less of a mystery. In the only definite statement that he has made he declares :

This country [Mexico] should not again be under military government. The armies by our Constitution are secondary to the constituted Government, and it is now time that the country should be governed by the people, for the people, and not, as heretofore, governed by a military clique whose only object is personal welfare and not the welfare of the masses.

FEDERAL CONTROL OF THE
MISSISSIPPI RIVER

In the course of a speech recently delivered before a great audience in New Orleans in behalf of the Progressive party, Mr. Roosevelt touched upon one subject that has been too much neglected in spite of the fact that it is of National concern. To the people of Louisiana Mr. Roosevelt said that the Mississippi River, the Father of Waters, was at once their most valuable asset and their most dangerous liability. Mr. Roosevelt pointed out that the control of this river was absolutely beyond the power or resources of any one State.

"Merely to build levees in the lower course of the river," he said, "will not avail. The levees must be built. But in certain great crises they will always prove useless by themselves. The water flows from State to State, now as the most potent aid to life and well-being, and again as fraught with the most terrible menace of destruction and of death. In the upper part of its course there is need to use the waters for irrigation. In the lower part there is need to prevent their ruining the land by flood. In all parts the water needs to be harnessed for use in our industrial development."

Therefore, Mr. Roosevelt concluded, the control of the Mississippi River is a matter for National action. He suggested that the twenty-five million dollars which it is proposed to pay to Colombia the National Government could put to better use by devoting it to the improvement of this great river together with "the plant of the Panama Canal, and as many scores of millions extra as are necessary, in precisely the same way as it used this money to construct the Panama Canal."

THE NEW POPE

The successor of Pius X was elected by the Conclave of Cardinals at Rome last week. His name is Giacomo della Chiesa. He was

117

born not quite sixty years ago at Pegli, on the shores of the Mediterranean near Genoa, of a family of the Italian nobility. His rise in the Roman Church has been dramatic. He was ordained a priest in 1878, served as an ecclesiastical official in Spain until 1887, became Secretary to Cardinal Rampolla in 1887, became Archbishop of Bologna in 1907, and a Cardinal in May, 1914. Cardinal Rampolla was Papal Secretary of State for Leo XIII, and would perhaps have been elected Pope to succeed Leo if Austria had not exercised the veto, which she then possessed, but which was abolished by Pius X. The new Pope has been so short a time a cardinal that very little is known either of his personality or of his policy, outside of the hierarchy of the Italian Church. His long and intimate association with Cardinal Rampolla, however, indicates that he has been trained in diplomatic statesmanship of a high order, as well as in dogmatic theology of a conservative type. An estimate of the effect of his election upon the Roman Catholic Church, written by an ecclesiastic of that Church, will be found elsewhere in this issue.

THE YALE SCHOOL OF RELIGION

In our "Commencement Notes " two months ago mention was made of the fact that the Yale Divinity School has been renamed the Yale School of Religion. The fact is of more than transient interest. What it involves needs to be adequately understood. In making the changes that required the change of name the Faculty of the School and the Corporation of the University felt that they were not making a new departure, but rather were "returning on a higher plane and with wider sweep to the ideal of the founders" of Yale in 1701, to train men "for Publick employment both in Church & Civil State."

This broad conception of Christian obligation has in our times discovered new fields of service, in which a thorough study of religion on its theoretical side must advance hand in hand with the widest study of it on its practical side. Provision must be made for the thorough training of a Christian ministry for service in all these new fields, as well as for the pastorate of churches. Twenty years ago provision for these new demands made a beginning which has been steadily followed up along with the expansion of philanthropic social work at home and foreign missionary work abroad. Such was the demonstration

of unexpected capacities for service, and such the enthusiasm, faith, and growth of student volunteer activity therein, that in 1909 the ultimate step was taken which made the Divinity School virtually, if not in name, a "University School of Theoretical and Applied Religion."

The plan then adopted actually instituted five schools (for convenience called departments) under the one name, Divinity School a school for the training of pastors and preachers; a school for that of the foreign missionary, whether layman or ordained. minister; a school for that of the teacher of religion, apart from the preaching office, in church or college; a school for the training of social workers; and a school of research in the history and philosophy of religion. It then went on record that the school thus reorganized "may now not inappropriately be termed the Yale School of Religion and Christian Science." The plan thus outlined was put at once into operation. Besides the courses given in these departments there is large use of those given in other departments of the University. In the Department of Missions its own courses were thus supplemented in the current year by more than one hundred others given by more than thirty professors.

What those best qualified to judge think of this scheme was expressed in 1909 by Dr. John R. Mott, President of the World's Student Christian Federation, in a letter to President Hadley: "Your plan is literally great. It is most timely as well as prophetic. It is adapted to meet the requirements of the modern world as no scheme which I have seen in operation on either side of the Atlantic."

The large increase-$1,500,000 of the School's endowment required for the fully developed operation of such a scheme is now proceeding at an encouraging rate. The sought-for organizer and head of such a School of Religion took office in 1912, when Dr. Charles Reynolds Brown, of Oakland, California, became its Dean.

THE COMPENSATION LAW
IN ACTION

"Your case was passed already. Go on home and they'll mail you your money." The court attendant's words brought a look of puzzled relief to the anxious face of thirteen-year-old Maddalena. She had gone along as interpreter for Giuseppe, her father, when

he went up to tell the New York Compensation Commission just how the heavy stone had fallen and hurt his back. Maddalena said he had been sick six weeks and they needed the money, for she was the oldest of seven, and, yes, that was her mother nursing the baby over there. They were all so anxious that they had come along to see if Giuseppe would surely get his money.

No, they had no lawyer. The Commission is a court without lawyers. Perhaps that is why the cases are passed upon so rapidly. Sixteen in twenty minutes is the rate at which they were handled the other day. If these sixteen claims had been tried at law, each case would have taken more than a year to decide, sometimes far more. Twenty years' work done in twenty minutes! As a laborsaving device the State Workmen's Compensation Commission ought to win the approval of even an efficiency engineer.

In the issue of August 8 The Outlook published a short summary of the New York Workmen's Compensation Law and pointed out some of the obstacles in the path of the five Commissioners. Since then the public hearings have been of daily occurrence in New York City, and a short interview with one of the Commissioners, Mr. John Mitchell, leader of the anthracite strike, has brought forward several interesting by-products, as it were, of the new law's application.

The most obvious is the increased willingness of employers to install safety devices in their factories. The fact that insurance premiums are reduced in direct proportion to the precautions taken to safeguard employees is a powerful argument for the "safety first idea.

Also you can see that the new law will tend to bring employer and employee automatically into closer relations," said Mr. Mitchell," since by its provisions the old custom in many industries of hiring men by number is done away with. Now the laborer's name and weekly wage must be kept in writing. It is likely to give one a different feeling to learn that James Smith, who received $9.60 per week, has lost his right arm in the company's service, instead of the old report that Laborer No. 11,729 has been injured.

1914

if James is paid, and it creates a far better feeling among the workers. In the old days, even if the employer wanted to pay a fair compensation, his insurance company made him fight the case, and a lawsuit goes further than most things to stir up strife between capital and labor.

A DEMOCRATIC TRIBUNAL

It is not for nothing that this is named the Workmen's Commission. With no desire to be hard on capital in its struggle for existence, the Commissioners seem to feel that they have been appointed chiefly to see that labor receives that redress which the courts cannot give. The whole tone of the hearings shows this spirit. As the chief attendant expressed it, pointing to a bench full of anxious claimants: They don't need to be afraid of us. We're for them. If it wasn't for this here Commission, they wouldn't get a cent."

Sometimes the worker himself makes it difficult to win his case. At one of the hearings recently a big, eager longshoreman gave the Commissioners a lot of trouble by insisting that he had hunted for work at least a week earlier than the limit of the period for which he was declared incapacitated. The man wanted to show that he needed employment and wasn't lazy, and he nearly wrecked any endeavors to give him compensation for the time he was disabled. Finally the whole Commission broke into laughter at his obtuseness, while the representative of the insurance company smilingly agreed to make no objection to payment for the full time of unemployment.

There is one class of citizen to whom the new law has proved disastrous. It has literally taken the bread from the mouth of the shyster lawyer known as "ambulance chaser." The cutthroat methods by which he was used, on the one hand, to hold up the companies for large damages, and, on the other, retained seventy-five per cent of the money collected for his fees and costs, are impossible now. An injured employee has still the right to take his case into court, and a defeat at law will not prejudice him in applying to the Commission later; but there are not many workingmen who will give up their immediate relief from the State for the tedious uncertainty of legal redress.

It is a pity that some of our judges throughout the country could not visit the hearings and mark the celerity and brevity with which

119

the awards are made. It might be a good idea for the Bar Association's Committee on Reform of Legal Procedure to look in occasionally and take a few notes. Besides despatch, there is shown a generous spirit of kindness and fair play. The relations between the Commission and the representatives of the insurance companies seem amicable. But it is the treatment of the workmen and the workmen's families that is so amazing to any one familiar with the court of a city magis

trate.

"The most democratic tribunal ever conceived" is the way one lawyer described it. It is to be hoped that the march of time and familiarity with misfortune may not tighten the broad sympathies of the Commission or make rigid the administration of its justice.

FOR WHAT SHALL WE PRAY?

We print on another page the President's proclamation requesting Americans to meet. in their various places of worship on October 4 for special prayer on account of the war in Europe. This proclamation, beautiful alike in its spirit and in its form, will appeal to all Americans, whether Roman Catholics, Protestants, Jews, or Agnostics. Even those who doubt the value of prayer may well join in this common expression of deep desire for the speedy recovery of Europe from this epidemic of war.

For what shall we pray?

In the time of William of Orange, those prayed well who prayed for religious libertythe right of every man to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience.

In the time of the American Revolution, those prayed well who prayed that the Colonies might be emancipated and that a new nation might be born, "conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal."

In the Civil War, those prayed well who prayed that the slave might be emancipated and the Union preserved on the basis of justice and liberty.

To-day those will pray well who pray that military despotism may be destroyed, the reign of the sword may be ended, and the reign of the conscience and the reason may begin.

Righteousness and judgment are said by a Hebrew poet to be the habitation of God's throne. Enduring peace-the peace of

God-can dwell only in righteousness and judgment.

SHALL THE UNITED STATES

BUY SHIPS?

A bill has been introduced into Congress by Congressman Alexander, of Missouri, which provides for the creation of a private corporation to own and operate deep-sea or foreigngoing ships. Fifty-one per cent of the stock is to be owned by the United States Government; and the Secretary of the Treasury, the Postmaster-General, and the Secretary of Commerce are to be the voting trust to control this fifty-one per cent of stock. If the bill passes, the Government will furnish the money to this new corporation to buy some ships. It is an interesting coincidence that the bill limits the amount of money supplied by the Government for purchasing the ships to be operated by this new corporation to thirty million dollars, a sum a little greater than it is rumored that the North German Lloyd Line will accept for its ships.

Private advices from Washington justify us in the belief that the general principles of the Alexander Bill have the approval of the National Administration.

The arguments for this bill are very inconclusive. The objections to it are very serious. They are three: economic, political, ethical. The Economic Objection. The objections to the Government ownership and operation of great railway lines apply with equal force to the Government ownership and operation of steamship lines. We affirm the right of the people to do what they can do better for themselves than can be done for them by private enterprise; we therefore affirm their right to own and operate railway and steamship lines. But such ownership and operation is a novel experiment, and the present is no time for trying such experiments-no time, because the civilized world is engaged in a great war, and the whole strength of the United States Government should be employed in keeping out of the war, and in reducing to a minimum the evils which it unavoidably inflicts upon our people; no time because, until we have definitely decided whether we will attempt the regulation or the dissolution of great combinations, it is not wise to enter on the experiment of Government ownership and operation.

The Political Objection. The United States

Government should avoid any action which might involve her in strained relations with the warring Powers. The Government ownership and operation of merchant vessels might easily involve us in such strained relations. Under international law, in time of war the merchant ships of a neutral power may be stopped on the high seas and searched for contraband. If the United States buys and owns, in whole or in part, merchant vessels, and this international right were exercised by a French, English, or German cruiser, the fact would arouse a feeling of resentment in the American people. That feeling might be unreasonable, but it would exist, and it would be much more likely to exist if the ship arrested were owned and operated by the United States Government than if it were owned and operated by private enterprise.

The average American would not expect the Government to act as insurer of all private vessels, but it would be hard to persuade him that it ought not to protect its own vessels, in which as a taxpayer he would be shareholder.

The Ethical Objection. The United States Government has declared its neutrality. The President has urged the people to maintain the spirit of neutrality even in their public and private discussions. The Administration has carried the doctrine of neutrality further than it has ever been carried before in the history of the world; for it has expressed officially its disapproval of a loan of money by private bankers to the French nation, engaged in this war. To affirm that for the Government to encourage private enterprise to provide France with money by a loan violates neutrality, but that for the Government itself to provide Germany with money by a purchase does not violate neutrality, seems to The Outlook a palpable inconsistency. It is reasonable to suppose that the Administration has considered this objection and would not give its sanction to this bill without the consent of England and France previously obtained, and it is reported that England and France have cordially corsented to the purchase of German ships for which it provides. It is quite possible that England believes that to deprive Germany of these ocean steamships until she can build anew will inflict an injury on German commerce greater than the benefit to Germany of the thirty million dollars paid to her now. But the American people do not know that the approval of either France or England has

1914

been obtained, and they ought to know of that approval before they give their sanction to this bill. They ought not to act on a rumor or a supposition.

Notwithstanding

these objections, the United States Government might perhaps be justified in buying the German ships in New York harbor, if they were necessary to the performance of some great National duty or the protection of some great National interest. If we had no other means of bringing home thousands of Americans marooned abroad, or no other means of sending our breadstuffs abroad and avoiding for ourselves that surplus of useful material which is only less disastrous than a famine, we might be justified in an experimental and hazardous policy. But such a necessity does not exist. England has cleared the sea of hostile cruisers. English, French, and Italian ships are crossing the ocean in comparative safety. Americans abroad suffer some serious inconveniences in their voyages, but there is transportation enough for those who are able to pay, and the American Government can by temporary charter or by army transports provide homecoming for the comparatively small number who find themselves stranded abroad without money or credit. Nor does there appear to be a serious lack of vessels to carry to Europe the breadstuffs which we have to sell. It is true that the large German mercantile fleet has been put out of commission, but it is also true that there are few or no steerage passengers to come from Europe to America, and tl at breadstuffs cannot be sent with safety to Belgian or German ports, and it may be gravely doubted whether the lessened commercial fleet is not entirely adequate to provide for the lessened commerce with Europe.

The proposal to have the Government buy, own, and operate merchant ships might perhaps be defended if such purchase were one step toward the re-establishment of an American merchant marine. But it is not such a step. The purchase and operation of merchant vessels by the United States Government would do nothing to encourage private capital to purchase and operate merchant vessels. On the contrary, it would discourage purchase and operation by private enterprise. Private capital is never inclined to compete with the Government; the industry which the Government takes up private capital lets fall. The express companies are allowing the United States Government to carry the small packages, and are devoting their energies to

121

building up a business with the larger and weightier packages which the Government does not carry. The United States Government would not stimulate private factories by establishing and operating factories with the capital of the people. The way to prevent the development of private ownership and operation of a merchant marine is for the Government to own and operate a merchant marine on the people's account.

The Outlook has heretofore pointed out the fact that the American Nation is in some respects the most independent nation on the globe. Three things are necessary for lifefood, shelter, and clothing. The people of the United States, thanks partly to their National policy, thanks partly to the variety of their soil, climate, and products, are able to provide for themselves food from their prairies, shelter from their forests, clay banks, and iron mines, and clothing from their cottonfields and flocks of sheep. But they are almost wholly dependent upon foreign nations. for their means of international intercourse. The present war has brought home to all the people this fact. It is an opportune time to take up the question how we shall make ourselves as independent of foreign nations for our international intercourse as we are independ ent of them for food, shelter, and clothing. But it is a very inopportune time to try experiments supposed to be called for by temporary exigencies, but having no relation to a wellorganized and enduring National policy.

THE FUNDAMENTALS OF

CHRISTIANITY

A committee in Chicago is publishing a series of small volumes entitled "The Fundamentals," meaning the fundamentals of Christianity. The expense of the publication is provided by two laymen whose names are not given to the public. The publishersTestimony Publishing Company, 808 North La Salle Street, Chicago-announce that "all English-speaking Protestant pastors, evangelists, missionaries, theological professors, theological students, Young Men's Christian Association secretaries, Young Women's Christian Association secretaries, Sunday-school superintendents, religious lay workers, and editors of religious publications throughout the earth, who so desire, are entitled to a free copy of each volume of 'The Fundamentals.'" The contributions to