revolt and agitation, and the troops were restraining demonstrations and rioting only by merciless repression when upon Wednesday of last week the Kniaz Potemkin sailed into the harbor, flying the red flag. The crew landed a body of sailors with machine guns; placed upon the dock the corpse of one of their number who, they alleged, had been shot by the captain because he had remonstrated against the quality of the food; and demanded that this sailor, Omiltchuk, should have the honors of a military funeral under the penalty of a bombardment of the place. There were no naval ships in the harbor, and the authorities were unable to deal with the situation. The revolutionists on shore joined with the mutineers, and the programme of an imposing public funeral was actually carried out, including a procession in which many thousands of the populace joined. During the night between the arrival of the battle-ship and the funeral very serious rioting took place, and probably hundreds of the mob were killed by the soldiers, while, in revenge, many buildings and ships lying at anchor in the harbor were burned. After the funeral a few harmless shots were fired from the Kniaz Potemkin, in consequence, it is said, of an attempt by the authorities to seize some of the mutineers who were on shore. War-ships were at once hurried to Odessa under the command of Admiral Krüger. It was at first reported that the Kniaz Potemkin had surrendered, but later reports state that a second ship, the Georgi Pobiedonostseff, had joined in the mutiny, both vessels signaling, in response to orders from Admiral Krüger to proceed to Sevastopol, "We remain here." In a council of war summoned by Admiral Krüger at Sevastopol it is reported that it was decided to dismantle the entire fleet. This would indicate a fear of widespread revolt. The true cause of the mutiny is believed to be, not dissatisfaction with food and the shooting of the sailor Omiltchuk, but the plots of a secret revolutionary organization. The official version sent from St. Petersburg asserts that when the captain received the complaints of the sailors

he mustered the crew and asked those who were satisfied to step out. A majority did so, but the minority, headed by the revolutionists, including, it is asserted, some foreign Anarchists, seized the guns, turned them on the officers and their supporters among the crew, and, after a bloody fight in which nine officers and many men were killed or jumped overboard, gained possession of the battle-ship and placed the surviving officers in irons. This official account by no means bears out the statement of the officials, "This is not a revolution. It is mere drunken anarchy." Anarchy it was, but it must have been planned in advance and founded in hatred and desire for revolution in the full sense. By Saturday something like quiet seemed restored in Odessa, but the situation was still critical, and bloodshed, pillage, and plunder had not ceased. How serious the whole affair was is shown by the Czar's manifesto: "In order to guarantee public safety and to terminate the disorders at Odessa and neighboring localities, we have found it necessary to declare a state of war in Odessa and district, and to invest the command of the troops in the military district of Odessa with the rights of military authority and special rights of civil administration for the defense of order and public tranquillity."

The Revolts at Cronstadt

and Libau

The significance of this extraordinary event at Odessa is more than doubled by the fact that almost similar scenes were enacted at the same time elsewhere. In old days, when revolutionists organized against a government, they gathered together an army and took the field; modern military conditions in a great country like Russia make this impossible, and the Russian Government has affected to scorn threats of force. But the new programme of revolutionists is different; public demonstrations, industrial revolts, rioting here and there and everywhere, appear first in one city, then in another; and as fast as they are put down by slaughter, others break out in unexpected quarters. At St. Petersburg, Lodz, Riga, Warsaw,

Reyal, Odessa, Cronstadt,

Libau, and many other places, these outbreaks have been dealt with by frightful severity, yet they do not cease. The Government cannot survive if these revolts continue and increase in violence. The revolutionists believe that the result must inevitably be some concession of popular government. The Government is at the same time pushed toward this end by the plain-spoken demands of the zemstvoists and those constitutionalists who are opposed to violence. The disturb ances at Cronstadt and Libau are merely the latest of a series of revolutionary outbreaks, but, like that at Odessa, they are peculiarly dangerous because they involve the naval branch of Russia's armed force. At the first-named port eight thousand imperial sailors, together with many workmen from the yards and docks, suddenly refused to work; and although the mutiny was quickly quelled as regards the sailors, the workmen are still holding out as we write. One officer at least was killed, and although the Government is allowing only meager details of what happened to become known, it is believed that severe measures of repression were employed. At Libau five thousand sailors made terms only after fierce fighting. Here, too, a pretense that the food was bad was made the occasion of a revolt. The military guards tried to seize the insurgents, and killed and wounded several, but the insurgents captured the guardhouse, broke open stores, and seized arms and ammunition. Troops in large numbers were at once sent to Libau. They drove the sailors into a wood where they were surrounded, and, after a continuous fusillade by the troops, the results of which are not told in the despatches, the sailors surrendered and order was, for the moment at least, restored. . It is not unreasonable to believe that these internal revolts may lead the Czar to a spirit of willingness to end the war on fair terms. The announcement is made by President Roosevelt that the plenipotentiaries appointed to conduct peace negotiations at Washington are, for Russia, Ambassador Muraviev and A nbassador Rosen, and, for Japan, Baron Komura and Minister Takahira. They will, it is stated, be intrusted with full power to negotiate and conclude a treaty of peace.

The Mazzini

Centenary

All Italy celebrated the cen

tenary of Mazzini's birth the other day. Like the recent Schiller celebrations, those in honor of Giuseppe Mazzini emphasized his many-sided work. Schiller was great not only in literature; Mazzini not only in pol itics. The latter was born in the year when Schiller died, and the two characters and careers have much in common. Each was singularly free from personal reproach, and the work of each has uplifted in peculiar degree society, patriotism, literature. From the time when, eighteen years old, Mazzini wrote his first essay to the time when, just before his death, he finished his last, he strenuously held, throughout a long list of publications, that a free literature is an essential part of a free country. To this end literature must be liberated from classic and academic shackles. Mazzini's literary influence was felt especially in England, and there notably by Carlyle, Clough, and Jowett. But the Italian's vigor and elevation, whether of style or sentiment, was a reflex of his lofty character. Not one word in the thousands of familiar letters written by the great patriot need be expunged in their forthcoming publication, as Signor Ernesto Nathan, their editor, informs us. Mazzini's life was so pure that an electric light might be turned on its every corner. Such a man's power was, of course, seen not merely on literary workers, but on society in general. He showed that his ideal government was absolutely distinct from Socialism on the one hand or atheism on the other. Mazzini was born, educated, and practiced law in Genoa, but when he joined the Carbonari he was expelled from Italy. In France he founded a nobler society for his countrymen, and called it" Young Italy." Its watchwords were "Liberty, Equality, Humanity;" its aim was to make Italy a republic. The Revolution of 1848 gave Mazzini an opportunity to return home. He became a member of the Provisional Government at Florence, and, when Rome was proclaimed a republic, was appropriately elected Triumvir. On the capture of Rome by the French, however, Mazzini had again to flee. In his second exile, as in his first,

he seemed to do as much to incite his countrymen toward liberty as if he had been at home. He assisted in organizing Garibaldi's various expeditions. Though repeatedly elected to Parliament after his final return to Italy, the inflexible republican refused to take his seat under a monarchical government. His death (1872) was a national loss, and a national funeral gave expression to the universal sentiment. During the years which have since passed his figure looms larger and larger, and this is right, for if Garibaldi has been called the knighterrant of Italian unification, and Cavour its actual welder, Mazzini was, beyond any one, its prophet.

The British

With the certainty that the Aliens Bill general election will not come before the end of the present session and the extreme probability that it will not come until late in 1905, most of the Government measures now before Parliament are likely to pass. Among these is the Aliens Bill, which will make a radical change in the policy of England toward immigration from Continental Europe. From time out of mind England has been an open country; and it would not be the great and powerful England of to-day had any other policy been long continued. Jews, from the reign of Edward I. until the Cromwellian Protectorate, were excluded; but, except for this, refugees from Continental Europe have always found a welcome in England. It was so with the Flemings and with the Huguenots; and to their immigration in the sixteenth century England owes her long pre-eminence in the textile industries, especially her unassailable superiority in the woolen. trade. An immigrant arriving on English shores to-day is subject to no physical examination and is asked no questions. He steps ashore with as much confidence as an Englishman returning to his native land. Until a few years ago no other policy was ever mooted for England; but in recent years aliens, mostly Jews, have been arriving in continuously increasing numbers. In 1902 the total was 71,500. Last year it suddenly jumped up to 83,000. Jewish

immigrants in England, as in this country, do not settle in rural communities. They crowd into the cities-chiefly into the East End of London and into the Jewish quarters of Manchester, Leeds, and Birmingham. Congestion and pressure for tenements have been the result. Their incoming, too, has been adversely felt in some departments of the labor market, and the outcome is the bill which the Balfour Government is now pressing through Parliament. Generally speaking, it is patterned on the American immigrant code. Under it all newcomers will be compelled to prove that they are selfsustaining; that they are not likely to become public charges by reason of lunacy, idiocy, or any other mental or physical infirmity; and that they have not been convicted of crime in the

country from which they come. If they fail to pass this examination, they are to be deported under much the same conditions that govern the deportation of undesirables who seek to land in the United States. There is much popular support for the bill, especially in London; and while the Liberals are opposed to this departure from the open-door policy of many centuries' standing, they are not a unit in opposing the bill. Most of the London Liberal and Radical members, including such well-known Radicals as Mr. Sydney Buxton and Mr. Randall Cremer, are supporting the bill; and it is as certain as anything can be of the British Parliament that the bill will become law this session.

The New Speaker at Westminster

After the Whitsuntide recess, when the House of Commons resumed its sittings at the end of the last vacation of the session, Mr. James William Lowther became Speaker, and Mr. Gully, his predecessor, went up to the House of Lords as a Viscount, with a life pension of £4,000 a year. A peerage and a pension have been bestowed on all Speakers since Abbot, who was in the Chair from 1802 to 1817, retired, and his place was taken by Manners Sutton. Sutton was Speaker from 1817 to 1835. He was in the Chair when the great Reform Bill went through its stages in

the House of Commons; and he has other distinctions. He was the last partisan occupant of the Chair; he was the last Speaker who continued an active association with his party while he was Speaker; and, moreover, until Mr. Lowther succeeded Mr. Gully, Manners Sutton was the last Speaker to be elected by a Tory majority. All other Speakers from 1835 to 1894, when Mr. Gully succeeded the present Viscount Peel, happened to be chosen while the Liberals were in a majority. In several instances Tory Governments came into power within a comparatively short time after these Liberals had been elected to the Chair; but in no instance-not even after a general election—was a Speaker dislodged because he was not of the party which came into possession of the Treasury Bench. In the early days of the House of Commons, the Speaker was a courtier who was practically nominated by the Crown. This connection between the Crown and the Speakership came to an end in the reign of Charles II. From then until 1835 the Speaker was more or less of a party man; but since 1835-from the time of Abercrombie, who was the first and only Scotchman to become Speaker-the Speakership has been an absolutely non-partisan office. During these seventy years it has become so entirely apart from partisan politics that nowadays a Speaker never enters a political club, never addresses his constituents on controversial political questions, and is seldom opposed when at the end of a Parliament he goes to his constituency for re-election as a member of the House of Commons. Mr. James William Lowther was Deputy Speaker for many years before he succeeded Mr. Gully, and he was also Chairman when the House was in Committee; but he took the same view of his position in the House that the Speaker did, and from the first cut himself entirely free from all party connections and all party activities. Thus, so far as the traditions of the House go, Mr. Lowther is an excellent successor to Mr. Gully; and, come what may of the Tory Government at the general election, Mr. Lowther's tenure of the Speakership is assured for as long a term as his health will permit

of the strain resulting from the close and exacting duties of the office. Mr. Lowther is of a family which a century ago exercised great influence in the House of Commons. He is a descendant of the Earl of Lonsdale, who in the reign of George III. was, by reason of his territorial position and his enormous wealth, able to nominate nine or eleven members of the House of Commons, and who was rewarded with an earldom solely for the services he had rendered to successive Tory Governments as a political boss. Before 1832 the Lowther family had produced two political bosses; but this is the first time that any member of it has achieved real distinction-distinction due to his own merits—in the House of Commons.

News from Rome this Temporal Power summer seems increas

The Pope's

ingly startling. One week it is announced that Pius X. wants to break the self-imposed bonds of previous Popes as to the Prisoner of the Vatican," and take a needed summer vacation at the Papal villa of Castel Gandolfo in the Alban hills, where his independence and sovereignty have always been freely conceded by the Italian Government. The next week we learn that, not satisfied with this, the Pope would even free himself from any traditions and seek his summer rest amid the higher and cooler Abruzzi Mountains, at the famous Benedictine monastery of Monte Cassino. Another week brings the announcement of the Pope's advice to the faithful no longer to regard as binding Pius IX.'s Encyclical of 1871, in which Roman Catholics were forbidden to take part in Italian Parliamentary elections. And now, last week, a cablegram announces that the Vatican has indirectly asked whether the Italian Government is inclined to pay the arrears of the subsidy offered by the Guaranty Law of 1871. One of the provisions of this law was for the payment to the Pope of an annuity of $645,000 by the Government, as, with other provisions, an offset to the occupation of the States of the Church by United Italy. This annuity was promptly refused by Pius IX., and the Papal

policy has remained unchanged in that regard. As reported in the despatch, the Vatican now actually hints at the possibility of its renunciation of its claims to temporal dominion, in case of the Government's favorable answer! If continued to the present, the arrears would amount to nearly twenty-two million dollars. Thus, we may be standing within a measurable distance of the end of the eleven and a half centuries of the Pope's temporal power. In our opinion, twenty-two million dollars would be a bagatelle to pay in comparison with the world's deliverance even from the specter of this past power. It is true that the power is no longer a tangible thing, but its redoubtable past has been continually and cleverly used to stir up dissension in many parts of the world. The Italian Government would hardly have difficulty in paying the arrears; but if it does, and if it meets the greater difficulty of radical opposition in Parliament, it may well fight hard to gain its point, knowing that not only will it be emancipated as never before, but that the whole world will be the grateful beneficiary. For if, more than anything else, the temporal power of the Popes has hindered the proper spiritual growth of the Roman Catholic Church, it has also hindered the proper civic growth of France, Spain, Portugal, Austria, Germany, and especially Italy. It may be that 1905 is to be a historic year, first in marking the downfall of Russian despotism and the rise of Japanese civilization, and, secondly, in marking the end of an intolerable Papal assumption, and one wholly unnecessary for the spiritual well-being of the Church. Pepin stands at the beginning of the period of Papal arrogance. It is much to be hoped that Pius X. stands at the other end and will close it.

avoid Pharisaic complacency, to remember that the pursuit of truth is more important than that of gain, and that "the worth of a man's life is to be measured, not by the things which he has done for himself, but by the things which he has done for the world around him and after him. Every man who has consecrated his life to an ideal larger than he can hope to compass has the kind of faith which moves the world." Of Secretary Taft's address before the Law School on needed reforms in criminal law, which has aroused wide discussion, we shall speak somewhat fully next week. The election of Mr. Payson Merrill, of New York, as a member of the Corporation is especially to be noted because he is the first layman to be made a permanent member, and this fact indicates an important deviation from tradition. At the alumni dinner President Hadley announced that not only had Mr. John D. Rockefeller made a gift of a million dollars to the endowment fund (limited by no condition except that it should be soundly invested and the income only applied to current expenses), but that another million had been subscribed within a comparatively short time by graduates whose names have not yet been made public. The gifts of classes to the endowment fund are also increasing in size, and the plan of securing a permanent fund of five million dollars seems now feasible. The graduating exercises were preceded by the usual procession of alumni, with over three thousand men in line, while degrees were granted to 669 candidates. Among the honorary degrees the one which attracted the most attention was that of Doctor of Music bestowed upon Sir Edward Elgar, "the foremost living musical composer." The recipient was present, and the performance of selections from his works was a pleasing feature of the occasion. Musicians and students of the art will rejoice in this honor done to Sir Edward Elgar. The degree of Doctor of Laws was bestowed on Augustus St. Gaudens, "the foremost sculptor of America;" on Edwin Anderson Alderman, "one of the leaders in the broad educational movement now being carried out in the Southern States" (Dr. Alder