THE

HE assertion that England is stirring up the Armenians is not new to the reading public on this continent. Many people will, however, be astonished to hear that America is held responsible in part for the outrages committed by the Turks during the past few months. This, at least, is the view taken by the editor of one of the most influential French periodicals, the Revue Bleue, Paris. In an article entitled "The Truth about the Armenian Question," he describes the causes of the present disturbances in Turkey as follows:

"Why do the powers ignore all the rest of the paragraphs of this voluminous treaty, and mention solely the 61st; the one in favor of the Armenians? Why not the 23d article, intended to benefit Candia? Nearly every article of this famous treaty, especially those in favor of Turkey as a power, remains a dead letter. We are told that it is necessary to protect the Armenian Christians. But why are these in danger? What is the cause of these massacres? The responsibility rests in two quarters: with England as a power, and with the evangelical missionaries. Let us take a look at the latter first.

"In the United States and in England there are to be found numerous persons who believe that there are millions of souls to be saved in Turkey. These pious persons furnish a large capital for the evangelization of Asia Minor, that is, for the conversion of a population belonging, to a great extent, to various Christian denominations, and living in the country from which Christianity has sprung. That proselytes are made, can not be denied. The converts are attracted by two things: money and protection. Thanks to the money, numbers of young Armenians finish their education at English and American universities. That is an irresistible argoment in favor of conversion. Generally speaking, the peoples of Asia Minor are poor, while those of the European provinces live in comparatively easy circumstances. Among the latter the missionaries are less successful. The Armenians form the best clientèle of the missionaries, and there are Armenian doctors, professors, lawyers, and engineers who have studied at the expense of the evangelical propaganda. Upon their return home, they fill the heads of their compatriots with ambitions which can not be realized.

"As for the protection accorded to the proselytes, it is a strong, if not the strongest argument in favor of conversion. The converts put themselves under the protection of the missionaries, who are themselves protected by their various governments. Some of the converts also obtain foreign-citizen rights-chiefly American—and enjoy the privileges of foreigners according to certain treaty rights. The presence of these, many American missionaries and citizens explains the part played by the American legation and the despatch of American ships of war to the Dardanelles."

The writer now turns to the British possession of Cyprus, and claims that it is quite as badly administered as Armenia. The powers, therefore, if they were just, should intervene to restore order to Cyprus as well as Armenia. But England ignores the beam in its own eye, and demands reforms in Turkey only.

These are her reasons:

"It is in the fist place the Egyptian question that determines England's attitude toward Turkey. It is a matter of facts and persons. The facts are known to the whole world: England is displeased that Turkey refuses to acknowledge her as mistress of the Nile country. The personal aspect of the matter is less well known. Sultan Abdul Hamid has never ceased to regard Egypt as a province of his empire, nor has he given up the hope of recovering his rights over that rich country. But England has still greater interests than these to guard. The English intend to construct a railroad through the valley of the Euphrates to establish a new communication with India. But the Porte evades all questions regarding the necessary concession for such a railroad, preferring to deal with French and German capitalists rather than the English. The Armenian difficulty, therefore, is

intended to convey an English warning to the Sultan to the following effect: 'You must cease to busy yourself with Egypt in defiance to us; you must stop causing diplomatic difficulties by flirting with the dual alliance, or you will rouse a veritable tempest about your ears.'

ence.

'With regard to Russia, England hopes to convert Armenia into a rampart against that power: The Kurds, paid by British could be formed into a formidable force against the Rusmoney, sians. England has vast plans on the subject. Intercepted correspondence shows that it is planned to convert Turkish and Russian Armenia into one great principality under British influDoes England intend to proceed alone with the dismemberment of Turkey? We must answer that question in the affirmative. The English want to act by themselves in order to obtain from the Sultan another island or another province, besides other concessions. England has prepared for this by sending a strong fleet to the Dardanelles, and France must send one that is equally numerous in order to preserve her prestige in the eyes of the Orientals."

As to reforms, the writer does not quite see how they are to be applied. The treaty of Berlin speaks of reforms for the provinces in which the Armenians are settled. Now, Armenians are found all over Turkey, but they form nowhere a majority. And the Mohammedans for the most part do not ask for a change in their administration. In the vilayets of Angora, Siwas Wau, Diarbekir, Bitlis, and Erzeroum the Armenian population is more numerous than anywhere else, but even here it falls far short of the Mohammedan majority. In these vilayets the Mussulmans number 3,750,000, the Gregorian Armenians 850,000, the Protestant Armenians 61,000. The 59,000 Roman Catholic Armenians do not make common cause with the others, and the 370,000 Greeks and 200,000 Nestorians, Chaldeans, and Syrians are also quiet enough. Thus the reforms would have to be applied for the sake of 17 per cent. of the population.-Translated for THE LITRRARY DIGEST.

CANADA AND THE CANADIANS THROUGH
SPANISH EYES.

Q

UIETLY and unostentatiously, but none the less effectively, the great Dominion on our Northern frontier is taking its place among the foremost nations of the world. English writers have described it as the home of the rejuvenated Anglo-Saxon. Germans point to its stability, which makes it specially valuable to investors who care more for certain than for large returns on their capital. But the most flattering recognition of Canadian work comes from Spain. Among the Spaniards, who are just emerging from the lethargy of centuries, Canada is regarded as an instance of what a colony can become under proper management, and many writers of note advise the reconstruction of the government of Cuba on Canadian lines. Adolfo Posada, Professor of Political Economy at the University of Oviedo, has a paper on this subject in the España Moderna, Madrid. We summarize his article as follows:

Hasty persons persist in believing that social ills can be cured by the application of some political panacea, some form of government which they judge only by the excellent results obtained in the country of its origin. We have a typical case in the Cuban question. The difficulties of the situation in Cuba, in a great measure caused by our traditional errors and our backwardness, naturally call for a solution. "What is to be done," is the universal cry, "to furnish Cuba with a prosperous policy? What kind of rule will insure progress and peace effectively?" People are

gradually convinced that Cuba must have some prudent measure

of autonomy, with more or less liberty. But the idea of autonomy, easy enough to express in a theoretical way, is far less easy to carry out practically. In principle, political autonomy is expressed by the English self-government, and means the right of a certain social entity to administer its own affairs, while yet it remains within a larger and, in some respects, superior organization. Our eyes are naturally turned toward Canada. Rightly or wrongly, the impression has gone abroad that the Pearl of the

intervention if it is turned against all interference in American affairs as inimical to United States interests. President Monroe declared that the United States must not be mixed up in the affairs of European colonies on the Western hemisphere. This is now done, and the Monroe doctrine, instead of gaining in importance, arouses prejudice.”

"But above all it should be remembered that the Monroe doctrine is not an acknowledged principle in international law. It is nothing but a political program. The United States itself has explained its terms differently at different periods. I will only mention the Panama Canal and the attitude of the United States in the Mexican question as instances. The Monroe doctrine was not brought up in 1863; it was first remembered in 1865, when the United States Government had become stronger.

Of some importance also is the attitude of Holland. This country, less than half as large as Ireland, rules over as vast a colonial empire in proportion as Great Britain. Dutch interests in South America and in the West Indies are considerable, and Dutch Guiana is a valuable colony. The Handelsblad, Amsterdam, the most widely circulated paper in Holland, expresses itself in very strong terms against President Cleveland's interpretation of the Monroe doctrine. It says:

"The Monroe doctrine is opposed to the principle of non

may enslave prisoners of war captured from the heathens around them. An Abyssinian may not, however, trade in slaves. He inherits them, or receives them as presents, if he does not capture them in war. King Theodorus possessed over 1,000 slaves, and King Menelik is said to have still more, for it is the pride of a prominent Abyssinian to own many. Every Abyssinian has one or more slaves, and these do all the work. Their lot is pitiful enough, and they rarely regain their liberty. King Menelik has given a written promise that slavery should cease, but this promise has never been redeemed. His soldiers continue to supply themselves with slaves in the Galla countries. It is the duty of Europe to assist Italy in supressing this sort of thing. The Galla nations will develop if once they are safe from slavery, and their country, which is immensely rich, will benefit Italy greatly." Concerning the slave-trade, the suppression of which has caused so much dissatisfaction in Abyssinia, the Rev. Flad says:

"Regular traffic in slaves is carried on mainly by the Mohammedans. Nearly every Mecca pilgrim takes two 'servants' with him to Arabia. These are slaves; they are sold in Arabia, and their price reimburses the pious Mussulman for the expenses of his religious journey. Besides these, there are the great caravans of slaves captured in the Galla countries, and there are 300 to 500 in a train. Formerly many of these were shipped from Massowah to Arabia, but the Italians have stopped that. They are now sent through Egypt to Tunis and Tripolis, and even as far as Morocco. The slave-trains have to pass through King Menelik's territory, and he demands heavy customs dues from them. The traders, on the other hand, retaliate by stealing poor Abyssinians, whom they add to their stock. The loss of life is terrible; sometimes 50 per cent. die before they reach their destination,"

The beginning of the war is marked by a disaster on the Italian side. A column of 1,500 native auxiliaries under the command of Italian officers and non-commissioned officers has been annihilated. But Italy will not give up the idea of subjugating King Menelik on this account. Premier Crispi, the Italian Bismarck, to whom Italy owes the gradual return of her prosperity and prestige, and who has succeeded in arranging her finances, has managed to maintain himself at the head of affairs, altho the Opposition endeavored to enforce his retirement over the African question. Of greater importance than the opposition in the Chambers is the jealousy of France and Russia. Both these powers are unwilling to recognize Italy's protectorate over Abyssinia, because Italy goes hand-in-hand with England. Tribuna, Rome, says:

The

"The treaty concluded between Italy and Abyssinia prohibits the negus from entering into negotiations with any foreign power except through the intervention of Italy. Russia alone has refused to acknowledge this treaty in full, but her objections are of a religious character only. Italy has now proof that Negus Menelik violates the treaty in many ways, and the Italian Government will not allow any interference on the part of other powers. France has long ago promised to keep out of all intrigues, and is bound to prevent the exportation of arms and ammunition to Abyssinia. England's interests are identical with our own, and the English Government will allow us to march through their territory if that is deemed necessary.”.

Russia did, during the middle of last year, take extraordinary interest in Abyssinia. But the deputation of Abyssinians which visited St. Petersburg proved to be barbarous and ignorant. The order offered to the Czar-The Star of Solomon's Seal-was started by an enterprising Russian agent, its jewels were worthless glass, and the deputation was rather backward in acknowledging the Czar's authority as head of their church. Russian interest has now declined, and the Gazette de Moscow declares that Russia will not actively interfere on behalf of Abyssinia.—Translated for THE LITERARY Digest.

HATRED of the Jews is waxing worse in Germany and Austria. This is said to be true also in France. Even in London the agitation against "pauper aliens " is chiefly supported, says The London Spectator, by hatred of the Jews! The Spectator adds somewhat bitterly: "We know of no clearer proof that, whatever the merits of Democracy, its creed is not a

religion of love."

THE

ALL ABOUT $20,000.

HE Carmanx strike is at an end. It has ended in an irrevocable lockout of the glass-workers, who, following the advice of the Socialist chiefs of France, insisted that an employer must not be allowed to discharge a workman who openly agitates against him. For months the struggle lasted; all France took sides in it; even the Government was asked to interfere on behalf of the strikers. This struggle leaves thousands of workingmen and their families without means of subsistence. Curiously enough, there is a large sum of money, $20,000, deposited in the Bank of France to relieve these sufferers. A wealthy woman has given this sum as the nucleus of a fund with which the locked-out workmen are to erect a factory of their own. But the Socialist leaders object to this, and their enemies declare that they do so because the members of cooperative societies will be irrevocably lost to the revolutionary cause if their venture is successful. The General Anzeiger, Frankfort, contains a sketch of the quarrel which has arisen over Mme. Dembourg's princely gift, while the workmen of Carmaux and their families remain in a state of utter deprivation. The writer says:

"Mme. Dembourg is a faithful reader of the Intransigéant, has unbounded faith in Henri Rochefort, and handed the money to him, confident that she had laid the foundation of much happiness. But she has made her calculations without counting the demagogs. The men who live by agitation do not see why their Carmaux friends should suddenly be made free and independent. If the workmen own a factory, they will no longer care for strikes. They would not be likely to quarrel among themselves about wages, and would hold all indolent comrades to their work. Worse than that: If the factory is a success, the proletarians will become well-off men, will get more and more conservative, and lose all faith in the doctrine of the universal division of wealth. The Carmaux workmen, until now trustworthy adherents of revolutionary principles, would develop into a lot of small capitalists and bourgeois. Revolutionary meetings would cease.

"The heads of the Socialist party therefore made up their minds that the cursed institution of employers should not prevail in Carmaux, not even in the form of cooperative societies, in which the members are employers and employed in one. The glass-works must be made an institution for the benefit of the whole French proletariat. The workmen were henceforth to earn their bread in the service of the socialistic-revolutionary party of France. Looked into closely, this is nothing but a restoration of the institution of employers, for the employed at Carmaux are not to be allowed to keep the surplus of their earnings, they must hand it over to the 'party,' which just like M. Ressegnier, the individual capitalist, can accept and dismiss workmen, and pay wages like any other ordinary 'exploiter.' But the 'party' can not possibly manage this affair. Its members are too numerous to supervise the works carried on in one spot. But then, the delegates could look after the matter, and a committee, which follows in everything the will of the party leader, could play the part of directors of this concern. Thus the Socialist leaders intend to administer a joint stock company whose shareholders will have no say, while the dividends, instead of being distributed, will remain in the hands of a committee with exclusive power to disburse them at will. Now, this is a very pretty idea, perhaps also a correctly Socialistic idea, but it is not a democratic idea. It can not be executed. Henri Rochefort maintains that he has received the 100,000 francs, which he has deposited in the Bank of France, for the benefit of the Carmaux strikers only, and he refuses to hand over the money to the committee. Mme. Dembourg intended to repay these poor deluded sufferers for their hardships; she wished to give them a chance to become financially independent, and hoped to set the example for future cooperative societies. Henri Rochefort says that it would be a violation of his trust to turn over the money to a group of demagogs. Meanwhile the strikers of Carmaux are as much without a livelihood as ever. The 100,000 francs alone are not sufficient to build a bottle-factory, and all plans for raising additional sums go for naught, because the Socialist chiefs quarrel as to whether a glass-workers' factory is to be erected, or a factory for the benefit of workmen. The giver of the money wants the first, the demagogs want the second, but only for appearance's sake. The Allemanist faction openly confess that they intend 'to put the money aside for the preparations of a general strike throughout the country. Their views are perhaps better expressed by 'putting it away for themselves.""—Translated for THE LITERARY DIGEST.

already recorded against him, was once again brought to book by the vigilance of the revenue-men. As an old offender, who had neither promised nor repented, it was like to go hard with him; and he begged earnestly, not for liberty, but for a commutation of his sentence which would send him to jail instead of the penitentiary, promising that so long as the judge remained upon the bench he would neither make nor meddle with illicit whisky. He won his case, and was sent to jail for a term of eleven months. This was in summer, and six months later, when the first snows began to powder the bleak summits of Chilhowee, the judge received a letter from the convict. It was a simple-hearted petition for a 'furlough' of ten days, pathetic and eloquent in its primitive English and quaint misspelling. Would the good judge let him off for just ten days? Winter was coming on, and the wife and children were alone in the cabin on the mountain, with no one to make provision for their wants. He would not overstay the time, and he would 'certain shore' come back and surrender himself.

A venerable judge, in whom judicial severity is tempered by a generous admixture of loving kindness and mercy, and whose humane decisions have made his name a word to conjure with among the dwellers in the waste places, tells a story which emphasizes the promise-keeping trait in the mountain character. A hardened sinner of the stills, whose first and second offenses were

"His petition was granted, and, true to his word, the moun taineer returned on the tenth day and gave himself up to the sheriff. He served the remainder of his sentence, and after his release kept his pledge so long as the judge remained on the bench."

national melancholy is wholly alien to pessimism and leads neither to despair nor to suicide; it is rather a melancholy which, as Renan says, causes the highest possible effects. The second typical trait is patience, which, psychologically speaking, is a successful effort of the will to overcome physical and moral suffering. As a result of our patience, we have remarkable self-control and the power to preserve internal spiritual peace. We are not sentimental, but we are capable of stoical resignation and readiness to endure misfortune. Humanity is another of our traits, and it has manifested itself in hospitality, tolerance, respect for other faiths and customs than ours, and, above all, in our disposition to appropriate what is best in other civilizations. The unifying and harmonizing influence of the Slav on other tribes is due to our tolerant spirit."

Next Professor Likorski discusses the faults or vices of the Russian type. He thinks that the Russian lacks energy and selfconfidence. He hesitates to take a decisive step, and is altogether too prudent and timid. This timidity and irresolution, again, must be attributed to the want of balance between intellect and heart. The feelings predominate and control in the Russian nature, while the intellect is subordinated to them. Sometimes this weakness leads to grave consequences, by preventing necessary action and prompt decisions.