It is hardly possible that an event so tremendous as the recent war should be the result of either isolated or fortuitous circumstances. It is not likely that the moving spirit of barbarism which so characterized many of its events was the sole possession of a single nation or group of nations. It is more than likely that investigation will disclose the wide dispersion of certain principles in modern civilization which bear and did bear the seeds of tragedy. Or if such a statement be too strong in view of the somewhat casual nature of the discussion following we might be permitted to say that there are discoverable in the common thinking of many men, and in the proverbial and catch phrases of the day, indications that certain principles which worked as motives in German national feeling are not wholly dead with the dying of their unrighteous cause. These principles have as much need to be combatted as their more obvious counterparts, made obvious by the clash of war, and nationally personified. To make the forces of righteousness that have been released in the hearts of multitudes the dominant forces of the future, to make sure that the forces of greed and in

justice shall not prevail, is a greater result and a sterner battle than any which culminated in the overthrow of the German power. This fact has been given expression by Maeterlinck in the following words:

"It is after we have won that we must really vanquish; it is in the hour of peace that the actual war will begin against an invisible foe, a hundred times as dangerous as the one of whom we have seen too much. If we leave a single outlet to the beast at bay; if, through our negligence we give it a single hope, a single opportunity of coming to the surface and taking breath, then the vigilant fatality which has but one fixed idea will resume its progress and pursue its way, dragging history with it and laughing over its shoulder at man once more tricked and discomfited. Everything that we have done and suffered, the ruins, the sacrifices, the nameless tortures, and the numberless dead will have served no purpose and will be lost beyond redemption."

Our danger from the Prussian sword has perhaps vanished, but our danger from Prussian principles is still immediate and living. The battle now to be fought is to be fought in the realm of ideas. It is more difficult than physical war because it is more insidious. A rampant Germany, looting the priceless treasures of the world which she had not the spiritual insight to produce, a barbarous Germany ravaging women and impaling infants makes so evident the evil of her principles that legions can be easily raised against her. But who shall be able to save us from the prevalence of moods and habits of thought which have within them the power of disaster!

We choose between ideas presented to us, we accept the statements of those in whom we have confidence, or we lean to the opinion which seems to favor our own interests. This is the general habit of thought with which the world gets along. It saves both time and

trouble. It obviates the work of thinking, study, and application. Having opinions is much easier than to think, and very often the strength of opinion is in exact ratio to ignorance. The tendency is aggravated by the existence of a partisan press and the multiplication of periodicals which have for their object an unblushing propaganda, combined with partial concealment of the facts. All this, together with the hurried character of our life and our ambition for wealth and comfort, has in spite of the advantages of popular education made us susceptible to "mushy" thinking.

This “mushy” thinking is gathered up into certain popular phrases often considered profound, the evidence of breadth and culture, but too often the lazy resort of shallow thinking and vicious in tendency. These phrases I shall characterize as Prussian ghosts. They are the lingering and sad reminders of the dire fate the world has so barely escaped.

"It's all right if it does good," might be called the wraith of a pragmatic ghost. While a certain degree of pragmatism is necessary to all true appraisals one must ever hold the pragmatic spirit in check to keep from falling into a merely unprincipled, and occasional utilitarianism. During the war it sometimes took the form "the right side will win," meaning by that, not that righteousness would determine the conflict, but that the right was so obscure that only the outcome could determine it. Historically this method is as old as the sophists. Sophism has always bred a race of moral weaklings for whom anything was true that served the convenience or pleasure of the moment. For such, truth had no deeper meaning than to be useful in pandering to present lusts or the momentary escape from the consequences of folly. In this way success comes to be lifted up to the standing of a moral mandate. The doctrine is Prussian in that the Hun used it to

justify his deepest sins. Utility, success, was to him as to the sophist and the extreme pragmatist, the measure of truth and there is no other. If to make Kultur prevail, murder, arson, torture or dishonor were necessary they were justified by success.

In our own civilization this is the principle appealed to when one is pointed to material possession as the best proof of the righteousness of one's cause the last and silencing word above all criticism: "Well, didn't he get there?" It is the ever fertile resort of those cults and systems which insist on being judged by the number of adherents, or by a consideration of some good they may do without any reference to the more than counterbalancing evil that they do. It serves equally well the reactionist who opposes all industrial reform, without regard for justice and the extreme radical who defends the Bolshevists of Russia by pointing to the fact that so far they have been able to perpetuate an infamous tyranny.

Another venerable ghost masks himself in the garb of tolerance, and lays claim to special distinction for mental breadth. Yet no one dares to denounce him for fear of being charged with ignorance or narrowness. He often comes garbed in the expression: "It doesn't matter what a man believes if he is only conscientious." This ghost walks the earth only when beliefs have lost their vital note and have become only formally adhered to. It is the favorite form under which we veil our indifference to the truth. It overlooks the important fact that conscience is a matter largely of habit and training and may be evil and misleading as well as good. This ghost has been kept on the scene by those people who, wearied of judging a man by his formal beliefs, have not had the moral stamina to go on and assert that one's ethical standing is to be judged by one's actual practice of the ethics of the world's greatest ethical teacher. It is the assumption that without

moral guidance of any kind one will immediately feel what is right or wrong. As a matter of fact the most cruel and wicked men of history have many of them been very conscientious. Their cruelty has been the more outrageous because they concealed from themselves the enormity of their action. Their unrighteousness, their injustice and their hates have been masked under the cloak of the general good or a passion for truth, in maintaining a cult, a faith, or a state idea. History has yet to record the heresy hunter who was willing to accord a christian fairness to his victim. The late Prussian exercise of conscience toward Belgium has been full of a "Gott mit uns" enthusiasm for Kultur, but that has not saved it from a deadly diabolism.

We are not oblivious to the measure of truth that hides in the half truths of which we are speaking. Ghosts are kept about by reason of the measure of truth they represent. If there were not some scintilla of truth in the hoariest error it would find short shrift. This is especially true of the widespread sentiment that the ills of society are chiefly economical, that a readjustment of social returns will banish discontent. A righteous readjustment of returns for service to society there must be, based on both actual service and economic need. There can be no peace in society until this is done. On the other hand the sources of discontent lie deeper than any material satisfaction. There are too many social reformers who have the idea that the adoption of the Prussian industrial program is the surest way to secure the future of society. We too often dream that the erection of sanitary houses will satisfy the spiritual needs of the poor. This ought we to have done, but not to have left the other undone. One needs two legs for walking and it is not seemly for one leg to protest that the other is quite unnecessary. In our cry for industrial efficiency we are quite in danger of