chooses. But what has been made certain is that every student in Harvard College hereafter is going to get something resembling education; and none will go out of the college despising the men who achieve academic distinction, because they will have some conception, attained by hard work, what that distinction means in brain force, in character, in concentration and devotion to a purely intellectual end. Speaking of the changes in the system of little or no difficulty in making any elections he education at the new Harvard, Dr. Berle says that "President Lowell believes in the college. He does not believe in handling a youth just out of a high school as though he were a man ready for professional studies." No sooner were the formalities of President Lowell's inauguration over than the faculty and governing boards agreed upon a plan under which a standing committee prepared general rules for the choice of electives, based upon the principle "that a student must take a considerable amount of work in some one field, and that the rest of his courses must be well distributed." Also that at the end of his first year in college each student must present to his adviser a plan of study for the remainder of his college course; and “that a student's plan be subsequently changed only for a cause satisfactory to the committee." The rules in accordance with which the freshman class of 1910 will begin the new régime show a real revolution in Harvard education. Nothing that is really valuable in the elective system is lost; in fact, it is generally understood that any student who shows himself capable of electing wisely and effectively will have Citing the case of a certain professor at Harvard, who less than a generation ago would decline to answer a simple question on which his opinion merely as an educated man would have been valuable by saying “It. is not in my department," Dr. Berle remarks that "President Lowell evidently will not regard, as a superior qualification for any chair in Harvard, total and arrogant ignorance of every other department of knowledge." The insular characters, the want of solidarity, the absence of cohesiveness which "made Harvard stand for something so purely individualistic as to appear a rather poorly concealed superciliousness and contempt for other forms and methods of education," have passed with the advent of the new president. "Harvard from this time is with her sister institutions, not apart from them." WILLIAM GRAHAM SUMNER: YALE'S GREATEST ECONOMIST B veteran. THE PIONEER Prof. Henry W. Farnam, writing under this heading, calls to mind the fact that when Sumner succeeded to the chair of political and social science at Yale College in 1872 there were but few professional economists in the country. Besides Walker at the Shef At field Scientific School, Dunbar at Harvard, We had no one who so stimulated Our Prof. Irving Fisher thinks "few teachers have ever lived who have influenced the lives of their students as did Professor Sumner." In his nature concealment found no place. Few men have been more ready to admit an error, more anxious to know and teach the naked truth, and more free from pride of opinion." "I am sure that I am but one of a multitude of Yale graduates who look back to a course taken under Professor Sumner as marking an epoch in their intellectual development," writes Prof. Clive Day. "Seen through Professor Sumner's eyes, history appeared broader and deeper than it had ever seemed before. The great element in Professor Sumner's power was his idealism. Beyond and above the material phenomena of life he taught us to see its great realities." THE MAN The tribute of Prof. Albert G. Keller to the engaging personality of Professor Sumner is a particularly happy one. He writes: As the writer looks back over the years of association with Professor Sumner the reflection which disengages itself from many others is this: how inevitably, yet without effort, did this man win allegiance, at first intellectual, and then of the affections to himself. Whatever he touched he transformed with interest,-lending ing object as a colonial piece of eight that all such glamour, for example, to such an uninspirof us wanted to own one, or to see one essayed, at once. This was the sort of teaching that counted. His invariable background was common sense. Of Professor Sumner's fidelity to obligation, the following example is cited: Not many years ago there occurred a heavy snowstorm on a Sunday night and Monday morning; and the trolley cars had not yet begun to run on time for an 8.30 class. Some of us who had waded in through the drifts were wagering that Sumner had been stopped for once, for he lived a mile or so from college, and was not very strong at the time. But when there, in his familiar, old-fashioned leather we went to his lecture-room to look, he was boots, flushed and panting, but ready for business. None of us can hope to rival that compelling quality of his which caused young men to wish to follow him above all others; for that was part of his genius. PROFESSOR ELY'S TRIBUTE Prof. Richard T. Ely writes: "As years went on I came to have an increasing appreciation of his work and an increasingly friendly feeling for him. . . . Although still unable to accept his underlying philosophy of society, I can now see more clearly than then that his clear-cut utterances had in them a message well worthy of consideration." Pro- trained by Professor Sumner. Such a stufessor Ely also states that he always wel- dent had "something definite and positive comed into his graduate classes a Yale man on which to build." AN ALLEGED DANGER OF OCEAN TRAVEL OCEAN travel, more specifically passage across the Atlantic,-has come to be regarded as so particularly safe, the assertions of the various steamship companies as to the precautions taken for the protection of their patrons having hitherto been accepted so implicitly, that it is much to be regretted that there should be published any statement calculated to cause uneasiness among the seagoing public, unless, of course, conditions endangering life and calling for exposal really exist. In the Atlantic Monthly an article, entitled "The Man on the Bridge," by Charles Terry Delaney, has caused something of a sensation among those who in the pursuit of health or of pleasure go down to the sea in ships "; and it is not going too far to say that, if true, the allegations made should result in immediate action on the part of the steamship companies for the remedy of the conditions depicted, and that if not capable of substantiation the article should never have been printed. Take, for example, the following extract: Except when rounding headlands, approaching harbor, or during fog, the master rarely mounts the bridge at all; everything is left in charge of the officer of the watch. There is no risk in this if the officer has had a sufficient amount of sleep. But does the officer in charge always get sufficient sleep to act quickly for the benefit and safety of those whose lives are in his keeping? I answer, emphatically, "No." At times he is no more fit to be left in charge than is a lunatic; and a moment's delay, a wrong order, or the slightest let-up in his vigilance is often all that is required to send both the liner and its freight of between three and four thousand souls to the bottom. 46 This passage occurs in a description of a voyage from Liverpool to New York; and Mr. Delaney charges that when leaving port the second officer, when he goes on the bridge, has been on his feet without sleep for at least thirty-nine hours." He claims that in nothing are his statements exaggerated ; and he goes on to say: I have experienced all that I have described, many times. I have been left in charge of a liner carrying in all about thirty-three hundred souls. These, in addition to the valuable ship and freight, have been under my charge at a time when I have been from thirty to forty hours on my feet, and without sleep or rest. The safety of all has depended on my vigilance at a time when soul, mind, and body have long been worn out. To keep awake at such times is torture; one must walk, walk, walk, and get through somehow; and all this in waters crowded with shipping and where vessels are subjected to the whims of tides! At no other time in their lives, perhaps, are passengers in such jeopardy. Just when an officer should be at his best and have all his wits about him, he is as heavy as lead and worse than useless. While the tracks adopted by the leading steamship companies minimize the risks of an ocean passage, the gravest and most unwarrantable risks are taken in the very worst places in the world, the English channels." The condition of sailors and officers at the commencement of a voyage is thus described: Sailors on leaving port, often muddled through drink, are of no assistance to the officer in keeping a lookout. The officers, though not through drink, are worse than muddled. Their faculties are impaired, their eyes are almost closed, their bodies are worn out; all this through false economy, or ignorance and bad management, on somebody's part. Until some fine vessel with her precious cargo is sent to the bottom through collision, these things, I believe, will not be rectified. It is only by good luck that this has not happened already. Mr. Delaney pays a high tribute to the qualifications of the young officers on the liners; and he assures his readers that "if there were only one certificated officer left on a ship the passengers need have no fear of her not coming into port." Indeed, he says plainly, that whereas the British authorities call for the presence of the master on the bridge of his vessel "at all times during fog," it would be far better for the safety of the ship if the command were handed over to the chief officer when the master finds himself worn out by watching. Under existing conditions the writer of the article under review has seen a master sixty years of age or thereabout stand on a bridge for over seventy hours, with eyes that were useless through strain and hearing impaired by the constant shrieking of the fog-whistle.' Is it right, he asks, to expect such a man to command in case of emergency? But hazy weather, in sailor language, one part clear to two parts thick," is even more danger 66 66 ous than fog. In such weather, especially Another danger arises from inaccurate. if the master has just been on the bridge for charts. On this point the evidence cited is a stretch, the officer in charge hesitates to circumstantial enough: call the latter again and sound the whistle. Serious risks are taken at such times. Mr. Delaney mentions two instances in which he nearly lost his ship: one when he was going at the rate of 21 knots," and the ship passed within 20 feet of an iceberg; the other when, "with hardly a moment's warning," the Deutschland hove in sight about an eighth of a mile away, the two ships passing each other with less than a hundred feet between them. For example: on British Chart No. 2480, Fire Island Lightship and Sandy Hook Lightship are given as being in the same latitude. All British books of instruction, coast-pilots, "lights of the world," etc., give both the same latitude,-namely, 48° 28′ North. Now, the latest American surveys place Fire Island Lightship in 40° 28′ 40′′ North and Sandy Hook Lightship in 40° 28′ 2′′ North, a difference of nearly three-quarters of difference between the two surveys is quite The three-quarters of a mile of enough to pile any ship up high and dry. a mile. THE NEW QUESTS FOR THE SOUTH POLE SHACKLETON'S expedition as well as planned for 1910-11, and that of the Gerthe contemplated Antarctic explorations man, Filchner, promises to be the most of a number of other investigators lend a notable. In the meeting last March of the timely interest to an article in the Berlin Berlin Geographical Society, he laid his Gegenwart by Dr. Adolf Heilborn, in which plan before the astonished circle of scholars, he dwells particularly upon the project of a plan which aroused genuine enthusiasm Wilhelm Filchner, the daring explorer of and was joyfully hailed by Nordenskjöld, Tibet. We give some of the main features who chanced to be present. Filchner, in an of his remarks: interview solicited by the writer, communicated to him details of his project which have not yet been made public, and which were the occasion of his article. From remote times a Southern Continent has been the dream and hope of geographers. Hipparchus in 150 B. C. located its beginnings as far north as Ceylon, while Ptolemy, 300 years later, placed them much farther south, where Africa juts out to the east, and his view prevailed up to the time of the Portuguese explorers. The rounding of the Cape of Good Hope and shortly after of Cape Horn, dispelled these erroneous suppositions. Cook demonstrated in 1769 that New Zealand, too, was only an island, and not the coast of a continent beyond Australia. The Russian, Bellingshausen, in 1821 was the first to discover a real Antarctic mainland, naming it Alexander Land. Ross, while searching for the magnetic pole in 1840'42, discovered the ice-mantled Victoria Land. Another interval of a generation ensued without any notable polar explorations; but since 1897 the old problem has been infused with new life: the German zoologist, Chun, in 1897-'99; the Belgian expedition under de Gerlache, 1898'99,-the first to winter in the Antarctic regions, -and Borchgevink's expedition, fitted out by English means, strove for its solution. Then from 1901 to 1905 we have a period of international undertakings: the German, Drygalski; the Englishman, Robert Scott; the Swede, Nordenskjöld; the Frenchman, Charcot; the Scotchman, Bruce, have contributed towards lifting the veil that hangs over the Antarctic regions. Shackleton, penetrating farther than any of these (88° 23′) into the very heart of the polar region, established beyond doubt the existence of a south-polar continent. His success naturally gave a new impetus to Antarctic exploration. No less than five new expeditions are Filchner's plan is not of recent conception; it is a pet idea of the daring explorer which in adequate means have heretofore prevented him from prosecuting. Bruce, the discoverer of Coatsland, means to start from that point and make an earnest endeavor to cross the Antarctic region; the same course, advocated by Peary, is contemplated by the Americans. But while in both cases the chief aim is to reach the South Pole, Filchner puts another problem in the foreground, the clearing up of the relation between the east and west polar regions. Are these connected, or are they divided from each other? A great geographical problem awaits solution here, more important than the attainment of the South Pole. To solve this problem is the task that Filchner has set himself, and there is every reason to believe that he will succeed in solving it. His achievements in the highlands of Tibet,-often under the most adverse circumstances,-seem to mark him as predestined for such a task; his motto: Pessimist in preparation, optimist in action," betrays the prudent investigator who realizes how multitudinous are the requirements for boldly penetrating into the unknown Antarctic regions. In order to carry out his plan Filchner wants to utilize two small vessels,-it being more difficult for those of a large size to steer their way through the ice-channels. Chief importance, however, is attached to the sledges, which will be drawn by ponies and dogs, the first obtained from Greenland, the last from Central Asia. The success of an expedition depends primarily upon thorough preparation; among other things, those who are to participate with Filchner propose to spend a number of weeks in the summer of 1910 in the north polar regions in order to familiarize themselves with the conditions in such sections. The real expedition, which is calculated to extend over about three years, will not start before the summer of 1911. ROOSEVELT ADDRESSES EUROPE "WHAT is it that makes Mr. Roosevelt extensively on these utterances of Mr. Roosethe power he unquestionably is?" velt. With this query the London Daily Chronicle begins a keen, yet sympathetic analysis of the ex-President's speeches at Paris, Christiania, and Berlin. In essaying to answer its own question this London journal admits that he is "not a deep or subtle thinker," that "most of his harangues are little more than strings of eminently estimable platitudes," and yet "they always thrill the audience to whom they are addressed and always thrill the greater audience who can only read them in print." The truth is chiefly, concludes the editorial from which we have quoted, that Mr. Roosevelt "brings to the problems of life and conduct and politics, first, a thoroughly fresh, pristine, and elemental type of mind and character, and, secondly, the courage to say out loud what most men feel, but few even whisper." Moreover, Mr. Roosevelt himself always practices what he preaches, and "his earnestness and sincerity are so overwhelming as to invest the most hoary platitude with a new meaning and a new message." Concluding with the remark that a possible proof of Mr. Roosevelt's subtlety of intellect may be found in his understanding that "the great majority of mankind enjoy being preached at and like to hear the eternal virtues thundered at them through a megaphone," the Chronicle reproduces the text of the speeches in question. Most of the journals of England and the continent comment THE OBLIGATIONS OF REPUBLICAN CITIZENSHIP Citizenship in a Republic" was the title of an address delivered by Mr. Roosevelt before the Sorbonne on April 23. After rapidly sketching the progress of civilization pioneering in new regions of the world, and at the same time instituting a comparison between the settled conditions of European life and the rude surroundings of colonial America, the lecturer passed to his subject of the responsibilities of individual citizens in republics, such as France and the United States. A democratic republic such as each of ours,an effort to realize in its full sense government by, of, and for the people, represents the most gigantic of all possible social experiments, the one fraught with greatest possibilities alike for good and for evil. The success of republics like yours and like ours means the glory, and our failure the despair, of mankind; and for you and for us the question of the quality of the individual citizen is supreme. Under other forms of government, under the rule of one man or of a very few men, the quality of the rulers is all-important. If, under such governments, the quality of the rulers is high enough, then the nation may for generations lead a brilliant career, and add substantially to the sum of world achievement, no matter how low the quality of the average citizen; because the average citizen is an almost negligible quantity in working out the final results of that type of national greatness. But with you and with us the case is different. With you here, and with us in my own home, in the long run, success or failure will be |