History for ready reference, Volume 7

by J. N. Larned

Legislative and administrative independence for all
parts of the Empire.
Repudiation of the National Debt.
Abolition of indirect taxation and a cumulative tax on
all incomes exceeding £300.
Elementary education to be free, secular, industrial,
and compulsory for all classes.
Age for school attendance to be raised to 16.
State maintenance of all school children.
Abolition of school rates.
Nationalization of land, of trusts, railways, docks,
and canals.
Public ownership of gas, electric light, water supply,
tramways, omnibuses, &c., food and coal supply;
State and municipal banks, pawnshops, restaurants,
public ownership of hospitals, cemeteries, and the
drink traffic.
A legal eight-hours day;
no employment under 16 years;
public provision of work for unemployed at trade union rates;
free State insurance against sickness, accident, old age,
and disability;
a minimum wage of 30s. a week;
equal rates of pay for both sexes.
Compulsory construction of healthy dwellings by public bodies.
Free administration of justice and legal advice.
Judges to be ‘chosen by the people.’
Abolition of capital punishment.
Disestablishment and disendowment of all State Churches.
Abolition of standing armies and establishment of
national citizen forces. …
"The Social Democratic Party is the most downright and
straightforward of the larger Socialist organizations. It is
more outspoken and consistent, less hazy and opportunist, than
the Independent Labour Party or the Fabian Society. It derives
its inspiration from the Social Democrats of Germany and
boldly upholds the ideal of revolutionary Socialism."
The Fabian Society, which comes next "in point of age, is at
the opposite end of the scale in regard to policy. It was
founded in 1884, on American inspiration, as a sort of mutual
elevation society, but adopted Socialistic principles from
Germany. Its ‘basis’ is thus stated:
"‘The Fabian Society consists of Socialists. It therefore aims
at the reorganization of society by the emancipation of land
and industrial capital from individual and class ownership and
the vesting of them in the community for the general benefit.
In this way only can the natural and acquired advantages of
the country be equitably shared by the whole people.
"‘The society accordingly works for the extinction of private
property in land and of the consequent individual
appropriation, in the form of rent, of the price paid for
permission to use the earth, as well as for the advantages of
superior soils and sites.
"‘The society further works for the transfer to the community
of the administration of such industrial capital as can
conveniently be managed socially.’
"It is not surprising that thorough-going Socialists denounce
the Fabians as make believe, Socialism-and-water ‘comrades,’
and hardly worthy to be called ‘comrades’ at all, an honour
which the Fabians, for their part, show no desire to claim.
Nevertheless, the Fabians are a very influential element in
the Socialist movement. … The Fabian Society is numerically
small, but growing rapidly, and that largely by the formation
of provincial branches. The headquarters are in London, where
it had in March last [1908] 1085 members out of a total of
2015. … Eleven Fabians are members of Parliament, and the
society supports the Labour party; but its real work lies
outside of politics, and is carried on chiefly by the
distribution of literature and by lectures. It contains
several well-known writers, and may almost be called a
literary society. The output of tracts and leaflets sold and
distributed last year was over 250,000. … Among the best-known
Fabians are Mr. Granville Barker, the Reverend R. J. Campbell,
the Reverend Stewart D. Headlam, Mr. Chiozza-Money, M. P., Mr.
Bernard Shaw, Mr. Sidney Webb, and Mr. H. G. Wells, who has,
however, recently seceded. Many members belong also to other
Socialist organizations. …
"The third large organization on the list is the Independent
Labour Party. It is considerably younger than the Social
Democratic Party and the Fabian Society, but much larger and
politically far more powerful than either or both together. In
character it comes between them, being more opportunist and
supple than the former, less nebulous and elusive than the
latter. It was formally inaugurated at Bradford in 1893, under
the leadership of Mr. Keir Hardie. The following are the
principal [demands] in the official prospectus, revised for
1908-1909:
"‘1. A maximum of 48 hours working week, with the
retention of all existing holidays and Labour Day, May 1,
secured by law.
"‘2. The provision of work to all capable adult applicants at
recognized trade union rates, with a statutory minimum,
of sixpence per hour.
{619}
"‘In order to remuneratively employ the applicants, parish,
district, borough, and county councils to be invested with
powers to
(a) Organize and undertake such industries as they may
consider desirable.
(b) Compulsorily acquire land; purchase, erect, or
manufacture buildings, stock, or other articles for carrying
on such industries,
(c) Levy rates on the rental values of the district and
borrow money on the security of such rates for any of the
above purposes.
"‘3. State pensions for every person over 50 years of age, and
adequate provision for all widows, orphans, sick, and disabled
workers.
"‘4. Free secular, moral, primary, secondary, and University
education, with free maintenance while at school or
University.
"‘5. The raising of the age of child labour, with a view to
its ultimate extinction.
"‘6. Municipalization and public control of the drink traffic.
"‘7. Municipalization and public control of all hospitals and
infirmaries.
"‘8. Abolition of indirect taxation and gradual transference
of all public burdens on to unearned incomes with a view to
their ultimate extinction.
"‘The Independent Labour Party is in favour of adult suffrage,
with full political rights and privileges for women, and the
immediate extension of the franchise to women on the same
terms as granted to men; also triennial Parliaments and second
ballot.’ …
"The most prominent individuals in the Independent Labour
Party are Mr. Keir Hardie, M. P., its father and guide; Mr.
Ramsay Macdonald, M. P., who pulls the political strings; Mr.
Philip Snowdon, M. P., who is an active pamphleteer; and Mr.
Bruce Glasier, who edits the Labour Leader. This
organization, by far the most important in Great Britain,
takes much less part in international Socialism than the
Social Democratic Federation, with which it has never agreed
very well. …
"The ‘Clarion’ organizations, - which make the fourth of the
more important Socialist organizations, need only a brief
mention here. They are not regular societies, like the others,
but merely propagandist agencies organized by the
Clarion newspaper and manned by Socialists who belong
to other bodies or to none. … The agencies include the
Clarion vans, which travel round the country and
proselytize; the Clarion fellowship societies, which
are social bodies, and the Clarion scouts, who are
young recruits, organized for special purposes."
From a series of Articles on
"The Socialist Movement in Great Britain,"
in the London Times, January, 1909.
SOCIALISM:
Work of the Anti-Socialist Union.
An Anti-Socialist Union in Great Britain is conducting a
training school for speakers and workers whom the union sends
into the constituencies to controvert the arguments of
Socialist orators. Of the 175 students who entered the
training school soon after the inauguration of the union in
1908 about 50 were reported the next year as qualified to take
an active part in the anti-Socialist campaign. In reply to an
appeal for volunteers, nearly 2,000 applications were received
from men and women who were anxious to enter the training
school.
SOCIALISM: FRANCE:
The Trade Union Version of Socialism.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION; FRANCE: A. D. 1884-1909.
SOCIALISM: A. D. 1909.
The Classes to which the Socialist Principle appeals.
Strength of Socialist Political Parties.
Their Leadership.
"The agriculturist loves the land which he usually owns, and
would scout the idea of becoming a farmer under the State,
which would be his position under a Socialistic regime; he is
frugal, hard-working, and thrifty to the point of avarice, but
intolerably narrow, suspicious and bigoted. Among this class
Socialism can hardly make proselytes, nor can it do so to any
great extent among tradesmen and commercial men, who are
either their own masters or who hope to set up for themselves
when they have amassed a small capital. We therefore find
ourselves reduced to two classes, the artisans and the
professions, and it is among these that we must seek the
Socialist voters of France. … In France, thanks to the fact
that members of Parliament are paid, the professional classes
are available for the recruiting of labour leaders; indeed the
younger section is naturally attracted to the Socialist
standard. As regards this particular class, we can find in
Great Britain no parallel. … Young Britons appear to be too
busy with their sports or social pleasures to study political
questions, so that we can hardly compare them with the
continental ‘Intellectuals.’ The ‘Intellectual’ is essentially
a product of modern Europe and is principally to be found in
France, Germany and Russia. He is almost invariably highly
educated, in sympathy with foreign progress, a humanitarian
and imbued with ideas either somewhat or very much ahead of
his time. The French ‘Intellectual’ is at his best in the
twenties; he may then be quixotic, but he generally knows his
subject and is fired with generous enthusiasms. … This curious
factor must never be lost sight of when the Socialist movement
in any European country is examined. In Great Britain members of
the educated classes almost invariably belong to one of the
two great political parties; but in France they are willing to
join hands with the masses, not only as leaders, but with a
view to the true enthronement of the people. It is probably
for this reason that the Socialist party has made so much
headway in France. Such being the soldiers and officers who
march under the Red Flag, it is not surprising that their
political organisation should have grown so powerful. The
Socialist party has hardly suffered from the ups and downs of
political life; every election has sent it back to power with
a greater number of seats to its credit; at the present time
the party has 74 representatives in the Chamber of Deputies,
to whom we must add, in certain cases, 135 Radical Socialists.
… The ‘Unified Socialists’ of the uncompromising type hold 53
seats, and the Independent Socialists 21; if we add these two
figures to the 135 Radical Socialists, we find that they form
a considerable portion of the 591 members. Though they have
not an absolute majority, the weight of these 209 advanced
votes is such as to colour very strongly modern legislation,
and there is no reason to doubt that their progress will
continue up to a certain point."
W. L. George,
France in the Twentieth Century,
chapter 8 (John Lane Co., New York, 1909).
SOCIALISM: Germany: A. D. 1902.
The Socialist Congress on Alcoholic Drinks.
See (in this Volume)
ALCOHOL PROBLEM: GERMANY.
SOCIALISM: A. D. 1903.
Gains of the Socialists in Elections to the Reichstag.
See (in this Volume)
GERMANY: A. D. 1903, and 1906-1907.
{620}
SOCIALISM: A. D. 1903.
Opposition among Workmen.
A great Congress of 200 delegates from bodies of German
workingmen opposed to Socialism, said to represent a total of
620,000, was held in October, 1903, at Frankfort-on-the Main.
Its object was to promote effective organization of workmen,
to which end it appealed to "all unorganized German workmen to
join those industrial organizations which do not make enmity
between the classes their principle."
SOCIALISM: A. D. 1908.
Socialists win Seats in the Prussian Diet for the First Time.
See (in this Volume)
PRUSSIA: A. D. 1908.
SOCIALISM: A. D. 1909.
Statistics reported to the Socialist Congress.
The annual report to the Socialist Congress at Leipzig stated
that the German Social Democratic party has a membership of
571,050 men and 62,259 women—total 633,309. The number of men
had increased during the past year by 13,172, and the number
of women by 32,801. There are said to be now only 20 Reichstag
constituencies in which there is no Socialist organization.
See (in this Volume)
GERMANY: A. D. 1909 (OCTOBER-DECEMBER).
SOCIALISM: Italy: A. D. 1904.
Gains in the Election claimed by the Socialists.
See (in this Volume)
ITALY: A. D. 1904 (OCTOBER-DECEMBER).
SOCIALISM: A. D. 1909.
Gains in Italian Elections.
See (in this Volume)
ITALY: A. D. 1909 (MARCH).
SOCIALISM: NEW ZEALAND.
Government Ownership of Land.
Graduated Taxation.
Public Loans to Farmers.
See (in this Volume)
NEW ZEALAND: A. D. 1905.
SOCIALISM: SPAIN: A. D. 1909.
Socialist-Republican Alliance.
See (in this Volume)
SPAIN: A. D. 1907-1909.
SOCIALISM: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1902.
Socialist Platform adopted by the Western Federation
of Miners.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: UNITED STATES: A. D). 1899-1907.
SOCIALISTIC POLITICAL PARTIES.
See (in this Volume)
PARTIES, POLITICAL.
SOKOTO:
British, Capture and Occupation.
See (in this Volume)
AFRICA: A. D. 1903 (NIGERIA).
SOMALILAND.
See (in this Volume)
AFRICA: SOMALILAND.
SONE, Viscount:
Japanese Resident-General in Korea.
See (in this Volume)
KOREA: A. D. 1905-1909.
SONNINO, BARON: PRIME MINISTER OF ITALY.
See (in this Volume)
ITALY: A. D. 1906-1909.
SOUDAN.
See (in this Volume)
SUDAN.
SOUFFRIÈRE, LA: VOLCANIC ERUPTION OF.
See (in this Volume)
VOLCANIC ERUPTIONS: WEST INDIES.
----------SOUTH AFRICA: Start--------
SOUTH AFRICA:
Suitable and Unsuitable Parts of South
Africa for European Settlement.
See (in this Volume)
AFRICA.
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1901-1902.
The Last Year of the Boer-British War.
The Concentration Camps.
Kitchener’s Block-house System and Protected Areas.
The Opening of Negotiations for Peace.
Text of the Treaty concluded.
When Volume VI. of this work went to press, in April, 1901,
and its record of events was closed, the dreadful Boer-British
War had still a little more than another year to be prolonged
through; but it was to be, as it had been throughout the past
year, a sheerly destructive prosecution of guerrilla warfare
by separate bands of the indomitable Boers. The operations of
such warfare,—its raids, its counter "drives," its little
battles and skirmishes, its captures and recaptures, its
breaking of railway lines, and the like,—cannot be detailed in
a work like this. Nothing of any decisive effect was done at
any time, on either side, to constitute an important event in
the war. There was simply a wearing process in operation which
went on, in an inexorable and horrible slow way, till the
country on which it worked was a desert, and the endurance of
its surviving people was worn out.
In November, 1900, Lord Kitchener had succeeded Lord Roberts
in the British command. He decided to empty the contested
regions of their non-combatant population, by gathering it
into "concentration camps," thus resorting to a measure which
the Spaniards had employed in Cuba, and which the Americans
had copied from them in the Philippines. Accordingly, on the
21st of December, 1900, he had issued to general officers a
"Memorandum" in which he said:
"Lord Kitchener desires that General Officers will, according
to the means at their disposal, follow this system in the
Districts which they occupy or may traverse. The women and
children brought in should be camped near the railway for
supply purposes, and should be divided in two categories,
viz.: 1st. Refugees, and the families of Neutrals,
non-combatants, and surrendered Burghers. 2nd. Those whose
husbands, fathers, and sons are on Commands. The preference in
accommodation, &c., should of course, be given to the first
class. The Ordnance will supply the necessary tents and the
District Commissioner will look after the food on the scale
now in use.
"It should be clearly explained to Burghers in the field,
that, if they voluntarily surrender, they will be allowed to
live with their families in the camps until it is safe for
them to return to their homes."
In "The Times History of the War in South Africa" it is
remarked on this order: "The policy was inspired by two
motives. In the first place, it was supposed that the removal
of the families would induce fighting Boers to surrender, and
would thus shorten the War. In the second place, it was a
measure of humanity towards the unprotected occupants of
lonely farms. The decision was taken somewhat lightly. In its
primary object it failed absolutely. Far from providing an
inducement to surrender, it lifted from the fighting burghers
a load of embarrassment. To the British, military consequences
were disastrous. To the Boers the gain was twofold. On the
shoulders of their enemy lay the heavy tasks of removal and
maintenance, involving enormous expense and a grave hindrance
to military operations, while they themselves, relieved of all
responsibility for their women and children, were free to
devote their energies with a clear conscience to the single
aim of fighting.
{621}
While one of the British aims was signally defeated, the
other, that of humanity, was at first only partially attained.
The scheme for the concentration camps was lacking in
foresight. Adequate provision was not made for the hosts of
refugees requiring shelter. The regular medical and sanitary
staff were already fully occupied with the needs of the army,
and men were lacking for the organisation and supervision of
the camps. Sites chosen on purely military grounds often
proved wholly unsuitable. Too much reliance was placed on the
capacity for self-help to be shown by the Boers themselves,
and the Boers proved to be helpless, utterly averse to
cleanliness and ignorant of the simplest elements of medicine
and sanitation. The result was that for a certain period there
was a very high rate of mortality among these unfortunate
people."
The Times History of the War in South Africa,
Volume v., chapter 3
(Low, Marston & Co., London).
With better success Kitchener adopted and steadily perfected a
block-house system, by which lines of barrier were drawn
across the country in different directions, and protected
areas were formed. The system and its working are thus
described in the history quoted above:
"One of the first reforms undertaken by Kitchener when he
assumed command in South Africa was the strengthening of the
railways. At that time the defences of the lines were of the
simplest description, consisting almost wholly of open
trenches at stations, bridges and culverts, while the line
itself was patrolled by small parties of mounted men. In
laying out these trench defences, the principal object kept in
view was to render them inconspicuous and thus immune from
artillery fire. The system required enormous numbers of men
both for patrol work and for manning the long lines of
trenches. … It was clear that some form of permanent or
semi-permanent defence must be adopted, if security was to be
gained and the railway guards reduced. Early in January,
accordingly, the first blockhouses were constructed. …
"Planted at first only at stations, bridges, culverts,
important cuttings and curves—at the points, in fact, which
experience had proved to be most vulnerable—blockhouses came
to be established at regular intervals of about a mile and a
half down the whole extent of a line. This interval was
steadily lessened. Ultimately it became as small as 400 yards
on the Delagoa line and was reduced even to 200 yards on some
portions of the Cape railways. A continuous fencing of barbed
wire ran along the line; elaborate entanglements surrounded
each blockhouse, and the telephone linked up the whole system.
A somewhat later development was a deep trench bordering the
line of barbed wire and running to within 100 yards of each
blockhouse. …
"Until July the system was confined to the railways; but in
July the idea first took definite shape of throwing blockhouse
lines across country, and thus creating fenced areas of
manageable size within which the Boers could be dealt with
piece-meal. It is important to note that these lines almost
invariably followed roads, which thus became to all intents
and purposes as safe as railways. In other words, a great
number of additional lines of communication were opened up and
secured, and the striking power of the army proportionately
increased. …
"While a thousand yards, or thereabouts, was the usual
interval between cross-country blockhouses, the rule was
invariably followed that each must be in sight of its
neighbour on either side. The wire fence spanning this
interval always ran in the form of an obtuse angle, so that
fire could be directed along it from both ends without risk to
either blockhouse. In order to secure accurate fire in the
dark, rests were provided for the correct alignment of rifles.
Ordinary barbed wire was used at first, but the Boers became
such adepts at cutting it that a quarter-inch unannealed steel
wire, specially manufactured in England, had to be
substituted. In Cape Colony, an eight-strand cable,
manufactured in special 'rope walks' established at
Naauwpoort, was largely used. Not to be daunted, the Boers
took to uprooting the stays and levelling the fence bodily.
The stays, accordingly, had to be anchored securely to heavy
rocks sunk deep in the ground. As on the railways, alarms of
all sorts were devised to give the garrisons notice of an
attempt to tamper with the fence. A spring-gun would fire,
dangling biscuit tins would rattle, a weight would drop in the
blockhouse, and on any such signal the garrison would fire
down the line of the fence. But, when all precautions were
taken, it was impossible, on dark nights, to prevent
determined bodies of Boers from passing the barrier. The
passage could be made dangerous and difficult; that was all. …
Exaggerated hopes were built on the efficacy of the lines as
barriers to determined men. … The Boers, for a long time to
come, viewed with disdain the eruption of tiny forts. It was
only by degrees that they awoke to the realization that they
were taken like flies in a spider’s web. … Communication
between commanders became more and more difficult;
concentrations on a large scale impossible.
"The ramifications of the blockhouse system and the slow
formation of protected areas were not the only signs that the
day of conquest was approaching. Within these areas, under the
able and energetic administrations of Lord Milner, who
returned to South Africa in August, and, in the Orange River
Colony, of the Deputy Administrator, Sir H. Goold-Adams,
marked progress was beginning to be made in the establishment
of civil industry and in administrative reconstruction. …
"With regard to the Boer non-combatant population, an
important modification of policy was initiated in December.
Orders were issued to all columns that no more families, save
those in actual danger of starvation and those belonging to a
privileged class, … were to be brought into the concentration
camps. Since most of the accessible farms had already been
emptied, the order applied mainly to the women and children
who had preferred, in defiance of hardship, to accompany the
commandos and who lived in nomadic laagers. The Boers, however
much they had railed in the past against the inhumanity of the
camps, were soon to realise and admit the essential humanity
of the concentration system. The embarrassment and anxiety
caused by the helpless non-combatants in their midst was to
grow day by day.
{622}
Finally, at the Vereeniging Conference, the truth received
frank and undisguised expression. ‘To-day,’ said Botha, ‘we
are only too glad to know that our women and children are
under British protection.’ The wretchedness of those who
remained on the veld became, indeed, a powerful argument for
submission."
The Times History of the War in South Africa,
chapters 10, 11, 14
(London, Low, Marston & Co.).
It was not until March, 1902, that the men of authority on
both sides of the war began to give tokens of a mutual
disposition to discuss terms of peace. In the previous
January, the government of the Netherlands had offered to act
as intermediary between Great Britain and the Boers, and the
proffer had been declined, the British government repeating
its determination to accept no foreign intervention. At the
same time it was suggested that, inasmuch as Mr. Steyn and Mr.
Schalk Burger, the chiefs of the Orange Free State and of the
Transvaal burghers, respectively, were understood to be
invested with full powers of government, including the power
of negotiation, those gentlemen could open, if they wished,
direct communication with Lord Kitchener, who had already been
instructed to forward to his government any offers that he
might receive. On the 7th of March this correspondence was
sent by Lord Kitchener, without comment, to the Transvaal
government, then established at Stroomwater. The suggestion in
it was rightly taken as an invitation, and acting President
Schalk Burger at once asked for a safe-conduct for himself and
the other members of his government into the British lines,
with intimations of a wish for opportunity to meet the members
of the Free State government, in order that they might concert
proposals for peace. His wishes were readily complied with. On
the 22d he entered the British lines, and all possible aid was
given him in getting together the men whom he wished to
consult. Some were brought away from active fighting, which
went on without them, no pause on the military side being
permitted for a single day, while the parleying of a month
went on.
The Transvaal and Free State governments met on the 9th of
April, at Klerksdorp, under British safe-conduct, and, after
debate among themselves on that day and the next, sent a
telegram to Lord Kitchener, requesting him to meet them and
receive from them a proposal of peace. He replied promptly,
inviting them to his headquarters at Pretoria, and there they
were received on April 12th. Their proposal was on the basis
of political independence for the two Boer states, under "an
enduring treaty of friendship and peace" with the British
government, as well as a customs, postal and railway union
with the adjoining British colonies, and with concessions of
the franchise to Uitlanders in the Transvaal. Kitchener could
give no consideration to a proposal of this nature; but
consented, after much discussion to cable it to London. At, a
second meeting on the 14th (when Lord Kitchener was joined by
Lord Milner, the British High Commissioner in South Africa) he
had the answer of the British government to produce. It
declared with emphasis that the government could not
"entertain any proposals based on the continued independence
of the former republics, which have been formally annexed to
the British Crown." To this the Boer officials replied that
they had no power to negotiate on any other basis than that of
independence, and they asked for an armistice, to enable them
to consult their people. This was refused, but, after some
parleying, it was arranged that they should have free use of
the railway and telegraph, and that military operations should
be so conducted as to allow opportunities for meetings in all
parts of the country, at which thirty burghers from each re-
public should be elected, with authority to act for the
people. These representatives were to meet on the 15th of May,
at Vereeniging, to determine the answer they would give.
Between the 11th and the 15th of May immunity was promised to
all commandos whose leaders should be chosen as
representatives, and this practically operated as an armistice
during those days.
"History records no precedent," says The Times History of the
War, "for the state of affairs which existed in South Africa
between April 18 and May 15, 1902. War went on, but, to borrow
a metaphor from football, the ball of war was continually
rolling into ‘touch.’ Kitchener loyally carried out his
undertaking to the Boer leaders. Commandos were allowed to
assemble and confer unmolested; officers and messengers
scoured the country by road and railway with free passes,
passing through British outpost lines, receiving the unstinted
hospitality of their foes, and occasionally, to the chagrin of
a junior British officer, undergoing accidental capture,
followed by immediate release on the production of the magic
pass. Steyn, indeed, was too ill to take part in all this
activity and had retired to a farm near Wolmaransstad. But De
Wet, with amazing energy, travelled over the whole of the Free
State, inspiring the burghers with his leader’s fiery spirit.
At eight successive meetings he personally addressed
practically the whole of the commandos and secured unanimous
resolutions against any surrender of independence. The
Transvaal leaders were scarcely less active, though the
purport of their activity was by no means the same." These
chiefs of the Transvaal, Louis Botha and others, were disposed
to end the struggle for independence; those of the Free State,
inspired by their unconquerable President, were not.
On the 15th of May the officials of the two Boer governments
met the sixty delegates from the burghers at Vereeniging, and
the question between surrender and a hopeless continuation of
war was threshed out. The Free State delegates and a few of
the Transvaalers had been bound by pledges to vote against any
surrender of independence; but in the end they were persuaded
by their own legal advisers that such a restriction on the
free action of a delegate was contrary to the principles of
law; and gradually the question of independence gave place to
other matters of consideration in the discussion of terms. On
the 19th a sub-committee was appointed to consider those
details, and several days of bargaining with Kitchener and
Milner, at Pretoria, ensued. There was much use of the cable
meantime, to secure assent in London to what might be done.
The result was a draft treaty which Lord Milner assured the
Boer Commissioners was absolutely final, and must be accepted
or rejected without any change, on or before the 31st of May.
{623}
They took it to the convention at Vereeniging on the 29th, and
there, in two days of stormy debate, the no-surrender party,
led by Steyn and De Wet, made their last stand. When the
decisive vote was taken, their ranks were reduced to six,
against fifty-four. The Boer commissioners returned at once to
Pretoria, with the accepted draft-treaty, and it was signed on
the night of the 31st, a little less than an hour before the
expiration of the fixed term of grace. The following is the
text of this treaty, which ended one of the worst of modern
wars:
"General Lord Kitchener of Khartoum, Commander-in-Chief, and
His Excellency Lord Milner, High Commissioner, on behalf of
the British Government;
"Messrs. S. W. Burger, F. W. Reitz, Louis Botha, J. H. De la
Rey, L. J. Meyer, and J. Krogh on behalf of the Government of
the South African Republic and its burghers;
"Messrs. M. T. Steyn, W. J. C. Brebner, C. R. de Wet, J. B. M.
Hertzog, and C. H. Olivier, on behalf of the Government of the
Orange Free State and its burghers, being anxious to put an
end to the existing hostilities, agree on the following
points:
"Firstly, the burgher forces now in the Veldt shall at once
lay down their arms, and surrender all the guns, small arms,
and war stores in their actual possession, or of which they
shall have cognizance, and shall abstain from any further
opposition to the authority of his Majesty King Edward VII.,
whom they shall acknowledge as their lawful sovereign.
"The manner and details of this surrender shall be arranged by
Lord Kitchener, Commandant-General Botha, Assistant
Commandant-General J. H. De la Rey, and Commander-in-Chief de
Wet.
"Secondly, burghers in the Veldt beyond the frontiers of the
Transvaal and of the Orange River Colony, and all prisoners of
war who are out of South Africa, who are burghers, shall, on
their declaration that they accept the status of subjects of
His Majesty King Edward VII., be brought back to their homes,
as soon as transport and means of existence can be assured.
"Thirdly, the burghers who thus surrender, or who thus return,
shall lose neither their personal freedom nor their property.
"Fourthly, no judicial proceedings, civil or criminal, shall
be taken against any of the burghers who thus return for any
action in connexion with the carrying on of the war. The
benefit of this clause shall, however, not extend to certain
deeds antagonistic to the usages of warfare, which have been
communicated by the Commander-in-Chief to the Boer generals,
and which shall be heard before a court-martial immediately
after the cessation of hostilities.
"Fifthly, the Dutch language shall be taught in the public
schools of the Transvaal and of the Orange River Colony when
the parents of the children demand it; and shall be admitted
in the Courts of justice, whenever this is required for the
better and more effective administration of justice.
"Sixthly, the possession of rifles shall, on taking out a
licence in accordance with the law, be permitted in the
Transvaal and the Orange River Colony to persons who require
them for their protection.
"Seventhly, military administration in the Transvaal and in
the Orange River Colony shall, as soon as it is possible, be
followed by civil government; and, as soon as circumstances
permit it, a representative system lending towards autonomy
shall be introduced.
"Eighthly, the question of granting a franchise to the natives
shall not be decided until a representative constitution has
been granted.
"Ninthly, no special tax shall be laid on landed property in
the Transvaal and Orange River Colony to meet the expenses of
the war.
"Tenthly, as soon as circumstances permit there shall be
appointed in each district in the Transvaal and the Orange
River Colony a Commission, in which the inhabitants of that
district shall be represented, under the chairmanship of a
magistrate or other official, with a view to assist in the
bringing back of the people to their farms, and in procuring
for those who, on account of losses in the war, are unable to
provide for themselves food, shelter, and such quantities of
seed, cattle, implements, etc., as are necessary for the
resuming of their previous callings.
"His Majesty’s Government shall place at the disposal of these
Commissions the sum of £3,000,000 for the above-mentioned
purposes, and shall allow that all notes issued in conformity
with Law No. 1, 1900, of the Government of the South African
Republic, and all receipts given by the officers in the Veldt
of the late Republics, or by their order, may be presented to
a judicial Commission by the Government, and in case such
notes and receipts are found by this Commission to have been
duly issued for consideration in value, then they shall be
accepted by the said Commission as proof of war losses
suffered by the persons to whom they had originally been
given. In addition to the above-named free gift of £3,000,000,
His Majesty’s Government will be prepared to grant advances,
in the shape of loans, for the same ends, free of interest for
two years, and afterwards repayable over a period of years
with three per cent. interest. No foreigner or rebel shall be
entitled to benefit by this clause."
The following military statistics of the War, as conducted on
the British side, were published in a Parliamentary paper soon
after its close:
The garrison in South Africa on August 1st, 1899, consisted of
318 officers and 9,622 men; reinforcements sent between then
and the outbreak of hostilities, October 11th, 1899, totaled
12,546. Thereafter the troops sent up to May 31st, 1902,
reached the great total of 386,081, besides 52,414 men raised
in South Africa. The final casualty figures are: Killed,
5,774; wounded, 23,029; died of wounds or disease, 16,168.
A return made to Parliament in April, 1902, of the estimated
amount of war charges in South Africa that had been and would
be incurred up to the 31st of March, 1903, gave the following
figures:
For the first year of the war (1899-1900), £23,217,000; for
the second year, £65,120,000; for the third year, £71,037,000;
for the year in which it ended, £63,600,000. Total,
£222,974,000.
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1902.
Cape Colony and Natal at the Colonial Conference, London.
See (in this Volume)
BRITISH EMPIRE.
{624}
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1902-1903.
Repatriation and Resettlement of the Boers in
the Transvaal and Orange River Colony.
Work of the first Eight Months of Restored Peace.
The following passages from a report dated March 14, 1903,
made by Governor Viscount Milner to Mr. Chamberlain, British
Secretary for the Colonies, will give some intimation of the
task of reconstruction and restoration which the war had
imposed on the victors, and the vigor with which it was
performed:
"The Terms of Surrender were signed at Pretoria on the 31st
May, 1902, but the Civil Government could not really begin to
take over the administration of the new Colonies, and
especially the country districts, for nearly a month after
that date. At Lord Kitchener’s request no attempt was made to
enter into possession of those districts until after the
surrender of the Commandos, and though that surrender was
accomplished with extraordinary celerity and smoothness,
something like three weeks elapsed before any Civil officer
could even set out for the house or tent, generally a tent,
allotted to him in the wilderness which we were about to take
over, devoid, as it was, of crops, of stock, of population,
and, to a large extent, of habitable dwellings. The period
over which this review extends is, therefore, one of about
eight months—from the end of June, when the work of
restoration commenced, till the end of February. …
"To begin with the Prisoners of War. The Vereeniging Terms
entitled something over 33,000 people to be restored to
liberty, and if they happened to be burghers imprisoned out
side South Africa, to be brought back to their homes as soon
as transports could be provided and their means of subsistence
assured. Of this large number upwards of 24,000 were in
prisoners’ camps in St. Helena, Bermuda, India and Ceylon;
upwards of 1,000 were in a prisoners’ camp, at Simons Town,
and about 1,200 were prisoners elsewhere in South Africa. Of
the rest the great majority had been allowed to live in
Concentration Camps, while the balance were on parole in
different parts of South Africa and a few in Europe. The
principal difficulty in connection with the prisoners was, of
course, the bringing back and distribution of the 24,000 odd,
who were at prisoners’ camps oversea. …
"The prisoners of war, on their return to South Africa, were,
in the first place, with few exceptions, sent to the
Concentration Camps of their respective districts, there to
rejoin their families, if they had them, and to return
together with them to their homes. They thus, in the majority
of cases, helped to swell the enormous number of people for
whom the Repatriation Departments of the two colonies had to
provide the means of transport to their homes, and, as a
general rule, the means of subsistence for months after such
return, as well as the seeds, instruments and animals
necessary to enable them to raise a crop. … In the eight and a
half months that we have been at work, we have restored about
200,000 of the old Burgher population in the two Colonies to
their homes, including all the inhabitants in the
Concentration Camps in the Transvaal, the Orange River Colony,
the Cape Colony and Natal, and the Prisoners of War. …
"By hook or by crook we had succeeded by the end of 1902, in
enabling the people to sow a fairly large mealie crop, besides
a considerable amount of forage, potatoes and other
vegetables. The change in the attitude of the farming
population, about that time, was very noticeable. The extreme
depression which characterised them two or three months
earlier had almost completely passed away, and they were
looking forward to the future with much more hopefulness. I
may say that almost the whole time, even when the outlook was
blackest, their attitude towards the Government was not
otherwise than a friendly one. They showed, with few
exceptions, great patience under hardships, and much energy
and resourcefulness in making the best of the small means at
their disposal."
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1902-1904.
Death of Cecil Rhodes.
Survival of his Influence and his Policy.
Dr. Jameson, as his representative, made Premier
of Cape Colony.
On the 26th of March, 1902, two months before the end of the
British-Boer war, Cecil J. Rhodes died at Cape Town, and his
death removed the most powerful of the personal influences
that would have been reckoned on for determining the results
of the war. He had been the master-spirit in South Africa for
nearly thirty years. Indications of the part he had taken in
the expansion of the British dominion in that part of the
world, and in the conflict of British with Dutch ambitions
which produced the war, will be found in Volume VI. of this
work (see, especially, pages 460-466, 470-471, and 475-477, in
that Volume).
Had he lived and been in health there can be no doubt that he
would have been a leading actor in the political
reconstruction of British South Africa since the war. He had
been the Premier of Cape Colony from 1890 to the end of 1895;
then his career was clouded by the "Jameson raid" into the
Transvaal, and he was forced to resign. But the cloud would
have cleared, as it has cleared from Jameson. Indeed, the new
career of Dr. Jameson, since 1904, when a general election in
Cape Colony brought the party of the Progressives into power,
and put the former chief lieutenant of Cecil Rhodes in the
place of Sir J. Gordon Sprigg as Prime Minister of the
colonial Government, is indicative of the new career that
would have opened to Rhodes. It is the Rhodes policy and the
Rhodes influence that has prevailed, as was said by Mr. Edward
Dicey in an article written at the time:
"When Rhodes’ life came to a sudden and melancholy end,
Jameson felt the best way he could show his respect for his
dead friend was to carry on the work of his lifetime. Amongst
the Progressives there were several public men who, in normal
circumstances, might have been selected as leaders of the
party, but there was a well-grounded conviction that the man
who could best carry on Rhodes’ policy, with the least breach
of continuity, was Jameson. Even the few British colonists who
had not altogether condoned the Raid, felt that there was no
one so qualified to lead the Progressive Party as the author
of the Raid. The result was that Jameson was appointed, by
acclamation, the political successor of Rhodes. It was under
the new leader that the battle of the general election in the
Cape Colony has been fought and won.
{625}
The Progressive majority in the Cape Parliament is small; but,
in spite of all disintegrating influences, it may be trusted
to hold together till a Redistribution Bill has been passed.
When the influence of the Bond was supreme in the Cape
Parliament, the electoral divisions were manipulated in such a
manner as to give thinly populated, rural constituencies equal
representation with that enjoyed by the comparatively densely
populated urban constituencies. This arose from the fact that
in the country the Dutch settlers outnumbered the British,
while in the town the British composed the vast majority of
the electorate. The simplest way to rectify this abuse was to
remodel the existing electoral system, by making population
the basis of representation. This reform, however, was open to
the objection that it practically disfranchised a large number
of rural constituencies in which the Boers were in a majority.
On Jameson being appointed Prime Minister, after Sir Gordon
Sprigg’s compulsory retirement, his first step was to
introduce a new Redistribution Bill based on a less invidious
principle than its predecessor."
Edward Dicey,
The New Cape Premier
(Fortnightly Review, April, 1904).
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1903-1904.
The Labor Question.
Investigation and opposing Reports by a Commission.
Adoption of Ordinance to admit Unskilled Non-European Laborers.
Beginning of Importation of Chinese Coolies.
The Political Side of the Question.
Debate in the British Parliament.
Early in 1903 Lord Milner appointed a Commission to
investigate and report on the labor question in South Africa,
which is a question between the mining people, who maintain
that the needful supply of labor for profitable mine-working
is not procurable, at rates which mine-owners can afford, from
any other than an Asiatic source, and their opponents who deny
the need of bringing either Chinese or East Indian coolies
into the mining fields. In November the Labor Commission
produced a majority and a minority report, the former agreeing
substantially with the mine-owners, the latter in contention
with them. The signatures to the majority report were ten in
number, the latter were but two. In the discussion of the
reports which took place in the Legislative Council of the
Transvaal late in the year, one speaker made the statement
that he was authorized by General Louis Botha to say that he
and all the Dutch he represented were opposed to the
introduction of Asiatics. A resolution favoring the
introduction of Chinese was adopted in the Council by a vote
of 22 to 4.
Ultimately, against the protests of a great majority of the
Boer population, an ordinance to regulate the introduction
into the Transvaal of unskilled non-European laborers was
adopted by the Legislative Council. It applied to males of
other races than those indigenous to Africa south of 12
degrees north of the Equator. The ordinance was to be
administered by an official superintendent; the laborers were
to be brought in by licensed persons only; they were to be
employed only in the Witwatersrand district, and only in
unskilled labor connected with the production of minerals, and
they were to be sent back to the country of their origin, at
the expense of their importer, at once on the termination of
their contract, which should not be for a longer term than
three years, renewable for two more. Provisions as to their
treatment, their passport identification, their restricted
residence, etc., were very precise and minute. The importation
of Chinese coolies under the provisions of this ordinance began
in June, 1904. At the end of the year over 20,000 had been
brought in.
That the question has its political as well as its industrial
side, and is one which concerns democracy no less than labor,
is shown in the following: "The political and industrial
position of the Rand, and, in some degree of the Transvaal as
a whole, is almost unique. The only parallel that comes to
mind is that of the town and district of Kimberly. A
considerable European community is dependent—on the Rand
entirely, throughout the Transvaal very largely—on a single
industry for the maintenance of its prosperity. This
dependence necessarily places great power in the hands of the
small group of men who are the owners, or represent the
owners, of the capital by which the industry has been created
and is now worked. Their influence is supreme. No law which
threatened their interests could be placed on the Statute
Book. Men who offer any effective opposition to their
wishes—like Mr. Wybergh, the Commissioner of Mines, Mr.
Creswell, the manager of the Village Main Reef Mine, Mr.
Moneypenny, the editor of the chief Johannesburg
newspaper—find it impossible to retain their positions. Two
dangers, and two only, threaten the permanency of this
supremacy—the Trade Union and the ballot, the combination of
the men employed and the possibility of an unsympathetic
majority in the legislature when a system of self government
is restored. Both these dangers would be increased in degree,
and brought nearer in time, by a large and rapid growth of the
white population.
"‘If 200,000 native workers were to be replaced by 100,000
whites,’ said Mr. Rudd, one of the directors of the
Consolidated Goldfields Company, ‘they would simply hold the
Government of the country in the hollow of their hand, and,
without any disparagement to the British labourer, I prefer to
see the more intellectual section of the community at the
helm!’ ‘ With reference to your trial of white labour for
surface work on the mines,’ wrote Mr. Tarbutt, another
director of the same important company and the chairman of the
Village Main Reef Company, in an often-quoted letter to Mr.
Creswell, 'I have consulted the Consolidated Goldfields
people, and one of the members of the board of the Village
Main Reef has consulted Messrs. Wernher, Beit and Co., and the
feeling seems to be one of fear that if a large number of
white men are employed on the Rand in the position of
labourers, the same troubles will arise as are now prevalent
in the Australian Colonies, i. e., that the combination of the
labouring classes will become so strong as to be able to more
or less dictate, not only on questions of wages, but also on
political questions, by the power of the votes when a
Representative Government is established.’
{626}
There have been other declarations of the same tenour; and,
indeed, no one who is acquainted with the views that prevail
among the circles of South African finance would seek to deny
that this dread of a second Australian democracy influencing
the political and economic future of the Rand is one of the
chief motives that direct the policy of the more far-sighted
men among those groups. …
"White labour, coupled with improved mechanical appliances,
stands established as the feasible remedy for the admitted
shortage in the number of Kaffir workers. To reject it in
favour of the introduction of Chinese is a policy which has
natural attractions for the owners of the mines. It is a
policy which should not have won the support of the
representatives of the British people."
Herbert Samuel,
The Chinese Labour Question
(Contemporary Review, April, 1904).
The bringing of Asiatic laborers into the mines was resisted
as strenuously in Cape Colony as by the Boer burghers and the
non-mining interests in general of the Transvaal. The leading
colony addressed a petition on the subject personally to King
Edward, saying: "Such an immigration, hampered and restricted
as it is proposed to be by stringent regulations, would, even
if it were possible to enforce such regulations, which is
doubtful, introduce a servile element, alien to the country,

destitute of rights, or interests, either in the present or
future of South Africa, and worked for the benefit of masters,
in many cases non-resident, thus constituting what would
practically be a slave state, in close contact with the other
free communities of South Africa. Your petitioners feel that
the introduction of such a class of labour would place an
obstacle in the way of the natural growth alike of European
and native elements in the population. …
"Such an importation would decide whether South Africa is in
future to constitute one of those great free communities under
the British flag, the growth of which shed so much lustre on
the reign of your august predecessor, or whether it is to be
ranked as a mere plantation worked in the interest and for the
benefit of foreign holders. Your petitioners therefore most
earnestly pray that your Majesty may be pleased to withhold
your sanction from any measure having for its object the
importation of Asiatics into South Africa, and by so doing
save them and those who may come after them from consequences
that will be fatal to their peace and prosperity."
Parliamentary Papers, 1904
(Cd. 1895), page 133.
Mr. Chamberlain, Secretary of State for the Colonies, returned
to England in March, 1903, from a visit to South Africa, and
made an extended statement in Parliament soon afterwards of
his observations and his conclusions from what he had seen. On
the labor question, then the subject of greatest agitation in
South Africa, he stoutly supported the mine-owners in their
contention that native labor, and supplies from beyond the
Zambesi, to supplement the Kaffir supply, is a necessity of
the mining industry; that white labor is impossibly expensive,
and that the feeling against the introduction of Asiatic labor
seemed invincibly strong. There was not, he maintained, the
slightest foundation for the charge that the mine-owners
wanted forced labor or slavery in any shape or form, but that
they must have cheap labor if the mines were to be worked.
A few days later Lord Lansdowne, the Foreign Secretary,
received a deputation from various missionary societies to
protest against a proposed exportation of native labor from
Central to South Africa. In reply to them he said that the
Government had no more in view at present than an experiment
with 1000 laborers, who would be taken from British Central
Africa to the Rand District of the Transvaal and employed
there under regulations very carefully framed. If
objectionable results were found the experiment would be
carried no farther. This was followed by warm debate on the
subject in the House of Commons, where Sir William Harcourt
and others denounced the greed of the mining companies,
insisting that the mines could not pay fair wages simply
because the rich mines were over-capitalized and the low-grade
mines had been developed only for sale. Mr. Chamberlain again
championed the mine-owners, and defended the policy of the
Government, which sought, he said, to promote the general
prosperity of the country by getting as many of the mines as
possible into working order. The debate had no practical
result.
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1903-1908.
Hostility to British Indian Immigration.
See (in this Volume)
RACE PROBLEMS: A. D. 1903-1908.
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1904.
Census of all British South Africa.
Whites and Natives.
A general census taken in 1904 showed a total white population
in all British South Africa--south of Zambesi—of 1,135,655,
and a colored population of 5,169,338. The distribution of
this in the several colonies was as follows; Cape Colony,
580,380 white, 1,825,172 colored; the Transvaal and Swaziland,
300,225 white, 1,030,029 colored; Natal, 97,109 white,
1,011,645 colored; Rhodesia, 12,623, white, 593,141 colored;
Orange River Colony, 143,419 white, 241,626 colored;
Basutoland, 895 white, 347,953 colored; Bechuanaland, 1,004
white, 119,772 colored.
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1905.
Importation of Chinese Coolies Suspended
by orders from London.
The Liberal Ministry in Great Britain, under Sir Henry
Campbell-Bannerman, which succeeded the Conservative-Unionist
Ministry of Mr. Balfour on the 10th of December, 1905, had
been seated but twelve days when a despatch was cabled by Lord
Elgin, Secretary for the Colonies, to Lord Selborne, the High
Commissioner in South Africa, that "the experiment of the
introduction of Chinese laborers should not be extended
farther until they could learn the opinion of the colony
through an elected and really representative Legislature, and
they had accordingly decided that the recruiting, embarking
and importation of Chinese coolies should be arrested pending
a decision as to the grant of responsible government to the
Colony"—that is, the Transvaal.
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1905-1907.
Fulfillment by the British Government of the Promises
of the Treaty of the Vereeniging Treaty.
Representative Government restored to the Boer States.
The seventh stipulation in the Vereeniging Treaty of May 81,
1902, which ended the Boer-British War (see above, A. D.
1901-1902), contained the promise, on the part of the British
Government, that "military administration in the Transvaal and
in the Orange River Colony shall, as soon as possible, be
followed by civil government; and, as soon as circumstances
permit it, a representative system tending towards autonomy
shall be introduced."
{627}
On the 31st of March, 1905, the first step toward the
fulfillment of this pledge was taken, by the issue of letters
patent from the crown (without action of Parliament, inasmuch
as the Boer States, in the eye of the law, had been under the
suzerainty of the British sovereign, had been in revolt, had
been subjugated, and were directly subject to the crown, as
conquered territory), conferring a Constitution of Civil
Government on the Transvaal. It gave popular representation in
a legislature of a single chamber, styled the Legislative
Assembly. Not exceeding thirty-five of the members of this
body were to be elected, and from six to nine others were to
be appointed by the High Commissioner of South Africa,—in
which office Lord Milner had been succeeded of late by Lord
Selborne. Every burgher of the former Transvaal Republic not
disqualified by conviction for treason since May 31, 1902, was
to be entitled to vote in the election of representatives; and
so were all white males of British birth occupying premises at
an annual rental of not less than $50, or possessed of capital
to the value of $500. The debates in the Assembly were to be
in English—not in English or Dutch, like the English or French
of the Parliament of Canada; but there is a provision that the
Speaker may permit a member to use the Dutch language. No bill
passed by the Legislative Assembly which should subject the
natives to disabilities or restrictions could become law until
it had received the sanction of the Colonial Office in London.
This organization of a partially representative colonial
government extended only to the Transvaal. The Orange River
Colony remained still under the Crown Colony system, which had
been the status hitherto of both the Boer states since the
close of the war.
This limited realization of the promise of representative
government to the Boers was undoubtedly all that could be
expected from the Conservative Ministry in England, which went
out of power soon after it had conferred the Transvaal
Constitution. Its successors, of the British Liberal party,
soon broadened the basis of self-government in the Transvaal,
by a new constitutional instrument, which was outlined to
Parliament on the 1st of August, and issued December 6th,
1906. This made the legislature a bicameral body, having, for
the time being, an upper Council of 15 appointed members,
which, however, it was said to be the intention of the
Government to extinguish at no distant day. The elective
Assembly was to be composed of sixty-nine members, elected by
secret ballot for terms of five years. Every adult male of
twenty-one years of age who had been a resident for six
months, except members of the British garrison, was entitled
to vote. The general lines of the old Boer magisterial
districts were followed, and, on the basis of the census
figures of 1904 the Rand would have 32 members, Pretoria 6,
Krugersdorp 1, and the rest of the country 30. The
constitution prohibited Chinese contract labor, and no more
coolies could be imported into the country after November 15.
Either the English or the Dutch language could be used for
public business, and naturalization was made easy, but the
Boers’ request for woman suffrage was denied.
A Constitution framed on similar lines was given to the Orange
River Colony within the same year.
In the first elections for the Transvaal Assembly there were,
besides Socialists and labor organizations, three parties
engaged in a somewhat embittered contest. "The Progressives
are the party of the great mining houses on the Rand; the
Nationalist party is composed of British electors opposed to
the enormous political influence which the mining houses have
hitherto exercised; while the Boers at Johannesburg and
Pretoria and in the rural constituencies are organized in Het
Volk. There was a coalition between the Nationalists and Het
Volk. These two parties united against the Progressives, and
adopted as the chief plank in their platform a declaration
that the one question on which the election must turn was,
‘Who shall control the Transvaal—the people or the mining
houses?’ The Progressives on their part insisted that the
question was, ‘Shall the Transvaal be governed by the people
of the Transvaal, or from Downing Street?’ They were aggrieved
by the action of the British Government in making legislation
concerning non-European labor subject to review in London, and
in the campaign they made no attempt to conceal their
hostility to the Campbell-Bannerman Government. In this way
the question of Chinese labor was forced to the front. The
Nationalists and Het Volk coalition was successful," and
General Lotus Botha, who has been the leading spirit and
guiding mind among the Boers since the war ended, became the
Prime Minister of the Transvaal Government then organized.
It has been fortunate for the Transvaal, and no less for South
Africa at large, that so large-minded and strong a leader of
the subjugated race was found for the trying period in which
victors and vanquished were to have peace and friendship
established between them.
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1906-1907.
Revolt of the Zulus in Natal.
Their Grievances.
An extensive and determined revolt of the Zulus living within
the Colony of Natal broke out late in January, 1906, as the
consequence of an attempt to collect a poll-tax levied on them
by the colonial Parliament. A police sergeant and two or three
native policemen were killed in the first melée, and from that
time until near the end of the following summer there was war.
That it was prosecuted with fierceness, if not actual
ferocity, by the whites of the Colony, is made manifest by the
fact that about 3500 Zulus are said to have been slain and
2000 taken prisoners. The principal Zulu leader, a chief named
Bambaata, was killed in a battle fought in June, and the
revolt declined from that time. Sigananda, another chief, was
condemned to death, and twelve prisoners, convicted by
court-martial of complicity in the original murder of police
officers, were executed; while thirty-eight others were
sentenced to imprisonment for two years.
A serious question between the colony and the
Imperial-Government arose in connection with these military
trials. The sentences to death, confirmed by the governor and
the Natal ministry, were about to be carried out, when Mr.
Winston Churchill, with the approval of Lord Elgin, Colonial
Secretary, cabled to the Natal premier ordering the suspension
of the execution pending an investigation by the Liberal
government, on the contention that the natives should have
been tried in a civil court.
{628}
Premier Smyth refused to obey, but the governor postponed the
executions, whereupon the Natal ministry resigned. Much
indignation was evident in England, as well as in the colony,
against what was regarded as an unwarrantable interference in
colonial affairs by the Imperial government. The matter was
concluded by Lord Elgin cabling to the governor of Natal that
the home government had no intention of interfering in
colonial matters, and that, upon the receipt of full
information, it recognized the right and competency of the
Natal ministry to decide the question at issue.
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1907 (April-May).
Imperial Conference at London.
See (in this Volume)
BRITISH EMPIRE: A. D. 1907.
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1908-1909.
Formation of the Legislative Union of South Africa.
The Framing of the Constitution.
Compromise on the Race Question of Franchise.
British Imperial Assent.
The Royal Proclamation of Union.
Very quickly after the placing of the Boer colonies on a
footing of political equality with their English neighbors a
fresh desire for South African Union, in which they, who had
fought to the death for its prevention only six years before,
now shared, began to be earnestly voiced. Its genesis was
explained clearly by a correspondent of the London
Times of May 24, 1909, who wrote "Economic causes of a
special character assisted the process. A great wave of
commercial depression, following hard upon the golden
expectations of the peace, passed over the whole country, but
made itself specially felt in the coast colonies. Here the
situation was painful in the extreme. It was a tale of
deficit, of retrenchment, of heroic Budgets. But far beyond
the rolling hills of the Karoo and the flat tableland of the
Orange River there was a wealthy State, a State with a
surplus. The Transvaal, possessing in Johannesburg the
principal centre of opulence and the chief market for produce,
was in a position to exert economic pressure upon colonies
whose principal source of revenue was derived from the profits
upon their railways and from the sale of their goods to the
great city on the high veld. The poorer colonies lived, so to
speak, upon the custom of the Transvaal, and were unable to
ignore, however much they might dislike, their position of
dependence. A rate war or a tariff war between the Transvaal
and the coast colonies could hardly end with a victory for
Cape Town or Durban, and so by a process of reasoning which
was not always pleasantly illustrated the coast colonies came
to accommodate themselves to the view that some form of
arrangement as to railways and Customs was desirable in their
own interests. Other causes contributed to illumine and
enlarge the horizon. A Zulu rebellion in Natal brought home
the common danger to the white community from native unrest or
from mistakes made by a weak colonial Government in its native
policy; the grant of responsible government to the two
conquered Colonies tended, not only to bring the English and
Dutch leaders into habitual communion, but to give to the
progressive section of the community a pressing interest in
the construction of a Government which should be strong enough
to resist the influences of the back veld."
The first action taken to transform the desire for Union into
a movement to that end was early in May, 1908, by a convention
of officials from the several colonies, assembled at Pretoria
to negotiate a new customs agreement and to arrange
intercolonial railway rates. The railway situation was nearly,
if not quite, the most serious one that brought pressure to
bear on some of the colonies, forcing them to seek a union in
which conflicts of interest would be overcome. It was a
situation which the High Commissioner, Lord Selborne,
described briefly, in a review of the many reasons for Union
which he addressed to the Governors and Lieutenant-Governors
of the several colonies, on the 7th of January, 1907:
"Of all the questions fruitful in divergence of opinion or of
interest to the Colonies of South Africa, there is none so
pregnant with danger," he wrote, "as the railway question. It
is not an exaggeration to say that a field more thickly sown
with the seed of future quarrel and strife than the
[State-owned] railway systems of South Africa does not exist.
As long as the Governments of the five British Colonies in
South Africa are wholly separated from, and independent of,
each other, their railway interests are not only distinct but
absolutely incompatible. There is a competitive struggle
between the ports of Cape Colony and of Natal to snatch from
each other every ton of goods which can be snatched. The
Orange River Colony desires as many tons of goods as possible
to be passed to the Transvaal through its territory, but it is
to the interest of Cape Colony that no such tons of goods
should pass into the Transvaal through the Orange River
Colony. … In the same way it is to the interest of Natal to
pass the goods consigned to the Transvaal from Durban into the
Transvaal at Volksrust, and not at Vereeniging through the
Orange River Colony. Thus the interests of Cape Colony, of
Natal, and of the Orange River Colony conflict the one with
the other. But when it comes to considering the railway
interests of the Transvaal, then it will be found that the
interest of the Transvaal is diametrically opposed to the
interests of Cape Colony, of Natal, and of the Orange River
Colony. The Transvaal loses revenue on every ton of goods
which enters the Transvaal by any other route than that from
Delagoa Bay [on the Portuguese coast]. … If the [Transvaal
Government] were as indifferent to the welfare of the three
sister Colonies as every State in Europe is to the welfare of
every other State, the Transvaal would see that all the trade
to the Transvaal came exclusively through Delagoa Bay. And
what then would be the position of the railways and the
finances of the three sister Colonies and of the ports of Cape
Colony and of Natal? This divergence, this conflict of railway
interests, this cloud of future strife, would vanish like a
foul mist before the sun of South African Federation, but no
other force can dissipate it."
That a railway and customs convention should start the action
which united the colonies of South Africa happened as
logically, therefore, as the happenings which derived the
American Federal Constitutional Convention of 1787 from a
River and Harbor Convention at Annapolis in 1786.
{629}
The South African Railway convention, before adjourning,
adopted a resolution recommending the appointment of delegates
from each colony to a convention for the framing of a
Constitution of United Government. Cape Colony led off in
approving the proposal, followed within a day or two by the
Transvaal and Orange River Colony, and a week later by Natal,
where the strongest opposition was developed. The
apportionment of delegates to the Convention was, for Cape
Colony 12, for the Transvaal 8, for Orange River and Natal 5
each. On the 12th of October these delegates assembled at
Durban, in Natal, under the presidency of Sir Henry de
Villiers and were in session there until the 5th of November,
when they adjourned to meet again at Cape Town, November 23.
Their labors were not concluded until the 3d of February,
1909, when all differences had been harmonized or compromised
and a draft Constitution approved, which every delegate signed
that day.
The Constitution was officially published on the 9th of
February, with a recommendation that the several Parliaments
should meet on March 30 to consider the draft, and that the
Convention should meet again in May on a day to be fixed by
the president of the Convention and the Premiers in
consultation. The final draft to be submitted to the
Parliaments in June. Then a committee of delegates appointed
by the Governments to proceed to England to facilitate the
passing of the Act.
This programme was successfully carried through. Cape Colony
and Natal contended for certain amendments to the draft
Constitution, but the Transvaal and Orange River colonies
approved the instrument and instructed their delegates to
support it as a whole. The General Convention was reassembled
at Bloemfontein, capital of the Orange River Colony, on the 3d
of May, when it discussed the proposed amendments and agreed
to eight of them. As thus amended the draft was adopted in
June by the parliaments of each of the four colonies, and sent
with that endorsement to the Imperial Government for the seal
of Sovereign Law. It was followed by an official mission,
composed of nineteen members, who represented, as a London
journal remarked, "almost the whole of the driving power in
South African politics," including, of course, such former
antagonists as General Botha and Dr. Jameson, now shoulder to
shoulder in powerful leadership of the movement for South
African Union.
One feature of the Constitution, as framed by the four
colonies and presented for the imperial approval, was
profoundly repugnant to English feeling. It was the product of
a compromise in the colonial convention, which ran a curious
parallel to that in the American constitutional convention of
1787, which gave the Southern States a representation in
Congress for their slaves. The question of elective franchises
and legislative representation for the colored natives had
troubled the South African union-making, just as the slavery
question had troubled the American. Cape Colony had conferred
the suffrage on its qualified colored citizens, and refused to
disfranchise them; the other colonies had disfranchised all
races but the white, and refused to allow a possible election
from the Cape Colony to the Union Parliament of any other than
members of European descent. The necessary compromise which
secured the Union left the Cape franchise undisturbed for the
present, but exposed to a future chance of being overruled;
and it barred all but European humanity from both houses of
the general Parliament.
This compromise was opposed with unyielding resolution by a
strong party in Cape Colony, led by two former premiers, Mr.
W. P. Schreiner and Sir J. Gordon Sprigg. Mr. Schreiner went
to England to appeal there to the Imperial Parliament against
the sanctioning of these provisions of the proposed
Constitution.
Mr. Schreiner found in Great Britain almost universal sympathy
with the feeling that he represented. In Parliament and out,
it was expressed by all parties; but there went with it a
prevailing opinion that the matter in question and the
attending circumstances were such that the Imperial Parliament
ought not to refuse assent to the action of the colonies. The
Prime Minister, Mr. Asquith, set forth the reasoning to this
conclusion very clearly and concisely, when, on the 19th of
August, he moved, in the House of Commons, the third reading
of the South Africa Bill. "I wish," he said, "in submitting
this motion to the House, to take the opportunity of putting
on record the fact that this Bill, consisting of over 150
clauses and a very complicated schedule, has, after the most
careful consideration by this House, been passed without
amendment. It would, however, be a totally false impression
were it suggested that as regards all provisions of this Bill
there is unanimity of opinion in the House. In particular as
regards some of the clauses which deal with the treatment of
natives—the access of native members to the Legislature—as
everybody who has followed the debate can see, there is not
only no difference of opinion, but absolute unanimity in the
way of regret that those particular provisions should have
been inserted in the Bill. I wish before the Bill leaves the
Imperial Parliament to make it perfectly clear that we here
have exercised, and I think wisely and legitimately exercised,
not only restraint of expression, but reserve of judgment in
regard to matters of this kind, simply because we desire that
this great experiment of establishing free self-government in
South Africa should start on the lines and in accordance with
the ideas of our fellow-citizens there which they have
deliberately and after long consideration come to.
"It is perfectly true that the Imperial Government cannot
divest itself of responsibility in this matter. We do not do
so. I think that if we have yielded, as we have, on points of
detail—on some points on which many of us feel very
strongly—to the considered and deliberate judgment of South
Africa, it has been because we thought it undesirable at this,
the last, stage in the completion of an almost unprecedentedly
difficult task to put forward anything that could be an
obstacle to the successful working of the Bill. Speaking for
myself and the Government, I venture to express not only the
hope, but the expectation, that in some of these matters that
have been discussed in this House, both on the second reading
and in the Committee stage, the views which have been so
strongly expressed, and practically without any dissent, will
be sympathetically considered by our fellow-citizens in South
Africa.
{630}
For my part I think, as I have said throughout, that it would
be far better that any relaxations of what almost all of us
regard as unnecessary restrictions upon the electoral rights
and eligibility of our native fellow-subjects there should be
carried out spontaneously and on the initiative of the South
African Parliament rather than that it should appear to be
forced on them by the Imperial Parliament here."
The Bill had already passed the House of Lords. It received
the royal approval on the 20th of September; and, on the 2d of
December, the Union of South Africa was proclaimed, to be of
effect on and after the 31st of May, 1910.
Soon after the passage of the Bill, announcement was made that
the Prince of Wales would visit South Africa to open the Union
Parliament, as he had done on the opening of the Parliament of
the Australian Commonwealth, in 1901.
In December it was made known that the Right Honourable
Herbert Gladstone would be the first Governor-General of
United South Africa.
For the text of the South African Constitution:
See (in this Volume)
CONSTITUTION OF THE UNION OF SOUTH AFRICA.
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1909.
The Native Protectorates.
Their Condition and Circumstances on the Eve of
the Inauguration of the Union of South Africa.
"It should not be forgotten that the protectorates are in
being to-day not because this particular arrangement of
protection was economically necessary or inevitable, nor even
because the general relationship of the native tribes of South
Africa made it the best that could be devised. The fact is
that they came into existence at different times and as
definite and probably expedient results of various fortuitous
crises in a chaotic native political history, which is at
least characteristic of South Africa. …
"To-day the protectorates are to a considerable degree
isolated native communities, so far at any rate as they are
concerned with any possible united feeling among the other
native tribes of South Africa. They are carefully guarded by
their responsible officials from interference and possible
harm from outside their own territories—that is from taking
any considerable interest or partnership in the real or
fancied troubles of neighbouring states. They are in a
sense—and more than a political sense—inside a ring fence.
"As regards the relationship between the native inhabitants
and the white settlers of the several protectorates, there are
no striking points of difference. In Basutoland no land is
held under white ownership. Such white residents as there are,
apart from officials and missionaries, are there as traders
and storekeepers. No land rights have been alienated to white
men. In the Bechuanaland Protectorate certain areas are held
by white men, but at the same time very large areas are
reserved entirely for native uses. In Swaziland the
relationship was, until a few months ago, upon a very
different basis—a position surely unique in the history of the
British colonial possessions. I have not space to describe
even briefly the extraordinary intricacy of the concessions
troubles or the heroic measures found necessary to effect a
settlement at once just to the concessionaire and the native.
It must be sufficient to say that today about half the area of
the country is held in white ownership, while rather more than
one-third is reserved for the exclusive use and benefit of the
natives. In Zululand certain areas of land are held by whites,
but the bulk of land is held in native possession. In each
case, however, it is not probable that any more land will be
alienated for purposes of sale or settlement by whites. It may
be accepted without doubt, I think, that the natives will
retain in perpetuity the land they hold at present. It will be
seen that the material interests of the natives, at any rate
as regards land, have been well guarded in the three
protectorates."
R. T. Coryndon,
The Position of the Native Protectorates
(The State, South Africa, September, 1909).
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1909.
Introduction of Proportional Representation.
See (in this Volume)
ELECTIVE FRANCHISE: SOUTH AFRICA.
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1909.
Native Labor Supplanting the Chinese.
See (in this Volume)
RACE PROBLEMS: SOUTH AFRICA. A. D. 1909.
----------SOUTH AFRICA: End--------
SOUTH AMERICAN REPUBLICS.
See (in this Volume)
American Republics.
SOUTH CAROLINA, and Interstate and West Indian Exposition.
See (in this Volume)
CHARLESTON: A. D. 1901.
SPAIN: A. D. 1870-1905.
Increase of Population compared with other European Countries.
See (in this Volume)
EUROPE: A. D. 1870-1905.
SPAIN: A. D. 1898-1906.
Gains from the Loss of Cuba and the Philippines.
Growth of Close Relations with the Spanish-American States.
"In many a war it has been the vanquished, not the victor, who
has carried off the finest spoils. Cuba and the Philippines
have been like a tumor in the side of Spain, dragging her down
in the race of civilization. They have drained her life-blood
and disturbed all her national activities. Only a serious
surgical operation could remove this exhausting excrescence;
and Spaniards themselves have been the first to recognize that
the operation, though painful, was in the highest degree
beneficial. Not even the most Quixotic of Spaniards dreams of
regaining these lost possessions. The war has been beneficial
in at least two different ways. It has had a healthy economic
influence, because, besides directing the manhood of Spain
into sober industrial channels, it has led to the removal of
artificial restrictions in the path of commercial activity. It
has been advantageous morally, because it has forced even the
most narrow and ignorant Spaniard to face the actual facts of
the modern world.
"The war has had a further result in leading to a movement,
for a closer sympathy between Spain and the Spanish states of
South America. The attitude of these states towards the mother
country has hitherto been somewhat unsympathetic; they have
regarded her as hopelessly opposed to all reform; the
hostility of Spain to the aspirations of Cuba and their own
earlier struggles for freedom amply accounted for such an
attitude. Now there is nothing to stand in the way of a
movement towards approximation which has already begun to
manifest itself, and may ultimately possess a serious
significance."
Havelock Ellis,
The Spirit of Present-Day Spain
(Atlantic Monthly, December, 1900).
{631}
"Thoughtful Spaniards will tell you that a change has come
over their country with the close of last century, and that
this change has been developing since the accession of their
young King. The starting-point of this evolution in national
life was the close of the short struggle with the United
States and the loss of what remained of their colonial empire.
That turning-point in the modern annals of Spain caused a deep
impression in the minds, not only of the governing classes of
the country, but of the hard-working middle classes and of the
masses themselves. … Almost immediately after conclusion of
the peace treaty, first a few and then more and more Spaniards
dared to speak out what at heart they felt, however sore and
resentful—namely, that foreign and colonial foes had rendered
Spain a service by ridding her of the colonies that hampered
her revival in Europe and in fields of action and enterprise
nearer home. This feeling spread widely among the masses and
middle classes when they perceived the first-fruits of the
concentration of the resources and energies of the nation in
Spain between 1899 and 1905. Much capital had flowed back from
the former colonies, especially from Cuba and the Philippines,
and promoted a rapid increase in enterprises of every
kind—banks, financial establishments, mines, industries,
syndicates, trusts, shipping-interests that, developing,
perhaps, too rapidly, were led to overproduction, and thus
gave rise to local crises at Bilbao, Barcelona, Santander,
Cadiz, Malaga. The rebound of the last year of the nineteenth
century and of the first few years of the twentieth was a
consequence also of the recovery of Spanish credit, effected
by a vigorous reorganization of Spanish finance and budgets by
the late Señor Villaverde, and by the gallant resolution with
which Governments and Parliaments, backed by the press and
public opinion, undertook to honor both the domestic
engagements of Spain herself, and the engagements that
resulted from saddling her treasury and budget with the debts
of Cuba and the Philippines, and with the cost of the last and
previous civil wars in the lost colonies. The restoration of
Spain’s credit abroad and at home, the successful levelling of
her budgets with a surplus revenue annually of several
millions of dollars since 1900, dispelled the fears of her
native capitalists; and they too, large and small, came
forward to invest in mines, banks, companies and railways."
World-Politics
(North American Review, November, 1905).
SPAIN: A. D. 1901-1904.
Four Years of Political Shuffling in the Government.
End of the Queen Dowager Regency.
Coronation of the Young King, Alfonso XIII.
Death of Sagasta.
A New Ministry, of Liberals, was formed in March, 1901, with
the veteran leader, Praxedes Mateo Sagasta, at its head; but
the military party was represented in the Government by
General Weyler, as Secretary for War. Measures undertaken by
the Government against unauthorized religious orders, to bring
them under surveillance, gave rise to anti-clerical
disturbances in some parts of the Kingdom, and were defiantly
opposed by the Church. Legislative elections held in June gave
the Government 280 seats, leaving but 70 to the Opposition;
but any party controlling the conduct of elections in Spain
was said to be able to secure whatever majority it desired.
The general condition of confusion and disturbance was
continued in 1902, and constant recourse was had, in one
region or another, to declarations of a "state of siege,"
involving martial law. General Weyler fought a battle of a
week’s duration in February at Barcelona, with rioting
consequent on a general strike.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: SPAIN.
On the 17th of May, his sixteenth birthday, Alfonso XIII.,
whose father, Alfonso XII., died before he was born, and who,
consequently, had been, nominally and constitutionally, King
of Spain since his birth, entered on the actual exercise of
royal functions. He was crowned that day, and the regency of
his mother came to an end. The coronation ceremonies were
splendid; the oath taken by the young King was very simple: "I
swear by God upon the Holy Bible to maintain the constitution
and laws. If so I do, may God regard me; if I do not, may he
call me to account." There is reason to believe that he took
this oath with a serious sense of the responsibilities he
assumed; but influences at Court, military, clerical, and
otherwise reactionary, were stronger than the influence of his
constitutional advisers for a few years, and the political
distractions of the time were increased. The attempted action
of Government against unauthorized religious orders ended in a
compromise which gave authorization to every order demanding
it.
On the 3d of December, 1902, Sagasta and his Cabinet resigned,
and a Conservative Ministry, under Señor Silvela, was formed.
On the 5th of January following Sagasta died. The liberalism
he represented had no substantial unity left, nor were the
opposing groups in a condition to give more consistency or
strength to the Government. A new Ministry under Senor
Villaverde succeeded that of Silvela in May, and was succeeded
in turn by another in December, with Señor Maura at its head.
Premier Maura, formerly of Sagasta’s party, but latterly more
Conservative, held the reins for a full year, escaping two
attempted assassinations in 1904, and giving place to General
Azcarraga on the 14th of December in that year. The General
was less fortunate, for he enjoyed the honors of the prime
ministry but six weeks.
SPAIN: A. D. 1903.
Agreement for Settlement of Claims against Venezuela.
See (in this Volume)
VENEZUELA: A. D. 1902-1904.
SPAIN: A. D. 1904 (April).
Declarations of England and France touching Spanish
interests in Morocco.
See (in this Volume)
EUROPE: A. D. 1904 (APRIL).
SPAIN: A. D. 1905-1906.
Unsatisfactory State of the Kingdom.
Rapid Succession of Changes in the Government.
Disorders in Catalonia.
The King’s Marriage.
Attempted Assassination of the King.
Proposed Anti-Clerical Law, which came to naught.
In the character of its political parties, in the condition of
its finances and in the general circumstances of the country,
Spain appeared to be in an increasingly unsatisfactory state.
Four changes of Ministry occurred within the year 1905, and no
Government was found able to project any policy that promised
permanency and definiteness of line.
{632}
Don Ramon Villaverde succeeded General Azcarraga as Premier in
January, and was succeeded in the following June by Don E.
Montero Rios, who had Don Jose Echegaray, the eminent poet,
dramatist, novelist, and banker, for his Minister of Finance.
In turn, Señor Montero Rios, after a reconstruction of his
Cabinet in October with the help of the King, gave way at the
end of November to Señor Moret. The Azcarraga and Villaverde
Ministries had been Conservative; those of Montero Rios and
Moret were of the Liberal type. The Parliament, which should
have been convened early in the year, but was not called
together until the middle of June, contained no majority which
any Ministry could trust, and all the leaders in Spanish
politics were afraid of it. Fresh elections in September gave
the Montero Rios Ministry a decided majority; but it had
quarrels within itself, and threatening disorders had arisen
in many parts of the country, especially in half-rebellious
Catalonia, which it seems to have lacked courage to face. An
arrogant, insubordinate temper had been developed among the
officers of the army, who disputed the supremacy of civil over
military authority; and in many ways the conditions in the
kingdom gave cause for grave anxiety to thoughtful minds.
Not much, if any, quieting of the disturbed conditions in
Spain came during the next year. The Government stooped to a
compromise with the insolent military faction, so far as to
allow press offenses against officers of the army to be dealt
with by courts-martial. On the 31st of May, 1906, King Alfonso
was married to the English Princess Ena of Battenberg, who
previously entered the Roman Catholic Church, much to the
disturbance of Protestant feeling in England. The wedding
festivities at Madrid were nearly made tragical by an
anarchist attempt to kill the royal pair. As they returned
from the marriage ceremony to the palace a wretch named Matteo
Morales threw a bomb into the midst of the procession of
carriages, killing a number of attendant people, but missing
those for whom it was intended. The coolness and readiness of
mind shown by the young king, and by his bride, excited
general admiration, and indicated a strength of character that
augured well for Spain.
In July the Moret Ministry found it expedient to resign, and
the administration of Government passed to a new Cabinet,
under Captain-General Lopez Dominguez. Then a strange change
of attitude toward the Church of Rome was given for a brief
time to the Spanish Government, as though it had caught the
temper of France. There had been signs of a disposition toward
some independence of secular policy a few years before, when
the strenuous opposition of the Church failed to prevent the
passage of a Spanish law which authorized civil marriage
between persons legally qualified, whatever their creed might
be. The Church continued its hostility to this law until it
succeeded, in 1900, in securing an amendment which restricted
the right of civil marriage to parties one of whom should not
be a Catholic. Public opinion does not seem to have approved
that concession, and the original provisions of the law were
now restored. This drew on the Government a fierce clerical
attack; in the face of which it brought forward, in October, a
project of law which seems to have been modelled very closely
on that French Associations Law, of 1901, by which all
religious orders, along with other associations, were brought
under surveillance and regulation by the State.
See in Volume VI. of this work,
FRANCE: A. D. 1901,
and, in this Volume,
FRANCE: A. D. 1903.
This Spanish measure proposed to allow no religious order to
be established in the kingdom without parliamentary
authorization. It would empower the Government to withdraw the
authorization of any order or association that it found
dangerous to public tranquility or morals; it would permit any
member of an order to renounce his or her vows; it would
dissolve any order whose members were foreigners or whose
directors lived abroad; it would command monasteries and
convents to open their doors to representatives of the proper
civil authority at any time; it would limit the property held
by religious orders to the need of the objects for which they
were instituted and put a limit on the gifts and bequests they
could receive.
This seemed an extraordinary measure to come even under
discussion in Spain. Some of the Liberal leaders were prompt
in declaring opposition to it, and its passage through the
Cortes was probably impossible; but it came to no vote. Debate
on it, opened on the 27th of November, was brought soon to an
abrupt and not well-explained end. The Prime Minister resigned
suddenly, in consequence of alleged intrigues; Señor Moret,
recalled to office, was forced to retire again almost at once;
a new Ministry was formed by the Marquis Vega de Armijo, and
nothing more appears to have been heard of the proposed
Associations Law.
SPAIN: A. D. 1906.
At the Algeciras Conference on the Morocco question.
See (in this Volume)
EUROPE: A. D. 1905-1906.
SPAIN: A. D. 1907.
Franco-Spanish Bombardment of Casablanca.
See (in this Volume)
MOROCCO: A. D. 1907-1909.
SPAIN: A. D. 1907-1909.
The Maura Conservative Ministry.
Unpopularity of the War in Morocco.
Insurgency in Barcelona.
The Ferrer Case.
The Moret Ministry.
Municipal Reform.
Present Parties.
The Ministry of Marquis Armijo de la Vega held the Government
little more than a month, giving way to Señor Maura and his
party, who returned to power in January, 1907. Five changes of
administration had occurred within a year and a half.
Elections in April yielded the Government a majority, and the
birth of an heir to the throne on the 10th of May gave much
satisfaction to the country. The Liberals, however, were so
indignant at the manipulation of the elections to the lower
chamber that, on the advice of their leader, Señor Moret, they
took no part in the senatorial elections which followed, later
in May; and this proved singularly embarrassing to the
Government. Bomb explosions and other anarchist outrages,
centering in Barcelona, but not confined to that turbulent
city, were being dreadfully increased, and a ministerial Bill
was brought before the Cortes in January, 1908, providing
measures of suppression so drastic, especially in its dealing
with the Press, that a most formidable opposition was stirred
up. The Government stood stoutly by the Bill for months, until
its control of the Cortes was shaken by the coalition that
took form against it.
{633}
In the end it withdrew the Anarchist Bill, but raised another
obstinate and threatening storm by the proposal of a Local
Administration Bill, quite startlingly revolutionary in its
plans for giving more independence to municipalities and
provincial councils. Contest over this Bill went on till early
in February, 1909, when Premier Maura came to an understanding
with Señor Moret, leader of one of the Liberal groups, which
enabled a part of the extensive measure, relating to
municipalities, to be passed. Among other things, this new
enactment made voting in the municipalities compulsory, and
elections held since are reported to have shown a heavy
increase of vote, proving effectiveness in the law. The other
section of the Bill, dealing with provincial councils, was
held over for subsequent action in the Cortes, and had not
been disposed of when Premier Maura and his Cabinet were
driven to resign, in October, 1909.
The causes of the overthrow of the Maura Ministry came
primarily from the serious war with the tribesmen of the Riff,
Morocco, into which Spain had been drawn in the midsummer of
1909.
See (in this Volume)
MOROCCO: A. D. 1909).
The war was exceedingly unpopular from the beginning, and made
more so by early reverses in its prosecution. Riotous
outbreaks and labor strikes occurred in several parts of the
Kingdom, but most fiercely at the turbulent city of Barcelona,
where they were suppressed with a severity which embittered
feeling against the Government. This feeling was excited to a
climax in October by the military trial and execution, at
Barcelona, of Professor Francisco Ferrer. Professor Ferrer was
a teacher of high standing and wide acquaintance in Europe,
extremely radical in his political opinions, and accused of
disseminating seditious doctrines in the school which he
conducted at Barcelona. The military authorities there put him
under arrest on the charge of having been a principal
instigator of the revolutionary rising in July. He was tried
by court-martial, without just opportunity for defence,
according to common belief, and summarily shot, the Government
disregarding many appeals from all parts of Europe for its
intervention in the case. An extraordinary excitement
throughout the world was produced by this tragedy, and it was
felt in Spain with reverberant effect. After violent speeches
in the Chamber of Deputies, October 20, Señor Maura felt it
necessary to resign, and the Liberal leader, Señor Moret y
Prendergast, was called by the King to take the Government in
hand.
The Moret Ministry made a speedy good beginning in domestic
policy, by reviving, in some degree, the further undertaking
of reform in local administration which Señor Maura had
attempted two years before. This was now done by a decree,
designed to clear away the mass of ordinances and special
decrees by which the existing municipal law has been gradually
choked since it was enacted in 1877, and to restore to
municipal bodies the liberty and initiative that they were
originally supposed to possess. Señor Moret and his party had
supported Premier Maura’s Local Administration Bill in 1907;
but it had been opposed and defeated by the class of
politicians who are trained to a distaste for any sort of
political reform. According to all accounts, the Moret
Ministry, with a much mixed and uncertain support in the
Cortes, has thus far done well.
Municipal elections were held throughout Spain December 12,
and the introduction of compulsory voting brought out an
unprecedented vote, from which the Republicans and Liberals
drew most. Altogether, there are said to have been chosen 481
Republicans, Liberals, and Democrats, 253 Conservatives, and
over a hundred Radicals of various shades. Madrid elected 12
Republican councillors, 2 Liberals, 1 Democrat, and 7
Conservatives, thus giving the Republicans an absolute
majority. Valencia chose 15 Republicans, against 10 of all
other parties. In Valladolid, 12 Liberals, 6 Republicans, and
3 Conservatives were elected; in La Coruña, 7 Republicans, 3
Liberals, and 3 others; in Córdoba, 10 Republicans, 6
Liberals, and 6 Conservatives.
In present politics the Republicans are said to have gone into
alliance with the Socialist or Labor party; the alliance
having its leader in a Señor Lerroux, of Barcelona, who
returned lately from a long political exile, and who has had
warm receptions in a number of the chief cities, where he made
stirring speeches. "Señor Lerroux," says a correspondent,
writing from Madrid in December, "preaches neither anarchism
nor atheism nor anti-militarism. But he asks for the abolition
of the Monarchy and of the religious orders. He would make the
army the humble servant of the State, promote lay education
and local autonomy, and do away with indirect taxation. And he
looks for the realization of this programme to a well-timed
revolution. Such are the ideas with which the bulk of the
Republican-Socialist coalition will go to the polls at the
next general election. Between these two extremes—the
Conservatives, representing the Monarchy, the aristocracy, and
the Church, and the Republican-Socialist alliance,
representing revolution—we see the present Government
balancing itself uneasily, with a foot in each camp, amenable
to pressure from both, and without any independent means of
support, save that which it enjoys in virtue of its temporary
control of the political machine."
----------SPAIN: End--------
SPALDING, Bishop John L.:
On the Anthracite Coal Strike Arbitration Commission.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1902-1903.
SPANISH AMERICA: A. D. 1906.
Growth of Close Relations with Spain.
See (in this Volume)
SPAIN: A. D. 1898-1906.
SPERRY, Rear-Admiral Charles S.:
Commissioner Plenipotentiary to the Second Peace Conference.
See (in this Volume)
WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1907.
SPERRY, Rear-Admiral Charles S.:
Commanding the American Battleship Fleet.
See (in this Volume)
WAR, THE PREPARATIONS FOR: NAVAL.
SPHAKIANAKIS, Dr.
See (in this Volume)
CRETE: A. D. 1905-1906.
SPIERS, Bishop:
Murder of.
See (in this Volume)
AFRICA: A. D. 1905.
{634}
SPITZBERGEN CONFERENCE.
"The Norwegian government, by a note addressed on January 26,
1909, to the Department of State, conveyed an invitation to
the government of the United States to take part in a
conference which, it is understood, will be held in February
or March, 1910, for the purpose of devising means to remedy
existing conditions in the Spitzbergen Islands. This
invitation was conveyed under the reservation that the
question of altering the status of the islands as countries
belonging to no particular State, and as equally open to the
citizens and subjects of all States, should not be raised.
"The European Powers invited to this conference by the
government of Norway were Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany,
Great Britain, Russia, Sweden, and the Netherlands.
"The Department of State, in view of proofs filed with it in
1906, showing the American possession, occupation, and working
of certain coal-bearing lands in Spitzbergen, accepted the
invitation under the reservation above stated, and under the
further reservation that all interests in those islands
already vested should be protected, and that there should be
equality of opportunity for the future. It was further pointed
out that membership in the conference on the part of the
United States was qualified by the consideration that this
government would not become a signatory to any conventional
arrangement concluded by the European members of the
Conference which would imply contributory participation by the
United States in any obligation or responsibility for the

enforcement of any scheme of administration which might be
devised by the conference for the islands."
Message of the President of the United States
to Congress, December 6, 1909.
SPOILS SYSTEM:
Cause of Corruption in the United States Customs Service.
See (in this Volume)
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1909 (OCTOBER-NOVEMBER).
See (in this Volume)
CIVIL SERVICE REFORM.
SPRECKELS, Rudolph.
See (in this Volume)
MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT: SAN FRANCISCO.
SPRIGGS, SIR J. GORDON.
See (in this Volume)
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1902-1904.
SPRIGGS, SIR J. GORDON.
Opposition to the Disfranchisement of Blacks
in South Africa.
See (in this Volume)
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1908-1909.
SPRING-RICE, SIR C.:
British Minister to Persia.
See (in this Volume)
PERSIA: A. D. 1907 (JANUARY-SEPTEMBER).
STACKELBERG, General.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1904 (FEBRUARY-JULY), and after.
STANDARD OIL COMPANY:
Suit by the Government for its Dissolution.
Decree of the U. S. Circuit Court.
Appeal to the Supreme Court.
See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL, &c.:
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1906-1909.
STATE LEGISLATION, Need of Unity in.
See (in this Volume)
LAW AND ITS COURTS: UNITED STATES.
"STATE RIGHTS":
The question in Australia.
See (in this Volume)
AUSTRALIA: A. D. 1902.
STEUNENBERG, EX-GOVERNOR FRANK, OF IDAHO:
His assassination.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1899-1907.
STEVENS, DURHAM WHITE:
Adviser to the Korean Foreign Office, by Japanese Selection.
His assassination.
See (in this Volume)
KOREA; A. D. 1905-1909.
STEVENS, JOHN L.:
Chief Engineer of the Panama Canal.
See (in this Volume)
PANAMA CANAL: A. D. 1905 and 1905-1909.
STEYN, PRESIDENT M. T.
See (in this Volume)
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1901-1902.
STOCK EXCHANGE, NEW YORK:
Report on its Operations.
See (in this Volume)
FINANCE AND TRADE: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1909.
STOCKHOLM: A. D. 1909.
Lockout and attempted General Strike.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: SWEDEN.
STOLYPIN, P. A.:
Premier of the Russian Government.
See (in this Volume)
RUSSIA: A. D. 1906, 1907, and after.
STONE, ELLEN M.:
Capture by Brigands in Turkey and Ransom paid for Release.
See (in this Volume)
TURKEY: A. D. 1901-1902.
STÖSSEL, GENERAL.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1904 (FEBRUARY-JULY); (FEBRUARY-AUGUST),
and A. D. 1904-1905 (MAY-JANUARY).
STRAUS, OSCAR S.:
Secretary of Commerce and Labor.
See (in this Volume)
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1905-1909.
STRAUS, OSCAR S.:
On the Chinese Exclusion Laws and their Administration.
See (in this Volume)
RACE PROBLEMS: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1905-1908.
STRIKE, A GENERAL: THE IDEA OF IT.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: FRANCE: A. D. 1884-1909.
STRIKES.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION.
STUNDISTS, POLITICAL IDEAS OF THE.
See (in this Volume)
RUSSIA: A. D. 1902.
SUBMARINE SIGNAL BELLS.
See (in this Volume)
SCIENCE AND INVENTION: SUBMARINE SIGNAL BELLS.
SUBWAYS, NEW YORK.
See (in this Volume)
NEW YORK CITY: A. D. 1900-1909.
SUCCESSION DUTIES:
Treaty concerning, between England and France.
See (in this Volume)
DEATH DUTIES.
SUGAR TRUST, THE FRAUDS OF THE.
See (in this Volume)
Combinations, Industrial, &c.:
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1907-1909, and 1909.
SUDAN, THE WESTERN: A. D. 1903.
English Ascendancy established in Nigeria.
See (in this Volume)
AFRICA: A. D. 1903 (NIGERIA).
SUDAN, THE WESTERN: A. D. 1907.
Great Changes wrought in Ten Years.
The new Khartoum.
"After Khartoum had fallen the palace was looted and
demolished, but on its ruins another stately pile has arisen
wherein Gordon’s memory is kept green by a tablet marking the
fatal spot where on the 26th of January, 1885, he was done to
death. And even as a new palace sprang up on the ashes of the
old, so likewise after a thorough clearing away of the ruins
of Gordon’s city, a new Khartoum has been planned and built on
the ancient site. This new city lies at an altitude of 1263
feet above sea level, has a moderate yearly rainfall of but
some forty inches, and a mean annual temperature of 84°
Fahrenheit; by water it is 1560 miles from the source of the
Nile at Ripon Falls, and 1920 miles from the Rosetta mouth of
that fertilising river. Slowly but surely vaccination is
reducing the small-pox mortality among the Soudanese; the old
mosquito-breeding pools have been filled up, and the mosquito
brigade is still doing good work. Thus the new Khartoum may be
said to enjoy a fairly salubrious climate, which, moreover,
should yearly become more and more healthy. …
{635}
"South of Khartoum proper, across the desert race-course and
golf-links, and hard by what remains of Gordon’s
fortifications, dwell, each in their own settlement with its
distinctive huts, the divers native tribes who make up the
city’s indigenous population. Probably the new Khartoum of
to-day, with Omdurman and the near villages, totals nearly one
hundred thousand souls, and, considering that its geographical
situation so admirably adapts itself to fostering the
expansion of trade, I venture to predict that in another fifty
years Khartoum will contain half a million inhabitants. …
"The material condition of the people is improving; indeed, it
is already prosperous. For the first time in their history the
Soudanese are an absolutely free people, living under a
Government anxious to protect them from injustice and to
promote their welfare; it is hard for stay-at-home Britishers
to realise adequately how far-reaching is this change in a
land ‘where slavery in one form or another has been for
thousands of years a permanent and universal institution.’ …
"To Lord Cromer’s wise counsel and untiring efforts the new
Soudan owes much, and in 1901 the Shillook and Dinka
representatives fully recognised this, when, using for the
simple ceremony a sort of dark green fez, they crowned him
their king. In the name of his own great Sovereign, whose
ensign holds sway on every continent and on all known seas,
his Lordship promised that the sacred law of Islam shall be
respected; and the very remarkable agreement of the 19th of
January, 1899, gave to this hitherto down trodden people their
Magna Charta, for Article II. stipulates that ‘the British and
Egyptian flags shall be used together, both on land and water,
throughout the Soudan.’"
W. F. Miéville,
The New Khartoum
(Nineteenth Century, January, 1908).
SUEZ CANAL:
Renewed Agreements between England and France.
See (in this Volume)
EUROPE: A. D. 1904 (APRIL).
SUFFRAGE, Political.
See (in this Volume)
ELECTIVE FRANCHISE.
SUFFRAGETTES.
See (in this Volume)
ELECTIVE FRANCHISE: WOMAN SUFFRAGE.
SUGAR-BOUNTY CONFERENCE, AND CONVENTION.
As the result of a Conference, at Brussels, in which Germany,
Austria-Hungary, Belgium, France, Spain, Great Britain, Italy,
the Netherlands, Sweden and Norway were represented, a Convention
was framed and signed March 5, 1902, the occasion for which is
set forth in these words:
"Desiring, on one hand, to equalize the conditions of
competition between beet and cane sugars from different
sources, and, on the other hand, to promote the development of
the consumption of sugar; considering that this double result
can only be attained by the suppression of bounties as well as
by limiting the surtax"—the high contracting parties concluded
a convention, the first article of which binds them as
follows:
"to suppress the direct and indirect bounties by which the
production or export of sugar may benefit, and they agree not
to establish bounties of this kind during the whole duration
of the said convention. In view of the execution of this
provision, sweetmeats, chocolates, biscuits, condensed milk,
and all other analogous products which contain in a notable
proportion sugar artificially incorporated, are to be classed
as sugar. The above paragraph applies to all advantages
resulting directly or indirectly, for the different categories
of producers, from the fiscal legislation of the States,
notably:
(a) The direct bounties granted to exports.
(b) The direct bounties granted to production,
(c) The total or partial exemptions from taxation
granted for a part of the manufactured output.
(d) The profits derived from surplusages of output,
(e) The profits derived from the exaggeration of the
drawback.
(f) The advantages derived from any surtax in excess of
the rate fixed" in a subsequent article.
Further articles elaborate the programme of measures for
carrying out this agreement. It was to come into force from
September 1, 1903; to remain in force during five years from
that date, and if none of the high contracting parties should
have notified the Belgium Government, twelve months after the
expiration of the said period of five years, of its intention
to have its effects cease, it should continue for one year,
and so on from year to year.
Papers relating to the Foreign Relations
of the United States, page 80.
Under this Convention, a Permanent Commission was established
at Brussels. In July, 1907, this Commission gave attention to
a suggestion from the Government of Great Britain, "to the
effect that if Great Britain could be relieved from the
obligation to enforce the penal provisions of the Convention
they would be prepared not to give notice on the first of
September next of their intention to withdraw on the 1st of
September, 1908, a notice which they would otherwise feel
bound to give at the appointed time." The ensuing discussion
and correspondence resulted in the signing, on the 28th of
August, 1907, of "An Additional Act to the Sugar Convention of
March 5, 1902," renewing it for a fresh period of five years
from September 1, 1908, with the privilege to any one of the
contracting parties to withdraw after September 1, 1911, on
one year’s notice, "if the Permanent Commission, at the last
meeting held before the 1st September, 1910, have decided by a
majority of votes that circumstances warrant such power being
granted to the contracting States. The request of Great
Britain was granted in the following article of the Additional
Act:
"Notwithstanding Article I, Great Britain will be relieved,
after the 1st September, 1908. from the obligation contained
in Article IV of the Convention. After the same date the
Contracting States may demand that, in order to enjoy the
benefit of the Convention, sugar refined in the United Kingdom
and thence exported to their territories shall be accompanied
by a certificate stating that none of this sugar comes from a
country recognized by the Permanent Commission as granting
bounties for the production or exportation of sugar."
Parliamentary Papers, 1907,
Commercial, Number 10 (Cd. 3780).
SULLY-PRUDHOMME, RENÉ FRANÇOIS ARMAND.
See (in this Volume)
NOBEL PRIZES.
SULTAN AHMED MIRZA,
The young Shah of Persia.
See (in this Volume)
PERSIA: A. D. 1908-1909.
SUMATRA: A. D. 1909 (June).
Earthquake in Upper Padang.
See (in this Volume)
EARTHQUAKES: SUMATRA.
{636}
SUNDAY OBSERVANCE:
Legal institution of a weekly Rest Day.
Recent Legislation in Europe.
The Canadian Lord’s Day.
A British Parliamentary Paper, published in the spring of
1909, gave information, gathered by the diplomatic
representatives of the Government, relative to legislation in
many foreign countries bearing on the observance of Sunday, or
otherwise prescribing a weekly Day of Rest. The facts
presented in these reports were discussed editorially by the
London Times in an article from which the following is
quoted.
"Within quite recent years the principle of the weekly
rest-day has been enforced, with various practical
modifications, in most of the chief Continental countries. It
forms, indeed, a striking vindication of the claim for the
observance of one day’s rest in seven—which was recognized
among Eastern races long before the days of Moses—that while
Sunday work has shown a regrettable, if in some ways scarcely
avoidable, tendency to increase in this country, steps to
restrict it have been widely taken elsewhere. While the
English Sunday has been becoming in some respects more
‘Continental,’ the actual Continental Sunday has shown a
distinct tendency to approximate to our own. … The review
provided by the present report of the legislation already in
force in France, Germany, Austria, Belgium, Holland, and other
leading industrial States gives plenty of examples of the way
in which the general principle of making Sunday a day of rest
has been accommodated to the necessities of a modern
community. The case of France is particularly interesting,
since the French method of observing Sunday has traditionally
provided the English public with the most familiar contrast
with its own. In France the law establishing a statutory
weekly day of rest, and making that day Sunday, was passed so
recently as in 1906. In common with the similar legislation
passed in other countries, it allows partial and carefully
regulated exceptions, to provide for the necessary sale of
food, and for such uninterrupted attention as is required, for
example, by foundries. But the application of the law is both
thorough and extensive, while supplementary legislation is to
be introduced, with the support of the Government, to extend
its benefits to all servants of the State and to all other
workers on railways, tramlines, and steamboat services who do
not already enjoy it. On the other hand, while the report
bears decided witness to the efficiency and success with which
the law has been enforced, it notes certain points on which
concession is being made by the Government in deference to the
strong demands of certain interests which claimed that they
were being unjustly sacrificed. …
"The law seems at first to have aroused opposition among many
shopkeepers, especially those who were handicapped by
competition with rivals whose business was carried on by
members of the family, and therefore was not affected by it. …
The difficulty is now said to be settling itself, as the
public is gradually learning to restrict its shopping to
week-days, when there is a wider field of choice. The
encouraging evidence provided by the operation of the law of
1906 in France is supported more or less explicitly by the
reports forwarded by His Majesty’s representatives in other
parts of Europe. The aim and method of the various enactments
show a prevailing similarity, and where they have already been
sufficiently long in operation for a fair estimate to be made,
their success seems to be recognized with but few exceptions.
Material is not available in every case for forming a full
opinion of the completeness with which the law of rest has
been enforced. In Vienna, however, it is expressly reported
that its administration is effective; and although no such
statement is expressly made in the case of Germany, it appears
improbable that the regulations, though less stringent than
those of some other States, are lightly disregarded."
The Canadian "Lord’s Day Act" of 1906 is a measure of much
stringency. Making numerous well-defined and carefully guarded
exceptions for "works of necessity and mercy," and for such
railway service as is subject to provincial regulation, the
prohibitions of the Act include the following:
"To sell or offer for sale or purchase any goods, chattels, or
other personal property, or any real estate, or to carry on or
transact any business of his ordinary calling, or in
connection with such calling, or for gain to do, or employ any
other person to do, on that day, any work, business, or
labour." "To require any employee engaged in any work of
receiving, transmitting, or delivering telegraph or telephone
messages, or in the work of any industrial process, or in
connection with transportation, to do on the Lord’s Day the
usual work of his ordinary calling, unless such employee is
allowed during the next six days of such week twenty-four
consecutive hours without labour." "To engage in any public
game or contest for gain, or for any prize or reward, or to be
present thereat, or to provide, engage in, or be present at
any performance or public meeting, elsewhere than in a church,
at which any fee is charged, directly or indirectly." "To run,
conduct, or convey by any mode of conveyance any excursion on
which passengers are conveyed for hire, and having for its
principal or only object the carriage on that day of such
passengers for amusement or pleasure." "To shoot with or use
any gun, rifle or other similar engine, either for gain, or in
such a manner or in such places as to disturb other persons in
attendance at public worship or in the observance of that
day." "To bring into Canada for sale or distribution, or to
sell or distribute within Canada, on the Lord’s Day, any
foreign newspaper or publication classified as a newspaper."
----------SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES: Start--------
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES:
Summary of Decisions (1901-1906) touching
the Governmental Regulation of Corporations.
See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1901-1906.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES:
Decision in the Case of the
Trans-Missouri Freight Association.
See (in this Volume)
RAILWAYS: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1890-1902.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES:
On Constitutionality of Utah Law restricting Hours of
Adult Labor in Mines.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1902.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES:
In the Northern Securities Case.
See (in this Volume)
RAILWAYS: UNITED STATES: A. D). 1901-1905.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES:
In the "Beef Trust" Cases, so-called.
See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1903-1906.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES:
On Interstate Commerce Act of 1887.
See (in this Volume)
RAILWAYS: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1870-1908.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES:
Limiting Police Power to regulate Hours of Labor.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR PROTECTION: HOURS OF LABOR.
{637}
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES:
In the Tobacco Trust Case of Hale vs. Henkel.
See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1905-1906.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES:
Concerning the Isle of Pines.
See (in this Volume)
CUBA: A. D. 1907 (APRIL).
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES:
In Case of Virginia Railroads vs. the State
Corporation Commission of Virginia.
See (in this Volume)
RAILWAYS: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1908 (NOVEMBER).
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES:
On the Constitutionality of the "Commodities Clause"
of the Hepburn Act.
See (in this Volume)
RAILWAYS: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1906-1909.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES:
On the Right of a State to Specially Limit the Hours
of Labor for Women.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR PROTECTION: HOURS OF LABOR.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES:
Limiting State Authority in matters touching
Interstate Commerce.
See (in this Volume)
RAILWAYS: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1907-1908.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES:
On Law against Rebating in Armour Packing Company Case.
See (in this Volume)
RAILWAYS: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1908.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES:
Invalidating Debts to an Illegal Combination.
See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1909.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES:
Affirming Fines on the New York Central Railroad Company.
See (in this Volume)
RAILWAYS: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1909.
----------SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES: End--------
SUTTNER, BARONESS BERTHA VON.
See (in this Volume)
NOBEL PRIZES.
SWADESHI MOVEMENT.
See (in this Volume)
INDIA: A. D. 1905-1909.
SWALLOW, SILAS E.:
Nomination for President of the United States.
See (in this Volume)
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1904 (MARCH-NOVEMBER).
SWARAJ.
The Hindu term for self government.
SWAZILAND.
See (in this Volume)
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1909.
"SWEATING," ENGLISH ACT TO SUPPRESS.
The Trade Boards Bill.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR REMUNERATION: WAGES REGULATION.
----------SWEDEN: Start--------
SWEDEN: A. D. 1901.
Unveiling of Monument to John Ericsson.
The Nobel Prizes.
The First Awarding of them.
A monument to the memory of John Ericsson, the
Swedish-American inventor, was unveiled at Stockholm with
impressive ceremonies on the 14th of September, 1901, that
being the date of the reception of his remains at Stockholm
eleven years before.
The first award of the munificent prizes for beneficial
services to mankind, instituted by the will of Alfred Bernard
Nobel, the eminent Swedish engineer and inventor, was made on
the 10th of December, 1901.
See (in this Volume)
NOBEL PRIZES.
SWEDEN: A. D. 1903.
Agreement for Settlement of Claims against Venezuela.
See (in this Volume)
VENEZUELA: A. D. 1902-1904.
SWEDEN: A. D. 1905.
Secession of Norway from the Union of Crowns.
Acceptance by King Oscar of his Practical Deposition.
See (in this Volume)
NORWAY: A. D. 1902-1905.
SWEDEN: A. D. 1906.
At the Algeciras Conference on the Morocco Question.
See (in this Volume)
EUROPE: A. D. 1905-1906.
SWEDEN: A. D. 1908.
Municipal Office opened to Women.
See (in this Volume)
ELECTIVE FRANCHISE: WOMAN SUFFRAGE.
SWEDEN: A. D. 1908 (April).
Treaty with Denmark, England, France, Germany,
and the Netherlands, for maintenance of the Status
Quo on the North Sea.
See (in this Volume)
EUROPE: A. D. 1907-1908.
SWEDEN: A. D. 1909.
Franchise Reform Legislation.
During many successive years, earnest attempts by the Swedish
Government, strongly backed by liberal majorities in the
Second or popular Chamber of the Riksdag, to answer the public
demand for a broadening of the suffrage, were defeated in the
First Chamber, whose members are elected by the provincial
Landstings and by municipal corporations. Success was not
attained until 1909, when a Franchise Reform Bill,
establishing universal suffrage and proportional
representation, was passed by the Riksdag on the 10th of
February, by larger majorities. According to a Press report
from Stockholm, "the leader of the Liberals declared in the
Lower House that, though his party had originally opposed it,
they would now vote for the Bill, as the country demanded a
solution of this long pending question. The Social Democrats
and a few extremists of the Liberal party voted against it,
considering it unacceptable in principle and inadequate
because it excluded female suffrage. In the Upper House the
Bill was opposed by a few uncompromising Conservatives, to
whom it seemed too democratic."
SWEDEN: A. D. 1909.
Lockout and Attempted General Strike.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: SWEDEN.
SWEDEN: A. D. 1909 (October).
Arbitration of Frontier Dispute with Norway.
See (in this Volume)
NORWAY: A. D. 1909 (OCTOBER).
----------SWEDEN: End--------
SWIFT & COMPANY et al.,
THE CASE OF THE UNITED STATES AGAINST.
See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1903-1906.
SWITZERLAND:
Backwardness of Woman Suffrage.
See (in this Volume)
ELECTIVE FRANCHISE: WOMAN SUFFRAGE.
SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1870-1905.
Increase of Population compared with other European Countries.
See (in this Volume)
EUROPE: A. D. 1870-1905.
SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1902.
General Election.
The general election, in October, of representatives in the
Federal Assembly, returned 97 Radicals, 35 Catholic
Conservatives, 25 Moderate Liberals, 9 Socialists, and 1
Independent, being a total of 167. The previous Chamber had
contained but 147, the increase of population having raised
the number of representatives.
SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1902.
Use of the Referendum and Initiative down to that time.
See (in this Volume)
REFERENDUM.
SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1905.
Rupture between Radicals and Socialists.
Completion of the Simplon Tunnel.
The coalition hitherto maintained between Radical and
Socialist parties was broken entirely in the elections of
October, 1905, because of the anti-military attitude of the
latter, who sought to have all national feeling and policy
sunk in international sentiments and principles. The
Socialists elected but two representatives in the National
Council. In April the completion of the Simplon Railway
Tunnel, furnishing a second passage through the Alps, was
celebrated with much rejoicing. The work of boring this
twelve-mile length of tunnel had been begun in 1898.
See, also, (in this Volume)
RAILWAYS: SWITZERLAND.
SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1909.
Acquisition of the St. Gothard Tunnel and Railway
by the Government.
See (in this Volume)
RAILWAYS: SWITZERLAND.
{638}
SYDOW, REINHOLD.
See (in this Volume)
GERMANY: A. D. 1908-1909.
SYNDICATES, German.
See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL (in Germany).
SYNDICATS AND SYNDICALISM, French.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: FRANCE: A. D. 1884-1909.
SZELL MINISTRY.
See (in this Volume)
AUSTRIA-HUNGARY: A. D. 1902-1903.
T.
TABAH INCIDENT, THE.
See (in this Volume)
EGYPT: A. D. 1905-1906.
TABRIZ, SIEGE OF.
See (in this Volume)
PERSIA: A. D. 1908-1909.
TACNA AND ARICA QUESTIONS.
See (in this Volume)
CHILE: A. D. 1907.
TAFF-VALE DECISION.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: ENGLAND: A. D. 1900-1906.
----------TAFT, WILLIAM H.: Start--------
TAFT, WILLIAM H.
President of the Second Philippine Commission.
Civil Governor of the Philippines.
See (in this Volume)
PHILIPPINE ISLANDS: A. D. 1901.
TAFT, WILLIAM H.
Secretary of War.
See (in this Volume)
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1901-1905, and 1905-1909.
TAFT, WILLIAM H.
Report on the Purchase of the Friars’ Lands.
See (in this Volume)
PHILIPPINE ISLANDS: A. D. 1902-1903.
TAFT, WILLIAM H.
Organization of Provisional Government in Cuba.
See (in this Volume)
CUBA: A. D. 1906 (AUGUST-OCTOBER).
TAFT, WILLIAM H.
Special Report on the Philippine Islands.
See (in this Volume)
PHILIPPINE ISLANDS: A. D. 1907.
TAFT, WILLIAM H.
Elected President of the United States.
See (in this Volume)
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1908 (APRIL-NOVEMBER).
TAFT, WILLIAM H.
Inauguration and Inaugural Address.
Cabinet Appointments.
See (in this Volume)
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1909 (MARCH).
TAFT, WILLIAM H.
On the Tariff.
See (in this Volume)
TARIFFS: UNITED STATES.
TAFT, WILLIAM H.
Statement, as President, relative to the
Tariff Maximum and Minimum Clause.
See (in this Volume)
TARIFFS: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1908-1909.
TAFT, WILLIAM H.
Tour of the United States.
Meeting with President Diaz, of Mexico.
See (in this Volume)
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1909 (SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER).
TAFT, WILLIAM H.
Legislation Recommended for the Conservation
of Natural Resources.
See (in this Volume)
CONSERVATION, &c.: UNITED STATES.
TAFT, WILLIAM H.
On Injunctions in Labor Disputes and on the Expediting
of Civil and Criminal Procedure.
See (in this Volume)
LAW AND ITS COURTS: UNITED STATES.
TAFT, WILLIAM H.
Special Message on "Trusts" and on Interstate Commerce.
See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL, &c.: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1910,
and RAILWAYS: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1910.
----------TAFT, WILLIAM H.: End--------
TAI HUNG CHI.
See (in this Volume)
CHINA: A. D. 1906.
TAI HUNG-TZE: GRAND COUNCILLOR OF CHINA.
See (in this Volume)
CHINA: A. D. 1909 (October).
TAIREN.
See (in this Volume)
DALNY.
TAI-TZE-HO, BATTLES AT THE.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1904 (JULY-SEPTEMBER).
TAKAHIRA KOGORO:
Japanese Minister at Washington and Plenipotentiary
for negotiating Treaty of Peace with Russia.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1905 (JUNE-OCTOBER).
TAKUSHAN HILL, CAPTURE OF.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1904-1905 (MAY-JANUARY).
TALIENWAN,
Re-named Dalny.
Later named Tairen, by the Japanese.
TAMMANY HALL:
Struggles with it.
See (in this Volume)
NEW YORK CITY.
TANG SHAO YI.
See (in this Volume)
OPIUM PROBLEM: CHINA.
TANGIER: A. D. 1905.
The German Emperor’s Speech.
See (in this Volume)
EUROPE: A. D. 1905-1906.
----------TARIFFS: Start--------
TARIFFS: Australia:
The question in the First Parliament.
See (in this Volume)
AUSTRALIA: A. D. 1901-1902.
TARIFFS: Tariff Excise Act.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR REMUNERATION: THE NEW PROTECTION.
TARIFFS: Austria-Hungary: A. D. 1907.
Settlement of the Austro-Hungarian Tariff Question.
See (in this Volume)
AUSTRIA-HUNGARY: A. D. 1907.
TARIFFS: Balkan States: A. D. 1905.
Serbo-Bulgarian Customs Union.
See (in this Volume)
BALKAN STATES: BULGARIA AND SERVIA.
TARIFFS: British Empire: A. D. 1909.
Resolutions of Empire Congress of Chambers of Commerce.
See (in this Volume)
BRITISH EMPIRE: A. D. 1909 (SEPTEMBER).
TARIFFS: Canada:
Attitude of Canadian Manufacturers’ Association toward Great
Britain and the United States on Tariff Questions.
See (in this Volume)
CANADA: A. D. 1903-1905.
TARIFFS: Canada and Germany:
German retaliation for Discriminating Duties in Favor
of British Goods.
Consequent on the discrimination in favor of British goods
which was granted in the Canadian tariff of 1897, Germany took
action which is explained in the following, from the Canadian
side of the official correspondence that ensued:
"Prior to July 31, 1898, Canada, as a portion of the British
Empire, received the most favourable tariff treatment in
Germany, under the terms of the treaty which had long existed
between that country and Great Britain. On the date named,
that treaty, having been denounced by the British Government,
ceased to have effect. Provisional agreements have since been
entered into from time to time between Great Britain and
Germany. Canada, however, has been excluded from the benefit
of such agreements. The products of Canada are no longer
admitted into Germany on the favoured terms known in the
German tariff as 'conventional duties,' but are specially
excluded therefrom and made subject to the higher duties of
the general tariff. The reason assigned by the German
Government for this discrimination against Canada is the
enactment by the Dominion of legislation granting preferential
tariff rates to the products of Great Britain.
{639}
The undersigned desires to point out that the policy of the
Canadian Government was not designed to give to any foreign
nation more favoured treatment than was to be allowed to
Germany. The Canadian policy has been confined to a
readjustment of the commercial relations of the Dominion with
the British Empire of which it is a part, a domestic affair
which could hardly be open to reasonable objection by any
foreign government. It would therefore seem that the action of
Canada afforded no just ground for complaint by Germany. The
undersigned is of opinion that there has been some
misconception of the Canadian policy in this respect, and
hopes that upon further consideration the German Government
will see that Canada, in taking the step referred to, did not
forfeit her claim to the advantages accorded by Germany to the
most-favoured nations."
The German Government, however, maintained with firmness the
ground it had taken; but eleven years later, in 1909, a German
Canadian Economic Association at Berlin sent delegates to
Canada to confer with chambers of commerce and solicit efforts
for bettering commercial relations between them. The Montreal
Board of Trade declined to take any action, saying,
substantially: "the reprisals against Canada were commenced by
Germany on account of the granting of preference by the
Dominion to Great Britain. If Germany now finds that she has
made a mistake the Montreal Board holds that she should
restore Canadian products to the conventional tariff, when the
Canadian surtax on German goods will be automatically
removed."
Finally, an agreement was reached which ended this tariff war
between Germany and Canada. Announcement of it was made in the
Canadian Parliament on the 15th of February, 1910, and it went
into effect on the 1st of March.
TARIFFS: FRANCE: A. D. 1910.
A revision of the tariff, on which the French Parliament had
long been engaged, was completed and became law on March 29,
1910, going into effect April 1.
TARIFFS: France-Canada:
Commercial Convention with Great Britain concerning Canada.
See (in this Volume)
CANADA: A. D. 1907-1909.
TARIFFS: Germany: A. D. 1902-1906.
The New Tariff Law and seven Special Tariff Treaties
with European Countries.
A changed Commercial Policy.
In the Diet of the Empire the committee which had been
laboring long and arduously on a tariff bill reported the
measure in October, and its increase of duties, which the
government did not favour, was stoutly opposed by Socialists,
Radicals, and Liberals; but the Conservatives, representing
the protected interests, constrained the government to
withdraw its opposition and the bill was carried through as a
whole, without change.
"How deliberately the Germans go about their tariff policy;
how thoroughly they study all the strong and weak points in
their adversaries’ positions; with what scientific care they
measure their own manifold interests; how carefully they
guard, in their work of tariff legislation, against disturbing
the stability of existing business conditions may best be seen
from the way in which the new tariff has been adopted. As
early as 1898—i. e., more than five years before the
expiration of the old tariff treaties—a Commission of
government experts and leading representatives of the
industrial and commercial interests was organized to make a
detailed study of the needs of every industry whose products
were in any way affected by the tariff. After five years of
incessant work of that character, in which more than 2,000
experts took part, the new general or so-called ‘autonomous’
tariff was enacted into law (but not put into effect) by the
German Reichstag.
"The new tariff law adopted on December 25, 1902, with rates
considerably raised, formed the basis of diplomatic
bargaining, of which it took more than two years to conclude
commercial treaties with the following seven countries:
Austria-Hungary, Russia, Italy, Switzerland, Belgium, Roumania
and Servia. These treaties, which considerably reduce some of
the rates provided for in the tariff of 1902, were enacted
into law on February 22d of this year, [1905], and together
form the new so-called ‘conventional’ tariff, which will be
applied to all countries enjoying ‘most favored nation’
privileges. Deliberate and cautious as these steps have been,
the new tariff is not to be thrust upon the business community
of the Empire on short notice, but the country is given one
full year in which to adjust itself to the new rates. Hence
the date for giving effect to the new tariff law has been set
for March 1, 1906."
N. I. Stone,
The New German Customs Tariff
(North American Review, September, 1905).
The chief point of interest for the United States in this law
is to be found, not so much in the high rates adopted, as in
the statement made in the Reichstag foreshadowing a changed
policy on the part of Germany in making new commercial
treaties. On the final day of the tariff debate Dr. Paasche,
one of the leaders of the majority, asserted that the
government had promised that it would no longer extend treaty
advantages to other countries than those that reciprocate with
corresponding concessions. ‘We expect,’ said Dr. Paasche,
‘that the government will undertake a thorough revision of all
the treaties containing the most favored-nation clause.
Promises of this kind were made to us in committee. We have
absolutely no occasion to concede anything to such nations as
are glad to take what we give by treaty to other countries
without making us any concessions in return. The United States
has introduced a limitation of the most-favored-nation clause;
we have every reason to act in precisely the same manner."
W. C. Dreher,
A Letter from Germany
(Atlantic Monthly, March, 1903).
In March, 1905, a few weeks after the conclusion of the last
of the seven special tariff treaties referred to above, which
modify the general German tariff of 1902-1906, in favor of the
nations which became parties to them, the Consul-General of
the United States at Berlin sent to the State Department at
Washington the following table, showing, with reference to
forty-six of the principal articles of German import from
America (1) the then maximum or autonomous duty as paid under
the tariff of 1879; (2) the same duties as modified and
reduced by then existing treaty concessions; (3) the new
autonomous duties that were to go into effect in 1906, and (4)
the amounts to which each of these rates of duty would be
reduced on merchandise coming from certain of the seven
European countries which had just concluded treaties of
commerce with Germany.
{640}
The figures show in all cases, unless otherwise specified, the
amount in American currency of duty per double centner (100
kilograms or 220.4 pounds):
Merchandise.
Tariff New tariff law of Difference.
1902 (to go into
(adopted in 1879). effect in 1906).
Maximum. Reduced Autonomous. Reduced
by treaty. by treaty.
Wheat $1.19 $0.83 $1.78 $1.30 $0.58
Rye 1.19 .83 1.66 1.19 .47
Oats .95 .67 1.66 1.19 .47
Barley .53 .47 1.66 .95 .71
Corn .47 .38 1.19 .71 .48
Wheat Flour 2.50 1.74 4.36 2.42 1.94
Malt .95 .85 2.44 1.37 1.07
Potatoes Free. Free. .59 1.24 (a)
Hops 4.76 3.38 16.66 4.76 11.90
Dried apples,
pears,
apricots,
peaches .96 .95 2.38 .95 1.43
Dried Prunes 2.38 1.19 1.19
Fresh apples
in barrels Free. Free. 2.38 1.19 1.19
Sausages 4.76 4.04 16.66 9.52 7.14
Lard 2.38 2.38 2.97 2.38 .59
Salted
Meats 4.76 4.04 10.71 8.33-9.25 2.38-1.46
Butter 4.76 3.80 7.14 4.76 2.38
Cheese 4.76 4.76 7.14 3.57-4.76 3.57-2.38
Eggs .71 .47 1.42 .71 .71
Margarine 4.76 3.80 7.14 4.76 2.38
Wood Alcohol Free Free 4.76 Free. 4.76
Cows and
oxen,
per head 2.14 2.14 4.28 1.90 2.38
Horses,
per head 4.76 4.76 21.42-85.68 7.14-28.56 14.28-57.12
Hogs,
per head 1.42 1.19 4.28 2.14 2.14
Shoes,
coarse 11.90 11.90 20.23 20.23 …
Shoes,
medium 16.66 15.47 28.86 23.80 5.06
Shoes,
fine 16.66 15.47 42.84 30.70 7.14
Lumber,
rough … … 1.42 .47 .95
Lumber,
dressed 2.38 2.38 2.38 2.38 …
Sewing
machines 5.71 5.71 8.33 2.85 5.48
Sewing
machines,
power 5.71 5.71 4.76 1.90 2.86
Electrical machinery
a. Under 500 kilograms (
1,102 pounds) per 100 kilograms 2.14 2.14 …
b. 500 to 3,000 kilograms
(1,102 to 6,614 pounds) 1.66 1.42 .24
c. More than 3,000 kilograms 1.42 .95 .47
Machine tools:
a. 250 kilograms
(551 pounds or less),
per 100 kilograms. 4.76 2.85 1.91
b. 250 to 1,000 kilograms
(551 to 2,205 pounds) 2.85 1.90 .95
c. 1,000 to 3,000 kilograms
(2,205 to 6,614 pounds) 1.90 1.42 .48
d. 3,000 to 10,000 kilograms
(6,614 to 22,046 pounds) 1.42 1.19 .23
Over 10,000 kilograms .97 .97 …
Telegraph instruments,
telephones, electric
lighting and power
apparatus. 14.28 (b).95-9.52 (b)
Railway and
street cars 2.38 .71 1.67
Motor cars and motor
bicycles, each:
a. 50 kilograms
(110 pounds) or less, each 35.70 … …
b. 50 to 100 kilograms
(110 to 220 pounds), each 28.56 … …
c. 100 to 250 kilograms
(220 to 550 pounds), each 21.42 … …
d. 250 to 500 kilograms
(550 to 1,110 pounds) 14.28 9.52 4.76
e. 500 to 1,000 kilograms
(1,110 to 2,220 pounds) 9.52 5.95 3.57
f. 1,000 kilograms and over 4.76 3.57 1.19
(a) Free from August 1 to February 14.
(b) According to weight.

"It needs but a glance at this list," said Consul-General
Mason, "to show how important will be the concessions granted
to one or more of the seven treaty nations, and how formidable
will be their competition in the German market against similar
goods coming from countries which, for want of a reciprocal
treaty or other convention, will be subject to the autonomous
or unmodified tariff in exporting goods into Germany."
On the 1st day of March, 1906, this tariff came into effect,
and the tariff arrangements of Germany with the United States,
under which the latter had enjoyed important concessions,
secured by the "most favored nation" agreement in its
commercial treaty with Germany, came to an end.
TARIFFS: A. D. 1909.
Economic Results of the Protective System.
See (in this Volume)
GERMANY: A. D. 1009 (APRIL).
TARIFFS: Great Britain: A. D. 1909.
List of articles on which Import Duties are collected.
The following is a complete list of the articles enumerated in
the British tariff as subject to import duties:
Beer; Cards, Playing; Chicory; Cocoa; Coffee;
Fruit, dried or otherwise preserved without sugar;
Spirits and Strong Waters (including all alcoholic
liquors, cordials and other alcoholic preparations);
Sugar (including all confectionery, sugar-preserved
fruits, and other sugared preparations);
Tea; Tobacco, in all forms; Wine.
TARIFFS: A. D. 1909.
Question of Preferential Trade raised by Mr. Chamberlain.
See (in this Volume)
ENGLAND: A. D. 1903 (MAY-SEPTEMBER).
TARIFFS: The United States: A. D. 1908-1909.
The Demand for Tariff Revision.
Its Expression in the Presidential Election.
The Action of Congress and the President.
The Payne-Aldrich Tariff Act.
For more than a decade prior to the presidential election of
1908 the popular demand for a revision of the exorbitantly
protective duties imposed by the so-called Dingley Tariff of
1897 had been steadily rising in the United States, and making
itself heard by men in public life. It had penetrated the mind
of the great captain-general of the protectionist forces.
{641}
President McKinley, as early as 1901, and his last public
utterance, addressed to a multitude at the Pan American
Exposition, in Buffalo, on the 5th of September, the day
before he was struck down by a murderous anarchist, contained
this wise admonition on the subject:
"We have a vast and intricate business, built up through years
of toil and struggle, in which every part of the country has
its stake, which will not permit of either neglect or of undue
selfishness. No narrow, sordid policy will subserve it. The
greatest skill and wisdom on the part of manufacturers and
producers will be required to hold and increase it. … Our
capacity to produce has developed so enormously, and our

products have so multiplied, that the problem of more markets
requires our urgent and immediate attention. Only a broad and
enlightened policy will keep what we have. No other policy
will get more. … We must not repose in fancied security that
we can forever sell everything and buy little or nothing. If
such a thing were possible, it would not be best for us or for
those with whom we deal. We should take from our customers
such of their products as we can use without harm to our
industries and labor. Reciprocity is the natural outgrowth of
our wonderful industrial development under the domestic policy
now firmly established. What we produce beyond our domestic
consumption must have a vent abroad. … If perchance some of
our tariffs are no longer needed for revenue or to encourage
and protect our industries at home, why should they not be
employed to extend and promote our markets abroad?"
TARIFFS: The Party-Platform Promises of 1908.
But President McKinley’s words fell on deaf ears, among those
to whom he had been leader and guide in this department of
economic policy hitherto. They gave no heed to his new
counsels of moderation for seven years. Even treaties of
commercial reciprocity, which he had learned to appreciate
since his own tariff-making was done, were negotiated in vain
by the executive department of Government, to be scorned and
rejected by the Senate. By 1908, however, the claim of the
many-millioned consumers of the nation, for some relief from
the intolerable cost to which almost every necessary of living
had been worked up by the protective tariff lever, had risen
to a pitch which compelled some attention from the managers of
political parties and drew from them promises in the
"platforms" prepared for the presidential and congressional
canvassing of that year.
See (in this Volume)
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1908, APRIL-NOVEMBER)
The National Republican Convention at Chicago, which nominated
Mr. Taft for the presidency, made this distinct and emphatic
pledge:
"The Republican party declares unequivocally for a revision of
the tariff by a special session of Congress, immediately
following the inauguration of the next President, and commends
the steps already taken to this end, in the work assigned to
the appropriate committees of Congress, which are now
investigating the operation and effect of existing schedules.
In all tariff legislation the true principle of protection is
best maintained by the imposition of such duties as will equal
the difference between the cost of production at home and
abroad, together with a reasonable profit to American
industries. We favor the establishment of maximum and minimum
rates to be administered by the President under limitations to
be fixed in the law, the maximum to be available to meet
discriminations by foreign countries against American goods
entering their markets, and the minimum to represent the
normal measure of protection at home."
The National Convention, at Denver, of the Democratic party,
supposedly confirmed in opposition to the whole theory of
tariff protection by all its doctrinal history, made this
declaration:
"We favor immediate revision of the tariff by the reduction of
import duties. Articles entering into competition with
trust-controlled products should be placed upon the free list,
and material reductions should be made in the tariff upon the
necessaries of life, especially upon articles competing with
such American manufactures as are sold abroad more cheaply
than at home, and graduated reductions should be made in such
other schedules as may be necessary to restore the tariff to a
revenue basis."
The Republican Party elected its candidate for the presidency,
with a majority in Congress, and was given the greater
opportunity to redeem its pledge, while the Democratic Party
obtained sufficient representation in both branches of
Congress to aid and influence the promised revision with
important effect. President Taft, in his inaugural address,
spoke impressively of the urgent duty thus laid on Congress,
saying:
"A matter of most pressing importance is the revision of the
tariff. In accordance with the promises of the platform upon
which I was elected, I shall call Congress into extra session,
to meet on the fifteenth day of March, in order that
consideration may be at once given to a bill revising the
Dingley act."
TARIFFS:
The Making of the Payne-Aldrich Tariff.
The new Congress, as called by the President, was convened on
the 15th of March, 1909, and a provisional tariff bill was
introduced in the House of Representatives on the 18th by
Chairman Payne of its Ways and Means Committee. This Bill was
a product of the work of the House Committee of the preceding
Congress, which had been giving hearings on successive tariff
schedules since November. Naturally the protected interests
swarmed to Washington, with attorneys and technical experts,
and their side of every argument for and against existing
duties was heard in its most persuasive form. Naturally, too,
the unprotected consumers, less able to combine, were
represented at the hearings in no such potent way, and their
side of most arguments, according to all accounts, was but
feebly pressed. Mr. Charles Francis Adams, who has the habit
of plain speech, wrote a letter to Congressman McCall, of
Massachusetts, while these hearings were in progress, in which
he characterized a conspicuously greedy part of the clamorers
for high duties in terms that were savagely rough, but not
entirely undeserved. "Speaking after the fashion of men," he
said, "they are either thieves or hogs. I myself belong to the
former class. I am a tariff thief, and I have a license to
steal. It bears the broad seal of the United States and is
what is known as the ‘Dingley Tariff.’ I stole under it
yesterday; I am stealing under it today; I propose to steal
under it to-morrow.
{642}
The Government has forced me into this position, and I both do
and shall take full advantage of it. I am therefore a tariff
thief with a license to steal. And—what are you going to do
about it? The other class come under the hog category; that
is, they rush, squealing and struggling, to the great
Washington protection trough, and with all four feet in it
they proceed to gobble the swill. … To this class I do not
belong. I am simply a tariff thief. … But, on the other hand,
I am also a tariff reformer. I would like to see every
protective schedule swept out of existence, my own included.
Meanwhile, what inducement have I to go to Washington on a
public mission of this sort? A mere citizen, I represent no
one. … Meanwhile, have it well understood that my position is
exactly the position of tens of thousands of others scattered
throughout the country; to ask us to put aside our business
affairs and at our own expense to go to Washington on a
desperate mission is asking a little too much."
The Bill introduced by Mr. Payne was under debate in the House
for three weeks, and passed on the 10th of April. In the
Senate it was then nominally taken into consideration by the
Finance Committee of that body, but that Committee, in fact,
under the dominating lead of its chairman, Senator Aldrich,
framed a new and protectively stiffened Bill, changed in 847
particulars from that of the House. A little more than twelve
weeks were required for this more arduous labor of Mr.
Aldrich, which the Senate approved by the passage of the Bill
on the 8th of July. On the 9th it went to a conference
committee of the two Houses; and there the President’s
influence, not much exerted, apparently, until now, wrung a
few important concessions to the great public of consumers,
which the special interests guarded by a majority in Congress
had been determined not to yield. The American people owe it
to President Taft’s insistence that their shoes may be
cheapened by a free importation of hides, and that lumber for
their houses and coal for warming them may come from Canada at
a slightly lower rate of duty than before; but he failed to
loosen the grip of the woolen and cotton interests on the
protected prices at which they are clothed.
After twenty days of battle the conferees reached agreement,
July 29; the House adopted their report on the 31st, the
Senate on the 5th of August. It was signed at once by the
President, and went into effect the next day.
In the House the Bill was adopted by a vote of 195 to 183,
twenty Republicans voting against it and two Democrats in its
favor. In the Senate the vote stood 47 to 31, the negative
including seven Republicans, and one Democratic senator
recording himself on the side of the Bill. The opposing
Republicans in both Houses were stigmatized as "insurgents,"
and the autocratic Speaker of the House, Cannon, of Illinois,
presumed, so far as the powers of his office would stretch, to
"read them out" of their party. In their struggle to secure a
more honest fulfilment of the election promises of both
parties, and more loyalty to the welfare of the people at
large, the Republican "insurgents" had no such compact and
earnest support from the Democrats of Congress as even party
considerations gave reason to expect.
After signing the Bill, the President gave out a statement for
publication, in part as follows:
"I have signed the Payne tariff bill because I believe it to
be the result of a sincere effort on the part of the
Republican party to make a downward revision, and to comply
with the promises of the platform as they have been generally
understood, and as I interpreted them in the campaign before
election.
"The bill is not a perfect tariff bill or a complete
compliance with the promises made, strictly interpreted, but a
fulfilment free from criticism in respect to a subject matter
involving many schedules and thousands of articles could not
be expected. It suffices to say that, except with regard to
whiskey, liquors, and wines, and in regard to silks and as to
some high classes of cottons—all of which may be treated as
luxuries and proper subjects of a revenue tariff—there have
been very few increases in rates.
"There have been a great number of real decreases in rates,
and they constitute a sufficient amount to justify the
statement that this bill is a substantial downward revision,
and a reduction of excessive rates.
"This is not a free trade bill. It was not intended to be. The
Republican party did not promise to make a free trade bill.
"It promised to make the rates protective, but to reduce them
when they exceeded the difference between the cost of
production abroad and here, making allowance for the greater
normal profit on active investments here. I believe that while
this excess has not been reduced in a number of cases, in a
great majority, the rates are such as are necessary to protect
American industries, but are low enough, in case of abnormal
increase of demand, and raising of prices, to permit the
possibility of the importation of the foreign article, and
thus to prevent excessive prices."
"The administrative clauses of the bill and the customs court
are admirably adapted to secure a more uniform and a more
speedy final construction of the meaning of the law. The
authority to the President to use agents to assist him in the
application of the maximum and minimum section of the statute,
and to enable officials to administer the law, gives a wide
latitude for the acquisition, under circumstances favorable to
its truth, of information in respect to the price and cost of
production of goods at home and abroad, which will throw much
light on the operation of the present tariff and be of primary
importance as officially collected data upon which future
executive action and executive recommendations may be based.
"The corporation tax is a just and equitable excise measure,
which it is hoped will produce a sufficient amount to prevent
a deficit, and which, incidentally, will secure valuable
statistics and information concerning the many corporations of
the country, and will constitute an important step toward that
degree of publicity and regulation which the tendency in
corporate enterprises in the last twenty years has shown to be
necessary."
{643}
TARIFFS:
New Apparatus of Tariff Administration.
The President’s remarks in the next to the last paragraph of
the above statement have reference to an important section of
the Tariff Act, which authorized the creation of a Board of
General Appraisers, a Customs Court of Appeals, and an agency
for the collection of information. The Board is to consist of
nine general appraisers of merchandise, the salary of each to
be $9,000 per annum, who shall possess all the powers of a
Circuit Court of the United States. To these general
appraisers all cases of dissatisfaction with the amount and
rates of duties levied by the appraisers and assistant
appraisers at the various ports would be referred; the board
to exercise both judicial and inquisitorial functions. The
Customs Court was to be composed of a presiding Judge and four
associate Judges appointed by the President, each to receive a
salary of $10,000 per annum; to be a Court of Record, with
jurisdiction limited to Customs cases, and to have several
judicial circuits, including Boston, New York, Philadelphia
and Baltimore, New Orleans and Galveston, Chicago, Seattle,
Portland and San Francisco, and such other places as may be
found necessary.
More important, however, than either of these creations was
the third one, embodied in a brief clause of the Act, which
reads:
"To secure information to assist the President in the
discharge of the duties imposed upon him by this section, and
the officers of the Government in the administration of the
customs laws, the President is hereby authorized to employ
such persons as may be required."
The President availed himself promptly of this permission to
have assistance from a commission or bureau of tariff
information, and on the 11th of September it was announced
that he had chosen for the service three well-qualified
gentlemen, namely: Professor Henry C. Emery, of Yale,
chairman; James B. Reynolds, of Massachusetts, assistant
secretary of the treasury, and Alvin H. Sanders, of Chicago,
editor and proprietor of the Breeders’ Gazette. In announcing
the selection of the board, the following statement was made
at the Executive Offices: "The President and the secretary of
the treasury have agreed upon the plan that these three
gentlemen are to constitute the board and are to be given
authority to employ such special experts as may be needed in
the investigation of the foreign and domestic tariff."
The important direction that was given at once by President
Taft to this Tariff Board, as he has named it, was explained
in his Message to Congress, December 6, 1909, as follows:
"An examination of the law and an understanding of the nature
of the facts which should be considered in discharging the
functions imposed upon the Executive show that I have the
power to direct the tariff board to make a comprehensive
glossary and encylopædia of the terms used and articles
embraced in the tariff law, and to secure information as to
the cost of production of such goods in this country and the
cost of their production in foreign countries. I have
therefore appointed a tariff board consisting of three
members, and have directed them to perform all the duties
above described. This work will perhaps take two or three
years, and I ask from Congress a continuing annual
appropriation equal to that already made for its prosecution.
I believe that the work of this board will be of prime utility
and importance whenever Congress shall deem it wise again to
readjust the customs duties. If the facts secured by the
tariff board are of such a character as to show generally that
the rates of duties imposed by the present tariff law are
excessive under the principles of protection as described in
the platform of the successful party at the late election, I
shall not hesitate to invite the attention of Congress to this
fact, and to the necessity for action predicated thereon.
Nothing, however, halts business and interferes with the
course of prosperity so much as the threatened revision of the
tariff, and until the facts are at hand, after careful and
deliberate investigation, upon which such revision can
properly be undertaken, it seems to me unwise to attempt it.
The amount of misinformation that creeps into arguments pro
and con in respect to tariff rates is such as to require the
kind of investigation that I have directed the tariff board to
make, an investigation undertaken by it wholly without respect
to the effect which the facts may have in calling for a
readjustment of the rates of duty."
TARIFFS:
The Corporation Tax.
The Corporation Tax mentioned in the final paragraph of the
President’s statement is one imposed by an incongruous section
of the Tariff Act, designed for revenue additional to the
expected yield of import duties. It exacts one per cent. of
the net earnings in excess of $5000 of all corporations, joint
stock companies, and associations organized for profit and
having a capital stock represented by shares, and all
insurance companies. Foreign corporations are liable for the
tax to the extent of their business in the United States. The
net income upon which the tax is paid is to be ascertained by
deducting from the gross income of the corporation all
ordinary and necessary expenses of operation and maintenance;
all uncompensated losses actually paid within the year on its
bonded or other indebtedness not exceeding the paid-up capital
stock; all Federal and State taxes already paid and all
amounts received by it as dividends upon stock of other
corporations subject to the tax hereby imposed.
Holding corporations were exempted in the original Bill. That
exemption was struck out, but the Conference Committee adopted
the original clause. Corporations exempted from the tax
are:—Labour organizations, fraternal beneficiary societies,
orders or associations operating under the lodge system, and
providing for the payment of life, sick, accident, and other
benefits to their members and dependents; domestic building
and loan associations organized and operated exclusively for
the mutual benefit of their members, and any corporation or
association organized and operated exclusively for religious,
charitable, or educational purposes, no part of the profits of
which inures to the benefit of any private stockholder, or
individual, but all the profit of which is in good faith
devoted to these purposes.
TARIFFS:
Two Opposite Views of the new Tariff.
The Payne-Aldrich Tariff has been and will long be a subject
of bitterly contentious discussion, from opposite standpoints
of disgusted disappointment and happy satisfaction, before a
large indifferent audience, which takes such legislation as
belonging to an established order of conditions in the United
States. For a fair presentation of the conflicting judgments,
two carefully chosen reviews of the Act, from the two points
of view, by unquestionably representative writers, are quoted
below. The first is from President Woodrow Wilson, of
Princeton University, as follows:
{644}
"The methods by which tariff bills are constructed have now
become all too familiar and throw a significant light on the
character of the legislation involved. Debate in the Houses
has little or nothing to do with it. The process by which such
a bill is made is private, not public; because the reasons
which underlie many of the rates imposed are private. The
stronger faction of the Ways and Means Committee of the House
makes up the preliminary bill, with the assistance of
‘experts’ whom it permits the industries most concerned to
supply for its guidance. The controlling members of the
Committee also determine what amendments, if any, shall be
accepted, either from the minority faction of the Committee or
from the House itself. It permits itself to be dictated to, if
at all, only by the imperative action of a party caucus. The
stronger faction of the Finance Committee of the Senate, in
like fashion, frames the bill which it intends to substitute
for the one sent up from the House. It is often to be found at
work on it before any bill reaches it from the popular
chamber. The compromise between the two measures is arranged
in private conference by conferees drawn from the two
committees. What takes place in the committees and in the
conference is confidential. It is considered impertinent for
reporters to inquire. It is admitted to be the business of the
manufacturers concerned, but not the business of the public,
who are to pay the rates. The debates which the country is
invited to hear in the open sessions of the Houses are merely
formal. They determine nothing and disclose very little. …
"One extraordinary circumstance of the debates in the Senate
should receive more than a passing allusion. The Republican
party platform had promised that the tariff rates should be
revised and that the standard of revision should be the
differences between the cost of producing the various articles
affected in this country and in the countries with which our
manufacturers compete. One of our chief industrial competitors
is now Germany, with its extraordinary skill in manufacture
and the handicrafts and its formidable sagacity in foreign
trade; and the Department of State, in order to enable
Congress the more intelligently to fulfil the promises of the
party, had, at the suggestion of the President, requested the
German Government to furnish it with as full information as
possible about the rates of wages paid in the leading
industries of that country,—wages being known, of course, to
be one of the largest items in the cost of production. The
German Government of course complied, with its usual courtesy
and thoroughness, transmitting an interesting report, each
portion of which was properly authenticated and vouched for.
The Department of State placed it at the disposal of the
Finance Committee of the Senate. But Senators tried in vain to
ascertain what it contained. Mr. Aldrich spoke of it
contemptuously as ‘anonymous,’ which of course it was not, as
‘unofficial,’ and even as an impertinent attempt, on the part
of the German Government, to influence our tariff legislation.
It was only too plain that the contents of the report made the
members of the controlling faction of the Finance Committee
very uncomfortable indeed. … It would have proved that the
leaders of the party were deliberately breaking its promise to
the country. It was, therefore, thrown into a pigeonhole and
disregarded. It was a private document.
"In pursuance of the same policy of secrecy and private
management, the bill was filled with what those who discovered
them were good-natured or cynical enough to call ‘jokers,’
—clauses whose meaning did not lie upon the surface, whose
language was meant not to disclose its meaning to the members
of the Houses who were to be asked to enact them into law, but
only to those by whom the law was to be administered after its
enactment. This was one of the uses to which the ‘experts’
were put whom the committees encouraged to advise them. They
knew the technical words under which meanings could be hidden,
or the apparently harmless words which had a chance to go
unnoted or unchallenged. Electric carbons had been taxed at
ninety cents per hundred; the new bill taxed them at seventy
cents per hundred feet;—an apparent reduction if the
word feet went unchallenged. It came very near escaping the
attention of the Senate, and did quite escape the attention of
the general public, who paid no attention at all to the
debates, that the addition of the word feet almost doubled the
existing duty.
"The hugest practical joke of the whole bill lay in the
so-called maximum and minimum clause. The schedules as they
were detailed in the bill and presented to the country,
through the committees and the newspapers,—the schedules by
which it was made believe that the promise to the country of a
‘downward’ revision was being kept by those responsible for
the bill, were only the minimum schedules. There lay at the
back of the measure a maximum provision about which very
little was said, but the weight of which the country may come
to feel as a very serious and vexatious burden in the months
to come. In the case of articles imported from countries whose
tariff arrangements discriminate against the United States,
the duties are to be put at a maximum which is virtually
prohibitive. The clause is a huge threat. Self-respecting
countries do not yield to threats or to ‘ impertinent efforts
on the part of other Governments, to affect their tariff
legislation.’ Where the threat is not heeded we shall pay
heavier duties than ever, heavier duties than any previous
Congress ever dared impose.
"When it is added that not the least attempt was made to alter
the duties on sugar by which every table in the country is
taxed for the benefit of the Sugar Trust, but just now
convicted of criminal practices in defrauding the Government
in this very matter; that increased rates were laid on certain
classes of cotton goods for the benefit, chiefly, of the
manufacturers of New England, from which the dominant party
always counts upon getting votes, and that the demand of the
South, from which it does not expect to get them, for free
cotton bagging was ignored; that the rates on wool and woollen
goods, a tax which falls directly upon the clothing of the
whole population of the country, were maintained unaltered;
and that relief was granted at only one or two points,—by
conceding free hides and almost free iron ore, for
example,—upon which public opinion had been long and anxiously
concentrated; and granted only at the last moment upon the
earnest solicitation of the President,—nothing more need be
said to demonstrate the insincerity, the uncandid, designing,
unpatriotic character of the whole process. It was not
intended for the public good. It was intended for the benefit
of the interests most directly and selfishly concerned."
Woodrow Wilson,
The Tariff Make-Believe
(North American Review, October, 1909).
{645}
The second quotation is from an article in The Atlantic
Monthly, by Honorable Samuel W. McCall, Congressman from
Massachusetts, setting forth reasons for a moderate
satisfaction with the Act:
"The certain method of determining just what the Payne Act
does, is, as I have said, to take its paragraphs in detail and
scrutinize the new duties in comparison with those which they
have supplanted. Such a course will show the exact character
and number of the increases and decreases. Those who have no
other means of comparison at hand may safely take the table
prepared by the Honorable Champ Clark of Missouri, Democratic
leader in the House of Representatives, and produced by him
July 31 last, in his speech in the House of Representatives
against the Conference Report on the bill. It is true that in
commenting upon it he showed that he was a trifle rusty on his
Cobden, and made the amount of actual revenue the test,—a
method only less weird than that based upon the average ad
valorem, for it is demonstrable that a purely free-trade
tariff after the British model would provide us a greater
revenue than does the Payne Act. While the table given by Mr.
Clark exaggerates in some cases the extent of the increases,
it will clearly appear from it that on the whole the decreases
so vastly outnumber the increases as to make the new law seem
almost revolutionary in character. If one takes the schedules
in their order, he will find in the first schedule, which
relates to chemicals, that the increases are a bare half-dozen
in number, and include fancy soaps and alkaloids of opium and
cocaine, while the decreases are more than fifty, and include
many of the articles which are in general consumption, such as
sulphur, various forms of soda, potash, lead, and sulphate of
ammonia, the last of which is put on the free list.
"The second schedule shows a slight increase upon the smaller
sizes of plate glass, and this increase is many times offset
by decreases upon fire and other brick, gypsum, various kinds
of window-glass, nearly all the grades of marble, and other
important articles.
"In the metal schedule there is an increase in fabricated
structural steel, zinc ore, and a very few other items, some
of which relate to articles not manufactured when the Dingley
law was passed; but, on the other hand, the basic article of
iron ore is reduced from forty to fifteen cents per ton, the
lowest ad valorem that it has had in the history of the
country; pig iron is reduced from four dollars to two dollars
and a half per ton, scrap iron and steel from four dollars to
one dollar per ton, bar iron from six-tenths to three-tenths
of a cent a pound, cotton ties from five-tenths to
three-tenths of a cent per pound, steel rails from seven
dollars and eighty-four cents to three dollars and ninety-two
cents per ton. There are nearly a hundred other reductions in
the metal schedule: in fact, the reductions in this schedule
are so general, and in some cases so drastic, that it may be
said, practically, that these duties have been cut in two.
"The lumber schedule shows but two unimportant increases,
while the schedule generally is cut nearly forty per cent. One
grade of sawed boards is reduced from one dollar to fifty
cents per thousand feet, and all other sawed lumber from two
dollars to a dollar and a quarter per thousand. Fence posts
are put on the free list. Dressed lumber, telephone poles,
railroad ties, and other important products of wood, are very
much reduced.
"Notwithstanding the attempt that is being made to create a
sectional feeling in the West, the only schedule covering
necessary articles in which increases predominate is the
agricultural schedule. The duties are also increased upon
champagnes and other wines, brandy, ale, beer, tobacco, silks,
high-priced laces, and various other articles, which for want
of a better term, are called luxuries.
"Bituminous coal is reduced from sixty-seven cents to
forty-seven cents per ton, which with the exception of a very
brief period, is in value the lowest duty we have ever imposed
upon it.
"Agricultural implements are reduced, and a provision added
admitting them free of duty from any country which admits our
agricultural machinery free.
"Works of art more than twenty years old are put on the free
list.
"Hides of cattle are put on the free list, and an enormous
reduction made, not merely on all the products of these hides,
but on nearly all articles of leather. Sole leather is cut
from twenty to five per cent ad valorem, upper leather from
twenty to seven and a half per cent, and boots and shoes from
twenty-five to fifteen per cent, and, on important kinds, to
ten per cent. … The two great textile schedules are
practically unchanged. The wool duty is politically the most
powerful of any in the tariff. The farmers of the country have
been pretty thoroughly educated to the belief, whether rightly
or wrongly, that the free-wool agitation, culminating in the
tariff of 1894, was responsible for the slaughter of their
flocks. Their representatives formed the strongest single
element behind the passage of the Dingley law; and, in the
session just ended, their strength was so great as to
discourage any assault upon the wool duties. These duties
range from forty to more than one hundred per cent of the
value, and so long as they are maintained at such a high point
it is idle to talk of any very material reduction on woolens
or worsteds. The centre of the entire schedule is the duty
upon wool. … Every duty in this schedule from top to bottom
might have been cut ten per cent without trenching upon the
necessary amount of protection.
"The Dingley duties upon cottons were greatly less than those
in the woolen schedule. This was doubtless due to the fact
that we are the great cotton-producing nation, and our
manufacturers are at no disadvantage in raw material with any
of their foreign competitors. … These duties are so
complicated that it is difficult for one who is not an expert
to understand them; but according to the best experts, they
are, at least, no higher in the Payne Act than the Dingley
duties were intended to be, and were interpreted to be for
four years after the passage of the act."
{646}
The following is from an article in the American Review of
Reviews, September, 1909:
"Summing up the changes made in the tariff as shown in the
various Senate documents, the new act has increased the
Dingley rates in 300 instances, while reducing them in 584
cases. The increases affect commodities imported in 1907 to
the value of at least $105,844,201, while the reductions
affect not more than $132,141,074 worth of imports. Four
hundred and forty-seven million dollars’ worth of imports (on
the basis of 1907) remain subject to the same duties as under
the Dingley tariff. That is to say, 65 per cent of the total
imports remain subject to the old rates, more than fifteen per
cent of the total will be subject to higher duties, the
average increase amounting to 31 per cent. over the Dingley
rates; and less than 20 per cent. of the imports are to be
subject to lower duties, the reduction being estimated about
23 per cent. below the Dingley rates. All of these figures
greatly underestimate the increases of duty for the following
reasons: First they do not take into account the numerous
changes (nearly all increases of duty) due to classification,
similar to the instances cited in the case of sawn wood,
structural iron, and cotton cloth; second a large part of the
imports subject to ad valorem duties will now be assessed on
the basis of domestic prices instead of the prices in foreign
markets (with due allowance for freight and duty), as has
hitherto been the case; and, finally, the possibility, even if
remote, of the application of maximum rates to imports from
some of the foreign countries, which will amount on the
average to an increase of more than 50 per cent. over the new
rates. The real increase of duty will not be accurately known
for a year, until we have full returns of the imports and
duties actually levied under the new law under the decisions
of the Board of General Appraisers and the new Customs Court."
TARIFFS:
Certain Outside Effects.
As between the United States and France, the situation
produced by the new Tariff Act, which caused existing
commercial agreements between the two countries to be
abrogated on the 31st of October, 1909, was explained as
follows in a Press despatch of September 22 from Washington:
"The State Department has received from Consul-General Mason
at Paris the text of the announcement by the French government
of the abrogation of the several commercial agreements with
the United States by the action of President Taft in
conformity with the provisions of our new tariff act.
"‘Under and in consequence of these conditions,’ the French
announcement says, ‘there is reason to decide that the decrees
dated July 7, 1893, May 28, 1898, and February 21, 1903, which
constitute the measure of the application of the
Franco-American agreement for merchandise produced in the
United States and the Island of Porto Rico shall cease to be
enforced on October 31, 1909.’
"On that date the articles produced in the United States and
exported to France will pay what is known in France as its
general tariff, but which in effect is its maximum rates of
duty. The principal articles of export from the United States
under this agreement are mineral oils and coffee from Porto
Rico. At the same time articles imported from France into the
United States under these agreements will pay our regular or
highest rate. These include canned meats, fresh and dried
fruits, manufactured and prepared pork meats, lard, and a few
other articles of less importance."
The effect of the Payne-Aldrich Tariff Act on trade between
the United States and Canada was left an open question,
dependent on a decision which President Taft must make on or
before April 1, 1910. Section 2 of the Law expressly provides
the President with power to treat "any dependency, colony, or
other political subdivision having authority to adopt and
enforce tariff legislation" as a separate fiscal entity. The
question for the President to decide is whether Canada, by
reason of her preferential treatment of the Mother Country or
by reason of the commercial treaty which she is about to
conclude with France, will be judged guilty of "undue
discrimination" and unworthy of the minimum rates.
Looked at from the English standpoint, it is thought that he
"can hardly declare so natural a relationship as the existing
British preference to be ‘unduly’ discriminatory when a
similar relationship exists between Cuba and the United
States, and when Porto Rico, Hawaii, and the Philippines
actually enjoy reciprocal free trade with America and with
America alone."
A more practical consideration in the matter, however, is that
suggested in the following, from a Boston newspaper, which
remarks:
"According to the Department of Commerce and Labor, there are
now 147 branch factories in Canada, representing a capital of
$125,000,000, established by United States concerns which
formerly supplied their Canadian trade with the product of
industry on this side the national border. This is the result
of retaliatory legislation in Canada invited by our own tariff
against Canadian imports. If further tariff war is invited by
the imposition of the maximum schedules against Canada, still
more United States capital will go over the line to provide
employment and wages for Canadian workmen."
The Monetary Times, of Toronto, made an exhaustive
inquiry on this subject late in 1909, and found 168 American
manufacturing concerns in Canada, representing an estimated
investment of $226,000,000.
The spirit in which President Taft will interpret the maximum
and minimum clause of the Act, and exercise his discretion in
applying it, was indicated by him in his Message to Congress,
December 6, 1909, when he said: "By virtue of the clause known
as the ‘Maximum and Minimum’ clause, it is the duty of the
Executive to consider the laws and practices of other
countries with reference to the importation into those
countries of the products and merchandise of the United
States, and if the Executive finds such laws and practices not
to be unduly discriminatory against the United States,
the minimum duties provided in the bill are to go into force.
Unless the President makes such a finding, then the maximum
duties provided in the bill, that is, an increase of 25 per
cent. ad valorem over the minimum duties, are to be in force.
Fear has been expressed that this power conferred and duty
imposed on the Executive is likely to lead to a tariff war. I
beg to express the hope and belief that no such result need be
anticipated.
{647}
"The discretion granted to the Executive by the terms ‘unduly
discriminatory’ is wide. In order that the maximum duty shall
be charged against the imports from a country, it is necessary
that he shall find on the part of that country not only
discrimination in its laws or the practice under them against
the trade of the United States, but that the discriminations
found shall be undue; that is, without good and fair reason. I
conceive that this power was reposed in the President with the
hope that the maximum duties might never be applied in any
case, but that the power to apply them would enable the
President and the State Department through friendly
negotiation to secure the elimination from the laws and the
practice under them of any foreign country of that which is
unduly discriminatory. No one is seeking a tariff war or a
condition in which the spirit of retaliation shall be
aroused."
On the 19th of January, 1910, the President issued the first
of his proclamations relative to the operation of the maximum
and minimum rates of duty. Six countries, namely Great
Britain, Russia, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, and Turkey, were
designated as entitled to the minimum rates. Negotiations with
Germany and France were understood to be still in progress,
which might, it was hoped, clear away the differences that
obstructed a similar concession to those countries. In the
case of Germany, the difficulty related to the exclusion of
American meats.
A second proclamation, February 7, announced the conclusion of
an agreement with Germany which gave to each country the
minimum rates of the other. This agreement had been ratified
by the Reichstag on the 5th.
Negotiations with France and with Canada occupied more time,
being protracted in the latter case almost to the limit of the
period prescribed in the Act. Terms of agreement were arrived
at in both instances, and, in the end, the President was not
called on to apply the maximum rates to any country.
----------TARIFFS: End--------
TARSUS:
Moslem attack on Armenians.
See (in this Volume)
TURKEY: A. D. 1909 (JANUARY-MAY).
TARTARS:
Holy War against Armenians in the Caucasus.
See (in this Volume)
RUSSIA: A. D. 1905 (FEBRUARY-NOVEMBER).
TASHINCHIAO, Battle of.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN; A. D. 1904 (JULY-SEPTEMBER).
TAVERA, DR. T. H. PARDO DE.
See (in this Volume)
PHILIPPINE ISLANDS: A. D. 1901.
TAXATION:
Graduated Taxation of Land.
See (in this Volume)
NEW ZEALAND: A. D. 1905.
TAXATION:
Progressive Taxation of Fortunes.
See (in this Volume)
WEALTH, THE PROBLEMS OF.
TAYLOR, EDWARD R.
See (in this Volume)
MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT: SAN FRANCISCO.
TEACHERS:
English and American Interchange of Visits.
See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION: INTERNATIONAL INTERCHANGES.
TEAMSTERS’ UNION:
Strike at Chicago.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1905 (APRIL-JULY).
TECHNICAL EDUCATION.
See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION.
TEHERAN:
TEHRAN:
Revolutionary events in.
See (in this Volume)
PERSIA.
TELEGRAPHERS’ STRIKE:
In France.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: FRANCE: A. D. 1909 (MARCH-MAY).
TELEGRAPHERS’ STRIKE:
In Russia.
See (in this Volume)
RUSSIA: A. D. 1904-1905.
TELEGRAPHERS’ STRIKE:
In the United States.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1907.
TELEGRAPHY.
See (in this Volume)
SCIENCE AND INVENTION: ELECTRICAL.
TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH MERGER, United States.
See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL, &c.: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1909.
TELISSU, Battle of.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1904 (FEBRUARY-JULY).
TELLES, Sebastião.
See (in this Volume)
PORTUGAL: A. D. 1906-1909.
TEMPERANCE.
See (in this Volume)
ALCOHOL PROBLEM.
TENEMENT HOUSE REFORM.
See (in this Volume)
NEW YORK: A. D. 1900-1903.
TERRITORIAL FORCE, THE BRITISH.
See (in this Volume)
WAR, THE PREPARATIONS FOR: MILITARY.
TEWFIK PASHA.
See (in this Volume)
TURKEY: A. D. 1908 (JULY-DECEMBER), and after.
TEXAS: A. D. 1906-1909.
Successful Prosecution of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company.
See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL, &C.:
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1904-1909.
THEOTOKIS MINISTRY.
See (in this Volume)
GREECE: A. D. 1906, and 1909.
THIBET.
See TIBET.
THOMSON, Sir Joseph:
Presidential Address to British Association for the
Advancement of Science, at Winnipeg.
See (in this Volume)
SCIENCE AND INVENTION: RECENT: PHYSICAL.
THOMSON, J. J.
See (in this Volume)
NOBEL PRIZES.
TIBET: A. D. 1902.
Russo-Chinese Treaty for Control of the Country.
"A Russo-Chinese treaty concerning Tibet was negotiated [in
the later months of 1902] … by Yung-lu. And as it had to be
notified to the Chief-Lamas of the different Buddhist
countries, it became possible to obtain the confidential
communication of its text immediately on its conclusion. This
text, which I published a month ago in the Frankfurter
Zeitung, and which has since been admitted as correct by
Russian semi-official papers, runs as follows:
"Article 1st.
Tibet being a territory situated between Central China and
Western Siberia, Russia and China are mutually obliged to care
for the maintenance of peace in that country. In case troubles
should arise in Tibet, China, in order to preserve this
district, and Russia, in order to protect her frontiers, shall
despatch thither military forces on mutual notification.
{648}
"Article 2nd.
In case of apprehension of a third Power’s contriving,
directly or indirectly, troubles in Tibet, Russia and China
oblige themselves to concur in taking such measures as may
seem advisable for repressing such troubles.
"Article 3d.
Entire liberty in what concerns Russian orthodox as well as
Lamaist worship will be introduced in Tibet; but all other
religious doctrines will be absolutely prohibited. For this
purpose, the Grand-Lama and the Superintendent of the Orthodox
Peking Mission are bound to proceed amicably and by mutual
assent, so as to guarantee the free propagation of both
religions and take all necessary measures for avoiding
religious disputes.
"Article 4th.
Tibet shall be made, gradually, a country with an independent
inner administration. In order to accomplish this task, Russia
and China are to share the work. Russia takes upon herself the
reorganisation of the Tibetan military forces on the European
model, and obliges herself to carry into effect this reform in
a good spirit and without incurring blame from the native
population. China, for her part, is to take care of the
development of the economic situation of Tibet, and especially
of her progress abroad."
Alexander Ular,
England, Russia, and Tibet
(Contemporary Review, December, 1902).
TIBET: A. D. 1902-1904.
British Enforcement of Unfulfilled Promises.
The Peaceful Mission of Colonel Younghusband which forced
its way to Lhasa.
For a dozen years prior to 1902 there had been unfulfilled
promises from China to India of a settlement of trade
relations between Tibet and the latter, so far as the nominal
suzerain at Peking had power to settle them. In that year the
Chinese Government proposed to send a Commissioner to the
Tibetan frontier to discuss matters there, and the Viceroy of
India, assenting promptly to the proposal, commissioned
Colonel Younghusband, in June, 1903, to proceed, with the
British Political Officer in Sikkim, to Khamba Jong, for a
meeting with Chinese and Tibetan representatives. The mission
was escorted by 200 native troops, and reached the meeting
place in July, but found no Chinese or Tibetan envoys on the
spot. It remained encamped at the appointed place for six
months or more, Colonel Younghusband returning personally
meantime to Simla to report the situation and receive
instructions. A reserve force was stationed in Sikkim to
protect the mission in case of need.
Early in 1904 the mission moved forward, over the Tang Pass,
to Tuna, where it halted again until the end of March, no
envoys appearing, but many marks of hostility shown. Then,
after being reinforced,—as the intention of Tibetans to oppose
its further advance had become plain,—its march was resumed.
Thrice attacked within the next few days and forced to severe
fighting, it reached Gyangtse on the 11th of April, where it
was halted again until near the end of June, in a camp
established on the plain. There Colonel Younghusband received
a communication from the Chinese Resident or Amban at Lhasa,
promising to meet him in three weeks. This was followed
immediately however by a fierce attack of the Tibetans on the
British camp. The assault was repelled, but bombardment of the
camp was opened from a neighboring fort. The Mission now
abandoned attempts to maintain its peaceful character, and
with approval of the governments behind it, both in India and
Great Britain, prepared to force its way to Lhasa and extort
fulfilment of the promises on the strength of which it had
been sent. General Macdonald, who held the military command,
brought up further reinforcements, and the expedition, now
numbering about 1000 British and 2000 native troops, after
capturing the fort at Gyangtse which had harassed it, set
forth on its march to Lhasa July 14th. It met with slight
resistance in the Karola Pass, across which a wall had been
built; but otherwise it found little but the natural obstacles
of the mountain country to overcome. Lhasa was reached, but
not entered in force, on August 3d. The Dalai Lama had left
the city, but had appointed an intelligent monk to act as
regent in his place. With him and with the Chinese Amban
Colonel Younghusband succeeded in negotiating the treaty
desired, which was signed September 7th. As soon as possible
thereafter the expedition started on its return, but suffered
severely from the cold and snows of the mountains before India
was reached. Its total death roll was 411, of which only 37
officers and men had died from battle-wounds.
By the treaty secured, the Tibetan Government was pledged to
carry out former agreements concerning the marking of
boundaries and the opening of trade at three marts; to arrange
a fixed tariff; to maintain certain roads from the frontier;
and to make no territorial, political, or commercial
concession to any foreign Power without granting similar or
equivalent concessions to Great Britain. It also undertook to
pay an indemnity for the cost of the British expedition,
pending the payment of which the Chumbi Valley should be held
by a British force.
TIBET: A. D. 1907.
Convention between Great Britain and Russia relative to Tibet.
See (in this Volume)
EUROPE: A. D. 1907 (AUGUST).
TIBET: A. D. 1910.
Chinese Authority strengthened in Tibet.
Flight of the Dalai Lama.
His formal Deposition.
The Dalai Lama, who had fled from Lhasa in 1904, on the
approach of the British expeditionary force under Colonel
Younghusband, did not return to Tibet until more than five
years later. Meantime he had visited Peking, where he was
coldly received, and seems to have wandered widely through the
Empire. During his absence the Chinese authority in Tibet had
been strengthened, and his return was followed by a
considerable reinforcement of troops to support the Ambans who
represent the Chinese Government at Lhasa. Exactly what
friction arose then has not yet been made clear; but, in
February, 1910, the Lama fled again from his capital, into
India, and on the 25th he was solemnly deposed from his sacred
office by an imperial decree.
TIEN-TSIN:
Delivered to the Chinese Viceroy.
See (in this Volume)
CHINA: A. D. 1902.
TIGER HILL.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1904 (FEBRUARY-JULY).
TILAK, BAL GANGADHAR:

His Trial and Imprisonment.
See (in this Volume)
INDIA: A. D. 1907-1908.
TIRPITZ, Admiral:
On German Navy-building.
See (in this Volume)
WAR, THE PREPARATIONS FOR: NAVAL.
TISZA MINISTRY.
See (in this Volume)
AUSTRIA-HUNGARY: A. D. 1902-1903; 1905-1906.
{649}
TITTONI MINISTRY.
See (in this Volume)
ITALY: A. D. 1905-1906.
TOBACCO FARMERS’ UNION, IN KENTUCKY:
Its Night-Riders.
See (in this Volume)
KENTUCKY: A. D. 1905-1909.
TOBACCO TRUST:
Suit of the Government against it.
Report of Commissioner of Corporations.
See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL, &c.: UNITED STATES:
A. D. 1901-1906; 1905-1906; 1907-1909; and 1909.
TOGO, Admiral:
In the Russo-Japanese War.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1904 (FEBRUARY-JULY), and after.
TOLSTOI, COUNT LYOFF:
His Challenge to the Russian Government.
See (in this Volume)
RUSSIA: A. D. 1909.
TOMUCHENG.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1904 (JULY-SEPTEMBER).
TORONTO: A. D. 1909.
Meeting of International Council of Women.
See (in this Volume)
WOMEN, INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL OF.
TOWN-PLANNING LEGISLATION.
See (in this Volume)
SOCIAL BETTERMENT: ENGLAND; A. D. 1909.
TRADE BOARDS BILL, THE ENGLISH.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR REMUNERATION: WAGES REGULATION.
TRADE UNIONS.
Disputes.
Agreements:
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION.
TRANSANDINE RAILWAY TUNNEL.
See (in this Volume)
RAILWAYS: ARGENTINE-CHILE.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transandine_Railway
TRANS-MISSOURI FREIGHT ASSOCIATION, The Case of the.
See (in this Volume)
RAILWAYS: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1890-1902.
TRANSVAAL, THE.
See (in this Volume)
SOUTH AFRICA.
TREPOFF.
See (in this Volume)
RUSSIA: A. D. 1904-1905.
TRIPLE ALLIANCE, THE: A. D. 1902.
Renewal.
The Triple Alliance of Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy,
originally negotiated in 1879, was renewed in June, 1902, for
twelve years from May, 1903.
TRIPLE ALLIANCE, THE: A. D. 1905.
Effect of the Defeat of Russia in the War with Japan.
See (in this Volume)
EUROPE: A. D. 1904-1909.
TROUBETZKOI, PRINCE S. N.
See (in this Volume)
RUSSIA: A. D. 1905-1907.
TRUSTS.
See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL, &c.
TSAI-TSE, PRINCE: HIS MISSION ABROAD.
See (in this Volume)
CHINA: A. D. 1905-1908.
TSONTSHEFF, GENERAL:
Operations in Macedonia.
See (in this Volume)
TURKEY: A. D. 1902-1903.
TSUSHIMA, NAVAL BATTLE OF.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1904-1905 (OCTOBER-MAY).
TUBERCULOSIS, THE CRUSADE AGAINST.
See (in this Volume)
PUBLIC HEALTH.
TUNG FANG.
See (in this Volume)
CHINA: A. D. 1906.
TURBINE ENGINE.
See (in this Volume)
SCIENCE AND INVENTION, RECENT.
----------TURKEY: Start--------
TURKEY: A. D. 1901.
The Bulgarian Committee which directs Revolutionary
Operations in Macedonia.
Its Instructions to the Bands and Control of their Murders.
"The Committee which was originally formed at Sofia for the
purpose of conducting the nationalist campaign among the
Macedonians has been the dominant factor in the later
developments of the Macedonian problem, and is directly
responsible for all the periodical outbreaks which students of
Eastern politics have been accustomed to look for at the
approach of spring during the last few years. The nature of
this Society will be clearly appreciated from the following
document, which sets forth in unequivocal terms both the
Committee’s mission and the means resorted to for its
fulfilment. This document was seized on the Bulgarian
conspirators who in the spring of 1901 were arrested at
Salonica, tried, sentenced to fifteen years’ incarceration at
Rhodes, and permitted to escape a few months after. I obtained
a literal translation of it from an official source at the
time …:
"‘Each armed band to consist of Bulgarians belonging to each
particular district. Their duty is to carry out secretly the
orders given by the president of the committee. The bands are
armed with weapons furnished by the Committee. These bands are
formed by the revolutionary committees of each district or
village, and receive the military training necessary for their
purpose. These bands depend on the committees, and in their
turn distribute arms among those whom they enrol or gain over
to the cause. … The armed bands are placed under the command
of the local committees in accordance with the following
rules:
"‘To obey received instructions. By means of persuasion or
intimidation to place new recruits at the committees’
disposal. To put to death the persons indicated by the
committees. … Each band, under the command of the
revolutionary committee established in the district, to be
ready to raise the standard of revolt on being so ordered by
the local committee, which cannot act except by the order of
the president of the Sofia committee. … The bands shall also
commit political crimes: that is to say, they shall kill and
put out of the way any person who will attempt to hinder them
from attaining their ends, and shall immediately inform the
Sofia committee of the crimes committed. The instructions of
the bands must be kept quite secret, as the least indiscretion
may lead to great disaster. … "Acts of personal vengeance,
attacks on villages, and generally all kinds of unauthorised
attempts to raise a revolution are strictly forbidden, and
those who are guilty of such acts will be sentenced to death.
No murder shall be committed by the bands without a previous
decision taken by the committee, except those which are
inevitable in an accidental encounter.’
"The reports of the action of the Committee in Macedonia
during the last twelve months alone form a dossier which leaves little doubt to the reader of average candour
that the regulations printed above are not allowed to remain a
dead letter, but that practice goes hand in hand with, or
rather outstrips, precept. The exploits of the Committee and
its brigands in the country may be classed under three heads:
extortion, intimidation, provocation. …
{650}
"Cases of wanton massacre, though not so numerous as the
atrocities committed with a material object in view, are not
uncommon. The victims in these cases are generally
Mohammedans. … The motive of these outrages is purely to
provoke reprisals—that is, a general massacre—and then pose as
the victims of Turkish cruelty and fanaticism, a cry which
never fails to move the nations of Europe to sympathy and
their Governments to intervention."
G. F. Abbott,
The Macedonian Question
(Nineteenth Century, March, 1903).
TURKEY: A. D. 1901-1902.
Abduction of Miss Ellen M. Stone, by Brigands.
The Ransom paid for her Release.
In a communication to the President of the United States,
March 24, 1908, the Secretary of State, Mr. Root, recited the
circumstances which attended the abduction by brigands, in
1901, of Miss Ellen M. Stone, an American missionary to
Turkey, as she travelled the highway from Raslog to Djumabala
in the Turkish Empire, and the necessary payment of a ransom
to her captors, to secure her release. In the judgment of Mr.
Root the Government should refund the ransom money to the
citizens from whom it was obtained by subscription at the
time, and his communication, as follows, was to that end:
"Our diplomatic and consular representatives in Turkey, in
correspondence with the Department of State, shortly after the
capture, indicated their belief that the motive therefor was
to obtain a ransom, and stated that they had requested the
Turkish officials to abstain from too close pursuit of the
brigands, lest the death of the captured might result. From
later correspondence with our representatives it appeared that
the brigands had retired to the mountains with the captive,
probably over the border into Bulgaria. The exact location of
the party during the captivity, however, is not established by
any evidence in the possession of the Department of State, nor
does it appear clearly of what government the bandits were
subjects.
"About October 1, 1901, the bandits opened negotiations for a
ransom, demanding £25,000, and transmitting a letter from Miss
Stone, asking that the sum demanded be paid and that pursuit of
the brigands by the Turkish troops be stopped. Our diplomatic
representatives were of the opinion that Miss Stone’s release
could only be obtained by the payment of the ransom, and the
State Department shared this view. Miss Stone’s friends, of
course, entered into correspondence with the Department
regarding the payment of the ransom, and were told that it
must be raised by private means.
"On October 3, 1901, the State Department wrote to the
Reverend Judson Smith, of the American Board of Commissioners
for Foreign Missions, Boston, Massachusetts, as follows: ‘It
seems imperative that the amount (of the ransom) should be
raised or pledged, so as to be available by your treasurer at
Constantinople in season to save Miss Stone. Statutory
prohibitions make it impossible for this Government to advance
the money or guarantee its payment. If paid by Miss Stone’s
friends, every effort will be made to obtain reimbursement
from whichever government may be found responsible under
international law and precedent. In the event of its proving
impossible to hold any foreign government responsible for the
capture and to secure the repayment of the money, this
Government is willing in the last resort to urge upon Congress
as strongly as possible to appropriate money to repay the
missionaries.’
"It is claimed that this assurance given by the Department in
its letter to Mr. Smith, to the effect that, as a last resort,
a recommendation would be made to Congress looking toward the
appropriation of a sum sufficient to pay the donors, was
largely instrumental in enabling Miss Stone’s friends to
secure the sum of $66,000, which was raised through public
subscription in this country by October 23, 1901, for the
purpose of effecting Miss Stone’s release. After negotiations
of considerable length, the brigands finally consented to
accept the amount raised and arrangements were made by United
States Minister Leishman for the payment of the money at a
point near Bansko, Macedonia, the Turkish authorities
consenting to withhold their troops from the vicinity of the
place in order that the negotiations might have a successful
issue. The release of the captive was not obtained so soon as
expected, but was finally reported by Minister Leishman on
February 23, 1902.
"After careful consideration of all the facts my predecessor,
Mr. Hay, decided on January 19, 1905, that it was not
advisable to attempt to hold the Turkish Government
responsible for the capture and to secure the repayment of the
money. Upon the subsequent application for reconsideration of
this decision Mr. Hay again, on April 11, 1905, reaffirmed the
judgment which he had originally expressed. Upon a further
review of the same subject I have come to the conclusion that
it is not advisable to reverse or change the conclusion which
Mr. Hay reached.
"It would seem, therefore, that the Executive Department is
bound to make good its promise to recommend to Congress that
money be appropriated to repay the ransom money, a promise
which was probably relied upon by many of those who
contributed of their private means to save the life of an
American citizen believed to be in the gravest peril.
Accordingly I have the honor to advise that Congress be
recommended to appropriate an amount sufficient to repay the
contributors."
60th Congress 1st Session, Senate Document No. 408.
TURKEY: A. D. 1902-1903.
Conventions for Building the Bagdad Railway.
See (in this Volume)
RAILWAYS: TURKEY: A. D. 1899-1909.
TURKEY: A. D. 1902-1903.
Insurgent operations in Macedonia.
Horrible Retaliatory Atrocities.
Misery of the Macedonian Peasants.
Contradictory Reports and Views of the Situation.
Insurgent operations in Macedonia were opened in the fall of
1902 and continued the following year, and into 1904. Besides
an activity of insurgent bands and collisions with Turkish
soldiery, there were many dynamite explosions, wrecking a bank
at Salonica, blowing up a railway train, a passenger steamer,
and other outrages of that kind. Then came confused and
revolting accounts of a terrible retaliation by the Turks.
According to Dr. Dillon, the monthly reviewer of "Foreign
Politics" for The Contemporary Review, the substantial
facts of what occurred were these:
{651}
"The insurrection in Macedonia planned by outsiders and fixed
for last autumn [1902] proved abortive. The first shot should
have been fired in August, but the members of the
revolutionary agencies which organised the scheme quarrelled
among themselves at the Congress held during that month in
Sofia, and then split up into hostile factions. In the
committee of one of these sections, General Tsontsheff
occupied the foremost position, and he resolved on his own
initiative to stir up the Macedonians to rebellion. Now it
should be borne in mind that all these committees are composed
of so-called outsiders—that is to say, mainly Macedonian
refugees in Bulgaria, and that whether their aim be to get the
provinces annexed to Bulgaria or Servia, or to demand simple
autonomy, they meet with but little sympathy and less active
support in Macedonia itself, where there is a very intelligent
native organisation in favour of self-government. Tsontsheff
was therefore left largely to his own resources. On the 23rd
of September his adjutant, Nikoloff, crossed the frontier, but
owing to the Shipka festivities, it was not until the 15th of
October that Tsontsheff himself, who had meanwhile escaped
from prison, took the field. The scene of action was the
valley of the Struma, which a week later was wholly occupied
by the Turks, and the insurrection, which had hardly even
flashed, suddenly fizzled and went out. The natives warned by
their own committee had generally held aloof. But there were
people among them who, not content with holding back, resolved
to act in the spirit of the admonitions vouchsafed to them by
the Great Powers, and ordered the revolutionary bands to quit
the country, and when the latter refused, actually drove them
off with arms in their hands. …
"When the people had gone home the Turks came to search for
arms. The peasants denied that they possessed any, and then
the work of torture began. All who could, ran away, and, owing
to the height of the mountain passes and the enormous
snowdrifts, had to leave their wives and children behind.
Before this calamity overtook the place, the district of
Razlog had twelve hamlets and 3,665 Bulgarian houses
containing about 25,000 inmates. Of these Madame Bakhmetieff,
the American wife of the Russian minister in Sofia, counted
961 fugitives, besides some hundreds who found a refuge in the
Peshtshersky district. The entire number of able-bodied men
driven away from Razlog alone is about 1,500!
"In that loyal and well-conducted district there were fourteen
churches with twenty-two priests; of the latter eight escaped
to Bulgaria, one was killed, one arrested, and the fate of the
remainder is unknown. According to the statement of the priest
who, having made good his escape, found an asylum in the
Principality, their churches were defiled and destroyed by the
Turks. A considerable number of the remaining peasants are
said to have perished on the way over the mountains. Over
one-third, therefore, of the male population of the best
behaved district of Macedonia has been thus forced to flee the
country. …
"We have the authority of Madame Bakhmetieff—who travelled
about in the deep snow with the thermometer at 22 Celsius
below freezing point, to bring succour to the fugitives—for
saying that two priests of the villages of Oranoff and Padesh
were tortured in a manner which suggests the story of St.
Lawrence’s death. They were not exactly laid on gridirons, but
they were hung over a fire and burned with red hot irons. In
the Djumaisk District six churches were destroyed, and the
Church of St. Elias was turned into a stable, while the shrine
dedicated to the same saint in Shelesnitza was converted into
a water closet. The churches of Padesh, Troskoff and Serbinoff
were razed to the ground; the school buildings in the Djumaisk
District were used as barracks, and the teachers put in prison
or obliged to flee. The horror of the situation is
intensified, Madame Bakhmetieff says, by the fact that large
numbers of fugitives have been driven back by the Turks into
the interior southwards towards Seres, where their horrible
sufferings and their miserable end will be hidden from all who
might give them help or pity."
E. J. Dillon,
The Reign of Terror in Macedonia
(Contemporary Review, March, 1903).
Another view of the Macedonian situation is presented in the
following, from another of the English reviews:
"The Macedonian problem is desperate mainly because it has
been overlaid with abstractions. We talk of trouble in the
Balkans, of insurgent excesses, and Turkish atrocities,
without realising that these occasional and startling
phenomena are the product of a misery that is as constant as
it is uninteresting—and unbearable. We think of Turkish
misrule as an isolated and irrational fact, without
comprehending that it is a highly organised and quite
intelligent system, designed to promote the profit of a small
minority of officials, tax farmers, and landlords. It rests on
a substantial basis of corrupt and anti-social interest. The
political mismanagement is the least of all the evils it
produces. The reality behind the whole muddle of racial
conflicts, beyond the Chauvinism of the Balkan peoples and the
calculations of the greater Powers, is the unregarded figure
of the Macedonian peasant, harried, exploited, enslaved,
careless of national programmes, and anxious only for a day
when he may keep his warm sheepskin coat upon his back, marry
his daughter without dishonour, and eat in peace the bread of
his own unceasing labour. All our efforts might fail to bestow
upon him an ideal government—there are not the makings of a
harmonious nation in Macedonia. But politics are, after all, a
mere fraction of life. While Servia earns the contempt of the
civilised world, the Servian peasant sows in hope and reaps in
peace, keeping for winter evenings the tale of murdered
forbears and ravished ancestors. The Macedonian villager is
ignorant. But his leaders have heard of a far-off England
which twenty-five years ago flung them back under the heels of
the Turk, after Russia had won their freedom at San Stefano.
The tale runs that this same England then guaranteed them, at
Berlin, the amplest of reforms. And thereupon these simple men
will talk about their rights. It is for these they are
fighting."
H. N. Brailsford,
The Macedonian Revolt
(Fortnightly Review, September, 1903).
{652}
And still a third view in this which follows:
"The Turks are honestly doing their best to administer justice
indifferently. Again and again during my travels in Macedonia
I have admired the energy of Valis and Kaimakams, who hold
thankless posts with courage and determination. If the
Albanians could be kept in order and Bulgarian anarchism could
be suppressed, there would be no grievances in Macedonia
to-day. The Albanians are turbulent sportsmen, engaging as
individuals, but intolerable as neighbours. They must be made
to understand that no further nonsense will be permitted. The
Porte would be quite capable of reducing them to order if they
had not a powerful protector at hand. The Porte could also
reduce the Bulgarian conspirators if she did not fear to
arouse prejudice in Europe. The echo of former Bulgarian
‘atrocities’ (as resolute government was dubbed), paralyses
effective action. The Turks cannot punish Christian criminals
so long as Exeter Hall is on the qui vive to defend
them. Give the Sultan a free hand, and the Macedonian
conspiracy may be ended in a few weeks."
Herbert Vivian,
The Macedonian Conspiracy
(Fortnightly Review, May, 1903).
The British Government received the following representation
of facts from its Minister to Bulgaria, Mr. Elliott, in a
despatch dated May 19, 1903.
"There are some points which appear to me to be too frequently
lost sight of in apportioning responsibilities for occurrences
in Macedonia. In the first place, the term ‘Bulgarian’ is
applied indiscriminately to subjects of the Principality and
to Macedonians of Bulgarian race, and the former are made to
bear the blame for the actions of the latter. In the same way,
it appears to be believed that the ‘Bulgarian bands’ which
make incursions into Macedonia from the territory of the
Principality are composed of Bulgarian subjects, whereas the
latter probably do not contribute more than 10 per cent, of
the number of incursionists, the remainder being all
Macedonians, of whom there are some 200,000 in the
Principality."
The same Minister wrote from Sophia on the 1st of July: "All
the reports received concur in stating that every Turkish
official, civil and military, from Hilmi Pasha downwards, look
to war as the only means of escape from a situation which is
becoming intolerable. It is obvious that in such a war both
sides would have much to lose and little material advantage to
gain; but the Turks argue that if they could administer a
crushing defeat to Bulgaria, of which they have no doubt, they
would, even if they were afterwards obliged to withdraw,
obtain some years’ peace in Macedonia, by the destruction of
what they have been taught to believe, with some justification
in the past, is the centre of disaffection, though the real
cause of it is to be sought in their own maladministration.
The Bulgarians, although believing that the conquest of
Bulgaria would not prove the easy matter that the Turks seem
to imagine, are, for the most part, under no illusions as to
their ability to hold out single-handed against the Ottoman
Empire; they are unprepared, and they have apparently been
deserted by their protectors. They are, therefore, sincere in
their desire to do everything to avoid a conflict. But it does
not rest with them to avoid it. The Macedonian agitators will
naturally do all they can to provoke a war. It is therefore of
the most urgent importance that an attempt should be made by
the Turkish Government to restore the conditions of life in
Macedonia to something like their normal state. If the
persecutions of the last few weeks continue, it will be
impossible for the Government to restrain the Macedonians
established in this country."
Parliamentary Papers, Cd. 1875.
The condition of suffering in the region of country tormented
by this inhuman strife is indicated by such despatches as the
following, from the British Vice-Consul at Monastir, writing
September 23, 1903:
"According to the best data actually available, the number of
persons now wandering on the mountains homeless and destitute
cannot be estimated at less than 40,000, while the number of
Christians massacred may be safely put down at 3,000. Some of
my colleagues, notably the Austrian, French, and Italian
Consuls, have sent even higher figures to their embassies."
Parliamentary Papers
(Turkey, No. 2, 1904), Cd. 1879.
TURKEY: A. D. 1903-1904.
The Mürzsteg Programme of Reforms in the Administration of
Macedonia.
During a meeting of the Emperors of Austria-Hungary and
Russia, in 1903, at Mürzsteg, in the Austrian Alps, a plan of
supervised administration in Macedonia (known since as the
Mürzsteg Programme), to be pressed on the Turkish Government,
was agreed upon by the two sovereigns and their advisers. With
the assent and support of the other Powers in Europe this was
submitted to the Porte, and was accepted in principle on the
25th of November; but it was not until the following May that
it could be said to have been brought at all into action.
Turkey "agreed
(1) to the appointment, for two years only, of Austrian and
Russian civil agents, with a limited staff of dragomans and
secretaries, to reside in the same place as the
Inspector-General, and to make tours in the interior,
accompanied by a Turkish official, to question the inhabitants
as to their grievances;
(2) to the appointment of an Italian general to reorganize the
gendarmerie;
(3) to consider the question of altering the administrative
districts so as to establish a more regular grouping of the
various nationalities;
(4) that neither race nor religion shall be a hindrance to
official employment;
(5) that an amnesty shall be granted to all persons implicated
in the insurrection, except those guilty of dynamite outrages;
and
(6) to exempt the inhabitants of destroyed villages from all
taxation for one year."
Annual Register, 1904, page 318.
General De Giorgis, of Italy, was appointed to the command of
the gendarmerie. Hostility to the arrangements of the Mürzsteg
programme in Albania was carried to the extent of open
warfare, and a number of serious engagements between Turkish
and Albanian forces occurred. Other collisions between the
various quarreling races—Greek, Bulgarian and Servian—were not
stopped by the reorganized gendarmerie. Turkish action
and inaction afforded about equal occasion for Bulgarian
complaints; but in April the Bulgarian and Turkish governments
came to mutual agreements, that the former would stop the work
of revolutionary committees within her territory, and that the
latter would carry out the reforms of the Mürzsteg programme
in good faith. No effective performance of either engagement
appears to have been secured.
{653}
TURKEY: A. D. 1903-1904.
Incursions of Armenian
Revolutionists from Russia and Persia into Asiatic Turkey.
Exaggerated accounts of retaliatory Massacre.
Many bands of revolutionary Armenians who crossed the
frontiers from Russia and Persia during 1903 and 1904, making
incursions into Armenian Turkey, and bringing upon the
inhabitants there the tender mercies of Turkish troops, appear
to have been acting generally in cooperation with the
Bulgarian revolutionists in Macedonia. The consequent
barbarities were dreadful enough, no doubt, but were found to
be greatly exaggerated in the reports current at the time.
This was the conclusion of the British Ambassador to Turkey,
derived from investigations made on the ground by a consular
officer who traversed it with care. In a despatch dated August
16, 1904, the Ambassador, Sir N. O’Conor, related a
conversation on the subject that he had had with the Armenian
Patriarch, Mgr. Ormanian, as follows:
"In the course of conversation I told his Beatitude that I had
heard with deep concern the statements he had made to several
newspaper correspondents, to the effect that he believed that
between 6,000 and 9,000 persons had been massacred in the
Sasun and Talori districts during the late troubles, and that
I deeply regretted that upon my applying for precise
information which would enable me to make earnest
representations to the Grand Vizier, his Beatitude has sent me
word that he was unable to indicate the places at which these
massacres had taken place or to affirm that his reports were
based on really trustworthy information. His Beatitude replied
that he had had no means of controlling these reports, and
that he had communicated them to others as he had received
them. I said that, judging from the reports of His Majesty’s
Consul at Van, who had visited many of the districts in
question, the numbers of victims mentioned by his Beatitude
was grossly exaggerated. Captain Tyrrell was more inclined to
estimate the number at 900 than 9,000, and he had, moreover,
been unable to confirm the statements in the public press that
there had been any massacre of Armenians in the ordinary sense
of these words, although, no doubt, many innocent persons had
been killed both by the insurgents and the troops. … I did not
despair of following to the end the investigations which had
been set on foot by the Grand Vizier. If, however, his
Beatitude could now furnish me with more definite information,
I would do all in my power, in conjunction with my French and
Russian colleagues, to bring about a searching investigation
on the spot. Mgr. Ormanian replied that he was not in a
position to give me this information."
TURKEY: A. D. 1903-1905.
A "Holy War" in Arabia.
The Sheik Hamid Eddin contesting the Caliphate
with the Sultan.
"Under the obscure heading of ‘Rebellion in the Yemen,’ a
series of brief telegrams has recently appeared in the British
and American press, describing in skeleton language the
exploits of Sheik Hamid Eddin, the Sovereign of Hadramaut,
against the troops of the Turkish Sultan. Absorbed in the
contemplation of the Far-Eastern struggle, neither the writers
nor readers of the newspapers have yet found leisure to
reflect upon the meaning of the movement, which the Lord of
the Land of Frankincense is leading. … But the Government in
Constantinople, though it would fain throw dust in the eyes of
Europe, is itself painfully conscious of the menacing
character of the challenge which has gone forth from Arabia.
It is, indeed, impossible for it any longer to doubt that
Hamid Eddin, the namesake of Abdul Hamid, is contesting not
only the possession of Yemen, but also the spiritual supremacy
of Islam. A Holy War, in fact, has started in Arabia, and upon
its issue depend the fate of Mecca and the title of Caliph. …
"For several years, the propaganda proceeded on comparatively
peaceful lines. Only occasionally it was marked by collisions
with the Turkish troops. But, towards the end of 1903, the
Sheik entered the northern district of the Yemen and laid
siege to the Turkish garrison of Assyr. The engagement ended
disastrously for the Turks. … For a whole year the Turks
refrained from attempting any serious resistance to the
Arabian movement. In February of this year, however, they
succeeded in inflicting on Hamid Eddin a slight reverse, which
the authorities in Constantinople, for political reasons, at
once magnified into a disaster."
W. F. Bullock,
The Fight for the Caliphate
(North American Review, August, 1905).
TURKEY: A. D. 1905-1906.
Demand in Crete for Union with Greece.
Resignation of Prince George as High Commissioner.
Appointment of M. Zaimis.
See (in this Volume)
CRETE: A. D. 1905-1906.
TURKEY: A. D. 1905-1906.
Anti-British agitation in Egypt.
Encroachments on the Sinai Frontier.
The Tabah Incident.
See (in this Volume)
EGYPT: A. D. 1905-1906.
TURKEY: A. D. 1905-1908.
Continued Reign of Terror in Macedonia.
Financial Reform forced on Turkey by a Naval Demonstration.
Barbaric Warfare of Greek and Bulgarian Bands.
Efforts of Great Britain to secure further action by the Powers.
On the 17th of January, 1905, the Austro-Hungarian and Russian
Governments proposed to supplement the Mürzsteg Programme by a
measure of financial reform, which would empower the agencies
of the Imperial Ottoman Bank to "act as Treasurer and
Paymaster-General in the three vilayets of Salonika, Kossovo
and Monastir," to receive the net revenues of those vilayets,
and to "be intrusted with the issue of payments of whatever
nature and in whatever form." The Turkish Government submitted
a counter proposition, somewhat to the same purpose, on the
5th of March; and, after much discussion between the six great
Powers, of Austria-Hungary, Russia, Germany, Great Britain,
France, and Italy, they joined in a note to the Sublime Porte,
on the 8th of May, accepting the Turkish project of financial
reform, provided the Porte would consent to complete it by
adding the following:
"To supervise the execution of the financial reforms and the
application of the preceding Regulation, and to insure its
observation, the Governments will each nominate a financial
Delegate. These Delegates of the four Powers will act in
concert with the Inspector-General and the Austro-Hungarian
and Russian Civil Agents, whose functions were defined in the
Mürzsteg programme. The Commission thus formed will have all
the powers necessary for the accomplishment of its task, and
particularly for the supervision of the regular collection of
taxes, including also the tithe.
{654}
Before being finally settled, the budgets must be submitted to
the Commission, which will have the right to amend, under the
head of receipts and expenditure, any provision which may be
inconsistent with the existing laws or unsuited to the
economic and financial requirements of the country. With a
view to facilitating its task, the Commission will have the
power of nominating for each vilayet an inspector charged with
the supervision of the agents employed in the different
services of the Treasury."
The Porte declined to acquiesce in a proposal which it
declared to be "contrary to the essential principles of the
maintenance of the rights and independence of the Imperial
Government." The demand was persisted in by the six Powers,
inflexibly, and resisted as determinedly by the Sultan and his
Ministers, during more than six months of parley. By that time
the Powers had arranged for a joint naval demonstration, and
landed forces at Mytilene on the 26th of November. This
brought the Turkish Government to terms; details of the
financial reform were settled on the 16th of December, 1905,
and the international fleet was withdrawn.
Meantime conditions in the wretched country for which these
attempted reforms of government were being so deliberately and
laboriously prepared do not seem to have been much improved,
if at all. On the 4th of September, the British Ambassador,
Sir N. O’Conor, forwarded to his Government "a statistical
résumé of the despatches recording occurrences in Macedonia"
sent to him "by His Majesty’s Consuls at Salonica, Uskup, and
Monastir between the 1st of January and the 27th of August,"
giving "the number of deaths for which the various
nationalities and organizations are responsible" in those
eight months of the year. The statistics were as follows:
Christians killed by Bulgarian Komitajis [Committees], 69;
Moslems killed by Bulgarian Komitajis, 60;
Christians killed by Greek Komitajis, 211;
Moslems killed by Servian Komitajis, 12;
Christians killed by Servian Komitajis, 10:
total, 362.
Troops killed by various bands, 60;
Bulgar Komitajis killed by troops, 145;
Greek Komitajis killed by troops, 38;
Serb Komitajis, killed by troops, 83;
total 326.
Christians murdered by Moslems, 43;
Christians killed during military operations, 54;
total 97.
Throughout the next two years the monthly reports of British
consular officers and the despatches of the Ambassador at
Constantinople, as published in the British Blue Books, are
monotonous in their sickening enumeration of single murders,
wholesale massacres, destruction of villages, flights to the
mountains of starving refugees,—outrages and miseries beyond
description. On the 10th of June, 1906, the Consul-General at
Salonika wrote:
"The general state of insecurity in the disturbed areas tends
to grow worse rather than better, chiefly owing to the
increase in the numbers and activity of the Greek bands and a
slight recrudescence of Moslem crime, the most remarkable
cases of which are attributed to a band of fifteen Albanians,
who at the beginning of the month infested the forest country
north of Niausta, where they robbed and murdered with
impunity. The fact that their victims were nearly all Greeks
has given rise to the belief in Greek circles that they have
been acting in the interests of the Vlach and Bulgarian
propagandas, though, so far as I know, there is no evidence
whatever in support of this theory. The operations of Turkish
troops have been on the whole very successful as against the
small Bulgarian and Servian bands which still kept the field.
Four of the former and two of the latter were totally
destroyed, with comparatively small loss to the soldiery. It
will be seen that the loss of life by violence again amounts
to over 200 during the month. Of armed revolutionaries, about
40 Bulgarians, 19 Servians and 26 Greeks were accounted for,
at a loss to the Turkish army of 23 killed. The great majority
of the unarmed victims were Bulgarians, of whom 33 were killed
by Greek bands, 15 by soldiers or in operation by the troops,
about 15 by the Moslems, and 12 by Bulgarian Komitajis of
rival factions; while 11 Vlachs were killed by Greek bands, 14
Greeks by Albanian brigands, 1 Greek by Bulgarian Komitajis,
and 6 Mussulmans by Greek revolutionaries."
Conditions were still the same at the end of another year, and
in December, 1907, the British Government addressed a
memorandum on the subject to France and similarly to the other
Powers, reciting some of the recent facts reported by its
consular officers, and saying: "These facts and the
circumstances of the outrages committed afford striking
evidence of the manner in which the gradual extermination of
the Christian inhabitants is being tolerated in Macedonia,
where the Ottoman authorities have displayed an utter
incapacity to maintain public tranquility. It therefore
devolves upon the Powers to suggest the adoption of measures
which will put an end to such a condition of affairs, and His
Majesty’s Government earnestly hope that the French Government
will give their most serious consideration to the proposals
which they are about to put forward. … His Majesty’s
Government are profoundly convinced that the time has now
arrived when General Degiorgis and the foreign Staff Officers
should be intrusted with a full measure of executive control,
and when the force under his command should be properly
qualified for effective action by a substantial increase in
numbers and an adequate equipment."
To this communication there was no encouraging response from
any other Government; and on the 3d of March, 1908, the
British Foreign Minister, Sir Edward Grey, reopened the
subject, expressing the regret with which His Majesty’s
Government had received the replies made to their proposals.
"The situation is not beyond remedy, but it cannot be remedied
by half-measures. Were a Governor of Macedonia to be appointed
who would be given a free hand and be irremovable for a term
of years except with the consent of the Powers, and were an
adequate force of gendarmerie and European officers placed at
his disposal, His Majesty’s Government are convinced that the
country might be cleared of bands and pacified in a short
time."
{655}
The measure proposed to other Powers by the British
Government, in this communication of the 3d of March, 1908,
obtained the assent of none, but it opened a discussion of the
subject between London and St. Petersburg which brought Great
Britain and Russia together, in joint action that gave promise
of effective results. The negotiations ensuing, between the
two Governments led to the drafting of two schemes of further
reform in Macedonia, to be pressed upon the Porte. Great
Britain accepted the Russian scheme, submitted in the form of
an aide mémoire, dated July 2, 1908. Some inkling of
this new programme, which the European Concert of Powers was
about to be asked to support, had been given to the public by
this time, and it seems to have precipitated a revolutionary
conspiracy for the self-reformation of Turkish Government,
which had been in the process of organization for many years,
and which had now drawn near to the point of open action.
TURKEY: A. D. 1906.
A Troublesome Punctilio removed.
The United States represented at Constantinople
by an Ambassador.
"According to usage in Constantinople, an Ambassador may
obtain an audience at any time with the Sultan, and force many
items through even against the influence of both the Palace
and the Porte. But every representative lower than an
Ambassador can never appear before the Sultan except when
called for by His Gracious Majesty. This invitation can be
secured sometimes by indirect means; but when, for any reason,
the Sultan does not wish to see a Minister of any foreign
Power, the Palace officials can baffle him, if necessary, for
years. Now, the American representative is called ‘Envoy
Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary,’ and is outranked
by every Ambassador to Turkey. Hence, he lacks the
all-important privilege of approaching the Sultan uninvited."
Americus,
Some Phases of the Issues between
the United States and Turkey
(North American Review, May, 1906).
The obstacle to American influence with the Turkish Government
which is explained in the statement above was removed in 1906,
by raising the diplomatic representative of the United States
at Constantinople to the rank of Ambassador.
TURKEY: A. D. 1907-1909.
The Cretan Situation as dealt with by
the Four Protecting Powers.
See (in this Volume)
CRETE: A. D. 1907-1909.
TURKEY: A. D. 1908.
Building the Damascus to Mecca Railway.
See (in this Volume)
RAILWAYS: ASIATIC: A. D. 1908.
TURKEY: A. D. 1908 (March).
The Races in Macedonia.
Struggle for Political Predominance.
The Bulgarian Propaganda.
"Macedonia, although a country of numerous tribes and tongues,
has a population of which the chief ethnic elements are Serbs,
Bulgarians, and Greeks. The last-named are numerically the
most important, while the Turks are, so to say, intruders.
Between Bulgarians and Serbs, a bitter struggle has been waged
for political predominance, each party being supported more or
less effectively by its kindred in the kingdom of Servia or
the Principality of Bulgaria. Both races in Macedonia speak
almost the same language, profess the same religion, and
inter-marry, so that the need of distinguishing between them
did not arise until the Bulgarian Church, freeing itself from
the Greek Patriarch, established an exarchate. Then all the
flock of the Exarchate was deemed to consist of Bulgarians,
although in reality many were Serbs; and the vigorous
proselytising campaign carried on by agents from the
Principality was successful in gathering many thousands more
into the true fold.
"Bulgaria had luck from the outset. Before this people had
been freed from the Mohammedan yoke the Turkish Government
favoured them because it hated the Serbs, who were believed to
be trying to gather together all Slavs and to found a powerful
Slav state. After the creation of the Bulgarian Principality
the Turks continued to wink at the Bulgarian propaganda in
Macedonia, because of Stambuloff’s anti-Russian and Turcophile
policy. And in this way crowds of Macedonians were won over to
the Bulgarian Exarchate. Moreover, the Prince’s Government
warmly seconded the efforts of its agents. Money was spent
liberally and judiciously. Many Macedonians who distinguished
themselves at school were sent to finish their education at
Sofia, where the most gifted among them received high places
in the civil service or the army. In time, however, peaceful
agitation gave way to filibustering expeditions, culminated in
bloodshed, and drove the Turks to repressive measures against
the Bulgarian element in Macedonia."
E. J. Dillon,
Foreign Affairs
(Contemporary Review, March, 1908).
TURKEY: A. D. 1908 (July-December).
The Young Turk party and its Revolutionary organization.
Its Plans hurried by the Anglo-Russian project of a
new Macedonian Intervention.
Beginning and Rapid Spread of Revolt.
Proclamation of the Constitution of 1876.
Yielding of the Sultan.
Intense Joy in the Empire.
Election of a Parliament.
Until July 3, 1908,—the day after M. Isvolsky, Russian
Minister of Foreign Affairs, had dated (as stated above) his
aide mémoire of Macedonian Reform, which he and Sir
Edward Grey were about to submit to the Powers,—the Turkish
party since famous under the name of "the Young Turks" had
attracted not much general attention, and, even in diplomatic
circles, there does not seem to have been much known of the
extraordinary work of revolutionary propagandism and
organization it had done. Its leadership, seated at Salonika,
had been in a Committee, named formerly the Committee of
Liberty, but styled in later years the Ottoman Committee of
Union and Progress. Of the rise and origin of this Young Turk
party, the following account was written some years before it
leaped into public fame, by the veteran apostle of political
liberty, Karl Blind:
"I remember its rise and origin in the sixties, when, between
1867 and 1868, a small group of Turkish exiles—namely, Zia
Bey, Ali Suavi, and Aghaia Effendi—lived in London. They
published here and in Paris an ably conducted journal, called
the Mukhbir (the ‘Advertiser’), copies of which are
still in my library. That paper came out under the auspices of
Mustafa Fazil Pasha, the well-known statesman who contributed
so much to the spread of public instruction and of Liberal
ideas by sending young students and others—among them, a
distinguished poet, Kemal—to Paris and London. In the
Mukhbir, parliamentary institutions and all other
desirable reforms were advocated.
{666}
"In 1876, the Sofia rising at Constantinople at last brought
about the introduction of a Charter under the young Sultan,
who had just come to the throne—the present Abdul Hamid the
Second. It was a popular movement, officered by the better
educated class of Mohammedans. In a famous rescript, the
Sultan said that ‘if his sire had lived longer, a
constitutional era would have been inaugurated under him.
Providence, however, had reserved for him (the son) the task
of accomplishing this happy transformation, which is the
highest guarantee of the welfare of his subjects.’ He went on
to denounce ‘the abuses which are the result of the arbitrary
rule of one or of some individuals.’ He then enumerated the
various reforms to be accomplished by the National Assembly:
responsibility of ministers; parliamentary right of control;
independence of the courts of justice; equilibrium of the
budget.
"All races and all creeds were represented in that Parliament,
which sat during 1877-1878: Turks and Armenians, Bulgars,
Greeks, Albanese, Syrians, and Arabs; Mohammedans,
Greco-Catholics, Armenian Christians, Protestants, and Jews.
Its debates, through the whole of which I went carefully at
the time in the French text of the Constantinople press,
exhibited a remarkable degree of ability. I learnt afterwards,
from men conversant with Turkish, and who had repeatedly been
present at the sittings, that these official reports had even
considerably toned down the liveliness of the discussions.
"I need not refer to the activity of Midhat Pasha, nor go into
the many useful reforms then debated, including freedom of the
press; equality before the law; liberty in matters of public
instruction; admission of all citizens, irrespective of race
and creed, to the various public employments; an equal
imposition of taxes; free exercise of every religious cult,
and so forth. …
"How did that Assembly come to grief? When the Russian army
arrived before the gates of Constantinople [in 1878], the
Sultan, pressed close by the Czar, and being at issue with the
representatives of the people on account of the exile of
Midhat and about budget questions, suddenly prorogued Parliament. Alexander the Second, the ‘Divine Figure from the
North,’ was thus freed from the danger of hearing Liberal
subjects of his own uttering the cry: ‘Let us, by way of
reward for our sacrifices in blood and money in this war, have
parliamentary government as in Turkey!’
"Prorogued the Turkish National Assembly was, let it well be
remembered—not abolished; not dissolved even. Ever since, the
Young Turkish party has called for its restoration."
Karl Blind,
Macedonia and England’s Policy
(Nineteenth Century, November, 1903).
When it came to be known, in the spring or early summer of
1908, that Great Britain and Russia were concerting a fresh
proposal to the Powers of more thorough going intervention in
Macedonian affairs, the Young Turk leaders are said to have
been driven to a hurried rearrangement of their own plans.
They had not expected, it seems, to be in readiness for a
decisive movement until some months or a year hence; but they
could not afford to have the Concert of Europe as well as the
despotism of the Sultan to deal with in their revolutionary
undertaking, contemplating as that did a state of government
for Turkey which outside nations would have no right or need
to be meddlesome with. Hence they hastened preparations for an
explosion of the revolt they had organized so patiently, and
its first outbreaks chanced to occur just as M. Isvolsky had
signed and dated the statement of his scheme of intervention
for communication to other Powers.
The beginnings, on the 3d of July, were in the vilayet of
Monastir, where the officers and soldiers of two battalions,
at Resna and Presba, with some officials of the district,
formed themselves openly into a "Young Turk" band, seized arms
and the military chest, and went into the mountains. Similar
movements in the Kossovo and Salonika vilayets followed
quickly. On the 7th, at the city of Monastir, General Shemsi
Pasha, when setting forth to take command of operations
against the insurgents, was shot, and the soldiers of his
escort were reported to have allowed the assassins to escape
by firing in the air. Other murders of officers who showed
activity against the rebels were soon announced. The Ottoman
Committee of Union and Progress had now issued a manifesto,
announcing that the object of their League was to secure the
restoration of the Constitution of 1876, and appealing to the
Great Powers "to show their good will towards the peoples of
Turkey by earnestly urging His Majesty, the Sultan, to yield
to the legitimate demands of his subjects, who are loyal,
though in revolt against the shameful situation of their
country." The Committee protested solemnly that the League
entertained no hostility to non-Moslems; that it would avoid
useless bloodshed, and employ "energetic methods" only in
extreme cases against the enemies of liberty.
By the 22d of the month the Sultan had become sufficiently

alarmed to dismiss his Grand Vizier, Ferid Pasha, and call
Kiamil Pasha, the former Grand Vizier, to his council again.
Kiamil exacted conditions which his master was slow in
yielding to, and he seems to have been Grand Vizier de
facto for a short time before he accepted the responsible
title. Change of Ministry, however, did not check the
deepening and spreading of revolt. On the 23d of July the
Young Turks, having complete possession of the cities of
Monastir and Salonica, and of several lesser towns, made
solemn proclamation of the Constitution, with popular
demonstrations and ceremonies of prayer and speech in which
Moslems and Christians were joined. That night the Sultan held
long counsel with his Ministers, at the Palace, and before
morning the reestablishment of the suspended Constitution of
1876 was decided.
See (in this Volume)
CONSTITUTION OF TURKEY.
The morning papers of the 24th gave the decree to the public
of Constantinople and the news of it was flashed throughout
the Empire and to the ends of the earth. This was the message
that went from the Grand Vizier to Hilmi Pasha, Inspector
General at Salonika:
"In compliance with the wish expressed by the people and by
order of His Majesty the Sultan, the Constitution promulgated
on the 11th (23d) December, 1876, which had for various reasons
been withdrawn, has been again enforced. The General Assembly
(Senate and Chamber of Deputies) may assemble on the terms
prescribed by law. I beg you to convey this news to the
public."
{657}
According to all accounts of the time, the feeling evoked by
the announcement of a constitutionalized government—as soon as
the long oppressed people could be persuaded of its actuality
—was quite extraordinary, and it swept away temporarily, at
least, the enmities of religion and race to a remarkable
extent. What occurred, for example, at Beirut, in Syria, as
described by a missionary, was probably not exceptional in
that place. "Men gathered," he says, "in large groups.
Audiences and orators sprung up like mushrooms. The torrent of
eloquence that poured forth there was such as would put
Niagara to shame. There were people mingling together there
who during the past years had been bitterly antagonistic to
each other, but who now were showing their friendship in
public; Greek Orthodox and Mohammedan priests were embracing
each other; branches were cut down from the trees; rugs were
brought out from the houses; the streets were lined with
people offering their hospitality to their new-found brothers;
everywhere, even among the criminal classes, there were these
evidences of good fellowship."
Howard S. Bliss,
Address to National Geographic Society,
December 18, 1908.
On the night of the 26th of July the Sultan received a
deputation, headed by the Sheikh-ul-Islam, who petitioned for
the removal of certain obnoxious favorites of the "Palace
camarilla," and especially for the dismissal of the notorious
Izzet Pasha, one of his secretaries, who was hated and feared
above all. Abdul Hamid refused at first; but three days later
he ordered Izzet Pasha into exile and disgraced Ismail Pasha,
his Aide-de-camp, who was said to be the chief spy of the
military schools. Izzet succeeded, a few days later, in
escaping from the country, and so, undoubtedly, saved his
life.
On the 29th of July the British Ambassador at Constantinople,
Sir G. Lowther, sent the following telegram to Sir Edward
Grey:
"The Sultan has sworn on the Koran, as Caliph, not to repeal
the Constitution, and the Sheikh-ul-Islam has officially
notified the oath, which was registered at his Department, to
the people. It religiously binds not only Abdul Hamid but also
his successors in the Caliphate to govern in accordance with
the Constitution, and becomes part of the Sheri law. This step
was demanded by the Young Turkey and Constitutional party, in
order to prevent the Constitution being put aside, as was that
of 1876." On the 31st, announcement was made in the morning
papers of Constantinople that "a Hatti Humayun which is
binding on the successors of the Sultan will be publicly read
at the Porte confirming the Constitution." Subsequently, on
sending a copy of this instrument to his Government, Sir G.
Lowther remarked that "a Hatti Humayun is the most binding
form of legislation in the Ottoman Empire." In the present
case it seems to have supplemented as well as confirmed the
original Constitution, pledging equality of freedom and of
rights to all subjects of every race and religion; supremacy
of law; inviolability of the individual domicile;
inviolability of the Post; freedom of the Press; freedom of
Education, etc., etc.
The ministers and spies of the old regime of despotism and
corruption were now proceeded against with celerity and vigor.
Some escaped, some were imprisoned, some were killed by
enraged crowds of people. The latter was the fate of Fehim
Pasha, who had been at the head of the secret police. At the
same time exiles of an opposite character were returning to
their country and meeting with excited welcomes as they came.
Kiamil Pasha took his proper place as Grand Vizier on the 7th
of August, and formed a new Cabinet, with Tewfik Pasha as
President of the Council of State and Minister of Foreign
Affairs. In announcing the composition of the Cabinet,
Ambassador Lowther remarked: "Kiamil Pasha appears very wisely
to have taken the League of Union and Progress into his
counsels in forming his Ministry, all of whom were
incorruptible opponents of the old regime, while two of them
are Christians, in accordance with the principles of the
Constitution."
While practically dominating the Imperial Government on one
hand, the ruling Committee of the League was likewise bringing
to terms the lawless Bulgarian, Greek, and other bands which
had tortured and terrorized Macedonia so long, and was
respectfully but plainly intimating its expectation that
foreign management of the gendarmerie and the finances of that
region would soon be withdrawn. Already, as early as the 25th
of July, M. Isvolsky had withdrawn, for the time being, at
least, his project of further intervention, saying that
"Russia will follow with the most sympathetic attention the
efforts of Turkey to insure the working of the new regime. She
will abstain, for her part, from all interference calculated
to complicate this task, and will exercise all her influence
in order to obviate and prevent all disturbing action on the
part of the Balkan States." Of course the British Government
was moved by the same feeling, and, as the new order in Turkey
gave more and more promise of stability, the willingness to
suspend the foreign organization of gendarmerie in the
Macedonian provinces became general among the Powers. A
collective note, accordingly, was addressed to the Sublime
Porte in September, asking if the Imperial Government had any
objection to a provisional suspension of its contract with
foreign officers, with leave of absence to them sine
die. The Porte promptly acquiesced and the Macedonian
intervention came to an end.
Preparations for the election of representatives in the new
Parliament became active in October, the League of Union and
Progress sending agents into the provinces to give much-needed
instructions to officials and people as to what they must do
and how. The elections were conducted under a complicated
electoral law. Excepting foreign residents, natives in foreign
service, soldiers not on furlough, bankrupts, criminals, and a
few other classes, all male tax-payers twenty-five years of
age were made "electors in the first degree." By their vote
they chose, not the parliamentary representative, but
"electors in the second degree" who would meet subsequently
and make that choice. At the preliminary elections 250 to 750
voters were entitled to one elector; 750 to 1250 to two, and
so on. The representation in Parliament was by one Deputy for
25,000 to 75,000 electors of the first degree; two for 75,000
to 125,000,—and further at that rate. Candidates for
Parliament were to be not less than thirty years of age.
{658}
According to the Constitution the chosen Deputies to
Parliament were to assemble at Constantinople on the 30th of
October, old style; but inevitable delays in the elections
postponed the meeting of Parliament until the 17th of
December, on which day it was opened by the Sultan in person,
good order prevailing in the city. In a written Speech from
the Throne, read by his First Secretary, he offered as an
explanation of the long suspension of the Constitution of
1876, that, in consequence of the difficulties encountered in
operating the parliamentary system thirty years ago, it was
thought best that "the execution of the said Constitution
should be postponed until, by the progress of instruction in
my Empire, the capacity of my people should be brought up to
the desired level." As this was now believed to have been
accomplished, he had "proclaimed the Constitution anew without
hesitation, in spite of those who hold views and opinions
opposed thereto." With marked abruptness the Sultan’s speech
was then turned to some recent occurrences which have not yet
been touched in this narrative of events. Its reference to
them was in these words: "Whilst the Ministry formed under the
Presidency of Kiamil Pasha, to whom the office of Grand Vizier
was intrusted upon this change in the system of
administration, was occupied with organizing the new
Constitutional Administration, Prince Ferdinand, Prince of
Bulgaria and Vali of the Province of Eastern Roumelia,
departing, for whatever reason, from the loyalty due to our
Empire, proclaimed the independence of Bulgaria; and
immediately after this the Government of Austria-Hungary also
announced to the Porte and to the Cabinets of the other Great
Powers that it had decided to annex to the sphere of its
dominion Bosnia and Herzegovina, which were subject to the
temporary occupation and administration of Austria in
accordance with the Treaty of Berlin. These two important
events, which are prejudicial to existing legal rights and
relations, are occurrences which have moved me to very great
regret, and our Ministers have been intrusted with the task of
taking the necessary action consequent on these encroachments
and of safeguarding (he rights of the State. In regard to this
matter, and under all circumstances, the help and support of
Parliament are desired."
The concluding words of the Sultan’s brief speech were these:
"I open the Chamber of Deputies to-day with prayers for the
happiness and prosperity of our Empire and country. I am happy
to see in my presence the Deputies of my nation. My intention
to govern our country under the Constitution is absolute and
unalterable. Please God our Chamber of Deputies will
accomplish good work for our Empire and our nation, and our
fatherland will attain to happiness of every kind. May God
make us all the objects of His divine grace!"
TURKEY: A. D. 1909.
American Mission Schools.
See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION: TURKEY AND THE NEAR EAST.
TURKEY: A. D. 1909 (January-May).
Wise Moderation of the Young Turks.
Gathering of Opposition to them.
The Counter-Revolution of April 13.
Treacherous Agency of the Sultan in it.
Quick Recovery of Power by the Young Turks.
Battle in Constantinople.
Moslem attack on Armenians in Asiatic Turkey.
Deposition of Abdul Hamid.
Mohammed V. placed on the Throne.
The declaration of Bulgarian independence and the Austrian
annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, protested against by the
Sultan in his Speech from the Throne at the opening of the new
Parliament, on the 17th of December, are recounted at some
length in another place, with notice of the prolonged
anxieties they produced in Europe at large.
See (in this Volume)
EUROPE: A. D. 1908-1909 (OCTOBER-MARCH).
In Turkey itself the feeling roused by these offensive
proceedings was overborne to a great extent by increasing
excitements in home politics at the time. The first unity of
welcome and support to the revolution, as organized by the
League of Union and Progress, was now being broken, as always
happens in such movements, by conflicts of ambition and
differences of opinion and aim. In other words, contentions of
party and faction were coming into play. The Young Turk
leaders of the League had manifestly conducted the whole
movement of revolution with extraordinary ability,
self-effacement, and restraint. The President of Robert
College, at Constantinople, Dr. C. Frank Gates, who must be
accounted a trustworthy observer of events in the Ottoman
capital, writing in The Outlook, November 7, 1908, of
"Turkey under the New Regime," paid this high tribute to its
chiefs:
"One of the most striking features of this movement to those
who have lived long in the country is the moderation shown by
the Young Turks. The regime which has been overthrown was
oppressive in the extreme, and all the people had suffered
terribly from it. The Turks have often said, ‘We suffer more
than the Christians.’ Many have predicted a day of terrible
retribution, when the old regime should fall into the hands of
its victims. But there have been no reprisals. Officers of the
army were killed in order to gain control of the army, a few
spies fell into the hands of the people and were killed, the
notorious Fehim Pasha was torn to pieces by the mob at
Broussa, but most of the rascals have been held for regular
trial, and the leaders of the new movement have firmly
insisted that it is no time for vengeance or for the
gratification of personal animosities; only one consideration
can be admitted, and that is the good of the country. Their
eyes are upon the future, not upon the past. This is
wonderful. If one could have expected a reign of terror
anywhere, here was the place to expect it, but it has not
come.
"The Young Turks have shown a practical wisdom in dealing with
the various parties and in solving the questions which have
arisen which commands the admiration of all. A friend who is
very well acquainted with the leaders in this movement said
the other day, ‘The most wonderful thing of all is the
committees.’ Properly speaking, there are no committees and no
tangible organization. There are men who stand behind the
present Government and practically guide and control it, but
they are content to be unknown and to work in silence. They
say, ‘It is the work of God,’ 'Do not congratulate us: thank
God.’
{659}
"The difficulties which these men have to face are enormous.
There is the difficulty of financing the Government, which is
aggravated by the fact that some of the provinces have
understood liberty as meaning freedom from taxes. Then there
is the difficulty of forming a programme for the new regime.
There have been two parties among the Young Turks, the
Committee of Union and Progress, and the Party of
Decentralization headed by Sebaheddin. … Sebaheddin has been
explaining his programme to popular audiences. His plan is to
have local assemblies in the provinces, to which shall be
relegated many of the functions which have been centralized in
Constantinople under the old regime."
The working of the new machinery of government went smoothly,
in appearance, for some weeks after this was written. On the
1st of January the Sultan gave a banquet to the Deputies of
Parliament at the Yildiz Kiosk, sitting with them at table and
speaking to them with eloquent piety and patriotism;
subsequently permitting a general kissing of his hands, which
performance of affectionate reverence was much disapproved by
some of the Turkish journals next day. A fortnight later Mr.
Hagopian, special correspondent at Constantinople of the New
York Evening Post, seemingly intimate in acquaintance
with the inner circles of parties, began to be sharply
critical of the Committee of Union and Progress, saying that
their "arrogant programme" "has led more enlightened Turks to
organize a new party, the Sons of Liberal Ottomans." Then he
speaks of what appears to be another party, "the association
of ‘Fedakiarans’ (Confederates), composed of all former
political exiles and prisoners who became free after the
establishment of the new regime. On the surface their aim is
said to be to assist all their unfortunate members who have
been brought to poverty, or disabled by the tortures of prison
and exile. Their membership within the last four months has
reached twenty thousand. …
"The mistake which the Young Turks committed in opposing
Kiamil Pasha, and in persecuting the Confederates," this
writer goes on to say, "has strengthened the cause of
Sabakheddin Bey and his followers. All the oppressed Christian
races, who welcomed the inauguration of a liberal government
in Turkey, were alarmed when a part of the young Turks came
forward as champions of Panislamism, and to-day they are
inclined to be in the rank and file of this new liberal
movement. The Young Turkish Parliament has shown a tendency to
be a Moslem institution."
A fortnight later Kiamil Pasha, the Grand Vizier, or Prime
Minister, as he preferred, it is said, to be called, dropped
Ali Riza Pasha, Minister of War, and Aarif Pasha, Minister of
Marine, from his Cabinet, appointing them to other posts,
which they declined; and this completed his breach with the
Committee of Union and Progress. Mr. Hagopian, in his next
letter to the Evening Post, averred that the Grand
Vizier had discovered a plot, organized by the Young Turks, to
dethrone the Sultan and proclaim Youssuf-Izeddin, elder son of
Abdul Aziz, the murdered former Sultan, and that he defeated
their project by the sudden change he made in the Ministries
of War and Marine. Other reporters from Constantinople to the
Press do not seem to have given credit to this explanation.
Whatever the inner facts may have been, the Young Turk
Committee proved stronger than the Grand Vizier, and they
forced his resignation on the 13th of February, by an
overwhelming vote in the Chamber of Deputies, 198 to 8, that
he "no longer possesses its confidence." He had commanded
foreign confidence more, perhaps, than any other Turkish
statesman, and his overthrow gave a serious shock for the
moment to the hopefulness with which the Turkish
constitutional experiment had come to be quite generally
regarded.
Hilmi Pasha, who had been Minister of the Interior under
Kiamil, was now called by the Sultan to be Grand Vizier, and a
new Cabinet was formed, Ali Riza Pasha resuming the portfolio
of the Ministry of War, and with it that of the Marine. The
administration was now entirely in harmony with the Committee
of Union and Progress. During the next two months there was
not much in Turkish affairs to command attention abroad. But
political hostility to the Committee of Union and Progress was
evidently increasing. The correspondent of the London
Times wrote to his paper from Constantinople in March
that "one of the most perplexing and disquieting features of
the situation since the fall of the late Cabinet has been the
persistent manner in which the Committee have denied that any
extra-Parliamentary pressure was employed to effect that
change, or that, since it was accomplished,
extra-Parliamentary forces have exercised any influence on the
conduct of affairs. Had they frankly admitted that such
influences had been, and were still, brought to bear—as,
indeed, the speech of the President of the Chamber implicitly
acknowledges—but that such interference was justified by
circumstances and would continue to be exercised until the
country had safely emerged from the critical period through
which it is passing, many who are now falling away from them
would have been found to agree, and few persons capable of
forming an unbiased opinion would have ventured to declare
that their contention was altogether unreasonable and
unjustifiable. By adopting a different course they have
alienated much of the sympathy and confidence they hitherto
commanded, and given rise to suspicions, quite possibly
unfounded, as to the purity of their motives, with the result
that the country, which needs and will long continue to need
the united energies of all its ablest and most enlightened
citizens, for the tremendous task of regeneration and
reorganization, is now weakened by a fierce party struggle,
and that many competent observers regard a fresh Ministerial
crisis as an event which cannot be delayed for many weeks."
The anticipated crisis came about four weeks after this had
been written, in a form much more serious than that of a mere
Ministerial collapse. It was precipitated by excitements that
followed the murder, on the 6th of April, of a political
journalist, Hassan Fehmi Effendi, editor of the
Serbesti, the organ of the Liberal party. As the
murdered man had been a vigorous critic and opponent of the
Committee of Union and Progress, that organization was accused
at once of having brought about his death.
{660}
This gave the start to agitations and demonstrations that were
secretly pushed for several days, until they culminated, on
the 13th, in an outbreak of soldiers and city mobs which
reversed for a time the Young Turk revolution of the previous
July. That the crafty Abdul Hamid had more than lent his hand
to the reactionary outbreak was universally believed; but when
it had accomplished the overthrow of Hilmi Pasha and his
Ministry the Sultan did not venture to call creatures of his
own to take their place. On the contrary, he gave the office
of Grand Vizier to Tewfik Pasha, one of the most respected and
independent of the elder officials of the Empire, charging
him, in an imperial rescript, "to form a Cabinet to conform
more directly to the sacred law and to maintain the
Constitution and guard public order." These words are
indicative of the nature of the hostility to the regime of the
Young Turks which had been worked up. Formerly, as appears in
one of the quotations above from Mr. Hagopian, the Young Turks
had been accused of being "champions of Pan-Islamism," and
their Parliament of showing "a tendency to be a Moslem
institution." Latterly, Moslem orthodoxy had been appealed to
against them on the charge that they were unfaithful to "the
sacred law" (the Sheriat), and that they were making the
Constitution a mere cover for designs that boded evil to
Islam. A fair inference from the contradictoriness of the
charges brought against them is decidedly favorable to the
party of the Young Turks.
At the outset of the revolutionary riot in Constantinople a
few murders were committed and some fatal shooting at random
was done, the victims including the Minister of Justice, an
Albanian Deputy and a few officers of the riotous soldiery;
but the mob-rising, as a whole, appears to have been kept
under singular restraint. No important members of the League
of Union and Progress are reported to have been killed. Those
who were in Constantinople escaped, and their ruling Committee
was soon established in activity at Salonika again, taking
measures which resulted quickly in the recovery of more than
the power that they had seemed for the moment to have lost.
That no reaction of substantial influences at Constantinople
against constitutional and representative government was
signified by what had occurred there was made plain by an
important proclamation, issued on the 16th of April, by the
Committee of the Ulema, the Moslem Doctors of the Sacred Law.
It was addressed to the Deputies and the Nation, in these
words:
"We are informed that certain Deputies, fearing for their
lives, wish to resign, while, on the other hand, the public
fears the return of despotic rule. The Committee of the Ulema,
which has never doubted that the Constitution is in entire
conformity with sacred law, and has not forgotten the burning
of Islamic books at Gulhaneh in the days of absolutism, will
defend the Constitution, which is in conformity with the
Sheriat, to the last, aided by the army and Parliament. Its
members consider it to be a religious duty to sacrifice their
lives for this end. They and the nation preserve the
confidence of Deputies, Moslem and non-Moslem alike, save such
as have resigned, or have fled and are thereby considered to
have resigned. Deputies, therefore, are informed that
henceforth those who resign will be considered traitors. Let
them do their duty justly and honourably, and they may be sure
of the support of the nation and the spiritual aid of the
Prophet. We beg the glorious army to maintain order and
discipline, following the counsels of the Ulema, for it is
thus that the Almighty will grant salvation to the country and
happiness in this world and the next."
But Asiatic Turkey was easily made distrustful and suspicious
of a change in government which appeared to lower the
authority and dignity of the Sultan-Caliph; and news of the
seeming triumph of that sacred sovereign in what had happened
at Constantinople must have had not a little to do with the
sudden outburst, on the 15th of April, of Moslem hostility to
the Armenian Christians in parts of Asia Minor and Syria. The
fighting and massacre then begun, and which continued for many
days, was most fiercely carried on within a circle of towns at
the corner where Syria and Asia Minor touch, and where the
Gulf of Iskanderun runs far into the land. On the northern and
western side, this piece of the Turkish dominion was the
ancient province of Cilicia, which Pompey added to the empire
of Rome; in which St. Paul was born, and which received its
modern name of Adana from Haroun al Raschid, the most famous
of the Caliphs of Bagdad,—thanks to "The Arabian Nights." In
and around its three principal towns, of Adana, Mersina, and
Tarsus, the first and worst of the atrocities occurred.
The League of Union and Progress had given way for an instant,
only, to the outbreak at Constantinople, which must have taken
its leaders by surprise. But the momentary reverse was a gift
of opportunity, in fact, to prove the astonishing energy of
ability that was in this remarkable body of men. They had been
betrayed by a considerable part, at least, of the division of
the army which garrisoned Constantinople, and which is said to
have been heavily bribed with money that must have come from
the Sultan’s purse. But the Second and Third Corps of the army
in Macedonia were unshaken in fidelity to them and their
cause. It was on Tuesday, the 13th of April, that their
opponents at the capital had their triumph; on Wednesday, the
14th, the two trusted corps were under orders from Salonika to
march on Constantinople. Nine days later Mahmud Shevket Pasha,
who commanded the movement, was in full possession of the
city, with the Sultan a prisoner, and the victorious general
was about to publish the following brief report of what had
been done in the interval:
"Our Second and Third Army Corps," he wrote, "being the
nearest to Constantinople, undertook as the executive power of
the whole Ottoman nation to shed the last drop of their blood
in defence of the Constitutional régime. Having
therefore taken counsel together and organized a force
sufficient for the purpose, they marched to Constantinople, in
order to counteract the effects of the despotic blow recently
struck at that régime, to subdue and chastise the
guilty, and to take the necessary measures for the prevention
of similar attempts in the future. Leaving Salonika on
Wednesday, I arrived the following day at San Stefano and gave
orders for a general movement preparatory to entering the
capital on Friday.
{661}
The troops quartered at the Ministry of War were compelled to
surrender before they had time to defend themselves. Only the
mutinous troops at Taslikishla and other barracks in Pera
offered any resistance to the army of occupation. These
barracks were accordingly bombarded and destroyed, their
garrisons being disabled or forced to surrender. As our heroic
army began operations at night and entered the town at dawn,
and as the inhabitants remained in their houses and the shops
were closed, there were no deaths in the civil population and
no disorder took place. The losses on both sides were heavy,
but the numbers are not yet known. I pray God that the hearts
of all Ottomans may rejoice at the news of this great victory
and that it may prove the dawn of a great future for our
country."
Military observers who accompanied Shevket Pasha and his army
are said to have been profoundly impressed by the masterly
handling of the whole operation, from start to finish. His
fellow Constitutionalists were equally impressed by the
qualities that he had revealed. A Press despatch to New York,
from Constantinople, April 26, reported:
"Schefket Pasha, commander of the Constitutional army, is the
man of the hour. The leading civilian members of the Committee
of Union and Progress desire him to be grand vizier in
succession to Tewfik Pasha, and he has been assured that a
majority of Parliament would gladly support a ministry under
his leadership in succession to the Tewfik ministry, which
resigned to-day. In reply to these proposals Schefket Pasha
said that the premiership afforded such a splendid opportunity
to assist in the political development of the country that he
would have rejoiced to accept the honor had it come to him
under any other circumstances, but that he could not accept it
while still leader of the army. To do so would not accord with
his ideas of civil and political liberty of action." This
seems to have been a true exhibit of the fine spirit and
intelligent patriotism of the man, and it added much to the
hopefulness of the regenerative undertaking of the Young
Turks. Shevket is an Arab, from Bagdad, who had his training
as a soldier in Germany and had lived in Europe twelve years.
What to do with Abdul Hamid was a question over which the
Committee of Union and Progress wasted very little time. He
became their captive on the 24th. On the 26th it was known
that he would be deposed and exiled to Salonika. His falsity
in all that he had professed of a willing adoption of
constitutional government, and his treacherous engineering of
the conspiracy against it, were believed to be open to no
doubt. It was probably not easy to save him from the doom of
death which he feared: but the men of calmly tempered mind and
will who had ruled the revolution from its beginning were
still in control. On the morning of the 27th a fetva or
formal decision by the Sheik-ul-Islam, authorizing the
deposition of Abdul Hamid from the Ottoman throne, was sent to
the National Assembly and read. It was in the form of a
question from that body, answered tersely by the supreme judge
of the law of Islam,—as follows:
"What becomes of an Imam [the title of the Sultan of Turkey as
head of the Orthodox faith] who has destroyed certain holy
writings, who has seized property in contravention to the
Sheri laws, who has committed cruelties in ordering the
assassination and imprisonment of exiles without any
justification under the Sheri laws, who has squandered the
public money, who, having sworn to govern according to the
Sheriat, has violated his oath, who, by gifts of money, has
provoked internecine bloodshed and civil war, and who no
longer is recognized in the provinces?" To this the
Sheik-ul-Islam replied: "He must abdicate or be deposed." At
once, by unanimous vote, the deposition of Abdul Hamid and the
succession of his younger brother, Mohammed Reschad Effendi
was pronounced by the National Assembly. The new Sultan was
proclaimed with impromptu ceremony in the afternoon, at the
Seraskierat, to which he went in the plain costume of a
Turkish gentleman. He was received by Mahmud Shevket Pasha and
his staff in the central court. The Grand Vizier, the
Sheikh-ul-Islam, Said Pasha, President of the Senate, and
Ahmed Riza, President of the Chamber, stood at the foot of the
stairs. All kissed hands, and the whole group, headed by his
Majesty, proceeded to a reserved chamber, the gallery above
the court being in the meantime crowded with Senators,
Deputies, officers, journalists, and ordinary sightseers. The
Deputies and Senators were then admitted to kiss hands, and a
prayer was recited. This ended the simple ceremony of the day;
but one of more solemnity occurred on the 10th of May, when
the Sultan received the sword of Osman—the equivalent of a
coronation—in the Mosque Ayub, which Christians are never
permitted to enter, and was conducted in an imposing
procession through the streets of the city.
Mohammed Reschad Effendi, who reigns as Mohammed V., was in
his sixty-fifth year when he came to the throne. Until the
revolution of the previous July he had been practically a
prisoner in one of the palaces on the Bosporus, surrounded by
the creatures of his jealous and suspicious brother, without
whose permission he could not leave the palace grounds.
Latterly he had enjoyed some degree of personal freedom, for
the first time in his life. An anonymous contributor to the
London Times, who had had an opportunity to meet him
since the revolution broke his bonds, wrote thus of the
interview:
"I had the privilege of a long conversation with Reschad when
I was in Constantinople in the autumn, on condition that the
visit should be conducted with some secrecy and should remain
secret until the return of Hamidianism was beyond the range of
possibility. I believe I was the first European whom he had
seen since the revolution of July mitigated the severity of
the reclusion enforced for 30 years by Abdul Hamid. The Heir
Apparent was still living in the Palace adjoining Dolma
Baghche, which had been his prison throughout the reign,
jealously guarded by the Sultan’s Pretorians at the entrances
from the main road, and by a gunboat moored in the Bosporus
opposite the water approach. …
"His Highness talked slowly and hesitatingly, often lowering
his voice to a whisper and casting furtive glances round the
room as if he was still haunted by the fear of spies, but he
listened eagerly while I told him of my own many journeyings
in Turkey, whose people I had known since the beginning of the
Hamidian régime, occasionally interrupting me with an
apposite remark, or asking for an explanation which showed
both interest and intelligence.
{662}
There was something strangely pathetic in this desire for
information about his own country, over which his Highness was
soon destined to reign. A full hour’s conversation left the
impression that, given favourable circumstances and good
advisers, the Prince was well qualified to preside over a
period of peaceful transition."
Punishment of the authors of the counter-revolution followed
quickly on the reestablishment of constitutional authority,
and it was sternly meted out. As Mr. Hagopian expressed the
feeling of the Young Turks, in his letter of April 26 to the
New York Evening Post, they "could not afford to be
lenient. The conspiracy of April 13," he added, "was no longer
a secret. In the last two days 15,000 soldiers and 6,000
hodjas and spies had been arrested. In their possession
over half a million dollars had been found. Where had this
money come from? Who could deny any longer that Abdul Hamid
drew from his bank about ten million dollars a month ago? His
favored son, Burhaneddin Effendi, went from barrack to barrack
and distributed the money among the soldiers. Former spies,
disguised in Turkish clergymen’s garments, went among the
troops and won them over with the Sultan’s bribes. Soldiers,
when arrested, were found to have an average of one hundred
dollars; some had two hundred, three hundred, and even five
hundred. Indeed, Abdul Hamid was the head of the conspiracy,
and the massacre in Adana was instigated by his emissaries
sent from Constantinople. The old and the new Yildiz cliques
were not less responsible." By the 12th of May thirty-eight
executions had been reported, most of them by hanging in
public places. "A member of the court-martial that sentenced
these men to death explained the reason of the public hangings
by saying that Constantinople was such a city of rumor and
traditions of corruption that, had the announcement been made
that these men had been executed in private, it would not have
been believed by the masses. It was desired to impress the
people with the fact that the guilty had been punished."
TURKEY: April-December.
Outbreak of Massacre in Southeastern Asia Minor.
The first news of the outbreak of massacre in southeastern
Asia Minor came to Europe and America in a telegram from
Constantinople, dated April 15, saying: "A massacre of
Armenians is in progress to-day at Mersina, a seaport of Asia
Minor on the Mediterranean." In this report the outbreak was
ascribed to the provocation of a murder of two Moslems by an
Armenian; but nothing that appeared subsequently gave any
confirmation to this. The Sultan has been accused of having
instigated the rising, as a means of starting complications
which might check the Young Turks; but that remains unproved.
Mersina, from which the first report of massacre came, is
thirty-six miles by railway from Adana, the capital of the
vilayet of that name and an important missionary station of
several American missionary organizations. Adana was a city of
about 45,000 inhabitants, mostly Mohammedans, but with
Armenians in considerable numbers and a few Greeks. The
Christian missions included important schools. In this city
the murderous mob had begun its work on the 14th of April, a
day prior to the Mersina report, and it is found to have been
the center of the deadly outbreak throughout. The Moslem fury
was directed against the Armenians, and, though two
missionaries were among the killed, they do not appear to have
been objects of attack, but to have suffered incidentally to
the efforts they made for the protection of their Armenian
neighbors and their schools. There were Turkish troops in the
city from the beginning of the slaughter, but they did nothing
to stop it for five days. According to some accounts the vali,
or governor, kept them shut up in quarters; according to others
they took part in the massacre. The Reverend Stephen
Trowbridge, who was in Adana during these terrible days,
declared a little later: "One man is responsible for the
disorders here. This is the vali himself. He had it in his
power to suppress lawlessness and massacre, but deliberately
refrained from doing so. He said simply: ‘We are not
responsible.’ The better class of Turks in Adana," Mr.
Trowbridge continued, "the members of the Committee of Union
and Progress, are deeply grieved and saddened at these
dreadful events. Some of them are ready to join us in relief
work for the Armenians. One Bey already has opened his house
to refugees." This gives color to the belief that the outbreak
was not mere mob-madness, but captained in some way from a
higher center of Turkish authority. Such, indeed, was the firm
conviction of many who were witnesses of what occurred.
Writing on the 24th of April from Tarsus, which bore its share
of the widespread attack, another missionary said: "The
massacres all began on the same day, Wednesday, the 14th,
showing, were there no other proof, that they were inaugurated
by telegraphic orders from Adana, probably from
Constantinople. The only places where the Christians took up
arms for a short time to defend themselves were Adana, Hadjin,
and near the battle-field of Issus; at the latter place they
are still holding out. The statement by Turkish officials that
there was an Armenian insurrection, that Turks were massacred,
and houses burned by the Christians, etc., etc., are simply
abominable lies. This cannot be put too strongly. … During
fifty long hours, while battle and murder and burnings were
going on all around our school and residence in Adana, the
vali, though he had hundreds of soldiers at the Konak, sent
not one to protect us and our property."
According to a report made some months later, after
investigations under the new Turkish regime, and quoted from a
Turkish newspaper, the number killed in all parts of the
province was 20,008; 620 were Moslems, and the remaining
19,400 were non-Moslems. Of the non-Moslems killed, 418 were
Old Chaldeans, 163 Chaldeans, 210 Armenian Catholics, 655
Protestants, 99 Greeks, and the remainder Gregorian Armenians.
The same report estimated the destruction of property as
having been equal to two-thirds of the entire wealth of the
province. The appearance of Adana and of the surrounding
country after the massacres were stopped was described by one
who made the journey from Tarsus to Adana, and who wrote:
{663}
"Leaving behind us the ruins of Tarsus, and the hundreds of
weeping widows and orphans there, we came by train to Adana.
Near the city the road runs for miles through vineyards and
gardens, in former days a beautiful sight. But now it is a
waste of desolation; all the houses of the Christians are
heaps of ruins; in and around those houses more than five
hundred were slain during the three terrible days of April.
The houses of Moslems have not been injured. We noted a like
contrast as respects the numerous farms on the plain between
Tarsus and Adana. And yet the charge is made, and believed,
that the Armenians were the aggressors!
"In the once prosperous Adana, nothing but ruins; it is like
the pictures I have seen of Pompeii. The wretched survivors
wander by twos and threes around the places where once stood
their happy homes; they look more like ghosts than human
beings, these pale, dejected, barefooted widows and orphans."
On the 12th of May, after the Young Turks had recovered power
at Constantinople, the Turkish Embassy at London gave out the
following announcement: "Order and tranquillity prevail
throughout the Sanjak of Djebel-i-Bereket. Troops are arriving
gradually and are being distributed according to the
necessities of each place. The local authorities at Adana are
about to proceed at once to confiscate stolen property and to
disarm Musulmans and non-Musulmans alike. This measure will be
adopted generally in the other parts of the vilayet as soon as
the troops which are coming from the various places have
reached the positions to which they have been assigned. The
authorities are very busily engaged in finding homes for
people who are without shelter and in supplying them with
food. A Commission for that purpose has been appointed at
Adana."
A Court Martial and a Parliamentary Commission were now sent
to Adana to investigate the massacre and punish the guilty.
Their work was soon showing results. On the 24th of May a
report came from Constantinople that "Ferid Pasha has informed
a representative of the Tanin that several of the soldiers who
took part in the recent massacres in Cilicia have been
arrested. Nine persons have already been condemned to death by
the Court-martial. With regard to the responsibility for the
outbreak, the Minister said that, while he could not
definitely ascribe it to official promptings, certain
officials had failed to do their duty, among them the
Mutesarrif of Jebel Bereket, who had been imprisoned pending
an inquiry into his conduct. The reactionaries had certainly
played a part in fomenting the outbreak, but other
elements—which the Minister did not specify—had contributed
thereto."
On the 13th of July it was reported that "an Imperial Iradeh
has been issued ordering the arrest of the ex-Governors of
Adana and Djebel Bereket, the commander of the Adana garrison,
and a number of notables of Cilicia, among whom is the editor
of the Itidal, the notorious Baghdadi."
Two days later it was said that "the ex-Governors of Adana and
Djebel Bereket have been sent to Adana under a strong escort.
Some 20 leading Moslem notables of Adana who have been
arrested will be immediately brought before a Court-Martial.
The Grand Vizier has given orders for a manifesto to be
prepared by the Sheikh-ul-Islam, demonstrating by means of
texts from the Koran and the Traditions that the duty of all
good Moslems is to treat Christians with justice and to regard
them as fellow-citizens with equal rights. It is to be
distributed by the kadis, muftis, and hodjas in every town and
village of the empire, and the most learned ulema are to take
it as their text in the sermons to be preached during next
Ramazan."
July 18th the court-martial was stated to have made a report
which concluded as follows:
"‘Fifteen persons have been already hanged, 800 deserve death,
15,000 deserve hard labour for life, and 80,000 deserve minor
sentences. If it is decided to proceed with the punishment, we
will draw a cordon around the town and deal expeditiously with
the matter.’ In view, however, of the general reconciliation
between the various elements, the Court-martial recommends a
general amnesty on the occasion of the National Fête."
The 11th of August brought accounts of the publication of a
declaration by a Commission of three ministers in the Turkish
Cabinet appointed to prepare it, acquitting the Armenians of
all responsibility for the outbreak at Adana. This
declaration, drawn up after a careful examination of the
reports of the members of the Parliamentary Commission on the
massacres and approved by the Council of Ministers, ascribes
the massacre to the ignorance of the population. "In the reign
of Abdul Hamid the people had become imbued with the idea that
every Armenian was a separatist at heart, and were therefore
averse from equality with the Armenian community. They had
become in consequence the tools of religious or political
agitators. The declaration censures severely the local
officials for their failure, not only to quell the outbreak,
but to warn the Government that the situation in Cilicia was
critical."
One of the Deputies of the Parliamentary Commission which
investigated matters at Adana gave, perhaps, a more distinct
idea of the causes that worked to produce the massacres, in an
interview published during August, when he said:
"The massacre in Adana had two strong causes: reaction and
tyranny. The joy of the July demonstrations [of 1908] had
scarcely passed when, at the beginning of August, tyrannical
tendencies began to appear. The former Mufti of Bakhcheh went
hither and thither declaring that liberty and the constitution
were the work of the Christians, that the constitution was
contrary to the Sheriat. In this way he stirred up Moslems
against the Christians and the constitution. In place of the
joy which appeared among all classes during the first days of
the constitution, a spirit of revenge and enmity against
non-Moslems began to spread."
Evidently the amnesty recommended by the Court-martial in July
was not granted; for the following telegram was sent from
Constantinople on the 12th of December to the London
Times: "Twenty-six Moslems, who were sentenced to death
in connexion with the Adana massacres in April last, were
executed at Adana yesterday and to-day. Order was maintained,
although the population was much moved, the women relatives of
the condemned publicly manifesting their grief. One Armenian
is awaiting execution."
{664}
Nevertheless the Armenians have not been satisfied with the
punishments inflicted, and the Armenian Patriarch resigned in
September, as a mark of protest, maintaining that the real
instigators of the massacres went unpunished.
TURKEY: A. D. 1909 (May-December).
Hilmi Pasha, Grand Vizier.
Parliament opened by the new Sultan.
Constitutional Amendments on Religion and Education.
The Committee of Union and Progress.
Change of Ministry.
From the 1st to the 5th of May Tewfik Pasha was Grand Vizier,
by appointment from the new Sultan. Then, as had been
expected, Hilmi Pasha was called to his place, and remained at
the head of the Government until the last week of the year. On
the 20th of the month the Sultan in person opened the session
of Parliament, and, after a speech from the throne had been
read by the Grand Vizier, pronounced the following words: "I
have sworn to respect the Sheriat and the Constitution in its
entirety, and not to transgress for one instant from
safeguarding the national rights and interests of the country.
You must now in return take the necessary oath." The oath was
then taken by the Senators and Deputies in turn, his Majesty
watching the proceedings from the Imperial box. On the 24th
the Grand Vizier announced the programme of measures and
general policy to be undertaken by his Ministry, and received,
after debate, a vote of confidence by 190 to 5. The
reconstituted Government was now a fully organized fact.
Questions concerning the attitude of the State towards
religion and education, as it should be defined in the
Constitution, were among the earliest of high importance to be
brought before the Parliament. On the 8th of June it adopted
an amendment to the article in the Constitution of 1876
reading as follows:
See, (in this Volume)
CONSTITUTION OF TURKEY.
"Islam is the State religion.
"The State, while safeguarding this principle, guarantees the
free exercise of all cults recognized in the Empire, and
maintains the religious privileges granted to divers
communities, provided public order and morality be not
infringed."
On the subject of education the Constitution was amended to
read:
"Education is free.
"All schools are placed under the control of the Government.
The necessary measures shall be taken to assure to every
Ottoman subject a uniform system of education. There shall be
no interference with the religious education of the different
communities."
The Christian communities, especially the Greek, objected
strenuously to this, fearing that governmental control would
be found to mean the imposition of the Turkish language in all
schools, as an instrument of nationalization.
Another proposed amendment, making members of the Chamber of
Deputies eligible for the posts of Parliamentary
Under-Secretaries of State, failed to secure the requisite
two-thirds majority, and this was regarded as a defeat of the
civilian leaders of the "Young Turk" Committee of Union and
Progress, who were supposed to be desirous of holding the
posts in question, while sitting also in the Chamber.
The firm control of affairs which the Committee in question
had exercised throughout the revolutionary movement, while
keeping itself mysteriously anonymous in the background, had
been extraordinarily successful, indicative of high wisdom and
a very genuine public spirit. But the forces thus handled by
the Committee, especially in the military element of the
revolution, were growing restive, it would appear, under the
feeling of too much subordination, and gave increasing signs
of discontent with the invisibility of the wires by which they
were pulled. Without doubt, it was evidence of this which led
the Committee, at a meeting at Salonika, in October, to
resolve and announce that their organization should no longer
be a secret society, but open to public knowledge and directed
henceforth by a responsible executive. Whether the Committee
did or did not strengthen itself by thus coming into the open,
it has maintained its ascendancy and still exercises a
controlling power.
The second session of Parliament was opened by the Sultan, on
the 14th of November, with a speech of roseate contentedness
in its contemplation of Turkish affairs. Late in December a
change of Ministry occurred, in somewhat obscure connection
with a consolidation of steamer lines on the Euphrates. A
British line of steamers, known as the Lynch Line, which had
been running on that river since 1860, was being consolidated
with a Turkish line that the Turkish Government controlled,
and something in the transaction which raised an issue between
Parliament and the Grand Vizier. Hilmi Pasha, led the latter
to resign December 28. Nobody seems to have doubted, however,
that the real cause of his leaving office was in the
willingness of the Committee that he should do so. General
Mahmud Shevket, the able military leader of the Revolution,
was invited to form a Cabinet, but declined, as he is said to
have done before. The high office was then conferred on Hakki
Bey, Turkish Ambassador at Rome, and Mahmud Shevket Pasha
accepted office in his Cabinet as Minister of War.
TURKEY: A. D. 1909 (October).
Railway and Irrigation Projects in the Tigris-Euphrates Delta.
Sir William Willcocks, the British engineer who has been
engaged for some time past in surveys for the Turkish
Government, having reference to irrigation and railway
improvements for the reclamation of the great Mesopotamian
region, made a report to the Ministry of Public Works at
Constantinople in October, 1909, of which the following
account was given to the Press through Reuter’s Agency:
"Sir William Willcocks advocates the construction of a railway
from Baghdad to the Mediterranean. The proposed railway would
start from Baghdad, cross the Euphrates at Feludia, and follow
the Valley to Hit. At Hit the line would take the Euphrates
Valley and traverse the flat desert in a straight line to El
Kaim, near Abu Kemal, the northern limit of the cataracts.
From El Kaim to Der Zor, the Euphrates has no cataracts, and
the river Khabour, which joins the Euphrates at Mayadin, the
ancient Rehoboth, is, like the Euphrates, navigable during the
whole year. These parts of the Euphrates and Khabour could be
extensively developed and all their products transported to El
Kaim by boat and thence by rail. From El Kaim the railway
would proceed to Tidmor (Palmyra) and follow the old trade
route over a flat desert supplied with water. From Palmyra the
line would go either to Homs or Damascus. The total length of

the railway from Baghdad to Damascus is placed at 880
kilometres.
{665}
"The report next deals with the works of irrigation to be
undertaken at once. These consist of barrages of the Hindich
canal, dams on the Habbania and Sakhlawia, and works for the
navigation on the Tigris. The total cost of the entire works
on the Euphrates is estimated at £T1,034,000, while that of
the works on the Tigris is placed at £T1,110,480. The cost of
the works to be undertaken forthwith attains the following
figures:—
On the Euphrates, £T822,700;
on the Tigris, £T710,000;
total, £T1,532,700.
The railway could be built in two years, while the irrigation
works would take eight years to complete. To begin with, one
million hectares of land would be restored to its former
prosperity out of five million hectares which comprise the
Tigris-Euphrates delta."
----------TURKEY: End--------
TUSKEGEE INSTITUTE:
Its Twenty-fifth Anniversary.
See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1906.
TWEEDMOUTH, LORD:
First Lord of the Admiralty.
See (in this Volume)
ENGLAND: A. D. 1905-1906.
TWO-HUNDRED-AND-THREE METRE HILL.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1904-1905 (MAY-JANUARY).
TWO POWER STANDARD, NAVAL.
See (in this Volume)
War, The PREPARATIONS for.
TURNEY, DANIEL BRAXTON:
Nominated for President of the United States.
See (in this Volume)
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1908 (APRIL-NOVEMBER).
TYRREL, Father George:
Writer of a Famous Letter on Questions of Religion.
His death.
The Reverend George Tyrrel, widely known as Father Tyrrel,
died on the 15th of July, 1909, at Storrington, Sussex,
England. He was the writer of a letter which gave a notable
impulse to the movement of thought in the Roman Catholic
Church known as "Modernism," which Pope Pius X. condemned as
heretical in his encyclical of 1907. The letter was addressed
to an English man of science (supposed to have been Professor
Mivart) who, being a Roman Catholic, found difficulty in
reconciling his scientific convictions with the tenets of his
Church. Parts of the letter obtained publication in Italy, and
led to the expulsion of Father Tyrrel from the Society of
Jesus. He then gave publication to the full text of the
letter, under the title of "A Much Abused Letter." On the
appearance of the encyclical against Modernism he criticised
it with keenness, and was virtually excommunicated from the
Church. The fact that on his death-bed, when stricken with
speechlessness, he received the sacraments of the Church, gave
rise to much controversy, as to his volition in the matter and
as to the justification of the priest who ministered to him.
Father Tyrrel had entered the Roman Church in 1879, under the
influence of the writings of Cardinal Newman.
TZE-HSI:
Dowager-Empress of China.
Her death.
See (in this Volume)
CHINA: A. D. 1908 (NOVEMBER).
U.
UGANDA:
Its habitability by Whites.
See (in this Volume)
AFRICA.
ULEMA, THE.
See (in this Volume)
TURKEY: A. D. 1909 (JANUARY-MAY).
UNDERFED SCHOOL CHILDREN.
See (in this Volume)
POVERTY, THE PROBLEMS OF.
UNEMPLOYMENT, THE PROBLEM OF.
See (in this Volume)
POVERTY, THE PROBLEMS OF.
UNIFORM STATE LAWS.
See (in this Volume)
LAW AND ITS COURTS: UNITED STATES.
UNITED DRY GOODS COMPANIES.
See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL, &C.: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1909.
UNITED FREE CHURCH, OF SCOTLAND.
See (in this Volume)
SCOTLAND: A. D. 1904-1905.
UNITED MINE-WORKERS, OF AMERICA.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: UNITED STATES.
UNITED PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, OF SCOTLAND.
See (in this Volume)
SCOTLAND: A. D. 1904.
----------UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Start--------
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1901 (September).
The Assassination of President McKinley.
"On the sixth of September, President McKinley was shot by an
anarchist while attending the Pan-American Exposition at
Buffalo, and died in that city on the fourteenth of that
month. Of the last seven elected Presidents, he is the third
who has been murdered, and the bare recital of this fact is
sufficient to justify grave alarm among all loyal American
citizens. Moreover, the circumstances of this, the third
assassination of an American President, have a peculiarly
sinister significance. Both President Lincoln and President
Garfield were killed by assassins of types unfortunately not
uncommon in history; President Lincoln falling a victim to the
terrible passions aroused by four years of civil war, and
President Garfield to the revengeful vanity of a disappointed
office-seeker. President McKinley was killed by an utterly
depraved criminal belonging to that body of criminals who
object to all governments, good and bad alike, who are against
any form of popular liberty if it is guaranteed by even the
most just and liberal laws, and who are as hostile to the
upright exponent of a free people’s sober will as to the
tyrannical and irresponsible despot.
"It is not too much to say that at the time of President
McKinley’s death he was the most widely loved man in all the
United States; while we have never had any public man of his
position who has been so wholly free from the bitter
animosities incident to public life. His political opponents
were the first to bear the heartiest and most generous tribute
to the broad kindliness of nature, the sweetness and
gentleness of character, which so endeared him to his close
associates.
{666}
To a standard of lofty integrity in public life he united the
tender affections and home virtues which are all-important in
the make-up of national character. A gallant soldier in the
great war for the Union, he also shone as an example to all
our people because of his conduct in the most sacred and
intimate of home relations. There could be no personal hatred
of him, for he never acted with aught but consideration for
the welfare of others. No one could fail to respect him who
knew him in public or private life. The defenders of those
murderous criminals who seek to excuse their criminality by
asserting that it is exercised for political ends, inveigh
against wealth and irresponsible power. But for this
assassination even this base apology cannot be urged. …
"The blow was aimed not at this President, but at all
Presidents; at every symbol of government. President McKinley
was as emphatically the embodiment of the popular will of the
Nation expressed through the forms of law as a New England
town meeting is in similar fashion the embodiment of the
law-abiding purpose and practice of the people of the town. On
no conceivable theory could the murder of the President be
accepted as due to protest against ‘inequalities in the social
order,’ save as the murder of all the freemen engaged in a
town meeting could be accepted as a protest against that
social inequality which puts a malefactor in jail."
Message of President Roosevelt to Congress,
December 3, 1901.
See (in this Volume)
Buffalo: A. D. 1901.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1901 (September).
Settlement of Boxer Indemnity from China.
See (in this Volume)
CHINA: A. D. 1901-1908.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1901 (December).
Communication of German Claims and Complaints against Venezuela.
The President’s Reply.
Interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine.
See (in this Volume)
VENEZUELA: A. D. 1901.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1901-1902.
The "Boom Years" in Trade and Investment of Capital.
See (in this Volume)
FINANCE AND TRADE: A. D. 1901-1909.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1901-1902.
Efforts of Secretary Hay to maintain the "Open Door"
in Manchuria.
See (in this Volume)
CHINA: A. D. 1901-1902.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1901-1902 (October-January).
The Second International Conference of American Republics.
See (in this Volume)
AMERICAN REPUBLICS.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1901-1902 (November-February).
Negotiation and Ratification of the Second Hay-Pauncefote
Treaty, relative to a Ship Canal between the Atlantic
and Pacific Oceans.
See (in this Volume)
PANAMA CANAL: A. D. 1901-1902.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1901-1903.
Urgency of President Roosevelt for more Effective Legislation
to control the Operation of so-called Trusts.
See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS: INDUSTRIAL, &c.:
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1901-1903.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1901-1903.
Purchase of Franchises and Property of French Panama Canal Co.
Failure of Canal Treaty with Colombia.
Secession and recognized Independence of Panama.
Treaty with the Republic of Panama.
Undertaking of the Canal.
See (in this Volume)
PANAMA CANAL.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1901-1905.
The Cabinet of President Roosevelt during his First Term.
On succeeding the murdered President McKinley, to fill the
unexpired term, President Roosevelt retained his predecessor’s
Cabinet, three members of which remained in it throughout the
term. These were John Hay, Secretary of State, Ethan Allen
Hitchcock, Secretary of the Interior, and James Wilson,
Secretary of Agriculture. Lyman J. Gage, Secretary of the
Treasury, resigned in 1902 and was succeeded by Leslie M.
Shaw. Elihu Root, Secretary of War, was succeeded by William
H. Taft in 1904. John D. Long, Secretary of the Navy, retired
in 1902, to be succeeded by William H. Moody, who went two
years later to the Department of Justice, as Attorney-General,
taking the place of Philander C. Knox, and being followed in
the Navy Department by Paul Morton. Charles E. Smith,
Postmaster-General, left the Cabinet in 1902, and his place
was taken by Henry C. Payne, who was succeeded in turn by
Robert J. Wynne in 1904. The Department of Commerce and Labor,
created in February, 1903, was filled first by George B.
Cortelyou, until 1904, then by Victor H. Metcalf.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1901-1905.
Urgency of President Roosevelt for more effective Railway Rate
Legislation.
See (in this Volume)
RAILWAYS: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1870-1908.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1901-1906.
Governmental Action against Corporate Wrongdoing.
A summary of Legislation, Litigation, and Court Decisions.
See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1901-1906.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1901-1909.
Progress of Civil Service Reform under President Roosevelt.
See (in this Volume)
CIVIL SERVICE REFORM: UNITED STATES.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1901-1909.
The great National Movement for an organized Conservation of
Natural Resources.
See (in this Volume)
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES: UNITED STATES.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1902.
Arbitration at The Hague of the Pious Fund Dispute with Mexico.
See (in this Volume)
MEXICO: A. D. 1902.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1902 (August).
Assertion to Germany of Principles involved in the Right of
Expatriation.
See (in this Volume)
NATURALIZATION.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1902 (January).
Founding of the Carnegie Institution of Washington.
See (in this Volume)
SCIENCE AND INVENTION: CARNEGIE INSTITUTION.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1902 (February-March).
Visit of Prince Henry of Prussia.
A visit by Prince Henry of Prussia, brother of the German
Emperor, was an event of considerable importance, in what it
signified of friendly relations between Germany and the United
States. The Prince arrived on the 22d of February and remained
in the country until the 11th of March, visiting and being
entertained at Washington (and Mt. Vernon), Annapolis, West
Point, Philadelphia, New York, and making a six days trip into
the West.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1902 (March).
Creation of a Permanent Census Bureau.
After long urging, Congress, in February, 1902, passed a bill
authorizing the organization of a permanent Census Bureau in
the Department of the Interior.
{667}
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1902 (May).
Unveiling of a Monument to Marshal de Rochambeau.
A joint resolution of the two Houses of Congress, in the
following words, was approved by the President on the 21st of
March, 1902:
"That the President be, and is hereby, authorized and
requested to extend to the Government and people of France and
the family of Marshal de Rochambeau, commander in chief of the
French forces in America during the war of independence, and
to the family of Marquis de Lafayette, a cordial invitation to
unite with the Government and people of the United States in a
fit and appropriate dedication of the monument of Marshal de
Rochambeau to be unveiled in the city of Washington on the
twenty-fourth day of May, nineteen hundred and two; and for
the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this resolution
the sum of ten thousand dollars is hereby appropriated, out of
any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the
same, or so much thereof as may be necessary, to be expended
under the direction of the Secretary of State."
The invitation was conveyed to the President of France by an
autograph letter from President Roosevelt, while Secretary
Hay, at the same time, communicated it officially, through the
American Ambassador at Paris, to representatives of the
families of Marshal de Rochambeau and the Marquis de
Lafayette. France, in response, sent a battleship, the
Gaulois, bearing a general and an admiral, with two
aids each, and two officials from the foreign office. The
invitation was accepted by the present Count and Countess de
Rochambeau; and, as explained by Ambassador Porter in a
despatch, "Mr. Gaston de Sahune de Lafayette and his wife, not
being able to proceed to the United States, the invitation is
accepted for Mr. Paul de Sahune de Lafayette, who has been
living in the United States for the last two years and who
speaks English. He is the brother of Mr. Gaston de Sahune de
Lafayette."
The ceremonies of the unveiling of the monument took place at
Washington on the 24th of May, and were followed by official
hospitalities to the guests of the occasion at Washington,
Annapolis, West Point, New York, Newport, and Boston. With the
sailing of the Gaulois, on the 1st of June, the
formalities of the visit came to an end.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1902 (May).
Establishment of the Republic of Cuba.
Transfer of Executive Authority from U. S. Military Governor
to President-elect Palma.
See (in this Volume )
CUBA: A. D. 1901-1902.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1902 (May-November).
The Restoration of the White House.
Until 1902 the residence and the executive offices of the
President of the United States were crowded together in the
historic White House, with increasing inconvenience and
impropriety. Many projects for their separation had been
discussed, involving generally the erection of a new mansion
for the chief magistrate; but they had no result until
President Roosevelt, with characteristic resolution, took the
matter in hand. His emphatic pronouncement that "under no
circumstances should the President live elsewhere than in the
historic White House" appealed strongly to a very common
public feeling, and smoothed the way for an undertaking which
speedily cleared the White House of its secretarial and
clerical offices and made it a fit and worthy residence for
the chief citizen of the Republic and his family.
On consultation with the Park Commission of Washington, and
especially with the architect, Mr. McKim, who was one of its
members, as to the expenditure of the annual appropriations of
Congress for repairs to the White House, it was decided to be
thriftless policy "to patch a building that needed thorough
reconstruction. When asked for his ideas as to such
reconstruction, Mr. McKim advised that a temporary one-story
building be located west of the White House, nearly on the
site once occupied by Thomas Jefferson’s offices, and be
distinctly subordinate to the main building; and that the
White House be restored to its original uses as a residence.
This solution commended itself to the President, but lateness
in the session of Congress seemed to make the project
impossible of immediate execution.
"The discussion was still in the academic stage when, one day
[in May, 1902], Mr. McKim outlined his ideas to the late
Senator McMillan, who straightway asked the cost of the
proposed changes. Pressed for an immediate answer, Mr. McKim
made a rough estimate. The Sundry Civil Appropriation Bill was
then pending in the Senate Committee on Appropriations, and
within an hour from the time the figures were given that
committee agreed to insert an item for the restoration of the
White House and for the construction of temporary executive
offices. To Senators Allison and Hale the President afterward
submitted the architect’s scheme; and when the item was
reached during the passage of the bill in the Senate, the plan
was received with favor, and the appropriation was agreed to
without objection."
It passed the House with equal promptitude. The President then
stipulated that "the work should be completed in time for the
next social season, and that the executive offices and the
living portion of the White House should be ready in November,
1902. That meant a campaign. Stones for floors and stairways
must be selected piece by piece at the distant quarry; steel
must be found to replace the over-tired wooden floor-beams;
velvets and silks must be woven; hardware must be fashioned;
and a thousand and one details must be looked after, because
in less than six months the White House was to be made over
from cellar to garret, and every piece of woodwork, every item
of furniture, each ceiling and panel and moulding, must be
both architecturally correct and also befitting a house of the
latter part of the eighteenth century. Such was the task which
the architects, Messrs. McKim, Mead & White, took upon
themselves. …
"The total amount which Congress placed in President
Roosevelt’s hands for both the executive offices and the
White House was $530,641, and he might expend the money either
by contract or otherwise in his discretion. This amount was
based on estimates furnished by the architects, with the
understanding that any portion saved on one item might be used
on others, a very happy proviso, as it turned out, because the
electric wiring had to be entirely renewed, new heating
apparatus provided, and even a new roof put on the house--all
unforeseen requirements. …
"At the outset the architects discovered that simply by
carrying out completely the early plans as to the exterior,
and by making certain rearrangements in the interior, the …
White House problems could be solved, at least for the
immediate future, without destroying one single feature of the
historic building. …
{668}
"By the restoration of the east and west terraces the White
House now rises from a stylobate 460 feet in length, thus
greatly enhancing the dignity of the structure. The roofs of
these terraces (which are level with the ground on the north)
are surrounded with stone balustrades bearing electric lamps."
Charles Moore,
The Restoration of the White House
(Century Magazine, April, 1903).
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1902 (June).
Reclamation (Irrigation) Act of Congress.
See (in this Volume)
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES: UNITED STATES.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1902 (October).
Failure of Projected Purchase of the Danish West Indies.
See (in this Volume)
DENMARK: A. D. 1902.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1902-1903.
Friendly course of Germany in undertaking Proceedings,
with Great Britain and Italy, against Venezuela.
Recognition of the Monroe Doctrine.
Intermediation of the United States.
"If any proof were needed of Germany’s purpose to maintain
good relations with our country [the United States], her
course in the Venezuela matter has amply supplied it.
See (in this Volume)
VENEZUELA: A. D. 1902-1904]
Indeed, the fact that Germany came to an understanding with
our government before taking forcible measures against
Venezuela is of most momentous significance. Why? Because this
was the first explicit recognition of the Monroe Doctrine by
any Continental Power. It is a notable milestone passed in the
history of our country and its relations with European
governments. It gives the Monroe Doctrine a validity no longer
to be disputed. All this was instantly recognized in Germany.
‘America for the Americans,’ said a great Berlin daily, ‘has
become an irreversible fact.’ German Jingo organs were dazed,
and angrily exclaimed, ‘Must we ask permission at Washington
to collect our claims from Venezuela?’ Papers of more rational
temper, however, accepted Germany's course, as not only
without detriment to her dignity, but as in harmony with her
political interests. Indeed, this saner section of the German
press was even pleased that the government had thus made such
an emphatic disavowal of the aims and dreams of the noisy,
fantastic Pan-Germans."
W. C. Dreher,
A Letter from Germany
(Atlantic Monthly, March, 1902).
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1902-1903.
Extension of Civil Service Classification
to Rural Free Delivery Service.
Order concerning Unclassified Laborers.
See (in this Volume)
CIVIL SERVICE REFORM: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1902-1903.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1902-1905.
Negotiation and Senatorial Destruction of the Hay-Bond
Reciprocity Treaty with Newfoundland.
See (in this Volume)
NEWFOUNDLAND: A. D. 1902-1905.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1902 (February).
Creation of the Department of Commerce and Labor in
the National Government.
The Bureau of Corporations.
"The establishment of the Department of Commerce and Labor,
with the Bureau of Corporations thereunder, marks a real
advance in the direction of doing all that is possible for the
solution of the questions vitally affecting capitalist and
wage-workers. The act creating the Department was approved on
February 14, 1903, and two days later the head of the
Department was nominated and confirmed by the Senate. Since
then the work of organization has been pushed as rapidly as
the initial appropriations permitted, and with due regard to
thoroughness and the broad purposes which the Department is
designed to serve. After the transfer of the various bureaus
and branches to the department at the beginning of the current
fiscal year, as provided for in the act, the personnel
comprised 1,289 employees in Washington and 8,836 in the
country at large. The scope of the Department’s duty and
authority embraces the commercial and industrial interests of
the Nation. It is not designed to restrict or control the
fullest liberty of legitimate business action, but to secure
exact and authentic information which will aid the Executive
in enforcing existing laws, and which will enable the Congress
to enact additional legislation, if any should be found
necessary, in order to prevent the few from obtaining
privileges at the expense of diminished opportunities for the
many.
"The preliminary work of the Bureau of Corporations in the
Department has shown the wisdom of its creation. Publicity in
corporate affairs will tend to do away with ignorance, and
will afford facts upon which intelligent action may be taken.
Systematic, intelligent investigation is already developing
facts the knowledge of which is essential to a right
understanding of the needs and duties of the business World.
The corporation which is honestly and fairly organized, whose
managers in the conduct of its business recognize their
obligation to deal squarely with their stockholders, their
competitors, and the public, has nothing to fear from such
supervision. The purpose of this Bureau is not to embarrass or
assail legitimate business, but to aid in bringing about a
better industrial condition—a condition under which there
shall be obedience to law and recognition of public obligation
by all corporations, great or small."
Message of the President to Congress,
December 7, 1903.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1903 (February).
Passage of the Act to further regulate Commerce with Foreign
Nations and among the States, known commonly as
the Elkins Anti-Rebate Law.
See (in this Volume)
RAILWAYS: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1903 (FEBRUARY).
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1903 (October).
Settlement of the Alaska Boundary Question.
See (in this Volume)
ALASKA: A. D. 1903.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1903 (October).
Lease from Cuba of two Coaling and Naval Stations.
See (in this Volume)
CUBA: A. D. 1903.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1903 (October).
New Treaty with China.
Two Ports in Manchuria opened to Foreign Trade.
See (in this Volume)
CHINA: A. D. 1903 (MAY-OCTOBER).
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1903 (October).
Commercial Relations with Germany as affected by the
new German Tariff Law.
See (in this Volume)
GERMANY: A. D. 1902 (OCTOBER).
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1903-1904.
The Financial Crisis.
See (in this Volume)
FINANCE AND TRADE: A. D. 1901-1909.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1903-1904.
Contention against Canadian claims to Sovereignty over Land
and Sea in Hudson Bay Region.
Canadian Measures to establish it.
See (in this Volume)
CANADA: A. D. 1903-1904.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1903-1905.
Investigation and Prosecution of the "Beef Trust," so called.
See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1903-1906.
{669}
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1903-1906.
Unearthing of Extensive Frauds in the Land Office.
Late in December, 1902, the Secretary of the Interior
Department, the Honorable Ethan Allen Hitchcock, received
information which led him, with the President’s approval, to
demand the resignation of the Commissioner of the Land Office,
Binger Hermann, of Oregon. Mr. Hermann was a man of importance
in the Republican party, and he rallied powerful influences to
his support. They could not anchor him durably in the Land
Office, but they did delay his departure from it for about a
mouth, during which time he is said to have destroyed
thousands of letters and documents bearing on land frauds
which he was under suspicion of having protected and promoted.
Returning to Oregon from Washington he sought and obtained
from his party an election to Congress, to fill a vacancy
which death had caused opportunely, and this seemed to augment
his political power. But agents of the Interior Department
were in Oregon and other Western States at the same time,
gathering evidence which soon removed all doubt of the huge
conspiracy of fraud which Commissioner Hermann had been a
party to, and which had wide ramifications wherever public
lands of value were open to entry, under the Homestead Act,
the Desert Land Act, or the Timber and Stone Act.
The frauds were carried on under false appearances of
compliance with the requirements of law, and the dismissal of
Hermann had not cleared from the General Land Office all the
treacherous connivance which made them possible. Other allies
of the land-thieves were tracked to their official desks, some
at Washington, some in the Interior Department, some in
Congress, and some out in the land offices at the West. Then
the Federal Grand Jury at Portland, Oregon, began to turn out
indictments, on evidence handled by Francis J. Heney, now
entering on a famous career, as special prosecutor for the
Government. Mr. Heney was appointed by the President on the
recommendation of Secretary Hitchcock and Attorney-General
Knox, with neglect of advice from Oregon Senators and
Congressmen. One of the first of the indictments found struck
an Oregon Senator, John H. Mitchell, and brought him to a
prison sentence, which death rescued him from. Another put a
member of the House of Representatives, J. H. Williamson, on
trial; a third put its brand on a recently removed United
States District Attorney, John H. Hall. Binger Hermann, a
State Senator, and several special agents of the Land Office
were among the other subjects of prosecution, besides a large
number of private operators in the land-thieves’ ring.
These proceedings were at the beginning of vigorous measures
which have gone far towards, if not fully to the end of
arresting the frauds which were rapidly robbing the nation of
the last of its valuable public lands.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1904.
Representation in the Interparliamentary Union.
See (in this Volume)
WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1904-1909.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1904 (May).
Kidnapping of Mr. Ion Perdicaris at Tangier, for Ransom.
See (in this Volume)
MOROCCO: A. D. 1904-1909.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1904 (May-October).
The Louisiana Purchase Exposition.
See (in this Volume)
ST. LOUIS: A. D. 1904.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1904 (May-November).
The Presidential Election.
Parties, Candidates, and Platforms.
Election of President Roosevelt.
The questions of leading interest and influence in the canvass
preliminary to the Presidential election of 1904 were
undoubtedly those relating to the governmental regulation of
interstate railways and of the capitalistic combinations
called "trusts"; but those questions had not yet acquired the
height of importance in the public mind which they reached
before the next quadrennial polling of the nation occurred.
The question of tariff revision and a moderated protective
system, in the interest of the great mass of consumers, was
rising in interest, especially at the West; but that, too, was
but mildly influential in the campaign. As for the
imperialistic ambitions that had been excited for a time by
the conquests of 1898, they had cooled to so great a degree as
to offer no longer much challenge to opposition; opinion in
the country now differing on little more than the length of
time to which American guardianship over the Philippine
Islands should be allowed to run. The voters of the United
States, in fact, made their election between the men who were
offered to it as candidates, far more than between the parties
and the policies whom the candidates represented; and
President Roosevelt was reelected on personal grounds, in the
main, because the kind of vigorous character he had shown was
greatly to the liking of a large part of the people.
The first nominating convention to be held was that of the
Socialist party, whose delegates met at Chicago, May 2, and
nominated for President Eugene V. Debs, of Indiana; for
Vice-President Benjamin Hanford, of New York.
On the same day the United Christian Party, whose declaration
of principles appears below, met at St. Louis.
The Convention of the Republican Party, also held at Chicago,
came next in time, June 21, and, with Theodore Roosevelt, of
New York, for reëlection as President, it named for
Vice-President Charles Warren Fairbanks, of Indiana.
The Prohibition Party, in convention at Indianapolis, June 29,
named Silas C. Swallow, of Pennsylvania, for President, and
George W. Carroll, of Texas, for Vice-President.
On the 4th of July the People’s or Populist Party held
convention at Springfield, Illinois, and nominated Thomas E.
Watson, of Georgia, for President, with Thomas H. Tibbles, of
Nebraska, for Vice-President.
Meeting two days earlier, in New York City, but in session
some days longer, the Socialist Labor Party named for
President Charles Hunter Corregan, of New York, and for
Vice-President William Wesley Cox, of Illinois.
The convention of the Democratic Party opened its session, at
St. Louis, on the 6th of July. Its nominee for President was
Alton B. Parker, of New York; for Vice-President Henry G.
Davis, of West Virginia.
The National Liberty Party met at St. Louis on the 7th of July
and put forth its platform of principles.
The last of the nominations were presented on the 31st of
August, at Chicago, by a convention representing a new party,
the Continental, whose candidates then named declined and were
subsequently replaced by Austin Holcomb, of Georgia, for
President, and A. King, of Missouri, for Vice-President.
{670}
With some abridgment, the declarations of principles and
pledges of party policy adopted by these several conventions
on the main questions at issue are given conveniently for
comparison in the following arrangement by subjects:
Trusts.
The Republican Party contented itself with a brief boast of
"laws enacted by the Republican party which the Democratic
party failed to enforce," but which "have been fearlessly
enforced by a Republican President," and of "new laws insuring
reasonable publicity as to the operations of great
corporations and providing additional remedies for the
prevention of discrimination in freight rates."
The Democratic Party condemned with vigor the failure of
Republicans in Congress to prohibit contracts with convicted
trusts; declared that "gigantic trusts and combinations" "are
a menace to beneficial competition and an obstacle to
permanent business prosperity;" denounced "rebates and
discrimination by transportation companies as the most potent
agency in promoting and strengthening these unlawful
conspiracies against trade," demanded "an enlargement of the
powers of the Interstate Commerce Commission," "a strict
enforcement of existing civil and criminal statutes against
all such trusts, combinations and monopolies," and "the
enactment of such further legislation as may be necessary to
effectually suppress them."
The People’s Party set forth the proposition that, "to prevent
unjust discrimination and monopoly the Government should own
and control the railroads and those public utilities which in
their nature are monopolies." It should "own and operate the
general telegraph and telephone systems and provide a parcels
post." Corporations "should be subjected to such governmental
regulations and control as will adequately protect the
public," and demand was made for "the taxation of monopoly
privileges, while they remain in private hands, to the extent
of the value of the privileges granted."
The Continental Party contended for a guarded chartering by
Congress of "all railroad and other corporations doing
business in two or more States," and for having the "creating
of ‘corners’ and the establishing of exorbitant prices for
products necessary to human existence … made a criminal
offence."
The United Christian Party declared that "Christian government
through direct legislation will regulate the trusts and labor
problem according to the golden rule."
The Tariff.
The Republican Party declared "Protection" to be its "cardinal
policy," maintenance of the principles of which policy is
insisted upon; wherefore "rates of duty should be readjusted
only when conditions have so changed that the public interest
demands their alteration," and "this work cannot safely be
committed to any other hands than those of the Republican
party."
The Democratic Party, on the contrary, denounced "protection
as a robbery of the many to enrich the few," favored "a tariff
limited to the needs of the Government, economically
administered," and called for a "revision and gradual
reduction of the tariff by the friends of the masses, for the
commonwealth, and not by the friends of its abuses, its
extortions and its discriminations."
The People’s Party declared for a change in our laws that
"will place tariff schedules in the hands of an omni-partisan
commission."
The Continental Party limited its declaration on this subject
to one pronouncing for an "adherence to the principles of
reciprocity advocated by that eminent statesman, James G.
Blaine, as applied to Canada and all American Republics."
Capital and Labor.
Public Ownership.
Socialism.
The Republican Party recognized "combinations of capital and
labor" as "being the results of the economic movements of the
age," but "neither must be permitted to infringe upon the
rights and interests of the people"; "both are subject to the
laws, and neither can be permitted to break them."
The Democratic Party expressed similar impartiality, in
favoring "the enactment and administration of laws giving
labor and capital impartially their just rights."
The People’s Party pledged its effort to "preserve inviolate"
"the right of labor to organize for the benefit and protection
of those who toil." It would seek "the enactment of
legislation looking to the improvement of conditions for the
wage-earners, the abolition of child labor, the suppression of
sweat shops and of convict labor in competition with free
labor"; also the "exclusion from American shores of foreign
pauper labor," and "the shorter work day."
The Continental Party adopted these expressions of the
People’s Party, in identical words.
The National Liberty Party asked "that the General Government
own and control all public carriers in the United States."
The Prohibition Party declared itself "in favor of … the
safeguarding of the people’s rights by a rigid application of
the principles of justice to all combinations and
organizations of capital and labor."
The United Christian Party pronounced simply for "Government
ownership of coal mines, oil wells and public utilities."
The Socialist Party pledged itself "to watch and work, in both
the economic and the political struggle, for each successive
immediate interest of the working class": for "shortened days
of labor and increases of wages"; for "insurance of the
workers against accident, sickness and lack of employment";
for pensions; for "public ownership of the means of
transportation, communication and exchange"; for graduated
taxation of incomes, etc.; for "complete education of children
and their freedom from the workshops"; for "free
administration of justice"; for "the initiative, referendum,
proportional representation, equal suffrage for men and women,"
etc.; and for "every gain or advantage for the workers that
may be wrested from the capitalist system and that may relieve
the suffering and strengthen the hands of labor"; but in so
doing it proclaims that it is "using these remedial measures
as means to the one great end of the co-operative
commonwealth."
The Socialist Labor Party declared that "the existing
contradiction between the theory of democratic government and
the fact of a despotic economic system … perverts government
to the exclusive benefit of the capitalist class"; wherefore,
"against such a system the Socialist Labor Party raises the
banner of revolt, and demands the unconditional surrender of
the capitalist class."
{671}
Nomination and Election.
Initiative and Referendum.
The Democratic Party declared for the election of United
States Senators by direct popular vote.
he People’s Party demanded "that legal provision be made under
which people may exercise the initiative and referendum, and
proportional representation, and direct vote for all public
officers, with the right of recall."
The Continental Party demanded "the enactment by the several
States of a primary election law"; the "elimination of the
party ‘boss’"; "direct legislation by the method known as the
initiative and referendum," and the possession by each State
of "the sole right to determine by legislation the
qualifications required of voters within its jurisdiction,
irrespective of race, color or sex."
The Prohibition Party expressed itself in favor of the popular
election of United States Senators; of "a wise application of
the principle of the initiative and referendum," and of making
the right of suffrage "depend upon the mental and moral
qualifications of the citizen."
Natural Resources.
Land.
Reclamation.
Waterways.
The Republican Party pointed simply to the fact that it had
"passed laws which will bring the arid lands of the United
States within the area of cultivation."
The Democratic Party congratulated "our western citizens upon
the passage of the law known as the Newlands Irrigation Act,"
claiming it as "a measure framed by a Democrat, passed in the
Senate by a non-partisan vote, and passed in the House against
the opposition of almost all Republican leaders, by a vote the
majority of which was Democratic." It declared for "liberal
appropriations for the improvement of waterways of the
country," and pronounced its opposition to "the Republican
policy of starving home development in order to feed the greed
for conquest and the appetite for national prestige."
The People’s Party asserted that "Land, including all the
natural sources of wealth, is a heritage of all the people,
and should not be monopolized for speculative purposes; and
alien ownership of land should be prohibited."
Each of the party platforms was fluent on many other topics,
such as the protection of citizens at home and abroad, the
Panama Canal, territories and dependencies, injunctions,
public economy, taxation, monetary questions, pensions, the
civil service, army and navy, merchant marine,
liquor-licensing and prohibition (the specialty of the
Prohibition Party), divorce, polygamy, etc.; but these entered
so little into the canvass that the party declarations on them
had small effect, if any, on the popular vote.
At the election, in November, the votes given to the
Republican nominees numbered 7,623,486; to Democratic,
5,077,971; to Socialist, 402,283; to Prohibition, 258,536; to
People’s, 117,183; to Socialist Labor, 31,249.
The electoral votes cast were 336 for Roosevelt and Fairbanks;
140 for Parker and Davis.
The States which gave Republican majorities were California,
Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana,
Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota,
Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New
Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania,
Rhode Island, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Washington, West
Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming,—32.
Democratic majorities were given in Alabama, Arkansas,
Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North
Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia,—12.
In Maryland, where the electors are chosen by the Legislature,
6 votes were given to the Democratic candidates and 2 to the
Republican.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1904 (October).
Initial invitation by the President to the holding of a Second
Peace Conference.
See (in this Volume)
WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1907.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1904 (November).
President Roosevelt’s Renunciation of any Third Term Candidacy.
On the evening of the day of election, as soon as the result
was known to have given him a second term in the presidential
office, President Roosevelt issued the following
acknowledgment and announcement to the country:
"I am deeply sensible of the honor done me by the American
people in thus expressing their confidence in what I have done
and have tried to do. I appreciate to the full the solemn
responsibility this confidence imposes upon me, and I shall do
all that in my power lies not to forfeit it. On the Fourth of
March next I shall have served three and one-half years, and
this three and one-half years constitutes my first term. The
wise custom which limits the President to two terms regards
the substance and not the form. Under no circumstances will I
be a candidate for or accept another nomination."
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1904-1905.
Beginning and Organization of Work on the Panama Canal.
See (in this Volume)
PANAMA CANAL: A. D. 1904-1905.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1904-1909.
Progress of State, County, and Town Prohibition.
See (in this Volume)
ALCOHOL PROBLEM: UNITED STATES.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1905.
Arbitration Treaty with Mexico.
See (in this Volume)
MEXICO: A. D. 1904-1905.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1905.
Reopened Controversy over American Fishing Rights on
the Newfoundland coast.
See (in this Volume)
NEWFOUNDLAND: A. D. 1905-1909.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1905.
Assistance to San Domingo against threatening Creditors.
See (in this Volume)
SAN DOMINGO: A. D. 1904-1907.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1905 (February).
Concentration of Forest Service in the Department
of Agriculture.
See (in this Volume)
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES: UNITED STATES.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1905 (February-June).
Recovery from France of the body of Admiral John Paul Jones.
On the 13th of February, 1905, President Roosevelt addressed
a Message to Congress which gave the following information:
"For a number of years efforts have been made to confirm the
historical statement that the remains of Admiral John Paul
Jones were interred in a certain piece of ground in the city
of Paris then owned by the Government and used at the time as
a burial place for foreign Protestants. These efforts have at
last resulted in documentary proof that John Paul Jones was
buried on July 20, 1792, between 8 and 9 o’clock P. M., in the
now abandoned cemetery of St. Louis, in the northeastern
section of Paris. About 500 bodies were interred there, and
the body of the admiral was probably among the last hundred
buried. It was encased in a leaden coffin, calculated to
withstand the ravages of time.
{672}
"The cemetery was about 130 feet long by 120 feet wide. Since
its disuse as a burial place the soil has been tilled to a
level and covered almost completely by buildings, most of them
of an inferior class. The American ambassador in Paris, being
satisfied that it is practical to discover and identify the
remains of John Paul Jones, has, after prolonged negotiations
with the present holders of the property and the tenants
thereof, secured from them options in writing which give him
the right to dig in all parts of the property during a period
of three months for the purpose of making the necessary
excavations and searches, upon condition of a stated
compensation for the damage and annoyance caused by the work.
The actual search is to be conducted by the chief engineer of
the municipal department of Paris having charge of
subterranean works at a cost which has been carefully
estimated. The ambassador gives the entire cost of the work,
including the options, compensation, cost of excavating and
caring for the remains as not exceeding 180,000 francs, or
$35,000, on the supposition that the body may not be found
until the whole area has been searched. If earlier discovered,
the expense would be proportionately less."
The President recommended an appropriation of the sum named,
"or so much thereof as may be necessary for the purposes above
described, to be expended under the direction of the Secretary
of State."
On the 14th of April following a telegram from the Ambassador
at Paris, General Horace Porter, announced that his "six
years’ search for the remains of Paul Jones" had resulted in
success, and described the identification of the body. This
had been verified by Doctors Capitan and Papillault,
distinguished professors of the School of Anthropology, who
had ample particulars of information from which to judge.
Arrangements were made at once for sending a naval squadron,
under Admiral Sigsbee, to France, to bring the remains to the
United States. This was done in the following June, when the
relics of the first of American naval heroes received the high
honors that were due to his exploits. They were deposited in a
vault on the grounds of the Naval Academy at Annapolis.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1905 (June-October).
Mediation by the President between Russia and Japan.
The Peace Treaty of Portsmouth.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1905 (JUNE-OCTOBER).
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1905 (July).
Proclamation of the Death of John Hay, Secretary of State.
"John Hay, Secretary of State of the United States, died on
July 1st. His death, a crushing sorrow to his friends, is to
the people of this country a national bereavement; and it is
in addition a serious loss to all mankind, for to him it was
given to stand as a leader in the effort to better world

conditions by striving to advance the cause of international
peace and justice. He entered the public service as the
trusted and intimate companion of Abraham Lincoln, and for
well nigh forty-five years he served his country with loyal
devotion and high ability in many positions of honor and
trust, and finally he crowned his life work by serving as
Secretary of State with such far-sighted reading of the future
and such loyalty to lofty ideals as to confer lasting benefits
not only upon our own country, but upon all the nations of the
earth.
"As a suitable expression of national mourning, I direct that
the diplomatic representatives of the United States in all
foreign countries display the flags over their embassies and
legations at half-mast for ten days; that for a like period
the flag of the United States be displayed at half-mast at all
forts and military posts and at all naval stations and on all
vessels of the United States. I further order that on the day
of the funeral the Executive Departments in the city of
Washington be closed, and that on all public buildings
throughout the United States the national flag be displayed at
half-mast.
"Done at the city of Washington this third day of July, A. D.
1905, and of the Independence of the United States of America
the one hundred and twenty-ninth. Theodore Roosevelt."
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1905-1906.
American Claims against Venezuela.
See (in this Volume)
VENEZUELA: A. D. 1905-1906, and 1907-1909.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1905-1906.
Part taken in the organization of the International
Institute of Agriculture.
See (in this Volume)
AGRICULTURE.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1905-1906.
The new Period of Inflated Exploitation of Capital.
Increased Cost of Living.
See (in this Volume)
FINANCE AND TRADE: A. D. 1901-1909.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1905-1907.
Receivership of San Domingo Revenues.
The "Modus Vivendi" and the Treaty.
See (in this Volume)
SAN DOMINGO: A. D. 1905-1907.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1905-1909.
The Cabinet of President Roosevelt during his Second Term.
During the second term of President Roosevelt his Cabinet
underwent the following changes: On the death of John Hay, in
July, 1905, Elihu Root became Secretary of State, and
continued in the office until January, 1909, when he resigned,
and was succeeded by the Assistant Secretary of State, Robert
Bacon. Leslie M. Shaw left the Treasury Department in 1907,
and the secretaryship was given to George B. Cortelyou.
William H. Taft continued in charge of the War Department
until his nomination for President, in 1908, when General Luke
E. Wright was called to his place. Charles J. Bonaparte,
appointed Secretary of the Navy at the beginning of the
President’s new term, was transferred in 1907 to the
Department of Justice, succeeding Attorney-General Moody,
appointed to the bench of the Supreme Court, and being
succeeded in the Navy Department by Victor H. Metcalf,
previously Secretary of Commerce and Labor. In the Department
of the Interior, Secretary Hitchcock resigned in 1907, and
James R. Garfield, previously Commissioner of Corporations,
came into his place. George B. Cortelyou had been called to
the Post Office Department at the beginning of the new
presidential term, and transferred thence to the Treasury
Department in 1907. His place in the Post Office was then
filled by George von L. Meyer. The Secretary of Agriculture,
James Wilson, remained at the head of that Department
throughout the term. On the transfer of Mr. Metcalf from the
Department of Commerce and Labor to that of the Treasury, in
1907, his place in the former was taken by Oscar S. Straus.
{673}
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1906.
Joint Action with Mexico in Central American Mediation.
See (in this Volume)
CENTRAL AMERICA.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1906.
Act for the Preservation of the Scenic Grandeur
of Niagara Falls.
See (in this Volume)
NIAGARA FALLS.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1906.
Dealings with Turkey facilitated by making the
American Minister an Ambassador.
See (in this Volume)
TURKEY: A. D. 1906.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1906.
Enactment of a National Pure Food Law.
See (in this Volume)
PUBLIC HEALTH.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1906 (January-April).
Represented at the Algeciras Conference on
the Morocco Question.
Instructions to the Delegates.
Declaration made on signing the Act of the Conference.
See (in this Volume)
EUROPE: A. D. 1905-1906.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1906 (March).
Supreme Court Decision enforcing the Demand of the Government
for the production of Books and Papers by the so-called
Tobacco Trust before a Federal Grand Jury.
See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1905-1906.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1906 (April).
Laying the Corner Stone of an Office Building for Congressmen.
On the 14th of April, 1906, the corner stone of a building
designed to supply each member of the House of Representatives
with an office was laid with ceremony, the President
delivering an address. Besides 410 distinct offices, the
design of the building contemplated a large assembly room for
public hearings before committees of the House. Its estimated
cost was something over $3,000,000. A corresponding office
building for the Senate was also in view.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1906 (April).
Convention with British Government for Determining and
Marking the Alaska Boundary Line.
See (in this Volume)
ALASKA: A. D. 1906.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1906 (April-July).
Long and Widespread Suspension of Coal Mining,
both Anthracite and Bituminous.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1906.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1906 (June).
The Joint Statehood Act.
By the Joint Statehood Bill, approved by the President June
16, 1906, Indian Territory and Oklahoma were united to form
the State of Oklahoma, the people being authorized to adopt a
constitution. Arizona and New Mexico were proffered a similar
union, in a State to be called Arizona. On the question of
such union the Bill provided for a vote to be taken in each
Territory, following which, if a majority in each should be
found to favor the union, delegates to be chosen at the same
election should meet and frame a constitution for submission
to the people. The contemplated vote was taken at the election
of November 6, and resulted in the rejection of the proposal
by Arizona, while New Mexico gave assent. The project was thus
defeated.
The plan of union was successful, however, in the creation of
the State of Oklahoma. Delegates to a convention for framing
its Constitution were elected November 6, 1906; the convention
began its session on the 20th of the same month, and finished
its labors on the 16th of July, 1907. By proclamation of the
President the new State,—the 46th of the Federal family,—was
admitted to the Union on the 16th of November following, under
the Constitution which had been ratified by vote of a majority
of the citizens of each of the Territories now united in it.
For some account of the Constitution;
See (in this Volume)
CONSTITUTION OF OKLAHOMA.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1906 (July-August).
The Third International Conference of American Republics,
at Rio de Janeiro.
See (in this Volume)
AMERICAN REPUBLICS.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1906 (August).
The Brownsville Affair.
On the 13th of August, 1906, a riotous affair of a
much-disputed nature occurred at Brownsville, Texas, in which
one man was killed and two, at least, were wounded. The
shooting was alleged to have been done by colored soldiers who
formed part of a battalion of the Twenty-fifth Infantry,
United States Army, stationed at Brownsville. An investigation
of the affair convinced the President that some few soldiers
of the battalion were guilty of what had been done, and that
their comrades knew of their guilt, but were shielding them,
by assertions to the contrary. On this belief he ordered the
entire battalion to be discharged from the service, and angry
controversy over his action arose at once. The negro soldiers
were championed by a considerable part of the Press of the
country, and by a section of Congress when it met. The
evidence of their guilt was declared to be more than doubtful,
and the authority of the President to issue the order of
discharge was challenged.
In the annual report of the then Secretary of War, now
President Taft, the action of President Roosevelt was firmly
sustained. Secretary Taft’s version of the circumstances of
the affair was substantially to the following effect: Some
number of men, from a battalion of 170, formed a preconcerted
plan to revenge themselves upon the people of a town for
insults which they resented. They left their barracks about
midnight and fired into the houses of the town for the purpose
of killing those against whom they had a grievance. They did
kill one man, wound another, and seriously injure the chief of
police. There can be no doubt, therefore, that this squad of
men were guilty; the purpose of one was the purpose of all.
Within a few minutes after the crime was committed, the men
returned to their places in the ranks (a call to arms having
been sounded), and must have been among the last to take their
places, for the firing continued after the formations had
begun. The absence of their rifles from the racks could not
have escaped the attention of the sergeants who had the keys;
yet all the sergeants swear that the rifles were in the racks,
untouched. It is impossible that many of the battalion who did
not take part as active members of the conspiracy were not
made aware, by one circumstance or another, of the identity of
the persons who committed the offense, instead of giving to
their officers or the inspectors the benefit of anything which
they knew tending to lead to a conviction of the guilty men,
there was a conspiracy of silence on the part of many who must
have had some knowledge of importance. "These enlisted men,"
said Secretary Taft, "took the oath of allegiance to the
Government, and were to be used under the law to maintain its
supremacy. Can the Government properly, therefore, keep in its
employ for the purpose of maintaining law and order any longer
a body of men, from five to ten per cent. of whom can plan and
commit murder, and rely upon the silence of a number of their
companions to escape detection? "
{674}
Mr. Taft then called attention to the fact that "when a man
enlists in the army he knows that, for the very purpose of
protecting itself, the Government reserves to itself the
absolute right of discharge, not as a punishment, but for the
public safety or interest." He thus corrected the supposition
that the discharge was a punishment either of the innocent or
the guilty. He said further: "The discharge ‘without honor’ is
merely the ending of a contract and separation from the
service under a right reserved in the statute for the
protection of the Government, which may work a hardship to the
private discharged, but which, in the public interest, must
sometimes be arbitrarily exercised."
Of the repeated investigations, Congressional and military,
that ensued, and of the protracted disputation, led in
Congress by Senator Foraker, and echoed in the newspapers, it
is needless to attempt an account; for no greater certainty as
to the facts in the case can be recognized to-day than when
Secretary Taft's report was made.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1906 (August-October).
Insurrection in Cuba.
American Intervention called for.
The Cuban Government dissolved.
Provisional Government established by Secretary-of-War Taft.
See (in this Volume)
CUBA: A. D. 1906 (AUGUST-OCTOBER).
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1906 (October-November).
Segregation of Orientals in San Francisco Schools.
Resentment of the Japanese.
See (in this Volume)
RACE PROBLEMS: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1904-1909.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1906-1909.
The Provisional Government of Cuba.
Reinstatement of the Republic.
See (in this Volume)
CUBA: A D. 1906-1909.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1906-1909.
The Reform of the Consular Service.
See
CIVIL SERVICE REFORM: UNITED STATES.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1907.
Monetary Panic.
Distress among the Speculative Great Capitalists.
Industrial Paralysis.
Unemployment for Labor.
See (in this Volume)
FINANCE AND TRADE: A. D. 1901-1909.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1907.
Enactment of a new Law of Citizenship.
See (in this Volume)
NATURALIZATION.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1907 (January).
Act to prohibit Corporations from making Contributions
in connection with Political Elections.
The following Act of Congress was approved by the President,
January 26, 1907.
"That it shall be unlawful for any national bank, or any
corporation organized by authority of any laws of Congress, to
make a money contribution in connection with any election to
any political office. It shall also be unlawful for any
corporation whatever to make a money contribution in
connection with any election at which Presidential and
Vice-Presidential electors or a Representative in Congress is
to be voted for or any election by any State legislature of a
United States Senator. Every corporation which shall make any
contribution in violation of the foregoing provisions shall be
subject to a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars, and
every officer or director of any corporation who shall consent
to any contribution by the corporation in violation of the
foregoing provisions shall upon conviction be punished by a
fine of not exceeding one thousand and not less than two
hundred and fifty dollars, or by imprisonment for a term of
not more than one year, or both such fine and imprisonment in
the discretion of the court."
According to a statement presented to the Senate in February,
1908, the laws of the following nineteen States and
Territories contain provisions for the publicity of election
contributions or expenditures originally enacted at the dates
given:
Alabama, 1903;
Arizona, 1895;
California, 1893
Colorado, 1891;
Connecticut, 1895;
Iowa, 1907;
Massachusetts, 1892;
Minnesota, 1895;
Missouri, 1893;
Montana, 1895;
Nebraska, 1897;
New York, 1890;
Pennsylvania, 1906;
South Carolina, 1905;
South Dakota, 1907;
Texas, 1905;
Virginia, 1903;
Washington, 1907;
Wisconsin, 1897.
The laws of the three following States, which contain no
publicity provisions, forbid corporations to contribute in any
manner for political purposes: Florida, 1897; Kentucky, 1897;
Tennessee, 1897.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1907 (April).
First National Peace Congress.
See (in this Volume)
WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1907.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1907 (June-October).
Represented at the Second Peace Conference.
See (in this Volume)
WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1907.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1907-1909.
The World-round Cruise of the Battleship Fleet.
See (in this Volume)
WAR, THE PREPARATIONS FOR: NAVAL.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1908.
Supreme Court Decision affirming right to specially limit
the Hours of Labor for Women.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR PROTECTION: HOURS OF LABOR.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1908 (April).
Conditional Ratification, by the Senate of the Peace
Conference Convention for the Pacific Settlement of
International Disputes.
See (in this Volume)
WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1907.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1908 (April).
Treaty with Great Britain respecting the Demarcation of the
International Boundary between the United States and Canada.
See (in this Volume)
CANADA: A. D. 1908 (APRIL).
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1908 (April).
Convention for the Preservation and Propagation of Food
Fishes in waters contiguous to the United States and Canada.
See (in this Volume)
FOOD FISHES.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1908 (April).
Passage of Act relating to the Liability of Common Carriers
by Railroad to their Employees.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR PROTECTION: EMPLOYERS’ LIABILITY.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1908 (April-November).
The Presidential Election.
Parties, Candidates, and Platforms.
Election of President Taft.
In the interval between the presidential elections of 1904 and
1908 the Trust and the Tariff questions had both received an
increase of attention and of real study, and were factors of
more influence in the latter than in the former election. The
energy with which President Roosevelt had pressed both
legislative and executive action, towards a more effective
restraint and regulation of monopolistic combinations, had
greatly strengthened his party in public favor. His
extraordinary personal force, moreover, had made itself felt
in many quickenings and stimulations of public spirit and of
governmental action, which gave a cheering experience to the
country.
{675}
The various ends to which this worked, and especially on the
lines which looked to the rescuing of the rich natural
resources of the country from private monopoly and reckless
waste became associated in thought with the President, and
widely talked of as belonging to "the Roosevelt policies."
Popular satisfaction with these policies and their champion
would have given Mr. Roosevelt a renomination by his party, if
he had not emphatically reiterated his pledge of four years
before, that "under no circumstances" would he "be a candidate
for or accept another nomination." There were some who strove
to persuade him to be false to that pledge; but they were not
the people who esteemed him most truly. Naturally the
nomination that would have gone again to Mr. Roosevelt if he
had been free to accept it sought a candidate so closely
identified with what he had stood for and labored for that no
departure from the favored "policies" need be feared. Quite as
naturally that candidate won a large majority of the popular
votes.
The first nominating convention held in 1904 was that of the
People’s or Populist Party, which sat in St. Louis April 2-3,
and again named its old leader, Thomas E. Watson, of Georgia,
for President, with Samuel W. Williams, of Indiana, for the
second place.
Reverend Daniel Braxton Turney, of Illinois, was the next to
be named for President, and L. S. Coffin, of Iowa, for
Vice-President, by the United Christian Party, at Rock Island,
Illinois, May 1.
On the 10th of May the Socialist Party met in convention at
Chicago and was in session until the 18th, again nominating
Eugene V. Debs, of Indiana, and Benjamin Hanford, of New York,
for President and Vice-President.
The Republican convention was assembled at Chicago, June
16-19, and its nominees were William Howard Taft, of Ohio, for
President, and James Schoolcraft Sherman, of New York, for
Vice-President.
The Socialist Labor Party, at New York, July 24, nominated,
for President, August Gillhaus, of New York; for
Vice-President, Donald L. Munro, of Virginia.
At Denver, July 7-10, the Convention of the Democratic Party
named, for the third time, William Jennings Bryan, of
Nebraska, for President, and for Vice-President John Worth
Kern, of Indiana.
The Prohibitionists convened at Columbus, Ohio, July 15-16,
and the candidates named by them for President and Vice
President were Eugene W. Chafin, of Illinois, and Aaron S.
Watkins, of Ohio.
The last of the parties to meet in convention was that
organized by William R. Hearst and named the Independence
Party. The candidates put forward were Thomas L. Hisgen, of
Massachusetts, and John Temple Graves, of Georgia.
Of the eight political parties which offered candidates to the
voters of the nation, four presented them on special grounds,
aside from which their standing on other questions of public
policy was but slightly and incidentally made known. The
"platforms" of the remaining four were of the scope of general
politics, defining positions taken on all or most of the
political discussions of the time. The declarations of these
latter on the questions which enlisted real interest in the
country will be given, as in the treatment of the party
platforms of 1904, under a dissected arrangement, by subjects,
for convenient comparison; while the former cannot easily be
dealt with in that analytic way. In both cases the distinctly
declaratory text of the platforms, only, will be given, with
some abridgment, as follows:
Trusts.
"The Republican Party," it asserted, "passed the Sherman
anti-trust law over Democratic opposition, and enforced it
after Democratic dereliction. … But experience has shown that
its effectiveness can be strengthened and its real objects
better attained by such amendments as will give to the Federal
Government greater supervision and control over, and secure
greater publicity in, the management of that class of
corporations engaged in interstate commerce having power and
opportunity to effect monopolies."
The Democratic Party demanded "the enactment of such
additional legislation as may be necessary to make it
impossible for a private monopoly to exist in the United
States." Among the additional remedies required it specified
three:
(1) "A law preventing a duplication of directors among
competing corporations";
(2) requirement of a federal license for a manufacturing or
trading corporation, "before it shall be permitted to control
as much as 25 per cent. of the product in which it deals, the
license to protect the public from watered stock, and to
prohibit the control by such corporation of more than 50 per
cent. of the total amount of any product consumed in the
United States"; and
(3) " a law compelling such licensed corporation to sell to
all purchasers in all parts of the country on the same terms,
after making due allowance for the cost of transportation."
The People’s Party declared that "the Government should own
and control the railroads and those public utilities which in
their nature are monopolies," including the telegraph and
telephone systems, and should provide a parcels post. From
those trusts and monopolies which are not public utilities or
national monopolies it demanded a withdrawal of the special
privileges they enjoy; taxation of all such privileges while
they remain in private hands, and "a general law uniformly
regulating the powers and duties of all incorporated companies
doing interstate business."
The Independence Party denounced all combinations which "are
not combinations for production, but for extortion," and
demanded "the enforcement of a prison penalty against the
guilty and responsible individuals controlling the management
of the offending corporations." It advocated, "as a primary
necessity for sounder business conditions and improved public
service, the enactment of laws, State and National, to prevent
watering of stock, dishonest issues of bonds and other forms
of corporation frauds."
Tariff.
The declarations of the Republican and Democratic national
conventions touching a revision of the tariff have been quoted
already in this Volume.
See (in this Volume)
TARIFFS: UNITED STATES.
The Independence Party, like the Democratic, demanded a
revision of the tariff, not by its friends, but by the friends
of the people, and declared for a gradual reduction of tariff
duties.
{676}
Capital and Labor.
Injunctions.
The Republican Party recited the enactments of the existing
Congress in the interest of labor, and pledged "its continued
devotion to every cause that makes for safety and the
betterment of conditions among those whose labor contributes
to the progress and welfare of the country." On the burning
question of the interference of courts of law, by writ of
injunction, with labor "strikes," it declared that, while "the
Republican Party will uphold at all times the authority and
integrity of the courts," it believes "that the rules of
procedure in the writ of injunction should be more accurately
defined by statute, and that no injunction or temporary
restraining order should be issued without notice, except
where irreparable injury would result from delay, in which
case a speedy hearing thereafter should be granted."
The Democratic Party gave expression to the same desire to
maintain the dignity of the courts, but had seen that
"experience has proven the necessity of a modification of the
present law relating to injunctions," and added: "we reiterate
the pledges of our national platforms of 1896 and 1904 in
favor of the measure which passed the United States Senate in
1896, but which a Republican Congress has ever since refused
to enact, relating to contempts in Federal courts and
providing for trial by jury in cases of indirect contempt. …
We deem … that injunctions should not be issued in any case in
which injunctions would not issue if no industrial dispute
were involved." Its further declarations were against any
"abridgment of the right of wage-earners and producers to
organize for the protection of wages and the improvement of
labor conditions"; for "the eight hour law on all government
work"; for the enactment by Congress of a "general employers’
liability act," and for the creation of "a department of
labor, represented separately in the President’s cabinet."
The Independence Party denounced "the so-called labor planks
of the Republican and Democratic platforms as political
buncombe and contemptible clap trap," and asserted "that in
all actions growing out of a dispute between employers and
employees concerning terms and conditions of employment no
injunction should issue until after a trial upon the merits;
that such trial should be held before a jury, and that in no
case of alleged contempt should any person be deprived of
liberty without a trial by jury." In further declarations the
party indorsed "those organizations among farmers and workers
which tend to bring about a just distribution of wealth," and
favored legislation to "remove them from the operation of the
Sherman anti-trust law"; endorsed the eight-hour work day, and
would have it applied to all work done for the Government;
called for legislation to prohibit "any combination or
conspiracy to blacklist employees"; demanded "protection for
workmen through enforced use of standard safety appliances and
provision of hygienic conditions"; advocated State and Federal
inspection of railways to secure a greater safety for
employees and the travelling public; condemned the manufacture
and sale of prison-made goods; favored a Federal department of
labor, with its chief in the Cabinet; and called for a Federal
inspection of grain.
The People’s Party condemned "all unwarranted assumption of
authority by inferior Federal courts in annulling by
injunction the laws of the States," and demanded legislation
to "restrict to the Supreme Court of the United States the
exercise of power in cases involving State legislation";
condemned the "attempt to destroy the power of trades unions
through the unjust use of the Federal injunction"; demanded
the abolition of child labor in factories and mines,
suppression of sweat shops, exclusion of foreign pauper labor,
the enactment of an employers’ liability act and measures
against carelessness in the operation of mines; opposed the
use of convict labor; favored the eight-hour work-day, and
"legislation protecting the lives and limbs of workmen through
the use of safety appliances"; declared that when working men
are thrown into enforced idleness works of public improvement
should be inaugurated.
Banking and Currency.
The Republican Party approved "the emergency measures adopted
by the government during the recent financial disturbances"
and declared the party to be "committed to the development of
a permanent currency system, responding to our greater needs."
It favored the establishment of a postal savings bank system.
The Democratic Party pointed to the panic of 1907, "coming
without any legitimate excuse," as furnishing additional proof
that the Republican party "is either unwilling or incompetent
to protect the interests of the general public," having "so
linked the country to Wall Street that the sins of the
speculators are visited upon the whole people." It declared
the belief that "in so far as the needs of commerce require an
emergency currency, such currency should be issued, controlled
by the Federal Government and loaned on adequate security to
National and State banks." It pledged itself "to legislation
under which the national banks should be required to establish
a guarantee fund for the prompt payment of the depositors of
any insolvent national bank under an equitable system which
shall be available to all State banking institutions wishing
to use it." It favored a postal savings bank "if the
guaranteed bank can not be secured, and believed that it
should be so constituted as to keep the deposited money in the
community where the depositors live."
The People’s Party reiterated its belief that "the issuance of
money is a function of government and should not be delegated
to corporation or individual." It therefore demanded "that all
money should be issued by the Government direct to the people,
without the intervention of banks, and shall be a full legal
tender for all debts, public and private, and in quantities
sufficient to supply the needs of the country." It also
demanded postal savings banks.
The Independence Party made a similar declaration, "that the
right to issue money is inherent in the Government," and it
favored "the establishment of a central governmental bank,
through which the money so issued shall be put into general
circulation." It also called for an extension of the parcels
post system and for postal savings banks, the deposits in
which should "be loaned to the people in the locality of the
several banks."
Railroads.
The Republican Party approved the railroad rate law and "the
vigorous enforcement by the present administration of the
statutes against rebates and discriminations"; believing,
"however, that the interstate commerce law should be further
amended so as to give railroads the right to make and publish
traffic agreements subject to the approval of the commission."
It declared for legislation and supervision to "prevent the
future overissue of stocks and bonds by interstate carriers."
{677}
The Democratic Party asserted "the right of Congress to
exercise complete control over interstate commerce, and the
right of each State to exercise like control over commerce
within its borders"; and it demanded a needed enlargement of
the powers of the interstate commerce commission. It
recommended a valuation of railroads by the commission. It
favored legislation to "prohibit the railroads from engaging
in business which brings them into competition with their
shippers"; to prevent the overissue of stocks and bonds, and
to "assure such reduction in transportation rates as
conditions will permit." It approved the laws prohibiting the
pass and the rebate. It favored giving to the interstate
commerce commission "the initiative with reference to rates
and transportation charges," also permitting it, "on its own
initiative to declare a rate illegal," and otherwise enhancing
its efficiency.
The Independence Party advocated "a bill empowering shippers
in time of need to compel railroads to provide sufficient cars
for freight and passenger traffic and other railroad
facilities through summary appeal to the courts." It also
favored "the creation of an Interstate Commerce Court, whose
sole function it shall be to review speedily and enforce
summarily the orders of the Interstate Commerce Commission,"
and it urged that the Commission "should proceed at once with
a physical valuation of railroads engaged in interstate
commerce."
Natural Resources.
Public Lands.
Waterways.
The Republican Party indorsed "the movement inaugurated by the
administration for the conservation of natural resources";
commended "the work now going on for the reclamation of arid
lands"; reaffirmed "the Republican policy of the free
distribution of the available … public domain to the landless
settler," and declared it to be "the further duty, equally
imperative, to enter upon a systematic improvement, upon a
large and comprehensive plan, just to all portions of the
country, of the water harbors and Great Lakes."
The Democratic Party repeated "the demand for internal
development and for the conservation of our national resources
contained in previous platforms," covering lines of policy the
same as above, and adding "the development of water power and
the preservation of electric power generated by this natural
force from the control of monopoly." It insisted upon "a
policy of administration of our forest reserve which shall …
enable homesteaders as of right to occupy and acquire title to
all portions thereof which are especially adapted to
agriculture, and which shall furnish a system of timber sales
available as well to the private citizen as to the larger
manufacturer and consumer." It called for regulations "in
relation to free grazing upon the public lands outside of
forest or other reservations until the same shall eventually
be disposed of." It favored the "immediate adoption of a
liberal and comprehensive plan for improving every water
course in the Union which is justified by the needs of
commerce," with "the creation of an ample fund for continuous
work."
The People’s Party declared that the public domain is a sacred
heritage of all the people, and should be held for homesteads
for actual settlers only; alien ownership should be forbidden.
The Independence Party rejoiced "in the adoption in both the
Democratic and Republican platforms of the demand of the
Independence party for improved national waterways." It
declared for the reclamation of arid lands and generally for
the conservation of the country’s natural resources. It called
for provision to be made for free grazing on public lands
outside of forest or other reservations. It protested against
the sale of water and electric light power derived from public
works to private corporations.
On other subjects touched in their platforms the declarations
of these parties varied little from those of 1904, and cannot
be regarded as having much historical significance.
Of the remaining parties, which are organizations with special
objects, the Socialist set forth the most elaborate programme
of demands, under three headings,—General, Industrial, and
Political. The first included "immediate Government relief for
the unemployed" by public works of many descriptions;
collective ownership of railroads, telegraphs, etc., and all
lands; "collective ownership of all industries which are
organized on a national scale and in which competition has
virtually ceased to exist"; inclusion of mines, quarries, oil
wells, forests and water-power in the public domain.
Industrial demands included improved industrial conditions;
shortened work days; a weekly rest-period of not less than a
day and a half; effective inspection of factories and shops:
no child labor under sixteen years of age; no interstate
transportation of products of child labor; substitution of
compulsory insurance against unemployment, illness, age, etc.,
for all official charity. Political demands were for extended
and graduated inheritance taxes; a graduated income tax; equal
suffrage for men and women; the initiative, referendum,
recall, and proportional representation; abolition of the
Senate; abolition of power in the Supreme Court to pass on the
constitutionality of legislation; amendability of the
Constitution by a majority vote, election of all judges for
short terms; free administration of justice; further measures
for general education and conservation of health.
The Socialist Labor Party repeated in substantially the same
words its general declarations of 1904, against a "despotic
economic system," as quoted above, under the heading "Capital
and Labor."
The Prohibition Party embodied its fundamental object in
demands for the submission of a constitutional amendment
prohibiting the manufacture, sale, etc., of alcoholic liquors
for beverage purposes; suppression of the liquor traffic in
all places under the jurisdiction of the National Government,
and repeal of the internal revenue tax on alcoholic liquors.
To this it added demands for a popular election of United
States Senators; graduated income and inheritance taxes;
postal savings banks; guarantee of deposits in banks;
regulation of corporations doing an interstate business; a
permanent tariff commission; uniform marriage and divorce
laws; enforcement of law against the social evil; an equitable
employers’ liability act; court review of post office
decisions; prohibition of child labor in mines, workshops and
factories; suffrage based on ability to read and write the
English language; preservation of the resources of the
country, and improvement of highways and waterways.
{678}
The United Christian Party, basing its platform, as before, on
the ten commandments and the golden rule, favored "direct
primary elections, the initiative, referendum, recall, uniform
marriage and divorce laws, equal rights for men and women,
government ownership of coal mines, oil wells and public
utilities; the regulation of trusts and the election of the
president and vice-president and senators of the United States
by the direct vote of the people."
The votes cast at the popular election, November 3, numbered
7,637,676 for the Republican nominees; 6,393,182 for the
Democratic; 420,464 for the Socialist; 231,252 for the
Prohibitionist; 83,183 for the Independence; 33,871 for the
Populist; 15,421 for the Socialist Labor. The total of votes
polled, including a few thousands to other than party
nominees, was reported to be 14,863,711.
The States which gave Republican majorities were California,
Connecticut, Delaware, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas,
Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada,
New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Ohio,
Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Utah,
Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming,—29.
The States which gave Democratic majorities were Alabama,
Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana,
Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Carolina, Oklahoma,
South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia,—16.
Maryland, where the electors are chosen by the Legislature,
divided its vote, giving 6 to the Democratic nominees and 2 to
the Republican.
The total vote in the Electoral College was 326 for Taft and
Sherman and 157 for Bryan and Kern.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1908 (May).
The Emergency Currency Act.
See (in this Volume)
FINANCE AND TRADE; UNITED STATES: A. D. 1908.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1908 (July).
Remission to China of Part of Boxer Indemnity.
See (in this Volume)
CHINA: A. D. 1901-1908.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1908 (October).
Reply of Secretary Root to the announcement from Belgium of
the Annexation of the Congo State.
Recognition of the Annexation reserved.
See (in this Volume)
CONGO STATE: A. D. 1906-1909.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1908 (November).
Supreme Court Decision in Case of Virginia Railroads vs.
the State Corporation Commission of Virginia.
See (in this Volume)
RAILWAYS. UNITED STATES: A. D. 1908 (NOVEMBER).
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1908 (November).
Exchange of Notes with Japan embodying a Declaration of
Common Policy in the East.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1908 (NOVEMBER).
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1908 (December).
Extension of the Competitive System of Appointment to
Fourth Class Postmasters in a large section of the Country.
See (in this Volume)
CIVIL SERVICE REFORM: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1908.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1908 (December).
Relief for the Survivors of the Earthquake at
and around Messina.
See (in this Volume)
EARTHQUAKES: ITALY.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1908-1909.
Diminished Consumption of Whiskey and Beer.
See (in this Volume)
ALCOHOL PROBLEM: UNITED STATES.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1908-1909.
The Government giving attention to Liberian Affairs.
See (in this Volume)
LIBERIA: A. D. 1907-1909.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1908-1909 (August-February).
The Country Life Commission, and its Report.
On the 10th of August, 1908, President Roosevelt addressed a
letter to five gentlemen whom he asked to serve upon a
Commission on Country Life. The five thus addressed were
Professor L. H. Bailey, New York State College of Agriculture,
Ithaca (named as Chairman of the Commission); Mr. Henry
Wallace, of Wallace’s Farmer, Des Moines, Iowa;
President Kenyon L. Butterfield, Massachusetts Agricultural
College, Amherst; Mr. Gilford Pinchot, of the United States
Forest Service; Mr. Walter H. Page, of The World's
Work, New York. Subsequently, Mr. Charles S. Barrett, of
Georgia, and Mr. William A. Beard, of California, were added
to the Commission.
In his letter to the original appointees the President wrote:
"I doubt if any other nation can bear comparison with our own
in the amount of attention given by the Government, both
Federal and State, to agricultural matters. But practically
the whole of this effort has hitherto been directed toward
increasing the production of crops. Our attention has been
concentrated almost exclusively on getting better farming. In
the beginning this was unquestionably the right thing to do.
The farmer must first of all grow good crops in order to
support himself and his family. But when this has been secured
the effort for better farming should cease to stand alone, and
should be accompanied by the effort for better business and
better living on the farm. It is at least as important that
the farmer should get the largest possible return in money,
comfort, and social advantages from the crops he grows as that
he should get the largest possible return in crops from the
land he farms. Agriculture is not the whole of country life.
The great rural interests are human interests, and good crops
are of little value to the farmer unless they open the door to
a good kind of life on the farm. … The farmers have hitherto
had less than their full share of public attention along the
lines of business and social life. There is too much belief
among all our people that the prizes of life lie away from the
farm."
The Commission entered promptly on its task, of obtaining wide
and exact information as to the existing conditions of farm
life and work in the country, as to homes and schools; means
of communication and intercourse, by postal service,
telephone, highway, electric railway and other railways;
neighborhood organizations to promote mutual advantages in
buying and selling; profitable sale of products; supply of
labor; facilities for business in banking, credit, insurance;
sanitary conditions; social entertainment; meetings for mutual
improvement, etc., etc.
{679}
This was sought, in the first instance, by a circular of
questions, about 550,000 copies of which were sent to names
supplied by the United States Department of Agriculture, state
experiment stations, farmers’ societies, women’s clubs, to
rural free deliverymen, country physicians and ministers, and
others. To these inquiries about 115,000 persons have replied
before the report of the Commission was made, "mostly with
much care and with every evidence of good faith."
In addition to the replies given to the circular questions, a
great number of persons sent carefully written letters and
statements that were invaluable. At thirty places, in all
sections of the country, the Commission, or part of it, held
appointed hearings in November and December, and obtained much
light from those. Its report of the conclusions to which it
had been led was presented to the President on the 23d of
January, 1909, and transmitted by him to Congress on February
9th.
The Commission found an unquestionable lack in the country of
a well organized rural society, and came to clear conclusions
concerning the many causes therefor, which are fully discussed
in its report. The leading specific causes are summarized with
brevity at the outset, as follows.
"A lack of knowledge on the part of farmers of the exact
agricultural conditions and possibilities of their regions;
"Lack of good training for country life in the schools;
"The disadvantage or handicap of the farmer as against the
established business systems and interests, preventing him
from securing adequate returns for his products, depriving him
of the benefits that would result from unmonopolized rivers
and the conservation of forests, and depriving the community,
in many cases, of the good that would come from the use of
great tracts of agricultural land that are now held for
speculative purposes;
"Lack of good highway facilities;
"The widespread continuing depletion of soils, with the
injurious effect on rural life;
"A general need of new and active leadership.
"Other causes contributing to the general result are: Lack of
any adequate system of agricultural credit, whereby the farmer
may readily secure loans on fair terms; the shortage of labor,
a condition that is often complicated by intemperance among
workmen; lack of institutions and incentives that tie the
laboring man to the soil; the burdens and the narrow life of
farm women; lack of adequate supervision of public health."
To this summary of main deficiencies the Commission adds the
following, of chief remedies:
"Congress can remove some of the handicaps of the farmer, and
it can also set some kinds of work in motion, such as:
"The encouragement of a system of thorough-going surveys of
all agricultural regions, in order to take stock and collect
local fact, with the idea of providing a basis on which to
develop a scientifically and economically sound country life;
"The encouragement of a system of extension work in rural
communities, through all the land-grant colleges, to the
people at their homes and on their farms;
"A thorough investigation by experts of the middleman system
of handling farm products, coupled with a general inquiry into
the farmer’s disadvantages in respect to taxation,
transportation rates, cooperative organizations and credit,
and the general business system;
"An inquiry into the control and use of the streams of the
United States, with the object of protecting the people in
their ownership and of saving to agricultural uses such
benefits as should be reserved for these purposes;
"The establishing of a highway engineering service, or
equivalent organization, to be at the call of the States in
working out effective and economical highway systems;
"The establishing of a system of parcel posts and postal
savings banks;
"Providing some means or agency for the guidance of public
opinion toward the development of a real rural society that
shall rest directly on the land. …
"Remedies of a more general nature are: A broad campaign of
publicity, that must be undertaken until all the people are
informed on the whole subject of rural life, and until there
is an awakened appreciation of the necessity of giving this
phase of our national development as much attention as has
been given to other phases or interests; a quickened sense of
responsibility in all country people, to the community and to
the State, in the conserving of soil fertility, and in the
necessity for diversifying farming in order to conserve this
fertility and to develop a better rural society, and also in
the better safe-guarding of the strength and happiness of the
farm women; a more widespread conviction of the necessity for
organization, not only for economic but for social purposes,
this organization to be more or less cooperative, so that all
the people may share equally in the benefits and have voice in
the essential affairs of the community; a realization on the
part of the farmer that he has a distinct natural
responsibility toward the laborer in providing him with good
living facilities and in helping him in every way to be a man
among men; and a realization on the part of all the people of
the obligation to protect and develop the natural scenery and
attractiveness of the open country.
"Certain remedies lie with voluntary organizations and
institutions. All organized forces, both in town and country,
should understand that there are country phases as well as
city phases of our civilization, and that one phase needs help
as much as the other."
In his Message communicating the reports of the Commission to
Congress the President focussed attention on four "great
general and immediate needs of country life" which stand out
of the exhibit before all others:
"First, effective coöperation among farmers, to put them on a
level with the organized interests with which they do
business.
"Second, a new kind of schools in the country, which shall
teach the children as much outdoors as indoors and perhaps
more, so that they will prepare for country life, and not as
at present, mainly for life in town.
"Third, better means of communication, including good roads
and a parcels post, which the country people are everywhere,
and rightly, unanimous in demanding.
{680}

"To these may well be added better sanitation: for easily
preventable diseases hold several million country people in
the slavery of continuous ill health.
"The commission points out, and I concur in the conclusion,
that the most important help that the Government, whether
National or State, can give is to show the people how to go
about these tasks of organization, education, and
communication with the best and quickest results. This can be
done by the collection and spread of information."
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1908-1909.
Spasmodic Process of Recovery from
the Financial Crisis of 1907.
See (in this Volume)
FINANCE AND TRADE: A. D. 1901-1909.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1908-1909.
Second Conference of State Governors and Report
of National Conservation Commission.
Its Inventory of Natural Resources.
See (in this Volume)
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES: UNITED STATES.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1909.
Existing Treaties with China and existing Enactments relative
to the Admission of Chinamen to the United States.
The Question of their Consistency with each other.
Chinese Complaints.
The present Status of the Question.
See (in this Volume)
RACE PROBLEMS: UNITED STATES.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1909.
The Census Bill and the President’s Veto.
he Amended Bill, which became Law.
See (in this Volume)
CIVIL SERVICE REFORM: UNITED STATES.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1909.
Protest against the Russo-Chinese Agreement of May, relative
to Municipalities on the line of the Chinese Eastern Railway.
See (in this Volume)
CHINA: A. D. 1909 (MAY).
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1909.
Trouble with Nicaragua.
See (in this Volume)
CENTRAL AMERICA: A. D. 1909.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1909 (January).
The Waterways Treaty with Great Britain, concerning Waters
between the United States and Canada.
See (in this Volume)
CANADA: A. D. 1909 (JANUARY).
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1909 (February).
Anti-Opium Act.
See (in this Volume)
OPIUM PROBLEM.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1909 (February).
Initiative in securing International Opium Commission
at Shanghai.
See (in this Volume)
OPIUM PROBLEM.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1909 (February).
Invitation of Canada and Mexico to a Conference on
the Conservation of Natural Resources.
See (in this Volume)
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES: NORTH AMERICA.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1909 (March).
The Inauguration of President Taft.
Intimations of Policy in his Inaugural Address.
His Cabinet.
The ceremonies of the inauguration of President Taft on the
4th of March were performed under singularly unfavorable
circumstances, in consequence of one of the most dreadful
storms that ever visited the Capital. Trains blocked by it
contained thousands of people who reached Washington too late
for what they had travelled far to witness or to take part in,
while those who did arrive on the scene were hardly gladdened
by their success. The President, however, accepted the
untoward conditions with a characteristic high-hearted
equanimity. His inaugural address, delivered in the Senate
Chamber, instead of in the open air at the East front of the
Capitol, opened with the following words:
"Any one who takes the oath I have just taken must feel a
heavy weight of responsibility. If not, he has no conception
of the powers and duties of the office upon which he is about
to enter, or he is lacking in a proper sense of the obligation
which the oath imposes.
"The office of an inaugural address is to give a summary
outline of the main policies of the new Administration, so far
as they can be anticipated. I have had the honor to be one of
the advisers of my distinguished predecessor, and as such, to
hold up his hands in the reforms he has initiated. I should be
untrue to myself, to my promises, and to the declarations of
the party platform upon which I was elected to office, if I
did not make the maintenance and enforcement of those reforms
a most important feature of my administration. They were
directed to the suppression of the lawlessness and abuses of
power of the great combinations of capital invested in
railroads and in industrial enterprises carrying on interstate
commerce. The steps which my predecessor took and the
legislation passed on his recommendation have accomplished
much, have caused a general halt in the vicious policies which
created popular alarm, and have brought about, in the business
affected, a much higher regard for existing law. To render the
reforms lasting, however, and to secure at the same time
freedom from alarm on the part of those pursuing proper and
progressive business methods, further legislative and
executive action are needed."
From this general intimation of the course to which his mind
was turned, the incoming President went on to a more specific
unfolding of his views on many subjects of governmental care.
The following is a summary of the suggestions of future policy
conveyed in the Address:
Reorganization of the Department of Justice and the Bureau of
Corporations of the Department of Commerce and Labor and of
the Interstate Commerce Commission.
Tariff revision in accord with the promises made in the
national platform adopted at Chicago.
A continuation of scientific experiments in the Department of
Agriculture for the improvement of agricultural conditions.
The enactment and carrying out of laws for the conservation of
the resources of the country.
Maintenance of the army and navy in such a state of
preparation as will insure a continuance of peace with other
countries.
A continuation of that treatment of aliens which will insure
for the people of the United States respect and fair treatment
among the peoples of other countries.
The enactment of legislation which will empower the Federal
government to enforce treaty promises made to other countries
within every State.
Such changes in the monetary and banking laws as will insure a
greater elasticity of the currency.
The enactment of a law providing for postal savings banks.
The encouragement of American shipping through the use of mail
subsidies.
A continuation of work on the Panama canal along the plans
which have been adopted for a lock type with such energy as
will insure the earliest possible completion of the work.
The continuation of a colonial policy which will still further
increase the business prosperity of our dependencies.
{681}
The betterment of the condition of the negro in the South
through observance of principles laid down in the Fifteenth
Amendment.
The promotion of legislation for the protection of labor and
the betterment of labor conditions.
On the day following his inauguration the President named his
chosen Cabinet to the Senate, and the nominations were duly
confirmed, as follows.
Philander C. Knox of Pennsylvania, to be Secretary of State.
Franklin MacVeagh of Illinois, to be Secretary of the Treasury.
Jacob M. Dickinson of Tennessee, to be Secretary of War.
George W. Wickersham of New York, to be Attorney-General.
Frank H. Hitchcock of Massachusetts, to be Postmaster-General.
George von L. Meyer of Massachusetts, to be Secretary
of the Navy.
Richard A. Ballinger of Washington, to be Secretary
of the Interior.
James Wilson of Iowa, to be Secretary of Agriculture.
Charles Nagel of Missouri, to be Secretary of Commerce and
Labor.
A few days after the appointment of the Cabinet, Mr.
Dickinson, the new Secretary of War, in a speech at Chicago,
explained why President Taft had chosen him, a Democrat, for a
place in a Republican Cabinet, and why he had accepted it. He
said that Mr. Taft, as President of the whole country, desired
to have a representative of the South among his counsellors.
To have chosen a Southern Republican would have been to
perpetuate the bitter sectionalism which it was Mr. Taft's
desire to obliterate. He had therefore chosen a Democrat who
had voted against him. Mr. Dickinson continued:—
"That his purpose was broad, magnanimous, and patriotic none
can question. The wisdom both of his purpose and his selection
must be tried by time, but I have every assurance that his
action in appointing me, and my action in accepting, are
approved by the South, and, having this approval, I can bear
with equanimity any criticism from individual Democrats
elsewhere."
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1909 (March).
Passage of new Copyright Act.
See (in this Volume)
COPYRIGHT.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1909 (March-August).
Tariff Revision.
The Payne-Aldrich Tariff-Act.
See (in this Volume)
TARIFFS: UNITED STATES.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1909 (May).
Creation of the Senate Committee on Public Expenditures.
An important incident of the Special Session of Congress which
was called by President Taft immediately after his
inauguration, was the creation by the Senate of a new Standing
Committee, on Public Expenditures, the function of which was
indicated in the following resolution of the Senate, adopted
May 29:
"Resolved, That the Committee on Public Expenditures be, and
they are hereby, authorized and directed, by subcommittee or
otherwise, to make investigations as to the amount of the
annual revenues of the Government, and as to the expenditures
and business methods of the several departments, divisions,
and branches of the Government, and to report to the Senate
from time to time the result of such investigations and their
recommendations as to the relation between expenditures and
revenues and possible improvements in Government methods; and
for this purpose they are authorized to sit, by subcommittees
or otherwise, during the recesses or sessions of the Senate,
at such times and places as, they may deem advisable, to send
for persons and papers, to administer oaths, and to employ
such stenographic, clerical, expert, and other assistance as
may be necessary, and to have such printing and binding done
as may be necessary, the expense of such investigations to be
paid from the contingent fund of the Senate."
Seven members of the Committee are the chairmen of the seven
committees in the Senate to some one of which every bill
providing for revenue or carrying an appropriation is
submitted. "Thus," as has been remarked, "is provided a medium
for better co-ordination and co-operation between what may be
termed the revenue and appropriation committees. The powers of
existing committees are not affected, but an avenue is
provided for concentration and distribution of information—a
committee forum for the discussion and recommendation of
fundamentals affecting the Government."
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1909 (May).
Establishment in the Government of a General Supply Committee.
On the 13th of May the President issued an Executive Order
establishing an Administrative General Supply Committee, which
is to purchase all supplies for Government use, paying one
price instead of several prices for the same supplies.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1909 (May).
Second National Peace Congress.
See (in this Volume)
WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1909.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1909 (July).
Proposed Constitutional Amendment authorizing
the Levying of an Income Tax.
Without a dissenting vote, on the 5th of July, 1909, the
Senate adopted a joint resolution providing for the submission
to the several States of a proposed amendment to the
Constitution of the United States, as follows:
"Article XVI.
The congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on
incomes, from whatever source derived, without any
apportionment among the several states and without regard to
any census or enumeration."
In reporting this action, a newspaper correspondent of
considerable sagacity remarked that the ease with which the
resolution glided through the Senate, and would with certainty
pass the House, must be regarded as "an indication of the
expectation of the representatives of capital and of high
protection that twelve states can be found among the forty-six
in the union to refuse their assent to the amendment, in which
event it will fail."
The endorsement of the House to the resolution was given on
the 12th, by a vote of 317 to 14, the negative votes being all
from Republicans. An attempt to have the resolution amended so
that the constitutional amendment would be submitted to state
conventions for ratification instead of to legislatures was
ruled out of order, and an appeal from Speaker Cannon’s ruling
was voted down, 185 to 143, on a strict party division.
{682}
The first State to act on the proposed amendment was Alabama,
where it was ratified by the Legislature and signed by the
Governor, August 17.
In the State of New York, on the 5th of January, 1910,
Governor Hughes addressed a special message to the
Legislature, recommending that the amendment in its proposed
form should not be ratified. He said: "I am in favor of
conferring upon the Federal government the power to lay and
collect an income tax without apportionment among the States
according to population. I believe that this power should be
held by the Federal government so as properly to equip it with
the means of meeting national exigencies.
"But the power to tax incomes should not be granted in such
terms as to subject to Federal taxation the incomes derived
from bonds issued by the State itself, or those issued by
municipal governments organized under the State’s authority.
To place the borrowing capacity of the State and of its
governmental agencies at the mercy of the Federal taxing power
would be an impairment of the essential rights of the State,
which, as its officers, we are bound to defend. …
"The comprehensive words, 'from whatever source derived,' if
taken in their natural sense, would include not only incomes
from ordinary real or personal property, but also incomes
derived from State and municipal securities. It may be urged
that the amendment would be limited by construction. But there
can be no satisfactory assurance of this. The words in terms
are all-inclusive. …
"In order that a market may be provided for State bonds, and
for municipal bonds, and that thus means may be afforded for
State and local administration, such securities from time to
time are excepted from taxation. In this way lower rates of
interest are paid than otherwise would be possible. To permit
such securities to be the subject of Federal taxation is to
place such limitations upon the borrowing power of the State
as to make the performance of the functions of local
government a matter of Federal grace."
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1909 (July).
The Question of American Participation in the
Hankau-Szechuan Railway Loan.
See (in this Volume)
CHINA: A. D. 1904-1909.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1909 (September).
Visit of a Commercial Commission from Japan.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1909 (SEPTEMBER).
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1909 (September-October).
Tour of President Taft.
Meeting with President Diaz on Mexican Soil.
In the fall of 1909 President Taft made an extended tour of
the country, from New England to the Pacific Coast and
southward to Mexico and the Gulf, speaking to great assemblies
at many points on all the important questions, political and
economical, that were then before the country. In the course
of the tour a meeting between President Diaz of Mexico and
himself was arranged, and took place on the 16th of October,
first at El Paso, on the Texas side of the Rio Grande, and
then at Ciudad Juarez, on the Mexican side, formal visits
being thus exchanged. Finally, in the evening, President Taft
was entertained at dinner in the Mexican city by President
Diaz. This was a second time that a President of the United
States had left the soil of his own country while in office,
President Roosevelt having done the same at Panama in 1906.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1909 (October-November).
Further Disclosures of Corruption in the Customs Service.
The shameful disclosure in 1907-1908 of Sugar Trust frauds on the
Federal Treasury afforded glimpses of a state of corruption in
the Customs Service of the Government, at the port of New York
especially, which were more than verified within the next year
and a half.
See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL, &c.:
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1907-1909.
The Collector of Customs, Mr. William Loeb, Jr., who took
charge of the New York office in the spring of 1909, exercised
a watchfulness which soon put him on the traces of fraud, and
he pursued them with an energy and determination that cannot
have been brought into action before. The first case brought
to light was that of a cheese-importing firm, the members of
which, father and son, were found to have paid bribes to
weighers of the Custom House for false reports of the
quantities on which duties were paid. Conviction was obtained
by means of evidence from some of the guilty officials, who
were given immunity and retained in service, in order to
secure information without which, it was said, the
well-covered corruption in the service could not be
successfully probed. In his annual report, made in December,
1909, Secretary MacVeagh, of the Treasury Department, had this
to say of the vigorous reformatory measures thus undertaken at
the port of New York, and of the significance of the
consequent revelations:
"The revelations made and proven were so startling and
impressive that opposition was silenced; and in this silence
the necessary, clear-cut measures could be carried out without
meeting serious obstructions.
"It soon developed that the frauds of the American Sugar
Refining Company, while, perhaps, the most important
instances, were as had been apprehended, symptoms of a
diseased condition, not universal by any means, but almost
general. And difficult as it always is to sufficiently bring
to light the facts of such a condition to afford a basis for
rehabilitation, this has been already largely accomplished.
Much has been discovered to afford an understanding of the
situation, with the result of numerous seizures, of numerous
prosecutions made or projected, and of important and
successful beginnings of a complete rehabilitation. While the
recovery of evaded duties, and the prosecution of individuals
have been of large significance, the greatest asset to the
government of these disgraceful conditions is the knowledge
and the light which guarantee in time a wholesome
reorganization.
"The study of the causes of the demoralization which has been
revealed is still incomplete, but the main causes are evident.
It is clear, for instance, that the influence of local
politics and politicians upon the customs service has been
most deleterious, and has promoted that laxity and low tone
which prepare and furnish an inviting soil for dishonesty and
fraud. Unless the customs service can be released from the
payment of political debts and exactions, and from meeting the
supposed exigencies of political organizations, big and
little, it will be impossible to have an honest service for
any length of time. Any considerable share of the present cost
of this demoralization to the public revenues, to the
efficiency of the service, and to public and private morality
is a tremendous amount to pay in mere liquidation of the small
debts of political leaders.
{683}
"It is also clear that the widespread disposition of returning
American travellers to evade the payment of legal duties has
greatly helped to create the conditions which have become
intolerable. Those Americans who travel abroad belong to the
sections of the people which most readily create public
sentiment, and are most responsible for it; and the fact that
in so many instances these travellers are willing to defraud
the government out of considerable or even small sums creates
an atmosphere on the docks that strongly tends to affect the
morale of the entire customs service. And when to this is
added the frequent willingness upon the part of these
responsible citizens to specifically corrupt the government's
men, then the demoralization is further accentuated."
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1909 (November).
Arbitration of the Alsop Claim against Chile.
See (in this Volume)
CHILE: A. D. 1909.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1909 (December).
Proposal to neutralize Manchurian Railways.
See (in this Volume)
CHINA: A. D. 1909-1910.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1910 (January).
President’s Message on Legislation relating to "Trusts"
and Interstate Commerce.
See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL, &c.: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1910,
and
RAILWAYS: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1910.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
Movements of Reform in Municipal Government.
See (in this Volume)
MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
Comparative Statement of the Consumption of Alcoholic Drink.
See (in this Volume)
ALCOHOL PROBLEM.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
The Interchange of People between the United States and Canada.
See (in this Volume)
CANADA: A. D. 1896-1909.
----------UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: End--------
UNITED STATES SENATORS:
Proposed Election by Direct Popular Vote.
"On December 3, 1895, the State of Idaho, taking advantage of
that provision of article 5, which permits States to apply to
Congress for authority to hold a constitutional convention,
passed a resolution requesting Congress to call such a
convention. Since then the States of Wyoming, Ohio, Minnesota,
Montana, Utah, North Carolina, North Dakota, Nevada,
Washington, Tennessee, South Dakota, Colorado, Oregon,
Michigan, Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Illinois,
Wisconsin, New Jersey, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania,
Indiana, Texas, California, Arkansas, Kentucky, and Alabama,
have taken legislative action in some form or other expressing
either a demand similar to that of the State of Idaho, or a
sympathy with the intent of the Idaho resolution. These
thirty-one States form a constitutional two-thirds of the
forty-six States of the Union.
"One of the complications which have arisen in connection with
these resolutions is the fact that only twenty-four of them
are of record as having been actually received by the Senate
of the United States. One of them, that of the State of Ohio,
which was the third State to act, was only recently discovered
to be in the Senate files. It is possible therefore, that
since the question of submitting the proposed amendment has
become a live issue, a further search of the files may
increase the number of State resolutions on this subject which
are actually on hand.
"A legal quibble is bound to ensue over the form of some of
these resolutions. Nine of the resolutions now on file in the
Senate are already held to be of doubtful legality, but the
ground on which they are held doubtful will appeal to most
people as a mere splitting of legal hairs. Nevertheless, the
Senate of the United States, at least, is, as a whole, a
notorious legal hair-splitter, and this fact must be taken
into account.
"It is, of course, a matter of record, that the House of
Representatives has four times sent to the Senate a proposed
joint resolution calling for the direct election of United
States Senators."
Washington Correspondent of the New York Evening Post,
October 13, 1909.
UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION:
Its conflict with the Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel
and Tin Plate Workers.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1901.
UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION:
The Placing of its Stock among its Employés.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR REMUNERATION: PROFIT-SHARING.
UNIVERSITIES.
See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION.
URIBE-URIBE, RAFAEL.
See (in this Volume)
COLOMBIA: A. D. 1898-1902.
URUGUAY: A. D. 1901-1906.
Participation in Second and Third International Conferences
of American Republics.
See (in this Volume)
AMERICAN REPUBLICS.
URUGUAY: A. D. 1904.
Rebellion and prolonged Civil War.
On the 8th of January, 1904, the American Minister at
Montevideo reported by telegram to the State Department at
Washington "that another crisis is at hand in Uruguay; that
encounters have taken place between groups of ‘Blanco,’ and
the Government forces, and that the former, who were neither
concentrated nor well organized, have been dispersed. A number
were killed and wounded. The Government is making an
aggressive campaign and demands obedience to the constituted
authority as a condition before peace negotiations will be
entered into."
This was the beginning of a state of civil war that was
prolonged through nine months, with infinite harm to the
country.
When peace came, at the end of September, it was practically
bought from the insurgents, the terms of submission, as
officially announced, including the following: "Sixth,
incorporation into the army of all the chiefs and officers
included in the amnesty law. Seventh. A mixed committee
appointed by agreement by the Government and insurgents will
distribute the sum of $100,000 between the chiefs, officers,
and soldiers of the rebel forces."
URUGUAY: A. D. 1910.
Agreement with Argentina concerning the River Plate.
See (in this Volume)
ARGENTINE REPUBLIC: A. D. 1910.
URUSSOFF, PRINCE:
Speech in the Duma.
See (in this Volume)
RUSSIA: A. D. 1906.
URYU, ADMIRAL.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1904 (FEBRUARY-JULY).
UTAH:
Law limiting Hours of Adult Labor in Mines.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1902.
UTILITIES, PUBLIC.
See (in this Volume)
PUBLIC UTILITIES.
{684}
V.
VACUUM OIL COMPANY.
See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL, &c.:
UNITED STATES. A. D. 1904-1909.
VALIAHD, The:
Heir to the Persian throne.
See (in this Volume)
PERSIA: A. D. 1905-1907.
VANNOVSKY, GENERAL.
See (in this Volume)
RUSSIA: A. D. 1901-1904.
VALPARAISO, DESTRUCTIVE EARTHQUAKE AT.
See (in this Volume)
EARTHQUAKES: CHILE.
VEHEMENTER NOS, THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL.
See (in this Volume)
PAPACY: A. D. 1906 (FEBRUARY).
VENEZUELA: A. D. 1901.
Claims and Complaints of Germany.
Memorandum presented to the Government of the United States.
Its Reply.
Interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine.
On the 11th of December, 1901, the German Embassy at
Washington presented to the State Department of the Government
of the United States a memorandum of the claims and complaints
of Germany against the Government of Venezuela. The principal
claim recited was that of the Berlin Company of Discount, "on
account of the non-performance of engagements which the
Venezuelan Government has undertaken in connection with the
great Venezuelan Railway which has been built by the said
Government." In respect to this it is remarked that the
"behaviour of the Venezuelan Government could, perhaps, to a
certain degree, be explained and be excused by the bad
situation of the finances of the State; but our further
reclamations against Venezuela, which date from the Venezuelan
civil wars of the years 1898 until 1900, have taken during
these last months a more serious character. Through those wars
many German merchants living in Venezuela and many German
land-owners have been seriously damaged"; and the treatment of
claims for these damages is characterized as "a frivolous
attempt to avoid just obligations." After some recital of
circumstances in these cases, the memorandum proceeds to
announce that "the Imperial Government believes that further
negotiations with Venezuela on the present base are hopeless,"
and that measures of coercion are contemplated. "But we
consider it of importance to let first of all the Government
of the United States know about our purposes, so that we can
prove that we have nothing else in view than to help those of
our citizens who have suffered damages. … We declare
especially that under no circumstances do we consider in our
proceedings the acquisition or the permanent occupation of
Venezuelan territory."
In reply, the Department of State returned a memorandum, in
part as follows:
"The President in his Message of the 3d of December, 1901,
used the following language: ‘The Monroe Doctrine is a
declaration that there must be no territorial aggrandizement
by any non-American Power at the expense of any American Power
on American soil. It is in no wise intended as hostile to any
nation in the Old World.’ The President further said: ‘This
doctrine has nothing to do with the commercial relations of
any American Power, save that it in truth allows each of them
to form such as it desires. … We do not guarantee any State
against punishment if it misconducts itself, provided that
punishment does not take the form of the acquisition of
territory by any non-American Power. … The President of the
United States, appreciating the courtesy of the German
Government in making him acquainted with the state of affairs
referred to, and not regarding himself as called upon to enter
into the consideration of the claims in question, believes
that no measures will be taken in this matter by the agents of
the German Government which are not in accordance with the
well-known purpose, above set forth, of His Majesty the German
Emperor."
Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations
of the United States
(House Doc’s, 57th Congress 1st Session, Volume 1),
pages 192-195
VENEZUELA: A. D. 1901.
Delegates withdrawn from Second International Conference
of American Republics.
See (in this Volume)
AMERICAN REPUBLICS.
VENEZUELA: A. D. 1902-1904.
Concerted Action by Great Britain, Germany, and Italy
to enforce Claims.
Blockade of Ports and seizure of Warships.
Intermediation of the United States.
Agreements Secured.
Reference to the Tribunal at The Hague.
The rebellion and revolution in Venezuela which gave control
of the government to General Cipriano Castro, in 1899, and the
speedy outbreak of revolt against his self-assumed
administration, are told of in Volume VI. of this work.
See, also, (in this Volume)
COLOMBIA: A. D. 1898-1902.
The first insurrection was overcome in May, 1900; but other
risings, concentrated in leadership finally under Manuel A.
Matos, followed in 1901-1902. Partly growing out of the
disturbances in the country and partly due to the arbitrary
and wayward conduct of Castro (who obtained election to the
Presidency in 1902, for six years) many claims for indemnity
and debt against that Government accumulated and citizens of
many countries were interested in them. As no satisfaction
could be obtained from President Castro by diplomatic methods,
peremptory proceedings against Venezuela were concerted in
1902 by Great Britain, Germany and Italy. A blockade of
Venezuelan ports and seizure of war vessels was undertaken by
the three Powers, with results which are narrated as follows
in the Message of President Roosevelt to the Congress of the
United States, on its meeting in December, 1903:
The "employment of force for the collection of these claims
was terminated by an agreement brought about through the
offices of the diplomatic representatives of the United States
at Caracas and the Government at Washington, thereby ending a
situation which was bound to cause increasing friction, and
which jeoparded the peace of the continent. Under this
agreement Venezuela agreed to set apart a certain percentage
of the customs receipts of two of her ports to be applied to
the payment of whatever obligations might be ascertained by
mixed commissions appointed for that purpose to be due from
her, not only to the three powers already mentioned, whose
proceedings against her had resulted in a state of war, but
also to the United States, France, Spain, Belgium, the
Netherlands, Sweden and Norway, and Mexico, who had not
employed force for the collection of the claims alleged to be
due to certain of their citizens.
{685}
"A demand was then made by the so-called blockading powers
that the sums ascertained to be due to their citizens by such
mixed commissions should be accorded payment in full before
anything was paid upon the claims of any of the so-called
peace powers. Venezuela, on the other hand, insisted that all
her creditors should be paid upon a basis of exact equality.
During the efforts to adjust this dispute it was suggested by
the powers in interest that it should be referred to me for
decision, but I was clearly of the opinion that a far wiser
course would be to submit the question to the Permanent Court
of Arbitration at The Hague. It seemed to me to offer an
admirable opportunity to advance the practice of the peaceful
settlement of disputes between nations and to secure for the
Hague Tribunal a memorable increase of its practical
importance. The nations interested in the controversy were so
numerous and in many instances so powerful as to make it
evident that beneficent results would follow from their
appearance at the same time before the bar of that august
tribunal of peace.
"Our hopes in that regard have been realized. Russia and
Austria are represented in the persons of the learned and
distinguished jurists who compose the Tribunal, while Great
Britain, Germany, France, Spain, Italy, Belgium, the
Netherlands, Sweden and Norway, Mexico, the United States, and
Venezuela are represented by their respective agents and
counsel. Such an imposing concourse of nations presenting
their arguments to and invoking the decision of that high
court of international justice and international peace can
hardly fail to secure a like submission of many future
controversies. The nations now appearing there will find it
far easier to appear there a second time, while no nation can
imagine its just pride will be lessened by following the
example now presented. This triumph of the principle of
international arbitration is a subject of warm congratulation
and offers a happy augury for the peace of the world."
Message of President Roosevelt,
December 7, 1903.
The claims of the Powers against Venezuela, presented in
September, summed up as follows:
France, $16,040,000;
United States, $10,900,000;
Italy, $9,300,000;
Belgium, $3,003,000;
Great Britain, $2,500,000;
Germany, $1,417,300;
Holland, $1,048,451;
Spain, $600,000;
Mexico, $500,000;
Sweden, $200,000.
The claim of Great Britain, Germany, and Italy to a right of
priority in payment, because of their action which compelled
the Government of Venezuela to arrange a settlement, was
submitted to the Tribunal at The Hague in November. The
decision, rendered in the following January, affirmed the
right of the three Powers which had exercised coercion in the
case to priority in the payment of their claims, and it
imposed on the United States the duty of overseeing the
fulfilment of the agreements which Venezuela had made. In this
last particular the decision of the Tribunal could be regarded
as an international affirmation of the Monroe Doctrine, and of
signal importance in that view.
VENEZUELA: A. D. 1902-1905.
A short Period of Comparative Tranquility.
"After the blockade instituted in December, 1902, by Germany,
Great Britain and Italy, had been raised, and protocols had
been signed for the settlement of all duly recognized claims
of foreign nations against Venezuela, Venezuela enjoyed a
short period of tranquility; but, by the beginning of 1905,
every legation in Caracas had a list of grievances founded on
alleged unfair awards of arbitrators, on denials of justice on
the part of the Venezuelan courts and on the diminution by
President Castro of the percentage he had agreed to pay to the
creditor nations from the receipts of his custom-houses.
Moreover, Germany and Great Britain began to show signs of
restlessness, because President Castro had not provided, as
had been agreed in the protocols, for the payment of interest
to British and German bondholders. The situation looked even
worse than before the blockade, for the principal nation
aggrieved was the United States, and it had the moral support
of all other nations represented in Caracas by legations.
"The main issue between the United States and Venezuela was
the asphalt case. In July, 1904, President Castro had demanded
ten million dollars from the American Company, known as the
‘New York and Bermudez Asphalt Company,’ and had threatened,
if that amount was not paid immediately, that the whole
asphalt lake and the property of the Company would be seized.
He based his demand on the alleged support given by the
Asphalt Company to the Matos revolution of 1902; but, as he
did not demand anything from the countless other supporters of
the revolution, it was clear that his demand on the Asphalt
Company was piratical."
H. W. Bowen,
Queer Diplomacy with Castro
(North American Review, March 15, 1907).
VENEZUELA: A. D. 1904.
Adoption of a new Constitution.
The following summary of the provisions of a new Constitution,
adopted in Venezuela, on the 27th of April, 1904, was
communicated to the State Department at Washington by United
States Minister Bowen:
It reduces the number of States to thirteen—Aragua, Bermudez,
Bolivar, Carabobo, Falcon, Guarico, Lara, Merida, Miranda,
Tachira, Trujillo, Zamora, and Zulia—and provides for five
Territories—Amazonas, Cristobal Colon, Colon, Delta Amacuro,
and Yururari—and the Federal District, which is composed of
the Departments Libertador, Varagas, Guaicaipuro, and Sucre,
and the island of Margarita.
The States enjoy equality and autonomy, having all rights not
delegated to the central Government. The Territories are
administered by the President.
The Government is divided into three branches—the legislative,
the executive, and the judicial.
The legislative branch is called the Congress, and is composed
of two bodies—the Senate and the House of Deputies. One deputy
will be elected by every 40,000 inhabitants, and all deputies,
as well as senators (two from every State) and the President,
will serve for six years. Deputies must be 21 years of age,
senators 30, and the President over 30. No extraordinary
powers are given to the Congress, except that 14 of its
members shall be chosen by itself to elect every sixth year a
President, a first and a second vice-president, and to elect a
successor to the second vice-president.
{686}
The President, besides being charged with the usual executive
duties, is authorized to declare war, arrest, imprison, or
expel natives or aliens who are opposed to the reëstablishment
of peace, to issue letters of marque and reprisal, to permit
aliens to enter the public service, to prohibit the
immigration into the Republic of objectionable religious
teachers, and to establish rules for the postal, telegraph,
and telephone services.
The judicial power is vested in the Corte Federal y de
Casacion (seven judges elected by the Congress) and the lower
courts (appointed by the State governments).
All Venezuelans over 21 years of age may vote, and aliens can
obtain that right by getting naturalized. No length of time is
prescribed for an alien to live in the Republic before he can
become naturalized.
Article 15 of the constitution denies the right of natives or
aliens to present claims to the nation or States for damages
caused by revolutionists.
Article 17 abolishes the death penalty.
And article 120 provides that all of Venezuela’s international
treaties shall hereafter contain the clause, "All differences
between the contracting parties shall be decided by
arbitration, without going to war."
In conclusion, the constitution provides that the next
constitutional terms shall begin May 23, 1905. Up to that date
General Castro will be Provisional President. He took his oath
of office as such on the 5th instant, and on the same day Juan
Vicente Gomez was made first vice-president and Jose Antonio
Velutini second vice-president.
As Provisional President, General Castro has been authorized
to name the presidents of the States, to organize the Federal
Territories, to fix the estimates for the public expenses,
and, in short, to exercise the fullest powers.
VENEZUELA: A. D. 1905-1906.
Troubles with the United States and France.
President Castro’s Vacation.
Both France and the United States had troubles which became
acute in 1905 with the arrogant President of Venezuela,
growing out of his high-handed treatment of French and
American business interests and rights in that country. In the
case of the United States, the most serious grievance, as
stated above, was that of the New York and Bermudez Company,
which had a concession dating back to 1883, and a later mining
title, under Venezuela laws, to the asphalt deposit known as
Bermudez Lake, together with the fee-simple ownership of land
surrounding the lake. Ever since the advent of Castro, the
company had been harassed by litigious proceedings, behind
which the Government was said to be always in action. In 1905
these were carried to the point of putting the whole property
into the hands of a receiver or "depositary," practically
transferring its capital and plant to its rivals in business.
A little later, a judicial decision, pronounced by a Venezuela
court, annulled the company’s concession. The main ground of
this confiscation appears to have been the charge that the
company had contributed funds to the support of the Matos
revolt, in 1901.
The same accusation was brought against the French Cable
Company, whose franchise was annulled and its property
confiscated in like manner. In both cases, the matter was a
proper one for arbitration, and this Castro refused,
maintaining the finality of the decision of the Venezuela
courts. Neither France nor the United States could afford to
permit such a penalty of confiscation to be imposed on its
citizens without a searching investigation of the justice of
the act. Under instructions from Secretary Hay, the American
Minister to Venezuela informed the Government of that country
that if it refused to arbitrate the questions involved in this
and other American claims, "the Government of the United
States may be regretfully compelled to take such measures as
it may find necessary to effect complete redress without
resort to arbitration"; and France, about the same time, made
a significant movement of armored cruisers to the French
Antilles. Not contented with the strain thus brought on the
relations of his Government with those of two considerable
Powers in the world, the Venezuelan President soon—in January,
1906—gave a fresh and quite wanton provocation to France. The
French Chargé d’ Affaires in Venezuela had gone on
board a French steamer without official permit, and was
refused permission to return to shore, on the pretence that he
might bring yellow fever infection. France at once dismissed
the Venezuelan Chargé from Paris, and added a demand
for apologies to her other claims.
Having brought his country into this interesting situation,
the eccentric Castro, of incalculable mind and temper, found
the occasion opportune for a vacation, and announced it, April
9, 1906, in a proclamation which opened as follows:
"Fatigue, produced by constant labor, and which I have been
endeavoring to overcome for some time past, makes it
imperative for me now, in order to restore my broken health,
to retire from the exercise of the office of prime magistrate.
"In accordance with a provision of the constitution I have
called to power General Juan Vincente Gomez, a very
meritorious citizen of well-known civic virtues, who in my
absence will fulfill strictly the duties of his office. You
all know him, and you know perfectly well that in view of his
character you must support him without any hesitation
whatever, in order that the administration may continue, as it
has up to now, under the surest bases of stability, order, and
progress, thus making the action of the executive the most
expeditious possible.
"On retiring from power I wish you to take into consideration
my effort and my sacrifices for the country’s cause, which has
been, and still is, the cause of the people, of reason,
justice, and right, so that you will agree with me that he who
has thus labored has a right to even a slight rest, and this
cannot be taken except in retirement and solitude.
"On the other hand, our present international situation,
completely defined and clear, gives us reason to hope that
everything will continue harmoniously and on a basis of mutual
respect and consideration."
{687}
The next morning he left quietly for Los Teques, where he has
a private estate; his late cabinet resigned, and a new
Ministry was formed by the acting President, Gomez. Six weeks
later, on the 23d of May, the President-on-vacation, from his
retirement, issued a second proclamation, announcing his wish
to withdraw permanently from public life, and his intention to
resign the presidency at the next session of Congress. But
differences appear to have arisen soon after this between the
retired President and his substitute, General Gomez, over
cabinet appointments, and presently there was a delegation
sent to request the former to abandon his intended
resignation. The delegation succeeded in its mission, and on
the 4th of July the now rested and refreshed Chief Magistrate
returned to Caracas and reburdened himself with the cares of
state.
VENEZUELA: A. D. 1905-1909.
Trouble given to Colombia over the Navigation of Rivers
flowing through both countries.
See (in this Volume)
COLOMBIA: A. D. 1905-1909.
VENEZUELA: A. D. 1906.
No participation in Third International Conference
of American Republics.
See (in this Volume)
AMERICAN REPUBLICS.
VENEZUELA: A. D. 1907-1909.
President Castro’s obstinate Provocations to France and
the United States.
His Quarrel with Holland.
His unwary venture Abroad.
The Triumph of his Enemies in Venezuela.
The Foreign Governments he Quarrelled with take part
in Preventing his Return.
President Castro, practically Dictator in Venezuela, continued
obstinate in his provocative attitude towards both France and
the United States, and added Holland at length to the list of
exasperated nations which were questioning and studying how to
deal with insolence from so petty a source. His courts, after
confiscating the franchises and seizing the property of the
French Cable Company and the American asphalt concessionaries,
imposed fines of $5,000,000 on each. Of the five claims for
redress or indemnity which the American Government pressed
upon him he refused to submit any to arbitration, in any form,
at The Hague or elsewhere. This situation continued until the
American Legation was withdrawn from Caracas, in June, 1908,
to signify that negotiation was ended, and the whole
correspondence of the State Department with Venezuela was laid
before Congress, for such action as it might see fit to take.
Castro had opened his quarrel with Holland in a characteristic
way. The bubonic plague had got a footing at the Venezuelan
port of La Guayra, and he refused to allow his own medical
officers, who reported the fact, to take measures for
preventing the spread of the disease. Then, when his Dutch
neighbors at Curaçao protected themselves by a quarantine
against La Guayra he retaliated by an embargo on commerce with
Curaçao, exchanged angry letters with the Dutch Minister at
Caracas, and ordered him finally to quit the country. The
Netherland Government acted slowly, with deliberation, on the
matter, despatching a battle-ship, at length, to the scene,
and otherwise manifesting serious intentions.
But now the domestic situation in Venezuela underwent a sudden
change; or, rather, a recurrence to the situation in 1906,
when Castro had found it easy to lay down the reins of
authority and take them up again at his pleasure. He was
afflicted with some ailment, for which he went abroad to seek
treatment, appointing Vice-President Gomez to conduct the
Government in his absence. Landing at Bordeaux on the 10th of
December, 1908, he made a short visit to Paris, receiving no
official recognition or entertainment, and went thence to
Berlin. In Germany he stayed with his family and suite for
about three months, undergoing a surgical operation with
subsequent treatment for his malady. Meantime, in Venezuela,
his enemies, or the opponents of his rule, had acquired the
upper hand, and were prepared to resist his return. On the
16th of December a mob at Caracas, crying "Down with Castro,"
wrecked considerable property of his friends. A few days later
some of his partisans were arrested on the charge of having
plotted the death of Acting-President Gomez, and that trusted
representative of the absent President became openly

antagonistic to him. The Castro Cabinet was dismissed, and an
anti-Castro Ministry was formed.
Pacific overtures were now made to the foreign governments
with which Castro had quarrelled. The Honorable William I.
Buchanan, an able diplomat, of much experience in
Spanish-America, was sent from the United States to reopen
negotiations at Caracas, where he arrived on the 20th
December, and the late Venezuelan Minister of Foreign Affairs
went abroad as an agent of President Gomez to treat with the
Netherlands, Great Britain, and France. Mr. Buchanan found
difficulty in arranging modes of settlement in the case of two
American claims, that of the New York and Bermudez Company,
and that of the Orinoco Corporation, which claimed very
extensive concessions; but the obstacles were overcome and a
satisfactory protocol signed, February 13, 1909.
Before this time, criminal proceedings had been instituted
against Castro, on the charge that he had instigated the
assassination of Vice-President Gomez, and the High Federal
Court had decided that adequate evidence had been adduced to
warrant the action. To this accusation Castro made answer from
Dresden, February 27, saying: "The only charge that has been
raised against me is that I tried to instigate the murder of
Gomez. It is incredible that, after having shown my interest
in him in so many ways, I should try to cause him to be
murdered. If Gomez had given me occasion to suspect him, I
would have given orders regarding him before my departure from
Venezuela, and I would not have been so stupid as to send such
an order by cable. Whoever knows me knows also that I am
incapable of such disgraceful cowardice. I give this
declaration in the interest of truth to the press and to the
foreign countries, in order to set at rest in places where I
am not known all doubts and suspicions regarding my behavior."
Having no apparent doubt that he could master the adverse
situation in Venezuela, Castro was now making his arrangements
to return. On the 24th of March he arrived at Paris, on his
way to Bordeaux, to take passage on the Steamer
Guadeloupe. There he was met by a statement from the
steamship company, "that it had been informed by the
Venezuelan government that Señor Castro will not be permitted
to land in Venezuela; that he will be arrested on board the
Guadeloupe if this vessel calls at a Venezuelan port, and that
even the movement of the Guadeloupe in Venezuelan ports
will be controlled by the authorities, if Castro is a
passenger.
{688}
As a result of this communication the company will embark
Castro only on condition that he leave the Guadeloupe before reaching Venezuela, either at Martinique or Trinidad.
This official notification to the steamship company was handed
in by José de Jesus Paul, the special Venezuelan envoy to
Europe. Señor Paul says in part:
"‘Cipriano Castro is under criminal prosecution in Venezuela,
and the High Federal Court having suspended his function as
President, he is liable, in accordance with the laws of
Venezuela, to imprisonment pending the result of the trial. A
warrant of arrest can be executed even on board the
Guadeloupe at the first Venezuelan port.’ "
At Bordeaux he was forced to take passage with the
understanding that he must leave the ship before she reached a
Venezuelan port, and he accepted tickets to Port-au-Spain,
Trinidad. On leaving Paris his parting words had been: "I
believe that God and destiny call me back to Venezuela. I
intend to accomplish my mission there, even though it involves
revolution." But he mistook the call, and mere earthly
authority sufficed to frustrate the mission he had in mind.
The British Government, after consultation with the United
States and other Powers most interested in the avoidance of
fresh disturbances in Venezuela, forbade his landing at
Trinidad, and he found no port to receive him but that of Fort
de France, Martinique. From that French soil, too, he was
ordered away the next day, and look passage back to France,
ultimately settling himself with his family in Spain. If he
has made further efforts or plans to recover a footing in
Venezuela, the public has not learned of them.
As soon as the out-cast President had been thus eliminated
from Venezuelan politics, he was cleared, May 21, of the
charge of plotting to assassinate General Gomez, by decision
of the Criminal Court. Both Holland and France had settled, by
this time, their differences with Venezuela, and restored
diplomatic relations. On the 12th of August, Vice-President
Gomez was formally elected Provisional President by Congress
in the exercise of powers claimed under the new Constitution.
On the 11th of September announcement was made that all but
one of the five American claims for which Mr. Buchanan had
arranged modes of settlement had been settled, and that one—of
the Orinoco Steamship Company—was before the tribunal at The
Hague.
VENICE: A. D. 1902.
Fall of the Campanile of St. Marks.
On the morning of July 14, 1902, the Campanile or bell-tower
of the cathedral of St. Marks fell to the ground. An attentive
architect had been calling attention for several years to
signs of danger in its walls, but nothing had been done to
avert the destruction of the most interesting monument of
antiquity in the city. The building of the tower was begun in
the year 888, and underwent a reconstruction in 1329. Its
height was 322 feet.
"At 9 o’clock, according to the story of an American architect
who witnessed the fall of the tower from the neighborhood of
the Rialto, he saw the golden angel slowly sink directly
downward behind a line of roofs, and a dense gray dust arose
in clouds. Instantly, from all parts of the city, a crowd
rushed toward the Piazza, to find on their arrival that
nothing was left of all that splendid nave but a mound of
white dust, 80 feet high." A press telegram from Venice,
January 4, 1910, announced that "the Campanile, after seven
years’ work, is now approaching completion. The shaft is
finished, and only lacks the belfry, the separate pieces of
which are ready to be set in place."
VEREENIGING, BOER-BRITISH TREATY OF PEACE AT.
See (in this Volume)
South Africa: A. D. 1901-1902.
VERESTCHAGIN, VASILI, DEATH OF.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1904 (FEBRUARY-AUGUST).
VERNON-HARCOURT, LOUIS:
First Commissioner of Works.
See (in this Volume)
ENGLAND: A. D. 1905-1906.
VESUVIUS, MOUNT:
Violent Eruption in 1906.
See (in this Volume)
VOLCANIC ERUPTIONS.
VETO, CIVIL, IN PAPAL ELECTIONS.
See (in this Volume)
PAPACY: A. D. 1904.
VIBORG CONFERENCE.
See (in this Volume)
RUSSIA: A. D. 1906.
VICTOR EMMANUEL III., KING OF ITALY:
His Agency in founding the International Institute
of Agriculture.
See (in this Volume)
AGRICULTURE.
VILHENA, SENHOR.
See (in this Volume)
PORTUGAL: A. D. 1906-1909.
VILLAZON, ELIDORO:
President of Bolivia.
See (in this Volume)
ACRE DISPUTES.
VIRCHOW, RUDOLPH:
Celebration of his Eightieth Birthday.
See (in this Volume)
SCIENCE AND INVENTION: ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATIONS.
VIRGINIA: A. D. 1907.
The Jamestown Tercentennial Exposition.
See (in this Volume)
JAMESTOWN.
VITHÖFT, ADMIRAL.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1904 (FEBRUARY-AUGUST).
"VLADIMIR’S DAY."
See (in this Volume)
RUSSIA: A. D. 1904-1905.
VLADIVOSTOCK:
In the Russo-Japanese War.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1904 (FEBRUARY-AUGUST).
VOLCANIC ERUPTIONS: ITALY: A. D. 1906 (April).
Great Outburst of Vesuvius.
The Most Violent since 1631.
"At a meeting of the Geological Society, London, on May 9, a
paper giving a scientific account of the recent great eruption
of Mount Vesuvius was read by Professor Giuseppe de Lorenzo,
of the Mineralogical Museum in the Royal University of Naples,
a foreign correspondent of the society. According to the
report in the London Times Professor de Lorenzo stated
that after the great eruption of 1872 Vesuvius lapsed into
repose, marked by merely solfataric phenomena, for three
years. Fissuring of the cone and slight outpourings of lava
began in May, 1905, and continued until April 5, 1906, when
the fourth great outburst from the principal crater occurred,
accompanied by the formation of deeper and larger fissures in
the south-eastern wall of the cone, from which a great mass of
fluid and scoriaceous lava was erupted. After a pause the
maximum outburst took place during the night of April 7 and 8,
and blew 3,000 feet into the air scoriæ and lapilli of lava as
fragments derived from the wreckage of the cone.
{689}
The southwesterly wind carried this ash to Ottajano and San
Giuseppe, which were buried under three feet of it, and even
swept it on to the Adriatic and Montenegro. At this time the
lava which reached Torre Annunziato was erupted. The
decrescent phase began on April 8, but the collapse of the
cone of the principal crater was accompanied by the ejection
of steam and dust to a height of from 22,000 to 26,000 feet.
On April 9 and 10 the wind was northeast, and the dust was
carried over Torre del Greco and as far as Spain; but on April
11 the cloud was again impelled northward. The ash in the
earlier eruptions was dark in color and made of materials
derived directly from the usual type of leucotephritic magma;
but later it became grayer and mixed with weathered elastic
material from the cone. The great cone had an almost
horizontal rim on April 13, very little higher than Monte
Somma, and with a crater possibly exceeding 1,300 feet in
diameter; this cone was almost snow white from the deposit of
sublimates. Many deaths, Professor de Lorenzo states, were due
to asphyxia, but the collapse of roofs weighted with dust was
a source of much danger, as was the case at Pompeii in A. D.
79. The lava streams surrounded trees, many of which still
stood in the hot lava with their leaves and blossoms
apparently uninjured. The sea level during April 7 and 8 was
lowered six inches near Pozzuoli, and as much as twelve inches
near Portici, and had not returned to its former level on
April 13. The maximum activity conformed almost exactly with
full moon, and at the time the volcanoes of the Phlegræan
Fields and of the islands remained in their normal condition.
Professor de Lorenzo believes that this eruption of Vesuvius
is greater than any of those recorded in history with two
exceptions—those of A. D. 79, the historic eruption which
destroyed Pompeii and Herculaneum, and of 1631, when Torre del
Greco was overwhelmed and 4,000 persons perished."
Scientific Notes and News
(Science, May 25, 1906).
VOLCANIC ERUPTIONS: WEST INDIES: A. D. 1902 (May).
Of Mont Pelee and La Souffrière, on the islands of Martinique
and St. Vincent.
Destruction of the City of St. Pierre.
The most appalling catastrophe in the annals of the Western
Hemisphere is that which burst from the long torpid volcano of
Mont Pelée, overlooking the city of St. Pierre, on the French
island of Martinique, and from its slumbering neighbor, La
Souffrière, of the British island of St. Vincent, on the
morning of the 8th of May, 1902. The following particulars of
the frightful volcanic explosion are borrowed from a graphic
account prepared for The American Review of Reviews by
W. J. McGee, of the Smithsonian Institution.
"The outbreak of Mont Pelée seems to have been second only to
that of Krakatoa in explosive violence in the written history
of the world. Nor was the catastrophe confined to a mountain
and a city, or even to an island: the towns and villages of
northern Martinique were devastated or utterly destroyed as
far southward as Fort de France, while the scant 400 square
miles of the whole island were at once shaken from below and
showered from above with uncounted tons of hot rock-powder,
scorching what it touched, and desolating the tropical
luxuriance of one of the fairest among the gems of the
Antilles. At the same time the Vulcanian spasm thrilled afar
through subterranean nerves and stirred into sympathetic
resurrection other long-dead volcanoes; and one of these,—La
Souffrière, on the island of St. Vincent, over a hundred miles
away,—sprang into baleful activity, poured out vast sheets of
viscid lava, showered land and sea with its own scorching
rock-powder, devastated another gem in the Antillean necklace,
and slew its thousands. The vigor of such volcanic outbursts
as those of Martinique and St. Vincent, and the vastness of
their products, are beyond realization. The governor of
Barbados, Sir Frederick Hodgson, estimates that ‘two million
tons of volcanic dust’ fell on his island, which is 110 miles
from La Souffrière, and still farther from Mont Pelée. …
"About the middle of April of the present year the inhabitants
of Martinique and passing seafarers began to note the
appearance of ‘smoke’ about the crest of the mountain; and
within a few days the report spread that Mont Pelée was in an
ugly mood. The smoky columns and clouds increased at
intervals, and anxiety deepened both at St. Pierre and Fort de
France; but as the days went by without other manifestations,
apprehension faded. On May 5, detonations were heard and a
tremor shook St. Pierre, while a mass of mud was violently
erupted from the old crater. The indications are that this
eruption was occasioned by the rise of viscous lava,
accompanied by steam and other gases attending its formation,
probably through the old vent, in sufficient quantity and with
sufficient violence to blow the lake out of the ancient crater
and vaporize the water. Portions of the lava were apparently
blown into dust by the flashing into steam of water imprisoned
in its interstices, after the manner of volcanic ejecta
generally; and this material (better called ‘lapilli’ than
‘ashes’) hastened condensation of the aqueous vapor in the air
already overcharged by the addition of that cast up from the
lake. The consequence was a shower of mud, apparently of
limited extent. Some of the accounts indicate that the greater
part of this mud was not vomited into the air, but that it
welled up in such wise as to fill and overflow the old crater,
and send scalding streams down the gorges seaming the rugged
sides of Mont Pelée; one of these flooded a sugar factory and
enveloped a score or more of the employees; others mingled
with the rivers, converting them into hot and muddy torrents,
carrying destruction down their channels to the sea. … So
matters rested, with Pelée still grumbling, until the evening
and night of May 7, when the black vapor-clouds and
subterranean groanings grew more terrifying; but it was too
late to escape before another day.
"About 7:50 A. M. on May 8 came the great shock, of which that
of May 5 was the precursor; and within ten minutes St. Pierre
and the smaller towns of Martinique were in ruins. Few
witnesses were left to describe the event, and the accounts of
these vary so widely as to require interpretation through the
testimony of other witnesses of similar eruptions elsewhere.
Briefly it seems evident that the lava mass, of which the
uppermost portion exploded on May 5, had continued to rise in
the vent after the temporary shock due to the recoil of the
initial explosion, and that by the morning of May 8 it had
reached such a height in the throat as to find relief from the
stupendous pressure of the lower earth-crust.
{690}
Coming up with the high temperature of subterranean depths,
the mass was, like other rocks in a state of nature, saturated
with water held in liquid state by the pressure, and charged
with other mineral substances ready to flash into gas or to
oxidize on contact with the air; and these more volatile
materials, being of less density than the average, were more
abundant in the upper portions of the mass.
"As the viscid plug of red-hot rock forced its way upward, the
mighty mountain travailed, the interior rocks were rent, and
the groaning and trembling were conveyed through the outer
strata to the surface and strange shakings of the shores and
quiverings of the sea marked the approach of the culmination.
Then the plug passed above the zone of rock-pressure great
enough to compress steam into water whatsoever the heat,—and
with this relief the liquid flashed into steam and the
superheated rock-matter into gases, while the unoxidized
compounds leaped into flame and smoke as they caught the
oxygen of the outer air. The lava was probably acidic, and
hence highly viscous; and when the imprisoned droplets of
water expanded, they formed bubbles, or vesicles, often much
larger than the Volume of rock-matter; doubtless some of this
matter remains in the form of vesicular pumice; but
unquestionably immense quantities were blown completely into
fragments representing the walls of the bubbles and the
angular spicules and thickenings between bubbles. Of these
fragments lapilli, or so-called volcanic ashes, consists; and
the Mont Pelée explosion was so violent that much of the
matter was dust-fine, and drifted hundreds of miles before it
settled from the upper air to the sea or land below. When the
imprisoned water burst into steam, the heavier gases were
evolved, also, with explosive violence; and while the steam
shot skyward, carrying lapilli in vast dust-clouds, these
gases rolled down the slopes, burning (at least in part) as
they went; and at the same time the heavier lava fragments,
together with rock-masses torn from the throat of the crater
by the viscid flood, were dropped for miles around. …
"Both press dispatches and physical principles indicate that
it was the debacle of burning gas that consumed St. Pierre
even before the red-hot rocks reached the roofs and balconies.
Meantime the aerial disturbance was marked by electrical
discharges, with continuous peal of thunder and glare of
lightning, while portions of the hot rock-powder were washed
down from the clouds by scalding rains. The heat of millions
of tons of red-hot lava and of the earth-rending explosion, as
well as of the burning gases, fell on Martinique; green things
crumbled to black powder, dry wood fell into smoke and ashes,
clothing flashed into flame, and the very bodies of men and
beasts burst with the fervent heat. Such, in brief, were the
evil events of Pelée and St. Pierre for May 8."
Simultaneously, on St. Vincent’s Island, the outbreak of La
Souffrière occurred that day. "The accounts are vague or
conflicting as to the hour and as to the precise nature of the
initial and later throes; yet it would appear, from the burden
of the testimony, that the outbreak quickly succeeded that of
Pelée. Apparently, too, the extravasation of rock-matter, both
of liquid and lava, exceeded that of the northern neighbor;
yet the indications are that the explosion was feebler, and
that the formation of gases was proportionately less abundant.
Lapilli are reported to cover the entire island to depths
ranging from an inch or more to several feet, several
roofs,—like those of Pompeii of old,—being crushed in by the
weight; the estimates of human mortality ranged from a few
hundreds in the early reports to over two thousand, and were
afterward slightly reduced, while the destruction of property
seems to have been relatively greater than on Martinique. So
far as the accounts of the two outbursts go, they indicate
that the Pelée eruption was primarily an explosion due to the
flashing of water and other gases on relief from pressure,
with attendant heat and meteorologic disturbances, followed by
a limited and quiet outflow of lava from the deeper and drier
portion of the lava plug; but that the upwelling lava of
Souffrière was in some way nearer equilibrium,—perhaps drier,
perhaps cooler, perhaps from less depth and pressure,—and
hence poured out in broad sheets of viscid rock-matter,
likened by some observers to burning sealing wax.
"Such, in brief, is the record of La Souffrière on May 8,—a
record that would have appalled the nations had it not been
eclipsed by the ghastly tale of Mont Pelée and St. Pierre."
In the case of St. Pierre almost the entire population had
remained in the town, not sufficiently warned by the outbreak
of May 5, and was, in consequence, destroyed. It is estimated
that 30,000 people perished in or near that town alone. Death
came to them almost instantaneously,—not from the flow of lava
or the showers of hot ashes that fell to the depth of perhaps
two feet, but from such a fierce current of burning gases that
men breathed flames instead of air.
On the English island, there was no large town close to the
mountain, and therefore not as great loss of life as in
Martinique, but nearly two thousand persons in the rural
districts lost their lives. These were burned to death by hot
sand or were killed by lightning, there being no suffocation,
as in St. Pierre. A layer of ashes fell over the entire
island, and in the northeastern part the land was buried in
ashes and stones to the depth of eighteen inches. As a
consequence, all the crops were destroyed.
Repeated outbreaks of both Mont Pelée and La Souffrière
occurred at intervals during more than a year following the
great explosion, adding much to the destruction of the means
of living on large parts of the islands and to the misery of
the inhabitants remaining in the regions affected, though not
greatly to the loss of life. Of the relief in money and
supplies from all sources that was poured into the two
afflicted islands no full reckoning can be obtained; but the
Governor of the Windward Islands reported to the Colonial
Office at London on the 20th of June, 1903, that total
receipts for the Eruption Fund to that date were £77,000, and
expenditures £42,787. "I shall have sufficient funds left in
the Colony," he added, "to meet all present needs, unless any
further unforeseen misfortune takes place."
VULGATE, REVISION OF THE.
See (in this Volume)
PAPACY: A. D. 1907-1909.
{691}
W.
WAGES AND COST OF LIVING.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR REMUNERATION: WAGES, &c.
WAI-WU-PU.
See (in this Volume)
CHINA: A. D. 1901-1908.
WALDECK-ROUSSEAU, PIERRE MARIE:
Resignation of Ministry.
See (in this Volume )
FRANCE: A. D. 1902 (APRIL-OCTOBER).
WALLER, DR. AUGUSTUS.
See (in this Volume)
SCIENCE AND INVENTION, RECENT: OPSONINS.
WALL STREET INVESTIGATION, THE.
See (in this Volume)
FINANCE AND TRADE: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1909.
----------WAR, THE PREPARATIONS FOR: Start--------
WAR, THE PREPARATIONS FOR: At Large:
Contradictory Feeling and Action in the World.
Its Causes.
International Barbarism with Inter-Personal Civilization.
The Two Main Knots of Difficulty in the Situation.
The British and the German Posture.
There was never before in the world so wide-spread and so
passionate a hatred of War, among civilized peoples, or so
earnest and determined an endeavor to supplant it by rational
methods of composing international disputes. At the same time,
there was never so frenzied a rivalry of preparation among the
nations for Warfare, by monstrous accumulation of its horrible
engines and tools. How can the glaring inconsistency be
accounted for without impeaching the general sanity of
mankind?
The strangeness of the situation was described most
graphically and feelingly, not long since, by Lord Rosebery,
in speaking at a banquet given to the delegates attending the
British Imperial Press Conference, at London, in June, 1909,
and his own feeling that went into the description of it
affords an explanation of the anomaly. "I do not know," said
the eloquent Earl, "that in some ways I have ever seen a
condition of things in Europe so remarkable, so peaceful, and
in some respects so ominous as the condition which exists at
this moment. There is a hush in Europe, a hush in which you
may almost hear a leaf fall to the ground. There is an
absolute absence of any questions which ordinarily lead to
war. One of the great Empires which is sometimes supposed to
menace peace is entirely engrossed with its own internal
affairs. Another great Eastern empire which furnished a
perpetual problem to statesmen has taken a new lease of life
and youth in searching for constitutional peace and reform.
"All forebodes peace; and yet at the same time, combined with
this total absence of all questions of friction, there never
was in the history of the world so threatening and so
overpowering a preparation for war. That is a sign which I
confess I regard as most ominous. For 40 years it has been a
platitude to say that Europe is an armed camp, and for 40
years it has been true that all the nations have been facing
each other armed to the teeth, and that has been in some
respects a guarantee of peace. Now, what do we see? Without
any tangible reason we see the nations preparing new
armaments. They cannot arm any more men on land, so they have
to seek new armaments upon the sea, piling up these enormous
preparations as if for some great Armageddon—and that in a
time of profoundest peace. We live in the midst of what I
think was called by Petrarch tacens bellum—a silent
warfare, in which not a drop of blood is shed in anger, but in
which, however, the last drop is extracted from the living
body by the lancets of the European statesmen. There are
features in this general preparation for war which must cause
special anxiety to the friends of Great Britain and the
British Empire, but I will not dwell upon these. I will only
ask you who have come to this country to compare carefully the
armaments of Europe with our preparations to meet them, and
give your impressions to the Empire in return. (Cheers.) I
myself feel confident in the resolution and power of this
country to meet any reasonable conjunction of forces. But when
I see this bursting out of navies everywhere, when I see one
country alone asking for 25 millions of extra taxation for
warlike preparation, when I see the absolutely unprecedented
sacrifices which are asked from us on the same ground, I do
begin to feel uneasy at the outcome of it all and wonder where
it will stop, or if it is nearly going to bring back Europe
into a state of barbarism, (hear, hear), or whether it will
cause a catastrophe in which the working men of the world will
say, ‘We will have no more of this madness, this foolery which
is grinding us to powder.’ (Cheers.)
"We can and we will build Dreadnoughts—or whatever the newest
type of ship may be (loud cheers)—as long as we have a
shilling to spend on them or a man to put into them. (Loud
cheers.) All that we can and will do; but I am not sure that
even that will be enough, and I think it may be your duty to
take back to your young dominions across the seas this message
and this impression—that some personal duty and responsibility
for national defence rests on every man and citizen. (Loud and
prolonged cheers.) Yes, take that message back with you. Tell
your people—if they can believe it—the deplorable way in which
Europe is lapsing into militarism and the pressure which is
put upon this little island to defend its liberties—and yours.
(Cheers.) But take this message also back with you—that the
old country is right at heart, that there is no failing or
weakness in heart, and that she rejoices in renewing her youth
in her giant dominions beyond the seas. (Loud cheers.) For her
own salvation she must look to herself, and that failing her
she must look to you. (Cheers.)"
{692}
Here, in the feeling of one superlatively civilized man, is
the feeling of more than half the world epitomized. It shrinks
with horror from the enormity of preparations that are "as if
for some great Armageddon," and shudders over what seems to be
"nearly going to bring back Europe into a state of barbarism";
but suspicion, distrust, fear impel it nevertheless, to cry
with Lord Rosebery: "We can and we will build Dreadnoughts as
long as we have a shilling to spend on them or a man to put
into them—because others are building them who may use them
against us." There is senselessness in this predicament of
mind, but it is the senselessness of a persisting
international barbarism, which keeps nation-neighbors still
standing in attitudes toward one another which became
foolishness to individual neighbors a thousand years ago. It
means, simply, that the society of nations is as barbaric as
it was when Englishmen and Normans fought at Senlac; and that
it is only in little street-neighborhoods that men have
arrived at the rational relationships which offer an
appearance of civilization in some parts of the world.
Two principal knots of difficulty must be cut in some way,
before an international civilization can be developed, by the
rational and moral processes which have civilized us
interpersonally in some considerable degree. The hardest of
these knots is tightened upon England, by the weight and the
strain of her great world-wide empire on the little island to
which it is bound. Not only the whole exterior fabric of
British Empire, but the bare subsistence of the people of the
small island at its center, depends on the uninterrupted use
of the surrounding seas for trade and travel between its
parts. To lose freedom in that use means the downfall of Great
Britain, not merely as a militant power, but in everything
that could carry her past importance into the future of the
world. It means so much as this, because the resources of the
island-home of the nation, within themselves, are so small.
There can be no wonder, then, that Englishmen reckon nothing
else so important to them as an indisputable free use of the
seas. Nor can there be wonder that they learned in the past to
look on an indisputable free use of the seas as implying a
mastery of the sea. Until within the last generation or two
this was the sole condition on which there could be security
in ocean trade. That it remains so still is the continued
belief of all the Governments which put millions on millions
into bigger and bigger steel-clad battleships, and of the
publics behind the Governments, which cry with Rosebery, "We
can and we will build Dreadnoughts as long as we have a
shilling to spend on them or a man to put into them." England
differs from the rest only in the imperativeness to her of
what is simply important to them. If security in the use of
the seas is still impossible of attainment without the
supremacy over them of an irresistible sea-power, then England
has justifications for the enormity of her naval armament
which no other nation can claim.
So long as a majority of Englishmen feel constrained to
believe that their ocean trade is made secure from hostile
obstruction by nothing but their naval strength, so long they
will strive to maintain a navy that shall be equal to the
combined navies of any other two Powers; and so long as that
"Two Power Standard" of British naval policy remains
inflexible, it seems forbidding to the hope of a common
agreement among the maritime nations to reduce their building
of battleships. With other Powers than Germany there might be
possibilities of such an agreement, even subject to a
concession of British naval supremacy, because of the
exceptionality of circumstance in England’s case; but it is
here that we come to the second of the two principal knots of
difficulty which hinder the international civilization of the
world, now so flagrantly over-due. Germany, coming late, by a
tardy unification, into the national career which the German
people are entitled to, by their energy of spirit and capacity
of brain, is impatient in the ambitions that were repressed so
long. Her industries, her commerce, her maritime undertakings
have been pushed in the last generation, against the older
competitions of Europe and America, with an impassioned
determination that has won extraordinary triumphs on every
line. Here, again, as in the case of England, there is an
exceptional exposure of the nation to those perils from war
which the state of international barbarism still keeps in
suspense. Germany elbows so many close neighbors in Europe
that nothing but a perfectly trusting friendship or a
perfectly organized reign of law among them can make safety
for any. In the absence of both friendly trust and
authoritative law, they stand on guard against each other in
the twentieth century as they did in the tenth; but with arms
a hundred-fold more hellish and a thousand-fold more ruinous
in cost. Under the pressure of her long-pent ambitions and
energies, Germany has beaten all her neighbors in this as in
other fields of exertion. She commands the best trained, the
best organized, the best equipped army in the world, and
stands admittedly the first among military Powers. But
military power does not give "world power," in the accepted
meaning of that term, and Germany is impelled by all the
strong motives of our time to acquire that. She is competing
with England in commerce, in shipping, in exploitations of
enterprise, everywhere, and she manifestly hopes yet to make
good the lateness of her coming into the field of colonial
plantation. By everything in the prevailing theories of
statesmanship, this calls for a development of naval power to
mate the military; and Germany has been zealously obedient to
the call,—so zealously that England has taken alarm. Since
about the year 1900 a German navy has been created so fast
that the "two power standard" of Great Britain has begun of
late to be a seriously difficult, because a frightfully
costly, naval standard to maintain. Yet England more than ever
believes that she must maintain it at any cost; because the
strenuousness of the German navy-building inspires her with a
new distrust. Hence these two Powers are setting a new pace to
the increase of naval armament, all other Governments catching
some infection from the new temper of suspicion and distrust
which works in theirs.
And this, mainly, at least, is why the world is busier to-day
than it was ever busy before in building monstrous ships and
guns and horrible inventions of a thousand sorts for battle,
while it loathes battle and war as they were never loathed by
mankind before.
{693}
One of the most impressive of recent utterances on this grave
subject fell from the lips of the Secretary for Foreign
Affairs in the Government of Great Britain, Sir Edward Grey,
on the 29th of March, 1909, when he said in Parliament: "Sir,
the martial spirit, I should be the last to deny, has its
place, and its proper place, in the life of a nation. That the
nation should take pride in its power to resist force by force
is a natural and wholesome thing. It is a source of perfectly
healthy pride to have soundness of wind and limb and physical
strength, and it has no unworthy part in the national spirit.
That I sympathize with entirely, but I would ask the people to
consider to what consequences the growth of armaments has led.
The great countries of Europe are raising enormous revenues
and something like one-half of them is being spent on naval
and military preparations. You may call it national insurance,
that is perfectly true; but it is equally true that one-half
of the national revenue of the great countries in Europe is
being spent on what are, after all, preparations to kill each
other. Surely the extent to which this expenditure has grown
really becomes a satire and a reflection upon civilization.
(Cheers.) Not in our generation, perhaps, but if it goes on at
the rate at which it has recently increased, sooner or later I
believe it will submerge that civilization. The burden already
shows itself in national credit—less in our national credit
than in the national credit of other nations—but sooner or
later, if it goes on at this rate, it must lead to national
bankruptcy. Is it to be wondered that the hopes and
aspirations of the best men in the leading countries are
devoted to trying to find some means of checking it? (Cheers.)
Surely that is a statement of the case in which, however
attached a man may be to what I may call the martial spirit,
he may at least see that the whole of Europe is in the
presence of a great danger. But, Sir, no country alone can
save that."
WAR, THE PREPARATIONS FOR: At Large:
Lord Morley on the Responsibility of the Press.
Speaking to the Imperial Press Conference, at London, in June,
1909, and referring to the "rebarbarism of Europe—the
rattling back into arms and the preparation to use arms," Lord
Morley said he thought the Press was more answerable for this
than all the ministers, officers, and diplomatists taken
together, and he pleaded for a systematic and persevering work
on the part of newspapers in behalf of peace among the
nations.
WAR, THE PREPARATIONS FOR: Military:
Average Cost of the Armies of the Great Military Powers.
In his report on the French army budget of 1909 M. Gervais
made a calculation of the average military expenditure of the
six Powers—namely, Russia, Germany, France, Austria-Hungary,
Italy, and Japan, which can mobilize the largest armies, and
found the total amount spent annually to be no less than 5,037
million francs (more than $1,000,000,000), and the number of
men which they could put into the field to be 31,700,000. The
army which England can mobilize comes seventh, and is given as
555,000 men, though her average annual expenditure is the same
as that of France—namely, 700 million francs ($140,000,000).
Comparing next the expenditure and the effectives of France
and Germany, the report states that the German army estimates
show an increase in 1909 to 69 million francs, being fixed at
1,067,862,437f., of which 838,037,151f., belong to the
ordinary budget and 229,825,226f. to the extraordinary budget.
The French army estimates for the year were 742,443,745f.
($150,000,000). The totals on either side were: Germany,
34,118 officers and 602,670 men; France, 27,310 officers and
511,930 men. The average cost per man in Germany is l,398f.
and in France 1,150f.
WAR, THE PREPARATIONS FOR:
Belgian Military Service Stiffened.
Substitution Abolished.
Personal Service Exacted.
Conscription of a mild type has existed in Belgium for some
years, supplemented by voluntary enlistments and ameliorated
by hired substitution, which released the well-to-do from
military service if they wished to escape it. The Liberals and
Socialists have for a long time been advocating the abolition
of the practice of substitution in favor of a system of
personal and universal military service; and, latterly they
were joined in the demand by a section of the Catholics. The
question became a dominant one in politics, and brought about
an extraordinary session of the Belgian Chamber in October,
1909, for discussion of a comprehensive measure of military
reform, for strengthening the self-defense of the kingdom. It
resulted in a decision that "general personal service
restricted to one son per family should be introduced, that
the annual contingent should be raised to 18,000 men, that the
peace strength should stand at 48,400, and that the eventual
war strength should be 250,000 men. It was also agreed that,
the ecclesiastics should be exempt."
WAR, THE PREPARATIONS FOR:
Brazilian Military Service.
Service in the Brazilian army was made obligatory by
legislation in 1907.
WAR, THE PREPARATIONS FOR:
The British Territorial Force.
The Reorganization of 1907-1908.
Lord Roberts’ Criticism.
His Bill for Compulsory Training.
The volunteer or militia forces of the United Kingdom, for
home service, underwent an important reorganization in 1907,
according to the provisions of an Act entitled the
"Territorial and Reserve Forces Act," the general scheme of
which may be learned from the following clauses, taken out of
the text of the Act:
"For the purposes of the reorganisation under this Act of His
Majesty’s military forces other than the regulars and their
reserves, and of the administration of those forces when so
reorganised, and for such other purposes as are mentioned in
this Act, an association may be established for any county in
the United Kingdom, with such powers and duties in connection
with the purposes aforesaid as may be conferred on it by or
under this Act. Associations shall be constituted, and the
members thereof shall be appointed and hold office in
accordance with schemes to be made by the Army Council."
"It shall be the duty of an association when constituted to
make itself acquainted with and conform to the plan of the
Army Council for the organisation of the Territorial Force
within the county and to ascertain the military resources and
capabilities of the county, and to render advice and
assistance to the Army Council and to such officers as the
Army Council may direct, and an association shall have,
exercise, and discharge such powers and duties connected with
the organisation and administration of His Majesty’s military
forces as may for the time being be transferred or assigned to
it by order of His Majesty signified under the hand of a
Secretary of State or, subject thereto, by regulations under
this Act, but an association shall not have any powers of
command or training over any part of His Majesty’s military
forces."
{694}
"The Army Council shall pay to an association, out of money
voted by Parliament for army services, such sums as, in the
opinion of the Army Council, are required to meet the
necessary expenditure connected with the exercise and
discharge by the association of its powers and duties.
"All men of the Territorial Force shall be enlisted by such
persons and in such manner and subject to such regulations as
may be prescribed: Provided that every man enlisted under this
Part of this Act—
(a)
Shall be enlisted for a county for which an association has
been established under this Act and shall be appointed to
serve in such corps for that county or for an area comprising
the whole or part of that county as he may select, and, if
that corps comprises more than one unit within the county,
shall be posted to such one of those units as he may select:
(b)
Shall be enlisted to serve for such a period as may be
prescribed, not exceeding four years, reckoned from the date
of his attestation:
(c)
May be re-engaged within twelve months before the end of his
current term of service for such a period as may be prescribed
not exceeding four years from the end of that term."
"Any part of the Territorial Force shall be liable to serve in
any part of the United Kingdom, but no part of the Territorial
Force shall be carried or ordered to go out of the United
Kingdom. Provided that it shall be lawful for His Majesty, if
he thinks fit, to accept the offer of any part or men of the
Territorial Force, signified through their commanding officer,
to subject themselves to the liability to serve in any place
outside the United Kingdom."
"Subject to the provisions of this section, every man of the
Territorial Force shall, by way of annual training—
(a)
Be trained for not less than eight nor more than fifteen, or
in the case of the mounted branch eighteen, days in every year
at such times and at such places in any part of the United
Kingdom as may be prescribed, and may for that purpose be
called out once or oftener in every year:
(b)
Attend the number of drills and fulfill the other conditions
relating to training prescribed for his arm or branch of the
service":
"His Majesty in Council may—Order that the period of annual
training in any year of all or any part of the Territorial
Force be extended, but so that the whole period of annual
training be not more than thirty days in any year."
The King is empowered to make orders with respect to pay and
allowances of the Territorial Force, as well as concerning its
government and discipline.
Under this Act the Territorial Force assumed form on the 1st
of April, 1908. The former organizations of Yeomanry and
Volunteers were given until 30th June to transfer to the new
Force. The strength of the Yeomanry and Volunteers on 31st
March had been 9,174 officers and 241,085 men. On 1st July the
strength of the new Force, including both transfers and
recruits, was about 8,000 officers and 176,500 men. Of these
some 112,000 men had joined for one year.
The latest published statement of the enrollment in the
Territorial Force (that can be referred to, here) was made on
the 26th of April, 1909, in the House of Lords, by Lord Lucas,
speaking for the Government, in reply to questions as to "how
many of the 315,000 men required to complete the Territorial
Force had been enrolled up to date; how many of these now
serving in the force were under 20 years of age; what was the
lowest age at which they had been and were now accepted; and
how many Territorials now serving had engaged for one year
only." The answer was: "the strength of the Territorial Force
on the first of this month was 8,938 officers out of an
establishment of 11,267, or 79 percent.; 254,524 men out of a
strength of 302,047; or a total of 263,462 out of an
establishment of 313,314, which came out at 84 per cent. In
answer to the second question he was sorry that they had not
got later particulars than October 1, 1908, but on that day
there were 188,785 men on the strength of the Territorial
Force of whom 62,288 were under 20. The answer to the third
question was that the limit of age for men was 17, and for
boys 14. In answer to the fourth, he could not give the noble
earl the actual number of men serving at the present time for
one year, but the figures he could give would make it pretty
clear. They had last year 107,857 one-year men serving in the
force—Volunteers who had transferred for one year. On April 1
last out of these 107,857 men 56,238 had already reengaged for
one year or more. That was to say, that these men had
signified their intention of re-engaging before their year was
actually up."
Lord Roberts has no confidence in the efficiency of the
Territorial Force, as a voluntary organization. In a letter
read to the House of Lords on the 17th of May, 1909, when a
motion expressive of this opinion was to be made and he found
himself unable to attend and support it personally, he wrote:
"On July 10, 1905, I said that ‘I have no hesitation in
stating that our armed forces as a body are as absolutely
unfitted and unprepared for war as they were in 1899-1900.
Close upon four years have passed since then, and I have no
hesitation in reaffirming my conviction."
Subsequently Lord Roberts introduced in the House of Lords a
"National Service (Training and Home Defence) Bill," on which
he spoke with great earnestness on the 12th of July. His Bill
imposed on all male subjects the obligation of serving in the
Territorial Force between the ages of 18 and 30, excepting
officers of the Regular and Reserve Forces, naval and
military, and some others; but subject to this and other
modifications every person who came under the Bill would be in
the same position as a person who voluntarily joins the
existing Territorial Force. The liability to training would
not extend over the whole term of service, but be limited to
four years. The Bill provided for absolute equality of
treatment of all classes, no purchase of discharge or of
exemption from service being allowed; but in the matter of
training various exemptions were provided for.
The Bill encountered more opposition than support in the
debate on it, and did not secure a second reading.
{695}
WAR, THE PREPARATIONS FOR:
British Army Reorganization.
Creation of a General Staff.
Result of the Report of the Esher Army Commission.
Work of the Defence Committee.
Speaking, in April, at the Imperial Conference of 1907, Mr.
Haldane, the Secretary for War in the British Ministry, gave a
brief but clear account of the reforms in the organization of
the Army which had been in progress since 1904. "The effect of
the war in South Africa," he said, "made a profound impression
on the minds of our advisers here. We realized that we had
gone into the war without adequate preparation for war on a
great scale, and that we had never fully apprehended the
importance of the maxim that all preparation in time of peace
must be preparation for war; it is of no use unless it is
designed for that; it is the only justification for the
maintenance of armies—the preparation for war. In consequence,
when the war was over, the then Government set to work—and the
present Government has continued to work—to endeavour to put
the modern military organization into shape. In 1904 a very
important committee sat. It was presided over by a civilian
who had given great attention to the study of military
organization, Lord Esher, and it contained on it two very
distinguished exponents of naval and military views, Sir John
Fisher and Sir George Clarke, as its other members. The
committee reported, and its report contained a complete scheme
for the reorganization of the War Office and of the Army. That
scheme was adopted by the late Government and has been carried
on by the present Government. One broad feature is this, that
our naval organization has been the one with which we have
been conspicuously successful in the history of this country,
as distinguished from our military organization, and,
therefore, as far as was possible, the naval organization was
taken as a type. But the broad feature which emerged with
regard to military preparations was this—Count Moltke was
able to organize victory for the Prussian and German armies in
1866, and again in 1870, because he and the General Staff
working under him were free to apply their minds wholly to war
preparation. That he was able to do this was due to the fact
that the organization and business administration of the Army
in peace were kept entirely distinct from the service which
consisted in the study of war problems and in the higher
training of the Staff and of the troops. That was the
principle recommended by the Esher Committee, and it
culminated in the provision of a brain for the Army in the
shape of a General Staff. That General Staff we have been at
work on for a long time past in endeavouring to get together.
The task was not as difficult as it seemed at first, because
the effect of the war was to bring to the front a number of
young officers who had shown remarkable capacity, and who
constituted the nucleus of a serious and thoughtful military
school. They were got together under the Esher reorganization,
and virtually there has been a General Staff in existence for
some time. But it was not until last September that it
received formal and complete shape in the Army Order of that
month."
Besides this fundamental reform, the Esher Commission pointed
the way to other important changes or effective improvements
in the administrative system of the Army. In place of the
commander-in-chief, a new post, that of inspector-general,
with a term of five years, was proposed, the principal duty of
the office being to inspect and report on the efficiency of
the military forces. Earl Roberts had just retired from the
position of commander-in-chief, and the Duke of Connaught
became inspector-general under the new regime. The existing
Defence Committee, instituted in 1902, was to be enlarged by
the addition of a permanent secretary, holding office for five
years; two naval officers, selected by the admiralty; two
military officers, chosen by the Viceroy of India; and, if
possible, other colonial representatives, holding office for
two years.
Of the importance of this Defence Committee, and of its work,
Prime Minister Asquith took occasion to speak recently in
Parliament (July 29, 1909). "Under the present Government," he
said, "during the four years we have been in office the full
Committee constituted by my predecessor, and which has since
rendered the same service to myself, has consisted of six
Cabinet Ministers in addition to the Prime Minister—namely,
the four Secretaries of State other than the Home Secretary,
the First Lord of the Admiralty, and the Chancellor of the
Exchequer. It has consisted next, as representing the Navy, of
the First Sea Lord and the Director of Naval Intelligence, and
as representing the Army the Chief of the General Staff and