world is not a short race, but a very long one. In such a race the competitors are all handicapped; and weight will tell every yard of the way from the start to the finish.

2. If that be so, it is prudent to consider what weight America has to carry in the race, as compared with other competitors. The answer popularly given to this question is that she has several points in her favour-economical, political, and social.

(a.) Economical. She possesses immense territorial area and great varieties of climate, which may hereafter enable her to compete with foreign countries in many—not to say most of the staple articles of commerce. For example: If her cotton product were worked up on or near the ground where it is raised, great economies in transportation and handling of raw materials might be effected. If her iron industry (rolling, nail, hardware mills etc.) were prosecuted on the ground where the coal and the iron lie close together, a similar great saving would result. If her potteries were established in the neighbourhood of her great mines of kaolin and china-clay, like economical benefits would be derived therefrom. With advantages of this kind at the outset, the gradual influx of capital, the gradual importation of highly educated or skilled artisans, and the gradual training of her own people in special industrial schools will give her a fair chance of competing with the world within a reasonable period of some (say) twenty-five years, and possibly a good deal earlier.

(b) Political.-America has no foreign policy. Its absence is a great saving to the National Exchequer. She is free from the necessity of maintaining great armaments, which make heavy calls on the vigourous manhood of a nation, as well as on its pecuniary resources. For the successful development of industrial enterprise, freedom.

from foreign complication is an eminently favourable condition. There is nothing to distract her attention from the development of her internal resources. From the investor's point of view, in quietness and confidence is strength. Sir Henry S. Maine has indicated, in his recent admirable essays,* the vast difficulties which attend government by the multitude. So strongly is a kindred opinion held by a large section of the keenest observers in America, that some States have exchanged annual for biennial sessions of their Legislatures. The result has been eminently satisfactory. As long as a Legislature is in session, it is impossible to foresee what tinkering with property will be devised. Investors are hushed and afraid, and active business is chilled. If drastic legislation against property is proposed, capital will inevitably flee away. In these States the general desire is that things of no particular moment may exhaust the session. When an adjourn

ment for two years is announced, everybody rejoices and settles down to business. This feeling involves no disrespect on the part of the people for their chosen representatives. They may be the best of men. But thirst for "making a record" and proposing violent measures is felt to be fatal to prosperity. The maiden speech of a thoroughly Radical orator may be the knell of a new railroad, coal mine, cotton mill, iron furnace, municipal loan, or the like. The country wants repose and time to develope its latent wealth. The restless demagogue is its very worst enemy. The substitution of biennial for annual sessions is more significant than pages of didactic exposition. It is a great example of the political sagacity of the American people; and it is immensely reassuring to the investor.

* "Popular Government," Sir Henry S. Maine,

(c) Social.-Although no country can, in this century, count on escaping the pest of Communism, America's power of resistance is to-day at least as high as that of any other country. A very substantial proportion of her citizens owns a little property in one form or another; and even a very limited amount of property suffices to bring the owner into line with his law-abiding fellow-citizens, as against the Socialist or the transgressor of law. Experience shows that the man who has the grit to make money has generally the grit to protect it. In a riot or a fight the owner of a little homestead or store is worth ten loafers. He has more nerve, a stiffer backbone, and something to lose, which the loafer has not. His sixshooter is of a better quality than that of the loafer, his powder is straighter, and, in short, there is a better man behind the gun. That as time goes on organized labour will, as between labour and capital, obtain a larger share of the profits of industry than it has heretofore received may be accepted as a foregone conclusion. Such a result will probably not be confined to America; but will extend, at no very remote period, to the whole of the civilized world. The question for the investor is-how far inevitable reduction of interest is likely to be associated with insecurity of capital. Many indications point to the conclusion that Communism-always dangerous-is, on the whole, less alarming in America than elsewhere. The singular quietness, with which the whole nation settles down to business after the violent excitement of a contested Presidential election, affords presumptions in favour of a peaceful solution of strikes. The tendency of the people is rather to accept arbitration than to pursue labour quarrels to their ultimate logical result. Appeals ad misericordiam, in cases where the transgressor of law has unduly presumed

on his power to dictate terms, and-in the vernacular language "got badly left," excite very little pity in the public mind. An uprising, which had no foundation in a real grievance and is defeated by unflinching resistance, meets with its fair share of ridicule. The public regards

an unsuccessful striker very much as it regards a player who "bluffs" at poker and is promptly "called." He has met with an opponent with nerve at least as good as his own, and it is plain that, if he was "bluffing," his game is up.

It is thought by many competent observers in this country that, at no very remote interval, the immense evil arising from monetary contraction will be, to some extent, grappled with and perhaps economized. It is beginning to be realized that as the legitimate expectation of gain lies at the root of the liberal employment of capital in industrial enterprise, consistently falling prices carry with them their own special nemesis. It may be doubted whether the confidence with which a higher range of prices inspires the owners of accumulated wealth is not, on the whole, better for the producing communities of the world than a very low range of prices, which marks undue appreciation of gold, and gives to the creditor of several years' standing an undue advantage, and to the owner of unemployed wealth a silent and unperceived increment of power as against property generally.* It is also thought not impossible that the natural shrewdness of the American wage-earner may induce him to see the propriety of submitting to a reduction of wages, if satisfied by fair explanation on the part of the capitalist that no profit can be made at subsisting rates of compensation, provided he is equally satisfied that an increase of wages will certainly follow on the realization of fair profits.

*The Economic Crisis and Its Causes, M. E. de Laveleye, Contemporary Review, May, 1886.

Again, the drift of public opinion is beginning to set in the direction of resistance to "rings," or any type of organization which lives by a policy of cajolery or intimidation and enforces on its members a sliding scale of rewards and punishments. Neither a National League nor a Birmingham "Caucus" could to-day reach its full stature in America. It would be killed by ridicule in its embryonic stage. America tried the experiment in Mr. Tweed's day, and discovered to her cost that a compact organization of irresponsible persons was a luxury altogether too expensive for a democratic community to support. She bequeathes the system as a legacy to England, with her best wishes, as a garment for which she has no further use.

Another very hopeful symptom is the discredit which is beginning to attach to solid votes. Wherever fifty or one hundred members in a representative body are prepared to vote "solid," it is plain that party organization is predominant and personal conviction subordinate. The moral value of a solid vote by the Birmingham "Caucus" or by Mr. Parnell's followers is greatly discounted by the circumstance that personal conviction and criticism are virtually excluded by the operation of an organized scale of rewards and punishments. The solid vote obviously means that party governs, and that patriotism and individual opinion are asleep. In America solid voting is on the decline, as the dignity of asserting independent conviction is becoming more generally appreciated, and the servility attached to "wearing the collar of the machine" is more generally felt.

3. Holding these views as to her place in the international handicap, it can be no matter of surprise that her citizens are willing to put up with some inconvenience for the purpose of making the Country as nearly self-sufficing