« PreviousContinue »
THE COLONIES AND NAVAL DEFENCE.
PLEA FOR AN IMPERIAL CONFERENCE IN 1895. “ The Imperial Federation (Defence) Committee,” an offshoot of the lately departed Imperial Federation League, pleads in the National Review for a juster recognition by the Colonies of their responsibilities to the Empire. While the United Kingdom has been paying £18,000,000 a year for the Navy, which defends the whole of the Empire, the North American and South African Colonies have not spent a farthing, and Australasia undertakes to pay some £200,000-on local defence only.
The proportion, therefore, contributed to the Naval Defence of the Empire by the people of those Colonies represents 23d. in every £l so spent. Or, viewed another way, their contribution per head of population is tļd. against 98. od. per head contributed by the people of the United Kingdom. Nor can allowance be made on the score of disproportionate
The self-governing Colonies, which thus contribute to the maintenance of the Navy that protects them and their property throughout the world just one-ninetieth part of its cost, enjoy among them revenues amounting to £13,000,000, very nearly half that of the United Kingdom, which finds the remaining eighty-nine ninetieths, in addition to supporting the Army and the Diplomatic and Consular and other Imperial services.
THE FIRST STEP.
“THE UNITED ANGLO-SAXON WILL."
WHAT IT MIGHT DO FOR THE WORLD. The distinguished foreigner, "Nauticus,” who usually plays the severe critic to our naval arrangements, has been roused by the presence of the Chicago in these waters to a vision of large hope for Great Britain, America, and mankind, and has revealed it to the readers of the Fortnightly Review. He laments that our blindness, ignorance, and indifference in respect to the United States render both us and the United States far less powerful for good than we ought to be. “It divides and weakens the expression of the Anglo-Saxon will—the will which ought, I am persuaded, to have upon the world in the future an even greater influence than it has had in the past.” He characterises the present endeavour of the two Powers to stand aloof from the affairs of other nations as not a dignified position for either great English-speaking Power.
The dignified and the beneficent position would be one of controller of events. It would be worthy of Great Britain and the United States, and well for all other countries, if you were able to say to Europe, as it stands now armed to the teeth : “ Only by our leaye shall you fight; and if you fight, only with our permission shall the victor keep his spoils." And because the united Anglo-Saxon will might do this and much more, it is sad to see Great Britain and the United States wasting their opportunities and imperilling their mission by trying to cultivate the fiction that they have different objects in life and need not closely associate one with the other.
SOUND THE KNELL OF WAR." It is in the utilisation of sea-power in its various aspects that the two countries may best co-operate and assist one another in the future. If they were to conie, as they surely will come, to an understanding to employ their combined naval forces for the preservation of general peace, and for the forwarding of the common interests, few countries, no matter how belligerently inclined, would care to defy the alliance, even now; and none would dare to question its will after it had re-arranged its forces in frank recognition of all its responsibilities. It is not merely that the combined navies would be strong. Far more weighty are the considerations that the British Empire and the United S:ates share between them nearly all the work of providing other countries with the food, raw material, and manufactures, which those countries cannot provide at home, and of carrying the ocean-borne trade of the world. The interests of your ever-growing commerce require the maintenance, if not of peace, at least of open ports everywhere. Why should not your combined navies declare : * We refuse henceforth to acknowledge the right of any civilised power to close her ports, or the ports of another power, by blockade, or otherwise.” Surely that would sound the knell of war!
A POWER THAT CAN BE TRUSTED. "Nauticus" advances the project because he believes that “the world can afford to place its confidence in the integrity and fairness of the Anglo-Saxon race," and that if that raco were all-powerful no other race would be oppressed. “For the sake of peace and disarmament, it seems necessary that some superior Power should be created”; and this would be the Power least likely to abuse its position.
I think that the happy future of Great Britain, of the l'nited States, and of the outlying British Empire, depends upon the realisation of such a dream. I think that the accomplishment of the Anglo-Saxon mission in the world depends upon it. I think that civilisation and peace would profit by it.
When even foreigners begin to dream such dreams, it is time that the English-speaking man began to take the matter up in earnest.
After rebutting the Colonial arguments for exemption ---such as, that the Pacific Railway is Canada's contribution to Imperial defence—the Committee proceeds to urge that
It is for the people of the United Kingdom to call upon their own Government to afford to their countrymen in the Colonies the opportunity of taking their just share in the cost and in the administration of the finest defensive force in the world. At the present time the responsibility for the precarious state of things which now exists owing to this question never having been faced lies with the Government and people of this country. Let the case be fully stated, and the Colonies invited to consider a fair proposition. If after that the Colonies, or any of them, upon mature consideration decide to decline the offer, they will, in effect, be taking upon themselves, with their eyes open, the full responsibility for any deficiency there may be in providing for the safety of their countries and their
At the same time, having thus once put the case before the Colonies, the United Kingdom will be relieved of the moral responsibility which, until that has been done, still devolves upon it, of itself making complete provision for their defence.
The committee regards the Ottawa Conference--met to press a cool request for a subsidy of £75,000 from the Home Government--as a golden opportunity for raising the whole question of contribution to naval defence, and for announcing an Imperial Conference on the subject in London in 1895.
The case for Canada and its alleged share in Imperial defence is forcibly put by Sir Charles Tupper in the Journal of the Royal Colonial Institute, and vigcrously debated in the speeches thereafter reported.
In the Newbery House Magazine Catherine Holroyil begins a story on “The Seething Days of the Sixteenth Century," the scene of which is laid in Wimbledon. The article which most calls for attention is Samuel J. Eales' historical inquiry into the portraits of St. Bernard of Clairvaux. There are ten portraits and one picture of the saint. The proprietors of the magazine offer summer prizes for amateur photography.
WANTED: INTERNATIONAL HISTORIES.
BY PROFESSOR SEELEY. In the Contemporary Review Sir J. R. Secley has the first place with an article entitled “ The History of English Policy." The gist of it is that to properly understand English history we ought to study it in connection with the hi of other nations of the Continent besides France, and that English policy abroad is as much worthy of study as the development of our constitution at home. He says there seems occasion to apply a doctrine of relativity to English history. The people of England must be studied in relation to people who live outside England. We have formed too much the habit of regarding each state as if it were, in a manner, watertight, whereas there are few subjects so rich and fruitful as the history of the intercommunication of states. Hence he comes to the conclusion that we should have such a department of study as International History. If we would read our history worthily and see the part we have played in the general development of the world, we ought not to make ourselves more insular than we are. As a matter of fact, we have, in all periods, exerted a strong influence upon the Continent and received powerful influences from it. Eoglish policy should have histories to itself in which English foreign relations should be treated by themselves and for their own sake, and not buried in the midst of other matter. We ought to have a Stubbs and a Hallam for English foreign policy, who would set it by the side of English constitutional history.
Such a history of the policy of modern England divides itself into periods, one of which is a long duration of war, covering all the eighteenth century and fifteen years of the nineteenth. After that there is a different period, in which the policy of the modern great Power is in embryo. In this embryonic period three international personages stand out, which link England with the Continent. These are Queen Elizabeth, Oliver Cromwell, and William III. In their careers England is closely interwoven with the Continent. We cannot understand Oliver Cromwell's foreign policy, for instance, without understanding the position and policy of Mazarin, of Gustavus of Sweden, and of Philip IV. of Spain. Speaking of the original policy of the Lord Protector, Professor Seeley says :
It was not for nothing that he made England a military State. He intended the navy and the army, upon which his supreme power rested, to execute far-reaching plans which he had conceived. He had a passionate anti-Spanish feeling, and he had a great Panevangelical idea, such as might naturally have grown up in a mind which united so strangely religious exaltation with comprehensive statesmanship. He pushed these schemes far enough to leave an indelible mark on English history; but if, instead of dying at sixty, he had reached the three-score years and ten, still more if he had anticipated the aged Premiers who recently have been seen ruling England at four-score years, we can see how far British policy might have heen deflected from the line it has actually pursued. This is to suppose that the military state had struck root and had endured ten or twenty years longer in England than it actually did. In that time, it is easy to see, the anti-Spanish passion might have carried us far and the Panevangelical idea might have borne strange fruit.
The article although brief is very suggestive and fall of material for thought. There is in it a germ for the writing of a whole library full of books, the compiling of some of which ought to afford Lord Rosebery an interesting and useful occupation after the next General Election.
THREE YEARS IN NYASSALAND.
By H. H. JOHNSTON. In the New Review Mr. H. H. Johnston, the Governor of our colony on Lake Nyassa, gives a very interesting account of what he has done and of wbat he hopes to be able to accomplish. The native population of the eastern half of British Central Africa numbers about three millions. Last April there were 247 British and 18 other nationalities, defended by 200 Sikhs and 40 Aralıs. There are now fourteen steam vessels plying upon the waters of British Central Africa, and over a hundred sailing boats, barges, and steam launches. The exports and imports in 1890 were £20,000 a year; they are now £100,000. The revenue of the Protectorate has gone up from £1,700 to £9,000. The missionary societies have increased from four to seven, and the area under European cultivation from 1,250 acres to 7,300. There are three newspapers in the country, and a literary society at Blantire. There are, however, no hotels or banks. There are sixty miles of good road between Katunga and Zomba, with bridges. There are four million coffee trees plante:in the Shire province all coming from a sickly little coffee tree which was brought out from Edinburgh. Coffee-planting is very profitable, planters making as much as a hundred per cent. Living is cheap, sport is ample, the scenery is magnificent, labour plentiful, but the climate is not good. Two-and-a-half per cent. of the European inhabitants die every year of malarial fever. Blackwater fever is especially to be dreaded ; it only differs from yellow fever in not being so deadly, and not being infectious or contagious. Tsetse fly is disappearing as cultivation spreads. Horse sickness is a more serious difficulty. More than seventy-five per cent. of the natives are friendly and supporters of the British administration, but the slave-traders hate us. As for the Arabs, they must go, every one, and never be readmitted. The negro will do most of the heavy work; but for intelligent labour which needs to be executed under British supervision, Mr. Johnston would import coolies from India. He says:
One seeks the solution in the introduction of a yellow race, able to stand a tropical climate, and intelligent enough to undertake those special avocations which in temperate climates would be filled by Europeans.
There can be little question as to the yellow race which is called upon to take a share in the Tridominium of the eastern half of Africa: it is the Indian-the Sikh, the Parsi, the Hindu, the Hindi, the Khoja, the Mennon, the Kattshi (Cutchee), the Goanese, and the Tamul. The Arab is condemned as hopelessly lazy, arrogant, ignorant, vicious, and unskilled. The Chinese is an undesirable immigrant for many reasons, which it is not necessary to specify, and besides does not appear to be well suited to the African climate. The yellow race most successful hitherto in Eastern Africa is the native of Hindustan—that race in divers types and of diverse religions which, under British or Portuguese ægis, has created and developed the commerce of the East African littoral.
The immigration of the docile, kindly, thrifty, industrious, clever-fingered, sharp-witted Indian into Central Africa will furnish us with the solid core of our armed forces in that continent, and will supply us with the telegraph clerks, the petty shopkeepers, the skilled artisans, the cooks, the minor employés, the clerks, and the railway officials needed in the civilised administration of Tropical Africa. The Indian, liked by both Black and White, will serve as a link between these two divergent races. Moreover, Africa, in opening this vast field to the enterprise and overflow of the yellow races of the Indian Empire, will direct a large current of wealth to the impoverished peninsula, and afford space for the reception, in not far distant homes, of the surplus population of Southern Asia.
COXEYISM AS A PORTENT.
SOME AMERICAN OPINIONS. The North American Review for June publishes three articles upon Coxeyism by three representative Americans, all of whom take a very serious view of the extraordinary movement which I described at length in the last number of the REVIEW.
THE PERSISTENCE OF THE AGITATION. Major-General Howard, writing on the significance and the aims of the movement, says:
The Coxey movement is unique in its inception, different from any other in the history of our country, and, indeed, quite unlike ordinary revolutionary experiments. The attempt to affect United States legislation by organising the unemployed into peaceful hosts and marching them, without previous furnishing of supplies, by the precarious means of begging their way for hundreds of miles, to the Capital, appears to ordinary minds the height of absurdity. Yet notwithstanding an almost unanimous press against their contemplated expedition, notwithstanding the discouragement by members of Congress with hardly a dissenting voice, and all legal checks put upon them by State and United States executive power. Coxey's first contingent is already in Washington, Kelly's from San Francisco at Des Moines, Ia.; Frye's, organised in Los Angeles, Cal., is in Pennsylvania ; the Rhode Island body, calling itself a delegation of unemployed workmen, has passed New York; and many other companies under different designations are organising, or have already accomplished miles en route.
GENERAL FRYE'S MANIFESTO, There is nothing in General Howard's paper that will be new to our readers, with the exception of what may be considered as his quotation from the State paper of General Frye:
His constitution was adopted at Los Angeles, Cal., March 5, 1894. In the preamble to his constitution he sets forth his followers' causes for complaint: First, in the form of epigrammatic statements, viz. :“ the evils of murderous competition; the supplanting of manual labour by machinery; the excessive Mongolian and pauper immigration; the curse of alien landlordism; the exploitation, by rent, profit, and interest, of the products of toil-have centralised the wealth of the nation into the hands of the few and placed the masses in a state of hopeless destitution."
Second, by questions:-
(d) “Why is it those who do the nation's work are forced to choose between beggary, crime, or suicide in a nation that bas fertile soil enough to produce plenty to feed and clothe the world, material enough to build palaces to house them all, and productive capacity through labour-saving machinery of 40,000 million man-power and only sixty-five million souls to feed, clothe, and shelter ? "
The purpose of the movement is then expressed, recognising the fact that " if we wish to escape the doom of the past civilisation, something must be done, and done quickly. Therefore we, as patriotic American citizens, have organised ourselves into an Industrial Army for the purpose of centralising all the unenıployed American citizens at the seat of government (Washington, D. C.), and tender our services to feed, clothe, and shelter the nation's needy, and to accomplish this end we make the following demand on the Govornment:“1. Government employment for all her unemployed
citizens. “ 2. The prohibition of foreign immigration for ten years." “3. That no alien be allowed to own real estate in the
A COURT OF ARBITRATION WANTED. General Howard endeavours to comfort himself by reflecting that Coxeyism is not so serious as the revolutionary movement in Europe, but he thinks that something should be done. He says :
It seems an absolute necessity that the holders of capital and labour should come to a cordial, mutual understanding; and certainly the day is not far distant when there will be a competent tribunal established by our Congress to adjust questions of difference and secure co-operation without resorting to the dangerous and costly methods of strikes and peremptory discharges.
A POLICEMAN'S ALARM. Mr. Byrnes, Superintendent of the New York police, takes an even more serious view of the situation. He says that the movement is the most dangerous that the country has ever seen since the Civil War. If there is no law to check it, he thinks that one ought promptly to be passed, for the movement is illegal, un-American, and odious, and should have been put a stop to long ago. Coxeyism is spreading the socialistic doctrine that the majority may be ruled by the minority; and if it is carried out much further, the United States will fall into a chaos in which mobs will be fighting mobs everywhere. He points out that the Coxeyites in Montana mobbed a United States marshal and his deputies, captured a train on the Northern Pacific and started east, compelling the railway company to clear the track in order to avoid a frightful collision. A United States regiment had to be called out to seize them.
A DOCTOR'S FEARS. Mr. Doty, Chief of the Bureau of Contagious Diseases, calls attention to the danger to public health that is involved in Coxeyism :
It is easy to understand that as a means of increasing contagious diseases throughout the country, Coxeyism is an agent of the most vicious type.
With the following practical suggestion Dr. Doty concludes his paper :
It seems strange that, while religious and other societies, philanthropists and rich men, are cudgelling their brains to find the best method of improving the lowest class, the important necessity of public baths should not occur to them. These should be built on a large scale, with every possible convenience, even a barber's shop, where a tramp could occasionally have his hair cut and face shaved, which luxury he is at present deprived of. The baths should always be opened and made attractive. When this is done there will be fewer Anarchists found, and fewer hospitals needed.
AN OPTIMIST'S COMPLACENCY. In marked contrast to General Howard and Superintendent Byrnes, Dr. Albert Shaw, in the American Review of Reviews, says that the Coxey march was a diversion which has helped to relieve the strain of the industrial depression and maintain the national cheerfulness. Alinost everybody has looked on the stealing of trains and the dodging of marshals with
amusement than solemnity. The Coxeyites, he says, are merely bands of American pilgrims bound upon a fantastic and adventurous journey, and afford a fresh evidence of the elasticity of the American spirit,
COMICAL VIEW OF ENGLISH COLLECTIVISM. The Secretary of Agriculture, in the North American Review,devotes several pages to demonstrating the wickedness of the Coxeyites, who, he says, may be regarded as the offspring of the Protective system. He says that their fundamental principle is to violate public faith, and
thereby proclaim the Americans to be a nation of liars to show that the great majority of civilisea men do not and cheats.
starve or perish miserably before they have reproduced The proletariats say they are in pursuit of work, but so far their kind--which, according to Prof. Haeckel's version of they indicate only a desire to work” Congress for special the cosmic process, is the inevitable fate of the great legislation, as the Protectionists have for, lo, these many years. mass of mankind. How ludicrously Americans can fail of a true insight
SOCIALIST VIEW OF NATURAL SELECTION. into Coxeyism and kindred phenomena receives striking Not that natural selection and the population question illustration in an article by Mr. W. N. Black in the
have no meaning for the Socialist. On the contraryEngineering Magazine. Coxey is the unconscious repre
He asserts that among gregarious animals, in particular sentative of "imperialism—the other name for paternal
civilised man, there is little, if any, evidence of the intraism,” which is now in enlightened countries “at its last
group struggle for existence playing an important part. He gasp." But it is making a strong effort to persuade men believes that the protress of man has depended in the main on in European lands that it may yet be useful :
the minimising of this particular factor of natural selection, in Hence, also, the craze for a corresponding absorption by order to emphasise the action of another factor-extra-group government of industrial functions in England, for the English
selection. He admits to the full the continuous action of man is generally a very sensible being until you touch upon physical selection at the present day, and does not see how the the permanency of the monarchy, and then he becomes as intiuence of this factor will be diminished by increased erratic as any Don Quixote. All his efforts looking to enlarge
socialisation of the State; in fact, he conceives that its effects ment of municipal powers by the invasion of industrial fields, will be more uniform and widespread than ever before. Less and all his longing for government possession of the railways, artificial protection for the weaklings will be possible, less are really inspired by dread of the revolutionary elements that chance of their surviving and reproducing their kind if they alarm the higher and middle classes, and keep the ground are called upon to take part in the work of life, and earn by continually trembling underneath the throne.
their own, rather than by their ancestors' hands, provision for This will be news to John Burns and Keir Hardie.
their offspring and themselves. While the Socialist denies that intra-group struggle in civilised communities is ever to
the death, he is quite ready to admit that intra-group compeIS BIOLOGY AGAINST SOCIALISM ?
tition may be of great social value, as putting the right man MR. KARL PEARSON'S REPLY TO MR. KIDD. into the right place, and as a means of obtaining a maximum “ SOCIAL Evolution" seems to have hit the Socialists
of efficient social work. hard, if one may judge from the way Mr. Karl Pearson Socialism, he says, wages no war against natural invoices their resentment in the Fortnightly Review. He equality. owns at the outset that “If Mr. Kidd's theory be a So far as I understand the views of the more active Socialists correct one, then the modern socialistic movement is of to-day, they fully recognise that the better posts, the more completely futile; it is opposed to fundamental biological lucrative and comfortable berths, must always go to the more truths." But,of course, he sees other alternatives. “The efficient and more productive workers, and that it is for the apparent contradiction between the conclusions of science
welfare of society that it should be so. Socialists, however, and the present socialistic trend of both legislation and
propose to limit within healthy bounds the rewards of natural ethical teaching
superiority and the advantages of artificial inequality. The
victory of the more capable, or the more fortunate, must not can be removed only by asserting that there is no socialistic involve such a defeat of the less capable, or the less fortunate, trend, as Mr. Kidd does; or by admitting that our society is that social stability is endangered by the misery produced ... decadent and the British race degenerating, which seems to be This competition becomes disastrous the moment it approaches the opinion of Mr. Spencer; or, finally, by proving that the a struggle, not for comparative degrees of comfort within a * biological truths” on which the contradiction is founded are
limited range, but for absolute existence. The Socialist feels no truths at all, merely misapplications of ill-defined terms; that in proposing to regulate this competition, he is not flying this is the firm conviction of the present writer.
in the face of biological laws and cosmic processes, but taking
part in the further stages of that evolution by which civilised Mr. Pearson argues that Mr. Kidd's acceptance of an
man has been hitherto developed ; this is just as much “bioincreasing “ rivalry of life" between individuals means
logical” and “cosmic” as the evolutionary history of ants or
bees. “the extinction of the less fit” or the checking of their
SOCIALISM TO INFLUENCE BIOLOGY. reproduction; or, in other words, intensified suffering, or starvation itself. With him religion seems to be a
Panmıxia, Mr. Pearson contemptuously dismisses as means of checkmating the reason, and altruism to be a
“all muddle”-“like the majority of Weismann's theories dodge for weakening the resistance of the power-holding-suggestive, nebulous, and utterly unproven.” The classes.” But, Mr. Pearson urges :
article concludes by advancing the possibility thatThe “great fund of altruistic feeling which is gradually
the socialistic movement will react on biological science as it saturating our entire social life" is quite as much opposed to
has already done on economic science. No portion of the the uulimited triumph of the individually strong in body or
material for the study of evolution is nearly as plentiful as mind over the individually weaker, as to the unlimited triumph
that dealing with mankind. We have most wide-reaching of one class at the expense of another.
statistics as to growth and as to mortality; we have most
elaborate measurements of a very great variety of organs in CIVILISATION AND THE COSMIC PROCESS.
many races of men, and even of men separated by considerable Mr. Pearson holds it “quite unproven that among intervals of time. The record is, of course, fragmentary in the gregarious animals of any kind, particularly in civilised extreme, but it is probably far better than can ever be attained man, the rivalry to death of individuals of the same for any other form of life. group plays any important part in natural selection.” “ He no more believes the limitation of that struggle
The Adopted Child. opposed to the natural order' than the development of If the mother of the boy who was adopted through the the earliest forms of social instinct among gregarious agency of THE REVIEW OF REVIEWS will communicate with animals, or indeed of the maternal instinct itself."
me I will give her the name and address of a solicitor Mr. Pearson, who strongly asserts that this is a mathe from whom, in the future, she will be able to receive matical problem, appeals triumphantly to vital statistics information as to his welfare.
ALTRUISM AND THE RIVALRY OF LIFE.
putants by the ministers of the Cross. This is perhaps due to the recoil from the old doctrine of the union of Church and State, but if so, the recoil has practically paralysed the Church, while the State, bereft of its conscience, is practically heathen.
When moral authority is not, resort to Gatlings and dynamite seems to many the only alternative. The great mischief in America is the absence of trust, the rooted disbelief in the honesty and good faith of anybody. Rightly or wrongly American workmen seem to be convinced-I have heard picked leaders of American labour assert it again and again--that no award, no agreement is ever respected by their employers a day longer than it suits their interest to keep it. Bad faith on the part of the employers is balanced by murder and outrage on the part of the employed, while the Church, which should be the conscience of the community, is seared as with a hot iron by a conventional indifferentism to the affairs of this world.
The Pope in his famous Encyclical on Labour, laid down doctrines which all Christian Churches everywhere would do well to lay to heart. But nowhere is there greater need of the preaching and the teaching of that sound doctrine than in the United States to-day. Catholic or Protestant it matters little which so long as there is a Church which will assert the eternal law of righteousness and justice and brotherhood in all the affairs of men. Blessed are the peacemakers, for theirs is the kingdom of Heaven, does not seem to offer a sufficient inducement to Christian inen to compose these industrial feuds. Perhaps they will wake up to a sense of their duty and their responsibility, when they discover that the failure to make peace not merely forfeits the kingdom of Heaven, but inevitably turns the kingdom of this world into a kingdom of Hell
THE LABOUR WAR IN THE STATES.
A STORY OF GATLINGS AND WINCHESTERS. In the Contemporary Review I have published some “ Incidents in the Labour War in the United States," culled from the Chicago papers of the last month. I will not attempt to summarise them here, but merely quote the opening and closing paragraphs:
The ruins of Finchale Abbey, on the river Wear, still remain to attest the sanctity of the north-country ascetic whose shrine it was in days of old. In his hot youth the saint, before he became a saint, was permitted by the grace of God (s0 runs the ancient legend) to see a vision of Hell. The sight transformed his life. From that moment he abandoned his sins and endeavoured by the cruellest mortification of his body to testify to the sincerity of his repentance. When he had looked into Hell he saw that it was the Hell of Extremes. Side by side with the conventional blazing fiery furnace there was a place of intense cold full of thick-ribbed ice, and driving lail, and biting winds, so bitter that he could not say which was worse to bear, the Hell of Heat or the Hell of Coll. But ever afterwards he sought to inflict upon himself at Finchale some foretaste of the doom of the danined. In high nown in hottest summer he would lie blistering and scorched on the heated rocks. In midwinter he would sit up to the neck in a hole broken in the ice of the frozen Wear. And when the country folk would expostulate with him as he lay baking in the sun, he answered nothing but “I have seen greater heat.” In like wise when in winter they abjured the saint to come out of his bath-hole in the icy river, as the cold was too great for mortal man to bear, he would murmur, “ I have seen greater cold."
This north-country tale comes back to me when I hear Englishmen groaning about our labour troubles. For I have been in the United States, and when I hear our labour men declaiming against the tyranny of capital, the depotism of employers, and the grievances inflicted upon workmen, I reply, with the saint of Finchale, “I have seen greater tyranny." So, in like manner, when employers denounce the violence of high-handed unionists and the unreasonableness of strikers, I shrug my shoulders, and reply, “I have seen worse violence.” For, as I have said, I have been in the United States, and in industrial matters our American kinsfolk are where we were forty or fifty years ago, when rattening was the first word of an outlawed unionism and murder the ultimate argument against the blackleg. What Sheffield was in the palmy days of Broadhead and Crookes, before the Royal Commission was appointed which revealed the secrets of a unionism resting upon the foundation of assassination-preached as a virtue and practised as a necessity --so Pittsburg is to-day, and when we say Pittsburg we say Chicago, Denver, or any other great industrial centre. Hence, when an Englishman returns from the United States to the worst strike region in the l'nited Kingdom he is conscious of an immediate and unmistakable change for the better. Our difficulties are bad enough, but they are as moonlight is to sunlight, as water is to wine, compared with the industrial feuds which rage on the other side of the Atlantic.
I can best illustrate this by briefly stringing together a few of the incidents of the labour war which has been raging for the last month or two in the coke and mining industries of America. As my object is to describe the temper of the disputants rather than to discuss the merits of the dispute, I will not confuse the issue by details as to the points of difference between the parties.
After copious quotations from the diary of the industrial feud, in which Gatling guns and Winchester rifles, clubs and revolvers play a most conspicuous part, I conclude as follows:
So far as can be seen from the American papers, the Christian Church made no effort to compose this fatal strife. No one who read the record of the strikes would imagine that these incidents occurred in a Christian country, or even in a country where Christian missionaries had ever penetrated, for, from first to last, no pressure appears to have been brought upon the dis
The Terrible Mouse. One of the standing jokes of the comic papers is the terror with which women are supposed to regard the harmless and timid mouse. It would seem, however, from a paper in McClure's Magazine for June on “Wild Beasts in Captivity,” that the king of beasts and the elephant share this feminine terror of the little rodent. The writer says :
One day Philadelphia, wishing to test the affection popularly supposed to exist between a lion and a mouse, put a mouse in the cage of a full-grown Nubian lion. The lion saw the mouse before he was fairly through the bars, and was after him instantly. Away went the little fellow, scurrying across the floor and squeaking in fright. When he had gone about ten feet the lion sprang, lighting a little in front of him. The mouse turned, and the lion sprang again.
This was repeated several times, the mouse traversing a shorter distance after each spring of the lion. It was demonstrated that a lion is too quick for a mouse, at least in a large cage. Finally the mouse stood still, squealing and trembling. The lion stood over, studying him with interest. Presently he shot out his big paw and brought it down directly on the mouse, but so gently that the mouse was not injured in the least, though held fast between the claws Then the lion played with him in the most extraordinary way, now lifting his paw and letting the mouse run a few inches, and then stopping him again as before. Suddenly the mouse changed his tactics, and instead of running when the lion lifted his paw, sprang into the air straight at the lion's head. The lion, terrified, gave a great leap back, striking the bars with all his weight, and shaking the whole floor. Then he opened his great jaws and roared and roared again, while the little mouse, still squealing, made his escape. Of the two the the lion was the more frightened. It is a fact well known in all menageries that a mouse will frighten an elephant more than will a locomotive. Let one appear in an elephant's stall, and the elephant, his mountain of flesh quivering, his trunk lashing the air, will trumpet in abject terror : and he will not recover for hours afterwards. The trainers say that what the elephant fears is that the mouse will run up his trunk. There is a tradition that a mouse really did this in one instance while an elephant was sleeping, and caused the elephant such intense pain that he had to be killed.