Springfield weekly Republican. [volume], November 10, 1910, Page 2, Image 2

About Springfield weekly Republican. [volume] (Springfield, Mass.) 1851-1946

Image provided by: Boston Public Library

                
2
10 WAS CENSUS EXHIBIT.
The census results for lona are of an
extraordinary character. Some days ago
a statement issued from the census bureau
that the past decade would show a de
crease in the total number of farms, of
farmers and of farm acreage for that
state: but that farm valuations would
show a remarkable increase. Now comes
the population enumeration which shows
a decrease for the decade in spite of con
siderable population gains in all of the
larger cities of the state. This means
of course a very marked decline in the
form population.
The varying, tendencies here shown in
population and farm valuation will ai
tiact wide attention and discussion. There
is no fairer agricultural state ih the
Union than lona. 'Eying between the
Mississippi and Missouri rivers its broadly
rolling surface leaves hardly a foot of the
immensely rich diluvial soil unworkable
over the whole great area of the state.
Its settlement from 1840. when the cen
sus gave -it a population of 43.112. pro
ceeded with great rapidity. By 1860 it
ltad 674.913 inhabitants; by 1870 nearly
1.200.000. Then the pate hegan to
slacken, but during the next decade (1870-
188 ft) the population gain was 430.595 or
86 per cent; during the next decade 287.-
281 or 17.7 jier cent: and from 1890 to
1900 319.556 or 16.7 per cent. Now for
the iast decade we have an actual de
crease of 7052 or about three-tenths of 1
per cent. In the same time, however, the
seven lending , cities of the state— Des
Moines. Dubuque. Davenport. Council
Bluffs. Cedar Bapids. Sioux City and
Waterloo—have gained about 74.000 in
population, leaving a decline for the rest
of the state of some 81.000.
But with this marked decline in farm
population, and there has also followed a
materia! decrease in the number and acre
age of farms, the census reports a great
appreciation in all farm values. The
bureau's statement of early last week
gave these comparative valuation figures
fog lowa:—
In
crease.
1910. 1900. Perot.
Farm -and*..52,199,U25.000 *1.256.752,000 122.7
Farm build
•nes 4.M.604.U00 240.803.000 gg.S
Farm ma
chinery ... 95.273.000 57.061,000 64.4
Paid to farm
labor 24.732,000 16.376.000 51.0
If something had not happened in the
past 10 years affecting the standard by
which these valuations are made, we
should have to say the above figures for
1910 were ridiculously wrong. It would be
impossible to believe that with farm pop
ulation and .lira declining values could rise
at all. lei alone so great a rise as is repre
sented. But something has happened af
fecting the standard of valuation. t4old.
through enormous increase in production,
has depreciated greatly in relation to com
modities. They have gone tip in gold or
money value, simply because gold or money
has gone down in value through excessive
production.
And this alone doubtless explains in
Emit measure the phenomenon of popula
tion loss during the decadp for one of the
very richest and most splendid of our j
agricultural The prices of lowa
farm products advanced greatly for the
cause mentioned, and as those prices went
«P. farm valuations went up: and farmers
suddenly found tbemselvps grown compara
tively rich, not only in ready money or j
bank accounts, hut in the higher values |
placed upon their farms and the greater
marketability of the farms. Their specula- ■
tire spirit was thereby aroused. If so good
a thing could be made out of lowa farms
in so short a time, would it not be well
to sell and buy and start farms on the
unoccupied and comparatively cheap lands
still remaining to some extent in Texas
and the Southwest, and toward and beyond
the Canadian border to the northwest?
M e do know that Texas in the same time
appears to have gained enormously in pop
ulation. and we do know that thousands
of families from the Missouri and Missis
sippi rirer region have been moving in
Tccem years to take up new lands in the
Canadian Northwest. At the same time
the old farm drift from the eastern sec
tions of the country to the western valley
states has been checked by similar causes
of high farm commodity prices w-hieh have
made our own agricultural lands appear
cheap and profitable. lowa has thus been
losing farm population to the remoter
M est. and failing to keep up its old gain
from the eastern states. Such seems to
be the explanation of a phenomenon which
further census results are likely to show
as not confined exclusively to lowa.
A TRADE MAR OVER POTASH.
Potash is a large ingredient of manufac
tured fertilizers nsed upon the cotton, grain
and tobacco fields of the United States.
Germany is the chief source of supply, and
the fertilizer concerns of the United States
are the purchasers of about half that sup
ply. We import some $8,090,009 worth of
potash annually from that country. The
potash mines of Germany have been oper
ated under a of ownership, but
f. year ago last June the syndicate was
dissolved through inability of the members
to agree upon the terms of a continuance.
Thereupon leading American huyers of
potash took advantage of the situation and
made contracts extending over some years
fur the delivery of potash to rhetu at
$20.40 a ton.
Thereafter, or late in 1909. the German
potash syndicate was reconstructed and a
bill was introduced in the Reichstag giving
special legal sanction to the syndicate and
apportioning the output pf the mines
among the members on the basis of specific
allotments and taxing the excess of out
put above those ullotmenta.j effect of
this measure would hs£ to tax
heavily the American ,-«> Then
tame the diplomatic neS ,* between
Germany and the Unife** «* over the
maximum and minimi .se of the
Payne-Aldrich tariff law. the said hill
was withdrawn. Its pendency would hurt
the German chances of escaping the 25
per cent additional tariff to he imposed on
imports into the United States from coun
tries unduly discriminating against this
country in their tariff or trade arrange
ments. Germany was finally admitted to
the minimum tariff schedule; whereupon,
or in May of this year, the Reichstag tome
up and enacted the bill referred to. with
the result that the potash syndicate refuses
to recognise or execute the American con
tract* at the $20.40 price. The price named
by the syndicate is $34. M’hile the Ger
man Bundesrath or federal council has
the power to compel observance of the
contracts and while the German govern
, ment has been appealed to on behalf of
; the American interests, nothing has been
; done, and the matter will now be taken up
actively by the American state depart
ment.
If the German government continues to
refuse to interfere, the Washington ad
ministration will no doubt consider itself
forced to adopt retaliatory measures, It
w ill likely use its P eyvor to apply the niaxi
j mum tariff schedules to all imports from
! Germany. That would inflict a hard blow
; on German trade in this direction, and
| measures in extended retaliation would
i doubtless be adopted by Germany against
the United .States. Potash seems to be a ,
I small matter oyer which to start an inter
i national trade war. but the American in
| terests seem to have a real grievance, and
failure oil the part of the German govern
ment to correct matters will justly provoke
retaliatory measures at M’ashington. It is
difficult to believe that the German gov
ernment will adhere to a position wjiieh is
! not without some iricky features.
1 THE RETIREMENT OF MORLEY.
Ix>rd Morley's retirement as secretary
■ of state for India) means his virtual re
| tiremeut from public life. His health has
I weakened in recent years and only by
i becoming a member of the House of Lords
i was he able to remain in the cabinet, for
| the House of Commons with its turmoil
i and late night sessions had imposed too
j severe a strain upon his physical strength,
j M’hile he may be heard occasionally from
j his scat in the upper chamber during the
j rest of his life, Lord Morley's political
! career is substantially ended.
With Lord Morley goes almost the iast
j of the old Gladstonian leaders. Lord Rose
bery, the youngest of the group to attain
great prominence under Mr Gladstone's
direction, has been out of the liberal party
for 10 years, and he remains without party
connections and without a political follow
i ing. Mr Bryce retired from active politics
; when he came to this country as the Brit
ish embassador. Lord Morley and Mr
! Bryce were devoted followers of the old
| liberai chieftain in his last great battles,
and they were personal friends of him as
well, although of the two Morley was
much the nearer to Mr Gladstone's heart.
As Mr Gladstone's authorized biographer,
I-ord Morley performed a labor of love in
producing the three volumes of a masterly
work which is really a political history
of the United Kingdom during a full half
of the 19th century. As chief secretary
for Ireland during the last Gladstone ad
ministrations, Lord Morley demonstrate
his complete loyalty to Gladstonian home
rule. His name really belongs alongside
that of Sir M'illiam Harcourt as a lieu
tenant of the great liberal leader in the
dark and stormy days of the closing phase
of his career.
Lord Morley never offended the more
radical sentiment of his party until the
pit sent liberal government came into
power. As secretary of state for India he
proved less sympathetic with the aspira
tions for self-government being developed
among the natives of the Indian empire
than bad been expected. A strong advo
cate of home rule for Ireland, why
should he not strongly encourage home
rule in India? A lifelong critic of
imperialism and jingoism and an un
flinching opponent of the policy of
conquest, why should he not endeavor
to bring Indian administration into some
what closer harmony with liberal ideals?
It was impossible, evidently, for Lord
Morley to carry his principles into prac
tice in order to please his old radical
friends. When, during his administration
of the India office, a wave of sedition
swept over the Indian empire he approved
of its ruthless suppression. He sustained
the drastic legal measures employed by the
Indian government to check the license of
the native press. The world, in short,
witnessed the curious spectacle of that old
doctrinaire democrat and radical ruling an
oriental empire like a despot.
It is not difficult to understand Lord
Morley's justification in his own mind.
Ireland was oue problem, India was quite
another. It is one thing to be a doctrinaire
philosopher and quite another to be a
practical administrator responsible for pub
lic order and the maintenance of govern
ment. If there was sedition, Lord Morley
suppressed it. If there was bomb-throw
ing. he had the culprits .hanged. At the
same rime, however, he sought to distin
guish his administration by helping India
to advance somewhat toward the goal of
self-government. His contribution has been
notable, even if slight in fact, inasmuch
as there had been scarcely any modifica
tion of England’s despotism in India since
the end of the rule of the East India
company. The new councils act, width
Lord Morley was able to secure from
liament, is a monument to his staicaian
ship in the Indian field. For the first time,
a native now gits iu the viceroy’s execu
tive council at Calcutta: an! for the first
time, the supreme legislative council of
India contains a few members chosen by
the Indian people. Supreme power re
mains in the hands of the British garrison,
but the native millions now have at least a
feeble rroice in their government. Through
these few representatives in the two coun
cils. executive and legislative, India is
at iast articulate. The time will come,
doubtless, when this achievement of Lord
Morley will be regarded as highly signifi
cant in India's modern history, oveu if in
the end it does not help to sustain the
British supremacy, which has never had
any basis but force. A* he leaves the
India office, laird Morley has a certain
satisfaction in noting that India is quieter
than before in several year*.
His other offense to the extremer radi
cals was his acceptance of a peerage two
years ago when Mr Asquith became prime
minister. For many years, as John Mor
ley, he had been a democrat of the demo
crats. a radical of the radicals. He was
the first to use the famous phrase that
the House of Lords must be "mended or
‘ended,” His acceptance of a peerage
was. indeed, open to just criticism in that
the tories and aristocrat* h*d *lways been
ready with the taunt that, however bitter
radicals were in their hostility to the
House of Lords, they always were glad to
become members of if. if the opportunity
came to them. Mr Gladstone had repeat
edly refused a peerage, and w hy should uot
his disciple be equally consistent?
It is now generally known Hist, in be
coming a lord, Mr Morley sacrificed hi*
political convictions and principle* iu order
to pay a financial debt of honor. One
very near to him had become a defaulter
THE BPRINGFIELI) WLhKLY REPUBLICAN: THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 10. 1910.
in business to aft extent Involving at least
SIOO,OOO. Mr Morley's name had been
fru'ged on notes, and lie took the view that
he was morally bound to pay them. In
order to d» this, however, his salary as
secretary of stale for India was necessary,
and he was thus forced to remain in pub
lic life. His transfer to the House of
Lords being required by the political exi
gencies which Mr Asquith confronted in
reorganizing the cabinet after Campbell-
Bannerman's death, as well as by the state
of his health, the old-time Gladstonian rad
ical accepted a peerage with a heavier
heart, probably, than any man of his race
before him. In his political meetings his
radical admirers used to shout out to him
sometimes. "Good old John!” Lord Mor
ley will be forgiven his adventure ns a
peer, and "good old John” he is likely to
be always, in the hearts of the democracy
of England.
LINE-UP ON INCOME TAX.
A year ago the candidates of the two lead
ing parties for either branch of the Legisla
ture in Western Massachusetts were cans6ssed
for their position on the proposed income
tax amendment to the federal constitution.
Of about 70 some 50 replied. They stood 26
for the amendment-—l 4 democrats and 12
republicans: 22 uncertain—lS republicans
and four democrats; and two opposed" one
of each party. The Legislature at the en
suing session refused ratification by a small
majority.
The said amendment can bn brought up
again and doubtless a division will be
forced on it at the next session, as should
be the case. It may therefore be consid
ered as a matter pending before the body
eleeted on Tuesday and we have ac
cordingly canvassed the legislative candi
dates of this part of the state again, with
the following results: —
For the Amendment.
Democrats: John F. Malley. Senate,
Ist Hampden: IV. J. La Francis. sth
Hampden; J. TV. Flannery, 7th Hamp
den : F. W. Otto, sth Hampden;
William Manning. 6th Hampden: J. IV.
Phelon, 2d Hampden: J. J. Betsoid. 3d
Hampshire; ,T. J. Bastion. sth Berkshire;
John H. Mack. Senate. Berkshire: M'. A.
O'Hearn. 2d Berkshire; H. E. Ward, 2d
Franklin: J. S. MacQuaid, Ist Hampden;
C. A. Hall. Ist Franklin : F. X. Quigley,
Seuate, 2d Hampden; John J. Barry, Bth
Hampden: T. J. Kearin. Senate. Great
Barrington; J. H. O’Connell. 3d Franklin;
M. T. Kane. Senate, Woreester-Hampden;
F. W. Burke, 12th Hampden; T. F. Mc-
Cullough. 11th Hampden: A. R McCarthy,
2d Hampshire: C. F. Robbins, 4th Frank
lin : George R. Burns, 9th Hampden: M. F.
Quinn, sth Berkshire; C. P. Aldrich, Sen
ate. Franklin-Hampshire.
Republicans: John H Curtiss, 3d Hamp
den: Charles T. Holt, 6th Hampden: Paul
I. Lombard. sth Hampden: H. B. Putnam,
12th Hampden: Charles F. McDevitt, Bth
Hampden : H. 11. Flower. 2d Hampden : W.
A. Taylor. 4th Hampshire: J. E. Merritt,
7th Berkshire: L. F. Hardy. 2d Hampshire:
John J. Harrington, 4th Hampden: J. W.
Haigis, 3d Franklin.
Uncertain.
Allen T. Treadway. Senate, of Stock
bridge: J. J. Madsen. 11th Hampden : Rich
ard March. Ist Hampshire; Charles L. Lap
ham. 4th Berkshire: Dr G. 0. Robert. 10th
Hampden: F. A. Palmer. Bth Berkshire,
republicans, and Alexander Sedgwick, Stb
Berkshire, democrat. ,0
Against the amendment stand A. P. Lang
try, sth Hampden, and A. A. Upton, 4th
Franklin, both republicans.
There are 45 responses from about 70
questioned, with the result that 25 demo
crats and 11 republicans, or 36 in all. are
for the amendment; only seven, all save
one being republican, are uncertain: and
only two, both republicans, are opposed.
Mr Sedgwick of the Bth Berkshire district
might properly be classed for the amend
ment. He is in favor of restoring this
power to the federal government, and even
in favor of its exercise, hut Gov Hughes's
Objection to the wording of the amendment
raises a doubt in his mind. When he
comes to consider that objection more
carefully, we imagine its weight will not
appear as great as when it was first pro
mulgated. It will be seen that positive
opinion in favor of the amendment has
grown decidedly among the candidates
since a year ago. The great body of those
replying are flatly for it. The opposition
among those replying is almost negligible.
Many, however, and chiefly republicans,
have declined or neglected to answer, as
was the case a year ago. It is fairly to be
presumed that most of these either have
no opinion or are afraid to express it. and
in either case a doubt would arise a.s to
their great fitness for the office sought.
The people have a rigid to know where
the men stand on important questions of
public policy who ask their suffrages for
public place. Representatives to the Leg
islature are not sent there to represent
themselves, but their constituents, and to
make them representative constituencies
must know where they stand before elec
tion
The replies generally indicate a dearer
understanding of the question here in
volved than was the case last year. Some
cloudiness, however, is still projected into
the discussion, either unwittingly or other
wise. The president of the Senate, Mr
Treadway of Stockbridge is. for ex
ample. in favor of an income tax,
but raises the question whether the
nation or the state should be the
'beneficiary. But the question primarily i*.
a* Mr Bastion of Pittsfield says, whether
or" npt the federal constitution shall be
made to rend as it always was held to
read from the beginning of the government
down to 1895, w hen, because a single judge
changed his mind over nighfc it was made
to toad differently. Is Mr Treadway in
favor of restoring so much of the old con
stitution. or not? Is he in favor of the old
nationalism or *omething even less than
the old nationalism?
He implies that the surrender of a pos
sible or actual source of state revenue is
involved. Not at all. It under a restored
power Congress were to impose an income
tax, the right of the state to, tax the same
income would not be impaired; and if
both were to tax the same or surplus in
come, the tax in both cases would take
the place of some part of other taxes now
resting largely on the poor and the total
tax burden oil the people generally would
not he increased. The ides frequently en
tertained Iha 1 income taxes will he levied,
if at all, additionally to other taxes, has
of course nothing to support it. The peo
ple would not stand such action on the
part of the taxing power. And a* for the
objection of "double taxation" in the case
supposed, it is not such in the common
understanding of that term. The citizen
w ould be taxed he is now-in hia two
capacities »» citizen of the state and cit
izen of the United 'States, To cry against
"double taxation” In such a case is to cry
against our dual citizenship, and that
seems to be here to stay.
It is still being urged by a rather lone
some opposition—lonesome rather in its
courage of opposition—that a federal in
come tax would be collected largely in
the northeastern states to the relief of
the other sections. It would be if the
wealth of the country is largely concen
trated here, and not otherwise; and oppo
sition on this ground is opposition to all
taxation on the basis of wealth or ability
to pay, and there is not a civilized nation
on the face of the earth to-day in whose
public life such a view- as that has any
standing worthy of notice.
The income tax amendment should be
ratified by Massachusetts in testimony of
its desire that the national government
shall possess all of its original powers and
all the essential powers for its own preser
vation which are possessed by the gov
ernments of all other nations. And it
should be ratified in order that that gov
ernment may, even in the absence of
great emergencies, place some part of
its tax burden on superfluous wealth and
not all of it. as now, upon the people in
proportion to their needs. Other eonsid
ations being equal as between opposing
legislative candidates, therefore, those
who stand for the ratification of this
amendment are to be preferred.
; SAVINGS SPITE OF HIGH TRICES.
: Savings bank returns for the year end
| > u ? with October are now being made to
; t * ,<> state bank commissioner. The results
i w ill doubtless be of interest when studied
j in the light of the general complaint of
j h'Sh cost of living and of a prevalent view
, in financial circles that the people are not
saving ns they should or as they common
ly do. Ihe deposits of the Boston savings
banks as they stood on October 31 are al
ready available and have been tabulated
by the Boston News Bureau. They ag
gregate $239,499,000, or the largest ever
known. The increase over a year ago is
$7,374,000. or 3.17 per cent, which com
pares with an increase of 5.24 per cent
for the previous year, of 1909. 1.41 per
cent, for 1908, one-fourth of 1 per cent for
1907. and 4.4 per cent for 1906.
So far as Boston and vicinity are con
cerned. therefore, this would seem to dis
pel the notion that the working classes
are either exceptionally unable to save
through the high cost of living or are ex
ceptionally indisposed to save through the
varied extravagances of the times. The
increase in deposits for all the banks,
while less than last year, is well above
the average for the past four or five years.
This is the more remarkable when it is re
membered that during the greater part of
the 12 months ending October 31 standard
investment stocks and bonds have ruled at
prices giving, a much larger return than
the savings banks are able to pay. Most
of these Boston banks pay 4 per cent, but
several of them, including nearly all of
the largest, pay only 314 per cent; while
the best dividend-paying railroad stocks
sold daring the summer at prices to net
the purchaser from ,to 6 and more per
cent; and a great many bond issues of a
high grade sold to net materially larger
returns than the highest-payinp savings
banks. Undoubtedly, money that would
otherwise have gone into savings banks
was directly invested: and no small amount
which had been on deposit with the banks
was doubtless withdrawn to be invested
directly. Nevertheless, we see a very sub
stantial net increase on deposits, indicat
ing probably a marked increase in small
savings among people who would not think
of making direct investments of their
money.
There is a feature of the Boston savings
returns which cannot be regarded as prom
ising for the great success of the postal
savings system in this section of the coun
try. Of the 19 Boston savings banks,
seven pay 3% per cent on deposits and
the rest 4 per cent. The rate of increase
in deposits for all the banks paying 3Vj
per cent is much less than it was fast
ft?ar. and in four of seven eases it is
less than 1 per cent. The 4 per cent
banks, on the other hand, average up
close to a year ago in respect to the rela
tive increase of deposits. This indicates
that the patrons of these banks have a
close eye out for the larger interest re
turn. and how are the government postal
banks to fare with these people when they
can offer a return of only 2 per cent on
deposits. Apparently the postal banka in
this fegion must depend for patronage
largely on people who distrust sil banks
and keep their money in hiding. It is sup
posed by the advocates of postal or gov
ernment hanks to be a rather numerous
class, but this may be doubted. The pos
tal savings system may at least perform
the service of deciding this disputed ques
tion respecting the amount of money beiifo
carried in secret hoards.
THE ENGLISH COPYRIGHT BILL.
This country has ao recently been
through the throes of a codification of the
copyright law that there will be much in
terest in the fate of the copyright bill now
being discussed in England, which goes
over much of the game ground aDd, if en
acted, as will doubtless happen, will dis
place about 20 old statutes. It differs
from our new copyright law in extending
the term of copyright to 50 years after the
author's death. This provision, also made
in France. Denmark. Norway, Sweden and
Russia, was proposed in the United States,
but wag rejected on the score of the in
justice to authors who die young, and
also because in certain ways it seemed to
be more to the advantage of the publisher
than the author. It remains to he seen
whether Great Britain will adopt this con
tingent term of copyright. It is to be
noted that the new bill fo r the first time
grants the musical composer control over
reproduction hy mechanical records—the
failure of England to grant such protec
tion wss one of the arguments urged
against protecting American composers iu
the same way. To be sure, there is in the
bill an element of compromise; composi
tions which the makers of records have
already money to pirate will con
tinue to be common property. But this is
an abuse which will rectify itself hi time.
There is evidence of a growing feeling
that monopoly is an evil even if neces
sary, ia the provision that after an au
thor's desth his books must be adequate
ly provided for the public or moaopoly in
them lapse?. In the author's lifetime no
such requirement ohtaina: ha may print,
his hooks or take them off the market as
be pleases. But he ia not allowed to hid-
j press his copyrighted work permanently.
I Obviously it will not be an easy matter
| to determine when a book is being inade
i quately published—the decision of this
point is left to the controller-general of
patents, subject to an appeal to the high
court. Short stories and serials in news
papers can he copyrighted, but apparently
not the news of the day. The copyright
! ing of nevws is an issue that has occasional
ly risen in this country, notably with ref
erence to the Cook and Peary stories, but
usually there has been an assumption of
some special value in the literar/ form; a
monopoly of bald facts seems to find no
place in the theory or practice of copy
right.
I Perhaps the most dubious part of the
English bill is the clause protecting works
of architecture. A distinguished jurist on
the committee, in fact, dissented from the
inclusion of architecture at till because of
the obvious difficulties, and the bill treats
the matter in gingerly fashion. A pirati
cal edition of a book may be seized and de
stroyed, but it is expressly stipulated that
an offending building may not be torn
down nor its completion prevented. It will
be difficult therefore to provide a remedy,
and it will probably be more difficult still
to determine what constitutes infringe
ment of copyright. The committee itself
seems to be somewhat in the haze and
loosely provides that such protection will
be extended only to buildings of "original
‘and artistic character, and uot to works
‘of common type which have been produced
‘on previous occasions." The nped of in
serting such a proviso is in itself a strik
ing illustration of the radical difference
between architecture and bookmakiug. A
modern writer strives for originality and
draws little from tradition. Perhaps lit
erature has gone too far in this direction
and we should have better books if wm
stole from each other in free-handed Eliza
bethan style. But that is beside the poiul.
Architecture is in a much less degree a
matter of original invention as modern
novelists understand the term, and much
more a matter of treating conventional ma
terial in an artistic way. it should be
easy to prevent the slavish copying of a
copyrighted building, but such copying is
already very rare. To guatd against the
pilfering of ideas and of style is a very
different matter. In the case of literature
it is not even attempted, but in the case
of .architecture it is chiefly this kind of
protection that is needed. The most un
scrupulous of borrowers, while he may help
himself to whatever he sees, is not very
likely to sell his client a precise replica of
a modern building already standing.
HOME RULE FOR ALL.
The talk that “home rule all around”
with imperial federation, might be the out
come of the conference between the lead
ers of the British government and the
leaders of the opposition began to be heard
last summer. From time to time the talk
is revived, and a report cabled from Lon
don the past week that a constitutional
convention would be called next year for
the settlement of the question must be
Accepted at least as indicating that a se
rious effort is being made by the respon
sible leaders to find a common basis of
settlement for the constitutional issues
which have lately disturbed British politics:
The calling of a constitutional conven
tion would indicate, however, that the
problem is too great for the parties in Par
liament to solve. But if they cannot solve
jt. what body can? No convention could
be more representative of the people of
the United Kingdom than the House of
Commons. A constitutional convention
would certainly be an innovation in Great
Britain and it might be somewhat out of
place, inasmuch as the United Kingdom
has no written constitution. What consti
tution there is consists of acts of Parlia
ment and precedents. Even the monarchy
rests upon parliamentary authority. And
since a convention would have no status
whatever save what Parliament should en
dow it with, by special act, the convention
could serve no purpose except to perform
the functions of an enlarged and much
more dignified royal commission. Final
decisions would necessarily rest with Parli
ament, and, back of Parliament, the people.
The specific questions of “home rule all
'around" and imperial federation, at this
time, are still disputatious and it would
be surprising if there could be any con
sensus of opinion reached concerning them
at an early day. In discussing the sub
ject last August, the London Spectator
violently denounced the whole scheme.
Quoting Oliver Cromwell's denunciation of
the idea of making the United Kingdom
a federation of autonomous states, the
Spectator proceeded to say ; “If we believed
‘that the nation and the empire could only
‘be preserved by breaking up the United
'Kingdom, we should, of course, adopt that
‘policy. Since, however, we believe that
‘the dissolution of the union and restora
‘tion of the heptarchy, plus some plan for
‘forcing a premature scheme of federation
‘upon the empire, would mean our ruin at
‘home and oversea—a weltetiSe political
'chaos in which one by one would disap
pear every part of that proud heritage
‘which is ours and our children's, and of
‘which these islands are the special trus
‘tees—we intend to fight this proposal to
'the death." There is. then, the opposition
of British unionists to be encountered at
home. And, in the self-governing domin
ions beyond the seas, there is sure to be
opposition from various local elemeuts.
The steadily growing nationalism in Can
ada and Australia is a force that the im
perial federation idea must struggle with
even more in the future than in the past.
Among the difficulties of the present con
ference of opposing party leaders in Lon
don, there is of course the question of the
House of Lords. The more radical wing
of the ministerial-party will not be satis
fied if the constitutional claims of the
House of Commons are not fully vindicated
— if, in short, the veto of the Lords ia not
materially shorn of its power. Little is
heard of this point in the talk about home
rule for all and imperial federation, but the
radicals who follow Premier Asquith are
not to be put off or cajoled. It may be,
of course, that if a comprehensiie scheme
of constitutional reorganization could he
brought Into the sphere of practical poli
tics the House of Lords issue would quick
ly settle itself. If Imperial federation could
be brought about, the hereditary chamber
might In effect disappear and its place be
taken by a grand council of the empire,
' leaving the House of Commons Suprsme in
1 strictly English affairs. Such a result
l-akould involve local Parliament* also in
I Ireland, Scotland sod Wales. Yet with
"home rule all around" some central au
thority should necessarily be supreme over
all of the local legislative bodies, whether
it be a Parliament of all the kingdoms or
the crown itself.
No more complicate problem of consti
tutional reorganization could easily be im
agined than this one which British states
men confront, assuming that they are seek
ing for a permanent adjustment of the re
[ lations between the two houses of Parlia
ment, the solution of the puzzle of home
rule and the determination of the ques
tion of the federation of the empire. To
settle all these questions at one stroke
would seem too great a task for human
I wisdom. It would not be surprising, how
ever, if progress should be made, at least
in piecemeal fashion, toward a settlement
of the difficulties the United Kingdom en
counters, through the consultations which
the leaders of the liberal and conservative
parties have indulged in during the past
few months. A statement concerning their
deliberations must come from the premier
when Parliament convenes the middle of
the present month.
EDUCATION IX ENGLAND.
That education in England is passing
through much the same crisis as in this
country appears from the excellent ad
dress to the educational science section
of the British association for the advance
ment of science at its recent meeting dt
Sheffield, presented by the president of
the section, H. £’\MJ«rs. principal of the
university of Loupun. an address printed
in full in the Popular Science Monthly for
November. Miers, who till two
years ago was pr *efisor of mineralogy in
Oxford university, covers many vital sub
jects, but most of them center about the
problem, acute in the Uiiited States as
well, of the relation between school and
university. It is his special complaint that
tile distinction between the two is not
made sharp enough, and that too much of
the energy of the university goes to
mechanical drill in studies which are mere
ly preparatory to real work. It is inter
esting to note that Principal Miers is in
line with some of the advanced thinker*-'
in this country in thinking that too much
red tape is stifling to education.
He does not. for example, believe in
making a fetish of preparation, or of ex
aminations upon elaborate preparatory
courses in many subjects. The essential
point to his mind for admission to uni
versity courses is mental competence, and
he thinks that with a sound school train
ing aimed chiefly at developing mental
powers, the student may take up research
work at the university and quickly ac
cumulate whatever special apparatus he
mayineed in the way of languages, mathe
matics, etc. He tells, for instance, of a
young Frenchman, whose training had
been literary and philosophical, who came
to Oxford and wished to get some insight
into scientific method. At scientific labora
tories he had been rejected because he. had
no preparation in mathematics, physics and
chemistry-. I’rof Miers set hint to work
immediately on actual research, and left
him to pick up the rudiments as he had
need for them. In a short time this stu
dent had published three original papers
which are now quoted as marking a sub
stantial advance in knowledge. He grants
the exceptional ability of the pupil, but
ability is none the less important for be
ing exceptional. There seems to be a real
danger that universities, in their zeal for
system, may underestimate, discourage,
or even reject the able man whose career
is for any reason irregular.
For this reason he thinks that entrance
examinations should not be, as they too
often are. merely a tbst of whether a boy
or girl has learned certain preparatory
subjects at school. Even more should it
be a test of general intelligence and of the
capacity to take up courses in rhe univer
sity spirit. The change, he believes, should
be abrupt: "It is of the essence of re
sponsibility that there should be sorne
‘thing sudden and unexpected about it"
Kindergarten training in independence 53
a contradiction in terms, and a sure way
to stifle initiative. Some boys are ready
at 18 to shift for themselves; others equal
ly hopeful are at that age but school boys.
Principal Miers would have no school boys
in the university, though he argues for an
enlargement of the school curriculum to
hold the interest of the older pupils.
The essential thing in the transition to
the university is that the pupil is thrown
upon his own initiative and must show a
spirit of independent inquiry. Principal
Miers would have research far more prom
inent than it has been in England, but he
gives warning that “much that is dignl
‘fied with the name of research is worth
ies?." In America we hare suffered great-,
ly in the graduate schools from trivial work
that benefits neither the investigator nor
the world, if is simply the method for
which he argues; it is not necessary to set
t’he student to searching for new,,scraps
of knowledge before his own development
is complete: “On the other hand, to carry
‘on any piece of work, w hetlier it be new
‘Or old. in the zealous spirit of inquiry,
‘with faith in a purpose, is to insure the
•intellectual interest of the student; and
‘I cannot see why this spirit should not
‘animate ail university education, whotli
‘cr it be accompanied by original research
‘or not.” But he would have all university
teachers more zealous in search, for the
sake of creating an atmosphere of investi
gation. There are, he notes, two types of
investigators, both valuable, the steady sys
tematic workers, and the versatile men
with the curiosity of a child who turn
eagerly from one field to another. The
latter, lie thinks, is the more fertile type
of investigator, but the best teacher
except for exceptional and original-minded
pupils. And the qualifications of a school
master are quite distinct from either.
There has been much criticism in this
Country, lately, of the investigator as
teacher, and some of it is well founded.
The investigator may not be a man of
force or even of notable mental powers;
specialists often get a distinction of a sort'
for lack of competition. But often the
failure of a specialist ss a teacher is due
to the very things Principal Miers depre
cates—sending schoolboys to the univer
sity anil continuing there to schoolmaster
them. The very teacher, perhaps diffident,
awkward, and iueffideut in discipline, .who
fails to club rudiments into a horde of
young barbarians, might be an Inspiration
to a little group of enthusiasts. The trou
ble with the university is that it Is still
where It b*» fallen between two stools.
As Principal Miers sayar—
When, for example, a boy who has nut
learned Greek or chemistry' comes to tha
university and proposes to take up one of
these subjects he is generally put through
a course of exercises which differ jfi no
essential respect from those set before a
boy of 12. In other Words, our university
met huff for the trained mind docs not
really differ from our school method, which
w supposed to he adapted to the mind ia
course of training.
In this connection it may he observed
that although he represents science Prin
cipal Miers speaks strongly of fho superi
ority of the classical school training: "I
'have often heard it asserted that, if a boy
is capable of taking up at the university a
‘course which is entirely different from his
‘school course, he w ill generally be found
‘to have come from the classical side and
not from the modern side. An ordinary
‘modern-side boy is rarely able to pursue
‘profitably a literary career at the uni
versity, whereas it often happens that or
dinary classical-side boys make excellent
scientific students after they have left
•school.” This, he owns, has been his ex
perience. and he attributes it partly to
some defect in the teaching of science
whereby a certain narrowness and rigidity
of mind are made possible, but also in
part to “the absence of that mental nxer
*cise which is provided by the thoughtful
‘use and analysis of language.” This is
strikingly in line with the recent complaint
of the distinguished critic Emile Faguet
that the neglect of linguistic studies has
resulted not only in the decay of French
literary style, but in a general decline, oa
the part of the younger generation, of the
ability to think straight. Language is much
disparaged nowadays as “mere words.”
but it must not be forgotten that except
in words the human mind hardly exists,
and that training in language is training
iu thinking, too.
A TAX OX CHRISTMAS TREES.
Our Montpelier dispatches record the
passage in the Vermont House of Repre
sentatives of a bin imposing a tax of 23
cents pev tree on evergreen trees “cut to
‘be shipped abroad and sold for Christmas’
‘trees.". Efforts on the part of any state
to check the depredations upon young
forest growth committed at every approach
of the Christmas season are to be com
mended. but it should hardly need to be
said that this particular method of state
operation will not stand.
Shipping trees "abroad" presumably
means shipping them beyond the borders
of the state in any direction. If it means
simpi.v export to Canada or other foreign
country, then we have a state levying an
impost on exports without the consent of
Congress, and this is prohibited by section
18, article 1, of the federal constitution.
If it means broadly export or shipment
from Vermont to other states in the Union,
then the tax would become an interference
with or control of interstate commerce by
the state, whereas the power to regulate
interstate commerce is given by the fed
eral constitution to. Congress.
Vermont concededly cannot tax imports
from other states, nor can it impose any
tax which discriminates in favor of its
Own productions and against those of other
states, Xo more eau it tax exports from
that to other states, or discriminate in
taxation between products of the state to
lip consumed therein and those to be ex
ported therefrom. If Vermont can place
a, tax on trees to he shipped outside of
the state. Pennsylvania can place 4 pro
hibitive tax on shipments of anthracile
coal beyond its borders, and Kansas can
tax its wheat as it passes out of the state.
Buch taxes can be as clearly applied in
the name of conservation of natural re
sources by Pennsylvania and Kansas in
■the eases of coal and wheat, as by Ver
mont in the case of Christmas trees; but
that will not save such taxes from the
constitutional inhibition as interpreted in a
long line ot decisions respecting the taxa
tion and the interstate commerce clauses
of the fundamental law of the nation.
If the Vermont Legislature were to im
pose a lax on all Christmas trees -Gut in
the state, irrespective of whether they
were to be used in the state or shipped
beyond, it might in some way or another
come into conflict with the rights of land
owners as secured by the Vermont or the
federal constitution, but it would escape
conflict with those federal constitutional
provisions which have been referred to.
As it is the bill involves an invasion of
the interstate commerce powers of the
constitution, if it is not contrary to the
section 10 above mentioned. If enacted,
it will be worth a suit in the fedaral
courts and nothing more.
WOOL TARIFF REVISION.
It is stated to be the purpose of the tariff
board at Washington to make a thorough
inquiry into the costs of wool production in
the United States. Through the farm cen
sus schedules, the names of leading sheep
raisers in various parts of the country
w ill be ascertained and agents sent to them
direct,. Attention will be directed chiefly
or entirely to those who are raising sheep
for wool, rather than for mutton, and this
will center the inquiry largely in the South
west and the intermountain region. The
Washington correspondent of the New York
Journal of Commerce says:-—
It is considered that if tariff duties are
adequate to protect those shepherds who
are raising sheep for wool, they are entirely
adequate to protect those whose primary
product is something else and to whom wool
is merely an incidental erop. In studying
the cost of the sheep farms in the way in
dicated. full attention is intended to he
given to by-products and the like, so as to
allow for the conflicting elements which
detract from accuracy of results under or
dinary conditions.
Such an inquiry as this ought to serve
rather strikingly to illustrate the futility
of trying to revise the tariff in a “scientific"
manner, or on a strict or even approximate
basis of difference in the cosls of production i
between this country and abroad. Let the
agents of the tariff board go into the far 1
Southwest. They will doubtless find some
sheep ranches located where land is so
cheap that wool can be produced profitably
in free competition with wool from the
plains of Argentina. The present wool
tariff or any wool tariff would offer exces
sive protection, and a “scientific" revision
would compel its abolition.
Rut in the same broad region may doubt
less he found sheep-grow ing where land and
other elements are more expensive and some
tariff protection may aeem' to be needed. Is
this case to determine what the wool duties
ahsll he, as against the Other case? Let the
investigation drift northeastward, say’ into
Ohio, formerly * great wool-growing stile,
where wool production has Keen on the
decline for years under high protection
Here will obviously be fouud plenty 0!