nations, but the contrary. Nations are disposed to resent industrial invasion, Free-Trade Britain not less than Protective Germany.

(2)The Venezuelan dispute, one of the major diplomatic fireworks of the nineties, went off because Venezuela and Great Britain could not agree upon the boundary between the former and British Guiana. Venezuela had for years proposed arbitration; in 1895 Cleveland and his Secretary of State, Richard Olney, insisted Britain arbitrate, since the application of her claims violated the Monroe Doctrine. Salisbury rejected the proposal and denied the American interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. Cleveland proposed to Congress the appointment of a commission to investigate the merits of the disputants and added that after the investigation the United States would resist as aggression any "appropriation" of Venezuela's lands by Great Britain. Britain's freedom of action was limited by the outbreak of violence between British "outlanders" and the Boers in the Transvaal in South Africa. The German Emperor openly congratulated President Paul Kruger of the Boers for maintaining the independence of his country Britain under Salisbury and Chamberlain, Secretary for Colonial Affairs, decided to liquidate the American quarrel and concentrate on South Africa. Consequently, England and Venezuela in February 1897 agreed to arbitration; on the tribunal of reference were two Justices of the American Supreme Court as well as British and neutral representatives. The award came in 1899.

Carnegie's picture of the American reaction to the Boer War is inaccurate. There was a "wild cheer," but it was not out of character. American opinion is predisposed to support under-dog nations, especially when an issue of independence is involved. Irish-Americans and German-Americans there anti-British; and so were the New York world and the New York Times, though not the Hearst papers. Bryan and the Democrats were pro-Boer. Official opinion, on the other hand, accorded with the Carnegie formula. John Hay (183&1905), Secretary of State, wrote: "I hope, if it comes to blows, that England will make quick work of Uncle Paul"; and President McKinley stood off all demands for American intervention. "Uncle Paul" is of course Paul Kruger (1825-1904), president of the Transvaal.

Carnegie's real opinions on the issues were as tangled as the issues themselves. He deplored Cleveland's attitude on the Venezuelan affair. In a private letter, later than this essay, he wrote he was with the Boers heart and soul.

tion of European Powers was behind Germany's action in regard to the Transvaal, which had for its aim the humiliation and ruin of Britain, and was taking advantage of the family quarrel to begin the partition of the possessions of the only other member of our race. When the plucky little island took up the challenge and prepared without a moment's hesitation to meet the world in arms, the American continent, from Maine to California, might be said to have burst forth in one wild cheer - a cheer which meant more than prosaic people will believe, and more, perhaps, than uncontrollable outburst; nor can one tell how far this impulse, which he could not check, would lead him when once in full swing. Senator Wolcott

(3) Edward Oliver Wolcott (1848-1905), Senator from Colorado.

than water our race-blood will be found if it is ever brought to the test.

(4) Victoria and her subjects celebrated the Queen's "diamond jubilee" in 1897. She had reigned sixty years. The allusion to the friendship of Queen is probably to her supposed preference for the North during Civil War, Actually it was the Prince Consort, with his immense influence over the Queen, who slowed down ministerial belligerence against Federal Union.

(5) In the Venezuela crisis Cleveland's special message to Congress on October 17, 1895, proposing to investigate the merits of claims to disputed territory and to support Venezuela's rightful claims, contained both cautious conditional clauses and cryptic utterances foreboding war. The latter made a great impression at the time. Richard Olney (1835-1917), Secretary State, had previously dispatched a communication to the American Minister in London, directing him to find out if Britain would arbitrate the dispute and asserting, "Today the United States is practically sovereign on continent." While the Spectator regarded with pleasurable anticipation possibility that the Monroe Doctrine would make the Anglo-Saxon supreme in Latin America, it objected to the schoolmasterish and pompous tone of these American utterances.

Britons. The Republic has never had a dangerous foe except Britain, for the short campaign against Mexico made no lasting impression upon the nation. It is impossible to do otherwise than state the facts as they occurred; and even if there were added the further facts that some of the greatest and best of British statesmen opposed the attempt to tax the colonies even at that early day, and that now the kindness and consideration with which Britain reigns over her colonies gives an example to the whole world, these things would make no impression upon children. The young American must begin in our day as an intense hater of England; and this we must accept: generations will elapse before it can be greatly modified.

sence of republicanism. This is the chief point which influences the ardent young politician, and gives the old land at last a warm place in the heart of young America. From this time on, the race sentiment grows stronger and stronger in his heart as knowledge increases.

59 Expounding the theme of liberty, Baha'u'llah asserted that "the embodiment of liberty and its symbol is the animal"; that "liberty causeth man to overstep the bounds of propriety, and to infringe on the dignity of his station"; that "true liberty consisteth in man's submission unto My commandments".

60 "We approve of liberty in certain circumstances," He declared, "and refuse to sanction it in others."

61 But He gave the assurance that, "Were men to observe that which We have sent down unto them from the Heaven of Revelation, they would, of a certainty, attain unto perfect liberty."

62 And "Mankind in its entirety must firmly adhere to whatsoever hath been revealed and vouchsafed unto it.

63 Then and only then will it attain unto true liberty." (The Universal House of Justice, Individual Rights and Freedoms

(6) The migratory fur seals generally resorted for breeding purposes to islands over which the American government, after the purchase of Alaska exercised jurisdiction. The American government sought to save the fur seals from extinction by domestic protective legislation. Since seals could still be taken on the high seas, these steps were inadequate. Pursuant to a treaty of 1892, negotiated by Pauncefote (1828-1902), British ambassador in Washington, and Blaine, the Bering Sea claims were referred to an international tribunal. It rejected the American claims to the exercise of a wide oceanic jurisdiction and enforced a payment to Canadian sealers for vessels illegally taken. In 1811 Russia, Japan, Britain, and the United States joined in a treaty protecting the seals in the North Pacific.

tions, through Sir Julian Pauncefote, to Mr. Blaine. The two nations were jointly to police the seas and stop the barbarous destruction of the female seals. Canada appeared at Washington and demanded to see the President of the United States upon the subject. Audience was denied to the presumptuous colony; nevertheless, her action forced Lord Salisbury to disavow the treaty. No confidence here is violated, as President Harrison referred to the subject in a message to Congress. Britain was informed that if she presumed to make treaties in which Canada was interested without her consent, she would not have Canada very long. It will be remembered that Canada took precisely the same position in regard to international copyright. It is this long-desired treaty-making power which Canada has recently acquired for herself, at least as far as concerns fiscal policy, so that she need no longer even consult her suzerain. She can now appear at Washington and insist upon being received when new tariff measures are desired, having suddenly become a "free nation," according to her Prime Minister. There are surprises in store here for the indulgent mother.

of State agreed to a fixed sum with Ambassador Pauncefote, "subject to an appropriation by Congress" - those are the very words of the agreement. When the bill was presented in Congress for an appropriation, the ex-chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations, Mr. Hitt,

(7) Robert R. Hitt (1834-1908).

(8) John Sherman was Secretary of State, 1897-1898.

not to the British Government - Lord Salisbury had already refused a conference on the subject. After that letter Lord Salisbury thought better of it, and agreed to the conference, which is to meet immediately in Washington. How this matter is viewed in America is shown by the following cable from Washington in to-day's (September 20) newspapers:

The officials of the State Department are not disposed to comment upon the correspondence which has been published relating to the fur-seal question between Great Britain and the United States. They say, however, that it shows that the object sought by the Government of the United States for the past three years has been attained by the agreement of Great Britain to participate in a conference to be held in October. They point out that the refusal of the British Government heretofore to consent to such a conference led to the transmission to Mr. Hay, United States ambassador in London, of Mr. Sherman's note of May 10, which was followed by Lord Salisbury's reply agreeing to hold a conference.

(9) Laurier (1841-1919) was the first French Canadian to become Premier.

(10) Blaine, long an advocate of inter-America co-operation, when he became Secretary of State in Harrison's administration pushed hard to establish an Inter-American Union. The first Inter-American conference assembled in Washington in 1889. The conference failed to establish a customs union, as Blaine had hoped it would, and fell short of tangible short-run accomplishments on other matters. Camegie had been appointed as one of ten United States delegates to the conference and was partially instrumental in finding a way through the arbitration thicket which confused the conference debates. The conference failed to adopt arbitration as a principle of "American international law" or to compel recourse to it. It did make conquest in defiance of arbitration inadmissible. Nor did the governments later ratify this feature of the conference's work. However, the conference did succeed in establishing a permanent secretariat at Washington which developed into the Pan-American Union. Andrew Carnegie later gave a building to house the Union's activities.

the torch of war upon the American continent. Mr. Gladstone's administration, through Earl Granville, foreign minister, agree to arbitrate. Lord Salisbury enters upon office, and immediately withdraws from the agreement and refuses to arbitrate. Repeated requests from the United States are made without result. Finally, President Cleveland appears upon the scene. Now, President Cleveland has one great wish namely, to bring about a treaty of arbitration between Great Britain and the United States. It was my privilege to introduce the first Parliamentary committee that approached him upon the subject. The interest he took in it was surprising, and his intimate friends well know that the consummation of the treaty of peace lies nearest his heart of all public questions. He is, beyond all things, a believer in the peaceful arbitration of international disputes.

fought, or will to-day fight, any nation - even Britain -- in defense of the principle of peaceful arbitration upon questions relating to the territorial rights of foreign Powers upon the American continent. Sixteen of the seventeen American republics have agreed to arbitrate their differences, and why should a European Power be permitted to make war on that continent thus dedicated to arbitration? Nations have their red rags. Every one knows that Great Britain would fight in defense of her right of asylum. Every one knows that she would defend her colonies to the extent of her power. There should be no mistake made by the British people upon this point, that the United States will not permit any European nation to attack an American State in consequence of a territorial dispute. These claims are to be settled by peaceful arbitration.

tion. The questions which Britons might ask themselves, when seeking for some explanation of the hatred aroused in the United States recently against their country, seem to be these: Does not a nation deserve to be hated which refuses to fulfill its agreement to arbitrate a territorial dispute with a weak power? Is not irritation justified against a nation which, having agreed to a treaty settling seal fisheries, repudiates it at the dictation of a colony with which the other contracting party has nothing whatever to do?

Venezuelan question. As for the denunciation of the Bering Sea treaty which had been agreed upon with Secretary Blaine, no one conversant with the circumstances holds him responsible. He could not have successfully withstood Canada, and there was nothing for him to do but to repudiate.

away, leaving fortunately unimpaired in the Republic that element which may be trusted to determine international action in a crisis -- pride of race, a force lying too deep in the national heart to be revealed upon calm seas, but which, under the recent swing of the tempest, bared its great head high enough above the surge to be seen and noted of all men - a dangerous rock upon a fatal shore for other races in combination to strike against, if ever they attempt to sail that unsailed sea.