the nature of Bertz's findings. After briefly pointing out the steps and trend of the study of Whitman in Germany, Bertz's disciple concludes: (1) In his philosophy Whitman has not found the synthesis of science and religion, for he borrows much from others and is not at heart an optimist: in Bertz's words his intellect disapproves, his faith approves the world. Furthermore, the irreconcilable discrepancy in Whitman's philosophy is due principally to an abnormal physical constitution; (2) To compare the form-or formlessness-of Whitman's poetry to the ocean's roar is indeterminate; he applies the same technique of rhetorical pathos to any and all subjects and the result is uncreative impressionism enervating, not invigorating; finally, (3) "nations that have produced a Goethe or an Emerson need not and should not worship a Whitman as one of their heroes."

It is claimed by Bertz that both American and English critics are in sympathy with some of his positions. However that may be, the main point in this connection is that, so far as appears, only one German critic has come over to his view. As recently as 1911 Edward Thorstenberg, detailing what he calls "The Walt Whitman Cult in Germany," makes no mention, except in a footnote with reference to Lessing's change of attitude, of the re-action initiated by Bertz. To suggest by his use of the term "cult" what amounts to extravagant enthusiasm over Whitman is as near as he comes to passing judgment upon the course of the American's vogue there. He ends with a quotation from Schlaf, giving no summary, no organized comment. Is it ill-founded to assume that his ignoring what would seem to amount to the overthrowing of the "cult" indicates no very wide acceptance in Germany of Bertz's conclusions?

WOODROW WILSON: TEACHER OF THE

AMERICAN PEOPLE

By P. B. McDONALD

Woodrow Wilson, in determining his course as president, wished to make his administration historically brilliant. In a fashion quite the opposite from that of the petty politician, he sacrificed present applause in favor of the opinion which history will write of him fifty years hence, when partisan hecklers and personal enemies are forgotten. It is natural that a historian of the American people should want to stand well in history. But there is an aspect of the presidential career of this college professor which is of immediate consequence and will persist for many years. The nation should be indebted to Mr. Wilson for teaching it some valuable lessons-lessons which, in the manner of the typical schoolboy, it learned unwillingly or did not realize that it was learning. For one thing, the schoolmaster president has revived the truth that, to exist, a democracy must give thought to its politics. People of the South have long comprehended that thoughtful discussion of national policies is their duty and privilege. In the industrial North the people have been so busy in the adventure of business, or have so little understood how to utilize leisure, that careful consideration of what was being done at Washington was left to the idle villager in the corner grocery. In the West, of course, politics always is prominent, but it is unfortunately true that too many Western communities allow their politics to decline to sectionalism, with more regard for electing "Cyclone Harry" or "Alfalfa Bill" than to judicial consideration of what is best for the ship of state. Mr. Wilson, by his ability in focusing attention on really important matters, has overcome the indifference that was depreciating national politics and has started American citizens to debating among themselves those questions of policy

which the voters in a democracy should properly consider. As in the times of Lincoln, Jackson, and Jefferson, the people of the country are discussing intelligently issues of national rather than local importance.

Another lesson which Mr. Wilson has taught the American people is the importance to the nation's welfare of the professional class, aside from the politician-lawyer. For years the business man has been exalted as the ideal of American manhood; the self-effacing, brain-toiling writer, teacher, engineer, and scientist have been elbowed out of the way by the pushful materialist. Men who dealt in ideas were disregarded as superfluous. Mr. Wilson, in appointing men to office, favored the professional class: Henry Van Dyke, Norman Hapgood, George Creel, Herbert Hoover, Josephus Daniels. These men, whatever their personal faults, represent the individualistic, thoughtful professional man rather than the corporation employee.

It is frequently argued that Mr. Wilson has been unfortunate in his selection of assistants. But much of the animosity aroused by his appointments has come from individuals who expected to see the traditional small-minded politician put into office rather than the man who had ideas and had worked to express them. That some of the appointees failed to satisfy the people is largely because the people refused to give this new type of official a fair chance, and partly because the professional class, from which Mr. Wilson chose his appointees, had got out of practical touch with national affairs from lack of support. Mr. Wilson's decision to appoint writers, teachers, and engineers to office is more important than is the adverse criticism aroused by the individual actions in office of Mr. Creel or Mr. Garfield. The President preferred selecting the best representatives available from the class which he considered should be encouraged to enter politics to selecting conventional office-holders with an industrial axe to grind.

But if the President's appointees did not please everybody,

how about the revelation he brought of the unfit men who were being elected to Congress? Perhaps the greatest lesson which Mr. Wilson has taught the nation is the need for choosing a higher type of Senator and Congressman. Time and again the President has taken a right position and held to it while desk-banging "honorable gentlemen" from Oklahoma or Idaho spent themselves in a fury of attack on this "despotic president" who had neglected to take them into his confidence. The voters in too many parts of the country had fallen into the lazy habit of permitting mediocrities and blatherskites to capture the Congressional nominations. It remained for Woodrow Wilson to impress upon the American people the undeniable fact that the men being sent to Washington to make the nation's laws were not fit. He achieved this valuable result with a quiet art which concealed art, so that many quite fair-minded people do not realize yet how much he has really taught them. The classicism naturally to be expected in a college professor is one reason for this refusal to advertise his exploits, quite unlike Roosevelt. This scholarly sense of restraint and proportion has kept him from making cheap political capital of the blundering lunges of his Congressional detractors. As D. Willoughby recently remarked in Everyman, "the best fighter avoids unnecessary fighting and prefers to see his foes beating themselves."

The crime of being too much of a politician has been thrown at Mr. Wilson's head many times. A shrewd game of politics has been stated to be his obsession to such an extent that he is too much absorbed in the moves of the game to keep his vision clear. Such a criticism is unfair and untrue. To have a keen political sense is a necessary asset for an American president. The United States is the most political country in the world, and Mr. Wilson's thorough study of political history showed him the need for political realism as well as idealistic imagination. Granted that the nation needs as president a welleducated man of independent views, how else can he secure the office and administer it except by political keenness? To

condemn the president of a republic for being a politician is like blaming a prize-fighter for being a clever boxer. If Mr. Wilson had never shown political ability, he would probably be droning out lectures in some college lecture-hall, and the country would have missed the opportunity of having an historian-president who has taught it lessons far more valuable than it realizes. The people of a republic need instruction in just the sort of thing that Mr. Wilson has emphasized. He has shown them what officials are responsible for particular results, what the limitations of the various governmental departments are, and how to connect political reality with theory.

Another of the heinous faults of Mr. Wilson which hectoring critics have pointed out is his "metaphysical idealism" -i. e., living in a world of his own ideas detached from ordinary life. Such critics undoubtedly prefer a president of the type of Roosevelt, who kept things continually stirred up, and who existed in a perpetual turmoil. They want a president to be mediocre and blundering in order that he shall resemble themselves, rather than to be possessed of philosophical leadership, able to formulate policies and make judicial decisions by reason of the clear vision possible in living mentally apart. That Mr. Wilson resembles Plato in building for himself a world of his own ideas should be counted as a great credit to him. Emerson, Carlyle, Washington, and many other inspired leaders have lifted men from the muck by this same power of metaphysical idealism.

An interesting phase of the criticism of Mr. Wilson is that which has come from Europe. Just in proportion as European countries welcomed the President as a prodigal Santa Claus has the reactionary abuse of him followed. Europe has never understood America except as a gift-bringing uncle from the wild and wolly west. It is much easier for an Englishman to patronize a strenuous, picturesque type like Roosevelt who looked the part of a moving-picture hero, than to understand the subtler and more far-seeing Mr. Wilson, who more resembles a Scottish philosopher than a Western cow