I The Peace Congress at The Hague T would be hard to find a more appropriately peaceful spot for the meeting of the Peace Congress than the beautiful summer palace called "The House in the Woods" at The Hague in peaceful Holland. Here on the eighteenth of the present month will gather delegates officially designated by the nations of the world to consider the possibility of lightening the military burdens of the peoples, and to make at least a tentative approach toward substituting reason, justice, and arbitration for the continuous threat of war. The real significance of the Congress will probably come not so much from what may be actually accomplished as from the fact that the Congress marks a turningpoint in the way of regarding international questions. The opinion grows that the Czar, the greatest military autocrat in existence, is yet thoroughly sincere in his conviction that the time is at hand when methods of military aggression must be abandoned, or at least restrained, by mu tual agreement. The chief aim will be, not toward immediate disarmament, but toward agreement not to relatively increase the present armaments. This is, to an idealist, a slender beginning; but when to it are joined the various proposed restrictions of certain practices in war, and the undertakings in behalf of humane principles wherever possible in warfare, it must be admitted that there is hope of a substantial result immediately, as well as indefinite possibilities for future combined action. Here is a summary of the points to be discussed: (1) An agreement not to increase naval or military forces and the corresponding budgets for a fixed period; (2) an endeavor to find means of reducing the forces and budgets in the future; (3) interdiction of the use of any new weapon or explosive of a power higher than now made; (4) restriction of the use of the most terrible of existing explosives, and forbidding the throwing of any explosives from balloons or similarly; (5) forbidding the employment of submarine torpedoes and similar contrivances; (6) undertaking not to construct vessels with rams; (7) application of the Geneva convention to naval warfare; (8) neutralization of vessels saving those wrecked in naval battles; (9) revision of the declaration concerning the laws and customs of war elaborated at Brussels in 1874; (10) acceptance of the principle of mediation and arbitration in such cases as lend themselves thereto. It will be seen that this programme is by no means sentimental or impracticable. Despite Tolstoï's dictum that nothing can be accomplished except by the absolute refusal of the individual to bear arms, it is true that to diminish the extreme horrors of war, to make the rights of neutrals and non-combatants clear and inviolable, and, above all, to urge arbitration and mediation, are objects of great moment and well worth striving after. A special correspondent of The Outlook will tell its readers whatever is possible to tell of the deliberations of this Peace Congress, of the views and impressions of the delegates, and of the actual results attained. Meanwhile it is gratifying to note that the American delegates named by President McKinley are men of high ability, of wide experience in public affairs, and of conspicuously representative character. CAPTAIN A. T. MAHAN Photograph by Hollinger. Thus, ex-President Andrew D. White has filled a large place in the educational and diplomatic history of the United States. As President of Cornell University for eighteen years, and before that as a professor of history and literature at the University of Michigan, his broad culture and thorough methods were widely recognized by all interested in university prog ress. In the service of the United States Government his personal record is equally notable. He was an attaché at St. Petersburg as far back as the Crimean War; in 1879 he succeeded Bayard Taylor as Minister to Germany, while in 1892 he was made Minister to Russia, and finally in 1897 was again sent to Berlin under the new title of Ambassador. Dr. White has also twice served on international commissions-those relating to San Domingo (1871) and Venezuela (1897). His appointment as a Commissioner to The Hague could not conceivably have been bettered. President Seth Low and Captain A. T. Mahan are equally admirable appointments, each in its special way. President Low has had, as our readers know, executive and organizing experience in business, in the government of a great city as its Mayor, in forming the charter of the consolidated city of New York, in administering the affairs of a great university, and in many special municipal activities. He will bring to the work of the Peace Congress broad and humane views and a thoroughly equipped mind. Captain Mahan is known throughout Europe as the most original and instructive living writer on naval history and on "the influence of the sea-power"-to quote part of the title of his most famous book. He is an expert in all matters relating to naval strategy and to the philosophy of warfare; and his profound technical knowledge makes him. eminently qualified to throw light on the difficult questions that must come before the Congress. Captain Mahan has been in the United States Navy since 1861, was President of the Naval War College from 1886 to 1889 and from 1892 to 1895, then had command of the Chicago, but again during the war with Spain served as a member of the Naval War Board (or Board of Strategy, as it was popularly called). As Captain Mahan represents the United States Navy in our Commission to The Hague, so Captain William Crozier may be said to stand for the United States Army. He is a distinguished officer of the Ordnance Department, but during the war with Spain he served with the Volunteers at his own request. Captain Crozier is one of the inventors of the disappearing gun-carriage which is so prominent a feature of our modern coast-defense. Stanford Newel is our present Minister to The Hague, and his appointment was obviously fitting and desirable as adding the element of active diplomacy. Mr. Frederick W. Holls, the other member of the Commission, is a New York lawyer in active practice. Mr. We have above referred to the lack of faith in results from the Congress expressed by Count Tolstoï. He has spoken with his usual vigor in a letter twice or thrice published in altered and rewritten versions. From the letter in its final form (which we find in the "Independent," of this city), translated by Mr. Aylmer Maude, whose recent article in The Outlook on the Doukhobors our readers will remember, we select some sentences which clearly state Tolstoï's central idea: "The aim of the Conference will be, not to establish peace, but to hide from men the sole means of escape from the miseries of war, which lies in the refusal by private individuals of all participation in the murders of war. And, therefore, the Conference can on no account accept for discussion the question suggested. "With those who refuse military service on conscientious grounds, Governments will always behave as the Russian Government behaved with the Doukhobors. At the very time when it was professing to the whole world its peaceful intentions, it was (with every effort to keep the matter secret) torturing and ruining and banishing the most peaceable people in Russia, merely because they were peaceable, not in words only, but in deeds, and therefore refused to be soldiers. "With amazing effrontery, all Governments have always declared, and still go on declaring, that all the preparations for war, and even the very wars themselves that they undertake, are necessary to preserve peace. In this sphere of hypocrisy and deception a fresh step is being made now, consisting in this: That the very Governments for whose support the armies and only be diminished and abolished when people cease to trust Governments, and themselves seek salvation from the miseries that oppress them, and seek safety, not by the complicated and delicate combinations of diplomats, but in the simple fulfillment of that law, binding upon every man, inscribed in all religious teachings, and present in every heart, not to do to others what you wish them not to do to you-above all, not to slay your neighbors. CAPTAIN WILLIAM CROZIER Photograph by Davis & Sanford, New York. the wars are essential, pretend that they are concerned to discover means to diminish the armies and to abolish war. The Governments wish to persuade the peoples that there is no need for private individuals to trouble about freeing themselves from wars; the Governments themselves, at their conferences, will arrange first to reduce and presently quite to abolish armies. But this is untrue. "Armies can be reduced and abolished only in opposition to the will, but never by the will, of Governments. Armies will Armies will first diminish, and then disappear, only when public opinion brands with contempt those who, whether from fear or for advantage, sell their liberty and enter the ranks of those murderers called soldiers; and when the men now ignored and even blamed - who, in despite of all the persecution and suffering they have borne, have refused to yield the control of their actions into the hands of others, and become the tools of murder-are recognized by public opinion to be the foremost champions and benefactors of mankind. Only then will armies first diminish and then quite disappear, and a new era in the life of mankind will commence. And that time is near. "And that is why I think that the refusals to serve in the army are facts of immense importance, and that they will emancipate mankind from the miseries of war. But the opinion that the Conference may conduce toward this is quite an error. The Conference can only divert people's eyes from the sole path leading to safety and to liberty." It will be seen that, as always, Tolstoï is an irreconcilable to the idea of compromise or of collective rather than individual conscience. Yet it remains true that the beginning is half the battle. |