![]() |
---|
![]() |
Midterm parliamentary elections were held in Cuba on 1 November 1914 in order to fill half the seats in the House of Representatives,[1] as well as a single seat in the Senate. The National Conservative Party was the biggest winner, taking 22 of the 49 House seats and the sole Senate seat.
YouTube Encyclopedic
-
1/5Views:3 881 604152 138260 809324 31613 406
-
American Imperialism: Crash Course US History #28
-
The War of 1914: An Avoidable Catastrophe - Sean McMeekin
-
Banana Wars - US Marines Occupy Cuba, Haiti & Dominican Republic (Documentary)
-
Hitler and the Nazis come to power | The 20th century | World history | Khan Academy
-
LEFT HISTORY: The Second International
Transcription
Episode 28: American Imperialism Hi, I’m John Green, this is CrashCourse U.S. History and today we’re gonna talk about a subject near and dear to my white, male heart: imperialism. So, here at CrashCourse we occasionally try to point out that the U.S., much as we hate to admit it, is actually part of a larger world. Mr. Green, Mr. Green, you mean like Alaska? No, Me from the Past, for reasons that you will understand after your trip there before your senior year of college, I do not acknowledge the existence of Canada’s tail. No, I’m referring to all of the Green Parts of Not-America and the period in the 19th century when we thought, “Maybe we could make all of those green parts like America, but, you know, without rights and stuff.” Intro So, the late 19th and early 20th centuries were a period of expansion and colonization in Asia and Africa, mostly by European powers. As you’ll know if you watched Crash Course World History, imperialism has a long, long history pretty much everywhere, so this round of empire building is sometimes called, rather confusingly, New Imperialism. Because the U.S. acquired territories beyond its continental boundaries in this period, it’s relatively easy to fit American history into this world history paradigm. But there’s also an argument that the United States has always been an empire. From very early on, the European settlers who became Americans were intent on pushing westward and conquering territory. The obvious victims of this expansion/imperialism were the Native Americans, but we can also include the Mexicans who lost their sovereignty after 1848. And if that doesn’t seem like an empire to you, allow me to draw your attention to the Russian Empire. Russians were taking control of territory in Central Asia and Siberia and either absorbing or displacing the native people who lived there, which was the exact same thing that we were doing. The empires of the late 19th and early 20th centuries were different because they were colonial in their own special way. Like, Europeans and Americans would rule other places but they wouldn’t settle them and more or less completely displace the native people there. (Well, except for you, Australia and New Zealand.) American historians used to try to excuse America’s acquisitions of a territorial empire as something of an embarrassing mistake, but that’s misleading because one of the primary causes of the phenomenon of American imperialism was economics. We needed places to sell our amazing new products. And at the time, China actually had all of the customers because apparently it was opposite day. It’s also not an accident that the U.S. began pursuing imperialism in earnest during the 1890s, as this was, in many ways, a decade of crisis in America. The influx of immigrants and the crowded cities added to anxiety and concern over America’s future. And then, to cap it all off, in 1893 a panic caused by the failure of a British bank led the U.S. into a horrible economic depression, a great depression, but not The Great Depression. It did however feature 15,000 business failures and 17% unemployment, so take that, 2008. According to American diplomatic historian George Herring, imperialism was just what the doctor ordered to help America get out of its Depression depression. Other historians, notably Kristin Hoganson, imply that America embarked on imperial adventures partly so that American men could prove to themselves how manly they were. You know, by joining the Navy and setting sail for distant waters. In 1890, Captain Alfred Thayer Mahan published “The Influence of Seapower upon History” and argued that, to be a great power like Great Britain, the U.S. needed to control the seas and dominate international commerce. Tied into this push to become a maritime power was the obsession with building a canal through Central America and eventually the U.S. decided that it should be built in Panama because you know how else are we gonna get malaria. In order to protect this canal we would need a man, a plan, a canal. Panama. Sorry, I just wanted to get the palindrome in there somewhere. No we would actually need much more than a man and a plan. We would need ships and in order to have a functioning two-ocean navy, we would need colonies. Why? Because the steamships at the time were powered by coal and in order to re-fuel they needed coal depots. I mean, I suppose we could have, like, rented harbor space, but why rent when you can conquer? Also, nationalism and the accompanying pride in one’s “country” was a worldwide phenomenon to which the U.S. was not immune. I mean, it’s no accident that the 1890s saw Americans begin to recite the pledge of allegiance and celebrate Flag Day, and what better way to instill national pride than by flying the stars and stripes over … Guam. So pre-Civil War attempts to expand beyond what we now know as the continental United States included our efforts to annex Canada, which were sadly unsuccessful, and also filibustering, which before it meant a senator talking until he or she had to stop to pee was a thing where we tried to take over Central America to spread slavery. But, the idea of taking Cuba persisted into the late 19th century because it is close and also beautiful. The Grant administration wanted to annex it and the Dominican Republic, but Congress demurred. But we did succeed in purchasing Canada’s tail. You can see how I feel about that. To be fair, discovery of gold in the Yukon made Seward’s icebox seem like less of a Seward’s folly and it did provide coaling stations in the Pacific. But we could have had rum and Caribbean beaches. Ugh, Stan, all this talk about how much I hate Alaska has me overheated, I gotta take off my shirt. Ughhh. Waste of my life. So hard to take off a shirt dramatically. I’m angry. Anyway, coal stations in the Pacific were important because in 1854 we “opened” Japan to American trade by sending a flotilla of threatening black ships under Matthew Perry. No Stan, not that Matthew Perry. You know better. By far, America’s best piece of imperial business before 1898 was Hawaii. Like, I like oil and gold as much as the next guy but Hawaii has pineapples and also had sugar, which was grown on American owned plantations by Chinese, Japanese, Filipino, and native workers. Treaties between the U.S. and the Hawaiian governments exempted this sugar from tariffs, and America also had established a naval base at Pearl Harbor, which seemed like a really good idea...then. We eventually annexed Hawaii in 1898 and this meant that it could eventually become a state, which it did in 1959, two years before Barack Obama was born in Kenya. And this leads us nicely to the high tide of American imperialism, the Spanish-American-Cuban-Fillipino War. The war started out because native Cubans were revolting against Spain, which was holding on to Cuba for dear life as the remnant of a once-great empire. The Cubans’ fight for independence was brutal. 95,000 Cubans died from disease and malnutrition after Spanish general Valeriano Weyler herded Cubans into concentration camps. For this Weyler was called “Butcher” in the American yellow press, which sold a lot of newspapers on the backs of stories about his atrocities. And at last we come to President William McKinley who responded cautiously, with a demand that Spain get out of Cuba or face war. Now Spain knew that it couldn’t win a war with the U.S. but, as George Herring put it, they “preferred the honor of war to the ignominy of surrender.” Let that be a lesson to you. Always choose ignominy. Oh, it’s time for the Mystery Document? The rules here are simple. I guess the author of the Mystery Document. I’m either right or I get shocked. Alright, let’s see what we’ve got today. With such a conflict waged for years in an island so near us and with which our people have such trade and business relations; when the lives and liberty of our citizens are in constant danger and their property destroyed and themselves ruined; where our trading vessels are liable to seizure and are seized at our very door by warships of a foreign nation, the expeditions of filibustering that we are powerless to prevent altogether -- all these and others that I need not mention, with the resulting strained relations, are a constant menace to our peace, and compel us to keep on a semiwar footing with a nation with which we are at peace. Thank you, Stan. This is obviously President William McKinley’s war message to Congress. You can tell it’s a war message because it includes the word “peace” more than the word “war.” By the way, it’s commonly thought that the President McKinley asked Congress for a declaration of war, he didn’t; he let Congress take the lead. That’s the only time that’s ever happened in all of American history, which would be more impressive if we had declared war more than 5 times. So, the document shows us that, at least according to McKinley, we officially went to war for American peace of mind and to end economic uncertainty. It was not to gain territory, at least not in Cuba. How do we know? Because Congress also passed the Teller Amendment, which forswore any U.S. annexation of Cuba, perhaps because representatives of the U.S. sugar industry like Colorado’s Senator Henry Teller feared competition from sugar produced in an American Cuba. Or maybe not. But probably so. Also not the cause of the war was the sinking of the USS Maine. The battleship which had been in Havana’s harbor to protect American interests sank after an explosion on February 15, 1898 killing 266 sailors. Now, most historians chalk up the sinking to an internal explosion and not to Spanish sabotage, but that didn’t stop Americans from blaming the Spanish with their memorable meme: “Remember the Maine, to hell with Spain.” Let’s go to the Thoughtbubble. The actual war was one of the most successful in U.S. history, especially if you measure success by brevity and relative paucity of deaths. Secretary of State John Hay called it a “splendid little war” and in many ways it was. Fighting lasted about 4 months and fewer than 400 Americans were killed in combat, although 5,000 died of, wait for it, disease. Stupid disease, always ruining everything. There weren’t a ton of battles but those that happened got an inordinate amount of press coverage, like the July attack on San Juan Hill at the Cuban city of Santiago, led by future president Theodore Roosevelt. While it was a successful battle, the real significance is that it furthered Roosevelt’s career. He returned a hero, promptly became Governor of New York and by 1900 was McKinley’s vice president. Which was a good job to have because McKinley would eventually be assassinated. A more important battle was that of Manila Bay in which commodore George Dewey destroyed a tiny Spanish fleet and took the Philippines. This battle took place in May of 1898, well before the attack on Cuba, which strongly suggests that a war that was supposedly about supporting Cuban independence was really about something else. And what was that something else? Oh right. A territorial empire. As a result of the war, the U.S. got a bunch of new territories, notably the Philippines, Puerto Rico and Guam. We also used the war as an opportunity to annex Hawaii to protect our ships that would be steaming toward the Philippines. We didn’t annex Cuba, but we didn’t let it become completely independent, either. The Platt Amendment in the Cuban Constitution authorized American military intervention whenever it saw fit and gave us a permanent lease for a naval base at Guantanamo Bay. Thanks Thoughtbubble. So, Cuba and Puerto Rico were gateways to Latin American markets. Puerto Rico was particularly useful as a naval station. Hawaii, Guam, and especially the Philippines opened up access to China. American presence in China was bolstered by our contribution of about 3,000 troops to the multinational force that helped put down the Boxer Rebellion in 1900. But in the Philippines, where Americans had initially been welcome, opinion soon changed after it became clear that Americans were there to stay and exercise control. Emiliano Aguinaldo, leader of the Filipino rebellion against Spain, quickly turned against the U.S. because his real goal was independence and it appeared the U.S. would not provide it. The resulting Philippine War lasted 4 years, from 1899-1903. And 4,200 Americans were killed as well as over 100,000 Filipinos. The Americans committed atrocities, including putting Filipinos in concentration camps, torturing prisoners, rape, and executing civilians. And much of this was racially motivated and news of these atrocities helped to spur anti-imperialist sentiment at home, with Mark Twain being one of the most outspoken critics. Now, there was some investment in modernization in the Philippines, in railroads, schools, and public health, but the interests of the local people were usually subordinated to those of the wealthy. So, American imperialism in short looked like most other imperialism. So Constitution nerds will remember that the U.S. Constitution has no provision for colonies, only territory that will eventually be incorporated as states. Congress attempted to deal with this issue by passing the Foraker Act in 1900. This law declared that Puerto Rico would be an insular territory; its inhabitants would be citizens of Puerto Rico, not the United States and there would be no path to statehood. But this wasn’t terribly constitutional. Congress did extend U.S. citizenship to Puerto Ricans in 1917. Now it’s a commonwealth with its own government that has no voice in U.S. Congress or presidential elections and no control over its own defense or environmental policy. The Philippines were treated similarly to Puerto Rico, in a series of cases between 1901 and 1904 collectively called the Insular Cases. But Hawaii was treated differently. Because it had a sizeable population of American settlers who happened to be white. Ergo, it became a traditional territory with a path to statehood because white people and also pineapples. Now let’s briefly talk about anti-imperialism. There were lots of people who objected to imperialism on racial grounds, arguing that it might lead to, like, diversity. But there were also non-racist anti-imperialists who argued that empire itself with its political domination of conquered people was incompatible with democracy, which, to be fair, it is. The Democratic Party, which had supported intervention in Cuba, in 1900 opposed the Philippine War in its platform. Some Progressives opposed imperialism too because they believed that America should focus on its domestic problems. Yet those who supported imperialism were just as forceful. Among the most vocal was Indiana Senator Albert Beveridge who argued that imperialism was benevolent and would bring “a new day of freedom.” But, make no mistake, underneath it all, imperialism was all about trade. According to Beveridge, America’s commerce “must be with Asia. The Pacific is our ocean … Where shall we turn for consumers of our surplus? Geography answers the question. China is our natural customer.” In the end, imperialism was really driven by economic necessity. In 1902, Brooks Adams predicted in his book The New Empire that the U.S. would soon “outweigh any single empire, if not all empires combined.” Within 20 years America would be the world’s leading economic power. We didn’t have the most overseas territory, but ultimately that didn’t matter. Now, the reasons for imperialism, above all the quest for markets for American goods, would persist long after imperialism became recognized as antithetical to freedom and democracy. And we would continue to struggle to reconcile our imperialistic urges with our ideals about democracy until...now. Thanks for watching. I’ll see you next week. Crash Course is produced and directed by Stan Muller. Our script supervisor is Meredith Danko. The associate producer is Danica Johnson. The show is written by my high school history teacher, Raoul Meyer, Rosianna Rojas, and myself. And our graphics team is Thought Café. Every week there’s a new caption for the libertage. You can suggest captions in comments where you can also ask questions about today’s video that will be answered by our team of historians. Thanks for watching Crash Course and as we say in my hometown, don’t forget to be awesome. This is the part where Stan gets nervous, like, is he gonna go this way or this way or this way? I’m going this way. Imperialism -
Results
House of Representatives
Party | Seats | |
---|---|---|
National Conservative Party | 22 | |
Liberal Party of Cuba | 15 | |
Unionist Liberal Party | 9 | |
Provincial Liberal Party | 2 | |
Cuban National Party | 1 | |
Total | 49 | |
Source: Nohlen |
Candidates for Representatives of La Habana Province
National Conservative Party (NCP)
- Gustavo Pino
- Raul de Cardenas (Incumbent)
- Miguel Coyula (Incumbent)
- Alfredo Betancourt Manduley
- Federico G. Morales (Incumbent)
- Felipe Gonzalez Sarrain (Incumbent)
- Gonzalo Freyre de Andrade
Liberal Party of Cuba (LPC)
- Eugenio L. Azpiazo
- Generoso Campos Marquetti
- Juan Gualberto Gómez
- Benito Lagueruela
- Carlos Guas Pagueras
Unionist Liberal Party (ULP)
- Manuel Varona Suárez
- Miguel Maniano Gómez
- Enrique Roig (Incumbent)
Cuban National Party (CNP)
- José d'Estrampes
Candidates for Representatives of Pinar del Rio Province
Candidates* | Status | Votes** |
---|---|---|
Wifredo Fernández Vega | Incumbent Winner | 36,940 |
Francisco Galatas Errasti | Won Race | 25,047 |
José Baldor Valdés | Won Race | 25,122 |
Narciso Camejo Pimienta | Lost Race | 10,030 |
Alfonso Masón García | Lost Race | 8,879 |
Candidates | Status | Votes |
---|---|---|
Armando del Pino Sandrino | Won Race | 22,708 |
Estanislao Cartañá Borrell | Won Race | 17,927 |
Ramón Vidal Díaz | Lost Race | 17,700 |
José Lazo Rodríguez | Lost Race | 7,156 |
Alfredo Veliz Muñoz | Lost Race | 9,690 |
Candidates | Status | Votes |
---|---|---|
César Madrid Vega | Lost Race | 5,515 |
Ramón Hernández | Lost Race | 9,082 |
Virgilio Rayneri | Lost Race | 7,488 |
Modesto Gómez Rubio | Lost Race | 6,920 |
Ibrahim Urquiaga Arrastía | Lost Race | 7,963 |
Candidates for Representatives of Matanzas Province
Candidates | Status | Votes |
---|---|---|
Gustavo G. Menocal Deon | Incumbent Winner | 19,434 |
Domingo Lecuona Mádam | Won Race | 21,761 |
Alfredo González Benard | Incumbent Loser | 17,474 |
Miguel Arango Mantilla | Incumbent Loser | 18,521 |
Eduardo García Vigoa | Lost Race | 14,872 |
Candidates | Status | Votes |
---|---|---|
Nemesio Busto Delgado | Incumbent Loser | 14,614 |
Juan Gronlier Sardiñas | Won Race | 16,006 |
Celso Cuóllar del Rio*** | Incumbent Winner | 17,452 |
Francisco Santiago Hernández | Lost Race | 13,056 |
Antonio Génova de Zayas | Incumbent Loser | 11,975 |
***Diario de la Marina places Celso with the Liberal Party of Cuba, while Crónica Cubana places him with the Liberal Unionist Party.
Candidates | Status | Votes |
---|---|---|
Agustín Mederos Lens | Lost Race | 13,068 |
Enrique González Gómez | Lost Race | 6,116 |
Silverio Sánchez Figueras | Lost Race | 10,067 |
Roque E. Garrigó Salido | Lost Race | 11,385 |
Fidel Fundora Vega | Won Race | 15,373 |
Candidates for Representatives of Santa Clara Province
Candidates | Status | Votes |
---|---|---|
Joaquín R. Torralbas de la Cruz | Incumbent Loser | 24,012 |
Manuel Rivero Gándara | Incumbent Winner | 48,096 |
Antonio Cazañas Gómez | Lost Race | 36,029 |
Juan Jiménez Casto Palomino | Lost Race | 33,710 |
Oscar Soto Calderón de la Barc | Incumbent Loser | 26,509 |
Rafael L. Mariscal Domínguez | Lost Race | 22,421 |
Carlos Robau López | Incumbent Winner | 33,953 |
Rafael Cabrera Sánchez | Lost Race | 29,326 |
José A. Hernández Fales | Lost Race | 26,534 |
Pedro Pamps Camps | Lost Race | 39,107 |
Justo Carrillo Morales | Won Race | 41,234 |
Candidates | Status | Votes |
---|---|---|
Orestes Ferrara Marino | Incumbent Winner | 54,347 |
Andrés García Santiago | Incumbent Winner | 36,550 |
Antonio Calvo Cárdenas | Lost Race | 19,553 |
Roberto Méndez Peñate | Lost Race | 47,868 |
Manuel J. Delgado Delgado | Incumbent Loser | 23,195 |
André Calleja Capote | Lost Race | 24,038 |
Ricardo Campos Martínez | Lost Race | 38,504 |
Mario García Madrigal | Lost Race | 23,880 |
Fernando J. del Pino | Lost Race | 27,811 |
Pablo Lezcano Larrondo | Lost Race | 24,019 |
Juan Fuentes Borges | Lost Race | 19,219 |
Candidates | Status | Votes |
---|---|---|
Eduardo Guzmán Macías | Incumbent Loser | 2,006 |
Carlos Calonga López | Lost Race | 3,890 |
Félix Arias Segrera | Lost Race | 1,225 |
Casimiro Haya Serrano | Lost Race | 2,603 |
Fortunato Sánchez Osorio | Lost Race | 1,139 |
Ernesto Collado Castillo | Lost Race | 1,108 |
Manuel J. de Carrerá Sterling | Lost Race | 1,193 |
Isidoro Tristá Pérez | Lost Race | 1,541 |
Antonio Rojas Oria | Lost Race | 1,446 |
Juan A. Espinosa Espinosa | Lost Race | 1,182 |
Andrés Pereira Torres | Lost Race | 1,244 |
Other Elected Representatives of Santa Clara Province
- Roberto Mendez Pendant (ULP)
Candidates for Representatives in Oriente Province
Candidates | Status | Vote |
---|---|---|
Luis A. Milanés Tamayo | Won Race | 38,801 |
Manuel Giraudy Vivar | Won Race | 32,255 |
Miguel López García | Lost Race | 31,199 |
Pablo G. Menocal Deop | Won Race | 36,366 |
Calixto Enamorado | Won Race | 27,616 |
Francisco Alvarez Lago | Lost Race | 23,053 |
Juan P. Sánchez Silveira | Lost Race | 18,769 |
Wilfredo Albanés Peña | Lost Race | 29,024 |
Arístides García Gómez | Lost Race | 26,233 |
Félix del Prado Jiménez | Won Race | 35,696 |
Francisco Gutiérrez Barroso | Lost Race | 25,378 |
Eduardo González Manet | Lost Race | 30,124 |
Candidates | Status | Votes |
---|---|---|
Sebastián Planas Mojena | Won Race | 26,614 |
Arturo de Feria Salazar | Won Race | 32,499 |
Justo R. Canipiña | Incumbent Loser | 20,111 |
Manuel León Valdés | Won Race | 32,227 |
Manuel Plana Rodriguez del Rey | Lost Race | 26,839 |
Enrique Samuel Duany | Won Race | 30,046 |
Ibrahím Arias Gutiérrez | Lost Race | 30,689 |
Idelfonso Llamas Cobos | Lost Race | 17,931 |
Alberto Duboy Castillo | Lost Race | 27,078 |
José R. Barceló Reyes | Won Race | 37,788 |
Alberto Castellanos | Lost Race | 19,065 |
Rogelio Robianas Arquimbau | Lost Race | 20,457 |
Other Elected Representatives of Oriente Province
- Manuel Diaz Ramirez (Liberal Provincial)
- Eduardo Beltran Moreno (Liberal Provincial)
Elected Representatives of Camagüey Province
- Julio C. del Castillo (LPC) (Incumbent)
- Aurelio Alvarez (NCP)
* Underline indicates that a candidate was elected to a seat in the Senate.
** Votes come from a source that reported on November 6, and may not have been completely tabulated at the time of reporting.
Allegations of Fraud
Although there were initial reportings of a steady and well-organized election, later information would come to dispute that, starting with a controversy regarding whether or not President Mario Menocal should have been allowed to vote, due to him having failed to register in the district that he lived in.[4] Later evidence would come forth showing an election that was tampered with ballot harvesting and voter fraud.
As reported by the Journal Gazette, allegations of fraud were rampant following the conclusion of the election. It was reported that there was a <10% voter turnout, yet the La Habana Province saw a voter turnout of 1,200,000, despite the fact that 7 years prior, the entire population of Cuba was barely above 2,000,000 people.[5] Votes were alleged to be sold in lots for $200. Despite calls for an annulment of the election due to fraud, the election was not recalled.[6] It is generally believed that the election was, at least in party, fraudulent. The Wilkes-Barre Semi-Weekly Record, while not reporting fraud, echoed similar concerns of inconsistency and suspicion regarding population issues in La Habana province.[7]
The Baltimore Sun reported similar claims. 2 days after the election, the 10% voter turnout statistics had been leaked. It was also recorded that some of the alleged voter fraud contained the names of dead men, such as Evaristo Estenoz, who had died a 4 years before the election during the Negro Rebellion. Later, it was reported that the Senate had failed to fill a quorum, and a message written by President Menocal regarding the state of the agricultural sector's economy.[8] Earlier in the year, the Sun had reported on fraudulent votes within the senate, stating that in the process to elect a Speaker of the House back on August 31 had 3 more votes cast than there were members in Congress, leading to more suspicion that the 1914 nationwide election could have been tampered with.[9]
Party | Votes |
---|---|
National Conservative Party | 349,115 |
Liberal Party of Cuba | 338,086 |
Liberal Unionist Party | 253,239 |
National Party of Cuba | 89,130 |
Federal Worker's Party | 10,773 |
Republican Party | 36,380 |
Party for Morale | 23,893 |
References
- ^ Dieter Nohlen (2005) Elections in the Americas: A data handbook, Volume I, p203 ISBN 978-0-19-928357-6
- ^ a b "Año LXXXII Número 307 Edición de la mañana". Diario de la Marina (in Spanish). 6 Nov 1914. p. 8. Retrieved 17 Feb 2023.
- ^ Primelles, Leon (1955). "Crónica cubana 1915-1918". archive.org (in Spanish). Talleres Tipográficos de Editorial Lex. pp. 45–47.
- ^ "Cuba's Election Tranquil". The Washington Post. 2 Nov 1914. p. 1. Retrieved 19 Feb 2023.
- ^ "Censos en Cuba" [Census in Cuba] (PDF) (in Spanish). National Office of Statistics of Cuba. Archived from the original (PDF) on 10 March 2013. Retrieved 24 February 2014.
- ^ "Frauds in Cuban Election". Journal Gazette. 7 Nov 1914. p. 5. Retrieved 18 Feb 2023.
- ^ "Cuba Election Report". Wilkes-Barre Semi-Weekly Record. 13 Nov 1914. p. 4. Retrieved 19 Feb 2023.
- ^ "Cuban Election Farce". The Baltimore Sun. 3 Nov 1914. p. 1. Retrieved 18 Feb 2023.
- ^ "Congress Ballot "Stuffed"". The Baltimore Sun. 1 Sep 1914. p. 14. Retrieved 19 Feb 2023.
![](/s/i/modif.png)