Entered at New York Post Office as Second Class Matter.
Published Weekly by the

FUNK & WAGNALLS COMPANY, 18 and 20 Astor Place, New York.
London: 44 Fleet Street.
Toronto: 11 Richmond Street, West.
Subscription price, $3.00 per year. Single Copies, 10 cents.
Renewals.-Two weeks after the receipt of a remittance, the extension of the
subscription will be indicated by the yellow label on the wrapper.
Discontinuances.-The publishers must positively receive notice by letter
or postal-card, whenever a subscriber wishes his paper discontinued.

N

In reply to your question asnt, I can repeatyny wpassibility

of a universal disarmament, I can repeat only what I have already said-for example, in my book on "The Present Position of European Politics"—that the unfortunate annexation of Alsace-Lorraine by Germany in 1870, contrary to the will of the inhabitants, rendered it impossible for a haughty and unbending nation like France to accept the results of the war as final.

But for this annexation I am convinced that in France, where the sentiment in favor of peace is widely prevalent, the sting of defeat would have gradually disappeared without thought, of revenge. As the matter stands France

must remain armed, and persistently seek a closer alliance with Russia. This necessarily forces Germany to a continued increase of her forces. Italy might reduce her land forces, and even withdraw from the Triple Alliance, without inducing any change in the general condition of affairs. She might be perfectly assured that such reduction would not tempt any foreign Power to assail her, for in such case she would, of course, ally herself with the other side, and strengthen its forces by her stately fleet. In passing it may be observed briefly, that England, for her own interests, might be tempted to protect the neutrality of Italy. Apart from Italy, any question of disarmament on the continent of Europe is, in my opinion, out of the question under existing political conditions. The best that we can immediately hope is that the armed peace will endure as long as possible. No effort of the Peace League could influence Germany to restore the annexed provinces, and even if Germany were so disposed, I fear that after all that has occurred, this alone would not influence the character of the future. This is a sad outlook; but we should deceive ourselves if we were to paint the future in brighter colors.

II.

LIEUTENANT-GENERAL VON BOGUSLAWSKI.

Sir Charles Dilke repeats the charge frequently heard abroad, and especially among the Radicals, that the annexation of Alsace-Lorraine is responsible for the existing increased armament and general state of unrest which prevails in Europe. Sir Charles Dilke's assumption that, but for the annexation of these provinces, France would have maintained peaceable and friendly relations with us, is a purely arbitrary one, opposed to every historical principle. I ask: Did France exhibit any such peaceful disposition after 1815 when her boundaries were left undisturbed? Did she not instigate the war-rumors of 1840, and the Luxembourg Deal of 1867? Did she not demand German soil from Bismarck in 1866 and finally force an unprovoked war upon us in 1870? Non-Germans, in calm philosophic mood may possibly give such a verdict as Sir Charles Dilke's. Were Sir Charles a German he would express different views. It is only the unpatriotic Social-Democracy, among us, that insults Germany by stamping the annexation of Alsace-Lorraine as a robbery.

He who appeals to the sword severs all treaty and international rights subsisting between him and the foe; and must consequently accept the arbitrament of the sword. The new international conditions are based on the Treaty of Peace.

The defeated, after a resort to the sword, can never again appeal to the relations which existed before the war. That France gave the provocation is a fact that none but a few Social-Democrats have ever called in question. That she really gave the provocation has recently been confirmed by an analysis of the confused Ems Dispatches. If we had again forborne, as in 1815, to insist on the restoration of these old German provinces, it would have been equivalent to a concession that France enjoyed the privilege of attacking other countries without incurring any risk of forfeiture, while she, on the contrary, after her victories asserted the right of annexation as a matter of course. The German people were unanimous through a thousand channels for the reclamation of the provinces previously wrested from us. Peace without annexation was simply unthinkable.

That the conquered provinces had a better right to decide on their own future by popular vote than the conquerors—that is monstrous. The disarmament of Italy by land and her withdrawal from the Triple Alliance, which Sir Charles Dilke advocates, would probably result in precipitating war. Cer

tainly both sides would leave Italy in peace, rather than provoke the hostility of its navy; but how would it be with Italy after the war, especially if France were the victor? At the Treaty of Peace she might expect precisely such treatment as Prussia experienced in 1856 at the Peace of Paris-she would become a vassal of France.

"

As to any participation in the war, by England, on the side of the Triple Alllance, Sir Charles Dilke does not appear to think. In 1891, I met an Englishman at Geneva who remarked to me: England's interests in the Mediterranean and in Egypt imperatively demand that, at the outbreak of hostilities, England shall at once ally herself on the side of the Triple Allies, and she will do so." This is also my view. If the Triple Alliance should be defeated, the English would then soon see whether they could maintain their hold in Egypt or not. A general belief that England would join the Triple Alliance at the outbreak of hostilities would afford the best possible guarantee for the maintenance of peace.

In Sir Charles Dilke's views as to the impossibility of a general disarmament, I entirely concur. The suggestion that Italy should nevertheless disarm, is the less intellegible and smacks of a French friendship à tout prix, engaged in for no other object than to place England herself in an unfavorable position.

TH

THE HOME-RULE BILL.
JUSTIN MCCARTHY, M. P.

Condensed for THE LITERARY DIGEST from a Paper in
Nineteenth Century, London, March,

HE Home-Rule Bill, in my opinion, will pass the House of Commons this session. But I do not expect it to pass the House of Lords this session. The Peers will no doubt reject it. Some people talk about the possibility of a dissolution in consequence. There will be no dissolution. Nothing is less likely than that Mr. Gladstone would allow the Peers, by any action of theirs, to decree a dissolution. The Bill, when thrown out by the House of Lords, will, in all probability, be brought in again in an Autumn session, and by the time it passes the Commons there will have been agitation enough in the country to induce the House of Lords to think twice before entering on a second veto. The reception which the Bill has got thus far is very satisfactory to Home-Rulers. The Bill is not all that I would have. Its financial clauses, in the judgment of my friend, Mr. Sexton, who has a perfect genius for finance, are anything but satisfactory, and would oblige the Irish Legislature to impose new taxes in order to do any useful work. I have naturally the strongest objection to seeing Ireland started on her course of self-government with a financial arrangement that threatens at the very outset something like early national bankruptcy. But there is no reason to doubt that the financial arrangements can be considerably moderated in the future; and of one thing I am certain, and that is that the Liberal constituencies throughout Great Britain have not the slightest desire to be niggardly in their dealings with Ireland.

The one great and crying demand of the Irish people is for a measure which shall allow them to manage their own domestic and national affairs. The Irish people are anxious above all things that England should take her centralized government off the neck of Ireland. They are willing to welcome any measure which gives them, under almost any restrictions, the real government of their own affairs. They are sick of being governed from Westminster. Therefore they welcome Mr. Gladstone's Bill because they believe it will do that much for them. They do not trouble themselves greatly about the Veto, and neither do I. Something must always be taken on trust. They have a quiet conviction-and so have I-that the Veto will never be exercised with any wanton and vexatious purpose.

I prefer very much the arrangement about the Second Chamber in the present Bill to the arrangement about the

Second Order in the first Bill. But I believe it is inevitable that we should have a Second Chamber; and, if we must have, I do not see how we could have it under a better arrangement. Of course, I do not like the idea of a second and a. larger franchise. But if you want to have what may be called a superior Chamber, you must have some condition of superiority. I do not know that we can do anything better than to accept the principle of the franchise "of a rateable value of more than twenty pounds" in the election of members of the Irish Legislative Council. I wish the Chambers were not. called "Legislative Council" and "Legislative Assembly." I would rather have it, as in Canada, a Senate and a House of Commons; but I believe there was uneasiness about the House of Commons, and uneasiness even about the Senate, and therefore we have come to Legislative Council and Legislative Assembly.

I am not fond of large representative assemblies, but I think a Chamber of 103 is rather a small proportionate number for Ireland. I do not particularly object to the reduced number of Irish representatives in the Imperial Parliament. I do think that the whole number of Irish representatives ought to be kept up until the Land Question is either settled in the Imperial Parliament, or relegated to the Parliament in College Green, Dublin. But, human nature being what it is, I fancy that there will be no settlement of the question at Westminster.

As to the financial question, the defects pointed out by Mr. Sexton are serious objections. They are made by a man whois as anxious to pass the Home-Rule Bill as I am, but who is a master of his subject, and cannot help seeing difficulties when difficulties are in the way. I can only hope that the difficulties may be got out of the way, and can only repeat my conviction that the English constituencies have not the slightest desire to be niggardly with Ireland, or to turn her out in her new life, like Chaucer's Griselda, in nothing but her smock. I think that a man might stump the Liberal constituencies of England, Scotland, and Wales, from end to end, and make the appeal that the new Irish Parliament should not be turned out by Great Britain as a pauper Parliament, and find not one single No given to his appeal.

THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS. Translated and Condensed for THE LITERARY DIGEST from a Paper in Deutsche Rundschau, Berlin, March.

ΒΥ

Y advices from San Francisco we learn that a revolution has broken out in Honolulu, the chief city of the island kingdom of Hawaii; that the reigning Queen, Liliuokalani, has been dethroned, and a provisional government established. Simultaneously, the Queen has issued a manifesto protesting against the violence to her queenly dignity guaranteed by treaty, and emphatically asserting that she forbore resorting to force in the hope of being reinstated in her rights. It is said also that, under instructions of the American Ambassador at Honolulu, the marines belonging to the American warship stationed there were landed, and that a special commission from Honolulu has reached Washington to urge upon the Government of the United States the absorption of the Hawaiian Islands.

The importance of these islands extends far beyond America. Important English interests, and by no means inconsiderable German interests, are involved. This is sufficiently indicated by the numbers of the settlers belonging to those three nations. At the close of 1890 there were 1,928 American residents, 1,348 English, and 1,034 German. In the period of greatest prosperity the total exports amounted to 48,000,000 marks yearly, and the imports to some 20,000,000.

Moreover, the independence of the Hawaiian Islands has been guaranteed by treaty with several European Powers since nearly forty years ago. It may, hence, be assumed that neither England nor Germany can remain simply indifferent to Amer

ica's latest display of lust of annexation. In fact, it is already reported that England's representative at Hawaii protested against American interference. Most recent advices, too, imply that the American Ambassador in Honolulu played no passive rôle in the present revolution, that he has already proclaimed an American protectorate over the islands, and that President Harrison has forwarded a message to the Senate to consider the project of annexation.

For us Germans the occasion calls for the consideration of other island groups in the Pacific Ocean, and especially of Samoa. While in Hawaii German interests rank only third in the order of precedence, they rank first in Samoa. These islands owe their trade and colonization to German pioneers; moreover, the greater part of the business undertakings in Samoa are in German hands. Both the Samoan and the Hawaiian groups enjoy a splendid position, healthy climate, and most luxurious fertility.

Samoa was declared neutral under the protectorate of the three Powers-the United States, England, and Germany. Hawaii is for the moment the plaything of English and American interests. That these islands should be simply annexed to the United States, is more than England, or even Germany, could concede offhand. Should, however, England and America make pretensions for a definite protectorate over the Hawaiian islands, it may constitute Germany's opportunity for securing Samoa as the price for her consent to the proposed arrangement. But if America make pretensions to a sole protectorate, Germany and England will surely be justified in stipulating that America withdraw all pretensions in respect of Samoa, a measure that would considerably simplify the government of those islands.

But as matters now stand it appears by no means improbable that all these combinations will be brought to naught. In contradistinction to her predecessor, Queen Liliuokalani has ruled the islands prudently; the heir-apparent, Princess Kaiulani, has been brought up in England, and has doubtless won English sympathies, and this, together with the fact that there is a strong royalist party in the islands inimical to the proposed changes, will not improbably result in the Queen being reinstated in her rights.

In conclusion, just one word more concerning the strategic importance to the United States of the establishment of a naval harbor and coaling-station on the Hawaiian Islands. On the one hand, it would secure America's maritime influence against Canada directly, and indirectly against England and the Australian colonies; on the other hand, in the event of a war between America and an Asiatic Power, the possession of a naval harbor within seven days of San Francisco and ten days of Yokohama, would be of immense strategic importance. That America is preparing to develop a naval power commensurate with her rapidly growing maritime interests is evident from the restless energy with which she is pushing forward the augmentation of her warships and naval material.

Compulsory Voting. It is proposed, by some writers, to make the neglect of voting a misdemeanor punishable by fine and, possibly, imprisonment. This is a very doubtful expediency. Criminal laws have never shown themselves to be very efficacious in procuring the performance of moral and social duties, and there is no reason to suppose they would be more potent in enforcing political ones. There is a mode by which most of our delinquent citizens could be induced to perform their political duties. That mode is to abate the taxes by, say, five or ten per cent., of every man who could show that he had attended the primary meetings and the elections for the current year, and had voted for some candidate. This would be an indirect punishment to those who did not so qualify themselves for the abatement, and it, would not require the intervention of a jury to inflict it. The plan proposed may, at first, secure the performance of the duties in a careless, perfunctory manner; but in time the voter who begins by voting merely to save his money will soon find himself acquiring an interest in the business apart from that feature of it, and will gradually come to act from the higher motive of serving his country.-JOHN A. BROMALL, in Annals of the American Academy, March.

SOCIOLOGICAL.

WOMAN'S CLUBS IN AMERICA.

A SWEDISH WOMAN'S ESTIMATE OF THEM. CECILIA WORN.

Translated and Condensed for THE LITERARY DIGEST from a Paper in Dagny, Stockholm, 6th häft.

́OMAN'S clubs play a part here in New England of which you have no idea in Europe. By Woman's Clubs you must not understand such clubs as are seen in England, with reading, reception, and dining-rooms, and all the other club characteristics, such as men have arranged for their exclusive benefit. Such clubs for women are not to be found in Boston. They are more like the Swedish ball-clubs for general use and improvement. "Sorosis" of New York is said to be the mother to all other woman's clubs. In Boston they say that to the "New England Woman's Club" belongs that honor. However, in America they must have clubs, and scarcely any village or small town is without one. How the ladies of Boston manage to belong to several such clubs is a mystery that perhaps only can be solved by the "higher intelligence" of the "Hub." The natives wonder and the foreigners laugh.

The clubs in America may be divided into two classes, reading-circles, and clubs for amusement and instruction. Readingcircles are, of course, of use where libraries are to be found. They usually take up a subject and dwell upon it, sometimes a year or more, till it has been "read up" from all points of view. In some places the reading-circles resolve themselves into " writing-circles," at the end of the course; i. e., the various members must write a paper on the subject, and read it at some stated meeting. Such writing-circles are useful and worthy of all respect; but where they are composed of members who are indifferent, or who are ignorant, the literary productions are beyond all criticism. I have been present and heard lectures, so-called, on the origin of Gothic art, on Leonardo's mystical art-notions, etc., which were perfect caricatures. The only redeeming feature of the lecture was the excellent photographs shown-but, of course, the lecturer did not make them nor the works of art which were presented. One would think that the women of the United States were the custodians of American love and knowledge of art. The most prominent subject for reading and writing in these clubs, I found to be the "History of Art." But, let me be just. Perhaps they do not always read or write about art. I know of a Shakespeare Club, which meets weekly, but Shakespeare is read only once a month. Perhaps these Art clubs, Tolstoï clubs, Reading clubs, Thursday Morning clubs, etc., are very broad and liberal. Who knows but that Dress Reforms, etc., are discussed once in a while. Shakespeare's own words might apply to the club that bears his name: What's in a name? A rose by any other name would smell as sweet."

"

But there is another group of clubs for woman which are worthy of all respect. I know of three such in Boston. The "Woman's Press Association" is a club for newspaper women, and has a clearly defined programme. I attended one of their dinners at the Parker House (they have no club-house), and The enjoyed myself very much. New England Woman's Club" is known for its lectures. The best talent in the country lectures there once a week. This club's monthly supper is quite remarkable: coffee, two slices of beef-tongue, and bread and butter is all that is served. Mental food is placed above anything else. Julia Ward Howe is president. A prominent characteristic of the club is the receptions given to prominent women who come to Boston. The Women's Educational and Industrial Union" has a large programme, “to meet the needs of women." These needs are met by reading-circles, night-lodgings and midnight-missions. The Union has large rooms, reading-rooms, and restaurants, and maintains classes for instruction in housework and all kinds of female work. This club gives free lectures once a week like all other