:

CONTENTS.

PAGE 253

256

258

259

Arbitration Jottings.

Fruits of the Peace Conference

Foreign Notes..

Speeches at the Peace Conference

THE Secretary has taken passage in the "New England," of the Dominion Line, which sails from Liverpool for Boston on August 17th. He hopes to arrive in time to attend the Peace Meetings at Mystie, Conn., whence he will go to Buffalo to attend the conference of the International Law Association on the 30th August and two following days. He will sail from Boston on the return voyage on September 27th, after attending the Congregational Ministerial Conference in that city. Among the delegates who will sail on the 17th August will be Mr. J. G. Alexander and Mr. Alfred F. Morgan, of Leamington.

THE Association will present for discussion and adoption at the Buffalo Conference, a report embodying a set of rules in relation to a Permanent Court of Arbitration, thus completing the project of Arbitration which was decided upon at the London Conference in 1893, and partially accomplished by that of Brussels in 1895. At one time it was thought probable that the work of the Hague Conference, would, to some extent at any rate, anticipate, and so render nugatory, the work of the Committee in presenting this completion of the scheme of the Association. But it was found, that although dealing with the same question-the formation of a permanent Court-the scope was so different, and the two sets of rules so distinct, that they may well take their place side by side in the education of the world, and in the gradual evolution of the International order which is constantly and surely progressing.

"THE Transvaal crisis is over," says an Editorial in Truth, "and I make no doubt that the newspapers which cannot exist without hatching a crisis some

[PRICE 1d.

where will soon discover one in another direction. But they have cried wolf so often, and the wolf has so often been discovered to be an animal of their own imagining, that no sane human being troubles himself about their outpourings. The Transvaal crisis was a conspiracy between Mr. Chamberlain, Sir Alfred Milner, the defeated Rhodesian speculators and buccaneers of the Cape, and the millionaires and their jackals in the Transvaal, to drag us into a racial war in South Africa. The common sense of the English nation, the declaration of the Leader of the Opposition that nothing had occurred even to justify preparations for hostilities, and the diplomatic skill of Mr. Schreiner at the Cape, have upset the conspiracy.

"THE President was prepared to admit a certain number of Uitlanders to the franchise when Mr. Chamberlain interfered. But he was not prepared to yield to bullying. Sir Alfred Milner submitted to him an ultimatum, and broke off all negotiations when he declined to accept it. The thread of negotiations was taken up in a friendly spirit by Mr. Schreiner, with the result that the President gave effect to what he had contemplated before Mr. Chamberlain interfered. The Colonial Secretary will probably seek to show that the arrangement now come to has been due to his bluster. As a matter of fact, he did his very best to render any satisfactory arrangement impossible.

"To understand what has transpired, it must be borne in mind that the Rhodesian buccaneers were defeated at the recent Cape General Election. They formed a "South African League," and the League at once confederated with the capitalists of the Transvaal to force a quarrel on that Republic, with the object of creating such turmoil in South Africa that, with the help of British bayonets, they would be able to secure office and power in the Cape Colony by unconstitutional means. Mr. Chamberlain and Sir Alfred Milner made common cause with them."

THIS estimate of the situation is not seriously affected by Mr. Balfour's speech at the Conservative luncheon on the 27th. That, in the opinion of the Leader, indicates pretty plainly that, if he ever thought extreme measures would be taken, he has changed his mind. Of course, there was the stereotyped reference to the possibility of war to "untie the knot" if other

means failed. But Mr. Balfour, after thus drawing the plaudits of the gallery, hastened to add that for his part he took a more sanguine view. The Transvaal, he said in effect, has conceded the main point, and he does not think that it will take back with one hand what it has given with the other. All of this rather conveys the impression that talk about war is only retained to cover the retreat of the war party. At the same time do not let us forget that, if war has been avoided, our Government has sought to obtain its demands by the threat of war, which is not in a moral sense a greatly different transaction.

"THE Uitlanders in the Transvaal," says Truth, “very likely do not find the government so good there in many particulars as it is at home. But all who are prepared to do honest work are able to earn wages three or four times higher than they can at home. Most of them go there

to put by money, and to return to England as soon as their object has been attained. Some few have made the Transvaal their home, and these few will now be able, after a reasonable period of residence, to abrogate their British nationality and to acquire that of the Republic. I have no great sympathy with these British patriots' in their patriotic aspirations, but if they wish to cease to be British, we can spare them. Were I in search of fortune in the Transvaal by means of honest work, I should prefer the rule of the Boers to that of Cosmopolitan financialists, for I should feel that my interests would be safer in the hands of stupid people than in the hands of wealthy knaves. With the Rhodesians in the Cape Colony I have, if possible, even less sympathy than with the company-mongers in the Transvaal.

"MOST of the Cape newspapers," it is added, " are in the hands of the Rhodesians, and they have been diligently engaged in the task of proving to us that these Rhodesians really represent public opinion, and that all who are not British born must accept a subordinate position to these 'patriots.'" [The Blue Book recently published is, in this respect, sad reading.] "The colonists of Dutch origin are thoroughly loyal to the Empire, and many of British origin are with them. It is not, consequently, solely a quarrel of race, as these newspapers would have us believe. Mr. Schreiner has obtained a majority in the Cape Legislature by votes of the British and of the Dutch races, and, so long as he retains that majority, he must be regarded as the exponent of opinion constitutionally expressed. From all that I hear, were there to be a new election, his majority would be largely increased. No colony approves of the interference of Downing Street. The appeal of the Rhodesians to Downing Street to interfere on their behalf, and their determination to force on, if possible, a war in South Africa, have alienated from them many who have heretofore supported them.

"OF what the South African League is capable may be estimated by the telegraphic despatch sent on Saturday, July 22nd, by its allies, the correspondents at the Cape of those London newspapers which have been aiding them. According to this despatch, Mr. Schreiner had telegraphed to President Kruger exhorting him not to make any further concessions,

and one correspondent went so far as to say that he had read the telegram. This slander was greedily accepted as gospel truth, and one egregious evening journal forthwith accused Mr. Schreiner of high treason,' and suggested that he should be impeached. Mr. Schreiner promptly replied with a declaration that the statement was destitute of truth. Evidently it was a despairing effort of these Press Jamesons and the League to influence public opinion over here, and it throws a light-if more light were needed-on the reckless misstatements with which the London Jingo newspapers have been fed in respect to what has been transpiring in South Africa. Mr. Hofmeyr and Mr. Schreiner have done their best both to avoid war and to secure from Mr. Kruger the maximum of eoncession. The last Blue Book which has been issued shows very clearly the useful part which has been played by Mr. Schreiner and the misrepresentation to which he has had to submit."

WHILE fully recognising the party and even personal bias of the article in Truth, it must nevertheless be admitted to be a full and fair, if somewhat forcible, presentation of the actual facts of the case, and we thank the editor for putting them so fearlessly. There is no doubt that many of the Uitlanders themselves would agree with Truth; indeed, we have been assured by a gentleman fresh from Johannesburg, not an Uitlander, but a loyal British subject, who stated what he assured us was within his own knowledge, that if the question were put to the vote of the Uitlanders as a whole, they would, by a very large majority, prefer the rule of the Boers to that of the British. Other evidence, too, points to the same conclusion-only it must be noted that it is really the rule, not of the British, but "that of Cosmopolitan financialists." The views of the Cabinets and Parliaments of the Cape Colony and Natal are well set forth by Mr. Percy A. Molteno, M.A., son of the first Premier of Cape Colony, in his pamphlet, "The South African Crisis."

IT is not necessary to discuss whether Truth's mode of accounting for the prevention of war is accurate or not. War has been prevented, and we rejoice. Accept the other account, that it is due to "firm pressure upon the Boers"-to "the determination to employ British resources to secure justice for our fellow-subjects in the Transvaal." But are not the Boers our fellowsubjects just as much as the capitalist Uitlanders, if the Queen's suzerainty is a fact?-a great deal more if the cosmopolitan character of the agitators is a fact, too. As to the justice of the end sought, let us be agreed; we are all lovers of justice, and seekers of it by legitimate means. Were the means legitimate? For a great, strong, civilised Christian nation, certainly not. We have carried our contention at the sword's point, and under the threat of modern bullets; allowable, we are told, in savage warfare; but not against civilised fellow-subjects of the Queen! No-even justice may be bought too dear at such a price. Bullying, bluster, barbarous methods of warfare, are not the way of Peace, and at the best, ignoble. Right ends must be sought by right methods or defeat follows. "This episode of the bullying of the Transvaal, partly by an avowed war party, partly by men who were prepared to acquiesce in any degree of pressure short of war,

will not make a pleasing page in the history of England." We have been saved the ignominy, the crime, of war with the Transvaal, and we rejoice. And when we seek justice we will seek all-round justice-for beguiled labourers as much as for capitalists clamouring for

power.

MR. LABOUCHERE'S strictures in regard to the Press are strong, but surely deserved. We yield to none in our respect for the Fourth Estate. It is a noble institution. It has immense power, and deservedly. But power involves responsibility, and to use it for ignoble ends is a mistake. The journalists who have laboured so assiduously to stir up war have never realised what war means. They do not reflect, or, if reflecting, they still deliberately pursue their inhuman work, then, of all criminals, they are the most deeply to be reprobated

"The traitor to humanity

Is the traitor most accurst."

WE devoutly wish it were possible to accept Truth's account of the decadence of Jingoism. It may be true; it is to be hoped it is. Omitting most of the personality, we give it with that hope :-"A man may bring himself into prominence by floating on the top of a wave. Waves, however, spend themselves, and this the Jingo wave has pretty well done. Two or three years ago, what Mr. Rhodes said in his recent speech was true. Both Liberals and Conservatives were competing for popularity by seeking to outdo each other in heaping ship on ship, and soldier on soldier, adding swamps and deserts to the Empire, and challenging the world in arms to be good enough to attack us, in order that we might have an opportunity to show that we are its master. Mr. Chamberlain shouted defiance louder than all others. He elaborated a doctrine that the Empire would vanish like the baseless fabric of a vision if we did not feed it by perpetual expansion, and he even went so far as to assert that some divine decree had conferred upon us the duty of annexing what did not belong to us. The newspapers declared him to be the wisest of patriots. He was the hero of the Jingo creed.

"BUT the follies of the English are short-lived. Common-sense soon asserts itself. Our vast and increasing armaments, the cost of which has eaten into our resources, have had a very cooling effect on them. They have begun to ask themselves whether bluster is worthy of them, and whether they commercially gain by annexing territory that costs us much money to hold, and which is comparatively worthless. At present Jingoism is on the down grade. Business men do not find their profit in perpetual crises. Working men find that, if we devote all our resources to maintaining a war expenditure in Peace, all schemes for bettering their lot have to be put off. Englishmen are willing to have a reasonable army and navy for defence. If the Empire is attacked, they are ready to defend it. But the policy of huge armaments, of menace, and of perpetual expansion, has had its day. Vainly the Jingoes curse all as traitors who will not follow their lead, and dub them 'Little Englanders.' The vast majority of the country are 'sane Englanders,' and they have no intention to allow them

selves to be befooled into the wild, reckless policy of adventure which Peel and Gladstone alike declared to be as foolish as it is criminal."

66

THE painful impression is borne in upon the mind. from a study of African affairs that the new diplomacy wants careful watching. On the West Coast, Sir David Chalmers, an able lawyer thoroughly acquainted with the district, was appointed to inquire into the origin of the rising in the Sierra Leone Protectorate last year. After a thorough investigation he came to the conclusion at which everybody, except the officials concerned, had previously arrived-namely, that the rising was due to the hut tax and to "the sense of personal wrong and injustice from the illegal and degrading severities made use of in enforcing the tax." The other causes which have been alleged, Sir David Chalmers found to be comparatively immaterial. They were at most incidental and subsidiary." These conclusions he stated, and proved in a report. But the conclusions did not suit the Colonial Secretary any more than they suited the Governor of Sierra Leone. Accordingly he withheld the report, which he has now, after a delay of some months, condescended to issue, together with a rejoinder of his own. He treats Sir David Chalmers's report as an editor treats an ignorant screed from an incompetent contributor. He just tears it up and puts it in the waste-paper basket. By the light of nature Mr. Chamberlain is able to refute the evidence of the "man on the spot," and to substantiate totally opposite conclusions of his own. This short way with Royal Commissioners, thinks the Leader, raises the question whether it was really worth while The answer is, we suppose, to get a report at all. that the promise of inquiry put off the public, which was what the Colonial Office desired at the time.

THE Morning Leader, too, renders a public service when it says: "The announcement that the Government of India is prepared to place 10,000 soldiers at the disposal of the Home Government in the event of war with the Transvaal is distinctly interesting. The costliness of the army in India has long been a theme of complaint and suggestion among Indian speakers and writers, and some important evidence on the subject has lately been taken by the Royal Commission on Indian Expenditure. The official answer invariably is that there is not one soldier to spare in India, and, therefore, that the burden upon the impoverished taxpayers of India cannot be reduced. Only a few weeks ago, when the Indian Budget was being discussed in India, Lord Curzon declared with vehemence, in reply to an Indian member of the Legislative Council, that during his Viceroyalty at least the British Army in India would not be reduced even by a single soldier. How do these statements and excuses square with the present discovery that 10,000 soldiers could be spared from India in order to fight the Boers? It will not do to say that the loan would be merely temporary. The army in India is supposed to be prepared for emergencies, and nobody, not even Lord Curzon, knows when an emergency may arise. Besides, the Home Government has formed a habit of drawing upon the army in India for service elsewhere, and at the present moment a considerable number of such borrowed troops are absent from India. The conclusion is irre

sistible that, in the opinion of the military authorities themselves, the strength of the army in India is maintained at a higher point than is strictly necessary. But to what end?

CANON MACCOLL has written to the Spectator expressing approval of Lord Kitchener's treatment of the dead Mahdi. The Mahdi was "during the period of his power a cruel and brutal sensualist of the lowest type; an oppressor and exterminator of all who opposed him, whether Christian, Heathen, or Mohammedan; in short, an enemy of the human race." "For my part I think Lord Kitchener would have been justified, in the interests of humanity and civilisation, if he had solemnly and ceremoniously cremated the Mahdi's body as a protest on the part of the British nation against crimes which disgraced human nature." This is fairly savage, says the Echo, from a Christian minister. Surely Canon MacColl must care greatly for effect, and must yield himself to the temptation to seek that before everything else. The Christianity of such writing, nay, the humanity of it, is impossible to detect. The attitude of some of the ambassadors of the Prince of Peace is to us quite incomprehensible. We "have not so learned Christ."

As there appears, says the Chronicle, to be some confusion in many people's minds between the " ocean penny postage," advocated half a century ago, and the "universal penny postage" or "imperial penny postage," of which we have lately obtained an instalment, and in connection with which Mr. Henniker Heaton has just received the freedom of the City, it may be of interest to state what was the extent of the reform which Elihu Burritt and his friends asked for some ten years after the Queen came to the throne. The "learned blacksmith" once described his scheme as follows:-"Every letter under half an ounce, from any town in Great Britain to any town in the colonies, should pay threepence; one penny for the home inland rate, another penny for the ocean, and the third for the colonial inland rate, and vice versâ. The Government now charges one shilling for these three rates." thus appears that Burritt did not dream of extending the range of the inland rate beyond the United Kingdom, and that the imperial penny postage proposal is quite a new thing. As the lineal descendants of Elihu Burritt, whose work was formally merged into that of the Peace Society, we are interested in this information, and rejoice that the work, for which Mr. Heaton has been so deservedly honoured, is so much beyond the dream of our large-hearted predecessor. The world moves-and that rapidly and far.

It

THE Baptist Missionary Review (Madras), referring to the revival of the anti-opium movement, says: "We fail to see how greed of revenue and lust of power can be more excusable in men collectively than in men individually, or to understand how the power to enforce an evil law can close the eyes of Christian people to its wickedness. Evils of this kind bring a reproach upon Christianity everywhere, and we heartily wish God-speed to those who are making this new attempt to remove from the King's highway such a mighty stone of stumbling." These remarks apply to international questions generally.

ARBITRATION JOTTINGS.

THE WAIMA INCIDENT.

AN interesting incident occurred in the House of Commons on the 20th ult. Mr. Bill (Staffs, Leek) asked the Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs whether Her Majesty's Government had come to any decision on the question of giving some temporary pecuniary assistance to the families of the British officers and men killed at Waima in December, 1893, pending the result of the Arbitration proceedings with the French Government, in accordance with the answers given in this House by the Secretary of State for the Colonies on May 6th, 1898, and by the late Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs on June 28th and July 28th of the same year. Mr. Hedderwick also asked a question on the same subject. Mr. Brodrick replied that Her Majesty's Government have reason to believe that the French Government will consent to refer this matter to Arbitration. When this consent has been obtained, they will consider the question of an advance to the survivors. Meanwhile, in considering these claims, Her Majesty's Government cannot forget that the relatives of officers killed in action with an enemy suffer equally with the relatives of these officers, and have no claim to compensation beyond the pensions provided in the Warrants, to which the relatives of these officers are equally entitled,

THE ALASKA BOUNDARY.

The negotiations between the United States and Canada are still at a standstill because of the Alaska boundary question. This is the only difficulty. Were it overcome the High Commission, when it meets again in August-as it is timed to dowill have accomplished its work. The gravity of the situation was expressed in an important speech in the Canadian Parliament, a few days ago (July 23rd) by the Premier Sir Wilfred Laurier, who is also a member of the High Commission.

SIR WILFRID LAURIER'S SPEECH.

"I agree with Sir Charles Tupper," he said, "that the case of Canada seems impregnable in this, that it rests on what appeals to the sense of fairness and justice of every man who approaches the subject with a fair mind; but the terms of the Treaty of 1825 unfortunately are not so clear as to admit of ready interpretation. In fact, they are of such a character that lawyers differ as to their meaning, and as to what extent of territory is to be given one nation and what to another. Under such circumstances, it having been found impossible to arrange the matter on the basis of a compromise, there were only two other ways in which it could be settled, namely, by Arbitration or by war." He was sure no one would think of war, but everybody would agree that though sometimes our patience was sorely tried, and though sometimes we might believe that our opponents were taking undue advantage of us, yet we must exhaust peaceable means of reaching a settlement, and that was by Arbitration. Both parties agreed to that, but neither the Commission nor the respective Governments had been able to agree on the subjects of reference, so that the question was not any more advanced now towards a settlement than in¡January. "But" (continued Sir Wilfrid) "we must have patience, at least for a few months more, until, should such be the event, we have come to the painful conclusion that there are no hopes of arriving at a basis of Arbitration." He should not believe, for it was too painful to believe for a moment, that we could not settle this question. The difficulty arises out of the interpretation of a treaty arranged at St. Petersburg in 1825 between Great Britain and Russia. Needless to recall,

Alaska, before it was acquired by America, was Russian territory. The treaty of St. Petersburg was supposed to define the boundary line between Alaska and Canada. But the matter was never worked out in detail, and the discovery of gold in the region concerned has not made the task any easier. Indeed, it is conceivable that had there been no Klondyke there would have been no Alaskan boundary question, anyhow in an acute degree. The Pacific coast hereabout is covered with mountains and indented with creeks, bays, and inlets, some of these, like Lynn Inlet, running nearly a hundred miles into the land. The American interpretation of the St. Petersburg Treaty is regarded by the Canadians as meaning that the strip of territory in dispute should be determined by the remotest reaches of the creeks and bays. On the other hand, the Canadian interpretation of the treaty is that the boundary should

follow the crest of the mountains nearest the coast or a line at the distance from the coast specified by the treaty. This is a claim that the creeks and inlets are territorial waters according to the rules of international law, and that therefore the boundary line should cross them.

ARBITRATION WITHOUT RESERVE.

During all the years that this question has been left unsettled, the Americans have been regarding their claim as beyond dispute, and have been quietly taking possession. England was far off and apathetic. British Columbia was feeble, and struggling for existence. When she became a part of Canada, however, the Dominion began to press for a settlement. The matter has dragged interminably, the Americans profiting by delay to strengthen their foothold, until at last the meetings of the Anglo-American Commission brought it to a focus. Should the matter be submitted to Arbitration without reserve, as Canada demands, then, if the American claim were allowed by the tribunal, Canada would be without a harbour on the Pacific between the fifty-sixth and sixtieth parallels; if the extreme Canadian claim should be allowed, then Canada would find herself mistress of the whole of the Stikine Valley; if the secondary, or compromise, claim of Canada should be allowed, then she would own the heads of Lynn Canal and Taku Inlet, and secure the inestimable benefit of a free outlet for the rich Yukon territory and the gold regions of Northern British Columbia.

STATEMENT BY SENATOR FAIRBANKS.

At Washington on the 24th ult, Senator Fairbanks said that he and Sir Wilfrid Laurier on Friday had agreed to the indefinite postponement of the meeting of the joint High Commission. Senator Fairbanks added:-" Direct negotiations respecting the boundary are progressing. Mr. Hay and Mr. Tower are directing their efforts to the attainment of an amicable adjustment, though on somewhat different lines from those pursued in the spring and summer. The principals are not without hopes of success, and then there is Arbitration in reserve in case of failure on the present lines. Officials here are in nowise alarmed at the recent developments at Ottawa, feeling confident that Sir Wilfrid Laurier's utterance on Saturday was given a meaning not intended by him, and Sir Charles Tupper's strong language is not credited to the Canadian Government. It is further realised that great latitude may properly be allowed in viewing the utterances of members in opposition." The New York Herald publishes a despatch from Washington on the same date, stating that the view prevailing in official quarters regarding the Alaska boundary dispute is that the matter will be settled by an amicable agreement between Great Britain and the United States, one of the parties making concessions on this question in return for concessions by the other on some other question pending between the two countries.

THE VENEZUELA ARBITRATION.

It is two and a half years since England and the United States were almost at war over the Venezuela question, yet it is only now that the Court of Arbitration is meeting in Paris, hearing evidence and deciding what is the boundary between the Republic of Venezuela and British Guiana. Professor Martens who is also serving as President of the Geneva Convention section of the Peace Conference, is President of the Court. He is a Russian, one of the greatest living authorities on International Law, and he has the reputation of possessing an eminently judicial mind. The Tribunal was appointed under the Treaty of Washington, signed on February 2nd, 1897. It held a formal sitting in January last, and resumed its sittings on Thursday, June 15th at the Quai d'Orsai, Paris, where the rooms used during the Behring Sea Arbitration have again been courteously lent by the French Government. At the opening Session the Arbiters sat on a raised platform, M. de Martens having on his right the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, and Lord Justice Collins on his left. The Lord Chief Justice of England, Lord Russell of Killowen, and Justice Brewer, counsel for Venezuela, occupied the right side of the hall. Facing the Tribunal were the counsel for Great Britain, Sir Richard Webster, the Attorney-General, and Sir Robert Reid, Q.C. Messrs. Askwith and Rowlatt sat on the left side. Sir Richard Webster opened the proceedings on behalf of Great Britain, and after he had spoken for two days, the Court rose, owing to the President having to return to the Hague for

his duties at the Peace Conference. The sittings recommenced on June 22nd, when the Attorney-General resumed his speech which altogether occupied thirteen days, when he was succeeded by Maitre Mallet Prevost, who at the sitting of the Court on July 21st, opened the case for Venezuela. His pleadings still continue. NEWFOUNDLAND FISHERY QUESTION.

The French Commodore was expected to arrive at St. John's on July 1st, to discuss the questions in dispute with the Colonial Ministry. A few days previously, the Legislature voted extra sums for the purpose of enforcing the Bait Act against the French.

SAMOAN SETTLEMENT.

The reports received regarding the labours of the Samoan Commission, have been most satisfactory. The Commission was sent out to Samoa to secure unanimity of action among the Powers, and with it the pacific administration of the Islands. The decision of the Chief Justice respecting the Kingship, has been prolcaimed valid and binding by the Commissioners, who recognised Malietoa Tanu as King, Malietoa, however, abdicated in favour of the Commissioners, who have appointed a provisional government, composed of the three Consuls, the majority to act in all cases where unanimity is not required by the Berlin Treaty. The Chief Justice was to continue in office, as also do the municipal officials. Dr. Solf is authorised to act as president of the municipality. Three thousand five hundred rifles, not including those served out to Malietoa Tanu's party, have been surrendered. The Mataafa chiefs met the Malietoa chiefs on board the American cruiser "Badger," in presence of the British, German, and American Commissioners. They shook hands and made Peace. A meeting between Mataafa and Tanu has been arranged; the Commissioners are also to be present. Peace is assured, and both factions have returned to their villages on friendly terms, while awaiting action by the three Powers. The Commissioners, says the Report, were making trips round the island, explaining their decisions, and conciliating the natives. They were expected to return on the 12th ult., and then to leave for Washington.

COBDEN AND DISARMAMENT.

THE following shows that the idea of nations disarming by agreement is by no means new. House of Commons, July 22nd, 1859. MY DEAR SIR,-Nothing can be done-not even a hearing this Session for paper. We have voted £5,000,000 more than last year for armaments, and unless this rivalry in preparation for war between England and France can be stopped, it will, I suppose end in war. People begin to say "We had better fight it out." The Governments of the two countries ought to come to an explanation and a mutual agreement to limit their preparations for war. But we find Governments on the side of heavy taxes and high expenditure.

Bright has just given us a good speech and I am waiting for a opportunity to urge the same course. England and France might save each other five millions sterling and be just as relatively powerful, and yet they will not speak the word! Such is the wisdom with which we are governed.-Believe me, yours truly, RICHARD Cobden.

Pall Mall.

To assume even that black men, such as the negroes and the Papuans, who constitute so large a section of collective humanity, have been created by God Almighty to live in spiritual darkness, is to form rather a low opinion of the moral government of the world :

A PARADOX.

If white be all the colours combined,

And black their absence be,

Then aren't the whites the coloured folks,

And the blacks from colour free?

THERE is no "I" in the Lord's Prayer, it is all "we," it is all the brotherhood of man and the fatherhood of God.-FRANCES E. WILLIARD.