網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版

of Nish, and ultimately Belgrade; while the British seem to be moving more to the eastnorth along the Struma River, which is practically the only other available line of advance. Meanwhile it is said that the Bulgarians have evacuated the seaport of Kavala. Altogether there is a strong probability that before winter comes the push on all the fronts in the Balkans by the Allies will embarrass Austria greatly and may very probably end in the reoccupation of Servia.

On the western front the gains of the week, both by French and British, were valuable. The capture of the town of Ginchy by the British forces was a fine bit of work. The French all through the week made gains, and particularly on September 12 took important positions which are of great value in the probable early attacks on Combles and later upon Péronne. They took fifteen hundred prisoners in one day. The fighting in all this section during the week was severe and the fatalities large.

There had been no very important development on the Russian front up to September 13, although advances have been made in the Carpathians, and apparently a strong advance movement is preparing in the neighborhood of Kovel and Lemberg.

The long-expected resignation of the Zaimis Ministry in Greece again renews the prediction that Greece is about to enter the war on the side of the Allies. The reports of the week indicate that her delay is due to the refusal of the Entente nations to promise at this late hour what Greece wants to have if the Allies win.

THE CARMEN'S STRIKE
IN NEW YORK

The memorandum and recommendations issued by the Public Service Commission and Mayor Mitchel in New York City last week, while they do not settle the strikes on the surface, subway, and elevated roads, will serve to clear the air, to give the public information as to the complicated issues, and perhaps to offer a basis for possible agreement between the contending parties. This basis has been definitely rejected, as we write, by the officers of the Interborough Company, but that does not necessarily mean that out of it may not grow negotiations which may avoid further injury and inconvenience to the public. The unions have accepted the proposal of arbitration, but with some conditions.

Every fair-minded citizen will agree

with the statement in the memorandum that "to-day, as on the 6th of August, the clear legal and moral principles governing the situation remain the same. Each side believes it is standing for its rights, but the rights of both sides are subordinated to the rights of the public, and it remains as true to-day as then that the public's right is a right superior to the rights of either the men or the company."

The specific recommendations made by the Mayor and the Public Service Commission are, in brief, as follows:

The strike to be called off immediately. The condition of affairs that existed before the break in negotiations to be restored.

Arbitration to be used to determine whether the Interborough individual working contractsthe rock on which the union and the employers split-constitute a breach of the peace pact of August 7.

The same means to be employed to determine whether the Interborough obtained signatures to these contracts by fraud, misrepresentation, coercion, or intimidation.

It will be remembered that the strike in early August on the surface lines belonging to the New York Railways Company was settled temporarily by an agreement which has been summarized in The Outlook. That agreement included the consent of both parties to the arbitration of questions that might exist between them, and there was an implied recognition of the union by the Company. The Interborough Company, which controls the subway and elevated lines, was not a formal party to this agreement. But, as the memorandum of the Commission points out:

Mr. Hedley informed Mr. Fitzgerald and his associates that as the same men governed the policies of the Interborough as governed the policies of the Railways Company, they might proceed upon the assumption that the principles and policies embodied in the Railways agreement of August 6 would be regarded as controlling in the case of the Interborough. It was definitely agreed to by both that the principle of freedom to organize, the principle of freedom from intimidation or coercion, and the principle of arbitration should govern.

Hardly, however, had the public begun to rejoice at the settlement of this strike when charges and countercharges began to be made by all the parties concerned, each alleg ing on the part of the other bad faith and acts contrary to the spirit and letter of the agreement. These charges have led to the existing strikes, and most emphatically they

[blocks in formation]

are accusations which ought to be arbitrated under the original agreement. On both sides a spirit of antagonism and a desire to fight rather than to conciliate has been manifested.

CAUSES AND EFFECTS
OF THE STRIKE

The chief cause, among several, of the existing trouble concerns the action of the Interborough Company in circulating two years' contracts among their employees for individual signatures, and the insistence of the company that it will not deal with the Amalgamated Association of Street and Electric Railway Employees, which is a National Association in which the several unions con. cerned are united. The Interborough declares that it is willing that its men should belong to a union of their own which has been formed under the name of a Brotherhood, but declines to deal with any "outsiders," although the agreement of August specifically provides that the men in dealing with the companies may do so through any representative they may choose, and they have apparently chosen the Amalgamated to represent them. On the other hand, the Amalgamated Association leaders insist that the "Brotherhood" is not a union at all in the proper sense; that the contracts obtained from the men were signed under misapprehension or fear of dismissal, and that in refusing to arbitrate the validity of these contracts the Interborough Company has forced the fight.

The Interborough, in a statement issued immediately after the Public Service Commission's memorandum, declares that over ten thousand men have signed the contracts and that the Company will protect the rights of those men under those agreements and will not "submit to any person or body of men the question whether those agreements should have been made." The Company denies all charges of fraud, threats, coercion, or intimidation. The Amalgamated Association, on the other hand, considers that the Interborough, and perhaps to a less degree the company controlling the surface lines, have entered into a campaign of war to the death to union organizations, and that their utterances plainly show this intention. The surface line employees, in addition to their interest in the Interborough questions, make specific charges on their own account, and in turn are charged with breaking their August agreements.

As to the actual history of the strike, it

115

may be said that, fortunately from the point. of view of the public, it has been far from complete. There have been considerable delay and inconvenience, and on the surface lines a shortage of cars, and in some of the more remote and detached districts of the city the inconvenience has been serious and irritating in the extreme. There has also been violence, but not on a large scale, and, compared with some other great strikes of this character in other cities, so far the number of serious attempts at violence has been small. Strike-breakers have been used, but not to a large extent; one serious accident, in which two persons were killed and twelve injured, was caused by a trolley car manned by incompetent strike-breakers. The subway and elevated lines have carried on their service without serious breaks or interruptions. Generally speaking, the public has been patient, and only quietly indignant at the situation, which has, however, given the people of New York a partial demonstration of the terrible condition which would arise should a strike on its main arteries of travel be completely effected.

There is at least a possibility of sympathetic strikes in occupations, such as those of the longshoremen and teamsters, which are of use by the transportation companies for the furnishing of coal and in other ways. The number of men who may be called out on these sympathetic strikes, if their unions decide so to do and secure the consent of the National unions involved, is estimated at from forty to seventy thousand men. Meanwhile some of the unions have urged their men individually to show sympathy with the strikers by declining to ride in any of the cars a difficult plan to be carried out under transportation conditions in New York City.

LAFAYETTE DAY

Lafayette, the French nobleman, general, and patriot, is, next to Washington, perhaps the most distinguished military figure of the American Revolution. What our forefathers thought of him is strikingly indicated by the fact that there is in every State of the Union either a city or county that bears his name. When he visited New York, at the age of nearly seventy years, in 1824, he received a reception such as no other foreigner has ever, perhaps, received on American soil.

A year or two ago a committee of American citizens was formed to celebrate Lafayette's birthday, the 6th of September, and a

notable celebration was held week before last in New York under the auspices of this committee. A distinguished group gathered in the fine aldermanic chamber of New York's beautiful City Hall in the afternoon. Judge Alton B. Parker presided. The words of welcome were spoken by Acting Mayor Dowling, and addresses were made by Mr. Sharp, our present Ambassador to France; Mr. Bacon, our former Ambassador to France; Dr. John H. Finley, who is Commissioner of Education of the State of New York, and a recognized authority regarding the effect of French civilization on the destinies of this country; and, finally, by the French Ambassador, his Excellency J. J. Jusserand. Ambassador Jusserand is peculiarly, among foreign diplomats, entitled to and possessed of American esteem. He has been longer in Washington than any other foreign Ambassador or Minister. His charming wife is an American. He himself has written in English some remarkable books regarding the fundamental sources of American social institutions, such as The English Novel in the Time of Shakespeare," "English Wayfaring Life in the Middle Ages," "Literary History of the English People," and finally, and only recently published, "With Americans of Past and Present Days."

[ocr errors]

Mr. Bacon, whose speech we print in full elsewhere, and Dr. Finley, whose effective poem written for the occasion will be found on another page, both pointed out the close relationship which has existed and ought still to exist between France and the United States, the two greatest democracies of modern times. "Here, in Lafayette," said Dr. Finley, "is the incarnation of the perpetual youth of France! Disinterested in purpose! Thinking not of cost or sacrifice if the cause be just, even though it seems to be lost! Ever beginning again with unquenchable spirit!" And he added that in this country and at this time "our supreme task is to make that spirit universal, as it is in France to-day." In his response Ambassador Jusserand expressed his own gratitude and that of his country for the aid and sympathy which have come to France from a large and influential section of the American people. He referred to the American ambulance and hospital workers, and spoke of the young aviators, like Victor. Chapman, who have gone from this country to the aid of the French Republic as American aerial Lafay ettes. He concluded with a play of words

upon the title of one of Dr. Finley's books, which is a charming example of French wit and French sympathy. "Dr. Finley," he said, "has written a distinguished historical work on the achievements of French explorers in the Mississippi Valley. The title may be taken in a scientific sense or with a touch of sentiment. I like to ascribe to Dr. Finley a feeling of sentiment for France when he chose for the title of his book, The French in the Heart of America.' I can only say that when the war is over some Frenchman, gratefully mindful of all you and your compatriots have done for France, will write a book which he will entitle America in the Heart of France'!"

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

On the evening of Lafayette Day a banquet was given by the France-America Society in honor of Ambassador Jusserand at the Waldorf Astoria Hotel. Every one of the important Allied countries was represented at this banquet by either a consular official or a military or naval attaché. Ambassador Jusserand spoke again and read messages of thanks to the Society and its friends from President Poincaré and Prime Minister Briand. Mr. James Beck, the distinguished American lawyer, who has made an international reputation for his analysis of the illegal criminality of the invasion of Belgium, made a notable address. He has just come back from France and England, and visited Verdun during the siege, and, among other places, the great cathedral at Rheims. most beautiful details of this monument of Gothic art, he says, have been irretrievably ruined. He drew a moving picture of the faith of all Frenchmen, who, even down to the most humble soldier, believe that they are fighting in defense of liberty, independence, and democratic freedom, which was, indeed, the fight of Washington and Lafayette.

GIFFORD PINCHOT FOR HUGHES

The

Next to Theodore Roosevelt, probably the best-known Progressive in the country is Gifford Pinchot. As the representative and leader of the Conservation movement during Mr. Roosevelt's Administration, he not only became widely known to the American public, but obtained an expert knowledge of the administrative side of Government business.

is fine honesty and courage, combined with a notable kindliness and human sympathy, have won for him National leadership, which he still possesses. His public attitude on the

[blocks in formation]

present National issues is therefore significant and important. He has just made a statement of that attitude, in which he has declared himself to be an opponent of President Wilson and a supporter of Mr. Hughes. "I am," he says, "neither a Democrat nor a Republican, but a Progressive. Yet, there being no Progressive nominee, unless I choose to support a candidate who cannot be elected, I must vote for either Wilson or Hughes."

He bases his opposition to the present Administration on President Wilson's failure

[ocr errors]

to protect American rights and honor in European and Mexican relations; on his vacillation and inconsistency with regard to National defense; on his failure to make his words effective by deeds with regard to the conservation of our natural resources; and on the record of his Administration in reintroducing the spoils system into the various Government departments.

Mr. Pinchot has lived in Washington for many years and has himself been a distinguished Government officer. For this reason the attention of those who are defending the Wilson Administration on economic grounds ought to be especially arrested by what he says in the following paragraph:

"I have known official Washington from the inside for six Administrations. In that time the Government business has never been so badly done and so inefficiently as it is now done under Wilson."

There has been considerable discussion as to whether the bulk of the Progressive vote of 1912 would go to Mr. Hughes or to Mr. Wilson. Mr. Pinchot's statement, coupled with the results of the Maine election, must be taken, we think, as an indication that the Progressives of 1912 will very largely support Mr. Hughes.

THE MAINE ELECTION

On Monday of last week the election in Maine resulted in a clean sweep for the Republicans. They elected a Governor, two United States Senators, all four of the Congressional Representatives from the State, and a large majority of both houses of the State Legislature. The new Governor, Mr. Milliken, has the confidence of the people and has proved to be an admirable candidate. He had the solid support of the anti-liquor element, and in practically every speech he declared himself for enforcement to the uttermost of the present anti-liquor law. The

117

Prohibitionists, therefore, may justly claim his election as a triumph for their cause.

The two newly elected United States Senators are Colonel Frederick Hale, who is a son of ex-Senator Eugene Hale, and ex-Governor Bert M. Fernald. Mr. Fernald's opponent was Professor Sills, of Bowdoin College, while Colonel Hale's antagonist was Senator Johnson, the present holder of the seat. Senator Johnson has been distinctively a personal supporter of President Wilson, and in his campaign received Administration support in a marked degree. His defeat by Colonel Hale is pointed to by the Republican managers, with reason we think, as indicating a loss of Administration prestige in the State of Maine. This opinion is strengthened by the defeat of Congressman McGillicuddy, of Lewiston. He represents an industrial district in which there is a large so-called "labor vote," has had a creditable record in Congress, and has introduced into that body some excellent proposals in the interest of labor. In spite of this record and of the support of Administration speakers of National prominence, he has failed of re-election.

The Maine voters, by a referendum ballot, at this election ratified, despite strong corporation hostility, the fifty-four-hour bill passed by the Legislature in 1915. This act reduces the working week of women and minors from fifty-eight to fifty-four hours. Maine is, we believe, the fifteenth State to adopt a measure of this kind.

The total number of votes cast was the largest in many years. This increase in the total vote in a State of well-nigh stationary population is significant of the great interest taken in the election, and perhaps indicates that the country is not so apathetic about National questions as the quietness of the Presidential campaign so far would seem to suggest. The Governor was elected by a majority of approximately 14,000, and the other candidates by somewhat smaller majorities. But the figures clearly lead to the conclusion that the Progressives of Maine-and there was a large body of them, for Maine was the only New England State to give in 1912 a larger vote for Mr. Roosevelt than for Mr. Taft-have gone back to the Republican party.

OUR UNECONOMIC MILITIA SYSTEM

A letter has come to us from an army officer stationed on the border which points

out, with a very graphic illustration, one of the many serious defects inherent in our present military system. We will let him tell his story in his own words :

"An old company commander of mine was recently showing me over the camp he had laid out for some militia brigades. He stopped the car to inspect a drainage ditch.

"When the Regiment came down here,' he remarked, 'I asked for a detail to dig this ditch, and when they reported I carefully explained to the corporal in charge just what the ditch was to accomplish. Then I asked him whether he understood. He did. It turned out that he was a civil engineer who had been called away from the charge of a five-million-dollar drainage contract in Florida.'

"So it goes. We hear some militia blamed for inefficiency, but that can be, and is being, remedied by border field service. Such arrant economic waste as the above incident illustrates can never be remedied under our present indiscriminate system of obtaining militia soldiers; it is the first principle of that system.

"Morally, the corporal in question deserves credit for enlisting in the militia. All he had to guide him was patriotism, emotional consciousness of debt to country, the evaluation of his home. Enlistment and intelligent obedience were all that seemed to him necessary. But logically, economically, why should he waste the capabilities of an engineer officer in a position where they have the greatest chance of being wiped out, lost, in action on an infantry firing-line? Or, rather, what right had the State to let him waste them? The State saw nothing in him except a recruit.

"There are many men in the militia to whom it is rather an incongruous lark to serve in the ranks for fifteen dollars a month. In some cases, no doubt, it is a very good thing. But when we have fought our Battle of Mons and look about to renew the officers it will cease to be a joke. It will not be satisfactory then to go up and down the militia firing-line' calling for any engineers, doctors, or railroad men present to stop shooting and begin different work."

In the Swiss army, under a system of universal service, the capabilities of this engineer-corporal would have been utilized in a way to preserve for his country the resources of his invaluable technical training. Possibly we are too optimistic in hoping that the time may come when we shall handle our military problems as intelligently as the free citizens of the Swiss Republic.

MR. ASQUITH INDORSES
INTERNATIONAL PEACE LEAGUE

The International League to Enforce Peace has received a very important indorsement in a recent address delivered by Mr. Asquith, the Prime Minister of England, at Queen's Hall, on the anniversary of Great Britain's entrance into the war. Coming from a man who is, in the best sense of that term, a representative of the people, this speech may, in its prophetic hope, be accepted as representing the public sentiment of Great Britain and an indication that when this war is over Great Britain will be ready to join with other civilized nations in an organic attempt to secure peace in the future by the only method by which peace can be secured —an organization of peace-loving nations to compel, by force where necessary, obedience to international law by all peoples. One parenthetical phrase in this speech is worthy the special notice of Americans. When Mr. Asquith says that the hope of peace rests " upon the common will of Europe, and I hope not or Europe alone," it is impossible to doubt his implication that the United States, perhaps all the American states, would unite in this common will to protect peace by the maintenance and enforcement of law. In his address he said, with notable clarity and force of expres sion :

By the victory of the Allies the enthronement of public right here in Europe will pass from the domain of ideals and of aspirations into that of concrete and achieved realities. What does public right mean? I will tell you what I understand it to mean-an equal level of opportunity and of independence as between small states and great states; as between weak and strong safeguards, resting upon the common will of Europe, and I hope not of Europe alone; against aggression; against international covetousness and bad faith; against the wanton recourse, in case of dispute, to the use of force and the disturbance of the peace; and, finally, as a result of it all, a great partnership of nations, federated together in the joint pursuit of a freer and fuller life for the countless millions who by their efforts and their sacrifice, generation after generation, maintain progress and enrich the inheritance of humanity.

We do not believe that the American people will be prevented by any fear of "entangling alliances" from entering into such an international federation, and we hope that when the time comes for the organization of such a federation our National Government will be of a character and possessed by a

« 上一頁繼續 »