Volume 3, page 1034 (Macmillan Company, New York, 1908).

At the half yearly meeting of the Grand Trunk Company in London, October 21, 1909, the President, Sir C. Rivers Wilson, who had recently returned from Canada, spoke of the present state and prospects of the transcontinental line, partly as follows:

"They were, he remarked, under an obligation to complete their road through to Prince Rupert by December 1, 1911, but, owing to the want of labour, he feared there was very little chance of their succeeding in doing so. … They had built through to Winnipeg on the one hand and to Lake Superior on the other, but there remained an unfortunate link of 245 miles to complete their junction with Lake Superior. … After what had happened he was very chary of making any prediction, but he should think that, after all that had taken place, and after the great pressure which was now being put on the contractors, the road would be finished by next summer. Their great object, of course, was to link up the west with their eastern system. That would be done during the summer by the road coming down to Lake Superior, which would enable them to communicate by water with their Georgian Bay port, and during the winter, when navigation was closed, by way of land north of Lake Superior by the line the Government was to build to a place called Cochrane, about 540 miles distant, where they would obtain communication with North Bay and put themselves in contact with their own Ontario road."

CANADA: A. D. 1904. General Election. Continuance of the Laurier Ministry. The Earl of Minto succeeded as Governor-General by Earl Grey.

The general election in 1904 resulted in a parliamentary majority of 64 for the Liberals, thus firmly reseating the Laurier Ministry. The Conservatives carried Ontario, but were beaten heavily in the Maritime Provinces, in Quebec, and in the West. The general prosperity of the country gave a backing to the Liberals which no political criticism could overcome.

The Earl of Minto was succeeded as Governor-General, in 1904, by Earl Grey, grandson of the Earl Grey who, as Prime Minister of England in 1832, carried through the first Reform of Parliament, extinguishing the "rotten boroughs," transferring political power from the land-owning aristocracy to the middle class of English people, and beginning the democratizing of government, which two later reforms have made nearly complete. "There can be no doubt," said a Canadian correspondent of one of the London journals lately, "that the present Governor-General is more widely popular in Canada than any of his predecessors in that high office were, or could have been. Happy in his personality, happier still in his opportunities, he is known and liked by all sorts and conditions of Canadians in every part of the country; whereas more than one of those who have represented the Sovereign there since the creation of the Canadian Confederacy were regarded as august functionaries forming the ‘dignified part’ of the constitutional mechanism (to use Bagehot’s phrase), and as sedulously avoiding close contact with the people at large."

Within the past year it has been announced officially from Ottawa that Lord Grey will fill out his full period of six years in the office of Governor-General, expiring in December, 1910.

CANADA: A. D. 1904. Creation of the Board of Railway Commissioners. Its large regulative powers.

See (in this Volume) RAILWAYS: CANADA.

CANADA: A. D. 1904-1909. Race problems. Restriction of Chinese Immigration. Labor hostility. Riotous attacks on Japanese, Chinese, and Hindu laborers.

See (in this Volume) RACE PROBLEMS: CANADA.

{68}

CANADA: A. D. 1905. New Provinces created. Alberta and Saskatchewan. Revival of the Separate School controversy. The compromise settlement.

By Bills brought into the Dominion Parliament by the Premier, Sir Wilfrid Laurier, on the 21st of February, 1905, and subsequently passed, the four Northwest Territories ceded to the Dominion by Great Britain in 1870 were reorganized as two provinces, and admitted to membership in the Canadian Federal Union, bearing the names of Alberta and Saskatchewan, with Edmonton for the capital of the former and Regina for the latter.

See, in Volume IV. of this work, NORTHWEST TERRITORIES OF CANADA.

Saskatchewan includes the territories of Saskatchewan, Assiniboia, and one-half of Athabasca, and Alberta the territory of Alberta and the remainder of Athabasca. The entire area of the two provinces is 550,345 square miles, and it extends from Manitoba west to the 110th meridian, and from the United States boundary to 60 north latitude. The population of each province was reckoned at 250,000, and was rapidly increasing. The Dominion Government retains control of the public lands. Each of the new provinces received at the beginning five representatives in the Dominion House of Commons and four in the Senate. A single Legislative Chamber of twenty-five members was provided for each; each has a Lieutenant-Governor, with a Cabinet of responsible Ministers. The Dominion Treasury contributes $250,000 yearly to the revenue of each.

A provision in these bills for conceding separate schools to religious minorities revived the controversy which raged in Canada for many years, after the Province of Manitoba, in 1890, had abolished denominational schools and established a free, compulsory, unsectarian school system.

See, in Volume VI. of this work, CANADA: A. D. 1890-1896, and A. D, 1898 (JANUARY).

The Government was forced to amend the provision, devising a compromise which cannot be said to have satisfied either party to the dispute, but which saved the Government from a probable defeat. This affords a half hour of religious teaching, by denominational teachers, at the end of school hours, the denominational character of the instruction determined by the majority in attendance, and its reception to be optional. As explained at the time by a writer in The Outlook, the working of the system is as follows. "The half-hour is the only noteworthy feature of the separate schools. They are liable for no other school taxation than that which is necessary to support those schools. In all other respects, in every detail of government control and oversight, they are exactly like the schools of the majority. From nine o’clock in the morning until three o’clock in the afternoon the order of lessons is the same for all; so are the textbooks, the standards of efficiency, and the qualifications of the teachers. There cannot be any control of the school by any clerical or sectarian body. There cannot be any sectarian teaching between nine o’clock in the morning and three o’clock in the afternoon. The Normal schools of the new provinces will give a uniform normal training for all teachers, and there will be uniform curricula and courses of study for all schools of the same grade. There will be complete and absolute control of all schools as to their government and conduct by the central school authority created by the new provincial Legislature. The distribution of the legislative grant to all schools will be according to educational efficiency, a wise provision which did not apply to separate schools of the old type. To recapitulate, all the schools are alike, except that where the trustees are Protestant there is Protestant religious teaching from half-past three to four, and where the trustees are Roman Catholic there is Roman Catholic teaching during the half-hour. That is the only distinction, and neither Protestant nor Roman Catholic children, when they are in the minority, need remain to hear any religious teaching against their parents’ wishes."

CANADA: A. D. 1906. Dominion Forest Reserves Act.

See (in this Volume) Conservation of Natural Resources.

CANADA: A. D. 1906. Passage of the "Lord’s Day Act."

See (in this Volume) SUNDAY OBSERVANCE.

CANADA: A. D. 1906. Prisons and Reformatory Act.

See (in this Volume) CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW: AS OFFENDERS.

CANADA: A. D. 1906 (May). Departure of the last British garrison.

On the 1st of May, 1906, the last British garrison in the Dominion was withdrawn from Esquimault, in British Columbia, under an arrangement which leaves the Canadian Government in undivided control of all military posts.

CANADA: A. D. 1906-1907. Political experiments in Ontario. Broadening the functions of government.

The Canadians of their Middle West, who used to be the most conservative of Britons, have manifested lately a new spirit, wafted, perhaps, from adventuresome New Zealand, and are trying governmental experiments that would stagger Oklahoma,—trying them, too, with what looks like success.

For the development of the rich cobalt and silver mining region on its eastern border, and for the encouragement of colonization farther northward on the same border, the Ontario Government has not hesitated to construct and own and operate officially an important line of railway, the Temiskaming and Northern Ontario, which is reported to have been profitable from the start. The road may possibly be extended to James Bay, the southward projection of Hudson Bay.

The progressive government of Ontario has also undertaken to work for its own benefit the mines in a large lately opened block of the Cobalt mining territory, covering about 100 square miles. In somewhat the same line of economic policy, it determined in 1906 to control the development and transmission of electric power at and from Niagara Falls, and accomplished its purpose by a contract with the Ontario Power Company, which secures power to municipalities in Ontario at an extremely reasonable rate.

This adventurous policy in economic directions is less surprising, however, than an absolutely novel experiment in the officializing of political parties, as agencies in representative government, which has been put on trial in Ontario during two parliamentary sessions. For the first time in constitutional history, the opposition leader in a legislature has been made a recognized functionary and salaried by the Government to the extent of $7,000 a year. Theoretically, the importance of an effectively critical opposition to the majority party in a legislature is always acknowledged. Is there not good sense, then, theoretically at least, in a policy of government which aims to increase the efficiency of that criticism and give it a responsible character, in the mode which the Ontarians are trying?

{69}

After between two and three years trial of this last named experiment, with a salaried leader of the Opposition, the Toronto correspondent of the London _Times_ wrote, in June, 1909, to that paper as follows:

"This is an experiment in Parliamentary government which has not been attempted elsewhere. It has both advantages and disadvantages. There are few men of wealth or leisure in Canadian public life, and generally a private party fund has been provided for the support of the leader of the Opposition. The charge was commonly made that as this fund was likely to be provided by the few wealthy men of the party they would exact compensation in the form of official appointment or legislative favour when the Opposition leader became the head of the Government. It was decided, therefore, to give a salary, equal to the emoluments of a Minister of the Crown, to the leader of the Opposition. Mr. Borden [leader of the Opposition in Ontario for some time past] sanctioned this legislation and accepted the remuneration provided. It was argued that he thus became a pensioner on the Government, and that a servile consideration for his salary would affect his independence and restrain his criticism of the paymasters on the Treasury benches. Mr. Borden, while disposed more than once to relinquish the salary, felt that this criticism was unjust, and, knowing the grave financial distresses which some of his predecessors had experienced, waited patiently for the attack to exhaust itself and for opportunity to prove that he was not a dependent of the Treasury. At length his course seems to be justified, and the appropriation of a salary for the leader of the Opposition seems likely to become a settled feature of the Canadian Parliamentary system. The real test will come, however, if the system of Parliamentary groups should ever replace the established two-party system in Canada. But for the time the experiment has been justified, and under the conditions which so often obtain in Canada it may even be said that the official salary enhances the independence and dignity of the Opposition leader in Parliament."

CANADA: A. D. 1906-1908. The Canada Temperance Act.

See (in this Volume) ALCOHOL PROBLEM: CANADA.

CANADA: A. D. 1907. The founding of Macdonald College.

See (in this Volume) EDUCATION: CANADA: A. D. 1907.

CANADA: A. D. 1907 (March). The "Industrial Disputes Investigation Act," to aid in the prevention and settlement of Strikes and Lockouts.

See (in this Volume) LABOR ORGANIZATION: CANADA: A. D. 1907-1908.

CANADA: A. D. 1907 (April-May). Imperial Conference at London.

See (in this Volume) British Empire: A. D. 1907.

CANADA: A. D. 1907-1909. Convention respecting commercial relations with France and its amendment.

A Convention which greatly liberalized the tariff regulations affecting trade between Canada and France was concluded between the British and French Governments and signed at Paris on the 19th of September, 1907. It gave "the benefit of the minimum tariff and of the lowest rates of customs duty applicable to like products of other foreign origin," reciprocally, in each country to certain enumerated products of the other; with mutual pledges that every reduction granted by either to any foreign country should apply to similar products of the other.

In January, 1909, an amended Convention was negotiated which liberalized still further this commercial agreement, enlarging the schedules of favored products, especially the agricultural schedules, giving important advantages to Canada in the French market. The amended Convention was ratified in France on the 13th of July, and in Canada early in December.

CANADA: A. D. 1908. Child Labor legislation.

See (in this Volume) CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW: AS WORKERS.

CANADA: A. D. 1908. Governmental undertaking of a railway to Hudson Bay.

See (in this Volume) RAILWAYS: CANADA: A. D. 1908-1909.

CANADA: A. D. 1908 (April). Convention for the preservation and propagation of Food Fishes in waters contiguous to the United States and Canada.

See (in this Volume) FOOD FISHES.

CANADA: A. D. 1908 (April). Treaty respecting the demarcation of the International Boundary between the United States and Canada.

A Treaty "providing for the more complete definition and demarcation of the international boundary between the United States and the Dominion of Canada," negotiated by Ambassador Bryce and Secretary Root, appointed Plenipotentiaries of the Governments of Great Britain and the United States, respectively, was signed at Washington on the 4th of June, 1908. The Treaty provides for parcelling the boundary line in eight sections, for the determination in each of which each Government "shall appoint, without delay, an expert geographer or surveyor to serve as Commissioner." Its first article prescribes with minuteness the procedure to be followed and the consideration to be given to former surveys and determinations of the boundary line "in the waters of Passamaquoddy Bay from the mouth of the St. Croix River to the Bay of Fundy." The second article defines similarly the task appointed to the Commissioners who shall determine the "line drawn along the middle of the River St. Croix from its mouth in the Bay of Fundy to its source." The third article instructs the Commissioners who shall fix the line from the source of the St. Croix to the St. Lawrence. The fourth deals in like manner with the next section of the line, from "the point of its intersection with the St. Lawrence River near the forty-fifth parallel of north latitude, as determined under articles I. and VI. of the Treaty of August 9, 1842, between Great Britain and the United States, and thence through the Great Lakes and communicating waterways to the mouth of Pigeon River, at the western shore of Lake Superior." The fifth pursues the line from "the mouth of Pigeon River to the northwestern-most point of the Lake of the Woods." The sixth traces the work to be done on the line from that point of the Lake of the Woods to the summit of the Rocky Mountains. The seventh relates to the section of boundary "along the forty-ninth parallel of north latitude, from the summit of the Rocky Mountains westward to the eastern shore of the Gulf of Georgia, as defined in article I. of the Treaty of June 15, 1846, between Great Britain and the United States and as marked by monuments along its course,"—for the renewing and completing of which monuments commissioners were appointed by concurrent action of the two Governments in 1902 and 1903. The eighth article has to do with the western terminal section of the task, carrying the boundary line "from the forty-ninth parallel of north latitude along the middle of the channel which separates Vancouver’s Island from the mainland and the Haro Channel and of Fuca’s Straits to the Pacific Ocean, as defined in article I. of the Treaty of June 15, 1846, between Great Britain and the United States, and as determined by the award made on October 21, 1872, by the Emperor of Germany as arbitrator.

{70}

In articles one and two there are provisions for the arbitration of disagreements; and the concluding article contains the following:

"If a dispute or difference should arise about the location or demarcation of any portion of the boundary covered by the provisions of this Treaty and an agreement with respect thereto is not reached by the Commissioners charged herein with locating and marking such portion of the line, they shall make a report in writing jointly to both Governments, or severally each to his own Government, setting out fully the questions in dispute and the differences between them, but such Commissioners shall, nevertheless, proceed to carry on and complete as far as possible the work herein assigned to them with respect to the remaining portions of the line.

"In case of such a disagreement between the Commissioners, the two Governments shall endeavor to agree upon an adjustment of the questions in dispute, and if an agreement is reached between the two Governments it shall be reduced to writing in the form of a protocol, and shall be communicated to the said Commissioners, who shall proceed to lay down and mark the boundary in accordance therewith, and as herein provided, but without prejudice to the special provisions contained in Articles I and II regarding arbitration.

"It is understood that under the foregoing articles the same persons will be appointed to carry out the delimitation of boundaries in the several sections aforesaid, other than the section covered by Article IV, unless either of the Contracting Powers finds it expedient for some reason which it may think sufficient to appoint some other person to be Commissioner for any one of the above-mentioned sections."

CANADA: A. D. 1908 (July). Tercentenary Celebration of the Founding of Quebec.

The three hundredth anniversary of the founding of Quebec by Champlain was celebrated at that city in July, 1908, with remarkable spirit and success. The Government of the Dominion took an active and important part in the preparations, nationalizing the battle-field of Wolfe’s victory over Montcalm, on the Plains of Abraham, and converting it into a park, where the principal pageants and ceremonies of the occasion were performed. The Imperial Government interested itself warmly in the undertaking, the Prince of Wales, Lord Roberts, the Duke of Norfolk, and other distinguished personages from Great Britain coming as guests of the festivity and to bear a part. Living descendants of Wolfe and Montcalm were also invited guests, and the Governments of France and the United States were officially represented. Battleships from the fleets of these nations and from Germany, Italy, Spain, Japan and the Argentine Republic were brought to a friendly concourse in the harbor of Quebec, for participation in the brilliant spectacles of the féte. These included a military representation of the armies of Wolfe and Montcalm, on the field where they fought; a representation of the landing of Champlain, from a ship which duplicated the structure and equipment of his own, and a number of other historical pageants, all admirably planned and executed, and offering a rare entertainment to the many thousands of visitors who were attracted to Quebec from all parts of the Dominion and the United States.

The celebration began on the 19th of July and continued through two weeks.

CANADA: A. D. 1908 (September). Act to amend Civil Service Act.

See (in this Volume) CIVIL SERVICE REFORM: CANADA.

CANADA: A. D. 1909. The projected Georgian Bay Canal. Present state of the project.

"The scheme for a canal to give through transport for ocean-going steamers from Montreal to the Great Lakes may now be said to have emerged from the field of idealism into that of practical politics, the need for such a waterway having been generally recognized by Canadian politicians. In commercial circles there is the strongest feeling that the canal works should be put in hand at once, and at the end of April last a powerful deputation representing 20 Canadian Boards of Trade and 54 municipalities pressed this point of view upon the Government. At the present time questions of finance alone prohibit the practical adoption of the enterprise. … When the work is started, it will probably be found that the contract will be entrusted to private enterprise under Government supervision.

… The present position of the negotiations between the Government and the canal company is that the latter corporation having matured its scheme, the Government engineers have made a report, and a compromise has now to be effected on those points where the recommendations of the Government engineers differ from the scheme of construction drawn up by the Georgian Bay Canal Company.

"The total distance of the route planned by the canal company engineers between Georgian Bay on Lake Huron to Montreal, the head of ocean navigation on the St. Lawrence River, is 440 miles. The project is essentially a river and lake canalization scheme, and for the greater part of its course the projected route follows the course of the French River and the Ottawa. River and its lakes. From Georgian Bay to the summit level it is proposed to utilize the middle channel of French River to Lake Nipissing. From the northern side of this lake to the summit level, a distance of over 80 miles from Georgian Bay, it would be mainly an artificial waterway. From the summit level, 677 ft. above sea level, there is a long fall to Montreal, and the route proposed by the canal company engineers is _via_ Trout and Turtle Lakes, the little Mattawa River into Talon Lake to Sand Bay, a distance of 21 miles. A canal three miles long would carry the waterway to the Mattawa River, 13 miles of which would be utilized, and a short canal cut would give access to the Ottawa River, which would then be followed for a distance of 293 miles. Thence the St. Lawrence River or a branch of the Ottawa River, known as the Back River, would form the new waterway for the last 25 miles. The difference in elevation of 659 ft. between Montreal and the summit level, and 99 ft. between the summit and Georgian Bay would be bridged by 27 locks, ranging in lift from 5 ft. to 50 ft. These locks would be designed for a length of 940 ft., with a width of 70 ft. and with 22 ft. of water upon the lock sills, the proposed depth of the canal being 24 ft. {71} The total length of canal cutting for the route is estimated at from 28 to 34 miles, and in all about 108 miles out of the total length of 440 miles would require excavation work for lock approaches, canals, and submerged channels.

"The plans of the Government engineers, as embodied in a report to the Department Of Public Works, do not differ materially from those of the canal company. The latter proposes a 24 ft. waterway, with 22 ft. upon the lock sills; the Government plans provide for a 22 ft. waterway, which, it is pointed out, would more than equal the conditions as they exist to-day in the channels connecting the waters of the Great Lakes, which govern the draught of boats on the Lakes. … The opening up of the Great Lakes for the first time to ocean-going traffic would be an event of the first commercial magnitude. It is not generally recognized that the trade of the Lakes is greater than the coasting trade of England, of France, and of Germany put together. The statistical reports of Lake commerce passing through the canals at Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan and Ontario, show that the tonnage passing through these canals increased during 1897 to 1907 from 18,982,755 to 58,217,214.

"Reference should also be made to the water powers which would be created by the present plans for the construction of the canal. The report of the Government engineers states that nearly 1,000,000 h. p. could be secured along the Ottawa and French rivers and it is estimated that 100,000 h. p. would be available within almost a mile of the city of Montreal.

"The question yet to be decided is when can the country afford to start the work. Sir Robert Perks, M. P., who has been intimately associated with the scheme, recently submitted an offer to the Government on behalf of the canal company, who own the charter, to provide £5,000,000 at a 3 per cent. guarantee, with ½ per cent. sinking fund, for the construction of the French River section of the canal, a distance of about 86 miles, and to build docks and warehouses at North Bay on Lake Nipissing. … It is estimated that it would take ten years from the inception of the work before the canal would be open for navigation, and that the total cost would be about £20,000,000."

_Engineering Correspondence London Times, August 18, 1909._

CANADA: A. D. 1909. The Great Mackenzie Basin. The Newest Canadian West.

A report on the agricultural possibilities of the great Mackenzie Basin, prepared by a select committee of the Dominion Senate, was made public in the summer of 1909. "Basing their calculations upon the testimony of witnesses, the Committee calculate that some two million square miles between the northern limits of Saskatchewan and Alberta and the Arctic Circle can be used for pasturage and for the cultivation of wheat, barley, potatoes, and other vegetables. Until a few years ago not only the Mackenzie basin but the valley of Peace rivers were on account of their high latitudes considered to be unfit for cultivation. The comparatively mild climate, which, as the report shows, they in reality enjoy, is said to be due to the proximity of large bodies of water such as the Great Slave and Great Bear lakes and to the _chinook_ wind, the warm current of air that blows across the Rocky Mountains from the Pacific. The shortness of the sub-Arctic summer appears to be offset by the proportionate length of the days and by the clearness of the air. In regard to the future of the district with which it deals the report points out that in 1870 the representatives of the people of Eastern Canada were anxious to obtain in regard to what is now the prosperous province of Manitoba exactly the same information as the Committee has been engaged in collecting about Canada’s ‘newest west.’"

CANADA: A. D. 1909. The opposition in Newfoundland to union with the Dominion.

See (in this Volume) NEWFOUNDLAND: A. D. 1909.

CANADA: A. D. 1909 (January). The Waterways Treaty between the United States and Great Britain, concerning the waters between the former and Canada.

Resulting from the labors of an International Waterways Commission, appointed four years before, a Waterways Treaty, having reference to the lakes and rivers that lie along the boundary between Canada and the United States, was concluded by Ambassador Bryce, on the part of the British Government, and Secretary of State Root, on the part of the United States, in January, 1909. The Treaty was ratified by the Senate of the United States in the closing hours of the Congressional session which ended March 4, but with a proviso, in the form of a resolution attached. The following is a summary of the provisions of the Treaty as it went to the Senate:

"A preliminary article defines the Canadian and American boundary waters.

"Article I. enacts that the navigation of these waters, including Lake Michigan and the canals connecting them, shall for ever continue free and open for the purposes of commerce to the inhabitants of both countries. Regulations affecting canals in the territory of either country shall apply equally to inhabitants of the other who may wish to make use thereof.

"Article II. reserves to the signatories and to the State and provincial Governments exclusive control over the use, diversion, &c., of such waters in their territory as flow into the boundary waters or across the frontier. Any inhabitant of either country injured by the use of this privilege will be entitled to the legal remedies he would have if he were a native of the defendant country. The contracting parties, however, reserve the right of objection whenever navigation on their own side of the boundary is imperilled by any diversion of water across it.

"Articles III. and IV. provide that no works shall be undertaken on either side of the line, if such works would be likely to affect the level of the waters on the other side, without agreement between the contracting parties and the sanction of the Joint Commission. Pollution of the waters is also forbidden.

"Article V., which relates to the diversion of the waters of Niagara, the control of the level of Lake Erie, and the flow of the Niagara River, has a clause which states that it is the desire of both parties to accomplish these objects with the least possible injury to the investments which have already been made in the construction of power plants on the United States side of the Niagara River under grants of authority from the State of New York, and on the Canadian side of the river under licenses authorized by the Dominion of Canada and the Province of Ontario.

{72}

"Article VI. apportions the uses of the St. Mary’s and Milk rivers and their tributaries in the west.

"Article VII. provides for the creation of an International Joint Commission, consisting of three representatives of Canada and three of the United States.

"Article VIII. provides that the Commission shall have jurisdiction over, and shall decide all cases involving, the waterways where, under articles III. and IV., their approval is required, and gives principles for their guidance. The contracting parties are to have equal and similar rights. The uses of the water are to be considered in the following order:—First, domestic and sanitary purposes; secondly, purposes of navigation; third, purposes of power and irrigation. The Commission is invested with some discretion with regard to departure from the principle of equal division, &c. In case of a tie vote each Commissioner is to make a separate report to his Government; whereupon the two Governments shall attempt to reach an agreement.

"The two following articles, IX. and X., requiring that all disputes shall be referred to the Commission, stand out as the most important provisions of the treaty. Article IX., after stating that matters of difference shall be referred to the Commission whenever either Government desires, goes on to authorize the Commission in each case so referred to examine into and report upon the facts and circumstances of the particular questions referred, together with such conclusions and recommendations as may be appropriate, subject, however, to any restrictions or exceptions which may be imposed with respect thereto by the terms of reference. Such reports of the Commission are in no way to have the character of an arbitral award. The Commission shall make joint report to both Governments in all cases wherein all or a majority of the Commissioners agree, and in case of disagreement the minority may make joint report to both Governments, or separate reports to their respective Governments. In case the Commission is evenly divided upon any question referred to it, separate reports shall be made by the Commissioners, one on each side to their own Government.

"Article X. extends the powers of the Commission by providing that other matters of difference affecting the rights of either country may be referred to the Commission. In each case so referred the Commission is authorized to examine into and report upon the facts and circumstances of the particular questions and matters referred, together with such conclusions and recommendations as may be appropriate, subject, however, to any restrictions or exceptions which may be imposed with respect thereto by the terms of reference. A majority of the Commission shall have power to render a decision or finding upon any of the questions or matters so referred.

"In the event of a failure of the Commission to agree upon the issues submitted to them for decision or report, the article requires the Commissioners to make a joint report to both Governments, or separate reports to their respective Governments, showing the different conclusions arrived at with regard to matters or questions so referred, which shall thereupon be submitted for decision by the high contracting parties to an umpire chosen in accordance with procedure prescribed in the fourth, fifth, and sixth paragraphs of Article XLV. of The Hague Convention for the pacific settlement of international disputes, dated October 18, 1907. Such umpire, the article concludes, shall have power to render a final decision on matters whereon the Commission have failed to agree."

The resolution attached to the Treaty by the Senate of the United States related to the use of waters flowing at the rapids of St. Mary’s River at Sault Ste. Marie, and was introduced by Senator Smith of Michigan. It is as follows:

"Resolved—As part of this ratification, the United States approves this treaty, with the understanding that nothing in the treaty shall be construed as affecting or changing any existing territorial or riparian right in the water, or the rights of owners of lands under water, on either side of the international boundary, at the rapids of St. Mary’s River at Sault Ste. Marie, in the use of waters flowing over such lands, subject to the requirements of navigation in the boundary waters and of the navigation of canals, and without prejudice to the existing right of the United States and Canada, each to use the waters of St. Mary’s River within its own territory; and that this interpretation will be mentioned in the ratification of this treaty as conveying the true meaning of the treaty, and will in effect form part of the treaty."

This stipulation was objectionable to Canada, and the consent of the Dominion Government to a ratification of the Treaty on the part of Great Britain was withheld. It has been understood, however, that the objection will be substantially removed if the Government of the United States acquires possession of the lands and riparian property concerned, which was provided for by an Act of Congress passed in March. The necessary proceedings will consume some time.

CANADA: A. D. 1909 (February). The institution of a Department of External Affairs.

An Associated Press despatch from Ottawa, on the 18th of February, 1909, made known that "the Canadian Government has announced its intention of creating a portfolio of external affairs. Heretofore all of the foreign business of Canada has been carried on through the channel of the British colonial and foreign office. Even after the external affairs branch is created by Canada this will be the principal avenue for such business. That method is cumbersome. In the case of negotiations with the United States, papers have to cross the Atlantic twice in passing from Washington to Ottawa, being sent first to the colonial office and then back to Canada. The process has been much criticised and both the prime minister and the opposition leader have declared themselves in favor of a modification. The creation of the external department is regarded as the first step. The most radical proposal is the intimation that in negotiations with the United States there will hereafter be direct communication between Washington and Canada, through the medium of the British Ambassador."

{73}

In the British Parliament, on the 4th of March, the Prime Minister, Mr. Asquith, replied to a question on the subject, as follows:

"It is understood that the Canadian Government propose to establish a Department of External Affairs. This department is merely intended—like the corresponding department of the Com [Commonwealth?] wealth Government—to conduct correspondence with the Secretary of State for the Colonies, and his Majesty’s Ambassador at Washington, and with the several departments of the Canadian Government. At present delay occurs in dealing with the correspondence, as there is no department to conduct the work. No suggestion has been made by the Canadian Government for the increase of their powers in dealing with external affairs."

CANADA: A. D. 1909 (February). Participation in a North American Conference on the Conservation of Natural Resources.

See (in this Volume) CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES: NORTH AMERICA.

CANADA: A. D. 1909 (April). Statistics of the Budget speech. Revenue. Trade. No increase of taxation.

The following was reported in a despatch from Ottawa, April 20, 1909:

"Notwithstanding the financial stringency of the past year, which reduced the revenue of Canada by $11,500,000, Mr. Fielding, Minister of Finance, in his Budget speech today made the gratifying announcement that there was a surplus of $1,500,000 for the year ended March 31. The increase in the net debt was $46,029,000, of which $32,000,000 was for the National Transcontinental Railway and the Quebec Bridge. The total trade of the country during the past year was $553,737,000, a decrease of $97,000,000, principally in imports. The estimated expenditures for the current year were $80,078,624. In the judgment of the Government there was no necessity for increased taxation, but the situation should be met by a substantial reduction in expenditures."

CANADA: A. D. 1909 (June). Important ruling by the Railway Commission affecting American Railways.

See (in this Volume) RAILWAYS: CANADA: A. D. 1909.

CANADA: A. D. 1909 (July-August). Imperial Defence Conference. Its agreements.

See (in this Volume) WAR, THE PREPARATIONS FOR: MILITARY AND NAVAL.

CANADA: A. D. 1909 (August). Meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science.

See (in this Volume) SCIENCE AND INVENTION, RECENT: PHYSICAL.

CANADA: A. D. 1909 (August). Proposed union of the Maritime Provinces.

A Press despatch of August 19, from Ottawa, reported:

"At a conference of the Boards of Trade of the Maritime Provinces at Charlottetown a resolution was adopted in favour of the union of the Maritime Provinces. The Governments of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island were asked to appoint a committee to draft terms of union. The general opinion is that only union can avert the overwhelming influence of the West in future."

CANADA: A. D. 1909 (December). Convention relating to obstructions in the St. John River.

"Commissioners have been appointed on the part of the United States to act jointly with commissioners on the part of Canada in examining into the question of obstructions in the St. John River, between Maine and New Brunswick, and to make recommendations for the regulation of the uses thereof, and are now engaged in this work."

_Message of the President of the United States to Congress, December 6, 1909._

CANADA: A. D. 1909-1910. As affected by the new tariff of the United States.

See (in this Volume) TARIFFS: UNITED STATES.

CANADA: A. D. 1910. Anti-Trust Bill in the Dominion Parliament.

See (in this Volume) COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL, &c.: CANADA.

CANADA: A. D. 1910 (January). Announcement of naval programme.

See (in this Volume) WAR, THE PREPARATIONS FOR: NAVAL.

----------CANADA: End--------

CANADA STEEL CORPORATION.

See (in this Volume) COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL, &c.: CANADA: A. D. 1909.

CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY STRIKE, 1908.

See (in this Volume) LABOR ORGANIZATION: CANADA: A. D. 1907-1908.

CANAL ZONE.

See (in this Volume) PANAMA CANAL.

CANALS.

See (in this Volume) PANAMA, GEORGIAN BAY, and (for Barge Canal) NEW YORK STATE: A. D. 1898-1909.

CAMPANILE OF ST. MARK’S, at Venice. Its fall.

See (in this Volume) VENICE: A. D. 1902.

CANBERRA, YASS-CANBERRA. Chosen site of the Capital of Australia.

See (in this Volume) AUSTRALIA: A. D. 1905-1906.

CANCER RESEARCH.

See (in this Volume) PUBLIC HEALTH.

CANDAMO, PRESIDENT MANUEL.

See (in this Volume) PERU.

CAPE COLONY.

See (in this Volume) SOUTH AFRICA.

CAPITALISTIC COMBINATIONS.

See (in this Volume) COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL, &c.; also RAILWAYS: UNITED STATES.

CAPUCHINS: Forbidden to teach in France.

See (in this Volume) FRANCE: A. D. 1903.

CARDUCCI, Giosue.

See (in this Volume) NOBEL PRIZES.

CARLOS I., King of Portugal. His assassination.

See (in this Volume) Portugal: A. D. 1906-1909.

CARMEN SYLVA: Queen of Roumania.

See (in this Volume) BALKAN AND DANUBIAN STATES: ROUMANIA: A. D. 1866-1906.

CARNEGIE, ANDREW: Gift to Scottish universities and students.

See (in this Volume) EDUCATION: SCOTLAND: A. D. 1901.

CARNEGIE, ANDREW: Gift of a building at Washington for the Bureau of the American Republics.

See (in this Volume) AMERICAN REPUBLICS, INTERNATIONAL BUREAU OF.

CARNEGIE, ANDREW: Gift of a court house and library for the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague.

See (in this Volume) WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1903.

CARNEGIE, ANDREW: At Peace Congress in New York.

See (in this Volume) WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1907.

CARNEGIE FOUNDATION, FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF TEACHING.

See (in this Volume) EDUCATION: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1905-1908.

CARNEGIE HERO FUNDS.

April 15, 1904, a letter from Andrew Carnegie was made public announcing that he had set apart a fund of $5,000,000 to be known as "The Hero Fund." In this letter Mr. Carnegie said: "We live in an heroic age. Not seldom are we thrilled by deeds of heroism where men or women are injured or lose their lives in attempting to preserve or rescue their fellows; such are the heroes of civilization. {74} The heroes of barbarism maimed or killed. I have long felt that the heroes and those dependent upon them should be freed from pecuniary cares resulting from their heroism and as a fund for this purpose I have transferred to a commission $5,000,000 of collateral 5 per cent bonds of the United States Steel Corporation." Only such as follow peaceful vocations on sea or land in the United States or Canada are eligible to receive money or medals for heroic deeds. The commission which has charge of the fund has its headquarters in Pittsburg, Pennsylvania. A similar fund in Great Britain was created soon afterward by Mr. Carnegie, and in May, 1909, he placed, for the same purpose, $1,000,000 of the bonds of the United States Steel Corporation in the hands of trustees in France, under the sanction of the French Government.

CARNEGIE INSTITUTE, The, at Pittsburg: Its enlargement and re-dedication.

See (in this Volume) EDUCATION: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1907.

CARNEGIE INSTITUTION OF WASHINGTON.

See (in this Volume) SCIENCE AND INVENTION: CARNEGIE INSTITUTION.

CARTAGO, COSTA RICA: Institution of the Central American Court of Justice. Gift of a building by Mr. Carnegie.

See (in this Volume) Central America: A. D. 1908.

CARTELS.

See (in this Volume) COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL (IN GERMANY).

CASABLANCA: Bombardment by French and Spanish fleets. The Casablanca incident.

See (in this Volume) MOROCCO: A. D. 1907-1909.

CASEMENT, ROGER: British consul in the Congo State. His reports.

See (in this Volume) CONGO STATE: A. D. 1903-1905.

CASTRO, CIPRIANO: President of Venezuela.

See in this Volume) VENEZUELA, also COLOMBIA: 1898-1902.

CASTRO, Luciano de.

See (in this Volume) PORTUGAL: A. D. 1906-1909.

CATALONIA: A. D. 1902. Disorders.

See (in this Volume) SPAIN: A. D. 1905-1906, and 1907-1909.

CATHOLIC DISABILITIES, IN ENGLAND: Majority vote in Commons for removing.

See (in this Volume) ENGLAND: A. D. 1909 (May).

CATHOLIC PEOPLE’S PARTY.

See (in this Volume) AUSTRIA-HUNGARY: A. D. 1904.

CATSKILL AQUEDUCT.

See (in this Volume) NEW YORK CITY: A. D. 1905-1909.

CATTLE DRIVING.

See (in this Volume) IRELAND: A. D. 1902-1908.

CAUCASUS, The: Conflict of Tartars and Armenians.

See (in this Volume) RUSSIA: A. D. 1905 (February-November).

CENSORSHIP.

See (in this Volume) RUSSIA: A. D. 1909.

CENSUS BILL, PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT’S VETO OF THE.

See (in this Volume) CIVIL SERVICE REFORM: UNITED STATES.

CENSUS BUREAU, CREATION OF A PERMANENT.

See (in this Volume) UNITED STATES: A. D. 1902 (March).

CENTER, or CENTRUM PARTY.

See (in this Volume) GERMANY: A. D. 1906-1907.

----------CENTRAL AMERICA: Start--------

CENTRAL AMERICA: A. D. 1901-1906. Participation of all the states in the Second and Third International Conferences of American republics. Their signature of an obligatory arbitration convention.

See (in this Volume) AMERICAN REPUBLICS.

CENTRAL AMERICA: A. D. 1902. Treaty of compulsory arbitration and obligatory peace between the five republics.

See (in this Volume) WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1902.

CENTRAL AMERICA: A. D. 1903. Honduras: Revolution, establishing General Bonilla in the Presidency.

In the spring of 1903 a rising in Honduras against the Government was reported to be in progress, under General Bonilla. Early in March the situation was stated by the American consular agent at Amapala as follows:

"A great part of the members of the Congress that was in session in Tegucigalpa, amongst them the President of the Congress, fled from the capital to the frontier of Salvador the 30th of January, so that Congress was de facto dissolved on that date. It seems that the council of ministers formed a new Congress out of the remaining deputies and the substitutes of the fugitives. The new Congress proclaimed Dr. Juan Angel Arias president, and General Maximo B. Rosales vice-president of the Republic. The new Government was recognized by Nicaragua, but I do not know if it was recognized by the other Central American Republics. In the meantime General Bonilla has gone ahead with his military operations against the new government. His forces have taken the fortified towns of Ocotepeque, Santa Rosa, and Gracias, near the frontier of Nicaragua. On the 22d of February General Bonilla was as attacked in El Aceituno by General Sierra, the ex-president, who was completely defeated and escaped with several hundred men, the remainder of his troops, to the fortified town of Nacaome, where he still is. General Bonilla has now an army of about 4,500 men."

In despatches of the 15th and 24th of April, Minister Combs, who represented the United States in transactions with both Guatemala and Honduras, advised the State Department that General Bonilla was in possession of Tegucigalpa; that ex-President Arias was a prisoner; that peace was restored, and that Bonilla should be recognized as President. Accordingly the recognition was given.

CENTRAL AMERICA: A. D. 1904. Nicaragua, Honduras, Salvador, and Guatemala: Peace Conference.

A despatch, August 31, 1904, from the American Minister at San José, Costa Rica, to the State Department at Washington, was as follows:

"I have the honor to advise that on the 21st instant, at Corinto, Nicaragua, the Presidents of Nicaragua, Honduras, and El Salvador, and a special delegate representing the President of Guatemala, held a conference ostensibly for the purpose of securing the peace of Central America. … The parties holding the conference have issued a lengthy manifesto, which indicates nothing of interest to our Government except that the four governments represented are controlled by parties who will aid each other by military force, if necessary, in maintaining the status quo, and that the peace of Central America is thus reasonably assured by making revolutionary efforts more difficult and less liable to achieve success."

{75}

CENTRAL AMERICA: A. D. 1904. Nicaragua and Honduras: Agreement to arbitrate boundary dispute.

In October, 1904, the United States Government was informed that Nicaragua and Honduras had agreed to submit a boundary dispute to the King of Spain.

CENTRAL AMERICA: A. D. 1905. Nicaragua: Treaty with Great Britain concerning the Mosquito Territory.

The following treaty between Great Britain and the Republic of Nicaragua was signed at Managua, Nicaragua, April 19, 1905:

Article I. The High Contracting Parties agree that the Treaty of Managua of January 28, 1860, is and shall remain abrogated.

Article II. His Britannic Majesty agrees to recognize the absolute sovereignty of Nicaragua over the territory that constituted the former Mosquito Reserve, as defined in the aforesaid Treaty of Managua.

Article III. In consideration of the fact that the Mosquito Indians were at one time under the protection of Great Britain, and in view of the interest that His Majesty’s Government and the Nicaraguan Government take in their welfare, the Nicaraguan Government agree to grant them the following concessions:

(a) The Government will submit to the National Assembly a law exempting, for fifty years from the date of the ratification of this Treaty, all the Mosquito Indians and the Creoles born before the year 1894, from military service, and from all direct taxation on their persons, property, possessions, animals, and means of subsistence.

(b) The Government will allow the Indians to live in their villages enjoying the concessions granted by this Convention, and following their own customs, in so far as they are not opposed to the laws of the country and to public morality.

(c) The Nicaraguan Government will concede a further period of two years for them to legalize their rights to the property acquired in conformity with the Regulations in force before 1894 in the Reserve. The Government will make no charge to the said inhabitants either for the lands or the measurement thereof, or for the grant of title-deeds. For this purpose the title-deeds in the possession of the said Indians and Creoles before 1894 will be renewed in conformity with the laws, and, in cases where no such title-deeds exist, the Government will give to each family, at their place of residence, eight manzanas of land, if the members of the family do not exceed four in number, and two manzanas for each person if the family exceeds that number.

(d) Public pasture lands will be reserved for the use of the inhabitants in the neighbourhood of each Indian village.

(e) In the event of any Mosquito Indians or Creoles proving that the lands which they held in conformity with the Regulations in force before 1894 have been claimed by and allotted to other persons, the Government will indemnify them by the grant of suitable public lands of approximate value as near as possible to their present residences.

Article IV. The ex-Chief of the Mosquito Indians, Robert Henry Clarence, will be permitted by the Nicaraguan Government to reside in the Republic of Nicaragua and to enjoy full protection so long as he does not transgress the laws, and provided his acts do not tend to incite the Indians against Nicaragua.

Article V. The Mosquito Indians, and other inhabitants of the former Reserve, will enjoy the same rights as are secured by the laws of Nicaragua to other Nicaraguan citizens.

CENTRAL AMERICA: A. D. 1906. Honduras, Guatemala, and Salvador: War, ended by mediation of the United States and Mexico.

Neither the Convention of Peace and Compulsory Arbitration signed at Corinto in 1902 by the presidents of all five of the Central American republics, nor the peace agreement between four of them two years later, sufficed to prevent an outbreak of war in 1906 which involved the three states of Honduras, Guatemala, and Salvador. President Roosevelt, in his annual Message to Congress that year, referred to the war as having arisen from "trouble which had existed for some time"; but does not indicate the nature of the "trouble"; nor is any light thrown on it in a long diplomatic correspondence between the parties to it and the governments of the United States and Mexico, which appears in the American report of Foreign Relations for 1906. Probably nobody outside of the belligerents ever learned definitely why they felt called upon to fight, or what they had to settle when peace was made.

Seemingly Honduras was the aggressor; but the affair seems hardly worth the trouble of any deep investigation. Its chief importance is in the successful mediation that was undertaken jointly by the governments of the United States and Mexico, of which President Roosevelt made report in the Message referred to above:

"The thoroughly good understanding which exists between the United States and Mexico," said the President, "enabled this Government and that of Mexico to unite in effective mediation between the warring Republics; which mediation resulted, not without long-continued and patient effort, in bringing about a meeting of the representatives of the hostile powers on board a United States warship as neutral territory, and peace was there concluded; a peace which resulted in the saving of thousands of lives and in the prevention of an incalculable amount of misery and the destruction of property and of the means of livelihood. The Rio Conference passed the following resolution in reference to this action:

"‘That the Third International American Conference shall address to the Presidents of the United States of America and of the United States of Mexico a note in which the conference which is being held at Rio expresses its satisfaction at the happy results of their mediation for the celebration of peace between the Republics of Guatemala, Honduras, and Salvador.’

"This affords an excellent example of one way in which the influence of the United States can properly be exercised for the benefit of the peoples of the Western Hemisphere; that is, by action taken in concert with other American republics and therefore free from those suspicions and prejudices which might attach if the action were taken by one alone."

{76}

The resulting "General Treaty of Peace and Amity, Commerce, etc., between the Republics of Costa Rica, Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras," signed September 25, 1906, involved solemn engagements in its first four articles, as follows:

"ARTICLE 1. There shall be perpetual peace and a frank, loyal, and sincere friendship among the Republics of Costa Rica, Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, each and every one of the aforesaid Governments being in duty bound to consider as one of their principal obligations the maintenance of such peace and the preservation of such friendship, by endeavoring to contribute every means to procure the desired end, and to remove, as far as lies in their power, any obstacles, whatever their nature, which might prevent it. In order to secure such ends they shall always unite when the importance of the case demands it, to foster their moral, intellectual, and industrial progress, thus making their interests one and the same, as it becomes sister countries.

"ARTICLE 2. In the event, which is not to be expected, that any of the high contracting parties should fail to comply with or cause any deviation from any of the subjects agreed to in the present treaty, such event, as well as any particular difficulty which may arise between them, shall necessarily be settled by the civilized means of arbitration.

"ARTICLE 3. The Governments of Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, in conformity with the stipulations of the treaty executed on board the _Marblehead_, hereby appoint as umpires, Their Excellencies the Presidents of the United States of America and of the United Mexican States, to whom all particular difficulties arising among said Governments shall be submitted for arbitration.

"For the purpose of agreeing on the manner to effect such arbitration, the above-mentioned Republics shall accredit, at the latest within three months from this date, their respective legations near the Governments of the United States of America and Mexico, and in the meanwhile arbitration shall be ruled according to the stipulations of the treaty of compulsory arbitration concluded in Mexico on the 29th of January, 1902.

"ARTICLE 4. Guatemala not having subscribed to the Corinto convention of January 20, 1902, Costa Rica, Salvador, and Honduras do hereby respectively declare, that said Corinto convention is to continue in force, and that any particular difference which may arise among them shall be settled in conformity with the aforesaid convention and with the regulations established by the Central American court of arbitration on the 9th of October of that year."

Notwithstanding these grave pledges to each other, three of the parties to this treaty were at war the next year.

CENTRAL AMERICA: A. D. 1907. Nicaragua, Honduras, and Salvador: War. Mexican and American Mediation. The Washington Peace Conference. General Treaty of Peace and Amity. Central American Court of Justice.

In February, 1907, a fresh outbreak of Central American war occurred, originally between Nicaragua and Honduras, but involving Salvador, presently, in alliance with Honduras. The arbitration convention of 1904 had not accomplished a specific settlement of the boundary disputes between Honduras and Nicaragua, and President Zelaya, of the latter republic, accused the former of encroachments. Mexico and the United States had endeavored to pacify the disputants before hostilities began, but without success. The quarrel was fought out, and a complete victory won by Nicaragua, whose forces captured the Honduran capital and drove President Bonilla from the country. A provisional government was established in Honduras and terms of peace arranged, April 24th. Then the good offices of President Roosevelt and President Diaz were employed again, with the result which the former communicated to Congress in his Message of December 3, 1907, as follows:

"The effort to compose this new difficulty has resulted in the acceptance of the joint suggestion of the Presidents of Mexico and of the United States for a general peace conference between all the countries of Central America. On the 17th day of September last a protocol was signed between the representatives of the five Central American countries accredited to this Government agreeing upon a conference to be held in the City of Washington 'in order to devise the means of preserving the good relations among said Republics and bringing about permanent peace in those countries.’ The protocol includes the expression of a wish that the Presidents of the United States and Mexico should appoint ‘representatives to lend their good and impartial offices in a purely friendly way toward the realization of the objects of the conference.’ The conference is now in session and will have our best wishes and, where it is practicable, our friendly assistance."

The first regular session of the Conference was held on the 14th of November, the place of meeting being the building of the International Bureau of the American Republics. In addition to the delegates present from the States of Costa Rica, Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua, the Republic of Mexico designated Señor Don Enrique C. Creel, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the United States, and the United States designated Honorable William I. Buchanan, as representatives from Mexico and the United States at the conference. The Honorable Elihu Root, Secretary of State of the United States, was present, also, at the first session, over which he presided until the organization of the Conference had been effected. His opening address to the Conference included these wise and impressive remarks:

"We cannot fail, gentlemen, to be admonished by the many failures which have been made by the people of Central America to establish agreement among themselves which would be lasting, that the task you have before you is no easy one. The trial has often been made and the agreements which have been elaborated, signed, ratified, seem to have been written in water. Yet I cannot resist the impression that we have at last come to the threshold of a happier day for Central America.

"It would ill become me to attempt to propose or suggest the steps which you should take, but I will venture to observe that the all-important thing for you to accomplish is that while you enter into agreements which will, I am sure, be framed in consonance with the most peaceful aspirations and the most rigid sense of justice, you shall devise also some practical methods under which it will be possible to secure the performance of those agreements. {77} The mere declaration of general principles, the mere agreement upon lines of policy and of conduct are of little value unless there be practical and definite methods provided by which the responsibility for failing to keep the agreement may be fixed upon some definite person, and the public sentiment of Central America brought to bear to prevent the violation. The declaration that a man is entitled to his liberty would be of little value with us in this country were it not for the writ of _habeas corpus_ that makes it the duty of a specific judge, when applied to, to inquire into the cause of his detention, and set him at liberty if he is unjustly detained. The provision which declares that a man should not be deprived of his property without due process of law would be of little value were it not for the practical provision which imposes on specific officers the duty of nullifying every attempt to take away a man’s property without due process of law.

"To find practical definite methods by which you shall make it somebody’s duty to see that the great principles you declare are not violated, by which if an attempt be made to violate them the responsibility may be fixed upon the guilty individual—those, in my judgment, are the problems to which you should specifically and most earnestly address yourselves."

The address of Secretary Root was followed by one of excellent counsel from the Mexican Ambassador, and a reply to both was made, on behalf of the Conference, by Señor Don Luis Anderson, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Costa Rica. The Conference then elected its officers, choosing Minister Anderson for its President, and proceeded to the transaction of business.

Fourteen sessions were held between November 14 and December 20, resulting from which eight conventions were agreed to and signed on the latter date. These conventions are:

General Treaty of Peace and Amity; Additional Convention to the General Treaty; Establishing a Central American Court of Justice; Extradition; On Future Conferences (Monetary); On Communications; Establishing an International Central American Bureau; and Establishing a Pedagogical Institute.

The essential provisions of the General Treaty of Peace and Amity are in the following articles:

"ARTICLE I. The Republics of Central America consider as one of their first duties in their mutual relations, the maintenance of peace; and they bind themselves to always preserve the most complete harmony, and decide every difference or difficulty that may arise amongst them, of whatsoever nature it may be, by means of the Central American Court of Justice, created by the Convention which they have concluded for that purpose on this date."

"Article III. Bearing in mind the central geographical position of Honduras and the facilities which this circumstance has afforded in order that its territory should have been most often the theatre of Central American conflicts, Honduras declares from now on its absolute neutrality in any event of conflict amongst the other Republics; and the latter, in their turn, provided such neutrality be observed, bind themselves to respect it and in no case to violate the Honduranean territory.

"ARTICLE IV. Bearing in mind the advantages which must be gained from the creation of Central American institutions for the development of their most vital interests, besides the Pedagogical Institute and the International Central American Bureau which have been established according to the Conventions celebrated to that end by this Conference, the creation of a practical Agricultural School in the Republic of Salvador, one of Mines and Mechanics in that of Honduras, and another of Arts and Trades in that of Nicaragua, is especially recommended to the Governments.

"ARTICLE V. In order to cultivate the relations between the States, the contracting parties obligate themselves each to accredit to the others a permanent Legation.

"ARTICLE VI. The citizens of one of the contracting parties, residing in the territory of any of the others, shall enjoy the same civil rights as nationals, and shall be considered as citizens in the country of their residence if they fulfill the conditions which the respective constituent laws provide. Those that are not naturalized shall be exempt from obligatory military service, either by sea or land, and from every forced loan or military requirement, and they shall not be obliged on any account to make more contributions or ordinary or extraordinary imposts than those which nationals pay."

"ARTICLE X. The Governments of the contracting Republics bind themselves to respect the inviolability of the right of asylum aboard the merchant vessels of whatsoever nationality anchored in their ports. Therefore, only persons accused of common crimes and by order of the competent judge, after due legal procedure, can be taken from them. Those prosecuted on account of political crimes or common crimes in connection with political ones, can only be taken therefrom in case they have embarked in a port of the State which claims them, whilst they may remain in its jurisdictional waters, and after the requirements hereinbefore exacted in the case of common crime have been fulfilled."

"ARTICLE XIV. Public instruments executed in one of the contracting Republics shall be valid in the others, provided they shall have been properly authenticated and in their execution the laws of the Republic whence they proceed shall have been observed."

"ARTICLE XVI. Desiring to prevent one of the most frequent causes of disturbances in the Republics, the contracting Governments shall not permit the head men or principal chiefs of political emigrations, nor agents thereof, to reside in the departments fronting on the countries whose peace they might disturb.

"Those who may have been actually established in a permanent manner in a frontier department shall be able to remain in the place of their residence under the immediate surveillance of the Governments affording them an asylum, but from the moment when they become a menace to public order they shall be included in the rule of the preceding paragraph.

"ARTICLE XVII. Every person, no matter what his nationality, who, within the territory of one of the contracting parties, shall initiate or foster revolutionary movements against any of the others, shall be immediately brought to the capital of the Republic, where he shall be submitted to trial according to law."

"ARTICLE XIX. The present Treaty shall remain in force for the term of ten years counted from the day of the exchange of ratifications. Nevertheless, if one year before the expiration of said term, none of the contracting parties shall have given special notice to the others concerning its intention to terminate it, it shall remain in force until one year after such notification may have been made."

{78}

The "Additional Convention to the General Treaty "is in three articles, as follows:

"ARTICLE I. The Governments of the High Contracting Parties shall not recognize any other Government which may come into power in any of the five Republics as a consequence of a coup d’Etat, or of a revolution against the recognized Government, so long as the representatives of the people, freely elected, have not constitutionally reorganized the country.

"ARTICLE II. No Government of Central America shall in case of civil war intervene in favor of or against the Government of the country where the struggle may take place.

"Article III. The Governments of Central America, in the first place, are recommended to endeavor to procure by the means at their command a constitutional reform in the sense of prohibiting the reëlection of the President of a Republic, where such prohibition does not exist, in the second place to adopt all measures necessary to effect a complete guarantee of the principle of alternation in power."

The "Convention for the Establishment of a Central American Court of Justice" contains thirty-eight articles, with a "Provisional Article" and an "Annexed Article" appended. The more important provisions are in the following:

"ARTICLE I. The High Contracting Parties agree by the present Convention to constitute and maintain a permanent tribunal which shall be called the ‘Central American Court of Justice,’ to which they bind themselves to submit all controversies or questions which may arise among them, of whatsoever nature and no matter what their origin may be, in case the respective Departments of Foreign Affairs should not have been able to reach an understanding.

"ARTICLE II. This Court shall also take cognizance of the questions which individuals of one Central American country may raise against any of the other contracting Governments, because of the violation of Treaties or Conventions, and other cases of an international character; no matter whether his own Government supports said claim or not; and provided that the remedies which the laws of the respective country provide against such violation shall have been exhausted and that a denial of justice shall be shown.

"ARTICLE III. It shall also take cognizance of the cases which by common accord contracting Governments may submit to it, no matter whether they arise between two or more of them or between one of said Governments and individuals.

[Footnote: After signing the treaties an omission was discovered in this Article. An additional protocol was thereupon signed by all the delegates adding to this Article, and to be considered as an integral part of the Convention, the following words:

"It shall also have jurisdiction over cases arising between any of the contracting Governments and individuals, when by common accord they may have been submitted to it.]

"Article IV. The Court may likewise take cognizance of the international questions which by special agreement any one of the Central American Governments and a foreign Government may have determined to submit to it.

"ARTICLE V. The Central American Court of Justice shall sit at the City of Cartago in the Republic of Costa Rica, but it shall be authorized to transfer its residence to another point in Central America when it may deem it proper to do so for reasons of health, of guaranteeing the exercise of its functions, or of the personal security of its members.

"ARTICLE VI. The Central American Court of Justice shall consist of five Justices named, one from each Republic and selected from among the jurists who possess the qualifications which the laws of each country may exact for the exercise of high judicial functions, and enjoy the highest consideration, not only because of their moral character but also on account of their professional ability. The vacancies shall be filled by substitute Justices, named at the same time and in the same manner as the regular ones and who shall unite the same qualifications as the former. The attendance of the five Justices who constitute the Tribunal is indispensable in order to have a legal quorum in the judgments of the Court.

"ARTICLE VII. The legislative power of each one of the five contracting Republics shall name one regular and two substitutes as their respective Justices. The salary of each Justice shall be eight thousand dollars, gold, per annum, which shall be paid by the Treasury of the Court. The salary of the Justice of the place where the Court resides shall be designated by the respective Government. Besides, each State shall contribute two thousand dollars, gold, annually for the ordinary and extraordinary expenses of the Tribunal. The Governments of the contracting Republics bind themselves to include their respective contributions in their budgets of expenses and to remit quarterly in advance to the Treasury of the Court the proportion which corresponds to them on account of such expenditures."

"ARTICLE XIII. The Central American Court of Justice represents the national conscience of Central America, wherefore the Justices who compose the Tribunal shall not consider themselves prohibited from the exercise of their functions because of the interest which the Republics, whence they derive their appointment, may have in any case or question. With regard to implications and challenges, the rules of procedure which the Court may fix shall make proper provision."

"ARTICLE XXII. The Court is authorized to determine its jurisdiction, interpreting the Treaties and Conventions germane to the matter in dispute, applying the principles of international law.

"ARTICLE XXIII. Every final or interlocutory decision shall be rendered in accordance with the agreement of at least three of the Justices of the Court. In case of disagreement, one of the substitute Justices shall be chosen by lot, and if still a majority of three be not obtained other Justices shall continue to be chosen by lot until three votes in the same sense shall have been obtained.

"ARTICLE XXIV. The decisions must be in writing and shall contain a statement of the reasons upon which they are based. They must be signed by all the Justices of the Court and countersigned by the Secretary. Once they have been published they cannot be altered on any account; but, at the request of any of the parties, the Tribunal may decide the interpretation which must be given to its judgment.

{79}

"Article XXV. The judgments of the Court shall be communicated to the five Governments of the Contracting Republics. The interested parties solemnly bind themselves to submit to said judgment; and they all agree to lend every moral support that may be necessary in order that they may be properly fulfilled, in this manner constituting a real and positive guarantee of respect for this Convention and for the Central American Court of Justice."

"Article XXVII. The High Contracting Parties solemnly declare that for no motive nor in any case will they consider the present Convention as lapsed; and that, therefore, they will consider it as being always in force during the term of ten years counted from last ratification. In the event that the political entity of one or more of the Contracting Republics is changed or altered, the attributes of the Central American Court of Justice created by this Convention shall be suspended _ipso facto_; and a conference to adjust the constitution of said Court and the new order of things shall be forthwith convoked by the respective Governments; in case they do not unanimously agree the present Convention shall be considered as rescinded."

"PROVISIONARY ARTICLE. As a recommendation of the five Delegations an Article is annexed which contains an amplification of the Central American Court of Justice, in order that the Legislatures that may deem it proper may see fit to include it upon ratifying this Convention."

"ANNEXED ARTICLE. The Central American Court of Justice shall also have jurisdiction over the conflicts which may arise between the Legislative, Executive and Judicial Powers, and when as a matter of fact the judicial decisions and congressional resolutions are not respected."

CENTRAL AMERICA: A. D. 1908. Inauguration of the Central American Court of Justice. Gift of a building for its use by Mr. Carnegie.

The Central American Court of Justice, contemplated in the treaty of 1907, quoted above, was formally instituted, at Cartago, Costa Rica, with appropriate ceremony, in the last week of May, 1908. The Honorable William I. Buchanan, in attendance as Commissioner from the United States, added interest to the occasion by announcing the proffer of a gift of $100,000 by Mr. Andrew Carnegie, for the erection of a building to be dedicated to the exclusive use of the Court.

CENTRAL AMERICA: A. D. 1909. Financial undertakings in New York. Honduras, Costa Rica, and Guatemala.

In the summer of 1909 various financial undertakings by great banking houses in New York were announced, involving some handling of the debts of Honduras, Costa Rica, and Guatemala. It was thought that these operations were in line with efforts of the State Department at Washington and the Bureau of American Republics to bring about the establishment of a chain of American banking houses in the Latin-American countries, for the advancement of American trade and the promotion of more intimate Pan-American relations.

CENTRAL AMERICA: A. D. 1909. Nicaragua. Establishment of a colony of Sioux Indians from the United States.

A dispatch to the Press from Boston, November 17, 1909, made the following statement:

"To save the remnant of the Sioux tribe of Indians from extinction by consumption and other diseases, a colony of the Indians will be established in Nicaragua early in the new year. Chief Little Bison, a full-blooded Sioux, sailed from Boston on the steamship Esparta to-day for Nicaragua, where he will receive the deeds to 16,000 acres of land granted by the Nicaraguan government for the establishment of the colony. The project is supported financially by F. S. Dellenbaugh, head of the American Geographical Society, and several wealthy New York people. The emigration of the Indians is expected to begin in January."

CENTRAL AMERICA: A. D. 1909. President Zelaya a menace to peace. His conduct trying the patience of the United States.

In the early spring of 1909 the disturbing attitude and conduct of the Nicaraguan President, Zelaya, not only towards his near neighbors of Salvador and Honduras, but also in the relations of his Government with that of the United States, had caused the latter to enter again into consultation with the Mexican Government, as to joint action to preserve peace.

For some years the United States had been trying to bring about the settlement of a claim against the Nicaraguan Government preferred by an American company. This Emery claim, as it was known, arose in connection with a concession granted in 1898 for cutting and exporting mahogany. The concession provided that any differences which should arise between the Government and the company should be arbitrated by a tribunal of three members, one to be selected by the Government, one by the company, and the third by these two arbitrators. In 1903 an accusation of smuggling was brought against the company, and the questions raised were submitted to the stipulated tribunal. This decided that, inasmuch as the company had paid taxes to the Government three years in advance, amounting to $30,000, the concession could not be annulled, as President Zelaya wished to have done. Nevertheless Zelaya declared it annulled, and caused proceedings to be instituted for stopping the company’s exportations. This led the American Government to interpose. Under instructions from Washington, its Minister at Managua, Mr. Merry, addressed the following note to the Nicaraguan Minister of Foreign Affairs, December 15, 1906:

"I have the honor to inform you that I have received instructions from my Government to make an urgent and firm request that your Excellency’s Government will settle the Emery company controversy by an international arbitration, and that until a decision has been given thereby, your Excellency’s Government will restore to the Emery company all its property, dismissing all legal prosecutions in the case, and permitting the company to resume its work under its concession, as if no controversy had arisen."

This communication secured a promise of the desired international arbitration, and the stopping meantime of proceedings of interference with the company’s business. But when the protocol of arbitration was to be drawn the Nicaraguan Government refused to have any question of damages to the company included. On this contention the settlement was blocked for more than two years, and the patience of the Washington Government was about worn out. In just what wrappings of diplomatic language it made that fact apparent has not yet been disclosed to the public; but evidently the understanding of Señor Zelaya was duly penetrated. {80} On the 26th of May last (1909) his representative at Washington signed a protocol which provided that the questions at issue between the Government of Nicaragua and the Emery Company should be submitted to arbitration, unless the parties could make their own settlement within four months.

This, however, did not end troubles with Nicaragua,—or, rather, with its presidential dictator. Revolutionary attempts in the republic to unseat him gave rise to new offenses on his part against the United States, which President Taft, in his Message to Congress, December 6, 1909, recounted as follows:

"Since the Washington conventions of 1907 were communicated to the government of the United States as a consulting and advising party, this government has been almost continuously called upon by one or another, and in turn by all of the five Central American republics, to exert itself for the maintenance of the conventions. Nearly every complaint has been against the Zelaya government of Nicaragua, which has kept Central America in constant tension or turmoil. The responses made to the representations of Central American republics, as due from the United States on account of its relation to the Washington conventions, have been at all times conservative and have avoided, so far as possible, any semblance of interference, although it is very apparent that the considerations of geographic proximity to the Canal Zone and of the very substantial American interests in Central America give to the United States a special position in the zone of these republics and the Caribbean Sea.

"I need not rehearse here the patient efforts of this government to promote peace and welfare among these republics, efforts which are fully appreciated by the majority of them who are loyal to their true interests. It would be no less unnecessary to rehearse here the sad tale of unspeakable barbarities and oppression alleged to have been committed by the Zelaya government. Recently two Americans were put to death by order of President Zelaya himself. They were officers in the organized forces of a revolution which had continued many weeks and was in control of about half of the republic, and as such, according to the modern enlightened practice of civilized nations, they were entitled to be dealt with as prisoners of war.

"At the date when this message is printed this government has terminated diplomatic relations with the Zelaya government, for reasons made public in a communication to the former Nicaraguan chargé d’affaires, and is intending to take such future steps as may be found most consistent with its dignity, its duty to American interests, and its moral obligations to Central America and to civilization. It may be necessary for me to bring this subject to the attention of the Congress in a special message."

Some days previous to the date of the President’s Message, the Secretary of State, Mr. Knox, had addressed a letter of extreme severity to the Nicaraguan Chargé d’Affaires at Washington, Mr. Rodriguez, reviewing the conduct of the Nicaraguan Government, and saying: "In these circumstances the President no longer feels for the government of President Zelaya that respect and confidence which would make it appropriate hereafter to maintain with it regular diplomatic relations, implying the will and the ability to respect and assure what is due from one State to another." The conclusion of the letter was as follows: "To insure the future protection of legitimate American interests, in consideration of the interests of the majority of the Central American republics, and in the hope of making more effective the friendly offices exerted under the Washington conventions, the government of the United States reserves for further consideration at the proper time the question of stipulating also that the constitutional government of Nicaragua obligate itself by convention for the benefit of all the governments concerned as a guarantee for its future loyal support of the Washington conventions and their peaceful and progressive aims.

"From the foregoing it will be apparent to you that your office of charge d’affaires is at an end. I have the honor to enclose your passports for use in case you desire to leave tins country. I would add at the same time that, although your diplomatic quality is terminated, I shall be happy to receive you as I shall be happy to receive the representative of the revolution, each as the unofficial channel of communication between the government of the United States and the de facto authorities to whom I look for the protection of American interests pending the establishment in Nicaragua of a government with which the United States can maintain diplomatic relations."

President Zelaya at once protested against this arraignment, telegraphing to Secretary Knox that his sources of information had been prejudiced, and asking that the United States send a commission of investigation, proposing to resign if his administration was shown to be detrimental to Nicaragua. Receiving no reply, he resigned the presidency of Nicaragua on the 16th of December, announcing the fact by cable to President Taft in these words:

"To avoid harm to my country, and desiring that it shall renew friendly relations with the United States, I have to-day sent my resignation to Congress. As my opponents consider my presence a disturbing factor, I propose to show my good faith by leaving Nicaragua. I stand ready to account for my acts."

The vacant presidential office was filled by the Congress of Nicaragua, which elected Dr. Madriz, the choice having been dictated, it was believed, by Zelaya. The revolutionists with whom Zelaya had been contending since October, and who had, on their part, elected and proclaimed their leader, General Juan Estrada, Provisional President of Nicaragua, refused to recognize this Congressional election, and continued, against the government of Madriz, the revolt they had organized against Zelaya, determined to secure for Estrada the power to order a presidential election by the people.

On Christmas Eve Zelaya left Nicaragua for Mexico, being conveyed by a Mexican gunboat from Corinto to Salina Cruz. A few weeks later he migrated to Europe and is understood to have taken up his residence in Belgium.

The revolt led by General Estrada is still in progress at the time this writing goes into print (early in March, 1910), but the latest reports do not warrant expectations of its success.

----------CENTRAL AMERICA: End--------

{81}

CENTRAL AMERICAN REPUBLICS.

See, (in this Volume) also, AMERICAN REPUBLICS.

CENTRAL BANK QUESTION.

See (in this Volume) FINANCE AND TRADE: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1909-1910.

CENTRO CATOLICO.

See (in this Volume) PHILIPPINE ISLANDS: A. D. 1907.

CHAFFEE, Major-General Adna R.: Military Governor of the Philippines.

See (in this Volume) PHILIPPINE ISLANDS: A. D. 1901.

CHAFIN, Eugene W.: Nominated for President of the United States.

See (in this Volume) UNITED STATES: A. D. 1908 (APRIL-NOVEMBER).

CHAMBERLAIN, Austen: Postmaster-General in the English Ministry.

See (in this Volume) ENGLAND: A. D. 1902 (JULY).

CHAMBERLAIN, Joseph: Address at opening of Colonial Conference of 1902.

See (in this Volume) BRITISH EMPIRE.

CHAMBERLAIN, Joseph: On a State-rights question in Australia.

See (in this Volume) AUSTRALIA: A. D. 1902.

CHAMBERLAIN, Joseph: Declaration for Preferential Trade with the Colonies. His resignation from the Cabinet.

See (in this Volume) ENGLAND: A. D. 1903 (MAY-SEPTEMBER).

CHAMBERLAIN, Joseph: Visit to South Africa. Views on the Labor question.

See (in this Volume) SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1903-1904.

CHAMPLAIN TERCENTENARY CELEBRATION.

See (in this Volume) NEW YORK STATE: A. D. 1909.

CHANG CHIH-TUNG: Measures as viceroy to check the use of opium.

See (in this Volume) OPIUM PROBLEM.

CHANTABUN: Restored to Siam.

See (in this Volume) SIAM: A. D. 1902.

CHANUTE, OCTAVE.

See (in this Volume) SCIENCE AND INVENTION, RECENT: AERONAUTICS.

CHARITIES.

See (in this Volume) POVERTY, PROBLEMS OF; SOCIAL BETTERMENT; and CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW.

CHARLES I., King of Roumania. What he has done for his kingdom.

See (in this Volume) BALKAN AND DANUBIAN STATES: ROUMANIA.

CHARLES, Prince, of Denmark: Election to the Norwegian Throne. Assumes the name of Haakon VII.

See (in this Volume) NORWAY: A. D. 1902-1905.

CHARLESTON: A. D. 1901. The "South Carolina and Interstate and West Indian Exposition."

Under this name, a very beautiful and successful exhibit of the progress of Southern industry and art, and of the possibilities of West Indian and Spanish-American trade, was opened at Charleston on the 1st of December, 1901. The site of the exposition was a tract of one hundred and sixty acres of ground, only two and a half miles from the business section of the city, embracing the famous old Lowndes estate, with its historic mansion, which the present owner permitted to be used as the Women’s Building of the occasion. Fine taste and a high public spirit entered into the making of this very interesting Fair.

CHARTREUX MONKS.

See (in this Volume) FRANCE: A. D. 1904 (June-July).

CHEMULPHO.

See (in this Volume) JAPAN: A. D. 1904 (FEBRUARY-JULY) and (FEBRUARY-AUGUST).

CHICAGO: A. D. 1896-1909. Institution and work of the Municipal Voters’ League.

See (in this Volume) MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT: CHICAGO.

CHICAGO: A. D. 1899. Institution of the first Juvenile Court.

See (in this Volume) CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW: AS OFFENDERS.

CHICAGO: A. D. 1903. The burning of the Iroquois Theater.

Chicago has now two of the most painful memories of fire that are in the past of any city. The second was added on the afternoon of December 30, 1903, when 588 people perished in the burning of the Iroquois Theater. The audience was made up principally of women and children, many of whom belonged to prominent families. The whole city was plunged in grief, and the whole world shared in the sorrow and manifested its sympathy. The theater was a new one, and was regarded as the best of any in the city in its method of construction. But inquiry soon proved that it was defective in its provisions for safety. Further examination, moreover, showed a similar condition in other places of assembly, with the result that all the theaters, with many churches and halls in Chicago, were closed by order of the mayor, pending their compliance with certain provisions of the law.

CHICAGO: A. D. 1905. Strike of the Teamsters’ Union.

See (in this Volume) LABOR ORGANIZATION: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1905 (APRIL-JULY).

CHICAGO: A. D. 1905-1908. Struggle for a better charter.

See (in this Volume) MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT.

CHICAGO: A. D. 1906. Packing-House Investigation.

See (in this Volume) Public Health: PURE FOOD LAWS: UNITED STATES.

CHICAGO: A. D. 1907. National Conference on Trusts.

See (in this Volume) COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1907.

CHICAGO: A. D. 1909. Population, and race mixture.

The City Statistician of Chicago, in his manual for 1909, gives the number of the inhabitants of the city as 2,572,835, of whom 699,554 are Americans or persons whose parents are not foreign born. The Germans rank second, with a population of 563,708; the Irish third, with a population of 240,560. Next come the Poles, with 173,409; the Swedes, with 143,307; the Russians, with 123,238; the Bohemians, with 116,549. Thirty other foreign countries given are all below the 100,000 mark. The Chinese population is given as 1,801, the Japanese as 257. The Albanians are the lowest, with a population of 39.

CHICAGO: A. D. 1909. "The Chicago Plan." Systematizing the future development.

"Early in 1906 the Merchants’ Club, comprising a group of the younger business and professional men of the city, arranged for the preparation of a complete project for the future development of Chicago. The next year the Merchants’ Club was merged with the Commercial Club under the name of the latter organization, and the city-planning work was continued under the auspices of that body." The resulting "Plan of Chicago" was reported in the course of the summer of 1909. "The report represents about thirty months’ work by men whose thoughts for years have dwelt upon the subject of city building and beautification. The work was in charge of Daniel H. Burnham, chief architect and director of works of the World’s Columbian Exposition of 1893, who gave his services to his city without compensation for the purpose of this report. Even so, the expense of preparing and publishing the report has approximated $75,000, all raised by voluntary subscriptions from the business men of Chicago."

_George C. Sikes, The New Chicago (The Outlook, August 28, 1909)._

{82}

CHICAGO: A. D. 1909 (May). The Second National Peace Congress.

See (in this Volume) WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1909.

CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE AND ST. PAUL TRANSCONTINENTAL LINE.

See (in this Volume) RAILWAYS: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1909.

CHI-KUAN-SHAN, Fort, Capture of.

See (in this Volume) JAPAN: A. D. 1904-1905 (MAY-JANUARY).

----------CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW: Start--------

CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW: As Dependents: England: The Poor Law Children.

The following is from a speech in Parliament June 17, 1909, by Mr. John Burns, President of the Local Government Board, which administers the Poor Laws and the Public Health Laws:

"In England and Wales there were 235,000 children supported by the rates either inside or outside Poor Law institutions, and of these 70,000 were in cottage homes, barrack schools, scattered homes, and similar institutions. The cost per child maintained in cottage homes varied from 12s. 9d. to 25s. 2d. per week, and in scattered homes from 8s. 6d. to 11s. 2d. At this moment the number of children in workhouse schools, which in 1870 was 29,000, was only from 500 to 600; 19,000 of the Poor Law children were being educated in elementary schools outside. … With regard to sick children he was delighted to hear the almost unanimous chorus of appeal that the Local Government Board should do a great deal by administration. They had, in fact, transferred 1,000 out of the 2,500 sick children from the London workhouses and infirmaries to an institution on the healthy and breezy downs of Surrey at Carshalton, where they could be better treated, and where they would recover much more quickly than in any of the workhouses and infirmaries in London. If he could find more buildings or institutions available he would transfer more children. He should not rest until all the sick children throughout the country were transferred from workhouses and infirmaries to institutions in the country where they would recover health more rapidly."

CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW: United States: Proposed Federal Child Bureau.

Transmitting to Congress, on the 5th of February, 1909, the proceedings of a conference held at Washington on the care of dependent children, President Roosevelt accompanied it with a message, in which he urged the establishment of a Bureau in one of the Departments of the Federal Government, to centralize attention to the subject; with the enactment of such legislation as will bring the laws and practices in regard to the care of dependent children in all Federal territory into harmony, and certain legislation in behalf of dependent children in the District of Columbia. The President maintained that such legislation is important not only for the welfare of the children immediately concerned, but "as setting an example of a high standard of child protection by the National Government to the several States of the Union, which should be able to look to the nation for leadership in such matters."

Statistics showing the large number of dependent children in the country were presented by Mr. Roosevelt. "Each of these children, he said, represents either a potential addition to the productive capacity and the enlightened citizenship of the nation, or, if allowed to suffer from neglect, a potential addition to the destructive forces of the community. The ranks of criminals and other enemies of society are recruited in an altogether undue proportion from children bereft of their natural homes and left without sufficient care. The interests of the nation are involved in the welfare of this army of children no less than in our great material affairs."

In urging a Children’s Bureau, one of whose duties will be to investigate and report upon all matters pertaining to the welfare of children and child life, the President pointed out that "the National Government is the only agency which can effectively conduct such general inquiries as are needed for the benefit of all our citizens."

CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW: As Dependents and as Offenders: England: The Children Act of 1908. Infant Life Protection. Reformatory and Industrial Schools. Treatment of Youthful Criminals. No death-sentence for them. Special "Places of Detention." Juvenile Courts.

An act entitled The Children Act, passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom in December, 1908, and which came into effect April 1, 1909, has such importance that it has been described as "The Children’s Charter." According to its full title it is "An Act to consolidate and amend the Law relating to the Protection of Children and Young Persons, Reformatory and Industrial Schools and Juvenile Offenders, and otherwise to amend the Law with respect to Children and Young Persons." It gathers into one great enactment nearly everything in which the guardianship of Law can be specially extended to them, except the matters of education and child labor, which are subjects of distinct legislation. It repeals wholly twenty-one previous enactments and amends more or less seventeen more. It contains 134 sections and fills a so-called Parliamentary "White Book" of 93 pages.

As used in the Act, the word "child" means a person under 14 years; the expression "young person" means one above that age, but under sixteen.

The Act is divided into six parts, which are concerned with the following main subjects: (1) Infant Life Protection. (2) The Prevention of Cruelty to Children and Young Persons. (3) Juvenile Smoking. (4) Reformatory and Industrial Schools. (5) Juvenile Offenders. (6) Miscellaneous and General.

The provisions for "infant life protection" have to do mainly with the supervision of "baby-farming." Foster parents are forbidden to insure the life of a nurse-child and insurance companies are forbidden to accept any such insurance.

Juvenile smoking is dealt with very drastically, the penalties for selling cigarettes or the material for making them to persons under sixteen years of age being sharp, and both policemen and park-keepers in uniform being empowered to take such materials from the persons of Juvenile smokers.

{83}

The part of the Act which relates to reformatory and industrial schools enables the Courts to deal effectively with youthful offenders without subjecting them to the prison taint. Boys or girls between the ages of 12 and 16 who are convicted of offences punishable in the case of adults with penal servitude or imprisonment may be sent to a certified reformatory school. In certain defined cases, children may be taken from depraved or drunken parents and consigned to a certified industrial school. In these cases the child may be brought before the Court by any person in order that the provisions of the Act may be set in force. Parents who are unable to control their children may themselves take advantage of the Act, and in these cases the Court may place the children under the supervision of a probation officer instead of sending them to an industrial school. In all cases of children who are liable to be consigned to an industrial school, there is given to the Courts the alternative power of committing them to the care of relatives or other fit persons with or without the supervision of the probation officer.

The most important part of the Act, perhaps, is that relating to juvenile offenders. It allows no young person under sixteen years of age to be sentenced to death. "Sentence of death," says this Law, "shall not be pronounced on or recorded against a child or young person, but in lieu thereof the Court shall sentence the child or young person to be detained during his Majesty’s pleasure."

In future, also, no child may be sentenced to imprisonment or penal servitude for any offence, or committed to prison in default of payment of a fine, damages, or costs. No young person may be sentenced to penal servitude for any offence, nor may he be sentenced to imprisonment or committed to prison in default of payment of a fine or costs, unless the Court certifies that he is of so unruly a character or so depraved that it is not desirable to send him to a "place of detention" provided under the Act. These provisions relating to the substitution of "detention" for imprisonment did not come into force until January 1, 1910.

This part of the Act makes elaborate arrangements for the treatment of youthful criminals, both before and after trial. Special "places of detention" are to be opened in all petty sessional divisions. Here children will be placed on arrest (if for some special reason they cannot be released on a recognizance), or after being remanded or committed for trial. Here they may be kept in custody instead of being lodged in gaol if they are sentenced to terms of imprisonment of less than one month. Persons under 16 years of age must also be tried in special "juvenile Courts," unless they are charged jointly with adult offenders. A "juvenile Court" must sit "either in a different building or room from that in which the ordinary sittings of the Court are held, or on different days or at different times from those at which the ordinary sittings are held." Only the Court officials, those directly interested in the case, and the representatives of the Press may be admitted to these Courts, unless the special leave of the magistrate is obtained. Every effort is to be made, both before and after trial, to prevent the association of children with adult criminals. Finally, parents and guardians are to be required to attend the hearing of charges against their children or wards, and may be ordered to pay any fines, damages, or costs imposed.

The miscellaneous provisions of the Act include a number of importance, to prevent the giving of intoxicating liquors to children, to exclude them from drinking places, to safeguard them at entertainments, and to make the Act applicable to Scotland and Ireland.

CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW: As Offenders: Canadian provision for Separate Detention, Reformatory Imprisonment, etc.

The Canadian Prisons and Reformatory Act of 1906 provides that—"Young persons apparently under the age of sixteen years who are,

(a) arrested upon any warrant; or, (b) committed to custody at any stage of a preliminary inquiry into a charge for an indictable offence; or, (c) committed to custody at any stage of a trial, either for an indictable offence or for an offence punishable on summary conviction; or, (d) committed to custody after such trial, but before imprisonment under sentence;

shall be kept in custody separate from older persons charged with criminal offences and separate from all persons undergoing sentences of imprisonment, and shall not be confined in the lock-ups or police stations with older persons charged with criminal offences or with ordinary criminals."

Other sections of the Act confer discretionary authority on courts and magistrates to sentence convicted offenders whose age does not exceed sixteen years, and whose offence is punishable by imprisonment, to reformatory prisons, for not less than two nor more than five years; also, in certain cases, to commit such offenders to a certified industrial school, from which they may sometimes be permitted to be taken for apprenticeship to any respectable and trustworthy person.

CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW: The George Junior Republic.

Much attention has been turned from many directions, within the last few years, upon the reformatory experiment which bears the name of The George Junior Republic. From an ordinary undertaking to give a few summer weeks of country fresh air to a group of neglected, roughly-bred boys, out of the slums of the City of New York, it has grown into a unique institution, which remolds character and refashions life for hundreds of the young of both sexes, who had been given wrong startings in the world by the circumstances into which they were born. It has done this by the simple method of organizing them into a self-governing community,—a republic in which they are citizens, invested with all the responsibilities, duties, and cares that go with republican citizenship in its larger spheres. They make and administer its laws, conduct its public business and its politics, manage its institutions, generate and have experience of its public opinion. The moral and social influence of this training has now been proved by more than a decade of success.

This remarkable organization was not framed up by its architect, Mr. William R. George, on the lines of a preconceived theory, but took its shape slowly from suggestions of experience as they came. {84} He began in 1890 to take companies of boys of the hoodlum class from New York City to his place of summer residence, at Freeville, a few miles from Ithaca and not far from Auburn, New York. He found it hard to rule them, and no satisfactory corrections of wrong-doing and bad behavior could be devised. Physically they were bettered by their summer outings, but he could not see much gain in other ways. This continued for some seasons before his experiments with them began. The first to be applied was a rule that such articles of clothing and the like as had formerly been given to the boys must be paid for in work. At the outset they resented the idea; but before the summer was over they were all cheerfully at work, and the tone of the party was much improved. In the next year culprits, who robbed orchards and committed other misdemeanors, were arraigned before the whole community, for a hearing and a public verdict as to their guilt. Hard labor at stone-breaking and the building of a road now became the penalty for wrong-doing, and, presently, there was a boy constable to see that they did their work.

So, step by step, from year to year, the fabric of self-government and self-supporting industry was constructed, until the Junior Republic emerged, with its President and other executive officers, its representative legislature, its courts, its police, its own monetary system and bank,—a political and industrial commonwealth of boys and girls (for both sexes have been included), taken out of a derelict class for treatment by this simple inoculation with social responsibilities. Writing of the George Junior Republic in 1908, Dr. Lyman Abbott said:

"It now has as a territory a hundred and fifty acres of land owned by the Board of Trustees, and the practical use of a hundred and fifty more belonging to Mr. George and some other friends of the Republic who have made their home here because such residence affords them an opportunity to give guidance and inspiration to the boys and girls. The citizens, i. e. the boys and girls in the Republic, number upwards of a hundred and fifty. They are in some cases signed over to the Republic by the parents, in other cases practically committed on suspended sentences by the courts. They are extraordinarily free within the territory, but are not free to leave it. Laundry, baking, carpentry, and printing are the principal trades indoors; road-making and land improvement the principal industries out-of-doors. There are two jails, one for the boys, one for the girls; a library, a school-house, a chapel, bank, and a well-organized banking and currency system. There is a court, and there is a judge, who is elected every year by the citizens. From this court an appeal lies in certain cases to a Supreme Court chosen by the boys from the Board of Trustees, but this court only passes on the regularity of the proceedings in the court below, that is, on what might be regarded as equivalent to constitutional and jurisdictional questions. There are a President, a Vice-President, a Secretary of State, and a Secretary of the Treasury, all of whom are elected annually; the three latter officers constituting the Police Commissioners, the Board of Health, and the President’s Cabinet. There are both a girl and a boy District Attorney, who are appointed by the President, and certain police officers and prison keepers. All citizens of the Republic, both boys and girls, over fourteen years of age, are voters; no one can remain a citizen after twenty-one. The legislature has been abolished by the citizens themselves, and all laws are made in town meeting, which is held once a month. …

"The Republic has been in existence long enough to give the experiment a fair trial, and the results justify the expectations of its friends. In round numbers, about five hundred have gone out from the Republic into life, most of them taken from the class of boys and girls whose environment was fruitful of crime and whose tendency was toward a criminal career. Of these five hundred two or three are known to have returned to crime, and five or six have disappeared entirely. But of these eight or ten failures not one was in the Republic more than a few months—not long enough to get the benefit of the training. The other four hundred and ninety are known to be earning an honest livelihood by honorable labor; and of these four hundred and ninety, twenty have either graduated from college, are now in college, or are just preparing to enter college. At this writing two new Republics are about being organized, one in Georgia and one in California, and a movement is on foot for the organization of a National Association."

Some months later than the above account of the Junior Republic there were reported to be kindred organizations modelled upon it in Connecticut and Maryland, with movements to the same end in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey, as well as in some countries abroad. Mr. Thomas M. Osborne, of Auburn, who has been from an early day the chief supporter of Mr. George in his work, said recently in a published letter:

"I believe that the success of the Junior Republic idea, as we have worked it out during the last fourteen years, is no longer dependent upon Mr. George, its originator, or upon any one man. Its established principles will now live on into the far future, and work the sure righting of thousands of youngsters gone wrong in every section of the greater republic."

But it may work much more than "the sure righting of thousands of youngsters gone wrong." It may, if its working widens and roots itself among the institutions of the future, as it seems likely to do, have a very potent and positive political influence in the world. If men and women representative of a class that is now troublesome to democracy, politically as well as otherwise, should by and by be brought in large numbers yearly from graduation in the Young Republic training schools of imitative citizenship, to be joined with their elders in larger spheres of more entire self-government, are they not likely to introduce a profounder change in the operation of republican institutions than can now be foreseen?

CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW: Juvenile Courts. Their origin and development.

A collection of reports on "Children’s Courts in the United States," prepared for the International Prison Commission and edited by Mr. Samuel J. Barrows, Commissioner for the United States, was published in 1904 as House Document No. 701 of the 58th Congress, 2d Session. The following account of the origin of the now widely established Juvenile Courts of America and Europe, and of their development in the United States during the first four years of their existence, is derived from those reports.

{85}

Commissioner Barrows opens his introduction to the collected reports with the following remarks:

"If the question be asked, 'What is the most notable development in judicial principles and methods in the United States within the last five years?’ the answer may unhesitatingly be, ‘The introduction and establishment of juvenile courts.’ Never perhaps has any judicial reform made such rapid progress. Beginning in Chicago in 1899, this institution has sprung up in city after city and State after State until it is now established in eight States and eleven large cities. This progress has been made not merely by changes in procedure or legal technique, nor by the introduction of a new method; it is most of all by the introduction of a new spirit and a new aim. … It must not be supposed that the juvenile court is only a smaller court for smaller offenders or simply a court holding separate sessions for such offenders; it represents an altogether different principle. The juvenile court is a life-saving institute in society.

"It is scarcely necessary to say that child-saving methods, institutions, and organizations have long flourished in the United States. The Northern States have regarded juvenile reformatories as a part of their correctional equipment, and the courts have served as vestibules for such institutions; but they have only been incidentally a part of the process. We have not before realized what the court might be and do before resorting to institutions. The children’s court still maintains relations with the reform school, but it represents in itself active and vital forces and invokes a whole range of influence and motives which are personal and formative. It appeals to the reform school not as the first, but only as the last resort. The juvenile court has discovered that the child is a child, and, as Judge Hurley says, ‘The child should be treated as a child. Instead of reformation, the thought and idea in the judge’s mind should always be formation. No child should be punished for the purpose of making an example of him.’ …

"The methods of children’s courts, or juvenile courts, as they are termed in some States, differ in different places. In some States the judge is detailed from some other court; in some courts but one judge is assigned to this work. In New York several judges from the court of special sessions act successively in turn as judges of the children’s court. In Maryland and Indiana the judges of the children’s courts exercise this function only, and it is claimed that it is better than the method of rotation, since the judge who confines himself to juvenile court cases becomes a specialist in this work. In Colorado Judge Lindsey is not only judge of the juvenile court, but also of the county court. He finds advantage in the fact that in his first capacity he can protect the child, while as judge of the county court he can also sentence the guardian or parent who is responsible for the child’s delinquency.

"An essential feature of every juvenile court is the probation system and probation officers. Their duty is to investigate the case before trial, and, if the child is placed on probation, to exercise watchcare over them until the period of probation is closed. It is in this way that the parental care of the State is exerted."

The City of Chicago and the Legislature of Illinois have the honors of the origination of the Children’s Court as a distinct creation of law. The Visitation and Aid Society of Chicago had been laboring since 1891 to secure various measures of advanced legislation bearing on child-saving, without much success, until, as related in a report by Mr. Hurley, of that Society, the Bar Association of Chicago took the matter in hand, in 1899, and appointed a committee to press it. This committee drafted the first juvenile court law ever planned distinctly to that end and secured its enactment by the Legislature of the State. The law went into force on the 1st of July, 1899. The Court was soon opened, and Judge Tuthill, of the Circuit Court of Illinois, who presided in it from the first, has stated the principles of its constitution and action in these following words:

"The basic principle of the law is this: That no child under 16 years of age shall be considered or be treated as a criminal; that a child under that age shall not be arrested, indicted, convicted, imprisoned, or punished as a criminal. It of course recognizes the fact that such children may do acts which in an older person would be crimes and be properly punishable by the State therefor, but it provides that a child under the age mentioned shall not be branded in the opening years of its life with an indelible stain of criminality, or be brought, even temporarily, into the companionship of men and women whose lives are low, vicious, and criminal.

"The law divides children into two classes, the ‘dependent’ and the ‘delinquent.’ A dependent child, in the language of the law, is a child—‘who for any reason is destitute or homeless or abandoned, or has not proper parental care or guardianship, or who habitually begs or receives alms, or who is found living in any house of ill fame or with any vicious or disreputable person, or whose home, by reason of neglect, cruelty, or depravity on the part of the parents, guardian, or other person in whose care it may be, is an unfit place for such a child.’ A ‘delinquent child’ is defined to be—‘any child under the age of 16 who violates any law of this State or any city or village ordinance, or who is incorrigible, or who knowingly associates with thieves, vicious, or immoral persons, or who is growing up in idleness or crime, or who knowingly frequents a house of ill fame, or who knowingly patronizes any policy shop or place where any gaming device is or shall be operated.’

"The law places its enforcement upon the judges of the circuit court, who are required to select one of their number to perform these duties as a part of the judicial work of such judge. … The circuit court is a court of original and unlimited jurisdiction, the highest in the State, and the duty of holding the juvenile court was placed in the circuit court (which for convenience is designated the ‘juvenile court’) as an indication by the legislature of the importance to the State of the work to be done.

"The case of each child brought into court, whether dependent or delinquent, becomes of record, and every step taken in the case is shown upon the court record."

Interest in the Illinois Law was awakened quickly in many parts of the country, and requests for copies of it, says Mr. Hurley in his historical sketch, "began to pour in from all directions. These requests were promptly answered and copies of the Juvenile Court Record, published by the Visitation and Aid Society, containing the necessary information, were sent to applicants. {86} Agitation began in other States for a law similar to the one passed in Illinois, and those who helped to form the Illinois law were invited to visit other States to explain the measure and the method of administering the law in Cook County.

"The Illinois law proved so satisfactory that many judges throughout the country, not wishing to await the action of a legislature, established branches in their several courts for children cases only, and in the treatment of the cases applied the probate and chancery powers of the court. This was the case especially in Denver, Colorado, where Judge Ben D. Lindsey had a complete and well-equipped juvenile court and probation system before the legislature took any action whatever. A like court was subsequently adopted in Indianapolis by George W. Stubbs. The two latter courts were carried on practically in the same way that they have been since laws were adopted by these States. In most of the States the probation officers are volunteers."

Judge Lindsey, of Denver, has won celebrity among the presiding magistrates of the Juvenile Courts by the kindly shrewdness of the methods by which he has won the confidence, the admiration and devotion of the boys and girls of his city, within the classes with which he has to deal. The scene which his court-room presents on the appointed days when the delinquents on probation come in a body to report to him and to be talked to by him has been often described, and it seems to exemplify a kind of influence that would go farther than any other in resistance to the vitiating conditions which surround masses of the young in all cities. Judge Lindsey’s extended report of his work and experience in the Denver Juvenile Court, published in the collection referred to above, is a paper of remarkable interest.

As stated already, the Juvenile Court is now an established institution in nearly every part of the United States, and in many countries abroad. It was established in Great Britain by the notable "Children Act" of 1908 (see above), and was instituted that year in several of the German cities. A Press despatch from Berlin, March 15, 1909, reported the opening of a congress in that city, under the auspices of the German Association for the Care of the Young, which aims at the extension of this important reform. "The labors of the society," says the despatch, "seem to have been stimulated by the passing of the English Children Act of 1908, a German translation of which has been distributed to members of the congress. The movement for the establishment of special Courts for juvenile offenders was taken up in Germany later than in some other countries, but has recently made rapid progress. The first children’s Courts were established on January 1, 1908, at Cologne, Stuttgart, and Breslau, and there are now 26 such Courts in Prussia. Official statistics, however, indicate that in recent years the total number of juvenile offenders in Germany has grown about three times as fast as the total number of offenders of all ages. During 1906, 55,211 persons under the age of 18 were sentenced, as compared with 51,232 in 1905 and 49,993 in 1904."

At the meeting of the International Prison Commission, at Lausanne, Switzerland, in 1907, it was significant of the deep interest which the children’s court has awakened in Europe that nineteen societies in France, including the Academy of Moral and Political Sciences, the General Society of Prisons, and the faculties of law of Paris, Lille, and Montpellier, and several of the most prominent tribunals in France, asked to have the whole subject of the organization of children’s courts elucidated and discussed. A similar interest was shown in Switzerland and Germany.

In an extended letter to the London _Times_, published August 19, 1909, Miss Florence Davenport-Hill traced the origin of children’s courts to Massachusetts, and gave the following account of their introduction from that source of suggestion into Australia, and thence, to some extent, into Great Britain. Miss Davenport-Hill’s statements on the subject are, in part, as follows:

"Although we hear little now from our earliest exemplar, Massachusetts—possibly because she has, I believe, cleared away the class to be dealt with—it is desirable to remember it was she who evolved the then new principle of absolute separation of child from adult, and devised its potent supporter, the probation system—a system affording watchful and kindly help to strong and maybe wilful weaklings. Thus did Massachusetts become a noble example, making the way plain for her successors. Mr. Joseph Sturge, attracted early in the eighties by reports of the ‘plan,’ visited Boston to investigate its methods. He describes in a pithy narrative subsequently published how his highest expectations were fulfilled; and it is interesting to learn from his pen that ‘the probation system by which juvenile offenders are saved from imprisonment has been so successful, economically and morally, that the city of Boston now employs a probation agent to deal with suitable adult cases in a corresponding manner.’

"A copy of Mr. Sturge’s narrative reached, by good fortune, the Chief Justice of South Australia, then presiding at a Royal Commission of inquiry concerning adult and juvenile dependents on the State. He recognized, and in his forthcoming report expounded, the value of the Massachusetts plan in its application to children. The result was the creation by the South Australian Government of a department, entitled the State Children’s Council, consisting of 12 ladies and gentlemen nominated by the State as honorary members, to deal with erring and neglected children on the lines of that plan. …

"Nineteen years ago the Children’s Court was opened in Adelaide, and in October, 1903, thanks, Sir, to your sympathetic courtesy, the reproduction in _The Times_ of a letter describing it in the _Melbourne Argus_ from Miss Alice Henry made known among us its scope, methods, and success. Gradually Benches of Magistrates in various parts of Great Britain and of Ireland who led the way tried the experiment, which was then discovered to be already existing among us here and there, and in a more or less developed form, as at Greenwich, Hull, &c."

CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW: As Workers: Canada: Child Labor Legislation.

"There is not in any province a comprehensive act dealing with the subject of child labor as a whole, and even in Ontario, which has its Factories Act, its Shops Act, its Mines Act, its Municipal Act, its Truancy Act—all bearing on the matter more or less directly—it is still possible for young children to be kept at work by their parents for mercilessly long hours under sweat-shop conditions. {87} Prince Edward Island, Saskatchewan, and Alberta have neither Shops nor Factories Acts. Ontario, Nova Scotia, Manitoba, and British Columbia have both; Quebec and New Brunswick have Factories Acts, and six of the provinces have Mines Acts. The several Factories Acts resemble one another closely. In general, they prohibit the employment of girls under eighteen and boys under sixteen in factories where the work is dangerous or unhealthy; forbid the employment of children under fourteen in any manufacturing establishment (except canning factories) in three provinces; limit the hours of labor for women and children to ten hours a day and sixty hours a week; and specify the amount of overtime permissible for these classes of workers. The Shops Acts, upon the whole, allow greater latitude to the employers of children; thus the hours of labor are longer and the conditions often not less injurious than those in factories. Except in Ontario, no age limit is set under which a child may not begin work in a shop. Again by the Mines Acts of British Columbia, children of twelve may be employed above ground, and by those of Saskatchewan and Nova Scotia boys of twelve may work under ground. The enforcement of the laws restricting child labor has, from various causes, proved somewhat inadequate. For instance, Nova Scotia has had a Factories Act since 1901, but no inspector of factories till the present year; while Ontario, with a Truancy Act that, if enforced, would prevent many children from engaging in unsuitable labor, has vested the appointment of truancy officers in the municipalities, and these, in many instances, have neglected to make appointments."

_The Outlook, November 14, 1908._

Recent changes in child labor laws in Canada are as follows:

In Ontario the Factories Act limits the working time of boys under sixteen to ten hours, forbids the employment of children under twelve within doors, and restricts the privileges extended to canning factories. The Shops Act is amended by raising the age limit from ten to twelve years. Manitoba forbids the employment of minors as bartenders. Alberta has raised the age limit of children employed in mines from twelve to sixteen years. British Columbia prohibits the employment of boys under fourteen and girls under fifteen except in the canning of fish.

CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW: England: The Employment of Children Act, 1903.

An Act "to make Better Provision for Regulating the Employment of Children" became law in August, 1903. Most of the responsibility for a proper protective regulation of child labor was imposed by this enactment on the local authorities of the Kingdom. Among its provisions were the following:

"1. Any local authority may make byelaws— (i) prescribing for all children, or for boys and girls separately, and with respect to all occupations or to any specified occupation,— (a) the age below which employment is illegal; and (b) the hours between which employment is illegal; and (c) the number of daily and weekly hours beyond which employment is illegal: (ii) prohibiting absolutely or permitting, subject to conditions, the employment of children in any specified occupation.

"2. Any local authority may make byelaws with respect to street trading by persons under the age of sixteen. …

"3. (1) A child shall not be employed between the hours of nine in the evening and six in the morning: Provided that any local authority may, by byelaw, vary these hours either generally or for any specified occupation.

(2) A child under the age of eleven years shall not be employed in street trading.

(3) No child who is employed half-time under the Factory and Workshop Act, 1901, shall be employed in any other occupation.

(4) A child shall not be employed to lift, carry, or move anything so heavy as to be likely to cause injury to the child.

(5) A child shall not be employed in any occupation likely to be injurious to his life, limb, health or education, regard being had to his physical condition. …

"4. (1) A byelaw made under this Act shall not have any effect until confirmed by the Secretary of State, and shall not be so confirmed until at least thirty days after the local authority have published it in such manner as the Secretary of State may by general or special order direct. …

"13. In this Act—The expression ‘child’ means a person under the age of fourteen years:

"The expression ‘guardian,’ used in reference to a child, includes any person who is liable to maintain or has the actual custody of the child:

"The expression ‘employ’ and ‘employment,’ used in reference to a child, include employment in any labour exercised by way of trade or for the purposes of gain, whether the gain be to the child or to any other person: …

"The expression ‘street trading’ includes the hawking of newspapers, matches, flowers, and other articles, playing, singing, or performing for profit, shoe-blacking, and any other like occupation carried on in streets or public places."

CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW: Germany: Child Labor Legislation and its operation.

The Reichstag, in 1903, passed a new law for the protection of children, concerning the operation of which a well known English student of social conditions in Germany wrote as follows in 1908:

"Several significant facts may be noted in relation to the protection of childhood in Germany. The legal age of admission to full employment in factories and workshops is fourteen years, though on the production of efficiency certificates children may be employed for not more than six hours daily at the age of thirteen, yet of the 5,607,657 industrial workers subject to inspection in 1905 only 10,245, or under 0.2 per cent., were below fourteen years, and in some States there were none. To show the progress which has been made in this respect it may be stated that in 1875 10 per cent. (88,000 out of a total of 880,500) of the factory workers were between twelve and fourteen years of age. … At the same time there is reason to believe that a serious exhaustion of juvenile strength takes place in the unregulated home industries of Germany. Further, from the age of six the child of the people attends the primary school for seven or eight years, and in many cases he is required to attend a continuation school several years longer. In most of the large towns the scholar from first to last receives free systematic medical care at the hands of the school doctors. It begins with a thorough examination on admission, and the health record thus opened is continued throughout the whole period of school life, so that the child is under constant medical supervision until it reaches the working age. Many towns have gone further, and have established dental surgeries, and attached eye and ear specialists to the primary schools."

_W. H. Dawson, The Evolution of Modern Germany, page 327 (Unwin, London; Scribner’s, New York)_.

{88}

CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW: United States: Child Labor Laws of the several States in 1908, and as amended since.

The requirements of an effective child labor law are set forth in Pamphlet No. 60 of the National Child Labor Committee as resting "primarily upon certain definite prohibitions, among which are the following:

Labor is prohibited (1) for all children under the age of fourteen years;

labor is prohibited (2) for all children under sixteen years of age who do not measure sixty inches and weigh eighty pounds;

labor is prohibited (3) for all children under sixteen years of age who cannot read fluently and write legibly simple sentences in the English language;

labor is prohibited (4) for all children under the age of sixteen years, between the hours of 7 p. m. and 7 a. m. or longer than eight hours in any twenty-four hours, or longer than forty-eight hours in any week;

labor is prohibited (5) for all children under the age of sixteen years in occupations dangerous to life, limb, health or morals."

Further prescriptions of the Committee relate to the regulations and agencies of authority requisite to an effective enforcement of the Law.

In Bulletin Number 62 of the United States Bureau of Labor published in January, 1906, there is published a compilation of the laws relating to child labor in each State of the Union, as amended and in force at the close of the year 1905. An examination of them shows that the proposed standard had not then been measured up to in any State, or approached even nearly by more than a few. In not one had the law prescribed a test by weight or measure of the bodily development of a child that should mark Nature’s consent to his employment in any kind of work.

Thirteen States, namely, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Indiana, Kansas, Minnesota, New Jersey, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, West Virginia, and Wisconsin, prohibited in general terms the employment of children under fourteen years in mechanical, manufacturing or mercantile establishments, or to that apparent effect. New York did the same, with the proviso that children over twelve might have employment during school vacation times. Rhode Island, likewise, excepted the vacation time for children under fourteen. The State of Washington allowed certain judges to make exemptions from a similar prohibition, for the needed support of helpless parents. Maine, Michigan, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin fixed the age under which no child may be employed in wage-earning labor at twelve. Louisiana appointed it at twelve for a boy and fourteen for a girl. Colorado placed it at twelve for labor in mines only. Florida raised it to fifteen, but only as prohibitory without consent of "those having legal control" of the child. Alabama and Nebraska had it lowered to ten years. South Carolina had kept it at ten until 1903, at eleven until 1904, and at twelve until May, 1905. In the Massachusetts law no absolute prohibition of child labor within any age line appeared.

Educational requirements, conditioning the employment of children, were in most of the State laws, as they stood at the end of 1905, and many of them satisfied the third rule propounded by the National Child Labor Committee, as given above.

In the next three years after the Bureau of Labor’s compilation of child labor laws, great reforms in them were brought about, as shown by comparison with the "Handbook 1908" of "Child Labor Legislation" compiled by Josephine Goldmark for the National Consumers’ League, and published originally as a Supplement to the Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, May, 1908. Some statements from this are given below:

"The age below which child labor is prohibited varies from sixteen to ten years. The number of employments prohibited also varies greatly—from all employment during school hours to mine work only. … Eleven states prohibit work to the sixteenth birthday in either mines or specific occupations injurious to health, or both. These are, for mines, New York, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania (inside anthracite mines), Texas; for specific occupations, Kentucky, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, Wisconsin; for both, Illinois and Montana."

The fifteen year age limit is prescribed in only one State, South Dakota, which forbids it in mines, factories, hotels, laundries, theatres, bowling alleys, elevators, messenger service, or places where liquors are sold.

The age limit of fourteen years is prescribed differently in different States. With various qualifications, employment below that age in factories, stores, offices, laundries, hotels, theatres, bowling alleys, is prohibited in California, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

In factories or stores it is forbidden in Connecticut, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Washington.

In factories it is not permitted in Arkansas, Colorado, Delaware, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, New Jersey, Tennessee, Texas, Wisconsin.

In messenger service it is made unlawful in California, Idaho, Illinois, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin.

Children under this age are excluded from mines in Arkansas, Colorado, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Minnesota, Missouri, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Utah, Washington, Wisconsin, Wyoming.

In all the prohibitions above cited many and various exceptions are allowed in the laws of different States—as for school-vacation periods, for children of widows and disabled fathers, etc. In like manner, the following State laws which, on general principles, forbid all employment of children under fourteen years during school hours, provide for numerous and different exceptional circumstances: California, Colorado, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Idaho, Illinois, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, South Dakota, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin.

{89}

The thirteen year age limit is fixed only in North Carolina, which excepts apprentices.

The twelve year limit is applied (with exceptions for the vacation months) to factories or stores in California, to most descriptions of regular employment in Maryland, and to factories in West Virginia. It is applied to factories, with varied exceptions, in Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Carolina, and Texas. It applies to factories, quarries, railroads, and messenger service in Vermont, and to factories, stores, and mines in Virginia. To mines distinctly it applies in Alabama, Florida, Maryland (if the twelve-year child is not wholly illiterate), North Carolina, North Dakota (in school hours), Pennsylvania (in bituminous mines only), South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia (vacation excepted).

The ten year old limit for labor to be lawful was only in Georgia factories, with exceptions for the babes of widows and disabled fathers.

As to hours of labor, "six states limit employment to 9 hours in one day and 54 in one week:—California, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, Missouri, and New York (applying to children under 16 in stores and as messengers).

"Twenty-four states restrict work to 10 hours in one day and either 55, 58 or 60 hours in one week.

"Five states, Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Tennessee allow more than 10 hours work in one day," in the hours per week they permit.

"Those states which fail to restrict the hours of labor allowed in one _week_ as well as in one _day_ invite the possibility of seven days’ labor. In Washington, for example, women and girls may not only work ten hours at night, they may do this every night, including Sunday.

"Work at night is effectively restricted to the 16th birthday in 18 states. Twelve states set an early closing hour for children under 16 years, New York fixing 5 p. m.; Michigan, Ohio, Oregon and Wisconsin 6 p. m., and Alabama, Idaho, Illinois, Kentucky, Minnesota, Missouri and New Jersey (in stores) fixing 7 p. m. Of these, the Ohio law is the most comprehensive, since it includes girls to the 18th birthday."

"Children have no positive immunity from night work unless the hours are explicitly stated between which it is unlawful to employ them. … The District of Columbia, 4 territories and 20 states fail to prohibit work at night after a definite closing hour. The sinister feature of this list is the presence of Connecticut, Delaware, Indiana, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, New Hampshire, Tennessee and West Virginia, all of them important manufacturing states having industries in which children are employed."

Since the compilation of the above several states have made important changes in or additions to their child labor laws, as follows:

In Kentucky the age limit is raised to 14 years during school terms, children between 14 and 16 not to be employed without certificate from school authorities. The hours of labor are limited to ten hours a day and sixty hours a week, and night work is prohibited for children under 16 years.

In Louisiana a fourteen-year age limit is established, with a 9 hour working day, and night work is prohibited for boys under 16 and girls under 18 years.

Mississippi has established a twelve-year limit, applicants under sixteen being required to furnish a certificate of age and educational advantages, and one from county health officer showing physical condition. The time limit is ten hours daily, 58 hours a week.

"New Jersey enacted a compulsory education law, requiring school attendance of all children between the ages of seven and seventeen, except that children of fifteen who have completed the grammar grades and are regularly employed may be excused. This places the age limit for employment during the school period at fifteen years.

"In New York a law was passed transferring the enforcement of the mercantile child labor law from local boards of health in cities of the first class to the State Labor Department, and providing for the creation of a bureau of mercantile inspection. This law became effective October 1st, 1908." It made important changes, affecting dangerous employments, which became effective October 1st, 1909.

"In Ohio an important measure was passed limiting the hours for boys under sixteen and girls under eighteen to eight per day and forty-eight per week."

_National Child Labor Committee (General Secretary’s Annual Report)._

An act to regulate the employment of child labor in the District of Columbia was passed by Congress on May 28, 1908. This law prescribes an age limit of fourteen years, and prohibits employment during school hours. Exceptions may be made for children in the service of the Senate, or for those whose labor is necessary for the support of a disabled or widowed parent. Street trades are forbidden to boys under ten and girls under sixteen years of age. The time limit for children under sixteen is eight hours a day and forty-eight hours a week.

The report of the National Child Labor Committee, for the year ending September 30, 1909, gives the following additional changes: In South Carolina a system of factory inspection was adopted. The hours of labor, however, were changed from 10 to 11 hours a day. In Maine an educational test was adopted, and the hours reduced from 60 to 58 per week. Rhode Island reduced the hours for women and children from 60 to 56 per week. Pennsylvania enacted a law requiring adequate proof of age of children seeking employment, and requiring school certificate.

Hours of labor have been reduced in the following States: Michigan to 54 hours a week for all women and for males under 18; Kansas, Oklahoma, North Dakota to 8 hour day and 48 hour week; Delaware to 9 hour day and 54 hour week; Maine to 10 hour day and 58 hour week for boys under 16, and girls under 18; Rhode Island to 56 hour week for minors under 16 and all women.

Night work has been prohibited in the following additional States: Delaware, Kansas, North Dakota, Michigan, Oklahoma, California.

Compulsory education laws have been passed in Arkansas and Tennessee, and revised and improved in New Jersey, New York, and Missouri.

See, also. LABOR PROTECTION: HOURS OF LABOR.

----------CHILDREN, UNDER THE LAW: End--------

{90}

CHILDREN, Public Playgrounds for.

See (in this Volume) PLAYGROUND MOVEMENT.

CHILDS, RICHARD S.

See (in this Volume) ELECTIVE FRANCHISE: UNITED STATES.

----------CHILE: Start--------

CHILE: A. D. 1901-1906. Participation in Second and Third International Conferences of American Republics, at Rio de Janeiro.

See (in this Volume) AMERICAN REPUBLICS.

CHILE: A. D. 1902. Noble Peace Agreements between Chile and the Argentine Republic. Treaty for Arbitration of all Disputes. Limitation of Armaments.

See (in this Volume) War, The Revolt against: A. D. 1902.

CHILE: A. D. 1903. Sale of war vessels to Great Britain.

Pursuant to her Convention with Argentina, for the reduction of armaments, Chile, in this year, sold two newly built war vessels to Great Britain.

CHILE: A. D. 1906. Installation of President Montt. His prospective difficulties.

Don Pedro Montt, elected President of Chile in June, 1906, was installed in office on the 10th of September following—the anniversary of Chilean independence. United States Minister Hicks, reporting the ceremony to his Government, added the following remarks on the political situation:

"The new President takes office while enjoying great personal popularity. He is the son of Don Manuel Montt, who was President of Chile from 1851 to 1862. His reputation is that of a calm, well-balanced man, of unimpeachable integrity, strong and self-reliant, but conciliatory and far-seeing. He begins his career with many difficulties on his hands. One question left over from the last administration—that of the rectorship of the university—is already causing considerable trouble. Under the law the President appoints the rector from three persons named by the doctors of the university itself. Señor Letelier has been so named, but as he is said to be a liberal and even a freethinker, the church party and the conservatives generally are fighting him. The new President selected a cabinet last week entirely different from the one now in office, but owing to the rectorship question and some other things it failed and a new one had to be appointed hurriedly.

"Among other difficulties to be met by the new President is the opposition of the Senate. It is understood that there is a majority in that body against him, and it is liable to operate unfavorably to him. Still his friends have full confidence that he will succeed in quieting opposition and will retain the unlimited confidence of the people.

"Under the Chilean constitution much of the power delegated to the President under the American Constitution is retained by Congress. That body really dictates to the President the appointment or removal of his cabinet and thus his functions are quite different from those of the President of the United States."

CHILE: A. D. 1906. Destructive earthquake.

See (in this Volume) EARTHQUAKES: CHILE.

CHILE: A. D. 1907. Diplomatic relations with Peru reestablished.

Diplomatic relations with Peru were reestablished in 1907; but the old sore question between the two countries, concerning the interpretation of the peace treaty of Ancón (1884), relative to the provinces of Tacna and Arica, which Chile took from Peru in the preceding war, remains open.

See (in Volume VI.) CHILE.

CHILE: A. D. 1909. Contract given for the Arica-La Paz Railway.

See (in this Volume) RAILWAYS: CHILE-BOLIVIA.

CHILE: A. D. 1909. Arbitration of the Alsop Claim of the United States.

"Many years ago diplomatic intervention became necessary to the protection of the interests in the American claim of Alsop and Company against the government of Chili. The government of Chili had frequently admitted obligation in the case, and had promised this government to settle it. There had been two abortive attempts to do so through arbitral commissions, which failed through lack of jurisdiction. Now, happily, as the result of the recent diplomatic negotiations, the governments of the United States and Chili, actuated by the sincere desire to free from any strain those cordial and friendly relations upon which both set such store, have agreed by a protocol to submit the controversy to definitive settlement by his Britannic Majesty, Edward VII."

_Message to Congress of President Taft, December, 1909._

The claim referred to is that of "the Alsop Company of New York and Connecticut which advanced large sums of money to the Bolivian government in exchange for the right to valuable guano deposits in that country and other concessions. The government contracted further to return a part of the loan from the receipts of customs at the port of Arica. Before her contract could be fulfilled Bolivia lost Arica and the adjoining districts to Chili in war. In 1885, following representations by the American State Department, Chili agreed to assume the obligations of Bolivia to the Alsop Company. She has never, however, made good her promise, and the matter has been the subject of diplomatic negotiations ever since. The claim now amounts to more than $1,500,000."

CHILE: A. D. 1909. Building of the Transandine Railway Tunnel.

See (in this Volume) RAILWAYS: ARGENTINA-CHILE.

CHILE: A. D. 1909 (October). Naval plans.

See (in this Volume) WAR, THE PREPARATIONS FOR: NAVAL: CHILEAN.

----------CHILE: End--------

----------CHINA: Start--------

CHINA: A. D. 1887-1907. Increase of Christian Mission Schools.

See (in this Volume) EDUCATION: CHINA.

CHINA: A. D. 1900-1905. Sudden and rapid upspringing of newspapers.

"Without giving actual statistics, it may be mentioned that Peking, which had no newspaper up to the time of the Boxer rising—except a short-lived weekly started by the Peking Reform Club and suppressed by the Empress Dowager—has now three daily newspapers and two fortnightly ones, some of these being partly illustrated. Tientsin has at least three dailies, one of these, the _‘Ta-kung Pao’_ ('The Impartial’), having the very respectable circulation of twenty thousand. The official organ which calls itself the ‘Times’ (the _‘Shih Pao’_), although not so widely circulated, is well written under European auspices and has considerable influence. {91} In Shanghai there are now sixteen daily papers (price, eight to ten _cash_ each), some of which have circulations of as much as ten thousand, and besides these there are many journals published there. Further south (at Foochow, Soochow, and Canton), there are in all some six or seven daily papers, and at Hong-Kong five, while Kiaochow has one, which is supported by the local German government. In addition to these, several papers are now published in the interior, but the majority, for various reasons, flourish in the treaty ports."

_A. R. Colquhoun The Chinese Press of To-day (North American Review, January, 1906)._

CHINA: A. D. 1900-1906. Progressive tariff and internal taxation measures to check the consumption of opium.

See (in this Volume) OPIUM PROBLEM.

CHINA: A. D. 1901-1902. The Russian grip on Manchuria. Coercive negotiations with China. Protests from other Powers. The Manchurian Treaty of 1902 and its impotence.

Early in December, 1901, the American Minister to China, Mr. Conger, reported to Secretary Hay, at Washington, an impending treaty which Russia seemed likely to force on the Chinese Government, which would practically secure to that aggressive Power, through a prolonged agreement of China with the Russo-Chinese Bank, exclusive railway and mining concessions in Manchuria, and which would protract the Russian evacuation of that country through three years. England and Japan were using all their influence at Peking to prevent the signing of the treaty, and Mr. Hay entered a vigorous protest on the part of the Government of the United States, "animated now, as heretofore, by the sincere desire to insure to the whole world full and fair intercourse with China on equal footing." The pressure from Russia on China was so potent, however, that Mr. Conger, on the 29th of January, 1902, reported to Mr. Hay that Prince Ch’ing, who acted with authority from his Government in the negotiation with Russia, had informed him "that the latter has done the best he could and has held out as long as possible, but that Russian possession of Manchuria has become intolerable, and that China must at once sign the convention or lose everything; that he has therefore agreed to sign the convention [modified in some particulars] and will also sign the separate agreement with the Russo-Chinese Bank, which practically gives exclusive privileges of industrial development in Manchuria." Nevertheless the consummation of the Russian project of coercive diplomacy was delayed until the 8th of April, and the terms of the treaty then signed were considerably moderated from the original design. Its provisions of interest to others than the contracting parties were as follows:

"ARTICLE I. His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, desiring to give a fresh proof of his love of peace and his sentiments of friendship for His Majesty the Emperor of China, notwithstanding the fact that the first attacks upon the peaceable Russian population were made from various points of Manchuria, which is situated on the frontier, consents to the reestablishment of the authority of the Chinese Government in the aforesaid province, which remains an integral part of the Empire of China, and restores to the Chinese Government the right to exercise governmental and administrative powers there as before its occupation by the Russian troops.

"ARTICLE II. In resuming possession of governmental and administrative powers in Manchuria, the Chinese Government confirms, as well in regard to the terms as to all the other articles, the engagement strictly to observe the stipulations of the contract concluded with the Russo-Chinese Bank on the 27th of August, 1896, and assumes, according to article 5 of said contract, the obligation to protect the railroad and its personnel by every means, and also pledges itself to guarantee the security in Manchuria, of all Russian subjects in general who reside there and the enterprises established by them. The Russian Government, in view of the assumption of this obligation by the Emperor of China, consents on its part, in case there shall be no agitations of any sort, and if the action of the other powers shall offer no obstacle thereto, gradually to withdraw all its troops from Manchuria so as (_a_) To withdraw, in the course of six months from the signing of the convention, the Russian troops from the southwest portion of the province of Moukden, as far as the Liao-he River, and again to place China in control of the railways; (_b_) To withdraw, in the course of the six months following, the Imperial Russian troops from the remaining portion of the province of Moukden and the province of Kirin; and (c) To withdraw, in the course of the six months following, the remainder of the Imperial Russian troops now in the province of Hei-lung Kiang.

"ARTICLE. III. In view of the necessity of obviating in future a repetition of the disturbances of 1900, in which the Chinese troops quartered in the provinces adjacent to Russia took part, the Russian Government and the Chinese Government agree to order the Russian military authorities and the dzian-dziuns, to come to an understanding for the purpose of regulating the number and determining the places of cantonment of the Chinese troops in Manchuria until the Russian troops shall have been withdrawn therefrom. The Chinese Government further pledges itself not to organize any other troops above the number thus agreed upon by the Russian military authorities and the dzian-dziuns which shall be sufficient to exterminate the brigands and to pacify the country. After the complete evacuation of the country by the Russian troops, the Chinese Government shall have the right to make an examination of the number of troops in Manchuria which are subject to increase or diminution, giving timely notice of such examination to the Imperial Government, for the maintenance of troops in the aforesaid province in superfluous numbers would manifestly lead to the increase of the Russian military forces in the adjacent districts, and would thus occasion an increase of military expenses, to the great disadvantage of both countries. For police service and the maintenance of internal order in this region outside of the territory ceded to the Chinese Eastern Railway Company, there shall be formed, near the local dzian-dziun governors, a police force, both on foot and mounted, composed exclusively of subjects of the Emperor of China

"ARTICLE IV. The Russian Government consents to restore to their owners the railway lines of Shan-hai-kwan—Yin-kow—Simminting, which have been occupied and protected by the Russian troops since the end of the month of September, 1900. In consideration of this the Government of the Emperor of China pledges itself:

{92}

"1. That in case it shall become necessary to insure the security of the aforesaid railway lines it will itself assume that obligation, and will not request any other power to undertake or participate in the defense, construction, or exploitation of these lines, and will not permit foreign powers to occupy the territory restored by Russia.

"2. That the above-mentioned railway lines shall be completed and exploited on the precise bases of the agreement made between Russia and England April 16, 1899, and on those of the contract concluded September 28, 1898, with a private company, relative to a loan for the construction of the aforesaid lines, and, moreover, in observance of the obligations assumed by the company, especially: Not to take possession of the Shan-hai-kwan—Yin-kow—Simminting line or to dispose of it in any manner whatever.

"3. That if a continuation of the railway lines in the south of Manchuria, or the construction of branch lines connecting with them, and the construction of a bridge at Yin Kow or at the transfer of the terminus of the Shan-hai-kwan Railroad, which is situated there, shall hereafter be undertaken, it shall be done after a previous understanding between the Government of Russia and that of China."

_Papers relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, 1902, pages 271-281._

During the next two years Russia was accused from all sides of infidelity to the engagements of this treaty, and her conduct, which seemed especially menacing to Japan, gave rise to the Russo-Japanese War.

See (in this Volume) JAPAN: A. D. 1901-1904.

CHINA: A. D. 1901-1902. Edicts for educational reform. Modernizing examinations for literary and military degrees. Establishing universities, colleges, and schools. Sending students abroad.

See (in this Volume) EDUCATION: CHINA: A. D. 1901-1902.

CHINA: A. D. 1901-1904. Persistent occupation of Manchuria by the Russians. Remonstrances of the Japanese.

See (in this Volume) JAPAN: A. D. 1901-1904.

CHINA: A. D. 1901-1908. Settlement of the indemnity to be paid to fourteen Powers on account of the Boxer Rising. Remission of part of it by the United States.

In April, 1901, when the record of events connected with the Boxer rising against foreigners in China was closed in Volume VI. of this work, the Chinese government had promised satisfaction and indemnity to the fourteen Powers whose subjects had suffered from the barbarous attack and whose forces had overcome it, and the measure of indemnity to be paid was then being discussed. The discussion and the reckonings involved were prolonged till September. The final protocol was signed September 7, but it was not until the 30th of that month that the formulated claims of the Powers concerned were accepted by China, and the responsibility of payment assumed by an imperial decree. The total was 450,000,000 taels, equivalent to $334,000,000, divided between Austria-Hungary, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Portugal, Russia, Spain, Sweden, and the United States. The sum was not reckoned solely for the covering of losses and expenses, consequent on the Boxer outrages, but was intended to be, in some degree, a penalty imposed on the Chinese nation; and some of the claimant nations were said to be more exacting on this score than others were.

The amount for which the United States stipulated was $24,440,000, and the American government received an indemnity bond for that sum. But when the expenses of the American relief expedition had been accurately ascertained, and all losses and destruction of property belonging to American claimants had been settled, it was found that they would be largely overpaid. It was possible, according to common practice in international dealings, to regard the excess as justly punitive; but a different view was dictated by the wish to show friendliness to China, and a return of the overpayment was proposed. Recommended by President Roosevelt, the necessary sanction was given by Congress, and on the 11th of July, 1908, the American Minister to China addressed the following communication to the Prince of Ch’ing, President of the Wai-Wu-Pu, or Board of Foreign Affairs, at Peking:

"_Your Highness:_ "It is with great satisfaction that I have the honor to inform your Highness, under direction of the Secretary of State of the United States, that a bill has passed the Congress of the United States authorizing the President to modify the indemnity bond given the United States by China under the provisions of Article VI. of the final protocol of September 7, 1901, from twenty-four million, four hundred and forty thousand dollars ($24,440,000), United States gold currency, to thirteen million, six hundred and fifty-five thousand, four hundred and ninety-two dollars and twenty-nine cents ($13,655,492.29), with interest at four per cent (4%) per annum. Of this amount two million dollars ($2,000,000) are held pending the result of hearings on private claims presented to the Court of Claims of the United States within one year. Any balance remaining after such adjudication is also to be returned to the Chinese Government, in such manner as the Secretary of State shall decide.

"The President is further authorized under the Bill to remit to China the remainder of the indemnity as an act of friendship, such payments and remissions to be made at such times and in such a manner as he may deem just.

"I am also directed by the Secretary of State to request the Imperial Government kindly to favor him with its views as to the time and manner of the remissions.

"Trusting that your Imperial Highness will favor me with an early reply to communicate to my Government, I avail myself of this occasion to renew to your Highness the assurance of my highest consideration —W. W. ROCKHILL."

In his reply, after reciting the statements conveyed to him by Mr. Rockhill, the Prince wrote (as translated) the following:

"On reading this despatch I was profoundly impressed with the justice and great friendliness of the American government, and wish to express our sincerest thanks.

"Concerning the time and manner of the return of the amounts to be remitted to China, the Imperial Government has no wishes to express in the matter. It relies implicitly on the friendly intentions of the United States Government, and is convinced that it will adopt such measures as are best calculated to attain the end it has in view.

{93}

"The Imperial Government, wishing to give expression to the high value it places on the friendship of the United States, finds in its present action a favorable opportunity for doing so. Mindful of the desire recently expressed by the President of the United States to promote the coming of Chinese students to the United States to take courses in the schools and higher educational institutions of the country, and convinced by the happy results of past experience of the great value to China of education in American schools, the Imperial Government has the honor to state that it is its intention to send henceforth yearly to the United States a considerable number of students there to receive their education. The Board of Foreign Affairs will confer with the American Minister in Peking concerning the elaboration of plans for the carrying out of the intention of the Imperial Government. "A necessary despatch. "SEAL OF THE WAI-WU-PU."

Simultaneously with the note from Prince Ch’ing, the Wai-Wu-Pu as a body addressed the following to Mr. Rockhill:

"_To his Excellency W. W. Rockhill, American Minister, Peking_:

"Referring to the despatch just sent to your Excellency regarding sending students to America, it has now been determined that from the year when the return of the indemnity begins, one hundred students shall be sent to America every year for four years, so that four hundred students may be in America by the fourth year. From the fifth year and throughout the period of the indemnity payments a minimum of fifty students will be sent each year.

"As the number of students will be very great, there will be difficulty in making suitable arrangements for them. Therefore, in the matter of choosing them, as well as in the matters of providing suitable homes for them in America and selecting the schools which they are to enter, we hope to have your advice and assistance. The details of our scheme will have to be elaborated later, but we take this occasion to state the general features of our plan, and ask you to inform the American Government of it. We sincerely hope that the American Government will render us assistance in the matter.

"Wishing you all prosperity, (Signed) PRINCE OF CH’ING, YUAN-SHIH-K’AI, NA-TUNG LIEN-FANG LIANG-TUN-YEN."

The remittance of somewhat more than $10,000,000 of the indemnity did not involve a repayment of that sum of money to the Chinese government, for the reason that payments on the original indemnity bond were to be in annual instalments, running until 1940, certain revenues being pledged to secure them. The remittance is effected, accordingly, by a readjustment of those payments hereafter.

Writing in _The Outlook_ of this transaction, and of the impression it has made in China, Mr. George Marvin, who has been for some time in official connection with the Chinese Government, says:

"In pledging itself to the American educational mission the Chinese Government has given the fullest evidence of its appreciation. According to estimates made in Peking last summer, it was calculated that by and after the fourth year of the proposed educational foundation the investment necessary to finance the Chinese students in America would amount to $500,000 annually, a sum nearly equivalent to the entire yearly revenue remitted. Already, and quite apart from the scheme proposed in the note of the Wai-Wu-Pu, there are maintained in the United States by Imperial and Provincial funds one hundred and fifty-five Chinese students, picked boys and young men, sons of officials and prominent and wealthy merchants, chosen often by competitive examinations. The students now to be sent annually by the Imperial Government will be still more carefully selected. These are the men destined for positions of responsibility and influence in that ‘Awakening China’ of which we hear so much."

_G. Marvin, in _The Outlook_, November 14, 1908._

A Special Ambassador from China, bearing a letter of thanks from the Emperor, presented it to the President on the 2d of December, 1908.

CHINA: A. D. 1902. Return to Peking of the Emperor, Empress-Dowager, and Court. Receptions to foreign representatives. Withdrawals of foreign troops. Recurrence of Boxer outbreaks.

The Emperor, Empress Dowager, and their suite reentered Peking on the 7th of January, 1902. On the 22d the foreign representatives were admitted to audience with the Emperor; on the 28th the Emperor and Empress-Dowager, together, gave a reception to the diplomatic body, the Empress-Dowager being throned on a higher seat than the Emperor; on the 1st of February the Empress-Dowager entertained the ladies of the foreign legations at a banquet, where presents of jewelry were made to all the guests. Sorrow for the misdoings from which the foreigners in China had suffered was expressed on all these occasions, and there seemed to be an earnest desire to make amends for them.

Foreign troops were withdrawn from Tien-tsin on the 15th of August, 1902, and the city delivered to the Chinese Viceroy. Many improvements in streets, bridges, and public grounds had been made by the provisional government which the Allies instituted in 1900. Shanghai was evacuated by the allied forces at the end of the year 1902.

Some recurrence of Boxer movements and insurrections occurred in different parts of the Empire during 1902. Several missionaries and a number of native converts were murdered, chapels were burned, and other outrages committed; but in general there was a restoration of order in the country, and considerable building of railways and forwarding of other enterprises went on.

CHINA: A. D. 1902. Russo-Chinese Treaty concerning Tibet.

See (in this Volume) TIBET: A. D. 1902.

CHINA: A. D. 1902 (January). Agreement respecting China between Great Britain and Japan.

See (in this Volume) JAPAN: A. D. 1902.

CHINA: A. D. 1902 (February). Wei-hai-wei found to be strategically worthless by the British Government.

See (in this Volume) ENGLAND: A. D. 1902 (FEBRUARY).

CHINA: A. D. 1902-1904. The British opening of Tibet by force.

See TIBET: A. D. 1902.

{94}

CHINA: A. D. 1903 (MAY-OCTOBER). Treaty with the United States. Opening of two ports in Manchuria. Rights and privileges enlarged.

"In the protocol of September 7, 1901, China had agreed to extend the scope of her commercial treaties with the powers.

_See, (in this Volume) above, A. D. 1901-1908._

When the negotiation of a new treaty was begun by Consul-General Goodnow at Shanghai, the United States demanded that at least two new ports in Manchuria be opened to foreign trade and residence. The Chinese commissioners declined to discuss this subject, on the alleged ground that they had no instructions to do so. It was evident that there was secret opposition somewhere, and on May 7, 1903, Mr. Conger reported that it came from the Russian charge d'affaires. Later he secured a written acknowledgment from the Chinese government that such was the case. … Mr. Hay then appealed with the utmost directness to the Russian government. … On July 14 a definite answer was at length received from Russia, in which she declared that it had never entered into her views to oppose the opening of certain cities in Manchuria to foreign commerce, but that this declaration did not apply to Harbin, one of the cities selected by the United States, which was situated within the railway zone, and therefore was not under the complete jurisdiction of China. A copy of this note was shown to the Chinese government; which finally agreed to insert in the treaty on October 8 (the date on which Russia had agreed to completely withdraw from Manchuria) a provision for the opening of two ports. The United States agreed to this arrangement, and on October 8 the treaty was signed, and Mukden and Antung named as the open ports."

_John H. Latané, America as a World Power,