less noise?" Such impassioned oratory with the exchange of personal insults serves to distract the jurors' minds from the issues of the case and to focus their attention upon the individualities of the lawyers. The natural instinct is to champion one of the two men. It was so in this case. Afterwards I inquired of several lawyers regarding this practice of haranguing the jury, and the reply was invariably the same: "We have to consider the type of men on the jury. It takes that kind of thing to impress them."

When the Court had completed its business, the jurors were dismissed to deliberate. We were locked in a small apartment. Eleven of the jurors lighted large black cigars, and the foreman made his proposals. For two whole days, from nine until four, we argued the case from every point of view. The air was dense with smoke and the cuspidors on either side of my chair were

in constant demand-I became extremely agile in my movements during those two days. There was ample opportunity offered me to express my opinion, and when I took advantage of it I was listened to with the greatest respect. We took frequent ballots, but were never able to secure the necessary nine assenting votes required in a civil case for a verdict. At the expiration of two days the Judge was forced to accept our deadlock, and we were sent back to the juror assembly rooms to await our next

case.

As I review my experience two points seem to be worthy of particular consideration. The first is the kind of treatment I received throughout my period of service-the democratic spirit I found, the fact that by reason of my presence there I was considered of the same class as all of the other jurors. Most of us were there making some sacrifice to do our duty, and that made

a peculiar tie between us. If, as a large part of the world contends, chivalry is declining because women are assuming their new rôle, no one can deny that women are receiving more practical respect and admiration from the men than ever before. What matter if the men fail to give us their seats in a street car or neglect to ask our permission to smoke, if they have sufficient regard for our minds to value our opinions? My second point is my firm conviction that it is the duty of every woman summoned to jury service, especially the woman of intelligence and education, to serve her term. Too many business men have slipped out of this duty in one way or another, and the mean character of the average jury is only too well known. The women, if they are conscientious in this new duty, can set an example for the men to follow. It is one of the ways in which women can demonstrate the qualities of good citizenship.

HE more print is being expended on a given topic, the more does a perverse editorial pen itch to add its quota to the profusion. The mutual recriminations of Grundyites and antiGrundyites are even noisier in conversation than on the printed page, but what puzzles the editorial mind is that anybody should find anything novel in a scrimmage between any two next-door generations. The first prerogative that youth has always assumed is the right to shock its elders, and the last prerogative that age would relinquish is the capacity to be shocked by the youngsters. Is it not a little touching, however, to observe the interdependence of all this pleasure in shocking and all this pain of being shocked? If old people and young people were ever so far apart as they think they are, would they be quite so sensitive to their effect on each other? Fathers and mothers are never actually laid on the shelf; they are always the most influential gallery gods in the universe.

Among history's most incessant repetitions is the conviction of all adolescence that it is staging something brand new in the matter of sophistication. For several thousand years no boy has come to twenty years without believing himself more knowing than his poor dear father in all respects, but especially in his insight into the heart of woman; and for an even longer period no girl has ever reached sixteen with out conceiving herself cleverer than her mother in manipulating the hearts of men. Yet the relations of the sexes are so hoary with antiquity that it is highly improbable that any youth has found out anything about women unknown to Solomon, who had a thousand specimens for experiment, and equally un

certain whether the very youngest débutante of 1921 will find any methods of popularity in which Cleopatra had not anticipated her.

To let every era suppose it is inventing the very newest thing in revolutions is history's way of safeguarding her stability. The emancipation of women will have to travel a long way before it gets as far as Deborah had already arrived in the neighborhood of 1200 B.C. Freedom of speech between the sexes is a custom so recurrent that one hesitates to call attention to the robust dialogue of the youths and maidens of Shakespeare or of Fielding. License to-day has still much to learn from the Court of Charles II, and is any one so illiterate as to fancy that all the lords and ladies who danced at those mad balls were on the farther side of sixteen? Sixteen was an age considered fully mature in those days, and for long and long afterward. In fact, it is only within the last forty years that we have tried forcibly to extend the age of infancy, possibly quite against nature. It is not Shakespeare or his audience, but ourselves, who would have considered Juliet precocious. In passing, it may be noted that Juliet's balcony had many advantages over the 3 A.M. roadster, notably the constant menace of the nurse's appearing as chaperon. When there is no longer any chaperon to circumvent, a great deal of zest is sacrificed. The strongest argument for keep ing up all the appearances of convention is that each incoming generation may have something against which to revolt.

In the 1920 discussions in the "Atlantic" and their 1921 repercussion in the "Times," space is politely given to both sides of this Grundyism. Youth

maintains that the Victorian era, because it kept feminine stockings and masculine vices both discreetly under cover, somehow brought on the European war, thereby entailing the Herculean task of reconstruction upon the young people of to-day. It is because they are working so hard to rebuild a ruined world that youths and maidens jazz-step and drink and fondle each other in public. The sequence is a little difficult to follow, but the dullest of us oldsters can gather that, whatever the faults of the present, the chief fault is our own, partly because we are responsible for smashing the world, and partly because we ourselves always wanted to walk and to talk, audacious and unclothed, but possessed neither the courage nor the frankness of our convictions. There is a certain Teutonic echo in the assumption that people are respectable only because they are too cowardly and too hypocritical to be anything else. Yet what requires more courage to-day than to be mid-Victorian in either morals or manners? And why is it hypocritical to wear your face as nature made it, but sincere to wear it gaudily painted? If a young man is really working as hard as he thinks he is, why is he not free to take the sleep he needs instead of being the slave of the midnight motor? If a girl really prefers to talk of flowers rather than Freud and to cover her back rather than to expose it, why should she not be at liberty to obey that impulse? After all, sex topics of conversation and all the gamut of physical sensations are extremely restricted.

Good old Victoria allowed us less license but more variety. Some of our world-worn sub-debs and sub-youths begin to sound a little jaded in spite of

their vigorous defense of their liberties. Monotonous old world in which every generation has always broken the bonds of its predecessors, only to become the slave of its own contemporaries! It never takes any independence to revolt against the past, because everybody is doing it and everybody always has done it, but it requires a great deal of initiative to rebel against the present. History has for some reason, however, always awarded her highest niches to the men and women who did make this revolt, who had the vision and the gumption to appropriate what seemed

best to them out of all past eras, laughing at all subservience to transient Puritanism or to transient license.

If no youthful generation need ever glory in its audacity, neither need any older generation ever grumble at it. The pendulum swings back and forth every thirty years with mathematical uniformity. All that youth ever desires is to be different from its parents, and in that fact is reassurance. To-day it is the fashion for young people to lay all things bare. They are leaving absolutely nothing to be revealed. Therefore the only way the next crop of boys and

girls can have their due of revolt is to cover everything up again. The debs of to-day will have their daughters, and these daughters will have no choice but to be prudes. Jazz will have tom-tomed so madly that there will be nothing to do but to bring back the minuet. Once the feminine anatomy has been entirely denuded, no girl will become alluring except by wrapping it up again from chin to toe. Since always the first duty of young men is to be wholly different from their fathers, every baby boy of to-day must inevitably grow up to be as decorous as a Scotch Covenanter.

HE best of baseball pitchers are likely to get rattled and lose their heads; but for a pitcher to lose a leg is a tragedy. Joseph Meehan, aged nineteen, lost his right leg above the knee. He also lost all hope of ever being able to pitch another game of ball. At this unhappy point in his career the Bureau of Rehabilitation of the State of Pennsylvania stepped in and put him back on his feet, providing him with an artificial leg and entering him in a business training course. He lost no time in becoming manager of an amateur baseball team in his neighborhood, and, greatly to his delight, discovered that he could pitch a ball as accurately as ever.

He pitched twelve games last summer, winning ten for his team; one game in which he played throughout wound up in a tie score after nineteen innings. He not only occupies the pitcher's box, but takes his turn at the bat and manages to run to first at a brisk clip.

The story of Pennsylvania's Bureau of Rehabilitation is a story of unusual human and industrial interest. It occupies an increasingly important place in a State whose industrial pay-roll totals $4,400,000,000, although its population is less than nine million. A total of 152,544 accidents was reported in 1919, of which 2,569 were fatal and 38,942 were serious; 768 of these accidents oc

curred to persons under sixteen years of age. The number of working days lost through accidents totaled over two million, with wages lost totaling over $8,000,000. More than 91,000 of these accidents occurred to married employees.

Governor Sproul signed the act establishing Pennsylvania's Bureau of Rehabilitation in 1919. The work is in charge of Clifford B. Connelley, Commissioner of Labor and Industry, and S. S. Riddle. These two men were confronted with a big job and with an appropriation of only $100,000 to work with. Their headquarters are in Harrisburg. They have managed to add ten field workers to their staff, and have aston

ished the State by their quick action in maintaining victims of accidents while they learn a trade or obtain an academic education.

"There must be no politics in this, only a supreme effort to serve," declared Commissioner Connelley when he started in on this work. He was himself compelled to drop out of school at the age of eleven while a boy in Pittsburgh, but this did not prevent him from learning the pattern-making craft nor from becoming an authority on labor, industry, and vocational and educational training. This announcement of his is found posted throughout the State of Pennsylvania:

"All residents of Pennsylvania whose capacity to earn a living has been destroyed or impaired through an industrial accident occurring in Pennsylvania are urged to write at once to the Bureau of Rehabilitation, Harrisburg, as the service of the Bureau is without cost to injured persons. Co-operation of employers and employees throughout the State is essential and wherever it is believed that a disabled one could be employed in suitable work the Bureau of Rehabilitation asks that it be so advised."

During the first six months of its activities the Bureau offered its services to 971 victims located in 59 of Pennsylvania's 67 counties; 105 of the people who had suffered injuries were over fifty years of age and 99 were under twenty-one. Of these people 167 had lost legs, 178 hands, 109 arms, 61 feet, and 48 were blind.

Harry Craig, for example, a sixteenyear-old, who lost his left leg as a result of injuries while employed chopping timber, was taught armature winding and the repairing of electrical equipment. Albert Thomas, with a wife and seven children to support, lost his sight, part of his hearing, and the use of his left shoulder through an explosion in a

CLIFFORD B. CONNELLEY, COMMISSIONER OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY, IS ONE OF THE TWO MEN IN CHARGE OF PENNSYLVANIA'S BUREAU OF REHABILITATION

EDWARD V. RAWHAUSER CLAIMS TO BE THE ONLY ONE-ARMED BLACKSMITH IN PENNSYLVANIA. THE BUREAU OBTAINED FOR HIM AN ARTIFICIAL HAND SUITABLE FOR BLACKSMITHING, AND HE IS OPERATING HIS OWN HORSESHOEING ESTABLISHMENT

workers, hospitals, hospitals, publicspirited citizens, and field workers or adjusters.

clay mine. welfare The Bureau induced the Workmen's Compensation Board to allow him a lump-sum payment of his compensation award adequate to obtain a small home and to buy a loom to weave rag carpets. They sent him to Pittsburgh's Workshop for the Blind, where he is learning to weave carpet, and upon the completion of his course he will operate his own loom in his home.

Edward 'V. Rawhauser claims that he is the only one-armed blacksmith in Pennsylvania. At the age of fifty-seven he lost his left hand; the Bureau obtained for him an artificial hand suitable for blacksmithing, which had been his trade prior to his injury, and he is to-day successfully operating his own horseshoeing establishment near York, Pennsylvania.

The present high cost of artificial arms and legs, it appears, makes these a luxury well beyond the reach of most victims of serious accidents, and the Bureau has enabled many who would otherwise have had to go about with empty sleeves or trouser legs to be equipped with artificial limbs.

Letters and telephone and telegraph messages are now pouring into the main office of the Bureau, asking aid on behalf of victims of accidents. Vigorous co-operation is being extended to the Bureau by employers, the Workmen's Compensation Board, insurance companies, physicians, the Red Cross, social

Visitors at the headquarters of the Bureau are refreshed by the cheering atmosphere, which is unlike the emotionless, humdrum routine of departments where politics holds sway.

"Hello, chief," one may hear "Si" Riddle say as he waylays the busy Commissioner; "we got that steel-worker fixed up to-day-lost his right leg in the steel mills. Yep, the leg will cost $150, but we pay only two-thirds. His future employer goes security for the balance at $10 a month and five installments."

"Great!" replies the Commissioner. "How's that big Pole with the new arm?"

"Got a good job for him in Cambria County," answers Riddle. "He sent for his wife to come over from Poland. They're farm tenants now."

The Bureau's field workers have established stations at Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Wilkes-Barre, Pottsville, Harrisburg, Altoona, and Du Bois. One of these workers has had experience in newspaper work, medicine, and schoolteaching; another was in the Tank Corps; a third has been a dentist, doctor, and president of a school board. These men quickly get into contact with every case reported, and from the mass of their data the Bureau will eventually be able to determine more definitely what Pennsylvania's rehabilitation problem is and how it should be met.

Н.

RUSSIA IN SUN OR SHADOW?

BY IVAN PETRUNKEVITCH

HONORARY PRESIDENT FOR LIFE OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL
DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF RUSSIA

G. WELLS speaks of "Russia in
the Shadows," and thinks that

not a beam of light, not a ray of hope, will penetrate it. Indeed, the powder smoke of war has enveloped Russia since the moment when Germany, feeling too crowded, decided that her neighbors should draw closer together to give her room and began to exert force against them. France and Belgium have greatly suffered from their powerful enemy. Yet, being richer, more civilized, and better armed than Russia, they have finally overcome

their enemy with the aid of England and America and with the approval of almost the entire world. They taught Germany a wholesome lesson. But Russia, weak, badly armed, and still worse governed, got into the clutches of the Bolsheviks and lies prostrate, battered, exhausted, and disarmed, yet still alive, still struggling. Those whom Wells calls adventurers and brigands are in reality true representatives of the unconquerable spirit of the people, the champions of freedom and of the Revolution of March, 1917, not of Czarism or of the old régime.

States do not collapse as suddenly as do badly built houses. Similarly, a people with a history stretching over a thousand years, having just overthrown autocracy, certainly have not done this merely to accept a new tyranny and then to die. We Russians do not doubt that the struggle will go on, whatever reverses we may suffer, since no defeats can change our belief that sooner or later victory will be on the side of the people and not on the side of the usurpers.

If Bolshevism crushes Russia, it will be a memento mori to Great Britain and America. The spiritual bareness of Bolshevism is best expressed in the words of one of its prophets: "If threequarters of the population of Russia should perish of hunger and cold, then one-quarter will remain which will achieve the glory of the world revolution." Only such glory, only such new happiness, can Bolshevism promise humanity hoping for the regeneration of the world.

The existence of Russia, the Russian problem in its full scope, is at present the foremost problem of international policy for all countries. No country can settle it from the point of view of its own interests alone without taking into account the interest of other countries as well.

The Russian problem in its world significance has found a lucid interpreter in the person of John Spargo, who

1 Russia in the Shadows. By H. G. Wells. Illustrated. The George H. Doran Company.

follows untiringly the evolution of Bolshevism in Russia and who is a profound student of Russia. In his address before the Cleveland Chamber of Com

merce some time ago Spargo denounced Bolshevism as the chief cause of Russia's ruin. He holds that every country into which Bolshevism penetrates will suffer the same fate as Russia. The same opinion is held by the best minds of Europe.

The vacillating attitude of England since the proposal of the Prinkipo conference leaves little hope that she will agree with Spargo. Unquestionably the internal diffi

IVAN PETRUNKEVITCH

culties of England are great. The Irish question and the triple union of workers cause heavy disturbance in her life. Yet every thinking Englishman knows that the Irish question, being more a problem of geography than of politics, is beyond the power of either Englishmen or Irishmen to solve. As for the labor problem, the advanced political develop ment of the English people serves as guaranty for the inviolability of parliamentary rule and Constitution as long as the madness of Bolshevism will be kept powerless to fetter the will of Englishmen as it has fettered H. G. Wells. Lloyd George's Government has seemed ready to sacrifice England's traditional pride, ready to forget all the epithets by which it has characterized the political and moral features of the Moscow usurpers, ready to forgive all the crimes against Englishmen in Russia. It has been ready to do all this in order to rejuvenate English trade, dispose of English goods, and give work to the unemployed. The English Government knows that the trade agreement with Soviet Russia will not bring England either

raw products or other advantages, but hopes that it will thus deprive the Opposition of one of the weapons used against the Government. The act of signing a trade agreement by England will have served as a signal for similar action by many other countries. It is a new and heavy blow to the Russian people.

The Moscow Soviet Government has

placed both itself and the country in a hopeless situation; it finds itself without means of transportation, without bread or clothing. All complaints against and references to the blockade lack foundation because Russia has never existed on imported grain, nor can she buy clothing if she has no bread for export. Bolshevism has recklessly squandered the national wealth, and in complaining of the blockade is only attempting to shift the guilt from its own shoulders to those of foreigners. Bolshevism more than any blockade has destroyed Russian industry.

As a losing gambler, Bolshevism has sought material support in western Europe and in America because any help would prolong its existence; it would, in the words of Lenine, give a temporary respite, which has been already more than once its salvation. A splendid example of this policy is the Riga peace with Poland. Bolshevism does not doubt that the world revolution will wipe out all assumed responsibilities and destroy the existing order.

We would not consider ourselves entitled to protest against the ending of the political isolation of the Soviet Government by foreign countries if that Government had the sanction of the Russian people. We protest because the idea of the sovereignty of the people forms the foundation of modern constitutional law and is recognized by all countries. The Soviet Government has denied the people the very right to sovereignty. It seems that outside of Russia many are thinking that the revolutionary origin of the Soviet Government does not differ materially from the origin of the First Provisional Government, which came into existence after the March Revolution, just as the Soviet Yet Government did in November. their respective positions differ greatly. The Provisional Government, having deposed the Czar and proclaimed the Republic, issued an electoral law never surpassed in democratic spirit. It considered its mission to be fulfilled when the Constituent Assembly elected by the people should have taken over the reins of government. The temporary character of the Government was accepted by every one. The Soviet Government, having overthrown the Provisional Government, dispersed by armed force the Constituent Assembly on the first day of its opening, when it became clear that the Government did not possess a majority. The Soviet Government declared that the dictatorship of the pro