VOL. XXII.

The

New Year's Day will usher in the Century's twentieth century. The transition Ending. has, however, been so much in mind, and has led to so many reviews of the period that lies behind us and forecasts of that which is to come, that there is little reason for trying to add anything more by way of effort to jog the memory or stimulate the imagination. As we remarked a year ago, the century end represents no real cleavage of periods or epochs, but is an imaginary line at once arbitrary and accidental. The equator is an imaginary line, but it is not accidental. It is determined on mathematical principles by essential conditions. The most striking experiences of the human race do not accommodate themselves in any very symmetrical fashion to the marshaling of the years by tens and hundreds. But for the ancestral habit of using the fingers as an aid to ready reckoning, we should never have had the decimal system of numbers. And, of course, without the decimal system, it would never have occurred to us to mark off the larger divisions of time by those periods of ten times ten years that we call centuries. This tendency to apply "round" numbers has had many an application far more practical than the recognition of hundred-year periods as fixed in the Gregorian Calendar. Countless millions of men,-doubtless billions,-in ancient, medieval, and modern times, have been organized as soldiers on the plan of the century, or company of a hundred. The discovery that a different numerical basis affords a better scheme of organization has been a comparatively recent But the world will continue to mark time by centuries, and to find the measure on some accounts a convenient one.

one.

No. 6.

importance is not reached until we come to the period of the Civil War of 1861-65. The War of 1812 and the Mexican War, taken in connection with their various results, also have importance as secondary divisions. It happens that the end of the nineteenth century coincides somewhat closely with the period of the Spanish and Philippine wars, which, with their political and social consequences, are evidently destined to form one of the major rather than secondary transitions of epoch in our national history.

Some Factors of Future History.

As for the European world, the writers of the future will doubtless mark the Peace Conference at The Hague, the war in South Africa, the determination of the United States to remain in the Philippines, and notably the Chinese crisis, as historic events at the close of one century which were destined to affect profoundly the course of affairs in the coming period. As the American and French revolutions towards the end of the eighteenth century produced world-wide results that gave much of its character to the nineteenth, so these various matters of international moment, which belong to the conclusion of the present century, will doubtless result in making the twentieth one that in future ages will be famous for the expanded and altered nature of international relations. It is not improbable that, when the events of the nineteenth century fall into their true places in the perspectives of history, the work of the Hague Peace Conference will appear as the crowning achievement of the period, and its best legacy to its successor. An event like the great conference at The Hague usually lacks full contemporary appreciation. None of the participating governments entered upon it hopefully; and even our own, like all the others, was at the outset rather skeptical and indifferent. There were, however, men here and there who were bold enough to hope that something could be done. One of these was Mr. Frederick W. Holls, whose interest in the matter was probably

greater than that of any other man in this country, and to whose initial efforts was largely due the changed sentiment that at length happily led Mr. McKinley to appoint an influential delegation, with Mr. Holls as its secretary and executive member.

A Reminder

The Hague Conference, and Mr. of the Hague Holls' previous interest in it and acČonference. tive service while there, are brought to mind again by the appearance of an excellent volume from his pen, entitled "The Peace Conference at The Hague, and Its Bearings on International Law and Policy." The conference was not held in the presence of newspaper correspondents; and its official proceedings, only very recently published, are not accessible to the general reader. It happens, therefore, that even the studious and philanthropic public has been heretofore only imperfectly informed as to the magnitude and profound importance of the work accomplished by this august international assemblage. Mr. Holls' volume, which embodies the full text of treaties and conventions, and much other matter of a formal and documentary nature, contains in addition an admirable commentary, not only upon the work of the conference, but also upon those great departments of international law and diplomacy that relate to war and peace. The conference drew up and agreed upon three conventions, or general treaties. The first of these is known as the arbitration treaty; and this, of course, is the preeminent achievement of the conference, and one of the greatest achievements of the rineteenth century. The first of the other two treaties deals with the laws and customs of war on land, and provides an enlightened and progress

HON. F. W. HOLLS.

ive code; while the second extends to naval warfare the principles of the Geneva convention of 1864, and makes provision for hospitalships thus, in a word, admitting the methods of such humane organizations as the Red-Cross Society in maritime warfare. There ought to have been a fourth, extending the same exemp tions to private property on sea as are granted on land. The American delegates advocated it, but the subject was postponed.

as members of the permanent court of arbitration, from which roll arbitrators are to be selected on the occasion of any practical resort to the tribunal. In so far as announced, the nations have appointed men of distinguished attainments and reputation, as the following examples will show. Spain has named her most highly re spected public man, in the person of the Duke of Tetuan. Holland has chosen Dr. Asser, president of the Institute of International Law. From Russia come the names of M. Fritsch, president of the Senate; Count Mouravieff, minister of justice; M. Pobyedonoszeff, and Professor Martens, the great authority on inter. national law. From the United States are appointed ex-President Benjamin Harrison and Judge George Gray, formerly United States Senator from Delaware. Ex-President Cleveland was appointed, but declined. While the English appointees have not been announced, it is understood that they will be jurists of great eminence, and it is not improbable that one of their number may be the new Lord Chief Justice of England, who succeeds the late Lord Russell, and who,-widely known to lawyers

everywhere as Sir Richard Webster, formerly attorney-general,-has more recently masqueraded under the title of Lord Alverstone.

"Militarism.

The idea, much discussed previous to As to ,,the Hague Conference, that something might be done in the direction of limiting European militarism by international agreement, only needed discussion to show its futility. So long as war is a real menace to nations, money and thought will be expended upon the devising of the most efficient means of defense and aggression. There is no virtue in having an inefficient army, like that of China. The world's peace would have been positively promoted if the Chinese army had been large, modern, and up to European standards. Such an army would, on the one hand, have kept the . revolutionary and criminal movement of the Boxers from gaining such headway as to engulf the empire; and, on the other hand, it would have held the rapacity of the European powers in check, and there would have been no thought of such insolence as the storming of the Taku forts.

THE NEW LORD CHIEF JUSTICE OF ENGLAND. (Lord Alverstone, more widely known as Sir Richard Web. ster, was chosen in October as the successor of the late Lord Russell.)

This

ury, and not less so in the end to our own. question of military efficiency is one about which there should be plain speech as well as clear thinking. Let us admit that it was negligence and error rather than wisdom and foresight that had allowed this nation of ours to attain its vast population and wealth with an army of only 25,000 men, and with preparations-as to arms, ammunition, and materials of all kinds-scarcely adequate even for so small a force. There were many Spaniards in high position, and many mili. tary experts throughout Europe, who strongly believed that Spain could defeat us in a quick campaign, on the same principle that fifty wellarmed soldiers may readily disperse several thou. sand unarmed and unwarned citizens. Spain had 200,000 men under arms in Cuba, while we had hardly more than a tenth of that number, and ours were doing garrison duty in small detachments all over the continent. Under these cir. cumstances, Spain could not believe that we really meant to fight; and still less did she believe that we could fight to any advantage on short notice. For this very reason the controversy was allowed to drift on until it was too late for a peaceful solution. Spain would have understood what we meant, and there would have been no war, if our army had been two or three times as large.