SIR CHARLES TUPPER, ex-Prime Minister of Canada and late High Commissioner for Canada in London, discusses "The Problem of Empire" in the new Nineteenth Century from the point of view of a convinced supporter of mutual preferential trade between the Mother-country and the Colonies. Perhaps his strongest argument is that based on the enactment of the intermediate tariff:—
"It permits Canadian Ministers to negotiate and conclude
reciprocity with foreign nations without recourse to the agency of the Imperial Government, and even without reference to their own Parliament ; and it automatically admits these foreign nations to a part of the preference in Canadian markets now enjoyed by the United Kingdom. Moreover, it is more than con- ceivable that in the course of negotiation with the astute industrial rivals of the United Kingdom, Canada may be led so to fix and limit the margin of British preference as to bar the way to any future arrangement of mutual preference within the Empire. Need more be said to prove the danger of the policy of drift? Is it conceivable that, with these perfectly natural developments of Colonial commercial policy staring her in the face, the Mother Country will persist in her refusal of reciprocity ? "
For the rest, Sir Charles Tapper is in substantial agreement with the views of Sir Wilfrid Laurier on the question of the status of the Imperial Conference and the constitution of the permanent secretariat. He endorsee the suggestion of the late Lord Thring that, to secure the direct intervention of a Colony, and give its representatives facility of access to the British Government, the position of Agent-General should be elevated to one more akin to that of the representative of a foreign State, and continues
" Having during four years represented Canada as High Com- missioner while I at the same time held a seat in the Canadian Cabinet, I found in discussing matters with the Imperial Govern- ment the additional weight given to my representations from the fact that I was not only a representative of the Canadian Govern- ment but also a member of it. Would it not be to the obvious and great advantage of all parties concerned if the offices of the High Commissioners of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa when confederated, were made departments of their respective Colonial Governments and held by members of their respective Cabinets ? I see that the suggestion is one that com- mends itself to Lord Milner after his long and brilliant career as a Proconsul For obvious reasons the connexion of these great outlying portions of the Empire with the Mother Country must be diplomatic, and to be successful of the most secret and con- fidential character."
Finally, in regard to Imperial defence as well as trade, he claims that Canada has never failed in doing what in her lies to realise the family ideal referred to by Mr. Balfour.—Mr. Ellis Barker's argument that Great Britain cannot muoh longer defend the Empire single-banded rests on the gratuitous assumption that the natural development of the United States will probably cause her, as well as Germany, to encroach upon the British Empire unless we are strong enough at sea to forbid such encroach- =mt. But as, according to the writer, both Germany and the United States are richer and more populous than we are, we can only hold our own by developing our latent resources. In other words, we must organise the defence of the Empire on an Imperial basis by creating an Imperial Cabinet, with an Imperial Navy Board, an Imperial Exchequer, and an Imperial Senate, representing the whole Empire.— Lord MonkBretton sends a reassuring paper, the outcome of a recent visit, on " South African Loyalty." The main point of his argument is that the ideal of South African inde- pendence arose, not in the Cape or the Orange Free State, but in the Transvaal; that it owed its influence entirely to the energy of one man, Paul Kruger ; and that it vanished with his death. Federation will come, but it must be under the British flag, the co-operation of the two races alone providing security for the material interests which are of paramount importance to the Transvaalers. In conclusion, he states his belief that the real danger to the British connexion is the possible intervention of the Imperial Government in the native question. Lord MonkBretton's remarks, it should be noted, only apply to the black races of South Africa; on the thorny question of Asiatic immigration and Chinese Labour he maintains silence.—Though Mr. E. N. Bennett, 31.P., in his paper on "Playing at Soldiers" pronounces -compulsory military training impracticable, we welcome the .spirit in which the writer—a Radical who believed the South African Campaign to be unnecessary and impolitic, yet served with distinction throughout the war—approaches the question -of national defence. His specific suggestions for modifying Mr. Haldane's scheme are as follows "Boldly face the difficulties involved in such differentiation, organise a portion of the new Territorial Force on the basis of a • _solid month's training per annum, and regard the rest as a kind of landwehr, trained on the lines proposed in the Bill. Recognise once and for all that we cannot get really adequate work, military or otherwise, out of our fellow-citizens unless we pay them fairly for such work ; recognise further that a Volunteer who gives up a month or a week—in many cases his entire holidays '—has clearly a right to receive a far higher rate of pay than a professional soldier who makes the Army his career for the time being. The material of our Volunteer battalions at present and our Territorial Army of the future is splendid, probably without its equal in the world, and greatly superior in many ways to that from which our Militia lads are recruited. The majority of our 'Territorial' recruits would doubtless refuse to undergo a month's training under stringent conditions, but you would in all probability find, say, sixty thousand men who would undertake these terms of service provided you paid theta well during their time in camp—that is the crux of the whole question. We should in this way possess for home defence, in addition to such Regulars as were available, and the Special Contingent' in our depots, some sixty thousand 'Territorials' of fine physique and morale, with a good month's training every year to their credit, and, as a last line, some 240,000 ' reserves' who had undergone the modicum of training and musketry suggested in the Bill for the entire force."
—Of the remaining articles, we can only notice Professor A. J. Church's admirable paper on "Authors and Pub- lishers," based on forty-six years of authorship, and the issue of more than sixty books with ten different publishing- houses. His verdict substantially acquits the publishers of the charges of greed and dishonesty recently launched against them. He emphasises the point that authors, with- out any compulsion, frequently made bad bargains out of improvidence and ignorance. On the other hand, he rightly pays a tribute to the munificence and public spirit displayed by leading publishers. We should never have bad the Dictionary of National Biography except for the enter- prise and generosity of the late Mr. George Smith, "and he, I believe, did not make this gift to the country, for such it really was, out of the profits of his business. In the presence of such facts these clamorous complaints seem to be as ungracious as they are ignorant."
" Tariff Reform is advancing by leaps and bounds over all the formidable obstacles barring its progress," writes the editor of the National Review in his " Episodes of the Month," and the sense of impending victory spurs him to unprecedented feats of eulogy and depreciation. The language used in disparagement of Sir Wilfrid Laurier and General Botha is, in our opinion, unwarranted, and very deeply to be regretted ; but reputations are rapidly made and unmade in the National Review, and Mr. Walter Long, who only a few months ago was bailed as the coming Unionist leader, is rapidly on the road to becoming a "Mandarin" Parliament is paralysed, Mr. Balfonr incorrigible, and the Opposition tactics incoherent and inept ; but on the other side there is the conversion of the London Chamber of Commerce, the collapse of Cobdenism, and the statesmanlike eloquence. of Mr. Deakin, who is the hero of the month. We observe, how- ever, with special regret an unwonted note of timorousness in the voice of the editor (who, if we are the "Cavalier of Cobdenism," may surely be termed "the Rupert of Reciprocity") when he deals with our suggestion that the Unionist leaders should have the courage to speak out in favour of universal training. He will not hear of such a proposal. Apparently the whole energy of the party must be devoted to Tariff Reform, and not an ounce can be spared to give the manhood of the nation a training in arms.—A pessi- mistic article on "The Failure of Liberalism" is contributed by Mr. Clayton, late editor of the New Age, a stalwart Radical, who declares that the country " will run the risk of Socialism or Tariff Reform, since both Sooialists and Tariff Reformers promise amelioration, and are unmistakably in earnest, rather than maintain in power for any length of time a Government that seems powerless to recognise social problems, let alone solve them."—Mr. Arnold-Forster, inn sequel to his previous article denouncing the policy of the Government as anti-national and vindictive, outlines a constructive programme for the Unionist Party. Of course, Tariff Reform must stand first ; otherwise there is little in Mr. Arnold-Forster's sketch which Free-trade Unionists can cavil at. We are glad to notice also that Mr. Arnold-Forster frankly admits that the sentiment which is opposed to Chinese labour is legitimate and deep-seated.— Mr. W. Morton Fullerton writes on Church and State in France as a thoroughgoing supporter of the policy of the French Government, and Lord Erroll states the case of the landlords against the Scotch Land Bill with force and ability. While ready to consent to a purchase clause as the only means of satisfying both parties, he condemns the measure as it stands as a calamity to agriculture, and notes as one of ite most unjust effects the fact that owners who have
encouraged small holdings in the past will suffer most. To apply methods suitable to the crofter area to the rest of Scotland reminds one, as Mr. Cochrane said in his excellent speech in the House on Tuesday, of the primitive practice of applying the same remedy to all diseases. The Bill, to summarise Lord Erroll's main arguments, will (1) drive capital away from the land, (2) swamp large farms, (3) penalise good land- lords, (4) aggravate the difficulties of equipment for the small tenant, and (5) sow discord between the two classes.—The article on "The Real Enemies of Tsardom," by "St. Peters- burg," is full of picturesque rhetoric, but leaves us in the dark as to whether the writer, whose style closely resembles that of Dr. Dillon, favours autocracy or Constitutionalism.—Mr. Maurice Low utilises the Harriman episode to continue his disparagement of Mr. Roosevelt as a politician. According to him, the President, while inspired by the loftiest motives, has carried his autocratic dictation to such lengths that people must either acquiesce in everything he does or risk the imputation of treachery. That, in our opinion, is a very conventional as well as a very untrue view. We are content to leave it to time to show whether our view or Mr. Low's is the true one.
Mr. J. A. Spender's paper in the Contemporary on "The Government and its Problems" is, like all that comes from
his pen, acute in analysis and temperate in expression, but at best it offers but cold comfort to his fellow-Liberals. The gist of the article is to be found in the statement that " under our present system, though the Liberal Party may be in, the Conservative Party is not out of power." Indeed, Mr. Spender goes so far as to say of Mr. Balfour's exercise of his " veto"
regard to the Education Bill that "it was the strongest exercise of individual power by a statesman that any of us living have witnessed, and it is a striking fact that it was exercised
by a statesman on the morrow of his defeat by a crushing majority, with every evidence that popular opinion was
against him." None the less, Mr. Spender doubts whether the Government should be pressed to produce their plan for dealing with the House of Lords this year. He also admits that the expansion of the Session's programme by the inclusion of a Licensing Bill and Small Holdings Bill is impracticable. His conclusions are therefore somewhat negative :—
"There is something to be said for Fabian tactics and some- thing to be said for forcing tactics, but there is nothing
to be said for a mix of the two. . . . . . We must not rely on tactics or leave the public in doubt about our meaning, or give them the impression that we are hanging on
to office or shirking a fight. The Government may so arrange
its programme as to defer the crisis, or it may so arrange its programme as to force the crisis, but, whichever it does, it
must be prepared to fight and to take all risks when the decisive moment comes. To convince its opponents that it will do this is its one chance of getting its measures through the House of Lords, for it may be quite sure that no quarter would be shown to it if the impression went abroad that it was unwilling to fight.
On these lines we may look to the future with much confidence. Liberalism is for the time being the one practical organised force in the country for the purposes of government. If it is wisely led it can appeal to the working class without losing touch with the middle class, and there is no reason for supposing that the electorate will, without great provocation, turn from it to an Opposition which is weak in personnel and divided in policy, and which offers us a commercial revolution for the benefit of tho producing classes to cover its dislike of Liberal reform."
We may note, in conclusion, that Mr. Spender assumes that "Tariff Reformers will dominate Unionist policy from hence- forth," an assumption somewhat at variance with his estimate of Mr. Balfour as a statesman to be reckoned with.—M. Paul Sabatier profoundly regrets the measures taken against Monsignor Montagnini and the confiscation of his papers by the French Government. But he contends that it is impossible, on the pretext that the seizure was a violation of public international law, to ignore these papers, or to go on as if they had not been published. Hence his paper, which con- demns the intellectual, moral, and religions bankruptcy of Pontifical diplomacy, and the shameless tactics of the Clerical Press. He sums up in the following weighty sentences :— "Catholicism is not injured, nor even religious authority, as the centre and instrument of Catholic unity ; but what has been
irremediably destroyed is the influence of an authority which calls itself purely religious and desires the benefit of that idealism, and yet involves itself mischievously in all the politioal questions. People think the Curia will be absolved by the public conscience by stating, for instance, that a celebrated secret society does the MSS, or that an the embassies are agencies of the same kind as that of the Rue de TElysee.' Supposing that were abso- lutely demonstrated, it would not follqw that it is excusable to indulge in similar action. The diplomatists of the Holy See are not ordinary diplomatists ; not only do they take precedence over their colleagues, but they are all ecclesiastics—that is to say, representatives of Christ."
—Mr. Foreman's paper on the American administration in the Philippines does not minimise the difficulties which have confronted the Americans, or the solid benefits which their rule has conferred on the Filipinos. As he puts it, government on democratic principles of an unwilling people is beset with so many difficulties that many thinking American politicians would gladly see their country wholly or partially relieved of the burden. Mr. Foreman apparently favours the scheme of joint protection by the United States, Japan, and Great Britain ; he would welcome a one-man rule if the supreme head of government were Major-General Leonard Wood, who in his opinion governed the Moro Province—which is under a semi-military control independent of the central insular Government—with snob extraordinary ability "that the highly efficient system of government there might in many respects serve as a pattern for the administration of the whole archipelago." His chief complaint is that America has not yet made it clear whether she intends to - hold the archipelago permanently as a colony under another name, or genuinely desires to prepare the Filipinos for eventual self- government. The agitation for autonomy is kept alive by the want of a definite policy at Washington, and this want leads the writer to the conclusion that the ultimate destiny of the Philippine Islands may be voluntary or compulsory union with Japan.—Mr. J. E. G. de Montmorency has an interest- ing paper on " Country Schools for Town Children," in which lie suggests "that select bands of children should be bodily drafted for one school term in the year (the term varying for each child each year so as to show all seasons at work) from the town schools to country schools, accommodation being found for them by the local rural educational authority in cottage homes in the vicinity of the rural schools."
He admits the difficulties, but does not regard them as insuperable. It would cost, according to his- estimate, less than £500,000 annually to remove one hundred thousand children to the country, and maintain them there for fourteen weeks. Half of this sum would come from the parents, and half would have to be found by voluntary subscriptions and rate and State aid ; but Mr. de Montmorency holds that it would be a small price to pay for an inestimable benefit.— Mr. W. Wybergh writes on " Imperial Organisation and the Colour Question" with candour• and moderation, and Mrs. Emily Crawford sends a gossipy budget of reminiscences of M. Berthelot. In illustration of his genial tolerance she tells
one excellent anecdote :—
" Not long before his death a deputation of anti-clericals called on him. He received them affably, talked a while, had up champagne, and, after filling glasses, proposed the health of the Pope, who had done so much for the Separation of Church and State."
Mr. Walter Long, writing in the Fortnightly Review on the Irish question, expresses himself with great moderation. His plea is that, the Unionist Party by no means rests its policy wholly on preserving order, and he points to a number of reforms which have improved the economic condition of Ireland. The difficulty, he insists, lies in the fact that the Nationalists prefer political agitation to agricultural and industrial development. In discussing the enlargement of local govern- ment, Mr. Long points out how difficult it is to carry this out. In Ireland, Councils, unlike those of England, oppressively demand that their officials shall be of the same political party as the majority of the Council. This being the case, "it would not be safe or fair to the minority to extend in any way the power already possessed by the majority in Ireland." Mr. Long argues that England will not submit to the responsibility without authority of Home-rule, or to the danger of separa- tion. A separate, and possibly hostile, Ireland across our trade routes providing shelter for our enemies is unthink- able.—Dr. Angelo Rappoport dissects the personality of Pobeclonoetzeff, and lays bare a most unpleasant anatomy. Had such a personage occurred in a work of fiction, we might have doubted the naturalness of the portraiture. But here the worst charges are justified by quotations from the works of this sinister figure, who for long was the evil genius of Russia. As Procurator of the Holy Synod, Pobedonostzeit controlled the activities of the Church, and he took good care that religious ideas such as are usually understood by Christians should make no progress. Symbols, images, mysteries, and ceremonies, he said, were " the only pillars of faith." The ignorance of the people was to be encouraged, and he declared that "in all these untutored minds, however, has been raised, as in Athens, an altar to the unknown God." To preserve the mystery of this altar, lest the enlightening teaching of St. Paul should penetrate the darkness of Little Russia, the translation of the New Testament into the dialect of the Ukraine was forbidden. Pobedonostzeff, fearful that the spread of Christianity might bring with it a strengthening and enlightening force, refused to allow the conversion of some of the pagan tribes of the Volga. In poi'. ,cs it was the same, and it was he who persuaded Alexander III, to take away some of the scanty liberties of local government and who placed the schools under the police.—Mr. Fox-Bourne's article on "Lord Cromer's Legacy" is a tepid and uncon- vincing attempt to persuade us that Egypt is ready for local government. The article is unconvincing because the writer brings no evidence to show that the Egyptian is yet capable of administering laws honestly, justly, and without favour. Mr. Fox-Bourne very unjustly insinuates that Lord Cromer has tried to keep Egyptians out of 'public life. The very reverse is the case. What Lord Cromer would not do was to give administrative posts of high importance and responsi. bility to natives who were unfit to hold them.
In Blackwood the first chapter of a military novel by the author of On the Heels of De Wet makes its appearance. To pronounce from a single chapter whether A Subaltern of Horse will equal in interest the author's former work would be obviously unfair. So far the characters do not convince us of their reality, as did "The Brigadier," "Mr. Intelligence," and "Miss Preterius." The situation indicated by this first chapter is as follows. A Subaltern of Dragoons, rich and capable, being bored with barrack life, makes a bet that he will disappear from society in London under the disguise of a butler for three months. The story leaves off at the point when the Subaltern in question has obtained three months' leave, and has bought at Tattersall's a horse with the reputation of bringing bad luck to its owner. How these two leading themes are to be worked out remains to be seen,—An unsigned article on India during the last fifty years impresses on us that although our relations with native Princes have improved, the attitude of the people towards us is no better than it was, and in some respects is worse. The individual Englishman in India is a bird of passage. His place is taken by a man fresh from home ignorant of the country. " The new men do not take up the work where their predecessors left off, but have to begin all over again for themselves." As an instance of native mistrust, we are told that when the sanitary officers in a cantonment ordered a ventilator to be made in huts occupied by servants, it was universally believed that this was done so that poison might he inserted through the opening. The author asks what can we expect of the inhabitants of a village when those in daily contact with the English are so credulous.—Mr. Charles Whibley contributes a study of the lip-service done to the word " Liberty " in America. Jefferson's description is quoted of the people of Philadelphia cutting off a pig's head as a symbol of Louis XVI.—" each one placing a cap of liberty upon his head, pronounced the word tyrant' "—unmoved by the thought of Republican slave- holders. In the present day the talk of liberty ill assorts with the presence of Tammany and Trusts. Mr. Whibley blames those who stand aloof, leaving to the "amateurs of graft and boodle" the politics of the country.
Mr. Arthur Symons has resuscitated for readers of the Monthly Review the forgotten poet John Clare. This writer, whose first works were published in 1820, was an agricultural labourer whose father was a pauper. What this means can only be realised by those who have studied village history of a hundred years age. Clare had a real, though not a very great, gift for verse, which developed gradually. Some examples are given; one poem, "The Dying Child," contains lines worth remembering.—An article by Mr. A. R. Orage treats of the elementary school from inside knowledge. This time the question is discipline. Mr. Orage gives various instances of the marvellous precision and military-like sub- Jordination which are attained .for the benefit of visitors. One
schoolmaster produced a deep impression upon strangers inspecting children by suddenly throwing down a football in the middle of a class of boys. Not an eye was lifted, all went on with their work. The effect had been rehearsed many times.
The Albany Review contains a very interesting article on the religious question in France by M. Paul Sabatier. In it is traced the struggle of the French Bishops with the Pope. It is curious to see how often it has turned out that declarations purporting to come from the Bishops have really been dictated from Rome. The writer asks : " Does not this in effect amount to the abdication of the Episcopate, and its absorption in Pontifical omnipotence P" M. Sabatier gives as a reason for the attitude of the Pope towards the French Government his abhorrence of the principles of the Revolution rather than any deeply laid schemes. We are told with emphasis that the Separation Law, "far from robbing the Church of its property, assured it to it indefinitely through the Associations for worship."—Major Seely writes of the Territorial Army. He says that no good army in England has ever been cheap. Cromwell's troopers, we are told, "received about the same rate of pay as a Lieutenant of cavalry does to-day," A citizen soldier for home defence, paid at a high rate for the time of his training, may be less expensive than a professional one who has to be maintained all the year round.