opinion on this subject, and calls upon the people to give their support to the principle by pronouncing strongly in its favour." The Rev. Dr. David Mullen seconded the resolution, which was passed unanimously.

The Rev. J. Denham Osborne moved a vote of thanks to the speakers who had addressed the meeting. Sir Robert Jackson seconded the motion, which was carried. The proceedings then terminated.

ANNUAL MEETING OF THE HALSTEAD AUXILIARY.

A meeting, under the auspices of the Halstead Peace and Arbitration Society, was held in the Temperance Hall on Tuesday evening, 22nd February, 1898. There was a fairly good attendance, and Mr. E. Doubleday presided. The proceedings commenced with a hymn, after which the Rev. S. Parkinson read a passage of Scripture and offered prayer. In the course of the evening some of the girls from the Greenwood Industrial School sang solos.

The Chairman, in his opening remarks, said the Peace Society existed to carry on what he was afraid must be called an unpopular cause, but at the same time they knew there was no party very hostile to them.

Mr. E. W. Robson, of Saffron Walden, gave an address on what he called the most unpopular text in the Bible, "He that is slow to anger is better than the mighty, and he that ruleth his spirit is better than he that tiketh a city." Mr. Robson said he would like to see war divested of its trappings and the false notions of honour and glory that were associated with it. He advocated Arbitration in place of war.

Mr. G. Southcomb proposed a vote of thanks to the speaker, and to the Chairman for presiding. Mr. J. S. Baker in seconding, said a means they might use in their locality in trying to overcome something of the military spirit was as far as possible to discountenance the growth of the Volunteer corps in their midst. He thought the Volunteer corps had done much to foster the military spirit. Their youths grew up and thought the Volunteers was a very good thing, and they joined it to the neglect of their business and the increase of bad habits, and became much worse men of business thereby. This could be seen going on around them continually, and he thought they might, by doing some little thing in the matter, help to overcome the military spirit.

A financial report of the past year's work, read by the chairman, showed that subscriptions amounted to £5. 6s., and this sum added to a balance in hand of £3. 8s., made a total of £9. 4s. Against this £3. 13s. 6d. had been sent to the parent Society, and £2. 2s. to the Arbitration Society, leaving a balance in the hands of the treasurer of £3. Os. 114d. after paying a few incidental

expenses.

ANNUAL MEETING OF THE LANCASTER PEACE SOCIETY. On Tuesday evening, February 22nd, 1898, in the Co-operative Hall, Lancaster, the Annual Meeting of the Lancaster and District Peace Society was held, and the attendance was a moderate

one.

The chair was occupied by Councillor Bowness, who was supported by the Rev. H. W. Smith, Rev. T. Wilshaw, Messrs. T. Burrow, J. Brash, W. Swainson, G. II. Weekes, and W. Barrow.

Mr. Brash read the Annual Report, which showed that the work during the past year had not been of an aggressive but of an educational character.

The Chairman, after expressing his deep sympathy with the object of the meeting, said they were met as friends and promoters of Peace. The aggressive spirit, the militarism which was at present rampant, seemed to ignore the simple elements of justice and humanity, especially when they came to deal with savage tribes. That England should go and conquer the people, and say 66 Hands off" to every other Power, he thought, was foreign to the principles of justice, and was altogether antagonistic to the principles of Christianity.

Mr. Worthington J.P., of Wigan, in the course of a lengthy address on "War in its Relation to Working Men," "What Conscription means," and "The Proposed Increase in the Army," characterised as monstrous and nonsensical the endeavour that was being made to make out that the Navy was not so strong as it should be.

The Rev. H. W. Smith proposed a resolution deploring the foreign complications and aggressive spirit of the present time, condemning the proposal to increase the Army, and affirming that

the only safe method of settling disputes was by International Arbitration. He asserted that it was humiliating to think that men were willing to go and be food for powder, and said that militarism was prejudicial to the highest interests of the people of this country, and to the well-being of nations.

Mr. T. Barrow seconded the resolution, and was confident what was right and just would eventually come to the top.

The resolution was cordially passed, and the meeting terminated with a vote of thanks to the chairman and speaker, proposed by the Rev. T. Wilshaw, seconded by Mr. G. H. Weekes.

ANNUAL MEETING OF THE LIVERPOOL PEACE SOCIETY. The Annual Meeting of the Liverpool Peace Society was held on March 8th in the Schoolroom of Myrtle Street Baptist Chapel. Mr. Thomas Crosfield presided, and there was a pretty numerous attendance of ladies and gentlemen, among others present being Mrs. Solly (lately resident in South Africa), the Revs. J. H. Martyn, M. J. Elliott, and J. Bennett Anderson, Messrs. Archibald Bathgate, J. K. Slater (Treasurer), J. C. Farrie, Samuel Davies, Thomas Pritchard, M. J. Hay, Williamson, W. R. Worthington, R. Sellars, Mark Howarth, Richard Eastley, W. G. Jones, W. Lewis, W. Lawton (Secretary), H. G. Coventry, and T. Coventry (Secretary Southport Peace Society), etc.

The Chairman, in introducing the proceedings, mentioned letters of apology from various clergymen and others. He spoke of Mr. Thomas Snape, the President, as having, he believed, presided over twelve annual meetings without a break, but said he was unable to do so on this occasion, because he was at present at the Antipodes.

The annual report for 1897-8 was read by the Secretary, Mr. William Lawton, and Mr. Thompson Coventry, of Southport, read the report of that Auxiliary.

Mr. J. K. Siater (Hon. Treasurer) submitted the statement of accounts, which showed a balance in bank of £5 2s. 4d.

The Chairman said they could not look back upon the record of the past twelve months with any sense of joy or gratification. In France they were making themselves slaves and worshippers of the gospel of force and militarism, ready to do anything to favour the Army in any action, however discreditable. France now only wanted a Cæsar or a Napoleon to take the head and lead them into thirty or forty years of bloodshed, rapine, and despotism. In England itself they were growing more and more into a military nation, as was shown by the increase in their armaments. In regard to the Indian frontier question, he declared that the British Government had shown as much utter barbarity in their treatment of the hill tribes as the barbarians themselves had ever shown.

Mr. Archibald Bathgate moved the adoption of the report and financial statement, and the reconstruction of the executive for the ensuing year, with Mr. Thomas Snape as President.

Mr. W. Lewis seconded, and Mrs. Solly (South Africa) supported the resolution, which was carried with acclamation.

Mr. J. C. Farrie moved a proposition protesting against the unwise and unrighteous system of attempting to settle disputes by war, and against the folly of ever-increasing armaments. The Rev. M. J. Elliot, in seconding, dealt with the subject in its Christian and moral aspects.

This resolution was also carried enthusiastically and the customary votes of thanks closed the proceedings.

OBITUARY NOTICE.

AN old and valued member of the Society, Mr. FRANCIS FRITH, of Reigate, has died at his winter residence at Cannes, aged seventy-five. A meeting for public worship was held in memory of him at Reigate Meeting House, on Saturday, March 5th. Mr. Frith was a minister of the Society of Friends, and was the author of "The Quaker Ideal," first published as a serial in The British Friend. He was also the most prominent writer of "A Reasonable Faith," a work which had a wide circulation a few years ago, and is still in demand.

THE Pope has sent his thanks and congratulations to the German Emperor for the attitude he has adopted regarding duelling by his officers.

THE

THE attitude of the American Peace Society in this great crisis is admirable. We congratulate Dr. Trueblood on the calm and high tone of the last issue of the Advocate of Peace, and its superiority to the spirit of the hour. The position is a difficult one. It is not easy to make it clearly understood that the Peace Society, either in this country or America (and the two societies are practically identical in basis and constitution), cannot be a political partisan. It exists for a definite object, and in proportion as it is partisan is disloyal to its own purpose, and so far ineffective. Whereas, if it be true to itself, to its mission, and to the truth for which it testifies, it cannot fail until that has failed. If it becomes the mere repeater of party shibboleths its work is ended, for that can be done better by other organisations more distinctly political. Political parties and their policies are temporary and fluctuating; the cause represented by the Peace Society is that of the King, and is eternal.

THERE are other difficulties of the position, to which our excellent friend thus wisely refers :-"It seems to

[PRICE 1d.

be supposed by some that an organisation like the American Peace Society is good for nothing if it cannot prevent any war that threatens, Such a society ought to be able, it is imagined, at a moment of sudden excitement and danger of hostilities, to set at once in motion a mechanism powerful enough to calm the inflamed minds of the people, to stop the sensational press reporters from lying, to arrest the pens of belligerent editors, to close the mouths of fiery Jingoes, to dictate the judgment of the Administration, and to direct the whole course of diplomacy between two Governments; in fact, to control two peoples and two Governments,

"THE Peace Society would be delighted to do all this, if it could, but it ought not to be expected to perform prodigies. It is only a little, comparatively, that any group of persons, unless it be large and distributed over a wide area, can do to control public sentiment when it is at fever heat, or to check the mischievous activity of a lot of irresponsible scareheads who are always busiest at such times. As to controlling diplomacy at these junctures, still less can be done. Its secrets are not disclosed to the public, and memorialising Government with declarations of general principles when delicate and disturbing questions are perplexing the minds of those in authority is about as nearly useless as any good thing can be. It is often a positive injury.

66

"WE do not under-estimate in the least the positive influence which a Peace Society ought to exert, and actually does exert, in the most troublous times. It goes without saying that such a society ought at such periods of disturbance, as at all other times, to put forth its utmost efforts, in all wise ways, in behalf of the principles and policies for which it stands. It should utter its voice all the louder because of the general din. Every one of its members constitutes a centre of influence in his locality. By his example, his conversation, his articles in the local press, etc., he exercises a considerable restraining influence. joint influence of all the members, scattered throughout the nation, is very strong. The Peace Societies, while not claiming perfection, have not been found wanting at times when people have been carried away by passion, and war has seemed imminent. They have contributed much of that restraining force which has

The

often, in spite of the gusts of wild and irrational feeling, held the nation fast to her moorings, and kept her from plunging recklessly into the mad orgies of

war.

"BUT the chief work of the Peace Societies is not done during times of excitement, such as we have just passed through. A society which did nothing except on such occasions, and then rushed about in a paroxysm of effort, would be unworthy of the name of Peace Society. The purpose of such societies is not so much to try to prevent war in specific cases, however efficient they may then be, as to bring about such a change in public sentiment in reference to the whole subject of war and the methods of administering international justice as will ultimately render all war impossible. This is the great field of their service-to promote better international feeling in a large general way; to inculcate the idea that war is a barbarous and irrational means of trying to secure justice; to induce Governments to settle by Arbitration all cases of dispute as they arise; to promote the negotiation of permanent treaties of Arbitration between nations; and to try to secure the ultimate establishment of a permanent international tribunal to which all cases of international difference, not adjustable by diplomacy, may go as a matter of course.

"IT is evident that but little of this work can be done when the public mind is in a state of frenzy and suspense. It requires the patient labour of months and years, when men's minds are free from passion and open to truth. It is but slowly at best that the bad instincts and habits of thought and belief inherited from the past and strengthened by false education can be changed."

EQUALLY explicit and high-toned is the position taken by the Friends in the States, who believe in making a stand against war "for Christ's sake." They say :"The war spirit which has recently developed and is still rampant in this country invests with fresh interest and importance the work of every Peace association. Never before in our time has the Christian testimony for Peace been so assailed at every point, Never has the importance of a clear understanding of the basis on which it rests been greater. Never was it more essential that those convinced of its obligation should maintain it boldly and at whatever risk."

BUT it is not only the Peace Society and the Friends, who are naturally committed to it, who take the side of Peace. The United Presbyterian, the organ of the American Presbyterians, on April 14th, says "We have not seen anything to change our expressed opinion that a war at this time with Spain would be unjustifiable. There is not any ground of dispute between the two countries which lies beyond the sphere of diplomacy and Arbitration. It is not as if Spain had made war upon us and we were compelled to act in selfdefence. The injuries we have received are not vital; they do not affect the integrity of the nation, its right of influence or domain, or even its honour. Our commerce has suffered, but not for the first time. Our citizens have suffered, but for that better amends can

be made than the death of other citizens. We have our rights, but a blow is not the only way by which we can protect them. There is cruelty, and the suffering has been great; so it was in Turkey; war is not the only means of redress. We have not exhausted the means of Peace.

"WE should remember what has already been accomplished by peaceful means. Our citizens in prison under sentence of death have been released; others in distress have been relieved; General Weyler, the monster of cruelty, has been recalled, and General Blanco has been given command; an order has been given for the return of the concentrados to their farms, and help is furnished them in doing so; relief is given to the starving, autonomy has been granted; in fact, almost all that we have asked for has been granted, and in regard to what remains there is no reason to say that we cannot secure the pacification of the island, the restoration of order and prosperity by the peaceful means at our command. Let the Christian sentiment of the country continue to express itself for Peace, and let prayers continue to ascend to Him to whom the billows were obedient."

CONCERNING the recognition of Cuban Independence, it has a very suggestive article, which begins: "It is the demand of the Cubans and the Cuban agitators in this country that the United States must recognise the independence of Cuba. It is insisted upon that this is essential to any interposition looking to the restoration of Peace. It is well to remember what this is." Then, after pointing out what is involved, and drawing a parallel between the Cuban "Reconcentrados" and the "Confederates" of the Civil War, the article concludes : "Thus far Spain has failed to repress the insurrection, but there is, in no proper sense, a government, or a nation, whose independence can claim recognition. If we recognise the independence of Cuba we, of course, By must receive a representative at Washington. whom shall he be sent ? By the junta in New York?"

IF they aspire to more they are simply following the ambitions and aims of the old war associations, and that can end only in disappointment. The Peace societies cannot create Parliaments and Courts and Authorities for the control and guidance of the civilised Powers. To attempt to do so is to put themselves in a false position, and to court defeat and ridicule. It is the way to defeat our purpose, for the real authorities will not listen to self-constituted rivals, though they may be influenced by calmly-reasoned and wisely-presented truths. We must remember the limits of our proper sphere if we would guard against disappointment and discouragement.

THERE are many who believe that the war between Spain and America has been expedited, if not brought about by the American Press. But, however these papers may have behaved hitherto, two of their number, now that the long-delayed "inevitable" has been reached, are displaying anything but a proper appre ciation of what is to follow. One journal offers 500 dols. for the first Spanish flag captured by an American regiment; another offers 1,000 dols. for the capture of General Weyler, "the Spanish murderer," dead or alive. This is trifling with war, and war is scarcely a matter to be trifled with; taken seriously, and planned and carried out by sober heads, it is surely bad enough.

WE have been told that the war is a humanitarian, almost a holy, war, and certainly a war in which virtue ought to be its own reward; and yet captured flags are priced at 500, and captured generals at 1,000 dols. If any time be a time for courtesy, it is the eve of war. Bickering is over, quite enough has been said to justify the blows which are to prove, not whether the principles upon which the aggressor acts are right or wrong, but, perhaps, the right of the aggressor to act upon those principles. But the journal that thirsts for General Weyler's blood does not appreciate this fact. It calls the General "the Spanish murderer." Whether this epithet be justified or not, it implies something to assert which the American arms have not been taken up. America means to point out by force of arms that Spain has done wrong, and not that an individual has failed in Cuba. It is not patriotism that thus bribes the soldier to mighty deeds. It is enterprise-the enterprise that causes a journal to offer to take a man to Klondyke. Such proposals are surely repugnant to the moral sense of the world. But all is fair, it is said, in war.

THE object of the meeting held in Trafalgar Square,

on the 24th inst., has our strongest sympathy. This meeting, which was addressed by Mr. A. E. Fletcher (editor of the New Age), and others, and was attended by about 1,000 persons, was convened "to protest against the continuation of the barbarities perpetrated by the Spanish authorities on the inhabitants of Cuba and the Philippine Islands and on their political prisoners." What more opportune moment could be chosen for such a protest than that in which Spain, from her peculiar circumstances, and her need of friendship and alliance, would be likely to listen to it, instead of treating it with the proud indifference or disdain which would be the case at another time, when she would be more independent and less amenable to moral influence?

A LONDON daily, it is true, waxes virtuously indignant and ironical over this meeting. "Is it not a little disgraceful," it asks, "that while Great Britain is striving to maintain a neutral position between two friendly Powers, who are at war, a public meeting of citizens should be held in Trafalgar Square strongly condemning one of them?" Does neutrality, then, consist in blind approval and applause of everything done by a Power that happens to be friendly? Why is it that partisan Press men will not observe necessary logical distinctions? The Trafalgar Square meeting

was held not to pass judgment on a friendly Power, but to condemn actions which were in themselves not only unfriendly to, but a crime against, humanity-which is infinitely more than principalities and powers, whether friendly or unfriendly. A public meeting of citizens held merely to condemn, and so handicap, either friendly Power would be virtually a violation of neutrality. But that was not the case, and the meeting would as vigorously have protested against the barbarities of the other friendly Power were there any demanding protest. The truest friends of Spain, or any other country, are those who protest most loudly against its wrongdoings, which carry their own certain and terrible retribution.

WELL would it have been for Spain and her unhappy subjects had such meetings been held long ago throughout the civilised world. Public opinion is admittedly mightier than armies. 'There is a moral sense in men, and the condemnation and moral indignation of Christendom, if friendly offices and moral persuasions were ineffective, would achieve infinitely more for the cause of freedom and good government and international goodwill than an appeal to arms, which can end only in multiplying and perpetuating the evils it forging fresh fetters for the enslaved and oppressed, seeks to remedy, in creating new animosities and who are never carried into real freedom by any such method.

66

As to what is so frequently said about things that are worse than war," "more horrible than war," and so on-such utterances are made either unreflectingly or in utter ignorance of what war actually is. What is worse than war? What can be more horrible than war? Despotism? But war itself is the superlative destroyer of freedom. There is no despotism equal to that of military despotism, without which other des

potisms could not exist, or would be mild and

innocuous. Cruelties? But war is the aggregate of the worst cruelties; it is "the sum of all villainies," the negation of all morality, the abolition of all order, (inter arma leges silent), the abdication of reason and the higher human sentiments, it is high treason against humanity, and the indefinite perpetration of the foulest fratricides. Nothing in human intercourse can be "worse" or "more horrible " than war.

THE Jewish Chronicle strikes a note which must win approval-"The long-drawn-out agony of the Spanish-American quarrel is ended at last. The dispute is to be submitted to the savage arbitrament of war, and the independence of Cuba must be decided at the cannon's mouth. We Jews, fresh from the celebration of our great festival of liberty, from whom persecution and misgovernment have taken the heaviest toll, cannot forbear a feeling of sympathy for the gallant and sanguinary struggle for freedom that has devastated a once prosperous island; a large area won back for good and righteous government is so much gained in the cause of human progress. But the manner of its accomplishment! That one must wade to liberty through a deluge of blood, there is the pity of it. Civilisation must still proceed on a powder cart, and freedom be won at the point of the bayonet.

"YET to those who have pondered over the bloodstained pages of history, or reflected upon the national travail which each race in its turn has undergone, growing to prosperity or sinking to ruin, there is something ephemeral in institutions born amid the thunders of war. Nations who lay their foundations with the firstborn of their enemy, and in his youngest son set up their gates, often lack the elements of permanence and stability, and pass through a turbulent youth to a weak and frail manhood. After all, peaceful and silent evolution is the best guarantee, as it is the surest test, of human progress. And to the Hebrew race the bloody conflict just opening is doubly appalling; for Peace has been to them ever the greatest of blessings; scarcely a page of their prayer-book but bears witness to their abiding love for it; it is their first and last appeal to Providence. Perhaps in the future that lies before us Jews will throw themselves more vigorously into the war against war, and identify themselves more prominently with the great Peace movement that would dethrone brute force for ever from its position as the arbiter of national destinies."

"WE are retiring from our raid into the country of the Afridis," says The Speaker, "having accomplished three things: (1) lowered the prestige of British arms before border tribes, whom we have taught their strength as guerillas when armed with modern weapons; (2) embittered for ever, by the cruelty of our 'punishment' which bears most on their women and children, the feelings of tribes whose goodwill would have been our best defence on the outer scarp of the frontier; (3) destroyed for ever their faith in British honour. It is surely an extraordinary achievement for a Christian Power that, at the beginning of winter, in one of the harshest regions of the world, we have razed the roof-trees and laid waste the crops of tribesmen whom we failed to defeat in battle. Thousands of human beings, of women and children, will be foodless and shelterless, thousands will die of cold and hunger this winter in the fastnesses of the Himalayas in consequence of our visit. This, we are told, is General Westmacott's compensation for his retreat-that the tribesmen are 'feeling their punishment severely.'"

A RAILWAY MUSEUM is being formed in Dresden, and its agents have arrived in England to purchase materials for its contents. A National Railway Museum Committee is in existence in England, and we believe it is endeavouring to induce the Government to form a Railway Museum at South Kensington, where a splendid nucleus for one has existed for years. But, if the Government delays a little longer, a good part of the wealth of objects now in England illustrating the history of railways in their birthland will have been lost to us for ever. The patriotism which expends itself in commemorating battles might have a little energy to spare in preserving for us what is a legitimate source of national pride. But the new patriotism is apt to overlook the real sources of England's greatness through its anxiety to emulate Continental nations in theatrical laudations of military achievements. The militarisin which we are bidden to cultivate is essentially a Continental product.

WHAT THE NATIONS PAY FOR WAR. THOSE who like to feel their pulses stirred at the prospect of war must have been more in their element during the past twelve months than for a quarter of a century. International situations and rumours of war have been the order of the day.

Strangely enough, though almost everybody talks glibly enough of war just now, it is generally agreed that no one can possibly realise, much less describe, what the horrors of any future great war will be like. Perhaps the statistical method is as effective as any in an attempt to represent the results of war.

War is the most costly luxury in which any nation can indulge, and with so many of the great Powers at loggerheads at the present time, the price paid for recent wars becomes a study of national importance.

The state of the National Debt forms a war thermometer which, by its rapid rise in times of strife, and its steady, though slow, fall in times of Peace, indicates very clearly the effect of warfare on national finance.

Thus, in the French War that began in 1792, our own debt increased to the extent of nearly £300,000,000; and again during the Napoleonic Wars, about £323,000,000. In the forty years of Peace that followed it decreased £91,956,500, but over £39,000,000 was added during the Crimean War and Indian Mutiny. The decrease during the comparative Peace that Britain has enjoyed since that time is over £167,000,000 the debt now amounting to over £640,000,000.

At the present time every nation is not only arming its soldiers with the newest and most destructive weapons ever devised by man for the slaughter of his fellow-man, at an annual expenditure of millions of pounds-Britain alone spending over £40,000,000 per annum-but many have already stored up for immediate use in the event of war large sums of money, amounting in some cases to seven or eight millions of pounds sterling. Such sums as these, however, merely represent the expenditure necessary for the initial operations of an international campaign.

Even in times of Peace the bare possibility of war adds a heavy item to the taxpayers' yearly bill. In France, the annual cost per inhabitant is about 17s., while in Britain it is only 1s. less. Strange to say, the peaceful Hollander comes next with 13s. ; then the warlike German with 10s. In Denmark, every man pays 9s.; in Russia and Spain, 8s. ; in Austria, Italy, and Belgium, 78.; and in Portugal, 6s.; while "Uncle Sam" has hitherto escaped with the comparatively small outlay of 4s. per annum for the maintenance of his army and navy.

As long as Peace endures these sums just suffice to secure the necessary efficiency; when war breaks out they are wholly inadequate.

What a great war really costs may best be gathered from a short review of the sums that have been spent in warfare during the last half-century The cost of the recent Græco-Turkish War cannot be accurately estimated yet, but, even taking the shortness of the campaign into consideration, it must be nearly enough to ruin both the nations concerned."

By far the most costly struggle of recent times was the American Civil War of 1861, when the outlay of the North amounted to £960,000,000, and that of the South to £460,000,000 -a total expenditure of no less than £1,400,000,000 sterling. It is scarcely possible to realise what this vast sum means, but some idea of its magnitude may be gathered from the fact that the average penny newspaper eontains rather less than a million letters, so that the American nation spent in civil strife a sum equal to £1 per letter in over four years' issue of such a paper as the "Standard"!

No European war within the last fifty years has incurred such an immense outlay as this, but the Franco-Prussian War cost, at the lowest estimate, £500,000,000; while the Crimean campaign involved an expenditure of £340,000,000; and the Russo-Turkish War of 1877, over £200,000,000.

[In point of fact, the monetary loss suffered by France alone was 12,666,487,522fr., or £506,659,500, including 2,386,412,558fr. for military expenses, 5,742,938,814fr. paid to Germany, loans 1,156,327,955fr., losses suffered by the State 2,033,939,000fr., public works 207,239,800fr., indemnities paid by the State to departments 604,622,425fr., and damages borne by the communes and not reimbursed by the State 535,007,000fr.]