He prefers to ask for an explanation of the fact. In 1831 the Liberal peers numbered one hundred and twenty-eight. Since then two hundred and ten peerages have been created by Liberal Governments, of which only thirty have become extinct. These figures might suggest that the Liberal peers to-day would number three hundred, instead of thirty. Why have these two hundred and seventy peers fallen away?

Lord Salisbury makes fun of the Premier's suggestion that the Upper House is a party organization ruled by party managers. The wiles of party management will hardly suffice as an explanation; for have not the Liberals had a Schnadhorst? Yet they have been left behind. The real reason Lord Salisbury finds in the fact that the party which calls itself Liberal no longer represents the principles to which the peers whom the Liberals created and their descendants considered themselves pledged. In Lord Palmerston's time, Liberals stood for-1, the established Churches; 2, the integrity of the Empire, and 3, the rights of property. As they have fallen away in these points, they have lost their adherents among the peers.

WHAT IS THE NEW SECOND CHAMBER TO BE? The following passage puts the writer's most weighty argument: "The distaste they have excited, both in respect to the rights of property and the integrity of the Empire, is a serious hindrance to Lord Rosebery's dream of fashioning a new Second Chamber warranted to exhibit Gladstonian proclivities. The classes among whom the candidates for Liberal peerages have hitherto been found have deserted his party, because of the monstrous transformation which the teaching of his party has undergone. He must dig deep and search far before he finds a couche sociale with the dispositions that he wants. I doubt if he will find it in any large abundance, unless he digs in Celtic soil. Of course, his Second Chamber may be so constructed that it will turn out to be a mere replica of the House of Commons; and in that case it will exhibit the oscillations which have marked the history of opinion in that assembly. But if it resembles the House of Commons in the origin and basis of its authority, it will insist on also possessing the same powers and the same functions. It will demand a voice in questions of finance, and the power to dismiss ministers; and it will be able to extort compliance with its demands by precisely the same methods as those by which the House of Commons in past days has built up the fabric of its own authority."

PROSPECTS OF CONSERVATIVE REFORM.

Lord Salisbury point blank denies Mr. Asquith's statement that the Conservatives have on the stocks a scheme of reform for the House of Lords, but after recalling proposals to this end supported by him twenty-five and again five or six years ago, he goes on to state that "it is very likely that if circumstances were favorable "-in the event of a sufficiently large majority being returned to the Lower House?

-"renewed attempts in this direction would be made on the same or on different lines." He considers it safe to predict that no measure diminishing the scope and importance of the present functions of the Upper House would ever be accepted by that House. Lord Rosebery apparently "means so to alter the House of Lords that it shall always defer to the House of Commons whenever Gladstonians are in office. Mr. Asquith and the other ministers wish on the other hand to enthrone the House of Commons as absolute sovereign sans phrase." The writer expects, with Mr. Chamberlain, that the struggle will be a long one, and anticipates that men will meantime closely scrutinize the Lower House which claims sole authority. They will see that "there party government is rapidly coming to mean government by an iron party machine, blindly fulfilling the bargains which its conductors have made in order to secure the votes of fanatical or self-interested groups."

SHOULD ENGLAND JOIN THE TRIPLE ALLIANCE? The Anti-English Policy of Italy.

THE

HE first place in the Contemporary Review is occupied by an article by Ex-Diplomat, entitled "Peace and the Quadruple Alliance." The writer, however, has much more to say about the shiftiness and untrustworthiness of the Italian policy with regard to England than about the peace of Europe. He begins well enough by pointing out the frightful danger which would menace Europe should war break out. He believes that such a war would not be of short duration. He says: 66 The highest probability is that the war will be long and exhaustive, exhaustive of wealth and of human life; of the finest results of civilization, as of the resources of future progress. The first results of such a struggle, prolonged, would be a general bankruptcy of all the powers involved." THE WAY OF PEACE.

The question, therefore, of how this catastrophe can be averted is the supreme question for all civilized men. Ex-Diplomat has his own particular scheme and that is: "The accession of England to the Triple Alliance, forming a Quadruple Alliance on the basis of the maintenance of peace."

He thinks that the only alternative is an English alliance with Italy and the adhesion of England to the Triple Alliance. By way of proving that the former is the preferable policy, he proceeds to set forth the unfriendliness which the Italian government has shown in relation to England. His paper is an attempt, as he says, to put "the diplomacy of Italy in relation to England, and to put the Italian diplomacy in its true light, for the benefit, not only of the English, but of all European public opinion. The machinery can be started by a very weak hand, but no one knows where to look for one strong enough to stop it. The war will end in social revolution and windfall republics."

His story is not likely to encourage England to form an alliance either with Italy or with any federa

tion of which Italy forms a part, for he has no difficulty in "showing how inconsistent toward England, but how blind to her own good, was the manner of conducting affairs adopted by that power which owed so much to English good will."

ITALY'S ANTI-ENGLISH POLICY.

66

The following is Ex-Diplomat's own summary of Italian policy in relation to England: Having done what was in its power to counteract the operations of England in Egypt, the Italian government continued to oppose the English administration of Egyptian affairs. In all the sanitary questions arising in the Levant (which are au fond political) Italy has always been in agreement with France in opposition to English views. Italy has repeatedly called on England, clearly under the instigation of France, to give effect to her promises made on assuming the administration of Egyptian affairs and to withdraw from Egypt, and instead of acting as a link between the Triple Alliance and England, has devoted all her influence to draw England into line with Paris and away from Berlin. For these endeavors of its diplomats and agents in the conferences about Egypt and the Suez Canal the Italian government received the thanks of the French."

MACHIAVELLI IN OFFICE.

Nor is it only England which has reason to complain of the uncertain policy of Italian statesmen. He says: "Under the guidance of Crispi and Robilant the Italian government has never, since Cavour, acted in good faith with any of its associates, but has leaned to France one day, and to Germany the next; England on one side and Russia on the other, according to some momentary advantage for which it hoped. It is the inheritance of the Middle Ages, the method of Machiavelli, entered into by the great majority of the public men and diplomats of Italy."

WHAT ENGLAND SHOULD DO.

The writer thinks that Crispi and Robilant can be relied upon to persist in the policy of the Triple Alliance, but in order to secure this desirable end England must help. He says: "Nothing more is needed to paralyze its action and insure the conformity of the government under any lead with the sentiment of the nation, than the placing of the issue plainly before king, parliament and country, by the conclusion of a definite agreement with England, which shall leave no ambiguity or pretext for misunderstanding the relations of the two countries, or Italy's relations to the Triple Alliance. The moral influence of England over the Italian people is such that any distinct declaration of policy by England, in the direction of consolidation of interests, would compel any possible Ministry to follow it, and insure the full adhesion of Italian parliaments to it. The position is not one to be trifled with or met by a see-saw dilettanteism, seeking to be all things to all interests, to friend and foe alike."

SHALL THERE BE WAR OR PEACE?

Ex-Diplomat sums up his point as follows? "Bismarck, long ago, expressed the opinion that the Triple

Alliance without an accord between Italy and England would not guarantee the peace of Europe. The material support of England may affect the event of a war, but her moral influence alone cannot influence the decision of the almost more important question: Shall there be war or peace? An accord once established between England and Italy would determine the relations of England with the central empires, and in all human probability the assured maintenance of peace and a final disarmament."

In the Gentleman's Magazine Mr. James Hutton writes the second part of an article on " The Balance of Power," which, although chiefly historical, concludes with an expression of opinion in favor of the gravitation of England to the Triple Alliance.

SOCIOLOGICAL STUDY IN COLLEGE.

THE

HE somewhat difficult task of mapping out a scheme of undergraduate instruction in the socalled science of sociology is undertaken by Prof. George E. Vincent, writing in the December Educational Review. Professor Vincent believes that students are now agreed in regarding society as a whole of interdependent parts; "a whole which has been naturally produced by the continuous action of innumerable forces that are still operative, effecting unceasing changes in social structures and activities.”

Assuming that this conception of the subject will be generally accepted by teachers, Professor Vincent proceeds to outline a plan of instruction which, as he says, follows not the chronological, but the pedagogical order; that is, its method is one of progress from the better known to the less known. These are the main features of his plan for college study:

66

During the sophomore year a course of lectures and quizzes should deal with the chief external traits of society, beginning with the community in which the college is situated, and extending the survey to include the State or the nation. It should be shown that knowledge about the earth, its structure, conformation, climate; about physical and chemical forces; about vegetable and animal life; about man's psychical nature; about language, all is correlated in the conception of society as a whole.

"Next, the great classes of social phenomena should be discriminated and apportioned among the different special sciences to which the students have already been introduced or will soon apply themselves. By such broad, synoptic treatment general relations will be indicated and study of details will become more intelligent.

ditions should be insisted upon. Books about phenomena should be subordinated to positive knowledge gained from personal observation. A family, village, town or city should be studied in much the same way that an animal organism is examined by the zoologist. Structures and activities should be analyzed and classified; processes of social change should be carefully observed and, so far as may be, accounted for in the light of past social experience.

"Ethics based upon the economies discoverable in the laws of social evolution or harmonized with them should follow, together with psychology, which should further explain the structural bonds and motive forces of society."

It is Professor Vincent's theory that after such training as this, near the end of senior year, students would be prepared to criticize intelligently the social reform programmes of the day. He would not encourage such discussions earlier in the course.

THE SALVATION ARMY.

N article by Prof. Charles A. Briggs in the De

history and triumphs of the Salvation Army from its formation in 1877 to General Booth's jubilee in 1894. Professor Briggs thus describes the organization of the Army:

"The Salvation Army is a religious order of the nineteenth century. The religious orders of the Roman Catholic Church assume the vows of poverty, virginity and obedience. The Salvation Army also has its vows. The soldiers are sworn in and are required to wear the uniform, to obey their officers, to abstain from drink, tobacco and worldly amusements, to live in simplicity and economy, earning their livelihood and saving from their earnings for the advancement of the kingdom of God. The officers assume more serious vows. They wear the uniform of officers, abstain from jewelry and finery, and dress in accordance with the direction of headquarters. They cannot make an engagement of marriage with any one or marry without the consent of the district officer and headquarters, and their companions in marriage must also be officers able to co-operate with them in the work of the Army. They are not allowed to earn anything for themselves, but only for the Army, and that with the consent of headquarters. They cannot receive presents of any kind for themselves, not even of food, unless it be to meet their wants when the corps is unable to give the necessary support. The maximum sum for the support of officers in the United States is: For single men, lieutenants, $6 weekly, and captains, $7; for single women, lieutenants, $5 weekly, and captains, $6; for married men, $10 per week and $1 per week for each child under fourteen years of age. The allotment in other countries depends on the cost of living. Even this sum is not guaranteed. Every officer is expected, so far as practicable, to collect his own salary in his field and perfectly understands that no salary or allowance is guaranteed to him, and that he will have no

claim against the Salvation Army or against any one connected therewith on account of salary not received by him.'

"The officers are pledged to promptly carry out all orders of superior officers and to be ready to march at short notice to any place where they are directed to go, in any part of their own land or of the world. The field officers are usually stationed in the same corps only for six months, so that they are constantly on the march. Provision is made for resignation if the officer is unable or unwilling to comply with the regulations of the Army. No one is received as an officer unless he has experienced full salvation and who cannot say that he or she is living without the commission of any known sin. It is easy to see that the organization is simple and powerful. General Booth finds as prompt obedience and as unflinching allegiance in the soldiers of the Salvation Army as the General of the Jesuits in the Society of Jesus. And for economical administration of funds it seems to the writer that the Salvation Army is pre-eminent above all other organizations."

Professor Briggs finds a remarkable characteristic of the Army in its employment of women in its ranks and among its highest officers. He also notes the fact that some of its officers have come from the higher strata of society. He shows that the existing churches, of various denominations, are gainers from the Army's work, since many of those "rescued" by the Army prefer to work in the churches. "We could no more anticipate that all the converts to the Army should be enrolled in its ranks than that every Roman Catholic should unite with one of the orders of his church. The army is essentially, therefore, a religious order, which aims at the rescue of men from sin and their salvation by Jesus Christ. It is not a church organization, and it will never become a church with the consent of the General or the present chief officers."

After giving an account of the original methods introduced by the Army into foreign mission work, the London social purity campaign of 1885 and the "Social Scheme" of General Booth, Professor Briggs presents the following statistics showing the Army's present condition. No religious organization in history, he says, has enjoyed such a marvelous growth in so short a time—seventeen years:

LATEST STATISTICS OF THE SALVATION ARMY.
Corps. Officers.

International Staff and Employes, including
Rescue, Trade and Social Staff.
Great Britain.....

Canada and Newfoundland.

United States of America..

South America..

Australia..

New Zealand.

1,159

1,210

2,981

India and Ceylon....

DR. WILLIAM R. HARPER, President of the

University of Chicago, contributes to the Biblical World, of which he is editor, the last of his remarkable series of articles on "Some General Considerations Relating to Genesis," begun in the September number. In this final installment, Dr. Harper answers the objections raised by interpreters of the book of Genesis who have ignored the human element, and by those who, on the other hand, have disregarded the divine element. We give, first, his answers to the objections advanced by those who have ignored the human element in Genesis :

"Are not the outside stories copied from the Bible stories? This position is untenable because: 1, there is evidence that some of the outside stories were in their present form before Israel was a nation; 2, the biblical stories contain upon their face the evidence of comparatively late origin; 3, this objection is based upon the supposition that there was a primitive revelation of the material contained in these stories, which has been preserved pure and intact alone in the Hebrew account. This supposition is opposed at the same time to all the historical facts involved, and to any proper conception of the development of the Old Testament religion.

"Did not Moses, according to the New Testament, write the law and is not any denial of this fact a denial of the veracity of Jesus himself? It is true that Moses organized the institutions of Israel as they had been inherited or borrowed from other nations before his time, and this pre-Mosaic element in the Mosaic system is very considerable. It is also true that in this reorganization new principles were given by Moses which justify tradition and history in ascribing his name to the system; but it is equally true that many additions and modifications were made in the centuries that followed. Should criticism prove that the larger portion of the Mosaic system, as we have it to-day, arose in a post-Mosaic period, it would not in any way contradict the representations made in the New Testament. A considerable portion of the law, upon any hypothesis, was Mosaic; the remainder grew out of the Mosaic portion and was permeated by the Mosaic spirit. The real essence of the law was Mosaic, and therefore we are justified to-day in calling it the Mosaic system.

"Was there no revelation from God before 900 B. C. This is not a fair implication, for it is distinctly maintained that the facts underlying these narratives are facts which were known to all the intervening centuries; and so far as these facts carry with them the lessons found there, revelation must be acknowledged. It is distinctly maintained that

Abraham handed down these stories in a purified form, and that the essence of the Mosaic teaching, which was revealed from God, was known to the people and after Moses' time. The acceptance of the analysis does not, therefore, bring down the date of the first revelation to the year 900 B. C. It only concedes that the present literary form of this revelation dates from about that period. A distinction must be made between the events themselves and the literary form.

How can this material be the word of God, and yet contain errors and inaccuracies? It seems impossible to take the space required for a detailed answer to this question. It will be sufficient, at this time, to note: 1, the parallelism between Israelitish history into which God entered in a special way, and Israelitish literature given above (pages 410-13); 2, the fact, universally accepted, that in the present manuscripts and versions of our Bible there are errors and inaccuracies; 3, the impossibility of supposing a priori that anything with which a human hand has had to do could be absolutely perfect; 4, that there is no necessity for demanding absolute freedom from error except as concerns religious truth.

"How can a statement be false in fact and yet ideally true? In this form the question is often asked. A moment's consideration shows that this putting of the question is a begging of it. In reply to it we may say: 1. That according to the hypothesis here presented the statements are not false in fact. It has been maintained that these statements were true in their essence. 2. That in any case care must be taken to distinguish fact and truth; there are many facts which teach no truth; there is much truth which is not dependent upon fact. 3. That even fiction has been employed in all periods of the world's history for the inculcation of the most important truth. Our Lord himself employed the parable, which is a species of fiction. 4. That the phrase "idealized history" presupposes, in the case of every narrative to which it is applied, real and genuine history. 5. That this phrase, properly interpreted. means history written for a special purpose, implying, of course, something different from and higher than history written merely to narrate or chronicle facts."

Following are Dr. Harper's answers to the objections urged by those who have ignored the divine element:

"How can it be shown that these words are not the work of a comparatively late date? This follows from: 1, their external character (including literary style and historical allusions) as compared with that of other similar stories; 2, their fundamental character in relation to the older biblical system, the beginnings of which, we must concede, date back to great antiquity; 3, their perfect consistency with the representations which they make concerning themselves.

"How can it be shown that God acted in Hebrew history as in no other? This is the teaching of the facts in the case, for if we study Hebrew history in its environment, Hebrew religious teaching in the midst of the teachings of surrounding nations, the

peculiar outcome of Israelitish history as seen in New Testament history, the institutions of Israel as compared with those of other nations, the position of Israel to-day among the nations of the earth,-there is surely no ground, from a scientific point of view, for doubting this fundamental position.

"Is there any more of inspiration in these records than in the work, for example, of John Bunyan? Because these records are the outgrowth of theocratic life, a life into which God entered as into no other, the inspiration which belongs to them is peculiar and may not be compared with that of even the world's greatest thinkers. This is something unique and incomparable. The history being what it was, the records are what they are. If, in the providence of God, there shall come another epoch in the world's history, during which he shall select and treat some nation as he did Israel of old, then, and not till then, shall we have writing to which may be accorded the same kind of inspiration that we accord to the Sacred Scripture.

"Is the predictive element sufficiently specific to prove anything? Yes. Even upon the supposition that these predictions come from a period not earlier than the eighth or ninth centuries B. C., we find in them evidence of a knowledge of the future development of the history of the human race which cannot be explained except upon the ground of the revelation from God. Prediction, to be sure, is and must be general, and these predictions may be said to be generic in each case. It remains true, however, that although generic, the details are of such a character as to make it impossible that they should have been uttered without some peculiar knowledge of the divine plan, or at all events of the principles which underlie that plan.

"Cannot the superiority of the Hebrew stories be accounted for on purely natural grounds? The effort to do this has been made many times, but always without success. It is just as great a mistake to throw out the supernatural element and try to explain everything from a purely natural view as it is to throw out the natural element and try to explain everything from the supernatural view. There is, without question, natural development, but in connection with this and permeating it through and through, there was a divine element. If we allow this divine element to be recognized as one of the factors, then everything may be said to be natural. It is impossible, however, to explain the presence of certain elements in Hebrew history and narrative, or the absence of the same elements in the history and narrative of contemporaneous nations, without asking why, if in the former case it was natural, it does not appear also in the latter?

"If these stories are divine why do men, Christians as well as skeptics, so largely fail to recognize the divine element? No one will deny that few people, comparatively, believe in the historical or even the religious value of these stories. This does not disprove the divine element in them. It shows merely that these people deny a particular current interpre

tation of these stories and that the world supposed that in the denial of this particular interpretation there is also a denial of the divine element in them. All this is wrong. A reasonable view of the narratives will receive acceptance. It is because men have been expected to adopt a thoroughly artificial and monstrous interpretation that they have been compelled to deny the divine element. When the real facts of the material are presented, and the true philosophy of the divine element is understood, men will no longer hesitate to accept these chapters as an organic part of the divine word with which they are connected, and they will no longer make their unbelief in these chapters an excuse for their unbelief in the Bible as a whole.

JOURNALISM IN THE METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

HE system under which the weekly papers of the

cially supervised and conducted is imperfectly understood outside of that connection. Much light is thrown on the matter by Dr. Theodore L. Flood, writing in the December Chautauquan. Few persons have any idea as to the amount of capital invested by Methodists in their periodical press. Dr. Flood estimates it at $2,500,000, exclusive of buildings and equipment. The combined circulation of the weeklies he estimates at 250,000. The General Conference every four years elects the editors of the Christian Advocate (New York), the Western Christian Advocate (Cincinnati), the Northwestern Christian Advocate (Chicago), the Central Christian Advocate (St. Louis), the Pittsburg Christian Advocate, the Northern Christian Advocate (Syracuse, N. Y.), the California Christian Advocate (San Francisco), and several other papers at various points. Dr. J. M. Buckley, editor of the Christian Advocate, at New York, and Dr. Arthur Edwards, of the Northwestern Christian Advocate, have held their positions for nearly twenty years. Dr. Charles Parkhurst, of Zion's Herald, at Boston, holds his place by the suffrage of the New England Wesleyan Association. Other prominent editors in the church are Dr. J. B. Young, of the Central Christian Advocate ; Dr. D. H. Moore, of the Western Christian Advocate; Dr. C. W. Smith, of the Pittsburg Christian Advocate; Dr. B. F. Crary, of the California Christian Advocate; Dr. Jesse L. Hurlbut, editor of Sunday school periodicals; Dr. J. F. Berry, of the Epworth Herald, and Dr. Wm. V. Kelley, of the Methodist Review (New York). Even the editors of the "unofficial" papers, of which there are many scattered through the country, must answer to the Annual Conference for errors in doctrinal teaching, or for "inveighing in any degree against the established organization." The business management of these journals seems to be entrusted to the Methodist book agents very largely. Dr. Flood suggests that each paper should have a business manager of its own. He also advocates a weekly paper at a dollar a year, illustrated.