OUR COMMERCIAL SUPREMACY.

HOW ARE WE TO MAINTAIN IT?

THERE is a very interesting symposium on a very important subject in the New Liberal Review for March. The subject is "How to Maintain Our Commercial Supremacy," and if the number and authority of the consultants is any measure of the gravity of the disease, we are in a very bad way. We are given the opinions of Mr. Kenric Murray, the Secretary of the London Chamber of Commerce, Mr. Keir Hardie, Sir Neville Lubbock, Colonel Sir Howard Vincent, Mr. Ernest Williams, Mr. W. H. Lever, of "Sunlight Soap," Mr. T. E. Blackwell, Chairman of the Council of the London Chamber of Commerce, Mr. A. L. Jones, and Mr. A. J. Wilson, of the Investor's Review. With such a number of contributors the contributions must needs be short, but they are not the less valuable for that.

MR. MURRAY'S VIEWS.

Mr. Murray says we must ensure our warehouse before we lay in a stock of goods. In other words we must first reform and strengthen our Army and Navy. Secondly, we must adopt a wide system of commercial education. Several of the Continental States, notably Germany, must be our models in this respect. Thirdly, we must attend to the danger which will result from the decreasing of our recuperative stores of country blood. Mr. Murray, like most of us, finds this the most difficult problem of all, and he gives no hint as to how it is to be solved. Fourthly, we must have Imperial Federation, on Free Trade principles. Fifthly, we must increase the productiveness of our labour. And lastly, we want cheap transport. The solution of this problem, Mr. Murray apparently sees in state-owned, and state-subsidised railways and steamships.

MR. KEIR HARDIE.

Mr. Keir Hardie does not believe in technical education, which is to the workman only what drill is to the soldier. Personal efficiency is not to be obtained by developing one lobe of the brain at the expense of the rest. But an eight hours' working day would cheapen production, and improve the efficiency of labour. Hardie agrees with Mr. Murray as to the nationalisation of railways, and he adds, significantly, of mines. As for expansion as a means of helping trade, of course Mr. Hardie will not have anything to do with it. He concludes:

-

Mr.

High wages, short hours, the abandonment of Imperialism and the nationalisation of raw materials and the means of transit, are in my judgment the chief means whereby our Commercial Supremacy is likely to be prolonged. Low wages and long hours, even when backed by technical education, will assuredly hasten the end.

SIR NEVILLE LUBBOCK.

Sir Neville Lubbock thinks that we ought to apply the open door" and "equality of opportunity" principles to our factory legislation, in other words, "not to handicap the producers in the interests of the wage-earning classes." Of course, we must educate :

But, while we do our utmost to improve the efficiency of every individual in the national workshop, do not let us forget that even the best equipped must fail to hold their own in the International struggle for existence if they go into the fight with their hands tied. Given "a fair field and no favour," I have a firm belief in the ability of the Britisher to hold his own against all comers. But the stress of the coming competition will allow of no artificial handicaps.

SIR HOWARD VINCENT.

Sir Howard Vincent hardly needs quotation, for he only says what he has said so often before. We must establish preferential trade with the Colonies on mutual terms, and impose a duty on foreign goods to readjust the balance. He thinks that the general sense of our people is in favour of such a policy, especially, he adds, after the events of last year. But at the same time he admits that the merchant and consuming interests are strong against it-and if we deduct these, who is left? MR. WILLIAMS.

Mr. Ernest Williams begins by saying that our commercial supremacy cannot be maintained under any circumstances. The most we can do is to maintain a large measure of commercial prosperity, for Germany and the United States will inevitably get ahead of us. As for technical education, it is by no means an all-sufficient weapon, for it could not have saved certain of our industries, such as sugar refining, which have decayed. Against such systems as the American Trust, no education will avail. The real and only remedy, he agrees with Sir Howard Vincent, is the establishment of a Customs Union. MR. W. H. LEVER.

But

Mr. Lever looks forward to the supremacy of the United States, but not till the end of the century. he does not think that that necessarily involves British decay. At the same time we are hampered by our unpractical system of education. Trades Unionism is another evil, but at the same time low-priced labour is a disadvantage. The high rates of wages in America have forced manufacturers to perfect their machinery, and increase the total efficiency of the man and machine. He says:

To my mind the sign of the highest manufacturing ability is shewn when a nation can pay the highest rate of wages in the world and yet produce manufactures cheaper than can be produced elsewhere. This the Americans are doing in many directions, and it will behove us to see that in the present century our workmen in England are better paid, better housed, and better educated; that sounder ideas of productive energy are instilled into them; that the fallacy of restriction of output is educated out of them; that they are taught to look with the greatest favour upon every labour-saving appliance that may be introduced into the work they are engaged in; that they are taught to assist as far as they possibly can by suggestions in the reduction of labour and the increase of the output, as the surest means of improving their own position. Given such conditions as these, notwithstanding that England of itself is geographically and physically limited, and is competing with the United States, which for the purposes of present expansion is practically unlimited, we need fear nothing with regard to the future.

MR. A. J. WILSON.

Mr. Wilson closes the discussion. He does not think it is any longer a question of maintaining our supremacy, but rather our equality. He regards the neglect of our mercantile navy as one of our greatest disadvantages. He says:

We require cheaper means of transport at home, higher organisation in many of our industries, a stronger feeling of comradeship among producers and merchants, and above all economy in every department of production. Unless our habits change in these respects, fear we must expect to be elbowed aside in the struggle for control of markets.

It is a very useful discussion, but the most remarkable thing about it is that education is regarded by so many men of weight as secondary to financial policy and industrial legislation. It is, of course, written largely from the employer and capitalist point of view. What would be still more interesting would be a discussion by intelligent workmen on the same subject from their point of view.

MORE MAIDEN TRIBUTE.

I REFERRED the other month to the melancholy confirmation afforded by a recent trial at Berlin as to the existence of the horrible evils to which I called attention in 1885 in "The Maiden Tribute of Modern Babylon." It would seem that in the New World the same evils exist and flourish even more shamelessly than they do in the capitals of Europe. The following extract from the New York Sun is quoted by Mark Twain in his paper in the North American Review:

The purpose of this article is not to describe the terrible offences against humanity committed in the name of Politics in some of the most notorious East Side districts. They could not be described, even verbally. But it is the intention to let the great mass of more or less careless citizens of this beautiful metropolis of the New World get some conception of the havoc and ruin wrought to man, woman and child in the most densely populated and least known section of the city. Name, date and place can be supplied to those of little faith-or to any man who feels himself aggrieved. It is a plain statement of record and observation, written without licence and without garnish.

Imagine, if you can, a section of the city territory completely dominated by one man, without whose permission neither legitimate nor illegitimate business can be conducted; where illegitimate business is encouraged and legitimate business discouraged; where the respectable residents have to fasten their doors and windows summer nights and sit in their rooms with asphyxiating air and 100-degree temperature, rather than try to catch the faint whiff of breeze in their natural breathing places, the stoops of their homes; where naked women dance by night in the streets, and unsexed men prowl like vultures through the darkness on "business" not only permitted but encouraged by the police; where the education of infants begins with the knowledge of prostitution and the training of little girls is training in the arts of Phryne; where American girls brought up with the refinements of American homes are imported from small towns up-State, Massachusetts, Connecticut and New Jersey, and kept as virtually prisoners as if they were locked up behind jail bars until they have lost all semblance of womanhood; where small boys are taught to solicit for the women of disorderly houses; where there is an organised society of young men whose sole business in life is to corrupt young girls and turn them over to bawdy houses; where men walking with their wives along the street are openly insulted; where children that have adult diseases are the chief patrons of the hospitals and dispensaries; where it is the rule, rather than the exception, that murder, rape, robbery and theft go unpunished -in short where the Premium of the most awful forms of Vice is the Profit of the politicians.

MONARCHY IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY.

MR. SIDNEY Low, in the Nineteenth Century, writes upon the part which royalty has played in the politics of the world during the last sixty years. Monarchy was not in good odour in 1837 in Europe, while in England it was less popular than it had been at any time since the latter part of the seventeenth century. A large part of England was flagrantly anti-monarchical. When the Queen came to the throne Greville noticed, as a rather agreeable sign, that the behaviour of the people" showed some amount of courtesy and interest." Outside the United Kingdom there was little loyalty, and India was fomenting with rebellion, and half its population were in favour of setting up a republic on their own account. the other colonies Great Britain was regarded as a disagreeable step-mother. The change that has been brought about since then is a veritable revolution. In the last sixty years the thrones of Europe have been occupied by a number of kings and queens who possessed considerable force of character, considerable mental and physical energy, and an unusual faculty for government.

In

These monarchs, without being men and women of genius, have been gifted with some of the best and most useful qualities which a sovereign can have. The result is that in this country there has been a most remarkable modification of feeling with regard to the royal prerogative. The throne has become the bond of empire, and in place of the old sense of suspicion and distrust there has been a growing pride in the throne and an increasing sentimental attachment to the reigning family.

On the continent of Europe the influence of the Sovereign has been quite as marked. Sixty years ago it seemed as if it would be difficult to keep several of the nations from falling to pieces. In almost every case the work has been accomplished by the personal energy and force of character, and the executive ability of the monarch. When the monarch did not possess those qualities, the State was threatened with dissolution. Two leading cases are the success with which Francis Joseph has kept Austria - Hungary together, while on the other hand we have the lamentable example of Spain. Italy and Germany have been revived and unified by strong patriot Sovereigns. Even in smaller nations it was the wisdom and character of Leopold and Christian which have done much to make Belgium and Denmark model States of Western Europe. The influence of monarchy has not been confined to Europe. The revolution in Japan, which has led almost to the creation of Japan as a modern State, was achieved by the Mikado, one of the great statesmen-sovereigns of the modern world. Mexico is nominally under a President of the Republic, but he has more authority than most constitutional kings. At the same time that monarchy has become stronger, and has achieved great results for the nations, Parliament has become weaker, and has fallen into more or less disrepute. In one Parliament there has prevailed a chronic deadlock, in another indecent violence, in a third scandalous obstruction, in a fourth a division into squabbling groups, incapable of doing business or controlling the administration. Mr. Low declares that so great has been the effect produced by the contrast between the frequent inadequacy of the Parliamentary machine and the smooth effectiveness of royalty, that the late Queen Victoria, if she had chosen, could have made use of her prerogative to an extent which would have provoked insurrection, if attempted by her predecessors.

THE CREATOR OF INDUSTRIAL RUSSIA. M. WITTE, THE REFORMER. BY HENRY NORMAN. Scribner's Magazine for March contains as its most important contribution the fifth of Mr. Henry Norman's articles on "Russia of To-day." It is entitled "M. de Witte and the New Economic Régime," and it gives a very excellent idea of the resources of Russia, and of the personality of the man who first revealed them to the world. Mr. Norman writes as an optimist; that is to say, it does not come within his province to deal with the objections, which are certainly held by a great number of enlightened Russians, to the industrialisation of Russia, and the occasionally forced measures by which it is brought about. To deal with these questions would require a much more profound knowledge of Russia than Mr. Norman possesses. But, as far as the superficial aspects, expressed in facts and statistics are concerned, Mr. Norman's article is excellent, and deserves to be studied.

M. WITTE, THE REFORMER.

It is evident that Mr. Norman has fallen under the glamour of M. de Witte. Anyone whose outlook is confined to Anglo-American ideas of economics must inevitably do so. So we get an excellent picture of M. de Witte, painted on the principle which I have always attempted to observe in my Character Sketches, "the man as seen by himself at his best moments." Of de Witte's earlier career it is not necessary to say anything. It was distinguished chiefly by energy and resolution. But it was only when he became Minister of Finances at the early age of forty-four that he was able to bring his good qualities to bear on the broader questions of Russian life. In the earlier portion of his career he had published a work on the political economy of Friedrich List, the apostle of "educational protection," or protection provisionally imposed for the purpose of developing home industries. This has been the keynote of de Witte's policy ever since.

HIS REFORMS.

M. Witte's first great reform was to stop the gambling on the price of the rouble which was prevalent in Berlin. In a single year the 100 rouble note had fluctuated from 245.10 marks to 191.50 marks. Witte boldly declared that its value henceforth was not to be below 216 marks, and brought the speculators to their knees. His next step was to establish the gold standard. This he did with equal success in 1897, reducing the amount of paper roubles issued by one-half. But perhaps his greatest undertaking is the establishment of a Government

monopoly in alcohol. This was the first of his reforms in point of time, but it is still proceeding. M. Witte's principle was that a man drinks for three reasons: first, because he has a natural desire to do so; secondly, because he is incited to do so; and thirdly, because he is given credit. Therefore he determined that nobody but the State shall make a profit on liquors. By 1904 the whole manufacture and sale of spirit within the Russian Empire will be a strict Government monopoly, and drink will be sold only by the glass, and together with food, and no credit will be given. The financial result of this reform has been already to bring a profit of £3,000,000 into the Russian Treasury. An ordinary critic might ask whether there was no danger of the State supplying inferior drink and encouraging its consumption in order to fill its coffers. But Mr. Norman does not deal with criticism.

EDUCATIONAL PROTECTIONISM.

As to the result of the educational protection policy, Mr. Norman says that the industrial turnover during the period 1893-97 was six times as great as that of ten years ago. Thus, in 1877, Russia produced 1,700,000 tons of coal, petroleum, iron and steel, whereas in 1898 she produced close upon 24,000,000 tons. M. de Witte has himself declared that this policy is as beneficial to agriculture as to industry. He has also declared himself as follows: "Abroad capital is plentiful and cheap; we must seek it there."

THE RUSSIAN FINANCES.

Now the objection of foreigners to putting their capital into Russian enterprises is the current belief that Russia is borrowing beyond her resources. To this Mr. Norman replies by saying that Russia has paid £30,000,000 off her national debt within the last ten years, and is at present paying it off at the rate of £2,500,000 a year. In regard to Russia's borrowings, he says that from 1887 to 1900 the Russian Treasury has not received from new loans a single penny of capital more than the old capital which she paid off. Russia's borrowings have been made only with the object of paying off more costly debts and for the development of her resources. He regards the apprehensions of foreign capitalists on this score, therefore, as baseless.

A MARKET FOR FOREIGN CAPITAL.

Mr. Norman proceeds to give an account of the great New Russia Company which was formed entirely on foreign capital, and is one of the most profitable enterprises in the world. He says that for foreigners with equal capacity there are opportunities just as profitable nowadays. Some of the Russian companies have paid 50 per cent. and even more. Enterprises which fail in Russia generally fail only through their own fault. At the same time he admits that industrial enterprises in Russia are hampered with restrictions which would be intolerable to English or American employers. New Russia Company has to support its own schools, take infinite precautions against accidents, and even pay a contribution towards maintaining the local Cossack guard. Taxation is also heavy, and material supplied to the Government is exposed to severe tests. The Minister of Finances fixes his own price, and the company must take the work or leave it. In spite, however, of these restrictions the New Russia Company's dividends for the last ten years fluctuated between 15 and 125 per cent.

TRADE AND THE SIBERIAN RAILWAY.

The

Mr. Alexander Kinloch contributes to the Monthly Review a paper entitled "Trade and the Siberian Railway," which is illustrated with an excellent map, but is otherwise not very interesting, except for the fact that he is extremely pessimistic as to the value of the railway for developing trade. He thinks that the waterways of the country are much more valuable. If Mr. Kinloch had examined the statistics as to the actual development of trade concurrently with the building of the railway he might perhaps have been less sceptical. His view as to the attractions of the railway for passengers is equally pessimistic. He regards the Siberian railway, like its prototype the Transcaspian, as primarily strategical.

A "LIBRARY EDITION " of Cassier's Magazine, namely, a copy of the monthly issue in cloth covers, has been issued at 2s. The cloth binding will be more serviceable than paper covers, and it may induce readers to preserve the magazines.

The tall chimney-pot hat, the flat "apple-pie" boots, the short trousers, the Bible, the long pipe, the oyster eyes, the Newgate frill, the flattened hair, are as well known as Mr. Chamberlain's eye-glass, Sir William Harcourt's chin, or Bismarck's three hairs, and lend themselves as readily to elementary caricature.

But there is in him something which cannot be caricatured, "that spark of something magnificent with which God kindles the natural rulers of men. Men recognise it gladly, at once; they follow it irresistibly; they call it Power, Inspiration, Genius . . A passion of conviction, a triumph of belief flames out of his merest words. . . . The spirit of the supernatural hovers behind his voice. He believes that God is with him, and when he ceases one believes it too." His personality "triumphs over the commonplace flesh, the slop-shop clothes, the offending spittoon, and sings a grand song of exaltation above their ugliness. If he came to England the people would listen to him. The very ruggedness of his words would attract, and public opinion would be caught up, and edified in its faith and trust, it would see God in things He has come to Europe to do work-hard, deep work. The need of obtaining arbitration consumes him to the detriment of every other interest . .

'Will no one arbitrate?" he cried to me the other day at the Hague. "Will no one give us a fair hearing, a chance of defending ourselves? We may have done wrongly; we have had our faults, our weaknesses; we declared this war, but our hands were forced-we can prove it. Let some one judge between this England and ourselves! Let some one judge!"

Bat England will not hear of arbitration, President," I said, "and we don't want a European war!"

"How can justice bring about a war?" he demanded fiercely. "We ask for light! We want the verdict of a neutral judge! We want justice, justice !"

His words, says the writer, "well up in him spontaneously from the depths of his stricken heart. He is the heavy clanging bell that voices the soul of a people. ... When he pleads for 'die Land,' when his great rough voice softens and grows like a woman's who mourns for her sick child, he rings true with the heart-throbs of his fellow countrymen

Then suddenly he casts his hands from each other, as if they "But the Lord will help us!" were rending earthly difficulties. he cried. "The Lord will help us! In the end we shall win! Be sure of it! we shall win! I do not know how or when, but it is a certainty to me we shall win. God is our strength. Worldly speaking this war is in the hands of the two Governments (the Republics and Great Britain), but God alone has it in His keeping. We shall win!"

It is quite impossible to describe the pent-up fire of his words. But this needful earnestness, this soul's conviction, soared through the jagged sentences with almost the living joy of prophecy. Here was a man who entrusted his cause to the Lord of Hosts, and shouted it defiantly to the heavens.

It was

a childlike faith in the invincibility of his ideal of “ Right" that inspired him.

He too may die blind and helpless in a land that he knows not. Good, it is God's will, and the triumph of Right and God's victory will come in His own good time.

His photographs make him older than he really looks. The homely, coarse features and the untidy beard force themselves upon the consideration, and the expression, the essence of the man, has filed before the ordeal of the camera.

When Mrs. Luden spoke to him of his wife and said how sorry she was for her, he answered :

"I am sorry for her too, I have deep sorrow for her! But I have far, far more sorrow for 'die Land.' My wife has her children-six are with her still; and the English are kind to her, they have left her in her own home. But die Land! die Land!'" And then his voice died down suddenly, and I could not look at him for the tears in my eyes.

The long lids fell over the tired, sick eyes for a moment, and then he said: "I have not heard from the wife for the last sixteen days, but she has six of her children with her, she is not to be pitied-at least, not as 'die Land' is :"

And then the prayer of his heart, the ache that runs through all his musings, burst from him again with an exceeding bitter cry: "A fair hearing! if they would only give us a fair hearing! Will no one take up our cause? Will no one help us! Justice! I ask for justice! We are a little folk, but we have made great steps-we have given much."

66

66 'England," he cried a few days ago, wanted to monopolise everything, and they have got all our monopolies, but they can't have a monopoly of freedom. They cannot take our freedom from us.”

He declared that an English dispatch was on the seas stating that nothing but force will avail" when England's statesmen came to treat with him. Two of his sons are dead, two are prisoners, one in St. Helena, one in Ceylon. He believes that two more are dead also, but thirty-one sons and grandsons of his are still in the field :

"I could not go with the commandoes-I could not." But as I have said, one must see the man, one must hear him speak, to get at the heart of his words, the passionate agony of his sorrow. Paul Kruger stands out before us now in all the hard, fierce light that a national calamity can throw upon its victims. Behind him is the din of war-the groans and misery of a dying people.

Mrs. Luden concludes her article by asking what is in store for Kruger in the future? Will he grow stone blind and deaf, and linger through years of angry second childhood, clamouring for "justice?" Will he, like Moses, die within sight of the promised land-with the joy-bells of arbitration ringing in his ears, and a “free” Transvaal stretching out before him? Will he return to Pretoria, a President again (and he would tell you that 'with God all things are possible "), but one who has learned bitter lessons, as he has given hard blows-a President with a terrible past, and a strengthened belief in the earthly punishments of God ?—

66

THE March number of Pearson's is very good-worth more space than I can give it. Especially interesting are-besides Dr. Louis Robinson's article, noticed elsewhere an account of M. Bertillon's methods of identifying criminals, entitled "The Speaking Portrait," and an account of " Wheeling on the Floor of the Ocean" in the wonderful little Argonaut, a sinkable ship-of course an American invention-destined to go down to a depth of 100 fathoms and recover lost cargoes. At the bottom of the sea she rests on three wheels which propel her over that fascinating unknown-the sea bottom. The whole article is particularly curious and interesting.

66

WHAT ENGLAND OUGHT TO DO.

BY A CONTINENTAL FRIEND.

A CONTINENTAL OBSERVER" writes in the North American Review to say what England ought to do in the present crisis. He professes himself to be a life-long friend and admirer of the British nation, and he speaks with appreciation of the moral grandeur of our people. He maintains that England has now reached the parting of the ways, and that it depends upon her decision whether she will continue to loom more and more mightily on the horizon of history or disappear in the fogs of the past. What, then, is his prescription? He gives it in a sentence. England ought to do two things—“ create a regular and well-disciplined army and secure a wellarmed diplomacy." "But England would be irremediably destined to decline if this South African war did not contain for her one of those supreme lessons which Providence gives to a land, and which is not renewed if the country does not know how to comprehend its decisive significance." That we have not been utterly defeated in South Africa was due first to the heroism of the soldiers, but above all to the complete absence of military instruction in the enemy. If the Boers had been trained in war, they could have utterly destroyed the British armies. Nothing short of general and compulsory military service can save England from destruction. As for relying upon volunteers, the volunteer camps of England, in comparison with the real military instruction, are what a boat-race is to a cavalry charge." Voluntary enlistment was all very well so long as we kept within our own borders. But when we have expanded over all the continents, it would be the rankest folly to pretend to be able to rise to our unparalleled responsibilities by the organisation of a volunteer army. He sums up a mass of absolutely competent opinion when he says that 100,000 men trained and disciplined and organised with the mathematical precision of Continental standing armies would have largely sufficed to bring the thing to a speedy conclusion.

Among other good results which would accrue from the adoption of military service in some form is that all Stop-the-War people would be summarily crushed out.

The English army, he says, should number in peace time at least 600,000 men if England is to keep herself intact, to say nothing of aggrandisement. And this Continental Observer maintains that our diplomatic service abounds with the same faults as those which paralyse our army. We have given our diplomacy a bad organisation. We have left the filling of the most important posts to caprice, to personal sympathies, or to considerations of birth. The result is the inevitable one. England has been beaten everywhere."

46

The British diplomatist possesses an insular soul which leads him to want long holidays. Every post is for him an obligatory sojourn, of which he supports courageously the load, but the weight of which he never ceases to feel." It is also diplomacy virtuous, with a rigid observance of the most austere laws and of public morality, reluctant to employ the methods in use among other diplomacies in the world. The result is that our diplomatists have been defeated over and over again. Our diplomatists possess no secret funds, hardly even the funds necessary to meet the requirements of its private police. As a result English diplomatists everywhere lost the battle.

The last point to which our adviser refers is that of Gibraltar being given in exchange for Ceuta. The rocks of Gibraltar can now be fired upon by the Spanish guns at Algeciras. To shift them out of the way, England would have to spend four or five millions, and if in

possession of Ceuta, in exchange for Gibraltar, she were to spend this sum there, she would render Ceuta the best situation for her own defence in the Mediterranean, just where Morocco threatens to become a formidable apple of discord, a danger which would then be annulled.

He finishes the article by summing up the three heads which England needs :-first, a well-disciplined standing army; second, an armed diplomacy; and third, the conquest of an ally.

WHO WERE THE LIARS?

THE campaign of calumny against the Boers is breaking down on many sides. Englishmen will ever remember with shame the slanders which passed current as gospel a year ago, but which even Jingo statesmen now completely disavow. In the March number of Cornhill another aspersion cast by mendacious "patriots" is wiped off. "Some Boer War Bulletins " is the title of an article contributed by Mr. Basil Williams, who was in the C.I.V. Battery. In July of last year he was sent with a companion to seek provisions in a deserted farm on Slabbert's Nek :-

It was a very prosperous-looking farm, stored with plenty of horses, poultry, and grain, and situated at the entrance of a very fertile-looking valley just under the hill. A certain amount of animal comforts were obtained here for the battery; and besides, as personal loot, I secured this bundle of papers, which looked as if they might be interesting.

He goes on:

They are interesting chiefly for the light which they throw on the amount of information about the war vouchsafed to Boers in scattered parts of the Free State. It has been said and often repeated in England that the most lying accounts of what was really happening were spread about to deceive the burghers; that their own victories were enormously exaggerated, their disasters concealed; and that the Boer and English losses were always set out in a light more in accordance with the Boer wishes than with the truth. These bulletins probably afford the best possible test of the truth of this theory, as they are evidently the sort of news sent to people who lived in out-of-the-way parts and had no means of verifying the truth of the statements; and it is surprising on the whole to find how accurate is the news thus given as compared with our own sources of information. He gives many extracts, and concludes :—

It is much to be regretted that these bulletins have arrived in so fragmentary a condition; but enough of them is extant to show that at any rate in the Free State the farmers were not put off with grossly untrue accounts of the state of the war, and that even in official veracity the Boer is not quite so bad as at one time the bellicose spirit of the Jingo papers thought it necessary to paint him.

A NOTABLE curiosity is supplied by the March Leisure Hour in a series of photographs taken of sleeping London by moonlight from the Tower Bridge. The exposures varied from three minutes to two hours, and the results are weird and ghostly enough. The paper is by Miss Gertrude Bacon. Gossip on cotton is supplied by Mr. W. J. Gordon. Among the benefits conferred by the cheap production of cotton, he cites the practical disappearance of rags and tatters and patches from the dress of the poor. Mr. W. J. Stevens' sketch of Zachary Macaulay leaves the impression that for ethical nobility Zachary was a greater man than his world-famous son. Sir John W. Moore gives an inviting account of a tour through North-Eastern Ireland. Mr. M. A. Morrison derives from his recently published letters a somewhat ideal picture of Bismarck as lover and husband. Dean Farrar's eulogy on the late Queen is rather disappointing.