History for ready reference, Volume 7

by J. N. Larned

Article V.
The Mosquito Indians, and other inhabitants of the former
Reserve, will enjoy the same rights as are secured by the laws
of Nicaragua to other Nicaraguan citizens.
CENTRAL AMERICA: A. D. 1906. Honduras, Guatemala, and Salvador:
War, ended by mediation of the United States and Mexico.
Neither the Convention of Peace and Compulsory Arbitration
signed at Corinto in 1902 by the presidents of all five of the
Central American republics, nor the peace agreement between
four of them two years later, sufficed to prevent an outbreak
of war in 1906 which involved the three states of Honduras,
Guatemala, and Salvador. President Roosevelt, in his annual
Message to Congress that year, referred to the war as having
arisen from "trouble which had existed for some time"; but
does not indicate the nature of the "trouble"; nor is any
light thrown on it in a long diplomatic correspondence between
the parties to it and the governments of the United States and
Mexico, which appears in the American report of Foreign
Relations for 1906. Probably nobody outside of the
belligerents ever learned definitely why they felt called upon
to fight, or what they had to settle when peace was made.
Seemingly Honduras was the aggressor; but the affair seems
hardly worth the trouble of any deep investigation. Its chief
importance is in the successful mediation that was undertaken
jointly by the governments of the United States and Mexico, of
which President Roosevelt made report in the Message referred
to above:
"The thoroughly good understanding which exists between the
United States and Mexico," said the President, "enabled this
Government and that of Mexico to unite in effective mediation
between the warring Republics; which mediation resulted, not
without long-continued and patient effort, in bringing about a
meeting of the representatives of the hostile powers on board
a United States warship as neutral territory, and peace was
there concluded; a peace which resulted in the saving of
thousands of lives and in the prevention of an incalculable
amount of misery and the destruction of property and of the
means of livelihood. The Rio Conference passed the following
resolution in reference to this action:
"‘That the Third International American Conference shall
address to the Presidents of the United States of America and
of the United States of Mexico a note in which the conference
which is being held at Rio expresses its satisfaction at the
happy results of their mediation for the celebration of peace
between the Republics of Guatemala, Honduras, and Salvador.’
"This affords an excellent example of one way in which the
influence of the United States can properly be exercised for
the benefit of the peoples of the Western Hemisphere; that is,
by action taken in concert with other American republics and
therefore free from those suspicions and prejudices which
might attach if the action were taken by one alone."
{76}
The resulting "General Treaty of Peace and Amity, Commerce,
etc., between the Republics of Costa Rica, Salvador,
Guatemala, and Honduras," signed September 25, 1906, involved
solemn engagements in its first four articles, as follows:
"ARTICLE 1.
There shall be perpetual peace and a frank, loyal, and sincere
friendship among the Republics of Costa Rica, Salvador,
Guatemala, and Honduras, each and every one of the aforesaid
Governments being in duty bound to consider as one of their
principal obligations the maintenance of such peace and the
preservation of such friendship, by endeavoring to contribute
every means to procure the desired end, and to remove, as far
as lies in their power, any obstacles, whatever their nature,
which might prevent it. In order to secure such ends they
shall always unite when the importance of the case demands it,
to foster their moral, intellectual, and industrial progress,
thus making their interests one and the same, as it becomes
sister countries.
"ARTICLE 2.
In the event, which is not to be expected, that any of the
high contracting parties should fail to comply with or cause
any deviation from any of the subjects agreed to in the
present treaty, such event, as well as any particular
difficulty which may arise between them, shall necessarily be
settled by the civilized means of arbitration.
"ARTICLE 3.
The Governments of Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, in
conformity with the stipulations of the treaty executed on
board the Marblehead, hereby appoint as umpires, Their
Excellencies the Presidents of the United States of America
and of the United Mexican States, to whom all particular
difficulties arising among said Governments shall be submitted
for arbitration.
"For the purpose of agreeing on the manner to effect such
arbitration, the above-mentioned Republics shall accredit, at
the latest within three months from this date, their
respective legations near the Governments of the United States
of America and Mexico, and in the meanwhile arbitration shall
be ruled according to the stipulations of the treaty of
compulsory arbitration concluded in Mexico on the 29th of
January, 1902.
"ARTICLE 4.
Guatemala not having subscribed to the Corinto convention of
January 20, 1902, Costa Rica, Salvador, and Honduras do hereby
respectively declare, that said Corinto convention is to
continue in force, and that any particular difference which
may arise among them shall be settled in conformity with the
aforesaid convention and with the regulations established by
the Central American court of arbitration on the 9th of
October of that year."
Notwithstanding these grave pledges to each other, three of
the parties to this treaty were at war the next year.
CENTRAL AMERICA: A. D. 1907.
Nicaragua, Honduras, and Salvador: War.
Mexican and American Mediation.
The Washington Peace Conference.
General Treaty of Peace and Amity.
Central American Court of Justice.
In February, 1907, a fresh outbreak of Central American war
occurred, originally between Nicaragua and Honduras, but
involving Salvador, presently, in alliance with Honduras. The
arbitration convention of 1904 had not accomplished a specific
settlement of the boundary disputes between Honduras and
Nicaragua, and President Zelaya, of the latter republic,
accused the former of encroachments. Mexico and the United
States had endeavored to pacify the disputants before
hostilities began, but without success. The quarrel was fought
out, and a complete victory won by Nicaragua, whose forces
captured the Honduran capital and drove President Bonilla from
the country. A provisional government was established in
Honduras and terms of peace arranged, April 24th. Then the
good offices of President Roosevelt and President Diaz were
employed again, with the result which the former communicated
to Congress in his Message of December 3, 1907, as follows:
"The effort to compose this new difficulty has resulted in the
acceptance of the joint suggestion of the Presidents of Mexico
and of the United States for a general peace conference
between all the countries of Central America. On the 17th day
of September last a protocol was signed between the
representatives of the five Central American countries
accredited to this Government agreeing upon a conference to be
held in the City of Washington 'in order to devise the means
of preserving the good relations among said Republics and
bringing about permanent peace in those countries.’ The
protocol includes the expression of a wish that the Presidents
of the United States and Mexico should appoint
‘representatives to lend their good and impartial offices in a
purely friendly way toward the realization of the objects of
the conference.’ The conference is now in session and will
have our best wishes and, where it is practicable, our
friendly assistance."
The first regular session of the Conference was held on the
14th of November, the place of meeting being the building of
the International Bureau of the American Republics. In
addition to the delegates present from the States of Costa
Rica, Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua, the
Republic of Mexico designated Señor Don Enrique C. Creel,
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the United
States, and the United States designated Honorable William I.
Buchanan, as representatives from Mexico and the United States
at the conference. The Honorable Elihu Root, Secretary of
State of the United States, was present, also, at the first
session, over which he presided until the organization of the
Conference had been effected. His opening address to the
Conference included these wise and impressive remarks:
"We cannot fail, gentlemen, to be admonished by the many
failures which have been made by the people of Central America
to establish agreement among themselves which would be
lasting, that the task you have before you is no easy one. The
trial has often been made and the agreements which have been
elaborated, signed, ratified, seem to have been written in
water. Yet I cannot resist the impression that we have at last
come to the threshold of a happier day for Central America.
"It would ill become me to attempt to propose or suggest the
steps which you should take, but I will venture to observe
that the all-important thing for you to accomplish is that
while you enter into agreements which will, I am sure, be
framed in consonance with the most peaceful aspirations and
the most rigid sense of justice, you shall devise also some
practical methods under which it will be possible to secure
the performance of those agreements.
{77}
The mere declaration of general principles, the mere agreement
upon lines of policy and of conduct are of little value unless
there be practical and definite methods provided by which the
responsibility for failing to keep the agreement may be fixed
upon some definite person, and the public sentiment of Central
America brought to bear to prevent the violation. The
declaration that a man is entitled to his liberty would be of
little value with us in this country were it not for the writ
of habeas corpus that makes it the duty of a specific
judge, when applied to, to inquire into the cause of his
detention, and set him at liberty if he is unjustly detained.
The provision which declares that a man should not be deprived
of his property without due process of law would be of little
value were it not for the practical provision which imposes on
specific officers the duty of nullifying every attempt to take
away a man’s property without due process of law.
"To find practical definite methods by which you shall make it
somebody’s duty to see that the great principles you declare
are not violated, by which if an attempt be made to violate
them the responsibility may be fixed upon the guilty
individual—those, in my judgment, are the problems to which
you should specifically and most earnestly address
yourselves."
The address of Secretary Root was followed by one of excellent
counsel from the Mexican Ambassador, and a reply to both was
made, on behalf of the Conference, by Señor Don Luis Anderson,
Minister of Foreign Affairs of Costa Rica. The Conference then
elected its officers, choosing Minister Anderson for its
President, and proceeded to the transaction of business.
Fourteen sessions were held between November 14 and December
20, resulting from which eight conventions were agreed to and
signed on the latter date. These conventions are:
General Treaty of Peace and Amity;
Additional Convention to the General Treaty;
Establishing a Central American Court of Justice;
Extradition;
On Future Conferences (Monetary);
On Communications;
Establishing an International Central American Bureau;
and Establishing a Pedagogical Institute.
The essential provisions of the General Treaty of Peace and
Amity are in the following articles:
"ARTICLE I.
The Republics of Central America consider as one of their
first duties in their mutual relations, the maintenance of
peace; and they bind themselves to always preserve the most
complete harmony, and decide every difference or difficulty
that may arise amongst them, of whatsoever nature it may be,
by means of the Central American Court of Justice, created by
the Convention which they have concluded for that purpose on
this date."
"Article III.
Bearing in mind the central geographical position of Honduras
and the facilities which this circumstance has afforded in
order that its territory should have been most often the
theatre of Central American conflicts, Honduras declares from
now on its absolute neutrality in any event of conflict
amongst the other Republics; and the latter, in their turn,
provided such neutrality be observed, bind themselves to
respect it and in no case to violate the Honduranean
territory.
"ARTICLE IV.
Bearing in mind the advantages which must be gained from the
creation of Central American institutions for the development
of their most vital interests, besides the Pedagogical
Institute and the International Central American Bureau which
have been established according to the Conventions celebrated
to that end by this Conference, the creation of a practical
Agricultural School in the Republic of Salvador, one of Mines
and Mechanics in that of Honduras, and another of Arts and
Trades in that of Nicaragua, is especially recommended to the
Governments.
"ARTICLE V.
In order to cultivate the relations between the States, the
contracting parties obligate themselves each to accredit to
the others a permanent Legation.
"ARTICLE VI.
The citizens of one of the contracting parties, residing in
the territory of any of the others, shall enjoy the same civil
rights as nationals, and shall be considered as citizens in
the country of their residence if they fulfill the conditions
which the respective constituent laws provide. Those that are
not naturalized shall be exempt from obligatory military
service, either by sea or land, and from every forced loan or
military requirement, and they shall not be obliged on any
account to make more contributions or ordinary or
extraordinary imposts than those which nationals pay."
"ARTICLE X.
The Governments of the contracting Republics bind themselves
to respect the inviolability of the right of asylum aboard the
merchant vessels of whatsoever nationality anchored in their
ports. Therefore, only persons accused of common crimes and by
order of the competent judge, after due legal procedure, can
be taken from them. Those prosecuted on account of political
crimes or common crimes in connection with political ones, can
only be taken therefrom in case they have embarked in a port
of the State which claims them, whilst they may remain in its
jurisdictional waters, and after the requirements hereinbefore
exacted in the case of common crime have been fulfilled."
"ARTICLE XIV.
Public instruments executed in one of the contracting
Republics shall be valid in the others, provided they shall
have been properly authenticated and in their execution the
laws of the Republic whence they proceed shall have been
observed."
"ARTICLE XVI.
Desiring to prevent one of the most frequent causes of
disturbances in the Republics, the contracting Governments
shall not permit the head men or principal chiefs of political
emigrations, nor agents thereof, to reside in the departments
fronting on the countries whose peace they might disturb.
"Those who may have been actually established in a permanent
manner in a frontier department shall be able to remain in the
place of their residence under the immediate surveillance of
the Governments affording them an asylum, but from the moment
when they become a menace to public order they shall be
included in the rule of the preceding paragraph.
"ARTICLE XVII.
Every person, no matter what his nationality, who, within the
territory of one of the contracting parties, shall initiate or
foster revolutionary movements against any of the others,
shall be immediately brought to the capital of the Republic,
where he shall be submitted to trial according to law."
"ARTICLE XIX.
The present Treaty shall remain in force for the term of ten
years counted from the day of the exchange of ratifications.
Nevertheless, if one year before the expiration of said term,
none of the contracting parties shall have given special
notice to the others concerning its intention to terminate it,
it shall remain in force until one year after such
notification may have been made."
{78}
The "Additional Convention to the General Treaty "is in three
articles, as follows:
"ARTICLE I.
The Governments of the High Contracting Parties shall not
recognize any other Government which may come into power in
any of the five Republics as a consequence of a coup d’Etat,
or of a revolution against the recognized Government, so long
as the representatives of the people, freely elected, have not
constitutionally reorganized the country.
"ARTICLE II.
No Government of Central America shall in case of civil war
intervene in favor of or against the Government of the country
where the struggle may take place.
"Article III.
The Governments of Central America, in the first place, are
recommended to endeavor to procure by the means at their
command a constitutional reform in the sense of prohibiting
the reëlection of the President of a Republic, where such
prohibition does not exist, in the second place to adopt all
measures necessary to effect a complete guarantee of the
principle of alternation in power."
The "Convention for the Establishment of a Central American
Court of Justice" contains thirty-eight articles, with a
"Provisional Article" and an "Annexed Article" appended. The
more important provisions are in the following:
"ARTICLE I.
The High Contracting Parties agree by the present Convention
to constitute and maintain a permanent tribunal which shall be
called the ‘Central American Court of Justice,’ to which they
bind themselves to submit all controversies or questions which
may arise among them, of whatsoever nature and no matter what
their origin may be, in case the respective Departments of
Foreign Affairs should not have been able to reach an
understanding.
"ARTICLE II.
This Court shall also take cognizance of the questions which
individuals of one Central American country may raise against
any of the other contracting Governments, because of the
violation of Treaties or Conventions, and other cases of an
international character; no matter whether his own Government
supports said claim or not; and provided that the remedies
which the laws of the respective country provide against such
violation shall have been exhausted and that a denial of
justice shall be shown.
"ARTICLE III.
It shall also take cognizance of the cases which by common
accord contracting Governments may submit to it, no matter
whether they arise between two or more of them or between one
of said Governments and individuals.
[Footnote: After signing the treaties an omission was
discovered in this Article. An additional protocol was
thereupon signed by all the delegates adding to this Article,
and to be considered as an integral part of the Convention,
the following words:
"It shall also have jurisdiction over cases arising between
any of the contracting Governments and individuals, when by
common accord they may have been submitted to it.]
"Article IV.
The Court may likewise take cognizance of the international
questions which by special agreement any one of the Central
American Governments and a foreign Government may have
determined to submit to it.
"ARTICLE V.
The Central American Court of Justice shall sit at the City of
Cartago in the Republic of Costa Rica, but it shall be
authorized to transfer its residence to another point in
Central America when it may deem it proper to do so for
reasons of health, of guaranteeing the exercise of its
functions, or of the personal security of its members.
"ARTICLE VI.
The Central American Court of Justice shall consist of five
Justices named, one from each Republic and selected from among
the jurists who possess the qualifications which the laws of
each country may exact for the exercise of high judicial
functions, and enjoy the highest consideration, not only
because of their moral character but also on account of their
professional ability. The vacancies shall be filled by
substitute Justices, named at the same time and in the same
manner as the regular ones and who shall unite the same
qualifications as the former. The attendance of the five
Justices who constitute the Tribunal is indispensable in order
to have a legal quorum in the judgments of the Court.
"ARTICLE VII.
The legislative power of each one of the five contracting
Republics shall name one regular and two substitutes as their
respective Justices. The salary of each Justice shall be eight
thousand dollars, gold, per annum, which shall be paid by the
Treasury of the Court. The salary of the Justice of the place
where the Court resides shall be designated by the respective
Government. Besides, each State shall contribute two thousand
dollars, gold, annually for the ordinary and extraordinary
expenses of the Tribunal. The Governments of the contracting
Republics bind themselves to include their respective
contributions in their budgets of expenses and to remit
quarterly in advance to the Treasury of the Court the
proportion which corresponds to them on account of such
expenditures."
"ARTICLE XIII.
The Central American Court of Justice represents the national
conscience of Central America, wherefore the Justices who
compose the Tribunal shall not consider themselves prohibited
from the exercise of their functions because of the interest
which the Republics, whence they derive their appointment, may
have in any case or question. With regard to implications and
challenges, the rules of procedure which the Court may fix
shall make proper provision."
"ARTICLE XXII.
The Court is authorized to determine its jurisdiction,
interpreting the Treaties and Conventions germane to the
matter in dispute, applying the principles of international
law.
"ARTICLE XXIII.
Every final or interlocutory decision shall be rendered in
accordance with the agreement of at least three of the
Justices of the Court. In case of disagreement, one of the
substitute Justices shall be chosen by lot, and if still a
majority of three be not obtained other Justices shall
continue to be chosen by lot until three votes in the same
sense shall have been obtained.
"ARTICLE XXIV.
The decisions must be in writing and shall contain a statement
of the reasons upon which they are based. They must be signed
by all the Justices of the Court and countersigned by the
Secretary. Once they have been published they cannot be
altered on any account; but, at the request of any of the
parties, the Tribunal may decide the interpretation which must
be given to its judgment.
{79}
"Article XXV.
The judgments of the Court shall be communicated to the five
Governments of the Contracting Republics. The interested
parties solemnly bind themselves to submit to said judgment;
and they all agree to lend every moral support that may be
necessary in order that they may be properly fulfilled, in
this manner constituting a real and positive guarantee of
respect for this Convention and for the Central American Court
of Justice."
"Article XXVII.
The High Contracting Parties solemnly declare that for no
motive nor in any case will they consider the present
Convention as lapsed; and that, therefore, they will consider
it as being always in force during the term of ten years
counted from last ratification. In the event that the
political entity of one or more of the Contracting Republics
is changed or altered, the attributes of the Central American
Court of Justice created by this Convention shall be suspended
ipso facto; and a conference to adjust the constitution
of said Court and the new order of things shall be forthwith
convoked by the respective Governments; in case they do not
unanimously agree the present Convention shall be considered
as rescinded."
"PROVISIONARY ARTICLE.
As a recommendation of the five Delegations an Article is
annexed which contains an amplification of the Central
American Court of Justice, in order that the Legislatures that
may deem it proper may see fit to include it upon ratifying
this Convention."
"ANNEXED ARTICLE.
The Central American Court of Justice shall also have
jurisdiction over the conflicts which may arise between the
Legislative, Executive and Judicial Powers, and when as a
matter of fact the judicial decisions and congressional
resolutions are not respected."
CENTRAL AMERICA: A. D. 1908.
Inauguration of the Central American Court of Justice.
Gift of a building for its use by Mr. Carnegie.
The Central American Court of Justice, contemplated in the
treaty of 1907, quoted above, was formally instituted, at
Cartago, Costa Rica, with appropriate ceremony, in the last
week of May, 1908. The Honorable William I. Buchanan, in
attendance as Commissioner from the United States, added
interest to the occasion by announcing the proffer of a gift
of $100,000 by Mr. Andrew Carnegie, for the erection of a
building to be dedicated to the exclusive use of the Court.
CENTRAL AMERICA: A. D. 1909.
Financial undertakings in New York.
Honduras, Costa Rica, and Guatemala.
In the summer of 1909 various financial undertakings by great
banking houses in New York were announced, involving some
handling of the debts of Honduras, Costa Rica, and Guatemala.
It was thought that these operations were in line with efforts
of the State Department at Washington and the Bureau of
American Republics to bring about the establishment of a chain
of American banking houses in the Latin-American countries,
for the advancement of American trade and the promotion of
more intimate Pan-American relations.
CENTRAL AMERICA: A. D. 1909.
Nicaragua.
Establishment of a colony of Sioux Indians from
the United States.
A dispatch to the Press from Boston, November 17, 1909, made
the following statement:
"To save the remnant of the Sioux tribe of Indians from
extinction by consumption and other diseases, a colony of the
Indians will be established in Nicaragua early in the new
year. Chief Little Bison, a full-blooded Sioux, sailed from
Boston on the steamship Esparta to-day for Nicaragua, where he
will receive the deeds to 16,000 acres of land granted by the
Nicaraguan government for the establishment of the colony. The
project is supported financially by F. S. Dellenbaugh, head of
the American Geographical Society, and several wealthy New
York people. The emigration of the Indians is expected to
begin in January."
CENTRAL AMERICA: A. D. 1909.
President Zelaya a menace to peace.
His conduct trying the patience of the United States.
In the early spring of 1909 the disturbing attitude and
conduct of the Nicaraguan President, Zelaya, not only towards
his near neighbors of Salvador and Honduras, but also in the
relations of his Government with that of the United States,
had caused the latter to enter again into consultation with
the Mexican Government, as to joint action to preserve peace.
For some years the United States had been trying to bring
about the settlement of a claim against the Nicaraguan
Government preferred by an American company. This Emery claim,
as it was known, arose in connection with a concession granted
in 1898 for cutting and exporting mahogany. The concession
provided that any differences which should arise between the
Government and the company should be arbitrated by a tribunal
of three members, one to be selected by the Government, one by
the company, and the third by these two arbitrators. In 1903
an accusation of smuggling was brought against the company,
and the questions raised were submitted to the stipulated
tribunal. This decided that, inasmuch as the company had paid
taxes to the Government three years in advance, amounting to
$30,000, the concession could not be annulled, as President
Zelaya wished to have done. Nevertheless Zelaya declared it
annulled, and caused proceedings to be instituted for stopping
the company’s exportations. This led the American Government
to interpose. Under instructions from Washington, its Minister
at Managua, Mr. Merry, addressed the following note to the
Nicaraguan Minister of Foreign Affairs, December 15, 1906:
"I have the honor to inform you that I have received
instructions from my Government to make an urgent and firm
request that your Excellency’s Government will settle the
Emery company controversy by an international arbitration, and
that until a decision has been given thereby, your
Excellency’s Government will restore to the Emery company all
its property, dismissing all legal prosecutions in the case,
and permitting the company to resume its work under its
concession, as if no controversy had arisen."
This communication secured a promise of the desired
international arbitration, and the stopping meantime of
proceedings of interference with the company’s business. But
when the protocol of arbitration was to be drawn the
Nicaraguan Government refused to have any question of damages
to the company included. On this contention the settlement was
blocked for more than two years, and the patience of the
Washington Government was about worn out. In just what
wrappings of diplomatic language it made that fact apparent
has not yet been disclosed to the public; but evidently the
understanding of Señor Zelaya was duly penetrated.
{80}
On the 26th of May last (1909) his representative at
Washington signed a protocol which provided that the questions
at issue between the Government of Nicaragua and the Emery
Company should be submitted to arbitration, unless the parties
could make their own settlement within four months.
This, however, did not end troubles with Nicaragua,—or,
rather, with its presidential dictator. Revolutionary attempts
in the republic to unseat him gave rise to new offenses on his
part against the United States, which President Taft, in his
Message to Congress, December 6, 1909, recounted as follows:
"Since the Washington conventions of 1907 were communicated to
the government of the United States as a consulting and
advising party, this government has been almost continuously
called upon by one or another, and in turn by all of the five
Central American republics, to exert itself for the
maintenance of the conventions. Nearly every complaint has
been against the Zelaya government of Nicaragua, which has
kept Central America in constant tension or turmoil. The
responses made to the representations of Central American
republics, as due from the United States on account of its
relation to the Washington conventions, have been at all times
conservative and have avoided, so far as possible, any
semblance of interference, although it is very apparent that
the considerations of geographic proximity to the Canal Zone
and of the very substantial American interests in Central
America give to the United States a special position in the
zone of these republics and the Caribbean Sea.
"I need not rehearse here the patient efforts of this
government to promote peace and welfare among these republics,
efforts which are fully appreciated by the majority of them
who are loyal to their true interests. It would be no less
unnecessary to rehearse here the sad tale of unspeakable
barbarities and oppression alleged to have been committed by
the Zelaya government. Recently two Americans were put to
death by order of President Zelaya himself. They were officers
in the organized forces of a revolution which had continued
many weeks and was in control of about half of the republic,
and as such, according to the modern enlightened practice of
civilized nations, they were entitled to be dealt with as
prisoners of war.
"At the date when this message is printed this government has
terminated diplomatic relations with the Zelaya government,
for reasons made public in a communication to the former
Nicaraguan chargé d’affaires, and is intending to take such
future steps as may be found most consistent with its dignity,
its duty to American interests, and its moral obligations to
Central America and to civilization. It may be necessary for
me to bring this subject to the attention of the Congress in a
special message."
Some days previous to the date of the President’s Message, the
Secretary of State, Mr. Knox, had addressed a letter of
extreme severity to the Nicaraguan Chargé d’Affaires at
Washington, Mr. Rodriguez, reviewing the conduct of the
Nicaraguan Government, and saying: "In these circumstances the
President no longer feels for the government of President
Zelaya that respect and confidence which would make it
appropriate hereafter to maintain with it regular diplomatic
relations, implying the will and the ability to respect and
assure what is due from one State to another." The conclusion
of the letter was as follows: "To insure the future protection
of legitimate American interests, in consideration of the
interests of the majority of the Central American republics,
and in the hope of making more effective the friendly offices
exerted under the Washington conventions, the government of
the United States reserves for further consideration at the
proper time the question of stipulating also that the
constitutional government of Nicaragua obligate itself by
convention for the benefit of all the governments concerned as
a guarantee for its future loyal support of the Washington
conventions and their peaceful and progressive aims.
"From the foregoing it will be apparent to you that your
office of charge d’affaires is at an end. I have the honor to
enclose your passports for use in case you desire to leave
tins country. I would add at the same time that, although your
diplomatic quality is terminated, I shall be happy to receive
you as I shall be happy to receive the representative of the
revolution, each as the unofficial channel of communication
between the government of the United States and the de facto
authorities to whom I look for the protection of American
interests pending the establishment in Nicaragua of a
government with which the United States can maintain
diplomatic relations."
President Zelaya at once protested against this arraignment,
telegraphing to Secretary Knox that his sources of information
had been prejudiced, and asking that the United States send a
commission of investigation, proposing to resign if his
administration was shown to be detrimental to Nicaragua.
Receiving no reply, he resigned the presidency of Nicaragua on
the 16th of December, announcing the fact by cable to
President Taft in these words:
"To avoid harm to my country, and desiring that it shall renew
friendly relations with the United States, I have to-day sent
my resignation to Congress. As my opponents consider my
presence a disturbing factor, I propose to show my good faith
by leaving Nicaragua. I stand ready to account for my acts."
The vacant presidential office was filled by the Congress of
Nicaragua, which elected Dr. Madriz, the choice having been
dictated, it was believed, by Zelaya. The revolutionists with
whom Zelaya had been contending since October, and who had, on
their part, elected and proclaimed their leader, General Juan
Estrada, Provisional President of Nicaragua, refused to
recognize this Congressional election, and continued, against
the government of Madriz, the revolt they had organized
against Zelaya, determined to secure for Estrada the power to
order a presidential election by the people.
On Christmas Eve Zelaya left Nicaragua for Mexico, being
conveyed by a Mexican gunboat from Corinto to Salina Cruz. A
few weeks later he migrated to Europe and is understood to
have taken up his residence in Belgium.
The revolt led by General Estrada is still in progress at the
time this writing goes into print (early in March, 1910), but
the latest reports do not warrant expectations of its success.
----------CENTRAL AMERICA: End--------
{81}
CENTRAL AMERICAN REPUBLICS.
See, (in this Volume) also,
AMERICAN REPUBLICS.
CENTRAL BANK QUESTION.
See (in this Volume)
FINANCE AND TRADE: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1909-1910.
CENTRO CATOLICO.
See (in this Volume)
PHILIPPINE ISLANDS: A. D. 1907.
CHAFFEE, Major-General Adna R.:
Military Governor of the Philippines.
See (in this Volume)
PHILIPPINE ISLANDS: A. D. 1901.
CHAFIN, Eugene W.:
Nominated for President of the United States.
See (in this Volume)
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1908 (APRIL-NOVEMBER).
CHAMBERLAIN, Austen:
Postmaster-General in the English Ministry.
See (in this Volume)
ENGLAND: A. D. 1902 (JULY).
CHAMBERLAIN, Joseph:
Address at opening of Colonial Conference of 1902.
See (in this Volume)
BRITISH EMPIRE.
CHAMBERLAIN, Joseph:
On a State-rights question in Australia.
See (in this Volume)
AUSTRALIA: A. D. 1902.
CHAMBERLAIN, Joseph:
Declaration for Preferential Trade with the Colonies.
His resignation from the Cabinet.
See (in this Volume)
ENGLAND: A. D. 1903 (MAY-SEPTEMBER).
CHAMBERLAIN, Joseph:
Visit to South Africa.
Views on the Labor question.
See (in this Volume)
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1903-1904.
CHAMPLAIN TERCENTENARY CELEBRATION.
See (in this Volume)
NEW YORK STATE: A. D. 1909.
CHANG CHIH-TUNG:
Measures as viceroy to check the use of opium.
See (in this Volume)
OPIUM PROBLEM.
CHANTABUN:
Restored to Siam.
See (in this Volume)
SIAM: A. D. 1902.
CHANUTE, OCTAVE.
See (in this Volume)
SCIENCE AND INVENTION, RECENT: AERONAUTICS.
CHARITIES.
See (in this Volume)
POVERTY, PROBLEMS OF; SOCIAL BETTERMENT; and
CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW.
CHARLES I., King of Roumania.
What he has done for his kingdom.
See (in this Volume)
BALKAN AND DANUBIAN STATES: ROUMANIA.
CHARLES, Prince, of Denmark:
Election to the Norwegian Throne.
Assumes the name of Haakon VII.
See (in this Volume)
NORWAY: A. D. 1902-1905.
CHARLESTON: A. D. 1901.
The "South Carolina and Interstate and West Indian
Exposition."
Under this name, a very beautiful and successful exhibit of
the progress of Southern industry and art, and of the
possibilities of West Indian and Spanish-American trade, was
opened at Charleston on the 1st of December, 1901. The site of
the exposition was a tract of one hundred and sixty acres of
ground, only two and a half miles from the business section of
the city, embracing the famous old Lowndes estate, with its
historic mansion, which the present owner permitted to be used
as the Women’s Building of the occasion. Fine taste and a high
public spirit entered into the making of this very interesting
Fair.
CHARTREUX MONKS.
See (in this Volume)
FRANCE: A. D. 1904 (June-July).
CHEMULPHO.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1904 (FEBRUARY-JULY) and (FEBRUARY-AUGUST).
CHICAGO: A. D. 1896-1909.
Institution and work of the Municipal Voters’ League.
See (in this Volume)
MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT: CHICAGO.
CHICAGO: A. D. 1899.
Institution of the first Juvenile Court.
See (in this Volume)
CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW: AS OFFENDERS.
CHICAGO: A. D. 1903.
The burning of the Iroquois Theater.
Chicago has now two of the most painful memories of fire that
are in the past of any city. The second was added on the
afternoon of December 30, 1903, when 588 people perished in
the burning of the Iroquois Theater. The audience was made up
principally of women and children, many of whom belonged to
prominent families. The whole city was plunged in grief, and
the whole world shared in the sorrow and manifested its
sympathy. The theater was a new one, and was regarded as the
best of any in the city in its method of construction. But
inquiry soon proved that it was defective in its provisions
for safety. Further examination, moreover, showed a similar
condition in other places of assembly, with the result that
all the theaters, with many churches and halls in Chicago,
were closed by order of the mayor, pending their compliance
with certain provisions of the law.
CHICAGO: A. D. 1905.
Strike of the Teamsters’ Union.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1905 (APRIL-JULY).
CHICAGO: A. D. 1905-1908.
Struggle for a better charter.
See (in this Volume)
MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT.
CHICAGO: A. D. 1906.
Packing-House Investigation.
See (in this Volume)
Public Health: PURE FOOD LAWS: UNITED STATES.
CHICAGO: A. D. 1907.
National Conference on Trusts.
See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1907.
CHICAGO: A. D. 1909.
Population, and race mixture.
The City Statistician of Chicago, in his manual for 1909,
gives the number of the inhabitants of the city as 2,572,835,
of whom 699,554 are Americans or persons whose parents are not
foreign born. The Germans rank second, with a population of
563,708; the Irish third, with a population of 240,560. Next
come the Poles, with 173,409; the Swedes, with 143,307; the
Russians, with 123,238; the Bohemians, with 116,549. Thirty
other foreign countries given are all below the 100,000 mark.
The Chinese population is given as 1,801, the Japanese as 257.
The Albanians are the lowest, with a population of 39.
CHICAGO: A. D. 1909.
"The Chicago Plan."
Systematizing the future development.
"Early in 1906 the Merchants’ Club, comprising a group of the
younger business and professional men of the city, arranged
for the preparation of a complete project for the future
development of Chicago. The next year the Merchants’ Club was
merged with the Commercial Club under the name of the latter
organization, and the city-planning work was continued under
the auspices of that body." The resulting "Plan of Chicago"
was reported in the course of the summer of 1909. "The report
represents about thirty months’ work by men whose thoughts for
years have dwelt upon the subject of city building and
beautification. The work was in charge of Daniel H. Burnham,
chief architect and director of works of the World’s Columbian
Exposition of 1893, who gave his services to his city without
compensation for the purpose of this report. Even so, the
expense of preparing and publishing the report has
approximated $75,000, all raised by voluntary subscriptions
from the business men of Chicago."
George C. Sikes,
The New Chicago
(The Outlook, August 28, 1909).
{82}
CHICAGO: A. D. 1909 (May).
The Second National Peace Congress.
See (in this Volume)
WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1909.
CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE AND ST. PAUL TRANSCONTINENTAL LINE.
See (in this Volume)
RAILWAYS: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1909.
CHI-KUAN-SHAN, Fort, Capture of.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1904-1905 (MAY-JANUARY).
----------CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW: Start--------
CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW:
As Dependents:
England: The Poor Law Children.
The following is from a speech in Parliament June 17, 1909, by
Mr. John Burns, President of the Local Government Board, which
administers the Poor Laws and the Public Health Laws:
"In England and Wales there were 235,000 children supported by
the rates either inside or outside Poor Law institutions, and
of these 70,000 were in cottage homes, barrack schools,
scattered homes, and similar institutions. The cost per child
maintained in cottage homes varied from 12s. 9d. to 25s. 2d.
per week, and in scattered homes from 8s. 6d. to 11s. 2d. At
this moment the number of children in workhouse schools, which
in 1870 was 29,000, was only from 500 to 600; 19,000 of the
Poor Law children were being educated in elementary schools
outside. … With regard to sick children he was delighted to
hear the almost unanimous chorus of appeal that the Local
Government Board should do a great deal by administration.
They had, in fact, transferred 1,000 out of the 2,500 sick
children from the London workhouses and infirmaries to an
institution on the healthy and breezy downs of Surrey at
Carshalton, where they could be better treated, and where they
would recover much more quickly than in any of the workhouses
and infirmaries in London. If he could find more buildings or
institutions available he would transfer more children. He
should not rest until all the sick children throughout the
country were transferred from workhouses and infirmaries to
institutions in the country where they would recover health
more rapidly."
CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW:
United States: Proposed Federal Child Bureau.
Transmitting to Congress, on the 5th of February, 1909, the
proceedings of a conference held at Washington on the care of
dependent children, President Roosevelt accompanied it with a
message, in which he urged the establishment of a Bureau in
one of the Departments of the Federal Government, to
centralize attention to the subject; with the enactment of
such legislation as will bring the laws and practices in
regard to the care of dependent children in all Federal
territory into harmony, and certain legislation in behalf of
dependent children in the District of Columbia. The President
maintained that such legislation is important not only for the
welfare of the children immediately concerned, but "as setting
an example of a high standard of child protection by the
National Government to the several States of the Union, which
should be able to look to the nation for leadership in such
matters."
Statistics showing the large number of dependent children in
the country were presented by Mr. Roosevelt. "Each of these
children, he said, represents either a potential addition to
the productive capacity and the enlightened citizenship of the
nation, or, if allowed to suffer from neglect, a potential
addition to the destructive forces of the community. The ranks
of criminals and other enemies of society are recruited in an
altogether undue proportion from children bereft of their
natural homes and left without sufficient care. The interests
of the nation are involved in the welfare of this army of
children no less than in our great material affairs."
In urging a Children’s Bureau, one of whose duties will be to
investigate and report upon all matters pertaining to the
welfare of children and child life, the President pointed out
that "the National Government is the only agency which can
effectively conduct such general inquiries as are needed for
the benefit of all our citizens."
CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW:
As Dependents and as Offenders:
England: The Children Act of 1908.
Infant Life Protection.
Reformatory and Industrial Schools.
Treatment of Youthful Criminals.
No death-sentence for them.
Special "Places of Detention."
Juvenile Courts.
An act entitled The Children Act, passed by the Parliament of
the United Kingdom in December, 1908, and which came into
effect April 1, 1909, has such importance that it has been
described as "The Children’s Charter." According to its full
title it is "An Act to consolidate and amend the Law relating
to the Protection of Children and Young Persons, Reformatory
and Industrial Schools and Juvenile Offenders, and otherwise
to amend the Law with respect to Children and Young Persons."
It gathers into one great enactment nearly everything in which
the guardianship of Law can be specially extended to them,
except the matters of education and child labor, which are
subjects of distinct legislation. It repeals wholly twenty-one
previous enactments and amends more or less seventeen more. It
contains 134 sections and fills a so-called Parliamentary
"White Book" of 93 pages.
As used in the Act, the word "child" means a person under 14
years; the expression "young person" means one above that age,
but under sixteen.
The Act is divided into six parts, which are concerned with
the following main subjects:
(1) Infant Life Protection.
(2) The Prevention of Cruelty to Children and Young Persons.
(3) Juvenile Smoking.
(4) Reformatory and Industrial Schools.
(5) Juvenile Offenders.
(6) Miscellaneous and General.
The provisions for "infant life protection" have to do mainly
with the supervision of "baby-farming." Foster parents are
forbidden to insure the life of a nurse-child and insurance
companies are forbidden to accept any such insurance.
Juvenile smoking is dealt with very drastically, the penalties
for selling cigarettes or the material for making them to
persons under sixteen years of age being sharp, and both
policemen and park-keepers in uniform being empowered to take
such materials from the persons of Juvenile smokers.
{83}
The part of the Act which relates to reformatory and
industrial schools enables the Courts to deal effectively with
youthful offenders without subjecting them to the prison
taint. Boys or girls between the ages of 12 and 16 who are
convicted of offences punishable in the case of adults with
penal servitude or imprisonment may be sent to a certified
reformatory school. In certain defined cases, children may be
taken from depraved or drunken parents and consigned to a
certified industrial school. In these cases the child may be
brought before the Court by any person in order that the
provisions of the Act may be set in force. Parents who are
unable to control their children may themselves take advantage
of the Act, and in these cases the Court may place the
children under the supervision of a probation officer instead
of sending them to an industrial school. In all cases of
children who are liable to be consigned to an industrial
school, there is given to the Courts the alternative power of

committing them to the care of relatives or other fit persons
with or without the supervision of the probation officer.
The most important part of the Act, perhaps, is that relating
to juvenile offenders. It allows no young person under sixteen
years of age to be sentenced to death. "Sentence of death,"
says this Law, "shall not be pronounced on or recorded against
a child or young person, but in lieu thereof the Court shall
sentence the child or young person to be detained during his
Majesty’s pleasure."
In future, also, no child may be sentenced to imprisonment or
penal servitude for any offence, or committed to prison in
default of payment of a fine, damages, or costs. No young
person may be sentenced to penal servitude for any offence,
nor may he be sentenced to imprisonment or committed to prison
in default of payment of a fine or costs, unless the Court
certifies that he is of so unruly a character or so depraved
that it is not desirable to send him to a "place of detention"
provided under the Act. These provisions relating to the
substitution of "detention" for imprisonment did not come into
force until January 1, 1910.
This part of the Act makes elaborate arrangements for the
treatment of youthful criminals, both before and after trial.
Special "places of detention" are to be opened in all petty
sessional divisions. Here children will be placed on arrest
(if for some special reason they cannot be released on a
recognizance), or after being remanded or committed for trial.
Here they may be kept in custody instead of being lodged in
gaol if they are sentenced to terms of imprisonment of less
than one month. Persons under 16 years of age must also be
tried in special "juvenile Courts," unless they are charged
jointly with adult offenders. A "juvenile Court" must sit
"either in a different building or room from that in which the
ordinary sittings of the Court are held, or on different days
or at different times from those at which the ordinary
sittings are held." Only the Court officials, those directly
interested in the case, and the representatives of the Press
may be admitted to these Courts, unless the special leave of
the magistrate is obtained. Every effort is to be made, both
before and after trial, to prevent the association of children
with adult criminals. Finally, parents and guardians are to be
required to attend the hearing of charges against their
children or wards, and may be ordered to pay any fines,
damages, or costs imposed.
The miscellaneous provisions of the Act include a number of
importance, to prevent the giving of intoxicating liquors to
children, to exclude them from drinking places, to safeguard
them at entertainments, and to make the Act applicable to
Scotland and Ireland.
CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW: As Offenders:
Canadian provision for Separate Detention,
Reformatory Imprisonment, etc.
The Canadian Prisons and Reformatory Act of 1906 provides
that—"Young persons apparently under the age of sixteen years
who are,
(a) arrested upon any warrant; or,
(b) committed to custody at any stage of a preliminary inquiry
into a charge for an indictable offence; or,
(c) committed to custody at any stage of a trial, either for
an indictable offence or for an offence punishable on summary
conviction; or,
(d) committed to custody after such trial, but before
imprisonment under sentence;
shall be kept in custody separate from older persons charged
with criminal offences and separate from all persons
undergoing sentences of imprisonment, and shall not be
confined in the lock-ups or police stations with older persons
charged with criminal offences or with ordinary criminals."
Other sections of the Act confer discretionary authority on
courts and magistrates to sentence convicted offenders whose
age does not exceed sixteen years, and whose offence is
punishable by imprisonment, to reformatory prisons, for not
less than two nor more than five years; also, in certain
cases, to commit such offenders to a certified industrial
school, from which they may sometimes be permitted to be taken
for apprenticeship to any respectable and trustworthy person.
CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW:
The George Junior Republic.
Much attention has been turned from many directions, within
the last few years, upon the reformatory experiment which
bears the name of The George Junior Republic. From an ordinary
undertaking to give a few summer weeks of country fresh air to
a group of neglected, roughly-bred boys, out of the slums of
the City of New York, it has grown into a unique institution,
which remolds character and refashions life for hundreds of
the young of both sexes, who had been given wrong startings in
the world by the circumstances into which they were born. It
has done this by the simple method of organizing them into a
self-governing community,—a republic in which they are
citizens, invested with all the responsibilities, duties, and
cares that go with republican citizenship in its larger
spheres. They make and administer its laws, conduct its public
business and its politics, manage its institutions, generate
and have experience of its public opinion. The moral and
social influence of this training has now been proved by more
than a decade of success.
This remarkable organization was not framed up by its
architect, Mr. William R. George, on the lines of a
preconceived theory, but took its shape slowly from
suggestions of experience as they came.
{84}
He began in 1890 to take companies of boys of the hoodlum
class from New York City to his place of summer residence, at
Freeville, a few miles from Ithaca and not far from Auburn,
New York. He found it hard to rule them, and no satisfactory
corrections of wrong-doing and bad behavior could be devised.
Physically they were bettered by their summer outings, but he
could not see much gain in other ways. This continued for some
seasons before his experiments with them began. The first to
be applied was a rule that such articles of clothing and the
like as had formerly been given to the boys must be paid for
in work. At the outset they resented the idea; but before the
summer was over they were all cheerfully at work, and the tone
of the party was much improved. In the next year culprits, who
robbed orchards and committed other misdemeanors, were
arraigned before the whole community, for a hearing and a
public verdict as to their guilt. Hard labor at stone-breaking
and the building of a road now became the penalty for
wrong-doing, and, presently, there was a boy constable to see
that they did their work.
So, step by step, from year to year, the fabric of
self-government and self-supporting industry was constructed,
until the Junior Republic emerged, with its President and
other executive officers, its representative legislature, its
courts, its police, its own monetary system and bank,—a
political and industrial commonwealth of boys and girls (for
both sexes have been included), taken out of a derelict class
for treatment by this simple inoculation with social
responsibilities. Writing of the George Junior Republic in
1908, Dr. Lyman Abbott said:
"It now has as a territory a hundred and fifty acres of land
owned by the Board of Trustees, and the practical use of a
hundred and fifty more belonging to Mr. George and some other
friends of the Republic who have made their home here because
such residence affords them an opportunity to give guidance
and inspiration to the boys and girls. The citizens, i. e. the
boys and girls in the Republic, number upwards of a hundred
and fifty. They are in some cases signed over to the Republic
by the parents, in other cases practically committed on
suspended sentences by the courts. They are extraordinarily
free within the territory, but are not free to leave it.
Laundry, baking, carpentry, and printing are the principal
trades indoors; road-making and land improvement the principal
industries out-of-doors. There are two jails, one for the
boys, one for the girls; a library, a school-house, a chapel,
bank, and a well-organized banking and currency system. There
is a court, and there is a judge, who is elected every year by
the citizens. From this court an appeal lies in certain cases
to a Supreme Court chosen by the boys from the Board of
Trustees, but this court only passes on the regularity of the
proceedings in the court below, that is, on what might be
regarded as equivalent to constitutional and jurisdictional
questions. There are a President, a Vice-President, a
Secretary of State, and a Secretary of the Treasury, all of
whom are elected annually; the three latter officers
constituting the Police Commissioners, the Board of Health,
and the President’s Cabinet. There are both a girl and a boy
District Attorney, who are appointed by the President, and
certain police officers and prison keepers. All citizens of
the Republic, both boys and girls, over fourteen years of age,
are voters; no one can remain a citizen after twenty-one. The
legislature has been abolished by the citizens themselves, and
all laws are made in town meeting, which is held once a month.
…
"The Republic has been in existence long enough to give the
experiment a fair trial, and the results justify the
expectations of its friends. In round numbers, about five
hundred have gone out from the Republic into life, most of
them taken from the class of boys and girls whose environment
was fruitful of crime and whose tendency was toward a criminal
career. Of these five hundred two or three are known to have
returned to crime, and five or six have disappeared entirely.
But of these eight or ten failures not one was in the Republic
more than a few months—not long enough to get the benefit of
the training. The other four hundred and ninety are known to
be earning an honest livelihood by honorable labor; and of
these four hundred and ninety, twenty have either graduated
from college, are now in college, or are just preparing to
enter college. At this writing two new Republics are about
being organized, one in Georgia and one in California, and a
movement is on foot for the organization of a National
Association."
Some months later than the above account of the Junior
Republic there were reported to be kindred organizations
modelled upon it in Connecticut and Maryland, with movements
to the same end in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and New
Jersey, as well as in some countries abroad. Mr. Thomas M.
Osborne, of Auburn, who has been from an early day the chief
supporter of Mr. George in his work, said recently in a
published letter:
"I believe that the success of the Junior Republic idea, as we
have worked it out during the last fourteen years, is no
longer dependent upon Mr. George, its originator, or upon any
one man. Its established principles will now live on into the
far future, and work the sure righting of thousands of
youngsters gone wrong in every section of the greater
republic."
But it may work much more than "the sure righting of thousands
of youngsters gone wrong." It may, if its working widens and
roots itself among the institutions of the future, as it seems
likely to do, have a very potent and positive political
influence in the world. If men and women representative of a
class that is now troublesome to democracy, politically as
well as otherwise, should by and by be brought in large
numbers yearly from graduation in the Young Republic training
schools of imitative citizenship, to be joined with their
elders in larger spheres of more entire self-government, are
they not likely to introduce a profounder change in the
operation of republican institutions than can now be foreseen?
CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW: Juvenile Courts.
Their origin and development.
A collection of reports on "Children’s Courts in the United
States," prepared for the International Prison Commission and
edited by Mr. Samuel J. Barrows, Commissioner for the United
States, was published in 1904 as House Document No. 701 of the
58th Congress, 2d Session. The following account of the origin
of the now widely established Juvenile Courts of America and
Europe, and of their development in the United States during
the first four years of their existence, is derived from those
reports.
{85}
Commissioner Barrows opens his introduction to the collected
reports with the following remarks:
"If the question be asked, 'What is the most notable
development in judicial principles and methods in the United
States within the last five years?’ the answer may
unhesitatingly be, ‘The introduction and establishment of
juvenile courts.’ Never perhaps has any judicial reform made
such rapid progress. Beginning in Chicago in 1899, this
institution has sprung up in city after city and State after
State until it is now established in eight States and eleven
large cities. This progress has been made not merely by
changes in procedure or legal technique, nor by the
introduction of a new method; it is most of all by the
introduction of a new spirit and a new aim. … It must not be
supposed that the juvenile court is only a smaller court for
smaller offenders or simply a court holding separate sessions
for such offenders; it represents an altogether different
principle. The juvenile court is a life-saving institute in
society.
"It is scarcely necessary to say that child-saving methods,
institutions, and organizations have long flourished in the
United States. The Northern States have regarded juvenile
reformatories as a part of their correctional equipment, and
the courts have served as vestibules for such institutions;
but they have only been incidentally a part of the process. We
have not before realized what the court might be and do before
resorting to institutions. The children’s court still
maintains relations with the reform school, but it represents
in itself active and vital forces and invokes a whole range of
influence and motives which are personal and formative. It
appeals to the reform school not as the first, but only as the
last resort. The juvenile court has discovered that the child
is a child, and, as Judge Hurley says, ‘The child should be
treated as a child. Instead of reformation, the thought and
idea in the judge’s mind should always be formation. No child
should be punished for the purpose of making an example of
him.’ …
"The methods of children’s courts, or juvenile courts, as they
are termed in some States, differ in different places. In some
States the judge is detailed from some other court; in some
courts but one judge is assigned to this work. In New York
several judges from the court of special sessions act
successively in turn as judges of the children’s court. In
Maryland and Indiana the judges of the children’s courts
exercise this function only, and it is claimed that it is
better than the method of rotation, since the judge who
confines himself to juvenile court cases becomes a specialist
in this work. In Colorado Judge Lindsey is not only judge of
the juvenile court, but also of the county court. He finds
advantage in the fact that in his first capacity he can
protect the child, while as judge of the county court he can
also sentence the guardian or parent who is responsible for
the child’s delinquency.
"An essential feature of every juvenile court is the probation
system and probation officers. Their duty is to investigate
the case before trial, and, if the child is placed on
probation, to exercise watchcare over them until the period of
probation is closed. It is in this way that the parental care
of the State is exerted."
The City of Chicago and the Legislature of Illinois have the
honors of the origination of the Children’s Court as a
distinct creation of law. The Visitation and Aid Society of
Chicago had been laboring since 1891 to secure various
measures of advanced legislation bearing on child-saving,
without much success, until, as related in a report by Mr.
Hurley, of that Society, the Bar Association of Chicago took
the matter in hand, in 1899, and appointed a committee to
press it. This committee drafted the first juvenile court law
ever planned distinctly to that end and secured its enactment
by the Legislature of the State. The law went into force on
the 1st of July, 1899. The Court was soon opened, and Judge
Tuthill, of the Circuit Court of Illinois, who presided in it
from the first, has stated the principles of its constitution
and action in these following words:
"The basic principle of the law is this: That no child under
16 years of age shall be considered or be treated as a
criminal; that a child under that age shall not be arrested,
indicted, convicted, imprisoned, or punished as a criminal. It
of course recognizes the fact that such children may do acts
which in an older person would be crimes and be properly
punishable by the State therefor, but it provides that a child
under the age mentioned shall not be branded in the opening
years of its life with an indelible stain of criminality, or
be brought, even temporarily, into the companionship of men
and women whose lives are low, vicious, and criminal.
"The law divides children into two classes, the ‘dependent’
and the ‘delinquent.’ A dependent child, in the language of
the law, is a child—‘who for any reason is destitute or
homeless or abandoned, or has not proper parental care or
guardianship, or who habitually begs or receives alms, or who
is found living in any house of ill fame or with any vicious
or disreputable person, or whose home, by reason of neglect,
cruelty, or depravity on the part of the parents, guardian, or
other person in whose care it may be, is an unfit place for
such a child.’ A ‘delinquent child’ is defined to be—‘any
child under the age of 16 who violates any law of this State
or any city or village ordinance, or who is incorrigible, or
who knowingly associates with thieves, vicious, or immoral
persons, or who is growing up in idleness or crime, or who
knowingly frequents a house of ill fame, or who knowingly
patronizes any policy shop or place where any gaming device is
or shall be operated.’
"The law places its enforcement upon the judges of the circuit
court, who are required to select one of their number to
perform these duties as a part of the judicial work of such
judge. … The circuit court is a court of original and
unlimited jurisdiction, the highest in the State, and the duty
of holding the juvenile court was placed in the circuit court
(which for convenience is designated the ‘juvenile court’) as
an indication by the legislature of the importance to the
State of the work to be done.
"The case of each child brought into court, whether dependent
or delinquent, becomes of record, and every step taken in the
case is shown upon the court record."
Interest in the Illinois Law was awakened quickly in many
parts of the country, and requests for copies of it, says Mr.
Hurley in his historical sketch, "began to pour in from all
directions. These requests were promptly answered and copies
of the Juvenile Court Record, published by the Visitation and
Aid Society, containing the necessary information, were sent
to applicants.
{86}
Agitation began in other States for a law similar to the one
passed in Illinois, and those who helped to form the Illinois
law were invited to visit other States to explain the measure
and the method of administering the law in Cook County.
"The Illinois law proved so satisfactory that many judges
throughout the country, not wishing to await the action of a
legislature, established branches in their several courts for
children cases only, and in the treatment of the cases applied
the probate and chancery powers of the court. This was the case
especially in Denver, Colorado, where Judge Ben D. Lindsey had
a complete and well-equipped juvenile court and probation
system before the legislature took any action whatever. A like
court was subsequently adopted in Indianapolis by George W.
Stubbs. The two latter courts were carried on practically in
the same way that they have been since laws were adopted by
these States. In most of the States the probation officers are
volunteers."
Judge Lindsey, of Denver, has won celebrity among the
presiding magistrates of the Juvenile Courts by the kindly
shrewdness of the methods by which he has won the confidence,
the admiration and devotion of the boys and girls of his city,
within the classes with which he has to deal. The scene which
his court-room presents on the appointed days when the
delinquents on probation come in a body to report to him and
to be talked to by him has been often described, and it seems
to exemplify a kind of influence that would go farther than
any other in resistance to the vitiating conditions which
surround masses of the young in all cities. Judge Lindsey’s
extended report of his work and experience in the Denver
Juvenile Court, published in the collection referred to above,
is a paper of remarkable interest.
As stated already, the Juvenile Court is now an established
institution in nearly every part of the United States, and in
many countries abroad. It was established in Great Britain by
the notable "Children Act" of 1908 (see above), and was
instituted that year in several of the German cities. A Press
despatch from Berlin, March 15, 1909, reported the opening of
a congress in that city, under the auspices of the German
Association for the Care of the Young, which aims at the
extension of this important reform. "The labors of the
society," says the despatch, "seem to have been stimulated by
the passing of the English Children Act of 1908, a German
translation of which has been distributed to members of the
congress. The movement for the establishment of special Courts
for juvenile offenders was taken up in Germany later than in
some other countries, but has recently made rapid progress.
The first children’s Courts were established on January 1,
1908, at Cologne, Stuttgart, and Breslau, and there are now 26
such Courts in Prussia. Official statistics, however, indicate
that in recent years the total number of juvenile offenders in
Germany has grown about three times as fast as the total
number of offenders of all ages. During 1906, 55,211 persons
under the age of 18 were sentenced, as compared with 51,232 in
1905 and 49,993 in 1904."
At the meeting of the International Prison Commission, at
Lausanne, Switzerland, in 1907, it was significant of the deep
interest which the children’s court has awakened in Europe
that nineteen societies in France, including the Academy of
Moral and Political Sciences, the General Society of Prisons,
and the faculties of law of Paris, Lille, and Montpellier, and
several of the most prominent tribunals in France, asked to
have the whole subject of the organization of children’s
courts elucidated and discussed. A similar interest was shown
in Switzerland and Germany.
In an extended letter to the London Times, published
August 19, 1909, Miss Florence Davenport-Hill traced the
origin of children’s courts to Massachusetts, and gave the
following account of their introduction from that source of
suggestion into Australia, and thence, to some extent, into
Great Britain. Miss Davenport-Hill’s statements on the subject
are, in part, as follows:
"Although we hear little now from our earliest exemplar,
Massachusetts—possibly because she has, I believe, cleared
away the class to be dealt with—it is desirable to remember it
was she who evolved the then new principle of absolute
separation of child from adult, and devised its potent
supporter, the probation system—a system affording watchful
and kindly help to strong and maybe wilful weaklings. Thus did
Massachusetts become a noble example, making the way plain for
her successors. Mr. Joseph Sturge, attracted early in the
eighties by reports of the ‘plan,’ visited Boston to
investigate its methods. He describes in a pithy narrative
subsequently published how his highest expectations were
fulfilled; and it is interesting to learn from his pen that
‘the probation system by which juvenile offenders are saved
from imprisonment has been so successful, economically and
morally, that the city of Boston now employs a probation agent
to deal with suitable adult cases in a corresponding manner.’
"A copy of Mr. Sturge’s narrative reached, by good fortune,
the Chief Justice of South Australia, then presiding at a
Royal Commission of inquiry concerning adult and juvenile
dependents on the State. He recognized, and in his forthcoming
report expounded, the value of the Massachusetts plan in its
application to children. The result was the creation by the
South Australian Government of a department, entitled the
State Children’s Council, consisting of 12 ladies and
gentlemen nominated by the State as honorary members, to deal
with erring and neglected children on the lines of that plan.
…
"Nineteen years ago the Children’s Court was opened in
Adelaide, and in October, 1903, thanks, Sir, to your
sympathetic courtesy, the reproduction in The Times of
a letter describing it in the Melbourne Argus from Miss
Alice Henry made known among us its scope, methods, and
success. Gradually Benches of Magistrates in various parts of
Great Britain and of Ireland who led the way tried the
experiment, which was then discovered to be already existing
among us here and there, and in a more or less developed form,
as at Greenwich, Hull, &c."
CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW: As Workers:
Canada: Child Labor Legislation.
"There is not in any province a comprehensive act dealing with
the subject of child labor as a whole, and even in Ontario,
which has its Factories Act, its Shops Act, its Mines Act, its
Municipal Act, its Truancy Act—all bearing on the matter more
or less directly—it is still possible for young children to be
kept at work by their parents for mercilessly long hours under
sweat-shop conditions.
{87}
Prince Edward Island, Saskatchewan, and Alberta have neither
Shops nor Factories Acts. Ontario, Nova Scotia, Manitoba, and
British Columbia have both; Quebec and New Brunswick have
Factories Acts, and six of the provinces have Mines Acts. The
several Factories Acts resemble one another closely. In
general, they prohibit the employment of girls under eighteen
and boys under sixteen in factories where the work is
dangerous or unhealthy; forbid the employment of children
under fourteen in any manufacturing establishment (except
canning factories) in three provinces; limit the hours of
labor for women and children to ten hours a day and sixty
hours a week; and specify the amount of overtime permissible
for these classes of workers. The Shops Acts, upon the whole,
allow greater latitude to the employers of children; thus the
hours of labor are longer and the conditions often not less
injurious than those in factories. Except in Ontario, no age
limit is set under which a child may not begin work in a shop.
Again by the Mines Acts of British Columbia, children of
twelve may be employed above ground, and by those of
Saskatchewan and Nova Scotia boys of twelve may work under
ground. The enforcement of the laws restricting child labor
has, from various causes, proved somewhat inadequate. For
instance, Nova Scotia has had a Factories Act since 1901, but
no inspector of factories till the present year; while
Ontario, with a Truancy Act that, if enforced, would prevent
many children from engaging in unsuitable labor, has vested
the appointment of truancy officers in the municipalities, and
these, in many instances, have neglected to make
appointments."
The Outlook,
November 14, 1908.
Recent changes in child labor laws in Canada are as follows:
In Ontario the Factories Act limits the working time of boys
under sixteen to ten hours, forbids the employment of children
under twelve within doors, and restricts the privileges
extended to canning factories. The Shops Act is amended by
raising the age limit from ten to twelve years. Manitoba
forbids the employment of minors as bartenders. Alberta has
raised the age limit of children employed in mines from twelve
to sixteen years. British Columbia prohibits the employment of
boys under fourteen and girls under fifteen except in the
canning of fish.
CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW: England:
The Employment of Children Act, 1903.
An Act "to make Better Provision for Regulating the Employment
of Children" became law in August, 1903. Most of the
responsibility for a proper protective regulation of child
labor was imposed by this enactment on the local authorities
of the Kingdom. Among its provisions were the following:
"1. Any local authority may make byelaws—
(i) prescribing for all children, or for boys and girls
separately, and with respect to all occupations or to any
specified occupation,—
(a) the age below which employment is illegal; and
(b) the hours between which employment is illegal; and
(c) the number of daily and weekly hours beyond
which employment is illegal:
(ii) prohibiting absolutely or permitting, subject to
conditions, the employment of children in any specified
occupation.
"2. Any local authority may make byelaws with respect to
street trading by persons under the age of sixteen. …
"3.
(1) A child shall not be employed between the hours of nine
in the evening and six in the morning: Provided that any
local authority may, by byelaw, vary these hours either
generally or for any specified occupation.
(2) A child under the age of eleven years shall not be
employed in street trading.
(3) No child who is employed half-time under the Factory
and Workshop Act, 1901, shall be employed in any other
occupation.
(4) A child shall not be employed to lift, carry, or move
anything so heavy as to be likely to cause injury to the
child.
(5) A child shall not be employed in any occupation likely
to be injurious to his life, limb, health or education,
regard being had to his physical condition. …
"4.
(1) A byelaw made under this Act shall not have any effect
until confirmed by the Secretary of State, and shall not
be so confirmed until at least thirty days after the local
authority have published it in such manner as the
Secretary of State may by general or special order direct. …
"13. In this Act—The expression ‘child’ means a person under
the age of fourteen years:
"The expression ‘guardian,’ used in reference to a child,
includes any person who is liable to maintain or has the
actual custody of the child:
"The expression ‘employ’ and ‘employment,’ used in reference
to a child, include employment in any labour exercised by way
of trade or for the purposes of gain, whether the gain be to
the child or to any other person: …
"The expression ‘street trading’ includes the hawking of
newspapers, matches, flowers, and other articles, playing,
singing, or performing for profit, shoe-blacking, and any
other like occupation carried on in streets or public places."
CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW: Germany:
Child Labor Legislation and its operation.
The Reichstag, in 1903, passed a new law for the protection of
children, concerning the operation of which a well known
English student of social conditions in Germany wrote as
follows in 1908:
"Several significant facts may be noted in relation to the
protection of childhood in Germany. The legal age of admission
to full employment in factories and workshops is fourteen
years, though on the production of efficiency certificates
children may be employed for not more than six hours daily at
the age of thirteen, yet of the 5,607,657 industrial workers
subject to inspection in 1905 only 10,245, or under 0.2 per
cent., were below fourteen years, and in some States there
were none. To show the progress which has been made in this
respect it may be stated that in 1875 10 per cent. (88,000 out
of a total of 880,500) of the factory workers were between
twelve and fourteen years of age. … At the same time there is
reason to believe that a serious exhaustion of juvenile
strength takes place in the unregulated home industries of
Germany. Further, from the age of six the child of the people
attends the primary school for seven or eight years, and in
many cases he is required to attend a continuation school
several years longer. In most of the large towns the scholar
from first to last receives free systematic medical care at
the hands of the school doctors. It begins with a thorough
examination on admission, and the health record thus opened is
continued throughout the whole period of school life, so that
the child is under constant medical supervision until it
reaches the working age. Many towns have gone further, and
have established dental surgeries, and attached eye and ear
specialists to the primary schools."
W. H. Dawson,
The Evolution of Modern Germany,
page 327 (Unwin, London; Scribner’s, New York).
{88}
CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW: United States:
Child Labor Laws of the several States in 1908,
and as amended since.
The requirements of an effective child labor law are set forth
in Pamphlet No. 60 of the National Child Labor Committee as
resting "primarily upon certain definite prohibitions, among
which are the following:
Labor is prohibited (1) for all children under the age of
fourteen years;
labor is prohibited (2) for all children under sixteen years
of age who do not measure sixty inches and weigh eighty pounds;
labor is prohibited (3) for all children under sixteen years
of age who cannot read fluently and write legibly simple
sentences in the English language;
labor is prohibited (4) for all children under the age of
sixteen years, between the hours of 7 p. m. and 7 a. m. or
longer than eight hours in any twenty-four hours, or longer
than forty-eight hours in any week;
labor is prohibited (5) for all children under the age of
sixteen years in occupations dangerous to life, limb, health
or morals."
Further prescriptions of the Committee relate to the
regulations and agencies of authority requisite to an
effective enforcement of the Law.
In Bulletin Number 62 of the United States Bureau of Labor
published in January, 1906, there is published a compilation
of the laws relating to child labor in each State of the
Union, as amended and in force at the close of the year 1905.
An examination of them shows that the proposed standard had
not then been measured up to in any State, or approached even
nearly by more than a few. In not one had the law prescribed a
test by weight or measure of the bodily development of a child
that should mark Nature’s consent to his employment in any
kind of work.
Thirteen States, namely, California, Connecticut, Delaware,
Indiana, Kansas, Minnesota, New Jersey, Ohio, Oregon,
Pennsylvania, Tennessee, West Virginia, and Wisconsin,
prohibited in general terms the employment of children under
fourteen years in mechanical, manufacturing or mercantile
establishments, or to that apparent effect. New York did the
same, with the proviso that children over twelve might have
employment during school vacation times. Rhode Island,
likewise, excepted the vacation time for children under
fourteen. The State of Washington allowed certain judges to
make exemptions from a similar prohibition, for the needed
support of helpless parents. Maine, Michigan, New Hampshire,
North Dakota, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, and
Wisconsin fixed the age under which no child may be employed
in wage-earning labor at twelve. Louisiana appointed it at
twelve for a boy and fourteen for a girl. Colorado placed it
at twelve for labor in mines only. Florida raised it to
fifteen, but only as prohibitory without consent of "those
having legal control" of the child. Alabama and Nebraska had
it lowered to ten years. South Carolina had kept it at ten
until 1903, at eleven until 1904, and at twelve until May,
1905. In the Massachusetts law no absolute prohibition of
child labor within any age line appeared.
Educational requirements, conditioning the employment of
children, were in most of the State laws, as they stood at the
end of 1905, and many of them satisfied the third rule
propounded by the National Child Labor Committee, as given
above.
In the next three years after the Bureau of Labor’s
compilation of child labor laws, great reforms in them were
brought about, as shown by comparison with the "Handbook 1908"
of "Child Labor Legislation" compiled by Josephine Goldmark
for the National Consumers’ League, and published originally
as a Supplement to the Annals of the American Academy of
Political and Social Science, May, 1908. Some statements from
this are given below:
"The age below which child labor is prohibited varies from
sixteen to ten years. The number of employments prohibited
also varies greatly—from all employment during school hours to
mine work only. … Eleven states prohibit work to the sixteenth
birthday in either mines or specific occupations injurious to
health, or both. These are, for mines, New York, Oklahoma,
Pennsylvania (inside anthracite mines), Texas; for specific
occupations, Kentucky, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, Wisconsin;
for both, Illinois and Montana."
The fifteen year age limit is prescribed in only one State,
South Dakota, which forbids it in mines, factories, hotels,
laundries, theatres, bowling alleys, elevators, messenger
service, or places where liquors are sold.
The age limit of fourteen years is prescribed differently in
different States. With various qualifications, employment
below that age in factories, stores, offices, laundries,
hotels, theatres, bowling alleys, is prohibited in California,
Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri,
Nebraska, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
In factories or stores it is forbidden in Connecticut,
Massachusetts, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode Island, and
Washington.
In factories it is not permitted in Arkansas, Colorado,
Delaware, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, New Jersey,
Tennessee, Texas, Wisconsin.
In messenger service it is made unlawful in California, Idaho,
Illinois, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska,
New York, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Washington,
Wisconsin.
Children under this age are excluded from mines in Arkansas,
Colorado, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Minnesota,
Missouri, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Tennessee,
Utah, Washington, Wisconsin, Wyoming.
In all the prohibitions above cited many and various
exceptions are allowed in the laws of different States—as for
school-vacation periods, for children of widows and disabled
fathers, etc. In like manner, the following State laws which,
on general principles, forbid all employment of children under
fourteen years during school hours, provide for numerous and
different exceptional circumstances: California, Colorado,
Connecticut, District of Columbia, Idaho, Illinois, Kentucky,
Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New
Hampshire, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, South Dakota,
Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin.
{89}
The thirteen year age limit is fixed only in North Carolina,
which excepts apprentices.
The twelve year limit is applied (with exceptions for the
vacation months) to factories or stores in California, to most
descriptions of regular employment in Maryland, and to
factories in West Virginia. It is applied to factories, with
varied exceptions, in Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana,
Mississippi, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Carolina, and
Texas. It applies to factories, quarries, railroads, and
messenger service in Vermont, and to factories, stores, and
mines in Virginia. To mines distinctly it applies in Alabama,
Florida, Maryland (if the twelve-year child is not wholly
illiterate), North Carolina, North Dakota (in school hours),
Pennsylvania (in bituminous mines only), South Carolina,
Virginia, West Virginia (vacation excepted).
The ten year old limit for labor to be lawful was only in
Georgia factories, with exceptions for the babes of widows and
disabled fathers.
As to hours of labor, "six states limit employment to 9 hours
in one day and 54 in one week:—California, Delaware, Florida,
Idaho, Missouri, and New York (applying to children under 16
in stores and as messengers).
"Twenty-four states restrict work to 10 hours in one day and
either 55, 58 or 60 hours in one week.
"Five states, Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania
and Tennessee allow more than 10 hours work in one day," in
the hours per week they permit.
"Those states which fail to restrict the hours of labor
allowed in one week as well as in one day invite
the possibility of seven days’ labor. In Washington, for
example, women and girls may not only work ten hours at night,
they may do this every night, including Sunday.
"Work at night is effectively restricted to the 16th birthday
in 18 states. Twelve states set an early closing hour for
children under 16 years, New York fixing 5 p. m.; Michigan,
Ohio, Oregon and Wisconsin 6 p. m., and Alabama, Idaho,
Illinois, Kentucky, Minnesota, Missouri and New Jersey (in
stores) fixing 7 p. m. Of these, the Ohio law is the most
comprehensive, since it includes girls to the 18th birthday."
"Children have no positive immunity from night work unless the
hours are explicitly stated between which it is unlawful to
employ them. … The District of Columbia, 4 territories and 20
states fail to prohibit work at night after a definite closing
hour. The sinister feature of this list is the presence of
Connecticut, Delaware, Indiana, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland,
New Hampshire, Tennessee and West Virginia, all of them
important manufacturing states having industries in which
children are employed."
Since the compilation of the above several states have made
important changes in or additions to their child labor laws,
as follows:
In Kentucky the age limit is raised to 14 years during school
terms, children between 14 and 16 not to be employed without
certificate from school authorities. The hours of labor are
limited to ten hours a day and sixty hours a week, and night
work is prohibited for children under 16 years.
In Louisiana a fourteen-year age limit is established, with a
9 hour working day, and night work is prohibited for boys
under 16 and girls under 18 years.
Mississippi has established a twelve-year limit, applicants
under sixteen being required to furnish a certificate of age
and educational advantages, and one from county health officer
showing physical condition. The time limit is ten hours daily,
58 hours a week.
"New Jersey enacted a compulsory education law, requiring
school attendance of all children between the ages of seven
and seventeen, except that children of fifteen who have
completed the grammar grades and are regularly employed may be
excused. This places the age limit for employment during the
school period at fifteen years.
"In New York a law was passed transferring the enforcement of
the mercantile child labor law from local boards of health in
cities of the first class to the State Labor Department, and
providing for the creation of a bureau of mercantile
inspection. This law became effective October 1st, 1908." It
made important changes, affecting dangerous employments, which
became effective October 1st, 1909.
"In Ohio an important measure was passed limiting the hours
for boys under sixteen and girls under eighteen to eight per
day and forty-eight per week."
National Child Labor Committee
(General Secretary’s Annual Report).
An act to regulate the employment of child labor in the
District of Columbia was passed by Congress on May 28, 1908.
This law prescribes an age limit of fourteen years, and
prohibits employment during school hours. Exceptions may be
made for children in the service of the Senate, or for those
whose labor is necessary for the support of a disabled or
widowed parent. Street trades are forbidden to boys under ten
and girls under sixteen years of age. The time limit for
children under sixteen is eight hours a day and forty-eight
hours a week.
The report of the National Child Labor Committee, for the year
ending September 30, 1909, gives the following additional
changes: In South Carolina a system of factory inspection was
adopted. The hours of labor, however, were changed from 10 to
11 hours a day. In Maine an educational test was adopted, and
the hours reduced from 60 to 58 per week. Rhode Island reduced
the hours for women and children from 60 to 56 per week.
Pennsylvania enacted a law requiring adequate proof of age of
children seeking employment, and requiring school certificate.
Hours of labor have been reduced in the following States:
Michigan to 54 hours a week for all women and for males under
18; Kansas, Oklahoma, North Dakota to 8 hour day and 48 hour
week; Delaware to 9 hour day and 54 hour week; Maine to 10
hour day and 58 hour week for boys under 16, and girls under
18; Rhode Island to 56 hour week for minors under 16 and all
women.
Night work has been prohibited in the following additional
States: Delaware, Kansas, North Dakota, Michigan, Oklahoma,
California.
Compulsory education laws have been passed in Arkansas and
Tennessee, and revised and improved in New Jersey, New York,
and Missouri.
See, also.
LABOR PROTECTION: HOURS OF LABOR.
----------CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW: End--------
{90}
CHILDREN, Public Playgrounds for.
See (in this Volume)
PLAYGROUND MOVEMENT.
CHILDS, RICHARD S.
See (in this Volume)
ELECTIVE FRANCHISE: UNITED STATES.
----------CHILE: Start--------
CHILE: A. D. 1901-1906.
Participation in Second and Third International Conferences
of American Republics, at Rio de Janeiro.
See (in this Volume)
AMERICAN REPUBLICS.
CHILE: A. D. 1902.
Noble Peace Agreements between Chile and the Argentine
Republic.
Treaty for Arbitration of all Disputes.
Limitation of Armaments.
See (in this Volume)
War, The Revolt against: A. D. 1902.
CHILE: A. D. 1903.
Sale of war vessels to Great Britain.
Pursuant to her Convention with Argentina, for the reduction
of armaments, Chile, in this year, sold two newly built war
vessels to Great Britain.
CHILE: A. D. 1906.
Installation of President Montt.
His prospective difficulties.
Don Pedro Montt, elected President of Chile in June, 1906,
was installed in office on the 10th of September following—the
anniversary of Chilean independence. United States Minister
Hicks, reporting the ceremony to his Government, added the
following remarks on the political situation:
"The new President takes office while enjoying great personal
popularity. He is the son of Don Manuel Montt, who was
President of Chile from 1851 to 1862. His reputation is that
of a calm, well-balanced man, of unimpeachable integrity,
strong and self-reliant, but conciliatory and far-seeing. He
begins his career with many difficulties on his hands. One
question left over from the last administration—that of the
rectorship of the university—is already causing considerable
trouble. Under the law the President appoints the rector from
three persons named by the doctors of the university itself.
Señor Letelier has been so named, but as he is said to be a
liberal and even a freethinker, the church party and the
conservatives generally are fighting him. The new President
selected a cabinet last week entirely different from the one
now in office, but owing to the rectorship question and some
other things it failed and a new one had to be appointed
hurriedly.
"Among other difficulties to be met by the new President is
the opposition of the Senate. It is understood that there is a
majority in that body against him, and it is liable to operate
unfavorably to him. Still his friends have full confidence that
he will succeed in quieting opposition and will retain the
unlimited confidence of the people.
"Under the Chilean constitution much of the power delegated to
the President under the American Constitution is retained by
Congress. That body really dictates to the President the
appointment or removal of his cabinet and thus his functions
are quite different from those of the President of the United
States."
CHILE: A. D. 1906.
Destructive earthquake.
See (in this Volume)
EARTHQUAKES: CHILE.
CHILE: A. D. 1907.
Diplomatic relations with Peru reestablished.
Diplomatic relations with Peru were reestablished in 1907; but
the old sore question between the two countries, concerning
the interpretation of the peace treaty of Ancón (1884),
relative to the provinces of Tacna and Arica, which Chile took
from Peru in the preceding war, remains open.
See (in Volume VI.)
CHILE.
CHILE: A. D. 1909.
Contract given for the Arica-La Paz Railway.
See (in this Volume)
RAILWAYS: CHILE-BOLIVIA.
CHILE: A. D. 1909.
Arbitration of the Alsop Claim of the United States.
"Many years ago diplomatic intervention became necessary to
the protection of the interests in the American claim of Alsop
and Company against the government of Chili. The government of
Chili had frequently admitted obligation in the case, and had
promised this government to settle it. There had been two
abortive attempts to do so through arbitral commissions, which
failed through lack of jurisdiction. Now, happily, as the
result of the recent diplomatic negotiations, the governments
of the United States and Chili, actuated by the sincere desire
to free from any strain those cordial and friendly relations
upon which both set such store, have agreed by a protocol to
submit the controversy to definitive settlement by his
Britannic Majesty, Edward VII."
Message to Congress of President Taft,
December, 1909.
The claim referred to is that of "the Alsop Company of New
York and Connecticut which advanced large sums of money to the
Bolivian government in exchange for the right to valuable
guano deposits in that country and other concessions. The
government contracted further to return a part of the loan
from the receipts of customs at the port of Arica. Before her
contract could be fulfilled Bolivia lost Arica and the
adjoining districts to Chili in war. In 1885, following
representations by the American State Department, Chili agreed
to assume the obligations of Bolivia to the Alsop Company. She
has never, however, made good her promise, and the matter has
been the subject of diplomatic negotiations ever since. The
claim now amounts to more than $1,500,000."
CHILE: A. D. 1909.
Building of the Transandine Railway Tunnel.
See (in this Volume)
RAILWAYS: ARGENTINA-CHILE.
CHILE: A. D. 1909 (October).
Naval plans.
See (in this Volume)
WAR, THE PREPARATIONS FOR: NAVAL: CHILEAN.
----------CHILE: End--------
----------CHINA: Start--------
CHINA: A. D. 1887-1907.
Increase of Christian Mission Schools.
See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION: CHINA.
CHINA: A. D. 1900-1905.
Sudden and rapid upspringing of newspapers.
"Without giving actual statistics, it may be mentioned that
Peking, which had no newspaper up to the time of the Boxer

rising—except a short-lived weekly started by the Peking
Reform Club and suppressed by the Empress Dowager—has now
three daily newspapers and two fortnightly ones, some of these
being partly illustrated. Tientsin has at least three dailies,
one of these, the ‘Ta-kung Pao’ ('The Impartial’),
having the very respectable circulation of twenty thousand.
The official organ which calls itself the ‘Times’ (the
‘Shih Pao’), although not so widely circulated, is well
written under European auspices and has considerable
influence.
{91}
In Shanghai there are now sixteen daily papers (price, eight
to ten cash each), some of which have circulations of
as much as ten thousand, and besides these there are many
journals published there. Further south (at Foochow, Soochow,
and Canton), there are in all some six or seven daily papers,
and at Hong-Kong five, while Kiaochow has one, which is
supported by the local German government. In addition to
these, several papers are now published in the interior, but
the majority, for various reasons, flourish in the treaty
ports."
A. R. Colquhoun
The Chinese Press of To-day
(North American Review, January, 1906).
CHINA: A. D. 1900-1906.
Progressive tariff and internal taxation measures to check
the consumption of opium.
See (in this Volume)
OPIUM PROBLEM.
CHINA: A. D. 1901-1902.
The Russian grip on Manchuria.
Coercive negotiations with China.
Protests from other Powers.
The Manchurian Treaty of 1902 and its impotence.
Early in December, 1901, the American Minister to China, Mr.
Conger, reported to Secretary Hay, at Washington, an impending
treaty which Russia seemed likely to force on the Chinese
Government, which would practically secure to that aggressive
Power, through a prolonged agreement of China with the
Russo-Chinese Bank, exclusive railway and mining concessions
in Manchuria, and which would protract the Russian evacuation
of that country through three years. England and Japan were
using all their influence at Peking to prevent the signing of
the treaty, and Mr. Hay entered a vigorous protest on the part
of the Government of the United States, "animated now, as
heretofore, by the sincere desire to insure to the whole world
full and fair intercourse with China on equal footing." The
pressure from Russia on China was so potent, however, that Mr.
Conger, on the 29th of January, 1902, reported to Mr. Hay that
Prince Ch’ing, who acted with authority from his Government in
the negotiation with Russia, had informed him "that the latter
has done the best he could and has held out as long as
possible, but that Russian possession of Manchuria has become
intolerable, and that China must at once sign the convention
or lose everything; that he has therefore agreed to sign the
convention [modified in some particulars] and will also sign
the separate agreement with the Russo-Chinese Bank, which
practically gives exclusive privileges of industrial
development in Manchuria." Nevertheless the consummation of
the Russian project of coercive diplomacy was delayed until
the 8th of April, and the terms of the treaty then signed were
considerably moderated from the original design. Its
provisions of interest to others than the contracting parties
were as follows:
"ARTICLE I.
His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, desiring to give a
fresh proof of his love of peace and his sentiments of
friendship for His Majesty the Emperor of China,
notwithstanding the fact that the first attacks upon the
peaceable Russian population were made from various points of
Manchuria, which is situated on the frontier, consents to the
reestablishment of the authority of the Chinese Government in
the aforesaid province, which remains an integral part of the
Empire of China, and restores to the Chinese Government the
right to exercise governmental and administrative powers there
as before its occupation by the Russian troops.
"ARTICLE II.
In resuming possession of governmental and administrative
powers in Manchuria, the Chinese Government confirms, as well
in regard to the terms as to all the other articles, the
engagement strictly to observe the stipulations of the
contract concluded with the Russo-Chinese Bank on the 27th of
August, 1896, and assumes, according to article 5 of said
contract, the obligation to protect the railroad and its
personnel by every means, and also pledges itself to guarantee
the security in Manchuria, of all Russian subjects in general
who reside there and the enterprises established by them. The
Russian Government, in view of the assumption of this
obligation by the Emperor of China, consents on its part, in
case there shall be no agitations of any sort, and if the
action of the other powers shall offer no obstacle thereto,
gradually to withdraw all its troops from Manchuria so as
(a) To withdraw, in the course of six months from the
signing of the convention, the Russian troops from the
southwest portion of the province of Moukden, as far as the
Liao-he River, and again to place China in control of the
railways;
(b) To withdraw, in the course of the six months
following, the Imperial Russian troops from the remaining
portion of the province of Moukden and the province of Kirin;
and
(c) To withdraw, in the course of the six months following,
the remainder of the Imperial Russian troops now in the
province of Hei-lung Kiang.
"ARTICLE. III.
In view of the necessity of obviating in future a repetition
of the disturbances of 1900, in which the Chinese troops
quartered in the provinces adjacent to Russia took part, the
Russian Government and the Chinese Government agree to order
the Russian military authorities and the dzian-dziuns, to come
to an understanding for the purpose of regulating the number
and determining the places of cantonment of the Chinese troops
in Manchuria until the Russian troops shall have been
withdrawn therefrom. The Chinese Government further pledges
itself not to organize any other troops above the number thus
agreed upon by the Russian military authorities and the
dzian-dziuns which shall be sufficient to exterminate the
brigands and to pacify the country. After the complete
evacuation of the country by the Russian troops, the Chinese
Government shall have the right to make an examination of the
number of troops in Manchuria which are subject to increase or
diminution, giving timely notice of such examination to the
Imperial Government, for the maintenance of troops in the
aforesaid province in superfluous numbers would manifestly
lead to the increase of the Russian military forces in the
adjacent districts, and would thus occasion an increase of
military expenses, to the great disadvantage of both
countries. For police service and the maintenance of internal
order in this region outside of the territory ceded to the
Chinese Eastern Railway Company, there shall be formed, near
the local dzian-dziun governors, a police force, both on foot
and mounted, composed exclusively of subjects of the Emperor
of China
"ARTICLE IV.
The Russian Government consents to restore to their owners the
railway lines of Shan-hai-kwan—Yin-kow—Simminting, which have
been occupied and protected by the Russian troops since the
end of the month of September, 1900. In consideration of this
the Government of the Emperor of China pledges itself:
{92}
"1. That in case it shall become necessary to insure the
security of the aforesaid railway lines it will itself assume
that obligation, and will not request any other power to
undertake or participate in the defense, construction, or
exploitation of these lines, and will not permit foreign
powers to occupy the territory restored by Russia.
"2. That the above-mentioned railway lines shall be completed
and exploited on the precise bases of the agreement made
between Russia and England April 16, 1899, and on those of the
contract concluded September 28, 1898, with a private company,
relative to a loan for the construction of the aforesaid
lines, and, moreover, in observance of the obligations assumed
by the company, especially: Not to take possession of the
Shan-hai-kwan—Yin-kow—Simminting line or to dispose of it in
any manner whatever.
"3. That if a continuation of the railway lines in the south
of Manchuria, or the construction of branch lines connecting
with them, and the construction of a bridge at Yin Kow or at
the transfer of the terminus of the Shan-hai-kwan Railroad,
which is situated there, shall hereafter be undertaken, it
shall be done after a previous understanding between the
Government of Russia and that of China."
Papers relating to the Foreign Relations
of the United States, 1902, pages 271-281.
During the next two years Russia was accused from all sides of
infidelity to the engagements of this treaty, and her conduct,
which seemed especially menacing to Japan, gave rise to the
Russo-Japanese War.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1901-1904.
CHINA: A. D. 1901-1902.
Edicts for educational reform.
Modernizing examinations for literary and military degrees.
Establishing universities, colleges, and schools.
Sending students abroad.
See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION: CHINA: A. D. 1901-1902.
CHINA: A. D. 1901-1904.
Persistent occupation of Manchuria by the Russians.
Remonstrances of the Japanese.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1901-1904.
CHINA: A. D. 1901-1908.
Settlement of the indemnity to be paid to fourteen Powers on
account of the Boxer Rising.
Remission of part of it by the United States.
In April, 1901, when the record of events connected with the
Boxer rising against foreigners in China was closed in Volume
VI. of this work, the Chinese government had promised
satisfaction and indemnity to the fourteen Powers whose
subjects had suffered from the barbarous attack and whose
forces had overcome it, and the measure of indemnity to be
paid was then being discussed. The discussion and the
reckonings involved were prolonged till September. The final
protocol was signed September 7, but it was not until the 30th
of that month that the formulated claims of the Powers
concerned were accepted by China, and the responsibility of
payment assumed by an imperial decree. The total was
450,000,000 taels, equivalent to $334,000,000, divided between
Austria-Hungary, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Great
Britain, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Portugal, Russia, Spain,
Sweden, and the United States. The sum was not reckoned solely
for the covering of losses and expenses, consequent on the
Boxer outrages, but was intended to be, in some degree, a
penalty imposed on the Chinese nation; and some of the
claimant nations were said to be more exacting on this score
than others were.
The amount for which the United States stipulated was
$24,440,000, and the American government received an indemnity
bond for that sum. But when the expenses of the American
relief expedition had been accurately ascertained, and all
losses and destruction of property belonging to American
claimants had been settled, it was found that they would be
largely overpaid. It was possible, according to common
practice in international dealings, to regard the excess as
justly punitive; but a different view was dictated by the wish
to show friendliness to China, and a return of the overpayment
was proposed. Recommended by President Roosevelt, the
necessary sanction was given by Congress, and on the 11th of
July, 1908, the American Minister to China addressed the
following communication to the Prince of Ch’ing, President of
the Wai-Wu-Pu, or Board of Foreign Affairs, at Peking:
"Your Highness: "It is with great satisfaction that I have the honor to inform
your Highness, under direction of the Secretary of State of
the United States, that a bill has passed the Congress of the
United States authorizing the President to modify the
indemnity bond given the United States by China under the
provisions of Article VI. of the final protocol of September
7, 1901, from twenty-four million, four hundred and forty
thousand dollars ($24,440,000), United States gold currency,
to thirteen million, six hundred and fifty-five thousand, four
hundred and ninety-two dollars and twenty-nine cents
($13,655,492.29), with interest at four per cent (4%) per
annum. Of this amount two million dollars ($2,000,000) are
held pending the result of hearings on private claims
presented to the Court of Claims of the United States within
one year. Any balance remaining after such adjudication is
also to be returned to the Chinese Government, in such manner
as the Secretary of State shall decide.
"The President is further authorized under the Bill to remit
to China the remainder of the indemnity as an act of
friendship, such payments and remissions to be made at such
times and in such a manner as he may deem just.
"I am also directed by the Secretary of State to request the
Imperial Government kindly to favor him with its views as to
the time and manner of the remissions.
"Trusting that your Imperial Highness will favor me with an
early reply to communicate to my Government, I avail myself of
this occasion to renew to your Highness the assurance of my
highest consideration
—W. W. ROCKHILL."
In his reply, after reciting the statements conveyed to him by
Mr. Rockhill, the Prince wrote (as translated) the following:
"On reading this despatch I was profoundly impressed with the
justice and great friendliness of the American government, and
wish to express our sincerest thanks.
"Concerning the time and manner of the return of the amounts
to be remitted to China, the Imperial Government has no wishes
to express in the matter. It relies implicitly on the friendly
intentions of the United States Government, and is convinced
that it will adopt such measures as are best calculated to
attain the end it has in view.
{93}
"The Imperial Government, wishing to give expression to the
high value it places on the friendship of the United States,
finds in its present action a favorable opportunity for doing
so. Mindful of the desire recently expressed by the President
of the United States to promote the coming of Chinese students
to the United States to take courses in the schools and higher
educational institutions of the country, and convinced by the
happy results of past experience of the great value to China
of education in American schools, the Imperial Government has
the honor to state that it is its intention to send henceforth
yearly to the United States a considerable number of students
there to receive their education. The Board of Foreign Affairs
will confer with the American Minister in Peking concerning
the elaboration of plans for the carrying out of the intention
of the Imperial Government.
"A necessary despatch.
"SEAL OF THE WAI-WU-PU."
Simultaneously with the note from Prince Ch’ing, the Wai-Wu-Pu
as a body addressed the following to Mr. Rockhill:
"To his Excellency W. W. Rockhill,
American Minister, Peking:
"Referring to the despatch just sent to your Excellency
regarding sending students to America, it has now been
determined that from the year when the return of the indemnity
begins, one hundred students shall be sent to America every
year for four years, so that four hundred students may be in
America by the fourth year. From the fifth year and throughout
the period of the indemnity payments a minimum of fifty
students will be sent each year.
"As the number of students will be very great, there will be
difficulty in making suitable arrangements for them.
Therefore, in the matter of choosing them, as well as in the
matters of providing suitable homes for them in America and
selecting the schools which they are to enter, we hope to have
your advice and assistance. The details of our scheme will
have to be elaborated later, but we take this occasion to
state the general features of our plan, and ask you to inform
the American Government of it. We sincerely hope that the
American Government will render us assistance in the matter.
"Wishing you all prosperity,
(Signed)
PRINCE OF CH’ING, YUAN-SHIH-K’AI,
NA-TUNG LIEN-FANG
LIANG-TUN-YEN."
The remittance of somewhat more than $10,000,000 of the
indemnity did not involve a repayment of that sum of money to
the Chinese government, for the reason that payments on the
original indemnity bond were to be in annual instalments,
running until 1940, certain revenues being pledged to secure
them. The remittance is effected, accordingly, by a
readjustment of those payments hereafter.
Writing in The Outlook of this transaction, and of the
impression it has made in China, Mr. George Marvin, who has
been for some time in official connection with the Chinese
Government, says:
"In pledging itself to the American educational mission the
Chinese Government has given the fullest evidence of its
appreciation. According to estimates made in Peking last
summer, it was calculated that by and after the fourth year of
the proposed educational foundation the investment necessary
to finance the Chinese students in America would amount to
$500,000 annually, a sum nearly equivalent to the entire
yearly revenue remitted. Already, and quite apart from the
scheme proposed in the note of the Wai-Wu-Pu, there are
maintained in the United States by Imperial and Provincial
funds one hundred and fifty-five Chinese students, picked boys
and young men, sons of officials and prominent and wealthy
merchants, chosen often by competitive examinations. The
students now to be sent annually by the Imperial Government
will be still more carefully selected. These are the men
destined for positions of responsibility and influence in that
‘Awakening China’ of which we hear so much."
G. Marvin, in The Outlook, November 14, 1908.
A Special Ambassador from China, bearing a letter of thanks
from the Emperor, presented it to the President on the 2d of
December, 1908.
CHINA: A. D. 1902.
Return to Peking of the Emperor, Empress-Dowager, and Court.
Receptions to foreign representatives.
Withdrawals of foreign troops.
Recurrence of Boxer outbreaks.
The Emperor, Empress Dowager, and their suite reentered Peking
on the 7th of January, 1902. On the 22d the foreign
representatives were admitted to audience with the Emperor; on
the 28th the Emperor and Empress-Dowager, together, gave a
reception to the diplomatic body, the Empress-Dowager being
throned on a higher seat than the Emperor; on the 1st of
February the Empress-Dowager entertained the ladies of the
foreign legations at a banquet, where presents of jewelry were
made to all the guests. Sorrow for the misdoings from which
the foreigners in China had suffered was expressed on all
these occasions, and there seemed to be an earnest desire to
make amends for them.
Foreign troops were withdrawn from Tien-tsin on the 15th of
August, 1902, and the city delivered to the Chinese Viceroy.
Many improvements in streets, bridges, and public grounds had
been made by the provisional government which the Allies
instituted in 1900. Shanghai was evacuated by the allied
forces at the end of the year 1902.
Some recurrence of Boxer movements and insurrections occurred
in different parts of the Empire during 1902. Several
missionaries and a number of native converts were murdered,
chapels were burned, and other outrages committed; but in
general there was a restoration of order in the country, and
considerable building of railways and forwarding of other
enterprises went on.
CHINA: A. D. 1902.
Russo-Chinese Treaty concerning Tibet.
See (in this Volume)
TIBET: A. D. 1902.
CHINA: A. D. 1902 (January).
Agreement respecting China between Great Britain and Japan.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1902.
CHINA: A. D. 1902 (February).
Wei-hai-wei found to be strategically worthless by the
British Government.
See (in this Volume)
ENGLAND: A. D. 1902 (FEBRUARY).
CHINA: A. D. 1902-1904.
The British opening of Tibet by force.
See TIBET: A. D. 1902.
{94}
CHINA: A. D. 1903 (MAY-OCTOBER).
Treaty with the United States.
Opening of two ports in Manchuria.
Rights and privileges enlarged.
"In the protocol of September 7, 1901, China had agreed to
extend the scope of her commercial treaties with the powers.
See, (in this Volume)
above, A. D. 1901-1908.
When the negotiation of a new treaty was begun by
Consul-General Goodnow at Shanghai, the United States demanded
that at least two new ports in Manchuria be opened to foreign
trade and residence. The Chinese commissioners declined to
discuss this subject, on the alleged ground that they had no
instructions to do so. It was evident that there was secret
opposition somewhere, and on May 7, 1903, Mr. Conger reported
that it came from the Russian charge d'affaires. Later he
secured a written acknowledgment from the Chinese government
that such was the case. … Mr. Hay then appealed with the
utmost directness to the Russian government. … On July 14 a
definite answer was at length received from Russia, in which
she declared that it had never entered into her views to
oppose the opening of certain cities in Manchuria to foreign
commerce, but that this declaration did not apply to Harbin,
one of the cities selected by the United States, which was
situated within the railway zone, and therefore was not under
the complete jurisdiction of China. A copy of this note was
shown to the Chinese government; which finally agreed to
insert in the treaty on October 8 (the date on which Russia
had agreed to completely withdraw from Manchuria) a provision
for the opening of two ports. The United States agreed to this
arrangement, and on October 8 the treaty was signed, and
Mukden and Antung named as the open ports."
John H. Latané,
America as a World Power,
chapter 6 (Harper & Bros., New York, 1907).
The further scope of the treaty was announced by President
Roosevelt in his Message to Congress, December 7, 1903, as
follows: "It provides not only for the ordinary rights and
privileges of diplomatic and consular officers, but also for
an important extension of our commerce by increased facility
of access to Chinese ports, and for the relief of trade by the
removal of some of the obstacles which have embarrassed it in
the past. The Chinese Government engages, on fair and
equitable conditions, which will probably be accepted by the
principal commercial nations, to abandon the levy of ‘liken’
and other transit dues throughout the Empire, and to introduce
other desirable administrative reforms. Larger facilities are
to be given to our citizens who desire to carry on mining
enterprises in China. We have secured for our missionaries a
valuable privilege, the recognition of their right to rent and
lease in perpetuity such property as their religious societies
may need in all parts of the Empire."
CHINA: A. D. 1904.
Railways and Chinese travel on them.
Unused British Concessions.
"It may not have passed out of the public mind that in
February, 1899, Mr. Balfour came down to the House of Commons
and paraded before it and the country the magnificent triumph
England had won in China in respect of Railway Concessions.
See, in Volume VI.,
CHINA: A. D. 1898 (FEBRUARY-DECEMBER.).
They totalled up to 2,800 miles! The House cheered, the
country indulged in a fit of self-complacency, and the critic
who asked questions was an ignoramus or a nuisance. Well, five
years have gone by, and not one mile of those railways is in
existence except the Chinese Northern State Railway, which has
passed out of our hands. Of the rest the two great trunk
lines, one from Hankow to Canton, and the other in Yunnan,
have been abandoned, while among those of shorter length the
only one that still remains in active force is the subject of
this paper. …
"In more than one recently published consular dispatch
attention has been drawn to the fact that the Chinese,
backward or hesitating in the adoption of every other European
or Western innovation, have shown no reluctance to avail
themselves of improved means of locomotion. The Northern
Railway is used by several million passengers every year; the
sections already open of the German railway in Shantung and of
the Belgian in Shansi can complain of no lack of traffic. The
fears of an earlier period as to what the Chinese would do
with regard to railways have been dissipated by experience."
D. C. Boulger,
The Shanghai-Nanking Railway
(Contemporary Review, June, 1904).
CHINA: A. D. 1904.
The Russo-Japanese War in Manchuria.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1904 (FEBRUARY-JULY) and after.
CHINA: A. D. 1904-1909.
The Hankau Sze-chuen Railway Loan.
The question of American participation.
In 1904 the American Minister at Peking concluded an agreement
with the Chinese Government to the effect that, when loans for
the construction of a projected railway into the western
province of Sze-chuen, from Hankau, should be negotiated,
Americans should have an opportunity to subscribe to it.
Nearly five years passed before arrangements for the loan were
made, and then, in the spring of 1909, it was found that terms
had been concluded with a group of British, German, and French
bankers for the whole sum sought, of $27,500,000, while
American capitalists had not been given the promised
opportunity. On behalf of the latter the Government of the
United States intervened, claiming fulfilment of the agreement
of 1904. The matter was regarded as being both politically and
financially important. "A precedent is what we want to
establish," said Mr. Crane, the newly appointed Minister to
China, in an interview on the subject at New York. "The task
of this Government to maintain its position with the European
Powers in the East will be less difficult. We are looking
twenty years ahead." As the result of communications in July
from Washington to Peking, in which President Taft took part
personally, the loan arrangement was readjusted, and American
capitalists became participant in it to the extent of
one-fourth.
According to a despatch from Peking, August 17, the matter was
settled definitely that day, on the following terms: "The loan
to be increased from $27,500,000 to $30,000,000, and of this
latter amount American bankers to get one-quarter, the other
three-quarters going to British, French, and German interests.
Americans are to have equal opportunity with the other nations
to supply material for both the Sze-chuen and the Canton lines
and the branches; they will appoint subordinate engineers, and
they will have also one-half of all future loans of the
Sze-chuen Railroad and its branches with the corresponding
advantages."
{95}
Subsequently, however, some difficulty in the readjustment of
business details in the matter arose, which delayed the final
settlement. The motives of the American Government in claiming
a participation in the enterprise were stated as follows by
President Taft in his Message to Congress, December 6, 1909:
"By the treaty of 1903 China has undertaken the abolition of
likin with a moderate and proportionate raising of the customs
tariff along with currency reform. These reforms being of
manifest advantage to foreign commerce as well as to the
interests of China, this government is endeavoring to
facilitate these measures with the needful acquiescence of the
treaty Powers. When it appeared that Chinese likin revenues
were to be hypothecated to foreign bankers in connection with
a great railway project, it was obvious that the governments
whose nationals held this loan would have a certain direct
interest in the question of the carrying out by China of the
reforms in question. Because this railroad loan represented a
practical and real application of the open-door policy through
coöperation with China by interested Powers, as well as
because of its relations to the reforms referred to above, the
Administration deemed American participation to be of great
national interest. Happily, when it was as a matter of broad
policy urgent that this opportunity should not be lost, the
indispensable instrumentality presented itself when a group of
American bankers, of international reputation and great
resources, agreed at once to share in the loan upon precisely
such terms as this government should approve. The chief of
those terms was that American railway material should be upon
an exact equality with that of the other nationals joining in
the loan in the placing of orders for this whole railroad
system. After months of negotiation the equal participation of
Americans seems at last assured. It is gratifying that
Americans will thus take their share in this extension of
these great highways of trade, and to believe that such
activities will give a real impetus to our commerce, and will
prove a practical corollary to our historic policy in the Far
East."
CHINA: A. D. 1905 (August).
New agreement respecting China between Great Britain and Japan.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1905 (AUGUST).
CHINA: A. D. 1905 (December).
Treaty with Japan relative to Manchuria.
By a treaty with Japan, concluded December, 1905, China
consented to lease to Japan the Kwangtung peninsula, at the
southern extremity of which are Port Arthur and Dalny,
formerly held by Russia under lease from China, and concede to
Japan the control of the railway on the peninsula northward as
far as Changchin. China also conceded to Japan the right to
build a railway from Antung on the Yalu River to Mukden, the
ancient capital of Manchuria, provided, however, that at the
end of a certain period the road may be purchased by China.
More important is the fact that China agreed in the treaty to
open to the world’s commerce and trade sixteen principal ports
and cities in Manchuria, including Harbin, or Kharbin, the
modern Russian capital of the province and its most important
railway center.
CHINA: A. D. 1905-1908.
The stir of new ideas.
Imperial Commission to study Representative
Systems of Government.
Signs of fruit from it.
Reformative movements.
The Constitutional Programme set forth in August, 1908.
Nine years of approach to a Promised Constitution.
A significant token of the dawning in China of a changed state
of mind respecting the western world of Europe and America,
and its very different development of scientific knowledge and
of social institutions, was afforded in the fall of 1905, when
an imperial commission, headed by Prince Tsai-Tse, was sent
abroad to study representative systems of government. The
Commission returned in the following July, and in August a
committee of high dignitaries, with Prince Ch’ing for its
chairman, was appointed to consider the report it had
submitted on administrative reforms. The outcome, soon
afterwards, was an imperial edict which recognized a "lack of
confidence between the highest and the lowest, between the
throne and ministers and the masses," and went so far as to
say that "foreign countries become wealthy and powerful by
granting a constitution to the masses and allowing suffrage to
all." While intimating that China must look forward to a
similar admission of the masses to some voice in the
government, the edict set forth the prior need of many
reforms, in the official system, in the laws, in education, in
the finances, and in the army and police. To begin the
undertaking of such reforms, Prince Tsai-Tse was put at the
head of a committee for dealing with the official system, and
before the year closed there were several changes of
importance introduced, tending towards more simplicity of
methods in public business and more centering of
responsibilities. Examinations in Western subjects of
knowledge began to replace the old conventional examinations
in classic Chinese literature, as tests for admission and
promotion in official service, and eagerness was shown in the
opening of schools and colleges that approached the European
and American type. Simultaneously with these stirrings of a
new consciousness and purpose in China, a great moral reform
was taken in hand. This was no less than an attempt to rescue
the nation from its opium curse. Some account of the opium
edict issued in September, 1906, will be found elsewhere.
See, (in this Volume)
OPIUM PROBLEM.
That these reformative steps were actually taken with a view
to the ultimate granting of "a constitution to the masses and
allowing suffrage to all" was proved in the summer of 1908,
when a programme of gradual approach to constitutional
government, by stages which extend through the next nine
years, was promulgated at Peking on August 27th. According to
Western ideas the document lacks definiteness, but it is not
difficult to believe in the sincerity of its intent. There may
be great wisdom of sincerity in the serial planning of
successive measures that are to unfold and introduce a
constitution at the end of nine years.
The edict of August 27 was summarized and partially translated
in a communication to the New York Tribune, as follows:
"The preamble alone fills twenty large pages and is written in
an incongruous mixture of Chinese Classical terms and new
Japanese terminology invented to fit Western meanings. The
efforts of the authors have been aimed at conveying to the
Chinese mind an understanding of things hitherto beyond its
comprehension. The explanations often convey nothing to the
Western mind.
{96}
"The subject is approached in an almost prayerful attitude.
The fact that China obtains this constitution ‘by the imperial
will’ is reiterated again and again. It is set forth that the
imperial government, under the constitution, shall not be
criticised, on the principle that the ‘sacred majesty of the
sovereign may not be offended against,’ and that the leaders
of the political parties are to be appointed by the throne.
Full government under this constitution will become effective
at the end of nine years. While the proposed system is called
constitutional, it is far removed from Western constitutional
government.
"Broadly speaking, the document follows the constitution of
Japan. Some of its most striking clauses follow:
"‘We beg, as the condition of the country is perilous, and the
hearts of the people are uneasy—trouble within and calamity
from without, danger threatening, and no parliament at the
side to investigate matters—that urgent measures may be taken
to overcome half-heartedness and procrastination, that there
may be peace above and completion below.
"‘We have therefore laid down the general principles of the
constitution and the programme for the work of getting
everything in readiness in nine years. These may not be
changed in the least particular.
"‘There will be boundless daily improvement. May the "silken
sounds" descend to inform the empire and fix the road for ten
thousand years, comforting the hopes of the myriads who long
for peace.’
"Fourteen laws are then submitted, as follows:
"1. The Ta Ch’ing Emperor will rule supreme over the Ta Ch’ing
Empire for one thousand generations in succession, and be
honored forever.
"2. Majesty of the sovereign.
"3. Right of promulgating laws.
"4. Convocation, suspension, extension and dissolution
of parliament.
"5. Appointment, payment, promotion, degradation of officials.
"6. Command over army and navy.
"7. Power to make war, peace, treaties; to receive and appoint
ambassadors.
"8. Martial law.
"9. Rewards and pardons.
"10. Right over judges and the administration of laws.
"11. Injunction.
" 12. Right of raising funds when parliament is not in session.
"13. Right of fixing the expenses of the imperial household.
"14. Respecting authority over the imperial clan.
"‘We look to our Empress Dowager and Emperor and see that they
take the measure of heaven and earth as their measure and the
heart of the people as their heart. The officials and people
within the wide seas are reverently grateful.
"‘The people should earnestly fulfil all the duties without
selfish reservations, which would hinder the public welfare,
and without rash impatience, which would confuse the
regulation; not looking on the matter as too easy, so that the
deliberations become empty wrangling, not failing to
understand the limitation of powers, so as to make laws which
overstep authority.
"‘The sovereign has absolute power, which he exercises in
constitutional form.’
"It is then set forth that on the dissolution of parliament
the people shall be called on to elect a new parliament, and
the document continues:
"‘Mercy is from above; officials, below, may not arrogate it
to themselves.
"‘Officers and people who keep within the law will have
freedom of speech, of the press and of assembly. They shall
not be disturbed without cause in their possession of
property, nor interfered with in their dwellings; and they
have the obligation to pay taxes and render military service
and the duty of obedience to the law of the land.
"‘Members of parliament shall not speak disrespectfully of the
court or slander others. Violation of this law will be
punished.’
"The nine year programme is as follows:
"‘Thirty-fourth year of Kwang Hsu, or 1908—Local
self-government; rules for reorganization of finance; fusion
of the Manchu and Chinese military; revision of criminal code.
"‘Thirty-fifth year, or 1909—Election of provincial
assemblymen; election to constitutional commission; local
self-government bureaus established; census; provincial
budgets; determination of functions of Peking officials;
issuing of school books.
"‘Thirty-sixth year, or 1910—Provincial assemblies opened;
local self-government established; census reports; tax rate
fixed; organization of provincial officials; courts of law at
provincial capitals and treaty ports; publishing criminal
code; extension of schools; preparation for organization of
sub-prefecture; department and district police.
"‘Thirty-seventh year, or 1911—Local self-government
continued; public account; imperial budget; rules on imperial
taxation; rules governing appointments and salaries of civil
officials; extension of schools; codes of municipal and
commercial laws and civil and criminal procedure drawn up.
"‘Thirty-eighth year, or 1912—Completion of general
arrangement of urban self-government; census reports;
publication of taxation laws of empire; perfection of
arrangements for provincial and lesser courts; extension of
schools.
"‘Thirty-ninth year, or 1913—Police registration; imperial
trial budget of variable expenses; Supreme Court; courts of
law in prefectures, sub-prefectures, departments and
districts; criminal code promulgated; urban self-government
established; rules for rural self-government; rules for urban
police.
"‘Fortieth year, or 1914—Imperial trial budget of fixed
expenses; publication of system of national accounts; rural
self-government established; rules for lower courts.
"‘Forty-first year, or 1915—Imperial household expenses fixed;
organization of the Banners’ controller’s office; public
accounting enforced; lower courts established; municipal and
commercial laws and civil and criminal procedure rules
established; police system complete.
"‘Forty-second year, or 1910—Promulgation of full constitution
and the laws of the imperial clan; parliamentary rules and
rules for parliamentary elections; budget for consideration of
parliament; reorganized official system; appointment of a
premier.’
"The document concludes with these words:
{97}
"'In the forty-third year of Kwang Hsu, or 1917, China will
be, by following this plan, a parliamentary country like Japan
or Russia.'"
China's Constitution
(New York Tribune, October 19, 1908).
Prince Ito, the veteran statesman of Japan, regards the
constitutional experiment in China with more anxiety than
hopefulness. Speaking on the subject in August, 1909, he
expressed doubt of its success, and thought failure would
imperil peace in the Far East. His reasoning in brief was
this:
"First—the enormous area of the Empire and the defective
facilities for communication would greatly impede the
assembling of a Parliament, especially in time of emergency.
Secondly, the immovable character of Chinese conservatism
forbade a change even of the system of taxation,
notwithstanding the State’s urgent need of funds, and there
was, therefore, still greater difficulty in effecting the
radical alterations required by a constitutional system.
Thirdly, the Chinese were untrained in local administration,
the institution of which was an essential prelude to a
national Assembly. He said he was astonished at the silence of
Occidental publicists on this question so vital to the peace
of the Orient."
CHINA: A. D. 1905-1908.
Chinese Exclusion Laws of the United States.
Boycott of American goods in the Empire.
See (in this Volume)
RACE PROBLEMS: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1905-1908.
CHINA: A. D. 1905-1909.
Disputes with Japan.
The Fa-ku-menn Railway and the Antung-Mukden Railway questions.
Settlement of the latter by Japanese ultimatum.
It could hardly have been possible for cordially friendly
relations to be maintained between China and Japan, in the
circumstances which transferred to the latter the extensive
rights and privileges in Southern Manchuria, which Russia had
acquired in that Chinese province by treaty and lease. By a
protocol of December, 1905, after the closing of the
Russo-Japanese War, there was an attempt, between Peking and
Tokyo, to define the effects of the Treaty of Portsmouth,
especially in the bearings of that article of the Treaty which
ceded to Japan, "with the consent of the Government of China,
the lease of Port Arthur, of Talien, and of the adjacent
territories and territorial waters, as well as the rights,
privileges and concessions connected with this lease or
forming part thereof," and likewise, of "all the public works
and property within the territory over which the above lease
extends"; but misunderstandings and differences of opinion
were sure to arise. Whether it has been more by the fault of
Japan than of China that they arose and increased until, in
the past year, they became a serious estrangement, is a
question on which the judgment of foreign observers is
conflicting. The veteran representative of the London Times at
Peking, whose friendship for the Chinese is fast-fixed by long
residence among them, lays the greater weight of
responsibility on Japan, though he finds a lack of
reasonableness on both sides. Japan, he says (writing July 19,
1909), was welcomed in China with open arms after her
victorious war. "No nation ever had a greater opportunity, and
faulty must have been the policy which in so short a time has
wrought so great a change. Japan is now regarded with a
comprehensive distrust that is most disquieting.
Not long ago more than 1,000 Japanese of different classes
were employed in China, in schools and colleges, in the army
and police, in law and prison reform, in agriculture and
sericulture, in telephone and electric light companies, on
railways, and in many other capacities. At present there are
fewer than 400, 52 of whom are in Peking, and these numbers
will be further reduced as existing contracts expire. Similar
reductions are noted in the number of Chinese being educated
in Japan. Three years ago there were more than 20,000; last
year there were more than 10,000. The number now is 5,125, and
only yesterday it was arranged that in the case of a body of
300 Government students just returned to China, only 88 would
be sent to take their places."
"At present each country, through its Press, is protesting
against the unreasonableness of the other. Contradictory
statements on questions of fact are made on almost every point
at issue."
The main contention has related to the projected extension by
China of a railway to Fa-ku-menn from the terminus of an
existing line at Hsin-min-tun, west of Mukden. It was in the
agreement of December, 1905, that no railways in competition
with the South Manchurian line, which Japan took from Russia,
should be built. The Japanese assert that they had in view
this very Fa-ku-menn extension when that stipulation was
inserted. The Chinese declare that the negotiation on their
part had reference solely to the area east of the Liao River.
Japan made two alternative proposals for the settlement of
this question: "One that the Chinese should build a railway
from Fa-ku-menn to the South Manchurian Railway instead of to
Hsin-min-tun, or that the Japanese should build a railway from
the South Manchurian line to Fa-ku-menn and thence to the
North, in which case Japan would withdraw her objection to the
Fa-ku-menn-Hsin-min-tun railway, provided that China undertook
not to extend the line beyond Fa-ku-menn without a previous
agreement with Japan." China is said to have declined
discussion of these proposals, but offered arbitration of the
whole matter. Japan objected to arbitration without previous
discussion of her new proposals. And so the dispute seemed
deadlocked.
Another dispute turned on the interpretation of a clause in
the Agreement of December, 1905, which reads: "China agrees
that Japan has the right to improve the Antung-Mukden Railway
so as to make it fit for the conveyance of commercial and
industrial goods of all nations." Japan undertook, as a
necessary "improvement" of the road, to reconstruct it, with a
change of gauge to connect it with the standard gauge of the
South Manchuria and Korean roads. China denied that the
agreement gave a right to reconstruction. Several other
questions arising between the two peoples have helped to raise
hard feeling on both sides; but these have seemed to be at the
front.
At length on the 6th of August, 1909, Japan brought discussion
of the Antung-Mukden Railway question to a summary ending, by
a note to the Chinese Government which announced that "the
Imperial Government is now compelled to take independent
action, and to proceed to carry out the necessary work of
reconstruction and improvement according to treaty rights."
{98}
Before taking this decisive step, the Japanese Government is
said to have consulted Great Britain and other powers, and to
have had approval of her action from London, if not from
elsewhere. China yielded to the ultimatum, and this leading
cause of quarrel between the great nations of the East was
removed on the 4th of September by the signing, at Mukden, of
a memorandum of agreement, reported in substance as follows:
China agrees, first, not to construct the
Hsin-min-tum-Fa-ku-men Railroad without consulting Japan;
second, that half the capital required to extend the Kirin
Railroad shall be borrowed in Japan; third, that Japan will be
permitted to extend the Yinkow and improve and modernize the
Antung-Mukden Railroads, to which China was bitterly opposed;
fourth, that Japan may work the mines in the Fushun and Yentai
districts, and have joint exploitation of the mines reached by
the Antung and Manchurian Railroad lines.
In the Chientao boundary dispute Japan agrees to recognize
China’s sovereignty, while China agrees to open four trade
marts in the district.
In a letter to a London journal, a few days before this
settlement of the Antung-Mukden Railway question, Lord
Stanhope said:
"The Chinese have surely deeper reasons for opposing this
scheme than the mere fact of reconstruction. They well realize
that this railway, crossing narrow valleys, can have no
commercial future, but is virtually a strategic railway to
strengthen the Japanese grip on Manchuria."
CHINA: A. D. 1906.
A Commission sent to America and Europe for the study of
political and other institutions.
The new spirit astir in China was manifested in the early
months of 1906 by the sending of a large Commission of
carefully chosen men to the United States and Europe, for
observations that would be helpful toward reforms in their own
country. It was headed by two High Commissioners of
distinction, Tai Hung-chi and Tuan Fang, and they were
attended by thirty-five scholars and functionaries of note.
They received much attention during their stay of five weeks
in the United States, and were placed by the Government under
the special charge of Professor J. W. Jenks. Writing
subsequently of their mission Professor Jenks said:
"The purpose of the commission is, primarily, to make such a
study of the political institutions of the various countries
visited that they will be able, on their return, to offer
valuable suggestions for the improvement of their own. There
is even serious talk among the high officials in China of some
form of a constitution. In consequence, the commissioners are
as eager to learn regarding the working of some of our
institutions as regarding their form of organization. Inasmuch
as political reform necessarily involves social reform, even
as a condition precedent, the commission is devoting special
attention to the study of education, in universities and
schools, and to methods of social amelioration, in prisons and
asylums for the insane and the poor. They, however, are not
neglecting the study of our large manufacturing plants, and
have clearly in mind, also, the improvement of the industrial
conditions of China. It is a matter of peculiar interest that
the Empress-Dowager charged them to inquire especially into
the education of girls in the United States, since she hoped,
on their return, to be able to found a school for the
education of the daughters of the princes."
CHINA: A. D. 1906.
Sixty cities being opened to foreign settlement.
A memorandum on the subject of the foreign settlements at the
open ports of China, prepared by the Chinese Secretary of the
American Legation at Peking, was transmitted to the State
Department at Washington in December, 1906. It conveyed the
following information:
"In China proper and in Manchuria 46 cities and towns have
been thrown open already to foreign residence and
international trade. This does not include Dalny, in
Manchuria, leased to Japan; Wei-hai-wei, in Shantung, leased
to Great Britain; Kiaochow, in Shantung, leased to Germany;
Kowloon, in Kuangtung, leased to Great Britain; nor
Kuang-chou-wan, in Kuangtung, leased to France. Besides the
above, there are 3 cities in Tibet thrown open to trade,
making 49 ports in the Empire. In addition to these already
declared open, there are 13 cities whose opening in the
immediate future is arranged for, and 3 others whose opening
depends upon the acceptance by other treaty powers of the
provisions of Article VIII. of the last commercial treaty
between China and Great Britain. No account is taken of the
cities of Turkestan, Mongolia, and the Amur region, in which
Russian subjects have for many years enjoyed privileges of
trade and consular jurisdiction. It will be seen, therefore,
that in the immediate future foreigners will enjoy the right
of residence for purposes of trade at more than 60 cities of

the Chinese Empire."
CHINA: A. D. 1906.
Edict against the use of opium.
See (in this Volume)
OPIUM PROBLEM.
CHINA: A. D. 1906 (January).
Chinese students in Japan.
See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION: CHINA: A. D. 1906.
CHINA: A. D. 1906-1907.
Flood and famine in the region traversed by the Grand Canal.
One of the frequent destructive floods in China which produce
famine befell the region that is traversed by the Grand Canal
in the summer of 1906. Heavy rains covered its vast plains
with lakes of water, which drowned out the crops throughout an
area estimated at 40,000 square miles. From ten to fifteen
millions of people were reduced to famine, and could only be
kept alive until the harvests of another year by the
generosity of the outside world. It was not vainly appealed
to; but the suffering and death in the afflicted country were
appallingly great.
CHINA: A. D. 1906-1907.
Christian Missions.
See (in this Volume)
MISSIONS: CHINA.
CHINA: A. D. 1907-1909.
Restriction on Chinese immigration to Canada.
Labor hostility.
Riotous attacks.
Lately modified regulations.
See (in this Volume)
RACE PROBLEMS: CANADA.
CHINA: A. D. 1908.
Expansion of the Postal Service.
According to a report from Peking on the working of the
Imperial Chinese Post Office in 1908, "the operations show an
unprecedented expansion." The postal routes cover 88,000
miles, of which 68,000 are courier lines. The number of post
offices open in 1901 was 176. There were 2,803 open in 1907,
and 3,493 in 1908. The number of postal articles handled in
1901 was 10,000,000. The number was 168,000,000 in 1907, and
252,000,000 in 1908. The number of parcels was 127,000,
weighing 250 tons, in 1901; 1,920,000, weighing 5,509 tons, in
1907; and 2,445,000, weighing 27,155 tons, in 1908.
CHINA: A. D. 1908.
Administration of the Department of Education.
See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION: CHINA: A. D. 1908.
{99}
CHINA: A. D. 1908.
Chinese students in the United States.
See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION: CHINA: A. D. 1908.
CHINA: A. D. 1908 (November).
Death of the Emperor, Kuang-hsu,
and of the Empress-Dowager, Tze-Hsi.
Accession of the child-Emperor, Hsuan-Tung (Pu-Yi).
The circumstances of the death, almost simultaneously, of the
late Emperor, Kuang-hsu, and of the Dowager-Empress, Tze-Hsi,
who had been the real ruler of the Empire, are involved in
considerable obscurity. The Emperor is said to have died on
the 14th of November, 1908, and the Empress on the following
day. The announcement of their decease was preceded by the
publication of two imperial edicts, one of which made Prince
Chun, of the royal family, Regent of the Empire, while the
other named Pu-Yi, the Prince’s son, three years old, as the
heir presumptive to the throne. As communicated later to
foreign governments, the Regent was given, by another imperial
rescript, full power over the civil and military departments
of government, and the entire appointment and dismissal of
officials. The promised creation of a Parliament was
anticipated in the prescription of his duties, among which
were the following:
"When a Parliament has been established the Prince Regent
shall attend the same in place of the Emperor, but he need not
attend the ordinary sessions. When the Constitutional
Commission meets, the Prince Regent shall likewise represent
the Emperor there.
"The Prince Regent shall have full authority in negotiating
treaties and in appointing representatives abroad.
"The Prince Regent shall enter and leave his chair at the
Ch’ien Ch’ing gate. The yamens, according to their duty, shall
draw up and report on regulations modelled on the precedent
established by Prince Jui-Chung regarding the equipage,
escort, and general preparations for movements of the Prince
Regent outside the palace.
"Every year the Board of Finance shall transfer to the
Department of the Imperial Household the sum of taels 150,000
for disbursement. When the Emperor comes of age, his studies
being completed, and his marriage takes place, the official
body shall unite in asking him to assume personal direction of
the government."
On the 21st of November the members of the Diplomatic Corps at
Peking were received in a body at the palace, to present the
condolences of the Governments they represent on the deaths of
the late Emperor and Empress. As reported to the Associated
Press, there were present on the occasion "every official or
member of the imperial family who recently has been reported
ill, dead by his own hand or estranged from the government,
and the desired impression of official stolidity at Pekin
which, it was most evident, this occasion was intended to
convey, was imparted successfully. This was the answer of the
government to the rumors of suicides and deaths current in
Pekin for the last week.
"Prince Ching, for the first time since the passing away of
their majesties, appeared officially as the head of the
foreign board. The heads of the various governmental
departments were present, with the members of the imperial
clan, and, in addition, several thousand minor officials, all
in white, had assembled at imperial command. At the conclusion
of the functions, in honor of the dead, the diplomats paid
homage to Prince Chun, the regent."
On the 2d of December the strict mourning observed at Peking
was suspended briefly, to permit the ceremonies attending the
ascension of the dragon throne by the child-Emperor, Pu-Yi,
who, as Emperor, took the name of Hsuan-Tung. The ceremonies,
described to the Associated Press, lasted but half an hour.
"The function began by the princes of the imperial family and
the high officials of the empire kowtowing to the memorial
tablets of their late majesties. After this they all kowtowed
in turn to Pu-Yi: Pu-Yi then offered a sacrifice before the
tablets of the Emperor and the Dowager Empress. After this he
was relieved of his dress of mourning and clad with much care
in a diminutive imperial garment, embroidered with the
imperial dragon. His nurses performed this duty with great
attention and care. Thus arrayed, the toddling Emperor
ascended the throne amid a fanfare of drums, bells and
firecrackers. He made his way alone and showed no need of the
assistance which willing hands would have given him had his
little feet faltered. From the throne Pu-Yi kowtowed to his
stepmother, the Dowager Empress Yiahonala. He then received
the kowtows, while still on the throne, of all the princes and
officials present. This over, he descended from the throne and
was again clad in his little dress of mourning.
"The ceremony took place in the throne hall of the Forbidden
City. The officials present were selected with great care and
were the highest men in the empire. According to an old
established custom, a number of humble coolies, men from the
lowest walks of life, were brought into the sacred precincts
of the Forbidden City to act as witnesses. The soldiery played
but an inconspicuous part in the proceedings."
Following the ceremony, an imperial edict proclaiming the
ascension was issued. This edict grants amnesty for certain
specified offences; rewards all the imperial princes,
princesses, and dukes; promotes all officials by one degree
and bestows honors on their parents; erases the demerits
entered against minor officials; advances the degree of
scholars; dismisses all pending petty criminal cases; excuses
certain liabilities, and grants bounties to the soldiers in
the service of the empire.
CHINA: A. D. 1908 (December).
Decree reaffirming the Constitutional Programme of the late
Empress Dowager.
An imperial edict reaffirming the determination of the new
government of China to carry out in its entirety the
Constitutional programme laid down by the late Empress Dowager
of China in August, 1908, was promulgated on the 4th of
December. A literal translation was made public at Washington
in January as follows:
"On the first day of the 8th moon (August 27, 1908), the late
Emperor reverently received the excellent decree of the late
great Empress Dowager strictly ordering the officials and
people of Peking and of the provinces to carry out completely
by the ninth year all the preparatory work, so that at the
appointed time the Constitution may be proclaimed. Also
proclamations for the members of Parliament to assemble, and
other decrees brightly manifested the sacred instructions, and
all between the seas applauded.
{100}
From ourselves down to the officials and people high and low
all must sincerely obey the excellent decree previously
issued. The eighth year of Hsuan T’ung [whose first year dates
from January 22, 1909] is the limit of time. Let there be no
‘reabsorption of sweat’ in this matter. Our hope is that this
will certainly be carried out. Let the officials of Peking and
the provinces on no account look idly on, and procrastinate,
delaying the opportune time. Let patriotism be shone forth.
Exert yourselves that constitutional government may be
established. And court and ‘wilds’ (people) may have peace;
and so we may comfort the spirits of the late great Empress
Dowager and the late Emperor in heaven, and make firm the
foundations of countless years of peaceful government."
CHINA: A. D. 1909.
Progress in the opium reform.
See (in this Volume)
OPIUM PROBLEM.
CHINA: A. D. 1909.
Progress in technical education.
See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION: CHINA: A. D. 1909.
CHINA: A. D. 1909.
Existing treaties with United States and existing laws in the
latter country relative to the admission of Chinamen.
The question of their consistency with each other.
Present status of the question.
See (in this Volume)
RACE PROBLEMS: IN THE UNITED STATES.
CHINA: A. D. 1909 (January).
Abrupt dismissal of Viceroy Yuan Shih-kai from his offices.
Much disturbance of feeling and apprehension of a troublesome
reaction in Chinese policy was excited among the foreign
representatives in China, on the 2d of January, 1909, by the
sudden dismissal of the able and powerful Viceroy of Chi-li,
Yuan Shih-kai, from all his offices. He had been looked upon
as the great leader of progress in China,—the statesman to be
counted on for the most and best influence in the government
of the Empire for some years to come. He had the confidence of
foreign powers, and was supposed to have acquired a sure
footing in the councils at Peking. Latterly, however, it is
said to have become known in Peking that "a powerful Manchu
cabal was working for his downfall, led by Tieh-liang, the
Minister of War, and supported by the aged doctrinaire and
Chinese ex-Viceroy, Chang Chih-tung," and the stroke which
overthrew him at the beginning of the new year was ascribed to
that source. "The cabal has been successful," was the wired
message of the Peking correspondent of the London Times to his paper; and he summarized the merits of the fallen
statesman thus: "No man in China deserved better of his
country. He has been in the forefront of progress, and is the
best administrator China has produced in this generation. When
Governor of Shantung in 1900 his action in resisting the Boxer
insurrection and in safeguarding foreigners really saved the
Empire from disruption. He created China’s modern army and was
the leader of the modern educational movement in China, and
his famous memorial of September 2, 1905, urging the summary
abolition of the antiquated system of literary examination was
epoch-making. Under his Viceroyalty the Metropolitan province
became the most advanced in the Empire. With Tang Shao-yi he
led the anti-opium movement. Since he entered the Ministry for
Foreign Affairs China has attained a measure of respect among
the Powers which was unknown before."
Some weeks after the blow had fallen, and when the peculiarly
Oriental manner of its infliction had been learned, a letter
from Peking to the New York Evening Post told of it as
follows:
"At 11 a. m. on Saturday, January 2, the grand councillors
were summoned by the regent. Prince Ching had evidently heard
a whisper of what was to come, and he pleaded illness. The
other grand councillors answered the summons promptly, but
when Yuan reached the door of the council chamber he was told
that he was not wanted. Three grand councillors therefore went
in and found the regent awaiting them with the edict
dismissing Yuan Shih-kai already drawn up. ‘I want no
discussion. Sign this edict!’ said the regent. Chang Chih-tung
turned to reply. The regent repeated his words impressively,
and the edict was signed without further demur.
"Within the next hour, while Yuan Shih-kai was hastily making
plans for his personal safety, the news flew around Peking and
the city throbbed with excitement. Every one but his immediate
councillors was astounded at Prince Chun’s temerity. Never in
the history of China had such a man as Yuan been thrown out of
office at such short notice. To the Western mind, however,
there was nothing very harsh in the edict; it said simply:
"‘Yuan Shih-kai, a member of the Grand Council and president
of the Waiwupu, formerly received repeated offices and
advancement under the late Emperor. After our enthronement we
gave him great honors, because we considered that his talent
certainly was one that could be made use of, if he exerted
himself in the public service. Unexpectedly Yuan Shih-kai has
now contracted rheumatism in the foot, which makes it hard for
him to walk and difficult for him to attend to the duties of
his offices. Yuan Shih-kai, therefore, is ordered to vacate
his posts and return to his native place to nurse his
disorder. Thus is our great mercy to him manifested.’"
Yuan Shih-kai left Peking in haste, evidently in fear of his
life, and it was expected that his whole following of friends
and supporters would be swept out of their offices and
employments. But no such result followed, and credit began to
be given to the assurances of the Imperial Government that the
dismissal of Yuan meant no reversal of policy or reaction
whatever. He was distrusted, it was intimated, because he had
been disloyal to the late Emperor in 1898, when the latter
attempted great reforms.
See, in Volume VI. of this work,
CHINA: A. D. 1898 (JUNE-SEPTEMBER), and after.
Yuan Shih-kai was then the chief agent and instrument of the
Dowager-Empress in overcoming the well-meaning but weak
sovereign and annulling his reformative work. Hence, it was
claimed, the present Government’s distrust of him.
The Ministers of Great Britain and the United States had
ventured some questions as to the significance of the act, but
their colleagues did not join them, and no further discussion
of the matter diplomatically took place.
CHINA: A. D. 1909 (February).
Meeting of the International Opium Commission at Shanghai.
See (in this Volume)
OPIUM PROBLEM.
CHINA: A. D. 1909 (May).
New Russo-Chinese Agreement concerning the
Chinese Eastern Railway.
Municipalities on the Line.
The Kharbin question.
The Chinese Eastern Railway, so named, is the line which
Russia, by Convention with China in August, 1896, obtained
permission to construct, from a point on her Trans-Siberian
Railway, through Northern Manchuria, to Vladivostok.
{101}
Under that agreement the Russian authorities claimed a right
to institute certain organizations of municipal administration
at Kharbin and other towns of rising importance on the line.
This right was challenged in 1908 by the American Consul at
Kharbin (sometimes written Harbin), Mr. Fisher, who refused to
recognize some ordinances of the Russian administration, on
the ground that he was accredited to China, only, and could
know no other sovereignty in Manchuria than the Chinese. This
led to a new Russo-Chinese Agreement, signed at Peking on the
10th of May, 1909, distinctly authorizing the "organization of
municipalities on the lands" of the Chinese Eastern Railway.
The "sovereign rights of China" are "not to be prejudiced in
any way," says the new Agreement; but "municipal bodies are to
be established in the commercial centres of a certain
importance situated on the lands of the railway. The
inhabitants of these commercial centres, according to the
importance of the localities and the number of the residents,
shall elect delegates by vote, who shall choose an Executive
Committee; or else the residents themselves shall take part in
the business of the municipality and a representative shall be
elected from amongst them who will take upon himself to carry
out the resolutions decided upon by meeting of all the
residents.
"No difference shall be made on the lands of the railway
between the Chinese population and that of other
nationalities; all residents shall enjoy the same rights and
be subject to the same obligations.
"The right to vote shall belong to every member of the
community who owns real estate of a fixed value or who pays a
fixed annual rental and taxes."
Reading no farther in the Agreement than this, imperial Russia
and China would seem to have jointly planted a seed of
democratic municipalities in Manchuria; but that impression is
destroyed by qualifying provisions, such as this:
"The President of the Chiao-She-Chu Court, formerly created] and the director of the railway,
occupying a position superior to the Presidents of the
assemblies of delegates and of committees, have a right of
control and personal revision, which they may exercise
whenever they think fit. … in the event of decisions by the
assembly of delegates not being approved by the President of
the Chiao-She-Chu or the director of the railway, these
decisions shall be returned to the assembly for further
consideration. If the original decision is adopted by a
majority of three-quarters of the members present, it becomes
binding."
The effect of the whole agreement would undoubtedly be to give
the Russian railway officials supreme authority in the
so-called municipalities. Remonstrances against it by the
Government of the United States have been supported by Great
Britain, Germany, and Austria. The question remains open and
troublesome. Dr. Morrison, of The Times, wrote of the
situation in November as follows:
"The situation in Manchuria is receiving close attention from
the Legations because of the increasing difficulty of the
problems created by Russian and Japanese claims to territorial
and administrative jurisdiction in connexion with their
respective railways, claims which conflict with China’s
unimpaired sovereignty and with the treaty rights of other
nations. A tentative proposal was recently submitted to the
consideration of the Diplomatic Body, with the approval of the
Wai-wu-pu and M. Korostovetz, to create an international
settlement at Kharbin on a separate site adjoining the railway
settlement. The proposal was unacceptable to the Powers
interested because it implied a fundamental discrimination in
favour of the railway company, leaving it to exercise, in an
important trade centre, powers which are incompatible with
treaties and which are not conferred by its charter. …
"The Chinese Government entirely fails to avail itself of its
opportunities at this juncture. The local authorities are
unable, and the Peking Government is unwilling, to take any
initiative. The Wai-wu-pu adheres to its policy of shifting
opportunism, as shown by its proposal to the Russian Minister
to cancel, in deference to the protests of the Powers, the
agreement with regard to the Kharbin municipal regulations
concluded on May 10, a proposal unaccompanied by any practical
alternative whereby political requirements might be reconciled
with the undeniable vested interests of the railway. In this
connexion it is interesting to note that, whereas England,
America, France, Germany, Italy, and Austria-Hungary refused
an unqualified assent to the Kharbin agreement, yet no
exception has been taken to the regulations of the Japanese
railway settlements, although, without any reference to China,
they confer the widest powers on the Japanese authorities,
including the right of arbitrary taxation and forcible
expulsion."
The Russian side of the question was presented in a
semi-official statement, made public in October, 1909, as
follows:
"The representatives of certain Powers which have trade
interests in China have, both in Peking and St. Petersburg,
expressed doubts as to the rights of authority exercised by
the Kharbin municipality. These representatives have
endeavoured, in notes presented to the Chinese and Russian
Governments on the matter, and in verbal communications, to
prove that certain paragraphs of the treaty which was signed
at Peking on May 10, 1909, violated the extra-territorial
rights granted to their nationals by treaty with China, and
further that some of the measures taken by the Kharbin
authorities were opposed to the regulations of the
international concession which, in their opinion, has been
recently established at Kharbin.
"It is easy to demonstrate that such a point of view is based
on a misunderstanding. Extra-territorial rights, so far as
they are secured by treaty, comprise exclusively the right of
every foreigner to be judged by his own Consul. They do not,
however, in any way exempt him from the obligation to pay town
and other taxes, or to submit to established regulations. The
difference between the pure Chinese open ports where there are
no foreign concessions and places which lie in the territorial
zone of the Chinese Eastern Railway, and are open to foreign
trade, consists solely in the fact that in the former the
Chinese authorities have the power to make administration
rules at their own discretion, while in places in the
territorial zone of the Eastern Railway the Chinese Government
has, by the concession agreement signed on August 28, 1896,
and the convention of May 10, 1909, transferred the rights of
administration to the Chinese Eastern Railway Company, as a
private concession, so that the company acts as the agent of
the Chinese Government in supervising the administration of
Kharbin and other places.
{102}
"Another misunderstanding has evidently given rise to the
statement that Kharbin has recently been converted into an
international concession. The contracting parties never had
any such intentions. By reason of legal acts, as well as of
traditions and conditions of a local character, under which
Kharbin originated, it is clear that this is a special kind of
concession, which is distinguished from other concessions by
its exceptionally liberal and exceedingly hospitable
regulations in regard to foreigners."
CHINA: A. D. 1909 (October).
Naval plans.
See (in this Volume)
WAR, THE PREPARATIONS FOR: NAVAL: CHINESE.
CHINA: A. D. 1909 (October).
Opening of the Peking-Kalgan Line of Railway.
A purely Chinese undertaking.
See (in this Volume)
RAILWAYS: CHINA.
CHINA: A. D. 1909 (October).
Death of Chang Chih-Tung.
Chang Chih-Tung, Grand Councillor of the Empire of China, died
on the 4th of October, 1909, and Tai Hung-tze, President of
the Board of Justice, was appointed his successor in office.
CHINA: A. D. 1909 (October-November).
Election and opening of Provincial Assemblies.
Beginnings of the institution of Constitutional and
Representative Government.
The following, from the Peking reports to The Times,
London, narrates the actual beginning of the series of
proceedings planned and promised for the gradual institution
of representative constitutional government. The first is of
the date of October 14, 1909:
"To-day marks an era in the establishment of constitutional
government in China. In obedience to the Imperial decrees of
October 19, 1907, and of July 22, 1908, ordering the
establishment, within one year of the latter date, in each of
the 22 provinces of China proper and in Manchuria and the New
Dominion of provincial deliberative assemblies, elections have
been in progress for some time past, and the assemblies meet
in accordance with the regulations for the first time to-day,
the first day of the ninth moon. …
"The elections have taken place according to the regulations,
and halls have been erected for the assemblies to sit wherever
a Viceroy or a Governor has his seat. The number of members
varies from 140 in Chih-li, 114 in Che-kiang, to 30 each in
Kirin, Lchlun-chiang, and Hsin-kiang. The incomplete returns
which have been published show nearly 1,000 voters for each
representative.
"For weeks past reports have been coming in from provincial
authorities asking for instructions and information concerning
this new departure. An edict issued last night renews the
Imperial admonitions to members of the assemblies as to their
deliberations, and to Viceroys and Governors as to their
supervision of the deliberations, and exhorts all to display a
loyal patriotism so that the country may attain strength and
prosperity. The event may be one of great historical
importance."
The next was sent from Peking on the 6th of the following
November:
"Already, in the opening debates of these Provincial
Assemblies, one apprehends the coming chaos, one hears the
first whispering of the approaching storm. Peking, panoplied
in ignorance and petrified in medieval statecraft, trifles
with Demos at its doors, evidently hoping that the Assemblies
will consume their own smoke, and that the Mandarin may be
preserved by the time-honoured device of holding the balance
between contending classes. But the spirits which the
Vermilion Pencil has called from the Celestial deep, though
elected with all possible precautions of ‘silkcoated’
franchise, and under the close direction of Viceroys and
Governors, show signs of scant respect for the Central
Government and of little sympathy for its difficulties.
Already, within a fortnight of their birth, many of the
Assemblies have passed resolutions denouncing several of the
Government’s pet proposals—e. g., the opium monopoly, the
stamp tax, and the foreign loan for the Hankau-Canton and
Hankau-Szechuan Railways. In the case of the stamp tax, 15
provinces have expressed the opinion, and have induced the
local officials in many cases to endorse it, that the proposed
levy is impracticable, so that, in the words of the native
Press, 'its imposition is deferred and the Ministry of Finance
is at its wits’ end.’ Concerning the vexed question of the
railway loan, the Hupei Assembly is reported to have endorsed,
without a dissentient, their chairman’s declaration that the
Government’s scheme should be resisted ‘to the death.’
"The spirit which animates these Assemblies is evidently very
similar to that which speaks through the vernacular Press;
iconoclastic, patriotic—in the sense that it denounces
everything foreign—but lacking, so far, in intelligent
leadership and constructive policy. Their attitude towards the
Central Government is generally one of scarcely veiled
contempt. I cannot illustrate better its general tendency than
in the words of a native journalist who, in a recent criticism
of the Grand Council, congratulated these rulers of China on
their remarkable longevity, but observed that ‘there is little
hope of longevity for an Empire that is governed by such
incompetent survivals.’"
A few weeks later, after the forty days’ session of the new
Provincial Assemblies had ended, this writer had changed his
view. Writing on the 22d of December, he said: "A study of the
reports of the proceedings so far available of the first
session of the Provincial Assemblies supports the contention
that the Throne has been justified in granting the subjects of
the Empire a limited right of speech through their chosen
representatives. The programmes of debate have been strictly
in accordance with the Imperial edict, and the proceedings
have been marked with dignity and decorum. The net result
justifies the declaration made by a high authority, who has
been given special opportunity of forming a judgment, that the
‘members have fulfilled their appointed task of working in
harmony with the executive authorities in the interests of
their respective provinces.’"
CHINA: A. D. 1909-1910.
Proposal of the United States for the neutralization of
Manchurian Railways.
Proposed Chinchow-Aigun Railway.
Late in December, 1909, the United States Government submitted
to that of China, and to the interested Powers, a proposition
which contemplated the neutralization of the railways in
Manchuria, now partly under Russian and partly under Japanese
control, and which looked, also, to an international
undertaking of the construction of a Chinchow-Aigun line, to
tap the Russian Trans-Siberian road at Tsitshar.
{103}
In a published statement subsequently, the American Secretary
of State, Mr. Knox, explained that his Government, during the
recent railway loan negotiations, had pointed out to the
interested Powers that the greatest danger to the policy of
the open door in China and the development of her foreign
trade arose from disagreements among the great Western
nations, and had expressed the opinion that nothing would
afford so impressive an object-lesson to China and the world
as the spectacle of the four great capitalist nations—Great
Britain, Germany, France, and the United States—standing
together for equality of commercial opportunity. The American
Government believed that one of the most effective steps to
this end in order to secure for China the enjoyment of all
political rights in Manchuria and to promote the normal
development of the Eastern provinces was to take the
Manchurian railroads out of Eastern politics and to place them
under an economic and impartial administration by vesting in
China herself the ownership of the railways. Such a policy
would require the cooperation, not only of China, but of
Russia and Japan, both of whom it would enable to shift their
onerous responsibilities in connexion with those railways on
to the shoulders of the combined Powers, including themselves,
and would effect a complete commercial neutralization of
Manchuria.
The proposal of a neutralization of the existing Manchurian
railways was not received with favor in either Japan or
Russia, and the other Powers concerned have manifested a
disposition to defer to the view taken by those two
Governments, which are most immediately touched by it. The
position of the Japanese Government on the question was stated
publicly in an address to the Diet on the 27th of January by
Baron Komura, Minister for Foreign Affairs, who said:
"The United States government recently proposed a plan
regarding the neutralization of Manchurian railways. The
Imperial government, in view of the important Japanese
interests involved, and considering that the proposal came
from a friendly Power with which the empire was on terms of
close intimacy, submitted the question to the most careful
examination. While determined to adhere scrupulously to the
policy of the open door and equal opportunity, it should be
recognized that the realization of the proposed plan would
involve radical changes in the condition of affairs in
Manchuria which were established by the treaties of Portsmouth
and Peking. The change must be attended by serious
consequences. In the region affected by the South Manchurian
Railway numerous undertakings have been promoted in the belief
that the railway would remain in our possession. As a
consequence, the Imperial government, with regret, was obliged
to announce its inability to consent to the proposal. I trust
that the United States will appreciate our position and that
the other Powers will equally recognize the justice of Japan’s
attitude."
The Russian Government is understood to have taken
substantially the same ground, on the general question of a
neutralization of Manchurian railways. There and elsewhere,
however, there is said to be a readiness to consider the
incidental proposition of an internationally financed
Chinchow-Aigun road.
----------CHINA: End--------
CHINA EMERGENCY APPEAL COMMITTEE.
See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION: CHINA: A. D. 1909.
CHINCHOW-AIGUN RAILWAY, Proposed.
See (in this Volume)
CHINA: A. D. 1909-1910.
CHINESE HIGHBINDER ASSOCIATIONS:
Their dangerous character.
See (in this Volume)
SAN FRANCISCO: A. D. 1902.
CHINESE IMMIGRATION:
The Resistance to it in America, Australia, and South Africa.
See (in this Volume)
RACE PROBLEMS.
CH’ING, Prince of.
See (in this Volume)
CHINA: A. D. 1901-1908.
CHOATE, Joseph H.:
Commissioner Plenipotentiary to the Second Peace Conference.
See (in this Volume)
WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1907.
CHRISTENSEN, Jens Christian.
See (in this Volume)
DENMARK: A. D. 1901, and 1905-1909.
CHRISTIAN IX., King of Denmark:
Death.
See (in this Volume)
DENMARK: A. D. 1906.
CHRISTIAN MISSIONS.
See (in this Volume)
MISSIONS, CHRISTIAN.
CHUN, Prince:
Regent of China.
See (in this Volume)
CHINA: A. D. 1908 (NOVEMBER).
CHURCH OF SCOTLAND:
Act of Parliament authorizing change of the Formula of
Subscription required from its ministers.
See (in this Volume and Volume 4.)
SCOTLAND: A. D. 1904-1905.
CHURCH, Roman Catholic.
See (in this Volume and Volume 4.)
PAPACY.
CHURCH AND STATE:
The French Separation Law and its execution.
See (in this Volume)
FRANCE: A. D. 1905-1906, 1906, and 1907;
also, PAPACY.
CHURCH AND STATE:
Russia: Emancipation of the Church urged by M. Witte.
See (in this Volume)
RUSSIA: A. D. 1905 (APRIL-AUGUST).
CHURCH SCHOOL CONTROVERSIES.
See (in this Volume)
FRANCE: A. D. 1903;
ENGLAND: A. D. 1902, and 1906;
CANADA: A. D. 1905.
CHURCHILL, Winston L.:
Under Secretary for the Colonies.
See (in this Volume)
ENGLAND: A. D. 1905-1906.
CHURCHILL, Winston L.:
President of the Board of Trade.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1908 (April).
CHURCHILL, Winston L.:
To the British Suffragettes.
See (in this Volume)
ELECTIVE FRANCHISE: WOMAN SUFFRAGE.
CHURCHILL, Winston L.:
On the Budget of 1909 and the House of Lords.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1909 (APRIL-DECEMBER).
CITIZENSHIP, American:
Principles of Naturalization defined.
The New Law.
See (in this Volume)
NATURALIZATION.
CITY GOVERNMENT.
See (in this Volume)
MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT.
CITY PLANNING.
See (in this Volume)
SOCIAL BETTERMENT;
also, CHICAGO: A. D. 1909.
CIVIC FEDERATION, The National.
See (in this Volume)
SOCIAL BETTERMENT: UNITED STATES;
also, NATIONAL CIVIC FEDERATION.
{104}
CIVIL SERVICE REFORM: CANADA: A. D. 1908.
Introduction of Competitive Examinations and the Merit
System of appointment and promotion.
An "Act to Amend the Civil Service Act," which came into force
September 1, 1908, divides the Civil Service of the Dominion
into the Inside Service and the Outside Service, the former
embracing "that part of the public service in or under the
several departments of the Executive Government of Canada and
in the offices of the Auditor General, the Clerk of the Privy
Council, and the Governor-General’s Secretary, employed at the
City of Ottawa, or at the Experimental Farm Station or the
Dominion Astronomical Observatory near Ottawa." The employés
of this Inside Service are required to be classified according
to their salaries, in three divisions, and all appointments to
positions in it are (except as otherwise provided in the Act)
to "be by competitive examination, which shall be of such a
nature as will determine the qualifications of candidates for
the particular positions to which they are to be appointed,
and shall be held by the Commission from time to time in
accordance with the regulations made by it and approved by the
Governor in Council."
For the administration of the Act a Civil Service Commission
is created, consisting of two members appointed by the
Governor in Council, who are to have no other office or
employment, and who may employ necessary assistance for the
examinations they conduct. The following are provisions of the
Act:
"No person shall be admitted to such an examination unless he
is a natural-born or naturalized British subject, and has been
a resident of Canada for at least three years, and is, at the
time of the examination, of the full age of eighteen years and
not more than thirty-five years, and presents the required
certificates as to health, character and habits.
"Before holding any such examination the Commission shall
require each head of a department to furnish it with the
number of additional permanent officers or clerks likely to be
required in his department within the next six months.
"On this basis, and having regard also to the requirement of
the several departments for temporary services, a computation
shall be made by the Commission of the number of competitors
to be selected at the next ensuing examination.
"If there remain from a previous examination successful
competitors who have not received appointments, their number
shall be deducted in making the computation, and their names,
in the order of merit, shall be placed at [the top of the
list] to be prepared in accordance with section 17 of this
Act.
"Thereupon due notice of the examination shall be given by the
Commission, stating the character and number of the positions
to be competed for.
"Immediately after the examination the Commission shall make
out a list of the successful competitors thereat for each
position, in the order of merit, up to the number computed in
accordance with Section 15.
"From the said list the Commission, on the application of the
deputy head, with the approval of the head, of any department,
shall supply the required clerks, whether for permanent or
temporary duty. …
"The selections shall be, so far as practicable, in the order
of the names on the list, but the Commission may select any
person who in his examination shows special qualifications for
any particular subject. …
"The cause of the rejection shall be reported by the deputy
head to the Commission, who shall thereupon select another
person to take the place of the one rejected, and decide
whether the latter shall be struck off the list or allowed a
trial in another department.
"After a person so selected has served a probationary term of
six months, [he shall be deemed] to be permanently accepted
for the service. …
"The head of the department, on the report in writing of the
deputy head, may, at any time after two months from the date
of assignment, and before the expiration of six months, reject
any person assigned to his department. …
"Promotion, other than from the third to the second division,
shall be made for merit by the Governor in Council upon the
recommendation of the head of the department, based on the
report in writing of the deputy head and accompanied by a
certificate of qualification by the Commission to be given
with or without examination, as is determined by the
regulations of the Commission.
"Except as herein otherwise provided, vacancies in the first
division shall be filled by promotions from the second
division."
Regulations prepared by the Civil Service Commission appointed
under the Act require fees, ranging from $2 to $10 to be paid
by the candidates for examination.
CIVIL SERVICE REFORM: United States: A. D. 1901-1909.
Progress of reform under President Roosevelt.
At the close of the administration of President Roosevelt, the
journal published by the National Civil Service Reform League,
entitled Good Government, bore the following testimony
to the fidelity with which the principles of the reform had
been upheld and promoted by the retiring executive:
"One of the first acts of President Roosevelt was the
reorganization of the civil service commission, which, under
the administration of President McKinley, had become lax and
ineffective. Since then the enforcement of the law and rules
by the commission has been sincere, vigorous and impartial.
Particularly strict has been the enforcement of the
prohibition against political assessments. Twice in the midst
of political campaigns has the President ordered the removal
of prominent officials for levying assessments on their
subordinates.
"During his administration President Roosevelt has extended
the scope of competition to many new and important offices.
Notable among these extensions have been the restoration of
the field service of the War Department (withdrawn by
President McKinley) and the classification of the rural free
delivery service (now numbering some 40,000), the forestry
service, deputy collectors of internal revenue, deputy
collectors of customs, deputy naval officers, and cashiers and
finance clerks in post offices. Prevented by the civil service
law from ‘classifying’ unskilled laborers, President
Roosevelt, under general executive authority, has prescribed a
system of examination for laborers in Washington and the
principal cities. By executive order of June 27, 1906, he
provided a system of examination and promotion for the
consular service which has done away with the more flagrant
evils of that service. His latest and most striking extension
has been the classification of over 15,000 fourth-class
postmasters, thereby taking them out of politics.
{105}
"He has prohibited the participation of competitive officials
in politics further than to vote as they please and to express
privately their opinions, and has made this prohibition
effective by incorporating it in the civil service rules, thus
giving to the commission the power to investigate. He has by
vetoing the Crumpacker census bill defeated the attempt by
Congress to obtain as spoils some 4,000 clerkships for the
next census.
"This is a brief record of President Roosevelt’s service to
civil service reform during his administration. In considering
the criticisms of his course which have been made from time to
time by the League and the press, this service should be kept
in mind and carefully weighed. For instance, against this
record of constant advancement, the suspension of the rules in
individual cases—in all about 370—although in our opinion
arbitrary and dangerous as precedents, are of comparatively
minor importance. A few have been made for political reasons;
the far greater number, however, were acts of charity or
personal impulse, and President Roosevelt himself realized the
danger in this practice and took steps to curtail it.
"In passing on the justice of the other criticisms of
President Roosevelt’s course regarding the civil service one
should keep in mind the distinction which he has so sharply
drawn between the classified and the unclassified service.
This is clearly set forth in a reply to a letter from the
civil service commission calling his attention to the omission
from the postal regulations of President Cleveland’s
‘pernicious activity’ order, and quoting a passage from the
11th report of the commission. President Roosevelt said:
‘I personally drew the paragraph which you quote. The
paragraph was drawn with a view to making a sharp line between
the activity allowed to public servants within the classified
service and those without the classified service—the latter
under our system are as a rule chosen largely with reference
to political considerations, and as a rule are, and expect to
be, changed with the change of parties. … It seemed to me at
the time, and I still think, that the line thus drawn was wise
and proper.’
"In considering such appointments to positions in the
unclassified service as that of James C. Clarkson as surveyor
of the Port of New York for instance, a just analysis must
take into account these frankly expressed views. President
Roosevelt drew a line between the classified and unclassified
service, and as to the latter recognized and availed himself
to some extent of existing conditions. He believed that so
long as positions remained in the unclassified service it was
impractical to eliminate political considerations and that any
attempt to do so led to hypocrisy. His remedy was to place the
positions in the classified service, wherever practicable. And
he has extended the line of the classified service higher than
ever before. The League does not believe this theory is ideal,
but in carrying it out the President has certainly not set the
reform back. Criticism based only on the fact that one who has
rendered great service to a cause has not accomplished all
that its ardent supporters wish to accomplish can be properly
set down as captious.
"In performing its duty to the public, the League has at
various times during his administration frankly criticised
certain acts of President Roosevelt, which in its opinion were
not in line with the best interests of the service. But this
does not prevent us from recognizing that during his entire
administration President Roosevelt has been loyal to the
reform with which he has been so prominently identified. We do
not believe that any act of his was intended to injure the
reform. Wherever he has thought it practicable to extend the
reform he has done so. A President less devoted to the reform
would not have been criticised for what President Roosevelt
has failed to do."
Good Government,
March, 1909.
The following exhibit of the whole progress in civil service
reform, from its beginning to the end of 1908, was made in the
annual report of the Council of the National Civil Service
Reform League, presented at the meeting of the League, on the
17th of December in that year:
"The whole United States civil service, in 1883, consisted of
110,000 persons, and of these 14,000 were put under the civil
service law. Now the federal civil service has grown to
352,000 positions, and, including the last extension, those
under the competitive system have increased from 14,000 to
about 222,000. Not only in numbers but in proportion to the
total has the competitive service increased from 12.7% in 1883
to 63% now."
CIVIL SERVICE REFORM: A. D. 1902-1903.
Extension of classification to the Rural Free Delivery Service.
Order concerning unclassified laborers.
"During the year ended June 30 [1903], 25,566 persons were
appointed through competitive examinations under the
civil-service rules. This was 12,672 more than during the
preceding year, and 40 per cent of those who passed the
examinations. This abnormal growth was largely occasioned by
the extension of classification to the rural free-delivery
service and the appointment last year of over 9,000 rural
carriers. A revision of the civil-service rules took effect on
April 15 last, which has greatly improved their operation. …
Executive orders of July 3, 1902; March 26, 1903, and July 8,
1903, require that appointments of all unclassified laborers,
both in the Departments at Washington and in the field
service, shall be made with the assistance of the United
States Civil Service Commission, under a system of
registration to test the relative fitness of applicants for
appointment or employment. This system is competitive, and is
open to all citizens of the United States qualified in respect
to age, physical ability, moral character, industry, and
adaptability for manual labor: except that in case of veterans
of the civil war the element of age is omitted. This system of
appointment is distinct from the classified service and does
not classify positions of mere laborer under the civil-service
act and rules. Regulations in aid thereof have been put in
operation in several of the Departments and are being
gradually extended in other parts of the service. The results
have been very satisfactory, as extravagance has been checked
by decreasing the number of unnecessary positions and by
increasing the efficiency of the employees remaining."
President’s Message,
December 7, 1903.
{106}
CIVIL SERVICE REFORM: A. D. 1906.
Excellent legislation in Pennsylvania.
See (in this Volume)
PENNSYLVANIA.
CIVIL SERVICE REFORM: A. D. 1906-1909.
The Reform of the Consular Service.
A great and greatly needed reformation of the consular service
of the United States was begun in 1906, by the passage of an
Act of Congress, approved April 5, which provided for the
reorganization of the service, primarily by the classifying
and grading of the consuls-general and the consuls, and the
fixing of salaries in each class. Consuls-general were placed
by the Act in seven classes, with salaries as follows:
Class one, twelve thousand dollars.
London, Paris.
Class two, eight thousand dollars.
Berlin, Habana, Hongkong, Hamburg, Rio de Janeiro, Shanghai.
Class three, six thousand dollars.
Calcutta, Cape Town, Constantinople, Mexico City,
Montreal, Ottawa, Vienna, Yokohama.
Class four, five thousand five hundred dollars.
Antwerp, Barcelona, Brussels, Canton, Frankfort, Marseilles,
Melbourne, Panama, Saint Petersburg, Seoul, Tientsin.
Class five, four thousand five hundred dollars.
Auckland, Beirut, Buenos Ayres, Callao, Chefoo, Coburg,
Dresden, Guayaquil, Halifax, Hankau, Mukden, Munich,
Niuchwang, Rome, Rotterdam, Saint Gall, Singapore.
Class six, three thousand five hundred dollars.
Adis Ababa, Bogota, Budapest, Guatemala, Lisbon, Monterey,
San Salvador, Stockholm, Tangier.
Class seven, three thousand dollars.
Athens, Christiania, Copenhagen.
Consuls were divided among nine classes, receiving salaries
that range from $8000 in the first class and $6000 in the
second, down to $2000 in the ninth. The first and second
classes hold but one incumbent each, at Liverpool and

Manchester, respectively. There are eight places in the third
class, twelve in the fourth, and then the numbers mount
rapidly, up to the sixty-nine included in the ninth class.
All fees allowed to be collected for services rendered in
connection with the duties of the consular office (which the
President may prescribe) are directed by the Act to be
accounted for thereafter and paid into the Treasury of the
United States. All consular officers whose salaries exceed
$1000 are forbidden to be interested in or to transact any
business as a merchant, factor, broker, or other trader, or a
clerk or other agent of one, or to practice as a lawyer for
compensation, or to be interested in the fees or compensation
of any lawyer. The whole service is placed under inspection by
five inspectors, to be appointed from the members of the
consular service; and each consular office must be inspected
at least once in every two years.
In June following this important enactment, the Secretary of
State, Mr. Root, submitted to President Roosevelt the draft of
a recommended executive order, which prescribed new rules to
be followed in filling the consular offices, as classified by
the recent Act. In doing so, the Secretary made this
explanation: "The main features of the order were embodied in
the early forms of the Consular Reorganization Bill passed at
this session of Congress, but they were dropped out, largely
for the reason that their enactment by Congress would appear
to be an infringement upon the President’s constitutional
power to appoint consuls. Your adoption of these rules by
executive order will be free from that objection, and judging
from the very positive commendation which many members of both
Houses have expressed for the proposed change in the method of
appointing consuls, I do not doubt that the new system will
receive the hearty approval of the Senate and of Congress
whenever occasion may arise for an expression upon the
subject."
The recommended order was approved and issued by the
President. "Subject to the advice and consent of the Senate,"
it declared in substance as follows:
(1) Vacancies in the office of Consul-General and in the
office of Consul above class 8 (salary, $2500) shall be filled
by promotion from the lower grades of the service, based upon
"ability and efficiency, as shown in the service";
(2) vacancies in the office of Consul of these two remaining
classes, 8 and 9, are to be filled
(a) by promotion, "on the basis of ability and efficiency, as
shown in the service," of consular clerks, vice-consuls, and
consular agents, and
(b) by new appointments from candidates who have passed an
examination;
(3) officials in the service of the Department of State, with
salaries of $2000 or upward, shall be eligible for promotion,
always on the basis of ability and efficiency, as shown in the
service, to any grade of the consular service above the eighth
class;
(4) the board of examiners for admission to the service shall
consist of the Secretary of State (or such other officer of
the department as the President shall designate), the chief of
the Consular Bureau, and the chief examiner of the Civil
Service Commission (or such other officer, as this commission
shall designate);
(5) this board of examiners shall formulate the rules for
examinations;
(6) among the compulsory subjects shall be at least one modern
language other than English, the natural industrial and
commercial resources and commerce of the United States,
political economy, and the elements of international,
commercial, and maritime law;
(7) 80 per cent. shall be necessary for eligibility;
(8) candidates must be over twenty-one and under fifty years
of age, citizens of the United States, and of good character
and physique. They must also have been specially designated by
the President for examination.
Other significant provisions of the order are to the effect
that no promotion shall be made except for efficiency and
conduct, that "neither in the designation for examination or
certification or appointment will the political affiliations
of the candidate be considered"; and that "due regard should
be had to the rule that, as between candidates of equal merit,
appointments should be made so as to secure in the service
proportional representation of all the States and
Territories."
The first examination of candidates for appointment under this
order was held on the 14th and 15th of March, 1907, since
which time no one has entered the consular service of the
United States without satisfying that test.
In June, 1908, Secretary Root announced the promotion or
transfer of nearly sixty consular offices, setting in motion
the desirable advancement of these officials from post to
post, to make the best use of their proved capacity and
acquired experience. About a year later, Mr. Root’s successor,
Secretary Knox, made public the promotion of twenty-seven
incumbents of consular office, and the appointment of
twenty-three new recruits to the service from his eligible
list. So the long striven-for reform of the American consular
service may safely be said to have arrived.
{107}
A bill introduced in the Senate, providing for a permanent
consular service, based on competitive examinations, was
decided by the Committee on Foreign Relations to be
unconstitutional, for the reason that the Constitution itself
confers the power of appointment of consular officers upon the
President, and that Congress has no right to limit this power
in any way. President Taft, by an executive order, has
practically put the scope of the proposed bill into effect,
thereby, in part, limiting the power conferred upon himself.
This, in the opinion of the Senators, is all that can be done
legally.
CIVIL SERVICE REFORM: A. D. 1908.
Extension of the Merit System to nearly one-third of the
Fourth Class Postmasters of the country.
In the Annual Report of the Council of the National Civil
Service Reform League, presented at the annual meeting of the
League in December, 1908, it was said:
"The great event of the year, which so aptly commemorates the
25th anniversary of the passage of the Pendleton bill, is the
extension of the competitive system to all fourth class
postmasters in the part of the country north of the Ohio and
east of the Mississippi, that is, in the New England States,
New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois,
Wisconsin, and Michigan. This is an extension covering more
positions than suggested by the civil service commission. It
is an extension large enough to be of present advantage, is
made in the more thickly settled portions of the country,
where it is easiest to carry it out, and yet it is not on so
large a scale as to invite mistakes or perhaps partial
failure. This extension covers about 15,000 positions. The
order of President Cleveland of May 26, 1896, covered about
31,000 places; and yet, from the point of political
significance, this present extension is the most important, we
believe, in the history of civil service reform since January
16, 1883, and when its purpose is fully carried out it will
include some 53,000 places."
See, in Volume VI. of this work,
Civil Service Reform: United States.
The report then reviewed the efforts that had been in progress
since 1889, with the support of Presidents Cleveland and
Roosevelt, to bring about the inclusion of this class of
postmasters, at the least, under the rule of appointment
subject to competitive examination. President Roosevelt, in
his annual Message of 1907, had said:
"The fourth-class postmasters’ convention has passed a very
strong resolution in favor of placing the fourth-class
postmasters under the civil-service law. The Administration
has already put into effect the policy of refusing to remove
any fourth-class postmasters save for reasons connected with
the good of the service; and it is endeavoring so far as
possible to remove them from the domain of partisan politics.
It would be a most desirable thing to put the fourth-class
postmasters in the classified service. It is possible that
this might be done without Congressional action, but, as the
matter is debatable, I earnestly recommend that the Congress
enact a law providing that they be included under the
civil-service law and put in the classified service."
Congress refused the desired legislation. The law committee of
the League was unanimous in the opinion that the President
held authority already to make the change by Executive Order,
and Mr. Roosevelt gave a hearing on the subject to Messrs.
McIlhenny and Greene, of the National Civil Service
Commission, and the Honorable Richard Henry Dana, Chairman of
the Council of the League. Evidently he became persuaded that
his authority was sufficient, and was prepared to act
accordingly. About the middle of November, 1908, the National
League of Postmasters of the United States, which had been
organized in 1905, sent a Committee, with its President, Mr.
A. K. Hoag, of Orchard Park, New York, to present to the
authorities at Washington their claim to a footing of
non-political appointment under civil service rules. By good
fortune they met at Washington Mr. Dana and Mr. Goodrich, of
the National C. S. R. League, who were visiting the Capital on
the same errand, and the doubled appeal had quick success. In
an interview with President Roosevelt, the Committee of the
Postmasters’ League received assurances that he would issue an
order on the subject, provided that the President-elect, Mr.
Taft, would approve his taking that step. The Committee went
at once to the Hot Springs in Virginia, where the
President-elect was then sojourning, received his ready
endorsement of the plan, and conveyed it to the President in
power. A fortnight later, on the 1st day of December, the
memorable order was proclaimed. On the 1st of the following
February a plan of filling vacancies was put into effect.
It was wise, no doubt, to apply the extension of the reform in
post-office appointments to one large and important section of
the country, and obtain a showing of practical results, before
attempting to overturn the old system as a whole. That more
will follow in due time is reasonably sure. Mr. Hoag, the
President of the National League of Postmasters, in a private
note, remarks:
"It is already evident that the change is to redound to a
better service. Scores of new buildings, new quarters and new
equipments are being installed by the emancipated postmasters;
which shows that postmasters of this class dare, for the first
time, to invest their money in better equipment, feeling that
they are likely to remain postmasters long enough to make the
investment a paying one, now that their tenure of office does
not depend upon their relations to a political faction or
boss."
CIVIL SERVICE REFORM: A. D. 1909.
The Census Bill.
Inveteracy of Spoils-seeking in Congress.
Veto of the bill in its first form by the President.
The Amended Bill which became law.
The greatness of the advance of civil service reform in the
United States, within the quarter century since its beginning,
is one of the most hopefully inspiring facts in recent
American history. But, by the side of it stands the warning
and shaming fact, that it has been achieved, from first to
last, by forces outside of Congress, and outside of all other
legislative bodies which supposedly represent the political
will of the people. Every measure of legislation that has
promoted it has been wrung from unwilling majorities in those
bodies,—yielded only when they feared to refuse. That
Congress, in both Houses, would wreck with eagerness, to-day,
if it dared, the bettered public service of the nation, to
recover for its members and their party henchmen the old
"spoils" of office and place, was shown unmistakably, within
the last year of this record, by its action on the bill to
provide for the taking of the Census of 1910.
{108}
The President, and every responsible official connected with
the Census Bureau, had borne testimony to the inefficiency and
wasteful costliness of previous census-taking under the old
system of appointment, and had besought Congress to provide in
the bill for an effective test of qualification for the
employment by competitive examination. Considerable majorities
in both House and Senate turned an equally deaf ear to all
considerations of public interest in the matter, and passed a
bill which enabled Senators and Representatives to parcel out
between themselves the large number of appointments to be
made.
President Roosevelt did not hesitate to veto the bill, and
gave it a thorough dissection in the Message which explained
his disapproval. In part, his comments on the Act offered to
him were as follows:
"Section 7 of the act provides in effect that appointments to
the census shall be under the spoils system, for this is the
real meaning of the provision that they shall be subject only
to non-competitive examination. The proviso is added that they
shall be selected without regard to political party
affiliations. But there is only one way to guarantee that they
shall be selected without regard to politics and on merit, and
that is by choosing them after competitive examination from
the lists of eligibles provided by the Civil Service
Commission. The present Director of the Census in his last
report states the exact fact about these non-competitive
examinations when he says:
‘A non-competitive examination means that every one of the
many thousands who will pass the examinations will have an
equal right to appointment, and that personal and political
pressure must in the end, as always before, become the
determining factor with regard to the great body of these
temporary employments. I cannot too earnestly urge that the
Director of the Census be relieved from this unfortunate
situation.’
"To provide that the clerks and other employés shall be
appointed after non-competitive examination, and yet to
provide that they shall be selected without regard to
political party affiliations, means merely that the
appointments shall be treated as the perquisites of the
politicians of both parties, instead of as the perquisites of
the politicians of one party. I do not believe in the doctrine
that to the victor belongs the spoils; but I think even less
of the doctrine that the spoils shall be divided without a
fight by the professional politicians on both sides; and this
would be the result of permitting the bill in its present
shape to become a law. Both of the last censuses, the eleventh
and the twelfth, were taken under a provision of law excluding
competition; that is, necessitating the appointments being
made under the spoils system. Every man competent to speak
with authority because of his knowledge of and familiarity
with the work of those censuses has stated that the result was
to produce extravagance and demoralization."
The veto went to Congress on the 5th of February, 1909, one
month before the expiration of President Roosevelt’s term of
office. His successor-to-be was well known to be in sympathy
with his views of the public service, and no attempt was made
either to pass the bill over the veto, or to proffer its
spoils-seeking provisions to the new occupant of the
Presidency when he came in. Congress was compelled, in this
case, as in many before, to surrender its cherished spoils of
salaried public employment to civil service reform, simply
because public interests and public sentiment are better
represented, as a rule, in the White House than in the
Capitol, which is not a pleasing fact.
During the extra session that was called by President Taft, in
March, an amended bill was passed which came near to
satisfying the demands of reform. It kept a little opening for
political favoritism, in a proviso, that the director of the
Census may, "when the exigencies of the service require," make
his selections from the list of eligibles, not by the
candidates’ rating, but on the ground of "immediate
availability" or previous experience in census work; but this
was so small a loophole that the President’s signing of the
bill was generally approved. "The act empowers the director of
the census to appoint special agents to whom will be assigned
principally the work of obtaining statistics from
manufacturing establishments, mines and quarries. While no
qualifying test is required by law for the appointment of
these agents, Director Durand has nevertheless provided for
their selection subject to a carefully worked out scheme of
competitive examinations, to be conducted by the United
States civil service commission. In rating the candidates the
experience declaration and practical test are to be given
equal credit. All candidates who receive a combined rating of
70 will be placed on an eligible list, from which selection
will be made as the needs of the service require. Eligibility,
according to the instructions, ‘is not of itself a guarantee
of appointment, but selection will be made solely with
reference to equipment and availability for appointment.’"
Good Government,
October, 1909.
CIVIL VETO, in Papal Elections.
See (in this Volume)
PAPACY: A. D. 1904.
CIVILISTAS, The.
See (in this Volume).
PERU.
CLANRICARDE ESTATE, Evicted tenants of the.
See (in this Volume)
IRELAND: A. D. 1907.
CLARION FELLOWSHIP.
See (in this Volume)
SOCIALISM: ENGLAND: A. D. 1909.
CLARK, Edgar E.:
On the Anthracite Coal Strike Arbitration Commission.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1902-1903.
CLEMENCEAU, Eugene:
In the Sarrien-Clemenceau Ministry, and as Prime Minister.
See (in this Volume)
FRANCE: A. D. 1906, and after.
CLEMENCEAU, Eugene:
Disclaims for France the desire to revenge the German
conquest of Alsace.
See (in this Volume)
WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1907-1908.
CLEMENCEAU, Eugene:
Triumph in the senatorial elections of 1909.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1909 (JANUARY).
CLEMENCEAU, Eugene:
His downfall from Premiership produced by an
intemperate speech.
See (in this Volume)
FRANCE. A. D. 1909 (JULY).
CLERICAL PARTY.
See (in this Volume)
FRANCE: A. D. 1903;
BELGIUM: A. D. 1904;
GERMANY: A. D. 1906-1907.
CLEVELAND, Grover:
Trustee of stock controlling the
Equitable Life Assurance Society.
See (in this Volume)
INSURANCE, LIFE.
{109}
CLEVELAND, Ohio: A. D. 1901-1908.
The Farm Colony Experiment.
See (in this Volume)
CRIME AND CRIMINOLOGY, PROBLEMS OF.
COAL, Wasteful mining and use of.
See (in this Volume)
Conservation of Natural Resources.
COAL AND COKE CARTELS.
See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL (IN GERMANY).
COAL COMBINATION, Alleged Anthracite:
Proceedings of Government against it.
See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1907-1909,
AND RAILWAYS: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1906-1909.
COAL MINES EIGHT HOURS ACT.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR PROTECTION: HOURS OF LABOR: ENGLAND.
COAL MINING STRIKES.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION.
COBALT SILVER MINES.
See (in this Volume)
CANADA: A. D. 1903, and 1906-1907.
COLLECTIVISM.
See (in this Volume)
SOCIALISM.
COLLEGES.
See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION.
COLOGNE:
Insurance against unemployment.
See (in this Volume)
POVERTY, PROBLEMS OF: UNEMPLOYMENT.
COLOMBIA: A. D. 1898-1902.
Castro, of Venezuela, and the Liberals (Yellows) of Colombia.
How they helped one another.
The following passages are from an article in the American
Review of Reviews on "South American War Issues," by Edwin
Emerson, Jr., who spent some time with the Colombian
insurgents in 1902 and acquired a good knowledge of the
troubled political conditions in that republic and its near
neighbors. It adds something to what is told in Volume VI. of
this work concerning the revolt started in 1899 by Rafael
Uribe-Uribe, and about its relation to the beginnings of the
career of Cipriano Castro, in Venezuela
See, in Volume VI,
COLOMBIA, and VENEZUELA).
"At the time when Spain was losing Cuba, the last Congress of
Colombia sat in Bogota. The Liberal party had but one
spokesman in the Congress—to wit, Rafael Uribe-Uribe. The
government majority championed the cause of Spain. Many of the
more ardent Liberals were fighting in the field for ‘Cuba
Libre.’ Uribe-Uribe was the only man in the Congress who spoke
for America as against Spain. He was hissed down. Next, the
Panama Canal question came up. The French concession was to be
extended for ten years. Again Uribe-Uribe spoke for America as
against France. The project was voted down. The Congress was
dissolved. President San Clemente, on his own motion, extended
the French concession. For this he is said to have received one
million dollars, cash. Then the revolution broke out, and
Uribe-Uribe took the field, in Santander, the richest
coffee-growing state of Colombia. He fell upon the town of
Cúcuta and took it, only to be driven out again after a
disastrous rout at Palo Negro. To make things worse for the
rebels, the Bishop of Santander ordered the excommunication of
those who would not renounce liberalism or all connection with
Liberals. It was a crushing blow, aimed at the wives and
daughters of the fighting insurgents.
"While affairs were thus disturbed in Santander, Cipriano
Castro, a Venezuelan exile living in Cúcuta, profited by the
occasion to lead a small band of Colombian Liberals into
Venezuela. They dashed across the border by night, and fell
into Castro’s native town, Capachio Viejo. Castro’s father and
five brothers, with other townsfolk, joined his standard and
helped him win his first battle over a small detachment of
Venezuelan government troops. Now the number of his adherents
grew, especially as he won battle after battle or bought over
his rival leaders. After a crushing defeat at Valencia,
President Andrade fled the country, and Castro entered Caracas
in triumph. His early Colombian adherents got Venezuelan
government jobs.
"All went well for a while, especially after the prompt
suppression of a counter-revolution, until Castro’s sympathies
with the Colombian Liberals in the field began to tell on his
foreign policy. Uribe-Uribe had been badly beaten in Colombia.
He was made welcome by Castro in Venezuela, and was intrusted
with the command of a division on the Colombian frontier. The
command was recruited from Colombians across the border. At
the same time, Castro arbitrarily stopped all navigation on
the Zulia and Catacumbo rivers, running from Colombian
Cordillera to the Lake of Maracaibo, in Venezuela. This was a
death-blow to the coffee industry of the Colombian state of
Santander, which has no other outlet to the sea. Cúcuta was
ruined. A German house failed for half a million dollars, an
American hacienda lost $200,000, and other foreign merchants
suffered in proportion. All commerce in Cúcuta and Maracaibo
coffee almost came to a standstill. Then it was that the
government forces in Santander, to bring relief to the
stricken district, tried to open the closed rivers by a sudden
armed invasion into that region. For the sake of appearances,
they were led by Ranjel Garbiras, a Venezuelan revolutionist.
They made for the prosperous town of San Cristobal, but
Uribe-Uribe had managed to gather his corps of insurgents, and
beat off the attack in a three days’ battle. Some two thousand
men fell on both sides. Uribe-Uribe promptly prepared a
counter invasion. He was aided in this by Castro, who
practically put all Venezuelan forces in the Cordillera at his
disposal.
"President Castro, who was furious at so overt an act of war
on the part of his old enemies, the Colombian Clericals,
furthermore sent another expedition across the Goajira desert
to aid his Colombian insurgent friends in that peninsula to
take the Colombian port of Rio Hacha. Venezuelan gunboats
appeared before Rio Hacha to do their part in the capture.
Unfortunately for the Liberal cause, the Venezuelan army in
the Goajira was taken unawares while on the march, and was all
but annihilated. The gunboats chose to retire without firing a
shot. Castro never recovered from this reverse. The expenses
of his various armed expeditions ate up all his ready
finances. When he could no longer maintain Uribe-Uribe’s
troops, Uribe cut loose and recrossed the border, to join
forces with other insurgent leaders in the interior of
Colombia. Uribe’s cousin proceeded to Panama, and the civil
war there broke out with fresh vigor. By their recent
brilliant stroke in the harbor of Panama, the Colombian
Liberals have won the command of the sea on the Pacific side.
To assist them in doing the same on the Atlantic side, Castro
has now supplied them with a torpedo-boat and a small
gunboat."
{110}
These last mentioned successes of Uribe-Uribe had no permanent
effectiveness, for his surrender, with 1300 men and 10 pieces
of artillery, was announced presently as having occurred on
the 25th of October, 1902. It seemed unfortunate that he did
not succeed in overthrowing the Conservatives, or "Blues," who
held the government, since most accounts of their rule
represented it as hopelessly bad; but a change for the better
came without revolution after no long time.
The state of civil war was closed by a treaty of peace, signed
on board the United States battleship Wisconsin, November 21.
COLUMBIA: A. D. 1901-1906.
Participation in Second and Third International Conferences
of American Republics, at Rio de Janeiro.
See (in this Volume)
AMERICAN REPUBLICS.
COLUMBIA: A. D. 1903.
Rejection of Treaty with the United States for the
building of the Panama Canal.
Revolt and independence of Panama.
See (in this Volume )
PANAMA CANAL.
COLUMBIA: A. D. 1903-1906.
Feeling toward the United States.
Of the feeling in Colombia toward the United States,
consequent on what occurred in Panama, Mr. Barrett, American
Minister at Bogota, reported in 1906 as follows:
"The question is continually asked me: What is the attitude of
the Colombian Government and people toward Americans and
American interests on account of the Panama affair? Without
entering upon any political discussion, I wish, in answering
this pertinent inquiry, to take advantage of the opportunity
to pay a just and frank tribute to Colombia. Speaking in the
first place for myself as minister, I can truthfully say that,
ever since my arrival here seven months ago, I have been
treated with a generous kindness and sincere hospitality that
have made a deep impression on me and increased my respect for
Colombians in particular and Latin Americans in general. The
United States minister has been extended invitations official
and personal, and the United States legation in turn has been
continually frequented by leading men of all parties, as if
nothing had ever happened to mar the entente cordiale of the two countries.
"In the granting of concessions and in the hearing of claims
the Government has treated Americans with as much
consideration as Europeans. During my stay here, and up to
this writing, there has not been one complaint lodged by
Americans in this legation of unkind treatment by Colombians
due to any political anti-American feeling. In my own travels
in various parts of the country, officials and peons alike
have everywhere accorded me polite and even gracious
attention. To let it be known that I was United States
minister has always led to extra courtesies rather than to any
lack of them.
"I could not, however, have it understood abroad that there is
not still strong feeling against the United States. It does
exist, but the passing of years, and generous, fair treatment
of Colombia and Colombians by the United States and its
citizens, in international relations and friendly social and
commercial intercourse, can effect its gradual disappearance.
Such feeling does not take the attitude of personal enmity
toward Americans. The Colombians, high and low, are too polite
and sensible for that. It is a feeling in the minds and
hearts, based on high political and patriotic grounds, which,
however, with commendable philosophy, recognizes the
inevitable and now turns to the future to bring blessings that
will counterbalance the losses and sorrows of the past. The
very courage and nobility of this attitude of Colombia is one
of the chief reasons why I predict for her a magnificent
future. Already this policy—if I may call it a policy—is
bearing fruit in the development of a greater and more
friendly and sympathetic interest throughout the United States
in Colombia, which is destined to lead to a mutually favorable
understanding and settlement of all differences in the near
future."
COLUMBIA: A. D. 1904.
Arbitration of boundary dispute with Equador.
A treaty for the arbitration of boundary questions with
Equador was concluded November 4, 1904 .
COLUMBIA: A. D. 1905.
Arbitration Treaties with Peru.
See (in this Volume)
PERU: A. D. 1905.
COLUMBIA: A. D. 1905-1906.
A New Era, under President Reyes.
"The New Era in Colombia" is the title of an article in the
American Review of Reviews, May, 1906, by Francis P.
Savinien, writing from the country in question.
"By judicious, if not generous, action," says the writer,
"President Rafael Reyes [who became President in the previous
year] has succeeded in harmonizing nearly all elements of the
population. His administration is neither Liberal nor
Conservative. It is Nationalist. Placed in power by
Conservatives and sustained by Liberals, his favors to the
former preserve order in the center of the country, and his
implicit trust in the latter insures peace on the frontiers.
He has made General Uribe-Uribe minister to Chile, Argentina,
and Brazil, and General Herrera commander along the Venezuelan
border, thus bestowing the highest diplomatic and military
honors on Liberals. From Conservatives he chose all his
ministers (except Dr. Modesto Garees, of the Department of
Public Works), the governor of the capital district, and other
high officials for the center of government. His government is
like that of Panama, the secession of which made a policy of
reconciliation predominant in both countries. … The Colombian
army has become a body of laborers. Troops are converted into
sappers and employed in building or improving ways of
communication. Idleness, as well as agitation, is beginning to
receive general condemnation. It is true that there is little
liberty. There is, however, less persecution than formerly.
Journals are abject and individuals mute. There is no free
speech or press. But there are few persons in prison or exile
for political reasons. The policy of the government has become
that of abstention rather than restraint."
General Reyes had represented Colombia at the Pan-American
Conference in the City of Mexico, in 1902, and had made a most
favorable impression on the delegates from the United States.
Referring to the occasion long afterwards, Mr. Sylvester
Baxter said of him: "It is notable that in that Conference
Colombia was represented by General Rafael Reyes, a high type
of man—gentleman by birth and education, of scientific
attainments, a natural leader, one of the strong characters of
Spanish America; a man whose existence makes things seem
hopeful when else they might look hopeless; a
soldier-statesman in whom many see the potentialities of a
second Diaz."
{111}
A similar expression of admiration appears in an interesting
special report, entitled "Colombia, a Land of Great
Possibilities," made in June, 1906, by the Honorable John
Barrett, then American Minister to Colombia, more recently the
Director of the International Bureau of American Republics.
"Great credit," wrote Mr. Barrett, "is due to General Rafael
Reyes, President of this Republic, for his untiring efforts to
restore the prosperity of his country to the position it
occupied before the last civil war and the loss of Panama. If
he succeeds, he will deserve a place in history like that of
President Diaz in Mexico. He has so far effectually stopped
revolutions, and, if his life and health are spared, Colombia
would seem to be assured of peace at least during his
administration."
COLUMBIA: A. D. 1905-1909.
Troubles with Venezuela over the navigation of rivers flowing
through both countries.
The arbitrary action begun by the ill-tempered and arrogant
Castro, of Venezuela, in 1902, when he stopped navigation on
the rivers which flow from Colombia to Lake Maracaibo, in
Venezuela, and thus open communication to the sea (see above),
was continued or resumed in subsequent years, and was a
distressing trouble to his Colombian neighbors.
In July, 1905, the Colombian Government appealed to that of
the United States for its good offices in maintaining the
principle of free navigation on rivers that are common to
neighboring countries. "From the time of the award which
decided the boundary dispute between the two countries," said
the Colombian Minister to the United States, in a
communication to the American Secretary of State, "the policy
of Venezuela in matters relating to the transit trade of
Colombia and the navigation of the common rivers, has been
marked by a conspicuous spirit of hostility. … Neither logical
arguments nor historic precedents, such as those submitted by
the Colombian chancellery to the Government of Venezuela for
the recognition by the latter of the principle of free trade
over the natural waterways placed by God at the disposal of
all nations, have availed."
The writer then reviewed at considerable length the arguments
with which the Government of the United States had contended
in the past with Spain and Great Britain for the free
navigation of the Mississippi and the St. Lawrence, and said
in conclusion: "It would be desirable, and I would ask that it
be done if this note were favorably received by the Government
of the United States, that the American minister at Caracas be
appropriately instructed in the sense of declaring on behalf
of the commercial interests of the citizens of the United
States his desire that the Government of Venezuela make the
navigation of the Zulia and Orinoco rivers free, and urging,
by persuasion, that the principle be solemnly consecrated in
its public treaties. My Government will join in such an
action, which comes within its traditional policy in the
matter, and will interpose no obstacle or delay to the meeting
of an international mixed commission for the framing of
regulations concerning the use of the above-named rivers
without detriment to the legitimate interests of the countries
through which they flow."
To this request the then Acting Secretary of State, Mr. Adee,
made a favorable reply, August 5, saying:
"The principle of the free navigation of rivers has been
advocated by the United States and maintained in its relations
with its neighbors for many years. This government is ready,
therefore, to use its good offices in the sense requested, and
Mr. Russell has been instructed upon arriving at his new post
in Venezuela to take advantage of fitting occasion to express
to the minister for foreign affairs the great satisfaction
with which the United States would view the adoption and
proclamation by Venezuela of the general principle of the free
navigation of rivers and fluvial arteries of communication
common to neighboring countries.
"It is of course to be understood that in touching upon this
matter this government does not seek to intervene or mediate
in any way in the relations between Colombia and Venezuela,
but is merely interested in the universal recognition of a
policy beneficial to the commerce of the world."
In the following December, the endeavor seemed promising; for
the American Minister to Colombia was able to report the
signing, at Bogota, of a protocol, preparatory to a new treaty
of amity, commerce, and navigation, to be concluded at
Caracas. Four months later, on the 27th of April, 1906,
Minister Russell, at Caracas, announced the arrival there of
the Colombian plenipotentiary, General Benjamin Herrera,
appointed for the negotiation of the treaty agreed upon, but
reported further that the Venezuelan Government had refused to
receive him, demanding that somebody else be sent. No
settlement of the matter could be obtained while Castro
controlled Venezuela. Since his elimination it has been
reported that President Gomez, his successor, has annulled his
decrees of hostility to Colombian commerce.
COLUMBIA: A. D. 1906-1909.
Efficient but arbitrary Government produces discontent.
Opposition to treaty with Panama and the United States.
Vacation of President Reyes which ends in resignation.
Revolt.
Elections.
While the Government organized under President Reyes was
undoubtedly efficient and effective in restoring order and
prosperity to the country, it was not satisfactory to the
people; and perhaps it speaks well for them that they showed
discontent. It was not a representative government, the
existing Congress not being an elective body, but a
provisional legislature made up by appointment. As admitted in
the quotation above from a friendly Colombian writer, the
citizens under it were tongue-tied subjects, having no free
speech or Press. The political situation and the differing
states of feeling produced by it were discussed in April,
1909, by a special correspondent of the New York Evening Post,
who wrote from Bogotá:
"It seems to be confessed by the great majority of the people
here that the country has not entered on that stage of
political development in which the people can govern
themselves by parliamentary methods. The history of their
nearly one hundred years of independent national life has been
that of almost continual civil strife, and of frequent civil
wars, which have interrupted and almost destroyed all efforts
at self-government; so that the present system of government
by executive decrees, to be ratified by an appointed
‘Constitutional and Legislative Assembly,’ is about the only
one that can preserve the peace and direct the country into
the line of prosperity and progress.
{112}
"Under this system of government the country has enjoyed
almost perfect internal peace during the year. This is the
political theory that is most widely accepted at the present
time in Colombia. Of course, there are those who do not agree
with this theory, which they consider as the natural action of
men who are more anxious to preserve order than they are to
establish truth and justice, and there are not lacking those
who say that in the long run it will be found to be a foolish
system.
"It is pointed out that the idea that grievances can be done
away with by forbidding men to complain, or that the
criticisms can be met by excommunicating the critics, or that
changes can be prevented by putting the troublers to silence,
is contradicted by the experience of the rest of the world.
The kind of effort that is being made in Colombia to prevent
the liberty of the press, of public speech, and of personal
opinion, is like the effort to prevent the escape of steam by
the safety valve, and is very likely to result in an
explosion."
The state of public feeling in Colombia became further
complicated, no doubt, when, early in January, 1909, a
tripartite treaty was negotiated, with Panama and the United
States, for the settlement of questions connected with the
secession of Panama in 1903. Panama, in this treaty, agreed to
pay Colombia the sum of $3,500,000, as her share of the
Colombian public debt, receiving recognition of her
independence in return. The treaty was submitted to the
Colombian Congress by President Reyes on the 24th of February,
with a special message of recommendation; but public feeling
was said to be bitterly against it, for the reasons that no
wrongfulness in the transaction was recognized and the
indemnity was insufficient. Disturbances which broke out at
Bogota and in the provinces about the middle of March were
attributed mostly to this cause of discontent. For some reason
of discouragement or disgust, the President was reported to
have resigned his office on the 13th, but was persuaded to
resume it next day.
It was now decided to suspend consideration of the tripartite
treaty, until it could be submitted to an elected National
Congress, the election for which would be held on the 20th of
the coming July. In June, a few weeks before the appointed
election, President Reyes made a sudden departure for Europe.
Rumors that he had gone because tired of political strife and
would not return were contradicted by the Colombian Consul at
New York, in a published note which said: "His departure, the
causes of which are well known throughout Colombia, was due to
the fact that after five years’ strenuous labor he desired a
rest, and last March to the National Assembly expressed his
desire to retire temporarily from the Presidency, but, owing
to the opposition of public sentiment and the strong desire of
the people to have him remain, he determined not to leave the
Presidency until elections to the coming Congress had been
made. To this Congress, about to be convened, and in which all
parties are represented, President Reyes confides many of the
cares of government, left by law under his jurisdiction until
Congress should assemble, and withdraws, temporarily only,
from the discharge of his Presidential duties, leaving in his
stead General Jorge Holguin, his most intimate friend and
former minister of war, who will continue to pursue in all
matters the same policy as that adopted by his predecessor.
General Reyes during his stay in Europe, whence he has gone,
will perfect plans for developing railroad and other
industries in Colombia. There is absolute peace and
tranquillity in all parts of the country."
But the "absolute peace and tranquillity" of the country was
shaken in the first week of July by a revolutionary outbreak
at Barranquilla, soon suppressed, and the resignation of
President Reyes was received soon thereafter, from abroad. The
election of his successor now devolved on the new National
Congress, elected by the people on the 20th of July. It gave
the office, for the remainder of the unfinished term (which
expires August 7, 1910) to Señor Gonzales Valencia, who had
been proclaimed by the Barranquilla revolutionists the month
before, though he disavowed their movement.
COLONIAL CONFERENCES, British.
See (in this Volume)
BRITISH EMPIRE.
COLONIAL DOMINION, The passing of the age of.
See (in this Volume)
WORLD MOVEMENTS.
COLONIZATION: The colonizable regions of Africa.
See (in this Volume)
AFRICA.
COLORADOS.
See (in this Volume)
PARAGUAY: A. D. 1902.
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY:
Interchange of Professors with German and Scandinavian
universities.
See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION: INTERNATIONAL INTERCHANGES.
COMBES, Justin Louis Émile:
Head of French Ministry.
See (in this Volume)
FRANCE: A. D. 1902 (April-October;
also 1903, and 1905-1906.
COMBES, Justin Louis Émile:
Vindication under scandalous charges.
See (in this Volume)
FRANCE: A. D. 1904 (JUNE-JULY).
--------COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL: Start------
COMBINATIONS: AUSTRALIA: A. D. 1909.
Decision of the Federal High Court on the Anti-Trust Law.
Prosecutions by the Government.
"The first case brought under the Federal Anti-Trust Law ended
in June last in a decision of the High Court to the effect
that two important sections of the Act were ultra vires, as
the Constitution only empowered the Commonwealth to regulate
foreign and inter-State trade and gave it no authority to
interfere with trade within a State. The Federal Government is
now instituting proceedings against 27 firms which are alleged
to belong to a coal combine trading with other countries and
among the States of the Commonwealth. Each firm has been
called upon to answer certain questions under the Act in
question."
Reuter Telegram,
Melbourne, September 27, 1909.
{113}
COMBINATIONS: Canada: A. D. 1909.
Merger of Dominion Iron, Steel, and Coal Companies.
Cement Combination.
The following is a Press despatch from Halifax, Nova Scotia,
November 13, 1909:
"The formation of the Canada Steel Corporation, the proposed
$70,000,000 merger of the Dominion Iron and Steel Company and
the Dominion Coal Company, was made possible by the agreement
of James Ross of Montreal, president of the Dominion Coal
Company, to transfer to a syndicate of Toronto capitalists a
portion of his holdings of the coal company stock. Final
arrangements regarding the stock transfer will be made here
to-day. President Ross owns coal company stock of a par value
of $5,000,000, and, although he does not dispose of all this,
he is to transfer enough to give control of the coal company
to the Toronto capitalists, who have already acquired a
controlling interest in the steel company. The plants of the
Dominion Iron and Steel Company and the Dominion Coal Company
are in Cape Breton, where they give employment to thousands of
men, and where they have caused little fishing villages to
spring up into flourishing cities."
Announcement of the completion of the merger was made in
December.
COMBINATIONS: CANADA: A. D. 1910.
Anti-Trust Bill in the Dominion Parliament.
A strongly constructed measure for controlling and regulating
commercial and industrial combinations, to check restraints of
trade and undue enhancement of prices, was brought into the
Dominion House of Commons on the 18th of January, 1910, by the
Minister of Labor, Mr. Mackenzie King, and its passage was
said to be assured. Mr King’s explanation of the Bill, as
summarized for the Associated Press, was as follows:
"The Bill, Mr. King stated, was not designed to interfere with
trade, but to protect the public from the operation of
monopolies. The bill provides that if six or more persons show
prima facie evidence to a superior court judge that a combine
exists, which has unduly enhanced the price of a manufactured
article, unduly limited the production of any commodity, or
unduly restricted trade in any way, the judge shall order the
minister of labor to have an investigation made. This shall be
done by a board of three, one member to be appointed by those
who complain, one by those complained against, and a chairman
by the first two, and if they fail to select the judge who has
heard the complaint shall act.
"This board has the full powers of a court to compel the
attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence. The
board must report to the minister and he must give the report
the fullest publicity.
"Two remedies are provided where a combination is reported to
exist. The government may withdraw the tariff protection from
the articles produced by the combine and bring the
manufacturers into competition with the world.
"The other remedy is a provision that if the combine persists
in its course after ten days there shall be a fine of $1,000 a
day imposed until the abuse is remedied. There is also
provision that when a patentee makes use of the protection of
the patent act to restrict trade or unduly enhance prices his
patent may be revoked.
"The act provides for its expeditious and thorough
enforcement, and all expenses of investigation are to be borne
by the government.
"Where question is raised as to the scope of the
investigation, the board shall make it as thorough and
complete as public interest requires. Boards are to conduct
their investigations in public and the decision of two members
shall be the decision of the board. Whenever the minister of
labor believes that counsel should aid the investigation, the
board may retain the services of a lawyer upon the consent of
the minister of justice. Witnesses are to be allowed the same
fees and traveling expenses allowed at the present in civil
suits. With the consent of the minister of labor a board may
employ experts to examine books and to report upon technical
questions."
COMBINATIONS: GERMANY:
Corporation Reform as the Germans have handled it.
"Thirty years ago the German people went through corporation
experiences much like our own. There, as here, the
corporation, as originally designed, was a mere shell. There,
as here, under the shelter of that shell, the property of the
country was being transferred from the German people at large,
even the little they had, to the few. There, thirty years ago,
as here now, great corporate scandals were exposed. And there,
as here, the human nature that is everywhere behind
civilization eventually began to recoil. It began there before
it began here, only because conditions reached a climax there
earlier than here, and because we as a people were too
prosperous and too busy to look even a little way beneath the
surface of things.
"But when the work of reform did come there, it was a genuine
reform. It did not content itself with indiscriminate
denunciation, or with mere lawsuits. Nor did it die out,
leaving the door still open to every character of corporation
the cunning of men might conceive. Before a corporation can be
organized in that country, it must prove, as in a court
proceeding, its rightful title to a corporate existence. In
the same way it must establish the amount and the character of
the capitalization it is allowed to put out. When property is
turned in, its value must be judicially ascertained. Upon
officers and directors is not conferred supreme power; in the
German corporation the shareholders’ meeting is the
counterpart of our New England town meetings—a genuine
assembly intended to do something more than pass resolutions
of approval. And every violation of trust, not merely to the
public, but to the shareholder as well, is quickly punished
with punishment that smarts. There is in the German
corporation no room for one to do, with impunity, in his
capacity as a corporation officer or promoter, what if done
individually would land him in the penitentiary."
Judge Peter S. Grosscup,
The Corporation and the People
(The Outlook, January 12, 1907).
COMBINATIONS: The Cartels.
Industrial combinations, quite as effective as the Trusts of
the United States, have been created in Germany on a wholly
different plan. The constituent organizations in them, of

capital and industry, are simply knitted or tied together by
hard and fast agreements, instead of being fused into huge
corporations, as the Trusts are. For the kind of covenant
which unites them a military term has been borrowed, and they
are called Cartels. The difference between the Cartel and
the Trust is described by a Scottish writer, D. H. Macgregor,
in his work on Industrial Combinations, as follows:
{114}
"The Cartel is an agreement for a time, the Trust is a
permanent structure; the former is therefore a factor in
industry full of speculative possibilities, both as regards
its actual operation, and because the 'residual' competition
of parties who break away at the end of the period is
considerably to be feared. … The principle of the pure Cartel
is compensatory action. It is an organization in which certain
producers deal with themselves, and exist for that purpose in
a double relation; they are producers of goods, and purchasers
of their own produce. What they stand to lose in one aspect
they stand to gain in the other. …
"The operation is broadly as follows. The members of the
Cartel, meeting as producers in general assembly, determine a
price for their product which covers cost of production, being
in fact practically a competitive price. This is the base or
normal price (Richtpreis). Thus they assure themselves, in
this capacity, of adequate remuneration. They then sell to the
Syndicate, that is to themselves as members of the Syndicate,
for what is called the ‘taking over’ or ‘accounting’ price
(Verrechnungspreis) which is usually on the average higher
than the base price, so that they have now created for
themselves as producers a ‘Cartel advantage.’ The Syndicate
then resells to the consumer, for a price which will be as
high as it can get, but which varies with the competition to
be met in different parts of the market; this price
(Verkaufspreis) may not in some cases be so high as the
taking-over price, or may not exceed it by more than the
margin necessary to cover the Syndicate’s expenses of
management. … It is the Syndicate which figures in the public
eye; and while it itself offers no sign of monopoly profit it
shelters the companies which gain by its handling of their
goods. It conceals monopoly dividends."
D. H. Macgregor,
Industrial Combination
(G. Bell & Sons, London, 1906).
COMBINATIONS: The Coal and Coke Cartels.
Their influence.
An elaborate history and description of the "Monopolistic
Combinations in the German Coal Industry," by Francis Walker,
was published for the American Economic Association in 1904.
These are treated as representative, because, says Mr. Walker,
"the most important and fundamental of all German castellated
industries" are those in mining and metallurgy. He traces
their development from a beginning in 1858, when an
association of the mining interests of the mining district of
Dormund was founded. In part, his conclusions as to the effect
of the coal cartels are as follows:
"The German coal cartels have not had an injurious influence,
in general, on the production of coal. More particularly they
cannot be accused, justly, of unduly limiting production among
themselves. Nor have they attempted to accomplish the same end
by crushing outside competition, by unfair methods. It would
be preposterous to say that they have hindered technical
progress. The cost of production, on the other hand, probably
has been somewhat increased by the preservation of weak and
costly mines through participation in the cartels. In regard
to prices, the policy of the coal cartels, on the whole, has
been moderate, taking circumstances into consideration, while
the policy of the coke cartel may be fairly pronounced
extortionate. The prices of coal have been more stable than
they would have been under free competition; during the
hausse they were not screwed up so high as they might
easily have been, but, on the other hand, they have not
declined so quickly with the baisse. The like may be said of
the coke prices, but, at the same time, they were exorbitant
considered from the point of view of costs and profits. … The
déroute of the iron industry was not due to the coal or
coke cartels in any important degree, i. e., even with low
prices, disaster to the iron industry would have been
inevitable. No other industry was affected so much as iron,
and it is at least very questionable whether the cartels in
general (excluding the coal cartels in particular) are to be
blamed for the crisis. … That they are to be blamed for the
ill-judged over-development of certain industries, which was
apparently the real cause of the crisis, does not seem to be a
just conclusion. On the other hand, the cartels may be
accused, with more probability of truth, of retarding the
convalescence of German industry by not reducing prices, and
if this is true, the coal and coke cartels are specially to
blame."
F. Walker,
Monopolistic Combinations in the German Coal Industry
(American Economic Association), 1904.
COMBINATIONS: Growing magnitude of companies.
Industrial concentration.
"The tendency to industrial concentration is shown by the
returns of public companies, which point to the growing
domination of large undertakings. Of 4,749 registered public
companies in 1895, 13.6 per cent. had a share capital not
exceeding £5,000, but in 1906, of 5,000 such companies, only
9.6 per cent. had a capital of that amount; the companies with
a capital of from £5,000 to £12,500 decreased from 14.0 to
10.4 per cent., and those with a capital of from £12,500 to
£25,000 decreased from 16.9 to 14.2 per cent. On the other
hand the companies with a capital of from £25,000 to £50,000
increased from 20.7 to 21.3 percent.; those with a capital of
from £50,000 to £250,000 increased from 28.5 to 35.0 per
cent.; those with a capital of from £250,000 to £500,000
increased from 3.4 to 5.4 per cent., and those with a capital
exceeding £500,000 increased from 2.9 to 4.1 per cent. In 1896
there were only two companies with a capital exceeding five
millions; in 1906 there were nine such companies, and their
combined capital was over seventy millions, having been more
than doubled since 1896. In spite of this tendency towards the
concentration of capital and the multiplication of large
undertakings, however, Germany is still an interesting
illustration of an industrial country which has not yet
entirely gone over to the factory system of production. The
handicrafts, the characteristic feature of which is the small,
independent master-workman, surrounded by his handful of
journeymen and apprentices, contend tenaciously, yet
unfortunately with only partial success, against the on-coming
tide of ‘great capitalism’ (private joint stock, and
cooperative), and the house industries continue to afford
employment to a multitude of workers of both sexes, estimated
at half a million."
William H. Dawson,
The Evolution of Modern Germany,
pages 59-60 (Unwin, London; Scribner's, New York, 1909).
{115}
"Among the home interests of the country nothing loomed up so
large last year [1904] as the subject of industrial
combinations. The process of consolidating industries and
banks into powerful organizations again made gigantic strides;
and the public mind, dazed and disquieted, is wondering what
will be its final outcome. All the largest steel manufacturers
have united in an association that shall have complete control
of the steel and iron products of the country; and it is
already effecting agreements with manufacturers of other
countries for parceling out the world’s markets. At the same
time the Coal Syndicate was reorganized to include all the
independent producers of the West; and in connection with it,
a great shipping and selling company was formed for the
purpose of controlling the retail trade and eliminating
recalcitrant dealers. These steel and coal combinations are
working in complete harmony, and no independent manufacturer
can exist against their will.
"In that great industrial region many large iron companies had
come into possession of coal mines. In order to induce these
to put their mines into the Syndicate, they were given the
right to produce, over and above their allotments, all the
coal that they might need for their own furnaces. A new
impetus was thus given to the process of consolidation. Strong
coal companies hastened to absorb iron establishments, in
order to earn larger profits by consuming their own coal in
indefinite quantities. Furthermore, as the allotments were
fixed absolutely for a long period, the strongest companies
proceeded to buy weaker, less economically worked collieries,
in order to shut them down and produce their allotments
elsewhere at lower cost. This movement assumed large
proportions. Miners by the thousand had to betake themselves
to other parts of the country, and entire communities were
threatened with depopulation. Industrial towns held
indignation meetings, to protest, and to demand the
nationalization of the mines; and excited operatives are still
holding conferences to discuss a general strike. The
Government has sent a commission to inquire into the movement;
and the Minister of Commerce has urged the coal magnates to
proceed as mildly as possible.
"This powerful concentric movement of industries has taken a
strong hold upon the thoughts of people and Government alike.
The public is deeply concerned at the growth of private
monopolies, and many persons who had hitherto favored letting
economic development take its own course now call for drastic
measures of prevention and repression. Country squires of the
most conservative type advocate the nationalization of all
coal deposits; and it is already asserted that a majority of
the Prussian Diet would vote for such a measure. This
convergence of the views of extreme Conservatism and radical
Socialism is certainly one of the oddest results of the
movement under discussion,—and one of the most instructive.
The natural trend of events is unquestionably in the direction
of some form of socialism. The Social Democracy clearly
perceives this, and so hails every industrial consolidation as
but another milestone on the way to state collectivism."
W. C. Dreher,
Recent Events in Germany
(Atlantic Monthly, March, 1905).
COMBINATIONS: International:
Of Transatlantic Shipping Companies.
Agreements with the British Government.
Announcement was made in October, 1902, of the incorporation
on the 1st of that month, under a New Jersey charter, of the
International Mercantile Marine Company, with a capital of
$120,000,000, and an issue of 4½ per cent. bonds to the amount
of $75,000,000. The combination included the American, the Red
Star, the White, the Atlantic Transport, the Leyland and the
Dominion lines. Both American and British capitalists were
represented in the board of directors, the former in the
majority. Several partners in the firm of J. Pierpont Morgan &
Company were included, and Mr. Morgan was understood to be the
architect of the combination; but he did not appear personally
in its organization.
The first step towards such a shipping combination had been
taken sixteen years before, when the British Inman steamship
line was taken over by the International Navigation Company,
made up of Americans, at the head of whom was Mr. Clement A.
Griscom, of Philadelphia. "The British Government promptly
withdrew the liberal subsidy which it had been paying to the
Inman liners; but Mr. Griscom and his comrades brought the
New York and Paris beneath the Stars and
Stripes, built the St. Louis and St. Paul, secured a
subsidy from the United States and gave the first-class
British lines a most formidable competitor. Indeed, commercial
rivalry in high grade ships on the North Atlantic soon became
too keen to permit of reasonable dividends and Mr. Griscom
found British ship-owners in a responsive mood when he
broached anew the great idea of an international combination.
"This union was made all the easier by the fact that meanwhile
another important British steamship concern, the Leyland line,
had been acquired by Mr. J. Pierpont Morgan in the spring of
1901. This line, itself the fruit of several consolidations,
controlled the largest British tonnage in the North Atlantic
trade. It owned no fast mail ships, no greyhounds. But it did
possess forty or fifty good, useful steamships of moderate
speed, many of them of large tonnage, and fit for passengers
as well as freight. The main Leyland service lay between
Boston or New York on this side, and Liverpool or London on
the other, and the business of the company had been so
profitable for a long term of years that its shares were
quoted at a handsome premium. Mr. Morgan paid a generous price
for his maritime investment. It is said that he gave £14 10s.
for each £10 share, or a bonus of 45 per cent. But amazement
at Mr. Morgan’s ‘liberality’ ceased when the next stage in the
great, far-sighted negotiation was unfolded.
"This was the dramatic uniting of the Leyland line with the
American and Red Star lines of the International Navigation
Company, and the Atlantic Transport line, another British
steam fleet owned by American capital. Later still it
transpired that the famous White Star line of fast mail,
passenger, and freight ships and the smaller but excellent
Dominion line were embraced in the huge consolidation. The
White Star was one of the two lines—the Cunard was the
other—which performed the British mail service between
Queenstown and New York. Its fleet included the great liners
Oceanic and Celtic, the swift Teutonic and Majestic, and the favorite Britannic and
Germanic which had held ocean records in their day,
together with a considerable number of large and efficient
freighters. The American purchase of the White Star line was
long disputed, and when it was finally confirmed, something
like consternation seized the British press and people, for
the White Star fleet had been regarded as distinctively a
British institution as the Bank of England. Its fast ships
received not only the mail pay of the post-office, but the
subventions of the Admiralty, and were enrolled on the
‘merchant cruiser’ list."
Winthrop L. Marvin,
The Great Ship "Combine"
(American Review of Reviews, December, 1902).
{116}
The anxieties with which the combination was regarded at first
in Great Britain were allayed materially by Mr. G. Balfour,
President of the Board of Trade, who made public, in a speech
at Sheffield, the terms of an arrangement that had been made
by the Government with the Cunard Company, on one hand, and
the Combination on the other. The Cunard Company, he said,
"pledged themselves to remain in every respect a British
company, managed by British directors—the shares not to be
transferred to any but British subjects. Their ships were to
be officered by British officers. They also engaged to
construct two vessels of twenty-four to twenty-five knots
which, as well as the entire Cunard fleet, the Admiralty would
have the right to charter or purchase at any time on terms
fixed in the agreement. The money for the construction of the
fast steamers would be advanced to the company at the rate of
2¾ per cent. interest, while in lieu of the present Admiralty
subvention—£28,000 a year for the contingent use of three
ships—the company would receive £150,000 a year. With Mr.
Pierpont Morgan, the head of the Shipping Combination, who had
shown the utmost readiness to meet the wishes of His Majesty’s
Government, it had been agreed that the British companies in
the Combination should remain British, not merely in name but
in reality. The majority of their directors were to be British
subjects. All their ships now flying the British flag were to
continue to fly it, and at least one-half of those hereafter
to be built for the Combination would likewise fly British
colours, be commanded by British officers, and manned in
reasonable proportion by British sailors. On the other hand,
the combined companies would continue to be treated, as
heretofore, on a footing of equality with other British
companies in respect of any services, whether postal, or
military, or naval, which His Majesty’s Government might
require from the British mercantile marine. It had been
further stipulated that in the event of the Combination
pursuing a policy hostile to our mercantile marine or to
British trade, the King’s Government should have the right to
terminate the agreement."
COMBINATIONS: United States: A. D. 1900.
Definition of the term Industrial Combination formulated
at the Census Bureau.
Statistics as collected in 1900.
"The officials of the Census Office, in order to prevent
misconceptions and insure consistency in the plan and system
of tabulation, formulated the following definition of the term
‘industrial combination’:
"‘For the purpose of the Census, the rule has been adopted to
consider no aggregation of mills an industrial combination,
unless it consists of a number of formerly independent mills
which have been brought together into one company under a
charter obtained for that purpose. We therefore exclude from
this category many large establishments comprising a number of
mills, which have grown up, not by combination with other
mills, but by the erection of new plants or the purchase of
old ones.’ …
"So far as can be ascertained from the data in the Census
Office, the number of these industrial consolidations is 183.
They control 2203 separate plants, scattered throughout the
United States, 2029 being active and 174 idle during the
census year. For 56 of the idle plants no returns could be
obtained, making the total number of reporting plants 2147.
The 183 combinations extend to almost all lines of industry,
producing articles of luxury, materials essential to the
upbuilding and growth of the country, and even the very
necessities of life. Fully 50 per cent. of these combinations
were chartered just prior to or during the census year; and it
is noteworthy that the epidemic of industrial consolidation,
as far as the so-called monopolies are concerned, has been
practically confined to the past four years. It is evident,
therefore, that the disease—if it be regarded as such—has
spread very rapidly.
"Naturally enough, iron and steel, with 69 combinations, heads
the list. The number of reporting plants engaged in this
industry is 469, and the capital invested, consisting of land,
buildings, machinery, tools and implements, and cash and
sundries, is valued at $348,000,000."
W. R. Merriam,
"Trusts" in the Light of Census Returns
(Atlantic Monthly, March, 1902).
COMBINATIONS: A. D. 1901-1903.
The question of Federal Control and Regulation.
Urgency of President Roosevelt for effective legislation.
In his first Message to Congress, three months after his
succession to the Presidency, President Roosevelt expressed
his mind frankly and clearly on the then increasing demand in
the country for more stringent measures of government, to
control and regulate the exercise of the power which great
aggregations of incorporated capital have created in recent
times. In part, he then said:
"The tremendous and highly complex industrial development
which went on with ever accelerated rapidity during the latter
half of the nineteenth century brings us face to face, at the
beginning of the twentieth, with very serious social problems.
The old laws, and the old customs which had almost the binding
force of law, were once quite sufficient to regulate the
accumulation and distribution of wealth. Since the industrial
changes which have so enormously increased the productive
power of mankind, they are no longer sufficient. The growth of
cities has gone on beyond comparison faster than the growth of
the country, and the up building of the great industrial
centers has meant a startling increase, not merely in the
aggregate of wealth, but in the number of very large
individual, and especially of very large corporate, fortunes.
… The process has aroused much antagonism, a great part of
which is wholly without warrant. It is not true that as the
rich have grown richer the poor have grown poorer. On the
contrary, never before has the average man, the wage-worker,
the farmer, the small trader, been so well off as in this
country and at the present time. There have been abuses
connected with the accumulation of wealth; yet it remains true
that a fortune accumulated in legitimate business can be
accumulated by the person specially benefited only on
condition of conferring immense incidental benefits upon
others. …
{117}
The captains of industry who have driven the railway systems
across this continent, who have built up our commerce, who
have developed our manufactures, have on the whole done great
good to our people. Without them the material development of
which we are so justly proud could never have taken place. …
It cannot too often be pointed out that to strike with
ignorant violence at the interests of one set of men almost
inevitably endangers the interests of all. … Much of the
legislation directed at the trusts would have been exceedingly
mischievous had it not also been entirely ineffective. In
accordance with a well-known sociological law, the ignorant or
reckless agitator has been the really effective friend of the
evils which he has been nominally opposing.
"All this is true; and yet it is also true that there are real
and grave evils, one of the chief being over-capitalization
because of its many baleful consequences; and a resolute and
practical effort must be made to correct these evils. There is
a widespread conviction in the minds of the American people
that the great corporations known as trusts are in certain of
their features and tendencies hurtful to the general welfare.
This springs from no spirit of envy or uncharitableness, nor
lack of pride in the great industrial achievements that have
placed this country at the head of the nations struggling for
commercial supremacy. … It is based upon sincere conviction
that combination and concentration should be, not prohibited,
but supervised and within reasonable limits controlled; and in
my judgment this conviction is right. … The first essential in
determining how to deal with the great industrial combinations
is knowledge of the facts—publicity. In the interests of the
public, the Government should have the right to inspect and
examine the workings of the great corporations engaged in
interstate business. …
"When the Constitution was adopted, at the end of the
eighteenth century, no human wisdom could foretell the
sweeping changes, alike in industrial and political
conditions, which were to take place by the beginning of the
twentieth century. At that time it was accepted as a matter of
course that the several States were the proper authorities to
regulate so far as was then necessary, the comparatively
insignificant and strictly localized corporate bodies of the
day. The conditions are now wholly different and wholly
different action is called for. I believe that a law can be
framed which will enable the National Government to exercise
control along the lines above indicated; profiting by the
experience gained through the passage and administration of
the Interstate-Commerce Act. If, however, the judgment of the
Congress is that it lacks the constitutional power to pass
such an act, then a constitutional amendment should be
submitted to confer the power."
President’s Message to Congress,
December 3, 1901.
In the following summer, during a tour which he made through
some of the New England States the President gave prominence
to the same subject in his addresses, emphasizing the
necessity of federal legislation to arm the General Government
with more effective authority for regulating the action of
corporations engaged in interstate trade. In speaking at
Providence especially, his remarks caused a great stir of
feeling in the country, and seem to have signalled the
beginning of an open array of hostile corporate interests
against him. On that occasion he spoke partly as follows:
"Those great corporations containing some tendency to
monopoly, which we have grown to speak of rather loosely as
trusts, are the creatures of the State, and the State not only
has the right to control them, but is in duty bound to control
them wherever the need for such control is shown. There is
clearly a need of supervision—need to exercise the power of
regulation on the part of the representatives of the public,
wherever, as in our own country at the present time, business
corporations become so very strong, both for beneficent work
and for work that is not always beneficent. It is idle to say
that there is no need for such supervision. A sufficient
warrant for it is to be found over and over again in any of the
various evils resulting from the present system, or, rather,
lack of system.
"There is in our country a peculiar difficulty in the way of
exercising such supervision and control because of the
peculiar division of governmental power. When the industrial
conditions were simple, very little control was needed, and no
trouble was caused by the doubt as to where power was lodged
under the constitution. Now the conditions are complicated,
and we find it difficult to frame national legislation which
shall be adequate, while as a matter of practical experience
State action has proved entirely insufficient, and in all
human probability cannot or will not be made sufficient, to
meet the needs of the case. Some of our States have excellent
laws—laws which it would be well indeed to have enacted by
the national legislature. But the wide differences in these
laws, even between adjacent States, and the uncertainty of the
power of enforcement result practically in altogether
insufficient control.
"I believe that the nation must assume this power of control
by legislation, and if it becomes evident that the
constitution will not permit needed legislation, then by
constitutional amendment. The immediate need of dealing with
trusts is to place them under the real, not nominal, control
of some sovereign to which, as its creature, the trusts shall
owe allegiance, and in whose courts the sovereign’s orders may
with certainty be enforced. That is not the case with the
ordinary so-called 'trust’ to-day, for the trust is a large
State corporation, generally doing business in other States
also, and often with a tendency to monopoly. Such a trust is
an artificial creature not wholly responsible to or
controllable by any legislature, nor wholly subject to the
jurisdiction of any one court. Some governmental sovereign
must be given full power over these artificial and very
powerful corporate beings. In my judgment this sovereign must
be the national government. When it has been given full power,
then this full power can be used to control any evil
influence, exactly as the government is now using the power
conferred upon it under the Sherman Anti-Trust law.
"Even when the full power has been conferred it would be
highly undesirable to attempt too much or to begin by
stringent legislation. The mechanism of modern business is as
delicate and complicated as it is vast, and nothing would be
more productive of evil to all of us, and especially to those
least well off in this world’s goods, than ignorant meddling
with this mechanism, and, above all, if the meddling was done
in a spirit of class or sectional rancor.
{118}
It is desirable that this power should be possessed by the
nation, but it is quite as desirable that the power should be
exercised with moderation and self-restraint. The first
exercise of that power should be the securing of publicity
among all great corporations doing an interstate business. The
publicity, though non-inquisitorial, should be real and
thorough as to all important facts with which the public has
concern. The full light of day is a great discourager of evil.
Such publicity would by itself tend to cure the evils of which
there is just complaint, and where the alleged evils are
imaginary, it would tend to show that such is the case. When
publicity is attained it would then be possible to see what
further should be done in the way of regulation.
"Above all, it behooves us to remember not only that we ought
to try to do what we can, but that our success in doing it
depends very much upon our neither attempting nor expecting
the impossible. …
"I see no promise of a complete solution for all the problems
we group together when we speak of the trust question. But we
can make a beginning in solving these problems, and a good
beginning if only we approach the subject with a sufficiency
of resolution, of honesty and of that hard common sense which
is one of the most valuable, and, unfortunately, not one of
the most common, assets in the equipment of any people. I
think the national administration has shown its firm intention
to enforce the laws as they now stand on the statute books
without regard to persons, and I think that good has come from
this enforcement. I think, furthermore, that additional
legislation should be had, and can be had, which will enable
us to accomplish much more than has been accomplished along
these same lines."
Theodore Roosevelt,
Address at Providence, August 23, 1902
(New York Tribune, August 24, 1902).
In his next Message to Congress, President Roosevelt renewed
his urgency for the needed legislation. "No more important
subject can come before the Congress," he said, "than this of
the regulation of interstate business. This country cannot
afford to sit supine on the plea that under our peculiar
system of government we are helpless in the presence of the
new conditions, and unable to grapple with them or to cut out
whatever of evil has arisen in connection with them. The power
of the Congress to regulate interstate commerce is an absolute
and unqualified grant, and without limitations other than
those prescribed by the Constitution. The Congress has
constitutional authority to make all laws necessary and proper
for executing this power, and I am satisfied that this power
has not been exhausted by any legislation now on the statute
books."
President’s Message to Congress,
December 2, 1902.
A year later, when the President addressed his Message to the
next Congress, at the opening of its first session, he was
able to say:
"The country is especially to be congratulated on what has
been accomplished in the direction of providing for the
exercise of supervision over the great corporations and
combinations of corporations engaged in interstate commerce.
The Congress has created the Department of Commerce and Labor,
including the Bureau of Corporations, with for the first time
authority to secure proper publicity of such proceedings of
these great corporations as the public has the right to know.
It has provided for the expediting of suits for the
enforcement of the Federal anti-trust law; and by another law
it has secured equal treatment to all producers in the
transportation of their goods, thus taking a long stride
forward in making effective the work of the Interstate
Commerce Commission."
President’s Message to Congress,
December 1, 1903.
COMBINATIONS: A. D. 1901-1906.
A summary of governmental action against corporate
wrongdoers, by Elihu Root.
Legislation.
Litigation.
Court decisions.
"The act creating the bureau of corporations, the act
expediting the trial of trust cases, the anti-rebate act, the
act for the regulation of railroad rates, have made possible
redress which was impossible before. Under the direction of
two successive Attorney Generals of the first order of
ability, sincerity and devotion, in hundreds of courts,
incessant warfare has been waged and is being waged under the
federal laws against corporate wrongdoers.
"The Northern Securities Company, which sought to combine and
prevent competition between two great continental railroads,
has been forced to dissolve by the judgment of the Supreme
Court of the United States. The methods of the Beef Trust in
combining to suppress competition in the purchase of livestock
and the sale of meat have been tried and condemned, and the
trust has been placed under injunction to abandon these
practices by judgment of the Supreme Court. The combination of
paper manufacturers in the territory from Chicago to the Rocky
Mountains has been dissolved by the judgment of the Supreme
Court, and the combination has been abandoned, and the price
of white paper in that territory has gone down 30 per cent.
The Retail Grocers’ Association in this country has been
dissolved by decree of the court. The elevator combination in
the West has been dissolved in like manner. The salt
combination west of the Rocky Mountains has been dissolved by
decree of the court. The Wholesale Grocers’ Association in the
South, the meat combination and the lumber combination in the
West, the combination of railroads entering the city of St.
Louis to suppress competition between the bridges and ferries
reaching that city; the Drug Trust, which suppresses
competition all over the country, are being vigorously pressed
in suits brought by the federal government for their
dissolution. The salt combination has been indicted and
convicted and fined for failing to obey the judgment of
dissolution. The Beef Trust has been indicted for failing to
obey the injunction against them, and have been saved so far
only by a decision that they had secured temporary immunity by
giving evidence against themselves. One branch of the Tobacco
Trust is facing an indictment of its corporations and their
officers in the federal court in New York, and the other
branches are undergoing investigation. The lumber combination
in Oklahoma is under indictment. The Fertilizer Trust, a
combination of thirty-one corporations and twenty-five
individuals to support and fix prices, has been indicted, the
indictments have been sustained by the courts, and the
combination has been dissolved. The ice combination of the
District of Columbia is facing criminal trial. Special counsel
are investigating the coal combination, and special counsel
are investigating the Standard Oil combination.
{119}
"Three of the causes won in the Supreme Court of the United
States have furnished decisions of the utmost importance. In
the Tobacco Trust case of Hale agt. Henkel, the Supreme Court
denied the claim of the trust corporations to be exempt under
the Constitution from furnishing testimony against themselves
by the production of their books and papers before a federal
grand jury. Thus, the protection of secrecy for corporate
wrongdoing is beaten down. In the Northern Securities case the
Supreme Court held that a wrong accomplished by means of
incorporating in accordance with the express provision of the
New Jersey statute was just as much a violation of federal law
as if there had been no incorporation. Thus, the state rights
defence of protection from favoring state statutes is beaten
down. In the Beef Trust case the Supreme Court held that,
although the business of manufacture was carried on within the
limits of a single state, yet the purchase of the raw material
in different states and the sale of the finished product in
different states brought the business within the interstate
commerce clause of the Constitution and gave the federal
government authority over it. Thus, the defence that the state
alone can deal with manufacturing corporations, however
widespread their business, is beaten down.
"The obstacles to the enforcement of the federal anti-trust
act thus removed are obstacles which stood in the way of all
proceedings, and they had to be cleared away before any
proceedings of the same character against the same classes of
corporations could be successfully maintained. They have been
removed, not by newspaper headlines and denunciation, but by
skill, ability, and energy of the highest order.
"After the Elkins anti-rebate law was passed by Congress in
1903 it was supposed, and the Interstate Commerce Commission
reported, that the railroads had substantially abandoned
giving rebates. Their good resolutions do not seem, however,
to have lasted. The struggle for business enabled the shippers
soon to secure a renewal of rebates, or, by ingenious devices
advantages equivalent to rebates. Thereupon the Department of
Justice began active prosecutions for the enforcement of the
law. Fifty-three indictments have been found against hundreds
of defendants and covering many hundreds of transactions.
There have been fourteen criminal convictions. Fourteen
individuals have been fined, to the gross amount of $66,125.
Nine corporations have been fined to the amount of $253,000.
Thirty-five indictments are ready for trial in their regular
order upon the court calendar. The original statute provided
only for punishment by fine. Last winter it was amended by
providing for punishment by imprisonment, and, if the lines
imposed under the original law shall not prove to have stopped
the practice, we shall see whether fear of the penitentiary
under the amendment will not do so.
"Under this statute also it was necessary to sweep away
defences which stood as barriers to general prosecution, and
in the New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad case, decided
by the Supreme Court February 19 of this year, and the
Milwaukee Refrigerator Transit case, decided in the Seventh
Circuit on May 31 of this year, the courts have held that the
substance and not the form is to control in the application of
the statute, and that, however the transaction may be
disguised, an unlawful discrimination can be reached and
punished. The way is therefore cleared for all other
prosecutions.
"The Railroad Rates act, which was the subject of such excited
discussion during the last session of Congress, has already
justified itself. Since the passage of the act, less than five
months ago, there have been more voluntary reductions of rates
by our railroads than during the entire nineteen years of the
previous life of the Interstate Commerce Commission. On the
single day of the 29th of August, 1906, two days before the
act went into force, over five thousand notices of voluntary
reduction of rates were filed with the Interstate Commerce
Commission by the railroads of the United States."
Elihu Root,
Speech at Utica, November 1, 1906
(New York Tribune, November 2, 1906).
COMBINATIONS: A. D. 1903-1906.
The "Beef Trust" suits and investigations.
The United States v. Swift & Co. et al.
Commissioner Garfield’s investigation.
Indictment of Armour & Co. and others.
Immunity decision of Judge Humphrey.
Fines for receiving rebates from railways.
In the case known as that of the United States v. Swift &
Company et al., the defendants were seven corporations, one
copartnership, and twenty-three other persons (commonly styled
"the Beef Trust"), charged with violations of the anti-trust
law, by combination in restraint of the trade which they
conducted, namely, the buying of live stock, slaughtering the
same in different states and selling the meats thus produced.
It was affirmed by the Government that they, together,
controlled about sixty per cent. of the total Volume of that
trade in the country, and that if the alleged combination
among them did not exist they "would be and remain in
competition with each other"; but that by such "unlawful
combination and conspiracy" they were directing and requiring
their agents
(1) not to bid against one another in the live-stock markets
of the different States;
(2) to bid up prices for a few days so as to induce cattlemen
to send their stock to the stock-yards;
(3) to fix prices at which they would sell, and hence, when
necessary, to restrict shipments of meat;
(4) to establish a uniform rule of credit to dealers and to
keep a blacklist;
(5) to make uniform and improper charges for cartage; and
(6) to obtain less than lawful rates from the railways to the
exclusion of all competitors.
The case, on motion for injunction, was tried first in the
Circuit Court of the Northern District of Illinois, Judge
Peter S. Grosscup. The Opinion of the Court, given April 18,
1903, held that, under the definition of the term by the
Supreme Court in the Trans-Missouri Freight Association Case
(see, in this Volume, Railways: United States: A. D.
1890-1902), "there can be no doubt that the agreement of the
defendants to refrain from bidding against each other in the
purchase of cattle is combination in restraint of trade: so
also their agreement to bid up prices to stimulate shipments,
intending to cease from bidding when the shipments have
arrived.
{120}
The same result," continued the judge, "follows when we turn
to the combination of defendants to fix prices upon and
restrict the quantities of meat shipped to their agents or
their customers. Such agreements can be nothing less than
restriction upon competition, and, therefore, combination in
restraint of trade; and thus viewed, the petition, as an
entirety, makes out a case under the Sherman Act. … The
demurrer is overruled, and the motion for preliminary
injunction granted."
On appeal, the case went to the Supreme Court, where it was
argued in January, 1905, and decided on the 30th of the same
month. The Opinion of the Court, rendered by Justice Holmes,
with no dissent, affirmed, but modified, the decree of
injunction issued by Judge Grosscup; the aim of the
modifications being to give more definiteness to the decree.
"The defendants," said Justice Holmes, for example, "cannot be
ordered to compete, but they properly can be forbidden to give
directions or to make agreements not to compete. The
injunction follows the charge. No objection was made on the
ground that it is not confined to the places specified in the
bill. It seems to us, however, that it ought to set forth more
exactly the transactions in which such directions and
agreements are forbidden. The trade in fresh meat referred to
should be defined somewhat as it is in the bill, and the sales
of stock should be confined to sales of stock at the
stock-yards named, which stock is sent from other States to
the stock-yards for sale or is bought at those yards for
transport to another State."
Federal Anti-Trust Decisions, 1900-1906,
Volume 2, prepared and edited by James A. Finch,
by direction of the Attorney-General
(Washington: Government Printing Office, 1907).
COMBINATIONS:
Investigation by the Commissioner of Corporations.
On the 7th of March, 1904, the House of Representatives
adopted a resolution requesting the Secretary of Commerce and
Labor to "investigate the causes of the low prices of beef
cattle in the United States since July 1st, 1903, and the
unusually large margins between the prices of beef cattle and
the selling prices of fresh beef, and whether the said
conditions have resulted in whole or in part from any
contract, combination, in the form of trust or otherwise, or
conspiracy, in restraint of commerce among the several States
and Territories or with foreign countries; also, whether said
prices have been controlled in whole or in part by any
corporation, joint stock company, or corporate combination
engaged in commerce among the several States or with foreign
nations; and, if so, to investigate the organization,
capitalization, profits, conduct and management of the
business of such corporations, companies, and corporate
combinations, and to make early report of his findings
according to law."
In compliance with this resolution, the Commissioner of
Corporations, Mr. James R. Garfield, went to Chicago in April
and began the requested investigation, which was prosecuted
throughout most of the ensuing year. "The inquiries of the
Bureau of Corporations were naturally concerned chiefly with
the six great concerns which, by the injunction of 1902, were
grouped together, and which were popularly considered as the
Beef Trust. The ‘Big Six,’ in the approximate order of their
magnitude as indicated by the number of animals slaughtered,
are: Swift & Company, with seven large plants; Armour &
Company, and the Armour Packing Company, which have the same
stockholders, and which together operate five packing-houses;
the National Packing Company, with eight comparatively large
plants and two or three minor ones; Morris & Company,
operating three plants; the Cudahy Packing Company, with three
plants in the middle West and a minor one at Los Angeles; and
the Schwarzschild & Sulzberger Company, operating three
plants. Nearly all of the important packing-houses of these
six companies are situated in the eight great live-stock
markets,—Chicago, Kansas City, South Omaha, East St. Louis,
South St. Joseph, Fort Worth, South St. Paul, and Sioux City."
As for the National Packing Company, it grew, apparently, out
of an abortive scheme for the consolidation of the other five
concerns which was rumored in 1902. "Shortly prior to the
formation of this company the Armour interests had acquired
control of the G. H. Hammond Company and the Omaha Packing
Company, the Swifts had secured the Anglo-American Provision
Company and the Fowler Packing Association, and the Morris
family had become dominant in the United Dressed Beef Company
of New York. The National Packing Company, organized in 1903,
took over the control of the various corporations thus
previously acquired by the three packing interests named, and
has since absorbed two or three other smaller concerns. The
directorate of the National Company consists almost wholly of
representatives of the Armour, Swift, and Morris companies.
Aside from this community of interest, the bureau finds that
there is no important inter-ownership of securities among the
six leading packing companies."
"The ‘Big Six’ are by no means the only slaughterers of cattle
in the United States. They, with a few minor affiliated
concerns, killed 5,521,697 cattle in 1903, while, from the
best available data, the Bureau of Corporations computes the
total slaughter of the country at about 12,500,000. But the
proportion of 45 per cent. thus indicated by no means measures
the full economic significance of the six great packers. Their
importance lies in the fact that they are the only concerns
which do an extensive business in shipping dressed beef. … The
‘Big-Six’ kill about 98 percent, of the cattle slaughtered at
the eight leading Western markets above named."
Edward Dana Durand,
The Beef Industry and the Government Investigation
(American Review of Reviews, April, 1905).
Early in March, 1905, just before the adjournment of Congress,
his report of it, in part, was transmitted by the President to
Congress. The following summary of important facts set forth
in the extended report was published in The Outlook of
the following week:
"The report as sent to Congress deals with the prices of
cattle and dressed beef, the margins between such prices, and
the organization, conduct, and profits of the corporations
engaged in the beef-packing business. In some respects the
conclusions presented are distinctly favorable to the packers;
in others, quite as unfavorable. It appears that the profits
of the six great companies whose operations were covered by
the investigation were very much smaller during the years 1902
and 1903 than the public had been led to suppose,—that, in
fact, for a part of that period the business was conducted at
an actual loss.
{121}
The percentage of profit on the gross Volume of business
during the years 1902-1904 was comparatively low. That realized
by Swift & Company is placed at two per cent. This, however,
we repeat, is the percentage on total sales, which is a very
different thing from profit on the investment. It is a
well-known fact that the actual capitalization of the packing
companies is very much less than the annual Volume of
business. From statements made by the six companies to the
Bureau of Corporations it appears that their gross business is
not less than $700,000,000 per year, while their nominal
capitalization is only $88,000,000, exclusive of $5,000,000
bonds of Swift & Company. On the other hand, it is practically
impossible, as the report shows, to determine accurately just
what proportion of the total investment represents plants and
properties concerned with the beef industry exclusively.
Still, it is obvious that Swift & Company’s net profit of two
per cent. on their sales would amount to very much more than
two per cent, on their investment. The report makes an
approximate estimate of twelve per cent.
"On one other count the report is favorable to the companies.
It declares that they are apparently not overcapitalized. This
conclusion, it is true, is robbed of some of its exculpatory
force when the private-car system is taken into consideration.
It is shown that the companies’ profits on refrigerator cars,
derived from mileage paid by the railroads, has ranged from 14
to 22 per cent. The report gives clear and definite
information as to the trust’s field of operations. It shows
that the six companies slaughtered in 1903 only about 45 per
cent. of all the cattle killed in that year, but that these
companies slaughter nearly 98 per cent. of all the cattle
killed in the leading Western packing centers, and that they
control a large percentage of the trade in beef in many large
cities—75 per cent. in New York, 85 per cent. in Boston, 95
per cent. in Providence, and in a number of other important
cities from 50 to 90 per cent. In all these centers of
population the consumer is now paying more for meats than ever
before, while the cattle-grower on the Western plains is
receiving less for his beeves. These two facts are doubtless
capable of explanation, but the published results of the
investigation ordered by Congress throw little light on the
matter."
COMBINATIONS:
Case of the United States v. Armour & Company et al.
Soon after the publication of the report of the Bureau of
Corporations a special Federal Grand Jury at Chicago began the
investigation of charges brought by the Attorney-General of
the United States against five of the corporations engaged in
the meat-packing business and seventeen of their officials. An
indictment was returned by the Grand Jury on the 1st of July,
1905, charging, in a number of counts, persistent violation of
the injunction laid on these corporations and their officials
by Judge Grosscup with affirmation by the Supreme Court, and
continued combination in restraint of trade,—by requiring
their purchasing agents to refrain from bidding in good faith
against one another; by agreements that fixed the prices of
beef; by restricting sales to maintain prices, etc. On the
trial of the indictment, which was begun on the 29th of
January and concluded on the 21st of March, 1906, the
defendants claimed immunity, under that clause of the Fifth
Amendment to the Constitution of the United States which
reads:
"Nor shall any person be compelled in any criminal case to be
a witness against himself."
Their claim for immunity under this constitutional
prescription was founded on the fact that "upon the lawful
requirement of the Commissioner of Corporations" they "had
furnished evidence, documentary and otherwise, of and
concerning the matters charged in the indictment"; and that a
section of the Act creating the Department of Commerce and
Labor provides that persons testifying or producing evidence
before the Commissioner shall be entitled to the immunities
conferred by the Act in relation to testimony before the
Interstate Commerce Commission of February 11, 1893. Judge
Humphrey, of the United States District Court, before whom the
case was tried, sustained the plea in his charge to the jury,
so far as concerned the individual defendants, saying: "Under
the law of this case, the immunity pleas filed by the
defendants will be sustained as to the individual defendants,
the natural persons, and denied as to the corporations, the
artificial persons, and your verdict will be in favor of the
defendants as to the individuals, and in favor of the
Government as to the corporations."
COMBINATIONS:
Fines for accepting rebates.
The same Federal Grand Jury at Chicago which returned the
indictments dealt within the case mentioned above brought
another indictment against four men in the employ of one of
the meat-packing companies, who were accused of unlawfully
combining and agreeing to solicit rebates for their
corporation from the Michigan Central, the Chicago, Rock
Island and Pacific, the Grand Trunk Western, the Lehigh
Valley, the Boston and Maine, and the Mobile and Ohio
railroads. It was charged that the defendants conspired with
one another in presenting to the railroad companies pretended
claims for damages which were in fact claims for rebates. They
were brought for trial before Judge Humphrey in September,
1905, and pleaded guilty. The Judge then pronounced sentence
on them as follows:
"Punishment for this offense as fixed by Congress has a wide
range, giving the Court unusual latitude, ranging from a
nominal fine without imprisonment to a heavy fine and two
years’ imprisonment, all in the discretion of the Court. I am
disposed to consider this case with reasonable moderation. The
sentence of the Court in the case of the defendant Weil will
be a fine of $10,000 and costs, and commitment to the county
jail until the fine is paid, and in the cases of Todd,
Skipworth, and Cusey a fine of $5,000 and costs, with the same

provision in regard to payment."
COMBINATIONS: A. D. 1904-1909.
The Standard Oil Company.
Federal Government investigation of its methods of business.
Criminal prosecutions for violation of the law against
rebates.
The $29,000,000 fine and its annulment.
Acquittal of the Company.
After a dozen years or more of slight oil production in
Kansas, that state became quite suddenly, in 1904, one of the
important sources of petroleum supply. The Standard Oil
Company had taken care to be prepared for whatever development
might occur, and had organized its operations in this western
field under the name of the Prairie Oil and Gas Company, of
Kansas.
{122}
Its refineries were ready to furnish a market to the Kansas
producers of crude oil, and they had no other. Independent
enterprises in oil refining were made quite impossible, and
the Prairie Oil and Gas Company was complete master of the
situation. The Kansas oil producers were soon writhing under
its dictation of prices and rules of dealing, as the
Pennsylvanians had been years before, and the Kansas
Legislature came promptly to their rescue. In the winter of
1904-1905 it passed five vigorous acts; authorizing the
establishment of a State oil refinery; making pipe lines
common carriers within the State; placing them under the
jurisdiction of the State board of railroad commissioners;
fixing maximum rates for the transportation of oil by freight
or pipe line; and, finally, prohibiting discrimination between
localities in the sale of any commodities. Furthermore, the
anti-trust laws of the State were brought into action against
the Standard Oil Company and the railroads accused of giving
it special rates and privileges.
At the same time, the Kansas situation was brought to the
attention of Congress and the Federal Executive. On motion of
a Kansas representative, the lower House of Congress, in
February, adopted a resolution calling on the President for an
investigation of the methods of business pursued by the
Standard Oil Company. The desired investigation was conducted
in the following year by Commissioner Garfield, the head of
the Bureau of Corporations, and his report was communicated to
Congress on the 5th of May, 1906, with an accompanying special
message, by the President. Nothing of the detail of facts in
the report can be given here; but the conclusions drawn from
them by the Commissioner were summed up by him, as follows:
"Upon the request of its attorney, all the essential facts
discovered by this Bureau were presented to the company at the
close of the investigation, and an exhaustive statement
relating thereto was made by its chief traffic officer. There
was no denial of the facts found, but explanations of
particular situations were offered, and it was urged that the
facts did not show any violation by the Standard of the letter
or spirit of the interstate-commerce law. A most careful
review of the facts and the explanations leads to the
following conclusions:
"The Standard Oil Company has habitually received from the
railroads, and is now receiving, secret rates and other unjust
and illegal discriminations.
"During 1904 the Standard saved about three-quarters of a
million dollars through the secret rates discovered by the
Bureau of Corporations, and of course there may be other
secret rates which the Bureau has not discovered. This amount
represents the difference between the open rates and the rates
actually paid. Many of these discriminations were clearly in
violation of the interstate-commerce law, and others, whether
technically illegal or not, had the same effect upon
competitors. On some State business secret rates were applied
by means of rebates.
"These discriminations have been so long continued, so secret,
so ingeniously applied to new conditions of trade, and so
large in amount as to make it certain that they were due to
concerted action by the Standard and the railroads.
"The Standard Oil Company is receiving unjust discriminations
in open rates.
"The published rates from the leading Standard shipping points
are relatively much lower than rates from the shipping points
of its competitors. The advantage to the Standard over its
competitors from such open discriminations is enormous,
probably as important as that obtained through the secret
rates.
"If an unfair discrimination be obtained by one shipper
through a device which in itself is seemingly not prohibited
by law, that fact shows that the law is defective and should
be strengthened; it does not show that the discrimination is
proper or just.
"The following are a few of the most important discriminations
and the methods by which they were obtained:
"(1) For about ten years the New England territory has been in
control of the Standard Oil Company by reason of the refusal
of the New York, New Haven and Hartford road and of the Boston
and Maine road, on all but a few divisions, to pro-rate—i. e.,
to join in through rates—on oil shipped from west of the
Hudson River, and by means of the adjustment of published
rates. …
"(2) The Standard Oil Company has been able to absolutely
control for many years the sale of oil in the northeastern
part of New York and in a portion of Vermont by means of
secret rates from its refineries at Olean and Rochester. …
"The saving to the Standard during 1904 by the secret rate
from Olean to Rochester alone was $115,000. This and other
less important rates from Olean were unknown to the
independent refiners, and were not published on the ground
that they were wholly State rates; yet in fact they were used
for oil consigned to points beyond the State boundary of New
York. Furthermore, all shipments from Olean on these secret
rates were blind-billed—i. e., the rates were not shown
on the waybills.
"(3) The Standard Oil Company has maintained absolute control
of almost the whole section of the country south of the Ohio
River and east of the Mississippi by means of secret rates and
open discriminations in rates from Whiting, Indiana. …
"(4) The Standard Oil Company has for at least ten years
shipped oil from Whiting to East St. Louis, Illinois, at a
rate of 6 or 6¼ cents on three of the five railroads running
between those places, while the only duly published rate on
all roads has been 18 cents during all that period! This
discrimination saved the Standard about $240,000 in 1904. …
"Whiting is located in Indiana, about two miles from the
Illinois line. East St. Louis is in Illinois, just across the
river from St. Louis. The secret low rates were given by the
Chicago, Burlington and Quincy, Chicago and Alton, and Chicago
and Eastern Illinois railroads. They were not published, on
the ground that they were State rates. …
"(5) In the Kansas-Territory field there were some unfair open
rates. …
"(6) In California direct rebates, as well as discriminations
by the use of secret rates, have been given on oil. …
"(7) Open published rates from Whiting into a large part of
the United States have given the Standard Oil Company an
unfair advantage of from 1 to 20 cents per hundred pounds.
{123}
"This discrimination seriously limits independent refiners in
some markets, and shuts them out completely from other
markets. It is accomplished by the use of commodity rates—that
is, rates which apply only to petroleum and its products—and
by refusal to pro-rate."
Report of the Commissioner of Corporations on the
Transportation of Petroleum,
May 2, 1906, Letter of Submittal, pages xxi-xxv.
(59th Congress, 1st Session House Document. number 812).
Consequent on the information secured by this investigation,
criminal proceedings against the Standard Oil Company in its
various State organizations were instituted in 1906-1907. The
number and character of the indictments found in these cases
are set forth in tabular form, in an article on "The Oil Trust
and the Government," by Francis Walker, published in the
Political Science Quarterly, March, 1908. The following
statement of them is summarized from that table:
In the Northern District of Illinois, August 27, 1906, against
the Standard Oil Co. of Indiana, 1903 and 134 indictments on
shipments over the Chicago and Alton Railway, from Whiting,
Indiana, to East St. Louis, Illinois, and from Chappell,
Illinois, to St. Louis, Missouri.
In same District, same date, against same Company, 2124 and
220 indictments on shipments over the Chicago, Burlington and
Quincy Railway, from Whiting to East St. Louis and St. Louis.
In same District, same date, against same Company, 1318 and
597 indictments on shipments over the Chicago and Eastern
Illinois and the Evansville and Terre Haute railways, from
Whiting to Evansville.
In same District, same date, against same Company, 103
indictments, on shipments over the Chicago and Eastern
Illinois and the Evansville and Terre Haute railways from
Whiting, via Grand Junction, Tennessee, to various points in
the South.
In the Eastern Division of the Western District of Tennessee,
October 16, 1906, against the Standard Oil Company of Indiana,
1524 indictments, on shipments over the Illinois Central and
Southern railways, from Evansville, via Grand Junction, to
various points.
In the Eastern District of Missouri, November 18, 1906,
against the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, 76 indictments, on
shipments over the St. Louis, Iron Mountain and Southern
Railway, to various points.
In the Western District of Louisiana, January 28, 1907,
against the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, 32 indictments, on
shipments over the St. Louis, Iron Mountain. and S. Railway,
to various points.
In the Western District of New York, August 10, 1907, against
the Vacuum Oil Company, 23 indictments, on shipments from
Olean to Vermont.
In the Western District of New York, August 24, 1906, against
the Standard Oil Company of New York, 23 and 123 indictments,
on shipments from Olean to Vermont.
In same District, August 9, 1907, against same Company, 188
and 40 indictments, on shipments from Olean, New York, to
Burlington, Vermont, over New York Central and Rutland and
Vermont Central railways.
In same District, same date, against the Vacuum Oil Company,
188 and 40 indictments on shipments from Olean to Burlington
and to Rutland and Burlington.
In same District, September 6, 1907, against the Standard Oil
Company of New York, 54 indictments, on shipments from Olean
and Rochester to points in Vermont.
The most notable of these criminal prosecutions has been the
one described first in the list above. The opening chapter of
its history is sketched as follows by Mr. Walker, in the
article already referred to:
"The only important case which, up to December, 1907, had come
to trial, was the indictment against the Standard Oil Company
of Indiana for accepting a secret rate on shipments over the
Chicago and Alton Railway, from Whiting, Indiana, to East St.
Louis, Illinois, and from Chappell, Illinois, to St. Louis,
Missouri. The published rate on this traffic was eighteen
cents per hundred pounds (as far as East St. Louis, a bridge
toll of one and a half cents being added on shipments to St.
Louis); while the rate paid by the Standard Oil Company of
Indiana, during the period of about three years covered by the
indictment and for many years before, was only six cents per
hundred pounds. On this rate, the Standard had transported, as
charged in the indictment, 1903 carloads of oil, each carload
being made the subject of a distinct count and separate proof.
The trial of this case began in Chicago, on March 4, 1907.
"The defence not only exhausted every device of technical
objection and obstruction but also attacked the
constitutionality of the ‘Elkins’ law forbidding rate
discrimination, alleging the right of the railroads and
shippers to make private contract rates, an impudent assertion
which the court justly characterized as an ‘abhorrent heresy.’
The question of guilt in the matter of technical proof
depended to a large extent on the requirements of the law that
carriers must file rates, and the argument of the prosecution
was that shippers must be charged with the knowledge as to
whether such rates were lawfully filed or not. The defendant
pretended ignorance of the fact that the six-cent rate had not
been filed by the Alton and alleged that it was an
unreasonable requirement to charge it with such knowledge. On
this point the court said in rendering judgment:
"‘The honest man who tenders a commodity for transportation by
a railway company will not be fraudulently misled by that
company into allowing it to haul his property for less than
the law authorizes it to collect. For the carrier thus to
deceive the shipper would be to deliberately incriminate
itself, to its own pecuniary detriment, which it may safely be
trusted not to do. The only man liable to get into trouble is
he who, being in control of the routing of large Volumes of
traffic, conceives a scheme for the evasion of the law, and
connives with railway officials in its execution.’
"The jury returned a verdict of guilty on 1462 counts, on
April 14, 1907: a considerable number of counts, namely 441,
were thrown out on technical grounds. In the matter of
penalty, the Standard’s counsel argued
(1) that there were only three offences shown, namely, one for
each year in which the rate was in force;
(2) that there were only 36 offences shown, namely, one for
each monthly settlement of freight charges; and
(3) that each train load constituted a separate offence. The
court held, however, that the unlawful rate was made on a
carload basis, and that each carload unlawfully transported
constituted a distinct offence.
{124}
In considering the amount of the fine to be levied, the court
demanded information from the officials of the Standard Oil
Company regarding the net earnings and dividends of the chief
holding company of the trust—the Standard Oil Company of New
Jersey. Their attendance and testimony were obtained only by
writ of subpoena; and it was admitted that the net profits
during the years 1903 to 1905 (when these rebates existed)
amounted to $81,336,994, $61,570,110, and $57,459,356
respectively.
"In view of the fact that the counsel of the defendant openly
maintained the right of the railways and shippers to make
private contracts for rates, the court declared that it was
‘unable to indulge the presumption that in this case the
defendant was convicted of its virgin offence.’ The defendant
also claimed that, as there were no other shippers of oil over
the Chicago and Alton Railway, no one was injured by the
secret rate. On this matter the court said:
"‘It is novel, indeed, for a convicted defendant to urge the
complete triumph of a dishonest course as a reason why such a
course should go unpunished.
"‘Of course, there was no other shipper of oil, nor could
there be, so long as, by secret arrangement, the property of
the Standard Oil Company was hauled by railway common carriers
for one-third of what anybody else would have to pay.’
"Moved by these considerations, the court adjudged, on August
3, 1907, that the defendant should pay the maximum penalty and
fined the Standard Oil Company $20,000 for each offence, that
is, for each of the 1462 counts in the indictment upon which
conviction was obtained. The total fine, therefore, amounted
to $29,240,000."
Francis Walker,
The Oil Trust and the Government
(Political Science Quarterly, March, 1908).
On a writ of error the case went now to the United States
Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, where it was
argued at the April session, 1908, and the opinion, by Judge
Peter S. Grosscup, Circuit Judge, delivered on the 22d of the
following July. In this opinion the District Court was held to
have erred in deciding that each single carload of oil was to
be dealt with as a separate offence, and that it reasoned
erroneously in determining the fine imposed. On this latter
point Judge Grosscup said:
"Did the court, in the fine imposed, abuse its discretion? The
defendant indicted, tried, and convicted, was the Standard Oil
Company, a corporation in Indiana. The capital stock of this
corporation is one million dollars. There is nothing in the
record, in the way of evidence, either before conviction, or
after conviction and before sentence, that shows that the
assets of this corporation were in excess of one million
dollars. There is nothing in the record, either before
conviction, or after conviction and before sentence, that
shows that the defendant, before the court, had ever before
been guilty of an offence of this character. It may,
therefore, be safely assumed, that but for the relation of the
defendant before the court to another corporation, not before
the court—a relation to be presently stated—the court would
have measured out punishment on the basis of the facts just
stated.
"That under such circumstances the punishment would have been
the maximum punishment, does not seem possible; for the
maximum sentence, put into execution against the defendant
before the court, would wipe out, many times, and for its
first offence, all the property of the defendant. …
"Briefly stated, the reason of the trial court for imposing
this sentence was because, after conviction and before
sentence, it was brought out, on an examination of some of the
officers and stockholders of the Standard Oil Company of New
Jersey, that the capital stock of the Standard Oil Company of
Indiana, the defendants before the court, was principally
owned by the New Jersey corporation, a corporation not before
the court—the trial court adding (upon no evidence however to
be found in the record, and upon no information specially
referred to) that in concessions of the character for which
the defendant before the court had been indicted, tried, and
convicted, the New Jersey corporation was not a ‘virgin’
offender.
"Is a sentence such as this, based on reasoning such as that,
sound? Passing over the fact that no word of evidence or other
information supporting the trial court’s comment is to be
found in the record, would the comment, if duly proven,
justify a sentence such as this—one that otherwise would not
have been imposed? Can a court, without abuse of judicial
discretion, wipe out all the property of the defendant before
the court, and all the assets to which its creditors look, in
an effort to reach and punish a party that is not before the
court—a party that has not been convicted, has not been tried,
has not been indicted even? Can an American judge, without
abuse of judicial discretion, condemn any one who has not had
his day in court?
" That, to our mind, is strange doctrine in Anglo-Saxon
jurisprudence. …
"The judgment of the District Court is reversed and the case
remanded with instructions to grant a new trial, and proceed
further in accordance with this opinion."
The Government failed in attempts to secure a rehearing before
the Appellate Court, as well as in an application for the
reviewing of the case by the Supreme Court.
On the new trial to which the case was remanded Judge Landis,
whose judgment had been set aside, declined to sit, and Judge
A. B. Anderson, of Indianapolis, was called to Chicago to
occupy his bench. The trial was opened on the 23d of February,
1909. On the 2d of March Judge Anderson sustained the motion
of the defence that the government must proceed on the theory
that there were thirty-six alleged offences—that is, that each
settlement on which an alleged rebate was paid instead of each
carload, constituted a separate offence. This made it
impossible to claim a penalty beyond $720,000, being at the
rate of $20,000 for each offence. But even that was put out of
the question by the ultimate decision of the Judge, that the
law, as laid down by the United States Court of Appeals,
required him to direct the jury to find the Standard Oil
Company not guilty on the charge of accepting rebates from the
Chicago and Alton Railroad. This instruction he gave on the
10th of March, thus bringing the case to an end.
{125}
The outcome in this case was said to mean that all but two of
the pending indictments against the Standard Oil Company of
Indiana, as recapitulated above, are void and would be
abandoned by the Government. The two cases not affected are
cases involving the shipment of 1915 carloads of oil from
Whiting, Indiana, to Evansville, Indiana, via Dolton Junction,
over the Chicago and Eastern Illinois Railroad.
On the 15th of March, five days after the acquittal of the
Company in Illinois, a fine of $20,000 was imposed upon it by
the United States District Court of the Western District of
New York, on one of the indictments founded on shipments from
Rochester and Olean to points in Vermont. Previously, the New
York Central Railroad had paid a heavy fine for granting
rebates on those shipments.
Numerous State prosecutions, under State laws in Missouri,
Texas, Minnesota, Ohio, and elsewhere, had been assailing the
monopolistic corporation simultaneously with the proceedings
of the General Government against it, and some of them with
greater seriousness of effect than the Federal prosecutors had
accomplished. The more important of these were in Texas,
against the subsidiary Waters-Pierce Oil Company of Missouri,
and in Missouri, against that Company in association with the
Standard of Indiana, and with another of the same Trust
family. The Texas suit, after making its slow way through the
State courts and to the United States Supreme Court, came to
its conclusion early in 1909, with the result of a fine of
$1,623,500, and the exclusion of the Company from business in
the State. The suit in Missouri, as decided at about the same
time by the Supreme Court of the State, resulted in an order
for the dissolution of the Waters-Pierce Company and for the
perpetual exclusion of the other companies, chartered
elsewhere, from operations within the State. The outcome of
this vindication of the law of the State is understood to have
been an arrangement under which the business of the
Waters-Pierce Company is taken over by a new company, the
stock of which is held by trustees approved by the Supreme
Court of the State and acting as officers of the Court.
COMBINATIONS: A. D. 1905-1906.
The Tobacco Trust Case of Hale v. Henkel.
Denial by the Supreme Court of the claim of corporations
to be exempt from the production of books and papers
before a Grand Jury.
A proceeding begun by the Government of the United States, in
the spring of 1905, to ascertain the lawfulness or
unlawfulness of the methods of business pursued by the
so-called Tobacco Trust, was embarrassed by the refusal of a
witness to give evidence for which he was summoned before the
grand jury of the Circuit Court of the United States for the
Southern District of New York. The case pending was between
the United States and the American Tobacco Company and
MacAndrews & Forbes Company. The witness, Hale, was secretary
and treasurer of the MacAndrews & Forbes Company. He refused
to answer any questions that were put to him concerning the
business of that company, or to produce any of the books,
accounts, contracts, correspondence, etc., that were demanded,
being advised by counsel that he was under no legal obligation
to do so, and that the evidence given or produced by him might
tend to incriminate himself. He was held to be in contempt of
Court and was committed to the custody of the United States
Marshal. Being then, on a writ of habeas corpus,
brought before another judge of the same Court, after a
hearing, the writ was discharged and he was remanded to
custody (June 18, 1905). An appeal to the Supreme Court
followed, which was argued in the early days of January, 1906,
and decided on the 12th of March following.
The decision of the Court, rendered by Justice Brown, was on
two issues which it found to be presented in the case: The
first involving "the immunity of the witness from oral
examination; the second the legality of his action in refusing
to produce the documents called for by the subpœna duces
tecum." The witness justified his refusal to answer questions,
"1st upon the ground that there was no specific ‘charge’
pending before the grand jury against any particular person;
2d that the answers would tend to criminate him." On the first
point the Court found it "entirely clear that under the
practice in this country, at least, the examination of
witnesses need not be preceded by a presentment or indictment
formally drawn up, but that the grand jury may proceed, either
upon their own knowledge or upon the examination of witnesses,
to inquire for themselves whether a crime cognizable by the
Court has been committed." As to the plea of an apprehended
self-incrimination, the Court held that the witness was
protected by the act which provides that no person shall be
prosecuted on account of anything concerning which he may
testify or produce evidence. But it was further insisted that
while the immunity statute may protect individual witnesses it
would not protect the corporation of which the appellant was
the agent and representative. "This is true," says the Court,
"but the answer is that it was not designed to do so. The
right of a person under the Fifth Amendment to refuse to
incriminate himself is purely a personal privilege of the
witness. It was never intended to permit him to plead the fact
that some third person might be incriminated by his testimony,
even though he were the agent of such person."
On the second issue in the case, the substance of the decision
is in the following passages from it:
"Having already held that, by reason of the immunity act of
1903, the witness could not avail himself of the Fifth
Amendment, it follows that he cannot set up that Amendment as
against the production of the books and papers, since in
respect to these he would also be protected by the immunity
act. … We are of the opinion that there is a clear distinction
in this particular between an individual and a corporation,
and that the latter has no right to refuse to submit its books
and papers for an examination at the suit of the State. … The
individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a
citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in
his own way. … Among his rights are a refusal to incriminate
himself, and the immunity of himself and his property from
arrest or seizure except under a warrant of the law. … Upon
the other hand, the corporation is a creature of the State. It
is presumed to be incorporated for the benefit of the public.
… Its rights to act as a corporation are only preserved to it
so long as it obeys the laws of its creation. There is a
reserved right in the Legislature to investigate its contracts
and to find out whether it has exceeded its powers. … The
defense amounts to this: That an officer of a corporation,
which is charged with a criminal violation of the statute, may
plead the criminality of such corporation as a refusal to
produce its books.
{126}
To state this proposition is to answer it. While an individual
may lawfully refuse to answer incriminating questions unless
protected by an immunity statute, it does not follow that a
corporation, vested with special privileges and franchises,
may refuse to show its hand when charged with an abuse of such
privileges."
Taking note of the fact that the franchises of the corporation
in this case were derived from one of the States, the Court
proceeds to say:
"Such franchises, so far as they involve questions of
inter-State commerce, must also be exercised in subordination
to the power of Congress to regulate such commerce, and in
respect to this the General Government may also assert a
sovereign authority to ascertain whether such franchises have
been exercised in a lawful manner, with due regard to its own
laws. … The powers of the General Government in this
particular, in vindication of its own laws, are the same as if
the corporation had been created by an act of Congress."
Justices Harlan and McKenna dissented from some of the views
set forth in the opinion of the majority, as declared by
Justice Brown, but concurred in the final judgment, which
affirmed the order of the Circuit Court, remanding the
prisoner to the custody of the Marshal. Justice Brewer and the
Chief Justice dissented from the conclusions relative to
corporations, and from the judgment, holding that "the order
of the Circuit Court should be reversed and the case remanded
with instructions to discharge the petitioner, leaving the
grand jury to initiate new proceedings not subject to the
objections to this."
Federal Anti-Trust Decisions, 1900-1906,
prepared and edited by
James A. Finch by direction of the Attorney-General,
Volume 2, page 874
(Washington: Government Printing Office, 1907).
COMBINATIONS: A. D. 1906-1910.
The Standard Oil Company.
Suit of the Government for its dissolution.
Decree for its dissolution by the Circuit Court.
Appeal to the Supreme Court.
Entirely distinct from the criminal prosecutions of the
Standard Oil Company by the United States Government, as
reviewed above was a suit begun in November, 1906, in the
United States Circuit Court for the Eastern Division of
Missouri. The former actions were to penalize the Company for
violations of the Elkins Act, by the procuring of railway
rebates. The later suit was to dissolve the combination in
restraint of trade which the Company was alleged to be, and
therefore illegally existing, in the view of the Sherman
Anti-Trust Law. The complaint was directed against the parent
organization, known as the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey,
with its various subsidiary corporations. It was also directed
against seven individuals namely, John D. Rockefeller, William
Rockefeller, Henry M. Flagler, Henry H. Rogers (now deceased),
John D. Archbold, Oliver H. Payne, and Charles M. Pratt. The
main company, its branches, and these individuals were charged
in the complaint with having entered into an agreement,
combination, and conspiracy to restrain trade and commerce
among the several States, to monopolize the trade in
petroleum, both in its purchase and its shipment and
transportation by pipe-line, steamships and by rail, also in
the manufacture and refining of petroleum.
One of the evidences of its monopoly adduced by the Government
was the enormity of its earnings which were summarized thus:
The Standard Oil Trust and the Standard Oil Company, on an
investment of $69,024,480, had earned up to the end of 1906,
$838,783,783. Adding the estimated profits of 1907 and 1908,
we have substantially, the brief states, a billion dollars
earned by this company in twenty-seven years, with an original
investment of about $69,000,000.
The United States asked for a perpetual injunction, and for
the dissolution of the Standard Oil combination. Hearings were
held in New York, Washington, Chicago, Cleveland, and St.
Louis, about four hundred witnesses being examined. It was not
until the 5th of April, 1909, that the case reached the stage
of argument, before Judges Walter H. Sanborn, Willis Van
Devanter, William C. Hook and Elmer B. Adams, constituting the
United States Circuit Court at St. Louis. The decision of the
Court was announced on the 20th of the following November, the
four judges concurring in the opinion, written by Judge
Sanborn, which held the Standard Oil Company to be an illegal
corporation and decreed its dissolution. The character of the
decision appears from the syllabus of Judge Sanborn’s opinion,
which reads:
"Congress has power under the commercial clause of the
Constitution to regulate and restrict the use in commerce
among the several States, and with foreign nations, of
contracts, of the method of holding title to property and of
every other instrumentality employed in that commerce, so far
as it may be necessary to do so, in order to prevent the
restraint thereof denounced by the Anti-Trust Act of July 2,
1890 (26 Stat. 29).
"Test of the legality of a combination under this act is its
necessary effect upon competition in commerce among the States
or with foreign nations. If its necessary effect is only
incidentally or indirectly to restrict the competition, while
its chief result is to foster the trade and increase the
business of those who make and operate it, it does not violate
that law. But if its necessary effect is to stifle or directly
and substantially to restrict free competition in commerce
among the States, or with foreign nations, it is illegal
within the meaning of that statute.
"The power to restrict competition in commerce among the
several States, or with foreign nations, vested in a person or
an association of persons by a combination, is indicative of
the character of the combination, because it is to the
interest of the parties that such a power should be exercised,
and the presumption is that it will be.
"The combination in a single corporation or person, by an
exchange of stock, of the power of many stockholders holding
the same proportions, respectively, of the majority of the
stock of each of the several corporations engaged in commerce
in the same articles among the States, or with foreign
nations, to restrict competition therein, renders the power
thus vested in the former greater, more easily exercised, more
durable, and more effective than that previously held by the
stockholders, and it is illegal.
{127}
"In 1899 the stockholders of the Standard Oil Company of New
Jersey owned a majority of the stock of nineteen other
corporations in the same proportions that they owned the stock
of the Standard Company, and those twenty corporations
controlled by the owners of the majority of their stock or
otherwise many other corporations. Each of these corporations
was engaged in some part of the business of producing, buying,
refining, transporting, and selling petroleum and its
products, and they were conducting about 30 per cent. of the
production of the crude oil and more than 75 per cent. of the
business of the purchasing, refining, transporting, and
selling petroleum and its products in this country. Many of
them were engaged in commerce in these articles among the
several States and with foreign nations, and were naturally
competitive.
"During the ten years prior to 1879 the seven individual
defendants had acquired control of many corporations,
partnerships, and refiners that had been competing in this
business, had placed the majority of the stock of those
corporations and the interests in property in business thus
obtained in various trustees to be held and operated by them
for the stockholders of the Standard Oil Company, one of the
nineteen companies in which the individual defendants were
principal stockholders, and had thereby suppressed competition
among these corporations and partnerships.
"In 1879, they and their associates caused all the trustees to
convey their interests in the stock, property and business of
these corporations to five trustees, to be held, operated and
distributed by them for the stockholders of the Standard
Company of Ohio. From 1879, until 1892, they prevented these
corporations and others engaged in this business, of which
they secured control, from competing in this commerce by
causing the control of their operations and generally of a
majority of their stocks, to be held in trust for the
stockholders of the Standard Company of Ohio, and, from 1892,
until 1899, they accomplished the same result by a similar
stock-holding device, and by the joint equitable ownership of
the majority of the stocks of the corporations."
Appeal from the decree has been taken to the Supreme Court,
where it was preceded by the appeal of the Tobacco Trust from
a similar decree, involving substantially the same questions,
according to what seems to be the general view of the Bar. On
the 17th of January, 1910, the Supreme Court of the United
States granted the motion of the Government for the
advancement on the docket of the Standard Oil case, and set
the hearing for March 14.
COMBINATIONS: A. D. 1907.
The chief existing combinations.
Their operation through stock ownership.
"Passing the matter of railroad combinations, as to which it
may be said that through stock ownership the control of all
American lines is now concentrated in seven groups of parent
properties, we are chiefly concerned with the practical use
that has been made of the new corporate power by the largest
and strongest of our manufacturing and industrial enterprises.
"The United States Steel Corporation, organized under the laws
of New Jersey, with a capital stock of $1,100,000,000 owns a
majority of the stock of eleven subsidiary companies, and
controls industries scattered over the entire country under
different styles and corporate names. This corporation owns or
manages 213 manufacturing and transportation plants and
forty-one mines located in eighteen different States; it has
more than 1,000 miles of railroad tracks to ore, coke and
manufacturing properties, and a lake fleet of 112 vessels.
This stock ownership gives it control of hundreds of millions
of capital that is not represented by its own billion dollars
of stock.
"The Amalgamated Copper Company, incorporated in New Jersey,
has no asset whatever except the stocks of other corporations.
It owns all the stock of four operating companies and a
controlling interest in seven others, and has taken them over
by an issue of $155,000,000 of its own stock.
"The American Smelting and Refining Company, organized under
the laws of New Jersey, controls the business of thirteen
corporations, in which it either owns the entire stock or a
majority interest. Associated with it are the American Linseed
Company, the National Lead Company and the United Lead
Company, and they together control twenty-eight concerns and
ninety-three affiliated corporations.
"The Standard Oil Company, incorporated in New Jersey, with a
capital stock of $110,000,000, controls, directs and manages
more than seventy corporations through its possession of a
majority of their stock. Some of these companies own stock in
still other corporations, and all together the combine
operates more than 400 separate and distinct properties, thus
monopolizing 90 per cent, of the export oil trade and 84 per
cent. of the domestic trade. The market value of its
capitalization is about $650,000,000, and all this vast
property was brought together under one head without the
payment of a single dollar of cash, the whole consolidation
being effected through the issue of stock in the holding
company in payment of stock in the companies that are held.
"The United Gas Improvement Company, incorporated in
Pennsylvania, own stock in thirty corporations doing the
character of business for which it was organized, and in
addition to this is interested in numerous street railway
properties, including the New York City surface railways. With
it is allied the Public Service Corporation of New Jersey and
the Rhode Island Securities Company, which last named owns all
the stock of the Rhode Island Company, which again has leased
for 999 years several of the most important railroad companies
doing business in that State. The power of this corporation,
through this system of stock ownership, is scarcely
calculable, and the value of properties controlled would equal
hundreds of millions, although its own capital stock is but
$36,000,000.
"The American Tobacco Company, organized under the laws of New
Jersey, with a capital stock of $40,000,000, practically
controls the whole market through its ownership of the stock
of innumerable other corporations.
"The International Harvester Company, incorporated in New
Jersey, with a capital stock of $120,000,000, while probably
not a holding company, maintains most, if not all, the
corporations which it has bought out, and they are operated as
if they were distinct and competing concerns.
"The American Sugar Refining Company, incorporated in New
Jersey, with a common stock of $40,000,000, controls
fifty-three other corporations.
{128}
"The American Telegraph and Telephone Company, incorporated in
New York, with a capital stock of $250,000,000 controls,
through stock ownership, thirty-five subsidiary corporations.
"The Western Union Telegraph Company owns stock in twenty-four
other corporations; the Distillers’ Security Company owns 90
per cent. of the stocks of the Distilling Company of America,
and has acquired ninety-three plants, representing 60 per
cent. of the industry; the Philadelphia Rapid Transit Company
owns the stock of twelve elevated and street railway
companies; the Brooklyn Rapid Transit Company owns the stock
of seven others; the Metropolitan Securities Company of New
York owns the stock of many traction companies, and the
controlling interest in others; the Inter-State Railways of
New Jersey own all the stock of the United Power and
Transportation Company, which latter company controls the
capital and franchises of about forty other projected
companies in New Jersey and Pennsylvania; while the
International Mercantile Marine Company of New Jersey owns a
majority of the shares of many of the most important steamship
companies whose vessels cross the Atlantic Ocean.
"These are but a few instances of the promotion of
combinations through stock ownership."
Wade H. Ellis,
Attorney-General of Ohio,
Paper read at National Conference on Trusts and
Combinations, Chicago, October 22, 1907.
COMBINATIONS: A. D. 1907.
National Conference on the Trust Question, invited
by the National Civic Federation.
A remarkably representative and impressive assembly at
Chicago, of delegates from all parts of the country, and
voicing all interests, was brought about by the invitation of
the National Civic Federation, in October, 1907, for a
thorough discussion of the questions which troubled the
country and confused its attitude toward Trusts and
Combinations, as subjects of regulation by law. There had been
a similar conference at Chicago in 1899, at the call of the
Civic Federation of that city; but no common ground of
agreement could then be found. The subject, as was afterwards
said, "was too new, too vaguely understood for men to be of
one mind in regard to it." But eight years later, in 1907, "it
appeared to the leaders of the National Civic Federation not
improbable that a new conference might lead to some definite
pronouncement of opinion. … Leaders of opinion in all walks of
life gave the project their hearty endorsement. … The matter
was taken up with great interest by the Governors of the
several States and by the presidents of commercial bodies, who
named delegates in response to the invitation of the National
Civic Federation. A significant evidence of this greater
interest is found in the larger number of delegations
appointed in 1907 than in 1899. The records show the
following:
Delegations. 1899. 1907.
Appointed by Governors 33 39
Appointed by national
and State organizations 22 33
Appointed by
labor organizations 7 14
Appointed by local
commercial bodies 33 58
Total 95 144
"Furthermore, the attendance of 492 delegates in 1907 might be
contrasted with that of 238 delegates at the earlier
conference.
"The conference of 1907, though larger in numbers, was much
more of a unit in sentiment. It developed at an early stage of
the discussion that there was no important element
antagonizing the trust and combination as such. There were few
speakers who failed to dwell upon the advantages which had
accrued to the nation from some combinations, and from the
spirit of association which, after all, cannot be separated
from them. On the other hand, there was no lack of emphasis in
dwelling upon the evils which had been disclosed among trusts
and combinations.
"The resolutions of the conference, adopted by a unanimous
vote, reveal these tendencies. They are a call for further
examination and more light, but a call for such examination
along certain pretty well-defined lines. They should receive
the attention of Congress as an expression of the popular will
on this pressing question."
The Conference held nine sessions, extending over four days,
focusing the thought of the best minds of the country, and the
counsels of the largest practical experience, on all points in
the many-sided problem before it. On all that appear most
important among those points it came to a full and clear
agreement in its conclusions, as embodied in the following
resolutions, which were adopted by unanimous vote, a committee
being appointed to present them to Congress and to the
President:
"After twenty years of Federal legislation as interpreted by
the courts, directed against the evils of trusts and
combinations, and against railroad rebates, beginning with the
interstate commerce act of 1887 and the anti-trust act of
1890, a general and just conviction exists that the experience
gained in enforcing these federal acts and others succeeding
them demonstrates the necessity of legislation which shall
render more secure the benefits already gained and better meet
the changed conditions which have arisen during a long period
of active progress, both in the enforcement of statute law and
in the removal of grave abuses in the management of railroads
and corporations. These changes now demanded are:
"First—Immediate legislation is required, following the
recommendation of President Roosevelt and the Interstate
Commerce Commission, permitting agreements between railroad
corporations on reasonable freight and passenger rates,
subject in all respects to the approval, supervision, and
action of the Interstate Commerce Commission.
"Second—The enforcement of the Sherman act and the proceedings
under it during the administrations of Presidents Harrison,
Cleveland, McKinley, and Roosevelt have accomplished great
national results in awakening the moral sense of the American
people and in asserting the supremacy and majesty of the law,
thus effectually refuting the impression that great wealth and
large corporations were too powerful for the impartial
execution of law. This great advance has rendered more secure
all property rights, resting, as they must, under a popular
government, on universal respect for and obedience to law. But
now that this work is accomplished, it has revealed the
necessity for legislation which shall maintain all that the
Sherman act was intended to secure and safeguard interests it
was never expected to affect.
{129}
"As the next step in executing the determination of the
American people to secure in all industrial and commercial
relations justice and equality of opportunity for all, with
full sympathy and loyal support for every effort to enforce
the laws in the past, we urge upon Congress without delay to
pass legislation providing for a non-partisan commission, in
which the interests of capital, of labor, and of the general
public shall be represented. This commission, like a similar
commission, which proved most successful in Germany in 1870,
shall consider the entire subject of business and industrial
combinations and report such proposals, as to the formation,
capitalization, management and regulation of corporations (so
far as the same may be subject to federal jurisdiction) as
shall preserve individual initiative competition, and the free
exercise of a free contract in all business and industrial
relations. Any proposed legislation should also include
modification of the prohibition now existing upon combinations
on the following subjects:
"1. National and local organizations of labor and their trade
agreements with employers relating to wages, hours of labor,
and conditions of employment.
"2. Associations made up of farmers, intended to secure a
stable and equitable market for the products of the soil free
from fluctuations due to speculation.
"3. Business and industrial agreements of combinations whose
objects are in the public interest as distinguished from
objects determined to be contrary to the public interest.
"4. Such commission should make a thorough inquiry into the
advisability of inaugurating a system of federal license or
incorporation as a condition for the entrance of certain
classes of corporations upon interstate commerce and also into
the relation to the public interest of the purchase by one
corporation of the franchises or corporate stock of another.
"On no one of these subjects must what has been gained be
sacrificed until something better appears for enactment. On
each, this conference recognizes differences between good men.
On all, it asks a national non-partisan commission to be
appointed next winter to consider the question and report at
the second session of the approaching Congress for such action
as the national legislature, in the light of this full
investigation, may enact.
"Third—The examination, inspection and supervision of great
producing and manufacturing corporations, already begun by the
Department of Commerce and Labor and accepted by these
corporations, should be enlarged by legislation requiring,
through the appropriate bureaus of the Department of Commerce
and Labor, complete publicity in the capitalization, accounts,
operations, transportation charges paid, and selling prices of
all such producing and manufacturing corporations whose
operations are large enough to have a monopolistic influence.
This should be determined and decided by some rule and
classification to be devised by the commission already
proposed.
"Fourth—The conflicts between State and Federal authorities
raised in many States over railroad rates being now under
adjudication and under way to a final and ultimate decision by
the Federal Supreme Court, this conference deems the
expression of an opinion on these issues unfitting, and
confidently leaves this great issue to a tribunal which for
118 years has successfully preserved the balance between an
indissoluble union and indestructible State, defining the
supreme and national powers of the one and protecting the
sovereign and individual powers of the other."
Proceedings of the National Conference
on Trusts and Combinations,
Chicago, October 22-25, 1907
(New York: National Civic Federation, 1908).
COMBINATIONS: A. D. 1907-1909.
Thievery of the Sugar Trust.
In the fall of 1907 disclosures were made to the Government
which led to an investigation of the methods whereby imports
of raw sugar for the American Sugar Refining Company, known
commonly as the Sugar Trust, were weighed for the payment of
Customs duties, at the Company’s docks in Williamsburgh and
Jersey City. The result of the investigation was to prove that
this enormously wealthy corporation, not satisfied with
extortions of profit from the public by its monopoly of the
vast sugar trade of the country, had stooped to practices of
systematic theft from the Government, by devices that would
almost shame the professional players of a thimble rigging
game. Several ingenious inventions of trickery with the
weighing scales had been employed at the sugar docks prior to
1904, but the crowning one appears to have been brought to use
in that year. "This," said the New York Evening Post of
April 29, 1909, in a full rehearsal of the story of the Sugar
Trust larcenies, "consisted of a thin steel corset spring,
which was inserted through a hole drilled in the uprights or
stanchions supporting the scales. If inserted at a time when
there was a load on the platform, its pressure against the
walking beam of the scale resulted in creating a false
balance, and in making the load appear considerably lighter
than it really was. This little device proved to be so
satisfactory for the purposes for which it was designed that
it was fitted to all the seventeen government scales at the
Havemeyer & Elder refinery. Holes were drilled in the
stanchions of each of the scales—hence the ‘case of the
seventeen holes’ to which Mr. Stimson called attention. So
successful was the operation of this mechanism that it was
used constantly down to the very day, November 20, 1907, when
a United States Treasury agent found it in use.
"The method of use was simple. The scales were placed with the
stanchions in a dark corner, next to the wall, and close
beside this stanchion sat the company’s checker, whose
ostensible duty it was to record in a little book the weight
of each load as it was read off to him by the government
weigher standing at the other end of the scale. The checker’s
really important duty seems to have been, however, to
manipulate the steel spring through the hole in the stanchion,
so that on each truck load, the company which employed him was
saved the payment of duty on some fourteen pounds of sugar.
"Evidence was adduced at the subsequent trial to show that the

company considered this special service on the part of its
checkers worthy of additional compensation. For although there
were seventeen scales, all of which could be used for this
purpose, practically all the weighing was done on six, and the
six reliable checkers who, year in and year out, operated the
little steel springs, all received extra pay in their weekly
pay envelopes for this service."
{130}
Consequent on the discovery of these facts, "several
indictments were found against the Sugar Trust’s employees,
and with that discovery as a basis the government began to
work up its case. … When the government came to work up its
case and to fix approximately the amount out of which it had
been defrauded, it was found possible to present a piece of
evidence which so thoroughly clinched the case that defence,
when it came to be made, was so weak as to be negligible. This
evidence consisted of a tabulation comparing the weights of
sugar on which duty was paid and the weights for which the
company paid the planters between the time the first cargo of
sugar of December, 1901, arrived at the refinery and the
discovery of the fraud in November, 1907.
"It took a score or more of accountants working steadily for
six months to complete the tabulation, but when it was
finished the astonishing corroborative story it told made it
well worth all the time and trouble expended. Never was there
a better example of the deadly parallel. For every entry the
weights on which duties were levied was set alongside of the
weights for which the company paid the planters."
The first result of the proceedings of the Government against
the thievish Trust was a pecuniary settlement with it,
concerning which the following official statement was given
out at Washington, by Attorney-General Wickersham, on the 29th
of April, 1909:
"The Attorney-General, with the concurrence of the Secretary
of the Treasury, has just approved a settlement between the
American Sugar Refining Company and the United States
Government of all the claims which the latter has against it
arising out of the fraudulent weighing on the docks of its
refineries at Brooklyn and Jersey City. In making this
settlement the sugar company pays in full the recent judgment
for the penalty in the amount of $134,411.03, which was
awarded against it by the jury in the case tried in the
federal court last March, with interest, and agrees to take no
appeal from the judgment.
"In addition to this, it pays into the United States treasury
$2,000,000 more, representing the duties which have been
unpaid during the last twelve years, owing to the fraudulent
practices, $1,239,088.97 of this amount has already been paid
in under protest to Collector Loeb on his reliquidation, as a
result of the trial above mentioned, of the duties upon the
cargoes entered at the Havemeyer & Elder refineries between
the years 1901 and 1907, when the frauds were discovered.
"The sugar company abandons its protests on these payments and
gives up its right to appeal from Mr. Loeb’s reliquidation and
in addition to this pays into the United States treasury the
above judgment and over $760,000 more to cover the duties
unpaid at the Havemeyer & Elder docks prior to 1901 and at the
Jersey City refinery between 1896 and 1906.
"This settlement with the sugar company in nowise affects the
criminal prosecution of the individuals who are responsible
for the perpetration of these frauds, and such prosecutions
will be pressed to a finish by the government."
[Soon after this settlement with the Government by the Sugar
Trust for shortage in payment of duties, the firm of Arbuckle
Brothers made a similar settlement, paying $695,573.19.]
A few days after the above announcement of a pecuniary
settlement with the American Sugar Refining Company, the Grand
Jury of the Circuit Court in the New York District presented
indictments against Oliver Spitzer, who was superintendent on
the company’s docks, Thomas Kehoe, Eugene M. Voelker, Edward
A. Boyle, J. R. Coyle, J. M. Halligan, Jr., and Patrick J.
Hennessy.
In November, further indictments were found against these
employees of the company, and James F. Bendernagel, general
superintendent of the Williamsburgh refinery for many years
past, was arrested on an indictment found by the same grand
jury. The trial of the accused, in the United States District
Court, was opened on the 30th of November.
On the 17th of January, 1910, Charles R. Heike, secretary and
treasurer of the American Sugar Refining Company, was
arraigned before Judge Hough in the criminal branch of the
United States Circuit Court, charged with making false entries
and conspiring to defraud the government.
COMBINATIONS: A. D. 1907-1909.
Suit of the Government against the Tobacco Trust.
Decree of Circuit Court restraining the combined
companies from interstate and foreign trade.
On the 10th of July, 1907, the Government began suit at New
York against the so-called Tobacco Trust. The defendants in
the case included 65 corporations and 27 individuals, the
principals, however, being six companies, namely, the American
Tobacco Company, the British-American Tobacco Company, the
Imperial Tobacco Company, the American Snuff Company, the
American Cigar Company, and the United American Cigarette
Company. Of these the parent organization, dominating all the
others, is the American Tobacco Company, which began the
finally gigantic combination in a small way in 1890. The
object sought in the Government’s suit was an injunction to
restrain the combination as such from engaging in interstate
and foreign trade, or for the appointment of receivers to take
the management of the business concerned.
The case was argued before the Second Circuit Court of the
United States in May, 1908, and the decision of the Court was
announced on the 7th of November following, Judges Lacombe,
Noyes, and Coxe agreeing and Judge Ward dissenting. The Court
found that an injunction should issue against some, but not
all, of the principal defendants, to prevent the continuance
of their violation of the Sherman Anti-Trust Law. It acquitted
the Trust, however, of the charge of dishonest and oppressive
practices, and it denied the application for receiverships.
The final decree of the Court was filed on the 15th of
December, 1908.
Appeals to the Supreme Court of the United States were taken,
both by the Government and by the defendants, and the case was
pending in that Court at the close of the year 1909. Mean time
the decree has been in suspense.
{131}
COMBINATIONS: A. D. 1907-1909.
Suit to dissolve the alleged Anthracite Coal Combination.
The following statements were made in an Associated Press
despatch from Philadelphia, March 8, 1909:
"Testimony of the Government in its suit against the
anthracite coal-carrying railroads and several coal companies,
to dissolve a so-called Trust agreement, alleged to be
existing among them, has been filed in the Circuit Court of
the United States for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
"Suit was begun here on June 12, 1907, and in the course of
three months all the defendants made answer, denying the
allegations of the Government. Subsequently, the court
appointed an examiner to take testimony, and a great part of
last year was taken up in hearing witnesses, sessions being
held mainly in Philadelphia and New York.
"The Government closed its case in New York several weeks ago,
having taken more than its allotted time, and the next move
will be for the Government to file a motion apportioning a
certain amount of time for the defendant companies to present
their witnesses for examination. Much of the testimony thus
far has been documentary, and it is believed this will be the
case with the defendants. After all the testimony is filed
with the court for review, arguments will be had on the case.
"It is impossible at this time to indicate when the case will
be ended, but it seems probable that a year or more will have
elapsed before it is legally decided whether a hard coal
monopoly, as alleged, exists in Pennsylvania."
See, also, proceedings under the "Commodities Clause" of
the Hepburn Act, and decision of United States Supreme
Court, in this Volume, under RAILWAYS: UNITED STATES: A. D.
1906-1909.
COMBINATIONS: A. D. 1908.
Declarations in Party Platforms on Trusts.
See (in this Volume)
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1908 (APRIL-NOVEMBER).
COMBINATIONS: A. D. 1908-1909.
Amending the Sherman Anti-Trust Law.
Action of the National Civic Federation.
The resolutions adopted at the great National Conference of
1907 on the Trust Question, as recited above, were duly
presented to Congress at its next session, and to the
President, with results which were stated at the annual
meeting of the National Civic Federation in December, 1908, by
its President, the Honorable Seth Low, as follows:
"When these resolutions were presented to the two Houses, the
Conference Committee was asked to submit a definite Bill in
legislative form to carry out its proposals. The Conference
itself had given no such authority to any Committee; but, in
view of the situation as it had developed, the Executive
Committee of the Federation took the matter up. The result of
its action was the preparation of a Bill, which was submitted
in due time to Congress, and which became the subject of
numerous hearings before the Judiciary Committees both of the
House and of the Senate, but especially of the House. The Bill
of last spring was based upon the belief that at that time,
and before the approaching Presidential election, it would be
impossible to change the substantive law as embodied in the
Sherman Anti-Trust Act. This being taken for granted, it
became impossible to do more than propose a method by which,
without changing the law, certain restraints of trade, if not
disapproved in advance by some government authority, might be
assured freedom from prosecution. The hearings before the
Congressional Committees made it evident that no relief from
the embarrassments caused by the Sherman Anti-Trust Law can be
looked for along this line of procedure. Perhaps it ought also
to be said that none ought to be looked for, because the
situation really calls for a change in the substantive
provisions of the law. Let no one imagine, however, that it is
an easy thing to say what such changes in the law ought to be.
Your Committee last spring began its work in the hope that it
would be able to submit a law which would command very large
support, not only from employers but also from organized
labor. After working upon the subject for many weeks, the Bill
which it actually presented commanded no large measure of
support from either. The mercantile classes favor amendments
to the law which, instead of forbidding all restraints of
trade, will forbid only unreasonable restraints of trade; and
which will provide amnesty for the past,
(1) on the theoretical ground that what has been done has
often been done without any realization that it was contrary
to the law; and
(2) on the practical ground that to attempt to rip up what has
already been done will destroy the industry of the country. The
representatives of organized labor, on the other hand, ask to
be omitted altogether from the provisions of the Sherman Act.
It is evident to your Committee that the changes desired by
the mercantile classes are going to meet with very serious
objection, unless they are combined with some positive
legislation which will provide some effective method of
assuring to the country, in the future, the power to protect
itself in advance from new combinations in the industrial
sphere, such as have been made in the past, and which
originally created the sentiment which placed the Sherman
Anti-Trust Law upon the statute books.
"In other words, precisely as a city may desire to limit the
height of buildings, for the future, without taking down those
that are already erected, so many persons believe that the
right to make commercial combinations, in the future, should
be under some sort of governmental control, even though those
already formed be left unmolested; and such persons, also,
believe that there is the same inherent right in the body
politic to do the one as the other. On the other hand, the
demand of organized labor to be exempted altogether from the
operations of this Act has been objected to in the past, and
is likely to be objected to in the future, as class
legislation of a kind that has no place on American soil,
because organized labor is believed to be capable of
exercising restraint of trade no less than commercial
corporations.
"These being the terms of the problem, it is apparent, on the
face of things, that the effort to amend the Sherman
Anti-Trust Law in any effective way is beset by difficulties
at every turn. … The whole subject is made infinitely
difficult by the Constitutional limitations upon the power of
Congress, which have led the United States Supreme Court to
decide, in effect, that Congress can regulate inter-State
commerce, but cannot regulate the corporation that does it;
because the corporation that does inter-State commerce is a
creature of the State and not of the United States. The
separate States, on the other hand, can regulate the
corporations that do inter State commerce, because they create
them; but the States cannot regulate the inter-state commerce
that is done, because under the United States Constitution,
inter-State commerce is under National control. It cannot be
too clearly apprehended that the effect of this situation is,
that neither sovereignty—neither the National sovereignty nor
the State sovereignty—can regulate both the agent that does
inter-State commerce and the inter-State commerce that is
done."
{132}
In the National Civic Federation Review of March, 1909,
it was announced that "the Executive Council of the National
Civic Federation has appointed a committee to draft proposed
amendments to the Sherman Anti-Trust act. By request of the
lawyers upon the committee Seth Low will serve as chairman.
The other members are Frederick P. Fish, of Boston; Frederick
N. Judson, of St. Louis; Reuben D. Silliman, of New York, and
Henry W. Taft, of New York.
"No attempt will be made to submit anything to the present
session of Congress. It is proposed to draft a tentative bill
as soon as a careful study of the problems will permit. This
will then be submitted for examination and suggestion to
various representative bodies in all parts of the country, and
with the aid of the comments thus received the final draft of
the bill to be submitted will be prepared."
COMBINATIONS: A. D. 1909.
Report of the Commissioner of Corporations on the
Tobacco Combination, or so-called Trust.
Parts of an elaborate report on the organization of the
Tobacco Combination were published in February, 1909, by the
Commissioner of Corporations, Herbert Knox Smith. It showed
the combination to be composed of "the American Tobacco
Company and its three great subsidiary combinations, the
American Snuff Company, the American Cigar Company, and the
British-American Company, besides eighty two other subsidiary
concerns doing business in the United States, Porto Rico, and
Cuba. The combination represents a total net capitalization of
over $316,000,000. A very small group of ten stockholders
controls 60 per cent. of the outstanding voting stock of the
American Tobacco Company, through which company the entire
combination is controlled."
A list of the subsidiary companies controlled, "including over
twenty hitherto secretly controlled, so-called ‘bogus
independent concerns,'" is given in the report. It is shown
also that the combination is practically the only important
exporter of tobacco manufactures from this country. In 1891
the combination controlled 89 per cent. of the business of
cigarette manufactures, and this proportion practically is
maintained. In cigars its output increased from 4 per cent. of
the business in 1897 to 14.7 per cent, in 1906; while in
manufactured tobacco (chewing, smoking, fine-cut, and snuff)
"the combination’s output increased from 7 per cent. of the
total in 1891 to 77 per cent. in 1906. Finally, in 1906, the
combination controlled of these separate products,
respectively, plug, 82 per cent.; smoking, 71 per cent.;
fine-cut, 81 per cent., and snuff, 96 per cent." In the year
1906 the combination used in the manufacture of its various
products nearly 300,000,000 pounds of leaf tobacco. The report
adds:
"An idea of the absorption of competing plants and of the
changes through combination within the last decade may be had
from the fact that in 1897 the combination had ten plants,
each producing over 50,000 pounds of manufactured tobacco or
snuff per year, while there were 243 independent plants of the
same class. In 1906, on the other hand, the combination had 45
plants of this class, and independent manufacturers 140.
Especially conspicuous has been the absorption of the large
plants. In 1897 the combination had eight plants, each
producing over 1,000,000 pounds of these products per year,
while its competitors had forty-six such plants. In 1906 the
combination had thirty-four plants of this size, and
independent concerns only seventeen."
COMBINATIONS: A. D. 1909.
Merger of Telephone and Telegraph Corporations.
Announcement of one of the most important financial mergers of
recent years was made November 16, 1909, when the American
Telephone and Telegraph Company disclosed its acquirement of
control of the Western Union Telegraph Company. "The American
Telephone and Telegraph Company has obtained the control of a
substantial minority interest in the shares of the Western
Union Telegraph Company," was the wording of the official
statement, but it became known that sufficient voting rights
of other stock had been obtained to give the telephone
interests control of the telegraph company.
According to a statement issued on May 1, 1909, the total
capital and outstanding interest-bearing obligations of the
American Telephone and Telegraph Company and allied systems
was $592,475,400. This amount included capital stock
aggregating $361,636,800, subdivided as follows: American
Telephone and Telegraph Company, $208,393,500; associated
operating companies in the United States and Canada, about
thirty-five in number, $142,674,400; associated holding and
manufacturing companies, $10,668,900. "The Western Union has a
capitalization of $125,000,000 in stock and $40,000,000 in
bonds.
COMBINATIONS: A. D. 1909.
Threatened combination to control the Water Power of the
country.
Speaking at the National Irrigation Congress, convened at
Spokane, Washington, in August, 1909, the National Forester,
Gifford Pinchot, declared that, notwithstanding the
contradictions issued by the parties in interest, a gigantic
combination was forming to seize the sources of the country’s
water power, and be in a position later to dominate all
industry.
"There could be no better illustration," he said, "of the
eager, rapid, unwearied absorption by capital of the rights
which belong to all the people than the Water Power Trust, not
yet formed, but in rapid progress of formation. This statement
is true, but not unchallenged. We are met at every turn by the
indignant denial of the water power interests. They tell us
that there is no community of interest among them, and yet
they appear year after year at these Congresses by their paid
attorneys, asking for your influence to help them remove the
few remaining obstacles to their perpetual and complete
absorption of the remaining water powers. They tell us it has
no significance that the General Electric interests are
acquiring great groups of water powers in various parts of the
United States, and dominating the power market in the region
of each group. And whoever dominates power, dominates all
industry. … The time for us to agitate this question is now,
before the separate circles of centralized control spread into
the uniform, unbroken, nation-wide covering of a single
gigantic Trust. There will be little chance for mere agitation
after that. No man at all familiar with the situation can
doubt that the time for effective protest is very short."
{133}
The same warning has been given by others who are in a
position to speak with knowledge, and heed has been given to
them by the Government. The annual report of the Secretary of
the Interior, the Honorable Richard A. Ballinger, made public
November 28, 1909, contained the following important
announcement: "In anticipation of new legislation by Congress
to prevent the acquisition of power sites on the public domain
by private persons or corporations with the view of
monopolizing or adversely controlling them against the public
interest, there have been temporarily withdrawn from all forms
of entry approximately 603,355 acres, covering all locations
known to possess power possibilities on unappropriated lands
outside of national forests. Without such withdrawals these
sites would be enterable under existing laws, and their
patenting would leave the general government powerless to
impose any limitations as to their use.
"If the Federal government desires to exercise control or
supervision over water-power development on the public domain,
it can only do so by limitations imposed upon the disposal of
power and reservoir sites upon the public lands, the waters of
the streams being subject to State jurisdiction in their
appropriation and beneficial use. I would, therefore, advise
that the Congress be asked to enact a measure that will
authorize the classification of all lands capable of being
used for water-power development, and to direct their
disposal, through this department. …
"Unreasonable or narrow restrictions beyond the necessity of
public protection against monopoly, or extortion in charges,
will, of course, defeat development and serve no useful
purpose. The statute should, therefore, while giving full
protection against the abuses of the privileges extended, so
far as consistent, encourage investment in these projects; and
it must always be borne in mind that excessive charges for the
franchise will fall upon the consumer. Legislation of this
character proceeds upon the theory that Congress can impose
such contractual terms and conditions as it sees fit in the
sale or use permitted of government lands so long as such
limitations do not conflict with the powers properly exercised
by the State wherein they may be situated."
COMBINATIONS: A. D. 1909.
The Sugar Trust settles a conspiracy charge.
While the American Sugar Refining Company, in the spring of
1909, was being forced to make good to the Government its long
cheating of the Custom House, it was being compelled, at the
same time, to indemnify a competitor in business, whom it had
ruined by means which the Sherman Anti-Trust Law forbade. Its
victim was the Pennsylvania Sugar Refining Company, whose
refinery had been established by Mr. Adolph Segal, of
Philadelphia, in 1903. Segal became financially embarrassed,
and was lured into taking a loan of $1,250,000, from a person
who acted secretly in the transaction for the American Sugar
Refining Company. The loan was made on terms which gave the
lender control of a majority of the stock of the Pennsylvania
Sugar Refining Company, and Mr. Segal found, when too late,
that the real lender was the Sugar Trust. It used its power to
shutdown the plant, which was said to be the most perfect of
its kind, and the Pennsylvania Company was wrecked. It brought
a suit for damages to the amount of $30,000,000, inflicted
upon it in contravention of the Anti-Trust Law. Before the
trial ended, the defendants found so much reason to fear its
outcome that negotiations were opened which resulted (June 8,
1909) in a settlement of the claim outside of court. The
settlement was said to involve a cash payment by the American
Company to the Pennsylvania Company of $750,000, the
cancellation of the $1,250,000 loan made by the trust to
Adolph Segal, of Philadelphia, and the return of the
securities given by Segal as collateral for the loan.
Subsequently the Government procured indictments of certain of
the officials of the American Sugar Refining Company for their
participation in the conspiracy; but the prosecution was
blocked in October by a decision from Judge Holt, of the
United States Circuit Court, that the acts charged were
outlawed by the statute of limitations. Later, in November, it
was reported that the Government was preparing an appeal to
the Supreme Court.
COMBINATIONS: A. D. 1909.
Dissolution of a Paper-making Combination.
By a decree of the United States Circuit Court, Judge Hough,
at New York, in May, 1909, the Fiber and Manila Association, a
combination of 25 paper manufacturers, located in many parts
of the country, East and West, was adjudged to be an illegal
combination in restraint of trade, and perpetually enjoined
from further operations in such combination. The members were
enjoined further from fixing prices or the qualities that
shall be manufactured or to maintain any pool or fund made up
of contributions from its members. Counsel for the Association
announced that no appeal would be made.
COMBINATIONS: A. D. 1909.
Chartering of the United Dry Goods Companies.
"Details of the greatest dry goods combination ever attempted
in this country were available to-day for the first time since
the United Dry Goods Companies took out a Delaware charter
last Friday [April 21, 1909], The concern will control many of
the largest dry goods stores in this city and at important
commercial centres of the South and West, acting first as a
holding company and later possibly as an operating concern,
with headquarters here. John Claflin will be the head of the
combination. The present managers of the various absorbed
stores will be continued. J. P. Morgan & Co. are financing the
deal, and public announcement will be made immediately.
"The United Dry Goods Companies will have a capital of
$51,000,000. Of this only $20,000,000 will be immediately
issued in the form of $10,000,000 7 per cent. cumulative
preferred stock and $10,000,000 common stock. The preferred
stock has preference as to both assets and dividends. The new
combination will purchase $8,650,000 of the outstanding
$17,250,000 capital stock of the Associated Merchants’
Company. …
"John Claflin said this afternoon that the new company would
not buy any mills, as it was not the purpose of the
combination to control the sources of production. All the
stores—there are more than forty, which the United Companies
and its allies will own in whole or in part—will be free to
purchase from whatever interests they wish, without being
restricted to any one market or to the product of any special
mills. The general business will be directed from the city,
but resident directors at different centres will have full
charge of the detail work."
New York Evening Post,
May, 25-26, 1909.
{134}
COMBINATIONS: A. D. 1909.
The illegality of a Trust invalidates a debt to it.
In a suit brought by the Continental Wall Paper Company to
recover a debt, payment of which was resisted on the ground
that the Company was an illegal combination in restraint of
trade, the Supreme Court of the United States, on the 1st of
February, 1909, affirmed a judgment of the Circuit Court of
Appeals which had dismissed the suit. The case was so decided
by a bare majority of one. The opinion of the majority,
delivered by Justice Harlan, held that a judgment in favor of
the Company would give effect to agreements constituting the
illegal combination. "Upon the whole case," said Justice
Harlan, "and without further citation of authority, we adjudge
upon the admitted facts that the combination represented by
the plaintiff in this case was illegal under the anti-trust
act of 1890; is to be taken as one intended, and which would
have the effect, directly to restrain and monopolize trade
among the several states and with foreign states; and that the
plaintiff cannot have a judgment for the amount of the account
sued on because such a judgment would, in effect, be in aid of
the execution of agreements constituting that illegal
combination. We consequently hold that the circuit court of
appeals properly sustained the third defense in the case and
rightly dismissed the suit."
In the dissenting opinion by Justice Holmes and others it was
set forth that "whenever a party knows that he is buying from
an illegal trust, and still more when he buys at a price that
he thinks unreasonable, but is compelled to pay in order to
get the goods he needs, he knows that he is doing an act in
furtherance of the unlawful purpose of the trust, which always
is to get the most it can for its wares. But that knowledge
makes no difference, because the policy of not furthering the
purposes of the trust is less important than the policy of
preventing people from getting other people’s property for
nothing when they purport to be buying it."
COMBINATIONS: A. D. 1909-1910.
Morgan & Co. Banking Combination.
See (in this Volume)
FINANCE AND TRADE: UNITED STATES.
COMBINATIONS: A. D. 1910.
Special Message of President Taft
on Legislation touching "Trusts."
An important special Message, recommendatory of legislation on
the two subjects of interstate commerce and the combinations
called "Trusts," was addressed to Congress by President Taft
on the 7th of January, 1910. It had been expected that the
Executive would advise amendments to the Sherman Anti-Trust
Law, so-called, but he did not. On the contrary he favored the
policy of leaving that law untouched, on the ground that its
defects have been cured already to a great extent by judicial
decisions, and that it is safer and better for the business
interests of the country to trust the law to the gradual
molding which the courts are giving it, than to undertake
amendments which would start anew series of judicial
interpretations. But the President’s conclusions on this point
were supplemented by the advocacy of an enactment to provide
for the federal chartering of corporations engaged in
interstate commerce, as a means of substituting continuous
regulation of such organizations for the spasmodic and
disturbing investigations which the Government is now
compelled frequently to institute.
In part, the President’s discussion of these questions is as
follows:—
"The statute has been on the statute book now for two decades,
and the Supreme Court in more than a dozen opinions has
construed it in application to various phases of business
combinations and in reference to various subjects-matter. It
has applied it to the union under one control of two competing
interstate railroads, to joint traffic arrangements between
several interstate railroads, to private manufacturers engaged
in a plain attempt to control prices and suppress competition
in a part of the country, including a dozen States, and to
many other combinations affecting interstate trade. The value
of a statute which is rendered more and more certain in its
meaning by a series of decisions of the Supreme Court
furnishes a strong reason for leaving the act as it is, to
accomplish its useful purpose, even though if it were being
newly enacted useful suggestions as to change of phrase might
be made.
"It is the duty and the purpose of the Executive to direct an
investigation by the Department of Justice, through the grand
jury or otherwise, into the history, organization, and
purposes of all the industrial companies with respect to which
there is any reasonable ground for suspicion that they have
been organized for a purpose, and are conducting business on a
plan which is in violation of the Anti-Trust law. The work is
a heavy one, but is not beyond the power of the Department of
Justice, if sufficient funds are furnished, to carry on the
investigations and to pay the counsel engaged in the work. But
such an investigation and possible prosecution of corporations
whose prosperity or destruction affects the comfort not only
of stockholders, but of millions of wage-earners, employees,
and associated tradesmen, must necessarily tend to disturb the
confidence of the business community, to dry up the now
flowing sources of capital from its places of hoarding, and
produce a halt in our present prosperity that will cause
suffering and strained circumstances among the innocent many
for the faults of the guilty few. The question which I wish in
this message to bring clearly to the consideration and
discussion of Congress is whether in order to avoid such a
possible business danger something cannot be done by which
these business combinations may be offered a means, without
great financial disturbance, of changing the character,
organization, and extent of their business into one within the
lines of the law under Federal control and supervision,
securing compliance with the anti-trust statute.
"Generally, in the industrial combinations called ‘Trusts,’
the principal business is the sale of goods in many States and
in foreign markets; in other words, the interstate and foreign
business far exceeds the business done in any one State. This
fact will justify the Federal government in granting a Federal
charter to such a combination to make and sell in interstate
and foreign commerce the products of useful manufacture under
such limitations as will secure a compliance with the
Anti-Trust law. It is possible so to frame a statute that
while it offers protection to a Federal company against
harmful, vexatious, and unnecessary invasion by the States, it
shall subject it to reasonable taxation and control by the
States, with respect to its purely local business.
{135}
"Many people conducting great businesses have cherished a hope
and a belief that in some way or other a line may be drawn
between ‘good Trusts’ and ‘bad Trusts,’ and that it is
possible, by amendment to the Anti-Trust law, to make a
distinction under which good combinations may be permitted to
organize, suppress competition, control prices, and do it all
legally, if only they do not abuse the power by taking too
great profit out of the business. … Now, the public, and
especially the business public, ought to rid themselves of the
idea that such a distinction is practicable or can be
introduced into the statute. Certainly under the present
Anti-Trust law no such distinction exists. It has been
proposed, however, that the word ‘reasonable’ should be made a
part of the statute, and then that it should be left to the
court to say what is a reasonable restraint of trade, what is
a reasonable suppression of competition, what is a reasonable
monopoly. I venture to think that this is to put into the
hands of the court a power impossible to exercise on any
consistent principle which will insure the uniformity of
decision essential to just judgment. It is to thrust upon the
courts a burden that they have no precedents to enable them to
carry, and to give them a power approaching the arbitrary, the
abuse of which might involve our whole judicial system in
disaster.
"In considering violations of the Anti-Trust law, we ought, of
course, not to forget that that law makes unlawful, methods of
carrying on business which before its passage were regarded as
evidence of business sagacity and success, and that they were
denounced in this act, not because of their intrinsic
immorality, but because of the dangerous results toward which
they tended, the concentration of industrial power in the
hands of the few, leading to oppression and injustice. In
dealing, therefore, with many of the men who have used the
methods condemned by the statute for the purpose of
maintaining a profitable business, we may well facilitate a
change by them in the method of doing business. …
"To the suggestion that this proposal of Federal incorporation
for industrial combinations is intended to furnish them a
refuge in which to continue industrial abuses under Federal
protection, it should be said that the measure contemplated
does not repeal the Sherman Anti-Trust law, and is not to be
framed so as to permit the doing of the wrongs which it is the
purpose of that law to prevent, but only to foster a
continuance and advance of the highest industrial efficiency
without permitting industrial abuses. …
"A Federal compulsory license law, urged as a substitute for a
Federal incorporation law, is unnecessary except to reach that
kind of corporation which, by virtue of the considerations
already advanced, will take advantage voluntarily of an
incorporation law, while the other State corporations doing an
interstate business do not need the supervision or the
regulation of a Federal license and would only be
unnecessarily burdened thereby.
"The attorney-general, at my suggestion, has drafted a Federal
incorporation bill embodying the views I have attempted to set
forth, and it will be at the disposition of the appropriate
committees of Congress."
COMBINATIONS: A. D. 1910.
Renewed investigation of the Beef Trust.
A renewed investigation of the business methods of the great
meat-packing concerns at Chicago, by the grand jury of the
United States District Court, Judge K. M. Landis, was begun on
the 24th of January, 1910. It is understood to have special
reference to the causes of the rising prices of meats. The
firms against which the Government is thus preparing to
proceed are: Swift & Co., Armour & Co., and Morris & Co., who,
it is alleged, control the National Packing Company, for their
common benefit.
----------COMBINATIONS: End--------
COMMERCE AND LABOR, The United States Department of.
See (in this Volume)
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1903 (FEBRUARY).
COMMERCIAL UNIVERSITIES, in Germany:
Their recent rise.
See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION: GERMANY: A. D. 1898-1904.
"COMMISSION PLAN," of City Government.
See (in this Volume)
MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT.
COMMITTEE OF ONE HUNDRED.
See (in this Volume)
PUBLIC HEALTH.
COMMITTEE OF UNION AND PROGRESS.
See (in this Volume)
TURKEY: A. D. 1908 (JULY-DECEMBER), and after.
COMMODITIES CLAUSE, of the Hepburn Act:
Supreme Court decision on.
See (in this Volume)
RAILWAYS: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1906-1909.
COMMUNAL SYSTEM, Russian:
Its modification.
See (in this Volume)
RUSSIA: A. D. 1906 AND 1909 (APRIL).
CONCENTRATION CAMPS.
See (in this Volume)
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1901-1902.
CONCILIATION BOARDS, Canadian.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: CANADA: A. D. 1907-1908.
CONCILIATION COMMITTEE, of National Civic Federation.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1902.
CONCORDAT OF 1802, The.
See (in this Volume)
FRANCE: A. D. 1905-1906.
CONFÉDÉRATION GÉNÉRALE DU TRAVAIL.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: FRANCE: A. D. 1884-1909.
CONFERENCE OF STATE GOVERNORS.
See (in this Volume)
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES: UNITED STATES.
CONFERENCES FOR EDUCATION IN THE SOUTH, Annual.
See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1898-1909.
CONGER, Edwin H.: U. S. Minister to China.
See (in this Volume)
CHINA: A. D. 1903 (MAY-OCTOBER).
CONGESTED ESTATES.
See (in this Volume)
IRELAND: A. D. 1909.
{136}
----------CONGO STATE: Start--------
CONGO STATE:
How the natives have been enslaved and oppressed.
The "Domaine Privé."
"The Berlin Conference laid it down that no import dues should
be established in the mouth of the Congo for twenty years. But
in 1890 King Leopold, alleging the heavy expenses to which he
had been put by the campaign against the Arabs in the Upper
Congo, applied for permission to levy import duties. It was
the first disillusionment; and the British Chambers of
Commerce began to wonder whether their opposition to the
Anglo-Portuguese Convention had not been mistaken. The King’s
request was granted (the Powers merely reserving to themselves
the right to revert to the original arrangement in fifteen
years), but not without the bitter opposition of the Dutch,
who had very important commercial interests in the Congo,
backed by the British Chambers of Commerce and all the traders
in the Congo, irrespective of nationality. A representative
gathering was held in London on November 4th, 1900, presided
over by Sir Albert Rollit, to protest against the imposition
of import duties and to denounce the hypocrisy which
attributed to philanthropic motives the desire on the part of
the Congo State so to impose upon them. …
"They were able to show that … King Leopold, notwithstanding
his formal assurances to the commercial world that the Congo
State would never directly or indirectly itself trade within
its dominions, was buying, or rather stealing, ivory from the
natives in the Upper Congo and retaining the proceeds of the
sale on the European market. They proved that, profiting by
the silence of the Berlin Treaty on the subject of export
duties, the Congo State had already imposed taxes amounting to
17½ per cent. on ivory, 13 per cent, on rubber and 5 per cent.
on palm kernels, palm-oil and ground-nuts, the total taxation
amounting to no less than 33 per cent. of the value of the
whole of the trade. Finally they had no difficulty in
demonstrating that, with all his professed wish to stamp out
the slave-raiding carried on by the half-caste Arabs in the
Upper Congo, His Majesty was himself tacitly encouraging the
slave trade by receiving tribute from conquered Chiefs in the
shape of slaves, who were promptly enrolled as soldiers in the
State army. …
"Five months after the termination of the Berlin Conference
King Leopold issued a decree (July, 1885) whereby the State
asserted rights of proprietorship over all vacant lands throughout the Congo territory. It was intended that the term
vacant lands should apply in the broadest sense to lands not
actually occupied by the natives at the time the decree
was issued. By successive decrees, promulgated in 1886, 1887
and 1888, the King reduced the rights of the natives in their
land to the narrowest limits, with the result that the whole
of the odd 1,000,000 square miles assigned to the Congo State,
except such infinitesimal proportions thereof as were covered
by native villages or native farms, became ‘terres
domaniales.' On October 17th, 1889, the King also issued a
decree ordering merchants to limit their commercial operations
in rubber to bartering with the natives. This decree was
interesting merely as a forewarning of what came later,
because at that time the rubber trade was very small. In July,
1890, the same year as the Brussels Conference, the Congo
State went a step further. A decree issued in that month
confirmed all that was advanced in November of the same year
by the speakers at the London Conference held to protest
against the imposition of import duties by the State. By its
terms King Leopold asserted that the State was entitled to
trade on its own account in ivory—the first open violation of
his pledges. Moreover the decree imposed sundry extra taxes
upon all ivory bought by merchants from the natives, which,
since the State had become itself a trading concern,
constituted an equally direct violation of the Berlin Act, by
establishing differential treatment in matters of trade. Such
were the plans King Leopold made, preparatory to obtaining
from the Powers the power to impose import duties. Everything
was ready for the great coup, which should also
inaugurate the Fifth Stage of His Majesty’s African policy.
"The Brussels Conference met. The Powers with inconceivable
fatuity allowed themselves to be completely hoodwinked, and
within a year the greatest injury perpetrated upon the
unfortunate natives of Africa since the Portuguese in the XVth
century conceived the idea of expatriating them for labour
purposes had been committed, and committed too by a Monarch
who had not ceased for fifteen years to pose as their
self-appointed regenerator. On September 21st, 1891, King
Leopold drafted, in secret, a decree which he caused to be
forwarded to the Commissioners of the State in the
Uban-ghi-Welle and Aruwimi-Welle districts, and to the Chiefs
of the military expeditions operating in the Upper Ubanghi
district. This decree never having been published in the
official Bulletin of the State, its exact terms can only be a
matter of conjecture, but we know that it instructed the
officials to whom it was addressed ‘to take urgent and
necessary measures to preserve the fruits of the domain to the
State, especially ivory and rubber.’ By ‘fruits of the domain’
King Leopold meant the products of the soil throughout the
‘vacant lands’ which he had attributed to himself, as already
explained, by the decree of 1885. The King’s instructions were
immediately followed, and three circulars, dated respectively
Bangala, 15th December, 1891, Basankusu, 8th May, 1892, and
Yokoma, 14th February, 1892, were issued by the officials in
question. Circular Number 1 forbade the natives to hunt
elephants unless they brought the tusks to the State’s
officers. Circular Number 2 forbade the natives to collect
rubber unless they brought it to the State’s officers.
Circular Number 3 forbade the natives to collect either ivory
or rubber unless they brought the articles to the State’s
officers, and added that ‘merchants purchasing such articles
from the natives, whose right to collect them the State only
recognised provided that they were brought to it, would be
looked upon as receivers of stolen goods and denounced to the
judicial authorities.’ Thus did the Sovereign of the Congo
State avail himself of the additional prestige conferred upon
him by the Brussels Conference. …
{137}
"In theory, then, the decrees of September, 1891, and October,
1892, made of the native throughout the Domaine Privé a
serf. In theory a serf he remained, for a little while. But as
the grip of Africa’s regenerator tightened upon the Domaine
Privé, as the drilled and officered cannibal army, armed
with repeating rifles, gradually grew and grew until it was
larger than the native forces kept up by any of the great
Powers of Europe on African soil, as the radius of the rubber
taxes was extended, as portions of the country began to be
farmed out to so-called 'Companies' whose agents were also
officials of the King, the native of the Domaine Privé became a serf not in theory only but in fact, ground down,
exploited, forced to collect rubber at the bayonet’s point,
compelled to pay onerous tribute to men whose salaries depend
upon the produce returns from their respective stations—the
punishment for disobedience, slothfulness or inability to
comply with demands ever growing in extortion, being anything
from mutilation to death, accompanied by the destruction of
villages and crops."
E. D. Morel,
The Belgian Curse in Africa
(Contemporary Review, March, 1902).
CONGO STATE: A. D. 1903-1905.
The alleged oppressiveness, barbarity, and rapacity of its
administration under King Leopold.
Observations of Lord Cromer on the Nile border.
Reports of a British Consular Officer, and of King Leopold’s
Belgian Commission.
Action of the British Government.
Serious accusations of oppression and barbarity in the
exploiting of the natural wealth of the so-called Independent
Congo State, under the administration of its royal proprietor,
King Leopold, of Belgium, were beginning to be made a dozen
years ago, as will be seen by reference to the subject in
Volume VI. of this work. The King and the companies which
operated in the region under his grants were reputed to be
taking enormous profits from it. Of one of those
concessionaire companies, sometimes referred to as the A. B.
I. R. Co. and sometimes as "the Abir," it was stated in 1901
that its £40,000 of shares could have been sold for
£2,160,000, and that half of its profits went to Leopold. But,
as was said later by a member of the British Parliament, who
wrote on the subject in one of the reviews, "meanwhile Europe
was becoming aware of the price that was being paid in Africa
for these profits in Belgium. Travellers, missionaries of
various nationalities, administrators in the neighbouring
territories belonging to England and France, sent home graphic
reports of the cruel oppression that was being practised on
the helpless population. In England especially, through the
efforts of Sir Charles Dilke, of Mr. Fox-Bourne, the secretary
of the Aborigines Protection Society, of Mr. E. D. Morel and
of other disinterested men, public opinion was informed of the
truth. In May, 1903, a resolution, which I had the honor of
moving in the House of Commons, calling upon the Government to
take action with a view to the abatement of the evils
prevalent in the Congo Free State, was accepted by Mr. Balfour
and unanimously passed. A diplomatic correspondence ensued
between the two governments. The British Consul in the Lower
Congo, Mr. Roger Casement, was sent on a tour of inquiry into
the interior, and his lengthy and detailed report fully
confirmed—in some respect extending—the indictment that had
been drawn. A Congo Reform Association was founded, and
immediately secured influential support. … At last King
Leopold, pressed by the despatches of the British Government
and bowing to the storm of public opinion, yielded so far as
to authorise further inquiry into the charges that had been
made. The investigation by an International Commission, which
had been proposed, he rejected. He nominated three
Commissioners of his selection, one a legal officer in the
service of the Belgian Government, one a judge in the service
of the Congo State, and the third a Swiss jurist of repute. In
October, 1904, the Commission reached the Congo. It stayed for
five months and made an extended journey into the interior.
After an unexplained delay of eight months its report was
published on the 6th of November of this year [1905]. …
"Had the report embodied an acquittal of the Congo State it
would not, under the circumstances, have been surprising. The
Commissioners, however, have to a great degree risen superior
to their natural prepossessions. … It is most regrettable …
that they present no minutes of the evidence taken before
them—a circumstance which deprives the report of actuality
and force, and prevents outside observers from drawing their
own conclusions from the facts which had been ascertained. But
the inquiry was painstaking. The case was fairly tried. The
judgment is an honest judgment.
"Being honest, it is necessarily a condemnation. The Belgian
defenders of the Congo Government, who were led by a
conception of patriotic duty as profoundly false as that of
the anti-Dreyfusards in France to deny everything and to meet
the critics merely with unceasing torrents of abuse, now have
their answer. A tribunal, not of our choosing, selected by the
defendant in their cause, has shown that those who denounced
Congo misrule were in the right, that the atrocities were not
imaginary, that a cruel oppression of the natives has been
proceeding unchecked for years."
Herbert Samuel,
The Congo State
(Contemporary Review, December, 1905).
Before this report appeared many witnesses had testified for
and against the impeached Government and its commercial
monopoly of the Congo State. Atrocities of slaughter,
mutilation and flogging, committed by the soldiery, the
sentries and other extortioners of a labor tax from the
helpless natives, were asserted and denied. It is best,
perhaps, to drop these blackest counts from the Congo
indictment, because of the controversy over them; and enough
remains in the Report of the King’s own Commission of Inquiry,
and in general conditions which are flagrantly in evidence, to
convict King Leopold and his agents of soulless rapacity, in
their treatment of the vast African country that was entrusted
to him by the Conference of Powers assembled at Berlin in
1884-1885.
There is great weight of meaning, for example, in a few words
that were written, in January, 1903, by Lord Cromer, while
returning from a long trip up the Nile, in which his steamer

passed along about eighty miles of Congolese shore. Before
reaching that border of Leopold’s domain he had traversed 1100
miles of the country lately wrested by the British from
dervishes and slave dealers, where, he remarks, "it might well
have been expected that much time would be required to inspire
confidence in the intentions of the new Government." But,
"except in the uninhabitable ‘Sudd’ region," he wrote,
"numerous villages are dotted along the banks of the river.
{138}
The people, far from flying at the approach of white men, as
was formerly the case, run along the banks, making signs for
the steamer to stop. It is clear that the Baris, Shilluks, and
Dinkas place the utmost trust and confidence in the British
officers with whom they are brought in contact. …
"The contrast when once Congolese territory is entered is
remarkable. From the frontier to Gondokoro is about 80 miles.
The proper left, or western, bank of the river is Belgian. The
opposite bank is either under the Soudanese or the Uganda
Government. There are numerous islands, and as all these are
under British rule—for the thalweg which, under Treaty, is the
Belgian frontier, skirts the western bank of the river—I
cannot say that I had an opportunity of seeing a full 80 miles
of Belgian territory. At the same time, I saw a good deal, and
I noticed that, whereas there were numerous villages and huts
on the eastern bank and on the islands, on the Belgian side
not a sign of a village existed. Indeed, I do not think that
any one of our party saw a single human being in Belgian
territory, except the Belgian officers and men and the wives
and children of the latter. Moreover not a single native was
to be seen either at Kiro or Lado. I asked the Swedish officer
at Kiro whether he saw much of the natives. He replied in the
negative, adding that the nearest Bari village was situated at
some distance in the interior. The Italian officer at Lado, in
reply to the same question, stated that the nearest native
village was seven hours distant. The reason of all this is
obvious enough. The Belgians are disliked. The people fly from
them, and it is no wonder they should do so, for I am informed
that the soldiers are allowed full liberty to plunder, and
that payments are rarely made for supplies. The British
officers wander, practically alone, over most parts of the
country, either on tours of inspection or on shooting
expeditions. I understand that no Belgian officer can move
outside the settlements without a strong guard."
This is in line with some parts of the experience of Mr.
Casement, the British Consular Officer referred to in the
article quoted above, who travelled for about ten weeks on the
Upper Congo in 1903, and whose report of what he saw includes
such accounts as the following, of conditions around Lake
Matumba:
"Each village I visited around the lake, save that of Q. and
one other, had been abandoned by its inhabitants. To some of
these villages the people have only just returned; to others
they are only now returning, In one I found the bare and burnt
poles of what had been dwellings left standing, and at another
—that of R—the people had fled at the approach of my steamer,
and despite the loud cries of my native guides on board,
nothing could induce them to return, and it was impossible to
hold any intercourse with them. At the three succeeding
villages I visited beyond R., in traversing the lake towards
the south, the inhabitants all fled at the approach of the
steamer, and it was only when they found whose the vessel was
that they could be induced to return."
An incident related by Mr. Casement is this:
"Steaming up a small tributary of the Lulongo, I arrived,
unpreceded by any rumour of my coming, at the village of A. In
an open shed I found two sentries of the La Lulanga Company
guarding fifteen native women, five of whom had infants at the
breast, and three of whom were about to become mothers. The
chief of these sentries, a man called S—who was bearing a
double-barrelled shot-gun, for which he had a belt of
cartridges—at once volunteered an explanation of the reason
for these women’s detention. Four of them, he said, were
hostages who were being held to insure the peaceful settlement
of a dispute between two neighbouring towns, which had already
cost the life of a man. … The remaining eleven women, whom he
indicated, he said he had caught and was detaining as
prisoners to compel their husbands to bring in the right
amount of india-rubber required of them on next market day.
When I asked if it was a woman’s work to collect india-rubber,
he said, ‘No; that, of course, it was man’s work.’ ‘Then why
do you catch the women and not the men?’ I asked. ‘Don’t you
see,’ was the answer, ‘if I caught and kept the men, who would
work the rubber? But if I catch their wives, the husbands are
anxious to have them home again, and so the rubber is brought
in quickly and quite up to the mark.’ When I asked what would
become of these women if their husbands failed to bring in the
right quantity of rubber on the next market day, he said at
once that then they would be kept there until their husbands
had redeemed them."
Parliamentary Papers, Africa,
Number 1 (1904), Cd. 1933.
But the facts which condemn the Congo administration most
conclusively are found in the report of the Commission of
Inquiry appointed by King Leopold himself,—especially in what
it represents of the heartless oppression of the labor tax, or
labor imposed on the natives, in their compulsory carrying of
goods or collection of rubber, food and wood, for the State
and for the companies that operate under the King’s grants. As
to the labor tax exacted in food, for example, the Commission
expresses itself as follows:
"The decree fixes at forty hours per month the work which each
native owes to the State. This time, considered as a maximum,
is certainly not excessive, especially if one takes account of
the fact that the work ought to be remunerated; but as in the
immense majority of cases … it is not precisely the work which
is demanded of the native, but rather a quantity of products
equivalent to forty hours of work, the criterion of time
disappears in reality and is replaced by an equivalent
established by the Commissioner of the district after diverse
methods. …
"Chikwangue (kwanga)is nothing but manioc bread. … The
preparation of this food requires many operations: the
clearing of the forest, the planting of manioc, the digging up
of the root and its transformation into chikwangue,
which comprises the operations of separating the fibers and
stripping the bark, pulverizing, washing, making it into
bundles, and cooking it. All these operations, except clearing
the land, fall to the women. The chikwangues so
prepared are carried by the natives to the neighboring post
and served for the food supply of the personnel of the
State—soldiers and laborers. … As the chikwangue keeps
only a few days, the native, even by redoubling his activity,
cannot succeed in freeing himself from his obligations for any
length of time.
{139}
The requirement, even if it does not take all his time,
oppresses him continually by the weight of its recurrent
demands, which deprive the tax of its true character and
transform it into an incessant corvée. … Doubtless the
adage, ‘time is money,’ cannot be applied to the natives of the
Congo; it is none the less inadmissible that a taxpayer should
be obliged to travel over ninety-three miles to carry to the
place of collection a tax which represents about the value of
twenty-nine cents. …
"Natives inhabiting the environs of Lulonga were forced to
journey in canoes to Nouvelle-Anvers, which represents a
distance of forty to fifty miles, every two weeks, to carry
their fish; and taxpayers have been seen to submit to
imprisonment for delays which were perhaps not chargeable to
them, if we take into account the considerable distances to be
covered periodically to satisfy the requirements of the tax."
As applied to the collection of rubber, the so-called labor
tax was found by the commission to consume so much of the time
of the natives subjected to it that it practically made slaves
of them, and nothing less.
When the abused native is pretendedly paid for his labor or
its product, it is by some trifle in metal or flimsy woven
stuff, which costs the State and its tributary companies next
to nothing and is next to worthless to the recipient.
And not only does the State exercise over the unfortunate
subjects that were delivered to it an authority of Government
which appears to be little else than a power of extortion, but
it has taken all their lands from them, substantially, and
left them next to nothing on which to perform any labor for
themselves. It has decreed to itself the ownership of all land
not included in the native villages or not under cultivation.
Concerning which decree the Commission remarks:
"As the greater part of the land in the Congo has never been
under cultivation, this interpretation gives to the State a
proprietary right, absolute and exclusive, to almost all the
land, and as a consequence it can grant to itself all the
product of the soil and prosecute as robbers those who gather
the smallest fruit and as accomplices those who buy the same.
… It thus happens sometimes that not only have the natives
been prohibited from moving their villages, but they have been
refused permission to go, even for a time, to a neighboring
village without a special permit."
In the summer of 1903 the British Government was moved to
address a formal communication to all the Powers which had
been parties to the Act of the Berlin Conference of 1884-1885,
whereby the Congo State was created and entrusted to King
Leopold, asking them to consider whether the system of
government and of trade monopoly established in that State was
in conformity with the provisions of the Act. The British
Foreign Secretary, Lord Lansdowne, in his despatch (August 8,
1903), rehearsed at length the charges that were brought
against the Congo administration, concerning its extortion of
labor from the natives by a method "but little different from
that formerly employed to obtain slaves," saying: "His
Majesty’s Government do not know precisely to what extent
these accusations may be true; but they have been so
repeatedly made, and have received such wide credence, that it
is no longer possible to ignore them, and the question has now
arisen, whether the Congo State can be considered to have
fulfilled the special pledges, given under the Berlin Act, to
watch over the preservation of the native tribes, and to care
for their moral and material advancement."
At the same time, the dispatch called the attention of the
Powers to the question of rights of trade in the Congo,
saying: "Article I of the Berlin Act provides that the trade
of all nations shall enjoy complete freedom in the basin of
the Congo; and Article V provides that no Power which
exercises sovereign rights in the basin shall be allowed to
grant therein a monopoly or favour of any kind in matters of
trade. In the opinion of His Majesty’s Government, the system
of trade now existing in the Independent State of the Congo is
not in harmony with these provisions. … In these
circumstances, His Majesty’s Government consider that the time
has come when the Powers parties to the Berlin Act should
consider whether the system of trade now prevailing in the
Independent State is in harmony with the provisions of the
Act; and, in particular, whether the system of making grants
of vast areas of territory is permissible under the Act if the
effect of such grants is in practice to create a monopoly of
trade."
Parliamentary Papers, Africa,
Number 14 (1903), Cd. 1809.
CONGO STATE: A. D. 1904.
Feeling in Belgium concerning the charges of oppression and
inhumanity to the natives.
See (in this Volume)
BELGIUM: A. D. 1904.
CONGO STATE: A. D. 1906-1909.
Reform Decrees and their small effect.
Continued reports of rapacious exploitation.
Concession secured by American capitalists.
Annexation of the State by Belgium.
Recognition of the annexation withheld by
Great Britain and the United States.
Apparently the endeavor of the British Government to set in
motion some action of the Powers which had been parties to the
creation of the Congo State, for the purpose of ascertaining
whether the provisions of the Berlin Act were being complied
with in the administration of that great trust, had no
practical result. During the next two years the Congo
Government was persistent in denying and attempting to refute
some parts of the reports sent home by British consular
officers in the Congo; but after the publication of the report
of its own investigating Commission, in 1905, there seems to
have been more reticence observed. In June, 1906, a series of
new decrees, supposed to embody the recommendations of the
Reforms Commission, was sanctioned by the King. But the
Consuls who reported to London from the Congo country do not
seem to have found the wretched natives much relieved by these
decrees. Vice-Consul Armstrong, writing from Boma December,
1907, after a prolonged journey through rubber-collecting
regions, declared his conviction that "the people worked from
twenty to twenty-five days a month" to satisfy their labor
tax. He added:
"The improvement that has been made by the application of the
Reform Decrees of June 1906 is solely in the withdrawal of
armed sentries, a reform which the serious decimation of the
population by the sentries demanded. … I saw nothing which led
me to view the occupation of this country in the light of an
Administration.
{140}
The undertakings of the Government are solely commercial, with
a sufficient administrative power to insure the safety of its
personnel and the success of its enterprise. … The
following is an estimate of the profits of the State on their
rubber tax. I take the village of N’gongo as being a large
one, and one of the few villages that supply the amount
actually assessed:—
Amount assessed yearly. 1,440 kilograms of rubber.
£ s. d.
1,440 kilograms of rubber at 10 fr. 576 0 0
Amount paid to natives at 50 c. per kilogram 28 16 0
"I calculate the rubber at 10 fr. per kilogram, the value
placed upon it by the State in the Commercial Report issued
this year. The market value in Antwerp is from 12 fr. to 13
fr. per kilogram. From this amount of 576£. must be deducted
the cost of transport, which cannot be more than 2 fr. per
kilogram rendered at Antwerp, so that the net profits derived
from this one village would be a little more than 456£. per
annum. One hundred and twenty natives, together with their
wives and children, which would bring the population of the
town to about 400 souls, share this amount of 28£ 16s., and as
this is paid in cloth at 7½d. per yard and salt at 1s. 7½d.
per kilogram, it is evident that they cannot receive very much
each, and that they complain of their remuneration."
These were not the only official witnesses now testifying to
the barbarities of commercial exploitation that were
perpetrated in the Congo country under pretences of
administering the Government of a State. Reports to the same
effect were coming to the Government of the United States from
its Consuls in the Congo. Consul-General C. R. Slocum wrote on
the 1st of December, 1906, to the Department of State at
Washington:
"I have the honour to report that I find the Congo Free State,
under the present regime, to be nothing but a vast commercial
enterprise for the exploitation of the products of the
country, particularly that of ivory and rubber. Admitted by
Belgian officials and other foreigners here, the State, as I
find it, is not open to trade in the intended sense of article
5 of the Berlin Act under which the State was formed."
A year later, the succeeding Consul-General of the United
States in the Congo State, Mr. James A. Smith, made a similar
report:
"In excluding the native," he wrote, "from any proprietary
right in the only commodities he possessed which would serve
as a trade medium—that is, the products of the soil—and in
claiming for itself and granting to a few concessionary
companies in which it holds an interest exclusive ownership of
these products, the Administration, in its commercial
capacity, has effectively shut the door to free trade and
created a vast monopoly in all articles the freedom of buying
and selling which alone could form a proper basis for
legitimate trade transactions between the native and
independent purchasers. Competition, by which alone can a
healthy condition of trade be maintained, has been entirely
eliminated. The Government is but one tremendous commercial
organization; its administrative machinery is worked to bar
out all outside trade and to absolutely control for its own
benefit and the concessionary companies the natural resources
of the country."
In the same report Mr. Smith gave details of an experiment he
had made, in conjunction with the chef de secteur at
Yambata, to test the truth of the assertions made by the
natives as to the length of time necessary to gather the
rubber which they are compelled to furnish. The place for the
experiment was selected by the chef de secteur, and he
chose the five natives who were employed in the experiment,
and who were promised rewards as an incentive to do their
best. The men worked for four hours, and although Mr. Smith
vouches for the fact that they did not lose a minute, they
only succeeded in gathering 650 grammes. From this, as Mr.
Smith argues, the amount of time they would have to spend in
collecting the rubber tax works out at 93 hours a month, or,
counting eight hours a day, at 140 days a year. This did not
include the time spent in travelling to and from the
rubber-bearing districts.
Before this time, American interest in the Congo State had
become more than humanitarian, and more than a commercial
interest in the general opportunities of trade; for heavy
American capitalists had secured concessions from King Leopold
in a large territory for the development of railways, rubber
production and mines. The fact was announced in the fall of
1906, and the names of John D. Rockefeller, Jr., Thomas F.
Ryan, Harry Payne Whitney, Edward B. Aldrich and the Messrs.
Guggenheim were mentioned as prominent in the group to which
the grant was made.
Under the Convention of 1890 between King Leopold and the
Congo State, as one party, and the Kingdom of Belgium as the
other, it became the right of the latter, on the expiration of
ten years, in 1900, to annex the Congo State to itself.
See, in Volume VI. of this work,
CONGO STATE: A. D. 1900.
The right was not then exercised; but the question of taking
over the sovereignty of that great African domain came under
warm discussion in Belgium before many years, and, finally, in
1908, it reached the point of a keen negotiation of terms with
the King, attended by lively conflicts in the Belgian
Chambers. While the question was thus pending in Belgium, the
British Government took occasion to express its views to the
Belgian Government, as to the obligations which such an
annexation would involve. This was done on the 27th of March,
1908, in a despatch from the Foreign Minister, Sir Edward
Grey, communicating an extended "Memorandum respecting
Taxation and Currency in the Congo Free State." The language
of the despatch, in part, was as follows:
"His Majesty’s Government fully recognize that the choice of
the means by which the administration of the Congo may be
brought into line by the Berlin Act rests exclusively with
Belgium. Nevertheless, while disclaiming all idea of
interference, His Majesty’s Government feel that in fairness
they should leave the Belgian Government in no doubt that in
their opinion the existing administration of the Congo State
has not fulfilled the objects for which the State was
originally recognized, or the conditions of Treaties, and that
changes are therefore required, which should effect the
following objects:
1. Relief of the natives from excessive taxation.
2. The grant to the natives of sufficient land to ensure their
ability to obtain not only the food they require, but also
sufficient produce of the soil to enable them to buy and sell
as in other European Colonies.
3. The possibility for traders whatever their nationality may
be to acquire plots of land of reasonable dimensions in any
part of the Congo for the erection of factories so as to
enable them to establish direct trade relations with the
natives. …
{141}
"Taking the three points enumerated above in order, it appears
to His Majesty’s Government that—
"1. As regards the question of taxation in labour, the abuses
to which the system has given rise have only been rendered
possible by the absence of a proper standard of value. They
believe, therefore, that the only sure and efficacious means
of precluding the existence of such abuses in the future is
the introduction of currency throughout the State at the
earliest possible date. Both the Reports of the Commission of
Inquiry and the experience of His Majesty’s Consular officers
agree in the conclusion that the native has learnt the use of
money, and that currency would be welcomed by all classes,
native and European alike.
"2. The natives in the concessionary areas should not be
compelled, by either direct or indirect means, to render their
labour to the Companies without remuneration. The introduction
of currency should contribute greatly to the protection of the
native against the illicit and excessive exactions on the part
of private individuals. Such protection, however, cannot be
adequately secured unless the latter be compelled to pay the
native in specie at a fair rate to be fixed by law.
"3. They would urge that a large increase should be made in
the land allotted to the natives."
The exceptional failure of the Congo State, among African
colonies, to introduce the use of currency in transactions
with the natives, and the connection of this failure with the
state of things existing there, is discussed at length in the
Memorandum, with a practical summing up in these sentences:
"The Secretaries-General said the native in the Congo had no
specie. True, but why has he no specie? Because, as already
explained, during the twenty-three years that the Congo State
has been in existence no serious attempt, in spite of all
assertions to the contrary, has ever been made by the State to
introduce currency on a sufficiently large scale. In every
other European Colony in Africa has the native come to learn
the practical value of a medium of exchange. What are the
reasons that the Congo State should stand in an exceptional
position in this respect? They are unfortunately obvious
enough. The truth is that it is precisely owing to the absence
of a proper standard of value that the Congo Government and
the Concessionary Companies have been able to abuse the system
of taxation in labour, and realize enormous profits out of the
incessant labour wrung from the population in the guise of
taxation."
This communication from Great Britain to the Belgian
Government was followed soon (in April) by memoranda from the
Government of the United States, setting forth the hopes and
expectations of administrative reform with which it
contemplated the proposed annexation of the Congo State.
A few months later the treaty of annexation was agreed upon,
and the annexation consummated by an Act of the Belgian
Parliament, promulgated on the 20th of October, 1908. To an
announcement of the fact by the Belgian Minister at
Washington, Secretary Root replied at considerable length, in
a communication which bears the date of June 11, 1909: "The
Government of the United States," said the Secretary, "has
observed with much interest the progress of the negotiations
looking to such a transfer, in the expectation that under the
control of Belgium the condition of the natives might be
beneficially improved and the engagements of the treaties to
which the United States is a party, as well as the high aims
set forth in the American memoranda of April 7 and 16, 1908,
and declared in the Belgium replies thereto, might be fully
realized.
"The United States would also be gratified by the assurance
that the Belgian Government will consider itself specifically
bound to discharge the obligations assumed by the Independent
State of the Congo in the Brussels Convention of July 2, 1890,
an assurance which the expressions already made by the
Government of Belgium in regard to its own course as a party
to that convention leave no doubt is in entire accordance with
the sentiments of that Government. Among the particular
clauses of the Brussels Convention which seem to the United
States to be specially relevant to existing conditions in the
Congo region are the clauses of Article II., which include
among the objects of the convention:
"‘To diminish intestine wars between tribes by means of
arbitration; to initiate them in agricultural labour and in
the industrial arts so as to increase their welfare; to raise
them to civilization and bring about the extinction of
barbarous customs. …
"‘To give aid and protection to commercial enterprises; to
watch over their legality by especially controlling contracts
for service with natives; and to prepare the way for the
foundation of permanent centres of cultivation and of
commercial settlements.’
"The United States has been forced to the conclusion that in
several respects the system inaugurated by the Independent
State of the Congo has, in its practical operation, worked out
results inconsistent with these conventional obligations and
calling for very substantial and even radical changes in order
to attain conformity therewith." Moreover, it renders nugatory
the provisions of the successive declarations and conventions,
cited by the Secretary, which have given such rights in the
Congo State to citizens of the United States and others as
must be maintained.
"It should always be remembered," wrote Mr. Root, "that the
basis of the sovereignty of the Independent State of the Congo
over all its territory was in the treaties made by the native
Sovereigns who ceded the territory for the use and benefit of
free States established and being established there under the
care and supervision of the International Association, so that
the very nature of the title forbids the destruction of the
tribal rights upon which it rests without securing to the
natives an enjoyment of their land which shall be a full and
adequate equivalent for the tribal rights destroyed."
Referring to a statement made in the Belgian reply given to
his memorandum of April 16, which he quotes as in these
words:—
{142}
"When it annexes the possessions of the Independent State
Belgium will inherit its obligations as well as its rights; it
will be able to fulfil all the engagements made with the
United States by the declarations of April 22, 1884"—Mr. Root
closes his letter with these remarks:
"It would be gratifying to the United States to know that the
last clause of the statement just quoted is not intended to
confine the rights of the United States in the Independent
State to the declarations of the Commercial Association which
preceded the creation of the Congo State as a sovereign power,
but includes the conventional rights conferred upon the United
States by the treaty concluded with the Independent State
immediately after its recognition.
"In the absence of a fuller understanding on all these points,
I confine myself for the present to acknowledging your note of
November 4 last and taking note of the announcement therein
made."
Thus no recognition was given to the Belgian annexation.
Recognition was held in abeyance, awaiting further information
and evidence of reform in the administration of the Congo
State. And this is the attitude assumed by the British
Government, which waited long and with growing impatience for
assurances from Belgium, with proceedings that would give sign
of making them good. On the 24th of February, 1909, the
subject came up in Parliament, with assertions that
"oppression of the natives was still going on just as before
the annexation," and that "Great Britain had waited for months
while the cruelties against which she had protested still
continued." In the debate, Sir Charles Dilke referred to the
harmony of action in the matter by the United States and Great
Britain, and expressed his conviction that "the cooperation of
two such powerful Governments in the cause of humanity would
be irresistible." Sir Edward Grey, speaking for the Ministry,
said:
"I am glad that in the course of the debate it has been
emphasized that this attitude is not ours alone, but that the
United States has spoken with equal emphasis and taken up the
same position. I am sorry that no other Power has taken up the
same position so strongly; but as there is only one Power
which has declared itself so definitely on the question as
ourselves, I should like to say that I am glad it is the
United States."
Alluding to a remark made by one of the speakers in the
debate, that the Government might have prevented the
annexation of the State by Belgium, Sir Edward said:
"I do not think we should have prevented the annexation, but
in any case I should not have tried to prevent the annexation.
And for this reason among others—that if Belgium was not going
to take the Congo State in hand and put it right, who was? I
have never been able to answer that question. Certainly not
ourselves, because we have always denied the intention of
assuming any responsibility over an enormous tract of land
where we have sufficient responsibility already."
The Foreign Secretary concluded his speech by saying:
"If Belgium makes the administration of the Congo humane and
brings it into accord, in practice and spirit, with the
administration which exists in our own and neighbouring
African colonies, no country will more cordially welcome that
state of things than this or more warmly congratulate Belgium.
But we cannot commit ourselves to countersign, so to say, by
recognition a second time, the system of administration which
has existed under the old regime."
Again, in May, the question came up in Parliament, with
impatient criticism of the Government for not taking
peremptory measures to compel a reformation of Belgian rule in
the Congo State, one speaker suggesting a "peaceful blockade"
of the mouth of the Congo. Sir Edward Grey replied:
"If this question were rashly managed it might make a European
question compared to which those which we have had to deal
with in the last few months might be child’s play. Take, for
instance, the question of peaceful blockade. It is no good
talking of peaceful blockade. Blockade is blockade. It is the
use of force. If you are to have blockade you must be prepared
to go to war, and a blockade of the mouth of the Congo means
blockading a river which is not the property of the Congo or
Belgian Government. They have one bank of the river. It is a
river which by international treaty must be opened to
navigation, and if you are to blockade to any effect you must
be prepared to stop every ship going in or out of the Congo,
whether under the French, Belgian, German, or whatever flag it
is. Surely if you are going to pledge yourself to take steps
of that kind, and to accept the responsibility for them, it is
not too much to say that you must be prepared to raise a
European question which would be of the gravest kind. I do not
say there are not circumstances which might justify a question
of that kind, but do not let the House think that by smooth
words, such as by applying the adjective ‘peaceful’ to
blockade, you are going to minimize what will be the ultimate
consequences of the step you are taking."
CONGO STATE: A. D. 1909 (October).
Programme of reforms promised by the Belgian Government.
The programme of long promised reforms to be instituted by the
Belgian Government in its administration of the now annexed
Congo State was announced in the Belgian Chamber on the 28th
of October, 1909, by the Minister for the Colonies, M. Renkin.
"He repeated his solemn assurance that the charges of cruelty
or oppression made against the Belgian Colonial Administration
were false. He had questioned missionaries, officials, chiefs,
and other natives during his visit, and heard nothing to
justify the accusation. Individual breaches of the law might
possibly have occurred, but every abuse brought to the notice
of the authorities was immediately made the object of inquiry.
"It was useless, he said, to refer to the past; the situation
had been radically altered by the annexation. As regards the
land system, the assignment of vacant lands to the State was
juridically unassailable, but they must also have regard to
the development of the natives. The natives would therefore be
granted the right to take the produce of the soil in the
Domain. This would be accomplished in three stages. On July 1,
1910, the Lower Congo, Stanley Pool, Ubangi, Bangala, Kwango,
Kasai, Katanga, the southern portion of the Eastern Province,
Aruwimi, and the banks of the river as far as Stanleyville
would be opened to freedom of trade. On July 1, 1911, the
Domain of the Crown, and on July 1, 1912, the Welle district
would also be thrown open. Furthermore, the Government would
levy taxes in money, and the system of the provisioning of the
agents would be abolished."
{143}
M. Renkin said furthermore that in regard to the territories
held by concessionnaires in the Congo the Government
would make an investigation with a view to ascertaining
whether it would not be advisable to make fresh arrangements
in agreement with the persons interested.
Writing from Brussels a mouth later, an English correspondent
represents the Belgian Reformers, who had most bitterly
denounced the atrocities of the Leopold regime in the Congo
State, as believing that M. Renkin's scheme is on the whole a
reasonable and satisfactory scheme, and above all a practical
scheme, that the Belgian Government are sincerely determined
to carry it through, and that, even if there were any
sufficient reason for doubting their sincerity, the Belgian
nation is in earnest and has the means of enforcing the
execution of the reforms by the exercise of the Parliamentary
control with which it is now for the first time invested over
the affairs of the Congo as a consequence of annexation.
On the other hand, English opinion, which had been roused to
much heat on the Congo question, is far from satisfied with
the Belgian proposals, and criticises them with a sharpness
which the Belgians resent.
----------CONGO STATE: End--------
----------CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES: Start--------
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES: Australia:
Undertakings of Irrigation and Forestry.
During a brief visit to the United States in 1902, Sir Edmund
Barton, then Premier of the Commonwealth of Australia,
contributed to The Independent an article on "Australia
and her Problems," in which he wrote:
"Another great problem with which we are struggling is that of
irrigation, and a joint irrigation scheme is afoot for using
the waters of the Murray, our greatest river, to fertilize
lands in New South Wales and Victoria. The Murray forms the
boundary of those two States and afterward flows through South
Australia. It is to the interest of New South Wales and
Victoria to use the waters of the Murray for irrigation
purposes, and it is to the interest of South Australia to use
the Murray for navigation. We hope to harmonize those
interests and are working to that end.
"Just before I left Australia I attended a conference, held on
the border, between representatives of the various States as a
result of which each has appointed a hydraulic engineer to a
joint commission on irrigation. These will make an
investigation and report their opinion in regard to the best
practicable system for conserving, storing and distributing
the Murray’s waters without interfering with its navigation.
We have good reason to believe that by means of a system of
locks and weirs it is quite possible to irrigate a very large
extent of dry country by means of the Murray without injuring
its navigability. Later we will take up the problem of using
the waters of the Darling in a similar way. It is a very long
river, which during the rainy season sends an immense Volume
of water into the Murray.
"Another of our problems is in regard to forestry. We have
planted some trees but not nearly enough of them, and cannot
yet tell anything about results. Along with this tree
planting, also, denudation of our timber has been going on,
for Australian hard woods, being impervious to water, are now
used all over the world for street paving purposes. Great harm
has been done, and the waste is still going on, for our
national Government cannot interfere in the matter, and the
land owners are in many instances reckless. The remedy must
come from the common sense of the people."
Since the above was written, progress has been made in
carrying out the projects of irrigation, as was stated in a
speech by Lord Northcote after his return to England, in the
autumn of 1909, from five years of service as Governor-General
of Australia. "Both in New South Wales and Victoria," he said,
"very large irrigation works are in progress, and will be
completed in a very short time, adding enormously to the
acreage of land fit for cultivation."
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES: Canada:
The Dominion Forest Reserves Act.
Irrigation in the Northwest.
A Dominion Act of 1906, thus short-titled, provides as
follows:
"All Dominion lands within the respective boundaries of the
reserves mentioned in the schedule to this Act are hereby
withdrawn from sale, settlement and occupancy under the
provisions of the Dominion Lands Act, or of any other Act, or
of any regulations made under the said Act or any such Act,
with respect to mines or mining or timber or timber licenses
or leases or any other matter whatsoever; and after the
passing of this Act no Dominion lands within the boundaries of
the said reserves shall be sold, leased or otherwise disposed
of, or be located or settled upon, and no person shall use or
occupy any part of such lands, except under the provisions of
this Act or of regulations made thereunder."
The schedule referred to lists 21 Forest Reserves in British
Columbia, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta. They are placed
under the management of the Superintendent of Forestry, for
the maintenance and protection of the growing timber, the
animals and birds in them, the fish in their waters and their
water supply, the Governor in Council to make the needed
regulations.
In a paper read before the Royal Colonial Institute at London,
England, in January, 1910, Mr. C. W. Peterson, Manager of the
Canadian Pacific Irrigation Colonization Company, gave the
following account of what is being done in the Arid Belt, so
called, near Calgary, in the Canadian Northwest:
"The irrigated land in Alberta and Saskatchewan nearly
equalled half of the total irrigated area of the United
States. In the year 1894 the Dominion Government withdrew from
sale and homestead entry a tract of land containing some
millions of acres located east of the city of Calgary, along
the main line of the Canadian Pacific Railway. The object of
that reservation was to provide for the construction,
ultimately, of an irrigation scheme to cover the fertile Bow
River Valley. The Canadian Pacific Railway Company undertook
to construct the gigantic irrigation system in question, and
selected as part of its land grant a block comprising three
million acres of the best agricultural lands. It had now been
opened for colonization, and this project—the greatest of the
kind on the American continent—was being pushed to its
completion. The tract had an average width of forty miles from
north to south, and extended eastwards from Calgary 150 miles."
{144}
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES: Egypt: A. D. 1909.
Completion of the Esneh Barrage.
An important addition to the irrigation works in Egypt,
supplementing the great dam at Assouan and the Assiout
barrage, was completed in February, 1909, when the Esneh
barrage was formally opened, on the 9th of that month. Esneh
is a town of some 25,000 inhabitants, situated in Upper Egypt,
on the west bank of the Nile, and the work now completed will,
even in the lowest of floods, ensure a plentiful supply of
water to a great tract of land in the Nile valley from Esneh
northwards. In deciding to undertake the construction of this
latest barrage, at a point about 100 miles north of the
Assouan reservoir, the Government were influenced by the great
success of the Assiout barrage, but that work differs from the
new barrage in being designed as a low-water summer regulator,
whereas the function of the Esneh barrage is to hold up the
water in low floods.
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES: Germany:
The work begun a century ago, and its result.
"Germany, a century ago, faced just such a situation as now
confronts us [the United States]. Then there began the work
which we must now undertake. New forests were planted,
wherever the land was unsuitable for other purposes. This
planting was done year after year, so that each year a new
tract would come to maturity. Forest wardens watched for
fires, and laws forbade careless hunters setting fires in the
woods. Timbermen were forced to gather and burn what twigs
from the slashings could not be used in the still or burned
for charcoal, and broad lanes were left through the forests as
stops for fires. In this way there arose those magnificent
German forests which now return the empire an average net
annual profit of two dollars and a half for each acre, on land
which is otherwise unusable; and, besides, give their services
free for the storage of water and for the retention of the
soil.
"In our own land something of this sort has already been done.
New York has nearly two million acres of land in forest
reserves which are being carefully tended. Pennsylvania has
half as much. Minnesota is already securing considerable
profit from the management of its white pine reserves and is
seeding down large areas; and the other lake states are also
moving, but all this is being done slowly, and lacks much of
the energy and cooperation which should accompany it."
J. L. Mathews,
The Conservation of our National Resources
(Atlantic Monthly, May, 1908).
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES: Great Britain:
Outline of undertakings by the Government in 1909.
Development and Road Improvement Act.
In his Budget speech to the House of Commons April 29, 1909,
the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. David Lloyd-George, gave
a broad indication of undertakings contemplated by the
Government, in forestry work (afforestation, or
reafforestation) and on other lines directed toward a more
effective preservation and development of the natural
resources of the country. In the afforestation of the waste
lands of the country, he said, "We are far behind every other
civilized country in the world. I have figures which are very
interesting on this point. In Germany, for instance, out of a
total area of 133 million acres, 34 millions, or nearly 26 per
cent., are wooded; in France, out of 130 million acres, 17 per
cent.; even in a small and densely-populated country such as
Belgium, 1,260,000 acres are wooded, or 17 per cent. In the
United Kingdom, on the other hand, out of 77 million acres,
only 3 millions, or 4 per cent., are under wood. Sir Herbert
Maxwell, who has made a study of this question for a good many
years, and whose moderation of statement is beyond challenge,
estimates that, in 1906, ‘eight millions were paid annually in
salaries for the administration, formation, and preservation
of German forests, representing the maintenance of about
200,000 families, or about 1,000,000 souls; and that in
working up the raw material yielded by the forests wages were
earned annually to the amount of 30 millions sterling,
maintaining about 600,000 families, or 3,000,000 souls.’ The
Committee will there perceive what an important element this
is in the labour and employment of a country. Any one who will
take the trouble to search out the census returns will find
that the number of people directly employed in forest work in
this country is only 16,000. And yet the soil and the climate
of this country are just as well adapted for the growth of
marketable trees as that of the States of Germany. Recently we
have been favoured with a striking report of a Royal
Commission, very ably presided over by my honourable friend
the member for Cardiff. A perusal of the names attached to
that report will secure for it respectful and favourable
consideration. It outlines a very comprehensive and
far-reaching scheme for planting the wastes of this country.
The systematic operation which the Commission recommend is a
gigantic one, and, before the Government can commit themselves
to it in all its details, it will require very careful
consideration by a body of experts skilled in forestry. I am
informed by men whom I have consulted, and whose opinion on
this subject I highly value, that there is a good deal of
preliminary work which ought to be undertaken in this country
before the Government could safely begin planting on the large
scale indicated in that report. … I am also told that we
cannot command the services in this country of a sufficient
number of skilled foresters to direct planting. …
"I doubt whether there is a great industrial country in the
world which spends less money directly on work connected with
the development of its resources than we do. Take the case of
agriculture alone. Examine the Budgets of foreign countries—I
have done it with great advantage in other directions—examine
them from this particular point of view, and honourable
members, I think, will be rather ashamed at the contrast
between the wise and lavish generosity of countries much
poorer than ours and the short-sighted and niggardly parsimony
with which we dole out small sums of money for the
encouragement of agriculture in our country. …
"I will tell the House what we propose. There is a certain
amount of money, not very much, spent in this country in a
spasmodic kind of way on what I will call the work of national
development—in light railways, in harbours, in indirect but
very meagre assistance to agriculture.
{145}
I propose to gather all these grants together into one grant
that I propose to call a development grant, and this year to
add a sum of £200,000 to that grant for these purposes. … The
grant will be utilized in the promotion of schemes which have
for their purpose the development of the resources of the
country, and will include such objects as the institution of
schools of forestry, the purchase and preparation of land for
afforestation, the setting up of a number of experimental
forests on a large scale, expenditure upon scientific research
in the interests of agriculture, experimental farms, the
improvement of stock—in respect of which I have had a good
many representations from the agricultural community—the
equipment of agencies for disseminating agricultural
instruction, the encouragement and promotion of co-operation,
the improvement of rural transport so as to make markets more
accessible, the facilitation of all well-considered schemes
and measures for attracting labour back to the land by small
holdings or reclamation of wastes."
In realization of this programme an important "Development and
Road Improvement Funds Act" was introduced by Mr. Lloyd-George
in August, and passed, after considerable amendment of its
administrative details in Committee of the Commons and in the
House of Lords. It is divided into two parts, the first
dealing with development, or the aiding and encouraging of
agriculture and other rural industries, inclusive of forestry,
reclamation and drainage of land, improvement of rural
transport, construction and improvement of inland navigation
and harbors, and the development and improvement of fisheries.
The Act enables the Treasury to make free grants and loans,
from a Development Fund fed by an annual Parliamentary vote
and by a charge on the Consolidated Fund. An independent
Development Commission is to be appointed by the Treasury,
consisting of five members appointed for ten years, whose
recommendation for the rejection of applications shall be
final, though not that for their acceptance. The second part
of the Act sets up a Road Board to carry out schemes of road
improvement, either under its own direct control or through
the existing highway authorities.
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES: North America:
International Conference of Delegates from Canada, Mexico,
and the United States.
The movement instituted in the United States for a better
conservation of the natural resources of the country was
broadened, early in 1909, into a continental and international
movement, by an invitation from President Roosevelt to the
Governments of Canada and Mexico to send delegates to a
general conference on the subject at Washington, for the
purpose of arranging some cooperative and harmonious plans of
action in the three countries. The invitation was cordially
accepted in both of the neighboring countries, and the
delegates sent were met, on the 18th of February, by many of
the leaders of the conservation movement in the United States,
including the National Conservation Commission. After being
received and addressed by the President at the White House, a
two days session of the Conference was held in the diplomatic
room of the State Department, with good results.
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES: Turkey: A. D. 1909.
Reclamation projects in the Tigris-Euphrates Delta.
See (in this Volume)
TURKEY: A. D. 1909 (OCTOBER).
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES: United States:
The Great Movement for an Arresting of Waste.
An organized National care-taking of Forests, Waters, Lands,
and Minerals.
Forest Service, Irrigation, Development of Waterways.
It is more than possible that the administration of Government
in the United States under President Roosevelt will be
distinguished, in the judgment of coming generations, most
highly by the impulse and the organization it gave to measures
for conserving the natural resources of the country, in woods,
water sources, mineral deposits and fertile or fertilizable
soils,—rescuing them from a hitherto unrestrained recklessness
of waste. The key-note of a new determination in governmental
policy, pointed to this end, was sounded by the President in
his first Message to Congress, on the 3d of December, 1901,
when he opened the subject largely and earnestly, saying,
among other things, this:
"The preservation of our forests is an imperative business
necessity. We have come to see clearly that whatever destroys
the forest, except to make way for agriculture, threatens our
well-being. At present the protection of the forest reserves
rests with the General Land Office, the mapping and
description of their timber with the United States Geological
Survey, and the preparation of plans for their conservative
use with the Bureau of Forestry, which is also charged with
the general advancement of practical forestry in the United
States. These various functions should be united in the Bureau
of Forestry, to which they properly belong. The present
diffusion of responsibility is bad from every standpoint. It
prevents that effective cooperation between the Government and
the men who utilize the resources of the reserves, without
which the interests of both must suffer. The scientific
bureaus generally should be put under the Department of
Agriculture. The President should have by law the power of
transferring lands for use as forest reserves to the
Department of Agriculture. He already has such power in the
case of lands needed by the Departments of War and the Navy. …
"The wise administration of the forest reserves will be not
less helpful to the interests which depend on water than to
those which depend on wood and grass. The water supply itself
depends upon the forest. In the arid region it is water, not
land, which measures production. The western half of the
United States would sustain a population greater than that of
our whole country to-day if the waters that now run to waste
were saved and used for irrigation. The forest and water
problems are perhaps the most vital internal questions of the
United States. …
"The forests alone cannot, however, fully regulate and
conserve the waters of the arid region. Great storage works
are necessary to equalize the flow of streams and to save the
flood waters. Their construction has been conclusively shown
to be an undertaking too vast for private effort. Nor can it
be best accomplished by the individual States acting alone.
Far-reaching interstate problems are involved; and the
resources of single States would often be inadequate. It is
properly a national function. at least in some of its

features. …
{146}
"The reclamation of the unsettled arid public lands presents a
different problem. Here it is not enough to regulate the flow
of streams. The object of the Government is to dispose of the
land to settlers who will build homes upon it. To accomplish
this object water must be brought within their reach. …
Whatever the Nation does for the extension of irrigation
should harmonize with, and tend to improve, the condition of
those now living on irrigated land. We are not at the
starting-point of this development. Over two hundred millions
of private capital have already been expended in the
construction of irrigation works, and many million acres of
arid land reclaimed. A high degree of enterprise and ability
has been shown in the work itself; but as much cannot be said
in reference to the laws relating thereto. The security and
value of the homes created depend largely on the stability of
titles to water; but the majority of these rest on the
uncertain foundation of court decisions rendered in ordinary
suits at law. With a few creditable exceptions, the arid
States have failed to provide for the certain and just
division of streams in times of scarcity. Lax and uncertain
laws have made it possible to establish rights to water in
excess of actual uses or necessities, and many streams have
already passed into private ownership, or a control equivalent
to ownership."
President's Message to Congress,
December 3, 1901.
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES:
The Nationalizing of Irrigation Works.
The highest quality of statesmanship is represented by such
recommendations as these. So far as concerned the proposed
nationalization of irrigation works, to reclaim the arid lands
of the West, they bore fruit within a year, in the passage by
Congress of the Reclamation Act of June 17, 1902. It devoted
most of the proceeds of the sale of public lauds, in Arizona,
California, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, Nevada, New
Mexico, North and South Dakota, Oklahoma, Utah, Washington,
and Wyoming, to a special Reclamation Fund in the Treasury,
for the creation and maintenance of irrigation works. This was
a measure for which the late Major John W. Powell, Director of
the United States Geological Survey, had labored incessantly
for many years. In his book on "The Lands of the Arid Regions"
he was the first to show the possibility of redemption for
most of the wide spaces of land then supposed to be hopeless
desert, and he pleaded with Congress, session after session,
for some national undertaking to store and distribute the
waters from the mountains that would give life to their soil.
In 1888 he succeeded so far as to win authority and means for
investigating the water supply for the region, and from that
time he had kept an efficient small corps of engineers at work
in the survey and measurement of streams, accumulating
information that was ready for immediate use when actual
constructive work was taken in hand. At once, on the passage
of the Reclamation Act, the Director of the Geological Survey,
acting under the Secretary of the Interior, began the
execution of plans already well matured, for irrigation in
Arizona and Nevada; and was able three years later to report
similar undertakings in progress within three of the ten
Territories and thirteen States.
In May, 1908, the following statement of the reclamation work
then in progress appeared in The Outlook: "The work as
a whole rivals the Panama Canal in the labor and expense
involved. The employment of 16,000 men and the expenditure of
$1,250,000 every month are but incidents in the service.
Already the canals completed reach a total of 1,815 miles—as
far as from New York to Denver. Homes have been made for ten
thousand families where before was desert. In the past five
years $33,000,000 has been spent, and the enterprises already
planned will add more than a hundred millions to this sum. Nor
is this money spent in one locality. In New Mexico one of the
largest dams in the world is being constructed. In California
and Nevada great reservoirs and irrigation plants are being
built. In western Kansas the beet-sugar raisers are to have a
$250,000 plant for pumping the ‘underflow,’ or the sheet water
found a few feet beneath the top-soil, of the Arkansas River
Valley to the surface, that ditches may be filled and crops
made certain. On seven great projects, involving the
expenditure of $51,000,000 and the reclamation of over a
million acres, the benefit is directly to the Northwest. These
projects lie in North and South Dakota, Montana, and
Washington. In these States lands that have been considered as
worthless except for the coarsest kind of grazing are being
transformed into productive farms. In South Dakota the largest
earth dam in the world is being constructed, that ninety
thousand acres of land may be made fertile; while just east of
the Yellowstone Park is being built a solid wall of masonry
310 feet high to hold back the waters of the Shoshone River
until a reservoir of ten square miles, capable of irrigating a
hundred thousand acres, is formed. The production of these
irrigated lands is marvelous."
The latest official statistics that are available represent
the total of acres irrigated at the end of the year 1907 as
being 11,000,000, in 167,200 farms, at an average cost (of
constructive work) of $13.46 per acre.
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES:
A National Forest Policy.
Less promptitude of action followed the President's urging of
measures for forest preservation, and his warnings to Congress
and the country, against the consequences of this inaction,
were repeated from year to year. His Message of December,
1904, carried a specially urgent plea for legislation to unify
the national forest work.
"I have repeatedly," he said, "called attention to the
confusion which exists in Government forest matters because
the work is scattered among three independent organizations.
The United States is the only one of the great nations in
which the forest work of the Government is not concentrated
under one department, in consonance with the plainest dictates
of good administration and common sense. The present
arrangement is bad from every point of view. Merely to mention
it is to prove that it should be terminated at once. As I have
repeatedly recommended, all the forest work of the Government
should be concentrated in the Department of Agriculture, where
the larger part of that work is already done, where
practically all of the trained foresters of the Government are
employed, where chiefly in Washington there is comprehensive
first-hand knowledge of the problems of the reserves acquired
on the ground, where all problems relating to growth from the
soil are already gathered, and where all the sciences
auxiliary to forestry are at hand for prompt and effective
coöperation."
{147}
During its following session Congress took the desired action,
and the whole forest service was transferred to the Department
of Agriculture in February, 1905.
Early in June of that year the efforts of the President to
waken attention to the seriousness of the forest destruction
in the country were greatly helped by a notable convention at
Washington of about twelve hundred men, having both interest
and knowledge in the matter, who came together to discuss the
problems involved. They were mostly practical foresters,
intelligent lumbermen, railway men, ranch-owners, engineers
and miners, and their urgency of a systematic conservative
treatment of the surviving forest wealth of the country
carried great weight. The convention was under the direction
of the Secretary of Agriculture, and was addressed by the
President.
During a journey through parts of the Southern States, in
October, 1905, the President took occasion, in some of his
speeches, to urge that a large part, at least, of the rapidly
disappearing forests on the Atlantic side of the country
should be nationalized, for preservation in the manner of the
forest reserves of the Far West. In his Message of 1906 he
submitted this to Congress, as a specific recommendation,
saying that the forests of the White Mountains and the
Southern Appalachian regions need to be preserved, and "cannot
be unless the people of the States in which they lie, through
their representatives in the Congress, secure vigorous action
by the National Government." This proposal encountered strong
opposition from selfish interests, and Congress was prevailed
upon with difficulty to authorize a survey of the forests of
the White Mountains and the Southern Appalachians, which
resulted in a recommendation by the Secretary of Agriculture
that 600,000 acres in the former region and 5,000,000 in the
latter be purchased for a National Reserve. A bill responsive
to this recommendation was passed by the Senate, but rejected
by the House, which appointed a commission, instead, to make
further investigations in the matter. Meantime, in the White
Mountains alone, busy slaughterers of the forests were said to
be stripping three hundred acres per day.
On the eve of the adjournment of Congress in March, 1907, the
President issued a proclamation adding some seventeen millions
of acres of forest lands to the National Forest Reserves
already established. This was just before he signed an Act of
Congress which abridged his authority to create reserves in
Colorado, Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. It
was a characteristic proceeding, for which the President had
ample power under a statute of 1891, and it simply held the
forests designated in safety from destruction until the
question of their treatment was more carefully considered. The
next Congress, or the next President, could give them up to
private ownership, in whole or in part, if the one or the
other found reason for doing so. Meantime they were sheltered
from the axeman, while undergoing study. As a matter of fact,
Mr. Roosevelt’s successor, President Taft, did conclude that
some of the lands reserved should be released for sale, and so
ordered soon after he entered the executive office.
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES:
The Inland Waterways Commission.
In his annual Message of December, 1907, the President
enlarged the range of considerations that connect themselves
with the question of economic forestry, by directing attention
to the importance of the waterways of the country and their
claim to a more systematic development. "For the last few
years," he said, "through several agencies, the Government has
been endeavoring to get our people to look ahead, and to
substitute a planned and orderly development of our resources
in place of a haphazard striving for immediate profit. Our
great river systems should be developed as National water
highways; the Mississippi, with its tributaries, standing
first in importance, and the Columbia second, although there
are many others of importance on the Pacific, the Atlantic and
the Gulf slopes. The National Government should undertake this
work, and I hope a beginning will be made in the present
Congress; and the greatest of all our rivers, the Mississippi,
should receive especial attention. From the Great Lakes to the
mouth of the Mississippi there should be a deep waterway, with
deep waterways leading from it to the East and the West. Such
a waterway would practically mean the extension of our coast
line into the very heart of our country. It would be of
incalculable benefit to our people. If begun at once it can be
carried through in time appreciably to relieve the congestion
of our great freight-carrying lines of railroads. …
"The inland waterways which lie just back of the whole eastern
and southern coasts should likewise be developed. Moreover,
the development of our waterways involves many other important
water problems, all of which should be considered as part of
the same general scheme. The Government dams should be used to
produce hundreds of thousands of horsepower as an incident to
improving navigation; for the annual value of the unused
water-power of the United States perhaps exceeds the annual
value of the products of all our mines. As an incident to
creating the deep waterway down the Mississippi, the
Government should build along its whole lower length levees
which taken together with the control of the headwaters, will
at once and forever put a complete stop to all threat of
floods in the immensely fertile Delta region. The territory
lying adjacent to the Mississippi along its lower course will
thereby become one of the most prosperous and populous, as it
already is one of the most fertile, farming regions in all the
world. I have appointed an Inland Waterways Commission to
study and outline a comprehensive scheme of development along
all the lines indicated. Later I shall lay its report before
the Congress."
The Inland Waterways Commission thus appointed by the
President in March, 1907, gave its attention first to the
project of a "Lakes-to-the-Gulf Deep Water Way," which had
been commanding wide interest in the Mississippi Valley for
some years. What the project, in its full magnitude,
contemplated, was stated as follows in the resolutions of a
great convention, of 4000 delegates, from 44 States, assembled
at Chicago in October, 1908:
"Any plan for the inland waterway development so imperatively
necessary to the material welfare of the valley should
comprise a main trunk line in the form of a strait connecting
Lake Michigan with the Gulf of Mexico by way of the Illinois
and Mississippi rivers.
{148}
The development of this trunk line should begin at once. The
improvement of the branches of this main line, such as the
upper Mississippi, with its tributaries; the Ohio, with its
leading tributaries, including the Tennessee and Cumberland;
the Missouri, the Arkansas, the Red, the White, and other
rivers, and the interstate inland waterway of Louisiana and
Texas, should proceed simultaneously with the development of
the principal line.
"The deep waterway is practically complete from Chicago to
Joliet through the courage and enterprise of the single city
of Chicago, which has by the expenditure of $55,000,000
created a deep waterway across the main divide between the
waters of Lake Michigan and those of the Mississippi. A
special board of survey, composed of United States engineers,
reported to Congress in 1905 that the continuation of the deep
waterway from Joliet to St. Louis was feasible and would cost
only $31,000,000. The State of Illinois, assuming that the
Federal Government will take the responsibility of completing
the waterway to the Gulf, is about to cooperate to the extent
of $20,000,000."
The waterway here mentioned as being "practically complete from
Chicago to Joliet" is that known as the Chicago Drainage
Canal. The $20,000,000 with which the State of Illinois would
cooperate in carrying out the whole project was voted by that
State in November, 1908, for building an extension of the
Drainage Canal from Joliet to Utica, Illinois, sixty-one
miles, for a development of water power. The depth of these
channels is and is to be twenty-four feet, and the project of
the Lakes-to-the-Gulf Deep Waterway contemplated that depth
throughout. The Board of Engineers to which the project was
referred reported, however, in June, 1909, against the
desirability of a waterway of such depth. Its cost from St.
Louis to the Gulf is estimated to be $128,000,000 for
construction, and $6,000,000 yearly for maintenance. In the
judgment of the board, the present demands of commerce between
St. Louis and the Gulf will be adequately met by an eight-foot
channel from St. Louis to the mouth of the Ohio and a channel
of not less than nine feet in depth below the mouth of the
Ohio. The board’s belief is that an eight-foot channel from
Chicago to St. Louis corresponding with the eight-foot project
from St. Louis to Cairo is the least that would adequately
meet the demands of commerce. It adds that such a waterway
would be desirable, provided its cost is reasonable. Present
and prospective demands of commerce between Chicago and the
Gulf would be adequately served, the board reports, by a
through nine-foot channel to the Gulf.
In the States bordering on the Atlantic a "Deeper Waterways
Association" is pressing long-mooted plans for uniting the
bays, sounds, and navigable rivers along the Atlantic coast by
canals, thus affording safe deep-water communication from
Boston on the east to Florida at the far south.
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES:
Conference of Governors at Washington.
In all his endeavors to establish a national policy directed,
systematically and scientifically, to the arresting of waste
in the use and treatment of the natural resources of the
country, President Roosevelt was assisted very greatly by the
knowledge and the energetic public spirit of the chief of the
National Forest Service, Mr. Gifford Pinchot. It is understood
to have been on the initiative of Mr. Pinchot that the
crowning expedient for stirring and determining public feeling
on the subject was planned, early in the winter of 1908, when
the President invited the Governors of all the States and
Territories to a Conference in Washington, for considering the
whole question of an economic conservation of natural
resources and concerting measures to that end. It was said,
indeed, by the President, in addressing the meeting of
Governors, that if it had not been for Mr. Pinchot "this
convention neither would nor could have been called." The
invitation went to others than Governors,—to men of national
prominence in public life, in scientific pursuits, in business
experience, and to heads of great associations. The resulting
assembly at the White House, on the 13th, 14th, and 15th of
May, 1908, marked an epoch in American history. There were
Governors from forty of the forty-six States of the Union,
with the President and members of his Cabinet, the Justices of
the Supreme Court, many Senators and Representatives from the
Congress, and a distinguished gathering of such citizens as
William Jennings Bryan, Seth Low, James J. Hill, Andrew
Carnegie, John Mitchell and Samuel Gompers. All sides of the
national thriftlessness that needed correction were discussed
by men who could best describe the evils produced and best
indicate the methods of remedy. Before adjourning their
meeting the Governors present adopted with unanimity a
declaration in which they say:
"We agree that our country’s future is involved in this: that
the great natural resources supply the material basis upon
which our civilization must continue to depend, and upon which
the perpetuity of the nation itself rests. We agree, in the
light of the facts brought to our knowledge and from the
information received from sources which we cannot doubt, that
this material basis is threatened with exhaustion. …
"We declare our firm conviction that this conservation of our
natural resources is a subject of transcendent importance
which should engage unremittingly the attention of the nation,
the States, and the people in earnest cooperation. These
natural resources include the land on which we live and which
yields our food; the living waters which fertilize the soil,
supply power, and form great avenues of commerce; the forests
which yield the materials for our homes, prevent erosion of
the soil, and conserve the navigation and other uses of the
streams; and the minerals which form the basis of our
industrial life, and supply us with heat, light, and power. …
"We commend the wise forethought of the President in sounding
the note of warning as to the waste and exhaustion of the
natural resources of the country, and signify our high
appreciation of his action in calling this Conference to
consider the same and to seek remedies therefor through
cooperation of the nation and the States. …
"We agree in the wisdom of future conferences between the
President, Members of Congress, and the governors of States on
the conservation of our natural resources with a view of
continued coöperation and action on the lines suggested; and
to this end we advise that from time to time, as in his
judgment may seem wise, the President call the governors of
States and Members of Congress and others into conference.
{149}
"We agree that further action is advisable to ascertain the
present condition of our natural resources and to promote the
conservation of the same; and to that end we recommend the
appointment by each State of a commission on the conservation
of natural resources, to coöperate with each other and with
any similar commission of the Federal Government."
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES:
The National Conservation Commission and its Report.
The President acted with promptitude on the suggestion of a
National Commission on the Conservation of Natural Resources,
to coöperate with kindred State Commissions. Within a month he
announced the appointment of such a Commission, composed of
nearly fifty men of special qualification for the inquiries to
be pursued, the recommendations to be made, and the action to
be taken. All sections of the country are represented on the
Commission, including such authorities on waters as Professor
Swain, of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; on
forests, as Professor Graves, of the Yale Forestry School, and
Mr. Charles Lathrop Pack, of New Jersey; on lands, as
Ex-Governor Pardee, of California, and Mr. James J. Hill, the
eminent railway president; on minerals, as Messrs. Andrew
Carnegie, of New York, John Hays Hammond, of Massachusetts,
and John Mitchell, of Illinois.
The Commission is divided into four sections, one to consider
forests, another waters, a third minerals, and the fourth
lands. Over these divisions is an executive committee, of which
Mr. Gifford Pinchot is chairman. In each section there are
representatives from the Senate and House of Representatives,
and officials of Government from the Department which has to
do with the subject referred to it.
State action on the lines commended by the Conference of
Governors had already been instituted in a number of States,
and in many others it was promptly set on foot; so that the
desired coöperative organization of effort was soon well under
way, and contributing to the first undertaking planned by the
Executive Committee of the National Commission, which was the
making of an inventory of the natural resources of the United
States. So effective was the work done in the summer and fall
of 1908 that a Second Conference of State Governors, jointly
with the State and National Commissions, was found desirable,
for consideration of the mass of facts collected as a basis
for definite plans. The Second Conference, like the First, was
in Washington, and it was opened on the 8th of December, under
the chairmanship of the then President-elect of the United
States, the Honorable William H. Taft. The draft of a report
prepared to be made by the National Conservation Commission to
the President of the United States was submitted
confidentially to this Conference, and was sent to Congress a
little later with its approval, as well as with that of the
President. The Conference adopted, furthermore, two important
resolutions, as follows:
"Resolved, That a joint committee be appointed by the
chairman, to consist of six members of state conservation
commissions and three members of the National Conservation
Commission, whose duty it shall be to prepare and present to
the state and national commissions, and through them to the
governors and the President, a plan for united action by all
organizations concerned with the conservation of natural
resources. (On motion of Governor Noel, of Mississippi, the
chairman and secretary of the conference were added to and
constituted a part of this committee.) "
"We also especially urge on the Congress of the United States
the high desirability of maintaining a National Commission on
the Conservation of the Resources of the Country, empowered to
coöperate with State Commissions, to the end that every
sovereign commonwealth and every section of the country may
attain the high degree of prosperity and the sureness of
perpetuity naturally arising in the abundant resources and the
vigor, intelligence and patriotism of our people."
In subsequently communicating to Congress, on the 22d of
January, 1909, the report of the National Conservation
Commission, the President said:
"With the statements and conclusions of this report I heartily
concur, and I commend it to the thoughtful consideration both
of the Congress and of our people generally. It is one of the
most fundamentally important documents ever laid before the
American people. It contains the first inventory of its
natural resources ever made by any nation."
The report of the Commission was prefaced by a brief
explanatory statement from the Chairman of its Executive
Committee, partly as follows:
"The executive committee designated in your letter creating
the commission organized on June 19 and outlined a plan for
making an inventory of the natural resources of the United
States. On July 1 work was undertaken, accordingly, with the
coöperation of the bureaus of the federal departments,
authorities of the different States, and representative bodies
of the national industries. The results of this coöperative
work are herewith submitted as appendices of the commission’s
report. … In its coöperation ‘with other bodies created for
similar purposes by States,’ the National Conservation
Commission has had most valuable assistance. Within the first
month after the creation of the commission, the governors of 5
States had appointed conservation commissions, and an equal
number of organizations of national scope had named
conservation committees. At the time of the recent joint
conservation conference 33 States and Territories had formed
conservation commissions. The number has now increased to 36,
with indications that nearly all of the remaining States will
soon take similar action. The number of national organizations
which have appointed conservation committees is 41."
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES:
An Inventory of Natural Resources.
From the report itself it is only possible, in this place, to
glean a few of its most impressive and significant disclosures
of fact. For example:
CONCERNING FORESTS.
"Forests privately owned cover three-fourths of the total
forest area and contain four-fifths of the standing timber.
The timber privately owned is not only four times that
publicly owned, but is generally more valuable. Forestry is
now practiced on 70 per cent. of the forests publicly owned,
and on less than 1 per cent. of the forests privately owned,
or on only 18 per cent. of the total area of forests.
"The yearly growth of wood in our forests does not average
more than 12 cubic feet per acre. This gives a total yearly
growth of less than 7,000,000,000 cubic feet.
{150}
"We have 200,000,000 acres of mature forests, in which yearly
growth is balanced by decay; 250,000,000 acres partly cut over
or burned over, but restocking naturally with enough young
growth to produce a merchantable crop, and 100,000,000 acres
cut over and burned over, upon which young growth is lacking
or too scanty to make merchantable timber.
"We take from our forests yearly, including waste in logging
and in manufacture, 23,000,000,000 cubic feet of wood. We use
each year 100,000,000 cords of firewood; 40,000,000,000 feet
of lumber; more than 1,000,000,000 posts, poles, and fence
rails; 118,000,000 hewn ties; 1,500,000,000 staves; over
133,000,000 sets of heading; nearly 500,000,000 barrel hoops;
3,000,000 cords of native pulp wood; 165,000,000 cubic feet of
round mine timbers, and 1,250,000 cords of wood for
distillation.
"Since 1870 forest fires have destroyed a yearly average of 50
lives and $50,000,000 worth of timber. Not less than
50,000,000 acres of forest is burned over yearly. The young
growth destroyed by fire is worth far more than the
merchantable timber burned.
"One-fourth of the standing timber is lost in logging. The
boxing of long-leaf pine for turpentine has destroyed
one-fifth of the forests worked. The loss in the mill is from
one-third to two-thirds of the timber sawed. The loss of mill
product in seasoning and fitting for use is from one-seventh
to one fourth. Of each 1000 feet, which stood in the forest,
an average of only 320 feet of lumber is used.
"We take from our forests each year, not counting the loss by
fire, three and a half times their yearly growth. We take 40
cubic feet per acre for each 12 cubic feet grown; we take 260
cubic feet per capita, while Germany uses 37 and France 25
cubic feet.
"We tax our forests under the general property tax, a method
abandoned long ago by every other great nation. Present tax
laws prevent reforestation of cut-over land and the
perpetuation of existing forests by use.
"Great damage is done to standing timber by injurious forest
insects. Much of this damage can be prevented at small
expense.
"To protect our farms from wind and to reforest land best
suited for forest growth will require tree planting on an area
larger than Pennsylvania, Ohio, and West Virginia combined.
Lands so far successfully planted make a total area smaller
than Rhode Island; and year by year, through careless cutting
and fires, we lower the capacity of existing forests to
produce their like again, or else totally destroy them. …
"By reasonable thrift we can produce a constant timber supply
beyond our present need, and with it conserve the usefulness
of our streams for irrigation, water supply, navigation and
power. Under right management, our forests will yield over
four times as much as now. We can reduce waste in the woods
and in the mill at least one third, with present as well as
future profit. … We can practically stop forest fires at a
cost yearly of one fifth of the value of the merchantable
timber burned.
"We shall suffer for timber to meet our needs until our
forests have had time to grow again. But if we act vigorously
and at once, we shall escape permanent timber scarcity." The
report adds much of interest on this subject.
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES:
CONCERNING WATERS.
"Our mean annual rainfall is about 30 inches; the quantity
about 215,000,000,000,000 cubic feet per year, equivalent to
ten Mississippi rivers. Of the total rainfall over half is
evaporated; about a third flows into the sea, the remaining
sixth is either consumed or absorbed. These portions are
sometimes called, respectively, the fly-off, the run-off and
the cut-off. They are partly interchangeable. About a third of
the run-off, or a tenth of the entire rainfall, passes through
the Mississippi. The run-off is increasing with deforestation
and cultivation.
"Of the 70,000,000,000,000 cubic feet annually flowing into
the sea, less than 1 per cent. is restrained and utilized for
municipal and community supply; less than 2 per cent. (or some
10 per cent. of that in the arid and semi-arid regions) is
used for irrigation; perhaps 5 per cent, is used for
navigation, and less than 5 per cent, for power. …
"For irrigation it is estimated that there are $200,000,000
invested in dams, ditches, reservoirs, and other works for the
partial control of the waters; and that 1,500,000,000,000
cubic feet are annually diverted to irrigable lands,
aggregating some 20,000 square miles. Except in some cases
through forestry, few catchment areas are controlled, and few
reservoirs are large enough to hold the storm waters. The
waste in the public and private projects exceeds 60 per cent.
while no more than 25 per cent. of the water actually
available for irrigation of the arid lands is restrained and
diverted.
"There are in continental United States 282 streams navigated
for an aggregate of 26,115 miles, and as much more navigable
if improved. There are 45 canals, aggregating 2,189 miles,
besides numerous abandoned canals. Except through forestry in
recent years, together with a few reservoirs and canal locks
and movable dams, there has been little effort to control
headwaters or catchment areas in the interests of navigation,
and none of our rivers are navigated to more than a small
fraction even of their effective low-water capacity.
"The water power now in use is 5,250,000 horse power; the
amount running over government dams and not used is about
1,400,000 horse-power; the amount reasonably available equals
or exceeds the entire mechanical power now in use, or enough
to operate every mill, drive every spindle, propel every train
and boat, and light every city, town, and village in the
country. … Nearly all the freshet and flood water runs to
waste, and the low waters which limit the efficiency of power
plants are increasing in frequency and duration with the
increasing flood run-off. … The direct yearly damage by floods
since 1900 has increased steadily from $45,000,000 to over
$238,000,000. …
"A large part of that half of the annual rainfall not
evaporated lodges temporarily in the soil and earth. It is
estimated that the ground water to the depth of 100 feet
averages 16 2/3 percent, of the earth-Volume, or over
1,400,000,000,000,000 cubic feet, equivalent to seven years'
rainfall or twenty years’ run-off. This subsurface reservoir
is the essential basis of agriculture and other industries and
is the chief natural resource of the country. It sustains
forests and all other crops and supplies the perennial springs
and streams and wells used by four-fifths of our population
and nearly all our domestic animals. Its quantity is
diminished by the increased run-off due to deforestation and
injudicious farming."
{151}
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES:
CONCERNING LANDS.
"The total land area of continental United States is
1,900,000,000 acres. Of this but little more than two-fifths
is in farms, and less than one-half of the farm area is
improved and made a source of crop production. We have nearly
6,000,000 farms; they average 146 acres each. The value of the
farms is nearly one-fourth the wealth of the United States.
There are more than 300,000,000 acres of public grazing land.
The number of persons engaged in agricultural pursuits is more
than 10,000,000. …
"There has been a slight increase in the average yield of our
great staple farm products, but neither the increase in
acreage nor the yield per acre has kept pace with our increase
in population. Within a century we shall probably have to feed
three times as many people as now; and the main bulk of our
food supply must be grown on our own soil.
"The area of cultivated land may possibly be doubled. In
addition to the land awaiting the plow, 75,000,000 acres of
swamp land can be reclaimed, 40,000,000 acres of desert land
irrigated, and millions of acres of brush and wooded land
cleared. Our population will increase continuously, but there
is a definite limit to the increase of our cultivated acreage.
Hence we must greatly increase the yield per acre. The average
yield of wheat in the United States is less than 14 bushels
per acre, in Germany 28 bushels, and in England 32 bushels. We
get 30 bushels of oats per acre, England nearly 45, and
Germany more than 47. Our soils are fertile, but our mode of
farming neither conserves the soil nor secures full crop
returns. The greatest unnecessary loss of our soil is
preventable erosion. Second only to this is the waste, nonuse,
and misuse of fertilizer derived from animals and men."
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES:
CONCERNING MINERALS.
"The available and easily accessible supplies of coal in the
United States aggregate approximately 1,400,000,000,000 tons.
At the present increasing rate of production this supply will
be so depleted as to approach exhaustion before the middle of
the next century.
"The known supply of high-grade iron ores in the United States
approximates 3,840,000,000 tons, which at the present
increasing rate of consumption can not be expected to last
beyond the middle of the present century. In addition to this,
there are assumed to be 59,000,000,000 tons of lower grade
iron ores which are not available for use under existing
conditions.
"The supply of stone, clay, cement, lime, sand, and salt is
ample, while the stock of the precious metals and of copper,
lead, zinc, sulphur, asphalt, graphite, quicksilver, mica, and
the rare metals can not well be estimated, but is clearly
exhaustible within one to three centuries unless unexpected
deposits be found.
"The known supply of petroleum is estimated at 15,000,000,000
to 20,000,000,000 barrels, distributed through six separate
fields having an aggregate area of 8,900 square miles. The
production is rapidly increasing, while the wastes and the
loss through misuse are enormous. The supply can not be
expected to last beyond the middle of the present century.
"The known natural-gas fields aggregate an area of 9,000
square miles, distributed through 22 States. Of the total
yield from these fields during 1907, 400,000,000,000 cubic
feet, valued at $62,000,000, were utilized, while an equal
quantity was allowed to escape into the air. The daily waste
of natural gas—the most perfect known fuel—is over
1,000,000,000 cubic feet, or enough to supply every city in
the United States of over 100,000 population.
"Phosphate rock, used for fertilizer, represents the slow
accumulation of organic matter during past ages. In most
countries it is scrupulously preserved; in this country it is
extensively exported, and largely for this reason its
production is increasing rapidly. The original supply can not
long withstand the increasing demand. …
"The National Government should exercise such control of the
mineral fuels and phosphate rocks now in its possession as to
check waste and prolong our supply."
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES:
CONCERNING LIFE AND HEALTH
"Since the greatest of our national assets is the health and
vigor of the American people, our efficiency must depend on
national vitality even more than on the resources of the
minerals, lands, forests, and waters. …
"Our annual mortality from tuberculosis is about 150,000.
Stopping three-fourths of the loss of life from this cause,
and from typhoid and other prevalent and preventable diseases,
would increase our average length of life over fifteen years.
There are constantly about 3,000,000 persons seriously ill in
the United States, of whom 500,000 are consumptives. More than
half this illness is preventable. …
"The National Government has now several agencies exercising
health functions which only need to be concentrated to become
coordinated parts of a greater health service worthy of the
nation."
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES:
FINAL WORDS.
"The inventory of our natural resources made by your
commission, with the vigorous aid of all federal agencies
concerned, of many States, and of a great number of associated
and individual cooperators, furnishes a safe basis for general
conclusions as to what we have, what we use and waste, and
what may be the possible saving. But for none of the great
resources of the farm, the mine, the forest, and the stream do
we yet possess knowledge definite or wide enough to insure
methods of use which will best conserve them. … The pressing
need is for a general plan under which citizens, States and
Nation may unite in an effort to achieve this great end. The
lack of cooperation between the States and the Nation, and
between the agencies of the National Government, is a potent
cause of the neglect of conservation among the people. An
organization through which all agencies, state, national,
municipal, associate, and individual, may unite in a common
effort to conserve the foundations of our prosperity is
indispensable to the welfare and progress of the nation. To
that end the immediate creation of a national agency is
essential."
{152}
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES:
Beginnings of a General Organization of all
Conservation Agencies.
The Joint Committee which the Chairman of the Second
Conference of Governors was instructed to appoint, for the
preparation of "a plan for united action by all organizations
concerned with the conservation of natural resources," met at
Washington on the 5th of March, 1909, for its first
consultation. The Committee, of eleven members, consists of
six chairmen of State Conservation Commissions, and five who
are members of the National Conservation Commission. In
preparation for the meeting the various conservation bodies
which have been actively at work for several months are
sending in suggestions based on their own experience.
Action for the preservation and increase of forests has been
stimulated in many if not all of the States of the Union by
the national agitation of the subject in these late years.
Nowhere has the influence been more effective than in New
York, which has not only greatly enlarged its control and
improved its care and treatment of the extensive forest tracts
in the Adirondack region, but has done even more important
reforesting work in other parts of its territory. "James S.
Whipple, forest, fish and game commissioner, has not only
planted more trees in this State than have been planted in any
other State, or even by the national government, but this year
he has made another great advance in the reforesting movement.
The commission has sold to private land owners at cost
1,034,050 pine and spruce trees for reforesting land within
the State."
New York Evening Post,
April 24, 1909.
These trees went to every county of the State, in numbers
ranging from 50 to 200,000.
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES:
Threatened Monopoly of Water Power.
See (in this Volume)
Combinations, Industrial, &c.: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1909.
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES:
Withdrawal of Water Power Sites from Land Office Entry.
What is said to be the largest number of acres of land
withdrawn for temporary water power sites in the history of
the Interior Department was made August 13, 1909, when Acting
Secretary Wilson withdrew 87,360 acres along the Colorado
River, in Utah. The land in question was withdrawn to prevent
"monopolies," and with a view to procure legislation from
Congress to preserve them to the Government.
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES:
The National Conservation Association.
"Great significance," said a Press despatch from Washington,
September 16, 1906, "is attached here to-day to the
announcement from Chicago of the formation of the National
Conservation Association, with Charles W. Eliot, ex-president
of Harvard University, as president. Friends of conservation
interpret the launching of the new organization to mean that a
national organization of the widest possible membership and
the greatest possible scope is to supplant the American
Forestry Association in administration favor as the
educational branch of the conservation movement."
Not long after its formation the Association issued an earnest
appeal to the country to bring the pressure of its opinion on
Congress for needed legislation. The special subject of this
appeal was the vast coal field in Alaska, which can only be
saved from monopoly by speedy amendment of existing laws. "We,
therefore," said the Association, "appeal to the American
people to bring the urgent needs of the situation to the
attention of their representatives in Congress, in order that
comprehensive legislation upon this vital matter may be
enacted at the next session of Congress. To this end, every
individual citizen is urged to do his part, and to act at
once."
On the request of Dr. Eliot, Mr. Gifford Pinchot, after the
withdrawal of the latter from the office of Chief Forester of
the United States, was made President of the Association, in
January, 1910, but Dr. Eliot was named Honorary President.
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES:
Legislation recommended by President Taft.
Earnestly upholding the Conservation policy instituted by his
predecessor, President Taft, in a Special Message to Congress,
January 14, 1910, recommended several measures of legislation,
for which suggested bills had been drafted by the Secretary of
the Interior.
"One of the most pressing needs," said the Message, "in the
matter of public-land reform is that lands should be
classified according to their principal value or use. …
"It is now proposed to dispose of agricultural lands as such,
and at the same time to reserve for other disposition the
treasure of coal, oil, asphaltum, natural gas, and phosphate
contained therein. This may be best accomplished by separating
the right to mine from the title to the surface, giving the
necessary use of so much of the latter as may be required for
the extraction of the deposits. The surface might be disposed
of as agricultural land under the general agricultural
statutes, while the coal or other mineral could be disposed of
by lease on a royalty basis."
The importance of an enlargement of the undertakings of the
Government in the line of irrigation works, for reclaiming
arid lands, is urged by the President with great force, and he
recommends "that authority be given to issue not exceeding
$30,000,000 of bonds from time to time, as the secretary of
the interior shall find it necessary, the proceeds to be
applied to the completion of the projects already begun and
their proper extension, and the bonds running ten years or
more to be taken up by the proceeds of returns to the
reclamation fund, which returns, as the years go on, will
increase rapidly in amount."
The Message gives approval to a Bill which passed the lower
House of the late Congress, directing that "the national
government appropriate a certain amount each year out of the
receipts from the forestry business of the government to
institute reforestation at the sources of certain navigable
streams to be selected by the Geological Survey with a view to
determining the practicability of thus improving and
protecting the streams for Federal purposes."
Finally, on the subject of waterway improvement, the Message
recommends the project of dams in the Ohio River from
Pittsburg to Cairo, and in the Upper Mississippi from St. Paul
to St. Louis.
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES: A. D. 1910.
Removal from office of Chief Forester Pinchot.
Investigation of charges against Secretary Ballinger.
Unfortunate differences between the Secretary of the Interior,
Mr. Ballinger, and the head of the Bureau of Forestry, Mr.
Pinchot, led to the removal of the latter from office early in
January, 1910. As a further result, formal charges of
unfaithfulness to public interests, in conducting national
measures of conservation, were brought against Secretary
Ballinger, and are undergoing investigation by a Congressional
Committee at the time of the passing of this matter to the
printers (March, 1910).
----------CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES: End--------
{153}
CONSERVATIVE-UNIONIST PARTY:
Surrender of the Government in Great Britain.
Defeat in the Elections.
See (in this Volume)
ENGLAND: A. D. 1905-1906.
CONSPIRACY LAW, British, as affecting Trades Unions.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: ENGLAND A. D. 1906 (MARCH).
CONSTABULARY, The Philippine.
See (in this Volume)
PHILIPPINE ISLANDS: A. D. 1901-1902.
CONSTANTINOPLE: A. D. 1901.
Loss of political importance.
See (in this Volume)
RUSSIA: THE ASIATIC FUTURE.
CONSTANTINOPLE: A. D. 1908-1909.
The Turkish Revolution.
See (in this Volume)
TURKEY: A. D. 1908 (JULY-DECEMBER), and after.
CONSTITUTION OF AUSTRALIA:
Proposed Amendments.
See (in this Volume)
AUSTRALIA: A. D. 1909 and 1910.
CONSTITUTION OF BRITISH INDIAN GOVERNMENT:
The Indian Councils Act.
See (in this Volume )
INDIA: A. D. 1908-1909.
CONSTITUTION FOR CHINA:
Nine years of approach to it.
Promised for 1907.
See (in this Volume)
CHINA: A. D. 1905-1908, 1908 (December),
and 1909 (OCTOBER-NOVEMBER).
CONSTITUTION OF ENGLAND:
Resolution of the Commons contemplating a change affecting
the Legislative Power of the House of Lords.
See (in this Volume)
ENGLAND: A. D. 1906 (APRIL-DECEMBER), and 1910.
CONSTITUTION OF GEORGIA:
Suffrage Amendment.
See (in this Volume)
GEORGIA: A. D. 1908.
CONSTITUTION OF MONTENEGRO.
See (in this Volume)
BALKAN AND DANUBIAN STATES.
CONSTITUTION OF OKLAHOMA.
Some of the more radical features of the Constitution under
which Oklahoma was admitted to the American Union are
summarized in the following:
"Legislative authority is vested in a legislature, but the
people reserve to themselves the power to propose laws and
amendments to the constitution and to enact or reject the same
at the polls independent of the legislature, and also reserve
power at their own option to approve or reject at the polls
any act of the legislature.
"Eight per cent of the legal voters have the right to propose
any legislative measure and 15 percent of the legal voters
have the right to propose amendments to the constitution by
petition. A referendum may be ordered, except as to laws
necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace,
health or safety, either by petition signed by 5 per cent of
the legal voters or by the legislature as other bills are
enacted. The veto power of the governor does not extend to
measures voted on by the people. The powers of the initiative
and referendum are also reserved to the legal voters of every
county and district as to local legislation or action.
"Every railroad, car or express company is required to receive
and transport without delay or discrimination each other’s
cars, loaded or empty, and passengers under such regulations
as shall be prescribed by law or any commission created for
that purpose. All oil-pipe companies are made subject to the
reasonable control and regulation of the corporation
commission, to which telephone and telegraph lines are also
subject in the same manner. No public-service corporation may
consolidate with any other like corporation having under its
control a parallel or competing line except by enactment of
the legislature upon the recommendation of the corporation
commission. The legislature, however, shall never enact any
law permitting any public-service corporation to consolidate
with any other public-service corporation organized under the
laws of any other state or of the United States owning or
controlling a parallel or competing line in the state. The
giving of passes by railroad or transportation companies is
forbidden except in the case of employés and other specified
persons.
"A corporation commission is created, to be composed of three
persons, elected by the people for terms of six years. The
commission shall have power to supervise and control all
transportation and transmission companies in the state in all
matters relating to the performance of their public duties and
their charges therefor and of correcting abuses and preventing
unjust discrimination and extortion by such companies; and to
that end the commission shall from time to time prescribe and
enforce such rates, charges, classification of charges and
rules and regulations and shall require the companies to
establish and maintain until amended all such public service,
facilities and conveniences as may be reasonable and just.
"Railroads, other than street or electric roads, are forbidden
to charge more than 2 cents a mile for the transportation of
passengers. The corporation commission may, however exempt
those roads which submit proof that they cannot earn a just
compensation for the services rendered by them to the public
if not permitted to charge more than 2 cents a mile.
"No corporation may issue stock except for money, labor done
or property actually received to the amount of the par value
thereof and all fictitious increase of stock or indebtedness
shall be void.