will than can be obtained in any other way except by direct

vote.

4. It would secure a real contest in every State, instead of the perfunctory campaign which now takes place in the States in which the party majority in either direction is so great that the result is a foregone conclusion.

5. It would eliminate the "pivotal States" from the case, with all the evils which that feature entails, and distribute the battle evenly over the entire country.

6, It would wipe out the vicious balance of power element in politics, by which a fraction of the voters make capital out of the cowardice of the larger parties. At the same time a small party would not be powerless, as now, to make itself felt in any other way.

Ismail Pacha's financial embarrassments grew out of his ambition to become the actual landowner of Egypt, on the strength of which he had already appropriated over a million acres, or one-fifth of the whole area of cultivated land. This article excited much interest, and stimulated the demand for an International Commission of Inquiry to ascertain the manner in which Ismail had disposed of the funds he had appropriated for his own use. I did not expect that the author of this article would be a persona grata at the Khedival Court; but immediately on my arrival I had the honor of being invited to dine with the Khedive, and to take part in all the official festivities. I will add that, of the ex-Khedive himself, as far as my personal relations with him were concerned, I have nothing but good to say. During my frequent sojourns in Egypt in the year prece

Such a change can come in a beneficent form only by an amendment to the Constitution which shall make it universal.

I

RECOLLECTIONS OF TEWFIK PACHA.
EDWARD DICEY, C.B.

Nineteenth Century, London, February. FIRST saw the late Khedive of Egypt in 1869, shortly before the opening of the Suez Canal. Those who were present at that gorgeous pageant will doubtless remember, as I do, a fair, pale lad, clad in the orthodox Stambouli black coat and red fez, who used to be seen alone in a close carriage driving up and down the Schoubra road on Friday promenades. This lad of eight was pointed out to visitors to Cairo as the eldest son of the lord and master of Egypt, the prince who was then entertaining the world to celebrate the piercing of the Isthmus, and who was expected to revive the glories of the Pharaohs.

Some nine years passed before I revisited the valley of the Nile; and there had been important changes, not only in the state of Egypt, but still more in the position of the Khedival family. Egypt was bankrupt; Ismail Pacha was involved in almost inextricable financial and political difficulties, and Tewfik, by a strange stroke of fortune, had become heir to the throne. By Mussulman law and usage, the head of a family is succeeded, not by his eldest son, but by his eldest male kinsman; and according to this rule Ismail, if he had died upon the throne, would have been succeeded by Halim Pacha, one of the youngest sons of Mehemet Ali. At the time, however, when Tewfik became of age, Ismail Pacha, whose influence was then great at Stamboul, obtained a firman from Sultan Abdul Aziz, decreeing that henceforth the Khedivate should pass from father to son in lieu of following the regular Oriental mode of descent.

As a matter of fact, Ismail certainly cared less for Tewfik than for his other sons, all of whom were, I believe, by different mothers. Ismail had the same sort of contempt for the native Egyptians as the Normans of the Conquest had for the Saxons. Now, Tewfik's mother, unlike all Ismail's other wives, was of Fellaheen extraction, and is believed to have retained very little influence over her husband after the earlier years of their marriage. I think, too, that without any other cause, the mere fact of Tewfik being his designated successor would have rendered him an object of personal disfavor to a prince of Ismail's character. However, the advantage of having as heir a son, who, in the course of nature must expect to succeed to the throne, and who has, therefore, no direct interest in removing the actual occupant before his time, cannot but commend itself to the ruler of an Eastern country. Tewfik was scarcely allowed to leave Egypt during his father's reign, was given none of those educational advantages so freely lavished on his brothers, and was kept studiously in the background.

I made his acquaintance at a ball given by his father in the Gesireh Palace in 1878. A short time before I had published in this Review an article, the object of which was to show that

he always treated me with consideration and courtesy.

ease.

The ball took place while my article was still fresh in Egyptian memories. I was strolling through the rooms when an Anglo-Egyptian official took my arm with the words, "I want to present you to his Highness Prince Tewfik." I turned and saw a stout, heavy-looking young man, seemingly very ill at The cause of his discomfort was obvious enough. His father was standing near us, and was watching us with his sharp, sleepy eyes, which always reminded me of a cat shamming sleep. I have seldom seen a man so manifestly anxious to cut short an interview, as Tewfik was on this occasion. He stammered, hesitated, spoke a few words of halting French, and uttered an audible sigh of relief as I bowed and passed on. I mention this incident as illustrating the conditions under which the late Khedive passed his life up to the time of his father's deposition.

Ο

(Concluded next week.)

TAMMANY HALL AND THE DEMOCRACY.
THE HON. RICHARD Croker.

North American Review, New York, February.

No political party can with reason expect to

or to retain power, unless it be efficiently organized. Between the aggressive forces of two similar groups of ideas, one entertained by a knot of theorists, the other enunciated by a well-compacted organization, there is such a difference as exists between a mob and a military battalion. The mob is fickle, bold, and timid by turns, and in different portions it is at the same time swayed by conflicting emotions. In fact, it is a mere creature of emotion, while the drilled and compacted battalion is animated and supported by purpose and scientific plan.

In political parties, organization is one of the main factors of success, and without it there can be no enduring results. When we consider the ghastly turmoil of the French Revolution, we cannot fail to admire the success, the influence, the resistless power of the Jacobin Club, not because the club was praiseworthy, but because it was skillfully organized and handled. When its representatives sat in the convention, they knew their orders, and they were also conscious that it was their business to carry them out. They acted upon the principle that obedience to orders is the first duty of the soldier, and that "politics is war." Everything is war in which men strive for mastery and power as against other men, and this is one of the essential conditions of progress.

The city of New York contains to-day a political organization which, in respect of age, skillful management, and unity of purpose, devotion to correct principles, public usefulness, and, finally, success, has no superior, and, in my opinion, no equal, in political affairs the world over. I mean the Tammany Democracy. I do not propose to defend the Tammany organization; neither do I propose to defend sunrise as an exhibition of celestialį mechanics, nor a democratic form of government as an illustration of human liberty at its best. In the last campaign almost the only argument used by the Republicans

was the assertion that Flower was the candidate of a corrupt political club named Tammany. Tammany was accused of every vice and crime known to Republican orators; it took forty millions annually from the citizens of New York, and gave them nothing in exchange. To the credit of the Democrats let us note that, while this torrent of abuse was poured upon the heads of voters, Democrats did what the inhabitants of Spain are said to do when the clouds are opened—“they let it rain." Nobody apologized for the misdeeds of the aileged malefactor; the Democrats went before the people on legitimate issues, and the result of the affair was expressed in the figures 47,937 majority. I doubt if the Democracy would have fared anything like as well if they had defended, or apologized, or explained away. 'He who excuses himself accuses himself" is a time-worn proverb. They let Mr. Fassett shout himself hoarse over Tammany corruption," and they won the victory.

In fact, such a defensive attitude would have been entirely at variance with the basis on which the Tammany Democracy acts. A well-organized political club is made for the purpose of aggressive warfare. It must move, and it must always move forward against its enemies. If it makes mistakes, it leaves them behind, and goes ahead. If encumbered by useless baggage or half-hearted or traitorous camp-followers, it cuts them off, and goes ahead. Such an organization has no term or place for apologies or excuses.

The political party that is uppermost in New York, legislates locally for the largest municipal constituency on the planet, except one. This enormous task demands a combination of skill, enterprise, knowledge, resolution, and what is known as "executive ability," which cannot be at once made to order, and cannot be furnished by any body of theorists, no matter how full may be their pockets or how righteous their intentions. Since the demise of the Whig party the Democrats have administered the affairs of New York County, rarely losing even the mayoralty except on personal grounds; always having the majority in the Board of Aldermen, and as a rule the Sheriff's and County Clerk's offices; and the guiding force of the New York Democracy has proceeded from the Tammany organization.

All members of Tammany stand by its principles and affirm its record. Its system is admirable in theory, and works excellently well in practice. There are now twenty-four Assembly districts in the County, which are represented in an Executive Committee by one member from each, who oversees all political movements in his district. This member of the Committee is always a man of ability and good executive training. If he goes to sleep or commits overt acts that shock public morality, he is compelled to resign.

Coincident with the plan of having each district thoroughly looked after by experienced leaders in close touch with the central committees, is the development of the doctrine that the laborer is worthy of his hire; in other words, good work must be paid for. Since there must be officials, and since these officials must be paid, and well paid, in order to insure able and honest service, why should they not be selected from the membership of the society that organizes the victories of the dominant party?

In my opinion, to ask this question is to answer it. We admit that the logical result of this principle would be that all the employés of the City Government, from the Mayor to the porter who makes the fire in his office, should be members of the Tammany organization. This would not be to their discredit. If any of them commits a malfeasance, he is just as responsible to the people as though he were lifted bodily out of the "Union League" or some transient Citizens' Reform Association," and he will at once find himself outside of the Tammany membership also.

That the Tammany Democracy will largely aid in organizing victory for the national ticket next November, is beyond ques

tion. The national Democracy is free to choose whatever candidate it may prefer. Tammany's part in the conflict is to elect the candidate named. No matter what Republican majorities may come down to the Harlem River from the interior of the State, we propose to meet and drown them with eightyfive thousand majority from New York and Kings.

W

WHAT IS RUSSIA?

Auguste StrINDBERG.*

La Nouvelle Revue, Paris, February 1.

HEN it was generally thought that a treaty between France and Russia had been, or was going to be signed, the union was stigmatized as an alliance, so to speak, within the prohibited degree, or still worse as a misalliance between the most civilized nation and the Barbarian. There are words which circulate like counterfeit money until the touchstone causes them to be refused. An instance of that is the use of the words "Russian barbarity.”

Let us take a glance at the history of Russia, and observe what reason there is for calling her barbarous.

Before the Christian era, Greek and Roman colonies had been planted on the Northern shore of the Black Sea and the Scythians had always commercial relations with civilized countries. Proof of this is furnished by the antiquities discovered in the Crimea.

When the Western Empire fell, and Byzantium became the centre of civilization, Vladimir, the founder of the Russian Empire, married a daughter of Romanoff II., emperor of Constantinople, and was baptized. Then Russia began its task of guardian of the frontiers of Asia. The barbarians, thenceforward, were the Mahometans. By the eleventh century Russia was so far civilized that she became a safe place of retreat for English and Scandinavian princes exiled from their country, and was allied by marriage with the most powerful houses of Europe. Anna, daughter of the Czar, married Henry I., of France. Its capital, Kiev, became a place of great trade, where Hungarian, German, Dutch, and Scandinavian merchants met for traffic. It was a rival of Constantinople, and, like the latter, had its cathedral of Santa Sophia, besides four hundred other churches. It had Greek artists, a Greek clergy, an alphabet of Greek letters, a Greek literature, and passed, in a word, for a Greek city.

When Constantinople fell under the assaults of the Turks, and the Eastern Empire ceased to exist, Moscow took the place of the venerable capital of that empire. To Moscow repaired a portion of the emigrants, carrying with them the treasures of learning, art, and industry, of Hellenic antiquity. Ivan III. married a Byzantine princess, Sophia Palæologus.

What has prevented the assimilation of the Russians with Western Europe is the religious schism between the Roman and Eastern Churches. Yet the Eastern Church dates from the first centuries of the Christian era; it controlled all the early Councils; it has had its reform and revival, without bastardizing itself like Protestantism, exempt from intestine quarrels, from Saint-Bartholomew massacres, and from burnings at the stake. It is not, then, on account of its religion that we can quarrel with this formidable, despised, and defamed giant. It was the Czars who made Siberia habitable, and who, by the conquest of the Caspian Sea, have established maritime routes to the very heart of Asia. It must be admitted that the Western Powers have not always seen fit to leave Russia to do her civilizing work unmolested. More than one diplomatist has played the part of Charles XII. at Constantinople, and preferred to evoke the spectre of Islamism to troubling the famous political equilibrium of Europe.

What signifies the epithet of barbarous, applied without discernment to Russia, and to her especially? What is it to

*The Editor of the Revue informs us that this gentleman is one of the leading writers belonging to the Democratic party in Sweden.

be barbarous? Originally, when there existed but one civilization in Europe, the Hellenes employed the word Bapßapos to designate foreigners from everywhere, without in any way attaching to the word the meaning which it has to-day. Is it reasonable to obstinately apply this term, which, in the course of ages has come to imply insult, to a European nation which is numbered among the most powerful?

Barbarous! a nationality which has based its education upon Hellenic traditions. Barbarous! a Christian people, in whose history are recorded the glorious combats in defense of the frontiers of civilization against the Huns of Asia.

A country which, already, in the time of Charlemagne, was acquainted with written characters; which printed its first book forty years after the invention of Guttenberg; which published a journal in 1703, and the dictionary of which, edited in 1789, with its 43,000 words, was compiled by an Academy which numbered among its correspondents Leibnitz, De l'Isle, Bernouilli, Diderot, Voltaire—such a country, assuredly, does not deserve the title of barbarous.

In our day, does not Russia possess a considerable network of railways, telegraphs, postal service? Has it not eight universities, 35,000 schools, thirty-eight learned societies, forty-five public libraries, observatories, museums, schools of the fine arts, conservatories of music?

Read the proceedings of its Academy of Sciences, and learned societies, and you will be convinced that Russia contributes its fair annual share to science, and that its share is of good alloy. Read the romances of Tolstoi and Dostoiewsky, if you have not read them already, and you will discover in them a young nationality, a new and virgin soil,

Russia is the young sister of the nations of Europe, with the defects of youth, but with the great qualities of the young; faith, enthusiasm, hope, lofty aspirations. She is, moreover, of a sound stock, of a good and ancient nobility. This fact fully explains the sympathy so lately proclaimed between France, the always vigorous descendant of Rome, and Russia, the daughter of Greece. It is an old friendship, which dates from the time of Peter the Great and Catherine the Second, who carried away from France buds and seeds which germinated in the black and fertile soil of their country.

Russia is vast, too vast for the jealousy of those of the Western Powers who do not comprehend that the frontier province against immense Asia must be immense and that Byzantium belongs, by right of succession, to the Byzantines and not to the Turks.

In closing, let me recall that Saint-Simon, after the project of Peter the Great for an alliance with the court of France had failed, bewailed the fatal fascination that England has for France, and the misfortune for the latter of not being able to perceive the increase of strength it might have found in Russia.

THE NICARAGUA CANAL: ITS POLITICAL ASPECTS. CAPTAIN W. L. MERRY.

Forum, New York, February. ICARAGUA is a sparsely settled country, with great, but

waterways, insuring cheap transportation. It is destined to be the site of the great interoceanic canal which shall connect the Atlantic with the Pacific, and necessarily the scene of great industrial and commercial activity on the highway of the world's commerce. The nation that supplies the money to build the canal will control its commerce, and subsequently its policy.

As the result of construction under private control, and with foreign capital, there is the right of foreign protection to foreign property. The nation whose citizens supply the capital cannot consistently be prevented by our government from landing military forces for the protection and the maintenance of the neutrality of the work. It is true that by its concession from

Nicaragua the Maritime Canal Company is inhibited from disposing of its rights to any government. It is now an American Company, and may remain so at the option of the United States Government, unless it elect to give up its charter from Congress. But there is nothing to prevent foreigners buying up its stock. There is no objection to foreign capital in domestic corporations, but the canal is an international work, and the conditions are different. Indeed it is not exaggerating the question to assert that the interoceanic canal means, for the United States, to build, to buy, or to fight, with the alternative of taking an inferior position among nations.

The Nicaragua Canal will be the great highway of our increasing commerce, between the Atlantic and Pacific coasts. President Hayes called the canal “a continuation of our coastline." It is more than that. It is a dominant factor in the control of the commerce of the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, and Lake Nicaragua is a position unique in its importance to our national interests. Gibraltar, Aden, or the Bosphorus, does not compare with it in the value of its military position. Upon its bosom an ironclad fleet may float in fresh water, in a delightful climate, surrounded by a territory producing supplies for fleets and armies. The construction of the canal will be a practical, friendly, and complete vindication of the Monroe Doctrine.

It has been contended by some that it is dangerous for the United States to acquire realty and interests abroad, which may require protection; but this which was applicable to the thirteen federated colonies does not apply to a growing nation of over sixty millions.

The political history of the Suez Canal should be a lesson to our statesmen. England prevented its construction as long as possible. When it was completed she purchased it secretly. When it became a military advantage for the English Government, temporarily to close the canal, British ironclads were sent to Ismailia and the termini, and the canal was closed at her pleasure. Does anyone now expect that England will abandon Lower Egypt? Never unless under the stress of military force. British troops are there to stay.

Is there any reason to assume that, if the Nicaragua Canal be not built under the control of the United States Government, the same policy will not be adopted by the British Government here also? Would it not be in the direct line of English policy to do so? What is to prevent England acquiring the controlling interest in the Company's stocks and bonds, as she has done in the Suez Canal? And if she then consider that military requirements justify her in closing the Suez canal, why not the Nicaragua Canal? The United States might object, but what are diplomatic objections opposed to rifled ordnance floated on ironclads? Better assume control now, than fight for it later.

when

It is fortunate that we have in Nicaragua a patriotic and friendly government, willing to meet us half way in any request which shall insure the construction of this great highway. President Lacasa and his advisers are friends of the United States, and appreciating the favored position of their country as the future highway of the world's commerce, are willing that our country shall share this great advantage, Under these conditions all parties should unite to secure an American canal under American control. The commercial and industrial interests of our country demand the American interoceanic canal, and the world at large needs it more and more every year. The foremost statesmen of both parties, from the Penobscot to the Gulf, and from the Atlantic to the Pacific, have raised their voices in its favor. The Pacific coast of the United States is united on this question, and they will not regard as a friend any legislator who goes on record against it. It would be unfortunate beyond comprehension if the day should come when the great canal, under a rival maritime power should become a menace to our interests instead of a peaceful highway for the world's commerce, and a monument to American statesmanship and American energy.

SOCIOLOGICAL.

THE SOCIAL QUESTION AN ETHICAL QUESTION. W. JERUSALEM.

Fels zum Meer, Stuttgart, February.

Y the "social question" is now generally understood the

laboring classes may be improved. Through the writing and agitation of men like Louis Blanc, Ferdinand Lassalle, Karl Marx, Henry George, and others, the majority of laborers in manufacturing, and generally organized industries, have been brought to the conviction that they are exploited under the present system, and that subject to the "iron law of wages," it would be impossible for them to secure more than the barest necessities of existence, under the present industrial system. With seeming logical consistency, many of the leaders preached the overthrow of the existing industrial order as the first essential step, and the social democratic party was at first revolutionary. Later, having separated itself from the anarchistic and destructive element, the party begins to realize that its aims may be eventually attained by peaceful, legitimate means. There are now thirty-five of these social democrats in the German Reichstag, and it appears probable that their numbers will be increased at the next general election. The question what is Socialism is consequently no longer one of merely academic interest, but is becoming for all of us a vital problem of practical life.

The two chief features of Socialism are: (1) the abrogation of private property, and (2) the universal obligation to labor. The anticipated workings of the system is set forth in fullest detail in Edward Bellamy's interesting work Looking Backward. Everything is nationalized. The State assumes control of all the means of production and transportation, and is the only employer. These changed conditions are supposed to work a corresponding change in humanity; selfishness and self-interest are unknown qualities. "The change of conditions involve a corresponding change of motives," says Bellamy, and on this presumption he proposes to solve the riddle. This is certainly very cleverly argued, but Bellamy forgets that human nature and character pursue a slow process of development. His future State is consequently no more than a beautiful dream, an Utopia from which a great deal may be learnt, in which we dare not learn all that it can teach.

The projectors of all these ideal States, the creation of the imagination, are deficient in the historical sense; they fail to apprehend that history is a continuous thread that cannot be broken. How, then, shall human motives change with the change of conditions? This, as Ziegler remarks, is making the thing stand on its head. Change the motives first, the conditions will then adapt themselves to them. Still, remarks Ziegler again, with right: "Things will not always remain as they are, the spirit of Socialism is right, and the future belongs to it. But the dream that we shall find it there some fine morning when we awake, is a delusion. Manners and morals are of slow growth, and hard to bend. Standing on the ground already attained we may advance towards our ideal, step by step, humanity securing at every stage a moral advance which shall fit it, by healthy growth, for changed and ever changing conditions. This is not so brilliant a vision as the golden dream of an Utopia, to be won in a single campaign; but it is more practical than dreaming."

It was laid down decisively by John Stuart Mill, in his autobiography, that nothing but a change of character, especially among the wealthy classes, could secure social peace. To this we would add that the rising generation might be trained in this conviction with marked success. Youth, with its impressionable nature, might easily be saturated with the social spirit. We could more easily train our children on these lines than ourselves. It is our first duty to impress upon them that the

individual is, before all, under obligations to become a useful member of society. Especially in those families in which it is probable that the children will not be under any necessity to earn their own bread, it should be timely and forcibly impressed upon the children that property has its duties. "What thou has inherited from thy father, earn, that thou mayest make it thine own," says the proverb. It is only by service rendered to the community that inherited property becomes legitimately owned.

Early habits of labor should be regarded as the most important feature of education, and by this must be understood, regular labor, engaged in for a useful purpose. In the smallest as in the greatest households there are numerous light tasks which might be intrusted to the children as regular daily duty with the beneficial result of training them in habits of industry, punctuality, sense of duty, and responsibility. By making such provision for the education of the children of the wealthy and employing classes, we should certainly pave the way to industrial peace. But it must not be overlooked that the social education of the laboring classes constitutes as important, if not a more important, feature of the problem. If the hours of labor are to be reduced, special training is necessary to aid the workman to a proper employment of his leisure.

Further the laboring class and the social-democratic party must be brought to realize that mental labor is as wearing and wearying as physical labor, and fully as important to the social weal. The social reformation must proceed from within outward. Standing on the ground already won, we are enabled to introduce external reforms of the worst features of existing conditions, as the limitation of hours of labor of women and children, etc., but for steady, continuous social reform, our children must be educated to a higher plane, to enable them to grapple in turn with the difficulties of their day. But in spite of all human progress, the perfect social ideal is attainable only by a perfected humanity.

THE NEW CIVILIZATION DEPENDS ON MECHANICAL

BY

INVENTION.

DR. W. T. HARRIS.

Monist, Chicago, January.

Y reason of his physical nature, man is hampered by three wants he needs food, clothing, and shelter. In his first and lowest stage of civilization he lives in enthrallment to nature. He dreads and worships the cruel forces of matter. But by the aid of science, and of invention which flows from science, man attains dominion or control over things and forces, and directs them into the service of humanity for use or beauty.

If the spectacle of pauperism and crime, the savagery that still lingers in the slums of our cities, sternly reminds us of the yet feeble hold which our civilization has obtained even in cities-if the census of mankind proves that three-fourths are yet below the line that separates the half-civilized from the civilized-we are still wont to console ourselves with the promise and potency which we can all discern in productive industry, aided by the might of science and invention.

This view is always hopeful. We see that there is a sort of geometric progress in the conquest over forces and things. The ability of man to create wealth continually accelerates. The more each one gets, the more his neighbor also gets.

Wealth, in the modern sense of the word, far more than in the ancient sense, is self-productive. Capital represents conquered forces and things-conquered for the supply of human wants. The three physical wants, food, clothing, and shelter are produced by nature-they are the chains and fetters whereby nature enslaves humanity, and keeps him in a state of thralldom.

But the Promethean cunning of man, realized first in science,