independent control over armaments, which she does not need, does not want, and could never afford. It is colonial in giving her what has proved the salvation of the self-governing Colonies. Her proximity and identity of commercial interest are the crowning reasons for confidence that her new rights will draw her closer to Great Britain, just as countries even in the Antipodes are being drawn closer.

ULSTER

When Ulster Unionists have uttered the last word of angry and passionate repudiation of Home Rule, it is pertinent to ask them what is their sober view of the future? Nobody doubts their intense sincerity; but have they thought out this matter? Virtually, Ireland is now governed as a dependent Crown Colony. They themselves constantly style themselves a garrison,' and so tacitly accept the status usually only claimed by a privileged white minority in a coloured dependency of the Crown. Very well. But where is this view leading them? Crown Colonies are at least solvent fiscal entities. The Union has reduced Ireland to pauperism, and Ulstermen cannot escape the responsibility. High and low, they share in the questionable profits derived from the Union, and stand to gain from the golden promises of the future. At this moment their English friends are destroying the case for the exceptional prosperity of Ulster, and the arguments hanging upon it, by proclaiming the 'bounding' prosperity of the rest of Ireland. Whatever the truth of that view, how do Ulstermen regard the counterproposals of English Unionists for the benefit of Ireland under the Union? Are they content to see Ireland plunged deeper and deeper into insolvency, costing more and more to maintain, receding further and further from the point at which she still contributed something to the Army and Navy? They are bound to consider-I say it in no spirit of sarcasm, but in sober appealwhat their loyalty to the Union is costing Great Britain in hard cash, and is going in the future to cost. What is the moral cost to their own country-Ireland? They are Irishmen first, and Unionists next: every Ulsterman admits that. They have honestly believed that the Union is best for Ireland as a whole. Is it too much to ask them to sound the foundations of that belief in the light of the modern finance and the revelations it suggests? I believe that if they did, a revulsion of feeling would ensue, and the conviction would gain ground that after all it was worth while to trust their Catholic fellow-countrymen to work with their Protestant brethren for the common good of Ireland.

What is the fundamental intention and significance of the Union? This, that Great Britain governs Ireland through the

dissensions of Irishmen. That is what her Government meant, avowedly, in the eighteenth century, and Ulstermen knew it well, and to their cost. That is what it means still. It is a shameful thing for Ireland. Ulster may seem to be dragging English Unionism behind her now. It is not so. If English statesmen could be induced to abandon the secular craving for undue domination, Irishmen would unite, like Englishmen and Frenchmen in Canada, and Englishmen and Dutchmen in South Africa, to make their countries prosperous, progressive, and loyal. Why should not Ulstermen anticipate the complete conversion of Great Britain, which is bound to come if the present system continues? Why should they not anticipate what is equally certain to come, if a Protectionist Government attains power in Great Britain, a general revolt in Ireland against a uniform tariff designed for British conditions, and therefore, like all uniform tariffs in the past, certain to hurt Ireland?

Ulster Unionists have never done justice to their fellowcountrymen. They know that their own linen industry was the solitary privileged exception to the destruction of Irish industries. They know that for more than a century they possessed a privileged racial ascendency based on religion, and they know, too, that even so their own ancestors had to wage the same demoralising social war of crime and secret conspiracy to obtain the Ulster Custom of land tenure, which placed them outside the agonies endured by their Catholic compatriots during the nineteenth century. They joined in at the last to reap the culminating benefits of the land reforms won by others. They should not join in the cheap and heartless hue and cry against the majority of Irishmen for the violence used in obtaining those reforms, and in the traditional defamation which survives from it.

What, in explicit terms, do they really fear? Not a Catholic tyranny corresponding to the extinct Protestant tyranny. How could it be enforced? What sensible layman would ever dream of inflicting it? Not an economic tyranny: the thing would be literally impossible and inherently senseless. What do they fear? Let them give precision to their doubts and then set them squarely and fairly against the consequences of the Union, and make a manly choice worthy of their character as loyal citizens of Ireland, Great Britain, and the Empire.

ERSKINE CHILDERS.

AN APPROACH

BETWEEN MOSLEMS

AND BUDDHISTS

PERSIA, Tripoli, Morocco !-three points from which simultaneously attacks are made upon Islam! So hard the West has never yet pressed the confessors of Mohammed's doctrine, and never before has the war of the Cross against the Crescent flamed up so dangerously as has lately been the case. What may be the cause of this strange phenomenon? Is it mere accident, or must we look upon it as the outcome of long-premeditated political designs? The answer is clear enough when we remember that this war has in reality been going on for centuries between the two culturally opposed worlds; and that the issues of it, dependent as they have been all along upon the political conditions of interested neighbouring States, and upon the enthusiasm displayed by the contending parties, have now, since the beginning of the nineteenth century, decidedly turned in favour of the West. The more pronounced was the cultural and material progress of the modern world, the deeper sank the courage of the antagonistic Islam community. Although fully convinced of the necessity of reform, and knowing that ultimately the same means by which western lands accomplished their success would have to be adopted, Islam has thus far not been able to effect the mental metamorphosis and rouse itself so as to face its opponents on a footing of equality. Bashfully and reluctantly the Moslem world has sat upon the school-bench of western education. There has been no lack of zeal nor of capability, but, just as the individual has to pass through gradual stages of learning to obtain his object in view, so it is with a nation; only the process is slower still, and especially when, as is the case with the community here in question, it has not only to fit itself into a new world of ideas, but also has to unlearn and forget many things born and bred in the flesh. In this difficult task the Moslem world has now been engaged for more than a century. The nations of the West act the part of impartial spectators, but their Governments show a lively interest in the cultural movements and evolutions of their Asiatic neighbours, and in measure as these latter rise, or would rise, out of the slough of antiquated 657

Vol. LXXI-No. 422

TT

notions, in that same measure the aggressive politics of the former increase. The fear of losing the booty, or of seeing it snatched away by another, is at the root of all the diplomatic scheming of our several Cabinets. The ostensible purpose to be the standard-bearers of western culture, the propagators of modern civilisation and humanisation, is either an empty shibboleth or else a matter of quite secondary importance. The chief object is, and remains: the acquisition of colonies, the extension of territory, the founding of new markets for home industries and commerce, and, by the subjugation of foreign nations, to exalt and to increase the power and importance of the mother country.

Under these circumstances it is easy to see why those of our Governments who have not yet acquired colonies, as well as those who would increase their colonial possessions, are always on the look-out for opportunities which may lead to the acquisition of territory, without considering whether the steps they are taking are strictly just, or whether these actually meet the object they have in view. Hitherto it has been the commendable custom of most of the assailants of the Moslem world to put forward at least some plausible pretext in justification of their aggression and ultimate occupation, the favourite excuse being the barbaric conditions, the absolute absence of order, security, and law in most of the Islamic lands, or else the obstruction and danger caused to international intercourse.

We do not, of course, deny that there is much truth in these statements. We have but to look at Morocco and note with sorrow how this pre-eminently rich piece of earth lies neglected, waste, desolate, although it could easily support six times its present population. Morocco possesses every kind of mineral, and a vegetation which is unparalleled. It has beautiful pastureland, forests of oaks, cedars, and cypresses, many streams which irrigate the plains, so that, without manuring and with very little labour, crops of barley, rye, oats, and wheat could easily be grown. What French dominion has done and still can do for this country is evident enough, and the question now is whether it would have been better to let matters remain as they were or whether we must welcome the civilising interference of a foreign Power.

The recent Italian invasion in Tripoli, where the conditions are not much better than in Morocco, has been universally condemned as a violation of the law and as downright robbery. We grant the possibility that in course of time through the steadily improving organisation of constitutional Turkey the affairs of Tripoli would be ameliorated; but still the question remains whether the old-established sovereignty of Italy will not

introduce the blessings of modern culture quicker, and more effectually, and carry out the reforms with more ability than could be expected of the Turkish Government, which is not thoroughly settled itself yet. Let us bear in mind what was the condition of North Africa in the days of Rome, as regards its economic, commercial, and political standing, and what it is to-day! Where once flourishing cities arose, keeping up a brisk intercourse with distant portions of the East, we now walk among ruins. Desolation stares us in the face wherever we go, and we are justified in asking if it would not be better to cut short as quickly as possible the wild fanaticism and horrible barbarism of the Arabs.

And what of Persia? In that unhappy land-the early cultural monuments of which arouse our admiration-anarchy and lawlessness have now been rampant for centuries, and the native Government, if it deserves that name, has done all it could to corrupt and desolate the country, and to bring the inhabitants, the most gifted of all Moslems, to poverty and misery. Everywhere the eye meets the heaped-up ruins of former cities, caravanseries, bazaars, palaces, high roads, bridges, hospitals, and houses of refuge, while the subterranean canals which should bring moisture to the thirsting land have long since collapsed and fallen into decay. Villages and settlements are hidden away in hollows far from the beaten track, so as not to be seen, and pillaged by the passing agents of the Government; for all officials, the high as well as the low, are in this land looked upon as the instruments of divine wrath, plundering, robbing, murdering, but never rendering help.

This terrible picture of his native land, given by Ibraham Bey,' is, as a matter of fact, mildly drawn as compared with the staggering reality of Iranian conditions, now and in the recent past. I still shudder to think of some of the scenes I witnessed on my travels, and of the pictures given by Melkom Khan, formerly Persian Ambassador in London and Paris, in his paper Kanun (Law).

In the face of these, and many similar revelations, one cannot but justify the aggressive politics of Europe in these lands, for emissaries from the West, even if in the accoutrements of war, always herald improvement. The appearance of western power in these lands signifies the introduction of order and law; it means that downtrodden humanity can breathe freely again, that it can rise and begin to look forward to a happier future. All the obstructions of deep-rooted fanaticism and prejudice being cleared away, nothing will hinder the process of transformation,

1 German by Walter Schutz, Leipzig, 1903.

1