ries, and even wars.

Intensified by racial feelings, national aspirations, and dynastic ambitions, they have unquestionably contributed in large measure to international conflicts.

Under these conditions we might expect to find, at least among democratic peoples, strong political sentiment in favor of a plan which, while just, would prevent commercial and financial rivalry from dragging nations into war. But the advocacy of such a plan has not in the past gone much beyond the stage of academic discussion. Problems of commercial policy have almost universally been considered wholly from the standpoint of individual nations seeking their own advancement. The commercial nations have either sought their selfish, narrow ends under the inspiration of Machiavellian principles by any method that would achieve their purposes, or they have assumed the complacent position that they are always right and that whatever benefits them will benefit all others. The deliberate use of trade and finance by some nations to further selfish ends and the studied indifference to them of others were large factors in making inevitable the most terrible war in history.

Not infrequently when the world aspect of commercial policy is dwelt upon the conclusion is hastily reached that nationalism is an evil that must be done away with. Patriotism is labelled chauvinism and is held up as one of the sinister influences of the world. National aims, aspirations, and ideals are described as relics of primitive life. Such a position fails to take account either of the facts or of human needs. The exclusive nationalist who sneers at international action is no more objectionable than the advocate of a world state who, with equal lack of insight, forgets the importance and

value of the nation as a unit of society.

As a matter of fact, both national and world action are necessary in the constructive task which is before us. We should avoid discriminatingly the evil tendencies in both, recognizing that each has its proper sphere. We shall not progress far toward the goal of justice and right until we lay down as one of the first principles that nationalism and internationalism are not antagonistic, but complementary, ideals. There are commercial problems that now and always will belong to the nation and that can be solved only by it. But there comes a time in the consideration of the problems of trade and finance when the national organization is inadequate for their solution and some degree of international action becomes imperative.

Military victory should sober rather than elate us. The crushing of Germany has not removed all of our enemies. The breaking up of organized Prussianism in Central Europe is a memorable stage in the progress of democratic ideals and a step toward the universal acceptance of the principles of responsible government, but in the days of reconstruction the spirit of the Prussian in many a tempting guise will lurk in the domestic and international programmes that will be brought forward. Reactionaries, having dwelt too long amid the musty traditions of the past, will appear with their plausible warnings against innovation. They will oppose any departure from the old chaotic order of things because its preservation is profitable to them and to their class. Such men, regardless of where they live, are Prussians at heart. If their counsels prevail in the final settlement, the Allies will be accomplices to the very thing that we denounced in Germany.

Bolshevism is a symptom of an unjust social condition and a warning that fundamental reforms are necessary. Russia is being visited today with the sins of generations that have exploited and trod upon the masses. Bolshevism, with its misdirected enthusiasm and programme of destruction, may, like war, serve to remove an obstruction, but it offers no constructive principles for guidance in the future. We shall not get rid of it, however, by denouncing it. Its antidote is a constructive programme that will carry our much lauded principles of democracy down into and through the very structure of our commercial and industrial life.

Those optimistic fatalists who tell us that people are so appalled by the losses of the war that they will never again draw the sword are not the least dangerous of the enemies of a sound policy of reconstruction. They talk confidently of the world's being on the threshold of a new era when wars will be no more. They say also that people have learned to organize and pool their resources for war and that they will naturally continue their cooperation during peace. But too often definite plans for achieving this complex result are lacking. There is little comprehension of the difficulties which lie ahead. or of the selfish and unscrupulous policies which must be combatted lest they be adopted by nations, dynasties, and commercial interests. We may be very certain that a permanent and just peace will not come merely because the war has been full of horrors and tragedies. The cry "never again" is not a new one. Nothing exists in the present situation that will insure the world, as a matter of course, against following the old circle of economic rivalries, balancing alliances, military preparations, and war.

The way to success in the days of reconstruction lies

neither with the paralyzing pessimist or selfish reactionary who feels that we must always follow the errors of the past, nor with the Bolshevist, nor with the planless optimist who believes that the new order of things will just happen. It lies with those who, giving full weight to the background of the war and holding firmly to the ideals of democracy, plan with insight and work out to its minutest detail the constructive programme of a permanent peace.

In the work of rebuilding the world the American nation has a unique and important part. We entered the war in the spirit neither of conquest nor even of revenge. We saw the world menaced by a power which, if successful, would destroy all that this country has stood for. We were willing to give without stint in order that national and international justice might prevail and that there might be established in the world the democratic principle in political and commercial affairs. We felt a common interest with the peoples of Italy, France, Belgium, Great Britain, and the self-governing British dominions in their long and bitter struggle against the military powers of Central Europe. We felt that they were fighting our battles. However varied the individual aims of the nations engaged in the great struggle, undoubted evidence that our past and future were bound up with theirs led us inevitably to cast our lot with them. Our armed forces on the sea and at Château Thierry, St. Mihiel, and along the Meuse translated American vigor and enthusiasm into war. They went into the war without a selfish motive. They faced a hard task in the spirit of sacrifice. They were willing, if need be, to lay down their lives, as so many of the brave Allied troops had done, in order that the world.

might be redeemed. Now that their work is so nobly accomplished, we should not fail to carry on in the same spirit of devotion the work of healing the wounds of the nations. Vindictiveness, punishment, and national selfishness, if allowed to govern in the readjustments, will return in future generations to plague the world. The reactionary statesmanship of Metternich was triumphant at the Congress of Vienna, but only temporarily, for it forced the peoples of Europe into revolution. Germany in 1871 took from France the provinces of Alsace and Lorraine and thereby made reconciliation impossible. Our own Civil War was followed by an illiberal and irrational reconstruction which fills some of the darkest pages of American history. History has many other warnings to those on whom the direction of national and international policies rest. The world will have no gains to offset the losses of the war if the Allies content themselves with destroying Germany's militarism and national power and at the same time merely build up their own. That procedure will change the pawns in the game, but not the game. Unless the spirit of sacrifice guides the councils of the Allies in the constructive work before them, we may expect the world to drift back into the evils of international anarchy. Unless the world view of affairs in some degree softens the exclusive national views of some of the leaders of the nations, the men who have laid down their lives in the cause of better things will have died in vain.

The task before national legislatures and diplomats of defining our ideals and converting them into laws and treaties is a task quite as essential as and infinitely more difficult than the raising of armies and the building of navies. The days immediately before us are critical.