CHRISTIAN ENDEAVOR FOR LEAGUE OF FREE NATIONS By Dr. Francis E. Clark, President United Society of Christian Endeavor. Un I believe that there is nothing quite so important for all forwardlooking people to unite upon, as the League of Free Nations, which we hope and pray will be established at the coming Peace Conference. less we desire that the world shall still welter in blood every few years, and that militarism shall still continue to be the curse of the ages, there is no alternative to the League of Nations. Everyone admits that there will be difficulties in the way of its adoption. Reactionaries of all kinds will oppose it, partisan interests will deplore it and put as much sand in the wheels as possible. But I believe there is a great and growing majority of the people of America and, I trust, of all the peoples of the world, who will stand together for this great advance step, which will not only make the world safe for democracy but make it a decent place for decent men to live in. The four millions of members of the Christian Endeavor societies in our own country and throughout the world, I believe, are united in standing for these high purposes, so far as they understand them, and in thousands of Local Union meetings during the year this will be one to come, of the subjects discussed, as a necessary adjunct to the advancement of the Kingdom of God on earth. The following Resolution was passed by the Trustees of the United Society of Christian Endeavor and the World's Christian Endeavor Union, December 10, 1918: "The Trustees of the United Society of Christian Endeavor and the World's Christian Endeavor Union, representing some four millions of Endeavorers throughout the world, join other Christian bodies in this country and Great Britain in demanding a new order in the world's political life, embodied in a League of Free Nations. "Three hundred thousand Endeavorers have enlisted in the armies of America and of the Allies. Many of them have laid down their lives that the world may be free from militarism. They have warred against war. That these men may not have died in vain, that others who have given everything but life may not have suffered in vain, we ask that no obstacle be allowed to stand in the way of the consummation of the world's great hope. "For the sake of the church of the future, for the sake of every righteous cause, for the sake of children yet unborn, for the sake of Christ whose we are and whom we serve, we pray that in this great crisis those who are responsible for the outcome may not fail to make the peace permanent, and bind together the free nations of the world in bonds that selfish nationalism and an aggressive militarism cannot break." The leaders of the Christian Endeavor movement have it in mind to do all that they properly can to promote the League of Free Nations, by frequent articles in The Christian Endeavor World, which reaches several hundred thousand who belong to this Society, and also by proposing to them a World-Union Committee, whose duties shall be in part as fol lows: "The committee will keep the society or union informed regarding wise plans for the promotion of permanent peace and a world brotherhood, especially such plans as those for a League of Free Nations and a World Court. "To advocate, promote, and sustain world-wide Christian Endeavor as a factor in this new world brotherhood, and a means for advancing it. The World's Christian Endeavor Union, already in existence for more than twenty years, with its efficient national secretaries, and a multitude of unpaid workers, its conventions and union meetings in almost every land, offers a splendid opportunity to make effective every wise plan for Christian co-operation among the nations and denominations of the world. "By keeping constantly before the Christian Endeavorers the world-wide democratic, humanitarian, and religious ideals of the new era." THE PAN-AMERICAN EXAMPLE By John Barrett, Director General of the Pan-American Union. ATURALLY anyone interested NAT in Pan-American affairs will be favorable to a League of Nations which will have as its great purpose the preservation of permanent peace throughout the world. The Pan-American Union is, in fact, today, a League of American Nations which has been actually effective in maintaining peace and preventing war throughout the Western Hemisphere. Since the Governing Board, or International Council of the PanAmerican Union, has met regularly around its oval table in the beautiful Pan-American Building, there has been no war between any two American republics, and undoubtedly the moral influence of this Council has prevented several wars between them. It is now twelve years since the reorganization of the Pan-American Union and the beginning of its great practical work, and it has a record of which it can be proud. It is, perhaps, no exaggeration to say that the Pan-American Union may be the prototype of a world organization. British and French statesmen who have been in the United States since the world war started have remarked that if there had existed in London or Berlin, in Paris or Vienna, a PanEuropean Union, like the Pan-American Union in Washington, where the highest representative of the European nations regularly gathered every month to consider European affairs, the war would have been averted. Already there is a sentiment developing in the United States Congress and throughout Central and South America in favor of So strengthening the Pan-American Union that it may become a real League of American Nations to preserve peace among them. It would not interfere with a World League, but would mean that the family of American Nations would settle their own questions and not require the cooperation of the World League unless this American family were in dispute with some country of Europe or Asia. This suggestion may seem impracticable to many, but ever since it was my first privilege to suggest it nearly twenty years ago, I have not yet found a really great Pan-American statesman who was opposed to it. The one necessity is to work out the problem in a way that will be approved by all the American governments. OF Peace By ROY MALCOM Professor of Political Science, University of Southern California F late years certain public speakers and writers have been saying that the Pacific will be the stage upon which the world will witness the enactment of the next great drama in history. They point out that other great movements in history have centered, first, around around the Mediterranean world, secondly, around the Atlantic, while the next, undoubtedly, will be in and about the great basin of the Pacific Ocean. At first thought this statement may seem to be more of an appeal to the imagination than a serious forecast of what is to come, but all students of the question are convinced of one thing at least, namely, the nations bordering upon this huge ocean will have a far greater influence, for good or ill, upon world politics of the future than they have had heretofore. In the past the slogan, or "bugaboo," "the mastery of the Pacific" has received no little attention in the writings of certain propagandists, and it has also appeared in the public utterances of a few alarmists. The appeal has been made upon the basis of military and commercial supremacy. It smacks of the old order of things before the World War and we must subject it to the light of the new day that has come in international politics. Let us briefly take stock of the situation and see just what interests are involved within the area of this vast body of water. We naturally think first of our own territorial possessions. Beginning at the California-Mexican border our coast line stretches on north to the Canadian border at the strait of Juan de Fuca, a distance of some fifteen hundred miles. This long reach of territory includes the three great Pacific Coast states of California, Oregon, and Washington, with a combined area of 324,123 square miles, over one and one-half times larger than Germany in Europe. Here is a land empire in itself and the resources as yet are hardly touched. Its relation, commercially, to the Pacific, particularly to the Orient, is one of immense strategic importance. Then we jump to the southern extremity of Alaska and follow its. jagged shores away to the Arctic regions. Here we find a domain larger than the combined areas of Germany and France in Europe and just in its infancy of economic and commercial development. "Seward's iceberg" is proving to be a vast coldstorage house filled with huge supplies of coal, gold, lumber, and other commodities while the surrounding waters abound in fish and other products of the sea. Next we may take a leap to the Hawaiian Islands, the "half-way house" between America and the Orient, rich in sugar, fruits, and coffee. From there we cross the vast reaches of the Pacific touching upon the Samoan group, Wake Island, Guam, and finally arriving at the Philippines, the farthest outpost of our colonial possessions, and which are now showing much promise under American tutelage. The United States must guard all of these possessions in no selfish spirit of exploitation and monopoly, but in the interests of the needs of mankind the world over. Among the other nations of this area, we, perchance, think next of China with its teeming millions and its undeveloped resources. This "Great Giant of the East" is just rousing itself from a centuries-old complacency that has been almost fatal to its national life, and even now is restless under the compelling urge of democracy. What possibilities for good or ill in the world lie dormant in those 300 millions, or more, of Chinamen! Across the Japan Sea and the East China Sea is the Island Empire of Japan, a land inhabited by an energetic and progressive people. This "mighty" little state that broke into the family of nations by defeating a great power in 1904-1905, and that has played a silent, but none the less effective, part in fighting the Prussian menace, particularly in ridding the Pacific of the Hun pirates! We cannot overlook the Pacific possessions of Russia, the nation that, though now torn and wrenched by revolution, is capable of playing such an important role in the politics of the Pacific. Then we may turn to British Canada, a land of unmeasured wealth, and champion in the Western Hemisphere of British democracy; South America, often called the "neglected continent," with its vast resources and numerous republican governments, and now beginning to play a very significant role in world affairs; Australia, the "Continent Island," and New Zealand representing the far-flung battle lines of democracy in the Southwest Pacific; and what shall we say of the thousands of islands scattered throughout this great water empire? In contemplating this wide expanse of territory several impressions stand out preeminently, namely, first, the possibilities for commercial development and growth are beyond measure; secondly, no one nation can "master," even if it desired, this huge portion of the world's area; and, thirdly, it can remain a pacific sea, as its name indicates, or it may become the scene of international squabbles and jealousies which would lead in the direction of a second world war. We believe the cry "the mastery of the Pacific" is a meaningless phrase. If it implies the physical mastery by one nation, it is empty-the job is too big. We all know the measure of the task confronting the Allies in attempting to master the North Sea, which has an estimated area of 180,000 square miles, whereas the Pacific Ocean has an estimated area of 68,634,000 square miles, approximately 380 times larger than the North Sea. If it contemplates the monopoly of trade and commerce by one nation, or a particular group of nations, here again the job is big and we would be thrown back again upon that form of national selfishness and aggrandizement which was one of the glaring defects of the old system. The two nations that have been commonly associated in the so-called "mastery of the Pacific" are the United States and Japan. For a long time busy-bodies and experts in "jingoism" and "scare-head" lines have been attempting to stir up trouble between these two great powers that face each other upon the Pacific. First it was the California school question, then Japanese immigration and the California anti-alien land law dispute, and now it is the "open door" in China and the Monroe Doctrine of the Orient. All of these problems are difficult of solution and furnish the basis for honest differences of opinion, but any open-minded seeker of the truth will be brought to one conclusion, namely, these questions may be settled, as some of them have been already, without resort to war. Indeed, it is to the everlasting credit of both Japan and the United States that thus far they have endeavored to settle all questions arising between them upon the basis of open diplomacy and moral responsibility. We have as evidences of this spirit of cooperation and friendliness the "Gentlemen's Agreement" of 1907, the Root Takahira Agreement of 1908, and, more recently, the Ishii-Lansing Agreement of 1917. Under the Gentlemen's Agreement of 1907 Japan undertook to limit the emigration of Japanese coolie laborers bound for the United States. She has adhered consistently to the word and spirit of this agreement, and thus has given to the world a splendid example of the place of moral responsibility in the dealings of one nation with another. The Root-Takahira Agreement of 1908 and the Ishii-Lansing Agreement of 1917 are attempts on the part of the two nations concerned to define their respective positions touching the politics of the Far East, particularly their attitude on the "Open Door" in China. The questions of American citizenship for the Japanese and the California anti-alien land law dispute are still in abeyance but there is no valid reason why they cannot also be settled in a friendly fashion. Again, because of America's attitude toward China on the questions of the Boxer indemnity and the "Open Door" she occupies a place of moral leadership rarely accorded before to any nation. The Chinese students educated on the "indemnity" money in America have acted as the leaven for the New China that is rising upon the dust of the old monarchy. How indefensible the act that would cause the surrender of this high place of moral leadership! There are neighbors of China and Japan that also see the moral emphasis in the new world order. Aus |