question of Constantinople will be decided before the Bagdad railway is finished.

Russia cannot help seeing in the construction of the Bagdad railway an unfriendly act, and she must conclude that Germany either means only to strengthen Turkey against Russia or that she means to acquire a kind of protectorate over Turkey. The Emperor has made the latter assumption possible by a very curious speech. On the 18th of November 1898, on his journey to Jerusalem, the Emperor proclaimed himself at Damascus as the Protector of Turkey and of all Islam. His words were: May the Sultan and may the 200,000,000 Mahommedans in all parts of the world who venerate the Sultan as their Calif feel assured that the German Emperor will be their friend for all time.' That speech was much commented on at the time when it was made, but its real significance was not understood because nothing was then known about the Bagdad railway project and its ultimate purpose.

Many people have been discussing the political object of the Reval visit and its probable outcome. It was argued that some big political problem must have been discussed, because the King was accompanied not only by a prominent diplomat but also by Sir John Fisher, the First Sea Lord of the Admiralty, and by Sir John French, Inspector-General of the Military Forces of Great Britain. Besides, the King had in his Reval toast expressed the hope of a 'satisfactory settlement in an amicable manner of some momentous questions in the future.' It was assumed that the 'momentous questions' concerned the settlement of the Macedonian problem. However, the Macedonian problem is not merely a problem regarding the disorders in Macedonia, but it is part of a larger problem. In Macedonia, as in the whole of European Turkey, there are far more Christians than Turks. About two-thirds of the inhabitants of European Turkey are Christians, and as they consist of many races and nationalities they are apt to fight among themselves. The Christian population of Turkey consists of Servians, Bulgarians, Greeks, Roumanians, Armenians, Magyars, &c., and all the nations bordering upon Turkey, and one which does not border upon it, have during many years endeavoured to peg out claims in the Turkish provinces which they believe will some day fall to one or the other of the neighbouring States. With this object in view, various nations have sent, not only priests, schoolmasters, doctors, and nurses across the border into Macedonia to nationalise the people, but also armed bands. Their propaganda is somewhat forcible. Numerous Greek bands, Bulgarian bands, and Servian bands are asserting the claims of their own nationality in Macedonia by exterminating peaceful inhabitants-men, women, and children-belonging to the rival nations, and devastating the country. Every day we read of Greeks slaying Bulgarians and of Bulgarians slaying Greeks. Every year peaceful and defenceless inhabitants are slain by the thousand.

The last Turkey Blue-book, Cd. 4076, gives detailed statistics of 1768 political assassinations during 1906 alone.

The Turks are in a small minority in European Turkey, and they do not wish to be swamped by the Christian majority. Therefore they are by no means sorry if the Christians are slaughtering each other, for if they did not fight and kill each other they might combine and fall upon the Turks. If disorder becomes too great, the Turks join in the fray with energy, massacre wholesale and indiscriminately both parties, and then we hear of Turkish atrocities. That is the traditional policy of Turkey in Europe, and it is perhaps not an illogical policy from the Turkish point of view. These being the conditions in European Turkey, it follows that the pacification of Macedonia will not end the Turkish troubles. If Macedonia be pacified, Bulgarians, Greeks and Servians will transfer their traditional activity to the remaining provinces of European Turkey, and will there reproduce the Macedonian horrors. Things will hardly get better as long as a Mahommedan minority misgoverns a Christian majority in the Balkan Peninsula.

In these circumstances it seems vain to hope that International Conferences and Programmes will effect a real and lasting improvement in European Turkey. Hitherto they have effected nothing. Very likely a better condition of affairs can be created in Macedonia and the other European parts of Turkey only by the abolition of Turkish rule. Therefore the Macedonian problem is, rightly considered, not a problem concerning the various nationalities in Macedonia, but a problem regarding the future of Turkey in Europe and the possession of Constantinople. If Turkish rule be abolished in Europe, there might be peace in the Near East. The question now arises, Which nation is to take Turkey's place in Europe and especially at Constantinople? That question is indeed a momentous one, but it may have to be solved.

For

During two centuries Russia has endeavoured to expel the Turks from Europe and to capture Constantinople. She wishes to possess, or at least to control, the Straits of Constantinople, because she desires to have free access to the sea for her enormous empire, and from her point of view that wish is a reasonable and a legitimate one. merly, when Russia was hostile to England, England not unnaturally barred Russia's path to the Golden Horn. Times have changed, and Great Britain may conceivably change her views and policy with regard to the control of the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles in accordance with the changed conditions. Great Britain would probably rather see Russia installed at Constantinople than any other European Great Power. Besides, it may be argued: Either Russia remains weak, and then she cannot do much harm to Great Britain even if she possesses Constantinople; or she will become strong and then she will take Constantinople in any case. The subject is certainly worth

reconsidering in view of recent developments in Turkey and in Asia Minor.

Since his return to Germany General von der Goltz, the organiser and creator of the new Turkish army, has made a rapid career. He has become commander of the First Army Corps, Inspector-General of the Army, and Commander-Designate of one of the large German armies in case of war. His experience in Eastern affairs would, of course, be particularly useful in case of a war in Eastern Europe. At the present moment, when a practical solution of the Macedonian difficulties is about to be proposed to Turkey, General von der Goltz is in Constantinople on a visit to the Sultan. As it can hardly be expected that General von der Goltz would choose the hottest time of the year for paying a purely private visit to Turkey, diplomats and politicians in Constantinople are keenly discussing the object of his mission, and they are inclined to believe that the General has come on business. The suggestion that he may have come to replace the German ambassador seems incorrect. It appears more likely that the General has gone to Turkey in order to advise the Sultan how to act in case of a great emergency or that he is arranging for Turco-German military co-operation in certain eventualities. There are many indications which point to the fact that it will be no easy matter to solve the Macedonian problem, that the Powers advocating order and good government in the Near East may have to overcome the determined opposition of those who wish to uphold the rule of Turkey in Europe even at the price of the yearly hecatombs in Macedonia. The whole weight and influence of the Triple Entente may be required to make the cause of humanity prevail.

The German press has followed very attentively the gradual development of the Triple Entente. While most of the Government inspired papers have endeavoured to depict the Reval meeting as a visit of courtesy devoid of political importance, many of the independent journals have complained that Great Britain tried to checkmate and isolate Germany and to hedge her in with a network of ententes in order to raise a European coalition against her. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Germany could hardly complain if such were Great Britain's policy. However, she is mistaken. As Great Britain is a peaceful country, it is clear that the object of the Triple Entente is not war but peace, and it must be assumed that its aim is threefold. It aims at creating a counterpoise to the Triple Alliance in order to preserve the balance of power in Europe, it aims at taking from the strongest European Power the temptation of breaking the peace, and it aims at settling, preferably by a friendly arrangement and without war, some of the great problems of Europe which possibly may come up for settlement in the near future.

J. ELLIS BARker.

VOL. LXIV-No. 377

с

THE Unrest in India is a drama that is presented by a company of juveniles. There are grown men behind the scenes, in the prompter's box, and in the orchestra, who arrange the properties, supply the words, and animate the courage of the young tragedians. These are the professionals of the art of agitation-lawyers, journalists, and schoolmasters,—who find in the play not merely a means of exhibiting their talents, but an excellent business advertisement. In the auditorium are the people of India, watching, not without some pride, the achievements of their boys, not without some malice the effect of these achievements upon the British Government; but without any definite wish or expectation that the stage effects will actually be realised : they still believe that the drama κωμικωτέραν ἔχει τὴν καταστροφήν. Very different would have been the position had religious prejudice been the motif instead of politics; had, for instance, feelings been aroused over such a question as cow killing. In this case the boy actors would have been pushed aside, and the stage have been taken by adults.

From its commencement school-boys have been the practical exponents of the Unrest. Rehearsals began two years ago in a number of mass meetings organised in the public squares of Calcutta by some prominent local journalists. They were practically meetings of boys, who crowded to listen to very inflammatory speeches, delivered in excellent English, by the leaders of the Calcutta press. It was at these meetings that the boycott was invented, the war cry of Bande Mataram' was adopted, corps of school-boy volunteers' were suggested, and a threat offered to any disciplinary methods on the part of the University by the establishment of National' schools and colleges which would be independent of the University and would not look to it for diplomas or degrees. These measures all affected, or relied upon, the conduct of school-boys, and were assimilated with boyish enthusiasm. Another resolution was passed which affected the conduct of adults-that men holding honorary offices under the Government, honorary magistracies and the like, should resign them. This went no further. No dramatic art was spared to render these

meetings impressive and exciting to the youthful mind. They did not stop short at words. On several occasions the boys brought forth their shirts and drawers and made bonfires of them in the streets, as of British manufacture. For days at a time the pavement in front of European shops was picketed by truant school-boys, who waylaid any of their own race who attempted to enter, turning them back with threats, adjurations, and supplications, in some cases even prostrating themselves on the ground before them. Everything savouring of England, except the language, was boycotted. A Bengali judge of the Calcutta High Court complained to me that for three weeks, in these days of dramatic enthusiasm, he was unable to send his little grandchildren to school.

It is easy to see now that a serious mistake was made in permitting the squares and streets of Calcutta to be blocked, and the public peace disturbed, by thousands of excited school-boys. The enforcement of ordinary police regulations would at the outset have probably been a sufficient check; at all events, bonfires and street picketing need not have been permitted. Musalman sympathies were on the side of the Government. It would be a mistake to believe that the movement had the approval of the whole body of Hindu schoolmasters; the majority of them were opposed to it by a natural dislike of a competing authority, if not by solicitude for the welfare of their students. Had their influence been enlisted early in the day, it would have been possible to restrain the majority of the students from participation in these political orgies. It was believed that the new enthusiasm would burn itself out. This would no doubt have been the case had it affected adults. It was not realised, with youth as fuel, how great a matter a little fire kindleth.

The propaganda spread from Calcutta to the interior. Here progress was slower, and, six months after the initiation of the crusade, not more than a dozen schools, of some hundreds in Eastern Bengal, had subscribed to it. They became violent proselytes; unprovoked assaults were made upon unprotected Europeans; carts laden, with English goods were overturned in the streets, boats sunk in the river, and, on two occasions, mobs of school-boys actually held up river steamers for several hours. Even at this stage order might have been restored by withdrawing from three or four schools the right to send up students for University examinations. To this measure the Government of India was opposed. It would have operated hardly upon individuals, since the lack of the university imprimatur would have barred them from the service of Government. But it was surely better that two or three hundred boys should suffer for misconduct than that demoralisation should spread wholesale through schools and colleges. It may have been feared that the exclusion of the offending schools from their University connection would have stimulated the movement for the foundation of National' schools, in