R

ENGLAND, THE UNITED STATES, AND
VENEZUELA.

EUTER'S Agency, usually very reliable, is now and then made responsible for news of a sensational character. Thus a great many English papers quoted a Reuter dispatch announcing that "Secretary Olney has instructed Ambassador Bayard to notify the British Government that the Monroe doctrine will be enforced unless Great Britain submits the Venezuelan question to arbitration." Some of our English contemporaries fail to notice that this dispatch took its origin from St. Paul, Minnesota, and that official confirmation is wanting. Hence the British press, both at home and in the colonies, fears grave difficulties. The Westminster Gazette says:

"Turn and turn about is all fair, you know.' The other day Lord Salisbury dispatched an ultimatum to China. It is now his lordship's turn to receive one. . . . It is to be hoped, however, that if a settlement of the British Guiana-Venezuela business can be hurried up, Downing Street will take the necessary steps. Of course we can not countenance any attempt on the part of Washington to 'rush' us out of our just claims in Northern South America, but it is yet to be seen that President Cleveland wishes to do that."

The Times and other papers print detailed accounts of the difficulty, claiming that Venezuela wants ground which has been partially developed by the Dutch and English. A correspondent of The Times asserts that the title of Great Britain to its possessions in Guiana stands on the same basis as its title to New York in prerevolutionary days. He observes:

"The Venezuelans never have made any settlement nearer to British Guiana than the sham village of Manoa, which consists of about two dozen souls all told. This bogus settlement was established for diplomatic reasons. But while Great Britain has occupied in the ordinary course, her territory in Guiana, Venezuela has most outrageously 'claimed' the right to all the territory between the Amacura and the left bank of the Essequibo. That any American statesman can be found to uphold a claim such as this is indeed surprising, for the Dutch had for generations occupied and cultivated a vast part of this territory before they ceded it to Great Britain. In 1796, when the colony was in possession temporarily of Great Britain, the Spaniards sent an expedition from the left bank of the Orinoco against a part of this coast. The Spanish force was most signally defeated by Dutch soldiers, who had taken service under the British flag. In spite of historical facts such as these, capable of examination by any one, the civilized world is asked to believe that Great Britain is taking away from Venezuela land belonging to that republic, from the left bank of the Essequibo up to the Amacura River."

The St. James's Gazette wants to know "what this blessed Monroe doctrine really is, and what it has to do with the quarrel between Great Britain and another independent state," and The Standard would be "much surprised if responsible American diplomats persist in maintaining that the Monroe doctrine has any bearing on the case." Venezuelan papers are not to hand. Novedades, New York, a Spanish paper known for its moderate criticism of international affairs, thinks the Venezuela people are hardly better pleased with the attitude of the United States than that of Great Britain. That paper says:

The

"The British press perfidiously throws out insults at Venezuela to cover the unreason of British demands, and gratuitously flings such terms at the Venezuelans as 'hybrid and barbarous Spanish. Indians,' 'half-civilized nation,' etc. The same press, well versed in sophisms and abuse, has discovered a strong argument to repel the over-officious Yankee Cabinet, especially as the press of that Cabinet is not a whit less abusive than the English. 'What right,' they ask, 'has the United States to interfere between two independent states?

If the United States is em

powered to speak for the other republics in cases of this kind, she must assume sole responsibility over their foreign relations.'

"But as a matter of fact the paternalism contained in this leaky Monroe doctrine is not found in any codex of international

law, is recognized by no power, and means nothing to any one except the chauvinists and excitable-article writers who think they are directing the international politics of the United States through the columns of newspapers. This doctrine is all the more a ridiculous mummery as it is dropped or brought into play as occasion demands. It represents no rights, but covers a good deal of ambition-including the absorption of a large part of this hemisphere. From first to last it has always been put forward at the expense of the states which it is supposed to protect, and this is precisely what it was originally formulated for. 'Between the pretensions of the English, ' remarked a Venezuelan the other day, and the paternalism of the Yankees, Venezuela is as between the devil and the deep blue sea. Whatever solution may be arrived at, Venezuela will have to pay the piper.""

Papers representing British colonial interests on this continent are very emphatic in their oppostion to the popular version of the Monroe doctrine. The South American Journal, London, says:

“It would mean nothing less than a direct intervention of the United States, under circumstances of a somewhat embarrassing nature for this country, for our Foreign Office would find it difficult, without injury to the national prestige, to yield that consent, in face of what has the aspect of a threat by the Government of the United States, which it has refused on the repeated solicitations of the Venezuelans themselves. We trust, therefore, that there is no truth in this representation, and, in any event, we fail to see how the Monroe doctrine can be 'enforced' in a case to which it does not, as we conceive, apply, unless, indeed, to encourage the hopes of the Irish fire-eaters in America, who have so recently been uttering grotesque maledictions against England, it is the deliberate intention of the people at Washington to pick a quarrel with Great Britain."

In loyal Canadian circles this alleged practical demonstration of the Monroe doctrine creates a feeling of alarm. It is regarded as another step in the direction of a struggle between Great Britain and the United States. The Week, Toronto, devotes a long article to the relation between the two powers, which we summarize as follows:

Englishmen are wont to assert that the Americans, as a nation, will never quarrel with them, because 'blood is thicker than water.' The Canadian knows better. True, his criticism must be taken cum grano salis, because he is continually irritated by the American. He is constantly told that Canada exists only by American sufferance. It is knocked into him by American newspapers and American speakers that a Canadian campaign would be a walk-over; the eagle can swallow the beaver and ask for more. Now, the Canadian knows better, and his answer is: 'Come and try.' But the irritation remains, and makes him, perhaps, not a fair judge of Americans. On the other hand, he lives alongside of the Union and is less likely to be humbugged than a man three thousand miles away.

For some reason or other Americans retain a bitter recollection of English domination. History does not explain this fact, but there it is. Besides, the Irish-American element have transferred their antipathies from their native soil and transmitted them to their posterity. How far their power extends has been proved over and over again. But these are sentimental grounds of hostility. The substantial grounds are based on commercial rivalry. Deprive England of her command of the sea and who would succeed her? America. Then, England retains Canada, and commands the seaport towns of the Union. Through .he West Indian Islands she can threaten the Southern coasts. If all these were transferred to the United States, what a power she would be. And England will stand no interference with the Canal which is to be dug across Central America. In another generation the waste lands of the Union will be absorbed, and the Americans will want the fertile Canadian Northwest.

Slowly but surely the war is approaching. The world's history repeats itself. Long ages ago Egypt and Assyria fought it out, only to succumb to other nations who took advantage of their exhaustion. Commercial rivalry forced Rome and Carthage into war. When it ended, Carthage was no more. France and Germany have fought their first round, the next will be the deathgrapple. The hand of the American may not be the one to pull England down, but it will be there to share in the plunder. Why

TEMPERANCE IN GERMANY.

CONDITION OF THE PRESS IN CHINA.

SOME

OME time since a French writer published a sketch of the press in Japan, its origin, extent, and influence. The Chinese press is now similarly reviewed in German publications. Chinese journalism is very old, but its development is of comparatively recent date. The most widely circulated paper in China is the Pekin Official Gazette, which was started more than six hundred years ago. It is dangerous to be on the editorial staff of this publication; no less than twelve hundred of its responsible editors are said to have been decapitated since it was founded. Besides this, periodicals are issued by the provincial authorities, but independent journalism is confined to the seaport towns. The European concessions-"European republics in China," the Munich Allgemeine Zeitung calls them can boast of many papers in English, German, Portuguese, and French, altho each settlement counts but a few hundred foreign residents. Tientsin, Amoy, and Futchen have a daily paper each, altho the number of subscribers is limited. This success of journalistic enterprise led the publishers to try their luck with the Chinese population. Vossische Zeitung, Berlin, says:

1

The

It has

"Chinese dailies were issued at the same time with the papers in foreign languages, and the success was such that the Chinese papers are now very numerous. As these Chinese papers are not of native growth, but a result of the contact with European civilization, they do not differ much from their European contemporaries. Most of them re eight-page publications, about the size of the Gartenlaube [something like The Illustrated American]. The advertisements come first, then the leading articles. Most of these papers have a circulation of 3,000 to 6,000 only; the Shanghai Shen-Pao, however, has a daily edition of 12,000. A much older paper is the bi-weekly I-wen-lu, Shanghai, a Catholic paper issued by the priests of the Zikawei Mission. probably more influence than all other Chinese publications, and is read throughout the entire Empire. The fact that the Catholic Church has to-day over a million members in China is, no doubt, explained by the influence of this publication, which is edited by the priests in a masterly manner. Much of the reading-matter in Chinese papers is taken from the Pekin Gazette, but the inevitable special correspondent is not wanting, and his principal business is to wire news from the capital. Reuter's agency, too, has subscribers among the Chinese papers. Much reading-matter is also taken from European papers. But as there are many words in use with us for which the Chinese have no equivalent, the Chinese editor takes some word with a similar sound, but often a very different meaning, and the text must often appear extremely 'Chinese' to his readers. Thus ultimatum is rendered by the Chinese signs as u-li-ma-tung, telephone becomes to-li-fung, status quo sze-ta-tu-ko. It is equally difficult for them to write European names, hence most of the business firms have adopted Ehlers has become E-li-si; Golding, Go-ting; Morrison, Ma-sun; Wilkinson, Way-king-sun. Only the good old German Meyer remains Meyer all over the world, but the Chinese spell it Mei-ir."

Chinese names.

In spite of their familiarity with Western thought, the Chinese editor has to reckon with the taste of his readers, and their preju dices. Many of the items printed appear extremely childish to the Westerner. Not only all kinds of rumors regarding the standing of China's Government among the nations find credence, but the most impossible stories are eagerly read and believed. The following may serve as samples :

The doctors were

"A young girl imprudently left a needle in her gown, and it entered her body when she dressed herself. unable to alleviate her pains, but her brother fetched a friend who is used to this kind of thing. He placed a paper covered with mystic writing on the girl's breast, and the next day the needle appeared sufficiently near the skin to permit its removal. "In the house of a knight of Pan-Yu a bamboo grew seven feet in a single forenoon. It burst through the roof and raised itself seventy feet in three days. Some people think this miraculous, but the ground contains much sulfur there, and sulfur is known for its expansive force." -Translated for THE LITERARY Digest.

THE

HE annual meeting at Berlin of the German Association to prevent the intemperate use of alcohol was well attended by medical men, and has led to some practical results. The profession, who, in Germany, regard themselves to a great extent responsible for the moral well-being of the nation as well as its physical health, are thoroughly alive to the need of immediate measures against the increase of intemperance, and will individually warn the people. They object, however, to a crusade in favor of total abstinence, as this can not, in their opinion, be enforced upon a whole nation. Dr. Hans Buchner said:

"The loss of money through intemperance is great enough, being in many cases a quarter of the entire income. But the danger to health is still more serious. The alcohol drunk by the German people robs them of their ability to compete with more sober nations. We must teach the adults of the nation what the effects of alcohol are, and the schools must impress the importance of the subject upon the young. Public health has no greater enemy in German than alcohol. To some extent, the legislature may be asked to interfere."

Professor Moritz, of Munich, chose beer as his special subject, and said:

"It is true that beer is the most nutritious of all alcoholic beverages. Wine contains but 0.5 per cent. albumin on an average, beer has 4 to 5 per cent. of sugar and 0.75 per cent. of albumin. But compared with its price the value of beer as food is very limited. There is about as much nutrition in five quarts of beer as in eight baker's rolls. The beer costs [in Germany] over 25 cents, the rolls only 5 cents. The difference is still more glaring if rye bread or potatoes is taken into consideration. That beer assists the digestion is undeniable, but only when used temperately."

The Professor is one of the few men who dare to set a limit beyond which a moderate man should not go, independent of the question of intoxication. It must also be remembered that he speaks of pure malt beer only. The use of injurious chemicals in the brewing of beer, so common in some countries, is rigorously punished in Germany. He continues:

"It is not at all rare for a citizen of Munich to drink 8 to 12 quarts of beer daily, and there are men who consume 20 quarts and more. This must lead to illness. But what is temperance? It would certainly hurt the temperance movement to describe as a drunkard every man who drinks beer daily. A pint of beer at dinner, and another pint or even a quart in the evening is not too much from a hygienic point of view. There are people who can drink 3 to 4 quarts per day, and yet remain perfectly healthy, but a sensible man will not endanger his constitution by the absorbtion of so much alcohol."

Professor Moritz then demonstrated the injurious effects of immoderate beer-drinking by some human hearts and kidneys, which had been preserved by Professor Bollinger. The latter suggested that the country physicians should gather evidences of the ravages of alcohol and send them to the Central Bureau. People would be astonished to hear what harm is done by intemperance. Many cases of tuberculosis end fatally only because the patient is not temperate in the use of alcohol.—Translated for THE LITERARY DIGEST.

HERE is a lesson for railroad conductors: About two months ago an old and infirm lady traveled over a Spanish road. She became very feeble, and required assistance, which was rendered her in the most courtly and attentive manner by the conductor, José Huard. At Rarcelona the lady got out, and offered the conductor a very handsome tip, which he, however, refused, declaring that he had done nothing but what a man should do. Shortly after this the lady died, remembering José Huard in her will with 10,000 pesetas ($2,000). She was the widow of MacMahon, Duke of Magenta, Marshal of France, and third President of the Republic.

THE London papers tell of a modern Damon. The man is a sailor who, being accused of assault, obtained his release on bail. When the time came for him to appear in court he was in Cardiff. As he had no money, he began to tramp to London, arriving in a state of extreme exhaustion, but just in time to save his friend from forfeiting his bail. The magistrate was so much impressed with the man's honorableness that he discharged him at once, giving him a present of $10.

THE

MISCELLANEOUS.

THE PLAGUE OF JOCULARITY.

HE last months of the life of Professor Boyesen were prolific of literary work. Among the interesting papers published since his death is one bearing the above title, in The North American Review (November). Professor Boyesen here tells us that, some years ago, at an annual exhibition in Columbia College he requested his students to write brief accounts of their lives. To his astonishment more than half of the class took this request (tho it was printed on the examination paper with the regular questions) to be a joke. Of the thirty-two responses which he received, seventeen were in a jocular vein. One youth wrote that as he had his eyes fixed on the White House he did not like to handicap his future biographer by pinning him down to any unyielding framework of facts which might prove embarrassing to the manager of his campaign. Another young gentleman declared that he had from the cradle been a monument of goodness and stupidity, and related several touching incidents of his childhood which parodied the good boy of the Sunday-school story. What impressed Professor Boyesen more than anything else in connection with this unexpected burst of jocularity was that with two exceptions all the names of the jokers indicated American parentage, while with three exceptions the names of those who gave serious responses indicated foreign origin. Commenting on this episode, Professor Boyesen says:

"As an exhibition of the national character, I regard this result as exceedingly striking. I had observed, many times before, the tendency of Americans to take a facetious view of life, and extract the greatest possible amount of amusement out of every situation. But I had never quite believed that the tendency was so pronounced and universal as the above-cited proportion would seem to indicate. And yet, as I look back upon an experience of twenty-six years in the United States, I am confirmed in the opinion that the most pervasive trait in the American national character is jocularity. It is by that trait, above all, that Americans are differentiated from all other nations. It is apt to be one of the first observations of the intelligent foreigner who lands upon our shores, that all things, ourselves included, are with us legitimate subjects for jokes. An all-leveling democracy has tended to destroy the sense of reverence which hedges certain subjects with sanctity, guarding them against the shafts of wit.

"Never shall I forget the shock I felt, the first time I was made aware of this spirit of heedless levity which spares nothing sacred or profane. More than twenty years ago, when I was introduced to a venerable clergyman-a kindly and cultivated man, but a trifle pompous in his manner-my introducer remarked that the reputed reason why the reverend gentleman had lived to be so old was that 'he was waiting for a vacancy in the Trinity.""

Professor Boyesen doubts if such a joke would be laughed at anywhere but in the United States. He alludes to certain humorous anecdotes prevalent in Germany and Scandinavia, in reference to St. Peter, the Savior, and "Unser Herrgott," showing that they are far from being in their essence blasphemous. Similar American jokes he finds, on the other hand, to be the product of over-sophistication and a reckless determination to be funny, in connection with a total want of reverence. tinues:

He con

Professor Boyesen believes that the startling decay of eloquence in the United States, since the days of Webster, Calhoun, and Clay, is largely due to our growing inability to be serious about serious things. He says, in conclusion:

"Tho I should be the last to deprecate a fair seasoning of humor in our toilsome and troublous lives, I can not but think that the seasoning with us takes the place of the dish and the dish of the seasoning. We invert the proper relation. And this inversion entails some serious and disadvantageous consequences. In the first place, it kills conversation. Instead of that interchange of thought, which with other civilized nations is held to be one of the highest of social pleasures, we exchange jokes. We report the latest jests we have heard, and repeat the latest comic stories. At a certain season certain stories and jokes have a particular vogue, and you hear them at every dinner-table and at every club you enter. They get to be, at last, an intolerable bore; and yet, whether you hear them the tenth or the hundredth time, your sense of politeness compels you to feign merriment. You have to know a man very well before you can venture to 'ring the chestnut-bell on him.' No observation I made on returning from Europe in 1879 was to me more startling than the discovery that in the United States there is, properly speaking, no conversation, i.e., conversation of the kind that you enjoy in the best French and Italian salons. It is so much easier-it entails, in fact, no effort whatever-to rehearse ready-made anecdotes and facetiæ; and to a hard-worked commercial people it is, I doubt not, a great relief to be able to fall back upon this conversational coinage, already stamped and polished, which makes no draft upon our intellectual capital."

Fascination of Serpents. Concerning the vexed question whether snakes are really able, as the popular belief affirms, to fascinate birds and other small animals, Gustav Le Conte abstracts in his monthly Chronique, in La Nature, September 24, the following piece of personal observation: "While out hunting one morning, I heard in a thicket the plaintive cries of a bird. Believing that a snake was probably robbing a nest, I approached. On a branch at about 30 centimeters [11 inches] from the ground, I saw a male traquet (Saxicola rubepa) which was moving its wings and head as if agitated, and crying as in despair. Even my presence did not affect it. Seeing only the bird I wonpered what was frightening it so, when in the depths of the thicket, I saw a brown snake, which was slowly, without any noise, raising its head from the ground. I waited, not wishing to lose this opportunity of gaining information regarding the pretended fascination of serpents. The reptile slowly advanced till just underneath the branch where the bird sat, and raising its head almost vertically, twisted itself into a figure 8. It was a When little viper (Vipera brachyura) quite common in Algeria. I had recognized the serpent I killed it with my gun, and the bird, which during the whole scene had not ceased to cry and flutter, flew off without even saying 'Thank you.' I carefully examined the viper and remarked that the pupil, instead of being oval and bluish-gray as in other vipers of its species, was rounded notwithstanding the bright sunlight which ought to have contracted it, and of a brilliant black. It was an old viper, for it was of great length (63 centimeters [23 inches]) and its fangs were brown; one of them had been broken and was in course of replacement by a fresh one that was just growing out. I abstain from drawing definite conclusions, but according to what I saw the serpent must really exercise some influence over its prey."-Translated for THE LITERARY DIgest.

...