Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

be compared with the indirect losses consequent upon hindrance of trade and disturbance of old-established business-relations."

In Hamburg's wretched quarters 18,000 persons were stricken last year between August and the middle of October, and 7,600 of the patients died.. Of course this fearful mortality was due chiefly to the corruption of the watersupply. But the social and sanitary conditions among the poorer classes of people contributed greatly to give the plague its extraordinary malignity. Accordingly it is not to be believed that other cities presenting similar conditions could fare much better than did Ham

HOUSE-ENTRANCES IN STEINGASSE.

burg if the cholera

should secure a firm
foothold in them.

The Illustreret Familie Journal of Copenhagen prints some interesting photographs of Hamburg dwellings and by-ways (which we reproduce), with vivid descriptions. At first glance these pictures do not reveal anything so very terrible, yet Dante's words might be fittingly written over their portals.

"The Steingasse is a broad and airy street, in which are many new buildings and large business-places. It runs from the heart of the city. Though comparatively short, it gives houseroom to 30,000 beings. It is in this thoroughfare that the next outbreak of the cholera is looked for.

"One of the Steingasse houses (No. 22 of that street) is represented in our illustration. A man of medium height cannot stand erect in the doorway, which measures only twenty-five inches outside. The hallway

is a little more than thirteen feet long, and leads to a so-called yard. This 'yard' IS SO narrow that one walking through it can touch the house-walls on either side. It serves to separate three-story tenements, some of them inhabited by more than a hundred people.

[ocr errors]

'Not much better are the conditions in Niederstrasse, running parallel with Steingasse. In the house at No. 22 (represented herewith) live eight families - fifty persons altogether. In this house there were three choleradeaths and two other

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]
[ocr errors][merged small]

are even worse. House No. 45 contains twenty-two families (125 souls). Seven died from cholera there, and nine others were carried away sick.

"

These houses are only specimens of hundreds as bad, or worse. The people (the children particularly) seen in these parts are pictures of misery."

OFFICIAL STATISTICS OF DEATHS FROM CHOLERA IN GERMANY.. The peculiar severity of Hamburg's affliction, in view of the comparative exemption of other European cities, is strikingly shown by the official statistics of deatns from cholera in Germany recently published by the German Government. These statistics (as quoted in the London Lancet for Dec. 31) makethe total number of deaths in the Empire 8,510, of which 7,614were in Hamburg (equal to about 1.22 per cent. of the city's population). Berlin had only 15 deaths, and there were only 892 in all Prussia, In Altona, a suburb of Hamburg, 328: persons died, and in Harburg, another suburb, there were 102 deaths.

DR. SHAKESPEARE ON NATIONAL QUARANTINE.. In the Forum for January, Dr. Edward O. Shakespeare, PortPhysician at Philadelphia, argues at length upon "The Necessity for a National Quarantine.". He expresses radical views on this subject, and not only urges that national supremacy in the control of quarantine is necessary, but adds that

"Harmony in provisions of law relating to quarantine in the United States, in Canada, in Mexico seems indispensable for the full protection of our extensive northern and southern frontiers, and our National Government should be strongly urged to obtain proper conventions with the Canadian authorities relating to such an important matter of common interest, and with the Mexican Government.'

SERIOUSNESS OF THE CHOLERA DANGER.

Of the seriousness of the cholera danger, Dr. Shakespeare: says:

[graphic]
[ocr errors]

.

It is a well-known fact that in the past, whenever cholera has obtained a foothold in Europe, it has never disappeared from that continent in less than from three to ten years. While the cold of winter has usually been sufficient, apparently, to exterminate the disease in most parts of Europe, yet it has always remained dormant in other portions of the continent which have less severe climates, to reappear with renewed virulence at the approach of the next warm season. We have no reason to believe that this. visitation of Europe by cholera will prove an exception in this.. respect to the rule which heretofore has had no exception. The mode of assault of a nation by cholera may be compared somewhat to the attack of the rattlesnake, which usually sounds a noteof warning before striking his fatal blow. The history of cholera-. epidemics shows that threatened peoples, as a rule, receive ample warning of danger. We have received our warning. Let it be followed by the enactment of such national legislation this winter as will render our defenses doubly secure against the danger of an invasion next summer."

[graphic]

LAX vs. RIGID QUARANTINE.

The most interesting portion of Dr. Shakespeare's article is his reply to those who deprecate very rigid quarantine systems, and favor the English policy of local sanitary and hygienic precautions as against the plan of severe marine quarantine. On this point he writes:

"England has for fifteen or twenty years expended thirty millions of dollars a year (exclusive of, and in addition to, large expenditures made by the general Government, for this large sum has.. been expended by local boards) within her compact small terri-tory, located as it is out of the main line of movement of the hordes of infecting emigrants constantly leaving all parts of Europe, and outside the latitudes which favor the existence of yellow fever. After the United States of America shall have intelligently spent at least an equal sum in the persistent effort to improve the hygienic surroundings of the homes of a population. already nearly twice as great as that of England, and scattered over a territory thirty-four times as extensive, we may reach a condition of public health in which it will be wise to abandon maritime quarantine and to rely mainly upon a perfect local. hygiene.

"While it is true that to remove the local conditions which favor the development and spread of diseases is to lessen greatly their harmfulness, it is none the less undeniable that to destroy the infecting agent or to prevent its entrance into the country is to render the harvest of death and destruction impossible, let the soil be never so fertile. Furthermore, the cost of preparing to wage a successful combat against the entrance and spread of disease among thousands of scattered villages, towns, and cities. would be indefinitely greater than the cost of placing our ports in.

a nearly perfect state of defense against those diseases which are now subjected to quarantine.

"As an example of what it costs, and of the time required to improve radically the hygienic conditions of a single dirty city, I would point to what has recently been determined upon with regard to the city of Naples, which suffered so severely from cholera in the epidemic of 1884, namely, the demolition of 17,000 houses and 62 churches in the very heart of the city, This means the expenditure of over $40,000,000 in a single sanitary work which cannot be completed in less than ten years; even then only a beginning will have been made of the radical removal of unsanitary conditions for which Naples is notorious."

THE SENATE QUARANTINE BILL.

The legislation desired by the advocates of Federal quarantine is now well under way. Last Tuesday the Senate passed without division a Federal Quarantine Bill which authorizes the Supervising Surgeon-General of the Marine Hospital Service, under the direction of the Secretary of the Treasury, to coöperate with State quarantine officials, and which gives the President "power to prohibit, in whole or in part, the introduction of persons or property from such countries or places as he shall designate, and for such period of time as he may deem necessary." The Bill is regarded as practically vesting the Federal officials with full authority over quarantine matters, in case they choose to exercise such authority.

The quarantine discussion has turned not only upon the question of Federal control, but upon the expediency of continuing to enforce the very severe measures against vessels from infected ports that were applied last fall in the port of New York against the Normannia and other liners from Hamburg. Various newspapers (notably the New York Evening. Post) have urged Federal control as a means of putting a check upon the rigid policy of the New York quarantine officials during the coming year. These journals entertain the hope that the Secretary of the Treasury, if clothed with power, will not sanction prolonged and undiscriminating detention of cabin-passengers; and they view the Senate Bill as an excellent measure for reassuring those foreigners who would be glad to visit the World's Fair but would hardly care to take the risk of encountering the same vexatious quarantine policy that was enforced last year in New York harbor.

ENGLAND ADHERES TO LAX MEASURES.

England seems to be thoroughly committed to the very liberal quarantine methods referred to in Dr. Shakespeare's article. The Lancet for Dec. 24 publishes the proceedings of a conference of the medical officers of English ports, called by the Lord Mayor of London. "The question of quarantine," says the Lancet," was very summarily disposed of. Dr. Davies, of Bristol, moved that the detention of vessels having no sickness on board, merely because they came from infected ports, was unjustifiable. This resolution was supported by Dr. Mason, of Hull, by Dr. Armstrong, of Newcastle, and by others, and was unanimously adopted. From the public-health point of view quarantine against cholera in British ports has, we trust, now received its coup de grace."

[ocr errors][merged small]

One of the first Bills introduced upon the assembling of Congress last December was Senator Chandler's for the suspension of immigration. A mere statement of Senator Chandler's proposition is sufficient to show its radical and unprecedented nature, and to explain the uncommon and continuing prominence of the discussion of the immigration question. After the New Orleans lynchings, there was much said for a time about restricting immigration; but even that discussion, though exceedingly earnest, is not to be compared with the present one.

Senator Chandler's object is nothing less than to suspend immigration entirely for a year.

His argument for suspension, as presented in a comprehensive article by him in the North American Review for January,

is based on the dread as to cholera and the necessity of protecting the interests of the World's Fair. He urges that the only reasonable way to keep out cholera entirely is to stop immigration altogether.

"The most eminent authorities assert that the suspension of all immigration is the best way to keep out the cholera. Many believe that it is the only reasonable, safe method. It is not believed that the cholera germs are now here, although it is possible they are. There will be another outbreak of cholera in Europe; indeed it has already appeared there. If it come to this country, it will be brought with the immigrants in the steerages of the steamships. There is no serious danger from cabin-passengers coming as visitors.

"It is certain that there is to be some cholera in Europe. If there is also to be cholera in the United States, Europeans will not come here. If, however, it can be made tolerably certain, as it can, by the suspension of immigration, that there will be no cholera in the United States, foreigners will come here in large numbers. It will be the safest place for them to visit, indeed it will be the only place in the world which they can visit where they will be reasonably sure to avoid cholera."

Chandler

The advocates of the Chandler Bill, however, have a fartherreaching purpose than the temporary protection of the country from disease. The cholera danger affords an occasion for agitating the anti-immigration policy on its merits.

"We may go on for years under the present laws," writes Senator Chandler, "without coming to an agreement which will take the shape of new laws of Congress. We need to bring the subject to a head by taking advantage of the temporary suspension of immigration, made necessary by existing circumstances. All persons now discussing the subject of further measures of restriction can agree as to a temporary suspension of immigration, although they differ as to what new methods of restriction should be permanently adopted the sentiment varying from the advocacy of a system almost amounting to the exclusion of new settlers, to plans which would very little, if at all, increase the stringency of the present laws.

"It is highly advisable to bring the debate to a close, and to determine our fixed policy as to immigration. The debate will end, and decision will be reached, if one year's suspension can be preliminarily agreed upon."

POLITICAL.

IS THERE LIKELY TO BE WAR IN EUROPE THIS YEAR?

EVERYTHING BEARING on the tremendous question of the expected war in Europe is of profoundest interest and importance on both sides of the Atlantic. The Statist, the views of which always command attention, in the article which follows, puts with great force the pros and cons of the subject as they appeared at the end of 1892.

A

The paper from the Nouvelle Revue, in maintaining that the Triple Alliance is substantially at an end, indirectly, though not explicitly, comes to the same conclusion as the English journal. M. de Cyon is vouched for by the Revue as an authority on the subject about which he writes, and he avers, as will be observed, that about two years ago he submitted to the Emperor of Russia a memoir advising a course which, in his view, has rendered the Triple Alliance impotent for evil.

The writer in the Preussische Jahrbücher evidently takes a directly opposite view from that expressed in the English and French publications, although his opinion can only be inferred from what he says.

THE EUROPEAN POWERS.

The Statist, London, December.

REMARKABLE pamphlet—said to be official—has been published in Germany, which sets forth very clearly the present military strength of the five great powers. In 1870, when the war broke out, we are told that Germany had 104 battalions of infantry, 130 squadrons of cavalry, and 400 guns more than France. Now France has 70 battalions of infantry, and 276 guns more than Germany, the cavalry of both States. being about equal. These figures show how extraordinary,

have been the efforts made by France to recover her old position in Europe; and, if we are to believe that the organization and discipline of the French army are equal to those of the German, and that all the necessary stores and materials have been provided, then unquestionably France at the present moment would be superior to Germany were war to break out. Furthermore, the pamphlet goes on to say that were war to break out, Russia and France can put into the field a million men and 1,700 guns more than Germany and her two allies. These figures are certainly remarkable, and cannot fail to have an influence upon public opinion in Germany. Whether they will break down the opposition to the new Army Bills remains to be seen; but unquestionably it will be difficult for the German Parliament to refuse the increase, if it be really true that the Triple Alliance is at so great a disadvantage, both as regards the numbers of men and guns, compared with France and Russia. Of course, it is to be borne in mind that Russia has to hold in check many neighbors. She is exposed to attack not only in Europe, but in Asia; her people is not homogeneous, and there may be at any moment a revolt, either in the Caucasus or in Poland, or elsewhere, if she should be unsuccessful in the field. It is also true that mobilization is difficult, slow, and costly in Russia; and, lastly, it is true that distances are great, and that armies cannot be thrown upon a given point rapidly, as in Germany and France. Still, if the fact be that Russia and France together can by a mighty effort bring a million more men into the field than Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy combined, the position is not one that can be acceptable to the German people, and it will be difficult for the German Parliament to refuse to grant what the Government requires.

The Military Bills have excited fears that the German Government is looking for war in the early spring, and the excitement caused by the Panama scandals has added to the fear; while the publication in Austria-Hungary this week of a secret dispatch, addressed in May, 1877, by Count Andrassy (then Minister for Foreign Affairs) to Count Beust (then Austrian Ambassador in London), is certainly not calculated to allay the apprehension. In effect, the dispatch states that under no circumstances can Austria-Hungary allow Russia to occupy Constantinople, to dominate Bulgaria, to annex Roumania, or to hold Servia. Further, it goes on to say that the establishment of a great Slav State in the Balkan Peninsula at the expense of non-Slav elements could not be tolerated. Naturally, people think that a dispatch of this kind would not be made public now if there were not a political motive. Ostensibly it is done to clear the memory of Count Andrassy; but, really, people believe it is a warning to Russia and to those Balkan States that are likely to be united by Russian influence. If the Austro-Hungarian Foreign Minister thinks it necessary to give such a warning in such a manner, then unquestionably the situation is grave. Yet we cannot believe that war is likely to break out in the spring; firstly, because the Triple Alliance will not begin the struggle, and, secondly, because Russia is not prepared for it. There is impending a great commercial crash. It will be odd, indeed, if the Russian Government chooses a time of famine, commercial crisis, and financial discredit abroad for beginning military operations.

There is one other reason for hoping that the danger of war is exaggerated, and it is, that what is going on now in Paris is calculated to remind the French people of what happened when the last war broke out. Every one will remember that the Minister of War of that day declared to the Emperor that France was prepared-even to the buttons on the soldiers' gaiters and that when war came it was found that nothing had been prepared. The garrisons had not been provisioned, and the military stores had been plundered. If it be really true that the public men of France are better than the crew that surrounded Napoleon III., still can there be any assurance that the money voted so plentifully for the army and navy has

been more conscientiously spent than it was under the Empire. Of course, we are not assuming that the charges made against French public men are true-we hope most sincerely that they will be all disproved. What we are pointing out is, that the mere fact that the Chambers have allowed five Senators and five Deputies to be charged with such grave offenses, is in itself calculated to make Frenchmen pause and feel a doubt whether they are really as well prepared for war as hitherto has been supposed.

THE END OF THE TRIPLE ALLIANCE.

E. DE CYON.

Translated and Condensed for THE LITERARY DIGEST from a Paper (7 pp.) in La Nouvelle Revue, Paris, December 1.

IN

'N view of the feeling manifested in certain political circles by rumors of a reconciliation between Russia and Austria, and of a projected meeting between Alexander III. and Francis Joseph, it is useful, nay, indispensable, to explain precisely what these rumors amount to.

It is true that there was a project of a meeting at Skiernewice between the sovereigns of Russia and Austria during the month of September last. The ceremonial of the reception had been arranged in all its details, and the guard of honor for the illustrious Russian visitor had been selected from the regiment of dragoons in garrison at Kalisch, commanded by the brilliant Colonel Bistram.

At the last moment, the journey of William the Second to Vienna and some sudden opposition cunningly made at Pesth put obstacles in the way of an interview. Yet neither the .unseasonable intervention of the Emperor of Germany nor the rain of decorations which fell on the Count de Taaffe has been able to prevent the reconciliation between Russia and Austria becoming an accomplished fact, the happy conclusion of which was the reception given to the Czarevitch at Vienna. France, let me make haste to say, cannot but congratulate herself on an event which, under the circumstances that have produced it, must be considered a direct consequence of the Franco-Russian understanding.

I speak without hesitation about this reconcilation between Russia and Austria, because I was the first, and even the only, person in Russia to advocate it at a moment when the relations between the two Governments had taken an almost open character of hostility, and no one in Europe appeared to doubt that the conflagration which was destined to embrace the entire Continent would break out on the Russo-Austrian frontier. In February, 1890, I had the honor to submit to the Emperor of Russia a memoir, the contents of which are indicated by its title: As to the Necessity and Possibility of a Reconciliation Between Russia and Austria." At that time there was need of a certain courage to be the champion of a thesis so paradoxical in appearance, and which shocked, not only the routine ideas of our diplomacy—about which I cared nothing but the most deeply rooted sentiments of my political friends, the representatives of Russian nationalism.

The whole history of Russia is a protest against dissension between herself and Austria. The Russian sovereigns, who were truly great, Peter I., Catherine II., and even Nicholas I., regarded a good understanding with Austria as indispensable to enable Russia to accomplish her task in the Orient. It was only under Alexander II. that considerations of relationship between the Russian and Prussian royal houses and the recollection of the part played by Austria during the Crimean War, caused the Russian Government to incline towards Prussia in the incessant squabbles between that Power and Austria. Prince Bismarck applied all his infernal cunning to widen and deepen every day the abyss between St. Petersburg and Vienna, and that, too, at a time when the Dreikaiserbund seemed to unite the three Courts closely.

I have not the right to disclose here the considerations of political and military order which were the base of the

memorandum which I submitted to my sovereign. The time at which I submitted it was favorable to the project I recommended. This will be admitted by every one who recalls the events of the year 1889 at Pesth, the struggle of the Hungarian opposition against the German policy of Tisza, which threatened to terminate in insurrection; the significant attitude of the unfortunate Archduke Rudolph, and the establishment at Vienna of an organ of the military party, which openly demanded a reconciliation with Russia and also with France.

With his sound judgment and his keen perception of the true interests of Russia, Alexander III. signified plainly his wish that the cordial relations with Austria of former times should be reëstablished. The indolence of certain Russian diplomats and the routine ill-will of others retarded the execution of the designs of the Czar. It is to be regretted that the Court of Prussia succeeded in preventing the meeting of the two Emperors at Skiernewice. Numerous explanations, however, exchanged between the two Governments had already dissipated distrust and scattered the clouds which had accummulated. The heir to the Russian throne, representing his father, came to Vienna, and had interviews with the Emperor Francis Joseph and Count Kalnoky, and it may be said that a complete understanding was reached by the two Governments in regard to questions on which there had been a difference of opinion.

All that, it may be urged, does not prevent the Treaty of the Triple Alliance existing. Doubtless, and Francis Joseph is not the man to be false to his signature. In diplomatic conventions, however, the agreement as to the ends to be pursued is everything, and the written stipulations amount to nothing. In so far as the Treaty is an arm directed against France and Russia, it has ceased to exist, since it became impossible for William II. to put Austria and Russia at loggerheads, in order to assure Germany and Italv full liberty of action against France.

To sum up, the Triple Alliance, while continuing to exist as a matter of law, is substantially annulled in its aims and its consequences by the reconciliation between Russia and Austria. This is clearly understood both at Berlin and at Rome. The best proof of its being so understood is the ardor with which William II. engaged in his campaign for the increase of the German army immediately upon his return from Vienna.

THE INTRODUCTION OF THE ARMY BILL.

Translated and Condensed for THE LITERARY DIGEST from a Paper (9 pp.) in

Preussische Jahrbücher, Berlin, December.

THIS SUBJECT was broached by the same writer in the November number of the Preussische Jahrbücher. After commenting on the officially reported strength of the Russian army, which on a peace-footing amounts to 987,000 men, of which only 100,ooo are in Asia, and remarking that this is almost equal to the united forces of the Triple Alliance, he says:

BUT

UT leaving out of sight the comparative number of the opposing forces, seeing, as I remarked in a previous paper, that conclusions drawn from them are subject to qualification by numerous other considerations; and turning our attention to the relative increase we find very serious food for reflection. The Russian army has been increased from 800,000 to nearly a million, while Germany's increase has been only from 468,000 to 486,000 men. Who, having these figures, will undertake to oppose an increase to our army-reserves—well, what would be done with him if the news of our overthrow in the field should come, and he should attempt to vindicate himself by pleading: “But I saved each of you I mark 20 pfennigs (40 cents) a year?"

The fundamental idea of the Army Bill now brought in by the Government is broad, simple, and clear. It is absolutely impossible for a State like Germany, threatened by two such powerful nations as France and Russia, to annually exempt * Vide THE Literary DigeST, Vol. VI., No. 6, p. 144.

40,000 eligible young men from preparation for participation in the coming struggle. That they have been exempted hitherto is bad enough, but in the natural order of events the time must inevitably come when the Government will say, "We cannot assume the responsibility any longer." The Nation wants an army so admirably organized, and exercising its functions with such vitality, that, in the space of two years, it shall be capable of converting the raw recruit into the perfect soldier; it is only by so doing that it will be enabled to impart military training to the entire young manhood of the Nation, and develop German military resources to their highest possible capacity. Who can oppose anything to this demand? Was it not more than a mistake, was it not a moral wrong, that 40,000, and, counting those who furnished substitutes, 60,000, young men, have been annually exonerated from the greatest and most imperative of all duties-one to which their friends, brethren, and comrades are all subjected? Is it not more than a mistake, is it not a crime, in the face of the immeasurable dangers which confront us, to have any portion of our strength unutilized, when it is seen that it can be advantageously availed of? The measure is in full accord with the military requirements of the country, and the most prudent administration.

The writer, here, after passing in review the attitude of the Reichstag, appealing to the teachings of history, arguing for the necessity of a nation adapting itself to the special conditions which confront it, and criticising the action of the Government limiting service to two years by constitutional provision when it is thoroughly understood that if a recurrence to the three years' period of service should be found necessary it will be resorted to, goes on to say:

The situation in many respects reminds us of the great military conflicts of William I., but there are many points of difference which render the problem far less difficult for the present Emperor than for his grandfather. The opposition against the present military proposal is peevish; in the days of William I. it was passionate. In those days the military conflict was at the same time a fight for constitutional powers, and, hence, insoluble. To-day it is a mere question of 30,000,000 marks or 60 cents a head of the population. To suppose that the Nation cannot endure this burden is ridiculous. There is not a servant-maid, not a laborer in the land, so poor that he could not contribute his quota, if it were imposed in the rude form of a capitation-tax. But there are many more rational methods of direct and indirect taxation by which the burden may be met and rendered endurable.

[ocr errors]
[merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

Why France is a Republic.—More than forty years ago, in 1849, when France was a Republic, and there were hopes in Spain, then in a state of turmoil, that Republican institutions would cross the Pyrenees and be established in the Iberian Peninsula, a great orator, Señor Donoso Cortès, uttered in the Parliament at Madrid words which are worthy of reflection: "All who have traveled in France agree in saying that there is not a Frenchman who is a Republican. I myself can testify to the truth of this assertion, for I have visited that country. It will be asked, however, if there are no Republicans in France, how is it that a Republic exists there. No one has given a reason for this, but I will give one. The Republic exists in France, and will continue to exist there, because it is the neces

sary form of government for a people who are ungovernable." Doubtless, between the period when these words were spoken and the present, time, habit and the rising tide of democracy have produced differences which must not be overlooked. Doubtless, also, the accession of the Empire appeared to belie the predictions of Señor Cortès. And perhaps it would not be rash to assert that the France which was thought to be ungovernable is the easiest of all nations to govern. With these reservations, nevertheless, the opinion delivered by the Spanish orator is one of those profound observations which suit all countries and all times, and of which it is not permissible to say: What is true on one side of the Pyrenees is false on the other side!-Louis Joubert, Le Correspondant, Paris, December 25.

An Italian View of the Panama Canal Scandal. It is not easy to foresee how this scandalous affair of the Panama Canal will end. Every one perceives, however, that it will leave behind through all France an ugly scar, and a deep irritation against that handful of insatiable wretches who, in order to support the expense of unbridled luxury, use every means which will enable them to amass money without work and fatigue. There are too many of these shameful affairs which nourish the blind fury of those who have nothing, and who not infrequently are wrestling with hunger, which urges them, through sheer despair, to violent means. Undeniably France, notwithstanding the attractive appearance she presents to foreign countries, is sick. In no way has she been bettered by the change from Imperial to Republican government. The vices that were eating her away before are still at work in her; the unrestrained cupidity, the immoderate and openly exhibited luxury, the reckless and visible prodigality, reduce almost to zero the excellent qualities of the French who live in the country, who work with ardor, who save with perseverance, and who yet throw away two billions on a foolish enterprise like that of the cutting through the Isthmus of Panama. Between one thing and another, the Nation, despite appearances to the contrary, is getting on miserably.-Nuova Antologia, Rome, December.

SOCIOLOGICAL.

SOCIALISM: VARIOUS ASPECTS AND VIEWS. RODBERTUS'S SOCIALISM.

N the December number of the Journal of Political Econ

from the point of view of Rodbertus's presentation of it, and pronounces the subject deserving the most thoughtful and careful study. At the outset, however, he is careful to assert that Socialism as represented by Lassalle, Bebel, Liebknecht, or the Zurich Social Demokrat, is unworthy of serious consideration. "Personal liberty and the opportunity for untrammeled individual development," he tells us, "are the best products of civilization." But on this point Rodbertus was thoroughly orthodox. Indeed our essayist recognizes in Rodbertus an economist of no mean ability, whose character he respects, while regarding his remedial proposals as fallacious. Of his system he says:

"To do full justice to Rodbertus's philosophy we should have to rethink his criticism of society as now constituted economically. He tells us, what every reflecting person knows, that there are dreadful insanities in existing economic arrangements. Only far more impressively than any of us can do without long and hard study, he sets forth the height, depth, and sweep of these evils, and tries to show that they are not necessary to the good connected with them, and often made their apology.

"Panics, he tells us, are the necessary consequence of faulty and inequitable distribution.

"Other crying vices of economic life, as now regulated, are riches without merit, poverty without demerit, men forced to serve men, cross purposes in production inducing infinite waste and injustice, idle wealth that might be aiding industry, but is not, fraud in

[merged small][ocr errors]

'Rodbertus proposes a remedy for the correction of this terrible depravity in our economic relation. Its ideas are few and simple, but sweeping. Practically they reduce to two.

66

One is that the State shall own and administer, as the universal entrepreneur, the two essential aids to human production, viz., land and capital proper. Wealth, destined for personal use, though produced by the State, could be purchased and be subject to private ownership. The other is that everybody would be employed by the State and paid according to the character of his work in labor-time-money. The prices of all things to be fixed and stated in terms of the same medium.

"In issuing this labor-time-money, or certificates to pay labor, the hour or day of ordinary, unskilled labor is to be taken as the unit, and all forms of skilled labor to be reduced to a common denominator with this, by accurately ascertaining the time and cost required to master those higher forms.

[ocr errors]

Each product of labor, on the other hand, is to be stamped with the number of hours spent on its production, the skilled labor, if any, being reduced to its equivalent amount of simple labor."

Having stated Rodbertus's views in some detail, the author passes on to a shrewd criticism of the difficulties of reducing the system to practice, and concludes as follows:

66

'Finally, let the Socialist deny or disguise it as he will, his ordering of our economic life would certainly dull energy, repress personal initiative, and level humanity downward a good way while leveling it up, as it might, a little. The whole administration of Socialism must be a process of lumping and arraying, wherein the best men would be mulcted for doing their best, and the poorest not mulcted for lagging behind and taking things easily. Socialists tell us that in their millennium no charity will be given. They cannot, however, mean to let the honest victims of accident or misfortune starve. And how will fraud upon the eleemosynary fund be prevented then more than now? There can be no mistake the thrifty will continue to be the prey of the thriftless. Without an entire transformation of human nature, no system of Socialism yet devised offers any relief that cannot be had by other means; while any such resort must threaten evils the most dire and desperate."

SOCIALISM AND THE REPUBLIC.

"Modern Socialism," says Jean La Rue Burnett, LL.D., in the American Journal of Politics, (January), "is the protest of human nature against fifteen centuries of cruelty and superstition." He then goes on to argue that its outbreaks have been most violent wherever human misery has been greatest and the rights of man least respected. His remedy is the Great Republic, where the explosions of fanaticism, so disastrous in the Old World, lose their force under the free and life-giving administrations of the Republic, of which he presents the following graphic picture:

"In a country where individual freedom is assured, where the mind can expand to its fullest extent, where press, pulpit, and platform are free from the vexatious control of the censor; where Pagan, Jew, Catholic, and Protestant stand equal, where no landaristocracy controls the supply of food, where every citizen can live and die under his own roof; in such a country, the discontent of the few is drowned in the blessings of the many, and we need not fear the Republic's dismemberment by political faction, nor be alarmed lest her sons trade in the blood of socialistic strife."

SOCIALISM AND THE STATE.

In the same Magazine, Mr. J. W. Smith treats the matter of Socialism in the Republic as a much more serious matter. Summing up the philosophy of history as the evolution of the individual man from a condition in which he was but a mere monad, too insignificant to claim recognition, to a condition of joint sovereignty; he regards with alarm the ominous cry of Collectivism; and describing Communism or Socialism, as he sees it, stripped of the poetic garb in which its devotees have bedecked it, he denounces the dream of such a state as the sheerest lunacy. There are evils undoubtedly, but the law can remedy them. (Mr. Smith, by the way, is a member of the Pennsylvania bar.) Speaking of what he deems the selfishness of capitalists and the ignorance of the laborers he says:

"The great lesson to be taught to both capital and labor is the consideration due to brotherhood and humanity on the one hand,

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »