Courtesy U. S. Forest Service

der private ownership. The trees used for Christmas are those cut for the sake of thinning the growth and improving the condition of the trees left standing.

The roadside through the Pike Forest displays signs inviting purchasers for rees. One of these signs, for example, reads:

Under a city ordinance, all the trees old in Denver must bear tags certifying hat they were cut as beneficial thinings. Trees offered without such tags ubject the venders to legal penalty.

That no injury results is proved by The fact that thinning requires the cuting of many more trees than those used or Christmas decoration.

Another method of using trees for Christmas without depleting our forests s that of setting up a living Christmas ree. For those who have grounds in which they can plant trees the use of the iving tree for Christmas serves a double urpose. It not only insures a tree that will remain fresh during the period of

tling is that a confidential report made to Governor Graves by Chief McAdory, of the State Law Enforcement Bureau, was found in the possession of Ira B. Thompson, reputed head of the Luverne branch of the Ku Klux Klan.

Governor Graves was elected with Klan support, and the general belief has been that he is in sympathy with the organization. In that the Governor of Alabama is, of course, within his rights. If, however, he permits to go uninvestigated a charge so serious as that made by Attorney-General McCall, he will be subject to the just criticism of good citizens. It is sufficiently serious that the Attorney-General charges the presence of a confidential report to the Governor in the hands of an official of the Klan, but it becomes more serious in connection with the Attorney-General's statement that along with this report were communications from the Grand Dragon of the Alabama Klan revealing what the Attorney-General brands as an attempt to intimidate him, but which the Grand Dragon is reported to have described as an effort "to bring the Attorney-General to his senses."

In situations such as exist in Alabama, it is important to secure convictions, if possible; but it is more important to see that the facts be made known.

Because the liquor trade even when legalized was lawless. It defied regulation. It was everywhere a source of political corruption. It defied municipal authority, local authority, State authority. Refusing to abide by restraint, it was abolished.

The early temperance movement with its Bands of Hope, its pledge, its White Ribbons, was one thing; the movement that brought about National prohibition by the Eighteenth Amendment was quite another. In the temperance movement there were undoubtedly many who hoped to be able to make men temperate by law; others who hoped to make them temperate by abstinence; still others who hoped to induce them to become temperate by self-control. But, by whatever means, their object was the moral reform of the drinkers. For good or ill the day of that movement has long since past. But one thing is plain-in its high noon it never approached National prohibition. States, with few exceptions, that adopted prohibition under that influence abandoned it. Then there started another movement. It was less of a temperance movement than an anti-trust movement. It was directed, not to the moral reform of the individual, but the restraint of a dangerous and rebellious trust, the liquor trust. As the old temperance movement waned, this newer movement waxed. It gained its momentum through local option laws. People who did not profess to be total abstainers joined it. They saw in the American saloon but one of the many arms of an octopus of trade. It was a time when people were learning the differences between a good trust and a bad trust; and what they saw in the liquor trust was only bad. They saw it breaking ruthlessly the restraints of the law against selling to minors, against selling out of hours, against selling to drunkards, and other restraints in places where the sale was at all allowed. They saw it thrusting itself on communities that had outlawed it by local option. They saw it invading States that had chosen to keep it out. They saw it encamped about factories, living like a parasite on the life of other and productive businesses. They saw it laying siege to every dry State and every dry town and making breaches in the walls erected to keep it out. Their numbers, it is true, were swollen by the temperance advocates and preachers, but they constituted a force that the ascetics could never muster. And so at last they lost patience and swept the whole business, good and bad, into. outlawry.

Was it wise? Would the opponents of the liquor trade have done better if they had waited for more victories? They were pressing the trade hard. Could they have humbled it? That may be debated; but it is now an academic question. Prohibition, with its accompaniment of bootlegging, is here. The only question that counts is what shall we do with it.

Shall we try to get rid of prohibition, whether we substitute something better or not? To get rid of prohibition it

will not be enough to get a majority to say or even think th drink may be good. Probably a majority of those who four the fight that brought about prohibition were unwilling to that to drink a stein of beer or a glass of wine was of its evil. That was not what they were aiming at. It will possible to get rid of prohibition only when a majority (pr ably a large majority) are willing to think and say that th want the old saloon back and want to reinstate the liqu traffic.

There is only one alternative that any so-called wets n propose Government sale of liquor. That means that the who think it dangerous for the Government to go into bu ness must be persuaded that Government should go into t most dangerous business of all. Hard-headed people will be shocked by the picture of Uncle Sam as a bartender; hard-headed people are not going to be persuaded into laund ing the United States Government into that kind of Social tic bureaucracy. If Government agents can be corrupted prohibition, what will happen to Government dispensers liquor?

Prohibition is yet an experiment; but it will not be fu tried until it ceases to be thought of as a measure of temp ance and becomes, what it was intended to be, simply t abolition of the manufacture, sale, and transportation of liqu as a trade.

R

Disarmament Talk

USSIA made a grand oratorical gesture of disarm ment at Geneva. To the Preparatory Disarmame Commission of the League of Nations the Soviet de gate Litvinov proposed dissolution of all land, sea, and forces; destruction of all fortifications, weapons, munition and war industries; scrapping of all war-ships; abolition military training, military appropriations, and military a naval ministries and staffs.

Spokesmen of the League answered softly that all the met ods developed and work accomplished hitherto in the Di armament Conferences could not be abandoned for anoth different program. Despite earlier threats to quit unless the principles were adopted, the Russians acquiesced and remaine in the Conference. A few days later it adjourned, to me again in March. That was all that came of the much-herald Russian challenge.

"Why?" it seems worth while to ask. Assuming that Ru sia really would be glad to disarm if other nations did, a so relinquish the immense political power and patronage th the Red Army represents for the Soviet régime, why did t open demand for something that all the nations represent profess to want make so little stir? Obviously because no o expected that it could be accepted or thought that the Ru sians expected it to be accepted-in other words, because was a flourish devoid of any relation to reality.

The world-and particularly Europe is full of unsettl disputes. Soviet Russia, even after her withdrawal from World War and consequent absence from the Peace Confe ence of Paris, is involved in some of them-for instance, dispute with Rumania over her annexation of Bessarabia an the dispute with Poland over territory that formerly forme part of northwestern Russia. Until there is some method dealing with these disputes which does not call for relian

upon national power in the ultimate event, the nations will not lay down their arms.

To say, "Let's drop our guns and be friends," is so useless that no one even pays serious attention-except for purposes of propaganda. To say, "Let's agree on friendly ways of settling difficulties; then we can drop our guns," may perhaps hold out some hope. No one has heard Soviet Russia propose that. The differences between her and the rest of the world, however, are too profound for her to agree to submit her case to a "capitalistic" institution like the Court of International Justice at The Hague. But it is the only line of action that offers much chance of even limited practical results in disarmament.

Ο

New Fords for Old

F all the components that went into the making of the old Ford car, the flivver of history, the greatest was imagination.

Other manufacturers had iron and steel and copper and wood and rubber and all the other material things that go to make a car; but no one else had quite the imagination, the same imagination, that Henry Ford had. It requires imagination now, more imagination than most of us have, for us to put ourselves back into the environment of the first Model T. Our imagination would be helped by looking over some of the advertising of those days. It had not been long since one customary place for the door to a car was at the rear; and by 1908, when the now abandoned Model T made its appearance, the driver's seat was still much like that of a horsedrawn carriage. Buggies were still for sale and advertised alongside of the new contraptions called automobiles. To own ahorse and carriage in city or town was to belong to a privileged class. Roads were still primarily the highways for horse-drawn vehicles. Automobile accidents were rare because automobiles were few. In 1908 The Outlook reported as notable the occurrence on one day of five automobile accidents-two in Connecticut, one in Kentucky, and two in Germany. At the same time The Outlook proposed "a tentative scheme of law for the regulation of this new method of loconotion," and in that suggested a provision that the driver of an automobile, whether he be owner or chauffeur, should be required to take out a license. This was a radical suggestion. And yet at that time Henry Ford foresaw the automobile as an ordinary means of transportation of the common people. He built his car, as he then said, "for the great multitude."

It is as the car of the great multitude that the flivver has multiplied into millions. It has become the badge of the comnon people, and it has wrought a revolution in the democraizing of industry. It has helped to establish the high wage scale as a means for reducing cost of production. It has not only supplied transportation for the multitude, but by mass production, with its attendant increase in wages, has enabled The multitude to buy that transportation-and other products of industry. It has started industry on a beneficent circle. It has proved in a spectacular fashion that every producer is lso a consumer, and has shown how every industry in a country like ours can help to create its own market. It has Deen a leader in the process of passing prosperity around.

And now comes the new Ford. It resembles the old only in price. Analyze it. Its four-wheel brakes, its selective gear

transmission, and all of the other components of the new car have been listed-except one. Is there some industrial chemist that can isolate in it Henry Ford's imagination of what this new car will mean to the multitude in the coming years?

Intervention in Nicaragua

A

BLOODY civil war in Nicaragua between Diaz, President, and Sacasa, claimant to the Presidency, dragged on for months in 1926 and 1927. General Moncada, the author of the article in this issue on "Nicaragua and American Intervention," commanded the revolutionary army. During the fighting American marines preserved neutral zones. What business had American marines there?

Bitter reproaches have been heaped upon the Government at Washington for its "occupation of Nicaragua." One critic says that the marines were used to uphold the "tottering régime" of the Conservative President Diaz against the Liberals, and that "Latin American hearts from Cape Horn to the Rio Grande beat in sympathy with any Latin who fights the Yankee invasion." Another critic declares that the use of American marines in Nicaragua has "aroused almost universal censure."

For fourteen years American marines had been stationed as a legation guard in the fortress overlooking the Nicaraguan capital. When a coalition Government, under Solorzano, Conservative, as President, and Sacasa, Liberal, as VicePresident, was established in 1925, the marines were withdrawn. Thereupon Manuel Chamorro, a former President, overthrew the Government and established himself as President. In accordance with an agreement which he himself had signed, the United States refused to recognize him; and, in accordance with the Nicaraguan Constitution, the Nicaraguan Congress elected Adolfo Diaz President. Against Diaz (who was recognized by Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy, and the Central American Republics of Labrador, Guatemala, and Honduras) Sacasa, the Vice-President, who had fled the country, started a revolt. In command of his forces, the army of the Liberals, was José Maria Moncada.

President Diaz was unable to protect foreigners. He told the United States so; and other countries, notably Great Britain, asked the United States to protect their citizens. Our marines were therefore landed. Mr. Henry L. Stimson, sent by President Coolidge, to investigate conditions, found the country practically in a state of anarchy. He conferred with both sides. General Moncada had captured towns on the Atlantic coast and had led his army through the mountainous country of the interior toward the capital, but in. May of this year he yielded his chance for victory.

Both sides voluntarily disarmed and agreed to abide by the election to be held next year under the supervision of the United States.

Since then General Moncada has visited the United States; and on the eve of his return to his own country has responded to the request of The Outlook for his views of what the United States had done to him, to his army, his party, and his country. He, of all men, should know whether the policy of the United States has been oppressive or not. His answer to our request is, we believe, a document of significance in the history of the relations between the United States and Latin America.

By J. M. MONCADA

Leader of the Liberal Army

S

INCE coming to the United States I have been many times asked to explain what is our point of view in Nicaragua toward the presence of your American marines. In most cases the question has been accompanied by others concerning the general situation in Nicaragua both before and since my meeting with General Stimson.

Generally, I am asked, are we Liberals in Nicaragua in favor of having the United States supervise the election of 1928? Specifically, I am asked if at the time of my conference with Colonel Stimson, when the civil war was at its height, if I had won, could I have brought peace and prosperity to Nicaragua without the help of the United States? Could any Nicaraguan?

To answer such questions fully requires a brief review of the entire Nicaraguan situation.

Let me say this, as a preliminary:

We Liberals want the United States marines in Nicaragua. We believe that the marine officers such as now command our constabulary can best super-. vise the free elections necessary to put a representative Government in office. Further, we believe that the United States owes it to Nicaragua to keep her marines there until such elections have taken place. It is her duty and obligation,

N

APOLEON III used to say that Nicaragua occupies a position similar to that of Constantinople. Though poor in the number of its inhabitants-800,000 Nicaragua is rich in natural resources, in the variety of its soils and climates, and its splendid position. Both the Atlantic and the Pacific wash its shores. The facilities it offers for a canal route through its territory have been well known since the time of the Conquest.

For these reasons Nicaragua has always been coveted by certain powerful nations, and the United States has stood guard against the colonizing aspirations of the Old World, making clear its specific guardianship, first, in the ClaytonBulwer Treaty-signed in 1850 by England and the United States-wherein are defined the obligations of each contract

ing party with respect to the Nicaragua Canal or any other canal which might be opened through the isthmus of Central America; and, second, in the HayPauncefote Treaty, which broadened the rights of the North American Republic, clearing her way toward the construction of the Canal and the guardianship of the Caribbean. By building the Panama Canal the United States averted the danger of having one of Europe's feet planted on the New World.

For Nicaraguans two questions present themselves: Is it to the best interests of Central America that the United States or one of the powerful nations of Europe shall contribute to its development and progress? Is it to the best interests of Central Americans to receive a monarchical education, as they did when Spain ruled them as colonies, or a republican education, such as the United States can give them?

The answer is obvious. Liberty flowers in republican soil. The Monroe Doctrine guarantees the existence of American nations, whether Englishspeaking or Spanish-speaking.

Some would maintain that Cuba, for example, is not a truly independent republic, because of the influence exercised by the United States. But did Cuba elect its Chief Executive under Spain? Did she elect her Congress or have her own Supreme Court? And as to Nicaragua, we should never have recovered from England the Mosquito Coast, so precious to our sovereignty, without the aid of the United States.

Geographical causes, reinforced by duties and rights that cannot be repu

diated, have made the United States a its sister republics in the south a sing body. In the near future these nation of the New World will be governed b an international law distinct from th which operates between Europe an America-or, better still, a different la from the old one, which modern scienc in disregard of frontiers, is renderin obsolete.

ICARAGUA can progress only throug labor, industry, and commerc through education, roads, and railroad She must link her two coasts and dra nearer to the Atlantic, to the civiliz tions of Europe and the United State She must live in peace and learn to go ern herself under republican institution Continuous strife impoverishes her, di honors her.

It would be indeed worthy of the world's praise if Nicaragua could do a that unaided; but she is more than hundred years old as an independen nation, and a true republic is yet t flower on her soil. Whether Conserva tives or Liberals have been in power there have been no fair or free election for one hundred years, except during th period of Carazo and Dionisio de Her rera, which are memorable to all Nica raguans. The party in power alway has perpetuated itself. A terrible stat of anarchy reigned from 1821, the yea of independence, to 1857. From 185 to 1893 there was a measure of pead But in 1893, when the Government fe into the hands of José Santos Zelay there was again continuous guerrill warfare. In fact, during his tyrannic régime of seventeen years the Chamor family warred on him continuously And when Zelaya was forced out Managua by the celebrated Knox not the victors fought among themselves f the spoils, and a still bloodier civil wa ensued.

Then American marines landed Nicaragua to guarantee foreign interest The marines maintained peace witho interfering with the internal politics the country. But meanwhile, as th Government in office habitually contr the result of elections unless a revolutio intervenes, the existing Conservativ

Government was continued in power. There was no genuine progress possible toward a really republican government. For this reason commissions of the Liberal Party went to Washington to enlist the moral support of the United States in favor of electoral liberty for Nicaragua. As a result, the Dodds Law came into being and served us during the elections of Solorzano and Sacasa. In general, this law was and is good; but the best law in the world is futile when those intrusted with its enforcement are the first to violate it.

To President Martinez, President Diego Manuel Chamorro's immediate successor, the Department of State proposed the supervision of the election by American marines. This was excellent. Upon the inauguration of the President, however, elected in 1924, the marines were withdrawn. Solorzano, the new President, was a weak man devoid of ability and at bottom a Conservative. He distrusted Liberalism, and therefore kept war materials away from the Liberals. Such war materials, however, being in the hands of the followers of Emiliano Chamorro, who in 1925 was plotting to overthrow the administration of President Solorzano, Chamorro was able to use violence and enter the fortress of Tiscapa. There followed the persecution of Vice-President Sacasa, violence at Leon, export of cattle to Guatemala, Salvador, and Costa Ricathe cattle having been taken as a tax from the haciendas of liberals. All these things were done under the responsibility of Chamorro and of Lieutenant Humberto Pasos Diaz, nephew of the present President. Finally, President Solorzano was forced to resign. Chamorro assumed power and the duly elected judges were driven from the Supreme Court, and hus the judicial power as well as legisative and executive power was destroyed, and the bloody road was opened once more to civil war.

Civil war did result. During that painful period all forces, even natural forces, seemed arrayed against Nicaaguan liberalism.

We fell and we rose on the march hrough the wild hills, clutching at trees and bushes to keep our footing, thrown lown precipices into infected marshes, nto rivers, with our horses and equip

ment.

We arrived at Teustepe, and hen at Tipitapa. Here we found the ersonal representative of President Coolidge, General Stimson, bearing eace proposals, asking for a cessation of he war.

Diaz's proposal for the supervision of the election of the chief authorities in 1928, which shall be free and fair, so that all Nicaraguan citizens may express their will at the polls. My Government considers that the very honor of the United States is involved in this. In recognizing Diaz my Government has acted in good faith, under a sincere interpretation of the laws of Nicaragua, and wishes the present Chief Executive to continue in the discharge of his functions while the electoral law is reformed and a true non-partisan national guard is created. With that guard and the marines a free and just election will be carried out."

The meaning of these words stirred me profoundly. I answered:

I am here as a simple soldier, and it is my duty to consult with the other chiefs of the army and with the delegates of Dr. Sacasa, who are also in Tipitapa. I ask of you a period of eight days to give an answer. During that time I will return to the army to do what I can to convince it, or to return to war if its opinion should be contrary to mine.

In these conversations the delegates of Dr. Sacasa and MM. Arguello Espinosa and Cordero Reyes intervened. They protested, saying immediately that they

had left to myself and the army the whole responsibility of the problem. I accepted it.

I held in the highest esteem this valiant and self-sacrificing army, always generous and well disciplined although lacking wages and food. I meditated profoundly; and when I spoke at Boaco to the assembled generals and to the army itself, which formed in the plaza, I did what was possible to convince them that it was necessary to yield, to have confidence in the word of the personal representative of President Coolidge, which was equivalent to the word of the American Government itself and would be backed by the American people as something pertaining to the National honor. I also told them that, in spite of this sincere opinion, I was ready to accompany them if the majority should resolve to resist. They all approved of my position. With the signatures of all the generals, the resolution was transmitted to General Stimson, who saluted the army when it disarmed at Tipitapa and wrote the promise that every one knows in the United States.

I

HAVE been asked since if at the time of my conference with General Stimson could I, if I had won, have brought peace and prosperity to Nicaragua without the help of the United States?

Could any Nicaraguan?

Actually, it is not possible for me to answer that question. Having been victorious in the field of battle-and I think I had already defeated the forces. of President Diaz-it would have been my duty as a loyal soldier to place the army at the disposal of the citizen recognized by us Liberals as the legitimate President. It would be his duty to take over the task of restoring constitutional order, the other laws of the land, and of establishing the peace.

I am perfectly convinced, however, that Sacasa or any other statesman will always need the help of the United States to establish a good Government. When General Stimson told me at Tipitapa that the President of the United States was willing to assist in the supervision of our election in 1928, I felt, and still feel, that this would open to Nicaragua the only way by which such good Government and a lasting peace could be established. I told General Stimson frankly that peace had so far only been attained through tyranny in Nicaragua. Tyranny brings with it no good and depraves the public conscience. To gain power over the dead bodies of our fellow