went to the bottom in 20 feet of water and cruised around at the will of those inside.

The second party had the same experience as the first, and the test was pronounced by all in every way satisfactory. It was then explained that three systems could be used for submerged travelling. With the masts used at the trial, which are hollow, permitting air to come in on one side and go out on the other, the vessel can work forty feet under water.

In deeper water hose is used, which answers the purposes of supplying air to the gasolene, engine and also supplies the crew. In water 100 feet deep the storage battery is depended upon for power and light and the compressed air reservoir for the air supply.

When the hollow masts are submerged and water pours in, an automatic valve stops the flow. The diver obtains his supply of air from a tube running around the top of the vessel, which contains compressed air. He experienced no trouble in the test to-day, either in going out or returning."

How will they fortify a harbor against such a craft as this? All the old fortifications may have to be abandoned as useless, and new ones built under water! Now for a new appropriation! There is great danger lest we be found unprepared!

Dr. Washington Gladden, among other excellent things, gave utterance at the anniversary of Plymouth Church, Brooklyn, Nov. 11, to the following:

I

"If men are brethren, and if the most unnatural and monstrous business they can possibly engage in is fighting one another (and this is certainly the doctrine of Jesus Christ), then I see no reason why this truth should not be asserted and insisted on as the only principle that can bear rule in the realm of labor and capital. I know of factories where it is really believed and acted on. know employers to whom the truth that the men who work for them are their brother men, partners of their welfare and sharers of their prosperity, is just as palpable as gravitation, and just as thoroughly respected. Those are happy factories, you may guess-and prosperous, too, thank God! They ought to prosper. Is it really incredible that men should find more profit in helping one another than in cheating and fighting one another? To some, to many, I fear, it is incredible. With the New Testament in our hands for eighteen hundred years, we have not yet really learned to believe that friendship is better than strife; and we still go on assuming that the society in which each one is trying to get all he can away from everybody else, and to give as little as he can to everybody else, is the only normal society; that if we should turn right about and give all we could to everybody, taking from others only that which they could freely give, we should speedily find ourselves in the highway to ruin. Is it not curious that reasonable men should not be able to see that by such assumptions the social order is simply inverted as to its leading motive, and that it is high time for those men who have the power to turn the world upside down to come hither also, that they may get it right side up. To all right reason it is so palpable, so utterly common-sensible, that it is

obvious is all this that one sometimes feels like going out with Wisdom" into the top of the high places, beside the gates at the entry of the city, at the coming in of the doors," and crying with her: "O ye simple, understand prudence, and ye fools, be ye of understanding heart!"

The following appeal to the people of the United States in behalf of the sufferers in Cuba has been issued by the State Department.

"By direction of the President, the public is informed that, in deference to the earnest desire of the government to contribute by effective action toward the relief of the suffering people in the island of Cuba, arrangements have been perfected by which charitable contributions, in money or in kind, can be sent to the island by the benevolently disposed people of the United States.

66

Money, provisions, clothing, medicines and the like articles of prime necessity can be forwarded to Gen. FitzHugh Lee, the consul-general of the United States at Havana, and all articles now dutiable by law, so consigned, will be admitted into Cuba free of duty. The consul-general has been instructed to receive the same and to cooperate with the local authorities and the charitable boards for the distribution of such relief among the destitute and needy people of Cuba.

"The President is confident that the people of the United States, who have on many occasions in the past responded most generously to the cry for bread from the people stricken by famine or sore calamity, and who have beheld no less generous action on the part of foreign communities when their own countrymen have suffered from fire and flood, will heed the appeal for aid that comes from the destitute at their own threshold, and, especially at this season of goodwill and rejoicing, give of their abundance to this humane end."

The following beautiful passages are found in the Sabbath Ritual of the Union Prayer Book used by the Jews:

"Grant us peace, Thy most precious gift, O Thou eternal source of peace, and enable Israel to be a mesBless senger of peace unto the peoples of the world. our country, that it may ever be a stronghold of peace, and its advocate in the councils of nations. May contentment reign within its borders, health and happiness within its homes. Strengthen the bonds of friendship and fellowship between all the inhabitants of our land. Plant virtue in every soul, and may the love of thy name hallow every home and every heart. Praise be to Thee, Giver of peace.

** O may all, created in Thy image, recognize that they are brethren, so that they, one in spirit and one in fellowship, may be forever united before Thee. Then shall Thy Kingdom be established on earth, and the word of Thine ancient seer be fulfilled: The Eternal alone shall rule forever and aye."

Hon. Gardner G. Hubbard, who died on December 10th at his home in Washington, was one of the warmest friends of a permanent Anglo-American treaty of Arbi

tration. He was chairman of the local committee which made arrangements for the National Arbitration Conference held at Washington in April, 1896. Mr. Hubbard was one of the most active and intelligent of the promoters of the Bell telephone, its success being largely due to his wisdom and energy. Alexander Graham Bell, whose name is always associated with the telephone, was his son-in-law. Mr. Hubbard's early home was in Boston, but, removing twenty-five years ago on account of the climate, he settled in Washington where he continued to reside until the time of his death. He was president of the board of trustees of the Covenant Presbyterian Church, with which he was connected from the time of its organization.

The 19th of December, Peace Sunday, was observed by the pastors of many churches, throughout the nation. We have no means of knowing how many. The peace department of the W. C. T. U., through its local superintendents did much to secure the observance of the day in their several localities. All the ministers in the District of Columbia were invited to devote some part of the day to the consideration of the subject of peace, and a number of them responded and preached strong, timely sermons. In addition to the attention given to the cause on this special day, the Christmas Sunday was also made the occasion, by many pastors, of treating the subject. Peace was also made the topic of special programs in a number of Sunday schools.

On the wires, the cables and in the press the situation in the East has been very critical for the last two weeks. But information just as we go to press indicates that the situation has been much exaggerated. Minister Denby sends word from Pekin that the German occupation of Kiao Chau will end when the Chinese government complies with the demands made upon it for the murder of the two German missionaries. The Russian occupation of the harbor at Port Arthur is understood to be merely for winter quarters, in accordance with a treaty between Russia and China. The massing of the British and Japanese fleets at Pe Chi Li is also said to mean nothing, these two nations having some years ago secured from China the right to keep their vessels in those waters. Finally, the last telegrams from Hong Kong and Tonquin deny the French occupation of the island of Hai Nan. We hope, for the honor of civilization, that these last reports may prove true. But, in spite of them, it seems certain that things in the Far East are in a very unsettled state and that the great powers, including Japan, are watching the situation and one another with a good deal of nervousness as well as ambition. We do not expect, however, either war or any immediate attempt to dismember China.

Brevities.

The definitive treaty of peace between Turkey and Greece has been concluded and ratified by both King George and the Sultan.

A bill was passed by the House of Representatives on December 16th appropriating $175,000 for the relief of the people who are in the Yukon river country.

From the report of Consul-General Haywood at Honolulu to the State Department it seems that there are less than 25,000 Japanese in Hawaii, less than half of whom are employed on the sugar plantations.

... The world's production of gold in 1896, according to the forthcoming report of the director of the mint, was $203,000,000. The silver produced during the same period had a commercial value of $111,278,000, the coinage value of which was $213,463,700.

... A joint resolution accepting the invitation of Norway to participate in an international fisheries exposition next year was passed by the Senate December 17th.

Mr. Underwood, president of the Alaska Central Railway, says that if Congress grants his road the right of way, he will have trains running from the nearest tide-water to Dawson City by the 15th of June. All the valuable mining land in the Klondyke region is said to be already taken up.

Concord, the journal of the (London) International Arbitration and Peace Association, is to begin the new year with several improvements. It will be increased to twelve pages, have a new heading, be printed in larger type, and have some new contributors added to its list. It has been a strong, well-edited journal in the past and we wish it great success in its efforts to increase its usefulness.

Beginning with this month, a new bimonthly review is to be published at Milan, Italy, for the promotion of a better internationalism. Its title is to be La Vita Internazionale, and it will be edited by E. T. Moneta, one of the foremost advocates of peace in Italy, assisted by several distinguished writers among the friends of peace.

.. La Conference Interpalementaire, the organ of the Interparliamentary Peace Union, which has been edited by Dr. Gobat, secretary of the Interparliamentary Bureau, at Berne, is to be discontinued for lack of financial support. It has been published for four years and has done excellent service. It is much to be regretted that it could not be kept alive.

. . The heirs of Mr. Alfred Nobel, though worth millions themselves, are contesting his will, being especially opposed to that portion of the legacy devoted to the cause of peace.

. . . The reciprocity negotiations with both Germany and France are at a standstill. There is little disposition to make material concessions on either side. The negotiations with Great Britain as to the British West Indies are proceeding slowly, but an agreement is not expected at an early date.

In a recent address in Boston, Hon. Charles S. Hamlin, former Assistant Secretary of State, stated that never before in the history of this government had any administration gone so far as the present one in its efforts to bring about a permanent settlement of all questions in difference between the United States and Canada in a manner just and right to all concerned, President McKinley's desire being to wipe out forever all serious differences which from time to time cause irritation.

. . Bishop Willis of Honolulu passed last month through Boston on his way home. He stated that a large majority of the people of the islands are opposed to annexation. The electorate, as now constituted, is very much in its favor. The new oath of allegiance has made registration very restricted.

Under the old régime

there were about 14,000 voters. The new oath requires subscribers to abstain from all attempts to restore the monarchy. Only about 3,000 voters, he said, have taken the oath, about half of them office-holders.

The International Brotherhood League of Washington, D. C. seeks to cultivate the spirit of brotherhood in all sorts and conditions of men. It is doing excellent work among the children in its Sunday afternoon meetings, where the fundamental ideas of kindness and brotherhood are taught.

Through the influence of Mr. Bellamy Storer, United States minister to Belgium, Americans resident in that country will not be required to serve in the civic guard, as they with other foreigners were required to do by the law of September last. By a treaty between the two countries, neither can call upon the citizens of the other for military service. The Belgian government holds that service in the civic guard is not military service.

Mr. Hannis Taylor, ex-minister to Spain, to whose remarkable article in the North American Review attention was called in our last issue, has severely denounced the President's message for its indifference to Cuba. He thinks Congress ought firmly and scornfully to reject such a policy of irresolution and non-action as that proposed in this "heartless, selfish message." He has no faith whatever in Spain's pretenses of granting autonomy to the island.

. . . An attempt was made on the 6th of December, by two soldiers of the imperial service, to assassinate the Sultan, at the Yildiz Kiosk, his palace. The attempt was frustrated by attendants.

.. The Haytian government has informed our State Department of its willingness to refer the claim of Bernard Campbell, an American citizen, to arbitration. The claim is for $100,000, and grew out of injuries which he received from being beaten by men who, he claims, were Haytian soldiers. It is understood that our government is ready to accept arbitration in the case.

The Dutch government was defeated on December 15th in the Chamber of Deputies, which by a vote of forty-six to forty-one refused to authorize the building of new warships. "Brave little Holland"!

. Peace has finally been signed in the Philippines. The insurgent chiefs handed their surrender to Gen. Rivera on December 15th, who accepted their submission in the name of the Spanish government. Hostilities were at once suspended, and the various groups at once gave themselves up with their arms, the chiefs stipulating only that they should have free pardon and money with which to emigrate. Both these conditions were granted.

Hawaiian Annexation.

HON. GEORGE S. BOUTWELL'S SPEECH
BEFORE THE BOOT AND SHOE CLUB OF BOSTON,
DECEMBER 22, 1897.

As I was forewarned by the gentleman from whom I received your invitation to meet the members of the Boston Boot and Shoe Club this evening, that the time for the discussion of the topic before us was limited to two hours, and that four persons were to participate in the debate, I have forecast the observations that I have had in mind that I might avoid the danger of trespassing upon the privileges of others who are to address you.

Since the organization of the government there have been four opportunities for the annexation of territory within continental lines, and all of them have been accepted. In the same period of time there have been three tenders of insular possessions, two of them without direct consideration in money, and all of them have been declined.

The first of these was the tender of the Sandwich Islands, made through our then Commissioner, Mr. Elisha H. Allen, in the year 1852. It was in the early months of Mr. Fillmore's administration, when Mr. Web ster was Secretary of State.

Mr. Allen had been my acquaintance and friend from the year 1847, when we were associated as members of the Massachusetts House of Representatives, and as members also of an important Special Committee.

Upon his arrival in Boston he took lodgings at the Adams House where I was then living. Our meetings at the table and otherwise were frequent and it was then that I received from Mr. Allen the statement that he came with authority, carte blanche, from the king to tender the islands to the United States. There may have been terms and conditions, but none were mentioned by Mr. Allen. At the same time he informed me that the offer had been declined by Mr. Webster.

The treaty for the acquisition of the island of St. Thomas, that was negotiated by Mr. Seward in President Johnson's administration, was not ratified by the Senate. The cause of its failure, or the circumstances incident to its failure, have been the subject of controversy. The undertaking failed, and that controversy

should not now be revived.

In General Grant's first term the country had an oppɔrtunity to acquire so much of the island of San Domingo as is known by that name. The terms of acquisition were favorable. The project was supported resolutely by General Grant, when his influence in the country had not suffered any serious impairment. The offer was re

jected by the Senate, and there were no indications of a controlling public opinion adverse to its action.

Thus it appears that there have been three favorable opportunities for the acquisition of insular possessions, all of which have been declined. Two of them were within a day's sail of our mainland coasts, while one of them, and that the one now urged upon the country, is more than two thousand miles from our nearest harbor on the Pacific Ocean.

The question of the extension of slavery was involved in the projects for the annexation of Louisiana, Texas and California, and except for the existence of that question the acquisition of those vast territories would have received a general support in all parts of the country.

The fourth was the acquisition of Alaska, a territory that in 1867 offered but few attractions to the people of the United States. It is worthy of remark that the men of the revolutionary era contemplated a union with Canada.

This résumé warrants the statement that the country has accepted continental territory as a wise public policy, now fully justified by experience, and that it has as uniformly rejected insular possessions.

And, further, this résumé warrants the statement that the burden of proof is upon those who demand a change in our public policy.

The public policy of the country may not have been based upon distinct propositions resting in the public mind, but I formulate that policy in two propositions, namely: First, continental acquisitions of contiguous territory tend to peace; second, the acquisition of insular territories increases the chances of war and adds to the difficulties in the way of conducting war.

If the first proposition is under question in the mind of anyone, much support may be found in our own experience and in the recent experience of other countries. The force of the North was augmented immensely in our Civil War by the consideration that two contiguous nations would not remain at peace, except during brief intervals between long and lengthening periods of open or smothered hostilities.

By unification the Provinces and States of Germany and Italy have been forced into peaceful relations with each other.

And, if now it were possible for France, Italy, Spain and Portugal to unite into one Confederated Republic they would not only command peace for themselves, but they might dictate peace for Europe.

The possession by Great Britain of the Canadas has given rise to many, I may say to most, of the questions that have disturbed our relations with England during the last sixty years. I mention the Oregon dispute, the San Juan dispute, the Caroline affair, the Northeastern boundary controversy, the Fenian invasions, the fisheries and now the seal fishery in Behring Sea.

If the United States and the Canadas were under one government the killing of seal upon the open sea would not be defended by anyone.

It is to be admitted that small countries and minor communities are strengthened and protected by union with strong states. That, as a practical question, is their question and not our question. If the gain is theirs and the loss is ours there can be no ground of defence for a policy of annexation, unless it can be found in the indulgence of the feeling called sympathy. Sympathy is akin

to one of the passions, and the guidance of the passions in public affairs ought never to be accepted.

My second proposition is not within the limits of actual demonstration, but it can command some support argumentatively.

Assume a war with England, would our position be strengthened or weakened by the possession of St. Thomas, San Domingo or Hayti, or by the possession of one or all of the islands of the Carribean Sea?

Assume a war with England, or Russia, or Japan, or China, a possible, aggressive and warlike power in a future not far away, and would the possession of the eight tropical islands in the mid-Pacific and extending over three degrees of latitude and six meridians of longitude, be a help or a peril? Would a coaling station or a harbor of resort at the mouth of the Pearl River, two thousand miles and more from our Pacific coasts give security, either in form or in fact, to California, Oregon, Washington, or to the dwellers on the shore and islands of Alaska?

Does the example of England attract us? The august ceremonies which closed the sixtieth year of the reign of Queen Victoria, were clouded by the fact that those had been years of uninterrupted wars, wars in which there had been hardships and dangers in unequal contests with inferior peoples; wars made necessary by the policy of England to preserve unbroken and to strengthen, if possible, the chain of empire that England has carried around the globe. For England this may have been a wise policy. An attempt at its imitation by us cannot bring either success or honor. England conquers that she may inhabit and trade. A small island in a northern sea with a hardy and adventurous population must gain new lands as a refuge and home for its accumulating masses. Thus it seeks and secures protection for its home industries by first subduing and then clothing the millions of Asia and the half-clad tribes of Africa.

Thus and by such processes was the foundation laid for the great eulogium which Mr. Webster pronounced upon our ancestors in America and in England when he said of the Colonists, "They raised their flag against a power to which, for purposes of foreign conquest and subjugation, Rome in the height of her glory is not to be compared; a power that has dotted over the surface of the whole globe with its possessions and military posts whose morning drum beat, following the sun and keeping company with the hours, circles the earth with one continuous and unbroken strain of the martial airs of England."

But the example of England is not for us. The field for conquest, for appropriation is about all occupied. Our theory is a theory of self government. Such has been our practice. Next we demand equality of citizenship in the States and equality of States in the Union. All this is inconsistent with the acquisition of distant and incongruous populations. And nowhere can there be found a more incongruous population than the present population of the Hawaiian Islands.

The future of the United States cannot be predicted, but of unoccupied territory we have a vast domain. Its vastness may be set forth in one statement: If the population of all the States and Territories of the Union could be transported to the State of Texas the number of inhabitants to the square mile would not exceed the number now resident in the States of Rhode Island and Massachusetts. By the treaty of 1875 and the amendment of 1887, we have as full control of the trade of the Hawaiian Islands

as we should have were those Islands made a part of the United States. Our manufactures, from iron bridges to friction matches, are entered without duty, and in return the sugar, rice, coffee and other products of the Islands are admitted free of duty at all our custom houses.

By the treaty of 1887 we acquired Pearl River Harbor, the most valuable harbor of the Islands.

...

The treaty of 1875 contains a stipulation that as long as the treaty shall remain in force the authorities of the Islands will not "dispose of or create any lien upon any port, harbor, or other territory, . . . or grant any special privilege or right of use therein, to any other power, state or government, nor make any treaty by which any other nation shall obtain the same privileges, relative to the admission of any articles free of duty."

These agreements and stipulations are all very well, says the advocate of annexation, but the treaty may be abrogated whenever we decline the treaty of annexation. What are the probabilities? In 1875 when the Islands were free to deal with England or with any other nation, when the United States had no foothold, we dictated the terms of the treaty.

Again in 1887, under the lead of Senator Edmunds, and when there was a heavy adverse public sentiment in the United States, and the treaty was in peril from our action, the Hawaiian authorities conceded the possession of Pearl River Harbor. For what reason have all these concessions been made? For fifty years the fortunes of the Islands have been in our hands, and the day of their freedom from our control is far away.

All the benefits that can come from annexation are now enjoyed by us, and they will continue to be enjoyed by us and by our successors through many generations, while we now are, and they hereafter are to be relieved of all responsibility for the government of the Islands. Moreover, the Islands can rest securely in mid ocean, freed from the anxieties and apprehensions of war, as Belgium and Switzerland are secure, though surrounded by rival and hostile States.

Whence this security for our supremacy in the Islands? It is to be found in two facts. First, in the situation of the Islands with reference to other countries. When we had acquired California and had connected it by railroads with the older States of the Union, the United States became the convenient, indeed the only valuable market for the products of the Islands. Distant as we are from the Islands, we are their only neighbors. Japan is 3400 miles from Honolulu. Hong Kong is 5000 miles away. The countries of Central and South America can only be reached by ocean voyages of three, four, five and six thousand miles.

My second reason is equally conclusive. Those distant countries are of no considerable value as markets for the products of the Islands.

In 1896 the total of exports was $15,515,230, and of this the sum of $55,132 found a market in other countries. In the same year the imports amounted to $7,164,562. Of this sum the imports from the United States amounted to $5,235,729. The exports of sugar to the United States in the year 1896 amounted to $14,932,173.

What would be the consequences of the abrogation of the treaty? What the consequences of the annexation of the Islands by Japan or by England? The loss of the free American market and the imposition of a duty by

the United States of forty per cent or more on the sugar product of the Islands would inevitably follow. What next? The depreciation of the sugar plantations at the rate of twenty-five per cent or more, and the ruin of the owners. And who are the owners? The owners of the plantations are the two thousand and seven hundred voters in a population of 109,000, and those whom they represent. The owners are the meagre minority now in authority and who constitute the government of Hawaii. They cannot consent to annexation by any other country. From 1882 They cannot afford to abrogate the treaty. to 1887, when propositions for the abrogation of the treaty were pending in our Congress, the business of the Islands was interrupted, property was depressed, the sugar planters were threatened with bankruptcy and the representatives of the Hawaiians appeared before the Committees on Foreign Affairs, pleading for the preservation of the treaty.

The pecuniary interests are much larger now than they then were, and by those interests any and every government that may be set up, by whatever name called and by whomsoever managed, will be controlled. The old monarchy had no affection for the United States, but its policy was subordinated to our policy, and such must be the condition of every successor, whether an oligarchy, a monarchy, or a republic.

From these general remarks I turn to the consideration of the circumstances under which we are invited to accept the annexation of the Hawaiian Islands. We are not so far removed in time from the events that occurred in Hawaii in the early months of the year 1893, that we may disregard the political character and moral quality of the proceedings, called a revolution, when we are invited to accept the territory that was then and thus wrested from its ancient proprietors.

There is nothing sacred in a monarchy, indeed there is nothing sacred in any government, whatever its form or name. The right of a government to exist comes from the will of the people freely expressed. This test is fatal to the claim of those who now rule in Hawaii.

There are forty thousand Hawaiians in the Islands and of those thirty-one thousand are of unmixed blood. It is claimed that under the old Régime there were ten thousand voters. They owed allegiance to the old government. There may have been others who were subjects. These as a body have never been consulted. Assume, what I

do assume, that the Queen had no rights except such as may have been derived from the people, and that there was a continuing right in the people to supersede her in authority, and yet the fact remains that that power in the people has never been exercised.

Mr. Secretary Foster, in the treaty which he prepared in the last days of President Harrison's administration, admitted a right as then existing in the Queen and beyond her in the heir apparent to the throne.

By that projet of a treaty the Queen was to be paid the sum of $20,000 annually during her life and the Princess was to receive in hand from the United States the sum of $150,000, provided, however, that those two women, respectively, should, "in good faith, submit to the authority of the government of the United States and the local government of the Islands."

Thus did that projet recognize the personal rights of the Queen and also the right of succession in the dynasty of which she was then the head.