FROM FOREIGN LANDS.

LATIN-AMERICAN DISTRUST of the UNITED STATES.

THE

`HERE is a rumor that a congress of all American Republics will be called together next summer at the initiative of the United States. It is also asserted that, among other things, means will be discussed to avoid conflicts between the different American countries. There is also a possibility that a defensive union of all American countries against foreign aggression will be proposed. It seems that the United States will have to contend with much jealousy and distrust on the part of the other American powers. Latin-America is little disposed to entrust the leading power on this continent with the exclusive administration of all foreign affairs, which Uncle Sam is supposed to desire. The Globe, Toronto, remarks:

"Means will have to be taken by the United States to remove from the minds of the assembled representatives the claim which the United States recently made to exercise a suzerainty over all the other American republics. It will be remembered that when the Pan-American congress met at Mr. Blaine's invitation, that gentleman had to be constantly on the alert to allay the suspicions of the smaller republics; but Mr. Blaine had never made the preposterous claim that Mr. Olney has made of a right in the United States to 'boss' all the Americas. Mr. Olney will have to hark back on the 'boss' business, or there will be a muss in the prospective congress."

This distrust of the races in the Central and Southern part of this continent against Americans in the narrower sense of the word is due to the attitude which the latter assumed toward the former in years past. The offense is rarely committed nowadays, but the distrust remains. The Mexican Herald, Mexico, in an article on the American "Uitlanders" settled in Mexico, says: "The English-speaking colony are Uitlanders and know it, and they refrain from intermeddling with the domestic housekeeping of the Mexican people," and claims that the enlightened portion of the people of Mexico no longer fear that "pacific conquest” which Americans were supposed to have in their minds in former

years.

This paper, which has a large circulation among Americans in Mexico, claims that they are strongly opposed to annexation or even a protectorate of Uncle Sam; for:

"The Monroe doctrine, narrowly interpreted to mean that all the countries of the New World shall be under the tutelage of the United States, which, on its part, shall not be asked to define its attitude as respects annexation, will continue to be viewed with suspicion by the more thoughtful publicists of Latin America. We can see no reason why the Nicaragua Canal should not be under the joint protection of all the nations of the New World, Mexico, Central and South America, and the United States. The Monroe doctrine, interpreted to mean, in this case, the domination of the United States, is repugnant to enlightened public sentiment in Mexico. That doctrine being now on the tapis, and under debate by the peoples of this hemisphere, may well be enlarged and broadened into an American doctrine which can be cordially ratified by all the peoples of the New World."

In these views the paper is supported by the more moderate Latin-Americans. Justo Sierra expresses himself in the Noticioso, Mexico, to the following effect:

"It is not astonishing that the states of Central and South America draw back. No great amount of sagacity is needed to discover that United States arbitration is a two-edged sword, and the future fate of South America is easily foretold if the views now current in Washington are victoriously proclaimed elsewhere. We do not wish to be strangled by Brother Jonathan, and hope that his present miserable failure to dabble in the higher politics will settle the question for good."

The Chileno, Valparaiso, is still more emphatic. In a long editorial it expresses itself as follows:

"The phrase 'America for the Americans' means that in every conflict, difficulty, litigious discussion, or danger of any kind the American republics ought to have recourse to a nation of this continent-that is, to the United States, which alone has sufficient force and importance. But the Yankees have never reconciled themselves to not having an absolute and lasting predominance over the other republics of America, and they never miss an opportunity of interfering in the affairs of the other states, to impose their arbitration, their commerce, and their protection. 'America for the Americans' means therefore simply 'South America diplomatically and commercially for the United States.' The poorer countries would merely become new centers of exploitation for the greater one, whose diplomacy is merely auxiliary to its mercantile enterprises. With its interested views and its want of diplomatic morality it offers neither guaranty nor protection for the other Republics. We Spanish-Americans have nothing in common with the people of the United States. We are a thousand times more distant from them than from any European power. Spain gave us its race, its language, and its culture. France nourished us intellectually by its literature and art for more than a century. From England we have commerce, industry, railways, and steamboats. Germany has sent us schoolmasters, officers, its most active commerce, and its most useful emigration. It would be dangerous to all American countries to allow the United States to become absolute arbiter with the right to examine questions and to give decisions which nobody wants."-Translations made for THE LITERARY DIGEST.

IT

A RUSSIAN SNUB TO GERMANY.

T is not only England that has to Complain of the forwardness of the Germans in colonial matters. Their apparent desire to establish themselves in the Far East is viewed with decided suspicion and disfavor by Russia. The Novoye Vremya, St. Petersburg, informs the Kaiser's subjects that their presence is neither wanted nor welcome in China. That paper says:

"The Germans seem unwilling to believe that Russia can inaugurate economical measures in China. They did not think that we could pursue in the East political and economical objects at the same time. We must, however, admit that, judging the future by the past, the Germans had every reason to be surprised at the change. Until quite recently we allowed to slip by every chance where political influence could have been used for economic purposes. For this reason it appeared only natural to them that, after having secured political interests in China, we should leave it to Western nations to secure economical benefits. The late developments proved such hopes to be wrongly founded. The Russo-Chinese loan appeared perplexing to the Germans, they became uneasy, and when we showed that we were deter mined to defend Russo-Chinese interests the German press became really nervous. The Germans found that five eighths of the capital was French, and three eighths Russian, while the Bank Council, consisting of eight persons, contained five Russians and three Frenchmen. Shanghai having been selected as the place

for locating the bank, the German East Asiatic Bank is in danger of lively competition. But this is not the worst. The misfortune to the Germans lies in the fact that the Russians have learned the tremendous importance of establishing a bank in a country which is on the eve of reconstructing entirely its economical system. This in itself seems like an attack on the Germans, who pose as monopolists of civilization.

"But if the Germans are so much concerned in extending civilization over the whole earth, they ought to welcome joyfully every one who comes to assist in this noble work. When others come to China to accomplish this object, the Germans ought to be delighted, and say: 'Now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace;' take their traps and bear the cross of civilization into other regions, Africa, for instance."-Translated for THE LITERARY DIGEST.

SHOULD WE JOIN HANDS WITH ENGLAND?

THE English press seems at present very anxious to conciliate

the people of the United States. The latter's right to safeguard the interests of the nations living on this continent is no longer contested. The Monroe doctrine or any other similar policy is welcomed by our British cousins, with one little provisoEngland must be recognized as an American power. Coupled with this goes a cordial invitation to the American Government to assist England in regulating the Armenian question. This attitude was first taken up by the Liberal press, but the Conservative papers have followed suit. The St. James's Gazette, in an article entitled "Why not come over and help us?" expresses itself, as follows:

"Mr. Chamberlain is perfectly in the right when he says that this country has no quarrel with the Monroe doctrine. We quite recognize that the two continents are shut to the colonizing enterprises of Europe. It is as much to our interest as to those of the United States to cause this to be thoroughly understood; for we hold as great an expanse of the New World as they do." Again: "It is very intelligible to us that the United States decline to permit any European 'system' hostile to the principles of their Government to be established in their neighborhood by force of arms. When Napoleon III. entered on an adventure of the kind we refused to join him. What we do find it necessary to dissent from with some emphasis is Mr. Olney's extension of Mr. Monroe's declaration of policy. The British Empire is on the continents of the New World by as good a right as the United States themselves or any Spanish-American Republic."

That paper declares most emphatically that European nations must indeed, be excluded from meddling with these continents. On the other hand, the United States will perform a good deed by taking an English view of the quarrel between Venezuela on the one hand and England in her capacity as an important American power on the other. The editor puts it this way:

.of

"It may possibly surprise some Americans to be told that they would also be doing a service to humanity in general, and to themselves, in helping us against that semi-barbarous half-caste Republic. And yet that is the fact. There is no question here of aggression by European powers or of the forcible imposition any system-unless, to be sure, it is the system of maintaining law and order and a decent police where the free native SpanishIndian-negro amalgamation would prefer its own sluttish anarchy. Venezuela has kept this frontier dispute open for half a century, not for any sane reason, but because it is essentially anarchical and incapable of conducting its relations with really civilized powers in a respectable way. We do not, for our part, see how the dignity of the Great Republic could possibly be injured if it joined with us in telling Venezuela that it must make its mind up to live on tolerable terms with its neighbors. Nobody wants to conquer that interesting child of freedom. want it to do is to cease,' as Mr. Carlyle would have said, 'from worshiping the devil' to our cost. Let it give up playing dog-inthe-manger, and refusing to negotiate unless we discuss ridiculous terms. As the result of bringing it to its bearings would be to open territory to industry and capital for the United States as well as for us, and as no attack would be made on American prin

All we

ciples, why should we not have the cooperation of Mr. Cleveland in this humane and civilizing 'mission'?"

Turning to the Armenian question, The St. James's Gazette is certain that, with the help of the United States, England could defy the rest of the European powers. The editor thinks it is the most natural thing in the world for America to take up the cudgels for the oppressed Christians in Turkey. He says:

"The American missions in Asia Minor are considerable, while ours are small. Many of the leaders of the late insurrection were trained in colleges supported by subscribers in the United States, and these institutions and their lively pupils are known to have suffered in the troubles of the last eighteen months.

"President Cleveland's Government has, then, very good ground for calling upon the Sultan for satisfaction. Its own citizens have been injured, and its Armenian clients cruelly ill-used. If it acts by itself, it is very likely to be paralyzed. as we are, by the much-quoted European concert. However ready we may be to face the world in arms if it makes a combined plundering attack on us, we can not be expected to deliberately provoke general hostility even for the sake of humanity and the Armenian.. But with the United States giving effectual help we should not stand alone, even if the European concert were to protest in chorus. If the people of the United States are really eager to advance the cause of civilization and good order in the world, they can do so in this way much more effectually than by encouraging Venezuela to defy us.

THE

POLITICS AND THE CHURCH IN CANADA. HE Canadian Parliament and the Canadian press declare in the most unmistakable manner that they stand.united in opposing any attempt from without to change the status quo, as far as Canada's position toward Great Britain is concerned. But here their unanimity ends. The Manitoba school question has given a strong impetus to political controversy, and Canadian affairs are discussed with much less moderation than formerly. Accusations of unfairness, of corruption, of untruthfulness, and depravity are hurled at the leaders of each party by their political opponents with increasing energy. This was especially noticeable in the case of the Cape Breton election, in which the Conservative candidate, Sir Charles Tupper, was elected by a majority of over 800. The Liberals are specially dissatisfied with the attitude of the Roman Catholic clergy in this election. Bishop Cameron expressed his views in the following letter:

"A great wrong has been done for the last five years to the Catholic minority of Manitoba, a wrong entailing most serious pecuniary loss on the sufferers as well as jeopardizing the salvation of countless souls; a wrong which, if not now abated, may sooner or later be inflicted on the Catholic minority of other provinces in a more or less cruel degree, and yet we meet the appalling spectacle of multitudes of men who are loud in their praises of liberty and justice and religion, arraigned against remedial legislation, the only available means under the constitution of redressing that wrong, and then doing all they can to perpetuate this monster evil, subversive of religion, justice, and liberty, in order to attain their own selfish ends, in defiance of God, And to our shame, among these hell-inspired hypocrites are to be found not a few Catholics who will vote against justice being done to their sorely-oppressed co-religionists, and who, to add insult to injury, will move for a commission of investigation instead of remedial legislation. This commission is pronounced to be the hollowest sham by the most competent of living judges on the subject."

As Bishop Labrecque had, only a short time before, asked the electors of Charlevoix to vote for a candidate who would pledge himself to assist in gaining a Catholic victory in the school question, the Liberals accuse the higher clergy of the misdemeanor of unduly influencing elections. The Witness, Montreal, says:

"It seems now that had not Bishop Cameron issued his epistle in which he cursed the Liberals as 'hell-inspired hypocrites,' who were acting 'in defiance of God,' Sir Charles Tupper would have

been, if elected at all, elected by only a very small majority. . . The victory is a poor one, but small as it is it has been won at a great cost to the Conservative Party, or else the Conservative Protestants of Ontario and the other provinces are more complacent than we imagine them to be. If Bishop Cameron's mandement does not do the Conservatives more harm, not only in Protestant but also in Roman Catholic constituencies, than it has done them good in electing. Sir Charles Tupper we shall be much astonished. The course of the Roman Catholic bishops in regard to the Manitoba school affair has been simply outrageous."

The Tribune, Victoria, B. C., thinks it is time for the people of Canada to consider how far they will allow their clergy to control political affairs. The Globe, Toronto, says:

"There may be cases in which it is difficult to draw the line between the legitimate participation of the clergy in politics and the abuse of their authority, but that Bishop Cameron has overstepped the line there is no manner of doubt. Whatever effect such utterances may have on the fortunes of one political party or the other, they are bad for the country, bad for the church, bad for citizenship, bad for religion, utterly indefensible upon every ground. Ministers of religion who take part in politics ought, by virtue of their education and of the mission of peace and goodwill with which they are entrusted, to set an example of fairness and good temper in the discussion of public affairs."

The Free Press, Ottawa, thinks the election of Sir Charles Tupper a Pyrrhus victory. It says:

"Not a Tory weapon that could by any means be used was left in its sheath. Money in barrels was there to corrupt the electors. The agency of the church was obtained, and the fulmination of the episcopate launched against all Catholics who proposed to vote against the Tory candidate. The electorate was further corrupted with the promise of railways and public works in the true Tupper style, and threats, cajolery, and deceit alike played their part in this monumental electoral contest of despair. . . However, the matter is of no great importance. A brigade of Sir Charles Tuppers could not save the Tory Government or the Tory Party. The public has now merely to wait and see whether Sir Charles will drive the hearse containing the 'remains' of the Tory Party to the cemetery quicker than his brother knight. The sooner the better."

The London (Ontario) Advertiser is equally bitter in its denunciation of the victorious candidate :

"To help to elect him, probably $50,000 has been spent by Sir Charles Tupper, who has become rich through office-holding and those who expect favors from him. In addition to this, hundreds of thousands of dollars' worth of public works have been promised in the constituency, and public offices almost without number."

The Week, Toronto, thinks Bishop Cameron's letter is more likely to have cost Sir Charles some votes than to have won them. If separate schools produce men who are influenced by a cleric who describes as "hell-inspired hypocrites" his political opponents, Manitoba's objection to such schools becomes comprehensible.

The Herald, Halifax, declares that the letter written by Bishop Cameron was private, and marked as such, and believes that the Liberals will not profit much by the manner in which they have made use of private correspondence to further their ends. The Mail and Empire, Toronto, points out that Cape Breton is not a Conservative electorate of long standing; that the Liberal candidate, Murray, went out of his way to promise protection for coal, the staple industrial product of Nova Scotia, and that the voters' lists were not complete. In spite of all this Sir Charles obtained a larger majority than has ever been given in the county. Concerning Bishop Cameron's attitude, The Mail and Empire says: "The participation of Bishop Cameron in the contest, a proceeding which is traceable to the religious appeals that the emissaries from Ottawa were making, doubtless cut, to some extent, both ways. The general result, however, was very marked. Protestants and Roman Catholics stood fairly shoulder to shoulder, avoiding the sectarian evil which the Ottawa emissaries were

WHY THE POPE HONORED BISMARCK.

THA

HAT Bismarck was the champion of secular power when the Catholic Church claimed exclusive jurisdiction over its clergy is well known. That he made his peace with Rome in later years is less known. Yet Bismarck is a Knight of the Order of Christ and possesses a decoration set in brilliants, which the present occupant of the Vatican conferred upon this once formidable enemy of the church. The order was conferred in recognition of the importance which Bismarck attached to the influence of the Pope at a time when he was supposed to lessen that influence. The Braunschweiger Tageblatt, Braunschweig, in referring to this matter, declares that Bismarck never failed to make due distinction between the quarrel in which he was engaged with the Holy See and the attempts of unbelievers who wished to destroy all prestige of the church. Leo XIII. was quick to acknowledge this. He sent a volume of his Latin verse to Bismarck in 1884, an act which astonished the world no less than the decoration of the Chancellor, which took place in 1885. The Tageblatt says:

“Bismarck often used strong expressions during the Kulturkampf, but he took care that the battle should be fought within narrow lines, and did his best to prevent unnecessary quarrels. Thus on March 10, 1873, he said in the Prussian House of Lords: 'This is not a question of difference of opinion between a Protestant dynasty and the Catholic Church; neither is it a struggle between faith and unbelief. The quarrel is one as old as the human race it is the quarrel between the authority of princes and that of the priesthood. Like every other struggle, this one is interrupted by armistices, alliances, and periods of peace, only to break forth afresh. The state will never forego the claim that it is predominant in the rule of this world, but the church attacks the state. Bismarck prevented the abolition of the Prussian Embassy to the Vatican, for he always hoped that a better understanding between the Pope and the Kaiser would be brought about, altho he acknowledged that it was equally difficult to take the first step. In 1885 Bismarck had a chance to conciliate the Pope, and he made use of it. He entrusted the Pope with the settlement of the quarrel between Spain and Germany regarding the Caroline Islands. Many people regarded this move only as one of Bismarck's little jokes, but it had great consequences. Leo XIII. informed Bismarck in a letter that 'the Catholics appreciated the honor conferred upon their Head,' and that the Chancellor 'who had created the German Empire, once more proved his wisdom.' Bismarck replied that he was 'willing to show due respect to the Vatican wherever he could do so without harm to his king and his country.' The hope of the Catholics that Germany would assist in the restoration of the Pope's temporal power was not realized, for Germany held to the Triple Alliance."

William I. returned the compliment paid to his Chancellor by conferring upon the Cardinal-Secretary, Mgr. Jacobini, the Order of the Black Eagle, the highest Prussian decoration.—Translated for THE LITERARY DIGEST.

HERE is what a writer in Chambers's Journal describes as an "amusing instance of the manner in which the Uitlanders at Johannesburg trade with the Boers: "An English trader purchased a wagon-load of stuff from a Boer, and by means of a few figures and calculations easily tossed off, and with many flourishes, makes out that the amount he has to pay to the Dutchman is about half of what it ought to be, if correctly reckoned up at the price agreed. 'Oom Paul' can not reckon much, but has a Ready Reckoner, and points to and wants the larger amount., 'What's that?' says the other. Let's look at it. Then, Why, that's last year's Ready Reckoner! Look here, man, it's marked 1894. It's no good now. Alla machta!' says the Boer, I did not notice that;' and plods off home, wagon and all, content with the lesser sum." The writer adds that "leading business men" at Johannesburg will tell you themselves that honesty is not expected there.

THE KIND OF FLEET THAT IS NECESSARY.

THE Correspondant, Paris, gives a résumé of Admiral Four

nier's book, "The Kind of Fleet that Is Necessary." The officer proceeds from the assumption that the naval war of the future will be fought between two powers whose naval forces are very unequal. He is inclined to think that the single cruiser and privateer of past ages, sweeping the ocean in search of prey, will revive. The Admiral declares that the great battle-ships have had their day, and that the future belongs to vessels of moderate size. He thinks it absolutely necessary to provide a fleet of vessels of uniform pattern. The crews would then have little to learn in going from one vessel to another, and slow vessels would not be forced to strain their machinery to keep up uniform speed with the rest of the fleet. Singly, such cruisers could do good service as commerce-destroyers; combined they would form valuable material in the hands of the commanding officers. The Admiral writes specially for France, but his remarks apply to almost every other naval power with the exception of England. He says:

"Our typical enemy at sea is, of course, England. Our fleet at the moment at which war is declared would be taken by surprise. The ships would either be in port, waiting to be got ready for sea, or dispersed about the coasts, training their crews. We would, therefore, stand a good chance of being beaten.

But even

if we win a battle, England would gain the advantage. This is no paradox. Great Britain has many more ships than we have. If her fleet succeeds in maiming some of our best vessels, the British fleet, even if its loss is equal or somewhat greater than our own, will retain enough ships to make England mistress of the seas by sheer force of numbers. We must act in a very different manner. We must send our ships to sea to haunt the most frequented routes of navigation; destroy the enemy's mailsteamers, take his sailing-ships, ruin his commerce and his credit. It will be said that England can retaliate. To a certain extent this is true, but she would be the loser in the game. For every three ships that we lose, England would lose ten. As for our coasts, these can take care of themselves, and there is plenty of artillery to keep the enemy's ships off. Besides, if our ships are out after the British merchant vessels, England's ships will be too busy chasing ours to allow a descent upon our coasts. No other conclusion can be arrived at than this: in case of war with England we must not lose a minute, but send our ships out before our ports can be blockaded. They must go in the rear of the enemy, interfere with his communications, destroy his commerce, strike at his very life.

Have we the ships necessary for this work? No.

Our ships are built to maneuver in the vicinity of our ports. What we want is a large number of fast cruisers, able to remain at sea for a long time. They must also be able to enter into combat not only in connection with other ships, but by themselves. "The combats of the future will be fought mainly at a distance. Whether the fight takes place between squadrons or single ships is immaterial; it will be a running fight. There will be pursued and pursuers. Hence it is necessary to place the guns in a position to attack or repel attack during a chase. Broadside guns and batteries are useless for this purpose. The ships we need must therefore possess the following qualities: A greater speed than that of the ships opposed to them in battle. For a fair chance to win, a vessel must be able to accept or decline a combat at pleasure, accepting only under the most advantageous terms. The artillery must be placed in the bow and in the stern. The guns should be of moderate calibre, and there should be as many quickfiring guns as possible. The ships should not be belted only, but armored all over, to insure proper protection of men and material. Well-protected torpedo-tubes, situated below the water-line. A small squadron of ocean-going torpedo-boats, to accompany the larger vessels.

"Ships of 6,000 to 8, 500 tons, with a mean speed of twenty knots, and a capacity of steaming 12,000 to 14,000 miles without replenishing their coal, will form the most serviceable fleet.”—Translated for THE LITERARY DIGEST.

THE attendance of foreign students in German universities is said to be larger this winter than at any previous time: 2,287 foreigners were immatriculated, 517 of whom are Americans.

America as the Scene of the Next Great Revolution. It is the custom of socialist and anarchist publications to paint the condition of the country in which they are published in the most somber colors. The Vorwärts, Buenos Ayres, deviates from this practise. It attributes to the United States the greatest misery, and predicts that the coming era of social revolution will be inaugurated here. The paper says:

"Nowhere has engineering reached such a high degree of perfection as in the United States, and-that country is not far wrong in claiming economical leadership among civilized nations. But along with this goes the fact that capitalistic exploitation has nowhere met with less obstruction than in the United States; its murderous, destructive results are nowhere more apparent, and the absurdity of the capitalistic mode of production has nowhere been demonstrated more glaringly."

The writer quotes Mr. Chauncey Depew as having said that "fifty prominent men could, if they agreed, stop the whole business of the nation." He then continues:

"And these men have the legal 'right' to do this, according to the 'divine' order of things. If, some day, they agree to make this amusing experiment, if they order the cessation of production, they can order the nation to starve in the most 'lawful' manner. If these American masters come to terms with their European fellows, the whole human race can be made to obey them. That is, if the rest of mankind are disposed to uphold the 'sacred' rights of private property. Against the power of these gods of capital the power of the Almighty is as nothing. The latter is supposed to have needed forty days to destroy mankind, and was forced to make use of extraordinary means. The former can create untold misery by a mere order."-Translated for THE LITERARY DIGEST.

FOREIGN NOTES.

THE new fortifications of Paris enclose a much larger area than in 1870. Even Versailles is now within the line of forts. The French regard Paris now as perfectly safe against a siege. Some critics, nevertheless, point out that such an enormous fortress needs a very large army for its defense; which army must necessarily be withdrawn from the troops operating in the field. That undisciplined masses are "seless for the defense of such a fortress was proven in 1870, when the Germans besieged Paris with an army less than two-thirds the size of the forces at the disposal of Trochu, if the National Guard and militia are to be counted.

Money, London, points out that, if the Germans invest large sums in British colonies, Englishmen do not fail to return the compliment. It has lately oozed out that Count Caprivi, immediately before his retirement from the Imperial Chancellorship, granted a British syndicate a concession of some millions of acres of territory in German East Africa, and a company is now about to be brought out to develop the concession. The original syndicate was largely Scotch, and most of its capital was raised over the border. Large subscriptions to the share capital of the company are also promised in the same quarter.

THE Panama Star and Herald has a suggestion to offer to President Cleveland. It says: "We dare say that the William doctrine in Africa will not be more to the taste of Great Britain than the Monroe doctrine is in America; but the medicine will have to be taken nevertheless, and don't you forget it! We respectfully suggest the name of the Kaiser to President Grover Cleveland, in case a vacancy occurs in the splendid commission to be selected."

ENGLAND means to build a navy large enough "to whip creation," and to prove that she is mistress of the sea, a fact which is denied by most nations. The Czar of Russia will make England's task pretty difficult. He has ordered $100,000,000 to be spent on the Russian navy, to place an adequate number of cruisers against the British ships of the same type.

THE Belgian Socialists won more victories last year than their fellows in any other country. They control now 250 municipalities of the kingdom. Among these are 25 towns with between 10,000 and 35,c00 inhabitants. In the largest cities, too, they have a good showing. A third of the aldermen of Brussels and Ghent are socialists.

THE Journal de Commerce, Rio de Janeiro, gets rather mixed when it discusses American politics. Here's a sample: "The municipal elections in New York certainly ended favorably for the Republicans last year. Mr. Tammany Hall was elected mayor by them, a fact which gave great satisfaction to the press of the Union."

THE most expensive parliament in Europe is that of France. The two cham bers cost the nation $1,500,000 annually. Spain spends $490,000 on her representation, Italy $420,000, England $320,000, Belgium $190,000, Portugal $150,000, Germany $95,000.

ONE of the few French Protestant visionaries, Guillaume Monod, died recently in Paris at the age of ninety-five. He believed that he was Jesus Christ and led a congregation of nearly 500 persons to believe it also. He belonged to the very numerous family of Monods, neariy all of whose male members are Protestant ministers.

MISCELLANEOUS.

MRS. LIVERMORE ON SEXUAL RELATIONS.

THE

HE history of woman through the ages is characterized by Mrs. Mary A. Livermore, in The North American Review, as "painful reading." Mrs. Livermore finds that woman's physical weakness, and not alone her mental inferiority, has made her the subject of man; that toiling patiently for him, asking little for herself and everything for him, cheerfully sharing with him all his perils and hardships, the unappreciated mother of his children, she has been bought and sold, petted or tortured, according to the whim of her owner, the victim eyerywhere of pillage, lust, war, and servitude. And this statement she says includes all races and peoples of the earth from the date of their historic existAfter recalling the Oriental and Roman and Grecian degradation of woman, and the fact that the early Christian fathers denounced women as "noxious animals," "painted temptresses," "necessary evils, ""desirable calamities," and "domestic perils," Mrs. Livermore notes that here and there along the ages there have been exceptional peoples whose civilization lifted woman for a time to an equality with men, and that chief among these were the Egyptians. She believes that the hereditary effects of the ages of servitude are apparent to-day in both men and women. She says:

MRS. MARY A. LIVERMORE.

ence.

"It has retarded woman's development in normal ways; has broken down her self-respect and self-appreciation. Living under constant restriction and hindrance, she became cowardly, both physically and morally. Denied the rights and privileges common to humanity, she gained them by cunning and fawning, stratagem and intrigue. Eager for her own sake to win the favor of her husband, father, or any other man who held her fate in his hands, she resorted to inordinate efforts to please and cajole him, so that she is to-day overweighted with love of approbation, which sometimes effaces all moral distinctions. It has rarely been possible for women to rise above the arbitrary standards of womanly inferiority persistently set before them. It is amazing that they held their own during these ages of degradation. And as 'the inheritance of traits of character is persistent in proportion to the length of time they have been inherited,' women are conservative, and progress slowly with halting step.

Having sketched what appears to her as exceptionally beautiful in the devoted married life of Wendell and Anne Phillips, Mrs. Livermore expresses the belief that there have been and are to-day husbands of a like rare type, who regard the wife as the "beloved other half," not in the meaningless sense in which the careless gallantry of the day phrases it, but with the unselfish devotion of a life, tho she thinks that such are comparatively few, while husbands of another sort are very much in evidence. She then generalizes as follows:

"My attention was called to three works of art, in a gallery, remarkable alike for their admirable technique and their unmitigated repulsiveness. One represented in marble the figure of the drunken god Silenus, astride an ass. The only sober object in the sculpture was the ass, bestrode by the marble god, whose every fiber, muscle, and feature drooped in senseless inebriety. Across the gallery was an ivory satyr, with pointed face, short horns, leering eyes, and lolling tongue, the whole expression being one of beastly sensuality. Locked in a glass case to protect it from the curious, was the head of a Bacchante, cut in the pellucid crystal of a gem bluer than God's heaven, the hair dishevelled, the features distorted, the mouth open, the whole face indicating drunken frenzy.

"Given time enough, and these works of art will cease to be. The marble god and the ivory satyr will disintegrate into sand and dust. But the drunken husband and father is also an artist. And he sends out into the world a hideous caricature of the living God in the person of his own child, whose life stretches away farther than our imaginations can follow. It is the most serious and widespread evil of our time, the drunkenness of husbands. alike in high life and low life, and it portends the direst consequences to posterity. The woman who dares marry a libertine, or a drunkard, with the hope of reforming him, or the expectation of finding happiness with him, ought to have a chance in a lunatic asylum or a home for imbeciles.

"Before all forms of government, all types of civilization, all advance in education, the relations of the husband and wife make the everlasting granite on which the whole world rests. Just so fast and just so far as these relations are what they ought to be, and what God intends they shall be, just so fast and just so far will society be uplifted-no faster, no farther. 'How shall we purify public life?' is the great question of the hour. We can purify public life no faster than we purify the private life in the home, for the public life is only the public expression of the pri vate life of a people. The advance of a nation comes only through the improvement of the homes of a nation. As the aggregate of these may be, so will the nation be. For it is in the home, conducted by the harmonious and right-minded husband and wife, that the real harmonizing and civilizing are carried for

ward."

HARD LIFE OF INDIAN WOMEN AND DOGS. HE life of the handful of persons, chiefly Indians and halfTHE breeds, who are the servants of the great Hudson Bay Company, is described by Mr. Caspar W. Whitney in his third paper on Northern Canada, "On Snow-Shoes to the Barren Grounds," published in the February Harper's. We are told that the real dwellers within the settlements of the Hudson Bay Company are a comparative handful. Those that live within the company's gates are chiefly half-breeds. In summer they catch and dry the fish which forms the chief article of food for men and dogs, or work on the flat-boats, and in winter they spend the short days in "tripping." and the long nights in smoking and talking about their dogs, or in dancing and sleeping. This applies to the men. Life is a more serious affair for the women.

Of these Mr. Whitney says:

"They too sleep and dance and smoke, but their sleeping comes as a well-earned respite after the day's toil; their dancing has the