of peace terms seems to me unwise. Premature declarations of details too often work mischievous results, particularly if the selfish interests of many nations are involved. Let us recognize the true bases of peace and stand rigidly in support of the principles on which these bases are founded. We entered the war to maintain those principles, and they must be maintained at all hazard. Thoughtful men must know that the peace which is to come will not be a lasting peace if its terms are written in anger or if revenge rather than the desire for strict justice and the common good is the underlying motive of those who are charged with the grave responsibility of drafting the greatest treaty which this world has ever known. I think that it is sufficient, in these days of toil and struggle, while the Beast is still at large, to assert that the peace which will come when the world is safe will be a peace founded on justice and righteousness; a peace which will satisfy the just, but not the unjust, wishes of all peoples. Let us not forget that, while stern justice without mercy is unchristian, mercy which destroys justice is equally unchristian. I am thankful that I am a Presbyterian and believe in a God of justice as well as a God of mercy. When the time comes to balance the account-and it seems to be drawing near as the vassals of Germany seek refuge from the day of wrath the authors of the frightful wrongs committed against mankind should not be forgotten. consider peace even to this extent, because my thought was of the time beyond. I shall go no further, but assume that a universal peace, internationally just, will usher in a new era and a new phase of civilization, to which we will have to conform our ideas, so that we may not futilely oppose, but may wisely apply, the irresistible influences which these years of conflict have brought forth and which will materially affect the social order. The period of readjustment and restoration which will follow the disorganization and destruction caused by the war will tax human wisdom to the uttermost. In a conflict so universal as to involve the whole earth, in a conflict which has compelled the mobilization of all the manhood and resources of the nations, requiring the expenditure of wealth fabulous beyond comprehension, and forced Governments to assume extraordinary powers over national and individual energies, new impulses of human action have been set in motion, not only in the political, industrial, and economic spheres, but in the structure of society and in the spiritual life of mankind. Many of the fundamental principles of the present social order will be threatened; some will be changed, some discarded, while novel and possibly extravagant and dangerous doctrines will find earnest and honest advocates. With all this we must reckon. After the horrors, the unspeakable agonies, which humanity has endured as a consequence of the old political It had not been my purpose to organization of the world, it would be unreasonable to expect the peoples who have borne so much to accept as a basis of national and international order that which previously existed. The status quo ante bellum of society, as well as of boundaries and international relations, seems impossible. This, I believe, must be accepted as a necessary premise in developing a program for the future. I do not see how it can be avoided; and I am not sure that it would be wise to avoid it if we could. The new era born in blood and fire on the battlefields of Europe must be a Christian era in reality and not alone in name. The years to come must be years of fraternity and common purpose. International injustice must cease. All men must be free from the oppression of arbitrary power. Unreasoning class hatreds and class tyrannies must come to an end. Society must be organized on principles of justice and liberty. The world must be ruled by the dominant will to do that which is right. I see no other complete solution to the great problems which will soon engross the thought of mankind, no other means of destroying forever that soulless materialism which plunged the nations into these years of agony. ing of this new era, to inculcate the truth in the hearts of men, to bring them into the right attitude toward God and toward mankind, is the greatest service that can be rendered to the present generation and to future generations, whose happiness depends on the principles which will govern the reorganization of society. The There is no time to be lost if this nation is to be made ready to enter with the right spirit and the right principles upon the task of readjustment and reconstruction. There is no time to be lost, because the day is drawing near when the spirit of liberty will stand triumphant above the spirit of militarism of which the Central Empires are possessed. millions of America's bravest and best, the very flower of her manhood, who have crossed the sea or are prepared to embark, are the earnest of victory. For four long years the armies of the Allies have heroically withstood the legions of the Beast. These war-worn veterans, whose unfaltering valor knows no equal, are to-day, with the splendid men of this republic by their side, sweeping back the invaders, broken in spirit, sullen and hopeless. It is the beginning of the end. The hour of triumph is drawing near. The day of the war lords is almost over. Announcement is made at Peking that Japan will remit her share of the Boxer indemnity against China and probably follow America's example in stipulating that the funds be used to maintain another school similar to Tsing Hua College, established with part of America's share. From A. M. Sonby, Departmental Educational Director, National War Work Council: "I do not wish to get out of touch with the splendid articles usually contained in the WORLD COURT MAGAZINE." From Doremus Scudder, Tokyo, Japan: "I read no publication with more interest and profit." New Party Responsibility in Japan PR By JEREMIAH W. JENKS, Ph.D., LL.D. RESIDENT WILSON early characterized the great war as a war for democracy, and English and French statesmen have since re-echoed the expression. With that fact in mind, the question was early raised whether the spirit of harmony could last among the Allies, with democratic states on the one hand, and on the other Russia in the early days a despotism and Japan at best a very strongly centralized, imperialistic constitutional monarchy. Would not the differing ideals of government bring about a lack of harmony that would be fatal? Germany doubtless counted on such a conflict. Her intrigues with Mexico and Japan made clear her belief regarding the latter country. Her intrigues in Russia were, first, to weaken Russia's military power, and second, by force and treachery and bribery to disintegrate the new republic, then to dominate it herself. Most Americans believe that at the end of the war it will be possible for Russia to have her steps guided safely in the direction of popular self-government. Japan has been and still is a problem that has raised serious question in the minds of a real, important forward step toward democracy. In the new Hera cabinet we have for the first time in Japanese history a strictly party cabinet, that of the Seiyukai, for though the Ministers of War and Navy are not party men, the civilian members are, and it was organized as a party cabinet with the expressed purpose of holding the party responsible for results. It is fair to say that Japan has been squinting in this direction for many years; it would hardly be accurate to say that one could detect a steadily progressive movement in that direction. As long ago as 1900, Ito, Japan's great, possibly her greatest statesman, recognized that in the course of time popular selfgovernment was bound to rule the world, and that Japan must take her place eventually by the side of the other nations. The writer recalls a personal conversation with one of Ito's trusted lieutenants at the time of the formation of the party, in which it was said almost with bated breath that the ultimate aim of the new party would be to introduce the principle of party responsibility as exemplified in Great Britain, with the intention that gradually, as time and opportunity would permit, full party responsibility reflecting the people's will would be attained. This same spokesman had accompanied Ito in that first great foreign tour made preliminary to the formation of the Japanese constitution when, with characteristic thoroughness, the constitutions and methods of administration of the United States, Great Britain, France, Germany-all the leading nations of the world-were studied in order that Japan might find the system best suited to her needs. As we all know, just emerging from a form of government that was practically a personal despotism, the Japanese statesmen felt that the model best suited for them at that time was the German, the Prussian form of government; and the new imperial constitution, embodying those principles, was finally promulgated in 1889. From a date even preceding the adoption of the constitution by several years, however, there have always been in Japan leading thinkers who advocated the establishment of popular assemblies, the expression of the people's will, and the gradual assumption of responsibility by the people's representatives. The organization of the party which has now finally succeeded in taking the responsibility came in 1900; but until the present time, though parties have made their wishes felt in government, though the leaders in different governments have represented certain party views, no cabinet as a whole has been appointed to carry out a party policy with public recognition of its sole party responsibility. We shall not be able to judge the full significance of this step until we see how successful it may be in carrying through any line of policy that it may undertake. As yet the party is responsible to the Emperor in all formal ways, and this first step may not lead to other progressive steps in the same direction without certain setbacks; but there is perhaps in the history of the war no single event that signalizes better the progressive advance of the spirit of democracy than this establishment of the party cabinet in Japan. The immediate cause of its formation may have been the rice riots, as has been suggested, in part; in part the conflict of opinions over the government's policy in Siberia; in part the determination to make Japan's policy toward China less political and more economic. Many factors probably contribute to the result, but underlying all of them there seems to have been the surging impulse of the democratic spirit, which is worldwide in its expression. It is hoped that the result will be permanent and beneficial. The cabinet promises well in its personnel. Mr. Takashi Hara, the Prime Minister and Minister of Justice, is a statesman of wide experience in public life. He was "one of the right-hand men of Prince Ito when he raised the banner of the Seiyukai in 1900"; and from that time to this he has been a consistent advocate of this forward policy. He is not the only strong, progressive man in the cabinet. Baron Takahashi, the Minister of Finance, has long been known as one of the ablest, most progressive men of his country. With him in experience and ability is Viscount Uchida, the Minister of Foreign Affairs; and throughout, the cabinet is one that will command respect. The outlook is promising. League of Nations The executive board of the League for Permanent Peace, 421 Boylston Street, Boston, Mass., has just issued the following timely questionnaire: Question 1. Why should the world be organized? Answer. Organization has been made acutely necessary as the only way to prevent destruction of civilization by war. It is the next step in the development of civilization. The world should be organized as effectively as we have already organized cities, states, and nations. Q. 2. What does world peace mean? A. It does not mean merely stopping war. If this war should come to an end without laying the foundations of organization between the nations, we should not have peace but only an armed truce. "Peace means a condition of organized living together among nations." Q. 3. How can the nations have an "organized living together"? A. The forty-eight nations can be organized eventually on somewhat the same plan as that on which our forty-eight states are organized, with a Supreme Court to settle disputes between them; with a conference or congress meeting regularly, its members chosen from all the nations; and with a common police force to ensure order and safety. Q. 4. What is the first step to be taken toward such organization? A. Education of the public on the needs and methods of world organization and immediate preparation for a League of Nations as its initial feature. Q. 5. What should the members of a League of Nations agree to do? A. The members should agree to settle all disputes between one another without resort to violence and bloodshed, and to protect one another from injustice and attack from outside their number. They should also provide for common defence against a possible recalcitrant member. Q. 6. What should be the essential foundations of the League? A. (a) A World Court. (b) A Permanent Council of Conciliation. (c) A World Conference meeting regularly. Q. 7. What should a World Court do? A. It should settle international disputes capable of judicial decision. Q. 8. What should a Permanent Council of Conciliation do? A. It should be in constant session to study causes of friction and to take such action as will promote better understanding and good feeling. It should receive disputes exclusive of those that involve questions of law, and should examine and report on them to the members of the League, with recommendations for their settlement. Q. 9. What should the World Conference do? A. It should create new international law, and provide for new agreements needed to preserve justice in a world of growth and change. Q. 10. What would happen if one of the great nations at the Peace Settlement should refuse to come into the League? A. It would leave the world divided, and thereby hinder the realization of international peace. Q. 11. Would a League be of any value if Germany remained out of it? A. Yes; for though it would not ensure permanent peace, the members of the League, acting under collective control, might exert such pressure on Germany, both educational and economic, as would finally force her to enter the League. Q. 12. What are the principal advantages of membership in the League? A. (a) Equal trade opportunities, by the abolition of preferential tariffs and the removal of economic barriers, so far as practicable. (b) Greater security without the necessity of huge rival armaments. Q. 13. Is it likely that Germany, as a member of the League, would keep her pledges in the future, after having broken so many in the past? A. Not only would it be for the material advantage of each nation to keep its pledges, but, as stated above, the League would exert compulsion on any recalcitrant member. Q. 14. When should the organization of the League be consummated? A. At the Peace Conference. But its detailed plan or constitution should now be carefully worked out by the best international minds and accepted by the peoples. Since all territorial readjustments and other agreements will be profoundly affected by the decision as to whether or not |