Sumerians, Cosmology of the, H. Radau, Mon.
Sutter, Gen. John A., Last Days of, W. S. Rice, OutW.
Swedenborg's Writings, The Word and, J. Reed, NC.
Symbol-Psychology and the Myths of Nations, A. Roeder,
Mind.

Tennis Matches, International, of 1902, H. Brewster, Mun.
Theatre, Free, Plea for the, J. L. Ford, Mun.
Theology as a Science-II., P. Carus, Mon.

Theology as a Science for the Christian Ministry, J. D. Severinghaus, Luth.

Thief, Autobiography of a, H. Hapgood, FrL.
"Tolstoy Colony" at Christchurch, A. Fifield, YM.
Tolstoy, Count Leo, An Hour with, E. Crosby, Mind.

Tolstoy, Count Leo, Misinterpretation of, A. Maude, OC.
Topffer, Rodolphe, J. A. F. Maitland, MonR.
Tracy, Harry, Story of, J. R. Justice, FrL.
Transvaal: see South Africa.

Trinity, The, P. Carus, OC.

Trout-Fishing, Swedish, Earl of Mayo, NineC.

Trust Problem: How to Meet It through Coöperation, G. F. Washburn, Arena.

Trust Problem, Latest Phase of the, J. B. Clark, NatM. Trusts and Monopolies, Influence of, on the Market, C. Cornélisse, RSoc, September.

"Trusts," Control of, H. E. Montgomery, GBag. Tuberculosis, S. Bernheim and A. Roblot, Revue, September 15.

Tuberculosis, Causes, and Suggestions for the Prevention of, H. D. Holton, San, September.

Tucson, Arizona, R. Ford, OutW, September.
Turkey, Seen in, R. S. Baker, Out.

United States and Mexico at the Hague Court, W. T. Stead,
AMRR.

Ains.

Abbreviations of Magazine

United States, Competition of the, with the United Kingdom, J. Waddell, PopS.

United States, Public Debt of the, O. P. Austin, NAR.
Uses and Trusts, California Statute of, J. Currey, ALR.
Vallombrosa, Italy, Mme. Sophia V. Bompiani, LeisH.
Venice, Artist Life in, H. Pennington, Cent.
Verdaguer, Mosseu Jascinto, BB.

Verse, English, On the Writing of, C. Oman, Corn.
Virchow, Rudolf, Career of, O. G. Villard, AMRR.
Virchow, Rudolf, the Teacher, H. S. Williams, AMRR.
Virginia, Round About in, H. H. Moore, Out.
Vreeland, Herbert Harold, C. W. Price, Cos.

Wage, A Fixed: Is It Just? G. Maxwell, WW.
Wages, Economic Theory of, F. W. Moore, MRN.
Wagner, Richard, E. P. Evans, OC.

War, Machiavelli on the Art of, R. G. Burton, USM.
White, Andrew D., C. H. Hull, WW.

White Slave-Trade and the Paris Congress, P. di Calboli,
NA, September 16.

Whitman, Walt, Leaves from the Later Life of, Crit. Wilson, President Woodrow, S. Andrews, Cos; J. L. Williams, McCl.

Wisconsin, Political Campaign in, E. R. Stevens, WW.
Woman That Toils, The, Marie Van Vorst, Ev.

Woman's Ideals: When They Fall, Lavinia Hart, Cos.
Woman's Victory for Schools, A. E. Winship, Ev.
Women, Some Peasant, G. Bourne, Corn.
Writing, Descriptive, B. A. Heydrick, Chaut.
Yachting A Personal Experience, T. Dixon, Jr., CLA.
Yeats, W. B., Later Work of, Fiona Macleod, NAR.
Young's "Night Thoughts," L. Stephen, Crit.
Zola, Emile, RRL.

Zoo, Lessons of the, F. G. Aflalo, Cham.

Titles used in the Index.

Ainslee's Magazine, N. Y.

ACQR. American Catholic Quarterly

Edin. Ed.

Review, Phila.

Ed R.

NAR.

AJS.

American Journal of Soci

EM.

ology, Chicago.

Ev.

AJT.

American Journal of The

Fort.

ology, Chicago.

Forum.

Nou.

NA.

OC.

0.

ALR.

American Law Review, St. Louis.

FrL.

Out.

Gent.

OutW.

don.

Over.

VOL. XXVI.

The Fifty-seventh Congress of the United States assembles in Washington, on December 1, for its concluding session. Its official term ends on March 4, 1903. The Congress which was elected last month will not come together for an entire year, unless it should be called to meet in extra session some time between March 4 and next December. In no other country does a radical change of sentiment, when expressed at the polls, take so long to affect the governing machinery. If there had been an overwhelming Democratic victory last month, the newly elected House of Representatives could not have passed a tariffrevision bill, or any other measure of importance, until some time in the early part of the year 1904. Furthermore, the Democrats in such case could scarcely have obtained control of the Senate until two years more had elapsed, and they could in no case have obtained control of the Presidential office and the Executive Government until March, 1905. Thus, if the people Thus, if the people of the United States had deliberately made up their minds, in 1902, that the Republicans had been in power long enough, and that the Democrats ought to have a chance to carry on the affairs of the country for a while, there would have been required at least three, and probably four, years in which to give that determination its full effect. What we should need three or four years to accomplish, our British friends, under their constitution, could bring about in three or four weeks. Both systems have their merits and their shortcomings.

Our Slow Wheels of Government.

Swifter Mechanism of States

It is to be remembered that the greater part of the domestic legislaand Cities tion actually affecting the people of the United States is the work of our State governments; and although, with the exception of New York and two or three other States, the legis latures ordinarily meet only once in two years, this meeting always comes soon after the elec

No. 6.

tion. Thus, practically all of the legislatures. which were chosen last month (and there were legislative elections in many States) will be in session and at work within two months after the date of the election. Questions of State government entered to no small extent into the electoral campaigns of the present year; and with our election of our State legislatures, governors and other State officers, mayors and municipal officials, county officers, school boards, local and State judges, and so on, the American citizen is not without opportunity to overhaul pretty quickly a large range of governmental mechanism.

The House
Fairly

As for the machinery of the federal Government, it is probably well for Responsive. us that our numerous checks and balances, and our highly deliberate processes, tend to steadiness. Few of the things that belong to national policy are of a sort that demand swift response to popular judgment. Our Constitution, upon the whole, works exceedingly well, and there will have to be a far more widespread dissatisfaction than exists at present before it can be changed even in respect to a few details. But probably, if it were to be done over again, there are not many people who would favor the present delay in calling together a newly elected Congress. Most people would have the new Congressmen meet a year earlier than now. Since, however, the reapportionment every ten years keeps the seats in the House of Representatives fairly distributed among the different sections, States, and population elements, the members are acquainted with popular sentiment, and usually as responsive to it as could be expected. This year, the election does not show any marked change of public opinion, and the outgoing Congress can do its winter's business, which will be varied and important, with a feeling that it has been sustained in an appeal to the country. It will know what the people expect of it.

As to the Senate.

A more difficult problem is that of keeping the United States Senate equally in touch with national opinion and duly responsive. The difficulties arise from several considerations. One of these is the secondary election of Senators. The two seats in the Senate for each State have come to be the most highly coveted prizes of success in American public life. The Constitution directs that Senators shall be chosen by the State legislatures. The candidacy of ambitious and powerful men for seats in the Senate does not, as a rule, await the assembling of the State lawmaking bodies. Since the legislatures have to choose the Senators, the would-be Senators make it their business to choose the legislatures. The whole public life of not a few of our States within the past few years has been demoralized by the struggle for seats in the Senate at Washington. This clause in the Constitution, which specifies that the Senators shall be chosen by the legislatures of the States, has abundantly proven itself an unwise and improper restriction. The States should have been left to choose their Senators as they like. Some States for a long time,

in that case, might have preferred the present plan of election by the two branches of the legislature; but most of the States, and in our opinion all of them,-as the result of an unrestricted opportunity to test different methods,would have come at last to the plan of direct popular election of Senators.

Every year brings fresh confirmation Direct Election of the desirability of such a change, of Senators. and upon few subjects are the people of the United States so nearly agreed. On a question of this kind the one set of men wholly incapable of expressing a wise or valuable judg ment are the Senators themselves, who are the beneficiaries of the existing system. The members of the other House, on the other hand, have no reason for expressing a biased judgment; and when they vote,-as they have done, with entire, or practical, unanimity,-in favor of an amendment to the Constitution allowing the States to elect their Senators by popular vote, nothing could be in more shockingly bad taste than the determination of Senators themselves to prevent the question from coming before the States for an expression of final judgment. It is not necessary, of course, to change the existing system in those States which prefer to keep it; but liberty ought to be given to every State to elect its Senators by direct vote, as it elects its governor, if it so chooses. Delaware remains today without any representation in the Senate at all, as the result of a legislative deadlock produced by the aggressive determination of one rich man to fight his way into the Upper House of Congress.

In many States it has become plain As a Possible that the legislatures are rendered Party Issue. less fit instruments for their important lawmaking, financial, and administrative duties by reason of the fact that in at least two out of every three of their biennial sessions they must subordinate all other business to the struggle for the choice of a United States Senator. If the Republican party will not respond willingly to what is not merely a popular whim, but an intelligent and profound conviction, the Democrats will do well to make a party issue out of this question of the election of Senators. They have already done it nominally, and they should follow up the proposition as a distinctive party tenet. In their last national party platform they declared in favor of an amendment to the federal Constitution providing for the election of United States Senators by direct vote of the people." The Republicans, on the other hand, omitted all refer