In many of our international attitudes, we doubtless seem to Europeans to be preoccupied with local objects. Possibly our view of international affairs is rather peculiar to ourselves. Since I am ignorant of the motives and intentions of the Argentine government, I speak only in a private capacity; but when Mr. Pueyrredon declares: 'I firmly believe that I serve the interests of France in continung the policy adopted at Geneva,' he refutes any suggestion of lukewarmness or aloofness. That is how the matter stands in case of one particular government.

Coming now to the attitude of Latin America as a whole, we have a welldocumented volume which has just been published by a former cabinet minister of Mexico, Mr. Isidro Fabela, under the title, Los Estados Unidos contra la Libertad - 'The United States vs. Liberty.' Its author asks, after reviewing the situation in Cuba, the Philippines, Panama, Nicaragua, and Santo Domingo, if it is not possible to ally the interests of Europe, Japan, and Latin America.

That is a question of manner, method, and degree.

For twenty years, I have been preaching against the exaggerated imperialism of the United States. But I am far from being an enemy of the Great Republic. Still less do I believe that we shall gain anything by a conflict with that country. We cannot compel respect for our rights and assure ourselves complete freedom of development as autonomous governments without some understanding and accord among ourselves, without a certain balancing of our mutual interests based upon the firmness and cohesion of our young democracies. It is evident that we cannot achieve these things without the active sympathy of governments outside of America; and in seeking that sympathy, we find the Monroe Doctrine as

interpreted to-day our principal obstacle. That is the problem to which the transatlantic countries who wish to remain friendly with the United States, and at the same time to preserve their identity, are now more or less avowedly addressing themselves.

We all share responsibility for existing conditions in America. The LatinAmerican governments are primarily responsible because of their indifference and lack of discipline. Spain is not free from reproach because one hundred years ago she insisted on making a colonial problem of what was essentially an international problem. Europe, as a whole, shares in this responsibility, because it has insisted on dealing with us exclusively from a narrow European point of view. This is particularly true of France, which at one time ruled Louisiana and Santo Domingo, and which, by an agreement with England, might have determined the destiny of Cuba. We know the latter fact from the statement made by Dumas, the French minister, in reply to Canning's question. But France, though deeply loved by Latin America, persisted in following a butterfly policy in the New World, lighting here and there, but staying nowhere; while its rivals adopted bull-dog tactics and, when they seized a thing, never let go.

Far be it from me to suggest that Europe embark upon new adventures in the Western Hemisphere. Of course that is now impossible. But looking at the question from a higher plane, the interest of Latin America in closer commercial ties with Europe is greater than ever. We invite Europe to take a larger share in the development of our wealth, and to show more interest in sympathy with our ideals and our destinies.

Latin America, it should be understood, resists imperialism solely in defense of its own liberty. But this resistance favors the increase of European

influence there, and Europe may well take to heart the situation of the republics across the sea, and seek some diplomatic formula which will restore its own liberty of action there, by identifying a free hand for itself with the welfare of these young republics. Who knows but that our apparently contradictory policies of late are not designed in the end to bring us in some round-about way closer to France and Europe? It is absurd to say dogmatically that continents cannot identify themselves with other continents. Europe has constantly intervened in the affairs of Asia and of Africa. In their days of power, the Mohammedans made themselves felt in Europe. The Roman Empire crossed the Mediterranean and the Caucasus. Spain ruled America for centuries. History does not support the theory that political geography depends on physical geography. The United States itself has refuted that, by making its presence felt in the affairs of the Orient and of Europe. A doctrine which is not based on right and justice is always subject to revision.

Although enriched considerably by the war, Latin America did not derive the advantage it might have from its favored situation because of outside influences. Its attitude is still one of prudent waiting. Many believe that with the coming of peace and the restoration of international life to its normal channels, there will be a rearrangement of the forces which were brought together by a single crisis; and that certain of the great powers may find that commerce and intercourse with us will bring them greater material benefit than a new conflict among themselves. To judge by recent symptoms, some powers begin to find the restraints of the Monroe Doctrine rather burdensome. And since Europe and Asia and Asia as represented by Japan - apparently wishes this barrier to become somewhat

more flexible, new possibilities present themselves that need not disturb the harmony of nations but, on the contrary, strengthen world concord by establishing a greater equality of rights among nations. If the participation of the United States has become unavoidable or indispensable in the affairs of Europe, it is logical that European influence may become equally indispensable in the affairs of America.

We should not forget that, on account of its special resources, Latin America will play a very important rôle in the economic mobilization of the world to repair the losses of the war. These young republics with their abounding natural wealth ask nothing more than an opportunity to utilize it most effectively. France, England, and certain other powers have an opportunity to do a good turn simultaneously for us and for themselves without trespassing upon the rights acquired by others or creating international friction. France in particular, next to Spain, enjoys the greatest prestige in our quarter of the world. To it preeminently falls the task of reasserting European influence on our side of the Atlantic. For Latin America will not remain Latin in the broader sense of the word, unless the spiritual currents which make it what it is are fostered and protected by material as well as intellectual intercourse.

I do not say that the republics across the sea can do much to maintain the equilibrium of the world; but a territory of more than 20,000,000 square kilometers, inhabited by 80,000,000 people, living in prosperity, cultivating the products of every zone, represents an asset of incomputable richness, which may be a real support for any larger scheme of international life.

Europe will be working for itself and for us in keeping Latin America open to all the four winds of life and civilization.

In many of our international attitudes, we doubtless seem to Europeans to be preoccupied with local objects. Possibly our view of international affairs is rather peculiar to ourselves. Since I am ignorant of the motives and intentions of the Argentine government, I speak only in a private capacity; but when Mr. Pueyrredon declares: 'I firmly believe that I serve the interests of France in continung the policy adopted at Geneva,' he refutes any suggestion of lukewarmness or aloofness. That is how the matter stands in case of one particular government.

Coming now to the attitude of Latin America as a whole, we have a welldocumented volume which has just been published by a former cabinet minister of Mexico, Mr. Isidro Fabela, under the title, Los Estados Unidos contra la Libertad - "The United States vs. Liberty.' Its author asks, after reviewing the situation in Cuba, the Philippines, Panama, Nicaragua, and Santo Domingo, if it is not possible to ally the interests of Europe, Japan, and Latin America.

That is a question of manner, method, and degree.

For twenty years, I have been preaching against the exaggerated imperialism of the United States. But I am far from being an enemy of the Great Republic. Still less do I believe that we shall gain anything by a conflict with that country. We cannot compel respect for our rights and assure ourselves complete freedom of development as autonomous governments without some understanding and accord among ourselves, without a certain balancing of our mutual interests based upon the firmness and cohesion of our young democracies. It is evident that we cannot achieve these things without the active sympathy of governments outside of America; and in seeking that sympathy, we find the Monroe Doctrine as

interpreted to-day our principal obstacle. That is the problem to which the transatlantic countries who wish to remain friendly with the United States, and at the same time to preserve their identity, are now more or less avowedly addressing themselves.

We all share responsibility for existing conditions in America. The LatinAmerican governments are primarily responsible because of their indifference and lack of discipline. Spain is not free from reproach because one hundred years ago she insisted on making a colonial problem of what was essentially an international problem. Europe, as a whole, shares in this responsibility, because it has insisted on dealing with us exclusively from a narrow European point of view. This is particularly true of France, which at one time ruled Louisiana and Santo Domingo, and which, by an agreement with England, might have determined the destiny of Cuba. We know the latter fact from the statement made by Dumas, the French minister, in reply to Canning's question. But France, though deeply loved by Latin America, persisted in following a butterfly policy in the New World, lighting here and there, but staying nowhere; while its rivals adopted bull-dog tactics and, when they seized a thing, never let go.

Far be it from me to suggest that Europe embark upon new adventures in the Western Hemisphere. Of course that is now impossible. But looking at the question from a higher plane, the interest of Latin America in closer commercial ties with Europe is greater than ever. We invite Europe to take a larger share in the development of our wealth, and to show more interest in sympathy with our ideals and our destinies.

Latin America, it should be understood, resists imperialism solely in defense of its own liberty. But this resistance favors the increase of European

influence there, and Europe may well take to heart the situation of the republics across the sea, and seek some diplomatic formula which will restore its own liberty of action there, by identifying a free hand for itself with the welfare of these young republics. Who knows but that our apparently contradictory policies of late are not designed in the end to bring us in some round-about way closer to France and Europe? It is absurd to say dogmatically that continents cannot identify themselves with other continents. Europe has constantly intervened in the affairs of Asia and of Africa. In their days of power, the Mohammedans made themselves felt in Europe. The Roman Empire crossed the Mediterranean and the Caucasus. Spain ruled America for centuries. History does not support the theory that political geography depends on physical geography. The United States itself has refuted that, by making its presence felt in the affairs of the Orient and of Europe. A doctrine which is not based on right and justice is always subject to revision.

Although enriched considerably by the war, Latin America did not derive the advantage it might have from its favored situation because of outside influences. Its attitude is still one of prudent waiting. Many believe that with the coming of peace and the restoration of international life to its normal channels, there will be a rearrangement of the forces which were brought together by a single crisis; and that certain of the great powers may find that commerce and intercourse with us will bring them greater material benefit than a new conflict among themselves. To judge by recent symptoms, some powers begin to find the restraints of the Monroe Doctrine rather burdensome. And since Europe and Asia as represented by Japan - apparently wishes this barrier to become somewhat

more flexible, new possibilities present themselves that need not disturb the harmony of nations but, on the contrary, strengthen world concord by establishing a greater equality of rights among nations. If the participation of the United States has become unavoidable or indispensable in the affairs of Europe, it is logical that European influence may become equally indispensable in the affairs of America.

We should not forget that, on account of its special resources, Latin America will play a very important rôle in the economic mobilization of the world to repair the losses of the war. These young republics with their abounding natural wealth ask nothing more than an opportunity to utilize it most effectively. France, England, and certain other powers have an opportunity to do a good turn simultaneously for us and for themselves for themselves without trespassing upon the rights acquired by others or creating international friction. France in particular, next to Spain, enjoys the greatest prestige in our quarter of the world. To it preeminently falls the task of reasserting European influence on our side of the Atlantic. For Latin America will not remain Latin in the broader sense of the word, unless the spiritual currents which make it what it is are fostered and protected by material as well as intellectual intercourse.

I do not say that the republics across the sea can do much to maintain the equilibrium of the world; but a territory of more than 20,000,000 square kilometers, inhabited by 80,000,000 people, living in prosperity, cultivating the products of every zone, represents an asset of incomputable richness, which may be a real support for any larger scheme of international life.

Europe will be working for itself and for us in keeping Latin America open to all the four winds of life and civilization.

I HAD known him, of course, for some years. We were as friendly as anyone can expect to be with a blackbird, always passed the time of day when we met, and so on. But we never became what you could call really intimate until a week or so ago. Coming upon him then on the croquet-lawn, disengaged and seemingly in an open humor, I went and sat down near him, asking him how he did.

His eye twinkled, and he flicked his tail up briskly. 'Well,' he said, 'pretty well. After life's fitful fever... We have got over the worst of it, I hope. She has settled down now to six. Pretty good, we think. But the weather has been all against her. To-day, I To-day, I assure you, is the first ease, as you may say, which I have had since the Day.' "Fourteenth of February?'

'That's right,' he said. 'We date from that.'

He had, at the moment, the intent, sidelong regard of the turf beneath him which I knew well. Very shortly he was deeply engaged in a momentous life-and-death kind of affair which made conversation impossible; and it was not until he had temporarily bestowed the spoils of victory that I ventured to

resume.

We got talking about Mr. Eliot Howard's book on Bird Territory. He had not heard of it, but was interested

or polite enough to seem so in what I had to say about it.

'Well, of course,' he said. "Territory? Yes, indeed, we have territory.' Here

he cast his eye lightly over the stretch of green grass which I knew for his. 'Haven't you?'

I said that we had, the lucky ones amongst us.

'And I suppose that you arrange your little affairs, matrimonial and so on, upon the scale of your belongings?'

I pointed out a distinction between my nation's practice and what Mr. Howard reported of his. 'With us,' I said, 'the funded man alone has complete freedom of choice. He can claim the girl of his heart, whatever her walk in life. It is the landless man who will choose a woman of property-chiefly because he must. He sighs as a lover; he obeys as a man of sense.'

That set my friend chuckling. ‘Excuse my smiling,' he said. 'Your Mr. Howard will have instructed you better than that, no doubt.'

'He seems to think,' I began, but he stopped me.

'A bird without territory,' he said, 'would not get a ghost of an offer. That is elementary. How should he?'

'Oh, then with you,' I said, 'it is the lady who proposes and disposes as well?'

--