our position when the imperative necessity for so doing should arise. It is clear that our imbecile government neglected the commonest business precautions, left everything to the last moment, and then made a blind dash. Such stupidity and negligence is incredible, and is only equalled by their neglecting to pass the legislation to meet the case which they are now hurrying through parliament. What has that gilded idler, Sir Charles Tupper, been doing, and what is he doing now? He has been supported in opulence and luxury in London for the past two years, for suppositious services in looking after Canadian interests, and as a means of communication between our government and that of Great Britain. So far his return for the hundred thousand dollars or so expended on him has been to get some Canadian cattle out of quarantine a day or two sooner than they otherwise would. Now is the chance for him to make some return for the money he has cost, and vindicate the usefulness of his office. Toronto Globe, May 22. TO ALLOW its vessels to go forth armed to trespass upon a neighbor's territory and pillage a neighbor's property, is unworthy of a great country, and especially of a free people. Canada will not be deterred by any danger of a possible collision and its possible consequences from asserting its rights and enforcing its laws. It is matter of complaint that the Canadian government are not doing all they should do to protect Canadian rights; that the fast cruisers chartered some time ago still lie in some of our harbors without crews or outfit; and that hundreds of United States fishing vessels hover round our coasts, sometimes buying, sometimes catching bait, and purchasing other supplies. When these cruisers are set to work, many other seizures will be made, unless, indeed, the United States fishermen, finding we are determined, keep away from our waters altogether. All this trouble and difficulty and danger might have been avoided, and Canada might have been for several months past enjoying all the benefits of a fair reciprocity treaty if Sir John Macdonald and his colleagues had done their duty when President Arthur, in his message to Congress, invited them to open negotiations. They were opposed to reciprocity, and they were too busily engaged in dividing timber berths, coal areas, lands for colonization companies, railway charters and subsidies, and public plunder of all kinds amongst themselves and their associates, to pay the necessary attention to their country's interests. Montreal Gazette, May 20. THE exportation of game is now prohibitory; the exportation of bait must be made so, if events prove the treaty of 1818 not to cover that point. Canada has sought earnestly for a settlement of this vexed question by arbitration; in evidence of sincerity and the friendliness of neighborhood, our Government has refrained for nine months from the enforcement of the treaty of 1818, in the hope that Congress would consent to the appointment of a joint commission, and now that the United States refuse to treat, there is no course consistent with self respect and the interest of Canadian fishermen other than the strict enforcement of treaty rights, supplemented by local customs laws of a prohibitory character in regard to the purchase of bait, ice and other supplies for American fishing vessels. To yield now would be a cowardly and ignominious act; it is the duty of the Government first of all to stand upon the literal interpretation of the treaty of 1818, and if the courts hold a contrary view, to make such laws as will shut American fishermen out of our waters so long as they decline to grant Canadian fishermen an equivalent concession in the shape of free admission of Canadian fish into United States markets. Montreal Gazette, May 23. enter New England ports and fit out for the mackerel fishery, and the arrange- The Manitoba, May 20. THE reason why a renewal of the Washington treaty was opposed by those interested in American fisheries was because Canadians were able to undersell the Americans in the United States markets, and that it was better to give up the right of Canadian waters and "take chances." The Americans are now taking their chances, and it is to be hoped that Canada will boldly insist on the maintenance of her rights. The frothy member from Maine has succeeded in passing a retaliatory clause to the new shipping bill, but it is a clause applying to all foreign vessels, and is another instance of the fool cutting off his nose to spite his face. Those who will suffer most by the clause will be the Americans themselves, and time will prove it. TO CANADA the fisheries constitnte one of her most fruitful sources of wealth; nor can Canadians easily exaggerate their importance from a national as well as a commercial point of view. The profit that Americans have derived from the share in them which they long enjoyed is also much oftener under than over estimated. Nor is it to be forgotten that the men who man our vessels and reap the harvests of our waters form an element of strength which, from an Imperial as well as a Canadian standpoint, is worthy of fullest recognition. Our maritime industries are, in fact, closely connected, as Capt. Colomb long since reminded us, with the security of the Empire. Those who live thereby should, therefore, meet with encouragement, not with neglect, seeing that with their interests are bound up those of Canada, of Great Britain, of the whole Empire. And, while nothing reasonable should be omitted that may tend to satisfy our neighbors and to place our relations with them on the most amicable footing, it is consistent neither with fairness nor self-respect to adopt a policy of surrender, detrimental to the country at large, and especially to the seaboard portion of our population. The Week, Toronto, May 20. ALIEN OWNERSHIP OF LANDS. THE following comments have been called out by a report and bill presented by the House Committee on Public Lands: Telegram from Washington, May 20. REPRESENTATIVE PAYSON, of Illinois, has prepared a report on the bill to preThe vent aliens from acquiring real estate in the Territories of the United States. report says the bill has for its basis the proposition that American soil shall be owned by Americans, so far as Congress can control it. The Committee on Pub lic Lands, in this Congress as in the last, is thoroughly committed to the policy of so administering our public land system that the agricultural lands of the nation shall be parted, without cost, to be held in small tracts by actual settlers only for the purposes of cultivation by the owner, securing thereby the thrift of the citizen and economy in his management which ownership always stimulates. This policy, the report submits, should become the national one. The report shows that, owing to the reckless donations of public lands to railroads and other corporations, and the lax administration of the laws by which men of wealth and companies have been permitted to acquire other great areas of the public domains, the vast territory we had at the beginning has become so reduced that less than 5,000,000 acres of arable agricultural land remain for the settler under the general land laws, and about 50,000,000 acres only of lands susceptible of improvement by irrigation. These lands, by devious methods in many cases, have been secured in great areas by capitalists and corporations, foreign as well as domestic. A statement is appended showing that 20,747,000 acres are held by foreigners. Among the large holders mentioned are the Marquis of Tweedale, Sir Edward Reed, the Holland company, and several syndicates, the possessions of each being millions of acres. The bill which the report accompanies provides that no alien or foreigner who has not declared his intention to become a citizen of the United States, nor any corpo ration one-tenth of whose stock is owned or controlled by aliens or foreigners, shall have the right to acquire real estate in any of the Territories of the United States. The bill has been agreed upon by the committee, and will probably be reported one day this week. WHEN the American people more generally come to see that in resisting the Maine fishermen, Canada is simply upholding her rights, they will without doubt condemn the action of these monopolists and their representatives in Congress. The whole trouble is simply a phase of protective policy; the Maine fishermen desiring to monopolize the fish-food supply of the eastern seaboard, exclude the Canadians from their markets by high duties; but Canadian bait being a necessity to their business, they demand permission to enter Canadian waters for it, trumping up imaginary rights and deliberately violating Canadian laws in order to get it-seizing it, in short, as a footpad snatches a purse under the conviction that the chances of immunity are in his favor, and that, moreover, the injured party is too weak to make a successful fight. In this enterprise the fishermen have the assistance of Congressmen, who confidently believe that the British government, rather than have a dispute with the United States, will force Canada to surrender her rights. Hamilton Times, May 21. WE cannot doubt that the supreme court of the empire will follow the decision given in the New Brunswick court, and decide that it is not illegal nor prejudicial to the interests of the Dominion for United States fishermen to come into Canadian ports and purchase whatever supplies they may require. Canadian vessels Chicago Tribune (Rep.), May 24. THE provision of the Payson bill in regard to the declaration of "intention to become a citizen of the United States" is too loose and not guarded as it should be against possible and probable abuse. The mere declaration of intent to become a citizen releases an alien from the operation of the act and puts him on the same footing as a native or naturalized citizen. Now the simple statement of intent does not dissolve the allegiance owing to a foreign power, and there is nothing in this bill which requires the alien to carry out his alleged purposes and actually become a citizen of the United States, or to live in this country after making the declaration. There is no penalty for making a false statement of intent, and the alien may change his mind whenever he sees fit; but the mere naked declaration in and of itself secures him the right to hold real estate in this country to an unlimited extent. Under this loose provision there is nothing to prevent an alien making a false statement and proceeding under it to acquire any amount of American soil while remaining the subject of Great Britain or any other foreign power, and owing no allegiance to the United States. The right to acquire title under a declaration of intent ought to be limited to the time between the making of the statement and the date when final papers could be taken out. If the alien does not carry out his intentions in good faith the right to hold real estate should lapse. Another bill on this subject has been reported favorably by a minority of the Judiciary Committee. It is in several respects much stronger than the Payson bill. In the first place it would permit aliens to acquire nothing more than a leasehold for a period not exceeding five years. This would prevent evasions of the law and would at the same time enable aliens acting in good faith to procure leaseholds before naturalization and perfect their titles afterwards. But the distinguishing feature of the Hepburn bill is that, unlike Payson's measure, it does not stop with the District of Columbia and the Territories, but applies to every foot of soil and prohibits alien landholding everywhere in the United States. As good lawyers as Oates and Hepburn, members of the Judiciary Committee, maintain that Congress can do this under its constitutional power "to establish a uniform rule of naturalization throughout the United States." The proposition seems somewhat novel, however, in view of the fact that the States have so long exercised an exclusive control over landholding within their limits. While the Hepburn bill is worthy of very serious consideration, it may be better at present for Congress to legislate only in regard to the Territories and the public domain, leaving the States to say whether they will longer endure the incubus of alien landlordism and foreign ownership of their soil. If, after a full view of the evils developed, the Sta'es continue to foster Scullyism" and serfdom, it may then be time for Congress to prescribe" a uniform rule" against alien landholding. Yet the Payson bill will not protect national soil and serve as an example to the States unless the provision in regard to the declaration of intent is carefully amended so as to preserve it from perversion and abuse. Pittsburgh Commercial Gazette (Rep.), May 25. It would be bad enough if these domains had been acquired by fair purchase in open market, but there is strong reason to believe that the ownership of great tracts is tainted by fraud. The facilities our laws extend to actual settlers have been outrageously abused for speculative purposes. It is in evidence that 30,000 acres were secured under the homestead law by means of a house on wheels, which was moved from one claim to another as fast as the fraudulent pre-emptor was able to make oath that he had complied with the law by erecting a house on his claim. In the Estes Park region of Colorado a special agent of the Interior Department has reported that 7,000,000 acres have been acquired by fraud and perjury. Lord Dunraven now owns 60,000 acres of this land. A bill is pending before the House prohibiting the acquisition of public lands by non-resident aliens. It should be promptly passed, and steps should be taken to overthrow all titles which are founded in fraud. Where the title is good, legislation should regulate the tenure so as to prevent the arrogant growth of landlordism such as overshadows the British isles. The public land laws need a thorough revision, and all fraudulent assumptions of proprietorship should be thrust aside. What remains of the once great national heritage should be strictly guarded for actual settlers who will acquire land for their own use. N. Y. Sun (Dem.), May 22. THE people will watch closely the action of the House of Representatives on the bill to prevent aliens from acquiring real estate in the Territories. The evil which this measure is intended to arrest should have been dealt with long ago; but the absorption of our public lands by foreign capitalists, corporate or individual, was carried on so craftily and quietly that the abuse of the plain purpose of our laws and defiance of the spirit of American institutions for some time escaped notice. Now our eyes are opened, and we learn with disgust and resentment that vast tracts in the most fertile sections of the national patrimony have been grabbed by British oligarchs who foresee that their own country will shortly be too hot to hold them, and who are planning to transfer to our free soil the system of absentee and alien landlordism about to be stamped out of Ireland. Minneapolis Tribune (Rep.), May 23. AGAINST the spirit of this bill there should be no objections raised. If any one metter is peculiarly a proper subject of national control, it is the ownership of land. It is not a natural human right to monopolize any portion of the earth's surface. It is certainly not a natural right for a man living on one side of the globe to exercise exclusive and proprietary control of immense areas on the other side, to the inconvenience of men living on tracts adjacent. The whole question of land ownership is to be settled by practical and not by theoretical considerations. If alien ownership works no present or prospective disadvantage to our citizens, it is not worth while to disallow it. If as a matter of fact, the thing is objectionable, there are no theoretical considerations which would require its further tolerance. Columbus, Ohio, Dispatch (Ind.), May 22. THE Committee consider it to be "the duty of the Government to furnish to its people cheap homes; to aid the actual settler, whose labor would make the land fruitful and productive, giving added wealth to the locality and stability and strength to the country." This is so true that it seems singular that it was not discovered and given effect long ago. It is a good deal like locking the stable after a majority of the horses have got away; but, by all means, let it be locked now, and, if possible, let the horses that have been illegally taken, be recovered. Philadelphia Record (Dem.), May 20. SOME of the large tracts of land owned by non-residents in Colorado, Arizona and New Mexico have been converted into sheep-ranges. The owners have their shepherds, and enjoy in London and Paris the profits of sheep-raising on their vast American estates.. A great deal of protectionist sympathy has been expressed in behalf of these alien sheep raisers lest they should be ruined by a repeal of the duty on wool. The interests of American woolen and worsted manufacturers and weavers appear to be a matter of minor consideration. Lands in reporting to the national House a bill forbidding any foreigner to acquire land in the Territories. It also forbids any corporation one-tenth of whose stock is owned or controlled by foreigners to acquire real estate in the Territories. The United States for her own citizens should be the maxim. Washington Post (Dem.), May 23. THE bill before Congress to prohibit foreigners from acquiring any of the public lands of the United States, either by pre-emption, entry or subsequent purchase, ought to become a law without a dissenting vote in either House. It will not, of course, for there are cranks among our law-makers who would not let a resolution to introduce the millennium pass unanimously, even if they knew it would fetch it. Chicago Journal (Rep.), May 21. THE rapid increase of alien landownership in our Western Territories in recent years, calls for some radical measure of prevention, and the present Congress will be derelict in its duty to the country if the session is allowed to end without the passage of some such law as Judge Payson has brought forward. Newark News (Dem.), May 24. CONGRESS could not do better work for the people than to stop land grabbing by aliens and then institute without delay a determined war upon both alien and American landholders, whose titles are vitiated by fraud. All of the damage that has been done could not be repaired, but some of it might be. Arkansas Gazette (Dem.), May 23. ONLY American citizens should own Americån soil. Our valuable lands should not be permitted to pass into the hands of persons who are not only speculators, but who do not think enough of this country and its institutions to become citizens. It is best to call a halt now. Troy Telegram (Rep.), May 22. It is none too soon to deal vigorously with this land question, and Congress will have no more important measure than this before it at the present session. Indianapolis Journal (Rep.), May 21. We do not want the evil of alien landlordism to serve this country as it has Ireland, even in a less degree. National Republican (Rep.), May 24. NO MORE empires in our Western domain should pass into the hands of aliens. THE LOGAN ARBITRATION BILL. THE Comments given below have been elicited by Senator Logan's bill providing for the arbitration of questions arising between employes and employers: Omaha Bee (Rep.), May 21. SENATOR LOGAN'S substitute for the labor arbitration bill, which was recently passed by the House, falls far short of what is demanded from Congress toward the solution of the labor problem. Senator Logan has simply compounded a nostrum which will probably be no more effective in settling labor troubles than a dose of St. Jacobs Oil or Radway's Ready Relief. To begin with, the Senator shows a lamentable lack of political statesmanship when he proposes to settle all differences between capital and labor in this country by a national commission. The object of national commissions, generally, is to delay and put off the settlement of a difficult problem which baffles the politician who wants to get on the right side of the fence, but does not know on which side it would be safest to land. Labor troubles are not issues that can be put off by shifting the settlement upon the shoulders of a commission. They usually break out like cholera and the smallpox, in epidemic form. Every case must be dealt with promptly on the spot, or fatal results are sure to follow. A national commission to settle all the labor strikes in America is an absurdity on its face. Mr. Logan proposes to create such a commission of five members, with powers to travel wherever they are wanted to arbitrate differences between employer and employes. If this commission were made up of five hundred men and each commissioner could travel with fifty legs it could not operate successfully. Thousands of employers all over the country are liable at any time to be at loggerheads with their workmen, and Mr. Logan's commission would more than find its hands full in settling such troubles. But even conceding that the commission was capable of performing this multifarious work, there is no likeli hood that its action would settle any serious labor troubles. Such a commission would at best be a jug-handled affair. All of Senator Logan's provisos about the selection from various vocations would simmer down to the fact that the influence of capital would prevail in the choice of its members, and even if the President were not influenced by corporations and men of wealth, it would not take ninety days to convert every member of the commission to the side of capital. It would be next to impossible for men placed in their position to resist the tempting baits and corrupting influences of the billionaires and millionaires. On the other hand, labor could exert no other influence upon the commission than the force of its vote, which a man who was disposed to play for big stakes would care nothing about. In any event, a commission acting cautiously would be regarded by the laboring element with distrust and without the employment of absolute force exerted through the sheriff's or military its orders would be disregarded and defied. That would leave us in no better condition than we are without this cumbrous machine. Had General Logan given the labor problem serious thought and reflection he certainly would not have resorted to this patent-medicine remedy. The only way to make arbitration effective is by legalizing the choice of arbitrators jointly by capitalists and employes in every case of difference just as new juries are chosen in every trial. By providing the method of choosing these boards and prescribing their powers and duties, Congress or the States can make arbitration effective. Of course material arbitration could apply only to common carriers engaged in interstate com merce, while State arbitration would apply to local employment, such as factories, mills, etc. In every special arbitration the employers and the workingmen should be required to sign an agreement that they will abide by the decision of the arbitrators, and a refusal to comply should be made punishable. The arbitrators should give both sides a free hearing, and all outside interference should be strictly prohibited and guarded against the same as is done with juries in criminal trials. Such a system of arbitration would doubtless prevent many violent outbreaks and costly strikes. It would by no means prove a cure for all of the labor troubles which are bound to exist as long as men differ about the value of their labor and the price of its products. Senator Logan's proposed remedy would remedy nothing. It would break down before it had been in operation thirty days. St. Paul Pioneer Press (Rep.), May 21. MR. RANDALL AND CIVIL-SERVICE RULES. THE proposal to put a "sider" on the legislative, judicial and executive appropriation bill amending the civil-service rules has been variously commented on, as shown by the press opinions here given. It is provided that in all cases submitted the parties at variance shall sign an agreement to submit to the award of the commission. Its decision is to be placed on record in the district court, and is "to have the same force and effect as a decree of that court and to be enforced in the same manner." This is the compulsory feature, which is certainly inexpedient. Even if it be legal to assign to a commission created by legislative act the powers and functions of a court of justice, it does not tend to increase the popularity of the tribunal. People will fight shy of it. If they are to be absolutely bound as in law, they might as well go to the courts at once. On the other hand, no such iron-bound provision is necessary. The man who, having consented to arbitrate, and having had a fair hearing before a commission appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, should then refuse to abide by its award, would so prejudice his own case before any court and before public opinion as to put himself at sufficient disadvantage. The precedent set in the creation of railroad commissions, in Senator Cullom's bill for regulating interstate commerce, for example, is a good one. The commission is not erected into a court, but its decision, with all testimony taken before it, is made prima facie evidence in any court of record. This is as far as it is wise to go. A more rigid rule could be no more effective, while it would discourage resort to arbitration. As a matter of fact and experience, it is exceedingly seldom that any case tried before such a commission is appealed to the courts. The clause tacked on for the purpose of elevating the bureau of labor into a department, and directing it to collect and collate certain statistics of labor, is partly superfluous and partly pernicious. If Gen. Logan has read the report of Mr. Carroll D. Wright, just issued, or even glanced at it, he must have found that the bureau of labor is now doing, in a most thorough and admirable manner, exactly what he wants to have done by a labor secretary. Its work could not be made any more efficient by the change, while the country would bear the expense of a new department; the cause of labor would itself suffer in the choice of a politician as secretary, instead of a practical statistician like Mr. Wright; and an example would be set for the creation of new departments to look after new interests, until it would be necessary to hire a hall for accommodating a Cabinet meeting. This is all a sop thrown to the labor vote, and a very unpalatable and costly one, if the laborer looks at it correctly. Nothing could be more judicious, and probably nothing productive of happier results, than the appointment of an arbitration commission. Let us have one devised on a wise plan and without any political trimmings. Rochester Herald (Rep.), May 21. N. Y. Sun (Dem.), May 24 THE legislative, executive, and judicial appropriation bill, reported by Mr. Randall the other day, contains one provision which fills the Mugwump midriff with holy rage, and even the Republicans shed some crocodile tears over it. With the item for salaries and expenses of the civil-service commission is married a judicious proviso that the appropriation shall not be available unless the commission so changes its rules "that the names of all applicants for official appointment from any one State, found duly qualified on examination, and without regard to age, shall be sent to the head of a department or other officer charged with making an appointment." Whereupon the lachrymal ducts of the lovers of civil-service reform are very piteously moved. The bill also provides that the Secretary of the Interior may appoint 150 special pension examiners upon recommendation of the Commissioner of Pensions. Mr. Garland decided about a year ago that special examiners are subjected to the civil-service rules, but Mr. Garland's law, like his Pan-Electric stock, doesn't stand high at present. Gen. Black wants to select the special examiners himself. Why shouldn't he? Mr. Randall is all right, as usual. The silly rules of the civil-service commission ought to be changed, and he insists that they shall be. Nor is he putting legislation into an appropriation bill. He simply makes the appropriation for the civil-service commission conditional. The rules of that commission are made under the civil-service law, but they are not a law, and a change in them will not be a change of law. There is no other way, in the present mood of Mr. Cleveland, of changing those rules save the one the Appropriations Committee has chosen. No change in the rules, no money for the commission. New York Star (Dem.), May 25. WHEN the parties sign an agreement, as provided for in the Logan bill, to submit to the award of the commission, they would seem to be legally bound to such acquiescence and liable for damages in case of a violation of the agreement; but even in such a case difficulties are apparent. If employes agree to return to work, the question arises how long, under such an agreement, they are bound to remain, if the decision is distasteful to them. On the other hand, how long are employers whose case has gone against them bound to retain in their employment those they have taken back under the award of the commission, or how long will they be bound to pay the scale of wages that may have been fixed by the board? These are a few of the questions that will be sure to provoke discussion sooner or later. Of course, it is understood that neither party to a dispute can be bound to submit its case to arbitration against its will. The right to hire and discharge labor, on the one hand, and the right to sell or withhold labor, on the other, cannot be abrogated by statute. No law can compel a man to work for another against his will, nor can any law compel a manufacturer to hire men he does not want or pay any specified scale of wages. It is in their moral influence upon our industrial system that these arbitration schemes and laws will be particularly serviceable, and we believe that in that direction they will go far toward reconciling the conflicting views of the two great classes on which the prosperity and happiness of the country so largely depend. We think that the commission just appointed by the governor and confirmed by the senate will prove to be an able and faithful body, and wish it the fullest success in the efforts it may make to harmonize the workingmen and employers of the State in such cases as may be brought before it. St. Louis Globe-Democrat (Rep.), May 21. THE attack of the House Appropriations Committee on the present civil service law ought to be opposed by Democrats for two reasons. In the first place, it is not an honest attack. There is an atmosphere of surreptition about it which must be distateful to sincere men. This is an effort to indirectly break up the competitive system and to substitute the pass examination. The proposed amendment amounts, at least, to very nearly this. In the second place, the change would not be fair or courteous to the President. The rules are his and not the commission's. That body is simply advisory. It su gests rules which the President adopts or rejects as he may see fit. The appointing power is lodged in him and the heads of departments by the Constitution, subject, in certain cases, to the supervision of the Senate. The President has chosen to be guided by the existing rules, and desires an appropriation for the maintenance of the commission. He believes that he needs advisers who devote their time to the study of the requirements of the civil service. The appropriation asked is so small that there is no question made on the score of extravagance. The only meaning which the proposed amendment has is that they who favor it seek to tie the hands of the President and to coerce him to refrain from making appointments in the manner which he approves. GENERAL LOGAN'S labor arbitration bill is preferable in some respects to similar measures of that kind which are now pending in Congress; but at the same time its theory is an illogical and impracticable one. There can be no arbitration in the true sense of the term where the parties to the proceeding are not allowed to have any voice in the selection of the arbitrators; and a law based upon that idea must inevitably fail, as all such laws have done in Europe, for the simple reason that men will not consent to submit their disputes to a board thus organized. St. Louis Republican (Dem.), May 21. THE Logan arbitration bill creating a commission whose findings "shall have the force of a United States court decree," is equivalent to asking for the United States courts jurisdiction in labor controversies in the several States. It is another form of the Loganese idea the only idea of government that ever penetrated the thickness of his Egyptian skull. New York Times (Ind.), May 24. MR. RANDALL knows as well as any one can that his party elected its candidate to the Presidency in 1883, not because the party was trusted by the men who gave it the victory, but because it was known that Mr. Cleveland was a sincere civilservice reformer and would prevent his party from doing the mischief it would like to do. He knows that the President has justified the confidence reposed in him and has steadily enforced the civil-service law to his utmost ability and has applied its principles where its letter did not extend further than any other President we have had since John Quincy Adams. Mr. Randall knows that the only ground on which his party can hope to retain its presant strength, or in the least to extend it, is the effective support in good faith of the President and the reform. Yet Mr. Randall has introduced into the legislative, executive and judicial appropriation bill a clause intended to nullify the reform law completely, and another exempting directly from its operation a large number of officials now included. This is a very stupid as well as a very contemptible thing for Mr. Randall to do. Harper's Weekly (Ind.), May 29. THIS shows the kind of support which the Democratic party in the House gives the Democratic President in his most important policy; and it shows the want of sympathy with reform among the Democratic party leaders, as the action of the Massachusetts legislature discloses the same feeling among Republican politicians in that State. It is not upon party leaders on either side that the President can rely. His real support is among the people who do not seek office or run a party machine, but who desire with him to see the business service of the Government cease to be the plunder of partisans. In the confidence of this constituency in both parties the President is strong. In the contest that he is waging he stands for the people as against the politicians, or men who make a trade of politics, and although it seems to be a paradox, it is none the less true, that the more unbending his course, the more indispensable he becomes to his party. Philadelphia Press (Rep.), May 26. MR. RANDALL'S proposition presents the plain question whether the reform system shall be overthrown. The adoption of such a provision would nullify it almost as effectually as the repeal of the act. Even now, with the more stringent requirements, the spirit and intent of the law can be too easily neutralized by officers who desire to do so, as it has been in this city; and with the proposed change it would lose all its efficacy. If Congress means to throw down the barriers which the civil-service act has erected, it can do so by forcing the commission to make this change in the rules, but let it do so with a full understanding that it means death to the reform policy, and with a full knowledge that the people will so understand it. PRESIDENTIAL POSSIBILITIES. DISCUSSION of Presidential candidates is so generally and profoundly interesting that it can not be omitted in making a faithful record of current opinion. Below we give the pithy portions of such press mentions of candidates as have come to hand during the week. Galveston News (Dem.). Ar this distance from the scene of operations it would seem that General John A. Logan is not paying proper attention to his fences. Blair, the New Hampshire crankoid, has coolly usurped Logan's place as the great pension distributor, and Frye and Hale, of Maine, are attending to the jingo sentiment just as ably and successfully as if the Plumed Knight himself were on the ground. What is Logan doing? Why doesn't he shake his mane at the British lion or the Canadian coyote in view of the seizure of American fishing vessels by the Canadian authorities? Logan is letting a golden opportunity go by, and Hale and Frye, on the part of Blaine, are taking advantage of it. Logan can never hope to be President without an issue. The bloody shirt is played out. The "rebel brigadier" is no longer a raw head and bloody bones to scare timid voters in the Northern rural districts, and the negro as an issue in national politics is flat, stale, and unprofitable. Logan must have an issue, or he must surrender his Presidential aspirations. Edmunds doesn't want an issue. He travels on his rigid respectability exclusively. Sherman wants a share in all issues—at least he endeavors to so comport himself that no issue can be an entire stranger to him; but, like Edmunds, Sherman is not a sensationalist, and would like to be known as the conservative business man's candidate, the great financier who can adjust our monetary system and establish it on a firm, safe, and lasting basis. Hoar, the white-souled statesman of Massachusetts, is a candidate for President, but true goodness and woman's suffrage are as much of an issue as he wants. The two Republican statesmen that need issues in their business are James G. Blaine and John A. Logan. Blaine is a private citizen residing at Augusta, Me. Logan is a Senator of the United States. They hitched teams and ran for the Presidency and Vice-Presidency in 1884 and were beaten. If current reports are correct, they will not hitch teams again in 1888. Both of them want to be at the top. Logan, no doubt, would not object to Blaine as a candidate for Vice-President on a ticket with Logan at the head. In other words, the Illinois warrior thinks that turn about is fair play, and that if he became the tail of the ticket to oblige Blaine in 1884, Blaine ought to become the tail of the ticket to oblige him in 1888. Here is where Blaine and Logan differ. Blaine firmly believes that the "old ticket" needs vindication and is entitled to vindication. Logan, too, thinks the old ticket needs vindication, but he favors a readjustment before it is again submitted to the people. Logan and Blaine would be just right from the standpoint of the Illinois novelist, but the Maine historian is convinced that Blaine and Logan would be much better. This is the state of affairs at present. The Presidential year is not far off, and it is strange that Logan is not stirring himself. Blair is entitled to the honors as the boss pension distributor, and Hale and Frye, Blaine's immediate representatives, pounce upon all lively, promising, vote-begetting issues before Black Jack has an opportunity to squint at them. Clearly the Illinois warrior will have to agitate himself if he hopes to cut any figure in 1888. The other fellows are cutting the ground from under him right before his face, and he doesn't even protest. What is the matter with Logan? Is he going to surrender before the fight is well begun? In the old days, when Logan was in the heyday of his power and activity, he never would have permitted Blaine's little bubs to pre-empt such a promising jingo issue as the seizure of American vessels by the Canadians without making a gallant fight. Something must be the matter with the swarthy sucker. Is he sighing for the shirt-the bloody shirt-that has departed never, never to return? The Irish American for May 29. ALL along the political line the cry runs that James G. Blaine is the one man who can command the nomination to the Presidency from the Republican party two years hence; and one of the chief reasons for his prominence is his supposed ability to hold the Irish vote." This is a trying time in the history of Ireland, when she needs the helping hand and encouraging voice of every friend that can come to her assistance, the world over. Our people are a grateful and generous race, and remember sympathy shown them as long and as steadfastly as they cher`ish resentment for their enemies; and, surely, Mr. Blaine knows this, and would seize the present opportunity, when men of every creed and shade of politics are present on public platforms with their words of cheer for the champions of home rule for Ireland, and their money for the necessities of the campaign, to prove the friendship that gives him his "hold on the Irish vote." Every man of prominence in the land has ranged himself on the side of Ireland. Has Mr. Blaine done so ? He has had many opportunities to place himself on record in the matter, for invitations have been showered on him; but there is only one instance in which that result was reached. He was invited to the demonstration held in Dover, N. H., on May 4, and sent the following reply: the fall on "the labor question." Evidently the "Irish racket" is judged to be played out, and "labor" is now the winning ticket. New York Sun (Dem.). JUST half way between the last National Convention of the Republican party and the next, that very keen politician and vigorous writer, the Hon. George C. Gorham, of California, opens anew the Stalwart war upon the Hon. James G. Blaine. Mr. Gorham brings against Brother Blaine a charge which has never before been put so broadly, namely, that he has been a traitor within the ranks since 1872, contributing more than any other man in either party to break down the reconstruction policy of the Republican party, and intriguing constantly for the suppert of Southern Democrats in his own ambition to be elected President. Is this true? Certainly, from 1871 to 1875, Blaine did a great deal to check the efforts of certain Republican leaders to fasten odious and oppressive legislation upon Southern citi. zens during the evil days of the carpet-baggers. Does that constitute treason to the Republican party? Do many Republicans regret now that the iron hand of Federal interference is no longer upon the throat of the South? Certainly, Blaine did more than any other Republican to defeat the nomination of General Grant for a third term as President. The fact stands to his everlasting glory. Are there many Republicans who regret now that the third-term idea, with its menace to liberty, is forever out of the way? Certainly, Blaine rendered considerable assistance in the overthrow of Mahoneism in Virginia, and in restoring the control of the State to the debt payers. Is that a black mark against Blaine? Is it true, moreover, as Mr. Gorham affirms, that Mr. Blaine has been far less conspicuous than certain other Republican leaders as an obstacle to the permanent reconciliation of the North and South? These things may all have been services to the Democratic party, as Mr. Gorham alleges, but were they not also services to the Republican party, and to the country without regard to party? It seems to us that if this is treason, it is shared by the 4,851,981 Republicans who voted eighteen months ago to put the traitor in the White House. New York Tribune (Rep.). MR. BLAINE does not need defense by anybody, but it is interesting that a vigorous defense against the charge of infidelity to the Republican cause is made for him by the Sun. Perhaps that journal considers that proof of his zeal and efficiency as a Republican will make Mr. Blaine weaker with its readers, but it proceeds to show that the precise features of Mr. Blaine's course for which Mr. Gorham, of California, assails him are those for which he has been most heartily appreciated by the great majority of Republicans, whose approbation of them and of him was shown by their support two years ago. A stranger in this country might think that Mr. Blaine was about the most active politician and unceasing self-seeker in the United States, to judge from the constant attacks on him in hostile journals.. Yet Americans know that Mr. Blaine is a private citizen, who holds no office, exerts no political power, is making no effort in politics, and desires no place for himself. It is well enough known that he honestly hopes the Republican party will find in some other person than himself a successful candidate two years hence. But the fact that such a man is so continually assailed is peculiarly significant. Some people seem to be much afraid of him. Philadelphia Press (Rep.). THE Buffalo Times, published at President Cleveland's home, says the Democratic party must have a new candidate in 1888. Its argument is brief and forcible. Mr. Cleveland has disappointed and disintegrated the party; he has shown no talent for organization or leadership; he has weakened instead of strengthening the Democratic forces. For this reason he could not lead to success, and another nomination is necessary. But how can the Democratic party throw Cleveland overboard? If they can't elect him how can they hope to elect anybody? To reject him would be to declare that the first and only Administration they have had for a quarter of a century is a failure. Would that be an effective argument for trusting them with power again? With New York and the patronage even badly used behind him, how are they to defeat his nomination? Are they not shut up to the alternatives of Cleveland or nobody? So far as can now be discerned there are only two possibilities outside of Cleveland. Bayard's blunders in the State Department have ruined him; Thurman is too old; Randall will have as much as he can do to stay in the party at all with its growing free-trade determination; and the only availabilities left are Speaker Carlisle and Governor Hill, of New York. But Carlisle's nomination would throw away New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut at the outset. Besides, there are fatal objections of another character. And as to Hill, how is he to wrest New York away from the forces that will be inter-ested in giving it to Cleveland? He carried the primaries and the convention for Governor last year, but there was no direct issue. If Cleveland wants a renomination-and of course he does-how would it be practicable to take his own State away from him? No, unpalatable as he may be, it looks very much as though the Democrats would have to swallow Mr. Cleveland as a candidate again. The election will be another matter. Baltimore Sun (Ind.). GOVERNOR HILL, of New York, is giving the strategists of the Republican party a great deal of trouble, having managed, it would appear, to make more party and personal capital out of the present session of the New York legislature than the Republican majority in that body has been able to do. He has a great deal of very important patronage, and is using it with skill, it is said, to secure control of the delegation from New York State to the National Democratic Convention in 1888. His success in carrying the State in the last gubernatorial election by a handsome majority, after a fight conducted on strict party lines, makes him "available" as a candidate for the Presidency in any event, and the outspoken character of his Democracy makes him a favorite with many who opposed Mr. Cleveland. Tammany Hall is with him, and, in view of the richness of the offices at his disposal, the County Democracy leaders may be relied upon not to oppose him. The absence of opposition to the dropping of Mayor Grace from the acqueduct commis ALTHOUGH this is not an important year in Maine politics, and the success of the Republican ticket is hardly doubtful, at least half a dozen Presidential candidates are expected to take the stump in July and August. Logan will be there. Brother Blaine has promised to make a speech on the labor question. John Sherman is expected, and Frisbie Hoar, Gov. Foraker, and Senator Allison are all on the list. These are extraordinary preparations for an off year, and the canvass is likely to be interesting. Meanwhile we advise Brother Blaine to keep a sharp watch on the headway which Gen. Logan is making with the Young Republican Clubs in different parts of the country. Last Wednesday, for example, the Young Men's Republican Club of the Thirteenth ward in Chicago formally nominated Logan for President. Last Friday Gen. Logan himself went all the way to Providence to dine with the Young Men's Club of that town, and he made them a very long and able speech, in which he confessed that his grammar was sometimes defective, but insisted that his heart was true to Young Republican principles. It looks, we say, as if Logan is not satisfied to be the candidate of the veterans merely. Has Brother Blaine noted this new wag of the tail of the old ticket, or, if Brother Blaine no longer cares about such things, is Joe Manley wide awake? A congeries of young men's Logan clubs and a Logan State ticket would indeed make a peculiar condition of affairs in Maine. Washington Star (Ind.). A NEW assembly will be elected in New York next autumn. In the early days of the coming year a United States Senator will have to be chosen by the legilature to succeed Warner Miller. If a sufficient majority of Democrats can be elected to the assembly to overcome the Republican majority in the other house on joint ballot, we suspect that Mr. Hill might be induced without much urging to exchange two years in Albany for six in Washington. With this hint to guide them, perhaps some of the newspapers which have been taking the Hill Presidential boom literally in earnest may see it in a new light. Should Mr. Cleveland propose to try for another term, for example, would not the assistance of the Federal administration in Mr. Hill's senatorial struggle be a cheap price to pay for his withdrawal from the list of possible candidates for national honors in 1888? New York Times (Ind). IN 1880 Mr. Shook went to the Chicago Convention and labored with might and main for Mr. Blaine's nomination. O'Brien, Biglin, McCord, and the rest of the "boys" were not Blaine men that year. Nor were they very zealous in support of the magnetic candidate in 1884. The Republican leaders about the national headquarters distrusted them and feared treachery at their hands. But the "boys" will be for Mr. Blaine henceforward, and particularly about two years from now, when Blaine delegates from New York will be wanted. There is no other candidate who will attract the "boys" to his support, and Mr. Blaine will be their man, first, last, and all the time. The Nooney Excise bill is only one of the numerous schemes by which the "boys" have been induced to link their political--that is, their personal-fortunes with Mr. Blaine's. Chicago Herald (Ind.). portant fact by the name of John A. Logan. Still, Logan, you know, could run Toledo Blade (Rep.). THE Republicans of the Green Mountain State believe that a Republican leader may exercise the right of private judgment regarding his course in a national campaign, and propose to sustain free thought and free speech in a practical way by supporting Mr. Edmunds. The mugwumps are scared already at the shadow of Blaine, and the leaders are discussing among themselves how they shall make their animosity to him most effective in opposition to his possible candidacy before the Republican national convention. FORAKER has had his say on Jeff Davis several times, and, fearing that the public will forget it, he now takes occasion to inform the world that he "will not modify or retract in any respect his recent severe criticism of Davis." That is all right, Mr. Foraker. Nobody has asked you to retract and nobody wants you to. Keep your sullen brow turned toward the Southland, and let the lightnings of your anger flash from your piercing eye. Dilate your nostrils like the war horse and paw up the earth, but do not imagine that you are the sole reliance of the Unionloving people of the country, or place too much confidence in the idea that soundness on the Jeff Davis question is all that is necessary to make a President out of a nobody. Washington Star (Ind.). Pittsburgh Dispatch (Ind.). THE practice of killing off Presidential candidates by a premature indorsement is resumed by the New York Sun as follows: "We suppose that Sam Randall, of Pennsylvania, is just now the one Democrat outside of New York who could carry this State by a handsome, old-fashioned majority as a Presidential candidate." Mr. Randall might get some votes in New York, but what would the appropriation statesmen do? And what in the world has Mr. Randall done to the New York Sun ? ONE of the funny things in politics just now is the impression said to be prevailing in California that Senator Stanford would make an available Presidential candidate for 1888. If the present signs of the times mean anything, they may be regarded as indicating that if any gentleman prominently connected with a great corporation could succeed in pulling through a nominating convention in 1888 which is exceedingly doubtful-he would be irrecoverably snowed under at the ballot-box in November. Meantime it may be set down as among the weather probabilities that Mr. Stanford will not be exposed to the storm. New Haven Special to N. Y. Tribune (Rep.). New York Commercial-Advertiser (Rep.). SPEAKER CARLISLE is paying the penalty of being a Presidential candidate. Having become involved, much against his will, no doubt, in a local postmaster squabble, the newspaper which represents the defeated faction threatens to expose Mr. Carlisle's private life in a way to destroy him as a party leader. It seems as if we had had enough of that sort of thing; and we doubt if the country will take kindly to spite work of this description. Nashville American (Dem.). GEN. LOGAN won't write the second volume of his great work entitled "The Part I Taken in the Great Conspiracy" until after the next Presidential election. Perhaps Logan wishes to follow the example of one James G. Blaine in using the first volume to secure his nomination, and devoting the second to basting the fellows who ripped him up the back after he was nominated. WALKER BLAINE, who has just returned from a visit to Maine, stopped over here a short time to-day. In speaking of his father he said: "His health was never better. He is taking it easy now and enjoying himself. He is looking rugged and hearty, and evidently has little care on his mind." To the inquiry if his father was getting in trim for 1888 he replied: "Not exactly. A Presidential contest with which my father has nothing to do would be a novelty, wouldn't it? But I don't suppose he thinks of being a candidate. He is greatly interested in the success of his party." Philadelphia Telegraph (Rep.). Providence Star (Rep.). MR. BLAINE might not consent to be a candidate for the Presidency in 1888, but the man who, by his great ability and his splendid services to the country and the Republican party has become almost universally recognized as the great Republican leader could hardly go out of politics so far as not to exert a most powerful influence on the future destiny of the Republican party. THE proposition of a Western paper that the Republican Presidential ticket of 1888 ought to be James G. Blaine, of Maine, and Ira Davenport, of New York, on the ground that Davenport also needs a vindication, might possibly be regarded as all well enough in its particular way, if it didn't omit to take notice of a very im GENERAL LOGAN has been nominated for the Presidency by the Young Men's Republican Club of the Nineteenth ward of Chicago. There are a few Republicans outside of the Nineteenth ward of Chicago who may be inclined to strike against this, but they may be induced to settle the matter by arbitration. Albany Argus (Dem.). PRESIDENT CLEVELAND's strength lies in the hearts of the people, and there it is |