to their own efforts, and secondly to Russia. Hitherto Russia has got nothing in return for all these efforts except Bessarabia—a doubtful boon. She has not even got access to warm water and the world's oceans through the closed Dardanelles. In Sofia (Bulgaria's noble city which thirty years ago was a dirty Turkish village), there stands in the grand square before the Parliament house the equestrian statue of the Czar Liberator,-the Russian despot who freed Bulgaria in the war of 1877. The memories of which that statue is the symbol has up to this moment restrained the Bulgarian peasant from taking the side of Russia's enemies in the present war.

"And what was Austria's rôle during these nineteenth century wars of liberation? Her rôle was to remain neutral as between Turk and Christian, and to carry off as much as she could in the scramble. When Bosnia, an entirely Serb province, bravely revolted against the Turk, Austria took Bosnia for herself,-by occupation, in 1878, followed by a long war against the Serb inhabitants, and by formal annexation in 1908. She thus increased the number of South Slavs in her dominions to nearly seven millions, and so compensated herself for the Italian possessions which she had recently lost. Indeed her rule over the South Slavs is very much of the same character as her rule over the Italians two generations ago. But before saying anything more about AustroMagyar rule over South Slavs and Roumanians, I should like first to say a little about independent Roumania and independent Serbia.

THE RISE OF ROUMANIA

"The Roumanians regard themselves as a Latin people. Their language is akin to Italian, although it contains also many Slav words. The people are descended from the inhabitants of Dacia, the province which Trajan added to the Roman Empire. But there has of course. been much intermarriage with later Slav immigrants. Certainly the modern Roumanians have many distinctive Latin qualities, good and less good. They are utterly different from the Slav and Magyar races by whom they are surrounded. They are an isolated and somewhat pathetic Western phenomenon in this Eastern world. They would be happier on the Mediterranean than on the Euxine. They look for alliance to Italy, and they get their modern civilization straight from France. Bucharest, the Roumanian capital, has been built in imitation of Paris and the life there is imitation Parisian. The literature they read is French literature, their theatre and opera are on the French and Italian model. They know French so well that it is worth while to publish four of the Bucharest papers in that language. Though their commercial and financial connections are necessarily Austro-German owing to their geographic position, their sympathies and ideas are French and Italian.

"Bucharest is a much more considerable city than Sofia or Belgrade, and as an imitation of Paris it is by no means contemptible. For there

is a leisured and a wealthy class in Roumania which makes the life at Bucharest. There is no such leisured and wealthy class in Bulgaria or in Serbia. In those Balkan countries south of the Danube every peasant owns his own farm and there is no one to make him afraid. But among the Roumanians of independent Roumania, as among the Magyars of Hungary, there is a feudal or landlord class owning great estates much as in England.

"Historical reasons can be found for this marked difference in social structure. The Turkish rule was never so absolute in Hungary or in Roumania as it was south of the Danube in Serbia and in Bulgaria, when the Turks were in the Hungarian plain. The Magyar nobility retired into the mountains of Transylvania, whence they returned to their old estates when the Turks were expelled by Prince Eugene. In Roumania the Turks were little more than suzerains, ruling to some extent through the agency of the boyars. When the Turks withdrew, these native feudal classes remained supreme both in Hungary and in Roumania. But in Bulgaria and Serbia the Turks killed off the old native feudal nobility of which we read in the Kossovo ballads, and themselves became the landlords. So when the Turks were driven out of Serbia and Bulgaria, feudalism disappeared with them, and the purest peasant democracy was left behind as they retired.

"Hungary and Roumania both have their feudal class. But whereas the Magyar feudal oligarchy still bears sway in Hungarian politics, the boyars of free Roumania, though they still collect their rents, are losing their political supremacy. Their position is in fact rather like that of the English landlords. The boyars constitute the Conservative party in Roumanian politics, but it is now in opposition. The Liberal party is in office under M. Bratianu, and this party is dependent on the peasant's vote, with a program of land reform and universal suffrage. But both parties have united to arm the country with a view to an attack on Hungary in the present war, which may or may not be made if the military conditions grow sufficiently favorable to warrant intervention on the side of the Allies. The Government is cryptic and cautious, as it is responsible for events; but the Conservative opposition is clamoring for war against Austria to release the three and one-half millions of their brother Roumanians from the Magyar yoke.

HATRED OF MAGYARS

"In spite of the personal sympathies of the late King Carol, all parties in Roumania were and are in favor of hostilities against Hungary rather than against Russia,-if there are to be hostilities at all. This is the more remarkable because the Roumanians do not love the Russians. It is true that the Russians have often in the past fought their battles against the Turks, but in the great war of 1877-78, when the Roumanians fought most gallantly in the Plevna campaign, the Russians rewarded them evilly by taking away from them Bessarabia, a province

chiefly inhabited by Roumanians. The Roumanians cannot forgive or forget that. But little as they like the Russians, they like the Magyars still less, and many more of their brothers are subject to the Magyar yoke than to the Russian. Furthermore the Roumanians or Transylvania have supplied more statesmen and leaders of literature and of culture to the race than have the Roumanians at Bessarabia. For these reasons the free Roumanians think much more about liberating their brothers in Hungary than in liberating their brothers in Russia. Also their sympathies in the present war have been directed by close racial and intellectual sympathy that they feel with the Latin peoples of the West.

"From what I have been saying, you may perhaps think that Roumania is now concerned only with Hungary, and that she lies outside the Balkan sphere. And indeed she did not take part with the other Balkan States in the last war against Turkey in 1912. But in 1913 she intervened in the second Balkan war between the Christian allies. On that occasion the Roumanians marched against Bulgaria, because they could not stand by and see Serbia crushed, for Serbia is Roumania's natural ally against Austria-Hungary. The Roumanians had given Bulgaria fair warning that if she attacked Serbia, they would join in the war. In that respect the Roumanian's interference in the war of 1913 was more justified than most people suppose; but unfortunately they ended by taking for themselves some Bulgarian territory, inhabited by Bulgarians. They are now paying the penalty in the hostile attitude of Bulgaria, which is one of the reasons why they do not venture to attack Hungary.

SERBIA AND HER WOES

"Serbia is more deeply involved than Roumania, both in Balkan and in Austro-Hungarian politics. Her quarrel with Bulgaria is less easy to adjust. Her quarrel with Austria-Hungary has involved herself and all Europe in the most frightful war that has ever plagued this planet.

"Like Roumania, Serbia since the war of 1913 holds territory that the Bulgarians regard as rightly belonging to themselves-the vexed region of Northern Macedonia, including the Vardar Valley and coveted Monastir. This is a much more serious question than the differences between Roumania and Bulgaria, where a rectification of frontier could easily be arranged on obvious racial lines. Indeed, the possession of Monastir and the Vardar Valley is a more difficult question than either Serbian or Bulgarian sympathizers are wont to admit. Macedonia is a mixture of races, Greek, Turk, Albanian, Vlach, Bulgar, Serb, and Macedonian Slav. The Macedonian Slavs are the most important race, akin both to Serbian and Bulgarian, but not identical with either.

"The Serbian standpoint in regard to Macedonia is clear. The Vardar Valley and railway, terminating in friendly Greek territory at Salonika, is Serbia's only connection with the rest of the world. She

cannot part with it until she has got some other exit for her commerce not dominated by her enemy Austria, who blocks all her routes to the north and denies her expansion out to the Adriatic. And most unfortunately Serbia cannot satisfy Bulgaria by ceding Monastir, without at the same time giving up the Vardar valley, because the Vardar region lies between Monastir and Bulgaria. Monastir and the Vardar valley are the wrong side of one another, from the point of view of a bargain between Serbia and Bulgaria. Monastir is what the Bulgarians above all desire and the Vardar Valley is, at present, vital to Serbia. In the present war if it were not for the supplies which Serbia has got up the Vardar Valley from Western Europe, she would months ago have been conquered by Austria. And in time of peace the Vardar line is equally vital to her commerce and connection with the world. Austria blocks her to north and west, and drives her to seek an exit to the south. In 1913 Austria threatened us all with a European war if Serbia got an outlet on the Adriatic. Austria won her point then, but we have got the European war after all. Because Serbia was not allowed to get out into the Adriatic after the Turkish war, therefore she had to cling to Macedonia and the Greek connection as her only other outlet to the sea. At the same time Austria's attitude encouraged King Ferdinand of Bulgaria to attack Serbia and Greece, instead of going to arbitration. The consequences was the fatal war of 1913 between the Christian allies—a triumph for Austrian diplomacy. That war prevented and still prevents a Balkan league against Austria.

"Since that war the problem of Macedonia has become more difficult than ever. Many hold that the best solution would lie in the creation of a Serb and Croat state on the Adriatic, uniting Serbia and the South Slav provinces of Austria. If Serbia had thus secured her opening to the sea by the northwest, then the Vardar Valley to the south would cease to be a vital necessity for her, and she could cede it to Bulgaria.

THE GREAT POWERS' ERROR

"Let us be fair to these Balkan states. If they fought savage wars against each other, and if they now fail to agree, the issues are real and vital and difficult beyond the comprehension of those who have not studied them closely. I have shown that the Macedonian problem presented real difficulties to any peaceful solution. These difficulties, greatly aggravated by the policy of Austria, caused the second Balkan war. It was a wicked war, but there was far more reason for it than there is for the present European war between the Great Powers. The Great Powers might have prevented the second Balkan war, but instead of that Austria did her best to bring it about by denying Serbia access to the sea except by way of Macedonia and Salonika. Finally when Serbia had disappointed Austria by emerging victorious over Bulgaria, Austria proposed to Italy to make a wanton and unprovoked attack upon Serbia, in August, 1913, nearly a year before the Sarajevo murder. Italy

refused. This significant fact of secret diplomacy was recently revealed in the Italian Chamber by Signor Giolitti himself, to whom the proposal was made.

"Why is Austria-Hungary so jealous of Serbia? Because she has an uneasy conscience. She is the tyrant of the South Slav races within her own borders, and therefore an independent South Slav state must either be her vassal or her deadly foe. Serbia stands towards Austria in the same relation that little Piedmont once stood to her in Italy. Now that in the last few years Serbia has at length become a powerful and orderly state, Austria cannot sleep o' nights for thinking of her. As the usurping King said of Hamlet, ‘Like the hectic in my blood he rages.' It is for this reason that the Balkan and Austro-Hungarian problems have got to be studied together, if we would understand either aright.

ATROCITIES OF BOTH SIDES

"I repeat, let us be just to these Balkan races. While they were under the Turk we idealized them as Christian martyrs, and when they threw off that yoke we were surprised to find that after five hundred years of crushing barbarian rule they were not more perfect than ourselves. It is not the only case in history of an enslaved race being overidealized until it was set free, and then unreasonably abused for not coming up to impossible expectations. There is no doubt that the second Balkan war caused a great revulsion of feeling against Serbian, Greek, and Bulgarian. This was much enhanced when Mr. Carnegie's Commission published its Report on the Causes and Conduct of the Second Balkan War. I do not think the Report was the last word on the causes of the war, but it established beyond question the fact that atrocities had been committed in its conduct. But those atrocities have now to be set side by side with the atrocities committed by the Austro-Hungarian troops in Serbia, near Shabatz and Losnitza, in the middle days of August last year. The Austro-Hungarian troops then and there murdered two to three thousand civilians, burning many women and children alive, and committing the most ghoulish outrages on many others. I have visited the scenes of these events and I have the proofs and details under my hand. So far as I was able to ascertain, the Serbians have committed no reprisals. Their sixty thousand Austrian prisoners in Serbia have no stories of such reprisals, they have no complaints to make, and in the hospitals the Austrian wounded (as I have seen both at the base and the front) are given absolute equality of treatment with the Serbian. How, after this, are we to go on regarding the Serbs as savages who should for their own good be subjected to Austro-Hungarian rule?

"The deficiency in the higher branches of government, natural to a peasant democracy, put Serbia back for a generation or more. She had begun her independent existence sixty years before any part of Bulgaria was set free, and she ought therefore to have remained ahead in