where possible, and to use fat and lard sparingly. To relieve the shortage of meat would not be so easy as to solve the bread question. The creation of an Imperial Fodder Board, to supply cattle, swine, and fowl raisers with oat, barley, and molasses substitutes for oat fodder, and the appointment of a certain number of days in the week when meat should not be eaten, were helpful measures but not complete solutions of the problem.

THE REICHSTAG IN MARCH. After eight months of the war, the Reichstag met again on March 10th for its third war session. The fear that Germany stood in immediate danger of being crushed by an iron ring of foes had by this time proved groundless; in its stead new problems had arisen, regarding the financial burden of a long and exhausting war, anticipating the political consequences of the war, and most of all respecting the economic crisis in Germany. In opening the session, the president of the Reichstag, Dr. Kaempf, declared: "Never can it be too frequently repeated that a people which is capable of such sacrifices, such devotion to the Fatherland, can not be conquered or destroyed. As the Almighty Lord of Hosts has thus far blessed our banners with victory, so also, we are sure, the final victory will be adjudged to our righteous cause. And on the bloody battlefields in the east and in the west, a lasting peace will be achieved, which will bring new blossoming, new might, and a new greatness to our beloved Fatherland." This was the key-note of the session. The first business on the programme was the budget. The Imperial secretary of the treasury, Dr. Helfferich, delivered his maiden speech as a government representative in the tribune of the Reichstag, clearly revealing in his lucid explanation of the financial situation the expertness he had acquired as director of the Deutsche Bank. A further war credit of 10,000,000,000 marks, to be raised by loan, was demanded and received the Reichstag's consent. Interest on the war debt, Dr. Helfferich insisted, should be met from current revenues; as for the rest, he cherished the hope "of being able to present the bill for our war expenditures to our enemies at the conclusion of peace." German financial conditions, the secretary asserted, were on a sounder basis than those of France or England. In spite of the loss of her external trade, worth over 20,000,000,000 marks a year, Germany was still able to endure. "As long as our own soil remains to us, no hunger and throttling policy will succeed in cutting off our necessaries of life," he believed. Germany was determined to persevere, and at the end to demand "a reward of victory that is worthy of this huge sacrifice." Following Dr. Helfferich, Deputy Herr Haase, a Social Democrat, mounted the tribune to offer some trenchant criticism of the government. The right of free speech and the liberty of the press, said Herr Haase, had been arbitrarily and unjustifiably interfered with. Moreover, the government had been too reluctant to adopt the measures of government control which the Socialists had been indefatigably suggesting to give the people an adequate supply of food at a fair price. Food speculators should have been relentlessly prosecuted. War profits should be taxed. In conclusion the Socialist deputy delivered an eloquent plea for peace. "In all lands the horrors of war strengthen the desire to put

an end to the frightful butchery of nations. To express this desire is no sign of weakness and can least of all be so interpreted in our own case, for our military successes are incontestable, our economic life has developed in an amazing manner, and our finances have remained firm. It is the strongest who may first desire peace. My party as the representative of international Socialism has always been the party of peace, and it knows that the Socialists of other countries have the same idea. Our desire is for a lasting peace that will not contain within itself the germs of new entanglements and new dissension. It must be established that no nation may oppress another, and above all that all nations shall perceive their peaceful mission in the exchange of cultural goods." Against this peace manifesto an immediate protest was raised by Dr. Spahn in the name of all the other parties excepting the Poles, on the ground that it would "lead to misunderstandings abroad." "We are waging war," he continued, "not for the sake of war but for the sake of peace; but it must be a peace that more than hitherto will ensure the prosperous development of German labor and the German spirit of enterprise, and give the Fatherland a permanent guaranty and protection for its greatness. The achievement of this goal demands still more victorious battles." The Social Democrats continued to perturb the otherwise unruffled confidence of the Reichstag. Herr Schmidt, a Socialist from Berlin, called attention to the sufferings of the very poor. Millions of families, he said, had nothing to rely upon but their war allowance of 12 marks per month with 6 marks additional for every child. "How shall these families subsist," he asked, "when the loaf of bread that formerly cost 50 pfennigs in Berlin now costs 95, and the potatoes which used to sell for 3-32 pfennigs a pound now have risen to 7-10 pfennigs? In the Rhine country the cost of living has increased even more." Another Socialist, Herr Ledebour, occasioned an uproar in the Reichstag by making a plea in behalf of the Poles, Danes, and Alsatians and by denouncing the threat which the German military authorities had made, that for every German village in East Prussia destroyed by the Russians, three Russian villages in Poland would be destroyed by the Germans. Amidst vehement interruptions, the presiding officer of the Reichstag reminded the speaker that "criticism of the military authorities under the present circumstances during the war cannot be allowed." Dr. Karl Liebknecht (Socialist) was reprimanded for exclaiming "barbarism!" when Ledebour referred to the German threat regarding the burning of Polish villages. Representatives of the non-Socialist parties protested formally against the insult which had been uttered against the German General Staff. Even the Socialist group, or a majority of the group, speaking through its chairman, Herr Scheidemann, was constrained to disavow Herr Ledebour's remarks, and after a brief recess, Herr Scheidemann announced that, for the same reasons which had actuated them on Aug. 4 and Dec. 2, 1914, the Social Democrats this time would again vote for the budget. The final vote on the budget was therefore unanimous, with the exception of two rebellious Socialists, Liebknecht and Ruehle.

MAY SESSION OF THE REICHSTAG. The brief session of the Reichstag in May, concerned chiefly with the economic measures necessary to carry

on the war, gave new proof of the solidarity of the various parties. Only a few Socialists continued to oppose the war. The comment of the Frankfurter Zeitung is worth noting: "The great majority of the Social Democrats think and feel about this war just as does the rest of the German nation. That they have a passionate wish that a good peace should speedily follow the war. in no way differentiates them from the rest of the Germans. For all Germans would have preferred peace, and would rather see a speedy than a distant peace; but all know, also, that the possibility of peace does not depend on us alone, and that only such a peace is possible for Germany as will insure us against the danger of new wars for all time." As far as the demand of the Socialists for democratic reforms was concerned, the Frankfurter Zeitung observed that it would be impossible for everything to "slip back again into the old ways" after the war; that the German nation must be organized democratically if the splendid spirit of solidarity and fraternity that had manifested itself during the war was to be preserved, so that Germany could become a leader and a model for all nations.

THE CHANCELLOR'S SPEECH. The close of the May session was signalized by a great speech of Chancellor von Bethmann-Hollweg, May 28th. The German Chancellor in vehement terms denounced the infidelity of Italy (Italy had just declared war against Austria-Hungary; see article WAR OF THE NATIONS, Italy's Entry into the War). Without shedding a single drop of blood, Italy could have obtained, according to Von Bethmann-Hollweg, land in the Tyrol and on the Isonzo, "as far as the Italian language is spoken," "satisfaction of her national desires in Trieste," "a free hand in Albania," and the Albanian harbor of Valona. "Germany pledged her word that the concessions would be carried out. There was no ground for distrust." This reference to Germany's word of honor, after the events of August, 1914, called forth no little sarcastic comment from the Entente press. In defining Germany's position, the Chancellor hinted that the greater the odds that Germany had to fight, and the harder the combat, the greater would be the German determination to persevere "until we have won all possible real guarantees and assurances that none of our enemies, singly or in coalition, shall again hazard an armed conflict with us."

A YEAR OF THE WAR. On July 31st, after just one year of the war, the Emperor issued a proclamation "to the German people," reaffirming Germany's innocence in the striking words, "Before God and history my conscience is clear. I did not want the war." With pious gratification the Emperor declared "with grateful hearts we may say to-day: God was with us." As for the terms of peace, he referred to "military, political, and economic guarantees for the future" and "conditions for the unrestricted expansion of our creative energies at home and on the free seas." The newspapers, in summing up the results of the first year of the war, pointed out that Germany had won almost 2,000,000 prisoners (Russians, 1,518,000; French, 268,000; Serbians, 50,000; Belgians, 40,000; English, 24,000). To balance the loss of her colonies, she had conquered extensive territories in Europe, including 68 per cent of the coal resources of France, 90 per cent of her

iron ore, 68.7 per cent of her textile industry, and 43 per cent of her total industry. The supply of metals, cotton, and other raw materials in Germany had been seriously curtailed, so that it had been necessary to commandeer, February 1st, all supplies of copper, tin, aluminum, nickel, antimony, and lead for military purposes, thus crippling certain industries; nevertheless German industry was giving evidence of remarkable vitality. The great fair at Leipzig in the spring had furnished a magnificent display of German industries. The industrial region of Westphalia was described as a vast workshop, busy night and day, supplying the material equipment of war. Finally, the German press was not slow to boast that although German commerce had been temporarily driven from the seas, Germany's enemies had suffered more than three times as heavily, both in merchant- and in war-ships, comparing the tonnage of ships actually lost.

THE REICHSTAG IN AUGUST. The fifth war session of the Reichstag was convened on August 19th. The Imperial Chancellor, in a long review of the causes of the war, laid the guilt at the door of the Triple Entente, and blamed France for lending money to Russia for military preparations against Germany. England, he said, had suffered a severe blow to her self-confidence and her hypocrisy. "The myth that it was only on Belgium's account that she was waging war, England herself has abandoned." The claim of England to be the protector of the freedom of small nations was being disproved by her interference with the freedom of the seas, by her seizure of Greek islands in the Egean, and by her attempts to involve Greece and Rumania in the war. "In Poland, where Russia is fighting with her allies for the freedom of nations, the entire country has been devastated by the retreating Russian armies. Villages were burned down, grainfields trampled under foot, and the population of entire communities, Jewish and Christian, sent into exile." "That is the way the Freedom and Civilization appear, for which our enemies fight." "We will continue this war," said Von Bethmann-Hollweg, "until the way will be clear for a new Europe, free from French conspiracies, from Muscovite lust for conquest, and from English tutelage." The Chancellor also made an important declaration respecting the future of Poland, that the Poles were to be "emancipated from the Russian yoke” and “given an opportunity to develop their national character." The declaration was so worded, however, that while it explicitly stated that the Poles were to be free from Russia, it left very vague the relationship which would exist between Poland and Germany. The day after Von Bethmann-Hollweg's speech, the secretary of the treasury came forward with a demand for another war credit of 10,000,000,000 marks. The credits previously voted had brought the total up to 20,000,000,000 marks, a sum equal to the value of the entire German railway system, including equipment and rolling stock. More was being spent in a single month than had been expended in the entire FrancoPrussian War. Germany's war cost was now approximately 70,000,000 marks a day, whereas England was called upon to supply 80,000,000 marks a day. Germany's superiority in financial strength was still asserting itself, he claimed. Following Dr. Helfferich's speech the various

parties in the Reichstag made brief declarations of policy. Dr. David, for the Social Democrats, hoped that war profits would be taxed, and that peace would come soon enough to render further war loans unnecessary. The food problem, he complained, had not yet received "a satisfactory solution." Concluding his remarks, the Socialist leader made a significant demand for democratic reform: "The might that gave us our interior strength cannot be employed by us except in the interest of freedom. Thus spoke the Imperial Chancellor. He was thinking about external policy. We, however, expect that internal freedom will not be denied us. Equal rights may not be denied to the great mass of the people. In this spirit we vote for the war credit." Herr Bassermann, in behalf of the National Liberals, heartily supported the government, and declared that the German Emperor was a Peace Emperor, until the war was forced on Germany and he was compelled to take the sword in self-defense. Herr Fischbeck, who spoke for the Progressive People's Party, approved the loan, but admitted ruefully that "our economic life has its gloomy side." The Conservative spokesman, Dr. Oertel, approved the loan and advocated vigorous measures against food speculation, generous support of the families of soldiers and crippled soldiers, and repeated the phrase that was coming to be stereotyped, "The magnitude of the reward of victory must correspond to the magnitude of the struggle." Dr. Spahn, for the Centre, signified approval of the loan. The Polish leader, Herr Seyda, referred with satisfaction to BethmannHollweg's promise of freedom for the Polish people, and expressed the hope that the war would allow the "free development of the national life of the Polish people." Dr. Schultz, of the Empire Party, reiterated the Conservatives' declaration, that "our army and our entire nation desires a peace which will be worth the sacrifice, and we are confident that our statesmen will obtain for us the kind of a peace which the nation desires." The declarations of the parties in the Reichstag are cited, because they indicate the progress of the movement in favor of territorial conquests. It may be added, that the confidence of the wealthy and middle classes in the ultimate success of German arms received new and eloquent confirmation in the rapidity with which the third war loan was subscribed. The loan was offered to the public September 2nd. Within three weeks enough subscriptions had poured in to cover the loan, 10,000,000,000 marks, with 2,000,000 marks to spare. Nearly 45,000 depositors of the Berlin Savings Bank subscribed to the new loan, compared with 35,000 for the March loan. (For a discussion of the attitude of the Socialists in the Reichstag, see SOCIALISM.)

THE DEBATE ON PEACE TERMS. The discussion of the terms which Germany should demand at the conclusion of the war reached a climax in the historic Reichstag debate of December. The debate was opened by Dr. Scheidemann, spokesman of the Social Democrats, who interpellated the government on the subject of possible peace terms. Inasmuch as Germany had demonstrated her amazing strength and determination, as she unquestionably has done, she could now afford to make the first move in the direction of peace, certain that her desire for peace would not appear as weakness. In

reply to the Socialist interpellation, the Imperial Chancellor delivered a long speech, dwelling at length upon what he conceived to be the unutterable folly and hypocrisy of the Entente Powers. Pretending to fight for "the destruction of Prussian militarism" and for the freedom of small nations, the Entente Powers were really striving, and striving in vain, to dismember Germany and to advance their own selfish interests. But Germany was invincible. As for the terms upon which Germany would consent to make peace, he refused to go into detail. The Entente Powers, having been the ones to begin the war, must be the ones to ask for peace. As soon as they were ready to admit defeat, however, and to approach Germany with peace proposals "which are in consonance with Germany's dignity and security, we will always be ready to discuss them." While making this declaration as proof of Germany's love of peace, he warned the Quadruple Entente that "the longer and more bitterly they wage the war, the greater will be the necessary guarantees" which Germany would demand to prevent future attacks. Some intimation of what Germany would in any case demand was given by the following passage of Dr. von Bethmann-Hollweg's speech: "Neither in the west nor in the east must our enemies of to-day hold in their possession the entrance gates to our country through which they might attack or menace us anew. It is known that France gave loans to Russia only on condition that Russia strengthen her railways and fortresses in Poland against us; also that England and France regarded Belgium as their route of advance against us. Against this danger we must have military and political security. Also we must insure our economic development. . . . As regards the means to this end, we must reserve complete freedom of decision." From these vague sentences it might be inferred that Germany would take Poland from Russia, and Verdun and Belfort from France; Belgium might be annexed outright or placed under a sort of military and economic German protectorate; and Germany's economic future might be secured by annexing extensive colonies, or by restoring Egypt to Turkey and making the Turkish Empire a German sphere of economic exploitation, or by gaining control of Belgian seaports and mines, or by exacting huge indemnities from the vanquished Powers, or by forcing them to lower their tariff walls against German manufactures. In reference to the condition of the territories which had been occupied by German armies, the Chancellor had the most favorable reports to make. Belgium, he announced, was recovering from her injuries; Belgian commerce and industry were reviving, coal was being mined in considerable quantity, and instruction in the Flemish language had been made obligatory for all. As regards the conquered Russian territory, Dr. von BethmannHollweg asserted that the German invaders found "terrible devastation" in Poland, Lithuania, and Courland. The Germans, however, had established new police forces, municipal administration, and legal and sanitary organization in the districts occupied by them. They had promoted economic activity, rebuilt railways, constructed roads, introduced "municipal statutes which give the people an interest in participating in public life." "The question of school teaching has everywhere been taken up,"