THE MAGAZINES.

WE allude in another column to the very interesting paper in the Nineteenth Century in which Lord Cromer

expresses his dissent from Lord Wolseley on the question of civilian control of the Army. Lord Cromer bases his view on general as well as specific grounds, in particular adducing his experience in the Khartoum Campaign, and hoisting Lord Wolseley with his own petard by quoting the case of Lord Cardwell, of whom Lord Wolseley admits that not only was he generally hated by the Army, but that this hatred was extended to all who, like him- self, supported that Minister's views. As Lord Cromer puts it, whoever heard of a, profession being reformed from within ? Not less illuminating are Lord Cromer's reasons for refusing to endorse Lord Wolseley's view that in treating with barbarian nations during a war the general to command and the ambassador to negotiate should be one and the same man. Lord Cromer adduces the history of our relations with

the Mahdi after 1885, and the erroneous forecasts of Gordon

and Lord Wolseley as to his power of offence, in support of his view, and sums up the question in the following pregnant remarks :—

"I conceive that, in all civilised countries, the theory of government is that a question of peace or war is one to be decided by politicians. The functions of the soldier are supposed to be confined, in the first place, to advising on the purely military aspects of the issue involved ; and, in tho second place, to giving effect to any decisions at which the Government may arrive. The practice in this matter not unfrequently differs somewhat from the theory. The soldier, who is generally prone to advocate vigorous action, is inclined to encroach on the sphere which should properly be reserved for the politician. The former is often masterful, and the latter may be dazzled by the glitter of arms, or too readily lured onwards by the persuasive voice of some strategist to acquire an almost endless succession of what, in technical language, are called 'keys' to some position, or—to employ a metaphor of which the late Lord Salisbury once made use in writing to me—' to try and annex the moon in order to prevent its being appropriated by the planet Mars.' When this happens, a risk is run that the soldier, who is himself uncon- sciously influenced by a very laudable desire to obtain personal distinction, may practically dictate the policy of the nation with- out taking a sufficiently comprehensive view of national interests. Considerations of this nature have more especially been, from time to time, advanced in connection with the numerous frontier wars which have occurred in India. That they contain a certain element of truth can scarcely be doubted."

Sir Rowland Blennerhassett in his very interesting paper on "The Germans at Waterloo and Anglo-German Relations" regards the Kaiser's recent utterance as part of

the invariable system adopted by the guides of public opinion in Germany—foremost among whom he places the notorious Anglophobe historian Treitschke—to excite contempt as well

as hatred for the nation they propose to attack. From which Germany visible proof that we are determined, and have the power, to shape our own policy in accordance with our own interests.—General Sir Edward Brabant, commenting as a Colonial on the Report of the War Commission, makes out a strong case for the foundation of Military Colleges on the model of Kingston (Canada) or West Point in each of the great British Colonies, with a view to training sufficient officers to supply the cadres of the troops belonging to, or to be raised in, each Colony. It is only natural, as General Brabant observes, that Colonists should, other things being equal, prefer to be commanded by men who know them and understand their peculiarities and prejudices ; and he states that the Canadian officers who had passed into the Service through the Kingston Military College were at once on excel- lent terms with the Irregular troops. For the rest, General ,Brabant is largely concerned with the attempt to vindicate the late Mr. Rhodes from criticisms passed by British officers before the War Commission on his conduct during the siege of Kimberley, General Brabant's verdict being that Mr. Rhodes only gave trouble where people were not up to the mark.—An excellent topical article is that by Mr. Joseph H. Longford (late H.M. Consul at Nagasaki) on "Japanese Relations with Korea." He points out that if war breaks out, it will be the fourth foreign war in which Japan has been en- gaged, and of every one Korea has been the subject. Mr. Longford is by no means a whole-hearted panegyrist of Japanese methods, and calls the murder of the Queen of Korea in 1895 as great an outrage on humanity, as ruthlessly and cruelly perpetrated, as that of the Queen of Servia. None the leas, he holds that in the present crisis Japan has behaved with unexampled forbearance, and that even if driven to strike the first blow, the war will, on her part, be as purely defensive as any that has ever been waged in history.

The principal article on foreign politics in the National Review is contributed by Sefior Montero Rios, a leading Spanish Liberal politician and President of the Senate. The subject

of his eloquent and interesting paper is "Spain and Morocco," and his chief aim is to establish the priority of the claim of

.Spain to take a leading part in the settlement of the North-West African question. The scheme of M. Etienne for the "pacific penetration " of Morocco by France moves him to indignation.

Partition he dismisses as equally impracticable. The pith of his argument is to be found in the following passage :—

" For other nations the future of iftrocco merely represents a question involving the development of their interests, an exten- sion of colonial power, a preponderating influence in the settle- ment of traditional emulations, or the satisfaction of a desire for military glory : but for us Spaniards it involves our territorial integrity, our independence, the fulfilment of our historical mission, and of the laws of geography and ethnology."

Hence the conclusion that the only settlement is the mainte-

nance of the status quo, "modified by a certain progressive tendency which will lead in the direction of freedom of trade, of the neutralisation of Tangier, and of a gradual development

of civilisation in Morocco under the guidance of all -the Powers acting in concert, with Spain, as she deserves to be, in the place of honour in the van of civilisation." We should greatly like to watch M. Etienne's countenance as he reads this modest proposal. Sefior Montero Rios, we may add, complains that English publicists never miss an oppor- tunity of speaking ill of his country. He gives no examples, and would certainly be hard put to it to match in the writings of any English writer the condemnation passed on his fellow- countrymen by Sefior Silvela.—Mr. Maurice Low discusses

the progress of the estrangement of Russia and the United States. Incidentally he embarks on an interesting speculation on the genesis of the United States foreign policy, its inevitable corollary—the growth of a powerful Navy—and the insepar- able obstacles interposed in the way of that policy being consistent and continuous by the limitations of the Presi-

dential power and the frequent changes of President and parties. Discussing President Roosevelt's chances of re-election, Mr. Low is inclined to think, that he has lost ground of late, and is less generally popular than when he entered the White House,—one of the reasons being his loyalty to and belief in his friends. We must also note his well- deserved praise of the American daily bulletin containing the gist of the Consuls' Reports of commercial intelligence issued

functions now divided between our Board of Trade, Home and Foreign Offices. Copies of this bulletin are sent every day without charge and post-free to every newspaper corre- spondent in Washington, to the Press Associations, and to any person or firm who may ask for them. The result, as Mr. Low points out, is that the information is promptly and widely published, and wherever an opening exists for American goods in foreign markets the persons directly interested can avail themselves of the opportunity. —Mr. R. H. Inglis Palgrave draws gloomy deductions from the volume recently issued by the Board of Trade, laying especial stress on the fact that while our population has increased, the proportion of workers to the population has dropped from 23 to 15 per cent. since 1851; and Mr. H. W. Wilson sketches a "national tariff for defence" to be levied on foreign manu- factured goods of the nature of luxuries, to provide for maintaining our expenditure on the Army and Navy at its present level. At the close he bids Mr. Austen Chamberlain "go forth like a new Samson and shatter this outworn Dagon of the Free Traders."—To the anthology of Protectionist invective to which the editor has so liberally contributed the following choice gems may now be added :—" Free Impostors [a graceful play on the word Importers] are thankful for small mercies "; "the tool of a contemptible caber—of the Duke of Devonshire; "lying leaflets "—of Free-trade literature. At the same time, we note with pleasure the editor's candid acknowledgment that the results of recent by-elections "indicate that the cause of Tariff Reform has not yet sufficiently penetrated the hide- bound Conservatism of that portion of the British working classes who have been wont to vote Radical," and that "Tariff

Reformers must realise that a vast amount of ` spade-work ' requires to be done to secure a triumph worthy of their cause."

The Contemporary prints three articles on fiscal policy,— one by Mr. C. H. Chomley contrasting the condition of Free-

trade New South Wales with protected Victoria, a second on "The Mystery of Dumping" by Mr. J. A. Hobson, and a third in which the Hon. Bertrand Russell dissects Mr. Charles Booth's tentative and unconvincing proposals for fiscal reform, the only merit in which was the temperateness with which they were advanced. Mr. Russell's examination is a master- piece of concentrated and destructive analysis—it only occupies eight pages—illuminated by many pungent com- ments. For example, Mr. Booth observes that whereas our system of free imports has done much to encourage Protection elsewhere, and a change in this respect might do much in the opposite direction, "stripped of its ideals Free Trade may still triumph." On this Mr. Russell has the following caustic

comment :—" If we become convinced that Protection is essential to a nation's prosperity, how will that lead other nations to Free Trade ? This is an instance of that lip-service

which is (to modify La. Rochefoucauld) the homage that Pro- tection pays to Free Trade. If Mr. Chamberlain's followers believed that his scheme would in the end further Free Trade, nine-tenths of them would cease to desire it, since Protection is the haven in which they hope to find rest." Mr. Russell is generally admitted to be one of our greatest living mathematicians, dealing in speculations so transcendental that few but Senior Wranglers can follow them. He has shown in this paper a gift of lucid and businesslike exposition unsurpassed by any writer on the subject. —The Russian novelist Korolenko sends, under the heading "House No. 13," a detailed account of one of the most pain- ful episodes in the massacre of Kishinieff, based on an

exhaustive inquiry conducted by himself on the spot. M. Korolenko admits that the question of usury was one of the motives of massacre, but evidently believes that the Gentile usurers are worse than the Jews, and observes that "years will have to go by before the terrible recollection of these

doings, and of the damning bloodstain on the consciences of the 'Christians in Kishinieff ' can be at all effaced." He disclaims all intention of attempting to solve the Jewish question, contenting himself in conclusion with a curious suggestion :—

"If I were one of those Jewish millionaires who interest them- selves in the affairs of their poorer co-religionists, I confess that I should not be able to resist the temptation to try a social experiment. I would assist, at any cost, the majority of the Jews living on the spot to move to another part of the oountry. I

would compensate the richer Jews for their losses, and help the poorer ones to a competency, on condition that they left the town immediately. And when, in this way, the Jewish wealth had been withdrawn from the town, leaving no capital in competition with our national and patriotic wealth ; when there were no longer any citizens of that race left, about whom Mr. Kroushevan could invent gloomy fictions of ritual murders; and when all usurers and monopolists wore European dress ; then it would be quite clear where the crux of the question lay. It would also be fully apparent that such problems cannot be solved by the murder of 'accountants' such as Nisensen, of the unhappy glazier Grienschpoun, nor of Jewish cabmen, who have to work as hard for their bread of bitterness as do their Christian comrades. Is the oppression of a usurer, one may ask, easier to bear because he wears a European dress, and calls himself a Christian ?"

—" Ivanovich," the anonymous author whose personal

sketches of illustrious personages have been a special feature in recent numbers of the Contemporary, contributes a striking

paper on the late Princess Mathilde. The leading idea in his paper is the influence exercised on Jerome's daughter by the spirit of Catherine's Court, in which her mother was brought up, coupled with her semi-German, semi-Corsican blood. In the view of the writer, if Mathilde had married Louis Napoleon she might have achieved for the Second Empire what Caroline of Anspach accomplished for the Hanoverian dynasty, with Sir Robert Walpole's help. According to an autobiographical passage, the source of which " Ivanovich " does not reveal, Princess Mathilde withdrew her promise to marry her cousin when she found how listless and fond of luxury he was. "I could have stood by his side to be shot, but I could not endure the prospect of having to share with him a debtors' prison."— The paper on "Professor Loisy and the Teaching Church" should be read in connection with the interesting series of

papers on the same subject which have been recently appearing in the literary supplement of the Times.

The Fortnightly opens with a plea for State aid for dramatic art. Mr. Hare's letter to the Times is reprinted, and the case is put both by the editor, Mr. W. L. Courtney, and Mr.

Frederic Harrison. A list of signatures is added of those who think that the State should take some action to prevent our drama being drowned by the sea of inane musical comedy.

Besides subsidising a theatre, we are told that it is of the greatest importance that there should be established a school of acting. Indeed, it would appear unreasonable to expect any great proficiency among actors in general without some systematic form of teaching. The difficulty of the question arises when we come to the ideal to be set up. Is it to be the ideal of Richter when he conducts "The Ring "—absolute subordination of all things to the intentions of the composer —or are we to have the ideal of the typical Shakespeare revival, with the historical plays interlarded with living waxwork shows, and outrageous liberties taken with the comedies ? Mr.

Courtney supports his case by pointing out that the State helps the art of painting by means of public collections of pictures.

If the State is to help the theatre, it must be made clear that the ideal is that of the National Gallery, and not that of the Academy.—Mr. William Watson writes of "The State Discouragement of Literature." He thinks that the other arts receive more acknowledgment at the hands of the State. As an instance of this we are reminded of the number of musician knights of the past fifty years whose names and whose works are forgotten. Mr. Watson laments the neglect because literature is one of the ways of reaching the national mind.

But if the State passes by literature as inconsiderable, how can those few who know better persuade the people to give ear to those who would inspire and quicken their minds ?

Mr. Watson says :—

"To amplify the mental prospect of the multitude is to vivify their whole existence, with results favourable to effective citizen- ship and of good omen to the commonwealth. But ignorance of all the larger thoughts of the world will in the end weaken the stroke of the hammer and dull the edge of the blade. I would entreat those amongst us who aspire to the name of patriot to regard as the supreme Imperial task of our time the raising of popular intelligence."

These eloquent words are typical of the style of the paper, which it is indeed a pleasure to read. It is seldom that we meet with writing which, dealing with a question of the moment in a clear, simple way, is at the same time a work of art.—The article by " Calchas " on "First Principles in the Far East" is a most sensible appeal to English people to keep

cool, and remember that it is of great importance for us not

ally, Russia. It is a great mistake to impute all possible evil motives to Russia, and too like the attitude of the Conti- nent towards ourselves in the Boer War. The situation is that two countries are expanding towards each other, and each considers that the success of the other means its own hurt. But that is no reason for our taking sides, and investing the side we champion with all the virtues. Russia wants Manchuria for the same reasons that Japan wants Korea. Can there be said to be absolute right on either side ? The writer concludes thus :—

" If British and French public opinion can clearly unite in the conviction that Korea ought to become Japanese and Manchuria to remain Russian, the solution that a trial of strength could scarcely fail to enforce might be reached even at the eleventh hour, without recourse to arms."

Blackwood, as usual, has tales of interest gathered from far places. The best of these is Mr. Lepper's account of how the Tibetans dispose of the dead bodies of their people of high rank.

The scene described is weird in the extreme,—the night among the great mountains 16,000 ft. above the sea, the long pro- cession suddenly appearing carrying the dead, the awful ritual of cutting the body up into small fragments and the throwing of these to the armies of wild dogs. These animals appeared on the sounding of innumerable gongs. The whole of this grim torchlight ceremony was witnessed by the writer of the article, who was, of course, in some danger, had he been dis- covered, for the Tibetans are especially jealous of suspicious persons near the frontier.—" Three Gambits" is a study of the diverse work of the British Army. The writer gives three pictures. The first describes the start of an expedition in Upper Burmah, the second the Dargai episode of the Afridi War, and the last a nameless incident of South Africa. All are strikingly told, obviously by an eyewitness. The first two fights succeed in a very different way from the last, though this is not a "regret- table incident" ; but the writer evidently wishes to mark the dissimilar way in which things happen when the enemy is a white one.—Readers who have already enjoyed the earlier numbers of Mr. Hugh Clifford's " Sally " will not be dis- appointed in the present instalment. The young Malay has

reached the crisis when he realises that the English girl he is in love with looks upon him as a "nigger." His primitive nature reasserts itself, and his impulse is to run amok.

Fortunately, he finds a harbour of refuge in the rooms of Norris, the Civil servant who had been instrumental to his coming to England. Norris's views on the effects of Europeanising natives are deeply interesting, and should be considered by all who think at all on the problems which our Asiatic dominions raise.

There is an interesting article in the Monthly Review on "Danish Agriculture," written by Mr. R. A. Westenholz, the President of the Agrarian League of Denmark. The writer

tells us that in spite of a severe climate, necessitating great expenditure on farm buildings, agriculture has flourished in his country. The reason of this prosperity he attributes to Free-trade. Denmark, instead of trying to compete with the virgin soils of America in corn-growing by means of a Protective tariff, buys American feeding-stuffs and produces bacon, eggs, and butter. A striking table is given showing how much higher prices Denmark can com- mand in the English markets than the Protectionist countries are able to do. The writer declares that the greatest benefit to his country would be that America should " dump " food- stuffs there, as then they could lower the prices of what they sell and conquer all markets. Mr. Westenholz also seems to think that English farmers are in a better position in some ways than Danish, especially as regards climate ; but he thinks we do not pay enough attention to practical science, and instances the six thousand men and women who attend the high schools yearly in Denmark. At the same time, he gives us credit for bard work.—Mr. Julian Corbett writes a curious

account of a Russian privateer in the Mediterranean, which carried on its abominable work in 1788. It seems that there

were some English seamen on board, one of whom wrote a narrative, a copy of which is in the possession of Admiral Henderson. The crew appear mostly to have been collected from the eastern shores of the Mediterranean, and they seem to have been pirates of the most bloodthirsty order. The accounts of the killing of the crews of captured vessels in cold blood are horrible. At first the English were shocked at the massacres, but became callous in time, and at last took their part in the work. The last episode of the cruise was to seize a pirate vessel whose captain was not a friend of the privateer's captain, like others they had met. This pirate shared the fate of the other ships taken. It seems strange to think that such barbarous practices went on until so recent a date, and were sanctioned by so-called civilised Governments underletters

of marque.—M. Menchikoff's short paper on "The Jewish Peril in Russia" is instructive. The writer is one of the editors of the Novoi Vre2nya, so his opinion is probably repre-

sentative. His comment on recent massacres is that the people took on themselves the solution of the problem which the authorities were too weak to tackle. We are told that no doubt a "more humane" and "thoughtful policy" would be best,—not apparently from merciful feelings, but in order to prevent "a secret internecine war." We may feel thankful- ness that the article could not have been written by a prominent English journalist.

Writing in the Independent Beview, Mr. Creswell argues strongly in favour of white rather than coloured labour in the

Transvaal gold mines. The writer's view is that the industry has been demoralised by cheap labour. He says :—

" Our industrial establishments have a warp in the wrong direction, viz., that of getting done by the brute force of human labour what in other countries would be done by more intelligent organisation, and by labour-saving machinery. With our present native labour, supplemented by white labour, I contend that the mines can now be run at a cat as low as that ruling in 1899, and in the future far more cheaply."

Mr. Creswell evidently believes that at the root of the matter lies the gold magnate's distrust of the white workman's power

in the State. But did England fight for three years in order that the oligarchy of Kruger should be succeeded by one of gold magnates importing and exploiting the labour of enslaved Chinamen ? If so, we stultify Lord Salisbury's declaration that Britain sought no gold mines, but wished to establish a free people in a free land.

Sir Edward Grey reviews the results of the autumn campaign, and notes as the chief characteristic of Mr. Chamberlain and his friends that they disregard all facts brought against their arguments. At the same time, they seize with avidity upon alarmist ideas which have the most insuffi- cient basis. As an instance of this he refers to Mr Chamber- lain's alarm at Greenock over an interview in an American paper with a director of the Steel Trust. The director said their trade was falling, and so they were going to flood foreign markets with cheap iron, and thus keep in work "hundreds of thousands of American workmen" who would otherwise be discharged. Mr. Chamberlain went on to say that thus "hundreds of thousands of English workmen will be thrown out of employment." This was on October 7th. What really happened is that information in December showed that the American output of pig-iron had fallen since last summer from 21,000,000 to 13,000,000 tons, and that it was the American workmen who were out of work.