while efforts are being made to befog the popular mind, there is every evidence that he is carrying the state with him. Governor Cummins ought to be in the Senate, but it is his misfortune to live in a state that is already well and ably represented there by men to whom he is loyal. His case brings attention to a thing that in the mind of the writer has always been a defect in our representative system. The Senate should be a body of men made up of those leaders of public opinion best able to represent the political feeling and faith of their constituents. As it is, it can not be so, because the man who is the ablest exponent of a policy to which the public opinion of a state is pledged may live and often does live in a state whose citizens in the main hold other views, while the state with which he is in accord must send to the Senate less capable men because within its own citizenship it can not do better. The Senate should be made up of men who belong, so far as considerations of residence are concerned, to the nation rather than to the state. If it were possible for the people of a state to choose for the Senate men who had distinguished themselves by the advocacy of policies which that state wished

to advance, regardless of their place of residence, as in England, we should have a body of finer and more disinterested statesmen in the upper house. The country at large would then secure the services of such magnificent leaders of men as Governor Cummins among Republicans and William J. Bryan among Democrats. At least it would be possible for the various political ideas of various commonwealths to be adequately and ably represented at Washington. It is not so in the best sense now.

While the whole country is entitled to and ought to have the service which such men as he are able to give it, there is work enough for him to do in his own state for his own state, and that he is doing and will do splendidly. A man of great physical vigor, of commanding presence, of telling speech, he wins his way into the firm confidence of the honest, thoughtful voters of a great commonwealth, and they are supporting him in his work for the common good. It is a great work greatly carried forward, and it is such work by such men that will establish republican government anew on the firm foundation of the political equality of man with man.

LEWIS WORTHINGTON SMITH.
Des Moines, Ia.

taxation and fiscal misrule which oppressed their fellow-subjects farther down the Nile. It is to their credit that they, too, began to chafe under this tyranny and that signs of irritation began to show themselves. Stirred up by the wretched economic plight of his neighbors, one Mohammed Ahmed of Dongola, son of a Nubian carpenter and boat-builder, began to preach to them very much in the style of the ancient Hebrew prophets. The people were downtrodden, he told them, because of their sins. They must repent and reform and return to the commandments of Allah. He announced himself to be the Mahdi, a prophet long expected in the Moslem world, who was to be the forerunner of Jesus or Issa, upon his return to the earth to judge the quick and the dead. The minaret is indeed pointed out at the great Mosque of Damascus where Issa is to alight. In token of his relationship to Issa, Mohammed Ahmed, who was thenceforth known as the Mahdi, bore a cross upon his banner, and it was indeed a sort of crusade that he preached. It is to be noted that his activity began at his home on the island of Abba, far above Khartoum on the Nile and altogether beyond reach of any connection with the independent movement in the Delta under Arabi. It is strange, and inconsistent with his usual breadth of vision, to find Lord Cromer in his last Blue-Book speaking of the Mahdi as a religious impostor." Nothing can be more certain than that he was perfectly sincere and possessed of many fine qualities. He was an ascetic with that one exception so common in Moslem countries which relates to the number of a man's wives. He denounced luxury and limited the amount of money which might be spent at a wedding. He forbade the wearing of jewelry, and for years the women of the Soudan, who love nothing so much as bracelets and anklets, obeyed his command. His sermons and proclamations give the true ring of the religious enthusiast who is full of his message. At first only a few followers gathered round

him, and together they refused to pay their taxes. A company of soldiers was sent to collect the tax and punish the mutiny, and they were defeated. This success gave color to the claim of Mahdiship and brought many recruits to the standard of Mohammed Ahmed, and before long he was the leader of a great armed insurrection, and the troops of the Khedive were completely overawed. Expeditions were sent against him in 1883 under the English general Hicks and in 1884 under General Baker, and both of these Egyptian armies were annihilated. The Mahdi now found himself the real ruler of the Soudan with an enthusiastic and victorious army under him, possessed by all the religious fervor of the first followers of the great Mohammed. Khartoum and a few other posts remained in the hands of the representatives of the Egyptian Government, but that was all.

At this juncture another interesting character comes upon the scene, a British general, but one who resembled the Mahdi in character far more than he did his fellow-officers. The English Government, now in control of Egypt, began to fear for the safety of the garrison at Khartoum and for the continuance of Egyptian control in the Soudan, and they determined to interfere. General Gordon was not far from London at the time and it was known that during his years of service as Governor of the Equatorial Provinces in the Soudan under the Khedive, he had become popular among the natives and understood them better than any other Englishman. Lord Wolseley telegraphed to him to come to London. He arrived in the morning and in the evening he left for Khartoum. It is said that Lord Wolseley had some difficulty in the haste of the moment and after banking hours to collect the money necessary for Gordon's traveling expenses, but that finally at the station he handed him two hundred pounds. Gordon, when he arrived at Ismailieh met an old servant of his in the street, halt and blind, and in response to

his appeal for a small backsheesh, gave him one hundred pounds, and he had to borrow in order to finish his journey. This anecdote is characteristic of the man. Years earlier he had received a gold medal from the Chinese Emperor in recognition of his distinguished military services in that country, but, on his return to London, wishing to contribute to some philanthropic cause and having no money to spare, he obliterated the inscription and gave the gold piece away. His opinions, expressed in his letters and diary during his tenure of office as provincial governor under Ismail are original and extraordinary. “It is not the climate, it is not the natives," he writes, "but it is the soldiery which is my horror": and again, "These are their (the white man's) maxims, if the natives do n't act after the most civilized manner, then punish them for not so acting, but if it comes to be a question of our acting, then follow the customs of the natives." A sheikh, engaged to guide an attacking party, leads them astray, and they clamor for his punishment. "If he did mislead them," says Gordon, "he was a brave patriotic man, and I shall let him go." "Some philanthropic people write to me about 'noble work,' 'poor blacks,' etc." he says; "I have, I think, stopped their writing by acknowledging ourselves to be a pillaging horde of brigands. 'We do not want your beads, we do not want your cloth,' of the poor Moogies rings in my ears." In the seventies he writes, "We derided these poor blacks who fought for their independence, and now God gave them the victory. I declare I

truly sympathize with them. They say, 'We do not want your cloth and beads; you go your way and we will go ours. We do not want to see your chief.' This they have said over and over again. They have said "This land is ours, and you shall not have it, neither its bread nor its flocks.' Poor fellows! You will say I am inconsistent, and so I am and so are you. We are dead against our words when it comes to action." And still again he writes: "People have little idea how little glorious

war is. It is organized murder, pillage and cruelty, and it is seldom that the weight falls on the fighting men; it is the women, children and old people." And finally in 1883 he says, " Anything is better than the wretched want of sympathy between us and the Egyptians, which is now increasing into deadly hate. We must have a Nemesis unless we show more sympathy."

And in 1884 General Gordon was as "dead against " his words, as he had been years earlier, and he set out confidently to stem the rising of the Soudanese, eager to possess their own country, a task similar to that which he had accomplished in the sixties in China. But when he reached Khartoum he found the situation much more serious than he had expected. His own popularity with the natives was a rush-light in comparison with the religious ardor which the Mahdi had aroused. The latter sent an embassy to Gordon with an eloquent message calling upon him to join him in spreading the true faith. Gordon treated the messengers with contempt and trod on their message, thinking that thus he could best impress their master, but they were not to be overawed, and soon the host of the Soudanese had invested the city and the long, dreary, fatal siege had begun. The story of Gordon's last year has often been told and it is not necessary to repeat it. For months from the roof of his palace, he saw the investing forces of the Mahdi closing in and his own garrison dwindling, as he scanned the horizon to the north, where the Nile disappeared on its journey to the sea, in the vain hope that relief would come. And relief, after much unnecessary delay, was on its way. On Wednesday, January 28, 1885, the first boat arrived within sight of Khartoum, but the flag of the Mahdi was flying from the palace. They were two days too late. two days too late. Before dawn on the Monday Khartoum had fallen and Gordon had been cut down. Slatin Pasha, an Austrian prisoner in the Mahdi's camp, had listened anxiously to the firing during the night of the assault,

hoping for the defeat of his captors. In In the morning two Arabs came to his hut with something wrapped in a cloth, and exhibited it to him. It was the head of Gordon, and his brown hair had turned completely white during the anxieties of the siege.

The Mahdi did not live long to enjoy his triumph. The story is that he gave himself up to sexual indulgence and died in a month or two as a result. It is possible that this is true, although it seems strangly inconsistent with the rest of his career. His death was a misfortune for the Soudan, for his successor, the Khalifa, Abdullahi, was a very different kind of a man, tyrannical and cruel, although it must be remembered that all the information we have of him comes from his enemies. For a dozen years he was the absolute ruler of the Soudan as far north as the frontier-post which Great Britain maintained in the name of Egypt at Wadi Halfa. From time to time he made advances towards this post, in the mad scheme of conquering the world for Islam, and he actually sent a message to Queen Victoria threatening the destruction of her capital if she did not acknowledge him as the representative of Allah on earth.

Meanwhile the Sirdar of the Egyptian Army, General Kitchener, was preparing to reconquer the Soudan. An officer of the engineers, he belonged to the school of Moltke and made of his army a machine which could coöperate with his new railway with mechanical precision. His presence in Egypt was, as I heard the story, an accident. He had been assigned as a lieutenant of engineers to assist in making excavations in Palestine and had there learned to speak Arabic. Thence he had been transferred to Cyprus to construct roads. Returning from furlough to Cyprus via Egypt in 1882, when the Events were immanent, he expressed his regret to an English friend whom we shall call X., that he could not stay and take part in the inevitable campaign. "I have written for an extension of leave," he said: "but I am expecting a letter order

66

ing me back every day. ing me back every day." A few days later X. was at the club when some one said "Here is an official letter for Kitchener." "I'll take it for him," said X., seeing the opportunity for rendering him a service, and he put it in his pocket and there it remained. It was discovered afterwards that it was an order to proceed at once to Cyprus, but Kitchner did not receive it. Meanwhile Sir Garnet Wolseley arrived and saw the need of having an officer on his staff who could speak Arabic. Kitchener alone met the requirement, and he was duly appointed. When the Egyptian army was reörganized with English officers, he naturally remained, and his ability and energy made his promotion certain. One of his officers told me long before he was famous, that Lieutenant-Colonel Kitchener, as he was at the time, did not know what it was to be afraid or to be tired. He could work twenty-four hours a day, and expected the officers under him to do the same, and for this reason he was far from popular among them, but, when he made up his mind to move up the Nile, the result was a foregone conclusion. I do not understand how military men can get up much enthusiasm over victories won with all the latest modern weapons against semi-civilized peoples armed with lances and muzzle-loaders. Kitchener's victories at the Atbara and Omdurman were of this character. They were mere massacres of dusky warriors who showed a reckless bravery unknown among men of European blood. Omdurman, the new capital of the Khalifa opposite Khartoum was destroyed, the venerated tomb of the Mahdi was despoiled by order of the general in command and his body dissevered. The Khalifa was pursued into the desert and slain, and the Soudan came back to its allegiance to the Khedive. The Khalifa may have been guilty of barbarism, but who shall acquit his victor of the same charge? And we have the testimony of Mr. Winston Churchill, who took part in the campaign, that there are some things to be said in favor of the Khalifa. 'Never were rescuers more un

66

welcome," he writes in the Morning Post (see the Academy, November 5, 1898). "The thousands who advanced to the Zareba or stood unflinching against the cavalry charge were not pressed men. They fought for a cause to which they were devoted, and for a ruler in whose reign they acquiesced. The Khalifa's house exhibited several signs of cleanliness and refinement, and the loyalty of his people unquestionably displayed-gives him some claim to be considered a fair ruler according to his light and theirs." And I may refer to Mr. Churchill's book on the River War passim, for many examples of his ability to see things judicially and from a standpoint above that of a partisan. I regret that I have no space in which to quote his horrible pictures of the campaign and his outspoken condemnation of the outrage committed upon the Mahdi's

exists no record of a better case for rebellion, than that which presented itself to the Soudanese. Their country had been ruined; their women ravished; their liberties were curtailed; even their lives were threatened. Aliens ruled the inhabitants; the few oppressed the many; brave men were harried by cowards; the weak compelled the strong." (Vol. I., p. 22.) It is no wonder that Mr. Gladstone said that the Soudanese were "struggling and rightly struggling to be free." (To be continued.)

Rhinebeck, N. Y.

ERNEST CROSBY.

23-470

Q.

WHAT is the Recall? A. The Recall, formerly also known as the Imperative Mandate, is a simple piece of governmental machinery by which, whenever any of the constituents of a public officer do not like his actions, they can, by signing and filing a petition for his recall, suspend him from office. If he is an elective officer, a new election is held for the balance of his term, and at this election the old officer is a candidate for reëlection unless he ex

pressly declines, and others are nominated in the regular way. If he is an appointive officer, the appointing power must appoint some other man. The percentage for the petitions is 50 per cent. in the case of appointive officers and sometimes 50 in the case of elective officers, though in