THE MAGAZINES.

BOTH sides of the fiscal controversy are represented in the Nineteenth Century, but the Protectionist cause is not very happy in its advocate, Mr. Lionel Phillips. Mr. Chamberlain, he admits, is inclined to err by forcing the pace when a more cautious mode of progression would be preferable. From this he proceeds to the more damaging admission that "if he [Mr. Chamberlain] really cherishes the idea that the masses can be induced to pay more for their food on the chance of higher wages he is probably doomed to disappointment," adding somewhat naively, "but is it not highly likely that, as the result of his investigation, he has found a road that leads the same way without involving so serious a proposal " Mr.; Phillips goes on to say that "for fiscal purposes the Colonies must be regarded as a unit Any attempt to differentiate between the various Colonies or dependencies, or to take account of physical conditions or geographical positions, will sooner or later lead to dispute and disruption." Now it is precisely this differentiation which is the inevitable corollary of the preferential system.—Mr. Mallock's paper is chiefly note- worthy for his handling of the " implications " of the figures of assessed incomes. The fundamental canon he lays down is that the greater the progress a country makes in its secondary industries, the greater is the loss entailed by a contraction of its root industries, or of the imported supply of those com- modities—food and raw materials—which root industries pro- duce elsewhere. The bearing of this contention on the fiscal problem is easy to apprehend. Mr. Mallock, we may also note, does good service in rebutting the arguments of those alarmists who allege that the excess of imports over exports is paid for by a constant drain on our capital. That allega- tion, as he shows, involves the omission of our shipping industry as an item of income, and a curious disregard for the nature of the commodities which we import. If we deduct from our total imports, estimated at 2450,000,000 in 1901, the £170,000,000 represented by raw materials and £8,000,000 by rails, girders, Sze., used in works of construction, we have a remaining total of £273,000,000, of which £200,000,000 is represented by food, £35,000,000 by dress, and £14,000,000 by fancy goods and tobacco. On this Mr. Mallock comments :— "It is not conceivable that the British nation as a whole is annually getting rid of more than f.:40,000,000 of its capital in order that its wives and daughters may wear silk gowns, furs, artificial flowers, and lockete."—Lord Avebury acquits Mr. Chamberlain of blame in bringing forward the question of preferential tariffs, in view of the pressure of Colonial opinion, but adduces a mass of valuable facts and figures in support of the maintenance of the existing system. Lord Avebury would justify retaliation in certain cases— notably the coasting trade—but only as a last resort. In regard to the taxation of food, he observes that in the long run such a tax would hamper our manufactures in the same

way as a tax on raw materials. "The word 'Protection' sounds well, but it is misleading. The fact is that a country can only protect one trade at the expense of the others." Turning to the Colonies, Lord Avebury adduces figures to prove that our competition in Colonial markets is not so much w*th foreign manufacturers as with Colonial producers, and that any trade which a preferential tariff could transfer to us from other European countries is but small. The recent advance of Germany he attributes as largely due to technical science, and adds :—" A development of commerce won, and fairly won, by science and skill cannot be met by Protection. But I believe Germany's success would have been even more striking if her trade had been free." As regards Canada, she "has given us a preference and we recognise it gratefully ; but her fiscal system presses with special severity on British goods " ; for even after the preference our goods pay on an average 18 per cent. of their value, those of the United States, which are nearly three time greater in value, paying only 12 per cent. "To estimate the value of a preference, we must therefore know what the general tariff is to be." But Lord Avebuty views with not unnatural alarm the prospect of bargaining with our Colonies. "We may seem to favour one Colony, or one interest, and may find that instead of closer union we have roused jealousy, suspicion, and animosities."—Mr. Longford (late H.M. Consul at Nagasaki) sends an interest- ing paper on "The Growth of the Japanese Navy " ; and Mr. Michael MacDonagh writes entertainingly on the music-hall and street songs of the day. One curious fact which he notes is that no music-hall songs are written by women. But the inducement is not great : "the average music-hall poet is content with 5s. for his verses," and in the great majority of cases he cannot be said to be underpaid.

We have so often found ourselves of recent years in sym- pathy with the public-spirited and patriotic attitude of the National Review that it is with the utmost regret we note its uncompromising advocacy of the new fiscal policy. The prin- cipal contribution to the controversy in the September issue takes the form of what may be called a polemzeon of a hundred and six pages on" The Economics of Empire" by the assistant. editor. It is impossible for us to enter into detailed discus- sion of this document. We are, however, glad to see that the writer admits that it is better to have a larger demand for your goods than a smaller, and that "hostile tariffs are, of course, a means of diminishing the demand for your goods, and stopping your export wholly or partially." But discussion is impossible with opponents who do not hesitate to describe Lord Goschen as a "wise and eminent Mandarin, who professes to be appalled by the risks of Mr. Chamberlain's policy ''—which is further described as the greatest scheme put before Englishmen since Chatham—or who contend that no one is hurt by the raising of the quartern loaf by one halfpenny.—Pan-Germanism in Hungary, according to M. Ferencz Herczeg, is like the snakes in Iceland. The movement was actively pushed by agents of German political associations, but has been effectively countered by a society boycott led by Count Albert Apponyi. "At present the propaganda confines itself to a long range bombardment of Hungary through the medium of the German press, for which no kind of projectile is too brutal to be used." In conclusion, M. Herczeg observes that "Hungary consti- tutes a firm support of the Triple Alliance, but that support would in the space of a moment become as weak as water should the maintenance of that alliance imply, even theoreti- cally, the relationship of guardian and ward between Germany and Hungary."—Mr. Maurice Low in his "American Affairs" deals, inter alia, with the lynching problem, and notes that the lynching of negroes is only condemned in those cities where it does not take place, while it is justified or condoned by the leading Southern papers. Justice Brewer, of the Supreme Court, who has done his best to arouse the deadened public conscience, predicts a popular reaction, with legislation to punish the guilty; but Mr. Low fears he is too sanguine. At any rate, there are, unhappily, no signs of reaction at the moment. As to the results of the Americanisa- tion of Western Canada by the influx of farmers from the States Mr. Low has no misgivings. He dismisses the notion that America is jealous of the development and continuous prosperity of Canada. "As the New York Evening Post so well says, a populous Canadian West is better for the United

States that an uninhabited wild. The richer and more populous Canada is, the greater will be her power to spend money, and the greater will be her requirements." Further, as against Professor Goldwin Smith, be holds that political will probably follow commercial allegiance in the case of the American settlers. "I! the American farmer does well in Canada it is more than likely that the next generation will see him more Canadian than the Canadians."—Of the miscel- laneous articles, we may note Sir Leslie Stephen's charming reminiscences of his fourteen years' residence at Cambridge, Mr. H. F. Abell's eloquent plea for the extension of Sunday recreation, and Mr. T. Rice Holmes's extremely able and well- reasoned defence, on utilitarian grounds, of a classical edu- cation. The pith of his argument is to be found in these sentences. "Establish in England, if you will, schools analogous to the Realgymnasien of Germany : but, 0 anti- classicists, since you are for ever dinning into our ears that we must make Germany our educational model, follow the wise example of Germans, and in your Realgymnasien make the study of Latin compulsory."

Professor A. V. Dicey, who has hitherto refrained from any public pronouncement on the fiscal controversy, breaks silence to good purpose in the September Contemporary. His adhesion to the Free-trade side would be valuable in any case, but it is rendered all the more so by two considerations. In the first place, he is a reluctant witness, being, as he observes, biassed

by no prejudice against a statesman whom he respects and admires, or a Government "which has rendered inestimable ser- vices both to the United Kingdom and to the British Empire." Secondly, his testimony is valuable because his criticisms are political, and deal effectively with the most plausible arguments of the Protectionist champions. In establishing the proposition that the new fiscal policy does not make for Unionism Pro- fessor Dicey is on familiar ground. It is in rebutting the contention that it makes for Imperialism that the real strength of his argument resides. So far from the system of preferen- tial tariffs conducing to greater affection between England and

her Colonies, it means, he asserts, nothing else than a constant bargaining between them :—

"Preferential tariffs mean of necessity a system of constant haggling, wherein the immediate or apparent interest of England will be set against the immediate or apparent interest of a Colony, wherein each party must, from the nature of the case, try to get as much and give as little as he can, and wherein, though each party expects to be treated with something of generosity, nobody can say definitely what is fair, and still less therefore what is generous. Who will decide whether in return for duties which give some advantage, for example, to the Canadian farmer as against his foreign competitor, and may raise the price of wheat in England, it is enough that the Canadian Dominion, without lowering the duties on certain English goods, raises the duty thereon as against foreign countries ? Does any one really expect that Australian manufacturers, and for that matter Australian workmen, who believe that Protection is the source of Australia's prosperity, will be willing, as regards England, to reduce duties on imports so as to let in English competition ? But if not, what will be the gain to England that duties are increased against foreign countries if they remain sufficiently high to exclude English trade ? If my brother locks his door in my face, it is no consolation that he double locks it against an ordinary acquaintance."

Professor Dicey goes on to show that the advocates of the new policy are led to underrate its political dangers by three causes. They confuse the proposed system with a Zollverein, though it does not establish Free-trade throughout the Empire; they attach weight to the consideration that preferential tariffs are desired by Colonial statesmen, irrespective of the fact (on which Sir Wilfrid Laurier has so strongly insisted since Professor Dicey wrote) that the statesmanship

which is to unite the Empire must be based on the wishes and interests of England no less than of the Colonies ; and thirdly,

they imagine that the new finaneial policy will lead to Federal union, whereas anything which tends to force the pace or hurry on prematurely that consummation must inevitably be fraught with enormous perils.—Mr. J. A. Hobson, in a paper on "The Inner Meaning of Protectionism," sets himself to show how Protectionism is based on a false conception of patriotism, with the allied sentiment of self-sufficiency. As he puts it, "nothing short of a protective policy of 'Thorough' making for the well-nigh complete economic isolation of our Empire, by a -virtual prohibition, not only of imports but of exports, can avail to safeguard the nation against the imaginary perils of a Free Trade economy which

is only the industrial aspect of the slowly growing inter- nationalism with which lies the future of civilisation."—The late Sir Charles Gavan Duffy's posthumous paper on "The Real Carlyle" is in welcome contrast to the gratuitous muck- raking with which we have been lately. surfeited. The tone of the article may be estimated by three brief quotations.

"If every social pimple is to be magnified and shown up under electric light, there is not a household in England which might not be made abnormal, and a spectacle for ridicule and dislike." "Carlyle was sometimes too clamorous over small domestic troubles in his conversation but all the great woes of life he bore with manly fortitude." "To maintain the right of thinking for himself he lived for years in a simplicity which might be called penury, refusing opulence and distinction which must be bought by base compliance with opinions which he rejected."

The Fortnightly Review contains the usual collection of Protectionist and Free-trade articles,—poison and antidote according to the point of view of the reader. Mr. J. A. Spender in his paper, "Free Trade and its Fruits," points out an absurdity of argument of which many Protectionists are guilty. They often argue that our trade has increased with our Colonies, while it has stagnated or declined with foreign countries on account of hostile tariffs. But it is overlooked that these Colonial markets where there has been an increase are largely protected, "some of them, and especially those in which Mr. Chamberlain is chiefly interested, having higher tariffs than are at all common in Europe." It is needless to say that this contradiction is always supported by statistics. A curious fact about the present controversy is that unimpeach- able statistics can be used by either aide to prove their case. Figures seem to be like the molecules composing matter, a small rearrangement of the same particles producing totally diverse results.—" The Macedonian Revolt," by Mr. H. N. Brails- ford, to which we referred last week, is a most interesting and illuminating paper, as the writer knows the country he describes. Few people, perhaps, have realised the terrible complexity of the situation caused by the division among the Christian population. Greek, Servian, and Bulgarian influences all take their share in the unrest. According to the writer, the Greeks and Servians merely try to preserve the status quo, because each think that at some future time they will be able to claim the whole of Macedonia. The Bulgarian element has tried to stir up a national feeling, the first aim of which is liberation from the infamous tyranny of the Turk. Mr. Brailsford describes the normal condition of a Mace- donian village. Grinding poverty is the villagers' lot. Though this country is fruitful, the exactions of the Turkish landowners and the extortions of the tax-gatherers leave the Christian peasant but the barest subsistence after never- ending toil. Everything is taxed, and so unjustly that it is "a common incident for a village to cut down its fruit trees to avoid the tax upon them." It appears that it is the tree, not its fruit, which is taxed. A peasant unable to pay the taxes has to work in the corvie. Mr. Brailsford summarises the situation thus :—

" The Macedonian problem is desperate mainly because it has been overlaid with abstractions. We talk of trouble in the Balkans, of insurgent excezses, and Turkish atrocities, without realising that these occasional and startling phenomena are the product of a misery that is as constant as it is uninteresting— and unbearable. We think of Turkish misrule as an isolated and irrational fact, without comprehending that it is a highly organised and quite intelligent system, designed to promote the profit of a small minority of officials, tax-farmers and landlords."

—Mr. Holyoake writes an inspiriting paean on the progress made in his lifetime by the working man. He goes through the various departments of the life and labour of the work- man and shows how all has changed for the better, and says truly :— " What may not be gained in the next fifty years with the larger means now at command and the confidence great successes of the past should inspire ? If working people adhere to the policy of advancing their own honest interests, without destroying others as rightfully engaged in seeking theirs, the workers may make their own future what they will."

This month's instalment of " Personalia" by " Sigma" in Blackwood contains a most amusing description of a strange Anglo-Portuguese individual called Charles Augustus Howell, who was for a time secretary and factotum to Ruskin. The association was indeed strange, of the Puritan aesthete, with

his suburban decorum, and the wild Bohemian, who is described as being "the most astonishing compound of charm and chicanery." Howell, through Ruskin, came in contact with the Preraphaelite painters and acted as an agent for Rossetti. The connection ended when the agent "started a manufactory of Rossetti facsimiles." The following

story of Thackeray is given on the authority of Mr. Justin McCarthy, who considered that the novelist— "Created quite erroneous impressions of himself by often indulging in irony in the presence of people who were incapable of understanding it. One curious instance which he gave was this. Thackeray had been dining at the Garrick,' and was talking in the smoking-room after dinner with various club acquaintances. One of them happening to have left his cigar- case at home, Thackeray, though disliking the man, who was a notorious tuft-hunter, good-naturedly offered him one of his cigars. The man accepted the cigar, but not finding it to his liking, had the bad taste to say to Thackeray, I say, Thackeray, you won't mind my saying I don't think much of this cigar.' Thackeray, no doubt irritated at the man's ungraciousness, and bearing in mind his tuft-hunting predilections, quietly responded, You ought to, my good fellow, for it was given me by a lord.' Instead, however, of detecting the irony, the dolt immediately attributed the remark to snobbishness on Thackeray's part, and to the end of his days went about declaring that Thackeray had boasted that he had been given a cigar by a lord' !"

—Mr. Walter Harris gives an interesting account of his "Three Weeks' Captivity with the Moorish Rebels." His description of the Sultan's preparations for war is curious. The process consisted largely in ordering from Europe every form of ammunition and arms. Money was freely spent, and Court officials and European agents shared in the sums which flowed from the Treasury. The rebellion itself seems a complicated affair of marching and countermarching. cattle-stealing and brigandage, losses and victories making very little difference to either side. Mr. Harris went to the scene of some fighting, and was led into a trap by a notorious rebel and highway robber, who held him prisoner. Fortunately for him, a friendly tribe appeared on the scene, who carried him off to their mountains, where they treated him with every kindness, till his exchange was effected for sixteen tribesmen held prisoners by the Sultan's Government. Mr. Harris at first seems to have been in danger from the excited con- dition of the tribes, and owed his release to the energetic action of our Minister, Sir Arthur Nicolson, and the Shereef of Wazatt.—For real obscurantism of the most refreshing kind we have only to turn to the passages about motor-cars in "Musings without Method." The writer considers that the "cult of the motor-car is, in truth, nothing better than the worship of senseless speed." He has apparently never heard of the people who travel soberly and comfortably with their luggage from door to door across country impassable by rail- way on account of junctions and changes from one hostile com- pany's line to another. The idea that these new engines can be of any practical use is scouted as absurd. All the same, we lately heard of a case in which a builder taking materials into the country by motor instead of rail paid 6s. 6d. a ton instead of us. The writer also joins the Cave Man in Mr. Kipling's poem, and sits in the dark mumbling "Romance is dead." It would be hardly possible to accuse Maeterlinck of insensibility to romance, and yet he has written a rhapsody on the beauty, not only of the scenes passed through, but of the mystic wonders of the machine. The motorists, we are told, must make roads for themselves, so that "the highroads of England may still serve the purpose for which they were designed,"— presumably for ox-waggons. This entertaining diatribe ends with the following delicious piece of. unreason :—" It is as logical to defend the motor-car on the ground that its manu- facturers need protection, as it would be to put a premium on burglary, lest the profitable making of crowbars and jemmies should untimely languish."

We dealt fully last week with Sir Michael Hicks Beach's article on Free-trade in the Monthly Review.—This number contains a very interesting paper by Miss Edith Durham on "The Blaze in the Balkans." The writer has lately returned from a journey—her fifth—in that ill-starred land. Like every one else, she describes the general feeling as desper e. Life in Macedonia is so intolerable that the people think it cannot be worse, and that there is just the possibility that after an explosion things may be better. Miss Durham's Macedonian friends told her that after the harvest was gathered serious business would begin, and advised her not to travel by train, which caution, in the light of recent events, was justified :—

" Europe,' said a man to me, knows nothing about us, cares nothing, understands nothing. If no one will help us, we must help ourselves. The organisation in Macedonia is complete. We have, and have had for years, agents in every town, in every village. We are fully armed. The people are ready to die for the cause. All is ready, and we shall begin.' This was in July, and they have begun. If the rest of the schemes that I got wind of are carried out with the same punctuality a good deal of 'history' is hurrying up. I have seen too much of the Balkan people to offer any solution of their difficulties, for there is a 'lion in every path.' But I have found them honest, kindly, generous, and hospitable, and I wish them well."

The writer reports a conversation with a woman which she says was typical. On learning that Miss Durham's father was dead, she asked, "Did the Turks kill him P" A country without Turks who killed your family seemed marvellous. The people are quite aware that they can look for no help from England, but we are not hated as are the Germans, "dirty Schwabs " as they are called, the reason of the hatred being the knowledge that Germany's Christian Emperor makes friends with the Sultan, who buys artillery in the Fatherland for the destruction of his Christian subjects, who are taxed to pay for it.—Colonel Pedder's article on "The Tipster and his Trade" deserves serious consideration. He rightly says that it is not betting alone which is becoming such an evil among the working classes. He points out the attendant curses of drink and vice which are almost invariably connected with it. Indeed, he gives good grounds for supposing that in very many cases the three evils are deliberately associated by those who make a trade of betting. According to Colonel Pedder, the organisation of the tipster is elaborate and extensive. A paper is published at seven- pence which can only be got by post, and which circulates in country villages. The tipster has a public-house where he calls and discusses betting intelligence, but no money is taken, his agent waiting at a specified place out of doors next day, where the money for the arranged bet passes.—Mr. R. F. Cholmeley deals with the question of public schools in a new way, and propounds a set of examination-papers for head and assistant masters. One of the questions is to write a short review of "Stalky & Co.," that solemn parable of the relations of boys and masters. By means of irony a good many questions are brought into the cold light of day. To answer: all the questions truly would indeed be an assistance towards accepting the hard saying, "Clear your mind of cant," so difficult for other people as well as schoolmasters.