THE STORY OF THE WAR

The

Probably no week of this year has been so devoid of important military happening as that which ended on May 17. There is significance, however, in the fact that the Russian army which has been advancing from Erzerum has taken the town of Rowan-, duz, about eighty miles northeast of Mosul in Mesopotamia. Mosul itself (the ancient Nineveh) is on the Tigris about two hundred and twenty miles north of Bagdad. Russian march upon Bagdad now appears to be from two directions, as another force is advancing down the Dijileh Valley from Persia. This double Russian drive toward Bagdad seems to be a good deal more than an attempt to protect the left flank of the Grand Duke's army, which is still fighting its way west from Trebizond, on the Black Sea. A minor activity is reported from Africa: German forces lately started an offensive against the British invading expedition under General Jan Smuts in German East Africa, but have been defeated with heavy loss. New activity by the Italians on the Trentino-Tyrol front is indicated by despatches from Rome saying that the Austrians have concentrated there three hundred thousand troops for defense and have abandoned their advanced positions before Rovereto in expectation of an immediate and serious attack. The Roman War Office states that the Italian attacks both in the Isonzo region and in the Trentino were made in order to prevent Austrian troops from being sent into action with the Germans at Verdun.

In Germany the retirement of Herr Delbrück, Secretary of the Interior, has excited much comment. The resignation is doubtless because of dissatisfaction with the present state of the food question. Berlin papers say that a strong hand is needed, and the irrepressible Maximilian Harden is quoted in Berlin despatches to the New York Times " as suggesting that Admiral von Tirpitz be made food dictator." Harden says:

The German people would find nothing hard if it were certain of its food for the morrow.

Here is a state of affairs where political and military common sense can and must work together in harmony. There is danger that we shall lose the war if the enemy really believes that hunger may slowly rob us of our strength, for, firm in this belief, he will postpone concluding peace. And why shouldn't the enemy believe what we in his place would believe? He needs only to read our official ordinances. . . . That we have necessary foodstuffs for our actual limited needs has frequently been stated from the highest official places. Knowingly false testimony here would be a thousand times worse crime than perjury at a murder trial. We must believe that we have enough, then finally take steps to secure a wise equal distribution.

SIR ROGER CASEMENT

A public trial for high treason is as dramatic and absorbing a spectacle as it is rare in history. Last week the trial of Sir Roger Casement and an Irish soldier named Bailey, who was captured with him, was held in London's Bow Street Police Court, famous in criminal annals. It was only in the nature of a preliminary hearing, but members of the English High Court of Justice sat with the magistrate, and the Crown presented its evidence far more completely than is customary in such hearings.

Both prisoners were committed for a jury trial before the High Court of Justice on the charge of high treason; both refused to make any statement or to call witnesses. Casement's line of defense has not been made public as we write, but it is expected that he will claim that he is not a traitor, but a revolutionist; that the few Irishmen enlisted by him in Germany (soldiers under the King, but prisoners in a German prison camp) were not to fight for Germany against Great Britain, but to be taken to Ireland, there to fight for Irish independence against England. Even this would, of course, put him in the same category with the leaders of the recent Irish revolt who were captured in arms and summarily executed, with the exception that, unlike them, he did not actually use violence.

The story as told in Bow Street and

151-159

listened to by as large a crowd as could get into the court-room was clearly brought out and supported by various witnesses who heard Casement harangue the Irish prisoners in Germany, who saw the collapsible boat in which he landed, who found him hiding in an old fort, who took from him incriminating papers, who discovered arms scattered near the place of landing, who captured the Aud, a small German vessel under a Norwegian flag, and who saw that vessel sunk by her crew and took the crew prisoners, while a diver told of the arms the ship contained and identified specimens brought up from the deep. As to the promises made to the Irish prisoners in Germany, witnesses said that Casement, who described himself as the organizer of the Irish Volunteers, assured the prisoners that a German victory in the war would mean everything for Ireland; promised them that if they joined a brigade which he was trying to organize they would be sent to Berlin as the guests, instead of the prisoners, of the German Government; declared that if Germany won a naval victory he would have the Irish brigade landed in Ireland to free her from England; and promised each man, if Germany should lose the war, from £10 to £20 ($50 to $100) and a free passage to the United States.

NEGATIVE NEWS FROM MEXICO

The week's news from Mexico is of a negative nature. Foremost among the events of indecisive character was the discontinuation of the conferences between General Obregon, representing the Carranza Government, and General Scott and General Funston, representing the United States. After two weeks of what is called "palaver" on the border, the conferences adjourned with no palpable accomplishment, although despatches. from Washington say that General Obregon and General Scott have reached "gentleman's agreement " as to co-operation in the suppression of banditry. So far apart were the Mexican and American delegates in their view-points and demands on each other that nothing like a compromise in a signed and written agreement could be reached. The Mexicans made the promised withdrawal of the American forces in Mexico a condition precedent to all other discussions. The Americans refused to consider the evacuation of northern Mexico by our soldiers on any fixed

date, and so the conference was hopelessly deadlocked.

News from the two " punitive expeditions " is also mainly negative. It is true that a picked band of horsemen under Major George T. Langhorne by a quick, daring ride rounded up fourteen Mexican prisoners alleged to have taken part in the raid on Glen Springs, Texas. But latest reports indicate that the second punishing column, under Colonel Sibley, like the first and larger column under General Pershing, has reached the limit to which it dare penetrate Mexico in its present strength because of the thinness of communications with the border. Pershing's men are still concentrated near Namiquipa in a position of defense rather than pursuit; and as they have fallen back, bandits are reported to have killed Chinese merchants who had been friendly enough to sell their goods to the Americans. Whatever may be said about the position of our avenging columns in Mexico to-day, it is no longer possible to speak seriously of a "hunt" for Villa.

Beyond the reassuring reports of General Funston's disposition of the new forces of regulars and militia now at his command for border patrol, the pleasantest report of the week regarding Mexico relates to the attitude of the South American nations towards our Mexican problem. Newspaper correspondents close to the President in Washington report that the Administration has "learned unofficially from official sources" that in the event of armed intervention in Mexico by the United States we would have the moral support of the Argentine, Brazil, Chile, Bolivia, Uruguay, and Guatemala. Opponents of intervention have often argued against it on the ground that intervention would cost us the sympathy of the South Americans. In regard to this The Outlook has frequently urged that it would be entirely practicable to have intervention in Mexico in which the United States would have the co-operation of the Argentine, Brazil, and Chile. Therefore it is now reassuring to hear from apparently "inspired" sources that in the event of intervention we would have at least the moral support of the principal nations of South America.

THE PREPAREDNESS PARADE

In the illustrated section of this week's Outlook there appears a picture of one of the most striking demonstrations of public opinion

which New York City has ever witnessedthe preparedness parade of May 13.

For twelve hours citizens of New York City passed in ceaseless review between the crowded sidewalks of Broadway and Fifth Avenue. The number in the parade was limited only by the capacity of the streets and the limits of the day. More than one hundred and twenty-five thousand marchers took part.

They bore no political banners.

They asked support of no political candidate.

They had no protest to make against the activities of any political party.

Each marcher carried over his shoulder an American flag. This was the sole symbol of loyalty which the organizers of the parade permitted or the participants desired.

Watching the ranks of these civilians, representing all occupations and kinds of men, the onlooker could not help regretting that, instead of marching up Fifth Avenue, this great preparedness parade could not have been sent up Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, past the White House and past the halls of Congress. Perhaps an echo from the tramp of this army may yet make itself audible in Washington, but the time is growing short. Those Congressmen who may be inclined to dismiss the obvious lesson of this New York parade as a manifestation of local spirit may perhaps pay more attention to the similar demonstration to be given in Chicago, probably on June 10. Chicago expects to outdo New York, and, if it does, no one will be more pleased than those New Yorkers who evinced their own faith in preparedness by marching on May 13.

A RITUAL OF CITIZENSHIP

Secretary Lane, of the Interior Depart ment, has long been an earnest advocate of the policy of making Indians citizens just as fast as they can exercise citizenship intelligently. When citizenship is bestowed, individual rights and responsibilities replace tribal allegiance and wardship to the Government. The transition is a solemn and important step for the Indian, and it should be marked with fitting ceremony. The American Indian has a natural liking for symbolism and ceremonial. Accordingly, the Secretary has devised what seems to us a remarkable and impressive ritual, used the other day when at Yankton, South Dakota, nearly two hundred

161

Sioux were made citizens and presented with individual patents to their allotted lands. The Sioux themselves, in an invitation to the Secretary to be present, said:

Thirty or forty years ago we were living in wigwams in our primitive ways, with the idea that the Government owed us a living, and therefore we had no thought for the morrow. But in recent years there have grown up, superseding the wigwam, fine dwelling-houses, and instead of our ponies being turned out on the prairies to graze we have fine barns with two or three work teams each, with lofts full of hay, cribs of corn, bins of wheat, coops of geese, ducks, and chickens, and where thirty or forty years ago were stretches of wild prairies now grow beautiful wavy fields of corn and wheat, the industry of us Indians. We have come to know that instead of the Government owing us a living the world owes us that living, and we have started out to collect it.

In opening the ritual Mr. Lane declared that the President had sent him "to speak a solemn and serious word to you, a word that means more to you than any other you have ever heard ;" that the privilege of becoming free American citizens was to be "pointed out by symbol and by word, so that no man or woman shall not know its meaning."

The entire "ritual" is notable for its sincerity and the charm of its symbolism. Each chosen Indian was called out by his "white" name, and asked to tell his Indian name. Then he was handed a bow and arrow and directed to shoot the arrow. After he did this, the Secretary said to him, calling him by his Indian name: "You have shot your last arrow. That means that you are no longer to live the life of an Indian. You are from this day forward to live the life of the white man. But you may keep that arrow; it will be to you a symbol of your noble race and of the pride you feel that you come from the first of all Americans." Then, calling the Indian again by his "white name, Secretary Lane said to him, "Take in your hand this plow." As the Indian took the handle of the plow the Secretary said: "This act means that you have chosen to live the life of the white man-and the white man lives by work. From the earth we all must get our living, and the earth will not yield unless man pours upon it the sweat of his brow. Only by work do we gain a right to the land or to the enjoyment of life." The Indian was then presented with a leather purse, a small flag,

listened to by as large a crowd as could get into the court-room was clearly brought out and supported by various witnesses who heard Casement harangue the Irish prisoners in Germany, who saw the collapsible boat in which he landed, who found him hiding in an old fort, who took from him incriminating papers, who discovered arms scattered near the place of landing, who captured the Aud, a small German vessel under a Norwegian flag, and who saw that vessel sunk by her crew and took the crew prisoners, while a diver told of the arms the ship contained and identified specimens brought up from the deep. As to the promises made to the Irish prisoners in Ger many, witnesses said that Casement, described himself as the organizer c Irish Volunteers, assured the prisor a German victory in the war w everything for Ireland; promise if they joined a brigade which to organize they would be

the guests, instead of th German Government: many won a naval vi

Irish brigade land

from England:

Germany sho

to £20 ($5 the Unit

an Bureau has turks in the little Anhalonium of this plant that the west and Mexico have

ve the "Survey " Gertrude discussed the distribuxs cactus and its effects

Zee & 7 Indian name for this cactus. ****. Vor who have the "peyote" habit.

Commerce.

The Indians who have acquired an almost fanatic regard for this dangerous drug have

date, and so the conference w deadlocked.

News from the two" pur is also mainly negative picked band of horsem T. Langhorne by ar up fourteen Mr have taken par Texas. Bur second p Sibley, Gene

whi

ין

,is

.ent,

chers, ave all

✰ power se of this

on which the ne law of 1897 ants among Inis made in 1915, griculture secured der the Food and are nearest to Indian mendment of the Haruld do the work. . . . is now before Congress Bill, which adds peyote to

ught within the Harrison ond bill, yet more drastic, has

oduced in the House by Congressman Gandy, of South Dakota. Congressman Gandy has seen with his own eyes the effects of peyote among the Indians of his own State and elsewhere; and in unmistakable terms his bill aims to "prohibit the traffic of peyote."

Miss Seymour sees in the peyote problem something more difficult to solve than the mere question of its prohibition. She quotes a distinguished anthropologist as saying:

You must see this thing in its proper background. It is a psychological condition, this peyote worship, like several other similar institutions of recent revival among the Indians. The real trouble is the deadly vacuity of their lives.

And here is her own conclusion:

The deep religious and idealistic nature of the Indian, his poetic impulse and æsthetic appreciation, cannot be satisfied with negations, annot perhaps be industrialized, cannot find complete satisfaction in schools and manual

aining or instruction in agriculture. The wider education that shall provide for philosophy and aesthetic culture, as well as a religionthis, and not less, is involved in the problem of peyote.

This testimony as to the idealistic and imaginative quality of the Indian mind is common among those who have observed the Indian at close hand. It is even alleged that some Indians, for the sake of retaining their use of this drug, may be willing to give up valuable property rights which white men covet. Surely it is a sad commentary upon the white man's civilization that, while destroying the native beliefs of the Indian, the white man has no better substi