Gbe "Untverstti? of CbtcagoPrice $J»00 founded by john d. rockefeller Single CopiesPet Year 5 CentsUniversity RecordPUBLISHED BY AUTHORITYCHICAGOGbe TUniversftE of Gbfcaao J>tessVOL III, NO. 41. PUBLISHED EVERY FRIDAY AT 3:00 P.M. JANUARY 6, 1899.Entered in the post office Chicago, Illinois, as second-class matter.CONTENTS.I. American Imperialism. By the Honorable CarlSchurz - 255-267II. The University Elementary School - - - 267-269III. Official Actions - 269IV. Official Notices 269V. Official Reports : The Library - - . 269-270VI. The Calendar 270American Imperialism.*BY THE HONORABLE CARL SCHURZ.By inviting me to address its faculty, its students,and its friends upon so distinguished an occasion, theUniversity of Chicago has done me an honor for whichI am profoundly grateful. I can prove that gratitudein no better way than by uttering with entire frankness my honest convictions on the great subject youhave given me to discuss — a subject fraught withmore momentous consequence than any ever submitted to the judgment of the American people sincethe foundation of our constitutional government.It is proposed to embark this republic in a courseof imperialistic policy by permanently annexing to itcertain islands taken, or partly taken, from Spain inthe late war. The matter is near its decision, but notyet decided. The peace treaty made at Paris is notyet ratified by the senate ; but even if it were, thequestion whether those islands, although ceded bySpain, shall be permanently incorporated in the territory of the United States would still be open for final*The Convocation address, delivered on the occasion of theTwenty-seventh Convocation of the University, held atthe Studebaker Music Hall, January 4, 1899. determination by Congress. As an open questiontherefore, I shall discuss it.If ever, it behooves the American people to thinkand act with calm deliberation, for the character andfuture of the republic and the welfare of its peoplenow living and yet to be born are in unprecedentedjeopardy. To form a candid judgment of what thisrepublic has been, what it may become, and what itought to be, let us first recall to our minds its condition before the recent Spanish War.Our government was, in the words of Abraham Lincoln, the greatest American of his time, and the mostgenuine type of true Americanism, "the governmentof the people, by the people, and for the people." Itwas the noblest ambition of all true Americans to -carry this democratic government to the highest degree of perfection and justice, in probity, in assuredpeace, in the security of human rights, in progressivecivilization ; to solve the problem of popular self-government on the grandest scale, and thus to make thisrepublic the example and guiding-star of mankind.We had invited the oppressed of all nations to findshelter here, and to enjoy with us the blessings offree institutions. They came by the millions. Somewere not as welcome as others, but, under the assimilating force of American life in our temperate climate, which stimulates the working energies, nursesthe spirit of orderly freedom, and thus favors thegrowth of democracies, they became good Americans,most in the first, all in the following generations.And so with all the blood-crossings caused by themotley immigration, we became a substantially homogeneous people, united by common political beliefs256 UNIVERSITY RECORDand ideals, by common interests, laws, and aspirations— in one word, a nation. Indeed, we were not withoutour difficulties and embarrassments, but only one ofthem, the race antagonism between the negroes andthe whites, especially where the negroes live in mass,presents a problem which so far has baffled all effortsat practical solution in harmony with the spirit ofour free institutions, and thus threatens complicationsof a grave character.We gloried in the marvelous growth of our population, wealth, power, and civilization, and in the incalculable richness of the resources of our country capableof harboring three times our present population, andof immeasurable further material development. Ourcommerce with the world abroad, although we had nocolonies, and but a small navy, spread with unprecedented rapidity, capturing one foreign market afteranother, not only for the products of our farms, butalso for many of those of our manufacturing industries, with prospects of indefinite extension.Peace reigned within our borders, and there was notthe faintest shadow of a danger of foreign attack.Our voice, whenever we chose to speak in the councilsof nations, was listened to with respect, even themightiest sea-power on occasion yielding to us adeference far beyond its habit in its intercourse withothers. We were considered ultimately invincible, ifnot invulnerable, in our continental stronghold. Itwas our boast, not that we possessed great and costlyarmies and navies, but that we did not need any.This exceptional blessing was our pride, as it was theenvy of the world. We looked down with pityingsympathy on other nations which submissivelygroaned under the burden of constantly increasingarmaments, and we praised our good fortune for having saved us from so wretched a fate.Such was our condition, such our beliefs and ideals,such our ambition and our pride, but a short year ago.Had the famous peace message of the Czar of Russia,with its protest against growing militarism and itsplea for disarmament, reached us then, it would havebeen hailed with enthusiasm by every American as atriumph of our example. We might have claimedonly that to our republic, and not to the Russianmonarch, belonged the place of leadership in so greatan onward step in the progress of civilization.Then came the Spanish War. A few vigorous blowslaid the feeble enemy helpless at our feet. The wholescene seemed to have suddenly changed. Accordingto the solemn proclamation of our government, thewar had been undertaken solely for the liberation ofCuba, as a war of humanity and not of conquest. Butour easy victories had put conquest within our reach, and when our arms occupied foreign territory, a louddemand arose that, pledge or no pledge to the contrary, the conquests should be kept, even the Philippines on the other side of the globe, and that as toCuba herself, independence would be only a provisional formality. Why not? was the cry. Has notthe career of the republic almost from its very beginning been one of territorial expansion? Has it notacquired Louisiana, Florida, Texas, the vast countriesthat came to usthrough the Mexican War, and Alaska,and has it not digested them well? Were not thoseacquisitions much larger than those now in contemplation? If the republic could digest the old, whynot the new? What is the difference?Only look with an unclouded eye, and you will soondiscover differences enough warning you to beware.There are HYe of decisive importance.1. All the former acquisitions were on this continent, and, excepting Alaska, contiguous to our borders.2. They were situated, not in the tropical, but in thetemperate zone, where democratic institutions thrive,and where our people could migrate in mass.3. They were but very thinly peopled — in f actywithout any population that would have been in theway of new settlement.4. They could be organized as territories in theusual manner, with the expectation that they wouldpresently come into the Union as self-governing stateswith populations substantially homogeneous to ourown.5. They did not require a material increase of ourarmy and navy, either for their subjection to our ruleor for their defense against any probable foreign attack provoked by their being in our possession.Acquisitions of that nature we might, since theslavery trouble has been allayed, make indefinitelywithout in any dangerous degree imperiling our greatexperiment of democratic institutions on the grandest scale ; without putting the peace of the republicin jeopardy, and without depriving us of the inestimable privilege of comparatively unarmed security on acompact continent which may, indeed, by an enterprising enemy, be scratched on its edges, but is, witha people like ours, virtually impregnable. Even ofour far away Alaska it can be said that, although atpresent a possession of d oubtf ul value, it is at leastmainly on this continent, and may at some futuretime, when the inhabitants of the British possessionshappily wish to unite with us, be within our uninterrupted boundaries.Compare now with our old acquisitions as to allthese important points those at present in view.UNIVERSITY RECORD 257They are not continental, not contiguous to ourpresent domain, but beyond seas, the Philippinesmany thousand miles distant from our coast. Theyare all situated in the tropics, where people of thenorthern races, such as Anglo-Saxons, or, generallyspeaking, people of Germanic blood, have never migrated in mass to stay; and they are more or lessdensely populated, parts of them as densely as Massachusetts — their populations consisting almost exclusively of races to whom the tropical climate iscongenial — Spanish Creoles mixed with negroes in theWest Indies, and Malays, Tagals, Filipinos, Chinese,Japanese, Negritos, and various more or less barbaroustribes in the Philippines.When the question is asked whether we may hopeto adapt those countries and populations to our system of government, the advocates of annexation answer cheerily, that when they belong to us, we shallsoon "Americanize" them. This may mean thatAmericans in sufficiently large numbers will migratethere to determine the character of those populationsso as to assimilate them to our own.This is a delusion of the first magnitude. We shall,indeed, be able, if we go honestly about it, to accomplish several salutary things in those countries. Butone thing we cannot do. We cannot strip the tropicalclimate of those qualities which have at all times deterred men of the northern races, to which we belong,from migrating to such countries in mass, and to maketheir homes there, as they have migrated and are stillmigrating to countries in the temperate zone. This isnot a mere theory, but a fact of universal experience.It is true, you will find in tropical regions a sprinkling of persons of Anglo-Saxon or of other northernorigin — merchants, railroad builders, speculators,professional men, miners, and mechanics; also hereand there an agriculturalist. But their numberis small, and most of them expect to go home again assoon as their money-making purpose is more or lessaccomplished.Thus we observe now that business men withplenty of means are casting their eyes upon our " newpossessions " to establish mercantile houses there, ormanufactories to be worked with native labor ; andmoneyed syndicates and "improvement companies"to exploit the resources of those countries, and speculators and promoters to take advantage of what mayturn up — the franchise grabber, as reported, is alreadythere — many having perfectly legitimate ends in view,others ends not so legitimate, and all expecting to bemore or less favored by the power of our government ;in short, the capitalist is thinking of going there, orto send his agents, his enterprises in most cases to be directed from these more congenial shores. But youwill find that laboring men of the northern races, asthey have never done so before, will not now gothere in mass to do the work of the country, agricultural or industrial, and to found there permanenthomes ; and this not merely because the rate of wagesin such countries is, owing to native competition, usually low, but because they cannot thrive there underthe climatic conditions.But it is the working-masses, those laboring in agriculture and the industries, that everywhere form thebulk .of the population ; and they are the true constituency of democratic government. And as thenorthern races cannot do the work of the tropicalzone, they Cannot furnish such constituencies. It isan incontestable and very significant fact that theBritish, the best colonizers in history, have, indeed,established in tropical regions governments and ratherabsolute ones, but they have never succeeded in establishing there democratic commonwealths of the Anglo-Saxon type, like those in America or Australia.The scheme of Americanizing our "new possessions " in that sense is therefore absolutely hopeless.The immutable forces of nature are against it. Whatever we may do for their improvement, the people ofthe Spanish Antilles will remain in overwhelmingnumerical predominance, Spanish Creoles and negroes,and the people of the Philippines, Filipinos, Malays,Tagals, and so on — some of them quite clever in theirway, but the vast majority utterly alien to us, notonly in origin and language, but in habits, traditions,ways of thinking, principles, ambitions — in short, inmost things that are of the greatest importance inhuman intercourse and especially in political cooperation. And under the influences of their tropical clim atethey will prove incapable of becoming assimilatedto the Anglo-Saxon. They would, therefore, remain inthe population of this republic a hopelessly heterogeneous element — in some respects more hopeless eventhan the colored people now living among us.What, then, shall we do with such populations?'Shall we, according, not indeed to the letter, but tothe evident spirit of our constitution, organize thosecountries as territories with a view to their eventualadmission as states? If they become states on anequal footing with the other states they will not onlybe permitted to govern themselves as to their homeconcerns, but they will take part in governing thewhole republic, in governing us, by sending senatorsand representatives into our Congress to help makeour laws, and by voting for president and vice president to give our national government its executive.The prospect of the consequences which would follow258 UNIVERSITY RECORDthe admission of the Spanish Creoles and the negroesof West India islands and of the Malays and Tagals ofthe Philippines to participation in the conduct of ourgovernment is so alarming that you instinctivelypause before taking the step.But this may be avoided, it is said, by governing thenew possessions as mere dependencies, or subjectprovinces. I will waive the constitutional questionand merely point out that this would be a most seriousdeparture from the rule that governed our formeracquisitions, which are so frequently quoted as precedents. It is useless to speak of the District of Columbia and Alaska as proof that we have done such thingsbefore and can do them again. Every candid mindwill at once admit the vast difference between thosecases and the permanent establishment of substantially arbitrary government over large territories withmany millions of inhabitants, and with a prospect ofthere being many more of the same kind, if we oncelaunch out on a career of conquest. The question is,not merely whether we can do such things, butwhether, having the public good at heart, we shoulddo them.If we do adopt such a system, then we shall, for thefirst time since the abolition of slavery, again havetwo kinds of Americans : Americans of the first class,who enjoy the privilege of taking part in the government in accordance with our old constitutional principles, and Americans of the second class, who are tobe ruled in a substantially arbitrary fashion*by theAmericans of the first class, through congressionallegislation and the action of the national executive —not to speak of individual "masters" arrogating tothemselves powers beyond the law.This will be a difference no better — nay, rathersomewhat worse — than that which a century and aquarter ago still existed between Englishmen of thefirst and Englishmen of the second class, the firstrepresented by King George and the British Parliament, and the second by the American colonists. Thisdifference called forth that great paean of humanliberty, the American Declaration of Independence —a document which, I regret to say, seems, owing to theintoxication of conquest, to have lost much of itscharm among some of our fellow-citizens. Its fundamental principle was the " governments derive theirjust powers from the consent of the governed." Weare now told that we have never fully lived up to thatprinciple, and that, therefore, in our new policy wemay cast it aside altogether. But I say to you that,if we are true believers in democratic government, itis our duty to move in the direction towards the fullrealization of that principle and not in the direction away from it. If you tell me that we cannot governthe people of those new possessions in accordancewith that principle, then I answer that this is a goodreason why this democracy should not attempt togovern them at all.If we do, we shall transform the government of thepeople, for the people, and by the people, for whichAbraham Lincoln lived, into a government of one partof the people, the strong, over another part, the weak.Such an abandonment of a fundamental principle asa permanent policy may at first seem to bear onlyupon more or less distant dependencies, but it canhardly fail in its ultimate effects to disturb the ruleof the same principle in the conduct of democraticgovernment at home. And I warn the American people that a democracy cannot so deny its faith as to th^vital conditions of its being — it cannot long play theking over subject populations without creating withinitself ways of thinking and habits of action mostdangerous to its own vitality — most dangerous especially to those classes of society which are the leastpowerful in the assertion, and the most helpless'in thedefense of their rights. Let the poor and the menwho earn their bread by the labor of their handspause and consider well before they give their assentto a policy so deliberately forgetful of the equality ofrights.I do not mean to say, however, that all of our newacquisitions would be ruled as subject provinces.Some of them, the Philippines, would probably remain such, but some others would doubtless becomestates. In Porto Rico, for instance, politicians oflively ambition are already clamoring for the speedyorganization of that island as a regular territory, soonto be admitted as a state of the Union. You may saythat they will have long to wait. Be not so sure ofthat. Consult your own experience. Has not morethan one territory, hardly fitted for statehood, beenprecipitated into the Union as a state when the majority party in Congress thought that, by doing so, itsparty strength could be augmented in the senate andin the house and in the electoral college ? Have ourparties become so unselfishly virtuous that this maynot happen again ? So we may see Porto Rico ad -mitted before we have had time to rub our eyes.You may say that little Porto Rico would not matter much. But can any clear-thinking man believethat, when we are once fairly started in the course ofindiscriminate expansion, we shall stop there ? Willnot the same reasons which induced us to take PortoRico also be used to show that the two islands of SanDomingo with Hayti, and of Cuba, which separatePorto Rico from our coast, would, if they were inUNIVERSITY RECORD 259foreign hands, be a danger to us, and that we musttake them ? Nothing could be more plausible. Why,the necessity of annexing San Domingo is alreadyfreely discussed, and agencies to bring this about areactually at work. And as to Cuba, every expansionistwill tell you that it is only a matter of time. Anddoes any one believe that those islands, if annexed »will not become states of this Union ? That wouldgive us at least three, perhaps four, new states, withabout 3,500,000 inhabitants, Spanish and FrenchCreoles and negroes, with six or eight senators, andfrom fifteen to twenty representatives in Congressand a corresponding number of votes in the electoralcollege.Nor are we likely to stop there. If we build andown the Nicaragua Canal, instead of neutralizing it,we shall easily persuade ourselves that our control ofthat canal will not be safe unless we own all thecountry down to it, so that it be not separated fromour borders by any foreign, and possibly hostilepower. Is this too adventurous an idea to becometrue ? Why, it is not half as adventurous and extravagant as the idea of uniting to this republic thePhilippines, 9000 miles away. It is already proposedto acquire in some way strips of territory several mileswide on each side of that canal for its military protection. But that will certainly be found insufficient ifforeign countries lie between. We must, therefore,have those countries. That means Mexico and varioussmall Central American republics, with a populationin all of about 14,000,000, mostly Spanish-Indian mixture — making at least fifteen states, entitled to thirtysenators and scores of representatives and presidentialelectors.As to the character of the people whom those senators, members, and presidential electors are to represent, I will let an authority speak that may astonishyou, considering his present position — the Hon. White-law Reid, who said in a public address at the timewhen the annexation of San Domingo was under discussion :" The land greed of the Anglo-Saxon race is still atwork. We have absorbed the best part of Mexico, butwe have plenty of propagandists, mainly in the army,and with influential voice near the head of the government, clamorous for the rest. We have taken afoothold in the West Indies ; it will be of God's mercyif we do not find the whole West Indian archipelagocrowded upon us to tax an already overloaded digestion. What are we to do with the turbulent, treacherous, ill-conditioned population? They have shownno faculty for self-government hitherto ; and are weto precipitate them in a mass into the already suffi ciently-degraded elements of our national suffrage?We are trying the powers of Anglo-Saxon self-governing digestion upon three millions of slaves ; are thegastric juices of the body politic equal to the additionof the Mexicans, the Santo Domingans, the Cubans,the ' Conks ' of the Bahamas, the Kanakas, and therest of the inferior mixed races of our outlying tropical and semi-tropical dependencies ? "As Mr. Reid now advocates the annexation of PortoRico and the Philippines, he must have changed hisopinion, which he had a right to do. But I think hesubstantially spoke the truth then, and if he nowwants the Philippines, his case clearly illustrates howfar people will be carried by the expansion fever whenit once fairly takes hold of them.You may think that the introduction of more thanthirty men in our senate, over eighty in the lowerhouse of our Congress, and much over one hundredvotes in our electoral college, to speak and act for themixture of Spanish, French, and negro blood on theWest India Islands, and for the Spanish and Indianmixture on the continent south of us — for peopleutterly alien and mostly incapable of assimilation tous in their tropical habitation — to make our laws andelect our presidents, and incidentally to help us liftup the Philippines to a higher plane of civilization —is too shocking a proposition to be entertained for amoment, and that our people will resist it to the bitterend. No, they will not resist it, if indiscriminate expansion has once become the settled policy of the republic. They will be told, as they are told now, thatwe are in it and cannot get honorably out of it ; thatdestiny, and Providence, and duty demand it ; that itwould be cowardly to shrink from our new responsibilities ; that those populations cannot take care ofthemselves, and that it is our mission to let them havethe blessing of our free institutions ; that we musthave new markets for our products ; that those countries are rich in resources, and that there is plenty ofmoney to be made by taking them ; that the American people can whip anybody and do anything theyset out to do ; and that " Old Glory " should float overevery land on which we can lay our hands.Those who have yielded to such cries once, willyield to them again. Conservative citizens will tell themthat thus the homogeneousness of the people of the republic, so essential to the working of our democraticinstitutions, will be irretrievably lost ; that our racetroubles already dangerous, will be infinitely aggravated, and that the government of, by, and for the peoplewill be in imminent danger of fatal demoralization*They will be cried down as pusillanimous pessimists,who are no longer American patriots. The American260 UNIVERSITY RECORDpeople will be driven on and on by the force of eventsas Napoleon was when started on his career of limitlessconquest. This is imperialism as now advocated. Dowe wish to prevent its excesses ? Then we must stopat the beginning, before taking Porto Rico. If wetake that island, not even to speak of the Philippines,we shall have placed ourselves on the inclined plane,and roll on and on, no longer masters of our own will,until we shall have reached bottom. And where willthat bottom be ? Who knows ?Our old acquisitions did not require a material increase of our army and navy. What of the new ? Itis generally admitted that we need very considerableadditions to our armaments on land and sea to restoreand keep order on the islands taken from Spain, andthen to establish our sovereignty there. This is aticklish business. In the first place, Spain has neverbeen in actual control and possession of a good manyof the Philippine Islands, while on others the insurgent Filipinos had well-nigh destroyed the Spanishpower when the treaty of Paris was made. The people of those islands will either peaceably submit toour rule or they will not. If they do not, and we mustconquer them by force of arms, we shall at once havewar on our hands.What kind of a war will that be ? The Filipinosfought against Spain for their freedom and independence, and unless they abandon their recently proclaimed purpose for their freedom and independence,they will fight against us. To be sure, we promisethem all sorts of good things if they will consent tobecome our subjects. But they may, and probablywill prefer independence to foreign rule, no matterwhat fair promises the foreign invader makes. For tothe Filipinos the American is essentially a foreigner,more foreign in some respects than even the Spaniard was. Now, if they resist, what shall we do ?Kill them ? Let soldiers marching under the starsand stripes shoot them down ? Shoot them down because they stand up for their independence, just asthe Cubans, who are no better than they, fought fortheir independence, to which we solemnly declaredthem to be " of right " entitled ? Look at this calmlyif you can.The American volunteers, who rushed to arms bythe hundreds of thousands to fight for Cuban independence, may not stomach this killing of Filipinosfighting for their independence. We shall have torely upon the regulars, the professional soldiers, andwe may need a good many of them. As to the bestway to fill the ranks in the Philippines, General Merrittis reported to have spoken in a recent interview published in the New York papers as follows : " To my mind the permanent force should consistof from 20,000 to 30,000 men. Of these, 15,000 shouldbe American soldiers. The remainder of the troopsmight be recruited from the Spaniards and Filipinos.The latter have exhibited no desire to enlist thus far,but there are many Spaniards there who have expressed a wish to wear the blue. They were impressedwith the good pay and treatment of our men, and Ithink they would make good American soldiers. Theyare brave and hardy, but have suffered for lack of discipline."Of course, General Merritt spoke only as the professional soldier, who has to take care of the army,and I do not blame him. But the idea of engaging the same Spaniards, who but recently foughtus and the Filipinos at the same time, to dothe killing of the same Filipinos for us, or atleast to terrorize them into subjection, because wewant to possess their land, and to do this under thestars and stripes — this idea is at first sight a littlestartling. It may make the Hessians of our Revolutionary War grin in their graves. If anybody hadpredicted such a possibility a year ago, every patrioticAmerican would have felt an impulse to kick himdownstairs. However, this is imperialism. It bids usnot to be squeamish. Indeed, some of our fellow-citizens seem already to be full of its spirit. TheHon. Cyrus A. Sulloway, a member of Congress fromNew Hampshire, is reported to have said in a recentinterview : " The Anglo-Saxon advances into the newregions with a Bible in one hand and a shotgun in theother. The inhabitants of those regions that he cannot convert with the aid of the Bible and bring intohis markets, he gets rid of with the shotgun. It isbut another demonstration of the survival of the fittest." In other words, unless you worship as we command you, and give us a profitable trade, we shallhave to shoot you down. The bloodiest of the oldSpanish conquerors, four centuries ago, could nothave spoken better. It has a strange sound in freeAmerica. Let us hope that the spread of this hideousbrutality of sentiment will prove only a temporaryepidemic, like the influenza, and will yield again whenthe intoxication of victory subsides and our headsbecome cool once more. If it does not, more shotgunswill be needed than Mr. Sulloway may now anticipate.If we take those new regions, we shall be well entangled in that contest for territorial aggrandizement,which distracts other nations and drives them far beyond their original design. So it will be inevitablywith us. We shall want new conquests to protectthat which we already possess. The greed of specu-UNIVERSITY RECORD 261lators working upon our government, will push usfrom one point to another, and we shall have new conflicts on our hands, almost without knowing how wegot into them. It has always been so under such circumstances, and always will be. This means moreand more soldiers, ships, and guns.A singular delusion has taken hold of the minds ofotherwise clear-headed men. It is that our newfriendship with England will serve firmly to securethe world's peace. Nobody can hail that friendlyfeeling between the two nations more warmly than Ido, and I fervidly hope it will last. But I am profoundly convinced that if this friendship results inthe two countries setting out to grasp "for the Anglo-Saxon," as the phrase is, whatever of the earth maybe attainable— if they hunt in couple — they will surelysoon fall out about the game, and the first seriousquarrel, or at least one of the first, we shall have, willbe with Great Britain. And as family feuds are thebitterest, that feud will be apt to become one of themost deplorable in its consequences.No nation is, or ought to be, unselfish. England, inher friendly feeling toward us is not inspired by meresentimental benevolence. The anxious wish of manyEnglishmen that we should take the Philippines isnot free from the consideration that, if we do so, weshall for a long time depend on British friendship tomaintain our position on that field of rivalry, and thatBritain will derive ample profit from our dependenceon her. This was recently set forth with startlingcandor by the London Saturday Review, thus :" Let us be frank and say outright that we expectmutual gain in material interests from this rapprochement. The American Commissioners at Paris aremaking this bargain, whether they realize it or not,under the protecting naval strength of England, andwe shall expect a material quid pro quo for thisassistance. We expect the United States to dealgenerously with Canada in the matter of tariffs,^andwe expect to be remembered when the United Statescomes into possession of the Philippine Islands, and,above all, we expect her assistance on the day, whichis quickly approaching, when the future of Chinacomes up for settlement, for the young imperialist hasentered upon a path where it will require a strongfriend, and a lasting friendship between the twonations can be secured, not by frothy sentimentalityon public platforms, but by reciprocal advantages insolid, material interests.And the cable dispatch from London bringing thisutterance added :"The foregoing opinion is certainly outspokenenough, but every American moving in business cir cles here knows this voices the expectations of theaverage Englishman."This is plain. If Englishmen think so we have nofault to find with them. But it would be extremelyfoolish on our part to close our eyes to the fact. British friendship is a good thing to have, but, perhaps,not so good thing to need. If we are wise we shallnot put ourselves in a situation in which we shallneed it. British statesmanship has sometimes showngreat skill in making other nations fight its battles.This is very admirable from its point of view, but itis not so pleasant for the nations so used. I shouldbe loath to see this republic associated with GreatBritain in apparently joint concerns as a junior partner with a minority interest, or the American navy inthe situation of a mere squadron of the British fleet.This would surely lead to trouble in the settling ofaccounts. Lord Salisbury was decidedly right when,at the last lord mayor's banquet, he said that the appearance of the United States as a factor in Asiaticaffairs was likely to conduce to the interests of GreatBritain, but might " not conduce to the interest ofpeace." Whether he had eventual quarrels with thisrepublic in mind, I do not know. But it is certainthat the expression of British sentiment I have justquoted shows us a Pandora box of such quarrels.Ardently desiring the maintenance of the friendshipbetween England and this republic, I cannot but express the profound belief that this friendship will remain most secure if the two nations do not attemptto accomplish the same ends in the same way and onthe same field, but continue to follow the separatecourses prescribed by their peculiar conditions andtheir history.The history of England is that of a small island,inhabited by a vigorous, energetic, and rapidly multiplying race, with the sea for its given field of action.Nothing could be more natural than that, as the population pressed against its narrow boundaries, Englishmen should have swarmed out, founding colonies andgradually building up an empire of possessions scattered all over the globe, England now must havethe most powerful fleet in the world, not only for theprotection of her distant possessions, but because ifany other sea power, or combination of sea powers,could effectually blockade her coasts, her people asthey now are, might be starved in a few months.England must be the greatest sea power in order tobe a great power at all.The American people began their career as one ofthe colonial offshoots of the English stock. Theyfound a great continent to occupy and to fill withdemocratic commonwealths. Our country is large262 UNIVERSITY RECORDenough for several times our present population. Ourhome resources are enormous, in great part not yettouched. We need not fear to be starved by the com-pletest blockade of our coasts, for we have enough ofeverything and to spare. On the contrary such ablockade might rather result in starving others thatneed our products. We are today one of the greatestpowers on earth, without having the most powerfulfleet, and without stepping beyond our continent.We are sure to be by far the greatest power of all, asour homogeneous, intelligent, and patriotic populationmultiplies, and our resources are developed, withoutfiring a gun or sacrificing a life for the sake of conquest — far more powerful than the British Empirewith all its Hindoos, and than the Russian Empirewith all its Mongols. We can exercise the most beneficent influences upon mankind, not by forcing our ruleor our goods upon others that are weak at the pointthe bayonet, but through the moral power of ourexample, in proving how the greatest as well asthe smallest nation can carry on the government ofthe people, by the people, and for the people in justice,liberty, order, and peace without large armies andnavies.Let this republic and Great Britain each follow thecourse which its conditions and its history have assigned to it, and their ambitions will not clash, andtheir friendship can be maintained for the good of all.And if our British cousins should ever get into veryserious stress, American friendship may stand behindthem ; but then Britain would depend upon our friendship, which, as an American, I should prefer, and notAmerica on British friendship, as our British friends,who so impatiently urge us to take the Philippines,would have it. But if we do take the Philippines, andthus entangle ourselves in the rivalries of Asiaticaffairs, the future will be, as Lord Salisbury predicted, one of wars and rumors of wars, and the timewill be forever past when we could look down withcondescending pity on the nations of the old worldgroaning under militarism with all its burdens.We are already told that we shall need a regulararmy of at least 100,000 men, three-fourths of whomare to serve in our "new possessions." The questionis whether this necessity is to be only temporary orpermanent. Look at the cost. Last year the supportof the army proper required about $23,000,000. It iscomputed that taking the increased costliness of theservice in the tropics into account, the army underthe new dispensation will require about $150,000,000 ;that is, $127,000,000 a year more. It is also officiallyadmitted that the possession of the Philippines wouldrender indispensable a much larger increase of the navy than would otherwise be necessary, costing untold millions for the building and equipment of ships,and untold millions every year for their maintenanceand for the increased number of officers and men.What we shall have to spend for fortifications and thelike cannot now be computed. But there is a burdenupon us which in like weight no other nation has tobear. Today, thirty-three years after the Civil War, wehave a pension roll of very nearly one million names.And still they come. We paid to pensioners over $145,-000,000 last year, a sum larger than the annual cost ofthe whole military peace establishment of the GermanEmpire, including its pension roll. Our recent Spanish War will, according to a moderate estimate, add atleast $20,000,000 to our annual pension payments*But if we send troops to the tropics and keep themthere, we must look for a steady stream of pensionersfrom that quarter, for in the tropics soldiers are " usedup " very fast, even if they have no campaigning to do.But all such estimates are futile. There may, andprobably will be, much campaigning to do to keep ournew subjects in obedience, or even in conflicts withother powers. And what military and naval expeditions will then cost, with our extravagant habits, andho w the pension roll then will grow, we know to be incalculable. Moreover, we shall then be in the situationof those European powers, the extent of whose armaments are determined, not by their own wishes, butby the armaments of their rivals. We, too, shall nervously watch reports from abroad telling us that this,power is augmenting the number of its warships, orthat another is increasing its battalions, or strengthening its colonial garrisons in the neighborhood of ourfar-away possessions ; and we shall have to follow suit.Not we ourselves, but our rivals and possible enemieswill decide how large our armies and navies must be,and how much money we must spend for them. Andall that money will have to come out of the pockets ofour people, the poor as well as the rich. Our taxpay-ing capacity and willingness are indeed very great.But set your policy of imperialism in full swing, as theacquisition of^ the Philippines will do, and the timewill come, and come quickly, when every Americanfarmer and workingman, when going to his toil, will,like his European brother, have " to carry a fullyarmed soldier on his back."Our government has agreed to appear in the " Peace-:and-Disarmament Conference" called by the Russianczar. What will our representative have to say whenthe Russian spokesman, as the czar has done, truthfully describes the ever-growing evils of militarism,and the necessity of putting a stop to them in the interest of civilization and of the popular welfare? TheUNIVERSITY RECORD 263American imperialist, whatever fine phrases he mayemploy, will have to say substantially this ; "All youtell us about the ruinous effects of increasing armaments and the necessity of stopping them in the interest of civilization and the popular welfare wasour own belief some time ago. But we Americanshave recently changed our minds. You, gentlemen,say that the powers you represent would disarm if theycould, and that general disarmament might be possible if one power would resolutely begin to disarm-But we Americans are just beginning to arm. You saythat this will put another difficulty in the way of generaldisarmament. But we Americans have, by way of liberating Cuba, won by conquest some islands in bothhemispheres, to which we may wish to add, and thisbusiness will require larger armies and navies thanwe now have."This is the voice of American imperialism. Andthus our great and glorious republic, which onceboasted of marching in the vanguard of progressivecivilization, will deliberately go to the rear, and makeof itself a new obstacle to a reform, the success ofwhich would do infinitely more for the general goodof mankind than we could accomplish by a hundredvictories of our arms on land or sea.It would seem, therefore, that the new territorialacquisitions in view are after all very different fromthose we have made before. But something more isto be said. When the Cuban affair approached acrisis, President McKinley declared in his messagethat " forcible annexation cannot be thought of " for" it would, by our code of morals, be criminal aggression." And in resolving upon the war against Spain,Congress, to commend that war to the public opinionof mankind, declared with equal emphasis and solemnity that the war was, from a sense of duty andhumanity, made specifically for the liberation ofCuba, and that Cuba " is, and of right ought to be,free and independent." If these declarations werenot sincere, they were base and disgraceful acts ofhypocrisy. If they were sincere at the time, wouldthey not be turned into such disgraceful acts ofhypocrisy by subsequently changing the war, professedly made from motives of duty and humanity, intoa war of conquest and self-aggrandizement ? It ispretended that those virtuous promises referred toCuba only. But if President McKinley had said that,while the forcible annexation of Cuba would becriminal aggression, the forcible annexation of anything else would be perfectly right, and if Congresshad declared that as to Cuba the war would be one ofmere duty, humanity, and liberation, but that wewould take by conquest whatever else we could lay our hands on, would not all mankind have broken outin a shout of scornful derision ?I ask in all candor, taking President McKinley athis word : Will the forcible annexation of the Philippines by our code of morals not be criminal aggression— a self-confessed crime ? I ask further, if the Cubans, as Congress declared, are and of right ought tobe free and independent, can anybody tell me why thePorto Ricans and the Filipinos ought not of right tobe free and independent ? Can you sincerely recognize the right to freedom and independence of one andrefuse the same right to another in the same situation,and then take his land ? Would not that be double-dealing of the most shameless sort ?We hear much of the respect of mankind for ushaving been greatly raised by our victories. Indeed,the valor of our soldiers and the brilliant achievements of our navy have won deserved admiration.But do not deceive yourselves about the respect ofmankind. Recently I found in the papers an accountof the public opinion of Europe, written by a prominent English journalist. This is what he says : " Thefriends of America wring their hands in unaffectedgrief over the fall of the United States under thetemptation of the lust of territorial expansion. Herenemies shoot out the lip and shriek in derision overwhat they regard as the unmistakable demonstrationwhich the demand for the Philippines affords ofAmerican cupidity, American bad faith and Americanambition. ' We told you so,' they exclaim. That iswhat the unctuous rectitude of the Anglo-Saxonalways ends in. He always begins by calling heavento witness his unselfish desire to help his neighbor,but he' always ends by stealing his spoons ! "Atrocious, is it not ? And yet this is substantiallywhat the true friends of America, and what her enemies in Europe, think — I mean those friends whohad faith in the nobility of the American people, wholoved our republican government, and who hoped thatthe example set by our great democracy would be aninspiration to those struggling for liberty the worldover ; and I mean those enemies who hate republicangovernment and who long to see the American peopledisgraced and humiliated. So they think : I know itfrom my own correspondence. Nothing has in ourtimes discredited the name of republic in the civilizedworld as much as the Dreyfus outrage in France andour conquest furor in America ; and our conquestfuror more, because from us the world hoped more.No, do not deceive yourselves. If we turn that warwhich was so solemnly commended to the favor ofmankind as a generous war of liberation and humanityinto a victory for conquest and self-aggrandizement.264 UNIVERSITY RECORDwe shall have thoroughly forfeited our moral creditwith the world. Professions of unselfish virtue andbenevolence, proclamations of noble humanitarianpurposes coming from us will never, never be trustedagain. Is this the position in which this great republic of ours should stand among the family of nations ?Our American self-respect should rise in indignantprotest against it.And now compare this picture of the state of thingswhich threatens us, with the picture I drew of ourcondition existing before the expansion fever seizedus. Which will you choose ?What can there be to justify a policy fraught withsuch direful consequences ? Let us pass the arguments of the advocates of such imperialism candidlyin review.The cry suddenly raised that this great country hasbecome too small for us is too ridiculous to demand ananswer, in view of the fact that our present populationmay be tripled and still have ample elbow-room, withresources to support many more. But we are told thatour industries are gasping for breath ; that we are suffering from over-production ; that our products musthave new outlets, and that we need colonies and dependencies the world over to give us more markets.More markets ? Certainly. But do we, civilized beings, indulge in the absurd and barbarous notion thatwe must own the countries with which we wish totrade ? Here are our official reports before us, tellingus that of late years our export trade has grown enormously, not only of farm products, but of the productsof our manufacturing industries ; in fact, that " oursales of manufactured goods have continued to extendwith a facility and promptitude of results which haveexcited the serious concern of countries that, for generations, had not only controlled their home markets,but had practically monopolized certain lines of tradein other lands."There is a distinguished Englishman, the RightHon. Charles T. Ritchie, President of the Board ofTrade, telling a British Chamber of Commerce that"we [Great Britain] are being rapidly overhauled inexports by other nations, especially the United Statesand Germany," their exports fast advancing, whileBritish exports are declining. What ? Great Britain,the greatest colonial power in the world, losing incompetition with two nations one of which had, sofar, no colonies or dependencies at all, and the othernone of any commercial importance ? What doesthis mean ? It means that, as proved by the UnitedStates and Germany, colonies are not necessary forthe expansion of trade, and that, as proved by GreatBritain, colonies do not protect a nation against a loss of trade. Our trade expands, without coloniesor big navies, because we produce certain goods better and in proportion cheaper than other people do.British trade declines, in spite of immense dependencies and the strongest navy, because it does notsuccessfully compete with us in that respect. Tradefollows, not the flag, but the best goods for the price.Expansion of export trade and new markets ! We donot need foreign conquests to get them, for we havethem, and are getting them more and more in rapidlyincreasing growth." But the Pacific Ocean," we are mysteriously told," will be the great commercial battlefield of the future, and we must quickly use the present opportunity to secure our position on it. The visible presenceof great power is necessary for us to get our share ofthe trade of China. Therefore we must have thePhilippines." Well, the China trade is worth having,although for a time out of sight the Atlantic Oceanwill be an infinitely more important battlefield of commerce than the Pacific, and one European customeris worth more than twenty or thirty Asiatics. Butdoes the trade of China really require that we shouldhave the Philippines and make a great display of powerto get our share ? Read the consular reports, and youwill find that in many places in China our trade israpidly gaining, while in some British trade is declining, and this while Great Britain had on hand thegreatest display of power imaginable and we hadnone. And in order to increase our trade there, ourconsuls advise us to improve our commercial methods,saying nothing of the necessity of establishing a baseof naval operations, and of our appearing there withwar ships and heavy guns. Trade is developed, not bythe best guns, but by the best merchants. Butwhy do other nations prepare to fight for the Chinese trade ? Other nations have done many foolishthings which we have been, and I hope will remain,wise enough not to imitate. If it should come tofighting for Chinese customers, the powers engagedin that fight are not unlikely to find out that they paytoo high a price for what can be gained, and that atlast the peaceful and active neutral will have the bestbargain. At any rate, to launch into all the embroilments of an imperialistic policy by annexing thePhilippines in order to snatch something more of theChinese trade would be for us the foolishest gameof all.Generally speaking, nothing could be more irrational than all the talk about our losing commercialor other opportunities which " will never come back ifwe fail to grasp them now." Why, we are so rapidlygrowing in all the elements of power ahead of allUNIVERSITY RECORD 265other nations that, not many decades hence, unless wedemoralize ourselves by a reckless policy of adventure, not one of them will be able to resist our will ifwe choose to enforce it. This the world knows, andis alarmed at the prospect. Those who are mostalarmed may wish that we should give them now, bysome rash enterprise, an occasion for dealing ^us adamaging blow while we are less irresistible." But we must have coaling stations for our navy ! "Well, can we not get as many coaling stations as weneed without owning populous countries behind themthat would entangle us in dangerous political respondsibilities and complications ?" But we must civilize those poor people ! " Arewe not ingenious and charitable enough to do muchfor their civilization without subjugating and rulingthem by criminal aggression ?The rest of the pleas for imperialism consist mostlyof those high-sounding catch -words of which a freepeople when about to decide a great question shouldbe especially suspicious. We are admonished that itis time for us to become a " world power." Well, weare a world power now, and have been one for manyyears. What is a world power ? A power strongenough to make its voice listened to with deference by the world whenever it chooses to speak. Isit necessary for a world power, in order to be such, tohave its finger in every pie ? Must we have thePhilippines in order to become a world power ? Toask the question is to answer it.The American flag, we are told, whenever 'onceraised, must never be hauled down. Certainly, everypatriotic citizen will always be ready, if need be, tofight and to die under his flag wherever it may wavein justice and for the best interests of the country.But I say to you, woe to the republic if it should everbe without citizens patriotic and brave enough to defythe demagogues' cry and to haul down the flag wherever it may be raised not in justice and not for thebest interests of the country. Such a republic wouldnot last long.But, they tell us, we have been living in a state ofcontemptible isolation which must be broken so thatwe may feel and conduct ourselves " as a full-grownmember of the family of nations." What is that so-called isolation? Is it commercial? Last year ourforeign trade amounted to nearly 2000 million dollars, and is rapidly growing. Is that commercial isolation? Or are we politically isolated? Rememberour history. Who was it that early in this centurybroke up the piracy of the Barbary States? Who wasit that took a leading part in delivering the world'scommerce of the Danish Sound dues? Who was it that first opened Japan to communication with thewestern world? And what power has in this centurymade more valuable contributions to internationallaw than the United States? Do you call that contemptible isolation? It is true, we did not meddlemuch with foreign affairs that did not concern us.But if the circle of our interests widens and we wishto meddle more, must we needs have the Philippinesin order to feel and conduct ourselves as a member ofthe family of nations?We are told that, having grown so great and strong,we must at last cast off our childish reverence for theteachings of Washington's farewell address — those" nursery rhymes that were sung around the cradleof the republic." I apprehend that many of thosewho now so flippantly scoff at the heritage the Fatherof his Country left us in his last words of admonition,have never read that venerable document. I challenge those who have, to show me a single sentence ofgeneral import in it that woul4 not as a wise rule ofnational conduct apply to the circumstances of today !What is it that has given to Washington's farewell address an authority that was revered by all until our recent victories made so many of us drunk with wildambitions ? Not only the prestige of Washington'sname, great as that was and should ever remain. No,it was the fact that under a respectful observance ofthose teachings this republic has grown from the mostmodest beginnings into a Union spanning this vastcontinent ; our people have multiplied from a handfulto 75 millions ; we have risen from poverty to a wealththe sum of which the imagination can hardly grasp ;this^American nation has become one of the greatestand most powerful on earth, and, continuing in thesame course, will surely become the greatest and mostpowerful of all. Not Washington's name alone gavehis teachings their dignity and weight. It was thepractical results of his policy that secured to it, untilnow, the intelligent approbation of the American people. And unless we have completely lost our senses.we shall never despise and reject as mere " nurseryrhymes " the words of wisdom left us by the greatestof Americans, following which the American peoplehave achieved a splendor of development without parallel in the history of mankind.You may tell me that this is all very well, but thatby the acts of our own government we are now in thisannexation business, and how can we get decently outof it ? I answer that the difficulties of getting out of itmay be great ; but that they are infinitely less greatthan the difficulties we shall have to contend with ifwe stay in it.Looking them in the face, let us first clear our minds266 UNIVERSITY RECORDof confused notions about our duties and responsibilities in the premises. That our victories have devolvedupon us certain duties as to the people of the conquered islands, I readily admit. But are they theonly duties we have to perform, or have they suddenlybecome paramount to all other duties? I deny it. Ideny that the duties we owe to the Cubans and thePorto Ricans and the Filipinos and the Tagals of theAsiatic islands absolve us from our duties to the75 millions of our own people and to their posterity. I deny that they oblige us to destroy themoral credit of our own republic by turning thisloudly heralded war of liberation and humanity into aland-grabbing game and an act of criminal aggression-I deny that they compel us to aggravate our racetroubles, to bring upon us the constant danger of war,and to subject our people to the galling burden of increasing armaments. If we have rescued those un_fortunate daughters of Spain, the colonies, from thetyranny of their cruel father, I deny that we are therefore in honor bound to marry any of the girls, or totake them all into our household, where they may disturb and demoralize our whole family. I deny thatthe liberation of those Spanish dependencies morallyconstrains us to do anything that would put our highest mission to solve the great problem of democraticgovernment in jeopardy, or that would otherwise endanger the vital interests of the republic. Whateverour duties to them may be, our duties to our owncountry and people stand first; and from this standpoint we have, as sane men and patriotic citizens, toregard our obligation to take care of the future ofthose islands and their people.They fought for deliverance from Spanish oppression, and we helped them to obtain that deliverance.That deliverance they understood to mean independence. I repeat the question whether anybody cantell me why the declaration of Congress that theCubans of right ought to be free and independentshould not apply to all of them? Their independence,therefore, would be the natural and rightful outcome.This is the solution of the problem first to be takenin view.It is objected that they are not capable of independent government. They may answer that this istheir affair and that they are at least entitled to a trial.I frankly admit that if they are given that trial, theirconduct in governing themselves will be far from perfect. Well, the conduct of no people is perfect, not evenour own. They may try to revenge themselves upontheir tories in their Revolutionary War. But we, too,threw our tories into hideous dungeons during our Revolutionary War and persecuted and drove themaway after its close. They may have bloody civilbroils. But we, too, have had our Civil War whichcost hundreds and thousands of lives and devastatedone-half of our land; and now we have in horribleabundance the killings by lynch law, and our battlesof Virden. They may have trouble with their wildtribes. So had we, and we treated our wild tribesin a manner not to be proud of. They may havecorruption and rapacity in their government, butHavana and Ponce may get municipal administrationalmost as good as New York has under Tammany rule ;and Manila may secure a city council not much less virtuous than that of Chicago.I say these things not in a spirit of levity, well understanding the difference ; but I say them seriously toremind you that, when we speak of the governmentthose islands should have, we cannot reasonably setup standards which are not reached even by the mostcivilized people, and which in those regions could notbe reached, even if we ourselves conducted their government with our best available statesmanship. Ourattention is in these days frequently called to the admirable and in many respects successful administrativemachinery introduced by Great Britain in India. Butit must not be forgotten that this machinery wasevolved from a century of rapine, corruption, disas-trous^blunders, savage struggles, and murderous revolts, and that even now many wise men in Englandgravely doubt in their hearts whether it was best fortheir country to undertake the conquest of India at all,and are troubledfby gloomy forebodings of a calamitous catastrophe that may some day engulf thatsplendid fabric of Asiatic dominion.No, we cannot expect that the Porto Ricans, theCubans, and the Filipinos will maintain orderly governments in Anglo-Saxon fashion. But they may succeed in establishing a tolerable order of things in theirown fashion, as Mexico, after many decades of turbulentdisorder, succeeded at last, under Porfirio Diaz, in having a strong and orderly government of her kind, not,indeed, such a government as we would tolerate in thisUnion, but a government answering Mexican charac^ter and interests, and respectable in its relations withthe outside world.This will become all the more possible if, withoutannexing and ruling those people, we simply putthem on their feet, and then give them the benefit ofthat humanitarian spirit which, as we claim, led usinto the war for the liberation of Cuba. To this endwe should keep our troops on the islands until theirpeople have constructed governments and organizedUNIVERSITY RECORD 267forces of their own for the maintenance of order. Ourmilitary occupation should not be kept up as long aspossible, but should be withdrawn as soon as possible.The Philippines may, as Belgium and Switzerlandare in Europe, be covered by a guarantee of neutralityon the part of the powers most interested in thatregion — an agreement which the diplomacy of theUnited States should not find it difficult to obtain.This would secure them against foreign aggression.As to the independent republics of Porto Rico andCuba, our government might lend its good offices tounite them with San Domingo and Hayti in a confederacy of the Antilles, to give them a more respectable international standing. Stipulations should beagreed upon with them as to open ports and the freedom of business enterprise within their borders,affording all possible commercial facilities. Missionary effort in the largest sense, as to the developmentof popular education and of other civilizing agencies,as well as abundant charity in case of need, will onour part not be wanting, and all this will help tomitigate their disorderly tendencies and to steadytheir governments.Thus we shall be their best friends without beingtheir foreign rulers. We shall have done our duty tothem, to ourselves, and to the world. However imperfect their governments may still remain, they willat least be their own, and they will not with their disorders and corruptions contaminate our institutionsthe integrity of which is not only to ourselves, but toliberty-loving mankind, the most important concernof all. We may then await the result with generouspatience — with the same patience with which formany years we witnessed the revolutionary disordersof Mexico on our very borders, without any thoughtof taking her government into our own hands.Ask yourselves whether a policy like this will notraise the American people to a level of moral greatnessnever before attained ! If this democracy, after allthe intoxication of triumph in war, conscientiouslyremembers its professions and pledges, and soberlyreflects on its duties to itself and others, and thendeliberately resists the temptation of conquest, it willachieve the grandest triumph of the democratic ideathat history knows of. It will give the government of,for, and by the people a prestige it never before possessed. It will render the cause of civilizationthroughout the world a service without parallel. Itwill put its detractors to shame, and its voice will beheard in the council of nations with more sincererespect and more deference than ever. The Americanpeople, having given proof of their strength and alsoof their honesty and wisdom, will stand infinitely mighter before the world than any number of subjugated vassals could make them. Are not here our bestinterests, both moral and material ? Is not this genuine glory ? Is not this true patriotism ?I call upon all who so believe never to lose heart inthe struggle for this great cause, whatever odds mayseem to be against us. Let there be no pussilanimousyielding while the final decision is still in the balance.Let us relax no effort in this, the greatest crisis therepublic has ever seen. Let us never cease to invokethe good sense, the honesty, and the patriotic pride ofthe people. Let us raise high the flag of our country— not as an emblem of reckless adventure and greedyconquest, of betrayed professions and broken pledges,of criminal agressions and arbitrary rule over subjectpopulations — but the old, the true flag, the flag ofGeorge Washington and Abraham Lincoln ; the flagof the government of, for, and by the people ; the flagof national faith held sacred and of national honorunsullied ; the flag of human rights and of good example to all nations ; the flag of true civilization,peace, and good- will to all men. Under it let us standto the last, whatever betide.And now, although much more might be said onthis momentous subject, I must close. Before takingleave of you, Mr. President, teachers, students, andfriends of the University of Chicago, permit me tocongratulate you on the growth and success of thisgreat institution of learning. Accept my heartiestwishes that it may continue to prosper and flourish,sowing the good seed, and that the American youthswho drink at its fountains may go forth into theworld true devotees of science and truth, firm pillarsof justice and right, and dauntless champions of thefree institutions of government which they haveinherited from their fathers, and should leave unimpaired in vigor and integrity to coming generations.The University Elementary School.groups II AND III.[This report covers the work done since the statement published in the Recoed, October 28, 1898.]After gaining a general idea of ihe life of man inthe cave period, some attention was given to gettinga clearer idea of the weapons and tools used, and theimprovements made in them. This was accomplishedby examining specimens of flint, granite, and limestone for cleavage, friability, etc., and deducing themethods and skill necessary for manufacturing fromthem knives, spears, axes, arrow-heads, etc. To get268 UNIVERSITY RECORDa vivid image of the shape, models were made in clayby the children.The invention of the bow and arrow was described,and its advantages for the tribe which possessed itbrought out by showing that men had now a weaponwhich could be used from a distance, thus lesseningthe risk to the user, and increasing his chances ofsuccess in hunting or defense.The idea of the earliest combination was broughtout by imagining specific cases ; first, the hunting ofa mastodon. This required many people, and its success depended upon some degree of coordinationunder a leader, whose position was gained by acknowledged ability, and whose commands for the time beingall must obey. Another reason for a combination —defense — was brought out by an appeal for help fromthe raids of a cave tiger upon an isolated community.The same principles of law and order were involvedhere, and the fundamental principle of the causes ofcombination brought out.From the temporary combination for a specific aimto permanent combination was developed by means ofa change of residence brought about by the migration of animals, and the necessity for the people of thetime to follow them, as animals constituted their mainfood. The changes involved required leadership for alonger period, and the superior force and intelligenceof the leader enabled him to make the position permanent.In order to enable the children to comprehend tosome degree the length of time which elapsed betweeneven slight improvements, they were told somethingof the changes in climate during the glacier periodand of the changes in animals. The length of timewas made clearer by referring it to a succession ofgenerations of the Ab family, though the childrenwere so attached to the name that it was continued.The discussion concerning the carrying of possessions into the new country brought out the fact thatclay had been discovered and moulded into dishes totake the place of the stone ones made with so muchlabor. The children speculated upon the possiblemethod of its discovery and use. The difficulties ofthe journey were passed over lightly, stress beingplaced only upon the means of crossing a river, whichwas done by the construction of a raft.The new situation required a different kind of shelter, and this was made of branches interlaced andcovered with straw or skins, forming a hut or wigwam.The new form of shelter was constructed in miniatureby groups of four children working together.The new homes were located near a river, and this afforded an opportunity for studying a river system.A river basin was formed of sand, showing the winding course through a plain and the straighter coursedown a slope. When the river basins had been properly constructed, the children were given water topour in and demonstrate the correctness of the theory.The earliest differentiation of labor was broughtout in the occupations in the new homes. The oldhunters confined their energies to small game neartheir homes, the young hunters were the main dependence of the tribe, and the women and childrengathered moss for beds, nuts and fruits for food, madethe fireplaces, etc. This was acted out by the children and was a means of finding out how much theyhad grasped from the previous discussions.The increase in the number of the tribe during successive generations was calculated adding by threes,fives, and tens. The children added up to 120 bytens, and were then shown another way of saying it^i. e., twelve tens equal 120. Most of them knew this,but it was a starting point for further number work.The next advance toward civilization was the making of cloth from wool. To illustrate the process, rawwool was given to the children to examine and decidehow the fibers could be made into yarn. When theyhad pointed out the crinkles which would hold thefibers together, they were shown pictures of a spindle,spindle whorls, etc., and the primitive method ofweaving explained.The animals of the new country were comparedwith those of the earlier home, and the habits of theanimals of the plain and those of the mountains discussed.The reading lessons for the children of this groupare sentences concerning the work in history whichthey give the teacher. These are typewritten andsupplied to the class.The work in science was a continuation of the studyof seed dissemination. The new types taken up werethe cat-tail seed and the Russian thistle. After examining and discussing these seeds the children wereasked to draw them. The drawing brought out thefact that observation had not been close enough todistinguish the cat-tail seed from the aster seed, previously studied, and their attention had to be calledto the difference. The bulbs planted in* the earlyautumn and placed in the cellar for germination werebrought up and their growth noted and the reasonsfor placing them in the dark for a time reviewed.Some of the bulbs had been started in water, and theroot tips were noted and their adaptation for pushingthrough the earth studied. An excursion was madeUNIVERSITY RECORD 26$to a neighboring lot to find out how herbaceousplants protect themselves for the winter. From thewinter habits of plants the methods of animals inprotecting themselves for the winter were talkedabout, especially of those belonging to a cold climate, the depth to which water freezes, and the effectof ice on the fish and frog was discussed. An experiment was performed to show that ice occupies morespace than the water from which it was formed,hence is lighter and floats upon the surface of thewater.Following the lessons given in the preparation ofwheatina, the children examined different wheat preparations to discover the relative amount of starchand cellulose contained in each, and to decide fromthat fact the amount of water needed to cook it, thetime necessary, and whether hot or cold water shouldbe used first. In order to bring out these principlesclearly an experiment was tried. Boiling water waspoured over pure starch and the effect in lumpingnoted. On another dish of starch cold water waspoured, and the smooth, milky effect noted. Thenboiling water was added to the cold mixture and theresult in smooth, clear, starchy paste compared withthe lumpy and half clear paste when hot water alonehad been used. After the experiment the childrenwere able to give direction for the cooking of thecereal.Tapioca was next studied as a food containing starch.In the talk before its preparation the children weretold where it grew, the part used, the method of extracting starch, and its preparation for the market.From their knowledge of its composition they wereable to tell how it should be cooked. Milk was to beused instead of water, and the children were told thatthis should be cooked at a lower temperature ; theywere shown how to arrange a double boiler with saucepans.In the sewing and weaving work the children finishedthe baskets referred to in former report, the fiberswhich had formed the ribs being turned in at the topmaking a finished loop edge. Some polishing clothsand towels were needed for the kitchen, and thesewere hemmed by the children of this group. Whenthis was done they were given spool work with coloredworsteds.Work in the Art department has been the illustration in colored chalks of subjects connected with theirhistory work. They have drawn a cave on a rockyhillside with trees near, then a special study wasmade of trees in order to get the proportion and perspective. The hunting party on the plain was illustrated, and the crossing of the river on a raft. In the Shop thin wood has been used in makingpencil sharpeners, match scratchers and yarn winders.In Music the relation of time in producing melodywas illustrated by giving the children a line of poetrywith a succession of notes on one pitch. When thechildren did not believe it was a melody it was harmonized by the teacher, recognized and sung. Severalsongs have been learned for the chorus singing withother groups.Work in the Gymnasium is confined to games andsimple movements.Official Actions.The Faculties of the Graduate Schools at a meetingheld December 22, 1898, accepted the following persons as candidates for the degree named :For the Degree of Master of Arts :Minnie Geiger,Robert Lee Hughes.For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy :Henry C. Biddle,Philemon Bulkley Kohlsaat,Malcolm William Wallace.Official Notices.Official copies of the University Record for theuse of students may be found in the corridors andhalls of the various buildings in the University quadrangles. Students are requested to make themselvesacquainted with the official actions and notices of theUniversity, as published from week to week in theUniversity Record.Official Reports.During the month ending December 31, 1898, therehas been added to the Library of the University atotal number of 983 volumes from the followingsources :Books added by purchase, 615 vols., distributed asfollows :General Library, 115 vols.; Philosophy, 16 vols.;Pedagogy, 11 vols.; Political Economy, 33 vols.; Political Science, 7 vols.; History, 111 vols.; Archseol-ogy, 1 vol.; Sociology, 14 vols.; Sociology (Divinity),14 vols.; Sociology (Folk. Psych.), 4 vols.; Anthropology, 9 vols.; Comparative Religion, 4 vols.; Semitic, 2270 UNIVERSITY RECORDvols.; New Testament, 2 vols.; Comparative Philology,6 vols.; Greek, 9 vols.; Latin, 10 vols.; Latin andGreek, 2 vols.; Romance, 7 vols.; German, 39 vols.;English, 40 vols.; Mathematics, 4 vols.; Astronomy,(Ryerson), 2 vols.; Physics, 30 vols.; Geology, 4 vols.;Biology, 3 vols.; Zoology, 10 vols.; Anatomy, 8 vols.;Palaeontology, 1 vol.; Neurology, 17 vols.; Physiology,14 vols.; Botany, 1 vol.; Elocution, 1 vol.; ChurchHistory, 2 vols.; Systematic Theology, 3 vols..; Homi-letics, 2 vols.; Morgan Park Academy, 30 vols.; Dano-Norwegian-Swedish, 6 vols.; Swedish TheologicalSeminary, 20 vols.; Haskell, 1 vol.Books added by gift, 256 vols., distributed asfollows :General Library, 165 vols.; Pedagogy, 1 vol.; Political Economy, 16 vols.; Political Science, 1 vol.;History, 9 vols.; Sociology, 1 vol.; Sociology (Divinity),1 vol.; English, 6 vols.; Biology, 41 vols.; Zoology, 1vol.; Palaeontology, 8 vols.; Neurology, 1 vol.; Botany,2 vols.; Systematic Theology, 1 vol.; Morgan ParkAcademy, 1 vol.; Haskell 1 vol.Books added by exchange for University Publications, 112 vols., distributed as follows:General Library, 42 vols.; Pedagogy, 1 vol.; PoliticalEconomy, 8 vols.; Political Science, 1 vol.; Sociology,19 vols.; Sociology (Divinity), 1 vol.; ComparativeReligion, 2 vols.; Semitic, 3 vols.; New Testament, 5vols. ; Geology, 9 vols.; Botany, 7 vols.; Church History, 9 vols.; Systematic Theology, 4 vols.; Homiletics,lvol.Calendar.JANUARY 6-14, 1899.Friday, January 6.Chapel-Assembly : Divinity School. — Chapel, CobbHall, 10:30 a.m.Saturday, January 7.Regular Meetings of Faculties and Boards :Administrative Board of Physical Culture and Athletics, 8:30 a.m.Material for the UNIVERSITY" RECOED mustorder to be published in the issue of the same week. The Faculty of the Junior Colleges, 10:00 a.m.The University Senate, 11: 30 a.m.Sunday, January 8.Convocation Vesper Service, Kent Theater, 4:00 p.m.The Convocation Sermon will be preached by the Bev.Professor Herrick Johnson, D.D., of McCormick Theological Seminary.Union meeting of the Y. M. C. A. and Y. W. C. A.,Haskell Museum, 7: 00 p.m.Monday, January 9.Chapel-Assembly : Junior Colleges. — Chapel, CobbLecture Hall, 10:30 a.m. (required of Junior CollegeStudents).Tuesday, January 10.Chapel-Assembly: Senior Colleges. — Chapel, CobbLecture Hall, 10:30 a.m. (required of Senior CollegeStudents).Wednesday, January 11.Meeting of the Y. M. C. A., Haskell Museum, 7: 00 p.m.Thursday, January 12.Graduate Assembly. — Chapel, Cobb Hall, 10:30 a.m.Friday, January 13.Chapel-Assembly : Divinity School. — Chapel, CobbHall, 10:30 a.m.Saturday, January 14.Regular Meetings of Faculties and Boards :The Administrative Board of the University Press,8:30 a.m.The Faculty of the Senior Colleges, 10:00 a.m.The University Council, 11:30 a.m.sent to the Recorder by THUESDAT, 8:30 A.M., in