injury from other nations, saving the regard due to the well being of these same nations.

4. General utility, in so far as it consists in such nation receiving the greatest possible benefit from all other nations, saving the regard due to the well being of these nations.

"It is to the two former objects that the duties, which the given nation ought to recognise, may be referred. It is to the two latter that the rights it ought to claim may be referred. But if the same rights shall, in its opinion, be violated, in what mauner and by what means shall it seek for satisfaction? There is no other mode but that of war. But war is an evil; it is even the complication of all other evils."

5. The fifth object of an international code, then, would be to make such arrangements that the least possible evil may be produced by war, consistently with the attainment of the good which is sought for.

"A disinterested legislator upon international law," he says, "would seek to promote the greatest happiness of all nations generally by following the same course he would follow in regard to internal law. He would endeavour to prevent positive international offences, to encourage the practice of positively useful actions. He would regard as a positive crime every proceeding by which the given nation should do more injury to foreign nations collectively, whose interests might be affected, than it should do good to itself. For example, the closing against other nations (of) the seas and rivers which are the highways of the globe. In the same manner, he would regard as a negative offence every determination, by which the given nation should refuse to render positive services to a foreign nation, when the rendering of them would produce more good to such foreign nations than it would produce evil to itself. For example, if having in its own power offenders against the laws of the foreign nation, it should neglect to do what depends upon it to bring them to justice."

War is a species of procedure by which one nation endeavours to enforce its rights at the expense of another. It is the only method to which recourse can be had, when no means of satisfaction can be found by complainants having no arbitrators between them sufficiently strong, absolutely to remove from them the hope of successful resistance.

But if internal procedure be attendel by painful ills, international procedure is attended by ills infinitely more painful, in certain respects, in point of intensity; commonly, in point of duration; and always, in point of extent.

The laws of Peace would, therefore, be the substantive laws of the international code and the laws of war would be its adjective laws.

LIVERPOOL PEACE SOCIETY.

At the Annual Meeting of the Liverpool Peace Society in Hope Hall, Hope Street, on March 9th, Mr. Thomas Snape presided, and was supported by Dr. Nevins, Revs. H. de B. Gibbins, Wynn Davies, W. H. Smith, and M. J. Elliott, Messrs. T. Crosfield, T. Pritchard, Mark Haworth, J. K. Slater (Treasurer), A. Bathgate, C. Stevenson (Manchester), W. Lawton (Secretary), &c.

Mr. Samuel Plimsoll, who had been announced to attend, sent a letter of apology, as also did Dr. Spence Watson, the Revs. Samuel Pearson, M.A. (Manchester), A. B. Barkway, A. M. Mitchell, &c.

The Annual Report of the Committee, after remarking that International Arbitration was understood and appreciated as never before, stated that nothing could have been nobler than the powerful address on International Arbitration, made last year by the Lord Chief Justice, to the New York Bar. Much greater would have been the cause for congratulation, however, had the treaty between Great Britain and the United States of America received the approval of the Senate of the latter country. Every branch of the Christian Churches of Liverpool was united upon this great question, for a memorial to the Senate was readily signed by the Bishop of Liverpool and representative ministers of all denominations in the city. A copy was then sent to each of the ministers in Liverpool and neighbourhood, in all 670, and 130 clergyman and ministers returned the card stating that their congregations had assented to the resolution. About fifteen gave their personal assent, but for various reasons did not see their way to bring the matter before their congregations, while the

remainder, though sending no reply, expressed no dissent. The Committee rejoice to record that several instances of the settlement by Arbitration of international disputes on matters of varying character had occurred during the year. Having regretfully referred to troubles in Africa and other places, the report proceeded-Eastern Europe is still a cause of anxiety to the friends of Peace. Turkey, presuming on the want of concord amongst other European Powers, continues her career of cruel oppression and misgovernment, and the need of an International Tribunal becomes more and more apparent. It is deplorable that the Concert of Europe should be mainly concerned for the maintenance of the status quo, though it is fraught with injustice, and for the repression of aspirations after freedom by oppressed peoples like the Armenians and the people of Crete, instead of being exercised in the interests of liberty and Peace. The Sunday before Christmas Day, December 20th, in accordance with the custom which the Peace Society had succeeded in establishing, was observed as a Peace Sunday, and sermons were preached or special references made, in 172 places of worship. In August last a Universal Peace Congress was held at Budapest, at which the Society was represented by its President, Mr. Alderman Thomas Snape, who was also a member of the Inter-Parliamentary Peace Conference, held in the same city, and by Mr. Mark Howarth. The Chairman, referring to the opposition in the United States to the Treaty of Arbitration, said he thought that hostility to it came only from a small minority, and he thought they had great reason for satisfaction in the fact that although not more than a year ago there was a possibility of an outbreak of war between their American brethren and themselves, they now found that the feeling was extending between the two countries in favour of the ratification of the Treaty of Arbitration. The United States Senate would meet on the 15th inst., and as President M'Kinley had expressed a desire to see the treaty ratified at the earliest possible moment, he believed the treaty would be an accomplished fact within the next twelve months, and if that were so it would be a grand triumph for the cause of Peace. He remembered the time when the Society was laughed at, and when their ideas were regarded as Utopian, but they held on to their opinions that Arbitration between nations would yet be adopted. He was hopeful that when the treaty was signed between England and the United States, other European nations would follow their example.

The financial statement showed the receipts during the year to have been £121 12s. 6d., and there was at present a balance in bank of £6 18s. 8d.

Mr. Thomas Crosfield proposed the adoption of the report and the balance-sheet, and the re-election of the officers and members of the executive committee, for the ensuing year. The Rev. W. Hodson Smith seconded.

Mr. Stevenson supported the motion, and it was unanimously adopted.

The Rev. H. de B. Gibbins moved "That this meeting rejoices at the growth of public opinion in favour of international Arbitration, and more especially congratulates President M'Kinley upon his clear enunciation in favour of the adoption of the treaty of Arbitration between the United States and ourselves; and this meeting trusts that the Senate will endorse the treaty at the earliest possible moment." A year ago it would have been almost useless to have passed such a resolution as this because of the war cloud that hung over the relations between England and the United States, but now he thought it a great triumph for the principles of this society that in so short a time that cloud had cleared away.

The Rev. Wynn Davies seconded, and Mr. M. Howarth supported, the resolution, which was adopted with acclamation. Mr. Pritchard (Southport) real the report presented by the Southport auxiliary, and then moved the following resolution :— "That this meeting deprecates in the strongest terms any interference by the British Government, whether with or without the cooperation of the so-called European Concert, with the endeavour of the Cretans to free themselves from the thraldom of the Turk and to win their national freedom,"

Mr. Lewis seconded, Mr. A. Bathgate supported, and the resolution was passed.

A vote of thanks to the chairman, proposed by Mr. Howarth, concluded the proceedings.

A PROTEST AGAINST WAR.

The first annual meeting of the Increased Armaments Protest Committee took place at St. Martin's Town Hall, Charing Cross, on the 19th ult. Dr. Spence Watson presided, and among those present were Sir Wilfrid Lawson, M.P., Mr. Henry J. Wilson, M.P., and Sir W. Wedderburn, M.P.-Mr. G. H. Perris, hon. sec., read several letters of regret, amongst others from Mr. Labouchere, M.P., Lord Farrer, Dr. Clifford, and Mr. T. Burt, M.P.

The CHAIRMAN, in his opening address, said the society was started in order in some way, if possible, to counteract the dangerous spirit of spurious patriotisin which seemed to prevail everywhere. They were told at the outset that it was a Quixotic enterprise, and that it was absurd, for they were an exceedingly small minority. It was true they were a small minority at present, but the history of minorities was one of progress. Minorities were not always right, but they often were, and there was no great question which had not at one time been regarded as a whim in the brain of some Quixotic individual. The Founder of the Christian faith had been in a minority of one. They might depend upon it that this expenditure on armaments was a business for the rich and not for the poor. The armaments gave us power to make those miserable little wars which were such a lasting disgrace to us, and by such wars rich men became richer, but they did so at a heavy cost to England and the good reputation of Great Britain. The South Africa Committee had cast much light upon these little wars. What a sorry mess the inquiry had revealed! He anticipated that it would lead to such an outburst of feeling as would put a stop to the slavery which was being carried on under the name of enforced labour, if it did nothing else. We told Europe we had no evil intentions in increasing our armaments, but no one believed it, and in response other nations began increasing their armaments. It seemed to him that our increased naval expenditure up to the present had brought about this extraordinary result, that we were to do the dirty work of despotic nations, and that those nations were to decide what the dirty work should be. There could be no doubt that there was something behind this armament movement, and that something was money. Wherever there was a chance of making money we were ready to go to war, but where help was being called for on behalf of the oppressed, we were entirely powerless. Where, he asked, were the bishops while all this was going on--why were they dumb dogs when the cause of their Master was at stake?

Sir WILFRID LAWSON, M.P., moved the first resolution, as follows:

"That this meeting protests against the further increase of Army and Navy expenditure in the present year, and especially against the scheme for squandering £5,500,000 sterling on useless military works. It believes that Great Britain could more easily than any other Great Power propose and initiate a general reduction of armaments, and that every step in the opposite direction is an aggravation of national burdens and international dangers." He said they were protesting against what Mr. Gladstone called the “wild, wanton, and most perilous expenditure in which this country is engaged." With all the misery, wretchedness, pauperism, and starvation, which existed in this country, it was monstrous that the Government should play ducks and drakes with the money of the country; indeed it was a national crime so to dissipate the resources of the country.

The movement of which the meeting was the outcome would, of course, be laughed at. Everybody was who started anything new. The history of minorities was a history of progress. Why shouldn't Great Britain set a good example? Somebody ought to start doing some good in the world, for the condition of the world was horrible at present. All nations were arming to the teeth, and most of them were called Christian nations. All wars were for money. Fine names were used, and Lord Rosebery called it "Pegging out claims," which was what burglars did. After there had been a massacre somewhere, the newspapers piously wrote about "the spread of Christianity in one of the fairest regions of the earth." As a Little Englander he was in favour of "Markets without Murder," while the big Englander was in favour of "Murder for Markets."

The resolution was seconded by Miss ORME.

Mr. W. CLARKE, in supporting it, said the policy of bloated

armaments was economically ruinous to the richest country in the world.

On the motion of Sir W. WEDDERBURN, M.P., seconded by Mr. D. NAOROJI, the following resolution was adopted ::

"That this meeting deeply regrets the destitution of the Indian masses, which renders them ready victims to famine and disease, and calls upon Parliament to put a stop to the policy of military enterprise and aggression, in pursuance of which the Indian Government diverts to mischievous purposes the public money, which should be employed to improve the condition of the people."

Mr. A. E. FLETCHER then moved :

"That this meeting deplores the use of British forces against the Cretans and their Greek friends, and regards the recent events in the East as affording abundant proof of the uselessness for good and the power for evil of the enormous military establishments of our own and other European countries." This was seconded by Mr. W. P. BYLES, and adopted.

REPORTS FROM AGENTS, ETC.
BIRMINGHAM AUXILIARY.

Our Agent, the Rev. J. J. Ellis, reports as follows:

Sunday, February 14th.-Visited the United Methodist Free Church at Wednesbury, presided in the morning, addressed about forty young inen in the afternoon on the "Meaning of Freedom," and spoke in the evening on the "Dawn of Peace." Good congregation.

Tuesday, February 16th, Birmingham.-Lectured to a large and appreciative audience of young people, in the Lecture Hall of the Rev. J. Halme's Church, on The Saviour of Germany." Sunday 21st, Rugeley Congregational Church.-Preached in the morning to a large congregation on the "Gift of Peace," spoke to the P.S.H. on "If Christ came to Europe what would He find?" I also conducted the evening service.

Tuesday, 23rd. - Lectured at Stratford-on-Avon to a large audience; the following night at Bilston, to a small company on "The Struggles of a German Reformer."

Thursday, 25th.-Rev. R. W. Row presided at a Peace Meeting, held in the Friends' Meeting-house, Bromyard. I gave an address on "The Anglo-American Treaty of Arbitration: its Position and Prospects."

Sunday, 7th, Selly Oak Institute.-A gathering of youths and young men, a by no means easy audience to address, and threw my thoughts on "The Cretans and Coercion" into a concrete form. For twenty minutes there was not a vagrant eye or a shuffling foot. Present about 180.

Wednesday, 10th, Smethwick.--Peace meeting_in_Congregational Lecture Hall. The Rev. T. T. Sherlock, B.A., presided. My address was on "The Anglo-American Treaty" its improving prospects, its need as illustrated by the rapidly increasing cost to Europe of the armed peace. The audience was not large, but several gentlemen privately thanked me for my speech, and expressed the wish to have another visit in the future.

Sunday, February 21st.-The chairman of the Local Auxiliary, R. F. Martineau, gave an address on "Peace-Why not?" to the Adult Bible Class of the Church of the Messiah in this City.

MANCHESTER AUXILIARY.

Mr. Charles Stevenson reports meetings as follows:February 14th, at Singleton Mission Hall, Manchester. An address on Peace.

February 18th, at the Octagon, Manchester. A lantern lecture on "Peace, War, and True Heroism."

February 25th, at the Old Chapel, Farnworth. A lecture on "Industrial and International Arbitration;" Rev. Wm. Hewgill, M.A., chairinan.

March 1st, at the Methodist School, Whitworth, Rochdale. An address on "Peace." Mr. Edward Leicester also spoke.

March 5th, at the School, Maple. A lecture on " International Arbitration," and Mr. E. Leicester gave an address. Rev. Wm. Allen was in the chair.

March 9th; Attended and took part in the annual meeting of the Liverpool Peace Society with Mr. Adams, who also spoke. March 15th, Chapel Street, Manchester, P.M.E. An address to "Woman on Peace." Chair occupied by Mr. Harrison,

AND

The Peace Societies and the Cretan Invasion..

Bishop Westcott on "War"..

The Next Peace Congress.

Work of the Secretary

War-Its Causes and Consequences

Reports from Agents and Affiliated Societies

225

228 229

ASTOR, LENOX 'AND'

231

The War Fever

CURRENT NOTES.

THE PEACE SOCIETY.

232

233

234

235

236

238

239

240

The Annual Meeting of the Peace Society will be held on Tuesday evening, May 18th, at 7.30 p.m., in the large Meeting-house at Devonshire House, Bishopsgate Without. Sir Jos. W. Pease, Bart., M.P., will preside.

ARBITRATION ALLIANCE.

The Annual Meeting of the Arbitration Alliance will be held on the following Tuesday evening, May 25th, at the Presbyterian College, Guildford Street, W.C., at 7 p.m. The Council will meet an hour earlier. The Rev, J. P. Gledstone will preside.

THE SECRETARY AND PRESIDENT FAURE.

On Monday, April 5th, Dr. Darby had an interesting interview with President Faure, and presented to him the international Petition from the Churches. An official acknowledgment of the Petition has also been received.

THANKS!

We wish to thank those friends who have sent us expressions of encouragement and approval of the "consistent attitude maintained by the Society during this difficult and dangerous Eastern crisis." Those who have taken an intelligent interest in the Society know that the position we hold in advocating international Concert is absolutely in harmony with the history and "whole tendency of the Peace Society." What else can it advocate consistently? Our principles, the very constitution of the Society, prevent us taking any other line. The Peace Society exists "to show

DELAGOA BAY ARBITRATION.

It has been reported that the Delagoa arbitration award is against Portugal to the extent of £6,000,000, and that England agrees to pay this, and is in turn conceded the Delagoa Bay territory on payment of another £10,000,000. But in regard to this report Reuter's Agency learns that the terms of the award are not yet known, Mr. Nicol, who was sent out by the tribunal to South Africa, not having yet returned from his mission, and it is added that some time must elapse before anything definite is likely to be heard on the subject.

GREAT BRITAIN AND GERMANY.-AN ARBITRATION

AGREEMENT.

While the Colonial Estimates were being discussed in the Reichstag recently Baron Richthofen, Director of the Colonial Department, stated with regard to the claims made against the British Government by Herren Denhardt Brothers, of South-East Africa, that it was proposed to submit the matter to a Court of Arbitration at Zanzibar.

A NEW TREATY.

A telegram from Mexico states that the Senate has approved the treaty with Great Britain concerning the Belize boundary. Señor Mariscal, Foreign Minister, urged the ratification of the treaty, and said it gave to Britain more than was asked, including the islands of Amergris and Hicaco.

REPORTED TREATY.

The tenour of the reported treaty between Servia, Bulgaria, and Montenegro, while modifying the frontier relations of these countries, does not appear to affect the general character of the Eastern Question. It arranges for the division of custom dues and for protection to political refugees of either nation. The contracting parties bind themselves to Russia, and in case of a congress of the three allies a Russian representative will preside. The alliance is placed under the protection of the Tsar, whose signature is necessary to give it any binding force.

a

RATIFICATION OF TREATY.

The Treaty of Arbitration between Great Britain and Venezuela was unanimously ratified by the Venezuelan Congress on Monday, April 5th, and the British Guiana Boundary is, therefore, now in the fair way of definite delimitation. Little remains but for both parties to submit their respective cases to the Arbitrators. These cases have already been prepared for the United States Boundary Commission, and will need little alteration for the pleadings before the Tribunal.

THE ANGLO-AMERICAN TREATY.

The Senate on the 20th inst. in Executive Session agreed on the 5th May as the date for taking a final vote on the Arbitration Treaty. The issue is still uncertain, but the supporters of the measure are beginning to express more confidence as to the outcome of the voting. The National Arbitration Committee which was appointed at a meeting held at Washington twelve months ago has published the memorial presented to the Senate of the United States in favour of the Treaty. It is an influential document, signed by leading citizens of almost every State of the Union. Were there no other evidence, the representative character of this memorial is in itself a proof of the great advance which the cause of Peace has made on the other side of the Atlantic. Though the treaty from which so much was expected has been almost made a dead letter, it is quite certain that the hopes it excited will live; and that, sooner or later, such an agreement will be arrived at between the two great English-speaking nations as will be a guarantee of continued peace between them.

THE BEHRING SEA SEAL FISHERY.

The President has appointed Mr. Foster, Ex-Secretary of State, as special envoy to conclude and sign an agreement with Great Britain to secure joint action between it and the United States for the protection of the seal fishery. Mr. Foster repudiates any intention of tampering with the decision of the Paris Arbitration Tribunal. He declares that the Paris decree is accepted by the Government of the United States. Both parties to the agreement, however, are pledged to avert an extermination of the seals; and as scientists are of opinion that these denizens of the deep will disappear if not more adequately protected than at present, President M'Kinley is anxious that the requisite measures should be taken.

WAR!!

Indeed, it

War has been declared, and commenced. had begun, informally, as wars usually do, before the actual declaration was made. What we have dreaded has come. Our hope and prayer must now be, that the war may be localised, and that the terrible horrors of warfare may be minimised by the firm resolve, and wise, pacific action of the Great Powers. A European war would be an indescribable, an immeasurable, calamity, and to this the present conflict may easily spread. But for the prevention of it there is still hope in a continued and genuine agreement of the Powers.

EUROPEAN CONCERT.

Apropos of this, and in harmony with the Editorial in our last issue, (for which the Editor, not individual

members of the Committee, is responsible), in which we pleaded for international agreement as the sole means of preserving Peace, and of enabling Peace propagandists to reach their goal, the Echo had, some days ago, the following pertinent words :-"There is, however, one commanding fact in connection with the Greco-Turkish crisis, full of encouragement. The Powers have been, and are, endeavouring to prevent war. To this end they have expostulated, diplomatised, threatened. The Powers are in reality an European League of Peace on Eastern questions. This being so, and notoriously so, they are not likely to go to war amongst themselves in reference to these questions. What was feared at one time was that a great nationshaking war would take place, that would end in the expulsion of the Turks from Constantinople, and a struggle for Turkish territory. That is now pretty certain to be avoided. This is an immense gain for mankind."

STILL SOME HOPE.

The Italian Minister of Foreign Affairs said in the Senate some days before the declaration was made, "If war between Greece and Turkey becomes inevitable I am confident that the Powers will remain united to circumscribe the effects of the conflict and prevent its becoming a menace to European peace." "So," added the Echo, "whatever Greece may do to provoke war, or whatever her heedless encouragers in this country may do to urge her on a perilous pathway, they will not, in all probability, be unitedly strong enough to make SouthEastern Europe a big battle-ground." The powers have interfered, not so much in the interests of Crete and Greece as in the interests of Europe. Fearing that a great war, which would be an immeasurable calamity, might break out, the Powers have endeavoured to prevent a war, and, if they could not curb Greek impetuosity, to localise the scene of action. And so far they are entitled to the gratitude of mankind. They have certainly moved slowly, and if they were all animated by a similar motive, or looked at events from the same standpoint, they would have gone further and done

more."

MR. STEAD'S REBUKE.

Mr. W. T. Stead, in the Review of Reviews, says :"There has been, indeed, throughout this discussion in England a melancholy lack of any realising sense of what war means, or the consequences which would follow the policy of breaking up the federation of Europe, merely in order to indulge our sentimental admiration of the Greeks. It is now as it was in the days when Coleridge wrote:

"Secure from actual warfare, we have loved
To swell the war-whoop, passionate for war.
We, this whole people, have been clamorous
For war and bloodshed, animating sports,
The which we pay for as a thing to talk of—
Spectators and not combatants.'

The lightness of heart with which some amongst us, who ought to have known better, have hallooed the Greeks on to a war in which they had no intention of giving them any help whatever, is a melancholy illustration of the lack of any moral sense on the part of those who pride themselves on their moral intentions."

THE PRESS AND THE WAR! There is only one redeeming feature in the agitation which has taken place, viz., that "the whole people" have not, as in Coleridge's words, "been clamorous for war and bloodshed." It is only a section, and really a section of a section, that have been so; but unfortunately they have been, indeed, those "who ought to have known better." As usual, the Press has not missed its opportunity to stir up the passions and warlike sentiments of the people, and notably the religious, and to the pain of many devout hearts, the so-called Christian, Press. But there have been noble exceptions. The number of newspapers, irrespective of party, which have taken calm views of current facts, and have reminded their readers of what war meant, and whither this popular clamour was tending, has been unusually great. It was not so in the Crimean War-that great conflict in the East, parent of the present difficulty, in which Britain took such a prominent part. Then the continuance of Peace was rendered impossible by the unanimous Press of this country, and bitterly had we to regret and to pay for our folly, and bitterly, but honestly, have we repeatedly confessed that we were guilty, not only of a blunder but a crime, as Bright and Cobden, amidst clamour and obloquy, had the courage to describe it.

THE NON-INTERVENTION OF THE PRIZE-RING.

We have been told by one of our best friends that the line taken in our plea for International Agreement was "quite contrary to the whole tendency of the Peace Society," and that we should have held to the doctrine of non-intervention in the affairs of other nations, as preached by Richard Cobden, John Bright, and Henry Richard. The doctrine of non-intervention preached by our great predecessors was the opposite of that Palmerstonian policy, which was both meddlesome and mischievous. "We wish to protest," said John Bright, "with all the energy of which we are capable, against the mischievous policy pursued so long by this country of interfering with the internal affairs of other countries, and thereby leading to disputes, and often to disastrous wars." With that all true friends of Peace agree. But the non-intervention which means only, "Stand aside that Greece may go a-head and fight it out with the Great Assassin" is of a wholly different kind. It is the non-intervention of the prize-ring, in which, to quote Coleridge again, we are

66 Spectators and not combatants," and is in no sense promotive and preservative of Peace. Only a few weeks ago, the same persons who are now shouting it were agitating for single-handed intervention in Armenia at any cost. There is a law of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ which might with advantage be introduced into the policies of modern civilised nations. It is "Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others." Friendly intervention for checking the insanity of war and for promoting a better understanding and fostering a spirit of patience and friendliness, is both humane and Christlike. Who can doubt that any such intervention to put a stop to the present insane and profitless slaughter in Greece would be a right and good thing?

NON-INTERVENTION v. CONCERT.

But as a means of promoting international peace and concord, or even international arbitration, as a

method and means of securing Peace, "splendid isolation" can mean only splendid failure. Non-intervention is, at the best, only negative, and so cannot accomPositive plish anything. It is merely abstention. action and forces are necessary for construction or progress, or united effort of any kind. Without operation there cannot be co-operation. So there must be international agreement, formal or informal, by treaty or action, before there can be any settlement of difficulty, or creation of arbitration tribunals, or any establishment of the reign of law in international affairs. This is axiomatic and scarcely needs expression. But the difficulty has always been-the beginning to agree.

THE ENEMIES OF GREECE.

A newspaper correspondent in Athens, who speaks the Greek language and knows the Greek people well, writes that there is absolutely no "Excitement in Athens" in favour of war, and that the only desire for it is among foreign agitators, "but that desire does not come from the inhabitants of Athens," "It is not the Athenians," he says, Athenians," he says, "who cry Zeeto ee polemos! (Hurrah for War), and they do not respond to the cry." Then he adds warning words, which however true they may be, come too late, for war has already begun. "Greece has a future, which includes extension of her dominions, but if the mad cry for war is listened to, the very foundation on which that future is built will be swept away. Constructive wisdom will give place to destructive ignorance, and all the forces of retrogression will usurp those of progress. The very aspect of the bands who are gathered from all the dark corners of the Levant to cry out for war in the streets of Athens is enough to indicate the tendency of the movement. True Phil-hellenes, who know Greece and are in sympathy with her, will do their utmost to avert a step backward, and a war under present circumstances would mean that, if it did not ruin her prospects totally. The Greek people have accomplished so much and have raised themselves so far above the level of other races in this region of the globe, that one cannot help believing that the element of common sense in them will triumph over the element of savagery which is striving to get the upper hand. Greece has no worse enemies than those who make use of the ignorance of a mob to urge her into courses that cannot fail to be disastrous, and when the motives for such manœuvres are founded on party ends and petty ambitions, of which the arena is Westminster, not Greece, they are not pernicious only, but base."

AN EXAMPLE FOR THE PRESENT MOMENT. "The bloody theme of war loomed up for consideration, and I was summoned by the voice of God to decide whether I would stand for or against it. I saw that it was a vast system of manslaughter, even in its most excusable form,-unfraternal, savage, and barbarous; anti-Christian, irrational and full of monstrous evils. I saw that it was based on the assumed rightfulness of resisting evil with evil, and overcoming deadly force with deadly force, which Christ, both with precept and example, unqualifiedly forbade His disciples to do even towards their worst enemies. He had laid His great regenerative axe at the root of this upastree, and it must be destroyed trunk and branches. I was fully convinced of this and took my stand accordingly. Starting from the divine fundamental principle of pure, universal goodwill, of absolute love, I felt bound to go with that principle wherever it carried me, for all that it dictated, against all that it condemned.