uce, for that is all there is between the agrarians and ruinous competition with the fields of America. The industrial population, of course, wants cheap food, and so the issue is clearly drawn. Their war cry is the epithet of “bread usurer.” Their arguments, from the industrial point of view alone, are unanswerable. Germany has the dearest meats and dearest wheat of any country in the world. Converts are plentiful when a campaign is made to centre about the easily understood phrase of cheap food.
It is natural to find the Socialists opposed to the great expenditures on army and navy. They are not so much opposed to the army as to the vast sums which the Kaiser pours into the building of a navy. They know that the navy is built from customs dues. They know that the taxes on cereals and coffee provide almost half of the customs receipts, and they feel that the Government unjustly taxes the necessities of life in such a way that the poor contribute to the defence of the country practically as much per man as do the well-to-do and the rich. The new tariff, raising the duty on wheat and rye from 33 to 55 marks, has not softened their bitterness. If this new customs law comes fully into force, they believe they will lose as much in that single blow as they gained by the passing of all the old-age pension laws which they secured after years of struggle. The Socialists’ complaint against the army is not directed toward military service, but against the system under which the army is officered only by aristocrats, and remains the least democratic of all German institutions, although every German gives part of his life to it.
Here is the programme of the German Socialists as formulated by the more moderate members of the party. They pronounce for the maintenance of constitutional guarantees, and would give real form and substance to the constitutional rights of the individual. They aim at the establishmeat of a sound financial system, with a view to free and unfettered economical development and the free interchange of commodities between nations. They desire the maintenance of peace, a just system of parliamentary representation and responsibility of the Ministers to the Reichstag, a fair division of the burdens of taxation by means of a progressive income tax, the making of proper commercial treaties, the administration of justice in criminal courts in a more humane spirit, reduction in the period of military service, and the limitation of military expenditure. All this does not seem very revolutionary in character, nor likely to result in serious harm to the German nation.
The Social Democracy has been wonderfully fortunate in the devotion and pure motives of its leaders. One sometimes hears the influence of August Bebel likened to that of the Pope in the extent to which he requires and wins the fidelity and obedience of radical elements noted in other countries for diversity of views and for restlessness under restraint. This great man ought not to be judged alone by his utterances in public speeches. He has an oratorical passion that sometimes goes far beyond his generally cool judgment and moderate views. Herr Bebel even in the opinion of the court is, I believe, first a lover of Germany, and second an implacable enemy of privilege and humbug. He has a vast talent for organization and for the selection and phrasing of issues. The millions of the poor behind him believe, and doubtless, justly, that his courage and discriminating devotion to them is without bounds.
One thing especially stands out in regard to the German Socialist party, and that is its absolute unity. The discipline of the party is magnificent. A most striking example of this was the way in which Bernstein accepted the vote directed against him by the majority of the general Congress of Lübeck, and declared himself to be willing to follow, under all circumstances, the wishes of the majority of the party. Shortly after this, Bernstein was chosen by the Socialists as their candidate for election from a certain district to the Reichstag, whereupon the entire party ia that district, including some of those who had been most violently opposed to him in the Congress, voted loyally for him and secured his election.
There have only been two cases in twenty-seven years where there has been such a split in the Socialist party of any district that they have put up two candidates for the same election.
The decisions of the general congress of the party are final, but the delegates have been careful to limit these decisions chiefly to matters of principle. Local organizations in the different states have a great
