check amounted to $186. As the work. ers in the camp were paid off for the week's Christmas holiday, given in all Western logging operations, the superintendent called me in and asked me if I was returning after New Year's. I assured him that I would be back. "All right," he said. "I've noticed that you never take a drink."

"No," I answered, "I haven't so far in life. I don't intend to start in this week."

I was curious to know why the superintendent asked me the question, but, on my query, he answered: "I take it that you must be green in the woods, and I just wanted to tell you that while you're downtown if you don't 'blow your money' you'll likely have a fair amount of change left when the vacation is over."

"Don't worry about that," I replied: "I'm not going to spend any of it, only for a hotel, a few picture shows, and a ticket back."

"No! no!" growled the superintendent. "I didn't want an oration on what you're going to do with it, but I've noticed that you're not familiar with the customs of the woods. While you're in town you'll continually meet some of the boys from the camp who are broke. They may ask you for a few dollars. When they do, don't ask any questions: just give it to them, as long as it is in small amounts, and don't worry about it; you'll get it back."

The superintendent was right. During the week I spent in town it seemed to me that the lumberjacks had spent their money with remarkable suddenness. Practically every man I ran into passed a very friendly greeting with a string attached, the string being a good-natured request for "a coupla dollars."

On the evening of the third day I counted up. I had just about enough left to get back. However, before I reached the boat I had given out $10 more to three friends who hadn't fared very well in the various "spending academies" dotting the streets in the famous skid-road section below the totem-pole in the "Queen City."

Yet I was buoyed up with the positive assurance of the superintendent that I would get it all back. "Maybe not this month," he told me, "but it'll all come back in the course of two or three pay days." But during the following week, bounding through the brush with the fourteen to twenty foot heavy "choker" cables at $3.30 a day, I couldn't help but become a little pessimistic about "getting it all back." Before the first of the month rolled around I was downright nervous, and I frankly told the superintendent that I had regretted the fact many times that my hundred and fiftyodd dollars I had loaned out were not safely reposing in a savings bank.

"Just as good where it is," he replied. "The savings bank might 'bust,' but these lumberjacks that you have loaned this money to aren't going to all die at once."

I knew that the loans were widely distributed. I hadn't kept track. I didn't know just how many men owed me, nor what amounts. In all, I think there were about thirty-five or forty loans, ranging from one dollar to fifteen. But what made me most nervous was the fact that not over thirty per cent of our crew had come back. A goodly part of the men I had loaned money to had gone out to other camps in various parts of the State. I didn't even know the names of most of them, and certainly hadn't the slightest idea where they had gone.

SHERMAN

ROGERS'S

ALASKAN
ARTICLES

BEGIN

IN
NEXT
WEEK'S
ISSUE.

THEY

HAVE

A

VITAL

BEARING

ON

THE

FUTURE

OF

A

GREAT

TERRITORY

To my intense surprise, on the third, fourth, and fifth of the first month my mail had the appearance of a collection agency. It seemed that all of a sudden I had become decidedly popular somewhere. Most of the envelopes contained a bill. Very few of them any other notice-a one-dollar bill, a two-dollar bill, or a five-dollar bill-leaving me no wiser than before as to who had sent it. I got back over a hundred dollars that first month. By March 1 a few odd onedollar and two-dollar bills had come in. By March 5 the entire amount had come back with the exception of one $7 loan and a $5 loan. I figured, by March 10, that I had probably lost the last.

During March a man in our camp was badly hurt, and I took him to the hospi tal. We arrived at the institution at about one o'clock in the morning. I remained long enough to see him into the ward reserved for men hurt in logging operations. As I entered the ward I heard: "There he is now! Hey, you!" I walked over to the bed from which the call came, and recognized a former worker in our camp, but I didn't recall anything further to bring him to mind.

"You loaned me $5," he blurted out. "I've been in the hospital here for six weeks, and I haven't been able to send it to you. I just got my compensation check from the State this morning, and here's your $5. Thanks very much."

I then went to bed, to get up two hours later to catch an early boat back up the canal. At that hour the "skid road" is practically deserted. I hadn't advanced very far when some one yelled and started on a run toward me. Instinctively I felt, "Here's a hold-up." I started to run. My pursuer was in good shape. Every few minutes he yelled lustily for me to stop. I put up a good race, but he steadily gained. However, I had reached Railroad Avenue by this time-out in the open glare of the electric lights. I figured I was safe, but the man chasing me didn't stop. He ran up to me, put his hand in his pocket, and wrathfully exclaimed, "You big chump! I've been looking for you all over since I came to town. I knew I had borrowed $7 from somebody. As you passed the alleyway back there, I recognized you, and instantly recognized the fact that I owed you the $7. Here it is. Thanks. See you again some time."

As I walked to the boat landing I realized that I had made thirty or forty promiscuous loans to men without knowing whether I should ever see them again, to men who had no money a week after pay day, to men who knew full well they probably would never see me again, and yet one hundred per cent of those men had returned their loans to me. In other words, one hundred per cent of these practical strangers had proved themselves to be square.

This experience was the beginning of the creed I have since grown to have perfect confidence in-that ninety-five per cent of men want to play fair.

N

OW that the curtain of armistice

had descended upon the world's most devastating war, the League to Enforce Peace was endeavoring to co-operate in every possible way with President Wilson and the official delegates to the Peace Conference, and with similar organizations in Europe, to bring into existence a League of Nations.

I had been made chairman of the Overseas Committee, and on the afternoon of Theodore Roosevelt's funeral former President Taft and I met to confer regarding the work to be done. Both of us were very much depressed by the death of our friend. Taft felt grateful that "Theodore" (as he always called Roosevelt) and he had some months earlier re-established their long-time former friendship, which had unhappily been interrupted by political events.

Mr. Taft courteously told me that he was glad that I was going to Paris, and that he believed I might render a great service in helping to secure an effective League of Nations. He hoped I would have conferences with Balfour, Lloyd George, and Léon Bourgeois, and that I would be able to show them what kind of a League we and, as we thought, the American public generally wanted. At my request, Taft agreed to write me a letter, signed by himself, as President of the League to Enforce Peace, and by A. Lawrence Lowell, chairman of the Executive Committee, giving me full authority to take whatever action in Europe that I might consider wise. I told Taft that I wanted a letter which should expressly state, among other things, that I was to support our official delegates, as it would not do for America to show a divided front.

He told me, what I also had known from conversations with Roosevelt, that Roosevelt had latterly expressed himself in favor of such a League of Nations as we stood for. I reminded Taft that Roosevelt had been the first in recent years to emphasize the subject of a League of Nations, having done so in his Nobel Peace Prize address.

A YOUTHFUL LORD CHANCELLOR Reaching London on February 4, 1919, I promptly conferred with the members of the British League of Nations Union. Sir Willoughby Dickinson, M. P., gave me full details of the meetings that had been held by the English, French, and Italian leagues in Paris.

While in London we dined with our new Ambassador, John W. Davis, formerly the Solicitor-General of the United

International

States. Both he and Mrs. Davis, in the short time they had been in London, had won the esteem of official England. At this dinner I had a long conversation with the new Lord Chancellor, Lord Birkenhead, formerly Sir Frederick Smith, who held a distinguished position at the British bar, and had been AttorneyGeneral in the last Cabinet. In the latter part of 1917 he had visited the United States, where I had met him. He was then only forty-seven years of age, but looked much younger, and therefore quite unlike the typical Lord Chancellor robed in venerable dignity. He told me that he was the youngest Lord Chancellor, with one exception, that had ever sat on the woolsack. He had the youthful and vivacious face of a man in the thirties. He said that nothing would please him more than, when he was no longer Lord Chancellor, to practice law in America, but he said that precedent would not permit a former Lord Chancellor to return to the bar and practice his profession. He was very outspoken in his opposition to a League of Nations, saying that it was a Utopian idea.

As a dinner guest of Sir Arthur Steele Maitland, M. P., Under-Secretary of the Foreign Office, I met my old friend Viscount Bryce, who was then about eightytwo years of age. He was still in the best of health and his mind was as alert He brought me a copy of his recent brochure, "Proposals for the Pre

as ever.

vention of Future Wars." Maitland strongly favored a League of Nations.

BEHIND THE SCENES OF THE PARIS
CONFERENCE

We arrived in Paris on February 9, where our friends Mr. and Mrs. Edward Mamelsdorf had generously placed at our disposal their comfortable apartment in the Rue Montaigne, which was most conveniently and centrally situated and saved us the necessity and difficulty of securing accommodations, all the hotels being jammed full. At the Crillon Hotel, headquarters of the American Delegation, we conferred with Colonel House, with whom arrangements were made for the fullest co-operation between our League and the Official Commission. We also conferred with Mr. Gordon Auchincloss, son-in-law and serretary of Colonel House, who, after consulting with the latter, gave me in confidence a typewritten copy of the Articles of the League entitled "Draft as Provisionally Approved." He said that the Colonel wanted me to have this, so that I might study it. I was told that the outlook for the adoption of a League very discouraging because the French Delegation, headed by Léon Bourgeois, insisted upon two additional clauses-(1) the control by the League of the manufacture of all armaments and of all war industries, and (2) a:

was

said he would shortly return, and hur riedly left us. In the meantime we continued the conversation with d'Estournelles, who, being familiar with our American system, was better able to appreciate the problem. I told him plainly that Colonel House had said to me that afternoon that "the League of Nations was on the rocks."

Bain

Léon Bourgeois, head of the French Delegation, who was persuaded by Mr. Straus to accept the League of Nations covenant as preliminarily drafted

international military force to defend the French frontier, which, Bourgeois insisted, quoting from a former speech of President Wilson, "was the frontier of civilization."

President Wilson had emphatically objected to the proposed additions.

When I informed Colonel House that I was about to call on Léon Bourgeois at his home across the Seine. he said, "By all means, go," and added that Bourgeois's attitude "had put the League on the rocks."

Arriving at Bourgeois's house late in the afternoon, we were told that he was in the Senate and would not return unti! late. While there, however, I met my friend and colleague on the Hague Tribunal, Baron d'Estournelles de Constant. He said he would see to it that we met Bourgeois that evening, and Baron d'Estournelles and Bourgeois arrived at my residence promptly at seven o'clock that evening.

Bourgeois presented the interposing difficulties and the divergence of views between him and President Wilson and Colonel House. I explained to him, more fully than he seemed to have appreciated before, that the war-making power was lodged by our Constitution exclusively in Congress, and that even if the President should agree to the additional articles, if these articles would in any way conflict with the war-making power as provided for in the Constitution President Wilson's assent would be without effect, and would never be ratified by our Senate.

Here the telephone rang, and M. Bourgeois was informed that the President of the Ministry, M. Clemenceau, desired to see him at once. Bourgeois

BOURGEOIS AGREES TO ACCEPT THE COVENANT

Bourgeois returned in half an hour, and we resumed the discussion. After explaining more at length our Constitutional provisions, I told him that if the proposed League were made too strong it would be useless, so far as America was concerned, since it would not be ratified by the Senate. Knowing what a strong advocate he had always been of the League of Nations, as he was and had been for years past the President of the French League of Nations Society, I asked him whether he would prefer having no League rather than a League as drafted, without the two articles he had proposed.

He frankly replied that, if that were the alternative, he would prefer to have the League as drafted. He then referred to the fact that at our last Congressional election the Administration had been defeated, and therefore, as he understood it, the President represented a minority party. I told him that, while such would be the case under the European system, it was not so under our system, and then read to him from my letter of credence "to support the President," explaining that the President of our League, Mr. Taft, along with Dr. Lowell, myself, and many others, were not of the President's party, yet I was authorized and instructed to support the President.

Bourgeois replied that at the Plenary Session of the Conference, which was to be held on the Friday following, namely, on the 14th, at the Quai d'Orsay, in view of the American position which I had made clear to him, he would support the "Draft as Provisionally Approved," but that he wanted me to appreciate that they had politics in France as well as we had, and that therefore he would, at any rate, have to present at the Conference the two articles referred to, if for no other reason than for their popular effect; but that I could rely on it that his Government would in the final analysis accept the Covenant or draft as provisionally presented by the representatives of the fourteen nations which had participated in its preparation and had preliminarily agreed to it.

When Bourgeois and d'Estournelles departed at about ten o'clock, I called up Colonel House, and, after briefly informing him what had taken place, I told him that the League was "off the rocks." He expressed his great gratification, and on the following morning when I met him he said that he had informed the

Colonel House, who, on Mr. Straus's arrival in Paris, immediately ushered him behind the scenes of the Peace Conference

President, who desired heartily to congratulate me.

When Colonel House had informed me that "the League was on the rocks," it was more real than figurative; for at the session of the Commission on the League held the evening before, the French members having insisted upon an international army to guard the frontier, and President Wilson having point-blank refused to agree to it, an impasse had been reached, since neither side would give way. The Commission thereupon adjourned, apparently without any possibility of coming to an understanding. Considerable bitterness was developed in the discussion, as I learned, between the President and M. Bourgeois. It was at this stage that I fortuitously arrived at the Crillon to report that our Committee, by calling on M. Bourgeois, had been able unofficially to take up and discuss with him the situation, which officially had apparently passed beyond the stage of further discussion. Therefore it proved a great relief to the President and Colonel House, as well as to Clemenceau and Bourgeois, that we had been able to remove the impasse by inducing the French delegates to agree to support the Covenant as preliminarily drafted.

The next day I met Baron d'Estournelles at lunch, and he informed me that Bourgeois had expressed himself gratified with the clarification I had given him and that I could rely upon the Covenant being adopted as we had agreed.

AT THE IMPOSING PLENARY SESSION

On the morning of the 14th, while I was at Colonel House's office, I received a copy of the Covenant, which had just been put in print, as re-edited by the Sub-Committee of the League of Nations

under the chairmanship of Lord Robert Cecil. While I was there, President Wilson came in to meet the representatives of the American press. When he saw me, he expressed his high appreciation for our services and helpfulness. The President made a brief address to the correspondents, beginning in a semihumorous vein, and then giving a gen. eral description of the Covenant as finally drafted, explaining that where so many nations were involved no one's individual ideas could be fully satisfied, and that there had to be yielding on all sides. Wilson added that he would have liked to see some definite provisions regarding the protection of religious minorities, and referred to several of the other outstanding provisions.

Colonel House asked me to see Bourgeois again before the Plenary Session, which was to take place that afternoon, saying that he had heard that Bourgeois was going to oppose the Covenant. I immediately called on Bourgeois again, and told him precisely what the Colonel had said, but Bourgeois assured me that there had been no change, and that the Covenant, or, as it was styled in French, Le Pacte, would not be opposed.

That same afternoon I went with former Ambassador Henry White, one of our official delegates, to the Session of the Plenary Conference at the Quai d'Orsay, which convened at 3:30 o'clock. I accompanied him into the Conference room, a large, vaulted, ornate chamber known as the Clock Room, where were seated, at the tables arranged along three sides of a square, with an inner row of seats arranged in the same way, the delegates of the thirty nations.

On the outside of the square were the tables for the secretaries of the several nations. At the head of the table sat M. Clemenceau; to his right was President Wilson, and on his left was to be Lloyd George, but, as he was not present, Lord Robert Cecil sat in his place. Next on the right was Mr. Lansing, and next on the left was Mr. Balfour, and so on in order. In the rear of the chamber were a number of distinguished persons and other officials of the Powers. To one side was another large room with arched entrances, occupied by the correspondents of the press of the world.

The proceedings began at four o'clock. The ushers closed the large entrance doors leading out into the foyer, and all was still and in expectancy when Clemenceau rose and, in his usual brusque and unceremonious manner, announced that "Monsieur Wilson" would have the "parole," meaning the floor.

WILSON READS COVENANT

President Wilson arose, calm, dignified, and entirely self-possessed, and, after a few preliminary words, stated that the representatives of the fourteen nations which composed the League of Nations Committee had unanimously agreed to the Covenant, consisting of twenty-six articles, to be presented to

(C) International

the Conference, representing, according to the estimate, 1,200,000,000 people.

He read the articles of the Covenant, one by one, interpolating here and there brief explanations. The title "Covenant" had been given the document by Wilson, a designation he had previously used in one of his speeches. This was regarded as most appropriate, since the pact was not a treaty or convention, but something higher and more sacred, hence the scriptural designation "Covenant," such as God had made with Israel.

After reading the articles, Wilson made an address of about thirty minutes. It was clear, forceful, and in his inimitable style. In closing he said: "Armed force is in the background in this programme, but it is in the background, and if the moral force of the world will not suffice, the physical force of the world shall. But that is the last resort, because this is intended as a constitution of peace, not as a League of War.

Many terrible things have come out of this war, gentlemen, but some very beautiful things have come out of it.

Wrong has been defeated, but the

rest of the world has been more conscious than it ever was before, of the majesty of right."

Lord Robert Cecil then spoke briefly; and I will quote a single passage from his address: "Finally, we have thought that if the world is to be at peace, it is not enough to forbid war. We must do something more than that. We must try and substitute for the principle of international competition that of international co-operation."

Bourgeois declared that he proposed amendments which he thought he ought to mention; that, while his country had accepted the text which had been read, the amendments were mentioned so that, as the text went before the world, the amendments might also be considered, to the effect that we ought to have a permanent organization to prepare military and naval means of execution and make them ready in case of emergency.

JAPAN'S PERSUASIVE VOICE

Baron Makino, speaking with persuasive eloquence in perfect English, m

tained his previous amendments, which were as follows: "The equality of nations being a basic principle of the League of Nations, the High Contracting Parties agree to accord, as soon as possible, to all aliens, nationals of States, members of the League, equal and just treatment in every respect, making no distinction either in law or in fact on account of their race or nationality." He then added: "I feel it my duty to declare clearly on this occasion that the Japanese Government and people feel poignant regret at the failure of the Commission to approve of their just demand for laying down a principle aiming at the adjustment of this longstanding grievance, the demand that is based upon a deep-rooted natural conviction. They will continue in their insistence for the adoption of this principle by the League in the future."

George Barnes, the English labor leader, upheld the argument of Bourgeois for an international force. Venizelos referred to the amendments of France which had been held back because of constitutional barriers of acquiescence on the part of certain countries. He thought those countries should make an effort to remove those barriers, but that, if they could not do so, then France should recede from her position. Mr. Hughes, of Australia, interposed a question demanding to know when and where the discussion of mandatories would take place, to which Clemenceau replied that the document would rest on the table and would be discussed at a distant date. Thereupon he abruptly adjourned the session.

CIVILIZATION'S GOLDEN CHAPTER

As the delegates moved out, I met President Wilson, who asked me for my opinion about the Covenant. I replied that it was much more comprehensive and forceful than I had believed it possible for the nations preliminarily to agree upon. He expressed himself as much gratified. I believed then, and do yet, that but for Wilson's prestige and dominant leadership of the Conference, so far at least as the Covenant was concerned, it would perhaps not have been formulated, if ever, until after the Treaty of Peace was concluded. At any rate, I very much doubt if an agreement could have been arrived at.

After my conversation with Wilson, Bourgeois said to me that he hoped I was satisfied with his remarks in support of the Covenant, that he had to refer to the amendments he presented so that they might receive consideration. I told him that he had followed the course he had agreed to when he spoke to me two nights before, that, while he would refer to his amendments, he would nevertheless support the Covenant.

When I had returned to my apartment, I wrote in my "Random Notes:" "I regard this day and its happenings as the golden chapter in the history of ivilization." Notwithstanding what has

since happened, I have not abandoned hope that such may yet prove true.

AT TEA WITH GENERAL SMUTS

Two days before the meeting of the Conference, Hamilton Holt and I had tea with General Smuts, the distinguished South African delegate. He is a man of very pleasant appearance, rather short in stature, and with his florid complexion looks like a veritable Dutchman. He was then apparently about fifty years of age. He would hardly, from his appearance, be taken for a soldier, but rather for a student. He had given much detailed study to the subject of a League of Nations, and from his brochure "The League of NationsA Practical Suggestion" (1918) more of his suggestions as there set forth entered into the articles of the Covenant than those proposed by any other of the delegates, including Wilson. Smuts advocated in this brochure that "the League should be put in the very forefront of the programme of the Peace Conference," the same position that Wilson afterward successfully pushed forward. In the preface of his brochure, dated December 16, 1918, Smuts says:

To my mind the world is ripe for the greatest step forward ever made in the government of man. And I hope this brief account of the League will assist the public to realize how great an advance is possible to-day as a direct result of the immeasurable sacrifices of this war. If that advance is not made, this war will, from the most essential point of view, have been fought in vain, and great calamities will follow.

Dining soon afterwards with Sir Robert Borden, then Premier of Canada and

MINAL events in Paris con

F

nected with the Peace Con

ference are described next week by Ambassador Straus in the closing chapter of his Autobiography. He depicts important conferences with President Wilson, Colonel House, Alexander Kerensky, Venizelos, refugee Russian statesmen, and others. He reports the London meeting of the allied societies for the League of Nations. He tells of his return to America and of the efforts to secure American participation in some kind of League of Nations. He closes with a terse and illuminating appeal for individual states to conform their policies to the world's common needs.

one of the British delegates, we met sev. eral of his colleagues. Balfour was ex pected, but he had been compelled to return to London that day. Sir Robert was an important member of the British Delegation, and made some very helpful suggestions. He opposed Article X of the Covenant, which provides that "the High Contracting Parties undertake to respect and preserve as against external aggression the territorial integrity and States, members of the League," etc., the existing political independence of all same article that eventually met with so much opposition in our Senate, and doubtless was the principal cause for the Senate's failure to ratify. At that time it was generally rumored that Borden would be selected as Ambassador to the United States to succeed Lord Reading. He would doubtless have made a most

acceptable representative in Washington of the British Government, exceptional as it would have been to have the British Empire represented by a colonia! official. No one could have been sent who understood our country and our people better.

PERSHING NERVOUS BEFORE MAKING
A SPEECH

Washington's Birthday was celebrated by the American Society, which gave a luncheon at the Hôtel Palais d'Orsay. There were present about one hundred and fifty Americans. It was a notable assembly, and I had the pleasure of sitting next to General Pershing, with whom I had a lengthy talk. We spoke, among other things, of the proposal that our country should take a mandate to govern the Ottoman Empire or any part of Europe. Great propaganda had been made that we should take a mandate for the Ottoman Empire. Pershing agreed with me that this would lead to endless complications and would not be approved at home. I also talked with Colonel House upon the subject, who was of the same opinion. Pershing was evidently quite nervous, for he was expected to speak, and he was making some notes. It appeared to me that he was more disturbed than if he were about to enter into a serious military engagement.

I had lunch the next day with Boris Bakhmeteff, Russian Ambassador to the United States, at which I met Sazonoff, former Minister for Foreign Affairs under the Czar's régime. We spoke of Russia and the possibility of reconstruction.

I was told that the late Czar was kindly and humane, but that he had been completely misled and dominated by crafty Ministers who were plotting and intriguing one against the other; that Russia was not, by reason of the ignorance of its people, fitted to become a republic, but that it must have a government powerfully centralized, and that its best hope would be the restoration of the monarchy under Grand Duke Nicholas as constitutional ruler. Sazo