to localities illustrated by Figs. 17 to 23, respectively. It will be noted that there is a progressive increase in the density of the pigmentation from base to tip, as well as a change in the nature of the relationships between the black medullary pigment masses (Fig. 17), the brown medullary masses (Fig. 18 to 22), and the brown cortical granules (Figs. 19 to 22). A somewhat similar color change can be followed along the length of the protective hair of the muskrat, (Figs. 24 to 29).

The pigment granules themselves, particularly those present in the cortex, also show variations. These are variations in form, size, color value and color depth, and are susceptible of accurate comparison, as an aid in determining to species-source of the hair, or part of the body from which the hair was taken. As has been pointed out in the case of the muskrat, the character of these granules bears a relationship to their position in the hair shaft.

The value of the prosecution of the detailed study of pigmentation of mammal hairs may be looked for in the application it may have to problems connected with the artificial coloring of furs; in its value for the additional data which it yields for the identification of the species-source of hair samples, and especially in the possibility which

Fig. 30. Coypu rat (Myocastor coypus), pigment granules, midway from tip to base in fur hair. Length, 0.775 μ. Sea Otter (Latax lutris), pigment granules, midway from tip to base in fur hair, Length, 0.46 μ.

Fig. 31.

Fig. 32.

American Otter (Lutra canadensis), pigment granules, midway from tip to base in fur hair. Length, 1.18 μ.

Fig. 33. Muskrat (Fiber zibethecus) pigment granules in tip of fur hair, Length, 0.91 μ.

Fig. 34.

Fig. 35.

Fig. 36.

Fig. 37.

Fig. 38.

Fig. 39.

Fig. 40.

Fig. 41.

Fig. 42.

Squirrel monkey (Chrysothrix sciurea), pigment granules, midway
from tip to base in yellow hair of wrists. Length, 1.80 μ.
Fur Seal (Callorhinus alascensis), pigment granules near base of
protective hair. Length, 0.76 μ.

Black bear (Ursus americanus), pigment granules midway from
tip to base in fur hair. Length, 1.20 to 1.85 μ.

Brown Bat (Vespertilio fuscus), pigment granules midway from tip to base in fur hair. Length, 0.20 to 0.53 μ.

Chinese (Manchu), pigment granules in head hair, midway from tip to base. Length, 0.74 M.

Eskimo (St. Lawrence Id.), pigment granules in head hair midway from tip to base. Length, 0.91 μ.

Fingo (Bantu), pigment granules in head hair, midway from tip to base. Length, 1.06 μ.

Papuan of New Guinea, pigment granule patterns in head hair, midway from tip to base.

Fingo (Bantu), pigment granule patterns in head hair, midway from tip to base.

Fig. 43. English girl (hair, golden red), pigment granule patterns in head

hair, midway from tipe to base.

Fig. 44. English girl (dark brunette), pigment granule patterns in head hair, midway from tip to base.

Fig. 45. Early Egyptian (floruit, 4,000 B. C.), pigment granule patterns in head hair, midway from tipe to base.

Fig. 46. South African Bushman, pigment granule patterns in head hair,

midway from tip to base.

Fig. 47. Chinese (Manchu), pigment granule patterns in head hair midway

from tip to base.

it affords of identifying minute fragments of hair, when these may be the only ones available in an investigation, as is sometimes the case in legal work.

It was the possibilities of the forensic application of the study of mammal hairs, which has induced the author to make a cursory survey of samples of the head hair of different races of man, to determine whether the pigmentation characters, so marked among the mammals, might not be equally well-defined in human hair. While the results of this tentative survey have not been conclusive, they are most suggestive.

The coloration of human hair appears to be due, in large measure, to either diffuse pigment (as is the case in "red" hair), or to granules in the cortex. The cortical granules are arranged in patterns, of distinctive size and form, for several of the chief races which were examined. Figs. 41 to 47 illustrate various forms of cortical granule patterns from the head hair of members of different races, and Figs. 38 to 40 depict separate pigment granules. The further study of pigmentation in human hair, may bring to light relationships of forensic significance.

For the study of their pigmentation, mammal hairs need to be prepared in the same way as for the study of the medulla, i. e., cleared and mounted in oils of various sorts, or Canada balsam. They should be examined under the highest powers of the microscope, obtainable with oil-immersion objectives of greatest amplification in combination with 18, 20, and 25-power oculars.

An indispensable piece of apparatus for those who wish to make careful identifications is the comparison ocular. This is fitted to two microscopes, and each microscope exhibits half of its field in the comparison ocular, in such a way that two samples of hairs or other fibers, mounted separately on two slides, can be enlarged to equal magnitudes and brought close together for comparison within the same microscopic field. The utility of such a device will be at once apparent. Figure 2 shows a drawing, made from a photomicrograph, of one of the common fur hairs of commerce, and its imitator. The differences in the pigmentation of the two hairs becomes at once apparent when the hairs are thus brought together for comparison. A micrometer scale in the eyepiece aids in making measurements.

The development of micro-analysis has, during the past several years, been very great, and its utility in industrial fields, as well as in pure science, has been firmly established.

4For the technique of hair examination, see Hausman, L. A., Structural Characteristics of the Hair of Mammals, footnote 1.

Papers Presented Before the Section of Social and Economic Science of The American Association for the Advancement of Science

A

SOME PRELIMINARIES OF PEACE'

By the Honorable DAVID JAYNE HILL
WASHINGTON, D. C.

YEAR ago, at St. Louis, we were discussing the merits of the

League of Nations as a mechanism for securing the world's peace. It was then pointed out that the Covenant of the League undertakes to accomplish two separate and different purposes-the execution of the Treaty of Versailles and the establishment of permanent peace in the future. It was then made evident not only that these two purposes are disparate, but that the means to be employed for the realization of them must be different.

Before we can discuss intelligently the problem of permanent peace, it is necessary to distinguish between the termination of an actual state of war and the establishment of the conditions of permanent peace in the future.

An actual war is normally terminated by the exercise of superior force; for war is, by its very nature, a contest of opposing forces, each seeking the mastery of its opponent. The war with Germany, for example, could be terminated in no other way than by overpowering the enemy's forces and compelling the vanquished to accept terms of peace imposed by the conqueror. Such terms were embodied in the Treaty of Versailles and accepted by Germany. Whether they are just or unjust is not in this place a question to be considered. The important point to emphasize is that they were terms imposed by force, and that the Covenant of the League of Nations was designed as an instrument to carry them into execution. It creates an armed military and political alliance for the enforcement of the Peace of Versailles.

Considered from this point of view, the League of Nations has a legitimate reason for existence; but why neutral nations, or any nations not associated in the war and directly responsible for the particular peace imposed, should be incorporated in the League, is a question that requires an answer. The obvious answer is, that it is intended to maintain the future peace of Europe by an armed coalition.

That this is really the purpose of the existing League of Nations

1Address of the President and Chairman of the Social and Economic Science Section of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Chicago, December 28, 1920.

is evident from the pledge contained in Article X to preserve, unconditionally, the territorial integrity and political independence of every Member of the League; and from the provisions of Article XVI, which declares that a state of war with all the Members of the League will arise, ipso facto, whenever a Member fails to comply with the obligations of the Covenant. In express terms, therefore, it is a war league, not a peace league; since peace is to be preserved, not by voluntary agreement to observe certain principles, but by the threat of war. The conclusion is inescapable that the league is a compact for the exercise of economic and military force, to be brought into operation automatically whenever a provision of the treaty is violated.

It would seem superfluous to insist that this attempt to base the peace of the world on an exercise of economic and military force is a preparation for permanent peace. The settlement of a past war on the terms of the victors, whatever they may be, and the prevention of future wars, are clearly undertakings so fundamentally different, and in truth so incompatible, that they are not to be accomplished by the same means or in the same manner. We rightly use force to subdue an enemy who challenges our rights; but we can not base permanent peace upon the pretension of any group of nations that a nation wronged may not defend its rights by force of arms, except by the permission of that group.

And here it is important to note the fact, that there are in Europe, including the United Kingdom, according to the latest statistics, 247,848,168 inhabitants, occupying a territory of 1,410,219 square miles, who are represented by their governments in the League of Nations; and 271,701,401 inhabitants, occupying 2,721,118 square miles, who are not represented in the League of Nations—that is, the non-members in Europe exceed the members of the League of Nations in Europe by 23,653,233, occupying territory of twice the extent of that occupied by the inhabitants of Europe, including the United Kingdom, represented in the league.

At present, it is true, the league contains the nations possessing the greater military strength; but it does not follow that this will always be the case, especially if there should be dissensions among the members of the league. At most, the league represents only a small preponderance of military efficiency, consisting chiefly in the possession of superior armament, and not at all in numbers. The retention of this preponderance will require the enforcement of the policy of preventing the non-members from arming, while the members continue to maintain their armed forces. But this is, in effect, a continuation of a latent state of war.

It can not, therefore, be said that, even if the terms of the treaties made at Versailles, St. Germain and Sèvres can be enforced, they insure

the permanent peace of Europe. This is not to affirm that the victory of the Allies was not an essential step toward permanent peace. On the contrary, it was absolutely necessary. The lesson it has taught is, that, however formidable an aggressor may appear at the momment of aggression, the world can not be permanently ruled by military force. The appeal to force is in itself a challenge to all that is highest and best in human nature. The resort to military force as a means of maintaining the right to control the action of other nations is in its very nature a menace of despotism, and there never has been, and never will be, any permanent despotism in human history.

Herein lies the fallacy of the whole theory of enforcing peace universally by military power. There never was, and there never can be, any permanent exclusive monopoly in the power to enforce the conditions of peace. The mere pretense of possessing it is a declaration of war. The reason is that this pretension strikes a fatal blow at the whole theory of self-government, for it implies a superiority of right and of judgment in the possessors of power which no nation can rightly claim to possess alone, and which no self-constituted council of nations can vindicate the right to exercise.

When civilization is attacked, it will always find means to defend itself; but civilization can never be more plainly or more fundamentally attacked then when a self-constituted combination of powers assumes the authority to say that a nation shall not vindicate its rights by force of arms when there is no other available means of redress.

What then is the true foundation of peace? It is the provision of means of redress without a resort to arms. It is the recognition of a right to those conditions of life that are essential to the satisfaction of a people's needs, and the establishment of a tribunal before which a nation's wrongs may obtain the judgment of a just judge.

I have spoken of the rights and wrongs of nations, because the existence of organized nations is not only a historic fact but a human necessity. There cannot be a world government that is not supported by national governments; for government, aside from futile dreams of universal empire, is of necessity local in its bases. It is a process of development by which families and communities establish the conditions of life with their neighbors. History is largely made up of the efforts of men to impose upon others submission to their control, but it has never anywhere been permanently successful except by the consent of the governed. The whole foundation of peace must be sought through the recognition of that consent,

The basis of human life is material subsistence. The standard of peaceful living is accepted law. These are the essential prerequisites of permanent peace. Without them it is illusory to try to enforce it anywhere.

VOL. XII.-15.