Indianapolis Journal, Indianapolis, Marion County, 30 April 1883 — Page 4

4

THE DAILY JOURNAL. IST JNO. C. NEW & SON. For Bares of Subscription, ere., see Sixth Paere. MONDAY, APRIL 30, Iss.i. Tiif. Rev. T. Dewit Taluiuge gives it as his opinion that “we have not had a more faithful, unpretentious, conscientious, dignified and competent President” than Arthur w ithin the memory of the present generation. Senator Voorhees is in Washington, and has said a little say upon the tariff, a question just now of paramount importance to statesmen. Mr. Voorhees gives it as his opinion that the only sensible speech made at the Iroquois banquet in Chicago was that of Carter Harrison, and that the only sensible part of Harrison’s speech was that advising that the Democrats should let the tariff alone next winter. The reports concerning widespread immorality in a mixed school at Chelsea, Mass., are said to have been greatly exaggerated, and instead of there being twenty cases of imprudent conduct by young women, but one instance has occurred, and that some three months since. In that case the young woman abandoned school quite suddenly, and was married without unnecessary delay. The reports of immoral conduct at the Stevens High School at Claremont, N. H.. are also greatly exaggerated. The Louisville Courier-Journal demands that Mr. Samuel J. Randall shall either recant his supposed heresies on the tariff or at once join the Republican party. Mr. Wattferson will have a pleasant and profitable time in driving out of the Democratic organization all who do not dance when he pipes his free-trade airs. He may not know it. from the infirmities of his constitution, but the truth is that lie speaks but for a minority of his own party. There never was a deader duck, politically speaking, than free trade. Even the Irish, in their Philadelphia convention, gave it “a side wipe,’ ns the boys say. Hon. Dorman B. Eaton, the president of the civil service commission, defends the appointment of Mr. De B. Randolph Keim as chief examiner. He says he considers “Mr. Keim nil excellent man for the place. In my judgment he has all the qualifications necessary to make a good examiner, and I believe that he will fulfill the duties of his office in an able an efficient manner.” In the opinion of the professional reformers Mr. Eaton can do no wrong; he is the perfection of wisdom; therefore we may be spared further criticism of this selection, remarkable as it has seemed to the entire country. __________ To hear councilmen talk of the “moral obligation” resting upon them to vote the monopoly of the streets of Indianapolis to the Citizens’ Street-railway Company one would imagine some awful act of repudiation was being attempted. These conscientious councilmen have sat for years and seen the company violate every provision of the charter; tiny have heard the repeated and continued complaints of the people; the newspapers have called their attention to the matter time and again, but their moral sensibilities were never touched. There seems to have come a remarkable season of refreshing since a competing company proposed to give our people respectable accommodations and conveniences.

Tin: professional traducers of Kentucky, and their name is legion—people who onvv us our brilliant historic record, our honorable prosj>erity, our robust manhood and our spotless prowess—will seize the Thomp-non-Davis tragedy with eagerness as a text for their customary diatribe.—Courier-Jour-nal. Here’s richness! Think of it! A whole legion that envy Kentucky’s “brilliant historic record,” her “honorable prosperity,” her “robust manhood” and her “spotlessprowess.” A brilliant historic record, such as Kentucky made during the late war, an honorable prosperity that doesn’t keep pace with that in neighboring States, a robust manhood and spotless prowess that evinces itself in a drunken debauch and cowardly assassination, are hardly calculated to inspire envy among honorable people anywhere. Strip your fine writin’ of slush and there is nothing left. __________ Mr. James Stephens, ex-head center of the Fenian Brotherhood, has been communicating his views of the Irish question to a correspondent of the London Standard. Mr. Stephens thinks constitutional agitation hopeless, and that Ireland should now demand her rights on the battlefield. He does not consider revolution practicable until the factions of the Irish party have buried their di(Terences and united for the common cause. After revotion has been inaugurated and fought to a successul conclusion, Mr. Stephens recommends an offensive and defensive alliance between Ireland and England. He predicts the speedy triumph of republican ideas in the British Isles and on the continent of Europe, and when that is accomplished England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales will best consult their respective interests by each establishing a republic independent in itself, but affiliated to the others by a system of federation. It is not probable that Mr. Stephens’s scheme will go into practical operation before next autumn, at least. There are about fourteen council men and possibly two aldermen who claim to be the sole guardians of the “moral honesty” of the city. There are eleven councilmen and eight aldermen who are willing to let the people take care of their own morality, and who vote to admit capital and labor to

an even competition. Nineteen to sixteen is about the way the vote stands, but the majority is so situated as to be in the power of a factious minority. Some of that minority are the willful tools of the present company; of them no different action can be expected or hoped for. But there are some few of that minority who are reputable, honorable, clear-beaded business men. Their action is a surprise and an inexplicable one. The question of monopoly is one for the courts to decide, but by their votes they prevent a case being made up by parties in interest, and at the same time they fasten upon the people outrageous inconveniences and annoyances which are suffered in no other city in the country'. Nowhere but in Indianapolis is there such willful disregard of the commonest decencies in street-car management. Everybody knows this fact, and no one better than the managers themselves. ___________ THE IRISH IN AMERICA. The result of the Philadelphia convention is in a degree a gratifying surprise to all the real friends of Ireland, and by so much must hare a great influence in the solution of a problem that has vexed and continues to vex the world’s politics. In size it was imposing, and by remarkably good luck the various discordant elements were harmonized into something like unanimity of purpose. It is as difficult a matter to handle Irish-Ameri-can impracticables as to restrain over-zealous Irish invincibles. But this was done in a measure at Philadelphia, and the result is encouraging to those who hope for Irish autonomy. Yet there were features of the meeting that revealed inherent weakness. The actors in it well-nigh forgot that, by adoption at least, they were Americans. As Irish-Americans it is theirs to sympathize and to tender words of encouragement. But beyond that they cannot go. An Irish “army” cannot have its right wing on American soil, except at the price of a declaration of war against England by America. This is not contemplated by Americans, and the Irish-Americans are not numerically strong enough to bring it about. The 10,000,000 Irishmen in America of Father Conaty are a phantasm. The latest census shows but a little more than 1,800,000 Irish in America, so that his estimate is more tliah 8,000,000 out of the way of the truth. It doesn’t pay to deceive one’s self. The situation must be viewed as it is. If the cause of Irish national independence is a forlorn hope it should be recognized as such and accepted, and efforts directed to what may be attainable. It is folly to regard the undertaking of Irish nationality other than a desperate one. The almost irresistible logic of heavy artillery is on the side of England, and it is this that has made Her wrongs against Ireland possible. For seven centuries no Irishman at home has slept beyond the range of British rifles and British cannons. It is so to-day. Every highway and byway in Ireland is patrolled by the constabulary. Every harbor is shackled by British fortresses and its waters float British men-of-war. The guns all point landward as well as seaward. To assume the burden of contending against all these elements of strength may be heroic or foolish, according to the manner in which it is done. AVhile it is beyond question that American sympathy is strong13’ enlisted in behalf of the wronged people of Ireland, and while the heaviest condemnation is felt and expressed for the cruelties and injustice practiced by the English government, it is impossible that America should actively interfere in the way of war. AVecannot be the self-invited arbiterof nations without assuming the attendant responibilities.

But it is to be rejoiced that the elements harmonized so well at Pbilrdelphia, and that tiie issue was so conservative. The dynamite branch, the self-constituted judges whose edicts are manifested in assassination and outrage, were given to understand that there was no active sympathy for them or their methods. This is a step in the right direction. It relieves the organization of the onus so long placed upon it. But Irish-Americans should not forget that by choice tliey have assumed allegiance to the United States. In no sense are IrishAmericans “exiles” except by choice. Tliey came to America because America offered greater advantages than did any other country; it was preferable to live under the stars and stripes than under lhe paw of the British lion. They find a welcome here, and enter upon our citizenship on a perfect equality with American-born citizens, except that they cannot become President of the Republic. All other offices, all other rights and privileges, are fully and unreservedly theirs. For Irish citizens of America to talk of being “exiles” is to Jalk worse than foolishness. Tliey dishonor tiie country that honors them, and only drive off valuable and sympathetic friendship. Corresponding to these benefits there are duties that cannot be ignored. It is just as much the duty of the man from Galway or Skibbereen to maintain the dignity and peace of America as it is of the man from the Rhine, from Christiansand, or from Warsaw. As Americans we have as much right to interfere in behalf of Poland as of Ireland, and it would he as reasonable for Polish-Americans to endeavor to align the American republic against Russia as for Irish-Americans to array it against Great Britain. Still those enlisted in the movement looking to a reform of the abuses practiced upon Ireland have reason to be encouraged. The comparative moderation evinced at Philadelphia is an earnest of a growing feeling in favor of honorable methods in preference to the practices which have so long been perpetrated to tie incalculable injury of those whose efforts might

TIIE INDIANATOLIS JOURNAL, MONDAY, APRIL 30, ISB3.

eventually attain to something of real value in local self-government for a disfranchised and oppressed people. This is the practicable point toward which all the real friends of Ireland should harmoniously co-operate. THE MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS-To-morrow in most of the towns and cities of the State elections for municipal officers will be held. These elections are really of greater importance to the citizens and to the taxpayers than the general elections in which State and national officers are chosen; yet, as a rule, the vote cast is much lighter, and the interest manifested much less. The men to be placed in power to-morrow have to do with the daily affairs of the people. They levy and expend the direct taxes, the payment of which the people feel a hundredfold more than they do all the contributions made to the support of the State and national governments. Municipal government is the vexing problem of the times, but it will have reached far toward proper solution when the local elections lay’ so strongly upon the minds and consciences of the people as to call out the largest possible proportion of voters and taxpayers. In many places party lines are not closely drawn, and they should not be drawn wherever one party or the other has nominated notoriously unfit men, expecting to force them into place by the strength of the party machinery and the party majority. This is a prostitution of party against which there is a very properly increasing protest. Yet still, taking the State by and large, there may be something learned from the results of these elections of the drift of public sentiment, and the impressions that have been made upon the popular mind by the party tendencies as exemplified since the last elections. It will be found, generally speaking, that the Republican party has stood for good government, for an administration of public affairs in harmony with the popular will and in obedience to the best interests of the people, while the opposite has been the rule with the Democratic party wherever it has had the power and opportunity to display itself. In a broad way, the Congress of the United States, speaking for the Republican party, answered the public demand for certain remedial legislation, while the State Legislature, speaking for the Democratic party, made a record which has proven to be a stench in the nostrils of even many Democrats. What is true of Indiana is true also of New York, and wherever the Democratic party has been in control. Therefore, the elections to-morrow will be taken to give something of an index of how the people respond to these indications of party tendency, and will be intently studied as possible portents of the shape of things in 1884. This being true. Republicans all over the State should give to their local tickets—wherever they are worthy—an earnest and full support. The Republican party comprises what are usually classed as the “good citizens” to a larger degree than the Democratic party. It is always true that the absenteeism is with these “good citizens,” who, as Dr. Crosby well states, are really, after ali, the dangerous classes. Let these “dangerous classes” go te the polls to-morrow and vote for good, wholesome, clean municipal government. That is their duty as well as their highest interest.

THE SUGAR TARIFF. The open letters of Mr. W. P. Fishback to Hon. Stanton J. Peelle upon the tariff are intended, if they nave any purpose at all, to create the impression that the tariff bill passed by the last Congress, instead of decreasing the customs duties, increased them, or at least were so arranged as to discriminate with greater effect than before against the people and in favor of the “monopolies” of manufactures and class interests. We say this is their purpose, if they have any; tor there has not been, in any line or phrase of them an acknowledgment of the fact that the tariff duties have been reduced. Yet the fact is that upon the very articles mentioned the rates have not only not been increased, but in most instances have actually been lessened, and nothing has been needed, therefore, on the part of ordinarily intelligent men to emphasize either the ignorance or the dishonesty of the letters. That is the reason they have not been deemed worthy of serious reply from any quarter. Yet so flagrant is the distortion of truth in No. 6, the last one published of the series, that it may serve a good purpose to expose it briefly. No. 6 is devoted to the tariff on sugar. Mr. Fishback . says: “Forced bj r public opinion to do soniething, tiie last Congress, in enacting the law to which I have been calling your attention, took a step in the wrong direction.” And he then specifies as follows: “Our imported sugars are of two kinds, one kind is not fit for use without refining, tho others are lighter and brighter sugars, fit for domestic use as they come to our shores. It was to tiie interest of tiie people to have the tax on tliis latter class of sugars as low as possible. It was to tiie interest of tiie sugar refiners to have the tax so high as to practically prohibit their importation. If these can be shut out the refiners have an absolute monopoly. And you voted to give it to them. * * * Sugars from 13 to 16 Dutch standard are fit for common use without refining.” From 16 up to 20 Dutch standard the sugars are of that “lighter and brighter” quality on which Mr. Fishback says it is to the interest of the people that the tax should be as low as possible. Now, what are the facts? On the sugars named—l3 to 16 Dutch standard—the old rate was 3 7-16 cents a pound, the present rate is 2 75-100 cents a pound, very nearly a cent a pound reduction. On grades from 16 to 20, the old rate was 4 1-16 cents, the new rate is 3 cents, 1 1-16 cents reduction. On grades above 20 tho old rate was 5 cents,

the new rate is 3.50, a reduction of cents —a reduction graduated precisely upon the principle Mr. Fishback says should have been observed, and which is in the interests of the people. In voting to reduce the duty on these lighter and brighter grades of sugars, did Mr. Peelle, or any other Republican, vote “to practically prohibit their importation?” On not one single article which Mr. Fisliback has mentioned throughout the whole seiies of letters thus far—lumber, salt, crude ore, soap, iron and sugar—has there been a shadow of an increase in the tariff duties, but. on the contrary, generally a decided reduction, as is shown by the figures in the sugar schedule, a reduction in itself estimated at $11,000,000. We submit that so remarkable a display either of ignorance or dishonesty should suggest to any man of ordinary sensibilities the propriety of abdicating the assumed position of teacher, and a cessation of sneers at the honesty or the intelligence of congressmen who voted in favor of the tariff-reduction bill. There are very few people anywhere who are not impressed with the necessity of tariff reform and tax reduction. To that not only is the Republican party pledged in its platform, but it has carried out its pledges by the earnest recommendations of its President and by the actual work of its Congress. All has not been done that should be done; but the Republican party has done all that has been done, while the Democratic party, when in power, remained entirely passive, and neither in Senate nor House made an honest effort to lighten the burdens of the people. The bill passed by the last Congress was not all that is wanted, nor did it meet the approval of an}’ one in all its details. But it was a step in the right direction, and, therefore, very properly received the support of intelligent and practical men. Mr. Peelle voted for it, and so did all the Republican members of Congress frc£n They voted for it, because if they had opposed it the tariff would have remained as it was, and the country would have lost the advantage of the reduction of $70,000,000 in taxation. The country will sustain this action of Congress, and it is the part neither of intelligent nor honest criticism to endeavor to create a wrong impression as to the effect of the bill, either by a suppression of the truth or by an actual suggestion of falsehood.

DEMOCRATS AND THE TARIFF The harmony of the Democratic party upon the tariff question is further developed by the publication of letters from two of the ablest and most distinguished Democratic members of tie United States Senate. Mr. Vest, of Missouri, by odds the finest orator in the chamber on his side, at least, has felt impelled to declare himself by reason of certain strictures made upon his course, which he does in these very clear and emphatic words: “I am a Democrat, and for a revenue tariff. I believe that any other tariff is unconstitutional, but I also believe that every tariff for any amount is necessarily protective, and I believe also that such a tariff should be equally distributed among all the industries of all the sections which need protection. I do not care whether you call it a tariff for revenue, which is incidental protection, or a tariff with discrimination in favor of American industries, or a judicious tariff, as Jackson termed it; but every tariff must protect to the extent to which it is levied or imposed. So said Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Jackson, Polk, Benton, and every otiier Democrat of distinction, including Calhoun. I can afford to let the little doctrinaires of tariff literature bark at me whilst in such company.” The phrase “little doctrinaires of tariff literature,” evidently refers to such eminent regulators of the party policy as Mr. Watterson and Mr. Hurlbert, not to mention others of lesser note, wiio were kicked to death by Carter Harrison at the recent Iroqouis banquet The other senator is Mr. McPherson, of New Jersey, who speaks quite at length, and talks about the degradation of labor through free trade, just as if he were a Republican. Mr. McPherson’s language is calculated to make the little doctrinaires howl and gnash their teeth. This is what the New Jersey senator says:

“With a national debt amounting to nearly $2,000,000,000, and a large sum needed annually to pay the interest upon this debt, together with enormous drafts upon the treasury on account of pensions, to say nothing of the amount needed annually to run the government, it would seem to conservative minds not a good time to take a gigantic stride downward to ‘free trade,’ or toward it, to an extent which would shock every industry in the land, even if it did not bring with it absolute disaster and ruin. To such a policy every intelligent business man, whatever lus theory about a tariff, must be unalterably opposed. ‘Free trade’ means direct taxation. which, under tbe Federal constitution, would require tlie taxes to be apportioned among the several States according to their respective population. Hence, under free trade one State might be required to pay* a 10 per cent, tax on all their taxable property, while the people of another State, having double the wealth according to population, w’ould only be required to pay a 5 per cent, tax. “Under free trade, therefore, the thrifty and saving property bolder would of necessity bear all the burdens of government, while the spendthrift and extravagant, who now squander their means in articles of luxury and fancy, thus contributing, under our present system, many millions of dollars for the support of the government, under free trade would pay nothing. Even at the risk of being charged with a lack of political sag acity, I cannot subscribe to such a doctrine. * * * Free trade would give a monopoly of our markets to foreigners to eat out our substance and absorb the untold w’ealth springing from the endless product of our bard labor and rich fields. * * * I believe in a tariff for revenue, with protection or discrimination, within the revenue limit, and have no sympathy' with the docrine that the tariff should be levied for revenue regardless of its effect upon home industries.” Senator McPherson closes his reply as follows: “To debase and degrade labor is to impair, if not to destroy’, republican government on this continent, and the man who does it, be he President or cabinet minister, senator or representative, or private citizen, of high or low degree, has no more right to be classed a Democrat than I have to call for three cheers at a funeral. It is charged that I was the only senator claiming to h* a Democrat who cast his vote for an oaotionable tariff bill.

This is true, and the others have my sympathy. The bill in question was and i9 not satisfactory to me, but it was the only reform possible at the late session. The people demanded reduction in taxation, and the bill for which I voted saves to them $70,000,000 in the next fiscal year, estimated upon the importations of 1882.” The little doctrinaires have hauled off for repairs. Two such broadsides from two such Democratic leaders was an unexpected shock, and has rather taken aw’ay' their breath. We suggest the reading of these two letters at the next meeting of ou “tariff-for-revenue-only” club. Bishop Garrett, of the Episcopal church, who is now engaged in missionary work in Texas, declines elevation to the bishopric of ♦he chinch in ♦his State, preferring to prosecute his labors in his present field. At the recent convention for selection of bishop, Dr. Garrett was the choice of the lay delegates. Righteous Massachusetts still keeps a kindly eye upon the heathen who are far off. The Boston Advertiser says of the Apaches: “Wo have nothing but abhorrence for the crimes which we know have been committed by lawloss Indians, and we have an equally intense abhorrence of the injustice which would wreak vengeance for such crimes on guiltless Indians, simply because they are Indians.’' In the next column the Advertiser laments the unpleasant criticisms widen are made upon the State by impertiuent outside newspapers since the Tewksbury disclosures, and says: “Those who know the facts know that this is the talk of ignorance or enmity.” With all the evidence yet made public in either case the Massachusetts pauper seems to be having a much harder time than the Apache, but perhaps Tewksbury is too far away from here for a clear-sighted observation. The people of Meriden, Conn., are a thrifty folk and ingenious withal. Mrs. Langtry visited that town the other day and went away after the evening performance at the theater with the impression that she was not appreciated. The audience to her appeared comparatively small, but realty numbered more than the house would have held oomfortably had they all been present at one time. Syndicates had been formed of about twenty persons each, and each syndicate bought one ticket. The firsr man entered, gazed at the actress for five minutes, then went out and gave his return check to the next man, the maneuver being repeated in turn until the twenty had entered seriatim. If this lesson in economy had been given earlier in the seasou bow much good mouey might have been saved.

A correspondent of the St. Louis GlobeDemocrat, writing from Paris, tells this story about the first Napoleon and Talma, the actor: “We have seen tiie first house this wonderful man lived in in Paris. It is a forlorn-looking place near Pont Neuf, and the room, which is close under the eaves, is not over eight feet square. It is said that from this room he went ouc night in a starving condition, resolved to throw himself into the Seine! Jle met Talma-an intimate friend—who said to him: “How fearfully you look! What is the matter?” Napoleon replied in desperation, *T am starving, and was'just going to throw- myself into the Beiue!” Talma, who was a famous actor then, handed him a five-franc piece, and made a friend of Napoleon forever. Nine years after this, almost to a day, the Pope blessed him on the stops of Notre Dame, as Emperor of France. A parrot wasjbrought into a Brooklyn Police Court the other day to act as a witness iu a case of disputed ow nership of lilinself. With no fear of the law before bis eyes, tbo bird proceeded to swear at the justice, using a vocabulary so extensive that the insulted justice grew red in the face and was about to fine the witness for contempt of court. Just then a third man who claimed to be an owner, looked in. with: “Polly come aud take u drink.” Polly flew out, aud the case is not decided yet. Mr. Muliiattan, of Texas meteor fame, is evidently sojourning in Kentucky at the present time. A story comes from there of an alleged native who has, in ins thirty-five years of existence. never taken a drink of water. If the story- stopped here no oue could doubt its truth, but it is further narrated that this singular native is nover thirsty, never drinks anything stronger than milk, and that only for its nutritive qualities. This is an unsuspicious world, but thero are limits. Mr. Zf.lmar, of Cleveland, has caused the arrest of his wife because she exercised tiie matrimonial privilege of opening aud reading a letter addressed to himself. All the other husbands iu Cleveland are awaiting with breathless anxiety upon the decision of tbo justice. If the justice is h married man Mrs. Zelmar will probably be sentenced to imprisonment for life. - ■ The Hon. John Young Brown, who recently fired a beefsteak and three pistol allots at Ins butcher, was, on Saturday, fined S3OO, and lus antagonist was bound over to answer to the Circuit Court. Mr. Brown is rapidly recovering from bis injuries.

ABOUT PEOPLE. Dr. Oliver Wendell lloi.mes never saw a letter of Ills in print that was not “characteristic.” Lady Florence Dixie is small, wiry and thirty years old; she swings, rides, drives and shoots; she is accomplished, olevor, warmhearted and sincere. Judge Stanley Matthew's is unfortunate with his children. Ho lost five little ones in one month of scarlet fever, and hi 9 youngest surviving sou is now reported to be very near the end of his oureer on earth. Mr. Thomas Wentworth Higginson says that intemperance was greater at Harvard when he was a student than it is to-day; that Harvard is no worse than the average American college, and far better than European ones. Tiie Hon. 8. 9. Cox has purchased a houso and lot in Washington, a steo which his wife has for the last ten years been urging him to take. He says now that he has “gone and done it,” that he realizes that he should have doue so thirty - five years ago. With great gravity a Georgia paper says that the Hon. Seaborn Reese, “who is one of the very first of all the public men of Georgia in all those attributes which command the confidence and esteem of the people, sports the charm of a rabbit’s foot to his watch-chain.” The expenses of Arabi’a defense were $17,500, all of which was advanced by Mr. Blunt, and not more than $2,500 of it has been repaid him; this mainly through the efforts of Mr Frederick Harrison. A subscription has been started for the purpose of mailing up the remaining $15,000. The delightful French gallantry of the olden time has not yet flown from earth. A beautiful rosebud of a girl is walking up the drawingroom leaning on the arm of her father. “What! mademoiselle,” says a gentleman of the old school, “do you wulu? Bless mo, I thought you were on a stem!” A Mu. Muth, of Paris, in Kentucky, has a violin made iu 1656, which has been in the Muth family for over two centuries and has furnished music Tor royalty in the old world. Violins of that period are said to be worth from $3,000 to $5,000, but that amount would not purchase the one in question. The late Louis Veuillot, the cinlneut Paris journalist, fought three duels and enoh time received a bullet in his coat but suffered m> bodily haim. Iu the first affuir the bullet spoiled the

fine new coat he had put on for the occasion, and he grieved much thereat. To oonsole him his friends presented him a handsome black velvet redingote de duel, wliioli ho wore in the two subsequent encounters. Tiie other day Alexander HI had a conversation at Gatchina with Trlfon Vassilieff, a Russian court officer, aged ninety-eight, who was patted on the head when a boy by Catherine the Great, and who has served in succession six sovereigns of Russia. During the lifetime of Trifon Vasilieff, the population of the Russian empire has grown from 28.000,000 to 101,000,000. in his youth Trifon heard from his grandfather many tales of the wars of Peter the Great. Queen Victoria’s birthday, May 24, will be celebrated on that day throughout Great Britain,, excepting in London, where it will be kept on May 2G. This is an admirable arrangement, the London Globe thinks, inasmuch as it will enable loy-al subjects to observe the day once in the country, and a second time in T ondou; while Mr. Labouchere, Mr. Bradlaugh, Mr. Parnell, ana others, by spending the 24th iu London and the 26th in the country, can easily avoid the celebration altogether. The following old but good and true story of Horace Greeley has been started upon its rounds again: On one occasion, just as Mr. Greeley was about leaving the office to attend a political leoture, the Albany correspondent, an old friend whom Mr. Greeley had sent up the river to write rubbishy letters iu order to be out of the way, entered. His eye detected something wrong ia the editor’s rear. “Excuse me, Mr. Greeley,” he said hesitatingly, “but—your suspender is hanging down below- your overcoat. You cau’t go out on the street iu that way.” “D—n your itnpudenoe,” squeaked Greeley, with a face as red as a lobster. “Never you mind my suspender. It’s a d—d sight better than vour Albany correspondence, anyway.” A curious story of the late Lord Derby has just eoine to light. When he was Prime Minister of England he offered the Lord High Commissionersliip to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland to a certain peer, who in reply wrote four loug pages setting forth numerous reasons against Ills acceptance, but in the last two or three lines, declaring his willingnesa to take the office. Now, as Professor Goldwiu Smith has said, Lord Derby was notoriously indolent. He only took the trouble to read the first two pages of the letter, aud concluding from them that his correspondent wished to decline the honor, at once offered the commissiouershlp to another man, who immediately accepted it. Os course the first candidate was furious, and nlso dreadfully bewildered, but both he and Lord Derby died without fiudiug out how the mistake occurreff

THE SPIRIT OF THE PRESS. Asa civilized nation wo must impress upon tiie Queen and her Parliament the necessity of u retoriu in the conduct toward, and treatment of, Irish subjects; with greater emphasis must we place our disapprobation upon the use of dynamite and the spirit of assassination.—Nashville American. The man who keeps his children out of the schools, either all the time or on alternate weeks, has no right to complain of the.tr not being educated. Nor has he the right to abuse tHe teacher whom lie refuses to aid in supporting or whom | he declines to furnish with a comfortableschool- | house.—Louisville Commercial. Not even the blind guides who talked so glibly ! a few years ago about “the dollar of the fathers,” i and raved about the independence of the United ■ States of the monetary standards of the civililized world, will pretend now tl.ai * measure of value which makes eiglity-five cents equivalent to a dollar is likely to bring anything but tinaucial confusion anu ruin.—Brooklyn Union. Asa matter of fact, the great majority in ail our large cities are interested in the preservation of order aud can be relied on to maintain it. All of the labor riots iu the United States, and they have not been numerous. Have been suppressed by men who have closer relations with the audinces of Herr Most and snob than with the millionaires.—San Francisco Chronicle. Is it proper for the government ever to compromise a suit on the payment of the money involved where criminal charges have been laid? Is the government in such a case solely endeavoring to collect a tax evaded or proceeding to collect that tax ana also to punish the offender as a warning that punishment will inexorably follow defiance of tbe law*?—New York Herald. NVe have before us tbe promise of a very severe and protracted contest between capital* aud labor, resulting from tbe apparent necessity of readjusting wages. Tno trade tribunal act comes in most opportunely, and employers and employed should alike use tlieirendeavors to prove experimentally tbe virtues of this new law before enforcing the wage issue tn the usual suicidal fashion.—Philadelphia Press. It has been tlio studied purpose of the British government to prevent Ireland from having her proper representation iu Parliament. Until Ireland has her equal representation, so as to have the fearful abuses of British rule removed, thero will be an Irish question, and Irishmen will be justified in demanding their right to equal representation, and in all lawful agitation of the subject uutil they get it.—Courier-Journal, The liot-headed, illogical, ignorant men who have, been Rossa’s dupes may love Ireland well, but they do not serve her wisely. If IrishAmericans are to effect anything toward improving the condition of Ireland, the first step in the convention will be to repudiate the dynamito policy. Its record, and the kind of parasites whom it lias produced, should lie enough to coudciun it.—Charleston Nows and Courier. The glass interest iu this country is thriving, and the day is not distant when we shall not bo dependent on Europe for any kind of glassware, from the common window glass to the highest designs in colored and cut ware, and it is to this attainment that American manufacturers should devote their energies and capital, rather than to seejf lo force a market abroad with very doubtful success or profit.—Cincinnati Commercial Gazette. It ia always pleasapter to meet your enemy in the open field in a square fight. For that reason we have been hoping mat the Democrats would be a good deal more bold and a little more stupid than usual next year, and avow themselves openly for free trade. They may do so yet, but the drift among them just now is in favor ot a straddle on the question. One course will be only a little less fatal than the other.—New York Tribune. If there is not sufficient law in This country to punish persons who abuse its hospitality by conspiring on its soil to commit murder or to incite to murder abroad, no time should be iost in its enactment. No honorable plea can be urged against such legislation, and no opinion that opposes it is worthy of anything but abhorrence. A society that countenances these dynamite conspirators or refuses to extirpate them nourishes a deadly enemy in its own bosom.—Phiiaaelpliia Record. The right of revolution always exists, but it exists in Ireland, not here or iu England, aud bitter experience has shown that progress is not helped but hindered by mere insurrection and riot. The gain that has been achieved in Ireland in the last twenty years has been in spite of lawlessness, not because of it, and the yet greater work to be accomplished for the political aineliorutiou of Ireland needs cool heads, not less than warm hearts, aud the wisest and most temperate leadership.—Philadelphia Times. Placing Carlisle as our standard-bearer in the third highest office of the government, and giving him the construction of the committees of the House, we go into the next presidential election with anew platform, unknown to modern Democracy as it was unknown to the Democratic aud Whig policies of our fathers. 'The Democracy cannot afford in this critical juncture to throw away all chance of victory by pushing forward a Southern man for Bneaker upon this British platform.—Noblesvtlle Register, (Deni.) Tub American government ought to insist vigorously that the American hog should bo allow’od Tree entrance into Germany. It is our commercial duty, looking to tbe best interests of the Atnerioan producer ana the German consumer. It is our political duty, for the American hog iu Germany will be the most energetic possible republican propaganda. If Germany discriminates against our missionary meat, this country should atones prohibit the importation of every adulterated article of commeroe from the “Fatherland.”—Chicago Tribune. Pension bills arc almost always drafted for political purposes, and no one dares refuse to vote for them; no Governor or President dares veto them for soar of alienating tho soldier vote front himself or his party. It Is time for this cosily nonsense to end. The survivors of the Mexican war are not paupers. Perhaps some of them are in straitened circumstances, but if they are the inhabitants of the localities where they reside should make it a matter of honor to provide for the old fellows. Instead of allowing them to be practically tho tools of demagogues. —New York Herald.