hundred thirty-one vice-presidents, five advisory councils, fortysix secretaries, nine boards of directors, twenty-eight executive committees, three entertainment committees, seven membership committees, three educational committees, three press committees, twenty-two employed officers and ten equipped offices are enlisted in our organized propaganda.

Considering again the relatively brief time included, the financial operations of our organization present an interesting illustration of rapid development. May first, 1913, the branches, sections and two affiliated societies had on hand $8,727.21. They received during the year from individual contributions $10,150.27. They received from subventions $13,425.08, from special collections $1,301.02, from memberships in the form of dues $9,594, from the sale of literature $71.79, from interest upon deposits $94.30, from legacies $1,500, from invested funds $420.68, from other sources $2,816.36. Adding to this other net receipts the grand total reaches the sum of $74,308.16, an increase over five years ago of 340%.

The expenditures may be briefly enumerated: for salaries, head secretaries, secretaries and clerks, $14,706.95; office rent, $2,839.86; traveling expenses, $1,323.57; telephone, $560.73; printing and mailing, $2,316.99; books and literature, $287.81; postage, including express and telegrams, $1,563.82; stationery, $313.47; office supplies, $865.53; extra help, $1,566.80; office furniture, $252.58; for the Advocate of Peace, $2,180.75; miscellaneous, including prizes, $7,525.96. Adding to this sum net other expenditures the grand total for the year reaches $64,657.05, an increase in five years of nearly 320%.

If there were time I would describe the work of one of our societies which operates through a committee of seven with thirty-three churches and four clubs, and which conducts peace movement study courses. It would be of interest and importance to examine the growing influence of our societies with the press, schools, and other organizations. The distribution of our peace literature is rapidly growing. One group has during the year sent four thousand letters and resolutions to clergymen, promoted peace propaganda through university extension, and worked especially to counteract the anti-Japanese agitation on the Pacific Slope. Senators and Representatives feel already the influence of our societies. Two branches have employed each during the year an official lecturer. One society lays claim to an affiliated membership of 30,000. Itineraries by speakers, such as Mr. Angell, and Mr. Davies of Great Britain, have been made effective by our workers. Propaganda among labor organizations is growing. Increasing interest and respect among the newspapers, business organizations and the like is manifest. Our secretaries report an increasing confidence and courtesy from

almost every quarter. One of our societies voluntarily voted to become self-sustaining for the last year, and it will probably continue to do so. Fraternity among the various workers is perceptibly increasing. All of the national peace congresses in America have been initiated and, in considerable part, directed by the American Peace Society. It has co-operated in unreportable ways with the Government, and it knows that it has influenced legislation and policies relating to arbitration and international justice. Tons of literature to writers, speakers, schools, colleges, and libraries are distributed each year in a continuous and increasing stream. The issuance of the Advocate of Peace, a monthly magazine founded in 1834, the circulation of which has increased fourteen times within twenty years, is continued. Its monthly edition has been recently increased to 11,000, a number representing an increase of 3,000 in less than two years. Over fifty peace pamphlets and as many books are constantly on sale at the society's headquarters.

Our Board of Directors fully recognizes the importance of co-operative effort. It believes that there is already a fine willingness on the part of most peace organizations to help each other for the sake of the cause. Selfishness holds no place in the movement. The belief that a national peace council, including a representative from every accredited peace organization, should be perfected is shared by our directors. The American Peace Society is such a council. Its functions in that direction will be developed in proportion as opportunity, resources, and understanding permit.

An ever recurring need of the hour in the peace movement is a new birth of statesmanship, of that deep quality of constructive effort which, recognizing clearly the lessons of national experiences, can codify and apply them to the needs and exigencies of the present. This I take it is an ultimate hope and promise of the anti-war party. We must, of course, rely upon the men who do things, the men of affairs, the holders of office, the chosen leaders in the councils of the nations.

But the organized peace movement in America depends first upon another quarter for its support and success. This is a nation of the people. Were this not so there would be no reason for a United States of America. The sure accomplishments in our national life must come from the intelligent appreciation and demand of the speakers, teachers, newspapers, and folks that together constitute us a homogeneous people. Any other interpretation of the means necessary to successful national accomplishment is subversive of our nation's life itself. You would exterminate disease? You must educate the people. You would reform the prisons, schools, churches? You must start with the people. You would correct abuses in taxation, transportation,

public office? Tell the people. You would improve laws, institutions, inventions, ideals? You must begin with the people. We have outlined some facts relating to the organization of our efforts. It is patent, however, that truth transcends facts, being more vital and dynamic than they. To find this truth means constantly to seek it. The peace movement has always had a very rich moral purpose. But the constant need is for a greater insight into the changing conditions here and now. Fearlessness, tolerance, the scientific spirit, will characterize increasingly our endeavors. Enthusiasm, tenacity, and eagerness to learn from the experience of others will aid immeasurably the victory. But organization until every hamlet is reached? Yes. Co-operation and wisdom to use effectively the practical means immediately at hand? I hope so. Our best thought, our best emotion, our best endeavor? Of course. These things will follow, if follow they may, the enlightenment of public opinion. There is one word, therefore, which the organized peace movement letters upon its banner, it is the word education.

Whether we realize it or not, we are in the midst of a great political reformation in this country. This reformation springs from a growing public realization that the stupendous military burdens of the world are cruelly unnatural, wicked, and futile. Every intelligent person has a part to play in this impressive movement, this upward climb away from savagery and barbarism to human right-reason and justice. His part is to look squarely at the facts, to furbish his sword of right thinking, and to go forth to street, shop, office, church, school, and there to do his part toward slaying this dragon, this montrous, devastating dragon of war. Such I conceive to be the duty and the privilege of each and of all. If the duty is to be effectively performed, the organized collective effort already begun must continue and expand until its high purpose is achieved. (Applause.)

The CHAIRMAN: The next speaker will be Dr. W. W. WILLOUGHBY of Baltimore, Professor of Political Science at Johns Hopkins University.

SUGGESTIONS AS TO THE FUTURE WORK OF THE MOHONK CONFERENCES

ADDRESS BY W. W. WILLOUGHBY, PH.D.

The major premise upon which these Mohonk Conferences are founded is this: that in most matters of controversy which arise between nations there is not an irreconcilable conflict which can be settled only by physical force measured in terms of men, finances, and munitions of war. The claim is that in most, if

not all, of these disputes there are grounds upon which they may be peaceably adjusted in conformity with justice and with the material interests of the parties concerned. One of the principal means whereby, as we believe, this desirable result may be brought about is that of arbitration, and to the substantiation and dissemination of this belief we have devoted our efforts.

The beneficent influence which these Conferences have exerted in the past cannot be measured. It is certainly very great, but in order that this influence may continue and be as great and as wise as possible, it is advisable that from time to time we should re-examine the general problem in the light of what has already been done, and thus obtain a clear view of what remains to be accomplished. It is with the idea of emphasizing this truth that I have ventured to occupy a few minutes of the time of this session. I have not enough confidence in my own wisdom and judgment to attach any great weight to the opinions which I may express, except possibly this one, that it is desirable that the future work of these Conferences should be conducted in accordance with some plan which has been thought out and definitely determined upon. And what I shall have to say is put forward merely as a means of inaugurating such a self-examination upon our part.

If we analyze our self-set task we find that it is founded upon the following beliefs:

First, that many, if not all, of the controversies between nations which cannot be settled by diplomatic negotiations are, nevertheless, founded upon matters of fact and considerations of policy, which may be fairly and satisfactorily determined by arbitral methods.

Second, that opportunity should be given for the discovery of these facts, and the determination of the claims which may justly be founded upon them.

Third, that convenient and appropriate instrumentalities and modes of procedure should be provided and be continuously in existence for the peaceful adjustment of those international disputes which fail of settlement through the ordinary channels of diplomatic correspondence.

Fourth, and finally, that there should be created a disposition and a controlling will to resort to these peaceable modes of determining international differences.

In the light of this, or of some similar, analysis of the problem, we must decide upon the ways in which these Conferences may aid in the advancement of the movement to which they stand pledged.

A consideration of the elements of our effort as revealed by this analysis, as well as an examination of the proceedings of the Conferences which have been held in the past, make it evident

that the work has fallen into two departments: the one, which is the more fundamental, the more scientific, and, as it would seem to me, the more permanent and enduring, is the determination of the nature, modes and possible value of arbitration as a means of adjusting international disputes; the other, is the dissemination and popularization of the results which we reach. And by popularization I mean not only the making of our conclusions widely known, but the creation, so far as in us the ability lies, of the disposition on the part of the people, and especially of those who occupy the higher places of political power, to resort to arbitration rather than to what has been euphemistically called the ultimate argument of kings.

Thus regarding our work as a two-fold one, the question which has arisen in my mind is whether, in the light of what has been already accomplished, the time has not come for shifting, or at least for redistributing, the emphasis of our efforts, and, at the same time, somewhat changing the character of the work itself. To be more specific, I think that more and more we should emphasize the constructive part of our work, and seek to render it more scientific and more specific. I believe the time has gone by when we may expect that much advantage will accrue from general statements, from whatever sources emanating, as to the horrors of war, as to the burden of large armaments, as to the beneficence of peace, and as to the advantages and feasibility of arbitration as a mode of adjusting international disputes. Whatever necessity there may have been in the past for these Conferences to play a part in enlightening public opinion upon these points no longer exists. Or, at any rate, it is not so great that we can now afford to spend any considerable part of our time and energy in the expression and diffusion of these generalizations and hortatory statements. believe that public opinion in this country is now moulded to an extent which will warrant us in leaving future propagation along these lines to the churches, the colleges and schools, the press, and, in particular, to the vigorous and influential peace societies of the country.

Secondly, I think we should not encourage discussions relating to modes of promoting peace among the nations of the world other than that of arbitration. Thus I think that questions of disarmament or the limitation of armaments, the work of commissions of inquiry, the resort to mediation and the proffer of good offices, are all questions which should receive but incidental consideration here.

Turning now to the affirmative side of the programme which I propose, I would say generally, that, centering our attention upon our one selected subject-arbitration-we should strive to discuss it in a specific and practical manner, and thus give to our