doctrine may safely be left to be declared and applied by the Executive and Congress as occasions may arise. But if Congress must have its say the resolution as reported is harmless enough."The Times (Dem.), New York.

President Cleveland Can Not be Put in the Background."This declaration, if it passes Congress, will prevent Nicaragua from granting a concession to England to build the Nicaraguan Canal, and that is worth a great war to keep for ourselves. But the Republicans need not delude themselves with any foolish ideas of putting the President in the background in this matter. Cleveland led the highest trump in the deck, and their best resource is to follow suit as promptly and gracefully as they can." The Times (Dem.), Kansas City. "The Monroe doctrine in its present shape answers every purpose for which we need it, and that, too, without imposing upon the United States any responsibility. The effort to define it more clearly might, besides creating opposition, lead to responsibilities and complications we do not desire."- The News (Dem.), Savannah, Ga.

WM. J. SEWELL.

"The resolution is so carefully drawn that it covers every form of European aggression in the way of territorial acquisition that falls. within the range of possibility. It is the natural outgrowth and development of the Monroe doctrine. It is the application of that doctrine to present conditions and modern necessities. It. doubtless accurately represents American opinion on the subject of America for Americans."- The Star (Ind.), Washington.

Part of the General Humbug of Campaigns.-"As we have already remarked, most of the emanations from Congress touching foreign policy just now are to be judged by much the same rules of interpretation we should apply to the resolutions of one of Debs's or Sovereign's assemblies. We must not consider them as acts of government or expressions of natural policy. We must examine them as agencies for the delusion of home voters, as part, in fact, of the general humbug of campaigns. Each party just now, within six months of the Presidential nomination, can not bear to let this dispute with England pass away without getting some capital out of it."-Evening Post (Ind.), New York.

A Chance for Some One to Outbid Davis. "It is now in order for some one anxious to outbid Davis, as he has been anxious to outbid Cleveland and Olney, in the way of belligerency, to offer another resolution declaring that any acquisition of territory on this side of the earth by any European power is per se dangerous to our peace and safety, and shall not be allowed. Then there will be but one more step to take, namely, to declare that all European nations that have in the past been guilty of acquiring territorial possessions on this hemisphere must give them up forthwith. Why not? Think of it, England has now more square miles in North America than we have! If we are going into the jingo business in real earnest, let us strike at once for all there is in it. By the way, it is a suggestive coincidence that Senator Davis, author of this new resolution, is the same Senator who, several weeks ago, was reported as interested personally in the Manoa Company which has secured from Venezuela important concessions in the territory in dispute."- The Voice (Proh.), New York.

Annoying to the Jingo Element in England.-"The adoption of the Senate resolution, defining the Monroe doctrine will put an effectual quietus upon those foreigners who insist that it never was anything but a personal opinion from President Monroe without the sanction or authority of Congress, and for that reason the

resolution should be promptly passed. It is as broad as could be desired. . . . The new declaration will be exceedingly annoying to the jingo element in England and a howl of rage may be expected from that quarter, but after a while even the impossible and pugnacious Briton will have to admit that while his drumbeat may travel around the earth with the sun, there are spots in which it will be very faintly heard."-The News (Pop.), Denver.

"Some people think they see the hand of John Sherman in this Monroe doctrine resolution, pushing Davis forward as a Presidential candidate to crowd out Allison, in payment of Allison's frequent services in crowding out Sherman. If that is not so, tactics equally petty are back of the resolution. It offers internal evidence of this."-The Republican (Ind.), Springfield, Mass. "We have nothing whatever to gain by the adoption of this resolution. There is no necessity for any 'doctrine,' Monroe or other, to give this country the right to interfere in any dispute in which its interests may be, threatened."-The News (Ind.), Indianapolis, Ind.

Senate Resolutions on the Armenian Question. -The Senate Committee on Foreign Relations last week reported Mr. Cullom's resolutions on the Armenian question and they were promptly adopted without amendment. The resolutions declare "that it is an imperative duty in the interests of humanity to express the earnest hope that the European concert, brought about by the treaty [of Berlin] referred to, may speedily be given its just effects in such decisive measures as shall stay the band of fanaticism and lawless violence, and as shall secure to the unoffending Christians of the Turkish Empire all the rights belonging to them both as men and as Christians and as beneficiaries of the explicit provisions of the treaty above recited." The President is requested to notify Great Britain, Germany, Austria, France, Italy, and Russia of this action, and the resolutions further pledge support to the President "in the most vigorous action he may take for the protection and security of American citizens in Turkey, and to obtain redress of injuries committed on the persons or property of such citizens." During the debate on the resolutions Senator Frye, of Maine, took occasion to declare that "regardless of what Great Britain might have thought," he would, had his will prevailed in the Senate Committee on n Foreign Relations, "have memoralized Russia to take possession of Armenia. at once, and would have proclaimed that the United States would back her in the doing of it.' A number of prominent Republican journals in the East withhold commendation of the resolutions. The New York Tribune (Rep.) says: "The motto of numerous. United States Senators seem to be: In time of peace prepare for war-by passing mischievous resolutions. The New York Herald (Ind. Dem.) calls this action the first step of jingoism in a European direction, and objects vigorously: "The Senators who voted for this extraordinary resolution must be aware that the United States is not a party to the Berlin treaty, and hence that it has no business to dictate to or even remind the parties what their duty may be with regard to it. But do they know that the conclusion of this treaty saved Europe from a general war in 1878, and that even now, if it were either broken or certain of its provisions were pushed to the letter, the result would be to precipitate

even diamonds and rubies, shares in which have recently excited a mania of speculation in Paris, Vienna, and Berlin. Look, say the hungry Continentals, at the wealth those selfish English are obtaining in Australia, South Africa, British Columbia, and British Guiana, digging it out of the very ground. Why should those insolent islanders, with no conscription, have all that, and we nothing except what we can make by tilling exhausted soils, or competing with all the world for the sale of our still very feeble manufactures? We will have some of the really fat things, if we have to fight for them. The French have been persevering in Madagascar because they expect to find gold. The Germans are eager for the independence of the Transvaal because it is a vast gold region, which may ultimately, they fancy, fall to them. Even the Japanese have been lured to Formosa by hopes, probably well founded, that the island may be found to be one of the 'metalliferous patches' of the world. There is a positive frenzy of greed developed in the active nations which lends heat and purpose to every accusation against England, and we ourselves are not innocent in the matter. Most of our mines came to us long before the thirst for mining began, but tho it is culturable territory that we have first of all sought in South Africa, our necessity being emigration, there can be no doubt that the search for gold has influenced both our policy and our colonization. It has not influenced our Government much, or we should never have invested the Boers with property rights in the Transvaal, or given up so easily our claim to Madagascar; but it has influenced financiers, traders, and the hosts of adventurers who have followed upon their footsteps. Lobengula was a horrid savage who at last took to murdering our people; but if his dominion had been merely prairie, we suspect he would have been reigning The Americans, who are like us in temperament, except that they are sensitive, have no foreign territories to exploit; but they would themselves admit that one key to their internal politics is the desire, rising to a furious passion among the governing men of their silver-yielding States, to raise the price of that metal to its ancient level. It is the greed of multitudes, not any financial necessity, which has given the 'Silverites' such a position in the Senate that no tax bill can be passed which does not in some way favor their views, and that no proposal for a single gold standard can obtain so much as a fair hearing.

still.

"We do not know that it is of any particular use to moralize upon this outbreak of international greediness, which is only remarkable because it has seized upon such vast populations at once. The world has known the symptoms of the gold-fever for many hundred years, and has agreed to treat the gold-thirst as a feature in human nature rather than an aberration. If gold has been found near a city, no one will remain at work; even military discipline is shaken, and no force short of military law, which has death for its ultimate sanction, will keep employees faithful to their duty. Nations are but collections of individuals, and we do not wonder, therefore, at France and Germany, and even America, regarding British success in gold-finding with envious or angry eyes. Our object is rather to point out to our countrymen that this is the fact, and to bid them remember that they can not run so hard as they have recently been doing in this race for wealth without stirring up bitter animosities."

HOW WE WOULD PROFIT BY EUROPEAN WARS.

OUR

UR German-American contemporaries regard the chance of a struggle between the United States and England as small, but they believe that the long-promised struggle between the European powers is at hand. The Volksblatt, Cincinnati, points out that we must necessarily profit very much by a war in Europe. That paper declares that it has no wish for such a war, but says that it would be very foolish in the people of America if they did not secure all the profits likely to fall to the looker-on. The Volksblatt expresses itself as follows:

"When two are fighting, the third generally goes off with the booty. Naturally it is thought that our country will play this part of the fortunate third party, for we alone are in a position to supply the warring powers with the necessary supplies. Among these supplies are, in the first place, provisions. Australia and India, both British dependencies, can not export grain except at

the risk of having their ships taken away by the enemies' cruisers. Their competition is thus out of the question. Hence the United States could extend its exports to Great Britain and France in a remarkable manner. Germany, however, would obtain all the breadstuffs she needs from Russia; but besides the grain exports, all the transportation business would be conducted by the United States. The Neutrality Regulations are as follows:

"Neutral flags protect the cargoes of the enemy, with the exception of war-material.

"Goods not classified as war-contraband can not be declared prizes.'

"The first rule proves that ships sailing under United States colors may carry on the commerce of the enemy. Germany, England, and the rest of the countries likely to be involved in a European war can therefore continue their exports by means of vessels sailing under the Stars and Stripes. This would raise at once to a strong position the hitherto neglected shipping trade of the United States. Not only would the momentary profits be very great, but it is also likely that, if this country once gets a thorough hold of the shipping of the world, it will not again lose it.

"The second rule allows the United States to send its goods even under the flag of one of the belligerents. We would, therefore, have plenty of ships at our disposal to transport the enormous quantity of supplies which would suddenly be demanded of us. By contraband is meant solely goods which are used exclusively for military purposes, such as arms and ammunition. The United States has, therefore, the right to provision the belligerents. The balance of trade would change in our favor, and all our financial difficulties would vanish.

"Thanks to neutrality, the American nation flourished wonderfully during the French Revolution. Not until Napoleon closed the Continent against British goods and Great Britain retaliated did the advantages cease which we derived from the great European wars. To-day Great Britain would not dare to prohibit neutral commerce, for fear of offending the whole civilized world. All we have to do is to carefully avoid friction with a European power, especially with England. As England will have her hands full in case of a war with Germany and Germany's allies, she would not wish to make enemies of us."-Translated for THE LITERARY DIGEST.

AMBASSADOR BAYARD'S EXPLANATIONS.

THO

HOMAS F. BAYARD, the American Ambassador to EngJand, has replied to the inquiry of the House of Representatives regarding his speeches made before the Philosophical Society at Edinburgh and at Boston, England. The Ambassador does not deny he used the language which aroused criticism in this country, but he thinks that the context and attendant circumstances should be considered. In justification of the Edinburgh speech, in which he characterized protection as a form of state socialism," he refers to sections of the personal instructions to diplomats, and then states that the address was delivered before an institution purely literary and scientific and wholly unconnected with political parties; no political controversy relating to the subject was pending, and the speech was an expression of personal opinion formed after careful deliberation. In the afterdinner speech in Boston, England, following the presentation of prizes at the grammar-school last fall, he was reported to have said: "The President [Cleveland] stood in the midst of a strong, self-confident, and oftentimes violent people-men who sought to have their own way. It took a real man to govern the people of the United States." Mr. Bayard says of this that a post-prandial tone prevailed, and adds: "I spoke without premeditation, without notes, unaware of a reporter's presence, and have no means except recollection (now somewhat vague) to enable me to correct either report [in local papers]. Therefore I shall not now essay it, atho it is obvious the reporters failed to catch my words (sometimes in Latin) and confused them. But both reports are sufficiently full and accurate to describe the purpose of my visit and general nature and intent of my remarks."

President Cleveland submitted the explanations and accom

panying papers to the House as a report from the Secretary of State, without comment. The House Committee on Foreign Affairs has a resolution of censure under consideration. Mr. Bayard has some upholders in the press, but many critics. The Chicago Chronicle says:

"What Mr. Bayard said he may repeat with propriety anywhere in the world, for what he said was a simple truth. . . . If Mr. Reed, who is the House of Representatives, pushes the matter [of censure] then the Republican Party will be fully responsible for as dastardly an attempt at menace of a free man as legislators have ever proposed."

The New York Herald (Ind. Dem.) demands an immediate recall :

"That an Ambassador shown by his own attempted defense guilty of such misconduct is unfit to represent this country abroad is not open to question. It is an offense which richly merits the recall of the offender, and if Mr. Cleveland fails so to deal with it promptly the House should not hesitate or delay to take such action as the case demands. If nothing is done a precedent will be established which will be taken as a license for every Ambassador and Minister of the United States abroad to neglect his official business to run around making mischievous harangues that can only bringridicule upon our diplomatic service and discredit upon the United States. Mr. Bayard should be recalled at once." The Boston Advertiser (Rep.) says:

"If there were any friends of Ambassador Bayard who hoped that his case would be improved by some new and more favorable light to be thrown upon the publication of the correspondence between him and the State Department relative to his partizan harangues, such hopeful ones will find their bright anticipations blasted, on reading the message sent yesterday to the National House of Representatives by the President, and the correspondence between Olney and Bayard which accompanies the message. Those, too, if any such there are, who expected to find that the President or Secretary of State had done all that was necessary in the premises, so that Congress had no need to act, will be disappointed. The President expressly says that no action has been taken by the Executive, except that which is disclosed in the accompanying documents. Those documents merely show Mr. Bayard's cable despatches and letters by which he endeavors to excuse himself, and Mr. Olney's cablegram calling for additional information. It is a moderate statement to say that the Ambassador's efforts to make out a defense fail completely. It would not be exaggeration to add that they leave him in a worse plight than before."

this country if their husbands earn good livings, and may point with faith to the part of the old law still left requiring the husband to support the wife all the same. The era of perfect equality when the husband can legally demand to be supported by the wife is yet some time off."

In this connection we note the comments of a Western paper, the Minneapolis Times, on the anthropological conclusions set forth in a paper read by Professor Waldeyer, of Berlin, at the late Anthropological Congress in Cassel. Professor Waldeyer asserted that there were conclusive physiological reasons why woman's sphere of activity should be different from that of man. Stress was laid on differences in the structure of the brain, and man was said to have the better developed muscular and bony system. The decisive difference, he claimed, lay in the blood. There is, said he, a difference of five hundred red corpuscles in a cubic centimeter of blood, and as these red corpuscles are the very quintessence of existence woman is vitally and dynamically inferior to man. She has about nine tenths the vital force of a man. The Times says:

"Other things being equal, it seems quite possible that women might rise superior to mere anatomical differences. But the greatest obstacle to absolute equality lies not in differences of The bone, nor brain, nor blood, but in differences of heart. nature, tastes, and inclinations of women are so totally different from those of men that it is impossible to conceive of any great number imitating men for any length of time. Women are constitutionally domestic, and this fact is the one great obstacle that will not be argued down.

"The rational way of looking at the woman movement is that it is a reaction from the oppression of the past. Nature's law of extremes makes it necessary for the pendulum to swing to its limit, but the present license in dress and manners seems to indicate that that point is almost reached, and it will speedily swing back to conventionality. Already women of culture and refinement are beginning to avoid the very suspicion of being ‘advanced' by renewed attention to the arts of femininity and the graces of womanhood. The masculine woman, the club woman, the new woman of every type will be carried out to the sea of oblivion with the ebbing tide of wildness. The idea that the sacred institution of home is threatened is the utter nonsense of alarmists. The home can not be shaken. It is founded upon the eternal rock of human nature."

·

"The decision points out that since our statutes relative to married women doing business on their own account, and relating to the property of married women, have already made every married women by law a distinct and independent person from her husband, not only in respect to her right to own property, but also in respect to her right to use her time for the purpose of earning money on her sole and separate account, the old common law 'whether-or-no' right of the husband to her 'society, companionship, and services' has disappeared. This is a consequence, says our Supreme Court, 'which the Legislature must be deemed to have foreseen and intended.' . . . Action for injuries sustained to herself brings forth the court's opinion that a husband 'can appropriate neither the earnings nor the time' of his wife. Remonstrants might, however, console themselves with the thought that few wives go into money-earning occupations in

TOPICS IN BRIEF.

LET dogs delight to bark and bite;
To do so is their fate.

They can't be turned; they never learned,
You see, to arbitrate.

BRAZIL shouldn't have left little Trinidad out over-night; she might have known somebody would steal it.-The Ledger, Philadelphia.

Ir all the world loves a lover, Mr. B. Harrison ought to have a pretty big boom at this time.Constitution, Atlanta.

To the new congressional chaplain we owe the stump prayer.-The Herald, Boston.

IT may be that Senator Tillman has thought better of it and will beat his pitchfork into a snowplow. The Times-Herald, Chicago.

HEREAFTER Ambassador Bayard will do well to apologize first and make his speeches afterward.-Press, New York.

A CONSOLATION in the present situation is that the investiture of Havana will not interrupt the manufacture of pure Havana cigars in this country.- The Republic, St. Louis.

-The Star, Washington.

CHICAGO

AT CHICAGO, JULY 7. "Beauty and the Beast,"

-The Journal, Detroit,