THE MAGAZINES.

IN the new Nineteenth Century Sir Roper Lethbridge leads off. with a paper on "Imperial Disintegration," prompted by the, Reciprocity Agreement between Canada and .the United States. Starting with a speech of Lord Beaconsfield, delivered in 1872, Sir Roper Lethbridge compiles an anthology of extracts from the utterances of leading statesmen down to the present day with a view to showing how the virus of

Cobdenism has infected Liberalism with anti-Imperialist tendencies and now dominates the present Administration. The weak point in his argument is that, out of an article, of twenty pages, only one paragraph deals with the atti tude of the Unionist Party towards Imperial Preference between 1872 and 1887, and that in the form of a general statement that " we English Imperialists are really the disciples and followers of those Colonial, and especially Canadian, statesmen who have always been the pioneers and the apostles of the Imperial idea." It may be perfectly true that " at this moment the solid Unionist Party is eagerly desirous of grasping the outstretched hand [of Canada] and accepting the offer in the same magnanimous spirit as that in which it is made." But in view of what successive Unionist Administrations failed to do during twenty years of office, it is hardly fair to saddle the Liberals with the entire

responsibility of a neglect which was not their monopoly.— Mr. J. Wilson Potter, ex-Chairman of the General Shipowners' , Society of London, who supports the Declaration of London in a temperately written article, starts from the sound assump. tion that the freedom to conduct a maritime war efficiently is in- finitely more important for us than the gain, when neutral, of any material trading advantage. There is not much that is new in the arguments by which he seeks to establish that the Declara- tion of London is calculated to secure this advantage. He maintains that too much importance can be made of the con- version of merchant vessels on the high seas, insists on the restrictions which hedge about the destruction of neutrals, and protests strongly against the view that justice cannot be expected from the International Prize Court. As regards expert opinion, he contends that many of the leading London shipowners and the more important of the two shipping societies in Liverpool are in favour of the , Declaration, while the rest of the shipping community of the United Kingdom accept it, save practically on one point- i.e., their fear that under Articles 33 and 34 neutrals will be unduly restricted in the carriage of food supplies to our ports , in war time. This point he meets by asserting that "directly our Navy is unable to protect our carrying trade, at that moment the war is over as far as Great Britain is concerned. If we can protect our own merchant vessels, the neutrals trading to our ports will be equally protected by us."—Rear- Admiral the Hon, V. A. Montagu condemns the Declaration-in a short article in which he dealt; mainly with the two questions

of conditional contraband and the conversion of merchant

'vessels into commerce destroyers on the high seas. His argument may be summed up in the phrase inter arma silent

Declarations.—Mr. Noel Buxton, M.P., writes on " Young Turkey after Two Years," and finds many evidences of progress : greater freedom of travel and of speech ; a considerable increase of trade; a serious attempt to reform the army and admit Christians to all ranks; an increased revenue ; and greater regularity in the payment of soldiers, gendarmerie, and police. He admits, per contra, the resort to widespread cruelty in the carrying out of the policy of repression in Macedonia and Albania. " No improvement has occurred which inclines the Christian population, at least of European Turkey, to make the best of the situation." Yet, with all deductions, he contends that, since Europe has accepted the right of Young Turkey to a friendly trial, there can be no question of our duty to pursue such a policy as will give to reformed Turkey the utmost help :—

" This is not to say that mistakes and barbarities should be over- looked. Bather the position of a sincere and energetic supporter would entitle us to represent the humane as well as the material interests of Great Britain, and would add weight to our protests. Failing some influence which will keep the Turkish policy upon lines of conciliation at home and abroad, the continuance of Turkey itself is uncertain, for she must in that case maintain a great army, while a great army, if efficiently maintained, will in- evitably drag her into bankruptcy ; and at the same time she must repress progressive and Christian elements; yet these very ele- ments are necessary to her if the wealth of the country is to be developed sufficiently to make a civilised State. British influence, in labouring actively for the development of Turkey, would be not only maintaining her tradition as the friend of national aspirations. but would be serving the cause of international peace."

--Mr. F. Warre Cornish prefers a weighty plea for the fuller recognition of the laity in the Church by the establishment of parochial lay councils, with power to administer parish funds and appoint and dismiss parish officers. The incumbent's position would then be " that of a constitutional monarch or head of the executive, not of an autocrat."—We may also note Mr. J. W. Cross's interesting paper on the national danger involved in the depletion of our gold reserves, and Sir E. Ray Lankester's plea for Compulsory Science versus Compulsory Greek.

The Declaration of London is discussed in the National by Mr. H. W. Wilson, who begins his hostile analysis by the statement that the Declaration does not represent the views of Sir Edward Grey, as expressed in his instructions to the British Delegates at The Hague and London Conferences, but what was imposed on him by foreign Powers and in especial by

Germany. He compares Articles 33 and 34 with the German draft submitted before the Conference of 1908 in support of this view, and meets Sir Edward Grey's allegation that pre-

sent international practice permits the destruction of food in neutral ships, while the Declaration would forbid it, with a fiat negative. According to Mr. Wilson, the Declaration would sanction the practice, while all precedents are against it. Apropos of the destruction of neutral ships by belligerent cruisers Mr. Wilson makes a good point. "The mere fact that Britain, who in the past was accused of carrying to an extreme limit of severity her belligerent rights at sea, had never permitted her own cruiser captains to destroy neutral ships, is the strongest possible presumption against the justice of such a claim." Mr. Wilson adversely criticises the composition of the International Prize Court, in which the Dominions are unrecognised, though Servia and Switzerland have each the right of appointing one judge for one or two years in every period of six years.—Mr. Albert Carman, writing from Montreal, discusses the Reciprocity Agreement from a hostile point of view as a menace to the very existence of the British Empire. He anticipates that it will be "held up" temporarily at both Washington and Ottawa, but that will only be a pre- liminary skirmish. "The Democrats will come in at Washington; and we will probably be presented with even a broader proposal. Then we must face the problem and make a definite decision; and there is a growing feeling amongst us that we will decide for a commercially in- dependent Canada, awaiting a scheme of Imperial Re- ciprocity which will render our connection with the Empire imperishable." Mr. Carman's remark that " business is no more business alone between Canada and the United States than it is between Austria and Servia " should, be studied in the light of Mr. Maurice Low's "American Affairs," in which

he discusies the course of thi_negotiations between Ottawa and Washington, the way in which the complete nationality of the Dominion has impressed the Americans, and the revival of the talk of annexation. The argument that it is " incon- ceivable that Canada can ever hope to equal the United States in population or wealth," and that she must therefore gain by consolidation, is not likely to hasten a consummation so pleasing to the megalomaniac American element.—M. Phllippe Millet contributes a somewhat sensational article on "The French Army and the Black Force." In consequence of her persistently falling birth-rate, France is confronted with the necessity of making good the national shortage of recruits by drawing more freely than at present on the black races of her colonial empire. M. Millet states the case for and against the expansion of this force and its employment in a European war, inclining, with certain reserves, to support the " black force polio,'" on the ground of the extreme urgency of France's position. M. Millet hazards the surmise that the development of this new policy may furnish us with a precedent for a similar use of our large reserves of men now left untouched in India. Another result of the new policy is the importance of the command of the sea between Franca and her African shores. " Not only will she be compelled to concentrate all her fleet in the Mediterranean, but she will depend much more than she did on England's support for her African mobilisation."—We have read with much pleasure Mr. H. C. Biron's spirited onslaught on the superior persona who belittle the genius of Thackeray. Mr. Austin Dobson contributes one of his charming eighteenth-century studies on Stowe, the famous seat of Lord Cobham, commemorated in verse by Pope and Thomson, and frequently mentioned byr Walpole in his " Letters."

The editor of the Contemporary, who pays a brief bUt eloquent tribute to his colleague and contributor, the late Dr.. J. B. Paton, reprints the paper on " Forms of Home Rule,' contributed to the Contemporary in April, 1892, by the Lord Chancellor. Lord Loreburn discusses the different schemes of Home Rule—(a) with Irish Members excluded from. Westminster, (b) retained to speak and vote- on all subjects, and (c) retained with liberty to take part only in Imperial questions—and, after frankly admitting the serious difficulties inherent in each solution, declares he would accept for a time any of them rather than go on as now "with Ireland at heart mutinous, under an unconstitutional rule, contaminating- our own traditions of freedom, and with a congestion of business in Parliament so serious that the prime wants of our own popula:- tion can scarcely be discussed, while public expenditure evades- control, and foreign, colonial, and Indian matters are deter- mined by a virtual autocracy of Ministers and permanent officials." He is prepared to accept any of these Systems, because any of them could be but a- preliminary stage to the- fourth and ideal system under which each kingdom should pass its own laws and choose its o*n Ministers, " combining- to regulate what is common to all three, and preserving unim- paired the sovereignty of Parliament for occasions of neces- sity," with the result that " all difficulties would vanish.' The amazing thing is not so much that Lord Loreburn should have written this article in 1892, but that as Lord Chancellor, nineteen years later, he should consent to its reproduction, and to pronounce the main view on which it is founded as still sound.—" Master Mariner" replies to the military critic of the Times on the question of invasion from the nautical standpoint, and adheres to the arguments he put forward in the Contemporary in February, 1909. The gist of his case -is that a sudden raid is beyond the capabilities. of even the German General Staff. But " Master Marind is no sentimentalist. He condemns "the unfortunate agitation for a reduction in naval expenditure " carried on in the Nation, and warns us "not to hug the delusion that invasion is impracticable under any conditions. It is only impracticable so long as we take the proper steps to defeat it on the water, which will ever demand sacrifices on our part if we would retain our national independence."—Sir John Macdonell writes on " The Referendum versus Representative Government." He maintains that representative goverii- ment and direct legislation are irreconcilable ; that the Referendum would make the problem of curbing the excesses of democracy more difficult than it is at present :--- • ' in essence of the representative system is trust by the many in the worthiest available. It is this trust which gives to re- presentative government what is best in aristocracy without its

drawbacks. It is this trust, used on the whole honestly and wisely, which has so far confuted the oldest and most common accusations against democracy ; and such hope as exists that the :evils incident to democracy may be more and more avoided depends upon the continuance of a system under which the many „repose confidence in a select few. And this element the Referen- dum or Initiative would weaken."

Wynford Dewhurst has an interesting paper on

impressionism, the genesis of which he traces to the influence Of Turner and Constable's pictures, coupled with Ruskin's exposition of their underlying principles, on Monet, Pissarro,

and other French painters during their sojourn in London in 1870.

In the Fortnightly Mr. H. F. B. Lynch writes an article on the Baghdad railway in which he seeks to blear away some

of the fictions of the controversy. One of these is Germany's contention that we are always trying to hem her in and thwart her legitimate interests. Our attitude towards railway expan- sion in Anatolia, Mr. Lynch contends, is a complete refutation of the charge. Another imputation is that the enemies of Germany have frightened the Turks by making it appear that the Fatherland contemplates sending colonists to take posses- sion of lands in Turkey. With reference to this, Mr. Lynch points out that it is not the enemies of Germany who have made these statements, but General von der Golts. " He informs us that Abdul Harold, towards the close of his reign, had conversed with him on the subject, and had expressed the desire that the Germans should establish colonies on both sides-of the Baghdad railway. He adds that the Sultan was pot jesting." A very important phase of the controversy for as to consider is that in Germany the projected railway is represented. in two different lights. When it is a question Of i-aising money to finance the enterprise the railway is described .as a purely commercial undertaking and without political bias. 'When, however, a writer like Dr. RZhrbach, who has journeyed "to "the region in question four times, wishes to inspire his

lbountrymen with the importance of the undertaking, he writes in this strain. After declaring an invasion of England by sea is impossible, he-goes on thus:— "England can be attacked and mortally wounded by land from Europe only in one place—Egypt. . . . The conquest of Egypt by a Mahommedan Power like Turkey would also imperil Eng- land's hold over her 60 million Mahorumedan subjects in India, besides prejudicing her relations with Afghanistan and Persia. Turkey can never dream of recovering Egypt until she is mistress of a developed railway system in Asia Minor and Syria, and until, through the progress of the Anatolian railway to Baghdad, she is in a position to withstand an attack by England upon Mesopotamia. Thepolicy of protecting Turkey, which is now pursued by Germany, has no other object but the desire to effect an insurance against the danger of a war with England."

Thequotation comerfroldIfiaiofirbacla'a "Tie Baghdadbahn,"

Berlin 1911, and the italics are those of the author.— Mr. (hr- yin has to shelter himself from the Canadian trouble by talking abou t annexation. Grant, for a mom ent,that annexation is coming about. Would such an enormous change as that and all the workings of tendencies that it implies be put a stop to by preferential trading with England? Mr. Garvin assumes the-eager national feeling of the United States desiring to absorb Canada. But he does not consider the possibility of the existence of an equally strong desire for national survival being found in the Dominion—The arguments in favour of the " Declaration of London" advanced by " Excubitor " are that by it, as a belligerent, we are practically unaffected, and it gives additional protection to our food supplies and raw material during war, and assists in " keeping the ring." He aloes not give any answer to the contention of the Naval officer who wrote in this magazine last month that the increased facilities for turning merchant ships into ships of war will mean that we must enlarge our fleet and distribute it more widely. We -should have to watch not only battle Beets but merchantmen as welL ' There is in Blackwood a terrible account of the results of democracy in South America, though it would not be fair to attribute all the evils to democratic institutions alone ; race must be taken into account. But the plunder, murder, and anarchy of the South'American Republics are appalling. In many ways they recall the worst aspects of mediaeval Italy with the bravi and the tyrannies (called Republics), but without any 91 the counterbalancing advantages of culture and genius. It seettis.that to-day in Brazil and Argentina the hired ruffian is a recognised institution, as it was in Rome and Milan 600years ago.—Sir Mortimer Durand brings his account of his "Holiday in South Africa " to an end. He concludes with some wise words about Empire. We must expect that as time goes on the descendants of settlers will naturally feel their new country has the first claim upon them, and we must also remember what harm can be done by a supercilious air, often not intentionally offensive, on our part. Lastly, we must see that England is secure and that for the sons of the Empire the way to it is open at all time—in peace or in war—Colonel Sir C. Watson gives a first-hand account of a gallant and well-managed stroke which ended in the peaceful occupation of the citadel of Cairo after the battle of Tel-el- Kebir. Sir C. Watson was in command of a body of English cavalry numbering less than 200, and he caused the garrison of over 6,000 to disperse quietly and let him occupy the stronghold. Two Egyptian officers of the surrendered garrison assisted, and showed good sense and complete trust- worthiness. One of these, indeed, afterwards asked if he might hot be given the English war medal !—Mr. Weigall always writes things worth reading about Egypt. Here we have a most convincing description of a far-away gorge in the lime- stone cliffs, with its pools of water. A Coptic tradition makes it a place of pilgrimage, but earlier still, perhaps, it was a shrine of Pan. To read the description is to long to go to thin place, which must be like thebaaground of a picture of classic beauty and romantic feeling.

In the English Review Mr. Markin writes of " Idealed John Bullesses" and of their desire to turn all things in the world into personal adornment. "-Indeed, the John Bullesses want to wear everything—metals, stones, animals! skins, dead leaves and dead birds."--The space usually occupied by the editor's comments on public affairs is this month devoted to " The Coming of Smith." Smith is the personification of English democracy, and we have an amusing and in many ways very true account of this personage. His awakening is attributed to the Boei War and Tariff Reform, but really it was the result of the second generation of School Board teaching. Smith will not have his food taxed, but he takes no account of Karl Marx, who is not only theoretical, but foreign. England to-day is being run for Smith—cheap theatres, newspapers, books, all are to catch his favour ; politicians of all sorts angle for him, and Smith knows that he is the most important person in the country. Whether he will, when he asserts himself fully, be quite what the English Review would have him to be remains to be seen. We are told to expect that his taste in the drama will be for Shakespeare and Shaw, but we hope his sense of humour will save him' from such a 'combination. Nor, perhaps, will he allow Miss Smith to adopt the views about marriage attributed to her by this magazine. Anyhow, Smith is a real person, and we are not in the least afraid of him, if he will be himself and not the tool of political party managers.—Mr. Frederic Harrison becomes quite cross with people who wish to criticise the Declaration of London. It is to be rejected or swallowed whole. The natural man, no doubt, bankers after an infallible Church, and Mr. Harrison finds his" at The Hague. All the same, we wonder what would have been said of those who now criticise details if they had merely advocated rejection without giving any reasons. We will quote one sentence which is characteristic not only of this article, but of the general attitude of those who have been arguing so vehemently for the acceptance of the Declaration: "If the new International Court be not all we could wish, it is obviously better than the Prize Court of an enemy." The assumption is always that England is suing for favours at the hands of her enemies, and will maintain herself, not by her own strength, but by "Declarations." If we ever enter into a great struggle in this spirit, heaven help us ! We think, also, that it is time for Mr. Harrison and those who think with him to leave off ins;nuating that people who feel bound to enquire earnestly into this question do so merely to embarrass the Government. To refuse to admit that your opponents on a great national issue can be acting on patriotic motives is to degrade the discussion of public affairs.

In the United Service Magazine for March an interesting article is that by Colonel Pilkington, entitled "Soldiers for the Land." The object of the article is to show (1) that the peculiar conditions of service in the British Army make it not

merely desirable but a matter of bare justice to provide for the future careers of officers and men who are now set adrift in the prime of life ; (2) that our Army conditions admit of a preparation for the agricultural career being given during service at very small cost and without any sacrifice of military efficiency ; (3) that the Empire needs the provision of settlers for the land, and that there is a practically unlimited field for such settlers, while agriculture is the only career for which the greater number of Army men could be prepared during service ; (4) that in the Colonies it would be possible to finance the settlement of soldiers on the land; (5) that we possess in the system of co-operation as applied to the business of agriculture the key to the solution of the problems involved. "It is to rural populations that we look for the best personnel for the Army," says Colonel Pilkington. " There is, therefore, a peculiar fitness about the design of again recruiting the rural population from those who have passed through the ranks." He adds : " No design, indeed, has more ancient precedents." His reference is, no doubt, to the plans of Augustus—plans kept alive for all time in the "Eclogues " of Virgil. Will it be possible, we wonder, for Colonel Pilkington to find another Virgil to sing his double policy of " back to the land" and proper provision for the Army veteran P