This REVIEW holds that the principal hope for humanity is in the progress in knowledge, intelligence and character of the less capable portion of mankind; that only through such progress can real advance be made in their fortunes; and that at present the main obstacle to such progress is in the fallacies and false hopes preached by demagogues to attract the crowd. The chief recent schemes of our demagogues, the make-everybody-rich juggles with the currency, and the movement to consign to the ignorant masses the functions of the learned judiciary are exploded, but other demagogues and other schemes will arise. The intelligence and conscience of the country need rallying points to oppose them. It is hoped to make this REVIEW one among such rallying points. There are those who have the temerity to say that this age is scattering its brains over daily papers and other rapid-fire periodicals until it has very little concentrated brain power left. If they speak truth, the revival of the Quarterly is greatly needed. From Lord Bryce: "The whole REVIEW is, so to speak, almost too good for a serial. There is matter in it for the making of books of permanent value. What strikes me most in it all through is that it is fresh, not hackneyed or conventional, and that it is full of thinking, written not because something has to be said, but because the writers have something to say." From Prof. A. S. Johnson, Cornell: "If anybody had told me, a year ago, that we should have, in this country, a magazine as good as this, I'd have spurned him as a false prophet." From Prof. William Lyon Phelps, Yale: "I am enjoying THE UNPOPULAR REVIEW immensely, and greatly admire it; it is a proof that wit, originality, and charm may all be successfully employed on the side of the angels." From Professor Paul Shorey, Chicago: "I read with interest a larger proportion of THE UNPOPULAR REVIEW, I think, than of any other periodical." From Mr. William Morton Payne, The Dial: "No reading gives me more delight in this time of intellectual disintegration." From Mr. Frank Foxcroft, The Living Age: "The only 'out' about it is that it sometimes creates discord between the two heads of the family over the question which shall have the first reading of it." From The Nation: "Solid substance and brilliant execution. . . To such a quarterly the Nation extends the right hand of fellowship.” From American Review of Reviews: "An instant and deserved success." From London Times: "THE UNPOPULAR REVIEW, . . . is welcomed here." Owing to the Post-office spending many millions annually in carrying periodicals below cost, it has become so loaded with them as to be obliged to send them as freight. Therefore subscribers should not complain to the publishers of non-receipt of matter under from one to two weeks, according to distance. This subject is fully treated in No. 2 of THE UNPOPULAR REVIEW, and in the Casserole of No. 3. 75 cents a number, $2.50 a year. Bound volumes $2. each, two a year. (Canadian $2.65, Foreign $2.75.) For the present, subscribers remitting direct to the publishers can have any back number or numbers additional to those subscribed for, for an additional 50 cents each (plus 4 cents a number for postage to Canada, 7 cents to Foreign countries), provided the whole amount is paid direct to the publishers at the time of the subscription. Address THE UNPOPULAR REVIEW HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY 35 WEST 32d STREET, NEW YORK CITY LONDON: WILLIAMS AND NORGATE Contents VOLUME VII THE TWO OPPOSING RAILROAD VALUATIONS Morrell W. Gaines ON THE DIFFiculty of Being Alone Correspondence: A Friend Who Helps. Esthetic Culture. The Sense of Time and Rhythm A Possible Subvention to Literature A Counsel EN CASSEROLE: "Why Should the Spirit of Mortal be Proud?" Should Not be Quite so Proud - Gift-Books and Book-Gifts - Psychical Research at Harvard Opportunity - Endicott and I Burn Drift- wood - The New Passion for the Drama One Way of Being Fooled- No. 13 JANUARY-MARCH, 1917 VOL. VII SOME SECOND THOUGHTS OF A SOBERED PEOPLE TH HE election is over, and there arises the usual babel of explanations. Yet who certainly knows which particular issues caused the result? The answer cannot be found in any relation between the platforms and the votes. The platforms were hardly mentioned, and in some respects were openly flouted. In our politics the candidates have become the platforms to such an extent that one function of the convention system has been outgrown, and survives only as a basis of false pretenses to the electorate. The election of President Wilson to succeed himself is the one sure lesson of the election, whatever that lesson may teach. Everywhere he was stronger than his party, and never did a President reach the White House with freer hands than he in his second term. Beyond this all else is chaos. The woman suffragists threatened both parties with four million votes, but where were they shown in operation? Illinois is the only State which reports woman votes separately. Illinois gave Hughes his greatest plurality, next to Pennsylvania, but Wilson carried ten of the eleven transmississippi woman suffrage states. The demonstration of sex solidarity is obscure, but so far as it is discoverable it went against the candidate of the women. There are more union votes in and near New York than anywhere else, perhaps than everywhere else. But it was in the Eastern industrial states that the labor candidate was weakest. There is hardly a chemical trace of the influence of the German vote on he final result, however it may be traced in a few locali I ties. These are small inconsistencies compared with the grand fact that the strongest vote the Democrats ever cast does not give them the House of Representatives. It is still doubtful that the Republicans have a reliable majority over the Democrats, but it seems sure that the balance of power lies with the scattering vote. A curious sidelight upon the working of our institutions is shown by the fact, as it seems at the time of writing, that Hughes gets the votes of Minnesota by a total of about 300 voters, or an average of 25 for each electoral vote, although the whole State averaged about 30,000 for each electoral vote. It is useless to attempt to reconcile the votes of Wisconsin for Hughes and Lafollette, the Reactionary and the Progressive. Wilson carried California by about 3,000, the exact figures still being subject to correction. Johnson carried California by nearly 300,000. The entire result would have been altered for all the United States if there had been loyal coöperation between Johnson and Hughes, and between the Republicans and the Progressives. Most of the foregoing contrasts are of a post-mortem nature. Most interest for forward looking observers lies in the new alignment between the comparatively backward South and the somewhat premature West. There's little hope for the conservative East if those two sections are to unite against it. False starts in that direction were made in the Granger movements of the 70's and 80's, and the silver movement. The country united for the rejection of those heresies. There now arises the question how the country will comport itself toward the alignment of those sections upon the Progressive movement. Will the leaven of the East prevail as before? Or will the Wilson Republicans finally conquer the Hughes Democrats? It would seem that a clue to the answer may be found in the results locally of the Progressive policies which have been adopted in the States and the cities, and which now are proposed for the country by the promoters of Progressive reforms. |