly the visit of Mr. Schwab to England last Fall, on the Olympic, was due to the activity of German agents in this country in their efforts to buy the Bethlehem Steel Company.

Word of the attempts of the German agents to obtain control of the Bethlehem Company soon found its way to England, and the result was that Mr. Schwab was invited to London for a special conference with the War Office. He renewed his acquaintance with Lord Kitchener, and his previously formed intention not to sell out was fortified with a guarantee of orders large enough to keep the big plant at Bethlehem going steadily for eighteen months or more.

When rumors were prevalent about New York that the visit of Sir Trevor Dawson, head of a great English steel concern, had as its object an attempt to obtain control of the Bethlehem Company so as to insure that it would continue turning out supplies for the Allies, the German agents here were making a strong bid for the control of the concern, and their efforts have since continued.

A Times reporter put to Mr. Schwab yesterday the direct question as to whether he was in actual control of the Bethlehem Steel Company.

"Absolutely," he said. "The only way anybody else could obtain control would be to get my interest. I would never sell my interest without making for the men who stood by me with their support when I was struggling to put the Bethlehem Company where it is today the same terms that would be offered for my share. As a matter of fact, my interest in the Bethlehem Company is not for sale. Indeed, I could not sell. I have contracts that I cannot break."

It was said yesterday that the Germans had been trying to conduct their negotiations for the Bethlehem Company in much the same fashion as they recently had employed in their diplomatic negotiations, and that if they had been successful in getting the Bethlehem Company they would have found themselves with contracts on their hands which they would have had to carry out. The mere closing of the plant and the refusal to continue the further manufacture and delivery of munitions of war already contracted for would not save them from a situation which would be the equivalent of jumping from the frying pan into the fire.

Not only the courts would be promptly invoked to see that legal contracts were carried out, but, if necessary, the Federal Government could step in and insist that the manufacture and delivery of supplies contracted for be continued, in order to prevent a breach of neutrality. Then would be presented the spectacle of German interests turning out vast quantities of guns, shells, and shrapnel to be sent to Europe to be used in fighting their own troops.

According to the authority already mentioned, the Bethlehem Steel Company is the only plant in the United States that can turn out shrapnel shell complete. Most of the contracts that have been given here have been taken for various parts of the ammunition by different firms. One thing necessary for the turning out of shrapnel and shells is a twelve-mile proving ground, and the only privately owned range of the kind in this country is that of the Bethlehem Company.

Mr. Schwab has insisted to his friends who have questioned him about the rise in Bethlehem stock that the only valid reason, aside from whatever might be the intrinsic value of the property, is the tremendous war orders that have been obtained. On this account, as well as on account of his knowledge that the majority of the stock was safe in his possession, he was able to enjoy his trip to the Pacific Coast regardless of rumors at one time prevalent that a big market operator, who was supposed to retain an ancient grudge against him, was trying to wrest from him the control of the company he had built up.

A League for Preparedness

By Theodore Roosevelt, ex-President of the United States,

and

George L. von Meyer, ex-Secretary of the Navy.

It was ascertained in Washington on June 1, 1915, that the Atlantic battleship fleet would remain in Atlantic Ocean waters indefinitely. The plan to send the fleet through the canal in July for participation in the Panama-Pacific Exposition at San Francisco had been abandoned, and Admiral Fletcher's ships would not cross the Isthmus this year. The decision to hold the fleet in Atlantic waters is predicated on two principle factors. These are: First, there undoubtedly will be another great slide in Culebra Cut in the Panama Canal some time this Summer, and it would be considered highly undesirable to have the fleet on the Pacific Coast with such a slide interposed between Admiral Fletcher's vessels and the Atlantic waters. Second, the general situation of American foreign affairs growing out of relations with Germany is such that it is considered unwise to send the fleet to the west coast and leave the Atlantic Coast unguarded. This is the extent, at present, of national preparation against war.

The Peace and Preparation Conference, called in the name of the National Security League to discuss the military needs of the nation, began on the evening of June 14, 1915, with the opening to the public of the Army and Navy Exhibit in the Hotel Astor, where there were to be seen numerous placards which gave in figures and words information as to the situation of the United States so far as military preparedness is concerned.

General Luke E. Wright of Memphis, who was Secretary of War the latter part of the second Roosevelt Administration, was among the visitors to the conference, and said he was in thorough sympathy with the aims of the National Security League. In his opinion the American first line of defense, to be immediately available for service, should be at least 300,000 men.

An audience composed of nearly as many women as men heard in Carnegie Hall, on the evening of June 15, the arguments of Alton B. Parker, Dr. Lyman Abbott, Henry L. Stimson, ex-Secretary of War; Charles J. Bonaparte, ex-Attorney General, and Jacob M. Dickinson, ex-Secretary of War, advocating immediate increases in the army and navy as the best safeguard against war. Ex-Judge Parker, who was Chairman of the meeting, struck the keynote of the conference in these words:

"We want to arouse the people of the United States from the Atlantic to the Pacific, to the end that they shall let Congress know that they have made up their minds to spend a little of that $187,000,000,000 of which we boast in order that our wives and our children and our grandchildren shall not be visited with the calamity which has befallen Belgium."

Two features of the conference were the reading of a letter to Hudson Maxim from ex-President Theodore Roosevelt and a speech on naval unpreparedness by George von L. Meyer, ex-Secretary of the Navy. The speech is reproduced below in part, and the letter from Mr. Roosevelt in full, together with the resolution of the conference.

MR. ROOSEVELT’S LETTER.

I thank you heartily for your book on "Defenseless America." It is a capital book and I believe it is safe to say that no wise and patriotic American can fail to recognize the service that you have rendered in writing it. I hope it will have the widest possible circulation throughout our country.

I was glad to see the first-class letters that have been written you by such good Americans as Oscar Straus, Garrett P. Serviss, Rear Admiral W.W. Kimball, C.P. Gray, Holman Day, and the others. On the other hand, I was saddened by the extraordinary letter sent you by the three young men who purported to speak for the senior class of the college of which they are members. The course of conduct which these men and those like them advocate for the nation would, of course, not only mean a peculiar craven avoidance of national duty by our people at this time, but would also inevitably tend permanently to encourage the spirit of individual cowardice no less than of national cowardice.

The professional pacifists, the professional peace-at-any-price men, who during the last five years have been so active, who have pushed the mischievous all-arbitration treaties at Washington, who have condoned our criminal inactivity as regards Mexico and, above all, as regards the questions raised by the great world war now raging, and who have applauded our abject failure to live up to the obligations imposed upon us as a signatory power of The Hague Convention, are, at best, an unlovely body of men, and taken as a whole are probably the most undesirable citizens that this country contains.

But it is less shocking to see such sentiments developed among old men than among young men. The college students who organize or join these peace-at-any-price leagues are engaged, according to their feeble abilities, in cultivating a standard of manhood which, if logically applied, would make them desire to "arbitrate" with any tough individual who slapped the sister or sweetheart of one of them in the face.

Well-meaning people, as we all know, sometimes advocate a course of action which is infamous; and, as was proved by the great Copperhead Party fifty years ago, there are always some brave men to be found condoning or advocating deeds of national cowardice. But the fact remains that the advocates of pacifism who have been most prominent in our country during the past five years have been preaching poltroonery.

Such preaching, if persevered in long enough, softens the fibre of any nation, and, above all, of those preaching it; and if it is reduced to practice it is ruinous to national character. These men have been doing their best to make us the China of the Occident, and the college students, such as those of whom you speak, have already reached a level considerably below that to which the higher type of Chinaman has now struggled on his upward path.

On the whole, for the nation as for the individual, the most contemptible of all sins is the sin of cowardice; and while there are other sins as base there are none baser. The prime duty for this nation is to prepare itself so that it can protect itself—and this is the duty that you are preaching in your admirable volume. It is only when this duty has been accomplished that we shall be able to perform the further duty of helping the cause of the world righteousness by backing the cause of the international peace of justice (the only kind of peace worth having) not merely by words but by deeds.

A peace conference such as that which some of our countrymen propose at the moment to hold is purely noxious, until as a preliminary we put ourselves in such shape that what we say will excite the respect and not the derision of foreign nations; and, furthermore, until we have by practical action shown that we are heartily ashamed of ourselves for our craven abandonment of duty in not daring to say a word when The Hague Conventions were ruthlessly violated before our eyes.

Righteousness must be put before peace, and peace must be recognized as of value only when it is the hand-maiden of justice. The doctrine of national or individual neutrality between right and wrong is an ignoble doctrine, unworthy the support of any brave or honorable man. It is wicked to be neutral between right and wrong, and this statement can be successfully refuted only by men who are prepared to hold up Pontius Pilate, the arch-typical neutral of all time, as worthy of our admiration.

An ignoble peace may be the worst crime against humanity, and righteous war may represent the greatest service a nation can at a given moment render to itself and to mankind.

Our people also need to come to their senses about the manufacture and sale of arms and ammunition. Of course, the same moral law applies here between nations as between individuals within a nation. There is not the slightest difference between selling ammunition in time of war and in time of peace, because when sold in time of peace it is only sold with a view to possibility or likelihood of war. It should never be sold to people who will make bad use of it, and it should be freely sold at all times to those who will use it for a proper purpose.

It is absolutely essential that we should have stores where citizens of a nation can buy arms and ammunition. It is a service to good citizenship to sell a revolver to an honest householder for use against burglars or to a policeman for use against "gunmen." It is an outrage against humanity knowingly to sell such a revolver to a burglar or a "gunman." The morality of the sale depends upon the purpose and the probable use. This is true among individuals. It is no less true among nations.

I am speaking of the moral right. Our legal right to sell ammunition to the Allies is, of course, perfect, just as Germany, the greatest trader in ammunition to other nations in the past, had an entire legal right to sell guns and ammunition to Turkey, for instance. But, in addition to our legal right to sell ammunition to those engaged in trying to restore Belgium to her own people, it is also our moral duty to do so, precisely as it is a moral duty to sell arms to policemen for use against "gunmen."

MR. MEYER’S SPEECH.

The National Security League brought its two-day Peace and Preparation Conference to a close on June 15, 1915, with a luncheon in the Hotel Astor at which more than 1,000 men and women listened to George von L. Meyer, ex-Secretary of the Navy, as he announced that the navy of the United States was utterly unfit for war with any first-class nation. Mr. Meyer was interrupted many times by applause, and the loudest outburst came when he placed the blame for what he termed the present demoralized state of the navy squarely up to Secretary Josephus Daniels. He said, in part:

In calling attention to these defects I have not done so from a desire to criticise the present head of the navy, although I do believe that he is responsible for the demoralized condition of the personnel and the decreased efficiency of the navy.

In advancing his argument for a greater navy Mr. Meyer contended that such a step would be the best safeguard against war. He asserted that we would have had no war with Spain in 1908 if we had had four more ships like the Oregon. With such a powerful fighting force, he argued, no nation at that time would have dared to meet us. Spain would have yielded without a fight, and this country would have saved $500,000,000. He continued:

The only attack we need consider is an attack from some great naval power, and for that reason we need an adequate navy because it tends toward peace, because it discourages attack and serves the best interests of the country, while an inadequate navy is a vast expense to the country and does not serve as a protection.

Of the thirty-five battleships that we have today only twenty-one are in commission and ready for emergency. Of those twenty-one, three have broken shafts, and the fourth is a turbine battleship which was put out of commission because it needs to be thoroughly overhauled. In addition to that, there are seventy fighting vessels which are not ready to be called upon for an emergency because they are out of commission and would require a long overhauling. We lack battle cruisers, scout cruisers, aeroplanes, and armed airships.

Our submarine fleet is in a critical condition. The complement of torpedo vessels has been reduced from 15 to 25 per cent. to get men to commission new boats. This reduction in personnel is a serious handicap, reduces the efficiency of the destroyers, affects contentment, and prevents the boats being kept in good condition. The Atlantic fleet needs 5,000 men, according to the evidence of the Commander in Chief of that fleet. The reserve fleet at Philadelphia was largely depleted in order to get a new crew for the Alabama when she was ordered to Hampton Roads to enforce neutrality; and the naval force of Hampton Roads was a pitifully weak one: One small submarine, one little torpedo destroyer diverted from Annapolis, and one reserve battleship, of which the fleet in Philadelphia had been robbed in order to put her in commission.

The review in New York this year was a poor imitation of previous reviews, in that the reserve fleet was absent. It was a mere parade, not a mobilization. It did not indicate the true condition of the fleet, because the people did not know the whole truth. For lack of men, ships are laid up in navy yards, where they rapidly deteriorate, like a vacant house.

All small ships and all cruisers now laid up for lack of men are needed in Mexico and elsewhere, and should be ready for an emergency call. The complement of enlisted men at shore stations and training stations has been kept down, with a decided loss of efficiency and greatly to the discontent and discomfort of the men. A navy with an insufficient and disgruntled personnel cannot be efficient, and its morale must necessarily be disastrously affected.

It would take 18,000 men in order to put the vessels that are fit for war service into commission, Mr. Meyer asserted. Congress was to blame for not having established a national council of defense, a general staff, and a national reserve of 50,000 efficient men. He added:

It is the lack of any definite naval policy and the failure of Congress to recognize the necessity for such a policy that has placed us in a position of inferiority, which may lead us to war or cause us great embarrassment as well as discredit to the country.

Mr. Meyer urged an investigation by Congress of our national defense, to the end that a comprehensive plan should be adopted for the future. He declared further:

This investigation has been denied to the people by the leaders of the party in power, and it is deplorable that there should be an attempt to deceive the people in a matter of such vital importance.

OFFICIAL RESOLUTION.

Here is the resolution of the league, which was later ratified by the official delegates and forwarded to the White House at Washington:

Whereas, The events of the past year have demonstrated the fact that war, no matter how greatly it may be deplored, may suddenly and unexpectedly occur, notwithstanding the existence of treaties of peace and amity, and have also shown that nations who were unprepared have paid and are paying the price of their lack of foresight;

And, Whereas, The reports of our military and naval experts have made clear that the defensive forces of the country are inadequate for the proper protection of our coasts and to enable our Government to maintain its accepted policies and to fulfill its obligations to other States, and to exert in the adjustment of international questions the influence in which the Republic is entitled;

That we appeal to the President, if consistent with the public interest, to call the early attention of Congress to the pressing need of prompt and efficient action so that the resources of our great country can be utilized for the proper defense of the Republic;

And, Resolved, That the National Security League, under whose auspices this Peace and Preparation Conference has been held, be urged to continue the work which it has already undertaken, of bringing the American people to a full realization of our deplorable state of unpreparedness and of the necessity of action by Congress.

Przemysl and Lemberg

German Reports of Mackensen’s
Victorious Thrust in Galicia

Przemysl fell to the German arms on June 3, 1915, ten weeks after the Russians had captured the fortress and its Austrian garrison following a six months' investment. The campaign which meant as its first result the recapture of this great fortress of nineteen modern forts and sixteen field fortifications, with innumerable trenches, was continued by the renewal of the "thrust" of General von Mackensen toward Lemberg, the capital of Galicia. Semi-official figures published in Berlin estimated the Russian losses from May 1 to June 18, when the victorious German armies were approaching the gates of Lemberg, at 400,000 dead and wounded and 300,000 prisoners, besides 100,000 lost before Field Marshal von Hindenburg's forces in Poland and Courland. On June 22 Berlin reported five Austro-German armies shelling the last lines of the Russian defenses before Lemberg, which fell on June 23.

The admitted weakness of Russia in this campaign was the exhaustion of her ammunition supplies. The intent of the German thrust was to drive the Russians far back and establish easily defended positions from which the Germans might detach forces for operations against Italy and the Allies in the west. Political consequences, also, were expected from German success in Galicia in deterring Bulgaria and Rumania from entering the war.

On June 21 advices reaching Tokio from Vladivostok indicated that heavy shipments of munitions of war intended for use by Russia's armies had arrived at that seaport, in such quantities that facilities were lacking to forward them by rail through Siberia.

THE WEST GALICIAN “DRIVE.”

(Wolff Telegraphic Bureau, Berlin, May 6, 1915.)

From the Great Headquarters we have received the following in regard to the "drive" in West Galicia:

To the complete surprise of the enemy, large movements of troops into West Galicia had been completed by the end of April. These troops, subject to the orders of General von Mackensen, had been assigned the task in conjunction with the neighboring armies of our Austrian ally of breaking through the Russian front between the crest of the Carpathians and the middle Dunajee. It was a new problem and no easy undertaking. The heavens granted our troops wonderful sunshine and dry roads. Thus fliers and artillery could come into full activity and the difficulties of the terrain, which here has the character of the approaches of the German Alps, or the Hörsal hills in Thuringia, could be overcome. At several points ammunition had to be transported amid the greatest hardships on pack animals and the marching columns and batteries had to be moved forward over corduroy roads, (artificial roads made of logs.) All the accumulation of information and preparations necessary for breaking through the enemy's line had been quietly and secretly accomplished. On the first of May in the afternoon the artillery began its fire on the Russian positions. These in some five months had been perfected according to all the rules of the art of fortification. In stories they lay one over the other along the steep heights, whose slopes had been furnished with obstacles. At some points of special importance to the Russians they consisted of as many as seven rows of trenches, one behind the other. The works were very skillfully placed, and were adopted to flanking one another. The infantry of the allied [Teutonic] troops in the nights preceding the attack had pushed forward closer to the enemy and had assumed positions in readiness for the forward rush. In the night from May 1 to 2 the artillery fired in slow rhythm at the enemy's positions. Pauses in the fire served the pioneers for cutting the wire entanglements. On the 2d of May at 6 A.M. an overwhelming artillery fire, including field guns and running up to the heaviest calibres, was begun on the front many miles in extent selected for the effort to break through. This was maintained unbroken for four hours.

FIELD MARSHALL VON MACKENSEN
Who Commanded the Victorious Teutonic Forces Against the Russians
in the Southeast

At 10 o'clock in the morning these hundreds of fire-spouting tubes suddenly ceased and the same moment the swarming lines and attacking columns of the assailants threw themselves upon the hostile positions. The enemy had been so shaken by the heavy artillery fire that his resistance at many points was very slight. In headlong flight he left his defenses, when the infantry of the [Teutonic] allies appeared before his trenches, throwing away rifles and cooking utensils and leaving immense quantities of infantry ammunition and dead. At one point the Russians themselves cut the wire entanglements to surrender themselves to the Germans. Frequently the enemy made no further resistance in his second and third positions. On the other hand, at certain other points of the front he defended himself stubbornly, making an embittered fight and holding the neighborhood. With the Austrian troops, the Bavarian regiments attacked Mount Zameczyka, lying 250 meters above their positions, a veritable fortress. A Bavarian infantry regiment here won incomparable laurels. To the left of the Bavarians Silesian regiments stormed the heights of Sekowa and Sakol. Young regiments tore from the enemy the desperately defended cemetery height of Gorlise and the persistently held railway embankment at Kennenitza. Among the Austrian troops Galician battalions had stormed the steep heights of the Pustki Hill, Hungarian troops having taken in fierce fighting the Wiatrowka heights. Prussian guard regiments threw the enemy out of his elevated positions east of Biala and at Staszkowka stormed seven successive Russian lines which were stubbornly held. Either kindled by the Russians or hit by a shell, a naphtha well behind Gorlise burst into flames. Higher than the houses the flames struck up into the sky and pillars of smoke rose to hundreds of yards.

On the evening of the 2d of May, when the warm Spring sun had begun to yield to the coolness of night the first main position in its whole depth and extent, a distance of some sixteen kilometers had been broken through and a gain of ground of some four kilometers had been attained. At least 20,000 prisoners, dozens of cannon and fifty machine guns remained in the hands of the allied troops that in the battle had competed with one another for the palm of victory. In addition, an amount of booty to be readily estimated, in the shape of war materials of all sorts, including great masses of rifles and ammunition, had been secured.

WORK OF GERMAN ARTILLERY.

(German Press Headquarters in Galicia, May 4, 1915.)

Reports of prisoners are unanimous in describing the effect of the artillery fire of the Teutonic allies as more terrible than the imagination can picture. The men, who were with difficulty recovering from the sufferings and exertions they had undergone, agreed that they could not imagine conditions worse in hell than they had been for four hours in the trenches. Corps, divisions, brigades, and regiments melted away as though in the heat of a furnace. In no direction was escape possible, for there was no spot of ground on which the four hundred guns of the Teutonic allies had not exerted themselves. All the Generals and Staff Officers of one Russian division were killed or wounded. Moreover, insanity raged in the ranks of the Russians, and from all sides hysterical cries could be heard rising above the roar of our guns, too strong for human nerves. Over the remnants of the Russians who crowded in terror into the remotest corners of their trenches there broke the mighty rush of our masses of infantry, before which also the Russian reserves, hurrying forward, crumbled away.

At least four Austro-German armies were operating toward Lemberg, the capital of Eastern Galicia, which Grand Duke Nicholas, Commander in Chief of the Russian Army, evacuated on June 23 to escape being surrounded. After the recapture of Przemysl (1) one army advanced along the railroad to Lemberg and captured Grodek, (2,) where the Russians were expected to make a possibly successful stand at the line of the lakes. Another, advancing along the railroad from Jaroslau, (3,) took Krakowice, Jaworow, Skio, Janow, and Zolkiew (4). A third, advancing from Sieniawa, (5,) apparently was joined by forces which took Tarnogrod (6) and on June 21 captured Rawa Ruska, (7,) thus cutting the Russian communications and line of retreat to the north. Finally an army, operating from Stryi, (8,) drove the Russians across the Dniester.

GERMAN TEAM WORK.

(Wolff Telegraphic Bureau, Vienna, May 7, 1915.)

From a well-informed source at the Royal and Imperial Chief Command, the War Press Bureau has received the following communication:

While by those concerned in conducting the operations of the armies individual achievements and isolated developments of distinction are regarded as excluded from particular mention, in the public press not infrequently certain successes are assigned to certain personalities. This, too, has been the case frequently with reference to the recent happenings in Galicia. The suggestions and plans made in the war are always the result of the co-operation of a number of persons. The Commander in Chief then assumes the responsibility for them. So far as the present operations in Galicia are concerned, these had in March already been similarly planned, and at that time such forces as were available were put into position for a penetrating thrust in the direction, by way of Gorlice, through the chain of valleys toward Zmygrod. These forces, however, proved to be numerically too weak, in spite of initial successes at Senkorva and Gorlice, to break through the enemy's stubbornly defended front. Only the proposal made by General von Falkenhayn and sanctioned by the German chief command, to bring up further strong German forces for a forward drive, supplied the foundation for the brilliant success of May 1 by the armies of Mackensen, Archdukes Joseph and Frederick and Boroevic.

ADVANCE IN MIDDLE GALICIA.

(Wolff Telegraphic Bureau, Berlin, May 26, 1915.)

We learn from the Great Headquarters the following concerning the progress of the operations of the Teutonic allies in Middle Galicia:

In barely fourteen days the army of Mackensen has carried its offensive forward from Gorlice to Jaroslaw. With daily fighting, for the most part against fortified positions, it has crossed the line of three rivers and gained in territory more than 100 kilometers in an airline. On the evening of the fourteenth day, with the taking of the city and bridge-head, Jaroslau, they won access to the lower San. It was now necessary to cross this stream on a broad front. The enemy, though, still held before Radymo and in the angle of San-Wislok with two strongly fortified bridge-heads the west bank of this river. For the rest he confined himself to the frontal defense of the east bank.

While troops of the guard in close touch with Austrian regiments gained, fighting, the crossing of the river at Jaroslau, and continued to throw the enemy, who was daily receiving reinforcements, continually further toward the east and northeast, Hanoverian regiments forced the passage of the river several kilometers further down stream. Brunswickers, by the storming of the heights of Wiazowinca, opened the way and thereby won the obstinately defended San crossing. Further to the north the San angle was cleared of the enemy that had still held on there. One Colonel, fifteen officers, 7,800 prisoners, four cannon, twenty-eight machine guns, thirteen ammunition wagons, and a field kitchen fell into our hands. The rest found themselves obliged to make a hasty retreat to the east bank.

These battles and successes took place on the 17th of May in the presence of the German Emperor, who, on the same day, conferred upon the Chief of Staff of the army here engaged, Colonel von Seeckt, the order pour le mérite , the commander of the army, General von Mackensen, having already received special honors. The Emperor had hurried forward to his troops by automobile. On the way he was greeted with loud hurrahs by the wounded riding back in wagons. On the heights of Jaroslau the Emperor met Prince Eitel Friedrich, and then, from several points of observation, for hours followed with keen attention the progress of the battle for the crossing.

In the days from the 18th to the 20th of May the Teutonic allies pressed on further toward the east, northeast, and north, threw the enemy out of Sieniawa and took up positions on the east bank of the river upon a front of twenty or thirty kilometers. The enemy withdrew behind the Lerbaczowa stream. All his attempts to win back the lost ground were unsuccessful, although in the days from the 13th to the 20th of May he brought on no less than six fresh divisions to stem our advance at and beyond Jaroslau.

Altogether, the Russian command had since the beginning of the operation thrown seven army corps from other areas of the war against the front of the army of von Mackensen and against the centre and right wing of the army of Archduke Joseph Ferdinand. These were the Third Caucasian, the Fifteenth, and a combined army corps, six individual infantry regiments, the Thirty-fourth, Forty-fifth, Fifty-eighth, Sixty-second, Sixty-third, Seventy-seventh, and Eighty-first Infantry, and the Thirteenth Siberian division, not counting a cavalry division, which entered the field already in the earliest days. With the combined army corps there appeared a Caucasian infantry division, the Third, made up of Armenians and Grusinians, which till January had fought in Persia, was transferred in April to Kars, and later to Odessa, where it formed part of the so-called Army of the Bosporus. Before our front now also appeared Cossacks on foot, a special militia formation, which hitherto had fought in the Caucasus. Finally, there came on the outermost left wing of the Russians the Trans-Amoor border guards, a troop designed purely for protection of the railway in North Manchuria, whose use in this part of the area of war was probably not foreseen even in Russia.

Yet the Russians still held along the lower San the bridge-head of Radymo on the west bank. The problem of the next ensuing battles was to drive him also from this point.

APPROACHING PRZEMYSL.

(By The Associated Press.)

VIENNA, June 1, (via Amsterdam and London.)—The following official communication was issued today:

East of the San our troops were attacked Monday night along the entire front by strong Russian forces. This was especially true on the lower Lubaczowka, where superior forces attempted to advance. All the attacks were repulsed with severe losses to the enemy, who at some points retreated in disorder.

On the north front of Przemysl Bavarian troops stormed three defenses of the circle of forts, capturing 1,400 prisoners and 28 heavy guns.

South of the Dniester the allied troops penetrated the enemy's defensive position, defeated the Russians and conquered Stry, the enemy retreating toward the Dniester. We captured 53 officers and over 9,000 prisoners, 8 cannon, and 15 machine guns.

BERLIN, June 1, (via London.)—The German General Staff gave out the following report today on the operations in the eastern theatre of war:

In the eastern theatre of war, near Amboten, fifty kilometers, (about thirty miles,) east of Libau, (Courland,) German cavalry defeated the Russian Fourth Regiment of Dragoons. Near Shavli, hostile attacks were unsuccessful.

Our booty in the month of May, north of the Niemen River, amounts to 24,700 prisoners, seventeen cannon, and forty-seven machine guns; south of the Niemen and the Pilica, 6,943 prisoners, eleven machine guns, and one aeroplane.

In the southeastern theatre of war: In front of Przemysl Bavarian troops yesterday stormed Forts 10-A, 11-A, and 12, west of Dunkowiczki, capturing the remainder of a garrison of 1,400 men, with eighteen heavy and five light cannon. The Russians attempted to escape their fate by an attack in masses against our positions east of Jaroslau, but failed, an enormous number of dead covering the battlefield before our front.

The conquerors of Zwinin (a ridge in the Carpathians)—the Prussian Guard under command of the Bavarian General, Count Bothmer—stormed a strongly fortified place on the Stry, and broke through Russian positions near and northwest of Stry. Up to the present time we have captured in this region fifty-three officers, 9,183 men, eight cannon, and fifteen machine guns.

According to an unofficial report from Piotrkow, Russian Poland, the Russians have evacuated Radom, in Poland, to the south of Warsaw.

MORE DEFENSES TAKEN.

VIENNA, June 2, (via Amsterdam and London.)—The official statement issued by the Austrian War Office tonight reads as follows:

The Russians have renewed their strong attacks against the allied troops on the eastern bank of the San. Desperate attacks everywhere have been repulsed with heavy Russian losses.

On the northern front of Przemysl two additional fortifications have been taken by storm, and we have maintained the conquered ground.

South of the Dniester our attacks are making successful progress. Hostile positions between Stry and Drohobycz were stormed yesterday.

Strong Russian forces, which yesterday attacked our position near Solowina, in South Galicia, suffered severe losses. They retreated and, at some points, took to flight.

Besides the booty mentioned in the German communication as having been captured during the month of May from the Russians we took 189 ammunition wagons and a quantity of other war material, such as 8,500 rounds of artillery ammunition, 5,500,000 cartridges, and 32,000 rifles.

BERLIN, June 2, (via London.)—The following report on the operations in the eastern theatre of war was issued today by the German General Staff:

Successful engagements occurred against minor Russian divisions at Neuhausen, fifty kilometers (about thirty miles) northeast of Libau, and at Shidiki, sixty-nine kilometers (about forty miles) southeast of Libau. The same thing happened further south in the district of Shavli, and on the Dubysa, southeast of Kielmy and between Ugiamy and Ejargola. At Shavli we took 500 prisoners.

Further Russian intrenchments situated around Dunkowiozki (near Przemysl) were taken by storm yesterday. After the victory at Stry the allied troops advanced yesterday in the direction of Medenice.

In the month of May 863 officers and 268,869 men were taken prisoners in the southeastern theatre of war, while 251 cannon and 576 machine guns were captured. Of these numbers, the capturing of 400 officers, including two Generals, 153,254 men, 160 cannon, including twenty-eight heavy ones, and 403 machine guns, is to the credit of the troops under General Mackensen.

Including prisoners taken in the eastern theatre of war, as well as those announced yesterday, the total number of Russians who have fallen into the hands of the Germanic allied troops during the month of May amounts to about 1,000 officers and more than 300,000 men.

PRZEMYSL RECAPTURED.

VIENNA, June 3, (via Amsterdam and London.)—The following official communication on the Przemysl victory was issued in Vienna today:

In the Russian war theatre the German troops last night stormed the last positions on the north front of Przemysl and entered the town at 3:30 o'clock this morning from the north.

Our Tenth Corps entered the town from the west and south and reached the centre of the town soon after 6 o'clock.

The attack of the allied troops in the sector north of Stry is making successful progress.

Following is the Berlin official announcement of the fall of Przemysl, dated June 3:

The fortified town of Przemysl was taken by us early this morning, after the fortifications on the northern front, which still held out, had been stormed during the night. The amount of booty taken has not yet been ascertained.

PETROGRAD ADMITS DEFEAT.

PETROGRAD, June 3.—Petrograd admits the loss of the fortress in the following official bulletin:

As Przemysl, in view of the state of its artillery and its works, which were destroyed by the Austrians before their capitulation, was recognized as incapable of defending itself, its maintenance in our hands only served our purpose until such time as our possession of positions surrounding the town on the northwest facilitated our operations on the San.

The enemy having captured Jaroslau and Radymno and begun to spread along the right bank of the river, the maintenance of these positions forced our troops to fight on an unequal and very difficult front, increasing it by thirty-five versts, (about twenty-four miles,) and subjecting the troops occupying these positions to the concentrated fire of the enemy's numerous guns.

Przemysl was bombarded with heavy guns up to 16-inch calibre, and the enemy delivered his principal attack against the north front in the region of Forts 10 and 11, which the Austrians had almost completely demolished before the surrender of the fortress.

When we repulsed these attacks the enemy succeeded in taking several of our guns, which had bombarded the enemy's columns until the latter were close to the muzzles, and the last shell was spent. According to supplementary information we took two hundred prisoners and eight quick-firers.

In Galicia on Monday between the Vistula and Przemysl stubborn fighting developed, our troops gaining somewhat important successes on the left bank of the lower San, taking several villages, some with the bayonet. On the right bank of the same river we were successful near the village of Kalukouve, taking a base south of the village, capturing 1,200 prisoners, including twenty-two officers and eight quick-firers.

RUSSIAN RETREAT FROM PRZEMYSL.

VIENNA, (via London,) June 4.—The Austrian War Office this evening issued the following official communication announcing the retreat of the Russians from Przemysl, their stand at Medyka, ten miles to the east, and their defeat at other points:

During the day Przemysl was cleared of the enemy, who is retreating in an easterly direction, offering resistance on the height southwest of Medyka. The allied troops there are attacking.

Meanwhile the army of the Austrian General Eduard von Boehm-Ermolli has succeeded in breaking through the Russian defensive positions from the south, and advanced in the direction of Mosciska, on the railroad to Lemberg, ten miles beyond Medyka, within a short distance of which our troops now hold positions. In these engagements we have captured numerous prisoners.

The army under General Alexander Linsingen also has achieved fresh successes, and the Russians are in full retreat before him.

On the Pruth line, in consequence of the events on the San and the upper Dniester, further fighting has developed. Wherever the enemy attempts an attack he is repulsed with severe losses. We have captured 900 men.

AUSTRO-HUNGARIAN FIELD HEADQUARTERS, (via London,) June 5. —According to information given out by the Austro-Hungarian military authorities to representatives of the press, heavy fighting is now in progress along virtually the entire Galician front, and the general situation is very favorable to the Austro-Germans. A decisive conclusion to the entire Russian campaign in Galicia is in sight.

Przemysl's recapture by Austrian and Bavarian troops, according to details received from the front, resulted from the taking of five forts in the northern sector and the simultaneous threatening of the forts on the south and west fronts.

With the forts on the north side in the possession of the besiegers, with a Bavarian corps pressing impetuously through the breach against the city, and with the Austrian Tenth Army Corps within storming distance of the southern and western forts, which artillery fire already had reduced sufficiently for attack, the Russians decided to evacuate the town and all the forts except those on the eastern and southeastern sectors. This movement was executed Wednesday night.

The Bavarians resumed their attack at dawn on Thursday, and entered Przemysl upon the heels of the retiring Russians.

The Austrian Tenth Army Corps simultaneously started toward the west and south fronts, but found the forts there had been evacuated. An attack now is in progress against the forts still held by the Russians, those positions being defended apparently with the object of covering the latter's retirement.

"The Russian rear guards," the statement to the press says, "are fighting delaying actions south of the Dniester River against the Austro-German forces advancing from Stry to cover the passage of the river. The Russians north of Przemysl are launching a series of the most desperate attacks against General von Mackensen's army. Here they are making use of new reserves, and at the same time they are exerting heavy pressure against the troops commanded by Archduke Joseph Ferdinand in the triangle between the River San and the River Vistula.

"The Russian offensive in Southeastern Galicia, designed to relieve this situation, has been a complete failure."

BERLIN, (via London,) June 4.—The following official communication on the Eastern fighting was issued here today:

Our troops, after much fighting, reached the line east of Przemysl and to the northeast thereof, to Bolesteasyzce, Ormis, Poodziao, and Tarzawa. The booty taken at Przemysl has not yet been ascertained. According to statements made by prisoners of the most varied descriptions, the Russians during the night of June 2-3, during which Przemysl was taken by storm, had prepared a general attack over the whole front against the army under General von Mackensen. This offensive broke down completely at the outset. Twenty-two kilometers (about 13½ miles) east of Przemysl German troops under General von Marwitz are fighting on the heights on both sides of Myslatyeze. The army of General von Linsingen is about to cross the lower crossing of the Stry, northeast of the town of the same name.

Our cavalry has driven Russian divisions out of the villages of Lenen and Schrunden, sixty kilometers, (thirty-seven miles,) and seventy kilometers, (forty-three miles,) east of Libau Courland. In the district of Rawcliany, west of Kurschany and near Sredniki, on the Dubysa, attacks by the enemy failed.

GERMAN THRUST TOWARD LEMBERG.

[By The Associated Press.]

VIENNA, June 3, (via London, Friday, June 4.) —The German and Austrian forces which broke the Russian lines at Stry are moving northward rapidly. The Russians are apparently unable to make a stand in the plains, and the chances of doing so north of the river are regarded as problematical.

Now that Przemysl has fallen, rendering it possible for General Mackensen to continue his movement eastward, he would naturally meet a check at the Russian fortified positions partly composed of a chain of lakes extending north and south, about eighteen miles west of Lemberg. It is thought, however, that these positions will prove untenable, because General Linsingen, having crossed the Dniester to the west of Mikolajow, will likely cut the communications with Lemberg. The Austro-German plan of operations against Lemberg apparently is the same as against Przemysl. The assailants are expected to throw columns on both sides of the city and then press together some distance beyond it. In the meantime this movement seems to threaten the Russians fighting around Nadworna with a loss of contact with the main body.

In view of the double success at Przemysl and Stry, it is expected in Vienna that the Galician campaign will move at an accelerated pace the next few days.

AN ENCIRCLING MOVEMENT.

LONDON, June 5.—Heavy fighting is still in progress in Galicia, where the Austro-Germans are attempting an encircling movement against Lemberg such as proved successful at Przemysl. The following statement was given out today at the War Office in Vienna:

East of Przemysl, near Medkya, the Russians have been unable to resist a further advance of the Teutonic allies toward Mosziska.

In the district of the Lower San the enemy's attacks were repulsed. From the west Austro-German troops approached the district near Kalusz and Zurawna.

On the Pruth fighting is proceeding. The enemy obstinately attacked here at several points but was driven back to the river.

In connection with the Russian attacks repulsed yesterday at Rawdejany and Sawdyniki, our troops have made further advances and have driven off their opponents who held the bridge-head at Sawdyniki. They made 1,970 prisoners. Further north cavalry engagements took place yesterday in the region of Fokeljanij with good results for us.

To the east of Jaroslau the situation remains unchanged. South of Przemysl our troops, under General Marwitz, together with Austro-Hungarian troops, are advancing in the direction of Mosziska. The army under General von Linsingen has driven the enemy back in the direction of Kalusz and Zurawno on the Dniester.

SIXTH WEEK OF THE “THRUST.”

BERLIN, June 7, (via London.)—Everything indicates that the Teutonic allies are beginning the sixth week of their Galician campaign with a promising outlook. The Russians have lost their line on the River San, and they appear also about to lose their positions on the River Dniester. These same advices indicate further that the Russians to the east and northeast of Czernowitz already have begun to retreat. The following bulletin was issued by the War Office today:

During the battles at Przemysl 33,805 prisoners were taken. East of Przemysl the troops of the Teutonic allies continued their victorious battle. They drove back the enemy toward Wysznia, to the northeast of Mosciska.

Part of the army under General von Linsingen has crossed the Dniester at Zurawna, and has taken the hill to the north of the eastern bank by storm. Further south the pursuit reached the Nowica-Kalusz-Tomaszow line. The number of prisoners taken has been increased to more than 13,000.

In addition to crossing the Dniester, which was accomplished by General von Linsingen's army through a feint attack on Zurawna, the Austro-German forces also were victors at Klusz, forty-five miles southeast of Drohobycz, where they took many prisoners.

VIENNA, (via London,) June 7.—The following official statement was issued tonight by the Austrian War Office:

After the severe defeat at Przemysl the Russian Army command, during the last few days, has made strong efforts to break our line by attacks against our positions on the Pruth, especially against the district of Kolomea and Delatyn, where the enemy continues to push forward masses of fresh troops.

While all these attacks were being put down by the tenacious bravery of General Pflanzer's army, through which the Russians suffered severely, allied forces under General Linsingen were approaching from the west. Yesterday they captured Kalusz, the district north of Kalusz and the heights on the left bank of the Dniester, north of Zurawna. Between Nadowarna, near the Bystrica, and the Lomnica, our troops joined in the attack.

Battles to the east of Przemysl and Jaroslau continue. North of Mosciska the enemy has been forced to evacuate Sieniawa. Isolated weak counter-attacks by the Russians collapsed.

LINSINGEN AT LUBACZOW.

BERLIN, June 8, (via London.)—General von Linsingen, in his advance from Przemysl in the direction of Lemberg, has reached Lubaczow, forty-five miles northeast of Przemysl. This information was contained in the following official report given out at German Army Headquarters today:

Eastern Theatre of War—Our offensive movement in the Shavli district and east of the Dubsa is taking its course. Southwest of Plodock an enemy aeroplane was captured.

Southeastern Theatre of War—East of Przemysl the general situation is the same. The number of prisoners taken by the army under General von Mackensen since June 1 amounts to more than 20,000. In the hills near Nowoszyn, northeast of Zuralt, the troops under General Linsingen again defeated the enemy. The pursuit reached the line of Lubaczow.

South of the Dniester River we crossed the Lukew River and reached Byslow, east of Kalusz, Wojnilow, Feredne, and Kolodziejow. The booty taken this day amounts to 4,300 prisoners, four cannon, and twelve machine guns.

VIENNA, June 8. (via London.)—At Army Headquarters today the following statement was given out:

In the districts of the Pruth and Dniester (Galicia) the troops of the Teutonic allies yesterday prosecuted an attack along the Lanozyn—Nadworna—Kalusz line and pushed back the enemy toward Stanislau and Halicz. Further progress was made on the left bank of the Dniester, east and north of Zurawna, 6,200 Russians being captured. Otherwise the situation is unchanged.

STANISLAU TAKEN.

BERLIN, June 9, (via London.)—Following is the bulletin concerning the operations issued today by the War Office:

To the northeast of Zurawna troops under General Linsingen brought the Russian counter-attack to a standstill. Further to the south fighting is in progress for possession of the hills to the east of Kalusz and west of Jezuwol.

Stanislau already is in our possession. We took 4,500 men prisoners and captured thirteen machine guns.

BERLIN, June 9, (by Wireless to Sayville.)—Included in the items given out today by the Overseas News Agency is the following:

The army under General von Linsingen has succeeded in crossing the Dniester River, in Galicia, with the purpose of cutting communications to the Russian armies in Bukowina and Galicia.

VIENNA, June 9, (via London.)—The Austrian War Office issued the following official communication tonight:

South of the Dniester the Russians have again lost ground. After many victorious engagements the [Teutonic] allies yesterday reached, to the north of Kolomea, the Kulacz-Kowcekorzow line and occupied the heights of Otynia. In the evening they occupied Stanislau, and made a further advance toward Halicz. The day's captures amounted to 5,570 prisoners.

No important events have occurred on the remainder of the front in Poland and Galicia.

GERMAN SETBACK IN THE NORTH.

BERLIN, (via London,) June 10.—An official announcement from Army Headquarters today states that the German forces which invaded the Baltic provinces of Russia have retreated. Following is the text of the statement:

To the southeast of Shavli the Russians offered strong resistance yesterday to our advance. Minor progress was made. The booty taken by us in the last two days in this district amounts to 2,250 prisoners and two machine guns.

The enemy brought forward reinforcements from a northeasterly direction in opposition to our encircling movement on the east of the Dubysa. On account of this menace our wing was withdrawn toward the line of Beisagola-Zoginie without being interfered with by the enemy.

South of the Niemen River we took 3,200 Russian prisoners, while in pursuit of the enemy since June 6. We also captured two flags, twelve machine guns, and many field kitchens and carts.

In the southeastern theatre the situation to the east of Przemysl remains unchanged.

Fresh Russian forces advanced from the region of Mikolaiow and Rohatyn, to the south and the southeast of Lemberg, respectively. Their attack was repulsed by parts of the army under General Linsingen on the line of Lityma, northeast of Drohobac, and Zurawna, in the Dniester section.

NORTH OF SHAVLI.

BERLIN, June 13, (via London.)—The following report of the operations on the Russian front was issued by the War Office today:

In the eastern theatre our attack northwest of Shavli made good progress. Kuzie was taken by storm. Enemy counter-attacks failed. Eight officers and 3,350 men and eight machine guns were captured.

Southeast of the Mariampol-Kovno Road battles against Russian reinforcements arriving from the south have commenced.

Our invasion into the enemy lines south of Bolimow was followed in the night by Russian counter-attacks, all of which were unsuccessful. The gained positions are firmly in our hands. Our booty in this sector has been increased to 1,600 prisoners, eight cannon, two of which are of heavy calibre, and nine machine guns.

DRIVING NEAR MOSCISKA.

VIENNA, June 14, (via London.)—The following official statement was issued today from General Headquarters:

In the Russian war theatre the allied armies again attacked yesterday in Middle Galicia. After stubborn fighting the Russian front to the east and southeast of Jaroslau was broken and the enemy was forced to retreat with very heavy losses.

Since last night the Russians have also been retreating near Mosciska and to the southeast of that place. We captured yesterday 16,000 Russians.

Battles south of the Dniester are continuing. Near Derzow, south of Mikolaiow, our troops repulsed four strong attacks. The enemy was routed from the battlefield.

Northeast of Zurawna the allied troops advanced against Zydaczow yesterday and captured it after heavy fighting. North of Tlamcz an attack is also in progress. Many prisoners, the number of whom has not yet been fixed, have fallen into our hands.

North of Zale Szczyky the Russians attacked, after 11 o'clock at night, on a front of three kilometers, (nearly two miles,) but the attack failed under losses to the enemy.

BERLIN, June 14, (via London.)—The following official announcement was issued here today:

Eastern Theatre of War: In the neighborhood of Kuzie, northwest of Shavli, (Baltic provinces,) a few enemy positions were taken. Three officers and 300 men were taken prisoners. Southeast of the road from Mariampol to Kovno our troops took the first Russian line by storm. Three officers and 313 men were captured.

Southeast Theatre of War: General von Mackensen began an attack over a line extending seventy kilometers, (forty-three miles.) Starting from their positions at Cyerniawa, northwest of Mosciska, and at Sieniawa, the enemy's positions have been taken along the entire length of this front. Sixteen thousand prisoners fell into our hands yesterday.

Attacks by the troops under General von Linsingen and General von der Marwitz also made progress.

LEMBERG IN DANGER.

VIENNA, June 15, (via London.)—The following official communication was issued today:

The army of Archduke Joseph Ferdinand, after the capture of Sieniawa, on the east bank of the San, has advanced in a northern and northeastern direction. The castle and farm of Piskorvice were stormed yesterday and numerous prisoners captured.

Fighting heavily, the army of General Mackensen is advancing on both sides of Krakowiec (southeast of Jaroslau) and toward Oleszyce (northeast of Jaroslau.)

Southeast of Mosciska the troops of General Soehm-Ermolli are attacking fresh hostile positions covering the road to Grodek (on the railroad between Mosciska and Lemberg.)

On the upper Dniester strong Russian forces are defending the bridge-head at Mikolajow against the advancing allies under General Linsingen, while further down the river the troops of General Pflanzer and General Baltin are standing before Nizniow (south of Maryampol) and Czernelica, maintaining the captured town of Zale Szczyky against all Russian attacks. Portions of this army again have forced the Russian troops making a stand in Bessarabia, between the Dniester and the Pruth Rivers, to retreat, driving them toward Chotin and along the Pruth.

The number of prisoners taken in Galicia since June 12 has been increased by several thousands.

BERLIN, June 15.—Official announcement that the Austro-German forces operating in Galicia had captured the town of Mosciska was made in the following bulletin issued from Army Headquarters today:

The enemy, who was defeated on the 13th and 14th of June by the army of General von Mackensen, has been unable to regain a footing in the positions prepared by him. To the northeast of Jaworow the enemy was driven back from the position at which he had stopped, the booty increasing.

The Russian forces south of the Przemysl-Lemberg Railway have been forced to retreat. The troops of General von der Marwitz yesterday took Mosciska. The right wing of the army of General von Linsingen stormed the heights east of Zekel. Our cavalry reached the district south of Maryampol.

East of Shavli German troops stormed the village of Danksze and took 1,660 prisoners. The positions recently won southwest and east of the Maryampol-Kovno Road were repeatedly attacked yesterday by a strong force of the enemy, which had no success. Our troops advanced on the Lipowo-Kalwarya front, pressed back the Russian line, and captured the Russian advanced trenches.

On the River Orzyc our attacking troops stormed and took the village of Gednoroczec, southeast of Chorzetten, and Czerwonagora and the bridges there, as well as the bridges east of this place. The booty taken at this place amounts to 365 Russian prisoners. Attacks by the enemy against the point at which we broke through north of Bolimow failed.

122,408 PRISONERS.

The following official report of the operations was issued today by the War Office:

The defeated Russian armies in Galicia attempted on Tuesday along the whole front between the River San, north of Sieniawa and the Dniester marshes to bring the Teutonic allies to a standstill. In the evening the Russians everywhere had been driven from their positions near Cieplice, north of Sieniawa, in the Lubsyow-Zuwadowka sector, southwest of Niemerow and west of Sadowa-Wiszenia. The enemy is being pursued.

General Mackensen's army has captured upward of 40,000 men and sixty-nine machine guns since June 12.

Between the Dniester marshes and Zurawna the Russians have gained some ground, but the general situation there has not changed.

Russian attacks against the German positions southeast of Mariampol, east of Augustowa, and north of Bolimow all were repulsed. Our attacks along the Lipowo-Kalwarya front gained further ground, several positions being recaptured. We made 2,040 Russian prisoners and captured three machine guns.

On the north of the Upper Vistula our troops repulsed an attack on the positions we took from the Russians on Monday.

VIENNA, June 16, (via London.)—The following official communication was issued today:

In Galicia the Russians, despite their obstinate resistance, could not withstand the general attack by the allied armies. Hotly pursued by our victorious troops the remainder of the defeated Russian corps are retreating across the Newkow, Lubaczow and Javorow.

South of the Lemberg Railroad the army of General Boehm-Ermolli Tuesday night stormed the Russian positions on the entire front, driving the enemy across the Sadowa, Wyszna, and Rudki.

South of the Dniester the fighting is proceeding before the bridge head. The troops of General Pflanzer yesterday captured Nijnioff.

From June 1 to June 15 our total war booty has been 108 officers and 122,300 men, 53 cannon, 187 machine guns, and 58 munition wagons.

LEMBERG’S LAST DEFENSES.

BERLIN, (via London,) June 18.—The following official report on the operations was issued today by the War Office:

In the Eastern Theatre—An advancing Russian division was driven back by German cavalry across the Szymeza branch. At a point to the east of the highroad between Cycowyany and Shavli an attack by the enemy in strong force against the Dawina line was repulsed.

In the Southeastern Theatre—On both sides of Tarnogrod Austro-German troops yesterday drove the enemy back toward a branch of the Tanew River. Later during the night these defeated Russians were driven still further back by the army under General von Mackensen. They retreated as far as the prepared positions at Grodek, which are on the line running from the Narol and Wereszyca brooks to their junction with the River Dniester.

VIENNA, June 18, (via London.)—The Austro-German troops in pursuit of the retreating Russians have crossed the Galician border to the north of Sieniawa and occupied the Russian town of Tarnogrod, according to an official communication issued by the War Office tonight. The communication says:

North of Sieniawa our pursuing troops have penetrated Russian territory and reached the heights north of Krezow and occupied Tarnogrod.

The Russian forces between the Lower San and the Vistula have retired at several points. The heights north of Cieszanow (ten miles north of Lubaczow) have been taken. In the mountainous region east of Niemirow and in the rear of Jaworow, strong Russian forces have appeared.

On the Wereszyca River the fighting continues. Our troops have gained a footing at some points eastward of the river.

South of the Upper Dniester the Russians, after hard fighting, were compelled to retire from positions near Litynia toward Kolodrub. Our pursuing troops have reached the mouth of the Wereszyca. Elsewhere the situation along the Dniester is unchanged.

The dotted line shows the approximate position of the Austro-German battle line in the middle of February, when the drive at Lemberg, supported with enormous reinforcements which had been concentrated at Cracow, began. The heavy black line shows the approximate position of the victorious armies bent on driving the Russians out of the corner of Galicia still remaining in their possession. The frontier is indicated by the line of dots and dashes.

The eastern groups of General Pflanzer's army yesterday repulsed three Russian storming attacks. The enemy making desperate attempts to throw our troops back in Bukowina, suffered heavy losses from our artillery and retired quickly. Eight officers and 1,000 men and three machine guns were captured.

GRODEK POSITION CAPTURED.

BERLIN, (via London,) June 20.—The armies under General von Mackensen are continuing their advance upon Lemberg, the Galician capital, after capturing Grodek, and have taken Russian trenches, one after another, along a front of almost twenty-four miles to the northwest of the city, where the Muscovites are making a desperate stand, according to a statement issued today at the headquarters of the German Army Staff. The statement says:

Eastern Theatre—Russian attacks against our lines in the vicinity of Szawle and Augustowo were beaten off. Our advance in small divisions resulted in the capture of advanced positions of the enemy near Budtbrzysieki and Zalesie, east of the Przasnysz-Myszyniec Road.

Southeastern Theatre—South of the Pilica, troops under General von Woyrich have taken several advanced enemy positions during the last few days.

The armies under General von Mackensen have taken the Grodek position. Early yesterday morning German troops and the corps of Field Marshal von Arz commenced an attack upon strongly intrenched enemy lines. After stubborn fighting, lasting until afternoon, enemy trenches, one behind the other, almost along the entire front, extending over a distance of thirty-five kilometers (twenty-four miles) north of Janow (eleven miles northwest of Lemberg,) Bisputa, and Obedynski, and southeast of Rawa Ruska, (thirty-two miles northwest of Lemberg,) had been stormed. In the evening the enemy was thrown back behind the high road to Zolkiew, north of Lemberg and Rawa Ruska.

Under pressure of this defeat the enemy also is weakened in his communication. Between Grodek and the Dniester marshes the enemy is hard pressed by Austro-Hungarian troops.

Between the Dniester marshes and the mouth of the River Stry the enemy has evacuated the southern bank of the Dniester.

KAISER WILHELM AT THE FRONT.

BERLIN, (via London,) June 21. —Emperor William, it was announced officially by the German War Department today, was present at the battle of Beskid for possession of the Grodek line. These Russian positions are to the west of Lemberg, the Galician capital.

The rapidity of the Austro-German success excites astonishment here. It was believed that the Russians would be able to check the allies' advance for some days on the Grodek line; hence the bulletins issued today recorded results far exceeding the expectations of the most optimistic observers.

Special dispatches from the front describe the Russian retreat from Grodek and the Russian resistance from the Tanew River to the mouth of the Wereszyca. Air scouts report that the Russians have fallen back upon their last line of defenses protecting Lemberg, which is nine miles west of the city limits.

The situation at Lemberg is evidently precarious, as General von Mackensen today seized the railway between Lemberg and Rawa Ruska, which is the main line of travel northward. This, it is considered, gives the Russians the alternative of preparing for speedy evacuation or of trying to hold the city, with the risk of being enveloped by von Mackensen's army sweeping around southeastward and forming a junction with General Linsingen's forces.

Grand Duke Nicholas, the Russian Commander in Chief, apparently has begun to realize the threatening dangers, for he has ordered the withdrawal of all Russian forces from the south bank of the Dniester. Military opinion here is that he cannot extricate his huge armies without heavy losses in men and material.

FALL OF LEMBERG.

BERLIN, June 23, (by Wireless Telegraphy to Sayville, N.Y.) —Lemberg has been conquered after a very severe battle, according to an official report received here from the headquarters of the Austro-Hungarian Army. The Galician capital fell before the advance of the Second Army.

The news that Lemberg has been carried by Austrian and Hungarian troops is received today with great jubilation in Berlin. Throngs of people crowd the public squares and the parks, flags are displayed from windows, and bands are playing patriotic airs. Extra editions of the newspapers are being shouted on the streets, and the church bells are ringing. Everybody seems to feel that another great step in the direction of final victory has been gained.

A correspondent of the Cologne Gazette telegraphs that the Russians, before the general retreat began, hurriedly sent back all the artillery they could move. This was done instead of endeavoring to cover the retreat of the artillery and saving all of it. Part of the cannon were useless, on account of poor ammunition. Continuing, the correspondent says:

"It was after the artillery had been sent to the rear that the panic-stricken troops began their flight. Wagons and supply trains blocked the roads. Men detached the horses from these vehicles and rode away on them, heedless of the crowd of soldiers of all arms crowding back to the rear. Generals and Colonels were helplessly carried away. Units were disbanded, and the army became a mere mob. It was readily to be seen that catastrophe was unavoidable."

A report given out today sets forth that, since June 12, 60,000 Russian soldiers and nine Russian guns have been captured.

LONDON ACCEPTS THE STATEMENT.

LONDON, June 23, 12:10 P.M. —The statement from Austrian headquarters that Lemberg had fallen before the advance of the forces of Austria and Germany was received in London without surprise. It was known that the Germanic allies were within artillery range of the Galician capital, and capitulation was regarded as a question only of days. Nothing has been heard yet from Petrograd, but there is no disposition to doubt the accuracy of the Austrian claim.

ARCHDUKE FREDERICK HONORED.

VIENNA, June 23, (via London,) 5:42 P.M. —Emperor William has given Archduke Frederick of Austria the rank of Field Marshal in the Prussian Army in recognition of his services in the campaign which resulted in the fall of Lemberg.

BELGIUM.

By LEONID ANDREYEV.

[Translated from the Russian by Leo Pasvolsky.]

Oh, look at me, kind men! I am clothed in snow-white robes, for I am innocent before the God of peace and love; it was not I that cast into the world the torch of strife, not I that lit the horrid flame of conflagration, not I that caused hot tears to stream from mothers', widows' eyes.

Oh, look at me, kind men! Look at this scarlet blot upon my bosom that burns so vividly upon my snow-white robe—Oh, 'tis my wounded heart, from which red blood is gushing forth! The traitor pierced me to the heart, he plunged his sword into my bosom. Ah, what a cruel blow!

On through this field I marched in peace, bearing these flowers, listening to the songsters' choirs on high, and praising God, who made the beauteous flowers. Who coveted this path of mine, that wound 'midst flowers and songs? The traitor pierced my very heart, and the white petals lifeless hang, o'er-sprinkled with red blood.

Oh, look at me, kind men! 'Tis not a crown upon my head, 'tis waterplants, the greenish grass of ocean fields, with which the sea had clad me. What could I do? So once again I sought my dear, old sea, I knelt before its mighty waves, I prayed: "Oh, cover me, my dear, old sea, for nowhere else can I seek aid. The cruel stranger rules my home; my gentle children lifeless lie. And dost thou see those horrid flames, that rise where once my temples stood? Oh, cover me, protect me, my dear, my dear, old sea, for nowhere else can I seek aid!"

'Twas thus I spoke and wept in grief. And lo! the kindly sea gave me protection.

Oh, look at me, kind men! For I am Belgium, and I live. My King, my Albert is alive; my Belgian people lives.

No, these are not tears that glisten in my eyes. Enough of tears! A holy wrath inflames my heart!

No, this is not a wound upon my bosom, 'tis a red, red rose, the quenchless flame of war, my sacred oath!

No, this wreath upon my head is not of waterplants, no, 'tis the crown of Belgium, the crown of a free nation!

Map showing where the French were trying on June 20, 1915, to capture the German lateral lines of communications about Arras and Lens in their steady forward drive in the north of France. The "Labyrinth" appears in the lower left section.

Battle of the Labyrinth

France’s Victory in the Chief Western Operation
Since the Marne

The Battle of the Labyrinth, technically described in French communiqués as "operations in the section north of Arras," really began in October, 1914, when General de Maud-Huy stopped the Prussian Guard before Arras. Because of their great strength the labyrinth of German trenches and fortifications southeast of Neuville-St. Vaast formed a dangerous salient which the French troops had to dispose of before they could make progress eastward from north and south of that point. The decisive part of the battle—or series of battles extending over fifty miles of front—is described in the brief review of the French official observer at the front, and in the two accounts by Wythe Williams cabled to The New York Times after a trip to the front specially arranged for him and three editors of Paris newspapers by the French War Ministry.

By The Associated Press.

Account of the French Official Observer At the Front

P ARIS, June 22.—A terrific combat from May 30 to June 19 has resulted in the conquest by the French of the formidable system of works and trenches called the "Labyrinth." The operations are described today in a dispatch from an official observer at the front.

The Labyrinth, lying between Neuville-St. Vaast and Ecurie, formed a salient of the German line, and its position, a strong one, had been greatly reinforced from time to time. The "Observer" writes:

French attacks on May 9 and days thereafter failed to modify the situation. At the end of May the French decided to finish things, and the order was given to take the Labyrinth inch by inch.

This meant an operation of two principal phases of different nature. It was necessary, first, by well-prepared and vigorous assaults, to get a footing in the enemy organization, and then to progress to the interior of the communicating trenches, repulsing the enemy step by step. These two operations lasted more than three weeks and resulted in complete success.

The debouch must have been difficult, as numerous German batteries, composed of 77-millimeter guns, the 150, 210, 280, and even 305 millimeter guns, concentrated their fire on us. They were stationed at Givenchy, La Folie, Thelus, Farbus, and Beaurains, south of Arras. Nevertheless, our men understood, and prepared to do their duty.

It was on May 30 that the assaults began, our regiments marching out from different points. Their ardor was admirable.

Everywhere, except on the right, we captured the first line. Behind this were a great number of barricades and fortlets. We took some of these, while others stopped us. One hundred and fifty prisoners, surprised in their holes by the furious charge of the French infantry, fell into our hands.

From this moment the war of the communicating trenches began. There were the trenches of von Kluck, Eulenburg, and the Salle des Fêtes, without counting innumerable numbered works, giving a feeling of unheard-of difficulties which our troops had to overcome.

Without a stop, from May 30 to June 17, they fought on this ground, full of big holes and filled with dead. The combat never ceased, either day or night. The attacking elements, constantly renewed, crushed the Germans with hand grenades and demolished their earth barricades. There was not an hour of truce nor an instant of repose. The men were under a sun so hot in the trenches that they fought bareheaded and in their shirtsleeves.

On each of these bloody days there were acts of incomparable heroism. From three sides at a time we made way where the Germans had dug formidable shelters, ten meters under ground. The enemy artillery continued firing on our line without interruption.

Our reserves suffered, for in this upturned earth, where every blow from the pickaxe would disinter a body, one can prepare but slowly the deep shelters which the situation demands.

We lost many men, but the morale of the others was unshaken. The men asked only one thing—to go forward to fight with grenades, instead of waiting, gun in hand, the unceasing fall of shells.

They were hard days, and it was necessary constantly to carry to the fighting men munitions and food, and especially water. Everybody did his best, and we continued our success. Little by little our progress, indicated by a cloud of dust, resulting from the combat of the grenades, brought us to an extremity north of the Labyrinth. The fighting continued in the Eulenburg and other trenches daily, and ultimately the Labyrinth belonged to us.

The Germans lost an entire regiment. We took a thousand prisoners. The rest were killed. A Bavarian regiment also was cut to pieces.

The resistance was as fierce as the attack. Despite the nature of the ground and the organized defenses, which had been in preparation for seven months, and despite the artillery, the bomb-throwers, and the quick-firers, we remained the victors.

THE FRENCH “CURTAIN OF IRON.”

By Wythe Williams.

[Special Cable to The New York Times .]

Paris, June 1. —I have just completed another trip to the front, probably the most important one accorded any correspondent since the war began. For several days, in the company of three Paris editors, I was escorted by an officer of the General Staff through the entire sector north of Arras where the French have been making brilliant gains in the last few weeks.

The trip was arranged suddenly by the War Ministry in order to prove the truth of the French official communiqués and the falsity of the German reports. I was the only neutral in the party. In fact, the day before we started I was informed that trips to the front had temporarily been abandoned because the fighting was too hot to take correspondents to any place on the line. During the entire time I was under heavy artillery fire and got more intimately acquainted with modern war than on all my previous trips to the front. I was especially fortunate to be picked out by the War Office over all competitors as the single foreigner permitted to go, for it so happened that we covered the same sector of fighting as that traversed last February on my first officially authorized visit to the battle zone. Thus I was able to make comprehensive comparisons of just what had been accomplished since that time.

On this trip I covered a large stretch of territory that until a few weeks ago—some places only a few days ago—Germany had claimed as her own by right of conquest. I walked through miles of trenches that only last February I peered at from other trenches through a periscope; cautiously, because they were then occupied by Germans; fearfully, because any instant the periscope was likely to be struck from my eyes and shattered by a hostile bullet.

The result of this long walk taught me many things. First in importance was that my confidence in the superiority of German trenches had been sadly misplaced. Since the trench fighting began after the battle of the Marne we have been regaled in Paris with stories of the marvelous German trenches. Humorists went so far as to have them installed with baths and electric lights, but we have all believed them to be dry, cement lined, with weather-proof tops and comfortable sleeping quarters, and as hygienically perfect as the German organization has ever made anything. This belief for me had been borne out in accounts of the German trench life reported for American newspapers and magazines.

What I can now say is that the correspondents who permitted this legend to go over the world must have been grandly entertained by the Germans in special sections of their trenches set aside as quarters for the officers. I believe that these trenches, which I saw on this trip, must compare favorably with any they hold, for they form part of what is called "the labyrinth." Some of the most desperate fighting of the war is still going on there, with the French literally blasting the Germans out yard by yard, trench by trench. In fact, this trench line was to have formed part of the new boundary line of Germany—they dug themselves in to stay.

I entered these trenches following a long passage leading from the rear of the original French lines. I thought I was still in the French trenches, when suddenly I found myself in a mud ditch, much narrower than any I had ever traversed. The bottom, instead of being corduroy lined, was rough and uneven, making very hard walking. I said to the Major with me, "You must have made these trenches in a hurry; they are not so good as your others." He replied, "We did not make them. The Germans are responsible."

Then we came to a wide place where a sign announced the headquarters of the German commandant. The sides of his underground cavern were all solid concrete, with cement inner walls separating four rooms. Paper and artistic burlaping covered the walls and ceilings, and rugs were on the floors. The furniture was all that could be desired. There was a good iron bed, an excellent mattress, a dresser with a pier glass, and solid tables and chairs. The rooms consisted of an office, dining room, bedroom, and a kitchen, with offshoots for wine, and sleeping quarters for the orderlies and cook. Kultur demanded that the Kaiser's office should have the best accommodation transportable to the firing line, but the fare of the common soldier, I should judge, averaged quite a third below that of the French—both privates and officers, all of whom share the common lot, with straw for bedding and either mud or stars for the roof.

Leaving this commandant's late magnificence, we soon found ourselves in another wide, corduroy-lined trench, with straw dugouts. My Major, without attempting any comparison, but merely to get my geography right, said quite simply: "We are now in the parallel French trench to that German one we just visited."

All this particular bit of trenches was where the Germans cleared out precipitately after French night attacks, and without waiting for the fearful "rideau de fer," or iron curtain, with which the French usually devastate everything before advancing. Littered through them were hundreds of unused cartridges, rifles, knapsacks, bayonets, and clothing of every description. The dead had been taken away just before our arrival. The prisoners—hundreds of them—we met going to the rear.

The second great lesson I learned on this trip I already had a good understanding of from my previous trip. It is that the "rideau de fer" is the most terrible thing ever devised by man to devastate not only men but every single object upon which it descends.

This time I saw the results of the "rideau de fer" on another long stretch of what had lately been German trenches. The "rideau de fer" is simply the French method of converging artillery fire upon a single point where they intend to attack or where they are being attacked. The fact that it is possible is due to the enormous number of guns and the unlimited supply of high explosive shells.

Behind the entire infantry lines there seems to be an endless row of batteries of "seventy-fives," close up to the trenches. These terrible little destroyers can whirl in any direction at will, so when the order comes for the "rideau de fer" at any point, literally hundreds of guns within a few seconds are converging their fire there, dropping a metal curtain through which no mortal enemy can advance.

In this section the French dropped nearly a quarter of a million shells in one day. Unlike the English shrapnel, which makes little impression against earthworks, the French use explosive shells almost entirely.

As I walked over this section after the curtain had been lifted, I was absolutely baffled for descriptive words. All the earth in that vicinity seemed battered out of shape. The dead needed no burial there. Down under the wreck and ruin the dead all lie covered just where they fell.

Among the places I either visited or at least was able to see plainly, all of which were held by the Germans at the time of my last trip, were Saint Eloi, Carrency, Notre Dame de Lorette, Souchez, and Neuville Saint Vaast, where the fighting still continues from house to house.

I found the same efficient, imperturbable army that I discovered previously, all absolutely sure of complete victory not very far off. I got an illustration on this trip of the imperturbability of the French soldier in such a way as I never before believed existed. We were walking along a country lane to a turning where a trench boyau began. Just at the turning the nose of a "seventy-five" poked across the path. Although the gun was speaking at its high record of twenty shots per minute, several soldiers lolled idly about within a few yards, smoking cigarettes. We stood off at an angle slightly in front, but about thirty yards away.

It was evening. We could see the spurt of flame from the mouth of the gun as the shell departed to the distant Germans.

Across the road in the direction the gun pointed was a field. There, almost in the path of the gun, which, instead of being raised at an angle, was pointed horizontally, and only fifteen yards away, I saw a man grubbing in the soil. He seemed so directly in the path of the shells that I don't believe they missed blowing off his head by more than two feet. But he just grubbed away, almost on his hands and knees. If the gunners saw him they paid not the slightest attention, but just calmly went on firing.

One of our party called the situation to the attention of an officer, who immediately began dancing up and down, calling to the man to "Come out of that before you are killed."

The man then raised his head and looked our way. He was a soldier. His cap was slanted over one eye, his pipe dangled from his mouth, and his face wore an expression of irritation. Seeing the officer, he saluted, but did not trouble to stand up.

"What are you doing there?" the officer called. The man raised his dirty fist to his cap, and said, "Digging carrots."

As we gasped our astonishment he calmly went back to his grubbing, this time, it seemed, slightly nearer to the flash of the cannon than before.

Another impressive sight afforded me was the manoeuvres behind the lines. I do not mean strategic manoeuvres bearing upon real operations, but manoeuvres such as were held in previous years—mimic warfare within the sound of real war and only a couple of miles away. Approaching the front, we were continually passing through these manoeuvres. I calculated that I saw thousands of soldiers playing at war and snapping empty rifles who the day before stood in the trenches firing bullets, and who will do it again tomorrow. The manoeuvres come during "days of repose" from the trenches, when the men know they at least have that day more to live. Every field, every road was full of them.

We motored along country lanes preferably to the main highways, where our autos would be more easily discerned by the German aeroplanes constantly hovering about. In these lanes we found lines of men sneaking along, sometimes crawling inch by inch, to surprise an imaginary enemy down around the bend. In the fields we saw charges and counter-charges from trench to trench. We saw cavalry manoeuvres across the open country and cavalry on foot facing each other in long lines along the roadsides, fighting desperately with lance and clubbed carbine.

Occasionally a real shell would come popping over from somewhere to tear a hole in the roadside to make our automobiling more difficult. In fact, we discovered that during "Joffre's offensive" days of repose mean drill, drill, and more drill, and when the men are not drilling many of them are guarding prisoners.

Along other roadsides we saw hundreds of prisoners, usually in charge of a cavalry company marching them to the rear. At one place we stopped and talked with them—several could speak French. There were many well set up, fine-looking fellows, who seemed perfectly content to do no more fighting. About a dozen under one guard were across the road in a meadow, tossing a tennis ball about, laughing and joking. Others were eating luncheon. It was just 1 o'clock. They had the same fare as their captors, the only difference in service being that the captors got theirs first.

Our officer talked to the Captain of the guard, who explained that his lot of about 400 had just been taken at Neuville Saint Vaast. Our officers then talked to the prisoners. I was surprised to note the extraordinary decency of their attitude and conversation. There was no boasting, no arrogance, no animosity. On the contrary, I heard one Captain telling the prisoners considerable they apparently did not know about the progress of the fighting in that neighborhood. He smiled as he talked, and concluded by telling the men they would be well fed and well treated.

I also noted the attitude of the prisoners. As a French officer approached the German soldier, true to his years of iron discipline, leaped to his feet and stood rigid as a poker through the talk, but never the raising of a hand to cap, never the salute to the Frenchman.

I strolled down the road and found another with whom I was able to talk. He was a non-commissioned officer, young and very intelligent. I told him I was an American, which aroused his interest. He wanted to talk about America. He had friends there. I asked him:

He stood very straight, looked me directly in the eye, and said: "Germany knows she is beaten, but she will fight to the last cartridge."

He spoke French. His final words, "La derniere cartouche," rang out. His eyes flashed. Several others crowded about.

Just then a company of Spahis cavalry came clattering down the road—a more ferocious-looking lot I have never seen—and disappeared in a cloud of dust. All of us turned to look, the prisoner remarking: "I'll say one thing, though: we never thought we would have to fight men like those."

Coming from the trenches at night, we waited in a little hamlet about a kilometer in the rear for our automobiles. About 1,000 soldiers were there, waiting to return to the trenches in the morning. They completely surrounded us, singling me out for observation on account of my khaki clothes. I heard one ask our Captain about me. The Captain replied that I was a correspondent of The New York Times . Many had never seen an American before. I was conscious that I was an object of intense curiosity.

I saw one little chap pushing through the crowd. He stood before me and thrust out his hand. "Hello!" he said. I thought his "Hello!" might be French quite as easily as American, so I merely returned his handshake. He grinned, and then said in perfectly good "American": "You forget me, huh?" I admitted my shortcoming in memory; but his beard was very thick and stubby and his uniform was very dirty. I complimented his linguistic ability. He waved his arms, saying: "Huh, didn't I live eight years in little old New York?" Then he came still nearer, saying: "You don't remember me, and I have served you many a cocktail. I don't know your name; but I am sure."

"Five years ago, at Mouquin's," he replied, and then I did remember him, and while the others stood about marveling at their "educated" comrade who could actually converse with the American, we talked about many of the old newspaper crowd in New York who frequented that restaurant. He had sailed on Aug. 4 to rejoin his regiment.

"Tell those folks back in America that we are all doing fine," he said. Then his voice sank to an impressive whisper: "And take it from me, you can say we are giving the Germans hell now."

As our automobile jerked suddenly away into the night I could hear my ex-waiter excitedly introducing American journalism, particularly The New York Times , to his regiment on the battlefield.

THE LABYRINTH.

[Special Cable to The New York Times .]

Paris, June 2. —This is a story about what, in the minds of the French military authorities, ranks as the greatest battle of the war in the western theatre of operations, excepting the battle of the Marne, which has already taken its place among the decisive battles of the world's history. This battle is still raging, although its first stages have been definitely settled in favor of the French, who are continuing their progress with less and less opposition.

So far the battle has received no name. The French official communiqués laconically refer to it as "operations in the section north of Arras."

I cannot minutely describe the conflict; no one can do that at this stage. I can, however, write about it and tell what I have seen these past few days when the Ministry of War authorized me to accompany a special mission there, to which I was the only foreigner accredited. I purpose to call this struggle the battle of the Labyrinth, for "labyrinth" is the name applied to the vast system of intrenchments all through that region, and from which the Germans are being literally blasted almost foot by foot by an extravagant use of French melinite.

There have been successive chapters by different writers describing and disposing of as finished—though it is not finished—still another battle which, from the English point of view, takes top rank, namely, the battle of Ypres. While a British defeat at Ypres might mean the loss of Dunkirk and possibly of Calais, a French defeat at the Labyrinth would allow the Germans to sweep clear across Northern France, cutting all communication with England.

The battle of the Labyrinth really began last October, when General de Maud-Huy stopped the Prussian Guard before Arras with his motley array of tired Territorials, whom he gathered together in a mighty rush northward after the battle of the Marne. The crack Guards regiments afterward took on the job at Ypres, while the Crown Prince of Bavaria assumed the vain task of attempting to break the more southward passage to the sea.

All the Winter de Maud-Huy worried him, not seeking to make a big advance, but contenting himself with the record of never having lost a single trench. With the return of warm weather, just after the big French advance in Champagne, this sector was chosen by Joffre as the place in which to take the heart out of his enemy by the delivery of a mighty blow.

The Germans probably thought that the French intended to concentrate in the Vosges, as next door to Champagne; so they carted all their poison gases there and to Ypres, where their ambition still maintains ascendency over their good sense. But where the Germans think Joffre is likely to strike is usually the place furthest from his thoughts. Activities in the Arras sector were begun under the personal command of the Commander in Chief, who was still personally directing operations during my visit only two days ago.

I doubt whether, until the war is over, it will be possible adequately to describe the battle, or rather, the series of battles extending along this particular front of about fifty miles. "Labyrinth" certainly is the fittest word to call it. I always had a fairly accurate sense of direction; but, standing in many places in this giant battlefield, it was impossible for me to say where were the Germans and where the French, so completely was I turned around on account of the constant zigzag of the trench lines. Sometimes, when I was positive that a furious cannonade coming from a certain position was German, it turned out to be French. At other times, when I thought I was safely going in the direction of the French, I was hauled back by officers, who told me I was heading directly into the German line of fire. I sometimes felt that the German lines were on three sides, and often I was quite correct. On the other hand, the French lines often almost completely surrounded the German positions.

One could not tell from the nearness of the artillery fire whether it was from friend or foe. Artillery makes three different noises; first, the sharp report followed by detonations like thunder, when the shell first leaves the gun; second, the rushing sound of the shell passing high overhead; third, the shrill whistle, followed by the crash when it finally explodes. In the Labyrinth the detonations which usually indicated the French fire might be from the German batteries stationed quite near us, but where they could not get the range on us, and firing at a section of the French lines some miles away. I finally determined that when a battery fired fast it was French; for the German fire is becoming more intermittent every day.

I shall attempt to give some idea of what this fighting looks like. Late one afternoon, coming out of a trench into a green meadow, I suddenly found myself planted against a mudbank made of the dirt taken from the trenches. We were just at the crest of a hill. In khaki clothes I was of the same color as the mudbank; so an officer told me I was in a fairly safe position.

Modern war becomes quite an ordinary—often even a sedate, methodical—affair after the first impressions have been rubbed off.

We flattened ourselves casually against our mudbank, carefully adjusting our glasses, turned them toward the valley before us, whence came the sound of exploding shells, and calmly watched a village developing into nothingness in the sunset. It was only about a thousand yards away—I didn't even bother to ask whether it was in French or German possession. There was a loud explosion, a roll of dense smoke, which was penetrated quickly enough by the long, horizontal rays of the descending sun to permit the sight of tumbling roofs and crumbling walls. After a few seconds' intermission there was another explosion, and what looked like a public school in the main street sagged suddenly in the centre. With no entre-acte came a succession of explosions, and the building was prone upon the ground—just a jagged pile of broken stones.

We turned our glasses on the other end of the village. A column of black smoke was rising where the church had caught fire. We watched it awhile in silence. Ruins were getting very common. I swept the glasses away from the hamlet altogether and pointed out over the distant fields to the left.

"I'll show you—just a moment!" he answered, and at the same time signaling to a soldier squatting in the entrance to a trench near by, he ordered the man to convey a message to the telephone station which connected with a "seventy-five" battery at our rear. I was on the point of telling the officer not to bother about it. The words were on my lips. Then I thought "Oh, never mind! I might as well know where the trenches are, now that I have asked."

The soldier disappeared. "Watch!" said the officer. We looked intently across the field to the left. In less than a minute there were two sharp explosions behind us, two puffs of smoke out on the horizon before us, about a mile away.

Away to the right of the village, now reduced to ruins, was another larger village; we squared around on our mud bank to look at that. This town was more important; it was Neuville-St. Vaast, which is still occupied by both French and Germans, the former slowly retaking it, house by house. We were about half a mile away. We could see little; for, strangely, in this business of house-to-house occupation, most of the fighting is in the cellars. But I could well imagine what was going on, for I had already walked through the ruins of Vermelles, another town now entirely in French possession, but taken in the same fashion after two months' dogged inch-by-inch advances.

So, when looking at Neuville-St. Vaast, I suddenly heard a tremendous explosion and saw a great mass of masonry and débris of all descriptions flying high in the air, I knew just what had happened. The French—for it is always the French who do it—had burrowed, sapped and dug themselves laboriously, patiently, slowly, by tortuous, narrow underground routes from one row of houses under the foundations, gardens, backyards, and streets to beneath the foundations of the next row of houses. There they had planted mines. The explosion I had just witnessed was of a mine. Much of the débris I saw flying through space had been German soldiers a few seconds before.

Before the smoke died away we heard a savage yell. That was the French cry of victory. Then we heard a rapid crackling of rifles. That was the sign that the French had advanced across the space between the houses to finish the work their mine had left undone. When one goes to view the work of those mines afterward all that one sees is a great, round, smooth hole in the ground—sometimes thirty feet deep, often twice that in diameter. Above it might have been either a château or a stable; unless one has an old resident for guide it is impossible to know.

It takes many days and nights to prepare these mines. It takes careful mathematical precision to determine that they are correctly placed. It takes morale, judgment, courage, and intelligence—this fighting from house to house. And yet the French are called a frivolous people!

A cry from a soldier warned us of a German aeroplane directly overhead; so we stopped gazing at Neuville-St. Vaast. A French aeroplane soon appeared, and the German made off rapidly. They usually do, as the majority of German aeronauts carry only rifles; the French now all have mitrailleuses. A fight between them is unequal, and the inequality is not easily overcome, for the German machines are too light for mitrailleuses.

Four French machines were now circling above, and the German batteries opened fire on them. It was a beautiful sight. There was not a cloud in the sky, and the sun had not yet gone. We could not hear the shells explode, but we could see little feathery white clouds suddenly appear as if some giant invisible hand had just put them there—high up in the sky. Another appeared, and another. There were several dozen little white clouds vividly outlined against the blue before the French machines, all untouched, turned back toward their own lines.

Again our thoughts and actions were rudely disturbed by the soldier with us, who suddenly threw himself face down on the ground. Before we had time to wonder why a German shell tore a hole in the field before us, less than a hundred yards away. I asked the officer if we had been seen, and if they were firing at us. He said he did not think so, but we had perhaps better move. As a matter of fact, they were hunting the battery that had so accurately shown us their trenches a short time before.

Instead of returning to the point where we had left our motors by the trench, we walked across an open field in quite another direction than I thought was the correct one. All the time we heard, high overhead, that rushing sound as of giant wings. Occasionally, when a shell struck in the neighborhood, we heard the shrill whistling sound, and half a dozen times in the course of the walk great holes were torn in our field, some times quite near. But artillery does not cause fear easily; it is rifles that accomplish that. The sharp hissing of the bullet that resembles so much the sound of a spitting cat seems so personal—as if it was intended just for you.

Artillery is entirely impersonal; you know that the gunners do not see you; that they are firing by arithmetic at a certain range; that their shell is not intended for anyone in particular. So you walk on striking idly with your stick at the daisies and buttercups that border your path. You calculate, almost indifferently, the distance between you and the bursting shell. You somehow feel that nothing will harm you. You are not afraid; and if you are lucky, as we were, you will find the automobiles waiting for you just over there beyond the brow of the hill.

The Modern Plataea

By Frederick Pollock

[From King Albert's Book.]

N EARLY 2,400 years ago the Boeotian city of Plataea was one among the many lesser Greek republics. Her citizens earned immortal fame by taking part with the leading States of Athens and Sparta in the decisive battles, fought on their own territory, which delivered Greece from the fear of Persian conquest and saved the light of Greek freedom and civilization from being extinguished. To this day the name of Plataea is held in honor throughout the world; for many years that honor was unique. Belgium has now done and dared for the freedom of modern Europe as much as Plataea did of old: she has, unhappily, suffered far more. As her valor has been equal and her suffering greater her reward will be no less immortal. Belgium will be remembered with Plataea centuries after the military tyranny of the Hohenzollerns has vanished like an evil dream.

A British Call For Recruits

This advertisement, occupying full pages, was recently run in the British press.

The British Army in France

Richebourg, La Quinque Rue, Festubert, and Ypres

By the Official “Eyewitness” and Sir John French

SAXONS SLAIN BY PRUSSIANS.

Under date of May 21, 1915, an Eyewitness with the British Headquarters in France, continues and supplements his narrative of operations:

The ground our troops were holding on Monday, May 17, projected as two salients into the enemy's territory, one south of Richebourg-L'Avoue and the other to the north of Festubert. The purpose of the operations undertaken on Monday was to connect up the space which lay between them. In this we were successful.

At about 9:30 A.M. on Monday, May 17, our forces attacked the enemy occupying this area, from north and south, and gradually drove him from all his intrenchments within it. The Germans here, pressed on three sides, subjected to a cross-fire from several directions and to continuous bombing, reached the limits of their endurance during the morning, and over 300 surrendered.

After this area had been made good by us fighting continued throughout the day, and our troops, having joined hands, pressed the enemy still further eastward, forcing them out of one post after another. As the afternoon wore on more prisoners fell into our hands, entire groups of men giving themselves up.

The centres of the hostile resistance in this quarter were the clusters of buildings which were very strongly held and surrounded by networks of trenches dotted with numerous machine gun posts, and in front of one of the nests of works near the Ferme Cour de L'Avoue, between La Quinque Rue and Richebourg-L'Avoue, a horrible scene was witnessed by our troops during the day.

Desperate fighting was going on in front of this farm when the remains of a battalion of Saxons, which, it appears, had been hastily brought down from further north and thrown into the fight, having decided to surrender en bloc, advanced toward our line. Not knowing what the movement of this mass of men implied, our infantry poured a hail of bullets into them, whereupon the survivors, some hundreds strong, halted, threw down their rifles, and held up their hands, and one of their number waved a white rag tied to a stick.

Our guns continued to fire from the rear, and whether our infantry, who, by this time, have had some experience of the treachery of the enemy, would have paid any attention to these signals is uncertain, but the matter was taken out of their hands, for as soon as the Prussian infantry on the north of this point realized what their Saxon comrades were trying to do, they opened rapid fire from the flank, enfilading the mass. It appears also that the news of what was happening must have been telephoned back to the German artillery further east—which was also probably Prussian, since its guns suddenly opened on the Saxon infantry, and under this combined fire most of the latter were very soon accounted for.

Among the many scenes of the war there has probably been no more strange spectacle than that of the masses of gray-coated soldiers standing out in the open, hands raised, amidst the dead and dying, being butchered by their own comrades before the eyes of the British infantry. The fact that the victims of this slaughter were Saxons was a source of regret to us, since the Saxons have always proved themselves more chivalrous and less brutal than either the Prussians or the Bavarians—in fact, cleaner fighters in every way.

While we were thus pressing forward gradually on the section of front between our two original points of penetration, our troops on the right in front of Festubert were making good progress southward along the German trenches. Their attack began at 11:30 A.M., and the Germans were soon cleared out of their line in this quarter up to a point a short distance south of Festubert, where they made a strong resistance and checked our further lateral progress.

Map of the British position. The solid line represents the territory held by the British, the dotted line to the north showing the position of the Franco-Belgian Army, and the dotted line to the south the position of the French Army.

The fighting here was made up of a series of isolated and desperate hand-to-hand combats with bayonet and hand grenades, and, since the Germans were, at many points, outflanked and enfiladed, their losses were very heavy, for in the narrow trenches there was often no room for escape, and the only alternative was death or surrender. In some places the trenches presented a horrible sight, being heaped with German corpses, many of whom had been blown to pieces by our bombardment carried out previous to the original attack. By about noon the total number of prisoners captured since the commencement of the attack on Sunday had increased to 550.

On the extreme right the Germans were pressed back along their communication trenches in such large numbers that they occasionally formed an excellent mark for the machine guns in our own line to the north of Givenchy, which were able to do great execution at certain points.

By midday the total front of the "bite" taken by us out of the enemy's position was almost exactly two miles long; but, as trenches and isolated posts were taken and retaken several times, the exact situation at any moment, as is usual in such cases, is somewhat obscure. Further progress was made to the south during the afternoon and after dark, and various posts and breastworks east of La Quinque Rue, from which we had withdrawn the previous night, again fell into our hands, although the enemy continued to hold some trenches in rear of them. But they again formed an exposed salient, and were once more temporarily evacuated by us.

At nightfall we held a continuous line embracing the whole of the German original front trenches from the south of Festubert to Richebourg-L'Avoue, and, in many places, were in possession of the whole series of hostile entrenchments, with the exception of a few supporting points and machine-gun posts in rear of the zone.

EAST OF FESTUBERT.

The following dispatch was received on May 26, 1915, from Field Marshal Sir John French, commanding in chief the British Army in the field:

The First Army continues to make progress east of Festubert. A territorial division carried last night a group of German trenches, capturing thirty-five prisoners, and this morning it captured one officer, twenty-one men, and a machine gun.

Since May 16 the First Army has pierced the enemy's line on a total front of over three miles. Of this the entire hostile front line system of trenches has been captured on a front of 3,200 yards, and of the remaining portion the first and second lines of trenches are in our possession.

The total number of prisoners taken is 8 officers and 777 of other ranks. Ten machine guns in all have fallen into our possession, as well as a considerable quantity of material and equipment, particulars of which are not yet available.

GERMAN GAS WARFARE AGAIN.

Under date of May 28, an Eyewitness with the British Headquarters in France continues and supplements his narrative as follows:

Monday, May 24, witnessed a fresh development in the situation in our front. It was a most brilliant May day, the heat of the sun being tempered by a light breeze, which had blown from the northeast during the night, and in the course of the morning had veered round toward the north. This breeze gave the enemy the opportunity they awaited of repeating their gas tactics against our position in front of Ypres, which, though reduced in prominence, was still a salient in the general line.

Between 2 and 3 o'clock in the morning a violent bombardment with gas shells was started against a section of our line about two and three-quarters miles long, and divided into four approximately equal parts by the roads from Ypres to St. Julien and Moorslede and the railway from Ypres to Roulers. The supply of gas available must have been great, for it continued to pour southwestward for some hours in great volume, in some places reaching to a height of several feet. Owing to the direction of the wind, also, it swept southward along our line as well as penetrating behind it.

The manner in which such an attack develops with a favoring wind cannot better be described than by the reports of its progress brought in on Monday morning by our aerial reconnaissances. One observer who crossed the opposing front in this quarter shortly after dawn reported when he came back that a thick cloud of what looked like smoke outlined the whole of the German trenches. The next observing officer, who arrived some time afterward, stated that to the west and southwest of the German line he could see a broad band of yellow grass and trees which looked as if they had been bleached. A third, who came in later, stated that the whole area behind our line was covered by a mist so thick as to interfere with observation.

This attempt to asphyxiate was of course preliminary to an assault against the salient, for which infantry had been massing on the east. It was carried out from three directions, being pushed forward under cover of a heavy bombardment against the northern face from the neighborhood of St. Julien, against the northeast face from Zonnebeke along the Roulers Railway, and against the west direct from the Polygon Wood. On the greater part of the front assailed our troops were able to stand their ground, and to maintain their positions in spite of the poisonous fumes, but in certain sections they were forced to evacuate the trenches, and the German infantry succeeded in getting a footing in our front line near the farm to the north of Wieltje, for some distance astride the Roulers Railway, and to the north and south of the Menin Road on the south of the Bellewaarde Lake.

In doing this the enemy lost considerably both from our artillery fire and the rifle fire of the sections of the defense which were able to maintain their position. Counter-attacks were organized during the morning, and by about midday our infantry had succeeded in reoccupying our former line to the north of the railway. By evening there were no Germans west of our original position on the south of the Menin Road, though we had not been able to reoccupy our line in that quarter, nor near Wieltje. The advance of the enemy, however, had been stopped. In the neighborhood of Hill 60 a party of our infantry during the night bombed their way for some forty yards up a trench which the Germans had taken from us, destroyed the enemy's barricade, reconstructed it, and held the trench.

In the centre, near Bois Grenier, a slight success was gained in the evening, our troops seizing some ground between our front line and that of the Germans near the Bois Grenier—Bridoux Road. This ground had been partially intrenched during the previous night, and at 8:50 P.M. the infantry advanced under cover of our artillery and established themselves in the new line.

On our right, in the neighborhood of Festubert, our troops continued their pressure, gaining one or two points in the maze of trenches and defended houses here and there, in spite of the heavy artillery and machine-gun fire to which they were subjected. Before dark the German infantry was observed to be massing opposite Festubert, as if to counter-attack in force; but their two offensive efforts made during the night were not serious, and were easily beaten back.

On Tuesday matters were quieter. On our left the German infantry attacking the Ypres salient did not, in the face of our resistance, attempt to push on further, nor was gas employed, but the bombardment of our positions was maintained. Except where he had retained or regained our original line our position was established behind the portions which the Germans had succeeded in occupying.

A GAIN AT GIVENCHY.

The following dispatch was received on June 4, 1915, from Field Marshal Sir John French, commanding in chief the British Army in the field:

On the night of the 30th of May we seized some outbuildings in the grounds of a ruined château at Hooge. Since then our trenches there have been subjected to a heavy bombardment.

Fighting on a small scale has been continuous. At one time we were forced to evacuate the buildings, taken by us, but last night we recaptured them.

Northeast of Givenchy last night we expelled the enemy from his trenches on a front of 200 yards, taking forty-eight prisoners. Our infantry, however, was unable to remain in occupation of these trenches after daylight, owing to the enemy fire.

Field Marshal Sir John French in a report, dated June 8, on the fighting along the British line, says:

The situation on our front has not changed since the last communication of June 4. There has been less activity on the part of the artillery.

On the 6th, in front of the Plogsteert wood, we successfully exploded a mine under the German trenches, destroying thirty yards of the parapet.

We have brought down two German aeroplanes, one opposite our right by gunfire, and the other in the neighborhood of Ypres, as the result of an engagement in the air with one of our aeroplanes.

AN ADVANCE NEAR YPRES.

Last week there was no change in the situation. The enemy exploded five mines on different parts of our front, but none of these caused any damage to our trenches, and only one caused any casualties.

Yesterday evening we captured the German front-line trenches east of Festubert on a mile front, but failed to hold them during the night against strong counter-attacks.

Early this morning in the neighborhood of Ypres we successfully attacked the enemy's positions north of Hooge, (to the east of Ypres.) We occupied the whole of his first line of trenches on a front of 1,000 yards, and also parts of his second line.

By noon today 157 prisoners had passed to our rear. The German counter-attack has been repulsed with heavy losses.

ALLIES IN CONCERTED ATTACK.

Field Marshal French's report of June 18 indicates that a strong, concerted attack was then being made by British and French troops upon the German front from east of Ypres to south of Arras. This report preceded the French announcement of victory in the battle of the Labyrinth, an account of which appears elsewhere. It says:

The fighting in the northern and southern portions of our front continued throughout June 16 in co-operation with the attack of our ally about Arras.

East of Ypres all the German first-line trenches which we captured remain in our hands, in spite of two counter-attacks, which were repulsed with heavy loss to the enemy. We were, however, unable to retain those of the enemy's second-line trenches which we had occupied in the morning.

East of Festubert, as a result of a further attack on the afternoon of the 16th, we made a slight advance and, judging by the number of dead Germans in the trenches entered by us, our artillery fire was very effective.

The Dardanelles Campaign

Progress of the Allies in June
Slow and Difficult

In his speech at Dundee on June 5, from which the passage concerning the Dardanelles is reproduced below, Winston Spencer Churchill's reference to "losses of ships" constituted the official comment on the sinking by submarine attack on May 26 and 27 of the British battleships Triumph in the Gulf of Saros, and Majestic off Sedd-el-Bahr. That increased to six the sum of battleships lost to the Allies in the Dardanelles operations. The review of the operations from May 15 to June 17, shows a development of slow trench warfare on land, which postpones the attainment of a few miles to a victory confidently predicted by Mr. Churchill.

A FEW MILES FROM VICTORY.

In the course of his speech at Dundee on June 5, 1915, Winston Spencer Churchill said:

The operations which are now proceeding at the Dardanelles will give him (Mr. Balfour) the opportunity of using that quality of cool, calm courage and inflexibility which fifteen years ago prevented Ladysmith from being left to its fate and surrendered to the enemy. I have two things to say to you about the Dardanelles.

First, you must expect losses both by land and sea. But the fleet you are employing there is your surplus fleet, after all other needs have been provided for. Had it not been used in this great enterprise it would have been lying idle in your southern ports. A large number of the old vessels, of which it is composed, have to be laid up in any case before the end of the year, because their crews are wanted for the enormous reinforcements of new ships which the industry of your workships is hurrying into the water. Losses of ships, therefore, as long as the precious lives of the officers and men are saved—which in nearly every case they have been—losses of that kind, I say, may easily be exaggerated in the minds both of friend and foe. Military operations will also be costly, but those who suppose that Lord Kitchener—(loud cheers)—has embarked upon them without narrowly and carefully considering their requirements in relation to all other needs and in relation to the paramount need of our army in France and Flanders—such people are mistaken, and not only mistaken, they are presumptuous.

My second point is this. In looking at your losses squarely and soberly you must not forget at the same time the prize for which you are contending. The army of Sir Ian Hamilton, the fleet of Admiral de Robeck are separated only by a few miles from a victory such as this war has not yet seen. When I speak of victory I am not referring to those victories which crowd the daily placards of any newspapers. I am speaking of victory in the sense of a brilliant and formidable fact shaping the destinies of nations and shortening the duration of the war. Beyond those few miles of ridge and scrub on which our soldiers, our French comrades, our gallant Australian and New Zealand fellow-subjects are now battling, lie the downfall of a hostile empire, the destruction of an enemy's fleet and army, the fall of a world-famous capital, and probably the accession of powerful allies. The struggle will be heavy, the risks numerous, the losses cruel, but victory when it comes will make amend for all. There never was a great subsidiary operation of war in which a more complete harmony of strategic, political, and economic advantages were combined, or which stood in truer relation to the main decision, which is in the central theatre. Through the Narrows of the Dardanelles and across the ridges of the Gallipoli Peninsula lie some of the shortest paths to a triumphant peace.

Scene of the Dardanelles operations. The black line marks the approximate allied position, the dotted line the approximate Turkish position, on June 18, 1915.

TWO WEEKS’ FIGHTING.

By The Associated Press.

PARIS, June 14.—An official note given out today presents a summary of the operations in the Dardanelles from May 15 to June 1 as follows:

Heavy fighting has taken place during this time. Today our progress is somewhat slower than it was in the beginning, but every inch of ground gained has been organized in such a manner as to permit the repelling of counter-attacks, and each advance has been held. The physical aspects of the country make fighting extremely difficult and dangerous, as the battle front presents the form of a triangle.

During the second half of May there were attacks on the Turkish line of intrenchments in front of Kereves Dere and the redoubt called the 'Bouchet,' which we took May 8. All the Turkish counter-attacks failed completely.

Our position being assured here, we endeavored to capture a small fortress situated on the extreme left of the enemy's line. On account of the strategic position of this fortress it was impossible to take it in the ordinary way by an artillery attack, followed by a bayonet charge; such a method would have resulted in heavy loss of life. The attack had to be a surprise. On the night of May 28 a mixed company composed of thirty-four white and thirty-two negro troops, all volunteers, under the command of a Lieutenant, received orders to slip out of our first trench one by one and crawl on their hands and knees to the opposing trench. Here they were to surprise the occupants and kill them without a shot. Two other companies bringing up the rear were to go at once to the assistance of the first company if the plan failed.

At 11:45 P.M. our men, having gone forward in accordance with instructions, rushed over the embankments of the enemy trenches. The Turks were completely surprised. They discharged their guns into the air and immediately took to flight. Thanks to the rapidity of our attack our only casualties were one Sergeant and two men wounded.

The Turks attacked twice without success, and dawn saw us firmly established in our new positions.

A GENERAL ASSAULT.

LONDON, June 6.—Official announcement was made tonight that the British troops at the Dardanelles, as a result of their new offensive movement last week, captured two lines of Turkish trenches along a three-mile front. The statement follows:

On the night of June 3-4 the Turks, having heavily bombarded a small fort in front of the extreme right French position, which previously had been captured, launched an infantry attack against it which was repulsed with heavy loss to the enemy. At the same time the Turks set fire to scrub in front of the left centre of the position occupied by the British division and attacked, but with no success.

On the morning of the 4th of June Sir Ian Hamilton ordered a general attack on the Turkish trenches in the southern area of the Gallipoli Peninsula, preceded by a heavy bombardment by all guns, assisted by battleships, cruisers, and destroyers.

At a given signal the troops rushed forward with the bayonet. They were immediately successful all along the line except in one spot, where the heavy wire entanglement was not destroyed by the bombardment.

Indian troops on our extreme left made a magnificent advance. They captured two lines of trenches, but, owing to the fact that the troops on their right were hung up by this wire entanglement, they were obliged to retire to their original line. The regular division made good progress on the left centre, capturing a strong redoubt and two lines of trenches beyond it, about 500 yards in advance of their original line.

The Territorial Division on our centre did brilliantly, advancing 600 yards and capturing three lines of trenches, but though the advanced captured trench was held all day and half of the ensuing night, they had to be ordered back in the morning to the second captured line, as both their flanks were exposed.

The Naval Division on our right centre captured a redoubt and a formidable line of trenches constructed in three tiers 300 yards to their front, but they, too, had to be ordered back, owing to the heavy enfilading fire.

The French Second Division advanced with great gallantry and élan. They retook for the fourth time that deadly redoubt they call 'Le Haricot,' but unfortunately the Turks developed heavy counter-attacks through prepared communication trenches, and under cover of an accurate shell fire were able to recapture it.

GENERAL GOURAUD
Commander of the French Land Forces Operating Against the Dardanelles
( Photo from Medem )

On the French extreme right the French captured a strong line of trenches which, though heavily counter-attacked twice during the night, they still occupy.

We captured 400 prisoners, including ten officers. Among the prisoners were five Germans, the remains of a volunteer machine gun detachment from the Goeben (the Turkish cruiser Sultan Selim). Their officer was killed and the machine gun was destroyed.

During the night information was received that enemy reinforcements were advancing from the direction of Maidos toward Kithia. Thereupon Lieutenant General Birdwood arranged to attack the trenches in front of Quinn's post at 10 P.M., which was successfully carried out, and the captured trenches held throughout the night. The Turkish casualties were heavy.

At 6:30 A.M. the enemy heavily counter-attacked, and by means of heavy bombs forced our men out of the most forward trench, though we still hold communication trenches made during the night.

The result of these operations is that we have made an advance of 500 yards, which includes two lines of Turkish trenches along a front of nearly three miles. We are now consolidating our new positions and strengthening the lines.

MR. ASQUITH’S PREDICTION.

LONDON, June 15.—There have been so many rumors recently that the Allies had forced the Dardanelles that Sir James H. Dalziel asked Premier Asquith this afternoon in the House of Commons if there was any truth in such reports.

"None whatever," was the reply. The Premier said that it was not in the public interest to say anything now about the Dardanelles. "The operations are of the highest importance," he added, "and they will be pushed to a successful conclusion."

The following announcement concerning the operations was given out officially today:

The situation on the Gallipoli Peninsula has developed into trench warfare. After our success on the 4th instant the Turks have evinced a great respect for our offensive, and by day and by night they have to submit to captures of trenches.

On the night of the 11th-12th of June two regiments of a British regular brigade made a simultaneous attack on the advanced Turkish trenches, and after severe fighting, which included the killing of many snipers, succeeded in maintaining themselves, in spite of bombs, in the captured position.

On the morning of the 13th a counter-attack was made by the Turks, who rushed forward with bombs, but coming under the fire of the naval machine gun squadron were annihilated. Of the fifty who attacked, thirty dead bodies were counted in front of that part of our trenches.

The situation is favorable to our forces, but is necessarily slow on account of the difficulties of the ground. The Turkish offensive has sensibly weakened.

FROM THE TURKISH SIDE.

[Staff Correspondence of The Brooklyn Eagle.]

CONSTANTINOPLE, June 5, (by Courier to Berlin and Wireless to Sayville, L.I.) —The forces of the Allies on the Gallipoli Peninsula at Ari Burnu and Sedd-el-Bahr are in the greatest danger, as a result of the withdrawal of the bombarding fleets—made necessary by the activity of German submarines—and the consequent difficulty of maintaining communications oversea from the Aegean Islands.

The inability to land heavy artillery was at first compensated for by the protection given by the guns of the fleet, but the withdrawal of the ships from Ari Burnu leaves the shore forces resting almost on the water's edge without means of meeting attacks.

These statements are made after a week spent in the Turkish field under the first personal pass issued to a newspaper correspondent by Field Marshal Liman von Sanders, the Commander in Chief of the Turkish Army.

The farthest advance made by the English at Ari Burnu is 1,000 yards from shore; at Sedd-el-Bahr, about two miles.

The net results of the English attempt to force the Dardanelles are at present almost nil.

The general impression at Constantinople and Berlin is that the attack as at present conducted is a failure.

The bombardment of March 18 was ineffectual, owing to the inadequacy of the landing forces, and the failure of the Entente powers to embroil Bulgaria against Turkey.

[By The Associated Press.]

KRITHIA, Dardanelles, June 17, (via London, June 19.) —The allied troops who landed at Sedd-el-Bahr, on the Gallipoli Peninsula, hold about ten square miles of the extreme southern part of the peninsula, the occupancy of which is maintained with the greatest difficulties.

The ground held by the Allies consists principally of a small plateau to the north of Sedd-el-Bahr and two adjoining ridges to the northwest, between which the Turks are pushing advance trenches.

The Associated Press correspondent, who spent two days in the trenches, found the Turkish troops in excellent condition and spirits, in spite of the fact that the Allies were using every conceivable means to carry on the operations, including bombs thrown from catapults and from aeroplanes.

From the Turkish station of artillery fire control the effect of the Turkish fire upon the allied trenches could be observed today, and the shells were reaching the mark. The sanitary and supply services of the Turks are being carried on efficiently. The number of wounded at the hospital bases at the front was small, although the fighting during the night had been fairly severe.

During the daytime both sides are usually inactive, the Turks preferring night bayonet attacks. Many Turkish batteries are in position, but the nearness of the opposing trenches makes their work difficult, and for the most part they are directing their attention to the reserves of the Allies and to changing shifts which are exposed at certain points. The Turks, in this, have the support of their heavy batteries on the Asiatic side, which, since the retirement of the allied fleet, work without fear of being molested, bombarding chiefly the allied right wing, composed of French, home, and Colonial troops.

Weber Pasha, the German General commanding the south group, gave the correspondent every opportunity to visit the Sedd-el-Bahr district, placing no restrictions whatever upon his movements. The result was a thorough inspection of the ground. Weber Pasha made no comment on the situation himself beyond saying that "the failure of the Allies to consummate their plan of forcing the Dardanelles is too obvious for discussion."

Weber Pasha, who is a member of the German military mission which undertook the improvement of the Ottoman Army organization, is fully confident that the Turks will be able to meet the Gallipoli situation, and that the Allies will never advance against the Dardanelles forts.

It has been ascertained that only a few German officers are active in the south group. German privates are employed in special lines.

Krithia, once a thriving village of about 4,000 inhabitants, is probably the most ruined place in all Europe. The Allies left no house standing during their bombardment.

THE EUROPEAN WAR AS
SEEN BY CARTOONISTS

[American Cartoon]

An Old Time Aeronaut

[American Cartoon]

A Parthian Brick

[American Cartoon]

The Benevolent Assassin

[American Cartoon]

The Black Flag

[American Cartoon]

A Statesman’s Exit

[American Cartoon]

“My Heart Bleeds for Karlsruhe”

"Emperor William has telegraphed his deep indignation at the wicked attack upon beloved Karlsruhe. The poor innocent victims among civilians have greatly affected him."—Berlin Press Dispatch.

[German-American Cartoon]

The Sandwich Man

[English Cartoon]

The Two-handed Sword

[German Cartoon]

Wilson’s Wrapping Paper

"Here is a sample of a new shell. It is wrapped up in a little bit of a protest—but you needn't take that very seriously."

[English Cartoon]

A Haul of U-Boats

[German Cartoon]

In the Carpathians

[German Cartoon]

The Sphinx on the Bosporus

[English Cartoon]

Twice Bitten—Thrice Shy

Map of the frontier between Italy and Austria where the Italians were advancing on June 18, 1915, to capture Trieste. The boxed numbers indicate altitudes in meters.

Italy vs. Austria-Hungary

The Italian Invasion and Italo-Germanic
Differences

Official reviews of the first month, ending June 23, of Italy's war with Austria-Hungary are still lacking. [4] On May 24 it was officially reported in London that Italy had given her adhesion to the agreement, already signed by the allied powers, not to conclude a separate peace. Active war operations were begun by Austria on the same day; bombs were dropped on Venice and five other Adriatic ports, shelled from air and some from sea. The attackers were driven off.

The rapid advance of the Italian armies which invaded Austria on the east had by May 27 carried part of the forces across the Isonzo River to Monfalcone, sixteen miles northwest of Trieste. Another force penetrated further to the north in the Crownland of Goritz and Gradisca. On June 4 the censored news from Udine, Italy, reported that encounters with the enemy thus far had been merely outpost skirmishes, but had allowed Italy to occupy advantageous positions in Austrian territory. The first important battle of the Italian campaign, for the possession of Tolmino, was reported on June 7.

A general Italian advance took place on June 7 across the Isonzo River from Caporetto to the sea, a distance of about forty miles. On June 12 reports from the Trentino indicated an Italian advance on Rovereto in Tyrol, thirteen miles southwest of Trent, and upon Mori, near by. Monfalcone was taken by the Italians on June 10—the first serious blow against Trieste—as Monfalcone is a railway junction and its electrical works operate the light and power of Trieste. In the extreme north, on the threshold of the Carnic Alps, after three days' fighting it was reported on June 10 that the Italians had swept the Austrians from Monte Croce and possessed themselves of Freikofel. The Austrian city of Gradisca was reported taken on June 11, as indicated in an official statement signed by Lieut. Gen. Count Cadorna, Chief of Staff of the Italian Army. The defenses of Goritz were shelled by the Italian artillery on June 13, and on June 14 the Italian eastern army had pushed forward along the Gulf of Trieste toward the town of Nabresina, nine miles from Trieste.

Count Cadorna

LIEUT. GEN. COUNT CADORNA
Chief of the Italian General Staff
( Photo from Paul Thompson )

The Italian advance was checked—but not until June 16, more than three weeks after the beginning of the war—by an elaborate system of intrenchments prepared by the Austrians along the Isonzo River. On June 17 the Italians in the Trentino had arrived at the town of Mori, where their forces were blocked by the fortifications between that town and Rovereto. On June 18 a dispatch of The Associated Press from Rome reported that the Austrians had then so strengthened their forces that they were taking the offensive both from Mori and Rovereto against the Italians, who were encamped at Brentanico at the foot of Mount Altissimo, at Serravale, situated in the Lagardina Valley, and also in the Arsa Valley. Tolmino, on Austria's battlefront to the north of Goritz, was being heavily fortified by the Austrians with a garrison of some 30,000 men, this place being considered indispensable to their operations as the key to the Isonzo Valley. On June 20, the fourth week of the war, was reported by General Cadorna as marking a brilliant victory at Plava. But on the following day reports from Rome indicated that the Italians were encountering strong and better-organized resistance from the Austrians. On June 22 dispatches from the Italian front to Berlin declared that serious reverses had been experienced by the Italians in their attempts to storm the Austro-Hungarian line along the Isonzo River.

Two things have puzzled the public: First, the status of Germany in regard to Italy declaring war against Austria-Hungary, arraying herself on the side of the Entente powers, and pledging herself, in turn, as each of them had done, not to make a separate peace with the enemy, and, second, the apparent weakness of the Austrian defensive in the Trentino and on the eastern frontier of Venetia.

Diplomatic relations between Rome and Berlin have been severed, but neither Chancellery has yet (June 23) found the other guilty of an aggression sufficiently grave to warrant a declaration of war. There is nothing astonishing in this situation. A similar situation obtained between Paris and Vienna and London and Vienna long after a state of war existed between Germany and Russia, France, and England.

The Italian plan of campaign apparently consists (1) in neutralizing the Trentino by capturing or "covering" her defenses and cutting her two lines of communication with Austria proper—the railway which runs south from Innsbruck and that which runs southwest from Vienna and joins the former at Franzensfeste, and (2) in a movement in force from the eastern frontier, with Trieste captured or "covered" on the right flank, in the direction of the Austrian fortress of Klagenfurt and Vienna, only 170 miles northeast from the present base of operations—a distance equal to that from New York City to Cape Cod.

The initial weakness of the Austrian defensive, which will doubtless be strengthened as troops can be spared from the seat of war in Galicia, is due to the fact that the invaded regions are normally defended by the Fourteenth and Third Army Corps, which were, in August, sent with two reserve corps to defend the Austrian line in Galicia. To fill the casualties in these corps the drain on the population has been great, so that when Italy began her invasion the defenses of the country were chiefly in the hands of the hastily mobilized youths below the military age of 19 and men above the military age of 42.

During the last six months, when Vienna gradually came to realize that war with Italy was inevitable, the Austro-Hungarian military authorities enrolled a new army of men who had already seen military service, but, for various reasons, had not been availed of in the present war. They were men of an unusually high mental and physical standard and had received additional training under German officers. Their ages were from 35 to 40, and they numbered from 700,000 to 800,000. On the desire of the German War Office this new army, which should have been sent to the Italian frontiers, was diverted to Galicia toward the last of April, and since then has been the backbone of the Teutonic drive against Russia in that region.

Below are given a sketch of the Alpine frontier by G.H. Perris, appearing in The London Chronicle of May 29; Colonel Murray's article on Italy's armed strength, and the speeches of mutual defiance uttered by the German Imperial Chancellor in the Reichstag on May 28 and the Italian Premier at the Capitol in Rome on June 2.

The Armed Strength of Italy

By Colonel A.M. Murray, C.B.

The article presented below originally appeared in The London Daily News of May 21, 1915.

The organization of the military forces of Italy is based upon the law of organization of 1887 and the recruiting law of 1888. Modifications have been made in these laws from time to time in regard to the strength of the annual contingent trained with the colors and the duration of the periods of training, but the original laws have not been altered in principle, and have now had time to completely materialize.

Every man in Italy is liable to military service for a period of nineteen years from the age of 20 to 39. All young men on reaching the age of 20, if passed medically fit for military service, are divided into three categories—first, those who are taken by lot for color service; second, those for whom there is no room with the colors, and, third, those who are exempted from military service for family reasons specified by law. Men placed in the first category serve for two years with the colors, after which they go to the active army reserve for six years. Men in the second category are sent at once into the active army reserve for the period of eight years, after which both they and the men in the first category are passed into the mobile militia reserve for four years, and subsequently into the territorial militia for seven years, making nineteen years altogether. The men in the third category pass all their nineteen years' obligatory period of military service in the territorial militia, receiving no training whatever till they are called up to their depots when mobilization is ordered. The following table shows the periods of service of the men according to the categories in which they are placed by the recruiting authorities. The figures are years:

In the above table the mobile militia corresponds to the German Landwehr, and the territorial militia to the Landsturm.

After deducting emigrants, men put back for the following year, those who are medically unfit, and one-year volunteers, the average number of recruits placed each year in the first category is approximately 150,000, in the second category 36,000, and in the third category 28,000. All men in the first category are fully trained, while those in the second category, who correspond to the German Ersatz Reserve, are only partially trained, being called up at the discretion of the War Minister for one or more periods of training not exceeding twelve months altogether during their eight years' service.

Last year's returns, which were published in the Italian press, gave the approximate war strength of the army as under:

According to a calculation, which need not be given in detail here, the above number of total men available includes upward of 1,200,000 fully trained soldiers, who have been through the ranks, with perhaps another 800,000 partially trained men of the second category, the remaining million being completely untrained men, who have passed all their nineteen years of obligatory service in the third category.

The organization for putting the above numbers of men into the field is as follows: The fully trained men are organized in four armies, each army consisting of three corps, one cavalry division, and a number of troops for the lines of communication. The twelve corps are recruited and organized on a territorial basis, each corps having its allotted area, as shown in the sketch, which also indicates the locality of corps headquarters. The Italian army corps, which is larger than that in other European armies, is composed of two active army divisions, with thirty guns each, one mobile militia division, brought up to strength from the territorial militia, one regiment of Bersaglieri, or light infantry, one cavalry regiment, one field artillery regiment of six batteries, (corps artillery,) and other technical and administrative units. The strength of the corps amounts to 50,000 men, with 8,400 horses and 126 guns, and this gives each of the four armies a strength of 150,000 men, 25,200 horses, and 378 guns, with the addition of a cavalry division of 4,200 sabres. The first line Italian army, therefore, which can be put into the field seven days after mobilization is ordered amounts to 600,000 men, 100,800 horses, 1,512 guns, and 16,200 sabres. But these cadres only absorb half the fully trained men called out on mobilization; duplicate corps will consequently be formed to take the place of the twelve first-line corps as soon as they have been dispatched to their concentration rendezvous. It is believed that sufficient guns have now been provided for these twelve duplicate corps, but it is unlikely that more than two cavalry divisions could be formed in addition to the four divisions with the first-line armies. These duplicate corps would be ready to take the field three or four weeks after the concentration of the first twelve corps. The above calculations show that within a few weeks after the declaration of war Italy can place in the field a force of 1,200,000 men, (24 corps,) and would still have 1,800,000 men of fighting age left at the depots after the field armies had been dispatched to the front.

The infantry are armed with the Mannlicher (1891) rifle, the field artillery with the 75-millimeter quick-firing Krupp gun, (1906,) and the mountain batteries, of which there are twenty-four, with a new 65-millimeter (2.56-inch) quick-firing gun of Italian construction. The heavy artillery is armed with a 149-millimeter field howitzer, also of Italian construction.

The organization of the Italian Army and the quality of the troops composing it were both tested in the Tripoli campaign, (1911-12,) and all military judges agree that the results prove the army to have reached a high standard of efficiency. The mobilization was only partial, but it was well carried out, and between October and December, 1911, 90,000 men, with 12,000 horses, were transported to Tripoli and Benghasi without a single hitch. Italian officers are well educated, and the men are brave and disciplined. Unlike the Austro-Hungarian Army, which is composed of men split into a variety of racial sections, the Italian Army is absolutely homogeneous, and the troops will enter the European struggle with the moral consciousness that they are fighting, not with aggressive intentions, but for the principle of nationality, which is the keynote to that marvelous progress which Italy has made since she became a nation in 1860.

The Italian Navy has ten up-to-date battleships in commission, all armed with twelve-inch guns, six of these being pre-dreadnoughts and four quite recently built dreadnoughts. These four latter ships carry a more powerful primary armament than the battleships of any other European country, the Dante Alighieri, the first of the type built, carrying twelve and the Conte di Cavour, Leonardo-da-Vinci, and Giulio Cesare thirteen twelve-inch guns mounted on the triple-turret system. Two more ships of the same class—the Caio Duilio and Andrea Dorea—are due to be commissioned this Autumn, and their completion will doubtless now be accelerated. Then there are four more battleships under construction, known as the Dandolo class—the Dandolo, Morosini, Mazzini, and Mameli—two of which are due to be launched in 1916 and two others in 1917. When completed these ships will be equal in gun power and speed to the ships of the Queen Elizabeth class, for they will carry eight fifteen-inch guns paired in four turrets—the triple-turret system having been abandoned—twenty six-inch and twenty-two fourteen-pr. guns, their speed being 25 knots. Besides these ten, or practically twelve, completed battleships, Italy has ten armored cruisers in commission and three twenty-eight knot light cruisers, but no fastgoing battle cruisers corresponding to those in the British and German Navies. She has also twenty-seven completed destroyers and thirteen thirty-two knot destroyers laid down, along with fifty-one torpedo boats and sixteen submarines, with four others building. With this fleet, which is half as strong again as the Austrian fleet, Italy can secure complete control of the Adriatic Sea and lock up the Austrian ships in Pola.

The Alpine Frontier

By G.H. Perris.

[This article appeared originally in The London Daily Chronicle of May 29, 1915.]

We have all learned a good deal of French, Russian, and Austrian geography in the last ten months; and, in the same sad school, we shall now become better acquainted with the region of mountain and plain which, through and for 140 miles east of Lake Garda, is the Austro-Italian borderland, and with the northeastern coast of the Adriatic, where there will be important side issues. There is this great difference, among others, between the Adriatic and the Alpine military problems: On the one side, the Germanic powers can now only assume the defensive; on the other, they can, and probably will, attempt the invasion of provinces dear not only to Italians, for their homes and a splendid galaxy of historic associations, but to cultivated minds throughout the world for treasures of art abounding even in the humblest towns and villages.

The irregularity of this northern frontier is the product of an unhappy history; it does not follow the line of the mountain summits or any other natural feature, and still less is it a limit marked by race or language. A glance at the map shows its salient characteristic—the piece of the Austrian Tyrol, from forty to sixty miles wide, which is thrust southward toward the great plain of Lombardy and Venetia, and toward the four provincial capitals, Brescia, Verona, Vicenza, and Belluno. The Trentino—as it is called, after the very ancient city of Trent, once the chief town of Tyrol, now a market centre dignified by many towers and poverty-stricken palaces and castles—is thoroughly Italian; but it still gathers much of its importance, as it has done ever since Roman times, from the fact that the best and oldest road from Germany and West Austria over the Alps runs through it to Verona. For nearly half a century one of the grandest of mountain railways has followed this olden track of conquest and pilgrimage, from Innsbruck over the Brenner Pass, through Botzen, and down the Adige Valley. More recently a branch line has been built which runs from Trent southeastward to Padua and Venice.

It is not only the Italian resistance to Austrian aggression and tyranny that has made this doorway into the lowlands about the Po a vast battlefield. From the Middle Ages onward France and Austria constantly fought out their quarrels here. In 1796, Napoleon, after routing Marshal Wurmser at Lonato and Castiglione, small towns to the south of the Lake of Garda, drove him up the Adige Valley to Trent, and then round the side track already named, the Brenta Valley, by Bassano back to Mantua. In 1848 the Piedmontese Army advanced upon the famous quadrilateral of fortresses, then Austrian, covering the entry—Mantua and Peschiera on the Mincio, Verona and Legnago on the Adige. Charles Albert was far from being another Napoleon; and the three days' battle of Custoza, when four weary and ill-found Italian brigades held out against Radetzky's five army corps, did not serve to turn the tide of the national fortunes. That year saw the first appearance of Garibaldi as a military leader and the accession of the present Austrian Emperor; and it is strange now to recall that in the war of 1859, when Lombardy was liberated by the French and Sardinian Armies, this same Francis Joseph was actually in command of the Austrian forces. The battle of Solferino, fought on a front of five leagues, along the hills to the south of Lake Garda, was a terrible butchery, even by the worst of modern standards, for in twelve hours 25,000 of the 300,000 combatants were killed or wounded. In the war of 1866 Garibaldi took a body of volunteers up the Adige; but the treaty which gave Venetia to the new Kingdom of Italy left the Trentino still to be recovered.

The Adige and Brenta Valley roads to Trent and Botzen are, then, clearly marked out for Italian effort in the present juncture; and if the Austrians have the advantage of innumerable defensive positions on the mountain heights, they have the disadvantage of very long and frail lines of supply and reinforcement. It may be supposed that the Alpine regiments, which are in some ways the flower of the Italian Army, will also attempt the lesser approaches to Tyrol from the west, by the Val di Sole and the Valtelline, and from the east from Belluno and Pieve. The Brenner railway, with its twenty-two tunnels and sixty large bridges, is peculiarly vulnerable. With many cities and good railways behind them, and a popular welcome in front, the Italian troops, on the other hand, will face the hill roads, now generally free from snow, with confidence.

Very different are the natural conditions on the only other part of the frontier where the hostile forces can well come to grips. The Alps gradually fall and break up into separate ridges as we pass east; and beyond Udine there is a flat gap, 50 miles wide, beyond which lies Trieste, with its fine harbor and predominantly Italian population. Further north, where the main line for Vienna passes the border at Pontebba, to penetrate the double barrier of the Carinthian and Styrian Alps, there can be little temptation to adventure on either side. But in the lowlands of Friuli a beginning has been made, the advance at one point, Caporetto, reaching as far as the River Isonzo, while Terzo, Cormons, and other small places have been occupied. If there is to be any large-scale warfare on the Alpine frontier, it must apparently occur either in this gap or in and about the Adige Valley, on the way to Trent.

“Italy’s Violation of Faith”

By Dr. von Bethmann-Hollweg, German Imperial Chancellor.

[Speech in the Reichstag, May 28, 1915.]

When I spoke eight days ago there was still a glimpse of hope that Italy's participation in the war could be avoided. That hope proved fallacious. German feeling strove against the belief in the possibility of such a change. Italy has now inscribed in the book of the world's history, in letters of blood which will never fade, her violation of faith.

I believe Machiavelli once said that a war which is necessary is also just. Viewed from this sober, practical, political standpoint, which leaves out of account all moral considerations, has this war been necessary? Is it not, indeed, directly mad? [Cheers.] Nobody threatened Italy; neither Austria-Hungary nor Germany. Whether the Triple Entente was content with blandishments alone history will show later. [Cheers.] Without a drop of blood flowing, and without the life of a single Italian being endangered, Italy could have secured the long list of concessions which I recently read to the House—territory in Tyrol and on the Isonzo as far as the Italian speech is heard, satisfaction of the national aspirations in Trieste, a free hand in Albania, and the valuable port of Valona.

Why have they not taken it? Do they, perhaps, wish to conquer the German Tyrol? Hands off! [Prolonged cheers.] Did Italy wish to provoke Germany, to whom she owes so much in her upward growth of a great power, and from whom she is not separated by any conflict of interests? We left Rome in no doubt that an Italian attack on Austro-Hungarian troops would also strike the German troops. [Cheers.] Why did Rome refuse so light-heartedly the proposals of Vienna? The Italian manifesto of war, which conceals an uneasy conscience behind vain phrases, does not give us any explanation. They were too shy, perhaps, to say openly what was spread abroad as a pretext by the press and by gossip in the lobbies of the Chamber, namely, that Austria's offer came too late and could not be trusted.

What are the facts? Italian statesmen have no right to measure the trustworthiness of other nations in the same proportion as they measured their own loyalty to a treaty. [Loud cheers.] Germany, by her word, guaranteed that the concessions would be carried through. There was no occasion for distrust. Why too late? On May 4 the Trentino was the same territory as it was in February, and a whole series of concessions had been added to the Trentino of which nobody had thought in the Winter.

It was, perhaps, too late for this reason, that while the Triple Alliance, the existence of which the King and the Government had expressly acknowledged after the outbreak of war, was still alive, Italian statesmen had long before engaged themselves so deeply with the Triple Entente that they could not disentangle themselves. There were indications of fluctuations in the Rome Cabinet as far back as December. To have two irons in the fire is always useful. Before this Italy had shown her predilection for extra dances. [Cheers and laughter.] But this is no ballroom. This is a bloody battlefield upon which Germany and Austria-Hungary are fighting for their lives against a world of enemies. The statesmen of Rome have played against their own people the same game as they played against us.

It is true that the Italian-speaking territory on the northern frontier has always been the dream and the desire of every Italian, but the great majority of the Italian people, as well as the majority in Parliament, did not want to know anything of war. According to the observation of the best judge of the situation in Italy, in the first days of May four-fifths of the Senate and two-thirds of the Chamber were against war, and in that majority were the most responsible and important statesmen. But common sense had no say. The mob alone ruled. Under the kindly disposed toleration and with the assistance of the leading statesmen of a Cabinet fed with the gold of the Triple Entente, the mob, under the guidance of unscrupulous war instigators, was roused to a frenzy of blood which threatened the King with revolution and all moderate men with murder if they did not join in the war delirium.

The Italian people were intentionally kept in the dark with regard to the course of the Austrian negotiations and the extent of the Austrian concessions, and so it came about that after the resignation of the Salandra Cabinet nobody could be found who had the courage to undertake the formation of a new Cabinet, and that in the decisive debate no member of the Constitutional Party in the Senate or Chamber even attempted to estimate the value of the far-reaching Austrian concessions. In the frenzy of war honest politicians grew dumb, but when, as the result of military events, (as we hope and desire,) the Italian people become sober again it will recognize how frivolously it was instigated to take part in this world war.

We did everything possible to avoid the alienation of Italy from the Triple Alliance. The ungrateful rôle fell to us of requiring from our loyal ally, Austria, with whose armies our troops share daily wounds, death, and victory, the purchase of the loyalty of the third party to the alliance by the cession of old-inherited territory. That Austria-Hungary went to the utmost limit possible is known. Prince Bülow, who again entered into the active service of the empire, tried by every means, his diplomatic ability, his most thorough knowledge of the Italian situation and of Italian personages, to come to an understanding. Though his work has been in vain the entire people are grateful to him. Also this storm we shall endure. From month to month we grow more intimate with our ally. From the Pilitza to the Bukowina we tenaciously withstood with our Austro-Hungarian comrades for months the gigantic superiority of the enemy. Then we victoriously advanced.

So our new enemies will perish through the spirit of loyalty and the friendship and bravery of the central powers. In this war Turkey is celebrating a brilliant regeneration. The whole German people follow with enthusiasm the different phases of the obstinate, victorious resistance with which the loyal Turkish Army and fleet repulse the attacks of their enemies with heavy blows. Against the living wall of our warriors in the west our enemies up till now have vainly stormed. If in some places fighting fluctuates, if here or there a trench or a village is lost or won, the great attempt of our adversaries to break through, which they announced five months ago, did not succeed, and will not succeed. They will perish through the heroic bravery of our soldiers.

Up till now our enemies have summoned in vain against us all the forces of the world and a gigantic coalition of brave soldiers. We will not despise our enemies, as our adversaries like to do. At the moment when the mob in English towns is dancing around the stake at which the property of defenseless Germans is burning, the English Government dared to publish a document, with the evidence of unnamed witnesses, on the alleged cruelties in Belgium, which are of so monstrous a character that only mad brains could believe them. But while the English press does not permit itself to be deprived of news, the terror of the censorship reigns in Paris. No casualty lists appear, and no German or Austrian communiqués may be printed. Severely wounded invalids are kept away from their relations, and real fear of the truth appears to be the motive of the Government.

Thus it comes about, according to trustworthy observation, that there is no knowledge of the heavy defeats which the Russians have sustained, and the belief continues in the Russian "steam-roller" advancing on Berlin, which is "perishing from starvation and misery," and confidence exists in the great offensive in the west, which for months has not progressed. If the Governments of hostile States believe that by the deception of the people and by unchaining blind hatred they can shift the blame for the crime of this war and postpone the day of awakening, we, relying on our good conscience, a just cause, and a victorious sword, will not allow ourselves to be forced by a hair's breadth from the path which we have always recognized as right. Amid this confusion of minds on the other side, the German people goes on its own way, calm and sure.

Not in hatred do we wage this war, but in anger—[loud cheers]—in holy anger. [Renewed cheers from all parts of the House.] The greater the danger we have to confront, surrounded on all sides by enemies, the more deeply does the love of home grip our hearts, the more must we care for our children and grandchildren, and the more must we endure until we have conquered and have secured every possible real guarantee and assurance that no enemy alone or combined will dare again a trial of arms. [Loud cheers.] The more wildly the storm rages around us the more firmly must we build our own house. For this consciousness of united strength, unshaken courage, and boundless devotion, which inspire the whole people, and for the loyal co-operation which you, gentlemen, from the first day have given to the Fatherland, I bring you, as the representatives of the entire people, the warm thanks of the Emperor.

In the mutual confidence that we are all united we will conquer, despite a world of enemies. [Loud and prolonged applause.]

Why Italy Went to War

By Signor Salandra, Italian Premier

[Speech in the Roman Capitol on June 2, 1915.]

I address myself to Italy and to the civilized world in order to show not by violent words, [cheers,] but by exact facts and documents, how the fury of our enemies has vainly attempted to diminish the high moral and political dignity of the cause which our arms will make prevail. I shall speak with the calm of which the King of Italy has given a noble example, [loud cheers, and shouts of "Long live the King!"] when he called his land and sea forces to arms. I shall speak with the respect due to my position and to the place in which I speak. I can afford to ignore the insults written in Imperial, Royal, and Archducal proclamations. Since I speak from the Capitol, and represent in this solemn hour the people and the Government of Italy, I, a modest citizen, feel that I am far nobler than the head of the house of the Habsburgs. [Loud cheers.]

The commonplace statesmen who, in rash frivolity of mind and mistaken in all their calculations, set fire last July to the whole of Europe and even to their own hearths and homes, have now noticed their fresh colossal mistake, and in the Parliaments of Budapest and Berlin have poured forth brutal invective of Italy and her Government with the obvious design of securing the forgiveness of their fellow-citizens and intoxicating them with cruel visions of hatred and blood. ["Bravo!"] The German Chancellor said he was imbued not with hatred, but with anger, and he spoke the truth, because he reasoned badly, as is usually the case in fits of rage. ["Hear, hear!" and laughter.] I could not, even if I chose, imitate their language. An atavistic throwback to primitive barbarism is more difficult for us who have twenty centuries behind us more than they have. ["Hear, hear!"]

The fundamental thesis of the statesmen of Central Europe is to be found in the words "treason and surprise on the part of Italy toward her faithful allies." It would be easy to ask if he has any right to speak of alliance and respect for treaties who, representing with infinitely less genius, but with equal moral indifference, the tradition of Frederick the Great and Bismarck proclaimed that necessity knows no law, and consented to his country trampling under foot and burying at the bottom of the ocean all the documents and all the customs of civilization and international law. [Cheers.] But that would be too easy an argument. Let us examine, on the contrary, positively and calmly, if our former allies are entitled to say that they were betrayed and surprised by us.

Our aspirations had long been known, as was also our judgment on the act of criminal madness by which they shook the world and robbed the alliance itself of its closest raison d'etre. The Green Book prepared by Baron Sonnino, with whom it is the pride of my life to stand united in entire harmony in this solemn hour after thirty years of friendship—[prolonged cheers and shouts of "Long live Sonnino!"]—shows the long, difficult, and useless negotiations that took place between December and May. But it is not true, as has been asserted without a shadow of foundation, that the Ministry reconstituted last November made a change in the direction of our international policy. The Italian Government, whose policy has never changed, severely condemned, at the very moment when it learned of it, the aggression of Austria against Serbia, and foresaw the consequences of that aggression, consequences which had not been foreseen by those who had premeditated the stroke with such lack of conscience.

BARON SYDNEY SONNINO
Italian Minister of Foreign Affairs
( Photo from Paul Thompson )

As proof of this statement, Signor Salandra read the following telegram sent by the Marquis di San Giuliano to the Duke of Avarna (Italian Minister in Vienna) on July 25 last:

"Salandra, von Flotow, and myself have had a long conversation. Salandra and I emphatically pointed out to von Flotow that Austria had no right, according to the spirit of the treaty of the Triple Alliance, to make a démarche like that made in Belgrade without coming to an agreement beforehand with her allies."

In effect, [continued Signor Salandra,] Austria, in consequence of the terms in which her note was couched, and in consequence of the things demanded, which, while of little effect against the Pan-Serbian danger, were profoundly offensive to Serbia, and indirectly so to Russia, had clearly shown that she wished to provoke war. Hence we declared to von Flotow that, in consequence of this procedure on the part of Austria and in consequence of the defensive and conservative character of the Triple Alliance Treaty, Italy was under no obligation to assist Austria if, as the result of this démarche, she found herself at war with Russia, because any European war would in such an event be the consequence of the act of provocation and aggression committed by Austria.

The Italian Government on July 27 and 28 emphasized in clear and unmistakable language to Berlin and Vienna the question of the cession of the Italian provinces subject to Austria, and we declared that if we did not obtain adequate compensation the Triple Alliance would have been irreparably broken. [Loud and prolonged cheers.] Impartial history will say that Austria, having found Italy in July, 1913, and in October, 1913, hostile to her intentions of aggression against Serbia, attempted last Summer, in agreement with Germany, the method of surprise and the fait accompli.

The horrible crime of Serajevo was exploited as a pretext a month after it happened—this was proved by the refusal of Austria to accept the very extensive offers of Serbia—nor at the moment of the general conflagration would Austria have been satisfied with the unconditional acceptance of the ultimatum. Count Berchtold on July 31 declared to the Duke of Avarna that, if there had been a possibility of mediation being exercised, it could not have interrupted hostilities, which had already begun with Serbia. This was the mediation for which Great Britain and Italy were working. In any case, Count Berchtold was not disposed to accept mediation tending to weaken the conditions indicated in the Austrian note, which, naturally, would have been increased at the end of the war.

If, moreover, Serbia had decided meanwhile to accept the aforementioned note in its entirety, declaring herself ready to agree to the conditions imposed on her, that would not have persuaded Austria to cease hostilities. It is not true, as Count Tisza declared, that Austria did not undertake to make territorial acquisitions to the detriment of Serbia, who, moreover, by accepting all the conditions imposed upon her, would have become a subject State. The Austrian Ambassador, Herr Merey von Kapos-Mere, on July 30, stated to the Marquis di San Giuliano that Austria could not make a binding declaration on this subject, because she could not foresee whether, during the war, she might not be obliged, against her will, to keep Serbian territory. [Sensation.]

On July 29 Count Berchtold stated to the Duke of Avarna that he was not inclined to enter into any engagement concerning the eventual conduct of Austria in the case of a conflict with Serbia.

Where is, then, the treason, the iniquity, the surprise, if, after nine months of vain efforts to reach an honorable understanding which recognized in equitable measure our rights and our liberties, we resumed liberty of action? The truth is that Austria and Germany believed until the last days that they had to deal with an Italy weak, blustering, but not acting, capable of trying blackmail, but not enforcing by arms her good right, with an Italy which could be paralyzed by spending a few millions, and which by dealings which she could not avow was placing herself between the country and the Government. [Very loud cheers.]

I will not deny the benefits of the alliance; benefits, however, not one-sided, but accruing to all the contracting parties, and perhaps not more to us than to the others. The continued suspicions and the aggressive intentions of Austria against Italy are notorious and are authentically proved. The Chief of the General Staff, Baron Conrad von Hoetzendorf, always maintained that war against Italy was inevitable, either on the question of the irredentist provinces or from jealousy, that Italy intended to aggrandize herself as soon as she was prepared, and meanwhile opposed everything that Austria wished to undertake in the Balkans, and consequently it was necessary to humiliate her in order that Austria might have her hands free, and he deplored that Italy had not been attacked in 1907. Even the Austrian Minister of Foreign Affairs recognized that in the military party the opinion was prevalent that Italy must be suppressed by war because from the Kingdom of Italy came the attractive force of the Italian provinces of the empire, and consequently by a victory over the kingdom and its political annihilation all hope for the irredentists would cease.

GENERAL KONRAD VON HOETZENDORF
On the Staff of the Archduke Eugene in the Campaign Against Italy

THE ARCHDUKE EUGENE
Titular Commander in Chief of the Austrian Forces Operating Against Italy

We see now on the basis of documents how our allies aided us in the Lybian undertaking. The operations brilliantly begun by the Duke of the Abruzzi against the Turkish torpedo boats encountered at Preveza were stopped by Austria in a sudden and absolute manner. Count Aehrenthal on Oct. 1 informed our Ambassador at Vienna that our operations had made a painful impression upon him and that he could not allow them to be continued. It was urgently necessary, he said, to put an end to them and to give orders to prevent them from being renewed, either in Adriatic or in Ionian waters. The following day the German Ambassador at Vienna, in a still more threatening manner, confidentially informed our Ambassador that Count Aehrenthal had requested him to telegraph to his Government to give the Italian Government to understand that if it continued its naval operations in the Adriatic and in the Ionian Seas it would have to deal directly with Austria-Hungary. [Murmurs.]

And it was not only in the Adriatic and in the Ionian Seas that Austria paralyzed our actions. On Nov. 5 Count Aehrenthal informed the Duke of Avarna that he had learned that Italian warships had been reported off Saloniki, where they had used electric searchlights—[laughter]—and declared that our action on the Ottoman coasts of European Turkey, as well as on the Aegean Islands, could not have been allowed either by Austria-Hungary or by Germany, because it was contrary to the Triple Alliance Treaty.

In March, 1912, Count Berchtold, who had in the meantime succeeded Count Aehrenthal, declared to the German Ambassador in Vienna that, in regard to our operations against the coasts of European Turkey and the Aegean Islands, he adhered to the point of view of Count Aehrenthal, according to which these operations were considered by the Austro-Hungarian Government contrary to the engagement entered into by us by Article VII. of the Triple Alliance Treaty. As for our operations against the Dardanelles, he considered it opposed, first, to the promise made by us not to proceed to any act which might endanger the status quo in the Balkans, and, secondly, to the spirit of the same treaty, which was based on the maintenance of the status quo.

Afterward, when our squadron at the entrance to the Dardanelles was bombarded by Fort Kumkalessi and replied, damaging that fort, Count Berchtold complained of what had happened, considering it contrary to the promises we had made, and declared that if the Italian Government desired to resume its liberty of action, the Austro-Hungarian Government could have done the same. [Murmurs.] He added that he could not have allowed us to undertake in the future similar operations or operations in any way opposed to this point of view. In the same way our projected occupation of Chios was prevented. It is superfluous to remark how many lives of Italian soldiers and how many millions were sacrificed through the persistent vetoing of our actions against Turkey, who knew that she was protected by our allies against all attacks on her vital parts. [Cheers.]

We were bitterly reproached for not having accepted the offers made toward the end of May, but were these offers made in good faith? [Laughter and cheers.] Certain documents indicate that they were not. Francis Joseph said that Italy was regarding the patrimony of his house with greedy eyes. Herr von Bethmann-Hollweg said that the aim of these concessions was to purchase our neutrality, and, therefore, gentlemen, you may applaud us for not having accepted them. [Loud cheers.] Moreover, these concessions, even in their last and belated edition, in no way responded to the objectives of Italian policy, which are, first, the defense of Italianism, the greatest of our duties; secondly, a secure military frontier, replacing that which was imposed upon us in 1866, by which all the gates of Italy are open to our adversaries; thirdly, a strategical situation in the Adriatic less dangerous and unfortunate than that which we have, and of which you have seen the effects in the last few days. All these essential advantages were substantially denied us.

To our minimum demand for the granting of independence to Trieste the reply was to offer Trieste administrative autonomy. Also the question of fulfilling the promises was very important. We were told not to doubt that they would be fulfilled, because we should have Germany's guarantee, but if at the end of the war Germany had not been able to keep it, what would our position have been? And in any case, after this agreement, the Triple Alliance would have been renewed, but in much less favorable conditions, for there would have been one sovereign State and, two subject States. [Murmurs.]

On the day when one of the clauses of the treaty was not fulfilled, or on the day when the municipal autonomy of Trieste was violated by an imperial decree or by a lieutenant's orders, to whom should we have addressed ourselves? To our common superior—to Germany? [Laughter.] I do not wish to speak of Germany to you without admiration and respect. I am the Italian Prime Minister, not the German Chancellor, and I do not lose my head. [Loud cheers.] But with all respect for the learned, powerful, and great Germany, an admirable example of organization and resistance, in the name of Italy I declare for no subjection and no protectorate over any one. [Cheers.] The dream of a universal hegemony is shattered. The world has risen. The peace and civilization of future humanity must be founded on respect for existing national autonomies. [Loud cheers.] Among these Germany will have to sit as an equal, and not as a master. [Loud cheers.]

But a more remarkable example of the unmeasured pride with which the directors of German policy regard other nations is given in the picture which Herr von Bethmann-Hollweg drew of the Italian political world.

Signor Salandra here read the portion of the German Chancellor's speech to which he referred, and added:

I do not know if it was the intention of this man, blinded by rage, personally to insult my colleagues and me. If that was the case, I should not mention it. We are men whose life you know, men who have served the State to an advanced age, men of spotless renown—[loud cheers]—men who have given the lives of their children for their country. [Loud cheers.]

The information on which this judgment was based is attributed by the German Chancellor to him whom he calls the best judge of Italian affairs. Perhaps he alludes to Prince Bülow, with the brotherly desire to shoulder responsibilities upon him. Now, I do not wish you to entertain an erroneous idea of Prince Bülow's intentions. I believe that he had sympathies for Italy, and did all he could to bring about an agreement. But how great and how numerous were the mistakes he made in translating his good intentions into action! He thought that Italy could be diverted from her path by a few millions ill-spent and by the influence of a few persons who have lost touch with the soul of the nation—[loud cheers]—by contact, attempted, but, I hope, not accomplished, with certain politicians. [Loud cheers.]

The effect was the contrary. An immense outburst of indignation was kindled throughout Italy, and not among the populace, but among the noblest and most educated classes and among all the youth of the country, which is ready to shed its blood for the nation. This outburst of indignation was kindled as the result of the suspicion that a foreign Ambassador was interfering between the Italian Government, the Parliament, and the country. [Loud cheers.] In the blaze thus kindled internal discussions melted away, and the whole nation was joined in a wonderful moral union, which will prove our greatest source of strength in the severe struggle which faces us, and which must lead us by our own virtue, and not by benevolent concessions from others, to the accomplishment of the highest destinies of the country. [Loud and prolonged cheers.]

Britain’s Cabinet and Munitions

A Coalition Ministry with Lloyd George in a New
Office

The formation of a British coalition Cabinet was announced on May 25, 1915, with the creation of a new office of Minister of Munitions, to which Lloyd George was transferred from the Chancellorship of the Exchequer. Below is given the official list of the new Ministers and their offices. In the third column are indicated the same offices as held under the late Liberal Administration. The eight members of the Opposition included in the new Cabinet are indicated by an asterisk:

The reconstruction of the Liberal Ministry that had ruled the British Empire for ten years was announced by Prime Minister Asquith in the following statement in the House of Commons on May 19:

I cannot say more at the moment than that steps are in contemplation which involve a reconstruction of the Government on a broader personal and political basis. Nothing is yet definitely arranged, but to avoid any possible misapprehension I wish here and now—as the House is to adjourn—to make clear to every one three things:

First, that any change that takes place will not affect the offices of the head of the Government or of the Foreign Secretary. [Cheers.] They will continue to be held as they are now. [Renewed cheers.]

The second is, there is absolutely no change of any kind in contemplation in the policy of the country in regard to the continued prosecution of the war with all possible energy, and by means of every available resource. [Loud cheers.]

The third and the last point—one of great importance, not only to my friends behind me, but also of importance no doubt to the Opposition—is this: Any reconstruction that may be made will be for the purpose of the war alone, and is not to be taken in any quarter as any reason for indicating anything in the nature of surrender or compromise on the part of any person or body of persons of their several political purposes and ideals.

That is really as far as I can go at the moment. Nothing definite has yet taken place. When and if an arrangement of this kind should become an accomplished fact the House will have the fullest opportunity of expressing itself, if it so desires, upon it. [Cheers.]

Mr. Bonar Law, leader of the Opposition, rose immediately after the Prime Minister and said:

I think it only necessary to say on behalf of my friends and myself that at the stage which this has reached our sole consideration in taking into account what further steps should be taken will be what is the best method of finishing the war successfully, and we shall leave out of our minds absolutely all considerations, political or otherwise, beyond the war; while, of course, if such an arrangement should take place, it is obvious our convictions on other subjects will remain unchanged, and will be settled when this danger is over.

CAUSES OF THE CHANGE.

At least four causes which were regarded as contributing to bring about a coalition Ministry, or War Government, are tersely outlined by A.P. Nicholson, Parliamentary correspondent of The London Daily News, as follows:

First—The quarrel between Mr. Churchill and Lord Fisher at the Admiralty, a conflict which began with the undertaking of the Dardanelles expedition. Mr. Churchill carried the War Council on this, and it was undertaken before the Cabinet were informed. The Cabinet were committed to it by the movement of ships before they had any formal notification. Lord Fisher, for his part, considered that the enterprise should not have been begun unless it was supported by land forces, but he also was committed to it. Mr. Churchill was counting on the support of Greek forces on land, a calculation which was not justified by the event.

Lately the quarrel between Lord Fisher and Mr. Churchill proved to be irreconcilable, and Lord Fisher sent in his resignation at the week-end. It is now hoped that he will withdraw his resignation, and the possibility of Mr. Churchill replacing Lord Crewe at the India Office or taking another office is being discussed.

Second—The Cabinet have not been kept informed by Lord Kitchener as to the supplies of high explosive shells sent out to our troops at the front. It is the fact that huge supplies of shells have been and are being sent out, but the proportion of shrapnel is greater than the proportion of high explosive shells, and the army command require that the proportion of high explosive shells should be greater. The fact that the Cabinet have been to some extent in the dark of late on this matter accounts for some apparent discrepancies in recent Ministerial statements.

Third—The Opposition leaders were in possession of the facts as to the high explosive shells, and threatened a debate in the House of Commons, in which their statements should be proved. Such a debate would have gravely undermined the authority of the Government, and, coupled with the tendered resignation of Lord Fisher, and the consequent disappearance either of the First Sea Lord or Mr. Churchill, would in all human probability have led to the disastrous downfall of the King's Government in the midst of the national peril of this war, with consequences most lamentable.

Fourth—There have been on both sides some leading statesmen in favor of a coalition Ministry for the prosecution of the war. They are few, but influential. They perceived that the curious circumstances that had arisen offered a brilliant opportunity to achieve a coalition, and they seized the opportunity. It should certainly be assumed that they were actuated by national motives, since their action may have averted the downfall of one of the greatest Governments of modern times in a time of national peril.

Lloyd George’s Appeal to Labor

In a speech at Manchester on June 4, and again on June 5, before the employers and workmen of Lancashire, the new Minister of Munitions announced his policy of discontinuing the methods of red tape that had hindered the mobilization of labor for the production of arms and ammunition. His speech at Lancashire appears below in full.

I have come here not for speech but for business, and I shall only indulge in speech to the extent that speaking is the essential preliminary to business. I placed yesterday before a meeting in Manchester my general views of the position, and I have very little to add to what I then said. But I have come here to appeal for the assistance of the men of Liverpool and the surrounding districts.

The situation is a serious one. It is as grave a situation as this country has ever been confronted with. You need have no special knowledge in order to ascertain that yourselves. A careful, intelligent perusal of the published dispatches in the newspapers must have caused you to come to the conclusion that this country is engaging one of the most formidable enemies that it has ever waged war against.

The issues are great, the perils are great, and nothing can pull us through but the united effort of every man in the British Empire. If you look at what our brave fellows are doing at the front you can see the perils there facing them, the trials, the privations, and they are doing it without flinching. ["Hear, hear!"] Never in the history of this country have our men shown greater courage and endurance than they have during this war. They have done all you can expect of mortal man.

We who are comfortable at home, free from privations, free from danger, let us, each of us, do his part as nobly as those heroes of ours are doing it at the front. [Cheers.] It would be horrible for us to think that those who fall fall through our neglect. It would be a still more ghastly reflection to think that those who fell have given their lives in vain through any slackness or selfishness on the part of any one of us in this land.

Yesterday we had a very important gathering of the employers and the representatives of labor in the great engineering firms in Manchester and other parts of this great county. The response made to our appeal was gratifying. Every man there showed a disposition to do all in his power to assist the country to pull through its difficulties triumphantly, and I feel perfectly certain that the same ready response will be given to the same appeal which I am now about to make to the men of Liverpool and the area surrounding it.

What makes Germany a formidable enemy is not merely its preparation for war, it is not merely its organization, potent as that is, but it is the spirit of every class and section of its population. You have only got to read the papers to see that as far as they are concerned they are all of them subordinating everything to the one great national purpose of winning victory for their Fatherland. That is the least we can do in this country for our land. [Cheers.]

I never doubted where ultimate victory would lie, never for a moment. Nor have I ever underestimated the difficulties. But although I have never doubted where victory would rest, all the same I know that victory will come the sooner for recognizing the difficulties there are.

You cannot remove difficulties without looking at them, and you cannot look at difficulties without seeing them, and that is why the business of a Minister is to point them out, and then to appeal to every section of the community to assist the Government in overcoming the obstacles in the way.

Now we want especially the help of those who can contribute to the increase of the munitions, the equipment, and the material of war. We want the help of employers, we want the help of the workers. We want employers and workmen to feel their responsibility in this matter. It is my intention to utilize as much as I possibly can the business brains of the community. I hope to get their assistance. Some of them will be at my elbow in London to advise, to counsel, to guide, to inform and instruct and to direct, but I want the help of the business brains in the localities.

This is no time for the usual methods of doing business with the Government. ["Hear, hear!"] I am assuming that Governments in the past have done their business in the most perfect way. This is not a time for the usual roundabout methods of Government business. ["Hear, hear!"]

We have got to trust business men in the localities to organize for us, to undertake the business in the particular locality on our behalf. We want to suspend during the war not merely trade-union regulations, but some Government regulations, too. ["Hear, hear!"]

We want rifles, we want guns, we want shells, fuses, chemicals, and explosives. There is one thing we want less of than usual, and that is red tape. It takes such a long time to unwind—[laughter]—and we can't spare the time. Therefore, the first thing I am going to ask you to do is to organize for yourselves in this locality, and in every other locality, the engineering resources, for the purpose of assisting the Government. You know best what you can do. I know the resourcefulness of the engineers of this country, I know, as the Lord Mayor has already pointed out, their adaptability. I want you to come together and form your own committee of management. Having done that, organize among yourselves the engineering resources of the locality, with a view to producing the greatest result in the way of helping our gallant forces at the front.

That involves a good deal more confidence and trust than usual. We have no time to go through the same processes of examination, of bargaining, as you get usually in the matter of Government contracts. ["Hear, hear!"]

Whatever is done has got to be done with promptitude. That involves our trusting to the integrity, to the loyalty, to the patriotism of the business men to do their best for us in these localities, and do it on fair terms. That is the first thing I have got to say to the business men of the community. I want you to regard this as your business as well as ours. This is not a Government entering into negotiations with you. You are the Government, you have got an interest in this concern, it is your concern, just as much as it is ours, and I want you to help us.

This is a business for all of us, and we want every business man in the community to give his very best to help the old country through in the great emergency and crisis. [Cheers.] That means that you will, as soon as you possibly can, get your committee of management, and, through that committee of management, organize your district for the purpose of producing such material of war, or such other component parts of any particular material of war, you can help us to produce.

I would make the same appeal to labor. I want them also to feel that this is their business. Should Germany win, God help labor! ["Hear, hear!"] It will come out of it worst of all. The victory of Germany will be the victory of the worst form of autocracy that this world has seen for many a century. There is no section of the community has anything like the interest in the overthrow of this military caste which labor has—["Hear, hear!"]—and the more they realize that, difficulties will vanish, obstacles will go, and bickerings and slackness. We have to get to work as one man to help to win a triumph for democratic free government against the autocratic systems of Germany and Austria. [Cheers.]

Now, I should like to say one or two words beyond what I said yesterday on this particular aspect of the business. I have had the privilege, both yesterday and today, of meeting some of the leading representatives of labor in Manchester and Liverpool. And let me say this: As far as the official representatives of organized labor are concerned, we have had nothing but help. The difficulty has been when you get beyond.

I am not saying a word about trade-union regulations during a period of peace. I have no doubt they were essential safeguards to the protection of labor against what otherwise might have been a serious interference with their rights and with their prospects. But as I have already pointed out to you, Government regulations have to be suspended during the period of the war because they are inapplicable in a time of urgency. The same thing applies to many trade-union regulations and practices. ["Hear, hear!"]

The first I should like to call attention to are those rules which had been set up for very good reasons to make it difficult for purely unsullied men to claim the position and rights of men who have had a training—that is true in every profession.

I happen, my Lord Mayor, to belong to about the strictest trade union in the world—[laughter]—the most jealous trade union in the world. If any unskilled man—and by an unskilled man we mean a man who has not paid our fees—if any man of that sort, however brainy he was, tried to come in and interfere with our business, well, we would soon settle him. [Laughter.] But if during the period of the war there were any particular use for lawyers—[laughter]—if you find that upon lawyers depended the success of the war, and it requires a good deal of imagination; even my Celtic imagination will hardly attain to the exalted height—[more laughter]—but if that were possible for a moment, do you suppose that even the Incorporated Law Society, the greatest and narrowest of all trade unions, could stand in the way of bringing in outside help in order to enable us to get through our work?

Well, now, the same thing applies here. If all the skilled engineers in this country were turned on to produce what is required, if you brought back from the front every engineer who had been recruited, if you worked them to the utmost limits of human endurance, you have not got enough labor even then to produce all we are going to ask you to produce during the next few months. Therefore, we must appeal to the patriotism of the unions of this country to relax these particular rules, in order to eke out, as it were, the skill, to make it go as far as it possibly can go, in order to enable us to turn out the necessary munitions of war to win a real and a speedy triumph for our country in this great struggle.

Now, the same thing applies to the work of women in the factories. There is a good deal of work now done by men, and men only, in this country which is done in France at the present moment in shell factories by women. Why is that? They have not enough men to go round. The men are working as hard as they can, for as long hours as they possibly can support, but in spite of that they would not turn out a sufficient number of shells and other material of war without doling out a good part of the work to women in those factories. Well, now, if there are any trade-union regulations to prevent the possibility of that being done, I hope during the period of war these will be suspended. ["Hear, hear!"]

Now, I am coming to another thing—and I am here to talk quite frankly—it is very much better to do so. ["Hear, hear!"] There must be no deliberate slowing down of work. I have had two or three very painful cases put before me. One was from an arsenal upon which we were absolutely dependent for the material of war. There was a very skilled workman there who worked very hard and who earned a good deal of money. He was doing his duty by the State. He was not merely warned that if he repeated that offense he would be driven out, I am not quite sure that he was not actually driven out.

The same thing happened in another factory. Now, in the period of war this is really intolerable. ["Hear, hear!"] We cannot do with it. We cannot afford it, I say again. There may be reasons, there might be very good reasons, that a policy of that sort should be adopted in the period of peace. I am expressing no opinions about that. I am simply stating the case of this particular emergency, and I am sure that the only thing in this emergency is that everybody should put forward all his strength in order to help the country through. [Cheers.]

Therefore, I do hope that whatever regulation, whatever practice, whatever custom there may be in existence at the present moment which interferes in the slightest degree in the increase of war material, will be suspended during the period of war.

We have given our undertaking as a Government, and that undertaking has been inherited by a new Government. That is that those safeguards which have been established by trade-union action prior to the war will be restored exactly to the position they were when the war is over, in so far as the action of the Government is concerned. We can only ask for a suspension of these regulations during the period of the war, then afterward the same process of discussion will go on between capital and labor as has gone on, I have no doubt, during the last fifty or one hundred years.

Those are two or three of the things which I wanted to put. The lives of our men at the front depend upon the amount of war material we are able to equip them with, success depends upon it, the lives of men depend upon it. Everybody ought to do his best. There is no room for slackers. ["Hear, hear!"] I don't want to get rid of the slackers, I only want to get rid of their slackness—[laughter and cheers]—and we really must.

In this war every country is demanding as a matter of right—not as a matter of appeal—as a matter of right from every one of the citizens, that he should do his best—[cheers]—and that is one of the problems with which we have to deal in this country. It ought to be established as a duty, as one of the essential duties of citizenship, that every man should put his whole strength into helping the country through. [Cheers.] And I don't believe any section of the community would object to it, if it were made a legal right and duty expected of every one. [Cheers.]

I don't know that I have anything further that I want specially to say to you, because I want to get to business as quickly as possible. Sir Frederick Donaldson of Woolwich Arsenal and Sir Percy Girouard are here to answer any question you may put to them on the business of the meeting. They can inform you on the technical side in a way that I can't pretend to. I can only ask you to help us. I know that appeal to you won't be in vain.

We are engaged in the greatest struggle this country has ever been precipitated into. It is no fault of ours. ["Hear, hear!"] We sought peace, we asked for peace, we avoided all the paths that led to war, but we should have forever been dishonored if we had shirked the conflict when it came. [Cheers.]

Harried into it, we are there to champion the deepest, the highest, the greatest interest ever committed to the charge of any nation. Let us equip ourselves in such a way that Great Britain through the war will be still great, and when the war is over it will be a Greater Britain than ever. [Cheers.]

Balkan Neutrality—As Seen
By the Balkans

Inspired Press Opinions from the Capitals of Greece,
Bulgaria, and Rumania

THE GREEK VIEW.

In what degree the Triple Entente would have respected the rights of Greece had we entered the war before Italy's intervention is demonstrated by the conduct of the Allies toward Serbia. The whole of the Adriatic is now an Italian sea, by virtue of a mutual agreement between the Entente powers and Italy, and only the slightest hope of obtaining Durazzo and Cattero is left to Serbia.

Greece therefore must congratulate herself for holding back and watchfully awaiting developments. It is generally admitted that the European war will last long and that the new ally will not give a decisive turn to its final conclusion. Those, therefore, who have their swords sharpened will be always in time to join. In a struggle that has such a wide field of adventures those who will intervene later will be more welcome than those who have already joined and offered all the strength they possessed. And, lastly, if this war will not show in the end a single victor, then the interests of each one of the participants will be settled by a European congress, where, again, those who will have preserved untouched their forces will be the real victors.... Greece is not going to be neutral for a long time; meanwhile she must husband her resources and her strength up to the day when events themselves will force her to enter the war, whether she likes it or not.

A PLEA FOR WAR.

We say in one word that the dangers that threaten us as long as we are neutral are immensely greater than those which we might incur in joining in the war. Greece cannot accept a comparison with Bulgaria and Rumania. Bulgaria, by remaining neutral, is sure to receive the Enos-Midia line, and in case of co-operating with the entente powers she may also be sure of getting Dobrudja and Serbian Macedonia. Rumania, on the other hand, if neutral will take a slice of Transylvania, and if she sides with the Allies in the war, may obtain the whole of Bukowina. But Greece has no alternative. She must by political necessity act in common with the Triple Entente. Of course, by so doing she runs certain risks, but we defy the Government [of Mr. Gounaris] to prove that the dangers threatening Greece are less in the case of a protracted neutrality than in the case of her joining in the war.

GREECE AFTER ITALY’S INTERVENTION.

Italy has entered the war on the Allies' side, because in the territorial negotiations England and France outbid Austria and Germany. And now does any one imagine that the Triple Entente would hesitate to sacrifice Hellenic interests in favor of Italy even if Greece had been the first to indorse their cause? But have we not seen how the Serbian national aspirations have been sacrificed by the Entente in its effort to secure the co-operation of Italy? And has not the Entente sacrificed Greek interests when Italy was occupying Vallona? Was that a token of sympathy with Greek interests? And did ever the Triple Entente say to Greece that they would not allow Italy to impose her rule on Greek countries and Greek populations? And the twelve Islands of the Aegean, the Dodekanisos—have they not been shown to Italy as a present and reward for her co-operation whether or not Greece joined the Entente?

How could Greece, in such circumstances, abandon her neutrality and risk everything for the Allies?

The shaded portion of the map shows how, if Rumania and Bulgaria join the Allies in the field, Germany and Austria-Hungary will be almost entirely surrounded by enemies, the only considerable outlet then remaining being over the Dutch frontier.

BULGARIAN VIEWS.

FAVORING NEUTRALITY.

From Narodni Prava, the mouthpiece of the Liberal Party and the Premier of Bulgaria, Mr. B. Radoslavoff, April 1, 1915.

In his statement to the Sobranjie (the Bulgarian Parliament) the Prime Minister yesterday categorically said that those wishing to march with either side of the belligerents are free to do so, if they are courageous enough and if they are aware of their duties to the interests of the country.... The Parliamentary majority and the nation at large are satisfied with the policy of the Government, which consists in preserving a strict neutrality and the peace of the country and in developing meanwhile the patriotic and military spirit of the nation, in order that we may be ready when the time comes to act for the interests of the fatherland.

OPPOSING NEUTRALITY.

From Mir, organ of the Nationalists and of ex-Premier I. Gueshoff, April 26, 1915.

Greece is hoping to profit from the present situation without any sacrifices, or with as few as possible, and Venizelos fell because the Greek people did not wish to give the Allies the assistance he promised them. In order to explain and justify their stand, the Greeks found an argument in the Bulgarian danger.... "Do you want us to prove that we are not willing to play the game of Germany? Here are the proofs: We are ready to shield Serbia against any possible attack from Bulgaria and to help you, not against Turkey but against Bulgaria"—that is what the Greeks said and wrote to the Entente powers. And the chief newspapers of the Allies are full of articles trying to prove that the Bulgarians, under the guidance of Germany and Austria, are endangering the Balkan situation. According to what we learn, Germany is straining every nerve to incite an armed conflict between Greece and Bulgaria. In this way Germany hopes to guarantee Turkey against any possible attack from Bulgaria, and thus promote her own interests. To this fact we most earnestly call the attention of the Bulgarian people.

OPPOSING GREECE, SERBIA, AND RUSSIA.

Greece and Serbia are, first of all, threatened by Bulgaria, and they both know that they must step out of Bulgarian Macedonia. The struggle for Macedonia does not date from yesterday or today; this is an age-long struggle, which will end only when Bulgaria shall have assured her frontier, when Greece shall return to her peninsula, and when Serbia shall be entirely wiped off the map of the Balkans. Aside from the Greeks and Serbs, Bulgaria constitutes a danger also for Russia, inasmuch as we do not want to be the bridge for any further Russian expansion. Russian diplomacy has done everything in its power to alienate Bulgarian sympathy and to make us unfriendly to Rumania and Turkey; but Russia is today severely punished for her misdeeds. Russia, Serbia, and Greece are finding themselves in a pretty hard position, and are looking for our help. But we must not hurry. Every day that passes weakens our enemies, and the future of Bulgaria becomes daily brighter.

THE RUMANIAN VIEW.

A PRO-GERMAN OPINION.

From the Moldava of Bucharest, organ of the Conservative Party, of April 1, 1915.

For a long time public opinion in Rumania has been lulled into believing that we shall take Transylvania, but not a word has been said about Bessarabia. We do not know why our political predecessors wanted to create a strong barrier in the face of Russia, behind which live, condemned to perpetual isolation, 3,000,000 Rumanians. That territory which lies between the Rivers Pruth and Bug contains a population of more than 5,000,000, of which 3,500,000 are Moldavians; it comprises, also, the mouth of the Danube, fertile lands, an extended shore, and the City of Odessa itself. The budget of that part of Bessarabia which lies between the Rivers Pruth and Dniester amounts to 250,000,000 lei, ($50,000,000,) or nearly as much as half of the entire budget of Rumania. But this wealth is not used for the benefit of the country which produces it. There are neither schools nor highways nor hospitals in Bessarabia. Ignorance and misery are the sole companions of that population, every national sentiment of which is smothered under the sway of Russian absolutism.

We in Rumania are ignorant of all these facts because our education is such as to make us ignore such vital issues. But only because we do not know ought we forsake Bessarabia?... Or is it that the national ideal of Rumania is to live at the mercy of Russia, by abandoning old Moldavia?

FOR A BALKAN UNION.

It is of the utmost importance that the Balkan States get together—quite apart from the present circumstances—for their own vital benefit. No matter what the outcome of the present war will be, the duty of the Balkan States is to act in unison, for mutual support and for the preservation of their future.

Under whatever form constituted, the alliance of the Balkan States is essential to the existence of the countries of Southeastern Europe.

To begin with, a Balkan congress must be called together, which should deal principally with the question of organizing a common network of communication, both on rail and water, strictly Balkan in character, which would contribute to a specific political purpose, and at the same time assure to the Balkan countries the monopoly of East Indian trade.

IN CASE OF WAR.

It is most essential that, should neutral countries decide to enter the European war, their first duty should be that of asking beforehand explicit and definite guarantees from the powers that solicit their assistance. Without such guarantees not one of the Balkan States would be willing to enter the war, because there is not a statesman who in like circumstances would plunge his country into an action which, on the face of it, is only an adventurous enterprise.

Portsmouth Bells

[From Punch.]

The Wanderers of the Emden

Odyssey of the German Raider’s Survivors Told by Captain
Muecke, Their Leader

By Emil Ludwig

Special Correspondent of the Berliner Tageblatt.

E L ULA, (via Damascus,) May 7, 11:40 P.M., (Dispatches to the Berliner Tageblatt.)—The Emden caravan arrived here tonight. In advance, Captain Mücke. We were sitting in high expectation when suddenly some Arabs burst in upon us, calling out "They're here!" A small caravan climbed down from the hills; I ran to meet it. A big, blonde fellow had already dismounted, and laughed heartily at my welcome. Completely rigged out in full tropical garb and with an involuntarily full beard and the bluest of seamen's eyes, he stood beside his white camel.

Then we sat down together in the station master's room, and without more ado Mücke began to narrate his Robinson Crusade by water and land. Between times he opened letters. "Have I the Cross?" he suddenly exclaimed, as he found newspapers that brought him the news that he had been decorated with the Iron Cross, First Class, a Bavarian and a Saxon order. He laughed, got red in the face, and was happy as a child over Christmas presents. "It's really too much," he said, "but I am most pleased over the Saxon order; my father also wore it." In between he asked questions about Captain Müller's fate, about the Carpathians and the Dardanelles, and then threw in scraps about the Emden and the Ayesha. Presently another caravan was reported. "I must ride out to meet my men," he said, and we approached a big caravan. Thirty Bedouins, with the Turkish flag at the head of the column; then, all mixed up, sturdy German blond sailors in disguise, with fez or turban, all on camels, among them dusky, melancholy looking Arabs. "Children!" their Captain called out to them, "you've all got the Cross, and you, Gyssing, have a Bavarian order to boot." "Hurrah!" resounded through the red desert. The German flag was raised. Handshaking all around.

"Children, here is Paradise; come, here flows champagne! And here, these are real railroad tracks!"

"In three hours, as quick as possible, through night and day," Captain Mücke replied. Even before he had reported his safe arrival to his parents at home, he files a telegraphic request for a new command before the enemy. Never have I seen so much modesty alongside so much glory as among these fifty Emden men.

That's what they all want to know. The men bathe, and then look happily at the special train in the desert.

THE SURVIVORS.

TABUK, (via Damascus,) May 8, noon.—They're still asleep. Last night the joy lasted a long while. But I couldn't help admiring the discipline, which did not break down even on that well-deserved joy day. Earnestness, the basic characteristic of the soldier, lay under all their merriment. As the engine was reported to be ready to start, Mücke called out: "All abroad! Youngsters, only once in my life do I command a railroad train." Then he and the officers sat down among the sailors. At every station they made jokes, because they were real stations that followed one another automatically and without the danger of adventures!

But all have only one wish—to get quickly back to Germany. Mücke wants to shorten all the festivities in his honor; he longs for nothing more than a command in the North Sea. I go down the aisle of the cars and watch them sleeping—comrades held together by the bonds of nine months on seas and desert, and I think how young they all are. None of them over 30, and their commander only 33. Of the officers, only Lieutenant von Gyssing was on the Emden. Wellman joined the party at Padang, Dr. Lang and Lieutenant Gerdts were taken over from the steamer Choising. This steamer of the North German Lloyd, the third and last ship to carry the expeditionary corps of the Emden, took over the men and provisions on Dec. 16, and on the same evening the Ayesha was sunk. On Jan. 9 they left this ship, too, before Hodeida, in the hope of being able to take the overland route through Arabia. After the loss of two months, on March 17, they again had to take a small sailboat of 75 feet length and beat about the Red Sea amid new adventures. All are in good health and spirits; they're astonished, however, and laugh, because they see themselves featured as heroes in the papers.

CRUISE OF THE EMDEN.

OASIS OF MAAN, 620 Kilometers South of Damascus, May 9.—As we ride through Arabia, Mücke and Lieutenant Gyssing, the only returning Emden officers, narrate:

"We on the Emden had no idea where we were going, as on Aug. 11, 1914, we separated from the cruiser squadron, escorted only by the coaler Markomannia. Under way, the Emden picked up three officers from German steamers. That was a piece of luck, for afterward we needed many officers for the capturing and sinking of steamers, or manning them when we took them with us. On Sept. 10 the first boat came in sight. We stop her. She proves to be a Greek tramp, chartered from England. On the next day we met the Indus, bound for Bombay, all fitted up as a troop transport, but still without troops. That was the first one we sunk. The crew we took aboard the Markomannia. 'What's the name of your ship?' the officers asked us. 'Emden! Impossible. Why, the Emden was sunk long ago in battle with the Ascold!'

"Then we sank the Lovat, a troop transport ship, and took the Kabinga along with us. One gets used quickly to new forms of activity. After a few days capturing ships became a habit. Of the twenty-three which we captured, most of them stopped after our first signal. When they didn't, we fired a blank shot. Then they all stopped. Only one, the Clan Mattesen, waited for a real shot across the bow before giving up its many automobiles and locomotives to the seas. The officers were mostly very polite and let down rope ladders for us. After a few hours they'd be on board with us. We ourselves never set foot in their cabins, nor took charge of them. The officers often acted on their own initiative and signaled to us the nature of their cargo; then the Commandant decided as to whether to sink the ship or take it with us. Of the cargo, we always took everything we could use, particularly provisions. Many of the English officers and sailors made good use of the hours of transfer to drink up the supply of whisky instead of sacrificing it to the waves. I heard that one Captain was lying in tears at the enforced separation from his beloved ship, but on investigation found that he was merely dead drunk. But much worse was the open betrayal which many practiced toward their brother Captains, whom they probably regarded as rivals. 'Haven't you met the Kilo yet? If you keep on your course two hours longer, you must overhaul her,' one Captain said to me of his own accord. To other tips from other Captains we owed many of our prizes. I am prepared to give their names," Captain Mücke added.

"The Captain of one ship once called out cheerily: 'Thank God, I've been captured!' He had received expense money for the trip to Australia, and was now saved half the journey!

"We had mostly quiet weather, so that communication with captured ships was easy. They were mostly dynamited, or else shot close to the water line. The sinking process took longer or shorter, according to where they were struck and the nature of the cargo. Mostly the ships keeled over on their sides till the water flowed down the smokestacks, a last puff of smoke came out, and then they were gone. Many, however, went down sharply bow first, the stern rising high in the air.

"On the Kabinga the Captain had his wife and youngster with him. He was inclined at first to be disagreeable. 'What are you going to do with us? Shall we be set out in boats and left to our fate?' he asked. Afterward he grew confidential, like all the Captains, called us 'Old Chap,' gave the Lieutenant a nice new oilskin, and as we finally let the Kabinga go wrote us a letter of thanks, and his wife asked for an Emden armband and a button. They all gave us three cheers as they steamed away. 'Come to Calcutta some time!' was the last thing the Captain said, 'and catch the pilots so that those [unprintable seaman's epithet] fellows will feel something of the war, too.'

"A few days later, by Calcutta, we made one of our richest hauls, the Diplomat, chock full of tea—we sunk $2,500,000 worth. On the same day the Trabbotch, too, which steered right straight toward us, literally into our arms.

"But now we wanted to beat it out of the Bay of Bengal, because we had learned from the papers that the Emden was being keenly searched for. By Rangoon we encountered a Norwegian tramp, which, for a cash consideration, took over all the rest of our prisoners of war. Later on another neutral ship rejected a similar request and betrayed us to the Japanese into the bargain. On Sept. 23 we reached Madras and steered straight for the harbor. We stopped still 3,000 yards before the city. Then we shot up the oil tanks. Three or four burned up and illuminated the city. They answered. Several of the papers asserted that we left with lights out. On the contrary, we showed our lights so as to seem to indicate that we were going northward; only later did we put them out, turn around, and steer southward. As we left we could see the fire burning brightly in the night, and even by daylight, ninety sea miles away, we could still see the smoke from the burning oil tanks. Two days later we navigated around Ceylon, and could see the lights of Colombo. On the same evening we gathered in two more steamers, the King Lund and Tyweric. The latter was particularly good to us, for it brought us the very latest evening papers from Colombo, which it had only left two hours before.

"Everything went well, the only trouble was that our prize, the Markomannia, didn't have much coal left. We said one evening in the mess: 'The only thing lacking now is a nice steamer with 500 tons of nice Cardiff coal.' The next evening we got her, the Burresk, brand-new, from England on her maiden voyage, bound for Hongkong. Then followed in order the Riberia, Foyle, Grand Ponrabbel, Benmore, Troiens, Exfort, Grycefale, Sankt Eckbert, Chilkana. Most of them were sunk; the coal ships were kept. The Eckbert was let go with a load of passengers and captured crews. We also sent the Markomannia away because it hadn't any more coal. She was later captured by the English together with all the prize papers about their own captured ships. All this happened before Oct. 20; then we sailed southward, to Deogazia, southwest of Colombo. South of Lakadiven on Deogazia some Englishmen came on board, solitary farmers who were in touch with the world only every three months through schooners. They knew nothing about the war, took us for an English man-of-war, and asked us to repair their motor boat for them. We kept still and invited them to dinner in our officers' mess. Presently they stood still in front of the portrait of the Kaiser, quite astounded. 'This is a German ship!' We continued to keep still. 'Why is your ship so dirty?' they asked. We shrugged our shoulders. 'Will you take some letters for us?' they asked. 'Sorry, impossible; we don't know what port we'll run into.' Then they left our ship, but about the war we told them not a single word.

"Now we went toward Miniko, where we sank two ships more. The Captain of one of them said to us: 'Why don't you try your luck around north of Miniko? There's lots of ships there now?' On the next day we found three steamers to the north, one of them with much desired Cardiff coal. From English papers on captured ships we learned that we were being hotly pursued. The stokers also told us a lot. Our pursuers evidently must also have a convenient base. Penang was the tip given us. There we had hopes of finding two French cruisers.

"One night we started for Penang. [A graphic narrative of this raid on Penang from the special correspondent of The New York Times , who was ashore there, appeared in The New York Times Current History of March, 1915.] On Oct. 28 we raised our very practicable fourth smokestack—Mücke's own invention. As a result, we were taken for English or French. The harbor of Penang lies in a channel difficult of access. There was nothing doing by night, we had to do it at daybreak. At high speed, without smoke, with lights out, we steered into the mouth of the channel. A torpedo boat on guard slept well. We steamed past its small light. Inside lay a dark silhouette; that must be a warship! But it wasn't the French cruiser we were looking for. We recognized the silhouette—dead sure; that was the Russian cruiser Jemtchug. There it lay, there it slept like a rat. No watch to be seen. They made it easy for us. Because of the narrowness of the harbor we had to keep close; we fired the first torpedo at 400 yards. Then to be sure things livened up a bit on the sleeping warship. At the same time we took the crew quarters under fire, five shells at a time. There was a flash of flame on board, then a kind of burning aureole. After the fourth shell, the flame burned high. The first torpedo had struck the ship too deep because we were too close to it, a second torpedo which we fired off from the other side didn't make the same mistake. After twenty seconds there was absolutely not a trace of the ship to be seen. The enemy had fired off only about six shots.

"But now another ship, which we couldn't see, was firing. That was the French d'Ibreville, toward which we now turned at once. A few minutes later, an incoming torpedo destroyer was reported. He mustn't find us in that narrow harbor, otherwise we were finished! But it proved to be a false alarm; only a small merchant steamer that looked like a destroyer, and which at once showed the merchant flag and steered for shore. Shortly afterward a second one was reported. This time it proved to be the French torpedo boat Mousquet. It comes straight toward us. That's always remained a mystery to me, for it must have heard the shooting. An officer whom we fished up afterward explained to me that they had only recognized we were a German warship when they were quite close to us. The Frenchman behaved well, accepted battle and fought on, but was polished off by us with three broadsides. The whole fight with both ships lasted half an hour. The commander of the torpedo boat lost both legs by the first broadside. When he saw that part of his crew were leaping overboard, he cried out: 'Tie me fast; I will not survive after seeing Frenchmen desert their ship!' As a matter of fact, he went down with his ship as a brave Captain, lashed fast to the mast. Then we fished up thirty heavily wounded; three died at once. We sewed a Tricolor, (the French flag), wound them in it and buried them at sea, with seamen's honors, three salvos. That was my only sea fight. The second one I did not take part in."

Mücke, who had been recounting his lively narrative, partly like an officer, partly like an artist, and not trying to eliminate the flavor of adventure, now takes on quite another tone as he comes to tell of the end of the Emden:

"On Nov. 9 I left the Emden in order to destroy the wireless plant on the Cocos Island. I had fifty men, four machine guns, about thirty rifles. Just as we were about to destroy the apparatus it reported, 'Careful; Emden near.' The work of destruction went smoothly. The wireless operators said: 'Thank God! It's been like being under arrest day and night lately.' Presently the Emden signaled to us, 'Hurry up.' I pack up, but simultaneously wails the Emden's siren. I hurry up to the bridge, see the flag 'Anna' go up. That means 'Weigh anchor.' We ran like mad into our boat, but already the Emden's pennant goes up, the battle flag is raised, they fire from starboard.

"The enemy is concealed by the island and therefore not to be seen, but I see the shells strike the water. To follow and catch the Emden is out of the question; she's going twenty knots, I only four with my steam pinnace. Therefore, I turn back to land, raise the flag, declare German laws of war in force, seize all arms, set up my machine guns on shore in order to guard against a hostile landing. Then I run again in order to observe the fight. From the splash of the shells it looked as if the enemy had fifteen-centimeter guns, bigger, therefore, than the Emden's. He fired rapidly, but poorly. It was the Australian cruiser Sydney."

"Have you heard?" Mücke suddenly asked in between, "if anything has happened to the Sydney? At the Dardanelles maybe?" And his hatred of the Emden's "hangman" is visible for a second in his blue eyes. Then he continues:

"According to the accounts of the Englishmen who saw the first part of the engagement from shore, the Emden was cut off rapidly. Her forward smokestack lay across the ship. She went over to circular fighting and to torpedo firing, but already burned fiercely aft. Behind the mainmast several shells struck home; we saw the high flame. Whether circular fighting or a running fight now followed, I don't know, because I again had to look to my land defenses. Later I looked on from the roof of a house. Now the Emden again stood out to sea about 4,000 to 5,000 yards, still burning. As she again turned toward the enemy, the forward mast was shot away. On the enemy no outward damage was apparent, but columns of smoke showed where shots had struck home. Then the Emden took a northerly course, likewise the enemy, and I had to stand there helpless gritting my teeth and thinking: 'Damn it; the Emden is burning and you aren't on board!' An Englishman who had also climbed up to the roof of the house, approached me, greeted me politely, and asked: 'Captain, would you like to have a game of tennis with us?'

"The ships, still fighting, disappeared beyond the horizon. I thought that an unlucky outcome for the Emden was possible, also a landing by the enemy on Keeling Island, at least for the purpose of landing the wounded and taking on provisions. As, according to the statements of the Englishmen, there were other ships in the neighborhood, I saw myself faced with the certainty of having soon to surrender because of a lack of ammunition. But for no price did I and my men want to get into English imprisonment. As I was thinking about all this, the masts again appear on the horizon, the Emden steaming easterly, but very much slower. All at once the enemy, at high speed, shoots by, apparently quite close to the Emden. A high, white waterspout showed among the black smoke of the enemy. That was a torpedo. I see how the two opponents withdrew, the distance growing greater between them; how they separate, till they disappear in the darkness. The fight had lasted ten hours.

"I had made up my mind to leave the island as quick as possible. The Emden was gone; the danger for us growing. In the harbor I had noticed a three-master, the schooner Ayesha. Mr. Ross, the owner of the ship and of the island, had warned me that the boat was leaky, but I found it quite a seaworthy tub. Now quickly provisions were taken on board for eight weeks, water for four. The Englishmen very kindly showed us the best water and gave us clothing and utensils. They declared this was their thanks for our 'moderation' and 'generosity.' Then they collected the autographs of our men, photographed them and gave three cheers as our last boat put off. It was evening, nearly dark. We sailed away. After a short address, amid three hurrahs, I raised the German war flag on 'S.M.S. Ayesha.'"

NARRATIVE CONTINUED.

DAMASCUS, May 10.—"The Ayesha proved to be a really splendid ship," Mücke continued, and whenever he happens to speak of this sailing ship he grows warmer. One notices the passion for sailing which this seaman has, for he was trained on a sailing ship and had won many prizes in the regattas at Kiel. "But we had hardly any instruments," he narrated, "we had only one sextant and two chronometers on board, but a chronometer journal was lacking. Luckily I found an old 'Indian Ocean Directory' of 1882 on board; its information went back to the year 1780.

"At first we had to overhaul all the tackle, for I didn't trust to peace, and we had left the English Captain back on the island. I had said: 'We are going to East Africa.' Therefore I sailed at first westward, then northward. There followed the monsoons, but then also long periods of dead calm. Then we scolded! Only two neutral ports came seriously under consideration: Batavia and Padang. At Keeling I cautiously asked about Tsing-tao, of which I had naturally thought first, and so quite by chance learned that it had fallen. Now I decided for Padang, because I knew I would be more apt to meet the Emden there, also because there was a German Consul there, because my schooner was unknown there, and because I hoped to find German ships there and learn some news. 'It'll take you six to eight days to reach Batavia,' a Captain had told me at Keeling. Now we needed eighteen days to reach Padang, the weather was so rottenly still.

"We had an excellent cook on board; he had deserted from the French Foreign Legion. But with water we had to go sparingly, each man received three glasses daily. When it rained, all possible receptacles were placed on deck and the main sail was spread over the cabin roof to catch the rain. The whole crew went about naked, in order to spare our wash, for the clothing from Keeling was soon in rags. Toothbrushes were long ago out of sight. One razor made the rounds of the crew. The entire ship had one precious comb.

"As at length we came in the neighborhood of Padang, on Nov. 26, a ship appeared for the first time and looked after our name. But the name had been painted over, because it was the former English name. As I think, 'You're rid of the fellow,' the ship comes again in the evening, comes within a hundred yards of us. I send all men below deck. I promenade the deck as the solitary skipper. Through Morse signals the stranger betrayed its identity. It was the Hollandish torpedo boat Lyn. I asked by signals, first in English, then twice in German: 'Why do you follow me?' No answer. The next morning I find myself in Hollandish waters, so I raise pennant and war flag. Now the Lyn came at top speed past us. As it passes, I have my men line up on deck, and give a greeting. The greeting is answered. Then, before the harbor at Padang, I went aboard the Lyn in my well and carefully preserved uniform and declared my intentions. The commandant opined that I could run into the harbor, but whether I might come out again was doubtful."

"On the South Coast," interjected Lieutenant Wellman, who at that time lay with a German ship before Padang and only later joined the landing corps of the Emden, "we suddenly saw a three-master arrive. Great excitement aboard our German ship, for the schooner carried the German war flag. We thought she came from New Guinea and at once made all boats clear, on the Kleist, Rheinland, and Choising, for we were all on the search for the Emden. When we heard that the schooner carried the landing corps, not a man of us would believe it."

"They wanted to treat me as a prize!" Mücke now continued. "I said, 'I am a man of war,' and pointed to my four machine guns. The harbor authorities demanded a certification for pennant and war flag, also papers to prove that I was the commander of this warship. I answered, for that I was only responsible to my superior officers. Now they advised me the most insistently to allow ourselves to be interned peacefully. They said it wasn't at all pleasant in the neighborhood. We'd fall into the hands of the Japanese or the English. As a matter of fact, we had again had great luck. On the day before a Japanese warship had cruised around here. Naturally, I rejected all the well-meant and kindly advice, and did this in presence of my Lieutenants. I demanded provisions, water, sails, tackle, and clothing. They replied we could take on board everything which we formerly had on board, but nothing which would mean an increase in our naval strength. First thing, I wanted to improve our wardrobe, for I had only one sock, a pair of shoes, and one clean shirt, which had become rather seedy. My comrades had even less. But the Master of the Port declined to let us have not only charts, but also clothing and toothbrushes, on the ground that these would be an increase of armament. Nobody could come aboard, nobody could leave the ship without permission. I requested that the Consul be allowed to come aboard. This Consul, Herr Schild, as also the Brothers Bäumer, gave us assistance in the friendliest fashion. From the German steamers boats could come alongside and talk with us. Finally we were allowed to have German papers. They were, to be sure, from August. Until March we saw no more papers.

"Hardly had we been towed out again after twenty-four hours, on the evening of the 28th, when a searchlight appeared before us. I think: 'Better interned than prisoner.' I put out all lights and withdrew to the shelter of the island. But they were Hollanders and didn't do anything to us. Then for two weeks more we drifted around, lying still for days. The weather was alternately still, rainy and blowy. At length a ship comes in sight—a freighter. It sees us and makes a big curve around us. I make everything hastily 'clear for battle.' Then one of our officers recognizes her for the Choising. She shows the German flag. I send up light rockets, although it was broad day, and go with all sails set that were still setable, toward her. The Choising is a coaster, from Hongkong for Siam. It was at Singapore when the war broke out, then went to Batavia, was chartered loaded with coal for the Emden, and had put into Padang in need, because the coal in the hold had caught fire. There we had met her.

"Great was our joy now. I had all my men come on deck and line up for review. The fellows hadn't a rag on. Thus, in Nature's garb, we gave three cheers for the German flag on the Choising. The men on the Choising told us afterward 'we couldn't make out what that meant, those stark naked fellows all cheering!' The sea was too high, and we had to wait two days before we could board the Choising on Dec. 16. We took very little with us; the schooner was taken in tow. In the afternoon we sunk the Ayesha and we were all very sad. The good old Ayesha had served us faithfully for six weeks. The log showed that we had made 1,709 sea miles under sail since leaving Keeling. She wasn't at all rotten and unseaworthy, as they had told me, but nice and white and dry inside. I had grown fond of the ship, on which I could practice my old sailing manoeuvres. The only trouble was that the sails would go to pieces every now and then because they were so old.

"But anyway she went down quite properly, didn't she?" Mücke turned to the officer. "We had bored a hole in her; she filled slowly and then all of a sudden plump disappeared! That was the saddest day of the whole month. We gave her three cheers, and my next yacht at Kiel will be named Ayesha, that's sure.

"To the Captain of the Choising I had said, when I hailed him: 'I do not know what will happen to the ship. The war situation may make it necessary for me to strand it.' He did not want to undertake the responsibility. I proposed that we work together, and I would take the responsibility. Then we traveled together for three weeks, from Padang to Hodeida. The Choising was some ninety meters long and had a speed of nine miles, though sometimes only four. If she had not accidentally arrived I had intended to cruise high along the west coast of Sumatra to the region of the northern monsoon. I came about six degrees north, then over Aden to the Arabian coast. In the Red Sea the northeastern monsoon, which here blows southeast, could bring us to Djidda. I had heard in Padang that Turkey is allied with us, so we would be able to get safely through Arabia to Germany.

"I next waited for information through ships, but the Choising did not know anything definite, either. By way of the Luchs, the Königsberg, and Kormoran the reports were uncertain. Besides, according to newspapers at Aden, the Arabs were said to have fought with the English. Therein there seemed to be offered an opportunity near at hand to damage the enemy. I therefore sailed with the Choising in the direction of Aden. Lieutenant Cordts of the Choising had heard that the Arabian railway now already went almost to Hodeida, near the Perim Strait. The ship's surgeon there, Docounlang, found confirmation of this in Meyer's traveling handbook. This railway could not have been taken over by the Englishmen, who always dreamed of it. By doing this they would have further and completely wrought up the Mohammedans by making more difficult the journey to Mecca. Best of all, we thought, we'll simply step into the express train and whizz nicely away to the North Sea. Certainly there would be safe journeying homeward through Arabia. To be sure, we hadn't maps of the Red Sea; but it was the shortest way to the foe, whether in Aden or in Germany.

"On the 7th of January, between 9 and 10 o'clock in the evening, we sneaked through the Strait of Perim. That lay swarming full of Englishmen. We steered along the African coast, close past an English cable layer. That is my prettiest delight—how the Englishmen will be vexed when they learn that we have passed smoothly by Perim. On the next evening we saw on the coast a few lights upon the water. We thought that must be the pier of Hodeida. But when we measured the distance by night, 3,000 meters, I began to think that must be something else. At dawn I made out two masts and four smokestacks; that was an enemy ship, and, what is more, an armored French cruiser. I therefore ordered the Choising to put to sea, and to return at night.

"The next day and night the same; then we put out four boats—these we pulled to shore at sunrise under the eyes of the unsuspecting Frenchmen. The sea reeds were thick. A few Arabs came close to us; then there ensued a difficult negotiation with the Arabian Coast Guards. For we did not even know whether Hodeida was in English or French hands. We waved to them, laid aside our arms, and made signs to them. The Arabs, gathering together, begin to rub two fingers together; that means 'We are friends.' We thought that meant 'We are going to rub against you and are hostile.' I therefore said: 'Boom-boom!' and pointed to the warship. At all events, I set up my machine guns and made preparations for a skirmish. But, thank God! one of the Arabs understood the word 'Germans'; that was good.

"Soon a hundred Arabs came and helped us, and as we marched into Hodeida the Turkish soldiers, who had been called out against us, saluted us as allies and friends. To be sure, there was not a trace of a railway, but we were received very well, and they assured us we could get through by land. Therefore, I gave red-star signals at night, telling the Choising to sail away, since the enemy was near by. Inquiries and determination concerning a safe journey by land proceeded. I also heard that in the interior, about six days' journey away, there was healthy highland where our fever invalids could recuperate. I therefore determined to journey next to Sana. On the Kaiser's birthday we held a great parade in common with the Turkish troops—all this under the noses of the Frenchmen. On the same day we marched away from Hodeida to the highland."

A PATH OF TRIUMPH.

DAMASCUS, May 10.—The Arabian railway was today transformed into a German Via Triumphalis—military receptions, flowers, flags at the stations, and a feast in the great rug-carpeted tent. Then once more straight through the desert and in the midst of 1,000 curious glances stood these cheerful and serious men and youths, unembarrassed, friendly, plain; amid them always the tallest, Mücke, who conceals his impatience to get to Germany behind every courteous phrase. The German builder of the railway, the German Consul, the German bank director, and officials came riding to meet them. Finally they had garlanded the machine, decked with the Turkish and the Emden's flag. Thus the German train rode into this splendid green and white oasis, into the old city of Arabian fairy tales, Arabian weapons, Arabian powers, all of which are no more fantastic than the adventures which the fifty homecomers told on the journey.

The Wali was waiting and the commanding General; militia by hundreds stood in rows, presenting arms with white gloves; music played in march time they well knew; softly howling Dervishes with their high hats stood in orderly traditional rows and played their wild flute notes, and the long man and his blond, young officers, all in their fantastic Arab headdress, the aghal, came out first; they came with their guns in their right hands.

Now Mücke gave orders to the landing corps of S.M.S. Emden. They marched in rhythmic step. The Turkish company took the Germans into its midst, saw them marching in the dazzling sunlight, these blue-eyed youths of yesteryear, now dressed in khaki and fez, many of them yellow from the malaria from which they had recovered; and as, amid the applause of the Turkish soldiers, they marched into the seraglio I could understand the amazement of the crowd. I have seen men of spirit and men of determination and courage, but I have found few at the same time so modest, so uncorruptible by fame, as these German soldiers. Can there be a greater temptation to lead young officers astray than that of being gazed at with admiration as strange adventurers celebrated as heroes, received as Princes? But not a face changed its expression. If German heroes often lack the handsome intoxication, they are, therefore, shielded also against the seductions of fame. Grateful and well trained they quietly refused the words of praise; and surrounded by the roar of applause, they thought only of their bath for today and their return home for tomorrow.

In the great hall Mücke sat in the centre, between the wall and the Commander, then the officers, and around them the forty-four mates, superior mates, sailors, firemen. At one pillar stood the color bearer with his flag. They took dainty coffee cups into their big hands, and told one another that the Turks were very good to them. None of them wishes to extend the feasts that are everywhere being prepared for them. All want to return to Germany; and when I saw them march away, the German men beneath the Arabian sun, I saw fame and achievement like shadows floating over them. I was seized by pity for those who were at the goal, whose great hour was the way to the goal, and they knew it not. Behind the little comfort company there floated three figures—the three German soldiers whose bodies lie mouldering in the desert.

A FIGHT WITH BEDOUINS.

"Two months after our arrival at Hodeida we again put to sea. The time spent in the highlands of Sana passed in lengthy inquiries and discussions that finally resulted in our foregoing the journey by land through Arabia, for religious reasons. But the time was not altogether lost. The men who were sick with malaria had, for the most part, recuperated in the highland air.

"The Turkish Government placed at our disposal two 'sambuks' (sailing ships) of about twenty-five tons, fifteen meters long and four meters wide. But, in fear of English spies, we sailed from Jebaua, ten miles north of Hodeida. That was on March 14. At first we sailed at a considerable distance apart, so that we would not both go to pot if an English gunboat caught us. Therefore, we always had to sail in coastal water. That is full of coral reefs, however."

"The Commander," Lieutenant Gerdts said, "had charge of the first sambuk; I of the second, which was the larger of the two, for we had four sick men aboard. At first everything went nicely for three days. For the most part I could see the sails of the first ship ahead of men. On the third day I received orders to draw nearer and to remain in the vicinity of the first boat, because its pilot was sailing less skillfully than mine. Suddenly, in the twilight, I felt a shock, then another, and still another. The water poured in rapidly. I had run upon the reef of a small island, where the smaller sambuk was able barely to pass because it had a foot less draught than mine. Soon my ship was quite full, listed over, and all of us—twenty-eight men—had to sit on the uptilted edge of the boat. The little island lies at Jesirat Marka, 200 miles north of Jebaua. To be sure, an Arab boat lay near by, but they did not know us. Nobody could help us. If the Commander had not changed the order a few hours before and asked us to sail up closer, we would probably have drowned on this coral reef—certainly would have died of thirst. Moreover, the waters thereabouts are full of sharks, and the evening was so squally that our stranded boat was raised and banged with every wave. We could scarcely move, and the other boat was nowhere in sight. And now it grew dark. At this stage I began to build a raft of spars and old pieces of wood, that might at all events keep us afloat.

"But soon the first boat came into sight again. The commander turned about and sent over his little canoe; in this and in our own canoe, in which two men could sit at each trip, we first transferred the sick. Now the Arabs began to help us. But just then the tropical helmet of our doctor suddenly appeared above the water in which he was standing up to his ears. Thereupon the Arabs withdrew; we were Christians, and they did not know that we were friends. Now the other sambuk was so near that we could have swam to it in half an hour, but the seas were too high. At each trip a good swimmer trailed along, hanging to the painter of the canoe. When it became altogether dark we could not see the boat any more, for over there they were prevented by the wind from keeping any light burning. My men asked 'In what direction shall we swim?' I answered: 'Swim in the direction of this or that star; that must be about the direction of the boat.' Finally a torch flared up over there—one of the torches that were still left from the Emden. But we had suffered considerably through submersion. One sailor cried out: 'Oh, pshaw! it's all up with us now; that's a searchlight.' The man who held out best was Lieutenant Schmidt, who later lost his life. About 10 o'clock we were all safe aboard, but one of our typhus patients, Seaman Keil, wore himself out completely by the exertion; he died a week later. On the next morning we went over again to the wreck in order to seek the weapons that had fallen into the water. You see, the Arabs dive so well; they fetched up a considerable lot—both machine guns, all but ten of the rifles, though these were, to be sure, all full of water. Later they frequently failed to go off when they were used in firing.

"Now we numbered, together with the Arabs, seventy men on the little boat, until evening. Then we anchored before Konfida, and met Sami Bey, who is still with us. He had shown himself useful even before in the service of the Turkish Government, and has done good service as guide in the last two months. He is an active man, thoroughly familiar with the country. He procured for us a larger boat, of fifty-four tons, and he himself, with his wife, sailed alongside on the little sambuk. We sailed from the 20th to the 24th unmolested to Lith. There Sami Bey announced that three English ships were cruising about in order to intercept us. I therefore advised traveling a bit overland. I disliked leaving the sea a second time, but it had to be done."

"Lith is, to be sure, nothing but this," said Mücke, with a sweeping gesture toward the desert through which we were traveling, "and therefore it was very difficult to get up a caravan at once. We remained aboard ship so long. We marched away on the 28th. We had only a vague suspicion that the English might have agents here also. We could travel only at night, and when we slept or camped around a spring, there was only a tent for the sick men. Two days' march from Jeddah, the Turkish Government, as soon as it is received news about us, sent us sixteen good camels.

"Suddenly, on the night of April 1, things became uneasy. I was riding at the head of the column. All our shooting implements were cleared for action, because there was danger of an attack by Bedouins, whom the English here had bribed. When it began to grow a bit light, I already thought: 'We're through for today'; for we were tired—had been riding eighteen hours. Suddenly I saw a line flash up before me, and shots whizzed over our heads. Down from the camels! Form a fighting line! You know how quickly it becomes daylight here. The whole space around the desert hillock was occupied. Now, up with your bayonets! Rush 'em!... They fled, but returned again, this time from all sides. Several of the gendarmes that had been given us as an escort are wounded; the machine gun operator, Rademacher, falls, killed by a shot through his heart; another is wounded; Lieutenant Schmidt, in the rear guard, is mortally wounded—he has received a bullet in his chest and abdomen.

"Suddenly they waved white cloths. The Sheik, to whom a part of our camels belonged, went over to them to negotiate, then Sami Bey and his wife. In the interim we quickly built a sort of wagon barricade, a circular camp of camel saddles, rice and coffee sacks, all of which we filled with sand. We had no shovels, and had to dig with our bayonets, plates, and hands. The whole barricade had a diameter of about fifty meters. Behind it we dug trenches, which we deepened even during the skirmish. The camels inside had to lie down, and thus served very well as cover for the rear of the trenches. Then an inner wall was constructed, behind which we carried the sick men. In the very centre we buried two jars of water, to guard us against thirst. In addition we had ten petroleum cans full of water; all told, a supply for four days. Late in the evening Sami's wife came back from the futile negotiations, alone. She had unveiled for the first and only time on this day of the skirmish, had distributed cartridges, and had conducted herself faultlessly.

"Soon we were able to ascertain the number of the enemy. There were about 300 men; we numbered fifty, with twenty-nine guns. In the night, Lieutenant Schmidt died. We had to dig his grave with our hands and with our bayonets, and to eliminate every trace above it, in order to protect the body. Rademacher had been buried immediately after the skirmish, both of them silently, with all honors.

"The wounded had a hard time of it. We had lost our medicine chest in the wreck; we had only little packages of bandages for skirmishes; but no probing instrument, no scissors were at hand. On the next day our men came up with thick tongues, feverish, and crying 'Water! water!' But each one received only a little cupful three times a day. If our water supply was exhausted, we would have to sally from our camp and fight our way through. Then we should have gone to pot under superior numbers. The Arab gendarmes simply cut the throats of those camels that had been wounded by shots, and then drank the yellow water that was contained in the stomachs. Those fellows can stand anything. At night we always dragged out the dead camels that had served as cover, and had been shot. The hyenas came, hunting for dead camels. I shot one of these, taking it for an enemy in the darkness.

"That continued about three days. On the third day there were new negotiations. Now the Bedouins demanded arms no longer, but only money. This time the negotiations took place across the camp wall. When I declined, the Bedouin said: 'Beaucoup de combat,' (lots of fight.) I replied:

"We had only a little ammunition left, and very little water. Now it really looked as if we would soon be dispatched. The mood of the men was pretty dismal. Suddenly, at about 10 o'clock in the morning, there bobbed up in the north two riders on camels, waving white cloths. Soon afterward there appeared, coming from the same direction, far back, a long row of camel troops, about a hundred; they draw rapidly near by, ride singing toward us, in a picturesque train. They were the messengers and troops of the Emir of Mecca.

"Sami Bey's wife, it developed, had, in the course of the first negotiations, dispatched an Arab boy to Jeddah. From that place the Governor had telegraphed to the Emir. The latter at once sent camel troops, with his two sons and his personal surgeon; the elder, Abdullah, conducted the negotiations; the surgeon acted as interpreter, in French. Now things proceeded in one-two-three order, and the whole Bedouin band speedily disappeared. From what I learned later, I know definitely that they had been corrupted with bribes by the English. They knew when and where we would pass and they had made all preparations. Now our first act was a rush for water; then we cleared up our camp, but had to harness our camels ourselves, for the camel drivers had fled at the very beginning of the skirmish. More than thirty camels were dead. The saddles did not fit, and my men know how to rig up schooners, but not camels. Much baggage remained lying in the sand for lack of pack animals.

"Then, under the safe protection of Turkish troops, we got to Jeddah. There the authorities and the populace received us very well. From there we proceeded in nineteen days, without mischance, by sailing boat to Elwesh, and under abundant guard with Suleiman Pasha in a five-day caravan journey toward this place, to El Ula, and now we are seated at last in the train and are riding toward Germany—into the war at last!"

"Not a bit of it," replied the youngest Lieutenant; "the Emden simply captured ships each time; only a single time, at Penang, was it engaged in battle, and I wasn't present on that occasion. War? No, that is just to begin for us now."

"My task since November," said Mücke, "has been to bring my men as quickly as possible to Germany against the enemy. Now, at last, I can do so."

"For myself," he laughed, and the blue eyes sparkled, "a command in the North Sea."

CAPTAIN MUECKE’S REPORT.

The impressive scene when the intrepid survivors of the Emden crew ended their long and perilous wanderings over the sea and through the desert, and reported once more to their superior naval officer for duty, is described in a dispatch from Constantinople, published in the Berlinger Tageblatt of May 25. The account, written by Dr. Emil Ludwig, the special correspondent whom the paper had sent to meet the Emden men as they emerged from the desert, and filed under date of May 24, reads:

Now the Emden men have at last reached Europe. The many feasts which the German colonies and the Turkish authorities insisted on preparing for the heroes on their way through Asia Minor, in Adana, Tarsus, Bosanti, Konia, and Eskishehir, have improved the condition of the crew, half of whom are still suffering from malaria or its consequences. The officers, to be sure, pressed forward. When the train today drew near to Constantinople, the cordiality and enthusiasm waxed to a veritable Whitsuntide fraternizing with the Turks.

The Chief Mayors delivered addresses at every station, or children recited poems amid the Turkish sounds of which only the words "Allaman" (Germans) and "Emden" were intelligible to us. One little child was specially courageous, and recited in German. The flags were wreathed with laurel, and prettily dressed little children brought up to the crew great baskets full of cherries and the first strawberries; but the eyes of the sailors hung more fondly upon beer and tobacco, which they received in large quantities. Even at those stations where the train whizzed past without stopping, Oriental applause floated up to us, and everywhere stood honorary reception committees.

When we at last drew near Haidar-Pasha, the final station of the railroad on the Asiatic side, the railway station seemed to be transformed into a festive hall. Lieut. Capt. von Mücke ordered his men, who had only now transformed themselves again into blue lads, since navy uniforms had been sent to them on the way, to step up, and he led them up to a group of navy officers who, with Admiral Souchon at their head, remained quietly standing.

Then this young "triumphator," who even a moment ago stood amid cheers and a shower of acacia blossoms, bowing and shaking hands on the platform, the man who for fourteen days has been the one man wherever stopped, now steps up in military order to the little Admiral and lowers his sword:

"Beg to report most obediently, Herr Admiral, landing corps of the Emden, 44 men, 4 officers, 1 surgeon."

Admiral Souchon received the announcement just as a daily report. Only then did he press the Lieutenant Captain's hand, bid him welcome, and marched along the front of the company.

No sooner had the column with the Emden flag appeared at the entrance of the station than there burst from 10,000 throats a rousing "Hurrah!" On a torpedo boat that had been waiting for them the crew crossed the Bosporus, in which all ships had decked themselves with flags, and landed on the wide park-like point of the seraglio. There, surrounded by new countless crowds, were the Ministers Enver Pasha and Talaat Bey, the German Ambassador, Freiherr von Wangenheim, and Marshal von der Golz Pasha, the combined navy corps of officers, General Bronsart von Schellendorf, all waiting their arrival.

Amid the strains of the German national anthem, played by the Turkish military band, Lieut. Capt. von Mücke, together with the War Minister, Enver Pasha, paced along the long German and Turkish fronts. Then he led forth his forty-four men and marched, amid new ovations, all through Stamboul, across the great bridge to Galata, to the deck of the steamship General, at the head of his little band, now grown epic, amid the cheers of Byzantium, on which he and his officers had never set foot before—always in the clear blue and sunlight of this war-heavy Whitsuntide day.

But nothing stirred me more deeply on the whole journey than that cold official report of the man who was being celebrated, before his Admiral, and I saw in that lowered swordpoint the symbol of the old and incorruptible Prussian spirit.

Civilization at the Breaking Point

By H.G. Wells.

[Copyright, 1915, by The New York Times Company.]

T HE submarine and aircraft have put a new proposition before the world. It is a proposition that will be stated here as plainly and simply as possible. These two inventions present mankind with a choice of two alternatives, or, to vary the phrase, they mark quite definitely that we are at the parting of two ways; either mankind must succeed within quite a brief period of years now in establishing a world State, a world Government of some sort able to prevent war, or civilization as we know it must break up into a system of warring communities, perpetually on the warpath, perpetually insecure and engaged in undying national vendettas. These consequences have been latent in all the development of scientific warfare that has been going on during the last century; they are inherent in the characteristics of the aircraft and of the submarine for any one to see.

They are so manifestly inherent that even before this war speculative minds had pointed out the direction to which these inventions pointed, but now, after more than three-quarters of a year of war, it is possible to approach this question, no longer as something as yet fantastically outside the experience of mankind, but as something supported by countless witnesses, something which the dullest, least imaginative minds can receive and ponder.

What the submarine and aircraft make manifest and convincing is this point, which argument alone has never been able to hammer into the mass of inattentive minds, that if the human intelligence is applied continuously to the mechanism of war it will steadily develop destructive powers, but that it will fail to develop any corresponding power of decision and settlement, because the development of the former is easy and obvious in comparison with the development of the latter; it will therefore progressively make war more catastrophic and less definitive. It will not make war impossible in the ordinary meaning of the word, the bigger the gun and the viler the lethal implement the more possible does war become, but it will make war "impossible" in the slang use of five or six years ago, in the sense, that is, of its being utterly useless and mischievous, the sense in which Norman Angell employed it and so brought upon himself an avalanche of quite unfair derision. No nation ever embarked upon so fair a prospect of conquest and dominion as the victorious Germans when, after 1871, they decided to continue to give themselves to the development of overwhelming military power. And after exertions unparalleled in the whole history of mankind their net conquests are nothing; they have destroyed enormously and achieved no other single thing, and today they repeat on a colossal scale the adventures of Fort Chabrol and Sidney Street, and are no better than a nation of murderous outcasts besieged by an outraged world.

Now, among many delusions that this war has usefully dispelled is the delusion that there can be a sort of legality about war, that you can make war a little, but not make war altogether, that the civilized world can look forward to a sort of tame war in the future, a war crossed with peace, a lap-dog war that will bark but not bite. War is war; it is the cessation of law and argument, it is outrage, and Germany has demonstrated on the large scale what our British suffragettes learned on a small one, that with every failure to accomplish your end by violent means you are forced to further outrages. Violence has no reserves but further violence. Each failure of the violent is met by the desperate cry, the heroical scream: "We will not be beaten. If you will not give in to us for this much, then see! We will go further." Wars always do go further. Wars always end more savagely than they begin. Even our war in South Africa, certainly the most decently conducted war in all history, got to farm burning and concentration camps. A side that hopes for victory fights with conciliation in its mind. Victory and conciliation recede together. When the German—who is really, one must remember, a human being like the rest of us, at the worst just merely a little worse in his upbringing—when he finds he cannot march gloriously into Paris or Warsaw, then, and only then, does he begin to try to damage Paris and Warsaw with bombs, when he finds he cannot beat the French Army and the British fleet, then, and not till then, does he attack and murder the slumbering civilians of Scarborough and Dunkirk, and lies in wait for and sinks the Lusitania. If war by the rules will not bring success, then harsher measures must be taken; let us suddenly torture and murder our hated enemies with poison gas, let us poison the South African wells, let us ill-treat prisoners and assassinate civilians. Let us abolish the noncombatant and the neutral. These are no peculiar German iniquities, though the Germans have brought them to an unparalleled perfection; they are the natural psychological consequences of aggressive war heroically conceived and bitterly thwarted; they are "fierceness"; they are the logical necessary outcome of going to war and being disappointed and getting hit hard and repeatedly. Any military nation in a corner will play the savage, the wildcat at bay, in this fashion, rather than confess itself done. And since the prophetic Bloch has been justified and the long inconclusiveness of modern war, with its intrenchments and entanglements, has been more than completely demonstrated, this is the way that every war in the future is likely to go. Fair and open conquest becoming more and more out of the question, each side will seek to cow, dismay, and subjugate the spirit of the other, and particularly the spirit of the noncombatant masses, by more and more horrible proceedings. "What do you think of that?" said the German officer, with a grin, as he was led prisoner past one of our soldiers, dying in agonies of asphyxiation. To that point war brings men. Probably at the beginning of the war he was quite a decent man. But once he was committed to war the fatal logic of our new resources in science laid hold of him. And war is war.

Now there does not appear the slightest hope of any invention that will make war more conclusive or less destructive; there are, however, the clearest prospects in many directions that it may be more destructive and less conclusive. It will be dreadfuller and bitterer; its horrors will be less and less forgivable; it will leave vast sundering floods of hate. The submarine and the aircraft are quite typical of the new order of things. You can sweep a visible fleet off the seas, you can drive an invading army into its own country, but while your enemy has a score of miles of coast line or a thousand square miles of territory left him, you cannot, it seems, keep his aircraft out of your borders, and still less can you keep his submarines out of the sea. You can, of course, make reprisals, but you can not hold him powerless as it was once possible to do. He can work his bloody mischief on your civil life to the very end of the war, and you must set your teeth and stick to your main attack. To that pitch this war has come, and to that pitch every subsequent war will come. The civil life will be treated as a hostage, and as it becomes more and more accessible, as it will do, to the antagonist it will be more and more destroyed. The sinking of the Lusitania is just a sign and a sample of what war now becomes, its rich and ever richer opportunities of unforgettable exasperation. Germany is resolved to hurt and destroy to the utmost, every exasperated militarism will come naturally to such resolves, and only by pain and destruction, by hurting, shaming and damaging Germany to the point of breaking the German spirit can this inflamed and war-mad people be made to relinquish their gigantic aggression upon the world. Germany, that great camp of warriors, must be broken as the Red Indians and the Zulus were broken, if civilization is to have another chance, and its breaking cannot be done without unparalleled resentments. War is war, and it is not the Allies who have forced its logic to this bitter end.

Unless this war does help to bring about a lasting peace in the world, it is idle to pretend that it will have been anything else but a monstrous experience of evil. If at the end of it we cannot bring about some worldwide political synthesis, unanimous enough and powerful enough to prohibit further wars by a stupendous array of moral and material force, then all this terrible year of stress and suffering has been no more than a waste of life, and our sons and brothers and friends and allies have died in vain. If we cannot summon enough good-will and wisdom in the world to establish a world alliance and a world congress to control the clash of "legitimate national aspirations" and "conflicting interests" and to abolish all the forensic trickeries of diplomacy, then this will be neither the last war, nor will it be the worst, and men must prepare themselves to face a harsh and terrible future, to harden their spirits against continuing and increasing adversity, and to steel their children to cruelty and danger. Revenge will become the burden of history. That is the price men will pay for clinging to their little separatist cults and monarchies and complete independencies, now. The traffic and wealth of our great and liberal age will diminish, the arts will dwindle and learning fade, science will cease to advance, and the rude and hard will inherit the earth. The Warpath or the World State; that is the choice for mankind.

This lesson of the submarine which destroys much and achieves nothing has ample support in history. There never was so blind a superstition as the belief that progress is inevitable. The world has seen the great civilization of the Western empire give place to the warring chaos of the baronial castles of the ninth and tenth centuries; it has seen the Eastern empire for 500 years decay and retrogress under the militarism of the Turk; it has watched the Red Indians, with rifles in their hands, grimly engage in mutual extermination. Is it still a blind world, doomed to blunder down again from such light and order and hope as we were born to, toward such another millennium of barbaric hates and aimless wars? That is no mere possibility; it is the present probability unless men exert themselves to make it impossible. It is quite conceivable that ours is the last generation for many generations that will go freely about the world, that will have abundance of leisure, and science and free speech and abundant art and much beauty and many varied occupations. We stand about in our old haunts and try to keep on with our old ways of living and speculate when the war will be "over," and when we shall be able to go back to everything just as it was before the war. This war and its consequences will never be "over," and we have not even begun to realize what it has cost us.

The course of human history is downward and very dark, indeed, unless our race can give mind and will now unreservedly in unprecedented abundance to the stern necessities that follow logically from the aircraft bomb and the poison gas and that silent, invisible, unattainable murderer, the submarine.

“Human Beings and Germans”

By Rudyard Kipling.

Addressing 10,000 persons at a recruiting rally in Southport, England, on June 21, 1915, Mr. Kipling spoke as reported in the subjoined cable dispatch to The New York Times .

T HE German went into this war with a mind which had been carefully trained out of the idea of every moral sense or obligation, private, public, or international. He does not recognize the existence of any law, least of all those he has subscribed to himself, in making war against com- [ Transcriber's Note: Text missing from original ] and children.

All mankind bears witness today that there is no crime, no cruelty, no abomination that the mind of man can conceive which the German has not perpetrated, is not perpetrating, and will not perpetrate if he is allowed to go on.

These horrors and perversions were not invented by him on the spur of the moment. They were arranged beforehand. Their outlines are laid down in the German war book. They are part of the system in which Germany has been scientifically trained. It is the essence of that system to make such a hell of countries where their armies set foot that any terms she may offer will seem like heaven to the people whose bodies she has defiled and whose minds she has broken of set purpose and intention.

So long as an unbroken Germany exists, so long will life on this planet be intolerable, not only for us and for our allies, but for all humanity.

There are only two divisions in the world today, human beings and Germans, and the German knows it. Human beings have long ago sickened of him and everything connected with him, of all he does, says, thinks, or believes.

From the ends of earth to the ends of the earth they desire nothing more greatly than that this unclean thing should be thrust out from membership and memory of the nations.

We have no reason to believe that Germany will break up suddenly and dramatically. She took two generations to prepare herself in every detail and through every fibre of her national being for this war. She is playing for the highest stakes in the world—the dominion of the world. It seems to me that she must either win or bleed to death almost where her lines run today.

Therefore, we and our allies must continue to pass our children through fire to Moloch until Moloch perish.

In Belgium at this hour several million Belgians are making war material or fortifications for their conquerors. They receive enough food to support life, as the German thinks it should be supported, (by the way, I believe the United States of America supplies a large part of that food.) In return they are compelled to work at the point of the bayonet. If they object, they are shot. They have no more property and no more rights than cattle, and they cannot lift a hand to protect the honor of their women.

If Germany is victorious, every refinement of outrage which is within the compass of the German imagination will be inflicted on us in every aspect of our lives. Realize, too, that if the Allies are beaten there will be no spot on the globe where a soul can escape from the domination of this enemy of mankind.

There has been childish talk that the Western Hemisphere would offer a refuge from oppression. Put that thought from your mind. If the Allies were defeated Germany would not need to send a single battleship over the Atlantic. She would issue an order, and it would be obeyed.

Civilization would be bankrupt, and the Western world would be taken over with the rest of the wreckage by Germany, the receiver.

So you see that there is no retreat possible. There are no terms and no retreat in this war. It must go forward, and with those men of England, who are eligible for service but who have not yet offered themselves, the decision of war rests.

This is, for us, in truth a war to death against the power of darkness with whom any peace except on our own terms would be more terrible than any war.

Garibaldi’s Promise.

By KATHERINE DRAYTON MAYRANT SIMONS, JR.

The Uncivilizable Nation

By Emile Verhaeren.

The Belgian poet whom Maurice Maeterlinck preferred should rank among the Immortals of the French Academy when that honor was bestowed upon himself, has contributed to Les Annales the following account of Germany and the German people. The translation is that appearing on June 11 in The Suffragette of England.

L IFE is not a means; life is an end. That is what we must tell ourselves in order really to live in this world. Hence the obligation to perfect life, to make it high and beautiful, to make a masterpiece of it. Hence too our contempt and hatred for those who wish to tarnish life, either by their thoughts or by their deeds.

Germany behaves as though it were the most backward among nations. And indeed it is in spite of appearances essentially feudal. There is perhaps a German culture, but there is no German civilization .

One may be well informed and yet be hardly civilized. A sense of duty to humanity, a sense of pride, a sense of liberty are independent, certainly not of intelligence, but are independent of mere knowledge of accumulated facts.

The German professor is a walking library. He collects, he arranges, he comments. Arrangement and discipline with him take the place of everything else, and they inculcate in him the spirit of dependence and of servility. It is perhaps because he classifies so much that he is so dully submissive. Everything according to his view is an ascending or descending scale. Everything is in its compartment.

How, then, can we be surprised if everything becomes materialized and the mind of each Teuton can lay claim to be nothing more than a sort of stiff and dingy compartment, in a sort of social chessboard.

It has already been said: The German invents almost nothing. He works upon the inventions of other people. In order to invent he would have to possess the spirit of rebellion against that which is. He is incapable of that spirit. He is a being who always accepts.

But as soon as a new discovery has been made by others the German gets hold of it. He examines it patiently. He turns and returns it this way, that way, and every way. He, as it were, criticises it. He thus succeeds in augmenting its power. Moreover, he wishes that it shall serve a practical purpose and be classified accordingly, just as he himself serves and is classified in life.

Never have the Germans opened up a great road in science. They open up only bypaths. Leibnitz and Kant joined their paths to the royal high road of Descartes. Haeckel would hardly have existed if Darwin had not existed. Koch and Behring are dependent upon the labors of Pasteur.

This second-hand science is excellent as a means of attracting mediocre minds. To work, each in his little corner, at solving some secondary question, and to believe one's self a somebody when one is hardly anybody, flatters the universal vanity. All the little provincial universities of Germany can live in the illusion that they are full of learned men—thanks to the German conception of what is learned and serious!

It is a system of regimenting in great barracks of laboratories. It is the absolute negation of the spirit of initiative of spontaneity and it is above all the negation of the spirit of protest and revolt.

If the German people had been truly civilized they would never have maintained silence before the assassination of Belgium. Even among those whose ideas are contrary to the existing political order in Germany, none has risen up against this crime admitted and proclaimed at the beginning of the war in full Parliament by the Chancellor Bethmann-Hollweg himself. The universal astonishment at such a silence was so great that even today the world has not recovered from it. Apart from Liebknecht the whole of German Social Democracy is dishonored: it is desired to expel the German Socialists from the International Socialist Movement. They excuse themselves; they aggravate their fault. They say:

In the German Socialist Party everything has been reduced to method and organized as in the German universities and the German Army.

There were I know not how many Socialist electors; German Socialism was thought to be already triumphant and invincible. People said: "They are Germany!"

The German Socialists were held up as an example to all the democracies of the earth.

Those who swore by the German Socialists affirmed that they would devour Kaiserism when it should become necessary. But last August in one hour in the Reichstag it was the German Socialist Party that was devoured!

When recently certain German Socialists visited the Maison du Peuple of Brussels they expressed astonishment that the Socialists of Belgium should attach so much importance to the invasion of their country.

Yet a true civilization has as its framework precisely honor. Honor is not a bourgeois ideal, but an aristocratic ideal. It was slowly created by the flower of humanity throughout the centuries. When force becomes educated, force opposes itself. It limits and incloses itself. It becomes intelligent and tempered by reserve and by tact. Brutal force thus changes into moral force, power becomes justice.

The more a nation lends itself to such a change, the more it rises from the material plane toward the spiritual plane. The more it enshrines in its institution respect for humanity as a whole, the greater and more civilized it becomes. Such a nation remains faithful to its pledged word; neither interest nor even necessity moves it to commit felony. It loves to protect and not to oppress those who are weaker than itself. It has at heart the work of propagating throughout the world certain principles of social life which certainly are utopian, but are yet beautiful to have before the eyes and in the heart, in order to live not only for the present, but also for the future.

These admirable principles which may never be put wholly into practice, but toward which we must try to grow always nearer, are the expression of the deepest human generosity. They are the radical negation of brutal and primitive force; they incline the world toward a unanimous and serene peace. They have based on faith the infinite perfectibility of conscience. Only a nation of a high degree of civilization can conceive of relations so perfect between human beings and cherish dreams so great.

Germany was never capable of this. The individual German is the least subtle and the least susceptible to education of any in the world.

It has been my lot to take part in certain European capitals in a number of reunions where English, French, Italians, and Germans came together and conversed. They were all, I was assured, distinguished people, of whom their respective nations might be proud. Now, the German was rarely to be seen in an excellent attitude. He was at once embarrassed and arrogant. He lacked refinement. His politeness was clumsy. He was as though afraid of seeming not to know everything. The most eccentric taste seemed to him the best taste. To him to be up to date was to be up to the minute. He would have been wretched if any one in his presence had claimed to be up to the second.

As soon as he had the chance to speak and got a hearing, he inaugurated, as it were, a course of lectures. Clearness was not at all necessary to him. One rarely understood precisely what he meant. The fastidiousness and subtlety which led others to seek perfection in phrase and thought had little attraction for him. With what heaviness the German diplomat discusses matters at the council table! With what clumsiness the German conqueror plants himself in a conquered country! While France, at the end of half a century, makes herself beloved in Savoy, at Mentone, and at Nice, while in the space of two centuries she assimilates Lille and Dunkirk and Strasburg and Alsace; while England in a few decades unites to her Egypt and the Cape, Germany remains detested in Poland, Schleswig, and in Alsace-Lorraine. Germany is essentially the persona ingrata everywhere it presents itself. It knows only the methods that divide, and not those which unite. Germany makes proclamations that act upon the mind as the frost acts upon plants. Germany knows neither how to attract nor how to charm nor how to civilize, because she has no personal and profound moral force.

Europe under the successive spiritual hegemonies of Athens, Rome, and Paris remained the most admirable centre of human development that has ever been.

Under German hegemony Europe would move toward a sort of gloomy and hard organization under which everything would be impeccable, arranged only because everything would be tyrannized over from above.

For the true Germany—we have today the sad but immovable conviction of this—was never that of Goethe, of Beethoven, nor of Heine. It was that of implacable Landgraves and fierce soldiers.

For thousands of years Germany has let loose its hordes upon Europe; Vandals, Visigoths, Alains, Franks, Herules. Germany continues to do this at the present day. It is Germany's terrible and sinister function.

Only let us not deceive ourselves as to this point in future, Germany is the dangerous nation because it is the uncivilizable nation, because its castles, its fields, and its barracks have remained the inexhausted, and perhaps the inexhaustible, reservoirs of human ferocity.

Retreat in the Rain.

By O.C.A. CHILD.

War a Game for Love and Honor

By Jerome K. Jerome

The chivalrous spirit of the present conflict informs this article, which appeared originally in The London Daily News under the title "The Greatest Game of All: The True Spirit of War," and is here reproduced by special permission of Mr. Jerome.

W AR has been described as the greatest of games. I am not going to quarrel with the definition. I am going to accept it. From that point of view there is something to be said for it. As a game it can be respectable; as a business it is contemptible. Wars for profit—for gold mines, for mere extension of territory, for markets—degrade a people. It is like playing cricket for money. A gentleman—man or nation—does not do such things. But war for love—for love of the barren hillside, for love of the tattered flag, for love of the far-off dream—played for a hope, a vision, a faith, with life and death as the stakes! Yes, there is something to be said for it.

Looked at practically, what, after all, does it matter whether Germany or Britannia rules the waves? Our tea and our 'baccy, one takes it, would still be obtainable; one would pay for it in marks instead of shillings. Our sailor men, instead of answering "Aye, aye, Sir," in response to Captain's orders, would learn to grunt "Jawohl." Their wages, their rations would be much the same.

These peaceful Old World villages through which I love to wander with my dogs; these old gray churches round which our dead have crept to rest; these lonely farmsteads in quiet valleys musical with the sound of mother creatures calling to their young; these old men with ruddy faces; these maidens with quiet eyes who give me greeting as we pass by in the winding lanes between the hedgerows; the gentle, patient horses nodding gravely on their homeward way; these tiny cottages behind their trim bright gardens; this lilliputian riot round the schoolhouse door; the little timid things in fur and feather peering anxious, bright-eyed from their hiding places! Suppose the miracle to happen. Suppose the weather-beaten board nailed to the old beech tree warning us in faded lettering as we pass beneath it of the penalties awaiting trespassers were to be superseded by a notice headed "Verboten!" What essential difference would there be—that a wise man need vex his soul concerning? We should no longer call it England. That would be all. The sweep of the hills would not be changed; the path would still wind through the woodland. Yet just for a name we are ready to face ruin and death.

It certainly is not business. A business man would stop to weigh the pros and cons. A German invasion! It would bring what so many of us desire: Conscription, tariff reform. It might even get rid of Lloyd George and the Insurance act. And yet that this thing shall not be, Tory Squire and Laborer Hodge, looking forward to a lifelong wage of twelve-and-six-pence a week, will fight shoulder to shoulder, die together, if need be, in the same ditch. Just for a symbol, a faith we call England. I should say Britain.

Can we explain it even to ourselves? Thousands of Germans come over to England to live. They prosper among us, take their pleasures with us, adapt themselves to our English ways, and learn to prefer them. Thousands of Englishmen make their homes in German cities; find German ways of living, if anything, suit them better. Suddenly there arises the question, shall English ways of life or German ways of life prevail: English or German culture—which shall it be? And the English who have lived contentedly in Germany for years hasten back to fight for England, and the desire of every German in England is to break up his pleasant home among us and fight to bring all Europe into German ways of thinking.

Just as all life is a game; joy and sorrow the zest of it, suffering the strength-giving worth of it. Till Death rings his bell, and the game is over—for the present. What have we learned from it? What have we gained from it? Have we played it to our souls' salvation, learning from it courage, manhood? Or has it broken us, teaching us mean fear and hate?

Although I can't pretend to like this nightmare, I cannot help realizing that it is doing something for those of us who are going through it that we otherwise would have missed; it brings out either the best or worst in a man. It makes character.

He speaks of a little black dog. They are living in two feet of water, he and his men. The German lines are a hundred yards off; wounds, disease, and death are around them. They are worried about this wretched little dog. He has, it seems, lost his people, and is not to be comforted. It is a curious picture. One sees the straggling line of grimy, mud-stained men. They are there to kill; their own life hangs on a thread. A nightmare of blood and dust and horror, and in the midst of it, growing there as if the soil suited it, this flower of pity for a little fellow-creature.

I can assure you there is none of that insensate hatred that one hears about out here. We are out to kill, and kill we do at every opportunity. But when it is all over the splendid universal soldier spirit comes over all the men. Just to give you some idea of what I mean, the other night four German snipers were shot on our wire. The next night our men went out and brought one in who was near and getatable and buried him. They did it with just the same reverence and sadness as they do our own dear fellows. I went to look at the grave next morning, and one of the most uncouth-looking men in my company had placed a cross at the head of the grave, and had written on it:

And under that "Got mitt uns," (sic,) that being the highest effort of all the men at German.

"Got mitt uns." One has the idea that He is—when the game is played in that spirit. God with us both, shaping brotherhood out of enmity.

Bernard Shaw in a moment of inspiration thinks that some way will have to be found enabling England and Germany to live together peaceably for the future. It is an idea that may possibly have occurred to others. Well, perhaps this is the way. Shaw would not approve of it. But then there is so much in human nature that Shaw does not approve of. There are times when one is compelled to a great pity for Shaw. He seems to have got into the wrong world. He is for ever thanking God that he is not as we other men—we Englishmen and Germans, mere publicans and sinners. It is a difficult world to understand, I admit, my dear Shaw, full of inconsistencies and contradictions. Perhaps there is a meaning in it somewhere that you have missed.

Perhaps we have got to fight one another before we understand one another. In the old Norse mythology Love is the wife of Strife; when we come to consider the nature of man, not such an odd union as it appears.

So long as the law runs that in sorrow woman shall bring forth her child; so long as the ground shall yield to the sons of Adam thorns also and thistles, so long will there be strife between man and man. So long, when the last word has been spoken and has failed, will there be war between the nations. The only hope of civilization is to treat it as a game. You cannot enforce a law without a policeman. You can only appeal to a man's honor—to his sporting instincts.

The mistake Germany is making is in not treating war as a game. To do so would be weakness and frivolity. War must be ruthless, must be frightful. It is not to be bound down by laws human or Divine. And even then she is not logical. Two German officers interned in Holland are released on parole. Taking their country at her word, they hasten back to rejoin their regiments. The German Staff is shocked, sends them back to be imprisoned.

So there really are rules to the game. An officer and gentleman may not lie. If a Sub-Lieutenant may not lie for the sake of his country, then what argument gives the right to the German Government to tear up its treaties, to the German Military Staff to disregard its Ambassador's signature to The Hague Convention?

Come, shade of Bismarck, and your disciples in Germany and other countries, (including a few in my own,) make up your mind. To be ruthless and frightful in a half-hearted, nervous, vacillating fashion is ridiculous. You have either got to go back to the beginning of things, and make war a battle of wild beasts, or you have got to go forward and make it a game—a grim game, I grant you, but one that the nations can play at and shake hands afterward. We have tried the ruthless and frightful method. We used to slaughter the entire population. To shoot a selected few is to court a maximum of contempt for a minimum of advantage. We used to lay waste the land. We did not content ourselves with knocking down a church spire and burning a library. We left not one stone upon another. We sowed salt where the cities had been. We tortured our prisoners before the ramparts. We did not "leave them their eyes to weep with"; we burned them out with hot irons; surely a much swifter means of striking terror! Why not return to these methods? They sound most effective.

They were not effective. God's chosen people—according to themselves—did not annihilate the Philistines, not even with the help of the Ark of the Covenant. The Philistines tightened their belts and acquitted themselves like men. Today the heathen rules in Canaan. Where Mohammed failed the shade of Bismarck is not likely to succeed. Poland is still a sore in European politics. The whole force of the Vatican could not suppress a handful of reformers. All the bloodthirsty edicts of the Revolution could not annihilate a few thousand aristocrats. These things cannot be done. War finishes nothing, it only interrupts. A nation cannot be killed; it can only die. This war is not going to be the end of all things either for Germany or for us. Germany can be beaten to her knees, as she beat France to her knees in 1870; as more than once before that France has beaten her. Later on we have all got to live together in peace, for a while.

Come, gentlemen, let us make an honorable contest of it, that shall leave as little of bitterness behind it as may be. Let us see if we cannot make a fine game of it that we shall be all the better for having played out to the end. From which we shall all come back home cleaner minded, clearer seeing, made kinder to one another by suffering. Come, gentlemen, you believe that God has called upon you to spread German culture through the lands. You are ready to die for your faith. And we believe God has a use for the thing called England. Well, let us fight it out. There seems no other way. You for St. Michael and we for St. George; and God be with us both.

But do not let us lose our common humanity in the struggle. That were the worst defeat of all—the only defeat that would really matter, that would really be lasting.

Let us call it a game. After all, what else is it? We have been playing it since the dawn of creation; and it has settled nothing—but the names of things. Its victories, its defeats! Time wipes them off the slate, with a smile.

I quote from a letter written by the officer who boarded the Emden. He speaks of the German officers: "A thoroughly nice fellow"—"also a good fellow." The order is given that there be no cheering from the Sydney when entering the harbor with her prisoners. English sailormen have fought with German sailormen; have killed a good many of them. It is over. No crowing, gentlemen—over fellow-sailormen. Our writer discusses the fight generally with Captain von Muller. "We agreed it was our job to knock one another out. But there was no malice in it."

We shall do better to regard war as a game—a game to be played for love, for honor, without hatred, without malice. So only shall we profit by it.

How England Prevented an
Understanding With Germany

By Dr. Th. Schiemann.

The writings of Professor Schiemann of the University of Berlin, who is also the leading editorial writer of the Kreuz Zeitung, are regarded as inspired by the Kaiser's Government, and in some degree by the Kaiser himself. Dr. Schiemann is often spoken of as an intimate personal friend of the Kaiser. The subjoined article was, in the original, sent by Dr. Schiemann to Professor John Bates Clark of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, with the special request that it be translated and forwarded for publication in The New York Times Current History .

A FTER the great crisis of the first world war, which terminated in the Congress of Vienna, the relations of England to the German States were fairly good. People lived in the protecting shade of the great alliance; England was busy digesting the enormous prey which it had seized at the expense of all the other powers that had taken part in the war; Continental Europe was endeavoring, as best it could, to heal the wounds and sores which had remained behind as mementos of oppressive but, despite all, glorious years. France recuperated most rapidly; by the Treaties of Paris there had been recovered from it only part of the abundant harvest which it had gathered in consequence of the victories and the coercive policy of Napoleon; the national soil was still fertile and the national consciousness was still imbued with the "gloire" which the Corsican General, with the help of his own and of foreign troops, had won for the French name. The great disturbances of world peace that marked the years 1830, 1854, and 1870 were attributable to an incessant pursuit of new "gloire," to which all other aims were subordinate. Parallel with this French striving for new "gloire" was England's endeavor to keep the Continent in a feverish condition; this was the policy of Lord Palmerston, and with it was combined a hysterical fear of attack on the part of possible enemies that were thought to exist in Russia, and especially in France. At the same time an arrogant challenge was constantly held forth to all the nations of the earth, and an almost uninterrupted war was carried on against the small States adjoining England's colonies in Asia and Africa. Between the years 1856 and 1900 England waged no less than thirty-four such wars, and by so doing acquired 4,000,000 square miles of land and 57,000,000 subjects. In Europe after the year 1815 England, for the most part, kept peace; the Crimean war, which was a coalition war, constitutes an exception, and it was not England's fault that Prussia, too, was not drawn into that war, which concerned a specifically English interest. At that time English threats were quite as numerous as they were in the year 1863, when The Daily News declared King William I. an outlaw, and The Daily Mail proclaimed for him the fate of Charles I. The cause of this, however, was that in London it was looked upon as an interference with English interests that Bismarck, by his attitude during the Polish insurrection, had prevented the effectuation of a coalition directed against Russia. During the war of 1864 over Schleswig-Holstein the threats were renewed, and even then we began to hear the watchwords with which public opinion in England for a decade has been mobilized against us: A Germany organized on a military basis, and with a fleet at its command besides, indicates that the goal of that State's policy, even more than in the case of France, is world rule. At that time, too, however, France and Russia were regarded by English war makers as the country's real enemies, and this conviction, rather than ideal considerations of any kind whatsoever, accounts for the fact that in the years 1870 and 1871 English policy followed a neutral course. England wished to see France weakened, had not foreseen Germany's great success, and had reserved for future opportunities the settlement of accounts with Russia, its very annoying rival in Asia.

In other respects, however, Bismarck was by no means satisfied with the way in which England pursued its policy of "neutrality." He had expected, at least, that the English would condemn the war, begun, as it was, in such a criminal manner, and not that they would carry on with France a flourishing trade in weapons. "It is a surprising fact, pregnant with warning," he wrote in May, 1874, "that Mr. Gladstone succeeded so easily in holding the country to an attitude directly opposed to the traditional hostility of the English masses toward France." He had all the more reason to expect a different attitude in view of the fact that, as was well known in England, it had been out of regard for England that Bismarck in December, 1870, had refused an offer of peace from Thiers, which rested on the condition that Belgium should be united to France under the rule of King Leopold. After the battle of Sedan Lord Odo Russell and Disraeli aroused the fears of the English people over the possibility of a German invasion; but Bismarck, nevertheless, was thinking of an English-German alliance, which, on account of the blood relationship of the two dynasties, was by no means impracticable, and which to Queen Victoria would have seemed a natural combination. Subsequently, in the years 1873 and 1874, Bismarck negotiated with Lord Odo Russell in Berlin regarding a German-English alliance, and through Münster he also took up the matter with Disraeli, who denied very emphatically that he had French sympathies. Nothing, he said, was more incorrect. The two peoples, he alleged further, who alone could proceed hand in hand, and who must become more and more cognizant of that fact, were Germany and England. The power of France, he added, was on the wane, a fact regarding which the demoralization of the empire, the decrease of population, and the course of recent events left no room for doubt. Notwithstanding Disraeli's views, however, the alliance with England, as is well known, was never formed. The most serious obstacle was created by the fact that party government in England rendered binding obligations extraordinarily difficult. Then came all sorts of pinpricks, as, for instance, Derby's advocacy in the year 1875 of Gortchakoff's famous rescue campaign. But despite all Bismarck held fast to the idea of bringing about closer relations with England, and the formation of the alliance with Austria-Hungary confirmed him in that purpose. "We shall have to adjust our attitude more and more," he wrote to Schweinitz in March, 1880, "with the object of increasing the security of our relations with Austria and England." It was this political desire that prompted him to reject a Russian proposal to unite the four Eastern powers in a common protest against England's isolated procedure in connection with the occupation of Egypt. He wished to prevent England from being humiliated by a prearranged coalition. A letter from Bismarck to Salisbury (July 8, 1885) has been preserved, which is very characteristic of this friendly attitude of German policy. "As to politics," he writes, "I have not the slightest doubt that the traditional friendly relations between the two dynasties, as well as between the two nations, will give sufficient security for settling every existing or arising question in a conciliatory way."

With respect to the question of the Egyptian loan that was being discussed at that time, as well as with respect to the burning Afghan question, Bismarck adhered tenaciously to this policy, and later on, too, he was determined to spin the threads further. In the latter part of the Autumn of 1887 an exchange of letters again took place between Lord Salisbury and Prince Bismarck, wherein the latter gave expression to the idea that Austria and England were the natural allies of Germany. If they were opposed to an alliance it would be necessary for Germany to alter its policy entirely and to think about establishing more intimate relations with Russia. This, properly considered, was an invitation to enter into negotiations regarding an alliance treaty. But Salisbury, who hoped for a conflict of the Continental powers which would insure England's position of power for another generation, answered evasively, and Bismarck justly regarded his reply as a rejection. But such a conflict did not arise. The menacing danger brought about by Alexander III. was overcome by the publication of the German-Austrian treaty of alliance. Even then, however, Bismarck did not give up the idea of bringing about closer relations with England. In December, 1888, he wrote: "The promotion of common feeling with England is primo loco to be encouraged." If Bismarck had left behind a political testament this sentence would in all probability be contained in it. Such was also the attitude which our Emperor has consistently maintained from his accession to the throne until the outbreak of the present war. He was a favorite of the old Queen, and the treaty signed on July 1, 1890, whereby we obtained possession of Heligoland by relinquishing our claims to Witu and Zanzibar, was an outward sign of an honest endeavor on the part of both nations to bring about closer mutual relations. The mutual limitation of spheres of interest in East and West Africa in the year 1893, and the friendly adjustment of the conflict which Article III. of the British Agreement with the Congo Free State of the year 1894 had threatened to bring about, might be considered additional symptoms of this general disposition or tendency.

The year 1896, however, brought disturbances; the telegram which Emperor William on Jan. 5 sent to President Kruger, after the predatory invasion of Dr. Jameson had been fortunately repelled, was received very unfavorably in England, and led to demonstrations on the part of the British fleet, which, although they had a very provocative character, remained finally without lasting effect. The impression was created, however, that public opinion in England was very easily excited; it saw itself disturbed in the execution of a thoroughly considered political plan, and, as it were, caught in flagranti. But the fact that there were still deeper reasons for a gradually increasing mistrust of Germany is brought to light by Wilson's book, published in 1896, which, under the title "Made in Germany," developed a program of battle against Germany's rapidly growing economic power. Since then all steps taken by Germany in the pursuit of its internal as well as its external policy have been viewed with extraordinary disapprobation on the part of England. The adoption of our Naval bill by the Reichstag on March 28, 1898, the foundation of the Naval League two days later, the new East-Asiatic policy of Germany, which in the leasing of Kiao-Chau was exemplified in a manner not at all to the liking of the English politicians, the Emperor's trip to the Orient, which led to friendly relations between Turkey and Germany—all this was looked upon with the more displeasure in view of the fact that Emperor William in the Summer of 1895 had emphatically rejected a plan, proposed to him by Lord Salisbury, to divide up Turkey. In August, 1898, nevertheless, when the Fashoda crisis had strained the relations of England and France to the utmost, and when, at the same time, English-Russian relations were becoming critical in the Far East, an understanding between Germany and England, which might perhaps have the character of an alliance, seemed to be quite possible. Secretary of State von Bülow and the English Ambassador, Sir Frank Lascelles, took up the matter very earnestly, but it was impossible to secure from England the assurance that the entire English Government and Parliament would sanction an alliance. Russia warded off the menacing danger of a war with England by means of the well-known proposal which on May 18, 1899, led to the holding of the Disarmament Conference in The Hague, and Delcassé on Jan. 20, 1899, began, with reference to the Fashoda affair, the policy of retreat, which excluded France from the Nile territory. Then came England's war against the Boers. It is well known how the German Government during this war scrupulously maintained its neutrality (not according to the English method) despite the fact that all the sympathies of the German people were with the Boers in their struggle for freedom. It is not so well known, on the other hand, that the Imperial Government rejected a Russian proposal to form an alliance against England. That, too, was a service for which England has not thanked us. Of the tragedy in South Africa it has retained in mind only one incident, the so-called "Kruger Message," which it regarded as an interference with its right to do violence to a weaker power, figuratively speaking, as a slap in the face.

In the course of the war the old Queen died, and Edward VII. entered upon his fateful reign. Emperor William had gone over to London to attend the funeral of his grandmother, and Prince Henry had accompanied him, so that the dynastic relationship was made most conspicuous. After that the political relations of the two States seemed about to shape themselves most propitiously. Of the fact that the Anglo-Japanese Alliance, concluded on Jan. 30, 1902, was directed against Russia, there was never for a moment any doubt; indeed it was Japan, not England, which took the initiative in bringing it about. On the other hand, the co-operation of English and German war vessels in adjusting the difficulties which both powers had with Venezuela was in complete harmony with the political wishes and convictions of Emperor William, who, like Bismarck at an earlier date, was of the opinion that the interests of the two nations could readily be reconciled. But in England that co-operation resulted in an excited anti-German campaign on the part of the press. The Times, The National Review, The Daily News, The Daily Telegraph, The Daily Express, and other newspapers vehemently attacked the Government for acting conjointly with us, and there can be no doubt that in so doing they gave expression, not to the ideas of the Balfour Ministry, but to the sentiments which, as was well known in those journalistic circles, were held by King Edward. Balfour, in an address which he delivered in Liverpool on Feb. 13, 1903, had opposed with great emphasis the arousing of English public opinion against Germany. "We wish," he said, "to bear in mind an old ideal, namely, that all the nations which stand in the front ranks of civilization should learn to work together in the interest of the whole, and that nothing any longer stands in the way of the realization of this high ideal save those national bitternesses, jealousies, and hostilities.... As far as Venezuela is concerned, that is passing over ... but with respect to the future it fills me with anxiety when I think how easy it is to stir up the fire of international jealousy, and how hard it is to quench it." It was all the harder in view of the fact that the King, from the very beginning of his reign, adhered tenaciously to the political idea of using the old French revanche notion as the cardinal point of English policy.

In April, 1903, the King began a series of political trips to Portugal, Spain, France, and Austria, while Berlin, very strangely, was not visited by him. Each one of these visits resulted in political agreements, into which Vienna alone declined to enter, and which, after a return visit on the part of Loubet, at that time President of the French Republic, and after a surprising visit in Paris on the part of certain members of the English Parliament, led to the significant English-French agreement of April 8, 1904, a treaty which culminated in the balancing of Morocco against Egypt and made it possible for the English Government, as soon as it chose, to regulate the Morocco question in such a way that it would necessarily bring about a conflict between France and isolated Germany. The ally of King Edward was the French Minister of Foreign Affairs, Delcassé, who, on the basis of the agreements made with England, had likewise concluded treaties with Spain and Italy, which, as he confidently assumed, insured the pénétration pacifique, i.e., the conquest, unhindered by Europe, of Morocco. How this plan presently fell through and how Delcassé was overthrown shall not be related here; on the other hand, attention should be called to the intimidating efforts to which England resorted for the purpose of exerting pressure upon Germany. The first effort of this nature took the form of an address delivered on Feb. 3, 1905, by Arthur Lee, a Civil Lord of the English Admiralty, who threatened the German fleet with destruction; the second effort came after Emperor William had landed in Tangier on March 31 and after Delcassé had been overthrown, and took the form of an appearance of an English fleet before Swinemünde, on which occasion it was officially asserted that the resolution had been adopted back in May, that is, at a time when the intrigues of Delcassé were culminating and when a war between Germany and France seemed likely to break out at any time. For even after Delcassé's overthrow England did not give up the game as lost; it declined to take part in a conference regarding Morocco and considered in all seriousness the question of an invasion. England's naval superiority was so great that the success of such an invasion could not seem doubtful, and in London it was thought that they could even do without the support of France. These plans were finally given up; for some time it was not known very well in London what decisions had been reached in the meeting between the Czar and Emperor William at Bjorkö, and there was a feeling of uncertainty. Accordingly, England also sent delegates to the conference at Algeciras, wherein we were obliged to deal solely, except for the Austrian delegates, with friends of the English-French combination.

The result, therefore, could only be a vague understanding, wherein was concealed the germ of subsequent conflicts. The first consequence, nevertheless, was a relaxation of German-English relations. In December, 1905, a Liberal Ministry had taken the helm, and the idea was conceived of diverting Germany by other means from the pursuit of a "world policy." Sir Edward Grey championed the contention that more intimate relations between England and Germany were, to be sure, desirable, but could only be effected if we swallowed France's Morocco policy unflinchingly, like bitter medicine. For this event Mr. Haldane, the new Minister of War, proposed an understanding between us similar to that which England had reached with France. This constituted the preliminary step toward an endeavor to effect more intimate relations, an endeavor which at first had a non-official character. German Burgomasters visited the City of London and were cordially received by King Edward himself. This was followed, in August, 1906, by a meeting between the King and his imperial nephew, in Homburg vor der Höhe, which, as was to be expected, passed off in a satisfactory manner. It should, nevertheless, be recalled to mind that the King expressed himself very ironically on the subject of The Hague Conference, which, he asserted, was a humbug. And Sir Charles Hardinge, who entered into negotiations with Secretary of State von Tschirschky, also voiced the opinion that the conference should offer no opportunity for serious interference with England's naval policy. On this point English and German views concurred, though from different motives. In the following September the English Minister of War, Mr. Haldane, was our guest. He came for the purpose of studying German military organization, and every conceivable courtesy was extended to him. In the addresses which he delivered after his return to England he referred many times to his sojourn in Berlin. He also made the assertion that the relations of England to France were closer and more intimate than ever before, that to Russia they were friendly, and that to Germany they were better than they recently had been. We now know—a fact which the Liberté also divulged at that time—that an English-French military convention had then been signed with reference to future possibilities. This fact was immediately denied, but it was merely a question of word quibbling. No convention, to be sure, was actually signed by the Government, but the "inner circle" of the Cabinet undoubtedly agreed that "conversations" between the military authorities of the two nations should take place, and these military conversations were held regularly, just as if a secret alliance existed, until the outbreak of the present war. Parallel with these political preparations were efforts that stood in sharp contrast to the irritating activities carried on without interruption by the above-mentioned anti-German press, which we embrace under the name "Pearson and Harmsworth Press." In England, as well as in Germany, societies were organized with the object of mitigating and, if possible, entirely abolishing the differences and antagonisms which existed between the two nations; these were the so-called "Friendship Committees." In England the Duke of Argyll and Lord Avebury were at the head of such a committee, and a visit made to London by representatives of our press initiated a well-meant movement which found enthusiastic representatives on both sides. English and German clergymen traveled back and forth between England and Germany, representatives of the English press paid a return visit to Germany, English and German workingmen's representatives endeavored to cement feelings of friendship by making personal observations and acquaintances, and in a similar way representatives of the Parliamentary groups of both countries thought and acted, while the leaders of science were working together at congresses held in Berlin and London. In this way were formed a number of valuable personal relations which led to political friendships and resulted in a conscious co-operation toward an honest English-German understanding.

These efforts continued until shortly before the month of August, 1914. One may safely say, moreover, that nobody has interceded more zealously and more constantly for English-German friendship and co-operation and for the removal of the difficulties that are ever cropping up anew than our Emperor. The enthusiasm with which Emperor William was always received in England on occasion of his numerous visits, especially in November and December, 1907, again in 1910, when he went to London to attend the funeral of Edward VII., and again in 1911, when he visited King George, would be absolutely inconceivable hypocrisy, which we regard as out of the question, had it not been the spontaneous expression of popular sentiment. Official English policy, however, followed other channels. As early as the year 1907 Sir Edward Grey had succeeded in securing from Russia an agreement which united England and Russia in co-operation at the expense of Persia, but which, indirectly, also affected German interests, the injury to which was later happily warded off by the Treaty of Potsdam. It soon became evident, moreover, that England, in concluding the agreement relating to Persia, was in reality less concerned about protecting its Asiatic interests than it was about including Russia in that coalition by means of which it expected to put a stop to the "world policy" of Germany and to check the further development of the German fleet. This became very distinctly evident on June 9, 1908, when a meeting took place at Reval between Edward VII. and Nicholas II. At that time it was agreed and decided between Hardinge and Iswolski, not officially, but in an oral exchange of views, that Russia would be ready to proceed hand in hand with England in European affairs (i.e., in the policy directed against Germany) as soon as it had sufficiently recovered from the after-effects of the war with Japan and the revolution. It was thought that this regeneration of Russia's military power would take six or eight years. The scope of this agreement is very obvious. Whereas Germany, during the persistent danger of a war with France over Morocco, had hitherto considered it highly probable that England would maintain a neutral attitude, it was obliged, as soon as England drew nearer to the Dual Alliance, to figure at all events upon a malevolent neutrality and very likely indeed upon open hostility. Sir Edward Grey, to be sure, who had not yet escaped from the anxiety with which English friends of peace were following the King's trip to Russia, in order to cover up his game, on July 7 had declared in the lower house, in reply to a question directed to the Government, that the visit of the King by no means had any diplomatic significance which might lead to an alliance or to an agreement or to any kind of a convention; no negotiations were being entered into, he asserted, for the purpose of concluding a treaty or a convention with Russia, nor would any such treaty or convention be concluded during the King's visit. But he went on to say that the visit would have some political effect, and it was very true that political effect was desired. "We wish that the visit shall exert a beneficent influence upon the mutual relations of both empires." Public opinion in England allowed itself to be satisfied with this equivocal, oracular statement. In other countries, however, a keener insight was displayed. The New York Times judged the situation correctly when it said: "It is always a mistake to force a warm friend, who is at the same time a business friend, a blood relative, out of intimate and useful friendship into bitter antagonism, and this mistake, according to the judgment of all non-partisan observers of contemporary history, has been committed by King Edward." When Edward VII. acceded to the throne, it went on to say, England was a warm friend of Germany and of the German Emperor, who had given numerous proofs of his friendship, and was not only willing but anxious to become England's ally; now, however, the guns of the two nations were, so to speak, pointed at each other.

H.M. GEORGE V.
King of Great Britain and Ireland and of the British Dominions
Beyond the Seas, Emperor of India
( Photo from W. & D. Downey )

H.I.M. NICHOLAS II.
Czar of All the Russias, and the Grand Duke Alexis Nicholaievitch,
the Heir Apparent
( Photo from Underwood & Underwood )

Such, indeed, was the actual case; a determined malevolence on the part of the King, the English statesmen, and that newspaper trust organized by Pearson and Harmsworth, began to mobilize Europe against Germany, and to incense, by means of cable and telegraph, the judgment of the world against our Emperor and against the German policy. No means seemed too infamous if it served this purpose. Over a private letter which Emperor William had sent to Admiral Lord Tweedmouth for the purpose of checking false rumors that were maliciously being spread abroad regarding our naval policy, The Times made a terrible fuss in order to disseminate the notion that Emperor William was interfering with the internal policy of Great Britain with a view to injuring English military power. The excitement of public opinion in England was then utilized by the press for the purpose of creating a sentiment in favor of a concentration of the British fleet in the North Sea. That, however, was certainly done at the instigation of the Government, which was fond of attributing resolutions it had already adopted to the pressure of public opinion throughout the country. The naval manoeuvres which in July, 1908, were carried out in the North Sea, close to our coastline, were participated in by a combination of the canal fleet and the so-called home fleet, and they bore a very provocative and demonstrative character. At this time, moreover, appeared that widely read book by Percival A. Hislam, entitled "The Admiralty of the Atlantic," the expositions of which culminated in the statement that a war between England and Germany was unavoidable, and that the sooner it broke out the shorter it would be and the less money and blood it would cost. All this, however, is rendered easily intelligible by the fact that the Balkan crisis, in consequence of the annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, had at that time assumed a very dangerous aspect, and was threatening to bring on a war between Austria and Russia and perhaps a world war, wherein England expected to gain its own particular ends. It was therefore a severe disappointment to English statesmen that Nicholas II., despite the vociferous protests of the Serbs, and despite the decidedly warlike attitude of the Russian people on March 25, 1909, recognized the annexation. The disappointment was all the more severe for the reason that shortly before that time, despite the still menacing conflict over Casablanca, the Morocco difficulties between Germany and France were also settled. On Feb. 9, 1909, the day on which King Edward made his first visit in Berlin, a German-French agreement regarding Morocco was signed, and in the latter part of May the Casablanca conflict was also adjusted by arbitration to the tolerable satisfaction of both contestants.

It is not too much to say that King Edward, in so far as he was able, did his best to bring about another outcome, and in England this was generally recognized. "There must be a definitive stopping of the King's interference in foreign politics," declared Mr. Sidebotham, M.P., in the Reform Club at Manchester during this crisis. His words were loudly approved by his hearers, but his voice, as well as the voice of other men in favor of establishing good relations with Germany, was drowned without effect under the influence of the panic which from the end of the year 1908 until well on into the Summer of 1909 kept all England in a state of excitement. Watchwords denoting the necessity of taking immediate action against the German fleet, as they were published in The Standard, The Morning Post, and in the great monthly periodicals, The Nineteenth Century, the Fortnightly Review, and The National Review, were echoed in the negotiations of Parliament, and they dominated the Maritime Law Conference held in London. The naval manoeuvres of July, 1909, brought together all three English fleets, and the plan was conceived of summoning the fleets of the larger colonies. A meeting of newspaper publishers, called in London, was designed to carry on propaganda for these ideas, and the Imperial Defense Conference, also held in London, proposed that England should be supported by its large colonies, though, to be sure, with certain reservations. In order to weaken the impression which Russia's recognition of the annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina had created, the Czar visited the English fleet at Spithead, and for the same reason, probably, the Russian Army manoeuvres in the Fall were considered a rehearsal of the measures that would be adopted to check the advance of an enemy toward St. Petersburg. Finally, on Oct. 23, agreements were made in Racconigi between Iswolski, who was accompanying the Czar on a new trip abroad, and Tittoni, which agreements were to make it possible for Russia, as a Russian newspaper put it, "to liberate itself from the necessity of friendly relations with Germany."

During this excitement in the political atmosphere the Imperial Chancellor, von Bethmann-Hollweg, endeavored to bring about a turn for the better by effecting an understanding with England, in whose attitude he correctly recognized the real cause of the political insecurity. At this point attention must be called to the fundamental difficulty with which all negotiations at that time, and subsequently, were confronted, and necessarily confronted. In Germany it was seen very clearly from the start that the probability of a combined French-Russian attack, for which influential political groups in St. Petersburg, as well as in Paris, were working, was very slight, so long as England's entrance into this anti-German combination could be left out of consideration. What we hoped to insure, therefore, was England's neutrality in the event of war, inasmuch as a German-English alliance, which might have definitely insured world peace, could not be effected. In order to win England over to the idea of neutrality, the Imperial Chancellor declared his willingness to decrease the rate at which our war vessels were being constructed. Both nations, moreover, were to give assurances that neither intended to attack the other, nor actually would make an attack. A second clause in the German proposal formulated the neutrality obligation. These negotiations continued until the Autumn of the year 1909, and were accompanied by the threatening chorus of the English anti-German press: "German dreadnoughts must not be built." [Black and White—"The Writing on the Wall."] The positive refusal on the part of Germany to abandon the naval program adopted by the Reichstag, and the fixed idea designedly fostered by the British Government that we were cherishing the intention of attacking France, gave England a pretext for rejecting the German efforts to effect an understanding between the two countries. But it is impossible to believe in the honesty of these arguments, which were recently defended, in dialectic perversion of the truth, by Sir Edward Cook in an article entitled "How Britain Strove for Peace." England's aggressive tendency is clearly shown by its above-mentioned agreements with France and Russia, which are today publici juris. Regarding that point there was no self-deception in those English circles which did not belong to the conspiracy; Edward Dicey, one of the most eminent of English publicists, expressed it in point-blank form in February, 1910, when he wrote in The Empire Review: "If England and Germany are friends, the peace of Europe is assured; but if the two nations fall apart, it will be a very unfortunate day for humanity." At that time, when Delcassé tendencies were again asserting themselves in France and a new political storm was brewing in the Balkan countries, King Edward died, on May 6. The hope could now be cherished, the leader of the anti-German policy of England being gone, that the moment had come when it would be possible to effect an understanding.

Dicey again began to argue for peace, the English-German Friendship Committee, the Albert Committee, the Archbishop of Canterbury, The Manchester Guardian, and The Economist advocated this idea, and Prime Minister Asquith found it profitable under these circumstances to strike the note of peace in a report which he submitted to the lower house regarding the frustrated German-English negotiations. But he included in this report false and disquieting statements regarding the German fleet. Herr von Bethmann-Hollweg replied to these statements in the Reichstag, and this led to the resumption of negotiations regarding a permanent political agreement on the basis of the existing German naval program, provided we would decrease our rate of building war vessels, as we had already offered to do. It soon became evident, however, with what little sincerity these negotiations were entered into on the part of England. With the direct encouragement of England, which renewed its promises regarding its attitude in the event of war, France, in the latter part of April, and in outright violation of the treaty, began its advance again Fez; and at the same time, as if it was desired that no doubt should arise regarding the solidarity of England and France, The Fleet Annual published an illustration representing the German high sea fleet under full steam, and under it were printed the words "The Enemy." As a sign of our disapproval of the French violation of the treaty we sent the Panther to Agadir, and in place of German-English negotiations German-French negotiations were commenced. Meanwhile England, cherishing the hope that a German-French war would now break out with certainty, armed itself against us in August and September with might and main. This fact was placed beyond all doubt by the well-known disclosures of Captain Faber, (before his electors in Andover.) The Times said later on that the year 1911 had brought three German-English crises, the first in the third week of July, the second in the week ending on Aug. 19, (that was the time of the enormous and very disillusioning labor strikes,) and the third in September. It is amazing that Sir Edward Cook dared to assert under these circumstances that Great Britain had facilitated the conclusion of the French-German Morocco agreement, which was ratified on March 12, 1912. In the "Open Letter on Foreign Policy," which on Nov. 24, 1911, was submitted to the members of the English Parliament, and was signed with the initials E.D.M. and F.W.H., (which is to be resolved into Edmund D. Morel and Francis W. Hirst,) it is expressly stated by these esteemed and honorable politicians:

"Our attitude was determined exclusively by the ostensible interests of France, which were directly opposed to the interests of British commerce and of British enterprise.... From this it follows that alliances, nay, even political agreements, with Continental powers, which may coerce us to take steps that are, at a given moment, harmful to our national interests, should be avoided."

Sir Edward Grey took pains to conceal these facts from the lower house and passed lightly over the disclosures of Faber—when the Imperial Chancellor vigorously opposed him—with skillful legerdemain. In the upper house Grey's policy also met with severe criticism, and from his declarations, as well as from those of Lloyd George made at the same time, only one conclusion could be drawn—that official England was determined to remain steadfast in the form of its political co-operation with France and Russia. Precisely to this was to be attributed the insecurity of the European situation. It has not become publicly known but has been reliably ascertained that the English Naval Attaché in Rome at that time pointed out that England, in the event of a war, which he expected to come, would have to occupy either Belgium or Copenhagen. That, he added, was very brutal, to be sure, but at the same time was rendered necessary by historic developments and by circumstances.

In view of all this we cannot deceive ourselves into believing that the mission which brought Lord Haldane to Berlin in February, 1912, had any other purpose than that of satisfying the voices in England which were calling with ever-increasing vigor for an understanding with Germany. The proposals which he submitted to us, after a discussion with Sir Edward Grey, were formulated by the English Cabinet as follows: "Inasmuch as both powers naturally wish to maintain relations of peace and friendship with each other, England declares that it will neither make an unprovoked attack upon Germany, nor support any other power in making such an attack. To attack Germany is neither the direct nor the indirect object of any treaty, understanding, or combination to which England is now a party, nor will England make itself a party to anything that has such an object." This carefully excogitated statement embraced in its Machiavellian wording neither those "oral conversations" at Reval nor the "innocent discussions" engaged in by the English and French General Staffs—discussions which were always revived on occasion of every political crisis. It was only natural, therefore, that we, since these relations between the General Staffs of the powers belonging to the Entente were no secret to us, demanded greater security and a declaration of neutrality on the part of England before consenting to enter into any general understanding.

This was all the more necessary in view of the fact that Poincaré, the French President, while the negotiations, commenced by Haldane, between Berlin and London were being carried on, had undertaken, in August, 1912, that trip to St. Petersburg, from which he brought back to France the system of three years' compulsory military service; and at the same time Hartwig, the Russian Ambassador in Belgrade, organized that Balkan Conference, the purpose of which was, first, to break the backbone of Turkey, and, secondly, to serve as a tool for the overthrow of Austria. The introduction and adoption of the German military program made it evident to all the world that we had recognized correctly, and betimes, the dangers which threatened the peace of the world, and in particular the peace of Germany. Furthermore, in a conversation with Prince Lichnowski, Lord Haldane said in so many words that England, in the event of a general war, would have to place itself on the side of France "in order to prevent Germany from becoming too powerful." We must not neglect to mention that during this critical year, as well as in the year 1913, negotiations were again entered into regarding the carrying out of the treaty concluded between England and Germany in the days of Caprivi with respect to an economic penetration of the Portuguese colonies in East and West Africa. The refusal of Sir Edward Grey to give these negotiations the secure form of a treaty, which could be laid before the English Parliament and the German Reichstag, here again shows that he was desirous of effecting only the appearance of an understanding. Both he and France were resolved to postpone their action against Germany until Russia, which was preparing itself with prodigious exertion, had finished its preparations, which in August, 1913, were critically inspected by General Joffre, and among which is to be included the construction of railways to run through Poland to the Austrian and Prussian frontiers. This consideration also accounts for England's attitude during the Balkan confusion of 1912 and 1913. At the London Conference we were able to co-operate with Sir Edward Grey in settling the great difficulties brought about by the war of the Balkan nations against Turkey, and subsequently their war inter se and the overthrow of Bulgaria. Under the impression created by this political co-operation the peace party in England also seemed to gain ground. On Feb. 18, 1913, Charles Trevelyan, M.P., paid me a visit and assured me with great positiveness that England would under no circumstances wage war. A Ministry which undertook to make preparations for war, he said, would at once be deposed. An inclination to bring about an understanding with Germany, he added, prevailed in all industrial circles. My impression that such was actually the case was confirmed during a sojourn in London in the months of March and April, 1914. On occasion of a political supper à deux with Lord Haldane the latter gave expression to the view that the present grouping of the powers offered the best guarantee of peace, that Sir Edward Grey was holding Russia in check and we were holding Austria-Hungary in check, in saying which he emphasized the fact that England had implicit confidence in the German Imperial Chancellor. I replied, saying that in consequence of the existing combination Paris and St. Petersburg would certainly count upon England's help in the event of a war, and would thus bring on the war. We then discussed the situation between England and Germany, and remarked how the present plan, adopted by both Governments, of fortifying both sides of the North Sea was detrimental to the real interests of both. The following letter, which I received from Lord Haldane in Berlin on April 17, is an echo of this conversation:

"It was a great pleasure to see you and have had the full and unreserved talk we had together. My ambition is, like yours, to bring Germany into relations of ever closer intimacy and friendship. Our two countries have a common work to do for the world as well as for themselves, and each of them can bring to bear on this work special endowments and qualities. May the co-operation, which I believe to be now beginning, become closer and closer. Of this I am sure, the more wide and unselfish the nations and the groups questions make her supreme purposes of their policies, the more will friction disappear and the sooner will the relations that are normal and healthy reappear. Something of this good work has now come into existence between our two peoples. We must see to it that the chance of growth is given." [5]

It is difficult to believe in the sincerity of the sentiments here expressed, when we consider that Lord Haldane belonged to the inner circle of the Cabinet and therefore must have known the secret chess-moves of Grey's policy. Furthermore, he did not resign, as did three other members of the Cabinet—Lord Morley, Burns, and Charles Trevelyan—when, on Aug. 4, Sir Edward's false game was shown up and when treaties grew out of those "conversations" and alliances out of those ententes, which had until then existed under counterfeit names. Even as late as June 13 Sir Edward Grey denied that he had entered into any binding obligations. Six weeks after that, however, England confronted Germany with the fait accompli of a life-and-death struggle. Grey had consciously uttered a falsehood before Parliament, and, as was ascertained from a Russian source, had not only accepted a Russian proposal to conclude a naval agreement, but had expressly given his approval that the deliberations regarding the effectuation of this agreement should be participated in by the Naval Staffs of both countries. In so doing he expressly counted upon a war between the Triple Alliance and the Triple Entente, and upon the complete alliance of England. England, at the proper time, was to send merchantmen to Russian ports on the Baltic Sea for the purpose of landing Russian troops in Pomerania, and to send as many ships to the Mediterranean Sea as seemed necessary to insure the ascendency of France. With the help of French money it was intended to overthrow the Ministry of Rodoslawow in Bulgaria and, with the assistance of the Russophile, Malinow, to win over that country to the combination, which was to attack Austria in the rear. All this, which took place before the assassination of Franz Ferdinand, was the political plan of battle adopted by the conspiring powers, which subsequently found an excuse for their behavior in the alleged coercion of Serbia. The hypocrisy with which the intrigue was carried out is without precedent. The palm rests, probably, on the friendly visit of the English squadron, under Admiral Beatty, in Kiel. Two days after the assassination of the Archduke the squadron started on its way home, through the Emperor William Canal, for the purpose of joining the concentration of the entire English fleet, which lay, ready for war, off Spithead. That England afterward made common cause with Russia and France for the murderers of the Archduke, and with moral indignation rose against the satisfaction demanded of Serbia by Austria, is all part of the system of the frivolous use of any pretext which might bring England closer to its longed-for goal—the deposition of Germany from her position in the world. Such was England's rôle in the preparation of this wantonly prearranged war.

Germany Free!

By BEATRICE BARRY.

Chronology of the War

Showing Progress of Campaigns on All Fronts and Collateral
Events from April 30, 1915, Up to and
Including June 15, 1915.

CAMPAIGN IN EASTERN EUROPE

May 1—Germans advance in their invasion of the Russian Baltic provinces, a Russian force retreating toward Mitau; fighting is being renewed along the East Prussian frontier and in Central Poland; Russians gain ground in their campaign for the Uzsok Pass; Germans defeat Russians near Szawle, in Kovno; Austrians repulse Russian attacks against the heights of the Orawa and Opor Valleys.

May 2—A great battle is developing in the plain of Rawa, Central Poland; Russians are taking the offensive; Austrians have opened an offensive in the region of Ciezkowice.

May 3—German and Austrian armies, under General von Mackensen, win a victory in West Galicia, breaking the Russian centre for miles, and gaining ground across practically the whole western tip of Galicia, from near the Hungarian border to the junction of the River Dunajec with the Vistula; the Teutonic allies take 30,000 prisoners, 22 cannon, and 64 machine guns; the Austrians gain ground in the Beskid region, and repulse Russians north of Osmaloda; the German advance in the Russian Baltic provinces continues unchecked along a 100-mile front, extending from the Baltic Sea, near Libau, southeast to the northern tributaries of the River Niemen.

May 4—Russians claim that the Austro-German drive in West Galicia is being checked; Germans hold positions on the right bank of the Dunajec; a fierce battle is raging in the direction of Stry; Germans make further progress in the Russian Baltic provinces.

May 5—Russians are retreating at points along the Galician line from the Vistula to the Carpathians, and are in retreat from positions they occupied on the Hungarian slopes of the Carpathians; the third line of Russian fortifications has been pierced; Austro-German Army captures the town of Gorlice.

May 6—Austro-German armies continue to advance in West Galicia; the northern wing has captured Tarnow; southern wing has crossed the Wisloka River and Russians are retreating east of the Lupkow Pass; Austro-Germans take the last Russian positions on the heights east of the Dunajec and Biala Rivers; Jaslo and Dukla have been taken from the Russians; Russians admit partial retreat in West Galicia.

May 7—Austro-German army is pursuing retreating Russians in West Galicia; Austrians take more prisoners, stores, and guns; in the eastern sector of the Carpathian front Russian attacks are repulsed by Austrians; Russian attacks in Southeast Galicia are repulsed; in Poland there is severe fighting.

May 8—Germans capture Libau, taking 1,600 prisoners, 18 cannon, and much war material; severe fighting continues in West Galicia, where General von Mackensen's army is pursuing the Russians; a Russian division surrounded near Dukla cuts its way through the surrounding troops and gets to the main Russian lines; all the passes in the Beskid Mountains, except Lupkow, are in the hands of Austro-German forces; Russians take the offensive southwest of Mitau.

May 9—Russians are retreating in Galicia along a front of 124 miles, from the Uzsok Pass to the Vistula; Austro-German forces have passed the line of the Uzsok Pass, Komanoza, Krosno, Debica, and Szezucin; in Southeast Galicia violent battles are developing; Austrians are pursuing Russians across the Dniester; Vienna reports that Hungary is now clear of Russians; German advance northeast of Kovno; Russian attacks on German positions on the Pilica are repulsed; Russians make progress southwest of Mitau.

May 10—Russian Embassy at Washington says that the Russians have retreated thirty miles in Galicia, but that only one division has withdrawn from Hungary; the first stage of the battle in West Galicia has been practically concluded; General von Mackensen's army is reforming for a new offensive; Germans have met a severe check west of Mitau.

May 11—Austro-German troops are still advancing in West Galicia; Russians are attacking in East Galicia and along the eastern section of the Carpathians; Russians have success in Bukowina, taking prisoners and guns; Austrians force Russian south wing in Russian Poland to retreat; Austrians repulse Russian attacks near Baligrod; advance Austrian troops have crossed the San near Dvornik.

May 12—Russians state that their counter-offensive has checked the Austro-Germans in West Galicia, while the Germans and Austrians state that their drive continues successfully; Austro-German troops have occupied Brozozow, Dynow, Sanok, and Lisko; there is severe fighting in the central Carpathians and Southeast Galicia, where the Russians are advancing on a forty-mile front; Austrians are repulsed in the direction of the Uzsok Pass and the Stry River.

May 13—Heavy fighting is in progress east of Tarnow; north of the Vistula the Austrians have forced the Nida line; Russians make progress on the right bank of the Dniester; Russians repulse Germans in the region of Shavli.

May 14—Russians break the Austrian line at various places on a ninety-four-mile front, driving the Austrians from Bukowina positions and forcing them over the Pruth River; Russians check the Austro-German advance in Galicia, and are concentrating on the line of the River San, with the object of occupying a shorter front; the advance guards of General Mackensen's armies are before Przemysl; the Teutonic allies are advancing in Russian Poland.

May 15—The Austro-German troops have now driven the Russians completely from Jaroslau, which they hold firmly, as well as all the towns on the west bank of the San River; the Austrian Tenth Army is now before Przemysl, its native stronghold; the rapid advance of the Teutonic allies is endangering the position of the Russians in the Carpathians; credit for the stiff and ceaseless pursuit of the Russians in the great West Galicia drive is being given by the Austrians to Field Marshal Baron Conrad von Hötzendorf, Chief of the Austrian General Staff; the Russian counter-drive to the east continues, and the Czar's armies in Bukowina force back the Austro-German lines for twenty miles.

May 16—Russians continue to withdraw in West Galicia; they are massing at the San River for a stand; in Bukowina and East Galicia the Russian cavalry is pursuing retreating Austrians; the Austrians are retiring behind the Pruth, evacuating strongly fortified positions; Hungarian cavalry has made sacrifices of large bodies to enable the infantry to retreat in good order; in Russian Poland the Teutonic allies continue to push back the Russians; Russians win success against the Germans in the Baltic provinces.

May 17—Austro-German armies continue their advance in West Galicia; Austrians have captured Drohobycz, in Central Galicia, forty miles southwest of Lemberg; fighting is in progress around Przemysl; Russians repulse Germans at Shavli; Russians have made advances on the West Niemen; Russian official statement says that the West Galician defeat has been offset by successes in Bukowina against the Austrians.

May 18—Austro-German troops are bombarding the western forts of Przemysl; the Teutonic allies have a firm foothold on the eastern bank of the San River; Russians are making vigorous attacks on the Germans in South Poland; Russians have driven the Austro-German forces back from the Dniester to the Pruth in East Galicia, and are making strong attacks in Bukowina; heavy fighting is in progress in the Russian Baltic Provinces and along the East Prussian frontier; Austrian official statement declares that 174,000 Russian prisoners, 128 guns, and 308 machine guns have been taken since the beginning of May as a result of the West Galicia drive; unofficial dispatch from Petrograd says Russians have been beaten back on a 200-mile front in West Galicia.

May 19—The Russian lines along the San River are in danger, the Austro-Germans having crossed the river on a wide front; the Russians are attempting to reform their lines north and south of Przemysl; Teutonic Allies occupy Sieniawa; in Bukowina the Russians have broken the extreme Austrian right; it is stated from Petrograd that the Germans and Austrians are using between thirty and forty army corps on a 200-mile front from Opatow, in Poland, to Kolomea, Eastern Galicia.

May 20—Russians are fighting desperately to save the remains of their West Galicia army, now in new positions along the San River; Austro-German forces are attacking with tremendous artillery fire, the shells being followed by a close phalanx of 150,000 men; the Russians hold both banks of the San south of Jaroslau.

May 21—Russians are rallying along the San River; a desperate battle is in progress below Przemysl; Russians are taking a strong offensive in Poland; official Austrian announcements state that Russian prisoners now in Austrian hands, as a result of the recent fighting, are 194,000; the German official announcement says that General Mackensen's army, since May 1, has taken 104,000 prisoners, 72 cannon, and 253 machine guns; official Russian statement says that on four recent days the losses of the Austro-Germans were 10,000 a day, and on seventeen other recent days were much heavier, and adds that the Austro-Germans have used between 2,000,000 and 3,000,000 shells during the recent fighting; Russian reports state that 3,000,000 men, including both sides, are now daily attacking and counter-attacking along the whole front, from Opatow to Kolomea; the Kaiser is stated to be personally directing operations at Jaroslau.

May 22—Stubborn fighting continues along the San, while severe fighting is in progress in the Russian Baltic Provinces and near the East Prussian frontier; on the left bank of the lower San the Russians have taken the offensive and captured the villages of Krawce, Biercza, Przyszow, and Kamerale; Russians repulse counter attacks in the direction of Nisko; Germans repulse Russians at Shavli; in Central Galicia the Austrians have gained some ground; east of Czernowitz Austrians repulse Russians; the right wing of the Austrian Army in Bukowina is falling back toward the Carpathians.

May 23—Russians, with strong reinforcements, have crossed the San at the junction of that river with the Vistula, and are advancing southward in an effort to outflank the Germany Army, which crossed the San in the vicinity of Jaroslau; Russians continue their offensive in Bukowina, and in the Opatow region; Germans defeat Russian northern wing near Shavli, and repulse Russian attacks from the Dubysa and Niemen Rivers; Russians are massing strong forces in the vicinity of Warsaw, Ivangrod, and Lublin.

May 24—Russians claim that they have definitely checked the German drive on the upper San River; a Russian movement upon Nisko, and the occupation of Ulanoff, Rudnik, Kraftza, Bourgny, and Shushav to the westward of the upper San, threatens the German position east of the river; General von Mackensen is drawing in his wings to protect his centre from attack; furious German assaults to the south of Przemysl continue without definite result; in the region of Shavli, the Russian troops now occupy a very extended front on the line of the Rivers Visdala, Venta, Dubysa, and Siup.

May 25—General von Mackensen renews his offensive against the Russians north of Przemysl, and takes six fortified villages, 21,000 prisoners, 39 cannon, and 40 machine guns; Austrians are advancing southeast of Przemysl; on the left bank of the upper Vistula, in the Opatow region, Russians repulse attacks and make counter-attacks.

May 26—Between Przemysl and Jaroslau, east of Radymno, Germans force a passage of the San River; Mackensen's army is making progress on both banks of the San in a southeasterly direction; southeast of Przemysl the Austro-German forces are progressing toward strong Russian positions; Russians repulse German attack near Ossowitz.

May 27—Austro-German forces continue to batter at the Russian lines northeast and southeast of Przemysl, and it is reported that they have severed communications between Przemysl and Lemberg; the Germans have forced another crossing of the San, eleven miles north of Przemysl, and are extending by several miles the zone held by them east of the San; Austro-German troops break through the Russian front line southeast of Drohobycz and near Stry, and force the Russians to fall back; Russians repulse attacks on the Upper Vistula; Russians have success in the region of the Dniester marshes.

May 28—Russians throw back the German force which crossed the San River and established itself at Sieniawa, fifty miles north of Przemysl; the Germans have retreated to the west bank of the San, with the loss of twelve guns; further south, between Jarislau and Przemysl, the Austro-German forces gain more ground on both banks of the San; Austrians reach Medyka, eight miles due east of Przemysl, leaving a gap of but twelve miles between the northern and eastern forces which are trying to encircle the fortress.

May 29—Germans and Austrians continue to fight fiercely to encircle Przemysl; in the Russian Baltic provinces heavy fighting is in progress; Russians are sending larger forces to meet the Germans in these provinces.

May 30—Fierce fighting is raging around Przemysl, the Austro-German forces striving to cut off the fortress; the Russians are bringing up huge reinforcements; north of Przemysl the Russians are making some progress, but to the southeast the Austro-German forces are making further headway, now commanding with their artillery the railway between Przemysl and Grodek; Russian attempts to cross the San near Sieniawa fail; in the Russian Baltic provinces German cavalry drives back Russian cavalry southeast of Libau.

May 31—Russians are beginning to assume the offensive at certain points along the San River, where severe fighting continues; near Stry the Austrians take several Russian positions.

June 1—The Serbians are resuming military activity against Austria; Austro-German forces are storming three of the outer forts of Przemysl; north and southeast of Przemysl the Austro-German forces are advancing; they have taken Stry.

June 2—Furious fighting continues around Przemysl; Austro-German troops take two fortifications on the north front of Przemysl; German official report states that during May the Teutonic allies took 863 Russian officers prisoners and 268,869 men, as well as capturing 251 cannon and 576 machine guns.

June 3—Austro-German troops, after a siege of twenty days, capture Przemysl, which has been in Russian possession since March 22, the present conquerors entering after storming the northern forts; Austro-Germans are driving back Russians north of Stry.

June 4—Severe fighting is in progress along the whole Galician front, Austro-Germans seeking to end the Russian campaign in Galicia; Russians are in position at Medyka Heights, ten miles east of Przemysl; they saved their batteries in evacuating Przemysl and claim to have removed all war material captured from the Austrians.

June 5—Austro-Germans are attempting an encircling movement against Lemberg; they are making progress from the southwest, but their left wing is checked by the Russians on the lower reaches of the San River; Austro-German extreme right in East Galicia and Bukowina is pounded by the Russians.

June 6—Battles over a wide area are in progress in Galicia; Russians are making considerable advances on the lower reaches of the San; southwest of Lemberg the Austro-Germans are advancing.

June 7—Austro-German armies are making progress in attempt to encircle Lemberg; Russians are being pressed back from their line on the San; Teutonic allies cross the Dniester; Germans advance in their invasion of the Baltic provinces of Russia.

June 8—Austro-Germans, having crossed the Dniester south of Lemberg, are assuming the offensive further to the south and are pushing back the Russians between Kolomea and Kalusz in East Galicia.

June 9—Austro-Germans take Stanislau, throwing the Russian left back to the Dniester River; in East Galicia, along the rest of the line, the Russians are holding their own and are counter-attacking.

June 10—Russians take offensive in their Baltic provinces, where they force the Germans to retreat to avoid being cut off; Russians advance again in Galicia; they attack Mackensen's forces, menacing Lemberg and Linsingen's forces on the Dniester; the Austro-German army of Bukowina crosses the Pruth and effects junction with Galician troops.

June 11—Russians win a series of successes against Germans and Austrians in East Galicia; they repulse Mackensen's troops with heavy loss and hurl Linsingen's army back across the Dniester; Russians take 17 guns and 49 machine guns; Germans are developing an offensive north of the Pilitza in Poland; Serbians are marching across Northern Albania toward the port of Durazzo, while Montenegrins are making for the port of Alessio.

June 12—A battle is raging along the Dniester, Austrians making gains on the lower reaches, while the Russians have success further up stream; Russians leave Bukowina, giving up their last positions on the Pruth and retreating across the frontier.

June 13—Austro-Germans commence an attack on the Russians on the River San north of Przemysl, and along the Dniester in Southeast Galicia; Germans are attacking Russian centre on the River Rawka, west of Warsaw; severe fighting continues in the Russian Baltic provinces.

June 14—Mackensen's army attacks Russian positions in Middle Galicia along a forty-three-mile front, and breaks the line, taking 16,000 prisoners; Austrians have successes on the Dniester.

June 15—Austro-Germans are renewing the drive in Galicia and advancing on a wide front; they capture Mosciska, thirty-seven miles from Lemberg, after a week's fight; Russian counter-attacks to protect Lemberg from the south are repulsed.

CAMPAIGN IN WESTERN EUROPE.

May 1—Germans continue the bombardment of Dunkirk with a huge gun or guns, doing considerable damage and killing several persons; Germans make further gains on the west bank of the Ypres Canal; French repulse Germans in the Argonne, near Bagatelle; French take trenches in the Forest of Le Prêtre; French artillery bombards fortifications of Altkirch, in Upper Alsace.

May 2—French have been bombarding for two days the southern fortifications of Metz; British and French attack the new German positions northeast of Ypres, but are beaten back; Germans make progress in the Argonne; German General Staff in Belgium admits a loss of 12,000 dead in the battle of Ypres.

May 3—Germans renew assaults near Ypres, the British lines being pounded north and south of that place, and Germans gain ground southeast of St. Julien; Germans damage French positions in Champagne at Ourchen, Sopain, and Perthes; French repulse an attack in the Forest of Le Prêtre.

May 4—Germans gain more ground northeast of Ypres, and take the villages of Zonnebeke, Zevecote, and Westhoek, and the Forest of Polygonous and Nonnebosschen; French gain in the region of Steenstraete.

May 5—Germans gain ground northeast of Ypres, British losing four positions and being forced to retire; Hill 60 is again menaced by the Germans, who, the British state, have obtained a footing there through the use of gases; French check one German attack near Perthes, and another at Four de Paris; French take two lines of German trenches in the Mortmare Wood; French gain ground on the north bank of the Fecht River, in Alsace.

May 6—Germans make further gains near Ypres, taking two positions from the Allies; British recapture some of the trenches at Hill 60, recently lost; French repulse a German night attack near Steenstraete; Germans repulse French near Flirey; Germans advance west of Combres; Germans take French positions in the Ailly Wood, capturing 2,000 men.

May 7—Germans make more gains near Ypres; there is severe fighting for Hill 60; German artillery checks a French attack near Steinbrück, in the valley of the Fecht; French repulse German attacks at Frise, west of Peronne, and in Champagne, around the Fort of Beauséjour.

May 8—French capture a German position west of Lens; French check three attacks in the Forest of Le Prêtre; French advance two-thirds of a mile along a mile front on the right bank of the Fecht River; British repulse a daybreak attack near St. Julien; British recapture a further section of recently lost trenches at Hill 60.

May 9—British repulse German attack east of Ypres; British gain ground toward Fromelles, after a vigorous attack on the German line; Germans capture the villages of Fresenburg and Terleranhoek; French make gains north of Arras; south of Carency the French make an advance by which they capture two lines of trenches over a front of 4-1/3 miles; French take the village of La Targette and half of the village of Neuville-St. Vaast.

May 10—The Allies are attacking along a front of twenty-six miles in the direction of Carency and Souchez; Allies repulse German attacks near Ypres; Germans make gains near Nieuport, and renew the bombardment of Dunkirk; French repulse Germans at the Forest of Le Prêtre and at Berry-au-Bac.

May 11—A strong French offensive against the German lines north of Arras is being pushed; the French carry the German trenches guarding the road from Loos to Vermelles; French take a strongly fortified position on Lorette Heights; French make gains at Souchez and Carency; Germans shell the town of Bergues, near Dunkirk; Germans heavily bombard British trenches east of Ypres.

May 12—Severe fighting is now raging over the whole front from Ypres to Arras, the Allies taking the offensive; to the north the British centre has Lille for its objective, while to the south the French centre is aiming at Lens; French repulse counter attacks at Neuville-St. Vaast, and between Carency and Ablain; French make gains in the wood east of Carency, and take three successive lines of trenches bordering the wood to the north of Carency; French take another portion of the village of Carency; French lose some of the ground they captured near Loos; Germans take a hill east of Ypres; Germans bombard Dunkirk.

May 13—The French are in complete possession of Carency, having captured the last German position there; French take large stores of German ammunition, twenty big guns and many machine guns; French also make progress north of Carency, where they have established themselves at Ablain-St. Nazaire; French have also taken all of the Forest of Le Prêtre, although Germans retain positions on the north and south slopes adjacent; Germans are making fierce assaults on the British positions east of Ypres, piercing the line at one point; Belgians repulse an attack on the right bank of the Yser; French now hold the forest at Notre Dame de Lorette.

May 14—French offensive is continued by the capture of German positions southeast of Angres, while they also make progress on the southern and eastern slopes of the Lorette hills, and at Neuville-St. Vaast; British attacks near Ypres are unsuccessful; Germans gain in the direction of Hooge; French artillery levels German trenches in the Valley of the Aisne.

May 15—French continue to advance near Carency; French also gain north of Ypres; they take several trenches in front of Het Sase, and occupy part of Steenstraete; French extend their attack southeast of Notre Dame de Lorette; Germans make progress on the St. Julien-Ypres road against the British; Germans state that they have taken since April 22 in the Ypres region 5,560 unwounded officers and men; artillery fighting is in progress southwest of Lille.

May 16—The first British army breaks the German line over most of a two-mile front northwest of La Bassée, and wins nearly a mile of territory; French repulse a counter-attack at Steenstraete; French make gains north of Arras; lively fighting in Champagne; Germans repulse French at Het Sase; British attack Germans south of Lille.

May 17—British make further advances northwest of La Bassée and carry additional German trenches, all trenches on a two-mile front now being in hands of the British; French and Belgians force Germans to evacuate positions they held west of the Yser Canal; French maintain gains on the east bank; French repulse German counter-attacks on the slopes of Lorette.

May 18—Heavy rains and mists hamper operations in Northern France; the French have consolidated the positions recently occupied by them to the east of the Yser Canal; French make gains near Ablain; an almost constant artillery duel is in progress north of Arras; Germans repulse British south of Neuve Chapelle.

May 19—Germans capture trenches from the French on the heights of Lorette; Germans repulse British attacks near Neuve Chapelle.

May 20—Recent heavy rains have made the ground in Flanders unsuited to infantry attacks and there is a lull, but artillery engagements are in progress; French make advances in Champagne by mining; French take trenches near Bagatelle, in the Argonne; fierce artillery duels between the Meuse and Moselle.

May 21—French drive Germans from the last of their positions on the heights of Lorette; The French now hold the entire Lorette Hill and the lesser ridges, which the Germans had defended for six months; French repulse German attack to the east of the Yser Canal; Canadians capture a German position to the north of Ypres after the British Guards fail twice.

May 22—British repulse attacks north of La Bassée; French make gains north of Arras; Germans repulse British and French attacks southwest of Neuve Chapelle; German official report states that the Allies, southwest of Lille and in the Argonne, are using mines charged with poisonous gases.

May 23—British advance east of Festubert; French gain ground northeast of Notre Dame de Lorette and near Neuville-St. Vaast; Germans are repulsed east of the Yser Canal.

May 24—Before attacking the British northeast of Ypres, the Germans roll a huge cloud of asphyxiating gas toward them, the volume of fumes being forty feet high along a six-mile front; because of the use of respirators, few British succumb; fighting in progress north of Arras.

May 26—British make further gains in their offensive against La Bassée, and it is officially announced that the net result of their operations in the territory to the west of that town since May 1 is the capture of a total front of more than three miles, along a considerable part of which two lines of German trenches have been taken; in the district north of Arras there is desperate fighting near Angres, the Germans attempting to regain ground lost yesterday.

May 27—French make further gains north of Arras; artillery engagements along the Yser Canal; Belgians repulse two German infantry attacks near Dixmude; artillery duels in the Vosges; French fail in attempt to break German lines between Vermelles and Lorette Hills.

May 28—British make further gains toward La Bassée; fierce fighting occurs north of Arras; French advance in Alsace on the mountain of Schepfenrieth; Germans repulse French attacks southeast of Lorette Ridge.

May 29—The village of Ablain-St. Nazaire, for which fighting has been in progress for three weeks, is now in the hands of the French, the Germans evacuating their last position this morning.

May 30—French gain ground at four points—near Neuville-St. Vaast, on the Yser, at Le Prêtre Forest, and in Alsace at Schnepfenriethkopf; British make small gains at Festubert; Belgian and German artillery are fighting a duel north and south of Dixmude.

May 31—Severe fighting continues in the region north of Arras, Germans acting, for the most part, on the defensive; French gain ground on the road from Souchez to Carency; artillery fighting at the Forest of La Prêtre.

June 1—French gain more ground at Souchez, where violent fighting is in progress, and also gain southeast of Neuville; French lose trenches on the outskirts of Le Prêtre Forest.

June 2—Germans recapture from the French the sugar refinery at Souchez, which has changed hands four times in twenty-four hours; British, by a bayonet charge, take Château Hooge, in the Ypres region; French make further progress north of Arras, taking trenches in "the labyrinth," as the system of intrenchments in that region is termed; Rheims is again bombarded.

June 3—Fierce fighting continues north of Arras; French and Germans still battle for possession of the sugar refinery at Souchez.

June 4—In consequence of the successes in the Galician campaign, the Germans are sending reinforcements to the Western line; Germans retake some of trenches northeast of Givenchy captured by the British; Germans take the village and Château of Hooge; French bombard the southern front of the intrenched camp of Metz.

June 5—French make important gains in the area north of Arras where desperate fighting has so long been in progress; they have taken two-thirds of the village of Neuville-St. Vaast; they advance a quarter of a mile in the northern part of the labyrinth; they hold the sugar refinery at Souchez, where 3,000 Germans have been killed.

June 6—French capture two-thirds of a mile of trenches in a new zone of activity, near Tracy-le-Mont, north of the Aisne; they take more of Neuville-St. Vaast; they capture more trenches in the labyrinth, of which they now hold two-thirds; they gain ground at Souchez; Germans repulse French attacks on the eastern slopes of Lorette.

June 7—French make further gains at Neuville-St. Vaast, and in the labyrinth; near Hebuterne, east of Doullers, two lines of German trenches are carried by the French; French repulse a fierce attack at Tracy-le-Mont, retaining their recent gain; at Vauquois, in Champagne, the French spray flaming liquid on the German trenches, "by way of reprisal," their statement says.

June 8—French advance on a three-quarters of a mile front south of Arras, near Hebuterne, taking two lines of trenches; French make slight gains at Lorette, Neuville-St. Vaast, and in the labyrinth.

June 9—French make gains at Neuville-St. Vaast, in the labyrinth, at Hebuterne, and in the Forest of Le Prêtre.

June 10—French hold substantially all their recent gains; artillery fighting is in progress north of Arras and on the heights of the Meuse; Germans take French trenches near Souvain and Les Mesnil, west of the Argonne.

June 11—French are organizing the positions recently won from the Germans north and south of Arras; in the Neuville-St. Vaast positions the French find 800,000 cartridges, three field and fifteen machine guns.

June 12—Germans regain some of the ground they lost at Ecurie, north of Arras; Germans repulse attacks northeast of Ypres, east of Lorette Heights, and in the Souchez district.

June 13—French take a strongly fortified ridge near Souchez and three trenches near Hebuterne; Germans bombard Soissons and the military works around Lunéville.

June 14—Germans regain some of the trenches at Souchez recently lost; Germans repulse heavy French attacks on both sides of the Lorette Hills and on the Neuville-Rochincourt line.

June 15—Severe fighting continues north and south of Arras, both sides claiming successes.

ITALIAN CAMPAIGN.

May 23—A clash, regarded in Rome as being the first skirmish of the war, occurs between Italian and Austrian troops at Forcellini di Montozzo, in the pass between Pont di Legno and Pejo; an Austrian patrol crosses the frontier, but is driven back over the border by Italian Alpine Chasseurs; Lieut. Gen. Cadorna, Chief of the Italian General Staff, starts for the front.

May 24—Austrian artillery shells Italian outposts on the Adige in front of Rivoli; there are clashes at other points, including a skirmish of border forces in the Isonzo Valley on the eastern frontier; a general forward movement by the Italians begins; Austrians are massing for defense.

May 25—Italians are advancing on a 67-mile front, their line having as extreme points Caporetto on the north and the Gulf of Trieste on the south; in three lines they sweep across the frontier for four miles; Italians occupy Caporetto, the heights between the Idria and Isonzo Rivers, Cormons, Corvignano, and Terzo; Austrians withdraw, destroying bridges and burning houses.

May 26.—Italians occupy Austrian territory all along the frontier from Switzerland to the Adriatic; Italians have seized various towns in the Trentino and forced their way through mountain passes; King Victor Emmanuel has assumed supreme command of the Italian army and navy, and has gone to the front.

May 27—Italian armies make rapid progress in the invasion of Austria, part of the forces having crossed the Isonzo River; another force, which penetrated further north in the Crownland of Goritz and Gradisca, has repaired the railroad beyond Cormons and is marching on Goritz, the capital; sharp fighting has occurred on the Tyrol-Trentino border, where the Austrians are being driven back in advance guard engagements; a battle is raging around Ploken and also west of the Praedil Pass in Austria.

[ Transcriber's Note: Text missing from original ] tinues in Austrian territory, the Austrians not making any determined resistance; they are laying waste large areas as they retreat; in the Provinces of Trentino and Friuli the Italians are pushing forward fast; the Austrians fall back in the direction of Trent; Italians are occupying the heights of Monte Baldo, overlooking the Valley of the Adige and commanding the railway from Verona to Trent; Italians have crossed the Venetian Alps, and among the lower spurs of the Dolomites are in touch with the left wing of the Austrian force thrown forward for the defense of Trent; in Carinthia the Italians have taken three passes and fourteen villages.

May 29—A large Italian army is trying to cross the Isonzo River; bayonet fighting is in progress south of Goritz, the Austrians slowly falling back; Italian forces are at Gradisca, eighteen miles from Trieste; Austrians repulse Italians at Caporetto and near Plava; Italians are penetrating from Tonale Pass into the Virmiglio Valley, with an objective north of Trent, in an attempt to place that city between two Italian armies; Italians capture the town of Storo and are bombarding Riva; the headquarters of the Austrian commander, Field Marshal Baron von Hötzendorf, are established at Trent.

May 30—Italian advance in Friuli encounters strong opposition at the Isonzo defenses, where progress is also being impeded because the river is swollen; Italian artillery destroys the fort of Luserna, on the Asiago plateau; in Cadore the Italians take several positions; a battle along the Adige River has been in progress, the Italians taking the village of Pilcante; artillery duels are in progress on the frontier in Tyrol and Trentino; Austrians repulse Italians at Cortina.

May 31—The Italian invasion of the Province of Trent is progressing from the south along the Adige and Chiese Rivers, from the west across the Tonale Pass, and from the east by way of the Lavaronne Plateau; the Italian attack is continuing all along the zigzag frontier, up to the highest point north, where they have occupied the Ampezzo Valley, together with the town of Cortina; Italians now are in possession of Monte Baldo, which dominates Lake Garda; to the east of Caporetto the Italians make a vain attempt to climb the slopes of the Kern; a great Austrian army is being massed in Tyrol.

June 1—Thirty-seven villages surrounding Cortina in the Ampazzo Valley are in Italian hands; the whole high plateau of Lavarone is in the hands of the Italian force advancing into the Trentino from the east.

June 2—In Friule the Italians are now established firmly on the Monte Nero ridge across the Isonzo River; on the Carnia front an artillery duel is in progress; to check Italians who are advancing from the border northeast of Trent, Austrians are massing troops behind Monte Croce Pass.

June 3—Italians repulse Austrian attempts to dislodge them from the Monte Nero ridge; Austrians repulse Italians at several points on the Tyrolian and Carinthian frontiers.

June 4—It is officially announced that Italian mobilization is complete: in the operations against Rovereto, the Italians occupy Mattassone and Val Morbia in the Val Arsa; Italian artillery silences the forts of Luserna and Spitzverle; on the middle Isonzo fierce fighting is in progress; Italians hold the summit and slopes of Monterno.

June 5—A battle is raging on the western bank of the Isonzo River, in front of Tolmino, the key to the railway and main highway to Trieste; Italians are making steady though slow progress in Southern Tyrol.

June 6—Austrians are making a desperate defense at Tolmino; Italians fail in an attempt to cross the Isonzo River near Sagrado; viewing the situation as a whole, the Italians are making progress along a 150-mile front, smashing Austrian defenses at many points with artillery fire.

June 7—Desperate fighting continues for Tolmino; Italians are making a general advance across the Isonzo River from Caporetto to the sea, a distance of forty miles; Austrians recapture Freikofel.

June 8—Fierce fighting is in progress at the Isonzo River; severe fighting also is going on in the Friulian sector.

June 9—Italians take Monfalcone, sixteen miles northwest of Trieste; a fierce artillery duel is in progress at Tolmino; fighting continues at the Isonzo River.

June 10—Italians are in full possession of Monfalcone; Italians occupy Podestagno, north of Cortina; fighting continues along the Isonzo.

June 11—Italians take Ploeken, imperiling communications to Laibach; fierce fighting is in progress for Goritz, Austrians still holding the city; fighting continues along the Isonzo.

June 12—Italians push their advance almost to Rovereto thirteen miles southwest of Trent, and to Mori, eighteen miles southwest of Trent; Italians are advancing from Monfalcone toward Trieste; at points on the Carinthian frontier Austrians repulse Italians.

June 13—Italian artillery is bombarding the fortifications defending Goritz, capital of the crownland of Goritz and Gradisca, twenty-two miles northwest of Trieste; severe fighting is in progress on Monte Paralba; in the last few days Austrians have brought up 45,000 troops and 64 batteries along the Isonzo River.

June 14—Italians in Carnia occupy Valentina; all the positions captured by Italians in Trentino are held against repeated assaults by Austrians; the Italian Eastern Army is pushing forward along the Gulf of Trieste toward the City of Trieste.

TURKISH CAMPAIGN.

May 1—French Senegalese troops occupy Yeni Shehr on the Asiatic side of the Dardanelles.

May 2—French troops lose ground on the Asiatic side of the Dardanelles; Allies make further advances on the Gallipoli Peninsula; Allies now hold Gaba Tepe; the Australian contingent has lost heavily.

May 4—Allies repulse Turks and are on the active offensive on Gallipoli; Turks win success near Avi Burnu.

May 5—Turks check attempt of Allies to advance at Sedd-el-Bahr; Turks check Allies near Avi Burnu.

May 6—Russians have defeated a Turkish army corps in the Caucasus, routing it and taking many prisoners; desperate fighting is in progress on the Gallipoli Peninsula, the advance of the Allies being met by stubborn resistance; Allies have captured the heights facing Souain Dere Fort, four miles west of Kilid Bahr.

May 7—Severe fighting at Avi Burnu and at Sedd-el-Bahr, at the latter place the Turks capturing ten British machine guns.

May 10—Russians drive Turks from their positions in the direction of Olti; Russians drive Turks from the South Pass near Tabriz and occupy villages; 8,000 Turkish wounded have arrived at Constantinople from the Dardanelles.

May 16—Allies make progress in hills behind Kilid Bahr and Maidos; Turks have been attacking for three days British positions on the Gallipoli Peninsula, but have been repulsed with heavy loss.

May 19—Turks drive back Allies from their advanced positions near Kara Burun; Allies are being reinforced daily.

May 20—Allies are reported to have occupied Maidos after fierce fighting; French troops have been landed at Sedd-el-Bahr, and are fighting around the Turkish positions at Krithia; British forces which debarked at Gaba Tepe are also directing their action toward Krithia, with the object of surrounding the Turks; the Allies are attacking the fortified position at Atchi Baba.

May 22—Official announcement is made in London that the Allies have gained further ground on the southern end of the Gallipoli Peninsula.

May 23—Turks repulse Allies near Sedd-el-Bahr; it is estimated that the British and French now have 90,000 troops along the Dardanelles.

May 24—Turkish troops attack allied camp near Goritza and capture five sailing vessels with provisions; Italian troops have landed on the Turkish Island of Rhodes in the Aegean Sea; Turks capture two British positions near Kurna, Mesopotamia.

May 25—Allies are advancing steadily on the Gallipoli Peninsula; thousands of Turkish wounded are arriving at Constantinople.

May 27—Allies carry five lines of Turkish trenches by the bayonet; German estimates show that the Allies have lost 30,000 men in killed, wounded, and missing during land operations at the Dardanelles; it is admitted by the British that the Australians have lost heavily.

May 28—The Russian Army in the Caucasus reports further gains in the Van region, including the occupation of Baslan, and announces that in the capture of Van the Russians took twenty-six guns, large stores of war material and provisions, and the Government treasury.

May 29—Turkish forces defending the Gallipoli Peninsula against Allies now number 80,000 men; reinforcements are being sent from Syria; in the Caucasus the Turks are remaining on the defensive.

May 30—An official French statement, reviewing recent operations on the Gallipoli Peninsula, pays tribute to the bravery and coolness of the Turkish troops; Turks take allied trenches at Avi Burnu with the bayonet; Turks make gains at Sedd-el-Bahr.

May 31—Heavy fighting is in progress on the Gallipoli Peninsula, the Turks being driven back at several points; Turks still hold trenches captured from the Allies near Avi Burnu; it is reported from Constantinople that the Turkish casualties thus far are 40,000.

June 2—Heavy fighting continues on Gallipoli Peninsula; all the Turks who recently broke the allied line between Gaba Tepe and Krithia have been either killed or captured.

June 4—A combined general assault on Turkish Gallipoli positions is in progress.

June 6—Official British announcement states that during the last week the Allies have made considerable gains in the southern area of Gallipoli Peninsula; British win a 500-yard strip three miles long; French take trenches; Turks offer spirited resistance, and lose heavily; it is officially announced in London that on the Tigris, Asiatic Turkey, the British have made important gains, and have received the surrender of the Governor of Amara, with 700 soldiers.

June 9—Allies are landing more troops at Sedd-el-Bahr under cover of the fleet's guns.

June 11—The advance guard of the Allies is fighting near the town of Gallipoli; severe fighting is in progress near Maidos.

June 13—In the Caucasus the Russians are pushing back the Turks in the direction of Olti, on the frontier, and are occupying Turkish positions; a counter-attack by Turks at Zinatcher has been repulsed.

June 14—Reports from Athens declare that the position of the Allies on the Gallipoli Peninsula continues to improve steadily; the Turks still occupy Krithia, and the British are engaging them.

CAMPAIGN IN AFRICA.

May 1—Official statement issued at Cape Town announces that the British have inflicted a defeat on the Germans near Gibeon, German Southwest Africa; British captured a railroad train, transport wagons, two field guns, Maxims, and 200 prisoners.

May 5—British Secretary for the Colonies issues a statement saying that when General Botha, commander of the forces of the Union of South Africa, occupied Swakopmund he discovered that six wells had been poisoned by the Germans with arsenical cattle wash; Botha says the German commander told him he was acting under orders.

May 11—A French column captures the post of Esoka, in the German colony of Kamerun.

May 13—On official statement made public at Cape Town states that Windhoek, capital of German Southwest Africa, was captured yesterday without resistance by Union of South Africa forces under General Botha; German Southwest Africa is declared now to be practically in the hands of the British.

June 11—Garua, an important station on the Benue River, Kamerun, German West Africa, surrenders unconditionally to an Anglo-French force.

LUSITANIA.

May 1—Cunarder Lusitania sails from New York for Liverpool; no passenger bookings are canceled, although discussion is aroused by a newspaper advertisement inserted by the German Embassy at Washington stating that "travelers sailing in the war zone on ships of Great Britain or her allies do so at their own risk."

May 7—Lusitania is sunk ten miles off the Old Head of Kinsale, Ireland, by either one or two torpedoes discharged without warning by a German submarine, stated to be the U-39; the Cunarder is hit about 2:05 P.M., and sinks in about eighteen minutes; 1,154 persons, including many women and children, are drowned, or are killed by explosions, while among the saved are 47 injured passengers; among the dead are 102 Americans; the saved total 764, among whom are 86 Americans; of the saved 462 are passengers and 302 belong to the crew; Captain William T. Turner of the Lusitania is saved by clinging to a bit of wreckage for two hours after remaining on the bridge until his ship sank; the ship was valued at $10,000,000, and the 1,500 tons of cargo, among which were munitions of war, at $735,000; official Washington and the nation generally, as well as other neutral and allied nations, are profoundly stirred by the news; President Wilson receives bulletins at the White House; London is astounded, and there are criticisms of the Admiralty for not having convoyed the Lusitania; panic conditions prevail on the New York Stock Exchange for thirty minutes after the first news is received, but the market closes with a rally.

May 8—Secretary Tumulty, after a conference with President Wilson, states that the Chief Executive "is considering very earnestly, but very calmly, the right course of action to pursue"; Secretary Bryan directs Ambassadors Gerard and Page to make full reports; an official communication issued in Berlin states that the Lusitania "was naturally armed with guns," that "she had large quantities of war material in her cargo," that her owners are responsible for the sinking, and that Germany gave full warning of the danger; the British Government announces that the statement that the Lusitania was armed "is wholly false"; American newspapers strongly condemn the sinking, many referring to it as murder; there is talk of war by many private citizens of the United States; there is rejoicing in Germany, where towns are hung with flags and children in Southern Germany are given a half-holiday, so reports state; Berlin newspapers acclaim the sinking, while hundreds of telegrams of congratulation are received by Admiral von Tirpitz, Minister of Marine; Dr. Bernhard Dernburg, former German Colonial Secretary, in a statement in Cleveland, argues that the sinking was justified.

May 9—Dudley Field Malone, Collector of the Port of New York, makes an official denial that the Lusitania was armed when she sailed; President Wilson has not yet consulted his Cabinet on the situation, but is studying the problem alone; Theodore Roosevelt terms the sinking "an act of simple piracy," and declares we should act at once; survivors criticise the British Admiralty for not supplying a convoy, and also criticise the handling of the Lusitania; newspapers in Vienna rejoice over the torpedoing.

May 10—In a speech at Philadelphia, President Wilson declares that "there is such a thing as a man being too proud to fight; there is such a thing as a nation being so right that it does not need to convince others by force that it is right"; Coroner's jury at Kinsale, which investigated five deaths resulting from the torpedoing of the Lusitania, in returning its verdict charges the Emperor and Government of Germany, and the officers of the submarine, "with the crime of wholesale murder before the tribunal of the civilized world"; a spirit of vengeance is springing up in England; the German Foreign Office sends to the German Embassy at Washington, which communicates it to the State Department, a message of sympathy at the loss of lives, but says the blame rests with England for her "starvation plan" and for her having armed merchantmen; telegrams are pouring in by the hundred to the White House and the Department of State, but the majority advise against the use of force; there is a fifteen-minute panic on the New York Stock Exchange on the rumor of the assassination of President Wilson, prices falling from 4 to 15 points; British exchanges bar German members; the National Security League issues an open letter in New York, declaring that the army, navy, and coast defenses are inadequate, and urging support for a military efficiency program; various State Legislatures pledge their support to President Wilson.

May 11—Secretary Bryan receives an official circular issued by the German Government which declares that there is no intention of attacking, either by submarine or aircraft, neutral ships in the war zone, and that if such attacks occur through mistake damages will be paid; President Wilson is at work on his communication to Berlin; American Line announces it will not hereafter carry contraband of war; Navy League of the United States passes a resolution asking President Wilson to call an extra session of Congress to authorize a bond issue of $500,000,000 for a bigger navy; riots occur all over England, demonstrations being made against Germans and German shops; former President Roosevelt states that the United States should act promptly and should forbid all commerce with Germany, while former President Taft states that delay can do no harm and that the United States should not hurry into war; President Wilson's Philadelphia speech results in a rise in prices on the New York Stock Exchange; the Committee of Mercy issues a country-wide appeal for help for destitute survivors of the Lusitania; customs guard on German ships at Boston is doubled; Cunard Line cancels intended sailing of the Mauretania from Liverpool; extra police guards are placed over the German ships at Hoboken.

May 12—Postponement is made until tomorrow of the sending of the American note to Germany; German Embassy discontinues its advertisement warning the public not to sail on British or allied ships: anti-alien rioting continues in England; seventy customs men, on orders from Washington, search German ships at Hoboken for explosives, none being found.

May 13—The text of the American note to Germany is made public at Washington; besides the Lusitania, it mentions the Falaba, Cushing, and Gulflight cases; it states that the United States Government expects a disavowal of the acts of the German commanders, reparation for the injuries, and a prevention of such acts in the future; it indicates that submarine warfare should be given up; it refers to the "surprising irregularity" of the German Embassy's advertisement warning Americans to keep off British ships, and states that notice of an unlawful act cannot be an excuse for its commission; it states that Germany will not expect the United States "to omit any word or any act" necessary to maintain American rights.

May 14—The American note to Germany has been delayed in transmission, and is not presented yet; President Wilson and the Cabinet are pleased with the response of the country to the note, which is praised generally by newspapers and public men: damage in anti-German rioting in South Africa is reported from Cape Town to exceed $5,000,000.

May 15—Ambassador Gerard hands the American note to the German Foreign Office; newspapers in England and France praise the note; Dr. Dernburg, who has for months been in the United States as unofficial spokesman for Germany, expresses a desire to go home, this being due, it is understood in Washington, to the criticisms resulting from his defense of the sinking of the Lusitania; German-American newspapers and prominent German-American individuals are going on record as being for the United States as against Germany in event of war.

May 16—New York clergymen from their pulpits praise President Wilson's note to Germany as a powerful instrument for the preservation of peace in this country; the loss of the Lusitania is proving a stimulus to recruiting in Great Britain.

May 17—The American note has not yet been published in Berlin, and most of the newspapers, under confidential orders from the Government, have refrained from comment.

May 18—Statements made by the officers of the British tank steamer Narragansett and of the British steamship Etonian, on arriving at New York and Boston, respectively, show that these ships and a third were prevented from going to the rescue of the Lusitania's passengers by German submarines; a torpedo was fired at the Narragansett.

May 19—Several leading German newspapers join in an attack on the United States, demanding that Germany refuse to yield to the American protest, the text of the note having been made known.

May 30—Full text of the German reply to the American note arrives in Washington and is made public; as to the Cushing and the Gulflight it is declared that the German Government has no intention of attacking neutral vessels by submarine or aircraft, and where it is proved that the attacked ship is not to blame is willing to offer regrets and pay indemnity, it being added that both the cases mentioned are now under investigation, which inquiry can be supplemented by reference to The Hague: as to the Falaba, it is declared that the persons on board were given twenty-three minutes to get off, and it is indicated that the passengers and crew would have had fuller opportunity to leave had the ship not tried to escape and had she not signaled for help by rockets: as to the Lusitania, it is declared she was built as an auxiliary cruiser and so carried on the British navy list, that Germany understands she was armed with cannon, that she carried war material and Canadian troops, while, in addition, the British Admiralty has instructed merchantmen to ram submarines; thus the sinking of the Lusitania was a measure of "justified self-defense"; it is also declared that the Cunard Company is "wantonly guilty" of the deaths, in allowing passengers to embark under the conditions cited; unofficial expressions of opinion from public men at Washington show there is disappointment and dissatisfaction over the note, which is held to be evasive; German Foreign Secretary von Jagow, in an interview given to The Associated Press correspondent in Berlin, declares that the note is not a final one because the German Government considers it essential "to establish a common basis of fact before entering into a discussion of the issues involved."

May 31—American press as a whole finds the German reply unsatisfactory, declaring that it is evasive and fails to meet the issue; London newspapers find the reply to be a "weak evasion"; German-American press as a whole supports the reply; Governors of States and other public men generally agree in condemning the note, but many of them suggest the need for caution; Berlin newspapers hold that the reply is complete.

June 1—President Wilson brings the German note before the Cabinet, which has a long conference.

June 2—A conference is held at the White House between President Wilson and Ambassador von Bernstorff, at the latter's request; Ambassador von Bernstorff arranges to send through the State Department a report to his Government of his talk with the President and of the condition of public opinion in this country; von Bernstorff tells the President that he has been given affidavits that the Lusitania was armed; these affidavits are given to the American Department of State for investigation.

June 3—Ambassador von Bernstorff is arranging to send an emissary, Dr. Anton Meyer-Gerhard, to Berlin to explain the position of the American Government and the state of public opinion; the affidavits that the Lusitania was armed are under official investigation; newspaper investigations throw doubt on their authenticity.

June 5—British Ambassador transmits a note from his Government to the United States Government assuring this country that the Lusitania was unarmed.

June 8—Secretary of State Bryan resigns because he cannot join in the new note to Germany, so he states in a letter to President Wilson, without violating what he deems his duty to the country and without being unfair "to the cause which is nearest my heart, namely, the prevention of war"; President Wilson's letter accepting the resignation expresses "deep regret" and "personal sorrow"; Counselor Robert Lansing is Acting Secretary of State; newspapers generally welcome Mr. Bryan's resignation; the note to Germany is read at a Cabinet meeting and finally decided upon.

June 9—Acting Secretary of State Lansing signs the note to Germany and sends it to Ambassador Gerard; Mr. Bryan's resignation causes interest in England and Germany; Mr. Bryan says that he favors inquiry by an international commission into the points at issue between the United States and Germany, and that Americans should be warned not to travel on belligerent ships; German-American press praises Mr. Bryan.

June 10—President Wilson's answer to the German note is made public at Washington; it "asks for assurances" that Germany will safeguard American lives and American ships; the German Government is assured that it has been misinformed as to the alleged arming of the Lusitania; it is stated that the United States is contending for the rights of humanity, on which principle "the United States must stand"; Mr. Bryan issues a statement to the public, explaining his views; Gustav Stahl, said to be a former German soldier, who made an affidavit that he saw four guns on the Lusitania, is arrested by Federal officers on a charge of perjury.

June 11—The pacific nature of the American note causes satisfaction in Germany; Mr. Bryan issues a statement to German-Americans; Colonel Roosevelt, in a statement, upholds President Wilson.

June 12—Mr. Bryan issues a third statement; some German-American newspapers criticise his statement addressed to German-Americans.

June 13—Newspapers of Germany today contain columns of comment on the last American note, the general tone being milder, the friendly tenor of the note being welcomed.

June 15—Court of inquiry opens in London; Captain Turner swears on the stand that his ship was not armed.

NAVAL RECORD—GENERAL.

May 1—Four British torpedo boat destroyers sink two German torpedo boats in the North Sea, after a fifth British destroyer is sunk by a German submarine; Russian Black Sea fleet bombards Bosporus forts; allied fleet bombards Nagara, on the Dardanelles.

May 3—The ships of the allied fleet are now working in shifts at the bombardment of the Dardanelles, which is maintained twenty-four hours a day; French battleship Henri IV. and British battleship Vengeance are damaged by fire of the forts.

May 4—Bombardment of Turkish forts on the Gulf of Smyrna is resumed by an allied squadron; British warship Agamemnon is damaged by forts at the Dardanelles.

May 6—Heavy bombardment of the Dardanelles is continued by the allied fleet; during the last three days a number of villages and forts have been set on fire by shells; British superdreadnought Queen Elizabeth is taking a prominent part in the bombardment.

May 8—British torpedo boat destroyer Crusader is sunk by a mine off Zeebrugge and the crew taken prisoners by the Germans.

May 9—Russians sink six Turkish transports off the Bosporus and two in the Sea of Marmora.

May 12—Turkish destroyers in the Dardanelles torpedo and sink the British pre-dreadnought Goliath, 500 men being lost; allied fleet bombards the forts at Kilid Bahr, Chanak Kalessi, and Nagara; Italian steamer Astrea sinks near Taranto, it being believed that she hit a mine.

May 15—Russian Black Sea fleet destroys four Turkish steamers and twenty sailing vessels; the fleet bombards Keffen, Eregli, and Kilimali.

May 16—For three days the allied fleet has been bombarding Turkish troop positions on the Dardanelles; shell fire is stated to have smashed whole trenches filled with Turkish soldiers.

May 17—Parliamentary Secretary of the British Admiralty announces in House of Commons that 460,628 tons of British shipping, other than warships, have been sunk or captured by the German Navy since the beginning of the war; that the number of persons killed in connection with the sinkings is 1,556; that the tonnage of German shipping, not warships, sunk or captured by the British Navy is 314,465, no lives being lost, so far as is known.

May 20—Bombardment of Nagara by the allied fleet continues night and day; British battleship Queen Elizabeth is supporting the allied troops on the Gallipoli Peninsula with the fire of her big guns from the Gulf of Saros; a new bombardment of the Turkish encampments on the Gulf of Smyrna is under way by ships of Allies.

May 24—Small naval units of Austria, especially destroyers and torpedo boats, bombard the Italian portions of the Adriatic coast; they are attacked by Italian torpedo boats and withdraw after a brief cannonade; the value of German and Austrian ships now in Italian ports, which have become prizes of war, is estimated at $20,000,000.

May 25—American steamer Nebraskan, en route from Liverpool to Delaware Breakwater, without cargo, is struck by either a torpedo or a mine forty miles off the south coast of Ireland; the ship is not seriously damaged and starts for Liverpool at reduced speed; Italy declares a blockade of the Austrian and Albanian coasts; allied warships bombard Adalia, Makri, Kakava, and other places along the coast of Asia Minor, destroying Government buildings and public works; Austrian ships sink an Italian destroyer near Barletta.

May 27—Captain Greene of the Nebraskan, which arrives at Liverpool, states that he thinks his ship was hit by a torpedo; the American flag had been hauled down shortly before she was struck, but the ship's name and nationality were plainly painted on her sides; British auxiliary ship Princess Irene is blown to pieces off Sheerness, 321 men being killed; it is presumed that careless handling of explosives caused the disaster.

May 28—Austrians sink an Italian torpedo boat destroyer, while the Italians sink an Austrian submarine. Danish steamer Ely is sunk by a mine off Stockholm, crew being saved.

May 29—Statement from the German Foreign Office is transmitted to Washington through Ambassador Gerard, urging that American shipping circles be again warned against traversing the waters around the British Isles incautiously, and especially that they make their neutral markings on the vessels very plain, and that they light them promptly and sufficiently at night: American naval experts find the facts to indicate that the Nebraskan was torpedoed and not struck by a mine, so Ambassador Page reports to Washington; British Admiralty puts stricter rules in force for navigation in the war zone.

May 30—British Legation at Athens issues a notice that, beginning on June 2, a blockade will be established off the coast of Asia Minor between the Dardanelles and the Strait of Samos.

May 31—An Admiralty statement shows that since the beginning of the war 130 British merchant ships and fishing vessels, with a tonnage of 471,000, have been sunk.

June 2—Two Italian torpedo boats sink two Austrian merchant vessels in the Gulf of Trieste and damage an auxiliary cruiser.

June 4—German transports, torpedo boats, and submarines seek to enter the Gulf of Riga, but sheer off on perceiving the Russian fleet; three German transports are sunk by mines.

June 5—A strong German fleet has appeared in the middle Baltic and has exchanged shots with the Russian fleet near the Gulf of Riga; Winston Churchill, in a speech at Dundee, declares that the British Navy is growing at an amazing rate, and is much stronger, both actually and relatively, than at the beginning of the war; Greek steamer Virginia is blown up by a floating mine while heading for the Gulf of Trieste, her crew being killed.

June 6—Italian warships are destroying cables and lighthouses on the Adriatic; Italian warships bombard the railway between Cattaro and Ragusa, and shell Monfalcone.

June 11—Turkish cruiser Midullu sinks a Russian torpedo boat destroyer in the Black Sea.

June 14—British steamship Arndale sinks from striking a mine in the White Sea.

June 15—Official announcement states that the total loss from all causes in the British Navy up to May 31 was 13,547 officers and men.

NAVAL RECORD—SUBMARINES.

May 1—The Gulflight, an American oil steamer owned by the Gulf Refining Company, is torpedoed off the Scilly Islands, but does not sink, and is towed to an anchorage in Crow Sound, Scilly Islands; the Captain dies of heart failure, and two men jump overboard and are drowned; she was flying the American flag; French steamer Europe is torpedoed by a German submarine, crew being rescued; British steamer Fulgent is torpedoed by a German submarine; some of the crew are missing; British steamer Edale is sunk by a German submarine off the Scilly Islands, crew being saved; Russian steamer Svorono is sunk by a German submarine off the Blasket Islands, crew being saved; British trawler Colombia is sunk by a German submarine, seventeen of the crew being lost.

May 3—In the last forty-eight hours one Swedish steamer and three Norwegian steamers have been sunk by German submarines; British steamer Minterne is sunk by a German submarine off the Scilly Islands, two of crew being killed.

May 4—Ten British trawlers have been sunk by German submarines in the last forty-eight hours; the submarine which caused the most damage has an iron cross painted on her conning tower.

May 5—Danish steamer Cathay is sunk by a German submarine in the North Sea; passengers and crew saved.

May 6—British steamers Candidate and Centurion are sunk off the Irish coast by German submarines, crews being saved; British schooner Earl of Latham is sunk by a German submarine; two British trawlers are sunk by German submarines.

May 8—British steamer Queen Wilhelmina is sunk by a German submarine in the North Sea, crew being given time to take to the boats.

May 12—British submarine E-14 has penetrated to the Sea of Marmora and has sunk two Turkish gunboats and five Turkish transports.

May 15—German submarine sinks without warning the Danish steamer Martha in Aberdeen Bay, Scotland; crew escapes.

May 19—German submarines sink British steamers Drumcree and Dumfries and British trawler Lucerne; no lives lost.

May 20—French steam trawler is blown to pieces by German submarine near Dartmouth; thirteen of crew killed; British trawlers Chrysolite and Crimond are sunk by German submarines; crews saved.

May 21—German submarine, with thirty-nine shots from her gun, sinks British sailing ship Glenholm off Irish coast; crew saved.

May 23—Repeated reports keep coming from Copenhagen that the German naval authorities admit the loss of seventeen submarines since the opening of the war.

May 25—British battleship Triumph is sunk in the Dardanelles by a German submarine, going down in seven minutes; 56 men are lost; the Triumph was built in 1904 and cost $4,750,000.

May 26—A British submarine has sunk a Turkish gunboat in the Sea of Marmora within sight of Constantinople.

May 27—German submarine torpedoes and sinks British battleship Majestic off Sedd-el-Bahr; 49 men are lost; Majestic was completed in 1895 and belonged to the oldest type of battleship in commission in British Navy; British Admiralty announces that submarine E-11 has sunk a large Turkish munition ship, while she caused a small storeship to run ashore; also that E-11 entered Constantinople harbor and discharged a torpedo at a transport alongside the arsenal; British steamer Cadeby is sunk off the Scilly Islands by gunfire from a German submarine; crew saved.

May 28—The torpedoing of the American tanker Gulflight is now established in Germany as having been due to a German submarine, the report of the submarine's Captain having been received by the German Admiralty; he reports that when he saw the Gulflight she was being convoyed by two patrol boats, and he concluded she must be British or was carrying contraband; British steamer Spennymoor is sunk by a German submarine off the Orkney Islands, six men being drowned; British steamer Tullochmoor is shelled and sunk by a German submarine, crew being saved; British steamer Glenlee is sunk by a German submarine, crew being saved; Portuguese steamer Cysne is sunk by a German submarine off Cape Finisterre, crew being saved; German submarine U-24 sinks British steamer Ethiope in the English Channel; fifteen of crew are missing.

May 29—British steamer Dixiana is sunk by a German submarine, which is disguised with sails; crew saved.

May 31—Danish steamer Soborg is sunk by a German submarine in the English Channel; crew saved.

June 1—British steamer Saidieh, carrying passengers, is torpedoed without warning in the North Sea by a German submarine and sinks in fifteen minutes; seven of the crew, including a stewardess, are lost; Welsh trawler Victoria is sunk by a German submarine, several of the crew being killed by shell fire.

June 2—British submarine torpedoes a large German transport in the Sea of Marmora; German submarines sink the Norwegian steamer Cubano and the Welsh trawler Hiorld, the crews being saved; Danish schooner Salvador is sunk by a German submarine, crew saved.

June 3—Swedish steamer Lapland is sunk by a German submarine off Scotland, crew being saved; Danish steamer Cyrus is sunk by a German submarine off Scotland, crew being saved; British steamer Iona is sunk by a German submarine, crew being shelled while taking to the boats and four men being wounded; British fishing steamer Chrysophrasus is sunk by a German submarine, crew being shelled while taking to the boats; Portugal is aroused over recent sinking of two Portuguese ships by German submarines; French steamer Penfeld is sunk by a German submarine, crew saved.

June 4—British trawler Ebenezer is sunk by shell fire from a German submarine, crew escaping; British steamer Inkum is sunk by a German submarine, crew escaping; steam drifter Edna May, trawler Strathbran, sailing ship George and Mary, steam fishing vessels Cortes, Kathleen, and Evening Star, steamer Sunnet Head, trawlers Horace and Economy, all British, have been sunk by German submarines; Russian mine layer is sunk by a submarine near the Gulf of Riga.

June 5—German submarine U-51 arrives at Constantinople from Wilhelmshaven, after a voyage of forty-two days, during which she sunk the British battleships Triumph and Majestic.

June 6—Five more British trawlers have been sunk by German submarines, all the crews being saved.

June 7—The trawler Arctic, bark Sunlight, steamer Star of the West, and the trawler Dromio, all British, have been sunk by German submarines; four of the Arctic's crew were killed by shell fire from the submarine; Russian schooner Afold has been sunk by a German submarine.

June 8—German submarines sink Belgian steamer Menapier, Norwegian steamer Trudvang, Norwegian bark Superb, Norwegian steamer Glittertind, British trawlers Pentland and Saturn; sixteen die on the Menapier.

June 9—British sink a German submarine and capture her crew; First Lord of the Admiralty Balfour states that hereafter submarine crews will be treated like other prisoners of war; German submarine sinks British steamer Lady Salisbury; one of the crew is killed and two are missing; official Austrian statement declares that submarine No. 4 torpedoed and sank a small British cruiser off the Albanian coast; British statement says the ship is now safe in harbor, not seriously damaged.

June 10—British torpedo boats Nos. 10 and 12 are sunk off the east coast of England by a German submarine; twenty-nine seamen are missing; German submarines sink steamers Strathcarron and Erna Boldt, and the trawlers Letty, Tunisian, Castor, Nottingham, Velocity, Cardiff, Qui Vive, and Edward, all British; German submarines sink Russian bark Thomasina, Russian steamer Dania, and Swedish steamer Otago, crews being saved.

June 12—German submarines sink British steamer Leuctra and trawlers James Leyman, Britannia, and Waago, crews being saved.

June 13—German submarine U-35 sinks British bark Crown of India and Norwegian bark Bellglade off Milford Haven, crews escaping; German submarine sinks British trawler Plymouth, crew escaping.

June 14—German submarines sink British steamer Hopemount and French schooner Diamant, crews being saved; German submarine burns the Danish schooner Cocos Merstal, crew being saved.

June 15—German submarine sinks British trawler Argyll, seven of crew being drowned; German submarine sinks Norwegian steamer Duranger; crew saved.

AERIAL RECORD.

May 2—German aeroplanes bombard towns in Eastern France; twenty incendiary bombs are dropped on Epinal.

May 3—Germans state that they have sunk a British submarine in the North Sea by dropping a bomb on it from an airship; this is denied by the British Admiralty; a German aeroplane is driven off from Dover by gunfire.

May 4—Two Austrian aeroplanes throw incendiary bombs near Mamaligia, in Bessarabia.

May 5—An official French note states that on March 22 French aviators damaged Briey, Conflans, and Metz; that on April 15 French aviators destroyed 150 railroad cars at St. Quentin, twenty-four soldiers being killed; that on April 28 French aviators destroyed a Zeppelin at Friedrichshaven; two Turkish aeroplanes are brought down by shells from the allied fleet at the Dardanelles.

May 9—British airmen bombard the St. André railway junction near Lille, the canal bridge at Dok, and also Furnes, Herlies, Illies, Marquelles, and La Bassée.

May 10—Zeppelins drop bombs on Westcliffe-on-Sea and Southend, seaside resorts in Essex; slight damage.

May 11—French aviator bombards airship hangar at Maubeuge; German aviator bombards railroad station at Doullens; Germans bring down a British aviator, and British bring down two German aviators.

May 13—A Zeppelin falls in the Gierlesche woods in Belgium, is badly damaged, and is dismantled by the crew, being taken away in sections.

May 17—Two Zeppelins drop bombs on Ramsgate, damaging buildings and wounding three persons; it is reported from Rotterdam that a fight recently occurred in the region of the Yser between a Zeppelin and twenty-seven allied aeroplanes, the Zeppelin being sent crashing to earth with sixty men, while two aeroplanes were wrecked and their pilots killed by machine gun fire from the Zeppelin; British aeroplanes drop proclamations on the town of Gallipoli announcing an approaching bombardment and advising the population to leave.

May 18—London reports that two Zeppelins have been destroyed, one falling within the allied lines at Dunkirk, and the other falling into the sea as the result of shell fire from a French torpedo boat destroyer.

May 21—Turkish aeroplanes are aiding their troops on the Gallipoli Peninsula; British bring down a German aeroplane near Ypres; Germans bring down an allied aeroplane at Fresnoy.

May 22—German aviators, in an aeroplane disguised as a French machine, drop eight bombs on Paris, two persons being slightly injured; because of the disguise the French air patrol allowed the German machine to pass.

May 24—Austrian aeroplanes drop bombs on Venice, Porto Corsini, Ancona, Gesi, Potenza Picena, the Tremiti Islands, and Barletta; a German Taube drops bombs in the northern suburbs of Paris; no one injured.

May 25—Six French aeroplanes drive off two German machines which seek to raid Paris; French aeroplanes are active along the entire front and drop 205 projectiles upon German positions.

May 26—A Zeppelin drops fifty bombs on Southend; one woman is killed and several persons injured; the property damage is slight; this Zeppelin later is reported as having fallen into the sea near Heligoland, having been struck by a shell while over England; French airmen bring down a German aeroplane which attacked the suburbs of Paris yesterday, the two German aviators being killed; allied airmen drop nineteen bombs on the aerodrome at Gontrode, southeast of Ghent, destroying the greater part of the aerodrome, killing forty-four soldiers, and wounding thirty; Italian aviators bombard railroad station at Monfalcone.

May 27—Eighteen French aeroplanes, each carrying 110 pounds of projectiles, bombard an important German manufactory of explosives at Ludwigshafen, on the Rhine, starting fires in several of the factory buildings, and killing eleven civilians; fifty German soldiers are killed at Ostend by a bomb dropped by allied aeroplane; Italian and Austrian aeroplane squadrons are active in the operations of the armies, doing much scouting and some bombarding; squadron of Italian hydro-aeroplanes throws bombs on the Trieste-Nabresina Railroad; allied aeroplane squadron flies over the Dardanelles and subjects Turkish position to heavy bombardment.

May 28—Experts estimate that orders amounting to $16,000,000 have been placed in the United States for aeroplanes for the Allies.

May 29—Austrian aeroplane squadron drops bombs on Venice, causing several fires; a French and a German aeroplane fight a duel at 9,000 feet near Fismes, the French machine, by its gunfire, shooting down the German from a height of 6,000 feet.

May 30—A Zeppelin drops bombs on Helsingfors, destroying cotton sheds and setting fire to a passenger ship; British bring down a German aeroplane near Courtrai; Turkish aviators drop bombs on the allied trenches at Sedd-el-Bahr.

May 31—Zeppelins drop ninety incendiary bombs on London in a night raid; four civilians are killed and several others wounded; numerous fires are started, but none prove serious; Berlin announces that the attack is a reprisal for the aerial attack on Ludwigshafen; Italian dirigible makes a raid on the Austrian naval base of Pola, damaging the railroad station and arsenal.

June 3—Twenty-nine French aeroplanes aim 178 shells and several thousand darts at the headquarters of the German Crown Prince, killing several soldiers.

June 4—Zeppelins drop bombs on the east and southeast coasts of England; little damage is done and casualties are few.

June 5—A Taube drops bombs on Calais, killing one person and doing slight property damage.

June 6—Ten Zeppelins of a new type are reported from Copenhagen to have been completed, these machines having greater speed than the old ships; they are stated to be fitted with appliances for dropping poisonous gas bombs; German aeroplanes drop bombs on Calais and on the aviation grounds at Lunéville; a Zeppelin drops bombs on the east coast of England, five persons being killed and forty injured.

June 7—Sub-Lieutenant Warneford of the British Flying Corps fights a duel with a Zeppelin at a height of 6,000 feet; with incendiary bombs he explodes the airship, which falls near Ghent, the twenty-eight men on board being killed; Warneford returns safely to the British lines; Italian dirigible bombards Pola.

June 8—King George sends a warmly congratulatory telegram to Sub-Lieutenant Warneford and confers upon him the Victoria Cross; Austrian aeroplane bombards Venice; Austrian aeroplane destroys an Italian airship.

June 12—Austrian aeroplanes drop bombs on the breakwater of Bari, on Polignano, where a woman is killed, and on Monopoli.

June 13—Italian airship seriously damages the arsenal at the naval station of Pola.

June 15—Twenty-three allied aeroplanes bombard the town of Karlsruhe, killing eleven and injuring six civilians.

AUSTRIA-HUNGARY.

May 23—Emperor Francis Joseph, in a manifesto to his troops, denounces Italy, and declares that his former ally's perfidy has no parallel in history.

May 25—The Foreign Ministry publishes documents presenting Austria's side of the controversy with Italy; it is contended that Italy, from the beginning, sought to evade her obligations by artificial interpretation of the Triple Alliance treaty.

BELGIUM.

May 24—The German Government has published a "White Book" charging Belgian civilians with many forms of attacks on German troops; German measures at Louvain and elsewhere are declared to have been only for the purpose of stopping these attacks.

June 6—Belgian Legation at Washington gives out a statement answering the German White Book recently issued at Berlin making accusations against the Belgian civilian population; reply denounces allegations of franc-tireur warfare as false and unsupported; Belgian Government, instead of encouraging civilian resistance, warned the population against it.

CANADA.

May 3—Official statement places Canadian casualties in the battle of Langemarck, as the recent fighting near Ypres is now officially termed, at 6,000 killed, wounded, and missing; total Canadian casualties in the entire war to date are 6,584.

May 17—Canadian losses since the battle of Langemarck total 4,792, made up of 680 killed, 3,208 wounded, and 904 missing.

June 10—Nine camps have been opened, at intervals from Nova Scotia to British Columbia, for training troops; plans provide for training 100,000 recruits this Summer.

FRANCE.

May 10—General Gouraud, it is announced, will relieve General d'Amade in command of the expeditionary force to the Orient; General d'Amade has been summoned back to France for a Governmental mission.

May 19—The Minister of Finance introduces a bill in the Chamber of Deputies providing for a $220,000,000 appropriation for the first six months of 1915 in addition to the $1,700,000,000 which has been already voted.

May 22—Captain Thery, a prominent economist, estimates that the cost of the first year of the war, including the expenses of all combatants, will be about $2,000,000 an hour.

May 29—A great demonstration is held in the Sorbonne amphitheatre, attended by the President, and the notables of political and artistic France, to express the appreciation of the French people for the sympathy and help of Americans during the war.

GERMANY.

May 4—Lübeck, on the Baltic Sea, formerly a port of relatively small importance, has become a great port, and dozens of ships are there discharging vast quantities of foodstuffs and other supplies; twenty-three Socialist members of the Reichstag opposed the voting of the full war credit last asked by the Government, according to a report from Berlin.

May 7—The Germans state that they and the Austrians now hold 46,000 square miles of Russian territory, containing a population of more than 5,000,000.

May 14—Lieutenant von Muecke and fifty men of the Emden's crew, who escaped when that cruiser was sunk in November, have arrived at Damascus, after six months of adventurous wanderings.

May 18—The London Chronicle, on the basis of statistics which it has received, estimates the total German losses in the war to be 2,050,000.

May 24—Germany asks Switzerland to take over German diplomatic affairs in Rome; this action is regarded in Washington as a slap at the United States.

May 26—Prince von Bülow, recently Ambassador to Italy, arrives in Berlin; Germany and Italy are still theoretically allies, war not having been declared between them.

May 28—Chancellor von Bethmann-Hollweg, speaking in the Reichstag, declares that the Teutonic allies are waging war in "holy anger" and will fight until they have made it certain that no enemy "will dare again a trial of arms"; he makes a scathing attack on Italy, and says that "her violation of good faith" is written in "letters of blood."

May 30—Americans are leaving Germany by the score, declaring the hate for Americans is so intense as to make life unbearable.

June 2—Officers and men on furlough in Berlin are forbidden to visit cafés and restaurants.

June 5—There are now 900,000 prisoners of war held in Germany, in 247 prison camps.

June 7—An extensive exodus of Americans from Germany is in progress, many going to Italy; refugees declare the Germans now hate Americans as bitterly as they do the British.

June 14—Germany discontinues her exceptional treatment of 39 British officers, put into effect as reprisal for England's exceptional treatment of German submarine crews, now ended.

GREAT BRITAIN.

May 2—Lord Kitchener is becoming the storm centre of the Cabinet upheaval; attacks on him by the Northcliffe newspapers are resented by other newspapers and by many of the public; a "White Paper," containing reports from firms and officers throughout the country, shows that drink is having a serious effect on repairs to warships and transports and on the output of munitions.

May 4—Since the beginning of the war the British Army has had 2,246 officers killed, 4,177 wounded and 762 missing; Chancellor Lloyd George, in a budget speech in Parliament, places the expenditure for the next six months at $10,500,000 a day.

May 7—Government abandons the plan to place extra taxes on spirits and instead substitutes a complete prohibition of the sale of spirits less than three years old.

May 12—The Committee on Alleged German Atrocities, headed by Viscount Bryce, appointed by Premier Asquith, makes public its report, which contains an account of hundreds of cases investigated; the report finds that there were in many parts of Belgium "systematically organized massacres of the civil population"; that in the general conduct of the war innocent civilians, men and women "were murdered in large number, women violated, and children murdered"; that "looting, house burning, and the wanton destruction of property were ordered" by German officers; that "the rules and usages of war were frequently broken," civilians, including women and children, being used as a shield for troops, and that the Red Cross and white flag were frequently abused.

May 13—Premier Asquith announces in the house of Commons the new policy of the Government with reference to alien enemies now resident in Great Britain; those of military age will be interned, while those not of military age, and women and children will be deported; King George orders the names of the German and Austrian Emperors, and of five German Kings and Princes stricken from the rolls of the Order of the Garter.

May 18—Premier Asquith is forming a "National Cabinet," or coalition government, in which some of the Cabinet posts at present occupied by Liberals will go to Unionist and Labor Party leaders; the crisis is the result of the resignation of Lord Fisher as First Sea Lord of the Admiralty, due to differences between him and Winston Churchill, First Lord of the Admiralty; Churchill has been much criticised, particularly for the fiasco at Antwerp and the policy pursued in the Dardanelles, while the loss of the Lusitania has further stirred his opponents.

May 19—The Northcliffe newspapers state that there has been difficulty over high explosives for the army, those in charge at the War Office not having awakened in time to the need for such explosives in large quantities; these papers criticise Lord Kitchener's conduct of the War Office; racing will be stopped after this week for the duration of the war, except at Newmarket.

May 25—The make-up of the new coalition Cabinet is announced; it is headed by Mr. Asquith and contains twelve Liberals, eight Unionists, one Laborite, and one non-partisan, Lord Kitchener; Arthur J. Balfour becomes First Lord of the Admiralty; John Redmond refuses a place in the Cabinet; Liberal newspapers criticise the entry into the Cabinet of Sir Edward Carson, who becomes Attorney General.

May 27—Admiral Sir Henry Jackson is appointed First Sea Lord of the Admiralty in the place of Admiral Lord Fisher.

June 3—Premier Asquith ends a visit of four days at the British front, during which he consulted with Field Marshal French and General Joffre; Minister of Munitions Lloyd George, in a speech at Manchester, declares that England must have more munitions and that the fate of the nation rests on the workshops.

June 8—House of Commons passes the Munitions bill on third reading; the measure establishes a new department to handle munitions.

June 9—Premier Asquith announces in the House of Commons that the total British casualties up to May 31 were 50,342 killed, 153,980 wounded, and 53,747 missing.

June 15—House of Commons votes a war credit of $1,250,000,000, making a total of $4,310,000,000 thus far voted; Asquith says expenditure will be not less than $15,000,000 a day.

GREECE.

June 15—Returns of the general election show that the party of former Premier Venizelos, who has been in favor of entering the war on the side of the Allies, has a considerable majority in Parliament.

HOLLAND.

May 19—A bill is being prepared providing for universal compulsory military service; the measure will increase the army approximately to 1,000,000 men.

ITALY.

May 10—Italy calls to the colors all classes of reserves back to the class of 1876; an Italian army of 600,000 is concentrated at Verona.

May 12—Government receives what is believed to be the final proposal of Austria for territorial concessions; ex-Premier Giolitti, one of the most influential men in Italy, is against war; war demonstrations are being held all over Italy.

May 14—The Cabinet tenders its resignation to the King because of the strength of the anti-war party, led by former Premier Giolitti; the entire country is in a turmoil, there being much indignation over the fall of the Cabinet.

May 15—Signor Marcora having refused to form a Cabinet, and a similar refusal having been made by Paolo Carcano, the King asks Salandra to resume the Premiership; Salandra consents; the people and press are furious with Giolitti; the country is on the verge of revolt; troops save the Austrian Embassy from attack.

May 16—There is general rejoicing throughout the country over the retention of office by Salandra; it is reported that Italy now has 1,700,000 men mobilized and equipped.

May 19—Italy issues a Green Book, tracing the course of events between Italy and Austria, from the Italian standpoint, during recent months; Italy holds that Austria has violated Article VII. of the Triple Alliance, which bound Austria to refrain from occupation of Balkan territory without agreement with Italy and due compensation; in the invasion of Serbia and occupation of her cities, Italy claims that Austria has broken faith, and the negotiations between the two countries have been concerned chiefly with compensation, Austria not meeting Italian demands.

May 20—Chamber of Deputies, amid wild enthusiasm, adopts, by a vote of 407 to 74, a bill conferring full power upon the Government to make war; Premier Salandra denounces Austria in a speech which is tremendously acclaimed; he says she broke her alliance, and was false to the treaty in its substance, form and spirit; he declares that Italy has long been for peace and strove to find a compromise which would restore agreement's reason for being.

May 21—By a vote of 262 to 2 the Senate passes the bill granting plenary powers to the Government; there is great enthusiasm in the Chamber; Italian and Austrian troops continue to mass at the border; all Italy is aflame with enthusiasm.

May 22—General mobilization of the army and navy is ordered; martial law is proclaimed, beginning May 23, in Northeastern Italy; the King signs the bill giving full power to the Salandra Ministry in the present emergency and for "the duration of the war."

May 23—Duke of Avarna, Italian Ambassador at Austria, presents to Baron von Burian, Austro-Hungarian Foreign Minister, a declaration of war by Italy, dated May 23, but not to take effect until tomorrow; the declaration states that the treaty of alliance between Italy and Austria has been violated by Austria; estimates put the total Italian war strength at 3,300,000 when all reservists are called.

May 24—Italy has given her adhesion to the agreement, already signed by the allied powers, not to conclude a separate peace.

May 25—Italy sends a note to the United States Government explaining her break with Austria; Italy states that she was forced into hostilities, cites a long list of grievances, and declares that, despite warnings, the ultimatum was sent to Serbia without notification to Rome; this ultimatum, so sent, declares Italy, violated Article I. of the Triple Alliance treaty, which provided that none of the contracting parties had the right to undertake, without a previous agreement, any step whose consequences might impose a duty upon the other signatories arising out of the alliance, or which would in any way encroach upon their vital interests; Italy further states that the Triple Alliance was essentially defensive; similar notes are sent by Italy to all important neutral countries.

May 28—The Pope declines an invitation from Spain to make his headquarters at the Palace of the Escurial.

June 13—Official journal publishes decree for seizing merchant ships of Italy's enemies in the ports of the kingdom and colonies.

RUMANIA.

June 1—Rumania has 1,000,000 fully equipped men ready for battle against Austria on a 600-mile front; a note to Austria containing Rumania's demands is now before the Austrian Government.

June 6—A great demonstration is held in Bucharest in favor of Rumania's joining the war with the Allies; speakers eulogize Italy for entering the war.

RUSSIA.

May 10—Figures made public in Petrograd show that the total number of prisoners taken by Russian armies and interned in Russia up to April 1 was 10,734 officers and 605,378 men; in addition, the statement says that large numbers of Galician prisoners have been given their liberty and sent home.

SAN MARINO.

June 3—The Republic of San Marino officially approves of the Italian attitude toward Austria and declares war.

SERBIA.

May 24—The Serbian Army has been reorganized; Great Britain and France have supplied it abundantly with artillery and ammunition.

SWEDEN.

June 6—Stockholm reports that a treaty has been ratified between Sweden and Russia, mutually acknowledging the financial, commercial, and industrial interests of the respective countries.

TURKEY.

May 23—A joint official statement issued by Great Britain, France, and Russia states that for the past month Kurds and the Turkish population of Armenia have been massacring Armenians, with "the connivance and help of the Ottoman authorities"; that the inhabitants of 100 villages near Van were all assassinated; that massacres have taken place at Erzerum, Dertshau, Moush, Zeitun, and in all Cilicia; that the allied Governments announce publicly to the Sublime Porte that "they will hold all members of the Government, as well as such of their agents as are implicated, personally responsible for such massacres."

June 6—The Krupps have established a large ammunition factory near Constantinople.

UNITED STATES.

May 3—Government is obtaining official reports on the sinking of the Gulflight from Ambassadors Page and Gerard.

May 5—State Department makes public the text of its reply to the German note in the William P. Frye case, which was forwarded on April 28; the reply declines the suggestion that a German prize court pass on the legality of the destruction and amount of indemnity; it suggests that the German Embassy at Washington be authorized to deal with the matter; it states that unquestionably the destruction of the vessel was a violation of old treaties between the United States and Prussia.

May 6—The State Department has replied to the German complaint that the German steamer Odenwald was "attacked" when she attempted to leave San Juan, Porto Rico, without clearance papers; text not made public.

May 19—American tank steamer Cushing arrives in Philadelphia, and Captain Herland tells the details of the attack made by a German aeroplane on April 28, while the ship was in the North Sea; he states that the aviator manoeuvred to drop a bomb into the funnel, from a height of 300 feet, but the three bombs thrown missed the ship; he says the attack took place at 7 P.M., but there was ample light for the aviator to see the ship's name in eight-foot letters, and the American flags at the masthead and the taffrail; Secretary Bryan has cabled to Ambassador Gerard, asking whether the action of the German Government in placing the William P. Frye case in a prize court is the reply to the American note stating that the United States did not regard prize court proceedings with favor.

May 21—Recent orders from the British Government bring up to $100,000,000 the total contracts for munitions of war given to the Bethlehem Steel Company since hostilities began.

May 22—The French Line has chartered thirty-seven freight steamships to aid in transporting the huge quantities of munitions of war waiting shipment from the United States to the allied countries.

May 24—Italy asks the United States to take over Italian diplomatic affairs at Vienna, and the United States consents; Germany, through Ambassador Gerard, explains that her action of sending the William P. Frye case to a prize court is not intended as an answer to the American note on the matter, but is a necessary procedure under German law.

May 25—United States issues a proclamation of neutrality, under date of May 24, covering the entry of Italy into the war.

May 29—Federal Court at Milwaukee dismisses the action brought by General Samuel Pearson, former Boer commander, in which he sought to restrain the Allis-Chalmers Company and others from manufacturing shrapnel shells, which, it was alleged, were being shipped to the Allies; the court holds that the relief sought by the plaintiff is political rather than legal.

June 2—The Allies have assured the State Department that Dr. Dernburg will be given safe conduct if he wishes to return to Germany.

June 4—Germany in a note expresses regret for the torpedoing of the Gulflight, which is stated to have been due to a mistake, and offers to pay for the damage.

June 5—German war bonds are being sold in this country, and German-Americans are buying them readily.

June 8—There are persistent rumors that German interests are trying to buy American ammunition factories so as to stop shipments to the Allies.

June 10—In a new note on the William P. Frye case Germany insists that the case go before a prize court, and puts forth the contention that she has the right to destroy any American ship carrying contraband, the contention being based on the American-Prussian Treaty of 1799.

June 12—Dr. Dernburg sails for Bergen on the Norwegian America liner Bergensfjord.

RELIEF.

May 15—A national Polish relief association is being organized in the United States; Paderewski, now in New York in the interests of relief, estimates the losses of his compatriots by the war at $2,500,000,000; he says that an area has been laid waste equal in size to New York and Pennsylvania; that 7,500 villages have been completely ruined; that thousands of persons are hiding in the woods and feeding on roots.

May 16—The American Commission for Relief in Belgium has now got a financial system working in Belgium by which the great bulk of food needed is being supplied indirectly by the Belgians themselves through their own energies and resources; 75 per cent. of the Belgian people are being supplied with food through the arrangements made by the commission, without recourse to charity.

May 20—England has asked American surgeons to man her newest and largest field hospital; as a result, the medical schools of Harvard, Columbia, and Johns Hopkins will send thirty-two surgeons and physicians and seventy-five nurses; the universities will bear the expenses of the corps.

May 21—Carleton Gibson of the Commission for relief of Poland sends a report to New York stating that in that part of Russian Poland within the Austro-German lines conditions are much worse than in the worst parts of Belgium and France, and that the population is now actually starving.

May 22—The Commission for Relief in Belgium states that about 1,500,000 persons are now destitute in Belgium through unemployment; the monthly food requirements of the Belgians involve an expenditure of between $7,000,000 and $8,000,000.

To the Captain of the U——.

By HARRY VARLEY.

FOOTNOTES

[1] Germany's apology and offer of reparation for the attack on the Gulflight, together with a request for information in the case of the Cushing, are conveyed in the following note, which was received by the State Department in Washington from Ambassador Gerard on June 3, and laid before the Cabinet, and published on June 4:

Referring to the note of May 28, the undersigned has the honor to inform his Excellency the American Ambassador of the United States of America, Mr. James W. Gerard, that the examination undertaken on the part of the German Government concerning the American steamers Gulflight and Cushing has led to the following conclusions:

In regard to the attack on the steamer Gulflight, the commander of a German submarine saw on the afternoon of May 1, in the vicinity of the Scilly Islands, a large merchant steamer coming in his direction which was accompanied by two smaller vessels. These latter took such position in relation to the steamer that they formed a regulation safeguard against submarines; moreover, one of them had a wireless apparatus, which is not usual with small vessels. From this it evidently was a case of English convoy vessels. Since such vessels are frequently armed, the submarine could not approach the steamer on the surface of the water without running the danger of destruction. It was, on the other hand, to be assumed that the steamer was of considerable value to the British Government, since it was so guarded. The commander could see no neutral markings on it of any kind—that is, distinctive marks painted on the freeboard recognizable at a distance, such as are now usual on neutral ships in the English zone of naval warfare. In consequence he arrived at the conclusion from all the circumstances that he had to deal with an English steamer, submerged, and attacked.

The torpedo came in the immediate neighborhood of one of the convoy ships, which at once rapidly approached the point of firing; that the submarine was forced to go to a great depth to avoid being rammed. The conclusion of the commander that an English convoy ship was concerned was in this way confirmed. That the attacked steamer carried the American flag was first observed at the moment of firing the shot. The fact that the steamship was pursuing a course which led neither to nor from America was a further reason why it did not occur to the commander of the submarine that he was dealing with an American steamship.

Upon scrutiny of the time and place of the occurrence described, the German Government has become convinced that the attacked steamship was actually the American steamship Gulflight. There can be no doubt, according to the attendant circumstances, that the attack is to be attributed to an unfortunate accident, and not to the fault of the commander. The German Government expresses its regrets to the Government of the United States concerning this incident, and declares itself ready to furnish full recompense for the damage thereby sustained by American citizens. It is left to the discretion of the American Government to present a statement of this damage, or, if doubt may arise over individual points, to designate an expert who would have to determine, together with a German expert, the amount of damage.

It has not yet been possible by means of an inquiry to clear up fully the case of the American ship Cushing. Official reports available report only one merchant ship attacked by a German flying machine in the vicinity of Nordhind Lightship. The German aviator was forced to consider the vessel as hostile because it carried no flag, and, further, because of no recognizable neutral markings. The attack of four bombs was, of course, not aimed at any American ship.

However, that the ship attacked was the American steamer Cushing is possible, considering the time and place of the occurrences. Nevertheless, the German Government accordingly requests of the American Government that it communicate to the German Government the material which was submitted for judgment, in order that, with this as a basis, a further position can be taken in the matter.

The undersigned leaves it to the Ambassador to bring the foregoing to the immediate attention of his Government, and takes this opportunity to renew to him the assurance of his most distinguished consideration.

VON JAGOW,
Minister for Foreign Affairs.

[3] The reference made by President Wilson in his first note of May 13 to the German Government regarding the sinking of the Lusitania to the "humane and enlightened attitude hitherto assumed by the Imperial German Government in matters of international right, and particularly with regard to the freedom of the seas," was based, it was learned in Washington on June 12, upon the instructions of Aug. 3, 1914, which the German Government sent to its naval commanders. These German rules are now in the possession of the State Department. While no mention is made in them of submarine warfare, the extent and method of the exercise of the right of search and the stoppage of ships is prescribed with great nicety, and provision is made for the safety of passengers and crew. After outlining the purpose of visiting and searching vessels, the regulations state:

All measures are to be carried out in a form whose observance, even against the enemy, will comport with the dignity of the German Empire and with a regard for neutrals conformable to the usages of international law and the German interest.

The method of signaling ships to be halted is prescribed, and it is directed that "two successive blank charges are to be fired, and, if necessary, a shotted charge over the ship" if the signals are not obeyed. "If the ship does not then stop or makes resistance, the Captain will compel her to stop," the instructions continue. After specifying what ships may be captured and destroyed, the regulations continue:

Before destruction all persons on board, if possible with their personal effects, are to be placed in safety and all the ship's papers and other articles of evidence, which in the opinion of the interested parties are of value for the judgment of the prize court, are to be taken over by the Captain.

[4] In an Associated Press dispatch from Rome (via Paris) on June 23 one of the chief Generals in the Italian War Office was reported to have summarized the first month of the campaign about as follows:

One month ago the Italians invaded Austrian territory, uprooted the yellow and black poles bearing the Austrian eagle, and occupied the enemy positions along a front of 500 miles. An Austrian squadron bombarded the Italian coast on the Adriatic, and Austrian aeroplanes dropped eleven bombs on Venice.

During this month the Italians overran the whole of Friuli. The capture of Tolmino and Goritz, the two Austrian strongholds, is considered imminent, which would open the way to Trieste; while in the Alpine region in the province of Trent they have conquered peaks and passes, from which the picked Austro-Hungarian troops have been unable to dislodge them.

Austrian activity has been chiefly displayed in bombarding the Italian Adriatic towns.

From Vienna (via London) on June 23 the following Austro-Hungarian official résumé of the operations of the first month of war along the Italian frontier was issued:

During the first month of the war the Italians have gained no great success. Our troops in the southwest maintain their positions as in the beginning, on or near the frontier.

On the Isonzo front in the fortified frontier district from Flitsch to Malborgeth, on the Carinthian ridge, and on all the fronts of Tyrol, all enemy attempts at an advance have collapsed with heavy losses.

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK NEW YORK TIMES CURRENT HISTORY; THE EUROPEAN WAR, VOL 2, NO. 4, JULY, 1915 ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™ electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org . If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”
• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.
• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of receipt of the work.
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™

Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate .

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility: www.gutenberg.org .

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™, including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.

	ACTIVE ARMY.		RESERVE ARMY.
Categories.	With the Colors.	In the Reserve.	Mobile Militia.	Territorial Militia.	Tot. Yrs.
First.	2	6	4	7	19
Second.	—	8	4	7	19
Third.	—	—	—	19	19

Officers	41,692
Active army (with colors)	289,910
Reserve (including men of first and second categories)	638,979
Mobile militia	299,596
Territorial militia	1,889,659
Total war strength	3,159,836

	Coalition Cabinet.	Late Liberal Cabinet.
Prime Minister	Mr. Asquith	Mr. Asquith.
Minister without portfolio	Lord Lansdowne*	——
Lord Chancellor	Sir S. Buckmaster	Lord Haldane.
President of Council	Lord Crewe	Lord Beauchamp.
Lord Privy Seal	Lord Curzon*	Lord Crewe.
Chancellor of the Exchequer	Mr. McKenna	Mr. Lloyd George.
Home Secretary	Sir J. Simon	Mr. McKenna.
Foreign Minister	Sir E. Grey	Sir E. Grey.
Colonial Secretary	Mr. Bonar Law*	Mr. Harcourt.
India Office	Mr. Chamberlain*	Lord Crewe.
War Office	Lord Kitchener	Lord Kitchener.
Minister of Munitions (new)	Mr. Lloyd George	——
Admiralty	Mr. Balfour*	Mr. Churchill.
Board of Trade	Mr. Runciman	Mr. Runciman.
Local Government Board	Mr. Long*	Mr. H. Samuel.
Duchy of Lancaster	Mr. Churchill	Hon. E. Montagu.
Irish Secretary	Mr. Birrell	Mr. Birrell.
Scottish Office	Mr. McKinnon Wood	Mr. McKinnon Wood.
Agriculture	Lord Selborne*	Lord Lucas.
Works Office	Mr. Harcourt	Lord Emmott.
Education Board	Mr. A. Henderson	Mr. J.A. Pease.
Attorney General	Sir E. Carson*	Sir John Simon.