of manhood as always to be peering and unravelling contrivance may be to the simplicity of the affections and the grandeur and unity of the imagination." The occasion of this comment was "a most unpleasant dispute with Wordsworth and Hazlitt" on teleology. Hazlitt is punished even more severely than Wordsworth for speaking " so irreverently, so malignantly of the Divine Wisdom." But for the capitals we might think Coleridge's wisdom was intended. "Hazlitt, how easily raised to rage and hatred self-projected! but who shall find the force that can drag him out of the depths into one expression of kindness, into the showing of one gleam of the light of love on his countenance?" There is more of this and worse, but the next day we find him sitting to Hazlitt for his portrait, which, let us trust, was more flattering than his portrait of Hazlitt. His own be sketches many times, and there is a strange mingling in this self-portraiture of abject humility and unconscious pride. But sometimes the note of self-esteem is as frank as possible. Thus "There are two sorts of talkative fellows whom it would be injurious to confound. The first sort is those who use five hundred more words than needs to express an idea. That is not my case. Few men, I will be bold to say, put more into their words than F, or choose them more deliberately and discriminately." His own trouble is that he has five hundred times too many ideas for his words. There is much insistence on his need of the sympathy and support of others, and this without miscalcula tion. His evil habit is barely touched upon, but there are passages that seem to indicate its sway. We find him studious of his dreams and of the half-light between sleep and waking. The essence of his character is nowhere more apparent than in a passage where he makes God in his own image: "Something inherently mean in action! Even the creation of the universe disturbs my idea of the Almighty's greatness-would do so but that I perceive that Thought with him creates." "A time will come when passiveness will attain the dignity of worthy activity," when men will be "proud of having remained in a state of deep, tranquil emotion." There are many incidental touches of great EIGHTH EDITION IN PRESS OF THE NOVEL OF HON. PETER STIRLING. By PAUL LEICESTER FORD. 12mo, $1.50. "One of the strongest and most vital characters that have appeared in our fiction."-Dial, "Commands our very sincere respect. . . . The tone and manner of the book are noble.... A timely, manly, thoroughbred, and eminently suggestive book."-Atlan tic Monthly. books, verbal fel cities of surprising force and BOOKS OF THE WEEK. 2 Ed Betz, L. P. Pierre Bayle und die "Nouvelles de la Ré- Christian, Sydney. Persis Yorke. Macmillan. $1.25. Ewing, Emma P. The Art of Cookery. Meadville, Pa.: Forman, H. B. The Letters of John Keats. Complete Books of To-day and HENRY HOLT & CO., N. Y. The Best Monthly Review of English Books Do me the favor to ask your wine-merchant, or Park & Tilford (wholesale agents), for my Picarillo" natural sherry, and "Manzanilla Pasada." GUILLERMO DOBLACHE, Puerto de Santa Maria. for American Readers. Annual Subscription 3s. bd., post free. HATCHARDS, Booksellers to the Queen, 187 PICCADILLY, LONDON. YALE MIXTURE. The choicest tobacco made, and pre-eminently a gentleman's smoke. Marburg Bros., The American Tobacco Co., Successor, Baltimore, Md. Foster, Prof. G C. and Atkinson, Prof. E. Elementary Frith, Walter. In Search of Quiet: A Country Journal. Gollancz, Israel. Coriolanus and Troilus and Cressida. Gumplowicz, Prof. Louis. Précis de Sociologie. Paris: Halsey, J. L., and E. D. Thomas Halsey of Hertford- Hardy, Thomas. The Trumpet-Major. Harpers. $1.50. Hornung, E. W. Irralie's Bushranger. Scribners. 75c. Johnson, Prof. Franklin. The Quotations of the New Kenyon, J. B. An Oaten Pipe. J. Selwin Tait & Sons. Macgibbon, David, and Ross, Thomas. The Ecclesiasti Mackinnon, James. The Union of England and Scot- Macnie, John. Elements of Plane Geometry. Ameri- McNulty, Edward. Misther O'Ryan. New ed. Edward Mitchell, Rev. E. C. The Critical Handbook of the Monahan, Michael. Youth: A Poem of Soul and Sense, Ottolengui, Rodrigues. The Crime of the Century. Paget, Rev. E. C. Silence, with Other Sermons. $1.50. Quain's Elements of Anatomy. 10th ed. Vol. III, Part Remsen, D. S. Intestate Succession in the State of New Co. $1. American Book Saintsbury, Prof. George. A History of Nineteenth Strain, E. H. A Man's Foes. M. J. Ivers & Co. 25c. White, Mary. The Book of a Hundred Games. Scrib- "One of the greatest historical novels ever written."-DIAL. Ekkehard, A Tale of the Tenth Century. By JOSEPH VIKTOR VON SCHEFFEL. With photogravure Illustrations. Two vols., 16mo, gilt top, $2.50; half calf, $4.50. Good judges of literature do not hesitate to put Von Scheffel's "Ekkehard" in the very forefront of historirical novels. Accurate descriptions of tenth-century manners and customs and wonderful knowledge of human nature are lavished on this splendid story. which has gone on increasing in popularity, till now nearly 150 editions have been published. The translation has been carefully revised and practically made anew. All the notes of the 138th edition have been added, and a series of illustrations by famous German artists reproduced, thereby adding greatly to its inte rest and value. NEW YORK, THURSDAY, MARCH 5, 1896. The Week. ONE has only to read the debate in the Senate of February 27 to see how absolutely in the dark the whole blundering belligerency work was done. Senator Sherman gravely introduced as his first evi and the points of the coast at which for eign Powers can communicate with them, the nature of their Government, and their armament on land and sea. These are the facts which constitute belligerency. Of these facts Mr. Hitt had not a particle of proof. What he said was that belligerency was proved "not by the newspaper reports alone, but by the reports of the United States consuls." Nothing of the sort has understand now how we feel, and what a big country this is, and they won't forget it soon either." The difficulty of hammering even elementary notions of international law into the heads of some of the inland sages was well illustrated in the debate on the Senate resolution in recognition of Cuban belligerency between Senator Gray and Sena dence a pamphlet written by a representa. appeared in any published conaular report tor Vest of Missouri. Senator Gray was tive of the Cuban insurgents. This exparte document "seems to be fairly and frankly written," said Mr. Sherman, and hence the Senate could implicitly accept all its statements. But even these statements, thus guaranteed, had nothing to say about the actual situation of the insurrection, or whether the fact of belligerency existed. Senator Morgan here interposed to strengthen the case by reading a letter just received "from a gentleman with whom I have no acquaintance whatever." The writer was ready to make oath that "57,000 Cubans bit the dust" in the last insurrection, and what other evidence could be demanded, Senator Morgan would like to know, that the insurgents in the present insurrection had all the recognized marks of belligerents? Senator Sherman went on to refer to a mysterious book in Spanish. He was sorry he had not had time to get it from the Library to awe the Senate with, but perhaps it did not matter, as he could not read Spanish anyhow. Luckily, extracts from it had been translated "by one of the great journals," and those he would read. They showed a horrible state of things in 1870, and who could doubt that conditions were even worse in 1896? To make the case absolutely complete, Lodge interposed to read "the last proclamation of Gen. Weyler." What he really read was a newspaper guess at what a proclamation was going to be-80 stated on its face, and a guess promptly belied, at that. There has been no such proclamation. Lodge must have known this at the time, but it would be a poor sort of Massachusetts Senator who would not stretch the truth a little in order to or in any newspaper. Cuban belligerency, in the sense in which the term is used in diplomacy, is an invention of his own. He fortified himself by alleging on his own authority that Spaniards held only one-third of the island, that 125,000 troops had been sent to Cuba, that the CaptainGeneral had issued two long proclamations which "had been read with horror," that guerilla warfare had proved too much for the French in Spain, under Napoleon, of which the Spaniards are very proud, and that the belligerency of the Confede racy had been recognized by Spain three months after the war broke out, as if belligerency were a question of time and not of circumstances. We presume no American who is proud of his country, and has any acquaintance with the part she has played in building up the code of international morals which now prevails in Christendom, has read the debate which ensued, without a good deal of humiliation, or without, under all the circumstances, much gratitude to the gentlemen, Messrs. Turner, Boutelle, McCall, and Tucker, who treated the House to a few doses of law and common sense. From most of the supporters of the resolutions nobody expected anything but what they supplied. Talking international law or usage to them would be like talking it to a chamber of Marchists. But Mr. Hitt is a graduate of Yale College and has been Assistant Secretary of State. Of neither experience was there the slightest trace in his speech. For all that appeared in that effort, he might have been bred in some vast wilderness, where ru mors of successful or unsuccessful war help bring on a glorious war for the im-reached him only through primers. The provement of our decaying morals. With no surer facts to go upon than this collection of guesses and irrelevancies, the Senate rushed blindfold on to what might be war. No better was the performance of the House on Monday. In the speech by which Mr. Hitt (the chairman of the House committee on foreign relations, be it remembered) introduced the resolutions, we look in vain for evidence of insurgent belligerency in the shape of official reports, or other testimony equally good, showing what territory the insurgents hold, the seat of their Government, most striking thing in his speech was the assurance he gathered from the Spanish Minister's apology for the Barcelona mob, that his own resolutions would cause no trouble. This brings out what is really the most alarming trait in Jingo performances. It will have been observed that whenever Jingoes indulge in violent language which imperils peaceful relations, and the Power to which it is addressed answers with astonished politeness, and shows anxiety to avoid a quarrel, the Jingo always sets it down to fear, turns calmly to his followers, and says: "You see; I told you there would be no war. That is the way to talk to these suckers. They contending for the elementary proposition "that recognition of the independence of a people is the recognition of a fact." Is Cuba independent or not? The reason have no ports, no fixed territorial area, no for thinking she is not is that the Cubans regular government, no organized army. What difference does that make? said Mr. Vest. "Will the Senator from Delaware permit me to ask him whether the cause of the American colonies was not more desperate than that of Cuba to-day when France recognized our independence?" When the French recognized the independence of the United States, the rebels had had through the whole contest thirteen regularly organized colonial governments. They had had the leading port of the Union in their possession for two years before the French recognition. Boston was surrendered to Washington March 17, 1776. French recognition came on February 6, 1778. But what is more important than all is that the leading British army in the field, that of Gen. Burgoyne, surrendered to the rebels October 17, 1777, which was really the determining cause of the French alliance. The discussion of the silver question in the Senate on Wednesday week served still further to clear the air. For many years the managers of the Republican party Colorado rightly styled a "bunco game" have been playing what Mr. Teller of on the silver States. This policy was inaugurated in 1888, when Mr. McKinley, as chairman of the committee on resolutions in the Republican national convention, reported the now famous plank "condemn ing the Democratic Administration for its efforts to demonetize silver." What the this matter from 1885 to 1888 was simply to urge the same policy that its Republican predecessor had urged from 1881 to 1885. We place side by side the final recommendation on this subject of President Arthur in 1884 and the first recommendation of President Cleveland in 1885: Secretary of the Trea- suspension of the com. I concur with the I recommend the sury in recommending pulsory coinage of sil the immediate suspen- ver dollars directed by sion of the coinage of the law passed in Febsilver dollars and of the ruary, 1878.- Presi issuance of silver cer. dent Cleveland, Detificates. President cember 8, 1855. Arthur, December 1, 1884. Democratic Administration had done in The McKinley resolution was intended to mean, and could mean, only that the Republican party, if restored to power, would turn its back upon its consistent record up to 1885, and show more favor to the silverites. This pledge was redeemed by the taking at the first opportunity of that "long step towards free coinage," as the Indiana Republicans styled the silver-purchase act of 1890-an act urged by Mr. McKinley, as leader of the House, on the ground that "it does what the present law has not done: it takes every dollar of silver bullion that is produced in the United States and places it at the disposal of the people as money"; and that "we cannot have free coinage now except in the manner as provided in the bill." The attempt to play the bunco game was continued in the national platform of 1892, with its declaration in favor of "bimetallism," which Mr. Teller and Mr. Jones of Nevada were assured meant what the silverites wanted. Mr. Carter, Mr. Teller, and the other Republican Senators from the silver States who stand with them, are rendering a national service in exposing this whole policy of deception upon which the Republican managers entered in 1888, and in insisting that no more of these McKinley games shall be played. For an organization that used to pride itself upon being the party of moral ideas, the record of the Republicans on the silver question during the last eight years has been most contemptible. McKinley himself is apparently ready to continue the policy of evasion and deception, but Carter, Teller, and their associates have rendered this impossible. The multiplying signs that free silver is going to cut through both parties and make itself the controlling issue in the next Presidential election, will give general satisfaction-they certainly will to the friends of sound money. The great peril now is, two-faced platforms and dough face candidates. The silver Republicans are apparently prepared to fight, and the sound-money Democrats are also stripping for the contest-none too soon. Secretary Carlisle boldly said last week that the conflict was now an irrepressible one, and the issue of a kind that could not be avoided even by trimmers, and would not be by men of character. A silver party, pure and simple, is by all means to be desired. If all the 16-to-1 men and the international- agreement men and the straddlers and dodgers in either party could be forced to go off with the Populists, where they belong, the country would first rise up and call them blessed, and then rise up and smite them hip and thigh. It seems almost too much to hope for such a result, but we may, for the present, hope for it with fear and trembling. Speaker Reed's obstinate silence, in the face of a threatened and probable split in his party, is highly inopportune, as he of imports of $61,018,579-the equivalent ad valorem being 46 per cent. This shows that with the rate of duty reduced more than one-half, the revenue was reduced only 23 per cent. It is an impudent demand to ask Congress to reimpose the high duties on raw wools to gain a revenue of six or seven millions of dollars, and to increase to an even greater degree the duties on manufactures of wool for a similar sum. At the end of February the deficit in the national account was only $900,000 more than it was at the end of November. The Government is, therefore, very nearly paying its expenses out of current revenue, and there is no reasonable ground for tinkering with the tariff, and least of all in the direction of higher duties on raw wools and manufactures of wool, where the consumer loses two dollars every time the Government gains one. A meeting was held at Cooper Institute on Friday evening, under the call of the Central Labor Union, to protest against the introduction of militarism as a govrning force in this country. The meetThe public debt statement for March ing was a great success in point of numshows the receipts and expenditures for bers and enthusiasm. The speeches were eight months of the fiscal year. The de- made by plain-talking men, who knew exficit was only $17,500,000. During the actly what they wanted, and the resolusame period of the previous year it was tions were of the most decisive character, $36,300,000, showing a gain of nearly declaring that the participants would vote $19,000,000. At this rate of progress it against every man, in either house of Conis a reasonable anticipation that in the gress, who should support the pending next fiscal year, beginning July, 1896, the bills to add to the permanent military receipts will equal the expenditures. force of the nation by fortifications or The only thing that can prevent this is otherwise. The Tribune, in its mendathe continual beating of war-drums at cious account of this meeting, suppresses Washington. If Congress would adjourn, all the ideas presented by the speakers or would take up its proper business and except one. It suppresses the resolutions stop meddling with foreign affairs and also. The one idea which it allows to go getting us into unnecessary broils, there before its readers is that the proposed forwould be a period of renewed prosperity tifications and the increased army are inin all parts of the country, the effects of tended to put down strikes rather than to which would be immediately perceptible fight foreign enemies. The truth is that in the public revenues. The maintenance the meeting was a protest against war and of the gold standard is now assured, not all its belongings, the facilities for dealonly by the accumulation of that metal ing with domestic insurrection being one in the Treasury, but still more by the pur- of several reasons for opposing this new pose shown by the public in the recent development of "Americanism." bond sale to furnish all that may be need- idea oftenest put forward by the speakers ed for that purpose hereafter. The only was that war means bloodshed and penury cloud upon the business horizon is that for the laboring classes, the glory and the which has been wantonly created by reck-profits being monopolized by a few officers less politicians. Attention should be called to the figures issued by the Bureau of Statistics for the calendar years 1891 to 1895 on the subject of wool. The period covered is practically four years under the tariff act of 1890 and one year under that of 1894. In 1892, which was the year of largest imports of woollen manufactures under the McKinley tariff, the amount of duties collected was $36,560,539 on a valuation of imports of $37,557,037. This was equivalent to an ad valorem of 97.36 per cent. In 1895 the duty collected was $28,102,648 on a value The and contractors. Is not this true of all wars? Another idea prominently presented was that the taxes to pay for this military equipment must be paid chiefly by laboring men, which is true also. The ordering of ships to Corinto by Secretary Olney, to protect Americans while the usual revolution is going on, will puzzle the international lawyers a good deal. They were told by Mr. Olney last July that "our fiat is law" on this continent. This they of course believed, for they didn't want their heads blown off for doubting it. But how much mystified they will be now to see men-of-war resorted to when a simple "fiat" could do the business so easily. Your true "fiat" is self-executing. When the Creator said, "Fiat lux," there was no need of casting about for some means of producing light, but immediately "there was light." This is the way Secretary Olney should have proceeded. He, too, shou'd have shown that he could speak and it was done, he could command and it stood fast. Instead of a war-ship, a cablegram should have been sufficient. Addressed to "Dagoes, Corinto, via Galveston," it would have needed only to say, "My fiat is peace. Olney." Instantly the machetes would have been beaten into ploughshares, and a vast and lucrative trade have been built up with this country. But cumbrous ships and guns instead of this swift KingCanute method! Fie on that kind of a fiat! Mr. Sanger has introduced in the New York Assembly what seems to be a desirable measure supplementary to our inadequate corrupt-practice law. It provides for the filing, within ten days after election, of itemized accounts of all receipts and expenditures by candidates, committees, agents, corporations, associations, and everybody else who has paid, or advanced, or promised to pay money to aid in an election. We wish we could say that there is hope of this or some similar measure becoming a law. The Republicans were pledged in favor of it when they came into power, an 1 Gov. Morton sought to hold them to their pledge in his first message. The last Legislature refused to pay any attention either to him or to the pledge, and this year he neglected to say anything whatever on the subject. Of course the rigid enforcement of such a law would be the destruction of Platt, for it would expose his entire system of machine control by revealing the sources of his income and the uses which he made of it. Not only would the amount of each corporation's contribution be revealed, but the share each candidate received to aid him in his election, or the price for which he sold himself to the boss, would also be exposed. This would be an appalling catastrophe to the boss system, and we look for a very chilling legislative reception to Mr. Sanger's proposal. Echoes of the income-tax agitation are growing fainter in the South. The action of the Kentucky Legislature in adopting a resolution looking towards a constitutional amendment under which such a tax could be assessed is more than offset by the rejection in the South Carolina House of a specific income-tax bill, which commanded the votes of only about onethird of the Representatives. Many who voted in opposition were influenced by the argument that an income tax, while a good thing when applied to the whole country, might, when confined to a single The verdict of the jury in South Carolina acquitting of murder last week the lynchers of an old colored woman is symptomatic of a lower stage of humanity than prevailed in the old slavery days. A Charleston correspondent of the Evening Post, in a recent letter relating the outrage for which these men were tried, pointed out that, even before the war, white men were sentenced to death in that State for killing negroes when the negroes were nothing but chattels in the eye of the law. The lynchers just acquitted dragged a negro, his wife, and mother from their house at night, and beat them so terribly that the man and his mother were found dead the next morning. One of these lynchers was a prominent physician of the neighborhood. The defence relied almost entirely on the evidence of a doctor who testified that the old woman (for whose murder this trial was held) died from asphyxiation-that is, was drowned in water not a foot deep, and not from the effects of the beating received. The prosecution seems to have been in earnest to secure the conviction, and this "medical testimony " was torn all to pieces on crossexamination; but the modern South Carolina jury seems incapable of punishing a white man when a negro is his victim. The accused are still to be tried for the murder of the negro man, and it is encou raging to hear that the Judge, after their acquittal, refused to admit them to bail. American fiction that the simultaneouspublication and American - manufacture clauses of the copyright law were going especially to protect and develop gloriously, it looks as if Mr. M. D. Conway had some ground for asserting that, from a financial point of view, the act of 1891 was the most disastrous thing that ever befell American authors. We, of course, have no patience with those cynics who maintain that the fault is not in our copyright stars, but in our fiction itself, that it is an underling. Measured on a scale of the scornful laughter which reference to them in Parliament produces, bimetallism, protection, the Tory social programme, and the Poet Laureate would rank in about the order named. Rosebery in the Lords vied with Harcourt in the Commons in jests about "the favorite remedy of the First Lord of the Treasury, which that right honorable gentleman, as First Lord of the Treasury, finds himself precluded from applyingbimetallism," and Olympian laughter followed in either house. A similar tribute was paid to every mention of protection; and when Lord Rosebery alluded to the way the Duke of Devonshire had gone round during the recess "as a universal refrigerator," to turn an icy spray upon every bud or blossom of hope of social legislation by the Tories, the Lords had to look to their waistcoat buttons. Poor Mr. Austin must have thought his laurel had been inadvertently taken from a thorntree. His eulogistic verse on the Jameson raid convinced Lord Rosebery that the laureateship was not only, as he always thought, an obsolete office, but also a dangerous one. Hard hitting Sir William Harcourt, when referring to the attitude which sober-minded Englishmen should observe towards lawless compromisers of the English name, like Jameson, remarked with huge disdain: "I am not speaking of music-halls or of poets laureate." The cheers and roars of laughter that followed were enough to suggest that the next official poem should begin: "Who would not be jeered at for England?" As anti-Semitism goes down in Berlin it goes up in Vienna. That pious Jewbaiter, Dr. Stöcker, is in disgrace, re The literary output of 1895, as footed up in the Publishers' Weekly, shows a total of 5,469 new books and new editions (368 of the latter), as against 4,484 in 1894. The greatest increase was in fiction (385), with lesser gains in law, theology, education, and nearly every category except political and social science; as to the fall-pudiated by his erstwhile enthusiastic ing off in the latter department, theorists may well be excused for waiting for prac tice to catch up. Some light is thrown by the statistics on the working of the copyright law. It appears that there were 3,396 books by American authors manufactured in the United States, as compared with 847 books by English and other foreign authors, while 1,226 books were imported, in sheets or bound. The American novelist shows up badly. He produced but 287 volumes to 589 by pau per foreign authors, manufactured in this country, and 238 imported. As it was admirer, the Emperor, and reduced to a practical nullity politically. But in Vienna the new Municipal Council is more sweepingly anti Semite than the last one, which the Emperor had to dissolve in November. It will doubtless elect its chosen agitator, Dr. Lueger, Burgomaster again, and bring on a fresh contest with the Crown. Stormy times are presaged for Austrian politics, not only by this insensate race prejudice, but by the socialistic and labor agitation as well, which is already leading to scenes of unprecedented violence in the Diet. MILITARISM IN A REPUBLIC. tion or to become aggressors. But we can- What we shall become in the course of another hundred years after we have got ourselves in readiness" to meet the world in arms," as the blatherskites are always saying, we may dimly infer from the antics of the present Congress. This collection of demagogues, the most dangerous we have had since the civil war, and rapidly becoming the most odious, has been in session three months, and during that time has put itself in fighting attitude three times. Although we have no army, no navy, no fortifications, although we have a Treasury deficit and have been near to suspension and the silver standard, this Congress has "stood behind Cleveland" in his unnecessary quarrel with Great Britain, has threatened Turkey and denounced Europe for not dismembering her, and is now threatening Spain about a matter which does not concern us, under pretence of a regard for humanity. If all this is done in the green tree, what shall be done in the dry? If this is the measure of our common sense when we have neither soldiers, ships, forts, nor money, what will happen when we have all of them? THE embroilment with Spain has come force at Madrid. All these doings are wicked, and they point to a reign of militarism the end of which no man can foresee. They will give rise to a new demand for forts, battleships, big guns, war material, and all the things that go to make a hell upon earth. Because we shake our fists at Spain, and a mob in consequence pulls down our flag at Barcelona, it is made plausible to say that our seacoast is defenceless, and that any third-rate Power can come into our harbors and lay our cities under contribution. A great many catchwords can be constructed out of such rotten material, yet the whole argument for forts and battle-ships rests upon the false assumption that foreign Powers (third-rate Powers, forsooth) are going to attack us without provocation. Such a wild, nonsensical assumption does not deceive any human being who stops to think. The United States of America unarmed is, for all purposes of self-defence, the strongest Power in the world to-day-strong in resources, strong in intelligence, strong in distance from other Powers, and strongest of all in moral greatness if it chooses to exercise its strength that way. No nation will ever attack us unless first provoked by us. The object and purpose of forts and battleships is to enable us to give such provoca Of one thing we may be sure-militarism, if we adopt it, will have a profound influence on the national character, and the effect will be less wholesome than it is among the military nations of the Old World, where each is under the restraints ance of power exists expressly to prevent which gave her peace in exchange for liberty. The military republic which grew out of the French Revolution ran nearly the same course, except that the monarch took away the nation's liberty without giving her peace. We are told, as though it were something important, that there is no intention to use these new implements for any other purpose than self-defence. The intention of the promoters is of no consequence. What Senator Lodge is looking for is the votes of unreflecting persons and the applause of other Jingoes like himself. The question is not what is intended by these preparations, but what they are adapted for. They will stay after Mr. Lodge is gone. He will disappear like an ignis fatuus in due time. The Roman legions were not recruited and drilled to butcher their own citizens, but they were found well suited to that purpose when they had no foreign foe to exercise their weapons upon. We do not apprehend anything of that kind here. We dread the reflex influence of militarism upon the national character, the transformation of a peace-loving people into a nation of swaggerers ever ready to take offence, prone to create difficulties, eager to shed blood, and taking all sorts of occasions to bring the Christian religion to shame under pretence of vindicating the rights of humanity in some other country. Depend upon it, this means putting the United States on a new pathway and altering the national character for the worse. Three months ago, nobody could have imagined such an outlook, and if anybody had predicted it, he would have been considered mad. GOOD AMERICAN SALVATION. MR. DEPEW, who has a remarkable gift for putting the gist of a complicated subject into a few terse, graphic words, says of the troubles in the Salvation Army: "Americans want to get their salvation by way of Bunker Hill and Faneuil Hall and the old gun at Lexington, instead of by way of London. If they can't get it that way, they'd just run their chances of getting to heaven." It is well that this should be said "right here" before the controversy over Ballington Booth's withdrawal from the Army goes any further, for it brings our thinkers face to face with the question, "Do we want English salvation or American salvation ?" That is the fundamental issue in the controversy. Certain persons, who are prone to take an un-American view of every international complication which arises between us and Great Britain, have been trying to shift the issue by saying that the real question is whether or not Ballington Booth is guilty of insubordination in refusing to relinquish command of the American branch of the Salvation Army and return to England for orders. It is not worth while to pay much attention to persons of this calibre. Anybody who will hold that discipline is of |