A

JAPANESE COMPETITION AND FREE

SILVER.

DVOCATES of the free coinage of silver are using alleged dangers of industrial competition from Japan, and other Asiatic countries which are on a silver basis, as an argument for the adoption of free coinage by the United States. Senator Stewart, of Nevada, recently presented a resolution asking information of the Finance Committee concerning the effect which the difference of exchange between gold-standard and silver-standard -countries has on the agricultural and manufacturing industries of the United States. In presenting this resolution, he stated the position taken by the silver men and their journals on the subject. Mr. Stewart said that as the expenses of Eastern labor and materials are paid for in silver by those countries, and as the products are sold in the United States and Europe for gold or its equivalent, the Orientals have, in the difference of exchange, an advantage of fifty per cent., and that this advantage, joined to their mechanical skill, their low wages, and their cheap mode of living. enables them to undersell all competitors and will, if not checked, transfer the manufacturing for the world from the West to the East. Many journals which are opposed to free silver as a Temedy admit that Japanese competition in certain lines must soon be recognized as an important factor in international trade.

The Character of Japanese Competition.-"It can be shown by the statistics of imports that as yet the Japanese imports have played but very little part in determining market prices in the United States. The Japanese unquestionably make goods very cheaply, but they have not yet succeeded in securing any considerable market in this country. In Eastern markets, however, it is worth some notice, the Japanese have practically made a clean sweep in many lines of goods, which were formerly supplied by Great Britain or the United States.

The average

"Lamp-burners, clocks, hats, and many other staple articles are now sent out from Kioto, or Kobe, at a price with which American manufacturers can not compete in the East. This is possible because of the markedly low rate of wages paid to Japanese operatives. As in most other 'silver-basis' countries, the fall of silver has affected the price of labor. laborer, for example, gets six silver yen a month, or about $3.50, which would be at the rate of 80 cents a week. At such a rate, of course, the American workman would starve; but the Japanese laborers are able to live very cheaply. The rate at which goods can be manufactured may be inferred from the prices at which the -common staples of trade are offered for sale in the open market in Japan. Boots and shoes cost, in Japan, practically one half of what they would bring in the United States or Great Britain. Woolen gloves, of the kind that are now sold at retail for 50 or 75 cents in this country, are sold for 16 cents in Japan; toothbrushes from three to six cents apiece, according to quality; Berlin knitting-wool at 68 cents a pound; leather-covered diningchairs, of a rather luxurious type, at $1.30 each, while felt hats, such as are sold in the United States for $3 or $4 a piece, bring 87 -cents; and so on. These prices are quoted on exceptionally good authority, and the comparisons are intelligently made by skilled The facts are significant enough to merit some - attention.". -The Advertiser (Rep.), Boston.

business men.

Revision of Tariffs may be Required. "The factor which she [Japan] has become in the commerce and manufactures of the world is not generally understood. Ingenious, artistic, inventive, industrious, and intelligent, wearing almost no clothes and living on less than would support a mechanic's dog in this country, the Japanese workmen can defy competition from Europe and AmerThey are introducing cotton manufactures and are now about establishing a great steel plant.

ica.

"It may be that the Japanese artisan will follow the example of his fellows in other countries, and insist upon receiving, in increased wages, part of the great profits which he finds his employers are making from the products of his labor. . . If this does not take place, it is certain that within a brief period even the most pronounced free-traders of all countries must, seriously take into consideration the subject of the revision of their tariff laws, to meet this new evil.

"It is one of the absurd consequences of the situation that the

advocates of free silver should hinge one of their arguments upon the existence of this condition. They claim that the ability of Japan to undersell American and European manufacturers is not caused by the low wages or cheap living of their workmen, but by the fact that it buys silver cheap in this country and thereby makes a large profit on its currency, which enables its merchants to pay their workmen at the rate of 59 cents on the dollar. From this they argue that if the United States were to adopt the same principle, we could defy competition. In other words, that we should pay our workmen 59 cents where we now pay them a dollar. How the workmen would like this is (as Kipling says) another story." The Eagle (Dem.), Brooklyn, N. Y.

Remonetization of Silver Would Give Us an Advantage.-"The campaign of British bimetalists is based almost wholly upon the admitted fact that Japanese and Chinese manufacturers are fast driving the product of British mills and factories out of the East. The Japanese enjoy two advantages, the low price of their labor and the difference in exchange, due to Britain and the United States being on the single gold standard. With the acquisition of markets, the spread of knowledge, and the introduction of machinery, it is probable that Japanese wages will steadily rise toward the white man's level, in nominal prices, but so long as the United States adheres to the gold standard just so long will Japan have the advantage of an exchange rate which gives it eight dollars of its home money for an article sold at four dollars in this country. If the United States stays on the gold basis the incoming of the Japanese may have so sinister an effect on American industries that we dislike to contemplate it. Unless the United States determines to build a wall and prevent imports from all countries the evil can not readily be met by a tariff measure, because the most-favored-nation clause is in the Japanese treaty. Unless that treaty is abrogated Japan must continue to have the same rights as any other country. With silver remonetized in the United States it is evident that much of the Japanese advantage would be destroyed, that this country would immediately secure a great advantage over Europe, and that upon the European manufacturers would fall the brunt of the contest between the monetary standards.”—The Rocky Mountain News (Dem.), Denver, Col.

"The remonetization of silver would reduce the difference between gold and silver to a parity; it would reduce the purchasing power of English gold in the Orient just fifty per cent. At present England buys American silver at sixty-seven cents an ounce and pays for it in gold. That silver is sent to Bombay and coined into dollars for China, into rupees for India, and that money purchases of all the products of those countries just as much as it did in the old days when silver was worth as much as gold. That fixes the prices of American products in London, and the experience of the last few years shows that the prices of all the products which America ships abroad have fallen in value fifty per cent. and a little more. ”—The Tribune (Ind.), Salt Lake City, Utah.

"The people of Europe and the United States, by permitting the money-dealers to demonetize silver for their own personal profit, have practically given to the manufacturers of Japan and other Eastern countries a bonus of a hundred per cent. on every article they produce. Meanwhile, in the silver-using countries prices remain at the level of 1873. The use of silver has no effect on the labor market, which is controlled entirely by the conditions of supply and demand. The overcrowded population of the East— more than a thousand millions-has accustomed itself to the practise of economies that would mean the utter degradation of Americans, and the labor market is so overcrowded that wages are down to the point of bare existence. The real meaning of the British gold standard for this country will begin to dawn on the minds of all the people after a while."-The Constitution (Dem.), Atlanta, Ga.

"That an ounce of silver can be bought here for 60 cents and sold somewhere else for $1.29 is palpably nonsensical. Gold is worth within a fraction of a cent as much in one part of the civilized world as it is in any other part. The cost of transportation measures the difference in the prices of wheat or cotton or any other commodity in any two markets in the world. If a ton of silver could be transported from New York to Japan or India at a profit of 100 per cent., less cost of transportation, there would not be an ounce of silver in the United States."-The Capital, (Rep.), Topeka, Kans.

is unfortunate, as it involves a disruption of the forces which by joint action would not only have insured the complete success of the loan, but have effected it with the least possible degree of friction or disturbance of the money market.”—Bradstreet's (Financial), New York.

"Mr. Morgan's letter to the members of the loan syndicate is a clear, manly statement of the facts pertaining to an honorable and patriotic transaction."-The Times (Dem.), New York.

"The amount of actual subscriptions thus far received at the Treasury is too small to be worth considering, and it is fully as reasonable to expect that ultimately the same bankers who were Toundly denounced as sharpers at the outset will have to be called upon to take the bonds that the people have not been able or seen fit to take as to believe that at the last moment individual subscriptions, of a valid and satisfactory sort, will come in with a rush and to an amount several times the loan offered. In the circumstances, however, it is but natural that the syndicate should be dissolved."— The Journal (Ind.), Providence, R. I.

"Banks all over the country having submitted bids, in the aggregate more than one hundred millions, presumably at a fair market rate, it remains to be seen whether the limited period of protection guaranteed by the syndicate is worth the ten or twelve millions which would have been exacted as the price of such a guaranty, or whether the Government is a distinct gainer by inviting proposals. Even if this question can not be answered in the affirmative, there will probably be no regret, since the masses condemn back-stair methods and star-chamber bargains.”— The Herald, Baltimore.

THE INCREASE IN THE PRODUCTION OF GOLD.

THER

HERE has been, as is well known, an enormous increase in the production of gold within the last two years. The production for 1893 throughout the world exceeded that of any of the years succeeding discoveries of gold in California and Australia, and competent authorities estimate the gold production of 1895 at nearly thirty per cent. above that of 1893. The retirement of silver currency in recent years has stimulated the production of gold, and the changes in the relative supplies of the two money metals are significant. Estimates for 1895 by the director of the United States Mint, based on reports by telegraph, indicate that the United States now leads all countries in the production of gold, with an output of about $48,000,000. The output in 1894 was $39,500,000, and in 1893 $35.955,000.

Possibilities of Gold Production.-"Mulhall's tables give the total amount of gold in the world in 1890 as $3,855,900,000 coined and $2,171,600,000 uncoined, or a total of $5,026,800,000. Thus it is estimated by expert engineers [John Hays Hammond and other mining engineers in the Transvaal] that there is enough gold in one mining district alone, which could be worked profitably, to nearly equal the quantity of coined gold in the world in the year 1890. The gold region of the United States, so far as discovered, is less in area than the South African district, but the ores on the average are much richer, and some enthusiasts predict that in time the yield of Colorado alone will equal that of South Africa.

"In the decade from 1840 to 1850 the world's production of gold was $363,000,000; in the decade from 1850 to 1860 it was $1,333,000,000, from which point it gradually decreased. In the decade from 1880 to 1890 it was about $1,000,000,000. It is estimated that for the decade from 1890 to 1900 the product of the yellow metal may reach $2,000,000,000, and that it is likely to go on increasing with considerable rapidity for many decades to come. On the other hand, the production of silver has shown only a slight increase. Since 1891 it has decreased in the United States from $82,000,000 to $64,000,000 annually, but developments in Mexico and South America have brought up the average to about that of the preceding decade. As the great mining energy is now directed to the production of gold, it would seem as if the relative quantity of gold is destined to a large increase during the life of the next generation, and it may easily come about that the old ratio of 151⁄2 to I will be restored by the operation of natural laws

I

without any effort to hasten it by legislation."—The_Tribune, Minneapolis.

The Largest Output of Gold in History.-"In an article published last January, the director of the Mint pointed out that the world's output of gold in 1893 was the largest in history, amounting in round numbers to $55.522,000. The highest previous yield had been in 1856-60, when the production reached the average yearly value of $133,970,000. For last year the world's product of gold is estimated at close upon $180,000,000, and for the present year it will not be less than $200,000,000. In 1893 the output of gold was already 16.08 per cent. greater than the annual average of the period of the greatest productiveness of the Californian and Australian gold-mines; by 1894 the excess was 34 per cent., and this year it will be at least 49 per cent. The value of last year's gold product was 9 per cent. greater than the average aggregate value of the gold and silver product of the world in 1861-65, and that of the present year will be fully 24 per cent. greater."- The Herald, Boston.

An Era of Gold Discovery.—"The world seems to be entering on an era of gold discovery which promises to eclipse the find of the Argonauts in California in 1849, and later in Australia. It may do something, in course of a few years, in solving the silver question by restoring the old relation of the two metals to each other. While London and Paris have been exploiting South African gold shares, in this country an era of speculation has set in as to the Cripple Creek gold-mines of Colorado. It is a district that will yield gold for years. A brief time ago Cripple Creek was producing from a few mines a limited tonnage, but to-day it is shipping 750 tons a day of gold-bearing ore to the smelters and mills, and in 1896 this output will be doubled. . . . Siberia is looked upon as the next new source of gold to be tapped, and reports of important gold discoveries in Alaska are coming in."The Post, Pittsburg.

Four Countries Supply the Gold Markets.- "Australasia has an approximate output of $44,000,000 for the last twelve months. This is a continuance of the increase of last year, but not in the same ratio. Interest, particularly in Europe, has, of course, been centered on the recent sensational developments of gold-mining in the Transvaal, with all of its attendant stock speculations on the London market. The output has increased there this year, but not in the same ratio as in the United States. The total output of the Transvaal is estimated at $42,676,171. The Russian output, including that of Asiatic Russia or Siberia, for the year is $33,990,000, an increase of more than $7,000,000 over last year. These four countries are practically supplying the gold markets of the world, tho Mexico added $5,600,000 to the grand total of gold and more than $56,000,000 to the silver supply. It is gratifying to know that this country has shared to such a large degree in the commerce resulting from the increase in both the demand for and the supply of gold.”—The News, Baltimore.

The Silver States Have Become Gold States.-"The gold output, as now reported for the year just closed, has been chiefly noticeable in what are generally known as the 'silver States.' While the free-silver advocates have been making stump speeches and telling the world that the silver States were ruined, the miners themselves have been more sensible and prudent.. According

to reports just received by the director of the Mint, at Washington, D. C., the gold output of the 'silver States' now exceeds in value the silver output of those States. Already they have become rather 'gold States' than silver States, if their chief product be allowed to fix their title. Within two years the gold output of Colorado alone, the great silver State of the West, has risen from $7,500,000 in 1893 to $15,000,000 in 1895, a clear gain of nearly 100 per cent. in only two years. It is true that the Cripple Creek discoveries may have had something to do with the tremendous increase of the gold output in Colorado; but it is nevertheless worth notice that the gold production in others of the silver States has shown a remarkable rate of increase in the past two years. Arizona's output went from $1,200,000 in 1893 to $2,500,000 in 1895 Idaho's from $1,646,000 in 1893 to $2,790,000 in 1895; Montana's from $3,575,000 in 1803 to $4,400,000 in 1895: Oregon's from $1,645,000 in 1893 to $2,200,000 in 1895; and so on. In two years the reports show an increase from $36,000,000 to $53,000,000 [the director of the Mint discounts this production reported by telegraph by 10 per cent., making the production about $48,000,

000.-Ed. LITERARY DIGEST], an increase of nearly 50 per cent." -The Advertiser, Boston.

Colorado Has the Gold. "If the people of the East will be so thick-headed as to insist upon a gold standard Colorado will dig out the gold and get full price for it, while the prices of their farm products and everything else they have to sell are cut in half. Cororado has a good thing, for which it is in nowise indebted to outside capital."- The Rocky Mountain News, Denver, Col.

Gold-Mines in the Southern States.-"Up to 1873 the Southern mines had yielded $20,052,006. The production in 1873 was very small, Georgia furnishing $35,437, and North Carolina $120,322. The yield has not varied much, as is shown by the reports of the director of the Mint, who assigns $97,200 as Georgia's share for 1893, $53,600 as North Carolina's, and only $15.000 for Alabama in conjunction with Maryland, Tennessee, and Virginia. The aggregate production of North Carolina up to December 31, 1893, was $11,726,629.90; of South Carolina, $2,221,590.90; of Georgia, $9,112,328.05; of Alabama, $242,994. 19, and of Virginia, $1,754,785.02. . . . The outlook is that the quantity of the metal is likely to be greatly increased in all of the gold regions throughout the South.”—The Virginian, Norfolk, Va.

Prices Will Be Advanced. "If the capacity of the world to absorb gold for money and manufactures is limited, as is its capacity for much more perishable merchandise, then there is a fair ground to assume that in a few years gold will be so plentiful that, if it has a decided effect upon prices, it will be to advance rather than contract. The United States Geological Bureau estimates that the world's supply of gold will reach $240,000,000 a year in a few years from now. At the rate of present production ($200,000,000 a year) almost one third as much gold will be produced during the next five years as was produced during the 357 years from 1493 to 1850, and nearly one fifth as much as during forty-three years from 1851 to 1893.”—The State Journal, Indianapolis.

Shall Gold Be Demonetized ?—“The increase in gold production is due to three causes: the discovery and opening up of new mines; improved processes by which the gold can be extracted at less cost; and the increased purchasing power of the yellow metal, which makes it possible to work mines that were heretofore unprofitable. . . . It will be remembered that one of the pet arguments of those who favored the demonetization of silver was the too rapid increase in the production of the white metal which, it was claimed, was flooding the world; and it will also be remembered that the monometalists, in the fifties, similarly suggested the demonetization of gold because the yield of it at that time was too bountiful. It remains to be seen whether the recent rapid increase in the production of gold, caused so largely by shoving silver out of the way, and which threatens a production of $400,000,000 annually by the beginning of the next century, will result in any attack on the yellow metal, on the ground that it is likely to furnish the world either more currency than it needs instead of restricting the currency and reducing prices, as the monometalists so greatly desire.”— The Times-Democrat, New Orleans.

Gold and Silver in the Arts.-"Soetbeer estimates that for the period from 1871 to 1880 the annual average of gold in millions of dollars in arts and industries in this country was 9, and of silver 4.2. In France during the same period the annual average of gold was 11.2, and of silver 3.1. In Great Britain during the same interval the average of gold was one tenth more than in France, but of silver the average was 2.9. In 1885 the United States used $13,000,000 of gold and 4.8 silver; Great Britain, 11.2 of gold and 2.9 of silver; France, 11.1 of gold and 3.1 of silver. The total use of gold in the arts in 1893 was $50,200,000, and of silver $16,600,000.

"The statistics furnished by the director of the Mint for the year 1894 show the total of gold used in the United States for arts and industries to be $10,658,604, and of silver $10,883,048. The gold figures, when compared with. Soetbeer's, should be diminished by $2,000,000 for old material, and a little more than $1,000,000 in silver for old material. The relative place of the two metals in arts in the United States for past two years is thus indicated 1893, gold in millions, 12.5, silver, 9.5; 1894, gold, 10.6, silver, 10.8; which shows that export of gold has been felt in the fine artisanship as in the Treasury reserve, while silver has gained correspondingly as a means of embellishment and for utensils. In ten years the use of gold has declined materially in the United States industries, while that of silver has more than doubled."-The Times-Herald, Chicago.

CAN GREAT BRITAIN AND VENEZUELA SETTLE BETWEEN THEMSELVES?

THE

HE question of a direct settlement between Great Britain and Venezuela overshadows other phases of the Venezuelan controversy as discussed in the press. Journalistic diplomats. quickly pointed out the significant suggestion of the possibility of such a settlement contained in these words of President Cleveland's Venezuelan message of December 17:

"Great Britain's present proposition has never thus far been regarded as admissible by Venezuela, tho any adjustment of the boundary which that country may deem for her advantage and may enter into of her own free-will can not of course be objected to by the United States."

A number of American journals criticized the President at the time of the message for making an admission of that character, claiming that the Monroe doctrine, of to-day at least, is directed against interference or extension of territory in any form by European powers on this hemisphere. London papers suggested. that Lord Salisbury could turn to advantage this admission without changing the position taken by him regarding the "real" Monroe doctrine in his correspondence with Secretary Olney.

This feature of the situation becomes of first importance by reason of contemplated action by the United States Senate. The Senate Committee on Foreign Relations has decided to report a resolution, accredited to Senator Cushman K. Davis, of Minnesota, that defines the Monroe doctrine and denies the right of European powers to acquire new or additional territory on this. Continent or the islands adjacent thereto, by force, purchase, cession, occupation, pledge, colonization, protectorate, or otherwise, in any case or instance as to which the United States shall deem such an attempt to be dangerous to its peace and safety. On the other hand, Senator Sewell, of New Jersey, has introduced a reso-lution declaring that the President, in the Venezuelan controversy, has pressed the Monroe doctrine beyond its proper meaning. A Precedent for Abandoning the Monroe Doctrine.-"Clearly there is a Monroe doctrine, and a need of it. Let us admit that. it is sacrosanct: the graveyards of Virginia and Kentucky are eloquent of it, since brother killed brother in its name. Because of it also France left Maximilian to his fate. And our admiration of all that the Monroe doctrine involves has been no small part of our admiration for the Federal Constitution of Washington and Hamilton. It has fenced out from the New World the quarrels and the camps of the Old, and this for the benefit of all mankind. But what has this to do with the abduction of two policemen on the neutral strip of the Orinoco? For this, and not any boundary question, is the cause of the present dispute between England. and Venezuela. The boundary trouble is just where it has been at any time since 1830. Our demand on President Crespo is for a sum of money, which is the only form of punishment that really goes home to these dago protégés of 'Uncle Sam.' The despatches, indeed, which have passed between Washington and Westminster seem to show that Lord Salisbury is a much better Monroeist than Mr. Cleveland. Mr. Cleveland, strange to say, writes, that any adjustment of boundary which Venezuela may deem for her advantage, and may enter into of her own free-will, can not of course be objected to by us.'

"Here, then, is a precedent for the abandonment of the entire Monroe doctrine. Does Mr. Cleveland mean that President Dole, who offered the Sandwich Islands to the United States, is at liberty to 'adjust the boundaries' of these islands by selling out to Great Britain or to Japan?"-Morton Frewen in The National Review (London and New York) for January.

Mr. Stanley Suggests a European Commission.-"I suggest, in order to satisfy their [peace-lovers'] tender consciences, that we appoint a European Commission of our own to examine our claims, and report to our foreign office. Every European power -nay, all the world—is interested in averting such a war, which will be the deadliest stroke to civilization that it could receive; and if our Government requested Russia, Germany, France, Italy, Switzerland, and Belgium to appoint their respective commissioners for the purpose just specified, I feel sure that the entire British race, from these islands to the Antipodes, would be unanimous for the defense of British dignity, honor, and rights, if we

were discovered not to be wilful aggressors on the territory of our neighbor. If, on the other hand, we have unknowingly overstepped our just frontier, it will be found that we are willing and ready to do that which is right. Another strong reason for some such course as this is, that we must not make it too hard for the American people to recede from the position they have so impulsively taken. From their point of view, they believe they have a great deal of justice on their side. But if their Commission find that the right is wholly on the side of Venezuela, I doubt whether they will have any hesitation in taking action. If, on the other hand, a European verdict is opposed to their own, they will naturally wish that the points in dispute should be settled amicably, rather than by the ruin of the Anglo-Saxon race. Henry M. Stanley, in The Nineteenth Century for January.

Direct Negotiations Favored.-"What we have now to consider is the possibility of entering upon such negotiations with Venezuela. It is not for Great Britain to take the initiative. Several years ago Venezuela broke off diplomatic relations with Great Britain without any better reason than a difference of opinion regarding the boundary. The Foreign Office can not, therefore, take any step in the matter until Venezuela chooses to resume negotiations in the ordinary way, but Great Britain is open to negotiations, as she has been throughout, on friendly terms. If reasonable conditions are kept in view an arrangement probably would not be difficult to effect. The obstacle, if any exists, has been created by the belief of the Venezuelans that they will be supported with all the power of the United States in any demand they may make on Great Britain. We are sure this is a grotesque mistake. The obvious course for Venezuela to adopt is to ask the United States to place her again in communication with Great Britain."- The Times, London.

"It must be only a work of time to effect a satisfactory settlement. The simplest way would be a direct agreement with Venezuela. It is obvious that we should have the good-will of the United States in such a solution."-The Standard, London.

The Constitution of Venezuela Forbids Alienation of Territory.-"It may as well be recognized, first as last, that the people of this country will not suffer any shuffling effort to discriminate between the sale and the surrender of the soil of an American republic. Any public man, who shall attempt seriously by such a wire-drawn and shallow distinction to pull the bottom out of the doctrine of American self-defense, first enunciated by James Monroe, need expect nothing from his countrymen except universal derision and contempt. To begin with, the Constitution of Venezuela forbids its Government to alienate under any circumstances or for any consideration one square inch of the national soil. The only ground, therefore, upon which President Crespo could cede to England a square inch of the territory in dispute would be an admission that his country has no title to the section ceded. Men can not sell what they have no title to. If in return for the tract surrendered, President Crespo should accept a dollar, he would be subject to impeachment for high treason. We will not insult the intelligence of the nation's chosen lawgivers by dwelling at length upon the deadly character of the precedent that would be set by our acquiescence in the sale by an American republic of a section of its territory to a European monarchy.”—The Sun (Dem.), New York.

A Real Solution of the Trouble.—“The real solution of the trouble, outside of arbitration, is that proposed in President Cleveland's Venezuelan message, in which he says: 'Any adjustment of the boundary which that country (Venezuela) may deem for her advantage and may enter into of her own free-will can not of course be objected to by the United States.' This is sound. It is just. It is the Monroe doctrine. It is the American doctrine. It is common sense. There is no reason why this country should get excited over a question between Great Britain and Venezuela until after it has been decided that the question can not be settled by Great Britain and Venezuela." The World (Dem.), New York.

The Govern

"This country can not reasonably object to such a course; it is in effect what we have urged from the beginning. ment of the United States has no interest one way or the other in the boundary dispute. It found Great Britain, a strong European power, threatening to take by force from Venezuela, a weak South American power, a tract of territory which, if not clearly Venezuelan, was claimed by that country. As a disinterested

friend of both parties, the United States suggested that the two nations come together and have the boundary line determined by arbitration. Venezuela expressed a willingness to do so, but Great Britain arrogantly refused. It was then that the President sent his message to Congress. . . The Commission has been appointed and is about to begin its work, and now Great Britain, if reports be true, is ready to go back to the beginning and treat with Venezuela directly, instead of forcibly seizing her territory. This purpose, if fairly carried out, brings a happy ending to the international dispute."- The Ledger (Rep.), Philadelphia.

The President Did Not Mean Settlement by Purchase. "The President did not mean that a settlement by purchase would be satisfactory to us. He surely would not be upheld by Congress in such a position. Mr. Cleveland referred unquestionably to the adjustment of the boundaries that might grow out of pacific negotiations between the countries based upon historical facts."-The Star (Ind.), Washington.

...

Definition of the Monroe Doctrine by the Senate.-"The facilities which exist for the transpiration of news from the committees of the Senate, as well as from the executive sessions of that body, have left little doubt that that body will report that the President's version of the Monroe doctrine does not go far enough. Indeed, the Republican Senators may be supposed to resent the increase of the President's popularity that has evidently been brought about by the determination he has shown to sustain the Monroe doctrine in its spirit as well as in its letter. . . . The majority [of the committee on Foreign Relations] proposes to stand by the report of our own commission, even tho Great Britain and Venezuela agree that Venezuela should be content with less territory than our commission allows her. What is to happen in the opposite event, that Venezuela insists upon more than we find to be her due, the report does not say. But upon the face of it, its proposition is somewhat surprising. If the contingency it contemplates should arise, we should have the spectacle, probably new in history, of a nation which had an indirect interest in a dispute about frontiers resisting the execution of an agreement with which the nation directly interested was content."-The Times (Dem.), New York.

"So far as the Monroe doctrine and our national policy under it is concerned, the Venezuela dispute offers a clear issue on which national principle, national practise, and our national decision ought to be calmly, unhesitatingly, and unmistakably affirmed; but this solemn affirmation ought not and should not travel outside of the case as it now stands. As other issues arise and other events come it will be time enough to meet and decide them. They should not be raised now."-The Press (Rep.), Philadelphia.

THE RED CROSS SOCIETY BARRED OUT OF ARMENIA.