was impossible not to have the deepest sympathy for him. His son had a farm of his own and in addition had acted as manager for his father. He now occupied the trenches at $33.00 a month while the father employed a despised enemy alien at $60.00 whose children may eventually, through force of numbers, wrest the control of Canada from the descendants of the British.

One other outspoken advocate of Chinese labor was met. He was probably the largest farm operator I met in Canada. He became very confidential confessing that he did not need Chinese in order to raise crops or to make money but that his employees were getting so independent that it took all the fun out of his business. He was solicitous to know whether I did not think it took all the pleasure out of life if one were not able to boss his men around as he chose. I am ashamed to acknowledge that he was so attractive a companion that I sidestepped his question, but I could not help thinking that his employees were entitled to a little fun also. Evidently he did not know that the cause of this war was the fact that the Kaiser wished to boss everybody in sight and was fool enough to think he could get away with it.

We must all be conscious of the difficulty the peoples of the belligerent countries have in getting the true perspective in the midst of battle. I was glad, therefore, that some investigations I was making which do not concern this paper, led me to confer with a Chinese scholar. He pointed out the importance of using cheap labor in winning the war. If the war is to continue five years, as he believed, the drain on the country is going to be enormous. We are developing a debt that posterity must shoulder. If the Allies can hold out five years paying the present prices for labor then, he contended, they could hold out ten years if labor only cost half as much.

FUTURE SLACK

The experience of Canada is a definite proof, if indeed proof is necessary, of the slack existing during peace times.

The question was repeatedly asked whether in Canada the slack had all been taken up. Canada was just then conscripting 100,000 men for the army, proportionately equivalent to one and one-half million in the United States.

What is going to happen when this additional contingent is removed?

The answers were extremely varied. One farm hand from Los Angeles, working at $50.00 a month in Alberta, predicated that the farms would revert to prairies, while an official expressed the belief that the removal of this number of effective laborers would not be seriously felt. The general opinion was that the situation was grave but not insurmountable.

AMERICA'S FUTURE

The United States will undoubtedly find it more difficult to meet the labor situation during the next three years than Canada has found it during the last three years, for at least two reasons:

1. In so far as labor is concerned the United States has been in this war since August, 1914. The labor situation in Canada is now no more acute than it is in the United States. Apparently the number of men withdrawn for war is not the controlling factor in the labor situation. If this is a fact, as I believe it to be, it is the most important lesson which I learned in Canada.

2. Both Canada and the United States are more prosperous than they were three years ago.

This is always true of either nations or individuals when they live on borrowed money. This prosperity constitutes our real menace. Taken as a whole the people of the United States and Canada have two dollars in their pockets to every dollar they had the first year Canada was at war.

The people are, therefore, competing with their government for commodities and services. This competition makes it exceedingly difficult for the government to buy commodities and services. It also makes services and commodities rise in value until two dollars will not buy any more than one dollar bought before. It is because people will not save. They spend two dollars just as readily as one provided they have them to spend.

Someone has remarked that the government is spending money like a drunken sailor. The fact is the government is being made to do so through the thoughtlessness of its own people. The government expenditures are but a fraction of the total expenditures of the people. The people have a far greater purchasing power than their government. It is the extravagant spending by the people which makes it necessary for the government to spend money like water in order to prosecute the war expeditiously and effectively.

The more liberty bonds and the more taxes the government exacts, the more readily it can equip its army and navy, not alone because it thus secures greater funds but because thereby civilians can less effectively compete against it for services and commodities.

Every time we allow anyone to do anything for us which we can just as well do ourselves, or whenever we use commodities that we can do without, whether it is food or clothing or gasoline, we are helping Germany win the war just as effectively as though we were in the German trenches. Probably it is the most effective way because Germany does not need us, while America is in dire need of the commodities which we are using so thoughtlessly.

AUSTRIA-HUNGARY: ITS PEOPLES AND

GOVERNMENT*

LUDWIK EHRLICH

If at the time when this lecture was announced I had been looking for a statement which would define all the issues of the present war, all the aims of the Allies in whose number the United States is now to be included, and all the tragic aspects of European conditions for which the afterwar settlement is to be a remedy, I could not have found any more luminous, concise and profoundly true exposition than that one made since then, and contained in one or two passages of the President's now famous War Message to Congress:

It was a war determined upon as war used to be determined upon in the old, unhappy days, when peoples were nowhere consulted by their rulers and wars were provoked and waged in the interest of dynasties or of little groups of ambitious men who were accustomed to use their fellow men as pawns and tools.

And again:

We are glad, now that we see the facts with no veil of false pretense about them, to fight thus for the ultimate peace of the world, and for the ultimate liberation of its peoples... for the rights of nations, great and small, and the privilege of men everywhere to choose their way of life and of obedience. The world must be made safe for democracy. Its peace must be planted upon the tested foundations of political liberty.

* A lecture delivered at the University of California on April 6, 1917. Apart from the footnotes, the lecture is practically unchanged.

There can hardly be a better illustration of the conditions against which you are now waging war, than that very complex empire known as Austria-Hungary. One secondary aspect in which the war has already proved useful is that it has been a great teacher of geography and of political science. It would be interesting to find out how many of you, if asked, could tell anything definite about what is known as Austria-Hungary. There are numberless misconceptions abroad, not only such as are due to ignorance, for instance, when you think of "Austria" as a unit, when you speak of the "Austrian nation," or even of an Austrian language, but such as in many cases have been

2

1 In how far the name 'Austria" may be correctly used, is disputed. Ordinarily people in this country mean by "Austria" Croatia, Slavonia, and Dalmatia (although, as a matter of fact, Dalmatia is now to all intents and purposes a part of the other state); the other state is sometimes referred to briefly as Austria, and some statutes warrant the use of this title (one statute speaks of " "Austrian citizenship''; others of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy"). Yet the Austrian part of the Dual Monarchy is so far from being a historical, political, or ethnographic unit, that in Austrian legislation the state itself (i.e., the Austrian part) is, as a general rule, referred to as "the Kingdoms and Countries represented in the Reichsrat." These kingdoms and countries are different political units not belonging to the Crown of St. Stephen, and brought at different times under the Hapsburg yoke. The official gazette in which all statutes (for all kingdoms and countries, not for an individual kingdom or country) must be published is called the "Imperial Law Gazette for the Kingdoms and Countries represented in the Imperial Council" (Reichsgesetzblatt für die im Reichsrate vertretenen Königreiche und Länder). There are seventeen kingdoms and countries represented in the Reichsrat, each with a title of its own, e.g., the kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria with the Grand Duchy of Cracow and the duchies of Oswiecim and Zator, the Kingdom of Bohemia, the "princified" County of Tyrol, the Grand Duchy of Upper Austria, the Grand Duchy of Lower Austria, the Duchy of Styria. The whole is neither a national state, nor a federation, nor can or should it be defined by any one of the words used in the classification of states.

2 This question is best illustrated by section 2 of the statute of June 10, 1869, on the publication of statutes and ordinances through the Imperial Law Gazette: "The Imperial Law Gazette is published... in all languages ordinarily used (landesüblich) in the kingdoms and countries represented in the Reichsrat. The German edition . . . contains the authentic text. . . . The editions in the other languages ordinarily used, contain the official translations of the authentic text." The other seven languages are: Bohemian, Polish, Ruthenian (Little Russian, "Ukrainian"'), Slovene, Serbo-Croatian, Rumanian, and Italian.