In this number, we have put the war articles last, giving them the place of second emphasis, and at the cost of cutting into the Casserole, because at the time the table of contents was made up, we considered the topic of our first article, Free Speech, of more consequence than any War possible among civilized nations. But we did not then suppose that one of the nations we considered civilized was capable of stamping on treaties, violating neutralities, dropping unnotified bombs on cities, and, if late reports are true, guiding the Turk in another assault on civilization.
Resistance to such infamies we regard as of more pressing importance than even the main object to which our leading articles have been heretofore devoted, namely, the elevation of the humbler man. We even regard that as, in the long run, the most effective agency toward Peace. But sometimes in emergencies, the long run has to be disregarded. Thus, not the least of the bad effects of the war is its diversion of effort from the social and political amelioration to which, for a generation, the world has given a degree of interest without precedent in all previous history. From this cause, where we would have our peculiar function the saving one of a brake, even our own humble efforts must be considerably diverted by an emergency so overwhelming; and we know that our readers, despite their inclination for the still air of delightful studies, can not fail to respond to so general and poignant an interest.
Buzzing around this subject, one of our most valued contributors writes: “Please don’t print apeace article.There are only two possible kinds of peace in this world, while man is man: the peace of exhaustion and thepax romana.”
How prophecy does rage on this subject—on both sides!
Which peace with each other did the chief European nations enjoy from 1871 to 1914, and the English speaking nations from 1814 to 1914? And we seem abundantly justified in hoping that it may be permanent.
“While man is man.” Which man—Homer’s,—butchering unarmed foes whom he finds in bathing; or today’s,—arbitrating most of his quarrels, and busying himself over schemes for the automatic settlement of the rest? Any one who fails to recognize the change in man, may well fail, especially at a time like this, to recognize the increasing peace and aids to peace among the nations. Between civilized peoples, war comes now mainly because of one decaying institution—autocratic government, and of one vanishing human peculiarity—the madness of the crowd—the readiness of men to do in mass what they scorn to do as individuals—to get excited over foolish causes, or no cause at all, and to find glory in doing at wholesale, work which, at retail, they shrink from as robbery and murder.
A certain college professor was asked by a lawyer for technical information needed in a property case. The professor spent half a day in disentangling the material and putting it into practicable shape. With it he presented a bill for $25.00.
Was this sensible or shocking?—business or betrayal? The lawyer, who seems in no way to have begrudged the money, told the tale as an instance of vulgar commercialism worming its ugly way into the fair ethics of the academic profession. And with him doubtless most college professors themselves would agree, even in the face of hisconfession that for any scraps of legal information formally sought by the professor a lawyer would charge a fee.
To a layman the case for the defence seems simple. Here is no shining opportunity for the idealism of the scientist who, preferring to give to humanity the fruit of his works, refuses to patent discoveries made in the university laboratory. Nor is there in such an instance any question of aid to a disinterested “seeker after truth.” A professor of Greek will gravely spend several hours in answering a village clergyman’s question about the New Testament “baptism.” The historian himself will take the free hours of several days to make out reading lists for a woman’s club. But why should one man who is making his living give time and work freely to another man who is going to use them to increase his earnings? The professor’s salary, unadorned by inherited capital or wife’s dower or extra work, is not a living wage. He has to endure the annual appeal to humanitarian alumni to consider his needs, the reiterated disclosures of his poor economies and poorer expenditures. Why should he not take from a lawyer’s pocket, rather than from a “donor’s,” in return for desirable goods, money which will pay part of his expenses to the next meeting of that learned society before which he is to read an unmarketable paper?
Why, indeed? we seem to hear the college professor echo. There is no reason save that he likes learning without courtesy, as little as religion without charity—and courtesy, like charity, makes no exceptions.
While Germany is fighting in disregard of International Law, and the allies fighting in its defence, it is a good time to impress a very powerful consideration for simplifying English spelling.
Probably the strongest reason why International Law has developed so much more slowly than law in the separate nations, has been the greater difficulty of the nationsunderstanding each other, and this is rapidly disappearing under increased facilities of intercommunication. Apparently there is no agency in sight which would promote this as much as an international language. Many considerations nominate English for the place: not only do more people speak it already than speak any other civilized language; but quite probably more people not born to it, speak it. Of all civilized languages, it is by far the simplest in its inflections and the richest in its vocabulary, and contains most words already contained in other languages. As a possible world-language, it far surpasses them all, except in the difficult inconsistencies of its spelling; and many devoted men, including virtually all the leading authorities, are now working hard to remedy these, perhaps their strongest motive being, as it is that of their most generous supporter, the interests of peace.
And now for a few words regarding some details of the simplification, which wil contain a few examples of mildly impruuvd forms, insted of the most outrageusly inconsistent of the uzual wons. Those we uze wil be inconsistent enuf in all consience.
Of experienses discuraging to those who favor the reform, the worst we hav encounterd has been in the letrs from members of the Simplified Spelling Board which hav bin evoked by our articls. Probably not one in five of those letrs has containd any new forms whatever, or at least enuf to be notist. If the anointed aposls of the reform don’t bac it up any betr than that, those who oppose it hav occasion to rejoise. On the other hand, the letrs from som of the faithful who really wer faithful, wer deliberately impruuvd until they wer very funny, tho very probably our grandchildren woud not find anything funny in them.
If the reform ever coms, it now seems most likely to com thru peepl getting so familiar with the milder impruuvd forms in correspondence, advertisments, and prospectuses,that they wil be reddy to giv their children a consistent scooling.
In such ways, and thru argument and right reson, probably there may gro up, in time, approval enuf to start the better forms in som scools, and when that is don, the spred and establishment of such forms seems inevitabl.
But there wil be som difficultys that ar obvius even now. Inevitably at this stage, experts ar qarreling among themselvs, tho qarreling is hardly the term: for the differenses ar in the best of temper. It is a question whether enuf new forms ar yet agreed upon, even by those who attemt thurro and consistent reform, to make possibl a scool-bouk that woud succeed. The foregoing sentence givs som illustrations. The word we spel asthurrois spelt by the S. S. B. asthoro, and by the S. S. S. asthuro. The word we spelwoudis spelt by the S. S. S. aswood, and the S. S. B. leavs it alone, after som tentativ votes that resulted inwud.Woodis excellent if identity with present practis wer desirabl, but ifwoodis right (riit?), how aboutfoodanddoor, and how, in any case, about usingoto express ausound? The S. S. S. setls part of the difficulty by keepingwoodas now, and makingfood=fuud, anddoor=doer. The presentdoer(won who duz) it makesduer. Withfuudandduerwe agree; but withdoerfordoorwe don’t: we thinkdooras it is, is as good as possibl, and think thatcoast,ghost,globe,lore, etc., would be vastly impruuvd if they wer made uniform and to agree with door, thus:coost,goost,gloob,loor.
It is a question wether reform had betr wait for a betr agrement of experts, or wether there is now enuf agrement to justify anybody’s going ahed with his share of it, and such personal extras as his consience reqires (reqiirs?) him to ad; and letting everybody’s personal extras fight (fiit?) it out to a survival of the fittest.
FOOTNOTES:[1]See H. de B. Gibbins,Industry in England, p. 382.[2]See W. H. Dawson, The Evolution of Modern Germany, chapter XIII. On the general subject of agricultural decentralization see Prof. V. G. Simkhovitch,Marxism versus Socialism.[3]Thirteenth Census,Agriculture, chapter I.[4]Thirteenth Census,Manufacturing. Handicrafts and establishments producing less than $500 worth of goods per year are not considered.[5]Apparently there was a Greek colony in the city.—The notes are by the Editor.[6]The O in Megaphon is long, representing the Greek omega. Quite possibly the author’s use of the word is satirical.[7]About three cents.[8]The language of this first section bears a striking resemblance to the beautiful translation, by Alexander Kerr, of a work called “The Republic of Plato.”[9]The ancient Greek manner of knocking for admission seems to have survived.[10]The theological terminology of antiquity clings to the narrator’s language.[11]Now called “rough-and-tumble”, or “catch-as-catch-can”.[12]Meaning the hard glove.[13]Socrates is in striking agreement with Fred Newton Scott, The Undefended Gate,English Journal, January, 1914, p. 5.[14]Socrates altered several terms as he read, probably for the sake of humor. An examination of the original shows “kimono” for “chiton.”[15]He evidently foresees the comic Sunday supplement.[16]This means lager beer, which has never appealed to the Hellenes, either now or in antiquity. The celebrated potologist Symposiastes records his conviction (Opera XL, 3, 2) that barbarian, barley (from which beer is made), bar (where it is sold), barrel, baron, and baroque are all etymologically related.[17]Can this mean tobacco?[18]The elephant.[19]He means pessimism, which is known to have existed before the term came into use.[20]The only important exception to this statement is the University of Virginia. The feeling of college faculties evoked by its change from democratic to monarchical organization is probably expressed by a contemporaneous editorial. “The thirteenth of June is to be an important date in the history of the American college. On that day the democratic system of government by the entire body of professors, which has marked out the University of Virginia from almost all other institutions of learning in the country, is to come to an end. This system, in spite of all that can properly be said on the other side, has good features which it is a pity to see extinguished.”—The Nation, June 11, 1903.It is evidently the college president who speaks in an editorial some weeks later in the same publication. “We believe that the president should be something of an autocrat in his proper domain and that faculty government would be bad government.”—The Nation, Sept. 24, 1903.[21]J. McKeen Cattell,University Control, Science Press, 1913.[22]The Schoolmaster’s Year Book, 1904, p. 4.[23]Charles W. Eliot, “The University President in the American Commonwealth,”Educational Review, December, 1911.
[1]See H. de B. Gibbins,Industry in England, p. 382.
[1]See H. de B. Gibbins,Industry in England, p. 382.
[2]See W. H. Dawson, The Evolution of Modern Germany, chapter XIII. On the general subject of agricultural decentralization see Prof. V. G. Simkhovitch,Marxism versus Socialism.
[2]See W. H. Dawson, The Evolution of Modern Germany, chapter XIII. On the general subject of agricultural decentralization see Prof. V. G. Simkhovitch,Marxism versus Socialism.
[3]Thirteenth Census,Agriculture, chapter I.
[3]Thirteenth Census,Agriculture, chapter I.
[4]Thirteenth Census,Manufacturing. Handicrafts and establishments producing less than $500 worth of goods per year are not considered.
[4]Thirteenth Census,Manufacturing. Handicrafts and establishments producing less than $500 worth of goods per year are not considered.
[5]Apparently there was a Greek colony in the city.—The notes are by the Editor.
[5]Apparently there was a Greek colony in the city.—The notes are by the Editor.
[6]The O in Megaphon is long, representing the Greek omega. Quite possibly the author’s use of the word is satirical.
[6]The O in Megaphon is long, representing the Greek omega. Quite possibly the author’s use of the word is satirical.
[7]About three cents.
[7]About three cents.
[8]The language of this first section bears a striking resemblance to the beautiful translation, by Alexander Kerr, of a work called “The Republic of Plato.”
[8]The language of this first section bears a striking resemblance to the beautiful translation, by Alexander Kerr, of a work called “The Republic of Plato.”
[9]The ancient Greek manner of knocking for admission seems to have survived.
[9]The ancient Greek manner of knocking for admission seems to have survived.
[10]The theological terminology of antiquity clings to the narrator’s language.
[10]The theological terminology of antiquity clings to the narrator’s language.
[11]Now called “rough-and-tumble”, or “catch-as-catch-can”.
[11]Now called “rough-and-tumble”, or “catch-as-catch-can”.
[12]Meaning the hard glove.
[12]Meaning the hard glove.
[13]Socrates is in striking agreement with Fred Newton Scott, The Undefended Gate,English Journal, January, 1914, p. 5.
[13]Socrates is in striking agreement with Fred Newton Scott, The Undefended Gate,English Journal, January, 1914, p. 5.
[14]Socrates altered several terms as he read, probably for the sake of humor. An examination of the original shows “kimono” for “chiton.”
[14]Socrates altered several terms as he read, probably for the sake of humor. An examination of the original shows “kimono” for “chiton.”
[15]He evidently foresees the comic Sunday supplement.
[15]He evidently foresees the comic Sunday supplement.
[16]This means lager beer, which has never appealed to the Hellenes, either now or in antiquity. The celebrated potologist Symposiastes records his conviction (Opera XL, 3, 2) that barbarian, barley (from which beer is made), bar (where it is sold), barrel, baron, and baroque are all etymologically related.
[16]This means lager beer, which has never appealed to the Hellenes, either now or in antiquity. The celebrated potologist Symposiastes records his conviction (Opera XL, 3, 2) that barbarian, barley (from which beer is made), bar (where it is sold), barrel, baron, and baroque are all etymologically related.
[17]Can this mean tobacco?
[17]Can this mean tobacco?
[18]The elephant.
[18]The elephant.
[19]He means pessimism, which is known to have existed before the term came into use.
[19]He means pessimism, which is known to have existed before the term came into use.
[20]The only important exception to this statement is the University of Virginia. The feeling of college faculties evoked by its change from democratic to monarchical organization is probably expressed by a contemporaneous editorial. “The thirteenth of June is to be an important date in the history of the American college. On that day the democratic system of government by the entire body of professors, which has marked out the University of Virginia from almost all other institutions of learning in the country, is to come to an end. This system, in spite of all that can properly be said on the other side, has good features which it is a pity to see extinguished.”—The Nation, June 11, 1903.It is evidently the college president who speaks in an editorial some weeks later in the same publication. “We believe that the president should be something of an autocrat in his proper domain and that faculty government would be bad government.”—The Nation, Sept. 24, 1903.
[20]The only important exception to this statement is the University of Virginia. The feeling of college faculties evoked by its change from democratic to monarchical organization is probably expressed by a contemporaneous editorial. “The thirteenth of June is to be an important date in the history of the American college. On that day the democratic system of government by the entire body of professors, which has marked out the University of Virginia from almost all other institutions of learning in the country, is to come to an end. This system, in spite of all that can properly be said on the other side, has good features which it is a pity to see extinguished.”—The Nation, June 11, 1903.
It is evidently the college president who speaks in an editorial some weeks later in the same publication. “We believe that the president should be something of an autocrat in his proper domain and that faculty government would be bad government.”—The Nation, Sept. 24, 1903.
[21]J. McKeen Cattell,University Control, Science Press, 1913.
[21]J. McKeen Cattell,University Control, Science Press, 1913.
[22]The Schoolmaster’s Year Book, 1904, p. 4.
[22]The Schoolmaster’s Year Book, 1904, p. 4.
[23]Charles W. Eliot, “The University President in the American Commonwealth,”Educational Review, December, 1911.
[23]Charles W. Eliot, “The University President in the American Commonwealth,”Educational Review, December, 1911.