system, the number of paupers during the year was only 1303, while in the carelessly conducted union of the city there were 1681.

THE CHARITY ORGANIZATION SOCIETY.

Since 1867, the date of its birth, the Charity Organiza tion Society has done incalculable good in straightening not the sociological tangle caused by the ill-advised efforts of sentimentalists.

"There are forty branches of the society in Londonone in each union and in the crowded parishes too-and these are managed by committees. There are paid officers, whose duty is the investigation of appeals, and as the organization has extended its work it has added many trained volunteers to its force. Its duty for the most part is to ascertain whether the applicants for aid are worthy, and in what manner they can best be relieved; but it also expends yearly in alms something like £20,000. . . . Most of the Church of England charities and many of the Jewish and Roman Catholic societies work in harmony with this non-sectarian body, but so far the nonconformists have been slow to give or take help, and there are thousands of private charities that refuse to co-operate and prefer to follow their own unorganized methods. The Charity Organization deals annually with about 25,000 cases, each case representing a family, and makes full reports upon these. It has in some branches established saving banks, and has also established a Metropolitan Provident Medical Association, with 30,000 subscribing members, by which the poor co-operate to obtain the best medical treatment at small individual cost."

The private hospitals, almshouses, and "homes," and the great city guild charities are enumerated and described. Not the least interesting are some of the venerable institutions like Saint Katherine's Hospital, dating from the year 1128, and the Trinity Almshouse with its "double row of pretty, tidy cottages, models of old-fashioned comfort," situated in a "green and peaceful pleasance," and its tiny church in the centre. Its charter was granted by Henry VIII. "as a refuge for master mariners and widows of master mariners.""

The sum of Miss Bisland's investigations is that London has too much charity, but that there are charities and charities. As she quotes from the remarks of Mr. Kipling's East End damsel, "They're bloomin' well pauped a'ready."

THE MUNICIPALITY OF PARIS.

THE third of Dr. Albert Shaw's articles in The Century on modern European municipalities is a description of "Paris-the Typical Modern City." To Americans more than to any other people should such articles be of value; for if we are ever to rid ourselves of the shame of our municipal governments, the means would seem to lie in lifting up our eyes and profiting by the example of those who are strong where we are weak.

After an introduction, in which he pays a tribute to the mission of France, "to teach the world a lesson of order, system and logic, of emancipation and iconoclasm," Dr. Shaw rapidly reviews "The French Municipal System since the revolution of 1789, and passes to

THE MECHANISM OF PARIS GOVERNMENT. When the new constitution was being made to "march" in 1789-90, Paris was given a popularly elected mayor, who with sixteen administrators performed the executive work. These, together with two councillors from each of the forty-eight sections and thirty-two aldermen, 145 in

all, formed the governing body. By the Directory and after it by Napoleon, Paris was divided into twelve arrondissements each with its nominal "maire," the whole under the charge of the prefect of the Department of the Seine, and practically it was the obedient machine of the emperor. Since then the system has gyrated with the political weathervane from Napoleon's tyranny to autonomy, and intermediate points. The present organization, dating from 1871, divides Paris into twenty ar rondissements, each with its "maire" and his assistants, the appointees of the prefect of the Seine. The municipal council consists of eighty members, four being elected from each arrondissement. The "maires" attend to a vast amount of routine work, and are highly satisfactory and valuable officers. By the side of the prefect of the Seine is the prefect of police, with an official status decidedly sui generis.

A BUREAUCRATIC POLICE SYSTEM.

"The prefecture of police for the Department of the Seine was the masterpiece of Bonaparte's administrative system. This police prefect was reconstituted in 1853 by Louis Napoleon as an indispensable part of his centralized government."

The prefect "is to-day the most unaccountable and most powerful man in France. His functions are highly varied. He controls not only the ordinary police that patrol the streets and keep order, but also the detectives and officers who constitute the 'police judiciare,' and who work up criminal cases. Besides these, he is master of the political police-the government's secret agents-and he has in his hands a secret-service fund to spend unaccountably except as regards his immediate superior, the minister of the interior.

"He was a fit creation of such rulers as the Napoleons, but he has no proper place in a republican form of government. Engaged as he must be in the secret service of politics, he is not the suitable person to administer the ordinary police government of a great city.

"But it would be a great mistake to jump at the conclusion that the existing police administration is not orderly and efficient. The real protection that the people have against the theoretical absolutism of the prefect of police lies in the magnificent organization of the great machine that the prefect superintends. Every one of the numerous bureaus is manned with permanent officials, who have entered the service upon examination and who are promoted for merit."

PROPOSED LIBERAL REFORMS.

The two sorest points with the liberal element of Paris are the humiliating subjection to the prefect of the Seine and this inscrutable prefect of police. The most noteworthy scheme for reorganization is that reported some years ago by a council committee headed by Sigismund Lacroix. This plan provides among other things for additional representation for the larger arrondissements, increasing the council to a membership of 109, for a general arrondissement ticket, which would bring out better-known men than the present "uninominal" system, and for the election of a mayor and his adjuncts by the council from its own members. The routine work now done by the twenty "maires" was to be assigned to appoin tees of the mayoralty. "The council was to have full control of taxation and finance, but could not borrow money without the direct ratification of the voters at a popular election. The municipal authorities were to have entire management of the education system. primary, secondary, and higher."

But these liberal reforms are only popular with liberals.

The propertied and educated classes stand up, with much reason on their side, for the administration by the trained officials of the general government.

HOW A CITY MAY BE LIGHTED.

Perhaps Dr. Shaw's paper is most interesting and instructive under the section he calls, "The Best Lighted City in the World."

"Like American cities, and in this respect wholly unlike those of England and Germany, French cities have been in the past, and still are, wholly disposed to leave the manufacture and sale of illuminants to private companies. But the resemblance between French and Ameri can cities as regards their management of this important service ends abruptly with the simple fact that they have chosen to employ private instead of public initiative. Municipal Paris has always fully protected public and private interests in its dealings with lighting companies. Even yet American cities have not thoroughly learned the simple lesson that there can be no real competition between gas companies in the same area, and that it is the height of foolish £tupidity to attempt to regulate by competitions a business that is monopolistic by its very nature. Paris, forty or fifty years ago, in the experimental period of public gas-lighting, had seven or eight different gas companies. But each was restricted to its own district; each was chartered upon terms that gave the city authorities large control, each furnished its quota of gas for street lights and public buildings at a price fixed by charter contract and approximating actual cost of manufacture; each paid a moderate street rental for the privilege of laying pipes under sidewalks; each submitted to a scale of prices for private consumers, arranged by agreement with the city upon the basis of reports made by commissions composed of scientific authorities and experts, each submitting to a daily official examination of the quality of its gas, and to penalties for failure to reach the standard; and each laid its pipes in its respective territory under strict regulations respecting injury to the pavement and the disturbance of traffic.

"The six companies which for some years had been engaged in the distribution of gas to Paris were fused into one great company in 1855 Some of our American cities have in recent years been well-nigh convulsed with excitement and indignation because their local gas companies had been consolidated or brought under a unitary management. And yet it ought to be perfectly obvious that a consolidated gas supply can be more economically produced and sold. The fusion of the Paris companies in 1855 was effected only after several years of negotiations between the companies and the government, and it rested upon basis carefully prescribed. The results were highly beneficial to all parties concerned¿'

The charter that the present company works under is now twenty years old, but is, nevertheless, far more "enlightened and satisfactory" than "any that has been made by large American cities." "The Company must furnish gas to individuals at a price not exceeding a fixed maximum. It must supply gas for public uses at what is practically the cost of manufacture. It must pay the city 200,000 (ultimately 250,000) franes a year for the right to pipe the streets," and the methods of laying the pipes are carefully prescribed. “It must pay a tax of .02 francs on each cubic meter of gas supplied to Paris. Finally, it must not water its stock, but must keep its capitalization at 84,000,000 francs, and after paying 13 12 per cent. out of net profits as dividends it must divide the surplus profits with the city." At the expiration of the charter, all rights revert to the city. This system results in an

annual revenue to the city of 20,000,000 francs. But notwithstanding this showing, which from the light of our American municipal experience is simply wonderful, Dr. Shaw considers public ownership of gas works would be an improvement in making easier rates for the poor people of the city.

Even more striking is the "patient, scientific systematic way" in which Paris has begun to introduce electricity for lighting purposes. The city is divided into "seven secteurs electriques," each assigned to one of the important electrical companies for a short term of years under strictly specified conditions. In addition, the municipality has its own central plant, where experiments are going on, and which serves as a regulator of prices. The great problem in our cities of the disposition of wires is no problem at all in Paris, where all wires are laid underground without danger or inconvenience.

Paris has within 30 square miles a population of 2,500,000, while Chicago has 118 square miles for 1,100,000 inhabitants. The consequence is that Paris is a "manystoried" city, and that transit facilities do not present such a problem as in less densely populated municipalities. However, the time has come when her omnibus system is inadequate, and a proposition for an underground railroad system, fathered by the famous M. Eiffel, is now being considered; in connection with which Dr. Shaw says, "The underground electric road is, in my judgment, to be the permanent rapid-transit system of the world's greatest cities."

The section devoted to "Water Supply and Drainage," is succeeded by the heading "What Paris Does for Its Citizens and What It All Costs." It costs the strikingly large sum of $25 for each man, woman and child, but Dr. Shaw decides that the game is quite worth the candle,that the "work is done in the most thorough and scientific manner, and the money is honestly and skilfully applied."

CUBA AND THE UNITED STATES.

Mutual Advantages of Annexation.

The advantages to be derived by the United States from the annnexation of Cuba to its territory are strongly presented in General Thomas Jordan's article in the July Forum, on "Why We Need Cuba." In the first place, he shows, with the aid of a map, that Cuba is a component part of our geographical system. Cuba commands the entrance to the Gulf of Mexico, and any maritime power that should occupy this island could easily make a mare clausum of the gulf. In the second place, he shows that Cuba should belong to us for commercial reasons. The people of the United States consume much the largest part of all that the island produces for exportation. He gives the value of our imports from Cuba between 1859 and 1889 as $1,660,000,000. Our sugar imports from Cuba reached, in 1888, as high as 71 1-16 per cent of the total importations of this product from all quarters. Concerning the physical features of the island, Mr. Jordan writes: It is 700 miles in length, nowhere more than 130 miles in width. It has an area of 36,013 square miles and more than 1700 miles of coast, exclusive of the numerous bays and harbors. The climate is, of course, tropical and is singularly favorable to animal as well as vegetable life. The soil is well watered, exceedingly fertile and peculiarly adapted to the raising of agricultural products, though hardly 15 per cent. of the land has been thus employed. The mineral resources of the island, it would seem, are also as yet undeveloped. "So rich and diversified," says Mr. Jordan on this point, "have been the agricultural resources of Cuba during the last fifty years, that atten

tion has been diverted from the great undeveloped mineral wealth of the island, which includes gold, copper, lead, iron, asphalt, and petroleum. Humboldt placed Cuba within the auriferous belt of this hemisphere. From my own personal experience, I am satisfied that there is a future gold field in the island awaiting profitable exploitation. As for copper, $19,000,000 worth of that metal was exported from the quarter of Santiago de Cuba to England in the six years preceding 1850. Iron of the very best description, suitable for the manufacture of Bessemer pig and most desirable for mixture with our own ores, has been found in large deposits in the district of Santiago de Cuba. The surface indications of petroleum and asphalt also give notable assurance of important industrial results. Moreover, the middle and eastern sections of this island are very rich in timber for construction, including great forests of m hogany and valuable rare woods for the interior decoration of houses, for cabinet furniture and for ship-building."

How the Cubans Regard Annexation.

The native Cubans themselves are, as a body, in favor of annexation. Indeed so strongly evident is it that the future of Cuba lies in union with the United States that the mother country no longer feels sure of the loyalty of even the Spaniards on the island. The controversy over commercial reciprocity with the Antilles has led Spain to increase her watchfulness over Cuba. Since the discussion began, writes in Lippincott's Mr. Frank Burr, fresh from the West Indies, six thousand Spanish soldiers have arrived in Cuba from Madrid. As to the sentiment which prevails in Cuba towards annexation with the United States, Mr. Burr says: "The native Cuban prays for that day and pleads for its power,-not from the mercenary standpoint from which the Spaniard looks towards the United States, but with a pathetic and sincere belief that across the channel which divides Cuba from Florida lies his only hope. What the Spaniard feels for his interests, the native feels from his heart. Thus the communion of the two from their different standpoints is working out great results and building up a sentiment that only needs to be encouraged to grow into an all powerful influence."

Mr. Burr's letter contains additional information to that presented by General Jordan, concerning the resources of Cuba: "When the day arrives for Cuba to assert herself, she will become the new Eldorado. Land and property will increase twice in value within thirty days, and development will spring as if by magic throughout the island where all seasons are summer.

Education has brought about this wonderful change. The influence of the United States, so close to this domain, has made itself felt. Local trade with Florida, the sale of a hundred million dollars' worth of sugar and tobacco per annum to the United States, has done its work. The civilizing influence of such a splendid line of steamers as the Ward line sails from New York to all the ports of this island, has been another element of progress. The new deal with the United States will send down by the Ward line alone twenty thousand barrels of flour a month at half the price that it now costs the native or the Spaniard. But there is far more than an increase in trade in this new arrangement. It is the beginning of a great future.

"The finest bread in the world is made in Cuba from American flour. For years the flour had to be shipped from New York to Barcelona, and from there to Havana. Very frequently the packages were not broken, or the American mark destroyed-again demonstrating the force

by which Spain exacted six dollars a barrel duty on the yield of the land wherein she found the market for ninetenths of all the products she raised. While the new commercial relation between the United States and Spain changes all this, it gives no benefit to the home government, because it weakens its power on the island, and hastens, rather than postpones, the hour when revolution, either peaceful or with the sword, will change a despotism to a republic, and make new what is now old and worn. "The sugar-crop of Cuba this year is one of the richest ever raised on the island. Some of the foremost planters and experts, who have watched its growth with pride, estimate that it will reach seven hundred and fifty thousand tons; others claim that it will be eight hundred thousand tons. Tobacco, it is said, will touch a higher figure than ever before. And the United States is the market for the great bulk of all this wealth of the soil, and there is no other in sight. Spain cannot take the yield and pay for it. England, France, Germany, and the other great countries have enough sweets of their own, and their dealings with the sad and silent island are limited and of no particular consequence. Is it any wonder, then, that America should be the beacon-light towards which the gaze of Cuba is riveted?"

A TAX ON INHERITANCE.

Advocated as a Measure of Reform by Professor Ely. Professor Richard T. Ely, writing in the North American Review for July, advocates a reform in the laws of inheritance as a means of bringing about an improved condition of society in the United States at the present time. He does not regard the taxation of inheritance as a violation of the rights of private property. "The right of inheritance," he says, "is one right, and the right of private property is another and a distinct right. He has made but little progress in the fundamental principles of jurisprudence who does not see how clearly separated are these two rights. The right of property means an exclusive right of control over a thing, but the right of inheritance means the transfer of this right in one manner or another. If there is no will, it means the right of some one to succeed to property, and this right is a product of positive law. If a will is made, the right of inheritance means, not an exclusive right of control vested in a person, but the right of a person to say who shall exercise the right of property over things which were his while he was living, after he is dead, and, consequently, after he has lost all rights of property, because the dead have no proprietary rights whatever."

As against the general belief that man has a natural right to say what shall become of his property after he is dead, Professor Ely shows that through the greater part of the world's history the right of free testamentary disposition of property was not recognized The right of such disposition of property was introduced by the Roman law and the continuous practice of this privilege under law, has so formed opinion that now we look upon what it provides regarding the inheritance of property as naturally right, although, in different countries or states, Dr. Ely adds, the regulation of inheritance by law varies. The chief purpose of a law regulating inheritance is, Professor Ely avers, the preservation and security of the family; its second purpose, the welfare of society in general. Regarding our present inheritance laws he says they make careful provision for the rights of the wife, but do not provide adequately for children, except when no will is made. Then, he adds, the provision made for

both wife and children by our laws is perhaps as satisfactory as could be desired.

The right of disposing of property by will, Professor Ely would leave intact-with the clear recognition that "this is a matter over which the law has control, and that no human being has a right to say what shall take place on this earth or what use shall be made of anything he may leave, after he is dead and gone"-but recommends that a graduated tax varying from 1 to 20 per cent. be levied upon inheritances of every sort exceeding a certain minimum amount. In the absence of a will the right of inheritance, he holds, should reach only as far as the real family feeling does. "Intestate inheritance should include, perhaps, those who are nearly enough related so that they can trace descent from a common great-grandfather, but none who are more distantly related. Any provision for a more distant relative should be made by will, just the same as provision for any one who is not related at all." All property which is not willed away and does not fall to some heir recognized by law should fall to the state.

The line of reform proposed in his article will stand, Professor Ely believes, every test. With respect to the family he holds that it will tend to the development of this institution "far better than the existing laws in the United States. It recognizes the solidarity of the family. The husband is responsible to the wife and the wife to the husband, and both are responsible for the children they have brought into the world. It co-ordinates rights and duties."

Looked at from the point of view of society, this proposed reform “diffuses property widely, and results in a great number of families with an ample competence, and tends to prevent the growth of plutocracy. It is these families with a competence lifting them above a severe struggle for bare physical necessities, which carry forward the world's civilization. It is from these families that the great leaders of men come, and not from either of the two extremes of society, the very rich or the very poor, both of which extremes we wish to abolish. Excessive wealth discourages exertion, but a suitable reform of the laws of inheritance will remove from us many idle persons who consume annually immense quantities of wealth, but contribute nothing to the support of the race; and who, leading idle lives, cultivate bad ideals and disseminate social poison."

The Tax Favored by Professor Buchanan.

Less calm in the treatment of the question of a tax on inheritances is Professor J. R. Buchanan in the June Arena. "What right," he exclaims, "have the millionaires to say how the world shall be managed after they have left it? What right to say that when they have established a dangerous inequality, posterity shall be compelled to make it perpetual?" They have no right, he replies, "no right but what we in our justice or in our good-nature give them." Holding that wealth is the product of the nation and that under no circumstances could man by himself accumulate wealth, he denies that it belongs to the millionaire to dispose of even while he lives. Man exercises this privilege during life only by the grace of society, he would seem to say. Professor Buchanan believes that it would be better for society "if all inheritance of wealth were forbidden, and every boy and girl required to begin life with a few hundred dollars and gain the position they deserved by their own abilities alone." The rights of the commonwealth over inherited wealth is, he cites instances to show, already recognized by law. Switzerland has gone farther than any other

country in applying the principle. The State of New York derived in 1888 over a million dollars from a tax on inheritances, and the proposition to impose such a tax is under discussion in Massachusetts and other States of the Union at the present time.

THE SWISS AND AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONS. Mr. W. D. McCrackan, in the July number of the Arena, compares the Swiss and American constitutions, the chief points of likeness and disagreement between which are presented in the following quotations:

"There are two institutions in the Swiss state which bear a very strong likeness to corresponding ones in our own. Both countries have a legislative system consisting of two houses, one representing the people numerically, and the other the cantons or states of which the Union is composed, and both possess a supreme court, which in Switzerland goes by the name of the Federal Tribunal. It is generally conceded that the Swiss consciously imitated these American institutions, but in doing so they certainly took care to adapt them to their own particular needs, so that the two sets of institutions are by no means identical.

"The Swiss National Council and Council of States, forming together the Federal Assembly, are equal, coordinate bodies, performing the same functions, whereas our House of Representatives and Senate have particular duties assigned to each, and the former occupies, in a measure, a subordinate position to the latter. The Swiss houses meet twice a year in regular sessions, on the first Monday in June and the first Monday in December, and for extra sessions if there is special unfinished business to transact. The National Council is composed at present of 147 members, one representative to every 20,000 inhabitants. Every citizen of twenty-one is a voter, and every voter not a clergyman is eligible to this National Council. (The exclusion of the clergy is due to dread of religious quarrels, with which the pages of Swiss history have been only too frequently stained.) A general election takes place every three years. The salary of the representatives is four dollars a day, which is forfeited by non-attendance, and about five cents a mile for travelling expenses. On the other hand, the Council of States is composed of forty-four members, two for each of the twenty-two cantons. The length of their terms of office is left entirely to the discretion of the cantons which elect them, and in the same manner their salaries are paid out of the cantonal treasuries.

"The attributes of the Swiss Federal Tribunal, though closely resembling those of our Supreme Court, are not identical with them, for the Swiss conception of sovereignty of the people is quite different from our own. Their Federal Assembly is the repository of the national sovereignty, and, therefore, no other body can override its decisions. The Supreme Court of the United States tests the constitutionality of laws passed by Congress which may be submitted to it for examination, thus placing itself as arbiter over representatives of the people; but the Federal Tribunal must accept as final all laws which have passed through the usual channels, so that its duty consists merely in applying them to particu lar cases without questioning their constitutionality."

There is, he shows, a striking difference between the Federal Council and our presidential office. "The Swiss constitution does not intrust the executive power to one man, as our own does, but to a Federa! Council of seven members, acting as a sort of Board of Administration. These seven men are elected for a fixed term of three

years, out of the ranks of the whole body of voters throughout the country, by the two Houses, united in joint session. Every year they also designate, from the seven members of the Federal Council, the two persons who shall act as president and vice-president of the Swiss Confederation. The Swiss president is, therefore, only the chairman of an executive board, and presents a complete contrast to the president of the United States, who is virtually a monarch, elected for a short reign."

Switzerland as a Neutral Power.

In the Atlantic Monthly for July, Mr. McCrackan discusses "The Neutrality of Switzerland." His paper is for the most part retrospective. Perpetual neutrality was guaranteed to Switzerland by the powers of Europe in congress in 1815. But it is one thing, as Mr. McCrackan says, to be endowed with this privilege of perpetual neutrality, and quite another matter to maintain it inviolate. Looked at from a purely military point of view, Switzerland could not, of course, hope to withstand for any length of time the invasion of any one of the great European powers. The preservation of her neutrality rests wholly on other and moral ground. "For it must be remembered that Europe at the congress in Vienna gave her word to Switzerland that her neutrality should be respected; so that, as a matter of fact, the trustworth iness of international agreements in general is at stake. It seems hardly likely that any of the rival powers would be willing to incur the odium of being the first to break this engagement with a small but highly respected and useful state. Public opinion the world over would promptly turn against that nation; and even Bismarck was forced to acknowledge that it was worth something to have the moral support of outsiders in a great contest."

In conclusion Mr. McCrackan says: "It may be that the example of Switzerland is destined to accomplish great results in the world's history, for, in truth, there are tremendous possibilities in this principle of perpetual neutrality. If I mistake not, it supplies means of arriving at a semblance, if nothing better, of permanent international peace. There are at present several other neutral states, and it only remains for the powers to extend this privilege gradually to all the contested points on the map of Europe in order to make war unnecessary and in time impossible." To be sure, this is the "only" requisite.

THE UNION OF THE AUSTRALIAS.

In the Contemporary Review for July Sir Henry Parkes is awarded the post of honor with a short article, in which he gossips pleasantly concerning the Australian peoples of the British stock who are engaged in the grandest of all human work, the founding of a great free nation. He tells us that of the 3,226,000 persons distributed in the six states of the proposed Australasian commonwealth there is in no part of the British dominions a population so thoroughly British.

BRITONS ALL!

Notwithstanding some faint sprinklings of German, French, and Italians, the elements of the coming nation are free from the taint of foreign blood. Already the native-born Australians more than double the number of English, Scotch, and Irish. There is no such thing as destitution in the land, and nowhere is there a group of school children without a school. For an industrious man

who knows how to work out his own self-help the earth has no better field than Australia. But although not only the aspiration for national life but the material conditions of nationhood are to be found in Australia, the federal idea has not yet crystallized into a clear form in many minds. The average politician, whose mind has been enervated by the struggle for the publican's vote, and who falls into the narrowest ruts of provincialism, finds the federal idea too large and weighty for him. Nevertheless, the federal cause, which was first pleaded twentyfive years ago by Wentworth and Gavan Duffy, is marching steadily on to assured success. Sir Henry Parkes declares that the new order of things will be firmly rooted long before the close of the century.

THE NEW CONSTITUTION.

Speaking of the scheme approved of by the Conference, Sir Henry Parkes says:

"It contemplates throughout a loyal union with the Empire, and the sublime and entrancing idea of a future world-wide confederation of the English-speaking race must have influenced at progressive stages the minds of its framers."

The following is his account of the constitution drafted for Australia:

"It provides for a federal parliament, consisting of a house of representatives, based upon the widest popular suffrage and modelled on the type of the existing House of Commons; and a senate modelled from the representa tive character of the illustrious Senate of the United States, without its executive functions. All through the principle of responsible government is preserved and skilfully adapted to the inherent conditions of a federation. It calls into existence an executive of the English pattern -a representative of the crown acting politically with the advice of responsible ministers; and it makes adequate provision for the exercise of the popular will in both Houses of Parliament by a frequent reference to the electors of the country. It creates an Australian judiciary which, besides conducting the ordinary judicial business of the commonwealth, would enable appeals from the supreme courts of the several states to be made with the legal assistance of professional men familiar with the laws, usages, and conditions of the country. It is not disfigured by any attempted restraint upon the free spirit of a free people."

So sanguine is Sir Henry Parkes of the birth of this new nation, that he thinks it possible and by no means impracticable before the close of 1892, and in all probability the great consummation cannot be held back by any untold cause of events beyond the year 1893.

"The churches even now have awakened to the advantages to church government and discipline, and to the organization of spiritual effort, which would come by federation. The primate of the Church of England, the cardinal of the Church of Rome, the heads of most of the Nonconformist churches, I am assured, are fervent federationists. The far-seeing men engaged in commerce are federationists. The men of enterprise of all classes are federationists. The men who have chosen as their calling the pursuit of literature, more especially those conducting the higher class of newspapers, are federationists. In two years more the whole Australian population will be welded into one enthusiastic body of federationists."

Sir Henry Parkes dismisses the opposition of the republicans in a contemptuous paragraph. He says:"Men who really have faith in nothing profess to believe in the necessity for some organic change in the