Republican of to-day. Look where we will, the same tendency is evident throughout the party. In Ohio, Mr. Sherman struggles for reëlection against Governor Foraker. In Pennsylvania Mr. Quay and his associates are supreme. Mr. Clarkson leads the national organization, while, as he complains, the great newspapers and magazines of the country, which formerly supported the Republican party, are now contending against it. The education and intelligence of the country are naturally repelled by the Republicanism of to-day.

On the other hand, the Democrats have, until recently, offered little which could attract the men whom the Republicans have alienated. Tammany and its methods do not suggest reform, and among those named as possible candidates for the Presidency there is only one who could command their support. Governor Hill inspires no more confidence than Mr. Blaine, nor is Mr. Gorman clearly better than Mr. Quay.

The practical question is whether men, who desire only to have their country well governed, cannot, by united action, do something to secure the nomination of good men by both parties, something to make them both "effective agencies of political progress and reform," rather than armies contending for the power to despoil their common country. Why is it not practicable to form a national organization of those who, without regard to party, will pledge themselves to act together in support of tariff reform, civil-service reform, electoral reform and honest money, and against corrupt men and corrupt methods in politics wherever found.

It would seem that the first step should be a conference of those who think alike, in order that, by comparison of views, some course of action might be promptly devised.

WAGES IN MEXICO.

M. ROMERO, MEXICAN MINISTER TO THE UNITED STATES. North American Review, New York, January.

IT

T has often been said, in advocating restrictions upon this country's trade with Mexico, that we pay low wages to our laborers, who are sometimes called paupers or peons, and that the maintenance of high wages here (in the United States) requires that free entrance of Mexican products similar to those of the United States be forbidden. I hope to render a service in the line of better understanding and reciprocal increase of trade to the advantage of both countries, by giving some idea of the wages paid in Mexico, of the way in which they affect the prices of Mexican productions, and of comparative prices of the commodities produced in both countries.

The broken surface of Mexico gives us all the climates of the world, frequently at very short distances from each other, and enables us to produce the fruits of all the zones, while placing at our disposal an immense hydraulic power, as yet little used. But, on the other hand, it makes transportation very expensive, and this fact renders exceedingly difficult the interchange of products. These conditions cause a great difference in the wages paid in different localities.

I present the following table compiled from the statistics collected by the Department of Public Works, which embraces the average field wages per day aid in the different States of the Mexican Confederation:

Agnas Calientes..

Laborers in factories, in mines, and on railroads receive considerably higher wages than field hands, but statistics concerning such have not been collected. Workers on railways recive on the coast and frontier as high as $1.50 per day.

On

There are comparatively few wagon roads in Mexico. that from Vera Cruz to the City of Mexico, the best constructed in the Confederation, the average freight was $68.75 per ton of 2,200 pounds for a distance of 2634 English miles, or over 26 cents per ton per mile; and during the French intervention, 1861-67, freights were as high as $330 per ton. The revived grant for a railroad from Vera Cruz to Mexico, restricted the maximum freight to $62 per ton, or 24 cents a mile per ton; and this rate was then considered quite reasonable. Such difficulties of transportation restricted the exports of Mexico to the precious metals, and to high-priced products like cochineal and indigo. Even now, with over 5,000 miles of railways, and when the depreciation in the value of silver has placed a bounty of about 30 per cent. on the exportation of commodities, the total export from Mexico during last year was in round numbers $40,000,000 in precious metals, and only $20,000,000 in commodities.

The impression prevailing in this country regarding the Mexican peon is erroneous. It is supposed here that peonage is equivalent to slavery, and that it is spread throughout the country. Actually it exists chiefly in comparatively reduced areas where laborers are very scarce. The peonage system has no legal existence in Mexico, it having been abolished by Article V. of our Constitution of 1857, which provides that “nobody shall be obliged to render personal service without proper compensation and his full consent," and rendered null any contract which contemplated the “loss or irreparable sacrifice of the freedom of man through work, education, or religious vows." This article was amended in 1873, mainly with the view of prohibiting the taking of religious vows, and of making it more explicit. It reads now, in regard to work, as follows:

The State cannot allow the fulfillment of any agreement, contract, or covenant which may in any manner impair, destroy, or irrevocably sacrifice man's liberty, either through work, education, or religious

Meats: Beef Mutton.. Pork

14

II

Paper (Printing)

5

Baja California (T.)

50

Nuevo Leon.

1834

Rice

7

Chiapas

349/8

Puebla

349/8

Sheep

gross weight.

Sugar

5

San Luis Potosi.

224

Tallow

4/6

614

Distrito Federal.

349/8

Tamanlipas

37/2

Whiskey

80 pr gal....

Guerrero

Hidalgo

Jalisco...

343/8

Tepic (T.).

372

372

43 34

Yucatan

314

454

Zacatecas

34/8

General Average..

36.

One reason for the high price of Mexican products is the local duties levied upon them on coming into the cities; for unfortunately the internal commerce of Mexico is not free. The Government is now endeavoring to bring the different

States to an agreement to replace such duties with some less objectionable tax.

The reciprocity treaty of 1883 contained a provision, which seems to be little appreciated here, whereby complete immunity from all local, State, and municipal taxes was granted to merchandise from this country imported into Mexico, giving it the same freedom as it enjoys at home. In agreeing to the above clause, my object was not only to promote trade between the two countries, but also to undermine the present obnoxious legislation at home. The moment foreign merchandise was exempted from local duties, domestic merchandise was left in such an unfavorable plight as to imperatively demand a change. We have great respect for international agreements, and hold that the legislative branch of the Government cannot abrogate them, unless with consent of the other party or in case of war.

We pay at home, in many cases, wages amounting to about one-sixth of what is paid here for similar work, and yet the production in Mexico is a great deal more expensive than the production of similar articles in the United States. The use of improved machinery and the greater skill of workmen-the ability to accomplish so much more in a given time-more than counteracts the difference in the rate of wages,

I hope the explanations I have made may dispel some of the errors prevailing in this country regarding the conditions of labor in Mexico; and that both countries, instead of contravening the provisions of nature—which has placed one beside the other, with different climates, productions, and possibilities will coöperate with the purpose of nature, and not interpose unnecessary obstacles to reciprocal trade.

dent da Fonseca had vainly sought to incorporate into the Federal Constitution the privilege of prorogation of Congress. It had been a royal prerogative of Dom Pedro II., and had frequently been exercised. But Brazil was more thoroughly republican than even its first republican President imagined. When, after a long and bitter struggle with Congress, he unlawfully assumed this prerogative, the people protested; the alternatives were civil war or resignation, and he chose the latter. Thus are probably ended forever, any pretensions of Brazilian Presidents to autocratic power.

Brazil has been singularly free from retrogressive steps in her political evolution. Every effort to usurp undue authority has ended in firmer establishment of the rights of the people. When Dom Joao VI., King of Portugal, fled to Brazil in 1808, his first important act was to publish the Carta Regia, by which the ports of this great colony were opened to the world. The King and his court having settled in Rio de Janeiro, the dignity of Brazil was increased, in 1815, by the decree constituting it a part of the United Kingdom of Portugal, Algarve, and Brazil. The situation under this arrangement becoming strained, a representative government was proclaimed in the mother country. In Brazil, the army took up the cause, and Dom Joao felt his throne tottering. In this exciting crisis, the prince, Dom Pedro I., acting as mediator, secured mutual concessions, under which a constitutional government was established, Dom Joao returned to Portugal, while Dom Pedro remained in Brazil as Prince Regent. It was a tremendous victory, accomplished without bloodshed.

Soon the authorities in Portugal assumed a dictatorial attitude towards Brazil, and on the 7th of September, 1822, we behold the Prince espousing the cause of an oppressed people, and giving the watchword to a new era, “Independencia ou Morte."

Without resistance Brazil obtained autonomy, and two years later by her new Constitution, although retaining Dom Pedro I. as Emperor, she secured a representative government, with toleration of all religions; public courts of justice; right of habeas corpus and trial by jury; legislative power vested solely in the General Assembly and legislative assemblies in the several provinces for local laws, taxation, and government. Freedom of the press was likewise accorded. This was an immense gain for a nation which only sixteen years before had been the colonial vassal of an autocratic monarchy!

But Dom Pedro I., the idol of the people, excited suspicion by summarily dismissing on Aptil 6, 1831, the Ministry which enjoyed the confidence of the masses. By nightfall the Emperor was besieged in his palace, his adherents deserted, and at midnight he faced the mob alone. Then and there he announced his abdication in favor of his son, Dom Pedro II., a child of five years. Thus ended the second revolution, and the business of the nation went on, ruffled only by the incident of a day. The Regency was first vested in a council of three, and afterwards changed to one man, elected by the people. Misuse of power provoked a popular outbreak, the entire Chamber of Deputies marched to the Senate, and jointly they decided to abolish the Regency, and to place Dom Pedro II., then fourteen, in charge of affairs.

We are all familiar with the peaceful extinction of slavery by this wise monarch, and the final summary notice which led to his abdication on the morning of November 15, 1889.

The force of example set in the first uprising has doubtless contributed to this remarkable course of political development. With such models before him, President da Fonseca was naturally impelled to acquiescence when the will of the people showed itself against him.

ens.

President da Fonseca and his Cabinet inherited heavy burdThe foreign indebtedness of Brazil amounted in round numbers to $154,000,000. The internal debt was still larger, in addition to which the Imperial Government had guaranteed interest upon a railway capitalization of $114,000,000. The Sao Paulo Railway, with a capitalization of $9,000,000, was the only road earning the amount of its guarantee. Instead of inaugurating prompt retrenchment in expenditures, the new Government felt impelled to prosecute all undertakings for the sake of winning favor in the provinces which would be benefited thereby. The financial stress became great, and the status of the exchequer finally alarming, when it was discovered that the deficit in the budget for 1890 would be nearly $19,000,000, instead of $14,000,000, as stated by the Minister of Finance.

The constitutional convention played an unexpected part in hastening the crisis. The members of the Cabinet were members of the convention also, and they differed violently from President da Fonseca upon financial policy, especially as to concessions and public works. The Ministry finally resigned, and led, in the Congress, an active opposition against the Administration. There was a spirit of needless and bitter antagonism on both sides. Congress finally passed a Bill, which was unconstitutional, denying the right of veto to the President. The President dismissed the National Assembly on the ground of incompetency. His intention seemed to be to carry the question to the people, but a popular uprising forestalled the decision of the ballot-box. That spirit of acquiescence which had so often saved Brazil from civil war saved her again. When the Dictator saw Rio Grande do Sul in arms, he prepared to quell the movement. When he saw that the Republic had taken up the cry, he resigned. The war clouds rolled away, and Brazil is once more at peace.

The recent crisis seems to have settled the permanence of republican government in Brazil. Fortunately,she needs only activity, energy, and prudence to bring her prosperity to even a higher pitch than it was before. She is not suffering under a foreign indebtedness like Argentina. Her speculation has

been with her own money. There exists no real scarcity to-day, for at a time near the end of the recent troubles there were on deposit in the banks 486,000,000 milreis out of a total circulating medium of 517,000,000 milreis. Now that the stress is over, and the Republic apparently safe, it is likely that a renewal of public confidence will restore commerce to a normal condition, and that Brazil may enter upon a career which will realize the hopes of greatness cherished by her true statesmen-and by none more than her former Emperor, who has died in the desolation of exile.

IN

ENGLAND AND GERMANY.

Westminster Review (Independent Section), London, December. N the next General Election, foreign politics will, we may all be glad to think, play only a very subordinate part. What the Government seem chiefly to pride themselves upon at present in respect of foreign policy is, not the sure foothold they have retained on the Nile, but the rapprochement which they are supposed to have brought about between ourselves and Germany. There are many ties to unite the two nations--consanguinity, natural affinity, a considerable trade, and the two nations have often been allies, never declared foes. But whence, one feels inclined to ask, comes this sudden, all-absorbingappreciation of Germany? And whence comes Germany's equally sudden willingness, if it exists, to bury the newly-dug-up hatchet, and let kindness take the place of denunciation ? We do not regret the loss of Heligoland, it has a more natural place in the German Empire than in our realm. But there are features about our bid for German amity which make us a little doubtful whether the bargain is really as good as it is represented to be.

When, thirty or forty years ago, we entered into that historic entente cordial with France the case was widely different. The new dynasty required our recognition; we, on our side, required support in our Eastern policy. The treaty, beyond it the entente, were freely established. They bound us to France, but without a shadow of detriment to any third country with which we were at peace. Without doubt it has produced a more or less permanent feeling of friendship, a closer connection, a more mutual confidence between the two countries. And it brought in its train the commercial treaty of 1860, which has been of unspeakable benefit to us.

Now what of a similar character has Lord Salisbury to show for his entente with Germany? There was, it must be admitted, something of a special opportunity offering a gain. Germany wanted our moral support in Europe, and beyond that—we know very well, although we do not know how far her want has been met-she wanted the support of our fleet in the event of a coming war. On the other hand, Lord Salisbury must have been very glad of the prospect of Germany's countenance and good-will in his dealings with foreign powers and colonial possessions-more especially as a make-weight against French oppositions in respect of Egypt. With such bricks certainly, a tolerably pretentious house might be built up. But what advantage, what enduring gain does it bring us? Is it precisely the sort of house that we should like to see erected, and is it likely to stand?

At the present moment, Germany is resting on her oars in a not altogether untroubled repose of beati possidentes, after the wars of 1864, 1866, and 1870. In that repose, no doubt she wishes neither to be herself disturbed nor yet to disturb others. But things cannot always rest at that point. By the constraining force of the part which she has addressed herself to play, Germany is almost without choice of her own, a country "going forth conquering and to conquer." Her Triple Alliances—this is the second-were formed specially, avowedly, for the purpose of defending her recent conquests, and her newly gotten position, and to keep down France, and, if need be, Russia. Beyond that, Germany having once lent her hand to the

realization of the all-German aspiration of perfect unificationDas ganze Deutschland soll es sein "—can no more stand still where she now is than a rolling ball can stop on its course half way down a hill. The acquisition of the German provinces of Austria is sure to crop up. There is more which has been Germany the German Cantons, the Low Countries. But leave all that out of sight as too far removed for present consideration, the Austrian provinces certainly are put down on the political task-bill, as well as the "isolation" and overmatching of France, the restraining of Russia, the extension of partially dispossessed Austria (as it will be) into the Balkan peninsula.

Now is that the paper on the back of which our name ought to appear? In past time we have sacrificed blood and treasure without stint to pull down great military empires which, by their power, threatened the freedom of Europe. Are we now deliberately going to lend a hand in the building up of one? It is claimed that the alliance is in the interests of peace, but it is vain to suppose that, by tacking on England as a nondescript ally to the Triple Alliance, France and Russia will be effectually deterred from drawing the sword, once they agree to coöperate, and make up their minds to fight. If, on the other hand, fighting enters into the calculations of our league for the preservation of peace, then obviously we are in for far more of a job than the country is likely to admit itself prepared for.

And after all, are we fit associates for that. ambitious company abroad, in which Lord Salisbury is, by a great mistake, trying to introduce us? We have tried alliances and found them wanting. Our place is neither by the side of France nor that of Germany-with their quarrels we have no concernbut on that neutral ground where medio tutissimi ibimus. Our proper post is at the head of "those Liberal and Secondary Powers" which need a leader pledged to fairness and peace. Germany knows that, like other countries she can have our friendship whenever she chooses, but she would immeasurably increase it by meeting us in something of the same spirit in which we have met her. Obviously friendship, political as well as private, are not to be cultivated across carefully barred and bolted doors. One little bit of commercial concession, one little opening of her commercial house, one little abstention from needless colonial bickering, would go ten times further than Lord Salisbury's studied demonstrations of good-will.

THE ECONOMIC SIGNIFICANCE OF THE COMMER

W

CIAL TREATY.

Grenzboten, Leipzig, December.

HATEVER may be the conclusion of commercial, financial, and tariff experts concerning the commercial treaty concluded in the first week of December, whatever their opinion as to its bearing upon the people's incomes, the memorial in the Reichstag and the address of Chancellor Caprivi have placed it on a basis which imparts to it an epochmaking significance. "The development of Germany to an industrial state of the first class "-so runs the memorial-"the increase of its population, and the inadequacy of the produce of the soil to our domestic requirements, result in the necessity of importing raw materials and food-stuffs in considerable supply from abroad. To restore the balance of trade disturbed by this necessity, it is of first importance to find foreign markets for our surplus manufactures"; but this is rendered difficult by the general exclusive policy of most States.

This official recognition of the fact that our soil-capacity is inadequate to the needs of our growing population, is just what renders the discussion of the treaty an epoch-making departure, for this public recognition of the fact involves the indispensable necessity of inaugurating . economic policy in harmony with it. The excess of imports over exports has increased steadily since 1880, and reached, in the year 1890,