the war. In industrial and financial matters they are all largely dependent on Great Britain. So if the Tories win control of the Government at London there is a chance that they may impose on their own country and on their allies a unified and oppressive customs barrier to smother the Central Empires.

There could be no measure more distressing to lovers of peace the world over than such a policy of industrial vengeance. It is at this point that the politics of Great Britain most closely affect us in America. The League to Enforce Peace, the possibility of cordial co-operation between the United States and Great Britain, depends on the defeat of this reactionary programme. "Peace" would be an empty word if the greatest industrial nation of Europe was bent on a ruthless economic war.

So, from almost every point of view, the center of interest in speculating on the nature of the new Europe which the Entente will organize if victorious is found to be the struggle of the political parties at Westminster.

66

There are two points of great similarity between British politics and our own. Under the two-party system neither political camp is homogeneous. As we have the "Old Guard" and Progressive " Republicans, with many sub-species in between, so the Unionist party of Great Britain is split up into many hostile factions. Sir Edward Carson and Sir Horace Plunkett are as far apart as Uncle Joe Cannon and Raymond Robins. It is equally true that membership in the Liberal party is no sure sign of Liberalism. The right wings of the two parties are nearer together than the two wings of either party.

A second point of similarity is that the same phenomenon develops in England which we have learned to expect in any party that is a long time in power. The Liberals came in with the Campbell-Bannerman Ministry in 1904, and they were continuously in power for the ten years preceding the war.

In 1904 the Liberal party was a fighting organization, inspired by high ideals. It offered a large programme of constructive legislation. Its record in this matter is good. Most of its campaign promises have been fulfilled. It has put through sweeping Budget reforms. It has made labor representation possible by the payment of Members. It has pulled the teeth of the Lords and has initiated many social reforms-old age pensions, national insurance, etc.

But with each of these victories some of the

party's radical idealism cooled. It had formed alliances with powerful "interests" which quickly became "vested." It had become a big, prosperous-and rather lifeless-machine. It had grown fat on power and, to say the least, sluggish. After ten years of office the Liberal Cabinet found it necessary to defend some of its members from "graft charges" in the obscure Marconi affair.

Even before the menace of war arose many ardent Liberals were hoping for the defeat of their party. As a political organization it no longer represented the best of British Liberalism. Sincere friends of the party realized that a shake-up was necessary. But the men in power were reluctant to surrender, and unless the organization was able to rejuvenate itself from within a defeat at the polls was inevitable in the near future. It is probable that the Asquith Ministry would have fallen before the end of 1914 if the war had not come.

What had happened in our Republican party between 1860 and 1912 had taken place in the Liberal party of Great Britain in ten years.

Shortly after the outbreak of war a coalition Cabinet was formed. As every one expected a short war, the postponement of party quarrels-union in the face of the enemy-seemed the wise policy. But there are some questions of internal politics which, while they can be safely postponed for a few months, cannot be ignored for years. Witness Ireland. Now, with the wisdom of two years' experience, it is evident that a longcontinued coalition policy is unsound.

The new Cabinet was not three months old before the Tories broke the truce by a revival of party intrigues. They understood "coalition" to mean their return to power. Their principal newspapers were quite frank about it. They had one great advantage over their Liberal colleagues in the Ministry. They controlled the vitally important depart ments of the army, the navy, and the foreign office. The Liberals had already been forced to surrender on the Home Rule Bill because the Tory army officers had mutinied. The element of democracy in the British Government is almost entirely limited to Parliament. And war inevitably gives predominance to the administrative and executive departments. High commands in the army and navy, important posts in the diplomatic corps, are confined to the aristocracy.

Of course there is nothing in war to change

1916

a landlord's dislike to a direct tax on land values. Face to face with the Germans, the Tories and Liberals could co-operate to a certain extent. But the internal life of the Empire also had to be "governed." And in these matters, where there was no chance of agreement, the Tories, whose aid was needed in the conduct of the war, scored victory after victory.

Their most successful political coup has been the breaking of the alliance between the Liberal party and the Irish Nationalists. If the Tories can succeed as well in forcing Asquith to break his pledges to the Labor party, it will be very doubtful if the Liberals can win in the next general elections.

So, although there can be little doubt that liberal ideas and modern progressive tenden cies predominate in British life, there is grave

419

It

danger that the Empire may be ruled by Tories in the first period after the war. is perhaps most probable that the first elections when peace comes will be indecisiveone party or the other winning a precarious majority-too slight to be stable.

There is little reason to fear for the ultimate outcome, for a new element is entering into British politics. The self-governing dominions—Canada, Australasia, South Africa—are surely going to have a larger voice in Imperial affairs. And they, having no indigenous aristocracy, are much more definitely liberal and democratic than the mother country. But the Imperial reorganization will be slow work. There may be several years-the immensely important years of European reconstruction-before Great Britian definitely makes up her mind to be liberal.

T

HE State of Montana doesn't owe me anything, and I owe Montana as little. But I do like to see a great American commonwealth getting on. To the East, Montana has long been merely a great copper-mining State which has a very wicked. mining camp named Butte, which produces strikes and Socialists and more copper ore than any like territory in the world. Oh, yes, and a State which is also noted for violent political feuds and corrupt political practices on a scale as vast as the mining operations themselves. Well, the East has another guess coming about Montana.

There are two Montanas, the old and the new. The new Montana is becoming a great agricultural as well as a great mining State, and into the eastern part of the commonwealth are pouring many thousands of enterprising farmers from all over the Union. The United States Department of Agriculture for 1915 shows that Montana leads the twelve principal agricultural States of the country in the average per acre production of wheat, oats, barley, flax, potatoes, and rye. In fifteen years the farm value of these products in Montana has increased more than

seven hundred fold. And the agricultural element is contributing a balance and an eco

nomic and political quality to the State of very great importance.

Butte is a unique mining camp and the richest hill in the world. The greatest copper deposits in the United States are in the Butte district. The social and political life of the State were long under the sway of the copper interests. Daly and Heinze and Clark, the Anaconda and the Amalgamated, are names of National notoriety and interest. Marcus Daly, looking for silver, came upon rich copper deposits deeper down. About the time that these deposits were first showing their richness a young mining engineer, Augustus Heinze, came to Butte, a man of thorough technical education, a graduate of technical schools not only in the United States but in Germany. At first he was employed as superintendent by the Anaconda Company. He began to discover fractions of mining claims of very great value, unlocated and unsurveyed, at the borders of the greater claims. Quitting the Anaconda and locating these fractions, he began to develop rich mines, which by and by encroached upon their neighbors. William A. Clark, the third member of this great copper triumvirate, was likewise one of the original owners in the Butte district.

The competitive activities of these power

ful economic personalities made the State of Montana in the early days the battleground of fierce political conflicts. The fight for the uncharted fractional claims of Heinze was taken into the courts. The original struggle lay between the Heinze interests and the Daly interests, by this time known as the Amalgamated. Both interests entered politics for the purpose of electing judges in Silver Bow County as well as the judges of the Supreme Court of the State. Heinze judges or Amalgamated judges-that was the whole issue. It was a crude, raw struggle for property preferment, without regard to the justice of the cause or to free institutions.

Clark had no part in the original feud. Later he had political ambitions and desired to go to the United States Senate. Clark was a Democrat. Daly had long been a Democratic leader. Heinze was a Republican and was popular with the mine-workers. Clark gained control of the Democratic organization and formed a coalition with the Republican Heinze. Daly organized the Independent Democratic party of Montana. Finally the time arrived when Clark was a candidate for the United States Senate before the Legislature of the State. There were loud allegations of corruption. On the day when the deadlocked joint session was about to vote for the fifteenth time four members arose in rotation and sent up to the Speaker's desk $10,000-each sent up ten onethousand-dollar bills-with which, they asserted there had been an attempt to bribe them. An amusing phase of the incident was that nobody ever claimed the fund, which finally went to charity. In connection with the charges of alleged bribery, Clark resigned from the United States Senate and went back to Montana. He and the controlling interests of the Amalgamated soon made a lasting peace, leaving minority stockholder Daly outside the breastworks. The organization Democrats now had a clear majority of the Legislature and Clark was finally sent with unclouded title to the United States Senate.

Clark has the reputation in Montana, as in New York, of being a wonderfully able man. Whatever he has done, all his life long, he has done thoroughly. When he first arrived in Montana, he drove out a bull-team from Iowa loaded with tobacco and beans and other supplies. Almost immediately he went into the merchandising business in Deer

Lodge, then into the banking business in Butte, and then into placer mining. As soon as he had made money enough he went back East to Columbia University in New York and took the mining courses for the full four years. As an indication of the versatility of the man, it may be stated that he is now, in his later years, a notable art collector.

Those were the old days of general political debauchery in this country. They were the days when men fought money with money, fire with fire-" plugged the devil," as the saying was in Montana, "with his own ammunition." For years there were no party lines in the State. It was Clark or Daly. And Daly died in the midst of the fight.

It was not total depravity on the part of the people of Montana, but plain old economic brutality, which gave to Montana a bad name half a generation ago, and wrought her temporary political deterioration. It is simply a variation of the story of California or Colorado or Pennsylvania or New Jersey or New York-the struggle for control by powerful economic groups, acting against the common welfare and the common life of the commonwealth.

The old days are done. The fractional claims are all at least legally established, and the economic giants have ceased to struggle and have passed on. Montana to-day shows few political scars of that great conflict. The people are as fine as any in the Union. The agricultural prospects of the State are superior to anything in the Northwest. No commonwealth in the country has so drastic a corrupt practices act. The liberal spirit in both parties is very strong. Wilson will get the united Democratic support. The only Progressives outside the Republican fold seem to be those who would be out if there had been no split at all in 1912, and the liberal wing in both parties is sure of the ascendency. The new immigration of farmers is mainly from Republican States, and the normal Republican majority is now ten or fifteen thousand. On the other hand, the addition of women to the electorate for the first time is a factor of uncertain political meaning, and the present Democratic Governor, Stuart, is a decent, honest, square-fighting man, looked up to by everybody. If you size it up on all sides, it is a pretty close State, but a clean State, and whichever way it goes it means to be for righteousness and the National weal. FREDERICK M. DAVENPORT.

O

N the afternoon of October 6, just as we were returning from a successful fishing trip, we sighted two submarines entering the Narrows of Narragansett Bay. As they passed us we saw that the first was the United States submarine E-2; the other was larger than any submarine I had ever seen, and by her flag I could see that she was German. My captain did his utmost to keep up with her, but of course she went much faster than we, so that when she anchored among the thirty-seven United States war-ships we were at least a mile behind. As we sailed nearer to her we saw hundreds of little boats crowding around her to congratulate the captain and the crew. They were on the decks in their leather suits, smoking cigars, and evidently in high spirits over the success of their long voyage. The sailors were making remarks about the "komisches Fahrboot" (funny ferry-boat) Connecticut.

After sailing around the submarine once or twice, we made for the landing, where we spread the news. Then a friend who owned one of the speediest motor boats in Newport immediately got up a party to go out and see the submarine.

When we arrived where the submarine lay at anchor, the first thing they asked us was, "Is there any news of the Bremen ?" We told them that we had not heard of her. We asked how many days they had been under way. "Seventeen days," they shouted in chorus. We asked whether they had enough to eat. A hearty affirmative was their reply; and they certainly looked a well-fed crew!

We then asked if we might come on board. One of the crew ran forward and asked the captain, who looked about thirty-eight years old, and who had kind blue eyes and a pointed beard. He was spick and span, despite his long and hard voyage. He looked at us critically a moment, and then beckoned to us to come alongside. We needed no urging to board her.

She was long and narrow, and on her starboard side was the wireless, which folded together. The conning tower rose about ten feet above the deck. There were three periscopes; two were for the man at the helm, and the other for the torpedo crew. On the floor of the conning tower was a manhole about three feet in diameter which led down to the wireless operating-room, and then down still farther to the engine-room.

The captain told us that there were thirtysix men in the crew. There were four officers, who took turns in standing four-hour watches during the entire voyage. He said that often the sea was so heavy that they had to be lashed to the railing of the conning tower for fear of being swept overboard by the waves. He then asked us if we did not want to go below. We exclaimed, "Are we allowed?" "Most people are not," he said, "but you are welcome."

We went down one of the forward manholes to the torpedo-room where the two forward torpedo tubes are. They were both loaded. Two other torpedoes hung in readiness on either side. Every part of the room was used. Tools were kept in cases on the ceiling, and the men's bunks folded against the walls.

The next was the captain's cabin, shared by the executive officer. The bunks were on either side of the cabin, and in the center was a folding table. On the wall were pictures of the Kaiser and several other notable Germans. The next cabin had about the same arrangement for the two inferior officers. We then went into the engine-room. We read the inscription, which said that she was completed January 20, 1916. The next room was the aft torpedo-room, similar to the one above described.

Then we went on deck and said good-by to the captain, thanking him for the kind hospitality that was shown to us. We boarded our launch, and gave the crew newspapers, cigars, and other things that we thought they would like.

After a hearty "Auf wiedersehen" we left for our landing, not dreaming that the most exciting part of our adventure was yet to come.

When we got to the landing, the owner of the launch suggested that we follow the submarine out to sea when she left that night. When the time came, we followed her about three miles beyond Brenton's lightship. By this time all the other boats that had tried to do the same as we had given up the chase. The captain recognized us and signaled us that they were going to submerge. Then at once all the crew that were on the decks went down the manholes and the big submarine looked quite deserted. All the party stood breathless. Suddenly a great hissing sound was heard, like the air escaping from tire, as they let out the air from the huge air-tanks. The