one of these, that offered by General Rivera, adopts in detail many of the checks and counter-checks of our Constitution. General Rivera's plan establishes the three branches of government-executive, legislative, and judicial; the President and members of the lower house are to be elected by public vote, the Senators by provincial assemblies correspond ing somewhat to our State Legislatures, the old political divisions now known as provinces being made into departments; local and municipal home rule is provided for, much as in this country; universal suffrage is established; a special provision of General Rivera's draft, supposed to be aimed at the exclusion of General Gomez from the Presidency, is the rule that only a native of Cuba is to be eligible to the Presidency. The other two drafts before the Convention omit the provision making birth in the island a qualification for the Presidency, but in other respects do not greatly differ from General Rivera's. An unofficial report asserts, however, that the delegates are secretly in favor of a constitutional plan under which the Republic should be unitary as in France, rather than federal as in the United States. It is eminently proper and desirable that the Assembly should take full time for the discussion of the details of the important work now in hand, as did the delegates who formed our own Constitution.

From the Philippines, in In the Philippines addition to a great deal of news about numerous but not important military engagements, comes the more welcome report of Dr. F. W. Atkinson, who was appointed General Superintendent of Education for the Philippines by the present Commission. Dr. Atkinson says that practically no progress was made in education under Spanish rule, that the Filipinos are almost without exception eager to attend school and to learn English, and that he proposes to use the English language as a basis of language instruction. He adds that the Filipinos have a special faculty for the lesser mechanical arts, and excel in writing and drawing. Using these tendencies and tastes as a means to interest them in education, Dr. Atkinson proposes to bring

out many teachers from the United States, while the United States Government will supply text-books, charts, and school material in great quantity. Already several American text-books have been translated into Spanish, and are being used with good effect. Dr. Atkinson says that while energy and money will be required to overcome religious prejudice and political distrust, the introduction of the modern American school will, he believes, tend to the pacification as well as to the improvement of the Filipino race. Another interesting report from the Philippines is that the Commission is about to start an experiment farm some two hundred miles from Manila, where the growth of plants and seeds from the United States will be tested. It is stated by the despatches that this farm will be conducted by Mr. Phelps Whitmarsh, who has been the special commissioner of The Outlook in the Philippines.

The British Parliament

The Queen's speech opening Parliament, shortest on record.

last week, was the It simply recited that, it having become necessary to make further provision for the expenses of the operations of the armies in South Africa and China, Parliament had been summoned in special session in order to sanction the enactments required for this purpose. Parliament

will not enter on the discussion of other public matters requiring its attention until the ordinary meeting next spring. If this speech had been already "discounted," as much could hardly be said for the speeches of the Marquis of Salisbury, Mr. Balfour, and Mr. Chamberlain, all on the subject of South Africa. Lord Salisbury could never allow that a shred of independence should be left to the Transvaal Republic. "How soon the Free Staters and the Transvaalers would have anything like self-governing powers depended on themselves. It might be years and it might be generations." Mr. Balfour attempted to justify British sternness in South Africa by citing alleged American army regulations. The cabled reports are obscure as to the nature of the operations under consideration, but if Mr. Balfour "read an extract from the United States army regulations showing

the severity with which persons alternating as combatants and non-combatants were treated under the American organization," he must have had spurious regulations placed in his hands. Of more importance and significance was Mr. Chamberlain's speech on the following day. By the moderation of his tone, the Colonial Secretary cut the ground from under the feet of the Opposition. The Government, said he, had laid down three objects: (1) To end the guerrilla war; (2) to establish a Crown government and (3) ultimate self-government. Never in history, said he, had a war been waged with so much humanity. The women had been deported only for their protection. The native population was answerable for the acts of outrage upon women and children, and it had been shown that in no case had a British soldier been justly accused. The farm-burning was greatly exaggerated. Lord Roberts had sanctioned the burning of farms only as punishment in cases of complicity in the rebellion, or damage done to the railroads in the neighborhood. Mr. Chamberlain hoped that the civil government would be inaugurated in February. Municipalities would be created in the very near future, notably at Pretoria, Bloemfontein, and Johannesburg, with all municipal privileges. Africanders would be employed as officials as far as possible, and every man, Boer or Briton, would have equal laws and equal liberties.

The Boer War

Lord Kitchener, now commanding in South Africa, telegraphs that General De Wet has failed to force a passage of the Orange River southward and has therefore trekked in the other direction, in his flight abandoning five hundred horses and many carts. The attempt to invade Cape Colony has hence been a failure. The Boer General appears to be in a perilous position, and to need all his strategy to keep his forces from capture. There are strong British columns on three sides, and swollen rivers bar his front. The British begin again to feel hopeful that the great chase, which has certainly been one of the most exciting operations of the war, may result in complete success. The appointment of Lord Roberts as Commander-in-Chief of the British army necessitates his leaving South

Africa, after ten months of as arduous and brilliant campaigning as has been done by any British commander since Wellington's time. Prior to quitting the seat of war, General Roberts issued a farewell order praising the army for its conduct during the campaign. He made special reference to the sufferings and hardships of the troops, which, he said, had been endured uncomplainingly. He added that they had marched enormous distances at incredible speed over precipitous mountains and through dense jungles. Their food and clothing were often scanty, and they were continually shot at by an invisible enemy. They had acted according to the highest standard of patriotism. In conclusion, Lord Roberts said: "I regard you, my gallant comrades, with affection and admiration. You will live in my memory to my life's end." Meanwhile the great Africander Congress at Worcester, Cape Colony, has passed in an orderly manner, owing perhaps to the presence of a garrison of fifteen hundred Canadians and Australians in the town, and ten guns on the hills commanding it.

the

Eight thousand persons attended Congress, which recorded its solemn conviction that the interests of South Africa demand the termination of the war and the retention of republican independence, by which alone peace could be maintained. The policy of burning houses and furniture, carrying away animals, and destroying farms where rebellion was suspected had also made a naturally profound impression on the minds of all present, and much indignation was expressed. We would add that war is always brutal, and doubtless brutal things have been done; but the evidence seems to show that acts of wanton destruction have either been episodical or in violation of the spirit and orders of the English generals in command. English troops are not by instinct either brutal or destructive; they are of the same blood as Ameri can troops, and American troops in China have been conspicuously free from the spirit of looting and wanton destruction. Charges of cruelty against them in the Philippines have, as a rule, been either disproven or shown to be grossly exaggerated in statement. There is reason to believe that this general view of the matter holds true of alleged English cruelties

in South Africa. On this subject Mr. Chamberlain's denials, reported in the preceding paragraph, must be accepted as final in the absence of definite and conclusive evidence to the contrary.

In China, unfortunately, Cruelty in China it is impossible to put this interpretation upon the reports of the destruction of property, the spoliation of large tracts of country, and the brutal treatment of women, children, and old men on the part of Russian, German, and French troops. The Russians appear to have been the greatest offenders, although the Germans have not come far short of them in brutality. In view of the characteristic German qualities, it is difficult to credit these charges, but, unfortunately, it was established by apparently conclusive evidence that the Germans in Central Africa were guilty of the greatest barbarity toward the natives. The so-called punitive expeditions in China, sent out for the express purpose of destroying property and killing the Chinese with a view of impressing them with the heinousness of their crimes, have certainly been inhuman, and they have probably entirely failed of their purpose. Vengeance does not belong to nations any more than to individuals; and if vengeance is to be taken, it ought to be taken on the offenders, not on innocent men, women, and children at a distance from the scene of the offense. It is doubtful whether these expeditions can be defended on any ground; they have certainly been most unchristian, and their ultimate effect must be, not to strike terror into the hearts of the Chinese, but to intensify their misconception of the spirit of the West and their hatred of Western nations. The removal to Paris or Berlin of the astronomical instruments from the ancient observatory of Peking has given, and ought to give, a shock to all the civilized nations. The celestial globe and bronze azimuth there were sent by Louis XIV. to the Chinese Emperor; also in the French monarch's reign that great Jesuit, Father Verbeist, was appointed Chinese Imperial Astronomer; he made designs from which Chinese artists, always wonderful imitators, modeled and cast the great group of dragon-wreathed instruments which for two centuries have been

the principal show-sight of the Peking observatory. A nation which to-day robs another nation of its works of art, as Napoleon robbed Italy, must be condemned, not only as cruel, but as dishonest. To take this kind of advantage of the extremities to which the Chinese have been driven by their own acts is to treat basely a great opportunity, and to plant seeds of hatred which will continue to flourish for many decades. We are glad to note that General Chaffee, commanding the United States Legation guard at Peking, has, in common with some of the representatives of other Powers, protested against looting in general, and in particular against the looting of the Imperial Observatory.

China and the United States

The cautious attitude of our Government in regard to China has been due to farseeing statesmanship. By it Mr. Hay has kept us out of international complications. At the earliest possible moment we shall withdraw our soldiers from China, leaving only a Legation guard at Peking; we have also declined to take any part in the so-called punitive expeditions to Paoting, Kalgan, and elsewhere, which have apparently resulted only in raids upon defenseless populations. This withdrawal and this abstention have called forth from English papers the complaint that the United States aims to secure its full share of the chestnuts without getting into the fire; and that, though in July our Government stood first in the councils of the Powers, in December we stand last, because, it is urged, our policy has been adopted by Russia, and probably by Japan, nations lowest in civilization among the Great Powers. On the Continent criticism of America has been even sharper. The "Journal de Genève," perhaps the best-informed and most judiciallyminded paper in Europe, thus betrays lack both of information and judgment: "One part of the [American] Cabinet favors indulgence pushed to its last limits; the President, however, has a different opinion. . . . This want of mutual understanding produces certain fluctuation, and brings about the loss to America of her influence in the concert [of the Powers]. ers]. As she changes her opinion from hour to hour, . . . her opinion in impor

tant questions will not be sought." Other Continental journals add that the responsibility for future troubles in China rests upon the United States Government, which has shown an unwise leniency and a fluctuating policy. Continental ignorance of American politics thus displayed would be amazing were it not so common. A more noteworthy criticism comes from China itself, in the continued support given by many missionaries to the severe demands first proposed by the British and German Governments. These missionaries protest against a "patched-up peace," saying that no punishment will be effectual which does not include the decapitation of officials of high rank. They regard the question of indemnity as wholly secondary, and the position of foreigners in China as insecure until the allies refuse to accept money except as indemnity for money losses. This missionary protest is not a clamor for vengeance; it is only a call for stern and adequate justice in the terms with China, as being not only best for the Powers, but also best for the future of China itself. The Outlook, however, has confidence that Mr. Hay's wisdom in rejecting the severe conditions agreed to by Mr. Conger, our Minister at Peking, will prove itself to have been of the highest good to China and to the world. It is worse than useless to make demands which cannot be enforced. It is evident to many that the demand for the Empress Dowager's deposition and the organization of a new and just government, which alone would give adequate security to foreigners, is a demand which cannot be enforced without the peril of war on a gigantic scale.

thus be put to the whole system of cheating, and consequent unjust transfer of a burden from those who have no conscience to those who have a conscience. This argument alone, to my mind, would be conclusive in favor of the single tax. Any possible amount of wrong or injury it might incidentally inflict would, to my mind, be little more than dust in the balance compared with the advantage which would result, after the thing fairly adjusted itself, from the complete freedom it would bring about from all temptation to evasion and false swearing. From the moral point of view, consequently, there do not seem to be any two sides to the question; and the moral point of view is, in my judgment, the all-important point of view.

As to the practical effects of the single tax, he says that if the amount of the tax were limited to the necessities of the government economically administered, he, as an individual landowner, would not be troubled by the talk about confiscation, since the removal of all his other taxes would benefit him as much as the double or treble taxation of his land would injure him. Indeed, he believes that the indirect effect of removing all taxes from improvements would be an enormous stimulus to industry, and thus cause in the cities an increase in the general wealth. In the rural districts, however, he believes that the single tax would work immediate disadvantage to the farming population. In the town of Lincoln, for example, where Mr. Adams has a country residence, the adoption of the single tax would cut his taxes in two, while he judges that it would double or treble the taxes of his neighbors who make their living by farming. Per contra, Mr. Thomas G. Shearman, in his "Natural Taxation," has given some figures to sustain his contention that under the single tax, involving as it does a large increase in taxation of town and city land, and also a tax on railroad franchises, farm taxation would be reduced rather than increased.

Mr. Adams believes Try the Experiment that a fair trial of the experiment can most easily and most safely be secured through a system of local option permitting each town to raise its taxes as it sees best. There is no doubt that, in advocating a local option system of this sort, the singletaxers are moving towards their end along the line of the least resistance. Nevertheless, the resistance to this system will

be much stronger than Mr. Adams seems to realize when he goes on to say that he cannot see what reason can be urged against it. Thus far the Massachusetts Legislature has resisted every attempt to put an end to the double taxation of certain forms of personal property, and a local option bill such as described would be resisted with far more vigor as an obvious attempt to get rid of the single taxation of personal property. Counting the taxes collected by the State authority upon the stock of banks, manufacturing corporations, and railroads, nearly twofifths of the taxes in Massachusetts are derived from personal property-though it must be remembered that the single tax regards a railroad as land. A bill permitting any town to attract residents or business from its neighbors by exempting personal property would be regarded as a bill to overthrow the whole system of taxing personal property and would array against itself the "vested interests" of all citizens who own relatively more real estate than personalty, to say nothing of the vested rights of those whose real estate consists almost exclusively of land.

The "Jim Crow" Car Law Upheld

The United States Supreme Court-Justice Harlan alone dissenting has upheld the Kentucky law requiring railroads to provide separate cars for their white and negro passengers. The case before the court was that against the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad, which had refused to obey the State law on the ground that this law attempted to regulate inter-State commerce, and was therefore unconstitutional. The Kentucky courts decided against the company, though it limited the application of the law to passengers traveling from one point within the State to another within the State. The Federal Court sustains the Kentucky court in all points, declaring that the question of regulating inter-State commerce did not arise, since the railroad might fully comply with the law if it carried separate coaches on its trains only within the State of Kentucky. In dissenting from his colleagues, Justice Harlan took the ground that a State law regulating the operation of a railroad engaged in inter-State com

merce was necessarily obnoxious to the Constitutional provision reserving to Congress the exclusive control of such commerce; and he further contended that a State had no more Constitutional right to require citizens of African descent to ride in separate cars than to require those of Irish or Italian descent to do so. This latter portion of Justice Harlan's opinion was doubtless based upon the clause in the Fourteenth Amendment which, after declaring all negroes born within the United States to be citizens, stipulates that

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States. In case the Kentucky law does not require the railroads to provide equal accommodations for both races, it would seem to abridge the privileges of the negroes; but until the full text of the decision reaches us we are unable to pronounce upon this point. The negroes certainly have a right to protest against any law denying them equal facilities on railroads, for it is the legally recognized duty of a common carrier to provide equal facilities for all patrons.

A bill has been reFurther Discriminations ported favorably to Against Negro Schools the Georgia Senate proposing a constitutional amendment to reduce still further the appropriations for negro schools. The scope of the bill is set forth with clearness in a memorial drawn up by Professor Du Bois, the Rev. H. H. Procter, and several other leaders of the negroes of Georgia. At the present time, says this memorial, forty-eight per cent, of the school-children of the State are blacks, yet out of $1,318,000 spent last year for teachers' salaries only $283,000 went to negro teachers, and out of $446,000 worth of school property controlled by county boards only $69,000 worth was used for negro schools. In other words, out of every dollar spent the white children received eighty cents and the colored children but twenty cents. In part, of course, this difference was due to the inability of negroes to keep their children in school as many years as the whites, but in still larger part it was due to the providing of poorer buildings for the