submarine, and the commander of the latter was led to believe that the Arabic was attempting to ram his vessel. Furthermore, the German government maintained that it was unable to acknowledge any obligation to grant any indemnity in the matter, even if the commander should have been mistaken as to the aggressive intentions of the Arabic. The note further suggested that if the German and American governments could not reach an agreement in the issue, that the question be referred to The Hague Tribunal for arbitration. This note was wholly unsatisfactory to the American government and a grave crisis arose. The President and Secretary Lansing stood firm on their demand that Germany should disavow the act of the submarine commander, and should pay an indemnity for the loss of American lives. The crisis was passed when, on Oct. 5, 1915, Count Bernstorff notified the American government that Germany had acceded to the demands of the United States, and that the instructions issued to the commanders of submarines had been made so stringent that a repetition of incidents similar to the Arabic case was considered out of the question. Shipment of War Munitions. Shortly after the outbreak of the war large orders for war munitions were placed by the Entente Allies with American firms. The complete control of the seas by the British and French fleets made it impossible for the Teutonic powers to obtain similar supplies. Comment in the German press indicated that the feeling in Germany was very strong that the United States was not observing a strict neutrality by allowing such shipments. On April 4, 1915, Ambassador Bernstorff called the matter to the attention of the United States government officially. He maintained that while the United States had taken no action in regard to alleged violations of international law by Great Britain in interfering with neutral trade, it had allowed American firms to supply large quantities of war munitions to Germany's enemies. He maintained that conditions in the present war were unique, that while theoretically arms might be shipped from the United States to Germany, practically they could be sent only to her enemies. A real spirit of neutrality called for the stoppage of a trade which was aiding only one side. In a vigorous reply to this note President Wilson set forth clearly the position of the United States. He first called attention to the fact that our relations with England could not be made a subject of discussion with a third government. With regard to the shipment of arms and ammunition, the President pointed out that any change in the laws of neutrality during the progress of a war would be a departure from the principle of strict neutrality, and that the placing of an embargo on the trade in arms would constitute such a change. In reply to a similar protest by the AustroHungarian government on Aug. 1, 1915, the Government of the United States on Aug. 12, 1915, made an exhaustive statement of its position. It reiterated the statement made in the reply to Germany that any change in the rules of neutrality made during a war would violate the spirit of neutrality. In addition, it pointed out that it had never been the policy of the United States to maintain a large military establishment or great stores of ammunition, and that the United States had depended upon the right to purchase arms and ammunition from neutral powers in time of war. To prohibit such trade would compel every nation to have on hand sufficient munitions of war to meet any emergency, and would practically make every nation an armed camp. Apart then from any question of the legality of an embargo on arms, the United States government felt that it would be a mistaken policy as it would deliberately encourage the spirit of militarism. Activities of German Agents in the United States. During the year the United States authorities were called upon to deal with a number of serious questions involving the activities of agents and officials of the German government, and German sympathizers in the United States. These activities included the obtaining of false manifests and clearance papers for vessels sent from American ports with supplies for German cruisers; the obtaining of fraudulent passports; subsidizing American newspapers; and efforts to hamper the shipment of arms and ammunition to Great Britain. While conclusive evidence was lacking that the German government or its official representatives in this country were responsible for such of these acts as violated the laws of the United States, nevertheless the Government of the United States considered the actions of two German officials, Capt. Karl Boy-Ed and Capt. Franz von Papen, the German naval and military attachés, to have been sufficiently culpable to demand their recall. This request was agreed to by the German government. Other prominent Germans aroused by their actions considerable criticism. Conspicuous among them was Dr. Bernard Dernburg, who during the early part of the war, had been the head of the pro-German propaganda in the United States. His outspoken defense of Germany in the Lusitania case, and his general aggressive attitude caused such strong protests that he voluntarily returned to Germany. Dr. Heinrich F. Albert, financial agent of the German government in the United States, was, according to a series of articles published in the New York World, involved in an elaborate scheme to subsidize American newspapers, to establish munition factories to supply arms and ammunition to Germany, and in general to foster a pro-German sentiment in the United States. Dr. von Nuber, the consul general of Austria-Hungary, was accused by Dr. Joseph Goricar, formerly Austro-Hungarian consul at San Francisco, of plotting to destroy munition factories in the United States. Carl Buenz, director of the Hamburg-American Steamship Company, was indicted on the charge of conspiracy to defraud the United States by procuring false manifest and clearance papers. Among the less prominent persons whose activities attracted wide attention, was Lieutenant Robert Fay, an ex-officer of the German army, who was arrested for having large quantities of high explosives in his possession. The confession of an accomplice clearly indicated that the explosives were to be used to destroy ships belonging to the enemies of Germany. Werner Horn, a German subject, was arrested for attempting to wreck the international bridge between Vanceboro, Maine, and St. Croix, New Brunswick. THE UNITED STATES AND AUSTRIA-HUNGARY. During the year 1915 two serious disputes arose involving the United States and Austria. The first of these concerned the activities of the Austro-Hungarian ambassador to the United States, Dr. Theodor Dumba. On Sept. 1, 1915, James F. J. Archibald, an American newspaper correspondent, was arrested by the British authorities when the steamer Rotterdam put into Falmouth, for carrying dispatches from the German and Austrian embassies at Washington to Berlin and Vienna. Among the papers was a letter from Dr. Dumba, suggesting a plan for crippling the munitions factories in America by fomenting strikes among the Austro-Hungarian laborers in these factories. Dr. Dumba admitted the authenticity of the documents, and defended his action on the ground that it was his duty to bring to the attention of his fellow countrymen employed by the manufacturers of munitions that they were engaged in enterprises unfriendly to the fatherland, and that the Imperial government would regard them as guilty of a serious crime, punishable by penal servitude should they return to their own country. This explanation proved unsatisfactory to the American government, and Secretary Lansing notified the Austrian government that, as Dr. Dumba had "conspired to cripple legitimate industries of the people of the United States, and had flagrantly violated diplomatic propriety by employing an American citizen protected by an American passport as a secret bearer of official dispatches through the lines of the enemy of Austria-Hungary," he was no longer acceptable to the United States as the ambassador from Austria-Hungary. In answer to this demand the Austro-Hungarian government agreed, on Sept. 27, 1915, to recall Dr. Dumba. The second incident involving the two countries was the sinking of the Italian steamer Ancona on Nov. 7, 1915, by an Austrian submarine. The Ancona had attempted to escape, but was overhauled. It was charged by the survivors that the submarine continued to fire after the Ancona had stopped. In all, more than 200 lives were lost, among them nine American citizens. In a vigorous note the Government of the United States, on Dec. 6, 1915, demanded that the Austro-Hungarian government should disavow the act, that the commander of the submarine should be punished, and that an indemnity should be paid for the loss of the lives of American citi zens. To this the Austro-Hungarian government replied on Dec. 15, 1915, asking for more specific information upon which the Government of the United States based its charges. On Dec. 19, 1915, the American government replied, stating that it based its charges on the official report of the Austro-Hungarian admiralty, and declined further to specify the additional testimony tending to corroborate the admiralty's report. The incident was closed by the Austro-Hungarian government granting practically all of the American demands. In a note sent Dec. 29, 1915, it was stated that the submarine commander had been punished for not taking into consideration the panic aboard the Ancona, which rendered disembarkment difficult. It agreed that Austria-Hungary should indemnify American citizens affected. While disclaiming responsibility for lives lost, due to shots which were fired while the Ancona was attempting to escape, or for those lost by the faulty lowering of life boats, Austria agreed not to press for proof that the American lives were lost through the fault of the submarine commander, and agreed "to extend indemnities to those whose cause cannot be established." In conclusion the note stated that the Austro-Hungarian government "reserved to itself the right to bring up for discussion at a later time the difficult questions of international law connected with submarine warfare." SUMMARY. Briefly summarized, the outstanding results of these various controversies between the United States and the different European powers appear as follows: With Great Britain little was accomplished during the year in reaching a satisfactory understanding in regard to the interference with neutral trade. The Government of the United States had placed itself on record as considering the blockade of Germany as "ineffective, illegal, and indefensible." This at least served notice that the United States was unwilling to acquiesce in what appeared to be an unwarranted extension of the principle of the blockade, and also, perhaps, laid the foundation for future claims for damages due to injuries done to American trade. Greater progress was made during the year in solving the difficulties which had arisen between Germany and the United States. Starting with the assertion that all belligerent merchantmen in the war zone would be sunk and that neutral vessels entering this area did so at their own risk, Germany gradually retreated, first agreeing not to attack neutral vessels and to offer reparation for such as might be sunk by "accident," and second that if any vessel should be sunk, full provision should be made for the "absolute safety" of persons on board. The one important controversy between the two countries which remained unsettled at the close of the year was that growing out of the sinking of the Lusitania, and this hinged largely on the question whether Germany was willing to recognize the illegality of that act. Public opinion in the United States was sharply divided as to the lessons to be drawn from the war, and as to the policy which this country should adopt. On the one hand a vigorous campaign was inaugurated to strengthen the military and naval defenses of the United States. (See MILITARY PROGRESS; NAVAL PROGRESS; and PREPAREDNESS.) It was urged with great earnestness that the war had demonstrated the futility of military unpreparedness, and that the United States was in particular danger because of her great wealth, which other nations would covet. On the other hand it was urged with equal fervor that the cause of the war was primarily the great military armaments in Europe, and that the United States would make a great mistake by joining in the competition for military preparedness. It was pointed out by the advo cates of peace that the energies of this country should be devoted to finding some means, if pos sible, to end the war, and to further the plans for preventing future struggles. If not the most effective, certainly the most picturesque, of the efforts of the pacifists in the United States during the year was the expedition organized by Henry Ford, a millionaire automobile manufac turer. He gathered together about 150 men and women, some of them more or less prominent Americans, and including newspaper and magazine writers and moving picture men, and took them with him to Europe with the purpose of discovering some means of ending the war. Of the sincerity of Mr. Ford there was no question, but the methods used in organizing the movement, and the actions of some of the persons prominently identified with it, seriously impaired the chances of its success. The United States authorities let it be known that it was in no sense officially sanctioned, while the European countries at war clearly indicated that the expedition was not welcome. Despite these discouragements the party sailed on the Scandinavian-American liner Oscar II on Dec. 4, 1915. During the voyage serious discord developed among the members of the party. The expedition reached Christiansand, Norway, on Dec. 18, 1915. A few days later it was announced that Mr. Ford would have to leave the party and return to America because of illness. The remainder of the party went on to Copenhagen, reaching there on the last day of the year. The prospects that the expedition would accomplish anything of importance toward ending the war were not bright. UNITED STATES COMMISSION ON INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS. See INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. On July 1, 1915, the partial reorganization of the Department proposed by Secretary Houston and approved by Congress went into effect. The main divisions of the Department are now as follows: Office of the secretary, including the offices of the assistant secretary, solicitor, chief clerk, appointment clerk, farm management, exhibits, and information; weather bureau; bureau of animal industry; bureau of plant industry; forest service; States relations service; bureau of chemistry; bureau of soils; bureau of entomology; bureau of biological survey; bureau of crop estimates; office of public roads and rural engineering (including irrigation, drainage, farm architecture, etc.); office of markets and rural organization; division of accounts and disbursements; division of publications; and the library. The work of the office of markets and rural organization has been greatly enlarged and now includes studies of market conditions, methods of grading, standardizing, packing, and ship ping, the means by which farm produce gets to the consumer, rural credits, insurance and communication, and rural social and educational activities. The States relations service represents the secretary of agriculture in his relations with the State agricultural colleges and experiment stations, including the administration of the Hatch and Adams Acts relating to the stations, the coöperative agricultural extension work provided for by the Smith-Lever Act (see AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION WORK), the farmers' coöperative demonstration work, investigations relating to agricultural schools, farmers' institutes, and home economics, and the maintenance of agricultural experiment stations in Alaska, Hawaii, Porto Rico, and Guam. The library now contains 133,000 books and pamphlets, mainly on agriculture and agricultural science, and currently receives 2128 peri odicals. In his annual report for 1915 the secretary of agriculture recommended legislation along the following lines-(1) To promote better handling and storing of farm products, and trading on the basis of fixed grades and standards, including a permissive warehouse act, a cottonstandard act, a grain-grades act, and provision for a market-news service; (2) a land-mortgage banking act; (3) assistance in roadmaking and similar improvements to communities near the national forests; (4) authority to grant waterpower permits within the national forests for fixed periods; (5) classification of the remaining public grazing lands; (6) more effective control over the production of hog-cholera serum; (7) continuance of appropriations for the purchase of forest lands in the Appalachian and White mountains. The appropriations for the Department for the year ended June 30, 1915, amounted to $19,865,832 for ordinary expenses, in addition to permanent and special appropriations amounting to $10,628,008, making a total of $30,493,840. The forest service received $2,481,469 from the sale of timber on the national forests, grazing and water-power permits, condemned property, etc. Fines and recoveries in cases arising under the food and drugs and insecticide acts amounted to $130,000; and court decisions resulted in the retention in the national forests of about 18,000 acres of land supporting 155,000,000 feet of timber worth about $700,000. The Department continued coöperation with the postmaster-general in the improvement of selected mail-route roads for which Congress appropriated $500,000, conditioned on the raising of double that amount by the States in which such roads are located. The appropriations for the year ending June 30, 1916, for ordinary expenses amounted to $22,971,782, but most of the increase was actually caused by the inclusion of items for which the Department had special appropriations the previous year. In the main, existing projects were continued with the same allotment of funds and comparatively few new lines of work were provided for. In 1915 the Department issued 913 new publications and a large number of reprints, aggregating more than 36,000,000 copies. There were 16,223 employees on July 1, 1915, of whom 3594 were employed in Washington. The number of women employed was 1921. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. See AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION, Educational Work of Department of Agricul ture. UNITED STATES MILITARY ACADEMY. The total enrollment in the academy in the autumn of 1915 was 627. The faculty numbered 125. There were no notable changes in the membership of the faculty during the year, and no noteworthy benefactions were received. The library contained about 95,000 volumes. The superintendent in 1915 was Col. Clarence P. Townsley. UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. The museum is a part of the Smithsonian Institution (q.v.), and the assistant secretary in charge for 1915 was Richard Rathbun. For the year ending June 30, 1915, the collections received additions of 1481 accessions, aggregating about 304,647 specimens. These were classified as follows: Anthropology, 15,140; botany, 51, |