Rev. 7. H. Rylance, D. D.

CANNOT the reason and conscience and skill of a community professing to be Chris tian, and boasting of its culture and strength, do something effectual for the more equal distril.ution of the enormous results of our productive industry? The United States census for 1870 gives $400 as the annual average of workers' earnings, and in 1880 a little over $300. Till something of that sort is achieved do not wonder if murmurings fill the air. that discontent is rife, that there is constant struggle between labor and capital, or that classes are jealous of each other and embittered, spite of all the preaching going on about a universal brotherhood. But what can be done? It is easy to complain, occasions are plentiful in all communities. But what are the remedies for our social troubles? Why, certainly not violent insurrection against the old order of things, but a gradual and steady improvement of it, so approaching, if only by slight steps, to a Christian socialism, when passions and powers, now in antagonism, shall work harmoniously together and be fruitful in larger benefits for all.

St. Louis Republican, (Dem.), April 11.

THE arbitration bill passed last week by the House at Washington is unsubstantial, and without the quality of self-enforcement. It is, moreover, seriously faulty because it imposes on the public the cost of settling private disputes. Nevertheless, it will do for a beginning. It recognizes the right of labor to be heard-ind this is no small thing. It brings in the whole public as a third party in every dispute between employers and employes on a railroad, and through indirect means makes it almost compulsory for both diputants to submit their cause to the test of public opinion and this is a virtual promise that neither labor nor capital shall make a demand that outrages the sense of public justice.

Boston Globe (Dem.), April 12.

THE passage of this bill by Congress is a recognition of the new principle of arbitration at the instance of the State. It is a short step forward, but it is forward. Voluntary arbitration laws are the sure precursors of compulsory arbitration laws, and the day is not far off when Congress, in response to the demand of the people, will say to the great railroad corporations not only that they may meet their em ployes in a spirit of justice, but they shall do it whether the Jay Goulds want to

or not.

N. Y. Tribune (Rep.), April 13.

THE bill which Senator Sherman wishes to substitute for the House Labor Arbitration bill will not accomplish the object aimed at by the original measure. It would provide an excellent commission to investigate the present labor troubles this summer and report next winter. But if such investigation is desirable, why should it not proceed side by side with the operation of a law providing means for arbitration when it is wanted? There would be no clashing of powers. The House bill, while by no means a broad or fully-matured measure, would certainly do much to obtain recognition from employers and employes for the principle that any strike without previous attempts at arbitration is contrary to justice and not in accordance with the suggestions in our laws.

Life, April 15.

THE efforts to arrange the differences between the Knights of Labor and the Missouri Pacific Railroad have failed, and again it is pull strikers, pull Gould. Mr. Powderly, the brains of the Knights, has been unhappily incapacitated to act, and Mr. Martin Irons has been to the fore. It is apprehended that the back seat ought to be sacredly reserved for Mr. Irons, and made attractive for him. The difficulty he and Mr. Gould-by Hoxie-have in agreeing points obstinately to the probability that in some occult way they are two of a trade. Such a suspicion is enough to abbreviate Mr. Iron's possibility of usefulness and must, as well, weaken confidence in Mr. Gould. What will come of the strike is as misty at this writing as an alderman's character. The burden of it lies heavily on the unlucky people of the Southwest, who depend upon the railroad for their supplies. The stripes fall thick on them, and the mind pictures them comparing the welts raised by Gould's whips with the alternating evidence of Iron's scorpions. Alas for the unlucky

Southwest!

Harpers Weekly (Ind.), April 17.

ARBITRATION is the frequent recourse of differing interests. In France and other countries courts of arbitration are of the highest public and private service. In England the immense advantage of arbitration has been conclusively demonstrated. Its details, of course, must be most carefully considered and arranged. The business of a great industry, of a factory, a railroad, a steam ship service, cannot be constantly interrupted by petty issues. But a friendly disposition even with the strongest conviction of rights, will settle many a difference happily which otherwise, by mere self assertion, would lead to enormous loss upon both sides. The arbitration bill just passed in the House is significant as a sign of Congressional good will. But it does not exclude other forms of arbitration upon which differing interest may agree. When Congress proposes a simple and fair method of adjusting serious differences, even if it cannot enforce it, the moral assumption will be against the party that refuses to resort to it.

BOYCOTT.

American Glass- Worker, Pittsburg, April 10.

THE boycott is only on trial in this country, and the chances are that the verdict of the American people will be against it. Nothing which gives ignorance, malice, hatred, blind prejudice and dare-devil recklessness such destructive power, and allows the demon in the human heart to disport himself and laugh and joy at the ruin he has wrought to others without being at all responsible can find approval among right-thinking men. The boycott kills, destroys, devastates, annihilates the business it has taken years of patient labor (the same kind of labor that the Knights call "noble and haly") to build up. If it is wrong to blow a few bricks and stones

in the shape of a building into the air and far away, how can it be right to destroy the business carried on inside, which is by far entitled to greater protection and should be held more sacred than the dumb walls of inanimate brick and stone? The total disregard of the rights of others involved in the boycott must array against it finally all men who love justice and right. To commit wrong and inflict injury is not the best way to obtain the rights we seek. We know well there is another side to this question. We hear some one say, "We but imitate the example of capital, set in numerous instances." But numerous instances do not establish a principle and make wrong right. The example set by capital, if wrong, should not be followed. At bes that is only a coward's reason which cannot rise above old Adam's "she gave me and I did eat."

Boston Journal (Rep.), April 10.

THE fact is that the boycott is foreign to American principles. It strikes at the foundations of personal liberty. It brings in a system of tyranny which, if it were undertaken in the name of organized capital, would go far to provoke revolution. It introduces a species of dictation against which every instinct of independence and fair play revolts. Avowedly and ostentatiously it strikes the unoffending in order that it may bring the offending to terms; and it does not scruple to paralyze the prosperity of entire communities to settle the quarrel or satisfy the spite of one We do not believe that even great emergencies would justify the use of the boycott before the common sense of the American people. Still less can it be justified when it is used right and left on trivial occasions and for petty reasons and multiplied to such an extent that those even who are disposed to execute it find it difficult or impossible to remember its applications.

man.

THE IRISH QUESTION.

AMERICAN PRESS OPINIONS.

Providence Star (Ind.), April 9.

MR. GLADSTONE recognizes the essential and salient fact that Ireland does not hold, and cannot hold, under existing conditions, the same relations to the union as England and Scotland. England and Scotland were independent and sovereign nations, which, having naturally recognized and respected each other's independence throughout a long course of centuries, agreed to form a union, and to sink their separate existence in the United Kingdom of Great Britain. Scotland was not forced into the union. She had vindicated her independence on more than one sanguinary field, and had proved her ability to maintain a position among the nations of the world, and it was on equal terms that she became a part of Great Britain. With Ireland it was wholly different. Ireland was a conquered province; her rulers have been aliens; her parliament, when it existed, was a parliament of the ruling class. The Irish always have been regarded and treated as an alien community, and to give them self-government now, is to give them that which they never willingly surrendered.

Chicago Tribune (Rep.), April 10.

THE prominent significance of Mr. Gladstone's home-rule scheme attaches to this point, namely, that it is the first time any definite plan has been presented for official action. The Tories have never dared to outline one. The Liberals and Radicals have never gone further than suggestion. The Irish leaders have never formulated the remedy for their grievances, because they knew well enough that however little they might ask that little would be refused on the grounds of being too much. Mr. Parnell was wise in not offering a scheme or giving voice to his ideas on the subject, as it would only have prejudiced the whole question. All sorts of proposals have been suggested; remedies, mostly of the quack sort, advised, and feelers thrown out, with the view of seeing on one side with how little the Irish would be satisfied and on the other how much they could obtain. Mr. Gladstone has been the first with sufficient courage to block out a definite scheme. He has thrown his materials together as a sculptor hews out his block in the rough, leaving it ready for the finishing touches of the chisel which will give it form and likeness. A lodgment has thus been made for the plan. It is before Parliament and the English people for discussion, and there the question will remain.

Kansas City Journal (Ind.), April 10.

FROM an American view the Gladstone bill is practical, and will be considered as the only solution of the Irish question, for, as Mr. Gladstone says, it is purely a question of the right of the Irishmen to make laws for the Irish people. What kind of work the people of Ireland will make framing and executing their own laws is a matter for them alone, and simply has reference to their ability for selfgovernment. This is a proposition which applies with equal force to every State in the American Union. It is not impossible that the Irish people will fail to manage their own affairs in case Mr. Gladstone succeeds in passing his bill. But that is a question which it is not necessary to discuss. England has failed to govern Ireland successfully from even an English standard. The people thus misgoverned claim that they can do for themselves exactly what England has failed to do for them. This is the essential point in the entire situation, and on the decision depends a peaceful attempt to govern wisely or constant rebellion in Ireland, backed by active sympathy in many parts of the world. Ireland really asks for nothing more than is enjoyed by the people of the States in this country, as far as the relation of people to the different governments will bear comparison.

Louisville Courier-Journal, April 10.

THE Scheme of Mr. Gladstone is admirably adapted to enlist Irish patriotism, both in laboring for t e country's rehabilitation and in executing the imperial policy. After the various reservations there is a large residuum of power left to Irish control, and in dealing with all questions in this category the legislative independence

is virtually complete. If the Irish statesmen so regard it, if the plan should be put in operation, and be so accepted as a frank concession to Irish aspirations for Home Rule, then the imperial interests in Ireland will certainly be more successfully con ducted, and the Irish province will be more valuable as a part of the Empire than it has ever been before. Gladstone's reservations would seem to be certainly am ple to assure the English Cabinet that the reins of Government are in not the least danger of slipping from the hands of the Queen. It is a great and wise concep. tion, and the furor which is being excited among the Tory elements of society and poli ics is conclusive that to have asked for more in the cause of Irish freedom would have been to sacrifice all. It may perhaps be that Gladstone's great mind has cut out a scheme too great for the Englishmen of to-day, but they will gradually be educated up to it, and its leading principles will become law at some future time.

N. Y. Times (Ind.), April 10.

NOTHING is of better augury for Mr. Gladstone's plan of settling the Irish ques tion than the reception it has met among Irish-Americans. The leading men among them cherish high hopes from it, and speak warmly and generously of the conduct of Mr. Gladstone in braving English prejudice and risking a rupture in his own party in behalf of pacification. On the other hand, the leaders of the dynamite faction are deeply dissatisfied with the plan and think little of its author. To un derstand their opposition it is necessary only to bear in mind that these men get their living by collecting money under the pretense of destroying the property and taking the lives of Englishmen, and that they do not account for the money they receive in this country except by the explosion of dynamite in England. If Mr. Gladstone's plan is adopted their occupation will be gone. The introduction of the plan, and even the rumors that preceded its introduc'ion have caused the dynamite funds and emergency funds to dwindle and languish. If it were actually adopted it would thenceforth be out of the question for these creatures to get their living without recourse to labor. Their opposition to the scheme will doubtless become fiercer as time goes on.

St. Louis Globe-Democrat (Rep.), April 10.

WHILE, in one sense, the bitter struggle of the Irish for local self government only commences anew with the introduction of Mr. Gladstone's measure, in another, the victory is won, for no matter when legislative independence for Ireland may begin, it will date from the 8th of April, 1886. It is difficult to say which are the more admirable, the long-protracted efforts of the Irish leaders and their patience under every species of rebuff, or the energy and determination of the great Liberal who, at the close of a long and brilliant career such as few men can boast of, stands before a determined opposition in Parliament and country, with an uncertain and wavering support from his own party, and asks that justice shall be meted out to Ireland, not in proportion to what might be done, but the least that in common decency ought to be granted to a long-suffering people.

Irish-American (Ind.), April 10,

Staats Zeitung (New York), April 10.

gress and of the legislature of Iowa. More especially does all this apply to New York, which, with cutting irony, some have ventured even to call New Ireland. For this reason it is only but too justifiable that, in German-American circles, one should follow, with the deepest interest, the present experiment of Gladstone to bring the Irish question to a conclusive adjustment. For, with the success of Gladstone's endeavors, not England alone, but likewise America, will be relieved of an oppressive night-mare, upon the removal of which rests, in a measure, their own quietude and progressive development.

However far the eloquent utterances of a Trevelyan, Chamberlain, Lubbock and Hartington may fall behind those of the far more experienced Gladstone; while their reception in Parliament may have been less noisy than when the acclamations of the well-drilled and strong-lunged Irish chorus have been in accord with them, the fact can neither be controverted nor its significance lessened, that these prominent leaders of the Liberal party are decidedly in opposition to the Gladstonean plan. How much soever their views may diverge from those of the Tories, only in the most favorable issue can it present an obstacle to union in a common party government as in this, at all events, do they find points of contact with the opposition. These are, under all circumstances, strong enough to bring about the fall of the Gladstonean system, although, to all appearances, not strong enough to lead to the fusion desired by the Tories with the disaffected Liberals. So far as the situation of affairs can be prejudged, the plan of Gladstone has no prospect of success, and the Irish question will continue to exercise, hereafter as before, a portentious influence upon English, as, unfortunately, also upon American internal politics.

St. Louis Globe-Democrat (Rep.), April 11.

MR. GLADSTONE's immediate purpose, of course, is the pacification of the Irish troubles; but he very well knows that home rule for that unhappy and troublesome country implies future results of infinite importarce to the British people in respects not now talked of in Parliament, and having no direct connection with the Irish question. He does not expect the British government to be overthrown, we may easily believe; but he does undoubtedly expect it to be changed in several material particulars, and does look hopefully and wisely forward to a time when the nation which he has served so long and well shall cease to rely upon exploded theories of any sort, and make itself as nearly like the United States as possible. That is the logic of his position, the foregone conclusion of the undertaking in which he is now so bravely and zealously engaged. He may not be able at this time to secure home rule for Ireland-the chances are against him from present appearances but it will come in time, and so will the other things which he has in mind and for which he is sowing the seed. There is something very impressive in the picture of this aged and famous statesman closing his great career with a supreme effort for progress and the best rights of mankind; and whether he shall succeed or fail in the special matter of his Irish bill, there can be no doubt that the future will vindicate him in a general way, and bring to his country the fulfillment of his utmost dreams and prayers in its behalf.

Cincinnati Commercial Gazette (Rep), April 11.

It would be impossible to conceive of a man better equipped for the emergency than Gladstone. He is the man and the only man for the hour. He has the confidence of the English people-of the whole British Empire, indeed. With a lofty Christian conscientiousness, a far sighted statesmanship and a superb moral courage, he has interposed himself on several occasions between the English people and their imperialistic thirst for conquest. For the nonce he was derided as an old woman, and by the Beaconsfield Jingoes even denounced as a traitor, but Gladstone serenely abided the day of his vindication. Gladstone thoroughly understands the temper of the English people. He knows that when their worst passions domineer them they are as brutal in their rage as the beasts of the forest, and his soul has revclted at the cruelties and oppressions of his race over subjugated nations. But he also knows that when reason has returned he can with confidence rely upon their love of justice and fair play. In thus appealing to their better instincts, Gladstone finds the obstacle to be prejudice. And prejudice will be the great difficulty for the "Grand Old Man" to overcome.

New Orleans Times-Democrat (Dem.), April 11.

A COMPARISON of the sentiment of the outside world shows a queer contrast to British public opinion. The French papers express profound admiration for the courage of the English Premier, and approves his Irish scheme; the German press are equally loud in their praise of Mr. Gladstone's statesmanship; while in this country, where the papers have given much attention to this subject, are in a position to pass an unbiased judgment on it, they are well pleased with the idea of legislative independence for Ireland. Here and there some defects may be found in the plan-it was impossible for Mr. Gladstone to propose any plan that would not contain objections--but the scheme is declared, despite these defects, to be the best, the most important step taken for years for the peace and prosperity of Ireland, and with it, that of the United Kingdom.

Cincinnati Enquirer (Dem.), April 11.

FOR more than a century coercion has been continuously tried in Ireland and has failed. Things have grown worse instead of better. When Ireland had her own parliament, before she was swindled and robbed of it by Castlereagh, she was loyal to the empire. With proper treatment she can be made loyal yet. As Mr. Gladstone brightly says, there is a local patriotism and an imperial patriotism, and there is no reason why they may not co-exist. But the struggle which is to bring about this change in Great Britain will be a terrific one. The world, and especially the American world, will wait and watch the outcome with breathless interest.

N. Y. Sun (Ind. Dem.), April 13.

AS FOR Lord Randolph's criticisms on the details of the home-rule plan, these can have no weight with the people, because it is not even pretended that the Tories wish to make good the bill's deficiencies by amendments in committee. He tries to provoke the Parnellites by denouncing their proposed exclusion from West,

minster as a reversion to the principle of taxation without representation, but Irishmen are perfectly aware that the Tories would never give them a tithe of the privileges which Mr. Gladstone offers them as a first installment of their dues. We have never doubted that the right of sending members to the imperial assembly would soon follow the establishment of a State legislature at Dublin, and we are not surprised, therefore, to hear that an amendment to that effect is likely to be favored by the government during the discussion of the present bill.

N. Y. Times (Ind.), April 14.

MERE inert opposition to the measure will not suffice; much less will a catalogue of Irish outrages, drawn up for the purpose of hardening the hearts of Englishmen against the appeals of Irishmen. An irresponsible politician like Lord Randolph Churchill may be permitted simply to let fly his heels against the measure and to cavort in contemptuous attitudes before its author. But a responsible statesman like Lord Salisbury or Lord Hartington is bound to produce a counter proposition which, while retaining the advantage of acceptability in Ireland, will stand a better chance of acceptance in England than Mr. Gladstone's plan. This point was made with clearness and emphasis in Sir William Harcourt's speech last night. He taunted the orators of the opposition with being unable to agree among themselves, or even to obtain the agreement of any two of them to a plan alternative to that for which the Ministry is responsible. The taunt was a fair one. In order to redeem opposition to Mr. Gladstone's bill from the reproach of a futile factiousness, its opponents must either produce a scheme of their own or else maintain either that the present relation of the two countries is tolerable or that it can be made tolerable by means of coercion. No statesman with a reputation to lose is likely to commit himself to either of these positions. The opposition might have devoted itself to perfecting the bill, but it has bent its energies to defeating it instead. It may succeed in this, but if it does the Irish question will still confront Parliament as importunate and inexorable as before.

FOREIGN PRESS OPINIONS.

The Tablet (English Catholic.)

MR. GLADSTONE has brought in a bold bill and a bill that spells secession. It was a strange sight, surely-this old man pleading before a House close-ranked and pale with passion, admitting that all the beliefs of his life were wrong, and calling upon the nation to divide its strength at its core. Now, at the end of his days, when his race is nearly run, this hero of a hundred fights is left in his loneliness and faced by the men he has made. But the change has been with him and not with them. Mr. Gladstone had never a word to justify, defend or excuse the course he has taken in suddenly flinging in his lot with those who worked so long and so persistently to undo that union which a long line of English statesmen have held it the service of their lives to guard. Abandonment of the common Parliament for the three peoples is a needless and mischievous concession to that craving after national and visible separateness which makes half the peril of our difficulty with Ireland. It is believed, however, that the Catholic Times, which has not been published since the Parnell day, will press the Walsh-Croke clerical side of the home rule question.

Dublin Freeman's Journal.

THE rejection of the home rule measure would result in an acute commercial crisis and would provoke the unemployed of Dublin to commit excesses similar to those perpetrated during the recent riots in London.

The Times, London, April 9.

IN substance the measure proposes to place Ireland in a position not like that of a State of the American Union, but like that of Canada-a self-governing province. Separation is complete and absolute in principle, and the restrictions which it is professed secure the supremacy of the Imperial Parliament must in practice be worthless, since there is no efficient sanction behind them This is the cardinal point to which public opinion must be immediately directed. Is the nation prepared to give Ireland an independent political existence? We cannot suppose that there any room for doubt on that point. It would be grossly unfair to assume that the House will consent to a second reading of the measure, which cannot possibly survive the debates in committee.

Montreal Gazette (Canadian), April 12.

THERE could not well be less unity between two nations than to day exists between those sister isles. Read the British or Irish papers and anyone will be convinced of this. The Queen's writ does not run in Ireland to-day, where the League says nay. Tenants pay what rent they please and the landowners are powerless to enforce their ri hts. There is virtually a nominal sway of the constituted authorities, and a real rule of irresponsible agitators. Union, under such conditions, is rot strength; it is a weakness of the empire. And any change that would make the Irish people contented and law-abiding, the friends and allies instead of the foes of England, would be more in the direction of true union-the union of sentiment and interests than has ever been had under legislative enactment. Our own country gives ample proof of this. Forty-eight years ago there existed far more intimate relations between the governments of the mother country and that of the colony than there do to-day, and the people of Upper and Lower Canada were in arms against their sovereign. They were beaten in their struggle, just as the Irish people have been beaten in their struggles. But there the parallel ends. This country was accorded the utmost rights of self government, and is free, contented, and attached to the mother land by ties stronger a hundred times than when a crown-appointed official exercised direct power in the course of the government. With emancipation came progress and prosperity, and undiminished respect for the land from which our people spring. And looking at the position of Ireland to-day, it is not to be seen why a like course pursued in that country should not have similarly happy results. The proposals of Mr. Gladstone's bill have caused a shock to En

glish sentiment. But when this first shock wears off, people must come to see that after all good will come from the measure, which, though defeated in the House, and even on an appeal to the country, will eventually pass, and in an enlarged form, too.

Deutsche Zeitung (Hungarian.)

It is incomprehensible that Mr. Gladstone could think of comparing his scheme with the Austrian dualism which made Hungary a sovereign State, gave her equal rights with Austria and a practical ascendency over Austria in matters concerning her own army, foreign policy and common expenses, whereas Ireland could not even dispose of an armed constabulary. Mr. Gladstone's future Ireland will be England's Croatia, not a British Hungary.

The Neue Frie Presse (Austria.)

THE scheme means simply an unconditional surrender, and has absolutely noth. ing in common with the Ausgleich between Austria and Hungary. He has created a new political future, a personal union of the second order, which cannot bring peace and solidity, but must lead to constant quarrels in the times of peace and open rebellion whenever a foreign army seeks an ally against the British power. Mr. Gladstone gives far too much to guard against disintegration and far too little to satisfy Ireland. His model was not Austria, but some distant and newly-discovered land across the sea, with no political organization and no history for good or evil like Ireland's. A mere personal union would be better than this half measure. It is worse than none. It cannot lead to peace, but to a fierce struggle, in which no quarter will be given on either side. He pays an exorbitant price for getting rid of the Irish members. They will accept the booty, and then begin again the battle against England, until a total separation has been achieved. Mr. Gladstone simply organizes the future of Irish revolution against England.

Neues Pesther Journal.

BETTER the total separation of Ireland, which might become an independent republic or a kingdom, than such a mixture of union and separation, which will lead to a constant political, national and religious discord, and to frequent civil wars. There will exist no guarantee that autonomic Ireland will fulfil her engagements except by the force of the British army and constabulary.

The Standard, London.

NOT the least striking feature of the scheme is its omissions. The absence of any special provision for Ulster is the first thing that condemns the bill. Hardly less astonishing is the frankness with which Mr Gladstone explained the grounds on which Ireland, though saddled with a portion of the imperial taxation, would have no representatives at Westminster. The whole argument is vitiated by incapacity in the face of plain facts. Mr. Parnell's speech is evidence that he would require the immediate, instead of the ultimate, transfer of the constabulary to the Irish executive, the abrogation of the checks which Mr. Gladstone would place on the proceedings of the Irish Parliament and the reduction of the very moderate sum which Ireland is to contribute for the expenses of the Empire. If the committee are prepared to accede to his views on these points the bill will not satisfy the Irish separatists, whom it was primarily meant to content. We cannot believe the measure will meet with the approval of any large section of the Queen's subjects. It is a measure of discord, not of peace.

The Post, Liverpool.

WHETHER Mr. Gladstone is successful or not in carrying his bill through Parliament he has forever killed oppression and coercion in Ireland. Proposals so unexpected as those made by the Premier, the Post says, require time to consider. The Guardian, Manchester.

It is a scheme substantially for the repeal of the legislative union between Great Britain and Ireland. If the bill is not rejected by Parliament it must in its central feature be recast The representation of Ireland at Westminster must be retained. Then, with this modification, the measure may pass.

The Scotsman, Edinburgh.

THE bill will not do as it stands. The exclusion of Irish members fram Westminster will be fatal. Mr. Gladstone has approached the subject with heroic spirit, but his desire to be generous to Ireland has carried him too far. He was asked to give Home Rule, and he proposes to give Repeal. It is safe to say that the country will not sanction the scheme

Newcastle Chronicle, April 13.

THE opposition to Mr. Gladstone's Home Rule bill is the same as that which the American colonies cowed in 1782. It basely smuggled the union with Ireland into existence eighteen years after this, and it allowed the bitterness of the emancipation trouble to ferment toward rebellion for an entire generation. It is an opposition which never concedes anything until it is no longer able to withhold it. Its mainspring is the traditional and deep-rooted prejudice of the English and Scotch toward their Irish neighbors, and this prejudice itself is partly racial, partly political and largely religious.

PERSONAL OPINIONS.

M. D. Gallagher, New York.

I REGARD as one of the most welcome features of the measure that which divorces the Irish members for all time from Westminster. It has a contaminating influence upon Irishmen and the wonder is that the Parnellites have so well withstood it. The control of the police by Ireland absolute and complete, must be fought for. The principal ground upon which Gladstone based his great speech was that the law in Ireland was discredited and nobody has done more to discredit it than the police,

Justice Edward Browne, New York.

THE principle of Ireland's right to govern herself has been recognized at last. Let such men as Parnell and his lieutenants attend to the details and, if the Liberals help them in the amendments which they will undoubtedly propose, peace will at last have been established between England and Ireland. I look forward to a season of great prosperity for the people of that glorious country, equaling if not rivaling that of Belgium. For the first time in a hundred years they will have a parliament that shall not be a mock parliament, and they will feel the responsibility of power which always brings caution and is the surest guarantee for the permanence of social order and of peace. I hope that the bill will pass despite the defection of that vagrant and deceitful politician, Chamberlain.

Patrick Ford, Editor of Irish World.

I DO hope that Irishmen will now keep their heads steady and study this proposition of Gladstone's with great care. The speech requires not alone to be read, but to be studied, so that one may understand what worth there is in it.

Counsellor John Delahanty, New York.

JUST imagine a Parliament in Dublin and 12,000 armed policemen beyond the power of that Parliament. Who, therefore, is left to enforce any laws which that body may pass? There is a splendid opportunity for the Irish people to prove their capacity for self-government by the manner in which they criticise the measure. It is good in principle, but contains many defects. I am unconcerned about the continued representation of Ireland in the English Parliament; in fact, I think the sooner the Irish members quit its precincts, never to return, the better will it be for Ireland and for themselves I would suggest, too, that an amendment be made demanding the release of the Irish political prisoners whose heroic selfsacrifice made the measure possible.

IRELAND Owes much of what she has hitherto received of good to the brave patriotism and wise statesmanship of Gladstone. His Home Rule proposal the crowning act of a great career and whether it is passed or not, Gladstone must be immortalized in an honorable way with the history of Ireland, no less than Parnell. The bill, I think, will pass. Gladstone's speech was a great one and must have swept the ground from beneath the feet of those of his own party who threatened to desert him. His nicely turned reference to the patriotism of Scotchmen and the battle of Bannockburn silenced all chance of defection, if there was any, in that quarter, for you know the Scotch members are all Liberals. On yes, I believe the bill will pass eventually, although there may be a dissolution first. Alexander Sullivan.

IT IS not difficult to find faults and weaknesses in Gladstone's bill. Neither on the other hand is it hard to perceive the great boon which the enactment of this law, with all its wrongs and imperfections, will confer upon Ireland, Nor do I think that in the discussion of this bill and in the consideration of its details we should criticise the old man who presented it to Parliament altogether from an American standpoint. We must bear in mind his peculiar surroundings and the various walls of prejudice which he must beat down in order to make any progress in the direction of justice to Ireland. On the whole the bill is a great step in the right direction. Of course it will be accepted by the representatives of Ireland in the English Parliament. They will naturally, as already indicated by Mr. Parnell, endeavor to amend and improve the bill before its enactment. Of their success in making many changes for the better I have no doubt whatever. But were we assured that they could not change a word it would be their duty to accept it. While the race knows that Ireland is entitled to more, and while it prays and works for complete justice to Ireland, he would indeed be a foolish friend, more injurious to Ireland than an enemy, who would seek to embarrass the Irish Parliamentary party or to interfere with its judgment in the acceptance of the best that can be accomplished under the present circumstances. Every practical man must see that the sooner any measure of Home Rule is granted the sooner will the Irish people be on the road to a permanent and satisfactory solution of their difficulties.

Ex-Congressman Finerty.

I SEE that my friend W. J. Onahan is delighted with the liberality of the measure, and that he looks upon it as a vindication of moral force and constitutional agitation. His statement about the measure being a vindication of moral force is refuted by Gladstone himself, who says that every concession to Ireland has been wrung from England by fear. Moral force was tried by O'Connell for fifty years, and by Isaac Butt for five years; both failed deplorably, yet both were loud in their condemnation of physical force. But Parnell, to whose leadership is to be attributed the success of the home measure, has never yet condemned a single act of violence, either explosive or otherwise, committed by Irish extremists, so-called,

during the whole course of the agitation. There were no buildings blown up, nor English officials assassinated in the time of O'Connell, or of Butt; both of these happened during Parnell's leadership. Of course, Mr. Parnell would never have approved of these means of redressing the wrongs of Ireland if the plan was submitted to him. On the other hand, he never undertook to bewail the misfortunes that befell the English or their capital at Irish hands. If the Irish extremists had never existed, and if all Irish patriots were of the conservative type the cause would now be where O'Connell and Butt left it-in the dust. Every man who went to prison or died on the scaffold for Ireland since 1848 aided in building up the power of Parnell, and the success of his agitation is due not to the moral, but to the forceful principle of the Irish cause. I AM not satisfied; but I am greatly surprised. The bill is an admission that all Ireland's agitation, unrest, rebellion, are justifiable and necessary, and that English coercion was criminal and wicked and deliberate. The speech of Gladstone will justify Irishmen for the retaliation of despair in case the bill is defeated. I am not satisfied when the chains are struck from Ireland's feet and still kept on her arms and throat. But I am gratified to hear the keeper admit his own iniquity and tell the world that he deserved little mercy if his victim could get free.

Wm. O'Brien, Editor United Ireland.

It would be easy to find blots on any measure, but this one, that six months ago Mr. Parnell would have been considered a madman if he had sketched it and proposed its acceptance by the British Parliament. Should it pass through Parliament unmutilated, I think it can and ought to content the Irish people, and will be the source of innumerable blessings to Ireland.

Pesti Naplo.

WERE a Magyar to propose such a scheme for Transylvania, exposing the Magyar landowners and officials to the brutality of the Wallachians, as the Ulster men are to be exposed to the nationalists, he would be torn to pieces.

Albert Grey, M. P.

IRELAND, which now enjoys equal voice with other parts of the kingdom in directing the imperial policy of the Crown, may, if this bill passes, no longer aspire to the share in its control. Ireland must cease to touch so much as even the handle of the imperial scepter. It will be enough for her to be allowed to crouch like a heathen dog beneath its shade. The crown of sovereignty shall rest on Welsh, Scottish and English brows alone; while on the ankles of Ireland, no longer a sovereign and co-equal kingdom, but a depressed, degraded dependency, shall rest the manacles of the slave. But while Ireland may no longer help to influence

and direct the imperial policy, she must pay over three million pounds yearly to Sovereign England to carry out any policy England may please. And what freedom is to be allowed to poor, degraded Ireland in raising "this tribute?" None.

W. H. Smith, ex-First Lord of the Admiralty and Chief Secretary for Ireland. IT may be asserted with authority that the members of the Conservative party regard the exciting crisis in Irish affairs, caused by the extraordinary proposals of Mr. Gladstone, as a national, not a party, question. They are fully prepared and determined to sink all thoughts of personal and party advantage in the single consideration of what is best for the maintenance of the legislative union between Great Britain and Ireland. Should Mr. Gladstone's proposals be defeated in the House of Commons on the second reading, and Lord Hartington be summoned by the Queen to form a new government, he will commind the support of the Conservative party in any form, to any extent necessary for his success in the good work of carrying on the Queen's government throughout the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.

F. M. Healy, M. P.

Ir would be perverse folly for the Irish representatives not to support this bill. We cannot wait while those who would oppose its acceptance have not together the might to force better terms from England. The lifeblood of the country is being drained and every day it is being further pauperized and depressed. Are we to dash from Mr. Gladstone's hand the cordial which he is about to administer to us as a restorative? Throughout this business I think Mr.Parnell has shown the profoundest judgment, and his policy has my most thorough and hearty support. I believe the bill will pass the second reading.

Justin McCarthy, M. P.

I APPROVE of the scheme, of course, but I fear the prospect before it is stormy. It is likely to reach the committee stage in the House, but it will surely be smashed in the committee. The government will then in all probability resign. An attempt will be made to form a coalition ministry, but I do not expect this attempt will be successful, or that such a ministry will hold together if formed. You will have the Tories coming into office, and as the Tories will by that time be educated up to Home Rule they will do what they did with the Reform bill in 1867, they will bring in a stronger Home Rule bill than Mr. Gladstone's and carry it. Home rule is inevitable in any case, and whether it be a Tory or Liberal government that shall carry the measure the prestige will all the same be Mr. Gladstone's.

Goldwin Smith, in Toronto Week.

IT was a fatal mistake ever to be drawn into treating the case of Ireland, in regard to the extension of self government, separately from those of the other two kingdoms. Self government to any extent may be safely granted so long as the measure is general, and the supreme authority of the Imperial Parliament in all things is preserved. At the very time when Mr. Parnell took to obstruction at Westminster, and to terrorism in Ireland, the government and Parliament were well known to be on the point of framing a much-needed measure of decentralization for all three kingdoms alike. Why did they not sweep away obstruction, put terrorism down, and persevere in the wise and liberal policy which they had

embraced? The answer to that question is the record of their shame. They will now, if Mr. Gladstone's scheme is rejected, have to struggle back to the sound position from which they have allowed themselves to be drawn. The return, after what has happened and when Irish disaffection has been brought to so angry a head, will no doubt be difficult enough. The moral rebellion which patriotic union would at once have repressed has now assumed very formidable proportions. But to return to a firm and rational policy on any subject is no longer easy since Mr. Gladstone's blind extension of the suffrage, without safeguards of any kind or any general revision of the constitution, to masses of ignorance, passion, and disaffection. The House of Commons shows almost daily by legislative escapades, as well as by its growing lack of organization, its unfitness for the exercise of the supreme power which at the same time it is more than ever disposed to engross. It is too probable that the country will have to undergo a convulsion of some kind in order to evolve a force capable of giving birth to a strong and stable gov

ernment.

Meanwhile famine, mocking the devices and rivalries of politicians, stalks along the western coast of Ireland, and not a 'cent is subscribed for the relief of the famishing ishing patriots who have subscribed a million for political agitation. Once more we are reminded that the root of the evil in Ireland is not political but economical. A peasantry in character like that of Celtic Brittany, amiable but thriftless, multiplies recklessly on potatoes in a climate unfavorable to the raising of grain, and is at the same time depressed by a religious system the effects of which on the industrial energy and material condition of the people have been in all countries the same. The case has been made worse by the absenteeism of the landlords, their frequent neglect of duty, and the bad relations existing between them and their tenants; while, to crown the whole, agricultural depression, the consequence of foreign competition, has probably rendered much of the land of Ireland incapable of paying rent. This malady, or complication of maladies, no political gimcrackery can cure. Nothing can cure it that does not equalize population with subsistence, and produce a change in the industrial habits of the people. The people themselves are at heart conscious of the fact, and have never shown much interest in any merely political agitation. O'Connell's repeal movement became a standing farce, and Smith O'Brien's rebellion ended in a cabbage garden. Other plots for the establishment of a Hibernian Republic have met a similar fate. The present political movement derives its whole force from its conjunction with agrarian discontent. If the people want the repeal of the union, it is because they have been led to believe that it would be the repeal of rent. Of this the political revolutionists are perfectly aware, as they are now showing by their jealous protests against the introduction of any land measure unaccompanied by a measure of home rule. Let Parliament impose silence on political revolution till the economical question has been settled; when the economical question shall have been settled, and the hungry begin to be fed, the flame of political disaffection will expire like that of a lamp from which the oil has been withdrawn.

THE state of Ireland during the past ten years, the brutal murders, houghing of cattle, cowardly boycotting and general state of terrorism in which society has lived owing to the machinations of secret associations, have aroused a feeling of deep indignation and disgust in the English mind. Beyond this is the conduct of the Irish members of the House of Commons. A nation that has seen the traditions of its historical parliament traduced, its authority defied and the House of Commons turned into a bear garden in the name of home rule can scarcely be expected enthusiastically to espouse a cause thus tainted. We are constrained to admit our conviction that the country is not yet ripe for home rule in Ireland. We regard Mr. Gladstone's scheme as one of the most consummate pieces of constructive statesmanship presented even by the author of a series of Irish land acts which have delivered Ireland from the incubus of an alien church. do not conceal our belief that though the measure may pass its first or second reading, it cannot, unless a remarkable change takes place in public opinon, become a law at this session.

But we

THE NEW LEADER OF A NEW IDEA.-Mr. Powderly enjoys unusual reasons for prominence. He is clothed with all the novelty attaching to a new leader of a new idea, and one very forward in the public eye at present. He heads the Spencerian evolution of labor, as it were, and at the same time he has shown that his mind rests on the foundation stones of common sense.

A BASE SLANDER.--The very idea of accusing a police captain of bribery—a police captain! The thing is preposterous. A police captain might have accepted a bribe in the days when there were no Senate committees, but offer a bribe to anybody else? Never! let the thought be hit on the head with a club.

THE American Union is often mentioned as à model for the British-Irish union. They will be wise if they avoid such ambiguity as led to honest state rights, secession and honest federalist repression, deluging this country with blood to settle what the Constitution meant or should mean.

LOOKING AHEAD.-When the pension swindle is consummated; when the Hennepin Canal project succeeds; when the Blair bill is a law, we will have an empty Treasury, high taxes, and the Republican party denouncing the waste and extravagance of the Democratic party.

WHETHER the unhappy experiences connected with the peach-blow vase have anything to do with the matter or not, it seems certain that lovers of art are growing sceptical with regard to some of the treasures offered them at public auction. IF THERE is any nation on earth whose people can govern themselves, it is the British, but the royal yoke fits the necks of the people so perfectly that any effort to throw it off will meet from the titled families bitter opposition.

THERE is just one element of grandeur in free trade theories- their lofty and serene indifference to facts.

RELIGIOUS.

THE BIBLE AND MODERN THOUGHT. PROF. HUXLEY in the Popular Science Monthly, for April:

My belief is, and long has been, that the Pentateuchal story of the creation is simply a myth. I suppose it to be an hypothesis respecting the origin of the universe which some ancient thinker found himself able to reconcile with his knowl

edge, or what he thought was knowledge, of the nature of things, and therefore assumed to be true. As such, I hold it to be not merely an interesting but a venerable momument of a stage in the mental progress of mankind, and I find it difficult to suppose that any one who is acquainted with the cosmogonies of other nations and especially with those of the Egyptians and the Babylonians, with whom the Israelites were in such frequent and intimate communication-should consider it to possess either more or less scientific importance than may be allotted to these.

PROFESSOR DRUMMOND in Nineteenth Century for March:

"The Bible has not been made in a day, any more than the earth; nor have its parts been introduced mechanically into the minds of certain men, any more than the cells of their brain. In uttering it they have not spoken as mere automatathe men, though inspired, were authors. This Bible has not been given independently of time, of place, or of circumstance. It is not to be read without the philosophic sense which distinguishes the provisional from the eternal; the historic sense, which separates the local from the universal; or the literary sense, which recognizes prose from poetry, imagery from science. The modern Bible is a book whose parts, though not of unequal value, are seen to be of different kinds of value; where the casual is distinguished from the essential, the subordinate from the primal end. This Bible is not an oracle which has been erected; it has grown. Hence it is no longer a mere word-book, nor a compendium of doctrines, but a nursery of growing truths. It is not an even plane of proof texts without proportion or emphasis, or light and shade, but a revelation varied as nature, with the divine in its hidden parts, in its spirit, its tendencies, its obscurities, and its omissions. Like nature, it has successive strata, and valley and hill top, and mist and atmosphere, and rivers which are flowing still, and hidden ores, and here and there a place which is desert, and fossils too, whose crude forms are the stepping-stones to higher things. In a word, this Bible is like the world in which it is found, natural, human, intelligible in form; mysterious, inscrutable, divine in origin and essence."

MR. GLADSTONE, in the Nineteenth Century for March, referring to the facts and themes which of late have been used to discredit the Bible, gives his opinion of those who advocate them, and says:

"None of these circumstances discredit or impair the proof that in the Book, of which Genesis is the opening section, there is conveyed special knowledge to meet the special need everywhere so palpable in the state and history of our race. Far indeed am I from asserting that this precious gift, or that any process known to me, disposes of all the problems, either unsoluble or unsolved, by which we are surrounded; of

The burden and the mystery

of all this unintelligible world.' But I own my surprise not only at the fact, but at the manner in which in this day writers, whose name is legion, unimpeached in character and abounding in talent, not only put away from them, cast into shadow or into the very gulf of negation itself, the conception of a Deity, an acting and a ruling Deity. Of this belief, which has satisfied the doubts, and wiped away the tears, and found guidance for the footsteps of so many a weary wanderer on earth, which among the best and greatest of our race has been so cherished by those who had it, and so longed and sought for by those who had it not, we might suppose that if at length we had discovered that it was in the light of truth untenable, that the accumulated testimony of man was worthless, and that his wisdom was but folly, yet at least the decencies of mourning would be vouchsafed to this irreparable loss. Instead of this, it is with a joy and exultation that might almost recall the frantic orgies of the Com-, mune, that this, at least at first sight, terrific and overwhelming calamity is accepted and recorded as a gain."

MRS. ELIZABETH CADY STANTON writes about "Our Boys on Sunday," in The Forum, for April, and suggests that

"It would be rational, to say the least, for the city authorities to open the libraries, picture galleries, museums, menageries, and concert halls; and to multiply the facilities of transit to all points of interest, that those who can do so may get out of the city one day in seven. It would be an inestimable blessing to the more intelligent working-men, if our school houses and public halls could be thrown open for courses of popular lectures on the sciences or on travels in the Old World and the New, with pictured representations of celebrated places and historic events and of the wonders of the natural world. The theater, too, should be made not only a means of entertainment, but with plays of a moral tendency, an agency for promoting the mental and moral welfare of the people. At all events, until such plays are produced the theater should be thrown open for readings, recitations and concerts, to furnish cheap amusements. A fine band of music in the skating rinks, affording free entertainment to multitudes from the gloomy tenement houses, would be a sight worthy of the liberality and common sense of the nineteenth century." THE CHAPLAIN'S PRAYERS.

THE Jewish Messenger, for April 9th, says: