Skip to main content
Add Me To Your Mailing List
HomeIndex A

Become a Member

Join the TRA today and receive the Association's scholarly journal, participate in Association-sponsored travel and tour opportunities and local TRA Chapter activities and events, and receive invitations to all TRA events.

Index A

Browse Index A-Z

A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z


Abbey Theatre

In the Abbey Theatre Lady Gregory and those associated with her . . . have not only made an extraordinary contribution to the sum of Irish literary and artistic achievement, but have done more for the drama than has been accomplished in any other nation of recent years. England, Australia, South Africa, Hungary, and Germany are all now seeking to profit by this unique achievement. The Abbey Theatre is one of the healthiest signs of the revival of the ancient Irish spirit which has been so marked a feature of the world's progress during the present generation; and, like every healthy movement of the kind, it has been thoroughly national and has developed on its own lines, refusing merely to copy what has been outworn. It is especially noteworthy, and is a proof of the general Irish awakening, that this vigorous expression of Irish life, so honorable to the Irish people, should represent the combined work of so many different persons, and not that of only one person, whose activity might be merely sporadic and fortuitous. (Outlook, December 16, 1911.) Mem. Ed. XIV, 402; Nat. Ed. XII, 317.

Abbott, Lyman

Dr. Abbott is one of those men whose work and life give strength to all who believe in this country, and hearten them in the effort to strive after better things. He has known how to combine to a very unusual degree a series of qualities, all of them necessary but by no means all often developed in the same individual. Exactly as in his writings he stands fearlessly for the rights of the laboring man and yet is equally fearless in his denunciation of any kind of mob violence or of attack on property; exactly as he unsparingly assails every corrupt politician and yet avoids the pit of mere slanderous accusation against all men in public life; so in his private character he combines a good-natured evenness of temper with the power of flaming wrath against unrighteousness, insistence upon adherence to a high ideal with ready recognition of the need of practical methods in the achievement of that ideal, and a serene and lofty hopefulness and belief in the future with a keen appreciation of all that is low, base, cruel, evil, and therefore mercilessly to be warred against in the present. (To Hamilton Wright Mabie, December 6, 1905.) Outlook, December 18, 1905, p. 16.


Owing to a variety of causes, the Abolitionists have received an immense amount of hysterical praise, which they do not deserve, and have been credited with deeds done by other men, whom they in reality hampered and opposed rather than aided. After 1840 the professed Abolitionists formed but a small and comparatively unimportant portion of the forces that were working towards the restriction and ultimate destruction of slavery; and much of what they did was positively harmful to the cause for which they were fighting. Those of their number who considered the Constitution as a league with death and hell, and who therefore advocated a dissolution of the Union, acted as rationally as would antipolygamists nowadays if, to show their disapproval of Mormonism, they should advocate that Utah should be allowed to form a separate nation. The only hope of ultimately suppressing slavery lay in the preservation of the Union, and every Abolitionist who argued or signed a petition for its dissolution was doing as much to perpetuate the evil he complained of as if he had been a slave-holder. (1887.) Mem. Ed. VIII, 216; Nat. Ed. VII, 187.

Abolitionists — Character and Influence of

Their courage, and for the most part their sincerity, cannot be too highly spoken of, but their share in abolishing slavery was far less than has commonly been represented; any single non-abolitionist politician, like Lincoln or Seward, did more than all the professional Abolitionists combined really to bring about its destruction. . . . Many of their leaders possessed no good qualities beyond their fearlessness and truth—qualities that were also possessed by the Southern fire-eaters. They belonged to that class of men that is always engaged in some agitation or other; only it happened that in this particular agitation they were right. (1887.) Mem. Ed. VIII, 118; Nat. Ed. VII, 103.


See also Slavery.

Accident Insurance

See Social Insurance; Workmen's Compensation.


See Rewards.


It is true of the Nation, as of the individual, that the greatest doer must also be a great dreamer. Of course, if the dream is not followed by action, then it is a bubble; it has merely served to divert the man from doing something. But great action, action that is really great, can not take place if the man has it not in his brain to think great thoughts, to dream great dreams. (At Clark University, Worcester, Mass., June 21, 1905.) Presidential Addresses and State Papers IV, 392.

____________. I hate a man who never does anything. Why, I'd rather do something and get it wrong, and then apologize, than to do nothing. (In conversation with Joseph De Camp, autumn 1908.) Bradley Gilman, Roosevelt: the Happy Warrior. (Little, Brown, & Co., Boston, 1921), p. 265.

Action and Criticism

The man who really counts in the world is the doer, not the mere critic—the man who actually does the work, even if roughly and imperfectly, not the man who only talks or writes about how it ought to be done. (1891.) Mem. Ed. IX, 420; Nat. Ed. X, 534.

____________. [A man] can accomplish a certain amount by criticism if his criticism is intelligent and honest, but he can of course accomplish infinitely more by action. Harvard Graduates' Magazine, October 1892, p. 4.

____________. Criticism is necessary and useful; it is often indispensable; but it can never take the place of action, or be even a poor substitute for it. . . . It is the doer of deeds who actually counts in the battle for life, and not the man who looks on and says how the fight ought to be fought, without himself sharing the stress and the danger. (Atlantic Monthly, August 1894.) Mem. Ed. XV, 53; Nat. Ed. XIII, 39.
____________. It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, and comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat. (At the Sorbonne, Paris, April 23, 1910.) Mem. Ed. XV, 354; Nat. Ed. XIII, 510.

Action and Rhetoric

Rhetoric is a poor substitute for action, and we have trusted only to rhetoric. If we are really to be a great nation, we must not merely talk big; we must act big. And our actions have been very, very small! (Metropolitan, September 1917.) Mem. Ed. XXI, 21; Nat. Ed. XIX, 18.


See also Boasting; Criticism; Deeds; Oratory; Practicality.

Addams, Jane

See Marriage.


Good legislation does not secure good government, which can come only through a good administration. (At Merchants' Association Dinner, New York City, May 25, 1900.) Mem. Ed. XVI, 506.

____________. Wise legislation is vitally important, but honest administration is even more important. (Before Republican National Convention, Phila., June 21, 1900.) Mem. Ed. XVI, 527; Nat. Ed. XIV, 344.


See also Government; Laws; Legislation.

Adulteration of Foods

See Pure Food Law.

Adventure—Qualifications for

The man should have youth and strength who seeks adventure, in the wide, waste spaces of the earth, in the marshes, and among the vast mountain masses, in the northern forests, amid the steaming jungles of the tropics, or on the deserts of sand or of snow. He must long greatly for the lonely winds that blow across the wilderness, and for sunrise and sunset over the rim of the empty world. His heart must thrill for the saddle and not for the hearthstone. He must be helmsman and chief, the cragsman, the rifleman, the boat steerer. He must be the wielder of axe and of paddle, the rider of fiery horses, the master of the craft that leaps through white water. His eye must be true and quick, his hand steady and strong. His heart must never fail nor his head grow bewildered, whether he face brute and human foes, or the frowning strength of hostile nature, or the awful fear that grips those who are lost in trackless lands. (1916.) Mem. Ed. IV, xxi; Nat. Ed. III, 181.

Adventurer—Delights of the

The grandest scenery of the world is his to look at if he chooses; and he can witness the strange ways of tribes who have survived into an alien age from an immemorial past, tribes whose priests dance in honor of the serpent and worship the spirits of the wolf and the bear. Far and wide, all the continents are open to him as they never were to any of his forefathers; the Nile and the Paraguay are easy of access, and the border-land between savagery and civilization; and the veil of the past has been lifted so that he can dimly see how, in time immeasurably remote, his ancestors—no less remote—led furtive lives among uncouth and terrible beasts, whose kind has perished utterly from the face of the earth. He will take books with him as he journeys; for the keenest enjoyment of the wilderness is reserved for him who enjoys also the garnered wisdom of the present and the past. He will take pleasure in the companionship of the men of the open. . . .

The beauty and charm of the wilderness are his for the asking, for the edges of the wilderness lie close beside the beaten roads of the present travel. He can see the red splendor of desert sunsets, and the unearthly glory of the afterglow on the battlements of desolate mountains. In sapphire gulfs of ocean he can visit islets, above which the wings of myriads of sea-fowl make a kind of shifting cuneiform script in the air. He can ride along the brink of the stupendous cliff-walled canyon, where eagles soar below him, and the cougars make their lairs on the ledges and harry the big-horned sheep. He can journey through the northern forests, the home of the giant moose, the forests of fragrant and murmuring life in summer, the iron-bound and melancholy forests of winter.

The joy of living is his who has the heart to demand it. (1916.) Mem. Ed. IV, xxii; Nat. Ed. III, 182.

Adventure; Adventurer

See also Exploration; Hunter; Hunting; Mountain Climbing; Sports.


"I speak of Africa and golden joys"; the joy of wandering through lonely lands; the joy of hunting the mighty and terrible lords of the wilderness, the cunning, the wary, and the grim.

There are mountain peaks whose snows are dazzling under the equatorial sun; swamps where the slime oozes and bubbles and festers in the steaming heat; lakes like seas; skies that burn above deserts where the iron desolation is shrouded from view by the wavering mockery of the mirage; vast grassy plains where palms and thorn-trees fringe the dwindling streams; mighty rivers rushing out of the heart of the continent through the sadness of endless marshes; forests of gorgeous beauty, where death broods in the dark and silent depths.

There are regions as healthy as the northland; and other regions, radiant with bright-hued flowers, birds, and butterflies, odorous with sweet and heavy scents, but treacherous in their beauty, and sinister to human life. . . .

The dark-skinned races that live in the land vary widely. Some are warlike, cattle-owning nomads; some till the soil and live in thatched huts shaped like bee- hives; some are fisherfolk; some are ape-like, naked savages, who dwell in the woods and prey on creatures not much wilder or lower than themselves. (1910.) Mem. Ed. V, xxv; Nat. Ed. IV, xxiii.

____________. Equatorial Africa is in most places none too healthy a place for the white man, and he must care for himself as he would scorn to do in the lands of pine and birch and frosty weather. Camping in the Rockies or the North woods can with advantage be combined with "roughing it"; and the early pioneers of the West, the explorers, prospectors, and hunters, who always roughed it, were as hardy as bears, and lived to a hale old age, if Indians and accidents permitted. But in tropic Africa a lamentable proportion of the early explorers paid in health or life for the hardships they endured; and throughout most of the country no man can long rough it, in the Western and Northern sense, with impunity. (1910.) Mem. Ed. V, 20; Nat. Ed. IV, 17.

____________. The widely spread rule of a strong European race in lands like Africa gives, as one incident thereof, the chance for nascent cultures, nascent semicivilizations, to develop without fear of being overwhelmed in the surrounding gulfs of savagery; and this aside from the direct stimulus to development conferred by the consciously and unconsciously exercised influence of the white man, wherein there is much of evil, but much more of
ultimate good. In any region of wide-spread savagery, the chances for the growth of each self-produced civilization are necessarily small, because each little centre of effort toward this end is always exposed to destruction from the neighboring masses of pure savagery; and therefore progress is often immensely accelerated by outside invasion and control. In Africa the control and guidance is needed as much in the things of the spirit as in the things of the body. (1910.) Mem. Ed. V, 362-363; Nat. Ed. IV, 312.

____________. As a field sure to yield valuable results to the student of early or primitive man, Africa holds a rank second to no other. Its vast extent; its amazing diversity, and the wide physical and cultural differences among its countless inhabitants, all conspire to make this great continent an inexhaustible source of archaeological and ethnographic interest. The need for scientific research in Africa is in proportion to the complexity and numbers of the problems presented by so great a field. . . . All kinds of problems await the archaeological explorer and investigator in Africa. They range from the existence of a blond element in the Berber stock, and the existence, of a possible similar element among the ancient Libyan invaders of Egypt, to the questions raised by the strange architecture of the cities southwest of the Sahara, such as Timbuktû. They include the ethnic changes due to infiltration, among the agricultural East African and Middle African negroes, of a northern pastoral type with very distinct physical and cultural characteristics. Isolated finds of stone implements in Somaliland, on the Upper Nile, in the Congo basin, and along the Zambesi, suggest still other archaeological questions regarding the early history of man in Africa. The tasks which await the ethnologist are of no less importance. The problems which at the present day are presented by the primitive tribes still existing in Africa are legion, be they those concerning low savages such as the Pigmies of the great central forests, or those concerning the relatively advanced Berbers and Abyssinians. They include the difficult but important problems of ethnic drift and change, of the small linguistic “islands” with which Africa abounds, and of great racial migrations. (Introduction, dated August 10, 1916.) Harvard African Studies I, Varia Africana I. (Peabody Museum, Cambridge, Mass., 1917.)

Africa—Conquest of

There have been very dark spots in the European conquest and control of Africa; but on the whole the African regions which during the past century have seen the greatest cruelty, degradation, and suffering, the greatest diminution of population, are those where native control has been unchecked. The advance has been made in the regions that have been under European control or influence; that have been profoundly influenced by European administrators, and by European and American missionaries. Of course the best that can happen to any people that has not already a high civilization of its own is to assimilate and profit by American or European ideas, the ideas of civilization and Christianity, without submitting to alien control; but such control, in spite of all its defects, is in a very large number of cases the prerequisite condition to the moral and material advance of the peoples who dwell in the darker corners of the earth. Where the control is exercised brutally; where it is made use of merely to exploit the natives, without regard to their physical or moral well-being; it should be unsparingly criticised, and there should be resolute insistence on amendment and reform. But we must not, because of occasional wrong-doing, blind ourselves to the fact that on the whole the white administrator and the Christian missionary have exercised a profound and wholesome influence for good in savage regions. (At celebration of Methodist Episcopal Church, Washington, January 18, 1909.) Mem. Ed. XVIII, 343-344; Nat. Ed. XVI, 260- 261.

Africa-Future of

The twentieth century will see and is now seeing the transformation of Africa into a new world. Within a few years its vast domain has been partitioned among various European nations. These nations are expending enormous sums of money and utilizing their best statesmanship and colonizing abilities in the development of colonial empires of wide extent and extraordinary material possibilities. Steamship-lines encircle the continent. A continental system of railways and of lake and river steamboats will soon extend northward from Cape Town six thousand miles to Cairo, while branch lines will unite the east and west coasts at several points. The latest results of science are being utilized in mining and agriculture, while scholarly experts in different centres of Europe are studying the questions of native languages and religions, as well as the best methods of advancing civilization among the many millions of native peoples. The wealth of the commerce which will be developed cannot be estimated. The white man rules; but there is only one white man on the continent to one hundred others, who are either barbaric black heathen or fanatical Mohammedans.

Self-interest and competition will, I believe, unite in making the governments fair to the people, and the indomitable energy of the ad- venturous settlers and the wealth of the nations behind them will result in exploiting the vast commercial resources of the continents. (At celebration of Methodist Episcopal Church, Washington, January 18, 1909.) Mem. Ed. XVIII, 351-352; Nat. Ed. XVI, 267.

Africa, East

In the highlands of British East Africa it is utterly impossible for a stranger to realize that he is under the equator; the climate is delightful and healthy. It is a white man's country, a country which should be filled with white settlers; and no place could be more attractive for visitors. There is no more danger to health incident to an ordinary trip to East Africa than there is to an ordinary trip to the Riviera. Of course, if one goes on a hunting trip there is always a certain amount of risk, including the risk of fever, just as there would be if a man camped out in some of the Italian marshes. But the ordinary visitor need have no more fear of his health than if he were travelling in Italy, and it is hard to imagine a trip better worth making than the trip from Mombasa to Nairobi and on to the Victoria Nyanza. (1910.) Mem. Ed. V, 123; Nat. Ed. IV, 106-107.

Africa, East—Frontier Conditions In

No new country is a place for weaklings; but the right kind of man, the settler who makes a success in similar parts of our own West, can do well in East Africa; while a man with money can undoubtedly do very well indeed; and incidentally both men will be leading their lives under conditions peculiarly attractive to a certain kind of spirit. It means hard work, of course; but success generally does imply hard work. (1910.) Mem. Ed. V, 32; Nat. Ed. IV, 28.


See also Hunting; Imperialism; Uganda; Wilderness.

African Natives

The porters are strong, patient, good-humored savages, with something childlike about them that makes one really fond of them. Of course, like all savages and most children, they have their limitations, and in dealing with them firmness is even more necessary than kindness; but the man is a poor creature who does not treat them with kindness also, and I am rather sorry for him if he does not grow to feel for them, and to make them in return feel for him, a real and friendly liking. They are subject to gusts of passion, and they are now and then guilty of grave misdeeds and shortcomings; sometimes for no conceivable reason, at least from the white man's standpoint.

But they are generally cheerful, and when cheerful are always amusing; and they work hard, if the white man is able to combine tact and consideration with that insistence on the performance of duty and lack of which they despise as weakness. (1910.) Mem. Ed. V, 81; Nat. Ed. IV, 70.

Agriculture — Broader Problems of

Our attention has been concentrated almost exclusively on getting better farming. In the beginning this was unquestionably the right thing to do. The farmer must first of all grow good crops in order to support himself and his family. But when this has been secured, the effort for better farming should cease to stand alone, and should be accompanied by the effort for better business and better living on the farm. It is at least as important that the farmer should get the largest possible return in money, comfort, and social advantages from the crops he grows, as that he should get the largest possible return in crops from land he farms. Agriculture is not the whole of country life. The great rural interests are human interests, and good crops are of little value to the farmer unless they open the door to a good kind of life on the farm. (Letter of appointment to Country Life Commission, August 1908.) Mem. Ed. XXII, 471; Nat. Ed. XX, 405.

Agriculture — Department of

The Department of Agriculture devotes its whole energy to working for the welfare of farmers and stock growers. In every section of our country it aids them in their constantly increasing search for a better agricultural education. It helps not only them, but all the nation, in seeing that our exports of meats have clean bills of health, and that there is rigid inspection of all meats that enter into interstate commerce. . . .

The Department of Agriculture has been helping our fruit men to establish markets abroad by studying methods of fruit preservation through refrigeration and through methods of handling and packing. . . .

Moreover, the Department has taken the lead in the effort to prevent the deforestation of the country. Where there are forests we seek to preserve them; and on the once treeless plains and the prairies we are doing our best to foster the habit of tree planting among our people. (At Sioux Falls, S. D., April 6, 1903.) Presidential Addresses and State Papers I, 303-305.

Agriculture — Government Aid to

I am glad to say that in many sections of our country there has been an extraordinary venturous settlers and the wealth of the nations behind them will result in exploiting the vast commercial resources of the continents. (At celebration of Methodist Episcopal Church, Washington, January 18, 1909.) Mem. Ed. XVIII, 351-352; Nat. Ed. XVI, 267.

Africa, East

In the highlands of British East Africa it is utterly impossible for a stranger to realize that he is under the equator; the climate is delightful and healthy. It is a white man's country, a country which should be filled with white settlers; and no place could be more attractive for visitors. There is no more danger to health incident to an ordinary trip to East Africa than there is to an ordinary trip to the Riviera. Of course, if one goes on a hunting trip there is always a certain amount of risk, including the risk of fever, just as there would be if a man camped out in some of the Italian marshes. But the ordinary visitor need have no more fear of his health than if he were travelling in Italy, and it is hard to imagine a trip better worth making than the trip from Mombasa to Nairobi and on to the Victoria Nyanza. (1910.) Mem. Ed. V, 123; Nat. Ed. IV, 106-107.

Africa, East—Frontier Conditions in

No new country is a place for weaklings; but the right kind of man, the settler who makes a success in similar parts of our own West, can do well in East Africa; while a man with money can undoubtedly do very well indeed; and incidentally both men will be leading their lives under conditions peculiarly attractive to a certain kind of spirit. It means hard work, of course; but success generally does imply hard work. (1910.) Mem. Ed. V, 32; Nat. Ed. IV, 28.


See also Hunting; Imperialism; Uganda; Wilderness.

African Natives

The porters are strong, patient, good-humored savages, with something childlike about them that makes one really fond of them. Of course, like all savages and most children, they have their limitations, and in dealing with them firmness is even more necessary than kindness; but the man is a poor creature who does not treat them with kindness also, and I am rather sorry for him if he does not grow to feel for them, and to make them in return feel for him, a real and friendly liking. They are subject to gusts of passion, and they are now and then guilty of grave misdeeds and shortcomings; sometimes for no conceivable reason, at least from the white man's standpoint.

But they are generally cheerful, and when cheerful are always amusing; and they work hard, if the white man is able to combine tact and consideration with that insistence on the performance of duty and lack of which they despise as weakness. (1910.) Mem. Ed. V, 81; Nat. Ed. IV, 70.

Agriculture — Broader Problems of

Our attention has been concentrated almost exclusively on getting better farming. In the beginning this was unquestionably the right thing to do. The farmer must first of all grow good crops in order to support himself and his family. But when this has been secured, the effort for better farming should cease to stand alone, and should be accompanied by the effort for better business and better living on the farm. It is at least as important that the farmer should get the largest possible return in money, comfort, and social advantages from the crops he grows, as that he should get the largest possible return in crops from land he farms. Agriculture is not the whole of country life. The great rural interests are human interests, and good crops are of little value to the farmer unless they open the door to a good kind of life on the farm. (Letter of appointment to Country Life Commission, August 1908.) Mem. Ed. XXII, 471; Nat. Ed. XX, 405.

Agriculture — Department of

The Department of Agriculture devotes its whole energy to working for the welfare of farmers and stock growers. In every section of our country it aids them in their constantly increasing search for a better agricultural education. It helps not only them, but all the nation, in seeing that our exports of meats have clean bills of health, and that there is rigid inspection of all meats that enter into interstate commerce. . . .

The Department of Agriculture has been helping our fruit men to establish markets abroad by studying methods of fruit preservation through refrigeration and through methods of handling and packing. . . .

Moreover, the Department has taken the lead in the effort to prevent the deforestation of the country. Where there are forests we seek to preserve them; and on the once treeless plains and the prairies we are doing our best to foster the habit of tree planting among our people. (At Sioux Falls, S. D., April 6, 1903.) Presidential Addresses and State Papers I, 303-305.

Agriculture — Government Aid to

I am glad to say that in many sections of our country there has been an extraordinary revival of recent years in intelligent interest in and work for those who live in the open country. In this movement the lead must be taken by the farmers themselves; but our people as a whole, through their governmental agencies, should back the farmers....

The government must co-operate with the farmer to make the farm more productive. There must be no skinning of the soil. The farm should be left to the farmer's son in better, and not worse, condition because of its cultivation. Moreover, every invention and improvement, every discovery and economy, should be at the service of the farmer in the work of production. (Before Progressive National Convention, Chicago, August 6, 1912.) Mem. Ed. XIX, 377; Nat. Ed. XVII, 270.

Agriculture—Importance of

We cannot permanently shape our course right on any international issue unless we are sound on the domestic issues; and this farm movement is the fundamental social issue— the one issue which is even more basic than the relations of capitalist and working man. The farm industry cannot stop; the world is never more than a year from starvation; this great war has immensely increased the cost of living without commensurately improving the condition of the men who produce the things on which we live. (1917.) Mem. Ed. XXI, 111; Nat. Ed. XIX, 113.

____________. To improve our system of agriculture seems to me the most urgent of the tasks which lie before us. But it can not, in my judgment, be effected by measures which touch only the material and technical side of the subject; the whole business and life of the farmer must also be taken into account. . . .

I warn my countrymen that the great recent progress made in city life is not a full measure of our civilization; for our civilization rests at bottom on the wholesomeness, the attractiveness, and the completeness, as well as the prosperity, of life in the country. The men and women on the farms stand for what is fundamentally best and most needed in our American life. Upon the development of country life rests ultimately our ability, by methods of farming requiring the highest intelligence, to continue to feed and clothe the hungry nations; to supply the city with fresh blood, clean bodies, and clear brains that can endure the terrific strain of modern life; we need the development of men in the open country, who will be in the future, as in the past, the stay and strength of the nation in time of war, and its guiding and controlling spirit in time of peace. Special Message from the President of the United States transmitting the report of the Country Life Commission, February 9, 1909. (Washington, 1909), pp. 8-9.

Agriculture—Needs of

The elimination of the middleman by agricultural exchanges and by the use of improved business methods generally, the development of good roads, the reclamation of arid lands and swamplands, the improvement in the productivity of farms, the encouragement of all agencies which tend to bring people back to the soil and to make country life more interesting as well as more profitable—all these movements will help not only the farmer but the man who consumes the farmer's products. (Before Progressive National Convention, Chicago, August 6, 1912.) Mem. Ed. XIX, 399; Nat. Ed. XVII, 289.

Agriculture, Scientific

Nothing in the way of scientific work can ever take the place of business management on a farm. We ought all of us to teach ourselves as much as possible; but we can also all of us learn from others; and the farmer can best learn how to manage his farm even better than he now does by practice, under intelligent supervision, on his own soil in such way as to increase his income. . . . But much has been accomplished by the growth of what is broadly designated as agricultural science. Much more can be accomplished in the future. . . . It is probably one of our faults as a nation that we are too impatient to wait a sufficient length of time to accomplish the best results; and in agriculture effective research often, although not always, involves slow and long-continued effort if the results are to be trustworthy. While applied science in agriculture as elsewhere must be judged largely from the standpoint of its actual return in dollars, yet the farmers, no more than anyone else, can afford to ignore the large results that can be enjoyed because of broader knowledge. The farmer must prepare for using the knowledge that can be obtained through agricultural colleges by insisting upon a constantly more practical curriculum in the schools in which his children are taught. He must not lose his independence, his initiative, his rugged self-sufficiency; and yet he must learn to work in the heartiest cooperation with his fellows. (At semi-centennial celebration, founding of agricultural colleges; Lansing, Mich., May 31, 1907.) Mem. Ed. XVIII, 179; Nat. Ed. XVI,135.

Agriculture and the Tariff

Agriculture is now, as it always has been, the basis of civilization. The six million farms of the United States, operated by men who, as a class, are steadfast, singleminded, and industrious, form the basis of all the other achievements of the American people and are more fruitful than all their other resources. The men on those six million farms receive from the protective tariff what they most need, and that is the best of all possible markets. All other classes depend upon the farmer, but the farmer in turn depends upon the market they furnish him for his produce. . . . American farmers have prospered because the growth of their market has kept pace with the growth of their farms. The additional market continually furnished for agricultural products by domestic manufacturers has been far in excess of the outlet to other lands. An export trade in farm products is necessary to dispose of our surplus; and the export trade of our farmers, both in animal products and in plant products, has very largely increased. Without the enlarged home market to keep this surplus down, we should have to reduce production or else feed the world at less than the cost of production. (Letter accepting Republican nomination for President, September 12, 1904.) Mem. Ed. XVIII, 522-523; Nat. Ed. XVI, 392-393.


See also Country Life Commission; Farm; Farming.


See Imperialism; Philippines.


See Aviation


Some form of local self-government should be provided, as simple and inexpensive as possible; it is impossible for the Congress to devote the necessary time to all the little details of necessary Alaskan legislation. Road-building and railway-building should be encouraged. The governor of Alaska should be given an ample appropriation wherewith to organize a force to preserve the public peace. Whiskey-selling to the natives should be made a felony. The coalland laws should be changed so as to meet the peculiar needs of the Territory. . . . There should be another judicial division established. As early as possible lighthouses and buoys should be established as aids to navigation. (Seventh Annual Message, Washington, December 3, 1907.) Mem. Ed. XVII, 535-536; Nat. Ed. XV, 456.

____________. Alaska should be developed at once, but in the interest of the actual settler. In Alaska the government has an opportunity of starting in what is almost a fresh field to work out various problems by actual experiment. The government should at once construct, own, and operate the railways in Alaska. The government should keep the fee of all the coalfields and allow them to be operated by lessees with the conditions in the lease that non-use shall operate as a forfeit. Telegraph-lines should be operated as the railways are. Moreover, it would be well in Alaska to try a system of land taxation which will, so far as possible, remove all the burdens from those who actually use the land, whether for building or for agricultural purposes, and will operate against any man who holds the land for speculation, or derives an income from it based, not on his own exertions, but on the increase in value due to activities not his own. There is very real need that this nation shall seriously prepare itself for the task of remedying social injustice and meeting social problems by well-considered governmental effort; and the best preparation for such wise action is to test by actual experiment under favorable conditions the devices which we have reason to believe will work well, but which it is difficult to apply in old settled communities without preliminary experiment. (Before Progressive National Convention, Chicago, August 6, 1912.) Mem. Ed. XIX, 406; Nat. Ed. XVII, 294.

Alaska—Future of

Alaska has interests of vital importance not merely to her but to the entire Union. Alaska contains a territory which will within this century support as large a population as the combined Scandinavian countries of Europe; those countries from which has sprung as wonderful a race as ever imprinted its characteristics upon the history of civilization. Exactly as the Scandinavian peoples have left their mark upon the entire history of Europe, so we shall see Alaska with its mines, its lumber, its fisheries, with its possibilities in agriculture and stock-raising, with its possibilities of commercial command, with the tremendous development that is going on within it even now, produce, as hard and vigorous a people as any portion of North America. (At Seattle, Wash., May 23, 1903.) Presidential Addresses and State Papers II, 428-429.

Alaskan Boundary Dispute

The treaty of 1825 between Russia and England was undoubtedly intended to cut off England, which owned the Hinterland, from access to the sea. The word lisiere used in the treaty means the strip of territory bordering all the navigable water of that portion of the Alaskan coast affected by the treaty, and this strip of territory is American of course. Equally of course in interpreting the treaty a prime consideration is the way in which all authorities interpreted it for the sixty years immediately succeeding its adoption. There is entire room for discussion and judicial and impartial agreement as to the exact boundary in any given locality—that is as to whether in such locality the boundary is to be pushed back ten marine leagues, or whether there is in actual fact nearer the coast a mountain chain which can be considered as running parallel to it.

In the principle involved there will of course be no compromise. The question is not in my judgment one in which it is possible for a moment to consider a reconciling of conflicting claims by mutual concessions. It is to determine whether the theory upon which Russia uniformly treated the boundary during her entire period of possession, upon which the United States has uniformly treated it ever since it acquired the territory, and upon which England uniformly treated it for over sixty years after the treaty was adopted, and according to which all the English as distinguished from the Canadian cartographers have since continued to treat it, is right in its entirety or wrong in its entirety. (To Elihu Root, Henry Cabot Lodge and George Turner, members of the Alaskan Boundary Tribunal, March 25, 1903.) Lodge Letters II, 5.

Alaskan Boundary Dispute— Settlement of

The result is satisfactory in every way. It is of great material advantage to our people in the far Northwest. It has removed from the field of discussion and possible danger a question liable to become more acutely accentuated with each passing year. Finally, it has furnished a signal proof of the fairness and good-will with which two friendly nations can approach and determine issues involving national sovereignty and by their nature incapable of submission to a third power for adjudication.

The award is self-executing on the vital points. To make it effective as regards the others it only remains for the two governments to appoint, each on its own behalf, one or more scientific experts, who shall, with all convenient speed, proceed together to lay down the boundary-line in accordance with the decision of the majority of the tribunal. (Third Annual Message, Washington, December 7, 1903.) Mem. Ed. XVII, 212- 213; Nat. Ed. XV, 182-183.

Aldrich Bill

See Banking. Algeciras Conference

[One] important achievement of my administration at least so far as foreign affairs were concerned, was the decisive part played by the United States at the Algeciras Conference of 1906. This was held against the wishes of France, on the insistence of the Kaiser, who was pursuing a dog-in- the-manger policy by supporting the Sultan of Morocco in his resistance to French aggressions. The Conference was faced with the delicate task of reconciling French claims to paramountcy in the Shereefian Empire with the German demand for the open door. The conflicting interests of the two countries soon created an impasse which promised to end in war. Henry White, my representative at the Conference, communicated the situation to me by cable. I sent for the French and German ambassadors and on a couple of those little White House cards jotted down the terms on which I believed that an amicable understanding could be arrived at. The ambassadors immediately communicated my suggestions to their governments and the Conference finally worked out a settlement of the dangerous Moroccan question based on the formula I had outlined. The Kaiser, for all his blustering, did not want war with France at that time, and when he found himself on the verge of it he became frightened. He realized that he had gone too far and he was mighty glad to have me show him a way in which he could extricate himself without losing face. He was so pleased with my formula that he wrote me he should keep it by him, just as I had written it, and always use it in settling any difficulty with France in the future. (In conversation with Mr. Powell aboard Hamburg, March 1909.) E. Alexander Powell, Yonder Lies Adventure! (Macmillan Co., N. Y., 1932), pp. 315-316.

Algeciras Conference

See also Jusserand, J.J.

Aliens—Treatment of

Special legislation should deal with the aliens who do not come here to be made citizens. But the alien who comes here intending to become a citizen should be helped in every way to advance himself, should be removed from every possible disadvantage, and in return should be required, under penalty of being sent back to the country from which he came, to prove that he is in good faith fitting himself to be an American citizen. We should set a high standard, and insist on men reaching it; but if they do reach it we should treat them as on a full equality with ourselves. (Before Knights of Columbus, New York City, October 12, 1915.) Mem. Ed. XX, 465; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 399.

Aliens in Key Positions

We cannot afford to leave American mines, munition plants, and general resources in the hands of alien workmen, alien to America and even likely to be made hostile to America by machinations such as have recently been provided in the case of . . . foreign embassies in Washington. We cannot afford to run the risk of having in time of war men working on our railways or working in our munition plants who would in the name of duty to their own foreign countries bring destruction to us. (Before Knights of Columbus, New York City, October 12, 1915.) Mem. Ed. XX, 469; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 403.


See also American People; Americanization; Citizenship; Immigrants.


We can have no "fifty-fifty" allegiance in this country. Either a man is an American and nothing else, or he is not an American at all. We are akin by blood and descent to most of the nations of Europe; but we are separate from all of them; we are a new and distinct nation, and we are bound always to give our whole-hearted and undivided loyalty to our own flag, and in any international crisis to treat each and every foreign nation purely according to its conduct in that crisis. (New York Times, September 10, 1917.) Mem. Ed. XXI, 38; Nat. Ed. XIX, 33.

Allegiance, Undivided

There are two demands upon the spirit of Americanism, of nationalism. Each must be met. Each is essential. Each is vital, if we are to be a great and proud nation.

The first is that we shall tolerate no kind of divided allegiance in this country. There is no place for the hyphen in our citizenship . . . .

The other is equally important. We must treat every good American of German or of any other origin, without regard to his creed, as on a full and exact equality with every other good American, and set our faces like flint against the creatures who seek to discriminate against such an American, or to hold against him the birthplace of himself or his parents. . . . To discriminate in any way, . . . is a base infamy from the personal standpoint, and from the public standpoint is utterly un-American and profoundly unpatriotic. (1918.) Mem. Ed. XXI, 329, 331; Nat. Ed. XIX, 301,303.

____________. We are a different people from any people of Europe. It is our boast that we admit the immigrant to full fellowship and equality with the native-born. In return we demand that he shall share our undivided allegiance to the one flag which floats over all of us. (At Lincoln, Neb., June 14, 1917.) Mem. Ed. XXI, 192; Nat. Ed. XIX, 183.


See also Americanism; Americans, Hyphenated; Citizenship; Flag; German- Americans; Love Of Country; Loyalty; Nationalism; Patriotism.

Alliances—Instability of

It is idle to trust to alliances. Alliances change. Russia and Japan are now fighting side by side, although nine years ago they were fighting against one another. Twenty years ago Russia and Germany stood side by side. Fifteen years ago England was more hostile to Russia, and even to France, than she was to Germany. It is perfectly possible that after the close of this war the present allies will fall out, or that Germany and Japan will turn up in close alliance. (Everybody's, January 1915.) Mem. Ed. XX, 167; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 143.


See also Foreign Relations; League for Peace; National Self-Reliance; Preparedness.


See World War.

Altgeld, John Peter

The attitude of many of our public men at the time of the great strike in July, 1894, was such as to call down on their heads the hearty condemnation of every American who wishes well to his country. It would be difficult to over-estimate the damage done by the example and action of a man like Governor Altgeld of Illinois. Whether he is honest or not in his beliefs is not of the slightest consequence. He is as emphatically the foe of decent government as Tweed himself, and is capable of doing far more damage than Tweed. The Governor, who began his career by pardoning anarchists, and whose most noteworthy feat since was his bitter and undignifed, but fortunately futile, campaign against the election of the upright judge who sentenced the anarchists, is the foe of every true American and is the foe particularly of every honest workingman. With such a man it was to be expected that he should in time of civic commotion act as the foe of the law-abiding and the friend of the lawless classes, and endeavor, in company with the lowest and most abandoned office-seeking politicians, to prevent proper measures being taken to prevent riot and to punish the rioters. Had it not been for the admirable action of the Federal Government, Chicago would have seen a repetition of what occurred during the Paris Commune, while Illinois would have been torn by a fierce social war; and for all the horrible waste of life that this would have entailed Governor Altgeld would have been primarily responsible. It was a most fortunate thing that the action at Washington was so quick and so emphatic. (Forum, February 1895.) Mem. Ed. XV, 8-9; Nat. Ed. XIII, 7-8.

Altgeld, John Peter

See also Bryan, W. J.; Election of 1896.

Ambassadors as Public Servants

There are a large number of well-meaning ambassadors and ministers, and even consuls and secretaries, who belong to what I call the pink-tea type, who merely reside in the service instead of working in the service, and these I intend to change whenever the need arises. . . . I shall not make a fetish of keeping a man in, but if a man is a really good man he will be kept in. A pink- tea man shall stay in or go out, just as I find convenient. Of course, most places at embassies and legations are pink-tea places. A few are not, and in these we need real men, and these real men shall be rewarded. (To Richard Harding Davis, January 3, 1905.) Mem. Ed. XXIII, 410; Bishop I, 356.

____________. You come in the category of public servants who desire to do public work, as distinguished from those whose desire is merely to occupy public place—a class for whom I have no particular respect. . . . The trouble with our ambassadors in stations of real importance is that they totally fail to give us real help and real information, and seem to think that the life work of an ambassador is a kind of glorified pink tea party. (To George von L. Meyer, December 26, 1904.) Mem. Ed. XXIII, 409; Bishop I, 356.


See also Diplomatic Service; Hay, John.

American, the Average

I hold that the average American is a decent, self-respecting man, with large capacities for good service to himself, his country and the world if a right appeal can be made to him and the right response evoked. Therefore, I hold that it is not best that he and his kind should perish from the earth. The great problem of civilization is to secure a relative increase of the valuable as compared with the less valuable or noxious elements in the population. (Metropolitan, October 1917.) Mem. Ed. XXI, 163; Nat. Ed. XIX, 157.

American, the Best

That man is the best American who has in him the American spirit, the American soul. Such a man fears not the strong and harms not the weak. He scorns what is base or cruel or dishonest. He looks beyond the accidents of occupation or social condition and hails each of his fellow citizens as his brother, asking nothing save that each shall treat the other on his worth as a man, and that they shall all join together to do what in them lies for the uplifting of this mighty and vigorous people. (Before Society of Friendly Sons of St. Patrick, New York City, March 17, 1905.) Mem. Ed. XVIII, 50; Nat. Ed. XVI, 44.

American, the Blatant and the Servile

The raw conceit of the vulgar "spread- eagle" American, screaming foolish defiance at Europe, and boasting with vainglorious ignorance of everything, good and bad, in this country, is distasteful to others and harmful to himself and to those who believe him; but it is on the whole rather preferable to the attitude of self-depreciation and apologetic servility habitually adopted in relation to their own land by some of our people, who though they dwell here are in reality by education and instinct entirely un-American. (Cosmopolitan, December 1892.) Mem. Ed. XIV, 368; Nat. Ed. XII, 302.

____________. The screaming vulgarity of the foolish spread-eagle orator who is continually yelling defiance at Europe, praising everything American, good and bad, and resenting the introduction of any reform because it has previously been tried successfully abroad, is offensive and contemptible to the last degree; but after all it is scarcely as harmful as the peevish, fretful, sneering, and continual faultfinding of the refined, well- educated man, who is always attacking good and bad alike, who genuinely distrusts America, and in the true spirit of servile colonialism considers us inferior to the people across the water. (Before the Liberal Club, Buffalo, N. Y., January 26, 1893.) Mem. Ed. XV, 73; Nat. Ed. XIII, 290.

American History

See History.

American Literature

See Literature.

American People

We Americans are the children of the crucible. The crucible does not do its work unless it turns out those cast into it in one national mould; and that must be the mould established by Washington and his fellows when they made us into a nation. We must be Americans; and nothing else. Yet the events of the past three years bring us face to face with the question whether in the present century we are to continue as a separate nation at all or whether we are to become merely a huge polyglot boarding- house and counting-house, in which dollar-hunters of twenty different nationalities scramble for gain, while each really pays his soul-allegiance to some foreign power. (New York Times, September 10, 1917.) Mem. Ed. XXI, 35; Nat. Ed. XIX, 30.

____________. We are a nation coming from many different race strains, a new nation growing up in this new continent; closer akin to some of the nations of the Old World than others, but somewhat different from each and all. The worst deed that any man can do here, so far as the national life is concerned, is to try to keep himself apart from his fellow Americans, and to perpetuate Old World differences, whether of race, of speech, of religion, or of religious hatred, or on the other hand to try to discriminate against his fellow Americans because they may come of a different race stock from his. (Address, October 11, 1897.) Two Hundredth Anniversary of the Old Dutch Church of Sleepy Hollow, (First Reformed Church, Tarrytown, N. Y., 1898), p. 104.

____________. We are a new people; we differ from all other peoples; we are neither English nor Irish, neither German nor French; we are Americans, and only Americans. We are bound to treat all other nations on their conduct, and only on their conduct, in each crisis as it arises. (1918.) Mem. Ed. XXI, 342; Nat. Ed. XIX, 312.

____________. Some latter-day writers deplore the enormous immigration to our shores as making us a heterogeneous instead of a homogeneous people; but as a matter of fact we are less heterogeneous at the present day than we were at the outbreak of the Revolution. Our blood was as much mixed a century ago as it is now. (1889.) Mem. Ed. X, 20; Nat. Ed. VIII, 17-18.

____________. Recent English writers, and some of our own as well, have foretold woe to our nation, because the blood of the Cavalier and the Roundhead is being diluted with that of "German boors and Irish cotters." The alarm is needless. As a matter of fact the majority of the people of the middle colonies at the time of the Revolution were the descendants of Dutch and German boors and Scotch and Irish cotters; and in less degree the same was true of Georgia and the Carolinas. Even in New England, where the English stock was purest, there was plenty of other admixture, and two of her most distinguished Revolutionary families bore, one the Huguenot name of Bowdoin, and the other the Irish name of Sullivan. Indeed, from the very outset, from the days of Cromwell, there has been a large Irish admixture in New England. When our people began their existence as a nation, they already differed in blood from their ancestral relatives across the Atlantic much as the latter did from their forebears beyond the German Ocean; and on the whole, the immigration since has not materially changed the race strains in our nationality; a century back we were even less homogeneous than we are now. It is no doubt true that we are in the main an offshoot of the English stem; and cousins to our kinsfolk of Britain, we perhaps may be; but brothers we certainly are not. (1888.) Mem. Ed. VIII, 286-287; Nat. Ed. VII, 247.

____________. Before the outbreak of the Revolution the American people, not only because of their surroundings, physical and spiritual, but because of the mixture of blood that had already begun to take place, represented a new and distinct ethnic type. This type has never been fixed in blood. All through the colonial days new waves of immigration from time to time swept hither across the ocean, now from one country, now from another. The same thing has gone on ever since our birth as a nation; and for the last sixty years the tide of immigration has been at the full. The newcomers are soon absorbed into our eager national life, and are radically and profoundly changed thereby, the rapidity of their assimilation being marvellous. But each group of newcomers, as it adds its blood to the life, also changes it somewhat, and this change and growth and development have gone on steadily, generation by generation, throughout three centuries. (At Jamestown Exposition, April 26, 1907.) Mem. Ed. XII, 587-588; Nat. Ed. XI, 307.

____________. The American people are good-natured to the point of lax indifference; but once roused, they act with the most straightforward and practical resolution. (1891.) Mem. Ed. IX, 415; Nat. Ed. X, 530.

____________. If any man is thrown into close contact with any large body of our fellow citizens it is apt to be the man's own fault if he does not grow to feel for them a very hearty regard and, moreover, grow to understand that, on the great questions that lie at the root of human well- being, he and they feel alike. (At Labor Day Picnic, Chicago, September 3, 1900.) Mem. Ed. XVI, 512; Nat. Ed. XIII, 483.

____________. We Americans are a separate people. We are separated from, although akin to, many European peoples. The old Revolutionary stock was predominantly English, but by no means exclusively so; for many of the descendants of the Revolutionary New Yorkers, Pennsylvanians, and Georgians have, like myself, strains of Dutch, French, Scotch, Irish, Welsh, and German blood in their veins. During the century and a quarter that has elapsed since we became a nation, there has been far more immigration from Germany and Ireland and probably from Scandinavia than there has been from England. We have a right to ask all of these immigrants and the sons of these immigrants that they become Americans and nothing else; but we have no right to ask that they become transplanted or second-rate Englishmen. (Metropolitan, October 1915.) Mem. Ed. XX, 328; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 282.

American People—Advance of the

I am inclined to think that on the whole our people are, spiritually as well as materially, on the average better and not worse off than they were a hundred years ago. (To Sir George Otto Trevelyan, March 9, 1905.) Mem. Ed. XXIV, 172; Bishop II, 147.

American People—Faith in

I have immense faith ultimately in the sober judgment of the American people. I believe that they are a law-abiding and an upright people, and I know that Republican government is worth preserving only on the supposition that in the long run the mass of the voters will stand for honesty and decency. (Before Liberal Club of Buffalo, N. Y., September 10, 1895.) Mem. Ed. XVI, 287; Nat. Ed. XIV, 206.

American People—Heritage of the

To us as a people it has been granted to lay the foundations of our national life in a new continent. We are the heirs of the ages, and yet we have had to pay few of the penalties which in old countries are exacted by the dead hand of a bygone civilization. We have not been obliged to fight for our existence against any alien race; and yet our life has called for the vigor and effort without which the manlier and hardier virtues wither away. Under such conditions it would be our own fault if we failed; and the success which we have had in the past, the success which we confidently believe the future will bring, should cause in us no feeling of vainglory, but rather a deep and abiding realization of all which life has offered us; a full acknowledgment of the responsibility which is ours; and a fixed determination to show that under a free government a mighty people can thrive best, alike as regards the things of the body and the things of the soul. (Inaugural Address as President, Washington, March 4, 1905.) Mem. Ed. XVII, 311; Nat. Ed. XV, 267.

American People—Obligation of the

We, here in America, hold in our hands the hope of the world, the fate of the coming years; and shame and disgrace will be ours if in our eyes the light of high resolve is dimmed, if we trail in the dust the golden hopes of men. If on this continent we merely build another country of great but unjustly divided material prosperity, we shall have done nothing; and we shall do as little if we merely set the greed of envy against the greed of arrogance, and thereby destroy the material well-being of all of us. . . . The worth of our great experiment depends upon its being in good faith an experiment—the first that has ever been tried—in true democracy on the scale of a continent, an a scale as vast as that of the mightiest empires of the Old World. Surely this is a noble ideal, an ideal for which it is worth while to strive, an ideal for which at need it is worth while to sacrifice much; for our ideal is the rule of all the people in a spirit of friendliest brotherhood toward each and every one of the people. (At Carnegie Hall, New York City, March 20, 1912.) Mem. Ed. XIX, 223; Nat. Ed. XVII, 170.

American People—Qualities of the

From the very beginning our people have markedly combined practical capacity for affairs with power of devotion to an ideal. The lack of either quality would have rendered the possession of the other of small value. Mere ability to achieve success in things concerning the body would not have atoned for the failure to live the life of high endeavor; and, on the other hand, without a foundation of those qualities which bring material prosperity there would be nothing on which the higher life could be built. (At Union League, Phila., November 22, 1902.) Mem. Ed. XVIII, 479; Nat. Ed. XVI, 356.

American People—Unity of the In this country we must all stand together absolutely without regard to our several lines of descent, as Americans and nothing else; and, above all, we must do this as regards moral issues. The great issues with which we must now deal are moral even more than material; and on these issues every good American should be with us, without the slightest regard to the land from which his forefathers came. (1916.) Mem. Ed. XX, 250; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 216.

____________. We are all of us Americans, and nothing else; we all have equal rights and equal obligations; we form part of one people, in the face of all other nations, paying allegiance only to one flag; and a wrong to any one of us is a wrong to all the rest of us. (New York Times, September 10, 1917.) Mem. Ed. XXI, 43; Nat. Ed. XIX, 37.

American Possessions

See also Alaska; Hawaii, Insular Possessions; Philippines; Porto Rico.

American Protective Association

See Religious Discrimination.

American System

See Democracy.


There is no room in this country for fifty-fifty Americanism. (March 2, 1918.) Roosevelt in the Kansas City Star, III.

____________. I cannot be with you, and so all I can do is to wish you Godspeed. There must be no sagging back in the fight for Americanism merely because the war is over. There are plenty of persons who have already made the assertion that they believe the American people have a short memory and that they intend to revive all the foreign associations which most directly interfere with the complete Americanization of our people. . . .

Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile. (To President of the American Defense Society, January 3, 1919; last message, read at meeting in New York, January 5, 1919.) Mem. Ed. XXIV, 554-555; Bishop II, 474.

____________. Americanism is a question of principle, of purpose, of idealism, of character; . . . not a matter of birthplace, or creed, or line of descent. (At unveiling of monument to Gen. Phil Sheridan, Washington, November 25, 1908.) Mem. Ed. XII, 478; Nat. Ed. XI, 222.

____________. There is one point upon which I wish to lay especial stress; that is, the necessity for a feeling of broad, radical, and intense Americanism, if good work is to be done in any direction. Above all, the one essential for success in every political movement which is to do lasting good, is that our citizens should act as Americans. . . . It is an outrage for a man to drag foreign politics into our contests, and vote as an Irishman or German or other foreigner, as the case may be. . . . But it is no less an outrage to discriminate against one who has become an American in good faith, merely because of his creed or birthplace. Every man who has gone into practical politics knows well enough that if he joins good men and fights those who are evil, he can pay no heed to lines of division drawn according to race and religion. (1890.) Mem. Ed. IX, 217; Nat. Ed. X, 360.

____________. Americanism means many things. It means equality of rights and, therefore, equality of duty and of obligation. It means service to our common country. It means loyalty to one flag, to our flag, the flag of all of us. It means on the part of each of us respect for the rights of the rest of us. It means that all of us guarantee the rights of each of us. It means free education, genuinely representative government, freedom of speech and thought, equality before the law for all men, genuine political and religious freedom and the democratizing of industry so as to give at least a measurable equality of opportunity for all, and so as to place before us as our ideal in all industries where this ideal is possible of attainment, the system of co-operative ownership and management, in order that the tool users may, so far as possible, become the tool owners. Everything is un- American that tends either to government by a plutocracy or government by a mob. To divide along the lines of section or caste or creed is un-American. All privileges based on wealth, and all enmity to honest men merely because they are wealthy, are un- American—both of them equally so. Americanism means the virtues of courage, honor, justice, truth, sincerity, and hardihood—the virtues that made America. The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living and the get- rich-quick theory of life. (To S. S. Menken, January 10, 1917; read before National Security League, Washington, January 26, 1917.) Proceedings of the Congress of Constructive Patriotism. (New York, 1917), p. 172.

Americanism and Internationalism

I believe in nationalism as the absolute prerequisite to internationalism. I believe in patriotism as the absolute prerequisite to the larger Americanism. I believe in Americanism because unless our people are good Americans first, America can accomplish little or nothing worth accomplishing for the good of the world as a whole. (1916.) Mem. Ed. XX, 529; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 454.

Americanism and Peace

Let ours be true Americanism, the greater Americanism, and let us tolerate no other. Let us prepare ourselves for justice and efficiency within our own border during peace, for justice in international relations, and for efficiency in war. Only thus shall we have the peace worth having. (1916.) Mem. Ed. XX, 260; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 224.

Americanism as a Cloak

There are plenty of scoundrels always ready to try to belittle reform movements or to bolster up existing iniquities in the name of Americanism; but this does not alter the fact that the man who can do most in this country is and must be the man whose Americanism is most sincere and intense. Outrageous though it is to use a noble idea as the cloak for evil, it is still worse to assail the noble idea itself because it can thus be used. The men who do iniquity in the name of patriotism, of reform, of Americanism, are merely one small division of the class that has always existed and will always exist—the class of hypocrites and demagogues, the class that is always prompt to steal the watchwords of righteousness and use them in the interests of evil-doing. (Forum, April 1894.) Mem. Ed. XV, 15; Nat. Ed. XIII, 13.

Americanism Versus Cosmopolitanism

Whatever may be the case in an infinitely remote future, at present no people can render any service to humanity unless as a people they feel an intense sense of national cohesion and solidarity. . . . The United States can accomplish little for mankind, save in so far as within its borders it develops an intense spirit of Americanism. A flabby cosmopolitanism, especially if it expresses itself through a flabby pacifism, is not only silly, but degrading. It represents national emasculation. (1916.) Mem. Ed. XX, 233; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 201.

Americanism Versus Sectionalism

The great lesson that all of us need to learn and to keep is the lesson that it is unimportant whether a man lives North or South, East or West, provided that he is genuinely and in good faith an American; that he feels every part of the United States as his own, and that he is honestly desirous to uphold the interests of all other Americans in whatever sections of the country they may dwell. (Outlook, September 10, 1910.) Mem. Ed. XVIII, 28; Nat. Ed. XVI, 25.


See also Allegiance; Flag; Fourth of July; Know Nothing Movement; Loyalty; Nationalism; Patriotism.


The process of assimilating, or as we should now say, of Americanizing, all foreign and non-English elements was going on almost as rapidly a hundred years ago as it is at present. A young Dutchman or Huguenot felt it necessary, then, to learn English, precisely as a young Scandinavian or German does now; and the churches of the former at the end of the last century were obliged to adopt English as the language for their ritual exactly as the churches of the latter do at the end of this. The most stirring, energetic, and progressive life of the colony was English; and all the young fellows of push and ambition gradually adopted this as their native language, and then refused to belong to congregations where the service was carried on in a less familiar speech. (1888.) Mem. Ed. VIII, 287; Nat. Ed. VII, 248.

____________. The one overshadowing fact in this process of complete Americanization, the one side of the question that should be always borne in mind, is the enormous benefit it confers upon the person who is Americanized. The gain to the country is real, but the gain to the individual himself is everything. Immigrants who remain aliens, whether in language or in political thought, are of comparatively little benefit to the country; but they themselves are the individuals most damaged. The man who becomes completely Americanized—who celebrates our Constitutional Centennial instead of the Queen's Jubilee, or the Fourth of July rather than Saint Patrick's Day, and who "talks United States" instead of the dialect of the country which he has of his own free will abandoned—is not only doing his plain duty by his adopted land, but is also rendering to himself a service of immeasurable value.

This last point is one that cannot be too often insisted on. The chief interest served by Americanization is that of the individual himself. A man who speaks only German or Swedish may nevertheless be a most useful American citizen; but it is impossible for him to derive the full benefit he should from American citizenship. And, on the other hand, it is impossible for him, under any circumstances, to retain the benefits incident to being a member of the nation of which he has left. It would be hard to imagine another alternative where the advantage was so wholly on one side. The case stands thus: by becoming completely Americanized the immigrant gains every right conferred upon citizenship in the country to which he has come; but, if he fails to become Americanized, he nevertheless loses all share and part in the nation which he has left, and gains nothing in return. He cannot possibly remain an Englishman, a German, or a Scandinavian; all he can do is to refuse to become an American, and thereby make himself a kind of mongrel waif, of no importance anywhere. America, April 14, 1888, p. 2.

____________. It is our duty from the stand-point of self-defense to secure the complete Americanization of our people; to make of the many peoples of this country a united nation, one in speech and feeling, and all, so far as possible, sharers in the best that each has brought to our shores.

The foreign-born population of this country must be an Americanized population. . . . It must possess American citizenship and American ideals—and therefore we native-born citizens must ourselves practise a high and fine idealism, and shun as we would the plague the sordid materialism which treats pecuniary profit and gross bodily comfort as the only evidences of success. (Before Knights of Columbus, New York City, October 12, 1915.) Mem. Ed. XX, 468; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 401.

____________. What we should have done, what we must do, is see to it that the immigrant is taken in hand and given a square deal. We must see to it that a real effort is made to Americanize him—he should have the opportunity to become Americanized. He should be given an opportunity, should be compelled to learn the English language, and if at the end of a stated period he has failed to do so, he should be sent back to the place from which he came. He must not be left to the agitator and the demagogue to exploit.

It is foolish to imagine that the immigrant will automatically and of his own will be converted into an American by his mere presence among us, so long as he comes here in masses, and settles down among his own kind, as ignorant of our ways, our customs, and our institutions as he is. (Fall 1917; reported by Leary.) Talk with T. R. From the diaries of John J. Leary, Jr. (Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, 1920), p. 148.

Americanization — Essentials for

I ask you to make a special effort to deal with Americanization, the fusing into one nation, a nation necessarily different from all other nations, of all who come to our shores. Pay heed to the three principal essentials: (1) The need of a common language, English, with a minimum amount of illiteracy; (2) the need of a common civil standard, similar ideals, beliefs, and customs symbolized by the oath of allegiance to America; and (3) the need of a high standard of living, of reasonable equality of opportunity, and of social and industrial justice. (Before Knights of Columbus, New York City, October 12, 1915.) Mem. Ed. XX, 470; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 403.

Americanization and Language

America is a Nation and not a mosaic of nationalities. The various nationalities that come here are not to remain separate, but to blend into the one American nationality—the nationality of Washington and Lincoln, of Muhlenberg and Sheridan. Therefore, we must have but one language, the English language. Every immigrant who comes here should be required within five years to learn English or to leave the country, for hereafter every immigrant should be treated as a future fellow citizen and not merely as a labor unit. English should be the only language taught or used in the primary schools. We should provide by law so that after a reasonable interval every newspaper in this country should be published in English. (April 27, 1918.) Roosevelt in the Kansas City Star, 143.


See also Immigrants; Language; Public Schools.

Americans, Hyphenated

We welcome the German or the Irishman who becomes an American. We have no use for the German or Irishman who remains such. We do not wish German-Americans and Irish-Americans who figure as such in our social and political life; we want only Americans, and, provided they are such, we do not care whether they are of native or of Irish or of German ancestry. We have no room in any healthy American community for a German- American vote or an Irish-American vote, and it is contemptible demagogy to put planks into any party platform with the purpose of catching such a vote. We have no room for any people who do not act and vote simply as Americans and nothing else. (Forum, April 1894.) Mem. Ed. XV. 24; Nat. Ed. XIII, 21.

____________. The one being abhorrent to the powers above the earth and under them is the hyphenated American—the “German-American,” the “Irish- American," or the "native-American." Be Americans, pure and simple! If you don't act on the theory that every man who in good faith assumes the duties and responsibilities of an American citizen in a spirit of true Americanism is an American, and is to be treated as such, . . . you are yourselves unfit to take part in managing our government and you are bound to make a failure if you try to better the condition of our cities. (Before Liberal Club, Buffalo, N. Y., September 10, 1895.) Mem. Ed. XVI, 276; Nat. Ed. XIV, 196.

____________. I am among those Americans whose ancestors include men and women from many different European countries. The proportion of Americans of this type will steadily increase. I do not believe in hyphenated Americans. I do not believe in German- Americans or Irish-Americans; and I believe just as little in English-Americans. I do not approve of American citizens of German descent forming organizations to force the United States into practical alliance with Germany because their ancestors came from Germany. Just as little do I believe in American citizens of English descent forming leagues to force the United States into an alliance with England because their ancestors came from England. (Metropolitan, October 1915.) Mem. Ed. XX, 328; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 281.

____________. There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism. When I refer to hyphenated Americans, I do not refer to naturalized Americans. Some of the very best Americans I have ever known were naturalized Americans, Americans born abroad. But a hyphenated American is not an American at all. This is just as true of the man who puts “native” before the hyphen as of the man who puts German or Irish or English or French before the hyphen. Americanism is a matter of the spirit and of the soul. Our allegiance must be purely to the United States. We must unsparingly condemn any man who holds any other allegiance. But if he is heartily and singly loyal to this Republic, then no matter where he was born, he is just as good an American as any one else.

The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities, an intricate knot of German-Americans, Irish-Americans, English- Americans, French-Americans, Scandinavian- Americans, or Italian-Americans, each preserving its separate nationality, each at heart feeling more sympathy with Europeans of that nationality than with the other citizens of the American Republic. The men who do not become Americans and nothing else are hyphenated Americans; and there ought to be no room for them in this country. The man who calls himself an American citizen and who yet shows by his actions that he is primarily the citizen of a foreign land, plays a thoroughly mischievous part in the life of our body politic. He has no place here; and the sooner he returns to the land to which he feels his real heart-allegiance, the better it will be for every good American. (Before Knights of Columbus, New York City, October 12, 1915.) Mem. Ed. XX, 456; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 392.

____________. Among the very many lessons taught by the last year has been the lesson that the effort to combine fealty to the flag of an immigrant's natal land with fealty to the flag of his adopted land, in practice means not merely disregard of, but hostility to, the flag of the United States. When two flags are hoisted on the same pole, one is always hoisted undermost. The hyphenated American always hoists the American flag undermost. (Metropolitan, October 1915.) Mem. Ed. XX, 324; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 278.

Americans, Hyphenated

See also Allegiance; German-Americans; Irish- Americans; Loyalty; Nationalism; Patriotism.

Americans in Politics

We have a right to demand that every man, native born or foreign born, shall in American public life act merely as an American. (Speech at Boston, November 1893.) Mem. Ed. XV, 34; Nat. Ed. XIII, 275.

____________. It is exceedingly unlikely that I shall ever again be a candidate for office, but, if I am, no man will be wise who votes for me under the idea that I am anything but a straightcut American. I care nothing for a man’s creed, or his birthplace, or descent! but I regard him as an unworthy citizen unless he is an American and nothing else. (To Rev. Gustavus E. Hiller, February 4, 1916.) Mem. Ed. XXIV, 472; Bishop II, 401.

____________. Americans should organize politically as Americans and not as bankers, or lawyers, or farmers, or wage-workers. (September 12, 1918.) Roosevelt in the Kansas City Star, 215.

Americans in Politics

See also Political Associates


The average individual will not spend the hours in which he is not working in doing something that is unpleasant, and absolutely the only way permanently to draw average men or women from occupations and amusements that are unhealthy for soul or body is to furnish an alternative which they will accept. To forbid all amusements, or to treat innocent and vicious amusements as on the same plane, simply insures recruits for the vicious amusements. (Century, October 1900.) Mem. Ed. XV, 428; Nat. Ed. XIII, 375.


See also Leisure; Sports.


The anarchist, and especially the anarchist in the United States, is merely one type of criminal, more dangerous than any other because he represents the same depravity in a greater degree. The man who advocates anarchy directly or indirectly, in any shape or fashion, or the man who apologizes for anarchists and their deeds, makes himself morally accessory to murder before the fact. The anarchist is a criminal whose perverted instincts lead him to prefer confusion and chaos to the most beneficent form of social order. His protest of concern for working men is outrageous in its impudent falsity; for if the political institutions of this country do not afford opportunity to every honest and intelligent son of toil, then the door of hope is forever closed against him. The anarchist is everywhere not merely the enemy of system and of progress, but the deadly foe of liberty. If ever anarchy is triumphant, its triumph will last for but one red moment, to be succeeded for ages by the gloomy night of despotism. (First Annual Message, Washington, December 3, 1901.) Mem. Ed. XVII, 97; Nat. Ed. XV, 84-85.

Anarchists—Treatment of

I treated anarchists and the bomb-throwing and dynamiting gentry precisely as I treated other criminals. Murder is murder. It is not rendered one whit better by the allegation that it is committed on behalf of "a cause." It is true that law and order are not all-sufficient; but they are essential; lawlessness and murderous violence must be quelled before any permanence of reform can be obtained. (1913.) Mem. Ed. XXII, 561; Nat. Ed. XX, 482.


See also Bolshevism; Immigration; Industrial Workers of the World.


Anarchy is always and everywhere the handmaiden of Tyranny and Liberty’s deadliest foe. No people can permanently remain free unless it possesses the stern self-control and resolution necessary to put down anarchy. Order without liberty and liberty without order are equally destructive. (1918.) Mem. Ed. XXI, 377; Nat. Ed. XIX, 342.


See also Liberty; Order; Revolution; Violence.

Andre, John, and Nathan Hale

Poor André! His tragedy was like that of Nathan Hale; and the tragedy was the same in the case of the brilliant young patrician, brilliant, fearless, devoted, and the plain, straightforward yeoman who just as bravely gave up his life in performing the same kind of duty. It was not a pleasant kind of duty; and the penalty was rightly the same in each case; and the countrymen of each man are also right to hold him in honor and to commemorate his memory by a monument. (To Sir George Otto Trevelyan, January 1, 1908.) Mem. Ed. XXIV, 198; Bishop II, 169.

Andrews, Avery D

See Police Commissioner.


See American People

Anglomania and Anglophobia

I am sure you will agree with me that in our political life, very unlike what is the case in our social life, the temptation is toward Anglophobia, not toward Anglomania. . . . If an Anglomaniac in social life goes into political life he usually becomes politically an Anglophobiac, and the occasional political Anglophobiac whose curious ambition it is to associate socially with 'vacuity trimmed with lace' is equally sure to become an Anglomaniac in his new surroundings. (To Finley Peter Dunne, November 1904.) Mem. Ed. XXIII, 400; Bishop 1, 348.

Animals—Adaptation of

With all wild animals it is a noticable fact that a course of contact with man continuing over many generations of animal life causes a species so to adapt itself to its new surroundings that it can hold its own far better than formerly. When white men take up a new country, the game, and especially the big game, being entirely unused to contend with the new foe, succumb easily, and are almost completely killed out. If any individuals survive at all, however, the succeeding generations are far more difficult to exterminate than were their ancestors, and they cling much more tenaciously to their old homes. (1905.) Mem. Ed. III, 115; Nat. Ed. II, 489.

Animals—Disappearance of

All species of animals of course ultimately disappear, some because their kind entirely dies out, and some because the species is transformed into a wholly different species, degenerate or not; but in our nomenclature we make no distinction between the two utterly different kinds of "disappearance." (To A. J. Balfour, March 5, 1908.) Mem. Ed. XXIV, 127; Bishop II, 109.

Animals—Nomenclature of

The nomenclature and exact specific relationships of American sheep, deer, and antelope offer difficulties not only to the hunter but to the naturalist. As regards the nomenclature, we share the trouble encountered by all peoples of European descent who have gone into strange lands. The incomers are almost invariably men who are not accustomed to scientific precision of expression. Like other people, they do not like to invent names if they can by any possibility make use of those already in existence, and so in a large number of cases they call the new birds and animals by names applied to entirely different birds and animals of the Old World to which, in the eyes of the settlers, they bear some resemblance. In South America the Spaniards, for instance, christened "lion" and "tiger" the great cats which are properly known as cougar and jaguar. In South Africa the Dutch settlers, who came from a land where all big game had long been exterminated, gave fairly grotesque names to the great antelopes, calling them after the European elk, stag, and chamois. . . . Our own pioneers behaved in the same way. Hence it is that we have no distinctive name at all for the group of peculiarly American game-birds of which the bob-white is the typical representative; and that, when we could not use the words quail, partridge, or pheasant, we went for our terminology to the barnyard, and called our fine grouse, fool-hens, sage-hens, and prairie-chickens. The bear and wolf our people recognized at once. The bison they called a buffalo, which was no worse than the way in which in Europe the Old World bison was called an aurochs. The American true elk and reindeer were rechristened moose and caribou—excellent names, by the way, derived from the Indian. (1905.) Mem. Ed. III, 171, 172; Nat. Ed. III, 6, 7.

Animals—Protective Coloration of

Very much of what is commonly said about "protective coloration" has no basis whatever in fact. Black and white are normally the most conspicuous colors in nature (and yet are borne by numerous creatures who have succeeded well in the struggle for life); but almost any tint, or combination of tints, among the grays, browns and duns, harmonizes fairly well with at least some surroundings, in most landscapes; and in but a few instances among the larger mammals, and in almost none among those frequenting the open plains, is there the slightest reason for supposing that the creature gains any benefit whatever from what is loosely called its "protective coloration." Giraffes, leopards, and zebras, for instance, have actually been held up as instances of creatures that are "protectingly" colored and are benefited thereby. The giraffe is one of the most conspicuous objects in nature, and never makes the slightest effort to hide; near by its mottled hide is very noticeable, but as a matter of fact, under any ordinary circumstances any possible foe trusting to eyesight would discover the giraffe so far away that its coloring would seem uniform, that is, would because of the distance be indistinguishable from a general tint which really might have a slight protective value. In other words, while it is possible that the giraffe's beautifully waved coloring may under certain circumstances, and in an infinitesimally small number of cases, put it at a slight disadvantage in the struggle for life, in the enormous majority of cases—a majority so great as to make the remaining cases negligible—it has no effect whatever, one way or the other; and it is safe to say that under no conditions is its coloring of the slightest value to it as affording it "protection" from foes trusting to their eyesight. (1910.) Mem. Ed. V, 44-45; Nat. Ed. IV, 38-39.

____________. The truth is that no game of the plains is helped in any way by its coloration in evading its foes, and none seeks to escape the vision of its foes. The larger game animals of the plains are always walking and standing in conspicuous places, and never seek to hide or take advantage of cover; while, on the contrary, the little grass and bush antelopes, like the duiker and steinbuck, trust very much to their power of hiding, and endeavor to escape the sight of their foes by lying absolutely still, in the hope of not being made out against their background. (1910.) Mem. Ed. V, 46; Nat. Ed. IV, 40.

____________. I have no question whatever. . . that concealing coloration is of real value in the struggle for existence to certain mammals and certain birds, not to mention invertebrates. The night-hawk, certain partridges and grouse, and numerous other birds which seek to escape observation by squatting motionless, do unquestionably owe an immense amount to the way in which their colors harmonize with the surrounding colors, thus enabling them to lie undetected while they keep still, and probably even protecting them somewhat if they try to skulk off. In these cases, where the theory really applies, the creature benefited by the coloration secures the benefit by acting in a way which enables the coloration to further its concealment. . . . But it is wholly different when the theory is pushed to fantastic extremes, as by those who seek to make the coloration of big-game animals such as zebras, giraffes, hartbeests, and the like, protective. (1910; Appendix of African Game Trails.) Mem. Ed. VI, 377- 378; Nat. Ed. V, 325.

____________. I have studied the facts as regards big game and certain other animals, and I am convinced that as regards these animals the protective-coloration theory either does not apply at all or applies so little as to render it necessary to accept with the utmost reserve the sweeping generalizations of Mr. Thayer and the protective-coloration extremists. It is an exceedingly interesting subject. It certainly seems that the theory must apply as regards many animals, but it is even more certain that it does not, as its advocates claim, apply universally; and careful study and cautious generalizations are imperatively necessary in striving to apply it extensively, while fanciful and impossible efforts to apply it where it certainly does not apply can do no real good. It is necessary to remember that some totally different principle, in addition to or in substitution for protective coloration, must have been at work where totally different colorations and color patterns seem to bring the same results to the wearers. The bear and the skunk are both catchers of small rodents, and when the color patterns of the back, nose, and breast, for instance, are directly opposite in the two animals, there is at least need of very great caution in deciding that either represents obliterative coloration of a sort that benefits the creature in catching its prey. (1910; Appendix of African Game Trails.) Mem. Ed. VI, 399-400; Nat. Ed. V, 344.

____________. Scientific men are no more immune from hysteria and suggestion than other mortals, and every now and then there arises among them some fad which for quite a time carries even sane men off their feet. This has been the case with the latter-day development of the theories of protective coloration and of warning and recognition marks—but especially the first. Because some animals are undoubtedly protectively colored and take advantage of their coloration and are served by it, a number of naturalists have carried the theory to fantastic extremes. They have applied it where it does not exist at all, and have endeavored to extend it to a degree that has tended to make the whole theory ridiculous. Most good observers are now agreed that in the higher vertebrates, that is, in mammals and birds, the coloration of probably the majority of the species has little or nothing to do with any protective or concealing quality. There are some hundreds of species which we can say with certainty are protectively colored; there are a great number which we can say with certainty are not protectively colored. As regards others we are still in doubt. There have not been sufficiently extensive observations made of wild animals under natural conditions to enable us to speak with certainty as to just the part played by protective coloration among large numbers of the smaller mammals and birds. We are, however, able to speak with certainty as regards most big birds and especially most big mammals. (Introduction to C. H. Stigand's Hunting the Elephant in Africa; 1913.) Mem. Ed. XIV, 495; Nat. Ed. XII, 364-365.

____________. My discussion of revealing and concealing coloration among birds and mammals covers but a tiny corner even of the question of animal coloration; but I do not think that it is possible to controvert my main thesis, which is, that as regards these higher vertebrates, concealing coloration (with or without counter-shading as a basis), as a survival factor working through natural selection, has been of trivial consequence in producing the special color patterns on the great majority of birds and mammals; that it has in an immense number of cases been wholly inactive, so that in very many of these cases the animals are extraordinarily conspicuous in nature at almost all times, including the vital moments of their lives; and that in most of the large number of cases where it has actually been a factor it has merely set limits of conspicuousness, sometimes very narrow, sometimes very broad, which must not be exceeded, but within which innumerable tints and patterns are developed, owing to some entirely different slant of causation. (American Museum Journal, March 1918.) Mem. Ed. VI, 416; Nat. Ed. V, 359.

Animals—Survival of

Other things being equal, the length of an animal's stay in the land, when the arch-foe of all lower forms of animal life has made his appearance therein, depends upon the difficulty with which he is hunted and slain. But other influences have to be taken into account. The bighorn is shy and retiring; very few, compared to the whole number, will be killed; and yet the others vanish completely. Apparently, they will not remain where they are hunted and disturbed. With antelope and whitetail this does not hold; they will cling to a place far more tenaciously, even if often harassed. The former, being the more conspicuous and living in such open ground, is apt to be more persecuted; while the whitetail, longer than any other animal, keeps its place in the land in spite of the swinish game-butchers, who hunt for hides and not for sport or actual food . . . .

All game animals rely upon both eyes, ears, and nose to warn them of the approach of danger; but the amount of reliance placed on each sense varies greatly in different species. Those found out on the plains pay very little attention to what they hear; indeed, in the open they can hardly be approached near enough to make of much account any ordinary amount of noise caused by the stalker, especially as the latter is walking over little but grass and soft earth. (1885.) Mem. Ed. I, 130-131; Nat. Ed. I, 107.

____________. Among the higher vertebrates there are many known factors which have influence, some in one set of cases, some in another set of cases, in the development and preservation of species. Courage, intelligence, adaptability, prowess, bodily vigor, speed, alertness, ability to hide, ability to build structures which will protect the young while they are helpless, fecundity—all, and many more like them, have their several places; and behind all these visible causes there are at work other and often more potent causes of which as yet science can say nothing. Some species owe much to a given attribute which may be wholly lacking in influence on other species; and every one of the attributes above enumerated is a survival factor in some species, while in others it has no survival value whatever, and in yet others, although of benefit, it is not of sufficient benefit to offset the benefit conferred on foes or rivals by totally different attributes. Intelligence, for instance, is of course a survival factor; but to-day there exist multitudes of animals with very little intelligence which have persisted through immense periods of geologic time either unchanged or else without any change in the direction of increased intelligence; and during their species life they have witnessed the death of countless other species of far greater intelligence but in other ways less adapted to succeed in the environmental complex. (1914.) Mem. Ed VI, 36-37; Nat. Ed. V, 31-32.


See also Birds; Game; Hunting; Nature Study; Wild Life.


Annapolis is, with the sole exception of its sister academy at West Point, the most typically
democratic and American school of learning and preparation that there is in the entire country. Men go there from every State, from every walk of life, professing every creed—the chance of entry being open to all who perfect themselves in the necessary studies and who possess the necessary moral and physical qualities. There each man enters on his merits, stands on his merits, and graduates into a service where only his merit willenable him to be of value. (At Haverhill, Mass., August 26, 1902.) Presidential Addresses and State Papers I, 120.


See also Hazing; Jones, John Paul; West Point .

Antelope Hunting

Of all kinds of hunting, the chase of the antelope is pre-eminently that requiring skill in the use of the rifle at long range. The distance at which shots have to be taken in antelope hunting is at last double the ordinary distance at which deer are fired at. . . . I have myself done but little hunting after antelopes, and have not, as a rule, been very successful in the pursuit. Ordinary hounds are rarely, or never, used to chase this game; but coursing it with grayhounds is as manly and exhilarating a form of sport as can be imagined. (1885.) Mem. Ed. I, 180; Nat. Ed. I, 149.


See also Prongbuck.

Anthracite Coal Strike

See Coal Strike.


See Primitive Society.


While I was police commissioner an anti-Semitic preacher from Berlin, Rector Ahlwardt, came over to New York to preach a crusade against the Jews. Many of the New York Jews were much excited and asked me to prevent him from speaking and not to give him police protection. This, I told them, was impossible; and if possible would have been undesirable because it would have made him a martyr. The proper thing to do was to make him ridiculous. Accordingly I detailed for his protection a Jew sergeant and a score or two of Jew policemen. He made his harangue against the Jews under the active protection of some forty policemen, every one of them a Jew! It was the most effective possible answer; and incidentally it was an object-lesson to our people, whose greatest need it is to learn that there must be no division by class hatred, whether this hatred be that of creed against creed, nationality against nationality, section against section, or men of one social or industrial condition against men of another social or industrial condition. (1913.) Mem. Ed. XXII, 224; Nat. Ed. XX, 192.


See also Chamberlain, Houston S.; Dreyfus, Alfred; Jews; Kishineff Massacre; Religious Freedom.


See Wapiti.

Appointments—Basis of

In the appointments I shall go on exactly as I did while I was Governor of New York. The Senators and Congressmen shall ordinarily name the men, but I shall name the standard, and the men have got to come up to it. (To Henry Cabot Lodge, October 11, 1901.) Mem. Ed. XXIII, 183; Bishop I, 157.

Appointments — Responsibility for

In appointing his successor, and in appointing all other officers to these places, I must keep in mind that it is I who am primarily responsible for the appointment, not the Senators. If I appoint a man who is unfit, then of course you must refuse to confirm him; and as a matter of fact, if you will give me a man of whom I can approve, I will gladly appoint him. There is no one whom I am personally desirous of putting in any of these positions. But I do not merely desire, but am firmly determined to have, a thoroughly good type of man in the position; and I cannot surrender to any one the right to decide for me whether or not I believe the man to be a good one. I cannot permit any one to say to me that such and such a man shall be appointed and no one else; nor if I believe a man to be unfit can I accept any one else's judgment that he is fit. In return, I have of course no right to insist that the Senate shall accept my judgment as to a man's fitness. They can reject any nominee of mine; and if they do so I will try to find some thoroughly good man whom they will accept. (To Senators from Oregon, August 25, 1903.) Mem. Ed. XXIII, 286; Bishop I, 248.

Appointments and Party Organization

I want to stand well with the organization, and all that, but I wish it distinctly understood that I will appoint no man to office, even if recommended by the organization, unless he is wholly qualified for the position he seeks and is a man of integrity. (To a Senator from Illinois; conversation, October 1901.) Mem. Ed. XXIII, 181; Bishop I, 156.

Appointments and Senatorial Courtesy

I am not yet prepared to announce my decision about Mr. H., but I must emphatically dissent from your statement that “it ought to suffice for me to simply say that I prefer Y. to H.”; and furthermore, that the appointment would “be recognized as an affront to the Senior Senator from the State of New York.”. . . I do not understand how you can make such a statement. It is my business to nominate or refuse to nominate, and yours, together with your colleagues, to confirm or refuse to confirm. Of course the common-sense way is to confer together and try to come to an agreement. (To Senator T. C. Platt, June 17, 1906.) Mem. Ed. XXIV, 18; Bishop II, 14.

____________. About appointments I was obliged by the Constitution to consult the Senate; and the long- established custom of the Senate meant that in practice this consultation was with individual senators and even with big politicians who stood behind the senators. I was only one-half the appointing power; I nominated; but the Senate confirmed. In practice, by what was called "the courtesy of the Senate," the Senate normally refused to confirm any appointment if the senator from the State objected to it. In exceptional cases, where I could arouse public attention, I could force through the appointment in spite of the opposition of the senators; in all ordinary cases this was impossible. On the other hand, the senator could of course do nothing for any man unless I chose to nominate him. In consequence the Constitution itself forced the President and the senators from each State to come to a working agreement on the appointments in and from that State. (1913.) Mem. Ed. XXII, 406; Nat. Ed. XX, 348.


See also Civil Service; Negro Appointments; Office; Patronage; Spoils System.


I do not believe that all matters between nations should be arbitrated, and I do not regard even good general arbitration treaties as of really prime importance, simply because they are not, and never can be self-acting, self-fulfilling. . . . But in good faith actually to arbitrate an existing arbitral question is action, and action of the most practical kind. Outlook, October 14, 1911, p. 365.

Arbitration—Issues Not Permitting of

It would be not merely foolish but wicked for us as a nation to agree to arbitrate any dispute that affects our vital interest or our independence or our honor; because such an agreement would amount on our part to a covenant to abandon our duty, to an agreement to surrender the rights of the American people about unknown matters at unknown times in the future. Such an agreement would be wicked if kept, and yet to break it—as it undoubtedly would be broken if the occasion arose—would be only less shameful than keeping it. Outlook, November 4, 1911, P. 566.

____________. Of course as regards England, now that the Alaska Boundary is out of the way, there is not any question that we could not arbitrate, for neither England nor America would ever do anything adverse to the honor or vital interest of the other. But with either Germany or Japan it is perfectly conceivable that questions might arise which we could not submit to arbitration. If either one of them asked us to arbitrate the question of fortifying the Isthmus; or asked us to arbitrate the Monroe Doctrine, or the fortification or retention of Hawaii; or Germany's right to purchase the Danish Islands in the West Indies; or Japan's right to insist upon unlimited Japanese immigration—why! we would not and could not arbitrate. Of course mushy philanthropists, and short-sighted and greedy creatures in Boards of Trade, and the large idiot class generally, will howl about the treaty. (To H. C. Lodge, June 12, 1911.) Lodge Letters II, 404.

Arbitration and Preparedness

Arbitration is an excellent thing, but ultimately those who wish to see this country at peace with foreign nations will be wise if they place reliance upon a first- class fleet of first-class battleships rather than on any arbitration treaty which the wit of man can devise. (Address as Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Naval War College, June 1897.) Mem. Ed. XV, 241; Nat. Ed. XIII, 183.

Arbitration Treaties

Just at this moment. . . .we have negotiated certain arbitration treaties with the great foreign Powers. I most earnestly hope that those arbitration treaties will become part of the supreme law of the land. Every friend of peace will join heartily in seeing that those arbitration treaties do become part of the supreme law of the land. By adopting them we will have taken a step, not a very long step, but undoubtedly a step in the direction of minimizing the chance for any trouble that might result in war; we will have in measurable degree provided for a method of substituting international disputes other than that of war as regards certain subjects, and as regards the particular nations with whom those treaties are negotiated. We can test the sincerity of those people devoted to peace largely by seeing whether this people does in effective fashion desire to have those treaties ratified, to have those treaties adopted. I have proceeded upon the assumption that this Nation was sincere when it said that it desired peace, that all proper steps to provide against the likelihood of war ought to be taken; and these arbitration treaties represent precisely those steps. (At Annapolis, Md., January 30, 1905.) Presidential Addresses and State Papers III, 212-213.

Arbitration Treaties—Sanctity of

It is dishonorable for a nation as for an individual to break promises; and the most dishonorable way is both to break them and at the same time to make mere promises which cannot and ought not to be kept. This especially applies to international questions such as arbitration treaties. At this moment we are not living up to the treaties we have made, and yet are indulging in magniloquent talk about making new treaties, which in their turn would be promptly repudiated if ever the time came to reduce them to practice. Such a course justly exposes us to derision. It is as if in the business world a merchant repudiated his just debts, and at the same moment announced that he would like to incur new debts which there was no possibility of his paying. Only very silly people would be taken in by or approve such conduct. So it is with our nation and the question of arbitration treaties. We already have arbitration treaties. Let us continue them and live up to them, and until we have done so let us remember that it is idle folly to talk of making new treaties—that is, new promises— especially when these promises are themselves foolish. It is a mean morality which breaks a promise, and then as a substitute for keeping it proposes to make a new one which would certainly in its turn be broken. (At New York City, October 3, 1913.) Mem. Ed. XVIII, 397; Nat. Ed. XVI, 297.

Arbitration Treaties—Sincerity in

I think that this amendment makes the treaties shams, and my present impression is that we had better abandon the whole business rather than give the impression of trickiness and insincerity which would be produced by solemnly promulgating a sham. The amendment, in effect, is to make any one of these so- called arbitration treaties solemnly enact that there shall be another arbitration treaty whenever the two governments decide that there shall be one. . . .

My present feeling is that I should like to have a clear-cut issue as to whether we are or are not to take this very short but real step toward settling international difficulties by arbitration, and that if we are not to take it I should prefer to withdraw the treaties and simply say that the temper of the Senate is hostile to arbitration.

In any event I think we should avoid above everything the suspicion that we are acting insincerely or trickily, or only with an eye for political effect and making believe to pass an arbitration treaty which in reality amounts to nothing. (To H. C. Lodge, January 6, 1905.) Lodge Letters II, 111, 112.

Arbitration Treaties, General

A general arbitration treaty is nothing whatever but a promise, and surely every man in private life understands that the whole worth of a promise consists in its being kept, and that it is deeply discreditable for any man to make a promise when there is reasonable doubt whether he can keep it. A merchant who loosely promises all kinds of things without serious thought as to whether he will be able to keep his promises is in grave jeopardy of losing both his fortune and his good name. The same thing is true of a nation. We should understand that the time to weigh, and to weigh well and thoroughly, the full import of a promise is the time when it is desired to make that promise, and not the time when it is desired to break that promise. Outlook, January 18, 1913, p. 112.

____________. The all-inclusive arbitration treaties negotiated by the present administration amount to almost nothing. They are utterly worthless for good. They are however slightly mischievous because:
1. There is no provision for their enforcement, and,
2. They would be in some cases not only impossible but improper to enforce.

A treaty is a promise. It is like a promise to pay in the commercial world. Its value lies in the means provided for redeeming the promise. To make it, and not redeem it, is vicious. . . . The Wilson-Bryan all- inclusive arbitration treaties represent nothing whatever but international fiat money. To make them is no more honest than it is to issue fiat money. Mr. Bryan would not make a good secretary of the treasury, but he would do better in that position than as secretary of state. For his type of fiat obligations is a little worse in international than in internal affairs. The all-inclusive arbitration treaties, in whose free and unlimited negotiation Mr. Bryan takes such pleasure, are of less value than the thirty-cent dollars, whose free and unlimited coinage he formerly advocated. (Everybody's, January 1915.) Mem. Ed. XX, 157; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 135.

____________. I am not willing to admit that this nation has no duty to other nations. Yet the action of this government during the past year can only be defended on the assumption that we have no such duty to others.

Of course, it is a defensible, although not a lofty, position to deny that there is such a duty. But it is wholly indefensible to proclaim that there is such a duty and then in practice to abandon it. It is a base thing to propose to pass all-inclusive arbitration treaties, and to pass the thirty-odd all-inclusive commission peace treaties that actually have been passed during the last two years, and yet not to dare to say one word when The Hague conventions which we have already signed are violated by the strong at the expense of the weak. I agree with the abstract theory of the men responsible for all these various treaties; for this theory is to the effect that America owes a duty to the world, to humanity at large. I disagree with their practice, because I believe that we should in fact perform this duty, instead of merely talking about it in the abstract and then shamefully abandoning it the moment it becomes concrete. (Metropolitan, October 1915.) Mem. Ed. XX, 331; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 284.

Arbitration Treaties, General— Effects of

A few weeks ago. . . .people were stirred to a moment's belief that something had been accomplished by the enactment at Washington of a score or two of all-inclusive arbitration treaties; being not unnaturally misled by the fact that those responsible for the passage of the treaties indulged in some not wholly harmless bleating as to the good effects they would produce. As a matter of fact, they probably will not produce the smallest effect of any kind or sort. Yet it is possible they may have a mischievous effect, inasmuch as under certain circumstances to fulfil them would cause frightful disaster to the United States, while to break them, even although under compulsion and because it was absolutely necessary, would be fruitful of keen humiliation to every right-thinking man who is jealous of our international good name. (New York Times, November 1, 1914.) Mem. Ed. XX, 74; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 64.

Arbitration Treaties, General—Value of

Under existing conditions universal and all- inclusive arbitration treaties have been utterly worthless, because where there is no power to compel nations to arbitrate, and where it is perfectly certain that some nations will pay no respect to such agreements unless they can be forced to do so, it is mere folly for others to trust to promises impossible of performance; and it is an act of positive bad faith to make these promises when it is certain that the nation making them would violate them. But this does not in the least mean that we must abandon hope of taking action which will lessen the chance of war and make it more possible to circumscribe the limits of war's devastation. (Outlook, September 23, 1914.) Mem. Ed. XX, 33; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 28.

____________. Recently, there have been negotiated in Washington thirty or forty little all-inclusive arbitration or so-called "peace" treaties, which represent as high a degree of fatuity as is often achieved in these matters. There is no likelihood that they will do us any great material harm because it is absolutely certain that we would not pay the smallest attention to them in the event of their being invoked in any matter where our interests were seriously involved; but it would do us moral harm to break them, even although this were the least evil of two evil alternatives. It is a discreditable thing that at this very moment, with before our eyes such proof of the worthlessness of the neutrality treaties affecting Belgium and Luxembourg, our nation should be negotiating treaties which convince every sensible and well-informed observer abroad that we are either utterly heedless in making promises which cannot be kept or else willing to make promises which we have no intention of keeping. What has just happened shows that such treaties are worthless except to the degree that force can and will be used in backing them. (New York Times, October 4, 1914.) Mem. Ed. XX, 41; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 35.

Arbitration Treaties, General Versus Specific

General arbitration treaties under the best circumstances can only be promises; they appeal especially to sentimentalists, who are never safe advisers, and their importance is usually exaggerated to a ludicrous degree; the really important thing is the practical application of the principle to specific instances. (Outlook, September 9, 1911.) Mem. Ed. XVIII, 421; Nat. Ed. XVI, 314.

Arbitration Treaties, Limited

Genuine good can even now be accomplished by narrowly limited and defined arbitration treaties which are not all-inclusive, if they deal with subjects on which arbitration can be accepted. This nation has repeatedly acted in obedience to such treaties; and great good has come from arbitrations in such cases as, for example, the Dogger Bank incident, when the Russian fleet fired on British trawlers during the Russo-Japanese War. (New York Times, October 4, 1914.) Mem. Ed. XX, 36; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 31.

Arbitration Treaty with British Empire

The time has now come when it would be perfectly safe to enter into universal arbitration treaties with the British Empire, for example, reserving such rights only as Australia and Canada themselves would reserve inside the British Empire; but there are a number of outside peoples with whom it would not be safe to go much further than above outlined. If we only made this one kind of agreement, we could keep it, and we should make no agreement that we would not and could not keep. More essential than anything else is it for us to remember that in matters of this kind an ounce of practical performance is worth a ton of windy rhetorical promises. (Kansas City Star, November 17, 1918.) Mem. Ed. XXI, 447; Nat. Ed. XIX, 403.

Arbitration Treaty with Germany

I hope you can see your way clear to have your Government enter into a treaty of arbitration with the United States. In the form in which the treaty now is I freely admit that it is not as effective as I could wish. Nevertheless good will result from the expression of good will implied in the treaty; and it would have a certain binding effect upon the Senate, making it morally obligatory to accept any reasonable agreement which might subsequently be made. Moreover it would confer a real benefit in the event of any sudden flurry both by providing the executives of the two countries with an excellent reason for demanding cool consideration of any question by their respective peoples, and also by enabling them to make a strong appeal under the sanction of a solemn treaty to both the peoples and their legislatures to accept an honorable arbitration. (To Emperor William II, May 6, 1908.) Mem. Ed. XXIV, 333; Bishop II, 283.


See also Hague Conventions; Hague Treaties; International Disputes; League For Peace; League of Nations; Neutrality; Peace; Treaties.

Arbitration, Industrial

See Industrial Arbitration.

Arbor Day

Arbor Day (which means simply “Tree Day”) is now observed in every State in our Union— and mainly in the schools. At various times from January to December, but chiefly in this month of April, you give a day or part of a day to special exercises and perhaps to actual tree-planting, in recognition of the importance of trees to us as a nation, and of what they yield in adornment, comfort, and useful products to the communities in which you live. It is well that you should celebrate your Arbor Day thoughtfully, for within your lifetime the nation’s need of trees will become serious. We of an older generation can get along with what we have, though with growing hardship; but in your full manhood and womanhood you will want what nature once so bountifully supplied and man so thoughtlessly destroyed; and because of that want you will reproach us, not for what we have used, but for what we have wasted. . . .

A true forest is not merely a storehouse full of wood, but, as it were, a factory of wood, and at the same time a reservoir of water. When you help to preserve our forests or to plant new ones, you are acting the part of good citizens. The value of forestry deserves, therefore, to be taught in the schools, which aim to make good citizens of you. If your Arbor Day exercises help you to realize what benefits each one of you receives from the forests, and how by your assistance these benefits may continue, they will serve a good end. (Arbor Day message to school-children, Washington, April 15, 1907.) Mem. Ed. XVIII, 166- 167; Nat. Ed. XVI, 127-128.

Arbor Day

See also Conservation; Forest; Trees.


Archaeologists, in order to reach the highest point in their profession, should be not merely antiquarians but out-of-door men, and above all, gifted with that supreme quality of the best type of historian, the quality of seeing the living body through the dry bones, and then making others see it also. In fact, this is just what the archaeologist is: a historian.

The best archaeologist ought to be a man whose books would be as fascinating as Thucydides or Tacitus, Gibbon or Macaulay; as fascinating and as fundamentally truthful as Herodotus himself. (Outlook, September 30, 1911.) Mem. Ed. XIV, 55; Nat. Ed. XII, 174-175.


See also Historical Knowledge; Inscriptions; Primitive Society.


Mere copying, mere imitation is as thoroughly unworthy in architecture as in every other branch of art and life. We need to profit by everything which has been done in the past, or is now being done, in other countries. We need always to adopt and develop what we adopt, and, if possible, ourselves to develop what is new and original or else what is indigenous to our soil. California and the South-west generally have been particularly successful in thus developing the old colonial Spanish architecture to our own uses; and in places the southwestern people are now doing the same thing with the far older architecture of the Pueblo Indians. The need of avoiding the aberrations of false or artificial originality must not blind us to the fact that unless there is real originality there will be no greatness.

To follow conventions merely because they are conventions is silly. . . . Let me give one small instance; the lion, because of the way in which his mane lends itself to use in stone, has always been a favorite for decorative purposes in architecture. He has in architecture become universally acclimatized and there is no objection to his use anywhere. But we happen to have here on this continent, in the bison with its shaggy frontlet and mane and short curved horns, a beast which equally lends itself to decorative use and which possesses the advantage of being our own. I earnestly wish that the conventions of architecture here in America would be so shaped as to include a widespread use of the bison’s head; and in a case like that of the New York Public Library there would be advantage from every standpoint in substituting two complete bisons' figures for the preposterous lions, apparently in the preliminary stages of epilepsy, which now front on and disgrace Fifth Avenue.

There is good architecture, public and private, here in the United States, good architecture of all types from the loftiest to the humblest, but it is over-slaughed by the mass of poor architecture. If houses are built simply and comfortably, and if each feature possesses a definite and wholesome purpose, then, although they may lack distinction, they are never ridiculous or discreditable. But there are avenues in at least some of our big cities, and in at least some residential countrysides, which run between houses, mostly small houses, two-thirds of which represent painted and pretentious gimcrackery of the most odious type. There are districts crowded with domiciles of the very wealthy which are mere jumbles of unrelated copies of what is good abroad and of sporadic types of native ugliness. Yet there are also plenty of houses in the city and the country where wealth and taste have combined to give to the house distinction, while yet amplifying all that is useful and comfortable. These houses show love of beauty for its own sake, and also the power to heighten comfort and usefulness while making them beautiful. (Letter to American Institute of Architects, read December 7, 1916.) Proceedings of the Fiftieth Annual Convention of the American Institute of Architects, Minneapolis, Minn., p. 45.


See also Public Buildings.

Arctic and Antarctic Regions

The contrast in life between the arctic and antarctic regions is very striking. The antarctic continent is a vast snow- covered mass of land, absolutely lifeless except for the life of whale and seal, penguin and gull, on the fringes. This is a most interesting life for the naturalists. . . . But this life, though interesting, is limited. There are no mammals, and no man has ever dwelt there nor visited it save as explorers visit it. There has never been any permanent human habitation even on the fringe of the antarctic. All this is reversed in the arctic region. There is an abundant life stretching very far toward the pole, and probably there are some representatives of this life which occasionally stray to the pole. Both in the water and on the ice when it is solid over the water, and on the land, in the brief arctic summer when the sun never sets, the arctic regions teem with life as do few other portions of the globe. Save where killed out by men, whales, seals, walruses, and innumerable fish literally swarm in the waters; myriads not only of water-birds but of land-birds fairly darken the air in their flights; and there are many strange mammals, some of which abound with a plenty which one would associate rather with the tropics. (Outlook, March 1, 1913.) Mem. Ed. XIV, 586; Nat. Ed. XII, 442.

Arctic Explorers

See Peary, Robert E.


See Monroe Doctrine.

Aristocracy and Plutocracy

There is something to be said for government by a great aristocracy which has furnished leaders to the nation in peace and war for generations; even a democrat like myself must admit this. But there is absolutely nothing to be said for government by a plutocracy, for government by men very powerful in certain lines and gifted with the "money touch," but with ideals which in their essence are merely those of so many glorified pawnbrokers. (To Sir Edward Grey, November 15, 1913.) Mem. Ed. XXIV, 409; Bishop II, 347.

Aristocracy and Plutocracy

See also Materialist; Millionaires; Wealth.


The present contest is but a phase of the larger struggle. Assuredly the fight will go on whether we win or lose; but it will be a sore disaster to lose. What happens to me is not of the slightest consequence; I am to be used, as in a doubtful battle any man is used, to his hurt or not, so long as he is useful, and is then cast aside or left to die. I wish you to feel this. I mean it; and I shall need no sympathy when you are through with me, for this fight is far too great to permit us to concern ourselves about any one man's welfare. If we are true to ourselves by putting far above our own interests the triumph of the high cause for which we battle we shall not lose. It would be far better to fail honorably for the cause we champion than it would be to win by foul methods the foul victory for which our opponents hope. But the victory shall be ours, and it shall be won as we have already won so many victories, by clean and honest fighting for the loftiest of causes. We fight in honorable fashion for the good of mankind; fearless of the future; unheeding of our individual fates; with unflinching hearts and undimmed eyes; we stand at Armageddon, and we battle for the Lord. (At Chicago, June 17, 1912.) Mem. Ed. XIX, 317; Nat. Ed. XVII, 231.

Armaments—Limitation of

Something should be done as soon as possible to check the growth of armaments, especially vital armaments, by international agreement. No one power could or should act by itself; for it is eminently undesirable, from the standpoint of the peace of righteousness, that a power which really does believe in peace should place itself at the mercy of some rival which may at bottom have no such belief and no intention of acting on it. But, granted sincerity of purpose, the great powers of the world should find no insurmountable difficulty in reaching an agreement which would put an end to the present costly and growing extravagance of expenditure on naval armaments. An agreement merely to limit the size of ships would have been very useful a few years ago, and would still be of use; but the agreement should go much further. (Before Nobel Prize Committee, Christiania, Norway; May 5, 1910.) Mem. Ed. XVIII, 414; Nat. Ed. XVI, 308.

Armaments—Need for

There is every reason why we should try to limit the cost of armaments, as these tend to grow excessive, but there is also every reason to remember that in the present stage of civilization a proper armament is the surest guarantee of peace—and is the only guarantee that war, if it does come, will not mean irreparable and overwhelming disaster. (1913.) Mem. Ed. XXII, 245; Nat. Ed. XX, 210.


See also Disarmament; Munitions; Naval Armaments; Preparedness.

Armenian Massacres

The news of the terrible fate that has befallen the Armenians must give a fresh shock of sympathy and indignation. Let me emphatically point out that the sympathy is useless unless it is accompanied with indignation, and that the indignation is useless if it exhausts itself in words instead of taking shape in deeds. (To Samuel T. Dutton, chairman, Committee on Armenian Outrages. November 24, 1915.) Mem. Ed. XX, 445; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 382.

Armenians—Sacrifice of

Thanks largely to the very unhealthy influence of the men whose business it is to speculate in the money market, and who approach every subject from the financial standpoint, purely; and thanks quite as much to the cold-blooded brutality and calculating timidity of many European rulers and statesmen, the peace of Europe has been preserved, while the Turk has been allowed to butcher the Armenians with hideous and unmentionable barbarity, and has actually been helped to keep Crete in slavery. War has been averted at the cost of more bloodshed and infinitely more suffering and degradation to wretched women and children than have occured in any European struggle since the days of Waterloo. No war of recent years, no matter how wanton, has been so productive of horrible misery as the peace which the powers have maintained during the continuance of the Armenian butcheries. (Address as Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Naval War College; June, 1897.) Mem. Ed. XV, 242; Nat. Ed. XIII, 184.

Army—Efficiency of the

As a nation we have always been short-sighted in providing for the efficiency of the army in time of peace. (Seventh Annual Message, Washington, December 3, 1907.) Mem. Ed. XVII, 547; Nat. Ed. XV, 466.

____________. In no country with an army worth calling such is there a chance for a man physically unfit to stay in the service. Our countrymen should understand that every army officer—and every marine officer—ought to be summarily removed from the service unless he is able to undergo far severer tests than those which, as a beginning, I imposed. To follow any other course is to put a premium on slothful incapacity, and to do the gravest wrong to the nation. (1913.) Mem. Ed. XXII, 59; Nat. Ed. XX, 51.

Army—Promotions in the

General X. has been in several times to see me, more often than any other candidate for promotion. He has an excellent record but seems unable to understand the utter impropriety of doing what he asks, which is, not to promote him to a vacancy but to punish some man now in the service by forcing him to retire in order to do a favor to General X. It is barely possible that some case would arise of so extreme a character as to justify such a proceeding, but I can hardly imagine it. There is no warrant whatever for doing it in General X's case as an exception, and it surely cannot be advocated as a general policy. It is not a question of giving General X. a promotion. It is a question of doing him a favor to which he has no more claim than hundreds of other officers, by doing a serious wrong and injustice to a man now in office. (To a Congressman from Maine, November 9, 1901.) Mem. Ed. XXIII, 182; Bishop I, 156.

____________. When I uphold the hands of the General Staff by taking their recommendations for promotion as against those of any outsider, no matter how influential, no matter how powerful, I am doing my best to prevent our little army from being reduced to a condition which would be only one degree above that to which it would be reduced if I tolerated actual corruption. In so acting, it seems to me that I am entitled to the support of every good American who feels that the Army is the property of the Nation, and not of one party, still less of any individual in that party. I can no more allow it to be run in the interest of politicians than I could allow it to be run in the interests of contractors or patentees. It is to be run in the interest of the entire American people, and with an eye single to making it the best and that it can possibly be made. (To a Senator from Vermont, June 3, 1905.) Mem. Ed. XXIII, 510; Bishop I, 444.

____________. I like what you say about the fact that 90 per cent of the officers in the division have risen from the ranks. . . . This represents the true American spirit; and when we get our universal service every officer in the army and the navy will have served for a year as an enlisted man before he is eligible for appointment as an officer. (To enlisted men, Twenty- seventh N. Y. Volunteer Division, April 6, 1918.) Mem. Ed. XXIV, 519; Bishop II, 443.

Army—Rations in the

It is all right to have differences in food and the like in times of peace and plenty, when everybody is comfortable. But in really hard times officers and men must share alike if the best work is to be done. (1913.) Mem. Ed. XXII, 302; Nat. Ed. XX, 258.

Army—Reorganization of the

Our army needs complete reorganization,—not merely enlarging,—and the reorganization can only come as the result of legislation. A proper general staff should be established, and the positions of ordnance, commissary, and quartermaster officers should be filled by detail from the line. Above all, the army must be given the chance to exercise in large bodies. Never again should we see, as we saw in the Spanish war, major-generals in command of divisions who had never before commanded three companies together in the field. Yet, incredible to relate, Congress has shown a queer inability to learn some of the lessons of the war. There were large bodies of men in both branches who opposed the declaration of war, who opposed the ratification of peace, who opposed the upbuilding of the army, and who even opposed the purchase of armor at a reasonable price for the battleships and cruisers, thereby putting an absolute stop to the building of any new fighting-ships for the navy. If, during the years to come, any disaster should befall our arms, afloat or ashore, and thereby any shame come to the United States, remember that the blame will lie upon the men whose names appear upon the roll-calls of Congress on the wrong side of these great questions. On them will lie the burden of any loss of our soldiers and sailors, of any dishonor to the flag; and upon you and the people of this country will lie the blame if you do not repudiate, in no unmistakable way, what these men have done. (Before the Hamilton Club, Chicago, April 10, 1899.) Mem. Ed. XV, 276-277; Nat. Ed. XIII, 327.

Army, Regular

Provide a Regular Army of a quarter of a million men. Relatively to the nation this army would be no larger than the New York police force is relatively to the city of New York. On paper our present strength is one hundred thousand, and we have in the United States a mobile army of only thirty thousand men. We need ten thousand more men adequately to man our coast defenses at home, and five thousand additional adequately to man those abroad. We need twenty thousand additional men to provide an adequate mobile army for meeting a raid on our overseas possessions. At home we should have a mobile army of one hundred and fifty thousand men, in order to guarantee us against having New York or San Francisco at once seized by any big military nation which went to war with us. A quarter of a million in the Regular Army is the minimum that will insure the nation’s safety from sudden attack. (Metropolitan, February 1916.) Mem. Ed. XX, 290; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 249.

Army, Regular—Cost of

In a country like ours a professional army will always be costly, for as regards such an army the government has to go into the labor market for its soldiers, and compete against industrialism. (Metropolitan, February 1916.) Mem. Ed. XX, 294; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 252.

Army, Standing

I do not believe in a large standing army. Most emphatically I do not believe in militarism. Most emphatically I do not believe in any policy of aggression by us. But I do believe that no man is really fit to be the free citizen of a free republic unless he is able to bear arms and at deed to serve with efficiency in the efficient army of the republic. (New York Times, November 15, 1914.) Mem. Ed. XX, 107; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 92.

Army in a Democracy

If we are a true democracy, if we really believe in government of the people by the people and for the people, if we believe in social and industrial justice to be achieved through the people, and therefore in the right of the people to demand the service of all the people, let us make the army fundamentally an army of the whole people. (Metropolitan, November 1915. ) Mem. Ed. XX, 391; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 335.

Army Officers—Training of

The careful training in body and mind, and especially in character, gained in an academy like West Point, and the subsequent experience in the field, endow the regular officer with such advantages that, in any but a long war, he cannot be overtaken even by the best natural fighter. In the American Civil War, for instance, the greatest leaders were all West Pointers. Yet even there, by the end of the contest both armies had produced regimental, brigade, and division commanders, who though originally from civil life, had learned to know their business exactly as well as the best regular officers; and there was at least one such commander—Forrest—who, in his own class, was unequalled. If in a war the regular officers prove to have been trained merely to the pedantry of their profession, and do not happen to number men of exceptional ability in their ranks, then sooner or later the men who are born soldiers will come to the front, even though they have been civilians until late in life. (1900.) Mem. Ed. XIII, 335; Nat. Ed. X, 228.


See also Chaplains; Desertion; Military Forces; Military History; Military Service; Military Training; National Guard; Rough Riders; West Point; Westward Movement.

Arnold, Benedict

How well you have done Benedict Arnold! How will you deal with his fall; with the money-paid treason of the rider of the war storm! What a base web was shot through the woof of his wild daring! He was at heart a Lucifer, that child of thunder and lover of the battle's hottest heat; and dreadful it is to think that when he fell his fall should have been, not that of the lightning-blasted Son of the Morning, but that of a mere Mammon or Belial. (To Sir George Otto Trevelyan, January 1, 1908.) Mem. Ed. XXIV, 197; Bishop II, 168.

Arnold, Matthew

Mr. Matthew Arnold's sudden death was felt almost as much in the American as in the English world of letters. We on this side of the water feel that we owe him as much as you do. We are far from agreeing with all his views; there are many of them which we do not believe could be held by a healthy and rudely vigorous nation; but we know that we get from his writings much of which our own civilization stands in especial need. Moreover, he is entitled to a most respectful hearing when he points out what he deems the shortcomings of our civilization; and were his remarks malicious, which they are not, and unjust, which they are only in part, it would not diminish in the least the debt due from us to him.

Mr. Arnold undoubtedly tried to write about us in the only way that can possibly produce good, either to the people criticized or to the other people who are to profit by the example portrayed. He wrote his last two articles only after some observation, and he evidently honestly endeavored to discriminate between the good and the bad. Where he failed to be fair, the failure was probably entirely unintentional; it was wholly out of his power to do full justice to a rough, pushing, vigorous people. The roseate-hued after-dinner account of an already prejudiced friend, produced after three months' travel, practically from one entertainment to another, however pleasant reading, is but a shade less useless than the bitter diatribe written by some one resolutely determined to see all things through a gloomy fog of dislike. Every people, as well as every system, has its faults and virtues; if the former overbalance the latter, the observer should say so, but he should be sure of his scales first. We honestly believe that our system has on the whole worked better than any other; but plenty of defects can be pointed out even by its friends; and if any foreigner who has studied it believes it to be bad, and fears that its influence both on our own people and on European races will be detrimental, then it is not only his right, but his duty, to say so and give his reasons. Eclectic Magazine, November 1888, p. 583.


Art, or at least the art for which I care, must present the ideal through the temperament and the interpretation of the painter. I do not greatly care for the reproduction of landscapes which, in effect, I see whenever I ride or walk. I wish ‘the light that never was on land or sea’ in the pictures that I am to live with. (To P. Marcius Simons, March 19, 1904.) Mem. Ed. XXIII, 377; Bishop I, 327.

____________. Of course an over-self-conscious straining after a nationalistic form of expression may defeat itself. But this is merely because self- consciousness is almost always a drawback. The self- conscious striving after originality also tends to defeat itself. Yet the fact remains that the greatest work must bear the stamp of originality. In exactly the same way the greatest work must bear the stamp of nationalism. American work must smack of our own soil, mental and moral, no less than physical, or it will have little of permanent value.

Let us profit by the scholarship, art, and literature of every other country and every other time; let us adapt to our own use whatever is of value in any other language, in any other literature, in any other art; but let us keep steadily in mind that in every field of endeavor the work best worth doing for Americans must in some degree express the distinctive characteristics of our own national soul. (Before Amer. Academy and Nat. Inst. of Arts and Letters, New York City, November 16, 1916.) Mem. Ed. XIV, 461-462; Nat. Ed. XII, 336.

Art—National Gallery of

There should be a national gallery of art established in the capital city of this country. This is important not merely to the artistic but to the material welfare of the country; and the people are to be congratulated on the fact that the movement to establish such a gallery is taking definite form under the guidance of the Smithsonian Institution. So far from there being a tariff on works of art brought into the country, their importation should be encouraged in every way. There have been no sufficient collections of objects of art by the government, and what collections have been acquired are scattered and are generally placed in unsuitable and imperfectly lighted galleries. (Seventh Annual Message, Washington, December 3, 1907.) Mem. Ed. XVII, 541- 542; Nat. Ed. XV, 461.

Art and National Life

Normally there must be some relation between art and the national life if the art is to represent a real contribution to the sum of artistic world development. Nations have achieved greatness without this greatness representing any artistic side; other great nations have developed an artistic side only after a preliminary adoption of what has been supplied by the creative genius of some wholly alien people. But the national greatness which is wholly divorced from every form of artistic production, whether in literature, painting, sculpture, or architecture, unless it is marked by extraordinary achievements in war and government, is not merely a one-sided, but a malformed, greatness, as witness Tyre, Sidon, and Carthage.

It behooves us in the United States not to be content with repeating on a larger scale the history of commercial materialism of the great Phœnician commonwealths. This means that here in America, if we do not develop a serious art and literature of our own, we shall have a warped national life. (Before Amer. Academy and Nat. Inst. of Arts and Letters, New York City, November 16, 1916.) Mem. Ed. XIV, 452; Nat. Ed. XII, 329.


See also Architecture; Painting; Public Buildings.


See Remington, F.; Saint-Gau-Dens, Augustus.

Aryan Supremacy

See Chamberlain, Houston Stewart.


See China; India; Japan; Mongol Invasions; Orient; Philippines.

Asiatic Immigration

See Chinese Immigration; Immigration; Japanese Exclusion.

Assassination—Risk of

The secret service men are a very small but very necessary thorn in the flesh. Of course they would not be the least use in preventing any assault upon my life. I do not believe there is any danger of such an assault, and if there were it would be simple nonsense to try to prevent it, for as Lincoln said, though it would be safer for a President to live in a cage, it would interfere with his business. (To H. C. Lodge, August 6, 1906.) Lodge Letters II, 224.

Assassination, Attempted

Prominence in public life inevitably means that creatures of morbid and semi-criminal type are incited thereby to murderous assault. But . . . I must say I have never understood public men who get nervous about assassination. For the last eleven years I have of course thoroughly understood that I might at any time be shot, and probably would be shot some time. I think I have come off uncommonly well. But what I cannot understand is any serious-minded public man not being so absorbed in the great and vital questions with which he has to deal as to exclude thoughts of assassination. I do not think this is a question of courage at all. I think it is a question of the major interest driving out the minor interest. (To Sir George Otto Trevelyan, October 29, 1912.) Mem. Ed. XXIV, 205; Bishop II, 176.

____________ Modern civilization is undoubtedly somewhat soft, and the average political orator or party leader, the average broker, or banker, or factory-owner, at least when he is past middle age, is apt to be soft—I mean both mentally and physically—and such a man accepts being shot as a frightful and unheard-of calamity, and feels very sorry for himself and thinks only of himself and not of the work on which he is engaged or of his duty to others, or indeed of his real self-respect. But a good soldier or sailor, or for the matter of that even a civilian accustomed to hard and hazardous pursuits, a deep-sea fisherman, or railwayman, or cowboy, or lumber-jack, or miner, would normally act as I acted without thinking anything about it. . . . There was then a perfectly obvious duty, which was to go on and make my speech. In the very unlikely event of the wound being mortal I wished to die with my boots on, so to speak. . . . Moreover, I felt that under such circumstances it would be very difficult for people to disbelieve in my sincerity, and that therefore they would be apt to accept at the face value the speech I wished to make. (To Sir Edward Grey, November 15, 1912.) Mem. Ed. XXIV, 401, 403; Bishop II, 342, 343.

____________. I have not the slightest feeling against him [the assassin]; I have a very strong feeling against the people who, by their ceaseless and intemperate abuse, excited him to the action, and against the mushy people who would excuse him and all other criminals once the crime has been committed. (To J. St. Loe Strachey, December 16, 1912.) Mem. Ed. XXIV, 404; Bishop II, 344.

____________. I did not care a rap for being shot. It is a trade risk, which every prominent public man ought to accept as a matter of course. For eleven years I have been prepared any day to be shot; and if any one of the officers of my regiment had abandoned the battle merely because he received a wound that did nothing worse than break a rib, I should never have trusted that officer again. I would have expected him to keep on in the fight as long as he could stand; and what I expect lieutenants to do I expect a fortiori, a leader to do. (To Sir Cecil Arthur Spring-Rice, December 31, 1912.) Mem. Ed. XXIV, 404; Bishop II, 344.

Assassination, Attempted

See also Bull Moose.


See Political Assessments.


See American People; Americanization; Immigration; Language.


It is of far more importance that a man shall play something himself, even if he plays it badly, than that he shall go with hundreds of companions to see some one else play well. . . . We can not afford to turn out of college men who shrink from physical effort or from a little physical pain. In any republic courage is a prime necessity for the average citizen if he is to be a good citizen; and he needs physical courage no less than moral courage, the courage that dares as well as the courage that endures, the courage that will fight valiantly alike against the foes of the soul and the foes of the body. Athletics are good, especially in their rougher forms, because they tend to develop such courage. They are good also because they encourage a true democratic spirit; for in the athletic field the man must be judged not with reference to outside and accidental attributes, but to that combination of bodily vigor and moral quality which go to make up prowess. (At the Harvard Union, Cambridge, February 23, 1907.) Mem. Ed. XV, 483, 484; Nat. Ed. XIII, 560, 561.

____________. I believe in athletics; but I believe in them chiefly because of the moral qualities that they display. I am glad to see the boy able to keep his nerve in a close baseball game, able to keep his courage under the punishment of a football game or in a four-mile boat race; because if the boy really amounts to anything and has got the right stuff in him, this means that he is going to keep his nerve and courage in more important things in after life. If your prowess is due simply to the possession of big muscles, it does not amount to much. What counts is the ability to back up the muscles with the right spirit. If you have the pluck, the grit, in you to count in sports, just as if you have the pluck and grit in you to count in your studies, so in both cases it will help you to count in after life. (At Georgetown College, Washington, D. C., June 14, 1906.) Presidential Addresses and State Papers, V, 789.

Athletics — Proper Place of

Every vigorous game, from football to polo, if allowed to become more than a game, and if serious work is sacrificed to its enjoyment, is of course noxious. From the days when Trajan in his letters to Pliny spoke with such hearty contempt of the Greek overdevotion to athletics, every keen thinker has realized that vigorous sports are only good in their proper place. But in their proper place they are very good indeed. (Foreword to The Master of Game by Edward, second Duke of York; dated February 15, 1904.) Mem. Ed. XIV, 481; Nat. Ed. XII, 352.

____________. The amateur athlete who thinks of nothing but athletics, and makes it the serious business of his life, becomes a bore, if nothing worse. A young man who has broken running or jumping record, who has stroked a winning club crew, or played on his college nine or eleven, has a distinct claim to our respect; but if, when middle-aged, he has still done nothing more in the world, he forfeits even this claim which he originally had. (North American Review, August 1890.) Mem. Ed. XV, 520; Nat. Ed. XIII, 586- 587.

____________. Athletic sports are excellent when treated as what they should be, that is as healthy pastimes; they become harmful if indulged in to excess, and if their importance in relation to the serious work of life is misestimated; and still more harmful when twisted into adjuncts of brutality or gambling. (Annual Message as Governor, Albany, January 3, 1900.) Mem. Ed. XVII, 66; Nat. Ed. XV, 57.

____________. I am delighted to have you play football. I believe in rough, manly sports. But I do not believe in them if they degenerate into the sole end of any one’s existence. I don’t want you to sacrifice standing well in your studies to any over-athleticism; and I need not tell you that character counts for a great deal more than either intellect or body in winning success in life. Athletic proficiency is a mighty good servant; and like so many other good servants, a mighty bad master. (To Theodore Roosevelt, Jr., October 4, 1903.) Mem. Ed. XXI, 502; Nat. Ed. XIX, 445.


See also Boxing; Football; Gymnastics; Jiu Jitsu; Playgrounds; Sports.


How entirely I sympathize with your feelings in the attic! I know just what it is to get up into such a place and find the delightful, winding passages where one lay hidden with thrills of criminal delight, when the grown-ups were vainly demanding one’s appearance at some legitimate and abhorred function; and then the once-beloved and half-forgotten treasures, and the emotions of peace and war, with reference to former companions, which they recall. (To Ethel Roosevelt, June 17, 1906.) Mem. Ed. XXI, 566; Nat. Ed. XIX, 508.

Audubon Societies

The Audubon Society and kindred organizations have done much for the proper protection of birds and of wild creatures generally; they have taken the lead in putting a stop to wanton or shortsighted destruction, and in giving effective utterance to the desires of those who wish to cultivate a spirit as far removed as possible from that which brings about such destruction. Sometimes, however, in endeavoring to impress upon a not easily aroused public the need for action, they in their zeal overstate this need. This is a very venial error compared to the good they have done, but in the interest of scientific accuracy it is to be desired that their cause should not be buttressed in such manner. (1905.) Mem. Ed. III 313; Nat. Ed. III, 124.

____________. The Audubon societies and all similar organizations are doing a great work for the future of our country. Birds should be saved because of utilitarian reasons; and, moreover, they should be saved because of reasons unconnected with any return in dollars and cents... And to lose the chance to see frigate-birds soaring in circles above the storm, or a file of pelicans winging their way homeward across the crimson afterglow of the sunset, or a myriad terns flashing the bright light of midday as they hover in a shifting maze above the beach—why, the loss is like the loss of a gallery of the masterpieces of the artists of old time. (1916.) Mem. Ed. IV, 226-227; Nat. Ed. III, 376- 377.

____________. I need hardly say how heartily I sympathize with the purposes of the Audubon Society. I would like to see all harmless wild things, but especially all birds, protected in every way. I do not understand how any man or woman who really loves nature can fail to try to exert all influence in support of such objects as those of the Audubon Society.

Spring would not be spring without bird songs, any more than it would be spring without buds and flowers, and I only wish that besides protecting the songsters, the birds of the grove, the orchard, the garden and the meadow, we could also protect the birds of the sea-shore and of the wildnerness. (To Chapman, March 22, 1899.) Frank M. Chapman, Autobiography of a Bird-Lover. (D. Appleton-Century Co., N. Y., 1933), pp. 180-181.

Audubon Societies

See also Birds; Wild Life.

Australia — Admiration for

I have, as every American ought to have, a hearty admiration for, and fellow feeling with, Australia, and I believe that America should be ready to stand back of Australia in any serious emergency. (1913.) Mem. Ed. XXII, 628; Nat. Ed. XX, 540.

Authority — Conditions of

No man is fit for control who does not possess intelligence, self-respect, and respect for the just rights of others. (1917.) Mem. Ed. XXI, 70; Nat. Ed. XIX, 59.


See also Power.


See Arnold, Matthew; Beebe, William; Beveridge, Albert J.; Browning, Robert ; Bryce, Lord; Burroughs, John; Carlyle, Thomas; Chamberlain, Houston S.; Cooper, James F.; Dante; Davis, Richard H.; Dickens, Charles; Garland, Hamlin; Gorky, Maxim; Harris, Joel Chandler; Lodge, George Cabot; Lowell, James Russell; Macaulay, Lord; Mahan, A. T.; Milton, John; Morris, William; Muir, John; Parkman, Francis; Robinson, E. A.; Selous, F. C.; Simms, W. G.; Tolstoy, Leo; Trevelyan, Sir George O.; Wister, Owen.

Aviation in War-Time

We must also remember that while we are still only beginning to build the twenty thousand airplanes, and beginning to train the future twenty thousand aviators to fly, we have not yet even begun to train the few hundred aviators we already have, to fight. After the best type of airplane has been produced in vast numbers, and after the tens of thousands of men necessary have been trained to handle them in the air, it will still be necessary to train them how to do the actual shooting against the war-hawks on the other side, and the actual bombing at the same time that they dodge the anti-aircraft guns of the enemy. We have waited to learn all this and to do all this until war actually came, although for over two years and a half we were vouchsafed such warning as no other nation in recent times has had in advance of war. (Stafford Little Lecture at Princeton University, November 1917.) Theodore Roosevelt, National Strength and International Duty. (Princeton, N. J., 1917), pp. 50-51.


The Theodore Roosevelt Association is a 501(c)(3) charitable organization. Tax Identification #13-559-3999

GuideStar: We have earned a 2024 Platinum Seal of Transparency with Candid and a Four-Star Rating !

GuideStar: We have earned a 2024 Platinum Seal of Transparency with Candid and a Four-Star Rating !