all this his "Castilian Days " is as much of a witness as are his "Pike County Ballads" to his observation of American life and his intense sympathy with that life. From 1870 to 1875 Mr. Hay was one of the editors of the New York "Tribune," and Horace Greeley regarded him as the most brilliant writer who had ever entered the office. During the Hayes Administration Colonel Hay was First Assistant Secretary of State. Following this he returned to the "Tribune" as its editor-in-chief and, in conjunction with Mr. Nicolay, began a peculiarly important literary work, the Life of Lincoln, which was at once recognized as the standard authority. Mr. Hay took an increasingly active part in politics, in which he had now a new personal tie by reason of his intimacy with another martyred President, Garfield. On the election of President McKinley, Mr. Hay was appointed Ambassador to London. To his diplomacy Great Britain's friendly attitude during the Spanish War is largely due. At that time all Europe regarded America with some jealousy and not a little distrust. The Continental Powers even suggested to England a joint demonstration off the Cuban coast. The British Premier's reply, as reported, was: "Yes, I was myself thinking of an English naval demonstration-but in company with America."

When Colonel Hay relinquished his duties as Ambassador to England, a prominent English statesman said of him that he had accomplished twice as much during two years as had ever any American envoy during a longer tenure of office. Mr. Hay left London to accept promotion to the Secretaryship of State. The Spanish War had just been brought to a close. Despite Dewey's epoch-making victory, our title to the position of a world power was not yet conceded. The settlement of the complicated issues brought about by the war was difficult. Mr. Hay executed that commission with credit, but the full extent of his service in this connection, we think, will only be appreciated years hence.

England had ranged herself on either side of the question as to whether foodstuffs in transit to an enemy's ports were to be considered contraband of war. In the advancement of a humane view of the question, America fortunately had as Secretary one who had already done much to stimulate Anglo-American friendship. Mr. Hay persuaded England to accept a general declaration that foodstuffs, though in transit to an enemy's ports, are not contraband of war when there is evidence that the food is not intended for the enemy's military uses. The weakest country, therefore, though at war with the greatest sea power-England herself-may invoke the justice of the guarantee secured by Mr. Hay.

In the following year the American Secretary won what seems to us an even greater triumph. For years England had vainly striven to obtain a joint agreement among the Powers that Chinese ports shall remain open on equal terms to the trade of all nations. Mr. Hay obtained it, and the term " open door" will always be indissolubly associated with his name.

The next year occurred the Boxer Rebellion-an event long foreseen by the Secretary. Alone among diplomats he was prepared for it. His instant course of action startled those other diplomats. Opposing them all, Mr. Hay stood for the recognition and maintenance of the Chinese Government at a time when that Government was in hiding and practically non-existent. Of course it was for the selfish interests of the Powers to disregard the Chinese Government. They wanted to partition China among themselves. But the ambition of all Europe was checked by the firmness of one quiet gentleman. He had already insured Chinese commercial integrity; he was to insure Chinese territorial integrity. It was not done without difficulty. By secret agreements Russia endeavored to impose herself upon a humiliated people, and by open acts of barbarity the more civilized Powers instituted hardly less outrageous punitive expeditions. Mr. Hay's disapproval was so great that he advised the Administration to withdraw from " concurrent

action" with the Powers in China, and to take away our troops. This threat was not unavailing, but the irritated Powers then began a policy of unwarranted delay in evacuation. Finally Mr. Hay secured evacuation, and, what is more, on the terms of the original protocol.

A book would be required properly to recount all the services to his country and to humanity of this lamented Secretary of State. He was one of the most efficient agents in advancing international arbitration, and in bringing about the Hague Conference and the Hague Tribunal. His name, however, is more popularly attached to the Hay-Pauncefote and the Hay-Herbert Treaties, the first supplanting the unjust ClaytonBulwer Treaty, the second settling the Alaskan question. Europe will not soon forget Mr. Hay's vigorous rep resentation to the Russian and Rumanian Governments as to their treatment of the Jews, nor will our own people forget his negotiation of reciprocity treaties. with Cuba and Newfoundland. Last year Mr. Hay reaffirmed this Government's position by sending to all the Powers a circular-note; he declared that the administrative entity of China during the Russo-Japanese war must be respected. The result has been, as he hoped, an immense gain to humanity in limiting the field of var operations. As to the Monroe Doctrine, while Mr. Hay forced England, Germany, and Italy to

fact of an expansion to a startled world, the question is a fair one whether America could have maintained its new position but for the inauguration of a new policy of ideal rather than of material ends and of broader frankness in meeting those ends. No matter, as was inevitable, how many subsidiary details might have to be kept secret, John Hay discussed with the whole world the aims toward which he had instituted his negotiations. He had nothing to conceal, personally or politically.

But

For

As a public speaker Mr. Hay well illustrated the Roman proverb, "Character makes the orator." His speeches were models of force, vivacity, humor, candor, and good taste, it is true. the hearer instinctively felt that in the speaker could be found an ideal beyond the ideal of the ordinary politician. John Hay never worked for the good of the American people alone. He labored for the good of all peoples. His rule of conduct was, as he often said, the Golden Rule. Unless our progress meant universal progress it was not worth much. Hence the world is freer and finer, as well as richer and better, because he lived in it. Of course now that he is gone from our earthly sight the world lacks the charm and power of his personality. But he has put his own fiber into humanity, and that enriched humanity cannot die.

were likely to come into conflict with that doctrine, he always recognized the fact that just European claims in this hemisphere must be protected, and hence had a treaty framed with Santo Domingo providing for American supervision of the island's finances until all foreign debts should be paid. He made that doctrine a greater issue than ever by his course in connection with an isthmian canal and with Panama.

John Hay's name will go down into history as the founder of the new American diplomacy. It is no mere coincidence that this new diplomacy and America's position as a world power came into being at the same time. While Dewey's shot at Manila announced the

It is evident that Mr. John F. Wallace does not think that a good name is more to be desired than great riches. He would rather bequeath to his children what he can save out of a $60,000 income than leave them a reputation acquired as the director of the greatest engineering feat the world has ever accomplished. If this question had been an open one between the two posts, the choice might be regarded simply as a matter of taste, and matters of personal taste are not matters for public discussion. But surely there is a value in loyalty not to be bartered away for dollars. A fair-minded maid would hardly desert her mistress, at a critical period in housekeeping affairs,

and without notice, in order to go where she could get easier work and better wage. That a man of Mr. Wallace's supposed standing can bring himself to do what in analogous conditions a housemaid could not do without dishonor speaks but ill for the standards of honor which are cultivated in certain schools of commercialism. Judge Taft's perfectly lucid description of this transaction is the more scathing because it was uttered in a personal interview direct to Mr. Wallace's face, because its heat of indignation was phrased in carefully restrained language, and because he had himself in time past afforded so fine an

Greater New York with the best material it can fairly and honorably command." The judgment of Mr. Wallace's action implied in these words is, so far as we can judge, that of the country at large. We believe that the incident will not be without value in emphasizing the truth that a public office is a public trust, neither to be sought for the sake of personal aggrandizement nor to be carelessly thrown aside whenever it involves personal risks or private enterprise offers to personal ambition a more enticing opportunity.

by declining an appointment to the Supreme Court Bench, which was the summit of his ambition, in order to remain with the Filipinos until his work with them was completed. If Mr. Wallace's very vague allusions to other than financial reasons refer, as some of the papers seem to think, to his dread of yellow fever, the reader will hardly fail to recall that Mr. Taft's decision to remain in the Philippines was at the hazard of his health if not of his life, nor to realize that a brave man does not desert his post because it involves danger.

Mr. Wallace's resignation is not to be regretted by the country. If his ideals of loyalty are such as this incident indicates, he is not the man to be put in charge of such a work as the construction of the Panama Canal. Happily for the country, they meet with no approval from any quarter. We have not seen report of any eminent defender of his course. The rumor that the mysterious offer of $60,000 a year came from the Interborough Rapid Transit Company meets with an indig nant disclaimer from its President, Mr. Belmont. "The Interborough Company," he says, "does not make a practice of buying men from their engagements; it seeks to secure those who are willing to enter its service in a spirit of loyalty and who will remain and will serve its interests and identify their future with it; and, above all, it will not go into the Government service to that service's detriment and take away its best instruments, but will continue its efforts exclusively to build and manage transportation in

The reader of the very interesting autobiographical sketch of the process of" Making Americans of Russian Jews," printed on another page, may not unnaturally question whether, in acquiring prosperity, the Jew is not losing religion, and so sacrificing the spiritual for the material. He is, however, in truth, rather reverting to the simpler and more vital faith of his forefathers. That faith identified morals and religion, and knew neither an unreligious morality nor an unmoral religion. Its most ancient code, the Ten Commandments, summed up all obligations in two-reverence for God and respect for one's neighbor. The prophets repeated the same message in many an utterance akin to that of Micah: "What doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, love mercy, and walk humbly with thy God?" The post-exilic Psalmist reiterated the same message: "Who shall ascend into the hill of the Lord, or who shall stand in his holy place? He that hath clean hands and a pure heart; who hath not lifted up his soul unto vanity, nor sworn deceitfully; he shall receive the blessing from the Lord, and righteousness from the God of his salvation."

When the ethical element is dropped out of religion, and it becomes a mere expression of reverence for God, without any accompanying regard for humanity, the spiritual element soon follows the ethical, and the liturgy degenerates into a meaningless formalism. When a reaction comes, a true spiritual faith is not

Chinese Exclusion

Mr. Chester Hicombe is an authority on Chinese afairs, and his article on another page is commended to the care

and ethical culture. In such a time the first duty of the teacher, whether he is a Jewish rabbi, a Christian minister, or a College Settlement worker, is to make it clear, by both his life and his teaching. that there is no inconsistency between reverence for God and regard for one's fellow-men. He is not, on the coe hand, to stamp with disapproval mere moral ity." nor, on the other, to treat regious feeling with indiference. Ethical principles are given power over conduct by religious feeling; religious feeling is valuable only as it inspires to righteous conduct. "We are divided." says Professor Huxley, into two parties-the advocates of so-called 'religious' teaching on the one hand, and those of socalled secular' teaching on the other. And both parties seem to me to be not only hopelessly wrong, but in such a position that if either succeeded completely, it would discover before many years were over that it had made a great mistake and done serious evil to the cause of education." It is only as this evil is avoided, only as ethical culture and religious emotion are combined, only as a regard for the welfare of our neighbor is reinforced by a feeling of loyalty and reverence to God, and only as reverence for God is directed into channels of practical service of man, that education is made adequate and a practically power ful moral character is produced. Man is "incurably religious," and it is only as "the great humanitarian movements for industrial and social betterment" are inspired "with something like the enthusiasm of the ancient prophets," which Fundly religious enthusiasm, be either radically benenently powerful.

W

consideration of cur readers. It is very clear that we cannot subject the Chinese travelers to insult and indignity at our ports and expect China to open her ports to our commerce. America must either abandon all hope of develop

men with respect. The American politician mest choose between the antiChinese labor vote, whatever that may be, and the commercial vote. California must either insist that Chinamen coming to our country are treated as other aliens are treated, or she must see closed the door the opening of which promised to make the Pacific coast as great a maritime coast as the Atlantic, and San Francisco the commercial peer of New York.

There is one objection to Chinese immigration to which Mr. Holcombe does not refer; we regard it as the only really serious objection. It is the coolie labor system. Under this system the coolie is under obligation to labor at a specified rate of wages for a specified term of years. The contract is supposedly voluntary. But by this contract the coolie signs away his liberty for the time, and the American doctrine is that liberty is inalienable. A large proportion of the laborers who emigrate from China are coolies, furnished by Chinese trading companies, to whom they have thus sold themselves for a definite term

generally, we believe, five years. The Constitution of the United States provides that "neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States or any place subject to their jurisdiction." The AttorneyGeneral of the United States, in a wellconsidered opinion, given in June, 1905, to the Secretary of War, holds that coolie contract labor is involuntary servitude within the meaning of this Constitutional prohibition. The decision of the United States Supreme Court respecting peonage indicates that if the coolie contract system were brought before that Court it