never be abolished, but a pretence of ease and insouciance and a parade of divers accomplishments may easily be discredited. The splendid impassiveness of the great gentleman has succumbed to modern worry and haste, and, for the most part, we frankly conThe Spectator.

fess that dignity is a nuisance and an anachronism. But the other side of the thing-the taste for a liberal culture-shows signs of revival, and we may see a return to the grand manner, brought up to date and purged of its silliness.

The writers of bulletins from America, who report the recent speech about the Monroe doctrine, all adopt an apologetic tone. The Minister of War, they say, declared that the United States would one day have either to give up the Monroe doctrine or to fight for it, and they excuse his utterance on the ground of his inexperience in diplomatic forms. We see little reason for the excuses. Mr. Root had doubtless been discussing the question with his colleagues, and he simply uttered aloud what every one knows to be true, that in maintaining the Monroe doctrine the Government of Washington accepts a position which must, some day or other, bring her into collision with some Power or coalition upon the European Continent. It will not, in all probability, bring her into collision with Great Britain, because our interests lie in Asia and Africa, and we seek nothing in North or South America which we do not possess, but that is not wholly true of other European Powers. More than one of them have large interests in South America. Italy, for instance, has hundreds of thousands of subjects in Argentina, and Germany has a large population in Brazil, and either of them might be compelled to seek redress, by force of arms, for unpardonable injuries done or threatened to those emigrants. In that case the United States must fight or give up

the Monroe doctrine, for the essence of that doctrine is that North and South America form, in some way, a confederation, that they stand apart in the world, and that no outside Power, especially no European Power, shall effect a lodgment upon either of those two continents. If they do, the Union will drive them off by force. This doctrine is not a mere proposition for diplomatists to discuss, but has once, at least, been acted on in a great way. It is well known that Napoleon III quitted Mexico under a distinct threat that if he did not the United States would support the insurgent Mexicans against Maximilian and his French allies, rumor adding that General Grant was bitterly disappointed that the threat was so successful. He believed in his own genius and in American arms, and he would have dearly liked to try conclusions with a first-class European army. He could not, he thought, have been defeated, and victory would have given him a historic reputation not to be obtained from any civil war. The American Minister of War, therefore, was only stating an historic fact, and probably was amazed that any one should take umbrage at his utterance.

The chance that America might have to fight for her favorite axiom in diplomacy has, moreover, of late years been greatly increased by two new circumstances. One is the immensely in

creased desire of the European States for transmarine possessions. They all think them invaluable as markets and sources of influence, and one of them at least-namely, Germany-longs for some broad territory to which she may send the overspill of her population, now rapidly growing too large to be maintained in comfort within her European dominion. The only great territories now left in the world which are fit for European settlement, yet are sparsely populated, lie in South America, and it is impossible, as the pressure increases, that covetous eyes should not be cast in that direction. Brazil, in particular, would hold 50,000,000 of people, and, therefore, be an immense prize for Germany, which has already a very large body of colonists on the Rio Grande do Sul. It is certain that Brazil could not defend itself, and, therefore, that if the Monroe doctrine is not to be allowed to lapse, the United States must defend her. That would be so easy now that the attempt will not be made, but when, under her new Navy Bill, Germany has doubled her fleet, it is by no means certain that ambitious thoughts will not be awakened, or that the Emperor may not endeavor to prove to his subjects that in asking such sacrifices at their hands he had a very great purpose indeed in view. He may be so strong at sea that the defence of Brazil would be impossible, or too risky, and, as America is disliked by the whole Continent, he would run, if England were occupied or in one of her quiescent moods, but little risk of other interference. American Minister of War had, therefore, sound reason for his speculation, even if it were uttered mainly from his desire to carry through Congress his Bill for considerably enlarging the standing Army.

The

The second and hitherto little noticed reason for regarding a struggle over the Monroe doctrine as within the range

of practical politics, is that the American position has become increasingly illogical. It never was logically defensible, for the right to protect any Power when threatened involves a certain responsibility for the acts of that Power, and Washington persistently refuses to acknowledge that responsibility. Supposing Brazil, for example, to suspect its German settlers of treason, and to order their massacre or expulsion-of course, an absurdly improbable event, but one which will illustrate the situation-America would not punish Brazil, but she would defend her against punishment by Germany. Brazil is, therefore, at liberty to do what she pleases without considering consequences-a liberty which is unjust, and one which, if it ever became a fact instead of a speculation, would profoundly irritate the diplomatists of the older world. There was, however, till recently, one corollary of the American attitude which rendered it easier to bear. If she cried, "Hands off!" in America, she agreed that events outside the two Americas were none of her business. If she defied the world to interfere with her protegés, she threatened no one with interference on her own part-a fact which, as she grew strong, was a decided relief to European statesmen. They considered America, in the broadest sense of the word, a sort of separate planet. This corollary, however, has recently been abandoned. In compelling Spain to surrender Cuba and the Philippines, which latter are Asiatic islands, the Union has interfered in Europe, has, indeed, upon one or two points-for example, the reversion of Morocco-seriously interfered with European combinations. In her recent action, also, as regards China, the Union has asserted herself-to use the new terminology-as a "world-power," and has given up even the pretence of being exclusively American. Moreover, her com

merce has become so extensive, and her market so important, that her action with respect to tariffs affects the prosperity of all peoples, and sometimes, in the new hunger for the profits of business, causes the profoundest irritation. All these causes render the Monroe doctrine so increasingly illogical that the older diplomacy will not consent to recognize it, and will, undoubtedly, when the emergency arises, deny that it can be an excuse for compelling any European Power to surrender its purposes. Mr. Root, therefore, in his vigorous and unconventional speech, was not only not stepping out of his way to threaten any

The Economist.

body, but was performing a plain duty to his countrymen by warning them that if they wished the Monroe doctrine to stand firm, they must provide their Government with the means of fighting in its defence. We do the same thing every day as regards the sovereignty of the seas. Mr. Goschen, when asking for more ships, has said things much stronger than any Mr. Root ventured to say, and so has Count von Bülow, when pleading for his master's Navy Bill. The apologies of the bulletin makers are not only officious; they are absolutely at variance with the precedents of Europe.

Nora Hopper.

"Pa," said Mart, after a silence, "may I say something?"

The farmer shifted his position. "Why, yes; anythin' y'like, daughter."

"I've been thinking so much about Charlie," she said. "I often wonder whether-pa, don't you think you'd be glad if he came back?"

To her relief, Mr. Bradbury did not shrink from the topic, nor did his tone grow harsh.

"Y' 've got a right t' ask 'bout those things, Mart," he said; "an' sometimes I've hed it in mind thet I'd ought t talk with ye 'bout 'em more."

"I have wanted to talk with you, father," responded the girl, softly; "only I didn't want to distress you too much. Wouldn't you like Charlie back?"

"Mart," said her father, after a moment's grave pause, "O' course y' know what was in my mind when I left th' church?"

Mart nodded.

"It's been a matter o' thankfulness with me," he went on, "thet what I felt I hed t' do then didn't affect any other body's b'liefs. I didn't want it should. I wouldn't 've disturbed your views, or y'r mother's or Emmie's f'r worlds. What I did, I hed t' do; but thet only concerned me."

• Deacon Bradbury. By Edwin Asa Dix. Copyright, 1900, by The Century Co. Price, $1.50.

"I understand," she breathed, lovingly.

"I did thet because I'd lost faith; an' I lost it, fust of all, in-in y'r brotherin Charlie. I can't go into thet. Y' didn't know much about it at th' time, an' mebbe it's better y' shouldn't now. I wouldn't hev y' lose faith in him, no more'n in other things, jest b'cause I hed to."

"But, father, is it truly lost?"

"Yes," said Mr. Bradbury, solemnly. "It 'ud make th' world diff'rent t' me ef 't wa'n't. Night after night I go over it. There ain't twenty-four hours passes there ain't an hour, mebbe, 'cept when I'm asleep-thet I don't find myself goin' over 'n over thet matter 'bout Charlie, an' tryin' t' make out ef I've been mistaken."

"And doesn't it ever seem so?" she questioned, breathlessly.

"Never once. I can't see it any diff'rent, no matter how I try. It can't be any diff'rent. I can't pictur' any one actin' as he did 'thout their bein' guilty o' doin' wrong." The farmer disengaged his arm, and, rising, began to pace the floor, leaving her poised on the arm of his chair. "Mebbe I'm strange 'bout thet," he went on; "mebbe I'd ought t' see it some other way, an' thet most folks would. Y'r mother sees it diff'rent. I ain't gainsayin' it. Lord knows, I only wish I could see it diff'rent. "Tain't f'r want o' thinkin' an' wishin'."

At two o'clock that afternoon the water committee, as summoned by Mr. Bradbury, met at Mr. Clark's office.

"We've come together this afternoon," began Mr. Clark, who was unofficial chairman of the committee, "because Mr. Bradbury informed us that Mr. Lee, of the firm of Lee and Lawrence, was in town in person, and was ready to present their analyst's report on the water question. By the way, Mr. Reed, I must make you acquainted with Mr. Lee."

The lawyer read the report. It gave a technical analysis, in full, of the new artesian water, and showed that the proportion of certain detrimental mineral constituents rendered it unavailable for drinking purposes.

There was a pause as Mr. Clark finished reading.

"Oh, come now," said Mr. Kemble, who, as a member of the firm, was much disappointed, "thet's pretty hard, ain't it? After all th' expense we've been put to!"

"Well, that was fully understood to be the firm's own affair, you know," Mr. Pickering said. "You took that risk."

Mr. Reed was on his feet.. His face was frowning, and he was evidently in no pleasant mood.

"The analysis is preposterous," he said, with ire.

Mr. Lee, astounded at the attack, turned to him with equal ire.

"What's that?" he demanded.

"I say it's preposterous. The water's as clear and pure as crystal. Chemists are daft, nowadays, about finding

things that don't exist-in food and water, and I don't know what all."

The firm had suffered severely once or twice from the adulteration laws. "See here, my friend," said Mr. Lee, with sharp indignation, "you can't bring a charge such as you've just made against my firm without substantiating it. If you're wise, you'll withdraw it immediately."

"I don't see," observed old Mr. Hayes, mildly, "how Mr. Reed c'n know about it exac❜ly."

The latter turned on him.

"I used to be a druggist myself over in Hingham," he said, "as I guess you know. And I've investigated this water a little myself. I was perfectly satisfied with it."

"Well, gentlemen," remarked Mr. Lee, ironically, "then you can choose between two reports."

"I only say," added Mr. Reed, more mildly, resuming his seat, "that your expert's been too anxious to discover something-that's all."

Mr. Lee sniffed in scornful amusement.

"Bradbury's one of our cleverest analysts," he said. "One of our most accurate, too. He-"

"Who?" demanded a voice at his

side.

"Bradbury," returned Mr. Lee, answering his host, who had spoken. "Same name as yours, by the way. Young, but has shown extraordinary talent in our business."

The farmer heard only the repeated

name.

"Bradbury, y' say?" he echoed, strangely startled. "Yes. Why?"

"What's his fust name?"

"I really don't know. Oh, yes, I do. It's Charles."

"Charles Bradbury," uttered Mr. Pickering, astonished.

Mr. Lee looked around, naturally astonished in turn.