his death in the waters of the Starnberg lake. Deposed kings have not usually been in such haste to leave the coast clear to their successors. On the contrary, in most instances, they create a great deal of labor and worry for them. It has now the appearance as though a great tempest were collecting over the Bavarian country; for the mountaineers were on the point of rising up in arms for the "Hereditary Lord." In that case, there would, at all events, have been some bloody heads. Philadelphia Inquirer, June 15. UNUSUAL interest has of late years attached to King Ludwig, not because of his public virtues or his great deeds, but because of his eccentricities. For years he was known as the mad King, and his madness took such a form of personal extravagance and lavish selfish indulgence as to bear severely upon his people, who were most onerously oppressed by taxation to supply means for his vast expenditures; and yet his people seem to have been most devotedly attached to him, and they sullenly resented his deposition from the throne, refusing to believe that he was mad or unfit to govern them. Baltimore Sun, June 15. The It is feared that his deposition, followed so quickly by his suicide, may have some unfortunate political consequences of a local character. The scenes of the King's last journey from Hohenschwangan Castle to Berg Castle indicate that the affection of the people for Ludwig had not been diminished by his mad pranks. peasants," we are told, "knelt in the roadways weeping," and Prince Luitpold and his ministers may congratulate themselves if the difficulty of the problem of government is not very considerably enhanced by the time and manner of the King's demise. New York Star, June 15. As a matter of state policy, his self-destruction is the only wise thing he has ever done. Confined in a castle, he would have been a disturbing element among an ignorant peasantry that seems to have doted upon his eccentricities, and was already preparing to rise to restore their crazy monarch to his throne. His brother Otto, who now assumes the nominal title of King, is also weak-minded, so that the reins of government will continue in the hands of Prince Luitpold as regent, and the political situation in Bavaria will remain unchanged. Brooklyn Times, June 14. His death can scarcely be called a loss to the Bavarian people, but it is, nevertheless, a shock to those who remember under what fair auspices the royal suicide began his brief reign. As a patron of the arts and artists the fame of the young monarch soon reached the outside world, and he began to be extremely popular both at home and abroad; and there is, indeed, no question that he was an earnest and sincere person, fully desirous of living to the world's advantage. Albany Journal, Junt 14. PRINCE LUITPOLD, who was made regent on Friday, will probably secure the throne for his son, for Prince Otto, the late king's brother, has been for several years in an asylum. The regent was married to an Austrian duchess, and his two sons are also married to Austrian archduchesses, so that on the surface Prussian ascendancy in Bavaria, which is still a necessity to the perpetuity of the German empire, appears to be menaced by the tragic events of the last few days. HOME RULE-GLADSTONE'S MANIFESTO. On the 13th instant Mr. Gladstone issued a manifesto to the electors of Midlothian, in which he said: "Will you govern Ireland by coercion, or will you let Ireland manage her own affairs? To debate in this address this and that detail of the lately defeated bill would only be to disguise this issue, and would be as futile as to discuss the halting, stumbling, ever shifting, and evor-vanishing projects of an intermediate class which have proceeded from the seceding Liberals. There are two clear, positive, and intelligible plans before the world. There is the plan of the government, and there is the plan of Lord Salisbury. Our plan is that Ireland should, under well-considered conditions, transact her own affairs. His plan is to ask Parliament to renew repressive laws and enforce them resolutely for twenty years, by the end of which time, he assures us, Ireland will be fit to accept any government in the way of a local government, on the repeal of the coercion laws, you may wish to give her." COMMENTS ON THE MANIFESTO. Philadelphia Press (Rep.), June 15. you govern Ireland by coercion or will you let Ireland manage her own affairs?" is the way he puts it. The dissidents will inevitably protest that this is only part of the issue to be decided; that while coercion is out of the question, grave dif ference of opinion is possible in regard to the plan of local self-government to be adopted. But the Premier's answer to such objections is that he proposes a complete plan, whereas the dissidents only produce fragmentary and imperfect propositions. It is, of course, not to be supposed that the Liberal leader will have all his own way in mapping out the campaign. If he could restrict the discussion to the lines he has drawn in the Midlothian address it might seem almost a foregone conclusion that he would enter the new Parliament with a good working majority. But there is strong prejudice as well as strong doubt to be encountered. The cry of danger to the solidarity of the Empire is certain to have considerable effect, and equally certain to be employed to the utmost. The charge that the present Union is only a paper one is telling, though the retort is liable to be made that all the proposed conditions for guaranteeing a closer connection between the countries are of the same general character. Mr. Gladstone, however, has opened the campaign with ma terly skill, judgment and knowledge of human nature; and it is much for the friends of Ireland to be able to feel that nothing will be lost through any fault or forgetfulness on the part of the champion of home rule. Boston Globe (Dem.), June 15. It would be quite in keeping with Mr. Gladstone's previous experiences if Midlothian should reject him. At every crisis-point in his great career the constituency which he represented when he took his new departure and moved forward to more radically progressive ground has dismissed him from its service. When he first favored giving the ballot to the English masses, Oxford rejected him and Lancashire gave him a seat. When, later on, he declared against the Irish State church, Lancashire drove him forth and Greenwich gave him shelter. When, still later, he proposed his land-reform scheme, he had to abandon Greenwich and take refuge in Midlothian. And now the Tories and Liberal mugwumps boast that they will drive him from Midlothian. Perhaps they will. But it is a fact worth noting that every reform he has advocated in the past has been embodied in statute law, in spite of his own personal defeats in the localities which he chanced at the time to represent. It would be just Gladstone's luck to lose Midlothian and yet win the country and carry home rule. Ir will seem to many critics that the weak point of Mr. Gladstone's address to his constituents lies in his assumption that there are but two ways of dealing with Ireland, namely, Lord Salisbury's and his own-coercion or national autonomy. This is exactly what Mr. Chamberlain disputes, and what is disputed by such unprofessional critics as Mr. Matthew Arnold. These enemies of the Premier's measure profess as great contempt as himself for the "unadorned simplicity" of Lord Salisbury's plan of twenty years' coercion. But for fear that Ireland might tend, should she get her legislature, to separate herself from England more than the Gladstone bill contemplates, and so bring moral if not actual dismemberment upon that "weary Titan," the British Empire, they propose instead to still further break up Ireland's nationality by creating several Irish provinces, and making each one of these autonomous in local affairs, while the Imperial Parliament remains as it is. In other words, they are jealous of any recognition of Irish nationality; and, whereas they are disposed (at least such a hitherto warm friend of Ireland as Mr. Arnold is), to do justice to Ireland, they propose that this justice shall be constantly supervised by England, and that Irishmen shall be treated not distinctively as Irishmen, but first and foremost as subjects of the Queen. It is obvious that there is an abyss between the central principles of these two plans. New York Tribune (Rep.), June 15. MR. GLADSTONE's address confines the question to the narrowest limits. "Will Springfield Republican (Ind.), June 15. THE London Times makes a very curious remark in its editorial on the Gladstone manifesto. Speaking of the escapes from the proposed home-rule scheme, it says: "When the worst comes to the worst, it is always open to Englishmen to say that they prefer separation pure and simple to yielding to the intolerable demands of the home-rule faction." Nothing could better illustrate the stupid political rivalry which forces men to calmly talk of rupturing the kingdom rather than to admit that Mr. Gladstone can solve the thus far unanswered question of English history. If these loyalists cannot have their proper Union, then they will have nothing at all to do with the Irish. This is not the first evidence of the panic in the Tory camp. Men like Lord Carnarvon and Mr. Blunt cannot be content to sign away their political birthright. Blunt is a Conservative, to be sure, but tha did not prevent him from defending Arabi and the Egyptian nationalists, nor will it prevent him and others of his party from seeing fair play in Ireland. Washington Critic (Ind.), June 15. MR. GLADSTONE holds that Ireland with a Parliament of her own, thereby made self-governing, would tend to the firmer consolidation of the Empire and prove a great accession to the national strength. There would also ensue a stoppage to the heavy, constant, and demoralizing waste of the public revenue now going on; ignoble feuds would cease; orderly government would prevail. Last, but not least, the honor of England would be redeemed from the stigma resting upon her from time almost immemorial, in the judgment of the whole civilized world, because of her misrule of the Irish people. Such is the deliberate opinion of a statesman whose long and conspicuous connection with the administration of public affairs entitles his conclusions to weight and confidence. It is certainly worth England's while to give the home-rule experiment a trial; and, so far as can be judged by present indications, the electors in the coming parliamentary elections will direct by an emphatic majority that the experiment be made. Baltimore Herald (Ind.), June 15. IN discounting the prospects of the coming election the effects of this manifesto must be borne carefully in mind. Mr. Gladstone has made many mistakes in his foreign policy, but on his home policy he has always been sound. Where his advice has not been taken disaster has followed. He has inaugurated and successfully conducted more measures of reform than any other English statesman of the century, and the course of events has always shown that his schemes were carefully contemplated and founded on a substantial basis. Beaconsfield was a dreamer and an enthusiast; Gladstone is a man of action and a creator of facts. There is nothing to be hoped for from Salisbury, and neither Hartington, Chamberlain, nor Goschen has any practical substitute to offer for the measure they have combined to defeat. Is it a wonder then that the eyes of the world are turned to Mr. Gladstone, who, in his declining years, boldly grapples with "the gravest yet simplest issue that has been submitted for half a century?" Brooklyn Eagle (Dem.), June 14. GLADSTONE'S address to the Midlothian electors is a model of lucidity, which indicates the writer's absolute mastery of the subject. Indeed, it is the most luminous publication that has been made yet on the Irish question, whose complexities it explores with perfect ease and with an almost amusing exposition of their insignificance. With a few bold sentences he sums up the present situation of affairs, exhibits the conditions which have brought it about, presents it in such a way as to show that it is simply intolerable, and then lays side by side the alternative methods by which it can be remedied. Contrasted with this summary Mr. Cham berlain's recent manifesto is seen to be disingenuous and his propositions chimerical. It has the great advantage, too, of consistency. The premier takes up his parable where he left it in his last manifesto and makes of this last document the natural sequel of its predecessor. New Yorker Staats-Zeitung, June 14. [Translated for PUBLIC OPINION.] GLADSTONE'S manifesto exhibits the whole strength of the incomparable talent of its author; but the whole weakness, also, of his argument for the noted homerule bill. With a mad-brained leap he opposes a policy of coercion as the only alternative to this, confessedly, stranded project of law, as if there were not many excellent intermediate courses between a complete separation from Ireland and an exceptional legislation. And just so boldly does Gladstone leap back again upon the notorious and repeatedly disclaimed clause, the exclusion of the Irishmen from the Imperial Parliament, in the hope of being able to bribe the voters more easily with the bait of an unobstructed legislature. But the old Anglo-Saxon maxim, "no taxation without representation" on the occasion of the election, will prove, as it has already done, in Parliament, an insurmountable obstacle to even Glad stone. New York Mail and Express (Rep.), June 14. How to govern Ireland without resort to the oppressive system of coercion, which assumes that all opposition is a crime; and how to do this without any peril to the permanency or the vitality of the legislative union between Ireland and Englandthese are the problems of statesmanship to be solved. In asking the people to strengthen the hands of the Liberal party in order that these things may be done in the way that party proposes, Mr. Gladstone recognizes that the preservation and the strengthening of the union is of quite as much consequence on one hand as justice to Ireland on the other. He touches this point of the case with characteristic openness and honesty, not as admitting that the projected home-rule measure involved any danger to the Union, but only as recognizing that since the opposition orators have so freely made the charge that this bill must lead to the separation of the kingdom-that charge is to be part of the canvass and must be met. Springfield Republican (Ind.), June 14. MR. GLADSTONE does more than outline the issue; he states the line of events that makes the issue inevitable. Lord Salisbury recognized that Ireland demanded attention, but in January he proposed the policy of coercion. Accordingly, when Gladstone came into power, he proposed a domestic legislature. The danger was before him and the empire and his remedy is before the world. Mr. Gladstone calls the opposition not unionists but paper unionists-a phrase that will stick. "Centralization of parliaments has been the division of peoples," he declares, and he recalls the parliamentary history of the past few years, during which the necessary legislation for Scotland and England has waited attendance upon Ireland. Mr. Gladstone's manifesto is short, forcible, and direct. The reply from the people of England will be equally direct. There is no room for the seceders and makers of political patchwork save in the camp of the paper unionists. New York Commercial Advertiser (Rep.), June 13. MAY we suggest to our English cousins the truth that American concern for the success of Mr. Gladstone in this his greatest attempt rests far more largely in our love of right and liberty for their own sakes, and in our conviction that Great Britain will reap from right doing such benefits as Mr. Gladstone points out, than in any of the less worthy and less friendly motives to which our sympathy with the Liberal cause is commonly attributed by English writers? With questions of British politics, as such, we have nothing to do; but with questions of justice, and above all with questions involving the eternal right of men to self-government, we have the concern of apostles of liberty, wherever those questions may arise. It is for that reason that the entire American people look forward with eager and anxious hope to the triumph of the Liberal idea in the approaching struggle in English and Scotch constituencies. New York Evening Post (Ind.), June 14. MR. GLADSTONE makes good use of the fact, which has occupied so prominent a place in English history during the last eighty years, that the Union has failed; that after having been brought about by a mixture of force and fraud, it has never become anything more than what it was in the beginning a paper or legislative union. The Tory and Unionist way of accounting for this failure is that the Irish are a peculiar people, who would not be content under any form of government. This is an old-fashioned explanation, which used to do good service early in the century in accounting for political troubles in various parts of the world, but it is especially an explanation which finds acceptance only among gentlemen and philosophers, or what our correspondent, Mr. Dicey, calls the thoughtful" classes. Whatever be its value, there is not much use in offering it to Democratic constituencies. Der Deutsche Correspondent, Baltimore, June 15. GLADSTONE'S address is a sort of general order for the Liberals in England, for the impending contest. Gladstone is of the opinion that the dissolution of Parliament brings before the country the most difficult question which has been presented for its decision during the past fifty years. The voters will have to decide on one or other of the two party plans; they must either permit the Irish to regulate their own affairs, or they must adopt the repressive measures advocated by Lord Salisbury. Gladstone contests the right of the Tories to call themselves Unionists, and shows how, in his time, the Union was accomplished through force and fraud. He assures his contestants that home rule for Ireland can only serve to strengthen the kingdom and save the honor of England. Philadelphia Ledger (Ind.), June 15. MR. GLADSTONE'S address is admirably clear and simple in its statement of the single issue to be decided at the election. Not only does it restrict the canvass to the one question of home rule or coercion for Ireland, but it avoids all questions of detail as to the terms under which home rule is to be granted, and ingeniously meets the expected cry of disunion by showing what a hollow mockery is the present Union. The Tories and Liberal dissenters will, of course, try to broaden the issue, but Gladstone's address gives the keynote for the Liberal candidates, and if they adhere to it there is every prospect that Gladstone will again triumph and crown a great life by the boldest and best piece of statesmanship that it has fallen to the lot of any Premier of this century to inaugurate. MR. GLADSTONE's address to the electors of Midlothian presents a single question for their consideration, and asks them to vote for William E. Gladstone; not because he is William E. Gladstone; not because he has their confidence as an able statesman and an upright man; not even because he belongs to the Liberal party and stands on its platform, but simply because a vote for him is a vote for the "plan for the better government of Ireland," embodied in the lately defeated home-rule bill. There is very little doubt that Mr. Gladstone-plus or minus the home-rule bill-will be re-elected in Midlothian, but only the full count of the returns will decide whether or not the electors of the United Kingdom are in favor of a better government for Ireland. Washington Star (Ind.), June 14. THERE is a pathetic side to the appeal which can not fail to impress every thoughtful reader. Mr. Gladstone has staked his all in politics upon the decision of the question now referred to the people. His defeat means his early retirement from the public service which he has so long adorned. It will be a day of regret to every British patriot when the "grand old man passes out of the foreground of imperial affairs. There is no other Liberal ready to step into his place. The electors whose favor he directly seeks are but a handful as compared with the multitude, not only in the United Kingdom and her colonies, but outside of them, who will feel the effect of his overthrow. Mr. Gladstone's address to Midlothian is really an address to the world. Philadelphia Inquirer (Rep.), June 15. Ir the manifesto betrays weakness in any manner whatsoever it is in the refusal of its author to discuss or consider his schemes in detail. He contends that the question is not how broad home rule shall be, but that Ireland shall have home rule. The manner is nothing; the matter is everything. But Mr. Gladstone's opponents will not fail to impress upon voters that if he had consented to a simple recognition of the principle, the right of Ireland to rule her own affairs, instead of insisting that the details of his schemes should be accepted, the government would not have been defeated on the second reading of its bill. New York Star (Dem.), June 14. Ir is an inspiring thing in the drama of the nineteenth century, this pleading before the proud English people of the venerable parliamentary chiestian for the long-refused rights due to a liberty-starved nation. As Mr. Gladstone himself says, it is the crisis of the half century. What a consummate triumph it will be if the years of his career as a statesman shall be crowned with success in this great contest between aristocratic prejudice and hate as against good men's demands for fair play and decent treatment of an oppressed race. Gladstone's sure victory will be civilization's gain and England's glory. Rochester Herald (Rep.), June 15. THE cry of disunion has been fairly turned by the liberal leader on his adversaries. It has undoubtedly had a potent effect up to the present time on the minds of a great many Englishmen who would, if it were not for their fears of a dismemberment of the empire, naturally side with the premier in this contest. After the clear, definite statement in the Midlothian address, showing that home rule is intended rather more strongly to cement the two countries together than to divide them, the demagogic cry of the conservatives will have less effect on the Scotch and English voters. New York Herald (Ind.), June 14. THE Union, which has stirred so much empty debate, Mr. Gladstone boldly denounces as "a paper union obtained by force and fraud," and then with withering sarcasm refers to the outrages at Belfast, which originated in the hot blood of indiscreet British statesmen, as "an attempt to import into the controversy a venomous ele. ment of religious bigotry." Taken altogether it is a wonderfully effective illustration of political shrewdness, and a wonderfully strong appeal to that common sense and love of fair play which the subjects of the Queen have been supposed to possess in a marked degree. Wheeling Intelligencer (Rep.), June 15. It is an eloquent appeal to do justice after centuries of wrong, to strengthen the British union by making friends of a people alienated by long continued oppression and a brutal indifference to their cry. If in the providence of God the "grand old man "shall live to see home rule established in Ireland and peace restored in all the land, he will have done his country a service beside which the victories of Marlborough and Wellington and Nelson, and the showy exploits of Beaconsfield, will be as the glow-worm's light to the fructifying blazing of the sun. Petersburg, Va., Index-Appeal (Dem.), June 15. MR. GLADSTONE's utterance gives the keynote of the campaign, and sounds with admirable simplicity and directness a tone which should find a response in every human heart in the united kingdom. It will be a miracle, however, if the grand old man is able to return a majority to the commons. Every English prejudice has been awakened, and even in Ireland Lord Churchill's reckless words, spoken some months ago, have borne fruit in riot and carnage. Before parliament reassembles, Great Britain will have been thrilled with a mighty agitation. New York Journal (Ind.), June 15. THE heart of Midlothian can only be won by logic, and logic the champion of Ireland's cause gives it in heroic doses. When the hard-headed Scotchmen have weighed the pros and cons carefully they will be very apt to see that in a selfish, if not a human point of view, Mr. Gladstone's plan is the only one to be adopted under the circumstances. It is simply, so far as the Scotch people are concerned, the lifting of a mighty weight from legislation upon the one hand, and utter legislative stagnation upon the other. New York Tribune (Rep.), June 16. If the Tories abandon their opposition to any system of home rule for Ireland it will be a gain for Mr. Gladstone. According to Mr. Gill, the Tories are on the eve of such a change in their policy. The issue will then shift from home rule versus coercion to Gladstone's home rule versus some other home rule: That will be to admit his principle. And when it comes to a question of what system shall be adopted the people of England will probably prefer what Mr. Gladstone calls a real Union to a Union." paper Chicago Journal (Rep.), June 14. It is very evident that neither the Tories nor the "bolting" Liberals will accept Mr. Gladstone's statement of the issue as correct. They all claim to be opposed to coercion, and to be in favor of some form of Irish home rule. But Mr. Gladstone's position is one of such power, he is so securely fixed in the hearts of the British people, and possesses such consummate skill in leadership, that the issue will be accepted as he has declared it, not as it may be declared in the protests and denials of his adversaries. Boston Post (Dem.), June 14. THIS plain statement, with his strong argument showing that it is for the interest of the people of England and Scotland, as well as for those of Ireland, that this true Union should be established, make up his appeal. Concerning its influences over his own constituents there can be no doubt. That its very simplicity will commend it to Liberal voters throughout the kingdom is equally certain. The grand old man is fighting bravely and well the greatest battle of his life. Utica Herald (Rep.), June 14. THE premier shows that the constantly increasing strength of the Irish partylet alone that of its cause-demands recognition, as indicative of a just and logical sentiment, which is not alone confined to Irishmen but has become a conviction in the minds of many Englishmen. The manifesto is characterized by equal rhetorical force to that of a former manifesto to this same constituency, at the same time being clearer in its argument and more direct in its appeal. Louisville Courier-Journal (Dem.), June 14. THE veteran statesman is capable of many surprises. His intellectual resources seem inexhaustible. This surprise is in the simplicity of the address. He states the case in few words, declines argument, rejects details, and makes an end of it. It seems unambitious-this short and simple address-but it is big with the fate of the Empire, and while there is a studied absence of display, there are several sentences that cannot fail to be memorable. Pittsburgh Press (Ind.), June 14. THE entire address is characterized by that calm review and concise statement of facts which in all his political utterances mark him as one of the greatest of living statesmen. And it demonstrates that, though recently defeated, he is not discouraged, but renews the combat with. all the vigor of a trained athlete in the flower of his manhood. There may be greater statesmen than Gladstone, but they are not known in English politics. Troy Telegram (Rep.), June 15. manence of its greatness better assured, should gladly assist in attaining. There MR. GLADSTONE's manifesto is an adroit and politic presentation of his side of the case and places the issue squarely between the government of Ireland by coercion and the establishment of home rule. It is most severely criticised for the alleged misstatement that the defeat of the government was a vote in favor of coercion and against the principle of the bill, whereas, in fact, no misstatement is made in this particular. Richmond State (Dem.), June 16. GLADSTONE appeals in this address not merely to his constituents in Midlothian, but to the people of Great Britain, and he plainly does so with an unquestioning belief in the success of his party at the coming election. He speaks with no uncertainty, and the confidence with which he offers his policy cannot fail to inspire the wavering and doubtful among his followers. hensions. BRITISH OPINIONS. London Press Telegram, June 14. THE Post, commenting on Mr. Gladstone's manifesto to his constituency, says the document bristles with transparent sophisms, and is based throughout upon obvious fallacies. The Chronicle says: "The address is disappointing. It is needless to say it is able and ingenious, but it is by no means up to the high standard of Mr. Gladstone's former manifestoes." The Times pronounces Mr. Gladstone's manifesto argumentatively and historically weak. "It does not offer," says the Times, "a single argument to prove that coercion is the only alternative policy to home rule for Ireland. Mr. Chamberlain gave one alternative other than coercion, and' Mr. John Morley suggested a fourth by admitting that it was possible to govern Ireland as a crown colony. When the worst comes to the worst, it is always open to Englishmen to say they prefer separation, pure and simple, to yielding to the intolerable demands of the home-rule faction. It must be made clear that there is another alternative, namely, to give Ireland local control of her local affairs, on the same scale as given to England and Scotland, and on principles as applicable to these countries as to Ireland." The News says: "The clear, sharp, decisive sentences brush aside with remorseless common sense the cobwebs so industriously spread to confuse and entangle the question, and the people will rally round the statesman who has the courage and capacity to lead them to a happy and honorable settlement of this great domestic quarrel." The Standard this morning says that Mr. Gladstone's manifesto labors under a disadvantage, appearing as a reply to that issued by Joseph Chamberlain. The manner of it is good, and it is better than Mr. Chamberlain's. It is clever, concise, and to the purpose, and every elector will understand at once what Mr. Gladstone means, but will, if he understands the "Mr. rest of the controversy, pronounce it inadequate. The Telegraph says: Gladstone's extraordinary address cannot be perused without admiration for the premier's power. Blinding himself to all his past disappointments, his present arguments show prudence and moderation under an impulse of passionate benefiThe conservative provincial papers bitterly criticise Mr. Gladstone's manifesto. The Irish papers do not make their comments on the manifesto a feature of their issues, but criticise it, as a matter of course, according to their party leanings. The Edinburgh Scotsman says that Mr. Gladstone, in his manifesto, inisrepresents the issue. Parliament, the Scotsman contends, never voted on the question of coercion versus home rule. If it had it would never have defeated the government on this issue. The Manchester Guardian says that, of Gladstone, Salisbury and Chamberlain, Mr. Gladstone alone sees the desperate circumstances in which the country is placed by the mistaken policy on the Irish question, and thal he alone perceives how those circumstances can be best dealt with. "We are confident," adds the Guardian," that the country will indorse the premier's dingnosis and proposed remedy, for they are based on rigorous common sense." cence." T. P. Gill, M. P., London, 15th, to New York Tribune. THE issue seems on the point of shifting from home rule versus coercion to Gladstone's home rule versus all the other home rules. The chances will, I think, be all the better for Gladstone. It admits his principle and only emphasizes the one towering advantage of his plan, which is that it is the only plan which will satisfy the Irish people and end the long international feud. He is for a real Union versus a sham Union, and the English democracy have a taste of that real Union in the changed feeling of the Irish people since the introduction of Gladstone's bill, which their conduct since the announcement of dissolution, their enthusiasm for Gladstone, and their rough handling of those Liberals who voted against the second reading show that they appreciate. The patience and self-control manifested by the Irish people in this crisis have been a force at the back of the Premier. Added to this advantage is the vast factor of Mr. Gladstone's personal influence, which, from every indication within the past few days, appears to be greater than ever. The people do not bother themselves with quibbles. They see plain issues. They see one great old statesman giving his life for a great principle, and they see arrayed against him a miscellaneous force not disputing the principle and moved only by a hatred and jealousy of the man. I much mistake the spirit of the newly enfranchised English democracy if there shall be any ambig uity in their choice as between Gladstone and his enemies. PRESIDENTIAL POSSIBILITIES. Sustained interest in Presidential possibilities of 1888 is clearly indicated by the prominence given to press discussion of every public event supposed to have any bearing upon the subject. The extracts given below indicate the drift of current thought so far as it can be gathered from the newspapers. Der Deutsche Correspondent (Dem.), Baltimore. [Translated expressly for PUBLIC OPINION.] IT is still two years and five months ere the next President of the United States will be elected, and there already reigns among professional politicians the most active President-making, quite a large number of journals (which, in general, are nothing if not dabblers in politics) lending a hand with all their might to the movement. This may spring from the mania of the American to have, as far as possible, a finger in the pie on the occasion of an election of the chief official of the nation, or perchance to be himself designated as one worthy of the honor of representing his people as "king in a dress coat." With many professional politicians and rich private citizens the latter is the evident object. This must have long been the case, for in the autobiography of many a member of Congress may be read: "His father (or grandfather) in his time was repeatedly spoken of in connection with the Presidency." Furthermore, there are Presidential candidates and aspirants who have an erroneous idea of the candidacy, similar to that of many persons on the subject of wines and cigars, who consider the oldest as the best; while the real connoisseur knows perfectly well that such commodities are not permitted to exceed a certain age without losing rather than gaining in quality. Some keep their Presidential aspirations constantly before the people-as, for instance, Blaine and Sherman for several years past have done. Others get up a drumming and fifing as soon as the year for the nomination comes on. If most of these people would poke their noses a little into the political history of this country, they would find that for a generation or more we have had no President whose reputation and "boom" was two years older than the hour of his election. When, forty-two years ago, the Democrats nominated James K. Polk, the politicians, surprised and disillusioned, inquired, "Who is James K. Polk?" The name of the Whig President, Zachary Taylor, was famous scarcely one year before the election. Pierce and Buchanan were absolutely less known than their rivals, Marcy and Cass, and before Lincoln's nomination there was nowhere any talk about him; everyone was thinking of Seward. Who, in 1862, would have prophesied that U. S. Grant would one day become General-in-Chief and President of the Republic? Such an individual would have been regarded as fit subject of a lunatic asylum. Hayes owed his nomination to his hard-won victory of the year previous over the Democrat, Allen, in the gubernatorial campaign in Ohio; and no one had thought of Garfield two days before his nomination. A similar surprise was Arthur's nomination. Our remarks will likewise apply to the present Administration. To-day, four years ago, Mr. Cleveland was mayor of Buffalo, and if one had challenged in June, 1882, the most experienced politician and farsighted prophet to name five and twenty Democrats from whom the party would make its selection, we are fully convinced that Cleveland's name would not have been among the number. From this it is clear that all premature drumming and trumpeting-or, as it is popularty called in this country, "booming "—is mere bosh and not of the slightest use. Some newspapers of late have put in print the name of the celebrated editor, George Washington Childs, of Philadelphia, as a candidate for the Presi dency. Mr. Childs is far too clear headed and sensible a man to be caught by such a lure. The New Yorker Staats-Zeitung, (Ind.). [Translated expressly for PUBLIC OPINION.] SHOULD Blaine again be the Republican candidate for the Presidency in the year 1888 reverends of the Burchard stamp will interest themselves considerably less in his favor. If "Jim" threw himself strongly in 1884 upon the Irish, he will do this far more in 1888; and coquetting with temperance parsons does not agree very well with a campaign on such a basis. Wherever the Blaineites have had anything to say lately the Republicans have become colder toward the champions of compulsory abstinence; and thus this miserable demagoguism has its good side. The reverse of the picture, to be sure, presents itself all the more unpleasantly. Thus, the infamous "accuse law" for the State of New York was established through the fact that the Republican machine politicians supported it "in the interests of the Republican landlords," as Sheridan Shook expressed it in his dispatch to the Tribune. It might more justly have been said in the interests of Blaine's candidacy, for it is certain that Blaine has perceived the impossibility of enlisting the better Republican elements, among which the Prohibitionists are very strong; and, on the other hand, hopes to carry the State of New York, notwithstanding, with the assistance of the Republican machine, which, in 1884, did not particularly exert itself for him. He probably counts upon the hypothests that Cleveland will again be the Democratic candidate, and that then it will be so much the more easy to conspire with Democratic politicians. Blaine's calculations may be so far correct; but they make him, only more and more, the candidate of the worst elements. His maneuvres repel the friends of a reasonable control over liquor traffic, who are, necessarily, the decided opponents of a misuse of this control to political ends, just as much as the coercive temperance people. If the Republican party were to lay aside its tendency to prohibition, to throw itself into the arms of the dissolute pothouse and brothel rabble, who are united with the Republican machine, it would thereby not materially better its prospects. In the first place, it would certainly not wint he respectable portion of the citizens who are interested in the traffic in liquors far less the German liberals, who would be the least disposed to bite at such a bait. effect, and one exactly contrary to what its author hoped and intended. Unless ignorance, bigotry, and presumption shall be considered essential qualifications of future candidates of the Republican party for the position of President of the United States, Mr. Logan may be safely counted out of the list. We fancy that few intelligent and patriotic members of the party to which he belongs would care to see the standard of that party or the dignity of the Presidential office committed under any circumstances to the keeping of the author of "The Great Conspiracy." He has demonstrated his unfitness for the high office which he now holds, or for any other, and however well he may represent the present generation of Republicans in Illinois, their idea of what constitutes a statesman is not likely to be adopted, we think, by the Republicans of New England, of New York, or of Ohio, so long as Mr. Blaine, Mr. Evarts, and even Mr. John Sherman are left to them. One can readily imagine, by the way, the keen satisfaction with which these three eminent politicians have perused the pages of "The Great Conspiracy," and with what a sigh of relief upon reaching its end they severally laid the ponderous volume on the shelf as they whispered to themselves the pleasing assurance that its author will henceforth occupy similar quarters. Presidentially speaking, he will trouble them no more. New York Tribune (Rep.). PRESIDENT CLEVELAND'S renomination has been predicted by several people of late, on curiously different grounds. One urges that, since he has taken a wife, the hearty sympathy of the people for the President and his young bride will lead to a more kindly judgment of his acts. It is thought that this sympathy will bring him stronger approval of his course, if it proves unpopular with the politicians. Another, an observer so sagacious as Mr. Elkins, is reported as saying that the President's nomination is likely to be insured by his control of the patronage at the South, and in New York and a few other Northern States. Still another, of the "Reform" variety, observes that a prominent Democrat at Washington, according to accounts in the Louisville Courier-Journal, proposes that Cleveland shall be boycotted by the Democratic party, and left in a helpless condition, as Andrew Johnson was by the Republicans, and concludes that this would insure him the delighted support of all the people who belong to no party. Now, if Mr. Cleveland is going to have the support of all the "reformers" because he resists and enrages the politicians, and of all the politicians because he uses his patronage to win and control them, and of all the people of hearty human sympathy because he has a lovely and loving wife, any opponents will have a hard time in the convention. Washington Evening Star (Ind.). THE pastime of bringing out candidates for the Presidency in 1888 has already been entered upon with considerable zest, and from present indications it would seem that the race is to be a brush free for all governors. The chief magistrate of pretty much every large State is liable to be groomed and entered for the stake, whether he becomes an actual starter or not. Foraker, of Ohio, is considered a possible dark horse, with a fair chance, on the Republican side, and Hill, of New York, and Pattison, of Pennsylvania, both have shrewd and well-heeled backers, on the Democratic side, while Lee, of Virginia, is named for the second place, with a strong northern entry at the head. How many other State stables are to be represented on the course it is too early yet to tell; but, while gubernatorial stock is regarded as good for the coming heat, how is it that no one has named the young colt, Jerry Rusk, of the Wisconsin paddock? He has shown himself lately to be a brisk, firm stepper, with indications of great staying powers. It is true that he might not at first sight be the favorite with the book-makers, but the horse named by them to win does not always lead the bunch at the finish, as the history of all race courses shows. The inquiry is therefore repeated: Why does no one name Jerry Rusk? New Orleans Picayune (Dem.). MR. BLAINE is the only American who has used the home rule excitement for his personal aggrandizement, and so well has he used it that if the election were to take place immediately he would make good capital. But the election is more than two years away yet, and long before it arrives the temporary ebullition will have died out, and his record as Secretary of State will recur to sober reflection. What he has accomplished, however, is his nomination. His intense popularity along the line from Philadelphia to San Francisco, where lay his strength in 18761884, is now matched by a new popularity along the line from Boston to St. Paul, the region which defeated him in two national conventions, and by its lukewarmness finally defeated him at the polls. Districts which in 1880-1884 sent delegates to convention for Edmunds, Windom, Washburne, Arthur, John Sherman, and J. R. Hawley will now close up solid for Blaine, and the nomination is certain to be made on the first ballot, if not by acclamation. Savannah News (Dem.). WITHOUT question the President at present stands a better chance of getting the nomination than any other man in the Democratic party. No one doubts his honesty, and it is generally admitted that he has thus far given the country a safe and satisfactory administration. His civil-service policy has created some opposition to him, but this opposition will disappear before the time of choosing another candidate arrives. Even if he makes no more removals and confines himself to filling vacancies, every important office in the country will be occupied by a Democrat when the time for selecting delegates arrives. All the office-holders-and they will be mainly party workers-will favor his renomination, because his re-election will mean their retention in office. With all the office-holders working for him, and with the sentiment of his party generally in his favor, it will be a most difficult matter for any one to beat him for the nomination. 1 were actually invested with full convention powers, or could influence and control a sufficient number of the voters of the United States to make his election absolutely certain and under those circumstances would make the offer--he would then only have the stronger reason to say, and would say with more emphasis, if that were possible: "This manifestation of your good will and great favor is very welcome to me, but you propose to do what should not be done, and what I can not under any possible circumstances agree that you shall do." Denver Tribune (Rep.). HILL is an abler man than Cleveland, clearer and quicker of intellect. He is as sprightly as Cleveland is dull and heavy. The "boys" like him and he would doubtless be as acceptable to Wall street as Cleveland is; but this is all that can be said for Hill. He is not a statesman, he has no acquirements of note and he is not fit to be President. But the Democrats will not stop to consider this. He will make the kind of President the Democrats want. He will trust his party, stick to it through thick and thin and do just about as its leaders tell him. Shrewdness takes the place of individuality in his character. Lacking in personality, though not in smartness, he would be quite willing to do as his party wanted him to do. He is just the man the Democrats who are disgusted with Cleveland are looking for. We have little doubt that he will be nominated. Richmond, Va., State (Dem.). THE Republican convention in Maine adopted a platform in which one of the most noteworthy sections calls on "patriotic citizens to resist the late efforts in the Southern States to awaken the bloody memories of the rebellion." These Maine partisans, whose own memories are conveniently short, seem to have forgotten the fierce denunciation of the South that flashed from the lips of James G. Blaine, not two years ago, when maddened by defeat, that malignant politician raved at the Southern States because not one of them would trust him sufficiently to give him its electoral vote. As Mr. Blaine's friends easily controlled the late State convention, it is natural to infer that, in order to secure the Republican nomination in 1888, the Maine statesman intends to pose as the chief of South-haters. New York Mail and Express (Rep.). THE Maine convention was held on the 9th inst., and Mr. Bodwell had a "walk-over," receiving 882 votes, while only 201 were given to Dr. Hamlin, and the announcement of the result, as is admitted even by the correspondent of the Democratic New York Times, "was received with tremendous enthusiasm." Evidently the terrible "Blaine despotism" as to Mr. Bodwell's nomination was merely a clear perception of Mr. Bodwell's strength and popularity beforehand, and a recognition of facts. If, now, Mr. Blaine had tried to give the minority candidate the nomination, the situation might have been in accordance with Democratic representations before the convention and with Democratic wishes afterward. What will be the next anti-Blaine bogy? New York Sun (Dem.). WHY should the passions of the war now be stirred up in Maine, where, during the great struggle, opinion was so unanimous? Why should the war that ended in 1865 be made an issue in 1886 in an untainted State like Maine? Who was it that pulled out the old bugle which did such excellent service twenty years ago, and has blown it, perhaps as it never was blown, in the midst of a peaceful Republican convention? Was this blast, which might have brought on a political convulsion in the border State, spontaneous on the part of General Hall, or was it really a note from that famous old soldier, John Alexander Logan? It sounds like him. Washington Correspondence Pittsburgh Dispatch (Ind.). LOGAN usually contrives to be in his seat when anybody is making a speech and turns around in his chair as if anxious not to miss a single precious word, and at the close shakes hands with the orator in a felicitous fashion that might be worth several delegates in the next national convention. Yet Logan is not especially chummy with his colleague Cullom, whom he thinks is inclined to put on frills as a Vice-Presidential candidate. Since Blaine and Logan have struck out in different paths, a Blaine-Cullom alliance is probable enough to breed a coolness between the Illinois Senators. New York Sun (Dem.). WE suppose the bottom reason why Mr. Childs will not hear of being President is, that he is lazy and hates hard work. But it would be splendid to have a lazy man in that post. He would not do as much routine drudgery as Mr. Cleveland, but he would give us more grand ideas and shed a poetic sadness about the events of daily life that would add to the pleasure of existence. However, there's no use arguing with an obstinate man, and Mr. Childs will have to go on doing good in his own way, and blushing to find it fame. Salt Lake Tribune (Rep.). not re-elect Cleveland, it can elect no one. Much, of course, will depend on the Baltimore Herald (Ind.). THE scarcity of Presidential timber in the Democratic party is something remarkable. Excepting Cleveland, there is hardly an available man. Ohio is fatally divided on Thurman, and it has been pretty well demonstrated that Joe McDonald lacks the leadership to hold his party together. Carlisle lives too far South, and Bayard's secession record retired him long ago. Tilden is too old and Hancock is dead. Verily, it looks as if “Cleveland and the offices" are to be the next campaign cry of the Democrats. BLAINE may never be President, may never reach the bauble which his hand is clutching for, but he can live and die with the thought that no office could exalt him. Indeed, he shows to the best when striking for victory or covering a disastrous retreat. He is to politics what Ney was to the French army-the rear guard on a retreat from a Moscow, the leader when the Old Guard are deployed and sent in flashing column to break and roll back the enemy's center, a man who will be the concernment of his fellow-men so long as he lives. Nashville American (Dem.). THE way the thing looks now all the Republican leaders, except Mr. Blaine, who are scheming to get the nomination of the party for President, may as well give their busy brains and over-worked chins a rest. It has been foreordained that Mr. Blaine should again be sacrificed for his country's good. San Francisco Argonaut (Ind.). THERE was a good deal of truth in Gorman's remark, that if the Democracy can Norfolk, Va., Landmark (Dem.). MR. SENATOR LOGAN is making hay, so to speak, in Mr. Blaine's own pasture. In other words, Black Jack's friends have appeared in great force in Maine, and the chances seem to be that in the next tilt the " Plumed Knight" will be ignominiously unhorsed. Logan's war whoop, which he calls a book, beats Blaine's Augusta speech, and the chances are now in favor of the latter's enforced retirement from public affairs. If it turns out to be a case of mutual slaughter, it will be a good thing for the country. Philadelphia Times (Ind.). IT now remains to be seen whether Hamlin and the soldiers will kiss the hand that smote them or decide to smite in return. In the former case Bodwell will be elected and Mr. Blaine's Presidential boom be given a vigorous send-off. If the latter, they can defeat Bodwell in spite of his barrel and his Blaine backing. As a rule, however, Maine Republicans have fallen into line when preliminary Presidential battles were to be fought, and it is quite probable they will do so again. Memphis Avalanche (Dem.). THE popular voice has already decreed Mr. Cleveland's renomination. The politicians will hardly pause to grumble before donning the harness again, and for one spoils-hunter vote lost he will have gained ten from disinterested American electors, securely gained by the sincerity, truthfulness, and trustworthiness of the man. His nomination is as certain as that he shall live and the sun shall rise on the morning of the convention, and his election is hardly less certain. |