to become more and more spiritual, and the petitioner more and more diffident in the expression of his material wants, and with a growing consciousness that the Deity knows best what is good for man, may rise to the height of the formula, 'Thy will be done.' It is interesting to note how in many races some such utterance has been heard; and at times men have been helped to it by the consciousness which scientific advance had awakened, that the laws of the material universe can not be capriciously altered to suit the temporary needs of the individual; a formula of acquiescence appears then to be the deepest and truest prayer. Finally, in the evolution of prayer we consider that the consummation is marked by the theory, maintained by later Greek philosophy and early Christian fathers alike, that the true intention of prayer is not the mere petition for some special blessing, but rather the communion with God, to whom it is a spiritual approach. Here, as often elsewhere, the highest spiritual product of human thought reveals its affinity with some dimly remote primeval concept; for much of the spell-ritual at which we have been glancing implies an idea of such communion, the human agent endeavoring to charge himself with a potency drawn from a quasi-divine source."

MUST MORALITY HAVE A RELIGIOUS BASIS?

THE

`HE question whether a code of morality can be drawn up, and obedience to moral law secured without a basis of belief in religion and in God is the topic of a symposium in La Revue (Paris), and many of the most eminent men in France have expressed their opinions on the question. Some of them think that moral ideas are an unconscious growth in the individual and spring from collective habits, and social instincts; others are convinced of the close union of faith and morals. Reason is affirmed to be the sole basis of morals by a third class.

The well-known writer Anatole France thinks that morals change with manners even in Christianity, and that legislation is the best system and sanction of morality. He cites the Code Napoleon and says:

"Law, which is the systematization of practical morals, is in Europe quite independent of any religious confession. The Italian minister Minghetti has justly observed that the Code Napoleon reproduces, to a very great extent, the whole of the Roman code as it existed prior to Christianity, but that it is inspired by the spirit of the eighteenth century. Here we have not only a system of morals, but moral sanctions independent of religious dogmas."

Man's character as a social animal determines his moral character, according to Max Nordau, the well-known author of "Degeneration." He thus formulates his views:

The sane and normal man has social tendencies. The morbid, degenerate man is, on the contrary, unsocial. The first accepts and practises morality instinctively because it is a social institution. The unsocial man is equally averse to morality from instinct, and does not submit to its rules unless compelled to do so. No argument can deprave the man who is good and social by nature, nor morally improve the man who by nature is bad and unsocial. Reason is perfectly competent to keep a social being on the right path."

...

Jules Lemaître refuses a definite answer, but says, while confessing that he does not know, he fears that morals can not exist without a belief in God. Nor has Emile Faguet, the famous critic, any firm convictions in the matter. Ferdinand Brunetière, editor of Revue des Deux Mondes, who is a faithful Catholic, points to his works in which he has emphasized the axiom "no morality without religion."

The worship of the goddess Reason "did not hold its place after the revolution," says H. Mézières, “doubtless because it did not satisfy the religious needs of the whole nation. We have no ground for believing pure reason would have greater success among us to-day. Something less dry will always be demanded by souls to whom the ceremonies of religion are a comfort, a prop, and a means of moral support.”

It is natural enough that Anatole Leroy-Beaulieu, who is presi

dent of the League against Atheism, should declare that the elimination of God from the intellectual system involves the elimination of morality, a fact established by history. He thus points out the consequences of a theory of morals which does not imply the existence of God:

"We must not be surprised if a theory of morals destitute of theistic ideas, independent of all religious or metaphysical conceptions, should finally land the human race in mere animalism. A morality independent of religious faith is essentially a relative morality, to be discussed, changed, or denied. To transfer morals from the domain of the absolute to that of the relative is not only to degrade morals but to take from any system of morals its force and imperative authority. Skepticism attacks moral beliefs as it attacks religious beliefs; it dissects them and takes them to pieces, one after the other, so that one man's pride and another man's egoism denies real existence to anything. Thus, in imitation of Nietzsche, many of our contemporaries declare under their breath, if they do not venture to declare aloud, that morals, like religion, can be nothing but a superstition, of no use excepting to the common people."

The eminent lawyer Charles Gide believes it might be possible to build a system of morals on the foundation of reason, but as this has never been done, he thinks he had better not give a definite opinion as to how such a system is to be taught and transmitted to those who only live by custom and authority. In contradiction to him, Gabriel Séailles says that we are at present actually living under the régime of a morality which is lay and not ecclesiastical, and that we find it a very good system. The war is carried into his enemies' country by Octave Mirbeau, who declares:

"Religions in any country have never been the foundation of morals; they have actually originated everything which is contrary to morals, for they are all founded on lying and blackmail. According to religion nothing is needed by the vilest scoundrel but to repent one second before his death in order to be welcomed into the paternal arms of God, where he receives the eternal joys of heaven. As long as there are gods in the world there can be no system of morals; there can be nothing but a hypocritical pretense of morality."

Mr. Berthelot is by far the most illustrious scientist in France, and he believes that science is the true school of morals, and not religion. He thus expresses himself:

"The effect of scientific knowledge is to give to the people means, first of all, of living, and further, of developing themselves intellectually and casting off the bondage of poverty. But science may be regarded also from another point of view. Its loftiest work is to free men from the dogmas imposed upon them, to give them free thought, the natural result of a scientific education. Science is the grandest school of morals in existence. I insist upon this point, altho we are frequently taught by certain orders of men that morals have been instituted among mankind by religion. This is an error contradicted by history."

The psychologist and physiologist, Charles Richet, a man of European reputation, answers that morals must be a rational system, but at the foundation of every science there are postulates which reason is forced to accept without discussion. He observes: "A universal system of morals must be founded on principles universally accepted. For instance, you can not bind Brahmins, Jews, Catholics, Mohammedans, and free thinkers to a system of morals whose basis is Protestantism. Hence it follows irrefutably that morals can not be made to depend upon a revealed religion." The scientist Louis Havet pronounces that reason is the only source of morals, and adds:

"Not only can morals exist independently of religion, but a system of morals can not be instituted without repudiating religion." All the good that is in religion, according to the popular poet Maurice Bouchor, lies in the morals founded on reason and experience which they have embodied, and which shall eventually survive them.

FOREIGN COMMENT.

THE

THE "BIG STICK" FOR TURKEY.

HE Turk has never more than been tolerated as an intruder on European territory, and, as the Paris Liberté says, the intervention of the Powers on behalf of oppressed Turkish subjects has embittered the quarrels of European and Oriental races, and aggravated the disputes between Christian and Mohammedan religionists. The present question in Macedonia, however, is purely a financial one. As the above-quoted paper says, " Europe proposes to inaugurate the administration of the latest functionaries she has invented, and whom she styles financial controllers of the Macedonian vilayets," i.e., provinces, including Salonika, Monastir, and Kossovo. "The first object of these 'controllers' is to protect the revenue of the Macedonians and to keep it in Macedonia." Constantinople has always been draining Macedonia by exorbitant taxation. 'Whenever Constantinople has need of money, and you may believe the Porte is always short, Kossovo

THE SULTAN.

or Monastir, vilayets of Macedonia, have had to fork out, irrespective of debt or duty."

The "financial controllers" of Macedonia, according to the Européen (Paris) have to supervise the collection and disbursement of taxes. The six Powers who signed the treaty of Berlin agreed to their appointment, but they have never been recognized by Abdul Hamid. The financial inspectorgeneral in Macedonia, Hilmi Pasha, having failed to carry out the wishes of the Powers,

a new move was thus rendered necessary.

The Sultan, however, has blocked it. This step necessitated a call for the police-" a naval demonstration was decided upon, wihch was to include the seizure of Turkish custom-houses, a blockade of the Dardanelles, and the landing of troops in an island of the Archipelago."

According to the Hamburger Nachrichten and the Fremden Blatt (Vienna), this demonstration was a sort of "big stick" held over Turkey while certain proposals were being submitted to Tewfik Pasha, foreign minister to the Porte. On the acceptance or rejection of these proposals further action is to depend. In accordance with these proposals the above-cited papers inform us, the European Powers will take complete control of Macedonian finance. They will appoint a fiscal commission, with powers to draw up the budget of the three vilayets of Macedonia, and to impose and collect taxes. They will also undertake the reform and reorganization of the police throughout the country. Izaak Walton says that when transfixing a frog for bait the fisherman must handle him as tho he loved him; so, says the influential Hamburg paper quoted above, will the Powers handle the Sultan in this delicate matter. To quote:

"It is self-evident that the Powers both wish and intend to respect and leave inviolate, as far as possible, the proper prestige of the Sultan. The present political situation, however we regard it, forbids any of the Powers from departing in the slightest degree from the line of procedure agreed upon which would ensure the

stability of the status quo. The interests of the Ottoman Empire must before all things be guaranteed."

This doubtless. is spoken apropos of Austria's well-known designs upon Macedonia. According to R. A. Scott-James, who writes in The Fortnightly Review (London), Francis Joseph wishes to substitute Austrian for Turkish rule in the Macedonian provinces where Austrian trade has so fully established itself. It is through the maneuvers of the gov-. ernment at Vienna that the present "demonstration" has been made under the command of an Austrian admiral. Of Austria Mr. ScottJames says in this connection:

TEWFIK PASHA,

"Her geographical position has given her an advantage over all the other great nations of Europe. Her people are most closely in contact with the Macedonians; her traders have been first on the spot; her wares have been sold in the towns and villages and pushed by an army of commercial agents. Austrian capitalists hold numerous shares in the national debt, and in private business undertakings; the tithes from the land adjoining the railways are appropriated as her security; and the railways themselves are owned, conducted, and manned by subjects of the Austrian Empire. Austria has nothing to gain by any sudden change in the Government of Macedonia, for if the present state of things continues, her securities in the country, and consequently her control of the country, will be such that she will have practically absorbed Macedonia as Russia was in process of absorbing Manchuria. Peace and order being necessary to her plans, she desires just such a measure of reform as will stave off revolution without destroying

The Turkish Minister of Foreign Affairs who has all along urged the Sultan to accede to the Macedonian program of the Powers.

THE COALITION AGAINST TURKEY.

"There is talk, your Majesty, of a European naval demonstration."

"ABDUL HAMID-"Oh, let them do as they have a mind to. I am quite used to that sort of thing."9 10gust 96

the supremacy of the Porte; just enough reform to keep Europe from interfering, but not enough to prevent the Macedonians from welcoming the substitution of an Austrian rule for a Turkish."

The Européen, in the article quoted from above, remarks that William II. is far too anxious to ensure the stability of the status quo." His omitting to send one of his North Sea squadron to join the fleet of demonstration is interpreted by this French journal to be due to his unwillingness to wound the susceptibilities of "his friend the Sultan," and is thought likely to encourage the Porte in its recalcitrancy. Some English papers share this suspicion and look upon the German Emperor as tertius gaudens. That this suspicion is unfounded is shown by the Vossische Zeitung (Berlin), which states that the ultimatum laid by the Powers before the Turkish Government was signed by the German ambassador at Constantinople along with the rest, and that Germany is therefore bound to its enforcement. The same paper explains that Germany has no fleet in the Mediterranean; that it would take eight days for one of her ships to reach the scene of action; that in any case her flag will fly side by side with those of the other Powers, for the school-ship Stein is now in the Levant and will join the squadron commanded by the Austrian Admiral von Ritter. -Translations made for THE LITERARY DIGEST.

THE NEXT PRIME-MINISTER OF ENGLAND.

Τ TH

HE position of political parties in England at present, according to the London papers, is peculiar. There are three prominent figures on the stage, Chamberlain, Balfour, and Campbell-Bannerman. The great question before them is the tariff problem. Chamberlain stands for protection; Campbell-Bannerman for free trade. The London Morning Post well describes Balfour's attitude toward the tariff when it likens him to a doubting Cæsar crossing a divided Rubicon. "It is," says The Post, as tho Cæsar on coming to the Rubicon had found it divided into a main stream separated from himself by a minor channel, and had crossed the minor channel, but declared that he would under no circumstances commit himself either to crossing the main stream

-46

And even for the humbler vocations of the unskilled labor market the free-traders have maintained a supply of eager competitors, who will take the poorest wages and accept the most miserable conditions, in the shape of the pauper'alien immigrants, who have only with much difficulty within the past few months been excluded from our shores. It is at the feet of the free trade politicians that the unemployed should lay their woes."

The free - traders, however, call themselves 'free fooders," and boast of cheap meat and flour in England. 'As Campbell - Bannerman said in his Portsmouth speech, "I will not cut down the size of the poor man's twopenny loaf," and the free-fooders refuse to reverse England's fiscal policy of the last sixty years. Meanwhile the political battlefield is filled, according to the London papers, by what Shakespearean stage directions would style "alarums and excursions." Parliament on the eve of dissolution, a ministry tottering to its fall, and politicians rushing hither and thither with speeches to the people give abundant matter for the ministerial and opposition press. Certain papers wish the present Premier to continue in office, and a Conservative daily raises the old Scottish battle-cry" A Balfour! A Balfour!" The London Standard is followed by The Daily Mail in declaring that Chamberlain is the man to restore prosperity and satisfy the clamors of the unemployed. The organ of the Government, however, reluctantly admits that Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman will be the next Prime-Minister of England.

SIR HENRY CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN, Leader of the Liberals, who, as The Times predicts, is to be the next Prime-Minister of England.

Mr. Balfour, in his recent Newcastle speech, confessed to some of the worst things with which the opposition charges him. He did shirk the fiscal question, and literally, to use his own expression, "ran away." To quote from the speech referred to, in which he dwells for a moment on the burning question of the hour without giving either his opinions or his plans:

"It will be in your recollection that when the fiscal question came on at a certain period in last session, I publicly advised the party to take no part either in the debates upon it or in the divisions to which it might give rise. That advice was given entirely on my own responsibility. It was most reluctantly acquiesced in by some of those of my colleagues in whose judgment I have the greatest confidence. It has been subjected to adverse criticism by some of the most eminent members of the party in and out of the House, but I have not the slightest doubt that the advice I then gave was the right advice, and that any other course would have been dogged by disaster."

Even the Continental press after this declare that Balfour is impossible and join in the jeers with which papers like The Westminster Gazette (London) mention his name. Thus the Frankfurter Zeitung remarks:

"We can not think that the present English ministry can hold... together much longer. Chamberlain, according to the latest news, has kept silence long enough and has at last risen in rebellion against the shilly-shallying of Balfour. The Prime-Minister wishes to keep office as long as he can possibly do so, but the ex-Colonial Secretary wishes to inaugurate a new era in English

politics, and the longer this lukewarm Balfour remains in power, so much the longer will Chamberlain's plans be kept from realization."

The "shilly-shallying" of Balfour on the tariff question is noted also by the Kölnische Zeitung, which thus comments on the Premier's political speech recently delivered at Newcastle :

"

'It will easily be seen how impossible it was for Mr. Balfour in his speech at Newcastle to refrain from mentioning the hopeless disagreements that prevail in his ministry. Frankness with regard to the political situation, or with regard to his own views on the tariff question no one expects to meet with in Balfour. On crucial questions any clearness of statement is foreign to his nature."

Thus the knell of Balfour's political preeminence has sounded, and, according to the London Times, which still gives him faint and feeble support, his successor is to be Sir Henry CampbellBannerman, his doughty antagonist on the floor of the House of Commons. Sir Henry has been reported in all the London papers as having delivered a speech in which he announces the Liberal program and denounces the free-trade ideas of the two Chamberlains as well as the modified free-trade which Balfour seems inclined to admit. Of this speech The Times says:

"It is certain-so far as anything can be certain in politics-that in the event of Mr. Balfour's resignation the King will send for Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman. With that great responsibility imminent, as his remarks show him to believe, the country naturally expects from him some indication of a concrete and practical policy of a constructive kind, or at least some evidence of the attitude of himself and his party toward political problems. But the country will not find much enlightenment of that sort in his address to the Portsmouth Liberals."

In his address to the Portsmouth Liberals, the nearest approach to a definite Liberal program set forth by Sir Henry is contained in the following extract from his speech:

"I take the question in the forefront-the fiscal question. Sir, we desire to remove all agencies that can be removed in restraint of trade, and therefore of prosperity; we desire to curb wasteful expenditure, which is more damaging to this country than the tariffs of other countries; we desire to keep the public hand on the liquor traffic; we desire to secure, not only public control, but improvement in the quality of education-and, to the best of my observation, the only effect of the meddling of the present Government with elementary education, at all events, has been-if I may use a strong word, but a good old classical word, and a very accurately expressive word has been to bedevil it. We desire a thorough

reform of the rating system, securing fairer incidence between town and country, between owner and occupier, and a sounder apportionment between imperial and local burdens, together with the rating of urban site values, and the relief in this respect of industry and improvements. We desire the development of our national resources, notably those which are to be found in the land itself, so as to arrest depopulation, to give freer access to the soil, and greater security and freedom of tenure. We desire to restore combinations of workmen to the position intended for them by Parliament."

Of this speech The Westminster Gazette (Liberal) says that 'Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman had the opportunity of replying to Mr. Balfour at Portsmouth and delivered an excellent speech." The London Daily News says:

"The interest with which Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman's opening speech at Portsmouth has been awaited shows where the nation now looks for guidance. From the mutinous exhortations of Mr. Chamberlain and from Mr. Balfour's passionate cries of despair, it is a relief to turn to an utterance which is, from first to last, sensible, straightforward, and sincere. One of our perplexities, at any rate, has solved itself. The title of Liberal leader is now beyond dispute, and if leadership is anywhere in question, we may ask Mr. Balfour and Mr. Chamberlain to tell us in what quarter such personal problems still rankle. Sir Henry CampbellBannerman has fought a long and weary battle, but his unfailing courtesy, his invincible courage, coupled with a conviction which is everywhere based upon accurate knowledge, has pulled him through, so that he now stands at the head of the strongest and most united Opposition of the last thirty years."

WAR-CRY OF THE RUSSIAN REVOLUTIONISTS.

THE Jewish revolutionary Bund in their appeal to the Russian

proletariat, recently published in the Européen (Paris), announce Death or Victory" as their war-cry. They declare that the tempest of revolution has at length broken upon Russia; that a bloody and pitiless civil war is to be waged; that the cause of liberty is in danger; but they declare that the air of liberty has been at last breathed by the people and that they are sure of success. To quote:

"The tempest of a great revolution has burst forth in Russia and is sweeping from one end of the country to the other. Its majestic course is followed by a sanguinary and pitiless civil war, such as has been stirred up by the violence of blind reactionaries

operating in a country which for centuries has struggled in the iron grip of autocracy. The party of reaction are mobilizing their forces. The expiring régime has allied itself with the refuse of society. The Government organizes and arms these blinded outcasts, who, worthy of their instigators, are bent on a savage and murderous struggle."

A vivid general description is given of the cruel massacres attributed to the "brute" Trepoff, as a leading French journal styles him. In the words of the appeal:

"The roar of musketry resounds in the streets of Russian cities. Victims without number bestrew the soil. Blood flows in torrents. Czarism once more has recourse to its favorite instrument of government. The massacres of Jews are carried on to such an extent that all the crimes of Czarism in the past dwindle into insignificance and are eclipsed by these new excesses of ferocity. The 'Black Gangs,' protected by the troops, encouraged by the authorities, under the supreme direction of Trepoff, systematically slaughter in cold blood the Jewish population of Russia. The Jewish quarters in many cities are total

upon. The Jewish working class has always been foremost in the fight for liberty and life. To quote further:

"We, the representatives of the Jewish working classes now

struggling for liberty, of that proletariat of a nation which has been more oppressed than any other, have for some time contemplated the idea of pursuing our struggle for liberty by armed resistance against the hired assassins of Czarism. The Jewish proletariat has always led the vanguard of the revolutionary struggle, encountering the most deadly attacks of its implacable foes. At this moment, when Czarism rages against us with unheard-of ferocity, the need for revolutionary self-defense comes home to us more keenly than ever. In defending ourselves we work for the revolution, our struggle for life is a struggle for liberty. And all who love the cause of liberty should hasten to our assistance."

The revolution, indeed, the appeal continues, has actually come and the revolutionists are confident of success. They invite others to join their desperate resolve, "Death or Victory." The Central Committee of the Bund signs the proclamation, which concludes as follows:

ly devastated. Cities are in flames. Anarchy and terror reign everywhere. The cause of liberty is imperiled."

The revolutionary activity of the Jewish proletariat is next dwelt

-Amsterdammer.

"The hour of revolution has struck. We catch a glimpse of