There is an unwritten and unformulated, but none the less coercive principle that governs the conduct of learned societies when assembled in full council which imposes certain limitations upon the president's address. One of these limitations is that the address shall deal in broad outline with some comprehensive or fundamental topic rather than attempt a detailed examination of a special subject. It is in conformity with this requirement that I have selected my subject for this evening. I shall speak of the various interpretations which the relation of the individual to the state has received.

This topic has furnished material for political and social speculation since the time when men began to be curious regarding their own rights and responsibilities. It may seem, therefore, futile to attempt to shed any new light upon such an ages-old inquiry. In truth, however, new conditions of life and new modes of thought give an altered significance to the question, and, therefore, justify, from time to time, its fresh examination.

Careful study of any period will reveal that back of all the complex happenings marking such period there have been certain fundamental impulses, certain human strivings, of which the happenings themselves have been, in great part, but the manifestations, or expression in concrete action. It is the prime function of the historian to discover, explain the rise, trace the development and make known the results of these forces which have dominated mass action in the past. Only as this is done do the myriad of events going to make up the body of historical data assume a real meaning, and historical narrative become other than a dry tabulation of detail.

A distinguished historian, E. A. Freeman, has well said that if history is past politics, politics is present history. If it is of value for the historian to trace out and place in their true light those great movements of the past, how much more important it is that the student of present-day politics should, by a similar examination of current events and efforts, seek to make known, and interpret the forces and aspirations now dictating the collective action of peoples.

War has marked the year 1913; and charges and countercharges as to alleged atrocities by belligerents have been rife. Treaties were drawn to be promptly torn up; and solemn declarations of intention and policy often proved futile. The existence of internal disorder and the outbreak of domestic revolutions in several countries have also exerted disturbing influences on international relations. The result was economic loss and diplomatic tension even well beyond the field of military operations. And these conditions have led to renewed activity in the struggle for concessions and investment in renascent communities. Racial and religious sentiments have also aroused bitter feeling; while political leaders in several countries compel renewed consideration of the weight of individuals in the determination of the world's affairs.

In large part the problems of 1913 were historic; but in part they were affected by apparently impending changes which we cannot as yet define. Thus the influence of socialism and of various forms of radical thought on international relations is a factor. The adoption of oil as a naval fuel, the opening of the Panama Canal, the plans for administrative reorganization of Turkey, and its capitalistic development, the renewed debate as to the Monroe doctrine, and the problem of China are all matters whose future significance scarcely concern us here; but their influence in the past year has been unquestionably great. We cannot estimate as yet the true value of many recommendations touching various fields of international coöperation; and the value of delay in international action still remains in dispute. So on the whole the year 1913 has apparently been the year of the cynic.

Since this is the first time that the great majority of male adults have had the opportunity of exercising the franchise, the recent Italian elections constitute an event of considerable significance, and were watched with much interest in Europe.

According to the new electoral law of 1912–13, practically all adult male Italians were given the right to vote at Parliamentary elections. More specifically, this right of suffrage may now be exercised by three classes of citizens: (1) all literate male Italians who are twenty-one years old; (2) illiterates who have reached the age of thirty; (3) all who have served in the Italian army or navy, even though they have not attained the age of twenty-one. Thus the number of possible voters has been increased from less than 3,500,000 to more than 8,500,000—an addition of over 5,000,000 illiterates.