for the same." There was to be absolutely free competition and no advantage given to competitors of one nationality over those of another.

It is needless to pursue this part of the subject. It is clear that the nationality of Morocco was to be intact and that all the Powers were to be on an equal footing as to exploitation.

Nothing apparently could be fairer or more satisfactory. What followed? The next act was the bombardment on 30 July 1907 by a French man of war of Casablanca on the west coast of Morocco because of a slight difficulty which was caused, it is understood, by acts in a cemetery, which the Moors resented. Houses were knocked down, a number of inhabitants killed, and a force landed. This was followed in 1911 by a French expedition of 16,000 men to Fez on the pretext that the lives of foreigners in Fez were in danger. The expedition, after a futile resistance by the Moors, arrived to find the foreigners unharmed, and that there had been no danger. But France was now in military occupation, at an expense, officially stated in the French parliament of $29,000,000. And this is not the end: the Moors have risen and new military preparations are making. When it is remembered that French expenditure equals that of the United States; that the debt is six times as great and the population but about two fifths, the wisdom of her adventure would seem doubtful. It is pretty evident that France is embarked in a very serious and expensive project, and there is no telling also what the effect will be upon Mohammedans in general.

Says Mr. Morel, again in the British review mentioned:

It was surely infantile to imagine that Germany was any more likely in 1911 than she was in 1904-05 to agree to France securing Morocco without positive guarantees as to the open door, and without paying her bill of compensation even as France had found it necessary to pay the British, Spanish and Italian bills. To Britain, relief in Egypt; to Spain almost the entire northern and part of the Atlantic coasts of Morocco, with a goodly slice of hinterland thrown in; to Italy, a free hand in Tripoli; to Germany-nothing. The pact of Algeciras to which Germany and ourselves [i. e., Great Britain] were signatories and in which Germany had a peculiar interest was torn up and thrown to the winds.

As a protest Germany sent the Panther to Agadir, Spain having already occupied Larache.

It is hardly too much to say that a large part of the British press lost

its head entirely, declaring it insufferable that Germany should do anything to establish a naval base upon the flank of British commerce, Agadir being about as reasonable a point to develop a naval base as would be the moon.

A report that Germany had demanded compensation in the Congo caused an additional inflammation of British sentiment which had voice in the London press. The day after a particularly inflaming article in The Times, the Chancellor of the Exchequer made a speech at the Mansion House which was a clear and direct threat of war against Germany. The destruction of the Algeciras agreement by France was wholly ignored and England was ready apparently to plunge Europe into a great war to uphold the action of the Power which had overturned the agreement to which both England herself and Germany were parties.

Meanwhile by England's understanding with Russia, Persia, which gave fair promise of establishing a wholesome government, has been divided into "Spheres of Influence" by these two Powers, and so far as the ordinary man can see, has no longer any independence. And Italy driven by the appropriation of Egypt and of Algiers, Tunis and Morocco, seized the only remaining chance in Africa and occupied Tripoli at the cost of an expensive and still continuing war. The Balkans and the whole of southeastern Europe are, we know, but a slumbering volcano.

I submit that this is a melancholy outlook for the principles of international arbitration. In all that I have mentioned I can, equally with Mr. Low, see no sign of ethical consideration. The whole has been a wave of self-interest apparently as irresistible as a Saharan sand wave.

The principal nations of Europe stand to-day with hands on swordhilt all on account of the despoilment of a nationality which, because it is from our point of view but half-civilized, is proper prey for the strongest, this strongest in this instance, because she is backed by Great Britain, being France. Deep feeling has been aroused in Germany, and we see the two foremost nations of Europe, the two most highly civilized nations of the world, spending vast sums; the one striving to overtake, the other striving to preserve, supremacy in maritime power. Can anyone say that the game of Morocco was worth the candle? Can anyone say that the swallowing up of a backward nationality for extension of trade and influence is worth a great European war? is worth an abiding

hate between two great kindred nations which should be competing in civilization instead of in hate? Is England to be destroyed by Germany, or Germany to be destroyed by England, or France to disappear as France because the special trader wants an extension of his field? This is the bald analysis of what has happened, and a true statement of the history of the last few years. It would seem that the words Delenda est Cartago must be in the heart of many, both German and English. But why this feeling? The Englishman cannot hate the German per se, nor the German the Englishman to the extent of desiring the one to annihilate the other. There must be some deep and most powerful reason which does not appear upon the surface of things apart from personality. This reason is in that ever most potent cause of international dissension trade jealousy, though trade is the creator of our civilization and in itself the most beneficent of human institutions.

Germans, as we all know, have ceased to emigrate as they did. Since 1870 thay have to a great degree remained at home and their energies have been turned toward manufactures. There has been a transformation in character of industry, in wealth, in the very face of the land itself, as wonderful perhaps as any in the history of the world.

There are now in Germany some 60,000,000 on a territory about equal to North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia and Florida taken together. In Great Britain and Ireland are 45,000,000 on an area just about that of New Mexico, who have illimitable possibilities of expansion within the British Empire. Nearly a million more Germans will be in the world in 1913 than in 1912, for that is the country's natural increase. Fifteen years hence there will be a full 80,000,000 of Germans on land which will now grow food for but 60,000,000. The question in the mind of every thoughtful German is: Whence shall come the trade which shall support their extra millions? Where shall they go? Where shall they sell? What shall become of their ever-increasing manufactures? The crux of the situation lies in this last inquiry, which is one common to all the great manufacturing nations. To secure and further their trade the vicious principle of what is called "Spheres of Influence" has been devised. The expression in itself epitomizes the whole of the present great difficulties. It accounts for the Moroccan, Tripolitan, Egyptian, Manchurian and Persian questions, three of which are so agitating the

world at the moment. And the opposition of Great Britain and Germany in these fundamentally vicious partitions which have been going on has brought about a situation which threatens to force war, despite all reason.

The former, too, is coquetting in a marked manner with her ancient foe, Russia. The status of Persia is one of the results. Does the great combination which now forms the triple entente, propose, in order to support their several spheres of influence, to fence in or reduce Germany to nullity? If so, and if as a result of a gigantic war Germany should succumb, Russia would be the great beneficiary. Europe would be dominated by the Slav. Can we wonder that Germany adds two army corps and increases her fleet? Is she not only following the great law of selfpreservation against what would seem the fatuous action of other Powers whose true interest, if a reduction in armaments is desirable, is to give all equal opportunities for trade and investments with those who have extended their holdings so enormously? Without such a principle there can be no real peace. This it seems to me is the plain matter of fact with which we have to reckon. In the face of the events of last summer, arbitration must be but the pursuit of a will o' the wisp. To make it really effective we must remove, as far as may be, the causes of the violent antagonisms which but a few months ago came so near producing a world convulsion and still threaten one. Our chief propaganda must thus be with the foreign offices of the Powers. It is they which need missionizing as much or more than the heathen. They are all, through designs upon others, through their efforts to advance their own supposed interests, the great enemies of peace.

What follows is not a propaganda of free trade in the usual acceptation of the term, although I am a free-trader in the broadest sense. The question is incidental, but vitally incidental, to that of peace. I believe that were men free to go and come and trade without the artificial hindrances which have been set up (and which, be it said, have slowly lessened from age to age), a vastly different condition from the point of view of peace would be created. Cobden saw with clear vision when he foretold that freedom of trade would finally be the great factor which would make for peace. The world situation which I have just sketched, and which has been produced by the very contravention of his dictum,

is the strongest proof of its truth. If peace is to come at all throughout the world, it will not come until we shall have everywhere the open door, with no more restriction upon trade than there is upon the swapping of penknives. The custom-house and special advantage are the principal great opponents of peace. If all were equally free to trade and exploit there would be no demanding of expansion or special spheres of influence. I have only used Germany to point a moral, as it is she who suffers most under the prevailing system. It is to-day perhaps the foremost of the races productive of civilization. It is foremost in chemistry, hygiene, in municipal organization and municipal government and in most other things which make for the material uplift, at least, of man. It is a great race close akin to the Anglo-Saxon. Can anyone say that its spread I would be to the detriment of the human race? or that its decadence would not be an injury to all? If there were millions of Germans in Africa and in South America, citizens of the countries to which they are emigrants, would Africa and South America be the worse? Their presence there would not mean the extension of the hegemony of the German Empire any more than does the presence of millions of Germans in the United States. But if the principle of "Spheres of Influence" is to hold, we find the one nation which most needs an outlet, prevented by circumstances which can only be overcome, as things now are, by war. Russia has a practically unlimited area, Great Britain has made almost a third of the world British, France, at a standstill in population, has a colonial area nearly a third larger than the United States. Looked at in this way, one can understand somewhat German feeling, and the tension which is now of so threatening a character. Shall it continue or shall the nations agree to a policy which shall mitigate the commercial rivalry which is at the bottom of it all?

By so much as in physical disease prevention is better than cure, so would be a firm step toward the removal of the causes of quarrels which lead to war instead of curing the quarrels after they have been set agoing. Coming thus to a concrete suggestion: Would it not be within the range of the possible to bring about an international conference with the object of throwing open to absolute equality of trade and opportunity, all of the vast territories belonging to barbarous and backward peoples which have been appropriated in late years as special spheres of interest? Why