that thereafter to the one propaganda that we had adopted we could add two more that are twins of it. One was the propaganda for what dear Frances Willard use to call "the white life for two." Of the white life for two the soldier has but a blurred conception. That is not a dream that comes in camps and fields and on the march. But it is a dream that is to mitigate and has already mitigated march and camp and field.

And what arrogance have women not been guilty of! I shrink with abasement when I think how we sometimes talk about women being the repository of the moral force of the universe, and how superior she is spiritually, and how, therefore, we can expect of her a purity which we cannot expect of men. Never can there be either simple and honest womanhood nor pure manhood nurtured under that false idea. Does one for a moment think that Moses was less pure than Miriam? Does one think for a moment that Jesus was less pure in His humanity, in His manhood, than Mary that gave Him human birth? If brave at all, we must both be brave, and if pure at all, we must both be pure. And that was what by unanimous vote all the nineteen councils added.

The third propaganda was like unto it, because without it these dreams can never be crystallized. The third was our councils should go forth (there are already twenty-five, six more having come into the national band within these last four years), that we should go before all these nations and demand also that no longer anywhere should there be any distinction concerning the political rights or political privileges that was based on sex. We do not demand everywhere suffrage for women, for in countries where it is not exercised by men we should not demand it for women, nor do we desire it, but the abolition of discrimination based on sex was the propaganda which was voted, and it is upon the basis of those three propositions, peace among the nations maintained by arbitration, secured by a humanity that recognizes physical and moral purity as an indispensable condition of that peace, created and sustained by political life everywhere, in which no discrimination of power and privilege is based upon sex, and it for the dissemination of our principles, for the cultivation of these International Council stands.

Has any one ever done what we did in this year 1908? It was in the year 1888 that these councils were formed on paper. We are not yet of age by the American voting standard. Is it to be expected that we should already have secured maturity for these great causes, in twenty years? No, verily; but what we have secured is true of all the organizations that are gathered into the councils of the different countries. We have secured an agency, we have secured an instrument, we have secured a means for the dissemination of our principles, for the cultivation of the doctrines, and for the hard work that must be done.

Now from my point of view this work ought to be done here at first, because it is in the United States of America, to a degree that it is nowhere else in the world, that the nations of the world are brought together and united in one citizenship. We must learn now a new definition for "we," and a new definition for "them," and for "they." I think there is nothing more ridiculous and laughable than the way in which we here in America still say "we," meaning merely we who are the immediate descendants of Anglo-Saxon ancestors. I wish you would all think for a moment what kind of a country we should have if we were all that. Suppose no one else had ever come here except the descendants from the English, how we could have forgotten the Spanish and the French and the Swedes and the Finns I really don't know. It seems as though our ears had been filled with wax to keep out the history even of all other nations in our country. To have commenced talking about all the races of the people who came here as foreigners, and feeling ourselves that we who were to make this country, and to whom it was to belong—if it ever were plausible, it ceased to be so long before I as a little child began to think, and began to think with shame, of how the prettiest girls in the little country school, with their black hair and blue eyes, were by some called "Paddies." The only Irishmen whose lives I knew anything about were Tom Moore and Daniel O'Connell, the great orator, and these little girls always made me think of them. I thought all the boys ought to be called Tom or Daniel, never" Paddy," in derision. And the other girls, with their fair complexions, light hair, and blue eyes, all called foreigners without the slightest distinction. If they had not come from the

Green Isle they were called "Dutch." I think a great deal of my Anglo-Saxon blood, but I think a great deal more of it because there is quite a little Celt in it from the Welch, and some Dutch, and some real German in it; because there is some French in it, and some Italian; and that is what is to make our country the one in which we shall feel the bonds of brotherhood. Perhaps there are in this audience others who can also trace their ancestry as I have done.

Let us realize that, so far as we in this country are concerned, there can never be a war anywhere in the world that is not for us a fratricidal war. We cannot lift our hands against a nation without lifting our hands in suicide against ourselves. No nation can lift a hand against us that is not guilty of fratricide. Now we have always thought, not merely the dreamers and sentimentalists, but statesmen and philosophers, when they have been making arguments to distinguish wars between nations, have always regarded civil war with peculiar horror; and the fact that we are a nation that has survived a civil war has not made civil war less horrible, but more so. We know its awfulness. We know its terribleness. But always people have thought that kind of a war horrible.

Now we have been told that there are two hundred and thirty organizations in Pennsylvania represented here to-day. I hope they will not be allowed to go away until their delegates have been formed into a permanent committee for permanent action. We must dream first, but we may not always dream. We must feel first, but unless the feeling goes out in doing, it is of little avail in this world.

Now it is true that under the industrial system both leisure and industry have united to organize the women of the world. Women of leisure have organized for pleasure, for enjoyment and for helpfulness to others, and the women who labor are organized to secure something like justice in the various occupations they pursue. We have an organized womanhood in our own country. The women of what we call the leisure class would be an instrument of service to the women of the laboring class. Many of the women of the leisure class have taken upon themselves such burdens of service that no eight-hour or ten-hour or twelve or four

teen-hour or sixteen-hour law can protect them; but the joy of their labor is that it is voluntary. It is under this thought of labor, of consciousness of sisterhood, that I am looking at the women of the world. I am look at one who is not only my sister but myself. Now that is the kind of consciousness we must grow into; and with that consciousness, with the acceptation of its importance, we can use it effectively by turning our organizations into channels into which run the family life. We can bring up our children in the spirit of peace, of loving one another, or never holding a "foreigner" from any country in the world in derision. If it is done by any one we should remind him that his greatgrandfather was a foreigner.

But I have overstepped my time. I thank you for your attention.

INDUSTRY THE PEACEMAKER.

MRS. MAUDE NATHAN.

In early days rulers of nations deliberately carried on wars in order to force their victims into commercial relations, and in order to have their industries carried on by the captive slaves. But to-day it is conceded that the best method of securing international commercial relations is to have the powers maintain a basis of friendly intercourse.

Formerly war left in its trail a conqueror and the conquered. But to-day it is difficult to draw the line between victor and vanquished. The end is usually a compromise, and the only distinction is between the exhausted and the semi-exhausted, the injured and the worse injured.

When the property of the vanquished is destroyed, the loss may fall on the insurance companies, banks and bondholders of the victorious. A writer in one of our magazines, not long ago, described an imaginary bombardment of New York by the German Empire. The suggestion was of German bankers crying out at home as every cannon ball knocked a hole in the dividends of their corporations. German companies are heavily interested in New York real estate; Germans invest heavily in American stocks. Nowadays, when any nation goes to war, it issues bonds to raise necessary funds, and these bonds are subscribed for largely by peo

ple of other countries, and in this way these people are at once directly interested in every catastrophe of the war. When merchant ships are sunk at sea, the loss falls upon the underwriters of whatsoever land. War to-day is too costly, not only to the conquered, but to the conqueror as well. In destroying his enemies, he destroys, at least in part, the source of his own wealth.

One of the chief deterrents of war, then, is that very spirit of commercialism which is so often decried and the shame of which is hurled with special opprobrium against our own nation. War is a menace to the stability of industry, and the captains of industry who stand guard at the gates use their shields to protect us from the flashing swords of the destroying enemy.

Our men of business are our heroes. They are one and all opposed to war. They do not wish interference with their particular industry. If exports are lessened, if laborers are summoned to arms, if money is deflected from the usual channels, our leaders' profits decrease. Over and beyond this selfish desire to defend their own property, there is another sentiment which has been gradually evolved from having international commercial relations. Ties have been formed through business interests in various countries; people of different languages, different habits, different temperaments and tastes have been brought into personal contact and former prejudices have been overcome, former antagonisms wiped out, former unreasoning hatred turned to sympathy.

Our prejudices always spring from ignorance, from lack of understanding. If we strive to understand another nation's point of view, we soon find that while we may not agree with its people, we can sympathize with them and can find much to admire. The old idea that one might ethically be honest and true to one's own clan or country, and be justified in deceiving and cheating foreigners, has exploded, and to-day we realize that we have no right to exploit people merely because they are not of our kin.

One of the best object lessons of this widening brotherhood is furnished by our social settlements, which are often surrounded by people of a dozen different nationalities, who share the benefits in harmony and develop a mutual respect. When the Hull House Museum was established in Chicago, to show the history of industries in different countries, it was found to be a most effective