SOME OF lkih MAGAZINES.

Br far the best of the larger magazines for September is the Fortnightly. Mr. Freeman's article, "Parallels to Irish Home- rule," which stands first, is an admirably lucid exposition of some of the essentials of the Irish Controversy. That Mr. Freeman, though a supporter of Mr. Gladstone, should have asked the questions it contains does immense credit to the historian's fairness of view and soundness of intellect. In truth, the article, when seriously considered, is intel- lectually one of the heaviest blows that has yet been dealt to the present proposals of the Home-rule Party. The strange and ill-fashioned scheme produced by the modification of the Bill of 1886, so as to comply with the clamorous demands of the editor of the Pall Mall Gazette, which Mr. Gladstone has been at last induced fully to endorse, is boldly faced by Mr. Freeman, and represented in its true light. One Gladstonian, at least, does not think that things can be and not be at the same time, and realising the fact is honest enough to speak oat. Mr. Freeman begins his article by asking " What is Home-rule ?" and by answering the question with a very admirable definition. Home-rule, he says, is " the relation of a dependency to a superior power when the dependency has the management of its own internal affairs, but has to follow the superior power in all matters other than its own affairs." As examples, he quotes the Isle of Man and the Territories of the United States, as long as they remain territories. Next, Mr. Freeman goes on to distinguish this relation from that with which it is often confounded—the Federal relation. They are, of course, totally different, the only point of likeness being that in both there is a division of powers. " Things belonging to one State only are settled by that State ; things common to all the States are settled by the common power, the 'Union. But Federation differs from Home-rule in this, that there is no relation of dependency. The States are not dependencies of the Union ; the 'Union has simply such powers as the States have chosen to grant to it. Canada has Home- rule by a grant from Great Britain ; if Ireland ever has Home-rule, it will be practically, though perhaps not formally, by a grant from Great. Britain. But the several States and Cantons of a Confederation do not hold their powers by a grant from the Union ; it is quite the other way." Having settled what Home-rule is, and what it is not, Mr. Freeman asks,—" Is Home-rule likely to do good or evil to Ireland P" But to this no direct attempt at an answer is given, for the object of the article is not to settle the question so much as to set the lists and clear the ground. In conclusion, however, Mr. Freeman enters upon a subject which is of vital importance:— "Of Home-rule, as I understand it, of Home-rule as it was set forth in Mr. Gladstone's Bill, it is an essential feature that the dependency should not be represented in the Parliament of the power of which it is a dependency. There is now a loud outcry, to which Mr. Gladstone himself is said to have yielded, in favour of giving Ireland a separate Parliament and yet of allowing Irish Members to have seats in the Parliament at Westminster. The proposal is not new ; I found something to say about it in the Fortnightly Review fifteen years back. I am not going now to argue for or against it. I only say now that it is a wholly different proposal from the old one. It may be better or worse ; but it is different. To keep the Irish Members at Westminster is not, like many things in Mr. Gladstone's Bill, a matter of detail, not affecting the general question. It is an essential point one way or the other; it makes the question a wholly new one. It is a proposal, not of mere Home-rule for Ireland, but of something much more. It is a proposal which has no meaning except as a step to a change within Great Britain itself. It is indeed avowed by some of its supporters that it is a step towards changing the present relation of the different parts of Great Britain into a federal relation. I am not now arguing for or against such a relation ; I said something about that in this Review three years back. All I say now is that the proposal is something quite different from Irish Home-rule, and that it must be dealt with as a wholly new proposal, to be pro- posed, attacked, and defended, on its own merits and demerits. If we do think it right to divide the kingdoms of England and Scotland into the smaller elements out of which those kingdoms were put together—for that is what any scheme of federation within Great Britain must come to—let us do it with our eyes open. It is much too big a thing to be done by a side-wind. If I am, when the next Parliament comes together, to find myself in a canton of Wessex, perhaps in a canton much smaller than Wessex, I desire that the change may at least be made with all deliberation, because a majority of the people of Great Britain are convinced that such a change would be an improvement in itself. It must not come in as a consequence or corollary of Irish Home-role. If such a radical change as this, the greatest ever proposed since King William came into England, is really to be made, let it be made on its own merits ; let us not be led into it either because we have done something else, or because we are thinking of doing something else. The two kingdoms of this island are something too great and illustrious to be made the corpus vile of experiments."

Under the head of "Russian Characteristics : Part

Lying," begins a series of articles by different writers. The present instalment is intended to show that Muscovite devia- tions from veracity are, as Mr. Gladstone might perhaps put it, not occasional, but habitual. According to the writer of the article, the ancient Cretan was nothing to the modern Russian, who, we are asked to believe, is absolutely incapable of dis- tinguishing between troth and falsehood. Possibly this is so; but only an intimate acquaintance with the subjects of the Czar would enable us to decide the matter. It is, however, absurd to speak as if the stories here given were in the nature of proof. They show nothing except that Russians, like Italians and Irishmen and most Orientals, think there is some- thing brutal in telling the truth when it is unpleasant.— Professor Dowden's article on " Coleridge" is a pleasant study of the poet, chiefly occupied with showing the influence 6f the scenery of Nether-Stowey and the Quantocks upon his writings.

The National _Review, by a curious coincidence, has a paper entitled " Wordsworth and the Quantock Hills," in which the effect of the Somersetshire scenery on another poet is elabor- ately discussed. The reader who turns to it will find many pleasant things said in the course of the argument that the Quantock period was poetically the most eventful in the poet's whole life.—The article on "Cow-Keeping by Farm Labourers," by Mr. H. Evershed, is full of practical value and good sense, and shows how much may be done in restoring a personal interest in agriculture to the rural day labourer. The chief difficulties are how to buy the cow to start with, and how to replace her when lost by accident. To both questions Mr. Evershed gives satisfactory answers, not based, however, on theory, but on the practice of landowners whom he names. The system of cow-clubs in use on Lord Tollemache's estates has been described before; we therefore prefer to quote the plan of cow-hiring devised by Mr. Turnbull,—a distinguished Yorkshire farmer, who, as agent to Lord Carlisle, is now trying the experiment on the latter's estates :— " The price charged for the hiring of a heifer when near calving, was one-fourth of her cost for a year, payable in advance. A number of Kerry cows cost £12 each, and were hired out to labourers and others in the North Riding at £2 lOs. Ayrshires, for which he paid £18 each, coot the hirers £4 lOs. An important point in the agreement between the parties is, that the hirer should have the right of purchase at the price at which he hired, because this encourages him to keep the animal in

good condition, and the owner's risk is diminished. The rule as to prepayment is sometimes waived, as, for example, in the case of men with large families, or in other cases when it is known that the hirer is deserving of trust and confidence. As a rule, the result of the business is that the hirer purchases the cow. He not only enjoys her products, and rears his family far better than he could have done without her aid, but he manages to increase his capital too by purchasing the cow which he had at first hired. It is interesting to observe how rapidly the so-called thriftless English labourer can become a man of thrift when once he is fairly started in the right track. No one doubts the energy and strong will of the English labourer, and it is by the exercise of these qualities, when tempting objects are placed within his reach, that

new virtues and fresh ambitions take possession of him Among the cow-hirers on Mr. Turnbull's books was a clever work- man who had been in the habit of spending in beer what he should have saved for use against the day when, for want of prudent provision, the gates of the Union open to receive so many

thriftless working men Seeing a cow in prospect he gave up moderate drinking, denied himself as many pints of beer as the object he had in view required, and, having first hired a cow, it was soon within his power to purchase one."

The Nineteenth Century is dull this month. In "Diseases Caught from Butcher's Meat," the curious fact is brought out that the regulations of the Talmud forbid the meat of cows with adhesions of the lungs to be eaten, and that this prohibition is respected by strict Jews. Such adhesions are a sure sign of the tuberculose disease, which the doctors now recognise as being able to be produced in man by the con- sumption of infected carcases. Jews, it may be added, are hardly ever attacked by tuberculosis.—Mr. George Russell's jaunty response to " The New Liberalism," a paper in the August number, is interesting as showing the tendency of the Gladatonian party, for Mr. Russell is not likely to speak without authority. The following passage will, we fear, destroy the hopes expressed by Mr. Freeman, quoted above. It is evident that, " as at present advised," the Gladstonian weathercock is pointing straight to the retention of the Members at Westminster. The voters, though not the leaders, who were anti-Gladstonian in 1886, have now, thinks Mr. Russell, been won back :- "That this happy consummation has been attained I believe to be due to the wise concession which Mr. Gladstone has made to the general sense of his followers in consenting to retain the Irish Members at Westminster. Ominous whispers, indeed, are heard from time to time to the effect that Mr. Gladstone has not really conceded this; that he still makes it the subject of mental reserva- tion, and still secretly inclines to Separatist schemes. But I am persuaded better things of the Liberal leader, and things which accompany political salvation, and I must persist in believing that what he seems to have yielded he has really yielded, and that his lieutenants and followers are not speaking without their book when they assume the retention of the Irish Members at Westminster as an essential part of the next Home-rule Bill."

Probably Mr. Russell has authority for this statement. We wonder whether the Bill by which Ireland is to govern us while we are not to govern her, has yet been drawn. Its production must have been a real intellectual treat for a statesman with a Hibernian turn of mind.—Mr. Champion, in pleading for an Eight-Hour Law, boldly adopts Protection in order to bring about short hours in trades where foreign competition other- wise forbids them. Indeed, he appears bitten by the old fallacy that a sufficiently extensive home market will create wealth out of nothing, and that, like the Scilly Islanders of the old story, we can all live comfortably if we will only con- sent to take in each other's washing. In spite, however, of the usual cant about protection, there is some sense in the article, and we can quite believe that an eight hours' day might mean more rather than less production. What we entirely disbelieve, however, is the assumption that the men cannot obtain an eight hours' day by combination. We may depend upon it that half its value will be gone if it is not won by voluntary action.

The Contemporary begins with a triple article, dealing with England and Africa. In the first part, entitled " Can we Desert Egypt P" a very good account is given of the present position of the Kingdom of the Khedive. The passage dealing with the improvement of the finances is worth quoting :— " Taking finance first, which is, in Egypt, perhaps, more than elsewhere, the touchstone of public weal, we can see from the terms of the Conversion contract, concluded with a syndicate in- cluding all the first financial houses, that there is a marked rise in the credit accorded to Egypt by Europe. The bankers, in June, 1889, offered Egypt conditions which implied confidence on their part that the public would eagerly subscribe to an Egyptian 4 per cent. loan at or near par. A very few years ago Egypt could not borrow at 6 per cent. At one time, in 1884—the year in which Sir Edgar Vincent arrived in Egypt—she could not borrow at '7 per cent. This is a very remarkable appreciation of credit, and the contrast between the present flourishing condition of Egyptian finance and the gloomy accounts received up to the last three or four years, has a tendency to render the public sceptical as to the soundness of the position."

The paper on " The Christians and Kurds " will, we trust, attract attention. The horrible atrocities committed under Turkish rule are described by an English resident who, we take it, is connected with the Archbishop of Canterbury's mission to the Chaldean Christians or Ashirets, as they are termed. The following is an account of a massacre which took place only last year :-

" I have already explained how the Ashirets are forced to pasture their flocks outside their country on account of the narrowness of their valleys. Last summer (1888) the sheep of Ashitha, the largest village in Tiari, were being fed in a soma, or mountain pasture, in charge of the women and girls of the village, to the number of about three hundred, and two men. On July 31st, the encampment was suddenly surrounded by the Kurds. The men were slaughtered in cold blood ; all the women and girls were violated; five, who made the most resistance, were killed, one pregnant woman under circumstances of atrocious cruelty, which I shrink from describing in the pages of this Review; another slowly put to death by repeated hanjar thrusts, and several more wounded. The unfortunate women were then stripped entirely naked, and left in that state to make their way back to Ashitha. The object of this terrible outrage was attained. A Sheikh from Amodia had been preaching a general massacre of Christians, and the Kurds intended to rouse the Tiari that they might have an excuse for slaughtering them. The Tiari, wild and uncivilised as they are, were maddened by grief and indignation. Fathers, husbands, and brothers seized their flint-lock guns, and prepared to avenge the honour of the outraged women. Against them there then assembled a host of Kurds, to the number of at least 10,000 men, most of them armed with Martini and other modern rifles, sufficient not only to repel the feeble attack of the Tiari, but also to force the entrance to the valley. Up to August 19th, the Turks showed no signs of interfering, when Mr. Browne sent a messenger across the Persian frontier to Canon Maclean, the head of the Archbishop's Mission at Urmi, with a letter concealed in his turban. The Canon instantly telegraphed to H.B.M.'s Consul-General at Tabriz, and the Turkish authorities in the province of Van, hearing of the publicity given to the affair, at last took steps to disperse the Kurds and to prevent the impending massacre. Whilst these events were passing Dr. Cholmeley and I arrived at Urmi from England, and proceeded at once to Kochanes, where we found the Tiari chiefs, to the number of twenty, assembled • at the Patriarch's residence to consider

measures for their defence. One of them was the husband of the •

woman who was slowly put to death on the some by dagger

thrusts. It will hardly be believed that when the danger was at its height, and the onslaught of the Kurds was daily expected, all that the distracted, helpless Patriarch and chiefs could suggest was that telegrams should be despatched to 'The Queen of Eng- land, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the King of France !' They are rather behind the times, poor souls, in their knowledge of politics and history !"

The New Review calls for little special comment, none of the papers being of any great interest, except that of M. Sevasly, who puts the case of the Armenians with force and vigour. The system by which Christian girls are carried off to the Turkish harems is thus described :- " The polygamous Turkish Beys and Agas, whose hitherto regular supply of Circassian girls from the Caucasus has been cut off from them since the annexation of the province by Russia, have recourse now to a bold system of rape. They swoop down upon an Armenian village, with their armed acolytes, and carry off to their harems, by main force, as many good-looking girls and women as they can lay hands on. This is permitted to them; and the mods/ operandi by which the abduction of Armenian girls is rendered legal by the Moslem judges may be summed up as follows. When the relatives present themselves in court to claim the abducted victim, the ravishers are ready with a brace

of Moslem witnesses (a hundred could be produced if wanted), who declare on oath that the kidnapped woman pronounced in their presence the regular formula of the Moslem faith : There is no God but God, and Mahomed is His Prophet.' The judge thereupon dismisses the case, on the ground that the stolen and ravished girl has by that profession adjured her former faith and embraced Mahomedaniam. And the verdict of these upright judges is not to be set aside."

Macmillan is, as usual, conspicuous by the literary merit of its articles. "A Real Working Man" is one of the simplest and yet most a,ffecting pieces of writing that we ever re- member to have seen. It purports to be, and doubtless is, an accurate report of the account given of her life and the life of her family by an agricultural labourer's wife. The squalor, poverty, and lack of food is pathetic enough, but what is far more touching is the splendid faithfulness of heart and true tenderness displayed by the noble woman who is the narrator. The spirit of household piety surviving, not feebly, but with a, pure bright flame, the miseries untold of the half- starved family, saves the recital from being intolerable in its power of affecting the emotions. To quote from it would be to spoil it ; but any town reader who wants to realise how the poorest of the villagers live, cannot do better than read it. [*** Mr. Lucas, the author of the " Sketches of Rural Life," reviewed in our last number, requests us to state that the poetical correspondence between two evangelical sisters in relation to a love affair, noticed at the end of that article, is not to be found in any of the published copies, but only in fifty copies printed for private circulation.]