Page images


No. 3245 Sept. 15, 1906.


Vol. CCL.







The Coming Hague Conference. By Harry Hodgson.

Charles Lever. By Lewis Melville.

Beaujeu. Chapter XXX. My Lord Sunderland Leaves the Ship.

Chapter XXXI. Love in a Carriage. By H. C. Bailey. (To
be continued).

When the Herring Come In. By Stephen Gwynn.

CORNHILL MAGAZINE 662 In the Footprints of Camoëns.

Recollections of a Board School Teacher. MONTHLY REVIEW 674
On Windy Hill. Chapter I. How Blair of Blair Caine Riding North.

Chapter II. How Sir Peter Lynn Drank his last Toast. By
Halliwell Sutcliffe. (Complete in three parts.) .

Progress in the Study of Cancer.

SATURDAY REVIEW 694 The Apostasy of a Wagnerian. By E. A. Baughan.

In Praise of Sea-Fishing.

Prisoners of Hope. By C. D. W.

642 Three Songs from Verlaine. By Arthur Symons.

SATURDAY REVIEW 642 Tears. By Dorothy Frances Gurney




[ocr errors]


[ocr errors]







TERMS OF SUBSCRIPTION. For Six DOLLARS remitted directly to the Publishers, The Living Age will be punctually forwarded for a year, free of postage, to any part of the U. S. or Canada.

Postage to foreign countries in U. P. U. is 3 cents per copy or $1.56 per annum.

Remittances should be made by bank draft or check, or by post office or express money order, if possible. If neither of these can be procured, the money should be sent in a registered letter. Ar! postmasters are obliged to register letters when requested to do so. Drafts, checks, express, and money orders should be made payable to the order of The Living Ace Co.

Single copies of The Living Age, 15 cents,




'Tis the ecstasy of repose, 'Tis love when tired lids clo 'Tis the wood's long shuddering In the embrace of the wind, "Tis, where gray boughs are thinned, Little voices that sing.

This world, alas! is full of prison bars, And they are many who behind them

sit, Albeit we may never know of it, Nor see within their hearts the wounds

and scars. We only know some windy current

mars The eagle's lofty flight,-the sorry tit Falls from the housetop,-and the

feeble wit Flickers and dies, that fain would

search the stars. Oh, eagle! whose strong pinions beat in

vain,Oh, little sparrow! stricken by the

blast, Oh, captive spirit! languishing in pain, By iron bonds of circumstance held

fast, Yet strive, yet sing,-until the portals

ope Where freedom waits the prisoners of Hope!

C. D. W.

O fresh and frail is the sound
That twitters above, around,
Like the sweet tiny sigh
That dies in the shaken grass;
Or the sound when waters pass
And the pebbles shrink and cry.

What soul is this that complains
Over the sleeping plains,
And what is it that it saith?
Is it mine, is it thine,
This lowly hymn I divine
In the warm night, low as a breath?



Go, and with never a care
But the care to keep happiness!
Crumple a silken dress
And snatch a song in the air.



Hear the moral of all the wise
In a world where happy folly
Is wiser than melancholy:
Forget the hour as it flies!


Dance the jig!

I loved best her pretty eyes,
Clearer than stars in any skies,
I loved her eyes for their dear lies.

The one thing needful on earth, it
Is not to be whimpering.
Is life after all a thing
Real enough to be worth it?

Arthur Symons. The Saturday Review.

Dance the jig!

And ah! the ways, the ways she had
Of driving a poor lover mad:
It made a man's heart sad and glad.


[blocks in formation]


In the recent resolution calling for a reduction of military expenditure, the House of Commons gave ostensible support to the method of effecting this purpose by an international agreement for the reduction of armaments. One cannot doubt that in this the House did more than it intended. It would appear that, in the ardor of its impulse to give support to the main part of the resolution, the latter portion, relating to the means of carrying out its purpose, was overlooked; and thus what some minds cannot regard as other than a very unsatisfactory scheme was endorsed.

At the first Hague Conference one section occupied itself with schemes for the limitation of armaments; and, after pointing out the many difficulties, they let the subject drop. To infer from this that no such scheme is practical would not be wise; but we are bound to call upon those who propose this method of dealing with the problem to show how it can be practically carried out. One objection to any scheme for the limitation of armaments is the difficulty of seeuring a satisfactory ratio. To take the simplest form of such an agreement-one relating to amount of expenditure only. On what basis is the amount of each nation to be determined? Are all to be alike? Is it likely the greater nations will agree to that? Then what other? One pro. posal is that the agreement shall be not to exceed the average expenditure of the preceding three years. This would be satisfactory to the nations which have maintained a high standard during this period, but it is not likely to be acceptable to those that have been left behind. The great defect, however, of this method, is that it would be impossible for any of the nations to

have assurance that the others were faithfully carrying out the agreement. Each nation has control of its own resources, and it would not be difficult for any to violate the agreement without the others knowing it. Even in those States where military expenditure is publicly stated, there are ways by which the nation's fighting forces

ht be considerably increased without showing it at once. It would not be difficult, if war should be threatening, to induce, let us say, a patriotic firm of ship-builders to build a vessel on credit, with assurance of future payment; nor would it be difficult to raise money privately and secretly in the same way. Can any such scheme be regarded as satisfactory?

If a scheme for the limitation of armaments could be carried out, it would be one of relation. It would be the maintenance at a stationary ratio of certain proportionate forces.

If we are anxious to have this relation keptas the proposal of such a scheme would imply-why don't we try to keep it without regard to agreements with other nations? In our modesty, we have assumed that we are entitled to keep a naval force equal to those of any other two nations. But this proportion has not been maintained. And by whom has it been infringed? Not by other nations, but by us. We have so far exceeded this proportion during recent years that our naval forces are now about equal to the combined forces of any other three nations. To an outside observer our position must appear ridiculous. It will seem incredible that this increased expenditure, about which we appear to be anxious to make agreements for its limitation, is not in the least caused by compulsion. If we desire to have

[ocr errors]


agreements with other nations for the we do not allow, citizens to settle their limitation of armaments, which must differences one with another by viobe based on a ratio of forces, why don't lent means: if they cannot settle them we show our earnestness by keeping peaceably between themselves, they the ratio ? The fact of our nation be- must appeal to a recognized judicial ing the worst offender places us at a authority. Should the code for the disadvantage for making a proposal of nation be lower than that for the single this kind. Other nations must think man? Ought not the nations to settle that our position does not betoken sin- their differences by appeal to justice? cerity. Does it not lay on us, as sin- It has been generally allowed that they cere folk, to adjust our position before ought: as a theory, we have given apmaking a proposal of this nature to proval to the principle of arbitration. other nations?

Let the nations establish the practice Are we not in danger of overlooking of appealing to an Arbitration Court the real nature of the evil, however, for the settlement of all their differfrom preoccupation with its most obvi- ences, and reduction of armaments will feature? Armaments

con- inevitably follow. They will reduce .stantly growing, so it appears on the then because they will have no real face that we must check the increase use for them at their present size. by artificial regulation. But this is How is it that individual citizens are merely lopping the extreme branches; under no necessity to make agreements it is not going to the root of the evil. for the limitation of personal expendiIt is the whole problem of militarism ture on instruments of violence? If that we have to deal with. To merely any man desires to lay out a large part arrange that there shall be no increase of his income in this way he may do of expenditure on armaments while the so; he is not bound by agreements with nations are at peace-for no nation will other men to limit his expenditure in consent to be bound when engaged in this direction. But there is no such diswar-and to leave them as free as ever position. Why? Because men don't to fall to war, is not a satisfactory way spend money on things that are useof dealing with it. To plan for the less. So would the establishment of artificial regulation of armaments is to the practice of settling all their difregard the evil only from the economic ferences by appeal to justice influence standpoint. But the evil is essentially the nations. When this shall be done, of a moral nature, and we can never nations will be as little disposed to deal with it satisfactorily till we ap- spend money on instruments of vioproach it from the moral standpoint. lence as are individual citizens.

The only effective way to deal with It will be asked, if this be true, why any evil is to seek the cause and alter have not the recent arbitration treaties that. What is the nature of the evil already had such an effect? The reawith which we are concerned ? Why son is that they are not thorough. do the nations provide these large ar- They apply only to "questions of a jumaments, and what is the cause of ridical character or relating to the intheir constant growth? The reason is terpretation of existing treaties"; and that each wishes to be able to assert by further stipulation that they shall its authority in any affair of difference apply only to such matters as do not that may arise between it and other involve "the vital interests, the indenations. But is it well that differences pendence or the honor” of the contractbetween civilized nations should be set- ing parties, a way is provided to avoid tled in this way? We do not expect taking even these to arbitration, since


no difference arises which may not be forces as they now exist among the claimed to affect the vital interests or great nations, nor that war between the honor of the nation. Thus they these has a moral justification. The really bind the nations to nothing. largeness of these forces, and their They are, to speak plain truth, sham constant increase, is not due to the agreements. They have certain needs for the suppression of lawlessvalue, as indicating that the nations ness, but to considerations of the possiare beginning to see that the solution bility of conflict one with another. of the problem lies in arbitration; but Thus the forces, whose true purpose they show also that they yet fear to is the maintenance of order and justice, trust themselves to it.

are maintained with a view to use in a If we are to benefit we shall have to purpose which is a violation of justice. accept arbitration thoroughly. We In so far as the armed forces of the shall have to bind ourselves in sincer- civilized nations are used against each ity with other nations that all differ- other, or shaped with a view to such ences that may occur between us and use, they are in opposition to the sole them shall be submitted to an Arbitra- purpose which justifies their being. tion Court for settlement. There This is the evil. How have the nations must be no exceptions of any nature. come to this dilemma? It is a situation The proposal to bind ourselves in this of natural growth. Each of these manner will evoke strong objections. States represents an established GovIt will be said to be imprudent. Many ernment maintaining that order and people will point to the reservations of justice which is necessary for the wellthe existing treaties as showing that being of a civilized society. Each is the prudent and experienced statesmen a growth: each has absorbed the many who formed them see that unreserved small societies and petty kingdoms committal would be unsafe. We in- which have in the past occupied the vite these to show how it would be same area. Each, during this growth, unsafe. We cannot allow our judg- has not only had to be on the guard ment to be influenced by assertions. against inimical forces within itself, It is questionable whether ever a bene- but constantly against hostile ficial public proposal escaped opposi- world without. Thus they stand, seption from prejudiced and short-sighted arate and on guard, at the point of people.

time which men in this part of the Το prevent misunderstanding, it world mark as 1906. The way of reought to be said that the purpose is lief is obvious. It is by unity. All not to utterly abolish war, but one the nations that stand for order and that particularly concerns the rela- justice should act in concert. Differtions subsisting between the great na- ences that occur between them ought tions. We recognize that in the pres- never to be settled by the method of ent stage of man's development armed each interested party insisting on its force is necessary for the maintenance own interpretation, but by appeal to of society, and consequently for a good justice. life. There are elements of lawless- The distinction implied in the exness and disorder, both outside and isting treaties in the nature of the within every State, which require force differences that rise between nations is for their repression. An armed force real. There are differences relating to properly stands for order and justice. matters of fact, termed “juridical," and To allow this, however, is not to ac- there are differences which rise from knowledge the necessity of armed conflicting interests and policies. Be


« PreviousContinue »