most of us cherish an inner resentment that our parents do not understand us better, forgetting the strain they are under-due to having known us all our lives of having to merge into one astounding composite all the myriad selves we have been since first they met us. It may easily be that at five or at fifteen our personality was so offensive that no parent could be expected to perceive that we ever afterward outgrew our evil condition. Even when our parents' recollections of us have been agreeable, it is but natural that they should revert to the lifetime habit of regarding us as infantile. Perhaps also they are loth to relinquish their attitude of protection and of precept. We grow tragically self-sufficient with maturity. Sometimes the only way for a parent to pierce our engrossment is by pin stabs of fussiness. Sometimes the only way to reach us is to irritate us, but this is only when we ourselves have locked the doors of intimacy so tight that love has no language of admittance except nagging.

The fact is, parents are often worth a child's cultivating even when that child is grown up. Parents, however, are ex

I

tremely elusive in friendship. A child must be patient, not precipitate. Parents often have rare confidences to make, but in order to receive these sons and daughters have to be themselves of rare imaginativeness. Margaret Ogilvie had a son to whom she appeared eternally a girl, but not many sons have Barrie's imagination, and so not many sons have such maternal companionship to remember as he commemorates in his life of his mother. It is more incumbent on the young to understand the old than on the old to understand the young, for the old are heavy with experience, and experience tends to stultify the imagination by its pain and poignancy. If you really want to get at a parent, you should endeavor to make him comfortable in your presence, so that wisdom, hesitant and shy if you are young and arrogant, will come forth from him confidently. Sometimes a parent's thoughts are very different from what we had supposed, but the best way of eliciting them is by submitting to the old habit that controls their utterance, the old habit of thinking us little children.

thesis that the best thing one can do for a parent is never to let him know he has grown old, even though his over-confidence lead to peril of life and limb. The author puts into a daughter's mouth words that few of us would have the courage to embody in our treatment of our parents. Anxious coddling is an insult, she maintains: "If all we can do for them is just to keep their poor old rusting machinery oiled and working— at whatever cost to pride and manhood and usefulness-if that's the price they have to pay for just keeping alive, is it worth the cost? What do a few years more or less matter so long as one is living to the very end?"

The essence of comradeship is letting others have their adventure at whatever cost to us or to them; for parents this means letting people have their adventure from the beginning; for children, letting people have it to the end. All of us have had to be children, many of us have had to be parents. The best way of getting even with the grim necessity is, if a parent, to stop being one as early as possible, and if a child, to remain one as

I

HAVE read the editorial in the June 25 Outlook on "The Daylight Saving Rider" with interest and absolute approval.

But what puzzles me now is how you can advocate the acceptance of the rider (League of Nations) on the Peace Treaty. Surely a rider is a rider whether it is attached to the Agricultural Bill or to the Peace Treaty; both are employed for the same purpose-to slip something over on the people that will not bear the "acid test."

To my mind, the use of the rider device is just as reprehensible for a Peace Commissioner as it is for a Senator. Espe cially objectionable is the rider conceived by a Peace Commissioner who was repudiated at the last election; who went abroad at a critical time on his own authority against the wishes of the majority of the people; who delayed peace, and was only able to carry out his threat to weave his rider into the Peace Treaty by giving up vital rights and privileges of the American people. It seems to me that if this rider the American people will have indeed lost "to a measurable degree the principle of self-government and to [have] substitute[d] oligarchy."

passes

(MRS.) JAMES D. DAVIS. Tionesta, Pennsylvania, July 7, 1919.

II

I find myself unable to resist the temptation to criticise The Outlook for its

lack of consistency regarding legislation by rider. If there is any one thing that you have persistently condemned it is this, and I had always supposed that your criticisms were a matter of principle; but I have been brought to a questioning attitude on this point by your recent course. If the repeal of the Daylight Saving Law by making it a rider on another bill is a thing to be condemned on principle, on the theory that a matter of this importance ought to stand or fall on its merits, how can you reconcile yourselves to the support of the League of Nations as a rider on the Peace Treaty? Why shouldn't it, too, stand or fall on its merits? The very obvious answer is that if it were to be submitted to the Senate for ratification, in accordance with the plain intent of the Constitution, it would fail, and so the President in the carrying out of his threat has so intertwined it with the Peace Treaty as virtually to force the Senate to approve something that it disapproves or to disapprove something that it approves.

Your editorial "The League of Nations in the Senate," in The Outlook of June 25, is a virtual acknowledgment of this fact, and yet I have not seen a word of censure from you on this very evident attempt to deprive the Senate of its Constitutional right-a duty as well as a right to pass on this momentous thing on its merits. What a chance you are

1 An editorial called out by these letters will be found on another page.-THE EDITORS.

CON

missing for a ringing editorial asserting your adherence to the anti-rider principle, even though it might result in the defeat of something that you favor, for I can hardly bring myself to believe that you want the League of Nations established by this most transparent chicanery-or do you?

I wouldn't want my own position misunderstood. I believe that there is more than a mere bit of humor in dubbing the thing "the League of Hallucinations." I believe it to be a very accurate naming of it. I want to see it defeated in the Senate, but I am perfectly ready to

66

take. my medicine" if the Senate can be brought to ratify on a fair and square test, but this test can't be had as the case now stands.

Just now I am especially interested to know if your opposition to legislation by rider applies only to the things that you are opposed to. There may be a touch of raillery in this letter, but I seriously think that you are in a very indefensible position. May I add that I think the repeal of the Daylight Saving Law was a serious mistake, however it may have been accomplished, and that I am as much opposed to rider legislation all the time as you are part of the time? C. F. HILDRETH. Freeport, Illinois, July 8, 1919.

III

I have been a reader and a friend of The Outlook for a long time, because it has stood for genuine, practical Ameri

canism of a high order. It was therefore a source of keen disappointment when you embraced internationalism. I have hoped that you would get back to the practical idealism of Theodore Roosevelt, but instead you have floundered from bad to worse, until you now have the temerity to say that because the American people are an adventurous people we should risk our birthright in a gamble with internationalism.

Such a statement is unworthy of you.

If we who believe in an unimpaired, uncompromised nationalism, who hold that our country should deal justly and honestly with all nations but take orders from none, are in the minority, it will be a pity, but nevertheless I must stand for the United States of America first, last, and always. I must not lend any support to any agency of the propaganda of internationalism.

I ask you to please cancel my subscription.

I will add just this: If the United States should be rushed into ratifying the present League of Nations Covenant by reason of the tricky tactics employed, it will not be by reason of the fact that the people of this country have deliberately renounced the Americanism of the past in favor of the new programme of World Socialism.

HARRY H. CALVIN. League for Preservation of American Independence, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, July 2, 1919.

66

IV

In your issue of July 9, in the article entitled "Ratify the Treaty," you enumerate in / 'the simplest terms what the Treaty will do-as you see it. In that enumeration appears no word of what happens to China. You rejoice in security against foreign despotism for Czechoslo vakia and Poland and in the uniting of the civilized nations to protect each other and the people under their guardianship from future aggressions, but you say not one word of the part of the arrangement which violates all the important principles upon which the League of Nations is supposed to be founded (justice, honor, selfdetermination, and the rest), viz., the handing over of Shantung to Japan. To buy adherence to the League by one of the most infamous acts in history is a sad omen for the ability of the League to carry out its professed principles in the future. A lasting peace cannot be obtained through injustice. You must be aware of the facts in regard to China and the policy pursued toward her by Japan. If you are not, you can easily ascertain them. Such a book as 'China and the World War," by W. R. Wheeler (Macmillan), will enlighten you. If you do already know the facts, it is inconceivable that a journal privileged to give out so many of Theodore Roosevelt's utterances can be untrue to his principles and gloss over the truth.

66

Those of us who hope for a real, effective League of Nations, but who believe that the end does not justify the means,

are heartsick to see such a journal as yours lending itself, tacitly or outspokenly, to the support of an act in direct opposition to all we hope the League will do-an act without any foundation of honor or justice.

SIDNEY L. LASELL.
Siasconset, Nantucket, Massachusetts,
July 13, 1919.

V

I have taken The Outlook for a number of years. I am an out-and-out Republican, but I think and trust that I am one in the broader sense. I have heretofore looked to The Outlook as being, if not a Republican, a patriot first and a partisan afterwards. An American patriot, in my conception, is one who has the privilege and the duty of thinking.

But The Outlook, apparently, no longer expects its readers to think. So it would appear to be a rather dangerous journal for those to read who won't think. I refer to your article of July 16 on "The Tactical Blunder of the Republicans."

66

In the suggestion contained in the second paragraph of this article you say, We are tired of fighting and appeals to force." This looks very pretty on paper, but does The Outlook really believe it? If we really are, won't we be just as tired, forsooth, after an opportunity to contemplate as we are now? And if we really are and want a change, won't we see that we get it after contemplation? Some of us doubt, when we look back over history, that the world is tired of fighting and appeals to force. Some of us think that, though it says it is, it really likes them-which is perhaps why we fear that the League of Nations is but a scrap of paper. Writing down and subscribing to our pretense won't purge us of the sin. You call the League an "experiment,' experiment," and yet you ask your readers to be sure they get this experiment, with something they get this experiment, with something they may later be sorry. rather vital to Americans, even though

Again, what has The Outlook come to that it would deny, as it does in the sug gestion of the sixth paragraph of this article, the right of every American citizen to think and act through his Constitutional representatives in crises such as the present? The Constitution, as you say, perhaps has its defects; but it is at least true that the people by their own choice that is, by all their representatives-put them there.

The Outlook is becoming quite Wilsonesque in speciousness. Shall we, the Republicans, take this step, this "experi ment," just to be sure that the Democrats shall not have the chance to compound the wrong which, through not taking thought, we may find, too late, it contains?

At least The Outlook might have had the delicacy, I think, not to parallel this article with the one hearing the titular illustration of a tablet "In Memory of Theodore Roosevelt-The American."

I should say that The Outlook needs to clean house.

JOHN W. STEWARD. Paterson, New Jersey, July 18, 1919.

VI

I want to congratulate you on the editorial "The Tactical Blunder of the Republicans," on page 425 of The Outlook for July 16. I am satisfied that the majority of the people of this country feel, first, that it is absolutely not a partisan question, and, second, that the League of Nations should be adopted as it stands, to be later corrected and amended as may be found necessary.

In one of his recent speeches Lloyd George made the statement that "had there been a League of Nations in 1914 the great war never would have occurred," and he was right about it. I believe also that the majority of the people are in favor of the tripartite treaty of Great Britain, France, and the United States for the protection and defense of France in the event of an unprovoked attack on her by Germany. L. B. YAPLE.

Chillicothe, Ohio, July 17, 1919.

I would refer you to page 374 of “The Education of Henry Adams." John Hay writes: "I shall see all my treaties slaugh tered one by one, by the thirty-four per cent of strikers and kickers."

On page 394, speaking of a treaty which ought to be ratified in twenty-four hours: "The Senate wasted six weeks on this one and ratified it with one vote to spare," etc. He says further: "They [the Senate] will reject any treaty on any subject with England. I doubt if they would accept any treaty of consequence with Russia or Germany," and winds up this paragraph: "Is it worth while for me to keep up this useless labor?”

While Willoughby recognizes the fact that the Senate can be called in while

negotiations are in practice, he also rec ognizes the fact that it is not done as a rule. When the President did consult, it was in the matter of local treaties, if I may so call them-those with the Indians, etc. But not with a complicated treaty such as the one now being acted

T took Japan several days to reconcile herself to the armistice. Previously, every rumor of peace brought about a slump in the stock market. Yet so certain was industry that the war would go on indefinitely that no abatement in its activities could be felt. So when November 11 came it took a little sarcasm from the foreign press to stir Japan to a show of some satisfaction. For a couple of days only foreign houses displayed flags in jubilation. Then Japan recalled that she too was an Ally and the various Chambers of Commerce threw all "bearing aside and brought out their flags, saki, and geishas, in riotous joviality. Officialism donated unto itself a banquet upon the public recreation grounds to which only officials and a few representative foreigners were invited. And after they ate all there was to eat and drank all there was to drink and played with all the geishas there were to play with (wives are never invited) they left the grounds for the common people to swarm about the remnants. Thus the East thought it had manifested its pleasure that the world had been made safe for democracy.

Why this hesitation? Because Japan was not really in the war. No country in the world has gained more and suffered less than Japan. She gained materially and she gained socially. At this time, when the nations are balancing their accounts, it is well for us to give a little summary of Japan's profit and loss from the war.

I will not dwell on the acquisition of the Marshall Islands, which lie so conveniently between the Hawaiian group and the Philippines, and not inconveniently distant from the Southern Hemisphere. I will leave Shantung to speak for itself, if its voice has not already been silenced, as was that of Korea. I will limit myself to the question of legitimate gains (if war profits can be regarded as such) to which Japan is as much entitled as any other individual or group which supplies the materials of warfare and to such social gains as can be directly traced to the

war.

First, then, come the material gains. Of these Kobe is perhaps the best example. No port in the Far East has come up so stridently as did Kobe during the war. Were it not for the silk trade, Yokohama would have completely fallen out of the race behind Kobe. Now this is significant. Yokohama lies near the capital (Tokyo), and will always be a distributing center for the Empire. Commercially and geographically, however, Japan has become the center of the business of the Pacific. During the war Japan's exports increased so tremendously that a port more on the direct highway of the world's trade was necessary. As such none was more suitable than Kobe, and it rose to the situation. Where up to the outbreak of the war Kobe's foreign settlement (where all the export

and import trade is handled) was largely under the control of foreigners, to-day the Japanese have well-nigh ousted them. All the desirable business sites have been bought over by Japanese narikin' establishments at enormous prices, in many cases the Government giving every possible financial support to natives. One foreigner disposed of a piece of property which cost him about $12,000 for $225,000. And to-day splendid modern structures crowd the former settlement-the pride of the Japanese.

Industrially, Japan has simply been seething with activity. No contract was ever turned aside; it was easy enough to fail to supply the material afterwards. Scandals in commerical circles were rife. Whereas other countries had to submit quietly to innumerable embargoes that England and America found necessary to impose on the export of their materials, Japan always found some way of having them loosened for her sake. When negotiations were under way for the construction of merchantmen, Japan so prepared prepared her plans that, under whatever circumstances, she would come out with from 175,000 to 450,000 tons of shipping ahead of her pre-war situation, while supplying the Allies with her old discarded types of vessels. She is now the mistress of the Pacific.

Of all this activity, Kobe was the center. From my house, at the other end of the city, I could hear the sound of the pneumatic hammers far after midnight. Four years ago Kobe was a promise; today its dockyards, its steel mills, its steamers, give it the appearance of a city of tremendous size. Its population has reached nearly 600,000, and it is the fifth largest city in Japan. Houses are as scarce as they are in New York. Smokestacks darken the sky with streams of smoke. And all because a war broke out in Europe, twelve thousand miles

away.

So great was the increase in trade and business in all Japan that for two years the railways and telegraphs and post office have been rendered virtually helpless. Telegrams could be delivered much more quickly if sent by train and letters with more certainty if sent by special messenger. The extent of inefficiency in these various branches of service would form the basis for an article in itself. Yet with all the prosperity salaries in Government departments still ranged from $6 to $50 a month. Only two per cent of the people earn more than $1,000 a year. In place of increase in salaries the Government offered marks of distinction and honor, expecting that good subjects would rejoice over small favors.

Yet the war intensified social conditions markedly. It made narikin of

1 The word narikin can be translated by our parvenu, It comes from the Japanese chess and is used when one of the pawns is jumped across the board. It is much more than a man who has just become rich-one who has made a bound for riches.

coolies who in another generation will be seeking vacancies. in the House of Peers. It has drawn the outcasts from their isolation into industrialism and forced them upon the social consciousness in unprecedented ways. It has increased the cost, though it has not yet raised the standard, of living. On an average, Japan still has more poverty and suffering and absence of individual development than most other civilized countries. But the conditions under war have made the average Japanese less contented with mere. rice and daikon (a vegetable shaped like a radish, pickled, and with a strong, unpleasant odor). He has seen how his neighbor in a couple of years became a rich man. Though the masses are much poorer than they ever were, a very few have obtained great wealth. While the war brought the peoples of Europe and America down to a basis of necessity, curtailing all luxuries, for many in Japan it meant the reverse- the shunning of simple living. Of that they had had more than their share.

Another source of gain to Japan has been in knowledge of military science. She has been able to look on and learn at a loss of only some two thousand men. That is a gain which may sooner or later have to be put in the debit column.

Some of the monetary gains are no less doubtful. It is felt in Japan that those who secured these material advantages are doing little to retain them. They have not placed either themselves or their country on a firm trade basis, having sought immediate progress more than a good reputation for business ethics. And that is a definite loss to Japan which some of its people are viewing with alarm.

Let us now turn to the social gains. What emotional, political, moral, and intellectual advantage has Japan which she did not have before the war? Emotionally there has been but a slight awakening. Sympathy with the wronged, with the suffering, has touched her but little. Politically there has been considerable discussion of democracy, but mighty little of its real significance has penetrated the crust of imperialism. You hear among the students in the higher schools (of which I was an instructor) considerable talk about democracy, and they have even gone to the point of holding demonstrations for the extension of the franchise. But the true meaning of democracy is not understood. Even the leaders in that vanguard naïvely advance a vague statement said to have been made by the first Emperor, Jimmu Tenno (who is largely wrapped in myth), about how much his rule depended upon the people, as proof that from time immemorial the basic principles of their government have been democratic.

Intellectually and morally Japan has learned that education and honest business are national assets. As the result of

the increase in foreign trade, she has found it necessary greatly to increase her educational facilities. Commercial schools are being raised to the status of universities and the whole educational administration is undergoing considerable changes. But, unfortunately, morally Japan has not applied, so far, the principles she has taught her young men. The breaking of contracts, the passing off of material inferior to that agreed upon, would form a chapter in a study of Japan by no means to her credit.

WP

WHY

One of the most satisfactory gains from an Occidental point of view has been that Japan has been forced to think outwardly on international affairs. She looked abroad, for instance, and saw the extent to which women helped win the war, and was somewhat alarmed. Japan realized that should her women be placed in the same position as were the women of the West it would not go well with the land. The condition of woman may, in consequence, some day be improved. There is a dim light of hope.

These social gains are, however, insig nificant in comparison with the monetary gains.

There is one great weakness in modern Japan which leaves all her gains-social and material—on an unstable foundation. Unfortunately, consciousness of this danger is almost wholly lacking. Whatever gains may be accredited to Japan in any sense cannot compensate her for the isolation in which she is left as the only great autocracy still standing in the world.

U CHAO-CHU, delegate to the Peace Conference from the Constitutionalist Government of China, and son of Wu Ting-fang, twice Ambassador to the United States, recently passed through New York on his way to Washington. When asked why China refused to sign the peace treaty, Wu Chao-chu responded as follows:

"While the other Great Powers were engaged in the war with Germany Japan took advantage of the situation to press her Twenty-one Demands, which aimed at the political and economic domination of China.

"The provisions relating to Shantung, which the Chinese Government signed with Japan under duress, were that China should agree to any arrangements which Japan might thereafter make regarding the disposition of German rights in the Shantung Province; that the Jap anese Government would restore Kiaochau to China, providing Japan be granted an exclusive concession to be designated later, and also that Japan should have the option of building a new railway in Shantung.

"The 'exclusive concession was no less than the port of Tsingtao, situated in the Bay of Kiaochau. This port was seized by the German Government in 1897, because of the killing of two German missionaries in China, and in March, 1898, the Manchu Government was forced to conclude a lease with Germany, giving her control of the port for a period of ninety-nine years. This treaty, forged by the mailed fist of the German Junkers, also provided for the passage of German troops in a zone around the Bay of Kiaochau and the granting of railway and mining rights in the province of Shantung.

"The port of Tsingtao is a strategic and commercial stronghold of vital importance to the safety and economic life. of China. It has a fine harbor, excellent docks, and strong fortresses, upon which the German Government has spent millions. It is also a popular summer resort. According to present plans, Japan intends to put into the concession the important features of the port and return

to China the bathing beach and a few hotels.

"Thus Japan has secured control of the gateway to Shantung Province, with an area of 36,000 square miles and a population of 38,000,000. It is an integral population of 38,000,000. It is an integral part of China and has been so for centuries. It is also the birthplace of Chinese civilization, for here Confucius was born.

"When in 1917 America broke off diplomatic relations with Germany, she invited all neutrals to do likewise, in order to show the world's unanimous disapproval of German militarism. When China received this invitation, she responded immediately, and was the first of the neutrals thus to take action. Later China declared war upon Germany and at the same time announced that all treaties made with her enemies were thereby abrogated. The Powers at war with Germany thereupon sent notes of congratulation to China, indorsing her attitude, which amounted to an express recognition of the fact that the treaty granting Germany rights in the Shantung Province was canceled, and that these rights automatically reverted to China.

"When the Peace Conference opened, it soon became evident that Japan had a hold upon the delegates, the nature of which did not appear upon the surface. Later it was discovered that this was nothing more nor less than the secret understandings entered into with Japan by the Governments of Great Britain, France, Italy, and Russia. They were arrived at after China had sent a note to Germany threatening to break off diplomatic relations unless she relinquished submarine warfare. promised Japan that her claims to the Shantung Province would be supported at the Peace Conference, provided that she would use her influence to compel China to declare war against Germany. But the bitter irony of the situation was that Japan had continually brought pressure to bear upon China to prevent her entering the war against Germany.

It was

"Until the Fiume incident, when the Italian delegates withdrew from the Conference, America remained China's best friend; but the added danger that

Japan might withdraw from the Conference if her demands were not granted threatened the establishment of the League of Nations. Certain French newspapers then announced that Japan might follow the example of Italy. If these countries should withdraw from the Peace Conference because of the opposition of President Wilson to their demands, who would be responsible for the failure of the League of Nations? No matter how moral or legal China's claims might be at the Conference, the Powers felt bound to fulfill their secret understandings with Japan, in spite of the fact that Japan's Twenty-one Demands upon China were made under duress and wholly oblivious of the fact that Germany had no rights in the Shantung Province to which Japan or any other country could lawfully succeed. And so America gave way and the so-called rights of Germany in Shantung were transferred to Japan.

"Later the Chinese delegates were informed that all former German rights were to be given over to Japan, unconditionally, and this agreement the Chinese delegates were asked to sign. Whereupon they protested, first orally, and subsequently in writing.

"It was announced that Japan had agreed with the Powers that Shantung would later be returned to China; but no definite time was mentioned when Japanese control should end. It is interesting to note here that Japan promises to return to China sovereign rights in Shantung, although Germany never asserted any rights of sovereignty.

"The Chinese delegates agreed to sign the Treaty with Germany, subject to a reservation of the three articles relating to Shantung. But they were told that they must sign without reservations. The position of the delegates was a most delicate one. Not to sign would be an admission to the world that the Allies were divided, thus strengthening the cause of the common enemy-Germany. To sign meant the betrayal of the whole Chinese nation, that is arrayed unanimously against any such step.

"In obedience to the will of my peo

ple the Chinese delegates refused to sign, so that a state of war still exists between China and Germany, making necessary the conclusion of a separate treaty of peace.

"From her experience at the Peace Table China has learned several important lessons. First, she knows that Amer

ica is her stanch and sincere friend, having championed China's rights, and at last giving way only when the possible withdrawal of both Italy and Japan menaced the League of Nations. With the final result the American delegation was as much disappointed as the Chinese. "China is well known for her pacific

settlements of disputes, despising the thought of being compelled to resort to barbarous methods of war, such as have been exemplified by the horrors of German militarism. But she also realizes that the millennium has certainly not yet come -the age of peace when right shall triumph over might."

일

TE

the

UPERLATIVES alone can do justice to the Centenary Celebration of American Methodism, just closed in Columbus, where for nearly a month not only the followers of John Wesley but those who owe allegiance to other great leaders of Protestantism thronged the Ohio State Fair Grounds, which cover over one hundred acres.

One of the chief reasons why the Celebration was held in Columbus was because this is the center of American Methodism. The Methodist Church, North and South, was responsible for this enterprise-the first time that these two great churches have got together on a really comprehensive programme, and it was noted that the attendance was very largely from the South.

The Celebration cost Methodism a million dollars; it was attended by a million people; it was held, in part, to celebrate the raising of one hundred and sixty million dollars for missions. It was a jubilee engaged in with an abandon that for once made the world understand that the Church could do a big thing in a big

way.

66

Eight great buildings housed exhibits from every part of the world. Nearly twenty thousand people served as stewards" and other helpers during the Celebration. The music was rendered by was rendered by thousands of singers, and there were bands and orchestras and quartettes and soloists of National reputation.

The pageant "The Wayfarer," written by Dr. J. E. Crowther, of the First Methodist Episcopal Church of Seattle, Washington, was one of the greatest productions of its kind ever seen in this country. Every night the great Coliseum, which seats about seven thousand people, was packed and thousands were turned away. Reserved seat tickets could scarcely be purchased from their owners at any price. Most extravagant offers were made to the management by theatrical producers to repeat the pageant in the big cities of this country. At least one fact was demonstrated in the popularity of the pageant-namely, that the masses of people will go to see and hear a production which is distinctly religious in character and which has practically none of the objectionable elements which theatrical managers say the public is demanding.

On the other hand, it is unquestionably true that many prominent leaders of

Methodism who were opposed to the theater saw in "The Wayfayer" a remarkable opportunity for using the drama for the teaching of great religious doctrines.

The costumes and scenic effects were designed by Livingston Platt, of New York, and the beautiful combinations of colors, not only in this regard, but in the general lighting effects, for which Laurence H. Rich was responsible, made a profound impression upon the audi

ences.

World travelers who were present at the Celebration declared that the exhibits were of so high a character and were so ably presented by the stewards and the hundreds of lecturers as to make it possible for one to obtain a liberal education in the religions and general customs of the people in almost every part of the world.

The managers of the Celebration felt that this alone justified the expenditure of a million dollars for the production of the Celebration's features. It will now be much easier to talk missions to Methodists.

In a most interesting fashion the problems of American life were presented. A New York East Side street was shown and an attempt was made to vivify the every-day life of the tenement dwellers.

A great deal of attention was given to the industrial problem, not only in the exhibits but in the life plays and demonstrations, of which there were scores in the various buildings.

For example, the Bolsheviki and the professional labor agitators called a "strike" of "workingmen," and in the mass-meetings which they held an opportunity was given to present the other side of the question in open forum dis

cussions.

This was

one of the most effective parts of the programme presented at the Celebration. The influence of the centenary upon thousands of workers who took part in many ways was invaluable, and this also would have justified the expenditure of the great sum required to put on the Celebration.

The five hundred college men and women who spent a month serving as stewards got a new idea of what the work of the Church actually means to say nothing about the thousands of other workers who were not college students.

66

The Church has learned as never before the value of publicity in pushing its work. No other single enterprise of the Protestant Church in all of its history obtained as much publicity as did the Centenary Celebration. High-grade graphics" dealing with the great problems and work of the Church were widely used. A supplement to the "Ohio State Journal" was issued daily dealing exclusively with the Celebration and its programme. Very carefully edited and selected literature was widely distributed.

Never again will a religious body engage in a great campaign without securing the co-operation of the newspapers and other periodicals. Money was also spent for newspaper advertising, to say nothing about immense posters which were freely used throughout the State.

It must not be imagined that this Centenary Celebration was merely a glorified camp-meeting or an old-fashioned missionary concert. There were enough of these elements to satisfy the most devout Christian, for the devotional and evangelistic meetings were given great prominence; but the Celebration was principally educational in character.

There were twenty-four great days, every one a feature day, with men of National and in many cases international prominence speaking to immense audi

ences.

The Minute Men who took so splendid a part in the raising of the Methodist millions helped to make Minute Men Day a great success by their fine enthusiasm.

On July 1-the day that the country went dry-the big guns of prohibition held a field day the like of which has never been seen.

Most of the great denominational bodies sent their executives to the Celebration to study it with the view of utiliz ing in their own work such features as could be adapted to their own programmes, and it is altogether likely that the Interchurch World Movement, which will soon launch what will probably be the greatest campaign in the history of the Church, will conduct a somewhat similar enterprise on its own account.

The Director-General of the Centenary Celebration was S. Earl Taylor, who is also at the head of the Interchurch World Movement.