THE MAGAZINES.

PERHAPS the most significant feature in the new Nineteenth Century is the conspicuous absence of all articles on the fiscal controversy, and no doubt many readers will welcome the number none the less on that account. Mr. Edward Dicey's paper on "The Rival Empires" resolves itself into a not very convincing plea for increased vigilance in our relations with Russia. The argument may be condensed as follows. The advance and expansion of Russia-which stands for absolutism, obscurantism, and the negation of individual freedom and national independence-cannot be safely regarded by us with indifference or equanimity ; open hostility on our part is out of the question, and the only alternative is the consolidation of the Empire. Mr. Chamber- lain's scheme for the conversion of Great into Greater Britain may not be perfect, but at least it is the only one that holds the field, and if we do not avail ourselves of the opportunity, "all idea of consolidating the Empire will have to be post- poned for an indefinite period," and at the same time we shall abandon the only effectual means of raising an effective barrier against the Russification of Europe. Mr. Dicey expressly disclaims sympathy with the views of Urquhart, or we might have been tempted to institute comparisons between him and that famous Russophobe. But if possibilities of international friction are to be made the basis of an argument in favour of Imperial Federation, it is strange that so well informed a publicist as Mr. Dicey should have left Germany entirely out of his calculations.-'--- Mr. John Fortescue sends an admirably written and tem- perate, though to our mind wholly .unconvincing, plea for the fuller recognition of the military element in the re- organisation of the War Office. He contends that the teachings of history prove a Commander-in-Chief to be indispensable, that the civil side of the War Office is an anachronism, and that the substitution of a military organi- sation would make for economy. But he does not propose to abolish "the inevitable civilian, the Secretary of State."

Be should, in Mr. Fortescue's scheme, be assisted by a small Council, whose first duty should be to furnish the advice and information necessary to the Cabinet for the formulation of the military policy of the country. "The Captain-General (or Commander-in-Chief) should certainly be a member, and perhaps his Chief of the Staff ; but for the protection of the Secretary of State, the Captain-General and any members of his Staff should not form a majority of the military members." Finally, to get over the difficulty that the Cabinet can at present excuse delay by pleading the necessity of coming to Parliament for funds, he proposes the grant of "a small military chest—say, half a million—to be expended only on preparations for war when war seems imminent."--- Mr. Reginald Farrer's short but graphic paper, "Impressions of Korea," is remarkable for its vivid characterisation of a 'people who have maintained for two thousand years "a con- temptuous indifference to life, to well-being, and to all the resources of prosperity"

"By the evil star of the Koreans it has been arranged that their land is to be the Switzerland of the Far East—a territory to be fciught over for ever, but one that no nation can either itself possess or allow any other to hold. Korea is the victim of her geographical advantages, and the impressionist carries away with him the picture of a people indomitably patient, dumb with the callousness of " despair, that yet has the secret of happiness in its power to extract joy from the most unpromising material ; a nation

• stunned by the oppression of the ages out of all moral and mental vigour—yet still stout, and capable, perhaps, of both— a nation of sturdy apathetic sheep, whose silent indifference under the driving lash of the world may some day be found unexpectedly 'to have its limits or its possibilities."

The National Review devote a "Special Supplement" of sixty pages to the discussion of "Preference and the Food -Supply." The initial contention of the writer is that the 'Corn-laws were repealed as the result of the immense. 'national miscalculation that England could never cease to be mainly self-supporting. From that he proceeds by a "cross-examination of the facts" to establish to his satis-

faction the conclusion that the Corn-laws, by the immense stimulus they threw into our own agricultural production, gave the people at large cheaper food than they would other- wise have enjoyed. If we had only maintained a fixed duty, with a rebate in favour of the Colonies; the nation would have

been stronger, its trade larger,- its wealth greater, the tide of emigration to extra-British territory would have been stayed, Canada's population would be now twenty millions, and the, permanent greatness of the Empire would have been secured ;upon a basis of adequate population. As regards Mr. *Chamberlain's famous pledge, it is absolutely sincere, and will be carried out." He "bas given his word, and in any . event he will keep it, even if he should have slightly to revise

his Glasgow ' Budget ' in order to do so." This reminds one somewhat of the Irishman who said he would commit suicidei

or perish in the attempt. The writer's last word is that i" the' maintenance of Cobdenism must put. in the long run .a. premium on separation. We can have free imports without an Empire, but we can have no Empire -without preference." We wo-uld respectfully commend to his notice the article by Mr. Parser on Canada and the New Imperialism in the - current Contemporary. As for his "cross-examination of

facts," we may note that he has judiciously abstained from calling any surviving witnesses as to the alleged satisfactory condition of the consumer before the repeal of the Corn-laws.

Ilefbre quitting this subject, we may note that in the editorial. ."-Episodes of the Month," which if not "powerful and con-, `wincing," are exceedingly lively reading, we are told that "the perpetually shifting tactics on the part of Mr. Chamberlain's opponents afford an eloquent tribute to the amazing success of his campaign." May a humble follower of the "Mandarins

. of the Free-Food League" be allowed to retort that shifting tactics are indispensable in dealing with a chameleonie adversary. Proles& gals tulerit de mobilitate querentern ?-

Sir Rowland Blennerhassett's article on German Anglo- phobia may be usefully read in connection with Mr. Dicey's Russophobe deliverance in the current Nineteenth Century.

The value of Professor Mommsen's palinode is seriously dis-

ccunted by the quotations from his article in the North American. Review in 1900.—Sir Leslie Stephen's further instalment of reminiscences deals with his experiences as .editor of the Corn hill and the Dictionary of National'

Biography, and abounds in genial appreciations of the various authors with whom he came in contact,—John Addington Symonds, Professor Gardiner, Tennyson, Sir Henry Taylor, James Spedding, Ruskin, and lastly Darwin, of whom he says :---" To me, and my opinion was not exceptional, he appeared to be simply the most lovable person whom I ever encountered. . . . . . Men of science, I fear, are not always free from jealousy; but when Darwin welcomes a

friend's suggestion with his favourite By Jove,' it suggest& the unqualified glee of a schoolboy when a good stroke is struck on his side of the game."—Lastly, we must not forget

to note Mr. W. Vivian's engrossing summary, under the title " A Modern Forlorn Hope," of the collection of documents in which Admiral Cervera, has vindicated his action and that of his officers in the Spanish-American War.

Beyond question the most striking political article in the new Contemporary is that on Canada and the New Imperial-

ism by Mr. E. Ferrer, a Canadian writing from Ottawa. Mr. Ferrer sums up the situation by saying that Canadians are, satisfied with the existing connection with Britain, but that they are not going to permit the New Imperialists to degrade them by taking away any portion of their self-government; "certainly we are not at this day going to break with the faith and tradition of the New World so far as to serve as mercenaries in the Old." Of the many Anti-Imperialist in- fluences to be reckoned with, Mr. Fairer holds Canada'a geographical position the chief. "We in Canada, lying along-

side the United States from one ocean to another, can no more escape American influences," social and political, "than a man can get away from his shadow." As regards commercial relations, in view of the fact that "Canada is by odds the best customer the United States has in this hemisphere," he predicts that after the next Presidential Election the Republicans will probably be forced to take notice of the demand for freer trade with Canada which has arisen in New England and Minnesota. He accordingly bids the New Imperialists to consider the situation which would arise from the realisation of their policy :—

" They are asking England to depart from a policy under which she has prospered greatly, and adopt another, which, from the nature of the case, would militate against her foreign trade alike by taxing foreign products—i.e., by diminishing imports from foreign countries, which are paid for with exports—and by in- creasing the cost of her food and raw material, on the chance that it may enable her to augment the lesser trade with the Colonies, notwithstanding that the bulk of Canada's trade might at any- moment be captured. by the United States, simply by relaxing the, Dingley tariff.'

—Mr- Edouard Bernstein's paper on the growth of German exports is devoted primarily to establishing the important :fact that the greatest items in Germany's exporting list—coals, cotton goods, woollen goods, machines —are eitlser not protected at all, or are more damaget1 than benefited by the Protective duties. More than that, he shows by citations from the Statistical Year Book for the German, Empire that the greatest increase took place when the Protective duties had been lowered by , the Caprivi treaties. Mr. Bernstein does well to point out that in the regular course of business only those trades are in a position to " dump " their goods continuously below cost price on foreign markets which enjoy a real monopoly at home. These are, with few exceptions, trades which manufacture raw and half-made-up material for further manufacture, as they are the especial domain of Cartels and Syndicates. — We may also notice Sir Robert Hunter's charming tribute to the late Sir Joshua Fitch; a very sympathetic sketch of the King and Queen of Italy by "Ivanovich" ; and a very interesting collection of speci-

mens of the table-talk of the late Bishop Westcott, con- tributed by Archdeacon Boutdower, who was for eleven years.

his chaplain. Though. essentially marked by. a broad-minded toleration—note his reference to the Nonconformist Com- munions and the public history of the .Popes—the Bishop's

obiter dicta were often penetrating and acute, witness his observations on special prayers, on the objections to a "Review of Reviews," his distinction between the genius of the Latin and Greek languages, and his illuminating comment on the Vandyck portraits, which made him see how the Rebellion was not only inevitable but necessary : "These men could never

have been the fathers of the England that was to be ! There must have been new blood."

Mr. Mallock writes in the Fortnightly Review' of "The Myth of the Big and Little Loaf." In trying to dispel the mists of error by means of analytical epigrams and analogies, he himself creates fresh fogs by his misunder- standing of his opponents. He has constructed an itnaginau argument which he thinks to be the belief of the Spectator on

the question of the price of bread. He says :—

"According to the Spectator, the poorer classes have only just sufficient to spend on bread as it is,—an irreducible minimum-with famine lying beyond it. Thus in the year 1894 they [Lord Rose- bery and ourselves] would have told us that the maximum which the people could afford to pay was twenty-two shillings and ten- pence. They must mean, since they are speaking now, that it is nearly twenty-seven shillings" Thus we are supposed to choose an arbitrary price, and to declare that " destitution and famine" are at hand if that

particular price is raised. This is an excellent example of the old plan of making a dummy, labelling it your opponent,

and then proceeding to knock it down. If Mr. Mallock had cared to understand our position, he would have found that

what we contend is that the margin of income of a great portion of our population is narrow,—so much so that we ought to take the advantage free imports give us of securing the benefits of the unrestricted harvests of the world. Mr. J. S. Mann's article on our relations with Germany is mainly an analysis of the views of Professor Schiemann. This Teacher of Contemporary History at the University of Berlin

writes the weekly review of foreign affairs in the Kreuz Zeitung, the organ of Prussian Conservatism. The articles of Dr. Schiemann have been reprinted, and from these Mr.

Mann draws an interesting picture of the desire of moderate opinion in Germany as to relations with Britain. Apparently the excesses of German opinion during the Boer War are regretted, but only because they estranged Britain, which might be so useful to Germany. There is, in fact, about these

Professors, from the late Dr. Mommsen ddwnwards, a most engaging simplicity. They all say in various ways : We think

you unjust and oppressive to small countries, and fundament- ally immoral in your policy, but you must not think too much. about what our less cautious people say, because you can be so useful to us.' Professor Schiemann admits that the feelings of Germany are against us, but says the Government must not be guided by feeling but by policy. It is, therefore, for an organ- ised hypocrisy that we are asked to be cat's-paw, for the

advantages to Britain are never discussed, they being of too nebulous a character even for a German Professor. When it comes to facts about Britain, Professor Schiemann's in- accuracy is indeed marvellous. We are told that there exists in England a "journalistic consortium" which includes the Times, the Fortnightly, Contemporary, and National Reviews.

(The editor of the last is stated to have served in a Prussian regiment of Uhlans.) All 'these journalistic enterprises, as far as Germany is concerned, act in concert and are controlled from Prague, Russia, and Poland. Why the Spectator is left out does not appear. In any case, the omission makes us feel quite jealous. If Mr. Malmo is to be given a commission in the Uhlans in this way, we shall certainly expect one in the Guards for ourselves. That a Professor of the University of Berlin should be possessed of such ridiculous ideas seems to

suggest that his connection with German journalism enabled him to see how the newspapersof the Fatherlandwere controlled

by the Leyds Press ,bureau. When Professor Schiemann comes to our education controversy he is no more fortunate,

for he believes that the Board-schools were Nonconformist and were handed over to the Church ! Such statements make us feel that the proper Chair for Professor Schiemann to fill in the University of Berlin would be that of the Romance of Contemporary History.

Those who read with interest last month in Blackicood Mr. Hugh Clifford's " Sally " will not be disappointed with the present instalment. This wonderful study of a Malay bey transplanted into England cannot fail to be of deep interest and illumination to any one who has ever considered the problem of the mixing of East and West. The young man at the point of his history we have now reached has become so English that he in the most natural way falls in love with an

English girl. So complete has been his acclimatisation that he is unable to feel, except as a vague haunting suspicion, that his race and colour can be of any consideration. We shall look forward to the next part with great interest, when the crisis will be reached.—The unsigned article describing Sir William Willweks's proposal to irrigate Mesopotamia is very interesting. It is argued that it

would be no more difficult to restore the prosperity of a great region than it has been to wake the great dam at Assouan, for which Sir William was responsible. The maps which accompany the article show the vast and, elaborate system of ancient irrigation canals that once made fertile this country, the centre of which was Babylon. The fertility

has long passed and desolation now reigns. Sir William Willcocks says :—

" This appearance of the country denotes that some sudden and overwhelming mass of water must have prostrated everything on its way ; while the Tigris as it anciently flowed is seen to have left its channel and to have taken its present course through the most flourishing portion of the district, severing in its mad career the neck of the great Nahrwan artery and spreading devastation over the whole district around. Towns, villages, and canals, men, animals, and cultivation must have been engulphed in a moment ; but the immediate loss was doubtless small compared to the misery and gloom which followed. The whole region for a space of 400 kilometres, averaging about 30 in breadth, was dependent on this conduit for water, and contained a population so dense, if we may judge from the ruins and great walls traversing it in its whole extent, that no spot on the globe perhaps could excel it."

"A Second Voyage to Laputa," which is to be found among the editorial pages of the Monthly Review, is a clever piece

of political satire,—unmistakable, but not envenomed. After an interview with the King the traveller descends to the mainland from the flying island and goes to visit my Lord Lades, and is received by him "in a little tent or tabernacle." Here Gulliver is told of the ravages made by a plague, which had subverted the intellects of many of the nation, of which " dumpophobia," " tariffyxia," and " fiscalitis " were the worst forms. In company with his host, the traveller pays a visit to the famous University, where they were received by the Sub-Dean with "the most urbane effrontery." A message reaching the traveller that the Dean himself was lecturing in the great ball, he set off to hear the end of the discourse, which had already been proceeding for two hours. The subject was the religious aspect of arithmetic.

Two students supplied the Dean with figures out of rag-bags, which he wrote down upon a blackboard and added up. "If by chance the sum did not answer his expectation, he rubbed it out quickly, saying very truly that it was but an illustration of his ideas and of no moment." After doing this several times, the lecturer suddenly produced two buns of equal size from his coat-tail pockets, explaining that one contained a pennyweight of flour less than the other, but that the deficiency had been made up by adding some tea- leaves lent by the Secretary for War. The rest of the lecture we must leave our readers to find out for themselves, merely referring them to such "points of the speech" as "one man's boom is another man's doom," and that foreign food should be avoided, "above all by taking it lying down."—The Rev A. Stapylton Barnes gives a curious historical study of the attempt made by Charles IL to obtain reunion with Rome. The documents quoted, some for the first time, are to be found in Paris and Rome, though we are not told with any accuracy to which place they severally belong. A certain Richard Bellings, the secretary of Henrietta Maria, was sent to Rome with the utmost

secrecy to negotiate. The " proposition " for reunion is a curious document setting forth that Charles would accept the profession of faith in accordance with the Council of Trent, and that he is prepared to break with all Protestants and to call the Reformation a Deformation. On the other band,

existing English Bishops and clergy are to be accepted if they acquiesce and are reconsecrated, keeping their wives ; newly ordained priests to be celibate. Priests in their disputations with Protestants were not to lay stress on post-Apostolic miracles, and were not to speak of the material fires of purgatory. Subjects- who preferred to risk their souls by remaining Protestants were to be allowed free exercise of their religion. The Pope's infallibility or right to depose Kings was not to be discussed in any way. Mr. Barnes says that it is not known why the negotiations fell through, and suggests that Rome may have known the temper of England better than Charles. May it have been that the Pope felt him to be untrustworthy and said, like Cromwell : "He is so damnably debauched he would ruin us all"? Strangely enough, Mr. Barnes falls into the delusion he attributes to Charles, and says of reunion with Rome that perhaps it "may yet be brought about, on lines not so very dissimilar from those that Charles laid down, before a very great number of years have passed away." How strangely he misreads the attitude of the bulk of his countrymen, who, though they will tolerate extreme opinions in individuals, would never for a moment consider a return to Romanism in Church or Stat .