cratic syndicate. Always the cry is for How came such a keen judge of chararistocrats. One is disposed to suggest to M. Lefranc, who so strongly shares this predilection, that he should apply the principle to the plays of Molière. They, surely, show much knowledge of aristocratic life, and much culture. How came the wandering actor to possess it? And how are we to believe, on the critical principles maintained by the Aristocratic School, that the sombre and unhappy Molière is the author of all those comedies, so full of life and gayety, so free from pessimism, save in the partial asperity of Le Misanthrope? The Observer acter as the author of those plays to make, at a mature age, so bad a choice of a wife? Surely the problem calls for an aristocrat! If it was an impossible presumption, as some antis tell us, for a young English actor to dedicate poems to Southampton (M. Lefranc thinks it quite credible that the dedications are Earl Derby's), how could the French actor venture to dedicate plays to the Grand Monarque? Clearly, there is an opening here for French literary enterprise. And a campaign on that line would give 'the Shakespeare problem' a welcome rest. 'NOW TO BE STILL AND REST. BY P. H. B. L. Now to be still and rest, while the heart remembers Now to awake, and feel no regret at waking, Now to fulfill our dreams, in woods and meadows Now to rejoice in children and join their laughter, Turn with a smile to sleep and our dreams again. Then with a new-born strength, the sweet rest over, The Spectator ECONOMICS, TRADE, AND FINANCE THE FINANCIAL CRISIS OF ITALY AND FRANCE THE imperious pressure of formidable needs weighs on America and to a less degree on England, who have interrupted that part of their exports which is not for war purposes, but have not interrupted production. The accumulation of stocks has produced in these two countries an immobility of capital, a crisis of circulation which makes it difficult for these two great allies, who have helped us by acting as banker, to respond to our financial needs quickly. The obvious remedy is then the reopening of business. ... But, on the other hand, on our side we say 'No,' because we should not be able to take part in this reopening and the neutral countries, which at present are suffering from our limitations, but are none the less full of gold, would enjoy an infinite capacity for purchasing and cornering, would produce without limit, would invade all our markets, would enter on a period of fabulous prosperity; and we should remain in a state of war privation, which would thus become endless. We should be overthrown and crushed in this rush to fortune of countries which have not fought, and which, owing to our sacrifice, have become the nouveaux riches of the world. They would, besides, supply our enemies, withdrawing them from our economic control, and they would get themselves paid by them with gold which is ours. . . . We alone would suffer and it is not just that we should support martyrdom for the liberation of the peoples, and that we should suffer a disastrous defeat in the peace for having won the war. Italy and France, bled white, impoverished, and devastated, could not sustain any international competition if the deep and painful wounds left in them by the war were not first cured. Thus we arrive at this strange situation: that it is preferable for us to continue to bear the privations and the burdens of a general state of war rather than consent to a return to normal conditions for which we are unprepared. Not everyone on the other side of the Atlantic can understand certain worrying anomalies; and the indignant surprise of some American newspapers, which accuse France of hindering the conclusion of a rapid peace, is easy to understand. The root of all questions is here. No settlement is possible without an economic basis. ... The revival of normal conditions ought to begin, in us and for us, with a revival of our economic strength. If this does not happen, Germany will have won the war. One only has to consider that we have bought our raw materials at war prices, aggravated by war freights, and that, bound by contracts made when the end of the war could not be prophesied, we continue to receive cargoes at war prices; whereas, Germany will be able to withdraw the enormous stocks bought by her at the beginning of the war in South America, when prices fell in the world panic, and she will be able to supply herself at current rates, paying in freights a third or a quarter of what we ourselves have paid. If we think of this, we realize at once that under equal conditions in the economic field we should be beaten by the enemy in the very first sprint. . . . Now how can we arise economically and financially from the state of pros cratic syndicate. Always the cry is for How came such a keen judge of chararistocrats. One is disposed to suggest to M. Lefranc, who so strongly shares this predilection, that he should apply the principle to the plays of Molière. They, surely, show much knowledge of aristocratic life, and much culture. How came the wandering actor to possess it? And how are we to believe, on the critical principles maintained by the Aristocratic School, that the sombre and unhappy Molière is the author of all those comedies, so full of life and gayety, so free from pessimism, save in the partial asperity of Le Misanthrope? The Observer acter as the author of those plays to make, at a mature age, so bad a choice of a wife? Surely the problem calls for an aristocrat! If it was an impossible presumption, as some antis tell us, for a young English actor to dedicate poems to Southampton (M. Lefranc thinks it quite credible that the dedications are Earl Derby's), how could the French actor venture to dedicate plays to the Grand Monarque? Clearly, there is an opening here for French literary enterprise. And a campaign on that line would give 'the Shakespeare problem' a welcome rest. 'NOW TO BE STILL AND REST. . . .' BY P. H. B. L. Now to be still and rest, while the heart remembers Now to awake, and feel no regret at waking, Now to fulfill our dreams, in woods and meadows Now to rejoice in children and join their laughter, Then - with a new-born strength, the sw The Spectator ECONOMICS, TRADE, AND FINANCE THE FINANCIAL CRISIS OF ITALY AND FRANCE THE imperious pressure of formidable needs weighs on America and to a less degree on England, who have interrupted that part of their exports which is not for war purposes, but have not interrupted production. The accumulation of stocks has produced in these two countries an immobility of capital, a crisis of circulation which makes it difficult for these two great allies, who have helped us by acting as banker, to respond to our financial needs quickly. The obvious remedy is then the reopening of business. ... Italy and France, d white, news hinde te न ... But, on the other hand, on our side we say 'No,' because we should of not be able to take part in this reopening and the neutral countries, which a: present are suffering from our limita tions, but are none the less full of 2.42 would enjoy an infinite capacity ir purchasing and cornering, would ot duce without limit, would invade our markets, would enter of fabulous prosperity; and remain in a state of war which would thus become des should be overthrown and this rush to fortune of have not fought, an our sacrifice, have ́riches of the w sides, supply them from woul with g ak L I 30 ia ld ›n ipsa in for isky 1 by pedi tal of bour ber 31 h was etween e provn of the From all year was stated as e Budget bad is the 1 the richer declared in would yield .000 rubles. three provTula reimpossible to et deficit for nitted to be The comtaxation rewly revealed of taxes and ocal Soviets. ight to do on the only selfng the former vernment and therefore, are for local pur tration in which the effort for victory leaves us? Our sacred rights are recognized. Justice is done to us in general terms, and the questions relative to compensation and war expenses are not the least among those that the Conference is considering, but when one comes down to practical applications, to the search after precise solutions, we find that divergence of opinions which we have emphasized in discussing the return to business. ... A greater distance than that existing between the French thesis and that of Great Britain and America with regard to the right to compensations cannot be imagined. The work of the commission is enormous. The Americans, on the basis of Wilson's points, only admit as compensationable, damage caused by war methods contrary to the international conventions recognized at the moment in which the damage is done. The rest ought to be considered as war expenses. America is concerned to keep up Germany's financial vitality so that she may be able to rise again solvent and able to face the grave financial engagements which defeat imposed upon her. This is very just. But it is difficult to calculate the point beyond which German vitality is compromised, and we feel with greater precision the point beyond which our own vitality is compromised. By thus placing the value of damage done in the category of war expenses, we should only increase the burdens which are crushing us, burdens of which we demand a more equitable distribution in proportion to the needs of the various countries. This is the central problem for us who are bearing the greatest economic burden of the war in proportion to our strength. But in this also America assumes the detached attitude of a benevolent witness. She does not pronounce herself, she does not discuss the projects which are being put forward to systematize the war debts with various forms of international loans entrusted to the League of Nations. She stands apart, reserved and on her guard. She has not yet admitted that the argument is official, and if we are far from the discussion we are further still from an agreement. The Americans have helped and constantly help the Allies. They have made a powerful military effort. They have been a decisive factor of victory and are inclined to consider all this as a sufficient participation in the war. They feel that it is enormously to their interest not to let this old world crumble; because economic ruin is like a boomerang.... They realize the need to support countries which have become their greatest debtors, but they see European affairs from over the Atlantic even when they are here. They look at things like people who are just passing through and will return to a distant place. They have been taken in the toils of our political passions and they have discovered that what they thought was easy is very complicated, that what they thought was clear is very obscure. Everything escapes the lineal simplicity of their energetic good sense and they do not adventure into anything. They are afraid of bonds and engagements and they meditate a long time at each step like people who move on unknown ground. In their minds the desire now dominates to finish quickly, to escape from this thicket of politics in which they do not feel at their ease. This explains their irritation against opposition whose indirect and hidden importance they do not always realize, accustomed as they are to precise and immediate definitions.... Generous, idealistic, they are at bottom business men in the good sense of the word. And this we ought to take into account in considering |