was considerably stronger on the part of the dignitaries in Macedonia than of those in Constantinople, the former fully realizing that their acknowledgment of the commission meant an end to their robbery for all time. They wisely and very cleverly appealed to the Sultan's pride and honor, and convinced him that the loss of the financial control of Macedonia meant the first step to the loss of the entire province, as had been proven in the case of eastern Roumelia. They stated that Macedonia constituted the pearl of his empire, and that its loss was equivalent to the end of Turkish rule in Europe.

In order to prove their absolute unity on this question, the six powers decided to take an unusual step. The six ambassadors in Constantinople had requested a joint audience, in the course of which they desired clearly to state the ideas of their sovereigns, and particularly to prove the entirely friendly purposes toward Turkey on which their propositions were based. The Sultan replied to this unusual step by taking one even more exceptional. He simply refused to receive the ambassadors. In this manner a situation had suddenly been created which made a purely diplomatic settlement quite impossible. The necessity for immediate action brought about the decision to enter upon a joint naval demonstration of all the powers concerned, which should primarily result in the seizure of certain custom-houses, and in its eventual course in a blockade of the Turkish coast. Merely the passing of this resolution, one had every reason to suppose, would prove to the Sultan the uselessness of further resistance.

The Padishah, however, remained immovably obstinate. The motives prompting his resistance are not difficult to surmise. The events in Russia could naturally not remain unnoticed in Constantinople. The military humiliation of that empire on land and on water perchance betokened to the Sublime Porte that Russia was no longer a dangerous opponent even for Turkey. That Austria-Hungary was loath to enter upon any military action at that time was also well known. Moreover, the Sultan felt perfectly secure in the possession of the frequently emphasized friendship of Germany,-in fact, felt encouraged thereby to continue his resist

ance.

When it finally became known that Germany did not intend to participate in the joint naval demonstration, this was interpreted as a direct summons to stand firm and unyielding. This, however, was a fatal error. I believe that my information regarding Germany's attitude. in this matter is as reliable as it is authentic. That the entire incident was unwelcome to Ger

William II. for the Sultan, as well as the special commercial position which Germany secured for herself during the past ten years in European and Asiatic Turkey, would naturally influence his course of action. In the question of Mace donian finance reform, however, he is in com plete accord with the other great powers.

This

is proved by the fact that his commissioner is jointly at work with the others. Moreover, the German Government has defined its point of view in an official notice in the Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, as follows:

The attitude of the Turkish Government in the question of the Macedonian financial control will call forth the sincerest regret. The refusal to grant the desired joint audience sought by the ambassadors of the nations concerned, purposing a last appeal to the wisdom of the Sultan, has unfortunately proved that influences have gained prevalence at the Golden Horn which have turned a deaf ear to sane and pertinent judgment of the situation. The course of events up to the present time should have aroused the conviction that there can remain no doubt as to the unity in the purpose of the powers to carry out this feature of the Muerzsteg programme.

Moreover, the German ambassador in Constantinople, Freiherr von Marschall, again emphasized in a special audience accorded to him by the Sultan, whose particular favor he enjoys, the advisability of granting the desired concessions, stating that Germany shared, without reserve, the opin ion of the other powers as to the necessity of the reforms in question. The failure to participate in the naval demonstration is attributable solely to practical considerations, inasmuch as there was no German man-of-war in the Mediterranean at the time, and, in the limited time for action, its dispatch would not have proved feasible.

Be this as it may, the Porte remained unre lenting even when the sailing orders had been issued to the united fleet, the chief command of which had been unanimously intrusted to the Austrian admiral, Ripper. The purpose of this action was to acknowledge the particular interests of Austria-Hungary in the Balkan peninsula, as well as to emphasize the more important fact that the monarchy demanded the execution of the Muerzsteg programme irrespective of any selfish interests whatsoever, merely purposing the preservation of the Sultan's sovereign rights.

The international fleet had already assembled in the Piræus when the Sublime Porte finally deigned to send a reply to the powers, and again a purely negative one. The attitude taken by the Turkish authorities was substantially this:

They held the commission of finance to be in direct opposition to the sovereign rights of the Sultan, and claimed that it would result in a loss of his prestige and

ence is also made to the Muerzsteg programme, which insured complete independence and integrity to Turkey. The appointment of the delegation of finance, however, was in complete contravention of this agreement. Finally, should the ambassadors persist in carrying out their purpose of bringing greater pressure to bear, the Porte declined to assume any responsibility for all events which might result, as well as for the consequences of the discontent in Ottoman public opinion following upon the infringement on the rights of the empire.

This unveiled threat of revolt and massacre of Christians was about the most unwise decision at which the council in Constantinople could have arrived. It is a matter of common knowl. edge that not only is the expression of popular opinion in Turkey not tolerated, but it is cruelly suppressed. The breaking out of hostilities, which, of course, did not occur, could therefore have resulted only at the direct instigation of the Turkish Government.

The most important feature of this message was an appeal to the signatories of the treaty of Berlin with particular reference to the fact that Turkey had conscientiously performed all the obligations which it imposed, whereas as much could not be said of the other high contracting parties. As it may be of importance, in considering the future development of events in Turkey and in the Balkans, to test the justification of this accusation, a short summary of the articles in question in the treaty of Berlin may not be out of place. Beyond a doubt it must be acknowledged that partially, at least, the reproaches of Turkey are based upon fact. Articles XIII. to XXII. of the treaty of Berlin contain a guarantee for the establishment of the sovereign province of East Roumelia, subject to the military authority of the Sultan and independent of Bulgaria. This guarantee was annulled by the revolt of Philippopolis in 1885 and the ensuing union of East Roumelia and Bulgaria. Similarly all the guarantees failed of performance by which Bulgaria was obligated to pay tribute to Turkey, Servia, Montenegro, and, furthermore, to assume a portion of the Turkish national debt, all of which resulted in the loss of great financial advantages to Turkey.

On the other hand, it cannot be said that Turkey more conscientiously performed the obligations resting upon her. The duties with regard to Crete which she assumed in Article XXIII. remained unperformed until enforced by the powers after the war with Greece. Further more, by reason of the same paragraph, special provision was to have been made for all European possessions, and this by means of special commissions, with the assistance of the native

the "Macedonian question" would no longer exist, and Turkey would have been spared this last humiliation. Finally, bearing in mind the contents of Article LXI., which minutely speci. fies the reforms for the Armenian provinces, and on the other hand remembering the outrages which the Porte visited upon these same Armenians, thereby losing the sympathies of all civilized nations, her present reference to her conscientious performance of treaties must be stigmatized as quite as unfortunate as her threats of new massacres. The international fleet went to sea and occupied the customhouses of Mytilene and Tenedos. In the interim, to be sure, there were days of inaction, by reason of the fact that the powers had agreed to continue to treat the Sultan with the utmost consideration. To be perfectly frank, it must be admitted that the powers were in dread of the moment which would necessitate the decision for a determined step, a step which necessarily exceeded the conception of a peaceable blockade. The opposition of Turkey had developed to such an extent that the military honor of six powers appeared to be involved.

Once more the Padishah resorted to the wellknown artifices. He declared his approval of the "finance control," provided it was exercised only by Austria-Hungary and Russia, a proposition promptly declined by the latter powers.

Eventually an agreement was reached,―obstreperous Turkey had to bow entirely. To pass. judgment on the real importance of these concessions would be useless. A common-sense view can but approve of them. The Macedonians will now attain their rights. Had any one of the powers actually intended to carry out the destruction of the Ottoman Empire at the present time, more energetic measures would have been adopted.

As it is, the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire is taking a most unusual course. Paradoxical as it my sound, Turkey will be ruined by reforms which are being forced upon her by degrees. These reforms cannot be obstructed, as they will progress automatically, one from the other. The incidents of the last few weeks are surely not the last of their kind. The Armenians will follow the Macedonians. On the pres ent occasion the various small powers of the Balkans were given to understand in a trite com. munication that the antagonistic attitude toward Turkey was not to be deemed an encouragement to them. It may be stated, however, that the future of Turkey will not be decided in Constantinople, but will be dependent upon the outcome of the present chaotic conditions in

OLLEGE athletics form a very essential part

COL

of a scheme of physical education because they develop certain desirable mental and phys ical qualities that cannot be as well developed in any other way. Some forms of athletics, such as boxing and wrestling, bring men into more or less violent personal contact with one another, and for this reason these sports would not be tolerated in intercollegiate contests. Nevertheless, there is a deep love for antagonistic sports in human nature of both sexes, and even such athletic contests as running, rowing, swimming, baseball, hockey, and lacrosse have to be carefully safeguarded to prevent personal encounters.

The game of football as played and developed in the American colleges has afforded the best opportunities for personal encounters, because they form an essential part of it and are disguised in what is termed a " scrimmage." In the dictionary sense, a "scrimmage" means “a rough-and-tumble contest." The convention of football representatives from Columbia, Princeton, Rutgers, and Yale held in New York in 1873 evidently had some conception of this feature of the game, for we read among the rules adopted for the guidance of the Intercollegiate Football Association of America the following: Rule 28. No hacking, throttling, butting, tripping up, tackling below the hips, or striking with closed fist shall be allowed." This rule, still accepted by the American Intercollegiate Football Association as late as 1882, was at least nominally intended to prevent these specified kinds of offensive personal contact that experience had shown likely to occur during the progress of a game. But what shall we say of the following rule, printed in the same book of directions, defining the duties of the referee?

puted points, and shall disqualify any player whom he has warned twice for intentional off side play, intentional tackling in touch, or intentional violation of Rule 28."

By this rule it will be readily seen that the referee is not only deprived of all power of immediate action in punishing foul play, but the player is actually allowed to hack, throttle, butt, or strike his opponent twice before he can be disqualified. In point of practice, the players of football in the early eighties were encouraged, and even commanded, by the captain on the field to take their "warning" during the progress of the game. It was the brutality and viciousness resulting from this kind of football that led the faculty of Harvard University to prohibit the game at that institution in 1885. Although the rules governing the game have since been amended so as to punish "unnecessary roughness, throttling, hacking, or striking with the closed fist" by immediate disqualification, many other methods of doing an opponent personal injury are still made possible by the pres ent style of play.

It is hard to eradicate from the student mind the old traditions of the game that have come down from a previous generation. It is even difficult for the umpire to realize that he is not expected to be blind to a certain amount of slugging," kneeing, elbowing, etc., and it is equally difficult for the player to understand that he is not expected to butt, hack, strike, etc., at least once during the game, if by so doing he can increase the chances of victory for his team. The much talked of team play covers a multitude of sins, and men do a lot of dirty work, under the mistaken plea of loyalty to their college, that they would shrink from doing on their

this respect of late years.

It is now considered better football to follow the man with the ball than to attempt to "do up" or knock out" an opponent. The injuries from football, which unfortunately are now more numerous than ever, do not result so much from personal assaults as from the vicious method of tackling a runner below the hips (formerly prohibited), various kinds of momentum or mass plays, and the practice of piling on to the man who is downed with the ball. So long as this method of playing is practised, it will be necessary to meet force with force, and injuries will continue to be numerous, for reasons that are so obvious that they need not be mentioned. No sport has long thrived among gentlemen that admits of violent personal contact. This is the factor in sport that has killed boxing and wrestling as athletic contests in the colleges, and it is the fundamental objec tion to football as at present played. The only way to prevent injuries from objectionable personal contact and violent collisions in football is to stop trying to advance the ball toward the opponent's goal by running with it. This will This will at once do away with all forms of tackling, with the inevitable downs, rush-line scrimmages, and mass plays. Permit the ball to be passed, batted, kicked, or rolled in any direction, and allow, if necessary, blocking or interference with the flight of the ball from player to player or toward the goal, but do not allow, under any circumstances, a player to lay hands upon or interfere with an opponent when he has the ball.

This requirement, which protects the man with the ball, should be followed by another making it obligatory upon him not to hold the

ball, but to pass it quickly to some other player on his own side who may have run to some more advantageous position to receive it. In order to make the attainment of a goal more difficult, the goals should be kicked, and not thrown, and the form of the goals through which the ball is kicked should be a vertical square or circle, made small enough and placed low enough to give a better opportunity for defense than is afforded by the present game. Other specific directions should follow as a matter of course.

It will be observed that the game that I would substitute for modern football is a combination of the good points of football and basketball. The rules of such a game could be made very simple, and twenty or thirty men on a side could play it at the same time. The crying need of our colleges to-day is not for the highly specialized and over-strenuous games that only few men can play, but for more simple games in which a greater number may take part. If athletics have any place in our institutions of learning, they should be so conducted that all the students attending may get some good from them. With this end in view, our schools and colleges should open up the best possible facili ties for the practice of all the approved forms of sports, games, and physical exercises. Unless the present interest in athletics take some such practical turn as this, it will soon be a disgrace for an institution of learning to turn out a victorious athletic team, and the attendance of forty thousand persons at a football game, the spirit and practice of which they condemn, may be considered evidence of our moral decadence.

WHEN five hundred children are turned

The

loose on a space of ground which in the old school days would have served fifty children for recess it is not possible for them to play freely; they interfere with one another. children being placed so much more closely together has greatly increased all those difficulties which are involved in social relations. The complexity of the situation has been greatly increased. In order that the five hundred children may play as freely as possible, it is necessary

tain order; who shall see that the available space is not monopolized by the few big and strong ones. He shall, when necessary, suggest plays and games adapted to the difficult and new conditions under which the children find themselves. In order that the play may be most free, it must be somewhat controlled. This control does not extend to the play itself, but is directed at the government of those conditions which are new,

namely, the social intensity and complexity due to the large number of children in the lim