Italy, on the other hand, encourages its nationals to emigrate from Italy temporarily, to send back their savings to the home country, to retain their language and customs, and generally to forward the interests of Italy in foreign lands.

Diametrically opposed to this, the United States follows the policy of desiring immigrants to assimilate with the Americans, to learn the English language, and to become American citizens."

The International Emigration Commission held at Geneva, August 2-11, 1921, adopted resolutions showing a desire on the part of the fifteen governments represented at that gathering to co-ordinate emigration and immigration measures of nationalistic tendencies that were being developed in certain countries.

The absence of a representative from the United States was regretted by the Director of the Conference. Mr. Mahany, appointed by the United States Government during the Wilson administration, had reached Europe in April, 1921, preparatory to taking part in the deliberations, but he had been compelled to return to his country. Mr. Todd had then been appointed by the new Harding administration. Nevertheless, after Mr. Todd's arrival in Europe and a few days prior to the opening of the Conference, he had informed the Commission that he would be unable to be present at its convening.

An analysis of the resolutions adopted at its final sessions seems to show that the object to be obtained by these representatives was some form of social legislation in the various countries which would accrue to the benefit of migratory workers.

"Hearings on Immigration and Naturalization, House of Representatives, December 13, 1921, p. 27.

Report of the International Emigration Commission, pp. 13-15, 1921.
Members of the Commission who were present:

Viscount Ullswater, Chairman, Great Britain.

M. de Michelis, Italy.

M. Burlini, Italy.

M. Cagianut, Switzerland.

M. Gemmill, South Africa.

M. Holstrom, Sweden.
M. Knoll, Germany.
M. Li Tchuin, China.

Sir Ernest Low, India.

Count De Montornès, Spain.

M. Nagai, Japan.

Col. Abed Smith, Canada.

M. De Oliveira, Brazil.

M. Qualid, France.

M. Philaretos, Greece.

M. Verunac, Czecho-Slovakia.
M. Bernatowicz, Poland (absent).

THE ARMS CONFERENCE AS A FORESHADOWING of the PRACTICAL APPLICATION IN THE POLITICAL FIELD OF INTERNATIONAL ADMINISTRATION OF NATIONAL GOVERNMENTAL POLICIES Although lacking the invigorating stimulation of a war spirit as the motive power, international administration of a political character was initiated by the United States in its call to the Arms Conference which met at Washington on November 11, 1921.

To this Conference came participants in the stupendous naval supremacy contest of the world, and, since the competitive building of warships is directly a governmental activity, the political cooperation evidenced by this assembly cannot be over-emphasized. Various aspects of political questions, such as the return of Shantung and the intentions of Japan regarding eastern Siberia, the nullification of the Anglo-Japanese Treaty, the revision of the Chinese customs tariff with the principles and policies to be followed in dealing with China, were considered by representatives of the nine powers taking part in the assembly.

After deliberations extending over a period of three months, the international competitors embarked upon a policy of limitation of naval armaments within certain prescribed confines, and agreed upon certain political reforms.

In the words of the President of the United States, in closing the Conference, the situation is summed up as follows:

"In the revealing light of the public opinion of the world, without surrender of sovereignty, without impaired nationality or affronted national pride, a solution has been found in unanimity, and today's adjournment is marked by rejoicing in the things accomplished."

"You have written the first deliberate and effective expression of great powers, in the consciousness of peace, of war's utter futility, and challenged the sanity of competitive preparation for each other's destruction."

FOR NATIONAL INDIVIDUALISM IS SUBSTITUTED INTERNATIONAL CO-OPERATION

The spirit of abnormal individualism among nations must lend itself to a mutual co-operation and co-ordination of endeavor and effort in a continuous perseverance for world harmony in economic

PLENARY SESSION AT ARMS CONFERENCE, WASHINGTON, D. C.

affairs, if the future historian is not to stigmatize this period in the world's history as "a long farewell to all my greatness.""

The reconstruction of the economic machinery, destroyed by international rivalries and ambitious contentions, may only be effected by the same forces which through a contraction of vision in foreign affairs led to a world defense of domestic isolation and insularity.

The shortcomings of a few nations with legerdemain proclivities, the locality of mind, and intriguing suspicion of pinchbeck political units, juggling with imaginary grievances, must not be permitted to becloud the issues.

These elements must not be justification for the world to adopt an economic psychology to the blunting of its own moral sensibility and to its future irreparable injury.

True world-values are yet unfixed, unstabilized, and unharmonized, but with the inevitable and gradual return of orderly progress of growth, the people of the world must not blindly accept the narrow gauge of vision which has been so regularly meted out to them from the underground passages of privilege.

They must rather steadily extend their influence in all fields of activity until, for the conquest of nations, shall be substituted the service of, by, and for mankind, in a universal world policy of understanding, tolerance, and co-operation.

Shakespeare, William, "Henry VIII," Act III, Scene 2.