3.

16

The

Na+ion

[Vol. gs,.Wr

2458

show how politicians

can dodge and cause without himself at the front of it
The genuine
hide.
Let
any
business
man try to get is to him unthinkable.
Mr. Roosevelts speech at Chicago on
sincere
crusader,
finally,
is
a man who
through
this
without
grinning:
Tuesday was intolerably long and repetitious.
And a large part of it came
The ,eystem to be adopted should have has a certain austerity of bearing. He
as
its basic principles soundness and elas- is not forever hobnobbing with people
from him for the hundredth time. Some
should flov~ forth
ticity. The currency
of his o-Id ideas he utters with-fresh em- readily at the demand of commercial activ- and clapping them on the shoulder. He
phasis: but it is evident that he has so ity, and retire as pronmtly when the d+. moves among them, rather, as one whose
It should be automnt- lips- had been touched by a live coal
frequently emptied himself of all he has mand diminishes,
ically
sufficient
for all of the legitimate
to. say that nothing remains wherewith needs of business in any section of the from off the altar. A jolly crusader is
he may burst upon a startled world. country. Only by such means can the coun- almost a contradiction
in terms. But
His new speech launching a new party try be freed from the danger of recurring that .is what Mr. Roosevelt essays to be.
panics. The control should be.lodged with
is only what we have heard from him the Government, and should be safeguarded It is fun for him to fight. grievous
in wearisome iteration before.
He thinks it bully to be
against manipulation
by Wall Street or the oppression.
It should be made impos- in the political
_ . To some, it is true, parts of his pro- large interests.
struggle.
And his obsible to use the machnery or perquisiies
gramme as indicated in this Chicago ad- of the currency system for any speculati-re vious love of excitement and joy in comdress will bring disquiet or alarm. He purposes. The country must be safeguard- bat necessarily shake ones faith in his
or unjust con- entire sincerity as a crusader.
He rehints at several ambitious proposals ed against overexpansion
traction
of either credit
or circulating
peats at Chicago his magnificent blague .
which, if th*ey were to be written down medium.
about Armageddon, but one all the while
.in concrete form and definitely pressed
Such hollow generalities,
however, feels him capable of saying cynically,
as legislation,
would mean something
like revolution. They would at least in- such absolute lack of definiteness, we after it is all over, as Disraeli did on
volve a sweeping away of established encounter in his entire speech. He turns one occasion, They call it the Battle
convictions and practices, and would in- from class to class, and section of the of Armageddon-but
let U-S go to
volve an enormous increase in the bur- country after se&on, offering to each a lunch.
happiness if it will
dens of taxation. But the careful read- kind of millennial
er will note that Mr. Roosevelt only only confide in his wisdom. But when
.UR. TAFT ON THE INSUEB.
hints at these things. He is vague and you ask fqr distinct proposals you get
The country long since left off looking
also hesitating.
Not one of these radi- only a fog-bank of words. Mr. Roosepublic
of making all to President Taft for kindling
cal doctrines does he fail to qualify, velt talks emphatically
hedging characteristically
at point after his political pledges take on the nature utterance, and it is not to be found in
point; and not one of them would he of a solemn contract with the people, his speech of acceptance. He has .many
delay in running
away from if it but if anybody sought to reduce them admirable qualities, but among them is
Even
.should appear politically
expedient to to precise writing he would find them not a gift for pungent writing.
what
he
sees
clearly
and
feels
deeply
be
do so.
all escaping in vapor.
does
not
express
in
a
way
to
go
home
We challenge anybody to read in full
It is not, however, in the light of a
that to the business and bosoms of! his felwhat he says about the tariff, the Trusts, speech-maker or platform-builder
No watchwords of debat,e
the hig t cost of living, the currency, Mr. Roosevelt asks the country to view low-citizens.
fall
from
his
pen. His is sometimes
and briiig away a definite idea of what him, but in that of a crusader.
The
he thinks or intends.
Take one test phrase, the spirit of a crusader, is of- weighty but never piercing. His speeches
case. The need of recasting our cur- ten on his lips. He would have us think often impress but do not thrill; and he
rency and banking system is now uni- of him as a man driven by holy zeal is a stranger to those words that are
To-day, as he himself is
versally admitted.
But as to the best to do what he is now setting about. His half-battles.
means of doing it there is sharp divi- speeches may not be overpowering and fully aware and plainly states, his party
sion of opinion. It is as sharp among his platform may not be perfect, but is face to face with a great crisis, yet
the Progressives as among the Repub- look at -the man himself and his md- his speech does not reveal the man of
licans or Democrats. One of Mr. Roose- tives and his mission! Well, it is much resource, vigor, and skill, with a certain
velts whole-hearted
and heavy-pursed easier to study Theodore Roosevelt as a &an of leadership, whom theRepublican
L
supporters,
Mr. George Perkins,
is crusader, than as a constructive states- situation cries out for. Hence there will
be disappointment
with his
strongly in favor of the Aldrich plan. man,.and we think that there is no dif- inevitably
But Dean Kirchwey, of the platform ficulty in showing that he ,.is fully as rather tame words at a juncture that
committee, declares that the Aldrich defective in the former guise as in the demands an assured and moving delivplan is the sum of villanies and cannot latter.
The real crusader must have a erance.
This is not to deny that many things
be approved except over his dead body. fanatic strain in him; but Mr. RooseNow, what light does the Colonel throw velt is wholly without it. He does not in Mr. Tafts speech are excellently con.
upon the matter? He knows all about it, rush forth as one impelled by an in- ceiyed. His warning against the ped- .
of course, and his judgments are true ward revelation; he plots and calculates dlers of panaceas is sound. Those who
and righteous altogether, but what does and poses. The true crusader is self- go about preaching an instant millem
he say? Why, he uses words that are forgetful;
hiscry is let my name rot nium are, when they are not self-deceiv.
ludicrously meaningless. They read like but let the thing itself be done. What ed, public deceivers, whose proposals
one of those burlesques of political plat- a glutton
of the limelight
Theodore are both futile and chaotic. The Presiforms which have been published to Roosevelt is, everybody now knows. A dent has a firm grasp of the true prin
A DEFECTIVE

CRUfUDER.

The Nation

Aug. 8, 19121

ciples of progress, which he well undel found to hurl at them. This the Prasj
standsmust
come aboutbyslow
an dent finds in the threatof t a r M change;
old argumentthat thc
cautious
experimentation,
proving
a andthehoary
success of theDemocraticpartywil
things.-andholdingfastthatwhich
1
mean panic and disaster. It seems hard
good, and never by hurricane method:
Thorodghly well-considered is also wha 1y credible t h a t Mr. Taft, after what hl
hassought tc do, andstillfavors,
iI
Mr. Taft has to say about maintainin
the way of pruningawaythe
excessel
the fundamental guarantees of the Cor
andenormities of theprotective tariff
stitution, In all its scope and adaptabi
should fall into this ancient vein of ca
ity, .and abouttheduty
of resistin;
lamity-howlmg, but he does, Ohio blooc
Stoutly every attempt t o undermine th
willtell.Broughtup
in thetraditior
independence
and
authority
of th
that the way to beat the Democrats
ir
courts In this last,matter, he 1s guilt
to accusethem
of intending t o clost
of unfarmessinassociating
Woodro5
all the mills and
r u m all the farmers
Wilson
wlth
Theodore
Roosevelt.
H8
Mr. Taft reverts to it in his speech of ac
should have known that Mr. Wilson ha
ceptance. He
attempts
once more t c
expressed himself strongly-against ax
identify
the
Republican
party
wit1
plyingtherecall
t o judges.And
nl
prosperity.Yethebetrays
a high13
one has ever charged that theDemocrat
uncertain
and
vacillating
idea
aboul
ic candidate has a particle of sympath
prosperity. In onepassagehe~nformh
with what President Taft properly call;
us that the Payne-Aldrich tariff blll has
Mr. Roosevelts grotesque notion;
gradually restored prosperity, since thc
about the recallof Judicial decisions..
panic of 1907. Only a littlefurther
The President speaks of the issue i r
on, however, he tells us that the accept.
this campaign, but does not make it en
mce of the Democratic tariff plan would
tirely certain what hethinks the issue is
postpone
indefinitely
the
coming
of
At one point he seems to make
it the pres
?rosperity Thus it Fppears thatthe
ervatlon of theRepublicanparty.
Ht
restored prosper~tyjs still t o come. But
referstotheissuepresentedto
thc
tt the end of his speech Mr. T a f t Points
Conventlon, as onewhichconstitutec
.o a prosperitywhichisjust
at Our
a c r m s in the partys life. This war
loor, and,for a momentforgetful of
forced by theattempt
t o violate thc
;he tariff, speaks of the need of discourthlrd-termtradition,and
also to nom1
g m g demagogic agitation, as the only
nate a manwho would havecommit
;hmgwhichcanpreventthe
enjoyted the party to radical proposalsinvolv,
nent by the whole
people of the great
ingdangerouschangesinourpreseni
n-osperity which the
and the
Constitutional
form
of representativc
)resent conditions ought to bring US.
governmentandourindependentjudi
Thls,as
George I11 said of Shake.
clary. In this view, theresult of the
;peare, is sad stuff. Yet-no one should
struggleat Chicago was t o save t h e
werlook thesignificance of it. It unRepublican
party
f o r Tuture
useful,
loubtedlymeansthattheRepdblicaa
n e m Thisleads Mr. Taft t o a long
nanagers
have
decided tomakeone
review of what that party has been and
nore dead set at the Presidency on the
done, togetherwithanaccount
of thc
ugh-protection
issue.
The
old a x u achievements of his own Administration.
nents will be refurbished, the old cries
In all this we get little but the ordinary
,evived, andthe old collectorswill
commonplaces of t h e callipaign orator,
ent out to fly the
fat ont of t h e prothoughthistimethepointingwlth
ected manufacturers. It
a choice of
prideis followed by aviewingwith
lattle-ground w h x G the Democrats
alarm of anunusualsort,for
to-day
lught to welcome.
the alarm is felt lest the RegubIican par.
ty may be, notmerelydefeatedbyits
OVERRIDING A VETO.
historic foe, but. destroyed by internai
factions.
The action of the Senate last week in
Evidently,
however,
the
President
,assing a bill over the President's head
feels that this appeal to keep the Repub- ;aye Mr. Taft a newexperience.
He
lican party alive is not enough by itself. tas vetoedimportant
tariff measures
Thatwilldo
as againstthe Roosevelt vith impunity. Even his disapproval of
deserters and traitors, but the campaign he Arizona-New Mexico Statehoodbill
is also to be waged against Democrats,
vas sustained.Buthlsrefusaltosign
and
therefore
some
missile
must
be A bill for the relief of certain persons

117having supplied labor and materials

theprosecution
of t h e work of constructing
the
Corbett
Tunnel
of theShoshone irrigation project, a piece of
legislationinvolvingthedisposition
of
the sum of $42,000, was too much, The
second days debate on the question resulted in the re-passage of the bill by a
vote of 42 to 17, and its reference t o t h e
House of Representatives.
The
merits of thesituationarenotentirely
clear.
Justice-loving
Senators
found
themselves o n opposingsides, and the
passing of this bill hasonlyprepared
the way for the Introduction of another,
of which formal notice was given In advance of thevoting. Plain citizenswill
be a t a loss t o understand how so much
smoke can arise from so little apparent
fire, f o r therewas
no partisanshipto
complrcate the
discussion
and
make
stubborn the legislators.
The facts behlnd the bill are neithel;
numerous nor doubtful. A contractor,
who hadundertaken
t o constructthe
CorbettTunnel for $750,000, was soon
made aware that he had put in too low
I bid.Accordingly,
whenhehad
completed about 1 6 per cent. of t h e work, h e
Failed. ThereupontheGovernment
finished the task, and proceeded to sue the
iefaultmgcontractor
on his bond
L75,OOO. Acrossbillwasthen
Eled by
;he concern that sold a portion Of the
3quipment t o the contractor, and a ten,atmeagreementwasreachedthat
in:luded thepayment of $42,000 by t h e
londsmen
to
the
Government.
This,
lowever,
left
unprotected
the small
.radesmeninMontanaandWyoming
vho had furnished supplies t o t h e con,ractor and even cashed time-checks for
11s laborers. Their claims amounted to
;42,000 also. Hence the bill, which gave
,hese creditors priority over t h e GovernDent In respect of - their losses. But
heultlmate loser, even so, Would not
le theGovernment.Thelast
Clause i n
hebill
1s a provisothat
n o action
,rosecuted under this act
shall involve
he United States in a n y expense. What
vould happen would simply be the shiftng of thisthreatenedloss
Of $162,000,
irst from the trustlng citizens who are
facing it t o theGovernment,and
hen from the Government to future setlers on the tract of land served by the
unnel or on the total irrigable acreage
,f t h e Shoshone
project.
This w c d d
crease the charge for the land 33 0 1 91
ents an acre, according to the alterna-

I18
tive adopted, and since the averageholding is sixty acres, this would make his
l a n d cost the farmer $19.80 more at the
least, and possibly $54.60.
Here
are
obviously
several
pretty
problems. Is it right to saddle the losses
of oneset of menuponanotherset?
Wouldtheaddition
of $19.80 o r $54.60
to the price of the land take away its
attraction f o r practicalfarmers,?
Did
notthetradesmenassumetherisk
in
furnishingsuppliesandcashingtimechecks? To thislastquestion.it
is replied thattheywererelying
on the
Government, in case of any failure on
thepart of thecontractor.Theywere
not intimately acquainted with the technicalities,buttheyknewtheywere
dealing
with
a contractor
with
the
UnitedStates.
It was
evenasserted
that the unlucky contractor himself had
been misled by therepresentation of
Government officials, and so was not altogethertoblameforhisimpossible
contract.PresidentTaft,
upon theadvice of hisSecretary
of theInterior,
vetoed the bill upon the ground that
it
~.
was of retroactive character and imposed an additional burden upon certain of
the settlers. Everybody agreed
that the
small tradesmen had suffered hardship.
The President preferred to let them suffer it toimposing i t upon the settlers.
The Senate apparently prefers to let the
settlers suffer it. And a bill is t o be introduced relievmg the project, that is,
the
settlers,
from
the
burden.
If
it
passes, the
kind-hearted
Government
will in the end bear this burden, as
it
bears so manyothers,andthematter
will thus have happily progressed
To where beyond these voices there

peace.

ButbeforetheSenatemade
up its
mindtopassthebilloverthe
veto, it
indulgedin some debate upon t h e veto
poweritself.SenatorCumminsled
off
i n thls branch of t h e discussion with an
observation
that
provoked
unusually
pointed
comment.
I do
not
understand, hesaid,flatly,
that t h e veto
power given by our Constitution to
the
President ought to be used in order t c
overthrowthe
mill of Congress in re.
spect to such a measure. H e continued:
I do not believe that the veto power in a
free country 1s Intendedtoauthorize
thc
Executive t o vetoeverymeasurewhich
he
mould have opposed
had he been a merabe1
of the legislative trlbunal -which passed
it
I thlnk we oughtto
pass this bill
notmithstandmgtheveto
of t h e Presldenf
simply,
f o r no other reason, because
Congress has determined that
shallbe-

. . .

micome a lam, and because it is not one of pany i n 1907do the majority and
the cases in whwh aPresident
ought t o nority reports conflict. The minority beinterpose hls veto.

iieves thatthedinnerconferences
of
Irust andindependentmanagerswere
the
shadow
of priceunderstandings
rather than their substance; but it con;iderably modifies the scope of this conAusion by saying that there 1s complete accord as topricesbetweenthe
R u s t a n d its rivals, and that in genertl, the United States Steel Corporation
jets the prices and the independents follow. As tothe
episode of 1907, the
ninorlty believes it to have %ut little
practicalbearing on theseriousissues
,f which we are treating, and dissents
irom the majoritys conclusion without
further comment.
The findings of fact on which there is
:omplete agreement cover wide ground.
They are not new discoveries; we point2d out,whentheCommitteebeganits
worJi, that there could be little that had
not, in one way or another, been brought
alreadytopublic
knowledge.
the
RE- hearingshave
at leasthad the effect,
when taken along with the earlier hearTheso-calledStanleyCommittee
of ings by theIndustrial Commission. of
theHouse
of Representativeswasapziving tofactswhichweregenerally
pointedinMay of last year t o investi- known the seal of expert testimony. Of
gatetheUnitedStatesSteelCorporathese facts, the most essential are as foltlons history, with a view to throwing Lows: Thegreatconsolidationswhich
light on its allegedviolations
of the xlminated
in
the
billion-dollar
steel
Anti-Trust law, anditsrelationswith
merger were intended by their authors,
independentproducers,withrailways,
among otherthings,torestrict
compewith
interlocking
directorates,
wlth
;itlonandmaintainprices:andtheir
StockExchangeoperations,with
pro- stock wasprodigiouslyandintentionmotingsyndicates,
and withfinancial
f o r promcswatered. The sum paid
p a n m . It has conducted a n exhaustive :ion services was so- excessive as t o bear,
series of public hearings during the fif- wen in the language.of the minority r e
gort, no relationwhatevertotheserteen past months, in which much very
vice rendered, the risk run, and the capfrank
testimony
has
been given
.taladvanced.Thesteelindustryitfinanciersconnectedwiththecorporatlon and with the steel industry, and it ;elf, as well as the investing public, h a s
suffered serious detriment from theperhas now submitted its report.
The findings of the Committees mem- :istent and pernicious practice of stock
manipulation and stock inflatlon by cerbers, so faras.regardstheremedial
legislation suggested for the evils which ;ain financiers who had secured thecomof s o large
they believe t o have been disclosed, are ,leteandabsolutemastery
not unanimous; there is, in fact, so wide 3 p a r t of this great business. The coma divergence of opinion as to necessitatc pany possesses enormouscontrolover
three distinct reports. But
on the ques otheroutsideenterpr~sesthroughthe
system of interlocking
dlrectorqtes
tion of facts,and o n the question
the use of the holding-company dewhat those facts mean, there is surpris
inglycompleteagreement.
In only twr vice.
Themajorityreportholds
that the
essential
considerations-the
influence
dinnerdJ
were
instituted
as
a
of the Gary dinners on arbitrary main Gary
tenance of prices and the culpability 01 meansfornotifyingindependentproPresident Roosevelt in agreeing not
t c ducers of mhat theSteelCarporations
block theSteelCorporations
purchaac attitude was, and f o r impressing upon
concernedthat
it mas thepart Of
of theTennessee
Coal andIron Corm
This position was a t once challenged.
I understand,remarkedSenator
Sutherland, the alternative of t h e veto
istheapproval
01 a bill.
Does the
SenatorthinkthePresidentoughtta
approve a bill which he, in fact, does not
approve?But the SenatorfromIova
wasnot t o becaught.
I do, most emphatically, he replied.
Senator
Root
thenwantedtoknow
upon what Mr.
Cummins based his extraordinary proposition, and cited Mr. Clevelands vetoes
of priva.tepension bills, separateand
relatively
insignificant
measures, as
also the practice of giving Governors the
authoritytovetoitems
in appropriation bllls. The answer of the Iowa Senator was not very specific, but for a few
momentsthedebatetook
an enjoyable
turn into the preserves of political philosophy.

Aug. 8,

19121

wlsdomandprudencetogovernthemselvesaccordingly.
It finds that the
Tennessee Coal purchase of 1907 was
in violation of the law; that President
Roosevelthad no right t o condoneor
encourage its violation, thztthepurchaseTvas-notnecessary
t o stop t h e
panic,anddid
not stop It. InrelectIng the
absurdlties
which
the
Steel
Trust financiers themselves have uttered
regarding
that
purchase
as t h e sole
means of averting general financial ruin,
theCommittee,fortunately,refuses
to
endorse the other and greater absurdity,
that the whole panlc of 1907 was caused
bytheSteelTrustinsiders
in order
to capture the Tennessee Coal.
The body of evidence supporting these
variousconclusionscanhardlybeignoredhereafter,
in discussions of t h e
generalsublect.Thequestion
of reme d y is another matter. The Committees
maJorltyadvocateswidepublicity,fre<queutreports on thecompanybythe
Commissioner of Corporations,andthe
prohibition of ownership of interstate
railwayenterprisesbyindustrial
concerns. It suggestsamendments of the
Anti-Trustlaw,wherebypartiesinJuriOUSIYaffected by trade combinations may
bring suit under the law, equally wlth
t h e official Covern7ieD.t prosecutors; and
it proposes that where restraint of trade
shall have been establishedin t h e course
of a suit, the burden of proving reasonableness shall rest on thepartywho
.contends that the restraint is reasonable.
It recommends a billprohibitingdlrectors in companies
manufacturing
railway steel or minlng coal from servl n g on - t h e boards of interstaterailways. The minority report recommends
,an Interstate Commission of Industry,
which shall supervise interstate corporations and, in general, fix prices f o r the
goods of such
corporations
when
existingpricesare
found t o be unreasonable by some competent authority to
bo determined
hereafter.
This shad.owy repetition of the notion thrown out
In his
evidencebyJudge
Gary, last
year, the majority report positively disapproves, remarking that the real evils
.of the situation could not be cured by
s m h an expedient, and that such
control, semi- socialistic^ in its nature, is
.beyond the power vested by the Constitution in the Federal Congress. There
canbe-littledoubtthat
this last-men;tionedproposalwillbethefocus
of a
good deal of controversy in the next3w

1-1
9
months. To people who have any doubt
aboutthemerits
of t h e suggestion, it
may be well t o recall the pllain and incmve comment of the veteran jurist and
legislator,ex-SenatorEdmunds,in
his
statement of last December:
Such- a commlsslon. substituted for the
courts of Justice, necessarily lmphes that
1~ is t o exerclse a discretion 1n granting
o r wvlthholding privileges that are not defined by law; and It is clear, from human
experience, that it would be in danger of
becomlng the victlm of political influences

BEITISE LNIVERLSITY P R O B L E S .

T o mostAmericans,
theuniversities
of Great
Britain
to-day
are
neither
more nor fewerthantheywere
fifty
years ago, o r thantheywillbeEfty
years hence. Oxford and Cambridge, and
if one thinks a second time, Edlnburgh,
they have always been, and Oxford and
Cambridge
and
Edinburgh
they
will
continue to be. To think otherwise
would be as difficult as to imagine direct
primariesformembers
of Parliament.
Yet the facts are far different.Within
thelastthirty-fiveyears
no less t h a n
seven universities have been founded in
England, five of themsince 1899; and
the character of the Unlversity of London ha.s been
transformed.
Birmipgham, Bristo!, Leeds, Liverpool. Manchester,
and
Sheffield, alongwithWales,
now
boast
institutions
of learning
which, if lacking
the
prestige
that
crownstheirolderrivals,have
a freedom from the p%st and an ambitlon for
the future that have already given them
a speclalplaceintheworld
of scholarship.Nor has theirappearance been
without effect upon theancientestablishments. F o r theircreationhasbeen
more t h a n a n evidence of localaspiration. It is a symptom of dissatisfaction
with the rigid policy t h a t has been followed so consistently at Oxford
and
Cambridge,whichinconsequencehave
felt compelled toadmitmodlficatlons
here and there.
This new and rapid development has
brought novel problems in its wake, and
these have just been the subject
of consideration .at a Congress of the Universities of the Empire. Some of these are
parallel to problems
of our omn, one such
being the question
of division of work
amonguniversities.Thenewuniversities
are
much
more
nar;owly
limited in resources than the older universities. For this reasontheycannot
at-

tempt t o cover theentire field of knowledge. What,then,shalltheydo?The

spirit of modern efficiency answers, Specialize, Divide, and Conquer. Why should
every university have a School of Medicineor of Law?Butthereareobstacles. T o those who argue f o r the establishment of some outside central authoritywhichshallsaytooneinstitutlon,
Do this, and to another, Do not do this,
but do that, itisrepliedthatonly
theendowment
of such a body with
omnisclence could make its decrees safe.
One speaker put the matter concretely:
A great teacher arlses In some subJectno one can foresee whcge It w111 b e l h e attracts students to hear hlm, draws t o hls
lectures and laboratorles men keen in the
purswit of learnlnq and science, whose researches he wlll dlrect. encourage, and
stlmulate A wise university will provide
h1m with assistants, enlarge h1s laborato-

n e s , provide the

equipment he
even
when It lnvolves serious strain on itsresourc~es. Prlvate donorsmay then step in
and aid
the
Sometlmes, agaln, a
private donor Interested ~n particular
a
university may provlde a handsome endonrment f o r some special branch of work In It

The teachmg activity of our own ProfessorGildersleevewasinstanced

ashaving virtually marked an epoch.
has
donesomethinginAmericatorevive
the days of the great Heyne, who is said
to havetrained
in Germanyoverone
hundrsd professors of philology.
The same problem is discussed
on its
reverseside
by WilliamLoweBryan,
president of the University of Indiana,
in a recent number of Sczence. &e calls
attention, not to the limitations
of .the
institution of modestresources,butto
the peril that the richest university
is
m, of so multiplyingthelines
of its
work that all the lines of its work shall
be lowered in quality. As a remedy, he
suggests
that
heads
of departments
should resist the constant temptation to
add
courses
of elementary
collegiate
grade, m order, as thephase
is, t o
cover thegroundrepresentedbythe
department; that they should also consider well before offering new electlves;
that graduate professors should be equally carefulinprovidingequipmentfor
research over wide ranges of their fields,
and that trustees should
be slow t o increase
departments
and
schools. H i s
warning is almost a confession t h a t we
havealreadybeenguilty
of doingthe
tbings that these English educators are
hopingtoprevent.Certainlyitisone
moreindication
of theturning of the
ttdeinthedirection
of qualityrather

The

12-O

than quantity. An approach towards the

solution of the problem as it exists in
England was made by a speaker who
urged that there was a minimum of
equipment for any university, including
courses in certain languages and literatures, history and philosophy, mathematics and the main science, physics
and chemistry. What lay beyond these
depended upon local conditions, geographical as well as financial.
Especially interesting to an American
is the discussion of the doctors degree
for England.
One speaker at the congress was so bold as to ask why the
English universities should not offer the
degree, and thus .datch many Americans
who now ignore Oxford and Cambridge
for the German universities. The growth
of graduate students in this country
during recent years was characterized
as one of the most remarkable phenomena in the history of higher education
among us. It was this very fact, however, that put these educators on their
guard respecting
the eagerly-sought
symbol, for they recognized that its
popularity in the United States is too
intimately
connected with its financial
value, and quoted President
Butler
upon the development of a deplorable
form of educational snobbery which insists that a candidate for appointment
to a teaching position shall have gained
the privilege of writing the letters Ph.D.
after his name. If one were to generalize about British education on. o
f~ibri grounds, one would be apt to
argue that educators being by nature
slow to move, and Britons being by nature devoted to standing still, British
education must inevitably be the height
of conservatism. If this was true once,
the proceedings of the recent congress
are enough to disprove it now.

A V(S!.E~ A
(A

VOT$

Third

FOR

Pa&

THAT.

Version.)

there a visionary wight

Who dreams reform an a that?
Well humor him wi promises:
A votes a vote for a that.
For a that an a that,
Utopian schemes, an a that.
Our platform will hold a his whims;
IS

A votes

a vote

for

a that.

What though a malcontent he be,

A radical,

an a that?

Were bound to win his sympathy:

A votes a vote for a that.
For
His

a that an a that,
red flag, an a that,
Well make concessions
to his
A votes a vote for a that.

kind;

Nation

[Vol. 95, No. 2458

Wi those who seek for patronage,

Aspiring chiefs, an a that,
Wi a such we make common cause;

I practitioners who first learned to write

in Oxford classrooms. But nearly all of
them have specialized in some particuA vote;
a vote for a that.
lar type of article.
Most of them have
For a that an a that,
succumbed to the fascination
of poliTheir
sordid aims, an a that,
tics, and chastise the Government or the
Weve got to flatter
their
poor hopes;
A votes, a vote for a that.
Opposition in daily or nightly editorials.
A few, like Hilaire Belloc, have made
Aristocrats
an hoi polloi.
their mark in the art of the literary
Een suffragists, an a that,
Well
find a plank to please them a;
causerie. Some, like Thomas Seccombe
A votes a vote for a that.
and J. C. Bailey, give themselves mainly
For a that an a that,
to literary
criticism
proper.
Several
Divergent
views, an a that,
others, following the lead of the late G.
Well win wi our elastic
clause:
W. Steevens, have magniEed the office of
A votes a vote for a that.
the descriptive reporter.
But we look
0. MORES.
in vain for any one who, even within
journalism itself, can compass the gamut
.
of Andrew Lang.
ANDREW LANGS GENIUS.
I His death reminds us of a change that
has been quietly passing over journalism
LONDON, July-26.
itself.
For an Andrew Lang, as the
You have only to stretch
out your hand Gzmdkm
acutely points out, there
in literature,
and whatever
it strikes
you must always be room in the newspapers,
can support yourself upon-by making, say, but in future it will probably be as the
three
guineas
out of it.
Whether
it be
star writer of signed articles rather
a cricket
match
at Lords,
or a theological
novel, or a big trout very nearly caught than as the anonymous journalist who
makes his daily or weekly contribution
at the nest,
or a new theory
of creation,
to the reputation of his paper.
It is
matters
nothing
to you.
Given the subject,
that in recent years Mr.
YOU provide
the copy,
and while
you are significant
work mainly
T>utting a little water into your ink-bottle Langs own journalistic
YOU decide whether
it is to be a ballade,
took the form of signed articles in. the
or a newspaper
brochure,
or a St. An- Mor-ning
Post and elsewhere, whereas
drews
lecture,
or an article
for the Coa- probably his best work in this line was
tempom-u.
If it may be any of these, you done as an anonymous member of the
prefer nowadays (alas!) to make it a news- regular staff of the Da@ News in, its
Paper leader, because YOU can dash these palmy days. In the eighties that jourd
off as easily
as some smoke cigarettes.
nal owed much of its success to the briE
Thus -wrote, nearly twenty-five years liant non-political articles that appearago, the anonymous author of an open ed day by day in its editorial columns,
letter to Andrew Lang. We know but it was not until selections of them
not, said the same candid friend, whe- were reprinted in a book of Lost Leadther to call YOU a great poet, critic, es- ers that the general reader knew he
sayist, novelist, scientist, journalist, or was indebted for them to Andrew Lang.
all those in one, or nearly all, but not Nowadays editorial
writing, except on
quite any. At the time these words political topics, has become so scrappy
were written Mr. Lang had yet to make that, except in the Tin&es and the i@unhis first ventures in biography, history, ch&er Guarclian, the well-informed and
and psychical research. Nor would the brightly written leading article on genaddition of these items complete the list eral subjects is almost extinct.
Even
of his achievements, for the writer of the old-established quarterlies have at
this appreciation
had strangely
over- last
abandoned. their
tradition
of
looked one of his earliest claims to dis- anonymity.
A few years ago the Qzcnrtinction-his
scholarly and artistic work terly Review began to admit tignecl conas a translator of ancient classics.
tributions, and now the EdinburgJL ReI There is left to us no man of letters view has followed suit under its new
who runs the risk of receiving a similar editor, Harold Cox.
compliment.
Versatile men there reThe lighter side of Andrew Langs
main, but nobody with quite the versa- output was really the recreation of an
tility of Andrew Lang. Take, for exam- active mind that found in ballades and
ple, the anthropologists.
It is curious causeries a relief from more serious
to note how many of them have come tasks. He had always a big book or
to their research into primitive customs two on hand, says Richard Whiteing,
through their Greek studies. J. G. Fraz- a former colleague on the Daily News,
er, F. B. Jevons, and more recently R. and his newspaper and magazine artiR. Marett, had all of them won distinc- cles, his endless gossip on all the hightion
in pure classics before they began ways
and byways of literature, came as
to investigate totems. But there is no- mere chips from a scholars workshop.
body nowadays who can turn from dis- The reading and thinking had been done
cussions of the meaning of myths to the elsewhere.
This fulness of resources,
concoction
of Rhymes 5 la Mode or the plus his lightness of touch, gave him his
compilation of Fairy Books of whatever remarkable facility. I have seen him,
color.
continues Mr. Whiteing, get his marchJournalism, too, employs scores Of ing orders for a column leader, sit down